U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey

Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality 

of the County Road A Disposal Site on the 

Bad River Indian Reservation, 

Ashland County, Wisconsin: 1997-98

Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4082

Location of Ashland and Iron Counties 

and the Bad River Indian Reservation

EXPLANATION 

Extent of Bad River 

Indian Reservation

Prepared in cooperation with the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 and

The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians

science for a changing world

Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of 

the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad 

River Indian Reservation, Ashland County, 

Wisconsin: 1997-98

By C.P. Dunning (U.S. Geological Survey) and D.J. Yeskis 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4082

Prepared in cooperation with

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 and

The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians

Middleton, Wisconsin 

2001

science 

USGS

for a changing world
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Charles G. Groat, Director

The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does 

not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government.

For additional information write to:

District Chief 

U.S. Geological Survey 

8505 Research Way 

Middleton, Wl 53562-3586

Copies of this report can be purchased from:

U.S. Geological Survey 

Branch of Information Services 

Box 25286 

Denver, CO 80225-0286
CONTENTS

Abstract...............................................................................................................^ 1

Introduction............................................^ 1

Purpose and scope....................................................................................................................................................... 3

Hydrogeologic setting................................................................................................................................................. 3

Previous work............................................................................................................................................................. 5

Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................................................^ 5

Methods of data collection and analysis ............................................................................................................................... 8

Well siting and installation.......................................................................................................................................... 8

Water levels, precipitation, and evaporation............................................................................................................... 8

Slug tests ..................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Geophysical logs......................................................................................................................................................... 9

Water-quality samples................................................................................................................................................. 10

Hydrogeology of the County Road A disposal site............................................................................................................... 11

Lithology....................................................................................................................................................^ 11

Hydraulic conductivity................................................................................................................................................ 15

Water budget for Pond A............................................................................................................................................. 15

Vertical hydraulic gradients beneath Pond A.............................................................................................................. 19

Vertical hydraulic conductivity of bottom sediments of Pond A................................................................................ 24

Ground-water-flow directions..................................................................................................................................... 24

Water quality......................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Field parameters.......................................................................................................................................................... 24

Inorganic analyses....................................................................................................................................................... 24

Organic analyses ......................................................................................................................................................... 28

Summary............................................................................................................................................................................... 36

References cited.................................................................................................................................................................... 40

Appendixes: 

A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A disposal site,

Ashland County, Wisconsin...................................................................................................................................... 44

B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin ............................................... 51

C. Meteorological data collected at the airport at Minocqua, Wisconsin, and estimates of evaporation for the

period May 5 to August 18, 1998 ............................................................................................................................. 57

FIGURES

1. Map showing the location of the Bad River Indian Reservation and County Road A disposal site in

Ashland County, Wisconsin .................................................................................................................................. 2

2. Diagram showing stratigraphic section for the northern Bad River Indian Reservation.......................................... 4

3-4. Maps showing:

3. Location of the Superior Lowland of the Lake Superior Region, northern Wisconsin..................................... 4

4. Locations of monitoring wells and well points at the County Road A disposal site ........................................ 6

5. Map showing lithologic logs and natural-gamma logs of unconsolidated sediments encountered in

selected monitoring wells at the County Road A disposal site............................................................................. 12

6. Diagram showing geophysical logs from monitoring wells CAMW-6B and CAMW-8B at the

County Road A disposal site................................................................................................................................. 13

7. Diagram showing geophysical logs from temporary well points WP-2G and WP-1G in Ponds A and B at the

County Road A disposal site................................................................................................................................. 14

8-9. Hydrographs showing:

8. Water-table altitudes in monitoring wells measured December 18, 1995 through August 20, 1998 at

the County Road A disposal site..................................................................................................................... 17

9. Water-level altitudes in monitoring wells, well points, and Pond A, measured May 6 through

August 20, 1998 at the County Road A disposal site...................................................................................... 18

10. Graph showing precipitation and stage of Pond A for the period May 5 through August 18, 1998 at the

County Road A disposal site ............................................................................................................................... 20

CONTENTS
CONTENTS Continued

11. Diagram showing construction of well point WP-2 in Pond A, and water levels on May 6, 1998 and

August 20, 1998, at the County Road A disposal site ....................................................................................... 23

12-13. Maps showing:

12. Water-table constructed using data collected on August 20, 1998, illustrating the interpreted

relationship between the local water table and ponds at the County Road A disposal site...................... 25

13. Hydraulic heads measured in deep monitoring wells, and direction and magnitude of vertical

gradients on August 20, 1998, at the County Road A disposal site.......................................................... 26

TABLES

1. Description of monitoring wells and well-points at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County,

Wisconsin............................................................................................................................................................ 7

2. Estimates of horizontal hydraulic conductivity (Kh) from slug tests conducted at the County Road A

disposal site......................................................................................................................................................... 15

3. Measured water-level altitudes in monitoring wells, well points, and ponds at the County Road A disposal

site...................................................................................................................................................................... 16

4. Estimated evaporation, measured stage, rate of stage change, estimated seepage, and estimated vertical

hydraulic conductivity during selected periods for Pond A at the County Road A disposal site ....................... 21

5. Field parameters measured April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Road A disposal site............................ 27

6. Inorganic analytical data for monitoring wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County

Road A disposal site............................................................................................................................................ 29

7. Inorganic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 near the County

Road A disposal site........................................................................................................................................... 31

8. Organic analytical data for monitoring wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Road A

disposal site......................................................................................................................................................... 32

9. Organic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 near the County

Road A disposal site........................................................................................................................................... 37

10. Organic carbon partitioning coefficient and water solubility product for selected organic compounds

detected in ground water, County Road A disposal site...................................................................................... 36

IV CONTENTS
CONVERSION FACTORS, VERTICAL DATUM, AND ABBREVIATED WATER-QUALITY UNITS

Multiply By To Obtain

Length

inch (in) 

foot (ft) 

mile (mi)

25.4 

.3048 

1.609

millimeter 

meter 

kilometer

Hydraulic Conductivity*

feet per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meters per day

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) can be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) by use of the following equation:

°F= 1.8 (°C) + 32.

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929) geodetic datum derived from 

a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.

*Hydraulic conductivity: The standard unit for hydraulic conductivity is cubic foot per day per square foot of aquifer cross-sectional area 

(ft3/d)/ ft2. In this report, the mathematically reduced form, feet per day (ft/d), is used for convenience.

Hydraulic gradient: Hydraulic gradient is given in feet per foot; the difference in measured hydraulic head at two points divided by the 

distance (vertical or horizontal) between the points of measurement.

Abbreviated water-quality units used in this report: Chemical concentration is given in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per 

liter (p-g/L). Milligrams per liter is a unit expressing the concentration of chemical constituents in solution as weight (milligrams) of solute 

per unit volume (liter) of water. One thousand micrograms per liter is equivalent to one milligram per liter.

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (|iS/cm at 25 °C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (|ig/L).

Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) is given in millivolts (mV).

Dissolved oxygen (DO) is given in milligrams per liter (mg/L).

Turbidity is given in nephalometric turbidity units.

Other Abbreviations Used in this Report:

ml/min milliliters per minute

CONVERSION FACTORS, VERTICAL DATUM, AND ABBREVIATED WATER-QUALITY UNITS V

Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County 

Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian 

Reservation, Ashland County, Wisconsin: 1997-98

ByC.P. Dunning anc/D.J. Yeskis 

Abstract

The County Road A disposal site, located on 

the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland County, 

Wisconsin, contains papermill sludge generated by 

a former mill in the City of Ashland. Since the time 

of disposal (1968-1970) the site has been the subject of investigations by the U.S. Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, and private consultants. During 1997- 

1998, an investigation was conducted by the U.S. 

Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency and the Natural 

Resources Department of the Bad River Indian 

Tribe, to evaluate the hydrogeology and groundwater quality of the disposal site, particularly with 

respect to the hydraulic connection between two 

ponds at the site and the shallow ground-waterflow system. Additional monitoring wells and well 

points were installed, and additional hydrogeologic, ground-water quality, and geophysical data 

were collected. The data from this and previous 

studies were integrated and interpreted.

Data collected during this investigation indicate the ponds are hydraulically connected to the 

shallow ground-water system. Pond stage and 

meteorological data collected from May 6 through 

August 18, 1998 indicate evaporation and seepage 

from Pond A, the southernmost pond, to ground 

water accounted for the measured declines in pond 

stage. Seepage was estimated to be from 

0.008-0.012 feet per day over the area of Pond A. 

Increases in the stage of Pond A following precipitation events resulted in increases in the hydraulic 

head in pond sediments as measured in well point 

WP-2 in the southwestern area of the pond. 

Hydraulic gradients were consistently downward

across the pond sediments, ranging from 0.24 to 

0.38 feet per foot. Although the estimated vertical 

hydraulic conductivity of the pond sediments is 

low (0.021-0.050 feet per day), limited flow occurs 

through the pond sediments. A complex hydraulic 

connection between Pond A and the shallow sediments was defined by changes in water levels in 

well points in and adjacent to the pond. Neutron 

logs indicated that the sediments under Pond A 

were saturated.

The hydraulic connection between the ponds 

and the shallow ground-water system is supported 

by water-quality data. Inorganic and organic constituents of the papermill sludge have been detected 

in water-quality samples collected from on-site 

monitoring wells. Concentrations of acetone, aluminum, antimony, 2-butanone, lead, sodium, and 

possibly cobalt exceeded background concentrations for this site. Concentrations of inorganic constituents, with the exception of potassium and zinc, 

were considerably lower in samples from local residential wells than those from monitoring wells. 

Elevated concentrations of potassium and zinc, 

however, are consistent with concentrations measured previously in other wells and springs on the 

Bad River Indian Reservation. None of the organic 

compounds identified in the papermill sludge have 

been detected in water sampled from the residential 

wells.

INTRODUCTION

The Bad River Indian Reservation is located in 

Ashland and Iron Counties, Wisconsin (fig. 1). The 

County Road A disposal site is located within the reservation, about 1 mi southwest of the intersection of U.S. 

Highway 2 and Ashland County Road A. The site is bordered by forest, with the nearest private residence

Abstract
Extent of Bad River 

Indian Reservation

f Madeline Island

Location of Ashland and Iron 

Counties and the Bad River 

Indian Reservation

ASHLAND CO. / ?J IRON CO

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:100,000 digita 

Department of Natural Resources. Wisconsin Tra

^County Road A disposal

jft' 'i

46'36'30"

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000, Odanah, Wisconsin, 1975; detailed area shown above: T 48N, R 3E

Figure 1. Location of the Bad River Indian Reservation and County Road A disposal site in Ashland County Wisconsin

2 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
located approximately 500 ft to the north across County 

Road A. To the south and east is Hanson Swamp, which 

drains into the White River northeast of the site. The site 

covers approximately four acres and contains two 

ponds, designated Pond A (the southern pond) and Pond 

B (the northern pond). The property is owned by Ashland County.

The site was used as a source for roadbed material 

(borrow pit) for the construction of U.S. Highway 2. 

Subsequently, during the years 1968 to 1970 the site 

was used for the disposal of papermill sludge generated 

at a former mill in the City of Ashland (Geraghty & 

Miller, Inc., 1996a). Since the time of disposal the site 

has been the subject of investigations by the U.S. 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (USBIA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and private consultants. During a Phase I screening investigation 

completed by Geraghty & Miller, Inc., analysis of water 

samples from the ponds indicated the presence of two 

volatile organic compounds (VOC), one semivolatile 

organic compound (SVOC), and several dioxins/furans 

(Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a). During 1997 and 

1998, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with USEPA Region 5 and the Bad River Natural 

Resources Department (BRNRD), conducted an investigation of the hydrogeology and ground-water quality 

of the site. A primary objective of this investigation was 

to assess the potential for migration of water from the 

ponds on the County Road A disposal site to the shallow 

ground-water-flow system.

Purpose and Scope

This report presents and interprets hydrogeologic 

and water-quality data collected by the USGS and the 

USEPA in support of this investigation. Included in this 

report is information on wells installed for the investigation, geophysical logs, ground-water and surfacewater levels, estimates of horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the shallow aquifer, a water budget for Pond A, 

and an estimate of the vertical hydraulic conductivity of 

Pond A sediments. Ground-water-flow directions and 

possible contaminant-migration pathways, particularly 

with respect to Pond A, are presented.

Hydrogeologic Setting

The general geologic setting of the northern part of 

the Bad River Indian Reservation is that of bedrock 

overlain by glacial and post-glacial deposits (fig. 2). 

The Precambrian Oronto and Cambrian Bayfield 

Groups compose the upper bedrock (Mudrey and others, 1982). The Oronto Group is composed of feldspathic sandstone, siltstone, shale and conglomerate. The 

younger Bayfield Group is composed of feldspathic 

quartzose sandstone with some orthoquartzitic sandstone (Mudrey and others, 1982). The Bayfield Group 

sandstones are believed to be present only in the far 

northwestern part of the reservation (Batten and Lidwin, 1995) and absent at the site.

The northern part of the reservation is within the 

Superior Lowland of the Lake Superior Physiographic 

Region (fig. 3) (Clayton, 1984). This region was glaciated many times during the Pleistocene Epoch, though 

evidence is abundant only for the last part of the Wisconsin glaciation, which began about 20,000 years 

before present. During this glaciation, the Superior and 

Chippewa Lobes advanced over the region.

At the site, glacial deposits include the Copper 

Falls Formation and the stratigraphically younger 

Miller Creek Formation (fig. 2). All monitoring wells at 

the site are open to varying intervals in the upper 50 ft 

of the Miller Creek Formation. Post-glacial deposits 

include stream and organic deposits of Holocene age.

The topography at and around the site is described 

as Lake-Modified Glacial Topography (Clayton, 1984). 

The topography is subdued as the result of wave action, 

or as the result of sediments deposited in waterlogged 

conditions during high stages of Lake Superior. The 

topography is characterized by low relief with hummocky, collapsed features; however, drumlins are 

present in some areas.

The principal water-supply aquifers in the northern 

part of the reservation are the Precambrian sandstone 

and the overlying sand and gravel deposits of the Copper Falls Formation. The lower portion of the Miller 

Creek Formation is composed of a massive red clay 

(Batten and Lidwin, 1995), which may act as a confining or semi-confining unit between the aquifer of the 

Copper Falls Formation from the upper part of the 

Miller Creek Formation. The extent and character of the 

clay portion of the Miller Creek Formation at the site 

were not evaluated during this investigation. The upper 

part of the Miller Creek Formation, in which the site 

monitoring wells are screened, is composed of

INTRODUCTION
Geologic

time interval

-o 

o

03

D_

CD

dJ 

CD

*

 ^-^-^-^*

CD

LJJ

O'o

rvi

0

dJ

O

ol

dJ i ' 

CD

O

dJ

-D

TD

^

Years

hpfnrp LJC7IUI C

present

0

10,000

11,000

20,000 ~^~-^~^~-^'

600 million

1,000 million

1,150 million

Stratigraphic unit

(Holocene) 

sediments

(Pleistocene)

Miller Creek Formation

(Pleistocene) 

Copper Falls Formation

^ ^^-- \ ^ ^. xBayfield Group

Oronto Group

Lithology

Soil and alluvial deposits

Interbedded sand, silt, and clay

Lower massive red clay

Sandy till, sand and gravel

~^_^ ^_-x v ^~~ ^. s~ \

Feldspathic quartzose sandstone

Feldspathic sandstone, siltstone, 

shale, and conglomerate

Figure 2. Stratigraphic section for the northern Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from 

Mudrey and others, 1982).

47 

46-30' 

MINNESOTA /T

Twp Harbors

ST. LOUIS CO

^ ^

£« ^ - Q^ D

<J "» o /r» AROSTLE

O^/ \°r <*

[J / ISLANDS

General location of the 

County Road A 

disposal site

EXPLANATION 

s"^* Southern extent of Superior Lowland

20 MILES

i i i 0 10 20 KILOMETERS

Figure 3. Location of the Superior Lowland of the Lake Superior Region, northern Wisconsin (modified from Clayton, 1984).

4 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
interbedded sand, silt and clay and is overlain by soil 

(Geraghty & Miller, Inc., L996a).

The shallow ground-water-flow system at the site 

is presumed to be controlled largely by topography and 

local variations in sediment lithology. On the basis of 

topography, flow is generally from local topographic 

highs west and northwest of the site to Hanson Swamp 

to the southeast, and eventually to the White River 

(fig-1).

Previous Work

Waste-characterization, water-quality, and hydrogeologic investigations have been conducted in and 

around the County Road A site since 1990. The USBIA, 

with field support from the USGS, conducted an investigation of the site from 1990 to 1992 (U.S. Bureau of 

Indian Affairs, 1992). During 1994, 3 Bears Environmental Services sampled surface-water sites and 

selected water-supply wells for water-quality analysis 

(3 Bears Environmental Services, 1994). From 1994 

through 1995, the USEPA and their contractors sampled 

water-supply wells, soil, pond sediment, sludge and surface water. A Phase I screening investigation was completed by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. (now known as 

Arcadis-Geraghty & Miller, Inc. [A-G&M]) on behalf 

of MRC Holdings, Inc., the owners of the assets and liabilities of the former mill (Geraghty & Miller, Inc, 

1996a, 1996b, 1997).

As part of the A-G&M site activities from August 

1995 to January 1996, monitoring wells were installed, 

and soil borings, surface soil samples, sludge samples, 

and Geoprobe samples were taken. Monitoring wells 

were installed at five locations in and near the site. 

A-G&M established a naming convention for monitoring wells that begins with the acronym CAMW (County 

Road A Monitoring Well). The acronym is followed by 

a hyphen and the number of the site location, 1 through 

5. Following the number of the site location is a suffix 

"A" or "B". The "A" suffix identifies wells screened 

across the water table, generally 10 to 15 ft below 

ground level. The "B" suffix identifies wells screened 

15 to 20 ft below the water table. The locations of monitoring wells installed by A-G&M CAMW-1 A, 

-IB, -2A, -2B, -3A, -3B, -4A, -4B and -5A are shown 

on figure 4. Construction details for all wells on site are 

provided in table 1. Monitoring wells CAMW-1A, -IB,

and -5A are located generally upgradient of the ponds 

and sludge deposits, and therefore assumed to best represent background conditions at the site.

