Geology topics

Andral W. Caldwell

Publications and source records attributed to Andral W. Caldwell.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2020

Effects of stormwater runoff from selected bridge decks on conditions of water, sediment, and biological quality in receiving waters in South Carolina, 2013 to 2018

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, investigated the effects of stormwater runoff from bridge decks on stream water quality conditions in South Carolina. The investigation assessed 5 bridges in 3 physiographic provinces in South Carolina (Piedmont, Upper Coastal Plain, and Lower Coast Plain) that had a range of bridge, traffic, and hydrologic characteristics. The five selected South Carolina bridge sites (coincident with U.S. Geological Survey stations) and corresponding highways were Lynches River at Effingham (station 02132000; U.S. Highway 52), North Fork Edisto River at Orangeburg (station 02173500; U.S. Highway 301), Turkey Creek above Huger (station 02172035; South Carolina Highway 41), South Fork Edisto River near Denmark (station 02173000; U.S. Highway 321), and Fishing Creek at Highway 5 below York (station 021473415; South Carolina Highway 5). Bridge decks at the selected sites used open chutes, scuppers, and downspouts to drain stormwater directly into the receiving water at evenly spaced intervals. Stream water, sediment, and biological samples were collected and analyzed for a variety of constituents to evaluate the stream conditions for this study. Five to six stream samples were collected at transects upstream and downstream from each selected bridge site using the equal-width-increment technique during observable stormwater runoff. Routine samples of the receiving waters were collected 12 to 14 times at the upstream transect during nonstorm conditions. Samples were analyzed for physical properties, suspended sediment, nutrients, major ions, trace metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and Escherichia coli . Bridge-deck sediment and streambed sediment at upstream and downstream transects were collected once at each bridge site and analyzed for metals and semivolatile organic compounds that include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Benthic macroinvertebrate community surveys were conducted once using Hester-Dendy multiplate artificial substrate samplers deployed at multiple upstream and downstream transects concurrently. Statistical analysis of the water-quality data determined that stormwater runoff from bridges did not significantly degrade physical properties, nor nutrient, trace-metal, Escherichia coli , and suspended-sediment concentrations at the selected sites beyond the variability at the upstream transect (no bridge influence) during the study period. During storm sampling at the bridge sites, water-quality conditions were statistically similar upstream and downstream from each bridge, except for greater turbidity, total nitrogen, and total organic nitrogen plus ammonia concentrations found downstream from the bridge site on Fishing Creek; higher total chromium concentrations detected downstream from the bridge site on Turkey Creek; and increased Escherichia coli concentrations found downstream from the bridge site on the North Fork Edisto River. Total recoverable lead, cadmium, and copper concentrations were the only trace metals that periodically exceeded the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control freshwater aquatic-life criteria at some bridge sites (lead, copper, and cadmium in Turkey Creek; cadmium and lead in Fishing Creek; lead in the South Fork Edisto River and Lynches River), but the exceedances occurred more frequently during routine sampling upstream from the bridge sites than during storm sampling at upstream and downstream transects. In general, stormwater runoff from the bridge decks did not seem to be the major source of metal enrichment in receiving waters during the study period. North Fork and South Fork Edisto Rivers and Turkey Creek had only one storm sample that exceeded South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control recreational criterion for Escherichia coli at both the upstream and downstream locations, while Fishing Creek had more frequent exceedances. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were detected infrequently in the stream samples. In general, sediment trace-metal concentrations were below the threshold and probable effect concentration at all bridge sites, except for the chromium concentration (45.1 milligrams per kilogram) detected upstream from the bridge site on Fishing Creek that exceeded the threshold effect concentration of 43.4 milligrams per kilogram. Based on enrichment ratios less than 1.5, bridge-deck runoff did not seem to be affecting trace-metal accumulation in the streambed sediment downstream from the bridge sites, except for lead at the bridge site on the Lynches River and manganese at the bridge site on Fishing Creek. Individual polycyclic aromatic compound concentrations and the sum of 18 compounds did not exceed any threshold and probable effect concentrations, indicating polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations in the streambed sediment at downstream and upstream transects were not likely to affect the health of benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Although the cumulative polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon concentrations in downstream sediment at the sites on Turkey and Fishing Creeks were well below the threshold effect concentration of 1,610 micrograms per kilogram, the 3- to 100-fold increase in downstream concentrations indicated a strong probability of a bridge-deck runoff source. Overall, benthic macroinvertebrate community health downstream from the bridge sites did not seem to be affected by bridge-deck runoff based on several multivariate analyses that indicated statistically similar benthic macroinvertebrate communities at upstream and downstream transects. Of the five bridge sites in this study, the site on Turkey Creek seemed to have the least healthy benthic macroinvertebrate communities because of the lowest Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera spp. (mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies, respectively) taxa, species richness, and diversity; and the highest biotic indices, indicative of poorer ecological health, at upstream and downstream transects. This ecological finding was not unexpected because of seasonal periods of negligible flow when dissolved-oxygen concentrations fell below 4 milligrams per liter during the study period. Of the five bridge sites in this study, the site on the South Fork Edisto River seemed to have healthier benthic macroinvertebrate communities because of the greater mean Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera spp. taxa; and lower mean biotic indices at upstream and downstream transects.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2017

