Background Evaluation · 2018-01-23 · Background Evaluation Report November 2017 Page 5 Common Acronyms BGS below ground surface BTV background threshold value CAFO Concentrated

Background Evaluation FINAL

Mid-Kansas Cooperative-Burns Facility Burns, Kansas

Prepared for: Mid-Kansas Cooperative

NOVEMBER 2017

Mid-Kansas Cooperative

BACKGROUND EVALUATION REPORT

NOVEMBER 2017

712 S . Kansas Avenue Su i te 1 Topeka , Kansas 66603

785 .256 .0045 www.ppbenv .com

ppB Project No. 2017-4

Ryan Weiser, P.G. Project Manager

Chris Carey, P.G. Project Manager

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page3TableofContents

TableofContents...............................................................................................................................3CommonAcronyms............................................................................................................................5Glossary...............................................................................................................................................6ExecutiveSummary............................................................................................................................81 Introduction,PurposeandObjectives.......................................................................................92 HistoricalOperationsandBackdrop........................................................................................113 ConceptualSiteModel.............................................................................................................123.1 SiteDescription.............................................................................................................................123.2 SurroundingPropertyUses...........................................................................................................123.3 PreviousInvestigations.................................................................................................................133.4 SiteGeology/HydrogeologySummary..........................................................................................153.5 GroundwaterMonitoringProgram...............................................................................................173.6 GroundwaterFlowAnalysisandSiteHydrogeology.....................................................................173.7 Upgradientvs.Onsitevs.Downgradient.......................................................................................183.8 NitrateConcentrationAnalysis.....................................................................................................184 RegulatoryFrameworkforGroundwaterBackgroundEvaluation..........................................194.1 Risk-BasedStandardsforKansas...................................................................................................194.2 BERNitratePolicy..........................................................................................................................194.3 BERBackgroundPolicy..................................................................................................................195 Statistics....................................................................................................................................215.1 Methodology.................................................................................................................................215.2 StatisticalAnalysisandResults......................................................................................................225.2.1 Outliers......................................................................................................................................225.2.2 DataDistribution.......................................................................................................................225.2.3 TrendAnalyses..........................................................................................................................225.2.4 BackgroundThresholdValues...................................................................................................235.2.5 InterwellAnalysis......................................................................................................................235.3 InterpretationsandConclusions...................................................................................................246 Recommendations....................................................................................................................267 References................................................................................................................................27

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page4Tables

Table1 GroundwaterConcentrationData(December2012-Present)

Figures

Figure1 SiteLocationFigure2 RegionalTopographyFigure3 SoilData(1997-2009)Figure4 GroundwaterElevationTrendsFigure5 VariationsinGroundwaterFlowOverTimeFigure6 WellClassificationforStatisticalAnalysisFigure7 NitrateConcentrationsinGroundwater(October2016)

Appendices

AppendixA WindshieldSurveyPhotoLogAppendixB StatisticalAnalyses B.1 GeneralStatistics B.2 OutlierAnalyses B.3 GoodnessofFitAnalyses B.4 TendAnalyses B.5 BackgroundThresholdValueAnalyses

B.6 InterwellAnalyses

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page5CommonAcronyms

BGS belowgroundsurfaceBTV backgroundthresholdvalueCAFO ConcentratedAnimalFeedingOperationsCERCLA ComprehensiveEnvironmentalResponse,Compensation,andLiabilityActCFR CodeofFederalRegulationsCOC contaminantofconcernCSM ConceptualSiteModelEPA U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyESA EnvironmentalSiteAssessmentKDHE KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironmentKGS KansasGeologicalSurveyMCL maximumcontaminantlevelMKC Mid-KansasCooperativemg/kg milligramperkilogrammg/L milligramperliterND non-detectNPR NitratePresumptiveRemedyPPB ppBEnviroSolutionsLLCRAO remedialactionobjectiveRL reportinglimitRSK KDHERisk-basedStandardsforKansasManualSDWA SafeDrinkingWaterActUCL95 95%upperconfidencelimitUPL upperpredictivelimitUPL95 95%UpperpredictivelimitUSL uppersignificancelimitsUTL uppertolerancelimitVCI VoluntaryCleanupInvestigationVCPRP VoluntaryCleanupandPropertyRedevelopmentProgramVCP VoluntaryCleanupProposal

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page6Glossary

Ammonia ChemicalformulaNH3(un-ionized)(ammonia)orNH4+(ionized)(ammonium).

Ammoniacanbeexpressedaseithermilligrams(mg)ofammoniamoleculeperLiter(mgNH3/L);or,mgofammonia-nitrogenperliter(mgNH3-N/L).ToreportasmgNH3-N/L,multiplymgNH3/Lby0.823.Ammonia(Total)asNlabanalysisincludesboththeionizedandun-ionizedforms.(KDHE,2014)

Aquifer Anundergroundgeologicformationthatcontainsandiscapableoftransmittingoryieldingwaterinsufficientquantitiesthatcanbeextractedforbeneficialpurposes(KDHE,2016).

BackgroundMeasurements

Measurementsthatarenotsite-relatedorimpactedbysiteactivities.Backgroundsourcescanbenaturallyoccurringoranthropogenic.

Facility Therealproperty,buildings,structures,fixtures,andappurtenanceslocatedat301EastMainStreetinBurns,Kansas.

ConfidenceInterval

Baseduponthesampleddataset,aconfidenceintervalforaparameterisarandomintervalwithinwhichtheunknownpopulationparameter,suchasthemean,falls.

ConfidenceLimit

Theloweroranupperboundaryofaconfidenceinterval.

Fertilizer Formsofnitrogenasnitrateorammoniacompoundsappliedforcropgrowth.(KDHE,2014)

Groundwater Subsurfacewaterinthezoneofsaturationthatisorhastheabilitytosupplywells,springs,orseeps,orthatisheldinaquifersorthesoilprofile(KDHE,2016)

LicensedProfessional

AnindividuallicensedbyandingoodstandingwiththeKansasBoardofTechnicalProfessionstopracticegeologywithspecificexpertiseinaquifercharacterization.TheBoardmaintainsadatabaseoflicensedprofessionalsavailableonlineathttp://licensing.ks.gov/Verification_KBTP/(KDHE,2016)

MCL Themaximumpermissiblelevelofacontaminantinwaterthatisdeliveredtoanyuserofapublicwatersystem

Nitrate ChemicalformulaNO3.Nitratecanbeexpressedaseithermgofnitratemoleculeperliter(mgNO3/L);or,mgofnitrate-nitrogenperliter(mgNO3-N/L).TheEPAMaximumContaminantLevelfornitrateinwaterisexpressedas10mgNO3-N/Lor45mgNO3/L.ToreportasmgNO3-N/L,multiplymgNO3/Lby0.225.(KDHE,2014)

Nitrogen Nitrogen(total)isthetotalamountofnitrateasmgNO3-N/L,NitriteasmgNO2-N/L,ammonia,andorganicallybondednitrogen.(KDHE,2014)

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page7PotableWater Watersuitablefordrinkingandcookingpurposesintermsofbothhuman

healthandaestheticconsiderations(KDHE,2016).PredictionInterval

Theinterval(baseduponhistoricaldata,backgrounddata)withinwhichanewlyandindependentlyobtainedsiteobservationofthepredictedvariablefallswithinagivenprobabilityorconfidencecoefficient.

Receptor Humanorenvironmentalendreceiverimpactedbycontaminatedsoils,groundwater,orsurfacewater(KDHE,2016).

RSKManual TheRisk-BasedStandardsforKansasManual5thVersion(October2015)andanysubsequentupdates.TheManualprovidesguidanceandcalculatedscreeninglevelsforspecificcontaminants.

Site Thefacility,inadditiontoallareasandmediatowhichcontaminationthatoriginatedattheFacilityhavebeenreleasedand/ormigrated.

Tier1 Tier1isacomparisonoftheconcentrationofanaturallyoccurringcontaminanttothebackgroundconcentrationofthatcontaminantintheaffectedmedium(KDHE,2010).

Tier2 Calculatedrisk-basedscreeninglevelsforaspecificcontaminantfoundinAppendixAoftheKDHERisk-basedStandardsforKansasmanual(KDHE,2010).

Tier3 Aprocessinvolvingcollectingthenecessarydata,underKDHE/BERdirection,toreplacedefaultvaluesintheTier2equationswithsitespecificinformation(KDHE,2010).

UpperConfidenceLimit(UCL)

Theupperboundaryorlimitofaconfidenceintervaloraparameterofinterestsuchasthepopulationmean

UpperPredictionLimit(UPL)

Theupperboundaryofapredictionintervalforanindependentlyobtainedobservation(oranindependentfutureobservation)

UpperToleranceLimit(UTL)

Aconfidencelimitonapercentileofthepopulationratherthanaconfidencelimitonthemean.

