april 5, 2013 - apache nitrogenapachenitrogen.com/downloads/2012-annual-performance-report.pdf · 9...

APRIL 5, 2013 2012 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING

AND SITE-WIDE STATUS REPORT

APACHE POWDER SUPERFUND SITECOCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA

Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc.

P.O. Box 700

Benson, AZ 85602

Hargis + Associates, Inc.

1820 East River Road #220

Tucson, AZ 85718

PREPARED FOR:

PREPARED BY:

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC.

2012 Annual Report_FINAL

4/8/2013 i

2012 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND SITE-WIDE STATUS REPORT

APACHE POWDER SUPERFUND SITE

COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.........................................................................................viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ES-1

1. 0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1

1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 REPORTING ........................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 REMEDY COMPONENTS...................................................................................................... 3 1.4 FIVE-YEAR REVIEW.............................................................................................................. 4 1.5 OTHER ACTIONS................................................................................................................... 5 1.6 PROJECT ORGANIZATION................................................................................................... 5 1.7 SITE REMEDIATION STANDARDS ...................................................................................... 6

2. 0 SOUTHERN AREA .....................................................................................................................7

2.1 SOUTHERN AREA REMEDY ................................................................................................ 8 2.2 PERCHED ZONE GROUNDWATER..................................................................................... 9

2.2.1 Water Level ................................................................................................................... 11 2.2.2 Perched Zone Dewatering ............................................................................................ 11 2.2.3 Water Quality................................................................................................................. 12 2.2.4 Perched Zone Status..................................................................................................... 13

2.3 MOLINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFER ...................................................................................... 13 2.3.1 MCA Water Levels ........................................................................................................ 14 2.3.2 MCA Water Quality........................................................................................................ 15 2.3.3 MCA Remedial Status................................................................................................... 16

2.4 SOUTHERN AREA SHALLOW AQUIFER........................................................................... 17 2.4.1 Regional Aquifer ............................................................................................................ 18 2.4.2 Shallow Aquifer Water Levels ....................................................................................... 19 2.4.3 Water Quality................................................................................................................. 20


TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)


4/8/2013 ii

2.4.4 Southern Area Shallow Aquifer Status ......................................................................... 20 3. 0 NORTHERN AREA...................................................................................................................22

3.1 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ...................................... 23 3.2 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE .................................................................................. 24

3.2.1 Maintenance and Repairs ............................................................................................. 25 3.2.2 Emergent Plant Monitoring............................................................................................ 26 3.2.3 Invasive Species Control............................................................................................... 26 3.2.4 Ecological Monitoring .................................................................................................... 27 3.2.5 Amendment Loading ..................................................................................................... 27

3.3 WATER LEVEL AND FLOW MONITORING........................................................................ 28 3.3.1 Influent Monitoring......................................................................................................... 28 3.3.2 Effluent Monitoring......................................................................................................... 29 3.3.3 Water Budget................................................................................................................ 29 3.3.4 Treatment Cell Water Level Monitoring ........................................................................ 31 3.3.5 Design Confirmation Piezometer .................................................................................. 31 3.3.6 Discharge Monitor Well MW-10 .................................................................................... 32

3.4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING........................................................................................ 33 3.4.1 Influent /Effluent Water Quality ..................................................................................... 33

3.4.1.1 Effluent Field Nitrate…………………………………………………………………..35 3.4.2 Treatment Cells Water Quality ...................................................................................... 36 3.4.3 Design Confirmation Piezometer Water Quality ........................................................... 38 3.4.4 Discharge Monitor Well MW-10 Water Quality ............................................................. 38 3.4.5 NARS Remediation Status............................................................................................ 39

3.5 NORTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER ................................................................................ 40 3.5.1 Northern Area Water levels........................................................................................... 40 3.5.2 Northern Area Water Quality......................................................................................... 41 3.5.3 Northern Area Shallow Aquifer Status .......................................................................... 43

4. 0 SAN PEDRO RIVER.................................................................................................................44

4.1 DISCHARGE ......................................................................................................................... 45 4.2 SAN PEDRO RIVER WATER QUALITY.............................................................................. 45

4.2.1 San Pedro River Status................................................................................................. 46 5. 0 INACTIVE AND FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS .......................................................................47

5.1 PONDS STATUS .................................................................................................................. 47 6. 0 INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS..................................................................................................48

6.1 WELL INVENTORY .............................................................................................................. 48 6.2 COMMUNITY OUTREACH................................................................................................... 49 6.3 ALTERNATE DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY PLAN ............................................................ 49 6.4 DEUR AND FENCING .......................................................................................................... 50 6.5 SOUTHERN AREA REMEDIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ..................................... 51

6.5.1 Mann-Kendall Trending................................................................................................. 52 6.5.2 Linear Regression Analysis........................................................................................... 52 6.5.3 MCA Mass and Volume Analysis.................................................................................. 53




4/8/2013 iii

6.5.4 Southern Area Geochemical Data ................................................................................ 55 6.6 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION EVALUATION............................................................ 57

6.6.1 NARS Evaluation........................................................................................................... 57 6.6.2 Northern Area MNA Evaluation..................................................................................... 58 6.6.3 Northern Area Geochemical Data................................................................................. 62

6.7 INACTIVE AND FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS REMEDIATION EVALUATION ................ 62 7. 0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/ QUALITY CONTROL ......................................................................64

8. 0 SUMMARY................................................................................................................................65

8.1 SOUTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER ................................................................................ 65 8.1.1 Perched Zone................................................................................................................ 65 8.1.2 MCA............................................................................................................................... 67 8.1.3 Southern Area Shallow Aquifer..................................................................................... 69

8.2 NORTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER ................................................................................ 69 8.2.1 NARS............................................................................................................................. 69 8.2.2 Northern Area MNA....................................................................................................... 71

8.3 SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER............................................................................ 72 8.4 MCA AND NORTHERN AREA GEOCHEMICAL DATA...................................................... 73 8.5 POND COVERS.................................................................................................................... 74

9. 0 RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................75

9.1 SOUTHERN AREA RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................ 75 9.2 NORTHERN AREA RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................ 77

10. REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................78




4/8/2013 iv

TABLES

Table 1 SITE REMEDIES

2 SITE INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS

3 2010 PERFORMANCE MONITORING SCHEDULE FOR GROUNDWATER,

SOIL, AND NARS REMEDIES

4 WATER LEVEL ELEVATION DATA

5 SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHED ZONE

6 PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETER P-03 EXTRACTION/TREATMENT

PERFORMANCE

7 GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA, (NITRATE-N AND PERCHLORATE)

8 WATER QUALITY DATA SOUTHERN AREA MNA PARAMETERS

9 AMENDMENT ADDITIONS LOG JANUARY 2012 THROUGH DECEMBER 2012

(MOLASSES, SODIUM TRIPOLYPHOSPHATE)

10 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM WETLAND, WATER BUDGET

11 INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT MEASUREMENTS

12 WATER LEVEL DATA (WELLS)

13 WATER QUALITY DATA (NITRATE-N AND AMMONIA-N)

14 WATER QUALITY DATA, NORMAL OPERATION ADDITIONAL ANALYTES,

INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT

15 WATER QUALITY DATA, NORMAL OPERATION (NITROGEN SPECIES)

16 WATER QUALITY DATA, NORMAL OPERATION (NUTRIENTS)

17 WATER QUALITY DATA, NORTHERN AREA MNA PARAMETERS

18 MCA MANN-KENDALL RESULTS

19 MCA LINEAR REGRESSION RESULTS




4/8/2013 v

TABLES (continued)

Table

20 ANNUAL MOLINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFER DATA

21 MANN-KENDALL AND LINEAR REGRESSION MONITOR WELLS IN THE

EXTENT OF SEW-1 CAPTURE

22 MANN-KENDALL AND LINEAR REGRESSION MNA MANAGEMENT

WELLS

23 2011 PERFORMANCE MONITOR SCHEDULE FOR REMEDIES

FIGURES

Figure 1 LOCATION OF APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS, INC.

2 APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF NITRATE-N AND PERCHLORATE

CONTAMINATION IN 2009, 2010, 2011, AND 2012

3 ORGANIZATION CHART APACHE POWDER SUPERFUND SITE

4 CHANGE IN EXTENT AND SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHED

GROUNDWATER FEBRUARY 1995 AND NOVEMBER 2012

5 SOUTHERN AREA MNA PERFORMANCE MONITORING NETWORK

6 NORTHERN AREA PERFORMANCE MONITORING NETWORK

7 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEMS PLOT PLAN

8 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM TREATMENT WETLAND

9 MONTHLY MOLASSES VOLUME AT TREATMENT CELLS PDA-S, PDA-C,

PDA-N, AND FDA AND ANNUAL VOLUME




4/8/2013 vi

FIGURES (continued)

Figure

10 2012 EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1 PERFORMANCE

11 CUMULATIVE EXTRACTION WELL PUMPAGE

12 CUMULATIVE SHALLOW AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1

NITRATE-N REMOVAL

13 20120 SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE AT SURFACE WATER MONITORING

LOCATIONS SW-12, SW-14, SW-03, SW-04, AND SW-13

14 LOCATION OF PONDS (NATIVE SOIL COVERS)

15 ANNUAL MCA VOLUME ESTIMATES AND NITRATE-N AND PERCHLORATE

MASS FROM 2000 THROUGH 2011

16 2009, 2010, 2011, AND 2012 NORTHERN AREA NITRATE-N PLUME AND

MODEL PROJECTED

17 NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONS IN 2 AND 5 YEARS WITH AND WITHOUT

ATTENTUATION

18 NAPA INITIAL NITRATE-N PLUME BASED ON 2007 AVERAGE NITRATE-N

CONCENTRATIONS

19 SCENARIOS OF SAN PEDRO RIVER STAGES AND RESULTING

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTIONS




4/8/2013 vii

APPENDICES

Appendix

A WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS

B PERCHED ZONE AND SHALLOW AQUIFER WATER LEVEL AND WATER

QUALITY FIGURES, NOVEMBER 2012

C NARS MONITORING SCHEDULES

D NARS WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS

E NARS FIELD DATA

F RESULTS OF 2012 ANNUAL POND COVER INSPECTION REPORT

G 2012 WELL INVENTORY UPDATE

H APACHE 2012 COMMUNITY UPDATES

I STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF SOUTHERN AREA PERFORMANCE DATA

FEBRUARY 2003 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2012

j STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF NORTHERN AREA PERFORMANCE DATA

FEBRUARY 2006 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2012

K DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION SUMMARY 2012 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

L MAROS MONITORING FREQUENCY GUIDANCE

M RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 2011 ANNUAL REPORT


2012 Annual Report_FINAL 4/8/2013

viii

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAWQS Arizona Aquifer Water Quality Standards

ADEQ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality

ADWR Arizona Department of Water Resources

ADWSP Alternate Domestic Water Supply Plan

AFCEE Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

ammonia-N ammonia as nitrogen

ANA anaerobic nitrification area

ANPI Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc

bls below land surface

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

COCs chemical of concern

COD chemical oxygen demand

COP Community Outreach Plan

DCP Design Confirmation Piezometer

DEUR Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction

DO dissolved oxygen

EC electrical conductivity

ESD Explanation of Significant Differences

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ET evapotranspiration

FDA final denitrification area

gpm gallons per minute

H+A Hargis + Associates, Inc.

ICs Institutional controls

LCU laterally confining unit

MAROS Monitoring and Remediation Optimization System

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MCA Molinos Creek Sub-Aquifer



ix

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (continued)

mg/l milligrams per liter

MNA monitored natural attenuation

msl mean sea level

mV millivolt

NAPA Northern Area Performance Assessment Model

NARS Northern Area Remediation System

nitrate-N nitrate as nitrogen

O&M operation and maintenance

ORP oxidation-reduction potential

PDA primary denitrification area

pH hydrogen ion potential

PMP Performance Monitoring Plan

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

RI remedial investigation

RPD relative percent difference

ROD Record of Decision

SEW-1 shallow aquifer extraction well

TDS total dissolved solids

TOC total organic carbon

TKN total Kjeldahl nitrogen

TSS total suspended solids

µg/l micrograms per liter



ES-1




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document reports on the annual performance of ongoing remedial actions as well as the

status of other media remedial components at the Apache Powder Superfund Site (the Site) in

Cochise County, Arizona, as of the end of Calendar Year 2012 (Figure 1). The Site remedial

actions are being performed pursuant to a Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) order under the oversight of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA, 1994b, 2009b). Performance monitoring is performed according to the

respective performance monitoring plans (PMPs) and Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plans

approved by EPA (Hargis + Associates, Inc (H+A), 2007a, 2007b, 2008b and 2009a).

The chemicals of concern (COCs) for groundwater at the site are nitrate as nitrogen (nitrate-N)

in the Northern Area and nitrate-N and perchlorate in the Southern Area. Cleanup standards for

the Site are 10 milligrams per liter (mg/l) for nitrate-N (EPA, 1994a) and 14 micrograms per liter

(µg/l) for perchlorate (EPA, 2005). Performance monitoring results for groundwater remedies

during 2012 indicate that monitored natural attenuation (MNA) and pump-and-treat remedy

components were both effective in reducing the volume and areal extent of contaminated

groundwater in both the Northern and Southern Areas of the Site (Figure 2). Pumping and

treating shallow aquifer groundwater in the Northern and Southern Areas of the Site was

selected as a remedy in the original Record of Decision (ROD) (EPA, 1994a). MNA was

selected as a remedy for contaminated shallow aquifer groundwater in the Southern Area of the

Site by a 2005 amended Record of Decision (EPA, 2005). MNA was selected as a remedy for

contaminated shallow aquifer groundwater in a portion of the Northern Area in Explanation of

Significant Differences (ESD) No. 3 (EPA, 2008). The selection of MNA followed from several



4/8/2013 ES-2

investigations and studies to identify the extent of groundwater contamination as well as the

dynamics of solute transport within the aquifer (H+A, 2003a, 2003b, 2003c, 2005a, 2005b,

2006a, 2008a, and 2008c).

In the Southern Area, groundwater levels and concentrations of both nitrate-N and perchlorate

were monitored quarterly in the perched zone and the Molinos Creek sub-aquifer (MCA). Since

cessation of wastewater discharges to evaporation ponds in 1995, the areal extent and volume

of the perched zone and MCA groundwater has decreased. The overall volume of perched

groundwater is trending downward as is the volume of groundwater present in the MCA

(Appendix A). However, as the volume of groundwater follows a decreasing trend, nitrate-N

concentrations at certain wells in both the perched zone and the MCA have shown increasing

trends, while perchlorate concentrations have remained stable. In particular, these trends are

observed at piezometer P-03 in the perched zone and at monitor well MW-21 in the MCA. This

phenomenon is believed to be related to vertical stratification in the contaminant distribution,

such that, at the outset of remedy implementation, water of lesser concentration was overlying

water with higher COC concentrations at depth. Thus, as the volume and water levels decline

according to the trends discussed earlier, the concentrations at these locations would be

expected to increase. In particular, groundwater in piezometer P-03 and monitor well MW-21

are expected to remain higher in concentration due to their proximity to historical sources, the

thickness of the saturated sediments at these locations, and the fact that the extremely low

gradients and lack of recharge are not expected to carry water away from these relatively

stagnant areas.

As a source control measure in the Southern Area, perched zone groundwater extraction at

piezometer P-03 which began in 2002 continued during 2012. The estimated volume of

groundwater removed from the perched zone during 2012 was approximately 4,396 gallons.

Overall, the area of the perched zone continued to shrink, and perched zone perimeter

monitoring confirmed that groundwater seepage from the perched zone into the MCA has not

occurred since late 2003.



4/8/2013 ES-3

In the Southern Area shallow aquifer, nitrate-N concentrations were detected outside the MNA

management area at monitor wells MW-06 and MW-14 at 0.27 and 0.38, respectively. In the

MCA, MNA is the selected remedy. Both nitrate-N and perchlorate were detected at MCA

monitor wells MW-21, -23, and -39 at concentrations exceeding the respective cleanup

standards. Monitor well MW-23 had a split sample that resulted in a nitrate-N concentration of

9.6 mg/L, which is below the cleanup standard of 10 mg/L. Monitor Well MW-15 remained dry

for all sampling events in 2012.

The remedy in the Northern Area of the shallow aquifer at the Site comprises two components,

a pump-and-treat system referred to as the Northern Area Remediation System (NARS) and

MNA. During 2012, the NARS extracted and treated over 57 million gallons of contaminated

groundwater. Changes in the extent of the nitrate-N plume were observed during 2012. These

changes indicate that the plume is shrinking in comparison with past years (Figure 2). This

areal change is attributed both to capture and treatment by the NARS and to natural attenuation

processes.

The far northern portion of the Northern Area is situated north and outside the influence of the

NARS capture zone. This area relies primarily on MNA to reduce concentrations of nitrate-N in

groundwater. The feasibility of MNA in this area was originally assessed both by a program of

field data collection of parameters and model projections. A comparison of projections based

on Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. (ANPI), Northern Area Performance Assessment (NAPA)

model with field data, indicates attenuation of the areal distribution of nitrate-N is occurring at a

rate consistent with an attenuation half-life of two years (H+A, 2008c). The 2012 water quality

data indicate that all shallow aquifer wells in the Northern MNA management zone are now

below the nitrate-N cleanup standard except for private well D(18-21)06bcb, where the nitrate-N

concentration was greater than the standard of 10 mg/l in all PMP sampling events except

November in 2012. The nitrate-N concentration in this well has been on a downward trend

since 2004 and dropped below the cleanup standard in May of 2011. In 2012, the nitrate-N

concentrations in groundwater from this well hovered above the cleanup standard until the split

sample in November where it was recorded at 8.6 and 9.3 mg/l. The concentration at this well

is soon expected to drop permanently below 10 mg/l..



4/8/2013 ES-4

The 2005 ROD Amendment selected a remedy to address soil contamination in “Formerly

Active” ponds on ANPI property (EPA, 2005). The Formerly Active ponds include Ponds 1A,

1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, Pond 7. and the Dynagel Pond. Additionally, the ROD Amendment

designated the Arizona Residential Soil Remediation Levels (SRLs) as the cleanup standards

for the remedy. The selected remedy included emplacement of a native soil cover to isolate

pond soil and sediments containing residual COCs in excess of the SRLs and the imposition of

certain institutional controls (ICs). The COCs exceeding SRLs included antimony, arsenic, and

beryllium. Soil cover emplacement was completed in 2007 (H+A, 2008a). During 2012, the

Pond covers were inspected and maintenance was performed to restore side slopes. As part of

the ICs, a Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction (DEUR) for Property with Engineering

Control and Non-Residential Restriction was recorded in Cochise County in 2008, according to

the approved plan (Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), 2008 and H+A,

2008b).

The groundwater monitoring networks in the Northern and Southern Areas were assessed to

evaluate whether the current network is sufficient for performance monitoring of the respective

remedies. Several recommendations are presented regarding adjustments to the performance

monitoring program for 2013. Adjustments to the sampling frequency in the Southern Area

MCA are not changing from a quarterly monitoring program. In-situ treatment of both the

Northern and Southern Area is recommended for potential reduction of nitrate-N concentrations

in 2013. The study requires frequent monitoring and sampling of ammonia, perchlorate, and

nitrate-N within the MCA, so that treatability feasibility can be quantified and cleanup

acceleration is observed. Additional monitor wells will be needed within the MCA for the pilot

test to begin. Pending results from the pilot study, recommendations for enhancements within

the Northern Area utilizing in-situ treatment could potentially reduce nitrate-N concentrations in

the vicinity of monitor well MW-36. Adjustments to the sampling frequency in one of the

Southern Area MCA wells from annually to quarterly monitoring of ammonia and MNA

parameters is proposed. Data collected during 2012 indicate that nitrate-N is less than the

cleanup standard in all wells north of the extent of Shallow Aquifer Extraction Well (SEW-1)

capture, except for private well D(18-21)06bcb. The nitrate-N concentration at private well



4/8/2013 ES-5

D(18-21)06bcb is projected to drop permanently below the standard within the next few years

based on trending. It is believed that implementation of these recommendations is justified on

the basis of operational efficiency of the performance monitoring program. Currently bottled

water is supplied to on well owner (D(18-21)06bcb).



1




1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes performance and operation and maintenance activities performed at the

Apache Powder Superfund Site (the Site) during calendar year 2012, in accordance with the

December 29, 1994, and December 15, 2009, Unilateral Administrative Orders issued by the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Apache Nitrogen Products, Incorporated

(ANPI), and the October 3, 1994, Record of Decision (ROD) and December 15, 2009, Consent

Decree for the Site (EPA, 1994a, 1994b, 2009b). The ROD was modified in an Explanation of

Significant Differences (ESD #1), a second ESD (ESD #2) (EPA, 1997 and 2000), the

September 2005 ROD Amendment, (EPA, 2005), the July 31, 2008 ESD #3 (EPA, 2008) and

approved PMP’s (H+A, 2007a, 2007b, 2008b and 2009a).

1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

The Site comprises an area of approximately 9 square miles of mixed industrial and rural

properties located in Cochise County, approximately 7 miles southeast of the town of Benson,

Arizona (Figure 1). The ANPI property comprises approximately 1,000 contiguous acres of

land, located in a portion of section 12, Township 18 South (T.18S.) Range 20 East (R.20E.)

and portions of Section 6, 7, and 8 in T.18 S., R. 21 E. (Figure 1). Most of the upland areas of

the Site can be described geomorphically as “badlands terrain”. Badlands are characterized by



4/8/2013 2

a hummocky topography, dissected by fine ephemeral drainages. Lowland areas along the San

Pedro River are riparian. Rural homesteads surround the ANPI property, some of which are

farms and livestock properties, while others are residential.

1.2 REPORTING

Remedy performance is evaluated by means of ongoing performance monitoring and operations

and maintenance (O&M) programs. Weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual reports are prepared

and transmitted to the respective regulatory agencies. This annual report includes a summary of

the data collected for the various active remedies, evaluation of data trends, discussion of

performance and effectiveness of remedy, summary of the quality assurance/quality control of

the sampling analysis activities, and recommendations for modifications to the monitoring

schedule focusing on the calendar year 2013. Performance monitoring plans have been

prepared for the respective ongoing Site remedies. These comprise four separate documents

titled:

Operation and Maintenance Plan Northern Area Remediation System, Revision 3.0 [NARS

O&M Plan] (H+A, 2007a)

Southern Area Performance Monitoring Plan, Revision 2.0 [Southern Area PMP] (H+A,

2007b),

Soils Engineering Control Plan [Soils O&M Plan] (H+A, 2008b) and,

Performance Monitoring Plan for Monitored Natural Attenuation of Shallow Aquifer

Groundwater in the Northern Area of the Apache Superfund Site, Revision 1.0, [Northern

Area PMP] (H+A, 2009a).



4/8/2013 3

1.3 REMEDY COMPONENTS

The Site media components that are currently being monitored for remedy performance include

the perched zone, the Molinos Creek sub-Aquifer (MCA), and the Ponds in the Southern Area of

the Site. In the Northern Area shallow aquifer groundwater is also an ongoing component

remedy. These media components are listed in Table 1.

Other media components relating to various areas of contaminated soils and waste materials

included the “White Waste and Vanadium Pentoxide Storage Area,” “Temporary On-Site

Storage Area (TOSA),” and the “Dinitrotoluene (DNT) Drum Storage Area.” Additionally, time-

critical removal actions were performed in the “Wash 3 DNT Drum Disposal Area” and the

“Trinitrotoluene (TNT) Contaminated Area.” These actions were completed in 2000 and

remedial action implementation reports were issued.

Remedial actions for the remaining media components included the perched groundwater,

shallow aquifer groundwater, and ponds. Remedial actions for these remaining media

components were implemented as of the end of calendar year 2007. The remedy for the

Southern Area includes both source control for the perched zone, monitored natural attenuation

(MNA), and institutional controls for the affected portions of the MCA pursuant to the 2005 ROD

(Figure 2) (EPA, 2005). The groundwater remedy for the Northern Area is comprised of both

an active pump-and-treat component known as the Northern Area Remediation System (NARS)

and a MNA component. The NARS treats groundwater pumped from extraction well SEW-1 by

denitrification within a constructed treatment wetland (Figure 2). North of the extraction well

SEW-1 capture envelope, nitrate-N is reduced within the aquifer through various mechanisms of

natural attenuation (EPA, 2008). All formerly-active ponds stopped receiving discharges in

1995. Native soil covers were emplaced as required over the formerly active Ponds in

December 2007 (H+A, 2008a). Requisite institutional controls (ICs) were, and continue to be,

implemented per the ROD Amendment (EPA, 2008).

ICs have been implemented at the Site to prevent access to contaminated soils and

groundwater. Other ICs have been implemented to provide surveillance measures to ensure



4/8/2013 4

that the remedy remained protective of human health (Table 2). More detailed information

concerning ICs is provided in Section 6.0.

1.4 FIVE-YEAR REVIEW

During Fiscal Year 2012, EPA completed a Five Year Review for the Apache Powder Superfund

Site (EPA, 2012). In terms of protectiveness, the Five-Year Review Report (5YR) concluded

that:

“The remedy at the Apache Powder Superfund Site is protective of human health and

the environment for both groundwater and soils because there is no current exposure.

The ICs restricting access to the contaminated shallow aquifer for drinking water

purposes and restricting access to former pond soils on-site where residual

contamination has been capped were put in place in 2008.”

The 5YR also presented recommendations related to follow-up actions as follow:

“Remedy enhancements, such as in-situ treatment should be considered for MNA

remedy for Southern Remedy Molinos Creek Sub-Aquifer (MCA).”

“Expanding the number of or modifying the open containment tanks should be

considered for maximizing extraction and evaporation of the Perched Zone

Groundwater.”

To date, ANPI has been working on a plan for conducting pilot testing for remedy enhancement

in the MCA. Remedy enhancement will be based on in situ denitrification/dechlorination. These

activities will be presented in separate workplans submitted to EPA for review and approval.



4/8/2013 5

1.5 OTHER ACTIONS

During 2012, ANPI also embarked on other actions directed toward the modernization and

upgrading of plant operations. These actions initially required the demolition of some 166

obsolete and unused buildings on the plant that supported former and since discontinued

manufacturing operations. These demolition activities are subject to pre- and post-demotion

sampling for hazardous materials and wastes as described in separate workplans. All work is

being completed under the oversight of EPA and the Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality (ADEQ).

A separate activity involves the decommissioning and removal of buried tanks, formerly used to

store elemental sulfur. The sulfur was used in a former acid manufacturing process, prior to

1980. This work will involve characterization of materials present in the tanks and surrounding

soils, removal and disposal of the tanks and any contaminated soils, and post-removal

verification of soil. This activity is also being completed under the oversight of EPA and is

described in separate workplans.

1.6 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

An organization chart showing responsibilities for implementing performance monitoring and O&M

activities at the Site has been prepared (Figure 3). The organization chart indicates the respective

roles of government agencies and contractors involved with the project. The primary

governmental agencies include EPA and ADEQ. The responsible party is ANPI. ANPI is

supported by its consultant contractors and laboratories.



4/8/2013 6

1.7 SITE REMEDIATION STANDARDS

EPA has selected remediation standards for the cleanup of groundwater at the Site. The

chemicals of concern (COCs) in groundwater are nitrate-N and perchlorate. Perchlorate is limited

to the perched zone and MCA in the Southern Area; whereas nitrate-N is the only COC for

groundwater in the Northern Area. The EPA selected the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)

for drinking water of 10 milligrams per liter (mg/l) as the Site cleanup standard for nitrate-N

(EPA, 1994a). The Arizona Department of Health Services Health-Based Guidance Level for

drinking water of 14 micrograms per liter (µg/l) was selected for perchlorate in Site groundwater

(EPA, 2005). The COCs for the Ponds are antimony, arsenic, and beryllium which remain in

concentrations above the Arizona residential Soil Remediation Levels (EPA, 2000; AAC Title

18). The ROD-selected remedy permitted leaving contaminated sediments in place beneath a

native soil cover (cap) (EPA, 2005).



4/8/2013 7

2.0 SOUTHERN AREA

The Southern Area of the Site includes most of the historical and current ANPI manufacturing

areas and the immediately-surrounding areas along the San Pedro River and upland. Basically,

this is the area drained by ephemeral washes designated as Wash 5 and Wash 6 (Figure 2).

This area incorporates the perched zone, MCA, and formerly active ponds. It is important to

understand the hydrologic relationship between the MCA and the perched zone, which is

situated to the west and underlying the active ANPI operations area.

The hydrogeologic conceptualization of the MCA features an essentially stagnant alluvial

system that is isolated hydraulically from the laterally adjacent, larger shallow alluvial aquifer

system along the San Pedro River. This lateral isolation occurs as a result of fine-grained,

overbank deposits that separate the San Pedro System from the similarly coarse-grained

alluvium in the MCA (H+A, 2003a). Underlying and forming the base of the MCA as well as the

San Pedro shallow aquifer is the St. David clay. This area incorporates the perched zone,

MCA, and formerly active ponds. The perched zone was created as a result of mounding of

groundwater with a base elevation notably higher than the water level in both the MCA and

shallow aquifer. The groundwater mound was created as a result of artificial recharge through

the bottoms of unlined former evaporation ponds and ditches used historically by ANPI for plant

wastewater management. The hydrogeology of the perched zone was first interpreted during

the Site Remedial Investigation (RI) and later studied by Deane (Deane, 2000). Specifically,

Deane’s interpretation was largely based on the paleogeomorphology of the St. David clay

surface, which he identified as a paleodrainage system. As such, paleochannels were “etched”

into the underlying clay surface. These paleochannels now serve to both collect water that

infiltrated historically through the pond bottoms and also direct drainage away from the perched

zone groundwater mound. Such paleofeatures were identified in the field on the basis of both

exploratory drilling and seismic reflection surveys. Historically, under sufficient hydraulic

mounding of perched groundwater in terrace deposit sediments overlying the clay, water

seeped eastward into the MCA. Presently the volume of perched groundwater is insufficient to

sustain lateral flow into the MCA as confirmed by a line of perched zone monitor wells



4/8/2013 8

constructed across the margin of the MCA. This field evidence confirms the elimination of the

perched zone as a source for the MCA, despite persistence of small remnants of perched zone

water at the piezometer P-01 and P-03 locations (Figure 4).

The Southern Area of the Site is located near the ANPI manufacturing area and along the San

Pedro River (Figure 2).

2.1 SOUTHERN AREA REMEDY

MNA was selected as the remedy for the MCA (EPA, 2005). Per EPA guidance, MNA

remedies require source control measures as appropriate (EPA, 2004). Source control in the

Southern Area was achieved via wastewater discharge elimination implemented by ANPI

beginning in 1995 as discussed in the previous section. All evaporation ponds, ditches, and

related facilities that formerly received ANPI’s industrial wastewaters were eliminated and

wastewater streams were routed to a newly-constructed brine concentrator facility. The brine

concentrator provides wastewater treatment sufficient to return most of the stream as process

make-up water, with a fraction becoming waste brine, which is disposed offsite. With the

elimination of this source of artificial recharge to the perched zone, the mound of groundwater

underlying the former unlined evaporation ponds and ditches immediately began dissipating,

largely as drainage to the MCA. By about late 2003, the perched zone had receded to the point

where lateral seepage into the MCA ceased. This condition remains to the present day and is

expected to persist into the indefinite future assuming no further artificial recharge is allowed.

ANPI monitors and controls seepage of groundwater from the perched zone to the MCA. The

MNA monitoring network in the Southern Area comprises a management zone, buffer zone,

sentinel wells, and upgradient zone (Figure 5). Nitrate-N concentrations were detected in the

MCA, perched zone, upgradient wells and a sentinel well in 2012. Perchlorate has only been

detected in the MCA and perched zone. Monitoring of nitrate-N in the Southern Area began in

1991. Monitoring for perchlorate in the Southern Area began in 1998 per direction from EPA.



4/8/2013 9

Groundwater samples were collected from perched zone monitor wells, MCA monitor wells, and

Southern Area shallow aquifer monitor wells in accordance with an approved schedule as

outlined in the Southern Area PMP (H+A, 2007b) (Table 3). The November 2012 water level

elevation and water quality figures are included (Appendix B).

2.2 PERCHED ZONE GROUNDWATER

As discussed earlier, the perched zone groundwater underlies ANPI’s primary operations area

in the southern portion of the ANPI property, in the vicinity of the formerly active ponds (primarily

Ponds 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, and 3B) (Figures 2 and 14). These ponds received process

wastewaters from 1971 until February 1995. When the brine concentrator facility was brought

online, ANPI eliminated all former discharges of process wastewater to the ponds.

Perched groundwater is present in this area under unconfined conditions within granite wash

alluvium and overlying the erosional surface of the St. David clay. It is important to note that the

quality of water discharged to ponds varied significantly over the years. Hence, the quality of

water that infiltrated historically into the perched zone also varied. First, the quality of the water

in ANPI’s waste stream compared with the quality of perched groundwater indicates that the

perched groundwater generally has a much a higher concentration of dissolved solids. In turn,

this suggests that evaporation of water detained in the ponds played a significant role in

concentrating dissolved solids including the COCs, nitrate-N and perchlorate. By 1995, many

process improvements had been implemented by ANPI, such that the quality of wastewater

discharged to the ponds had greatly improved. In fact, the last volume of water discharged to

the ponds was actually fresh makeup water produced from ANPI production well ANP-4. This

water had been used to pressure test the recently-constructed 1.2-million gallon surge tank

associated with the new brine concentrator facility. It is believed that a significant percentage of

this fresh water infiltrated the perched zone and thereby resulted in water quality stratification in

the perched zone, such that the concentration of dissolved solids increases with increasing

depth.



4/8/2013 10

Ongoing quarterly monitoring of water levels in perched zone piezometers and monitor wells

confirms both cessation of lateral seepage into the MCA and the shrinkage of the areal extent

and volume of the perched zone. Historical water levels measured at perched zone monitor

well MW-29, situated at the edge of the MCA, indicate that seepage from the perched zone into

the MCA has not occurred since late 2003 (Figure 4).

The perched zone comprises part of the management zone for the Southern Area MNA

performance monitoring network (Figure 5). As discussed earlier, the perched zone represents

a potential source area for the MCA because of historical discharges of nitrate-N and

perchlorate-bearing groundwater to this area. The goal of perched zone performance

monitoring is primarily to assure that these discharges do not resume. In addition to

performance monitoring, ICs provide another level of protection in association with the Southern

Area remedy. For example, as a provision of the DEUR, groundwater resource development in

this area of the ANPI property is precluded. Section 6.0 provides further details on ICs.

Performance monitoring was performed quarterly in the perched zone in 2012 (Table 3). The

monitoring included quarterly measurements of water level elevations and collection of water

quality samples. The perched zone performance monitoring network includes piezometers

P-01, P-03, P-10 and perched monitor wells MW-03, MW-04, and MW-29 (Figure 4). While

historically other monitor wells and piezometers were used to characterize groundwater

conditions across the perched zone, the dissipation of the perched zone has obviated the need

to continue monitoring at these sites. Accordingly, perched zone piezometers P-02, P-04, P-05,

P-06, P-07, P-08, P-09, P-11, and monitor wells MW-02, and MW-07 are dry and no longer

monitored (Figure 4). Perched zone piezometer P-10 and perched monitor well MW-29 are

monitored quarterly for water level elevation to confirm that communication between the

perched zone groundwater and MCA has not resumed. These locations represent the direction

of drainage in a paleochannel.



4/8/2013 11

2.2.1 Water Level

Water level elevations were measured quarterly in perched zone piezometers P-01, P-03, and

P-10, and perched monitor wells MW-03, MW-04, and MW-29 in 2012. Perched zone

piezometers P-01 and P-03 were the only perched zone monitoring locations where

groundwater depths were sufficient to measure (Table 4; Figure 4). Perched zone monitor wells

MW-03, MW-04, and MW-29 remained dry in 2012, and water levels at P-01 and P-03

remained stable during 2012 (Figures A-1, A-2, and A-3 in Appendix A). Declining water levels

in the perched zone are attributed to the cessation of wastewater discharges to evaporation

ponds in 1995. Occasional increases at P-01 and P-03 are believed to be attributed to natural

and/or artificial recharge. Natural recharge occurs from infiltration of precipitation and/or

overland runoff, while artificial recharge might occur from water line leaks, irrigation, or other

water handling practices.

The saturated thickness of the perched zone ranged from approximately 2.77 to 1.39 feet at

perched zone piezometer P-01 and from approximately 8.55 to 7.84 feet at piezometer P-03 in

2012 (Table 5; Figure B-3 in Appendix B). Water level elevations ranged from approximately

3,636.87feet above mean sea level (msl) at perched zone piezometer P-03, to approximately

3,665 feet above msl at piezometer P-01 in 2012 (Table 4).

2.2.2 Perched Zone Dewatering

In 2002, operation of a pilot extraction/treatment system was initiated. This system provided for

additional source control for the MCA and further accelerated perched zone dewatering and

involved the pumping of groundwater from perched zone piezometer P-03 using a submersible

pump (H+A, 2002). Extracted perched zone groundwater is discharged into lined pools and

allowed to evaporate until the pools were replaced with lined, steel stock tanks in 2009.

Operation of the dewatering has continued since 2002. In April 2008, the submersible pump

failed and was removed from piezometer P-03. In its place, a wind-powered air-lifting device

was installed. Not long after installation, the system failed and groundwater could no longer be



4/8/2013 12

extracted. The dewatering system remained inoperative through the remainder of 2008, with

the exception of occasional groundwater withdrawals using a small submersible pump powered

by a portable generator. In 2009, pumping was resumed using the portable generator. On May

9, 2010, a solar powered submersible pump was installed for groundwater extraction at P-03.

During 2012, the perched zone dewatering system removed an estimated 4,396 gallons of

perched groundwater in 2012. Since the system was initially installed in 2002, an estimated

82,741 gallons have been removed (Table 5). Pumping rates within the perched zone remained

stable throughout 2012 and the total gallons pumped were comparable to 2011 totals.

2.2.3 Water Quality

Groundwater samples were collected from perched zone piezometer P-03 during 2012 quarterly

groundwater monitoring.

Nitrate-N detections in samples collected from the perched zone piezometer P-03 decreased

from 9,800 mg/l in February 2012 to approximately 9,100 mg/l during August 2012 (Table 7).

The nitrate-N concentration in the sample collected in November 2012 was 11,000 mg/l (Figures

C-1 and C-2 in Appendix C). A split sample taken during the November sampling event had a

result of 9,400 mg/l. During 2012, an estimated 346 pounds of nitrate-N were removed from the

perched zone at piezometer P-03 (Table 5).

Perchlorate detections in samples collected from the perched zone piezometer P-03 ranged

from 569 µg/l in August to 649 µg/l at piezometer P-03 during May 2012 (Table 7; Figures C-1

and C-2 in Appendix C). During 2012, an estimated 0.02 pounds of perchlorate was removed

from the perched zone at piezometer P-03 (Table 5).

Per EPA approval, monitoring of fluoride and ammonia as nitrogen (ammonia-N) was

discontinued in the perched zone in 2009 (EPA, 2009a). At the direction of ADEQ and EPA,

ammonia-N and fluoride concentrations had been monitored at monitor wells MW-15 and MW-

21 since February 1998 (ADEQ, 1998).



4/8/2013 13

2.2.4 Perched Zone Status

Current data are consistent with the current conceptual understanding of the perched zone

hydrogeology. Source control measures initiated in 1995 have been effective in reducing the

extent of the perched zone and have eliminated the transport of perched zone groundwater into

the MCA (Figure 5). Perched zone monitoring and IC measures confirm that there are no

potential receptors and no new sources for perched groundwater. Perched zone piezometer

P-03 is the only location where nitrate-N and perchlorate are present in concentrations

exceeding the cleanup standards. Increasing trends in COC concentrations have been

observed and are expected to continue at perched piezometer P-03. This phenomenon is

explained by the vertical stratification of groundwater quality in the perched zone as discussed

in Section 2.2. The operation of the dewatering system at piezometer P-03 is intended to

continue until the water levels become too low to operate a pump. As outlined in the Southern

Area PMP, dewatering activities provides source control for the MCA.

2.3 MOLINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFER

Groundwater-bearing alluvium referred to as the MCA is isolated from the San Pedro River

aquifer (SPA) to the east along the San Pedro River due to hydraulic isolation of the MCA. The

MCA is believed to be an area that historically was created largely as a result of artificial

recharge. Prior to the construction of the evaporation ponds in 1971, the industrial wastewater

stream was mostly routed offsite via unlined ditches leading to Wash 6 (Figure 5). Infiltration of

these discharge waters as well as storm water runoff began to accumulate within the alluvial

sediments in the MCA. Additionally, it is likely that the perched zone began to develop even

before the operation of the evaporation ponds due to leakage from unlined wastewater

conveyances and general non-point discharges. Depending on the volume of the mound that

accreted from this ongoing process of infiltration, seepage from the perched zone into the MCA

may have also contributed to the aforementioned artificial recharge. Presently, hydrographic



4/8/2013 14

data indicate that groundwater levels in the MCA are declining, presumably owing to a lack of

this artificial recharge and concurrent losses via other mechanisms (Appendix A). Based on the

flatness of the hydraulic gradient across the MCA, there appears to be little, if any, lateral

groundwater movement. This is an important realization because it provides further evidence of

hydraulic isolation between the MCA and shallow aquifer.

Approximately 40 percent of the groundwater-bearing sediments within the MCA are believed to

underlie property owned by ANPI. This estimate could be conservative based on eh limited

distribution of monitor wells to the east. This limitation results from the inability to obtain

permission to construct wells on the private properties. Offsite property owners do not rely on

wells tapping the shallow aquifer. ICs, such as surveillance of new or petitioned well drilling

activities and community outreach, provide further control over potential exposures to

contaminated groundwater. Surveillance includes observing any changes in land use and

annual updating of the site-wide well inventory. Well inventory updates are compiled on a

compact disk (CD) and sent annually to EPA (H+A, 2010c). The ADEQ performs an ongoing

review of notices of intent (NOIs) for proposed new wells near the MCA. This information is

reported to ANPI. Section 6.0 provides further details on ICs.

The MCA is part of the Southern Area MNA management zone. Performance monitoring in the

management zone was performed quarterly in 2012. Monitor wells located in the MCA include

MW-15, MW-21, MW-23, MW-24 and MW-39 (Figure 5). Groundwater samples were collected

from the MCA monitor wells MW-23, semi-annually, and MW-24, annually, and quarterly at

monitor wells MW-15, MW-21, and MW-39 during 2012 when sufficient water was present

(Table 7). Performance monitoring included quarterly measurements of water level elevations

and water quality sampling for nitrate-N and perchlorate (Table 3). Water quality samples for

MNA parameters were collected in November 2012 (Table 8).

2.3.1 MCA Water Levels

Water level elevations in MCA monitor wells MW-15, MW-21, MW-23 and MW-39 continued to

decline during 2012 (Appendix B). Static water levels were also measured in perched monitor



4/8/2013 15

wells MW-29, MW-30, MW-31, and MW-32 during November 2012. These wells are situated

along the perched zone MCA boundary. Perched monitor wells MW-30, MW-31, and MW-32

have never had measurable groundwater present, whereas MW-29 has been dry since late

2003. These monitor wells remained dry in 2012.

Water level elevations at monitor wells in the MCA increased in February and May and

decreased in August and November 2012. The highest water levels were in May which follows

the previous trend. Monitor well MW-15 declined to the extent that there was insufficient water

to collect samples in 2012 (Figure A-7 in Appendix A Monitor wells MW-21, -23, and -24 showed

seasonal water level fluctuations, yet notably depressed water levels relative to water levels

measured in the adjacent monitor wells MW-14 and MW-22 to the east. This trend is consistent

with historical data (Figure B-2 in Appendix B).

The apparent hydraulic gradient across the MCA, based on November 2012 water levels, was

approximately 0.0002, as calculated between monitor wells MW-21 and MW-39 (Figure B-2 in

Appendix B). This low gradient suggests a stagnant system.

2.3.2 MCA Water Quality

Nitrate-N detections in original groundwater quality samples collected in the MCA ranged from

12 mg/l at monitor well MW-23 in November 2012 to 4,800 mg/l at monitor well MW-21 in

November 2012 (Table 7; Appendices B and C). Nitrate-N concentrations at downgradient

monitor well MW-24 was 0.94 mg/l in November 2012.

Perchlorate detections in groundwater samples collected in the MCA ranged from less than 15

µg/l at monitor well MW-23 in May 2012 to 320 µg/l at monitor well MW-21 in November 2012

(Figure B-4in Appendix B). Perchlorate concentrations in original groundwater quality samples

collected at monitor well MW-24 was 2.8 µg/l in November 2012 (Table 7).



4/8/2013 16

Per EPA approval, analyses for ammonia-N were discontinued at monitor wells MW-15 and

MW-21 (EPA, 2009a). Previously, ammonia-N concentrations had been monitored at monitor

wells MW-15 and MW-21 since February 1998 (ADEQ, 1998).

During the November 2012 monitoring round, samples were collected from monitor wells

MW-21, -23, -24, and -39 and analyzed for a selected suite of parameters indicative of

conditions supporting natural attenuation of nitrate-N and perchlorate, the MNA parameters.

MNA parameters, per the PMP, include dissolved oxygen (DO), oxidation-reduction potential

(ORP), total dissolved solids (TDS), and alkalinity (Table 8). Ferrous iron was not sampled

because of instrumental failure. Alkalinity concentrations ranged between 210 mg/l at monitor

well MW-24 and 1200 mg/l at monitor well MW-23. Turner Labs indicated presence of soil

solids within the sample are the cause of the high alkalinity increase. DO concentrations ranged

from 2.43 mg/l at MW-24 and 5.53 mg/l at MW-23. ORP ranged between -70 millivolts (mV) at

monitor well MW-24 to 126 mV at monitor well MW-21, and TDS concentrations ranged

between 410 mg/l at monitor well MW-24 to 21,560 mg/l at monitor well MW-21.

Comparing analytical results from 2011 to 2012, there were relatively no changes in

concentrations at monitor wells MW-24 and MW-39, except thatMW-24 did have a large

decrease in oxygen reduction potential (ORP) whereas, all other MCA wells show sharp

increases. Monitor well MW-21 results show that electrical conductivity (EC) has decreased

back to similar concentrations found in 2010. Alkalinity concentrations at monitor well MW-24

increased sharply. Turner Laboratories indicated that a presence of solids in the sample was

the cause of this large increase. (Table 8).

2.3.3 MCA Remedial Status

Water level monitoring indicates a decreasing trend in water level elevations in the MCA

(Figures A-4 and A-5 in Appendix A). In 2012, the average saturated thickness was 30 feet at

monitor well MW-21,, 7 feet at monitor well MW-23 and 26 feet at monitor well MW-39. Monitor



4/8/2013 17

well MW-15 was dry except for in May 2012 where a saturated thickness was recorded at 1.8

feet. During 2012 water levels have remained stable and are comparable to water levels

measured in 2011 at monitor well MW-21. Water-level declines in the MCA are attributed to

limited, if any, recharge from the perched zone during 2012.

The data collected in the MCA and perched zone together generally support the original

Southern Area conceptualization. As was the case in the dewatering of the perched zone, it is

expected that the MCA will eventually contain only a few locations where groundwater persists,

mainly MW-21 and MW-39 (Figure 5). It is anticipated that COC concentrations detected at

MW-21 will continue to increase as a result of the same vertical stratification phenomena

described for the perched zone in Section 2.2. Additionally, groundwater level declines are

expected to continue as a result of various factors such as evapotranspiration (ET) losses and

lateral and downward infiltration of MCA groundwater into adjacent dry soils along the margins

of the MCA.

During 2012, ICs were effective and no changes in land use were observed. Section 6.0

provides further details of ICs and Section 7.0 provides further evaluation of the MNA remedy

using statistical methodologies and other metrics.

2.4 SOUTHERN AREA SHALLOW AQUIFER

The lithology of the shallow aquifer primarily consists of gravel, sand, and silt sediments. These

unconsolidated sediments are generally between 40 and 100 feet thick, but locally may be as

thick as 150 feet. Locally, the aquifer may yield as much as 2,000 gallons per minute (gpm) to

properly constructed wells. Depths to groundwater in the shallow aquifer generally range from

20 to 80 feet below land surface (bls), depending upon surface topography. In certain locations

along the San Pedro River, the water level in the shallow aquifer may be at or near the river

bottom. Movement of shallow aquifer groundwater is generally northward and typically

groundwater is under semi-confined conditions in the vicinity of the Site. As discussed earlier,

the shallow (or San Pedro) aquifer is hydraulically isolated from the MCA owing to an



4/8/2013 18

intervening, low hydraulic conductivity unit referred to as the laterally confining unit (LCU). To

the extent that there may be an exchange of groundwater between the MCA and Southern Area

shallow aquifer, the rate is extremely limited. The direction of the hydraulic gradient across the

LCU is from the Southern Area shallow aquifer toward the MCA.

2.4.1 Regional Aquifer

Groundwater also occurs in the lower portion of the St. David Formation and the underlying

older sedimentary rocks. These lithologic units comprise a single, confined hydrostratigraphic

unit, referred to as the regional or deep aquifer. The upper unit of the deep aquifer consists of

clayey and silty gravel beds near the mountains and clay, silt, and sandy silt, with interbeds of

gypsum in the central part of the Basin. Near the Site, the upper unit of the deep aquifer is

encountered at depths ranging from approximately 300 to 400 feet bls. The upper unit of the

deep aquifer ranges from 300 to 800 feet in thickness. The lower unit of the deep aquifer is

composed of older sedimentary rocks including lenses of gravel, sandstone, and siltstone.

Gypsiferous silt lacustrine sediments may also be present (Roeske and Werrell, 1973). The

lower unit of the deep aquifer is encountered at depths below 600 feet bls at the Site, and

ranges in thickness from several tens of feet, near the edge of the valley, to more than 1,000

feet beneath the San Pedro River (H+A, 1990a). Water in the regional aquifer is under artesian

pressure, and in most areas, the elevation of its potentiometric surface is higher than the water

table in the shallow aquifer, thereby indicating an upward vertical gradient. In lower elevations

near the central part of the San Pedro Valley, wells tapping the regional aquifer may be artesian

flowing, although depressurization has occurred as a result of increasing development and

associated groundwater exploitation.

The performance monitoring network in the Southern Area of the shallow aquifer includes

monitor wells MW-01, MW-06, MW-14, MW-22, MW-25, and MW-33 (Table 3; Figure 5).

Monitor wells MW-06 and MW-01 are considered to be situated upgradient from the Site, and

therefore monitor background conditions in the shallow aquifer. Sentinel wells included monitor

wells MW-14 and MW-22. Sentinel wells monitor whether the plume boundary has advanced.



4/8/2013 19

If plume advancement is seen, an alert is triggered. Buffer zone monitor wells MW-25 and

MW-33 monitor the anticipated maximum distance that the plume would migrate if the plume

were detected in the sentinel wells (Figure 5).

ICs for the Southern Area of the shallow aquifer include surveillance and community outreach to

assure that no groundwater resource development occurs within areas where the shallow

aquifer may be contaminated. Surveillance also includes observing any changes in land use

and updating the well inventory to query for new well permits filed near the Site. Section 6.0

provides further details on ICs.

2.4.2 Shallow Aquifer Water Levels

Shallow aquifer water level elevations in shallow aquifer monitor wells in the Southern Area are

monitored quarterly for water level elevation (Figures A-12 through A-17 in Appendix A).

Water level elevations in the Southern Area ranged from approximately 3,625.66 feet above msl

in November 2012 to 3,625.92 feet above msl in February 2012 in shallow aquifer monitor well

MW-06, and approximately 3,598.54feet above msl in November 2012 to 3,600.41feet above

msl in May 2012 in monitor well MW-25 (Table 4).

The apparent hydraulic gradients estimated for November 2012 within the Southern Area

shallow aquifer groundwater were approximately 0.005 calculated between monitor wells

MW-06 and MW-01, and approximately 0.005 calculated between monitor wells MW-22 and

MW-33 (Figure B-2 in Appendix B). These gradients are approximately an order of magnitude

higher than hydraulic gradients calculated for MCA wells, and reflect a more typical groundwater

flow system.

Water level elevations in shallow aquifer monitor wells showed seasonal fluctuations typical of

the shallow aquifer. Historically, however, water level elevations observed in the Southern Area

shallow aquifer wells in proximity of the San Pedro River typically increase during the summer

monsoon season. During 2012, the monsoon was moderate and increased water level



4/8/2013 20

elevations were not observed in August, except at monitor well MW-25. Increased water level

elevations were observed in February 2012, and decreases were observed in August and

November 2012 (Figures A-12 through A-17 in Appendix A). In addition to recharge during

seasonal rainfall-runoff, groundwater levels are affected by seasonal pumping cycles, which

typically are higher in the warm seasons.

2.4.3 Water Quality

Groundwater samples were collected from upgradient Southern Area shallow aquifer monitoring

wells MW-01 and MW-06 on a semi-annual basis in February and August 2012. Groundwater

samples were collected from Southern Area sentinel monitor wells MW-14 and MW-22 and

Southern Area MNA buffer zone monitor well MW-33 on an annual basis in February 2012.

Water quality is not monitored at monitor well MW-25, however this well would be monitored

contingent upon results from monitor well MW-33.

Nitrate-N was detected at concentrations less than 1 mg/l in Southern Area shallow aquifer

monitoring wells MW-06 and MW-14 during 2012 (Table 7; Figure B-4 in Appendix B).

Perchlorate was not detected in Southern Area shallow aquifer monitoring wells during 2012

(Table 7; Figures B-4 in Appendix B).

2.4.4 Southern Area Shallow Aquifer Status

Data collected during 2012 support the current conceptualization of the shallow aquifer in the

Southern Area and its relationship to the MCA. The LCU provides hydraulic separation between

the MCA and shallow aquifer. Nitrate-N was less than 1 mg/l or not detected at sentinel wells,

upgradient wells and buffer zone wells. Perchlorate concentrations were not detected in any

Southern Area shallow aquifer upgradient, buffer zone or sentinel wells during 2012 (Figure 2).

Historically perchlorate has never been detected in the shallow aquifer. Nitrate-N has been

detected at several locations in the shallow aquifer. Nitrate-N concentrations exceeding the



4/8/2013 21

cleanup standard of 10 mg/l have not been detected in the Southern Area shallow aquifer since

1991, and since 1999, detected concentrations have remained less than 1 mg/l.

ICs were effective and no observed changes in land use occurred during 2012.



4/8/2013 22

3. 0 NORTHERN AREA

The Northern Area is the portion of the shallow aquifer into which the Wash 1, 2, 3, and 4

watersheds drain. The Northern Area extends from the vicinity of shallow aquifer monitor well

MW-13 north toward shallow aquifer private property D(17-20)23ada (Figure 6). Within this

area, the shallow aquifer boundary widens to the east of the San Pedro River and incorporates

large tracts of farmland in St. David. Moving farther downgradient, the aquifer then narrows to

the north of Dragoon Wash. Generally groundwater flow is to the north-northwest paralleling the

course of the San Pedro River. Further information about the regional aquifer is provided in the

first paragraph in Section 2.4.1.

Nitrate-N is the only COC in the Northern Area. The San Pedro River itself forms the eastern

boundary of the nitrate-N plume (as defined by concentrations exceeding 10 mg/l) (Figure 2).

The nitrate-N plume is believed to have resulted from historical discharges of plant wastewaters

and runoff originating within Wash 4, 5, and 6 watersheds, based on the primary locations of

ANPI’s industrial operations (Table 7; Figure 2). Both groundwater and surface water transport

mechanisms are believed to control the dynamics of the nitrate-N plume.

Remedial actions addressing nitrate-N contamination in the Northern Area comprise both an

active component based on pump-and-treat technology (NARS) and a passive remedy based

on natural attenuation.

The NARS is located in the northwest section of the ANPI property (Figure 7). The MNA

performance network in the Northern Area comprises a management zone, buffer zone, sentinel

wells, and upgradient zone (Table 3; Figure 6) (H+A, 2009a). Performance monitoring is

performed in the Northern Area to evaluate the NARS and MNA performance pursuant to the

Northern Area PMP and the NARS operations and maintenance manual (H+A, 2007a, 2009a).

Monitoring of the NARS is performed in both weekly and monthly rounds, while shallow aquifer

groundwater monitoring occurred on a quarterly basis during 2012 (Table 3; Tables D-1 through

D-7 in Appendix D).



4/8/2013 23

The deep aquifer is the primary aquifer used for domestic purposes throughout the St. David

area (H+A, 2009b). Several private wells tap the shallow aquifer for irrigation purposes. Some

residences rely on shallow aquifer water for domestic purposes, however, these are located

outside of the area of contamination. Three private well owners in the study area are currently

using the shallow aquifer for domestic usage. Currently groundwater at each of these private

wells is below the cleanup standard for nitrate-N (Table 7).

ICs for the Northern Area include community outreach, surveillance and an Alternate Domestic

Water Supply Plan (ADWSP). Section 6.0 provides further details on ICs.

3.1 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

By means of the NARS, nitrate-N in extracted groundwater is reduced in the wetland by means

of biological denitrification with a goal of reducing the nitrate-N to concentrations less than the

cleanup standard of 10 mg/l. NARS monitoring is performed to assist operational decisions

regarding wetland operation and to verify that the treated effluent discharge meets Arizona

Aquifer Water Quality Standards (AAWQS). The NARS began full-scale operations in 2005.

The NARS consists of four subsystems including extraction, delivery, treatment, and return

systems. The extraction system includes extraction well SEW-1, which pumps nitrate-bearing

groundwater from the shallow aquifer (Figure 7). The delivery system conveys water withdrawn

from extraction well SEW-1 to the treatment system via approximately 5,100 feet of above- and

below-grade pipe. The treatment system consists of a 4.3-acre constructed wetland, comprising

five separate treatment cells. The first three treatment cells denitrify the groundwater extracted

from SEW-1. Fundamentally, in the anoxic conditions artificially created and maintained in the

bottoms of the wetland ponds, bacteria utilize oxygen on the nitrate radical for their metabolic

processes, thereby liberating free nitrogen to the atmosphere. Additional nitrate removal is

realized as a result of nutrient uptake by cattails growing in the wetland ponds. The fourth

treatment cell is designed to oxidize any ammonia residuals originating in the influent water.



4/8/2013 24

This is accomplished through an oxidation process created as a result of oxygen liberation from

photosynthesis. The fifth treatment cell relies on the same denitrification processes to remove

any residual nitrate-N. Treated water is returned via approximately 2,900 feet of above- and

below-grade piping. This piping conveys the treated effluent to a return location in Wash 3,

where it recharges back into the shallow aquifer or flows into the San Pedro River (Figures 7

and 8).

3.2 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Proper operation of the NARS requires maintenance of the groundwater extraction system, and

groundwater treatment system (wetland), and confirmation that treated effluent return system

components are working properly and efficiently. By regularly inspecting and maintaining each

system component and keeping accurate maintenance records, problems can often be

discovered and corrected before a serious malfunction or system upset occurs. NARS

maintenance also consists of conducting equipment inspections, repairing or replacing damaged

equipment or equipment parts, and exercising good housekeeping. Equipment maintenance is

performed according to recommendations of the respective manufacturers. These are compiled

in Appendix C of the NARS O&M manual (H+A, 2007a). The NARS O&M manual also includes

guidelines for pest control and abatement. These guidelines provide the operator with procedures

for monitoring and implementing control of harmful pests, such as caterpillars or invasive plants.

Information regarding amendment loading and monitoring procedures is also presented in the

O&M manual, in addition to specifications for ranges of normal operating parameters, routine

operation duties, and reporting forms (H+A, 2007a).

The following sections describe various routine and non-routine O&M actions performed during

2012.



4/8/2013 25

3.2.1 Maintenance and Repairs

During 2012, routine maintenance included cleaning out the hydraulic distribution piping, outlet

structures, and outlet structure gratings, which became clogged with plant debris. Periodic

maintenance was performed to remove sediment that filled treatment cell inlet open trays. This

typically occurs mainly at final denitrification area (FDA), where the bank slope meets the inlet

tray (Figure 8).

In February 2012, maintenance was performed in the NARS. On February 24, the evaporator,

used to measure evaporation rates in the ponds, was replaced. On February 28, the tip of the

nitrate probe was changed out due to malfunction. Problems with the evaporator continued to

persist through the week of April 13, 2012.

The week of April 13, 2012, the pumping time at SEW-1 was increased from 12 hours per day to

16 hours per day. The rationale of adjusting the discharge rate of SEW-1 is that at lower

temperatures, denitrification is limited and nitrate-N contaminated water was being observed in

effluent from the ponds above MCL, 10 mg/l. Pumping is adjusted according to temperature

threasholds and nitrate-N concentrations within pond effluent remains under MCL In July, the

SEW-1 totalizer was temporarily disabled due to obstructions in the paddle wheel and was then

replaced on August 17, 2012. In September, maintenance was performed on SEW-1 due to a

variety of complications. On September 7, 2012, the SEW-1 timer failed and was replaced.

During the week of September 14, 2012, SEW-1 ran for continuously for 3 days due to a faulty

“stop” key. Timer was set on manual mode until an electrician performed a diagnostic test on

the electrical system on September 17, 2012, however he determined that the SEW-1 electrical

system was properly functioning. On September 26, 2012, the SEW-1 timer run time was

changed to 12 hours per day because of decreasing pond temperatures. On November 16,

2012, SEW-1 timer run time was changed to 8 hours per day to accommodate for colder

weather.

In mid-July, the Parshall flume totalizer was nonfunctional. It remained nonfunctional until the

battery was replaced the week of September 21, 2012.



4/8/2013 26

3.2.2 Emergent Plant Monitoring

Monitoring for cattail vitality is performed continuously throughout the year. During 2012,

monitoring of emergent plants indicated acceptable vitality based on their healthy green

coloration; large, well developed catkins; and an aerial coverage over approximately 90 percent

of pond surfaces. Typically, the cattails in PDA-S green-up earlier than in the other PDAs and

FDA. This is attributed to the comparatively warmer influent water temperatures into PDA-S in

early spring. Water surfaces in the downstream ponds are exposed to atmospheric

temperatures that are typically cooler than the relatively constant temperature of the influent

from extraction well SEW-1.

3.2.3 Invasive Species Control

Routine measures to control invasion of insect and plant pests were performed in 2012. Simyra

henrici (Sh), commonly known as cattail caterpillars, were observed in the treatment cells in

2012, but due to conditions of the ponds and predatory wildlife, their presence was short lived

and no abatement was necessary.

Mosquito monitoring was also performed routinely. Mosquitoes were not observed in significant

numbers during inspections conducted in 2012. It is believed that mosquito populations are

largely in balance due to predatory species of birds and bats.

Non-wetland plants were observed in and around the treatment cells during 2012. Invasive

plant removal was performed at the treatment wetland to remove Tamarisk (Tamarisk

chinensis), commonly known as salt cedar, and also tumbleweed (Salsola tragus). The

tamarisk and tumbleweeds were removed.



4/8/2013 27

3.2.4 Ecological Monitoring

During 2012, active controls for invasive animal species were not required. The wetlands are

well-populated with a variety of avian species. Some of the species observed include sharp-

shinned hawk, red-tailed hawk, mourning dove, common raven, northern rough-winged swallow,

tree swallow, marsh wren, ruby-crowned kinglet, chipping sparrow, Brewer’s sparrow, vesper

sparrow, black-throated sparrow, white-crowned sparrow and yellow-headed blackbird. A

number of reptiles and mammalian species have also been observed. Frogs, rattlesnakes,

javelina, bats, and coyote were noted most often. Ecological monitoring is performed to assess

whether wildlife activity is causing damage to the treatment cells. In the past, when treatment

cell water levels were low, javelina were noted entering the treatment cells to dig up cattail

roots. This created conditions vulnerable to bank erosion.

3.2.5 Amendment Loading

During 2012, molasses was dosed into the wetland as a carbon amendment to support DO

suppression in the water column and to sustain the proper dissolved organic carbon

concentration. The total volume of molasses added from January through December 2012 was

approximately 10,515 gallons. This comprises 8,640 gallons added at PDA-S and 1,875 gallons

added at PDA-C (Table 9; Figure 9). The PDA-S and PDA-C treatment cells received all of the

carbon amendment in 2012 (Figure 9). Air monitoring of the area surrounding the wetland was

performed to assure that excessive molasses loading had not created offensive odors from

hydrogen sulfide off-gassing. Such odors were not detected to any significant degree, and

when detected, the odors were limited to the immediate wetland area.

During 2012, it was determined that phosphorus supplements (in the form of B-52) were not

needed based on cattail vitality. Phosphorus is believed to recycle into the water column in the

winter when plants senesce; therefore, the nutrient is utilized by plants only during the growing

season. Molasses may also be providing an added source of available phosphorus within this

system.



4/8/2013 28

3.3 WATER LEVEL AND FLOW MONITORING

Hydrologic conditions in the wetland are monitored to ensure proper hydraulic routing through

the wetland. Hydraulic routing is affected by treatment cell water levels, preferred flow

pathways through the treatment cells, and influent and effluent volume and rate.

3.3.1 Influent Monitoring

The rate and volume of extracted groundwater delivered to the treatment wetland is monitored

on a weekly basis as part of O&M and monitoring activities. Two parameters are measured

weekly: totalized flow volume (in gallons), and instantaneous flow in gallons per minute (gpm)

(Figure 10). Table 11 summarizes the totalized flow volume measured at SEW-1 during 2012.

Figure 11 provides a graphic depiction of the cumulative pumpage history at extraction well

SEW-1 through December 2012. With the exception of a few days of 24 hour continuous

running, SEW-1 pumpage time was variable from January to December of 2012 that ranged

from 8 hours per day to 16 hours per day. (Table 10; Figure 10).

During 2012, the instantaneous flow rate at extraction well SEW-1 was maintained at

approximately 180 to 190 gpm (Table 11). The total volume of groundwater extracted from the

shallow aquifer via SEW-1 during the 2012 reporting period was 55,074,470 gallons (Table 10).

It is estimated that a total volume of 672,688,100 gallons has been removed since pumping of

extraction well SEW-1 commenced in 1997 (Table 11; Figure 11). According to vendor

specifications, the precision of the flow meter at extraction well SEW-1 is rated at ± 2 percent of

the actual flow. Thus, the uncertainty due to flow measurement during 2012 was approximately

1,101,489 gallons, and during the entire operational history of the NARS, uncertainty is

approximately 13,453,762 gallons.



