Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army Environmental and Natural 

Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon

Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected 

from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial 

Sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2013–1140

Version 1.1, March 2015
Cover: Riser pipe that drains the 17th Street landfill site at Fort Gordon. Photograph by 

Doug Nagle.
Quantity and Quality of Stormwater 

Collected from Selected Stormwater 

Outfalls at Industrial Sites, Fort Gordon, 

Georgia, 2012

By Doug D. Nagle

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army Environmental 

and Natural Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal Center and 

Fort Gordon

Open-File Report 2013–1140

Version 1.1, March 2015

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

First release: 2013

Revised: March 2015 (ver. 1.1) 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Nagle, D.D., 2013, Quantity and quality of stormwater collected from selected stormwater outfalls at industrial sites, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012 (ver. 1.1, March 2015): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1140, 24 p., 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1140/.
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................3

Description of the study area .............................................................................................................3

Methods...........................................................................................................................................................3

Quality Assurance and Quality Control Procedures .......................................................................7

Rainfall and Discharge.........................................................................................................................8

Stormwater Sampling ..........................................................................................................................8

Results .............................................................................................................................................................8

Rainfall and Discharge.......................................................................................................................10

Stormwater Sampling ........................................................................................................................11

Summary........................................................................................................................................................22

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................22

Figures

1. Map showing location of the stormwater industrial sites sampled

in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia......................................................................................................2

2. Map showing location of the stormwater sampling sites sampled

in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia......................................................................................................4

3. Photographs showing retention and detention ponds at the landfill sites, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia....................................................................................................................5

4. Photograph showing automatic sampler and precipitation gage installed at

selected industrial sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia .......................................................................9

Tables

1. Station identification name and number, and classification type for stations

where stormwater runoff was sampled in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia...............................5

2. Type of constituents sampled and method of analysis for stormwater 

samples at Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012 .....................................................................................6 

3. Detected concentrations of inorganic and organic constituents in the 

field and equipment blanks submitted for the stormwater runoff sampling, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, April 13, 2011, and June 21, 2012.........................................................9 

4. Stormwater discharge and rainfall amounts, date that sample was collected,

number of days from last measurable rain event, and duration of rain event

at selected industrial sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012.......................................................10

5. Field parameters detected in stormwater samples collected from selected 

stormwater industrial sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012......................................................11

6. Suspended material, nutrients and organic compounds, and major and

trace inorganic compounds detected in a single grab stormwater sample

taken within the first 30 minutes of runoff from landfill site SWR11-1,

Fort Gordon, Georgia, March 3, 2012.......................................................................................12
iv

7. Suspended material, nutrients and organic compounds, and major and trace

inorganic compounds detected in a single grab stormwater sample taken

within the first 30 minutes of runoff from landfill site SWR11–2, Fort Gordon,

Georgia, February 19, 2012 ........................................................................................................12

8. Suspended material, nutrients and organic compounds, and major and trace

inorganic compounds detected in a single grab stormwater sample taken

within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling site SWR11–3,

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012 ....................................................................................13

9. Suspended material, nutrients and organic compounds, and major and trace 

inorganic compounds detected in a single grab stormwater sample taken 

within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling site SWR11–4, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012 ....................................................................................13

10. Suspended material, nutrients and organic compounds, and major and trace 

inorganic compounds detected in a single grab stormwater sample taken 

within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station site

SWR11–5, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.................................................................14

11. Acute and chronic aquatic life criteria for hardess-dependent and nonhardnessdependent metals .......................................................................................................................16

12. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in a single stormwater grab 

sample taken within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and 

cooling station SWR11–3, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012 .....................................18

13. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in a single stormwater grab 

sample taken within the first 30 miunutes of runoff from heating and 

cooling station SWR11–4, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012 .....................................19

14. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in a single stormwater grab 

sample taken within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and 

cooling station SWR11–5, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012 .....................................20

15. Detected semivolatile organic compounds in a single stormwater grab

sample taken within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and 

cooling stations, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012......................................................21

Conversion Factors and Datums

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeters (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.0283 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
v

Abbreviations 

GaDNR Georgia Department of Natural Resources

H&C heating and cooling

LRL laboratory reporting limit

mg/L milligram per liter

μg/L microgram per liter

MDL method detection level

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NWIS National Water Information System

NWQL National Water Quality Laboratory

PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

QA quality assurance

QC quality control

SDI-12 serial data interface at 12 baud

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

SWP3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Abstract

An assessment of the quantity and quality of stormwater 

runoff associated with industrial activities at Fort Gordon was 

conducted from January through August 2012. The assessment 

was provided to satisfy the requirements from a general permit 

that authorizes the discharge of stormwater under the National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System from a site associated 

with industrial activities. The stormwater quantity refers 

to the runoff discharge at the point and time of the runoff 

sampling. The study was conducted by the U.S. Geological 

Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army 

Environmental and Natural Resources Management Office of 

the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon.

Stormwater runoff samples were collected from five 

stations at four industrial sites, including two landfills 

(SWR11–1 and SWR11–2) and three heating and cooling 

sites, SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5. The assessment 

included the collection of physical properties, such as 

dissolved oxygen and pH; the detection of suspended materials 

(total suspended solids, total fixed solids, and total volatile 

solids), nutrients and organic compounds, and major and 

trace inorganic compounds (metals); and for the three heating 

and cooling sites, the detection of volatile and semivolatile 

organic compounds. 

Landfill site SWR11–2 had the greatest total suspended 

solid concentration (214 milligrams per liter) of all sites 

and exceeded the daily maximum effluent limit for landfills. 

Heating and cooling site SWR11–3 had the greatest total 

suspended solid concentration (169 milligram per liter), total 

fixed solids (101 milligrams per liter), and total volatile solids 

(68 milligrams per liter) when compared to the three heating 

and cooling sites. Total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations were 1.02 and 0.09, and 1.74 and 0.21 milligrams per 

liter, respectively, at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2. 

At heating and cooling sites, total nitrogen and phosphorus 

concentrations ranged from 0.53 to 1.08 milligrams per liter 

and 0.07 to 0.1 milligrams per liter, respectively, with the 

highest concentrations measured at site SWR11–3. Additionally, oil and grease concentrations at all sites were compared 

to applicable benchmark standards; no sample concentrations 

exceeded these standards.

The estimated dissolved concentrations of cadmium, 

lead, nickel, zinc, mercury, and silver, and the total recoverable concentrations of arsenic and selenium were compared 

to applicable benchmark levels and to acute and chronic 

effect aquatic-life criteria for further screening purposes. The 

estimated dissolved zinc concentration (105 micrograms per 

liter) at site SWR11–3 was the only constituent to exceed 

a benchmark standard (40 micrograms per liter). Estimated 

dissolved zinc concentrations at sites SWR11–4 and SWR11–5 

exceeded acute and chronic effect aquatic-life criteria. 

Estimated dissolved concentrations of lead exceeded the 

chronic effect aquatic-life criteria at all sites and exceeded the 

acute effect criteria at site SWR11–3. Acute and chronic effect 

aquatic-life criteria for dissolved cadmium were exceeded at 

site SWR11–3.

Samples from sites SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5 

were analyzed for 83 volatile and semivolatile organic 

compounds. Eight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds, benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[ghi]

perylene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, chrysene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]

pyrene, phenanthrene, and pyrene, were detected at all three 

sites. Of the 86 volatile and semivolatile organic compounds 

that were analyzed in stormwater samples from heating and 

cooling sites, 15 (18 percent) were detected at site SWR 11–3, 

12 (14 percent) were detected at site SWR11–4, and 17 

(20 percent) were detected at site SWR11–5.

Introduction

Fort Gordon is a U.S. Department of the Army facility 

located in east-central Georgia, approximately 10 miles 

(mi) outside of Augusta, Georgia (fig. 1). Five outfalls on 

four industrial sites located within the Fort Gordon area 

were sampled to determine the water quantity and quality of 

the runoff from January through August 2012 (fig. 1). The 

quantity of the runoff refers to the discharge measured at the 

time and location of the sample. The U.S. Department of the 

Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from 

Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012

By Doug D. Nagle
2 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

CHAMBERLAIN AVENUE

4TH ST.

19TH ST.

RICE RD.

RICHMOND

COLUMBIA

Marcum 

McCoys

Creek

Little

Sandy Run

Creek

RANGE ROAD

GIBSON ROAD

82°14' 82°12' 82°10'

33°26'

33°24'

33°22'

Base From ESRI® Data and Maps, 2010

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

Standard parallels 29 30 N and 45 30 N

Central meridian -81 00 00

0 1 2 MILES

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

SWR11–5

SWR11–4

SWR11–3 SWR11–2

SWR11–1

LANE AVENUE

Branch

SWR11–1

EXPLANATION

Sampling site and number

Fort Gordon

Base from 1:100,000 scale

U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graph

COLUMBIA

COUNTY

RICHMOND

COUNTY

BURKE

CO.