UpperSimultaneousLimit(USL)

Theupperboundaryofthelargestvalue.

Water-wellsurvey

Aprocesstoidentifyallgroundwaterandsurfacewaterusersinthevicinityofacontaminatedareainordertodetermineiftheyareimpacted.(KDHE,2014)

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page8ExecutiveSummary

TheMid-KansasCooperative(MKC)facilityinBurns,Kansas(hereinafter,the“BurnsFacility”or“MKCFacility”)isanagribusinessfacilitylocatedat301EastMainStreetinBurns,MarionCounty,Kansas.Facilityoperationsbeganinthemid-1970sandincludegrainstorageandagronomicandfeedservices.TheBurnsFacilitywasvoluntarilyenteredtheKansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment’s(KDHE)VoluntaryCleanupandPropertyRedevelopmentProgram(VCPRP)in1999.MKC’sextensivesitecharacterizationeffortshaveincludedamulti-phasedvoluntarycleanupinvestigation(VCI),includingsoilandgroundwatersampling,andongoingcontinualgroundwatermonitoringtodelineatenitrogen,intheformofnitrate,(hereinafter“nitrate”)impactsinsoilandgroundwaterintheSitevicinity.

TheavailabledatademonstratethepresenceofnitrateingroundwateratconcentrationsinexcessofthedrinkingwaterstandardestablishedbytheSafeDrinkingWaterAct(SDWA)(i.e.,MaximumContaminantLevels,orMCLs)of10milligramsperliter(mg/L)throughouttheBurnscommunity.Originally,theseimpactswereattributedtoreleasesattheMKCFacility;however,furtheranalysisshowsmanypotentialsourcesintheSitevicinity,includingbutnotlimitedtoconcentratedanimalfeedingoperations(CAFOs)andagriculturalfields.ContaminationassociatedwiththesetypesofothersourcesarenottypicallyaddressedthroughKDHE’sVCPRP.

MKCretainedppBEnviroSolutionsLLC(PPB)in2017toperformadetailedanalysisoftheprojectdatasetto:(1)helpunderstandtherelationshipbetweenvarioussourcesofnitrateintheSitevicinity;(2)determinetheextentofimpactsrelatedtooperationsattheBurnsFacilityand;(3)establishtheappropriatepathforwardtoproactivelymanageanyrisksposedbycontaminationassociatedwithMKC’soperations.PPBreviewedthedataandperformedanumberofstatisticalanalysestoquantifythenitrateconcentrationsthatcanreasonablybeattributedtotheMKCfacilityandupgradientsourcesunaffectedbytheMKCFacility.ThisanalysisshowsthatwhiletheremaybesomelocalizedmasscontributiontogroundwaterontheMKCFacilityitself,thenitrateconcentrationsdowngradientoftheMKCfacilityarestatisticallysignificantlylowerthantheconcentrationspresentingroundwaterupgradientoftheMKCFacility.Inshort,theeffectsofanyresidualnitratesoilsourcesontheMKCfacilityarenegligiblecomparedtotheoverwhelmingbackgroundimpactsattributabletootherundefinedsourcesupgradientoftheBurnsFacility.

Basedontheavailabledataandbackgroundanalysisperformedherein,PPBproposestomoveforwardwithestablishmentofanEnvironmentalUseControltoaddresspotentialexposurerisktoresidualcontaminationandtofacilitateKDHE’sNoFurtherAction(NFA)determinationfortheBurnsFacility.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page91 Introduction,PurposeandObjectives

TheMKCBurnsFacilityislocatedat301E.MainStreetinBurns,Kansas.AlocationmapisincludedasFigure1.TheBurnsFacilityisapproximatelynine(9)acresinsizeandincludesvariousstructuresconsistingofbuildings,grainbins,loadingpads,scales,etc.AgribusinessoperationshavebeenconductedattheBurnsFacilitysincethemid-1970s.TheBurnsFacilitywasvoluntarilyenteredintotheKansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment’s(KDHE)VoluntaryCleanupandPropertyRedevelopmentProgram(VCPRP)in1999.MKC’sextensivesitecharacterizationactivitieshaveincludedamulti-phasedvoluntarycleanupinvestigation(VCI),includingsoilandgroundwatersamplingandongoingcontinualgroundwatermonitoringtodelineatenitrogen,intheformofnitrate,(hereinafter“nitrate”)impactsinsoilandgroundwaterintheSitevicinity.

Asnewdatabecameavailableovertheperiodofrecord,itbecameapparentthattheremaybeothersourcescontributingtonitrateimpactsingroundwaterintheBurnscommunity.AlthoughtheBurnsFacilityhandlednitrogen-basedfertilizer,othersourcesofnitrateincludenearbyConcentratedAnimalFeedingOperations(CAFOs)andagriculturalfields.ForthepurposesoftheBurnsConceptualSiteModel(CSM),backgroundcontaminationisdefinedasthenitratemassingroundwaterthatisnotassociatedwithreleasesattheBurnsFacility.

KDHEandtheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)frequentlyrelyonacomparisonofsitedatatothreetimestheobservedbackgroundconcentrationasapreliminaryscreeningtooltoevaluatethesignificanceofpotentialonsitereleases(seefigureright;basedonEPA,2016).PPBappliedthissameapproachasaninitialscreeningsteptoevaluatethereasonablenessoffurtheranalysistoquantifycontaminationpotentiallyattributabletotheMKCFacility.

MDL(2mg/L)

RL(10mg/L)

Case#1 Case#2

BackgroundSample(#2)(11mg/L)

BackgroundSample(#1)(ND(2)

SourceSample(#2)(40mg/L)

SourceSample(#1)(11mg/L)

3XBackground

3XBackgroundMDL]

]

SignificanceAboveBackground

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page10Thisreportpresentstheresultsofthatanalysisandspecificallyevaluates:

(1) Geospatialdistributionofnitratecontamination;(2) Identificationofpredominantgroundwaterflowdirectionanddelineationofupgradient

(i.e.,background),onsite,cross-gradientanddowngradientareasintheSitevicinity;(3) GeneralstatisticsfortheBurnsdatasettoensureproperapplicationofstatisticaltools;(4) Calculationofupperpredictivelimits(UPLs)toestablishthebackgroundthresholdvalue

(BTV),orlevelofcontaminationwhichcanreasonablybeattributabletobackgroundconditions;

(5) ComparisonofsitedatatothecalculatedBTV;and(6) Interwellanalysisforthedowngradientandonsitedatasetstothebackgrounddataset.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page112 HistoricalOperationsandBackdrop

In1997,anitratereleaseattheBurnsFacilitywasfirstreportedtotheKDHENorthCentralDistrictOffice.Thereleasewasreportedlyassociatedwithstormwaterrunofffromthedryfertilizerstoragearea.Subsequently,inNovemberof1997,asoilinvestigationwasconductedbyServi-Tech,Inc.whichidentifiednitrateinsubsurfacesoilsrangingfrom515to536milligramsperkilogram(mg/kg).OnFebruary11,1999,aVoluntaryCleanupApplicationwassubmittedtoKDHEbyFarmersGrainCooperative.OnJuly7,1999,theVoluntaryAgreementwasexecutedtoprovidearegulatoryframeworkfortheinvestigationandcleanupofnitrateimpactedsoilandgroundwaterattheBurnsFacility.Sincethattime,theBurnsFacilityhasbeenthesubjectofvariousenvironmentalstudies,includingaVCI(Enviro-Tech,2010),whichincludedmultiplesoilandgroundwaterinvestigationstoevaluatenitrateimpactsintheBurnscommunity.NitratehasbeendetectedinonsitesoilatconcentrationsexceedingKDHE’sscreeninglevels(BER-RS-047)andingroundwateratlevelsexceedingtheEPApromulgatedmaximumcontaminantlevel(MCL)of10milligramsperliter(mg/L).Soilimpactsaregenerallylimitedtothedryfertilizerbuildingareaandloadpadoftheoperationalfacility.MKChasalsoperformedongoinggroundwatermonitoringsince2002.Resultsofthe2016monitoringeventsindicatenitrateconcentrationsingroundwaterrangedfrom7.2mg/LindowngradientmonitoringwellMW-11,toamaximumconcentrationof34mg/Lonsite.MW-8and9,whicharelocatedhydraulicallyupgradientoftheBurnsfacilitycontainnitrateatconcentrationsrangingfrom23to33mg/L.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page123 ConceptualSiteModel3.1 SiteDescription

TheCityofBurnsisinMarionCounty,Kansas,approximately17milesnorthofElDorado,Kansas.U.S.Highway77runsadjacenttotheeastsideofBurns.TheMKCBurnsfacilityislocatedat301EastMainStreetintheSoutheastQuarterofSection33,Township22South,Range5East.AtopographicmapoftheSitevicinityisprovidedinFigure2.

ThefollowingtableandmapsummarizesthesurfacecharacteristicswithintheBurnsCSM.