Monitoring storm tide and flooding from Hurricane Matthew along the Atlantic coast of the United States, October 2016

Introduction Hurricane Matthew moved adjacent to the coasts of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The hurricane made landfall once near McClellanville, South Carolina, on October 8, 2016, as a Category 1 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) deployed a temporary monitoring network of storm-tide sensors at 284 sites along the Atlantic coast from Florida to North Carolina to record the timing, areal extent, and magnitude of hurricane storm tide and coastal flooding generated by Hurricane Matthew. Storm tide, as defined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is the water-level rise generated by a combination of storm surge and astronomical tide during a coastal storm. The deployment for Hurricane Matthew was the largest deployment of storm-tide sensors in USGS history and was completed as part of a coordinated Federal emergency response as outlined by the Stafford Act (Public Law 92–288, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5207) under a directed mission assignment by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. In total, 543 high-water marks (HWMs) also were collected after Hurricane Matthew, and this was the second largest HWM recovery effort in USGS history after Hurricane Sandy in 2012. During the hurricane, real-time water-level data collected at temporary rapid deployment gages (RDGs) and long-term USGS streamgage stations were relayed immediately for display on the USGS Flood Event Viewer ( https://stn.wim.usgs.gov/FEV/#MatthewOctober2016 ). These data provided emergency managers and responders with critical information for tracking flood-effected areas and directing assistance to effected communities. Data collected from this hurricane can be used to calibrate and evaluate the performance of storm-tide models for maximum and incremental water level and flood extent, and the site-specific effects of storm tide on natural and anthropogenic features of the environment.

Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina↗

USGS2016

Assessing potential scour using the South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves

Summary Bridge-scour equations presented in the Federal Highway Administration Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 18 reflect the current state-of-the practice for predicting scour at bridges. Although these laboratory-derived equations provide an important resource for assessing scour potential, there is a measure of uncertainty when applying these equations to field conditions. The uncertainty and limitations have been acknowledged by laboratory researchers and confirmed in field investigations. Because of the uncertainty associated with bridge-scour equations, HEC-18 recommends that engineers evaluate the computed scour depths obtained from the equations and modify the resulting data if they appear unreasonable. Perhaps the best way to evaluate the reasonableness of predicted scour is to compare it to field measurements of historic scour. Historic field data show scour depths resulting from high flows and provide a reference for evaluating predicted scour. It is rare, however, that such data are available at or near a site of interest, making the evaluation of predicted scour as compared to field data difficult if not impossible. Realizing the value of historic scour measurements, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), conducted a series of three field investigations to collect historic scour data with the goal of understanding regional trends of scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina. Historic scour measurements, including measurements of clear-water abutment, contraction, and pier scour, as well as live-bed contraction and pier scour, were made at more than 200 bridges. These field investigations provided valuable insights into regional scour trends and yielded regional bridge-scour envelope curves that can be used as supplementary tools for assessing all components of scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina. The application and limitations of these envelope curves were documented in four reports. Because each report addresses different components of bridge scour, it was recognized that there was a need to develop an integrated procedure for applying the envelope curves to help assess scour potential at riverine bridges in South Carolina. The result of that effort is detailed in Benedict and others (2016) and summarized in this fact sheet.

