Hydrology Journal, Vol. 40 & 41, Issue 1 - 4 Jan. - Dec. 2017 & 2018, pp. 87 - 100

ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY FOR DRINKING PURPOSE IN A WATERSHED OF REGION

Meeta Gupta1*, Jyoti P. Patil2, V.C. Goyal3

1* Junior Research Fellow, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, , 247667 Email: [email protected] 2 Scientist D, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, India 247667 Email: [email protected] 3 Scientist G, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, India, 247667 Email: [email protected] *Corresponding author

ABSTRACT

The present study is aimed at assessing water quality of groundwater in Ur river watershed, Bundelkhand region, India. Sampling was done in years 2014 and 2016 where, 25 samples were collected and analysed for 8 physico-chemical parameters. A Water Quality Index (WQI) was evaluated based on these parameters, which include pH, turbidity, fluoride, nitrate, iron, hardness, chloride and total dissolved solids. The assessment results are compared with drinking water quality standards by Bureau of Indian Standards IS 10500 (2012). The WQI values of samples were found in the range from 11.46 – 225.57 in 2014 and 140.81– 479.87 in 2016. The results revealed that the quality of water has declined from 2014 to 2016. High values of turbidity, nitrate and hardness in sampling locations indicate the unsuitability of groundwater for drinking purpose. The study lays emphasis on periodic monitoring and evaluation of water quality and flags the need of management practices for protection of the sources of drinking water.

KEYWORDS: Bundelkhand; Groundwater; Ur river watershed; Water Quality Index

INTRODUCTION Groundwater quality is an important aspect to assess the freshwater availability for drinking purposes. The direct or indirect contamination by human and animal faecal matter, chemical, municipal, domestic and industrial liquid discharge are the most widely spread challenges associated with drinking water (Deepak and Singh, 2013; Vishwakarma and Thakur, 2016). Once the groundwater is contaminated, its quality cannot be restored back by blocking the inflow of pollutants from the source. The groundwater quality is characterized by different physico-chemical characteristics. These characteristics are dynamic in nature, which can change widely due to the influence of different types of pollution, seasonal variation, excessive groundwater extraction etc. Hence, continuous monitoring of groundwater becomes imperative to minimize the groundwater pollution and have a control on the pollution-causing agents (Rao and Nageswara rao, 2013). 88 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018

Water Quality Index (WQI) is one of the most effective tools to communicate the status on the quality of water to the local people and decision makers and, thus, is considered an important parameter for the assessment and management of groundwater (Dohare et al., 2014; Goel et al., 2018). WQI reflects a composite influence of contributing factors on the quality of water for any water system (Kakati and Sarma, 2007). Therefore, the objective of the study was to evaluate and assess the groundwater quality of Ur River watershed, District () to determine the suitability of groundwater for human consumption. In this study, WQI was developed as a component of the Watershed Score Card (Gupta et al., 2017), which is a part of the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Plan for Ur river watershed developed as a management decision tool for the local line departments (National Institute of Hydrology, 2018; TIFAC, 2019).

STUDY AREA Tikamgarh district is located in the Bundelkhand region of Madhya Pradesh. The study area chosen for the research is Ur river watershed (Fig. 1). Administratively, Ur river watershed located in Tikamgarh district, is bounded by Chattarpur in the east and south. The western and northern boundaries run along the Lalitpur and districts of , respectively. The watershed

Fig. 1. Index map and location of the Ur river watershed area extends between latitudes 24 35’0” N and 25 05’0” N and between 78 50’0” E and 79 10’0” E longitudes. The total geographical area of Ur river watershed is 991 km2, located at an average elevation of 400 m above the mean sea level. The watershed area falls under four development blocks of Tikamgarh district (, , and Tikamgarh). The study area comprises Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 89

190 villages with a total population of 2,95,116, which is 20% of the total population of the district (Directorate of Census Operations, 2011). The climate of watershed is characterized by hot summers and general dryness except during the monsoons. The normal maximum temperature during the month of May is 41.8 C and normal minimum temperature during the month of January is 7.0 C. The average annual rainfall in the watershed is approximately 808 mm (1999- 2016) (Fig. 2). The rainfall pattern is erratic, irregular and uncertain, which causes drought and is a common feature. The average drought frequency varies between 1 in 3 years in the watershed.