SurfaceCharacteristics SourceElevation 1480FeetAMSL USGS7.5’

DigitalElevationModel

TopographicGradient Flat,gentleslopetothewest

NearestSurfaceWaterBody EastBranchWhitewaterRiver(approximately0.85mileswestofProperty)

3.2 SurroundingPropertyUses

AccordingtheUSCensusBureau(USCensusBureau,2010),228people,93households,and59familiesareinBurns,whichis40personsreductionsince2000(USCensusBureau,2000).ThelanduseinBurnsconsistsofcommercial,residential,andagriculturaluses.TothenorthandwestoftheFacilityisprimarilycommercialandresidential;totheeastandsouthisagriculturalsettingwithfeedlotoperationsimmediatelyadjacenttotheeast(seeaerialphotographabove,courtesyGoogleMaps,2017).

AwindshieldsurveywasconductedonJune19,2017.Theobjectiveofthesurveywastoidentifyanddocumentlandusesofsurroundingpropertiesindicativeofpotentialnitrate

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page13contributiontotheregionalnitrateimpactsintheBurnsvicinity.AccordingtoKDHE’sNitratePolicy(KDHE,2014),therearevariousfactorsand/oractivitiesthatmayhaveabearingonnitrogenlevelsinsoilorgroundwaterforaparticularareaincludingbutnotlimitedtothefollowing:

• Agriculturalactivities:cropfertilizersconsistingofnitrateorammonia;turfmanagementoperations,gardening.

• Animalwastes:manure,feedlots,dairies,confinedfeedingoperations.

• Naturalcauses:geologicand/orcontentoforganicmatter.

• Precipitation:Precipitationinconjunctionwithagriculturalactivities,animalwastes,orothernaturalcauses.

PPBobservedlanduseintheSitevicinity,whichincludedagriculturalactivitiesandCAFOs.Specifically,severalupgradientpointandnon-pointsourcesweredocumented,whichincludedafeedlottotheeast,alongwithheavyagricultureactivitiestothesouthandeast.Inaddition,Glen’sFeedStore,aretailfacilityfocusingonfeedandagriculturalchemicalsalesislocatedjustwest(cross-gradient)oftheMKCfacility.ThephotographiclogofthepotentialcontributingsourcescanbefoundinAppendixA.

3.3 PreviousInvestigations

SeveralinvestigationshavebeenconductedattheBurnsfacilitysinceitsinceptionintotheVCPRP.Thefollowingisasummaryandbriefsynopsisofpertinentactivities.Figure3presentsacomprehensivesummaryofavailablesoilconcentrationdata:

• June-August1997:KDHESiteVisitandSampling:KDHEvisitsSiteandobservesliquidinditchesneardryfertilizerstoragebuilding;watersamplescollectedfromthreeprivatewellsindicatenitratelevelsexceedingtheMCLof10mg/L.

• November1997:Servi-TechSoilInvestigation:Soilsampleswerecollectedinsurfacedrainagepathways(at11locations)fromdepthsrangingfromsurfaceto10feetbelowgroundsurface(bgs).Themaximumnitrateconcentrationdetectedinsoilwas536mg/kgfrom1-2feet(ft)bgsfromalocationtopographicallydowngradientofthedryfertilizerplant.Asoilsamplecollectedimmediatelytopographicallydowngradientfromaliquidfertilizercontainmentarea(from0-0.5ftbgs)detectedammoniaat515mg/kg.ThereisnoKDHEscreeninglevelforammoniainsoil.

• September2000:Servi-TechSoilSampling:Soilsampleswerecollectedatsixlocationsatdepthsrangingfrom1-10ftbgsnearthedryfertilizerstoragearea.Thehighest

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page14

concentrationsofnitrogendetectedwere280mg/kgnitrateand300mg/kgammoniafromthe2-3ftinterval.

• June2002:Servi-TechMonitoringWellInstallation:Threemonitoringwells(MW-1throughMW-3)wereinstalledtodepthsof37-40ftbgs.

• October2006:EnviroTechServices,Inc.SoilSampling:Soilsampleswerecollectedatfourlocationsneartheliquidfertilizerstoragearea.

• April2007:EnviroTechServices,Inc.SoilSampling:Soilsampleswerecollectedfrom29locationsneartheliquidanddryfertilizerstorageareas.

• May2007:EnviroTechServices,Inc.MonitoringWellInstallation:Fourmonitoringwells(MW-4throughMW-7)wereinstalledtodepthsrangingfrom44-50ftbgs.

• June2009:EnviroTechServices,Inc.SoilSampling:Soilsampleswerecollectedfrom11locationsnearMonitoringwellMW-4;upgradientofanyfertilizerstorage/handling.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page153.4 SiteGeology/HydrogeologySummary

ThetablebelowsummarizessitesoilsrelevanttotheBackgroundEvaluation.

SoilTypes Source3890-LadysmithSiltyClayloam,0to1percentslopes

USDASoilConservationService,SSURGODatabase

SoilSurveyStaff,NaturalResourcesConservationService,UnitedStatesDepartmentofAgriculture.WebSoilSurvey.Availableonlineathttp://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.AccessedJuly17,2017.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page16ThetablebelowsummarizessitegeologyandhydrogeologyrelevanttotheBackgroundEvaluation.

SiteGeologyandHydrogeology Source

Formation Permian-agedsedimentsoftheChaseGroup,consistingofalternatinglayersofshalesandlimestones.

LogDescription

Uppertwofeetoftopsoil,followedbyasiltyclay,whichquicklygradesintoalternatinglayersofyellowandredshalesandlimewithlimestonefragmentsintermixed.Grayshaleand/orgreylimestonerockwasencounteredatdepthsrangingfrom70-90ft.

KansasGeologicalSociety;WWC5logsobtainedfromthewaterwellsurvey(Terracon,2017a)andVCI(Enviro-Tech,2010)

DepthtoGroundwater

Depthtogroundwateronthefacilityhasrangedfrom19.57to39ftbgssince2012.

Terracon,2012-2017

GroundwaterFlowDirection

Groundwaterflowisgenerallytothenorthwestinthewater-bearingzonebeingevaluatedattheBurnsFacility

Professionalinterpretation

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page173.5 GroundwaterMonitoringProgram

Groundwatermonitoringhasbeenconductedsinceatleast2002,withcontinuouseventsoccurringsemiannualoverthelastfiveyears.MonitoringhasbeenconductedinaccordancewiththeKDHE-approvedgroundwatersamplingprogramandKDHE’sStandardOperatingProcedureforCollectionofGroundwaterSamplesatKnownorSuspectedGroundwaterContaminationSites(KDHE,2011)asfurthersummarizedbelow:

MonitoringWell

2012

(June,December)

2013

(April,October)

2014

(April,October)

2015

(April,October)

2016

(April,October)

MW-1 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-2 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

MW-4 ✔ ✔ ✔

MW-5 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-6 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-7 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-8 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

MW-9 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-10 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-11 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔MW-12 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔Monitoringoccurredannuallyfrom2002-2006,semiannually,in2007,andin2010

Asidentifiedabove,substantialdatahasbeencollectedoverthelast15years.Groundwatersamplesfromthe11monitoringwellsweretypicallycollectedwithabailerandanalyzedbyEPAMethod353.2.Welllogsindicatethateachwelliscompletedwithinthesameperchedwater-bearingzone.Additionalinformationonsamplingmethodsandresultsisprovidedinthereportscitedherein.

3.6 GroundwaterFlowAnalysisandSiteHydrogeology

Since2012,groundwaterelevationshavefluctuatedwithpeakelevationsgenerallycoincidingwiththefallseason.Figure4,GroundwaterElevationTrends,showsthegroundwaterelevationstrendsfrom2012to2016forsitemonitoringwells.

Groundwaterflowdirectionhasbeenextensivelyevaluatedandisconsistentlytothenorthwest.Figure5presentsdepictsvariationsingroundwaterflowdirectionoverthelastfive

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page18years.Itisevidentthatgroundwaterflowdirectionisconstantandisnotaffectedbyfluctuationsingroundwaterelevationorseasonalvariations.

3.7 Upgradientvs.Onsitevs.Downgradient

Forthebackgroundevaluation,monitoringwellsattheSitewereclassifiedasfollowsandshownonFigure6:

• Onsite:WellslocatedontheMKCBurnsfacility

• Downgradient:Wellslocatednorthwest(hydraulicallydowngradient)fromtheMKCBurnsfacility(MW-11andMW-12)

• Upgradient:WellslocatedeastorsoutheastoftheMKCBurnsfacilitythatareindicativeofbackgroundconditions(MW-8andMW-9)

• Cross-gradient(X-Gradient):WellslocatedwestornortheastofthefacilitythatarenotLocatedperpendiculartothedirectionofgroundwaterflowfromtheMKCBurnsFacility(MW-5andMW-10).

