Showing posts with label Private Wells. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Private Wells. Show all posts

Friday, January 2, 2015

FREE WELL WATER TESTING Pike County Pennsylvnaia

Conservation District looking for Volunteers  to allow FREE WELL WATER TESTING


Pike County Conservation District along with the US Geological Survey (USGS) will be completing a study of drinking water wells from around the county during the summer of 2015. The wells included in the study will be selected from a list of private residential or business wells owned by individuals who agree to volunteer access to their well for the study.  From this list of volunteers, wells will be selected based on several criteria such as geology, accessibility and construction information.  In order to place your well on the list, just call or email the Pike County Conservation District at 570-226-8220 or PikeCD@pikepa.org and give some basic contact info and well location.


Help Pike County develop a baseline for drinking water quality! This is a great opportunity to have an excellent comprehensive sampling of your well water. The cost of this sampling would be several hundred dollars but well water tests completed as part of this study will all be done at no cost to the well owner because this study is funded by the Commonwealth Finance Authority through a Marcellus Legacy Fund Grant awarded to the Pike County Conservation District.   Well water samples will be compared to EPA health standards along with many secondary standards for safe drinking water. Also included in the testing will be several chemicals associated with Unconventional Gas Well Drilling (fracking).  Well owners will be provided with the results. There are only 60 openings for wells throughout Pike County available for the study. Well locations and names will be kept confidential; only the data from the water tests will be used in the study.



Monday, August 19, 2013

Act 13 Grant Application Baseline Testing Luzerne, Lackawanna, and Columbia County Pennsylvania

Notice of Grant Application

The Pocono Northeast Resource Conservation & Development Council has submitted a grant application to the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development that could allow our organization and its partners to use financial resources from the Marcellus Legacy Fund to implement a Baseline Water Quality Testing Program in the Council’s service area. Through this grant, we hope to complete testing in Columbia, Lackawanna, and Luzerne Counties.  As it is a requirement for this grant, we are notifying you that if we are successful in obtaining the funds, we could be working within your jurisdiction.

The Marcellus Shale underlies eight of the ten counties in the Council’s service area. Most of the residents we serve are either directly or indirectly impacted by unconventional shale gas development. In addition, approximately 60% of the residents rely on private wells for their drinking water needs, putting them at increased risk. Monitoring and documenting baseline conditions is critical to not only protecting rural water sources and the environment, but also to safeguard the larger community water supply water sources.

The main elements of the project will include: 

1.      Educate private well owners on baseline water quality issues; 

2.      Provide free baseline water testing, conducted by a certified testing laboratory and collected by trained samplers, for approximately 200 private well owners, giving priority to those over the age of 65 or families that have a median income of less than 2 times the poverty level in our project area;

3.      Offer free assistance to review baseline testing conducted by this project or conducted by the individual private well owner or given to the private well owner within our service area;

4.      Implement a training program for samplers conducting baseline analysis to ensure the use of proper chain-of-custody, field collection, testing, and documentation, and reporting of the data;

5.      Provide assistance to all private well owners that participated in this project by providing a “non-
technical” review of the testing results explained in plain language, a free copy of  Pennsylvania Groundwater Quality: Your Private Well: What Do the Results Mean?, and conducting regional education outreach events; and

6.      The data, excluding confidential contact information, will be maintained by the certified laboratory and the Council in a spreadsheet format that can be then added to the Citizen Groundwater and Surfacewater Database or other state and regional databases.

The Pocono Northeast R C & D Council appreciates your interest and support for this project. It will provide valuable data on the status of rural wells, as well as ensure that the participants in the study will be better off with its completion. Please contact us with any questions you may have at 570-234-3577.

http://www.pnercd.org





Monday, April 1, 2013

The Carbon County Groundwater Guardians Volunteer Groundwater Group in Pennsylvania

The Carbon County Groundwater Guardians (CCGG) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, volunteer, environmental education organization which provides homeowners with information on private wells, water quality and quantity, and septic systems. We are dedicated to protecting private well owners from illnesses caused by our drinking water. We advance good groundwater stewardship by raising awareness on a variety of groundwater issues that affects everyone with a private water supply. We can help you get your water tested at the lab of your choice and explain the test results.

We seek new people at all skill levels for a variety of programs. One thing that everyone can do is attend meetings to share ideas on improving CCGG, enabling us to better understand and address the concerns of well owners.


Everything we do began with an idea.

We realize your time is precious and the world is hectic. CCGG’s volunteers do only what they’re comfortable with. It can be a little or a lot.

For more information, please go to CCGG’s About Page .
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians on Facebook







Sunday, July 1, 2012

Baseline Water Testing for New York State


This is a list of parameter for wells outside the 1000 foot radius around a well and not along a horizontal leg.  I do not agree with the PSU recommendations from 2008 and the updated listing in 2011 and the recommendations from CSI are still missing some key parameters.    For the record, I still do not understand the chemical oxygen demand and Total Organic Carbon. recommendation by the CSI.

This is a general list of test packages.  Please remember baseline water testing is not a one size fits all program.  The actual testing that you need depends on your health, your water source, your surrounding land-use, the history for your area, and what is planned in the near future.  Also, please note that this list evolved back in 2008 and we had been recommending key parameters like bromide, multiple gases, aluminum, and others since 2008/2009.

