Prepared in cooperation with the

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Groundwater Quality in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011

Open-File Report 2013–1021

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover. (Clockwise from left) A domestic well in Herkimer County, New York (photograph by Carolyn VanAlstyne); a 

production well in Schoharie County, New York (photograph by Paul M. Heisig); a U.S. Geological Survey scientist sampling 

a well in Herkimer County, New York (photograph by Paul M. Heisig). 
Prepared in cooperation with the 

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 

Groundwater Quality in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011

By Elizabeth A. Nystrom and Tia-Marie Scott

Open-File Report 2013–1021

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

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

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit 

http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS

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

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

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

Suggested citation:

Nystrom, E.A., and Scott, T., 2013, Groundwater quality in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2013-1021, 43 p., at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1021/.

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

endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

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

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
iii

Contents

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

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

Objective and Approach............................................................................................................................................. 2

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

Hydrogeologic Setting................................................................................................................................................ 3

Methods of Investigation................................................................................................................................................ 5

Well Selection ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

Sampling Methods ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

Analytical Methods....................................................................................................................................................10

Quality Control Samples ...........................................................................................................................................11

Groundwater Quality.....................................................................................................................................................11

Physiochemical Properties........................................................................................................................................12

Dissolved Gases .......................................................................................................................................................13

Major Ions .................................................................................................................................................................13

Nutrients and Total Organic Carbon .........................................................................................................................14

Trace Elements.........................................................................................................................................................15

Pesticides..................................................................................................................................................................17

Volatile Organic Compounds ....................................................................................................................................17

Radionuclides ...........................................................................................................................................................17

Bacteria.....................................................................................................................................................................18

Well sampled in 2002, 2006, and 2011.....................................................................................................................18

Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................19

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................................19

Appendix: Results of Water-Sample Analyses .............................................................................................................24

Figures

Maps showing:

Figure 1. Topography and geography of the Mohawk River Basin, New York. ......................................................... 4

Figure 2. Generalized bedrock geology of the Mohawk River Basin, New York, and locations of wells sampled in 

2011. ................................................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 3. Generalized surficial geology of the Mohawk River Basin, New York, and locations of wells sampled in 

2011. ................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Tables

Table 1. Previous groundwater-quality studies and reports..................................................................................... 2

Table 2. Information on wells from which water samples were collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. ................................................................................................................................................................... 8

Table 3. Summary of information on wells from which water samples were collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. ............................................................................................................................................................ 9

Table 4. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for physiochemical properties of groundwater samples 

from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011........................................................................................................... 12

Table 5. Summary statistics for concentrations of dissolved gases in groundwater samples from the Mohawk 

River Basin, New York, 2011....................................................................................................................................... 13
iv

Table 6. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of major ions in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. ........................................................................................... 14

Table 7. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of nutrients in groundwater samples 

from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011........................................................................................................... 15

Table 8. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of trace elements in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. ........................................................................................... 16

Table 9. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of radionuclides in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. ........................................................................................... 18

Appendix 1

Table 1-1. Constituents that were not detected in groundwater samples collected from 21 wells in the Mohawk 

River Basin, New York, 2011....................................................................................................................................... 25

Table 1–2. Physiochemical properties of groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. ............................................................................................................................................................. 26

Table 1–3. Concentrations of dissolved gases in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011. ............................................................................................................................................................. 27

Table 1–4. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. ............................................................................................................................................................. 28

Table 1–5. Concentrations of nutrients and organic carbon in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2011. ............................................................................................................................................... 30

Table 1–6. Concentrations of trace elements in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011. ............................................................................................................................................................. 31

Table 1–7. Concentrations of pesticides detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. .......................................................................................................................................................... 34

Table 1–8. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples collected in the 

Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011......................................................................................................................... 35

Table 1–9. Activities of radionuclides in groundwater samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011... 36

Table 1–10. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011................... 37

Table 1–11. Physiochemical properties and concentrations of nutrients in groundwater samples collected in the 

Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011. ............................................................................................. 38

Table 1–12. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2002, 2006, and 2011.................................................................................................................................................. 39

Table 1–13. Concentrations of trace elements and radionuclides in groundwater samples in the Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011. .................................................................................................................... 40

Table 1–14. Concentrations of pesticides and of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples 

collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011..................................................................... 42

Table 1–15. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2006 and 2011. .. 43
v

Conversion Factors

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

Flow rate

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

Pressure

inch of mercury at 60oF (in Hg) 3.377 kilopascal (kPa) 

Radioactivity

picocurie per liter (pCi/L) 0.037 becquerel per liter (Bq/L) 

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). 

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

Elevation, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

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

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

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

AMCL Alternative maximum contaminant level

CFCL USGS Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory

CFU Colony-forming units

cICP-MS Collision/reaction cell inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry

CIAT 2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine

GC-MS Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

GPS Global positioning system

HPLC-MS High-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

ICP-AES Inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry

ICP-MS Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry

ICP-OES Inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry

LRL Laboratory reporting level

MCL Maximum contaminant level

MTBE Methyl tert-butyl ether

NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988

NWIS National Water Information System

NWQL USGS National Water Quality Laboratory

NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

NYSDOH New York State Department of Health

PERC Tetrachloroethene

PVC Polyvinyl chloride

SDWS Secondary drinking-water standards

THM Trihalomethane 

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VOC Volatile organic compound
1

Groundwater Quality in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011

By Elizabeth A. Nystrom and Tia-Marie Scott

Abstract 

Water samples were collected from 21 production and domestic wells in the Mohawk River 

Basin in New York in July 2011 to characterize groundwater quality in the basin. The samples were 

collected and processed using standard U.S. Geological Survey procedures and were analyzed for 148 

physiochemical properties and constituents, including dissolved gases, major ions, nutrients, trace 

elements, pesticides, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), radionuclides, and indicator bacteria.

The Mohawk River Basin covers 3,500 square miles in New York and is underlain by shale, 

sandstone, carbonate, and crystalline bedrock. The bedrock is overlain by till in much of the basin, but 

surficial deposits of saturated sand and gravel are present in some areas. Nine of the wells sampled in 

the Mohawk River Basin are completed in sand and gravel deposits, and 12 are completed in bedrock.

Groundwater in the Mohawk River Basin was typically neutral or slightly basic; the water typically was 

very hard. Bicarbonate, chloride, calcium, and sodium were the major ions with the greatest median 

concentrations; the dominant nutrient was nitrate. Methane was detected in 15 samples. Strontium, iron, 

barium, boron, and manganese were the trace elements with the highest median concentrations. Four 

pesticides, all herbicides or their degradates, were detected in four samples at trace levels; three VOCs, 

including chloroform and two solvents, were detected in four samples. The greatest radon-222 activity, 

2,300 picocuries per liter, was measured in a sample from a bedrock well, but the median radon activity 

was higher in samples from sand and gravel wells than in samples from bedrock wells. Coliform 

bacteria were detected in five samples with a maximum of 92 colony-forming units per 100 milliliters. 

Water quality in the Mohawk River Basin is generally good, but concentrations of some 

constituents equaled or exceeded current or proposed Federal or New York State drinking-water 

standards. The standards exceeded are color (1 sample), pH (1 sample), sodium (9 samples), chloride (1 

sample), sulfate (2 samples), dissolved solids (7 samples), aluminum (3 samples), iron (8 samples), 

manganese (6 samples), radon-222 (10 samples), and bacteria (5 samples). Fecal coliform bacteria and 

Escherichia coli (E. coli) were each detected in one sample. Concentrations of fluoride, nitrate, nitrite, 

antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, 

thallium, zinc, and uranium, and gross alpha activities, did not exceed existing drinking-water standards 

in any of the samples collected. Methane concentrations in two samples were greater than 28 milligrams 

per liter, and the maximum measured concentration was 44.3 milligrams per liter.

Introduction 

Groundwater is used as a source of drinking water by approximately one-quarter of the 

population of New York State (Kenny and others, 2009). In 2002, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 

in cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), 

developed a program to evaluate groundwater quality throughout the major river basins in New York on 

a rotating basis. The program parallels the NYSDEC Rotating Intensive Basin Study program 
2

(http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/30951.html), which evaluates surface-water quality on a 5-year cycle 

by sampling in 2 or 3 of the 14 major river basins in the State each year, and supports NYSDEC’s 

responsibilities under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977 to report on the 

chemical quality of groundwater within New York (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997). 

The groundwater-quality program began in 2002 with a pilot study in the Mohawk River Basin 

and has continued throughout upstate New York since then (table 1). Sampling completed in 2008 

represents the conclusion of a first round of groundwater-quality sampling throughout New York State 

(excluding Long Island, which is monitored through local county programs). Groundwater-quality 

sampling was conducted in 2011 in the Mohawk River Basin, Niagara and Allegheny River Basins, and 

Lake Erie and western Lake Ontario tributaries. 

Table 1. Previous groundwater-quality studies and reports.

Study area Year Report Reference

Mohawk River Basin 2002 Water-Data Report NY-02-1 Butch and others, 2003

Chemung River Basin 2003 Open-File Report 2004-1329 Hetcher-Aguila, 2005

Lake Champlain Basin 2004 Open-File Report 2006-1088 Nystrom, 2006

Susquehanna River Basin 2004 Open-File Report 2006-1161 Hetcher-Aguila and Eckhardt, 

2006

Delaware River Basin 2005 Open-File Report 2007-1098 Nystrom, 2007b

Genesee River Basin 2005 Open-File Report 2007-1093 Eckhardt and others, 2007

St. Lawrence River Basin 2005 Open-File Report 2007-1066 Nystrom, 2007a

Mohawk River Basin 2006 Open-File Report 2008-1086 Nystrom, 2008

Western New York 2006 Open-File Report 2008-1140 Eckhardt and others, 2008

Central New York 2007 Open-File Report 2009-1257 Eckhardt and others, 2009

Upper Hudson River Basin 2007 Open-File Report 2009-1240 Nystrom, 2009

Chemung River Basin 2008 Open-File Report 2011-1112 Risen and Reddy, 2011a

Eastern Lake Ontario Basin 2008 Open-File Report 2011-1074 Risen and Reddy, 2011b

Lower Hudson River Basin 2008 Open-File Report 2010- 1197 Nystrom, 2010

Lake Champlain Basin 2009 Open-File Report 2011- 1180 Nystrom, 2011

Susquehanna River Basin 2009 Open-File Report 2012- 1045 Reddy and Risen, 2012 

Delaware River Basin 2010 Open-File Report 2011- 1320 Nystrom, 2012

Genesee River Basin 2010 Open-File Report 2012- 1135 Reddy, 2012

St. Lawrence River Basin 2010 Open-File Report 2011- 1320 Nystrom, 2012

Objective and Approach

The objective of the groundwater-quality monitoring program is to quantify and report on 

ambient groundwater quality from bedrock and glacial-drift aquifers in upstate New York. Using 

consistent, standardized methods, groundwater-quality samples were collected from existing domestic 

and production wells using on-site, permanently installed pumps, then analyzed. Wells were selected to 

represent an approximately equal number of domestic and production wells, to represent an 

approximately equal number of bedrock and glacial-drift wells, and to provide a representative 

geographic distribution of samples with emphasis on areas of greatest groundwater use. As basins were 

sampled for the second or third time, approximately 20 percent of samples were collected from wells 

that previously have been sampled as part of the cycle of studies. 
3

Samples were analyzed for a broad suite of constituents, including physiochemical properties 

and concentrations of dissolved gases, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, pesticides, volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), radionuclides, and indicator bacteria. The resulting data set will be used to 

establish a groundwater-quality baseline for New York State, characterizing naturally occurring and 

background conditions, and to identify long-term trends. The data are made available through the USGS 

National Water Information System (NWIS) (http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/ny/nwis/qw) and project 

reports.

Groundwater-quality samples were collected in the Mohawk River Basin (excluding the 

Schoharie subbasin) in 2002 and in the complete Mohawk River Basin in 2006 and 2011. In 2011, 21 

environmental samples and 3 quality-assurance samples were collected during the month of July. Four 

of the wells sampled in 2011 were also sampled as part of this cycle of studies in 2002 and 2006 (Butch 

and others, 2003; and Nystrom, 2008). 

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the findings of the 2011 study in the Mohawk River Basin, in which 21 

groundwater-quality samples were collected during July 2011. The report (1) describes the 

hydrogeologic setting, sampled wells, and the methods of site selection, sample collection, and chemical 

analysis; (2) presents discussions of the analytical results; and (3) presents comparisons of the results of 

this study with results for selected wells in the Mohawk River Basin that were sampled in 2002 and 

2006 (Butch and others, 2003; and Nystrom, 2008).