4/8/2013 29

Water levels are measured quarterly in extraction well SEW-1 as part of O&M and performance

monitoring. A table and hydrograph presenting water level elevations at SEW-1 are provided

(Table 12; Figure E-1 in Appendix E). Pumping water level elevations at extraction well SEW-1

ranged between 3562.76 feet to 3,560.13 feet above msl during 2012 (Table 12). The lowest

pumping water levels were observed in August and November 2012.

During 2012, the pumping water levels fluctuated approximately 3 feet. The largest decline

occurred between February and May. The decline is normally greater during the summer

months due to increased groundwater withdraws for irrigation at nearby properties. The water

level elevation appears to have stabilized between 3,560 and 3,563 feet above msl.

The last static water level was measured in March 2008. The apparent difference between the

pumping and static water levels was approximately 8 feet; however, the “static” water level

possibly was still affected by residual drawdown from pumping.

3.3.2 Effluent Monitoring

In accordance with normal operation, discharge to the primary location in Wash 3 was

continuous during 2012 (Figure 7). The average effluent flow rate estimated at the Parshall

flume was 63 gpm (Table 11). The 2012 annual volume of treated water discharged from the

primary location into Wash 3 was approximately 37,518,380 gallons (Table 11). No complaints

concerning discharge odors were received from neighbors in 2012. The monitoring location for

detecting discharge odors is located at Apache Powder Road and Wash 3 (Figure 7).

3.3.3 Water Budget

A water budget facilitates evaluation of operational performance of the wetland system.

Monitoring inflow and outflow volumes allows the operator to determine mass removal rates of

nitrate-N, identify if leakage is occurring, and estimate a recharge volume of treated water. The



4/8/2013 30

water budget is one of the components that help guide in the operation of the wetland; however,

long-term operation of the NARS is guided by monitoring water levels, water quality, adjustments

to inflow, carbon loading, and biological parameters (Kadlec & Knight, 1996).

Water budget for the NARS is calculated based on the best available data for the system inputs

(I) and outputs (O). The resulting equation is:

SOI

Where ΔЅ = change in storage and = total error in measurement and/or estimation.

Input data included data collected from the SEW-1 flow meter and precipitation data collected on

site. The surface area of the treatment cells was used to calculate the precipitation volume based

on the ANPI rain gauge. The remaining watershed was not included because the soils at the

wetland consist of high-permeability, sandy and gravely soils that generally infiltrate a large

percentage of the rainfall. Once these soils reach saturation, a percentage of runoff is diverted

along the road, or along the open distribution piping. Vegetation also acts to intercept smaller

amounts of precipitation. In the past, erosion has occurred only in response to extremely heavy

precipitation and mainly near the wetland shed, near the FDA inlet tray, and near the influent

piping (Figure 8). Thus, based on these assumptions, 2012 input to the system from precipitation

and SEW-1 was estimated to be approximately 56,124,616 gallons (Table 10).

Output from the system includes evapotranspiration (ET) losses, evaporation losses from open

water areas, and discharge at the Parshall flume. ET is a combination of evaporation and

transpiration. Evaporation accounts for water losses from soil and water, and transpiration is

water loss from photosynthesis by emergent flora. Evaporation measurements were collected

by means of an atmometer (ETgage™ Model A) located near the wetland shed. The monthly

ET rate was multiplied by a factor of 1.5 during the growing season, specifically for the months

June, July and August, to account for transpiration from cattails. These data were compared to

estimated rates for reference crop ET (ETo) and pan/lake evaporation rates. A referenced pan

evaporation rate of 93 inches per year was used for the open water area (Sellers and Hill, 1974)



4/8/2013 31

(Table 10). During October 2007, a sonic flow meter was installed at the Parshall flume to

provide a method to measure totalized discharge. However, this instrument performed

inconsistently in 2007, 2008, and most of 2009. Therefore, discharge estimates were calculated

from the rate of outflow as measured weekly from the Parshall flume. Output from the system

was calculated to be approximately 47,838,027 gallons in 2012. Of this amount, an estimated

37,518,380 gallons was returned to the system (Table 10).

Uncertainties to the water budget calculations, in addition to measurement uncertainties for the

output, include changes in storage and infiltration losses into underlying, adjacent soils. Input

errors include rainfall, runoff and percent error with the SEW-1 totalizer. Based on these

calculations, the difference between input volume produced at extraction well SEW-1 and the

outflow volume estimated at the Parshall flume is approximately 8,286,589 gallons with

approximately 68 percent of the input being discharged (Table 10). However, this level of

apparent loss is probably due to the likely uncertainties/errors in the various component

measurements as well as the several unquantified/unaccounted for variables as discussed

earlier.

3.3.4 Treatment Cell Water Level Monitoring

Water levels were measured weekly in the PDA, anerobic nitrification area (ANA), and FDA

treatment cells (Appendix E). A table presenting treatment cell water levels is included (Table

E-1 in Appendix E). Every effort was made to operate treatment cells at maximum operating

depths from January through December 2012 (Table E-1 in Appendix E). This goal was

intended to maximize residence times through the wetland.

3.3.5 Design Confirmation Piezometer

A design confirmation piezometer (DCP), DCP-12, was installed below the toe of the FDA

(Figure 7). The primary purpose of this piezometer was to monitor for potential leakage across

the cutoff wall of the FDA. During initial filling of the FDA in 1997, water seeped through the



4/8/2013 32

cutoff wall and appeared in the piezometer. This leakage was believed to be due to the

temporary desiccation of the clay materials in the cutoff wall between the time of construction

and the filling of the wetland. In the subsurface, infiltrating waters leaked through the

desiccation cracks and migrated toward the piezometer. At the same time during continued

operation of the FDA, subsurface water was rewetting, swelling the clay, and healing over the

desiccation cracks, thus restoring the functionality of the clay cutoff wall. Since 1997, water

levels in piezometer DCP-12 have remained relatively static. This seems to indicate that the

water in the vicinity of the piezometer must be resting within a depression in the Saint David

clay, which underlies the alluvial sediments associated with Wash 3. The water level elevation

at DCP-12 ranged from approximately 3667.30 feet above msl in October 2012 to 3,669.39 feet

above msl in January 2012, with an average depth to water of 21.44 feet below measuring point

(bmp) and an average saturated thickness of approximately 3.6 feet during 2012 (Table 12;

Figure E-1 in Appendix E). The slight fluctuations in the hydrographic data may be in part due

to local recharge effects along Wash 3 and/or ET due to phreatophytes.

3.3.6 Discharge Monitor Well MW-10

Monitor well MW-10 is located in the Wash 3 alluvium, downstream from the primary discharge

location (Figure 7). From the time it was installed in 1990 until wetland discharge was initiated

at the primary Wash 3 location in May 2005, monitor well MW-10 remained dry. Water level

elevations at monitor well MW-10 ranged from approximately 3,616.85 feet above msl in

September 2012 to 3,617.53 feet above msl in August 2012 with an average depth to water of

15.69 feet bmp during 2012 (Table 12; Figure E-2 in Appendix E). The average saturated

thickness of the alluvium at monitor well MW-10 in 2012 was approximately 4.81 feet, an

increase of approximately 0.42 feet compared to the 2011 average thickness.



4/8/2013 33

3.4 WATER QUALITY MONITORING

Monitoring influent and effluent water at the NARS provides the essential basis for evaluating

wetland operational and performance efficiency. Nitrate-N is monitored at these and other key

locations weekly using a field probe. Monthly samples are also collected and transmitted to an

Arizona-licensed laboratory for nitrate-N analysis by EPA Method 300.0 and ammonia-N

analysis by EPA Method 350.1. Other parameters are monitored monthly, quarterly, and

annually according to an approved schedule (Tables D-1 through D-7 in Appendix D). These

parameters are used for evaluation of potential operational issues and therefore provide

possible information of trends that may be leading to an upset condition. Water quality

monitoring was performed at extraction well SEW-1, within wetland treatment cells, at the

wetland effluent discharge location, at monitor well MW-10, and piezometer DCP-12 as part of

O&M monitoring program.

3.4.1 Influent /Effluent Water Quality

Water quality samples were collected at shallow aquifer extraction well SEW-1 and analyzed for

nitrate-N on a monthly basis; total phosphorus and ammonia-N on a quarterly basis; and

bicarbonate, calcium, chloride, fluoride, orthophosphate, potassium, magnesium, sodium,

sulfate, and TDS on an annual basis, as outlined in the extraction well monitoring schedule

(Tables 13 and 14; Table C-1 in Appendix C). Field parameters hydrogen ion potential (pH), EC,

and temperature were monitored monthly at the extraction well (Table E-1 in Appendix E).

Field nitrate is monitored weekly (Table E-1 in Appendix E). In addition in 2011, the 5-year

metals were sampled at extraction well SEW-1 (Table M-1 in Appendix M). The 5-year metals

include aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium (total), copper,

iron, lead, manganese, mercury, selenium, silver, thallium and zinc. Arsenic was detected for

the first time at a concentration of 0.0029 mg/l, below the AAWQS of 0.05 mg/l (AAC, Title 18,

Chapter 11).

Water quality samples were collected at the primary discharge location EFF-L and analyzed for

nitrate-N and ammonia-N on a monthly basis; TDS, total phosphorus, and total suspended



4/8/2013 34

solids (TSS) on a quarterly basis; and bicarbonate, chloride, fluoride, sulfate, orthophosphate,

potassium, magnesium, calcium, and sodium on an annual basis, as outlined in the effluent

monitoring schedule (Tables 13 and 14; Table C-3 in Appendix C). Field parameters pH, EC,

and temperature were monitored monthly at the primary discharge location (Table E-1 in

Appendix E). Field nitrate is monitored weekly (Table E-1 in Appendix E).

Nitrate-N concentrations ranged from 54 mg/l in December 2012 to 72 mg/l in July 2012 in water

quality samples collected monthly from extraction well SEW-1 (Table 13; Figure D-3 in Appendix

D). The 2012 average nitrate-N concentration was 63 mg/l. At the end of the reporting period,

the total estimated mass of nitrate-N removed from the shallow aquifer since pumping

commenced in 1997 was 621,712 pounds. The total estimated mass of nitrate-N removed from

January through December, 2012 was approximately 28,526 pounds (Figure 12).

Nitrate-N concentrations in wetland effluent were less than the ROD cleanup standard of 10

mg/l. Nitrate-N concentrations ranged from less than 1 mg/l to 4.82 mg/l from January through

December 2012, in original water quality samples collected monthly at the primary discharge

location EFF-L (Table 13; Figure D-6 in Appendix D).

Ammonia-N concentrations ranged from 4 mg/l in March 2012 to 5.3 mg/l in September 2012 in

original samples collected quarterly from SEW-1 (Table 13). Ammonia-N concentrations in

wetland effluent water samples collected monthly from EFF-L during 2012 were less than 0.5

mg/l (Table 13).

The concentration of nitrate-N in groundwater sampled at extraction well SEW-1 is higher than

the concentration of nearby monitor wells MW-08 and MW-19, and private well D(18-21)6bcc2,

which are located along the aquifer boundary and in the “backwater” area of the extraction well.

Monitor wells MW-17 and MW-18 are essentially co-located and represent different sampling

depths at the same location. These wells are believed to be along the northern edge of the

extraction well SEW-01 capture envelope.

The assumption that the source of nitrate is upstream from SEW-1 is based primarily on

knowledge of historical plant operations. Additionally it is based on:



4/8/2013 35

The concentrations of nitrate-N in groundwater from upstream monitor wells MW-34,

MW-35 and MW-36.

The concentrations of nitrate-N in monitor wells located across the San Pedro River

which ranged from less than 0.6 to 2.5 mg/l when sampled during the Remedial

Investigation.

The water levels contours on the east side of the San Pedro River showing flow to the

river on the west.

Surface water stations SW-03 and SW-04, which indicate discharge of nitrate-N in San

Pedro River baseflow down gradient from monitor wells MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36.

3.4.1.1 Effluent Field Nitrate

Field monitored nitrate-N concentrations ranged from 0.56 mg/l to 4.82 mg/l in effluent

discharge (Table E-1 in Appendix E). Field nitrate-N was compared to analytical laboratory

results and the relative percent difference (RPD) was calculated (Table E-2 in Appendix E). If

the analytical result from the lab and the nitrate field probe was 1 mg/l or less, the RPD was not

calculated. The data suggest that the field probe results are consistently higher than the

laboratory results (Figure E-1 in Appendix E). The reasons for the consistent offset between the

probe and lab data is uncertain. Initial thoughts are that there may be some degree of

denitrification occurring in transit to the laboratory. However, the critical operational decisions

pending on the sampling results are such that it would be preferable to base the decision on

falsely higher analytical results than falsely lower results. Thus, the present method of

operation is conservative. Additionally, it is possible that the field probe may be the more

representative value because it is taken within hours of sample collection, whereas laboratory

analyses have a holding time of up to 48 hours. During this time denitrification may be

occurring.



4/8/2013 36

3.4.2 Treatment Cells Water Quality

It was believed that the increasing trend in nitrate-N concentration of the effluent resulted from

falling air temperatures at the site approaching freezing. Colder temperatures suppress

denitrification processes in the treatment cells. Reducing pumping duration at SEW-1

decreased the nitrate loading into the wetland and increased the residence time through the

treatment cells. The molasses loaded into the wetland suppressed the DO concentration

thereby facilitating the denitrification process.

Water quality samples were collected monthly from the PDA, ANA, and FDA treatment cells and

analyzed for nitrate-N and ammonia-N as part of normal operation of the NARS (Table 13;

Figures E-3 through E-5 in Appendix E). In addition, samples were also collected for chemical

oxygen demand (COD), total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), and total organic

carbon (TOC) (Tables 15 and 16).

Nitrate-N concentrations detected in original water samples ranged from less than 1 mg/l at

PDA-N, ANA, and FDA to 44 mg/l at PDA-S (Table 13; Figures E-1 in Appendix E). The 2012

average nitrate-N concentrations were 34.75 mg/l at PDA-S, 7.53 mg/l at PDA-C, 1.87 mg/l at

PDA-N, 1.53 mg/l at ANA, and 1.12 mg/l at FDA, calculated from monthly detections During

2012, denitrification performance was consistent in the PDA and FDA treatment cells.

Water quality sampling for ammonia-N was performed monthly. Ammonia concentrations

detected in original water samples ranged from less than 0.5 mg/l at ANA, FDA, PDA-C, PDA-

N, and PDA-S to 11 mg/l at PDA-S (Table 13). The 2012 average ammonia-N concentrations

were 2.77 mg/l at PDA-S, and less than 0.5 mg/l at ANA, PDA-N, PDA-C, and FDA, calculated

from monthly detections. These concentrations of ammonia-N are favorable in terms of

potential issues related to reconversion of ammonia to nitrate.

Water quality sampling for COD was performed quarterly in 2012, according to the treatment

cell monitoring schedule (Appendix D). COD concentrations detected in samples ranged from

24 mg/l at PDA-N in December 2012 to 120 mg/l in March 2012 at ANA (Table 16). The critical



4/8/2013 37

COD value for denitrification is 40-60 mg (HSU, 2002). The COD values have increased as

more detrital material has accumulated and decomposed in the treatment cells.

Water quality sampling for TOC was performed quarterly in 2012. TOC concentrations detected

in samples ranged from 5.8 mg/l at PDA-S in June 2012, to 21 mg/l on a split sample at PDA-C

in March 2012 (Table 16).TOC concentrations in 2012 were comparable to 2011 concentrations

although the volume of molasses added was decreased by about 38 percent over 2012. It

appears that molasses volume does not greatly affect TOC concentrations as thought in

previous years. It is also possible that the wetlands system itself is contributing to the reduction

in TOC concentrations..

Water quality sampling for TKN was performed in September 2012. TKN concentrations detected

in original samples ranged from 0.88 mg/l at PDA-N to 2.3 mg/l at FDA (Table 15).

Water quality sampling for phosphorus was performed quarterly in 2012. Total phosphorus

concentrations detected in samples ranged from less than 0.1 mg/l at PDA-C, PDA-S, PDA-N,

FDA, and ANA throughout 2012, to 3.6 mg/l at ANA in September 2012 (Table 16). During the

growing season, phosphorus concentrations are typically low due to uptake from cattails. Once

cattails enter their senescent phase, concentrations detected in water samples should increase.

The December 2012 results ranged from less than 0.1 mg/l to 0.17 mg/l (Table 16).

Selected water quality parameters were evaluated from water samples collected monthly from

the wetland treatment cells with field meters during the period from January through December

2012. NARS parameters included DO, pH, EC, nitrate-N, and temperature (Table E-1 in

Appendix E). Field nitrate-N was compared to analytical laboratory results and the RPD was

calculated (Table E-2 in Appendix E). Field parameters showed little fluctuations during 2012.

DO was detected at concentrations less than 2 mg/l in all treatment cells except one or more

months during the period of January through August 2012 at all treatment cells. During

September, October, and November 2012 higher DO concentrations were recorded as a result

of taking measurements closer to the surface. When measurements were taken at the proper

depths, DO concentrations in December 2012 were consistent with historical data. The



4/8/2013 38

measurements at the ANA were at higher concentrations than at the other treatment cells.

Since the ANA treatment cell is designed to be aerobic, higher DO at ANA is not an issue.

Suppression of DO concentrations in other cells is a favorable condition for the denitrification

process. During 2012, EC did not increase as treatment water moved through subsequent

treatment cells as was observed during the establishment phase of the wetland, when dissolved

solids concentrated and stressed the wetland plants. The pH remained within an optimal range

for denitrification during 2012.

3.4.3 Design Confirmation Piezometer Water Quality

Water samples were collected from DCP-12 during the February, May, August and November

2012 quarterly groundwater activities. These samples were analyzed for nitrate-N (Table 13).

The nitrate-N concentration in original water samples collected at DCP-12 ranged between 16

mg/l in November 2012 to 44 mg/l in August 2012 (Figure E-1 in Appendix E). The average

nitrate-N concentration during 2012 was 29.5 mg/l. Sampling of this piezometer is performed

using a bailer to manually extract three borehole volumes before sampling occurs. During the

past few years, the piezometer has typically gone dry before purging the requisite three

borehole volumes (approximately 8 to 10 gallons). This may help to explain the occasional

increase in nitrate-N concentrations in the samples. Specifically, and as discussed earlier, there

may be some level of local recharge. At the same time, there may also be vertical stratification

in the water at that location such that more concentrated water is situated at the bottom of the

piezometer. This concentrated water is probably reflective of water that was leaked during the

initial filling of the wetland, considering the nitrate-N concentrations are much higher than any

waters that have been in the FDA in recent years.

3.4.4 Discharge Monitor Well MW-10 Water Quality

Water samples were collected from monitor well MW-10 during the February, May, August, and

November 2012 quarterly groundwater activities. These samples were analyzed for nitrate-N



4/8/2013 39

and ammonia-N (Table 13). Ammonia-N concentrations in samples collected at monitor well

MW-10 were less than 0.5 mg/l throughout 2012 (Table 13; Figure E-1 in Appendix E) Nitrate-

N concentrations in original water samples were less than 0.1 mg/l for May, August, and

December 2012 and 1.9 mg/l in February 2012 (Table 13; Figure E-1 in Appendix E).. Water

quality at monitor well MW-10 is used to monitor the quality of water recharging to the shallow

aquifer to determine if compliance with the AAWQS of 10 mg/l for nitrate-N is being met (AAC,

Title 18, Chapter 11). Ammonia-N is monitored to evaluate if nitrate-N conversion is occurring

through oxidation. Ammonia-N inhibits denitrification because it is a stronger election accepter

than nitrate-N which prevents the production of nitrogen gas, or denitrification, from the nitrate-N

compound.

3.4.5 NARS Remediation Status

The NARS remedy was effective during 2012. The treatment cells provided the essential

conditions for denitrification to occur. Even through the November and December months of

2012, nitrate-N concentrations remained less than 2 mg/l in effluent samples (Table 13).

Nitrate-N was not detected in samples collected at the effluent in January and from March

through October 2012. The NARS was effective in capturing and treating contaminated

groundwater, based on decreasing nitrate-N concentrations north of SEW-1 capture envelope.

Highlights through 2012 include removal of 36,913,230 gallons of contaminated groundwater;

removal of 28,526 pounds of nitrate-N mass; operations of the SEW-1 extraction well for a total

of 362 days; continuous discharge of treated effluent to the primary discharge location; and non-

detections of ammonia-N concentrations and little to no detections of nitrate-N at Wash 3

monitor well MW-10.



4/8/2013 40

3.5 NORTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER

The Northern Area groundwater monitoring activities were performed according to the schedule

outlined in the Northern Area PMP (H+A, 2009a). Groundwater samples were collected from

Northern Area shallow aquifer monitor wells and shallow aquifer private wells in accordance

with an approved schedule to evaluate performance of the NARS and MNA (Table 3). The

shallow aquifer monitor wells in the network include MW-08, MW-10, MW-11, MW-13, MW-17

through MW-20, MW-34, MW-35, MW-36, MW-38, MW-40, MW-41A, MW-41B and MW-42

(Figure 6).

Shallow aquifer private wells have also been incorporated into the performance monitoring

network and were monitored for water quality and/or water level elevation during 2012. These

include shallow aquifer private wells D(17-20)25bad, D(17-20)36aad1, D(17-20)36aad3, D(17-

20)36caa, D(17-20)36cad1, D(17-20)36cdb, D(17-20)36dad, D(17-20)36ddc, D(18-20)01aad,

D(18-21)06ada, D(18-21)06bab, D(18-21)06bbc2, D(18-21)06bcb, and D(18-21)08bab.

3.5.1 Northern Area Water levels

Water levels were measured quarterly and water level contour maps were prepared to evaluate

groundwater flow dynamics in the Northern Area of the shallow aquifer (Appendix B). Water

level monitoring is essential in the determination of possible shifts in flow direction, which could

cause migration of nitrate-N to areas where it previously had not existed. The general pattern of

groundwater flow in the Northern Area shallow aquifer is sub parallel to the San Pedro River

which flows along a north to northwest course.

Water level elevations in the Northern Area shallow aquifer ranged from approximately 3,540.16

feet above msl in monitor well MW-38 in November 2012, to approximately 3,602.52 feet above

msl in private well D(18-21)08bab in February 2012 (Table 4). A localized depression in the

shallow aquifer near monitor wells MW-08, MW-17, MW-18, and MW-19 has developed as a

result of increased pumping at NARS extraction well SEW-1 (Figure B-1 in Appendix B).



4/8/2013 41

Water level elevations in shallow aquifer monitor wells feature typical seasonal fluctuations.

These effects include increases due to winter recharge and decreases due to pumping

increases and ET losses during the summer. However, water levels in shallow aquifer wells not

influenced by SEW-1 pumping indicated decreases during summer monsoon. The monsoon

event was moderate and likely increased the need for groundwater production from the shallow

aquifer by local ranchers (Table 4; Figures A-13 through A-14 in Appendix A).

The apparent hydraulic gradients calculated in November 2012 within the Northern Area shallow

aquifer were approximately 0.003, calculated between shallow aquifer monitor wells MW-13 and

MW-20; approximately 0.003, calculated between monitor wells MW-20 and MW-40; and

approximately 0.002, calculated between monitor wells MW-40 and MW-41B (Figure B-1 in

Appendix B).

3.5.2 Northern Area Water Quality

Water quality sampling for nitrate-N contamination was performed on a quarterly, semi-annual

or annual basis according to an approved schedule (Table 3). Water quality hydrographs for

nitrate-N concentrations were prepared to examine trends (Appendix C).

Nitrate-N concentrations, detected in shallow aquifer groundwater samples collected from

upgradient monitor wells in the MNA performance monitoring network, ranged from less than

0.2 mg/l at monitor well MW-34 in November 2012 to approximately 180 mg/l at monitor well

MW-36 in May 2012 (Table 7). Nitrate-N was detected at concentrations greater than 10 mg/l in

samples collected from upgradient Northern Area monitor wells MW-08, MW-13, MW-18,

MW-19, MW-35, and MW-36 during 2012 (Table 7; Figures C-9 through C-13 in Appendix C). It

is important to understand that these high concentrations of nitrate-N in upgradient monitor

wells in the Northern Area are certainly not comparable to the low background concentrations

as seen in the upgradient monitor wells in the Southern Area MNA performance monitoring

network. The Southern Area upgradient monitor wells were well upgradient of the location

where historical discharges from the site occurred. In contrast, upgradient from the Northern



4/8/2013 42

Area MNA area, the NARS is operative as an active component of the remedy. Therefore, the

high nitrate-N concentrations detected in monitor wells such as MW-36 are controlled by the

capture of extraction well SEW-1 (Figure 6).

Nitrate-N concentrations were less than 10 mg/l within most of the MNA management zone

wells, with the exception of one management zone well D(18-21)06bcb (Table 7). Management

zone well D(18-21)06bcb is located just north of the SEW-1 extent of capture zone as

determined from particle tracking and water level monitoring data (H+A, 2005b). Nitrate-N

concentrations ranged from 8.6 mg/l in November 2012 to 15 mg/l in the split sample from May

2012. At this location, the concentrations of nitrate-N in the well might be expected to fluctuate

if agricultural pumping were sufficiently intense. The remaining MNA management zone wells

ranged from less than 1 mg/l at MW-40 in August 2012, to 8. 2 mg/l at MW-42 in August 2012.

Nitrate-N concentrations in buffer zone wells ranged from <1 mg/l at MW-33 in November 2012

to 2 mg/l at D(17-20)25bad in May 2012 (Table 7).

MNA parameters were collected on an annual basis at MNA management zone monitor wells

MW-38, MW-40, MW-41B, MW-42, and D(17-20)25bad, according to the performance

monitoring schedule (Table 3). Samples were analyzed for alkalinity, dissolved manganese,

and sulfate by an approved laboratory, and DO, ORP, TDS, and dissolved iron by field probe

(Table 17). Geochemical parameters identify if conditions are right for denitrification to occur.

Low DO conditions are necessary for in situ biodenitrification to occur. Concentrations of less

than 2 mg/l indicate that the requisite anaerobic environment for denitrification is present.

Dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged from 2.33 mg/l at monitor wells MW-42 and D(17-

20)25bad to 5.49 mg/l at MW-40 in August 2012. If dissolved manganese and iron are present

in a reduced form, this may indicate coupled redox reactions of these metals with nitrate-N.

Manganese was detected at all wells but MW-42 and D(17-20)25bad were the only wells with

concentrations greater than 0.2 mg/l, and those detections were low at those two wells. Iron

concentrations were also low, all concentrations being less than 0.3mg/l. Alkalinity ranged

between 160 mg/l at MW-42 to 280 mg/l at MW-38 and MW-41B. The ORP measured at all



4/8/2013 43

shallow aquifer wells was between 58.3 mV at MW-42 and 168.1 mV at MW-40. Sulfate

concentrations were between 55 mg/l at MW-40 and 1100 mg/l at MW-42, and TDS

concentrations were between 393 mg/l and 1,412 mg/l (Table 18). These parameters will be re-

evaluated in November 2013 to verify if geochemical conditions are consistent with historical

data.

3.5.3 Northern Area Shallow Aquifer Status

The shallow aquifer in the Northern Area showed decreasing concentrations of nitrate-N in the

MNA network monitor wells, so much so that the nitrate-N plume extent has decreased closer to

the extraction well (Figure 6). Private well D(18-21)06bcb nitrate-N concentrations have

hovered above and below 10 mg/l during 2012, and the remaining wells in the MNA

management zone are less than 10 mg/l.

Nitrate-N concentrations at shallow aquifer monitor wells MW-34, MW-35, and MW-19 indicated

large fluctuations during 2012. Monitor Well MW-19 increased to 150 mg/l in November 2012.

This is attributed to high concentration water circulating within the capture zone of SEW-1.

Further monitoring of this increase in concentration will be monitored in 2013. This is consistent

with water level patterns and flow line analyses expected along the aquifer boundary. Nitrate-N

concentrations at monitor wells MW-8 and MW-17 remained steady in 2012. These monitor

wells are upgradient and within the capture zone of extraction well SEW-1. Statistical

evaluations were performed on Northern Area monitoring data. Section 7.0 provides details on

the statistical methodology and results.

ICs were effective during 2012. The well inventory was updated and no domestic well were

identified as “at minimal risk.” Details on the 2012 well inventory are in Section 6.1. Currently

bottled water is supplied to one well owner D(18-21)06bcb. This residence is located just north

of SEW-1, and currently the nitrate-N concentration is around 10 mg/l. This private well will be

monitored quarterly in 2013 to verify when nitrate-N concentrations remain below 10 mg/l.

Details on ICs are provided in Section 6.0.



4/8/2013 44

4.0 SAN PEDRO RIVER

The San Pedro River is the primary hydrologic feature within the basin. The shallow aquifer is

interactive with this stream. The interactions are controlled largely by hydrostratigraphic and

geomorphic factors. For example, lithologic logging in the vicinity of monitor well MW-35

indicates semi-confinement by a fine-grained stratum in the vicinity of monitor well MW-35,

however, moving eastward toward the River, this stratum does not appear to be present, likely

owing to historic downcutting along the River meander. Accordingly, throughout the study area,

the San Pedro River alternates between gaining and losing reaches. Groundwater-surface

water interactions are particularly evident during base flow conditions. In addition, ephemeral

tributaries entering the San Pedro River from the west, probably contribute some degree of

recharge to the shallow aquifer during periods of intense runoff. Detailed investigations of the

groundwater-surface water interactions along the San Pedro River have been performed as part

of the Site RIs (H+A, 2003c). Additionally, similar investigations have been performed by other

investigators upstream and downstream from the site (Black and Veatch, 1988).

The 10 mg/l surface water quality standard for the San Pedro River along the Curtiss Reach

was removed by ADEQ in December 2008 and replaced with a new standard of 3,733 mg/l.

During 2012, water quality and surface water discharge rates were monitored quarterly at five

surface water monitoring stations along the San Pedro River, according to an approved

schedule (Table 3). The five surface water monitoring stations are identified as SW-03, SW-04,

SW-12, SW-13, and SW-14. Water quality monitoring in the San Pedro River is opportunistic

due to the intermittent nature of its flow. Sections of the stream flow perennially due to

groundwater discharge, whereas other reaches are dry during most of the year. During more

extreme runoff events, the stream can flow bank-to-bank or occasionally overbank throughout

the Site. Therefore, measurement and sampling is contingent on flow conditions.



4/8/2013 45

4.1 DISCHARGE

San Pedro River surface water discharge conditions during the 2012 monitoring period were

near base flow during February.. Surface water sampling locations during the May, August, and

November PMP sampling events had no flow in 2012. In February, the flow rate for SW-03

was 1.87 cfs, SW-04 was 1.20 cfs, SW-12 was 1.23, and SW-14 was 1.40. Perennial flow was

persistent in the vicinity of stations SW-03 and SW-04. There was no flow in surface water SW-

13 in February 2012.

Surface water discharge was measured with a portable flow meter when stream depth was

sufficient (Figure B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B). Arizona observed a moderate monsoon in 2012

unlike monitoring years 2005 through 2008; discharge was observed during only one quarterly

sampling event at 4 stations. Surface water SW-13 remained dry for 2012.

4.2 SAN PEDRO RIVER WATER QUALITY

During 2012, surface water quality samples were scheduled for collection at the five monitoring

stations along the San Pedro River (Figures B-4 and B-5 in Appendix B). Surface water

samples collected from monitoring stations SW-03, SW-04, SW-12, and SW-14 were analyzed

for nitrate-N (Table 7). Surface water samples collected at SW-14 were also analyzed for

perchlorate because it is situated near the Southern Area.

Nitrate-N concentrations in samples collected from San Pedro River surface water stations

ranged from less than 1 mg/l at SW-12and SW-14 during 2012 to approximately 2.3 mg/l at SW-

03 in February 2012 (Table 7; Figures C-22 through C-24 in Appendix C).

Perchlorate was not detected above 1 µg/l in surface water samples collected in February 2012

from monitoring station SW-14 (Table 7).



4/8/2013 46

4.2.1 San Pedro River Status

Surface water flow was observed during the February 2012 quarterly sampling event at four

locations, SW-03, SW-04, SW-12 and SW-14. Flow was observed at only four surface water

stations in 2012. (Figure 13). The highest nitrate-N concentrations in 2012 were observed at

the perennial flow locations of monitoring stations SW-03 and SW-04 (Figure 6). The SW-03/04

reach has historically recorded the highest nitrate-N concentrations. These data are consistent

with the Site conceptual model for the Northern Area.



4/8/2013 47

5.0 INACTIVE AND FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS

The remedy for the Inactive and Formerly Active ponds on ANPI property involved the

emplacement of a native soil cover over the footprint of the former ponds (Figure 14). ICs are

also used to further prevent potential for exposures to pond soils containing COCs greater than

Arizona Residential Soil Remediation Levels (SRLs). This remedy was selected in the 2005

EPA-amended ROD (EPA, 2005). Pursuant to the August 22, 2008 DEUR, a pond inspection

was performed during December 2012 (ADEQ, 2008) (H+A, 2010a). The full inspection report

is included in an Appendix to this report (Appendix F). The DEUR was recorded in Cochise

County on July 28, 2008 and subsequently approved by ADEQ on August 22, 2008 (ADEQ,

2008). The DEUR restricts the use of the property to non-residential, restricts the use of

contaminated groundwater beneath the ANPI property, and provides details on institutional and

engineering controls for maintaining pond covers.

Pond cover maintenance activities performed during 2012 included backfilling along side slopes,

filling surface channels, and replacing damaged wattles. Details of the Pond locations requiring

maintenance and current photographs showing the conditions of the Pond covers as of the

annual inspection are provided (Appendix F).

5.1 PONDS STATUS

It was observed during 2012 maintenance activities at the ponds that erosion was more severe

along pond slopes. Repairs were performed using backfilling equipment operated by ANPI

personnel. Overall, the pond covers continue to provide effective containment of contaminated

soils. ICs including the DEUR, signage and fencing insure a further degree of protectiveness.



4/8/2013 48

6.0 INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS

ICs for groundwater have been imposed pursuant to an amendment to the ROD (EPA, 2005).

The ICs required by the ROD amendment and the DEUR for the Ponds included Site access

restriction, community education and outreach, and well inventory for the purpose of

determining potential exposure risk. In addition, ANPI implemented a revised ADWSP and a

Community Outreach Plan (COP) (ANPI, 2007 and H+A, 2009b).

6.1 WELL INVENTORY

ANPI completed a 2012 well inventory update (H+A, 2012c). The primary purposes of the well

inventory are to identify shallow aquifer wells in the vicinity of the ANPI study area and track well

development and construction as it may relate to potential human exposure pathways

associated with contaminated groundwater associated with the Site. The well inventory

comprises an assemblage of well information managed in both electronic and hardcopy formats.

The electronic media are stored within Microsoft Access Database and a Geographic

Information System (GIS) based on ArcView 9.3 architecture. Data sources for the well

inventory include the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Wells 55 database,

Groundwater Site Inventory (GWSI) database, and field data collected by ANPI. The well

inventory is updated annually, once ADWR completes their revised database. The complete

2012 well inventory update is provided (Appendix G).

Based on the May 2012 nitrate-N plume, no domestic wells were identified as “at risk.” Five

new registration records were added to batabase between 2011 and 2012, three wells were

identified within the detailed extent, which includes the ANP study area, the affected areas of

the shallow aquifer and a buffer zone. Two wells were drilled and confirmed as deep aquifer

wells according to driller’s reports. Driller reports were not available for the other 2 wells outside

of the detailed extent.. Update for these wells will be searched for next year. The well inventory

continues to be a useful tool for evaluating potential receptors for contaminated shallow

groundwater.



4/8/2013 49

6.2 COMMUNITY OUTREACH

The COP was prepared in 2007 (ANPI, 2007). The COP specifies outreach activities designed

to inform the community in the vicinity of the Site of ongoing remediation activities as well as

other information that may be useful in understanding plant operations. Activities associated

with the COP include mailings to nearby residents to communicate remediation status, maps

showing the extent of contamination, and opportunities for participation in community meetings

to provide updates on the Superfund project. ANPI also maintains a website at URL

http://www.apachenitro.com. This website is another component of the outreach program and is

updated regularly with background information on ANPI, including history; products and

processes; information on the Community Alert Network and Shelter-in-Place program;

information on activities completed under the Superfund program; and quarterly groundwater

monitoring data. The Benson library also contains a repository of information on the Apache

Superfund Site for public viewing. The repository will be updated in 2012 by ANPI as part of

their community outreach program.

During 2012, community outreach activities (Appendix H) included:

Distribution of Apache Updates to the community.

Uploading current annual and quarterly groundwater monitoring reports to the website.

6.3 ALTERNATE DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY PLAN

The ADWSP describes measures taken to address the contamination of domestic wells that

were contaminated as a result of historical discharge of nitrate. This included construction of

replacement wells drilled into the deep aquifer at eight residences and the identification of

http://www.apachenitro.com/



4/8/2013 50

procedures for newly-identified at risk domestic supply wells (H+A, 2009b). The ADWSP

applies only to residences where the sole water supply is from the shallow aquifer.

The procedures involve contacting the well owner and determining whether the well is used for

domestic consumption or some other purpose. If the nitrate-N concentration is above 10 mg/l

and the well is used for domestic purposes, a confirmation sample is collected. If the sample

analysis indicates a concentration of nitrate-N greater than 10 mg/l, delivery of bottled water is

immediately provided to the well owner. The private well is then monitored on a quarterly basis.

If the nitrate-N is less than 10 mg/l, quarterly monitoring continues until EPA approves a

reduction to either semi-annually or annually. Then the well is monitored for an additional two

years (H+A, 2009b). When the nitrate-N concentrations in the domestic well are less than 10

mg/l for four consecutive quarters, bottled water deliveries are discontinued. During 2012, no

new shallow aquifer wells were identified for monitoring and bottled water. Only one private well

owner, D(18-21)06bcb, currently receives bottled water. According to samples collected in

2012, private well D(18-21)06bcb nitrate-N has hovered above and below 10 mg/l (Table 7).

This well will be sampled quarterly during 2013.

6.4 DEUR AND FENCING

As previously stated, a DEUR was filed in 2008. The DEUR binds to the property deed and

restricts the land use of the area where the native soil covers were constructed. The DEUR also

provides a declaration which outlines requirements for an engineering control plan for native soil

covers and ICs for the ANPI property. Perimeter fencing was inspected quarterly during the

pond cover inspections and no repairs were required during 2012. Fencing around ANPI

property restricts Site access, thereby affording a safety buffer for the general public as well as

for security. In 2008, additional 10-foot barbed fencing was installed around ANPI operations

area. Pond 7 and Dynagel are within the high security fenced area and the Formerly Active

ponds are within the property fencing. Appendix F presents the results of the annual pond

cover inspection. Attachment A in Appendix F provides a copy of the DEUR.



4/8/2013 51

0 REMEDY EVALUATION

Water level and water quality trending are tools used for the evaluation of the performance of

the groundwater remedy. The following sections discuss the metrics associated with these

tools.

6.5 SOUTHERN AREA REMEDIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Water quality data indicate that the MNA remedy in the Southern Area is performing as

expected. The perched zone groundwater areal extent is shrinking, water levels continue to

decline in the MCA, and perchlorate has never been detected outside of the management zone.

Nitrate-N has been sporadically detected outside of the management zone between 2007 and

20012. Perched zone perimeter monitoring confirmed that groundwater seepage from the

Water level elevations across the MCA are trending downward (Figures A-4 and A-5 in

Appendix A). Water levels in MCA wells declined approximately 5.8 feet at monitor well MW-23,

approximately 11.85 feet at monitor well MW-21, and approximately 16 feet at monitor well

MW-15 since these wells were initially constructed. MW-15 was dry during all quarterly water

level measurement rounds in 2012.

Further evaluation of the data was based on a comparison of current data with previous years in

accordance with the Southern Area PMP (H+A, 2007b). Water quality data were also assessed

using the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE) software known as

Monitoring and Remediation Optimization System (MAROS) (AFCEE, 2006). This application

facilitated data evaluation in terms of identifying trends and optimizing monitoring schedules. In

addition, a performance metric was developed based on evaluation of trends in the volume and

mass of COCs in the MCA as a whole. While MAROS and performance matrix tools are

analyzed each year, the field and laboratory data results provide the basis for final decisions

regarding monitoring effectiveness.



4/8/2013 52

According to the Southern Area PMP, MAROS is used annually to evaluate trending of water

quality data collected from MCA monitor wells. Annual estimates of mass of nitrate-N and

perchlorate were calculated for the MCA for each year from November 2000 through November

2012 (Table 20). The MAROS software was used on data from 2006 to 2012 to calculate

Mann-Kendall statistics and perform a linear regression analyses to evaluate if data trends are

increasing, probably increasing, stable, decreasing, probably decreasing, or no trend (Appendix

I). This period was selected to facilitate all trends captured in EPA’s fiver year review and the

most current data attained in 2012.

6.5.1 Mann-Kendall Trending

The results of the Mann-Kendall calculations for monitor wells MW-15 and MW-21 indicated no

differences in the respective water quality trends ascertained for previous years. Specifically,

the analysis indicated that the nitrate-N trends for monitor well MW-15 are decreasing, whereas

the nitrate-N trend for monitor well MW-21 is increasing (Table 19; Table I-1 in Appendix I). In

contrast, the trend at monitor well MW-23 changed from stable trend to an increasing trend in

nitrate-N. The trend at monitor well MW-39 changed from probably decreasing in 2011 to a

decreasing trend in 2012 for nitrate-N. For perchlorate, the trend at monitor well MW-23

indicated a probably decreasing trend, a change from a decreasing trend the previous year.

Trending for monitor wells MW-15,-21, and -39 for perchlorate were consistent with 2011 results

of increasing, decreasing, and stable, respectively. According to Mann-Kendall, decreasing

trends in perchlorate concentrations were observed at monitor well MW-15 and MW-24,

probably decreasing trends at monitor well MW-23, and monitor well MW-21 continues to

observe increasing trend (Table 19).

6.5.2 Linear Regression Analysis

Linear regression analysis is another feature in the MAROS software. The linear regression

analysis for perchlorate and nitrate-N indicated no change in trending for MW-15, decreasing,

and MW-21, increasing, (Table I-1 in Appendix I). Monitor wells MW-23 and MW-24 changed



4/8/2013 53

from both having stable trends to an increasing and decreasing trend, respectively, for nitrate.

Both monitor wells MW-23 and MW-24 had continued to have decreasing trends for perchlorate

as that of 2011. The results of the linear regression trending evaluation for monitor well MW-39

indicated a probably decreasing trend for nitrate-N and a stable trend for perchlorate (Table I1 in

Appendix I).

6.5.3 MCA Mass and Volume Analysis

Mass and volume trending are used as another measure of remedy performance in the

Southern Area. Both mass trending of COCs and trending of groundwater volume are

evaluated annually with an expectation of downward trending of each due to the progress of

natural attenuation mechanisms. Evaluation of MNA performance, therefore, is based on both

the calculated annual mass of the COCs and the calculated annual volume of groundwater, as

determined from comparison of year-to-year November monitoring results. To facilitate the

calculation of volume of contaminated groundwater in the MCA, Golden Software’s Surfer® 8

was used to krig both the St. David clay surface elevation as well as the water table elevation.

This analysis provided a basis for estimating the saturated thickness of the MCA. This array,

together with an assumed value of porosity, is used to calculate the volume of groundwater.

The next step is to discretize a concentration’s array for each COC, nitrate-N and perchlorate,

for the purpose of mass calculation. This discretization is calculated from the krigged water

quality data (Table 20).

Based on these calculations, the volume of the MCA decreased by an estimated 2.6 acre-feet

from November 2011 through November 2012 (Table 20). The linear regression trend line over

the entire annual data set still indicated a downward trend with a coefficient of determination

(R2) value of 0.9697 (Figure 15). The volume of groundwater in the MCA estimated in 2000 was

119.6 acre-feet. This may be compared to the 2012 estimate of 86.7 acre-feet. This suggests a

volume reduction of approximately 28 percent since 2000.



4/8/2013 54

The decrease in volume of the MCA may be due to limited natural recharge. Several factors that

might affect MCA water levels in the future include resumption of recharge from the perched

zone; seepage into adjacent boundary materials; changes in ET rates; and responses to

drought or humid conditions.

According to the strict application of PMP performance metrics, nitrate-N mass increased from

November 2011 through November 2012 (H+A, 2007b). Perchlorate mass remained somewhat

stable from December 2011 to December 2012. The methodology indicated that the nitrate-N

mass increased from 147,784 pounds to 185,268 pounds, or an estimated 37,484 pounds

(Table 20). Perchlorate decreased from 23.6 pounds to 22.8 pounds, or an estimated 0.8

pounds. The increase in nitrate-N is largely biased by the increase in concentration observed at

monitor well MW-21 from 3,600 mg/l in November 2011 to 4,800 mg/l in November 2012 (Figure

B-4 in Appendix B). Nitrate-N concentrations have steadily increased at the MW-21 location as

water levels continue to decrease similar to perched piezometer P-03. The slight decrease in

perchlorate reflects the increase in perchlorate concentrations observed at monitor well MW-39

from November 2011 to November 2012. Perchlorate concentrations at MW-39 decreased from

98 µg/l to 86 µg/l in 2012. Monitor well MW-15 was not included in the evaluations since 2005

due to insufficient water for sample collection. No mass inputs of either COC are known or

detectable into the MCA.

Considering that there is no inflow via the perched zone and the water levels in the MCA are

decreasing, there is no reason to believe that there is any new or old source of COCs entering

the MCA. Therefore, the apparent mass increase results from limitations in the ability to

precisely define the COC distributions. A linear regression analysis was used to plot a linear

trend line over the approximate mass of nitrate-N and perchlorate removed from the MCA

(Figure 15). The coefficient of determination (R2) values obtained from the linear regression

analyses were approximately 0.1309 for nitrate-N and 0.7 for perchlorate (Figure 15). However,

the concentration trends are probably not linear.

The MCA is a hydraulically isolated system with minimal recharge since 2003, when discharge

from the perched zone ceased. Historical data observed in the perched zone have indicated



4/8/2013 55

increasing COC concentrations accompanying decreasing water levels. As discussed earlier,

water quality is believed to be highly stratified across the vertical section of the saturated aquifer

alluvium. Specifically, concentration is believed to increase with depth in the aquifer, or at least,

there may be a less concentrated lens of water overlying the more highly concentrated water

occurring at depth. The fresher lens of water would be present as a result of recharge of dilute

water such as that released during the 1995 pressure testing of the brine concentrator surge

tank.

Presently, perched zone seepage into the MCA has been effectively eliminated; sampling has

become more biased in favor of the older, deeper, more concentrated water in the lower portion

of the MCA. Perched zone evaluation is based on annual volume changes and the continued

shrinkage of the areal extent of the saturated media.

Decreasing trends in concentration were observed in the MCA in 2012 (as seen in Nitrate-N-

Figure 15). Increases in concentration have been observed in past years despite continued

water level declines across the MCA. This condition could potentially exist in the future as well.

Additionally, the limited data record at monitor well MW-39 may continue to bias the overall

trending analysis. Because monitor wells MW-21 and MW-39 are similarly constructed with

screened intervals extending across the entire saturated thickness of the MCA, whereas monitor

wells MW-15 and MW-23 are only partially screened near the upper part of the aquifer, future

evaluations might be improved if a greater weight were to be assigned to the trends observed at

monitor wells MW-21 and MW-39.

6.5.4 Southern Area Geochemical Data

As discussed earlier, a suite of parameters in addition to the COC concentrations, are being

monitored as potential indicators of MNA performance status. Basically, these parameters may

indicate the progression of the following denitrification reaction in groundwater, where microbial

respiration involves the nitrate oxyanion as a terminal electron acceptor, thereby producing

dinitrogen gas:



4/8/2013 56

2NO3- + 12H+ + 10e - N2 + 6H2O

In actuality, this occurs in four steps as follows:

NO3- NO2

- NO N2O N2

Similarly, the redox chemistry of the perchlorate oxyanion would progress according to the

following steps:

ClO4- ClO3

- ClO2- ClO Cl- + O2

The analytical suite selected for the Southern Area includes DO, ORP, TDS, alkalinity, ferrous

iron, and ammonia-N. These analytical results are presented (Table 8). However, it is difficult

to draw any strong indications between analytical results and the significance of natural

attenuation processes. DO concentrations ranged from 2.43 mg/l to 5.53 mg/l in 2012. This is

an increase in the concentrations seen in previous years. The persistently low concentrations

of DO from 2008 through 2012 indicate favorability for denitrification by anaerobic bacteria due

to the unavailability of free oxygen. Similarly, lower values of ORP in the -50 mV to +250 mV

range are favorable for denitrification. The 2012 ORP values fall well within this range.

TDS is monitored primarily as an indication of change in water conditions, and does not indicate

any particular natural attenuation activity. TDS increased at MW-21 and decreased at MW-39

between 2011 and 2012 data. Changes in alkalinity present in groundwaters undergoing

biological denitrification would favor increasing alkalinity due to carbon dioxide liberated during

microbial respiration processes. A sharp increase in alkalinity was observed in monitor well

MW-23 that Turner Labs indicated was a result of solids present within the sample. All other

alkalinity results in the MCA remained stable (Table 8).

Nitrate reduction can also couple with oxidation of pyrite (FeS2). The reaction proceeds

according to:



4/8/2013 57

5FeS2 + 14NO3- + 4H+

7N2 + 5Fe2+ + 10SO42- + 2H2O

and then,

5Fe2+ + NO3- + 7 H2O 5FeOOH + 1/2N2 + 9H+

(Appelo and Postma, 2005)

Thus, if this type of denitrification process is occurring, an increase in ferrous iron concentration

in the groundwater might be expected. Ferrous iron was not collected in 2012 due to

instrumental. Overall, the long-term reduction of volume and COC mass within the MCA, and

favorable DO and ORP levels, indicate that natural attenuation may be occurring.

6.6 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION EVALUATION

Water quality data indicate that MNA and the NARS in the Northern Area is performing as

expected. Nitrate-N concentrations are decreasing in the extent of SEW-1 capture in addition to

the MNA management area located north of the capture envelope.

6.6.1 NARS Evaluation

The NARS extraction well operated 363 days in 2012 and discharge to Wash 3 was continuous.

It is estimated that 28,526 pounds of nitrate-N was removed from the shallow aquifer in 2012.

The number of pounds removed is comparable to 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 (Figure 12).

Nitrate-N concentrations ranged between 54 mg/l and 72 mg/l at SEW-1 (Table 13). The

highest nitrate-N concentrations at SEW-1 were observed in the late 2003, early 2004 time

period. During this time, concentrations were approximately 390 mg/l.



4/8/2013 58

The MAROS statistical package was used to further evaluate trending of water quality data

collected from the Northern Area shallow aquifer in the extent of the extraction well SEW-1

capture envelope. Data from the time period of November 2006 through November 2012 were

used, representing the timeframe since the initiation of full-scale operation of the NARS. As in

the Southern Area, analytical methods that were applied to the data evaluation included

Mann-Kendall and linear regression trending. These methods enable characterization of data

trends as increasing, probably increasing, stable, decreasing, probably decreasing, or no trend

(Table 21 and 22,Appendix J). According to MAROS statistical summary, the nitrate-N

concentration in Northern Area wells in the extent of SEW-1 capture were increasing, stable,

decreasing, or no trend according to Mann-Kendall and linear regression (Table 21; Appendix

J). Shallow aquifer monitor wells MW-11 and surface water station SW-14 showed probably

increasing or increasing trends in nitrate-N. The increasing nitrate-N trend indicated at SW-14

is likely due to the increase in detection limit from 0.5 mg/l in 2009 to 1 mg/l in November 2010.

The nitrate-N concentration at MW-11 increased from 5.1 mg/l in August 2011 to 5.9 mg/l in

August 2012. The increasing nitrate-N trend at MW-11 is due to an increase in nitrate-N

concentrations from 2.7 mg/l in August 2007 to 13 mg/l in August 2009. The concentration has

steadily decreased from August 2009 to August 2012.

6.6.2 Northern Area MNA Evaluation

The extent of nitrate-N in the Northern Area MNA management zone indicates a shrinking

plume. This is believed to be largely due to the capture of high nitrate-N concentrations in

groundwater by the NARS extraction well SEW-1. Without capture by this system, water moved

under natural and pumping-induced gradients northward into the MNA management zone.

Nitrate-N concentrations at monitoring locations in the MNA management zone were all less

than 10 mg/l during 2012 except for concentrations at D(18-21)06bcb which ranged between 8.6

mg/l to 15 mg/l. Further evaluation of nitrate-N trending in individual Northern Area wells was

performed using MAROS.

MAROS statistics are used on an annual basis to evaluate trending of water quality data

collected from the Northern Area shallow aquifer to assess plume stability as outlined in the



4/8/2013 59

PMP (H+A, 2009a). Both the Mann-Kendall analysis and linear regression can assist in

determining plume stability, but trending can also be used to evaluate various concepts related

to the system such as recharge effects.

Concentration of nitrate-N was calculated for the Northern Area shallow aquifer from the time

period of November 2006 through November 2012. Analytical methods included Mann-Kendall

and linear regression trending to evaluate whether concentrations in the wells are increasing,

probably increasing, stable, decreasing, probably decreasing, or there is no trend (Appendix J).

According to MAROS statistical summary, the nitrate-N concentration in Northern Area wells is

decreasing, stable, or no trends are apparent based on the current data set (Table 22; Appendix

J). The exception was buffer zone well D(17-20)36aad1 showing an increasing trend. From

2011 to 2012, the nitrate-N concentration in private well D(17-20)36aad1 decreased from 4.5

mg/l to 3.7 mg/l, and MW-40 decreased from 2.7 mg/l to 1.1 mg/l. The nitrate-N concentrations

in all of these wells are currently below the cleanup standard. See Section 3.5.2 for a

discussion of the nitrate-N concentrations at MW-40. Decreasing trends were determined at

several monitor well locations from the 2006 through 2012 data set (Table 23). These locations

include management zone wells MW-20, MW-38, MW-41A, MW-41B, D(17-20)36cdb,

D(17-20)36ddc, D(18-21)06bcb, D(17-20)36caa2, D(17-20)36caa, D(18-20)01aad, and

D(17-20)25bad.

Other types of analysis performed by MAROS for the Northern Area included: spatial moment

analysis for plume analysis, and sampling optimization.

Spatial moment analysis is a three part analysis (zeroeth moment, first moment, and second

moment) that assesses the plume stability compared to its original mass and location. Spatial

moment analysis calculates the mass estimate for each sample event, estimates the center of

mass of the plume, the distance of contamination from the center of mass, the change in mass

over time, the change in location of mass center over time, and change in plume spread over

time using Mann Kendall trending.



4/8/2013 60

The zeroeth moment in the spatial moment analysis shows change in mass of the contaminant

plume over time. MAROS analyses determined that the zeroeth moment trend is increasing.

This suggests that the overall mass of the plume has increased over time (Appendix J). This

trend has a large degree of variability due to fluctuating concentrations at the most

contaminated wells (AFCEE, 2006). Temporal and spatial variability occurs when plume

analysis is based exclusively on concentrations.

The first moment analysis shows changes in the center of mass over time relative to the original

source. The trend indicates the changes in the distance in the center of mass between the

current plume and original plume. An increasing trend indicates that the center of mass of the

current plume is further away from the original source area than previously observed. A

decreasing trend indicates that the center of mass of the current plume is closer to the original

source than previously observed. MAROS analyses determined that the first moment trend for

the Northern Area is probably decreasing (Appendix J).

The second moment analysis indicates the spread of the plume about its center of mass over

time in the X and Y directions. An increasing trend would indicate a plume that has spread

further away from its center of mass than previously observed, while a decreasing trend would

indicate a plume that has contracted towards it center of mass. MAROS analyses determined

that the second moment trend for the Northern Area is decreasing (Appendix J).

Sampling optimization includes sampling location optimization, sampling frequency optimization

and power analysis for individual well cleanup status. The sampling location analysis is

determined by the Delaunay method based on Delaunay triangulation to analyze

redundancy/sufficiency of wells (Appendix J). The slope factor (SF) indicates the relative

importance of a well in the monitoring network. SF values range from zero to 1, with zero

meaning that the concentration at the location can be exactly estimated by its surrounding

locations, thus provides no additional information for understanding the plume. SF values close

to 1 indicate that the location provides useful information about the plume. According to the

results for the Northern Area, the SF values were small and medium with monitor wells

D(17-20)36cad2, D(17-20)36ddc questioned for elimination (Appendix J).



4/8/2013 61

Sampling frequency analysis uses the modified cost effective sampling (CES) method based on

temporal analysis. The suggested sampling frequency results are based on recent data and

overall data trends. According to the recommended sampling frequency D(17-20)23ada can be

sampled on a biennial basisand all other network monitoring wells on an annual basis.

The last trending test that MAROS performed was a data sufficiency analysis which evaluates

the cleanup status using statistical power analysis. Individual wells are accessed in addition to

risked-based cleanup status for the site. The power analysis is dependent on significance level,

number of sampling points, frequency and duration, minimum detectable difference, and natural

variability (AFCEE, 2006). According to the power analysis normal distribution assumption

results, attainment has occurred at D(17-20)23acd, D(17-20)23ada, D(17-20)36caa, MW-20,

MW-40, MW-41A, MW-42, SW-13, and SW-14. Cleanup has not been attained at MW-13.

Shallow aquifer monitor wells D(17-20)25bad, D(17-20)36aad1, D(17-20)36caa2, D(17-

20)36cdb, D(17-20)36ddc, D(18-20)01aad, D(18-21)06bcb, MW-08, MW-11, MW-17, MW-18,

MW-19, MW-34, MW-35, MW-36, MW-38, MW-41B, SW-03, and SW-04 were recommended for

continued sampling.

The extent of the area containing nitrate-N above the cleanup standard of 10 mg/l in the shallow

aquifer has shrunk to an area close to the northern edge of the SEW-1 capture zone. A

comparison of the current nitrate-N plume to the model projections documented in the Northern

Area Performance Assessment model (NAPA) was performed (H+A, 2008c). According to

model projections, natural attenuation is occurring in the Northern Area at an attenuation rate

approximately consistent with a two-year half-life for nitrate-N attenuation (Figures 16, 17 and

18). The monitoring data also suggest that extraction well SEW-1 has been effective in

capturing nitrate-N contaminated groundwater and that movement of the nitrate-N plume north

of the extent of capture did not occur during 2012, according to data collected from network

wells (Figure 16).



4/8/2013 62

6.6.3 Northern Area Geochemical Data

Earlier, the relevance of the so-called MNA parameter monitoring was discussed for

groundwater in the Southern Area of the shallow aquifer (Table 8). These same principles apply

for groundwater in the Northern Area of the shallow aquifer, except that perchlorate is not

present in the Northern Area.

The analytical suite selected for the Northern Area includes DO, ORP, sulfate, TDS, alkalinity,

manganese, and ferrous iron. The field parameters of DO and ORP were inadvertently omitted

during the 2012 sampling event. The laboratory analytical results for 2012 are presented (Table

17). However, it is difficult to draw any strong connections between analytical results and the

significance of natural attenuation processes. The low concentrations of DO from 2008 through

2012 indicate favorability for denitrification by anaerobic bacteria due to the unavailability of free

oxygen. Similarly, lower values of ORP in the -50 mV to +250 mV range are favorable for

denitrification (Appelo & Postma, 2005). The 2012 ORP values fall well within this range.

Geochemical data DO and ORP suggest favorable conditions for natural attenuation if nitrate-N

continues to exist. Ferrous iron, manganese and sulfate data are not

conclusive indicators in the Northern Area.

TDS is monitored primarily as an indication of change in water conditions, and does not indicate

any particular natural attenuation activity. If there is any trend in TDS between 2008 through

2012 data, it is decreasing. Changes in alkalinity present in groundwaters undergoing biological

denitrification would favor increasing alkalinity due to carbon dioxide liberated during microbial

respiration processes (ITRC, 2002). However, changes in alkalinity in Northern Area monitor

wells have not been significant.

6.7 INACTIVE AND FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS REMEDIATION EVALUATION

At the end of 2012, the Pond covers were in excellent condition. Advisory signage was secure

and the perimeter fence was in good condition (Appendix F). Pond inspections will be



4/8/2013 63

performed throughout 2013 in response to extreme weather events and according to the O&M

manual.



4/8/2013 64

7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/ QUALITY CONTROL

The quality of the data collected during the 2012 quarterly monitoring activities and monthly

NARS activities were evaluated using data assessment procedures as specified in the Quality

Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (H+A, 2000a). Data assessment procedures are used to

identify data that do not meet data quality objectives. Data assessment procedures included,

but were not limited to, review of holding times; preservation methods; chain-of-custody

documentation; field and rinsate blank results; matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate results;

field duplicate and split sample comparison results; reporting detection limits; and data trending.

Data assessment is a means of identifying deficiencies in laboratory or in field procedures.

Such deficiencies increase the risk of failure to attain data quality objectives. Accordingly,

assessment assists in the identification of appropriate corrective actions and/or the type of data

qualification that should be applied (H+A, 1990b, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2000). In 2009,

the QAPP was revised (H+A, 2009c). This revision incorporated EPA’s current quality

assurance/quality control requirements, an updated list of analytes and analytical methods, and

review of the detection limits for performance monitoring and O&M. The new document is

currently being reviewed by EPA. Performance monitoring for groundwater and NARS water

quality analytical data met data quality objectives and acceptance criteria in 2012. A summary of

the data assessment and data validation results for 2010 is provided (Appendix K).



4/8/2013 65

8.0 SUMMARY

Performance monitoring was performed on remedial systems for respective Media Components

of the Site during Calendar Year 2012. These remedial systems are discussed in this annual

report and include Southern Area Groundwater, the NARS and Northern Area Groundwater

MNA Management Zone, and the former Ponds. From the data gathered during 2012,

performance of these remedial systems was within or exceeded expected ranges. Performance

trends indicate effective source control and support the Site conceptual model. Additionally, it is

concluded that the active remedies combined with effective ICs are protective of public health.

If, in the future, trends are not supportive of the site conceptual model, a contingency will be

evaluated and submitted for approval by EPA and ADEQ.

Detailed summaries and discussion of each remedial system is provided in the following

sections.

8.1 SOUTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER

Southern Area groundwater comprises both the perched zone and the MCA. Adjacent areas of

the shallow aquifer along the San Pedro River are also monitored as part of the Southern Area

remedy, but the shallow aquifer is presently hydraulically isolated from both the perched zone

and MCA, as has been discussed in this and in past reports (H+A, 2006b, 2007b, 2009e and

2010b).

8.1.1 Perched Zone

During 2012, groundwater levels measured in the perched zone indicate that perched zone

groundwater is not discharging into the MCA (Figure 4). Both piezometer P-10 and monitor well



4/8/2013 66

MW-29, the monitoring locations that provide indications of perched zone to MCA drainage,

remained dry. Prior to 2004, perched groundwater had been present at these locations.

However, since mid-2004 no measurable perched groundwater has been present in these

sentry wells. This condition is taken as an indication of the effectiveness of the source control

measures. While groundwater in monitor well MW-03 was not present after May 2008,

groundwater levels in piezometers P-01 and P-03 showed increasing trends in previous monitor

years 2007 and 2008. The water levels in P-01 and P-03 have declined since then. The

increase was believed to be due to a combination of increased recharge with decreasing

volumes of the groundwater extraction from piezometer P-03. The reason(s) for increases in

annual recharge is/are uncertain, but it is generally believed to result from an artificial source(s),

such as leakage from a freshwater line. Additionally, no consistent seasonal variability is

discernible in the recent data from piezometer P-03 (Figure A-2 in Appendix A). Piezometer

P-01 has been more variable than P-03 since 2008 and has had fluctuations over a range of

over 3 feet in a three month time period. Additionally, concentrations of the COCs appear to

have increased significantly coincident with these fluctuations, possibly indicating dissolution of

salts in the overlying vadose zone. The combination of these factors suggests uncontrolled

artificial recharge, which should be addressed to avoid perched zone accretion. Rather than

conducting a field inventory of possible water sources upgradient of the perched zone, ANPI, as

part of its plant expansion and modernization efforts, has designed a new water distribution

system. When completed, the existing water system will be decommissioned. It is believed that

this will eliminate the possibility of uncontrolled artificial recharge to the perched zone.

Removal rates at perched piezometer P-03 increased during 2012 and water levels remained

stable in 2012. The method for estimating the extracted volume at P-03 is read from the totalizer

meter installed during 2011.

Both nitrate-N and perchlorate concentrations detected in piezometer P-03 increased during

2012. Concentrations of nitrate-N remained approximately four orders of magnitude higher than

perchlorate. This is consistent with the fact that ammonium nitrate is a manufacturing product,

whereas perchlorate is only present as a result of trace impurities in a process feedstock that

was used onsite for a limited period of time. Interestingly, as in past years, the time-series



4/8/2013 67

concentrations of nitrate-N and perchlorate occasionally trended in opposite directions. No

particular significance is attributed to this observation, except a possible indication of a historical

change in the source of perchlorate from a process standpoint. This proportional relationship

between nitrate-N and perchlorate was also observed during 2012. As discussed in past

reports, the trend of increasing concentration with decreasing perched zone water levels was

generally observed in 2012 (H+A, 2007b). This has been attributed to a declining influence of

freshwater recharge into the perched groundwater near piezometer P-03, combined with the

vertical stratification of the COC concentrations (Section 2.2).

Mass removal of nitrate-N and perchlorate from the perched zone decreased during 2012. The

maximum removal of 571 pounds of nitrate-N occurred in 2009 and the maximum removal of

perchlorate of 0.07 pounds occurred in 2003 (Table 6). Over the last few years perchlorate

removal rates remain stable at 0.02 pounds. Maximum groundwater withdrawal of 14,739

gallons was achieved in 2003. In 2012, the groundwater withdrawal was 4,286 gallons, a

decrease compared to recent years.

8.1.2 MCA

Groundwater in the MCA is essentially stagnant. Groundwater levels in MCA monitor wells

continue to exhibit seasonalities with characteristically higher groundwater levels in the first two

quarters with declines in the latter two quarters. The highest water levels were measured during

the May quarterly performance monitoring rounds and the lowest in August or November

(Table 4). In addition to the seasonal variations, all MCA monitor wells exhibit long-term

downward water-level trends (Figures A-7 through A-11 in Appendix A). Linear regression

analysis indicated rates of decline between 2007 and 2012 that ranged from 0.22 feet per year

(MW-15 which is currently dry) to 0.66 feet per year (MW-21 and MW-23). In contrast, water

levels observed in upgradient monitor wells MW-01 and MW-06 do not exhibit these declining

trends, nor do they have significant seasonal amplitudes compared to water levels observed in

MCA monitor wells (Figures A-12 and A-13 in Appendix A). This observation is taken to indicate

the effect of nearby hydraulic boundaries in the MCA. Seasonalities in the MCA are not likely

the effect of groundwater pumping, but rather natural infiltration of runoff, combined with the



4/8/2013 68

effects of ET losses in this small groundwater basin. In the adjacent portions of the shallow

aquifer, groundwater is flowing through the basin from south to north, and groundwater-surface

water exchanges with the San Pedro River are occurring.