Information collected from monitoring well construction, soil borings, surface soil samples, and 

Geoprobe samples was used to characterize the subsurface geology and sludge thickness (Geraghty & Miller, 

Inc., I996a). A-G&M interpreted data collected during 

their investigation as indicating shallow ground-water 

flow generally from west to east across the site. The 

conceptual model developed by A-G&M suggested no 

hydraulic connection between the ponds and the 

ground-water-flow system (Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 

1996a).

As a part of A-G&M site activities, papermillsludge samples and surface-water samples were collected from the site for chemical analysis (Geraghty & 

Miller, Inc., 1996a). Analytical results from that study 

are presented in appendix A. The sludge was heterogeneous with a wide variation in concentrations of VOC's, 

SVOC's, metals, and dioxins/furans. Analysis of water 

samples from the ponds indicated the presence of two 

VOC's (4-methyl-2-pentanone and acetone), one S VOC 

(bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate) and several dioxins/furans 

(2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran [TCDF (total)], 

Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin [HpCDD (total)], 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD, and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-Octachlorodibenzodioxin [OCDD]).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following people and organizations. 

Tracey Ledder, Matthew Eitrem, and Ann Barnes of the 

BRNRD assisted with planning the field investigation, 

and devoted significant time to field activities. Beth 

Reiner, Laura Evans, and Arunas Draugalis of USEPA 

Region 5 provided project management and assisted 

with field activities. James Rauman, Ty Sabin. John 

DeWild, James Krohelski, Frederick Paillet, Richard 

Hodges, and Barbara Corland of the USGS assisted 

with monitoring-well construction and a wide variety of 

sampling activities and geophysical logging. Kevin 

Daleness and Bruce Evans of Arcadis-Geraghty & 

Miller, Inc. assisted with many field activities.

INTRODUCTION
EXPLANATION

CAMW-1A Well, piezometer, or well point 

* location and name

|-vy:'/,-j Low, wet area

t, CAMW-3B VX CAMW-3A

WP-P3 

WP-P2

CAMW-7P. \

Figure 4. Locations of monitoring wells and well points at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (base 

map modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a).

6 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
r|~7l c'o

CL,

c a

'to >

c *

8 I

CO 

> -a

*£c Q

o jy

° 3

T3 u, C 1J

05 «

.C >

< 0

. "Jj

0) X)

W H"

^~ ^

8 «

O if ti

<r ^ «

«3

03 , -

o r 

cc £

> <u "c a

O c

0 -2

o a

-c S

*- M

13

"c jy

0 ^

Q. .0

== 3,

0) D,

> C3

"7^ ^

C °

03 g

= -a 0) o

D) C

c. 22 ^ o u *

c 1

0 ^

E c 

"o «

|l

b 1 w o

0) o

Q ^ 

T- |5

« «

^ c

|2 Jl

re

sill ^ E ^i

 * "S « w

re = « ?

°- « .E 1

oM

>

E « E § 

o o n « ^ ^ *- ^

O ._ <u re m "* o u »- o Ma>

.E

^-

^c

o > 9- « o 

«

O) "D ^ it

~ 2 +* ~

^ s fl) re

<o re H- M 

re tv .E

V 0)

u > _

3 "2 re «

M « 4- _L = v re

^ n) 0) c re *^ IA

re c w

^ «

c

'wo

w .

e S 

C 5

E T3 OOVQco

(0 ^«

= re M

_cc

_oc

o o

1.E §

 E ' ?

o "« o)

.- 3 'w

c ,_ «

0 0 "0

«o^^u-)^^in^«o

rrl'^iON(NON(Nvbcor»S (N-^-^H-rf-_-rt-^HC<-)(N

ooooooinoo

' ^OOOONOCOl/^lO' ii i

 i m m m m '

NONOroro^^r^ONO 

^HON^cd^cdoNod <

(NON(NON(NCN iON(N

<Nr^r^NO(Nr^fSONio fo^r^NOf^iO' "O^

r^r~-fNfN(^ir»^ododi-^

33SSSSSSS

^^^HCOCOONONOOOO' i

y~i i/"i O O O O i/~) »/-) i/~)

1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

IO IO 'O */^ */^ IO W) I/") ^

ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

NO*/S' "OOONOOOOl/S

pOOmr«-)<N(N<NO

(N(N(N-H-H---H-H(N

H^H^H^H^H 

03030303

-^CQ^CQ^OS^OS^ -H < fvj (-4 m m ^ ^ ^

^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^

uuuououuu

ooo 

r~: o -H

VO VO VO VO

-^-

VO

ON ON ON ON

rt O

u u

<C D3

oo oo

o o

O

o

OH O. PL, PL,

^ ^ ^ £

Q Q Q Qa

<N I ^H

O rn O

r»^ r»^ r»^

VO VO VO

ON ON ON

INTRODUCTION
METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION AND 

ANALYSIS

During the course of this investigation, a variety of 

hydrogeologic data were collected to assess the potential for migration of water from ponds at the County 

Road A disposal site to the shallow ground-water-flow 

system.

Well Siting and Installation

In October 1997, the USGS installed a water-table 

monitoring well and a deep monitoring well at each of 

two locations within the County Road A site. The monitoring wells were sited and constructed to provide additional information about the local hydrogeology, and to 

provide sampling locations for water-quality analyses 

directly downgradient from the site ponds and known 

sludge-disposal areas. The USGS continued the naming 

convention established by A-G&M for the earlier 

installed wells. The locations of the new monitoring 

wells, CAMW-6A, -6B, -8A, and -8B, are shown in figure 4. The wells were drilled using 4-1/4-inch inside 

diameter (ID) hollow-stem augers. The wells were constructed with flush-threaded, 2-inch polyvinyl chloride 

(PVC) risers and wire-wound screens. Monitoring well 

construction reports for these wells are included in 

appendix B. Because of site conditions, monitoring well 

CAMW-6B was installed with a 10-foot screen, rather 

than the intended 5-foot screen. Approximately one 

week before water-quality sampling began, the wells 

were developed by vigorously surging with Teflon bailers.

Six well points were installed during a site visit 

from April 27 to May 6, 1998. One permanent well 

point, CAMW-7P, was installed, along with five temporary well points. The temporary well points include 

WP-1 and WP-2 installed in Ponds B and A, respectively, and WP-P2, WP-P3 and WP-P4 installed on land 

between WP-2 and CAMW-7P (fig. 4). All well points 

except CAMW-7P were constructed with a 1-foot 

length of 2-inch-diameter stainless steel screen with a 

pointed metal drive-tip, and a 2-inch-diameter, 5-ft 

long, stainless steel riser pipe. CAMW-7P has identical 

construction except for a 2-foot length of screen. Installation involved hand-augering a hole as deep as practical (generally 1-2 ft below top of soil saturation) and 

then driving the point with a sledge hammer to the 

desired depth. The location for well point CAMW-7P

was chosen to monitor a sludge pile on the west side of 

Pond A. CAMW-7P was installed in a topographic 

depression where sludge was absent although the well 

was surrounded by the sludge pile. Temporary well 

points WP-1 and WP-2 were installed in the ponds to 

monitor stage and water levels in the pond sediments. 

Both were installed by placing the well point in a hole 

that had been hand-augered and driving the point to 

depth with a sledge hammer. Temporary well points 

WP-P2, WP-P3 and WP-P4 were installed near Pond A 

to evaluate changes in ground-water level as a function 

of distance from the pond to CAMW-7P. The monitoring well construction report for CAMW-7P is included 

in appendix B. No monitoring well construction reports 

were completed for the temporary well points, but a 

summary of their construction is included in table 1.

During a subsequent site visit from August 17 

to 21, 1998, two additional temporary well points, WP1G and WP-2G, were installed specifically for geophysical logging of the bottom sediments of Ponds B and A, 

respectively (fig. 4). Construction of these well points 

was the same as the others except no screens were used, 

only solid pipe (table 1). As a result, the completed well 

points allowed the neutron and natural-gamma tools to 

be run in air, rather than in water, across the pond bottom sediments. This was necessary for a meaningful 

evaluation of sediment saturation by the neutron tool.

Water Levels, Precipitation, and Evaporation

Water levels in monitoring wells and well-points 

were measured using an electric tape on 10 dates from 

December 18, 1995 through August 20, 1998. These 

measurements were made by A-G&M, USEPA/U.S. 

Geological Survey, or BRNRD. From May 6 through 

August 18, 1998, water levels were measured on a 

nearly continuous basis

(60-minute intervals) in monitoring wells CAMW-1A, 

-IB, -7P, -8A and -8B, and well points WP-2, WP-P2, 

WP-P3 and WP-P4. These monitoring wells and well 

points were chosen because of their locations upgradient, or downgradient, or adjacent to Pond A so that the 

interaction between the pond and the shallow groundwater-flow system could be investigated. Water levels 

were measured with pressure transducers and recorded 

with data loggers. Nearly continuous measurement of 

stage in Pond A was conducted over the same period by 

hanging a transducer on the outside of well point WP-2.

Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
A weather station was set up onsite to collect meteorological data concurrently with water-level data. 

Unfortunately, the station stopped collecting data after 

eight days, necessitating use of meteorological data 

from locations further from the site. Precipitation data 

were obtained from the University of Wisconsin experimental farm near Ashland, Wisconsin (fig. 1) for the 

period May 6, 1998 through August 18, 1998. Pond 

evaporation for this period was estimated using the 

method of Linsley and others (1982, equation 5-30), 

which was applied to unpublished meteorological data 

from the airport at Minocqua, Wisconsin (fig. 1) (Jim 

Krohelski, USGS, oral comm., 1999). These meteorological data are maintained by the North Temperate 

Lakes Long-Term Ecological Research (NTL-LTER) 

program. Because the farm near Ashland and the airport 

at Minocqua experience excess precipitation and average annual evaporation similar to the study site (Dunne 

and Leopold, 1978; Novitzki, 1982), these data are 

appropriate to use for this investigation.

Slug Tests

Slug tests (displacement/recovery tests) were performed during April 1998 on monitoring wells CAMW4A, -4B, -6A, -8A and -8B. Slug tests are initiated by 

quickly lowering a solid cylinder below the water level 

in a well, causing water level to quickly rise. The recovery of the water to its static level with time is measured 

(falling-head test). Quick removal of the cylinder provides the opportunity to measure the recovery of the 

lowered water level to its static level (rising-head test). 

The change in water level in the well due to the slug and 

the recovery of water level to its static level were measured using a pressure transducer. Data were collected 

using a data logger.

Slug-test data were analyzed using the techniques 

of Bouwer and Rice (Bouwer and Rice, 1976; Bouwer, 

1989) and Hvorslev (1951). These techniques were 

developed for use in unconfined aquifers and can be 

applied to wells that either fully or partially penetrate an 

aquifer. The following conditions are assumed in the 

application of the Bouwer and Rice and the Hvorslov 

techniques:

(1) Drawdown of the water table in the vicinity of 

the well during the test is negligible;

(2) Unsaturated flow above the water table can be 

ignored;

(3) Head losses as the water enters the well are 

negligible; and

(4) The hydraulic unit is homogeneous and 

isotropic.

These conditions are likely to be met or approximated at the site wells over the small volume of aquifer 

affected by the slug tests.

In the analysis of the slug-test data, the borehole 

radius was assumed to equal the diameter of the auger 

used in well construction. Because no site wells penetrated the entire shallow aquifer, its thickness is 

unknown. It is shown to be at least 100 ft thick, however, in the area around the site on the basis of residential well logs (U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1992). 

Although the greatest saturated thickness encountered 

in any of the tested wells was about 30 ft, a thickness of 

35 ft was used for analysis of all the slug tests. To test 

the sensitivity of the slug test analysis to saturated thickness, a 100-ft thickness was also used, and resulted in 

very little change in estimated Kh values.

Some slug-test data did not show a logarithmic 

recovery in water level with time, complicating data 

analysis. These results were most likely influenced by 

well construction, including skin effects and filter packs 

(Bouwer, 1989). Where possible, these affected data 

were analyzed in accordance with the recommendations 

of Bouwer (1989) to obtain an estimate most representative of the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the 

aquifer materials.

Geophysical Logs

Geophysical logs were run in monitoring wells 

CAMW-6B and -8B, and in temporary well points 

WP-1G and WP-2G, which were installed in bottom 

sediments of Pond B and A (fig. 4). Geophysical logging was conducted by the USGS Borehole Research 

Group, based in Lakewood, Colorado.

The first geophysical method used was naturalgamma logging. Natural-gamma logs record the relative 

amounts of naturally occurring gamma radiation in geologic materials. This radiation is primarily the composite result of the radioisotopes potassium-40, uraniuin238, and thorium-232. Natural-gamma logs usually 

indicate the clay content of sediment or rock, which 

provides a useful tool for stratigraphic correlation. SevMETHODS OF DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
eral limitations are inherent with natural-gamma logs. 

The volume of aquifer sampled by the logging sonde is 

limited (usually 6 to 12 inches around the borehole) and 

will be reduced when run in a cased hole. In addition, 

differences in well construction may result in inconsistent measurements between wells (Keys, 1990).

Neutron logging was also performed. The neutron 

tool uses a radioactive source that emits radioactive particles that are absorbed by hydrogen atoms, the principal component of water. The greater the neutron count 

returning to the receiver pad on the probe, the fewer 

neutrons that were absorbed by hydrogen/water, indicating lower porosity and/or saturation of the aquifer. 

Generally, the neutron tool penetrates approximately 

the same distance into the aquifer (6 to 12 inches) as the 

natural-gamma tool (Keys, 1990).

Formation conductivity logs were run in 

CAMW- 6B and CAMW-8B to aid stratigraphic correlation. For example, clays generally exhibit greater conductance of electrical current than sands. Though open 

boreholes are preferred, conductivity logs can be run in 

non-conductive casing such as PVC. The volume of formation sampled by the logging sonde will be reduced 

when run in a cased hole, and differences in well construction may result in inconsistent measurements 

between wells.

Water-Quality Samples

During the site visit of April 28 through May 6, 

1998, samples for water-quality analyses were collected 

from all monitoring wells. Analyses were conducted for 

a range of inorganic constituents, VOC's, SVOC's, and 

dioxins/furans. Samples were collected using methods 

described in the sampling and analysis plan for the site 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Geological Survey, 1998), which requires the purging of a 

well until field parameters stabilize.

Considering the glacial origin of the Miller Creek 

Formation, spatial variability (horizontal and vertical) 

of sediments within the shallow aquifer is to be 

expected. This variability may affect dissolved constituents in ground water and suspended materials being 

transported by ground water. For this site investigation, 

low-flow sampling techniques were used so that mobilization of fine materials was minimized.

The purging of wells and collection of water-quality samples were completed using a low-flow, positivedisplacement Fultz pump that was lowered to a depth

generally within the interval of the well screen. Wells 

were purged by pumping at a rate of 500 milliliters per 

minute (ml/min) or less. The field parameters measured 

include water temperature, turbidity, pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), specific electrical conductance (SEC), and 

oxidation-reduction potential (ORP). Field parameters 

were monitored during purging using a multi-parameter 

Hydrolab sonde. After these field parameters had stabilized according to the following criteria, a representative water sample could be taken: turbidity ±10 percent, 

pH ±0.1, DO ±10 percent, SEC ±3 percent, and ORP 

±10 mV.

A bailer stuck in CAMW-6B prevented sufficient 

development of the well. Because this could bias concentrations of inorganic constituents, CAMW-6B was 

not sampled for inorganic constituents.

Monitoring well CAMW-7P could not be sampled 

using the low-flow sampling procedure because a 

restriction at the top of the well screen prevented the use 

of the sampling pump. Instead, a check-valve connected 

to Teflon tubing was used to purge the well and collect 

a sample. CAMW-7P had insufficient yield to allow for 

monitoring of field parameters, so water was evacuated 

from the well point and it was allowed to recharge prior 

to sampling. CAMW-7P also had insufficient recharge 

to allow for sampling of inorganic constituents or 

SVOC's; therefore, only VOC's were analyzed for this 

well point. The action of the check valve may result in 

increased turbulence in water in the well and during the 

transfer of water from the tubing into the bottles. Both 

of these situations may result in increased exposure of 

the water to the atmosphere, which would result in a 

negative bias in the VOC analysis.

Water-quality samples were submitted to a USEPA 

Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) laboratory for 

analysis of inorganic constituents, VOC's, SVOC's, 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's), and pesticides. 

Water-quality samples analyzed by the CLP laboratories included field samples, duplicate samples, and 

method (pump) blanks. A shipping blank of VOC-free 

water was included for the VOC samples only. Analytical methods conform to criteria established by the 

USEPA, which are referenced in the sampling and analysis plan (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1998). Prior to the release of 

the data to the site investigators, the analytical results 

from the laboratory were reviewed to insure compliance 

with USEPA laboratory QA/QC requirements. As a part 

of this review, matrix spike sample results were 

reviewed to determine matrix effects. Field and labora10 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
tory blank samples were analyzed to determine if field 

and/or laboratory handling practices resulted in unintentional contamination of samples. Duplicate samples 

were analyzed to determine the precision and accuracy 

of analytical results. The data results were "flagged" 

with appropriate data qualifiers by laboratory and data 

reviewers prior to the release of the data to the site 

investigators, along with a narrative summarizing the 

analytical and review process.

Field parameters of the water in Ponds A and B also 

were measured. The Hydrolab sonde was submerged 

approximately one foot below the water surface and 

allowed to equilibrate. Data were collected at two locations within each pond.

