2011-29

2011 WATER RESOURCES REPORT FOR THE GREAT MIAMI RIVER WATERSHED

Summary

This report summarizes the overall state of water resources in the Great Miami River Watershed for 2011, with an emphasis on the buried valley aquifer and water quantity and quality data. The Miami Conservancy District (MCD) operates and maintains an extensive hydrologic monitoring system. By tracking trends in precipitation, runoff, and groundwater levels, changes to the balance of the hydrologic system of the watershed are assessed. Water quality data also is collected in both surface and groundwater to track annual trends, establish a baseline for future studies, and verify nutrient reductions from landowner incentive programs.

WATER QUANTITY

The year 2011 was a record setting year with regards to annual precipitation. In 2011 MCD recorded record high annual precipitation within the Great Miami River Watershed. The 2011 mean annual precipitation was 58.89 inches, 19.84 inches above the long-term mean annual precipitation.

The above normal precipitation contributed to above normal runoff in the Great Miami River and its tributary streams. The total annual runoff for the Great Miami River Watershed upstream of Hamilton was 29.83 inches, 16.61 inches above the long-term mean annual runoff.

The year 2011 was an above normal year for groundwater storage in the Great Miami River buried valley aquifer system. The annual groundwater recharge to aquifers is estimated from stream gaging records for the Great Miami River Watershed. Groundwater recharge in 2011 was estimated to be 15.54 inches, 7.46 inches above the long-term mean annual groundwater recharge. The groundwater elevation levels measured in MCD observation wells reflect that the aquifers in the Great Miami River Watershed received most of their recharge in three major pulses occurring in late February/early March; late April/early May; and late November/early December. Groundwater levels in the major aquifers began the year at near normal levels, climbed to above normal levels, and finished the year at above normal levels.

The water budget computed by MCD for the Great Miami River Watershed is a simple analysis using water inflows and outflows to the watershed. The computed 2011 water budget shows net water storage in the aquifers and soils of the watershed. Over the long term, the net water storage in the Great Miami River Watershed is near zero and water inflows and outflows are in balance.

WATER QUALITY

MCD collects data on nutrients in surface water to track annual trends, establish a baseline for future studies, and verify nutrient reductions from landowner incentive programs. In 2011, surface water quality continued to be impacted by excessive nitrogen and phosphorus levels. Nutrients are the primary pollutant issue in rivers and streams in Ohio (Ohio EPA, 2011). Excessive nutrients can lead to eutrophic conditions locally and contribute to the hypoxia problem in the Gulf of Mexico. Nutrients in the Great Miami River Watershed originate from both point and nonpoint sources.

MCD collects data on emerging contaminant compounds which likely originated from private and municipal wastewater treatment systems. During 2011, data was collected on 21 emerging contaminant compounds in rivers, headwater streams, and the buried valley aquifer. Seventeen of the compounds were detected in one or more of the water samples.

Analysis of surface water also reflects that the Great Miami River Watershed is impacted by fecal contaminants under all flow conditions and particularly during high flow events. Fecal indicator bacteria concentrations tend to be lowest during the summer and fall seasons when low flow conditions prevail.

During 2011 groundwater samples were also collected to analyze the presence or absence of pollutants in the buried valley aquifer. The results show that water in the aquifer continues to be of high quality. Groundwater quality consistently meets nearly all the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) standards for drinking water. However, arsenic was detected in three samples at concentrations above the drinking water maximum contaminant levels. Arsenic is thought to be naturally occurring and probably not indicative of a human source.

BACKGROUND ...... 1 Great Miami River Watershed ...... 1 Buried Valley Aquifer...... 1 MCD’s Water Resource Monitoring Program ...... 1 Hydrogeologic Setting ...... 4 WATER QUANTITY ...... 7 A. The Water Cycle ...... 7 B. Precipitation Monitoring ...... 7 2011 DATA ...... 9 2011 Precipitation in the Great Miami River Watershed ...... 9 C. Monitoring Runoff, Streamflow, and Groundwater Recharge ...... 11 2011 Runoff in the Great Miami River Watershed ...... 13 How Runoff is Computed ...... 13 Surface Runoff ...... 13 Base Flow...... 14 Trends in Annual Runoff ...... 14 2011 Flow in the Great Miami River at Hamilton ...... 15 2011 Groundwater Recharge in the Great Miami River Watershed ...... 17 How Groundwater Recharge is Estimated ...... 17 D. Monitoring Aquifer Storage ...... 19 2011 Groundwater Levels ...... 19 2011 Groundwater Storage ...... 21 2011 Estimated Water Budget for the Great Miami River Watershed ...... 22 2011 Water Quantity Summary ...... 25 WATER QUALITY ...... 27 A. Nutrients ...... 27 Nutrient Criteria ...... 27 Nitrogen ...... 28 Phosphorus ...... 28 Annual Nutrient Loads ...... 28 Annual Nutrient Yields ...... 30 B. Emerging Contaminants ...... 32 C. Microbial Source Tracking of Fecal Contaminants ...... 34 D. Groundwater Quality Assessment ...... 36

E. Exceedances of National Drinking Water Standards ...... 38 F. Major Ions ...... 38 G. Nutrients ...... 39 H. Trace Metals ...... 39 I. Semi-volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) ...... 39 J. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) ...... 39 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 40 REFERENCES...... 41 Appendix A - Precipitation Data ...... 44 Appendix B - Summary of Precipitation, Runoff, & Base Flow Data ...... 46 Appendix C - Calculated Groundwater Recharge Data ...... 47 Appendix D - Groundwater Observation Well Hydrographs ...... 48 Appendix E - Statistical Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations ...... 57 Appendix F - Statistical Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations ...... 59 Appendix G - Phosphorus Concentrations and Discharge Values ...... 61 Appendix H – Emerging Contaminant Results ...... 65 Appendix I – Groundwater Sampling Results ...... 72

1

BACKGROUND

Great Miami River Watershed

With headwaters near Indian Lake, the Great Miami River flows 170 miles southwest to its confluence with the Ohio River west of Cincinnati. The Great Miami River Watershed drains all or parts of 15 counties and also includes the Stillwater and Mad rivers and Twin, Wolf and Sevenmile creeks. The total drainage area of the Great Miami River Watershed in Ohio is 3,946 square miles; the entire watershed, including the Whitewater River in Indiana, drains 5,371 square miles. Buried Valley Aquifer