South Carolina↗

USGS2016

The South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, conducted a series of three field investigations to evaluate historical, riverine bridge scour in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain regions of South Carolina. These investigations included data collected at 231 riverine bridges, which lead to the development of bridge-scour envelope curves for clear-water and live-bed components of scour. The application and limitations of the South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves were documented in four reports, each report addressing selected components of bridge scour. The current investigation (2016) synthesizes the findings of these previous reports into a guidance manual providing an integrated procedure for applying the envelope curves. Additionally, the investigation provides limited verification for selected bridge-scour envelope curves by comparing them to field data collected outside of South Carolina from previously published sources. Although the bridge-scour envelope curves have limitations, they are useful supplementary tools for assessing the potential for scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina.

South Carolina↗

USGS2016

Upper bound of pier scour in laboratory and field data

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, conducted several field investigations of pier scour in South Carolina and used the data to develop envelope curves defining the upper bound of pier scour. To expand on this previous work, an additional cooperative investigation was initiated to combine the South Carolina data with pier scour data from other sources and to evaluate upper-bound relations with this larger data set. To facilitate this analysis, 569 laboratory and 1,858 field measurements of pier scour were compiled to form the 2014 USGS Pier Scour Database. This extensive database was used to develop an envelope curve for the potential maximum pier scour depth encompassing the laboratory and field data. The envelope curve provides a simple but useful tool for assessing the potential maximum pier scour depth for effective pier widths of about 30 ft or less.

South Carolina↗

USGS2016

Development and evaluation of clear-water pier and contraction scour envelope curves in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont Provinces of South Carolina

The U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation collected clear-water pier- and contraction-scour data at 116 bridges in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont Physiographic Provinces of South Carolina. Pier-scour depths collected in both provinces ranged from 0 to 8.0 feet. Contraction-scour depths collected in the Coastal Plain ranged from 0 to 3.9 feet. Using hydraulic data estimated with a one-dimensional flow model, predicted clear-water scour depths were computed with scour equations from the Federal Highway Administration Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 and compared with measured scour. This comparison indicated that predicted clear-water scour depths, in general, exceeded measured scour depths and at times were excessive. Predicted clear-water contraction scour, however, was underpredicted approximately 30 percent of the time by as much as 7.1 feet. The investigation focused on clear-water pier scour, comparing trends in the laboratory and field data. This comparison indicated that the range of dimensionless variables (relative depth, flow intensity, relative grain size) used in laboratory investigations of pier scour, were similar to the range for field data in South Carolina, further indicating that laboratory relations may have some applicability to field conditions in South Carolina. Variables determined to be important in developing pier scour in laboratory studies were investigated to understand their influence on the South Carolina field data, and many of these variables appeared to be insignificant under field conditions in South Carolina. The strongest explanatory variables were pier width and approach velocity. Envelope curves developed from the field data are useful tools for evaluating reasonable ranges of clear-water pier and contraction scour in South Carolina. A modified version of the Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 pier-scour equation also was developed as a tool for evaluating clearwater pier scour. The envelope curves and modified equation offer an improvement over the current methods for predicting clear-water scour in South Carolina. Data from this study were compiled into a database that includes photographs, measured scour depths, predicted scour depths, limited basin characteristics, limited soil data, and modeled hydraulic data. The South Carolina database can be used to compare studied sites with unstudied sites to evaluate the potential for scour at the unstudied sites. In addition, the database can be used to evaluate the performance of various methods for predicting clear-water pier and contraction scour.

