Monday, May 28, 2012

Northeastern Environmental Laboratories Now Part of Microbac Laboratories



To: Northeastern Environmental Laboratories, Inc. Clients
From: Microbac Laboratories, Inc.
RE: Laboratory Services

Effective May 17, 2012, Microbac Laboratories, Inc., a Pennsylvania-based company, has reached agreement with Northeastern Environmental Laboratories to service and support NEEL clients. Microbac will provide environmental, food and product testing for the NEEL clients through the local Scranton office, as well as our fully certified and accredited laboratories throughout the state.

While Microbac will facilitate expansion of the Scranton office, your contacts, John Scheatzle, Erin Zangardi and James Burton will continue to provide the personal service you have come to expect with the full backing of the Microbac network's enhanced certified testing capabilities.

We welcome the opportunity to have you as a client and are pleased to add to our national network a team of employees and a location that will ensure our ability to provide exceptional service and quality to you.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. In the meantime, to learn more about Microbac, our accreditations and services, please visit www.microbac.com

Sincerely,


Cherie Gudz
Senior Vice President
Microbac Laboratories, Inc.   

717-651-9700
cherie.gudz@microbac.com


 __________________________________________  


Microbac is one of the world's most diversified independent commercial testing and analytical networks, operating 25 locations nationwide. Celebrating over 40 years in business, Microbac offers comprehensive sampling and analytical services to a wide variety of industries. 

  Learn more at: www.microbac.com

Sponsors Links

Water Well Testing Harveys Lake Pennsylvania and Q&A Session Offered


Water Well Tests and Q&A Session Offered

A comprehensive package of drinking water tests will be offered once again this summer at a deeply discounted price to Harveys Lake residents  ( Haveys Lake, Luzerne Wyoming County, PA) by the Water Research Center and National Testing Laboratories, Ltd. together with the Harveys Lake EAC.

The tests will be conducted on Saturday morning, July 21.  On Saturday morning, August 4, a free follow-up Q&A session on water well systems and non-point source pollution issues will be held.  The Q&A session is open to all residents, not just those testing their wells.

The cost of this year’s water well test package will rise to $95 (compared to a retail value of more than $225).  Residents' water will be tested for Alkalinity (Total as CaCO3), Chloride, Fluoride, Hardness, Nitrate as N, Orthophosphate, pH (Standard Units), Sulfate, Total Dissolved Solids, Turbidity (Turbidity Units), Total Coliform with e. coli check, Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Calcium, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Magnesium, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel, Potassium, Selenium, Silica, Silver, Sodium and Zinc.  This includes some key Marcellus Shale Indicators.

Interested residents should register with Denise, at 570-639-1042. Participants can pick up water sampling kits at the Harveys Lake Borough Building between July 9 and 21.  Water samples must be dropped off between 10am and noon on July 21 at the Borough Building’s meeting room, where scientists will perform certain tests immediately.  Confidential final test results will be mailed to participants directly from the Water Research Center within two weeks of the testing date.  Payment in full for the testing is due on July 21.

The well water and non-point source pollution Q&A session will be conducted at 10AM on August 4 by Brian Oram, a professional geologist and water well expert who has run the testing programs here at Harveys Lake for many years.  Brian will make an informative presentation and then take questions from the public.  Brian’s past Q&A sessions here at the lake have been greatly appreciated by all attendees- They are fact based and provide action items to correct and evaluate problems.

Important Note: This program’s test results do not meet the requirements of a legal baseline water well test.  However, these tests remain a valuable and cost-effective opportunity for homeowners to monitor the safety of their drinking water.  If legal baseline testing is needed or would like to schedule a community information meeting with Q/A, please contact Mr. Brian Oram, PG at 570-335-1947 or go to http://www.bfenvironmental.com/natural-gas-exploration.php.




Saturday, May 26, 2012

HW-16 Methane Boron Barium Acetone Ketone, Strontium, Iron, Manganese, Biogenic


Comment

1. Without predrilling data, it is not possible to comment on the cause for any water quality problems.  
2. Where possible, I have noted situations where elevated levels of a water quality parameter exists in Pennsylvania.
3. If duplicate analysis provided, I attempted to use the highest reported value.
5. This is not about cause and effect; it is about a review of the data.
6. A well by well review for Dimock, PA
7. Well appears to be impacted by saline water.
8. The treatment system that has been installed appears to mitigate methane, iron, and manganese, but not addressing barium and potential concerns related to bromide.
9. It might be advisable to pull the pump - camera survey the well and seal off a portion of the well.

Well – HW-16 (2/10/2012)

With the exception of the following parameters, the remaining values were reported as NOT Detected (U)

Aluminum – 0.102 mg/L (Total) and < 0.030 mg/L (D)- drinking water standard ranges from 0.05 to 0.2 mg/L.   This parameter is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard, because of aesthetic reasons.   The treated water level of aluminum is < 0.030 mg/L.  It would be advisable to continue monitoring. (Action- monitoring)

Anionic Surfactants –0.023 mg/L – the secondary drinking water standard for foaming agents is 0.5 mg/L.  (OK)

Arsenic – 0.0053 mg/L – drinking water standard is <  0.010 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact and arsenic is a common problem in NEPA – about 6 % of private wells have arsenic above 0.010 mg/L.  The treated water level of arsenic was 0.0033 mg/L and treated and filtered 0.0028 mg/L.  (Ok – monitoring recommended)

Barium – 2.91 mg/L – the primary drinking water standard for barium is 2.0 mg/L –– this is elevated and raises specific concerns related to the inter-relationship between fresh and saline water.  Barium is typically detectable in non-saline impacted water at a level of less than 1 mg/L, but regionally is detected at levels of 1 to over 2 mg/L for water that are influenced by saline water.  (The level is Elevated).

  It appears the treatment system only reduced the level of barium to 2.85 mg/L.  It may be possible that the water treatment system did not take into consideration the level of barium. A water softener may be needed.  (Action- Continued Monitoring - well may be influenced by saline water- it may be possible to mitigate saline water impact - but additional work is needed.)