With its abundant supply of high quality groundwater, the buried valley aquifer system is the most important aquifer in southwest Ohio. This system consists of highly permeable sand and gravel deposits as thick as 200 feet that can store a great deal of groundwater. The system underlies the river and streambeds, allowing plenty of opportunity for groundwater recharge. This essentially makes the aquifer an unending renewable resource. The buried valley aquifer is a valuable natural resource and it is vital to manage it wisely. Proper management of this resource will ensure the aquifer continues to support and enhance the region’s economy and quality of life. Highlights include:

• Total aquifer storage of approximately 1.5 trillion gallons of groundwater. • Principal drinking water source for an estimated 1.6 million people. • Yields in excess of 2,000 gallons of water per minute are possible in wells near large streams. • Much of the groundwater maintains a constant temperature of 56 degrees Fahrenheit. • Appropriate use and proper protection will ensure that the aquifer is available as a long-term healthy fresh water supply.

The U.S. EPA designated the buried valley aquifer as a sole source aquifer beginning in 1988. A sole source aquifer designation applies only to aquifers that serve as the sole or principal source of drinking water for an area. This designation signifies that contamination of the aquifer would create a significant hazard to public health. As a result of this designation, all federally funded projects constructed near the aquifer, and its principal recharge zone, are subject to U.S. EPA review. This insures that projects are designed and constructed in a manner that does not create a significant hazard to public health. MCD’s Water Resource Monitoring Program

MCD is a conservancy district, which is a political subdivision of the State of Ohio. MCD works as a regional government agency throughout the 15-county Great Miami River Watershed. Formed in 1915, MCD provides flood protection, water resource monitoring and information,

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 2 and recreational opportunities. Since its inception, MCD operates automated and observer precipitation stations and an extensive stream gaging network to record stream stage and calculate stream flow. MCD has operated the stream gaging network with the USGS under a cooperative agreement since 1931.

MCD’s Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict was created in 1997 to develop and maintain an ongoing, watershed-wide program to support comprehensive protection and management of the Great Miami River Watershed’s groundwater resources. The goals and projects of the subdistrict are guided by a Liaison Committee of stakeholders to ensure that local and regional needs are addressed throughout the watershed.

The Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict includes all, or portions of, nine counties including Butler, Clark, Greene, Hamilton, Miami, Montgomery, Preble, Shelby, and Warren counties (Figure 1).

Partnering with a variety of federal, state, and local governments, the Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict conducts quality and quantity studies of the buried valley aquifer; provides grants to communities to protect their drinking water sources; and helps citizens collect quality and quantity data on their own private wells and streams through the Groundwater Monitors, Test Your Well and Stream Team programs.

For more information on the current programs of MCD and the Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict, visit www.miamiconservancy.org.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 3

Figure 1 – Counties located within the Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 4

Hydrogeologic Setting

The geology of the Great Miami River Watershed consists of unconsolidated Pleistocene glacial deposits, predominantly Wisconsinan and Illinoian in age, overlying a thick sequence of older limestones and shales of Devonian, Silurian, and Ordovician age (Klaer & Thompson, 1948; Norris & Spieker, 1966). The geology of the region influences many of the physical properties of the landscape such as soil type, topography, runoff, and the quality of surface and groundwater. The types of geologic deposits in a watershed and their distribution are important in determining how water is transported through the system and the amount and types of dissolved minerals in the water (Debrewer et al., 2000).

The Great Miami River Watershed contains parts of fifteen counties in Ohio and two in Indiana. Land-surface altitudes range from 1,550 feet above mean sea level in the northern parts of the watershed to 450 ft at the confluence of the Great Miami River with the Ohio River in Hamilton County, Ohio (MCD, 2002).

Major aquifer systems within the Great Miami River Watershed include sand and gravel buried valley aquifers; carbonate bedrock aquifers; and water-bearing sand and gravel lenses within overlying glacial till henceforth referred to as upland glacial sediment aquifers. Of these major aquifer systems, the buried valley aquifer system, which is associated with the Great Miami River and its principal tributaries, is the most productive groundwater resource in Ohio (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1999) (Figure 2). This large aquifer system provides potable water for many communities within the Great Miami River Watershed (MCD, 2001; MCD, 2002). The buried valley aquifer system consists of highly permeable sand and gravel deposits that fill, or partially fill, preglacial river valleys.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 5

Figure 2 –Great Miami River Watershed and the Buried Valley Aquifer System

The Great Miami River Watershed lies within the Eastern Corn Belt Plains Ecoregion which is characterized by rolling till plains with local moraines; rich soils; and extensive corn, soybean,

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 6

and livestock production. Within the Great Miami River Watershed, agriculture is the dominant land use comprising about 69 percent of the land. Most of the remaining land is either developed (17.4 percent) or forested (11.5 percent) (see Figure 3).

Figure 3 – Land cover in the Great Miami River Watershed

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

7

WATER QUANTITY

A. The Water Cycle

In a cooperative partnership with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), MCD and MCD’s Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict measure precipitation, surface runoff, and base flow (the water that the aquifer contributes to the river) to track long-term changes in water availability in the Great Miami River Watershed. In addition to these measurements, the Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict measures groundwater levels in the buried valley aquifer system to monitor long term changes in the amount of groundwater stored in the aquifer. These records are also useful for comparing current hydrologic measurements with historical measurements.

Precipitation falls on the Great Miami River Watershed as rain, snow, or ice. Some of this precipitation evaporates or sublimates and returns to the atmosphere as water vapor. The water vapor cools, condenses, and forms clouds which may travel long distances away from southwestern Ohio. Some of the precipitation flows by gravity towards streams and rivers and becomes surface runoff which can eventually reach the Ohio River and its tributaries. Some of the precipitation infiltrates into the ground and percolates through the soil until it reaches the water table. This water provides recharge to the aquifers and helps sustain the groundwater resources in the Great Miami River Watershed.