This approach ranges in cost from about $ 350 to over $ 1000.00.

Testing Package # 1
This package is recommended as a screening for post gas development or screening for wells that are not a long a major roadway or areas that have not been leased.
Parameters
Total Coliform with e. coli confirmation, chloride, sodium, bromide, barium, pH, ORP, total dissolved solids, MBAS, iron, manganese, and methane/ethane/propane and other gases..

Testing Package # 2
This is the minimum package I recommend for the area- this is based on PADEP recommendations, plus I added Arsenic and Nitrate.  Note- If nitrate is at or greater than 1 mg NO3-N/L - I would recommend adding Nitrite.
Parameters
Package # 1- plus Aluminum, T. Hardness, Magnesium, Strontium, Conductivity, Calcium, Zinc, Alkalinity, Arsenic, Nitrate, Total Suspended Solids, Sulfate, Oil & Grease, 21-VOCs/MTBE, Selenium

Testing Package # 3
More Comprehensive- Assuming the wells are outside 1000 feet of a well site and not along a horizontal leg
Package # 2 - plus Potassium, Sulfide, Ammonia, Acidity, Nickel, Gross, Alpha/Beta, Lead, and Uranium.

Possible Addons- Based on available frac water data- this would be more appropriate for wells within 1000 feet or less.
Radium 226 and Radium 228- if alpha or Uranium is high.
Turbidity- cheap screening test
Phenol and phenolic compounds- located near well or along major road
Chemical Oxygen Demand - DO Not Recommend
Total Organic Carbon- DO Not Recommend
2- Butanone (methyl ethyl ketone)
Naphthalene
Phthalates- this may be a problem already for private wells with PVC casing or substand piping.
Ethylene Glycol and other Glycols- recommend
1,2- Propanediol - I think this is being used by some as an alternative to ethylene glycol
Methylchloride
Acetone - may be source because of a break down in 1,2- Propanediol
Acetophenone
Lithium- Recommend
Thallium reviewing
2-Methylnaphthalene
SOCs

Schedule a Sampling Event

Other Post on the subject
http://pennsylvania-solutions.blogspot.com/2010/07/getting-waters-tested-informational-and.html

Training - Third Party Baseline Samplers

Other Programs
1. Schedule a Private Well Owner Workshop - Learn How to Review Your Water Quality Testing Results, Select Parameters, Screen Your Well Water Quality, and Much More.

2. Well by Well Review of Dimock, PA

Co-Authored - New Publication on Water Quality for Private Well Owners- Website - http://www.bfenvironmental.com/links.php
http://www.bfenvironmental.com/pdfs/Waterbooklet070610.pdf


Website provided for information only and the site is always under development and subject to change.

Thanks

Brian Oram, Professional Geologist
B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc.
Water-Research.net


Friday, April 20, 2012

Baseline Testing Less Common Parameters with and without Standards

Elements with or without EPA Drinking Water Standards

Antimony- The EPA primary drinking water limit of 0.006 mg/L.

Cobalt - The PA Statewide Health Standard Guidance for Brownfields - recommends a Cobalt concentration of less than 0.011 mg/L for residential areas with a total dissolved solids of 2500 mg/L. (Source: “Pocket Guide to Statewide Health Standards, January 2011).
Additional Information on Cobalt - http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts33.pdf

Molybdenum - No specific drinking water standard, but the WHO recommends a level of less than 0.07 mg/L and in Wisconsin the standard is 0.040 mg/L.
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/molybdenum.pdf
http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/eh/hlthhaz/fs/MolybdenumDrinkingWater.pdf

Nickel - EPA Suggested a Maximum Contaminant Level of 0.1 mg/L
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/pdfs/factsheets/ioc/tech/nickel.pdf

Silver - < 0.05 mg/L Maine  and < 0.1 mg/L (World Health Organization)

Amounts of silver in drinking water over the drinking water standard of 0.05 milligrams per liter may cause a permanent blue-gray discoloration of eyes, skin and mucous membranes.

Thallium – The EPA primary drinking water limit of 0.002 mg/L.
http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/thallium.cfm

Thorium The EPA has set a drinking water limit of 15 picocuries per liter (15 pCi/L) of water for gross alpha particle activity and 4 millirems per year for beta particles and photon activity (for example, gamma radiation and x-rays).
Vanadium - Action Level in California at 0.050 mg/L - inform public at 0.015 mg/L
http://oehha.ca.gov/water/pals/vanadium.html

A Well by Well - Review of the Data for Dimock, PA collected by EPA

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

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


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-02

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

Total Coliform – Two samples  - (82 colonies per 100 ml and 1 colonies per 100 ml) – since EPA collected this sample at the end of the purging process – this suggests the well is vulnerable to near surface influence and the presence of total coliform would suggest the water is not potable.  This is a very common problem in NEPA and about 30 to 50% of private wells have total coliform bacteria.  The problem could be private well construction, type of well cap, or improper well siting.   The primary recommendation would be to inspect the well, shock disinfect the well, and retest.  If this was a regulated water source, it would be classified as not-potable, and disinfection would be required.  As stated, this is a common problem with private wells in PA and the significant variation in the two testing results could suggest induced contamination by the field samplers.  Retesting Recommended

Ethylene glycol –  the reported value is < 10 mg/L – there is no standard set by EPA or PA, 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 using a method that is more sensitive or conducting some type of standard additions analysis.