Hydrogeologic Setting

The Mohawk River Basin encompasses approximately 3,500 square miles (mi2) in central New 

York (fig. 1) and all or parts of 14 counties, including all of Montgomery County, most of Schoharie 

and Schenectady Counties, part of Herkimer, Hamilton, Fulton, Greene, Oneida, Saratoga, and Albany 

Counties, and small parts of Lewis, Madison, Otsego, and Delaware Counties (fig. 1). The Mohawk 

River is a major tributary to the Hudson River; the major tributaries to the Mohawk River are the 

Schoharie and West Canada Creeks (fig. 1). The Mohawk River Basin contains three major reservoirs 

(fig. 1): the Schoharie Reservoir, which diverts water out of the basin as part of New York City’s watersupply system; Hinckley Reservoir, which provides drinking water to the Utica area, and Delta 

Reservoir. 

The highest elevations in the Mohawk River Basin are approximately 4,000 ft above the North 

American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) along the southern edge of the basin. The Mohawk River 

Valley runs from west to east along the middle of the basin; the lowest elevation (approximately 10 ft) 

in the basin is at the confluence of the Mohawk River and the Hudson River north of Troy, N.Y. (fig. 1).

The Mohawk River Basin is predominantly forested, especially in upland areas, with urban and 

agricultural areas mainly in valleys and other low-lying areas (Vogelmann and others, 2001); urban 

centers and adjacent developed areas in the Mohawk River Basin include Schenectady, Utica, and 

Amsterdam (fig. 1).

The surficial material (fig. 2) throughout the basin was deposited primarily during the last 

glaciations of the Pleistocene epoch when the Wisconsin glaciers covered most of the Northeast 

(Reynolds, 1990). Till mantles the uplands and ice-contact, deltaic, fluvial-, and alluvial sand and gravel 

and lacustrine silt and clay are present in the valleys. Till and lacustrine silt and clay deposits generally 

have low yields of water, whereas the well-sorted, coarse-grained deposits form important aquifers in 

the basin. The valley-fill sand-and-gravel aquifers may produce yields of as much as 500 gallons per 

minute (gal/min) (Reynolds, 1990).
4

Base from U.S. geological Survey digital data, 1983, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 18

Hydrology from National Hydrography Dataset, 1:100,000

Topography from National Elevation Dataset

5,333 feet

10 feet

Water

EXPLANATION

Elevation,

in feet above the

North American

Vertical Datum of 1988

Study area

!

!

!

!

Utica

Schenectady

Troy

Amsterdam

Schoharie

Reservoir

Hinckley

Reservoir

Delta

Reservoir

West CanadaCreek

Schoharie

Creek

MOH

VA EY

Mohawk River

Hudson River !

Tro

Hu

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

WARREN

HAMILTON

LEWIS

ONEIDA

HERKIMER

FULTON

MONTGOMERY

SCHENECTADY

SARATOGA

ALBANY

RENSSELAER

COLUMBIA

OTSEGO

CHENANGO

DELAWARE

ULSTER

GREENE

MADISON

SCHOHARIE

Study

area

75°30' 75°00' 74°30' 74°00'

43°30'

43°00'

42°30'

Figure 1. Map showing topography and geography of the Mohawk River Basin, New York.
5

Bedrock in the Mohawk River Basin (fig. 3) includes shale, sandstone, carbonate, and crystalline 

rocks. Black shale is present in the Mohawk Valley, with bands of carbonate rock along the edges of the 

valley. Bedrock in the southern part of the basin consists mainly of shale and sandstone, and bedrock in 

the northern part of the basin is mainly crystalline metamorphic rock. Of the bedrock aquifers in the 

basin, carbonate rocks generally produce the highest yields, and the crystalline rocks generally produce 

the lowest; the clastic rocks generally have low to moderate yields (Hammond and others, 1978). 

Methods of Investigation

The methods used in this study, including (1) well-selection criteria, (2) sampling methods, and 

(3) analytical methods, were designed to maximize data precision, accuracy, and comparability.

Groundwater-sample collection and processing followed standard USGS procedures as documented in 

the National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data (U.S. Geological Survey, variously 

dated). Samples were analyzed by documented methods at the USGS National Water Quality 

Laboratory (NWQL) in Denver, Colorado, and other laboratories. 

Well Selection

The 21 wells selected for sampling (figs. 2 and 3) represent forested, developed, and agricultural 

areas (table 2). The final selection of each well was based on the availability of well-construction data 

and hydrogeologic information for the well and its surrounding area. The study did not target specific 

municipalities, industries, or agricultural practices.

The domestic wells were selected on the basis of information from the NYSDEC Water Well 

program, which began in 2000. The program requires that licensed well drillers file a report with 

NYSDEC containing basic information about each well drilled, such as well and casing depth, diameter, 

yield, and a hydrogeologic log. Inspection of well-completion report data identified several hundred 

wells as potential sampling sites; well owners were each sent a letter requesting permission to sample 

the well and a questionnaire about the well. Well owners who granted permission were contacted later 

by phone to verify well information and to arrange a convenient time for sampling. 

Production wells considered for sampling were identified through the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (USEPA) Safe Drinking Water Information System, the New York State Department 

of Health (NYSDOH) Drinking Water Protection Program, and the NYSDEC Water Well program. 

Town officials and (or) water managers were sent letters requesting permission to sample a well, and 

follow-up phone calls were made to arrange a time for sampling. Well information, such as depth, was 

provided by water managers if a well-completion report was unavailable. The aquifer type indicated for 

sampled wells was assigned through inspection of hydrogeologic logs and published geologic maps, 

including Fisher and others (1970) and Cadwell (1991). 

The characteristics of the wells sampled and the type of land cover surrounding each well are 

listed in table 2. The depths of the wells, the aquifer units from which samples were collected, and the 

numbers of production and domestic wells are summarized in table 3. Four wells sampled in 2011 (HE 

622, OE1460, SA1501, and MT 406) were also sampled in 2002 and 2006 (Butch and others, 2003; 

Nystrom, 2008).
6

Surficial material

Sand and gravel

Silt and clay

Study area

Wells sampled

Bedrock well sampled and number

Sand and gravel well sampled and number

Water

Rock

Till

EXPLANATION

G 837

SO 814

Base from U.S. geological Survey digital data, 1983, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 18

Geology modified from Cadwell, 1991

SO 814

SO 605

SN1366

SA2259

SA1501

OE1468

OE1460

HE 622

HE1929

A667

G 837

MT 406

SO1658

SO1487

SO1037

SN1131

SA2806

OE2876

HE1480

HE1459

FU1611

SA2259

5

SA2806 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

WARREN

HAMILTON

LEWIS

ONEIDA

HERKIMER

FULTON

MONTGOMERY

SCHENECTADY

SARATOGA

ALBANY

RENSSELAER

COLUMBIA

OTSEGO

CHENANGO

DELAWARE

ULSTER

GREENE

MADISON

SCHOHARIE

75°30' 75°00' 74°30' 74°00'

43°30'

43°00'

42°30'

Figure 2. Map showing generalized bedrock geology of the Mohawk River Basin, New York, and locations of 

wells sampled in 2011.
7

EXPLANATION

Generalized bedrock geology

Carbonates

Shale and carbonates

Shale

Black Shale

Shale and sandstone

Study area

Wells sampled

Bedrock well sampled and number

Sand and gravel well sampled and number

Sandstone

Metamorphosed clastic

Crystalline

Water

Glacial (bedrock type not mapped)

SO 814

G 837

Base from U.S. geological Survey digital data, 1983, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 18

Geology modified from Fisher and others, 1970

SO 814

SO 605

SN1366

SA2259

SA1501

OE1468

OE1460

HE 622

HE1929

A667

G 837

MT 406

SO1658

SO1487

SO1037

SN1131

SA2806

OE2876

HE1480

HE1459

FU1611

SA2259

5

SA2806

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

WARREN

HAMILTON

LEWIS

ONEIDA

HERKIMER

FULTON

MONTGOMERY

SCHENECTADY

SARATOGA

ALBANY

RENSSELAER

COLUMBIA

OTSEGO

CHENANGO

DELAWARE

ULSTER

GREENE

MADISON

SCHOHARIE

75°30' 75°00' 74°30' 74°00'

43°30'

43°00'

42°30'

Figure 3. Map showing generalized surficial geology of the Mohawk River Basin, New York, and locations of wells 

sampled in 2011.
8

Table 2. Description of wells from which water samples were collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. [--, unknown; well types: P, production; D, domestic. Land cover categories: D, developed; F, forested; 

A, agricultural; W, open water; WL, wetlands. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3] 

Well 

number1

Date 

sampled

Well 

depth, feet 

below land 

surface

Casing 

depth, feet

below land 

surface

Well 

type Bedrock type

Land cover2, percent by category, 

within 0.5-mile radius surrounding 

the well

D F A W WL

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 7/27/2011 52 -- P 

HE1929 7/12/2011 81 81 D 

OE1460 7/21/2011 28 -- P

OE1468 7/21/2011 49 39 P

SA1501 7/25/2011 30 -- P 

SA2259 7/28/2011 40 40 D 

SN1366 7/18/2011 395 395 D

SO 605 7/13/2011 36 32 P

SO 814 7/19/2011 80 65 P 

Bedrock wells

A667 7/26/2011 226 179.7 P Carbonate

FU1611 7/12/2011 245 20 D Crystalline

G 837 7/26/2011 184 -- P Shale and sandstone

HE1459 7/14/2011 279 89.75 D Carbonate

HE1480 7/11/2011 160 46 D Shale

MT 406 7/27/2011 815 -- P Shale

OE2876 7/14/2011 270 102 D Shale and carbonate

SA2806 7/25/2011 200 47 D Shale and sandstone

SN1131 7/28/2011 120 31 D Shale

SO1037 7/20/2011 190 70 D Sandstone

SO1487 7/20/2011 380 20 D Shale

SO1658 7/19/2011 402 100 P Carbonate

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.

2 Determined from the National Land Cover Data set (Vogelmann and others, 2001).

22

10

4

3

21

1

7

10

43

6

10

25

68

64

91

16

16

22

38

53

39

31

33

20

22

5

14

76

93

74

7

1

1

40

3

12

2

32

18

3

9

1

48

7

1

4

34

1

22

19

41

37

7

4

10

26

16

6

67

43

5

67

33

10

13

22

41

5

16

53

12

59

52

5

14

2

49

24

13

9

2

14

14

55

2

9

36

5
9

Table 3. Summary of information on wells from which water samples were collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. [bls, below land surface]

Type of well

Number of wells

Production Domestic Total

Wells completed in sand and gravel (depth 28 to 395 feet bls) 6 3 9

Wells completed in bedrock (depth 120 to 815 feet bls) 4 8 12

Carbonate bedrock 2 1 3

Shale and carbonate bedrock 0 1 1

Shale bedrock 1 3 4

Shale and sandstone bedrock 1 1 2

Sandstone bedrock 0 1 1

Crystalline bedrock 0 1 1

Total number of wells 10 11 21

Sampling Methods

Samples were collected and processed in accordance with documented USGS protocols (U.S. 

Geological Survey, variously dated). The samples were collected before any water-treatment system to 

be as representative of the aquifer water quality as possible. Most samples from domestic wells were 

collected from a spigot near the pressure tank; samples from production wells were collected at the 

spigot or faucet used for collection of raw-water samples by water managers.

At sites with garden-hose type spigots, samples were collected from one or more 10-ft lengths of 

Teflon tubing attached to the spigot. Domestic wells were purged after the tubing was connected by 

running to waste for at least 20 minutes at pumping rates ranging from about 2 to 5 gal/min or until at 

least one well-casing volume of water had passed the sampling point. Wells that had been used recently 

required removal of less than three well-casing volumes (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006). At least three 

well-casings of water were pumped from production wells before sampling; several were pumped for 1 

hour or more prior to sampling, typically at rates of about 100 gal/min. During well purging, notes about 

the well and surrounding land and land use were recorded, including a global positioning system (GPS) 

measurement of latitude and longitude. After the well was purged, field measurements of water 

temperature, pH, specific conductance, and dissolved oxygen concentration were recorded at regular 

intervals until these values had stabilized, after which the sample was collected (U.S. Geological 

Survey, variously dated).

The flow rate for sample collection was adjusted to less than 0.5 gal/min when possible. The 

Teflon sampling tube was then connected to a sample-collection chamber constructed of a polyvinyl 

chloride (PVC) frame and a clear plastic chamber bag. The Teflon tubing and spigot-attachment 

equipment for each sample were pre-cleaned in the laboratory with a dilute phosphate-free detergent 

solution, followed by rinses with tap water and deionized water. Equipment for filtration of pesticide 

samples was rinsed with methanol as described in Wilde (2004).

Samples were collected and preserved in the sampling chamber according to standard USGS 

procedures. Samples for nutrient, major-ion, and some trace-element analyses were filtered through 

disposable (one-time use) 0.45-micrometer (μm) pore-size polyether sulfone capsule filters that were 

preconditioned in the laboratory with 3 liters (L) of deionized water the day of sample collection.