Six nearby residential wells were sampled by tribal 

representatives during the same time period (April 28 

through May 6, 1998) for the same water-quality 

parameters and constituents as the monitoring wells. To 

protect the privacy of the residents, the Bad River Tribe 

requested that these well locations be considered proprietary information. These wells are identified only as 

Res 1 through Res 6. Although exact locations of the 

residential wells are unknown, they are all reasonably 

close (within few miles or so) and probably represent 

background conditions. Aerators were removed from 

residential taps and pipes were flushed before sampling. 

Field parameters were measured with a Hydrolab. Samples were shipped to the same USEPA CLP laboratory 

as were samples from the monitoring wells. Dissolvedoxygen concentrations at these residential wells were 

determined by titration rather than using the Hydrolab.

Well CAMW-6A was re-sampled for VOC's in 

August 1998 to confirm analytical results from samples 

collected in May 1998. Well point CAMW-7P was to be 

re-sampled at this time but was dry. Four of the five residential wells were re-sampled for VOC's.

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE COUNTY 

ROAD A DISPOSAL SITE

The removal of natural material for highway construction and the subsequent addition of papermill 

sludge at the County Road A disposal site has altered 

the topography, surface-water drainage and hydrogeology of the site in ways that can only be estimated. There 

is an incomplete understanding of the physical evolution of the site and the extent to which the site hydrogeology has been affected by these changes.

Lithology

The shallow geology of the site is characterized by 

glacial diamictons containing sand, silt, and clay. These 

lithologies were logged by A-G&M during the drilling 

of monitoring wells (Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a). 

The lithologic logs for the deeper of each pair of AG&M wells are shown in figure 5. Samples were not 

collected during the drilling of wells by the USGS, but 

auger returns showed sands, silts, and clays similar to 

those reported by Geraghty and Miller, Inc. (1996a). In 

general, the relative proportion of sand was greatest on 

the western side of the site, and the relative proportion 

of silt was greatest on the eastern side. Clay was 

reported in the upper 2 to 5 ft of CAMW-1B, -2B and - 

5A. Natural-gamma logs from monitoring wells 

CAMW-6B and -8B also indicate lithologic variability 

(figures 5 and 6); the higher gamma counts generally 

indicate a greater proportion of clay in the sediment. 

Trace amounts of sludge were encountered just below 

the ground surface while drilling CAMW-6A and -6B. 

Trace amounts also were encountered at a depth of 

approximately five feet below land surface while drilling CAMW-8 A and-8B.

The natural-gamma and neutron logs for well 

points WP-1G and WP-2G, located in Ponds B and A, 

respectively, are presented in figure 7. The naturalgamma logs show that the proportion of clay in sediments that compose the bottom of the ponds is spatially 

variable, both vertically and horizontally. The generally 

low response seen in the neutron logs suggests the sediments beneath the ponds are saturated. The variable 

nature of the neutron response, seen particularly in Pond 

A (well point WP-2G) suggests that the sediment porosity and/or degree of saturation is variable. Scattered 

probing of the bottom sediments of the ponds indicated 

clayey-silt to silty-clay (thickness unknown) under 

much of the pond. The restriction to vertical flow 

caused by these fine-grained sediments is likely responsible for the existence of the pond, and constrains the 

degree of hydraulic connection between the ponds and 

shallow ground-water system. The extent of hydraulic 

connection between the surface water and ground-water 

system in turn determines the potential for solutes to 

move from the ponds to the shallow ground water.

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE COUNTY ROAD A DISPOSAL SITE 11
EXPLANATION 

Lithology

Sand

Silt

Clay

CAMW-1A Well, piezometer, or well point 

* location and name

Vertical positions of logs are referenced 

to a datum of 630 feet above sea level

Each log is positioned so that 

its 630-foot datum (msl) is 

adjacent to the location of its

well

Figure 5. Lithologic logs and natural-gamma logs of unconsolidated sediments encountered in selected monitoring wells at the 

County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (base map modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a).

12 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
CAMW - 6B CAMW - 8B

NATURAL GAMMA,

IN COUNTS

PER SECOND

100 200 300 0

CONDUCTIVITY,

IN 

MMHO/METER

50

NEUTRON ACTIVITY, 

IN COUNTS 

PER SECOND

100 0 500 1,000

10

20 -

cc

ID 

00

o

 i

LLJ 

00

Q. 

LLJ 

Q

30

40

50

NATURAL GAMMA,

IN COUNTS

PER SECOND

0 100 200 300 0

CONDUCTIVITY,

IN 

MMHO/METER

50 

10

20

30

40

50

Figure 6. Geophysical logs from monitoring wells CAMW-6B and CAMW-8B at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, 
O I

o <

C Q.

3 3

«< (fl "

WP-2G (POND A) WP-IG(PONDB)

NATURAL GAMMA,

IN COUNTS

PER SECOND

NEUTRON ACTIVITY, 

IN COUNTS 

PER SECOND

NATURAL GAMMA,

IN COUNTS

PER SECOND

NEUTRON ACTIVIT

IN COUNTS 

PER SECOND

100 200 300 500 1,000 100 200 300 500 

10

20

oo 

< 

o

Ll_

O 

Q_ 

O

LLJ 

00

Q_ 

LLJ 

Q

30

40

50

Figure 7. Geophysical logs from temporary well points WP-2G and WP-1G in Ponds A and B at the County Road A disposal site, A

County, Wisconsin.
Table 2. Estimates of horizontal hydraulic conductivity (Kh) from slug tests 

conducted at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin

[--, no measurement]

Horizontal hydraulic conductivity (Kh ) 

in feet per day

Bouwer and Rice (1976) method Hvorslev (1951) method

Monitoring well 

and test number Falling head Rising head Falling head Rising head

CAMW-4A 

Test 1 

Test 2

CAMW-4B 

Testl

CAMW-6A 

Test 1

CAMW-8A 

Test 1 

Test 2

CAMW-8B 

Testl 

Test 2

1.4 

.9

2.1 2.1

.3

6.6 

6.6

1.3 1.4 

1.1 1.5

2.7 2.6

1.7 1.7 

1.8 1.4

Hydraulic Conductivity

The Darcy equation relates ground-water discharge 

to hydraulic gradient through a coefficient of proportionality referred to as hydraulic conductivity (Gupta, 

1989):

(1)

where

Q 

K 

A

is ground-water flow (L3T1 );

is hydraulic conductivity (LT 1 );

is the cross-sectional area perpendicular to

flow (L2); 

Ah is the change in head along the length A/ (L);

and 

A/ is the length (L).

On the basis of slug tests, the estimated Kh of sediments in the screened intervals of monitoring wells 

CAMW-4A, -4B, -6A, -8A and -8B ranged from 0.3 to 

6.6 ft/d (table 2). These values are consistent with published Kh values for silt and silty sand (Freeze and 

Cherry, 1979, p. 29). In each well, results of the risinghead and falling-head slug tests generally were similar. 

For wells where the water table intersected the screened

interval, the falling-head tests were not analyzed. In 

these tests, the displaced water entered the unsaturated 

zone, which violated analytical assumptions.

Water Budget for Pond A

Ponds A and B within the County Road A disposal 

site have relatively simple hydrologic budgets because 

there is little surface-water inflow and no outflow. 

Inflow to the ponds is limited to direct precipitation and 

local surface runoff, and outflow from the ponds is limited to evaporation and, possibly, seepage through the 

pond bottoms. Water-level data from monitoring wells 

in the area and stages of the ponds over the period of 

study suggest no ground-water discharge to the ponds. 

Water levels in monitoring wells and well-points were 

measured using an electric tape on 10 dates from 

December 18, 1995 through August 20, 1998 (table 3 

and fig. 8). These measurements were made by AG&M, USEPA/USGS or BRNRD. From May 6 through 

August 18, 1998, water levels were measured on a 

nearly continuous basis (60-minute intervals) in monitoring wells CAMW-1A, -IB, -7P, -8A and -8B, and 

well points WP-2, WP-P2, WP-P3 and WP-P4 (fig. 9).

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE COUNTY ROAD A DISPOSAL SITE 15
Table 3. Measured water-level altitudes in monitoring wells, well points, and ponds at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland Cou

[est., estimated; , no measurementj

Hydrogeology a County, Wiscon

V) 3

" 0

£ 5

CD c

I *

Q>

m

Oc

SL

^

E?

0

O

0

c

3

3D

0

Q>

Q.

g

 o

o

V)

52.

S 

o

3

5

0

co

Q>

a

po

0

5"

a&>'

3

3D

0

V)

Water-level altitude, in feet above sea level

Monitoring well 

or well-point 

designation

CAMW-1A

CAMW-1B

CAMW-2A

CAMW-2B

CAMW-3A

CAMW-3B

CAMW-4A

CAMW-4B

CAMW-5A

CAMW-6A

CAMW-6B

CAMW-7P

CAMW-8A

CAMW-8B

WP-1 (pond stage)

WP-1 (inside)

WP-2 (pond stage)

WP-2 (inside)

WP-P2

WP-P3

WP-P4

Packed or screened 

interval, in feet 12/1 8/1 995 a 1/1 5/1 996 a 8/5/1 996 a 

above sea level

622.08-632.08 629.49 629.32 633.72

600.08-605.08 629.33 629.15 633.58

621.75-631.75 624.23 624.10 627.45

598.75-603.75 624.07 623.96 626.95

621.88-631.88 627.55 627.30 632.95

598.88-603.88 627.37 627.12 632.26

619.76-629.76 626.42 626.27 629.10

597.76-602.76 626.43 626.27 629.07

622.06-632.06 628.55 628.45 631.39

620.6-630.6

605.8-615.8

628.9-631.9

619.5-629.5

597.0-602.0

est. 629.1 -630.1

-

est. 631.3-632.3

630.68-631.68

633.54-634.54

630.6-631.6

11/4/1 996 a

632.53

632.50

626.85

626.52

631.43

630.97

628.46

628.48

631.21

-

-

--

~

~

~

4/28/1 998 b 5/6/1 998 b

631.11

631.06

625.54

625.27

629.57

629.24

627.63

627.63

629.90

628.30

628.39

632.05

623.83

624.23

635.11 e

631.90 d

635.13

634.72

632.01

635.09

632.08

5/22/1998°

-

-

625.38

625.13

629.31

628.96

627.39

627.37

629.65

628.15

628.15

~

__

-

~

--

-

6/1

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

6

aMeasured by Arcadis-Geraghty & Miller.

bMeasured by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Geological Survey.

cMeasured by Bad River Natural Resources Department.

Measurement on April 29, 1998.

Measurement on May 5, 1998.
FEET ABOVE SEALEVEL

LU

LU 

 1

or

LU

636

CD GO -t»

CD CO NJ

CD CO O

628

626

624

622

CAMW-1A

Continuous water-level 

measurements taken between 

May 6 and August 20 are 

presented in figure 9

CAMW-3A

CAMW-5A

_/_____/,

CAMW-4A

- *,

CAMW-2A

May6-Augus

1996 1997 

YEAR

19

Figure 8. Water-table altitudes in monitoring wells measured December 18, 1995 through August 20, 1998 at the County Road A dis

Wisconsin.
O I 

O <

C O.

3. 3

< (Q

" (D

00

<

636

634

632

630

628

626

624

622

WP-2 

CAMW-1B 

Monitoring well data in solid gray lines 

Pond A well point data in dashed black lines 

Pond A adjacent well point data in solid black lines

* Flat sections of record indicate 

water levels below those mea

by transducer

CAMW-8B

CAMW-8A

MAY 6-31 JUNE 1-30 JULY 1-31 AUGUS

DAYS

Figure 9. Water-level altitudes in monitoring wells, well points, and Pond A, measured May 6 through August 20, 1998 at the County 

Ashland County, Wisconsin
A general form of the water balance equation 

(Gupta, 1989) can be modified to express the water balance at the County Road A as:

AS = P + R-E-QGO ,

where

AS is change in pond storage (L3 T -1 ); 

P is precipitation (L3 T '*); 

R is direct surface runoff (L3 T ~ ! ); 

E is evaporation (L3 T -1 ); and 

QGO is seepage to ground water (L3 T " 1 ).

For the purposes of this study, the water balance 

can be rewritten to solve for seepage from the ponds:

(2)

Qro = P+R-&S-E (3)

The water budget for Pond A was developed using 

the following data for May 6 through August 18, 1998:

1. Daily precipitation at the University of Wisconsin experimental farm near Ashland, Wisconsin 

(fig. 1 and fig. 10),

2. Estimates of evaporation based on the method of 

Linsley and others (1982, equations 5-30) and 

meteorological data from the airport at Minocqua, Wisconsin (appendix A and fig. 1), and

3. Pond A stage measured by a pressure transducer 

outside well point WP-2 (fig. 6).

Daily measured values of precipitation and stage of 

Pond A for May 6 through August 18, 1998 are presented in figure 10. For periods during which there is no 

precipitation or runoff (P=0, R=Q), only two terms on 

the right hand side of the hydrologic budget (equation 3) 

remain, specifically change in pond storage (AS) and 

evaporation (E). With no precipitation or runoff, change 

in storage can only be negative; in this case, equation 3 

can be rewritten as

QGn = &S-E (4)

Four time periods which had no measured precipitation were selected from this data set (designated periods 1 through 4) and were used to determine the water 

budget (fig. 10).

The components of any water balance can be 

expressed either as a volumetric rate (L3 T1 ) or as a 

depth over an implied area per unit time (L T" 1 ) (Dunne 

and Leopold, 1978). In this report, water budget terms

are reported as depths per day; the implied area is the 

area of Pond A (assumed to be constant over the range 

of stages observed).

Using the Minocqua airport data and an evaporation pan coefficient of 0.8 (Wentz and Rose, 1991), 

daily evaporation from Pond A was estimated. The estimate of evaporation and the measured rate of change in 

pond stage during the four time periods are presented in 

table 4. On the basis of the daily estimates, an average 

evaporation rate (£) was calculated for each time 

period (table 4, column 5). The daily measured pond 

stage was taken directly from the continuous pond stage 

measurements, and the average rate of change of pond 

stage (AS) was calculated for each of the chosen periods 

(table 4, column 8). A comparison of the average rate of 

evaporation (E) and the average rate of stage change 

(AS) for each of the periods suggests that evaporation 

alone does not fully account for changes in the stage of 

Pond A. The difference between the average rate of 

change of pond stage and the average evaporation rate 

is attributed to seepage ( QGO ) from Pond A to ground 

water. The seepage of water from Pond A to ground 

water is estimated to be from 0.008 to 0.012 ft/d 

(table 4, column 9).

Vertical Hydraulic Gradients Beneath Pond A

Well point WP-2 (fig. 4) provides useful information about the hydraulic connection between Pond A 

and the underlying sediments. The top of the well 

point's 1-ft screen is estimated to be 1.3 ft below the 

pond bottom (table 1 and fig. 11). The measurement is 

approximate because of the soft muck in the uppermost 

pond sediment.

Well point WP-2 provides a measure of the difference between the pond stage and the hydraulic head in 

the sediment intersected by the screen. The pond stage 

and the hydraulic head in the well point were measured 

nearly continuously from May 6 through August 18, 

1998 (fig. 9). WP-2 (outside) is the stage in Pond A, and 

WP-2 (inside) is the water level inside the well point 

(fig. 9). These data indicate a consistent downward 

hydraulic gradient between Pond A and the sediments 

underlying the pond. The hydraulic gradient in Pond A 

is the difference between pond stage and hydraulic head 

in WP-2 divided by the distance from the pond bottom 

to mid-screen (1.8 ft). The average downward gradient 

determined for each of the four periods ranges from 

about 0.2 to 0.4 ft/ft (table 4). As would be expected.

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE COUNTY ROAD A DISPOSAL SITE 19
O T

0 "5

C Q.

a s «< (Q

II

3 D>

tt 3 5' &

to o 

<o c

DC 

D_

I Precipitation 

» Pond A stage

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 

MAY 4-31 AUG

1998

Figure 10. Precipitation and stage of Pond A for the period of May 5 through August 18, 1998, at the County Road A disposal site, A
Table 4. Estimated evaporation, measured stage, rate of stage change, estimated seepage, and estimated vertical hydraulic conductiv

Pond A at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin

T

D

30

0

O

m

0

0 

O

0-n

H

X

m

o

0

c

z

3D

O

0

g

 o

0

r- 

(/)

H

m

Period 

... . . Measurement 

defined by no 

. . . date 

precipitation

5/19/98

5/20/98

5/21/98

5/22/98

1 5/23/98

5/24/98

5/25/98

5/26/98

5/27/98

6/2/98

6/3/98

6/4/98

6/5/98

2 6/6/98

6/7/98

6/8/98

6/9/98

6/10/98

Estimated Total Average rate of Measured 

daily evaporation for evaporation for stage, in feet 

evaporation, 3 period, in period, (E), b in above sea 

in inches inches feet per day level

0.22

.20

.18

.19

.13

.23

.19

.22 1.56

.18

.17

.06

.13

.11

.13

.08

.04 .90

634.88

634.85

634.81

634.79

634.76

634.73

634.71

634.69

0.016 634.66

634.79

634.77

634.75

634.73

634.71

634.68

634.65

634.63

.009 634.62

. . . Downward gradie

. Average rate of . . ~, . 

Average rate of determined from 

Daily change stage change Pond 

in stage, in for period . A stage and wate

feet ( AS ), in feet c . level in well poin

per day (QGO)I ! n feet WP-2, d in feet pe

**"** foot

0.03

.04

.02

.03

.03

.02

.02

.03 0.028 0.012

.02

.02

.02

.02

.03

.03

.02

.01 .021 .012

0.23

.23

.22

.23

.23

.23

.25

.27 

.36

.36

.34

.33

.32

.30

.29

.28 
Table 4. Estimated evaporation, measured stage, rate of stage change, estimated seepage, and estimated vertical hydraulic conductiv

o ^ Pond A at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued

irogeology and Gi

jnty, Wisconsin: 1

u> o

U> c

<o *? 

Q>m

Oc

2L

o

g:

m

O

0

c

3

3D

0

Q> 

Q.