South Carolina↗

USGS2015

The upper bound of abutment scour defined by selected laboratory and field data

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, conducted a field investigation of abutment scour in South Carolina and used that data to develop envelope curves defining the upper bound of abutment scour. To expand upon this previous work, an additional cooperative investigation was initiated to combine the South Carolina data with abutment-scour data from other sources and evaluate the upper bound of abutment scour with the larger data set. To facilitate this analysis, a literature review was made to identify potential sources of published abutment-scour data, and selected data, consisting of 446 laboratory and 331 field measurements, were compiled for the analysis. These data encompassed a wide range of laboratory and field conditions and represent field data from 6 states within the United States. The data set was used to evaluate the South Carolina abutment-scour envelope curves. Additionally, the data were used to evaluate a dimensionless abutment-scour envelope curve developed by Melville (1992), highlighting the distinct difference in the upper bound for laboratory and field data. The envelope curves evaluated in this investigation provide simple but useful tools for assessing the potential maximum abutment-scour depth in the field setting.

South Carolina↗

USGS2015

The upper bound of Pier Scour defined by selected laboratory and field data

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, conducted several field investigations of pier scour in South Carolina (Benedict and Caldwell, 2006; Benedict and Caldwell, 2009) and used that data to develop envelope curves defining the upper bound of pier scour. To expand upon this previous work, an additional cooperative investigation was initiated to combine the South Carolina data with pier-scour data from other sources and evaluate the upper bound of pier scour with this larger data set. To facilitate this analysis, a literature review was made to identify potential sources of published pier-scour data, and selected data were compiled into a digital spreadsheet consisting of approximately 570 laboratory and 1,880 field measurements. These data encompass a wide range of laboratory and field conditions and represent field data from 24 states within the United States and six other countries. This extensive database was used to define the upper bound of pier-scour depth with respect to pier width encompassing the laboratory and field data. Pier width is a primary variable that influences pier-scour depth (Laursen and Toch, 1956; Melville and Coleman, 2000; Mueller and Wagner, 2005, Ettema et al. 2011, Arneson et al. 2012) and therefore, was used as the primary explanatory variable in developing the upper-bound envelope curve. The envelope curve provides a simple but useful tool for assessing the potential maximum pier-scour depth for pier widths of about 30 feet or less.

South Carolina↗

USGS2014

A pier-scour database: 2,427 field and laboratory measurements of pier scour

The U.S. Geological Survey conducted a literature review to identify potential sources of published pier-scour data, and selected data were compiled into a digital spreadsheet called the 2014 USGS Pier-Scour Database (PSDb-2014) consisting of 569 laboratory and 1,858 field measurements. These data encompass a wide range of laboratory and field conditions and represent field data from 23 States within the United States and from 6 other countries. The digital spreadsheet is available on the Internet and offers a valuable resource to engineers and researchers seeking to understand pier-scour relations in the laboratory and field.

Data Series↗

USGS2014

A guidance manual for assessing scour potential using the South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, conducted a series of three field investigations of bridge scour in order to better understand regional trends of scour within South Carolina. The studies collected historic-scour data at approximately 200 riverine bridges including measurements of clear-water abutment, contraction, and pier scour, as well as live-bed contraction and pier scour. These investigations provided valuable insights for regional scour trends and yielded bridge-scour envelope curves for assessing scour potential associated with all components of scour at riverine bridges in South Carolina. The application and limitations of these envelop cureves were documents in three reports, Each repoort addresses different components of bridge scour and this, there is a need to develop an integrated procedure for applying the South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves. To address this need, the U.S. Geological Survey and the South Carolina Department of Transportation initiated a cooperative effort to develop an integrated procedure and document the method in a guidance manual. In addition to developing the integrated procedure, field data from other investigations outside of South Carolina were used to verify the South Carolina bridge-source envelope curves.

