YEAR TWO FOLLOW-UP INVESTIGATION REPORT 

SOIL AND WATER QUALITY EVALUATION 

ST. MARY’S SHOALS PARK ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 

BAKER COUNTY, FLORIDA 

Prepared for: 

JEA 

21 W. Church Street 

Jacksonville, Florida 32202 

For Submittal to: 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

7825 Baymeadows Way, Suite B200 

Jacksonville, Florida 32256 

Prepared by: 

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. 

1714 Belmonte Avenue 

Jacksonville, Florida 32207 

November 17, 2011
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. i November 17, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Subject Page 

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 1

3.0 EVALUATION HISTORY ................................................................................................ 1

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................ 2

5.0 SOIL ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... 2

5.1 Soil Sample Collection ..................................................................................................... 2

5.2 Soil Analysis Results ........................................................................................................ 3

5.2.1 Total Recoverable Analysis Method ............................................................................. 3

5.2.2 SPLP Analysis Method ................................................................................................. 3

6.0 WATER ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 3

6.1 Groundwater Assessment ................................................................................................. 4

6.2 Surface Water Assessment ................................................................................................ 4

6.3 Stormwater Assessment .................................................................................................... 5

7.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS............................................................................................... 5

8.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 7

9.0 SIGNATURES OF PROFESSIONALS ............................................................................. 8

FIGURES 

Figure 1 Site Vicinity / Topographic Map 

Figure 2 Sample Locations 

TABLES 

Table 1 (Totals Method) Soil Analytical Summary 

Table 2 (SPLP Method) Soil Analytical Summary 

Table 3 Groundwater Analytical Summary 

Table 4 Surface Water Analytical Summary 

Table 5 Stormwater Analytical Summary 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A Soil Sampling Logs and Field Notes 

Appendix B Groundwater, Surface Water, and Stormwater (Ditches) Sampling Logs 

Appendix C Analytical Laboratory Reports 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

As a component of the ongoing evaluation of an uncovered EZBase® application, Mechling Engineering 

& Consulting, Inc. conducted a follow-up soil and water quality investigation for the St. Mary’s Shoals 

Park Roadway Improvements Project. The purpose of this investigation was to compare current soil and 

water quality conditions to the conditions found during the baseline investigation conducted prior to the 

2009 application of EZBase. 

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 

St. Mary’s Shoals Park is located in northeastern Baker County, Florida. In general, the park is bound on 

the south by Odis Yarborough Road; on the west by CR 125; on the north by sparsely developed land; on 

the northeast by the St. Mary’s River; and on the east by CR 23. There are a number of dirt roads 

throughout the property. Cedar Creek flows through the property from west to east and into the St. 

Mary’s River along the northeastern park boundary. 

Some nature trails and horse trails have been in place since the time of the baseline investigation. One 

parking and restroom area was completed between the time of the baseline and three-month follow-up 

investigation. A separate park entrance near the intersection of CR 125 and Yarborough Road was 

completed between the six-month and twelve-month investigations. 

EZBase was applied to an area of existing dirt roadway approximately 1.7 miles in length, beginning at 

Odis Yarborough Road and proceeding north and west to a crossing at Cedar Creek. The existing 

roadway appeared to have been constructed of native soil excavated from the ditches/swales on either side 

of the road. The area selected for the investigation included the northern one-half mile of the roadway 

paved with EZBase. 

Please see Figure 1, Site Vicinity / Topographic Map, which includes a portion of the Macclenney West, 

FL (1993) USGS Topographic Map. The figure shows a number of landmarks, the Area of EZBase 

Placement, and the Area of Investigation. 

3.0 EVALUATION HISTORY 

During March and April of 2009, prior to EZBase placement on existing roadways at the park, a soil and 

water baseline investigation was conducted. The results of the investigation were reported in Mechling 

Engineering’s July 10, 2009 Baseline Soil and Water Quality Evaluation Report. 

Between April 15 and May 15, 2009, approximately 1.7 miles of dirt roads in the park were improved by 

EZBase application. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 2 

Follow-up investigations were performed at approximately three months, six months, and twelve months 

after completion of the EZBase application. Results of these investigations were reported in separate 

reports at the time of the investigations. 

4.0 SCOPE OF WORK 

The current investigation included the following scope of work: 

1. Soil sampling on both sides of the St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway test area at three 

approximately equally spaced locations for a total of six soil sampling locations. Soil samples 

were analyzed for aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, vanadium, and nickel by both the total 

recoverable and SPLP methods. 

2. Water sampling from six groundwater monitoring wells, eight surface water locations, and 

stormwater runoff from ditches in four locations. Unfiltered and field-filtered water samples 

were analyzed for aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, vanadium, and nickel. 

3. Reporting of the findings and conclusions. 

5.0 SOIL ASSESSMENT 

On May 25, 2011, Mechling Engineering personnel mobilized to the park property to conduct the soil 

investigation. A total of six shallow soil borings were placed at the approximate locations of those placed 

during the baseline investigation. The locations of the soil borings placed in the roadway proper during 

the baseline investigation were not replicated. Therefore, soil samples were collected from boring 

locations B-1, B-3, B-4, B-6, B-7, and B-9 (see Figure 2). 