D55'

V)

2L

w

5?

0

3

5

O

CO

D>

Q.

33<'

5"

Q.

Q>

3

30 

0

(0

0

Q> 5'

. Estimated Total

. f. er\°.. Measurement daily evaporation for 

defined by no . /.» _ 

. .. .. date evaporation, a period, in 

precipitation . . . . . K K in inches inches

7/15/98

7/16/98

7/17/98

7/18/98

7/19/98

7/20/98

3 7/21/98

7/22/98

7/23/98

7/24/98

7/25/98

7/26/98

7/30/98

7/31/98

8/1/98

8/2/98

4 8/3/98

8/4/98

8/5/98

8/6/98

.19

.22

.20

.25

.24

.27

.21

.21

.15

.12

.22 2.28

.17

.17

.21

.12

.21

.11

.07 1.06

. Downward gradien

AVGTSQG TSTG Of

t , .. . Average rate of u^ , determined from 

Average rate of Measured _ ., . . ground-water n . 

... . . . . Daily change stage change a . Pond 

evaporation for stage, in feet . ' . . a . _f seepage for . . . 

 . ,FV b- : in stage, m for period . . A stage and water 

period, (jfe ), in above sea . /i~^\ * * period . .. .. . . 

feetperday level feet (A5),mfeet (Q^e |nteet level m we 1 point 

K J per day v L<0/' . WP-2, ° m feet per 

per day ' . 

foot

634.75

634.73

634.70

634.66

634.65

634.62

634.60

634.56

634.53

634.50

634.48

.017 634.45

634.38

634.35

634.33

634.31

634.29

634.27

634.25

.013 634.23

.02

.03

.04

.01

.03

.02

.04

.03

.03

.02

.03 .027 .010

.03

.02

.02

.02

.02

.02

.02 .021 .008

.33

.33

.33

.33

.33

.33

.34

.34

.34

.34

.34 

.37

.37

.37

.39

.39

.39

.39 

a Evaporation rate estimated using meteorological data from Minocqua Airport, Minocqua, Wisconsin, about 70 miles southeast of the site.

b The average rate of evaporation was calculated by converting the total evaporation to feet and dividing by one less than the number of days in the period.

c The average rate of stage change due to ground-water seepage is the average rate of stage change minus the average rate of evaporation for the period.

"^ d The downward gradient in Pond A is the difference between pond stage and water level in well point WP-2, divided by 1 .8 (the distance in feet from pond 

M3- 

Q>

Q.

e The average vertical hydraulic conductivity is estimated by dividing the average seepage rate (Qoo) by the average gradient.
638 r 

637 

636

635 

LU 

00

g 634

633 

632

May 6, 1998 

635.13 v

Pond stage

PI/I 634.72 ~I1 - - -

Water level in well point

.'or ** s -S s *; :

Screen

fi?7 UO / ,\3^ ^4

August 20, 1998

V 634.12

Pond stage

.. .^.. , ,. ^ ... , _. -^,-

xT ^ ^ :X^ XT-^

 3332

Water-level in-welfyoint

004.0 1 1 1 1 1 

633.6

Estimated bottom 

of pond

631 

Pond sediments

630

Figure 11. Construction of well point WP-2 in Pond A, and water levels on May 6, 1998 and August 20, 1998, at the 

County Road A disposal site, ashland County, Wisconsin.

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE COUNTY ROAD A DISPOSAL SITE 23
precipitation results in an increase in stage in Pond A 

(fig. 10). The measured head in WP-2 shows a subdued 

response to the change in stage of Pond A (fig. 9). Thus, 

the vertical gradient, which increased due to pond stage 

rise with precipitation, decreased with time as the 

hydraulic head in the underlying sediment increased in 

response. These observations suggest that Pond A is 

hydraulically connected to the underlying shallow 

ground-water system. Data from WP-1 suggest that the 

hydraulic connection between Pond B and the underlying sediments is similar to that of Pond A.

The altitude and variation in water levels in well 

points WP-P2, WP-P3, WP-P4, and CAWP-7P provide 

additional evidence that Pond A is in hydraulic connection with the shallow ground-water system (fig. 9). 

However, the relation between water levels in the ponds 

and in adjacent shallow sediments is likely to be complex due to the history of the site.

ground-water system is to the east and northeast, flow is 

downward and radially away from the ponds because 

they are a local high point in the water table. Hydraulic 

heads measured on August 20, 1998 in the deep monitoring wells are presented in figure 13. The vertical 

hydraulic gradient at each nested monitoring well site 

was calculated from water levels in the water-table 

wells and deep monitoring wells. Four of six sites, 

CAMW-1, -2, -3, and -4, exhibited downward gradients 

on this date. The gradient was zero at the CAMW-6 site, 

and at CAMW-8 site, there was an upward gradient.

WATER QUALITY

An assessment of water quality at the County Road 

A disposal site was conducted through measurement of 

field parameters and laboratory analysis of inorganic 

and organic constituents in surface-water and groundwater samples.

Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity of Bottom 

Sediments of Pond A

The Darcy equation (equation 1) can be used to 

estimate the vertical hydraulic conductivity (Kv) of the 

bottom sediments of Pond A by considering the estimated ground-water-seepage rates and the vertical gradients measured at well point WP-2. Using the average 

vertical gradient and estimated seepage rate for each of 

periods 1 through 4, the estimated Kv of the bottom sediments ranges from 0.021 to 0.050 ft/d (table 4). These 

values of Kv are about one to two orders of magnitude 

less than Kh values estimated from slug tests (table 3). 

The lower Kv values are to be expected because the 

pond bottom sediments are composed of more silt, clay, 

and sludge than the aquifer sediments (Miller Creek 

Formation) where the monitoring wells are screened.

Ground-Water-Flow Directions

A water table map (fig. 12) was constructed for the 

site on the basis of water levels collected on August 20, 

1998, the date when the most complete set of data was 

available (table 3). A direct hydraulic connection 

between the ponds and the shallow ground-water-flow 

system was assumed on the basis of water-level data 

from WP-2, neutron-log data from well points WP-1G 

and WP-2G, and the calculated water budget of Pond A. 

Although the principal flow direction in the shallow

Field Parameters

Field parameters were measured to characterize 

surface water and ground water at the County Road A 

disposal site (table 5). At most of the monitoring wells, 

DO was 1 |ig/L or less and ORP was less than 0 mV, 

indicating reducing or anaerobic conditions. The pond 

water was aerobic as indicated by concentrations of DO 

greater than 1 |ig/L and ORP greater than 0 mV. The 

SEC of ground water sampled from monitoring wells 

ranged from 183 to 1,320 |iS/cm; samples for the residential wells had a narrower range, from 218 to 

295 |iS/cm. Pond water had even lower SEC readings 

and a narrower range, from 56 to 82 |iS/cm. The pH of 

surface water and ground water sampled from monitoring wells ranged from 6.0 to 7.9. Water sampled from 

nearby residential wells generally had higher pH values 

(ranging from 7.7 to 8.7) than water sampled from the 

monitoring wells. This finding is consistent with previous studies of residential wells in the area (Batten and 

Lidwin, 1995). No ORP readings were obtained for 

water samples from residential wells.

Inorganic Analyses

The inorganic constituent analytical data for water 

samples collected from the monitoring wells are presented in table 6. Data for water samples collected from 

the residential wells are presented in table 7. A "B" data

24 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
EXPLANATION

Estimated ground-water 

flow direction

CAMW-4A 

626.48

Contour of equal water-table altitude 

contour interval is 2 feet, dashed 

where approximate

Monitoring well location, 

name, and water-table 

altitude, in feet above 

sea level

CAMW-3A 

628.14

CAMW-8A 

623.24

CAMW-2A 

624.83

100 METERS

Figure 12. Water-table map constructed using data collected on August 20, 1998, illustrating the interpreted 

relationship between the local water table and ponds at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County. 

Wisconsin (base map modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a).

WATER QUALITY 25
EXPLANATION

CAMW-1B Monitoring well location, 

629.66 * name, and water table altitude, 

in feet above sea level

CAMW-4B 

V 626.44 

0015 ft/ft

0.016 ft/ft

A 

0.01

V

4 ft/ft

Upward hydraulic 

gradient and magnitude

Downward hydraulic 

gradient and magnitude

Figure 13. Hydraulic heads measured in deep monitoring wells, and direction and magnitude of vertical hydraulic 

gradients on August 20, 1998, at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin, (base map 

modified from Geraghty & Miller Inc., 1996a).

26 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Table 5. Field parameters measured April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Road A disposal site, Ash

County, Wisconsin

[--, no measurement; ?, data uncertain]

Monitoring well, 

pond, or residential 

well designation

CAMW-1A

CAMW-1B

CAMW-2A

CAMW-2B

CAMW-3A

CAMW-3B

CAMW-4A

CAMW-4B

CAMW-5A

CAMW-6A

CAMW-6B

CAMW-7P

CAMW-8A

CAMW-8B

Pond A 

(near isthmus)

Pond A 

(near CAMW-8)

PondB 

(near CAMW-6)

PondB

(at west end)

Residence 1

Residence 3

Residence 4

Residence 5

Residence 6

Dissolved 

oxygen, in 

milligrams per liter

0.41

.27 a

.36

.11

.10

.23

8.35?

.17

.24

.76a

.59 a

e

.28

.21

6.47

5.86

6.10

6.95

.92

3.58 d

3.52 d

1.86 d

1.26 d

Temperature, 

in degrees 

Celsius

14.3

9.5

14.0

11.3

8.8

16.0

8.9

12.3

10.5

11.9

14.8

e

12.9

12.2

17.6

17.7

17.0

17.2

8.9

8.1

8.1

9.7

8.9

Specific conductance, 

in microsiemens 

per centimeter

728

183

850

859

608

508

527

537

1,130

1,320

1,060

__ e

297

904

57

56

82

64

295

244

2?

280

218

PH, 

in standard 

units

6.4

7.9

6.5

7.3

6.2

7.0

6.8 b

7.3

6.7

6.0

6.5

__ e

6.6

6.3

6.5

6.4

6.5

6.6

8.2

7.7

8.5

8.4

8.7

OxidationReduction 

potential, 

in millivolts

173 a

143

-65

15 a

-65

-57

234

-10

-82

-20a

15 a

e

-89

-75 a

186

213

201

192

-

Turb

in neph

turbidi

8

56

1

36

4

14

3

20

1

6

1

3

C 0

errati

aValue is decreasing, but pumped volume exceeded purge criteria.

bValue is increasing, but pumped volume exceeded purge criteria.

cVery sunny day when measured, value is unreliable.

dValue determined by titration.

Insufficient water to measure field parameters.
qualifier in these tables indicates the analytical result 

may be the result of laboratory contamination because 

the constituent also was found in the laboratory 

blank(s).

No concentrations of beryllium, cadmium, mercury, selenium, silver, or thallium were found above the 

detection limit; however, some results indicated laboratory contamination at concentrations approximating the 

detection limits (table 6). Detected constituents were 

compared to the maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) 

established by the USEPA for protection of public water 

supplies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996). Concentrations of arsenic, barium, chromium, 

copper, nickel, and zinc did not exceed the MCL's. The 

detection limit for thallium (4 [ig/L) was higher than its 

MCL (2 ^ig/L). Antimony exceeded the MCL (6 ^ig/L) 

and detection limit (3 ^ig/L) in one sample (CAMW-6A, 

at 8.1 ^ig/L); however, antimony was detected in the 

laboratory blank (3.0 ^ig/L), indicating possible laboratory contamination. The concentration measured at 

CAMW-6A was above the concentrations in the laboratory blank and should therefore be considered a possible 

detection. Lead exceeded the MCL (15 [ig/L) and detection limit in one sample (CAMW-8B at 49.1 jig/L).

Aluminum and iron exceeded the secondary MCL 

in almost all of the samples. Because these samples 

were unfiltered and exceeded 5 NTUs (table 5), some 

aluminum and iron may be the result of clay and silt in 

the samples. Although manganese concentrations 

exceeded the MCL (50 |ig/L) in every sample, these 

concentrations were not substantially greater than background concentrations determined from samples from 

wells CAMW-1A, -IB and -5A.

Although MCL's have not been established for calcium, cobalt, magnesium, potassium, sodium, or vanadium, by comparing the concentration of these 

constituents in samples from the downgradient monitoring wells to concentrations in samples from the background wells (CAMW-1A, -IB and -5A), some 

tentative conclusions can be reached. Allowing for 

some variability in background conditions, concentrations of calcium, magnesium, potassium, and vanadium 

from downgradient locations do not exceed background 

concentrations. The concentration of cobalt in the sample from CAMW-6A, however, was above background 

concentrations. The concentration of sodium in a sample from CAMW-6A may also have been elevated 

above background concentrations.

Only samples from the newly constructed wells 

were analyzed for cyanide. This constituent had not

been detected in the previously sampled wells. Detections were flagged with "B" (table 6) as a result of 

apparent laboratory contamination. No concentrations 

of cyanide exceeded the MCL of 200 [ig/L.

The disposal of the papermill sludge at the site has 

apparently resulted in localized concentrations above 

established MCL's for lead at well CAMW-8B, and for 

antimony at well CAMW-6A. Analysis of sludge samples reported in appendix A shows the concentration of 

lead ranged from 14,100 to 414,000 [ig/L, and antimony 

ranged from 1,010 to 2,090 ^ig/L. According to tribal 

representatives, there are no other nearby potential 

sources of lead or antimony. Elevated concentrations of 

sodium and cobalt (at well CAMW-6A) may be related 

to disposal activities at the site; however, these constituents were not reported in previous sludge samples. 

With two exceptions, concentrations of inorganic constituents were considerably greater in samples from 

monitoring wells than in those from residential wells 

(table 7). Samples from residential wells Res 5 and 

Res 6 had higher concentrations of potassium and zinc 

than samples from any monitoring wells. The high concentrations of potassium are consistent with the maximum concentrations seen in residential wells and 

springs previously sampled on the reservation (Batten 

and Lidwin, 1995). Zinc concentrations were below the 

MCL of 500 [ig/L and were within the range of concentrations reported by Batten and Lidwin (1995). The elevated concentrations of potassium may be related to 

aquifer lithology. The elevated concentration of zinc 

may also be related to aquifer lithology and (or) well 

construction.

Organic Analyses

The results of analyses for organic compounds in 

samples from monitoring wells are presented in table 8. 

VOC's were detected in several of the monitoring wells. 

A "J" qualifier (table 8) indicates the result is an estimate because it was above the instrument detection 

limit, but below the laboratory detection limit. Acetone 

was found in monitoring wells CAMW-6A and -7P at 

concentrations of 61 and 110 ^ig/L, respectively, in May 

1998 samples. CAMW-6A was resampled in August 

1998 and found to have an acetone concentration of 

27 ^ig/L. 2-butanone was detected in the sample from 

CAMW-7P at 39 jxg/L. Toluene was detected at trace 

concentrations (qualified as an estimate in table 8) in 

samples from CAMW-6A, -6B, and -8B. Various

28 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
fj

COo

DC

^%"co0

0)

.c

"CO

oo

05

O)

CDas" ^

O) o

oo

CM

Q.

T3

0)

Q.

CO 

CO

"o>§

O)

'Co

I.EE

C/} c

u. 0

0 0 *- co

CO ^

CO -* 

 0 5^

si ' p °

Ir0

c ^

§ S 

o ^

S 5 co <r

en .

o S

-E 'co

* 1

Jl> o

m .§" i ~&

 a uo

t3 a

£"

1 ^

.H

.1"^

..^o

 a

 a

*j

efl O

 a

^guxc

efl a«Vus a33«

o c

"u

'§1oB3B'S

efl E

d ^ > N

^ X

J "w

1 g

c °

 a r

B '

1^

U _ra

S -12

U X

- 3 

> ^

5 -§

2j J3

TJm5S

< omm5So

°?5£omCM5So<

CM5

s 

< umgs

U' ^

Y- gOos^

01

1 

n 

n 

a.

CQ CQ ^^ -^

^ C C

E -.3 

 g £ 

s a

-

- -a .3

CL C'J p ,

S S 2

c 6 a

c « P § R S

II 1

.S Q ^

I § I

Q Q

 a X c

> N U

WATER QUALITY 29
O I

o < 

C Q.