MCDUFFIE

COUNTY

Study

area

Augusta

Coastal Plain

GEORGIA

Piedmont

Blue Ridge

Cumberland

Plateau and

Valley and Ridge

88

20 520

1

78

221

223

78

Augusta

Hephzibah

Fall Line

Fort

Gordon

Fall Line

Location of the sampling sites on Fort Gordon

JEFFERSON

COUNTY

#

#

#

## #

8218'45”

3226'15”

3218'45”

8211'15”

78

1

Figure 1. Stormwater industrial sites sampled in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia.
Methods 3

Army uses water-quality information from stormwater 

samples to support development of a Stormwater Pollution 

Prevention Plan (SWP3) as required by the State of 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GaDNR) 

Environmental Protection Division under a general 

permit to discharge stormwater associated with industrial 

activities (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 

2012a). An effective SWP3 ensures that natural resource 

conservation measures and Army activities are consistent 

with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) Federal and State requirements to manage such 

installations. Under the general permit, numeric effluent 

limitations have been established for industrial facilities 

through the NPDES (Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, 2012a). Numeric limitations are assigned for 

landfills, but no numeric limitations are listed for heating 

and cooling sites.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to describe the quantity 

and quality of stormwater collected from January through 

August 2012 by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

at selected stormwater outfall locations associated 

with industrial activities at Fort Gordon, Georgia. The 

U.S. Army at Fort Gordon was provided water-quality 

data from a single storm event at the selected outfalls. The 

stormwater data are needed to support the SWP3 and be in 

compliance with the general permit that allows discharges 

from sites associated with industrial activities (Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources, 2006 and 2012a). The 

sampling targeted stormwater runoff at five outfall locations from four sites (fig. 2). Two outfalls were sampled 

from a single industrial site. 

Description of the Study Area

Fort Gordon is a U.S. Army facility located in eastcentral Georgia, approximately 10 miles (mi) southwest of 

Augusta, Georgia (fig. 1). Fort Gordon lies in the northern 

part of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province and 

south of the Fall Line. Surficial soil and sediments are 

characterized by the unconsolidated sands, indurated sands 

and semiconsolidated sandstones, and layers of clay that 

include kaolinite (Gregory and others, 2001).

The five outfall locations had an individual station 

name and number assigned by the USGS to allow data 

entry and archival into the National Water Information 

System (NWIS) database (fig. 2, table 1). For this study, 

two of the five outfall locations scheduled for sampling 

were classified as landfill sites (site SWR11–1, Gibson 

Road landfill; and site SWR11–2, 17th Street landfill) 

(table 1, fig. 2). The remaining three outfall locations 

were classified as heating and cooling (H&C) plants 

(site SWR11–3, H&C plant # 310; and sites SWR11–4 

and SWR11–5, H&C plant # 25910) (table 1, fig. 2). 

Impervious surface covers much of the drainage area at 

the H&C plants. Because of this site characteristic, only 

minor infiltration occurs during storm events and sufficient 

discharge at the associated stormwater outfall is available 

for sampling during most storm events. Conversely, 

the landfill areas have negligible impervious cover. 

This allows stormwater to infiltrate and requires much 

greater rainfall amounts before sufficient discharge at the 

associated stormwater outfall is available for sampling. 

Furthermore, runoff at the landfill sites must first fill a 

retention (SWR11–1) or detention (SWR11–2) pond before 

the discharge can be sampled and measured at the outfall 

location (fig. 3). 

Methods

All samples were collected and processed using standard 

USGS and GaDNR field procedures (U.S. Geological Survey, 

variously dated; Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 

2012a). The stormwater samples were collected as grab 

samples during the first 30 minutes of storm runoff at all five 

outfalls. Criteria for sampling required that each storm event 

produce at least 0.1 inch (in.) of rain 72 hours after the last 

measurable (more than 0.1 in.) rain event (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a). During each runoff event, 

automatic samplers were prepared to collect water samples at 

the outfall in pre-cleaned, acid-rinsed plastic containers. The 

samplers were automated to collect samples and measure discharge based on the preprogrammed settings. If the samplers 

did not automatically sample, they were manually operated to 

collect the sample and the discharge. Finally, if the flow depth 

was not sufficient to allow the automatic sampler to collect 

the samples, the samples were collected manually and the 

discharge was computed indirectly. It should be noted that a 

streamflow measurement is no longer required according to 

the latest stormwater permit issued by the State of Georgia 

(Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a). However, 

because USGS personnel were in place before the storm 

events, a streamflow measurement was made and computed 

directly or indirectly. The individual samples were processed 

in the field before shipment to the laboratory. Sample processing included preparation (for example, compositing and 

filtering) and preservation (for example, acidification) of the 

final composite sample (U.S. Geological Survey, variously 

dated). Procedures that were followed were specific to the 

constituent that was analyzed. Pre-cleaned, acid-rinsed 8-liter 

(L) plastic churns were used as the compositing devices. For 

analysis of dissolved inorganic constituents, samples were 

filtered using 0.45-micron glass-fiber capsule filters that 

were conditioned with 2 L of deionized water. A summary 

of analytical methods for stormwater samples is listed in 

table 2.
4 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

CHAMBERLAIN AVENUE

4TH ST.

19TH ST.

RICE RD.

RICHMOND

COLUMBIA

Marcum 

McCoys

Creek

Little

Sandy Run

Creek

RANGE ROAD

GIBSON ROAD

82°14’ 82°12’ 82°10’

33°26’

33°24’

33°22’

Base From ESRI® Data and Maps, 2010

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

Standard parallels 29 30 N and 45 30 N

Central meridian -81 00 00

0 1 2 MILES

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

SWR11–5

SWR11–4

SWR11–3 SWR11–2

SWR11–1

LANE AVENUE

Branch

SWR11-1

EXPLANATION

Sampling site and number

Fort Gordon

#

#

#

## # 78

1

SWR11–5

SWR11–4 SWR11–3

SWR11–1

SWR11–2

Figure 2. Stormwater sampling sites sampled in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia.
Methods 5

Table 1. Station identification name and number, and classification type for stations where stormwater runoff was 

scheduled to be sampled in 2012, Fort Gordon, Georgia.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey]

USGS station identification 

number

USGS station name 

(figs. 1 and 2) Classification type Description Latitude Longitude

332205082143100 SWR11–1 Landfill Gibson Road Landfill 33° 22' 05" 82° 14' 31"

332442082094100 SWR11–2 Landfill 17th Street Landfill 33° 24' 42" 82° 09' 41"

332452082085100 SWR11–3 Heating and cooling 

plant

Heating and cooling 

plant #310

33° 24' 52" 82° 08' 51"

332538082085200 SWR11–4 Heating and cooling 

plant

Heating and cooling 

plant #25910

33° 25' 38" 82° 08' 52"

332540082085100 SWR11–5 Heating and cooling 

plant

Heating and cooling 

plant #25910

33° 25' 40" 82° 08' 51"

A

B

Figure 3. (A) retention and (B) detention ponds at the landfill sites,

Fort Gordon, Georgia.
6 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 2. Type of constituents sampled and method of analysis for stormwater samples at Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012. 

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; NWQL, USGS National Water Quality Laboratory; USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; NPDES, National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System]

Constituent type Laboratory schedule NPDES method Method description

Volatile organic 

compounds

NWQL 1307 USGS O-4127-96 

(mod. USEPA 624)

1

 Purge-and-trap capillary-column gas chromatography/mass 

spectrometry.

Dissolved and whole water 

wutrients 

NWQL 2352 USEPA 350.1 2,3,4 Phosphours and Kjeldahl 

digestion method automated 

photometric finish.

Trace metals in unfiltered 

water 

NWQL 2351 USGS I-4471-97; EPA 200.8 4

Inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry and 

inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry.

Chemical oxygen demand USGS I-3561-85 3

Colorimetric, dichromate 

oxidation

Hardness USEPA 200.7 4

Inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry and 

inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry.

Total suspended solids USGS I-3765 2

Residue at 105 degrees Celsius, 

suspended, gravimetric.

Oil and grease TestAmerica contract item 

number 50136

USEPA 1664 Hexane extractable material 

and silica gel treated hexane 

extractable materiol (HEM and 

SGT-HEM).

Semivolatile organic 

compounds

NWQL 1383 USGS O-3116-87 2

 Continous liquid-liquid extraction and capillary-column 

gas chromatography and mass 

spectrometry.

1

Connor, B.F., Rose, D.L., Noriega, M.C., Murtagh, L., Abney, S.R., 1997, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey water quality laboratories—Determination of 86 volatile organic compounds in water by gas spectrometry, including detections less than reporting limits: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open File Report 97–829, 78 p.

2

Fishman, M.J, ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of inorganic constituents in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93–125, 217 p.

3

Fishman, M.J, and Friedman, L.C., 1989, Methods for determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 5, chapter A1, 545 p. 