Chloride – 3.9 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Sulfate – 8.9 mg/L (OK) – drinking water standard is <  250 mg/L – this does not suggest any specific impact.

Arsenic – 0.004 mg/L (Total) and 0.0026 mg/L (D) – 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.  It would be advisable to monitor the arsenic level of the well on an annual basis. (OK)

Barium - 0.275mg/L (Total) and 0.263 mg/L (D) – drinking water standard is <  2 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) and 0.0588 mg/L (D) – 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- 31.7 mg/L (Total) and 32.1 mg/L (D) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)

Copper – 0.0035 mg/L (Total) and 0.0025 mg/L (D)- Copper is regulated as a primary standard (EPA and PA) and secondary drinking water standard in Pennsylvania.  Primary standard 1.3 mg/L and secondary standard 1.0 mg/L.   (OK)

Iron – 1.62mg/L (Total) and 0.140 mg/L (D) – 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 exceeds the secondary drinking water standard.  Since the total value exceeds the limit and not the dissolved, this suggests that the primary recommendation would be to install a water treatment system to filter the iron colloids or particles from the water.  Because of the high bacterial issue, it is also possible that iron bacteria may be present in the water causing discolored and smelly water.  The water probably has a reddish or brown appearance. Elevated level of iron is a common water quality problem in Northeastern PennsylvaniaAction is Recommended, because of an aesthetic issue.
Lead – 0.0019 mg/L (Total) and 0.001 mg/L (D)- 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 – Call MIC – Microbiologically Induced Corrosion – Problem recommend inspection of the well, camera survey, shock disinfection, and retesting.  This is a common problem in NEPA.  (Action Needed may be a warning sign of corrosion)

Magnesium- 5.73 mg/L (Total) and 5.75 mg/L (D) – no specific drinking water standard drinking water standard is available.  (OK)

Manganese– 0.112 mg/L (Total) and 0.105 mg/L (D) – 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 exceeds the secondary drinking water standard.  Since the manganese is in a dissolved form, the water could become browner in color over time.  Because the water coming out of the well has dissolved manganese, the water treatment system would require either chemical oxidation or some type of ion exchange system. Elevated level of manganese is a common water quality problem in Northeastern PennsylvaniaAction is Recommended, because of an aesthetic issue and it could be related to Iron-Related Bacteria and MIC.  (photos of iron bacteria on the website)

Sodium – 15.9 mg/L (Total) and 16.2 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)

Strontium 0.661mg/L (Total) and 0.677 mg/L (D)  – 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)

Thallium- < 0.001 mg/L (Total) and < 0.001 mg/L (D)  – Thallium is regulated as a primary drinking water standard by the EPA and PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 0.002 mg/L.  (OK)

Uranium 0.004 mg/L (Total) and 0.0039 mg/L (D)  – 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 (Total) and < 0.002 mg/L (D)  – Zinc is regulated as a secondary drinking water standard by the PADEP in Pennsylvania and the action limit is 5.0 mg/L.  (OK)

Ethane 0.57  mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard (OK)

Methane 18  mg/L  – No specific drinking water standard, but the level indicates supersaturated conditions.  This means the well pump is pulling in water that is not in equilibrium with the atmosphere.  The well is above the new action limit of 7 mg/L and methane gas mitigation measures should be employed.  These measures not only include venting the well, but also potentially modifying the well, installing treatment, or taking other action.  For more details, go to http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm
There are places in PA were baseline levels of methane gas are at or above 7 mg/L. In general, I would estimate that 1 to 3 % of private wells may have elevated levels of methane.  In addition to modifying the well, it would be advisable to conduct isotopic analysis.  Based on the ratio of methane to ethane, the ratio is 31 to 36.  Since a ratio of methane to ethane of over 1000 typically suggests a biogenic source and a value of under 100 suggests a thermogenic source, the available information would suggest a thermogenic source for the gas.  As a guide, it may be possible to use a ratio to suggest the source of the gas- “ if the ratio of methane to ethane is 25, the source is thermogenic, but if the ratio is over 2500, then it is biogenic" (Mr. Bob Pirkle, President of Microseeps, Inc.), but between 25 and 2500 this is where isotopic analysis is critical.  


No specific health concern, but a health risk associated with the potential for a flammable environment.  


Action needed to properly vent gas from the well, perhaps modifying the well, water treatment to reduce methane level in the water to < 7 mg/L or more,  and isotopic analysis recommended.

May be advisable to check the level of other gases, such as propane.

Total Dissolved Solids  95  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.  (OK)

Acenaphthylene – the reported level was  0.00001 mg/L. Acenaphtylene is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon – PAHs are created when products like coal, oil, gas, and garbage are burned but the burning process is not complete. Acenaphthylene is a component of crude oil, coal tar and a product of combustion which may be produced and released to the environment during natural fires. Very little information is available on the document that was released and the report indicates that one sample had a detected at   0.00001 mg/L and the other sample was  non-detected.  There is no EPA or PADEP drinking water standard and the primary recommendation would be to retest the water. During retesting, it is critical to check for airborne sources of contamination during sampling.

“Note: PAHs have been detected in surface waters of the United States. In an assessment of STORET data covering the period 1980-82, Staples et al. (1985) reported median concentrations in ambient water of less than 0.010 mg/L for 15 PAHs (acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, anthracene, benz[a]anthracene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, benzo[g,h,i]perylene, benzo[a]pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, fluorene, indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, and pyrene).