D 0)

M 3 5' &

(O O

<0 c

1 =

Table 6. Inorganic analytical data for monitoring wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Roa

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued

[All values reported in (J.g/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; <, less than the indicated detection limit; (B), de

blank; , not analyzed]

Parameter

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Potassium

Selenium

Silver

Sodium

Thallium

Vanadium

Zinc

Cyanide

MCL

50-200 b

6 a

50 a

2,000 a

4 a

5 a

-

100 a

-

l,000 b

300 b

15 a

-

50 b

2 a

100 a

50 a

100 b

20,000 c

2 a

-

5,000 b

200 a

CAMW-4A

6,030

4.6 (B)

4.1 (B)

118(B)

<1

< 1

106,000

13.5

4.5 (B)

20.4 (B)

6,340

3.3

31,500

152

<0.1

13.1 (B)

1,960 B

<3

1.5 (B)

39,700

<4

26.3 (B)

78.6

2.1 (B)

CAMW -4B

18,300

2.7 (B)

3.6 (B)

106

0.99(B)

.39

6,400

33.5

12.6 (B)

26.9

25,400

2.6

8,220

, 333

.09

28.1

2,340

1.2

.39

521 (B)

1.6

49.9

107

0.27(B)

CAMW -5A

2,490

3.1(B)

5.9 (B)

713

<1

<1

161,000

20.7

18.5 (B)

18(B)

45,800

3.6

50,600

5,570

<0.1

13.7 (B)

1,560(8)

<3

<1

18,400

<4

6.5 (B)

22.9

--

CAMW -6A

1,560

8.1 (B)

7.5 (B)

203

<1

< 1

215,000

75.8

71.4

10.4 (B)

74,700

6.5

62,000

8,050

<0.1

71.3

1,410 B

<3

<1

 41,700

4.1 (B)

10.4 (B)

25.4

<1

CAMW -8A

156(B)

<3

6.3 (B)

88.4 (B)

<1

< 1

68,200

<1

6.4 (B)

2.9 (B)

9,410

<1

9,230

1,250

<0.1

2.6 (B)

1,320(8)

<3

<1

2,000 (B)

<4

1.9(B)

10.5 (B)

1.3(8)

CAMW-8A d

282

<3

5.1(B)

86.8 (B)

<1

<1

66,900

<1

6.1 (B)

2.7 (B)

9,260

<1

9,110

1,220

<0.1

2 (B)

1,340(8)

<3

< 1

1,970 (B)

<4

1.4 (B)

7.6 (B)

<1

2

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

bSecondary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

GDrinking Water Equivalent Level (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

dDuplicate sample.
Table 7. Inorganic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 

near the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin

[All values reported in jJ-g/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; <, less than the indicated detection limi

(B), detected in laboratory blank; , not analyzed]

Parameter

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Mercury

Nickel

Potassium

Selenium

Silver

Sodium

Thallium

Vanadium

Zinc

Cyanide

MCL

50-200 b

6 a

50 a

2,000 a

4 a

5 a

100 a

-

l,000 b

300 b

15 a

50 b

2 a

100"

50 a

100 b

20,000 c

2 a

-

5,000 b

200 a

Res1

<24

<3

<3

76.6 (B)

< 1

< 1

25,700

< 1

< 1

<2

111

1(B)

8,770

79.7

<0.1

< 1

3,580 (B)

<3

< 1

18,600

<4

< 1

72.2

<1

Res1 d

<24

<3

<3

80 (B)

< 1

< 1

26,500

1.1 (B)

< 1

7.4 (B)

127

< 1

9,020

80.3

<0.1

1.6(B)

3,710 (B)

<3

<1

19,600

<4

< 1

75.9

< 1

Res 3

<24

<3

<3

125 (B)

< 1

< 1

21,200

<1

< 1

5.9 (B)

364

1.1 (B)

8,200

8.6 (B)

<0.1

1.1 (B)

3,850 (B)

<3

< 1

17,300

<4

<1

48.5

<1

Res 4

<24

<3

<3

24.1 (B)

< 1

< 1

15,200

< 1

< 1

6.6 (B)

20 (B)

1.5 (B)

3,350 (B)

8 (B)

<0.1

< 1

4,020 (B)

<3

<1

23,500

<4

<1

43

< 1

Res 5

<24

<3

<3

64.6 (B)

< 1

< 1

24,800

1.1 (B)

< 1

10 (B)

715

1.6 (B)

5,220

10.8 (B)

<0.1

1.3 (B)

6,140

<3

< 1

25,200

<4

1.3 (B)

225

2.4 (B)

Res 

137 (B

<3

22

< 

< 

15,500

< 

< 

2

52

2

3,410 (B

9 (B

<0

5

5,340

<3

23,800

4(B

< 

220

< 

m

3D

O

c

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

bSecondary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

°Drinking Water Equivalent Level (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

dDuplicate sample.
Hydrogeolog County, Wise

o <

3 D>

(A 3

_=>' °-

11 ^

(O O

? =

£ *

to

5

0

c

=:

f

5

<D

O 

O

C 

3

DO

O

0)

Q.

g(A*

O 

(A

to_

Jo

o

3

3

(0 

00

0) 

Q.

2

<D

5"

Q. 5'

^J

(0 

(A

5

u

6'

p

M3"

to

3

Q.

laoie o. urgamu anaiyuuai uaia lor rnoniioring wens sc 

[All values reported in fig/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000); b, Duplicate sample]

Compound MCL *

Chloromethane

Bromomethane

Vinyl Chloride 2

Chloroethane

Methylene Chloride

Acetone

Carbon Disulfide

1 , 1 -Dichloroethene

1 , 1 -Dichloroethane

1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

Chloroform

1 ,2- Dichloroethane

2-Butanone

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 200

Carbon Tetrachloride 5

Bromodichloromethane

1 ,2-Dichloropropane 5

CM-1, 3-Dichloropropene

Trichloroethene

Dibromochloromethane

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5

Benzene 5

fran.s-l,3-Dichloropropene

Bromoform

4-Methyl- 2-Pentanone

2-Hexanone

Tetrachloroethene

1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

Toluene 1,000

Chlorobenzene 100

-1A

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10 (J)

<10(J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10 (J)

<10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U

bDuplicate sample.

-1B

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

-2A

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

2(J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

impiea April ^o mrc 

no established MCL; <

-2B

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10(J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

-3A

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

3(J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

juyn may o, laso ai ine 

, less than detection limit; (J),

-3B -3B b

< 10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

2 (J) 2 (J)

< 10 (J) < 10 (J)

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 < 10

< 10 (J) < 10 (J)

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 (J) < 10 (J)

< 10 (J) < 10 (J)

< 10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

-4A

<10

<10

< 10

<10

3(J)

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10(J)

<10(J)

<10

<10

<10

< 10

oouruy noau M disposal sue, Msnia

estimated value; , not analyzed; a,Primary 

-4B

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10 (J)

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10 (J)

< 10 (J)

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

-5A -6A -6B 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

<10 <10 <10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 2 (J) 

<10(J) 61 <10(J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

<10 <10(J) <10 

< 10 (J) < 10 (J) < 10 (J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

<10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 <10(J) < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

<10(J) <10(J) <10(J) 

< 10 (J) < 10 (J) < 10 (J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

<10 <10 <10 

< 10 1 (J) 2 (J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).
Table 8. Organic analytical data for monitoring wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland 

[All values reported in |ig/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; <, less than detection limit; (J), estimated value; , not analyzed; a,Primary Dr

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000); b, Duplicate sample]

WATER

O

c

Compound MCL' -1A

Ethylbenzene 700 < 10

Styrene 100 < 10

Xylene (total) 10,000 < 10

Phenol - < 10

bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether - < 10

2-Chlorophenol - < 10

1,3-Dichlorobenzene - < 10

1,4-Dichlorobenzene - < 10

1,2-Dichlorobenzene - < 10

2-Methylphenol - < 10

2,2-oxybis(l-chloropropane) - < 10

4-Methylphenol - < 10

N-Nitroso-di-n-propylainine - < 10

Hexachloroethane - < 10

Nitrobenzene - < 10

Isophorone - < 10

2-Nitrophenol - < 10

2,4-Dimethylphenol - < 10

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane - < 10

2,4-Dichlorophenol - < 10

1,2,4-TrichIorobenzene 70 < 10

Naphthalene - < 10

4-Chloroaniline - < 10

Hexachlorobutadiene - < 10

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol - < 10

2-Methylnaphthalene - < 10

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 50 < 10 (J)

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol - < 10 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol - < 25 

2-Chloronaphthalene - < 10

-1B

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10(J)

<25

-2A

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

0.6 (J)

< 10

<10

<10

 7(J)

< 10

< 10

<25

-2B

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<25 

< 10

-3A

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

<25 

< 10

-3B

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<25 

< 10

-3B b -4A

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

<10 < 10

<10 < 10

<10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

<10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 < 10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

<10 < 10

< 10 <10

<10 < 10

< 10 < 10

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 25 < 25 

< 10 < 10

-4B -5A

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 <10

<10 <IG

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 <10

< 10 <10

< 10 <10

< 10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 <10

<10 <10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 < 10

< 10 (J) < 10

< 10 < 10

< 25 < 25 

< 10 <10

-6A

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

2(J)

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

0.9 (J)

< 10

<10

< 10

1(J)

< 10 (J)

< 10 

<25 

< 10

-6

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

3 

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<2

"Primary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

Duplicate sample.
Hydrogeol County, W

ogy and 

isconsin

_L O

CD O

55 c

<r> 9-

00 <

(D

O

SL

<

(D

c

3

31

fi)

to

i Dsposal £

w/

(D

o

5

(D

00 

D)

a

3D<'

 _

1 Indian

3D

(Dw

(D

SI o' 

p

w3"

fi)

3

a

lauic u. wiyai ML. ai laiyiioai uaia iwi i uwi nivji uiy vvc/no oaiiipicu r-vpi 11 *i<j 11 in

[All values reported in |ig/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; < 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000); , Duplicate sample]

Compound MCL* -1A

2-Nitroaniline - < 25 

Dimethylphthalate - < 10 

Acenaphthylene - < 10

2,6-Dinitrotoluene - < 10

3-Nitroaniline - < 25

Acenaphthene - < 10

2,4-Dinitrophenol - < 25 (J)

4-Nitrophenol - < 25 (J) 

Dibenzofuran - < 10

2,4-Dinitrotoluene - < 10

Diethylphthalate - < 10

4-Chlorophenyl- - < 10 

phenylether

Fluorene - < 10

4-Nitroaniline - < 25

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol - < 25

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine - < 10 

(D

4-Bromophenyl- - < 10 

phenylether

Hexachlorobenzene 1 < 10

Pentachlorophenol 1 < 25

Phenanthrene - < 10

Anthracene - < 10

Carbazole - < 10

Di-n-butylphthalate - < 10

Fluoranthene - < 10 

Pyrene - < 10

Butylbenzylphthalate - < 10 

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine . < \Q

Benzo(a)anthracene - < 10

Cnrysene - < 10

bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate - < 10

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U

-1B

<25 

<10 

<10

< 10

<25

<10

< 25 (])

< 25 (J) 

<10

<10

<10

<10 

<10

<25

<25

<10

< 10

<25

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10 

< 10

<10

<10

<10

-2 A -2B -3A

< 25 < 25 < 25 

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 25 < 25 < 25

<10 <10 <10

< 25 < 25 < 25

< 25 (]) < 25 (i) < 25 (]) 

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 25 < 25 < 25

< 25 < 25 < 25

< 10 < 10 <10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 25 < 25 < 25

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 <10 <10

< 10 < 10 < 10

10 2 (J) 4 (J)

< 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10

<10 < 10 0.5 (J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10

->uyi i may u, i C7C7U ai 11 ic; lywui uy i ivjau r\ uiopvjoai one/, noi iiai l

, less than detection limit; (J), estimated value; --, not analyzed; a,Primary D

-3B

<25 

<10 

< 10

<10

<25

<10

<25

< 25 (J) 

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<25

<25

< 10 

<10

<10

<25

<10

<10

< 10

6(J)

<10

<lo

<10

<10

<10

-3B " -4A -4B -5A -6A

<25 <25 <25 <25 < 25 

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

<25 <25 <25 <25 < 25

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

<25 <25(J) <25(J) <25(J) < 25 (J)

<25(J) <25(J) <25(J) <25(J) < 25 (J) 

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

<25 <25 <25 <25 < 25

<25 <25(J) <25 <25(J) < 25

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

<25 <25 <25 <25 <25

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

7 (J) < 10 < 10 8 (J) < 10

<!.' <!» :io :io <»

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

< 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10

-6B 

< 25 

< 10 

< 10 

< 25 

< 10 

< 25 

< 25 

< 10 

< 10 

1 (J) 

< 10 

< 10 

< 25 

< 25 

< 10 

< 10 

< 10 

< 25 

< 10 

< 10 

< 10 

7 

< 10 

< 10 

< 10 

< 10 

<10 

.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).

bDuplicate sample.
Table 8. Organic analytical data for monitoring wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 1998 at the County Road A disposal site, Ashland 

[All values reported in [LgfL; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; <, less than detection limit; (J), estimated value; --, not analyzed; a,Primary Dri

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000); b, Duplicate sample]

H

m 

3D

0

c

r~ 

H

Compound

Di-n-octylphthalate 

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 

Benzo(a)pyrene 

Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

alpha-BHC

beta-BHC

delta-BHC

gamma-BHC (Lindane)

Heptachlor

Aldrin

Heptachlor epoxide

Endosulfan I

Dieldrin

4.4 '-DDE

Endrin

Endosulfan II

4,4'-DDD

Endosulfan sulfate

4,4 '-DOT

Methoxychlor

Endrin ketone

Endrin aldehyde

alpha-Chlordane

gamma-Chlordane

Toxaphene

Aroclor-1016

Aroclor-1221

Aroclor-1232

Aroclor-1242 

Aroclor-1248 

Aroclor-1254

Aroclor-1260

MCL" -1A

0.2 < 10

< 0.05

<

<

<

0.4 < ,

<

0.2 <

<

<

< ,

2 <

<

<

<

40 <

<

<

2 <

2 <

3 <5

< 1

<2

< 1

< 1 

< 1 

< 1

< 1

.05

.05

.05

,05

.05

.05

.05

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.5

,1

.1

.05

.05

-1B

< 10 

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<0

<

<

<

<

<

<

<5

<1

<2

< 1

< 1 

< 1

< 1

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.5

.1

.1

.05

.05

-2A

< 10 

< 10

< 10 

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<0

<

<

<

<

<

<

<5

< 1

<2

<1

< 1

<1

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.5

.1

.1

.05

.05

-2B

< 10 

< 10

<0.05

< .

<

.05

.05

< .05

< .

<

< .

< .

< .

< .

< .

< .

< .

<0

<

<

< ,

< 

.05

.05

.05

.05

,

1

1

1

1

1

,1

1

.5

1

,1

< .05

<

<5

<1

<2

<1

j|

< 1

.05

-3A

< 10

< 10

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<0

<

<

<

<

<

<

<5

<1

<2

< 1

< 1

< 1

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.5

.1

.1

.05

.05

-3B

< 10 

< 10

<0.05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

<0.1

< .1

< .5

< .1

< .1

< .05

< .05

<5

< 1

<2

<!

J|

<1

-3B b

< 10

< 10

<0.05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

<0.1

< .1

< .5

< .1

< .1

< .05

< .05

<5

< 1

<2

< 1

< 1

<1

-4A

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<0

<

<

<

<

<

<

<5

<1

<2

<1

< 1 

< 1

< 1

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.05

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.1

.5

.1

.1

.05

.05

-4B

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

< .

<

< .

<

< .

< .

< .

< .

< .

<0.

<

<

<

<

<

<

<5

<1

<2

<1

5;

< i

.05

.05

.05

05

.05

05

.05

1

,1

1

1

1

1

,1

.5

1

.1

.05

,05

-5A

< 10

<0.05

<

<

<

<

<

< .

< .

< .

< .

<

< ,

<

<0.

< .

< .

<

<

<

<

<5

<1

<2

<!

<[

< 1

,05

.05

.05

05

.05

05

05

1

1

,1

1

,1

1

1

,5

1

.1

.05

.05

-6A

< 10

<0.05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .05

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

< .1

<0.1

< .1

< .5

0.049 (J)

0.054 (J)

< .05

< .05

<5

< 1

<2

< 1

< 1

< 1

-6B 

< 10

< 0.0

< .0

< .0

< .0

< .0

< .0

< .0

< .0

< .1

< .1

< .1

< 1

< .1

<0.1 

< .1

< .5

< 1

<1

< .0

< .0

<5

<1

<2

<1

<

< 1

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). 

bDuplicate sample.
SVOC's were detected at concentrations below the laboratory detection limit and were qualified with J's in 

table 8. These compounds were 4-methylphenol 

(detected in CAMW-6A and -6B), naphthalene 

(detected in CAMW-2A, -6A, and -8A), 2-methylnaphthalene (detected in CAMW-2A, -6A, -6B and -8B), 

diethylphthalate (detected in CAMW-6B), and butylbenzylphthalate (detected in CAMW-3A). Methylene 

Chloride and Di-n-butylphalate were also detected in a 

number of monitoring wells at concentrations below the 

laboratory detection limit; however, detections of both 

are attributed to laboratory and/or field contamination. 

No pesticides or PCB's were detected in the groundwater samples.

Samples from the residential wells had detectable 

concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane below the laboratory detection limit in four of the six samples collected 

(table 9). Many of the wells were subsequently resampled, at which time 1,2-dichloroethane was not 

detected. No SVOC's, PCB's, or pesticides were 

detected in any of the residential samples.

The mobility of a compound is expressed by its 

water-solubility product, which measures the capacity 

with which the compound dissolves in water (high numbers indicate high capacity to dissolve), and its Log Koc, 

the partition coefficient to organic fraction of aquifer 

materials (low numbers indicate low capacity to sorb 

onto organic material). According to data on acetone 

and 2-butanone provided in Montgomery and Welkom 

(1990), solubility products for these compounds are 

high and their Log Koc 's are low compared to other 

compounds detected in ground water at the site 

(table 10). These more mobile organic compounds were 

detected at higher concentrations in the ground-water 

samples and the less mobile compounds were detected 

at trace concentrations. Most of the organic compounds 

detected in the ground-water samples had been detected 

in samples of papermill sludge (appendix A) at significantly higher concentrations (Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 

1996a). Diethylphthalate was detected in ground water 

but not reported in analysis of the papermill sludge and 

thus may not be related to disposal activities. Unless 

natural-attenuation processes occur, such as biodegradation or abiotic degradation, less mobile compounds 

eventually may migrate and be detected in ground 

water.

Table 10. Organic carbon partitioning coefficient and water 

solubility product for selected organic compounds detected 

in ground water, County Road A disposal site, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin

[Koc , partition coefficient; mg/L, milligram per liter]

Organic 

compound

acetone

2-butanone

butylbenzylphthalate

diethylphthalate

2-methylnapthalene

napthalene

toluene

Log 

KOC

-0.43

.09

2.2

1.84

3.9

3

2.06

Water solubility 

product 

(mg/L)

Miscible in all proportions

353,000 at 10°C

2.82 at 20°C

760 at 20°C

25 at 25°C

32 at 25°C

32 at 25°C

SUMMARY

The County Road A disposal site, located on the 

Bad River Indian Reservation in Ashland County, Wisconsin, contains papermill sludge generated by a former 

mill in the City of Ashland. The U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with United State Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region 5 and the Bad 

River Natural Resources Department (BRNRD), conducted an investigation of the hydrogeology and 

ground-water quality of the site. A primary objective of 

this investigation was to assess the potential for migration of water from ponds on the site to the shallow 

ground-water-flow system. This report presents and 

interprets hydrogeologic and water-quality data collected by the USGS and the USEPA in support of this 

investigation.

