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

John W. Clune; Charles A. Cravotta

doi:10.3133/sir20185170

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20185170

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

John W. Clune·Charles A. Cravotta

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

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

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 41.5447° to 42.0026° latitude; -76.9291° to -76.1171° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

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

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Evaluating the number of realizations (train-test splits) necessary to ensure robust estimates of conventional hydrothermal resource favorability using Monte Carlo cross-validation, the Great Basin, Western USA

Supervised machine learning approaches used to produce favorability maps in resource assessments commonly partition an input dataset into training and testing subsets (that is, through train-test splits). However, if a single split is not representative of underlying resource conditions, the resulting favorability map may be biased, particularly with sparse or heterogeneous datasets. To mitigate the potential for unrepresentative favorability maps, recent works by U.S. Geological Survey researchers have used Monte Carlo cross-validation to implement a large number ( n) of randomized train-test splits to produce n realizations. The realizations are then aggregated using cell-wise median predictions to produce the resulting final favorability map, recognizing that the median will remove extreme values that might have been estimated from a comparatively few unrepresentative realizations. Theoretically, the median prediction at every cell converges to a single estimate as n approaches infinity, and the question addressed herein is: How many realizations are necessary to get a robust estimate (that is, an estimate unaffected by additional realizations)? Therefore, convergence metrics are described to identify the number of train-test splits and realizations needed to make a reliable map using the data and supervised machine learning workflow for conventional hydrothermal resource assessment of the Great Basin of the Western United States. For this study, robust prediction occurs with n approximately equal to 600 realizations, and smaller ensembles (for example, n is approximately equal to 200 or even 100) may be suitable during preliminary or exploratory analyses. Although the resulting threshold numbers will vary depending on the data and modeling approach used, the convergence metrics proposed and applied herein are applicable to other supervised machine learning studies that use Monte Carlo cross-validation.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin, southeastern Idaho

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources, developed the first groundwater budget for the upper Portneuf River Basin in southeastern Idaho, a tributary of the Snake River. A groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin supports water resource and administrative management decisions within the basin and for downstream users of the eastern Snake River Plain aquifer. The analysis quantifies inflows, outflows, and residuals for an aquifer system defined by the Idaho Department of Water Resources under three recent precipitation conditions: an average year (2016), a dry year (2021), and a wet year (2023). The budget was calculated for the basin and for two subbasins delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Portneuf River at Topaz, Idaho (13073000): the above Topaz subbasin, which includes the Portneuf-Gem valley, and the below Topaz subbasin, which includes Marsh Valley. Aquifer inflows include mountain-front recharge; areal recharge; recharge from applied water, including recharge from irrigation, canal seepage, and effluent returns; groundwater flow into the basin; and reservoir seepage. Outflows include groundwater pumping for agricultural, municipal, and domestic uses; subsurface outflow through the Portneuf gap; and discharge to streams as base flow. Estimated annual inflows for the full basin ranged from 116,880 acre-feet in 2021 to 154,880 acre-feet in 2023, and outflows ranged from 132,190 acre-feet in 2016 to 158,490 acre-feet in 2023. Basinwide residuals, the change in storage plus uncertainty, were −2,410 acre-feet in 2016, −18,410 acre-feet in 2021, and −3,610 acre-feet in 2023, and each subbasin had a mixture of negative and positive residuals. These basinwide results, interpreted as change in storage plus water-budget uncertainty, indicate minor net losses that increase with dry conditions, consistent with well depth-to-water measurements indicating gradual multi-decadal declines. Patterns in subbasin residuals are driven by irrigation practices and surface-water management; for example, the above Topaz subbasin relies more on groundwater for irrigation, resulting in more negative residuals during dry years. In contrast, the below Topaz subbasin depends more on surface water, producing positive residuals during dry years because of irrigation losses and canal seepage. The analyses for both subbasins indicate decades-long groundwater declines, which agree with the overall negative residuals calculated. The largest sources of uncertainty include climate inputs (precipitation and evapotranspiration) and poorly constrained components such as groundwater inflow and tributary stream infiltration. These findings provide insight into how climatic variables and irrigation practices affect groundwater inflows and outflows within the Portneuf River Basin.

Idaho↗

USGS2026

World minerals outlook—Antimony, copper, graphite, niobium, potash, silicon, silver, and tungsten through 2030

Demand for mineral commodities continues to increase owing to rapid technological advancements and global economic growth. To support this increase in demand, information about current and near-term supplies of these mineral commodities is essential. Such data help evaluate the health and stability of global supply chains and protect against potential supply risks. Current production and production capacity data coupled with information regarding near-term expected changes (such as facility closures, planned expansions, or the completion of new mineral production projects) can provide insight into expected future market developments and expected available supply of mineral commodities. This report within the “World Minerals Outlook” series analyzes data for antimony, copper, natural graphite, niobium, potash, silicon metal, silver, and tungsten—eight mineral commodities listed in the 2025 List of Critical Minerals. World production data from 2019 through 2025, as well as estimated world capacity data from 2023 through 2025 were analyzed. Using these data, near-term (2026–2030) expected world capacities were estimated. For antimony, copper, niobium, silicon metal, silver, and tungsten, modest increases in production capacity of 4 to 10 percent were expected between 2025 and 2030, whereas capacities for natural graphite and potash were expected to increase by about 18 to 20 percent.

Scientific Investigations Report↗