Bromide – 0.857 mg/L - In freshwater, bromide is typically less than 0.05 mg/L. Therefore, it would be advisable to retest using a method with a lower detection limit. If an ozone-based water treatment system is proposed, it may be best to have the bromide level of less than 0.0063 mg/L to prevent the formation of bromates.    Additional Sampling post-treatment for bromates would be advisable (Action Suggested- again this suggests the well water is influenced by saline water).

Other References

Boron –0.0915 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available. EPA appears to have a long-term health advisory of 2.0 mg/L, but other states have limits that range from 0.6 to 1 mg/L.   Therefore, this does not appear to suggest any form of impact.  (OK- but monitoring advisable- again this suggests the well water is influenced by saline water).

Calcium- 35.0 mg/L (Total)– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK) – the value seems low.  The treatment system has reduced the level to 1.56 mg/L.

Chloride –94.1 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Chromium-< 0.002 mg/L (D) and the EPA/ PADEP primary drinking water standard is
< 0.100 mg/L (OK).

Copper – < 0.002 mg/L  (Untreated) - the secondary drinking water standard is 1.0 mg/L and the primary drinking water standard is 1.3 mg/L. (OK)  At the tap the level was 0.0035 mg/L – this suggests there is some level of corrosion and leaching of copper in the plumbing for the home.

Ethane –0.011 mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard (OK) and treated < 0.0012 mg/L.

Fluoride – < 0.1 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is < 2 mg/L- PADEP drinking water standard is 2 mg/L.

Iron – 0.464 mg/L (Total)) – Iron is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.3 mg/L.  Therefore, the total iron content does exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  (Treatment Needed)  After water treatment the level was < 0.100 mg/L.

Lead – < 0.001 mg/L (Total) - Lead is regulated as a primary standard (EPA and PA) at 0.015 mg/L, but the action level in PA for source water is 0.005 mg/L. (OK)

Lithium – < 0.200 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but EPA has recommend a level be below 0.7 mg/L    (OK)

Methane   26 mg/L   – No specific drinking water standard. (Action Needed). The well water is above the new action limit of 7 mg/L- The well should be actively vented, but it may be advisable to evaluate a structural modification to the well and changing the pumping system.   After treatment, the level of methane is 0.380 mg/L. For more details, go to http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm

Note – It appears the well water is treated and the treated water methane was 0.380 mg/L.  Water treatment system may be specifically designed for methane, but no specifically addressing the issue of bromide and barium.

Magnesium-10.7 mg/L– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)  The treated water level of magnesium was 0.629 mg/L.

Manganese– 0.0648 mg/L (Total) – Manganese is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.05 mg/L.  Therefore, the total manganese content does exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  Some intermittent problems with discolored water may occur – additional monitoring recommended.   (Elevated)   After treatment the level is < 0.001 mg/L.

Nickel – 0.0018 mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but the
EPA has suggest a MCL of 0.1 mg/L.   (OK)  After treatment the level was 0.0015 mg/L

Potassium – 2.1 mg/L (Total) and  2.03 mg/L (D) –  no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available (Ok)

Sodium –50.2  mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but the EPA has added it to the Candidate List to provide more analysis.  The EPA’s initial value of 20 mg/L has been clearly identified as not realistic.  When chloride (salt is sodium chloride) is present at a concentration of over 250 mg/L, the water can have an “off” taste. At 400+ mg/L chloride, the water will taste definitely salty. (Source- Dr. Brian Redmond, Professional Geologist). (OK)  After treatment, the level was 66.00 mg/L – this suggests that the treatment system probably includes a water softener that uses a sodium based salt.

Sulfate –0.628 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Strontium 1.803 mg/L   – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but it is on the EPA Candidate List.  The EPA recommends that drinking water levels of nonradioactive strontium should not be more than 4 mg/L.  The report limit is consistent with background levels in Northeastern Pennsylvania.  If the background level was above 4 mg/L, it would be advisable to test for radiological parameters, especially alpha/beta.  (OK)  After treatment, the level is < 0.200 mg/L.

Total Dissolved Solids  258 mg/L   – Total Dissolved Solids is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 500 mg/L.  After treatment the level was 239 mg/L.

Total Suspended Solids - < 10 mg/L – no standard, but would recommend retesting to obtain a lower detection limit.

Uranium –< 0.001 mg/L (Total) – Uranium is regulated as a primary drinking water standard by the EPA and PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.030 mg/L.  (OK)

Zinc  0.0248 mg/L – Zinc is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 5.0 mg/L.  (OK)

Nitrate+Nitrite- N – < 0.05 mg/L, this is well below the EPA / PADEP drinking water limit of 10mg N/L for nitrate-N and would also be below the limit of 1.0 mg N/L for nitrite-N. (OK)

Acetone - the reported value was 0.0042 mg/L (J- actually below the actual water limit of  < 0.002 mg/L in the treated water, but < 0.002 mg/L in the untreated water) and no trigger limit is reported, but PADEP has a Medium Specific Concentration (MSC) for aquifers with a TDS of < 2500 mg/L of 33.0 mg/L and Massachusetts appears to have a drinking water standard of 6.3 mg/L. (OK)

Bromoform – 0.0024 mg/L – the Total Trihalomethane Group has a limit of 0.08 mg/L, but bromoform should be less than 0.004 mg/L.  This is probably formed by the reaction of bromide and ozone – Assuming ozone is used in the treatment system.  (Action is Needed- monitoring and additional testing for bromates).

Methyl ethyl ketone – 0.0031 mg/L in the treated water, but  < 0.002 mg/L in the untreated water.
Methyl ethyl ketone is a colorless volatile liquid that is soluble in water. The odor threshold for methyl ethyl ketone is 5.4 parts per million (ppm), with an acetone-like odor reported. Methyl ethyl ketone is also referred to as 2-butanone.   The EPA and PADEP has not set a drinking water standard, but it appears that Massachusetts has set a level of 4 mg/L.    The likely source is the piping of the home – additional monitoring is recommended.