5.1 Soil Sample Collection 

Grab soil samples were collected from one discrete depth (0 to 0.5 feet bls) at each soil boring location. 

Soil encountered in the six borings generally consisted of gray, brown, and tan fine sands. 

Soil samples for laboratory analysis were obtained utilizing a field decontaminated hand auger. Sampling 

methodology was in accordance with FDEP Standard Operating Procedures for Field Activities, DEPSOP-001/01. Soil samples were transferred from the decontaminated hand auger directly into laboratorysupplied containers and stored on wet ice. Samples were delivered to FedEx for overnight shipment to 

Environmental Science Corp. (ESC), Mt. Juliet, Tennessee. ESC is a NELAC-certified laboratory. Soil 

samples were analyzed for aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, vanadium, and nickel by both the total 

recoverable and SPLP methods. 

Soil and water sampling locations are shown on Figure 2. Soil sampling logs and field notes are included 

as Appendix A. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 3 

5.2 Soil Analysis Results 

5.2.1 Total Recoverable Analysis Method 

The results of soil analysis for total recoverable metals were compared to the Chapter 62-777, Florida 

Administrative Code (FAC), Table II, Soil Cleanup Target Levels (SCTLs). Laboratory analysis results 

revealed no target analytes at concentrations in excess of their respective SCTLs for the Year Two 

sampling event. These results fall within the range of results of the baseline and prior follow-up 

investigations. 

Table 1 includes a summary of soil analytical results for total recoverable metals for all sampling events. 

The laboratory analytical reports for all soil and water samples are provided as Appendix C. 

5.2.2 SPLP Analysis Method 

The results of SPLP soil analysis were compared to the Chapter 62-777, FAC, Table I, Groundwater 

Cleanup Target Levels (GCTLs) and Freshwater Surface Water Cleanup Target Levels (SWCTLs). 

Aluminum concentrations for the Year Two investigation ranged from 540 to 11,000 micrograms per liter 

(ug/l). In all cases these are greater than the aluminum GCTL of 200 ug/l and SWCTL of 13 ug/l. These 

results are consistent with both the baseline and prior follow-up sampling events. 

Iron was detected at concentrations ranging from 170 to 1,000 ug/l. Four of six sample results were 

greater than the iron GCTL of 300 ug/l. None exceeded the SWCTL of 1,000 ug/l. These results are 

generally consistent with the baseline and prior follow-up events. 

Lead was detected above laboratory detection limits in two of six samples at concentrations of 6.5 and 36 

ug/l. The GCTL for lead is 15 ug/l; the SWCTL for lead varies based on water hardness. Lead was 

detected in the baseline sampling event and the prior follow-up investigations, but at concentrations less 

than its GCTL. 

Arsenic, nickel, and vanadium results were consistent with both the baseline and prior follow-up sampling 

events. None of these analytes exceeded their respective GCTLs or SWCTLs in the Year Two samples. 

Table 2 includes a summary of all SPLP soil analytical results to date. 

6.0 WATER ASSESSMENT 

Groundwater, surface water, and stormwater samples were collected for laboratory analysis using a 

peristaltic pump and dedicated polyethylene tubing. All procedures for sample collection were performed 

in accordance with FDEP Standard Operating Procedures DEP-SOP-001/01. The water samples were 

collected in laboratory-supplied sample containers and placed on wet ice. Both unfiltered and filtered 

samples were collected for analysis. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 4 

Prior to the collection of the groundwater samples, each monitoring well was purged using a low flow 

peristaltic pump and dedicated polyethylene tubing. Groundwater field parameters including pH, 

temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity were recorded during purging activities. 

Samples were delivered to FedEx for overnight shipment to ESC. The water samples were analyzed for 

aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, vanadium, and nickel. Water sampling logs, calibration logs, and field 

notes are provided in Appendix B. 

6.1 Groundwater Assessment 

On May 25, 2011, Mechling Engineering personnel sampled monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-6. 

The results of groundwater analysis were compared to Chapter 62-777, FAC, Table I, GCTLs. 

Iron was detected at concentrations ranging from 400 to 2,100 ug/l. In all cases, this is greater than its 

GCTL of 300 ug/l. This is generally consistent with baseline and prior follow-up sampling events, 

indicating the presence of iron as a background constituent of groundwater. 

Aluminum was detected at a concentration greater than its GCTL of 200 ug/l in five of six unfiltered 

samples (range – 440 to 11,000 ug/l) and one of six filtered (dissolved) samples (650 ug/l). This is also 

generally consistent with baseline and prior follow-up sampling events, indicating the presence of 

aluminum as a groundwater background constituent. . 

Arsenic, lead, nickel, and vanadium were not detected at concentrations in excess of their respective 

GCTLs in the baseline sampling event, the prior follow-up sampling events, or the Year Two sampling 

event. Year Two sampling event analytical results for these analytes were generally consistent with the 

baseline and prior follow-up sampling events. 