Some of the water stored in aquifers remains underground and in storage for a long period of time. Some of the precipitation that reaches the aquifer does not remain in storage for very long. This water stays close to the ground surface and seeps into nearby streams or rivers as base flow. As a result, some of the streams and rivers in the Great Miami Watershed are able to sustain flow, even during periods of prolonged drought, because the underlying buried valley aquifer provides groundwater discharge to the streams and rivers. B. Precipitation Monitoring

MCD measures precipitation throughout the Great Miami River Watershed. The data is provided to the National Weather Service to assist with climatic assessments and flood forecasting. The data is also analyzed in conjunction with groundwater level data to better understand how precipitation affects the water stored in the buried valley aquifer.

To collect this data, MCD operates two precipitation networks; manual observers and automated tipping bucket rain gages. The manual observer network is staffed by a citizen network of observers who record daily rainfall at 42 stations within the Great Miami River Watershed. At twenty-eight of MCD’s manual observer stations data has been collected for at least 75 years. The station in Urbana has the longest period of recorded data —130 years. These long records are important for understanding environmental trends and for use in resource planning. The second precipitation network consists of 18 tipping bucket rain gages that automatically record accumulated rainfall. The tipping bucket rain gages are equipped with data transmitters that utilize satellite and radio frequency communication (see Figure 4).

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 8

Figure 4 – Location of MCD’s precipitation network

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 9

A majority of the MCD manual observer stations have standard National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Weather Service rain and snow gages from which MCD staff or volunteers observe readings at least once a day. In addition, 19 of these stations are equipped with recording gages, which graphically record the time and duration of rainfall. This data is also used by NOAA to help develop the rainfall frequency atlas for the Midwest, and monthly Climatological Data reports for Ohio. 2011 DATA

This report documents the overall state of water resources in 2011 in the Great Miami River Watershed, with an emphasis on the buried valley aquifer. The data used in this report was collected in 2011 by MCD, the Aquifer Preservation Subdistrict of MCD, and MCD cooperators: The USGS, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2011 Precipitation in the Great Miami River Watershed

The mean of record, which is recalculated every ten years, represents the long-term mean annual precipitation total for the watershed. The most recent recalculation of the mean included all of the station precipitation records up to and including the year 2009. The mean of record for the Great Miami River Watershed is currently 39.05 inches (See Appendix A, Precipitation Data).

The year 2011 was a record setting year with regards to annual precipitation. An average of 58.89 inches of precipitation fell across the Great Miami River Watershed in 2011 exceeding the long-term mean annual precipitation by 19.84 inches. The previous record annual precipitation was 53.91 inches set in 1990. The cumulative precipitation pattern for 2011 can be characterized by much above normal precipitation during the late winter and spring followed by below normal precipitation during the summer and much above normal precipitation during the fall. Figure 5 illustrates the monthly precipitation and accumulated monthly precipitation for the Great Miami River Watershed during 2011, as compared to the long-term mean.

The highest annual precipitation measured at an observer station in 2011 (66.72 inches) was recorded at the Franklin station and the lowest (51.58) inches was recorded at the Union City station (see Appendix A, Precipitation Data).

Monthly precipitation totals for February, March, April, September, October, November, and December 2011 were above normal. Monthly precipitation totals for January, June, July, and August were below normal. April was the wettest month averaging 9.82 inches of precipitation across the watershed. August was the driest month averaging 2.21 inches of precipitation.

A recent trend of above normal annual precipitation continued in 2011. Annual precipitation totals for the Great Miami River Watershed going back to 1915 are shown in figure 6. Annual precipitation exceeded the long-term mean for the Great Miami River Watershed in 17of the 23 years between 1989 and 2011. The two highest annual precipitation totals ever recorded for the watershed occurred during this time interval in 1990 and 2011.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 10

Figure 5 – Monthly precipitation and accumulated monthly precipitation

Figure 6 – Annual precipitation since 1915

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 11

Three monthly maximum precipitation records were set in 2011. Monthly precipitation totals in February, April, and September were 4.99, 9.82, and 8.01 inches respectively. Each of these monthly totals was a new record high for the month. See Figure 7 for a comparison of long-term monthly mean precipitation data with the 2011 monthly precipitation data in the Great Miami River Watershed.

Figure 7 – 2011 monthly precipitation compared to long term maximum, minimum, and mean

C. Monitoring Runoff, Streamflow, and Groundwater Recharge

MCD operates an extensive stream gaging network within the Great Miami River Watershed to record stream stage and calculate stream flow (see Figure 8). The network consists of 21 automated stream gages maintained through a cooperative partnership with the USGS. MCD staff maintains the stream gages and make discharge measurements with equipment furnished by USGS. USGS processes the data from the gages, prepares rating curves and tables, and computes records for publication in state and federal reports. These public records provide surface water levels and stream flow data (discharge) to any interested party via the National Water Information System (NWIS) website at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 12

The information can be used for planning related to water supply, flood protection, construction, agriculture, commerce, and industry. In addition to USGS, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Weather Service, and Dayton Power and Light Company are cooperative partners on one or more of the 21 gages.

Figure 8 – Location of stream gaging stations

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 13

All 21 stream gages are equipped with Geostationary Orbiting Environmental Satellite (GOES) telemetry. The GOES telemetry systems allow MCD, USGS, and the National Weather Service to receive real-time stream stage, discharge, and precipitation data.

The National Weather Service’s Ohio River Forecast Center uses the stream gaging network for the Great Miami River Watershed to forecast peak stream flows and provide flood warnings to communities during large runoff events. Daily monitoring of the remote gages by MCD staff ensures gage reliability and accuracy during significant runoff events. 2011 Runoff in the Great Miami River Watershed

In 2011, data from 13 of the 21 stream gaging stations in the network was used to assess runoff in the Great Miami River Watershed. Total stream runoff is comprised of both surface runoff and base flow. Overall, 2011 annual runoff was above the mean annual runoff at all 13 of the gaging stations. The stream gaging station on Holes Creek near Kettering recorded the highest 2011 runoff total at 36.12 inches while the stream gage on the Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill recorded the lowest runoff total at 25.43 inches in 2011 (see Appendix B, Summary of Precipitation, Runoff, & Base Flow Data). The stream gaging station at Hamilton measures runoff for the portion of the Great Miami River Watershed upstream of Hamilton. The station is the furthest downstream station managed by MCD and is the closest stream gaging station to the mouth of the Great Miami River. The Great Miami River Watershed upstream of the Hamilton stream gaging station is 3,630 square miles. MCD estimated 2011 runoff for the entire Great Miami River Watershed upstream of the Hamilton gaging station at 29.83 inches, a new record. The previous record runoff for the Hamilton gaging station was 23.6 inches set in 1996. How Runoff is Computed