Monitor well MW-15 had insufficient water to collect samples throughout 2012. This is the

second year that MW-15 was not able to be sampled which is a result of the declining water

levels in the MCA. This trend could persist for several more years until the area around MW-15

is completely dry. MW-15 will continue to be monitored in 2013 to see if there is an opportunity

to collect a groundwater sample from the well. MCA monitor well MW-23 is also trending

towards dry conditions, where water levels dropped below the top of the pump after 2010. The

pump was lowered in 2011 to allow collection of groundwater samples for the remainder of the

year. If this declining water level trend continues, the remaining monitor well network in the

MCA will be limited to monitor wells MW-21 and MW-39, which are fully penetrating (Figure 5).

The apparent mass of nitrate-N and perchlorate decreased between 2011 and 2012 (Table 20;

Figure 15). There is no reason to believe that there is any new or old source of COCs entering

the MCA based on lack of inflow from the perched zone to the MCA and the declining water

levels in the MCA. Therefore, if there are apparent mass increases in the future, these would

likely be attributable to limitations in the ability to precisely define the COC distributions. Linear

regression trending continues to indicate downward trends in water levels, and perchlorate

mass and a slightly increasing linear trend for nitrate-N concentrations although the data are

likely not linear. Such departures from the trend would be expected based on uncertainty in

several variables including: sampling location biases; laboratory analytical errors; geostatistical

uncertainties; and vertical concentration variability. One improvement, however, has been the

replacement of monitor well MW-15 with monitor well MW-39. Specifically, monitor well MW-15

was only a partially penetrating well, whereas new monitor well MW-39 is fully penetrating, as is

monitor well MW-21. Finally, the concentrations of COCs in monitor well MW-24 have remained

below the respective cleanup standards. Considering the hydraulic isolation between monitor

well MW-24 and the remainder of the MCA there is no reason to believe the COC

concentrations at MW-24 will ever increase above the cleanup standards.



4/8/2013 69

Presently, the configuration of the network comprising monitor wells MW-21, MW-23, and

MW-39 seems appropriate considering their positions in essentially the “corners” of the MCA

and the essentially stagnant conditions that exist across the MCA. COC concentrations in

groundwater at monitor well MW-21 are expected to always be higher than at the other MCA

monitor wells due to the proximity of MW-21 to the historical source area, the greater thickness

of the saturated sediments at that location, and the fact that the extremely low gradients and

lack of recharge are not expected to move water away from this stagnant area.

8.1.3 Southern Area Shallow Aquifer

Groundwater quality trends at monitor well MW-01 and MW-06 indicate no new sources of

contamination upgradient in the shallow aquifer. Nitrate-N was not detected at monitor wells

MW-01, MW-06, MW-14, MW-22, and MW-33. Nitrate-N is occasionally detected at low

concentrations in all these wells and appears to be background concentrations. Perchlorate

concentrations were not detected in the upgradient, buffer zone or sentinel wells in 2012 (Figure

5). Collectively, these data continue to support a conceptual site model based on a stagnant

system receiving little to no flow or transport from the shallow aquifer to the MCA.

8.2 NORTHERN AREA GROUNDWATER

The remedial action components in the Northern Area comprise the NARS and MNA to the

north of the NARS capture envelope (Figure 6).

8.2.1 NARS

Performance monitoring of the NARS indicates effectiveness of the remedy in terms of

consistent withdrawal of nitrate-N bearing groundwater from NARS extraction well SEW-1 as

well as the monitoring of upgradient performance network wells in the SEW-1 capture envelope



4/8/2013 70

(Figures 6 and 7). Groundwater levels in monitor wells in the vicinity of extraction well SEW-1,

such as monitor wells MW-08, MW-17, MW-18, and MW-19, indicate that they are affected by

the pumping cone of depression as well as their proximity to the shallow aquifer boundaries.

Farther upgradient, monitor wells MW-35 and MW-36 reflect “steadier” hydrographs, with slight

seasonal amplitudes. This pattern is similar to monitor wells even farther upgradient in the

shallow aquifer, such as monitor wells MW-01 and MW-06 (Appendix A). In addition to the

hydrographic data, groundwater-level mapping indicates a flowpath toward extraction well

SEW-1 (Figure B-1 in Appendix B). It also defines a capture zone that extends across the limits

of the upgradient plume of nitrate-N defined within the limits of the 10 mg/l isoconcentration line.

Water quality trends representing nitrate-N concentrations in all monitor wells within the capture

envelope of NARS extraction well SEW-1 are declining, with the exception of monitor wells

MW-08, MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36. Shallow aquifer monitor well MW-08 increases are due to

its proximity to extraction well SEW-1 and the circulation pattern caused by its cone of

depression in proximity to the shallow aquifer boundary. Concentrations at shallow aquifer

monitor well MW-36 were on a relatively steady decline between 2005 and November 2007, but

suddenly started to increase through about August 2008. During 2012, nitrate-N concentrations

again indicated a decreasing trend at this well. The 2008 “blip” was interpreted as: (1) an

indication that NARS extraction well SEW-1 is affecting gradients and concentrations at the

monitor well MW-36 location as well as in areas upgradient, and; (2) there are some areas

upgradient from monitor well MW-36, probably along the aquifer boundary, where high

concentrations linger due to poor circulation and/or aquifer heterogeneities (Section 7.2.1).

Thus, the temporarily increasing concentrations at monitor well MW-36 were not necessarily

unexpected, and probably indicated a positive outcome for the NARS. A “blip” also occurred at

monitor well MW-34 in February and May 2010 increasing from 0.67 mg/l in February 2009 to a

high of 120 mg/l in May 2010. The nitrate-N concentration dropped back to its trendline in

August 2010 and remained there until a “blip” occurred in May 2012. Concentrations regressed

to less than 1 for August and November 2012. As with monitor well MW-36, the increase at

MW-34 may have been due to the aforementioned factors. Additionally, seasonal pumping and

recharge factors may have been involved. The so called “hot spots” are not considered to be

continuing sources. As explained in Section 7.2.1, this plume is heterogeneous in terms of the



4/8/2013 71

distribution of nitrate concentrations within it. This is expected considering the variable history

of contaminant release as well as variation of hydraulic properties in the aquifer. It might be

expected that the concentrations of nitrate_N detected at these monitor wells would fluctuate

from time to time due to heterogeneities in the aquifer materials as well as in the plume itself.

The Northern Area Groundwater Model (H+A, 2005b) showed that SEW-1 is capturing water

from the areas of monitor wells MW-08 and MW-35 and MW-36. The radius of influence from

SEW-1 while affecting gradients at MW-08 probably does not significantly affect gradients in the

area of monitor wells MW-35 and MW-36. Hence the travel time from this area to the extraction

well is long.

The 2012 influent nitrate-N concentrations remained the same. The nitrate-N mass extracted

in 2011 was about 26 percent greater than the mass extracted in 2012, while the volume of

groundwater extracted decreased by 22 percent in 2012 compared to 2011 (Figure 12).

Optimization of SEW-1 was considered for 2011; however, an evaluation was not performed as

the rate of mass removal still remains significant.

According to the MAROS analysis, monitoring frequency at all network wells in the capture zone

could be reduced from quarterly to annual, based on the data trends.

8.2.2 Northern Area MNA

Water levels in shallow aquifer monitor wells north of the NARS extraction well SEW-1 capture

envelop exhibit greater seasonal amplitudes as compared with other wells in the performance

monitoring network, with the exception of those in the extraction well SEW-1 capture zone.

These seasonal fluctuations are primarily attributable to either (or both) the effects of

groundwater-surface water exchange in the vicinity of the San Pedro River and/or local irrigation

pumping (Figure 6).



4/8/2013 72

Groundwater quality across this area has indicated substantial improvement over the past five

years such that, in 2012 all wells, except shallow aquifer private well D(18-20)06bcb, contained

concentrations of nitrate-N less than the cleanup standard of 10 mg/l throughout 2012.

Typically a three to five year verification monitoring is required to verify attainment of cleanup

standards (EPA, 2004). Many of these shallow aquifer wells in the MNA management zone

achieved the remediation goal by 2008. These data track with numerical model projections

based on a two-year half-life for natural attenuation of nitrate-N. Nitrate-N concentrations in

D(18-20)06bcb in 2012 were above the cleanup goal of 10 mg/l, except in November when

concentration was 8.6 mg/l. This well will be sampled quarterly again in 2013.

According to the MAROS analysis, the monitoring frequency of many of the network wells could

be reduced. Currently many of the private wells are sampled on a semi-annual basis.

Recommendations are provided in Section 10.0 of this report.

8.3 SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER

Nitrate-N concentrations detected in surface water during low-flow durations were less than 10

mg/l during 2012 at surface water stations SW-03, SW-04, SW-12, SW-13 and SW-14 (Table

7). The highest nitrate-N concentration in 2012 of 2.3 mg/l was measured in February at SW-

03/04 reach. This location is known to be within a gaining reach of the stream, which receives

discharge from the shallow aquifer in the vicinity of monitor well MW-35. All five surface water

stations were flowing in February and dry for the remainder of 2012. Water level elevations in

nearby extraction well SEW-1 have declined to their lowest level in 2012. This situation will be

monitored in 2013 to see if there is a connection between the pumping at SEW-1 and the no

flow at stations SW-03 and SW-04.

It should also be noted that, in 2008, the ADEQ reassigned the narrative standard along this

(Curtiss) reach of the San Pedro River. The standard was changed from 10 mg/l nitrate-N

to 3,733 mg/l, consistent with other similarly designated streams in southern Arizona. Surface

water station SW-12 located in the Southern Area is monitored to evaluate upgradient surface



4/8/2013 73

water quality and detect possible new sources. Nitrate-N was not detected in samples collected

during 2012.

According to the MAROS analysis, surface water quality monitoring frequency at all stations

could be reduced from quarterly to annually. Surface water flow will continue to be measured

quarterly.

8.4 MCA AND NORTHERN AREA GEOCHEMICAL DATA

As discussed in Appendix C of the Northern Area MNA Report, natural attenuation at the Site is

believed to comprise multiple processes including: advection, dispersion, and diffusion, as well

as biodegradation (H+A, 2008c). To this list, other natural processes, such as

groundwater-surface water interactions and phreatophytic consumption, and anthropogenic

processes, particularly groundwater extraction for agricultural irrigation, are also potentially

reducing nitrate-N concentrations in the aquifer, particularly in regard to the Northern Area.

Based on the overall time-series trends observed in shallow aquifer data for the MCA and MNA

management zone of the Northern Area, it appears that concentrations of the respective COCs

have attenuated naturally. The source area for the Southern Area appears to be fully

characterized and contained by the continued pumping and dewatering of the perched zone.

However, it is believed that high concentrations of nitrate-N may be concentrated in the soils

and sediments in the area of MW-36 and these concentrations continue to linger due to poor

circulation. With time, the nitrate-N will be flushed out and the concentrations will decline.

Among these multiple processes, the relative role of biodegradation in contributing to these

declining trends cannot be clearly characterized at this time. What is known about

biodegradation is that there are certain favorable indicators such as low DO concentrations and

ORP values in the proper range for denitrification. Additionally, bioassay studies performed at

Humboldt State University have confirmed the presence of both denitrifying and perchlorate-

reducing bacterial species in the MCA and denitrifying bacteria in the shallow aquifer in the

Northern Area, particularly where nitrate-N and/or perchlorate are present (HSU, 2000, 2001).

A couple important conditions that may be locally limiting biodegradation are low concentrations



4/8/2013 74

of organic carbon and the presence of ammonia. It has been postulated that there are some

areas, such as along the riparian corridor of the San Pedro River, where organic carbon may be

present, particularly in the alluvial materials, in sufficient concentrations as to sustain biological

denitrification. The in-situ pilot study will provide a better understanding of the constraints and

time limitations associated with ammonia on denitrification processes within the MCA.

8.5 POND COVERS

During 2012, the pond covers were inspected and maintenance was performed in order to

restore side slopes to specifications of the approved plan and DEUR (Figure 14) (H+A, 2008b).

ICs implemented during 2012 included well inventory updates, community outreach programs,

and inspection of perimeter fencing. Overall, the remedy remains effective in terms of isolating

the buried contaminants.



4/8/2013 75

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

In light of previously discussed findings, ANPI offers the following recommendations. A table of

the proposed 2013 monitoring schedule has been developed based on these

recommendations (Table 24). Revisions to the monitoring schedule will be implemented upon

EPA and ADEQ approval.

Changes to the monitoring schedule were based on results from the MAROS analysis, data

collected during 2012, historical data, numerical model, and the Site conceptual model.

MAROS literature on methods for determining frequency of monitoring based on analysis for

each COC is provided (Appendix L). Field data was referenced as the final decision for the

proposed reduction in monitoring of the selected shallow aquifer wells.

9.1 SOUTHERN AREA RECOMMENDATIONS

Add perched zone piezometer P-01 to the monitoring program for one year of quarterly

sampling to check on the seasonal changes of nitrate-N and perchlorate.

Eliminate monitoring frequency at downgradient monitor well MW-24 (Figure A-10 in

Appendix A). The nitrate-N concentrations at this well have ranged from 1.2 mg/l to 3.3 mg/l

since 2004 and have been less than 2 mg/l since 2008. The perchlorate concentrations at

this well have ranged from 2.3 µg/l to 10 µg/l since 2004 and have been less than 5 µg/l

since 2008. Monitoring for nitrate-N and perchlorate has provided sufficient data on

concentrations in this area of the MCA and it can be inferred that high concentration water is

not migrating toward MW-24.

Based on the counterintuitive results for mass estimation of the COCs in the MCA, this

metric was considered for elimination as a performance measure. Specifically, the method



4/8/2013 76

seems to indicate increasing mass inputs when it has been established field data that this is

not the case. However, ANPI will continue to include the mass calculation metric for the

MCA.

ANPI is presently planning remedy enhancements through pilot testing for remedy

enhancement in the MCA. Remedy enhancement will be based on in situ

denitrification/dechlorination. These activities will be presented in separate workplans

submitted to EPA for review and approval.

Frequency parameters, MNA parameters and ammonia, at monitor well MW-21 are

recommended to be sampled quarterly instead of annually for 2013. This will provide more

background information and current data needed for the most efficient design of in-situ

remedy enhancement.

Uncontrolled artificial recharge may be occurring in the perched zone. ANPI, as part of its

plant expansion and modernization efforts, has designed a new water distribution system.

When completed, the existing water system will be decommissioned. It is believed that this

will eliminate the possibility of uncontrolled artificial recharge to the perched zone.

ANPI will evaluate various types of equipment such as a solar aerator to increase

evaporation from the stock tanks.



4/8/2013 77

9.2 NORTHERN AREA RECOMMENDATIONS

According to the MAROS analysis, all monitoring network wells could be reduced to annual

monitoring for nitrate-N with the exception of D(17-20)23ada and D(17-20)36caa which could be

sampled on a biennial basis. All but one of the monitor wells (D(18-21)06bcb) in the MNA

management zone remained below the cleanup goal of less than 10 mg/l in 2012. While

MAROS provides a tool for evaluating monitoring frequency, it was not used as the final

decision for the proposed reduction in monitoring. The field data results were thoroughly

evaluated. For monitoring year 2013 the follow recommendations are presented:

Maintain quarterly monitoring at D(18-21)06bcb during 2013 to verify when the nitrate-N

concentrations at this location decrease to less than 10 mg/l. D(18-21)06bcb is the closest

MNA management well to SEW-1 extent of capture (Figure 6). Once this well is confirmed

to be below the cleanup standard of 10 mg/l and all the remaining shallow aquifer wells

north of SEW-1 capture remain below 10 mg/l, then the cleanup standard for the Northern

MNA area will have been achieved. ANPI will monitor the well annually for 2 years after the

nitrate-N concentration goes below the goal to make sure no rebound occurs.



4/8/2013 78

10.0 REFERENCES

Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE), 2006. Monitoring and Remediation

Optimization System (MAROS). March 2006

Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. 2007. Community Outreach Plan. September 11, 2007.

Appelo, C.A.J. and D. Postma, 2005. Geochemistry and Groundwater Pollution, 2nd ed., A.A.

Balkema, New York, New York.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).1998. Interoffice memorandum from

Craig Kafura, ADEQ, Southern Regional Office to Kris Kommalan, Apache Powder

Project Manager, Federal Projects Unit, ADEQ,

_____, 2008. Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction (DEUR) for Property with

Engineering Control and Non-Residential Restriction. August 22, 2008.

Arizona Administrative Code (AAC), Title 18, Chapter 7, Article 2, Section 204. Arizona’s Soil

Remediation Levels,

Black and Veatch, 1988. Preliminary Investigation Report, Apache Powder Site, Cochise

County, Arizona. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, June 1988.

Deane, T.C., 2000. Conceptualization of Groundwater Flow in the Shallow Aquifer Along the

Apache Reach of the San Pedro River, Cochise County, Arizona. Master’s thesis,

Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona,

202p.; 2000.



4/8/2013 79

Hargis + Associates, Inc. (H+A), 1990a. Study Area Survey, Apache Powder Superfund Site.

Prepared for Apache Powder Company, Inc., Benson, Arizona, February 16, 1990.

_____, 1990b. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Apache Powder Company, Benson, Arizona.

Prepared for Apache Powder Company, Inc., Benson, Arizona, May 21, 1990.

_____, 1995. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson,

Arizona, Revision 0.0. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona,

May 17, 1995.


Arizona, Revision 1.0. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona;

January 31, 1996.


Arizona, Revision 2.0. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona,

January 30, 1997.

_____, 1999. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Quality Assurance Project Plan, Revision 3.0.

Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona; October 8, 1999.

_____, 2000. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Quality Assurance Project Plan, Revision 4.0.

Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona; February 28, 2000.

_____, 2002. Scope of Work for Perched Zone Groundwater Extraction/Treatment Pilot Study,

Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona; July 9, 2002.

_____, 2003a. Characterization of Groundwater Systems In The Southern Area Apache

Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona; June 10, 2003.



4/8/2013 80

_____, 2003b. Applicability of Monitored Natural Attenuation Apache Powder Superfund Site

Cochise County, Arizona, Revision 2.0. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc,

Benson, Arizona, July 9, 2003.

_____, 2003c. San Pedro River Summary of Investigations Apache Powder Superfund Site

Cochise County, Arizona, July 9, 2003.

_____, 2005a. Northern Area Nitrate Characterization Workplan, Apache Powder Superfund

Site, Cochise County, Arizona. May 4, 2005.

_____, 2005b. Northern Area Groundwater Model, Revision 1.0, Apache Powder Superfund

Site, Cochise County, Arizona. July 8, 2005.

_____, 2006a. Comprehensive Northern Area Characterization Workplan Apache Powder

Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. August 18, 2006.

_____, 2006b. Southern Area Workplan Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County,

Arizona. September 8, 2006.

_____, 2007a. Operation and Maintenance Plan Northern Area Remediation System, Revision 3. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona; March 9, 2007.

_____, 2007b. Southern Area Performance Monitoring Plan, Revision 2.0. September 5, 2007.

_____, 2008a. Remedial Action Implementation Report for Pond Soils and Sediments

(CERCLA Media Component 3 and Formerly Active Ponds) Revision 1.0 Apache

Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona, April 22, 2008.

_____, 2008b. Soils Engineering Control Plan, Apache Powder Superfund Site Cochise

County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. Benson, Arizona; April

22, 2008.



4/8/2013 81

_____, 2008c. Northern Area Monitored Natural Attenuation Assessment, Revision 1.0.

Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona; July 14, 2008.

_____, 2009a. Performance Monitoring Plan for Monitored Natural Attenuation of Shallow

Aquifer Groundwater in the Northern Area Revision 1.0 of the Apache Powder

Superfund Site. February 12, 2009.

_____, 2009b. Alternate Domestic Water Supply Plan Revision 3.0. February 12, 2009.

_____, 2009c. Quality Assurance Project Plan Performance Monitoring and Operation and

Maintenance of Remedies Revision 0.0. Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise

County, AZ. May 8, 2009

_____, 2009e. 2008 Annual Performance Monitoring and Site-Wide Status Report Revision 1.0.

Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, AZ. June 18, 2010.

_____, 2010a. Results of 2009 Annual Pond Cover Inspection Report, Apache Nitrogen

Products, Inc. Cochise County, Arizona. January 5, 2010.

_____, 2010b. 2009 Annual Performance Monitoring and Site-Wide Status Report Revision 1.0.

Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, AZ. July 2, 2009

_____, 2010c. 2010 Well Inventory Update, Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County,

Arizona, Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. Cochise County, Arizona. October 21, 2010.

Humboldt State University (HSU), 2000. Initial Studies of Perchlorate Bioremediation: The

Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache

Nitrogen Products, Inc., November 21, 2000.

______, 2001. Isolation of Indigenous Perchlorate Reducing Bacteria and In-situ Simulation of

Perchlorate Contaminated Groundwater, Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise

County, Arizona. June 11, 2001.



4/8/2013 82

______, 2002. Start-up Readiness of the Apache Nitrogen Products Superfund Site The

Denitrification Wetland Cochise County, Arizona. July 2002.

Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC), 2002. A Systematic Approach to In Situ

Bioremediation in Groundwater. August 2002.

Kadlec and Knight, 1996. Treatment Wetlands.

Roeske and Werrell, 1973. Hydrologic conditions in the San Pedro River Valley, Arizona, 1971:

Arizona Water Commission Bulletin 4, 76 p., 1 sheet.

Sellers, William D. and Hill, Richards H. 1974 Arizona Climate 1931-1972.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1994a. Record of Decision, Apache Powder

Company, EPA ID AZD008399263, OU01, Saint David, Arizona. EPA/ROD/R09-94-

120. September 30, 1994.

_____, 1994b. EPA Unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Design, Remedial Action and

Other Response Actions: U.S. EPA Docket No. 95-07; Issued to Apache Nitrogen

Products, Inc., December 21, 1994, Effective Date: December 29, 1994.

_, 2000. Letter from Ms. Andria Benner, EPA, to Ms. Kerstin Alter, ANPI, re: Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD) #2; September 29, 2000.

______, 2004. Performance Monitoring of MNA Remedies for VOCs in Ground Water. April

2004.

______, 2005 Amendment to the Apache Powder Superfund Site, Record of Decision.

September 30, 2005.



4/8/2013 83

______, 2008 Letter from John Lucey of EPA to Pamela Beilke of ANPI. Re: EPA Explanation

Of Significant Differences approving MNA in the Northern Area July 31, 2008.

______, 2009a Letter from Andria Benner of EPA to Pamela Beilke of ANPI. Re: Comments on

2008 Annual Performance Monitoring and Site-Wide Status Report. May 12, 2009.

______, 2009b. Apache Powder Superfund Site, Final Consent Decree. December 15, 2009.

______, 2010. Letter from Andria Benner of EPA to Pamela Beilke of ANPI. Re: Approval of

Request for Off-Site Disposal of P-03 Pool Sludge. July 20, 2010.


TABLES


ANP-PMP Annl Rpt-Table 01.doc

TABLE 1

SITE REMEDIES

MEDIA COMPONENT LOCATION REMEDY(IES)

Perched Zone Southern Area Source control

Molinos Creek Sub-Aquifer Southern Area Monitored natural attenuation (MNA)

Ponds Southern Area Native soil cover and institutional controls

Shallow Aquifer Groundwater Northern Area Northern Area Remediation System (NARS) and MNA


.

ANP-PMP Annl Rpt-Table 02.doc

TABLE 2

SITE INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS

MEDIA COMPONENT LOCATION INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL

Perched Zone Southern Area DEUR*, fencing (access restriction)

Molinos Creek Sub-Aquifer Southern Area DEUR*, Well Inventory, Community Outreach

Ponds Southern Area DEUR*, Fencing, Signage, Community Outreach

Shallow Aquifer Groundwater Northern Area Well Inventory, Community Outreach, Alternate Domestic Water Supply Plan

* DEUR = Declaration of Environmental Use Restrictions

WATERNITRATE‐N MNA(1) C. ION(2) AMMONIA METALS(3) ClO4 LEVELS

NARS MONITORING WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]

MW-08 ANPI Q Aug-14 Q

MW-11 ANPI A - Aug Aug-14 Q

MW-13 ANPI S - Feb/Aug Aug-14 Q



MW-19 ANPI Q Feb-15 Q




MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]MW-20 ANPI S - Feb/Aug Feb-15 QMW-38 ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 Q

MW-41A ANPI S - Feb/Aug Feb-15 QMW-41B ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 QMW-42 ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 Q

D(17-20)36aad1 Jacobs Q Aug-14 QD(17-20)36caa2 Hyder S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 QD(17-20)36caa Gaynor S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q


TABLE 3

2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING SCHEDULE

FOR GROUNDWATER, SOIL, AND NARS REMEDIES

SITE ID WELL OWNER COMMENTS

PROPOSED MONITORING FREQUENCY/PARAMETERS

of 6


MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]

D(17-20)24ccd Kartchner Suspended (EPA, 2011)

D(17-20)36cdb Woolever S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36ddc Morales S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36ddd Higgenbotham Suspended

D(18-20)01aad McRae S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 NM

D(18-21)06bcb Jones Q Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36cad2 Vivian Suspended

D(17-20)36aad3 Acuna Q Water level only

D(17-20)36cad1 McCann Q Water level only

D(17-20)36dad Ohlde Q Water level only

D(18-21)06ada White Q Water level only

D(18-21)06bab Alexander Q Water level only

D(18-21)06bbc2 Wooten Q Water level only

D(18-21)08bab Tenopir Q Water level only

MW-40 ANPI Q A - Aug May-15 Q

D(17-20)23ada Dill Suspended (EPA, 2012)

D(17-20)23acd Levy/Drow Suspended (EPA, 2012)D(17-20)25bad Spears S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Aug-14 NM Buffer Zone Well (EPA, 2012)


TABLE 3

2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING SCHEDULE FOR GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND NARS REMEDIES


SENTINEL WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]

MNA BUFFER ZONE WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]

PROPOSED MONITORING

FREQUENCY/PARAMETERS

of 6


SEW-1 ANPI M Q Sep-16 Q

Weekly nitrate-N with field methods. Additional parameters include total phosphorus (Q), major

ions (A)

MW-10 ANPI Q Q Weekly

DCP-12 ANPI Q Feb-16 Q

TREATMENT CELL (sediments) ANPI Sep-16

EFFLUENT ANPI M M Sep-16

Additional parameters include total phosphorus, total kjeldahl nitrogen, organic nitrogen, total

dissolved solids, and total suspended solids (Q). Major ions (A)

POND 1 ANPI ANPI performs quarterly inspections and after heavy rainfall, H+A performs annual inspection.




DYNAGEL ANPI ANPI performs quarterly inspections and after heavy rainfall, H+A performs annual inspection.


TABLE 3



NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM [NARS O&M]

TREATMENT CELLS

(surface water) ANPI M M Weekly

Weekly nitrate-N with field methods. Additional parameters include total phosphorus, chemical oxygen demand, and total organic carbon (Q),

total kjeldahl nitrogen, organic nitrate (A).

NATIVE POND COVERS [Soils Engineering Control Plan]

PROPOSED MONITORING


of 6


SW-03 NA Q Q If flow is present



SW-14 NA Q Q Q If flow is present

P-01 ANPI Q Q Q

P-03 ANPI Q Q Q

P-10 ANPI Q Q Q If sufficient water exist to sample

MW-03 ANPI S - May/Nov S - M/N Q

MW-04 ANPI Q Water level onlyMW-29 ANPI Q Q Q If sufficient water exist to sample

MW-15 ANPI Q A - Nov Q Q


MW-23 ANPI S - May/Nov A - Nov S - M/N QMW-24 ANPI A-Nov A - Nov A-N QMW-39 ANPI Q A - Nov Q Q

TABLE 3



SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER MONITORING STATIONS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]


PERCHED ZONE (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

MOLINOS CREEK AQUIFER (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

PROPOSED MONITORING


of 6


MW-14 ANPI A - Feb A - Feb Q


MW-01 ANPI S - Feb/Aug S - F/A Q


MW-25 ANPI C C Q




TABLE 3


PROPOSED MONITORING


SENTINEL WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

UPGRADIENT WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]


MNA BUFFER ZONE WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER MONITORING STATIONS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP]


TABLE 3

Page 6 of 6

EXPLANATION:

A= Annually

ANPI= Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc.ClO4= Perchlorate

C. ION= common ions, EVERY 5 YEARSC= Contingent on MW-33 resultsH+A= Hargis + Associates, Inc.M= MonthlyMETALS, EVERY 5 YEARSNA= Not applicableNARS= Northern Area Remediation SystemNM= Not measuredO&M= Operation and maintenancePMP= Performance Monitoring PlanQ= QuarterlyS= Semi-Annually

Standard Field Parameters - Temp (oC), pH, Electrical Conductivity (µs/cm) are collected every time a well is sampled(1) MNA Parameters: alkalinity, dissolved iron, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential and total dissolved solids (TDS) at all marked locations.

The Northern Area wells are also sampled for dissolved manganese and sulfate.See the NARS O&M Manual, & Northern and Southern Area PMP's for specific details.

(2) Common Ion List every 5 years: alkalinity, chloride, fluoride, sulfate, nitrate-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, TDS, dissolved calcium, dissolved magnesium, dissolved potassium and dissolved sodium

(3) Metals List every 5 years: SEW-1 and Effluent: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, total chromium, copper, iron, lead, managanese,mercury, selenium, silver, thallium and zinc.DCP-12: barium, beryllium, total chromium, lead, mercury and thallium.Treatment Cells Sediment: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, zinc; calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, orthophosphate, chloride, fluoride, sulfate,alkalinity, pH; total nitrogen by calculation, total organic carbon, total phosphorus, ammonia-nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen, total kjedahl nitrogen.


TABLE 4WATER LEVEL ELEVATION DATA

DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)

WATER LEVELELEVATION

(feet msl)IDENTIFIER


01 PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETERS

P-01

23.87 3665.063688.932/4/201123.78 3665.155/16/201123.33 3665.68/19/201123.96 3664.9711/14/201123.93 36652/17/201224.53 3664.45/14/201225.31 3663.628/10/201225.04 3663.8911/5/2012

P-03

36.55 3637.93674.452/4/201136.81 3637.645/16/201137.03 3637.428/19/201137.27 3637.1811/14/2011

37 3637.452/17/201236.87 3637.585/14/201237.58 3636.878/10/201237.15 3637.311/5/2012

P-10

DRY ---3669.122/4/2011DRY ---5/16/2011DRY ---8/19/2011DRY ---11/14/2011DRY ---2/17/2012DRY ---5/14/2012DRY ---8/10/2012DRY ---11/5/2012

02 PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELLS

MW-03

DRY ---3670.692/4/2011DRY ---5/16/2011

(see page 17 for explanation of abbreviations)

DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)



TABLE 4 (continued)WATER LEVEL ELEVATION DATA

Page 2 of 17



MW-03

DRY ---3670.698/19/2011DRY ---11/14/2011DRY ---2/17/2012DRY ---5/14/2012DRY ---8/10/2012DRY ---11/5/2012

MW-04

DRY ---3685.202/4/2011DRY ---5/16/2011DRY ---8/19/2011DRY ---11/14/2011DRY ---2/17/2012DRY ---5/14/2012DRY ---8/10/2012DRY ---11/5/2012

MW-29

DRY ---3664.912/4/2011DRY ---5/16/2011DRY ---8/19/2011DRY ---11/14/2011DRY ---2/17/2012DRY ---5/14/2012DRY ---8/10/2012

11/5/2012

MW-30

DRY ---3664.282/4/2011DRY ---5/16/2011DRY ---8/19/2011DRY ---11/14/2011DRY ---2/17/2012DRY ---5/14/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 3 of 17



MW-30

DRY ---3664.288/10/201211/5/2012

MW-31


11/5/2012

MW-32


11/5/2012

03 MCA MONITOR WELLS

MW-15


11/5/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 4 of 17



MW-21

62.03 3600.843662.872/4/201161.92 3600.955/16/201162.9 3599.978/19/201163.96 3598.9111/14/201162.12 3600.752/17/201261.21 3601.665/14/201263.45 3599.428/10/201264.41 3598.4611/5/2012

MW-23

UTM ---3660.662/4/201158.92 3601.745/16/201161.31 3599.358/19/201162.05 3598.6111/14/201160.04 3600.622/17/201259.39 3601.275/14/2012

62 3598.668/10/201262.7 3597.9611/5/2012

MW-24

23.82 3600.683624.502/4/201123.8 3600.75/16/201127.14 3597.368/19/201126.91 3597.5911/14/201124.02 3600.482/17/201224.12 3600.385/14/201227.93 3596.578/10/201227.66 3596.8411/5/2012

MW-39

47.88 3601.263649.142/4/201146.93 3602.215/16/201149.63 3599.518/19/201150.45 3598.6911/14/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 5 of 17



MW-39

48.52 3600.623649.142/17/201247.6 3601.545/14/201250.54 3598.68/10/201251.21 3597.9311/5/2012

04 SOUTHERN AREA SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLS

MW-01

17.77 3613.233631.002/4/201118 36135/16/2011

17.76 3613.248/19/2011UTM ---11/14/201117.87 3613.132/17/201218.3 3612.75/14/201218.76 3612.248/14/201219.14 3611.8611/7/2012

MW-06

22.38 3626.063648.442/4/201122.61 3625.835/16/201122.09 3626.358/19/201122.67 3625.7711/14/201122.52 3625.922/17/201222.74 3625.75/14/201222.72 3625.728/10/201222.78 3625.6611/5/2012

MW-14

14.1 3609.493623.592/4/201114.3 3609.295/16/201114.27 3609.328/19/201114.82 3608.7711/14/201114.3 3609.292/17/201214.74 3608.855/14/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 6 of 17



MW-14

15.07 3608.523623.598/10/201215.28 3608.3111/5/2012

MW-22

15.66 3609.33624.962/4/201116.02 3608.945/16/201115.84 3609.128/19/201116.5 3608.4611/14/2011

15.84 3609.122/17/201216.25 3608.715/14/201216.51 3608.458/10/201216.87 3608.0911/5/2012

MW-25

22.24 3598.773621.012/4/201120.25 3600.765/16/201122.1 3598.918/19/201122.05 3598.9611/14/201120.77 3600.242/17/201220.6 3600.415/14/201222.37 3598.648/10/201222.47 3598.5411/5/2012

MW-33

18.8 3604.893623.692/4/201118.64 3605.055/16/201120.52 3603.178/19/201120.64 3603.0511/14/201118.94 3604.752/17/201218.9 3604.795/14/201220.92 3602.778/10/2012

21 3602.6911/5/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 7 of 17


05 NARS SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLS

MW-08

66.61 3572.343638.952/4/201165.14 3573.813/11/201165.3 3573.653/25/201164.5 3574.454/8/201164.48 3574.474/14/201167.56 3571.395/16/201171.41 3567.548/19/201171.86 3567.0911/14/201168.75 3570.22/17/201269.69 3569.265/14/201271.8 3567.158/10/201270.05 3568.911/5/2012

MW-11

26.44 3589.233615.672/4/201126.98 3588.695/16/201126.41 3589.268/19/201127.3 3588.3711/14/2011

25.62 3590.052/17/201226.55 3589.125/14/201226.66 3589.018/10/201227.71 3587.9611/7/2012

MW-13

27.55 3594.573622.122/4/201128.69 3593.435/16/201129.08 3593.048/23/201129.75 3592.3711/14/201127.69 3594.432/20/201228.23 3593.895/14/201228.99 3593.138/10/201229.41 3592.7111/5/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 8 of 17



MW-17

51.99 3572.583624.572/4/201150.69 3573.883/11/201150.52 3574.053/25/201150.34 3574.234/8/201150.41 3574.164/14/201153.6 3570.975/16/201156.79 3567.788/19/201157.47 3567.111/14/201154.56 3570.012/17/201255.66 3568.915/14/201257.21 3567.368/10/2012

56 3568.5711/5/2012

MW-18

53.53 35713624.532/4/201152.37 3572.163/11/201152.22 3572.313/25/201151.84 3572.694/8/201151.88 3572.654/14/201155.21 3569.325/16/201158.31 3566.228/19/201158.99 3565.5411/14/201156.02 3568.512/17/201257.47 3567.065/14/201258.69 3565.848/10/201257.68 3566.8511/5/2012

MW-19

69.07 3572.013641.082/4/201167.73 3573.353/11/201167.37 3573.713/25/201166.91 3574.174/8/201166.86 3574.224/14/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 9 of 17



MW-19

69.58 3571.53641.085/16/201173.92 3567.168/19/201174.32 3566.7611/14/201171.33 3569.752/17/201271.75 3569.335/14/201274.28 3566.88/10/201272.4 3568.6811/5/2012

MW-34

25.56 3588.443614.002/4/201125.62 3588.385/16/201125.25 3588.758/19/201126.69 3587.3111/14/201125.56 3588.442/17/201226.46 3587.545/14/201226.05 3587.958/10/201226.92 3587.0811/5/2012

MW-35

10.67 3585.493596.162/4/201110.75 3585.413/11/201110.77 3585.393/25/201110.79 3585.374/8/201111.11 3585.054/14/201111.01 3585.155/16/20119.82 3586.348/19/201110.68 3585.4811/14/201110.31 3585.852/17/201210.93 3585.235/14/201210.62 3585.548/10/201211.02 3585.1411/5/2012

MW-36

23.15 3586.373609.522/4/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 10 of 17



MW-36

23.3 3586.223609.523/11/201123.3 3586.223/25/201123.3 3586.224/8/201123.45 3586.074/14/201122.75 3586.775/16/201122.52 35878/19/201123.3 3586.2211/14/201122.8 3586.722/17/201223.52 35865/14/201223.13 3586.398/10/201223.77 3585.7511/5/2012

06 NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLS

MW-20

24.6 3576.653601.252/4/201127.72 3573.535/16/201128.51 3572.748/19/201130.4 3570.8511/14/2011

27.86 3573.392/17/201230.15 3571.15/14/201229.86 3571.398/10/201230.31 3570.9411/5/2012

MW-38

23.15 3548.23571.352/4/201128.95 3542.45/16/201128.69 3542.668/19/201130.95 3540.411/14/201128.71 3542.642/20/201230.98 3540.375/14/2012

31 3540.358/14/201231.19 3540.1611/5/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 11 of 17



MW-40

26.38 3563.053589.432/4/201127.57 3561.865/16/201126.38 3563.058/19/2011

31 3558.4311/14/201127.72 3561.712/17/201229.7 3559.735/14/201229.1 3560.338/10/201230.15 3559.2811/5/2012

MW-41A

19.51 3555.423574.932/4/201120 3554.935/17/201122 3552.938/23/2011

22.83 3552.111/14/201121.42 3553.512/21/201222.41 3552.525/14/201223.17 3551.768/14/201223.11 3551.8211/5/2012

MW-41B

21.51 3553.423574.932/4/201122.94 3551.995/17/201123.33 3551.68/23/201125.21 3549.7211/14/201123.83 3551.12/21/201225.15 3549.785/14/201225.2 3549.738/14/201225.42 3549.5111/5/2012

MW-42

36.06 3567.233603.292/4/201135.76 3567.533/11/201135.66 3567.633/25/201136.14 3567.154/8/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 12 of 17



MW-42

36.23 3567.063603.294/14/201138.23 3565.065/16/201138.9 3564.398/19/201141.13 3562.1611/14/201138.8 3564.492/17/201240.63 3562.665/14/201240.88 3562.418/10/201241.08 3562.2111/5/2012

07 NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELLS

D(17-20)23acd(Drow)

UTM ---3550.782/4/2011UTM ---5/16/2011UTM ---8/19/2011UTM ---11/14/2011UTM ---2/17/2012

D(17-20)23ada(Dill)

UTM ---3542.812/4/2011UTM ---5/16/2011UTM ---8/19/2011UTM ---11/14/2011UTM ---2/17/2012

D(17-20)24ccd(Kartchner)

UTM ---3558.562/4/2011

D(17-20)36aad1 (Jacobs)

23.33 3558.013581.342/4/201123.29 3558.055/16/201124.43 3556.918/19/201126.2 3555.1411/14/2011

25.39 3555.952/17/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 13 of 17




25.65 3555.693581.345/14/201232.5 3548.848/10/201225.73 3555.6111/5/2012

D(17-20)36aad3 (Acuña)

23.2 3558.83582.002/4/201123.96 3558.045/16/201122.1 3559.98/19/201126.08 3555.9211/14/201124.62 3557.382/17/201225.42 3556.585/14/201224.9 3557.18/10/201225.71 3556.2911/5/2012

D(17-20)36caa (Gaynor)

28.99 3560.663589.652/4/201135.12 3554.535/16/201135.3 3554.358/19/201134.7 3554.9511/14/2011

32.32 3557.332/17/201237.7 3551.955/14/201233.09 3556.568/10/201238.4 3551.2511/5/2012 (PWL

D(17-20)36caa2(Hyder)

31.68 3557.163588.842/4/201133.64 3555.25/16/201132.25 3556.598/19/201134.3 3554.5411/14/2011

32.57 3556.272/17/201234.01 3554.835/14/201234.25 3554.598/10/201234.52 3554.3211/5/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 14 of 17



D(17-20)36cad1 (McCann)

30.44 3561.253591.692/4/201132.21 3559.485/16/201132.9 3558.798/24/201134.94 3556.7511/14/201132.96 3558.732/17/201234.17 3557.525/14/201234.55 3557.148/10/201234.97 3556.7211/5/2012

D(17-20)36cdb (Woolever)

48.29 3562.353610.642/4/201150.29 3560.355/16/201150.7 3559.948/19/201152.82 3557.8211/14/201150.87 3559.772/17/201252.62 3558.025/14/201252.66 3557.988/10/201253.18 3557.4611/7/2012

D(17-20)36dad (Ohlde)

31.77 3568.233600.002/4/201134.99 3565.015/16/2011UTM ---8/19/2011UTM ---11/14/2011UTM ---2/17/201238.68 3561.325/14/201237.51 3562.498/10/2012

11/5/2012

D(17-20)36ddc (Morales)

26.51 3564.093590.602/4/201128.61 3561.995/16/201129.25 3561.358/19/201131.65 3558.9511/14/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 15 of 17




29.14 3561.463590.602/17/201231.8 3558.85/14/201231.17 3559.438/10/201231.63 3558.9711/5/2012

D(18-21)06ada (White)

36.75 3589.253626.002/4/201138.42 3587.585/18/201139.57 3586.438/19/201139.35 3586.6511/14/201137.87 3588.132/17/201240.59 3585.415/14/201240.35 3585.658/10/201239.55 3586.4511/5/2012

D(18-21)06bab (Alexander)

27.01 3582.993610.002/4/201132.2 3577.85/16/201131.39 3578.618/19/201131.6 3578.411/14/2011

29.79 3580.212/17/201234.81 3575.195/14/201233.2 3576.88/10/201231.66 3578.3411/5/2012

D(18-21)06bcb (Jones)

38.22 3574.583612.802/4/201137.5 3575.33/11/201137.9 3574.93/25/201138.2 3574.64/8/201138.26 3574.544/14/201140.27 3572.535/16/201142.6 3570.28/19/201143.7 3569.111/14/2011


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




Page 16 of 17




41.11 3571.693612.802/17/201242.31 3570.495/14/201243.2 3569.68/10/201242.87 3569.9311/5/2012 (PWL

D(18-21)06bcc2 (Wooten)

63.96 3571.043635.002/4/201165.4 3569.65/16/201169.46 3565.5411/14/201166.35 3568.652/17/201267.55 3567.455/14/201268.89 3566.118/10/201267.57 3567.4311/5/2012

D(18-21)08bab (Tenopir)

24.81 3600.193625.002/4/201124.12 3600.885/16/201124.3 3600.78/19/201125.4 3599.611/14/2011

22.48 3602.522/17/201223.49 3601.515/14/201224.4 3600.68/10/201224.24 3600.7611/7/2012


feet mslbmpUTM

NMRP

PWL

= feet above mean sea level= below measuring point= unable to measure= not measured= recently pumped= pumping water level


Page 17 of 17

FOOTNOTES:


TABLE 5SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHED ZONE

DATEMEASURED

WATER LEVEL

ELEVATION(feet msl)

ELEVATION OF SCREEN

BOTTOM(feet msl)

SATURATEDTHICKNESS OF

PERCHED ZONE (feet)IDENTIFIER


PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETERS

P-01

3662.233665.062/4/2011 2.833665.155/16/2011 2.92

3665.68/19/2011 3.373664.9711/14/2011 2.74

36652/17/2012 2.773664.45/14/2012 2.17

3663.628/10/2012 1.393663.8911/5/2012 1.66

P-03

3629.033637.92/4/2011 8.873637.645/16/2011 8.613637.428/19/2011 8.393637.1811/14/2011 8.153637.452/17/2012 8.423637.585/14/2012 8.553636.878/10/2012 7.84

3637.311/5/2012 8.27

P-10

3622.78DRY 2/4/2011 0.00DRY 5/16/2011 0.00DRY 8/19/2011 0.00DRY 11/14/2011 0.00DRY 2/17/2012 0.00DRY 5/14/2012 0.00DRY 8/10/2012 0.00DRY 11/5/2012 0.00


DATEMEASURED

WATER LEVEL

ELEVATION(feet msl)

ELEVATION OFSCREENBOTTOM(feet msl)

SATURATEDTHICKNESS OF

PERCHED ZONE AND MOLINOS

CREEK (feet)IDENTIFIER

TABLE 5 (continued)SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHED ZONE


Page 2 of 3

PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELLS

MW-03


MW-04



feet msl = feet above mean sea level

TABLE 5 (continued)SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHED ZONE

Page 3 of 3

FOOTNOTES:



YearTotal Pumped

(gal)NO3-N Mass

Removed (lbs)ClO4 Mass

Removed (lbs)

12/30/02 3,524 62 0.01

12/30/03 14,739 289 0.07

12/30/04 11,513 243 0.05

12/30/05 12,587 363 0.05

12/30/06 10,073 315 0.05

12/30/07 6,991 280 0.03

12/30/08 2,887 122 0.01

12/30/09 9,795 571 0.05

12/30/10 4,764 290 0.02

12/30/11 6,049 427 0.02

12/30/12 4,286 337 0.02

TOTAL 87,207 3,299 0.39

FOOTNOTES:

gal = gallonslbs = pounds

NO3-N = nitrate-Nitrogen

ClO4 = perchlorate

totalized values were collected at the P-03 flow meter

TABLE 6PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETER P-03

EXTRACTION/TREATMENT PERFORMANCE

TABLE 7GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA(NITRATE AND PERCHLORATE)

IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE SAMPLETYPE

PERCHLORATE(µg/l)

NITRATE-N(mg/l)


01 PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETERS

P-01

11/16/2011 ORG14150 (E)

2/22/2012 ORG12180

5/16/2012 ORG24.9210

8/15/2012 ORG19.8220

11/7/2012 ORG27.2200

P-03

2/7/2011 ORG4906900 (E)

5/17/2011 ORG5109200 (E)

8/22/2011 ORG5809500

11/15/2011 SPT6609000

11/15/2011 ORG 580 (E)9700

2/20/2012 ORG5709800

5/15/2012 ORG6499300

5/15/2012 ESPT59010000

5/15/2012 SPT61012000

5/15/2012 FD64310000

8/13/2012 ORG5699100

11/6/2012 SPT6119400

11/6/2012 ORG59011000 (E)


MW-21

2/7/2011 FD3403600 (E)

2/7/2011 ORG4203400 (E)

5/17/2011 ORG2303700 (E)

8/22/2011 ORG2603700


TABLE 7 (continued)GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATAPage 2 of 13

IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-21

11/15/2011 ORG 290 (E)3600

2/20/2012 ORG2803600

5/15/2012 ESPT2904500

5/15/2012 ORG3194200

8/13/2012 SPT 280 (E)4900

8/13/2012 ORG2874300

11/6/2012 ORG3204800

MW-23

5/17/2011 ORG157.3

11/15/2011 ORG259.6

11/15/2011 FD258.6

5/15/2012 ORG< 1523

11/6/2012 ORG2212

11/6/2012 SPT19.49.6

MW-24

5/17/2011 SPT2.61.2

5/17/2011 ORG 2.3 (E)1.5

11/15/2011 FD 3.6 (E)2.3

11/15/2011 ORG 3.1 (E)1.2

11/6/2012 ORG2.80.94

MW-39

2/7/2011 ORG140110 (E)

5/17/2011 FD130120 (E)

5/17/2011 ORG130120 (E)

8/22/2011 ORG130100



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-39

11/15/2011 SPT110100

11/15/2011 ORG9898

2/20/2012 ORG110110

5/15/2012 ESPT11092

5/15/2012 ORG11188

8/13/2012 ORG91.381

11/6/2012 FD8777

11/6/2012 ORG8677


MW-01

2/8/2011 ORGNA< 1

8/22/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

2/22/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

8/14/2012 ORG< 0.31 (E)< 1

MW-06

2/7/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)2.4 (E)

8/22/2011 SPTNA< 0.2

8/22/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)2.7

2/20/2012 SPT< 20.27

2/20/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

8/13/2012 ORG< 0.31 (E)< 1

MW-14

2/7/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1 (E)

2/20/2012 SPT< 20.38



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-14

2/20/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

MW-22

2/7/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1 (E)

2/20/2012 FD< 0.23 (E)< 1

2/20/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

MW-33

2/7/2011 SPTNA< 0.2

2/7/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1 (E)

2/20/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1


MW-08

2/7/2011 ORGNA37 (E)

5/17/2011 ORGNA36 (E)

8/22/2011 ORGNA40

11/15/2011 ORGNA37

2/21/2012 ORGNA33

5/15/2012 ORGNA34

8/13/2012 FDNA33

8/13/2012 ORGNA34

11/6/2012 ORGNA35

MW-11

8/22/2011 ORGNA5.1

8/13/2012 FDNA6.2

8/13/2012 ORGNA5.9



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-13

2/7/2011 ORGNA16 (E)

8/23/2011 FDNA17

8/23/2011 ORGNA17

2/20/2012 ORGNA13

8/13/2012 ORGNA17

MW-17

2/7/2011 ORGNA4.7 (E)

2/7/2011 FDNA4.8

8/23/2011 ORGNA8.4

2/21/2012 ORGNA9.2

8/13/2012 ORGNA9

MW-18

2/7/2011 ORGNA9.9 (E)

8/23/2011 ORGNA15

2/21/2012 SPTNA17

2/21/2012 ORGNA13

8/13/2012 ORGNA16

MW-19

2/7/2011 FDNA16 (E)

2/7/2011 ORGNA16 (E)

5/17/2011 ORGNA16 (E)

8/22/2011 ORGNA14

11/15/2011 ORGNA13

2/21/2012 ORGNA13

5/15/2012 ESPTNA16



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-19

5/15/2012 ORGNA15

8/13/2012 ORGNA15

11/6/2012 ORGNA150 (E)

MW-34

2/7/2011 ORGNA< 1 (E)

5/17/2011 ORGNA< 1

8/23/2011 ORGNA2.4

11/15/2011 ORGNA< 1

2/20/2012 ORGNA< 1

5/15/2012 ORGNA9

8/13/2012 ORGNA< 1

11/6/2012 FDNA0.25

11/6/2012 ORGNA< 0.2

MW-35

2/7/2011 ORGNA30 (E)

5/17/2011 ORGNA19 (E)

8/23/2011 ORGNA74

11/15/2011 ORGNA72

2/20/2012 FDNA63

2/20/2012 ORGNA63

5/15/2012 ESPTNA59

5/15/2012 ORGNA57

8/13/2012 ORGNA81

11/6/2012 ORGNA93



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-36

2/7/2011 ORGNA220 (E)

5/17/2011 ORGNA210 (E)

8/23/2011 ORGNA210

11/15/2011 FDNA170

11/15/2011 ORGNA170

2/20/2012 ORGNA170

5/15/2012 ORGNA180

5/15/2012 ESPTNA180

8/13/2012 SPTNA210

8/13/2012 ORGNA170

11/6/2012 ORGNA170


MW-20

2/8/2011 ORGNA5

8/22/2011 ORGNA3

2/22/2012 ORGNA2.7

8/14/2012 ORGNA2.5

MW-38

2/9/2011 SPTNA3.5

2/9/2011 ORGNA3.1

8/23/2011 ORGNA3.1

2/20/2012 ORGNA3.2

8/14/2012 ORGNA3.7



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



MW-40

2/8/2011 ORGNA4.6

5/17/2011 ORGNA5.2

8/23/2011 ORGNA4.5

11/16/2011 ORGNA2.7

2/21/2012 ORGNA2

5/15/2012 ORGNA2.4

8/14/2012 ORGNA< 1

11/7/2012 ORGNA1.1

MW-41A

2/8/2011 ORGNA1.7

8/23/2011 ORGNA1.5

2/21/2012 ORGNA1.3

8/14/2012 ORGNA1.4

MW-41B

2/8/2011 ORGNA3.1

8/23/2011 SPTNA3.6

8/23/2011 ORGNA3.1

2/21/2012 ORGNA3.3

8/14/2012 ORGNA4.1

8/14/2012 FDNA4

MW-42

2/8/2011 ORGNA7.8

8/22/2011 ORGNA8

2/21/2012 ORGNA7.4

8/14/2012 ORGNA8.2



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)



D(17-20)23ada(Dill)

11/16/2011 ORGNA< 1

D(17-20)25bad(Spears)

5/18/2011 SPTNA2.4

5/18/2011 ORGNA2

8/24/2011 ORGNA2.3

5/16/2012 ORGNA2

8/14/2012 ORGNA1.9


2/9/2011 FDNA4

2/9/2011 ORGNA4

5/18/2011 FDNA3.5

5/18/2011 ORGNA3.5

8/24/2011 ORGNA4.5

11/16/2011 ORGNA4.5

2/22/2012 SPTNA5.2

2/22/2012 ORGNA3.9

5/16/2012 FDNA3.9

5/16/2012 ORGNA3.7

8/15/2012 ORGNA3.9

11/7/2012 FDNA3.8

11/7/2012 ORGNA3.7


2/9/2011 ORGNA1.5

8/24/2011 FDNA2.3

8/24/2011 ORGNA2.3



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)




2/21/2012 ORGNA1.9

8/15/2012 ORGNA1.4

D(17-20)36caa2(Hyder)

2/9/2011 ORGNA3

8/24/2011 ORGNA3.2

2/22/2012 FDNA3.4

2/22/2012 ORGNA3.5

8/15/2012 SPTNA3.8

8/15/2012 ORGNA3.2

D(17-20)36cdb (Woolever)

2/9/2011 ORGNA3.9

8/24/2011 ORGNA4.6

2/22/2012 ORGNA5.3

8/15/2012 FDNA5.5

8/15/2012 ORGNA5.5


2/9/2011 ORGNA4.1

8/24/2011 FDNA3.9

8/24/2011 ORGNA4

2/22/2012 ORGNA4.1

8/15/2012 ORGNA4.5

8/15/2012 SPTNA5.5


2/9/2011 ORGNA12 (E)

4/6/2011 ORGNA11 (E)



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)




5/18/2011 ORGNA9.8 (E)

8/24/2011 ORGNA16

11/16/2011 ORGNA14

2/21/2012 FDNA13

2/21/2012 ORGNA12

5/16/2012 SPTNA15

5/16/2012 ORGNA12

8/14/2012 ORGNA13

11/7/2012 SPTNA9.3

11/7/2012 ORGNA8.6

08 SURFACE WATER

SW-03

2/8/2011 ORGNA9.9

5/18/2011 ORGNA10 (E)

5/18/2011 SPTNA12

8/24/2011 ORGNA1

2/22/2012 ORGNA2.3

SW-04

2/8/2011 ORGNA13 (E)

5/18/2011 FDNA11 (E)

5/18/2011 ORGNA11 (E)

8/24/2011 ORGNA1.4

2/22/2012 ORGNA1.8



IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATESAMPLE

TYPEPERCHLORATE

(µg/l)NITRATE-N

(mg/l)


08 SURFACE WATER

SW-12

2/8/2011 ORGNA< 1

5/18/2011 ORGNA< 1

8/24/2011 ORGNA< 1

2/22/2012 ORGNA< 1

SW-13

2/9/2011 SPTNA< 0.2

2/9/2011 ORGNA< 1

SW-14

2/9/2011 ORGNA< 1

8/24/2011 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1

2/22/2012 ORG< 0.23 (E)< 1



mg/lNitrate-N

µg/l NA

<TURN

TAA UL ORG

FDSPT

FB E

HU

= Milligrams per liter=Nitrate as Nitrogen =Micrograms =Not Analyzed=Not detected, numerical value is less than the method detection limit=Turner Laboratory (Primary Lab)=Test America Analytical (Split Lab)=Underwriters Laboratory (Primary Perchlorate Lab) =Original sample=Field duplicate sample=Split sample =Field blank =Estimated =Unusable

FOOTNOTES:


ELECTRICAL SAMPLE ALKALINITY CONDUCTIVITY pH TDS SAMPLE

IDENTIFIER DATE (mg/l) (µS/cm) (mg/l) (mg/l) (MV) (pH units) (mg/l) TYPE

MW-21 11/12/2007 330 1035 0.83 0.02 560.1 6.37 8500 ORG11/17/2008 330 2170 0.01 0.08 100 6.79 13000 ORG11/16/2009 430 1920 0.91 2.04 137 6.23 20000 ORG11/15/2010 330 26800 4 2.5 141 6.9 16600 ORG11/15/2010 320 NA NA NA NA NA NA FD11/15/2011 280 42000 3.91 2.49 17.6 6.09 18040 ORG11/6/2012 280 27133 4.36 NA 126.8 6 21560 ORG

MW-23 11/12/2007 200 1555 3.59 0.07 134.2 7.58 1200 ORG11/17/2008 190 330 UTM 0.74 30 7.89 1200 ORG11/16/200911/15/201011/15/2011 190 1430 4.06 OR 67.3 7.12 1070 ORG11/15/2011 190 NA NA NA NA NA NA FD11/6/2012 1200 1301 5.53 NA 114.6 6.63 1029 ORG

MW-24 11/12/2007 230 714 1.22 0.06 44.9 7.69 450 ORG11/17/2008 220 822 0.33 0.48 -9 8.21 500 ORG11/16/2009 220 629 0.00 1.36 58 7.49 430 ORG11/15/2010 230 746 0.82 ND -26 7.91 477 ORG11/15/2010 210 NA NA NA NA NA NA SPT11/15/2011 220 664 3.93 OR 36.4 7.67 402 ORG11/15/2011 220 NA NA NA NA NA NA FD11/6/2012 210 498 2.43 NA -70 7.18 410 ORG

MW-39 11/12/2007 260 500.2 0.4 0.04 16.1 7.02 4800 ORG11/17/2008 240 3680 0.00 0.05 66 7.73 23000 ORG11/16/2009 240 2780 0.76 1.51 135 6.93 2200 ORG11/15/2010 240 3040 0.15 ND 106 7.76 1940 ORG11/15/2011 260 2220 3.63 OR 28.9 7.41 1700 ORG11/6/2012 270 1870 4.56 NA 117.7 6.61 1513 ORG11/6/2012 270 NA NA NA NA NA NA FD

FOOTNOTES:EC= electrical conductivityfield parameters = EC, ORP, pH, TDS, dissolved oxygen and ferrous Iron OR = out of range of equipment(1)

µS/cm = microsiemens per centimeter ORG = original sample, SPT = split samplemg/l = milligrams per liter ORP = oxidation reduction potentialMV = millivolts pH= hydrogen ion potentialNA= not analyzed (field parameter) TDS = total dissolved solidsND = not detected UTS = unable to collect a sample(1) For ferrous iron, the field meter calibration range is 0.45 to 7.0 mg/L.

UTS


DISSOLVED OXYGEN ORP

FERROUS IRON

TABLE 8WATER QUALITY DATA

SOUTHERN AREA MNA PARAMETERS

UTS


TREATMENT CELLS DATE

MOLASSES (Liquid Form)

(gal)

B-52 Sodium

Tripolyphosphate (lbs)

PDA-S 1/6/2012 250 01/12/2012 250 01/19/2012 250 01/27/2012 250 02/3/2012 250 02/10/2012 250 02/16/2012 250 02/24/2012 250 03/2/2012 250 03/8/2012 250 03/16/2012 250 03/23/2012 250 03/30/2012 250 04/5/2012 250 04/13/2012 250 04/20/2012 250 04/25/2012 125 05/3/2012 125 05/11/2012 125 05/18/2012 125 05/24/2012 60 06/1/2012 100 09/14/2012 250 09/21/2012 250 09/28/2012 100 010/13/2012 100 010/26/2012 250 011/2/2012 250 011/8/2012 250 011/16/2012 250 011/24/2012 250 011/30/2012 350 012/7/2012 420 0

TABLE 9AMENDMENT ADDITIONS LOG

JANUARY 2012 THROUGH DECEMBER 2012(MOLASSES, SODIUM TRIPOLYPHOSPHATE )


Page 2 of 3



(gal)

B-52 Sodium


PDA-S 12/14/2012 420 012/21/2012 420 012/28/2012 420 0

TOTAL (PDA-S) 8,640 0

PDA-C 1/6/2012 125 01/12/2012 125 01/27/2012 125 02/3/2012 125 02/10/2012 125 02/16/2012 125 02/24/2012 125 03/2/2012 125 03/8/2012 125 03/16/2012 125 03/23/2012 125 03/30/2012 125 04/5/2012 125 04/13/2012 125 04/20/2012 125 0

TOTAL (PDA-C) 1,875 0




Page 3 of 3



(gal)

B-52 Sodium


PDA-N

TOTAL (PDA-N) 0 0

FDA

TOTAL (FDA) 0 0

ANA

TOTAL (ANA) 0 0




INPUTS Units 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

SEW-1 a gal 22,241,215 25,018,950 23,313,210 22,322,350 32,491,750 50,356,930 52,953,830 56,738,430 62,257,020 76,113,710 69,325,856 71,215,764 55,074,470

Precip b in 15 14 7 8 9 7.9 12.7 13 13 6 10 9 9Precip ft 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.7 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.7Precip Vol gal 1,777,722 1,680,951 833,905 909,171 1,123,023 940,233 1,511,303 1,600,906 1,585,374 663,062 1,223,379 1,133,776 1,050,146INPUT TOTAL gal 24,018,937 26,699,901 24,147,115 23,231,521 33,614,773 51,297,163 54,465,133 58,339,336 63,842,394 76,776,772 70,549,235 72,349,540 56,124,616

OUTPUTS Units 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

ET RATE c ft 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 8.6 7.3 7.7 7.8 8.1 7.0 7.6 7.0ET gal 8,088,722 8,088,722 8,088,722 8,088,722 8,088,722 9,275,068 7,905,378 8,304,422 8,412,271 8,735,820 7,549,474 8,175,002 7,549,474

Evap Rate d ft 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8Evap gal 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173 2,770,173

Discharge e,f gal 0 4,151,520 163,900 4,423,680 20,750,400 32,760,000 44,042,400 47,753,280 44,915,717 51,131,146 52,699,680 61,903,720 37,518,380OUTPUT TOTAL gal 10,858,896 15,010,416 11,022,796 15,282,576 31,609,296 44,805,241 54,717,951 58,827,875 56,098,161 62,637,139 63,019,327 72,848,895 47,838,027

Units 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Input - Output * gal 13,160,041 11,689,485 13,124,319 7,948,945 2,005,478 6,491,922 -252,819 -488,539 7,744,233 14,139,632 7,529,907 -499,356 8,286,589

EXPLANATION

ET= evapotranspirationPrecip= precipatationft= feetgal= gallonsSEW-1 = shallow aquifer extraction well

* Uncertainty unaccounted for changes in storage, infiltration losses, and measurement errora = measured from SEW-1 flow meterb = measured from ANP weather stationc = measured from wetland atmometerd = estimated from referenced pan evaporation Arizona climate 1931-1972, U of A Press, 1974e = estimated from measurements at the Parshall flumef = The Parshall Flume totalizer was out of service for apprimxately 2 months in 2012. The total in 2012 is estimated.