Fig. 2. Annual rainfall variation in Ur river watershed (2006-07 means water year June 2006 - May 2007)

The major land use of watershed is agriculture (489 km2) which is about 49% of the total watershed area. The agricultural area is spread all around the watershed, possibly because of the large number of tanks that provide irrigation and domestic demands. The land with or without scrub land is the second most dominant land use in the study area, covering an area of 301 km2. The area covered by settlement is 16 km2, whereas river and water bodies cover an area of 39 km2. The fallow and barren land covers 101 km2 of the watershed and dense forest occupies an area of 44 km2. The forests are located towards the western portion of the watershed whereas the scrubs are located mostly towards the south-western and north-western parts of the watershed. Geologically, Ur river watershed is almost entirely composed of massive granites. The granites are criss-crossed by a number of quartzite and quartz reefs. The soils in the watershed area have a thin soil cover with a fine sandy texture. Nearly 635 km2 of the area is covered with sandy loam soil

90 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018 and another 267 km2 of the area is covered with sandy-clay-loams soils. This altogether limits the process of groundwater recharge (Madhya Pradesh Council of Science and Technology, 2011). Geo-morphologically, the area is dominated by pediplains formed by the erosion of granites, and are moderately buried by weathered material offering good support for agriculture. To the northeast of Tikamgarh tehsil, there are several small denudational hills interspersed with patches of flat land. These ridges act as barriers against the flow of surface and groundwater. Several large water bodies in this district are built along these ridges (Fig. 3). Tikamgarh district has a net groundwater availability of 630 MCM/year (Central Ground Water Board, 2013). The average level of groundwater development in the district is almost 86%, and the district falls under semi-critical category. In a large part of the watershed area, the water table has gone to 50 metres below ground level.

Fig. 3. Lithology Map of Ur river watershed

MATERIALS AND METHODS Sample collection Groundwater quality tests were performed in November 2014 and March 2016. A total of 25 samples (18 hand pumps and 7 wells) were tested for 8 parameters (pH, turbidity, fluoride, nitrate,

Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 91 iron, hardness, chloride and total dissolved solids (TDS)) (Fig. 4 and Table 1). The sampling and chemical analysis was done using Jal Tara Water Testing Kit (SGS, 2004) adapting standard methods from APHA (APHA, 2012).

Calculation of Water Quality Index The weighted arithmetic index method has been used for the calculation of WQI for the groundwater samples, providing information on a rating scale from 0-300. According to the relative importance of the chemical parameters in overall quality of water for drinking purposes, specific weights (wi) are assigned to them as indicated (Table 2). It is to be noted that the relative weights (Wi) assigned were done with the help of literature surveyed (Ramakrishnaiah et al., 2009; Kushtagi and Srinivas, 2011; Al-Hadithi, 2012; Rupal et al., 2012; Das et al., 2013; Patil and Patil, 2013; Tyagi et al., 2013; Dubey et al., 2014; Kumari and Rani, 2014; Ambiga and Annadurai, 2015). The standards (Si) for drinking purposes as recommended by BIS 10500-2012 have been considered for calculation of WQI (Bureau of Indian Standards, 2012).

Fig. 4: Groundwater sampling locations in the Ur river watershed

92 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018

Table 1. Groundwater sampling locations for the study period (2014 and 2016) Samples Latitude Longitude Tehsil Village Sources S1 24.759 79.032 Baldeogarh Baisa Ugad Hand pump S2 24.811 79.059 Baldeogarh Sujanpur Well S3 24.784 79.023 Baldeogarh Baisa Khas Well S4 24.793 79.027 Baldeogarh Banpura Khurd Hand pump S5 24.935 79.119 Palera Pali Well S6 24.944 79.134 Palera Ghooratal Hand pump S7 25.002 79.153 Palera Mahendra Maheva Hand pump S8 24.689 78.885 Tikamgarh PathaKhas Hand pump S9 24.662 78.908 Tikamgarh Gudanwara Hand pump S10 24.635 78.954 Tikamgarh Patar Khera Hand pump S11 24.638 78.965 Tikamgarh Shyampura Well S12 24.685 78.963 Tikamgarh Nainwari Hand pump S13 24.744 78.926 Tikamgarh Lakhora Hand pump S14 24.735 78.914 Tikamgarh Bad Madai Hand pump S15 24.769 78.961 Tikamgarh Papawani Hand pump S16 24.789 78.953 Tikamgarh Kater Khera Hand pump S17 24.901 79.007 Jatara Lar Khurd Hand pump S18 24.905 79.005 Jatara Lar Khurd Well S19 24.960 79.007 Jatara Manchi Hand pump S20 24.915 79.054 Jatara Karmaura Hand pump S21 24.976 79.029 Jatara Baiwarkhas Hand pump S22 25.022 79.052 Jatara Lidhouratal Well S23 25.033 79.045 Jatara Lidhouratal Hand pump S24 25.030 79.051 Jatara Lidhouratal Well S25 24.961 78.974 Jatara Vikrampura Hand pump

The sub-index or the quality rating (qi) is first determined for each parameter using equation 1, which is further used to determine the WQI using the equation 2.