Samples for pesticide analyses were filtered through baked 0.7-μm pore-size glass fiber filters. Ultra-
10

pure nitric acid preservation was required for trace-element samples, except mercury, which was 

preserved with hydrochloric acid. Hydrochloric acid was added to VOC samples to kill bacteria that 

might degrade VOCs; samples for major-cation analysis and some samples for radiochemical analysis

were preserved with ultra-pure nitric acid. Acid preservative was added after the collection of other 

samples to avoid the possibility of cross contamination by the acid preservative; for example, samples 

preserved with nitric acid were acidified after the collection of samples for nutrient analysis. Samples 

for bacterial analysis were collected in accordance with NYSDEC and NYSDOH protocols, except that 

the tap from which each water sample was collected was not flame sterilized. Water samples for radon 

analysis were collected through a septum chamber with a glass syringe, according to standard USGS 

procedures. Water samples for the analysis of dissolved gases were filled and sealed while submerged in 

a beaker of water to prevent exposure to the atmosphere. Water samples analyzed by NYSDOHcertified laboratories were collected in bottles provided by the analyzing laboratory. After collection, all 

water samples except those for radiochemical analyses were chilled to 4 degrees Celsius (°C) or less and 

were kept chilled until delivery to the analyzing laboratory. Bacterial samples were hand delivered to 

the analyzing laboratory within 6 hours of collection; all other samples were shipped by overnight 

delivery to the designated laboratories.

Most sampling sites had easy access to a garden-hose type spigot; however, some supply wells 

did not. Wells A667, HE622, OE1460, OE1468, SO605, SO814 were sampled from faucets using 

adapters to connect the Teflon tubing. Well SA1501 was sampled from a hydrant, and well SO1658 was 

sampled from a 4-inch discharge pipe at which water-system personnel routinely collect raw-water 

samples. The syringe for radon-222 sample collection at these sites was inserted directly into the 

flowing water in the throat of the tap to minimize sample exposure to the atmosphere.

Analytical Methods

Samples were analyzed for 148 physiochemical properties and constituents, including dissolved 

gases, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, pesticides, pesticide degradates, VOCs, radionuclides, and 

bacteria. Physiochemical properties such as water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen concentration, and 

specific conductance were measured at the sampling site. Major ions, nutrients, total organic carbon, 

trace elements, radon-222, pesticides, pesticide degradates, and VOCs were analyzed at the USGS 

NWQL in Denver, Colo. Selected dissolved gases were analyzed at the USGS Chlorofluorocarbon 

Laboratory (CFCL) in Reston, Virginia. Gross alpha and gross beta radioactivities were analyzed at 

Eberline Services in Richmond, California. Indicator bacteria were analyzed at the NYSDOH-certified 

St. Peter’s Bender Laboratory in Albany, N.Y.

Anion concentrations were measured by ion-exchange chromatography, and cation 

concentrations were measured by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), 

as described in Fishman (1993). Nutrients were analyzed by colorimetry, as described by Fishman 

(1993), and Kjeldahl digestion with photometric finish, as described by Patton and Truitt (2000). Total 

organic carbon samples were analyzed by high temperature combustion and catalytic oxidation for 

measurement by infrared detection according to Standard Method 5310 (American Public Health 

Association, 1998). Mercury concentrations were measured through cold vapor–atomic fluorescence 

spectrometry according to methods described by Garbarino and Damrau (2001). Arsenic, chromium, 

and nickel samples were analyzed by use of collision/reaction cell inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry (cICP-MS), as described by Garbarino and others (2006). The remaining trace elements 

were analyzed by ICP-AES (Struzeski and others, 1996), inductively coupled plasma-optical emission 

spectrometry (ICP-OES), and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (Garbarino and 

Struzeski, 1998). Procedures for in-bottle digestions for trace-element analyses described by Hoffman 
11

and others (1996) were followed. Radon-222 activities were measured through liquid-scintillation 

counting (ASTM International, 2006). Samples for pesticide analyses were processed as described by 

Wilde and others (2004) and were analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and 

high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS), as described by Zaugg and 

others (1995), Sandstrom and others (2001), and Furlong and others (2001). VOCs were analyzed by 

GC-MS using methods described by Connor and others (1998).

Gross alpha and gross beta radioactivities were measured through gas flow proportional counting 

according to USEPA method 900.0 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980). Carbon dioxide and 

methane concentrations were measured through gas chromatography with flame ionization detection; 

dissolved nitrogen gas and argon concentrations were measured through gas chromatography with 

thermal conductivity detection. Indicator bacteria samples were tested for total coliform, fecal coliform, 

and Escherichia coli (E. coli) using membrane filtration through Standard Method 9222 (American 

Public Health Association, 1998); a heterotrophic plate count test (SM 9215 B) also was done. 

Quality-Control Samples

In addition to the 21 groundwater samples, 1 field blank sample, 1 replicate sample, and 1 

pesticide spike sample were collected for quality assurance. Constituents did not exceed laboratory 

reporting levels (LRLs) in the blank sample, except for total organic carbon, which was measured at 0.5 

milligrams per liter (mg/L). The variability between replicate samples was greatest for unfiltered trace 

elements, gross alpha radioactivity, and radon-222. No VOCs or pesticides were detected in the 

replicate samples. The median recovery in the pesticide spike sample, which was collected at site A667,

was 79 percent; constituents with 60 to 70 percent recovery include benfluralin, diazinon, dieldrin, 

fipronil sulfone, malathion, metribuzin, propyzamide, and tebuthiuron. Constituents with less than 50 

percent recovery include fonofos (47 percent recovery), phorate (44 percent), terbufos (40 percent), 

disulfoton (30 percent), 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine (CIAT, 25 percent), p,p’-DDE 

(23 percent), propargite (20 percent), and cis-permethrin (1 percent); of these compounds, disulfoton, 

CIAT, and propargite are known to have highly variable recovery rates in the analysis method used and 

are routinely coded as estimated values.

Groundwater Quality

Many of the constituents for which the groundwater samples were analyzed were not detected in 

any sample. Some concentrations are reported as “estimated.” Estimated concentrations are typically 

reported when the detected value is less than the established LRL or when recovery of a compound has 

been shown to be highly variable (Childress and others, 1999). Concentrations of some constituents 

exceeded maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or secondary drinking-water standards (SDWS) set by 

the USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009) or NYSDOH (New York State Department 

of Health, 2011). MCLs are enforceable standards for finished water in public water supplies; they are 

not enforceable for private homeowner wells but are presented here as a standard for evaluation of the 

water-quality results. SDWS are nonenforceable drinking-water standards that typically relate to 

aesthetic concerns such as taste, odor, or staining of plumbing fixtures.

The results of analyses of the 21 groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin

during July 2011 are presented in tables 1-1 through 1-10 in appendix 1. Of the 148 constituents and 

physiochemical properties analyzed for, 82 were not detected at levels greater than the LRLs (appendix 

table 1–1). Results for the remaining 66 constituents and properties that were detected in the Mohawk

River Basin are presented in appendix 1, tables 1–2 through 1–10. 
12

Physiochemical Properties

Most (16) of the samples from the Mohawk River Basin had a color of less than (<) 1 platinumcobalt (Pt-Co) unit (table 4 and appendix table 1–2); one sample from a bedrock well had a color of 175

Pt-Co units, exceeding the NYSDOH MCL and USEPA SDWS of 15 Pt-Co units. Sample pH was 

typically near neutral or slightly basic (median 7.5 for all wells) and ranged from 6.5 to 8.9. The pH of 

one sample from a bedrock well was higher than the USEPA SDWS range for pH (6.5 to 8.5). Specific 

conductance ranged from 194 to 1,470 microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 

25°C); the median conductance was 542 μS/cm at 25°C. Water temperature ranged from 9.4 to 16.0°C; 

the median temperature was 11.5°C. Hydrogen sulfide odor was detected at seven sites, most (six) of 

which were bedrock wells.

Table 4. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for physiochemical properties of groundwater samples 

from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [All concentrations in unfiltered water except as noted; Pt-Co units, platinum-cobalt units; μS/cm at 25oC, microsiemens per 

centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; oC, degrees Celsius; --, not applicable; <, less than]

Constituent

Summary statistics for physical properties

Drinkingwater 

standard

Number of 

samples 

exceeding 

standard

Median

(all samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Color, filtered, Pt-Co units 1

15 1 <1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 175

pH 1

6.5-8.5 1 7.5 6.8 7.3 8.0 6.5 7.6 8.9

Specific conductance, 

μS/cm at 25oC -- -- 542 194 835 1,470 286 534 1,450

Temperature, oC -- -- 11.5 9.6 11.5 15.2 9.4 11.6 16.0

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standard.
13

Dissolved Gases 

Dissolved oxygen concentrations ranged from <0.3 to 6.8 mg/L (table 5 and appendix table 1–3) 

and typically were greater in samples from sand and gravel wells (median 3.9 mg/L) than in samples 

from bedrock wells (median <0.3 mg/L). The concentrations of carbon dioxide, argon, dissolved 

nitrogen gas, and methane were determined twice for each site (table 1–3). The median concentrations 

of these dissolved gases in the samples were 22.09 mg/L for nitrogen, 17.0 mg/L for carbon dioxide, 

0.7546 mg/L for argon, and 0.013 mg/L for methane. Methane was detected in 15 of the 21 samples; 

concentrations were generally greater in samples from bedrock wells (median 0.573 mg/L) than in 

samples from sand and gravel wells (median 0.0014 mg/L). The maximum methane concentration 

measured was 44.3 mg/L in a sample from a well finished in black shale and limestone. Although the 

USEPA and NYSDOH do not have MCLs for methane, dissolved methane concentrations greater than 

28 mg/L (2 samples) can pose explosion hazards as a result of methane accumulation in confined 

spaces; in addition, the Office of Surface Mining recommends that methane concentrations ranging 

from 10 to 28 mg/L in water (1 sample) signify an action level where the situation should be closely 

monitored, and if the concentration increases, the area should be vented to prevent methane gas buildup

(Eltschlager and others, 2001).

Table 5. Summary statistics for concentrations of dissolved gases in groundwater samples from Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2011.

[All concentrations in unfiltered water; mg/L, milligrams per liter; <, less than]

Constituent

Summary statistics for concentrations of dissolved gases

Median

(all samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Carbon dioxide, mg/L 17.0 1.7 20.2 37.8 0.3 14.7 47.1

Dissolved oxygen, mg/L <0.3 <0.3 3.9 6.8 <0.3 <0.3 2.2

Argon, mg/L 0.7546 0.6101 0.7331 1.171 0.6387 0.8067 0.9661

Nitrogen gas, mg/L 22.09 16.66 19.85 39.85 16.16 23.29 33.62

Methane, mg/L 0.013 <0.001 .0014 0.143 <0.001 0.573 44.3

Major Ions

The anions detected in the highest concentrations were bicarbonate (median concentration 258

mg/L) and chloride (median concentration 64.9 mg/L) (table 6 and appendix table 1–4). The cations

detected in the highest concentrations were calcium (median concentration 63.6 mg/L) and sodium 

(median concentration 56.6 mg/L). The concentration of sodium in nine samples exceeded the USEPA 

Drinking Water Advisory Taste Threshold of 60 mg/L; the maximum concentration of sodium detected 

was 273 mg/L. The concentration of chloride in one sample, 393 mg/L, exceeded the NYSDOH MCL 

and USEPA SDWS of 250 mg/L. The concentration of sulfate in two samples exceeded the NYSDOH 

MCL and USEPA SDWS of 250 mg/L; the maximum concentration of sulfate detected in the samples 

was 453 mg/L. The concentration of fluoride did not exceed established MCLs in any sample (table 6).

Most of the water samples (13 of 21) from the Mohawk River Basin were very hard (greater than 

180 mg/L as calcium carbonate, CaCO3; Hem, 1985). The median hardness of the samples was 204

mg/L as CaCO3, and the maximum hardness was 636 mg/L as CaCO3. Of the remaining eight samples, 

two were soft (0 to 60 mg/L as CaCO3), five were moderately hard (61 to 120 mg/L as CaCO3), and one
14

was hard (121 to 180 mg/L as CaCO3). Alkalinity ranged from 48 to 289 mg/L as CaCO3; the median 

was 212 mg/L of CaCO3. Dissolved solids concentrations ranged from 125 to 1,090 mg/L with a median 

of 436 mg/L; dissolved solids concentration in seven samples exceeded, and one sample equaled, the 

USEPA SDWS for total dissolved solids of 500 mg/L.