4

Patton, C.J., and Kryskalla, J.R., 2003, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Pollution Laboratory—Evaluation of 

alkaline persulfate digestion as an alternative to Kjeldhal digestion for determination of total and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus in water: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-4174, 33 p. 
Methods 7

Field parameters (dissolved oxygen and pH) were 

measured in the field using a calibrated field meter. Water 

samples were analyzed for constituents appropriate for each 

site (table 2). Samples were analyzed for nutrients, trace metals, 

hardness, total suspended solids, total organic carbon, chemical 

oxygen demand, volatile organic compounds, and semivolatile 

organic compounds by the USGS National Water-Quality 

Laboratory (NWQL) in Lakewood, Colorado (information on 

laboratory available at http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/). Samples 

were analyzed for oil and grease by Test America located in 

Denver, Colorado (information on laboratory available at www.

testamericainc.com/home_alt.aspx). Total organic nitrogen and 

ammonia and total phosphorus concentrations were determined 

by analyses described by Patton and Kryskalla (2003). Total 

ammonia concentrations were determined by EPA Method 350.1 

(O’Dell, 1993). All nitrogen species concentrations are reported 

as milligrams per liter (mg/L) as nitrogen. All phosphorous 

species are reported as milligrams per liter as phosphorous. 

Dissolved and total trace metal concentrations were determined 

by inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry 

and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (Fishman 

and Friedman, 1989; Fishman, 1993; Hoffman and others, 

1996; Garbarino and Struzeski, 1998; Garbarino and Damrau, 

2001; Garbarino and others, 2006). Total suspended solid 

concentrations were measured by analytical methods used to 

quantify concentrations of suspended organic and inorganic 

particles in surface waters (Fishman and Friedman, 1989). 

Total organic carbon was measured on whole water samples 

according to standard method 5310B (Standard Methods for 

the Examination of Water and Wastewater High-Temperature 

Combustion Method, 2005). Chemical oxygen demand was 

measured on whole water samples according to the colorimetric 

dichromatic oxidation HACH method (Fishman and Friedman, 

1989). Volatile organic compounds were determined by using 

purge-and-trap capillary-column gas chromatography and mass 

spectrometry methods described by Connor and others (1997). 

Semivolatile organic compounds were measured by continuous 

liquid-liquid extraction and capillary-column gas chromatography and mass spectrometry analytical methods used to 

determine inorganic and organic constituents in water and fluvial 

sediments (Fishman, 1993). Oil and grease concentrations were 

determined according to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA) method 1664A (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1999a).

Handling censored data appropriately is necessary when 

laboratories report quantitative, estimated, and censored results: 

(1) Results above a laboratory reporting level (LRL) are 

reported as a quantitative value. (2) Results below the LRL and 

above the method detection level (MDL) are estimated (because 

the values are considered semiquantitative) and are reported 

with the remark code (E). (3) Results below the nondetection 

level are reported as censored data, and are reported as less than 

the LRL (Childress and others, 1999). For example, if the LRL 

for total recoverable cadmium concentration is 0.4 microgram 

per liter (μg/L), but was detected above the MDL of 0.2 μg/L, 

then an estimated value of 0.3 μg/L may be reported.

Quality Assurance and Quality Control 

Procedures

Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) 

procedures maintain the integrity, accuracy, and legal 

defensibility of results from data collection and assessment 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009). For this 

study, the QA procedures included the sampling techniques, 

stewardship of the samples, and laboratory analyses. The 

QA for the sampling protocols were maintained by adherence to established procedures of the USGS and GaDNR 

Environmental Protection Division (U.S. Geological Survey, 

variously dated; Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 

2012a). The stewardship of the samples refers to the 

preservation, hold times, and chain-of-custody of the samples. 

Appropriate preservation of samples (for example, placement 

of the samples on ice, or addition of an acid preservative) was 

maintained for all samples. Hold times refer to the maximum 

amount of time a sample can be preserved (mostly with ice) 

before it must be analyzed. All samples were analyzed within 

the appropriate hold times (National Water Quality Laboratory, 2010). The chain-of-custody ensures that the samples 

be accounted for from the time of sampling to the time the 

results are reported (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2009). The chain-of-custody procedure documents who is in 

possession of the samples at all times, from collection to the 

reporting of the results. The analytical service request form 

and laboratory login to email served as the chain-of-custody 

documentation for the samples.

Water-quality data from each sampled event were reviewed 

for completeness, precision, bias, and transcription errors when 

received from the laboratory as part of the QA procedures. Collection and analysis of a QC sample was part of this study. One 

equipment blank was collected during this sampling period and 

a field blank was collected in 2011. The field blank was used 

to evaluate if contamination from the sampling equipment and 

sample processing methods affected the environmental sample 

concentrations. The equipment blank was used to verify that 

changes in cleaning procedures removed the presence of chemical oxygen demand and total organic carbon contamination 

identified in the field blank. Acceptable levels of contamination 

for field and equipment blanks are dependent on the data quality 

objectives of the investigation (U.S. Geological Survey, 2012). 

Because the data are for regulatory purposes, field blanks with 

detectable concentrations greater than 20 percent of the sample 

concentration (blank concentration to sample concentration 

ratio greater than 0.2) were considered to require an action (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1999b; 2004). Environmental sample results with blank-to-sample concentration ratios 

greater than 0.2 were rejected due to potential contamination. 

Water-quality and rainfall data are stored in the USGS National 

Water Information System (NWIS) database and quality-assured 

water-quality data are available for retrieval on the internet 

at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/sc/nwis/sw. The USGS NWQL 

provides all QA/QC documentation for their analytical services 

on the internet at http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/.
8 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Detections were identified in the field blank for some 

constituents. Calcium, fluorene, and total nitrogen were 

all detected in the field blanks, but all at levels below 

the levels of the results of the environmental samples; 

therefore, the results of the environmental samples 

are considered reliable and maintained in the database 

(table 3). The volatile organic compound (VOC) diethyl 

phthalate was detected in the field blank at a level of 

0.32 μg/L and present in the environmental samples 

SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5 at concentrations of 

less than 0.62, 0.15, and 0.31 μg/L, respectively; therefore, 

results for diethyl phthalate are considered unreliable for 

all three stations and removed from the database (table 3). 

Di-n-butyl phthalate was detected in the field blank at 

0.89 μg/L, and concentrations in environmental samples 

SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5 were less than 2.8, 

estimated 0.27, and estimated 0.21 μg/L, respectively; 

therefore, those environmental samples also were considered unreliable and removed from the database (table 3). A 

phenol concentration was measured (estimated 0.16 μg/L) 

in the field blank and the results of the samples SWR11–3, 

SWR11–4, and SWR11–5 ranged from 0.06 to 0.39 μg/L; 

therefore, those environmental samples also were considered unreliable and removed from the database (table 3). 

The greatest level of contamination in the April 2011 

field blank was with chemical oxygen demand and 

dissolved organic carbon (table 3). After investigation 

of sampling preparation and field procedures, it was 

determined that the contamination was related to the final 

step of cleaning of the sampling equipment with methanol 

to remove trace level organic contaminants. The methanol 

residue contributed to the chemical oxygen demand 

and total organic carbon concentrations but not to other 

organic contaminants. Changes in cleaning procedures 

were implemented for the calendar year 2012 samples and 

a field equipment blank was conducted in June 2012 to 

verify the revised cleaning procedure were adequate. 

Rainfall and Discharge 

Each outlet location was outfitted with an ISCO 6712 

automatic sampler. This sampler includes tubing that is 

deployed at the sampling location, a pump to bring the 

sample up to the sampler, and pre-cleaned containers to 

collect the sample (Teledyne Isco, Inc., 2012). In addition, 

the automatic samplers have the capability of connecting 

precipitation gages to a data logger using a serial data 

interface at 12 Baud (SDI-12) (Teledyne Isco, Inc., 2012). 

The SDI-12 interface can be connected to a wide range of 

environmental sensors, and for this study, the data logger 

was connected to a continuous-recording tipping-bucket 

precipitation gage, and to a 750-area-velocity flow module 

(Teledyne Isco, Inc., 2007). The continuous-recording 

tipping-bucket precipitation gages were deployed at four 

of the five sites, because one of the industrial sites had 

two outfalls (H&C plant # 25910) and did not need to be 

equipped with a second precipitation gage (fig. 2, table 1). 

An equipment setup at site SWR11–5 with the precipitation gage and automatic sampler is shown in figure 4.

 Nonrecording precipitation gages also were deployed 

during storm events near the outfall site to collect precipitation data (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992; 

Church and others, 1999). Data from the nonrecording 

precipitation gages were used to confirm the results of the 

recording precipitation gages, and as a backup measurement of rainfall.

Stormwater discharge, or flow, was measured by the 

750-area-velocity module that uses the stage, or depth, 

of the stream in the culvert, the velocity of the stream in 

the culvert, and the culvert geometry. These parameters 

were recorded by the data logger in the sampler. In addition, stormwater discharge was computed by the indirect 

methods described by Bohdaine (1968) at all sites. 