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/methylet.html

Ethylene glycol –  the reported value is < 10 mg/L – there is not standard, but the EPA has a guidance limit of < 7 mg/L.  Other states have lower and higher standards:

New Jersey 0.300 mg/L (300 ppb)
Arizona 5.5 mg/L (5500 ppb)
New Hampshire 7.0 mg/L (7000 ppb)
Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota14.0 mg/L (14,000 ppb)
Minnesota

At a minimum, I would recommend retesting for ethylene glycol other and glycol-type compounds using a method that is more sensitive or conducting some type of standard additions analysis.

1. Methane was present at a level that is above the action limit of 7 mg/L and exceeding a limit of 20 mg/L.  Action is needed.  Since the ratio of methane/ethane (C1/C2) is 2600 – this would suggest that the gas is of biogenic origin.

2. Barium is high, but the combination of barium, sodium, strontium, boron, and bromide would suggest the water is impacted by saline water.  The existing water treatment system is not addressing the issue with barium and bromide.

3. Iron and manganese were elevated in the raw water, but reduce to below the drinking water standard in the treated water.

4. The copper is  higher after treatment than in the raw water, this could suggest an internal corrosion related problem in the piping of the home.

5. Bromoform – probably related to the reaction between bromide and ozone.  Additional monitoring and adjusting treatment system for bromide-based compounds advisable.

6. Acetone and Ketone – possibly higher in the treated water- this is most likely related to the plumbing for the home and treatment system and not groundwater quality.


Annual Water Testing 

Watercheck with Pesticide Option (Order Online)- This informational testing package will check for 103 contaminants in your well water.  These contaminants include Bacteria, (19) Heavy Metals & Minerals, (6) Other Inorganic Chemicals, (5) Physical Characteristics, (4) Trihalomethanes (disinfection by-products), (47) Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs), and (20) Pesticides, Herbicides and PCBs.  This package works well for well water customers (Code 9002)- $ 206.00, plus shipping - Request information .

Add Methane (Order from us) - We can do a methane, ethane, propane - test for about $ 100.00 
( self collection)-Request information .
Document can not be copied in whole or part without the expressed written permission of Mr. Brian Oram, B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc. http://www.bfenvironmental.com

Do you want to make a positive change in PA - that will cost you NO Money?
Help Support the Citizens Groundwater and Surfacewater Database and Submit Your Baseline Data !

 Free Information on Drinking Water Quality - http://www.water-research.net

Sunday, May 20, 2012

HW-15 Methane, Manganese, Barium, Strontium, dimethyl phthalate , sodium, arsenic Biogenic


Comment

1. Without predrilling data, it is not possible to comment on the cause for any water quality problems.
2. Where possible, I have noted situations where elevated levels of a water quality parameter exists in Pennsylvania.
3. If duplicate analysis provided, I attempted to use the highest reported value.
5. This is not about cause and effect; it is about a review of the data.

Well – HW-15 (2/7/2012)

With the exception of the following parameters, the remaining values were reported as NOT Detected (U)

Anionic Surfactants – < 0.01 mg/L – the secondary drinking water standard for foaming agents is 0.5 mg/L.  (OK)

Arsenic – 0.0053 mg/L – drinking water standard is <  0.010 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact and arsenic is a common problem in NEPA – about 6 % of private wells have arsenic above 0.010 mg/L.  The treated water level of arsenic was 0.0033 mg/L and treated and filtered 0.0028 mg/L.  (Ok – monitoring recommended)

Barium – 0.582 mg/L – the primary drinking water standard for barium is 2.0 mg/L –– this does not suggest any specific impact and barium is typically detectable in non-saline impacted water at a level of less than 1 mg/L. (OK)
It appears the treatment system has reduced the level to 0.0184 mg/L.

Boron –< 0.050 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available. EPA appears to have a long-term health advisory of 2.0 mg/L, but other states have limits that range from 0.6 to 1 mg/L.   Therefore, this does not appear to suggest any form of impact.  (OK)

Calcium- 31.9 mg/L (Total)– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK) – the value seems low.  The treatment system has reduced the level to 1.56 mg/L.

Chloride –15.6 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Chromium-0.0022 mg/L (D) and the EPA/ PADEP primary drinking water standard is
< 0.100 mg/L (OK).

Copper – 0.002 mg/L  (Untreated) - the secondary drinking water standard is 1.0 mg/L and the primary drinking water standard is 1.3 mg/L. (OK)  At the tap the level was 0.0134 mg/L – this suggests there is some level of corrosion and leaching of copper in the plumbing for the home.

Ethane –0.130 mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard (OK)

Fluoride – < 0.1 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is < 2 mg/L- PADEP drinking water standard is 2 mg/L.

Iron – 0.109 mg/L (Total)) – Iron is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.3 mg/L.  Therefore, the total iron content does not exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  (OK)  After water treatment the level was < 0.100 mg/L.

Lead – < 0.001 mg/L (Total) - Lead is regulated as a primary standard (EPA and PA) at 0.015 mg/L, but the action level in PA for source water is 0.005 mg/L. (OK)

Lithium – < 0.200 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but EPA has recommend a level be below 0.7 mg/L    (OK)

Methane   14 mg/L   – No specific drinking water standard. (Action Needed). The well water is above the new action limit of 7 mg/L- The well should be actively vented, but it may be advisable to evaluate a structural modification to the well and changing the pumping system. For more details, go to http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm

Note – It appears the well water is treated and the treated water methane was 0.027 mg/L.

Magnesium-10.3 mg/L– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)  The treated water level of magnesium was 0.629 mg/L.

Manganese– 0.160 mg/L (Total) – Manganese is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.05 mg/L.  Therefore, the total manganese content does exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  Some intermittent problems with discolored water may occur – additional monitoring recommended.   (Elevated)   After treatment the level is < 0.001 mg/L.

Nickel – 0.0014 mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard
is available, but the EPA has suggest a MCL of 0.1 mg/L.   (OK)  After treatment the
level was not detectable.