Table 6. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of major ions in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [All concentrations are in milligrams per liter in filtered water; --, not applicable; <, less than; oC, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, 

calcium carbonate]

Constituent

Summary statistics for concentrations of major ions

Drinkingwater 

standard

Number of 

samples 

exceeding 

standard

Median

(all 

samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Cations

Calcium -- -- 63.6 24.2 87.6 120 7.14 38.9 214

Magnesium -- -- 16.6 2.91 21.1 53.8 0.781 14.3 37.7

Potassium -- -- 1.91 0.47 1.46 3.40 0.29 2.04 6.68

Sodium 4

60 9 56.6 2.51 40.0 150 11.7 64.3 273

Anions

Bicarbonate -- -- 258 59 258 352 95 238 310

Chloride 2,3250 1 64.9 3.01 24.6 188 7.63 77.0 393

Fluoride

1

4.0

2

2.2

3

2

0 0.36 <0.04 0.06 0.55 0.20 0.42 1.55

Silica -- -- 8.94 5.10 7.57 13.5 7.38 9.22 17.5

Sulfate 2,3250 2 18.1 5.01 31.9 453 1.31 16.0 388

Hardness as CaCO3 -- -- 204 72.5 301 520 21.0 176 636

Alkalinity as CaCO3 -- -- 212 48 212 289 78 195 255

Dissolved solids, dried 

at 180oC

3

500 7 436 125 473 1,090 170 378 1,040

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level.

2 New York State Department of Health Maximum Contaminant Level.

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standard.

4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Advisory Taste Threshold.

Nutrients and Total Organic Carbon

The dominant nutrient detected in the Mohawk River Basin was nitrate (table 7 and appendix 

table 1–5). The concentration of ammonia ranged from <0.010 to 2.07 mg/L as nitrogen (N) and was 

generally greater in samples from the 12 bedrock wells (median 0.448 mg/L as N) than in samples from 

the 9 sand and gravel wells (median <0.010 mg/L as N). The concentration of nitrate ranged from 

<0.013 to 3.48 mg/L as N and was generally greater in samples from sand and gravel wells (median 

0.456 mg/L as N) than in samples from bedrock wells (median <0.020 mg/L as N). The concentration of 

nitrate plus nitrite did not exceed the NYSDOH and USEPA MCL of 10 mg/L as N in any sample.

Nitrite was detected in 7 of the 21 samples with a maximum concentration of 0.020 mg/L as N; the 

concentration of nitrite did not exceed the NYSDOH and USEPA MCL (1 mg/L as N) in any sample.

Orthophosphate concentrations ranged from 0.005 to 0.155 mg/L as phosphorus (P). Total organic 

carbon was detected in 18 of the 21 samples; the maximum concentration was 11.3 mg/L.
15

Table 7. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of nutrients in groundwater samples 

from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [All concentrations in milligrams per liter in filtered water except as noted. N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; --, not applicable; <, 

less than]

Constituent

Summary statistics for concentrations of nutrients

Drinkingwater 

standard

Number of 

samples 

exceeding 

standard

Median

(all 

samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Ammonia plus organic N, as N -- -- 0.23 <0.05 0.07 0.84 <0.05 0.57 2.4

Ammonia (NH3), as N -- -- 0.100 <0.010 <0.01

0 0.715 <0.010 0.448 2.07

Nitrate plus nitrite (NO2 + 

NO3), as N

1,210 0 0.04 <0.02 0.46 3.48 <0.02 <0.02 0.55

Nitrate (NO3), as N 1,210 0 0.038 <0.016 0.456 3.48 <0.013 <0.020 0.550

Nitrite (NO2), as N 1,21 0 <0.001 <0.001 <0.00

1 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 0.020

Orthophosphate (PO4), as P -- -- 0.011 0.005 0.007 0.022 0.007 0.011 0.155

Total organic carbon, unfiltered -- -- 0.7 <0.3 0.7 2.2 <0.3 0.7 11.3

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level.

2 New York State Department of Health Maximum Contaminant Level.

Trace Elements

The trace elements present in the highest median concentrations in the samples were strontium, 

with a median of 769 micrograms per liter (μg/L), iron (median 132 μg/L in unfiltered water; 12 μg/L in 

filtered water), barium (median 126 μg/L), boron (median 39 μg/L in filtered water), and manganese

(median 15.8 μg/L in unfiltered water; 13.7 μg/L in filtered water) (table 8 and appendix table 1–6). The 

highest detected concentration of a trace element was 23,400 μg/L of strontium in a sample from a 

bedrock well. The median concentrations of some trace elements were higher in samples from sand and 

gravel wells than in samples from bedrock wells, for example, copper and lead; the median 

concentrations of other trace elements were greater in samples from bedrock wells than in samples from 

sand and gravel wells, including aluminum, barium, boron, iron, lithium, manganese, and strontium.

The concentration of aluminum in three samples from bedrock wells exceeded the low end of the 

USEPA SDWS for aluminum of 50 μg/L, but none exceeded the high end of 200 μg/L. The 

concentration of iron in eight unfiltered and three filtered samples exceeded the NYSDOH MCL and 

USEPA SDWS of 300 μg/L. Three samples had unfiltered iron concentrations greater than 1,000 μg/L; 

the maximum iron concentration was 14,400 μg/L in an unfiltered sample from a bedrock well. The 

concentration of manganese in six unfiltered and four filtered samples exceeded the USEPA SDWS of 

50 μg/L; the concentration of manganese in two unfiltered and two filtered samples exceeded the 

NYSDOH MCL of 300 μg/L. The maximum concentration of manganese, 1,670 μg/L, was in an 

unfiltered sample from a sand and gravel well. Drinking-water standards for antimony, arsenic, barium, 

beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, thallium, zinc, and uranium 

were not exceeded; additionally, cadmium, mercury and thallium were not detected in any of the 21 

samples collected (appendix table 1–1).
16

Table 8. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of trace elements in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [All concentrations in micrograms per liter in unfiltered water except as noted. <, less than; --, not applicable]

Constituent

Summary statistics for concentrations of trace elements

Drinkingwater 

standard

Number of 

samples 

exceeding 

standard

Median

(all 

samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Aluminum 3

50-200 3-0 3 <3 <3 36 <3 10 194

Antimony 1,26 0 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.7 <0.2 <0.2 1.2

Arsenic 1,2

10 0 0.43 0.14 0.43 4.9 0.15 0.40 6.2

Barium 1,22,000 0 126 6.5 20.1 1,100 7.5 179 968

Beryllium 1,24 0 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02

Boron, 

filtered -- -- 39 5.8 19 350 1.3 165 907

Cadmium 1,25 0 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Chromium 1,2100 0 <0.21 <0.21 0.23 0.46 <0.21 <0.21 0.82

Cobalt -- -- 0.03 <0.02 0.03 0.61 <0.02 0.02 11.5

Copper 3

1,000 0 4.5 <0.70 7.6 52.5 <0.70 <0.81 20.5

Iron, filtered 2,3300 3 12 <3 4 7,620 <3 25 14,000

Iron 2,3300 8 132 <5 <5 7,700 <5 338 14,400

Lead 4

15 0 0.22 <0.04 0.41 1.14 <0.04 0.09 4.07

Lithium -- -- 8.5 0.3 6.1 91.2 3.2 60.0 989

Manganese, 

filtered

2

300

3

50

2 

4 13.7 <0.2 5.6 1,620 0.3 17.2 1,040

Manganese

2

300

3

50

2 

6 15.8 <0.4 9.8 1,670 0.4 19.6 995

Mercury 1,22 0 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005

Molybdenum -- -- 0.4 <0.1 0.3 5.1 0.1 0.6 8.4

Nickel -- -- 0.38 <0.12 0.38 2.4 <0.12 0.33 2.8

Selenium 1,250 0 0.10 <0.05 0.10 0.79 <0.05 0.11 19.8

Silver 2,3100 0 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.07 <0.01 <0.01 0.02

Strontium -- -- 769 54.9 229 2,910 78.1 1,410 23,400

Thallium 1,22 0 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06

Zinc 2,35,000 0 7.2 <2.4 8.5 22.3 <2.4 7.0 50.4

Uranium 1,230 0 0.224 0.026 0.224 1.15 <0.014 0.229 3.13

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level.

2 New York State Department of Health Maximum Contaminant Level.

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standard.

4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Treatment Technique.
17

Pesticides

Four pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected at trace concentrations in four samples 

from production wells finished in sand and gravel (appendix table 1–7); all were broadleaf herbicides or 

their degradates. The pesticide detected with the highest (and estimated) concentration (0.034 μg/L) was 

CIAT (2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine), a degradate of atrazine, which was detected in 

four samples. Atrazine was detected in two samples with a maximum concentration of 0.027 μg/L.

Prometon and simazine were detected in one sample each. One sample had detections of four pesticides, 

one sample had detections of two pesticides, and two samples had detections of one pesticide each, all 

from sand and gravel wells. No pesticide concentrations exceeded established drinking-water standards; 

pesticide degradates currently are not regulated.

Volatile Organic Compounds

VOCs were rarely detected in any of the 21 sampled wells. Three VOCs were detected in 

samples from two sand and gravel and two bedrock wells (appendix table 1–8). The VOCs detected are 

a trihalomethane (THM) and two solvents. THMs are byproducts that form when chlorine or bromine 

are used as disinfectants. Trichloromethane (chloroform) was detected in four samples with a maximum 

concentration of 4.5 μg/L in a sample from a bedrock well. The concentration of total THMs did not 

exceed the NYSDOH and USEPA MCLs of 80 μg/L. Tetrachloroethene (PERC), a solvent, was 

detected in a sample from a sand a gravel well with a concentration of 0.2 μg/L, which did not exceed 

the NYSDOH and USEPA MCLs of 5 μg/L. Toluene, another solvent, was detected in a sample from a 

bedrock well with a concentration of 0.1 μg/L, which did not exceed the NYSDOH MCL of 5 μg/L or 

the USEPA MCL of 1,000 μg/L.

Radionuclides

Gross alpha activity ranged from non-detectable levels to 5.5 picocuries per liter (pCi/L); the 

median activity was <2 pCi/L (table 9 and appendix table 1–9). The gross alpha activity did not exceed 

the NYSDOH and USEPA MCLs for gross alpha of 15 pCi/L in any sample. Gross beta activities 

ranged from non-detectable levels to 5.1 pCi/L. The USEPA and NYSDOH MCLs for gross beta are 4 

millirem per year, a dosage determination that requires knowledge of the specific radionuclide sources. 

The activity units (picocuries per liter) that were used to measure gross beta radioactivity in this study 

are not comparable to dosage units (millirems per year) without determination of the nuclide sources. 

Therefore, it is not possible to determine whether any of the samples exceeded the MCL for gross beta 

radioactivity. Radon-222 activities in the water samples ranged from 22 to 2,320 pCi/L; the median was 

141 pCi/L. The highest radon activity was in a sample from a bedrock well finished in sandstone, but 

the median radon activity in samples from sand and gravel wells (500 pCi/L) was higher than the 

median activity in samples from bedrock wells (93 pCi/L). Radon is currently (2013) not regulated in 

drinking water; however, the USEPA has proposed a two-part standard for radon in drinking water: (1) 

a 300 pCi/L MCL for areas that do not implement an indoor-air radon mitigation program and (2) an 

alternative MCL (AMCL) of 4,000 pCi/L for areas that do (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1999). Activities in 10 of the samples exceeded the proposed MCL, but none exceeded the proposed 

AMCL.
18

Table 9. Drinking-water standards and summary statistics for concentrations of radionuclides in groundwater 

samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [All activities in picocuries per liter in unfiltered water except as noted. mrem/yr, millirem per year; --, not applicable; <, less 

than]

Constituent

Summary statistics for radionuclide activities

Drinkingwater 

standard

Number of 

samples 

exceeding 

standard

Median

(all samples)

Sand and gravel aquifers Bedrock aquifers

(9 samples) (12 samples)

Minimum Median Maximum Minimum Median Maximum

Gross alpha 

radioactivity

1,215 0 <2 <0.33 <0.87 5.5 <0.92 1.4 4.9

Gross beta radioactivity

1,24

mrem/yr -- 1.6 <0.42 1.4 3.3 <0.62 2.8 5.1

Radon-222

3

300 4

4,000

10

0 141 46 500 710 22 93 2,320

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level.

2 New York State Department of Health Maximum Contaminant Level.

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Proposed Maximum Contaminant Level.

4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Proposed Alternative Maximum Contaminant Level.

Bacteria

Coliform bacteria were detected in five samples, all from bedrock wells (appendix table 1–10),

with a maximum of 92 colony-forming units (CFUs) per 100 mL. Coliform bacteria were detected in 

three of the four wells sampled that are finished in carbonate rocks. The NYSDOH and USEPA MCLs 

for total coliform bacteria are exceeded when 5 percent of samples of finished water collected in 1 

month test positive for total coliform (if 40 or more samples are collected per month) or when two 

samples test positive for total coliform (if fewer than 40 samples are collected per month). Fecal 

coliform bacteria were detected in one sample (1 CFU/100mL), and Escherichia coli (E. coli) were 

detected in one sample (2 CFU/100 mL). The heterotrophic plate count ranged from <1 CFU per mL to 

998 CFU per mL. The USEPA MCL for the heterotrophic plate count is 500 CFU/mL; this limit was 

exceeded in one sample from a sand and gravel well.