TABLE 10

NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM WETLAND

WATER BUDGET

DATE RECORDED IDENTIFIER

TOTALIZED FLOW

(gallons)FLOW (GPM) IDENTIFIER

TOTALIZED FLOW

(gallons) FLOW (GPM)

INFLUENT EFFLUENT

SEW-1PARSHALL

FLUME12/29/2011 617,613,630 190 226,432,300 84.78

1/6/2012 618,735,630 180 227,658,400 90.261/12/2012 619,578,130 180 228,618,300 92.041/19/2012 620,498,520 180 229,755,650 92.11/27/2012 621,610,210 180 230,978,190 90.22/3/2012 622,609,340 180 232,034,060 89.79

2/10/2012 623,663,740 180 233,139,000 87.122/16/2012 624,430,580 180 234,057,560 92.142/24/2012 625,529,010 180 235,336,330 983/2/2012 626,519,740 190 236,290,200 84.13/8/2012 627,350,560 190 237,051,190 77.61

3/16/2012 628,484,050 180 238,070,550 83.53/23/2012 629,489,660 180 239,054,180 78.173/30/2012 630,468,150 180 239,962,240 70.314/4/2012 631,273,880 180 240,670,920 81.17

4/13/2012 632,508,520 180 241,672,290 102.74/20/2012 633,825,390 180 242,908,090 101.74/25/2012 634,889,360 180 243,997,600 86.35/3/2012 636,205,060 180 244,857,940 79.79

5/11/2012 637,730,030 190 245,857,920 79.595/18/2012 639,019,520 180 246,612,120 60.25/24/2012 640,077,350 180 247,093,150 58.526/1/2012 641,582,350 180 247,711,780 55.466/8/2012 642,744,060 180 248,157,680 46.55

6/15/2012 644,197,110 180 248,556,810 47.896/22/2012 645,461,880 180 248,952,150 46.336/29/2012 646,758,460 190 249,455,420 54.567/6/2012 648,028,760 180 250,247,760 50.7

7/12/2012 649,167,080 180 251,389,550 72.297/20/2012 NL 180 NL* 677/27/2012 651,917,760 190 NL* 678/3/2012 653,346,860 190 NL* 67

8/10/2012 654,526,860 190 NL* 67


TABLE 11INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT

MEASUREMENTS

TABLE 11INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT MEASUREMENTSPage 2 of 3

DATE RECORDED IDENTIFIER

TOTALIZED FLOW

(gallons)FLOW (GPM) IDENTIFIER

TOTALIZED FLOW

(gallons) FLOW (GPM)

INFLUENT EFFLUENT

SEW-1PARSHALL

FLUME

8/17/2012 655,726,860 190 NL* 678/24/2012 656,995,390 190 NL* 678/31/2012 658,320,340 180 NL* 679/7/2012 659,191,620 190 NL* 67

9/14/2012 660,638,680 190 NL* 679/21/2012 661,205,270 190 251,813,380 74.49/28/2012 662,026,600 190 251,964,550 31.4910/5/2012 663,054,510 190 252,320,540 20.04

10/13/2012 664,156,030 190 252,744,670 30.8710/19/2012 665,016,770 190 253,127,280 42.6710/26/2012 666,061,840 180 253,597,610 24.8711/2/2012 667,014,720 190 254,055,250 40.8511/8/2012 667,798,050 190 254,418,530 55.74

11/16/2012 668,503,560 180 254,750,660 26.3211/24/2012 669,090,690 180 255,026,650 9.21511/30/2012 669,658,130 190 255,253,010 21.9612/7/2012 670,315,140 190 255,561,560 29.91

12/14/2012 671,362,910 190 256,281,890 73.4912/21/2012 672,019,510 195 256,713,060 23.4812/28/2012 672,688,100 190 257,110,680 26.72

Total Influent volume January through December 2012 = 55,074,470 gallonsAverage Influent flow rate January through December 2012 = 189 gpm

Total Effluent volume January through December 2012 = 37,518,380 gallonsAverage Effluent flow rate January through December 2012 = 63 gpm


TABLE 11INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT MEASUREMENTSPage 3 of 3

NOTE:

Totalized flow measurements are recorded from the McCrometer Flowmeter,located in the extraction well vaultGPM = gallons per minute measured at the McCrometer Flowmeter and/or Parshall FlumeNL= Not logging, meter was fixedNL* = Not logging; average flow each week was approximately 760,000 gallons. Nine weeks of estimated flow was added to flume reading for total effluent volumeSEW-1 = Shallow Aquifer Extraction Well


TABLE 12WATER LEVEL DATA

(WELLS)

DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)




SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELL

MW-10

15.82 3616.913632.731/6/201215.8 3616.931/12/2012

15.61 3617.121/19/201215.81 3616.921/27/201215.81 3616.922/3/201215.81 3616.922/10/201215.8 3616.932/16/201215.77 3616.962/24/201215.61 3617.123/2/201215.71 3617.023/8/201215.77 3616.963/16/201215.61 3617.123/23/201215.8 3616.933/30/201215.71 3617.024/4/201215.8 3616.934/13/201215.8 3616.934/20/2012

15.82 3616.914/25/201215.77 3616.965/3/201215.8 3616.935/11/2012

15.64 3617.095/18/201215.63 3617.15/24/201215.77 3616.966/1/201215.81 3616.926/8/201215.8 3616.936/15/2012

15.77 3616.966/22/201215.28 3617.456/29/201215.41 3617.327/6/201215.7 3617.037/12/2012

15.61 3617.127/20/201215.8 3616.937/27/2012


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)



TABLE 12 (continued)WATER LEVEL DATAPage 2 of 4



MW-10

15.2 3617.533632.738/3/201215.8 3616.938/10/201215.78 3616.958/17/201215.61 3617.128/24/201215.8 3616.938/31/201215.25 3617.489/7/201215.82 3616.919/14/201215.88 3616.859/21/201215.53 3617.29/28/201215.61 3617.1210/5/201215.81 3616.9210/13/201215.61 3617.1210/19/201215.46 3617.2710/26/201215.75 3616.9811/2/201215.68 3617.0511/8/201215.83 3616.911/16/201215.8 3616.9311/24/2012

15.64 3617.0911/30/201215.81 3616.9212/7/201215.52 3617.2112/14/201215.73 361712/21/201215.38 3617.3512/28/2012

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

59.32 3562.763622.082/17/2012 (PWL)60.71 3561.375/14/2012 (PWL)61.95 3560.138/10/2012 (PWL)61.01 3561.0711/5/2012 (PWL)


DATEMEASURED

MEASURINGPOINT

ELEVATION(feet msl)

DEPTH TOWATER

(feet bmp)



TABLE 12 (continued)WATER LEVEL DATAPage 3 of 4


DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER

DCP-12

20.71 3669.393690.11/19/201221.11 3668.993/2/201221.55 3668.553/30/201221.68 3668.424/25/201220.78 3669.325/18/201220.95 3669.156/22/201221.1 36697/27/201222.38 3667.728/24/201221.29 3668.819/21/201222.8 3667.310/26/2012


mslbmpPWL

= mean sea level= below measuring point= pumping water level

TABLE 12 (continued)WATER LEVEL DATA

Page 4 of 4



(NITRATE-N AND AMMONIA-N)

IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LABNITRATE-N

(mg/l)SAMPLE

TYPE

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

1/19/2012 TURN < 1 ORG < 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN 2.7 ORG< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

6/20/2012 TAA < 0.2 SPT< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN 3.1 ORG< 0.5

9/17/2012 TURN 1.5 ORG< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

11/29/2012 TURN 3 ORG< 0.5

12/11/2012 TAA 0.61(E) SPT< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE

TABLE 13 (continued)WATER QUALITY DATA

Page 2 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

FDA

1/19/2012 TURN < 1 ORG < 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN 1.7 FD< 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN 1.7 ORG< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5(E)

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

4/25/2012 TAA < 0.2 SPT< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN < 1 ORG0.63

9/17/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

9/17/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 3 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

11/29/2012 TURN 1.7 ORG< 0.5

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

PDA-C

1/19/2012 TURN 13 ORG < 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5(E)

3/28/2012 TAA 0.21 SPT< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN 3.3 ORG< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN 5.4 ORG< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN 8.6 ORG< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN 8.5 FD< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN 14 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN 19 ORG< 0.5(HU)

9/17/2012 TURN 11 ORG< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN 12 ORG< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 4 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

11/29/2012 TAA 0.41 SPT< 0.5

11/29/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 ORG1.1

PDA-N

1/19/2012 TURN < 1 ORG < 0.5

2/29/2012 TAA < 0.2 SPT< 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN 2.7 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN 8.3 ORG< 0.5

9/17/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 5 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

10/22/2012 TURN 2.4 ORG< 0.5

11/29/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

PDA-S

1/19/2012 TURN 44 ORG 0.9

2/29/2012 TURN 40 ORG< 0.5

3/28/2012 TURN 37 ORG0.74

4/25/2012 TURN 35 ORG5.5

5/30/2012 TURN 38 ORG4.7

5/30/2012 TAA 47 SPT5

6/20/2012 TURN 36 ORG4

7/23/2012 TURN 37 FD1.7

7/23/2012 TURN 37 ORG2.8

8/23/2012 TURN 42 ORG0.58


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 6 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

9/17/2012 TAA 32 SPT1

9/17/2012 TURN 30 ORG0.83

10/22/2012 TAA 39 SPT2

10/22/2012 TURN 31 ORG1.9

11/29/2012 TURN 28 ORG 1.2(E)

12/11/2012 TURN 19 ORG11


MW-10

2/21/2012 TURN 1.9 ORG< 0.5

2/21/2012 TURN 1.9 FD< 0.5

5/16/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5(E)

8/15/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

11/7/2012 TAA 0.5 SPT< 0.5

11/7/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 7 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

1/19/2012 TURN 66 FD----

1/19/2012 TURN 70 ORG ----

2/29/2012 TURN 65 ORG----

3/28/2012 TURN 68 ORG4

4/25/2012 TURN 55 ORG----

5/30/2012 TURN 61 ORG----

6/20/2012 TURN 60 ORG4.7

7/23/2012 TAA 72 SPT----

7/23/2012 TURN 60 ORG----

8/23/2012 TURN 66 FD----

8/23/2012 TURN 66 ORG----

9/17/2012 TURN 63 ORG5.3

10/22/2012 TURN 60 ORG----

11/29/2012 TURN 60 ORG----

12/11/2012 TURN 54 ORG4.9


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 8 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


EFFLUENT

EFF-L

1/19/2012 TAA 0.28 SPT< 0.5

1/19/2012 TURN < 1 ORG < 0.5

2/29/2012 TURN 1.6 ORG< 0.5(E)

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 FD< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

8/23/2012 TAA 0.72 SPT< 0.5

9/17/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

11/29/2012 TURN 1.6 FD< 0.5

11/29/2012 TURN 1.6 ORG< 0.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 9 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


EFFLUENT

EFF-L

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 ORG< 0.5

DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER

DCP-12

2/21/2012 TURN 24 ORG----

5/16/2012 TURN 34 ORG----

5/16/2012 TAA 40 SPT----

8/15/2012 TURN 43 FD----

8/15/2012 TURN 44 ORG----

11/7/2012 TURN 16 ORG----

BLANKS

FIELD BLANK

1/19/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

2/21/2012 TURN < 1 FB2.8

2/29/2012 TURN < 1 FB----

3/28/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

4/25/2012 TURN < 1 FB0.76


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

NITRATE-N(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


Page 10 of 11

AMMONIA-N(mg/l)


BLANKS

FIELD BLANK

5/30/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

6/20/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

7/23/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

8/15/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

8/23/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

9/17/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

10/22/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5

11/7/2012 TURN < 1 FB----

11/29/2012 TURN < 1 FB 0.58(E)

12/11/2012 TURN < 1 FB< 0.5


TABLE 13 (continued)WATER QUALITY DATAPage 11 of 11

mg/l Nitrate-N

AmmoniaN ---

<CAS

TURNTAAXNPORG

FDSPT

= Milligrams per liter= Nitrate as Nitrogen= Ammonia as Nitrogen =Not Analyzed= Not detected, numerical value is less than the method detection limit= Columbia Analytical Services= Turner Laboratories=Test America Analytical, Inc.= Xenco Laboratories= Original sample= Field duplicate sample= Split sample

FOOTNOTES:

= Field blank = Estimated= Unusable

FBE

HU


SAMPLE SAMPLEDATE LAB ANALYTES SEW-1 EFF-L UNITS TYPE

9/12/2012 TURN bicarbonate 260 520 mg/L ORG

carbonate <2 <2 mg/L ORG

chloride 26 33 mg/L ORG

fluoride 1.7 1.8 mg/L ORG

sulfate 250 330 mg/L ORG

ortho-phosphate 0.24 0.52 mg/L ORG

phosphorus <0.1 0.65 mg/L ORG

potassium 5.6 14 mg/L ORG

magnesium 30 46 mg/L ORG

calcium 170 160 mg/L ORG

sodium 120 170 mg/L ORG

total dissolved solids 1100 NA mg/L ORG

total suspended solids NA NA mg/L ORG

NOTES:

(<)= Not detected, numerical value is less than the method detection limit

TURN = Turner Laboratories, Inc.

NA = not analyzedmg/l = milligrams per literORG = original sample

INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT


TABLE 14

WATER QUALITY DATANORMAL OPERATION ADDITIONAL ANALYTES

Total Kjeldahl ORGANICSAMPLE Nitrogen (TKN) NITROGEN SAMPLE

Identifier DATE LAB (mg/l) (mg/l) TYPE

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S 9/17/2012 TURN 1.9 1.1 ORG9/17/2012 TAA 1.2 <1.6 SPT

PDA-C 9/17/2012 TURN 0.97 0.97 ORG

PDA-N 9/17/2012 TURN 0.88 0.88 ORG

ANA 9/17/2012 TURN 1.9 1.9 ORG

FDA 9/17/2012 TURN 1.7 1.7 ORG9/17/2012 TURN 2.3 2.3 FD

EFFLUENT

EFF-L 9/17/2012 TURN 1 1 ORG

BLANKS

FIELD BLANK 9/17/2012 TURN <0.5 0 FB

NOTES:(<)= Not detected, numerical value is less than the method detection limitTURN = Turner Analytical Laboratories Inc.TAA = Test America Analytical Laboratories, Inc.ORG = original sampleFD = field duplicate sampleSPT = Split sample


NORMAL OPERATION (NITROGEN SPECIES)

mg/l = milligrams per liter

TABLE 15

WATER QUALITY DATA


NORMAL OPERATION (NUTRIENTS)

IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LABCHEMICAL

OXYGEN DEMAND(mg/l)

SAMPLETYPE


TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON

(mg/l)

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS

(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

3/28/2012 TURN 71 ORG11 < 0.1

3/28/2012 TURN 120 FD11 < 0.1

6/20/2012 TAA 40 SPT8.6 0.12(HU)

6/20/2012 TURN 64 ORG11 < 0.1

9/17/2012 TURN 37 ORG7.6 3.6

12/11/2012 TAA 54 SPT6.3 < 0.1

12/11/2012 TURN 33 ORG8.9 < 0.1

FDA

3/28/2012 TURN 71 ORG11 < 0.1

6/20/2012 TURN 66 ORG14 < 0.1


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB

CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND

(mg/l)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 2 of 5


TOTAL PHOSPHORUS

(mg/l)


(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

9/17/2012 TURN 65 FD9.1 0.68

9/17/2012 TURN 49 ORG9.6 0.63

12/11/2012 TURN 37 ORG8.8 < 0.1

PDA-C

3/28/2012 TURN 88 ORG12(E) < 0.1

3/28/2012 TAA 60 SPT21(E) < 0.1

6/20/2012 TURN 58 ORG6.9 0.18

6/20/2012 TURN 55 FD7 0.19

9/17/2012 TURN 33 ORG7.8 0.13

12/11/2012 TURN 38 ORG14 0.15


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB


(mg/l)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 3 of 5


TOTAL PHOSPHORUS

(mg/l)


(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

3/28/2012 TURN 69 ORG11 < 0.1

6/20/2012 TURN 46 ORG8.9 0.15

9/17/2012 TURN 35 ORG7.8 < 0.1

12/11/2012 TURN 25 FD11 < 0.1

12/11/2012 TURN 24 ORG11 < 0.1

PDA-S

3/28/2012 TURN 77 ORG6.6 < 0.1

6/20/2012 TURN 52 ORG5.8 0.4

9/17/2012 TAA 40 SPT8.3 0.18

9/17/2012 TURN 48 ORG9.7 0.14


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATE LAB


(mg/l)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 4 of 5


TOTAL PHOSPHORUS

(mg/l)


(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

12/11/2012 TURN 72 ORG18 0.17



Page 5 of 5

mg/l ----

<

TAA TURN

CASORG

FDSPT

= Milligrams per liter= Not Analyzed= Not detected, numerical value is less than the method detection limit

= Test America Analytical, Inc.=Turner Laboratories = Columbia Analytical Services= Original sample= Field duplicate sample= Split sample

FOOTNOTES:

= Estimated E


ELECTRICAL SAMPLE ALKALINITY CONDUCTIVITY Mn pH SULFATE TDS SAMPLE

IDENTIFIER DATE (mg/l) (mg/l) (µS/cm) (mg/l) (mg/l) (MV) (pH units) (mg/l) (mg/l) TYPE

MW-38 11/20/2008 280 4.71 940 0.18 ND 132 8.04 100 700 ORG

11/16/2010 270 2.77 1850 ND 0.023 133 6.64 110 543 ORG8/23/2011 260 509 0.039 7.44 110 510 ORG8/14/2012 280 5.29 763 < 0.3 < 0.02 156.8 6.67 160 573 ORG

MW-40 11/18/2008 190 0.00 210 1.46 ND 5 8.17 76 1400 ORG11/18/2008 210 74 SPT11/16/2009 270 0.00 752 1.19 < 0.010 26.2 7.42 120 480 ORG11/15/2010 220 1.50 680 ND ND 36 8.24 67 432 ORG8/23/2011 270 771 ND 7.3 98 450 ORG8/14/2012 260 5.49 496 < 0.3 < 0.02 168.1 7.31 55 393 ORG

MW-41B 11/18/2008 310 0.00 1030 0.95 ND 53 7.76 180 700 ORG11/16/2009 290 0.00 915 1.89 < 0.010 47 7.24 180 610 ORG11/15/2010 300 0.00 994 0.63 ND 92 meter error 190 640 ORG8/23/2011 280 971 ND 7.38 200 670 ORG8/14/2012 280 3.37 871 < 0.3 < 0.02 136.4 7.43 200 660 ORG

MW-42 11/18/2008 180 0.00 3050 0.37 ND 77 7.74 730 2000 ORG11/16/2009 160 0.86 1742 0.53 0.018 37.1 7.15 870 1700 ORG11/15/2010 180 0.00 2110 0.27 0.21 15 7.78 920 1350 ORG8/22/2011 160 2250 0.29 7.27 990 1800 ORG8/14/2012 160 2.33 1966 < 0.3 0.32 58.3 7.32 1100 1420 ORG

D(17-20)25bad 11/18/2008 240 0.00 1310 < 0.1 0.062 46 7.96 150 900 ORG11/17/2009 250 0.00 769 1.38 0.04 152 7.69 160 560 ORG11/17/2010 260 0.00 891 ND 0.046 74 7.15 150 570 ORG8/24/2011 260 832 0.036 7.13 140 500 ORG8/14/2012 250 2.33 668 < 0.3 0.035 124.9 7.23 130 500 ORG

FOOTNOTES:

EC= electrical conductivity ORG = original sample, SPT = split samplemg/l = milligrams per liter pH= hydrogen ion potentialMV = millivolts TDS = total dissolved solidsMn = manganese µS/cm = microsiemens per centimeter ND = not detected UTS = unable to sample

ORP = oxidation reduction potential

field parameters = ORP, pH, electrical conductivity, TDS, dissolved oxygen and ferrous Iron

NORTHERN AREA MNA PARAMETERS


UTS

DISSOLVEDOXYGEN ORP

FERROUS IRON

WATER QUALITY DATATABLE 17


ANP-PMP Annl Rpt-Table 18

TABLE 18

MCA MANN-KENDALL RESULTS

Decreasing (D) Stable (S) No Trend (NT) Increasing (I) Probably

Increasing (PI)

Nitrate-N

MW-15 MW-21

MW-39 MW-23

Perchlorate

MW-15 MW-39 MW-21 MW-23



TABLE 19

MCA LINEAR REGRESSION RESULTS

Decreasing (D) Stable (S) Increasing (I) Probably Decreasing (PD) No Trend (NT)

Nitrate-N

MW-15 MW-21 MW-39 MW-23

Perchlorate

MW-15 MW-39 MW-21 MW-23

Date Volume (acre-ft) Nitrate-N Mass (lb) Perchlorate Mass (lb)November 2000 119.6 122,030 80.2November 2001 119.6 124,189 88.5November 2002 116.5 121,595 116.9November 2003 108.7 82,706 64.9November 2004 106.5 119,578 54.71November 2005 106.5 80,719 41.6November 2006 101.2 51,077 20.6November 2007 97.4 69,464 38.6November 2008 97.9 77,931 22.8November 2009 93.9 123,307 28.6November 2010 94.6 150,242 28.9November 2011 89.3 147,784 23.6November 2012 86.7 185,268 22.8

FOOTNOTES:lb = pounds

acre-ft = acre feetNitrate-N = nitrate-nitrogen


TABLE 20ANNUAL MOLINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFER DATA

Page 1 of 1



TABLE 21

MANN-KENDALL AND LINEAR REGRESSION MONITOR WELLS IN THE EXTENT OF SEW-1 CAPTURE

Decreasing (D) Probably

Decreasing (PD)

Stable (S) No Trend

(NT)

Probably Increasing

(PI) Increasing (I)

Mann-Kendall

MW-08 MW-13 MW-35 MW-34 MW-11 SW-14 MW-17 SW-04 MW-18 SW-03 MW-19 MW-36

Linear Regression

MW-08 MW-13 SW-04 SW-03 MW-11 MW-17 MW-35 MW-34 MW-18 SW-14 MW-19 MW-36



TABLE 22

MANN-KENDALL AND LINEAR REGRESSION MNA MANAGEMENT WELLS

Decreasing (D) Probably

Decreasing (PD) Stable (S) No Trend (NT)

Probably Increasing (PI)

Increasing (I)

Mann-Kendall

D(17-20)25bad D(17-20)23acd SW-13 D(17-20)23ada D(17-20)36aad1 D(17-20)36caa2 MW-40 D(17-20)36cdb D(17-20)36ddc D(18-20)01aad

MW-38 MW-41A MW-41B MW-42

D(17-20)36caa D(18-21)06bcb

MW-20

Linear Regression

D(17-20)25bad MW-20 D(17-20)23acd MW-42 D(17-20)36aad1 D(17-20)36caa MW-40 SW-13 D(17-20)36caa2 D(17-20)23ada D(17-20)36cdb D(17-20)36ddc D(18-20)01aad D(18-21)06bcb

MW-38 MW-41A MW-41B


NARS MONITORING WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]

MW-08 ANPI Q Aug-14 Q

MW-11 ANPI A - Aug Aug-14 Q








MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]MW-20 ANPI S - Feb/Aug Feb-15 QMW-38 ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 Q

MW-41A ANPI S - Feb/Aug Feb-15 QMW-41B ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 QMW-42 ANPI S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Feb-15 Q

D(17-20)36aad1 Jacobs Q Aug-14 QD(17-20)36caa2 Hyder S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 QD(17-20)36caa Gaynor S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q


TABLE 23

2013 PERFORMANCE MONITORING SCHEDULE

FOR GROUNDWATER, SOIL, AND NARS REMEDIES


PROPOSED MONITORING FREQUENCY/PARAMETERS

of 6


MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP and Long-Term Site-Wide Plan]

D(17-20)24ccd Kartchner Suspended (EPA, 2011)

D(17-20)36cdb Woolever S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36ddc Morales S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36ddd Higgenbotham Suspended

D(18-20)01aad McRae S - Feb/Aug Feb-14 NM

D(18-21)06bcb Jones Q Feb-14 Q

D(17-20)36cad2 Vivian Suspended

D(17-20)36aad3 Acuna Q Water level only

D(17-20)36cad1 McCann Q Water level only

D(17-20)36dad Ohlde Q Water level only

D(18-21)06ada White Q Water level only

D(18-21)06bab Alexander Q Water level only

D(18-21)06bbc2 Wooten Q Water level only

D(18-21)08bab Tenopir Q Water level only

MW-40 ANPI Q A - Aug May-15 Q

D(17-20)23ada Dill Suspended (EPA, 2012)

D(17-20)23acd Levy/Drow Suspended (EPA, 2012)D(17-20)25bad Spears S - Feb/Aug A - Aug Aug-14 NM Buffer Zone Well (EPA, 2012)


TABLE 23



SENTINEL WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]

MNA BUFFER ZONE WELLS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]

PROPOSED MONITORING


of 6


SEW-1 ANPI M Q Sep-16 Q

Weekly nitrate-N with field methods. Additional parameters include total phosphorus (Q), major

ions (A)

MW-10 ANPI Q Q Weekly

DCP-12 ANPI Q Feb-16 Q

TREATMENT CELL (sediments) ANPI Sep-16

EFFLUENT ANPI M M Sep-16

Additional parameters include total phosphorus, total kjeldahl nitrogen, organic nitrogen, total

dissolved solids, and total suspended solids (Q). Major ions (A)





DYNAGEL ANPI ANPI performs quarterly inspections and after heavy rainfall, H+A performs annual inspection.


TABLE 23



NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM [NARS O&M]

TREATMENT CELLS

(surface water) ANPI M M Weekly

Weekly nitrate-N with field methods. Additional parameters include total phosphorus, chemical oxygen demand, and total organic carbon (Q),

total kjeldahl nitrogen, organic nitrate (A).

NATIVE POND COVERS [Soils Engineering Control Plan]

PROPOSED MONITORING


of 6





SW-14 NA Q Q Q If flow is present

P-01 ANPI Q Q Q

P-03 ANPI Q Q Q

P-10 ANPI Q Q Q If sufficient water exist to sample

MW-03 ANPI S - May/Nov S - M/N Q

MW-04 ANPI Q Water level onlyMW-29 ANPI Q Q Q If sufficient water exist to sample



MW-23 ANPI S - May/Nov A - Nov S - M/N QMW-24 ANPI A-Nov A - Nov A-N QMW-39 ANPI Q A - Nov Q Q

TABLE 23



SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER MONITORING STATIONS (NORTHERN AREA) [Northern Area PMP]


PERCHED ZONE (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

MOLINOS CREEK AQUIFER (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

PROPOSED MONITORING


of 6






MW-25 ANPI C C Q




TABLE 23


PROPOSED MONITORING


SENTINEL WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

UPGRADIENT WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]


MNA BUFFER ZONE WELLS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP and Long- Term Site-Wide Plan]

SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE WATER MONITORING STATIONS (SOUTHERN AREA) [Southern Area PMP]


TABLE 23

Page 6 of 6

EXPLANATION:

A= Annually

ANPI= Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc.ClO4= Perchlorate

C. ION= common ions, EVERY 5 YEARSC= Contingent on MW-33 resultsH+A= Hargis + Associates, Inc.M= MonthlyMETALS, EVERY 5 YEARSNA= Not applicableNARS= Northern Area Remediation SystemNM= Not measuredO&M= Operation and maintenancePMP= Performance Monitoring PlanQ= QuarterlyS= Semi-Annually

Standard Field Parameters - Temp (oC), pH, Electrical Conductivity (µs/cm) are collected every time a well is sampled(1) MNA Parameters: alkalinity, dissolved iron, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential and total dissolved solids (TDS) at all marked locations.

The Northern Area wells are also sampled for dissolved manganese and sulfate.See the NARS O&M Manual, & Northern and Southern Area PMP's for specific details.

(2) Common Ion List every 5 years: alkalinity, chloride, fluoride, sulfate, nitrate-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, TDS, dissolved calcium, dissolved magnesium, dissolved potassium and dissolved sodium

(3) Metals List every 5 years: SEW-1 and Effluent: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, total chromium, copper, iron, lead, managanese,mercury, selenium, silver, thallium and zinc.DCP-12: barium, beryllium, total chromium, lead, mercury and thallium.Treatment Cells Sediment: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, zinc; calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, orthophosphate, chloride, fluoride, sulfate,alkalinity, pH; total nitrogen by calculation, total organic carbon, total phosphorus, ammonia-nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen, total kjedahl nitrogen.



FIGURES

APACHE NITROGEN

PRODUCTS INC. BOUNDARY

11

01

29

3236

05

24

12

25 30

08

02

1923 20

06

31

07

35

26 28

21

33

09

13 1714 18 16

10

34

03

27

22

15

14 13 18 17 1615

U.S. 80

APACHEPOWDERROAD

U.S.80

U.S. 80

WASH

6

WASH3

WASH2

WASH1

WASH4

WASH5

DRAGOONWASH

³ LOCATION OF APACHE

NITROGEN PRODUCTS, INC.

APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS, INC.

FIGURE 1

0 2,000 4,000

Feet

EXPLANATION

RANGE 20E RANGE 21E

TOWNSHIP 17S

TOWNSHIP 18S

SECTION6

BENSON, AZAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY

OF THE SHALLOW AQUIFER

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______DAT 130.140-1BAM

1/18/2012

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\FIGURE1-location.mxd

kj

APACHE NITROGEN

PRODUCTS INC. BOUNDARY

SANPEDRORIVER

NARSWETLAND

LATERALLYCONFINING UNIT

WASH6

WASH3

WASH 2

WASH1

WASH4

WASH5

DRAGOONWASH

U.S. 80

APACHEPOWDERROAD

U.S. 80

APACHEPOWDERROAD SEW-1

³APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF

NITRATE- N AND PERCHLORATE

CONTAMINATION IN 2009,

2010, 2011, AND 2012


FIGURE 2

0 3,000 6,000

Feet

EXPLANATION

NORTHERN

AREA

SOUTHERN

AREA

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______

TREATMENT EFFLUENT RETURN SYSTEM

kj SHALLOW AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL (SEW-1)kj

U.S. 80

APACHEPOWDERROAD

U.S.80

U.S. 80

WASH

6

WASH3

WASH2

WASH1

WASH4

WASH5

DRAGOONWASH

SEW-1

SOUTHERN

AREA

NORTHERN

AREA

YEAR 2012YEARS 2009/2010/2011

MOLINOS CREEKSUB-AQUIFER

LATERALLYCONFINING UNITPERCHED ZONE

PERCHED ZONE

NARSWETLAND

MOLINOS CREEKSUB-AQUIFER

DAT BAM 130.140

2009

APACHE NITROGENPRODUCTS INC. BOUNDARY

APACHEPOWDERROAD

WASH

6

DETAILED EXTENT OF

PERCHED ZONE

PONDS 3A&3B

PONDS 2A &2B

PONDS 1A &1B

FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B)

COLLECTION SYSTEM PIPING

EPHEMERAL TRIBUTARY

APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF SHALLOW AQUIFER

2010

2011

2012

EXTENT OF NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONSABOVE THE CLEAN-UP STANDARD OF 10 mg/lIN 2011 AND 2012

EXTENT OF NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONSABOVE THE CLEAN-UP STANDARD OF 10 mg/lIN 2010

EXTENT OF NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONSABOVE THE CLEAN-UP STANDARD OF 10 mg/lIN 2009

2/1/2013

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2012Annual\FIGURE2-areaCOC.mxd

EXTENT OF NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONSABOVE THE CLEAN-UP STANDARD OF 10 mg/lAND PERCHLORATE CONCENTRATIONS ABOVE14 ug/l IN THE MILINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFERAND PERCHED ZONE IN 2012

U.S. ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION AGENCY

APACHE NITROGENPRODUCTS INC.

HARGIS+

ASSOCIATES INC.

HUMBOLDTSTATE

UNIVERSITY

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT

OFENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY

APACHE NITROGEN

PRODUCTS INC.STAFF

FIGURE 3. ORGANIZATION CHART, APACHE POWDER SUPERFUND SITEOPERATION AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING

REGULATORY MONITORING.MONTHLY, QUARTERLY,

ANNUAL REPORTING.DATABASE MANAGEMENT,

QA/QC MANAGEMENT

NARS WEEKLY MONITORING. .WEEKLY REPORTING. PERCHEDZONE EXTRACTION OPERATION,

QUARTERLY MONITORINGSUPPORT

NARS PERFORMANCEASSESSMENT AND

OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE

EPA Technical Consultant State Regulatory Authority

!>

!>

!>

!>

!(

!>

!>

!>

!>

!>

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

DRY

DRY

APACHE

POWERHOUSE

PARKING AREA

ADMINISTRATION

MAINTENANCE YARD

BRINE

CONCENTRATION

SITE

MOLINOS PROPERTY

DRY

(14.98)

DRY

(14.24)

DRY

(14.42)

DRY

(DRY)

DRY

(1.43)

DRY

(5.67)

DRY

(5.35)

DRY

DRY

DRYDRY

(DRY)

DRY

(5.30)

DRY

(5.53)

DRY

(15.81)

DRY

(14.28) DRY(19.81)

8.27(27.29)

1.66

(9.08)

DRY

P-11

P-10

P-09

P-08

P-07P-06

P-05

P-04

P-03

P-02

P-01

MW-32

MW-31

MW-30

MW-29

MW-28

MW-16

MW-07

MW-04

MW-03

MW-02

CHANGE IN AREAL EXTENT AND SATURATED

THICKNESS OF PERCHED GROUNDWATER

FEBRUARY 1995 TO NOVEMBER 2012


FIGURE 4

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______BAS

0 300 600

Feet

³

BENSON, ARIZONA

EXPLANATION

!>PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL

!(

PERCHED ZONEPIEZOMETER

!(

SHALLOW AQUIFERMONITOR WELL

SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHEDZONE (IN FEET) NOVEMBER 2012

8.27

130.140LSL

MW-02

MW-16

P-10

APPROXIMATE SURFACE OUTCROP OFST. DAVID CLAY (WITHIN STUDY AREA)

SATURATED THICKNESS OF PERCHEDZONE (IN FEET), FEBRUARY 1995)

(27.29)

APPROXIMATE BOUNDARYOF SHALLOW AQUIFER

MAXIMUM LATERAL EXTENT OF PERCHEDZONE SATURATED SEDIMENTS, NOVEMBER 2012

MOLINOS CREEK

SUB-AQUIFER (MCA)

2/12/2013

Path:P:\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2012Annual\Figure4PZ_MaxThickness.mxd

MAXIMUM LATERAL EXTENT OF PERCHEDZONE SATURATED SEDIMENTS, FEBRUARY 1995

!(

>

>

!(

!(

+U+U

!(

+U

+U

!(

>

!(

#*

.

..

!(

+U

POWDER

APACHE

ROAD

WASH

6

WASH3

WASH2WASH1

WASH4

WASH5

SAN PEDRO RIVER

LATERALLYCONFINING UNIT

0

P-10P-03

P-01

MW-29

MW-24

MW-23

MW-22

MW-21

MW-14

MW-06

MW-04

MW-03

MW-01

MW-15

SW-12

MW-33

UPGRADIENT WELLS

SENTINEL WELLS

MNA Management Zone

(Nearest Potential Receptor)

(Contingency Triggered)

BUFFER ZONE

(Potential Receptor of

New Source Unrelatedto ANP)

SOUTHERNPACIFICR.R.

APACHEPOWDERROAD

MW-39

MW-25

SOUTHERN AREA MNA PERFORMANCE

MONITORING NETWORK


FIGURE 5

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______DAT ARC130.140-4 11

0 1,500 3,000

Feet

³

130.140

BENSON, ARIZONAMMMMMMM

EXPLANATION

BAM

1/19/2012

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\Figure5SouthernA_MNA_Zones.mxd

PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETER.

PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL>

MCA MONITOR WELL+U

!( SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELL


EPHEMERAL STREAM

APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS INC. BOUNDARY

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

kj

#*

#*

#*

%

#*

!(

DCP-12

SAN PEDRO RIVER

SW-14

SW-04

SW-13

SW-03

SEW-1

MW-42

MW-40

MW-38

MW-36MW-35

MW-34

MW-25

MW-20

MW-19

MW-18 MW-17

MW-13

MW-11MW-10

MW-41BMW-41A

D(18-21)06bcb

D(18-21)08bab

D(18-21)06bab

D(18-21)06adaD(18-20)01aad

D(17-20)36ddc

D(17-20)36dad

D(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)36caa

D(17-20)25bad

D(18-21)06bcc2

D(17-20)36caa2

D(17-20)36cad1

D(17-20)36aad3D(17-20)36aad1

MW-08

U.S. 80

U.S. 80

U.S. 80

BENSON, ARIZONA

NORTHERN AREAPERFORMANCE

MONITORING NETWORK

0 1,900 3,800

Feet

³APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS, INC.

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______130.140FIGURE 6

BAMDAT

WELLS WITHIN THE EXTENT OF SEW-1 CAPTURE[NARS TREATMENT]

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE

BUFFER ZONE

MNA SENTINEL WELL

NARSWETLAND

2/12/2013

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\AN

P GIS\

Figure

s\130

.140_

Annu

al\20

12 An

nual\

FIGUR

E 6 M

NA_N

A_Ne

twork

.mxd

EXPLANATIONEPHEMERAL STREAMCOLLECTION SYSTEM PIPING

APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF SEW-1 CAPTUREAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF SHALLOW AQUIFERSHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELL!(

#* SURFACE WATER MONITORING LOCATIONSHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE MONITOR WELL ")

k SHALLOW AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1

TREATMENT EFFLUENT RETURN SYSTEM

!(

k

R

WASH

6

WASH3

WASH 2

WASH1

WASH4

WASH5

OLDAPACHEPOWDERROAD

SEW-1

ALTERNATEEFFLUENT RETURN

LOCATION

MW-10

U.S. 80

APACHEPOWDERROAD

APACHEPOWDERROAD

DCP-12

SANPEDRORIVER

RAILROAD

NORTHERN AREAREMEDIATION SYSTEMTREATMENT WETLAND

PRIMARYTREATED EFFLUENT

RETURN AREA

S.FLYNNROAD

³NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION

SYSTEMS PLOT PLAN



BENSON, ARIZONA

FIGURE 7

DAT BAM 130.140-7

EXPLANATION

0 1,000 2,000

Feet

1/19/2012

DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER (DCP-12)R

SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELL MW-10!(

SHALLOW AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL (SEW-1)k

FLOW DIRECTION

COLLECTION SYSTEM PIPING

TREATMENT EFFLUENTRETURN SYSTEM

APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS, INC.PROPERTY BOUNDARY

! ! ! ! ! !

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\Figure7NARSPLOT.mxd


0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

1/1/

10

3/1/

10

5/1/

10

7/1/

10

9/1/

10

11/1

/10

1/1/

11

3/1/

11

5/1/

11

7/1/

11

9/1/

11

11/1

/11

1/1/

12

3/1/

12

5/1/

12

7/1/

12

9/1/

12

11/1

/12

1/1/

13

DATE

VO

LU

ME

(G

AL

)

PDA-S

PDA-C

PDA-N

ANA

FDA

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

YEAR

VO

LU

ME

(g

allo

ns)

FIGURE 9. MONTHLY MOLASSES VOLUME AND ANNUAL VOLUME AT TREATMENT CELLSPDA-S, PDA-C, PDA-N, ANA, AND FDA


0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

Jan-

12

Feb-1

2

Mar

-12

Apr-1

2

May

-12

Jun-

12

Jul-1

2

Aug-1

2

Sep-1

2

Oct-12

Nov-1

2

Dec-1

2Mo

nth

ly V

olu

me

Pu

mp

ed

(g

all

on

s)

0

100,000,000

200,000,000

300,000,000

400,000,000

500,000,000

600,000,000

700,000,000

800,000,000

Cu

mu

lati

ve

Vo

lum

e P

um

pe

d (

ga

llo

ns

)

2012 Monthly Volume Pumped

2012 Cumulative Volume Pumped

20.00

60.00

100.00

140.00

Jan-

12

Feb-

12

Mar

-12

Apr

-12

May

-12

Jun-

12

Jul-1

2

Aug

-12

Sep

-12

Oct

-12

Nov

-12

Dec

-12

Date

SE

W-1

Av

era

ge

M

on

thly

Flo

w R

ate

(g

pm

)

0

4

8

12

16

20

SE

W-1

Av

era

ge

D

ail

y P

um

pin

g

Du

rati

on

(H

ou

rs)

Average Monthly Flow Rate (gpm)Hours

FIGURE 10. 2012 EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1 PERFORMANCE


FIGURE 11. CUMULATIVE EXTRACTION WELL PUMPAGE

0

100,000,000

200,000,000

300,000,000

400,000,000

500,000,000

600,000,000

700,000,000

800,000,000

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

DATE

TO

TA

LIZ

ED

FL

OW

(g

allo

ns)


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Oct

-97

Feb

-98

Jun-

98O

ct-9

8F

eb-9

9Ju

n-99

Oct

-99

Feb

-00

Jun-

00O

ct-0

0F

eb-0

1Ju

n-01

Oct

-01

Feb

-02

Jun-

02O

ct-0

2F

eb-0

3Ju

n-03

Oct

-03

Feb

-04

Jun-

04

Oct

-04

Feb

-05

Jun-

05O

ct-0

5F

eb-0

6Ju

n-06

Oct

-06

Feb

-07

Jun-

07O

ct-0

7F

eb-0

8Ju

n-08

Oct

-08

Feb

-09

Jun-

09

Oct

-09

Feb

-10

Jun-

10O

ct-1

0F

eb-1

1Ju

n-11

Oct

-11

Feb

-12

Jun-

12O

ct-1

2

Date

Con

cent

ratio

n (m

g/l)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

Nitr

ate

Ext

ract

ed (

lbs)

SEW-1 NO3N Conc (mg/l)

Cumulative Mass Removed (lbs)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

YEAR

Nitr

ate

Ext

ract

ed (

lbs)

FIGURE 12. CUMULATIVE SHALLOW AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1 NITRATE-N REMOVAL

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000

Distance (feet)

Rat

e (c

ubic

feet

per

sec

ond)

February 2012

May-2012

August-2012

November-2012

SW-13SW-04SW-14 SW-03SW-12

FIGURE 13. 2012 SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE AT SURFACE WATER MONITORING LOCATIONS SW-12, SW-14, SW-03, SW-04, AND SW-13



I

BAS

0 500 1,000

Feet

³

EXPLANATION

DYNAGEL

(INACTIVE PONDS)

POND 7

EMR 130.140

LOCATION OF PONDS

(NATIVE SOIL COVERS)


FIGURE 14

BENSON, ARIZONA

Cooper Aerial Survey CO., 2004, Aerial PhotoREFERENCE:

ARC130.140-14 11A

(FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS)1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B

POND 1

POND 2

POND 3

POND 7

DYNAGEL

1/19/2012

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\Figure14PONDS.mxd


y = -0.0076x + 400.9

R2 = 0.9697

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

01/00 01/01 01/02 01/03 01/04 01/05 01/06 01/07 01/08 01/09 01/10 01/11 01/12 01/13Vo

lum

e o

f W

ater

(A

cre-

ft)

y = 9.6181x - 263605

R2 = 0.1309

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

01/00 01/01 01/02 01/03 01/04 01/05 01/06 01/07 01/08 01/09 01/10 01/11 01/12 01/13

Nit

rate

-N M

ass

(lb

)

y = -0.018x + 751.58

R2 = 0.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

01/00 01/01 01/02 01/03 01/04 01/05 01/06 01/07 01/08 01/09 01/10 01/11 01/12 01/13

Per

chlo

rate

Mas

s (l

b)

FIGURE 15. ANNUAL MCA VOLUME ESTIMATES AND NITRATE-N AND PERCHLORATE MASS FROM 2000 THROUGH 2011

")

")

!(

MW-42

D(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)36caa2

0 2,500 5,000

Feet

2009, 2010, 2011, AND 2012

NORTHERN AREA NITRATE-N

PLUME AND MODEL PROJECTED


FIGURE 16PREP BY: DAT

BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: BAM PROJECT: 130.140

³10

EXPLANATION

MODEL YEAR 2 ASSUMING ATTENUATIONHALF-LIFE OF 2 YEARS

MODEL YEAR 2009 PROJECTION

!(

MW-42

2012 Nitrate-N Plumes

MODEL YEAR 2009 PROJECTION

NARS EXTENTOF CAPTURE

2/1/2013

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2012Annual\Figure16HLife_2Y_Attenuation_1Y_2Y_09.mxd

APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY

OF SHALLOW AQUIFER

2009 MODEL PROJECTED NITRATE-N

CONCENTRATION CONTOURINTERVAL (mg/l)

10

MODEL EXTENT

NARS EXTENT

OF CAPTURE

!( SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELL

") SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELL

NITRATE-N EXTENT NOVEMBER 2009




")

")

!(

MW-42

D(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)36caa2

0 1,500 3,000

Feet

NITRATE-N CONCENTRATIONS

IN 2 AND 5 YEARS WITH AND

WITHOUT ATTENUATION


FIGURE 17PREP BY: BAM

BENSON, ARIZONA

DATE: 3/2/2011

REV BY: LSLPROJECT: 130.140

³

")

")

!(MW-42

D(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)36caa2

10

NITRATE CONCENTRATION

CONTOUR INTERVAL (mg/l)

EXPLANATION

MODEL EXTENT


OF SHALLOW AQUIFER

MODEL PROJECTED

EXTENT OF CAPTURE

10

10

YEAR 2012

NO ATTENTUATIONYEAR 2009

5-YEAR HALF-LIFE RATE

!(

")


SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELL

1/24/2012

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\Fig17NitratePlumeNoAtten20095yrHL.mxd

")

")

")

!(

!(10

50

100

10

10

MW-42

MW-38

D(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)25bad

D(17-20)36caa2

0 1,500 3,000

Feet

NAPA INITIAL NITRATE-N PLUME

BASED ON 2007 AVERAGE

CONCENTRATIONS


FIGURE 18PREP BY: BAM

BENSON, ARIZONA

DATE: 3/2/2011

FILE: Fig 18 Init Nitrate Plume.mxdREV BY: LSLPROJECT: 130.140

³!(

50

100

200

MW-42

0

10

SEW-1 AREA DETAIL

NITRATE CONCENTRATION

CONTOUR INTERVAL (mg/l)

EXPLANATION

MODEL EXTENT


OF SHALLOW AQUIFER

NO FLOW CELLS

10

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.140_Annual\2011Annual\Fig18InitNitratePlume.mxd

1/23/2012

ALLUVIALSEDIMENTS

FLOOD-PLAINDEPOSITS

SEW-1 SAN PEDRORIVER

St. DAVIDFORMATION

GAINING STREAM

ALLUVIALSEDIMENTS

FLOOD-PLAINDEPOSITS

SEW-1 SAN PEDRORIVER

St. DAVIDFORMATION

DRY STREAM

SEW-1

ALLUVIALSEDIMENTS

FLOOD-PLAINDEPOSITS

SAN PEDRORIVER

St. DAVIDFORMATION

FLOOD STAGE STREAM

?

SOUTHWEST

NORTHEAST

SOUTHWEST

NORTHEAST

SOUTHWEST

NORTHEAST

SCHEMATIC ONLY: NOT TO SCALE

SEW-01 AREA DETAIL (groundwater elevations from November 2011)

APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS INCBENSON, ARIZONA

SCENARIOS OF SAN PEDRO RIVER STAGESAND RESULTING GROUNDWATER

FLOW DIRECTIONS

FIGURE 19

06/26/2012

PREP BY DAT REV BY BAM RPT NO 130.124 Schematic SEW-1 to River.ai

Approximate groundwater flow directionAprroximate level of water table

Approximate cross section location

SHALLOW AQUIFERBOUNDARY



APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CROSS SECTION


APPENDIX A

WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS


1

APPENDIX A

WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS

TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure A-1 WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETER P-01 A-2 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR PERCHED ZONE

PIEZOMETER P-03 A-3 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR PERCHED ZONE

PIEZOMETER P-10 A-4 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR PERCHED ZONE

MONITOR WELL MW-03 A-5 WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-04 A-6 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR PERCHED ZONE

MONITOR WELL MW-29 A-7 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR MOLINOS CREEK

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-15 A-8 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR MOLINOS CREEK




MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-39 A-12 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA

MNA UPGRADIENT MONITOR WELL MW-01 A-13 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA

MNA UPGRADIENT MONITOR WELL MW-06


2

A-14 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-14

A-15 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA

MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-22 A-16 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA

MNA BUFFER ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-25 A-17 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SOUTHERN AREA

MNA BUFFER ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-33 A-18 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NARS MONITOR

WELL MW-08 A-19 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NARS MONITOR








WELL MW-36 A-27 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-20 A-28 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-38 A-29 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA

MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-40


3

A-30 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-41A

A-31 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-41B A-32 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA

MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-42 A-33 WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT

ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)25bad AND D(17-20)36aad1 A-34 WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT

ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)36caa AND D(17-20)36caa2 A-35 WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT

ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)36cdb AND D(17-20)36ddc A-36 WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT

ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(18-20)01aad AND D(18-21)06bcb A-37 SURFACE FLOW AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SURFACE

WATER LOCATION SW-03 A-38 SURFACE FLOW AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR SURFACE




WATER LOCATION SW-14

3655

3660

3665

3670

3675

3680

01/90 01/92 01/94 01/96 01/98 01/00 01/02 01/04 01/06 01/08 01/10 01/12 01/14

DATE

Perched Zone Piezometer P-01

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)


DRY = Water level below bottom of screen; No formation water is present.ft msl = feet above mean sea level

FIGURE A-1. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR PERCHED ZONE PIEZOMETER P-01

screen bottom

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

01/90 01/92 01/94 01/96 01/98 01/00 01/02 01/04 01/06 01/08 01/10 01/12 01/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(ug

/l)

Nitrate-N (mg/l) MCL = 10 mg/lPerchlorate (ug/l) HBGL = 14 ug/l

MCL = Maximum Contaminant LevelHBGL = Health Based Guidance Levelug/l = micrograms per litermg/l = milligrams per liter




3625

3630

3635

3640

3645

3650

3655

3660

3665

3670

01/90 01/92 01/94 01/96 01/98 01/00 01/02 01/04 01/06 01/08 01/10 01/12 01/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

*22 data pts. exceed

range from 2/23/91-7/5/95

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(ug

/l)

Nitrate-N (mg/l) MCL = 10 mg/l

Perchlorate (ug/l) HBGL = 14 ug/l


screen bottom




3620

3625

3630

3635

3640

3645

3650

01/90 01/92 01/94 01/96 01/98 01/00 01/02 01/04 01/06 01/08 01/10 01/12 01/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

screen bottom DRY

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

Nitrate-N (mg/l) MCL = 10mg/l

MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-4. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-03

3635

3640

3645

3650

3655

3660

3665

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Perched Zone Monitor Well MW-03

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

screen bottom

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

20

40

60

80

100

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l


DRY

DRY



FIGURE A-5. WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR PERCHEDZONE MONITOR WELL MW-04

3660

3665

3670

3675

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

screen bottom DRY DRYDRY



FIGURE A-6. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-29

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

01/90 01/92 01/94 01/96 01/98 01/00 01/02 01/04 01/06 01/08 01/10 01/12 01/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

5/2

000

screen bottomDRY DRY

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(ug

/l)






FIGURE A-7. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR MOLINOS CREEK MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-15

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Molinos Creek Sub-Aquifer Monitor Well MW-15

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

screen bottom DRY

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(ug

/l)








3595

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

100

200

300

400

500

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l



3590

3595

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

8/9

9

screen bottom

0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

20

40

60

80

100

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l






3590

3595

3600

3605

3610

3615

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

8/9

9

0

3

6

9

12

15

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l





3590

3595

3600

3605

3610

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Molinos Creek Sub- Aquifer Monitor Well MW-39

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

6/2

007

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

100

200

300

400

500

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-12. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA UPGRADIENT MONITOR WELL MW-01

3605

3610

3615

3620

3625

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Monitor Well MW-01

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

4

8

12

16

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-13. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA UPGRADIENT MONITOR WELL MW-06

3615

3620

3625

3630

3635

3640

3645

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

4

8

12

16

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

2.31

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-14. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-14

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-15. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-22

3600

3605

3610

3615

3620

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

8/9

9

0

4

8

12

16

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

2

4

6

8

10

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-16. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA BUFFER ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-25

3590

3595

3600

3605

3610

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

5/0

0

0

4

8

12

16

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l




FIGURE A-17 WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SOUTHERN AREA MNA BUFFER ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-33

3595

3600

3605

3610

3615

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

9/2

002

0

4

8

12

16

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l



FIGURE A-18. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NARS MONITOR WELL MW-08

3560

3570

3580

3590

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

PWLSEW-1

0

20

40

60

80

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l


DRY = Water level below bottom of screen; No formation water is present.ft msl = feet above mean sea levelPWL SEW-l = Pumping water level for Shallow Aquifer Extraction well.




3580

3585

3590

3595

3600

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l






3585

3590

3595

3600

3605

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l



FIGURE A-21. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NARS WELL MW-17


3565

3570

3575

3580

3585

3590

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

PWLSEW-1

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l




3565

3570

3575

3580

3585

3590

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

PWLSEW-1

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l






3565

3570

3575

3580

3585

3590

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

PWLSEW-1

0

20

40

60

80

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l





3575

3580

3585

3590

3595

3600

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

9/2

002

0

30

60

90

120

150

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)



MCL =10 mg/l





3575

3580

3585

3590

3595

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

9/2

002

0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l





3575

3580

3585

3590

3595

3600

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

9/2

004

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l



FIGURE A-27. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-20


3565

3570

3575

3580

3585

3590

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l





3535

3540

3545

3550

3555

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

7/2

005

0

5

10

15

20

25

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l



FIGURE A-29. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NORTHERN AREA MNA SENTINEL MONITOR WELL MW-40


3560

3565

3570

3575

3580

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

6/2

006

0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l


FIGURE A-30. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-41A



3550

3555

3560

3565

3570

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Monitor Well MW-41A

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

6/2

006

0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Monitor Well MW-41A

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l



FIGURE A-31. WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE MONITOR WELL MW-41B


3550

3555

3560

3565

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE

Shallow Aquifer Monitor Well MW-41B

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

6/2

006

0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE

Shallow Aquifer Monitor Well MW-41B

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l





3560

3565

3570

3575

3580

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

ELE

VA

TIO

N (

ft m

sl)

Con

stru

cted

6/2

007

0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l


FIGURE A-33. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)25bad AND D(17-20)36aad1


0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)25bad

0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)36aad1


FIGURE A-34. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)36caa AND D(17-20)36caa2


0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)36caa

0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)36caa2


FIGURE A-35. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(17-20)36cdb AND D(17-20)36ddc


0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)36cdb

0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(17-20)36ddc


FIGURE A-36. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NORTHERN AREA MNA MANAGEMENT ZONE PRIVATE WELLS D(18-20)01aad AND D(18-21)06bcb


0

20

40

60

80

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(18-21)06bcb

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DATE

Shallow Aquifer Private Well D(18-20)01aad


FIGURE A-37. SURFACE FLOW AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHSFOR SURFACE WATER LOCATION SW-03

0

100

200

300

400

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE

Surface Water Location SW-03

DIS

CH

AR

GE

(cf

s)


0

20

40

60

80

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

cfs = cubic feet per second

DRY



0

100

200

300

400

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


DIS

CH

AR

GE

(cf

s)


cfs = cubic feet per second

0

20

40

60

80

100

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DRY



0

100

200

300

400

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14DATE


DIS

CH

AR

GE

(cf

s)


0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DRY DRY

DRY = Surface water was not flowingcfs = cubic feet per second




0

100

200

300

400

500

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


DIS

CH

AR

GE

(cf

s)

0

10

20

30

40

50

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)


MCL =10 mg/l

DRY DRY






0

100

200

300

400

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


DIS

CH

AR

GE

(cf

s)

0

5

10

15

20

1/90 1/92 1/94 1/96 1/98 1/00 1/02 1/04 1/06 1/08 1/10 1/12 1/14

DATE


NIT

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

g/l)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

PE

RC

HLO

RA

TE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(µ

g/l)

Perchlorate (ug/l) HGBL = 14 ug/lNitrate-N (mg/l) MCL = 10mg/l

MCL =10 mg/l

DRY DRY


APPENDIX B

PERCHED ZONE AND SHALLOW AQUIFER WATER LEVEL AND

WATER QUALITY FIGURES, NOVEMBER 2012

k

#*

#*

#*

#*

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

")

SEW-13561.07 (PWL)

Pomerene Canal

U.S. 80

U.S. 80

U.S. 80

SAN PEDRO RIVER

SEW-1 Area

3560

3555

3565

3570

3590

3580

3575

3585

3595

3600

3550

3545

MW-083568.9

MW-423562.21

MW-403559.28

MW-383540.16

MW-363585.75

MW-353585.14

MW-343587.08

MW-203570.94

MW-193568.68

MW-183566.85

MW-133592.71

MW-113587.96

MW-41B3549.51

MW-41A3551.82

D(17-20)36dad (Ohlde)UTM

D(18-21)06bcb (Jones)3569.93 D(18-21)06ada (White)

3586.45

D(17-20)36caa2(Hyder)3554.32

D(17-20)36caa (Gaynor)3551.25

D(17-20)36aad3 (Acuña)3556.29

D(18-21)08bab (Tenopir)3600.76

D(18-21)06bcc2 (Wooten)3567.43

D(17-20)36ddc (Morales)3558.97

D(17-20)36cad1 (McCann)3556.72

D(17-20)36aad1 (Jacobs)3555.61

D(17-20)36cdb (Woolever)3557.46

D(18-21)06bab (Alexander)3578.34

D(17-20)25badNM

SW-14

SW-04

SW-13

SW-03

WASH

3WASH 1

WASH 2

WASH 4

DRAGOON WASHWAS

H 5

MW-173568.57


FIGURE B-1PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______DAT

0 2,000 4,000

Feet

³130.140

BENSON, ARIZONA

EXPLANATION

SW-14 SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE MONITORING STATION !( SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLMW-11

#*

WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS IN THENORTHERN AREA SHALLOW AQUIFER

GROUNDWATER NOVEMBER 2012

BAM

DRY (APPROXIMATE SURFACE WATER FLOW IN SAN PEDRORIVER IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs))

DRY

DRY

DRY

3600

DRY

k

#* #*

")

")

")!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

3585

3570

3580

3575

3565

MW-083568.9 MW-36

3585.75

MW-353585.14

MW-343587.08

MW-203570.94

MW-193568.68

MW-183566.85

D(18-21)06bcb (Jones)3569.93

D(18-21)06bcc2 (Wooten)3567.43

D(18-21)06bab (Alexander)3578.34

MW-173568.57

SW-04SW-03

SEW-1

WASH 1

WASH

3

WASH

2

3561.07 (PWL)

DRYDRY

SEW-1 AREADETAIL

D(17-20)36aad1SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELL")

APPROXIMATE LINE OF EQUAL WATER ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVELEPHEMERAL STREAMAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF SHALLOW AQUIFER

PURPOSES ONLY. DATA REPORTEDUNDER SEPERATE REPORT RESULT USED FOR CONTOURING k

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\A

NP G

IS\Fig

ures\1

30.14

0_An

nual\

2012

Ann

ual\F

igure

B-1_

Wate

r_Lev

el_Ele

vatio

n_AN

P_11

_12.m

xd

2/5/2013

UTM UNABLE TO MEASUREPWL PUMPING WATER LEVELNM NOT MONITORED



0 1,000 2,000Feet

³

130.24

BENSON, ARIZONA

EXPLANATION


SW-12DRY (APPROXIMATE SURFACE WATER FLOW IN SAN PEDRO

RIVER IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs))SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE MONITORING STATION

REACH WITH FLOW

!( SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLMW-06

#*

WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS IN THE SOUTHERN AREA SHALLOW AQUIFER

NOVEMBER 2012

D(18-21)08bab SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELL")

BAM

INFERRED WATER LEVEL

#*>

>

!(>

>

>

>

5

")

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

5

5

SAN PEDRO RIVER

APACHE POWDER ROAD

LATERALLY CONFINING UNIT

MOLINOS CREEK AQUIFER

SOUT

HERN

PACI

FIC R

.R.

P-033637.3

P-013663.89

MW-393597.93

MW-333602.69

MW-253598.54

MW-243596.84

MW-233597.96

MW-223608.09

MW-213598.46

MW-143608.31

MW-063625.66

MW-013611.86

D(18-21)08bab (Tenopir)3600.76

MW-32DRY

MW-31DRY

MW-29DRY

MW-15DRY

P-103622.4

MW-033636.85

MW-043662.09

MW-30DRY

3615

3625

3605

3610

3620

3600

SW-12

WASH 6

WASH 5

WASH 4

DRY

3620 APPROXIMATE LINE OF EQUAL WATER ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL

EPHEMERAL STREAM

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\A

NP G

IS\Fig

ures\1

30.14

0_An

nual\

2012

Annu

al\Fig

ure B

-2_So

uthern

_Wate

r_Lev

el_Ele

vatio

n_AN

P_11

_12.m

xd

2/12/2013

>

>

!(

>

>

>

>

5

!(

5

5

3601.61

3602.01

P-10DRY

MW-32DRY

MW-31DRY

MW-30DRY

MW-04DRY

MW-03DRY

MW-29DRY

P-033637.3

P-013663.89

MW-213598.46

0 250 500

Feet

³

EXPLANATION

WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND SATURATED THICKNESS

IN PERCHED ZONE GROUNDWATERNOVEMBER 2012


FIGURE B-3

BENSON, ARIZONA

PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______130.24BAMDAT

1.66

8.27

MOLINOS CREEK

SUB-AQUIFER(MCA)

2/12/2013

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\A

NP G

IS\Fi

gures

\130.1

40_A

nnua

l\201

2 Ann

ual\F

igure

B-3_

Perch

ed_W

ater_L

evel_

ANP_

11_1

2.mxd

PERCHED ZONE MONITOR WELL

MW-03>

PERCHED ZONEPIEZOMETER

P-03.

SHALLOW AQUIFERMONITOR WELL

MW-21!(

APPROXIMATE SURFACE OUTCROP OF ST. DAVID CLAY (WITHIN STUDY AREA)


ELEVATION OF PERCHED GROUNDWATER(IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) November 2012

3637.3

MEASURED SATURATED THICKNESS IN FEET8.27

")

!(

>

>

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

>

!(

#*

!.

%

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.

!.

SAN PEDRO RIVER

LATERALLY CONFINING UNIT

MOLINOS CREEK SUB-AQUIFER

SOUT

HERN

PACI

FIC R

.R.

WASH 3

WASH 4

WASH 5

P-01200

MW-3977

MW-2312

P-0311000

MW-240.94

MW-214800

MW-33NS

MW-29NS

MW-25NS

MW-22NS

MW-15NS

MW-14NS

MW-13NS

MW-06NS

MW-04DRY

MW-01NS

DCP-12NS

D(18-21)08babNS



0 1,200 2,400Feet

³

130.24

BENSON, ARIZONA

EXPLANATION


SW-12 SAN PEDRO RIVER SURFACE MONITORING STATION

!( SHALLOW AQUIFER MONITOR WELLMW-06

NITRATE-NITROGEN AND PERCHLORATE IN SOUTHERN AREA

SHALLOW AQUIFER AND PERCHED ZONEGROUNDWATER, NOVEMBER 2012

PERCHLORATE CONCENTRATION IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

590

NS NOT SAMPLED (SAMPLED ON SEMI-ANNUAL OR ANNUAL BASIS)

BAM

11000NITRATE-NITROGEN CONCENTRATION IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

P-03 PERCHED PIEZOMETERMW-03 PERCHED MONITOR WELL

!.

!>

ND NOT DETECTED

#*

PERCHED ZONE

SHALLOW AQUIFER

SHALLOW AQUIFER

32086

590

MW-03DRY

P-10DRY

22

2.8

27.2

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\A

NP G

IS\Fig

ures\1

30.14

0_An

nual\

2012

Annu

al\Fig

ure B

-4_So

uthern

_Nitra

te_AN

P_11

_12.m

xd

2/12/2013

SW-12DRY

k

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

#*

#*

#*

%

#*

")

")

")

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

D(17-20)25badNM

SAN PEDRO RIVER

APACHE NITROGEN PRODUCTS INC.

BOUNDARY

SEW-1 Area

SEW-160

MW-3593

MW-34ND

MW-401.1

MW-36170

D(18-21)06bcb (Jones)9.3

D(17-20)36aad1 (Jacobs)3.7

MW-0835 MW-19

150

SW-14NS

SW-04NS

SW-13NS

SW-03NS

MW-42NS

MW-38NS

MW-20NS

MW-17NS

MW-13NS

MW-11NS

MW-10NS

DCP-12NS

MW-41BNS

MW-41ANS

D(18-21)06babNS

D(18-21)06adaNS

D(18-20)01aadNS

D(17-20)36ddcNS

D(17-20)36dadNS

D(17-20)36cdbNS

D(17-20)36caaNS

D(18-21)06bcc2NS

D(17-20)36caa2NS

D(17-20)36cad1NS

D(17-20)36aad3NS

Pome

rene C

anal

U.S. 80U.S. 80

U.S. 80

WASH

1

WASH

3WASH

2

WASH 4

DRAG

OON W

ASH

MW-18NS

SW-13

MW-3593

D(18-21)06bcb

EXPLANATION

APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF SHALLOW AQUIFER GROUNDWATER WITH NITRATE-NITROGEN

SHALLOW AQUIFER MON ITOR WELL

RESULT USED FOR CONTOURING PURPOSES ONLY. DATA REPORTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

SHALLOW AQUIFER PRIVATE WELLSAN PEDRO RIVER MONITORING STATION

k

EXCEEDING 10 MILLIGRAMS PER LITEREXCEEDING 50 MILLIGRAMS PER LITEREXCEEDING 100 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER


0 1,000 2,000

Feet

³ NITRATE-NITROGEN INSHALLOW AQUIFER GROUNDWATER

AND SURFACE WATER, NOVEMBER 2012


FIGURE B-5PREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______130.24

BENSON, ARIZONA

BAMEPHEMERAL STREAM

")

!(

DAT

NITRATE-NITROGEN CONCENTRATION IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

NS = NOT SAMPLED

ND = NOT DETECTED

(SAMPLED ON SEMI-ANNUAL OR ANNUAL BASIS)

#*

k

")

")

")

")

")

")

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

#* #*

#*

")

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

SEW-161

MW-3593

MW-34ND

MW-36170

D(18-21)06bcb (Jones)9.3

MW-0835 MW-19

150

SW-04NS

SW-03NS

MW-42NS MW-20

NS

MW-17NS

MW-11NS

MW-10NS

D(18-21)06babNS

D(18-21)06adaNS

D(18-20)01aadNS

D(17-20)36ddcNS

D(18-21)06bcc2NS

MW-18NS

WASH

1

WASH 3

WASH

2

SEW-1 AREA DETAIL

2/12/2013

Path:

P:\P

rojec

t Stor

age\1

30 - A

NP\A

NP G

IS\Fi

gures

\130.1

40_A

nnua

l\201

2 Ann

ual\F

igure

B-5_

Nitrat

e_SA

quife

r_ANP

_11_

12.m

xd

NM = NOT MONITORED


APPENDIX C

NARS MONITORING SCHEDULES

TABLE C-1

EXTRACTION WELL MONITORING SCHEDULE

Analyte or Parameter Monitoring Frequencyto be Monitored Normal Operation Period Comment

METALSaluminum every 5 years September 2016; September 2021antimony every 5 years September 2016; September 2021arsenic every 5 years September 2016; September 2021barium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

beryllium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021cadmium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

chromium (total) every 5 years September 2016; September 2021copper every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

lead every 5 years September 2016; September 2021iron every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

manganese every 5 years September 2016; September 2021mercury every 5 years September 2016; September 2021selenium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

silver every 5 years September 2016; September 2021thallium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

zinc every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

NITROGEN SPECIES / NUTRIENTS

nitrate-N weekly

weekly monitoring may be performed utilizing field methods and verified monthly by lab

ammonia-N quarterlytotal phosphorus quarterly


Table SEW-1.xls

TABLE C-1 (Continued)EXRACTION WELL MONITORING SCHEDULE Page 2 of 2

Analyte or Parameter Monitoring Frequencyto be Monitored Normal Operation Period Comment MAJOR IONSbicarbonate annual

calcium annualchloride annualfluoride annual

magnesium annualphosphate annualpotassium annual

sodium annualsulfate annual

total dissolved solids (TDS) annual

FIELD PARAMETERSpH monthly

temperature monthlyspecific conductance (EC) monthly

FLOW RATE weeklyWATER LEVELS quarterly

FOOTNOTES:

pH= hydrogen ion potential nitrate-N = nitrate-Nitrogen(a) Treatment cell water quality analysis may be performed utilizing field methods / instrumentation where possible.