A USGS software program called PART is used by MCD staff to compute total runoff, surface runoff, and base flow from the streamflow records of the13 MCD stream gages in the Great Miami River Watershed network listed in Appendix B. PART uses streamflow partitioning to estimate a daily record of base flow from the streamflow record (Rutledge, 1998). The program scans the period of record for days that fit a requirement of antecedent recession, designates groundwater discharge to be equal to streamflow on these days, and linearly interpolates the groundwater discharge on days that do not fit the requirement of antecedent recession.

This method of analysis is appropriate if all or most of the groundwater in a watershed discharges to the stream; and if a stream gaging station at the downstream end of the watershed measures all or most outflow. Regulation and diversion of streamflow should be negligible. These conditions are likely met for most stream gaging stations in the Great Miami River Watershed with drainage areas of between one and 500 square miles. Surface Runoff

Surface runoff is the portion of flow in a stream that is derived directly from precipitation which reaches the ground and flows by gravity into the stream. All 13 of the stream gaging stations used for this report recorded above normal surface runoff in 2011 (see Appendix B, Summary of

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 14

Precipitation, Runoff, & Base Flow Data). The stream gaging station on Holes Creek near Kettering recorded the highest surface runoff of 28.70 inches. The lowest surface runoff recorded at a stream gaging station in 2011 was on the Mad River near Urbana with an annual surface runoff of 5.97 inches.

The Great Miami River at Hamilton gage recorded a 2011 surface runoff of 17.25 inches which is 10.92 inches above the mean annual surface runoff (6.33 inches) for the gage period of record. Surface runoff contributed 58 percent of the total runoff in the Great Miami River at Hamilton in 2011. Base Flow

Annual base flows exceeded the period of record mean annual base flow at all 13 of the stream gaging stations in 2011 (see Appendix B, Summary of Precipitation, Runoff, & Base Flow Data). Base flow is the portion of flow in a stream that is derived from groundwater and wastewater discharges from industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants. The stream gaging station with the highest 2011 base flow (19.66 inches) was recorded at the Mad River at Eagle City. The stream gaging station with the lowest 2011 recorded base flow (6.73 inches) is located on Loramie Creek near Newport. The Mad River gages at Springfield, Eagle City and Urbana had significantly higher base flow indices than other stations. This higher number is the result of the large inflow of groundwater from the buried valley aquifer into the Mad River channel. Base flow recorded at Hamilton in 2011 was 12.58 inches which is 5.69 inches above the mean annual base flow runoff for the gage period of record. Base flow contributed about 42 percent of the total runoff at Hamilton in 2011. Trends in Annual Runoff

The mean annual runoff at Hamilton, for the 82 years that the gaging station has existed, is 13.22 inches. The annual runoff at Hamilton exceeded 13.22 inches for eight consecutive years from 2001 through 2008. Annual runoff at Hamilton exceeded the mean for nine out of the last eleven years from 2001 through 2011(see Figure 9). A Mann-Kendall trend analysis was performed on the annual runoff data (Helsel, 1992). The test results suggest there is a statistically significant increase in annual runoff for the Great Miami River during the time period of 1927 to 2011.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 15

Figure 9 – Annual runoff for the Great Miami River at Hamilton

2011 Flow in the Great Miami River at Hamilton

The highest mean daily flow recorded at the stream gaging station in 2011 on the Great Miami River at Hamilton was 50,900 cubic feet per second (cfs). This flow was recorded on April 20th. The lowest 2011 mean daily flow at Hamilton was 662 cfs recorded on September 3rd. The mean daily flow for the Great Miami River at Hamilton in 2011 was 7,977 cfs. The period of record mean daily flow for the Great Miami River at Hamilton is 3,532 cfs.

The Hamilton stream gaging station has a sufficient period of record so as to look at trends in five year interval mean daily steamflows back to 1931. The data illustrates an increasing trend in mean daily flow after the 1961-1965 interval (see Figure 10). The 2001-2005 interval has the highest five year interval mean daily flow (4,657 cfs) of any five year interval going back to 1931. The 2006-2010 interval has the second highest five year mean daily flow (4,406 cfs).

A Mann-Kendall trend analysis was performed on the five year interval mean daily flow data (Helsel, 1992). The test results suggest there is a statistically significant increase in five year interval mean daily flows for the Great Miami River during the time period of 1927 – 2010.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 16

Figure 10 –Mean Daily Flow by 5-year Intervals for the Great Miami River at Hamilton

The annual seven-day low flow is the lowest mean value for any seven consecutive day period in a year. The 2011 seven-day low flow measured on the Great Miami River at Hamilton was 724 cfs. There is a sufficiently long period of record of stream flow for the Great Miami River at Hamilton to look at trends in seven-day low flows measured at Hamilton since the gaging station was established in 1927. MCD staff performed a Mann-Kendall test on the seven-day low flow data for the entire period of record. The test results indicate a statistically significant increase in the seven-day low flow for the period analyzed (1927-2011) (see Figure 11).