It appears that Arizona and Missouri recommended a limit of < 0.003 ug/L or <0.000003 mg/L.”

Retesting is Recommend -During retesting, it is critical to check for airborne sources of contamination during sampling and it would be advisable to attempt to use a method with a lower detection limit.  At this point, I am not sure if a certified method can detect acenaphthylene to the recommended level of 0.000003 mg/L – still researching.


Anthracene the reported level was  0.00023 mg/L (0.23 ug/L).  This  is an unregulated synthetic organic compound and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.   PAHs are created when products like coal, oil, gas, and garbage are burned but the burning process is not complete. There is no EPA or PADEP drinking water standard and the primary recommendation would be to retest the water.

Retesting Recommended - During retesting, it is critical to check for airborne sources of contamination during sampling.  The EPA reports a trigger value of 1.3 mg/L, but I can not this reference.  I did find a reference to a DWEL of 2.0 mg/L.  It appears that the health-based screening requirement in California is 2.0 mg/L and a lifetime exposure limit is 10 mg/L- based on this information (OK).


Benzo(a)pyrene – the reported level was 0.00020 mg/L (0.00016 to 0.0002 mg/L).   The EPA and PADEP have a primary drinking water standard of 0.0002 mg/L.  The value is at the maximum contaminant level for a regulated water source.  The primary recommendation would be to continue to monitor this source and make sure to monitor the source following a recharge event.

4-Bromopheyl-Phenyl Ether – the reported level was 0.00018 mg/L – there does not appear to be a federal drinking water standard but Florida does appear to have an upper limit of 0.0010 mg/L.   (OK)

Butyl benzyl phthalate – the reported level was 0.00035 mg/L – “Benzylbutylphthalate, also called
n-butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP) or benzyl butyl phthalate, is a phthalate, an ester of phthalic acid, benzyl alcohol and n-butanol.”   The health based screening level appears to be 0.100 mg/L and the EPA Human Health Equivalent is 1.4 mg/L. Butyl benzylphthalate is an industrial solvent and additive used in adhesives, vinyl flooring, sealants, car-care products and some personal care products.  (OK)


Carbazole (Diphenylenimine)was reported at a level of 0.29 ug/L or 0.00029 mg/L. Carbazole is released to the atmosphere in emissions from waste incineration, tobacco smoke, aluminum manufacturing, and rubber, petroleum, coal, and wood combustion. If released to the atmosphere, vapor-phase carbazole is rapidly degraded by photochemically produced hydroxyl radicals (estimated half-life of 3 hr). In the particulate phase, the rate of degradation depends upon the adsorbing substrate.   The EPA does not have a regulated drinking water limit, but it appears Florida has set a standard of 0.0075 mg/L.   (OK)

Source: USEPA/Office of Water; Federal-State Toxicology and Risk Analysis Committee (FSTRAC).

4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether was reported at a level of 0.10 ug/L or 0.0001 mg/L.  The preliminary research suggests that this chemical has a relatively low solubility and would have a tendency to bind to soil and sediment.   In general, it is considered to be insoluble or have a low solubility in water.  The U.S. EPA Storet Data Base, 1,333 samples, 1.1% positive, median concentration less than 10 ug/L or 0.010 mg/L.  Because of the affinity to have only slight mobility in soil and water and because the well is vulnerable to near surface activity, it may be advisable to check the area around the well for evidence of surface contamination.

“4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether which finds use as a dielectric fluid, can be released to the environment during its manufacture, formulation, and through its use in capacitors. If released to the atmosphere, 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether should react with photochemically produced hydroxyl radicals with an estimated half-life of 1.3 days. Direct photolysis in the atmosphere should be an important fate process, as 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether has an absorption greater than 290 nm. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether should be expected to undergo biodegradation in soil and in water. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether should display slight mobility in soil, and volatilization to the atmosphere may be an important process. If released to water, 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether would be expected to adsorb to sediment and suspended material, can volatilize to the atmosphere, and should bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms. Degradation by direct photolysis in surface water has been estimated to proceed with a half-life of 200-400 days. Volatilization from water to the atmosphere should be an important fate process. The estimated volatilization half-life for a model river is 6 hours, while from a model pond which takes into account adsorption processes, the estimated half-life is 40 days. Exposure to 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether should be by inhalation and dermal contact which might occur during its manufacture, formulation, or use in capacitors. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether is an anthropogenic compound, and is not known to exist in nature.”   Florida appears to have established a standard of 0.010 ug/L.   Based on the available standard, the level seems appropriate, but it would be advisable to monitor the quality of the water and inspect the area for signs of surface contamination. (OK)

Dibenzofuran (Dixons) was reported at a level of 0.04 ug/L or 0.00004 mg/L. Dibenzofuran is used as an insecticide, to make other chemicals, and is a by-product of combustion. It is made from coal tar and has been found in coke dust, grate ash, fly ash, and flame soot.  In addition, it can be found in tobacco and as a combustion product, dibenzofuran may be released from the incomplete combustion of coal biomass, refuse, diesel fuel and residual oil, as well as from tobacco smoke.