Table SEW-1.xls

Analyte or Parameter Monitoring Frequency

to be Monitored (a) Normal Operation Period Comment NITROGEN SPECIES / NUTRIENTS

ammonia-N monthlytotal kejdahl nitrogen (TKN) annual

organic nitrogen annual

nitrate-N weekly


total phosphorus quarterly

MISCELLANEOUS

chemical oxygen demand (COD) quarterly

total organic carbon (TOC) quarterly

FIELD PARAMETERS

dissolved oxygen (DO) monthly more frequently if neededpH monthly more frequently if needed

specific conductance (EC) monthly more frequently if neededtemperature monthly more frequently if needed

WATER LEVELS weekly

FOOTNOTES:

nitrate-N = nitrate-Nitrogen


pH= hydrogen ion potential

TABLE C-2

TREATMENT CELL MONITORING SCHEDULE

TABLE C-3

WETLAND EFFLUENT MONITORING SCHEDULE



beryllium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021cadmium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

chromium (total) every 5 years September 2016; September 2021copper every 5 years September 2016; September 2021


manganese every 5 years September 2016; September 2021mercury every 5 years September 2016; September 2021selenium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021




nitrate-N weekly


ammonia-N weeklytotal ammonia annual

organic nitrogen annualtotal kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) annual

total phosphorus quarterly


Table Effluent.xls

TABLE C-3 (Continued)WETLAND EFFLUENT MONITORING SCHEDULEPage 2 of 2

Analyte or Parameter Monitoring Frequency

to be Monitored Normal Operation Period Comment MAJOR IONSbicarbonate annual

calcium annualchloride annualfluoride annual

magnesium annualphosphate annualpotassium annual

sodium annualsulfate annual

MISCELLANEOUStotal suspended solids (TSS) quarterlytotal dissolved solids (TDS) quarterly

FIELD PARAMETERSpH monthly more frequently if needed

temperature monthly more frequently if neededdissolved oxygen monthly more frequently if needed

specific conductance (EC) monthly more frequently if needed

FLOW RATE weekly

Daily monitoring only following adjustments in flow rate, then weekly

FOOTNOTES:

pH= hydrogen ion potential nitrate-N = nitrate-Nitrogen(a) Effluent water quality analysis may be performed utilizing field methods / instrumentation where possible.


Table Effluent.xls

TABLE C-4

MONITOR WELL MONITORING SCHEDULE


METALSbarium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

beryllium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021chromium (total) every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

lead every 5 years September 2016; September 2021mercury every 5 years September 2016; September 2021thallium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021


nitrate-N quarterlyquarterly monitoring performed by laboratory (b)

FIELD PARAMETERSpH quarterly

temperature quarterlyspecific conductance (EC) quarterly

WATER LEVELS monthly (b)


nitrate-N quarterlyquarterly monitoring performed by laboratory (a) (b)

ammonia-N quarterlyquarterly monitoring performed by laboratory (a) (b)

FIELD PARAMETERSpH quarterly more frequently if needed

temperature quarterly more frequently if neededspecific conductance (EC) quarterly more frequently if needed

WATER LEVELS weekly


Design Confirmation Piezometer DCP-12

Monitor Well MW-10

Table DCP-MW-10.xls

TABLE C-4 MONITOR WELL MONITORING SCHEDULEPage 2 of 2

FOOTNOTES:

pH= hydrogen ion potentialnitrate-N = nitrate-Nitrogen(b) more frequent monitoring will be required at DCP-12 if treatment cell overflow occurs. more frequent monitoring will be required at MW-10 if AWQS standard is exceeded

(a) Water quality analysis may be performed utilizing field methods / instrumentation where possible.


Table DCP-MW-10.xls

TABLE C-5



beryllium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021cadmium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021chromium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021copper every 5 years September 2016; September 2021


manganese every 5 years September 2016; September 2021nickel every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

mercury every 5 years September 2016; September 2021selenium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021




nitrate-N every 5 yearsammonia-N every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) every 5 years September 2016; September 2021total nitrogen (calculation) every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

total organic carbon every 5 years September 2016; September 2021total phosphorus every 5 years September 2016; September 2021


TREATMENT CELL SOIL MONITORING SCHEDULE

TABLE C-5 (Continued)TREATMENT CELL SOIL MONITORING SCHEDULEPage 2 of 2


MAJOR IONSbicarbonate every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

calcium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021carbonate every 5 years September 2016; September 2021chloride every 5 years September 2016; September 2021fluoride every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

magnesium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021phosphate every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

pH every 5 years September 2016; September 2021potassium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

sodium every 5 years September 2016; September 2021sulfate every 5 years September 2016; September 2021

FOOTNOTES:

pH= hydrogen ion potential nitrate-N = nitrate-Nitrogen



APPENDIX D

NARS WATER LEVEL AND WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS

TABLE D-1WATER LEVEL DATA(TREATMENT CELLS)

DATEMEASURED

WATERDEPTH(feet)IDENTIFIER


TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

4.901/6/20124.901/12/20124.901/19/20124.801/27/20124.902/3/20124.902/10/20124.902/16/20124.902/24/20124.903/2/20124.903/8/20124.903/16/20124.903/23/20124.903/30/20124.904/4/20124.904/13/20124.904/20/20124.904/25/20124.905/3/20124.905/11/20124.905/18/20124.905/24/20124.906/1/20124.906/8/20124.906/15/20124.906/22/20124.906/29/20124.907/6/20124.907/12/20124.907/20/20124.907/27/2012

DATEMEASURED


TABLE D-1 (continued)WATER LEVEL DATAPage 2 of 11


TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

4.908/3/20124.908/10/20124.908/17/20124.908/24/20124.908/31/20124.809/7/20124.909/14/20124.609/21/20125.009/28/20124.9010/5/20124.9010/13/20124.9010/19/20124.9010/26/20124.9011/2/20124.9011/8/20124.9011/16/20124.9011/24/20124.9011/30/20124.9012/7/20124.9012/14/20124.9012/21/20124.9012/28/2012

FDA

2.201/6/20122.201/12/20122.201/19/20122.201/27/20122.202/3/20122.202/10/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

2.202/16/20122.202/24/20122.203/2/20122.203/8/20122.203/16/20122.203/23/20122.203/30/20122.204/4/20122.204/13/20122.204/20/20122.204/25/20122.205/3/20122.205/11/20122.205/18/20122.205/24/20122.206/1/20122.206/8/20122.206/15/20122.206/22/20122.306/29/20122.407/6/20122.207/12/20122.207/20/20122.207/27/20122.208/3/20122.308/10/20122.308/17/20122.308/24/20122.308/31/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

2.209/7/20122.209/14/20122.209/21/20122.209/28/20122.2010/5/20122.2010/13/20122.2010/19/20122.2010/26/20122.2011/2/20122.2011/8/20122.2011/16/20122.2011/24/20122.2011/30/20122.2012/7/20122.2012/14/20122.2012/21/20122.2012/28/2012

PDA-C

3.001/6/20123.001/12/20123.001/19/20123.001/27/20123.002/3/20123.002/10/20123.002/16/20123.002/24/20123.003/2/20123.003/8/20123.003/16/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

3.003/23/20123.003/30/20123.004/4/20123.004/13/20123.004/20/20123.004/25/20123.005/3/20123.005/11/20123.005/18/20123.005/24/20123.006/1/20123.006/8/20123.006/15/20123.006/22/20123.006/29/20123.007/6/20123.007/12/20123.007/20/20123.007/27/20123.008/3/20123.008/10/20123.008/17/20123.008/24/20123.008/31/20123.009/7/20123.009/14/20123.009/21/20123.009/28/20123.0010/5/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

3.0010/13/20123.0010/19/20123.0010/26/20123.0011/2/20123.0011/8/20123.0011/16/20122.9011/24/20122.9011/30/20123.0012/7/20122.9012/14/20122.9012/21/20122.9012/28/2012

PDA-N

2.201/6/20122.201/12/20122.201/19/20122.201/27/20122.202/3/20122.202/10/20122.202/16/20122.202/24/20122.203/2/20122.203/8/20122.203/16/20122.203/23/20122.203/30/20122.204/4/20122.204/13/20122.204/20/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

2.204/25/20122.205/3/20122.205/11/20122.205/18/20122.205/24/20122.206/1/20122.206/8/20122.206/15/20122.206/22/20122.306/29/20122.307/6/20122.207/12/20122.307/20/20122.207/27/20122.208/3/20122.208/10/20122.208/17/20122.208/24/20122.208/31/20122.109/7/20122.009/14/20122.209/21/20122.209/28/20122.2010/5/20122.2010/13/20122.2010/19/20122.2010/26/20122.2011/2/20122.2011/8/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

2.2011/16/20122.2011/24/20122.2011/30/20122.2012/7/20122.2012/14/20122.2012/21/20122.2012/28/2012

PDA-S

2.601/6/20122.601/12/20122.601/19/20122.501/27/20122.602/3/20122.602/10/20122.602/16/20122.202/24/20122.603/2/20122.603/8/20122.603/16/20122.603/23/20122.603/30/20122.604/4/20122.804/13/20122.804/20/20122.804/25/20122.805/3/20122.805/11/20122.805/18/20122.805/24/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

2.806/1/20122.806/8/20122.806/15/20122.806/22/20122.906/29/20122.907/6/20122.807/12/20122.907/20/20122.907/27/20123.008/3/20123.008/10/20123.008/17/20123.008/24/20122.908/31/20122.609/7/20122.009/14/20122.909/21/20122.909/28/20122.9010/5/20122.7010/13/20122.7010/19/20123.0010/26/20122.9011/2/20122.9011/8/20122.6011/16/20122.4011/24/20122.6011/30/20122.2012/7/20122.6012/14/2012

DATEMEASURED




TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

2.6012/21/20122.6012/28/2012


Note: Water depths are measured with staff gauges located in outlet structures



3660

3670

3680

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

EL

EV

AT

ION

N(f

ee

t a

bo

ve

me

an

se

a le

ve

l )

DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER DCP-12

EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1

3560

3570

3580

3590

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t a

bo

ve

me

an

se

a le

ve

l)

Static Water Level

Pumping Water Level

FIGURE D-1. WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1 AND DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER DCP-12


3600

3610

3620

3630

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

DRY

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

EL

EV

AT

ION

N(f

eet

abo

ve m

ean

sea

leve

l )

DISCHARGE MONITOR WELL MW-10

DRY

FIGURE D-2. WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR MONITOR WELL MW-10

Notes:

MCL = Federal Maximum Contaminant Level

NO3-N = Nitrate as Nitrogen


EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

TREATMENT CELL PDA-S

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

FIGURE D-3. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NO3-N IN NARS EXTRACTION WELL SEW-1

AND TREATMENT CELL PDA-S

Notes:




TREATMENT CELL PDA-C

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

TREATMENT CELL PDA-N

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

FIGURE D-4. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NO3-N IN NARS TREATMENT CELLS PDA-C AND PDA-N

Notes:




TREATMENT CELL ANA

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

TREATMENT CELL FDA

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

FIGURE D-5. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NO3-N IN NARS TEATMENT CELLS ANA AND FDA

Notes:




EFFLUENT DISCHARGE

0

20

40

60

80

100

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

Primary

Alternate

MCL =10 mg/l

0

100

200

300

400

500

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er) SEW-1(influent)

FDA

MCL =10 mg/l

FIGURE D-6. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NO3-N AT NARS EFFLUENT

Notes:




DESIGN CONFIRMATION PIEZOMETER DCP-12

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

Monitor Well MW-10

0

20

40

60

80

100

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DATE

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

(m

illi

gra

ms

per

lit

er)

MCL =10 mg/l

FIGURE D-7. WATER QUALITY HYDROGRAPHS FOR NO3-N IN DESIGN CONFORMATION PIEZOMETER AND MW-10


APPENDIX E

NARS FIELD DATA

TABLE E-1SUMMARY OF FIELD WATER QUALITYJANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER 2012

IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE

HYDROGEN ION POTENTIAL(pH Units)

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY

(mS/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

1/6/2012 ORG-------- 6.2 0.987

1/12/2012 ORG-------- 7.4 0.493

1/19/2012 ORG1.517.95 7.9 0.671

1/27/2012 ORG-------- 7.1 2.77

2/3/2012 ORG-------- 7.6 3.89

2/10/2012 ORG-------- 10.1 4.25

2/16/2012 ORG-------- 9.7 4.55

2/24/2012 ORG-------- 9.3 5.77

2/29/2012 ORG1.57.93 9.5 3.76

3/2/2012 ORG-------- 10.3 2.74

3/8/2012 ORG-------- 7.4 1.08

3/16/2012 ORG-------- 10.5 0.55

3/23/2012 ORG-------- 11.4 0.871


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE

TABLE E-1 (continued)WATER QUALITY DATA

Page 2 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

3/28/2012 ORG1.5477.82 13.3 0.989

3/30/2012 ORG-------- 13.3 0.922

4/4/2012 ORG-------- 12.8 0.701

4/13/2012 ORG-------- 14.4 0.871

4/20/2012 ORG-------- 15.1 1.06

4/25/2012 ORG1.4916.83 17.6 0.761

5/3/2012 ORG-------- 17.6 3.29

5/11/2012 ORG-------- 18.2 0.981

5/18/2012 ORG-------- 19.7 0.813

5/24/2012 ORG-------- 19 1.02

5/30/2012 ORG1.5797.55 21.3 2.03

6/1/2012 ORG-------- 18.3 0.939

6/8/2012 ORG-------- 18.1 0.988


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 3 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

6/15/2012 ORG-------- 18.1 0.879

6/20/2012 ORG1.6457.71 23.6 0.918

6/22/2012 ORG-------- 22.5 0.971

6/29/2012 ORG-------- 25.1 0.914

7/6/2012 ORG-------- 24 0.893

7/12/2012 ORG-------- 25.9 0.988

7/20/2012 ORG-------- 25.1 0.823

7/23/2012 ORG1.6317.55 24.6 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- 26.1 0.997

8/3/2012 ORG-------- 23.7 1.52

8/10/2012 ORG-------- 24 1.64

8/17/2012 ORG-------- 25.2 2.32

8/23/2012 ORG1.577.62 23.9 ----


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 4 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

8/24/2012 ORG-------- 25.8 3.49

8/31/2012 ORG-------- 24.8 3.74

9/7/2012 ORG-------- 23.9 6.09

9/14/2012 ORG-------- 22.3 7.63

9/17/2012 ORG1.57.34 18.24 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- 24.3 3.91

9/28/2012 ORG-------- 20 0.869

10/5/2012 ORG-------- 19.2 2.82

10/13/2012 ORG-------- 16.7 0.977

10/19/2012 ORG-------- 16.1 0.851

10/22/2012 ORG1.5827.7 15.9 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- 15.8 1.48

11/2/2012 ORG-------- 14.7 3.27


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 5 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

ANA

11/8/2012 ORG-------- 12.8 6.35

11/16/2012 ORG-------- 10.4 7.42

11/24/2012 ORG-------- 13.8 7.14

11/29/2012 ORG3.027.76 11.4 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- 10 5.51

12/7/2012 ORG-------- 11.3 1.98

12/11/2012 ORG0.9567.48 6.83 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- 8.3 1.15

12/21/2012 ORG-------- 6.8 1.25

12/28/2012 ORG-------- 6.3 1.5

FDA

1/6/2012 ORG-------- 7.7 0.611

1/12/2012 ORG-------- 7.8 0.691


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 6 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

1/19/2012 ORG1.577.92 7 0.836

1/27/2012 ORG-------- 5.9 1.98

2/3/2012 ORG-------- 6.1 2.25

2/10/2012 ORG-------- 11.3 3.01

2/16/2012 ORG-------- 8.8 3.39

2/24/2012 ORG-------- 8.7 3.68

2/29/2012 ORG1.567.95 9.3 2.51

3/2/2012 ORG-------- 9.4 1.66

3/8/2012 ORG-------- 7.1 0.75

3/16/2012 ORG-------- 11.6 0.627

3/23/2012 ORG-------- 14.8 0.826

3/28/2012 ORG1.4717.7 13.9 0.891

3/30/2012 ORG-------- 16.3 1.63


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 7 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

4/4/2012 ORG-------- 13 0.681

4/13/2012 ORG-------- 16.2 0.961

4/20/2012 ORG-------- 18.6 0.969

4/25/2012 ORG1.5026.93 17.2 0.782

5/3/2012 ORG-------- 17 0.977

5/11/2012 ORG-------- 19.4 1.04

5/18/2012 ORG-------- 20.8 0.975

5/24/2012 ORG-------- 17.4 0.949

5/30/2012 ORG1.6067.51 18.9 1.62

6/1/2012 ORG-------- 17.6 1.33

6/8/2012 ORG-------- 17.5 0.989

6/15/2012 ORG-------- 17.5 0.963

6/20/2012 ORG1.7097.77 19.7 0.929


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 8 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

6/22/2012 ORG-------- 19.4 0.964

6/29/2012 ORG-------- 22.5 0.892

7/6/2012 ORG-------- 22 0.889

7/12/2012 ORG-------- 23.5 0.973

7/20/2012 ORG-------- 23.5 0.791

7/23/2012 ORG1.6787.49 22.8 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- 23.5 0.901

8/3/2012 ORG-------- 22 0.761

8/10/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 0.743

8/17/2012 ORG-------- 23.2 0.776

8/23/2012 ORG1.6247.54 22.9 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- 23.6 0.942

8/31/2012 ORG-------- 22.3 1.11


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 9 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

9/7/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 0.796

9/14/2012 ORG-------- 19.6 2.77

9/17/2012 ORG1.497.35 15.43 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- 18.6 1.77

9/28/2012 ORG-------- 18 0.731

10/5/2012 ORG-------- 16.3 1.91

10/13/2012 ORG-------- 13.4 0.888

10/19/2012 ORG-------- 15.1 1.08

10/22/2012 ORG1.6457.58 13.8 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- 12.6 0.779

11/2/2012 ORG-------- 13.1 2.34

11/8/2012 ORG-------- 12.3 3.98

11/16/2012 ORG-------- 10.1 4.31


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 10 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

FDA

11/24/2012 ORG-------- 10.6 2.99

11/29/2012 ORG1.5747.57 10.1 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- 8.6 3.57

12/7/2012 ORG-------- 9.9 1.56

12/11/2012 ORG0.9467.63 4.45 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- 8.8 1.48

12/21/2012 ORG-------- 5 1.68

12/28/2012 ORG-------- 5.1 1.85

PDA-C

1/6/2012 ORG-------- 10.4 2.04

1/12/2012 ORG-------- 9.8 2.95

1/19/2012 ORG1.547.47 10.2 14.9

1/27/2012 ORG-------- 10 15.8


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 11 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

2/3/2012 ORG-------- 9.9 7.58

2/10/2012 ORG-------- 11.2 5.87

2/16/2012 ORG-------- 10.6 12.3

2/24/2012 ORG-------- 10.6 4.07

2/29/2012 ORG1.577.39 12.1 0.555

3/2/2012 ORG-------- 10.6 0.599

3/8/2012 ORG-------- 10.1 0.429

3/16/2012 ORG-------- 10.8 0.987

3/23/2012 ORG-------- 11.4 0.797

3/28/2012 ORG1.527.22 14.4 0.717

3/30/2012 ORG-------- 13.1 1.08

4/4/2012 ORG-------- 12.5 3.18

4/13/2012 ORG-------- 14.6 0.832


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 12 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

4/20/2012 ORG-------- 15 1.02

4/25/2012 ORG1.5146.81 16.5 4.09

5/3/2012 ORG-------- 16.1 7.09

5/11/2012 ORG-------- 16.4 2.83

5/18/2012 ORG-------- 17.9 2.88

5/24/2012 ORG-------- 17.5 4.83

5/30/2012 ORG1.6257.18 18.3 6.64

6/1/2012 ORG-------- 17.1 8

6/8/2012 ORG-------- 17.3 7.97

6/15/2012 ORG-------- 17.3 8.01

6/20/2012 ORG1.6187.26 19.7 8.23

6/22/2012 ORG-------- 18.8 13.2

6/29/2012 ORG-------- 20.7 7.25


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 13 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

7/6/2012 ORG-------- 20.9 10.7

7/12/2012 ORG-------- 21.6 10.8

7/20/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 11.9

7/23/2012 ORG1.5947.15 21.5 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 15.8

8/3/2012 ORG-------- 21.2 18.9

8/10/2012 ORG-------- 21.3 19.5

8/17/2012 ORG-------- 21.6 24.5

8/23/2012 ORG1.5817.18 21.6 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- 21.8 15.2

8/31/2012 ORG-------- 21.1 25.7

9/7/2012 ORG-------- 21.5 22.3

9/14/2012 ORG-------- 20.5 11.2


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 14 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

9/17/2012 ORG1.476.95 17.64 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- 19.1 6.92

9/28/2012 ORG-------- 18.4 0.938

10/5/2012 ORG-------- 17.3 4.15

10/13/2012 ORG-------- 16.6 10.3

10/19/2012 ORG-------- 16 12.57

10/22/2012 ORG1.5097.31 15.7 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- 15 15.4

11/2/2012 ORG-------- 14.4 18.4

11/8/2012 ORG-------- 13.9 20.1

11/16/2012 ORG-------- 11.9 13.9

11/24/2012 ORG-------- 12.8 7.41

11/29/2012 ORG1.5327.45 11.6 ----


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 15 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-C

11/30/2012 ORG-------- 11.2 1.51

12/7/2012 ORG-------- 11.5 0.987

12/11/2012 ORG0.9977 7.65 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- 10.6 0.743

12/21/2012 ORG-------- 8.7 0.772

12/28/2012 ORG-------- 8.5 0.644

PDA-N

1/6/2012 ORG-------- 6.5 0.888

1/12/2012 ORG-------- 6.5 0.608

1/19/2012 ORG1.537.95 7.1 4.08

1/27/2012 ORG-------- 6.1 7.1

2/3/2012 ORG-------- 6.1 5.37

2/10/2012 ORG-------- 8.7 5.02


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 16 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

2/16/2012 ORG-------- 7.4 9.75

2/24/2012 ORG-------- 7.5 3.69

2/29/2012 ORG1.557.87 9.7 0.76

3/2/2012 ORG-------- 7.6 0.612

3/8/2012 ORG-------- 6.8 0.561

3/16/2012 ORG-------- 8.5 0.883

3/23/2012 ORG-------- 9.4 0.807

3/28/2012 ORG1.4837.69 10.9 0.818

3/30/2012 ORG-------- 11.3 1.25

4/4/2012 ORG-------- 10.1 0.984

4/13/2012 ORG-------- 12.2 0.856

4/20/2012 ORG-------- 13.8 0.977

4/25/2012 ORG1.4756.98 15.2 0.894


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 17 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

5/3/2012 ORG-------- 14.5 0.891

5/11/2012 ORG-------- 15 1.28

5/18/2012 ORG-------- 16.8 1.66

5/24/2012 ORG-------- 15.7 1.83

5/30/2012 ORG1.6427.36 16.8 2.31

6/1/2012 ORG-------- 15.4 1.64

6/8/2012 ORG-------- 15.6 0.996

6/15/2012 ORG-------- 15.6 0.917

6/20/2012 ORG1.6787.46 17.5 0.956

6/22/2012 ORG-------- 17.5 1.66

6/29/2012 ORG-------- 20.1 1.49

7/6/2012 ORG-------- 20.2 1.53

7/12/2012 ORG-------- 21.2 0.991


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 18 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

7/20/2012 ORG-------- 21.1 1.8

7/23/2012 ORG1.657.37 21.6 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- 21.2 3.3

8/3/2012 ORG-------- 20.7 5.46

8/10/2012 ORG-------- 20.6 5.88

8/17/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 8.68

8/23/2012 ORG1.6157.45 21.4 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 5.4

8/31/2012 ORG-------- 20.7 9.96

9/7/2012 ORG-------- 21.2 6.14

9/14/2012 ORG-------- 19.7 4.69

9/17/2012 ORG1.556.73 18.33 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- 18.4 1.09


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 19 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

9/28/2012 ORG-------- 17.6 0.943

10/5/2012 ORG-------- 16.1 2.84

10/13/2012 ORG-------- 14.6 0.891

10/19/2012 ORG-------- 14.3 2.52

10/22/2012 ORG1.5447.54 14.2 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- 13.1 4.29

11/2/2012 ORG-------- 12.6 11.7

11/8/2012 ORG-------- 12.1 13.6

11/16/2012 ORG-------- 9.6 3.12

11/24/2012 ORG-------- 10.7 0.979

11/29/2012 ORG1.5247.65 10 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- 9.4 0.932

12/7/2012 ORG-------- 9.5 1.02


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 20 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-N

12/11/2012 ORG0.9467.41 5.5 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- 8.2 0.987

12/21/2012 ORG-------- 6 0.956

12/28/2012 ORG-------- 6.1 0.814

PDA-S

1/6/2012 ORG-------- 14.8 50.3

1/12/2012 ORG-------- 15.4 41.2

1/19/2012 ORG1.567.39 14.2 54.8

1/27/2012 ORG-------- 15.1 54.3

2/3/2012 ORG-------- 14.3 48.8

2/10/2012 ORG-------- 16.4 47.4

2/16/2012 ORG-------- 14.4 50.4

2/24/2012 ORG-------- 15.3 46.7


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 21 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

2/29/2012 ORG1.6217.11 17 46.3

3/2/2012 ORG-------- 15 57.6

3/8/2012 ORG-------- 14.5 64.4

3/16/2012 ORG-------- 15.8 66.8

3/23/2012 ORG-------- 16.8 63.5

3/28/2012 ORG1.5246.99 17.7 40.5

3/30/2012 ORG-------- 17.8 55.5

4/4/2012 ORG-------- 16.6 51.5

4/13/2012 ORG-------- 18.2 56.1

4/20/2012 ORG-------- 19.6 52.7

4/25/2012 ORG1.6137.01 19.1 63.3

5/3/2012 ORG-------- 19.2 51.9

5/11/2012 ORG-------- 19.8 51.6


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 22 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

5/18/2012 ORG-------- 20.5 53.5

5/24/2012 ORG-------- 19.5 50

5/30/2012 ORG1.6537.11 20.6 53.1

6/1/2012 ORG-------- 19.7 54.9

6/8/2012 ORG-------- 19.8 56.2

6/15/2012 ORG-------- 19.8 49.3

6/20/2012 ORG1.7387.07 20.7 47.2

6/22/2012 ORG-------- 20.5 46.2

6/29/2012 ORG-------- 21.5 38.6

7/6/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 40.7

7/12/2012 ORG-------- 21.8 47.2

7/20/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 38.8

7/23/2012 ORG1.5887.08 21.5 ----


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 23 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

7/27/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 38.5

8/3/2012 ORG-------- 21.5 49

8/10/2012 ORG-------- 21.6 49.2

8/17/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 58.8

8/23/2012 ORG1.587.08 22 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- 21.7 43.7

8/31/2012 ORG-------- 21.4 53.7

9/7/2012 ORG-------- 21.9 37.6

9/14/2012 ORG-------- 21.1 31.6

9/17/2012 ORG1.537.17 16.28 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- ---- 20.4

9/28/2012 ORG-------- 20.1 55.8

10/5/2012 ORG-------- 19.4 39.6


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 24 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

10/13/2012 ORG-------- 18.6 54.5

10/19/2012 ORG-------- 18.5 34.8

10/22/2012 ORG1.527.06 18 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- 18.1 36.9

11/2/2012 ORG-------- 17.8 44.4

11/8/2012 ORG-------- 17.3 74.4

11/16/2012 ORG-------- 15.5 66.7

11/24/2012 ORG-------- 15.8 73.5

11/29/2012 ORG1.5737.23 15.3 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- 14.2 94.2

12/7/2012 ORG-------- 15.3 62.3

12/11/2012 ORG1.136.52 10.27 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- 14.6 107


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 25 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

TREATMENT CELLS

PDA-S

12/21/2012 ORG-------- 12.4 66

12/28/2012 ORG-------- 12.2 98

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

1/6/2012 ORG-------- ---- 77.5

1/12/2012 ORG-------- ---- 76.9

1/19/2012 ORG1.636.69 18 79.3

1/27/2012 ORG-------- ---- 89.9

2/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 78.6

2/10/2012 ORG-------- ---- 73.1

2/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 75.4

2/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 86.2

2/29/2012 ORG1.6017.12 21.3 83.4


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 26 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

3/2/2012 ORG-------- ---- 92.7

3/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 98.5

3/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 86.3

3/23/2012 ORG-------- ---- 81.3

3/28/2012 ORG1.5566.79 21.2 69.1

3/30/2012 ORG-------- ---- 84.5

4/4/2012 ORG-------- ---- 84.9

4/13/2012 ORG-------- ---- 90.4

4/20/2012 ORG-------- ---- 73.1

4/25/2012 ORG1.5316.87 21.4 86.7

5/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 78.9

5/11/2012 ORG-------- ---- 87.3

5/18/2012 ORG-------- ---- 81.6


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 27 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

5/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 74.5

5/30/2012 ORG1.5787.12 22.1 72.6

6/1/2012 ORG-------- ---- 69.8

6/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 83.1

6/15/2012 ORG-------- ---- 73.1

6/20/2012 ORG1.567.43 23.3 70.5

6/22/2012 ORG-------- ---- 74.2

6/29/2012 ORG-------- ---- 63.2

7/6/2012 ORG-------- ---- 72.9

7/12/2012 ORG-------- ---- 69.5

7/20/2012 ORG-------- ---- 70.5

7/23/2012 ORG1.6227.02 21.6 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- ---- 68.5


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 28 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

8/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 78.3

8/10/2012 ORG-------- ---- 73.7

8/17/2012 ORG-------- ---- 71.9

8/23/2012 ORG1.5977.06 20.7 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 62.8

8/31/2012 ORG-------- ---- 73.4

9/7/2012 ORG-------- ---- 67.6

9/14/2012 ORG-------- ---- 72.7

9/17/2012 ORG1.537.69 19.06 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- ---- 67.6

9/28/2012 ORG-------- ---- 82.8

10/5/2012 ORG-------- ---- 61.5

10/13/2012 ORG-------- ---- 85.8


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 29 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

10/19/2012 ORG-------- ---- 69.5

10/22/2012 ORG1.6337.19 20.4 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- ---- 63.3

11/2/2012 ORG-------- ---- 71.2

11/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 95.3

11/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 79.2

11/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 120

11/29/2012 ORG1.4987.25 19.7 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- ---- 116

12/7/2012 ORG-------- ---- 112

12/11/2012 ORG1.297.27 18.23 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- ---- 127

12/21/2012 ORG-------- ---- 121


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 30 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EXTRACTION WELL

SEW-1

12/28/2012 ORG-------- ---- 138

EFFLUENT

EFF-L

1/6/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.56

1/12/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.768

1/19/2012 ORG1.557.89 7.7 0.944

1/27/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.25

2/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 2.22

2/10/2012 ORG-------- ---- 2.47

2/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 2.95

2/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 3.54

2/29/2012 ORG1.4957.79 13 2.98

3/2/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.69


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 31 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EFFLUENT

EFF-L

3/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.869

3/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.859

3/23/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.929

3/28/2012 ORG1.5438.16 15.3 1.52

3/30/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.822

4/4/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.627

4/13/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.989

4/20/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.938

4/25/2012 ORG1.4948.02 18.9 0.717

5/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.904

5/11/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.08

5/18/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.981

5/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.942


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 32 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EFFLUENT

EFF-L

5/30/2012 ORG1.5967.66 21.4 0.989

6/1/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.37

6/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.972

6/15/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.951

6/20/2012 ORG1.7127.79 20.6 0.903

6/22/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.967

6/29/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.878

7/6/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.862

7/12/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.851

7/20/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.779

7/23/2012 ORG1.6887.45 22.2 ----

7/27/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.875

8/3/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.811


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 33 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EFFLUENT

EFF-L

8/10/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.803

8/17/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.795

8/23/2012 ORG1.6287.66 23.5 ----

8/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.988

8/31/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.15

9/7/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.982

9/14/2012 ORG-------- ---- 4.82

9/17/2012 ORG1.718.01 21.77 ----

9/21/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.53

9/28/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.844

10/5/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.48

10/13/2012 ORG-------- ---- 0.987

10/19/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.15


IDENTIFIERSAMPLE

DATETEMPERATURE

(C)SAMPLE

TYPE


Page 34 of 35



(ms/cm)


NITRATE-N(mg/l)

EFFLUENT

EFF-L

10/22/2012 ORG1.6267.77 16.1 ----

10/26/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.24

11/2/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.73

11/8/2012 ORG-------- ---- 3.79

11/16/2012 ORG-------- ---- 3.88

11/24/2012 ORG-------- ---- 2.49

11/29/2012 ORG1.5587.84 12.5 ----

11/30/2012 ORG-------- ---- 3.14

12/7/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.66

12/11/2012 ORG0.9897.41 6.63 ----

12/14/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.65

12/21/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.05

12/28/2012 ORG-------- ---- 1.33


TABLE E-1 (continued)FIELD WATER QUALITY DATA

Page 35 of 35

mg/lms/cm

pH---C

NO3-N

= Milligrams per liter= MilliSiemens per centimeter= Hydrogen ion potential= Not Analyzed= Centigrade= Nitrate-NitrogenNote: Data Field collected with a pH/Con 10 field meterNitrate-N field method 9307 Orion 290 meter

FOOTNOTES:


DATEIDENTIFIER LAB ANP RPD (%)

PDA-S 1/19/2012 44 54.8 21.92/29/2012 40 46.3 153/28/2012 37 40.5 94/25/2012 35 63.3 585/30/2012 38 53.1 336/20/2012 36 47.2 277/23/2012 37 38.8 58/23/2012 42 43.7 49/17/2012 30 46.7 44

10/22/2012 31 36.9 1711/29/2012 28 94.2 10812/11/2012 19 107 140

PDA-C 1/19/2012 13 14.9 142/29/2012 <1 0.555 NC3/28/2012 <1 0.717 NC4/25/2012 3.3 4.09 215/30/2012 5.4 6.64 216/20/2012 8.6 8.23 47/23/2012 14 11.9 168/23/2012 19 15.2 229/17/2012 11 6.92 46

10/22/2012 12 15.4 2511/29/2012 <1 1.51 NC12/11/2012 <1 0.743 NC

PDA-N 1/19/2012 <1 4.08 NC2/29/2012 <1 0.76 NC3/28/2012 <1 0.818 NC4/25/2012 <1 0.894 NC5/30/2012 <1 2.31 NC6/20/2012 <1 0.956 NC


TABLE E-2DATA COMPARISON TABLE

(Nitrate as Nitrogen) (mg/l)


PDA-N 7/23/2012 2.7 1.8 408/23/2012 8.3 5.4 429/17/2012 <1 1.09 NC

10/22/2012 2.4 4.29 5711/29/2012 <1 0.932 NC12/11/2012 <1 0.987 NC

ANA 1/19/2012 <1 0.671 NC2/29/2012 2.7 3.76 333/28/2012 <1 0.989 NC4/25/2012 <1 0.761 NC5/30/2012 <1 2.03 NC6/20/2012 <1 0.918 NC7/23/2012 <1 0.823 NC8/23/2012 3.1 3.49 129/17/2012 1.5 3.91 89

10/22/2012 <1 1.48 NC11/29/2012 3 5.51 5912/11/2012 <1 1.15 NC

FDA 1/19/2012 <1 0.836 NC2/29/2012 1.7 2.51 383/28/2012 <1 0.891 NC4/25/2012 <1 0.782 NC5/30/2012 <1 1.62 NC6/20/2012 <1 0.929 NC7/23/2012 <1 0.791 NC8/23/2012 <1 0.942 NC9/17/2012 <1 1.77 NC

10/22/2012 <1 0.779 NC11/29/2012 1.7 3.57 7112/11/2012 <1 1.48 NC


TABLE E-2DATA COMPARISON TABLE (Nitrate as Nitrogen) mg/lPage 2 of 4


SEW-1 1/19/2012 70 79.3 122/29/2012 65 83.4 253/28/2012 68 69.1 24/25/2012 55 86.7 455/30/2012 61 72.6 176/20/2012 60 70.5 167/23/2012 60 70.5 168/23/2012 66 62.8 59/17/2012 63 67.6 7

10/22/2012 60 63.3 511/29/2012 60 116 6412/11/2012 54 127 81

EFFLUENT

EFF-L 1/19/2012 <1 0.944 NC2/29/2012 1.6 2.98 603/28/2012 <1 1.52 NC4/25/2012 <1 0.717 NC5/30/2012 <1 0.989 NC6/20/2012 <1 0.903 NC7/23/2012 <1 0.779 NC8/23/2012 <1 0.988 NC9/17/2012 <1 1.53 NC

10/22/2012 <1 1.24 NC11/29/2012 1.6 3.14 6512/11/2012 <1 1.65 NC

EXTRACTION WELL



FOOTNOTES

mg/l - milligrams per literRPD = Relative percent differenceNC = Not calculated; lab or probe results less than 1 mg/l.

LAB = Turner Laboratories Inc. Tucson, AZ



ANP = Apache Nitrogen Products Inc. analyzed using Orion 290 meter model 9307

IDENTIFIER 5 6 7

TREATMENT CELLSPDA-S

1/19/2012 1.09 1.13 1.112/29/2012 1.07 1.11 1.093/28/2012 1.01 1.13 1.064/25/2012 1.03 1.09 1.175/30/2012 1.05 1.13 1.036/20/2012 1.05 1.07 1.137/23/2012 1.07 1.11 1.248/23/2012 1.67 1.91 1.879/17/2012 5.98 3.41 2.66

10/22/2012 5.75 3.47 2.3211/29/2012 6.03 3.71 2.1712/11/2012 0.55 0.95 0.98

PDA-C1/19/2012 1.12 1.33 1.132/29/2012 1.11 1.27 1.113/28/2012 1.27 1.23 1.314/25/2012 1.21 1.19 1.295/30/2012 1.12 1.25 1.136/20/2012 1.11 1.12 1.257/23/2012 1.17 1.11 1.238/23/2012 1.91 1.83 1.739/17/2012 3.52 2.27 2.39

10/22/2012 3.67 2.19 2.2111/29/2012 4.02 3.78 8.812/11/2012 0.61 1.01 1.01

PDA-N1/19/2012 0.961 0.941 0.9782/29/2012 0.972 0.951 0.9793/28/2012 0.94 0.92 1.194/25/2012 0.98 0.96 1.215/30/2012 0.981 0.949 0.9716/20/2012 1.07 0.981 0.9777/23/2012 1.07 1.05 1.028/23/2012 1.72 1.55 1.619/17/2012 3.37 5.21 4.26

10/22/2012 3.15 5.15 4.2111/29/2012 7.2 6.31 11.312/11/2012 2.09 1.29 0.74


TABLE E-3FIELD WATER QUALITY DATA

(DISSOLVED OXYGEN) (mg/l)

SAMPLE DATELOCATION

IDENTIFIER 5 6 7

TREATMENT CELLSFDA

1/19/2012 1.54 1.16 1.192/29/2012 1.47 1.15 1.173/28/2012 1.64 1.47 1.674/25/2012 1.71 1.41 1.635/30/2012 1.39 1.17 1.156/20/2012 1.38 1.27 1.227/23/2012 1.41 1.29 1.198/23/2012 1.69 1.75 1.889/17/2012 13.74 5.78 2.11

10/22/2012 12.91 5.83 2.0911/29/2012 14.5 6.87 6.9112/11/2012 0.36 0.31 0.16

1 2

ANA1/19/2012 1.21 1.242/29/2012 1.19 1.213/28/2012 1.33 0.84/25/2012 1.29 0.915/30/2012 1.15 1.236/20/2012 1.21 1.377/23/2012 1.25 1.398/23/2012 1.77 1.929/17/2012 13.84 2.89

10/22/2012 11.81 2.7111/29/2012 14.4 7.3112/11/2012 1.78 2.25

FOOTNOTES:

mg/l = milligrams per literSee Figure 8 for sampling locations

LOCATION

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC.TABLE E-3FIELD WATER QUALITY DATA (DISSOLVED OXYGEN) Page 2 of 2

SAMPLE DATELOCATION


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Jan-12 Mar-12 May-12 Jul-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Dec-12

NIT

RA

TE

-N C

ON

CE

NT

RA

TIO

N

(mg

/L)

DATE

LAB ANP

0

2

4

6

8

10

Jan-12 Mar-12 May-12 Jul-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Dec-12

NIT

RA

TE

-N C

ON

CE

NT

RA

TIO

N

(mg

/L)

DATE

LAB ANP

EFFLUENT LOCATION

SEW‐1

FIGURE E-1. Nitrate-N Concentrations for SEW-1 and EFF-L Lab Data versus ORION Field Meter


APPENDIX F

RESULTS OF 2012 ANNUAL POND COVER INSPECTION REPORT

Other Offices: Mesa, AZ San Diego, CA

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC. HYDROGEOLOGY • ENGINEERING 1820 East River Road Suite 220 Tucson, AZ 85718 Phone: 520.881.7300 Fax: 520.529.2141

January 17, 2013 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS STANDARD AND ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. John Patricki DEUR Program Coordinator 1110 W. Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Re: Results of 2012 Annual Pond Cover Inspection, Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. Cochise County, Arizona. Dear Mr. Patricki: Pursuant to the August 22, 2008 Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction For Property with Engineering Control and Non-Residential Restriction (DEUR), Hargis + Associates, Inc. (H+A), on behalf of Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. (ANPI), is submitting this annual inspection report for the above-referenced property. As required by the DEUR, this report:

• Describes the condition of the engineering controls and the status of the institutional controls for the pond areas;

• States the nature and cost of maintenance activities performed on engineering controls during the 2012 calendar year;

• Includes photographs depicting the condition of the engineering controls; and

• Describes the status of the financial assurance mechanism and certifies that the financial assurance mechanism is being maintained.

The main text of the DEUR is provided (Attachment A). Native soil covers were installed over Ponds 1A and 1B, Ponds 2A and 2B, Ponds 3A and 3B, Pond 7, and the Dynagel Pond in accordance with the June 13, 2006, Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work Plan for Pond Soils and Sediments (CERCLA Media Component 3 and Formerly Active Ponds) Revision 1.0 (H+A, 2006). Once this work was completed, the boundaries between adjacent Ponds 1A and 1B, Ponds 2A and 2B, and Ponds 3A and 3B were eliminated (Figures 1 and 2). Therefore, for the purposes of this report, Ponds 1A and 1B, Ponds 2A and 2B, and Ponds 3A and 3B will be referred to as the Pond 1, Pond 2, and Pond 3 areas, respectively.

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. John Patricki January 17, 2013 Page 2

Institutional and Engineering Controls Pursuant to the DEUR, institutional controls limit the use of the ANPI property to non-residential use and prohibit the excavation or other disturbance of the pond covers. The institutional controls also prohibit the installation of shallow aquifer wells on the ANPI property except for wells used in the remediation and/or monitoring of the shallow aquifer. Engineering controls include the native soil pond covers, erosion control devices, perimeter fencing, and warning signs around the ponds. In accordance with the April 22, 2008, Soils Engineering Control Plan (H+A, 2008) quarterly maintenance requirements for the engineering controls include:

• Inspecting erosion control devices installed on the pond covers for damage or wear;

• Inspecting surface and side slopes of the pond covers for development of erosional channels;

• Repairing or replacing damaged erosion control devices;

• Replacing damaged, missing, or illegible warning signs;

• Filling in and compacting erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep; and

• Repairing any damage to the facility perimeter fence. Quarterly inspections of engineering and institutional controls were performed by ANPI in March, June, and September 2012. The annual inspection was performed by H+A in December 2012. On March 23, 2012 the following findings were documented:

• Pond 1, 2, 3, 7 and Dynagel covers were in good condition and no maintenance was performed.

• Erosional channels were observed at Pond 7 (less than 2 inches deep).

• Erosion control devices were in good condition on all Pond covers.

• Perimeter fencing and warning signs were in good condition.

On June 20, 2012 the following findings were documented:

• Erosion control devices showed signs of deterioration at Ponds 2 and 3.

• Erosional channels were observed at Pond 7 (less than 2 inches deep).


On September 13, 2012 the following findings were documented:

• Pond 1 and 3 covers were in good condition. Erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed along the southeastern side slopes. Maintenance was performed.

• Erosional channels were observed at Pond 2 and Dynagel.

• Erosion control devices showed signs of deterioration at Ponds 1 and 3. Maintenance was performed.



On December 18, 2012 the following findings were documented:

• Pond 1 cover was in good condition. Erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed along the southeastern side slope. Maintenance was performed.

• Pond 2 cover was in good condition. Erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed along the southern side slopes. Maintenance was performed.

• Pond 3 cover was in good condition, however, erosion control devices need replaced throughout middle sections of the cover. Maintenance was performed.

• Along the Pond 3 eastern and southern side slopes erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed. Maintenance was performed.

• Along the Pond 7 eastern and southern side slopes erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed. Also, additional erosion control devices were needed along the southern end of the pond. Maintenance was performed.

• Dynagel Pond cover was in good condition. Erosional channels greater than 2 inches deep were observed along the southern and northern side slopes. Maintenance was performed.

• Perimeter fencing and warning signs were in good condition. Restoration Costs

ANPI completed all repairs identified during the 2012 quarterly inspections. The total cost for repairs was approximately $1551 which included $766 in materials and approximately $785 for labor. Photographs of Engineering Controls

Photographs of the Pond covers and engineering controls taken during the December 2012 annual inspection are provided (Attachment B). Financial Assurance

ANPI has provided financial assurance using a Certificate of Deposit (CD) naming ADEQ as the Beneficiary. ANPI may not withdraw any portion of the principal without the written consent of the Director of ADEQ.


Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. Sincerely,


Anthony Rossi, PE C53826 Senior Engineer TRR/DLG Attachments: Figure 1. Location of Covered Ponds

Figure 2. Location of Covered and Former Ponds

Attachment A. Declaration of Environmental Use Restriction For Property with Engineering Control and Non-Residential Restriction

Attachment B. 2012 Photograph Documentation cc: Andria Benner, EPA (via Federal Express and Electronic Mail) Bob Wallin, ADEQ (via Federal Express and Electronic Mail)


References Hargis + Associates, Inc. (H+A), 2006. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work Plan for Pond Soils and

Sediments (CERCLA Media Component 3 and Formerly Active Ponds) Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona, Revision 1.0. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona, June 13, 2006.

_____, 2008. Soils Engineering Control Plan Apache Powder Superfund Site Cochise County, Arizona.

Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona, April 22, 2008.


1

FIGURES

Pond 7

Dynagel

POND 3

POND 2POND 1

LOCATION OF COVERED PONDS


FIGURE 1ARC130.139 -1B

12/09

BENSON, AZ

EXPLANATION

³0 250 500

FeetPREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______

POND COVERS

130.139BAS EMR

POND 3B

POND 2B

POND 3A

POND 2A

POND 1BPOND 1A

LOCATION OF COVERED ANDFORMER PONDS


FIGURE 2ARC130.139 -1C

12/09

BENSON, AZ

EXPLANATION

³0 125 250

FeetPREP BY ______ REV BY ______ RPT NO ______

POND COVERS

130.139BAS EMR

FORMERLY ACTIVE PONDS


1

ATTACHMENT A

DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL USE RESTRICTION FOR PROPERTY WITH ENGINEERING

CONTROL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTION


ATTACHMENT B 2012 PHOTOGRAPH DOCUMENTATION


Pond 7

12/18/12

Dynagel

12/18/12


Pond 1

12/18/12

Pond 1

12/18/12


Pond 2

12/18/12

Pond 2

12/18/12


Pond 3

12/18/12

Pond 3

12/18/12


APPENDIX G

2012 WELL INVENTORY UPDATE

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC. HYDROGEOLOGY ENGINEERING 1820 East River Road Suite 220 Tucson, AZ 85718 Phone: 520.881.7300 Fax: 520.529.2141

Other Offices: Mesa, AZ San Diego, CA

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS December 5, 2012 Andria Benner Remedial Project Manager US EPA, Region 9 Superfund Division SFD-6-2 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Re: 2012 Well Inventory Update, Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona Dear Ms. Benner: As directed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency1 (EPA), Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc (ANPI) has completed its 2012 well inventory update. The well inventory area surrounds the Apache Powder Superfund Site and comprises an area of approximately 386 square miles. The primary purposes of the well inventory are to (1) identify shallow aquifer wells in the vicinity of the ANPI study area, and (2) track well development and construction as it may relate to human exposure pathways associated with contaminated groundwater associated with the Apache Powder Superfund Site. The well inventory comprises an assemblage of well information managed in both electronic and hardcopy formats. The electronic media are stored within Microsoft Access Database and a Geographic Information System (GIS) based on ArcView 10 architecture. The hardcopy media consist of records contained within the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ (ADWR) Imaged Records. ADWR’s Imaged Records consist of scanned documents and correspondence between the well owner and ADWR. The following paragraphs describe the well inventory.

1 EPA, 2005. Amendment To Record of Decision Apache Powder Superfund Site Benson, Arizona. September 2005.


Ms. Andria Benner December 5, 2012 Page 2

INPUT DATA

Data sources for the well inventory include the ADWR Wells 55 database, Groundwater Site Inventory (GWSI) database, and field data collected by ANPI. The GWSI database was originally created by the U.S. Geological Survey, but is now managed by ADWR. The ADWR Wells 55 database contains a large number of records, including registry IDs that have no associated imaged record. The database is not site-verified. It also includes all Notices of Intent (NOI) filed with ADWR. In addition to actual, completed water wells, NOIs may represent exploratory borings, dry wells that were never completed as water wells, foundation borings, denied or cancelled NOIs, etc. Additionally, property owners sometimes file NOIs, but do not actually drill the petitioned well. On the other hand, occasionally NOIs are filed with and accepted by ADWR and the well is actually completed, but the well driller does not file a well driller report with ADWR. ANPI routinely receives and reviews NOIs provided by Arizona Department of Environmental Water Quality (ADEQ). These NOIs are those that represent wells within a specified distance from the shallow aquifer which ADEQ review was requested as a matter of assuring against human exposure by plume avoidance or against aquifer cross-contamination via special construction design. The GWSI database is site-verified, but it is not nearly as comprehensive as the Wells 55 database. GWSI data was used to supplement Wells 55 data in the ANPI well inventory and to verify that a well does exist. Field data collected by ANPI, such as the 1990 Site Survey including a private well survey and quarterly groundwater monitoring knowledge, was used to correct known mistakes within the ADWR Wells 55 database or to verify the existence of a well. Additionally, reconnaissance is ongoing. ANPI personnel continuously monitor drilling activities within the area. WELL LOCATION METHOD

ADWR’s method of well location is to position the well within the center of the smallest division of the reported location. As a result, the cadastral location of wells reported in the Wells 55 database is not exact. For example, if the location in the driller’s report is given as Township/Range/Section/160 Acres/40 acres/10 acres, its accuracy is assumed to be precise to within ten acres and its location is plotted in the center of that ten acre area. Often, locations are not reported to within ten acres. Thus, a map produced from well locations taken from the Wells 55 database often produces a grid like configuration. In fact, a well with only the Township/Range/Section information could be mislocated by as much as 0.7 miles. METHODOLOGY

An area including the Apache Powder Superfund Site study area was selected to assure inclusion of all potentially relevant records. This area is considerably larger than the actual extent of the study area as well as the affected portions of the shallow aquifer because it is intended to have a substantial buffer. ADWR’s GIS shapefile was therefore “clipped” to include an area that is approximately 386 square miles, or approximately a 20-mile by 20-mile area, with the ANPI study area at the approximate center (Figure 1). All wells within this area are incorporated within the electronic well inventory.



A second, more focused area was defined within the broader area, and incorporates the ANPI study area, the affected areas of the shallow aquifer, and a buffer zone. This area is oriented roughly parallel to the course of the San Pedro River (Figure 2). This second area is referred to as the “detailed” extent. All wells within this zone are included in both the electronic and hardcopy components of the well inventory. In addition to the hardcopy media, any wells within the detailed extent area having an available ADWR Imaged Record were hyperlinked to the corresponding well record. This provision facilitates viewing of further information for selected wells in the GIS. Further descriptive information was added to the database as a means of identifying relevant information for each well within the inventory. This descriptive information includes the following categories:

Aquifer

Conf_aqui

Conf_loc

Comments

Drill_log

Loc_update

Location These categories are described in the following sections. “Aquifer” defines the “water-bearing zone” tapped by the well. The “water-bearing zones” include the shallow aquifer, deep, or other aquifer. In some instances, the wells may be classified as dry and in others, as unknown. If the well depth was reported as less than 200 feet, the well was assumed to be tapping the shallow aquifer, initially. Further scrutiny of the well log, location, depth-to-water, etc. as reported in the Imaged Record or as ascertained from field knowledge was then made to verify shallow aquifer assignment. If the well depth was reported as greater than 200 feet, the well was assumed to be tapping the deep aquifer. In some cases, generally ones with field knowledge, the well was classified as “other” referring to wells in the ANPI perched zone or the design confirmation piezometer, monitoring the ANPI Northern Area Remediation System. If the well was described as “artesian” or “flowing” in the water well report, but well depth was not reported, its category was assigned as “unknown,” because in technical terms, artesian simply means that the water level in the well is above a confining unit. This condition has been observed to exist both in the shallow and deep aquifers according to location and geologic conditions. If the well drilling did not encounter water, the well was classified as “dry.” The Conf_aqui category contains information concerning a well’s existence and history. For instance, if a well was verified by ANPI or by GWSI, it is so identified. It is also indicated if ADWR’s Imaged Record only has an existing well registration, NOI, or if it contains a well driller’s report among other things.



The Conf_loc category declares the actual confidence in the existence of a particular well. It is largely contingent on information reported in the conf_aqui category. One of five well groupings was assigned: “well not evaluated,” “confirmed well,” “unconfirmed well,” “aborted/cancelled well,” or “abandoned well.” Most wells outside the detailed extent were assigned to “well not evaluated” grouping. Wells that have been site verified by either ANPI or the GWSI database, have a well driller report, or have an existing well registration were assigned to the “confirmed well” grouping. Wells that only have a NOI, or there is no Imaged Record, were assigned to the “unconfirmed well” grouping. Any well with an NOI denial or cancellation were assigned to the “aborted/cancelled well” grouping. Finally, wells with a Notice of Abandonment or known ANPI exploratory boreholes were assigned to the “abandoned wells” grouping. The Comments category is for adding notes, specifically if a category originally filled out by ADWR was changed based on additional or new information. The Drill_log category indicates whether a driller’s report is available for the particular well. The column simply indicates “yes,” “no,” or “unknown.” This provision facilitates searches for wells located within a certain area that have additional information available in the form of the driller’s report. The Loc_update category indicates whether a well location has been updated by ANPI. The column simply indicates “yes” or “no.” In 2006, ANPI acquired an extensive set of Cochise county assessor maps. The assessor maps, imaged records, and field knowledge combined allowed for many shallow well locations within the detailed extent to be updated manually. The Location category indicates which general area the well can be located, the study area, the northern area, the eastern area, or the northeastern area. WELLS POTENTIALLY AT RISK

As stated earlier, the well inventory was designed with the intent to identify shallow aquifer wells within the vicinity of the ANPI study area that may be within the extent of the nitrate-nitrogen (nitrate-N) plume. After each well update, GIS is used to “filter” out deep or unknown wells within the detailed extent area. A determination of “wells potentially at risk” is based on an overlay of the extent of the limits of nitrate-N in concentrations exceeding ten milligrams per liter (10 mg/l) within the shallow aquifer, based on the most current sampling and analysis from quarterly monitoring rounds outlined in performance monitoring plans2. If any of the new, confirmed shallow wells are within, or reasonably close to, the extent of the plume, the well owners are notified. “Reasonably close to” is defined as a buffer zone of 0.7 miles from the extent of the nitrate-N plume. This buffer was chosen on the basis of maximum error associated with ADWR’s convention of assuming the well is located at the center of the smallest areal division reported. Specifically, if only the Township, Range, and Section are reported, the distance from the center of the section to the corner is 0.7 miles.

2 H+A, 2007. Southern Area Performance Monitoring Plan Revision 2.0. September 19, 2007. H+A, 2009. Performance Monitoring Plan for Monitored Natural Attenuation of Shallow Aquifer Groundwater in The Northern Area of the Apache Powder Superfund Site Revision 1.0. February 12, 2009.



RESULTS OF THE 2012 WELL INVENTORY UPDATE

The current well inventory, based on the April 27 2012 Wells 55 download from the ADWR, website consists of 2,142 wells (Figure 3). Of those 2,142 wells, 1,110 are within the detailed extent. Within the detailed extent, 236 wells are confirmed shallow wells (Figure 4), 486 are confirmed deep wells (Figure 5), 23 are confirmed other aquifer wells, and the remaining are classified as unknown, aborted/cancelled, or abandoned wells. Based on the May 2012 nitrate-N plume, the inventory identified no new wells as being considered at risk (Figure 6). Five additional registration records were added to the database between 2011 and 2012. Of those five new records, three were within the detailed extent, including wells 55-220929, 55-221249 and 55-913476. Wells 55-220929 and 55-913476 were confirmed as deep aquifer wells according to driller’s reports. Well 55-221249 had an NOI which proposed a deep aquifer well according to ADWR image records; however, a driller’s report was not provided. Well 55-221249 is located within the study area boundary, south of the ANPI property boundary west of the San Pedro River very close to the western edge of the shallow aquifer boundary (Figure 6). The remaining three wells were not evaluated since they were not located in the detailed extent. The nitrate-N plume delineated on the basis of groundwater analyses collected during the May 2012 quarterly performance monitoring round was used to evaluate shallow wells completely within the plume and within 0.7 miles of the plume perimeter. 83 shallow wells were confirmed within this area (Figure 7; Table 1). 34 of the 83 shallow wells belong to either ANPI or are within the ANPI performance monitoring network. A significant number of the remaining wells are located east of the San Pedro River and south of the Dragoon Wash (aka Pima Wash). Due to the groundwater flow pattern from the St. David Area, it is believed that this area is at minimal risk from the nitrate-N plume. The owners of the remaining wells have been contacted by ANPI to determine the operational status of the wells and the type of groundwater usage. All wells within the detailed extent identified in the 2009 through 2011 well inventory updates as new registrations were reviewed in 2012 for new information concerning well owner information, well abandonment, confirmed drilling, or well cancellation. The well record 55-217872 indentified in the 2009 update was queried from the ADWR image records for a drillers report. There is still no image record for this well. Well records 55-219483, 55-220063, and 55-911722 indentified in the 2010 update were also queried for updated information. There were no updates to the image records for 55-219483, 55-220063 or 55-911722. Well records 55-220168 and 55-220222 indentified in the 2011 update were also queried for updated information. There were no updates to the image records for these wells. INVENTORY UPDATES

The entire well inventory is updated on an annual basis. This update involves acquiring a database update using the latest ADWR Wells 55 database by downloading it from ADWR’s URL site: https://gisweb.azwater.gov/WellRegistry/MapHelp.aspx#WellDownload. Next a query for new wells, a review of the imaged Records for new wells, and organizing hardcopies of Imaged Records for new wells is performed. This update is performed in a manner that does not break the hyperlinks existing between wells and portable document files (pdf) of the Imaged Records.



Every annual update also reevaluates the Imaged Records of the previous year’s wells at potential risk to check for ownership updates, abandonment, etc. A new search for wells at potential risk using the most current nitrate-N plume is performed on the confirmed shallow wells. Any new wells at potential risk are reported along with any updates to wells on previous year’s potential risk list in the annual letter report. Approximately every five years, a more extensive update will be performed. Five-year updates will be timed to coincide with EPA’s Five-Year Review. This activity will update the Imaged Records for wells already within the inventory, as appropriate, and will involve updating the database, reviewing Imaged Records for all wells, and organizing hardcopies of all new and updated wells. ADWR’s Imaged Records are continually updated with new ownership, abandonment data, etc. This update was performed during 2012. One hundred twenty nine (129) records were updated in the database based on an extensive search of all locations within the detailed extent. Of those 129, 126 were updated for a change of ownership status. Location 55-503968 and 55-631780 were abandoned in 2010 and 55-644151 was abandoned in 2012. All hard copies of the imaged records have been reviewed and confirmed though the ADWR database. The database has also been updated. The enclosed CD contains the well inventory Database and the GIS in a PDF format. A “readme” file is included on the CD. This file contains instructions for utilizing the layers function of the PDF file and further instructions for the well inventory. The PDF file has several queries included with it represented by individual layers. These queries include: shallow, confirmed wells; deep, confirmed wells; other, confirmed wells; unconfirmed wells; aborted/cancelled wells; and abandoned wells. The PDF format does not support hyperlinking; therefore, the ADWR Imaged Records are not included on this CD. Please contact me if there are any questions concerning this report. Sincerely,


LEO S. LEONHART, PHD, RG Project Director

Enclosures: Table 1 Figures 1 through 7 Compact Data Disk

cc w/encl: PMP Distribution

LSL:DAT

REGISTRYIDCADASTRAL LOCATION

WELLDEPTH INSTALLED COMMENTS LASTNAME FIRSTNAMEDRILLER REPORT AVAILABLE

IN IMAGED RECORDSLOCATION

NONE TO REPORT

NONE TO REPORT

NONE TO REPORT

218794 D(18-21)06ABB 140 4/20/2009 Well location is East of SPR south of U.S. 80. Trejo Damon YES SA

216741 D(18-20)01AAC NOT Cancelled in September 2009 McRae Lorin NO SA

212356 D(17-20)36ADC 90 6/23/2006 ANP MW-40 NO SA212632 D(17-20)36ABB 129 6/20/2006 ANP MW-41B NO SA212633 D(17-20)36ABB 50 6/22/2006 ANP MW-41A NO SA215007 D(17-20)36AAC 30 5/10/2007 USGS Piezometer YES SA215008 D(17-20)36AAD 36 5/10/2007 USGS Piezometer YES SA215848 D(18-21)07DCD 77 7/17/2007 ANP MW-39 NO SA215849 D(17-20)36DCC 133 7/16/2007 ANP MW-42 NO SA605933 D(18-21)05AA* 150 4/1/1956 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon WHITEHEAD,G N NO E605934 D(18-21)05AA* 100 4/1/1956 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon WHITEHEAD,G N NO E628281 D(17-20)23DCA 100 1/1/1956 Well location north of narrows; previously owned by MaxWHETSTONE PARTNERS, LLP NO N628286 D(17-20)23DCA 100 1/1/1955 Well location north of narrows KARTCHNER, MAX,J NO N

85222 D(18-21)06BAA 75 10/20/1980 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY, JIM, YES SA204298 D(18-21)06DBB 68 ANP MW-36 YES SA206932 D(18-21)06AAB 0 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ESLER-FLOWERS FAYE J YES SA208189 D(17-20)25DAC 130 7/15/2005 ANP MW-38 YES N501649 D(17-20)36DDD 125 6/24/1982 CGMP Private Well HIGGINBOTHAM, RONALD,B YES SA503019 D(18-21)05CAD 130 6/30/1982 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon KARTCHNER PB & SD YES SA503534 D(17-20)36DDC 125 8/16/1982 CGMP Private Well SCOTT,J YES SA503601 D(17-20)36AAA 140 8/10/1982 CGMP Private Well JACOBS, BENJAMIN JR, YES SA504183 D(17-20)36AAA 77 4/8/1983 CGMP Private Well ACUNA,E B YES SA505194 D(17-20)36AAA 45 4/15/1983 CGMP Private Well ACUNA,E B YES SA508401 D(17-20)36CCA 140 8/3/1984 CGMP Private Well COOPER PAT YES SA513537 D(18-21)06ADA 240 3/26/1986 CGMP Private Well WHITE, EULAS,E YES SA518592 D(17-20)36DBC 109 8/5/1987 CGMP Private Well THOMPSON, RUSSELL,V YES SA528009 D(18-21)07CDC 62 5/11/1990 ANP MW-13 APACHE POWDER CO, YES SA528018 D(18-21)06BCC 102 5/6/1990 ANP MW-08 APACHE POWDER CO, YES SA528019 D(18-21)08CBB 132 5/9/1990 ANP MW-14 APACHE POWDER CO, YES SA528022 D(18-21)06DBD 62 5/8/1990 ANP MW-11 APACHE POWDER CO, YES SA

TABLE 1


WELLS WITHIN 0.7 MILES OF THE NITRATE-N PLUME MAY 2008





ANPI SEPTEMBER 2012 WELL INVENTORYSHALLOW WELLS WITHIN 0.7 MILES OF THE NITRATE-N PLUME

WELLS WITHIN 0.7 MILES OF THE MAY 2007 NITRATE-N PLUME THAT WERE ALSO INCLUDED WITH THE NOVEMBER 2005 NITRATE-N PLUME


Page: 1 of 3




TABLE 1



530043 D(18-21)06BBD 120 7/17/1991ANP evaluated property owner for a deep replacement well was found to have a deep well (see 55-530042).

MITCHELL, HUGH,A YES SA

530522 D(18-21)06BCD 140 2/11/1991 ANP MW-17 APACHE NITROGEN PROD, YES SA530523 D(18-21)06BCD 140 2/10/1991 ANP MW-18 APACHE NITROGEN PROD, YES SA556575 D(18-20)01ADA 70 6/11/1997 McRae's 2nd Shallow Well MCRAE LORIN P YES SA562927 D(18-21)06CBB 0 ANP MW-19 APACHE NITROGEN PROD, NO SA562928 D(18-21)06BBD 100 7/10/1997 ANP MW-20 APACHE NITROGEN PROD, NO SA562930 D(18-21)06BCC 0 ANP SEW-1 APACHE NITROGEN PROD, YES SA569824 D(17-20)36DAD 0 CGMP Private Well OHLDE LYLE P & BELIND NO SA

570135 D(17-20)25BDA 130 9/25/1998Well has been evaluated for CGMP. Well was found to have no electricty to run pump. Owner uses a deep well for domestic purposes.