Stormwater Sampling

Stormwater was collected as grab samples as 

described in the GaDNR general permit for discharges 

associated with industrial activities (Georgia Department 

of Natural Resources, 2006, 2012a). At all sites, grab 

samples were collected manually and stormwater discharge 

was measured indirectly by computational methods 

described in the Methods section. Grab samples were 

collected in pre-cleaned, acid-rinsed high density polypropylene (HDLP) containers within the first 30 minutes 

of the runoff event (Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, 2006, 2012a). All five outfalls were sampled 

in 2012 during rainfall events that met or exceeded the 

0.1-inch criteria. Antecedent conditions varied between the 

two landfill sites, but all three outfalls of the H&C sites 

were sampled during the same rain event (table 4). 

Results

The results of the multiple stormwater sample collection from the five different outfalls that were sampled 

during 2012 are presented in this section of the report. 

Results of discharge, rainfall amounts, field parameters, 

suspended materials, nutrients and organic compounds, 

major and trace inorganic compounds for landfill sites 

(SWR11–1 and SWR11–2), and volatile and semivolatile 

organic compounds from the H&C sites (SWR11–3, 

SWR11–4, and SWR11–5), are presented in subsequent 

sections. Measured concentrations are compared to 

appropriate standards.
Results 9

Table 3. Detected concentrations of inorganic and organic constituents in the field and equipment blanks submited for the 

stormwater runoff sampling, Fort Gordon, Georgia, April 13, 2011 and June 21, 2012. 

[mg/L; milligram per liter; μg/L, microgram per liter; NA, not applicable; <, less than; E, estimated; Bold text indicates that the ratio of blank to environmental 

sample concentration is greater than 0.2.]

Constituents Units Field blank 

concentration

SWR11–1

concentration

SWR11–2

concentration

SWR11–3

concentration

SWR11–4

concentration

SWR11–5

concentration

April 13, 2011 March 3, 2012 February 19, 2012 August 28, 2012 August 28, 2012 August 28, 2012

Calcium mg/L 0.024 6 8.9 0.90 2.20 1.60

Fluorene μg/L 0.0032 NA NA <0.34 <0.34 0.04

Total nitrogen mg/L 0.06 1.02 1.74 1.08 0.94 0.53

Diethyl phthalate μg/L 0.32 NA NA <0.62 E 0.15 0.31

Di-n-butyl phthalate μg/L 0.89 NA NA <2.8 E 0.27 E 0.21

Phenol μg/L E 0.164 NA NA 0.12 E 0.06 0.39

Chemical oxygen 

demand

mg/L 2,543 NA NA NA NA NA

Total organic carbon mg/L 528 NA NA NA NA NA

Constituents Units Equipment 

blank

June 21, 2012 March 3, 2012 February 19, 2012 August 28, 2012 August 28, 2012 August 28, 2012

Chemical oxygen 

demand

mg/L <10 20 20 60 30 20

Total organic carbon mg/L <0.5 9.2 8.8 16.3 20.8 7.1

Automatic

sampler

Precipitation

gage

Figure 4. Automatic sampler and precipitation gage installed at selected industrial 

sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia.
10 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Rainfall and Discharge 

Samples were collected at the landfill sites, SWR11–2 

and SWR11–1 on February 19, 2012 and March 3, 2012, 

respectively. On August 28, 2012 samples were collected 

at the H&C sites SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5 

(table 4). Weather radars were observed to track incoming 

rain events, and USGS personnel were positioned at every 

station before the start of the rain event. Rainfall amount 

for the February 19, 2012 storm event was 1.0 in. and 

lasted for more than a period of 8.5 hours with no prior 

rainfall for 30 days (table 4). Rainfall amount for the 

March 3, 2012 storm event was a 0.1 in. and lasted for 

more than a period of 3.0 hours with no prior rainfall for 2 

days (table 3). USGS personnel were on site a day before 

this event and upon visual inspection found that the retention pond was not flowing, thus the 72-hour dry period 

was not applicable in this instance. On August 28, 2012, 

the rainfall amount was 0.1 in. at H&C site SWR11–3 

and 0.3 in. at sites SWR11–4 and SWR11–5, respectively, 

and rainfall lasted for a period of 15 hours with no prior 

rainfall for 7 days (table 4). At all sites, samples were 

collected within the first 30 minutes of observed runoff. 

At all five stations, the continuously recording precipitation gages did not function correctly; therefore, the 

precipitation results were obtained from the nonrecording 

precipitation gages. Stormwater discharge at the time of 

sample collection ranged from 0.01 ft3

/s at site SWR11–4 

to 0.89 ft3

/s at site SWR11–1 (table 4).

Table 4. Streamflow and rainfall amounts, date that sample was collected, number of days from last measurable rain event, and 

duration of rain event, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NS, not sampled; EST, eastern standard time]

USGS station 

name (fig. 1) Date of sample

Number of days 

from previously 

measured storm 

event

Quantity of rain 

(inches)

Peak streamflow, 

instantaneous 

(ft3

/s)

Duration of storm event 

(hours)

1

SWR11–1 March 3, 2012, Hour: 09:15 EST 2 0.1 0.89 3

 SWR11–2 February 19, 2012 Hour 02:15 EST 30 1 0.27 8.5

 SWR11–3 August 28, 2012 Hour: 08:00 EST 7 0.1 0.5 15

 SWR11–4 August 28, 2012 Hour: 10:00 EST 7 0.3 0.01 15

 SWR11–5 August 28, 2012 Hour: 10:15 EST 7 0.3 0.09 15

1

 USGS personnel were on site a day before this event and upon visual inspection found that the retention pond was not flowing, thus the 72-hour dry period 

was not applicable in this instance.
Results 11

Stormwater Sampling

Field parameters (dissolved oxygen, and pH) were measured 

at the five stations before the samples were collected. The pH 

values ranged from 4.2 to 6.9 standard units at sites SWR11–3 

and SWR11–2, respectively (table 5). At landfill sites SWR11–1 

and SWR11–2, pH values were 6.4 and 6.9, respectively, which 

are within the range of 6 to 9 published in Georgia Department 

of Natural Resources NPDES general permit guidance (2012a). 

Heating and cooling sites SW11–3 and SW11–4 had pH values 

that fell below 6 (4.2 and 5.7, respectively; table 4). Dissolved 

oxygen concentrations ranged from 6.5 to 11.2 milligrams per liter 

(mg/L) at sites SWR11–4 and SWR11–2, respectively (table 5).

Suspended material, nutrient and organic compound, 

and major and trace inorganic compound concentrations were 

determined for the stormwater samples at two landfill and 

three H&C sites (tables 6–10). Suspended material often is 

transported during storm events. At the landfill site SWR11–1, 

total suspended solids, total fixed solids (inorganic fraction), 

and total volatile solids (organic fraction) concentrations were 

below the LRL (less than 20 to less than 30 mg/L) during the 

March 2012 storm event (table 6). However, a much higher 

total suspended solids concentration of 214 mg/L was measured 

at landfill site SWR11–2 with most of the suspended solids 

consisting of fixed solids (176 mg/L) rather than volatile solids 

(38 mg/L) (table 7). The total suspended solids concentration at 

site SWR11–2 exceeded the maximum daily effluent limit for 

total suspended solids (88 mg/L) (Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, 2012a). 

Heating and cooling site SWR11–3 had the highest concentrations of total suspended solids (68 mg/L), total fixed solids 

(101 mg/L), and total volatile solids (169 mg/L) when compared 

to other two H&C sites, SWR11–4 and SWR11–5 (tables 8–10). 

There are no numeric criteria for the H&C sites.

Excessive nutrients have the potential to cause detrimental 

effects on the receiving water body, usually related to increased 

algal activity. Because total phosphorus and total nitrogen 

include the particulate (sediment- or organic-bound) and dissolved fractions of these nutrients, greater concentrations of these 

nutrients often are observed during storm events that also transport greater suspended solids. Total nitrogen concentrations were 

1.02 and 1.74 mg/L at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, 

respectively (tables 6–7). Total phosphorus concentrations were 

0.09 and 0.21 mg/L at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, 

respectively (tables 6–7). Total ammonia values were 0.02 mg/L 

at SWR11–1 (table 6) and 0.03 mg /L at SWR11–-2 (table 7), 

which are below the maximum daily effluent limit of 10 mg/L for 

landfill sites (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a). 

For H&C sites, SWR11–3 had the highest value of total nitrogen 

of 1.08 mg/L compared to 0.94 and 0.53 mg/L at sites SWR11–4 

and SWR11–5, respectively (tables 8–10). Total phosphorus 

values were 0.1 mg/L at both sites SWR11–3 and SWR11–4 

as compared to 0.07 mg/L at SWR11–5. Additionally, at the 

three H&C sites values for total ammonia ranged from 0.19 to 

0.41 mg /L with site SWR11–3 having the highest concentration.