Based on the available information, the primary recommendation would be to conduct a more detailed site-specific evaluation and conduct confirmation testing.  Since this well appears to be susceptible to near surface impacts, it may be possible to eliminate exposure by improving control at the wellhead to reduce vulnerability to contamination.  No clear standard, but follow-up testing and on-site evaluation is recommended.  Note: The aerobic decomposition in an aerobic and anaerobic environment is < 28 days to over 112 days.
Groundwater Chemicals Desk Reference by By John H. Montgomery (Google Books)

Note: Dibenzofuran was qualitatively identified in drinking water collected from Cincinnati,
Ohio in October 1978 and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in February 1976. 

Retesting –should also include breakdown products.
Comment  = the presence of the partially combusted material and the bacterial contamination is making me believe there is a local source of contamination, i.e., old burn pit, burn barrels, etc.  This is not a judgment, but it makes me very interested in seeing this site and the condition of the well and surrounding area.

Lucas SV; GC/MS Analysis of Organics in Drinking Water Concentrates and Advanced Waste Treatment Concentrates: Vol 1. EPA-600/1-84-020a p. 45,147 (1984)

Fluoranthene (Benzo(j, k)fluorene) was reported at a level of 0.27 ug/L or 0.00027 mg/L and there is a trigger level reported at 0.63 mg/L.  It has been suggested that the EPA has set for total PAHs of 0.2 ug/L or 0.0002 mg/L and I can not find an EPA reference that confirms this statement, but Florida has a health advisory level  of 0.5 ug/L or 0.0005 mg/L for benzo(k)fluorene

Note: “Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are a group of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil, and gasoline. PAHs are also present in products made from fossil fuels, such as coal-tar pitch, creosote, and asphalt.  Fluoranthene adsorbs strongly to soil and would be expected to remain in the upper layers of soil. However, it has been detected in groundwater samples which demonstrates that it can be transported there by some process(es). It slowly degrades in soil (half-life ca 5 mo to 2 yr).”  Based on the reported trigger level and the standard used for Florida, this value does not appear to violate a trigger level, but monitoring is advisable. http://www.doh.state.fl.us/environment/community/health-advisory/HAL_list.pdf

Benzo(k)fluoranthene was reported at 0.32 ug/L or 0.00032 mg/L and the reported EPA trigger level is 0.029 mg/L.    Florida has a health advisory at 0.0005 mg/L. (OK)  Still researching

Benzo(b)fluoranthene was reported at 0.15 ug/L or 0.00015 mg/L and the reported EPA trigger level is 0.0056 mg/L. Florida has a health advisory at 0.0005 mg/L.  (OK) Still researching

Fluorene was reported at 0.10 ug/L or 0.0001 mg/L and the reported EPA trigger level is 0.220 mg/L, but has a DWEL of 1.00 mg/L.  Florida  has a health advisory at 0.500 mg/L. (OK)
Still researching- “Fluorene is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) released from the incomplete combustion of fuels including oil, gasoline, coal and wood, as well as waste materials; it is an intermediate in production of dyes and other chemicals”- The reported health based standard was 0.3 mg/L or 300 ug/L.
http://www.ewg.org/tap-water/chemical-contaminants?file=contaminant&contamcode=2264

Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) - was reported at 0.22 ug/L or 0.00022 mg/L and the reported PADEP/ EPA has a MCL of 0.001 mg/L. (OK)  Florida also has a standard of 0.001 mg/L.  (OK)

Ortho Nitroaniline (2-Nitroaniline)- the reported value was 0.00007 mg/L and the EPA indicates a “Trigger Level” of 0.15 mg/L.  The NY Regulations suggest a limit of 0.005 mg/L is the principle organic standard. (OK)

3-Nitroaniline -the reported value was 0.00012 mg/L and the EPA indicates that there is no “Trigger Level”.  The NY Regulations suggest a limit of 0.005 mg/L is the principle organic standard. (OK)
http://www.bnl.gov/gpg/files/Annual_Reports/2001pdf/Table1-03.PDF

4- Nitrobenzenamine - the reported value was 0.00014 mg/L and the EPA indicates that there is a “Trigger Level” at 0.061 mg/L.  The NY Regulations suggest a limit of 0.005 mg/L is the principle organic standard. (OK)

4-Nitrophenol - the reported value was 0.00017 mg/L and the EPA indicates that there is no “Trigger Level”.  The NY Regulations suggest a limit of 0.001 mg/L is the standard for the total amount of phenolic compounds. (OK)

n-Nitrosodimethylamine  (NDMA) - the reported value was < 0.005 mg/L and the EPA indicates that there is  “Trigger Level” at 0.00004 mg/L.     It appears this could be a by-product of chlorination.  NDMA can be produced and released from industrial sources through chemical reactions, such as those that involve alkylamines with nitrogen oxides, nitrous acid, or nitrite salts. Potential industrial sources include byproducts from tanneries, pesticide and rocket fuel manufacturing plants, rubber and tire manufacturers, alkylamine manufacture and use sites, fish processing facilities, foundries, and  dye manufacturers (ATSDR 1989).  In 2011, Health Canada established a drinking water guideline at a maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) of 0.00004 mg/L, based on an assessment by the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water (CDW). EPA has a 10-4 Cancer Risk of 0.00007 mg/L.
Therefore, the primary recommendation would be to resample and use a method with a lower detection limit.   