Table 3 includes a summary of groundwater analytical results for all sampling events. 

6.2 Surface Water Assessment 

Sampling of surface water took place on May 26, 2011. Four sets of samples were collected downstream 

(SW-1 through SW-4) of the EZBase placement area, and four sets of samples were collected upstream 

(SW-5 through SW-8). At the time of this sampling event, the elevation of Cedar Creek was 

approximately 7 feet below the deck of the bridge that crosses the creek at the north end of the 

investigation area. This is the lowest creek level noted since the placement of EZBase in April and May 

of 2009. 

Laboratory results showed aluminum detected at concentrations ranging from 59 to 350 ug/l. In all cases 

these results are in excess of the aluminum Chapter 62-777, FAC, Table I, SWCTL. This is consistent 

with the baseline investigation and all prior follow-up investigations. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 5 

Iron was detected at a concentration less than its Chapter 62-777, FAC, Table I, SWCTL in all cases. 

These results are generally consistent with the low end of the range of concentrations noted in prior 

investigations. 

Arsenic, lead, nickel, and vanadium were not detected at their respective laboratory reporting limits in any 

sample. None of these target analytes have been detected at concentrations in excess of their respective 

SWCTLs in any sampling event. 

See Table 4 for a summary of surface water analytical results. 

6.3 Stormwater Assessment 

Sampling of standing water from roadside swales took place on October 10, 2011. Sampling followed a 

1.95-inch rainfall event during the overnight hours of October 10. (Source: Weather Underground, 

Macclenny, Florida weather station MMACF1). Four sets of samples were collected at sampling 

locations utilized in prior investigations (D-1 through D-4). At two other prior sampling locations (D-5 

and D-6), insufficient water was available for sampling. The results of stormwater analysis were 

compared to Chapter 62-777, FAC, Table I, SWCTLs. 

Laboratory results showed aluminum detected at concentrations ranging from 73 to 460 ug/l. In all cases 

these results are in excess of the aluminum SWCTL of 13 ug/l. This is consistent with the baseline 

investigation and all prior follow-up investigations. 

Arsenic, iron, lead, and nickel, were not detected at concentrations in excess of their respective SWCTLs. 

Vanadium does not have a listed SWCTL. These results are generally consistent with the range of 

concentrations noted in prior investigations, with the exception of vanadium. Vanadium was detected at 

concentrations generally greater than in prior sampling events. 

7.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 

Laboratory analysis was conducted on soil samples collected from six boring locations, groundwater 

collected from six locations, surface water from eight locations, and stormwater from four locations. 

Samples were analyzed for aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, vanadium, and nickel by a number of methods. 

A comparison of the findings during the two years of sampling and analysis follows: 

x Total recoverable method soil analysis revealed that all of the target analytes were detected at 

concentrations above laboratory reporting limits in at least one sampling event; however, none 

were detected at concentrations in excess of their respective SCTLs. The totals method soil 

analysis results for the Year Two follow-up investigation were generally consistent with those 

seen in the baseline and prior follow-up investigations; 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 6 

x SPLP method soil analysis showed that all the target analytes were detected at concentrations 

greater than laboratory minimum detection limits in some sampling events during the two-year 

investigation. Aluminum was detected at concentrations greater than its GCTL in nearly all 

samples; iron was detected at concentrations greater than its GCTL in approximately half the 

samples. Lead was detected at a concentration greater than its GCTL in one sample location for 

one sampling event. 

Arsenic, nickel, and vanadium results did not exceed their respective GCTLs or SWCTLs in any 

of the Year Two SPLP samples. These results are generally consistent with prior results; 

x Groundwater analysis showed iron detected at a concentration greater than its GCTL in nearly all 

baseline and follow-up samples. Aluminum was detected in groundwater samples at a 

concentration greater than its GCTL in most baseline and follow-up samples. None of the other 

target analytes were detected at concentrations in excess of their respective GCTLs in any 

sampling event. Follow-up analysis results were generally consistent with those of the baseline 

investigation. Based on soil SPLP and groundwater analysis, iron and aluminum appear to be 

background constituents; 

x Surface water (Cedar Creek) analysis documented all target analytes at concentrations greater 

than laboratory minimum detection limits at some point during the two years of investigation. 

Aluminum was consistently detected at concentrations greater than its SWCTL in the baseline 

and follow-up samples. Iron was detected at concentrations greater than its SWCTL in some 

baseline and follow-up samples. Iron and aluminum appear to be present in surface water as 

background constituents. None of the other target analytes were detected at concentrations in 

excess of their respective SWCTLs. Follow-up analysis results were generally consistent with 

those seen in the baseline investigation; and 

x Stormwater analysis documented that all target analytes were at concentrations greater than 

laboratory minimum detection limits at some point during the two years of investigation. 

Aluminum was detected at concentrations greater than its SWCTL in all baseline and follow-up 

samples. Iron was detected at concentrations greater than its SWCTL in some baseline and 

follow-up samples. None of the other target analytes were detected at concentrations in excess of 

their respective SWCTLs. Vanadium was detected at generally greater concentrations than in 

prior sampling events. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 7 

8.0 CONCLUSIONS 

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. has completed a soil and water quality investigation for the St. 

Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvement Project. The investigation reported here follows by two years 

the completion of EZBase application on selected roadways at the park. 

In general, the results of the Year Two investigation did not reveal evidence of impacts to soil, 

groundwater, or surface water attributable to EZBase application based on comparison of the baseline 

investigation results to the results of the Year Two investigation. 

Laboratory analyses indicate that aluminum and iron are naturally-occurring in the area of investigation at 

concentrations in excess of FDEP corrective action criteria in soil (SPLP), groundwater, and surface 

water. Our experience indicates that this condition is common throughout northeast Florida for aluminum 

and iron. 

Stormwater analysis for the Two Year investigation indicated an increase in vanadium concentrations in 

standing water from roadside swales; however, no evidence of vanadium concentration increases in either 

groundwater or in the surface waters of Cedar Creek was noted. Based on this evidence, it appears that 

the roadside swales are effectively treating stormwater runoff as intended. 
St. Mary’s Shoals Park Roadway Improvements, Year Two Follow-up Investigation Report

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. November 17, 2011 8 

9.0 SIGNATURES OF PROFESSIONALS 

In accordance with the provisions of Florida Statutes, Chapter 471, our work for this report was prepared 

under the direct supervision of a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Florida. This report has 

been determined to be in accordance with good engineering practices pursuant to Chapter 471 of the 

Florida Statutes as it applies to the work described herein. The data, findings, conclusions, 

recommendations, specifications, and professional opinions were prepared solely for the use of JEA and 

the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. makes no 

other warranty, either expressed or implied, and is not responsible for the interpretation of these data by 

others. 

_________________________________ 

Mark Mechling, P.E., LEED AP 

Principal 

Licensed, Florida PE Number 41998 

Engineering Business CA 27999 

Digitally signed by Mark Mechling, P.E., LEED AP

DN: cn=Mark Mechling, P.E., LEED AP, c=US, 

o=Mechling Engineering and Consulting, Inc., 

email=mmechling@mechlingeng.com

Reason: Digitally signed and sealed per FAC 

Chapter 61G15-23

Location: Jacksonville, FL

Date: 2011.11.18 08:01:51 -05'00'

Mark Mechling, 

P.E., LEED AP
FIGURES
Date of Figure: June 12, 2009

St. Mary's Shoals Park

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. Project

904.346.5468

1714 Belmonte Avenue, Jacksonville, FL 32207

Engineering Business Certificate of Authorization No. 27999

Baker County, Florida

Site Vicinity/Topograhic Map

Figure 1

6600'

Macclenney West, FL, 1993 

NT

CR 23C

ODIS YARBOROUGH RD.

SR 121

AREA OF INVESTIGATION

AREA of EZBASE PLACEMENT
Date of Figure: June 12, 2009

St. Mary's Shoals Park

Mechling Engineering & Consulting, Inc. Project

904.346.5468

1714 Belmonte Avenue, Jacksonville, FL 32207

Engineering Business Certificate of Authorization No. 27999

Baker County, Florida

Sample Locations

Figure 2

2480'

MW-2

B-9 B-7

MW-1

D-4

MW-4

B-6

MW-3

B-4

D-3 B-5

D-2 SW-8

D-6

D-5

SW-7

SW-5

SW-6

MW-5

B-3

MW-6

SW-3

SW-2 SW-4

SW-1

B-2

B-1

B-8

D-1
TABLES 
Table 1: (Totals Method) Soil Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

Number Interval 

(fbls)

Collected (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Comments

SCTL - Direct Exposure Residential 80,000 2.1 53,000 400 340** 67**

SCTL - Direct Exposure Comm/Ind * 12 * 1,400 35,000 10,000 

SCTL - Leachability *** *** *** *** 130 980 

3/30/2009 560 0.27 U 140 1.8 0.49 U 1.1 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 2600 0.27 U 420 4.4 0.49 U 2.2 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 870 B 0.32 U 250 2.2 0.26 U 1.5 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 3900 0.32 U 920 7.5 2.2 7.8 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 2400 0.32 U 360 13.0 0.74 I 4.2 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 390 0.27 U 120 2.3 0.49 U 1.1 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 2400 0.35 I 750 2.6 0.49 U 3.4 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 220 0.27 U 90 0.90 0.49 U 0.54 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 1200 0.27 U 500 11 0.49 U 2.0 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 2600 0.27 U 780 3.7 0.49 U 3.0 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 2100 B 0.32 U 610 3.3 0.26 U 2.3 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 1800 0.32 U 600 5.3 0.53 I 2.4 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 2400 0.32 U 880 6.8 0.44 I 2.9 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1000 0.27 U 580 1.6 0.49 U 1.1 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 630 0.27 U 270 2.1 0.49 U 0.76 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 490 0.27 U 170 1.6 0.49 U 0.65 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 210 B 0.32 U 61 0.52 0.26 U 0.42 I 6 month Follow up Event