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) measures the amount 

of oxygen consumed by biologically-mediated decomposition of 

organic matter in water. The chemical oxygen demand (COD) 

test procedure is the amount of oxygen consumed based on the 

chemical decomposition of organic and inorganic contaminants, 

dissolved or suspended in water, and therefore, is inclusive of 

BOD (organic-based). Chemical oxygen demand was measured 

at 18 and 19.6 mg/L at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, 

respectively (tables 6–7). At these landfill sites, measured COD 

was well below the maximum daily effluent limit for 5-day BOD 

is 140 mg/L, indicating that the sites were within the permit guidelines (Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a). Total 

organic carbon (TOC) concentrations were 9.2 and 8.8 mg/L, at 

landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, respectively. 

Table 5. Field parameters detected in stormwater samples 

collected from selected stormwater industrial sites, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2012.

[NS, not sampled]

Parameter Result Concentration unit

SW11–1

Sample quantity 1.06 gallons

Dissolved oxygen 8.4 milligrams per liter

pH 6.4 standard units

SW11–2

Sample quantity 1.06 gallons

Dissolved oxygen 11.2 milligrams per liter

pH 6.9 standard units

SW11–3

Sample quantity 1.06 gallons

Dissolved oxygen 8.6 milligrams per liter

pH 4.2 standard units

SW11–4

Sample quantity 1.06 gallons

Dissolved oxygen 6.5 milligrams per liter

pH 5.7 standard units

SW11–5

Sample quantity 1.06 gallons

Dissolved oxygen 7.5 milligrams per liter

pH 6.2 standard units
12 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 6. Suspended material, nutrients and organic 

compounds, and major and trace inorganic compounds 

detected in a single grab stormwater sample collected within 

the first 30 minutes of runoff from landfill site SWR11–1, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, March 3, 2012.

[All units in milligrams per liter; <, less than; NR, not reported; E, estimated; N, nitrogen]

Compound Result 

Suspended material

Total suspended solids <30.0

Total fixed solids <30.0

Total volatile solids <20.0

Nutrients and organic compounds

Chemical oxygen demand, high level 18

Total organic carbon 9.2

 Ammonia, as nitrogen 0.02

Oil and grease E 3.3

Total phosphorus 0.09

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonia + organic-N)

1.02

Major and trace inorganic compounds

Hardness 18.5

Calcium, dissolved 5.98

Barium, dissolved 12.86

Magnesium, dissolved 0.88

Arsenic, total 0.0009

Cadmium, total <0.0004

Chromium, total 0.00061

Lead, total 0.00155

Silver, total <0.0006

Mercury, total <0.00007

Selenium, total 0.00013

Zinc, total 0.0111

Nickel, total 0.0011

Table 7. Suspended material, nutrients and organic 

compounds, and major and trace inorganic compounds 

detected in a single grab stormwater sample collected within 

the first 30 minutes of runoff from landfill site SWR11–2, Fort 

Gordon, Georgia, February 19, 2012.

[All units in milligrams per liter; <, less than; NR, not reported; E, estimated; N, nitrogen]

Compound Result 

Suspended material

Total suspended solids 214.0

Total fixed solids 176.0

Total volatile solids 38.0

Nutrients and organic compounds

Chemical oxygen demand, high level 19.6

Total organic carbon 8.8

 Ammonia, as nitrogen 0.03

Oil and grease E 2.3

Total phosphorus 0.21

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + 

ammonia + organic-N)

1.74

Major and trace inorganic compounds

Hardness 29.2

Calcium, dissolved 8.91

Barium, dissolved 35.35

Magnesium, dissolved 1.69

Arsenic, total 0.0011

Cadmium, total <0.0004

Chromium, total 0.0062

Lead, total 0.00587

Silver, total <0.0006

Mercury, total 0.000065

Selenium, total 0.00011

Zinc, total 0.0208

Nickel, total 0.0028
Results 13

Table 8. Suspended material, nutrients and organic 

compounds, and major and trace inorganic compounds detected 

in a single grab stormwater sample collected within the first 

30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling site SWR11–3, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.

[All units in milligrams per liter; <, less than; NR, not reported; E, estimated; N, nitrogen]

Compound Result 

Suspended material

Total suspended solids 169.0

Total fixed solids 101.0

Total volatile solids 68.0

Nutrients and organic compounds

Chemical oxygen demand, high level 60

Total organic carbon 16.3

 Ammonia, as nitrogen 0.41

Oil and grease E 3.9

Total phosphorus 0.1

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + 

organic-N)

1.08

Major and trace inorganic compounds

Hardness 2.7

Calcium, dissolved 0.868

Barium, dissolved 0.0111

Magnesium, dissolved 0.129

Arsenic, total 0.0013

Cadmium, total 0.0004

Chromium, total 0.0014

Lead, total 0.00764

Silver, total 0.0006

Mercury, total 0.000013

Selenium, total 0.000087

Zinc, total 0.107

Nickel, total 0.0013

Table 9. Suspended material, nutrients and organic 

compounds, and major and trace inorganic compounds detected 

in a single grab stormwater sample collected within the first 

30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling site SWR11–4, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.

[All units in milligrams per liter; <, less than; NR, not reported; E, estimated; N, nitrogen]

Compound Result 

Suspended material

Total suspended solids <10.0

Total fixed solids <15.0

Total volatile solids <15.0

Nutrients and organic compounds

Chemical oxygen demand, high level 30

Total organic carbon 20.8

 Ammonia, as nitrogen 0.21

Oil and grease <4.9

Total phosphorus 0.1

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + 

organic-N)

0.94

Major and trace inorganic compounds

Hardness 6.39

Calcium, dissolved 2.21

Barium, dissolved 0.129

Magnesium, dissolved 0.214

Arsenic, total 0.00028

Cadmium, total <0.0004

Chromium, total <0.0006

Lead, total 0.00168

Silver, total <0.0006

Mercury, total 0.0000009

Selenium, total 0.000062

Zinc, total 0.0248

Nickel, total <0.0011
14 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 10. Suspended material, nutrients and organic 

compounds, and major and trace inorganic compounds 

detected in a single grab stormwater sample collected within 

the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and cooling site 

SWR11–5, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.

[All units in milligrams per liter; <, less than; NR, not reported; 

E, estimated; N, nitrogen]

Compound Result 

Suspended material

Total suspended solids <10

Total fixed solids <20

Total volatile solids 20

Nutrients and organic compounds

Chemical oxygen demand, high level 20

Total organic carbon 7.1

 Ammonia, as nitrogen 0.19

Oil and grease E 1.3

Total phosphorus 0.07

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + 

organic-N)

0.53

Major and trace inorganic compounds

Hardness 4.64

Calcium, dissolved 1.64

Barium, dissolved 0.00041

Magnesium, dissolved 0.13

Arsenic, total 0.00048

Cadmium, total <0.0004

Chromium, total 0.0008

Lead, total 0.00132

Silver, total <0.0006

Mercury, total <0.000008

Selenium, total 0.000085

Zinc, total 0.0368

Nickel, total <0.0011
Results 15

Chemical oxygen demand and TOC ranged from 20 to 

60 mg/L and 7.1 to 20.8 mg/L, respectively for H&C sites 

SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and SWR11–5. The largest COD 

(60 mg/L) was measured at site SWR11–3.

Oil and grease concentrations were estimated at 3.3 

and 2.3 mg/L at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, 

respectively (tables 6–7). At the H&C sites, concentrations 

were estimated at 3.9 mg/L at site SWR11–3, less than 

4.9 mg/L at site SWR11–4, and estimated 1.3 mg/L at site 

SWR11–5. None of these values exceeded the Benchmark 

Monitoring Concentration of 15 mg/L for H&C sites 

(Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a).

Trace elements, such as lead, mercury, and arsenic, 

exist in surface water at very low concentrations, generally in the range of parts per billion. Even at these low 

levels, most trace elements can be harmful to aquatic 

life; however, the exact level that acutely or chronically 

affects aquatic life can vary with hardness. Therefore, 

hardness-based criteria levels are computed for certain 

trace elements (including cadmium, copper, lead, and 

zinc) for the protection of aquatic life in surface-water 

systems. For use in this report, the GaEPD freshwater 

water-quality hardness-dependent criterion for trace 

metals was adopted as a conservative screening limit, 

although it was developed for protection of aquatic life in 

receiving waters, not stormwater. Equations to compute 

these criteria for certain trace elements are provided by the 

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006). 

Hardness ranges are used to determine benchmark values 

for cadmium, lead, nickel, and zinc. In order to compare 

concentrations of the environmental sample to the criteria 

values the concentration values were converted from total 

to dissolved (table 11). The estimated dissolved concentrations of cadmium, lead, nickel, zinc, mercury, and silver, 

and the total recoverable concentrations of arsenic and 

selenium were compared to applicable benchmark, acute 

and chronic effect criteria (Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, 2012a, 2012b). The estimated dissolved 

zinc concentration (105 μg/L) at site SWR11–3 was 

the only constituent to exceed a benchmark standard of 

40 μg/L based on the hardness-range at the site (table 11). 