Note: 10-4 Cancer Risk: The concentration of a chemical in drinking water corresponding to an excess estimated lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 10,000.

n-Nitrosodiphenylamine-- the reported value was 0.00017 mg/L and the EPA indicates that there is a “Trigger Level” at 1.0 mg/L. 

It dissolves in water, but it binds to soil and does not move quickly through soil. It breaks down in air, water, and soil within several weeks. For drinking water, the EPA has suggested trigger limits that range from 0.070 to 0.70 mg/L.
http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0178.htm  Looks Ok – but may want to monitor.

Pentachlorophenol – the reported value was <  0.005 mg/L, but the EPA/ PADEP MCL is < 0.001 mg/L.   The NY Regulations suggest a limit of 0.001 mg/L is the standard for the total amount of phenolic compounds. The EPA has a DWEL of 0.2 mg/L.
 Looks OK, but retesting using a method with a lower detection limit may be advisable.

benzo(ghi)perylene– the reported value was <  0.0021 mg/L, but the there is no MCL or trigger limit.  Like most PAHs, benzo(g,h,i)perylene is used to make dyes, plastics, pesticides, explosives and drugs. It has also been used to make bile acids, cholesterol and steroids. It has been suggested that the EPA has set for total PAHs of 0.2 ug/L or 0.0002 mg/L and I can not find an EPA reference that confirms this statement, but Florida has a health advisory level of 0.210 mg/L for benzo(ghi)perylene
(OK)

phenanthrene– the reported value was <  0.0023 mg/L, but the there is no MCL or trigger limit. Florida has a health advisory level of 0.210 mg/L for phenanthrene
(OK)

dimethyl phthalate – the reported value was 0.00015 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. 
(OK)

di-n-octyl phthalate (DNOP)- the reported value was 0.00028 mg/L and no trigger limit is reported. Exposure to di-n-octylphthalate occurs mainly from eating food or drinking water that is stored in plastic containers.http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts95.html    There does not appear to be an action limit, but it would be advisable to monitor and conduct a site-specific survey. “This type of plastic can be used for medical tubing and blood storage bags, wire and cables, carpetback coating, floor tile, and adhesives. It is also used in cosmetics and pesticides.”

Pryene - the reported value was 0.00026 mg/L and the reported trigger limit is 0.087 mg/L. Florida has a health advisory level of 0.210 mg/L for Pryene.  (OK)

indeno(1,2,3-cd)-pryene- the reported value was 0.00021 mg/L and the reported trigger limit is 0.003 mg/L. It is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH).  (Source for standard not available). (OK)

This sample seems to have as series of detects for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), plus is positive for bacterial contamination.

 “Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a group of over 100 different chemicals that are formed during the incomplete burning of coal, oil and gas, garbage, or other organic substances like tobacco or charbroiled meat. PAHs are usually found as a mixture containing two or more of these compounds, such as soot. “

Again – I have not been to the site, but I am just wondering if the because the well is vulnerable to bacterial contamination is it also vulnerable to air-borne or local contamination related to the burning of materials.   I have recommended the following:
a. an evaluation of the well – including a shock disinfection.
b. local wellhead survey to attempt to identify local sources of potential contamination.
c. Recommended retesting for a number of parameters to either monitor or to use a different method with a lower detection limit.  This should include monitoring following a recharge event.
d. Methane above the action limit – recommend venting and other modifications to the well and regular monitoring. http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm  The gas appears to have a thermogenic origin, but additional analysis is recommended.
e. Retesting for glycol using a more sensitive method.
f. Iron and manganese exceeds secondary drinking water limits that were set for aesthetic reasons.
Again – this is not about cause and effect- it is an honest review of the data.  (Period)


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 !

Saturday, March 17, 2012

EPA Press Release and Statement to The Press Dimock Pennsylvania

Statement released to press inquiries March 15, 2012

On Jan. 19, as a result of requests from residents and a review of the data we had in hand, EPA announced it would perform water sampling at approximately 60 homes in the Carter Road/Meshoppen Creek Road area of Dimock, Pa. to further assess whether any residents are being exposed to hazardous substances that cause health concerns.

The first round of sampling results is now available for the first 11 homes that were tested during the week of Jan. 23. Sampling results from these 11 homes did not show levels of contamination that could present a health concern. Samples from six of the 11 homes did show concentrations of sodium, methane, chromium or bacteria, but concentrations were all within the safe range for drinking water. The sampling results also identified the presence of arsenic at two homes.

Out of the 11 homes tested, there are currently three homes receiving an alternate water supply provided by EPA. EPA will continue to provide water to these homes while we perform additional sampling to ensure that the drinking water quality at these homes remains consistent and acceptable for use over time. EPA is also taking a second round of samples from the two homes where arsenic was detected, and although the levels meet drinking water standards, we will resample to better characterize the water quality of these wells. After receiving results from the second round of sampling, EPA will re‐evaluate the need to continue providing an alternate water source.

EPA has offered to meet with all the residents to go over their data and answer any health‐related concerns. As further quality assured data becomes available for the remaining homes, we will share with the homeowners in an expedited manner. Our actions will continue to be based on the science and the law as we work to help get a clear picture of water quality for these homes in Dimock.