South Carolina↗

USGS2013

Flood-inundation maps for the Saluda River from Old Easley Bridge Road to Saluda Lake Dam near Greenville, South Carolina

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 3.95-mile reach of the Saluda River from approximately 815 feet downstream from Old Easley Bridge Road to approximately 150 feet downstream from Saluda Lake Dam near Greenville, South Carolina, were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/, depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Saluda River near Greenville, South Carolina (station 02162500). Current conditions at the USGS streamgage may be obtained through the National Water Information System Web site at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/sc/nwis/uv/?site_no=02162500&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060,00062. The National Weather Service (NWS) forecasts flood hydrographs at many places that are often collocated with USGS streamgages. Forecasted peak-stage information is available on the Internet at the NWS Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) flood-warning system Web site (http://water.weather.gov/ahps/) and may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation.In this study, flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The model was calibrated using the most current stage-streamflow relations at USGS streamgage station 02162500, Saluda River near Greenville, South Carolina. The hydraulic model was then used to determine water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1.0-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from approximately bankfull to 2 feet higher than the highest recorded water level at the streamgage. The simulated water-surface profiles were then exported to a geographic information system, ArcGIS, and combined with a digital elevation model (derived from Light Detection and Ranging [LiDAR] data with a 0.6-foot vertical Root Mean Square Error [RMSE] and a 3.0-foot horizontal RMSE), using HEC-GeoRAS tools in order to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with real-time stage data from the USGS streamgage station 02162500 and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, can provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical during flood-response and flood-recovery activities, such as evacuations, road closures, and disaster declarations.

South Carolina↗

USGS2012

Trends in live-bed pier scour at selected bridges in South Carolina

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, used ground-penetrating radar to collect measurements of live-bed pier scour at 78 bridges in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic provinces of South Carolina. The 141 measurements of live-bed pier-scour depth ranged from 0.5 to 5.1 meters. Using hydraulic data estimated with a one-dimensional flow model, predicted live-bed scour depths were computed with scour equations from the Hydraulic Engineering Circular 18 and compared with measured scour. This comparison indicated that predicted pier-scour depths generally exceeded the measured pier-scour depths. At times, predicted pier-scour depths were excessive with overpredictions as large as 7.0 meters. Relations in the live-bed pier-scour data also were investigated, leading to the development of an envelope curve for assessing the upper-bound of live-bed pier scour using pier width as the primary explanatory variable. The envelope curve developed with the field data has limitations, but it can be used as a supplementary tool for assessing the potential for live-bed pier scour in South Carolina. This paper will present findings related to the field investigation of live-bed pier scour. A companion paper presents findings related to live-bed contraction scour that was studied during the same field investigation.

South Carolina↗

USGS2012

Assessment of soil-gas contamination at three former fuel-dispensing sites, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2010—2011

Soil gas was assessed for contaminants at three former fuel-dispensing sites at Fort Gordon, Georgia, from October 2010 to September 2011. The assessment included delineation of organic contaminants using soil-gas samplers collected from the former fuel-dispensing sites at 8th Street, Chamberlain Avenue, and 12th Street. This assessment was conducted to provide environmental contamination data to Fort Gordon personnel pursuant to requirements for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Hazardous Waste Permit process. Soil-gas samplers installed and retrieved during June and August 2011 at the 8th Street site had detections above the method detection level (MDL) for the mass of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ortho-xylene, undecane, tridecane, pentadecane, and chloroform. Total petroleum hydrocarbons soil-gas mass exceeded the MDL of 0.02 microgram in 54 of the 55 soil-gas samplers. The highest detection of TPH soil-gas mass was 146.10 micrograms, located in the central part of the site. Benzene mass exceeded the MDL of 0.01 microgram in 23 soil-gas samplers, whereas toluene was detected in only 10 soil-gas samplers. Ortho-xylene was detected above the MDL in only one soil-gas sampler. The highest soil-gas mass detected for undecane, tridecane, and pentadecane was located in the northeastern corner of the 8th Street site. Chloroform mass greater than the MDL of 0.01 microgram was detected in less than one-third of the soil-gas samplers. Soil-gas masses above the MDL were identified for TPH, gasoline-related compounds, diesel-range alkanes, trimethylbenzenes, naphthalene, 2-methyl-napthalene, octane, and tetrachloroethylene for the July 2011 soil-gas survey at the Chamberlain Avenue site. All 30 of the soil-gas samplers contained TPH mass above the MDL. The highest detection of TPH mass, 426.36 micrograms, was for a soil-gas sampler located near the northern boundary of the site. Gasoline-related compounds and diesel-range alkanes were detected in multiple soil-gas samplers, and the highest detections of these compounds were located near the central part of the site near existing, nonoperational, fuel-dispensing pumps. Trimethylbenzenes were detected in less than half of the soil-gas samplers. Naphthalene soil-gas mass was detected above the MDL in 10 soil-gas samplers, whereas 2-methyl-napthalene was detected above the MDL in half of the soil-gas samplers. Octane mass was detected above the MDL in one soil-gas sampler located near the central part of the site. Tetrachloroethylene soil-gas mass was detected above the MDL in more than half of the soil-gas samplers, and the highest tetrachloroethylene soil-gas mass of 0.90 microgram was located in the northeastern part of the site. Soil-gas samplers collected at the 12th Street site during July 2011 contained soil-gas mass above the MDL for TPH, toluene, undecane, tridecane, and pentadecane (diesel-range alkanes), trichloroethylene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, chloroform, and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene. The highest detected TPH mass was 24.37 micrograms in a soil-gas sampler located in the northern part of the site. The highest detection of toluene soil-gas mass was from a soil-gas sampler located near the southern boundary of the site. The diesel-range alkanes were detected above the MDL in five soil-gas samplers; the highest detection of soil-gas diesel mass, 0.65 microgram, was located in the southern part of the site. Trichloroethylene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene were detected above the MDL in the northern part of the site in one soil-gas sampler that also had one of the highest detections of TPH. Chloroform was detected above the MDL in three soil-gas samplers, whereas 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene soil-gas mass was detected above the MDL in two soil-gas samplers.