At the County Road A disposal site, unconsolidated sediments of glacial and post-glacial origin overlie sandstone bedrock. The unconsolidated sediments 

are primarily fine-grained sand and silt, with localized 

clay layers. Within the upper 50 ft of sediment, the proportion of sand is greatest on the western side of the site 

and the proportion of silt and clay increases to the east. 

Bottom sediments of the ponds range from clayey-silt to 

silty-clay, and are commonly overlain by organic mud, 

muck, and papermill-sludge deposits. The shallow 

ground-water-flow system within the near-surface sand 

and silt deposits is presumed to be controlled largely by 

local topography, resulting in flow generally from west 

of the site to Hanson's Swamp on the east. Geophysical, 

hydrologic, and water-quality data indicate a direct 

hydraulic connection between Pond A and the shallow

36 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Table 9. Organic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 

1998 near the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin

[All values reported in ng/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; , no established MCL; <, less than indicated 

detection limit; (J), estimated value]

Compound

Chloromethane

Bromomethane

Vinyl Chloride

Chloroe thane

Methylene Chloride

Acetone

Carbon Bisulfide

1 , 1 -Dichloroethene

1,1-Dichloroethane

1,2-Dichloroethene (total)

Chloroform

1 ,2-Dichloroe thane

2-Butanone

1,1, 1 -Trichloroethane

Carbon Tetrachloride

Bromodichloromethane

1 ,2-Dichloropropane

cis- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene

Trichloroethene

Dibromochlorome thane

1 , 1 ,2- Trichloroethane

Benzene

trans-l,3-Dichloropropene

Bromoform

4-Methyl-2-Pentanone

2-Hexanone

Tetrachloroethene

1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroe thane

Toluene

Chlorobenzene

Elhylbenzene

Styrene

Xylene (total)

Phenol

bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether

2-Chlorophenol

1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene

1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene

1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene

2-Methylphenol

2,2'-oxybis(l-chloropropane)

4-Methylphenol

N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine

Hexachloroe thane

Nitrobenzene

MCL"

--

2

--

--

--

--

-

-

..

--

-

200

5

-

5

--

-

5

5

--

--

--

-

--

1,000

100

700

100

10,000

--

--

-

--

--

--

--

-

--

--

-.

Res1

<1

< 1

< 1

<1

2(J)

<5

<1

<1

< 1

<1

<1

0.6 (J)

<5

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

<1

< 1

<1

<5

<5

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 2

<1

<1

<1

<1

2(J)

<5

< 1

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 3

< 1

<1

<1

<1

2(J)

<5

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

0.6 (J)

<5

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

< 1

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 4

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

2(J)

<5

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

<1

<1

<5

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

<1

<1

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

<1

<5

<5

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

< 1

<1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 5

<1

< 1

< 1

<1

2(J)

<5

<1

<1

<1

<1

<1

0.8 (J)

<5

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

<1

<1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 6

<1

<1

< 1

<1

2(J)

<5

< 1

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

0.7 (J)

<5

<1

<1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

< 1

< 1

< 1

< 1

<1

< 1

< 1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

SUMMARY 37
Table 9. Organic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 

1998 near the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued 

[All values reported in ug/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; --, no established MCL; <, less than indicated 

detection limit; (J), estimated value]

Compound

Isophorone

2-Nitrophenol

2,4-Dimethylphenol

bi s (2- Chloroe thoxy )methane

2,4-Dichlorophenol

1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

Naphthalene

4-Chloroaniline

Hexachlorobutadiene

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

2-Methylnaphthalene

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

2-Chloronaphthalene

2-Nitroaniline

Dimethylphthalate

Acenaphthylene

2,6-Dini trotoluene

3-Nitroaniline

Acenaphthene

2,4-Dini trophenol

4-Nitrophenol

Dibenzofuran

2,4-Dini trotoluene

Diethylphthalate

4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether

Fluorene

4-Nitroaniline

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine (1)

4-Bromophenyl-phenylether

Hexachlorobenzene

Pentachlorophenol

Phenanthrene

Anthracene

Carbazole

Di-n-butylphthalate

Fluoranthene

Pyrene

Butylbenzylphthalate

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine

Benzo(a)anthracene

Chrysene

bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate

MCL" Res 1

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

70 <5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

50 <5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

1 <5

1 <20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 2

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 3

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 4

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Res 6

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<20

<20

<5

<5

<5

<20

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

38 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Table 9. Organic analytical data for residential wells sampled April 28 through May 6, 

1998 near the County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued

[All values reported in ng/L; MCL, maximum contaminant level; -, no established MCL; <, less than indicated 

detection limit; (J), estimated value]

Compound

Di -n-octylphthalate

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Indeno( 1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

alpha-BHC

beta-BHC

delta-BHC

gamma-BHC (Lindane)

Heptachlor

Aldrin

Heptachlor epoxide

Endosulfan I

Dieldrin

4,4-DDE

Endrin

Endosulfan II

4,4-DDD

Endosulfan sulfate

4,4-DDT

Methoxychlor

Endrin ketone

Endrin aldehyde

alpha-Chlordane

gamma- Chlordane

Toxaphene

Aroclor-1016

Aroclor-1221

Aroclor-1232

Aroclor-1242

Aroclor-1248

Aroclor-1254

Aroclor-1260

MCL" Res 1

<5

<5

<5

0.2 <5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

0.4 < .01

< .01

0.2 < .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

2 < .02

< .02

< .02

< 0.02

< .02

40 < .10

< .02

< .02

2 < .01

2 < .01

3 <1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

Res 2

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

<0.02

< .02

< .10

< .02

< .02

< .01

< .01

<1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

Res 3

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

<0.02

< .02

< .10

< .02

< .02

< .01

< .01

<1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

Res 4

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

<0.02

< .02

< .10

< .02

< .02

< .01

< .01

<1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

Res 5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

<0.02

< .02

< .10

< .02

< .02

< .01

< .01

<1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

Res 6

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<0.01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .01

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

< .02

<0.02

< .02

< .10

< .02

< .02

< .01

< .01

<1

< .20

< .40

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

< .20

aPrimary Drinking Water Standard (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).

SUMMARY 39
ground-water system. Neutron logs indicated the bottom sediments of the ponds were saturated.

A water budget prepared for Pond A for selected 

periods in summer 1998 indicated seepage of pond 

water to shallow ground water at rates of 0.008 to 

0.012 ft per day. In addition, a consistent downward gradient through the bottom of Pond A was measured, 

ranging from 0.24 to 0.38 ft per foot. During the same 

period, changes in the stage of Pond A were reflected in 

changes in the hydraulic head of the underlying sediments. The downward vertical gradient, which 

increased due to pond-stage rise with precipitation, 

decreased with time as the hydraulic head in the underlying sediment increased in response. The vertical 

hydraulic conductivity of the pond bottom sediments 

(estimated to be 0.021 to 0.050 ft per day) was sufficiently low to support the gradient, but not so low as to 

completely inhibit flow through the sediments.

The altitude and variation in water levels in well 

points WP-P2, WP-P3, WP-P4, and CAWP-7P indicate 

that Pond A was affecting the water table in adjacent 

areas. The relation between water levels in the pond and 

in adjacent shallow sediments is complex due to the 

physical evolution of the site.

Water-quality analyses indicate that inorganic and 

organic constituents have moved from the papermill 

sludge and/or ponds into the shallow ground-waterflow system within the site. Water samples from monitoring wells contained elevated concentrations (above 

maximum contaminant levels, where established) of 

sodium, aluminum, lead, antimony, and possibly cobalt, 

in addition to acetone and 2-butanone. All of these constituents except sodium and cobalt were identified in 

papermill samples. No analytical data for sodium or 

cobalt were found in previous reports. The more mobile 

organic compounds were detected at higher concentrations, and less mobile compounds were detected at trace 

concentrations. The future movement of the inorganic 

and organic constituents to ground water over time cannot be predicted without a detailed analysis of the partitioning of the compounds to the clay and soil-organic 

materials.

Analyses of water from residential wells in the 

vicinity showed considerably lower concentrations of 

inorganic constituents, with the exceptions of zinc and 

potassium, than were detected in the monitoring wells. 

Elevated concentrations of potassium and zinc, however, were consistent with concentrations measured previously in samples from other wells and springs on the 

reservation, which were presumably unaffected by

papermill sludge disposal. None of the organic compounds identified in the papermill sludge were detected 

in water sampled from the residential wells.

REFERENCES CITED

3 Bears Environmental Services, 1994, Report on water-well 

sampling program: Bad River Reservation, Wisconsin.

Batten, W.G. and Lidwin, R.A., 1995, Water resources of the 

Bad River Indian Reservation, northern Wisconsin: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 95^207, 45 p.

Bouwer, Herman, 1989, The Bouwer and Rice slug test an 

update: Ground Water, v. 27, no. 3, p. 304-309.

Bouwer, Herman, and Rice, R.C., 1976, A slug test for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers 

with completely or partially penetrating wells: Water 

Resources Research, v. 12, no. 3, p. 423-428.

Clayton, Lee, 1984, Pleistocene geology of the Superior 

Region, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Extension 

Geological and Natural History Survey, Information 

Circular Number 46, 40 p.

Dunne, Thomas, and Leopold, L. B., 1978, Water in environmental planning: New York, W.H. Freeman and Company, 818 p.

Freeze, R. A., and Cherry, J. A., 1979, Groundwater: New 

Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 604 p.

Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, Phase I screening investigation, County Highway A and Government Road sites, 

Ashland, Wisconsin [variously paged].

__1996b, Addendum to Phase I screening investigation, 

County Highway A and Government Road sites, Ashland, Wisconsin [variously paged].

__1997, Laboratory results from a second round of

groundwater samples, County Highway A and Government Road sites, Ashland, Wisconsin [variously paged].

Gupta, R.S., 1989, Hydrology and hydraulic systems: Prospect Heights, Illinois, Waveland Press, Inc, 739 p.

Hvorslev, M.J., 1951, Time lag and soil permeability in 

ground-water observations: U.S. Army Engineers 

Waterway Experimental Station Bulletin, 36 p.

Keys, W.S., 1990, Borehole geophysics applied to groundwater investigations: Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey, bk. 2, 

Chap. E2, 150 p.

Linsley, R.K. Jr., Kohler, M.A., and Paulhus, J.L.H., 1982, 

Hydrology for engineers:0 New York, McGraw-Hill 

Book Company, 508 p.

Montgomery, J.H., and Welkom, L.M., 1990, Ground water 

chemicals desk reference: Chelsea, Michigan, Lewis 

Publishers, Inc., 640 p.

40 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Mudrey, M. G., Jr., Brown, B. A., and Greenberg, J. K., 1982, 

Bedrock geologic map of Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History Survey, scale 1:1,000,000, 1 sheet.

Novitzki, R. P., 1982, Hydrology of Wisconsin Wetlands: 

U.S. Geological Survey Information Circular 40, 22 p.

U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1992, Investigation of groundwater contamination in the vicinity of Odanah, Wisconsin, Bad River Indian Reservation: Portland Area 

Office, 15 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000, Drinking 

water standards and health advisories: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 822- 

B-00-001, Summer 2000, 12 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Geological 

Survey, 1998, Surface and ground-water sampling and 

analysis plan for the County Road A and Government 

Road sites on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland County, Wisconsin: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Chicago, Illinois, 32 p.

Wentz, D. A., and Rose, W. J., 1991, Hydrology of Lakes 

Clara and Vandercook in north-central Wisconsin: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 89-4204, 24 p.

REFERENCES CITED 41

APPENDIXES A-C

APPENDIXES A-C 43
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, 

Wisconsin.

44 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
EXPLANATION

CASW-2 9 Surface-water sampling site 

CASB-4 o Soil-boring sampling site 

Low, wet area

CASW-2

Pond B

Appendix A. Locations for selected surface-water and soil-boring samples.

Appendix A 45
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A 

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, table 5-1, 

and Appendix M)

[J, estimated values; R, result was rejected; <, constituent was not detected at the method quanitation limit which follows the "< " sign; 

*, sample CASB3B:3-4 was a soil sample collected beneath the Sludge Sample CASB3B:2-3; Jig/kg, micrograms per kilogram, equals 

parts per billion (ppb); pg/g, picograms per gram, equals parts per trillion (ppt); |ug/L, micrograms per liter; pg/L, picograms per liter; 

Papermill sludge samples were also analyzed for PCBs and Pesticides. These constituents were not detected in papermill sludge samples]

Sample Identification 

Sample Date

Volatile Organics

2-Butanone

2-Hexanone

Acetone

Ethylbenzene

Toluene

Xylenes (total)

Semi- Volatile Organics

2-Methylnaphthalene

4-Methylphenol

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Butyl benzyl phthalate

Chrysene

Di-n-butyl phthalate

Fluoranthene

Fluorene

Naphthalene

Pyrene

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate

Dioxin/Furan Isomers

Total TCDF

2,3,7,8-TCDF"

Total PeCDF

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF"

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF"

Total HxCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF"

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF"

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF"

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF"

Total HpCDF

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF"

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF"

OCDF

Total TCDD

2,3,7,8-TCDD"

Total PeCDD

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD"

Total HxCDD

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD"

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD"

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD"

Total HpCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD"

OCDD

Units

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

Pg/g

CASB1C:3-5 

08/22/95

660 J

<660J

<660J

<66

1,900

<66

<910

4,300

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

<910

9,500

390

190

31

3.2 J

3.9 J

570

13

3.1J

4.2 J

<0.31

2,800

440

38

2,300

20

14

16

6.1

1,200

4.6 J

270

80

8,900

4500

100,000

CASB2B:2-4 

08/22/95

1 3,000 J

27,000 J

6,300 J

< 1,800

< 1,800

< 1,800

790

2,300

<520

<520

<520

260J

<520

180

<520

96 J

<520

<520

< 2,300

62

27

14

2.5 J

<0.95

140

12

<1.0

<2.0

<0.22

490

91

8.6

440

6.2

4.8

7.2

3.1J

440

<1.1

92

33

1,200

650

13,000

CASB3B:2-3 

08/22/95

< 29,000 J

< 29,000 J

6300 J

< 2,900

< 2,900

< 2,900

760 J

<910

130 J

120 J

140 J

<910

140 J

<910

210 J

<910

210 J

180 J

5,400

84

38

8.7

<2.0

<1.2

160

9.1

3.3 J

3.9 J

<0.22

580

110

10

760

6.8

6.3

2.6

<2.4

500

<1.7

100

37

1,500

790

16,000

CASB3B:3-4* 

08/22/95

32 J

39 J

<96

<5.8

<5.8

<5.8

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<380

<0.25

<.25

<.14

<.078

<.049

<.71

<.15

<.095

<.28

< 0.054

2.6

<0.80

<0.13

<4.6

<0.29

<0.11

< 0.093

< 0.067

<2.0

< 0.071

<0.67

<0.29

10

5.2

110

CASB4:2-4 

08/23/95

<670J

870 J

< 1,700 J

120

340

32 J

3500 J

23,000

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 4,500

< 6,800

120

49

15

<2.1

<1.9

270

7.7

<1.4

2.6J

0.19

1,300

210

19

1,300

12

8.6

7.9

2.7 J

790

<2.4

170

55

3,900

2,000

4,4000

46 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A 

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, table 5-1, 

and Appendix M) Continued

[J, estimated values; R, result was rejected; <, constituent was not detected at the method quanitation limit which follows the "< " sign; 

*, sample CASB3B:3-4 was a soil sample collected beneath the Sludge Sample CASB3B:2-3; ^g/kg, micrograms per kilogram, equals 

parts per billion (ppb); pg/g, picograms per gram, equals parts per trillion (ppt); Hg/L, micrograms per liter; pg/L, picograms per liter; 

Papermill sludge samples were also analyzed for PCBs and Pesdcides. These constituents were not detected in papermill sludge samples]

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Inorganics

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Chromium

Copper

Cyanide, Total (9012, Automated)

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Selenium

Vanadium

Zinc

Solids, Percent

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Volatile Organic Compounds

1,1,1 -Trichloroe thane

1 , 1 ,2,2- Tetrachloroe thane

1 , 1 ,2-Trichloroe thane

1 , 1 -Dichloroe thane

1,1-Dichloroethene

1 ,2-Dichloroe thane

1,2-Dichloropropane

2-Butanone

2-Hexanone

4-Methyl-2-pentanone

Acetone

Benzene

Bromodichloromethane

Bromoform

Bromomethane

Carbon disulfide

Carbon tetrachloride

Chlorobenzene

Chloroe thane

Chloroform

Chloromethane

Dibromochloromethane

Ethylbenzene

Methylene chloride

Styrene

Tetrachloroe thene

Toluene

Units

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

M,g/kg

|j,g/kg

Hg/kg

|j,g/kg

|j,g/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

Hg/kg

|j,g/kg

M'g/kg

M,g/kg

Hg/kg

|j,g/kg

Hg/kg

%

Units

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

^g/L

^g/L

^g/L

^g/L

Hg/L

CASB1C:3-5

08/22/95

12,900,0001

2090

5300

136,000

75,900

239,000

840

6,340,000 J

414,000 J

1470,000

96,800 J

20,800

< 1,380,000

1,990

58,200

132,000

37.8

CASW-01

11/18/95

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<10J

<10R

<10J

<10J

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

< 1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

< 1.0

CASB2B:2-4

08/22/95

3,910,000 J

1,010

1,880

37,100

15,400

29,200

390

3,1 70,000 J

63,000 J

< 787,000

20,900 J

7,340

< 787,000

1,160

13,000

31,300

35.3

Dup. 