Well sampled in 2002, 2006, and 2011

Four of the wells sampled in 2011 (wells HE 622, MT 406, OE1460, and SA1501) were sampled 

previously in 2002 and 2006 as part of this study. Of the 148 constituents and physiochemical properties 

that samples were analyzed for in 2011, 140 were common to at least 2 years of analyses; the values for 

the physiochemical properties of the samples and the concentrations of nutrients, major ions, trace 

elements, radon-222, detected pesticides, pesticide degradates, and VOCs are presented in appendix 

tables 1-11 through 1-15. Differences between wells were often greater than differences between 

samples at a single well; however, well MT 406, a bedrock well, showed more variability than other 

wells. Five pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in the two of the wells sampled in 2002, 

2006, and 2011 (appendix table 1–14); more pesticides were detected in 2006 and 2011 than in 2002.

Seven VOCs were detected in three of the wells sampled in 2002, 2006, and 2011, including four 

THMs—methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), tetrachloroethene, and toluene. More VOCs were detected in 

2002 and 2006 than in 2011. Coliform bacteria were not detected in any of the four resampled wells 

(appendix table 1–15).
19

Summary 

Groundwater samples were collected during July 2011 from 21 wells in the Mohawk River 

Basin to characterize the groundwater quality. Sample collection and analysis followed standard USGS 

procedures and other documented procedures. Samples were analyzed for physical properties and 

concentrations of dissolved gases, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, pesticides, volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), radionuclides, and bacteria. Many of the 148 constituents analyzed for were not 

detected in any of the samples.

The depths of sand and gravel wells sampled in the Mohawk River Basin range from 28 to 395 ft 

below land surface; the bedrock wells are 120 to 815 ft deep and typically are completed in shale, 

sandstone, or carbonate bedrock. Ten of the 21 wells sampled are production wells; 11 are domestic 

wells. The samples generally indicated good water quality, although properties and concentrations of 

some constituents—color, pH, sodium, chloride, sulfate, dissolved solids, aluminum, iron, manganese, 

radon-222, and bacteria—equaled or exceeded primary, secondary, or proposed drinking-water 

standards. The constituents most frequently detected in concentrations exceeding drinking-water 

standards were radon-222 (10 samples had concentrations equal to or greater than the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 300 

picocuries per liter (pCi/L)), sodium (9 samples had concentrations greater than the USEPA Drinking 

Water Taste Advisory of 60 milligrams per liter (mg/L)), iron (8 unfiltered samples had concentrations 

greater than the New York State Department of Health MCL and USEPA secondary drinking-water 

standard (SDWS) of 300 micrograms per liter (μg/L)), dissolved solids (7 samples had concentrations 

greater than the USEPA SDWS of 500 mg/L), manganese (6 unfiltered samples had concentrations 

greater than the USEPA SDWS of 50 μg/L), and coliform bacteria (5 samples had detections).

Sample pH was typically near neutral or slightly basic. Methane was detected in 15 of the 21 

samples; 2 samples had methane concentrations greater than 28 mg/L. The water typically was very 

hard, and the median dissolved solids concentration was 436 mg/L. The ions detected in the highest 

median concentrations were bicarbonate, chloride, calcium, and sodium. The dominant nutrient was 

nitrate; concentrations of nitrate and nitrite did not exceed established drinking-water standards.

Strontium was the trace element with the highest median concentrations; some samples had moderately 

high (greater than 10,000 μg/L) concentrations of strontium or iron. Four pesticides and pesticide 

degradates were detected in four samples from sand and gravel wells; all were trace-level detections of 

broadleaf herbicides or their degradates. Three VOCs were detected in four samples, including

chloroform, tetrachloroethene, and toluene. Radon-222 activities in 10 samples exceeded a proposed 

MCL, but none exceeded the proposed AMCL. Coliform bacteria were detected in five samples. Fecal 

coliform and Escherichia coli bacteria were detected in one sample each.

References Cited 

American Public Health Association, 1998, Standard methods for the examination of water and 

wastewater (20th ed.): Washington, D.C., American Public Health Association, American Water 

Works Association, and Water Environment Federation [variously paged].

ASTM International, 2006, D5072-98(2006), Standard test method for radon in drinking water: ASTM 

International, accessed December 28, 2006, at http://www.astm.org.

Butch, G.K., Murray, P.M., Hebert, G.J., and Weigel, J.F., 2003, Water resources data, New York, 

water year 2002: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report NY-02-1, p. 502–520.

Cadwell, D.H., 1991, Surficial geologic map of New York: New York State Museum Map and Chart 

Series no. 40, Lower Hudson sheet, scale 1:250,000.
20

Childress, C.J.O., Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., and Maloney, T.J., 1999, New reporting procedures 

based on long-term method detection levels and some considerations for interpretations of waterquality data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–193, 19 p.

Connor, B.F., Rose, D.L., Noriega, M.C., Murtagh, L.K., and Abney, S.R., 1998, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of 86 volatile 

organic compounds in water by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, including detections less 

than reporting limits: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97–829, 78 p., accessed December 9, 

2011, at http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/rpt.shtml?OFR-97-829.

Eckhardt, D.A., Reddy, J.E., and Shaw, S.B., 2009, Groundwater quality in central New York, 2007:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009–1257, 40 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1257/.

Eckhardt, D.A., Reddy, J.E., and Tamulonis, K.L., 2007, Ground-water quality in the Genesee River 

Basin, New York, 2005–06: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1093, 26 p., accessed 

August 15, 2011, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1093/.

Eckhardt, D.A., Reddy, J.E., and Tamulonis, K.L., 2008, Ground-water quality in western New York, 

2006: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1140, 36 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1140/.

Eltschlager, K.K., Hawkins, J.W., Ehler, W.C., and Baldassare, F.B., 2001, Technical measures for the 

investigation and mitigation of fugitive methane hazards in areas of coal mining: Pittsburgh, Pa., U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 124 p.

Fisher, D.W., Isachsen, Y.W., and Rickard, L.V., 1970, Geologic map of New York State: New York 

State Museum Map and Chart Series no. 15, Lower Hudson sheet, scale 1:250,000.

Fishman, M.J., ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 93–125, 217 p., December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1993/0125/report.pdf.

Furlong, E.T., Anderson, B.D., Werner, S.L., Soliven, P.P., Coffey, L.J., and Burkhardt, M.R., 2001, 

Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

Determination of pesticides in water by graphitized carbon-based solid-phase extraction and highperformance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 01–4134, 73 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at http://nwql.usgs.gov/WRIR-01-

4134.shtml.

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

Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of organic plus inorganic mercury in filtered and unfiltered 

natural water with cold vapor-atomic fluorescence spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 01–4132, 16 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://nwql.usgs.gov/WRIR-01-4132.shtml.

Garbarino, J.R., Kanagy, L.K., and Cree, M.E., 2006, Determination of elements in natural-water, biota, 

sediment and soil samples using collision/reaction cell inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 5, chap. B1, 88 p., accessed 

December 9, 2011, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2006/tm5b1/.

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

Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of elements in whole-water digests using inductively 

coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry:
21

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 98–165, 101 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://nwql.usgs.gov/OFR-98-165.shtml.

Hammond, D.S., Heath, R.C., and Waller, R.M., 1978, Ground-water data on the Hudson River Basin, 

New York: U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report 78-710, 18 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1978/0710/report.pdf.

Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural water (3d ed.): U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254, 264 p.

Hetcher-Aguila, K.K., 2005, Ground-water quality in the Chemung River Basin, New York, 2003: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004–1329, 19 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://ny.water.usgs.gov/pubs/of/of041329/.

Hetcher-Aguila, K.K., and Eckhardt, D.A., 2006, Ground-water quality in the upper Susquehanna River 

Basin, New York, 2004: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006–1161, 21 p., accessed 

August 15, 2011, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1161/.

Hoffman, G.L., Fishman, M.J., and Garbarino, J.R., 1996, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—In-bottle acid digestion of whole-water samples: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 96–225, 28 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1996/0225/report.pdf.

Isachsen, Y.W., Landing, E., Lauber, J.M., Rickard, L.V., and Rogers, W.B., eds., 2000, Geology of 

New York—A simplified account (2d ed.): Albany, N.Y., New York State Museum/Geological 

Survey, 294 p. 

Kenny, J.F., Barber, N.L., Hutson, S.S., Linsey, K.S., Lovelace, J.K., and Maupin, M.A., 2009, 

Estimated use of water in the United States in 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1344, 52 p.

New York State Department of Health, 2011, New York State Health Department public water systems 

regulations: Albany, N.Y. [variously paged], accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://www.health.ny.gov/regulations/nycrr/title_10/part_5/subpart_5-1_tables.htm.

Nystrom, E.A., 2006, Ground-water quality in the Lake Champlain Basin, New York, 2004: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006–1088, 22 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1088/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2007a, Ground-water quality in the St. Lawrence River Basin, New York, 2005–06:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1066, 33 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1066/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2007b, Ground-water quality in the Delaware River Basin, New York, 2001 & 2005–06:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1098, 36 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1098/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2008, Ground-water quality in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2006: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1086, 33 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1086/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2009, Groundwater quality in the Upper Hudson River Basin, New York, 2007: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009–1240, 37 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1240/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2010, Groundwater quality in the Lower Hudson River Basin, New York, 2008: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–1197, 39 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1197/.

Nystrom, E.A., 2011, Groundwater quality in the Lake Champlain Basin, New York, 2009: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1180, 42 p., accessed August15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1180/.
22

Nystrom, E.A., 2012, Groundwater quality in the Delaware and St. Lawrence River Basins, New York, 

2010: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1320, 58 p., accessed January 17, 2012, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1320/.

Patton, C.J., and Truitt, E.P., 2000, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water 

Quality Laboratory—Determination of ammonium plus organic nitrogen by a Kjeldahl digestion 

method and an automated photometric finish that includes digest cleanup by gas diffusion: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 00–170, 31 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/0170/report.pdf.

Reddy, J.E., and Risen, A.J., 2012, Groundwater quality in the Upper Susquehanna River Basin, 2009:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1045, 30 p., accessed April 11, 2012, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1045/.

Reddy, J.E., 2012, Groundwater quality in the Genesee River Basin, 2010: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2012–1135, 29 p., accessed August 7, 2012, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1135/.

Reynolds, 1990, Availability of ground water from unconsolidated deposits in the Mohawk River basin, 

New York: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4091, 9 plates.

Risen, A.J., and Reddy, J.E., 2011a, Groundwater quality in the Chemung River Basin, 2008: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1112, 25 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1112/.

Risen, A.J., and Reddy, J.E., 2011b, Groundwater quality in the Eastern Lake Ontario Basin New York, 

2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1074, 32 p., accessed August 15, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1074/.

Sandstrom, M.W., Stroppel, M.E., Foreman, W.T., and Schroeder, M.P., 2001, Methods of analysis by 

the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of moderate-use 

pesticides and selected degradates in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction and gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

01–4098, 70 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/WRIR-01-4098.shtml.

Struzeski, T.M., DeGiacomo, W.J., and Zayhowski, E.J., 1996, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of dissolved aluminum and 

boron in water by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 96–149, 17 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1996/0149/report.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980, Prescribed procedures for measurement of radioactivity 

in drinking water: EPA 600/4-80-032, accessed March 16, 2010, at 

http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/cwa/bioindicators/upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_900_0.

pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997, Guidelines for preparation of the comprehensive state 

water quality assessments (305(b) Reports) and electronic updates: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 841-B-97-002A and EPA 841-B-97-002B, 

PL95-217, 271 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Proposed radon in drinking water rule: Washington, 

D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 815-F-99-006, 6 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009, National primary drinking water standards and national 

secondary drinking water standards: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, EPA 816-F-09-0004, 6 p., accessed March 25, 2009, at 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/consumer/pdf/mcl.pdf.
23

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data:

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resource Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1–A9 

[variously paged].

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Collection of water samples (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, September, accessed March 4, 

2010, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A4/.

Vogelmann, J.E., Howard, S.M., Yang, L., Larson, C.R., Wylie, B.K., and Van Driel, J.N., 2001, 

Completion of the 1990’s National Land Cover Data Set for the conterminous United States:

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, v. 67, p. 650–662.

Wilde, F.D., ed., 2004, Cleaning of equipment for water sampling (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A3, April, accessed March 4, 2010, at 

http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A3/.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 2004 with updates through 2009, 

Processing of water samples (version 2.2): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, April, accessed March 4, 2010, at 

http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/.

