Marilyn Murphy, David Plavcan, William Shepard, Donna Suevo, Jeff Thomas, Karen Trozzo, Timothy Woods and David Yezuita West Chester University July 2002 Water Quality Assessment of the Brandywine Creek

Introduction Water quality assessment of the Brandywine Creek drainage basin. More emphasis on the East Branch. Samples collected at various points including tributaries and downstream of point sources. Impact of nutrients (nitrates and phosphates) and coliforms evaluated. Recommendations and conclusions. Water quality assessment of the Brandywine Creek drainage basin. More emphasis on the East Branch. Samples collected at various points including tributaries and downstream of point sources. Impact of nutrients (nitrates and phosphates) and coliforms evaluated. Recommendations and conclusions.

Purpose of Study Assess water quality in the Brandywine Creek drainage basin. Determine impacts from point and non-point sources of pollution. Provide recommendations to minimize impacts. Assess water quality in the Brandywine Creek drainage basin. Determine impacts from point and non-point sources of pollution. Provide recommendations to minimize impacts.

Brandywine Creek Drainage Basin Study Area

Agricultural use created problems with bacteria, nutrients and sedimentation. Industrial use created issues with synthetic/volatile organic chemicals and metals. Clean Water Act of 1972 enabled communities to improve water quality. Agricultural use created problems with bacteria, nutrients and sedimentation. Industrial use created issues with synthetic/volatile organic chemicals and metals. Clean Water Act of 1972 enabled communities to improve water quality. History of Water Quality in Brandywine Creek

Increased residential and commercial growth. Current Water Quality Issues of the Brandywine Creek Increased storm water runoff, loss of pervious ground cover. Increased demand for clean water. Increased storm water runoff, loss of pervious ground cover. Increased demand for clean water.

Watershed issues encompass many political borders. Cooperation and coordination is a challenge. Watershed issues encompass many political borders. Cooperation and coordination is a challenge. Current Water Quality Issues of the Brandywine Creek

Two types of discharge:  Point Source easily identifiable indicated by pipes, drainage ditches, channels, tunnels, etc.  Non-Point Source less obvious than point sources surface run-off most common but also includes groundwater infiltration, erosion, and atmospheric deposition Two types of discharge:  Point Source easily identifiable indicated by pipes, drainage ditches, channels, tunnels, etc.  Non-Point Source less obvious than point sources surface run-off most common but also includes groundwater infiltration, erosion, and atmospheric deposition Sources of Discharge

Downingtown Area Regional Wastewater Treatment Authority (DARWTA) Taylor Run Sewage Treatment Plant (TRSTP) Generic example: Downingtown Area Regional Wastewater Treatment Authority (DARWTA) Taylor Run Sewage Treatment Plant (TRSTP) Generic example: Point Sources to the East Branch Photo obtained from Freefoto.com, accessed 7/13/02.

Run-off from agricultural fields, construction and industrial sites, public parks, and golf course. Groundwater infiltration from faulty septic systems. Erosion from mineral deposits (naturally occurring). Others… Run-off from agricultural fields, construction and industrial sites, public parks, and golf course. Groundwater infiltration from faulty septic systems. Erosion from mineral deposits (naturally occurring). Others… Potential Non-Point Sources to the East Branch Example of potential non-point source pollution from farm in rural Chester County.

Water Quality Concerns Drinking water  Disinfection by products  Pathogens (e.g., Giardia and Cryptosporidium)  Terrorism Stream water  Nutrients  Industrial discharges  Organic matter/DO level Drinking water  Disinfection by products  Pathogens (e.g., Giardia and Cryptosporidium)  Terrorism Stream water  Nutrients  Industrial discharges  Organic matter/DO level

Field observations included:  types of vegetation  substrate  land use Grab samples obtained using Horizontal Water Sampler. Samples analyzed for nitrates, phosphates and total coliforms. Field observations included:  types of vegetation  substrate  land use Grab samples obtained using Horizontal Water Sampler. Samples analyzed for nitrates, phosphates and total coliforms. Methods & Materials Sample Collection

Field measurements included:  DO  pH levels  conductivity DO meters measure the oxygen content in the water. Low DO concentrations negatively affects aquatic life. Field measurements included:  DO  pH levels  conductivity DO meters measure the oxygen content in the water. Low DO concentrations negatively affects aquatic life. Methods & Materials Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations

pH meters  Availability of hydrogen ions  Acceptable pH levels range from 5-9 with adverse biological effects occurring outside of this range pH meters  Availability of hydrogen ions  Acceptable pH levels range from 5-9 with adverse biological effects occurring outside of this range Methods & Materials Conductivity & pH Levels Conductivity meters Salt/ion concentration Indicator of total dissolved solids (TDS) Conductivity meters Salt/ion concentration Indicator of total dissolved solids (TDS)

Nitrate and phosphate concentrations were determined by the standard curves resulting from serial dilutions of known concentrations. Methods & Materials Nitrate & Phosphate Analysis Laboratory analysis included estimating concentration of nitrates, phosphates and total coliforms.