EPA Webportal for Dimock
A Well by Well - Review of the Data for Dimock, PA collected by EPA

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Methane migration, other water problems explored at Oil & Gas Force Meeting By Josh Wengler Honesdale, Pa. — Obviously, methane migration is a problem in Pennsylvania.

"Methane migration, other water problems explored at Oil & Gas Force Meeting By Josh Wengler Honesdale, Pa. — Obviously, methane migration is a problem in Pennsylvania.
The question, says former Wilkes University professor and professional geologist Brian Oram, is whether that problem is a result of Marcellus Shale gas extraction or has always been with us and is only coming to light now due to the increased scrutiny gas drilling has brought about.

One of two speakers brought out to help residents understand this issue, Oram spoke Tuesday at a forum on methane migration held by the Wayne County Oil and Gas Task Force at the Stourbridge Plaza.With news in recent years of such high profile cases as the Dimock residents whose water wells exploded due to methane concentrations, it’s easy to understand peoples’ fears.

It’s also easy to understand how people associate such cases with Marcellus Shale natural gas extraction, Oram says. However, he says methane has always surfaced in Pennsylvania wells and in some cases has brought about deaths when concentrations were high enough to explode whole houses long before the Marcellus Shale was even on the radar.

The longtime laboratory manager for Wilkes’ Center for Environmental Quality before leaving this year to pursue his own projects, Oram said, “I have spent the last 23 years testing water in Pennsylvania and all around the world, and I can tell you that although our water is very pristine, about half of our private wells do not meet drinking water standards...”

The reasons for this are many. Chief among them are bacterial infestations, Oram said, along with high pH values, iron and manganese, which causes discoloration and possible health risks, lead, which is also toxic to humans and plasticizers known as phthalates.

These noxious — and unregulated in terms of their use in water wells — petrochemicals are often used to soften the plastic piping used to pump water from wells and have been known to cause cancers and endocrine disruptions.

These things are the real problem, Oram said, calling each water well a “pinprick” in the aquifer below. He pointed out that unlike gas wells, private water wells are not required to have a cement “grout” to fill the space between the perfectly round casing and the never-perfectly round well bore. This, he said, makes each water well a potential pathway for contamination of myriad types.
Then there is the methane.
“I lit my first private well in 1989,” Oram said, “In my first year when I started working at Wilkes. Not a year ago or two years ago. Methane has been with us a very long time.”
To illustrate this point, Oram showed slides of houses blown apart by methane concentrated in the well or in other enclosed areas that naturally bubbled up from the well where no drilling had ever been present. He also pointed out that in places like Salt Springs National Park in Susquehanna County, naturally occurring methane has been used since the 1700s for heat and light and can still be seen today bubbling up from the ground.

Methane gas in the water is highly changeable, both Oram and fellow speaker and geologist Burt Waite explained, able to saturate groundwater at increasing densities as pressure increases deeper into the well.

Since the bottom of the well is where we draw our water from, it then stands to reason that as water is drawn up and that pressure is released at the pump or spigot, the methane can no longer be held by the water molecules and explodes outward, sometimes with enough force to kill.
Since the average water well is hundreds of feet deep but the depth of its casing is only measured in tens of feet, methane — whether naturally occurring or released by much deeper hydrofracking — has no barrier to finding its way into water wells.

It is a problem that must be addressed, to be sure, but how to address it?

According to Oram, the only way is to gather as much data as possible from as many varied sources as possible, then overlay those data sets with what we know about the structural formations in the earth under our feet. Armed with these analyses, we can then gain a much clearer understanding of where the risks are, how severe they may be and hopefully how to mitigate them.
To that end, Oram — using his own money, he is quick to add, without funding from any other group — is compiling a database of water testing information from as many private wells as possible in the state.
The database, known as the Citizens’ Ground Water and Surface Water Database, solicits private citizens’ professional baseline water test results — whether tested by a gas company or at the property owner’s expense — for inclusion in hopes of developing a clearer understanding of the hydrogeology of the state, which Oram says can only help in protecting the most valuable resource we have, our water.

That resource is one we have not done a great job of safeguarding thus far, he says.

Even if only because of the fear Marcellus Shale gas extraction has raised, it’s time we all got serious about protecting it."

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Well Water Testing and Private Water Supply Analysis

Residential Private Well Owner Water Supply and Homeowner Drinking Water

Testing and Evaluation Program

Environmental Education and Outreach - Drinking water testing and analysis services provided by National Testing Laboratories, Commercial Laboratories, and University research laboratory - using certified procedures. The residential water testing program includes analysis for common water quality problems, microbiological contamination, and makes recommendations regarding the potential need for water treatment devices, such as: softeners, reverse osmosis units, distillation, neutralizers, chlorination systems, ultraviolet or UV systems.   The program provides links to quality laboratory testing services or tools to monitor the quality yourself.


Getting your well water or private drinking water source tested is critical.  Here are just a few options:
Option 1: Water Chemistry - NEW Addition- Natural Gas Parameters, plus Lead and Arsenic and Glycols.