6/7/2010 1600 0.32 U 520 1.90 0.68 I 2.0 12 month Follow up Event

5/25/2011 470 0.32 U 170 2.0 0.26 U 0.62 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 66 0.27 U 52 0.60 0.49 U 0.51 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 840 0.27 U 520 1.2 0.49 U 1.8 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 160 0.27 U 58 0.5 0.49 U 0.38 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-5 0.5 - 2.0

Laboratory Analyses

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-1

B-1 0 - 0.5

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-5 0 - 0.5

0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-2 0 - 0.5 Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-2 0.5 - 2.0 Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0 - 0.5

B-3 0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-4 0 - 0.5

B-3

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-4

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Page 1 Reviewed MM 
Table 1: (Totals Method) Soil Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

Number Interval 

(fbls)

Collected (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Comments

SCTL - Direct Exposure Residential 80,000 2.1 53,000 400 340** 67**

SCTL - Direct Exposure Comm/Ind * 12 * 1,400 35,000 10,000 

SCTL - Leachability *** *** *** *** 130 980 

Laboratory Analyses

3/30/2009 310 0.27 U 240 1.4 0.49 U 0.60 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 230 0.27 U 230 0.90 0.49 U 0.26 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 90 B 0.32 U 60 0.24 I 0.26 U 0.22 I 6 month Follow up Event

6/7/2010 41 0.32 U 30 0.090 U 0.26 U 0.15 I 12 month Follow up Event

5/25/2011 430 V 0.32 U 180 2.0 0.26 U 0.52 P1 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1000 0.27 U 390 1.1 0.49 U 1.0 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 1800 0.27 U 2000 2.2 0.49 U 3.4 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 1200 0.27 U 410 2.5 0.49 U 1.8 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 120 B 0.32 U 28 0.38 0.26 U 0.28 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 2500 0.32 U 400 2.5 1.2 I 3.6 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 1300 0.32 U 450 2.0 0.26 U 1.6 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 2200 0.27 U 990 1.3 0.49 U 3.7 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 1200 0.27 U 320 1.6 0.49 U 1.4 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 580 0.27 U 220 1.4 0.49 U 0.75 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 790 0.27 U 250 1.0 0.49 U 0.93 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 340 0.27 U 130 1.8 0.49 U 0.44 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 970 B 0.32 U 350 1.3 0.26 U 1.2 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 1000 0.32 U 550 1.4 0.91 I 1.3 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 1200 0.32 U 1200 2.0 0.26 U 1.4 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1000 0.27 U 180 0.91 0.49 U 0.93 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

Notes:

SCTL - Soil Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

 fbls - feet below land surface

 mg/kg - milligram per kilogram

Flags: U - Undetected at noted concentration, I - Estimated value between the MDL and PQL

 B - Compound detected in method blank P1 - RPD value not applicable 

 V - Sample concentration too high to evaluate spike recoveries

 * - Analyte is not a health concern for this exposure scenario

 ** - Based on acute toxicity considerations

 *** - May be derived using SPLP Test to calculate site-specific SCTL

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-8 0 - 0.5

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-7

B-9 0 - 0.5

B-9 0.5 - 2.0

B-8

B-7 0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0 - 0.5

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-6 0 - 0.5

0.5 - 2.0

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-6 0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Page 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 2: (SPLP Method) Soil Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Interval 

(fbls)

Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

GCTL - Groundwater Criteria 200 10 300 15 100 49 

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

3/30/2009 1000 0.47 I 180 6.1 B2 21 B2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 900 1.5 210 3.2 2.6 B2 2.6 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 2900 6.5 U 740 B2I 1.8 UIB2 12 I 6.0 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 5000 6.5 U 1100 7.1 5.3 U 55 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 6900 8.5 I 1000 36 6.4 I 15 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 3300 0.22 U 490 2.2 IBB2 1.0 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 13000 0.61 I 3100 4.3 B2 1.9 B2 10 Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 2700 0.22 U 510 1.3 IBB2 1.1 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 1500 0.25 I 260 1.7 IBB2 0.57 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 2100 0.39 IP1 460 2.3 1.6 B2I 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 1800 J5 6.5 U 390 B2I 1.8 UIB2 8.5 I 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 2200 6.5 U 520 6.7 5.3 U 7.0 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 2500 6.5 U 650 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 890 0.22 U 240 1.5 IBB2 0.81 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 290 0.24 I 91 I 0.87 IBB2 0.33 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 300 0.28 I 68 I 1.0 0.70 IB2 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 600 6.5 U 350 B2I 1.8 UIB2 12 I 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 420 6.5 U 170 2.1 I 5.3 U 6.0 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 650 6.5 U 170 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 150 0.88 I 61 I 0.61 IBB2 0.64 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 610 0.36 I 310 0.83 IBB2 0.34 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 410 0.22 U 140 1.5 IBB2 0.31 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011 Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0 - 0.5

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-5 0.5 - 2.0

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

0 - 0.5

B-2 0 - 0.5 Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-4

Laboratory Analyses

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-2 0.5 - 2.0 Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-1