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 17

Figure 11 – Annual 7-day Low Flows on the Great Miami River at Hamilton

Streamflow data collected at the stream gaging station on the Great Miami River at Hamilton indicates increasing trends in the mean daily flow and the seven-day low flow since 1927. These trends, coupled with above normal precipitation in 17 of the 23 years between 1989 and 2011, suggest that wetter climate conditions within the Great Miami River Watershed in recent years led to increased streamflows in the Great Miami River. 2011 Groundwater Recharge in the Great Miami River Watershed

Groundwater recharge in the Great Miami River Watershed originates from precipitation that infiltrates through the soil or fractures in bedrock and eventually reaches the aquifer. Once precipitation enters the aquifer system if flows toward nearby streams and rivers entering the stream or river channel as base flow. The time span from when precipitation falls on the ground, infiltrates into the aquifer, flows through the aquifer, and finally enters a river or stream typically ranges from less than a year to several decades or more (Rowe, Shapiro, & Schlosser, 1999). How Groundwater Recharge is Estimated

The USGS software programs RECESS and RORA is used to estimate the groundwater recharge to aquifers located upstream of nine stream gaging stations in the Great Miami River Watershed. The programs utilize streamflow records to define a master recession curve for the watershed of interest and then estimate groundwater recharge using the recession-curve-displacement method (Rutledge, 1998; Rutledge, 2000). This technique is appropriate for watersheds characterized by

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 18 diffuse areal recharge to the aquifer and all or most of the groundwater discharges to a stream. Regulation and diversion of streamflow should be negligible and the stream gaging station at the downstream end of the watershed should measure all or most of the flow leaving the watershed. These conditions were met for the watersheds analyzed in this report.

Annual groundwater recharge in 2011 exceeded the period of record mean annual recharge for all 12 of the stream gaging stations analyzed (see Appendix C, Calculated Groundwater Recharge Data). Groundwater recharge ranged from a high of 24.03 inches for the Mad River Watershed upstream of the Urbana station to a low of 10.27 inches for the Twin Creek Watershed upstream of the Germantown station. The mean 2011 groundwater recharge, weighted by drainage area for the 12 stream gaging stations, is 15.54 inches.

For the purpose of this report 15.54 inches is considered to be the mean 2011 groundwater recharge for the Great Miami River Watershed. The period or record mean annual groundwater recharge for the Great Miami River Watershed is 8.08 inches; therefore 2011 annual groundwater recharge is estimated to be 7.46 inches above normal.

Annual groundwater recharge and annual base flow are significantly higher at the Mad River gaging stations than other stations (see Figure 12). Groundwater recharge values are highly dependent on the characteristics of the watershed upstream of the stream gaging station and reflect the local geology of the river and aquifer system. For example, the Mad River Watershed is characterized by an extensive buried valley aquifer system beneath and along side of the present day Mad River channel. The buried valley aquifer system is overlain by relatively permeable soils that developed in sand and gravel deposits. Precipitation can easily infiltrate through the soil and reach the water table below providing recharge to the buried valley aquifer system. Thus, the annual groundwater recharge for the Mad River stream gaging stations near Springfield, Eagle City, and Urbana are significantly higher than the other stream gaging stations (see Appendix C, Calculated Groundwater Recharge Data).

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 19

Figure 12 – 2011 Groundwater Recharge to Aquifers

D. Monitoring Aquifer Storage

MCD operates a groundwater level observation network that spans 11 counties in the Great Miami River Watershed and consists of 98 residential and monitoring wells. Of those wells, 60 are in the buried valley aquifer. MCD staff visit the wells on a monthly basis and collect data using manual water level measurement devices and automated data loggers. Eight of the observation wells are equipped with GOES data transmitters for hourly automated data transmissions to the USGS National Water Information System. 2011 Groundwater Levels

Groundwater levels are tracked at 60 observation wells in the buried valley aquifer. MCD also works in a partnership with USGS and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Soil and Water Resources to track groundwater levels on a near real-time basis at eight observation wells in the buried valley aquifer.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 20

Figure 13 – Locations of wells used for the analysis of 2011 groundwater levels

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 21

The year 2011 was an above normal year for groundwater storage in the Great Miami River buried valley aquifer system. For this report, 30 observation wells were selected to analyze groundwater levels and changes in groundwater storage (see Figure 13). Of the 30 observation wells selected, 21 of the observation wells are screened in buried valley sand and gravel deposits while nine of the observation wells are screened in upland glacial sediment aquifers surrounding the buried valley system.

The buried valley aquifer received three major pulses of recharge during 2011. The first recharge event occurred during the months of February and March. Significant precipitation events caused groundwater levels in most of the observation wells to rise (see Appendix D, Groundwater Observation Well Hydrographs). Many of the observation well hydrographs show a mid to late March peak. A second pulse of recharge occurred during the months of April and May. April brought an average of 9.82 inches of precipitation to the watershed while May added 7.12 inches of precipitation. Groundwater levels at most observation wells climbed to a second peak in mid to late May before declining throughout the summer.

An unusually wet September brought an average of 8.00 inches of precipitation to the watershed and caused groundwater levels at many observation wells to stabilize or begin to rise again. By late fall of 2011 groundwater levels were rising in most observation wells in the buried valley aquifer because 6.10 inches of precipitation occurred in November and 5.54 inches occurred in December .

Several of the observation wells with ten or more years of data logged record high groundwater levels in 2011. The record amount of precipitation received by the Great Miami River Watershed in 2011 resulted in above normal groundwater levels at most observation wells during the spring and late fall of 2011.

The hydrographs in Appendix D illustrate that 2011 groundwater levels at 20 observation well sites in the buried valley aquifer. Many of the hydrographs also show river discharge at the nearest gaging station. The groundwater level trends at many of the observation well sites closely mimic the trends in river discharge showing the coupled nature of the river/buried valley aquifer system.

Statistical plots are also shown in Appendix D for ten observation wells with ten or more years of record. The statistical plots illustrate how 2011 groundwater levels compare with nonparametric statistics for each well. 2011 Groundwater Storage

Groundwater storage (ΔSg) in 2011 for the Great Miami River Watershed was estimated by multiplying the change in groundwater level from the beginning to the end of the year by the specific yield (Sy) as stated in the following equation:

ΔSg = ΔH(Sy)

Specific yield was not measured in the field. A literature search revealed that typical values for specific yield in sand and gravel aquifers range from 0.05 to 0.3. For this report a value of 0.2 is

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 22 used. The variable ΔH is simply defined as the difference between the first January and the last December groundwater level measurement at a particular observation well in 2011.

Appendix E illustrates the annual groundwater storage calculations for each of the 30 observation wells used to estimate mean groundwater storage for the watershed. The observation wells were divided into two categories, buried valley aquifer or upland glacial sediment aquifer, based upon the aquifer the well was screened in. The mean 2011 groundwater storage for the buried valley aquifer wells is 13.4 inches. The mean 2011 groundwater storage for wells installed in upland glacial aquifers is 5.3 inches.

