USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20185170

Drinking water health standards comparison and chemical analysis of groundwater for 72 domestic wells in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, 2016

Abstract

Pennsylvania has the second highest number of residential wells of any state in the Nation with approximately 2.4 million residents that depend on groundwater for their domestic water supply. Despite the widespread reliance on groundwater in rural areas of the state, publicly available data to characterize the quality of private well water are limited. In Bradford County, more than half of the residents use groundwater from private domestic-supply wells as their primary drinking source. The quality of private well water is influenced by the regional and local setting, including the surrounding soil, geology, land use, household plumbing, and well construction. The groundwater used for domestic water supply in Bradford County is obtained primarily from shallow bedrock and from unconsolidated (glacial) deposits that overlie the bedrock. Historical land use has been predominately forested, agricultural, and residential, but more recently unconventional oil/gas development has been distributed throughout the landscape. Pennsylvania is one of only two states in the Nation without statewide water-well construction standards. To better assess the quality of groundwater used for drinking water supply in Bradford County, data for 72 domestic wells were collected and analyzed for a wide range of constituents that could be evaluated in relation to drinking water health standards, geology, land use, and other environmental factors. Groundwater samples were collected from May through August 2016 and analyzed for physical and chemical properties, including major ions, nutrients, trace elements, volatile organic compounds, ethylene and propylene glycol, alcohols, gross-alpha/beta-particle activity, uranium, radon-222, and dissolved gases. A subset of samples was analyzed for radium isotopes (radium-226 and -228) and for the isotopic composition of methane. This study was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Northern Tier Regional Planning and Development Commission and is part of a regional effort to characterize groundwater in rural areas of Pennsylvania. Results of the 2016 study show that groundwater quality generally met most drinking-water standards. However, a percentage of samples failed to meet maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for total coliform bacteria (49.3 percent), Escherichia coli (8.5 percent), barium (2.8 percent), and arsenic (2.8 percent); and secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCL) for sodium (48.6 percent), manganese (30.6 percent), gross alpha and beta activity (16.7 percent), iron (11.1 percent), pH (8.3 percent), total dissolved solids (5.6 percent), chloride (1.4 percent), and aluminum (1.4 percent). Radon-222 activities exceeded the proposed drinking-water standard of 300 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) in 70.4 percent of the samples. There were no exceedances of drinking water health standards for any volatile organic compounds, and the only detections were for three trihalomethanes in one sample. The pH of the groundwater had a large influence on chemical characteristics and ranged from 6.18 to 9.31. Generally, the higher pH samples had higher potential for elevated concentrations of several constituents, including total dissolved solids, sodium, lithium, chloride, fluoride, boron, arsenic, and methane. For the Bradford County well-water samples, calcium/bicarbonate type waters were most abundant, with others classified as sodium/bicarbonate or mixed water types including calcium-sodium/bicarbonate, calcium-sodium/bicarbonate-chloride, sodium/bicarbonate-chloride, sodium/bicarbonate-sulfate, or sodium/chloride types. Six principal components (pH, redox, hardness, chloride-bromide, strontium-barium, and molybdenum-arsenic) explained nearly 78.3 percent of the variance in the groundwater dataset. Groundwater from 12.5 percent of the wells had concentrations of methane greater than the Pennsylvania action level of 7 milligrams per liter (mg/L); detectable methane concentrations ranged from 0.01 to 77 mg/L. In addition, low levels of ethane (as much as 0.13 mg/L) were present in seven samples with the highest methane concentrations. The isotopic composition of methane in five of these groundwater samples was consistent with the isotopic compositions reported for mud-gas logging samples from these geologic units and a thermogenic source. Isotopic composition from a sixth sample suggested the methane in that sample may be of microbial origin. Well-water samples with the higher methane concentrations also had higher pH values and elevated concentrations of sodium, lithium, boron, fluoride, arsenic, and bromide. Relatively elevated concentrations of some other constituents, such as barium and chloride, commonly were present in, but not limited to, those well-water samples with elevated methane. Four of the six groundwater samples with the highest methane concentrations had chloride/bromide ratios that indicate mixing with a small amount of brine (0.02 percent or less) similar in composition to those reported for gas and oil well brines in Pennsylvania. In several other eastern Pennsylvania counties where gas drilling is absent, groundwater with comparable chloride/bromide ratios and chloride concentrations have been reported, implying a potential natural source of brine. Most of Bradford County well-water samples have chloride concentrations less than 20 mg/L, and those with higher chloride concentrations have chloride/bromide ratios that indicate anthropogenic sources (such as road-deicing salt and septic effluent) or brine. Brines that are naturally present may originate from deeper parts of the aquifer system, whereas anthropogenic sources are more likely to affect shallow groundwater because they occur on or near the land surface. The available data for this study indicate that no one physical factor, such as the topographic setting, well depth, or altitude at the bottom of the well, was particularly useful for predicting those well locations with an elevated dissolved concentration of methane. The 2016 assessment of groundwater quality in Bradford County shows groundwater is generally of good quality, but methane and some constituents that occur in high concentration in naturally occurring brine and also in produced waters may be present at low to moderate concentrations in groundwater in various parts of the aquifer.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41.5447° to 42.0026° latitude; -76.9291° to -76.1171° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

John W. Clune, Charles A. Cravotta. 2019-04-19. Drinking water health standards comparison and chemical analysis of groundwater for 72 domestic wells in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185170

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