CASW-01

CASW-99

11/18/95

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<10J

< 10 R

<10J

3.8 J

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

< 1.0

CASB3B:2-3 CASB3B:3^»*

08/22/95 08/22/95

5,560,000 J 6,880,000 J

1,460 1,140

2,240 2,010

67,300 33,100

31,100 13,400

72,700 7,960

< 690 < 290

2,970,000 J 8,970,000 J

1 46,000 J 14,1001

< 1,390,000 2,460,000

46,000 11 2,000 J

< 11100 10,700

< 1,390,000 711,000

2150 < 1,140

< 13,900 27,600

45,200 34,000

31.4 86.7

CASW-02

11/18/95

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

< 10 J

< 10 r

< 10 J

<10J

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

< 1.0

CASB4:2-4

08/23/95

5,360,000 J

1,920

2,570

93,200

37,900

49,100

<850

1,590,000 J

20,700 J

< 1,700,000

55,300

< 13,600

< 17,00,000

< 1,700

< 17,000

95,000

37.5

Appendix A 47
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A 

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, table 5-1, 

and Appendix M) Continued

[J, estimated values; R, result was rejected; <, constituent was not detected at the method quanitation limit which follows the "< " sign; 

*, sample CASB3B:3-4 was a soil sample collected beneath the Sludge Sample CASB3B:2-3; |J,g/kg, micrograms per kilogram, equals 

parts per billion (ppb); pg/g, picograms per gram, equals parts per trillion (ppt); Hg/L, micrograms per liter; pg/L, picograms per liter; 

Papermill sludge samples were also analyzed for PCBs and Pesticides. These constituents were not detected in papermill sludge samples]

Sample Identification 

Sample Date Units

CASW-01 

11/18/95

Dup. 

CASW-01

CASW-99 

11/18/95

Volatile Organic Compounds (con't)

Trichloroethene Hg/L

Vinyl chloride (ig/L

Xylenes (total) ng/L

cis-l,2-Dichloroethene (ig/L

cis-l,3-Dichloropropene (ig/L

trans-l,2-Dichloroethene (ig/L

trans-l,3-Dichloropropene (ig/L

CASW-02 

11/18/95

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

1.2-Dichlorobenzene

1.3-Dichlorobenzene

1.4-Dichlorobenzene 

2,2'-Oxybis(l-Chloropropane)

2.4.5-Trichlorophenol

2.4.6-Trichlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenol

2,4-Dimethylphenol

2,4-Dinitrophenol

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

2-Chloronaphthalene

2-Chlorophenol

2-Methylnaphthalene

2-Methylphenol

2-Nitroaniline

2-Nitrophenol 

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine

3-Nitroaniline

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

4-Chloroaniline

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether

4-Methylphenol

4-Nitroaniline

4-Nitrophenol

Acenaphthene

Acenaphthylene

Anthracene

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

B enzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(ghi)perylene

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

Butyl benzyl phthalate

Carbazole

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 50

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 50 J

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 20

Hg/L < 50

Hg/L < 50

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 50

Hg/L < 50 J

Hg/L < 10

^ig/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

Hg/L < 10

<11

< 11

<11

<11

< 11

< 11

< 11

<11

<11

<55

< 11

< 11

< 11

<11

<11

<11

<55

< 11

<22

<55

<55

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

<55

<55J

<11

<11

<11

< 11

<11

< 11

<11

<11

<50

<50J

<20 

<50 

<50

<50 

<50J

< 11

48 Hydrogeoiogy and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A 

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, table 5-1, 

and Appendix M) Continued

[J, estimated values; R, result was rejected; <, constituent was not detected at the method quanitation limit which follows the "< " sign; 

*, sample CASB3B:3-4 was a soil sample collected beneath the Sludge Sample CASB3B:2-3; |^g/kg, micrograms per kilogram, equals 

parts per billion (ppb); pg/g, picograms per gram, equals parts per trillion (ppt); fig/L, micrograms per liter; pg/L, picograms per liter; 

Papermill sludge samples were also analyzed for PCBs and Pesticides. These consdtuents were not detected in papermill sludge samples]

Sample Identification 

Sample Date

Semi- Volatile Organic Compounds (con

Chrysene

Di-n-butyl phthalate

Di-n-octyl phthalate

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene

Dibenzofuran

Diethyl phthalate

Dimethyl phthalate

Fluoranthene

Fluorene

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Hexachloroe thane

Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene

Isophorone

N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine

Naphthalene

Nitrobenzene

Pentachlorophenol

Phenanthrene

Phenol

Pyrene

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane

bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate

PCBs

Aroclor 1260

Furan Isomers

TCDFs (total)

2,3,7,8-TCDF

PeCDFs (total)

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF

HxCDFs (total)

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF

1, 2,3,7,8, 9-HxCDF

HpCDFs (total)

1,2,3,4,6,7.8-HpCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF

OCDF

Dioxin Isomers

TCDDs (total)

2,3,7,8-TCDD

PeCDDs (total)

Units

't)

Hg/L

Hg/L

fig/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

CASW-01 

11/18/95

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<50

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

<6.0

< 1.0

<2.7

<2.7

<3.5

< 1.3

< 1.7

<4.3

<4.3

< 1.7

<3.4

< 1.3

<8.4

<6.7

<2.0

< 13

< 1.2

< 1.2

< 1.0

Dup. 

CASW-01

CASW-99 

11/18/95

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

<11

< 11

<55

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

< 11

<6.6

< 1.0

<2.1

<2.1

<1.2

<0.73

<0.80

<2.8

< 1.6

<0.54

<2.8

<0.99

<7.2

<3.8

< 1 0

<9.6

<0.74

<0.74

<0.56

CASW-02 

11/18/95

<10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

<10

<10

<10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

< 10

<10

< 10

<10

<50

<10

<10

< 10

<10

<10

<6.0

< 1.0

<24

<4.0

<22

<6.8

< 11

<23

<23

<9.1

<6.8

<3.5

<21

< 15

<4.4

<22

<2.0

<2.0

<2.1

Appendix A 49
Appendix A. Results of analysis of papermill sludge and surface-water samples, County Road A 

disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin (modified from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., 1996a, table 5-1, 

and Appendix M) Continued

[J, estimated values; R, result was rejected; <, constituent was not detected at the method quanitation limit which follows the "< " sign; 

*, sample CASB3B:3-4 was a soil sample collected beneath the Sludge Sample CASB3B:2-3; Hg/kg, micrograms per kilogram, equals 

parts per billion (ppb); pg/g, picograms per gram, equals parts per trillion (ppt); Hg/L, micrograms per liter; pg/L, picograms per liter; 

Papermill sludge samples were also analyzed for PCBs and Pesticides. These constituents were not detected in papermill sludge samples]

Sample Identification 

Sample Date

Dioxin Isomers (con't)

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD

HxCDDs (total)

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD

HpCDDs (total)

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD

OCDD

Inorganics

Cadmium (Total)

Chromium (Total)

Copper (Total)

Cyanide (Total)

Lead (Total)

Selenium (Total)

Zinc (Total)

Cadmium (Dissolved)

Chromium (Dissolved)

Copper (Dissolved

Cyanide (Dissolved)

Lead (Dissolved)

Selenium (Dissolved)

Zinc (Dissolved)

Units

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Pg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

Hg/L

CASW-01 

11/18/95

<1.0

<7.4

<0.83

<2.7

<1.9

63

30 J

640

<10.0

<20.0

<10.0

<5.0J

<3.0

<5.0

<50.0

<10.0

<20.0

<10.0

<5.0

<3.0J

<5.0

<50.0

Dup. 

CASW-01

CASW-99 

11/18/95

<0.56

<7.6

<0.47

<2.4

<1.9

61

30 J

580

<10.0

<20.0

<10.0

<5.0

<3.0

<5.0

<50.0

<10.0

<20.0

<10.0

<5.0

<3.0J

<5.0

<50.0

CASW-02 

11/18/95

<2.0

<16

<1.3

<5.1

<4.5

85

44J

710

<10.0

<20.0

<12.5

5.3 J

<3.0

<5.0

98.5

<10.0

<20.0

<10.0

<5.0

<3.0J

<5.0

<50.0

50 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin.

Appendix B 51
.

tment of Natural RMoufcei Route to: Watershed/Wastewater |_J Waste Management I I 

Remediation/RedevclopnrcntL_] Other I I.

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION 

Form 4400-113A Rev. 7-98

Facility/Project Name 

Ita.l River Cminlv Road A

Facility License, Permit or Monitoring No.

Facility ID 

0

Type of Well

Well Code

Distance from Waste/ 

Source Q ft

11; m\v

Enf. Stds. 

Apply n

Local Grid Location of Well _. 

.0 ft- DS.' 0

Local Grid Origin Q (estimated: D ) or 

Lat. 0*0 0 "Long. 0 *. .0

St. Plane 0 fLN. 0

Section Location of V» asie/Source 

NW 1/4 of fn\\! 1/4 of See. ^ ,T. ^

Location of Well Re.lativc to Waste/Source 

u D Upgradient s D Sidegradienl

d Y Downgradient n D NOT Known

, DE.

. ,.,. /< aw.

Well Location v 

0 or

ft. E. S/C/N

N.R._j__X&

Gov. Lot Number

Well Name 

CAMW-6A

Wis. Unique Well No. 

HJ571

DNR Well ID No.

Date Well Installed 

IQJ 17 /.97

Well Installed By: Nan

US Geological Survey 

ic (first, last) and Firm 

WRD - Wisconsin l>ist.

A. Protective pipe, top elevation __<)_._ _ fL MSL 

B. Well casing, top elevation - -640.63. - (l MSL 

C. Land surface elevation _ _63X_ _ _ ft. MSL 

D. Surface sea), bottom __().___ ft. MSL or .4.S12. USCS classification of soil near screen: 

GP D GMD GCD GWD SW D

SM a sc n ML n MH n CL a

Bedrock Q 

13. Sieve analysis performed? D Yes Y 

14. Drilling method Uied: Rutary D 

1 lollow Stem Auger ^ 

Other i_i

15. Drilling fiuid used: Water Q 0 2 Air D 

Drilling Mud Q o 3 None ^

16. Drilling addidves used? Q Yes y 

Describe

17. Source of water (attach analysis, if required):

SP D

CH n

No 

50

41.

01 

No

E. Rentonite seal, top _ .()_ _ _ _ ft- MSL or _ j|. _ _ _ ft. 

F. Fine sand, top _ .631.6. _ ft- MSL or _ 6.4. _ _ A. 

G. Filter pack, lop _ _631_ _ _ ft. MSL or _ 7. _ _ _ ft; 

H. Screen joint, top _ -630.6- _ & MSL or _ 74, _ _ ft. 

I. Well baaom _ _620.1_ _ ft- MSL or _ j y.9_ _ ft 

J. Filler pack, bottom _ _620.1_ _ ft MSL or _ 17.9_ _ JL 

K. Borehole, bottom _ -620.1- _ ft- MSL or _ 17.9_ _ ft. 

L. Borehole, diameter _ 8.25- in. 

M. O.L). well casing 

N. ID. well casinii

1. Cap and lock?

2. Protective cover pipe; 

». Iruide JitutiAicT: 

b. Length: 

foVKta? Cl Material:

d. Additional protection? 

If yes, describe:_____

y Yes D No 

4- inSteel -Y D4

Other LJ KU

Q Yes v No

3. Surface seal: Bentonite D 30 

Concrete X ^ ^

_______________________ Other D ;|i| 

4. Material between well casing and protective pipe:

Bentonite D 30

Concrete Other

5. Annular space seal: a- Granular/Chipped Bentonite Y_ 3 3

Lbs^gaJ mud weight . . . Bentonite-sand *lwry U 35

c. ,{) ___ HWgal inud weight ..... Bcnlanite slurry *-* 3 J

% Bentonite .... . . Bentoniie-cemern grout D 50

c _() ______ Ft volume added for any of the above

f. How installed: Tremie D 0 i

Tremic pumped D 02

Gravity ^ 0 g

6. Bentonite seal: a. Benlunitc granules £j 33

b. dl/4 in. ^3/S in. D 1/2 in. Bentonite chips ^ 32

c. ________________________ Other U ||?|-

7. Fine sand material: Manufacturer, product name &. mesh size

a. R. \V. Sidley 50 ___________________ :f_j

b. Volume added -0.5- ft8. Filter pack material; Manufacturer, product name & mesh sue 

a R. VV. Si<Uev 30________________ S§i 

b. Volume added ,3,25________ ft

9. Well CHsing; Hush tlireadcd PVC schedule 40 v 2 3 

Flush threaded PVC schedule 80 u 24 

______________________ Other D II

10. Screen material: 

a. Screen type:

b. Manufacturer Johnson_______

c. Slol si/e: 

d. Slotted length: 

11. Backfill material (below filter pack);

Factory cut D II

Continuous slot v Q j

__ Oiher U gS|

0.01. in.

-10 ft 

None ]£ 14 

Othet u IS

1 hereby coftify that (he information on this form is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Firm w

ease complete both Fotmt 4400-113A and 4400-113B and return them to the appropriate DNR office anrf hun-nu Completion of lhp.se reporu is required by chs. 160,281, 

283,239,291.292.293.295. and 299. Wb. Suts., md ch. NK 141. Wis. Adra. Code. In accordmcc with eh*. 281,289, 291, 292, 293, 295, and 299, Wis. Sun., failure to file 

these forms may result in a forfeiture of between 510 and 525,000. or imprisonment fur up u> on« year, depending un die program and conduct involved. Personally idcnnfjable 

information on these forms it not intended to be used for any other purpose. NOTE: See the intlruoions for more information, including where the completed form* should he 

sent.

Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin.

52 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Deportment of Natural x»sourc<n Route to: Watershcd/Wastewater O Waste Management! I

Remediarion/RedevelopmcntL-J Other LJ.

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION

Form 4400-113A Rev. 7 -98

Facility/Project Name 

Bad River County Road A

Facility License, Permit or Monitoring No.

Facility ID 

0

Type of Well

Well Code

Distance from Waste/ 

Source y ft

12 / p/

Enf. Stds.

Appty n

Local Grid Location of Well _

o ft- ns' o

Local Grid Origin n (estimated: n ) or 

Lat. 0 0 * . .0 .. "Long. 0 ...* 0

St. Plane 0 ft-N. 0

Section Location of Waste/Source 

.NW-1/4 of - NW- 1/4 of Sec^^s^T. _48__

Location of Well Relative to Waste/Source 

u D Upgrudient s D Sidegradient

d v Downgradienr. n D Not Known

, DE. 

,,,. P- DW.

Well Location v 

0 or

ft. E. S/C/N

N. R..^X^

Gov. Lot Number

0

Well Name 

CAMW-6B

Wis. Unique Well No.

JU572

Date Well Insulle^ 

10 J

m m

Well Installed By: Nan 

James Ram 

US Geological Survey -

DNRWelllDNo.

16 197

ad v v \ Y

e (first, last) and Pirn

WRD - Wisconsin Di

A. Protective pipe, top elevation _ _ 0 - . - - ft- MSL 

B. Well casing, top elevation - -640.8 - - flt MSL

C. Land surface elevation _ .637.3 _ _ ft MSL

jrfR^r.*: 

D. Surface seal, bottom __().___ ft. MSL or -5 _ - - ft- %|ijii*r »,

12. USCS classification of soil near screen:

GP n GMD oca own sw a SP a SM a sc n XILD MHD CL n CH a

Bedrock n

13. Sieve analysis performed?

14. Drilling method used:

n Yes "V No 

Rotary D 5 0

I lollow S tern Auger v 4 1 

Other LJ $m

15. Drilling fluid used: Water Q 0 2 Air D 0 1

Drilling Mud p o 3 None X "

16. Drilling additives used? n Yes y No

Describe _____________________

17. Source of water (attach analysis, if required):

E. Bcnlonite seal, top _.(}____ ft MSL or _()____ fU

F. Fine sand, lop _ _618.3_ _ ft- MSL or _ 19_ _ _ f\. v

G. Filter pack, top _ _617.3_ _ ft- MSL or _ 20~ _ _

H. Screen joint, top _ _615.8- - ^- MSL or _ 21,5- - &~

I. Well bottom _ _605.3_ _ ft- MsL or _ 32_ _ _ fl"

J. Filter pack, bottom _ _605.3_ _ ft. MSL or _ 32_ _ _ ftK. Borehole, bottom _ _605.3- - fL MSL or _ 33- - -

L. Borehole, diameter _ 8.25- in.

M. O.D. well easing _ 2.5. - in.

N. I.D. well casing _ 2 - in.

1.Cap and lock?

2. Protective cover pipe: 

». Inside diameter: 

b. Length: 

c. Material:

X

Yes D No

d. Additional protection? 

If yes, describe:____

4. _ _ »n. 

7.--ftSteel jr 04 

Other i-J HH 

Q Yes No

3. Surface seal: Bentonile D 30

Concrete X ° 1

_____________________ Other D 111 

4. Material between well casing and protective pipe:

Bentonite d 30

other Y iii yv >*^-*M>

5. Annular space seal: B- Granular/Chipped Bentonite X 3 3

h ()___Lbs/gal mud weight. . . Bcntonite-sand slurry U 3 5

c. .0___Lbs/gal mud weight..... Bentonite slurry C3 31

rj 0__ % Bentonite .... .. Bcnionite-cemeni grout D 50

e _(j______Ft volume added for any of the above

f. How installed: Tremie D 01

Trerriic pumped Q 02

Gravity v o g

6. Bentonite seal: a. Benumite granules _j 33

b. Dl/4in. J_3/8in. D1/2 in. Bentonite chips ^ 32

c._______________________ Other U |f!

7. Fine sand material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

a, R. W. Sidley 50__________________ tH 

b. Volume added _Q 5_________ ft-*

8. Filter pack material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

g K. W. Sidtey 30________________ ||i

b. Volume added ,.3^5_________ &

9. Well casing: iriush threaded PVC schedule 40 -j^ 2 3

Flush threaded PVC schedule 80 u 24

_____________________ Other D tl

10. Screen material: pvc;_________________ Hi; 

a. Screen type:

b. Manufacturer Jolmsun________

c. Slot si/e: 

d. Slotted length: 

11. Backfill material (below filter pack):

Faetory cut O 11

Continuous slot -v 01

__ Other u ill

0.01. in. 