Estimated dissolved zinc concentrations at sites SWR11–4 

and SWR11–5 exceeded acute and chronic effect aquatic 

criteria (table 11). Estimated dissolved concentrations of 

lead exceeded the chronic effect criteria at all sites and 

exceeded the acute effect criteria at site SWR11–3. The 

acute and chronic effect criteria for dissolved cadmium 

were exceeded at site SWR11–3 (table 11).

Samples from H&C sites SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and 

SWR11–5 were analyzed for various semivolatile organic 

compounds (tables 12–14). Several compounds were 

detected at quantitative (above the laboratory reporting 

level) or estimated (semiquantitative) levels at all three 

sites and included eight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 

(PAH) benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[ghi]

perylene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, chrysene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]

pyrene, phenanthrene, and pyrene. Other semivolatile 

organic compounds detected at all three H&C sites 

included pentachlorophenol, dimethyl phthalate, and 

isophorone. Eight additional semivolatile organic compounds were detected at measured or estimated levels at 

one or two of the three sites (table 15).

Of the 83 volatile and semivolatile organic compounds that were analyzed in stormwater samples from 

heating and cooling sites, 15 (18 percent) were detected at 

site SWR 11–3 (table 12), 12 (14 percent) were detected 

at site SWR11–4 (table 13), and 17 (20 percent) were 

detected at site SWR11–5 (table 14). No volatile organic 

compounds were detected at any of the three heating 

and cooling sites (table 15). Instead, the most frequently 

detected semivolatile organic compounds were from the 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) group. Of the 

14 PAHs that were analyzed in the stormwater samples, 

between 9 and 11 (64 and 79 percent) of the compounds 

were detected at concentrations that ranged from E 0.03 to 

0.86 μg/L (table 15). The greatest total PAH concentration 

(pyrene, 0.86 μg/L) was detected at site SWR11–5.
16 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 11. Acute and chronic aquatic-life criteria for hardness-dependent and nonhardness-dependent metals.

[μg/L, microgram per liter; mg/L, milligram per liter]

Station number

USGS 

Station 

name

Date of 

sample

Hardness 

(mg/L)

Acute and chronic aquatic-life Criteria (Georgia Department of Natural Resources2

) and 

benchmark values (Georgia Department of Natural Resources1) for hardness-dependent metals

Dissolved cadmium (μg/L) Dissolved Lead (μg/L)

Estimated con- Acute Chronic Bench- Estimated Acute Chronic Benchcentration criteria criteria mark concentration criteria criteria mark 

332205082143100

332442082094100

332452082085100

332538082085200

332540082085100

SWR11–1

SWR11–2 

SWR11–3 

SWR11–4

SWR11–5

March 3, 

2012

February 

19, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

19

29

2.7

6.4

4.6

<0.4

<0.4

0.44

<0.4

<0.4

0.70

1.14

0.09

0.22

0.15

0.64

0.90

0.15

0.29

0.23

0.50

0.80

0.50

0.50

0.50

1.61

5.72

10.1

2.01

1.64

9.88

16.5

1.08

2.93

2.03

0.39

0.64

0.04

0.11

0.08

14.0

23.0

14.0

14.0

14.0

Station number

USGS 

Station 

name

Date of 

sample

Hardness 

(mg/L)

 Aquatic-life acute and chronic criteria for nonhardness dependent metals in freshwater 

(Georgia Department of Natural Resources2

) and benchmark values (Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources2)

Dissolved mercury (μg/L) Total recoverable arsenic (μg/L)

Estimated con- Acute Chronic Bench- Estimated Acute Chronic Benchcentration criteria criteria mark concentration criteria criteria mark 

332205082143100

332442082094100

332452082085100

332538082085200

332540082085100

SWR11–1

SWR11–2 

SWR11–3 

SWR11–4

SWR11–5

March 3, 

2012

February 

19, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

19

29

2.7

6.4

4.6

0.01

0.06

0.01

0.01

0.01

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.4

1.4

0.77

0.77

0.77

0.77

0.77

1.40

1.40

1.40

1.40

1.40

0.93

1.10

1.30

<0.28

0.48

340.00

340.00

340.00

340.00

340.00

150.00

150.00

150.00

150.00

150.00

150.0

150.0

150.0

150.0

150.0

1,2See references cited.
Results 17

Table 11. Acute and chronic aquatic-life criteria for hardness-dependent and nonhardness-dependent metals–Continued.

[μg/L, microgram per liter; mg/L, milligram per liter; NA, not applicable]

Station number

USGS 

Station 

name

Date of 

sample

Hardness 

(mg/L)

Acute and chronic aquatic-life criteria (Georgia Department of Natural Resources2

) and 

benchmark values (Georgia Department of Natural Resources1) for hardness-dependent metals

Dissolved nickel (μg/L) Dissolved zinc (μg/L)

Estimated Acute Chronic Bench- Estimated Acute Chronic Benchconcentration criteria criteria mark concentration criteria criteria mark 

332205082143100

332442082094100

332452082085100

332538082085200

332540082085100

SWR11–1

SWR11–2 

SWR11–3 

SWR11–4

SWR11–5

March 3, 

2012

February 

19, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

19

29

2.7

6.4

4.6

1.1

2.8

1.3

<1.1

<1.1

112

165

22.0

45.7

34.9

57.4

79.5

14.5

26.8

21.3

150

200

150

150

150

11

20

105

24

36

28.0

41.3

5.49

11.4

8.69

28.3

41.6

5.5

11.5

8.8

40

50

40

40

40

Station number

USGS 

Station 

name

Date of 

sample

Hardness 

(mg/L)

 Aquatic-life acute and chronic criteria for nonhardness dependent metals in freshwater 

(Georgia Department of Natural Resources2

) and benchmark values (Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources2)

Dissolved silver (μg/L) Total recoverable selenium (μg/L)

Estimated Acute Chronic Bench- Estimated Acute Chronic Benchconcentration criteria criteria mark concentration criteria criteria mark 

332205082143100

332442082094100

332452082085100

332538082085200

332540082085100

SWR11–1

SWR11–2 

SWR11–3 

SWR11–4

SWR11–5

March 3, 

2012

February 

19, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

August 

28, 2012

19

29

2.7

6.4

4.6

<0.6

<0.6

<0.6

<0.6

<0.6

3.2

3.2

3.2

3.2

3.2

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0.13

0.11

0.09

0.06

0.09

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

1,2See references cited.
18 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 12. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–3, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012. 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected.]

Compound Result

1,2-Dichloroethane <0.2

1,2-Dichloropropane <0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <0.34

2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.36

2,4-Dimethylphenol <0.8

2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <2

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <0.54

4-Nitrophenol <0.52

Hexachlorobenzene <0.3

Pentachlorophenol E 0.1

1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.1

1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethene <0.1

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.26

1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine <0.3

1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4-Dinitrophenol <2

2,4-Dinitrotoluene <0.56

2,6-Dinitrotoluene <0.4

2-Chloronaphthalene <0.24

2-Nitrophenol <0.4

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <0.42

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <0.24

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <0.34

9H-Fluorene, water <0.34

Acenaphthene <0.28

Acenaphthylene <0.3

Anthracene, water <0.38

Benzene, water <0.1

Benzo[a]anthracene 0.04

Benzo[a]pyrene 0.08

Benzo[b]fluoranthene E 0.15

Benzo[ghi]perylene 0.07

Benzo[k]fluoranthene E 0.08

Benzyl n-butyl phthalate E 0.6

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <0.24

Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether <0.3

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether <0.14

Table 12. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–3, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.–Continued 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected.]

Compound Result

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <7.2

Bromodichloromethane <0.1

Chlorobenzene <0.1

Chrysene, water 0.12

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene <0.42

Dibromochloromethane <0.2

Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.2

Dichloromethane <0.2

Diethyl ether <0.2

Diethyl phthalate <0.62

Diisopropyl ether <0.2

Dimethyl phthalate 0.03

Di-n-butyl phthalate <2.8

Di-n-octyl phthalate <0.6

Ethylbenzene <0.1

Fluoranthene 0.15

Hexachlorobutadiene <0.24

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.5

Hexachloroethane <0.24

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene E 0.06

Isophorone E 0.23

Methyl tert-butyl ether <0.2

Methyl tert-pentyl ether <0.2

m-Xylene plus p-xylene <0.2

Naphthalene 0.03

Nitrobenzene <0.26

N-Nitrosodimethylamine <0.32

N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <0.4

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <0.48

o-Xylene <0.1

Phenanthrene 0.04

Phenol 0.12

Pyrene 0.12

Styrene <0.1

tert-Butyl ethyl ether <0.1

Tetrachloroethene <0.1

Tetrachloromethane <0.2

Toluene, water <0.1

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Tribromomethane <0.2

Trichloroethene <0.1

Trichlorofluoromethane <0.2

Trichloromethane <0.1

Trihalomethanes <0.6

Vinyl chloride <0.2
Results 19

Table 13. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–4, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012. 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected, M; values that are 

detected below method detection limits but unable to be quantified.]