B-1

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

0 - 0.5

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

0 - 0.5

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

B-4 0.5 - 2.0

B-5

B-3

B-3 0.5 - 2.0 Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Page 1 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 2: (SPLP Method) Soil Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Interval 

(fbls)

Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

GCTL - Groundwater Criteria 200 10 300 15 100 49 

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

Laboratory Analyses

3/30/2009 200 0.22 U 84 I 0.68 IBB2 0.29 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 280 0.47 I 130 0.89 I 0.72 IB2 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 210 6.5 U 110 B2I 1.8 UB2 9.1 I 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 110 6.5 U 45 I 2.0 I 5.3 U 2.7 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 540 6.5 U 200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 500 0.29 I 94 I 1.2 IBB2 0.47 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 670 0.22 U 290 0.86 IBB2 1.1 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 540 0.42 I 150 1.1 1.0 B2I 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 190 6.5 U 100 IB2 1.8 UIB2 13 I 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 4600 6.5 U 580 5.2 5.3 U 17 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 11000 6.5 U 900 6.5 6.1 I 8.2 I 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 940 0.22 U 220 1.4 IBB2 0.86 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 1000 0.22 U 180 1.0 IBB2 0.59 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 550 0.26 I 150 1.8 IBB2 0.80 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

3/30/2009 680 0.23 I 160 2.8 IBB2 0.58 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 660 0.69 I 160 1.7 0.86 IB2 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/9/2009 1300 10 I 540 B2I 1.8 UB2 16 I 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 1800 J5 6.5 U 690 5.8 5.3 U 6.4 IP1 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 940 6.9 I 570 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 970 0.89 IPI 170 2.2 IBB2 0.54 IBB2 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009

11/9/2009

6/7/2010

5/25/2011

Notes:

ug/L - micrograms per liter

fbls - feet below land surface

GCTL - Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

SWCTL - Surface Water Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

 NL - Not Listed in FAC 62-777

 * - Based on hardness equation - Pb < e(1.273 [lnH] - 4.705) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

 ** - Based on hardness equation - Ni < e(0.846[lnH]+0.0584) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

Flags: U - Undetected at noted concentration 

 I - Estimated value between the MDL and PQL

 B - The indicated compound was found in the associated method blank as well as the laboratory sample.

 B2 - The detection limit has been elevated due to blank contamination.

 J5 - Sample matrix interference

 PI - RPD Value not applicable for sample concentrations less than 5 times the reporting limit.

Bold font - indicates exceedance of regulatory standard

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

B-9 0.5 - 2.0

B-8 0 - 0.5

B-8 0.5 - 2.0

B-9 0 - 0.5

B-7 0 - 0.5

B-7

B-6 0 - 0.5

B-6 0.5 - 2.0

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

0.5 - 2.0

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Sampling not required by sampling plan

Location under EZBase pavement - no sampling required 

Page 2 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 3: Groundwater Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

Location Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

GCTL - Groundwater Criteria (ug/l) 200 10 300 15 100 49 

4/13/2009 9800 0.68 I 2700 6.3 11 I 11 Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 6100 0.37 I 3600 1.9 U 9.8 U 3.4 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 4600 0.25 U 3700 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.8 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 4800 0.25 U 1500 3.9 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 11000 0.25 U 1600 4.9 I 5.3 U 7.3 I 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/13/2009 500 0.54 I 1800 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.9 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 170 0.57 I 2500 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 250 0.97 I 3200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 940 0.72 I 1400 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 650 0.25 U 780 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/13/2009 2200 0.22 U 880 1.9 U 12 I 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 520 0.22 U 650 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 34 U 7.8 590 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 100 0.25 U 200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 200 0.25 U 930 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/13/2009 37 I 0.22 U 790 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 32 U 0.22 U 670 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 34 U 0.39 I 600 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 130 0.36 I 210 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 49 I 0.25 U 910 3.2 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 2000 0.22 U 1400 3.1 I 11 I 2.0 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 260 0.24 I 950 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 99 I 3.5 780 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 3800 0.25 U 560 3.8 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 770 0.25 U 510 5.0 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up

4/14/2009 100 0.31 I 1200 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.4 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 200 0.28 I 1000 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 180 0.68 I 840 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 200 0.50 I 460 1.8 U 5.3 U 3.0 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 120 0.25 U 400 1.9 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 3000 0.28 I 2700 2.4 I 10 I 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 460 0.49 IP1 2500 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 34 U 2.4 2600 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 1200 0.25 U 2700 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 2400 0.25 U 2100 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 89 I 0.50 I 2400 3.4 I 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 280 0.55 I 2600 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 72 0.72 I 2600 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 130 0.62 I 2600 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 110 0.25 U 1900 2.1 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

Laboratory Analyses

MW-2 unfiltered

unfiltered

MW-1 filtered

MW-1

filtered

MW-3 unfiltered

MW-3 filtered

MW-4 filtered

MW-4 unfiltered

MW-2

Page 1 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 3: Groundwater Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