Sodium –16.9  mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but the EPA has added it to the Candidate List to provide more analysis.  The EPA’s initial value of 20 mg/L has been clearly identified as not realistic.  When chloride (salt is sodium chloride) is present at a concentration of over 250 mg/L, the water can have an “off” taste. At 400+ mg/L chloride, the water will taste definitely salty. (Source- Dr. Brian Redmond, Professional Geologist). (OK)  After treatment, the level was 66.00 mg/L – this suggests that the treatment system probably includes a water softener that uses a sodium based salt.

Sulfate –3.95 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Strontium 0.803 mg/L   – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but it is on the EPA Candidate List.  The EPA recommends that drinking water levels of nonradioactive strontium should not be more than 4 mg/L.  The report limit is consistent with background levels in Northeastern Pennsylvania.  If the background level was above 4 mg/L, it would be advisable to test for radiological parameters, especially alpha/beta.  (OK)  After treatment, the level is < 0.200 mg/L.

Total Dissolved Solids  158 mg/L   – Total Dissolved Solids is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 500 mg/L.  After treatment the level was 175 mg/L.

Total Suspended Solids - < 10 mg/L – no standard, but would recommend retesting to obtain a lower detection limit.

Uranium 0.0012 mg/L (Total) – Uranium is regulated as a primary drinking water standard by the EPA and PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.030 mg/L.  (OK)

Zinc  –< 0.002 mg/L – Zinc is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 5.0 mg/L.  (OK)

Nitrate+Nitrite- N – < 0.05 mg/L, this is well below the EPA / PADEP drinking water limit of 10mg N/L for nitrate-N and would also be below the limit of 1.0 mg N/L for nitrite-N. (OK)

dimethyl phthalate – the reported value was 0.00001 mg/L (J- value - actually below the detection limit of  < 0.005 mg/L-and the reported trigger limit is 1.4 mg/L. Florida has a health advisory level of 70 mg/L for dimethyl phthalate.  This hit was reported on the treated water – this would suggest that it could be related to the plumbing and piping and not the well water quality (OK)


Ethylene glycol –  the reported value is < 10 mg/L – there is not standard, but the EPA has a guidance limit of < 7 mg/L.  Other states have lower and higher standards:

New Jersey 0.300 mg/L (300 ppb)
Arizona 5.5 mg/L (5500 ppb)
New Hampshire 7.0 mg/L (7000 ppb)
Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota14.0 mg/L (14,000 ppb)
Minnesota

At a minimum, I would recommend retesting for ethylene glycol other and glycol-type compounds using a method that is more sensitive or conducting some type of standard additions analysis.

1. Methane was present at a level that is above the action limit of 7 mg/L and approaching a limit of 20 mg/L.  Action is needed.  Since the ratio of methane/ethane (C1/C2) is 107 – this would suggest that the gas is of biogenic origin.

2. dimethyl phthalate hits was suggested, but the reported values were actually below the method detection limit.  This suggests that additional monitoring may be advisable.

3. Detect for dimethyl phthalate after treatment suggest that this may be related to recent repairs or changes in the plumbing for the home.

4.The house appears to have a treatment system that is likely a sodium based water softener that reduces the level of barium, strontium, calcium, magnesium, iron, and manganese.  Because of the elevated level of manganese in the raw water, the system was probably installed because of the manganese.

5. The copper is  higher after treatment than in the raw water, this could suggest an internal corrosion related problem in the piping of the home.


Annual Water Testing 

Watercheck with Pesticide Option (Order Online)- This informational testing package will check for 103 contaminants in your well water.  These contaminants include Bacteria, (19) Heavy Metals & Minerals, (6) Other Inorganic Chemicals, (5) Physical Characteristics, (4) Trihalomethanes (disinfection by-products), (47) Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs), and (20) Pesticides, Herbicides and PCBs.  This package works well for well water customers (Code 9002)- $ 206.00, plus shipping - Request information .

Add Methane (Order from us) - We can do a methane, ethane, propane - test for about $ 100.00 
( self collection)-Request information .
Document can not be copied in whole or part without the expressed written permission of Mr. Brian Oram, B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc. http://www.bfenvironmental.com

Do you want to make a positive change in PA - that will cost you NO Money?
Help Support the Citizens Groundwater and Surfacewater Database and Submit Your Baseline Data !

 Free Information on Drinking Water Quality - http://www.water-research.net



Saturday, May 19, 2012

Dimock Pennsylvania Water Contamination EPA Testing Water On Fire

A fact based review - Well by Well of the Available Well Water Data for the Dimock Area that was generated by the EPA.    I was not involved with the sampling, but I was on-site during the sampling and field evaluation of one home.  I was invited by the homeowner.   We are still in the process of reviewing the data.  The main goal of this evaluation is to understand the nature of the regional water quality and to provide a fact based review of the data.   The results are compared the EPA and Pennsylvania Drinking Water Standards.  If no standard was available, we searched for a standard that has been established by another state or the World Health Organization.

HW-1 Dimock Private Well Marcellus Shale EPA Sampling January 2012
http://pennsylvania-solutions.blogspot.com/2012/04/hw-1-dimock-private-well-marcellus.html

Dimock Well – HW-02 January 25, 2012 - a review of the data


HW-3 EPA Dimock methyl ethyl ketone MEK 2-Butanone carbon disulfide Caprolactam methane iron


EPA Dimock Well Water Pennsylvania Water Quality Dimock HW-4 Janurary 2012 EPA Data Private Well Review by Oram- Barium, Iron, Lead, Benzo(a)pyrene, 4-Bromopheyl-Phenyl Ether, Fluoranthene,


HW- 5 EPA Dimock Iron methane barium well water PA


HW-6 Dimock Data EPA barium, copper, methane, nickel, thermogenic


Well Water Dimock Pennsylvania HW-7 February 2012 EPA barium, manganese, lead, copper, nickel, zinc


Dimock EPA Private Well Data HW-8 glycols, bacteria, copper, lead, methane, acetone, Anthracene


Dimock Well Water HW-9 Acetone, Arsenic, Barium, Copper, Lead, Lithium, ethane, methane, glycols Pennsylvania


HW-11 Dimock Water Quality Methane, Acetone, Methyl ethyl ketone, Manganese, glycols, barium, strontium, uranium, thermogenic