Compound Result

1,2-Dichloroethane <0.2

1,2-Dichloropropane <0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <0.34

2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.36

2,4-Dimethylphenol <0.8

2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <2

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <0.54

4-Nitrophenol <0.52

Hexachlorobenzene <0.3

Pentachlorophenol M

1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.1

1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethene <0.1

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.26

1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine <0.3

1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4-Dinitrophenol <2

2,4-Dinitrotoluene <0.56

2,6-Dinitrotoluene <0.4

2-Chloronaphthalene <0.24

2-Nitrophenol <0.4

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <0.42

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <0.24

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <0.34

9H-Fluorene, water <0.34

Acenaphthene <0.28

Acenaphthylene <0.3

Anthracene, water <0.38

Benzene, water <0.1

Benzo[a]anthracene <0.26

Benzo[a]pyrene 0.06

Benzo[b]fluoranthene E 0.12

Benzo[ghi]perylene E 0.07

Benzo[k]fluoranthene E 0.05

Benzyl n-butyl phthalate <1.8

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <0.24

Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether <0.3

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether <0.14

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <7.2

Bromodichloromethane <0.1

Chlorobenzene <0.1

Chrysene, water E 0.08

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene <0.42

Dibromochloromethane <0.2

Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.2

Dichloromethane <0.2

Diethyl ether <0.2

Table 13. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–4, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.–Continued 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected.]

Compound Result

Diethyl phthalate E 0.15

Diisopropyl ether <0.2

Dimethyl phthalate E 0.02

Di-n-butyl phthalate E 0.27

Di-n-octyl phthalate <0.6

Ethylbenzene <0.1

Fluoranthene E 0.14

Hexachlorobutadiene <0.24

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.5

Hexachloroethane <0.24

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene E 0.06

Isophorone E 0.14

Methyl tert-butyl ether <0.2

Methyl tert-pentyl ether <0.2

m-Xylene plus p-xylene <0.2

Naphthalene <0.22

Nitrobenzene <0.26

N-Nitrosodimethylamine <0.32

N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <0.4

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <0.48

o-Xylene <0.1

Phenanthrene E 0.05

Phenol E 0.06

Pyrene E 0.11

Styrene <0.1

tert-Butyl ethyl ether <0.1

Tetrachloroethene <0.1

Tetrachloromethane <0.2

Toluene, water <0.1

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Tribromomethane <0.2

Trichloroethene <0.1

Trichlorofluoromethane <0.2

Trichloromethane <0.1

Trihalomethanes <0.6

Vinyl chloride <0.2
20 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Table 14. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–5, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012. 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected.]

Compound Result

1,2-Dichloroethane <0.2

1,2-Dichloropropane <0.1

1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <0.34

2,4-Dichlorophenol <0.36

2,4-Dimethylphenol <0.8

2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol <2

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <0.54

4-Nitrophenol E 0.25

Hexachlorobenzene <0.3

Pentachlorophenol E 0.1

1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.1

1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethane <0.1

1,1-Dichloroethene <0.1

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.26

1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine <0.3

1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.1

2,4-Dinitrophenol <2

2,4-Dinitrotoluene <0.56

2,6-Dinitrotoluene <0.4

2-Chloronaphthalene <0.24

2-Nitrophenol <0.4

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <0.42

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <0.24

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <0.34

9H-Fluorene, water 0.04

Acenaphthene <0.28

Acenaphthylene <0.3

Anthracene, water 0.06

Benzene, water <0.1

Benzo[a]anthracene 0.11

Benzo[a]pyrene 0.34

Benzo[b]fluoranthene E 0.76

Benzo[ghi]perylene 0.4

Benzo[k]fluoranthene E 0.38

Benzyl n-butyl phthalate E 0.4

Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <0.24

Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether <0.3

Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether <0.14

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <7.2

Bromodichloromethane <0.1

Chlorobenzene <0.1

Chrysene, water 0.71

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene <0.42

Dibromochloromethane <0.2

Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.2

Dichloromethane <0.2

Diethyl ether <0.2

Table 14. Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds in 

a single stormwater grab sample taken within the first 30 

minutes of runoff from heating and cooling station SWR11–5, 

Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.–Continued 

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; NR, not 

reported; Bold text indicates compound detected.]

Compound Result

Diethyl phthalate 0.31

Diisopropyl ether <0.2

Dimethyl phthalate 0.03

Di-n-butyl phthalate E 0.21

Di-n-octyl phthalate E 0.6

Ethylbenzene <0.1

Fluoranthene <1.24

Hexachlorobutadiene <0.24

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.5

Hexachloroethane <0.24

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene E 0.34

Isophorone E 0.34

Methyl tert-butyl ether <0.2

Methyl tert-pentyl ether <0.2

m-Xylene plus p-xylene <0.2

Naphthalene <0.04

Nitrobenzene <0.26

N-Nitrosodimethylamine <0.32

N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <0.4

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <0.48

o-Xylene <0.1

Phenanthrene 0.51

Phenol 0.39

Pyrene 0.86

Styrene <0.1

tert-Butyl ethyl ether <0.1

Tetrachloroethene <0.1

Tetrachloromethane <0.2

Toluene, water <0.1

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.1

Tribromomethane <0.2

Trichloroethene <0.1

Trichlorofluoromethane <0.2

Trichloromethane <0.1

Trihalomethanes <0.6

Vinyl chloride <0.2
Results 21

Table 15. Detected semivolatile organic compounds in a single stormwater 

grab sample taken within the first 30 minutes of runoff from heating and 

cooling stations, Fort Gordon, Georgia, August 28, 2012.

[All units in micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; M, values that are detected at a 

level below method detection limits but unable to be quantified; NR, not reported; Bold text 

indicates compound detected.]

Compound SWR11–3 SWR11–4 SWR11–5

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

9H-Fluorene, water <0.34 <0.34 0.04

Anthracene, water <0.38 <0.38 0.06

Benzo[a]anthracene 0.04 <0.26 0.11

Benzo[a]pyrene 0.08 0.06 0.34

Benzo[b]fluoranthene E 0.15 E 0.12 E 0.76

Benzo[ghi]perylene 0.07 E 0.07 0.4

Benzo[k]fluoranthene E 0.08 E 0.05 E 0.38

Chrysene, water 0.12 E 0.08 0.71

Fluoranthene 0.15 E 0.14 <1.24

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene E 0.06 E 0.06 E 0.34

Naphthalene 0.03 <0.22 < 0.04

Phenanthrene 0.04 E 0.05 0.51

Pyrene 0.12 E 0.11 0.86

Total PAH concentration 0.94 0.74 4.51

Other Semivolatile Organic Compounds

4-Nitrophenol <0.52 <0.52 E 0.25

Pentachlorophenol E 0.1 M E 0.1

Diethyl phthalate <0.62 E 0.15 0.31

Dimethyl phthalate 0.03 E 0.02 0.03

Di-n-butyl phthalate <2.8 E 0.27 E 0.21

Di-n-octyl phthalate <0.6 <0.6 E 0.6

Benzyl n-butyl phthalate E 0.6 <1.8 E 0.4

Isophorone E 0.23 E 0.14 E 0.34

Phenol 0.12 E 0.06 0.39

Total Detected Compounds 16 15 20
22 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

U.S. Department of the Army Environmental and Natural 

Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal 

Center and Fort Gordon, assessed the quantity and quality 

of stormwater runoff associated with industrial activities 

from January through August 2012. The assessment was 

conducted to satisfy the requirements from a general 

permit that authorizes the discharge of stormwater under 

the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System from 

a site with industrial activities.

Stormwater runoff was sampled from five stations 

at four industrial sites (two landfills, sites SWR11–1 and 

SWR11–2, and three heating and cooling sites, SWR11–3, 

SWR11–4, and SWR11–5). The assessment included the 

collection rainfall amounts, discharges, and field parameters (dissolved oxygen and pH); the detection of suspended 

materials (total suspended solids, total fixed solids, total 

volatile solids), nutrients and organic compounds, and 

major and trace inorganic compounds; and the detection of 

volatile and semivolatile organic compounds (heating and 

cooling sites only). The largest rainfall amount was of 1.0 

inch at station SWR11–2. The results for all five samples 

indicate that many of the constituents were detected above 

their laboratory reporting levels.