The large difference in groundwater storage between the two aquifer systems is largely due to the greater thickness and porosity of the buried valley aquifer system and the fact that the buried valley aquifer system occurs at lower elevations and is a focal point for surface runoff from surrounding upland areas. The mean groundwater storage is determined by computing a weighted average of buried valley and non-buried valley observation wells. The average is weighted based upon the land surface area within the watershed that overlays buried valley aquifer system (350 mi2) versus the land surface area within the watershed that does not overlay the buried valley aquifer system (3542 mi2). The estimated mean groundwater storage in the Great Miami River Watershed at 6.0 inches for 2011. 2011 Estimated Water Budget for the Great Miami River Watershed

A water budget is a quantitative statement of the balance between water gains and losses over a period of time. The water budget for the Great Miami River Watershed can be expressed using the following equations, Inflows = Outflows ± ΔStorage

or

P = R + ET + C + U + ΔSs + ΔSg (1)

Where: P = precipitation R = runoff from surface water and groundwater ET = evapotranspiration C = consumptive water losses from human activity U = subsurface underflow of groundwater ΔSs = change in soil moisture ΔSg = change in groundwater storage

In 2011, the total water inflow into the Great Miami River Watershed from precipitation (P) was 58.89 inches.

Outflows for the watershed included surface runoff estimated at 17.25 inches and base flow runoff estimated at 12.58 inches for a total runoff (R) of 29.83 inches based upon stream flow data collected at the Hamilton gaging station.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 23

Consumptive losses from water use in 2011 were not available from ODNR’s Division of Soil and Water Resources at the time this report was finalized. Estimates obtained in 2007-2009 suggest consumptive losses are only a minor component of the water budget and account for about 0.34 inches of outflow on average.

MCD estimated subsurface underflow (U) of groundwater at the Hamilton gaging station by using the formula, U = T · I · L (2) Where: T = buried valley aquifer transmissivity I = the hydraulic groundwater gradient L = width of the buried valley aquifer

Aquifer pump tests by the USGS near the Hamilton North wellfield determined a transmissivity (T) of 50,000 ft2/day for the semiconfined portion of the buried valley aquifer system (Sheets and Bossenbroek, 2005). This value agrees with previous estimates for aquifer transmissivity by Spieker (1968). The hydraulic gradient of the buried valley aquifer system at the Hamilton gaging station is estimated from potentiometric surface maps produced by MCD in 2007. The hydraulic gradient is estimated at 0.0017. The width of the buried valley aquifer system at the Hamilton gaging stations was obtained from GIS overlays of the buried valley aquifer and determined to be approximately 8625 feet.

Substituting values for T, I, and L into equation (2) yields a value of 733,125 ft3/day for U. Converting U to inches of water over the entire watershed per year yields a value of 0.03 inches which is negligible when compared to other outflows. U is assumed to be fairly constant from year to year.

Soil moisture data from the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center at URL http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/soilmst/index_jh.html showed a gain of approximately 200 mm or 8 inches of soil moisture across the Great Miami River Watershed from January 2011 to January 2012 (see Figure 14). Therefore ΔSs for 2011 is estimated at 8 inches.

Evapotranspiration (ET) losses for 2011 were not directly measured. However, by rearranging equation (1) to solve for ET, an estimate can be made,

ET = P - (R + C + U ± ΔSs ± ΔSg) (3)

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 24

Figure 14 – 2011 calculated soil moisture levels in the United States from NOAA Climate Prediction Center

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 25

Substituting known values rounded to the nearest whole number and assuming that C and U are negligible when compared to other outflows, equation 3 simplifies to

ET = 59 – (30 + 8 + 6) ET = 15 inches

The estimated 2011 water budget for the Great Miami River Watershed indicates that inflows from precipitation exceeded outflows from evapotranspiration and runoff resulting in net water storage in aquifers and soils. See Figure 15.

Figure 15 – 2011 water outflows for the Great Miami River Watershed

2011 Water Quantity Summary

In general, water inflows and outflows were much above average in 2011. Of the 58.89 inches of precipitation that was received in the Great Miami River Watershed, an estimated 29.83 inches flowed out of the Great Miami River Watershed as surface and base flow runoff. The average groundwater recharge in the Great Miami River Watershed is estimated at 15.54 inches. In general, the buried valley aquifer received three major pulses of recharge in 2011 during the spring and late fall. The total amount of recharge received by the buried valley aquifer was well above normal and groundwater levels in the aquifer rose to much above normal levels during the

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 26 spring and the late fall of 2011 as record levels of precipitation fell across the Great Miami River Watershed.

Recent trends in hydrologic data for the Great Miami River Watershed indicate above normal precipitation for nine out of the ten years during the decade of 2000-2010 and for 17 out of the last 23 years beginning in 1989 and ending in 2011. Similar trends are present in annual runoff, mean daily flows, and seven-day low flows for the Great Miami River Watershed. The trends suggest a tendency toward wetter climatic conditions.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

WATER QUALITY

This section summarizes the methods, locations, and results of the groundwater and surface water quality data collected by MCD in the Great Miami River Watershed during 2011. A. Nutrients

This section summarizes the results of nutrient studies collected by MCD in 2011. This data is also included in a more detailed Water Quality Study report (MCD Report # 2011-43), entitled Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations and Loads in the Great Miami River Watershed, Ohio 2005 – 2011 (MCD, 2012).

An automated sampler is located downstream of the Englewood, Taylorsville, and Huffman dams. A fourth sampler is located in Fairfield, Ohio (see Figure 16). The sampling station at Englewood provides nutrient load and yield data for the Stillwater River Watershed upstream of Englewood Dam. The sampling station downstream of Taylorsville Dam is located in Huber Heights and provides nutrient load and yield data for the Upper Great Miami River Watershed. The sampling station downstream of Huffman Dam provides nutrient load and yield data for the Mad River Watershed. The sampling station in Fairfield, Ohio is located near the Greater Cincinnati Water Works Bolton Water Treatment Plant and provides nutrient load and yield data for the entire Great Miami River Watershed upstream of the gaging station at Hamilton, Ohio. In 2011, samples for nitrogen and phosphorus analysis were collected at all four locations.