MCCLURE LAWRENCE M YES N

574517 D(17-20)25BAD 110 10/20/1999 CGMP Private Well SPEARS FRANK D YES N574588 D(18-21)07DAC 0 ANP EXB-4b / MW-24 NO SA574589 D(18-21)08CBB 0 ANP MW-22 NO SA576951 D(18-21)06ABA 120 12/18/1999 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ANDERSON RUSSELL Y YES SA577270 D(18-21)06BCB 128 12/27/1999 CGMP Private Well HAYMORE THOMAS S YES SA579872 D(18-21)08BBC 130 6/15/2000 ANP MW-26 YES SA579874 D(18-21)08BBC 160 6/15/2000 ANP MW-25 YES SA579877 D(18-21)08BBC 130 6/15/2000 ANP MW-27 YES SA594006 D(18-21)08BCB 78 9/24/2002 ANP MW-33 YES SA594007 D(18-21)06DBD 45 9/11/2002 ANP MW-34 YES SA594008 D(18-21)06BDA 54 9/17/2002 ANP MW-35 YES SA594574 D(17-21)31DDD 140 3/4/2003 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY ANDREW YES SA594823 D(17-21)31DCC 155 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BRIMHALL JERRY & RUTH YES SA596097 D(18-21)06ABA 118 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon TREJO DAMON YES SA604231 D(18-21)05DCC 110 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon GIBBENS,M L NO604232 D(18-21)05DCC 65 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon GIBBSONS,M L NO607625 D(18-21)06AD* 80 9/30/1962 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon; Wel WHITE,E E NO SA607854 D(17-21)31DDA 80 8/1/1939 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon GOODMAN,D R NO E607856 D(18-21)06AAA 60 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon JUDD,J V NO SA607860 D(17-21)31DCA 132 2/2/1950 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MC RAE,G A NO E608438 D(18-21)05BDD 95 1/1/1949 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon RAUSCH,V E NO E609235 D(18-21)06DAC 108 3/31/1977 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MERRILL,F NO SA609236 D(18-21)05CBB 115 1/1/1958 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MERRILL,F NO SA609573 D(17-21)31DDD 125 8/1/1964 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ALARCON,R NO SA610200 D(17-21)31DDC 140 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon FENN,G L NO SA610372 D(18-21)08BAB 110 7/6/1964 CGMP Private Well TENOPIR,F NO SA610911 D(17-20)36ADD 74 10/15/1979 CGMP Private Well (Gaynor) THOMPSON,D A NO SA611267 D(17-20)36ACC 100 10/1/1979 CGMP Private Well (water level only) THOMPSON,R V NO SA611921 D(18-21)05CA* 110 6/1/1976 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon KARTCHNER, PAUL,B NO SA612814 D(18-21)06ABB 100 1/1/1929 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY,R NO SA


Page: 2 of 3




TABLE 1



618510 D(18-21)06AD* 0 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon SMITH,S G NO SA

619450 D(18-21)06ACA 104 10/4/1976Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon; Included in 1990 Inventory

RICHY,R L NO SA

620712 D(18-21)06B** 100 1/1/1977 CGMP Private Well KEMPTON,G J NO SA620713 D(18-21)06B** 40 1/1/1931 Kempton/Jones Well not in CGMP KEMPTON,G J NO SA620728 D(17-21)31DDC 150 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon SANDVE,P A NO SA623460 D(17-21)31DDB 135 5/1/1970 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MORTENSON REYNOLD MAX NO E623461 D(17-21)31DDB 235 6/1/1970 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon PROCTOR JAMES NO E625379 D(18-21)05BC* 160 1/1/1970 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BRANCH & ROSS,Q M NO SA625380 D(18-21)05BC* 200 1/1/1969 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BRANCH & ROSS, NO SA625744 D(18-21)05CA* 120 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon KARTCHNER, PAUL,B NO SA627686 D(18-21)06ABB 105 1/1/1929 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY,E J NO SA627698 D(18-21)06BAA 105 1/1/1954 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY,E J NO SA627699 D(18-21)06ABB 60 1/1/1951 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY,E J NO SA627700 D(18-21)06BAA 105 1/1/1980 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MAYBERRY,E J NO SA628081 D(18-21)08BAA 132 2/28/1972 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MILLER BROS'S RANCH, NO SA628285 D(17-20)24CCD 118 1/1/1977 CGMP Private Well KARTCHNER, MAX,J NO N628464 D(18-21)06AD* 100 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon SMITH,G W NO SA629006 D(17-20)36CAA 108 2/2/1980 CGMP Private Well HYDER, TOMMIE LEE, NO SA631237 D(17-21)31CC* 200 4/1/1949 Well location is East of SPR and near Dragoon RILEY, ROBERT,A NO SA631238 D(17-21)31CC* 200 4/1/1949 Well location is East of SPR and near Dragoon RILEY, ROBERT,A NO SA631239 D(17-21)31CC* 200 Well location is East of SPR and near Dragoon RILEY, ROBERT,A NO SA631240 D(17-21)31CC* 200 Well location is East of SPR and near Dragoon RILEY, ROBERT,A NO SA631273 D(18-21)06BAA 95 6/6/1962 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ALEXANDER,J W NO SA631274 D(18-21)06BAA 30 12/31/1927 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ALEXANDER, JAMES & B, NO SA631275 D(18-21)06BAB 50 1/1/1925 CGMP Private Well ALEXANDER,J W NO SA631276 D(18-21)06BAA 50 6/1/1942 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ALEXANDER,J W NO SA631775 D(18-21)06AAB 125 12/31/1936 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BRYCE, DANIEL,V NO SA631777 D(18-21)06AAB 100 11/23/1977 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BRYCE, DANIEL,V NO SA631778 D(18-21)06ADB 100 11/23/1977 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon TREJO,A J NO SA631796 D(17-21)31CCC 24 1/1/1930 Well location is East of SPR and near Dragoon RILEY, ROBERT,A NO SA632942 D(18-21)05DBB 111 1/1/1980 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon KARTCHNER,G R NO E641700 D(17-21)31DD* 100 12/7/1974 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MERRILL,G E NO E643450 D(18-21)05*** 50 1/1/1953 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BICKERT,M E NO E645416 D(18-21)06AAB 110 5/2/1976 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon BURG ROBERT EDWARD NO SA647038 D(18-21)06AD* 80 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon SMITH,G W NO SA647428 D(18-21)05BBC 125 3/1/1965 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MORTENSON,D O NO SA647579 D(18-21)06AAA 100 9/1/1980 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon SMITH,G L NO SA648409 D(18-21)05DC* 40 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon MARSHALL,C M NO648982 D(18-21)06AA* 80 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon ZYWAR ALBERT NO SA649691 D(18-21)06*** 120 Carnes shallow well CARNES,P L NO SA650038 D(18-21)08BAA 180 Well location is East of SPR and South of Dragoon PATTERSON & BUSH III, NO SA806011 D(18-21)06BCB 100 12/31/1971 CGMP Private Well WOOTEN, RANDAL, NO SA606590 D(18-20)01AAA 138 6/20/1980 CGMP Private Well MCRAE LORIN P YES SA

FOOTNOTE:* ACREAGE WAS NOT SPECIFIED NE = NORTHEASTERN AREASA = STUDY AREA SPR = SAN PEDRO RIVERN = NORTHERN AREAE = EASTERN AREA


Page: 3 of 3

EXTENT OF WELL INVENTORY

0 5,500 11,000

Feet

¢



BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: BAM

PROJECT: 130.104

EXPLANATION

Inferred Shallow Aquifer Boundary

Study Area Boundary

Shallow Aquifer Boundary

Property Boundary


2006 Google Earth Imagery 8/27/2012

Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.104WellInvetory\2012WellInventory\Figures\SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig1.mxd

File: SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig1

0 3,000 6,000

Feet

¢

DETAILED EXTENT OF WELL INVENTORY


BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: BAM

PROJECT: 130.104

EXPLANATION

Study Area Boundary



Property Boundary

Detailed Extent of Well Inventory


2006 Google Earth Imagery 8/27/2012


Path:\\Phoenix02\d-drive\ProjectStorage\130-ANP\ANPGIS\Figures\130.104WellInvetory\2012WellInventory\Figures\SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig2.mxd

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")")

")")")")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")")")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")") ")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

") ")")")

")

") ") ")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")")")")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")")")")")")

")

")")")")")")")")

")")

")

")")") ")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

") ")

")")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")")")")")

")

")")")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")")

")

")

")

") ")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")")")

") ")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")")

")")")")

")")

")")

")

")")

")")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

") ")

")")")")")

")

")

")")")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")")

")")

")

")

") ")

")")

")

")")")

")")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")")")")")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")")")")

")")")")

")")

")")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")")

")

")")") ")")")")

")

")

")")

")")")")")")")")

")

")")")

")")

")")")

")")

")

")")")

")")")")")")

") ")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")")

")")

")")

")")

")")")")")") ")")

")")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")")")")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")")")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")")")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")")")

")")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")


0 5,000 10,000

Feet

¢

ALL WELLS WITHIN

THE WELL INVENTORY


BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: LSL

PROJECT: 130.104

EXPLANATION

") 2012 Well Inventory



Ephemeral Wash

Property Boundary


Study Area

San Pedro River


2006GoogleEarthImagery


Date: 9/7/2012Path: \\Phoenix02\d-drive\Project Storage\130 - ANP\ANP GIS\Figures\130.104 Well Invetory\2012 Well Inventory\Figures\SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig3.mxd

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

") ")

")")

") ")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")

")")")")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

0 3,000 6,000

Feet

¢

CONFIRMED SHALLOW WELLS

WITHIN THE DETAILED EXTENT


BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: LSL

PROJECT: 130.104

EXPLANATION

") Confirmed Shallow Well 2012 Inventory Location

Study Area


Ephemeral Wash


Property Boundary

San Pedro River



Date: 9/7/2012


Path: \\Phoenix02\d-drive\Project Storage\130 - ANP\ANP GIS\Figures\130.104 Well Invetory\2012 Well Inventory\Figures\SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig4.mxd

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")")")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

") ")

")

")

")") ")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")")

")")

")")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

0 3,000 6,000

Feet

¢

CONFIRMED DEEP WELLS

WITHIN THE DETAILED EXTENT


BENSON, ARIZONA

REV BY: LSL

PROJECT: 130.104

EXPLANATION

") Confirmed Deep Well 2012 Inventory Location

Study Area


Ephemeral Wash


Property Boundary

San Pedro River



Date: 9/7/2012File: SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig5

Path: \\Phoenix02\d-drive\Project Storage\130 - ANP\ANP GIS\Figures\130.104 Well Invetory\2012 Well Inventory\Figures\SEPT2012_wellinvupdate_fig5.mxd

!(

")

!(

")

!(

")


0 5,500 11,000

Feet

¢

2012 WELL INVENTORY UPDATE

WELLS IDENTIFIED IN

FULL AND DETAILED EXTENTS


BENSON, ARIZONA




EXPLANATION

Study Area


Ephemeral Wash


Property Boundary

San Pedro River

May 2012 Approximate Limit of Nitrate-NitrogenExceeding 10 milligrams per liter



") 2012 Additions - Full Extent

!( 2012 Additions - Detailed Extent

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")

")")

")

")

")")")

") ")")

")")

")")")")

")

")")")")

")")")")

")")

")

")")

")

") ")

")")

")")

0 3,000 6,000

Feet

¢

SHALLOW CONFIRMED WELLS

WITHIN 0.7 MILES OF THE MAY 2012

NITRATE-N PLUME


BENSON, ARIZONA




EXPLANATION

Study Area


Ephemeral Wash


Property Boundary

San Pedro River

")

Confirmed Shallow location within0.7 miles of NO3 plume

May 2012 Approximate Limit of Nitrate-NitrogenExceeding 10 miligrams per liter




APPENDIX H

APACHE 2012 COMMUNITY UPDATES

For more information contact Amy Charles at 520-720-2109 or [email protected].

January 2012

Apache Powder Superfund Site Update

The Apache Powder Superfund site is now in routine operation and maintenance. The Northern Area Remediation System is the primary component of the ongoing remedy with extraction from SEW-1 and treatment in the wetland.

The wetlands continue to perform beyond expectations with treatment of nitrates occurring year-round. Following are some performance measures for the Northern Area:

Extracted over 618 million gallons of contaminated groundwater Removed over 597,499 pounds of nitrate-N mass since start-up Nitrate-N concentrations at SEW-1 declined below 100 mg/l Aerial extent of contamination continues to decline

Solar System Performance

In November of 2010 Apache completed construction of solar awnings and a canopy to provide electricity for the Administration Building. At times the system generates more electricity than is consumed, putting the energy back into the grid. With the Performance Based Incentive from SSVEC Apache can actually receive a credit during peak months.

So far the system has generated 93,832 kilowatt hours. That is equivalent to saving:

67,371 kilograms of CO2, 1,688 trees, or 7,600 gallons of gas


APPENDIX I

STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF SOUTHERN AREA

PERFORMANCE DATA FEBRUARY 2007 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2012

2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012MK -140 MK 629 MK 100 MK -223 MK -103

Confidence in trend (%)

100Confidence in

trend (%)100


99.4Confidence in trend (%)

100Confidence in trend (%)

99.8

COV 0.55 COV 0.79 COV 0.58 COV 0.38 COV 0.35MK Trend D MK Trend I MK Trend I MK Trend D MK Trend D

2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012MK -141 MK 520 MK -61 MK -258 MK -3


100Confidence in

trend (%)100


94.3Confidence in trend (%)


52.7

COV 0.49 COV 0.53 COV 0.29 COV 0.52 COV 0.32MK Trend D MK Trend I MK Trend PD MK Trend D MK Trend S

2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012Ln Slope -1.00E-03 Ln Slope 9.20E-04 Ln Slope 3.20E-04 Ln Slope -3.60E-04 Ln Slope -2.40E-04


100Confidence in

trend (%)100




99.6

COV 0.55 COV 0.79 COV 0.58 COV 0.38 COV 0.35LR Trend D LR Trend I LR Trend I LR Trend D LR Trend D

MW-15 ClO4

2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012Ln Slope -8.00E-04 Ln Slope 5.20E-04 Ln Slope -2.20E-04 Ln Slope -4.90E-04 Ln Slope -5.40E-05


100Confidence in

trend (%)100




66.3

COV 0.49 COV 0.53 COV 0.29 COV 0.52 COV 0.32LR Trend D LR Trend I LR Trend D LR Trend D LR Trend S

MW-15 ClO4

Man

n-K

end

all

An

alys

is

MW-15 NO3-N

MW-24 NO3-N

MW-24 ClO4

MW-24 NO3-N


TABLE I1 MAROS SUMMARY RESULTS

MW-15 NO3-N

MW-21 NO3-N MW-23 NO3-N

MW-23 ClO4MW-21 ClO4

MW-24 ClO4MW-21 ClO4 MW-23 ClO4

MW-23 NO3-NMW-21 NO3-N

Lin

ear

Reg

ress

ion

An

alys

is

MW-39 NO3-N

MW-39 ClO4

MW-39 NO3-N

MW-39 ClO4

Consolidation Period:

ND Values:

J Flag Values :

No Time ConsolidationMedianConsolidation Type:

Duplicate Consolidation: Average1/2 Detection Limit

Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

Well

Mann-

Kendall

Trend

Linear

Regression

Trend

Number

of

Detects

Number

of

Samples

Average

Conc.

(mg/L)

Median

Conc.

(mg/L)

All

Samples

"ND" ?

MAROS Statistical Trend Analysis Summary

DLGUser Name:

BensonLocation: ArizonaState:

ANPI 2012 Annual Report MCAProject:

Source/

Tail

NITRATE

MW-15 D D1818S 2.9E+02 3.8E+02 NoMW-21 I I3737S 1.8E+03 1.2E+03 NoMW-23 I I2424T 8.5E+00 6.3E+00 NoMW-24 D D2424T 2.5E+00 2.5E+00 NoMW-39 D D2222T 1.2E+02 1.1E+02 No

PERCHLORATE

MW-15 D D1818S 2.4E-01 2.7E-01 NoMW-21 I I3737S 1.9E-01 1.6E-01 NoMW-23 PD D2323T 3.9E-02 4.0E-02 NoMW-24 D D2525T 6.9E-03 5.0E-03 NoMW-39 S S1919T 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 No

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); No Detectable Concentration (NDC)

The Number of Samples and Number of Detects shown above are post-consolidation values.

Friday, February 08, 2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE

MAROS Mann-Kendall Statistics Summary

DLGUser Name:




ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

Source/

Tail

Coefficient

of Variation

Mann-Kendall

StatisticConfidence

in Trend

Concentration

TrendWell

All

Samples

"ND" ?

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects

NITRATE

S -140 100.0% D0.55MW-15 No18 18S 629 100.0% I0.79MW-21 No37 37T 100 99.4% I0.58MW-23 No24 24T -223 100.0% D0.38MW-24 No24 24T -103 99.8% D0.35MW-39 No22 22

PERCHLORATE

S -141 100.0% D0.49MW-15 No18 18S 520 100.0% I0.53MW-21 No37 37T -61 94.3% PD0.29MW-23 No23 23T -258 100.0% D0.52MW-24 No25 25T -3 52.7% S0.32MW-39 No19 19

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A)-Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); Source/Tail (S/T)


Friday, February 08, 2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2,.2 2006, AFCEE

0.55

Coefficient of Variation:

100.0%

Mann Kendall S Statistic:

-140

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall

Concentration Trend:

(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-15

Effective

DateWell TypeWell Constituent

Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+02

2.0E+02

3.0E+02

4.0E+02

5.0E+02

6.0E+02

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

2/10/2003 4.7E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/19/2003 4.9E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 18/4/2003 4.5E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 1

11/17/2003 4.5E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 3.9E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 4.0E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 3.9E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2005 3.3E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 2.0E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 1.6E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.3E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2008 8.7E+01MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 7.7E+01MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 6.4E+01MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 3.2E+01MW-15 S NITRATE 1 1

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = Non-detect

2/8/2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE

0.49


100.0%


-141

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-15

Effective


Data Table:

0.01

0.1

1

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

2.0E-01

2.5E-01

3.0E-01

3.5E-01

4.0E-01

4.5E-01

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

2/10/2003 3.6E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/19/2003 4.1E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/4/2003 4.2E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 2 2

11/17/2003 3.6E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 3.3E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 3.1E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 2.9E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 3.0E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 2.6E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 2.7E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2005 2.1E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 1.9E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 1.4E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 1.2E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/4/2008 1.2E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 9.7E-02MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 8.1E-02MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 4.3E-02MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 1



0.79


100.0%


629

Confidence in

Trend:

I

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-21

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

10000

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+03

2.0E+03

3.0E+03

4.0E+03

5.0E+03

6.0E+03

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 2.4E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2004 2.8E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 3.3E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 3.5E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 4.9E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 6.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/14/2005 7.8E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 7.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 8.0E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 9.6E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.0E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/6/2007 9.7E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1

11/12/2007 8.9E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2008 9.3E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.2E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/25/2008 1.5E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 1.6E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/2/2009 1.8E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1


Result (mg/L) FlagEffective


Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


5/18/2009 2.2E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/17/2009 2.6E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.7E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 2.8E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 3.0E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 3.5E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 3.4E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 3.4E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1

5/17/2011 3.7E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 3.7E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 3.6E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/20/2012 3.6E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2012 4.2E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/13/2012 4.3E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/6/2012 4.8E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1



0.53


100.0%


520

Confidence in

Trend:

I

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-21

Effective


Data Table:

1.00E-02

1.00E-01

1.00E+00

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

2.0E-01

2.5E-01

3.0E-01

3.5E-01

4.0E-01

4.5E-01

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 6.0E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/17/2004 7.3E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 8.2E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 6.7E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 8.3E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 9.9E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 1.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/14/2005 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 1.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 7.0E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 1.5E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/6/2007 1.6E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1

11/12/2007 1.5E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/4/2008 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 1.4E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/25/2008 1.8E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 2.1E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/2/2009 2.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


5/18/2009 2.4E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/17/2009 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/15/2010 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.7E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2010 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2010 2.8E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/7/2011 4.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1

5/17/2011 2.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/22/2011 2.6E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/20/2012 2.8E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2012 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/13/2012 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/6/2012 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1



0.58


99.4%


100

Confidence in

Trend:

I

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-23

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-11

May

-12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-11

May

-12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

2/10/2003 6.0E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/19/2003 6.6E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 18/4/2003 5.2E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 1

11/18/2003 5.8E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 5.2E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 6.0E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 4.4E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 4.1E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 4.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 3.9E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/14/2005 3.7E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 9.9E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 5.4E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 9.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.8E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 4.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.3E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 1.1E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 1.5E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.1E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 7.3E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 9.6E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


5/15/2012 2.3E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/6/2012 1.2E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 1



0.29


94.3%


-61

Confidence in

Trend:

PD

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-23

Effective


Data Table:

1.00E-02

1.00E-01

1.00E+00

May

-03

Nov-

03

May

-04

Nov-

04

May

-05

May

-06

Feb-0

7

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

May

-10

Nov-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E-02

2.0E-02

3.0E-02

4.0E-02

5.0E-02

6.0E-02

7.0E-02

May

-03

Nov-

03

May

-04

Nov-

04

May

-05

May

-06

Feb-0

7

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

May

-10

Nov-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

5/19/2003 4.4E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/4/2003 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 1

11/18/2003 4.2E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 4.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 4.2E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/14/2005 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 4.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 3.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 4.6E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 5.8E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/12/2007 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 5.3E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 5.1E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 4.7E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.3E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2011 1.7E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 2.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2012 1.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


11/6/2012 2.2E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 1



0.38


100.0%


-223

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-24

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/18/2003 3.5E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 3.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.3E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 3.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 2.8E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 3.0E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 2.9E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2005 2.6E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 2.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 2.0E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 2.1E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 2.1E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 1.6E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 1.3E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 3.0E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52


100.0%


-258

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-24

Effective


Data Table:

1.00E-03

1.00E-02

1.00E-01

1.00E+00

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E-03

4.0E-03

6.0E-03

8.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.2E-02

1.4E-02

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

2/10/2003 1.3E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/19/2003 1.3E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/4/2003 1.2E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 1

11/18/2003 1.1E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 9.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 1.1E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 1.0E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 9.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 8.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 9.5E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2005 7.2E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 6.4E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 4.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 4.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 5.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/12/2007 4.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 4.7E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 4.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 3.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 2.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.2E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2010 4.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.35


99.8%


-103

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-39

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.5E+02

2.0E+02

2.5E+02

3.0E+02

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

8/6/2007 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 2.8E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/4/2008 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2008 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 7.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/2/2009 1.3E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2009 1.5E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/17/2009 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 9.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 1.0E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 9.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2012 8.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 8.1E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/7/2012 7.7E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.32


52.7%


-3

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-39

Effective


Data Table:

0.01

0.1

1

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

2.0E-01

2.5E-01

3.0E-01

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

8/6/2007 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/12/2007 2.5E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/4/2008 1.0E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 8.4E-02MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/25/2008 7.5E-02MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 7.3E-02MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/2/2009 1.3E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 1

5/18/2009 1.3E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/17/2009 1.2E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 1.1E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/15/2010 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 1.2E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2010 1.1E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2010 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/7/2011 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2011 1.3E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/22/2011 1.3E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 9.8E-02MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/6/2012 8.6E-02MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 1



MAROS Linear Regression Statistics Summary

DLGUser Name:



Source/

Tail Ln SlopeStandard

Deviation

Coefficient

of VariationWell

Confidence

in TrendConcentration

Trend

Average

Conc

(mg/L)

Median

Conc

(mg/L)


ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to

All

Samples

"ND" ?

NITRATE

S 2.9E+02 1.6E+02 D-1.0E-03MW-15 0.55 100.0%3.8E+02 NoS 1.8E+03 1.5E+03 I9.2E-04MW-21 0.79 100.0%1.2E+03 NoT 8.5E+00 4.9E+00 I3.2E-04MW-23 0.58 100.0%6.3E+00 NoT 2.5E+00 9.4E-01 D-3.6E-04MW-24 0.38 100.0%2.5E+00 NoT 1.2E+02 4.1E+01 D-2.4E-04MW-39 0.35 99.6%1.1E+02 No

PERCHLORATE

S 2.4E-01 1.2E-01 D-8.0E-04MW-15 0.49 100.0%2.7E-01 NoS 1.9E-01 1.0E-01 I5.2E-04MW-21 0.53 100.0%1.6E-01 NoT 3.9E-02 1.1E-02 D-2.2E-04MW-23 0.29 100.0%4.0E-02 NoT 6.9E-03 3.5E-03 D-4.9E-04MW-24 0.52 100.0%5.0E-03 NoT 1.2E-01 3.8E-02 S-5.4E-05MW-39 0.32 66.3%1.2E-01 No

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Non-detect (ND); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); COV = Coefficient of Variation

Friday, February 08, 2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE

0.55

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-1.0E-03

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-15

Consolidation

DateWell TypeWell Constituent Result (mg/L) Flag

Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects

Consolidation Data Table:

0.0E+00

1.0E+02

2.0E+02

3.0E+02

4.0E+02

5.0E+02

6.0E+02

7.0E+02

8.0E+02

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

MAROS Linear Regression Statistics


ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 4.5E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 3.9E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 4.0E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 3.9E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 3.8E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2005 3.3E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 2.0E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 1.6E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.3E+02MW-15 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2008 8.7E+01MW-15 S NITRATE 1 1


Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = All Samples are Non-detect

Page 1 of 12/8/2013MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE

0.49

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-8.0E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-15

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E-01

2.0E-01

3.0E-01

4.0E-01

5.0E-01

6.0E-01

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Feb-0

7

Feb-0

8

May

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 3.6E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 3.3E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 3.1E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 2.9E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 3.0E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 2.6E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 2.7E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2005 2.1E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 1.9E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 1.4E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 1.2E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/4/2008 1.2E-01MW-15 S PERCHLORATE 1 1




0.79

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

9.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-21

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+03

2.0E+03

3.0E+03

4.0E+03

5.0E+03

6.0E+03

7.0E+03

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 2.4E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2004 2.8E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 3.3E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 3.5E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 4.9E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 6.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/14/2005 7.8E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 7.1E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 8.0E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 9.6E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.0E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/6/2007 9.7E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1

11/12/2007 8.9E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2008 9.3E+02MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1



Result (mg/L) FlagConsolidation


Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


2/2/2009 1.8E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 2.2E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/17/2009 2.6E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.7E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 2.8E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 3.0E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 3.5E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 3.4E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 3.4E+03MW-21 S NITRATE 1 1




0.53

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

5.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-21

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

2.0E-01

2.5E-01

3.0E-01

3.5E-01

4.0E-01

4.5E-01

Feb-0

3

Nov-

03

Aug-

04

May

-05

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/17/2003 6.0E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/17/2004 7.3E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 8.2E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 6.7E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 8.3E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 9.9E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 1.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/14/2005 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 1.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 7.0E-02MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 1.5E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/6/2007 1.6E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1

11/12/2007 1.5E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/4/2008 1.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1





Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


2/2/2009 2.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 2.4E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/17/2009 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/15/2010 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.7E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2010 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2010 2.8E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/7/2011 4.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1

5/17/2011 2.3E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/22/2011 2.6E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 12/20/2012 2.8E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2012 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 18/13/2012 2.9E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 111/6/2012 3.2E-01MW-21 S PERCHLORATE 1 1



0.58

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

3.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-23

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-11

May

-12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/18/2003 5.8E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 5.2E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 6.0E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 4.4E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 4.1E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 4.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 3.9E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/14/2005 3.7E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 9.9E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 5.4E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 9.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 1.8E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 4.5E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.3E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 1.1E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 1.5E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.1E+01MW-23 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 7.3E+00MW-23 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.29

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-2.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-23

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E-02

2.0E-02

3.0E-02

4.0E-02

5.0E-02

6.0E-02

7.0E-02

May

-03

Nov-

03

May

-04

Nov-

04

May

-05

May

-06

Feb-0

7

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

May

-10

Nov-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/18/2003 4.2E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 4.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 4.2E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/14/2005 3.9E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 4.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 3.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 4.6E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 5.8E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/12/2007 4.0E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 5.3E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 5.1E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 4.7E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.3E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2011 1.7E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 2.5E-02MW-23 T PERCHLORATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.38

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-3.6E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-24

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/18/2003 3.5E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2004 3.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/24/2004 3.3E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2004 3.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2004 2.8E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2005 3.0E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2005 2.9E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2005 2.6E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2006 2.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2006 2.0E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 12/12/2007 2.1E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/14/2007 2.1E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 1.6E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/12/2008 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 1.4E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 1.3E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.2E+00MW-24 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-4.9E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-24

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E-03

4.0E-03

6.0E-03

8.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.2E-02

1.4E-02

1.6E-02

Feb-0

3

Aug-

03

Feb-0

4

Aug-

04

Feb-0

5

Nov-

05

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

May

-09

May

-10

May

-11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


11/18/2003 1.1E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/16/2004 9.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/24/2004 1.1E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2004 1.0E-02MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2004 9.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/14/2005 8.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/16/2005 9.5E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2005 7.2E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/15/2006 6.4E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/13/2006 4.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/12/2007 4.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/14/2007 5.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/12/2007 4.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/12/2008 4.7E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/17/2008 4.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/18/2009 3.9E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 2.3E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 2.2E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


11/15/2010 4.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2011 4.0E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2011 3.1E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/6/2012 2.8E-03MW-24 T PERCHLORATE 1 1



0.35

COV:

99.6%

Ln Slope:

-2.4E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-39

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.5E+02

2.0E+02

2.5E+02

3.0E+02

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to


5/12/2008 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2008 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 7.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/2/2009 1.3E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2009 1.5E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/17/2009 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 9.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1

5/17/2011 1.2E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 1.0E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 9.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.1E+02MW-39 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2012 8.8E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 8.1E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


11/7/2012 7.7E+01MW-39 T NITRATE 1 1Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = All Samples are Non-detect


0.32

COV:

66.3%

Ln Slope:

-5.4E-05

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

PERCHLORATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-39

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

2.0E-01

2.5E-01

3.0E-01

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 2/10/2003 11/7/2012to



5/18/2009 1.3E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/17/2009 1.2E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/16/2009 1.1E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/15/2010 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 15/17/2010 1.2E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 18/23/2010 1.1E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 111/15/2010 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 12/7/2011 1.4E-01MW-39 T PERCHLORATE 1 1





Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





APPENDIX J

STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF NORTHERN AREA

PERFORMANCE DATA NOVEMBER 2006 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2012

Table J-1130.140


MW-08 MW-11 MW-13 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-34 SW-03 SW-04 SW-13 D(17-20)23acd D(17-20)23ada D(17-20)25bad D(17-20)36aad2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012

MK -138 16 -41 -132 -121 -179 -49 16 -2 -18 -16 -7 26 -233 147Confidence in

trend (%)100.0% 94.0% 90.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.3% 69.8% 51.2% 70.7% 79.1% 76.4% 93.6% 100.0% 100.0%

COV 0.2 0.81 0.24 0.49 0.59 0.97 0.41 2.26 0.83 0.85 1.08 0.16 0.5 0.49 0.23MK Trend D PI PD D D D D NT S S NT S PI D I

MW-35 MW-36 MW-38 MW-40 MW-41A MW-41B MW-42 SW-14 D(17-20)36caa D(17-20)36caa2 D(17-20)36cdb D(17-20)36ddc D(18-20)01aad D(18-21)06bcb

2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012

MK -17 -130 -265 -15 -223 -203 -53 52 -20 -68 -87 -103 -11 -53Confidence in

trend (%)64.5% 99.9% 100.0% 62.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.6% 99.5% 99.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 97.2% 95.4%

COV 0.49 0.25 0.52 0.72 0.52 0.48 0.27 0.47 0.39 0.45 0.61 0.45 0.5 0.61MK Trend S D D S D D D I D D D D D D

MW-08 MW-11 MW-13 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-34 SW-03 SW-04 SW-13 D(17-20)23acd D(17-20)23ada D(17-20)25bad D(17-20)36aad2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012

Ln Slope -2.7E-04 9.30E-04 -1.30E-04 -7.10E-04 -6.90E-04 -3.10E-04 -2.30E-04 3.50E-04 4.00E-05 -1.80E-04 -4.10E-04 -7.50E-05 4.10E-04 -9.70E-04 2.70E-04Confidence in

trend (%)100.0% 98.1% 93.9% 100.0% 100.0% 96.5% 92.6% 70.8% 53.2% 64.1% 71.7% 66.6% 88.3% 100.0% 100.0%

COV 0.2 0.81 0.24 0.49 0.59 0.97 0.41 2.26 0.8 0.82 1.08 0.16 0.5 0.49 0.23LR Trend D I PD D D D PD NT NT S NT S NT D I

MW-35 MW-36 MW-38 MW-40 MW-41A MW-41B MW-42 SW-14 D(17-20)36caa D(17-20)36caa2 D(17-20)36cdb D(17-20)36ddc D(18-20)01aad D(18-21)06bcb2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012 2006-2012

Ln Slope -7.00E-05 -2.10E-04 -7.70E-04 -7.60E-05 -8.70E-04 -7.90E-04 3.00E-05 -1.10E-04 -7.10E-04 -6.40E-04 -6.20E-04 -5.90E-04 -8.20E-04 -5.50E-04Confidence in

trend (%)65.3% 99.8% 100.0% 64.3% 100.0% 100.0% 57.2% 59.8% 99.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 98.4% 100.0%

COV 0.49 0.25 0.52 0.72 0.52 0.48 0.27 0.83 0.39 0.45 0.61 0.45 0.5 0.61LR Trend S D D S D D NT S D D D D D D

Man

n-K

end

all A

nal

ysis

Lin

ear

Reg

ress

ion

An

alys

is

TABLE J-1

MAROS SUMMARY RESULTS

Man

n-K

end

all A

nal

ysis

Lin

ear

Reg

ress

ion

An

alys

is


ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

Well

Mann-

Kendall

Trend

Linear

Regression

Trend

Number

of

Detects

Number

of

Samples

Average

Conc.

(mg/L)

Median

Conc.

(mg/L)

All

Samples

"ND" ?

MAROS Statistical Trend Analysis Summary

DLGUser Name:


ANPI 2012 Annual Report NAProject:

Source/

Tail

NITRATE

D(17-20)23acd S S88T 6.6E+00 6.5E+00 NoD(17-20)23ada PI NT1313T 1.2E+00 1.0E+00 NoD(17-20)25bad D D2525T 7.3E+00 8.0E+00 NoD(17-20)36aad1 I I2424T 3.3E+00 3.5E+00 NoD(17-20)36caa D D88T 2.4E+00 2.2E+00 NoD(17-20)36caa2 D D1414T 6.0E+00 6.1E+00 NoD(17-20)36cdb D D1717T 7.6E+00 5.5E+00 NoD(17-20)36ddc D D1717T 7.2E+00 6.1E+00 NoD(18-20)01aad D D66T 9.6E+00 7.5E+00 NoD(18-21)06bcb D D2020T 1.6E+01 1.2E+01 NoMW-08 D D2121T 4.9E+01 4.8E+01 NoMW-11 PI I99T 5.4E+00 5.1E+00 NoMW-13 PD PD2020S 2.1E+01 2.1E+01 NoMW-17 D D1919T 1.5E+01 1.4E+01 NoMW-18 D D1919T 2.3E+01 1.8E+01 NoMW-19 D D2525T 2.8E+01 2.2E+01 NoMW-20 D PD1919T 3.5E+00 3.0E+00 NoMW-34 NT NT1919T 1.4E+01 1.0E+00 NoMW-35 S S2525S 5.7E+01 5.7E+01 NoMW-36 D D2525S 2.4E+02 2.3E+02 NoMW-38 D D2525T 7.5E+00 7.6E+00 NoMW-40 S S2626T 3.9E+00 2.9E+00 NoMW-41A D D2222T 3.6E+00 3.3E+00 NoMW-41B D D2222T 7.4E+00 7.1E+00 NoMW-42 D NT1919T 8.3E+00 8.1E+00 NoSW-03 S S2121S 9.0E+00 9.3E+00 NoSW-04 S S2020S 9.5E+00 8.7E+00 NoSW-13 NT NT1414T 1.6E+00 5.3E-01 NoSW-14 I I1616T 5.9E-01 5.0E-01 No

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); No Detectable Concentration (NDC)


Monday, February 11, 2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE


DLGUser Name:




ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

Source/

Tail

Coefficient

of Variation

Mann-Kendall

StatisticConfidence

in Trend

Concentration

TrendWell

All

Samples

"ND" ?

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects

NITRATE

T -7 76.4% S0.16D(17-20)23acd No8 8T 26 93.6% PI0.50D(17-20)23ada No13 13T -233 100.0% D0.49D(17-20)25bad No25 25T 147 100.0% I0.23D(17-20)36aad No24 24T -20 99.3% D0.39D(17-20)36caa No8 8T -68 100.0% D0.45D(17-20)36caa No14 14T -87 100.0% D0.61D(17-20)36cdb No17 17T -103 100.0% D0.45D(17-20)36ddc No17 17T -11 97.2% D0.50D(18-20)01aad No6 6T -53 95.4% D0.61D(18-21)06bcb No20 20T -138 100.0% D0.20MW-08 No21 21T 16 94.0% PI0.81MW-11 No9 9S -41 90.2% PD0.24MW-13 No20 20T -132 100.0% D0.49MW-17 No19 19T -121 100.0% D0.59MW-18 No19 19T -179 100.0% D0.97MW-19 No25 25T -49 95.3% D0.41MW-20 No19 19T 16 69.8% NT2.26MW-34 No19 19S -17 64.5% S0.49MW-35 No25 25S -130 99.9% D0.25MW-36 No25 25T -265 100.0% D0.52MW-38 No25 25T -15 62.0% S0.72MW-40 No26 26T -223 100.0% D0.52MW-41A No22 22T -203 100.0% D0.48MW-41B No22 22T -53 96.6% D0.27MW-42 No19 19S -2 51.2% S0.83SW-03 No21 21S -18 70.7% S0.85SW-04 No20 20T -16 79.1% NT1.08SW-13 No14 14T 64 99.8% I0.47SW-14 No16 16

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A)-Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); Source/Tail (S/T)


Monday, February 11, 2013 Page 1 of 1MAROS Version 2,.2 2006, AFCEE

0.16


76.4%


-7

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)23a

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Nov-

06

Apr-

07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

Dec

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

8.0E+00

9.0E+00

Nov-

06

Apr-

07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

Dec

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 6.5E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 14/23/2007 8.5E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 4.8E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 2 28/8/2007 6.6E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 7.4E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 111/20/2008 6.6E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 6.4E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1

12/15/2009 5.9E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1



0.50


93.6%


26

Confidence in

Trend:

PI

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)23a

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 4.0E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 8.1E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 18/8/2007 1.1E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 2.5E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.3E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 1.4E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 1.8E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 1.8E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 1.7E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 15/19/2009 2.2E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 9.3E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 1.0E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/16/2011 1.0E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1



0.49


100.0%


-233

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)25b

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Oct

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Oct

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 9.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 112/12/2006 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 11/16/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 9.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 2 23/14/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 14/23/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 16/7/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/8/2007 9.2E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 19/27/2007 1.0E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 110/23/2007 1.0E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/12/2007 1.0E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 8.0E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 7.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 6.7E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 6.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 5.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1

8/19/2009 4.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 4.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 3.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 2.2E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 15/18/2011 2.0E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


8/24/2011 2.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 15/17/2012 2.0E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 1.9E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1



0.23


100.0%


147

Confidence in

Trend:

I

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36a

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

5.0E+00

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 3.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 1.8E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 2.7E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1

11/15/2007 3.0E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 1.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 2.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 2.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/19/2009 3.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 3.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 3.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 3.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 4.0E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2011 3.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 4.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2011 4.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2012 3.7E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


8/15/2012 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/7/2012 3.7E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1



0.39


99.3%


-20

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

5.0E+00

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

2/4/2009 4.3E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.8E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 3.1E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 2.1E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.5E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 1

8/24/2011 2.3E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 1.9E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 1.4E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 1



0.45


100.0%


-68

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 9.5E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 8.9E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.0E+01D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 9.8E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1

8/28/2008 7.1E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 6.4E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1

8/19/2009 5.7E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 3.9E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 3.1E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 3.0E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1

8/24/2011 3.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 3.5E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 3.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1



0.61


100.0%


-87

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

2.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.6E+01D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.8E+01D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.5E+01D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 9.8E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.7E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 6.2E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 6.1E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 5.3E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 5.0E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 1


8/24/2011 4.6E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 5.3E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 5.5E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 1



0.45


100.0%


-103

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36d

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.2E+01D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.3E+01D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 9.2E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.3E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 5.9E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/28/2008 7.5E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 6.1E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 6.2E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 1


8/24/2011 4.0E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 4.1E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 4.5E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 1



0.50


97.2%


-11

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(18-20)01a

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Sep-0

8

Feb-0

9

Aug-

10

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Sep-0

8

Feb-0

9

Aug-

10

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.7E+01D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.4E+01D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 6.0E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 19/24/2008 8.1E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 12/2/2009 7.0E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 1

8/26/2010 5.2E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 1



0.61


95.4%


-53

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(18-21)06b

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Apr-

11

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

4.0E+01

4.5E+01

5.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Apr-

11

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 2.8E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 4.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 3.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 3.1E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 2.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 1.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 7.8E+00D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 8.8E+00D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 1.0E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 9.7E+00D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.0E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.2E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 14/6/2011 1.1E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2011 9.8E+00D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 1.6E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 111/16/2011 1.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.2E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 15/17/2012 1.2E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 1.3E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 111/8/2012 8.6E+00D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.20


100.0%


-138

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-08

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+01

2.0E+01

3.0E+01

4.0E+01

5.0E+01

6.0E+01

7.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to



5/18/2009 5.9E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 4.2E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 4.8E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 5.1E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 4.4E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 4.0E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 4.3E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 3.7E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 3.6E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 4.0E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 3.7E+01MW-08 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.81


94.0%


16

Confidence in

Trend:

PI

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-11

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

100

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Aug-

08

Aug-

09

May

-10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Aug-

08

Aug-

09

May

-10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 1.2E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.0E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 9.9E-01MW-11 T NITRATE 1 18/6/2007 2.7E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 1

8/25/2008 8.3E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 18/17/2009 1.3E+01MW-11 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.0E+01MW-11 T NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 5.1E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 18/13/2012 5.9E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 1



0.24


90.2%


-41

Confidence in

Trend:

PD

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-13

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

4.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 1.9E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.7E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 2.2E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 2.9E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 1







Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.49


100.0%


-132

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-17

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to







0.59


100.0%


-121

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-18

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+01

2.0E+01

3.0E+01

4.0E+01

5.0E+01

6.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to







0.97


100.0%


-179

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-19

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

1.4E+02

1.6E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to



5/18/2009 2.2E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 1.6E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 1.6E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 1.4E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2010 1.7E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 1.7E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 2.4E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 1.6E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 1.6E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 18/22/2011 1.4E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 1.3E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 1.3E+01MW-19 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.41


95.3%


-49

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-20

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 2.9E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 5.0E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 5.6E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 4.4E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 3.8E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 6.6E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 3.4E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2008 4.9E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 1.5E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 1.8E+00MW-20 T NITRATE 1 1





2.26


69.8%


16

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-34

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

100

1000

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

1.4E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 3.3E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 7.7E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 4.1E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 1.6E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 5.0E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 6.7E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 5.0E+01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/25/2010 6.4E+01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 1.2E+02MW-34 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 3.8E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 2.4E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/20/2012 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2012 9.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 18/13/2012 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/6/2012 2.0E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 1



0.49


64.5%


-17

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-35

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to







Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.25


99.9%


-130

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-36

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

1000

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.5E+02

2.0E+02

2.5E+02

3.0E+02

3.5E+02

4.0E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to







Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52


100.0%


-265

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-38

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Jul-0

7

Sep-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Jul-0

7

Sep-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to








Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.72


62.0%


-15

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-40

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to


11/13/2007 2.0E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 6.5E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 4.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 9.0E-01MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 1.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 4.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 3.0E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 3.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 1.3E+01MW-40 T NITRATE 1 16/29/2010 9.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 8.0E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 4.6E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 1





Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52


100.0%


-223

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-41A

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

8.0E+00

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 6.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 7.0E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 13/26/2007 6.5E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 2 25/16/2007 6.2E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 5.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 4.8E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 4.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 3.9E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 3.9E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 3.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 3.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2009 3.1E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 2.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 2.3E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.1E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 1.8E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 1.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 1.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1

8/23/2011 1.5E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 1.3E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 1.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.48


100.0%


-203

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-41B

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.3E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.3E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 13/27/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 2 25/15/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 1.1E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 9.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 7.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 8.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 7.6E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 7.9E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2009 6.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 5.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 5.5E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 4.9E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 4.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 3.6E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 3.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 3.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1

8/23/2011 3.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 3.3E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/14/2012 4.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.27


96.6%


-53

Confidence in

Trend:

D

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-42

Effective


Data Table:

1

10

100

Jun-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Jun-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to








0.83


51.2%


-2

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SSW-03

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 3.1E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.6E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.1E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.4E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 1.7E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 7.9E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2008 9.3E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 5.0E-01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 2.2E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 2.2E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 7.7E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.7E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 9.8E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 1.1E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.8E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 1.4E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.7E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 9.9E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2011 1.0E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 1.0E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/23/2012 2.3E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.85


70.7%


-18

Confidence in

Trend:

S

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SSW-04

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

100

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 2.6E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 2 22/13/2007 8.3E-01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.4E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 2.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 6.4E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/14/2008 6.2E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 2.7E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 1.3E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/19/2009 7.6E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.7E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 9.8E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 1.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.7E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 7.4E-01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.7E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 1.3E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 1

5/18/2011 1.1E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 1.4E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.8E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




1.08


79.1%


-16

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TSW-13

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

10

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 5.2E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 1.8E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 5.5E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 1.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 3.7E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 15/14/2008 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 4.8E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 2.2E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.0E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 1



0.47


99.8%


64

Confidence in

Trend:

I

Mann Kendall


(See Note)

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TSW-14

Effective


Data Table:

0.1

1

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Aug-

10

Nov-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Result (mg/L) Flag

0.0E+00

2.0E-01

4.0E-01

6.0E-01

8.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.2E+00

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)

Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 6.9E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.6E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 1


5/19/2009 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 1

8/24/2011 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 1



MAROS Linear Regression Statistics Summary

DLGUser Name:



Source/

Tail Ln SlopeStandard

Deviation

Coefficient

of VariationWell

Confidence

in TrendConcentration

Trend

Average

Conc

(mg/L)

Median

Conc

(mg/L)


ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

All

Samples

"ND" ?

NITRATE

T 6.6E+00 1.1E+00 S-7.5E-05D(17-20)23acd 0.16 66.6%6.5E+00 NoT 1.2E+00 5.8E-01 NT4.1E-04D(17-20)23ada 0.50 88.3%1.0E+00 NoT 7.3E+00 3.6E+00 D-9.7E-04D(17-20)25bad 0.49 100.0%8.0E+00 NoT 3.3E+00 7.7E-01 I2.7E-04D(17-20)36aad 0.23 100.0%3.5E+00 NoT 2.4E+00 9.6E-01 D-7.1E-04D(17-20)36caa 0.39 99.6%2.2E+00 NoT 6.0E+00 2.7E+00 D-6.4E-04D(17-20)36caa 0.45 100.0%6.1E+00 NoT 7.6E+00 4.7E+00 D-6.2E-04D(17-20)36cdb 0.61 100.0%5.5E+00 NoT 7.2E+00 3.2E+00 D-5.9E-04D(17-20)36ddc 0.45 100.0%6.1E+00 NoT 9.6E+00 4.8E+00 D-8.2E-04D(18-20)01aad 0.50 98.4%7.5E+00 NoT 1.6E+01 1.0E+01 D-5.5E-04D(18-21)06bcb 0.61 100.0%1.2E+01 NoT 4.9E+01 9.8E+00 D-2.7E-04MW-08 0.20 100.0%4.8E+01 NoT 5.4E+00 4.4E+00 I9.3E-04MW-11 0.81 98.1%5.1E+00 NoS 2.1E+01 5.2E+00 PD-1.3E-04MW-13 0.24 93.9%2.1E+01 NoT 1.5E+01 7.2E+00 D-7.1E-04MW-17 0.49 100.0%1.4E+01 NoT 2.3E+01 1.4E+01 D-6.9E-04MW-18 0.59 100.0%1.8E+01 NoT 2.8E+01 2.8E+01 D-3.1E-04MW-19 0.97 96.5%2.2E+01 NoT 3.5E+00 1.4E+00 PD-2.3E-04MW-20 0.41 92.6%3.0E+00 NoT 1.4E+01 3.1E+01 NT3.5E-04MW-34 2.26 70.8%1.0E+00 NoS 5.7E+01 2.8E+01 S-7.0E-05MW-35 0.49 65.3%5.7E+01 NoS 2.4E+02 6.0E+01 D-2.1E-04MW-36 0.25 99.8%2.3E+02 NoT 7.5E+00 3.9E+00 D-7.7E-04MW-38 0.52 100.0%7.6E+00 NoT 3.9E+00 2.8E+00 S-7.6E-05MW-40 0.72 64.3%2.9E+00 NoT 3.6E+00 1.9E+00 D-8.7E-04MW-41A 0.52 100.0%3.3E+00 NoT 7.4E+00 3.6E+00 D-7.9E-04MW-41B 0.48 100.0%7.1E+00 NoT 8.3E+00 2.2E+00 NT3.0E-05MW-42 0.27 57.2%8.1E+00 NoS 9.0E+00 7.5E+00 S-1.1E-04SW-03 0.83 59.8%9.3E+00 NoS 9.5E+00 8.1E+00 S-3.4E-04SW-04 0.85 77.0%8.7E+00 NoT 1.6E+00 1.7E+00 NT-4.1E-04SW-13 1.08 71.7%5.3E-01 NoT 5.9E-01 2.8E-01 I7.4E-04SW-14 0.47 99.9%5.0E-01 No

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Non-detect (ND); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); COV = Coefficient of Variation


0.16

COV:

66.6%

Ln Slope:

-7.5E-05

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)23a

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

8.0E+00

9.0E+00

Nov-

06

Apr-

07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

Dec

-09

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 6.5E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 14/23/2007 8.5E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 4.8E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 2 28/8/2007 6.6E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 7.4E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 111/20/2008 6.6E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 6.4E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1

12/15/2009 5.9E+00D(17-20)23acd T NITRATE 1 1Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = All Samples are Non-detect


0.50

COV:

88.3%

Ln Slope:

4.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)23a

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 4.0E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 8.1E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 18/8/2007 1.1E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1

11/14/2007 2.5E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.3E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 1.4E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 1.8E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 1.8E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 1.7E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 2.2E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 9.3E-01D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 1.0E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 111/16/2011 1.0E+00D(17-20)23ada T NITRATE 1 1



0.49

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-9.7E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)25b

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Aug-

07

Oct

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Nov-

09

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 9.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 112/12/2006 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 11/16/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 9.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 2 23/14/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 14/23/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 1.2E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 16/7/2007 1.1E+01D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/8/2007 9.2E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1


5/13/2008 7.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 6.7E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 6.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 5.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 4.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 4.6E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 3.3E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 2.2E+00D(17-20)25bad T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.23

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

2.7E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36a

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

5.0E+00

Nov-

06

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to


11/15/2007 3.0E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 1.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/13/2008 2.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 2.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 3.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 3.1E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 3.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 3.3E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 3.6E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2010 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 4.0E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2011 3.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 4.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2011 4.5E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 3.9E+00D(17-20)36aad1 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.39

COV:

99.6%

Ln Slope:

-7.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.5E+00

2.0E+00

2.5E+00

3.0E+00

3.5E+00

4.0E+00

4.5E+00

5.0E+00

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

2/4/2009 4.3E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.8E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 3.1E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 2.1E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.5E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 2.3E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 1.9E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 1.4E+00D(17-20)36caa T NITRATE 1 1



0.45

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-6.4E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 9.5E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 8.9E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.0E+01D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 9.8E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/28/2008 7.1E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 6.4E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1

8/19/2009 5.7E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 3.9E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 3.1E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 3.0E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 3.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 3.5E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 3.2E+00D(17-20)36caa2 T NITRATE 1 1



0.61

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-6.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36c

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

2.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to


11/14/2007 9.8E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.7E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 1


8/19/2009 3.6E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 3.3E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 3.6E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 3.9E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 4.6E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 5.3E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 5.5E+00D(17-20)36cdb T NITRATE 1 1



0.45

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-5.9E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(17-20)36d

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Aug-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to


11/14/2007 9.2E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 7.3E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 1


8/19/2009 6.1E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 4.3E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/25/2010 4.2E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 4.1E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 4.0E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 4.1E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 18/15/2012 4.5E+00D(17-20)36ddc T NITRATE 1 1



0.50

COV:

98.4%

Ln Slope:

-8.2E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(18-20)01a

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Sep-0

8

Feb-0

9

Aug-

10

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.7E+01D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.4E+01D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 6.0E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 1

9/24/2008 8.1E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 12/2/2009 7.0E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 18/26/2010 5.2E+00D(18-20)01aad T NITRATE 1 1



0.61

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-5.5E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TD(18-21)06b

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

4.0E+01

4.5E+01

5.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Apr-

11

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 2.8E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 4.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 3.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 18/7/2007 3.1E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/6/2008 2.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 1.4E+01D(18-21)06bcb T NITRATE 1 1






Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.20

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-2.7E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-08

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+01

2.0E+01

3.0E+01

4.0E+01

5.0E+01

6.0E+01

7.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.81

COV:

98.1%

Ln Slope:

9.3E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-11

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Aug-

08

Aug-

09

May

-10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 1.2E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.0E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 9.9E-01MW-11 T NITRATE 1 18/6/2007 2.7E+00MW-11 T NITRATE 1 1




0.24

COV:

93.9%

Ln Slope:

-1.3E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

PD

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-13

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

4.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to




5/18/2009 2.5E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 3.7E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 2.4E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 12/15/2010 2.1E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.1E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 2.2E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2011 1.6E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 1.7E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 12/20/2012 1.3E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 18/13/2012 1.7E+01MW-13 S NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.49

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-7.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-17

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

3.5E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.59

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-6.9E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-18

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+01

2.0E+01

3.0E+01

4.0E+01

5.0E+01

6.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.97

COV:

96.5%

Ln Slope:

-3.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-19

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

1.4E+02

1.6E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.41

COV:

92.6%

Ln Slope:

-2.3E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

PD

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-20

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

Aug-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to








Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




2.26

COV:

70.8%

Ln Slope:

3.5E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-34

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

1.4E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Feb-0

8

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/14/2006 3.3E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 7.7E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 4.1E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 1.6E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 5.0E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 6.7E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 1


5/17/2011 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 2.4E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2011 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 12/20/2012 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2012 9.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 18/13/2012 1.0E+00MW-34 T NITRATE 1 111/6/2012 2.0E-01MW-34 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.49

COV:

65.3%

Ln Slope:

-7.0E-05

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-35

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+01

4.0E+01

6.0E+01

8.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.2E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.25

COV:

99.8%

Ln Slope:

-2.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SMW-36

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+01

1.0E+02

1.5E+02

2.0E+02

2.5E+02

3.0E+02

3.5E+02

4.0E+02

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Nov-

11

May

-12

Nov-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to









Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-7.7E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-38

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

1.8E+01

Nov-

06

Jan-0

7

Mar

-07

May

-07

Jul-0

7

Sep-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

Feb-1

0

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.4E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 112/12/2006 1.3E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 11/16/2007 1.4E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.4E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 13/14/2007 1.2E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 14/23/2007 1.1E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.1E+01MW-38 T NITRATE 1 16/7/2007 9.3E+00MW-38 T NITRATE 1 17/25/2007 9.4E+00MW-38 T NITRATE 1 18/8/2007 8.3E+00MW-38 T NITRATE 1 1






Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.72

COV:

64.3%

Ln Slope:

-7.6E-05

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-40

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to



5/13/2008 4.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 9.0E-01MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 1.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 4.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 3.0E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 3.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 1.3E+01MW-40 T NITRATE 1 16/29/2010 9.8E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 8.0E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 2.7E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 4.6E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 15/17/2011 5.2E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 4.5E+00MW-40 T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects





0.52

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-8.7E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-41A

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

7.0E+00

8.0E+00

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 6.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 7.0E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 13/26/2007 6.5E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 2 25/16/2007 6.2E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 5.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 4.8E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 4.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 3.9E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 3.9E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 3.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 3.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 3.1E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 2.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 2.6E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 2.3E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.1E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 1.8E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 1.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 1.7E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 1.5E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 1.3E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


8/14/2012 1.4E+00MW-41A T NITRATE 1 1Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = All Samples are Non-detect


0.48

COV:

100.0%

Ln Slope:

-7.9E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

D

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-41B

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

1.6E+01

Nov-

06

Mar

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 1.3E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.3E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 13/27/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 2 25/15/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.2E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/13/2007 1.1E+01MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/5/2008 9.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1

5/13/2008 7.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 8.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/18/2008 7.6E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 7.9E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 6.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 5.8E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 5.5E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 4.9E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 4.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 3.6E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 3.4E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 3.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 18/23/2011 3.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 12/21/2012 3.3E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects


8/14/2012 4.1E+00MW-41B T NITRATE 1 1Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = All Samples are Non-detect


0.27

COV:

57.2%

Ln Slope:

3.0E-05

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TMW-42

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E+00

4.0E+00

6.0E+00

8.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.2E+01

1.4E+01

Jun-0

7

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Aug-

12

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to



5/12/2008 8.4E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 18/26/2008 8.8E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 111/17/2008 8.4E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 12/3/2009 8.5E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2009 7.4E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 18/18/2009 7.4E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2009 7.8E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 12/16/2010 7.9E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 7.5E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 8.3E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2010 8.1E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 7.8E+00MW-42 T NITRATE 1 1





Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.83

COV:

59.8%

Ln Slope:

-1.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SSW-03

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Nov-

09

May

-10

Nov-

10

May

-11

Feb-1

2

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 3.1E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/13/2007 1.6E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.1E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.4E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 1.7E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 7.9E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 1

5/14/2008 9.3E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 5.0E-01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 2.2E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/4/2009 2.2E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 7.7E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.7E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 9.8E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 1.1E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.8E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 1.4E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.7E+01SW-03 S NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 9.9E+00SW-03 S NITRATE 1 1





Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




0.85

COV:

77.0%

Ln Slope:

-3.4E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

S

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

SSW-04

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

5.0E+00

1.0E+01

1.5E+01

2.0E+01

2.5E+01

3.0E+01

Nov-

06

May

-07

Nov-

07

May

-08

Feb-0

9

Aug-

09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 2.6E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 2 22/13/2007 8.3E-01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/15/2007 1.4E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 1.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 2.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 6.4E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 1


5/19/2009 7.6E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/19/2009 2.7E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/17/2009 9.8E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 1.0E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 2.7E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2010 7.4E-01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.7E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/8/2011 1.3E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 15/18/2011 1.1E+01SW-04 S NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 1.4E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.8E+00SW-04 S NITRATE 1 1




Number of

SamplesNumber of

Detects




1.08

COV:

71.7%

Ln Slope:

-4.1E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

NT

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TSW-13

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

1.0E+00

2.0E+00

3.0E+00

4.0E+00

5.0E+00

6.0E+00

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Nov-

07

Feb-0

8

May

-08

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

Feb-0

9

May

-09

Feb-1

0

May

-10

Feb-1

1

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

11/15/2006 5.2E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/14/2007 1.8E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 15/16/2007 5.5E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 18/28/2007 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 111/15/2007 1.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/7/2008 3.7E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 1

5/14/2008 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 4.8E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 2.2E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 1

5/19/2009 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 5.0E-01SW-13 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.0E+00SW-13 T NITRATE 1 1



0.47

COV:

99.9%

Ln Slope:

7.4E-04

Confidence in

Trend:

I

LR Concentration

Trend:

NITRATE

Well:

Well Type:

COC:

TSW-14

Consolidation


Number of

Samples

Number of

Detects


0.0E+00

2.0E-01

4.0E-01

6.0E-01

8.0E-01

1.0E+00

1.2E+00

Nov-

06

May

-07

May

-08

Nov-

08

May

-09

May

-10

Nov-

10

Aug-

11

Date

Co

ncen

trati

on

(m

g/L

)



ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to


5/14/2008 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 18/27/2008 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 111/19/2008 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/5/2009 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 15/19/2009 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/17/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 15/18/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 18/23/2010 5.0E-01SW-14 T NITRATE 1 111/16/2010 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/9/2011 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 18/24/2011 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 12/22/2012 1.0E+00SW-14 T NITRATE 1 1



MAROS Spatial Moment Analysis SummaryDLGUser Name:



Estimated

Mass (Kg) Xc (ft)Sigma XX

(sq ft)

Number of

WellsEffective Date Yc (ft)Sigma YY

(sq ft)Source

Distance (ft)

1st Moment (Center of Mass) 2nd Moment (Spread)0th Moment

NITRATE

0.0E+0011/13/2006 3

2.5E+05 11,585,435 5,097,583 21,295,7591,872,19011/14/2006 7,818 13

2.7E+05 11,584,580 2,608,927 5,921,2061,872,69811/15/2006 6,832 11

0.0E+0012/12/2006 2

0.0E+001/16/2007 2

0.0E+002/12/2007 2

2.5E+05 11,582,103 2,133,138 4,027,6701,873,1372/13/2007 4,784 15

1.0E+05 11,587,784 2,539,681 11,038,9431,871,5002/14/2007 10,137 8

0.0E+003/14/2007 2

0.0E+003/26/2007 1

0.0E+003/27/2007 1

0.0E+004/23/2007 3

0.0E+005/14/2007 2

3.8E+05 11,582,445 2,194,290 4,560,5781,873,5215/15/2007 4,704 16

8.0E+04 11,589,231 3,256,719 10,121,7301,870,7895/16/2007 11,739 7

0.0E+006/7/2007 2

0.0E+006/20/2007 1

0.0E+007/25/2007 1

1.3E+05 11,579,411 168,839 109,5201,875,7848/6/2007 1,207 6

3.3E+05 11,581,050 2,760,068 2,919,7011,874,4648/7/2007 3,090 9

0.0E+008/8/2007 4

2.0E+04 11,583,992 696,572 1,224,5851,873,6178/28/2007 5,808 6

0.0E+009/27/2007 2

0.0E+0010/23/2007 2

0.0E+0011/12/2007 2

1.8E+05 11,580,329 1,648,860 2,145,9781,874,84811/13/2007 2,388 13

0.0E+0011/14/2007 4

0.0E+0011/15/2007 4

0.0E+002/4/2008 2

3.1E+05 11,581,733 1,700,871 5,720,0231,874,5222/5/2008 3,490 12

1.3E+05 11,586,924 1,675,830 11,309,7861,871,2752/6/2008 9,557 8

0.0E+002/7/2008 4

0.0E+005/12/2008 3

5.0E+05 11,582,106 6,126,952 17,609,2071,874,4415/13/2008 3,817 15

0.0E+005/14/2008 4

0.0E+008/25/2008 2

5.1E+05 11,580,598 1,541,475 4,243,1021,875,5298/26/2008 1,977 10

1.7E+05 11,586,060 3,048,832 14,132,3451,871,8998/27/2008 8,492 9

0.0E+008/28/2008 2

0.0E+009/24/2008 1


Xc (ft)

Sigma XX

(sq ft)Number of

WellsEffective Date

NITRATE

Yc (ft)

Sigma YY

(sq ft)Source

Distance (ft)

DLGUser Name:



Estimated

Mass (kg)


0.0E+0011/17/2008 2

3.7E+05 11,580,335 2,017,801 6,651,5261,875,76611/18/2008 1,624 12

1.8E+05 11,585,657 3,154,327 10,958,2261,872,29711/19/2008 7,931 7

0.0E+0011/20/2008 2

0.0E+002/2/2009 1

2.0E+05 11,581,688 2,033,111 6,237,3811,874,5842/3/2009 3,414 14

9.1E+04 11,586,483 1,419,359 6,886,4251,871,3702/4/2009 9,149 8

0.0E+002/5/2009 5

2.5E+05 11,579,193 1,764,116 2,060,9311,875,9035/18/2009 1,081 11

3.8E+04 11,585,372 2,673,426 11,054,2621,873,7995/19/2009 6,893 7

0.0E+008/17/2009 3

1.1E+05 11,580,211 1,860,541 2,844,4071,874,8578/18/2009 2,329 10

9.7E+04 11,584,996 1,534,109 5,074,7311,872,3288/19/2009 7,388 9

3.4E+04 11,582,126 295,236 1,917,3221,872,91911/16/2009 4,974 7

3.5E+05 11,580,401 1,577,470 5,847,1421,875,83811/17/2009 1,618 9

0.0E+0012/15/2009 1

0.0E+002/15/2010 5

2.1E+05 11,581,854 1,812,156 5,220,0661,874,6912/16/2010 3,462 11

1.2E+05 11,584,573 3,980,864 10,268,6911,872,9052/17/2010 6,698 10

0.0E+002/25/2010 1

0.0E+005/17/2010 3

2.8E+05 11,581,171 2,491,971 4,184,1651,875,2015/18/2010 2,614 14

0.0E+006/29/2010 1

2.8E+04 11,579,023 2,403,094 918,9981,875,3638/23/2010 1,636 7

7.0E+04 11,582,539 2,077,380 6,204,6661,874,5178/24/2010 4,104 11

0.0E+008/25/2010 5

0.0E+008/26/2010 1

4.1E+04 11,582,030 248,645 1,275,5081,872,93311/15/2010 4,907 6

8.7E+04 11,581,804 779,697 2,929,4781,875,24511/16/2010 3,082 8

0.0E+0011/17/2010 3

7.0E+04 11,579,120 440,715 279,6541,875,9922/7/2011 1,000 8

3.8E+04 11,582,547 850,440 950,5521,873,3332/8/2011 4,913 7

8.5E+04 11,582,989 2,261,903 2,591,9401,873,7412/9/2011 4,942 9

0.0E+004/6/2011 1

1.1E+05 11,580,505 504,667 912,9161,874,9725/17/2011 2,366 6

0.0E+005/18/2011 5

0.0E+008/22/2011 5

1.9E+05 11,582,052 1,453,823 4,978,4181,874,8888/23/2011 3,492 10

1.1E+05 11,584,141 2,409,635 5,773,0031,872,9048/24/2011 6,362 10

0.0E+0011/15/2011 5

0.0E+0011/16/2011 4

0.0E+002/20/2012 4

7.8E+04 11,581,365 1,014,354 1,556,9941,873,9662/21/2012 3,679 9

6.3E+04 11,582,653 2,603,034 2,030,2881,873,4342/22/2012 4,911 8


Xc (ft)

Sigma XX

(sq ft)Number of

WellsEffective Date

NITRATE

Yc (ft)

Sigma YY

(sq ft)Source

Distance (ft)

DLGUser Name:



Estimated

Mass (kg)


0.0E+002/23/2012 1

0.0E+005/15/2012 4

0.0E+005/16/2012 2

0.0E+005/17/2012 2

7.2E+04 11,578,789 551,034 288,8811,876,0678/13/2012 1,028 7

7.9E+04 11,584,100 1,065,483 5,041,4381,873,5328/14/2012 5,945 9

0.0E+008/15/2012 5

0.0E+0011/6/2012 3

0.0E+0011/7/2012 3

0.0E+0011/8/2012 1


DLGUser Name:



Note: The Sigma XX and Sigma YY components are estimated using the given field coordinate system and then rotated to align with the estimated groundwater flow direction. Moments are not calculated for sample events with less than 6 wells.