Landfill site SWR11–2 had the largest total suspended 

solids concentration (214 milligrams per liter, mg/L) with 

most of the suspended solids consisting of fixed solids 

(176 mg/L) rather than volatile solids (38 mg/L). The 

total suspended solids concentration at site SWR11–2 

exceeded the maximum daily effluent limit for total 

suspended solids of 88 mg/L. Heating and cooling site 

SWR11–3 had the highest concentrations of total suspended solids (169 mg/L), total fixed solids (101 mg/L), 

and total volatile solids (68 mg/L) when compared to 

other two heating and cooling sites. Total nitrogen and 

phosphorus concentrations were 1.02 and 0.09, and 1.74 

and 0.21 mg/L, respectively at landfill sites SWR11–1 

and SWR11–2. Heating and cooling sites total nitrogen 

and total phosphorus concentrations ranged from 0.53 to 

1.08 mg/L and 0.07 to 0.1 mg/L, respectively, with the 

highest concentrations measured at site SWR11–3. Chemical oxygen demand was measured at 18 and 19.6 mg/L 

at landfill sites SWR11–1 and SWR11–2, respectively, 

which are less than the maximum daily effluent limit for 

5-day BOD (140 mg/L). Chemical oxygen demand ranged 

from 20 to 60 mg/L for the heating and cooling sites. The 

largest COD (60 mg/L) was measured at site SWR11–3. 

Additionally, oil and grease concentrations at the heating 

and cooling sites were compared to applicable benchmark 

standards; no sample concentrations exceeded these 

standards.

The estimated dissolved concentrations of cadmium, 

lead, nickel, zinc, mercury, and silver, and the total 

recoverable concentrations of arsenic and selenium were 

compared to applicable benchmark, acute and chronic 

effect criteria. The estimated dissolved zinc concentration 

(105 micrograms per liter) at site SWR11–3 was the only 

constituent to exceed a benchmark standard (40 micrograms per liter). Estimated dissolved zinc concentrations at 

sites SWR11–4 and SWR11–5 exceeded acute and chronic 

effect aquatic-life criteria. Estimated dissolved concentrations of lead exceeded the chronic effect aquatic-life 

criteria at all sites and exceeded the acute effect aquaticlife criteria at site SWR11–3. The acute and chronic effect 

aquatic-life criteria for dissolved cadmium were exceeded 

at site SWR11–3.

Samples from sites SWR11–3, SWR11–4, and 

SWR11–5 were analyzed for 83 volatile and semivolatile 

organic compounds. Eight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds, benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, 

benzo[ghi]perylene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, chrysene, 

indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene, phenanthrene, and pyrene, were 

detected at all three sites. Other semivolatile organic 

compounds detected at all three sites included pentachlorophenol, dimethyl phthalate, and isophorone. Of the 83 

volatile and semivolatile organic compounds that were 

analyzed in stormwater samples from heating and cooling 

sites, 15 (18 percent) were detected at site SWR 11–3, 

12 (14 percent) were detected at site SWR11–4, and 17 

(20 percent) were detected at site SWR11–5.

References Cited

Bohdaine, G.L., 1968, Measurement of peak discharge at 

culverts by indirect methods: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 3, chap. A3, 

60 p.

Childress, C.J.O., Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., Maloney, T.J., 

1999, New reporting procedures based on long-term method 

detection levels and some considerations for interpretations of water-quality data provided by the U. S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 99–193, 19 p.

Church, P.E., Granato, G.E., and Owens, D.W., 1999, 

Basic requirements for collecting, documenting, and 

reporting precipitation and storm-flow measurements: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–255, 38 p.

Connor, B.F., Rose, D.L., Noriega, M.C., Murtagh, L., Abney, 

S.R., 1997, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey water quality laboratories—Determination of 86 

volatile organic compounds in water by gas spectrometry, including detections less than reporting limits., 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97–829, 78 p.
References Cited 23

Fishman, M.J, ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

Determination of inorganic constituents in water and fluvial 

sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

93–125, 217 p.

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., 1989, Methods for 

determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial 

sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chapter A1, 545 p.

Garbarino, J.R., and Damrau, D.L., 2001, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of organic plus inorganic in filtered and unfiltered natural waters with cold vapor—Atomic 

fluorescence spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 01–4132, 16 p.

Garbarino, J.R., Kanagt, L.K., and Cree, M.E., 2006, Determination of elements in natural water, biota, sediment, and soil 

samples using collision/reaction cell inductively coupled 

plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 5, sec. B, chap. 1, 88 p.

Garbarino, J.R., and Struzeski, T.M., 1998, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of elements in whole-water 

digests using inductively coupled plasma-optical emissions spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

98–165, 101 p.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2006, Authorization to discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System—Storm Water Discharges associated 

with Industrial Activity , General Permit No.GAR000000, 

effective date August 1, 2006, through July 31, 2011, 

accessed on March 21, 2013, at http://www.gaepd.org/

Files_PDF/techguide/wpb/Industrial_SW_General_

Permit_GAR000000_Y2006_June8.pdf

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012a, Authorization to discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System—Storm water discharges associated 

with industrial activities, general NPDES stormwater 

permit No. GAR050000, effective date June 1, 2012, 

through May 31, 2017, accessed March 28, 2012, at 

http://www.gaepd.org/Documents/techguide_wpb.html.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2012b, Water use 

classifications and water quality standards—Code of Federal Registry 391-3-6-.03, accessed 1/10/2013, at 

http://www.gaepd.org/Files_PDF/techguide/wpb/WQS/

EPA_Approved_WQS_March2012.pdf.

Gregory, M.B., Stamey, T.C., and Wellborn, J.B., 2001, 

Eco¬logical characterization of streams, and fish-tissue 

analysis for mercury and lead at selected locations, Fort 

Gordon, Georgia, June 1999 to May 2000: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 01–203, 14 p.

Hoffman, G.L., Fishman, M.J., and Garbarino, J.R., 1996, 

Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National 

Water Quality Laboratory—In bottle acid digestion of 

whole-water samples: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 96–225, 28 p.

National Water Quality Laboratory method holding times 2010: Accessed April 25, 2013, at 

http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/pubs/Method%20holding%20

times%205-25-10.pdf.

O’Dell, J.W., 1993, Method 350.1 – determination of ammonia 

nitrogen by semi-automated colorimetry, Revision 2.0: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 

Development, accessed 06/05/2013 at http://water.epa.gov/

scitech/methods/cwa/bioindicators/upload/2007_07_10_

methods_method_350_1.pdf.

Patton, C.J., and Kryskalla, J.R., 2003, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Pollution 

Laboratory—Evaluation of alkaline persulfate digestion 

as an alternative to Kjeldhal digestion for determination 

of total and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus in water: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03–4174, 33 p. 

Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edition, 2005, Method 5310B high temperature combustion method: Accessed April 7, 2012, 

at http://www.standardmethods.org/store/ProductView.

cfm?ProductID=38.

Teledyne Isco, Inc., 2007, 750 Area velocity module 

installation and operation guide: Teledyne Isco, Inc., 39 p.

Teledyne Isco, Inc., 2012, 6712 Portable samplers installation 

and operation guide: Teledyne Isco, Inc., 246 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, National 

pollutant discharge elimination system storm water 

sampling guidance document: Washington, D.C., Office of 

Water, Report EPA 883-B-92-001, 177 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999a, Analytical 

methods-method 1664, revision A; n-hexane extractable 

material (HEM; oil and grease) and silica gel treated n-hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM; non-polar material) by 

extraction and gravimetry: Report EPA 821-R-98-002, 23 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999b, USEPA 

Contract laboratory program national functional guidelines 

for organic data review: Office of Emergency and Remedial 

Response, Washington, D.C., Report EPA 540-R-99-008, 

118 p.
24 Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, USEPA 

Contract laboratory program national functional guidelines 

for inorganic data review: Washington, D.C., Office of 

Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA 540-R-04-004, 

136 p.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006, National 

Recommended Water Quality Criteria: U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Office of Water (4304T), accessed June 

05, 2013, at http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1003R9X.

TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=2006

+Thru+2010&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&Searc

hMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&

QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldO

p=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfil

es%5CIndex%20Data%5C06thru10%5CTxt%5C00000007

%5CP1003R9X.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=ano

nymous&SortMethod=h%7C-&MaximumDocuments=1&F

uzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/

i425&Display=p%7Cf&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyA

ctionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&M

aximumPages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009, Industrial 

stormwater monitoring and sampling guide: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, EPA 832-B-09-003, 51p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Quality: Accessed 06/06/2013 at 

http;//nwql.usgs.gov/quality.shtml.

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National 

field manual for the collection of water-quality data: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1–A9, accessed March 26, 

2012, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A.

For further information about this publication contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

South Carolina Water Science Center

Stephenson Center, Suite 129

720 Gracern Road

Columbia, SC 29210-7651

Or visit the South Carolina Water Science Center Web site at

http://sc.water.usgs.gov/

Prepared by the Raleigh Publishing Service Center and the 

Rolla Publishing Service Center
Nagle—Quantity and Quality of Stormwater Collected from Selected Stormwater Outfalls at Industrial Sites–Open-File Report 2013–1140, ver. 1.1

ISSN 2331-1258 (online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20131140