3.8 NitrateConcentrationAnalysis

Figure7,NitrateConcentrationsinGroundwaterOctober2016,reflectsthemostcurrentsnapshotofsite-widenitrogenconcentrationingroundwater.ThehighestnitrateconcentrationdetectedinthegroundwaterontheFacilitywas34.0mg/L.UpgradientmonitoringwellsMW-8andMW-9detectednitrateatconcentrationsof33.6and23.3,respectively.AdditionalgroundwaterdataarepresentedinTable1.

Asshownintheboxplottotheright,thehighestnitrateconcentrationshavehistoricallybeendetectedattheMKCfacility;however,thefigurealsoshowsthatnitrateconcentrationsaresignificantlyelevatedintheupgradientpopulationrelativetodowngradientandx-gradientdatasets,andtheMCLof10mg/L.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page194 RegulatoryFrameworkforGroundwaterBackgroundEvaluation

ThefollowingpoliciesandguidancedocumentsprovidetheregulatoryframeworkfortheinvestigationandcleanupofnitrogensitesinKansas.Inaddition,thefollowingresourcesprovidethebasisforestablishingforthcomingremedialactionobjectives(RAOs).

4.1 Risk-BasedStandardsforKansas

TheRisk-BasedStandardsforKansas(RSK)Manual(KDHE,2015)establishesathree-tierapproachtoestablishscreeninglevels.Tier1involvesacomparisonofsite-specificdatatobackgroundconcentrationsfortheaffectedmedium.ATier2analysisinvolvesacomparisonofsite-specificdatatopublishedscreeninglevelsdevelopedbyKDHEusingrelativelyconservativeinputparameters.ATier3analysisincorporatessite-specificinputparameterstodetermineappropriatescreeninglevels,andcanalsoincorporatemodelingandanevaluationofexposurepathwaysandpotentialreceptorsbasedonlanduse.

4.2 BERNitratePolicy

KDHE’sPresumptiveRemedyPolicy,InvestigationandCleanupofNitrogenatAgriculture-RelatedSitesinKansas(KDHE,2014)providesguidanceforastreamlinedframeworkforevaluatingnitratecontaminationinsoilandgroundwater.Thepolicyspecificallydefines“background”evaluationasaCleanupLevelConsiderationandprovidesflexibilitytoensurebackgroundcontributionisconsideredwithrespecttoassessmentandremediation.

Morespecifically,thepolicystates:Itiscriticaltounderstandbackgroundnitrate-Nconcentrationsingroundwaterpriortoestablishingtheremediationgoalforasite.Ifthenitrate-NcontaminationlevelsforgroundwaterfortheareasurroundingthesiteareabovetheMCLof10mg/Lbecauseofnon-pointsourcepollutionandthesitenitrate-Nconcentrationsarewellabovetheobserved“backgroundlevels”thentheremediationgoalmaybeevaluatedwithKDHEtodetermineamoreappropriatecleanuplevelconsistentwiththeAppendix“BackgroundEvaluationforNitrateSites.ThepolicyalsoidentifiesMCLsasfinalcleanupgoals,butrecognizesbackgroundimpacts:EPA-promulgatedMCLswhenavailablewillbethefinalcleanuplevelsforgroundwater,withconsiderationofbackgroundcontribution,independentofTier3analysis(KDHE,2014).

4.3 BERBackgroundPolicy

KDHE’sguidanceonDeterminingBackgroundLevelsforChemicalsofConcern(KDHE,2010)providesamechanismfordevelopingsite-specificbackgroundvaluesinlieuoftheMCLswhennaturalornon-pointsourceanthropogeniccontaminants(e.g.,nitrate)arepresentupgradientandimpactingaparticularfacility.Thepolicyspecificallystates:

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page20“Naturalornon-pointsourceanthropogenicCOCs(suchasmetals,nitrate,radionuclides,chloridesandothers)maybepresentingroundwaterandmayexceedtheTier2cleanupvalues”(e.g.,10mg/L).Determininglocalbackgroundlevelsingroundwatermayrequireinstallationofupgradientorsidegradientmonitoringwellsorgroundwaterprobesandobtainingsamplesordatafromnearbymonitoringorwater-supplywells.Insparselypopulatedareas”(e.g.,Burns,KS)“,dataavailabilitymaybelimited.Nevertheless,obtainingbackgrounddatafromevenafewexistingwellsmayreduceuncertaintyregardingbackgroundlevelsofCOCs.Determiningbackgroundlevelsingroundwatershouldfollowthesamegeneralproceduresasthoseforsoils,recognizingthatthenumberofsamplepointsmaybelimited.”(KDHE,2010).

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page215 Statistics

Basedonthedataandpolicyframeworkpresentedabove,PPBproceededwithastatisticalanalysisoftheBurnsdatasettoevaluatepotentialSiterelatedandupgradientcontributiontogroundwater.

5.1 Methodology

AnanalysisofthegroundwaterdatasetfromDecember2012throughOctober2016wasperformedusingEPA’sProUCLver.5.1statisticalsoftwarepackage(EPA,2015)toevaluatebackgroundconcentrations,datadistribution,andcontaminanttrendsintheSitevicinity.ThestatisticalanalysesareprovidedinAppendixBanddiscussedbelow.Thedataanalysisincludesthefollowing:

• TestforOutliers:NitrateconcentrationmeasurementsfromallsitemonitoringwellsweretestedforoutliersusingDixon’stest.Outliersweresubjecttofurtherqualityassurancereviewtodeterminewhetherthesamplewascompromisedandthesourceofimpact.

• Non-DetectResults:Traditionally,non-detect(ND)results(i.e.,resultsreportedasbelowtheirlaboratoryreportinglimits(RL)),areadjustedbasedonthefrequencyofNDresultsinthedatasettofacilitatestatisticalanalysis(e.g.,setat50percentoftheRL,setattheRL,etc.).TheBurnsdatasetdoesnotincludeanyNDresultsfornitrate;therefore,noadjustmentswererequired.

• Distributionassessment:ThedatawereevaluatedtodeterminewhetherthenitrateconcentrationdistributionsatisfiesnormalityassumptionsusingtheShapiro-Wilkstest.Inaddition,thedatawereevaluatedonanarea-specificbasis(e.g.,upgradient,downgradient,andcross-gradient)toensurethedatadistributionofthesesubsetssatisfiednormalityconstraints.Ifdatadidnotsatisfynormalityconstraints,appropriatetransformationswouldbeappliedandthedatawouldbereanalyzedfornormality.

• TrendAnalysis:Thedatawereevaluatedtodeterminewhethertrendsexistinthedatasetonawell-by-wellbasisusingtheMann-Kendalltest.

• PredictionLimits:Theupgradientsitedatawereevaluatedtodeterminethebackgroundthresholdvalue(BTV).TheBTVisapredictivevaluerepresentativeofthehighestconcentrationata95%levelofconfidencethatcouldbepresumedtobeattributabletobackgroundimpacts.UpperToleranceLimits(UTL),UpperPredictionLimits(UPL)andUpperSignificanceLimits(USLs)weredeterminedfortheupgradientdataset.

• InterwellComparison:Nitrateconcentrationsfromdowngradient,onsite,andcross-gradientwellsarecomparedtothecorrespondingBTVfromthebackgrounddataset.Inaddition,thedataweresubjectedtotwosamplet-Testswherenitrateconcentrations


fromdowngradient,onsite,andcross-gradientareaswerecomparedagainstupgradientconcentrationsusingtheStudentt(Pooled)Test,Welch-SatterthwaiteTest,andMann-Kendall-WhitneyTest.

5.2 StatisticalAnalysisandResults

TheresultsofthestatisticalanalysesarepresentedinAppendixBandaresummarizedbelow.GeneralstatisticsfortheMKCBurnsfacilitygroundwaterdatasetarepresentedinAppendixB.1.

5.2.1 Outliers

TheresultsoftheoutlieranalysisareprovidedinAppendixB.2.Theoutlieranalysisidentifiedsixpotentialoutliersinthedatasetata10%significancelevel,fivepotentialoutliersata5%significancelevelandthreepotentialoutliersata1%significancelevelasshowninthetablebelow.

Date Result Min/Max SignificanceLevel(s) MethodMW-4 10/22/2014 63.8mg/L Maximum 10% Dixon’sOutlierTest

MW-5 10/8/2015 25.7mg/L Maximum 10%,5%,1% Dixon’sOutlierTest

MW-7 10/18/2016 2.9mg/L Minimum 10%,5%,1% Dixon’sOutlierTest

MW-10 10/15/2013 22.7mg/L Maximum 10%,5% Dixon’sOutlierTest

MW-11 4/4/2013 21.4mg/L Maximum 10%,5% Dixon’sOutlierTest

MW-12 10/18/2016 11.6mg/L Minimum 10%,5%,1% Dixon’sOutlerTest

OutlierswerenotremovedfromsubsequentanalysisbecausePPB’squalityassurancereviewcouldnotascertainwhetherthesamplesinquestionwerecompromisedoridentifyanysourcesofsuchimpacts.