Georgia↗

USGS2012

Assessment of soil-gas contamination at the 17th Street landfill, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2011

Assessments of contaminants in soil gas were conducted in two study areas at Fort Gordon, Georgia, in July and August of 2011 to supplement environmental contaminant data for previous studies at the 17th Street landfill. The two study areas include northern and eastern parts of the 17th Street landfill and the adjacent wooded areas to the north and east of the landfill. These study areas were chosen because of their close proximity to the surface water in Wilkerson Lake and McCoys Creek. A total of 48 soil-gas samplers were deployed for the July 28 to August 3, 2011, assessment in the eastern study area. The assessment mostly identified detections of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), and gasoline- and diesel-range compounds, but also identified the presence of chlorinated solvents in six samplers, chloroform in three samplers, 2-methyl naphthalene in one sampler, and trimethylbenzene in one sampler. The TPH masses exceeded 0.02 microgram (μg) in all 48 samplers and exceeded 0.9 μg in 24 samplers. Undecane, one of the three diesel-range compounds used to calculate the combined mass for diesel-range compounds, was detected in 17 samplers and is the second most commonly detected compound in the eastern study area, exceeded only by the number of TPH detections. Six samplers had detections of toluene, but other gasoline compounds were detected with toluene in three of the samplers, including detections of ethylbenzene, meta- and para-xylene, and octane. All detections of chlorinated organic compounds had soil-gas masses equal to or less than 0.08 μg, including three detections of trichloroethene, three detections of perchloroethene, three chloroform detections, one 1,4-dichlorobenzene detection, and one 1,1,2-trichloroethane detection. Three methylated compounds were detected in the eastern study area, but were detected at or below method detection levels. A total of 32 soil-gas samplers were deployed for the August 11–24, 2011, assessment in the northern study area. All samplers in the survey had detections of TPH, but only eight of the samplers had detections of TPH greater than 0.9 mg. Four samplers had TPH detections greater than 9 mg; the only other fuel-related compounds detected in these four samplers included toluene in three of the samplers and undecane in the fourth sampler. Three samplers deployed along the western margin of the northern landfill had detections of both diesel-and gasoline-related compounds; however, the diesel-related compounds were detected at or below method detection levels. Seven samplers in the northern study area had detections of chlorinated compounds, including three perchloroethene detections, three chloroform detections, and one 1,4-dichloro-benzene detection. One sampler on the western margin of the landfill had detections of 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene and 1,3,5-tr-methylbenene below method detection levels.