Option 2: Bacterial Evaluation - total coliform, e coli, and fecal streptococcus
Option 3: Specialized Bacterial Testing - sulfur related bacteria that may indicate a pathogen is present
Option 4: Metals, Organic, Pesticides, Herbicides, and more
Option 5: Pathogenic Bacteria - New Addition for Repeated Coliform Positives

Comprehensive Water Quality Testing for Information Only (Watercheck Program)
Baseline and Certified Water Quality Analysis in Pennsylvania
Measuring Water Quality (Field Meters) - Students / Professionals

At a minimum, the water should be tested annually.  If you need assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.  Free Information !
More Green Products

Visit Us on Facebook - we could use some friends.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

Radon and Drinking Water from Private Wells

Radon causes an estimated 14,000 lung cancer deaths each year. It is the earth's only naturally produced radioactive gas and comes from the breakdown of uranium in soil, rock, and water. You cannot see or smell radon, but it can become a health hazard when it accumulates indoors. It can enter your home through cracks and openings in the foundation floor and walls. When radon decays and is inhaled into the lungs, it releases energy that can damage the DNA in sensitive lung tissue and cause cancer.
Radon is a gas produced by the radioactive decay of the element radium. Radioactive decay is a natural, spontaneous process in which an atom of one element decays or breaks down to form another element by losing atomic particles (protons, neutrons, or electrons). When solid radium decays to form radon gas, it loses two protons and two neutrons. These two protons and two neutrons are called an alpha particle, which is a type of radiation. The elements that produce radiation are called radioactive. Radon itself is radioactive because it also decays, losing an alpha particle and forming the element polonium.

Radioactivity is commonly measured in picocuries (pCi). This unit of measure is named for the French physicist Marie Curie, who was a pioneer in the research on radioactive elements and their decay. One pCi is equal to the decay of about two radioactive atoms per minute.
Radon is measured in picocuries per liter and written as (pCi/L). One picocurie is one-trillionth of 37 billion disintegrations per second. One curie, named for Marie Curie, the discoverer of metallic radium, is the amount of radiation given off by one gram of radium.
Radon decay products (RDPs) such as polonium(218), lead(214), bismuth(214), and polonium(214), lead(210), bismuth(210), polonium(210) are measured in working levels (WL). A working level is the amount of RDP which normally results when the decay products are in equilibrium (maximum concentration) with 100 picocuries of radon in the air. RDPs are difficult to measure in a house though, because among other problems, RDPs have a static charge and tend to plate out (stick) to walls, furniture, clothing, dust, smoke, and other objects and substances.
One of the problems with understanding the amount of risk due to a specific radon level measurement is that the risk statistics are based on an average lifetime (70 years) spent in an exposed area, even though the average American moves every 7 years, and is thus exposed to many different radon levels.
The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers has set the lowest level, which suggests a radon action level of 2 picocuries per liter or less for commercial buildings and residences. The EPA has adopted a 4 picocuries per liter of air action level. The U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, on the other hand, suggests an action level of 16 picocuries per liter (while miners are in underground mines).
Because the level of radioactivity is directly related to the number and type of radioactive atoms present, radon and all other radioactive atoms are measured in picocuries. For instance, a house having 4 picocuries of radon per liter of air (4 pCi/L) has about 8 or 9 atoms of radon decaying every minute in every liter of air inside the house. A 1,000-square-foot house with 4 pCi/L of radon has nearly 2 million radon atoms decaying in it every minute.
Radon levels in outdoor air, indoor air, soil air, and ground water can be very different. Outdoor air ranges from less than 0.1 pCi/L to about 30 pCi/L, but it probably averages about 0.2 pCi/L. Radon in indoor air ranges from less that 1 pCi/l to about 3,000 pCi/L, but it probably averages between 1 and 2 pCi/L. Radon in soil air (the air that occupies the pores in soil) ranges from 20 or 30 pCi/L to more than 100,000 pCi/L; most soils in the United States contain between 200 and 2,000 pCi of radon per liter of soil air. The amount of radon dissolved in ground water ranges from about 100 to nearly 3 million pCi/L.
Why do radon levels vary so much between indoor air, outdoor air, soil air, and ground water? Why do some houses have high levels of indoor radon while nearby houses do not? The reasons lie primarily in the geology of radon - the factors that govern the occurrence of uranium, the formation of radon, and the movement of radon, soil gas, and ground water.
Radon is a naturally-occurring radioactive gas that may cause cancer, and may be found in drinking water and indoor air. Some people who are exposed to radon in drinking water may have increased risk of getting cancer over the course of their lifetime, especially lung cancer. Radon in soil under homes is the biggest source of radon in indoor air, and presents a greater risk of lung cancer than radon in drinking water. The map shown above represents the potential for a radon problem based on geologic boundaries, so that rock and soil units with similar radon generation and transport characteristics.
Radon will dissolve into groundwater and can be transported some way from the source. When the water is exposed to air the radon is released. If a well or bore hole is supplied from such water, the use in an enclosure such as a dwelling or greenhouse will release radon into that environment. Showers and sprays are a prime release method and the greater the water usage, the greater the potential radon problem.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency is reportedly prepared to set an maximum contaminant Level of 300 to 4,000 pico curies per liter for radon in drinking water. At high levels (i.e. among mine workers) radon is a known human carcinogen. There is, however, epidemiological evidence that low levels present no increase cancer risk (Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Dec. 1994). Additional research is needed before the true level of risk associated with low level radon is known.

"While most radon-related deaths are due to radon gas accumulated in houses from seepage through cracks in the foundation, 30 to 1,800 deaths per year are attributed to radon from household water."
Ref Source: http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/radon.html
To Read More - Article Source

Radon in Air Testing

Radon in Water Testing