5.2.2 DataDistribution

Thedatasetintotalandforindividualsub-areaswereevaluatedtodeterminewhethertheymetconditionsfornormalityorwereotherwisedistributed.Theresultsofthegoodness-of-fitanalysesareprovidedinAppendixB.3,includinggraphicalQ-Qplotsfornitrate.Thedatasatisfytheconditionsfornormalityandthereforenodatatransformationswererequiredforsubsequentanalyses.

5.2.3 TrendAnalyses

Mann-KendallTrendAnalyseswereperformedtoevaluatepotentialtrendsinthedataset.TheresultsofthetrendanalysesareprovidedinAppendixB.4.MonitoringWell11(downgradient)

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page23exhibitedstatisticallysignificantevidenceofadecreasingtrendata5%levelofsignificance.Therewasinsufficientevidencetoidentifyasignificanttrendata5%levelofsignificanceinallothersitemonitoringwells.

5.2.4 BackgroundThresholdValues

AppendixB.5presentsthecalculationsofpredictivelimits(e.g.,BTVs)forthebackgrounddataset.TheanalysisyieldedthefollowingestimatesofBTVbasedona95%confidenceleveland95%coverage:

BTVestimatecalculations Result95%uppertolerancelimitwith95%coverage 38.4mg/L

95%upperpredictionlimit 33.7mg/L

95%uppersimultaneouslimit 37.4mg/L

TheUSLtendstoyieldaconservativeestimateoftheBTVandprovidesbalancebetweenfalsepositivesandfalsenegativesinabackgrounddataset;therefore,itwasselectedastheBTVforsubsequentanalyses.

5.2.5 InterwellAnalysis

Theinitialinterwellanalysisinvolvescomparingarea-specificconcentrationdata,theUPL,andestimatesofthemeantotheBTVestimate(37.4mg/L).

October2016 UPL95 Maximum Mean UCL95Downgradient 11.6 31.3 26.9 15.7 19.3

Onsite 34.0 50.7 63.8 26.0 29.4

CrossGradient 12.2 22.5 25.7 15.0 16.7

Noneofthecurrent(October2016)concentrationdataexceedtheBTVof37.4.Moreover,dataindicatethatthearithmeticmeanandUCL95alsofallwellbelowtheBTV.Notwithstanding,basedontheUPL95andmaximumhistoricaldata,itispossiblethatnitrateconcentrationscouldreasonablybeanticipatedtoexceedtheBTVontheMKCfacility.

Thedatawerefurtheranalyzedusingtwosamplet-teststoevaluatewhethertherearestatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenbackgroundandonsite,downgradient,andcross-gradientdatasets.

Thetablebelowindicatestheresultsoftheseanalyses,witha“+”indicatingthatthetestindicatedtheindicatedpopulationisgreaterthanorequaltobackgroundand“-”indicatingthetestindicatedthespecifiedpopulationisbelowbackgroundata95%levelofconfidence:


StudenttTest

WelchSatterthwaite

Test

Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney

Downgradient - - -Onsite + + +

CrossGradient - - -Theinterwellanalysesshowthatthedowngradientandcrossgradientdatasetsarestatisticallysignificantlylowerthanthebackgrounddatasetviaeachstatisticaltest.Theinterwellanalysesfurthershowthattheonsitedatasetexceedsthebackgrounddataset.

5.3 InterpretationsandConclusions

Theevaluationpresentedaboveprovidesacomprehensiveevaluationofthegroundwaterdatasetandnitratedistributioninthesubsurface.Theanalysisnaturallyleadstothefollowinginterpretationsandconclusions:

(1) TheestimatedBTVcalculatedfortheSite(37.4mg/L),whichisanestimateofthemaximumconcentrationthatisstatisticallyreasonablyexpectedtobeattributabletobackgroundbasedontheexistingdataset,exceedstheMCLfornitrate.Inaddition,theUCL95,anupperboundestimateofthemean,andthearithmeticmeanofthebackgrounddataset(25.1mg/Land22.3mg/L,respectively)exceedtheMCL.

CONTAMINATIONUPGRADIENTOFANDUNRELATEDTOTHEMKCFACILITYISPRESENTATCONCENTRATIONSWELLABOVEDRINKINGWATERSTANDARDS.

(2) ThehighestnitrateconcentrationsdetectedduringtheOctober2016samplingevent(34.0mg/LatonsitewellMW-3and33.6mg/LatupgradientwellMW-8)fallbelowtheBTVof37.4mg/L.ALTHOUGHNITRATECONCENTRATIONSINTHEBURNSVICINITYEXCEEDDRINKINGWATERSTANDARDS,THEMOSTRECENTSITEDATAAREINDISTINGUISHABLEFROMBACKGROUND.

(3) Interwellanalysesalsoevaluatedtherelationshipbetweentheonsiteandbackgrounddatasets.TheseanalysesalsoyieldedconsistentfindingsshowingthattherehaslikelybeenareleaseofnitratetotheenvironmentinthevicinityoftheMKCfacilitywhichresultedinlocalizedgroundwaterimpactsinexcessoftheBTVandMCL.


LOCALIZEDGROUNDWATERIMPACTSABOVETHEBTVARELIKELYATTRIBUTABLETORELASESNEARTHEMKCFACILITY.HOWEVER,ASNOTEDABOVE,CURRENTCONCENTRATIONDATAONTHEMKCFACILTIYFALLBELOWTHEBTV,INDICATINGTHESIGNIFICANCEOFTHESEIMPACTSARENEGLIGIBLERELATIVETOBACKGROUND.

(4) Interwellanalyseswereperformedtoevaluatetherelationshipbetweendataupgradient(background)anddowngradientoftheMKCfacility.EachinterwellanalysisyieldedconsistentfindingsanddemonstratethatconcentrationsdowngradientoftheMKCfacilityarestatisticallysignificantlylowerthanthebackgrounddataset.DOWNGRADIENTGROUNDWATERCONCENTRATIONSAREBELOWBACKGROUNDCONCENTRATIONS.ALTHOUGHITISPOSSIBLETHATRELEASESATTHEMKCFACILITYMAYHAVEAFFECTEDGROUNDWATER,THESEIMPACTSHAVENOTRESULTEDINGROUNDWATERIMPACTSABOVEBACKGROUNDDOWNGRADIENTOFTHEMKCFACILITY.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page266 Recommendations

Basedonthebackgroundevaluationpresentedherein,PPBrecommendsestablishmentofanEnvironmentalUseControl(EUC)ontheMKCBurnsfacility.TheEUCwillestablishappropriatecontrolstomitigatepotentialfutureexposurerisksassociatedwithresidualcontaminationontheBurnsfacility.AnEUCapplicationandsupportingdocumentationwillbeprovidedtoKDHEunderseparatecover.PPBunderstandsthatKDHEwillgrantanofurtheractiondeterminationuponestablishmentoftheEUCandsatisfactionofKDHE’spublicparticipationrequirements(KDHE2017).

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page277 References

Enviro-Tech,2013a,GroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyEnviro-TechServicesonbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,June.

Enviro-Tech,2013b,GroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyEnviro-TechServicesonbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,January.

Enviro-Tech,2010,VoluntaryCleanupInvestigationReport,preparedbyEnviroTechServices,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,February.

EPA,2016,USEPASuperfundWebsite,Section6:LikelihoodofRelease,U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,https://www.epa.gov/superfund/section-6-likelihood-release.

EPA,2015a,ProUCLSoftwarever.5.1.002,developedbyLockheedMartinonbehalfofU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency.

EPA,2015b,ProUCLVersion5.1UserGuide,developedbyLockheedMartinonbehalfofU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,EPA/600/R-07/041,October.

KDHE,2017,KDHEResponsetoBackgroundEvaluationReport,farmersgraincooperative,burns,MarionCounty,Kansas,LetterfromB.Johnson(KDHE)toE.Lange(MKC),October12.

KDHE,2016,ConsiderationsforGroundwaterPotabilityandUseDetermination,BERPolicy#BER-RS-045;KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment,April.

KDHE,2015,Risk-BasedStandardsforKansas:RSKManual-5thVersion;KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment,October.

KDHE,2014,PresumptiveRemedyPolicy,InvestigationandCleanupofNitrogenatAgriculture-RelatedSitesinKansas,BERPolicy#BER-RS-047;KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment,December.

KDHE,2010,DeterminingBackgroundLevelsforChemicalsofConcern,KDHEBERPolicy#BER-RS-038;KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment,June.

KDHE,2011,CollectionofGroundwaterSamplesatKnownorSuspectedGroundwaterContaminationSites,StandardOperatingProcedure–BER-01,KansasDepartmentofHealthandEnvironment,January.