Zaugg, S.D., Sandstrom, M.W., Smith, S.G., and Fehlberg, K.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of pesticides in water by C-18 

solid-phase extraction and capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with selected-ion 

monitoring: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95–181, 60 p., accessed December 9, 2011, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1995/0181/report.pdf.
24

Appendix: Results of Water-Sample Analyses

The following tables summarize results of the chemical analyses of the 21 samples collected in 

the Mohawk River Basin in New York during July 2011. 

Table 1–1. Constituents that were not detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. ...................................................................................................................................................... 25

Table 1–2. Physiochemical properties of groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. ......................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 1–3. Concentrations of dissolved gases in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. ...................................................................................................................................................... 27

Table 1–4. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011. ......................................................................................................................................................... 28

Table 1–5. Concentrations of nutrients and organic carbon in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk 

River Basin, New York, 2011................................................................................................................................... 30

Table 1–6. Concentrations of trace elements in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. ...................................................................................................................................................... 31

Table 1–7. Concentrations of pesticides detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, 

New York, 2011. ...................................................................................................................................................... 34

Table 1–8. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples collected in the 

Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011..................................................................................................................... 35

Table 1–9. Activities of radionuclides in groundwater samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011...

......................................................................................................................................................... 36

Table 1–10. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011............... 37

Table 1–11. Physiochemical properties and concentrations of nutrients in groundwater samples collected in the 

Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011.......................................................................................... 38

Table 1–12. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2002, 2006, and 2011..................................................................................................................................... 39

Table 1–13. Concentrations of trace elements and radionuclides in groundwater samples in the Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011. ................................................................................................................ 40

Table 1–14. Concentrations of pesticides and of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples 

collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011. ................................................................ 42

Table 1–15. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2006 and 2011. ..

......................................................................................................................................................... 43
25

Table 1-1. Constituents that were not detected in groundwater samples collected from 21 wells in the Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2011. [NWIS, National Water Information System]

U.S. Geological 

Survey NWIS 

parameter code Constituent

Laboratory 

reporting 

level

Trace elements in unfiltered water, in micrograms per liter

01027 Cadmium 0.05

71900 Mercury 0.005

01059 Thallium 0.06

Pesticides in filtered water, in micrograms per liter

82660 2,6-Diethylaniline 0.006 

49260 Acetochlor 0.010 

46342 Alachlor 0.008 

34253 alpha-HCH 0.004 

82686 Azinphos-methyl 0.120 

82673 Benfluralin 0.014 

04028 Butylate 0.004 

82680 Carbaryl 0.060 

82674 Carbofuran 0.060 

38933 Chlorpyrifos 0.004 

82687 cis-Permethrin 0.010 

04041 Cyanazine 0.022 

82682 DCPA 0.008 

62170 Desulfinylfipronil 0.012 

39572 Diazinon 0.006 

39381 Dieldrin 0.008 

82677 Disulfoton 0.04 

82668 EPTC 0.006 

82663 Ethalfluralin 0.006 

82672 Ethoprop 0.016 

62169 Desulfinylfipronil 

amide 0.029 

62167 Fipronil sulfide 0.012 

62168 Fipronil sulfone 0.024 

62166 Fipronil 0.018 

04095 Fonofos 0.005 

39341 Lindane 0.004 

82666 Linuron 0.060 

39532 Malathion 0.016 

82667 Methyl parathion 0.008 

39415 Metolachlor 0.020 

82630 Metribuzin 0.012 

82671 Molinate 0.004 

82684 Napropamide 0.008 

34653 p,p'-DDE 0.002 

39542 Parathion 0.020 

82669 Pebulate 0.016 

82683 Pendimethalin 0.012 

82664 Phorate 0.020 

U.S. Geological 

Survey NWIS 

parameter code Constituent

Laboratory 

reporting 

level

Pesticides in filtered water, in micrograms per liter--continued

82676 Propyzamide 0.004

04024 Propachlor 0.006

82679 Propanil 0.010 

82685 Propargite 0.02 

82670 Tebuthiuron 0.03 

82665 Terbacil 0.024 

82675 Terbufos 0.02 

82681 Thiobencarb 0.016 

82678 Triallate 0.005 

82661 Trifluralin 0.018 

Volatile organic compounds in unfiltered water,

in micrograms per liter

34506 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.1 

77652 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-

trifluoroethane 0.1 

34496 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.1 

34501 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.1 

34536 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.1 

32103 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.2 

34541 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.1 

34566 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.1 

34571 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.1 

34030 Benzene 0.1 

32101 Bromodichloromethane 0.1 

32104 Tribromomethane 0.2 

34301 Chlorobenzene 0.1 

77093 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.1 

32105 Dibromochloromethane 0.2 

34668 Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.2 

34423 Dichloromethane 0.2 

81576 Diethyl ether 0.2 

81577 Diisopropyl ether 0.2 

34371 Ethylbenzene 0.1 

50005 Methyl tert-pentyl ether 0.2 

85795 m-Xylene plus p-xylene 0.2 

77135 o-Xylene 0.1 

77128 Styrene 0.1 

50004 tert-Butyl ethyl ether 0.1 

78032 Methyl tert-butyl ether 0.2 

32102 Tetrachloromethane 0.2 

34546 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.1 

39180 Trichloroethene 0.1 

34488 Trichlorofluoromethane 0.2 

39175 Vinyl chloride 0.2 
26

Table 1-2. Physiochemical properties of groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011.

[μS/cm @ 25°C, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; (00080), U.S. Geological Survey National Water 

Information System parameter code; <, less than; U, not detected; M, detected but not quantified. Bold values exceed one or 

more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Color, 

platinum-cobalt 

units

(00080)

pH, 

field,

standard units

(00400)

Specific 

conductance, 

field,

μS/cm @ 25°C

(00095)

Water 

temperature, 

field,

degrees Celsius

(00010)

Hydrogen 

sulfide odor

field

(71875)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 <1 7.3 874 11.4 U

HE1929 <1 8.0 207 9.6 U

OE1460 <1 7.2 923 13.6 U

OE1468 <1 7.3 835 9.6 U

SA1501 <1 7.3 353 11.7 U

SA2259 <1 7.2 480 15.2 U

SN1366 5 7.6 1,470 13.3 M

SO 605 <1 6.8 194 11.5 U

SO 814 <1 7.6 1,100 10.6 U

Bedrock wells

A667 <1 7.6 590 13.6 M

FU1611 175 6.5 286 11.5 U

G 837 <1 8.9 309 9.6 M

HE1459 <1 7.3 510 10.7 U

HE1480 <1 8.0 526 11.7 M

MT 406 <1 7.5 961 10.3 M

OE2876 2 8.2 1,260 14.4 M

SA2806 8 7.7 453 15.7 M

SN1131 10 7.5 773 16.0 U

SO1037 <1 8.1 308 11.4 U

SO1487 <1 7.5 542 13.1 U

SO1658 <1 7.5 1,450 9.4 U

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
27

Table 1-3. Concentrations of dissolved gases in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011.

[mg/L, milligrams per liter; (00300), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; <, less 

than. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Dissolved

oxygen, 

field,

mg/L

(00300)

Carbon

dioxide,

laboratory,

mg/L

(00405)

Argon,

laboratory,

mg/L

(82043)

Dissolved nitrogen 

gas,

laboratory,

mg/L

(00597)

Methane,

laboratory,

mg/L

(85574)

Bottle 1 Bottle 2 Bottle 1 Bottle 2 Bottle 1 Bottle 2 Bottle 1 Bottle 2

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 4.3 19.6 19.6 0.6990 0.7008 19.06 19.04 <0.001 <0.001

HE1929 6.8 1.7 1.8 0.7332 0.7330 19.63 19.52 0.0013 0.0015

OE1460 5.4 37.8 37.7 0.6949 0.6927 18.36 18.19 0.0088 0.0084

OE1468 4.3 24.9 25.0 0.7348 0.7384 22.00 22.18 <0.001 <0.001

SA1501 3.9 22.2 21.9 0.7033 0.7019 19.87 19.83 0.143 0.067

SA2259 1.6 23.8 23.3 0.7728 0.7859 23.57 24.24 <0.001 <0.001

SN1366 0.2 20.4 19.9 1.171 1.164 39.85 39.49 0.0030 0.0028

SO 605 0.5 17.5 17.5 0.6101 0.6179 16.66 16.95 <0.001 <0.001

SO 814 <0.3 16.4 16.7 0.7598 0.7619 23.35 23.39 0.013 0.013

Bedrock wells

A667 <0.3 13.9 14.0 0.7407 0.7497 18.81 19.32 35.6 38.3

FU1611 <0.3 47.1 47.0 0.8120 0.8097 23.05 22.95 0.632 0.631

G 837 <0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9605 0.9661 30.22 30.21 8.33 8.25

HE1459 1.0 15.9 16.0 0.7510 0.7443 21.43 21.29 <0.001 0.0014

HE1480 <0.3 6.2 6.2 0.8858 0.8960 26.05 26.48 5.10 5.11

MT 406 <0.3 36.3 35.8 0.9487 0.9521 33.37 33.62 0.021 0.019

OE2876 <0.3 1.7 3.0 0.6700 0.6571 16.81 16.16 42.0 44.3

SA2806 <0.3 9.3 9.3 0.6392 0.6387 17.39 17.51 23.7 24.2

SN1131 <0.3 15.4 15.7 0.8202 0.8256 23.53 23.72 0.515 0.510

SO1037 <0.3 2.6 2.6 0.8148 0.8057 24.69 24.32 0.054 0.052

SO1487 <0.3 17.1 16.9 0.8077 0.8051 23.67 23.65 <0.001 <0.001

SO1658 2.2 29.3 29.8 0.7544 0.7549 21.10 20.98 <0.001 <0.001

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
28

Table 1-4. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011. [mg/L, milligrams per liter; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; (00900), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System 

parameter code; <, less than; °C; degrees Celsius. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations 

are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Hardness, 

filtered, 

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(00900)

Calcium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00915)

Magnesium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00925)

Potassium,

filtered, 

mg/L

(00935)

Sodium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00930)

Acid 

neutralizing 

capacity, 

unfiltered, 

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(90410)

Alkalinity, 

filtered,

incremental 

titration,

field, 

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(39086)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 284 87.6 15.9 3.40 68.7 226 212

HE1929 103 27.1 8.57 0.47 2.51 105 94

OE1460 357 98.0 27.4 1.92 56.6 247 269

OE1468 347 97.8 25.1 1.46 40.0 240 230

SA1501 204 63.6 11.0 2.02 15.2 176 160

SA2259 301 73.8 28.3 0.89 10.1 205 243

SN1366 520 119 53.8 2.14 150 347 289

SO 605 72.5 24.2 2.91 0.83 9.91 65 48

SO 814 386 120 21.1 1.02 64.6 241 211

Bedrock wells

A667 198 41.1 23.0 2.17 94.7 268 243

FU1611 79.6 27.2 2.82 1.01 11.7 80 78

G 837 21.0 7.14 0.781 0.29 88.5 122 107

HE1459 260 85.6 11.3 1.28 40.6 130 169

HE1480 75.2 17.9 7.44 6.68 89.0 275 157

MT 406 385 113 25.0 4.10 53.3 294 255

OE2876 96.6 18.9 12.0 5.08 273 172 159

SA2806 160 36.7 16.6 4.40 57.9 264 224

SN1131 315 63.8 37.7 1.91 81.5 274 251

SO1037 53.0 15.2 3.63 0.59 50.4 147 126

SO1487 193 45.9 19.0 3.04 43.3 255 223

SO1658 636 214 24.7 1.19 70.7 264 221

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
29

Table1-4. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011—Continued

[mg/L, milligrams per liter; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; (00900), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System 

parameter code; <, less than; °C; degrees Celsius. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations 

are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Bicarbonate, 

filtered, 

incremental 

titration,

field,

mg/L

(00453)

Chloride, 

filtered,

mg/L

(00940)

Fluoride, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00950)

Silica, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00955)

Sulfate,

filtered, 

mg/L

(00945)

Dissolved 

solids,

dried at 180oC, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(70300)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 258 112 0.06 7.34 33.2 500

HE1929 114 3.01 <0.04 6.08 5.01 133

OE1460 327 101 0.05 6.11 18.0 507

OE1468 279 89.5 <0.04 7.57 32.1 473

SA1501 194 24.6 0.20 13.0 16.1 302

SA2259 295 21.5 0.05 11.5 32.4 351

SN1366 352 9.83 0.55 13.3 453 1,090

SO 605 59 13.1 0.43 5.10 12.2 125

SO 814 257 188 0.06 13.5 31.9 764

Bedrock wells

A667 295 92.1 0.53 8.94 18.1 444

FU1611 95 17.8 0.26 13.0 9.15 170

G 837 127 64.9 0.48 7.45 4.36 230

HE1459 205 97.2 0.20 17.1 19.4 436

HE1480 190 10.4 0.79 9.50 1.31 305

MT 406 310 89.0 0.32 7.38 79.8 577

OE2876 191 393 1.55 7.78 4.81 843

SA2806 272 19.9 0.37 13.1 14.0 314

SN1131 305 112 0.60 17.5 35.4 540

SO1037 153 7.63 0.36 8.81 11.4 186

SO1487 272 13.3 0.53 10.9 19.2 319

SO1658 270 110 0.36 8.70 388 1,040

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
30

Table 1-5. Concentrations of nutrients and organic carbon in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River 