Data collection was conducted according to a USEPA-approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (MCD, 2009). MCD staff retrieves water samples from the automated samplers weekly and then delivere select samples to a laboratory for chemical analysis. The laboratory analyzes the water for ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, orthophosphate, and total suspended sediment (see Appendix F, Statistical Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations). Nutrient Criteria

Currently, there are no statewide standards for in-stream nutrient concentrations in Ohio. In December 2000, the USEPA published ambient water quality criteria recommendations for states to use in developing nutrient criteria for rivers and streams based on the different ecoregions of the United States (USEPA, 2000). The Great Miami River Watershed lies within the Eastern Corn Belt Plains Ecoregion and the recommended nutrient criteria is summarized in table 1.

Table 1 - Recommended Nutrient Criteria for Rivers and Streams in the Eastern Corn Belt Plains Ecoregion

Parameter Recommended Nutrient Criteria (mg/L) Nitrate + Nitrite 1.60 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.40 Total Nitrogen 2.00 Total Phosphorus 0.0625

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 28

Nitrogen

In 2011, median and mean concentrations of nitrate + nitrite, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and total nitrogen exceeded the USEPA recommended nutrient criteria at all sampling sites (see Appendix F). The highest observed concentration for nitrate + nitrite in 2011 was 12.10 mg/L in a sample collected from the Stillwater River at Englewood, Ohio. This concentration exceeded the drinking water primary maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 mg/L.

Total nitrogen concentration and river discharge plots for each of the sampling stations are shown in Appendix G. The plots illustrate total nitrogen concentrations tend to rise quickly during runoff events. As the runoff event ends total nitrogen concentrations quickly reduce to levels approaching the annual median or mean concentration. The highest total nitrogen concentrations tend to occur during winter and spring runoff events, but high concentrations associated with runoff can occur at any time of the year.

Phosphorus

Median and mean concentrations of total phosphorus samples collected in 2011 also exceeded the USEPA recommended nutrient criteria at all sites. Total phosphorus concentrations were above the laboratory detection limits for all samples collected. The highest total phosphorus concentration measured was 1.90 mg/L in a sample collected from the Upper Great Miami River at Huber Heights.

Total phosphorus concentrations and river discharge plots are illustrated in Appendix G. The levels of in-stream total phosphorus concentrations have an annual cycle and tend to show sharp increases during late winter and early spring runoff events. When the runoff events end total phosphorus concentrations tend to quickly decline. Total phosphorus concentrations also tend to rise during prolonged periods of lower discharge in rivers which typically occur during the summer and early fall. This trend is particularly pronounced in the data collected from the stations at Taylorsville, on the Mad River, and at the Great Miami River near Fairfield. Generally, the observed rise in total phosphorus concentrations during low flows is not as great as during large runoff events.

Annual Nutrient Loads

The annual load for a pollutant in a river or stream is defined as the total mass of that pollutant transported by the river or stream in a given year. Calculation of a pollutant load requires information on the streamflow, pollutant concentration, and time window for which the streamflow and pollutant concentration data is to be applied. The pollutant loads are calculated using a numeric integration approach (Richards, 1998). Mathematically, an annual loads for nutrients is estimated by using the equation: n Load = k∑ciqiti i=1

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 29

Where k is a constant use to convert units to metric tons/year, ci is the ith observation of concentration, qi is the corresponding observation of flow, and ti is the time interval represented by the ith sample.

The total nitrogen concentrations are estimated for this report by adding sample concentrations of ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. Total phosphorus concentrations were measured directly from water samples.

Table 2 – Annual Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loads in Metric Tons

Stillwater River Watershed Constituent 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Flow (acre-feet) 614,696 663,828 754,258 377,304 474,368 862,054 Total Nitrogen (metric tons) 5,550 4,463 6,148 3,417 4,642 6,056 Total Phosphorus (metric tons) 165 365 519 118 175 322

Upper Great Miami River Watershed Constituent 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Flow (acre-feet) N/A N/A 1,478,988 528,798 669,138 1,773,883 Total Nitrogen (metric tons) N/A N/A 9,600 3,914 4,434 8,994 Total Phosphorus (metric tons) N/A N/A 688 174 314 785

Mad River Watershed Constituent 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Flow (acre-feet) N/A 697,275 742,710 N/A N/A 981,612 Total Nitrogen (metric tons) N/A 3,242 3,493 N/A N/A 4,133 Total Phosphorus (metric tons) N/A 206 239 N/A N/A 291

Great Miami River Watershed Constituent 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Flow (acre-feet) N/A 3,471,558 4,141,823 N/A N/A 5,911,167 Total Nitrogen (metric tons) N/A 18,619 26,879 N/A N/A 28,991 Total Phosphorus (metric tons) N/A 1,513 2,455 N/A N/A 2,848

Table 2 illustrates the total nitrogen and total phosphorus annual loads at each sampling station for the years 2006-2011. The table shows that total flows measured at or near each sampling station in 2011 were the highest for the five-year monitoring period. The high flows caused an increased flux of nutrients at each sampling station. Total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads were among the highest measured over the five-year monitoring period. The total nitrogen load

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 30 for the Great Miami River Watershed upstream of Hamilton is estimated at 28,991 metric tons and the total phosphorus load at 2,848 metric tons. The Mad River Watershed had the smallest total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads of the three tributary watersheds. Annual Nutrient Yields

The size of a watershed can overshadow the effects that land use and the physiography have on loads because large watersheds contribute large loads due in large part to their high volume of runoff (Reutter, 2003). The impacts of land use and physiography on nutrient loads in a given Watershed are better observed when yields rather than loads are compared. The yield of given watershed is computed by dividing the pollutant load by the watershed area. The 2011 total nitrogen and total phosphorus yield was computed for comparison (Table 3). The Stillwater River Watershed had the highest total nitrogen yield at 36 kg/ha. The Great Miami River Watershed upstream of Hamilton had the highest total phosphorus yield at 3 kg/ha. The Mad River Watershed had the lowest nutrient yields for both nitrogen and phosphorus.