Georgia↗

USGS2012

Assessment of soil-gas and groundwater contamination at the Gibson Road landfill, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2011

Soil-gas and groundwater assessments were conducted at the Gibson Road landfill in 201 to provide screening-level environmental contamination data to supplement the data collected during previous environmental studies at the landfill. Passive samplers were used in both assessments to detect volatile and semivolatile organic compounds and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil gas and groundwater. A total of 56 passive samplers were deployed in the soil in late July and early August for the soil-gas assessment. Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were detected at masses greater than the method detection level of 0.02 microgram in all samplers and masses greater than 2.0 micrograms in 13 samplers. Three samplers located between the landfill and a nearby wetland had TPH masses greater than 20 micrograms. Diesel was detected in 28 of the 56 soil-gas samplers. Undecane, tridecane, and pentadecane were detected, but undecane was the most common diesel compound with 23 detections. Only five detections exceeded a combined diesel mass of 0.10 microgram, including the highest mass of 0.27 microgram near the wetland. Toluene was detected in only five passive samplers, including masses of 0.65 microgram near the wetland and 0.85 microgram on the southwestern side of the landfill. The only other gasoline-related compound detected was octane in two samplers. Naphthalene was detected in two samplers in the gully near the landfill and two samplers along the southwestern side of the landfill, but had masses less than or equal to 0.02 microgram. Six samplers located southeast of the landfill had detections of chlorinated compounds, including one perchloroethene detections (0.04 microgram) and five chloroform detections (0.05 to0.08 microgram). Passive samplers were deployed and recovered on August 8, 2011, in nine monitoring wells along the southwestern, southeastern and northeastern sides of the landfill and down gradient from the eastern corner of the landfill. Six of the nine samplers had TPH concentrations greater than 100 micrograms per liter. TPH concentrations declined from 320 micrograms per liter in a sampler near the landfill to 18 micrograms in a sampler near the wetland. Five of the samplers had detections of one or more diesel compounds but detections of individual diesel compounds had concentrations below a method detection level of 0.01 microgram per liter. Benzene was detected in three samplers and exceeded the national primary drinking-water standard of 5 micrograms per liter set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The concentrations of benzene, and therefore BTEX, were 6.1 micrograms per liter in the sampler near the eastern corner of the landfill, 27 micrograms per liter in the sampler near the wetland, and 37 micrograms per liter in the sampler at the southern corner of the landfill. Nonfuel-related compounds were detected in the four wells that are aligned between the eastern corner of the landfill and the wetland. The sampler deployed nearest the eastern corner of the landfill had the greatest number of detected organic compounds and had the only detections of two trimethylbenzene compounds, naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene, and 1,4-dichlorobenzene. The two up gradient samplers had the greatest number of chlorinated compounds with five compounds each, compared to detections of four compounds and one compound in the two down gradient samplers. All four samplers had detections of 1,1-dichloroethane which ranged from 42 to 1,300 micrograms per liter. Other detections of chlorinated compounds included trichloroethene, perchloroethene, cis-1,2-dichloroethene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane and chloroform.

Georgia↗

USGS2012

Assessment of soil-gas contamination at building 310 underground storage tank area, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2010-2011

Soil gas was assessed for contaminants in the building 310 underground storage tank area adjacent to the Dwight D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center at Ft. Gordon, Georgia, from October 2010 to September 2011. The assessment, which also included the detection of organic compounds in soil gas, provides environmental contamination data to Fort Gordon personnel pursuant to requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Hazardous Waste Permit process. The study was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army Environmental and Natural Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon. Soil-gas samplers were deployed below land surface at 37 locations in the building 310 underground storage tank area. Soil-gas samplers were deployed in a grid pattern near the storage tank area as well as downslope of the tank area in the direction of groundwater flow toward an unnamed tributary to Butler Creek. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in 35 of the 37 soil-gas samplers at levels above the method detection level, and the combined mass of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes were detected above their detection levels in 8 of the 37 samplers. In addition, the combined masses of undecane, tridecane, and pentadecane were detected at or above their method detection levels in 9 of the 37 samplers. Other volatile organic compounds detected above their respective method detection levels were chloroform, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and perchloroethylene. In addition, naphthalene, 2-methyl naphthalene, and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene were detected below the method detection levels, but above the nondetection level.