Well – HW-12 Dimock 1/26/2012 A Review-  Arsenic, Boron, Barium, Iron, Manganse, Nickel, Strontium, Uranium, Methane, Chloroethane, Methyl Chloride


HW-13 Dimock Data EPA January 30, 2012


HW-14 EPA Dimock Data Review January 2012 Biogenic Gas


Dimock HW-17 arsenic, barium, methane, uranium, thermogenic gasEPA Findings


HW-19 Dimock Data Review - EPA Findings - barium, chloride, phthalates


Dimock HW-24 boron fluoride methane lithium barium glycols

Annual Water Testing 

Watercheck with Pesticide Option (Order Online)- This informational testing package will check for 103 contaminants in your well water.  These contaminants include Bacteria, (19) Heavy Metals & Minerals, (6) Other Inorganic Chemicals, (5) Physical Characteristics, (4) Trihalomethanes (disinfection by-products), (47) Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs), and (20) Pesticides, Herbicides and PCBs.  This package works well for well water customers (Code 9002)- $ 206.00, plus shipping - Request information .

Add Methane (Order from us) - We can do a methane, ethane, propane - test for about $ 100.00 
( self collection)-Request information .


For free Information on Water Quality - Go to http://www.water-research.net

Document can not be copied in whole or part without the expressed written permission of Mr. Brian Oram, B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc. http://www.bfenvironmental.com

Do you want to make a positive change in PA - that will cost you NO Money- Yes it is FREE

Help Support the Citizens Groundwater and Surfacewater Database and Submit Your Baseline Data FOR FREE !


Thursday, May 17, 2012

HW-11 Dimock Water Quality Methane, Acetone, Methyl ethyl ketone, Manganese, glycols, barium, strontium, uranium, thermogenic



Comment

1. Without predrilling data, it is not possible to comment on the cause for any water quality problems.
2. Where possible, I have noted situations where elevated levels of a water quality parameter exists in Pennsylvania.
3. If duplicate analysis provided, I attempted to use the highest reported value.
5. This is not about cause and effect; it is about a review of the data.
6. Note- Suspected detects for acetone and ketone were after the treatment system and not before treatment.
7. Treatment system appears to reduce the methane to well below any action limit.

Well – HW-11 (2/13/2012)

With the exception of the following parameters, the remaining values were reported as NOT Detected (U)

Anionic Surfactants – < 0.01 mg/L – the secondary drinking water standard for foaming agents is 0.5 mg/L.  (OK)

Arsenic – < 0.001 mg/L – drinking water standard is <  0.010 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact and arsenic is a common problem in NEPA – about 6 % of private wells have arsenic above 0.010 mg/L. 

Barium – 0.164 mg/L – the primary drinking water standard for barium is 2.0 mg/L –– this does not suggest any specific impact and barium is typically detectable in non-saline impacted water at a level of less than 1 mg/L. (OK)

Boron –< 0.050 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available. EPA appears to have a long-term health advisory of 2.0 mg/L, but other states have limits that range from 0.6 to 1 mg/L.   Therefore, this does not appear to suggest any form of impact.  (OK)

Calcium- 35.5 mg/L (Total)– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK) – the value seems low.

Chloride –7.24 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Chromium- < 0.002 mg/L (D) and the EPA/ PADEP primary drinking water standard is < 0.100 mg/L (OK).

Copper – < 0.002 mg/L  (Untreated) - the secondary drinking water standard is 1.0 mg/L and the primary drinking water standard is 1.3 mg/L. (OK)

Ethane –0.320 mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard (OK)

Fluoride – < 0.1 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is < 2 mg/L- PADEP drinking water standard is 2 mg/L.

Iron – < 0.100 mg/L (Total)) – Iron is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.3 mg/L.  Therefore, the total iron content does not exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  (OK)

Lead – < 0.001 mg/L (Total) - Lead is regulated as a primary standard (EPA and PA) at 0.015 mg/L, but the action level in PA for source water is 0.005 mg/L. (OK)

Lithium – < 0.200 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but EPA has recommend a level be below 0.7 mg/L    (OK)

Methane   22 mg/L   – No specific drinking water standard. (Action is needed). The well water is above the new action limit of 7 mg/L- The well should be actively vented, but it may be advisable to evaluate a structural modification to the well and changing the pumping system. For more details, go to http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm

Magnesium-8.13 mg/L– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)

Manganese– 0.0457 mg/L (Total) – Manganese is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.05 mg/L.  Therefore, the total manganese content does Not exceed the secondary drinking water standard, but it is approaching the value.  Some intermittent problems with discolored water may occur – additional monitoring recommended.   (OK)

Nickel – 0.0014 mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard
is available, but the EPA has suggest a MCL of 0.1 mg/L.   (OK)

Sodium –8.48  mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but the EPA has added it to the Candidate List to provide more analysis.  The EPA’s initial value of 20 mg/L has been clearly identified as not realistic.  When chloride (salt is sodium chloride) is present at a concentration of over 250 mg/L, the water can have an “off” taste. At 400+ mg/L chloride, the water will taste definitely salty. (Source- Dr. Brian Redmond, Professional Geologist). (OK)

Sulfate –13. 7 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Strontium 0.469 mg/L   – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but it is on the EPA Candidate List.  The EPA recommends that drinking water levels of nonradioactive strontium should not be more than 4 mg/L.  The report limit is consistent with background levels in Northeastern Pennsylvania.  If the background level was above 4 mg/L, it would be advisable to test for radiological parameters, especially alpha/beta.  (OK)

Total Dissolved Solids  110 mg/L   – Total Dissolved Solids is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 500 mg/L. 

Total Suspended Solids - < 10 mg/L – no standard, but would recommend retesting to obtain a lower detection limit.