-10 ftNone ^ 14 

Other u m

I hereby «:rtify thai the inforrnslion ~£ on this form is true and correct to the best of my knowledge

ease complete both Iwrns 44(X}-113 A and 4400-113B and return ihem 10 the appropriate DNR office and hurean. Completion of ih&se reporu is T«joiTed by chs. 160,281, 

283,289.291.292^ 293,295. and 299. WU. Suu., and cH. NR 141. Wis. Adra. Cod«. In accorJince with ch*. 281,289, 291, 292,293,295, and 299, Wis. SUU., failure to file 

these foims may result in a forfeiture of berween 510 and $25,000, or imprisonment, for up u> on« year, depending on the program »nd conduct involved. Personally identifiable 

information on these forms ii not. intended to be used for any other purpose. NOTE: Sen ihe instructions for more information, iucluding where the completed forms should be 

sent

Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued.

Appendix B 53
Stjte of Wisconsin. 

D«p8rtin«fU of Natural KHO Route to: Watershed/WastewaterC] Waste Management I I 

Remcdlatian/Redevclopmcntdl Other I I.

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION 

Form 4400-113A Rev. 7-98

Facility/Project Name 

Bad River County Road A

Facility License, Permit or Monitoring No.

Facility ID 

0

Type of Well

Well Cod*

Distance from Waste/ 

Source Q ft

11 / mw

Enf. Stds. 

Apply n

Local Grid Location of Well _

.0 ft- as." o,....._.

Local Grid Origin D ( estimated: D ) or 

Lat. 0 * ft 0 "Long. « * 0

St. Plane 0 fLN. 0

, DE. 

 f- OW.

Well Location Y

n or

fuE. S/C/N

Section Location of Waste/Source 

NW V* °f -NW- W* of Sec^^T. _}{_ N, R. .-, __ X W

Location of Well Relative to Waste/Source ~ - -- 

u Q Upgradient s D Sidegrodienl

d v Downgradient n D Not Known

uov. Lot Numoer

0 

Well Name 

CAMW-8A

W!s. Unique Well No. DNR Well ID No.

Date Well Insult 

10J_16u_/.97

Well Installed By: Name (first, last) and Firn 

US Geological Survey - WRD - Wisconsin Di

A. Protective pipe, top elevation _ _ 0 - - - ft- MSL 

B. Well casing, top elevation - -644.56 _ ^ MSL 

C. Land surface elevation _ .641.6 _ _ ft. MSL 

D. Surface sea], bottom. _ 0- - - - ft. MSL or .4.5__ ftSP n CH n

12. USCS classification of soil near screen:

GP a GMD GCD GWO sw a

SM O SC D MLd MHD CL D 

Bedrock D

13. Sieve analysis performed? D Yes

14. Drilling method used: Rotary D 5 0 

Hollow Stem Auger x 4JLv

15. Drilling fluid used: Water Q 0 2 Air d 0 1 

Drilling Mud O 0 3 None X 9 9

16. Drilling additives used? n YC* v NO

Describe.

17. Source of water Cattach analysis, if required):

E. Bentonile seal, top _ _ft_ _ _ _ ft. MSL or _()____ ft.s 

F. Fine sand, lop _ _632.4_ _ ft- MSL or _ 9.2. _ _ ft. s 

G. Filter pack, top _ _630.9_ _ ft- MSL or _ !().?_ _ 

H. Screen joint, top _ _629.5- - & MSL or _ 12.1- - & " 

I. Well bottom _ _619.1_ _ ft MSL or _ 22.5_ _ ft" 

J. Filter pack, bottom _ _619.1_ _ ft. MSL or _ 22.5_ ftK. Borehole, bottom _ -619.1- _ & MSL OT - 22.5_ ft-v 

L. Borehole, diameter _ 8.25- in. 

M. O.D. well casing _ 2.5- - in. 

N. ID. well casing _ 2 - in.

1. Cap and lock?

2. Protective cover pipe: 

a. Inside diameter: 

b. Length: 

c. Material:

X

d. Additional protection? 

If yes, describe:____

No

4_ _ _ in.

7. _ _ftSteel V 04 

Other i-i |1 

D Yes x No

3. Surface seal: Bentonile D 3 Q 

Concrete X ° 1 

______________________ Other O |pj|

4. Material between well casing and protective pipe:

BentoniUs D 30 

Concrete ___________________ Other Y |i|

5. Annular space seal: a. Granular/Chipped Bcntonite ^ 3 3 

^ 0 ___ Los/gal mud weight . . . Bentanite-sand slurry U 3 5 

c. ft Los/gal mud weight ..... Bentonite slurry C3 31 

d. Q __ % Bentoni 

e _Q ______ Ft 

f. How installed:

% Bentonite .... . . Bentonile -cement grout D 50

Ft volume added for any of the above

6. Bentonite seal: 

b. Dl/4 in.

Tremie D 01 

Tretnie pumped D Q 2 

Gravity ^ 08 

a. Bcnionitc granules y 33 

in. D 1/2 in. Bentonite chips ^ 32 

Other

7. Fine sand material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

a..R. W. Sidley SO___________________ |g_3 

b, Volume added _fjj;_________ ft-*

8. Filter pack material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

a R. W.SIdley 30_________________ |lf 

b. Volume added .3.25_________ &

9. Well casing: Hush threaded PVC schedule 40 x 2 3

Flush threaded PVC schedule 80 u 24

____________________ Other D HI

. Screen material: pyc 

a. Screen type:

b. Manufacturer Johnson_______

c. Slot size: 

d. Slotted length: 

11. Backfill material (below filter pack):

Factory cut n 1 1

Continuous slot -v- Q j

_ Oiher u m

0.01. in. 

 10 ftNone Q 14 

Other D |i

I herebyceilify that the information on this form is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Finn

XPIeasa complete both Pornu 4400-113 A and 4400-113B and return them to the appropriate DNR office and bureau, Completion of these reports U required by chs. 160,281, 

283.289,291.292,293,295. and 299. WU. St»t5.. and eh. NR 141, Wis. Adra. Code. In nccoiduicc with chs. 281,289,291,292,293,295, »nd 299, Wit. St»U., failure to file 

these forms may result in s forfeiture of between $10 and $25,000, or imprisonmrni for up to one year, depending on the program and conduct involved. Personally identifiable 

information on there forms it not intended to be used for any other purpose. NOTE: See the instructions for more information, including where ihe completed forms should he

vent.

Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued.

54 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Depmmentof Natural JU»(wrc« Route to: Watershed/WastewaterHU Waste Managementdj

Remcdiation/RedevclopmcntlH] Other ED.

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION 

Form 4400-113A Rev, 7-98

Facility/Project Name 

Bad River County Road A

Facility License, Permit or. Monitoring No.

Facility ID 

0

Type of Well

Well Code

Distance from Waste/ 

Source o ft_

12 ,_&

Enf. Stds. 

Apply n

Local Grid Location of Well _

.0 ft- as: o.............

Local Grid Origin n (estimated: D ) or 

Lat. 0 * ft * fl "Long (1 * ft

St. Plane 0 fLN. 0

Section Location of Waste/Source

Location of Well Relative to Waste/Source 

u D Upgradient s D Sidegradienl

d v Downgradient n D Not Known

, DE. 

 ft- DW.

Well Location v 

fl or

fuE. S/C/N

N,R._3 __ ^W

Gov. Lot Number

Well Name 

CAMW-8B

W!s. Unique Well No. DN&WelliDN

TU574

Date Well Installed 

10-/.15 1.97

o.

Well Installed By: Name (first, last) and Pint 

US Geological Surrey - WRD - Wisconsin Di

A. Protective pipe, top elevation _ _ 0 - . - - f t- MSL 

B. Well casing, top elevation --644.32 - fu MSL 

C. Land surface elevation _ .641 _ _ _ ft. MSL 

D. Surf ace seal, bottom --0. _ _ _ ft. MSLor -6-_ ft- %$£pl*%

12. USCS classification of soil near screen:

GP n GM n GC a GW a sw a SP a

SM a SC D MLD MHO CL D CH D

Bedrock a

13. Sieve analysis performed? Q Yes vNb

14. Drilling method used: Rotary Q 5 0 

1 lollow Stem Auger v 4 1

"= A. SfeyS

Other

15. Drilling fluid used: Water Q 0 2 Air D 0 1 

Drilling Mud Q o 3 None Y 9 9

16. Drilling additives used? __\ YCB v No

Describe____________________

17. Source of water [attach analysis, if required):

E. Bentonitc seal, top _ .{)- - - - & MSL or _ o. _ _ _ fl.

F. Fine sand, lop _ _603.6_ _ ft MSL or _ 37.4, _ ft.

G. Filter pack, top _ _602.4. _ ft- MSL or _ 38.6_ _ ft-1

H. Screen joint, top _ _602- _ _ ft. MSL or _ 39. _ _ ft.'

I. Well boaom _ _596.4_ _ ft- MSL or _ 44.6. _ ft

J. Filter pack, bottom _ .596.4. _ ft- MSL or _ 44.6_ _ ft

K. Borehole, bottom _ _596.4- - & MSL or _ 44,6- _ ft.

L. Borehole, diameter _ 8.3. - in.

M. O.D. well casing _ 2.5. - in.

N. ID. well casing _ 2 - - in.

1. Cap and lock?

2. Protective cover pipe: 

a. Inside diameter: 

b. Length: 

c. Material:

X

Yes D No

d. Additional protection? 

If yes, describe:___

Steel

Othe

Q Yes

4-- -in7- --ft. 

v ° 4

Other ui

No

3. Surface seal: Bentonite O 30 

Concrete X ° l 

______________________ Other D HH 

i. Material between well casing and protective pipe:

Bentonite O 30

Concrete Other

5. Annular space seal: a- Granular/Chipped Bentonite ^ 3 3

' j> ()___Lbs/gal mud weight... Bentonite-sand slurry U 3 5

c. .0___U>s/gal mud weight..... Bentonite slurry D 31

j Q______ % Bentonite .... .. Bcntonite-cement grout O 50

e _7 75____Fl volume added for any of the above

f, How installed: Jnmie D 01

Tremic pumped D 02

Gravity v Q 8

6. Bentonite seal: » Bcniuiiitc granules y 33

b, Dl/4 in. YjS/8 in. D1/2 in. Bentonite chips £ 32

c. Other U g^

7. Fine sand material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

a. R. W. Sidley SO__________________ HI 

b. Volume added _Q $_________ ft3

8. Filter pack material: Manufacturer, product name & mesh size 

a R. \V. Sidley 30________________ ||| 

b. Volume added _2___________ ft

9. Well casing: Mush threaded PVC schedule 40 ^ 2 3

Flush threaded PVC schedule 80 u 24

____________________ Other D II

10. Screen material: pvcau Screen type:

b. Manufacturer Johnson_______ 

c. Slot size: 

d. Slotted length: 

11. B ackfill material (below filter pack):

Factory cut O 11

Continuous slot v Q 1

_ Other u fig

0.01. in.

.5__ft. 

None Q 14 

Other D 11

ation on this form is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Firm

/Please complete both l^ormt 4400-113 A and 4400-113B and return them to iHe ippmprUte DNR office and banni. Completion of these reporu h requited by chs. 160,281, 

f 283,2^. 291,292,293.295. *n4 299. Wia. Suu.. »nd ch. NR141, Wis. Adm. Code. In scwrdtftce with chs. 281,289, 291,292,293.295, and 299, Wit. Suu,. failure to fib 

thete forms may result in i fotfeiturc of between $10 and $25,000, or imprisonment for up u. one ye»r, depending on the progrtm and conduct involved. Personally identifiable 

information on ihete forms U not intended to be used for any other purpose. NOTE: See U» instructions for more information, including where the completed form* should be 

sent

Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued.

Appendix B 55
Sute of Wisconsin

of Natural RMOUTO<I Route to: Watershed/ Wastcwatcrd) Waste Management I I 

Remediation/RedeYclopmctitCI] Other I

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION 

Form 4400-113A Rev. 7-98

Facility/Project Name 

Bad River Counlv Road A

Facility License, Permit or Monitoring No.

Facility ID 

0

Type of Well

Well Code

Distance from Waste/ 

Source Q ft

11 / mw

Enf. Stds. 

Apply n

Local Grid Location of Well _ 

- UN. 

 0 & DS. 0

Local Grid Origin D (estimated: D^ or 

Lat. ft __.* 0 ' 0 "Long, ft * (I

St. Wane 0 ftN. 0

OE.

Well Location v 

« or

ft. E. S/C/N

Section Location of Waste/Source 

.N\V-U* of - NW- 1/4 of Sec__35_. T. _48_ N, R. .3 ? W

Location of Well Relative to Waste/Source 

u O Upgradient s O Sidegradient

rl v Downgradient n D Not Known

Gov. Lot Number

Well Name 

CAMW-7P

WU. Unique Well No.

JU575

Date Well Installed 

SI I

DNRWdllDNo.

J9 !

Well Installed By: Name (first, last) and Firn 

James _______ Raiunaii _________ 

US Geological Survey - WRD - Wisconsin Di

A. Protective pipe, top elevation _ _ 0 _ _ _ f L MSL

B. Well casing, top elevation - -637.2- - fu MSL

C. Land suifax* elevation _ .632.9 _ _ ft. MSL

?J*_Jcr<**; 

D. Surface seal, bottom_ _ 0- - - - ft. MSL or .ft _ _ _ ft £&.£?$?»

12. USCS classification of soil near screen:

GP a GMD oca GWD sw a SP a

SM D SC D MLd MHD CL D CH D

Bedrock O

13. Sieve analysis performed? D Yes vNo

14. Drilling method used: Rotary D 5 0

Hollow Stem Auger x 4 1

Driven point____________ Othcr <-* It*

15. Drilling fluid used: Water O 0 2 Air D 0 1 

Drilling Mud D 0 3 None X 9 9

16. Drilling additives used? Q Yes v No

Describe ___________________ 

17. Source of water (attach analysis, if required):

E. Bcntonile seal, top _ _0_ _ _ _ ft MSL or _ ft. _ _ _ ft. k

F. Fine sand, lop _ _ft_ _ _ _ f L MSL or _().___ ft. y

G. Filterpack, top _ _0_ _ _ _ & MSL or _ 0. _ _

H. Screen joint, top _ _631.9- _ & MSL or _ j. _ _ _ ft."

I. Well bottom _ _628.9_ _ & MSL or _ 3. _ _ _ ft>

J, Filter pack, bottom _ _0_ _ _ _ ft MSL or _ ft. _ _ ft~

K. Borehole, bottom _ _628.4- - ft MS^ or _ 3. _ _ _ ft.\

L. Borehole, diameter _ 0. - - in.

M. O.D. well casing _ 0 - - in.

N. 1J3. well casing _ 0 - - in.

1. Cap and lock?

2. Protective cover pipe; 

a. Inside diameter: 

b. Length: 

c. Material:

d. Additional protection? 

If yes, describe:___

D Yes v JNO

0. _ - inSteel n 04

Other Q 11 

Q Yes D No

3. Surface seal: Bentonile D 30

Concrete X ^ *

____ ___________ Other D ||||

4. Material between well casing and protective pipe:

Bentonite n 30

_____________________ Other O 111

5. Annular space seal: »- Granular/Chipped Bentonite D 33

' b. 0___Lbs/gal mud weight... Bentonite-sand slurry D 3 5

c. .()___Lbs/gal mud weight..... Bcntonite slurry E 31

__ Q__ % Bentonite .... .. Bcntonite-ccmeni grout D 50

e _o______^Ft volume added for any of the above

f. How installed: Trernie D 01

Trends pumped Q Q2

Gravity D 08

6.Bentoniteieal: a. Beniuiiitegranules p S3

b. Dl/4in. D3/8in. Dl/2m. Bentonite chips D 32

c.______________________ Other D ||

7. Fine sand material: Manufacturer, product name &. mesh size

b. Volume added _Q__________ ft-5 

8. Filter pack material: Manufacturer, product name &. mesh size

b. Volume added _Q___________ ft 3 

9. Well casing: Flush threaded PVC schedule 40 D 23 

Flush threaded PVC schedule 80 Q 2 4 

.stainless steel_______________ Other D ill

10. Screen material: stainless steel ___________ II

a. Screen type:

b. Manufacturer Johnson 

c. Sloisize: 

d. Slotted length: 

1 1 . Backfill material (below filter pack):

Factory cut D 11

Continuous slot O 0 1

__ Other D SI

0.01. in.

None D 14 

Other D «P!

I hereby codify thai the information on this form is true, and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Firm

/Please complete both J'oTim 4400- 113A and 4400-113B and return them to the ippmprlwe DNR office and bureau. Completion of these reports Is required by ch». 160,281, 

283,289.291.292.293.295, *n4 299. Wia. Suti., and ck. NR 141. Wis, Adra. Code. In »c«>r-«nce wkh chs. 281,2«9,291, 292,293,295, and 299, Wit. Suu., failure to file 

these forms may rtiuh in * forfeiture of between 510 and 525,000, or imprisonment, for up to one year, depending on the, program and conduct involved. Personally identifiable 

information on these form s it ncl intended to be used for any other purpose. NOTE: See tha instructions for more information, including where the completed formt should be

sent

Appendix B. Well construction reports, County Road A disposal site, Ashland County, Wisconsin Continued.

56 Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation, Ashland 

County, Wisconsin: 1997-98
Appendix C. Meteorological data collected at the airport at Minocqua, Wisconsin, and estimates of evaporation for the period 

May 5 to August 18, 1998.

Appendix C 57
Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of the County Road A Disposal Site on the Bad River Indian Reservation

Ashland County, Wisconsin: 1997-98