Georgia↗

USGS2012

Assessment of groundwater, soil-gas, and soil contamination at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2011

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of the Army Environmental and Natural Resources Management Office of the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, Georgia, assessed the groundwater, soil gas, and soil for contaminants at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility (VATF) at Fort Gordon, from October 2009 to September 2011. The assessment included the detection of organic compounds in the groundwater and soil gas, and inorganic compounds in the soil. In addition, organic contaminant assessment included organic compounds classified as explosives and chemical agents in selected areas. The assessment was conducted to provide environmental contamination data to the U.S. Army at Fort Gordon pursuant to requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Hazardous Waste Permit process. This report is a revision of "Assessment of soil-gas, surface-water, and soil contamination at the Vietnam Armor Training Facility, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010," Open-File Report 2011-1200, and supersedes that report to include results of additional samples collected in July 2011. Four passive samplers were deployed in groundwater wells at the VATF in Fort Gordon. Total petroleum hydrocarbons and benzene and octane were detected above the method detection level at all four wells. The only other volatile organic compounds detected above their method detection level were undecane and pentadecane, which were detected in two of the four wells. Soil-gas samplers were deployed at 72 locations in a grid pattern across the VATF on June 3, 2010, and then later retrieved on June 9, 2010. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in 71 of the 72 samplers (one sampler was destroyed in the field and not analyzed) at levels above the method detection level, and the combined mass of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylene (BTEX) was detected above the detection level in 31 of the 71 samplers that were analyzed. Other volatile organic compounds detected above their respective method detection levels were naphthalene, 2-methyl-naphthalene, tridecane, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and perchloroethylene. After the results of the 71 soil-gas samplers were received, 31 additional passive soil-gas samplers were deployed on July 14, 2011, and retrieved on July 18, 2011. These 31 samplers were deployed on a larger areal scale to better define the extent of the contamination. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were detected above their method detection level at all 31 samplers, whereas BTEX was detected above its method detection level at 17 of the 31 samplers. Other organic compounds detected above their method detection levels were naphthalene, 2-methyl-naphthalene, octane, undecane, tridecane, pentadecane, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, chloroform, and perchloroethylene. Subsequent to the 2010 soil-gas survey, four areas determined to have elevated contaminant mass were selected and sampled for explosives and chemical agents. No detections of explosives or chemical agents above their respective method detection levels were found at any of the sampling locations. The same four locations that were sampled for explosives and chemical agents were selected for the collection of soil samples. A fifth location also was selected on the basis of the elevated contaminant mass of the soil-gas survey. No metals that exceeded the Regional Screening Levels for Industrial Soils, as classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, were detected at any of the five VATF locations. The soil samples also were compared to values from the ambient, uncontaminated (background) levels for soils in South Carolina, as classified by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. Because South Carolina is adjacent to Georgia and the soils in the Coastal Plain are similar, these comparisons are valid. No similar values are available for Georgia to use for comparison purposes. The metals that were detected above the ambient background levels for South Carolina, as classified by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, include aluminum, arsenic, barium, beryllium, calcium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, sodium, and zinc.

Georgia↗

USGS2012

Modification of selected South Carolina bridge-scour envelope curves

Historic scour was investigated at 231 bridges in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic provinces of South Carolina by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Transportation. These investigations led to the development of field-derived envelope curves that provided supplementary tools to assess the potential for scour at bridges in South Carolina for selected scour components that included clear-water abutment, contraction, and pier scour, and live-bed pier and contraction scour. The envelope curves consist of a single curve with one explanatory variable encompassing all of the measured field data for the respective scour components. In the current investigation, the clear-water abutment-scour and live-bed contraction-scour envelope curves were modified to include a family of curves that utilized two explanatory variables, providing a means to further refine the assessment of scour potential for those specific scour components. The modified envelope curves and guidance for their application are presented in this report.

South Carolina↗