Uranium 0.0021 mg/L (Total) – Uranium is regulated as a primary drinking water standard by the EPA and PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.030 mg/L.  (OK)

Zinc  0.0042 mg/L – Zinc is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 5.0 mg/L.  (OK)

Nitrate+Nitrite- N – 0.162 mg/L, this is well below the EPA / PADEP drinking water limit of 10mg N/L for nitrate-N and would also be below the limit of 1.0 mg N/L for nitrite-N. (OK)

Acetone - the reported value was 0.0057 mg/L (J/P -actually below the actual water limit of  < 0.002 mg/L- Treated Water- the untreated water had a reported value of  <0.002 mg/L) and no trigger limit is reported, but PADEP has a Medium Specific Concentration (MSC) for aquifers with a TDS of < 2500 mg/L of 33.0 mg/L and Massachusetts appears to have a drinking water standard of 6.3 mg/L. (OK)

Methyl ethyl ketone – 0.0014 mg/L (J/P- the sample is following the treatment system and below the detection limit for the method) – the untreated water had a value of < 0.002 mg/L ) – therefore the result is not actually detectable.
Methyl ethyl ketone is a colorless volatile liquid that is soluble in water. The odor threshold for methyl ethyl ketone is 5.4 parts per million (ppm), with an acetone-like odor reported. Methyl ethyl ketone is also referred to as 2-butanone.   The EPA and PADEP has not set a drinking water standard, but it appears that Massachusetts has set a level of 4 mg/L.  (OK- but additional monitoring advisable)

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/methylet.html


Ethylene glycol –  the reported value is < 10 mg/L – there is not standard, but the EPA has a guidance limit of < 7 mg/L.  Other states have lower and higher standards:

New Jersey 0.300 mg/L (300 ppb)
Arizona 5.5 mg/L (5500 ppb)
New Hampshire 7.0 mg/L (7000 ppb)
Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota14.0 mg/L (14,000 ppb)
Minnesota

The EPA also collected a treated water sample.  After treatment, the following was documented:

Ethane – From 0.320 mg/L to < 0.0012 mg/L
Methane – From 22.00 mg/L to 0.026 mg/L
Chloride – From 7.24 mg/L to 7.01 mg/L
Sulfate – From 13.74 mg/L to 13.3 mg/L
Barium – From 0.164 mg/L to 0.164 mg/L
Copper – From < 0.002 mg/L to 0.0045 mg/L – suggest corrosion within plumbing of home, the result is still below the action limit.
Sodium – From 9.35 mg/L to 11.8 mg/L
Strontium – From 0.469 mg/L to 0.513 mg/L
Uranium – From  0.0019 mg/L to 0.0019 mg/L
Zinc – 0.0042 mg/L to 0.012 mg/L  - suggest corrosion within plumbing of the home, the result is still below the action limit.
Acetone - < 0.002 mg/L to 0.0057 mg/L (J) – the detect is below the reported detection limit for the method.
Methyl ethyl ketone - < 0.002 mg/L to 0.0014 mg/L – a suspected detect following treatment.

At a minimum, I would recommend retesting for ethylene glycol other and glycol-type compounds using a method that is more sensitive or conducting some type of standard additions analysis.

1. Methane was present at a level that is above the action limit of 7 mg/L and approaching a saturated level.  Action is needed.  Since the ratio of methane/ethane is 68 – this would suggest that the gas is of Thermogenic origin/

2. Methyl ethyl ketone and Acetone hits were suggested, but the reported values were actually below the method detection limit.  This suggests that additional monitoring may be advisable.

3. Detects for ketone and acetone after treatment suggest that this may be related to recent repairs or changes in the plumbing for the home.

4.Manganese is just below the secondary drinking water standard – continued monitoring is advisable.

Document can not be copied in whole or part without the expressed written permission of Mr. Brian Oram, B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc. http://www.bfenvironmental.com

Do you want to make a positive change in PA - that will cost you NO Money?
Help Support the Citizens Groundwater and Surfacewater Database and Submit Your Baseline Data !

 Free Information on Drinking Water Quality - http://www.water-research.net

Dimock Well Water HW-9 Acetone, Arsenic, Barium, Copper, Lead, Lithium, ethane, methane, glycols Pennsylvania


Comment
1. Without predrilling data, it is not possible to comment on the cause for any water quality problems.
2. Where possible, I have noted situations where elevated levels of a water quality parameter exists in Pennsylvania.
3. If duplicate analysis provided, I attempted to use the highest reported value.
5. This is not about cause and effect; it is about a review of the data.
6. A Well by Well - Review of the Data for Dimock, PA collected by EPA

Well – HW-9 (2/3/2012)
With the exception of the following parameters, the remaining values were reported as NOT Detected (U)
Anionic Surfactants – < 0.01 mg/L – the secondary drinking water standard for foaming agents is 0.5 mg/L.  (OK)

Arsenic – 0.001 mg/L – drinking water standard is <  0.010 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact and arsenic is a common problem in NEPA – about 6 % of private wells have arsenic above 0.010 mg/L. 

Barium – 0.106 mg/L – the primary drinking water standard for barium is 2.0 mg/L –– this does not suggest any specific impact and barium is typically detectable in non-saline impacted water at a level of less than 1 mg/L. (OK)

Boron –< 0.050 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available. EPA appears to have a long-term health advisory of 2.0 mg/L, but other states have limits that range from 0.6 to 1 mg/L.   Therefore, this does not appear to suggest any form of impact.  (OK)

Calcium- 23.4 mg/L (Total)– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK) – the value seems low.

Chloride –13.8 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Chromium- < 0.002 mg/L (D) and the EPA/ PADEP primary drinking water standard is < 0.100 mg/L (OK).

Copper – 0.00375 mg/L (OK)- the secondary drinking water standard is 1.0 mg/L and the primary drinking water standard is 1.3 mg/L. (OK)

Ethane – < 0.0012 mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard (OK)

Fluoride – < 0.1 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is < 2 mg/L- PADEP drinking water standard is 2 mg/L.

Iron – < 0.100 mg/L (Total)) – Iron is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.3 mg/L.  Therefore, the total iron content does not exceed the secondary drinking water standard.  (OK)

Lead – 0.0016 mg/L (Total) - Lead is regulated as a primary standard (EPA and PA) at 0.015 mg/L, but the action level in PA for source water is 0.005 mg/L. Because of the hits for copper and lead, it is possible that the nuisance bacteria may be causing some corrosion related problems  (MIC) and it may be worth conducting a first flush analysis of the water. MIC – Microbiologically Induced Corrosion – Problem recommend inspection of the well, camera survey, shock disinfection, and retesting.  This is a common problem in NEPA.  (OK) = Level below all action limits, but monitoring recommended.