BackgroundEvaluationReportNovember2017Page28Terracon,2017a,UpdatedWaterWellSurvey,FarmersGrainCooperative(MKCBurns),

preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,February.

Terracon,2017b,October2016Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,March.

Terracon,2016,April2016Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,May.

Terracon,2015a,October2015Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,October.

Terracon,2015b,April2015Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,May.

Terracon2014,April2014Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,April.

Terracon,2013,October2013Semi-AnnualGroundwaterMonitoringReport,preparedbyTerraconConsultants,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative,October.

Servi-Tech,2002,DRAFTVCIReport,preparedbyServi-Tech,Inc.onbehalfofMid-KansasCooperative.

Servi-Tech,2000,SoilSamplingNorthofDryFertilizerStorageBuilding,preparedbyServi-Tech,Inc.onbehalfofFarmersGranCooperativeofWalton–BurnsBranch,Burns,Kansas.

Servi-Tech,1997,SamplingandSiteAssessmentFertilizerFacilities,preparedbyServi-Tech,Inc.onbehalfofFarmersGrainCooperativeofWalton-BurnsBranch,Burns,Kansas,December.

TABLES

TABLE1Mid-KansasCooperative-BurnsFacility

HistoricalGroundwaterElevationandNitrateConcentrationData

ppBEnviroSolutionsLLCAugust2017Page1of4

MonitoringWellID

TOCElevation

Longitude Latitude SampleDate DepthtoWater(ftBelowTOC)

GroundwaterElevation(ftAMSL)

NitrateConcentration(mg/L)

Classification

MW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 12/18/12 39.12 1461.63 4.16 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 4/4/13 38.93 1461.82 3.6 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 10/15/13 33.11 1467.64 3.3 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 4/8/14 36.86 1463.89 5.0 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 10/22/14 36.98 1463.77 3.8 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 4/21/15 39.03 1461.72 4.5 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 10/8/15 34.96 1465.79 3.6 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 4/12/16 38.16 1462.59 3.2 ONSITEMW-1 1500.75 -96.88472037 38.09024938 10/18/16 27.36 1473.39 2.4 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 12/18/12 38.32 1462.22 44 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 4/4/13 38.3 1462.24 26.2 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 10/15/13 32.21 1468.33 13.6 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 4/8/14 36.02 1464.52 18.4 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 10/22/14 36.12 1464.42 24.6 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 4/21/15 38.42 1462.12 39.9 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 10/8/15 34.14 1466.4 20.8 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 4/12/16 37.22 1463.32 26.6 ONSITEMW-2 1500.54 -96.88423186 38.08919629 10/18/16 26.47 1474.07 15.9 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 12/18/12 38.78 1462.72 39.6 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 4/4/13 38.89 1462.61 34.2 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 10/15/13 32.76 1468.74 37.6 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 4/8/14 36.59 1464.91 36.5 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 10/22/14 36.73 1464.77 32.3 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 4/21/15 39.04 1462.46 34.3 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 10/8/15 34.83 1466.67 35.7 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 4/12/16 37.79 1463.71 33.6 ONSITEMW-3 1501.5 -96.88353366 38.08976546 10/18/16 27.02 1474.48 34.0 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 12/18/12 35.67 1463.24 44 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 4/4/13 35.79 1463.12 44.8 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 10/15/13 29.51 1469.4 50.1 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 4/8/14 34.43 1464.48 52.3 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 10/22/14 33.45 1465.46 63.8 ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 4/21/15 35.9 1463.01 43.2 ONSITE




MonitoringWellID

TOCElevation




Classification

MW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 10/8/15 NotMeasured NotMeasured NotMeasured ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 4/12/16 NotMeasured NotMeasured NotMeasured ONSITEMW-4 1498.91 -96.88340916 38.08885244 10/18/16 NotMeasured NotMeasured NotMeasured ONSITEMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 12/18/12 31.41 1463.58 12.5 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 4/4/13 31.33 1463.66 12.4 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 10/15/13 25.32 1469.67 13.8 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 4/8/14 29.08 1465.91 12.6 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 10/22/14 29.27 1465.72 11 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 4/21/15 31.49 1463.5 12.8 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 10/8/15 27.4 1467.59 25.7 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 4/12/16 30.34 1464.65 10.2 X-GRADIENTMW-5 1494.99 -96.88334406 38.09027228 10/18/16 19.57 1475.42 9.9 X-GRADIENTMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 12/18/12 33.49 1461.78 32.2 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 4/4/13 33.31 1461.96 26.6 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 10/15/13 27.49 1467.78 29.7 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 4/8/14 31.22 1464.05 33.1 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 10/22/14 31.35 1463.92 27.4 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 4/21/15 33.38 1461.89 29.2 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 10/8/15 29.36 1465.91 26.7 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 4/12/16 32.49 1462.78 32.3 ONSITEMW-6 1495.27 -96.88411089 38.09025271 10/18/16 21.77 1473.5 23.9 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 12/18/12 36.28 1461.73 23.8 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 4/4/13 36.16 1461.85 25.4 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 10/15/13 30.3 1467.71 22.3 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 4/8/14 34.04 1463.97 20.1 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 10/22/14 34.12 1463.89 21.6 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 4/21/15 36.2 1461.81 24.5 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 10/8/15 32.11 1465.9 22.6 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 4/12/16 35.29 1462.72 20.9 ONSITEMW-7 1498.01 -96.88469725 38.08979596 10/18/16 24.58 1473.43 2.9 ONSITEMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 12/18/12 32 1463.97 16 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 4/4/13 32.35 1463.62 17.7 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 10/16/13 25.87 1470.1 31.9 UPGRADIENT




MonitoringWellID

TOCElevation




Classification

MW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 4/8/14 29.8 1466.17 18.2 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 10/22/14 29.73 1466.24 22.8 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 4/21/15 32.13 1463.84 18.2 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 10/8/15 28.05 1467.92 30.4 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 4/12/16 30.93 1465.04 17.4 UPGRADIENTMW-8 1495.97 -96.8828865 38.08811407 10/18/16 19.78 1476.19 33.6 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 12/18/12 31.71 1462.97 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 4/4/13 32 1462.68 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 10/15/13 25.78 1468.9 28.5 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 4/8/14 29.53 1465.15 13.8 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 10/22/14 29.72 1464.96 16.8 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 4/21/15 31.72 1462.96 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 10/8/15 27.87 1466.81 23.8 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 4/12/16 30.72 1463.96 22 UPGRADIENTMW-9 1494.68 -96.88274996 38.08995162 10/18/16 19.96 1474.72 23.3 UPGRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 12/18/12 39.21 1461.69 16 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 4/4/13 39.19 1461.71 16.4 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 10/15/13 33.21 1467.69 22.7 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 4/8/14 36.94 1463.96 17.8 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 10/22/14 37.04 1463.86 15.5 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 4/21/15 39.26 1461.64 17.3 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 10/8/15 35.01 1465.89 17.2 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 4/12/16 38.2 1462.7 14.6 X-GRADIENTMW-10 1500.9 -96.88537831 38.08919309 10/18/16 27.6 1473.3 12.2 X-GRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 12/18/12 35.6 1461.02 9.75 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 4/4/13 35.37 1461.25 21.4 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 10/15/13 29.31 1467.31 10.2 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 4/8/14 32.95 1463.67 7.9 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 10/22/14 33.13 1463.49 5.4 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 4/21/15 35.38 1461.24 12.8 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 10/8/15 31.02 1465.6 4.7 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 4/12/16 34.25 1462.37 7.2 DOWNGRADIENTMW-11 1496.62 -96.88558259 38.09026968 10/18/16 23.84 1472.78 0.28 DOWNGRADIENT




MonitoringWellID

TOCElevation




Classification

MW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 12/18/12 33.38 1461.37 23.4 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 4/4/13 33.3 1461.45 26 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 10/15/13 27.42 1467.33 21.8 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 4/8/14 31.28 1463.47 22.5 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 10/22/14 31.27 1463.48 21.6 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 4/21/15 33.3 1461.45 26.4 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 10/8/15 29.2 1465.55 22.9 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 4/12/16 32.61 1462.14 26.9 DOWNGRADIENTMW-12 1494.75 -96.88522145 38.09082476 10/18/16 21.88 1472.87 11.6 DOWNGRADIENT

AllconcentrationsreportedinmilligramsperliterGroundwaterandTOCelevationsreportedinfeetAMSL

FIGURES

0 300 600150

Feet

Monitoring WellMKC Facility Boundary

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Site LocationCCRWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility

Background EvaluationReportFigure 1

July 2017

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

0 0.25 0.50.125

MilesDESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Regional TopographyCCRWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility

Background Evaluation ReportFigure 2

August 2017

0 50 10025

FeetSoil BoringMonitoring Well

Soil concentrations reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg)ND - Not DetectedNA - Not Analyzed

SAMPLE IDDepth - NO3/NH3

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Soil Data (1997-2009)CCRWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility

Background Evaluation ReportFigure 3

July 2017

0 100 20050

FeetMonitoring Well

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Groundwater Elevation TrendsCCRWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility


14601462146414661468147014721474

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-1

146014621464146614681470147214741476

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-2

146214641466146814701472147414761478

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-5

146214631464146514661467146814691470

10/18/

2012

1/26/2

013

5/6/20

13

8/14/2

013

11/22/

2013

3/2/20

14

6/10/2

014

9/18/2

014

12/27/

2014

4/6/20

15

7/15/2

015

MW-4

146014621464146614681470147214741476

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-7

146014621464146614681470147214741476

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-6

14601462146414661468147014721474

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-10

146214641466146814701472147414761478

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-8

14601462146414661468147014721474

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-11

14601462146414661468147014721474

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-12

14621464146614681470147214741476

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-9

146014621464146614681470147214741476

4/1/20

12

10/18/

2012

5/6/20

13

11/22/

2013

6/10/2

014

12/27/

2014

7/15/2

015

1/31/2

016

8/18/2

016

3/6/20

17

MW-3 Nitrate Trends

July 2017

Groundwater elevations reported in feet above mean sea level

Sources: Terracon, dates as shown, edited by ppB EnviroSolutions

RWCC

RWRW

Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Background Evaluation Report

Figure 5

July 2017

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

Burns Facility

Variations in Groundwater FlowOver Time

APRIL 2014 APRIL 2015 APRIL 2016

OCTOBER 2013 OCTOBER 2015 OCTOBER 2016

0 100 20050

FeetDowngradient WellOnsite WellUpgradient WellCross-gradient WellMKC Facility Boundary

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Well Classification for Statistical AnalysesCCRWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility


July 2017

0 100 20050

Feet

Monitoring Well

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

RW Nitrate Concentrations in GroundwaterOctober 2016CC

RWRW Mid-Kansas Cooperative

Burns Facility


July 2017

Nitrate concentration reported in milligrams per literNS - Not Sampled

APPENDICES

AppendixA

WindshieldSurveyPhotoLog

AppendixA-PhotographicDocumentationMid-KansasCooperative–BurnsFacility

Photo1:LookingnorthtowardsMain&Winfield;primarilyresidential.

Photo 2: Ag fieldssoutheast of MKCfacility lookingsoutheast.

(potentialnon-pointcontribution)


Photo3:AgfieldssouthofMKCfacility,lookingsouth.


Photo4:AgfieldsSEofMKCfacility.



Photo5:FeedlotwithwellMW-8inforeground,lookingeast.

(potentialpointsourcecontribution)

Photo6:EastsideofMKCfacilitylookingsouthatfeedlottotheeast/upgradient



Photo7:AgfieldeastofBurnsandMKCfacility


Photo8:Glen's Feed StorefacilitywestofMKCfacility,lookingnortheast.


AppendixB

StatisticalAnalyses

B.1 GeneralStatisticsB.2 OutlierAnalysesB.3 GoodnessofFitAnalysesB.4 TrendAnalysesB.5 BackgroundThresholdValueAnalysesB.6 InterwellAnalyses

AppendixB.1

GeneralStatistics

32.92 33.46

Nitrate Concentration (mw-9) 6 3 15.3 16.8 18.1 22.65 23.68 23.8 26.15 27.33 28.27

17.7 18.2 30.4 31 32.24Nitrate Concentration (mw-8) 9 0 17.12 17.58

32.78 33.04


26.7 29.2 32.2 32.24 32.46Nitrate Concentration (mw-6) 9 0 26.06 26.66

60.93 63.23

Nitrate Concentration (mw-5) 9 0 10.14 10.68 11 12.5 12.8 13.2 16.18 20.94 24.75

44.2 47.45 51.75 52.3 58.05Nitrate Concentration (mw-4) 6 3 43.6 44

42.36 43.67

Nitrate Concentration (mw-3) 9 0 33.34 33.84 34 34.3 36.5 36.94 38 38.8 39.44


17.96 20.71

Nitrate Concentration (mw-12) 9 0 19.6 21.72 21.8 22.9 26 26.16 26.5 26.7 26.86


4.8 4.96



Percentiles for Uncensored Data Sets

Variable NumObs # Missing 10%ile 20%ile 25%ile(Q1)50%ile(Q2)75%ile(Q3) 80%ile 90%ile 95%ile 99%ile

0.689 0.309

Nitrate Concentration (mw-9) 6 3 13.8 28.5 21.37 20.78 5.274 2.153 5.189 -0.294 0.247

22.91 22.01 7.078 2.359 3.262Nitrate Concentration (mw-8) 9 0 16 33.6

-0.144 0.108



1.416 0.157



0.888 0.405



0.996 0.671



0.00538 0.205



From File: Burns MW Data for ProUCL.xls

General Statistics for Uncensored Data Sets

Variable NumObs # Missing Minimum Maximum Mean Geo-Mean SD SEM MAD/0.675 Skewness CV

From File Burns MW Data for ProUCL.xls

Full Precision OFF

General Statistics on Uncensored Full Data

Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.18/2/2017 10:26:14 AM

User Selected Options

AppendixB.2

OutlierAnalyses

Outlier Tests for Selected Uncensored Variables



Dixon's Outlier Test for Nitrate Concentration (mw-1)

Number of Observations = 9

10% critical value: 0.441


Full Precision OFF

Test Statistic: 0.278

For 10% significance level, 5 is not an outlier.





1. Observation Value 5 is a Potential Outlier (Upper Tail)?

For 10% significance level, 2.4 is not an outlier.



2. Observation Value 2.4 is a Potential Outlier (Lower Tail)?



1. Observation Value 22.7 is a Potential Outlier (Upper Tail)?









For 10% significance level, 22.7 is an outlier.






































1. Observation Value 44 is a Potential Outlier (Upper Tail)?




































































































2. Observation Value 16 is a Potential Outlier (Lower Tail)?

















AppendixB.3

GoodnessofFitAnalyses

Data not Lognormal at (0.0500000) Significance Level

Approximate Shapiro Wilk P Value 3.750E-13

Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.1482024

Lilliefors Critical (0.0500000) Value 0.0879893

Correlation Coefficient R 0.9216838

Approximate Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.8674325

K-S Critical(0.0500000) Value 0.0899416

Data not Gamma Distributed at (0.0500000) Significance Level

Lognormal GOF Test Results

A-D Test Statistic 1.5841887

A-D Critical (0.0500000) Value 0.7630585

K-S Test Statistic 0.1120200

Gamma GOF Test Results




Data appear Approximate Normal at (0.0500000) Significance Level



Approximate Shapiro Wilk P Value 0.0456610

Standard Deviation of Log Transformed Data 0.8231069

Normal GOF Test Results

Kstar 2.2475555

Theta star 9.6509646

Mean of Log Transformed Data 2.8449900

Standard Deviation of Raw Data 12.248800

Khat 2.3089292

Theta hat 9.3944320

Minimum 0.2800000

Maximum 63.800000

Mean of Raw Data 21.691078

Number of Valid Observations 102.00000

Number of Missing Observations 6.0000000

Number of Distinct Observations 90.000000

Nitrate Concentration

Raw Statistics


Full Precision ON

Confidence Coefficient 0.95

Goodness-of-Fit Test Statistics for Uncensored Full Data Sets without Non-Detects





Shapiro Wilk Critical (0.0500000) Value 0.8970000




Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.7131784




















Khat 1.7750072

Theta hat 8.8491035

Kstar 1.5162097

Maximum 26.900000





Minimum 0.2800000

Nitrate Concentration (downgradient)

Raw Statistics


Full Precision ON


Goodness-of-Fit Test Statistics for Uncensored Full Data Sets without Non-Detects


























Theta hat 13.346159

Kstar 1.8448877




Khat 1.9463042


Minimum 2.4000000

Maximum 63.800000

Raw Statistics



Nitrate Concentration (onsite)


Data appear Lognormal at (0.0500000) Significance Level







Data appear Gamma Distributed at (0.0500000) Significance Level





Data appear Normal at (0.0500000) Significance Level











Kstar 11.383151




Khat 14.173383

Theta hat 1.5729013

Minimum 13.800000

Maximum 33.600000





Nitrate Concentration (upgradient)

Raw Statistics


Data appear Lognormal at (0.0500000) Significance Level







Data appear Gamma Distributed at (0.0500000) Significance Level





Data appear Normal at (0.0500000) Significance Level











Kstar 13.017570




Khat 15.576639

Theta hat 0.9651205

Minimum 9.9000000

Maximum 25.700000


Raw Statistics



Nitrate Concentration (x-gradient)

AppendixB.4

TrendAnalyses

Insufficient evidence to identify a significant

trend at the specified level of significance.