퐶푖 − 퐶푖표 ( 1 ) 푞푖 = 푥 100 푆푖 − 퐶푖표

( 2 ) 푊푄퐼 = 푊푖 푥 푞푖

Where, Ci is the concentration of each chemical parameter in each water sample in NTU or mg/L, Cio is the ideal value of the parameter in pure water and Si is the Indian drinking water standard for each chemical parameter in NTU or mg/L according to the guidelines of the BIS 10500 - 2012. The ideal value, Cio for pH is 7 and for fluoride is 1.5 and for the remaining parameters the ideal value is 0. The calculated WQI values are categorised into five classes and

Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 93 grades are given accordingly (Vasanthavigar M et al., 2010; Rajamanya et al., 2011; Rao and Nageswararao, 2013; Dubey et al., 2014 (Table 3).

Table 2. Relative weight for each groundwater quality indicator

Chemical parameters Si wi Wi pH 8.50 4.00 0.14 Turbidity (NTU) 1.00 2.00 0.07 Fluoride (mg/L) 1.00 4.00 0.14 Nitrate (mg/L) 45.00 5.00 0.18 Iron(mg/L) 0.30 4.00 0.14 Hardness(mg/L) 200.00 2.00 0.07 Chloride(mg/L) 250.00 3.00 0.11 TDS(mg/L) 500.00 4.00 0.14

wi= 28.00 Wi= 1.00

Table 3. Categorisation for water quality index (WQI) for groundwater samples

WQI Value Class Water Quality 0 – 50 I Excellent 50 – 100 II Good 100 – 200 III Poor 200 – 300 IV Very Poor >300 V Unsuitable for Drinking

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The observations obtained from chemical analysis of 25 samples, for the years 2014 and 2016, are presented in Table 4. Table 5 gives statistical characterization of groundwater quality data set for the two years. The detailed calculations of groundwater quality for 2014 and 2016 are shown in Table 6 and Table 7, respectively. The individual WQI as well as overall WQI and the comparison between 2014 and 2016 are shown in Table 8. The number of samples falling in different classes of WQI is summarized in Fig. 5.

94 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018

Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 95

96 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018

Table 8: Values and comparison of WQI for 25 sampling site for study periods 2014 and 2016 2014 2016 Samples Trend WQI Quality WQI Quality S1 70.85 Good 176.28 Poor Decreased S2 105.15 Poor 155.71 Poor Decreased S3 11.46 Excellent 197.06 Poor Decreased S4 122.83 Poor 167.98 Poor Decreased Unsuitable for S5 112.40 Poor 346.48 Decreased Drinking S6 58.24 Good 233.19 Very Poor Decreased S7 42.40 Excellent 239.71 Very Poor Decreased S8 210.46 Very Poor 154.79 Poor Decreased S9 156.57 Poor 145.57 Poor Improved S10 191.17 Poor 147.57 Poor Improved S11 225.57 Very Poor 140.81 Poor Improved S12 141.28 Poor 259.40 Very Poor Decreased Unsuitable for S13 136.00 Poor 331.31 Decreased Drinking S14 143.66 Poor 268.93 Very Poor Decreased S15 145.78 Poor 200.22 Very Poor Decreased S16 129.71 Poor 235.24 Very Poor Decreased S17 150.35 Poor 290.29 Very Poor Decreased S18 107.81 Poor 205.91 Very Poor Decreased S19 138.57 Poor 181.61 Poor Decreased S20 154.46 Poor 240.30 Very Poor Decreased S21 60.45 Good 167.41 Poor Decreased S22 66.98 Good 237.80 Very Poor Decreased S23 75.18 Good 146.46 Poor Decreased S24 140.90 Poor 148.54 Poor Decreased Unsuitable for S25 57.93 Good 479.87 Decreased Drinking Overall 118.25 Poor 219.94 Very Poor Decreased