Lithium – < 0.200 mg/L (Total) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but EPA has recommend a level be below 0.7 mg/L    (OK)

Methane   0.0043 mg/L (J-actually below the detection limit for the method)  – No specific drinking water standard. (OK). The well water  is not above the new action limit of 7 mg/L. For more details, go to http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm

Magnesium-4.00 mg/L– no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)

Manganese– 0.0013 mg/L (Total) – Manganese is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.05 mg/L.  Therefore, the total manganese content does NOT exceed the secondary drinking water standard.   (OK)

Nickel – 0.0014 mg/L  – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard
is available, but the EPA has suggest a MCL of 0.1 mg/L.   (OK)

Sodium –8.48  mg/L  (D) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but the EPA has added it to the Candidate List to provide more analysis.  The EPA’s initial value of 20 mg/L has been clearly identified as not realistic.  When chloride (salt is sodium chloride) is present at a concentration of over 250 mg/L, the water can have an “off” taste. At 400+ mg/L chloride, the water will taste definitely salty. (Source- Dr. Brian Redmond, Professional Geologist). (OK)

Sulfate –18. 7 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Strontium < 0.200 mg/L   – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available, but it is on the EPA Candidate List.  The EPA recommends that drinking water levels of nonradioactive strontium should not be more than 4 mg/L.  The report limit is consistent with background levels in Northeastern Pennsylvania.  If the background level was above 4 mg/L, it would be advisable to test for radiological parameters, especially alpha/beta.  (OK)

Total Dissolved Solids  110 mg/L   – Total Dissolved Solids is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 500 mg/L. 

Total Suspended Solids - < 10 mg/L – no standard, but would recommend retesting to obtain a lower detection limit.

Uranium 0.0021 mg/L (Total) – Uranium is regulated as a primary drinking water standard by the EPA and PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.030 mg/L.  (OK)

Zinc  0.0206 mg/L – Zinc is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 5.0 mg/L.  (OK)

Nitrate+Nitrite- N – 2.41 mg/L, this is well below the EPA / PADEP drinking water limit of 10mg N/L for nitrate-N and would also be below the limit of 1.0 mg N/L for nitrite-N. (OK)

Acetone - the reported value was 0.0031 mg/L (J- actually below the actual water limit of  < 0.002 mg/L) and no trigger limit is reported, but PADEP has a Medium Specific Concentration (MSC) for aquifers with a TDS of < 2500 mg/L of 33.0 mg/L and Massachusetts appears to have a drinking water standard of 6.3 mg/L. (OK)

Ethylene glycol –  the reported value is < 10 mg/L – there is not standard, but the EPA has a guidance limit of < 7 mg/L.  Other states have lower and higher standards:

New Jersey 0.300 mg/L (300 ppb)
Arizona 5.5 mg/L (5500 ppb)
New Hampshire 7.0 mg/L (7000 ppb)
Florida, Massachusetts, and Minnesota14.0 mg/L (14,000 ppb)
Minnesota

At a minimum, I would recommend retesting for ethylene glycol other and glycol-type compounds using a method that is more sensitive or conducting some type of standard additions analysis.

1. No major problems
2. Recommend additional testing for nitrite.
3. Arsenic was detected.
4. Copper, lead, and zinc detected this could suggest a corrosion related problem. This is a common problem in NEPA

Document can not be copied in whole or part without the expressed written permission of Mr. Brian Oram, B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc. http://www.bfenvironmental.com

Do you want to make a positive change in PA - that will cost you NO Money?
Help Support the Citizens Groundwater and Surfacewater Database and Submit Your Baseline Data !

 Free Information on Drinking Water Quality - http://www.water-research.net

Saturday, May 12, 2012

Didymo (Rock Snot) Fact Sheet Delaware River PA, NY, NJ



This is not my work.  This website and posting was generated to help me learn more about this organism.

Source 1:
Source of this content -
http://www.wvdnr.gov/fishing/didymo.shtm

The invasive algae known as Didymo has been found in the Elk River in the Webster Springs area following reports from anglers that heavy algal mats were seen in the Elk River.  DNR staff collected samples from three locations near Webster Springs.  The samples were sent to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources for confirmation.  All three samples contained Didymo.

Didymo is a common name for Didymosphenia geminata, a freshwater diatom species that can form extensive mats on stream beds.  The thick mats can smother native algae and aquatic insects, and make fishing very difficult.  These thick mats appear slimy, but feel more like cotton or wool fabric.  The algal mats are also called “rock snot” and can be white, yellow or brown in color.  The algae form stalks that attach to rocks.   While the algae eventually die and break off, the stalks persist and may impact stream habitats and aquatic organisms for weeks or months.


Didymo is native to the northern latitudes of North America, Europe and Asia.  Its range has expanded and it now can be found in rivers in the western United States and more recently in Maryland, New York, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Vermont.  It has also been found in three western Virginia rivers (Jackson, Pound and Smith).
WV Didymo Poster
WV Wildlife Didymo TV Spot

Rock covered with DidymoDidymo in River

What precautions should everyone take to avoid spreading Didymo?

Recreational users of West Virginia’s aquatic resources have the potential to spread aquatic invasive species and fish and wildlife pathogens from stream to stream and watershed to watershed.  Responsible stewards of our state waters take precautions to minimize the spread of these threats.  Follow these ‘Best Practices’ and Disinfection Procedures to minimize the spread of aquatic invasive species, such as Didymo, and fish and wildlife pathogens.  This approach is modeled after New Zealand’s widely-used ‘Check, Clean, Dry’ strategy. 