ConstituentMoment Type

Coefficient

of Variation

Mann-Kendall

S Statistic

Confidence

in Trend

Moment

Trend

Zeroth Moment: Mass

1.58 D-199 100.0%NITRATE

1st Moment: Distance to Source

0.58 D-145 100.0%NITRATE

2nd Moment: Sigma XX

0.62 D-213 100.0%NITRATE

2nd Moment: Sigma YY

0.86 D-257 100.0%NITRATE

Mann-Kendall Trend test performed on all sample events for each constituent. Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A)-Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events).

0.30 Uniform: 80 ft

Note: The following assumptions were applied for the calculation of the Zeroth Moment:

Porosity: Saturated Thickness:


D

Zeroth Moment

Trend:

NITRATECOC:

Data Table:

0.0E+00

1.0E+05

2.0E+05

3.0E+05

4.0E+05

5.0E+05

6.0E+05

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Mass (

Kg

)

MAROS Zeroth Moment Analysis

Effective Date Constituent Number of Wells

1.58


100.0%


-199

Confidence in

Trend:

Change in Dissolved Mass Over Time

DLGUser Name:



Estimated

Mass (Kg)

Porosity:

Saturated Thickness:

0.30

Uniform: 80 ft

0.0E+0011/13/2006 NITRATE 32.5E+0511/14/2006 NITRATE 132.7E+0511/15/2006 NITRATE 110.0E+0012/12/2006 NITRATE 20.0E+001/16/2007 NITRATE 20.0E+002/12/2007 NITRATE 22.5E+052/13/2007 NITRATE 151.0E+052/14/2007 NITRATE 80.0E+003/14/2007 NITRATE 20.0E+003/26/2007 NITRATE 10.0E+003/27/2007 NITRATE 10.0E+004/23/2007 NITRATE 30.0E+005/14/2007 NITRATE 23.8E+055/15/2007 NITRATE 168.0E+045/16/2007 NITRATE 70.0E+006/7/2007 NITRATE 20.0E+006/20/2007 NITRATE 10.0E+007/25/2007 NITRATE 11.3E+058/6/2007 NITRATE 63.3E+058/7/2007 NITRATE 90.0E+008/8/2007 NITRATE 42.0E+048/28/2007 NITRATE 6



Effective Date ConstituentEstimated

Mass (Kg) Number of Wells

0.0E+009/27/2007 NITRATE 20.0E+0010/23/2007 NITRATE 20.0E+0011/12/2007 NITRATE 21.8E+0511/13/2007 NITRATE 130.0E+0011/14/2007 NITRATE 40.0E+0011/15/2007 NITRATE 40.0E+002/4/2008 NITRATE 23.1E+052/5/2008 NITRATE 121.3E+052/6/2008 NITRATE 80.0E+002/7/2008 NITRATE 40.0E+005/12/2008 NITRATE 35.0E+055/13/2008 NITRATE 150.0E+005/14/2008 NITRATE 40.0E+008/25/2008 NITRATE 25.1E+058/26/2008 NITRATE 101.7E+058/27/2008 NITRATE 90.0E+008/28/2008 NITRATE 20.0E+009/24/2008 NITRATE 10.0E+0011/17/2008 NITRATE 23.7E+0511/18/2008 NITRATE 121.8E+0511/19/2008 NITRATE 70.0E+0011/20/2008 NITRATE 20.0E+002/2/2009 NITRATE 12.0E+052/3/2009 NITRATE 149.1E+042/4/2009 NITRATE 80.0E+002/5/2009 NITRATE 52.5E+055/18/2009 NITRATE 113.8E+045/19/2009 NITRATE 70.0E+008/17/2009 NITRATE 31.1E+058/18/2009 NITRATE 109.7E+048/19/2009 NITRATE 93.4E+0411/16/2009 NITRATE 73.5E+0511/17/2009 NITRATE 90.0E+0012/15/2009 NITRATE 10.0E+002/15/2010 NITRATE 52.1E+052/16/2010 NITRATE 111.2E+052/17/2010 NITRATE 100.0E+002/25/2010 NITRATE 10.0E+005/17/2010 NITRATE 32.8E+055/18/2010 NITRATE 140.0E+006/29/2010 NITRATE 12.8E+048/23/2010 NITRATE 77.0E+048/24/2010 NITRATE 110.0E+008/25/2010 NITRATE 50.0E+008/26/2010 NITRATE 14.1E+0411/15/2010 NITRATE 68.7E+0411/16/2010 NITRATE 80.0E+0011/17/2010 NITRATE 37.0E+042/7/2011 NITRATE 83.8E+042/8/2011 NITRATE 78.5E+042/9/2011 NITRATE 90.0E+004/6/2011 NITRATE 11.1E+055/17/2011 NITRATE 6



Effective Date ConstituentEstimated

Mass (Kg) Number of Wells

0.0E+005/18/2011 NITRATE 50.0E+008/22/2011 NITRATE 51.9E+058/23/2011 NITRATE 101.1E+058/24/2011 NITRATE 100.0E+0011/15/2011 NITRATE 50.0E+0011/16/2011 NITRATE 40.0E+002/20/2012 NITRATE 47.8E+042/21/2012 NITRATE 96.3E+042/22/2012 NITRATE 80.0E+002/23/2012 NITRATE 10.0E+005/15/2012 NITRATE 40.0E+005/16/2012 NITRATE 20.0E+005/17/2012 NITRATE 27.2E+048/13/2012 NITRATE 77.9E+048/14/2012 NITRATE 90.0E+008/15/2012 NITRATE 50.0E+0011/6/2012 NITRATE 30.0E+0011/7/2012 NITRATE 30.0E+0011/8/2012 NITRATE 1

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); ND = Non-detect. Moments are not calculated for sample events with less than 6 wells.


NITRATECOC:

MAROS First Moment Analysis

Effective Date Constituent Xc (ft) Yc (ft) Distance from Source (ft) Number of Wells

Groundwater

Flow Direction:

Change in Location of Center of Mass Over Time

DLGUser Name:



Source

Coordinate:

X:

Y: 11,579,258

1,876,982

0 8 / 120 2 / 110 5/ 0 9

11/ 0 9

0 8 / 0 7

11/ 0 80 8 / 0 8

0 8 / 10

11/ 10

0 5/ 10

0 5/ 11

0 8 / 11

0 8 / 0 911/ 0 7

0 2 / 100 2 / 0 90 2 / 0 8

0 8 / 10

0 8 / 0 7

0 5/ 0 8

0 2 / 12

0 5/ 0 9

0 2 / 11

0 8 / 0 70 8 / 12

0 5/ 0 70 2 / 120 2 / 11

0 2 / 0 711/ 1011/ 0 9

0 2 / 100 8 / 11

11/ 0 60 8 / 0 9

11/ 0 811/ 0 6

0 8 / 0 8

0 2 / 0 7

0 2 / 0 90 2 / 0 8

0 5/ 0 7

11578 0 0 0

1158 0 0 0 0

1158 2 0 0 0

1158 4 0 0 0

1158 6 0 0 0

1158 8 0 0 0

1159 0 0 0 0

18 70 0 0 0 18 710 0 0 18 72 0 0 0 18 73 0 0 0 18 74 0 0 0 18 750 0 0 18 76 0 0 0 18 770 0 0

Xc (ft)

Yc (

ft)

11/13/2006 NITRATE 311,585,43511/14/2006 NITRATE 1,872,190 7,818 1311,584,58011/15/2006 NITRATE 1,872,698 6,832 11

12/12/2006 NITRATE 21/16/2007 NITRATE 22/12/2007 NITRATE 2

11,582,1032/13/2007 NITRATE 1,873,137 4,784 1511,587,7842/14/2007 NITRATE 1,871,500 10,137 8

3/14/2007 NITRATE 23/26/2007 NITRATE 13/27/2007 NITRATE 14/23/2007 NITRATE 35/14/2007 NITRATE 2

11,582,4455/15/2007 NITRATE 1,873,521 4,704 1611,589,2315/16/2007 NITRATE 1,870,789 11,739 7


11,579,4118/6/2007 NITRATE 1,875,784 1,207 611,581,0508/7/2007 NITRATE 1,874,464 3,090 9

8/8/2007 NITRATE 411,583,9928/28/2007 NITRATE 1,873,617 5,808 6





11,580,32911/13/2007 NITRATE 1,874,848 2,388 1311/14/2007 NITRATE 411/15/2007 NITRATE 42/4/2008 NITRATE 2

11,581,7332/5/2008 NITRATE 1,874,522 3,490 1211,586,9242/6/2008 NITRATE 1,871,275 9,557 8

2/7/2008 NITRATE 45/12/2008 NITRATE 3

11,582,1065/13/2008 NITRATE 1,874,441 3,817 155/14/2008 NITRATE 48/25/2008 NITRATE 2

11,580,5988/26/2008 NITRATE 1,875,529 1,977 1011,586,0608/27/2008 NITRATE 1,871,899 8,492 9


11,580,33511/18/2008 NITRATE 1,875,766 1,624 1211,585,65711/19/2008 NITRATE 1,872,297 7,931 7

11/20/2008 NITRATE 22/2/2009 NITRATE 1

11,581,6882/3/2009 NITRATE 1,874,584 3,414 1411,586,4832/4/2009 NITRATE 1,871,370 9,149 8


8/17/2009 NITRATE 311,580,2118/18/2009 NITRATE 1,874,857 2,329 1011,584,9968/19/2009 NITRATE 1,872,328 7,388 911,582,12611/16/2009 NITRATE 1,872,919 4,974 711,580,40111/17/2009 NITRATE 1,875,838 1,618 9

12/15/2009 NITRATE 12/15/2010 NITRATE 5

11,581,8542/16/2010 NITRATE 1,874,691 3,462 1111,584,5732/17/2010 NITRATE 1,872,905 6,698 10

2/25/2010 NITRATE 15/17/2010 NITRATE 3

11,581,1715/18/2010 NITRATE 1,875,201 2,614 146/29/2010 NITRATE 1

11,579,0238/23/2010 NITRATE 1,875,363 1,636 711,582,5398/24/2010 NITRATE 1,874,517 4,104 11

8/25/2010 NITRATE 58/26/2010 NITRATE 1

11,582,03011/15/2010 NITRATE 1,872,933 4,907 611,581,80411/16/2010 NITRATE 1,875,245 3,082 8

11/17/2010 NITRATE 311,579,1202/7/2011 NITRATE 1,875,992 1,000 811,582,5472/8/2011 NITRATE 1,873,333 4,913 711,582,9892/9/2011 NITRATE 1,873,741 4,942 9

4/6/2011 NITRATE 111,580,5055/17/2011 NITRATE 1,874,972 2,366 6




5/18/2011 NITRATE 58/22/2011 NITRATE 5

11,582,0528/23/2011 NITRATE 1,874,888 3,492 1011,584,1418/24/2011 NITRATE 1,872,904 6,362 10


11,581,3652/21/2012 NITRATE 1,873,966 3,679 911,582,6532/22/2012 NITRATE 1,873,434 4,911 8

2/23/2012 NITRATE 15/15/2012 NITRATE 45/16/2012 NITRATE 25/17/2012 NITRATE 2

11,578,7898/13/2012 NITRATE 1,876,067 1,028 711,584,1008/14/2012 NITRATE 1,873,532 5,945 9


Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events). Moments are not calculated for sample events with less than 6 wells.


D

First Moment Trend:

NITRATECOC:

Data Table:

0.0E+00

2.0E+03

4.0E+03

6.0E+03

8.0E+03

1.0E+04

1.2E+04

1.4E+04

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12

Date

Dis

tan

ce f

rom

So

urc

e (

ft)



0.58


100.0%


-145

Confidence in

Trend:

Distance from Source to Center of Mass

DLGUser Name:





11,582,1032/13/2007 NITRATE 1,873,137 4,784 1511,587,7842/14/2007 NITRATE 1,871,500 10,137 8

3/14/2007 NITRATE 23/26/2007 NITRATE 13/27/2007 NITRATE 14/23/2007 NITRATE 35/14/2007 NITRATE 2

11,582,4455/15/2007 NITRATE 1,873,521 4,704 1611,589,2315/16/2007 NITRATE 1,870,789 11,739 7


11,579,4118/6/2007 NITRATE 1,875,784 1,207 611,581,0508/7/2007 NITRATE 1,874,464 3,090 9

8/8/2007 NITRATE 411,583,9928/28/2007 NITRATE 1,873,617 5,808 6

9/27/2007 NITRATE 2




10/23/2007 NITRATE 211/12/2007 NITRATE 2

11,580,32911/13/2007 NITRATE 1,874,848 2,388 1311/14/2007 NITRATE 411/15/2007 NITRATE 42/4/2008 NITRATE 2

11,581,7332/5/2008 NITRATE 1,874,522 3,490 1211,586,9242/6/2008 NITRATE 1,871,275 9,557 8

2/7/2008 NITRATE 45/12/2008 NITRATE 3

11,582,1065/13/2008 NITRATE 1,874,441 3,817 155/14/2008 NITRATE 48/25/2008 NITRATE 2

11,580,5988/26/2008 NITRATE 1,875,529 1,977 1011,586,0608/27/2008 NITRATE 1,871,899 8,492 9


11,580,33511/18/2008 NITRATE 1,875,766 1,624 1211,585,65711/19/2008 NITRATE 1,872,297 7,931 7

11/20/2008 NITRATE 22/2/2009 NITRATE 1

11,581,6882/3/2009 NITRATE 1,874,584 3,414 1411,586,4832/4/2009 NITRATE 1,871,370 9,149 8


8/17/2009 NITRATE 311,580,2118/18/2009 NITRATE 1,874,857 2,329 1011,584,9968/19/2009 NITRATE 1,872,328 7,388 911,582,12611/16/2009 NITRATE 1,872,919 4,974 711,580,40111/17/2009 NITRATE 1,875,838 1,618 9

12/15/2009 NITRATE 12/15/2010 NITRATE 5

11,581,8542/16/2010 NITRATE 1,874,691 3,462 1111,584,5732/17/2010 NITRATE 1,872,905 6,698 10

2/25/2010 NITRATE 15/17/2010 NITRATE 3

11,581,1715/18/2010 NITRATE 1,875,201 2,614 146/29/2010 NITRATE 1

11,579,0238/23/2010 NITRATE 1,875,363 1,636 711,582,5398/24/2010 NITRATE 1,874,517 4,104 11

8/25/2010 NITRATE 58/26/2010 NITRATE 1

11,582,03011/15/2010 NITRATE 1,872,933 4,907 611,581,80411/16/2010 NITRATE 1,875,245 3,082 8

11/17/2010 NITRATE 311,579,1202/7/2011 NITRATE 1,875,992 1,000 811,582,5472/8/2011 NITRATE 1,873,333 4,913 711,582,9892/9/2011 NITRATE 1,873,741 4,942 9




4/6/2011 NITRATE 111,580,5055/17/2011 NITRATE 1,874,972 2,366 6

5/18/2011 NITRATE 58/22/2011 NITRATE 5

11,582,0528/23/2011 NITRATE 1,874,888 3,492 1011,584,1418/24/2011 NITRATE 1,872,904 6,362 10


11,581,3652/21/2012 NITRATE 1,873,966 3,679 911,582,6532/22/2012 NITRATE 1,873,434 4,911 8


11,578,7898/13/2012 NITRATE 1,876,067 1,028 711,584,1008/14/2012 NITRATE 1,873,532 5,945 9


Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events). Moments are not calculated for sample events with less than 6 wells.


D

Second Moment

Trend:

NITRATECOC:

Data Table:

MAROS Second Moment Analysis

Effective Date Constituent Number of Wells

0.86


100.0%


-257

Confidence in

Trend:

Sigma XX (sq ft) Sigma YY (sq ft)

D

Second Moment

Trend:

0.62


100.0%


-213

Confidence in

Trend:

DLGUser Name:



Change in Plume Spread Over Time

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

10000000

100000000

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12Date

Syy^2 (

sq

ft)

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

10000000

Nov-

06

Feb-0

7

May

-07

Aug-

07

Feb-0

8

Aug-

08

Nov-

08

May

-09

Feb-1

0

Aug-

10

Feb-1

1

Aug-

11

Feb-1

2

Nov-

12Date

Sxx^2 (

sq

ft)

11/13/2006 NITRATE 321,295,75911/14/2006 NITRATE 5,097,583 135,921,20611/15/2006 NITRATE 2,608,927 11


4,027,6702/13/2007 NITRATE 2,133,138 1511,038,9432/14/2007 NITRATE 2,539,681 8




Effective Date Constituent Sigma XX (sq ft) Sigma YY (sq ft) Number of Wells

5/14/2007 NITRATE 24,560,5785/15/2007 NITRATE 2,194,290 16

10,121,7305/16/2007 NITRATE 3,256,719 76/7/2007 NITRATE 26/20/2007 NITRATE 17/25/2007 NITRATE 1

109,5208/6/2007 NITRATE 168,839 62,919,7018/7/2007 NITRATE 2,760,068 9

8/8/2007 NITRATE 41,224,5858/28/2007 NITRATE 696,572 6


2,145,97811/13/2007 NITRATE 1,648,860 1311/14/2007 NITRATE 411/15/2007 NITRATE 42/4/2008 NITRATE 2

5,720,0232/5/2008 NITRATE 1,700,871 1211,309,7862/6/2008 NITRATE 1,675,830 8

2/7/2008 NITRATE 45/12/2008 NITRATE 3

17,609,2075/13/2008 NITRATE 6,126,952 155/14/2008 NITRATE 48/25/2008 NITRATE 2

4,243,1028/26/2008 NITRATE 1,541,475 1014,132,3458/27/2008 NITRATE 3,048,832 9


6,651,52611/18/2008 NITRATE 2,017,801 1210,958,22611/19/2008 NITRATE 3,154,327 7

11/20/2008 NITRATE 22/2/2009 NITRATE 1

6,237,3812/3/2009 NITRATE 2,033,111 146,886,4252/4/2009 NITRATE 1,419,359 8

2/5/2009 NITRATE 52,060,9315/18/2009 NITRATE 1,764,116 11

11,054,2625/19/2009 NITRATE 2,673,426 78/17/2009 NITRATE 3

2,844,4078/18/2009 NITRATE 1,860,541 105,074,7318/19/2009 NITRATE 1,534,109 91,917,32211/16/2009 NITRATE 295,236 75,847,14211/17/2009 NITRATE 1,577,470 9

12/15/2009 NITRATE 12/15/2010 NITRATE 5

5,220,0662/16/2010 NITRATE 1,812,156 1110,268,6912/17/2010 NITRATE 3,980,864 10

2/25/2010 NITRATE 15/17/2010 NITRATE 3

4,184,1655/18/2010 NITRATE 2,491,971 146/29/2010 NITRATE 1



Effective Date Constituent Sigma XX (sq ft) Sigma YY (sq ft) Number of Wells

918,9988/23/2010 NITRATE 2,403,094 76,204,6668/24/2010 NITRATE 2,077,380 11

8/25/2010 NITRATE 58/26/2010 NITRATE 1

1,275,50811/15/2010 NITRATE 248,645 62,929,47811/16/2010 NITRATE 779,697 8

11/17/2010 NITRATE 3279,6542/7/2011 NITRATE 440,715 8950,5522/8/2011 NITRATE 850,440 7

2,591,9402/9/2011 NITRATE 2,261,903 94/6/2011 NITRATE 1

912,9165/17/2011 NITRATE 504,667 65/18/2011 NITRATE 58/22/2011 NITRATE 5

4,978,4188/23/2011 NITRATE 1,453,823 105,773,0038/24/2011 NITRATE 2,409,635 10


1,556,9942/21/2012 NITRATE 1,014,354 92,030,2882/22/2012 NITRATE 2,603,034 8


288,8818/13/2012 NITRATE 551,034 75,041,4388/14/2012 NITRATE 1,065,483 9


The Sigma XX and Sigma YY components are estimated using the given field coordinate system and then rotated to align with the estimated groundwater flow direction. Moments are not calculated for sample events with less than 6 wells.

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events)


11595904.00

D(17-20)23ada

D(17-20)25bad

D(17-20)36aad1

D(17-20)36caa D(17-20)36caa2

D(17-20)36cdb D(17-20)36ddc

D(18-20)01aad D(18-21)06bcb

MW-08

MW-11

MW-13

MW-17 MW-18

MW-19

MW-20

MW-34

MW-35 MW-36

MW-38

MW-40

MW-41A MW-41B

MW-42

SW-03 SW-04

SW-13

SW-14

S

S

S S

S S

S S S

S

M S S S S S

S

S S

M

M M

M

S

S M S

M

M

S

S

S

M

S

S

S

S S

S S

S

M M S

M

M

M S

M

M

11575000.0

11580000.0

11585000.0

11590000.0

11595000.0

11600000.0

1866000.0 1868000.0 1870000.0 1872000.0 1874000.0 1876000.0 1878000.0 1880000.0

NORTH

EAST

NITRATE New Location Analysis for

Existing Locations

High SF -> high estimation error -> possible need for new locations

Low SF -> low estimation error -> no need for new locations

Potential areas for

new locations are indicated by triangles w ith a high SF level.

Estimated SF Level: S - Small M - Moderate L - Large E - Extremely large

MAROS Plume Analysis Summary

DLGUser Name:




ND Values:

J Flag Values :



Actual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

WellSource/

Tail

Mann-

Kendall Modeling Empirical

Linear

RegressionConstituent

Number

of

Samples

Number

of

Detects

Average

(mg/L)Median

(mg/L)

All

Samples

"ND" ?

NITRATE

T N/AD(17-20)23acd S S N/A88 6.6E+00 6.5E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)23ada PI NT N/A1313 1.2E+00 1.0E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)25bad D D N/A2525 7.3E+00 8.0E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)36aad1 I I N/A2424 3.3E+00 3.5E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)36caa D D N/A88 2.4E+00 2.2E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)36caa2 D D N/A1414 6.0E+00 6.1E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)36cdb D D N/A1717 7.6E+00 5.5E+00 NoT N/AD(17-20)36ddc D D N/A1717 7.2E+00 6.1E+00 NoT N/AD(18-20)01aad D D N/A66 9.6E+00 7.5E+00 NoT N/AD(18-21)06bcb D D N/A2020 1.6E+01 1.2E+01 NoT N/AMW-08 D D N/A2121 4.9E+01 4.8E+01 NoT N/AMW-11 PI I N/A99 5.4E+00 5.1E+00 NoS N/AMW-13 PD PD N/A2020 2.1E+01 2.1E+01 NoT N/AMW-17 D D N/A1919 1.5E+01 1.4E+01 NoT N/AMW-18 D D N/A1919 2.3E+01 1.8E+01 NoT N/AMW-19 D D N/A2525 2.8E+01 2.2E+01 NoT N/AMW-20 D PD N/A1919 3.5E+00 3.0E+00 NoT N/AMW-34 NT NT N/A1919 1.4E+01 1.0E+00 NoS N/AMW-35 S S N/A2525 5.7E+01 5.7E+01 NoS N/AMW-36 D D N/A2525 2.4E+02 2.3E+02 NoT N/AMW-38 D D N/A2525 7.5E+00 7.6E+00 NoT N/AMW-40 S S N/A2626 3.9E+00 2.9E+00 No


DLGUser Name:



NITRATE

WellSource/

Tail

Mann-

Kendall Modeling Empirical

Linear

RegressionConstituent

Number

of

Samples

Number

of

Detects

Average

(mg/L)Median

(mg/L)

All

Samples

"ND" ?

T N/AMW-41A D D N/A2222 3.6E+00 3.3E+00 NoT N/AMW-41B D D N/A2222 7.4E+00 7.1E+00 NoT N/AMW-42 D NT N/A1919 8.3E+00 8.1E+00 NoS N/ASW-03 S S N/A2121 9.0E+00 9.3E+00 NoS N/ASW-04 S S N/A2020 9.5E+00 8.7E+00 NoT N/ASW-13 NT NT N/A1414 1.6E+00 5.3E-01 NoT N/ASW-14 I I N/A1616 5.9E-01 5.0E-01 No

Note: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A) - Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events); Source/Tail (S/T)



Effective DateNumber of

Centerline Wells

Regression

Coefficient (1/ft)

Confidence in

CoefficientSample Event

Regression of Plume Centerline Concentrations

DLGUser Name:



From Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

Groundwater Flow Direction: 135 degrees 808 feetDistance to Receptor:

Selected Plume

Centerline Wells:Well Distance to Receptor (feet)

MW-08 18624.4

MW-17 18635.0

MW-18 18638.5

MW-35 19876.6

MW-36 20847.5

The distance is measured in the Groundwater Flow Angle from the well to the compliance boundary.

NITRATE

11/13/2006 3 -6.89E-04 91.7%Sample Event 1

11/14/2006 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 2

11/15/2006 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 3

12/12/2006 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 4

1/16/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 5

2/12/2007 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 6

2/13/2007 3 4.52E-02 72.4%Sample Event 7

2/14/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 8

3/14/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 9

3/26/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 10

3/27/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 11

4/23/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 12

5/14/2007 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 13

5/15/2007 3 2.47E-02 65.8%Sample Event 14

5/16/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 15

6/7/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 16

6/20/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 17

7/25/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 18

8/6/2007 5 -8.08E-04 98.8%Sample Event 19

8/7/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 20

8/8/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 21

8/28/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 22

Tuesday, February 12, 2013 Page 1 of 4MAROS Version 2.2, 2006, AFCEE


Centerline Wells

Regression

Coefficient (1/ft)

Confidence in

Coefficient

NITRATE

Sample Event

DLGUser Name:



9/27/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 23

10/23/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 24

11/12/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 25

11/13/2007 5 -7.85E-04 99.0%Sample Event 26

11/14/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 27

11/15/2007 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 28

2/4/2008 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 29

2/5/2008 3 -5.81E-04 78.1%Sample Event 30

2/6/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 31

2/7/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 32

5/12/2008 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 33

5/13/2008 3 -9.27E-04 79.4%Sample Event 34

5/14/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 35

8/25/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 36

8/26/2008 3 -7.64E-04 81.6%Sample Event 37

8/27/2008 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 38

8/28/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 39

9/24/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 40

11/17/2008 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 41

11/18/2008 4 -1.25E-03 97.4%Sample Event 42

11/19/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 43

11/20/2008 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 44

2/2/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 45

2/3/2009 5 -6.60E-04 91.2%Sample Event 46

2/4/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 47

2/5/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 48

5/18/2009 5 -1.04E-03 91.2%Sample Event 49

5/19/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 50

8/17/2009 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 51

8/18/2009 3 1.02E-01 86.7%Sample Event 52

8/19/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 53

11/16/2009 3 1.08E-01 85.4%Sample Event 54

11/17/2009 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 55

12/15/2009 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 56

2/15/2010 3 1.16E-01 87.7%Sample Event 57

2/16/2010 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 58

2/17/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 59



Centerline Wells

Regression

Coefficient (1/ft)

Confidence in

Coefficient

NITRATE

Sample Event

DLGUser Name:



2/25/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 60

5/17/2010 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 61

5/18/2010 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 62

6/29/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 63

8/23/2010 3 1.09E-01 81.6%Sample Event 64

8/24/2010 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 65

8/25/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 66

8/26/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 67

11/15/2010 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 68

11/16/2010 2 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 69

11/17/2010 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 70

2/7/2011 5 -1.21E-03 96.1%Sample Event 71

2/8/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 72

2/9/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 73

4/6/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 74

5/17/2011 3 -7.32E-04 72.7%Sample Event 75

5/18/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 76

8/22/2011 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 77

8/23/2011 4 -1.35E-03 99.2%Sample Event 78

8/24/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 79

11/15/2011 3 -6.79E-04 95.4%Sample Event 80

11/16/2011 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 81

2/20/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 82

2/21/2012 3 -1.41E-03 94.7%Sample Event 83

2/22/2012 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 84

2/23/2012 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 85

5/15/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 86

5/16/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 87

5/17/2012 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 88

8/13/2012 3 -1.20E-03 94.1%Sample Event 89

8/14/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 90

8/15/2012 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 91

11/6/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 92

11/7/2012 1 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 93

11/8/2012 0 0.00E+00 0.0%Sample Event 94



Centerline Wells

Regression

Coefficient (1/ft)

Confidence in

Coefficient

NITRATE

Sample Event

DLGUser Name:



Note: when the number of plume centerline wells is less than 3, no analysis is performed and all related values are set to ZERO; Confidence in Coefficient is the statistical confidence that the estimated coefficient is different from ZERO (for details, please refer to "Conference in Trend" in Linear Regression Analysis).


MAROS Sampling Location Optimization Results

From

11/13/2006 11/8/2012

to

DLGUser Name:



Sampling Events Analyzed: Sample Event 1 Sample Event 94

WellAverage

Slope Factor* Eliminated?X (feet) Y (feet) Removable?Minimum

Slope Factor*

Maximum

Slope Factor*

Parameters used: Constituent Inside SF Hull SF Area Ratio Conc. Ratio

NITRATE 0.1 0.01 0.95 0.95

NITRATE

D(17-20)23acd 0.0381866659.38 11595904.00 0.027 0.060

D(17-20)23ada 0.4981867982.88 11598599.00 0.117 0.818

D(17-20)25bad 0.2671870564.00 11592142.00 0.001 0.476

D(17-20)36aad1 0.3111873549.38 11586502.00 0.055 0.581

D(17-20)36caa 0.3841870872.50 11584016.00 0.128 0.673

D(17-20)36caa2 0.1601870368.00 11584460.00 0.046 0.373

D(17-20)36cdb 0.1071869934.50 11582915.00 0.009 0.287

D(17-20)36ddc 0.0701872252.75 11582461.00 0.001 0.249

D(18-20)01aad 0.1301873896.50 11581129.00 0.096 0.161

D(18-21)06bcb 0.2861874401.88 11580568.00 0.037 0.772

MW-08 0.2081874000.00 11579420.00 0.083 0.411

MW-11 0.2321877535.00 11578087.00 0.073 0.817

MW-13 0.5461879052.00 11576627.00 0.208 1.000

MW-17 0.1251874410.00 11579815.00 0.054 0.328

MW-18 0.1231874414.00 11579814.00 0.054 0.315

MW-19 0.1001874336.00 11578905.00 0.010 0.226

MW-20 0.4411874443.00 11581286.00 0.085 0.838

MW-34 0.6051877417.00 11578935.00 0.069 1.000

MW-35 0.2171876374.00 11580023.00 0.000 0.831

MW-36 0.4791876982.00 11579258.00 0.197 0.766

MW-38 0.1521872597.63 11589126.00 0.008 0.506

MW-40 0.2691872890.88 11584475.00 0.025 1.000

MW-41A 0.3331871339.75 11586157.00 0.127 0.780

MW-41B 0.3211871345.00 11586148.00 0.008 0.777

MW-42 0.1181872103.38 11581381.00 0.018 0.392

SW-03 0.2461875769.00 11580454.00 0.006 1.000

SW-04 0.2871876061.88 11580444.00 0.002 0.830

SW-13 0.4681872916.00 11587247.00 0.026 1.000


DLGUser Name:



WellAverage

Slope Factor* Eliminated?X (feet) Y (feet) Removable?Minimum

Slope Factor*

Maximum

Slope Factor*

SW-14 0.8051878628.63 11577756.00 0.525 1.000

Note: The Slope Factor indicates the relative importance of a well in the monitoring network at a given sampling event; the larger the SF value of a well, the more important the well is and vice versa; the Average Slope Factor measures the overall well importance in the selected time period; the state coordinates system (i.e., X and Y refer to Easting and Northing respectively) or local coordinates systems may be used; wells that are NOT selected for analysis are not shown above. * When the report is generated after running the Excel module, SF values will NOT be shown above.


MAROS Sampling Location Optimization

Results by Considering All COCs

DLGUser Name:



From

11/13/2006 11/8/2012

toSampling Events Analyzed: Sample Event 1 Sample Event 94

Well Y (feet) Abandoned?X (feet)COC-Averaged

Slope Factor*

Number

of COCs

D(17-20)23acd 1866659.38 11595904.00 0.0381

D(17-20)23ada 1867982.88 11598599.00 0.4981

D(17-20)25bad 1870564.00 11592142.00 0.2671

D(17-20)36aad1 1873549.38 11586502.00 0.3111

D(17-20)36caa 1870872.50 11584016.00 0.3841

D(17-20)36caa2 1870368.00 11584460.00 0.1601

D(17-20)36cdb 1869934.50 11582915.00 0.1071

D(17-20)36ddc 1872252.75 11582461.00 0.0701

D(18-20)01aad 1873896.50 11581129.00 0.1301

D(18-21)06bcb 1874401.88 11580568.00 0.2861

MW-08 1874000.00 11579420.00 0.2081

MW-11 1877535.00 11578087.00 0.2321

MW-13 1879052.00 11576627.00 0.5461

MW-17 1874410.00 11579815.00 0.1251

MW-18 1874414.00 11579814.00 0.1231

MW-19 1874336.00 11578905.00 0.1001

MW-20 1874443.00 11581286.00 0.4411

MW-34 1877417.00 11578935.00 0.6051

MW-35 1876374.00 11580023.00 0.2171

MW-36 1876982.00 11579258.00 0.4791

MW-38 1872597.63 11589126.00 0.1521

MW-40 1872890.88 11584475.00 0.2691

MW-41A 1871339.75 11586157.00 0.3331

MW-41B 1871345.00 11586148.00 0.3211

MW-42 1872103.38 11581381.00 0.1181

SW-03 1875769.00 11580454.00 0.2461

SW-04 1876061.88 11580444.00 0.2871

SW-13 1872916.00 11587247.00 0.4681

SW-14 1878628.63 11577756.00 0.8051


Well Y (feet) Abandoned?X (feet)COC-Averaged

Slope Factor*

DLGUser Name:



Number

of COCs

Note: the COC-Averaged Slope Factor is the value calculated by averaging those "Average Slope Factor" obtained earlier across COCs; to be conservative, a location is "abandoned" only when it is eliminated from all COCs; "abandoned" doesn't necessarily mean the abandon of well, it can mean that NO samples need to be collected for any COCs.* When the report is generated after running the Excel module, SF values will NOT be shown above.


MAROS Sampling Frequency Optimization Results

DLGUser Name:



The Overall Number of Sampling Events: 94

"Recent Period" defined by events: Sample Event 1 To Sample Event 94From

11/13/2006 11/8/2012

WellRecommended

Sampling Frequency

Frequency Based

on Recent Data

Frequency Based

on Overall Data

"Rate of Change" parameters used:

Constituent Cleanup Goal Low Rate Medium Rate High Rate

NITRATE 10 5 10 20

Units: Cleanup Goal is in mg/L; all rate parameters are in mg/L/year.

NITRATE

D(17-20)23acd Annual Annual Annual

D(17-20)23ada Biennial Annual Annual

D(17-20)25bad Annual Annual Annual

D(17-20)36aad1 Annual Annual Annual

D(17-20)36caa Biennial Annual Annual

D(17-20)36caa2 Annual Annual Annual

D(17-20)36cdb Annual Annual Annual

D(17-20)36ddc Annual Annual Annual

D(18-20)01aad Annual Annual Annual

D(18-21)06bcb Annual Annual Annual

MW-08 Annual Annual Annual












MW-41A Annual Annual Annual

MW-41B Annual Annual Annual


DLGUser Name:



WellRecommended

Sampling Frequency

Frequency Based

on Recent Data

Frequency Based

on Overall Data


SW-03 Annual Annual Annual




Note: Sampling frequency is determined considering both recent and overall concentration trends. Sampling Frequency is the final recommendation; Frequency Based on Recent Data is the frequency determined using recent (short) period of monitoring data; Frequency Based on Overall Data is the frequency determined using overall (long) period of monitoring data. If the "recent period" is defined using a different series of sampling events, the results could be different.


Individual Well Cleanup Status Visualization

NITRATE

Groundwater

Flow Direction:

SW-14

SW-13

SW-04SW-03

MW-42

MW-41BMW-41A

MW-40

MW-38

MW-36MW-35

MW-34

MW-20

MW-19

MW-18MW-17

MW-13

MW-11

MW-08

D(18-21)06bcbD(18-20)01aad

D(17-20)36ddcD(17-20)36cdb

D(17-20)36caa2D(17-20)36caa

D(17-20)36aad1

D(17-20)25bad

D(17-20)23ada

D(17-20)23acd

11575000

11580000

11585000

11590000

11595000

11600000

1866000 1868000 1870000 1872000 1874000 1876000 1878000 1880000X (ft)

Y (

ft)

Normal

Lognormal

Normal

Distribution Assumption

SA

MP

LIN

G O

PTI

MIZ

ATI

ON

SA

MP

LIN

G O

PTI

MIZ

ATI

ON

MAROS Power Analysis for Individual Well Cleanup Status

DLGUser Name:



From Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

WellSample

Size Cleanup StatusAlpha

Level

Expected

Power

Sample

Mean

Sample

Stdev.

Normal DistributionAssumption

Lognormal DistributionAssumption

Cleanup Status

NITRATE 10 8Cleanup Goal (mg/L) = Target Level (mg/L) =

4 Attained AttainedD(17-20)23acd 0.05 0.86.52E+00 2.85E-01

6 Attained Cont SamplingD(17-20)23ada 0.05 0.81.08E+00 5.46E-01

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(17-20)25bad 0.05 0.85.65E+00 3.68E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(17-20)36aad1 0.05 0.83.33E+00 6.02E-01

4 Attained Cont SamplingD(17-20)36caa 0.05 0.82.43E+00 8.51E-01

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(17-20)36caa2 0.05 0.86.03E+00 2.83E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(17-20)36cdb 0.05 0.87.60E+00 5.01E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(17-20)36ddc 0.05 0.87.00E+00 3.42E+00

5 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingD(18-20)01aad 0.05 0.81.01E+01 5.14E+00

7 Cont Sampling Not AttainedD(18-21)06bcb 0.05 0.81.90E+01 1.05E+01

6 Cont Sampling Not AttainedMW-08 0.05 0.85.06E+01 9.96E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingMW-11 0.05 0.86.44E+00 4.33E+00

7 Not Attained Not AttainedMW-13 0.05 0.82.02E+01 3.78E+00




7 Attained AttainedMW-20 0.05 0.83.33E+00 9.13E-01





7 Attained Cont SamplingMW-40 0.05 0.83.60E+00 1.93E+00

7 Attained Cont SamplingMW-41A 0.05 0.83.50E+00 2.11E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingMW-41B 0.05 0.87.23E+00 4.04E+00

6 Attained AttainedMW-42 0.05 0.88.28E+00 6.68E-01

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingSW-03 0.05 0.87.59E+00 4.37E+00

7 Cont Sampling Cont SamplingSW-04 0.05 0.81.03E+01 8.09E+00

6 Attained Cont SamplingSW-13 0.05 0.81.86E+00 1.76E+00

7 Attained Cont SamplingSW-14 0.05 0.86.35E-01 3.06E-01


DLGUser Name:



NITRATE 10 8Cleanup Goal (mg/L) = Target Level (mg/L) =

WellSample

Szie Cleanup StatusAlpha

Level

Expected

Power

Sample

Mean

Sample

Stdev.

Normal DistributionAssumption

Lognormal DistributionAssumption

Cleanup Status

Note: N/C refers to "not conducted" because of insufficient data (N<4); S/E indicates the sample mean significantly exceeds the cleanup level and thus no analysis is conducted; Sample Size is the number of concentration data in a sampling location that are used in the analysis; The Target Level is the expected mean concentration in wells after cleanup attainment, it is only used in individual well celanup status evaluation. The test for evaluating attainment status is from EPA (1992). Refer to Appendix A.6 of MAROS Manual for details.


Individual Well Cleanup Status - Optional Analysis Results

User Name:



From Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

WellSample

Size

Significantly <

Cleanup Goal? PowerExpected

Sample Size

Significantly <


Sample Size

Sample

Mean

Sample

Stdev.

Normal Distribution Assumption Lognormal Distribution Assumption

NITRATE 10 0.05Cleanup Goal (mg/L) = Alpha Level = 0.8Expected Power =

4 YES YES 1.000D(17-20)23acd <=31.000 <=36.52E+00 2.85E-01

6 YES YES 1.000D(17-20)23ada <=31.000 <=31.08E+00 5.46E-01

7 YES NO 0.568D(17-20)25bad 130.905 65.65E+00 3.68E+00

7 YES YES 1.000D(17-20)36aad1 <=31.000 <=33.33E+00 6.02E-01

4 YES YES 1.000D(17-20)36caa <=31.000 <=32.43E+00 8.51E-01

7 YES YES 0.792D(17-20)36caa2 80.969 46.03E+00 2.83E+00

7 NO NO 0.292D(17-20)36cdb 330.327 287.60E+00 5.01E+00

7 YES YES 0.587D(17-20)36ddc 120.708 97.00E+00 3.42E+00

5 NO NO S/ED(18-20)01aad S/ES/E S/E1.01E+01 5.14E+00

7 NO NO S/ED(18-21)06bcb S/ES/E S/E1.90E+01 1.05E+01

6 NO NO S/EMW-08 S/ES/E S/E5.06E+01 9.96E+00

7 YES NO 0.209MW-11 560.659 106.44E+00 4.33E+00





7 YES YES 1.000MW-20 <=31.000 <=33.33E+00 9.13E-01

7 NO NO 0.159MW-34 940.090 >1007.87E+00 1.76E+01



7 YES YES 0.644MW-38 110.760 86.17E+00 4.08E+00

7 YES YES 1.000MW-40 <=31.000 <=33.60E+00 1.93E+00

7 YES YES 0.992MW-41A 41.000 <=33.50E+00 2.11E+00

7 NO NO 0.359MW-41B 250.529 147.23E+00 4.04E+00

6 YES YES 1.000MW-42 <=31.000 <=38.28E+00 6.68E-01

7 NO NO 0.205SW-03 580.394 227.59E+00 4.37E+00

7 NO NO S/ESW-04 S/ES/E S/E1.03E+01 8.09E+00

6 YES YES 0.997SW-13 <=31.000 <=31.86E+00 1.76E+00

7 YES YES 1.000SW-14 <=31.000 <=36.35E-01 3.06E-01


User Name:



NITRATE

WellSample

Szie

Significantly <


Sample Size

Significantly <


Sample Size

Sample

Mean

Sample

Stdev.

Normal Distribution Assumption Lognormal Distribution Assumption

10 0.05Cleanup Goal (mg/L) = Alpha Level = 0.8Expected Power =

Note: N/C refers to "not conducted" because of insufficient data (N<4); S/E indicates the sample mean significantly exceeds the cleanup level and thus no analysis is conducted; Sample Size is the number of concentration data in a sampling location that are used in the power analysis; Expected Sample Size is the number of concentration data needed to reach the Expected Power under current sample variability; The Target Level is the expected mean concentration in wells after cleanup attainment, it is only used in individual well celanup status evaluation. The Student's t-test on mean difference is used in this analysis. Refer to Appendix A.6 of MAROS Manual for details.


Monitoring System Category

Monitoring System Categories

E: Extensive

M: Moderate

L: Limited

(I) Increasing (PI) Probably Increasing (S) Stable (PD) Probably Decreasing (D) Decreasing

Graph Key:

Plume Status

< < B a c k N e x t > >

TRE

ND

AN

ALY

SIS

Worst Case: L

(NT) NoTrend

TailS

ou

rce

PI

I

S

PD

D

PI I S PD D

E

L

M

NT

NT

TailS

ou

rce

PI

I

S

PD

D

PI I S PD D

E

L

M

NT

NT

H e l pV i e w R e p o r t

COC Tail Stability Source Stability Category Result

NITRATE PD PD L

MAROS Site Results

DLGUser Name:



1. Compliance Monitoring/Remediation Optimization Results:

User Defined Site and Data Assumptions:

Level of Monitoring Effort Indicated by Analysi Limited

856.6

Source Treatment:

4580 ftCurrent Plume Length:

1005 ftDown-gradient receptor:

45 ftDown-gradient property:

1538 ftCurrent Plume Width

In-situ Biodegradation

Groundwater Seepage Velocity:

Number of Source Wells:

Number of Tail Wells:

524

Preliminary Monitoring System Optimization Results: Based on site classification, source treatment and Monitoring System Category the following suggestions are made for site Sampling Frequency, Duration of Sampling before reassessment, and Well Density. These criteria take into consideration: Plume Stability, Type of Plume, and Groundwater Velocity.

Hydrogeology and Plume Information:

Source Information:

Down-gradient Information:

ft/yr

Distance from Source to Nearest:

808 ft

42 ft

NAPL is not observed at this site.

Distance from Edge of Tail to Nearest:

Down-gradient receptor:

Down-gradient property:

Note: These assumptions were made when consolidating the historical montoring data and lumping the Wells and COCs.


ND Values:

J Flag Values :


Duplicate Consolidation: Average

1/2 Detection LimitActual Value

Time Period: 11/13/2006 11/8/2012to

Data Consolidation Assumptions: Plume Information Weighting Assumptions:

Well Weighting:

Weighting Applied to All Chemicals Equally

No Weighting of Wells was Applied.

Summary Weighting:

Chemical Weighting:

Consolidation Step 1. Weight Plume Information by Chemical

Consolidation Step 2. Weight Well Information by Chemical

No Weighting of Chemicals was Applied.

2. Spatial Moment Analysis Results:

COCTail

StabilitySource Stability

Level of Effort

Sampling Duration

Sampling Frequency

Sampling Density

NITRATE PD PD L Continue remediation

mechanism unitl

reach stable trend or

No Recommendation 48

(I) Increasing; (PI)Probably Increasing; (S) Stable; (NT) No Trend; (PD) Probably Decreasing; (D) DecreasingNote:

Plume Status:

(E) Extensive; (M) Moderate; (L) Limited (N/A) Not Applicable, Insufficient Data AvailableDesign Categories:


ConstituentMoment Type

Coefficient

of Variation

Mann-Kendall

S Statistic

Confidence

in Trend

Moment

Trend

Zeroth Moment: Mass

1.58 D-199 100.0%NITRATE

1st Moment: Distance to Source

0.58 D-145 100.0%NITRATE

2nd Moment: Sigma XX

0.62 D-213 100.0%NITRATE

2nd Moment: Sigma YY

0.86 D-257 100.0%NITRATE

Mann-Kendall Trend test performed on all sample events for each constituent. Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); Stable (S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing (D); No Trend (NT); Not Applicable (N/A)-Due to insufficient Data (< 4 sampling events).

0.30 Uniform: 80 ft

Note: The following assumptions were applied for the calculation of the Zeroth Moment:

Porosity: Saturated Thickness:



APPENDIX K

DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION SUMMARY

2012 ANNUAL SUMMARY


APPENDIX K QA-QC 2012 txt.doc 3/14/2013

K-i

APPENDIX K


2012 ANNUAL SUMMARY

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................... K-iii

1. 0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... K-1 2. 0 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM ..................................................................... K-3

2.1 DATA ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... K-4 2.2 DATA VALIDATION ............................................................................................................ K-4 2.3 DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION RESULTS ....................................................... K-5

3. 0 GROUNDWATER PERFORMANCE MONITORING ............................................................ K-6

3.1 DATA ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... K-6 3.2 DATA VALIDATION ............................................................................................................ K-7 3.3 DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION RESULTS ....................................................... K-8 3.4 EPA SPLIT RESULTS ........................................................................................................ K-8

4. 0 FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ........................................................................... K-9 5. 0 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... K-10 6. 0 REFERENCES CITED .......................................................................................................... K-11



K-ii

TABLES Table K-1 2012 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM – TOTAL NUMBER OF

ANALYSES PERFORMED K-2 2012 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM – DATA QUALIFIERS

SUMMARY K-3 2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN – TOTAL NUMBER OF

ANALYSES PERFORMED K-4 2012 PEFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN - DATA QUALIFIERS SUMMARY K-5 2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN - EPA SPLIT ANALYSES

SUMMARY K-6 QUALITY CONTROL FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 2012

SUMMARY



K-iii

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

% Percent

Ammonia-N Ammonia as Nitrogen

COC Chain-of-Custody

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

E Estimated

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

H+A Hargis + Associates, Inc.

HU Unusable

LDC Laboratory Data Consultants, Inc.

MNA Monitored Natural Attenuation

MS Matrix Spike

MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate

NARS Northern Area Remediation System

Nitrate-N Nitrate as Nitrogen

O&M Operations and Maintenance

PMP Performance Monitoring Plan

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

SOPs Standard Operating Procedures

TAL Test America Laboratories

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TSS Total Suspended Solids

Turner Turner Laboratory



K-1

APPENDIX K


2012 ANNUAL SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

A laboratory and field data quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program has been

established to ensure the reliability and validity of data gathered as part of the performance

monitoring of groundwater remedies. The QA/QC program ensures that representative,

consistent, defensible, and valid water quality and water level data is collected. To achieve

these objectives, the QA/QC program is a comprehensive program from the planning stage to

the reporting of the data.

Water quality data is extensively reviewed to ensure that quality control criteria have been met

in accordance with standard operating procedures (SOPs) outlined in the following supporting

documents:

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Northern Area Remediation System (NARS),

Revision 3.0 (Hargis + Associates, Inc. [H+A,] 2007a);

Southern Area Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), Revision 2.0 (H+A, 2007b);

Soils Engineering Control Plan (H+A, 2008);

Alternate Domestic Water Supply Plan, Revision 3.0 (H+A,2009a);

Long-Term Site-Wide Performance Monitoring and O&M of Remedies, Revision 1.0

(H+A, 2009b);

PMP for Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Shallow Aquifer Groundwater in the

Northern Area, Revision 1.0 (H+A, 2009c); and



K-2

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Performance Monitoring and O&M of Remedies,

Revision 1.0 (H+A, 2010).

QA/QC SOPs are implemented to ensure that the water and soil quality data obtained can be

used to support decisions on site assessment and remedial actions. QA/QC SOPs, such as

data assessment and validation, are specified in the QAPP (H+A, 2010). As required by the

QAPP, SOPs assess the precision, accuracy, and completeness of field and laboratory data.

Field data are reviewed to evaluate their completeness and correctness. Field duplicate results

are used to evaluate the precision of the sampling technique. Field blank results are reviewed

to verify that sample collection, handling, and transport processes did not affect the quality of

the samples. Data generated by the laboratory for analysis of laboratory spike samples and

internal laboratory duplicates are evaluated to determine laboratory accuracy and precision.

The following sections provide the 2012 data assessment summary for the NARS and quarterly

groundwater performance monitoring activities.



K-3

2.0 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM

NARS water quality samples were collected in accordance with the QAPP and O&M Plan (H+A,

2010 and 2007a). The January through December 2012 NARS analytical data have been

extensively reviewed to ensure that QC criteria have been met. Monthly NARS water quality

samples were collected from extraction well SEW-1, primary effluent location, and treatment

cells ANA, FDA, PDA-C, PDA-N, and PDA-S. Water quality samples from the design

confirmation piezometer DCP-12 and monitor well MW-10 were collected on a quarterly basis.

Extraction well SEW-1, treatment cells, and effluent samples were analyzed for nitrate as

nitrogen (nitrate-N) monthly; total phosphorus quarterly; and bicarbonate, calcium, fluoride,

chloride, magnesium, potassium, orthophosphate, total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended

solids (TSS), sulfate annually (Tables 13 and 14). Effluent samples were also analyzed for

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), ammonia-nitrogen (ammonia-N), and organic nitrogen (Tables 13

and 15). Treatment cell water quality samples were also analyzed for chemical oxygen demand

(COD), total organic carbon (TOC) (Table 16). The quarterly DCP-12 and monitor well MW-10

samples were analyzed for nitrate-N (Table 13). In addition, quarterly samples collected at

monitor well MW-10 was also analyzed for ammonia-N (Table 13).

In addition to the above listed laboratory analyses, 1,062 field analyses for treatment cells and

effluent were performed for electrical conductivity, pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and

nitrate-N (Appendix E). Field parameters were measured using direct-reading instruments: 1)

Cole Palmer pH/Con 10 meter for electrical conductivity, pH, and temperature; 2) YSI meter for

dissolved oxygen; and 3) Orion 290 meter for nitrate-N.

From January to December 2012, laboratory analyses were performed for 281 original samples,

39 field duplicates, 43 field splits, 38 field blanks, and 3 trip blank, equaling a total of 404

analyses. See Table K-1 for the number and type of NARS analyses performed in 2012.

Original water quality samples, field duplicates, and field blanks were submitted for analysis to



K-4

Turner Laboratory (Turner) of Tucson, Arizona. Split samples were submitted for analysis to

Test America (TAL) Laboratories of Phoenix, Arizona.

2.1 DATA ASSESSMENT

The NARS water quality data was evaluated using assessment procedures as specified in the

QAPP (H+A, 2010). Level III data assessment procedures were performed on 100 percent of

the 2012 sampling analytical data. NARS data derived from water quality samples collected

from January through December 2012, were assessed by H+A including the evaluation of the

following:

Sample holding times;

Analytical methods and data reporting;

Field blanks and laboratory reagent blanks;

Matrix spike (MS) recovery;

Matrix spike duplicate (MSD) analysis;

Field duplicate analysis;

Split sample analysis; and

Data trending.

SOPs were used to assess data reported by the analytical laboratory and to assign H+A data

qualifiers (H+A, 2010). The H+A data qualifiers were developed in order to differentiate data

qualified by H+A from data qualified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (H+A,

2010). Data qualifiers are entered into the project database and have been tabulated with the

analytical results (Tables 13 through 16).

2.2 DATA VALIDATION

Validation of NARS water quality data was performed according to EPA Level IV guidelines by

Laboratory Data Consultants (LDC) of Carlsbad, California. The analyses were validated using

the following documents, as applicable to each method: 1) USEPA Contract Laboratory Program



K-5

National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Superfund Data Review, January 2010 (EPA, 2010),

and 2) the QAPP (H+A, 2010). Validation is the comprehensive assessment of the raw data

including the evaluation of the following:



Ion chromatograph performance;

Initial and continuing instrument calibrations;

Field blanks;

Laboratory reagent blanks;

Laboratory control samples;

MS recovery and MSD analysis; and

Compound identification and compound quantitation.

Data validation was performed on the 2012 water quality data after data assessment issues

were addressed. The QAPP requires a minimum of 20 percent of the original data to be

validated on an annual basis. Approximately 23 percent of the original data was validated by

LDC for NARS water quality samples collected from January through December 2012 (i.e., 92 of

the 404 analyses were validated by LDC).

2.3 DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION RESULTS

Instances where 2012 NARS water quality data failed to meet data quality objectives and

acceptance criteria established in the QAPP and EPA Level IV guidelines are summarized in

Table K-2. Of the 404 data points, a total of 12 data points were qualified as estimated, “E” and

3 data points were qualified as unusable, “HU”. All other NARS analytical results met data

quality objectives and acceptance criteria.



K-6

3. 0 GROUNDWATER PERFORMANCE MONITORING

PMP groundwater quality samples were collected in accordance with the SOPs outlined in the

Southern Area PMP, PMP for MNA of Shallow Aquifer Groundwater in the Northern Area, and

QAPP (H+A, 2007b, 2009c, and 2010). The PMP analytical data, collected quarterly from

January through December 2012, have been reviewed to ensure that QA/QC criteria have been

met. Water quality data have been reviewed in accordance with SOPs outlined in the QAPP

(H+A, 2010). These SOPs are implemented to ensure that the groundwater water quality data

obtained can be used to support decisions regarding site assessment and remedial actions.

Specifically, SOPs for data assessment and validation are specified in the QAPP.

In accordance with the PMPs, the 2012 groundwater water quality samples were collected on a

quarterly basis (i.e., February, May, August, and November). The groundwater quality samples

were collected from the MNA groundwater well monitoring network, perched zone piezometers,

and surface water locations and were analyzed for nitrate-N, perchlorate, common ions, and

MNA analytes (Tables 7, 8, and 17).

From January through December 2012, analyses were performed for 171 original samples, 28

field duplicates, 21 field splits, and 14 field blanks, equaling 234 total analyses. See Table K-3

for the number and type of PMP analyses performed in 2012. Original groundwater quality

samples, field duplicates, and field blanks were submitted for analysis to Turner of Tucson,

Arizona. Split samples were submitted for analysis to TAL of Phoenix, Arizona.

3.1 DATA ASSESSMENT

The PMP groundwater quality data was evaluated using assessment procedures as specified in

the QAPP (H+A, 2010). Level III data assessment procedures were performed on 100 percent

of the 2012 sampling analytical data. Procedures used to assess the 2012 quarterly

groundwater quality data included evaluation of the following:



K-7



Field blanks, trip blanks, and laboratory reagent blanks;

MS recovery;

MSD analysis;

Field duplicate analysis;

Split sample analysis; and

Data trending.

SOPs were used to assess laboratory data and to assign H+A data qualifiers in accordance with

the QAPP (H+A, 2010). The H+A data qualifiers were developed in order to differentiate data

qualified by H+A from data qualified by the EPA. Data qualifiers are entered into the project

database.

3.2 DATA VALIDATION

Validation of PMP groundwater quality data was performed according to EPA Level IV guidelines

by LDC of Carlsbad, California. The analyses were validated using the following documents, as

applicable to each method: 1) USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional

Guidelines for Inorganic Superfund Data Review, January 2010 (EPA, 2010), and 2) the QAPP

(H+A, 2010). Validation is the comprehensive assessment of the raw data including the

evaluation of the following:



Ion chromatograph performance;

Initial and continuing instrument calibrations;

Field blanks;

Laboratory reagent blanks;

Laboratory control samples;



K-8

MS recovery and MSD analysis; and

Compound identification and compound quantitation.

Data validation was performed on the 2012 PMP groundwater quality data after data

assessment issues were addressed. The QAPP requires a minimum of 20 percent of the

original data to be validated on an annual basis. Twenty percent of the original data was

validated by LDC for PMP groundwater quality samples collected quarterly from January

through December 2012 (i.e., 48 of the 234 total analyses were validated).

3.3 DATA ASSESSMENT AND VALIDATION RESULTS

Instances where 2012 PMP groundwater quality data failed to meet data quality objectives and

acceptance criteria established in the QAPP and EPA Level IV guidelines are summarized in

Table K-4. Of the 234 data points, a total of 16 data points were qualified as estimated, “E”. All

other PMP analytical results met data quality objectives and acceptance criteria.

3.4 EPA SPLIT RESULTS

A total of 9 EPA split analyses were performed during the May 2012 PMP sampling event (i.e., 6

nitrate-N and 3 perchlorate analyses). A summary of the 2012 EPA split analyses results and

comparison to H+A original and split sample results is provided (Table K-5). EPA split results

demonstrate acceptable analytical precision between the laboratories.



K-9

4.0 FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

The QA Manager documents any findings and corrective action requirements that ensue from

the review of laboratory reports and field documents. Corrective action/comments on variations

such as poor detection limits, missing data, and COC record errors are recorded and the results

of the review and corresponding corrective action requests are documented. A summary of

2012 laboratory and field quality control findings and corrective actions is provided in Table K-6.

Instances where 2012 laboratory data failed to meet data quality objectives and acceptance

criteria established in the QAPP and EPA Level IV guidelines are summarized in Tables K-2,

K-4, and K-6.



K-10

5.0 CONCLUSION

All 2012 analytical results met data quality objectives and acceptance criteria with the following

exceptions:

Of the 404 NARS water quality data points, a total of 12 data points were qualified as

estimated, “E” and 3 data points were qualified as unusable, “HU” (Table K-2).

Of the 234 PMP water quality data points, a total of 16 data points were qualified as

estimated, “E” (Table K-4).



K-11

6.0 REFERENCES CITED

Hargis + Associates, Inc. (H+A, 2007a). Operation and Maintenance Plan Northern Area

Remediation System, Revision 3.0, of the Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. March 9, 2007.

_____, 2007b. Southern Area Performance Monitoring Plan, Revision 2.0, of the Apache

Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. September 5, 2007.

_____, 2008. Soils Engineering Control Plan, Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County,

Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. April 22, 2008. _____, 2009a. Alternate Domestic Water Supply Plan, Revision 3.0, Apache Powder Superfund

Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. February 12, 2009.

_____, 2009b. Long-Term Site-Wide Performance Monitoring and Operations and Maintenance

of Remedies, Revision 1.0, Apache Powder Superfund Site, Benson, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. February 12, 2009.

_____, 2009c. Performance Monitoring Plan for Monitored Natural Attenuation of Shallow

Aquifer Groundwater in the Northern Area, Revision 1.0, of the Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. February 12, 2009.

_____ 2010. Quality Assurance Project Plan Performance Monitoring and Operation and

Maintenance of Remedies, Revision 1.0, of the Apache Powder Superfund Site, Cochise County, Arizona. Prepared for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc., Benson, Arizona. June 14, 2010.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2010. USEPA Contract Laboratory Program

National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Inorganic Data Review. January 2010.


TABLES

TABLE K-1

2012 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM – TOTAL NUMBER OF ANALYSES PERFORMED

TBL K-1 NARS Analyses 2012.doc Page 1 of 1 3/14/2013

No. Analyses Analyte

2 Ca Calcium

2 Cl Chloride

1 ClO4 Perchlorate

30 COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

2 F Fluoride

2 HCO3 Bicarbonate

Hg Mercury

2 K Potassium

2 Mg Magnesium

9 N Calculated Nitrogen

2 Na Sodium

116 NH3 Ammonia - Nitrogen

135 NO3 Nitrate - Nitrogen

2 OPO4 Orthophosphate

41 P Total Phosphorus

2 SO4 Sulfate

2 TALK Alkalinity (Total)

5 TDS Total Dissolved Solids

9 TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

33 TOC Total Organic Carbon

5 TSS Total Suspended Solids

404 Total Analyses

Sample_ID Lab_ID QA Code Group Parameter Date Sampled H+A Qualifier

ADHS Code

ADHS Code Description

PDA-C 12C0659-03 ORG TC TOC 3/28/2012 E Original vs. Split RPD > QAPP criterion.PDA-C PVC2071-01 SPT TC TOC 3/28/2012 E Original vs. Split RPD > QAPP criterion.

PDA-S-B 12K0687-03 FB B NH3-N 11/29/2012 E B4Target analyte detected in blank at or above method acceptance criteria.

PDA-S 12K0687-02 ORG TC NH3-N 11/29/2012 E B4Target analyte detected in blank at or above method acceptance criteria.

SEW-1 12I0499-08 ORG EW ClO4 9/17/2012 E E8Analyte reported to MDL per project specification. Target analyte was not detected in the sample.

ANA PVL0769-01RE1 SPT TC NO3-N 12/11/2012 E H1 Sample analysis performed past holding time.

EFF-L 12I0499-09 ORG EF SO4 9/17/2012 E M1, R4

MS recovery was high; the associated blank spike recovery was acceptable; MS/MSD RPD exceeded the method acceptance limit. Recovery met acceptance criteria.

PDA-S 12I0499-01 ORG TC TKN 9/17/2012 E M2MS recovery was low; the associated blank spike recovery was acceptable.

EFF-L 12C0036-03 ORG EF NH3-N 2/29/2012 E M2, M7

MS recovery was low; the associated blank spike recovery was acceptable; Matrix spike recovery was low.

FDA 12C0659-07 ORG TC NH3-N 3/28/2012 E M2, M7


PDA-C 12C0659-03 ORG TC NH3-N 3/28/2012 E M7 MS recovery was low.

MW-10 12E0496-01 ORG SM NH3-N 5/16/2012 E M2, M7



2012 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM - DATA QUALIFIERS SUMMARY

TABLE K-2

Tbl K-2 NARS QA Qualifiers Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 1 of 2

Sample_ID Lab_ID QA Code Group Parameter Date Sampled H+A Qualifier

ADHS Code



2012 NORTHERN AREA REMEDIATION SYSTEM - DATA QUALIFIERS SUMMARY

TABLE K-2

ANA PVF1355-02 SPT TC P 6/20/2012 HU L4, N1

The associated blank spike recovery was below method acceptance limits; Case narrative= The LCS Duplicate recovered low and outside of acceptance limits for Total Phosphorous. The LCS as well as the MS/MSD recoveries were acceptable. The MS/MSD RPDs were within limits. Precision and accuracy has been shown for the batch. Data is not impacted.

PDA-C 12H0714-04 ORG TC NH3-N 8/23/2012 HU M2MS recovery was low; the associated blank spike recovery was acceptable.

ANA PVF1355-02RE1 SPT TC P 6/20/2012 HU N1

Case narrative = The LCS Duplicate recovered low and outside of acceptance limits for Total Phosphorous. The LCS as well as the MS/MSD recoveries were acceptable. The MS/MSD RPDs were within limits. Precision and Accuracy has been shown for the batch. Data is not impacted.

Abbreviations:

ADHS = Arizona Department of Health Services MS/MSD = Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Dupicate

B = Blank NH3-N = Ammonia-Nitrogen

DCP = Design Confirmation Piezometer NO3-N = Nitrate-Nitrogen

E = Estimated ORG = Original

EF = Effluent QAPP = Quality Assurance Project Plan

EW = Shallow Aquifer Extraction Well RPD = Relative Percent Difference

FB = Field Blank SM = Shallow Monitor Well

FD = Field Duplicate SPT = Split

LCS = Laboratory Control Sample TC = Treatment Cell

MDL = Method Detection Limit TOC = Total Organic Carbon

Tbl K-2 NARS QA Qualifiers Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 2 of 2

TABLE K-3

2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN – TOTAL NUMBER OF ANALYSES PERFORMED

TBL K-3 PMP Analyses 2012.doc 3/14/2013 Page 1 of 1

No. Analyses Analyte

43 ClO4 Perchlorate

11 CO3 Carbonate

6 Fe Iron

11 HCO3 Bicarbonate

6 Mn Manganese

124 NO3-N Nitrate - Nitrogen

11 OH Alkalinity (Hydroxide)

5 PALK Alkalinity (Phenolphthalein)

6 SO4 Sulfate

11 TALK Alkalinity (Total)

234 Total Analyses

Sample_ID Lab_ID QA Code Group Parameter Date Sampled

H+A Qualifier

ADHS Code


MW-21 PVH1086-01 SPT SP ClO4 8/13/2012 E E4, D1

MDL used as the detection limit; Concentration estimated - Analyte was detected below laboratory minimum reportinglimit; Sample required dilution due to matrix.

P-03-B 12K0293-2 FB B NO3-N 11/6/2012 E H2Initial analysis within holding time. Reanalysis for the required dilution was past holding time.

MW-19 PVK0481-07RE1 ORG SM NO3-N 11/6/2012 E H2Initial analysis within holding time. Reanalysis for the required dilution was past holding time.

P-03 PVK0481-01RE1 ORG PP NO3-N 11/6/2012 E H2Initial analysis within holding time. Reanalysis for the required dilution was past holding time.