Basin, New York, 2011. [N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; mg/L, milligrams per liter; (00623), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information 

System parameter code; <, less than. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Ammonia 

plus 

organic-N, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00623)

Ammonia, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00608)

Nitrate plus 

nitrite, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00631)

Nitrate, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00618)

Nitrite, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00613)

Orthophosphate, 

filtered,

mg/L as P

(00671)

Organic 

carbon, 

unfiltered, 

mg/L

(00680)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 0.07 <0.010 2.38 2.38 <0.001 0.007 0.6

HE1929 <0.05 <0.010 0.28 0.281 0.001 0.006 0.4

OE1460 <0.05 <0.010 2.41 2.41 <0.001 0.005 0.7

OE1468 <0.05 <0.010 2.39 2.39 <0.001 0.007 <0.3

SA1501 0.25 0.164 0.04 0.038 <0.001 0.011 2.2

SA2259 0.07 <0.010 3.48 3.48 <0.001 0.012 1.4

SN1366 0.84 0.715 <0.02 <0.016 0.004 0.011 0.4

SO 605 <0.05 <0.010 0.46 0.456 0.001 0.007 1.0

SO 814 0.15 0.100 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.022 0.7

Bedrock wells

A667 1.5 1.29 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.155 0.6

FU1611 0.80 0.556 <0.02 <0.013 0.007 0.007 11.3

G 837 0.05 0.059 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.033 0.5

HE1459 <0.05 <0.010 0.55 0.550 0.002 0.011 0.8

HE1480 2.4 2.07 <0.02 <0.019 0.001 0.010 0.3

MT 406 0.44 0.339 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.008 1.4

OE2876 1.7 1.61 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.011 <0.3

SA2806 0.70 0.612 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.036 0.9

SN1131 0.29 0.243 <0.02 <0.020 <0.001 0.014 1.1

SO1037 <0.05 <0.010 0.05 0.049 <0.001 0.016 <0.3

SO1487 1.2 0.990 0.48 0.477 <0.001 0.008 <0.3

SO1658 0.23 0.011 0.16 0.136 0.020 0.007 1.0

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
31

Table 1-6. Concentrations of trace elements in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011. [μg/L, micrograms per liter; (01105), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; <, less 

than. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Aluminum,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01105)

Antimony,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01097)

Arsenic,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01002)

Barium, 

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01007)

Beryllium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01012)

Boron,

filtered,

μg/L

(01020)

Chromium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01034)

Cobalt, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01037)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 <3 <0.2 1.0 206 <0.02 25 0.29 0.02

HE1929 14 <0.2 0.14 6.5 <0.02 5.8 <0.21 0.02

OE1460 <3 <0.2 0.37 85.7 <0.02 19 <0.21 0.05

OE1468 <3 <0.2 0.45 205 <0.02 16 <0.21 0.03

SA1501 <3 <0.2 0.43 20.1 <0.02 22 0.46 0.61

SA2259 36 <0.2 0.42 12.2 <0.02 11 0.29 0.31

SN1366 <3 <0.2 2.6 11.0 <0.02 350 0.38 0.10

SO 605 <3 <0.2 0.16 18.4 <0.02 11 <0.21 <0.02

SO 814 <3 0.7 4.9 1,100 <0.02 39 0.23 0.02

Bedrock wells

A667 18 <0.2 0.25 968 <0.02 376 0.32 <0.02

FU1611 80 <0.2 0.18 7.5 <0.02 1.3 0.48 11.5

G 837 7 <0.2 6.2 157 <0.02 99 0.29 <0.02

HE1459 5 <0.2 0.34 48.5 <0.02 28 <0.21 0.02

HE1480 124 0.7 0.15 245 0.02 907 <0.21 0.07

MT 406 <3 <0.2 0.80 126 <0.02 121 <0.21 0.03

OE2876 13 0.4 0.47 535 <0.02 564 <0.21 <0.02

SA2806 194 <0.2 0.26 694 <0.02 170 0.82 0.05

SN1131 3 <0.2 4.0 110 <0.02 160 <0.21 0.14

SO1037 16 <0.2 4.0 22.0 <0.02 188 <0.21 0.02

SO1487 <3 <0.2 0.23 201 <0.02 319 <0.21 0.02

SO1658 <3 1.2 0.79 215 <0.02 27 0.55 0.05

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
32

Table1-6. Concentrations of trace elements in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011—Continued

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; (01105), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; <, less 

than. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Copper,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01042)

Iron,

filtered,

μg/L

(01046)

Iron,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01045)

Lead,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01051)

Lithium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01132)

Manganese,

filtered,

μg/L

(01056)

Manganese,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01055)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 7.7 <3 <5 0.41 6.1 0.4 0.5

HE1929 6.1 6 738 1.14 0.3 5.6 9.8

OE1460 9.6 4 <5 0.16 7.6 0.4 0.5

OE1468 7.6 <3 <5 0.58 6.7 <0.2 <0.4

SA1501 1.7 3 <5 1.11 4.3 1,620 1,670

SA2259 52.5 12 111 0.49 0.8 13.7 15.3

SN1366 <0.70 7,620 7,700 <0.04 91.2 268 282

SO 605 4.5 <3 <5 0.09 0.5 <0.2 <0.4

SO 814 11.5 175 195 0.23 75.8 232 246

Bedrock wells

A667 <0.70 31 487 0.04 360 33.4 35.6

FU1611 20.5 14,000 14,400 4.07 3.6 1,040 995

G 837 <0.70 6 22 0.06 40.3 27.4 29.5

HE1459 5.5 11 78 0.25 7.2 0.3 0.4

HE1480 0.81 43 237 0.08 353 13.3 15.8

MT 406 <0.70 102 132 <0.04 10.9 17.1 19.1

OE2876 5.5 271 440 <0.04 989 7.7 9.1

SA2806 <0.70 19 684 0.10 79.7 45.0 50.5

SN1131 5.7 1,340 1,410 0.35 91.2 45.2 50.5

SO1037 2.7 17 458 0.33 8.5 17.2 20.2

SO1487 <0.70 <3 <5 0.22 118 4.5 5.0

SO1658 <0.70 9 24 <0.04 3.2 0.5 0.9

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
33

Table1-6. Concentrations of trace elements in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2011—Continued

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; (01105), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; <, less 

than. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Molybdenum, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01062)

Nickel, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01067)

Selenium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01147)

Silver, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01077)

Strontium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01082)

Zinc, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01092)

Uranium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(28011)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 0.1 0.21 0.79 <0.01 618 <2.4 0.208

HE1929 0.1 <0.12 <0.05 <0.01 79.1 <2.4 0.073

OE1460 <0.1 0.44 0.09 0.07 229 8.5 0.137

OE1468 0.3 0.60 0.12 <0.01 169 15.2 0.423

SA1501 1.2 2.4 0.12 <0.01 235 <2.4 0.224

SA2259 0.3 2.0 0.12 <0.01 205 22.3 0.717

SN1366 5.1 0.12 <0.05 <0.01 2,910 <2.4 1.15

SO 605 0.1 0.18 0.10 <0.01 54.9 11.5 0.026

SO 814 0.6 0.38 <0.05 <0.01 1,330 15.0 0.533

Bedrock wells

A667 0.1 0.49 9.1 <0.01 4,280 50.4 <0.014

FU1611 0.2 2.8 0.25 <0.01 78.1 6.7 0.074

G 837 1.8 <0.12 3.6 <0.01 152 22.1 <0.014

HE1459 0.4 0.24 0.06 <0.01 824 11.7 0.257

HE1480 0.1 0.22 <0.05 <0.01 1,460 <2.4 0.032

MT 406 2.8 0.50 0.08 <0.01 1,810 10.7 1.48

OE2876 5.9 <0.12 0.05 <0.01 2,730 <2.4 0.165

SA2806 0.2 0.81 19.8 <0.01 1,360 <2.4 0.201

SN1131 7.7 0.42 0.08 <0.01 769 7.2 0.874

SO1037 8.4 <0.12 0.20 <0.01 111 <2.4 3.13

SO1487 0.6 0.18 0.12 <0.01 3,700 <2.4 0.279

SO1658 0.6 0.80 0.10 0.02 23,400 23.0 0.643

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
34

Table 1-7. Concentrations of pesticides detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New 

York, 2011. [μg/L, micrograms per liter; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; (04040), U.S. Geological Survey 

National Water Information System parameter code; <, less than; E, estimated concentration; M, presence verified but not 

quantified. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

CIAT, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(04040)

Atrazine, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(39632)

Prometon,

filtered,

μg/L

(04037)

Simazine,

filtered, 

μg/L

(04035)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 E0.001 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

HE1929 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

OE1460 E0.034 0.027 M 0.002

OE1468 E0.005 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SA1501 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SA2259 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SN1366 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SO 605 E0.005 0.003 <0.01 <0.006

SO 814 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

Bedrock wells

A667 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

FU1611 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

G 837 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

HE1459 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

HE1480 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

MT 406 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

OE2876 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SA2806 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SN1131 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SO1037 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SO1487 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

SO1658 <0.006 <0.008 <0.01 <0.006

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
35

Table 1-8. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk 

River Basin, New York, 2011. [μg/L, micrograms per liter; (34475), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; <, less 

than. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Tetrachloroethene,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(34475)

Toluene,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(34010)

Trichloromethane, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(32106)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

HE1929 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

OE1460 0.2 <0.1 0.1

OE1468 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SA1501 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SA2259 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SN1366 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SO 605 <0.1 <0.1 0.2

SO 814 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Bedrock wells

A667 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

FU1611 <0.1 0.1 4.5

G 837 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

HE1459 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

HE1480 <0.1 <0.1 0.2

MT 406 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

OE2876 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SA2806 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SN1131 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SO1037 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SO1487 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

SO1658 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
36

Table 1-9. Activities of radionuclides in groundwater samples from the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [pCi/L, picocuries per liter; (01519), USGS National Water Information System parameter code; <, less than. Bold values 

equal or exceed one or more existing or proposed drinking-water standard. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Gross alpha 

radioactivity,

unfiltered,

pCi/L

(01519)

Gross beta 

radioactivity,

unfiltered,

pCi/L

(85817)

Radon-222,

unfiltered,

pCi/L

(82303)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 <1.5 3.3 470

HE1929 <0.33 <0.42 126

OE1460 <0.87 1.6 560

OE1468 <1.4 1.6 510

SA1501 <0.75 1.3 500

SA2259 <0.83 0.7 670

SN1366 5.5 2.0 400

SO 605 <0.42 0.6 710

SO 814 2.0 1.4 46

Bedrock wells

A667 4.6 4.8 115

FU1611 1.2 0.8 80

G 837 1.5 <0.62 300

HE1459 <0.95 1.0 141

HE1480 <0.92 5.1 22

MT 406 <2 4.0 106

OE2876 3.2 4.3 42

SA2806 2.1 4.5 47

SN1131 <1.4 2.5 74

SO1037 4.9 3.0 2,320

SO1487 1.2 2.7 35

SO1658 2.7 <1.3 300

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
37

Table 1-10. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011. [CFU, colony-forming unit; mL, milliliter; (31691), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter 

code; <, less than. Bold values indicate detections of coliform bacteria. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1

Escherichia 

coli, 

defined 

substrate,

unfiltered,

CFU/100mL

(31691)

Fecal 

coliform, 

membrane 

filtration,

unfiltered,

CFU/100mL

(61215)

Heterotrophic 

plate count, 

unfiltered,

CFU/mL

(31692)

Total 

coliform, 

membrane 

filtration,

unfiltered,

CFU/100mL

(61213)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622 <2 <1 <1 <1

HE1929 <2 <1 998 <1

OE1460 <2 <1 1 <1

OE1468 <2 <1 <1 <1

SA1501 <2 <1 <1 <1

SA2259 <2 <1 90 <1

SN1366 <2 <1 3 <1

SO 605 <2 <1 2 <1

SO 814 <2 <1 2 <1

Bedrock wells

A667 <2 <1 4 <1

FU1611 <2 <1 130 <1

G 837 <2 <1 <1 <1

HE1459 <2 <1 50 54

HE1480 <2 <1 209 <1

MT 406 <2 <1 2 <1

OE2876 <2 <1 7 21

SA2806 <2 <1 8 <1

SN1131 <2 <1 76 92

SO1037 <2 1 12 67

SO1487 <2 <1 14 <1

SO1658 2 <1 <1 1

1 A, Albany County; FU, Fulton County; G, Greene County; HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida 

County; SA, Saratoga County; SN, Schenectady County; SO, Schoharie County.
38

Table 1-11. Physiochemical property values and concentrations of nutrients in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, 

and 2011. [(00080), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; N, 

nitrogen; P, phosphorus; <, less than; E, estimated concentration; --, not analyzed. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 

and 3]