Fig. 5. Water quality status comparison for the year 2014 and 2016

Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 97

In this study, the computed WQI ranges from 11.46- 225.57 during 2014 and 140.81-479.87 during 2016 (Table 8). For the year 2014, the minimum value has been recorded from sample S3 while maximum has been recorded from sample S11. For the year 2016, the minimum value has been recorded from sample S11 while the maximum value has been recorded form the sample from S25. As per the results, values of parameters pH, chloride, fluoride and iron of the analysis for both the years was found to be well within the permissible limits of BIS standards for drinking purposes. The results also revealed that there have been notable problems of turbidity, which has increased from 2014 to 2016. The chemical analysis of 2016 samples showed that turbidity values have exceeded the permissible limits for all 25 locations. High turbidity values can be attributed to the fact that there is over-pumping of water from the wells, which disturbs the sediments and may cause the water to become turbid. The two physico-chemical parameters nitrate and hardness have also been found to exceed the permissible limits of BIS and there has been an increasing trend observed in 2016. The principal source for nitrate can be through the over application of fertilizers in agricultural lands and seepage and runoff from soils, thereby contaminating the groundwater. A comparison of means of groundwater quality parameters was made for two years of analysis (Table 5). The sampling period November 2014 falls during water year 2014-15 (rainfall- 624 mm) and March 2016 falls during water year 2015-16 (rainfall-541 mm). It was observed that rainfall during 2014-15 and 2015-16 was below normal rainfall of the area, which was insufficient to fill the surface water bodies. Therefore, extraction of ground water might have increased in both years. The WQI value revealed that 32% of samples in 2014 were found in excellent and good category while in 2016 none of the samples maintained that quality standards. The reduction of 32% in excellent and good category can be attributed to influence of weathering and seeping of pollutants through domestic and agricultural activities. The groundwater samples in 2014 constituted 60% and 8% under poor and very poor categories. None of the samples in 2014 were under unsuitable for drinking category. Whereas in 2016, 48%, 40% and 12% of the total groundwater samples were categorised as poor, very poor and unsuitable for drinking respectively. This increase in the percentage indicates that the groundwater quality in the study area has been declining. The overall results showed that quality of groundwater has been deteriorated from 2014 to 2016 as the overall WQI has increased from 118.25 to 219.94 i.e. from poor to very poor status. The groundwater of this watershed needs some degree of treatment before drinking and it needs to be protected from further contamination to prevent adverse health effects on human beings.

CONCLUSION WQI has been computed to assess the suitability of groundwater for human consumption in the Ur river watershed located in Tikamgarh district (Madhya Pradesh). 25 samples were collected and chemically analysed during the years 2014 and 2016. The results obtained from this study clearly indicated that the groundwater is not fit for drinking purposes. In addition, the results

98 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018 highlighted that the quality of groundwater of Ur river watershed has declined during the period 2014-2016. It may be pointed out that there is major problem of turbidity which has been observed in all the samples in 2016. Two parameters nitrate and hardness are found to be exceeding the permissible limit of BIS. Of the total samples, 68% of samples in 2014 and 100% of samples in 2016 are not considered fir for human consumption. The high values of WQI showed that the natural as well as anthropogenic sources are contaminating the groundwater in the study area. The study presents a simple yet useful application of WQI in assessing the drinking water quality, which is easy for a common person to comprehend. The findings of the study will also be useful for line departments like Public Health Engineering (PHE) for prioritizing the locations and taking appropriate measures to improve the groundwater quality of area.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was carried out at the National Institute of Hydrology (NIH) under a project supported by Technology Information, Forecasting and Assessment Council (TIFAC), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India. The authors would like to acknowledge the team of Development Alternatives for providing help during sampling and Madhya Pradesh Council of Science and Technology for generating the GIS database required in the study.

REFERENCES Al-Hadithi, M., 2012. Application of water quality index to assess suitability of groundwater quality for drinking purposes in Ratmao – Pathri Rao watershed, Haridwar district India, American Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 395–402. Ambiga, K. and Annadurai, R., 2015. Development of water quality index and regression model for assessment of groundwater quality, International Journal of Advanced Remote Sensing and GIS, 4, 931-943. APHA, 2012. Standard method for examination of water and wastewater (22nd Edition). American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, Washington DC, USA. Bureau of Indian Standards, 2012. Indian Standard Drinking Water — Specification (Second Revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, New . Central Ground Water Board, 2013. District Groundwater information booklet. Tikamgarh district, Madhya Pradesh, North Central Region, CGWB, MoWR, RD & GR, Government of India, Delhi. Das, S., Roy, P. K. and Mazumdar, A., 2013. Development of water quality index for groundwater in Kolkata City, West Bengal, India, ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(12), 1054–1058. Deepak, S. and Singh, N. U., 2013. Water quality index for ground water (GWQI) of Dhar Town, MP, India, International Research Journal of Environment Sciences, 2(11), 72–77. Directorate of Census Operations, Madhya Pradesh, 2011. District Census Handbook, Tikamgarh, Village and Town Directory, Series 24 Part XII-A. Government of India, Delhi. Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking Purpose in a Watershed of Bundelkhand Region 99