Location Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

GCTL - Groundwater Criteria (ug/l) 200 10 300 15 100 49 

Laboratory Analyses

4/14/2009 530 0.22 U 400 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 220 0.22 U 940 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 34 U 1.4 850 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 75 I 0.25 U 680 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 440 0.25 U 1000 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 470 0.27 I 340 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 110 0.22 U 940 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 61 I 0.37 I 850 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 76 I 0.25 I 660 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 140 0.25 U 930 3.6 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 1900 0.22 U 460 2.4 I 12 I 2.0 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 1100 1.1 I 250 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 61 I 0.25 U 1400 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 600 0.25 U 1400 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 830 0.25 U 1500 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

4/14/2009 290 0.22 U 240 2.7 I 9.8 U 2.6 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/21/2009 250 0.22 U 66 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/12/2009 86 IP1 0.53 I 1500 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 190 P1 0.42 I 1100 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/25/2011 140 0.25 U 1400 3.2 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up Event

Notes:

ug/L - micrograms per liter

GCTL - Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

Flags: U - Undetected at noted concentration 

 I - Estimated value between the MDL and PQL

 P1 - Relative Percent Difference not applicable for sample concentrations less than five times the reporting limit

Bold font - indicates exceedance of regulatory standard

MW-5 unfiltered

MW-5 filtered

MW-6

MW-6

unfiltered

filtered

Page 2 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 4: Surface Water (Cedar Creek) Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

3/31/2009 160 0.27 I 440 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1800 1.4 I 1200 3.9 I 9.8 U 1.9 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 150 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 400 0.34 I 510 1.8 U 8.8 I 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 350 0.58 I 500 3.0 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 49 I 0.23 I 300 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.0 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 610 0.45 I 880 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 120 0.25 U 180 3.9 I 5.3 U 4.3 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 72 I 0.25 U 260 1.8 U 5.3 U 3.5 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 82 I 0.32 I 220 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 170 0.47 I 440 1.9 U 9.8 U 3.9 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1900 1.1 I 1200 3.4 I 9.8 U 2.1 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 270 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 440 0.34 I 530 4.4 I 9.0 I 3.6 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 320 0.46 I 470 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 62 I 0.22 U 350 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 580 0.42 I 780 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 140 0.25 U 180 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 75 I 0.25 U 280 1.8 U 5.4 I 2.5 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 80 I 0.25 U 200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 280 0.32 I 460 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1800 1.9 I 1200 2.7 I 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 270 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 560 0.26 I 540 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 290 0.43 I 450 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 51 I 0.22 U 290 1.9 U 12 I 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 390 0.39 I 510 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 160 0.25 U 170 2.0 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 96 I 0.25 U 290 1.8 U 6.8 I 2.6 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 59 I 0.25 U 210 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 310 0.35 I 420 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1800 1.0 1200 2.6 I 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 280 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 280 0.25 U 450 2.6 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 260 0.49 I 440 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 51 I 0.25 I 280 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.0 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 670 0.41 I 800 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 150 0.25 U 180 1.8 U 5.3 U 3.5 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 82 I 0.25 U 270 1.8 U 6.4 I 2.5 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 73 I 0.25 U 210 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 1000 0.22 U 1600 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.9 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1600 1.4 I 1100 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 280 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 650 0.31 I 530 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 290 0.45 I 470 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 910 0.38 I 1400 3.6 I 9.8 U 2.2 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 700 0.41 I 810 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 170 0.25 U 190 3.4 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 110 0.25 U 300 1.8 U 5.7 I 2.3 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 73 0.25 U 190 3.0 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

unfiltered

unfiltered

SW-5 filtered

Laboratory Analyses

SW-1 unfiltered

SW-1

SW-4

filtered

SW-2 unfiltered

SW-2 filtered

SW-3 unfiltered

SW-3 filtered

SW-4

filtered

SW-5

Page 1 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 4: Surface Water (Cedar Creek) Analytical Summary

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

Laboratory Analyses

3/31/2009 1000 0.32 I 1600 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1800 1.0 1200 3.5 I 9.8 U 1.9 I 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 280 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 730 0.25 U 550 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 240 0.51 I 440 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 950 0.46 I 1500 2.6 I 9.8 U 2.2 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 590 0.46 I 760 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 160 0.25 U 200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.6 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 120 0.25 U 300 1.8 U 5.6 I 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 65 I 0.25 U 200 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 1000 0.49 I 1600 2.9 I 9.8 U 2.1 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1700 1.1 UO 1200 3.7 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 280 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 280 0.29 I 440 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 310 0.48 I 690 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 940 0.39 I 1500 3.2 I 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 610 0.42 I 780 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 120 0.25 U 170 3.7 I 5.3 U 3.5 I 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 81 I 0.25 U 270 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.6 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 85 I 0.25 U 250 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 1000 0.37 I 1600 2.3 I 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 1500 1.3 I 1100 3.4 I 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 34 U 0.25 U 230 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 600 0.31 I 530 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 240 0.44 I 460 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

3/31/2009 960 0.38 I 1500 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/24/2009 570 0.35 I 770 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

11/27/2009 140 0.25 U 150 2.8 I 5.3 U 2.2 U 6 month Follow-up Event

6/3/2010 140 0.25 U 330 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.3 I 12 month Follow-up Event