Well 

number1 Year Month

Color,

platinumcobalt 

units

(00080)

Dissolved

oxygen, 

mg/L

(00300)

pH, 

field,

standard 

units

(00400)

Specific 

conductance, 

field,

μS/cm

(00095)

Water 

temperature, 

field,

degrees 

Celsius

(00010)

Ammonia 

plus 

organic-N, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00623)

Ammonia, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00608)

Nitrate plus 

nitrite, 

filtered,

mg/L as N

(00631)

Nitrite, 

filtered, 

mg/L as N

(00613)

Orthophosphate, 

filtered,

mg/L as P

(00671)

Organic 

carbon, 

unfiltered, 

mg/L

(00680)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622

2002 September -- 4.3 7.6 880 12.3 <0.10 <0.04 2.53 <0.008 <0.02 E0.5

2006 September 2 7.9 7.2 1,040 9.9 E0.08 <0.010 2.60 <0.002 E0.004 1.0

2011 July <1 4.3 7.3 874 11.4 0.07 <0.010 2.38 <0.001 0.007 0.6

OE1460

2002 September -- 4.8 7.6 941 13.5 <0.10 <0.04 2.00 <0.008 <0.02 2.6

2006 September 2 5.6 7.1 910 13.6 <0.10 E0.006 2.04 <0.002 E0.004 1.1

2011 July <1 5.4 7.2 923 13.6 <0.05 <0.010 2.41 <0.001 0.005 0.7

SA1501

2002 August -- -- 7.3 507 12.8 0.42 0.32 <0.05 <0.008 <0.02 2.6

2006 September 2 0.6 7.1 455 12.4 0.48 0.343 E0.04 <0.002 0.007 1.6

2011 July <1 3.9 7.3 353 11.7 0.25 0.164 0.04 <0.001 0.011 2.2

Bedrock well

MT 406

2002 September -- 0.1 4.8 1,080 9.4 0.52 0.43 <0.05 <0.008 <0.02 0.8

2006 August 5 5.6 6.6 1,060 9.4 0.47 0.409 <0.06 <0.002 0.007 <1.0

2011 July <1 <.3 7.5 961 10.3 0.44 0.339 <0.02 <0.001 0.008 1.4

1 HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida County; SA, Saratoga County.
39

Table 1-12. Concentrations of major ions in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011.

[(00900), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; mg/L, milligrams per liter; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; <, less than; E, estimated concentration; 

°C, degrees Celsius; lab, laboratory. Bold values exceed one or more drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1 Year

Hardness, 

filtered,

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(00900)

Calcium, 

filtered,

mg/L

(00915)

Magnesium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00925)

Potassium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00935)

Sodium, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00930)

Acid 

neutralizing 

capacity, 

unfiltered, 

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(90410)

Alkalinity, 

filtered, 

fixed end 

point, lab, 

mg/L as 

CaCO3

(29801)

Bicarbonate2, 

filtered, 

fixed end 

point, lab, 

mg/L

(29805)

Chloride, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00940)

Fluoride, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00950)

Silica, 

filtered, 

mg/L

(00955)

Sulfate,

filtered, 

mg/L

(00945)

Dissolved 

solids,

dried at 

180oC,

filtered,

mg/L

(70300)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622

2002 298 92.7 16.2 3.64 62.7 244 237 289 115 E0.07 7.3 39.9 517

2006 314 97.8 17.0 3.60 68.2 242 243 296 130 <0.10 7.22 35.3 531

2011 284 87.6 15.9 3.40 68.7 226 220 268 112 0.06 7.34 33.2 500

OE1460

2002 366 95.1 31.2 2.10 60.0 E288 E233 284 105 <0.10 6.0 48.4 545

2006 349 91.5 29.3 2.09 55.1 294 290 354 98.1 E0.08 6.21 30.4 453

2011 357 98.0 27.4 1.92 56.6 247 251 306 101 0.05 6.11 18.0 507

SA1501

2002 230 73.0 11.7 2.35 14.8 196 198 242 26.5 0.21 10.9 34.2 311

2006 227 72.6 11.2 2.38 15.2 210 212 259 21.9 0.21 11.8 19.5 283

2011 204 63.6 11.0 2.02 15.2 176 183 223 24.6 0.20 13.0 16.1 302

Bedrock well

MT 406

2002 502 148 32.4 4.40 41.3 290 289 353 108 0.33 7.7 151 708

2006 424 123 28.5 4.24 51.4 295 293 357 110 0.32 7.15 101 634

2011 385 113 25.0 4.10 53.3 294 194 237 89.0 0.32 7.38 79.8 577

1 HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida County; SA, Saratoga County.

2 Bicarbonate concentrations calculated from laboratory alkalinity values.
40

Table 1-13. Concentrations of trace elements and radionuclides in groundwater samples in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011.

[(01105), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; μg/L, micrograms per liter; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; E, estimated concentration.

Bold values exceed one or more existing or proposed drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1 Year

Aluminum,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01105)

Antimony,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01097)

Arsenic,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01002)

Barium, 

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01007)

Beryllium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01012)

Boron,

filtered,

μg/L

(01020)

Cadmium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01027)

Chromium,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(01034)

Cobalt, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01037)

Copper, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01042)

Iron, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(01046)

Iron, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01045)

Lead, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01051)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622

2002 <2 <0.9 E1 203 <0.06 26 <0.04 <0.8 <1.00 2.3 <10 46 <1.00

2006 <2 <0.2 0.60 200 <0.06 27 E0.03 0.23 0.183 3.6 <6 E6 0.15

2011 <3 <0.2 1.0 206 <0.02 25 <0.05 0.29 0.02 7.7 <3 <5 0.41

OE1460

2002 <2 <0.9 <2 94.7 <0.06 31 <0.04 <0.8 <1.00 3.5 <10 <12 <1.00

2006 <2 <0.2 0.21 97.3 <0.06 28 <0.04 0.05 0.235 1.0 <6 E3 E0.06

2011 <3 <0.2 0.37 85.7 <0.02 19 <0.05 <0.21 0.05 9.6 4 <5 0.16

SA1501

2002 <2 <0.9 <2 22.6 <0.06 28 0.04 <0.8 <1.00 2.8 <10 E7 <1.00

2006 <2 <0.2 0.38 19.8 <0.06 24 0.05 0.45 0.742 1.2 E4 7 0.07

2011 <3 <0.2 0.43 20.1 <0.02 22 <0.05 0.46 0.61 1.7 3 <5 1.11

Bedrock well

MT 406

2002 <2 <0.9 E1 114 <0.06 178 <0.04 <0.8 <1.00 1.6 169 236 <1.00

2006 <2 <0.2 0.91 105 <0.06 139 <0.04 0.16 0.260 3.0 154 143 <0.06

2011 <3 <0.2 0.80 126 <0.02 121 <0.05 <0.21 0.03 <0.70 102 132 <0.04
41

Table 1–13. Concentrations of trace elements and radionuclides in groundwater samples in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2002, 2006, and 2011—

Continued

[(01105), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; μg/L, micrograms per liter; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; E, estimated concentration.

Bold values exceed one or more existing or proposed drinking-water standards. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1 Year

Lithium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01132)

Manganese, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(01056)

Manganese, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01055)

Mercury, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(71900)

Molybdenum, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01062)

Nickel, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01067)

Selenium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01147)

Silver, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01077)

Strontium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01082)

Thallium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01059)

Zinc, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(01092)

Radon-222,

unfiltered,

pCi/L

(82303)

Uranium, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(28011)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622

2002 6.2 <2.0 <2.4 <0.011 <0.2 4.04 0.9 <0.05 616 <0.90 3 490 0.221

2006 5.7 E0.5 <0.6 <0.010 E0.1 1.96 0.71 <0.16 651 <0.18 9 450 0.221

2011 6.1 0.4 0.5 <0.005 0.1 0.21 0.79 <0.01 618 <0.06 <2.4 470 0.208

OE1460

2002 9.7 <2.0 <2.4 0.030 <0.2 4.04 E0.2 <0.05 407 <0.90 4 590 0.149

2006 10.4 <0.6 <0.6 <0.010 <0.2 1.01 E0.06 <0.16 369 <0.18 E2 480 0.151

2011 7.6 0.4 0.5 <0.005 <0.1 0.44 0.09 0.07 229 <0.06 8.5 560 0.137

SA1501

2002 4.0 1,930 1,910 <0.011 1.1 1.72 <0.4 <0.05 233 <0.90 4 530 0.284

2006 4.7 1,960 2,020 <0.010 1.0 2.29 <0.08 <0.16 237 <0.18 <2 500 0.236

2011 4.3 1,620 1,670 <0.005 1.2 2.4 0.12 <0.01 235 <0.06 <2.4 500 0.224

Bedrock well

MT 406

2002 18.4 27.6 27.6 0.020 2.4 6.35 E0.2 <0.05 2,420 <0.90 2 170 1.95

2006 14.5 19.9 18.3 <0.010 2.7 1.84 <0.08 <0.16 2,090 <0.18 7 150 1.80

2011 10.9 17.1 19.1 <0.005 2.8 0.50 0.08 <0.01 1,810 <0.06 10.7 106 1.48

1 HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida County; SA, Saratoga County.
42

Table 1-14. Concentrations of pesticides and of volatile organic compounds detected in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 

2002, 2006, and 2011.

[(04040), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less 

than; E, estimated concentration; M, presence verified but not quantified. Bold values indicate detected concentrations. Well locations are shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1 Year

CIAT, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(04040)

Atrazine, 

filtered, 

μg/L

(39632)

Metolachlor,

filtered,

μg/L

(39415)

Prometon,

filtered,

μg/L

(04037)

Simazine,

filtered, 

μg/L

(04035)

Bromodichloromethane, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(32101)

Tribromomethane, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(32104)

Dibromochloromethane, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(32105)

Methyl tertbutyl ether,

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(78032)

Tetrachloroethene,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(34475)

Toluene,

unfiltered,

μg/L

(34010)

Trichloromethane, 

unfiltered, 

μg/L

(32106)

Sand and gravel wells

HE 622

2002 <0.006 <0.007 <0.013 <0.01 <0.005 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2006 <0.014 <0.007 <0.006 <0.01 <0.005 0.3 0.8 0.7 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.2

2011 E0.001 <0.008 <0.020 <0.01 <0.006 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

OE1460

2002 E0.040 0.022 <0.013 <0.01 <0.005 0.2 0.3 0.3 <0.2 0.3 <0.1 0.8

2006 E0.033 0.024 E0.002 <0.01 <0.005 0.1 0.5 0.3 <0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1

2011 E0.034 0.027 <0.020 M 0.002 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.1 0.1

SA1501

2002 <0.006 <0.007 <0.013 <0.01 <0.005 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 E0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2006 <0.014 <0.007 <0.006 <0.01 <0.005 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2011 <0.006 <0.008 <0.020 <0.01 <0.006 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Bedrock well

MT 406

2002 <0.006 <0.007 <0.013 <0.01 <0.005 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2006 <0.014 <0.007 <0.006 <0.01 <0.005 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

2011 <0.006 <0.008 <0.020 <0.01 <0.006 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

1 HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida County; SA, Saratoga County.
43

Table 1-15. Bacteria in groundwater samples collected in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2006 and 2011.

[(84385), U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System parameter code; CFU, colony-forming unit; mL, milliliter; <, less than; U, not detected. Well locations are 

shown in figures 2 and 3]

Well 

number1 Year 

Escherichia coli, 

unfiltered, 

Presence/

Absence

(84385)

Fecal coliform, 

membrane filtration,

unfiltered, 

CFU/100mL

(61215)

Heterotrophic plate 

count, 

unfiltered, 

CFU/mL

(31692)

Total coliform, 

membrane 

filtration,

unfiltered, 

CFU/100mL

(61213)

Sand and gravel wells

HE622

2006 U <5 <1 <1

2011 U <1 <1 <1

OE1460

2006 U <5 13 <1

2011 U <1 1 <1

SA1501

2006 U <5 <1 <1

2011 U <1 <1 <1

Bedrock well

MT 406

2006 U <5 2 <1

2011 U <1 2 <1

1 HE, Herkimer County; MT, Montgomery County; OE, Oneida County; SA, Saratoga County.
For more information concerning this report, contact

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

New York Water Science Center

425 Jordan Road

Troy, NY 12180-8349

dc_ny@usgs.gov

or visit our Web site at:

http://ny.water.usgs.gov

Nystrom and Scott—Groundwater Quality in the Mohawk River Basin, New York, 2011— Open-File Report 2013–1021