Dohare, D., Deshpande, S., and Kotiya, A., 2014. Analysis of ground water quality parameters: A review, Research Journal of Engineering Sciences, 3(5), 26–31. Dubey, R. K., Hussain, J., Malhotra, N. and Mehta, A., 2014. Ground water quality and water quality index of Dwarka District of National Capital of India, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 3(4), 85–93. Goel, P., Saxena, A., Sen Singh, D., and Verma, D., 2018, Impact of rapid urbanization on water quality index in groundwater fed Gomati River, Lucknow, India, Current Science, 114(3), 650- 654. Gupta, M., Goyal, V. C., Tarannum, F., and Patil, J. P., 2017, Designing a watershed scorecard as a performance evaluation tool for Ur River watershed, Tikamgarh District, Madhya Pradesh, International soil and water conservation research, 5(4), 280-292. Kakati, S.S. and Sarma, H.P., 2007. Water quality index of drinking water of Lakhimpur District, Indian Journal of Environmental Protection, 27(5), 425-428. Kumari, S. and Rani, J., 2014. Assessment of water quality index of ground water in Smalkhan, Haryana, International Journal of Latest Research in Science and Technology, 3(6), 69–172. Kushtagi, S. and Srinivas, P., 2011. Studies on water quality index of ground water of Aland Taluka, Gulbarga District, Karnataka, International Journal of Applied Biology and Pharmaceutical Technology, 2, 252-256. Madhya Pradesh Council of Science and Technology, 2011. Resource Atlas of Tikamgarh. Centre for Policy Studies, Madhya Pradesh. National Institute of Hydrology, 2018. Development of IWRM Plan for Tikamgarh, Jhansi, and Lalitpur districts. Roorkee, NIH Roorkee. Patil, V.T. and Patil, P.R., 2013. Groundwater quality status using water quality index in Amalner Town, Maharashtra, Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, 5(5), 67-71. Rajamanya, V. S., Reddy, V., Khadakbhavi, B. I., and Mise, S. R., 2011. Water quality index of River Wan at upstream. Nature, Environment and Pollution Technology, 10(2), 265-268. Ramakrishnaiah, C. R., Sadashivaiah, C. and Ranganna, G., 2009. Assessment of water quality index for the groundwater in Tumkur taluk, Karnataka State, India, E-Journal of Chemistry, 6(2), 523–530. Rao, G. S. and Nageswararao, G., 2013. Assessment of groundwater quality using water quality index. Archives of Environmental Science, 7, 1–5. Rupal, M., Tanushree, B. and Sukalyan, C., 2012. Quality characterization of groundwater using water quality index in Surat city, Gujarat, India, International Research Journal of Environment Sciences, 1(4), 14–23. SGS, 2004. NABL accredited lab validation certificate for Jal – Tara Kit. Report no. 42110312. SGS Pvt Ltd. Gurgaon, Haryana

100 Vol. 40 – 41, Issue 1 – 4 Jan. – Dec. 2017 & 2018

TIFAC, 2019. Integrating hydrology, climate change and IWRM with livelihood issues: Development of methodology and a DSS for water-scarce Bundelkhand region in India. TIFAC- DST, GoI, New Delhi. Tyagi, S., Sharma, B., Singh, P. and Dobhal, R., 2013. Water quality assessment in terms of water quality index, American Journal of Water Resource, 1(3), 34-38. Vasanthavigar, M., Srinivasamoorthy, K., Vijayaragavan, K., Ganthi, R. R., Chidambaram, S., Anandhan, P., Vasudevan, S., 2010. Application of water quality index for groundwater quality assessment: Thirumanimuttar sub-basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 171(1-4), 595-609. Vishwakarma, V. and Thakur, L. S., 2016. Assessment of ground water quality status by using water quality index in city, Madhya Pradesh, Pollution Research, 30 (4), 87-91.