5/26/2011 68 I 0.25 U 180 1.8 U 5.3 U 2.2 U 2 Year Follow-up event

Notes:

ug/L - micrograms per liter

SWCTL - Surface Water Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

NL - Not Listed in FAC 62-777

 * - Based on hardness equation - Pb < e(1.273 [lnH] - 4.705) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

 ** - Based on hardness equation - Ni < e(0.846[lnH]+0.0584) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

Flags: U - Undetected at noted concentration 

 I - Estimated value between the MDL and PQL

 O - Sample diluted due to matrix interference

Bold font - indicates exceedance of regulatory standard

SW-6 unfiltered

SW-8 unfiltered

filtered

SW-7 unfiltered

SW-7 filtered

SW-8 filtered

SW-6

Page 2 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 5: Stormwater Analytical Summary (Ditches)

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

3/30/2009 480 0.45 I 580 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.7 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 2800 0.63 I 1400 1.9 U 9.8 U 7.9 I 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 380 0.25 U 65 I 1.7 U 13 I 570 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 300 0.35 I 230 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 79 I 0.90 I 100 1.9 U 9.8 U 18 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 73 I 4.9 26 U 15 5.2 U 520 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 580 0.79 I 380 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 190 0.68 I 620 1.9 U 9.8 U 23 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 380 6.5 U 240 1.8 U 5.3 U 62 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 540 0.25 U 420 4.9 I 7.9 I 230 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 460 0.25 U 78 I 1.7 U 17 I 540 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 120 0.50 I 87 1.9 U 9.8 U 3.3 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 200 0.98 I 190 3.6 I 9.8 U 14 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 34 U 6.5 U 31 I 4.7 I 5.3 U 54 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 55 I 0. 25 U 56 I 1.8 U 5.3 U 190 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 86 I 0.25 U 26 U 12 5.2 U 510 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1500 0.97 I 830 1.9 U 9.8 U 2.4 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 500 0.72 I 1500 1.9 U 9.8 U 25 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 280 0.25 U 290 2.6 I 6.8 I 240 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 150 0.25 U 26 U 1.7 U 5.2 U 1200 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1100 0.62 I 720 1.9 U 9.8 U 3.6 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 330 0.90 I 360 1.9 U 9.8 U 4.0 I 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 75 I 0.54 IP1 38 I 1.8 U 5.3 U 240 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 110 8.0 26 U 74 5.2 U 1100 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 890 1.1 610 1.9 U 9.8 U 3.5 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 2600 0.41 I 1000 1.9 U 9.8 U 6.6 I 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 130 6.5 U 56 I 1.8 U 5.3 U 17 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 130 0.25 U 26 U 1.7 U 5.2 U 600 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 530 0.61 I 300 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 34 I 0.54 I 1500 2.3 I 9.8 U 1.9 U 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 120 6.5 U 74 I 4.1 I 5.3 U 19 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 100 1.3 26 U 26 5.5 I 580 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 1300 1.4 2600 3.8 I 9.8 U 3.7 I Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 760 1.4 1400 3.0 I 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 2 year Follow-up Event

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-4 filtered

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-5 filtered Insufficient water to sample this location

Laboratory Analyses

D-1 unfiltered Insufficient water to sample this location

D-5 unfiltered Insufficient water to sample this location

D-3 unfiltered

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-4 unfiltered

D-1 filtered

D-2 unfiltered

D-2 filtered

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-3 filtered

Page 1 of 2 Reviewed MM 
TABLE 5: Stormwater Analytical Summary (Ditches)

Facility Name: St. Mary's Shoals Park 

Location: Baker County, Florida

 Sample

Boring Sample Date Aluminum Arsenic Iron Lead Nickel Vanadium

No. Description Collected (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) (ug/l) Comments

SWCTL - Freshwater Criteria 13 50 1,000 0.5-18.6* 16.1-168.5** NL

Laboratory Analyses

3/30/2009 110 0.80 I 240 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 2 year Follow-up Event

3/30/2009 82 0.95 I 140 1.9 U 9.8 U 1.9 U Baseline Sampling Event

8/20/2009 3 month Follow-up Event

12/3/2009 6 month Follow-up Event

6/7/2010 12 month Follow-up Event

10/10/2011 2 year Follow-up Event

Notes:

ug/L - micrograms per liter

SWCTL - Surface Water Cleanup Target Levels (from Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-777)

NL - Not Listed in FAC 62-777

 * - Based on hardness equation - Pb < e(1.273 [lnH] - 4.705) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

 ** - Based on hardness equation - Ni < e(0.846[lnH]+0.0584) with H=25 and H=400 per FAC 62-302.530 Table: Surface Water Quality Criteria

Flags: U - Undetected at noted concentration 

Bold font - indicates exceedance of regulatory standard

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-6 unfiltered Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

Insufficient water to sample this location

D-6 filtered

Insufficient water to sample this location

 I - Estimated value between the MDL and PQL; IP1 - RPD value not applicable for sample concentrations less than 5 times the 

 reporting limit.

Insufficient water to sample this location

Page 2 of 2 Reviewed MM