MW-14 12B0567-06 ORG SM ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.

MW-21B 12B0567-04 FB B NO3-N 2/20/2012 E

FB sample was contaminated possibly due to NO3-N dust in air or due to sampling technique or glove/hand/container contact.

MW-21B 12B0567-04 FB B ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-33 12B0567-09 ORG SM ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-22D 12B0567-08 FD SM ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-22 12B0567-07 ORG SM ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-06 12B0567-05 ORG SM ClO4 2/20/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.SW-14 12B0622-12 ORG SW ClO4 2/22/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-01 12B0622-09 ORG SM ClO4 2/22/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-39B 12H0446-04 FB B ClO4 8/13/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-06 12H0446-05 ORG SM ClO4 8/13/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.MW-01 12H0505-07 ORG SM ClO4 8/14/2012 E MDL used as the detection limit.

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC.TABLE K-4

2012 PEFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN - DATA QUALIFIERS SUMMARY

Tbl K-4 PMP QA Qualifiers Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 1 of 2

Abbreviations:

ADHS = Arizona Department of Health Services

B = Blank

ClO4 = Perchlorate

E = Estimated

FB = Field Blank

FD = Field Duplicate

MDL = Method Detection LimitNO3-N = Nitrate-Nitrogen

ORG = Original

PP = Perched Zone Piezometer

SM = Shallow Monitor Well

SP = Shallow Perched

Tbl K-4 PMP QA Qualifiers Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 2 of 2

Sample ID Lab ID Group Sample Date Lab Code Method ParameterLab

ResultLab

UnitsQA

Code

MW-19 12E0489-10 SM 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-300.0 NO3-N 15 mg/L ORG

MW-19-QA 1205046-06 SM 5/15/2012 R9RC EPA-300.0 NO3-N 16 mg/L ESPT

MW-21 12E0489-05 SM 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-314.0 ClO4 319 µg/l ORG


MW-21-QA 1205046-02 SM 5/15/2012 R9RC EPA-331.0 ClO4 290 µg/l ESPT






MW-39 12E0489-04 SM 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-314.0 ClO4 111 µg/l ORG


MW-39-QA 1205046-03 SM 5/15/2012 R9RC EPA-331.0 ClO4 110 µg/l ESPT


P-03 12E0489-01 PP 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-314.0 ClO4 649 µg/l ORG

P-03 12E0489-01 PP 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-300.0 NO3-N 9300 mg/L ORG

P-03 PVE1218-01 PP 5/15/2012 TAA EPA-314.0 ClO4 610 µg/l SPT

P-03 PVE1218-01 PP 5/15/2012 TAA EPA-300.0 NO3-N 12000 mg/l SPT

P-03-D 12E0489-02 PP 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-314.0 ClO4 643 µg/l FD

P-03-D 12E0489-02 PP 5/15/2012 TURN EPA-300.0 NO3-N 10000 mg/L FD

P-03-D PVE1218-02 PP 5/15/2012 TAA EPA-314.0 ClO4 600 µg/l SPT

P-03-D PVE1218-02 PP 5/15/2012 TAA EPA-300.0 NO3-N 12000 mg/l SPT

P-03-QA 1205046-01 PP 5/15/2012 R9RC EPA-331.0 ClO4 590 µg/l ESPT

P-03-QA 1205046-01 PP 5/15/2012 R9RC EPA-300.0 NO3-N 10000 mg/L ESPT

HARGIS + ASSOCIATES, INC.TABLE K-5

2012 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN - EPA SPLIT ANALYSES SUMMARY

Tbl K-5 PMP QA EPA Split Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 1 of 2

Abbreviations:

µg/l = micrograms per liter

ClO4 = Perchlorate

ESPT = US Environmental Protection Agency Split


mg/l = milligrams per literNO3-N = Nitrate-Nitrogen

ORG = Original

PP = Perched Zone Piezometer

R9RC = US Environmental Protection Agency Region IX Laboratories

SM = Shallow Monitor Well

TAA = Test America Laboratories

TURN = Tuner Laboratories

SPT = Split

Tbl K-5 PMP QA EPA Split Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 2 of 2

Date Site Program Issue Type Findings Corrective Action

Jan-12 NARS Field

On the 01/19/2012 Turner COC record: 1) The sampler's signature is missing; 2) Incorrect method number listed on the COC record; should be NH3-N SM4500B,C; 3) Samples arrived at lab above the recommended temperature; 4) Custody seal was not intact for sample PDA-N

Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly and completely as well as firmly affixing custody seals. No action for temperature issue; samples were on ice and were hand delivered directly to the laboratory and may not have had enough time to completely cool.

Jan-12 NARS Field

On the 01/19/2012 Test America COC record, the incorrect method number was listed; it should be NH3-N SM4500NH3-D Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Feb-12 PMP Field

There was a typographical error on the pre-sampling memo for well ID D(18-21)06bcb; therefore, there was also an error on the corresponding chain-of-custody (COC) record.

Notified pre-sampling memo author and database manager of the typographical error. Ensured electronic database deliverable (EDD) and database (DB) were corrected from D(18-20) to D(18-21).

Feb-12 PMP Field

Field personnel collected a field duplicate (D) and not a field blank (B) at D(18-21)06bcb. As a result no field blank was collected on 02/21/2012.

Contacted DB manager and ensured EDD and DB were corrected and noted in comments section of DB. Changed sample ID from “B” blank to “D” field duplicate. That is, D(18-21)06bcb at 12 mg/l and D(18-21)06bcbD at 13 mg/l nitrate-N. Notified field sampling personnel.

Feb-12 PMP Field

The 48-hour Hold Time column was not marked by field personnel for all 130.24 1Q 2012 COC records.

Reminded field personnel to mark the COC 48-hour Hold Time column for all nitrate-N samples.

Feb-12 PMP Field

Field blank (FB) sample (MW-21B 7.5 E mg/l nitrate-N) was contaminated possibly due to nitrate-N dust in air or due to improper sampling technique (i.e., glove/hand/container contact).

Reminded field personnel to always sample FBs prior to the ORG sample collection and to prevent possible glove/hand/container contamination.

Mar-12 NARS Field

On the 03/28/2012 Turner COC record, 1) the 48-hr Hold Time column not marked for nitrate-N samples, and 2) the incorrect sample ID was recorded; it should be EFF-L Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.


QUALITY CONTROL FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 2012 SUMMARY

TABLE K-6

Tbl K-6 QC Findings Corrective Actions Summary 2012.xls3/14/2013 1 of 4




TABLE K-6

Apr-12 NARS Field

For PDA-S and PDA-N samples collected on 4/25/12, the sample labels were switched. This was confirmed based on years of historical data as well as the field Monthly Monitoring Log data.

Reminded field personnel to affix sample labels correctly. Requested Test America PVD1910 to correct report in-house. However, the Turner 12D0697 EDD and DB had to be manually corrected by H+A. Ensured Turner 12D0697-07 PDA-N is <0.5 mg/l and 12D0697-08 PDA-S is 35 mg/l for nitrate-N.

Jul-12 NARS Field

On the 07/23/12 Test America COC record forPVG1590, the 48-Hr Hold Time Column notmarked for nitrate-N analyses. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Jul-12 NARS

On the 07/23/12 Turner COC record for12G0730, the 48-Hr Hold Time Column notmarked for nitrate-N analyses. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Aug-12 NARS Field

On the 08/23/12 Turner COC record for12H0714, the 48-- Hr Hold Time Column notmarked for nitrate-N analyses. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Aug-12 NARS Field

On the 08/23/12 Test America COC record forPVH19290, the 48-Hr Hold Time Column notmarked for nitrate-N analyses. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Aug-12 PMP Field

On 8/14/2012 a FB was not collected; On 8/15/2012 the FB matrix was marked incorrectly on the COC record as a groundwater sample rather than lab prepared water.

Reminded field personnel to take a FB on every day of sampling and to ensure the matrix is correctly recorded on the COC record.

Aug-12 PMP FieldFive MS/MSDs were collected on 8/14/12 and zero MS/MSDs were collected on 8/15/12.

Clarified with field personnel the 20% MS/MSD DVP III QAPP requirement; would like to see MS/MSDs DVPs requested on all sampling days. Reminded field personnel to call QA manager with any questions.

Sep-12 NARSField &

Laboratory

No trip blank for the TOC analysis was sent to Test America for the September sampling. Test America did not provide TB with bottle order.

Reminded field personnel to check bottle orders; Test America requires a TB for TOC analyses. Reminded Test America to send TB when TOC bottles are requested.

Oct-12 NARS LaboratoryThe Turner report for 12J0654 had the incorrect sample ID for SEW; it should have been SEW-1. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.





TABLE K-6

Oct-12For PVJ1516 the sample ID was incorrect on lab report for PDA-5; it should have been PDA-S. Ensured EDD and DB were correct at PDA-S.

Nov-12 PMP Field

It was verified by H+A that MW-35 and MW-36 samples were swapped in the field and it showed up on the lab results. MW-35 (PVK0481-11) nitrate-N was 170 mg/l and MW-36 (PVK0481-12) nitrate-N was 93 mg/l. The depths to water are very different. MW-35 is around 10 feet to water and MW-36, 24-26 feet to water. These values were swapped on the field forms for November 2012.

Notified the laboratory of the switched sample IDs and requested corrections. Test America submitted a revised report PVK0481 dated 11/28/2013.

Nov-12 PMP Laboratory

The ALK and nitrate-N results did not match historical trends: 1) MW-23 (PVK0481-03) the alkalinity and bicarbonate alkalinity as CaCO3 were each 1,200 mg/l. Previously, these recent historical values have never been over 200 mg/l. 2) MW-19 (PVK0481-07RE1) the nitrate-N was 150 mg/l.

The ALK and nitrate-N results were double confirmed by Test America and the samples were noted to have a lot of sediment. The report/values were deemed acceptable. Field Task manager proposed to lower pumping rate to prevent disturbance of sediment at bottom of well.

Nov-12 NARS

The 12K0336 samples delivered to the lab above the recommended temperature (i.e., 7.9 degrees C).

No action; samples were on ice and were hand delivered directly to the laboratory and may not have had enough time to completely cool.

Nov-12 PMP Field

On 11/6/12 the ORG samples were shipped to the SPT laboratory in error; SPT samples were shipped to ORG laboratory in error.

Informed labs to perform the analyses for the samples received in order to ensure holding time requirements were met. Reminded field personnel to double-check the shipping documents prior to shipping.

Nov-12 PMP Field

On the 11/7/12 Turner Work Order 12K0335 samples arrived at above recommended temperature; the temperature was 7.9 degrees C.

No action; samples were on ice and were hand delivered directly to the laboratory and may not have had enough time to completely cool.

Dec-12 NARSFor 12L0426 the effluent matrix was incorrect on lab report but correct on COC record.

Requested amended report for 12L0426 for effluent matrix to surface water.





TABLE K-6

Oct-12 & Nov-12 NARS Field

All October and November COCs did not have the special handling 48-hr Hold Time marked. Reminded field personnel to fill out COC records correctly.

Note:

Abbreviations:

ALK = Alkalinity

COC = Chain-of-Custody

DVP = Data Validation Package

EFF = Effluent

FB = Field Blank


ID = Identification

MS/MSD = Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate

ORG = Original

QAPP = Quality Assurance Project Plan

SPT = Split

Instances where 2011 laboratory data failed to meet data quality objectives and acceptance criteria established in the QAPP and EPA Level IV guidelines are summarized in Tables K-2 and K-4.



APPENDIX L

MAROS MONITORING FREQUENCY GUIDANCE

AFCEE MONITORING AND REMEDIATION OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM SOFTWARE

Version 2.2 March 2006

A.9-1 Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence

APPENDIX A.9 � SAMPLING FREQUENCY ANALYSIS: MODIFIED CES METHOD Authors: Ling, M. and Rifai, H. S., University of Houston; Vanderford, M., Groundwater Services, Inc.

In MAROS, the Modified CES method is used to determine the sampling frequencies at all sampling locations for each COC. The Modified CES method has been developed based on the Cost Effective Sampling algorithm (CES, Ridley et. al. 1995) developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The Modified CES method is designed to set the sampling frequency for a well based on the analysis of time series concentration data at each sampling location, considering both recent trends and long-term trends of the concentration data. In contrast to the spatially-based Delaunay Method used in the MAROS sample location optimization, the Modified CES method is an approach based on temporal analysis. Its use, combined with the Delaunay Method and trend analyses, leads to a complete process of sampling optimization.

Cost Effective Sampling Regulatory guidance on choosing appropriate intervals for groundwater sampling is somewhat limited. General guidelines suggest that sampling intervals should be related to issues such as the variability in contaminant concentrations, distance and travel time of contaminants relative to potential receptors and the attenuation of contaminant concentration required to meet regulatory criteria (AFCEE, 2000). Cost Effective Sampling (CES) is a methodology developed to estimate the lowest-frequency sampling schedule for a given groundwater monitoring location providing stakeholders the needed information for regulatory and remedial decision-making.

The CES method evaluates the frequency of well sampling based on statistics describing the trend, variability and magnitude of contaminant concentrations. The central premise of the CES method is that sampling frequency should be based on the rate of change of constituents at the well rather than well location within the plume. The CES method recommends three steps for determining the sampling frequencies.

Step 1. Set frequency based on recent trends. Initial sampling of monitoring wells is usually quarterly, so the definition of ‘recent’ is usually 2 years or 8 data collection events. Based on the trends determined by rates of change from linear regression analysis, a location is routed along one of four paths. The lowest rate of change, 0-10 ppb per year, leads to an annual frequency schedule. The highest rate, 30+ ppb per year, leads to a quarterly schedule. Rates of change in between these two extremes are qualified by variability information, with higher variability leading to a higher sampling frequency. Variability is characterized by a distribution-free version of the coefficient of variation: the range divided by the median concentration with 1.0 as the cut-off.

Step 2. Adjust frequency based on overall trends. If the long-term history of change is significantly greater than the recent trend, the frequency may be reduced by one level. If this is not so, no change could be made.

Step 3. Reduce frequency based on risk. Since not all compounds in the target list are equally harmful, frequency is reduced by one level if recent maximum concentration for compound of high risk is less than one half of the MCL.




It was stated that the evaluation by CES should be performed at the end of each year's monitoring. All the target chemicals should be evaluated to make the final decision. Latest updates by LLNL include biennial sampling of the well if three successive annual recommendations are made, and the cut-off value of variability at high concentrations.

The adoption of minimum frequency of "quarterly" sampling is referred to by Barcelona et. al (1989). The use of the quarterly interval can be useful during the characterization phase of groundwater monitoring to evaluate seasonality, rate of change and variability, especially for fast moving plumes. However, for more stable plumes, the default adoption of quarterly monitoring can be excessive. The use of sampling intervals from Quarterly, Semi-Annual, Annual to Biennial levels is very common in long-term groundwater monitoring (AFCEE 1997, NFESC 2000) and has been adopted in MAROS method.

Details of the Modified CES Method The sampling frequency method MAROS employs is based on the CES method, with some modifications to integrate with the overall MAROS approach. The resulting Modified CES method has three major steps that correlate with those of the original CES method. The details of the decision procedures for the three major steps are given in the following sub-sections.

In the Modified CES method, Concentration Trend (CT) determined by Mann-Kendall analysis is used instead of the distribution-free version of the coefficient of variation for the characterization of the variability. The GSI style Mann-Kendall trend results (Groundwater Services, Inc.) fall into 6 categories: Decreasing (D), Probably Decreasing (PD), Stable (S), No Trend (NT), Probably Increasing (PI), and Increasing (I). The result of nonparametric Mann-Kendall analysis is judged with Coefficient of Variation (standard deviation divided by sample mean) and Confidence in Trend to determine the trend category. Details of this statistical method can be found in Appendix A.2 of this User Guide.

The Rate of Change (ROC) parameters used for determining the linear trends of COC were generalized to include all possible ranges. The ROC parameters fall into five categories: Low (L), Low-Medium (LM), Medium (M), Medium-High (MH), and High (H). The ROC is simply the slope of the fitted line by linear regression. The User is required to define three ROC parameters, the Low rate, Medium rate, and High rate in the software. The other two rates, Low-Medium and Medium-High will be automatically determined. The term Cleanup Goal or PRG (Primary Remediation Goal) is used in MAROS to stand for MCL. By default, the Low rate is defined as 0.5PRG/year, the Medium rate is defined as 1.0PRG/year and the High rate is defined as 2.0PRG/year, for all COCs. The Low-Medium rate is defined as the half way between the Low rate and the Medium rate, as is the same for Medium-High rate. The User should provide more accurate values for these ROC values, if accurate classification is available from the hydrogeologic setting in the studied site. The unit of the ROC parameters is mg/L/year.

For example, in the screen displayed to the right, the Cleanup Goal for Benzene is 0.005 mg/L. Then the default Low rate is 0.5 � 0.005 = 0.0025 mg/L/year, unless the User provides a site-specific value. According to the definition, the default Medium rate is 0.005 mg/L/year, and the default Low-Medium rate is (L+M)/2 = (0.0025+0.005)/2 = 0.00375, etc. For




details on how to set these parameters, refer to the corresponding section under MAROS Detailed Screen Descriptions.

In MAROS, the determination of sampling frequencies using the Modified CES method starts with the Sampling Frequency Analysis screen, detailed under MAROS Detailed Screen Descriptions.

1) DETERMINE FREQUENCY BY RECENT TRENDS

Sampling frequency can be determined by results from both recent trends and overall trends. In the initial step, we need to determine the sampling frequency based on recent trends using the decision logic shown below.

Y

Y

Y

Y

SemiAnnualY

N

Annual

Quarterly

CT is Incr, ProbIncr with ROC>LM, or NoTrend with ROC>LM ?

Annual

Quarterly

ROC <= L ?

ROC > H ?

ROC <= M ?

ROC > M

CT is Incr, ProbIncr, or NoTrend with ROC>MH ?

SemiAnnual

N

N

N

N




For wells with sufficient data to determine a trend and low rates of change, Annual sampling is recommended. Wells without a sufficient data set (<4 sample events) are assigned a default Quarterly sampling frequency. Wells with high rates of change are assigned default quarterly monitoring as well. For wells with moderate rates of change, the concentrations trend results from the Mann-Kendall analysis are evaluated and wells are assigned either Quarterly, Semi-annual or Annual monitoring frequencies.

A similar procedure is used to determine the sampling frequency based on overall trends. In this step, the sampling frequency can be one of three possible outcomes: Annual, Semi-Annual, or Quarterly. An adjustment based on the recent/overall ratio will be performed in the next step. Figure A.9.1 gives a quick decision matrix that is similar to the above flowchart but is more illustrative of the results.




2) ADJUSTMENT BASED ON RECENT/OVERALL RATIO If the frequency determined from overall trend is greater than that from the recent trend, e.g., the overall frequency is Quarterly while the current frequency is Annual, we might need to adjust the recent frequency by one level. When the recent trend is significantly lower than the long-term trend, reducing the sampling frequency gradually will ensure safety. Additionally, as more data is collected the confidence in the concentrations trends should increase. The steps used in evaluating recent versus overall trends are illustrated in the chart below.

Y

Y

Quarterly

SemiAnnual

N

N

Use Frequency determined by Recent data

Overall CT is Incr, ProbIncr, or NoTrend ?

SemiAnnual

Overall CT is Incr, ProbIncr, or NoTrend

Annual

SemiAnnual

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

Recent frequency is less than Overall frequency ?

Recent frequency is SemiAnnual ?

Recent frequency is Annual

Overall frequency isSemiAnnual ?

Overall frequency isQuarterly

Overall CT is Incr, ProbIncr, or NoTrend

Quarterly




3) ADJUSTMENT BASED ON MCL

If the maximum concentration in the sample is less than one half of the MCL, and if the trend of COC in this well is not increasing, we can reduce the sampling frequency by one level. Because at such a low concentration level and with confidence that it will not increase, the adjustment will not result in higher risk. The steps to be followed are shown in the following flow chart. In addition, wells that have attained cleanup standards (their long-term concentrations were far less than MCL) can be eliminated from the monitoring network to further optimize the monitoring program. Some of the empirical rules are referred to NFESC (2000).

N

The above determined frequency is SemiAnnualand Current CT is not Incr ?

N

The above determined frequency is Quarterlyand Current CT is not

Keep the frequency determined above

N Keep the frequency determined above

Y Annual

Y SemiAnnual

Y Biennial

Y

The above determined frequency is Annual and Current CT is Stable,ProbDecr or Decr ?

Maximum value in recent data is less than one half of COC's MCL ?

Y

Biennial is also made in three consecutive Annualrecommendations.

Wells that have attained cleanup standards and are not critical, sampling can be stopped.




Figure A.9.1 Decision Matrix for Determining Frequency.

As illustrated above, the Modified CES method has three major steps centered on the magnitude of ROC, and the direction of change. The GSI style Mann-Kendall analysis is adopted because it can perform distribution-free test and provides a good measure of the direction of change. Most Users will be more concerned with an increasing trend rather than a decreasing trend, assuming they have the same ROC. Regulators tend to impose more stringent sampling plans if the trend is increasing. An increasing trend can result in future exceedences of the MCL and increased threats to potential receptors. By contrast, a decreasing trend may drop the concentration below MCL and bring the well into compliance. These examples illustrate the importance of both the magnitude and direction of the concentration trend. As discussed above, the modified CES method incorporateds these considerations into the decision process.

The final results displayed in MAROS include the recent result (based on the analysis of the ‘recent’ time period chosen by the User), overall result (based on the analysis of overall data) and the recommendation after two steps are adjusted (Sampling Frequency) As is shown in the right screen, the Sampling Frequency for MW-15 is Biennial. Both the Current and Overall results for MW-15 are Annual. Its recommended frequency can be used in the future round of sampling. The final recommendation for sampling frequency should be made only after evaluating the Sampling Frequency recommendation for each well in light of site specific conditions. Wells used as sentry or compliance points may, by regulation, require more frequent monitoring. Other wells, with concentrations below MCLs, limited data sets with low concentrations or wells with suspicious data points can have their frequency intervals increased.




Both parts of the sampling optimization � sampling location determination (based on the Delaunay Method) and sampling frequency determination (based on Modified CES method) can be performed periodically to ensure continued quality of the groundwater monitoring program. Re-analysis is particularly important when newer monitoring wells have been included in the program. Changes in sampling location and frequency can evolve when wells gain sufficient data to determine a concentration trend.

References AFCEE, 1997, Long-Term Monitoring Optimization Guide - Version 1.1, HQ Air Force Center for

Environmental Excellence, Consultant Operations Division, Brooks Air Force Base, TX. AFCEE, 2000, Designing Monitoring Programs to Effectively Evaluate the Performance of

Natural Attenuation. Technology Transfer Division, Brooks Air Force Base, TX. Barcelona, M. J. et al., 1989, Sampling Frequency for Ground-water Quality Monitoring,

EPA/600/4-89/032, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, U.S. EPA. NFESC, 2000, Guide to Optimal Groundwater Monitoring - Interim Final, Naval Facilities

Engineering Service Center, Port Hueneme, California. Ridley, M. N. et al., 1995, Cost-Effective Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells, the Regents

of UC/LLNL, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.




APPENDIX A.8 � MAROS SITE RESULTS Authors: Newell, C.J. and Aziz, J. J., Groundwater Services, Inc. The preliminary monitoring system optimization results are based on site classification, source treatment and monitoring system category (Figure A.8.1). The decision matrices below are heuristic rules based on the judgment of the authors. Users are expected to review and modify as necessary to reflect site specific hydrogeology, contaminants, risks and regulatory considerations. General recommendations by more rigorous statistical methods can be obtained by using the more detailed optimization approaches outlined in Appendices A.2 and A.3. General site results are outlined by for Sampling Frequency, Well Sample Density and Duration of Sampling. These criteria take into consideration: plume stability, type of plume, and groundwater velocity. The results are specific to only one COC. Each COC considered in the MAROS software is assigned a result based on the criteria outlined here.

Tail

Sour

ce

PI

I

S

PD

D

PI I S PD D

E

L

MNT

NT

Tail

Sour

ce

PI

I

S

PD

D

PI I S PD D

E

L

MNT

NT

Figure A.8.1 Decision Matrix for Assigning Monitoring System Categories: Moderate (M); Extensive (E); Limited (L); Plume Stability: Increasing (I); Probably Increasing (PI); No Trend

(NT); Stable(S); Probably Decreasing (PD); Decreasing(D).

Weighted Average Two types of weighting are available within the MAROS Analysis software (i.e. LOE weighting and well weighting). The weighting for these analyses follow a simple weighted average defined as:

Weighted Average

�

�

�

�� n

ii

n

iii

W

XW

1

1 , where .0�iW

Wi is the weight of the value, Xi, in the MAROS software, high, medium, and low weight correspond to values 3, 2 and 1 respectively.




No Current Site Treatment Or Monitored Natural Attenuation Sites not currently undergoing site treatment (i.e. no current site remediation method other than monitored natural attenuation) have separate decision matrices applied (Tables A.8.1 to A.8.3)

FREQUENCY

MAROS uses a simple decision matrix to indicate how often wells at the site should be sampled to be sufficient for adequate groundwater monitoring. Users can compare the frequency of the sampling at their site to the suggested frequency of monitoring evaluated based on the decision matrix below. If their site has wells being sampled at a significantly higher interval, then some reduction in the sampling frequency could be applied. Note that user can apply the sampling optimization (Sample Frequency) wing of the software to perform a more rigorous analysis of the sampling frequency required for monitoring for individual well sampling frequency recommendations. Another possibility for sites with slow moving groundwater (higher TTR) involves a comparison study of trends for a complete dataset and a censored dataset. For example, the user can choose to analyze all existing monitoring data, then censor the data (consistently choose 1 quarter’s worth of data, e.g. the first sample event for each year) and run the trend analysis again. Run the MAROS trend results on both the sets of data and then compare the results. If both trend results are the same, then the trend results could have been obtained from using only annual sampling. Similarly, if you would like to be able to sample at a frequency greater than biennial, this same type of analysis could be applied. You could choose to monitor the well greater than every 2 years if the trend results are consistent with less data. This type of analysis is only appropriate with adequately characterized plumes and long time period sample datasets (> 8 years). The sampling frequency at the site is determined by the Monitoring System Category assigned by the results from the Source and Tail Stability as well as the “Time to Receptor”. Sites with both decreasing Source and Tail Results are recommended for closure.

Table A.8.1 Frequency Determination for sites with no groundwater fluctuations and Monitored natural Attenuation.

Monitoring System Category TTR E M L

Close (TTR < 2 yrs) Quarterly Biannually (6 months)

Annually

Medium (2 < TTR < 5 yrs) Biannually (6 months)

Annually Annually

Far (TTR > 5 yrs) Annually Annually Biennially (2 year interval)

TTR: time to receptor (distance to receptor/seepage velocity)




Table A.8.2 Frequency Determination for sites with groundwater fluctuations and Monitored natural attenuation.

Monitoring System Category TTR E M L

Close (TTR < 2 yrs) Quarterly Quarterly Biannually Medium (2 < TTR < 5 yrs) Quarterly Biannually Biannually Far (TTR > 5 yrs) Biannually Biannually Annually TTR: time to receptor (distance to receptor/seepage velocity)

DURATION

MAROS uses a simple decision matrix to assess when the design of the groundwater monitoring network should be reassessed for reducing the scope of the system or to stop monitoring altogether. Users can compare the projected duration of the sampling at their site to the suggested duration of monitoring evaluated based on the decision matrix below. The matrix was developed based on engineering judgment and experience of the authors. It is not based on any kind of statistical analysis. If their site has groundwater monitoring planned for a significantly longer time period, then some reduction in the monitoring duration could be applied, subject to local and federal regulations. The sampling duration at the site is determined by the Monitoring System Category assigned by the results from the combined Source and Tail Stability Category as well as the length of the sampling record available. Sites with both decreasing Source and Tail Results are suggested to end the sampling.

Table A.8.3 duration Determination for sites with Monitored Natural Attenuation.

SAMPLING DENSITY

MAROS uses a simple rule of thumb to indicate how many wells at the site may be sufficient for groundwater monitoring. Users can compare the number of wells at their site to the number of wells from the rule of thumb. If their site has significantly more wells being sampled, then some reduction in the number of wells is possible. Note that users can use the sampling optimization (Sample Location) wing of the software to perform a more rigorous analysis of the number of wells required for monitoring.

Source or Tail Trend Category Sampling Record I or PI Trends NT or N/A S Trends PD or D

Trends Small (< 2 yrs)

Consider reassessment of network if concentrations

begin to decrease.

Insufficient Data, continue

sampling

6 more years 3 more years

Medium (2 < TTR < 10 yrs)


begin to decrease.


sampling

4 more years 2 more years

Large (> 10 yrs)


begin to decrease.


sampling

2 more years 1 more year




The simple rule of thumb is based on two large databases of historical plume data were considered when evaluating the minimum well density reflecting both BTEX and chlorinated solvent plume information (Mace, 1997 and McNab, 1999). Mace (1997) used data from 138 BTEX plumes while McNab (1999) presented data from 37 the chlorinated solvent plumes. These data were combined, plotted, and then used to develop the following equation:

sampling density (number of wells) = � � 4.05.1 hplumelengt = where plume length is in units of feet and the sampling density is the number of wells for the entire plume. In other words, this equation indicates the monitoring well density actually in use at the sites in the database and is based on plumes of different sizes (roughly 50 ft to 5000 ft). MAROS uses this equation to indicate a well density that is typical at many sites. Based on recommendations developed by ASTM (1998), a minimum of four wells is specified for all plumes. User should also consider the well density in light of adequately defining/characterizing the plume through gathering sufficient site information. Current Site Treatment Sites currently undergoing site treatment (i.e. pump and treat system, etc.) have separate site suggestions for sampling frequency, duration and density applied.

FREQUENCY

No recommendation is given for the sampling frequency at a site that is currently undergoing remediation.

DURATION

MAROS uses a simple decision matrix to assess when the design of the groundwater monitoring network should be reassessed for reducing the scope of the system or to stop monitoring altogether. Users can compare the projected duration of the sampling at their site to the suggested duration of monitoring evaluated based on the decision matrix below. The matrix was developed based on engineering judgment and experience of the authors. It is not based on any kind of statistical analysis. If their site has groundwater monitoring planned for a significantly longer time period, then some reduction in the monitoring duration could be applied, subject to local and federal regulations.

Table A.8.4 duration Determination for sites with current site treatment.

Source or Tail Trend Category I or PI Trends NT or N/A S Trends D or PD Trends Remediate indefinitely or consider increasing performance or remediation mechanism.

Insufficient Data,

continue sampling.

Stop treatment if PRG met. Consider stopping treatment if plume has

been stable for extended period.

Consider stopping treatment if

decreasing trends have been

occurring for extended period.




The sampling duration at the site is determined by the Source and Tail Stability results. Sites with both decreasing Source and Tail trends are suggested to consider stopping treatment if decreasing trends have been occurring for an extended period or PRG’s have been met. Sites with Source or Tail results that indicate an increasing plume size are recommended for indefinite remediation or consider increasing performance or remediation mechanism. Sites with Stable in the Source and Tail suggest to consider removing the treatment system if previously reducing concentration or PRG met.

SAMPLING DENSITY

The sampling density determination for a site currently undergoing remediation is identical to that not currently undergoing site treatment. However, the results should be considered in the context of evaluating both regulatory compliance as well as remediation method performance evaluation. References

Mace, R.E., R.S. Fisher, D.M. Welch, and S.P. Parra, Extent, Mass, and Duration of Hydrocarbon Plumes from Leaking Petroleum Storage Tank Sites in Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas. Geologic Circular 97-1, 1997.

McNab, W.W., D.W.R.J. Bear, R. Ragaini, C. Tuckfield, and C. Oldenburg, 1999. Historical Case Analysis of Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compound Plumes, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, University of California, Livermore, Ca, 1999. http://searchpdf.adobe.com/proxies/0/5/69/6.html


APPENDIX M

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 2011 ANNUAL REPORT

Attachment 1 - Response to June 7, 2012 EPA Comments on Annual Performance Monitoring and Site-Wide Status Report, dated March 29, 2012, prepared by Hargis + Associates for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. (ANPI)

July 2, 2012 1 of 17

EPA COMMENT ANPI RESPONSE

SECTION IN REVISED 2011 ANNUAL REPORT

TEXT WHERE RESPONSE WILL BE LOCATED

GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Regarding EPA comments on prior year annual monitoring reports, it has

been agreed in the past that the following year monitoring report would address prior year comments. ANPI’s May 24, 2011 letter responding to EPA comments on the 2010 Report states: “During that meeting [with EPA and ADEQ], it was decided that revision of the annual report would not be necessary (see Appendix O of the 2011 Annual Report). However, several important EPA comments on the 2010 Annual Report and ANPI’s responses do not appear to have been incorporated (i.e., text rewritten or tables corrected) in this 2011 Annual Report. Some examples include the change of the nitrate standard for the San Pedro, more explanation regarding the source of the nitrate observed in MW-35 and MW-36, and more explanation about P-03 and perched zone dewatering, etc. It should be standard practice to review comments and responses on prior year Annual Reports and incorporate additional text or changes, as needed, into subsequent Annual Reports. See attached May 24, 2011 ANPI Response Summary to EPA’s comments on the 2010 Annual Report. We can discuss this comment further in our June 12 meeting.

Noted. This was an oversight that will be corrected in future report preparation.

To be addressed in future documents.

2. The conclusions in the 2011 Annual Report regarding the effectiveness of the MNA remedy for the Southern Area needs to be discussed at the upcoming June 12, 2012 Annual Technical Meeting. The conclusions drawn in this Report that the current remedy is meeting expectations does not seem consistent with the increasing concentrations of nitrate and perchlorate observed in the remaining monitoring wells that still can be monitored. Consideration needs to be given to modifying the remedy, rather than modifying the performance standards.

This topic was discussed in the June 12, 2012 Annual Technical meeting. ANPI is presently considering remedy enhancements, which will be further discussed with EPA as plans are developed.

To be addressed in future documents.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS 1. Page 9, Section 2.2.1, Water Level, second paragraph; and page 66,

Section 9.1.1, Perched Zone. The text states that artificial recharge to the perched zone might occur from water line leaks, irrigation or other water handling practices, and that an inventory of possible water sources should be conducted. Will this inventory task be one of the work tasks scheduled in 2012?

ANPI, as part of its plant expansion and modernization efforts, has designed a new water distribution system. When completed, the existing water system will be decommissioned. It is believed that this will eliminate the possibility of uncontrolled artificial recharge to the perched zone.

2.2.1, 9.1.1, 10.1


July 2, 2012 2 of 17




2. Page 9, Section 2.2.2, Perched Zone Dewatering, first paragraph. This section discusses perched zone dewatering. What is the limiting factor the pumping rate of P-03? Would greater extraction rates be possible if a larger pump were installed? Please add a brief explanation or a footnote for further clarification on this point.

Pumping of piezometer P-03 is limited by several factors: the rate of evaporation from the stock tanks which hold the purged water, the amount of rainfall in the area, the pumping capacity, the limited saturated thickness and hydraulic properties of the perched zone. The current pumping rate of approximately 2 gallons per minute is believed to be what the perched aquifer can support. Pumping has been discontinued on occasion either due to aquifer depletion or tank capacity. ANPI will evaluate various types of equipment such as a solar aerator to increase evaporation from the stock tanks. This evaluation will be added as a bullet in Section 10.1.

2.2.2, 10.1

3. Page 19, Section 2.4.3, Water Quality, second paragraph. The text states that perchlorate was detected in February 2008 in a split-sample from shallow aquifer monitoring well MW-22 at a concentration of 4.4 ug/l, however it was not detected in the original sample at a concentration above the detection limit of 2 ug/l. Subsequent sampling in March 2008 detected no perchlorate in MW-22. If correct, the text should be expanded to state that no perchlorate has been detected in MW-22 during sampling in 2009, 2010 and 2011, and this one-time perchlorate detection in the split-sample is considered a result of laboratory error. Otherwise, the statement in the following section 2.4.4. Southern Area Shallow Aquifer Status, that “historically perchlorate has never been detected in the shallow aquifer” needs to be qualified.

The text in the second paragraph of Section 2.4.3 will be expanded to include the sentence “The perchlorate detect of 4.4 µg/l in the split sample of February 2008 in monitor well MW-22 was the only detection of perchlorate over the entire sampling period at the well from August 1999 to present.” The final sentence will be amended to read “The one-time perchlorate detection in the split sample of February 2008 is considered a result of laboratory error.”

2.4.3

4. Page 27, Section 2.3.2, Effluent Monitoring, first paragraph. The first sentence refers to the alternate upper discharge location for the first time in the report with no explanation as to its purpose. For clarity, a new sentence should follow that states “The alternate discharge point may be used if there is a risk that the discharged effluent may not meet the discharge limit of 10 mg/l nitrate. See Section 3.4.1.1 for additional details.” Delete the last sentence in paragraph 2 of this section.

ANPI will revise the first paragraph of Section 3.3.2 as suggested.

3.3.2


July 2, 2012 3 of 17




5. Page 32, Section 3.4.1, Influent/Effluent Water Quality, first paragraph. The text states that the AAWQS for arsenic is 0.05 mg/L; however, this does not appear consistent with the current (since 2006) federal MCL in drinking water of 10 ug/L. All applicable Arizona surface water and groundwater quality standards referenced in the Report should be confirmed, and where changes are necessary, comparisons to sampling results and decision-making should be reevaluated.

The AAWQS value of 0.05 mg/l for arsenic was verified as included in the most current supplement (08-4) of Title 18, Chapter 11 of the Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) promulgated on December 31, 2008. The text will be modified here and elsewhere to reference the most current source of any water standard listed in the report.

3.4.1, 3.44

6. Page 33, Section 3.4.1.1, Effluent Field Nitrate, second paragraph. The section discusses that when the effluent nitrate-N concentration exceeds 10 mg/L or is close to exceeding 10 mg/L, one of the corrective actions is to switch from the primary to the alternate discharge location. Please reference in the Report the Northern Area Operations and Maintenance Plan or other documents that describe when this action may be taken. The reasoning behind this switch is not readily apparent to the reader at any of the numerous locations in the text of the Report where this occurrence or action is discussed.

Section 4.10.1 of the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, Northern Area Remediation System (NARS), March 9, 2007, describes the procedures to take following a field probe analysis detection of nitrate-N concentrations in effluent exceeding 10 mg/l. These procedures include re-routing the effluent to the alternate location after the exceedance is detected. In February 2011, when the increasing nitrate-N concentration in effluent was observed to reach approximately 9 mg/l, the decision was made to re-route the effluent to the alternate location while the effluent concentration was still below the 10 mg/l cleanup standard. Reference to the NARS O&M Plan will be placed in the text wherever the re-routing of the effluent is discussed.

3.4.1.1, 3.3.2, 3.4.5, 7.2.1

7. Page 34, Section 3.4.1.1, Effluent Field Nitrate, last paragraph. The text states: “Based on these nitrate increase in cold weather, it is recommended that cold weather be added as a possible cause for nitrate exceedance in Section 4.10.1 of the O&M Manual. The correctives measures would be reduced pumping at SEW-1 and increased molasses in the treatment cells.” This recommendation needs to be implemented. Corrected or edited pages for the O&M Manual need to be submitted to the Agencies for review and approval.

Revised pages for the March 9, 2007 NARS O&M will be submitted to EPA later in 2012.

10.2

8. Page 46, Section 4.2.1, San Pedro River Status. This section discusses the surface flow and subflow in the San Pedro River. In order to add visual context, it is suggested that a cross-section from SEW-1 to the San Pedro River be added. The cross-section should contain water levels and riverbed elevations.

ANPI will add a schematic cross section from SEW-1 to the San Pedro River.

Figure 19


July 2, 2012 4 of 17




9. Page 49, Section 6.1, Well Inventory, second paragraph, second to last sentence. This paragraph discusses the new wells installed within the study area during 2011. One well was confirmed to be a deep aquifer well, but no driller’s report was available for the other well. Has data been located for this second well? Please update this section to discuss the status of this second well.

A June 2012 search of the ADWR 55 database shows that no data has yet been filed on this notice of intent (NOI). Often there is a delay between submitting a NOI, drilling the well and submitting the final driller’s report. Also, not all NOIs result in the drilling of a well. The annual preparation of the well inventory always includes not only the determination of new NOIs filed within the study area but for the review of past incomplete NOIs to see if driller’s reports are now available.

6.1

10. Page 52, Section 7.1, first paragraph. The text states: “water quality data indicate that the MNA remedy in the Southern Area is performing as expected.” This statement does not seem to quite accurately summarize the status of the Southern Area Remedy. The primary objective of the remedy for this Southern Area is to meet the groundwater cleanup standards. The text may need some revision to more explicitly state the current status. Further discussion of this issue is needed at our June 12 meeting. See General Comment #2 above.

The text will be revised to state that “Water quality data indicate that the MNA remedy in the Southern Area is performing at a pace slower than expected.” ANPI is currently considering remedy enhancements as mentioned in the response to general comment #2. In addition as mentioned in the response to specific comment #1, ANPI is replacing its existing water distribution system which will eliminate the possibility of uncontrolled artificial recharge to the perched zone.

7.1

11. Page 58, Section 7.2.1. NARS Evaluation, second paragraph. This section discusses the MAROS statistical evaluation results. The list of possible Mann-Kendall trends is exactly the same as the list of actual nitrate-N trends two sentences later. The “possible” list should be deleted, even when future trends don’t include the full list. This also occurs in Section 7.2.2, page 59, paragraph 3. Please summarize, as this text is repetitive and confusing to read.

The “possible” list will be deleted. The text in 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 will be reviewed and summarized.

7.2.1, 7.2.2


July 2, 2012 5 of 17




12. Pages 59-62, Section 7.2.1, NARS Evaluation. This section discuss the effectiveness of the capture zone created by SEW-1, but does not discuss the continuing migration of elevated nitrate in the vicinity of upgradient monitoring wells MW-34 and MW-36. An additional paragraph needs to be added to this section to discuss the impact of this continuing elevated nitrate.

The following paragraph will be added to discuss the impact of this continuing elevated nitrate. It is expected that the concentrations of nitrate-N detected at monitor wells MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36 would fluctuate from time to time due to heterogeneities in the aquifer materials as well as in the plume itself. Instead of a continuing source of contamination to the shallow aquifer, it is believed that high concentrations of nitrate-N linger in some areas due to poor circulation. While the particle tracking in the model indicates these areas are within the capture zone, the radius of hydraulic influence from SEW-1 probably does not significantly affect gradients in this area. Hence, the travel time from this area to the extraction well is long.

7.2.1

13. Pages 69-70, Section 9.2.1, NARS, first and second paragraphs. This section discusses the effectiveness of the capture zone created by SEW-1 in withdrawal of nitrate-contaminated groundwater. However, wells MW-08, MW-34, MW-15 and MW-36 have experienced variations of nitrate concentrations in recent years. Please add a discussion explaining whether the nearby “hot spot” near MW-35 and MW-36 is a continuing source of nitrate to wells in the area and what has been done to investigate this source. Also, as noted under Specific Comment #13 above, please discuss the long-term impact of this area of elevated nitrate on the overall effectiveness of the NARS remedy.

Please see response to Comment #12 above for MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36 and the long-term impact. Section 9.2.1 text will refer back to this discussion in Section 7.2.1. For MW-08, Section 9.2.1 already includes the following explanation: “the variations in water quality are believed due to its proximity to extraction well SEW-1 and the circulation pattern caused by its cone of depression in proximity to the shallow aquifer boundary.” The so called “hot spots” are not considered to be continuing sources. As explained in response to comment 12, this plume is heterogeneous in terms of the distribution of nitrate concentrations within it. This is expected considering the variable history of contaminant release as well as variation of hydraulic properties in the aquifer.

9.2.1


July 2, 2012 6 of 17




14. Page 73, Section 9.4, MCA and Northern Area Geochemical Data, first paragraph, last sentence. The last sentence states: “Moreover, there is no evidence of continuing source inputs,” in reference to both the Northern and Southern Areas. Recommend this statement be qualified to state that the source area for the Southern Area appears to be fully characterized and contained by the continued pumping and dewatering of the perched zone. However, there may be a residual, unknown source of nitrate in the vicinity of MW-36 that ANPI has not been able to identify. The text should clarify this point, as well as the observation that this nitrate “hot spot” or an unidentified secondary source area (area where nitrate has concentrated in the soils and sediments at the bottom of Wash 3) should flush out and the nitrate concentrations should continue to decline with time.

The last sentence of first paragraph will be changed to “The source area for the Southern Area appears to be fully characterized and contained by the continued pumping and dewatering of the perched zone. However, it is believed that high concentrations of nitrate-N may be concentrated in the soils and sediments in the area of MW-36 and these concentrations continue to linger due to poor circulation. With time, the nitrate-N will be flushed out and the concentrations will decline.”

9.4

15. Page 75, Section 10.1, bullet 1. EPA and ADEQ concur with adding P-1 to the monitoring program for one year of quarterly sampling to check on the seasonal changes of nitrate-N and perchlorate.

ANPI will implement this change. Table 23

16. Page 75, Section 10.1, bullet 2. EPA and ADEQ also concur with the reduction in sampling frequency of MW-24, as concentrations of contaminants of concern have been consistently below selected cleanup standards.


17. Page 75, Section 10.1. Although the sampling frequency for several Southern Area monitoring wells is being reduced, EPA and ADEQ recommend that the input data for the mass calculation metric should continue to be collected and used to evaluate the effectiveness of site remediation. Further discussion is needed at the upcoming June 12, 2012 meeting regarding the overall performance standards for meeting a MNA remedy in the Southern Area, before consideration be given to changing any performance standards.

ANPI will continue to include the mass calculation metric for the MCA. In addition, ANPI is presently considering remedy enhancements, which will be further discussed with EPA as plans are developed.

10.1

18. Page 75, New Bullet 4. Please add a recommendation to determine potential sources of recharge to the perched zone, as discussed in Specific Comment #1 above.

The bullet will be added per the response to specific comment #1 above.

10.1

19. Page 76, Section 10.2, bullet 1. EPA and ADEQ concur with maintaining quarterly monitoring at D(18-21)06bcb until nitrate concentrations are below 10 mg/l. However, once the nitrate concentration is below 10 mg/l, this well should continue to be monitored annually for two more years to make sure no rebound occurs.

ANPI will maintain quarterly sampling at D(18-21)06bcb. ANPI also agrees to monitor the well annually for 2 years after the nitrate-N concentrations go below the goal to make sure no rebound occurs.

10.2


July 2, 2012 7 of 17




20. Page 76, Section 10.2, bullet 2. EPA and ADEQ also concur with discontinuing to monitor private wells D(17-20)23acd and D(17-20)23ada, and replacing them with D(17-20)25bad as a buffer zone well.


21. Page 76, new bullet. EPA and ADEQ again (as in EPA’s comments on the 2010 Annual Report) recommend installation of one additional monitoring well in the shallow aquifer northeast of SEW-1. This new monitoring well would help define the contour in this area and also provide both hydrogeological and water quality information. It will also help improve capture zone analysis for the nitrate originating in the vicinity of MW-35 and MW-36, the remaining area of cleanup concern in the Northern Area.

ANPI understands that the EPA recommends another well in the shallow aquifer northeast of the river. The logistical issued of siting this well was discussed at the annual meeting with EPA and ADEQ in 2010 (Section 3.6, 2011 Annual Report). It was determined that this well would not be installed as a result of the inability to acquire property access at a strategic location on the east side of the San Pedro River. There has been no change in property access since that meeting.

3.6

22. Page 76, new bullet. Please add a recommendation to determine the well details for the second well application in the Northern Area for which no driller’s report was available in 2011. See Specific Comment #9 above.

The ADWR Wells 55 database was checked in June 2012 and there is still no additional information filed for this NOI. The well inventory is conducted annually to determine if new NOIs have been submitted and to check on previous year’s incomplete NOIs to see if they have been completed. There is no need to add a new bullet at this time.

6.1

23. Page 76, new bullet. Please add a recommendation to update the NARS O&M Plan to include provisions for operational modifications during cold weather.

A bullet will be added recommending the update of the NARS O&M Plan to include provisions for operational modifications during cold weather.

10.2

Attachment 2 - Response to April 21, 2011 EPA Comments on Annual Performance Monitoring and Site-Wide Status Report, dated March 31, 2011, prepared by Hargis + Associates for Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. (ANPI)

July 2, 2012 8 of 17




The following is a response to comments issued on April 21, 2011 by the EPA on the ANPI 2010 Annual Report. ANPI comments were submitted on May 24, 2011

GENERAL COMMENTS

1. In general the report is well organized in the presentation of the data that was collected during 2010. The comments submitted by EPA for the 2009 report requested a more in-depth level of analysis and evaluation and that more detail and explanation regarding data results and data trends should be addressed in future annual reports. Those elements have been incorporated into this report including how the data results support model predictions and EPA-specific MNA guidelines. In addition the Executive Summary has been written to include more specific information regarding activities at the Site.

Noted. Future reports will follow this same level of detail.

No change.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS

1. Page ES-2. Please provide additional explanation concerning stratification of contamination distribution. Is the stratification tied to geological stratification or some other mechanism? What direct physical or geochemical evidence suggests stratification? See Specific Comment #5 for Section 2.2.

“Contaminant stratification” in the perched zone and Molinos Creek sub-aquifer (MCA) refers to a pattern of increasing concentrations of nitrate and/or perchlorate with increasing depth in the saturated zone. This is not believed to result from “geological stratification” but rather from the effects of artificial recharge. Water that was discharged to the ponds improved in quality over time. The last volume of water discharged to the ponds was over one million gallons of fresh water produced from ANPI production well ANP-4. This discharge represented water that was used to pressure-test the surge tank for the new brine concentrator facility. This discharge of fresh water recharged into the perched zone occurred in early 1995 and can be clearly seen as a spike in the hydrograph of perched zone piezometer P-03 (Figure A-1) and in the corresponding depression of nitrate-N concentrations for perched zone piezometer P-03 (Figure C-1).

Executive Summary


July 2, 2012 9 of 17




2. Page ES-2. Why was only 4,764 gallons of water pumped from P-03 in 2011? In 2009, the Annual Report notes that 9,795 gallons (twice as much) were extracted in the prior year. Please explain the limiting factors. See Specific Comments #6 for Section 2.2.2 and #7 for Section 2.2.4.

Lower volume of water pumped at P-03 in 2010 (4,764 gals) vs. 2009 (9,795 gals) is believed due to higher rainfall in 2010 over 2009 which kept the steel stock tanks full to mostly full during February through April, July, August, and October through December. P-03 was pumped whenever possible to keep the tanks full, but there was no month in 2010 when it could be pumped more than 1,000 gallons versus 2009, when there were 6 months during which P-03 pumped more than 1,000 gallons (Section 2.2.2).

Executive Summary, 2.2.2 The volume of rainfall as a limiting factor on P-03 pumping will be listed in these two sections. The details about the volume of water pumped in 2009 versus 2010 will not be included in the 2011 report.

3. Page 3. This section refers to previous actions performed at ANPI. Actions were completed in 2000. What is the current status of these sites? Were the remedial action implementation reports approved? The text should state that the remedial action implementation reports were approved and all remedial soils activities were completed and documented in EPA’s “construction complete” determination in 2008.

Remedial actions completed by ANPI in 2000 were inspected and approved by EPA. Approval of the respective remedial action implementation reports for the individual media components was documented in EPA’s 2008 Preliminary Close Out Report.

1.3

4. Page 3. Native soil covers placed over the formerly actions ponds are discussed. Is the soil cover adequate to prevent infiltration of rain water or is there an additional geotechnical or clay layer under the soil layer? While the ROD Amendment required a clay cover for the close-out of the formerly active ponds, the text should be expanded to discuss whether this is adequate given the recent infiltration issues.

The remedy for formerly active ponds was approved by EPA in the Record of Decision Amendment (2008) and implemented accordingly. It is believed the intent of the native soil cover was primarily to prevent air entrainment of soils exceeding the residential respective soil remediation levels. However, the former pond areas are regularly monitored for damage by runoff and for ponding of water over the soil covers. The native soil covers and requisite institutional controls were and continue to be implemented per the ROD Amendment of 2008.

1.3

5. Page 7. This section provides an explanation of a process that could potentially explain stratification in the perched zone. What direct evidence is there for this explanation?

See the ANPI Response for Comment No. 1. 2.2


July 2, 2012 10 of 17




6. Page 9. The incidence of higher rainfall in 2010 over 2009 is used to explain the lower annual pumping volume from well P-03, implying that the tank evaporation rate is the limiting factor for pumping well P-03. Would greater extraction rates be possible if the tanks were larger? Other sections of the report appear to say that lower hydraulic conductivity in the perched zone, as the aquifer if being pumped down, is the limiting factor. Please provide further explanation of factors limiting pumping rates for P-03.

The rate of evaporation from the stock tanks in part is related to the surface area of the water. ANPI recently replaced the former swimming pools with the steel stock tanks based on the expectation that these vessels would require less maintenance and be sturdier. ANPI believes that the size of the stock tanks is reasonable, considering the magnitude of the dewatering activities at piezometer P-03. However, as a means of enhancing the rate of evaporation from the tanks, ANPI is evaluating various types of equipment such as a solar aerator. ANPI is not clear which sections of the report imply that hydraulic conductivity in the perched zone is the limiting factor for withdrawals at piezometer P-03. However, there are limitations related to well diameter, pumping capacity, and the limited saturated thickness of the perched zone. Overall, it is important to recognize that the dewatering activities at P-03 were undertaken by ANPI as a voluntary measure to support the Southern Area Remedy. This was not a component remedy required under the 2008 ROD Amendment. The control of the perched zone is carefully maintained and monitored nevertheless, and ANPI remains committed to continuing the perched zone extraction/evaporation action.

2.2.2


July 2, 2012 11 of 17




7. Page 10. The report states that the operation of the dewatering system at piezometer P-03 is intended to continue until the water levels become too low to operate a pump. It is not clear whether one or more of the following is (are) preventing more aggressive pumping of this system or if the system is being pumped as aggressively as the perched allows.

Please address the following questions: 1) Does the perched aquifer deplete using the 2-gallon per minute pump and

pumping has to be discontinued until it recharges? 2) Is the current pump rate all the perched aquifer can support? 3) Does pumping have to be stopped for the water collected in the tanks to

evaporate prior to pumping more water into them? 4) How often was the well pumped in 2010 prior to installation of the solar

powered pump in May 2010? As long as the treatment of the perched groundwater is dewatering and the objective is to pump as much perched groundwater as possible to accomplish this, consideration should be given to both the size of the tanks and the pump rate to have a more efficient system. One way to accomplish this would be to replace the current tanks with tanks that will accommodate more water and provide a greater surface area for more efficient and faster evaporation. Depending on the capacity of the perched aquifer, a larger pump may be necessary.

Please see the ANPI Response for Comment No. 6. In regard to the above questions: 1. See above response. 2. ANPI believes this is the case. 3. Yes, on occasion, either due to aquifer depletion or tank capacity. 4. See monthly reports for information on the pumping volumes. The frequency of pumping is not monitored.

2.2.4


July 2, 2012 12 of 17




8. Page 20. Currently, nitrate concentrations at SEW-1 are higher than those of the nearby monitoring wells (MW-08, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, D(18-21)-06bcc2). The current assumption is that the source of the nitrate from upstream of the SEW-1. Yet there are no nearby monitoring wells (between the San Pedro River and the SEW-1 to confirm the source of the high-concentration of nitrate reported from the SEW-1.

EPA recommends considering the installation of one additional monitoring well in the shallow aquifer located to the northeast of SEW-1. This new monitoring well would help define the 100 mg/L nitrate contour in this area, and also provide both hydrological and water quality information. In addition, it will improve the site conceptual model and help SEW-01 capture zone analysis. Once nitrates have decreased in wells MW-35 and MW-36, there will be no monitoring point for any other area that might be contributing nitrate to SEW-1.

The concentration of nitrate-N in groundwater sampled at extraction well SEW-1 is higher than the concentration of nearby monitor wells MW-08 and MW-19, and private well D(18-21)6bcc2, which are located along the aquifer boundary and in the “backwater” area of the extraction well. Monitor wells MW-17 and MW-18 are essentially co-located and represent different sampling depths at the same location. These wells are believed to be along the northern edge of the extraction well SEW-01 capture envelope. The assumption that the source of nitrate is upstream from SEW-1 is based primarily on knowledge of historical plant operations. Additionally it is based on:

The concentrations of nitrate-N in groundwater from upstream monitor wells MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36. The concentrations of nitrate-N in monitor wells located across the San Pedro River which ranged from less than 0.6 to 2.5 mg/l when sampled during the Remedial Investigation. The water levels contours on the east side of the San Pedro River showing flow to the river on the west. Surface water stations SW-03 and SW-04, which indicate discharge of nitrate-N in San Pedro River baseflow down gradient from monitor wells MW-34, MW-35 and MW-36. In the past, EPA has recommended installation of a new monitor well on the east side of the San Pedro River, however, it has not been possible to obtain a suitable site for such a well to date. The comment suggests that the possibility that there may be a need for the proposed well to monitor remedy performance at a future date. Accordingly, this will be reconsidered at such a time that a significant decrease in nitrate-N concentrations is observed at monitor wells MW-35 and MW-36.

3.4.1 (SEW-1 water quality); 3.6 (additional monitor well)


July 2, 2012 13 of 17




9. Page 39. A statement is made that the surface water quality standard on 10 mg/l along the Curtiss Reach was removed by ADEQ and replaced with a new standard of 3,733 mg/l. Please explain the rationale for such a large change and how this conforms to ADEQ surface water quality rules. What is the natural background range of nitrate in the San Pedro River and what are its sources? Section 9.3 (San Pedro River Surface Water) states that nitrate concentrations in surface water were generally less than 10 mg/l in surface water.

The Notice of Final Rulemaking published in the Arizona Administrative Register on December 26, 2008, provided the explanation for the new standard of 3,733 mg/l. The ADEQ researched the origin of the previous site-specific criterion of 10 mg/l. This 10 mg/l limit had been proposed by the Arizona Department of Health Services in 1985 due to their concern that incidental ingestion of the nitrate-enriched water during river recreation and consumption of alluvial groundwater further downstream could pose a public health risk. The ADEQ investigated the uses of water in this reach and determined that the designated uses for the San Pedro River from Curtiss to Benson do not include a domestic water source (DWS) designated use. The ADEQ determined that the Full Body Contact recreation (FBC) criterion of 3,733 mg/l for nitrate is adequate to protect the public during water-based recreation. The natural background range of nitrate-N along the San Pedro River is provided by the upgradient locations of surface water station SW-12 and monitor wells MW-01 and MW-06. Concentrations of nitrate-N in the upgradient surface water station SW-12 have ranged from less than the detection limit of 0.06 mg/l to 1.2 mg/l. Concentrations of nitrate-N in the background wells MW-01 and MW-06 have ranged from less than the detection limit of 0.06 mg/l to 2.4 mg/l. Agricultural land to the south and upstream of the site is assumed to be the source of the upgradient nitrate-N.

4.0


July 2, 2012 14 of 17




10. Page 53. The text states that the nitrate-N concentration in the Northern Area wells is decreasing, stable, or no trends are apparent based on the current data set. The exceptions were buffer zone wells D(17-20)23ada, D(17-20)36aad1, and MW-40 which showed increasing trends. If the buffer zone wells are used to determine whether or not the contamination is migrating off-site or out of a pre-determined area, is there a concentration threshold that triggers a plan to investigate the situation even though the concentrations of nitrate-N in these wells has since declined? Of particular interest is buffer zone well MW-40 located particularly far to the north.

Monitor well MW-40 is not a buffer zone well, but rather a sentinel well (see Figure 6). The recent increases in the nitrate-N concentrations in this well were noted as being temporary and the most recent trends are downward. This perhaps is a problem with applying the trending analysis to data with seasonal fluctuations or other temporal influences. It should further be noted that monitor well MW-40 is situated adjacent to the San Pedro River and downstream from surface water monitoring stations SW-3 and SW-4. As previously noted, these are locations of known discharge of nitrate-N-bearing water from the shallow aquifer. Once discharged, this water, depending on flow conditions, moves downstream into a “losing” reach of the River and can recharge in the vicinity of MW-40. This is the likely explanation for the “spike” in the MW-40 data. In specific regard to contingency, the Performance Monitoring Plan for Monitored Natural Attenuation of Shallow Aquifer Groundwater in the Northern Area of the Apache Powder Superfund Site, Revision 1.0, February 12, 2009 includes a contingency plan for the area. Criteria that may trigger the contingency plan include: unfavorable water quality trends; new sources or releases; and new risk factors. It is not believed that the trends indicated at any of the referenced sites justify implementation of contingency measures.

7.2.2


July 2, 2012 15 of 17




11. Page 63. There is a discussion of the effectiveness of the capture zone created by SEW-1 in withdrawal of nitrate bearing groundwater. Nitrate concentrations are increasing at MW-35 and MW-36. Is the capture zone created by pumping at SEW-1 effective in the area of MW-35 and MW-36? Is there a continuing source of contamination to the shallow aquifer? How long will it take to flush out the shallow aquifer?

The Northern Area Groundwater Model (2005) showed that SEW-1 is capturing water from the area of monitor wells MW-35 and MW-36. It might be expected that the concentrations of nitrate-N detected at these monitor wells would fluctuate from time to time due to heterogeneities in the aquifer materials as well as in the plume itself. Instead of a continuing source of contamination to the shallow aquifer, it is believed that high concentrations of nitrate-N linger in this area due to poor circulation. While the particle tracking in the model indicates these areas are within the capture zone, the radius of hydraulic influence from SEW-1 probably does not significantly affect gradients in this area. Hence, the travel time from this area to the extraction well is long. Overall, the predicted timeframe for the remedial action in this part of the Northern Area was predicted to be on the order of 20 years.

9.2.1

12. Page 65. The text states that “the persistent groundwater discharge along this gaining reach is a positive indication that the capture of the San Pedro River underflow by NARS extraction well SEW-1 is not significant. Should this sentence read “is significant” instead of “is not” significant?

The sentence is worded consistent with the intended meaning and should remain the same

No change

13. Page 68. The proposed changes to the monitoring schedule on Table 24 are not clear. Proposed monitoring schedule for most wells appears to be the same as the current schedule. Please clarify.

Changes to the monitoring schedule will be highlighted in yellow in future report tables.

Table 23

14. Page 68. This section includes the following two recommendations for the Southern Area:

Install a flow meter at the extraction system at piezometer P-03 for accurate tracking of the groundwater removal rates

Determine a new method for sampling MCA monitor well MW-23. The water level has declined below the top of the submersible pump in this well. A pump contractor will be out to remove the pump before the May sampling event to see if it can be lowered to obtain a sample. If this cannot be done, then a portable submersible pump will be used to sample monitor well MW-23 EPA agrees with these two recommendations.

ANPI will implement these changes. 2.2.2 (flow meter); 2.3.1 (MW-23)


July 2, 2012 16 of 17




15. Page 69. This section includes four recommendations for the Northern Area, as follows:

According to the MAROS analysis all monitoring network wells could be reduced to either semiannual or annual monitoring for nitrate-N with the exception of MW-34 which should remain at quarterly monitoring. All but one of the monitor wells (D(18-21)06bcb) in the MNA management zone remained below the cleanup goal of less than 10 mg/l in 2010. If this trend continues, a reduction to annual monitoring will be proposed in the future. While MAROS provides a tool for evaluating monitoring frequency, it was not used as the final decision for the proposed reduction in monitoring. The field data results were thoroughly evaluated. EPA agrees with this recommendation to maintain the quarterly monitoring schedule for MW-34.

ANPI will maintain quarterly sampling at MW-34. Table 23

Maintain monitoring at D(18-21)06bcb at quarterly to verify when the nitrate-N concentrations at this location decrease to less than 10 mg/l. During 2011, D(18-21)06bcb will be monitored quarterly to verify when nitrate-N concentration remains steadily below 10 mg/l. D(18-21)06bcb is the closest MNA management well to SEW-1 extent of capture (Figure 6). Once this well is confirmed to be below the cleanup standard of 10 mg/l and all the remaining shallow aquifer wells north of SEW-1 capture remain below 10 mg/l, then the cleanup standard for the Northern MNA area will have been achieved. EPA agrees with this recommendation to maintain the quarterly monitoring schedule for D(18-21)06bcb.


Discontinue monitoring private well D(17-20)24ccd. This location has not been available for monitoring since May 2007; therefore, data was not available for analysis using MAROS. Private shallow aquifer well D(17-20)25bad is in sufficient proximity to private well D(17-20)24ccd and has been reliably monitored since late 2004. EPA agrees with this recommendation to discontinue monitoring private well D(17-20)24ccd.



July 2, 2012 17 of 17




Reduce monitoring frequency at downgradient monitor wells MW-41A, MW-41B and MW-42 from quarterly to semi-annually (Figure 6). The nitrate-N concentrations at these wells have been less than the cleanup standard since May 2008 (Figure C-10 in Appendix C). Semiannual monitoring for nitrate-N should provide sufficient data on concentrations in this area of the shallow aquifer. In addition, the MAROS analysis suggests the acceptability of annual sampling at these three wells. Quarterly monitoring at these wells would resume if nitrate-N concentrations exceed the 10 mg/l cleanup standard for at least two consecutive measurements. EPA agrees with the recommendation to reduce monitoring frequency at downgradient monitor wells MW-41A, MW-41B and MW-42 from quarterly to semi-annually. However, EPA does not agree that annual monitoring is acceptable at this time. However, if concentration trends continue to remain below the cleanup standards, annual monitoring may be a viable option.

ANPI will implement the change to semiannual for monitor wells MW-41, MW-41B, and MW-42.

Table 23

16. Table 8 (Water Quality Data, Southern Area MNA Parameters). The table lists the (limited) water quality data for wells MW-21, MW-23, MW-24, and MW-29 at the Southern Area MNA Management Zone. Some of the water quality data, such as electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved solids (TDS), and oxidation reduction potential (ORP), varied significantly from year to year. However, the limited water quality data does not explain the variations. The TDS can be estimated from the EC. Some of the values presented in the table are not consistent with estimations.

Please review the inconsistent values in Table 8. In addition, recommend that groundwater from the wells listed above be analyzed for common ions (major cations and major anions) to help gain a better understanding of the water chemistry and the natural attenuation processes that are actually occurring. It is recommended that the common ions be analyzed on the same five-year schedule (Table 3) that the monitoring wells are sampled in the Northern Area MNA Management Zone.

The field personnel have been instructed to check that the units are recorded correctly and to make sure that the TDS and EC are properly recorded.

No change

april 5, 2013 - apache nitrogenapachenitrogen.com/downloads/2012-annual-performance-report.pdf · 9...

Documents