Assessment of soil-gas, soil, and water contamination at the former 19th Street landfill, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010

W. Fred Falls; Andral W. Caldwell; Wladmir B. Guimaraes; W. Hagan Ratliff; John B. Wellborn; James Landmeyer

doi:10.3133/ofr20111145

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · ofr20111145

Assessment of soil-gas, soil, and water contamination at the former 19th Street landfill, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010

W. Fred Falls·Andral W. Caldwell·Wladmir B. Guimaraes·W. Hagan Ratliff·John B. Wellborn·James Landmeyer

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Soil gas, soil, and water were assessed for organic and inorganic constituents at the former 19th Street landfill at Fort Gordon, Georgia, from February to September 2010. Passive soil-gas samplers were analyzed to evaluate organic constituents in the hyporheic zone and flood plain of a creek and soil gas within the estimated boundaries of the former landfill. Soil and water samples were analyzed to evaluate inorganic constituents in soil samples, and organic and inorganic constituents in the surface water of a creek adjacent to the landfill, respectively. This assessment was conducted to provide environmental constituent data to Fort Gordon pursuant to requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Hazardous Waste Permit process. The passive soil-gas samplers deployed in the water-saturated hyporheic zone and flood plain of the creek adjacent to the former landfill indicated the presence of total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) and octane above method detection levels in groundwater beneath the creek bed and flood plain at all 12 soil-gas sampler locations. The TPH concentrations ranged from 51.4 to 81.4 micrograms per liter. Octane concentrations ranged from 1.78 to 2.63 micrograms per liter. These detections do not clearly identify specific source areas in the former landfill; moreover, detections of TPH and octane in a soil-gas sampler installed at a seep on the western bank of the creek indicated the potential for these constituents to be derived from source areas outside the estimated boundaries of the former landfill. A passive soil-gas sampler survey was conducted in the former landfill from June 30 to July 5, 2010, and involved 56 soil-gas samplers that were analyzed for petroleum and halogenated compounds not classified as chemical agents or explosives. The TPH soil-gas mass exceeded 2.0 micrograms in 21 samplers. Most noticeable are the two sites with TPH detections which are located in and near the hyporheic zone and are likely to affect the creek. However, most TPH detections were located in and immediately adjacent to a debris field located within the former landfill and in areas where debris was not visible, including the northwestern and southeastern parts of the study area. Two of the four soil-gas samplers installed within a former military training area adjacent to the landfill also had TPH detections above the method detection level. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (as combined BTEX mass) were detected at 0.02 microgram or greater in three soil-gas samplers installed at the northwestern boundary and in five samplers installed in the southeastern part of the study area. There was no BTEX mass detected above the method detection level in samplers installed in the debris field. Toluene was the most frequently detected BTEX compound. Compounds indicative of diesel-range organics were detected above 0.04 microgram in 12 soil-gas samplers and had a distribution similar to that of TPH, including being detected in the debris field. Undecane was the most frequently detected diesel compound. Chloroform and naphthalene were detected in eight and two soil-gas samplers, respectively. Five soil-gas samplers deployed during September 2010 were analyzed for organic compounds classified as chemical agents and explosives, but none exceeded the method detection levels. Five composite soil samples collected from within the estimated boundaries of the former landfill were analyzed for 35 inorganic constituents, but none of the constituents detected exceeded regional screening levels for industrial soils. The sample collected in the debris field exceeded background levels for aluminum, barium, calcium, chromium, lead, nickel, potassium, sodium, and zinc. Three surface-water samples were collected in September 2010 from a stormwater outfall culvert that drains to the creek and from the open channel of the creek at upstream and downstream locations relative to the outfall. Toluene was detected at 0.661 mi

Explore related subjects

Open-File Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 32.26694444444444° to 32.48361111111111° latitude; -82.35111111111111° to -82.06694444444445° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

W. Fred Falls, Andral W. Caldwell, Wladmir B. Guimaraes, W. Hagan Ratliff, John B. Wellborn, James Landmeyer. 2011. Assessment of soil-gas, soil, and water contamination at the former 19th Street landfill, Fort Gordon, Georgia, 2009-2010. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20111145

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report↗

USGS2026

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region↗

USGS2026

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona↗