Analysis of the standards produced a linear equation: (y = mx + b). Analysis of the water samples produced absorbance values that were converted to nitrate or phosphate concentrations by linear equation. Analysis of the standards produced a linear equation: (y = mx + b). Analysis of the water samples produced absorbance values that were converted to nitrate or phosphate concentrations by linear equation. Methods & Materials Nitrate & Phosphate Analysis Ultraviolet spectrometers were used to measure absorbance values, which reflect concentration levels in a sample.

Analysis of total coliforms used a membrane filtration technique. Water samples were passed through 45-micron filters to collect possible bacteria. Filters were placed in sterile petri dishes and incubated for 24 hours at 35°C at which time bacterial colonies were counted. Analysis of total coliforms used a membrane filtration technique. Water samples were passed through 45-micron filters to collect possible bacteria. Filters were placed in sterile petri dishes and incubated for 24 hours at 35°C at which time bacterial colonies were counted. Methods & Materials Total Coliform Analysis

Dissolved Oxygen Results * * Current water quality standard concentration

Dissolved Oxygen Results by Sampling Location Dissolved Oxygen 12.9 – 11.0 mg/L 10.9 – 9.0 mg/L 8.9 – 7.0 mg/L 6.9 – 5.0 mg/L

Specific Conductance Results

Specific Conductance Results by Sampling Location < – >200 Conductivity (microSeimens/cm)

pH Results Acceptable range of pH: 5-9

pH Results by Sampling Location 9.4 – – – – – 7.0 pH

Nitrate (NO N) Results * Downstream of WWTP effluent * * * * Water quality criteria value (10 mg/L)

Nitrate (NO N) Results by Sampling Location 8.4 – 7.0 mg/L 6.9 – 5.5 mg/L 5.4 – 4.0 mg/L 3.9 – 2.5 mg/L 2.4 – 1.0 mg/L Nitrate-N Concentrations

Nitrate Historical Trends

Nitrate Discussion Downstream of point sources (WWTPs) typically have greater levels of NO N. No samples exceed water quality criteria value (10 mg/L). Current sample results fairly similar to historical median concentrations. WWTPs are main entry point for nitrate in the drainage basin. Decreased as distance from source increased. Downstream of point sources (WWTPs) typically have greater levels of NO N. No samples exceed water quality criteria value (10 mg/L). Current sample results fairly similar to historical median concentrations. WWTPs are main entry point for nitrate in the drainage basin. Decreased as distance from source increased.

Phosphate (PO P) Results * * * * * * Downstream of WWTP effluent EPA recommended value (0.1 mg/L)

Phosphate (PO P) Results by Sampling Location Phosphate-P Concentrations – 0.12 mg/L – 0.09 mg/L – 0.06 mg/L – 0.03 mg/L – 0.00 mg/L – 0.03 mg/L

Phosphate Historical Trends ND ND = not detected EPA recommended value (0.1 mg/L)

Phosphate Discussion Downstream of point sources (WWTPs) have detected levels of PO P. One sample result exceeds EPA’s recommended phosphate value (0.1 mg/L). Sample results slightly less than historical median concentrations. WWTPs are main entry point for phosphate in the drainage basin. Monitoring of effluent and more effective treatment methods needed. Downstream of point sources (WWTPs) have detected levels of PO P. One sample result exceeds EPA’s recommended phosphate value (0.1 mg/L). Sample results slightly less than historical median concentrations. WWTPs are main entry point for phosphate in the drainage basin. Monitoring of effluent and more effective treatment methods needed.

Total Coliform Results (colonies/100 ml)

Unhealthy bacteria levels prior to 1972 CWA. Bacteria concentrations decreased from 1973 – 1999 due to improved treatment and decreased point source discharges. Fecal coliform bacteria limits (PADEP):  200 colonies/100 mL from May-September  2000 colonies/100 mL for rest of year Chlorination of water prior to discharge eliminates much of the coliforms. Unhealthy bacteria levels prior to 1972 CWA. Bacteria concentrations decreased from 1973 – 1999 due to improved treatment and decreased point source discharges. Fecal coliform bacteria limits (PADEP):  200 colonies/100 mL from May-September  2000 colonies/100 mL for rest of year Chlorination of water prior to discharge eliminates much of the coliforms. Total Coliform Discussion

Conclusions Nitrate concentrations increased with addition of points sources but remained within the acceptable range. Coliforms effectively removed during treatment process. Phosphate concentrations increased with addition of points sources. pH and DO values were within acceptable ranges. Nitrate concentrations increased with addition of points sources but remained within the acceptable range. Coliforms effectively removed during treatment process. Phosphate concentrations increased with addition of points sources. pH and DO values were within acceptable ranges.

Recommendations Measures to reduce pollution:  Riparian corridors  Stream bank fencing  Proper fertilizer application  Farming practices Phosphate removal  More effective or better applied treatment of phosphate  Addition of aluminum sulfate  Monitoring Measures to reduce pollution:  Riparian corridors  Stream bank fencing  Proper fertilizer application  Farming practices Phosphate removal  More effective or better applied treatment of phosphate  Addition of aluminum sulfate  Monitoring

Acknowledgements Gary Kreamer (Delaware Aquatic Resource Education Center) Francis Menton (City of Wilmington Water Department) Gary Kreamer (Delaware Aquatic Resource Education Center) Francis Menton (City of Wilmington Water Department)