BEST PRACTICES for minimizing the spread of Didymo, other aquatic invasive species, and fish and wildlife pathogens:

  • Anglers - Consider the use of easily disinfected wading gear.  For example, rubber-soled wading boots with cleats are easier to disinfect quickly than felt-soled boots. 
  • All Users - Disinfect your gear and boat before traveling between different bodies of water or watersheds (see below).
  • All Users - If you move around to fish, boat, play or work, construct and use a simple, portable disinfection kit.
  • All Users - Visually inspect your boat, gear and equipment before entering and leaving the water.  Remove all plants, plant fragments, animals, mud or other debris and discard in the trash. 
  • Anglers - When practical, fish in a downstream direction.  This doesn’t mean you can’t wade upstream a bit to fish that nice run upstream – think on a watershed scale.  By fishing at the mouth of a large river in the morning, then going to the headwaters in the afternoon without disinfecting your gear, you’ve potentially spread Didymo upstream to the whole stream, which may not have been previously infected.  Most algae and aquatic invasives/pathogens can’t swim upstream.
  • Anglers, Guides, Outfitters - Designate waders/boots/canoes/tubes for different watersheds or have multiple sets available for same-day travel, when needed.
  • Canoeists, Kayakers, Boaters, Tubers - Remove drain plug and drain any water prior to leaving boat loading/unloading area.  Don’t move water between waterbodies.

How can I properly disinfect my recreational equipment?

DISINFECTION PROCEDURES – Disinfect prior to moving to another waterbody, watershed, or upstream site
There are a number of disinfection techniques that will kill most aquatic invasive species and fish and wildlife pathogens, including Didymo.  Solutions of bleach or dishwashing detergent products are suggested as they provide the best combination of availability, cost AND effectiveness against Didymo as well as other aquatic invasive species and fish and wildlife pathogens, such as whirling disease.  Choose the appropriate agent based on the actual items requiring disinfection (i.e. bleach solutions can damage some items).  It is recommended that all disinfected equipment be rinsed on dry land, away from state waters.  It is preferable to drain used solutions into treated wastewater (e.g. pour down a sink drain).

Non-absorbent items (boats, canoes, rubber waders, ‘hard-sided’ objects)
  • Dishwashing Detergent: soak and scrub for at least one minute in 5% solution (add 6.5oz of detergent with water to make one gallon).  ‘Green’ products are less effective and not recommended for disinfecting.
  • Bleach: soak or spray all surfaces for at least one minute in 2% household bleach (2.5oz with water added to make one gallon).  Bleach solutions must be replaced daily to remain effective.
  • Hot Water: soak for at least one minute in very hot water (above 140°F – hotter than most tap water) OR for at least 20 minutes in hot water kept above 120°F (hot tap water, uncomfortable to touch).
  • Drying:  Drying will kill Didymo, but slightly moist environments will support some organisms for months.  This approach should only be used for gear that can be left in the sun for extended periods of time (i.e. a canoe that’s left in the yard for several days between uses).
  • Freeze:  Place item in freezer until solid.
Absorbent items require longer soaking times to allow thorough penetration into the materials.  Felt-soled waders, for example, are difficult and take time to properly disinfect. Other absorbent items include clothing, wetsuits, sandals with fabric straps, or anything else that takes time to dry out.  The thicker and denser a material, the longer it will require for adequate disinfection.  Err on the side of caution.  Bleach solutions are not recommended for absorbent materials. 
  • Hot Water:  Soak items for at least 40 minutes in very hot water kept above 140°F (hotter than most tap water).
  • Dishwashing Detergent and hot water: (‘Green’ products are less effective and not recommended for disinfecting):  soak for 30 minutes in a hot 5% detergent/water solution kept above 120°F.
A simple, portable DISINFECTION KIT might include:
  • Large trash can and/or medium sized Rubbermaid-type bin for soaking wading boots
  • Large stiff bristle brush for scrubbing
  • Spray bottle(s) or herbicidal pump spray can(s)
  • Graduated cylinder or measuring cup
  • 5% detergent solution and/or 2% bleach Solution

What should I do if I think I’ve found Didymo?

Please contact the DNR fisheries biologist at the nearest district office to report possible Didymo outbreaks.
Other sources of information on Didymo

http://www.epa.gov/region8/water/didymosphenia/International%20fact%20sheet.pdf
http://www.epa.gov/region8/water/didymosphenia/didymo_field_guide.pdf
http://www.vtwaterquality.org/lakes/docs/ans/lp_dididguide.pdf



Source # 2
http://www.vtwaterquality.org/lakes/htm/ans/lp_didymo.htm



Things you should know about Didymo in Vermont:
  • Didymo can have negative ecological, economic and aesthetic impacts in infested areas, but how it will affect Vermont waters is unknown.
  • There are many examples of rivers where Didymo does do not form nuisance blooms or mats.  Surveys can locate viable cells but, for some reason, they do not undergo rapid growth and excess production of stalk material.  Scientists around the world are still attempting to determine what factors limit or support this bloom activity.
  • Scientific studies conducted around the globe have yet to show conclusively that Didymo has significant impacts to trout fisheries.  However, it remains a priority of the Agency of Natural Resources to limit the alga’s spread throughout the region, as a precaution.
  • Spread prevention is the only effective management tool.  There are no known methods of eradicating Didymo once established.
  • Vermont ANR is cooperating with a number of federal, state and other entities to monitor and reduce the spread of Didymo in the Northeast.
  • You can do your part to minimize the spread of Didymo by following best practices and disinfecting your gear when using Vermont waters (for specific suggestions see below).
  • Disinfection and best practices not only help to reduce the spread of Didymo, but other invasive species and pathogens such as VHS (viral hemorrhagic septicemia) or whirling disease as well.  It’s simply good stewardship.
  • Didymo can be present in a stream yet be invisible to the naked eye, particularly during the early stages of an infestation or following heavy flows.  This holds true for many other aquatic nuisance species as well as fish diseases.  River users should incorporate the suggested best practices (listed below), including proper gear disinfection before moving between ANY waterbodies, whether they are declared positive or not. 
Other good sources
2. Map for Part of PA, NY, NJ- showing distribution - http://www.fish.state.pa.us/water/habitat/ans/didymo/map_didymo.gif