Standard Deviation of S 9.5393920

Standardized Value of S -1.467599

Approximate p-value 0.0711066

Mann-Kendall Test

M-K Test Value (S) -15.00000

Tabulated p-value 0.0900000

Standard Deviation 0.7635516

Coefficient of Variation 0.2047665

Mean 3.7288889

Geometric Mean 3.6564527

Median 3.6000000

Number Values Reported (n) 9

Minimum 2.4000000

Maximum 5.0000000

General Statistics

Number or Reported Events Not Used 0

Number of Generated Events 9

Level of Significance 0.0500000

Nitrate Concentration-mw-1


Full Precision ON


Mann-Kendall Trend Test Analysis



Statistically significant evidence of a decreasing





Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 8.8477778


Median 7.9000000


Minimum 0.2800000

Maximum 21.400000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 16.633333


Median 16.400000


Minimum 12.200000

Maximum 22.700000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 25.555556


Median 24.600000


Minimum 13.600000

Maximum 44.000000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 22.566667


Median 22.900000


Minimum 11.600000

Maximum 26.900000

General Statistics









Standardized Value of S 0.7514691


Mann-Kendall Test

M-K Test Value (S) 5.0000000


Median 47.450000


Minimum 43.200000

Maximum 63.800000

Mean 49.700000


Number Values Missing 3

Number Values Used 6

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 35.311111


Median 34.300000


Minimum 32.300000

Maximum 39.600000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 29.011111


Median 29.200000


Minimum 23.900000

Maximum 33.100000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test



Median 12.500000



Maximum 25.700000

Mean 13.433333




Minimum 9.9000000


General Statistics





Standardized Value of S 1.2579418


Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 22.911111


Median 18.200000


Minimum 16.000000

Maximum 33.600000

General Statistics









Mann-Kendall Test





Mean 20.455556


Median 22.300000


Minimum 2.9000000

Maximum 25.400000

General Statistics









Standardized Value of S 0


Mann-Kendall Test



Median 22.650000


Minimum 13.800000

Maximum 28.500000

Mean 21.366667


Number Values Missing 3

Number Values Used 6

General Statistics




AppendixB.5

BackgroundThresholdValueAnalyses


Full Precision ON

Confidence Coefficient 95%

Normal Background Statistics for Uncensored Full Data Sets



Coverage 95%

New or Future K Observations 1

Total Number of Observations 15.000000 Number of Distinct Observations 14.000000


Nitrate Concentration (upgradient)

General Statistics

Maximum 33.600000 Third Quartile 26.150000

Mean 22.293333 SD 6.2591038

Minimum 13.800000 First Quartile 17.550000

Second Largest 31.900000 Median 22.000000

Critical Values for Background Threshold Values (BTVs)

Tolerance Factor K (For UTL) 2.5660000 d2max (for USL) 2.4090384

Coefficient of Variation 0.2807612 Skewness 0.5812949

Mean of logged Data 3.0685957 SD of logged Data 0.2749107

5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.8810000 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level

Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2101046 Lilliefors GOF Test

Normal GOF Test

Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.9152152 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test

Background Statistics Assuming Normal Distribution

95% UTL with 95% Coverage 38.354194 90% Percentile (z) 30.314698

5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.2196000 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level

Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level

Note: The use of USL tends to yield a conservative estimate of BTV, especially when the sample size starts exceeding 20.

Therefore, one may use USL to estimate a BTV only when the data set represents a background data set free of outliers

and consists of observations collected from clean unimpacted locations.

The use of USL tends to provide a balance between false positives and false negatives provided the data

95% UPL (t) 33.679102 95% Percentile (z) 32.588643

95% USL 37.371755 99% Percentile (z) 36.854186

represents a background data set and when many onsite observations need to be compared with the BTV.

AppendixB.6

InterwellAnalyses

Conclusion with Alpha = 0.05

Two variances appear to be equal

Numerator DF Denominator DF F-Test Value P-Value

17 14 1.947 0.214

Variance of Sample 2 76.278115

Test of Equality of Variances


Pooled SD 7.715


Student t (Pooled) Test: Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite Test: Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite (Unequal Variance)30.4 2.517 1.697 0.009

Pooled (Equal Variance) 31 2.442 1.696 0.010

Method DF Value t (0.05) P-Value

Sample 1 vs Sample 2 Two-Sample t-Test

H0: Mean of Sample 1 - Mean of Sample 2 <= 0

t-Test Critical

SE of Mean 1.6160937 2.0585609

Median 22.000000 17.100000

SD 6.2591038 8.7337343

Maximum 33.600000 26.900000

Mean 22.293333 15.707222

Number of Distinct Observations 14.000000 18.000000

Minimum 13.800000 0.2800000

Number of Valid Observations 15.000000 18.000000

Number of Missing Observations 3.0000000 0

Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2

Sample 1 Data: Nitrate Concentration(upgradient)

Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(downgradient)

Substantial Difference (S) 0.000

Selected Null Hypothesis Sample 1 Mean <= Sample 2 Mean (Form 1)

Alternative Hypothesis Sample 1 Mean > the Sample 2 Mean


Full Precision ON


t-Test Sample 1 vs Sample 2 Comparison for Uncensored Full Data Sets without NDs


Date/Time of Computation ProUCL 5.18/2/2017 4:43:48 PM


Two variances are not equal


50 14 5.427 0.001




Pooled SD 13.217


Student t (Pooled) Test: Do Not Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 <= Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite Test: Do Not Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 <= Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite (Unequal Variance)55.1 -1.414 1.673 0.919

Pooled (Equal Variance) 64 -0.949 1.669 0.827




t-Test Critical

SE of Mean 1.6160937 2.0418211

Median 22.000000 26.600000

SD 6.2591038 14.581519

Maximum 33.600000 63.800000

Mean 22.293333 25.975686


Minimum 13.800000 2.4000000


Number of Missing Observations 3.0000000 3.0000000

Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2


Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(onsite)





Full Precision ON






Two variances appear to be equal


14 17 2.273 0.110




Pooled SD 5.210


Student t (Pooled) Test: Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite Test: Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

Welch-Satterthwaite (Unequal Variance)23.5 3.843 1.711 0.000

Pooled (Equal Variance) 31 3.986 1.696 0.000




t-Test Critical

SE of Mean 1.6160937 0.9785944

Median 22.000000 14.200000

SD 6.2591038 4.1518245

Maximum 33.600000 25.700000

Mean 22.293333 15.033333


Minimum 13.800000 9.9000000



Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2


Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(x-gradient)





Full Precision ON





Approximate P-Value 0.0265284


Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

SD(U) - Adj ties 27.658633

WMW U-Stat Critical Value (0.0500000) 181.00000

Standardized WMW U-Stat 1.9344582

Sample 1 Rank Sum W-Stat 309.00000

WMW U-Stat 189.00000

Mean (U) 135.00000

Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney (WMW) Test

H0: Mean/Median of Sample 1 <= Mean/Median of Sample 2

SD 6.2591038 8.7337343

SE of Mean 1.6160937 2.0585609

Mean 22.293333 15.707222

Median 22.000000 17.100000

Minimum 13.800000 0.2800000

Maximum 33.600000 26.900000



Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2



Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(downgradient)

Substantial Difference 0.000

Selected Null Hypothesis Sample 1 Mean/Median <= Sample 2 Mean/Median (Form 1)

Alternative Hypothesis Sample 1 Mean/Median > Sample 2 Mean/Median


Full Precision ON


Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney Sample 1 vs Sample 2 Comparison Test for Uncensor Full Data Sets without NDs




Do Not Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 <= Sample 2

P-Value >= alpha (0.0500000)

SD(U) - Adj ties 65.350708

Approximate U-Stat Critical Value (0.0500000) 1.6448536

P-Value (Adjusted for Ties) 0.9351035


Standardized WMW U-Stat -1.514919

Mean (U) 382.50000



SD 6.2591038 14.581519

SE of Mean 1.6160937 2.0418211

Mean 22.293333 25.975686

Median 22.000000 26.600000

Minimum 13.800000 2.4000000

Maximum 33.600000 63.800000

Number of Missing Observations 3.0000000 3.0000000


Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2



Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(onsite)





Full Precision ON





Approximate P-Value 1.8390E-4


Reject H0, Conclude Sample 1 > Sample 2

SD(U) - Adj ties 27.654011

WMW U-Stat Critical Value (0.0500000) 181.00000

Standardized WMW U-Stat 3.5621681


WMW U-Stat 234.00000

Mean (U) 135.00000



SD 6.2591038 4.1518245

SE of Mean 1.6160937 0.9785944

Mean 22.293333 15.033333

Median 22.000000 14.200000

Minimum 13.800000 9.9000000

Maximum 33.600000 25.700000



Raw Statistics

Sample 1 Sample 2



Sample 2 Data: Nitrate Concentration(x-gradient)





Full Precision ON





Documents

Background Evaluation · 2018-01-23 · Background Evaluation Report November 2017 Page 5 Common Acronyms BGS below ground surface BTV background threshold value CAFO Concentrated