Table 3 – 2011 nutrient yields for the Great Miami River Watershed and tributary watersheds

2011 Total Nitrogen Yield in 2011 Total Phosphorus Yield in Watershed kilograms/hectare (kg/ha) kilograms/hectare (kg/ha) Stillwater 36 1.9 Upper Great 30 2.6 Miami Mad 25 1.8 Great Miami 31 3.0

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 31

Figure 16. Locations of MCD nutrient stations and the nearest USGS streamgaging station.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 32

B. Emerging Contaminants

In 2011, water samples were collected at the outfalls of three wastewater treatment plant, at 20 stream or river sites, at seven monitoring wells, and at two municipal production wells (see Figure 17). The water samples were analyzed for 21 organic wastewater compounds contaminants including pharmaceuticals and personal care products as part of an occurrence survey of emerging contaminants in streams and aquifers of the Great Miami River Watershed (Table 2). A complete summary of the occurrence survey can be found in MCD report #2011-18 (MCD, 2011 a).

What is referred to as “emerging contaminants” are emerging not because they are just starting to arrive, but because the ability to detect them has improved. Advancing technology in laboratory methods now allows very low concentrations of chemicals to be detected. With the ability to detect smaller and smaller quantities of chemicals comes the realization that some common products—pharmaceuticals, personal care products, hormones, and miscellaneous chemicals such as caffeine, cleansers, insect repellents, perfumes and fire retardants—exist in our environment.

Table 2 – Emerging Contaminant Analyte List

Emerging Contaminants Acetominophen Fluoxetine Atenolol Gemfibrozil BisPhenol A (BPA) Ibuprofen Butalbital Iopromide Caffeine Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) Carbamazepine Progesterone Cotinine Sulfamethoxazole Diazepam Testosterone Estradiol Triclosan Estrone Trimethoprim 17 alpha-Ethinyl Estradiol

Analysis of the surface and groundwater samples detected low concentrations of 17 out of the 21 target analytes listed in Table 2 (see Appendix H, Emerging Contaminant Results). Overall, detection frequencies and concentrations of emerging contaminants were highest in the samples collected at wastewater treatment plant outfalls followed by samples collected from rivers downstream of those outfalls. Lower detection frequencies and concentrations of emerging contaminants were recorded in samples collected from headwater streams and groundwater (see Figure 17). Four of the emerging contaminants, estradiol, estrone, ethinyl estradiol-17 alpha, and progesterone were not detected.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 33

Figure 17 – Emerging Contaminant Water Sampling Locations

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 34

Emerging contaminants detected in the occurrence survey and there common uses:

• Acetaminophen – the active ingredient in pain medications such as Tylenol • Atenolol – a drug used to control high blood pressure • Bisphenol A (BPA) – a compound used primarily to make plastics • Butalbital – is in a group of drugs called barbiturates and often combined with acetaminophen to treat tension headaches • Caffeine – found in a variety of commonly consumed beverages such as coffee, tea, and colas • Carbamazepine – a mood stabilizing drug used primarily in the treatment of epilepsy • Cotinine – is a byproduct of nicotin • Diazepam (Valium) – a drug commonly used for treating anxiety, insomnia, seizures, muscle spasms, etc. • Fluoxetine (Prozac) – used to treat depression and obsessive-compulsive disorders • Gemfibrozil – a drug used to lower lipid levels and aids in the metabolism of carbohydrates and fats • Ibuprofen – an anti-inflammatory drug sold under various tradenames such as Advil and Motrin • Iopromide – a contrast agent used in radiographic studies such as intravenous urograms and CT brain scans • Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) – was the key ingredient in Scotchgard and has been used in fire-fighting foams • Sulfamethoxazole – an antibiotic commonly used to treat urinary tract infections • Testosterone – the principal male sex hormone and is an anabolic steroid • Triclosan – antibacterial/antifungal agent used in soaps, deodorants, toothpastes, etc. • Trimethoprim – an antibiotic used in the treatment of urinary tract infections

A screening level risk assessment was performed on the highest concentrations of emerging contaminants detected in groundwater to calculate margins of exposure (MOEs) for individual compounds. The results of the assessment suggest that emerging compound concentrations in groundwater do not pose a significant health risk to local drinking water supplies that use drinking water as their source water. C. Microbial Source Tracking of Fecal Contaminants

Previous surface water sampling work performed by MCD in the Great Miami River Watershed documented water quality exceedances of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) Class A primary contact recreation standards for E. coli (MCD, 2011b). E. coli is a bacterium used as an indicator of the presence of fecal contamination. It is a rod shaped, gram negative bacterium, commonly found in the gastrointestinal tracts and feces of warm-blooded animals. Common sources of E. coli include sewage, cattle, and birds.

In 2011, the Microbial Source Tracking (MST) techniques were utilized to provide information on sources of fecal contaminants in the Great Miami River. MCD contracted with Source Molecular Corporation to provide MST analysis of four water samples collected at the Great

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 35

Miami River near Fairfield, Ohio nutrient monitoring station and two samples collected from the outfall of the City of Hamilton’s wastewater treatment plant.

Source Molecular Corporation utilized the bacterium Bacteroidetes as an alternative to the more traditional indicator organisms E. coli and Enterococci. Fecal Bacteroidetes is an anaerobic bacterium and indicative of recent fecal contamination, because it cannot survive for long periods of time outside of the intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals. Certain strains of Bacteroidetes are specific to humans and can be used as indicators of human fecal contamination.

Source Molecular Corporation utilized a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) technique to amplify DNA sequences specific to certain human fecal Bacteroidetes genetic biomarkers. Once each targeted gene was quantified, the relative percentage of that biomarker was determined relative to the total population fecal Bacteroidetes in the water sample. Relative levels of human fecal pollution can be determined by the proportion of the human gene biomarker found in fecal Bacteroidetes relative to the total population of fecal Bacteroidetes (Seurinck and others, 2005).

The qPCR analysis results show that human sources of fecal Bacteroidetes were the primary contributor of fecal Bacteroidetes in the water samples collected from the outfall (see Table 3). Human sources of fecal Bacteroidetes were a major contributor of fecal Bacteroidetes in three out of the four samples collected from the Great Miami River near Fairfield, Ohio. Each of these samples was collected during a significant runoff event when flows measured in the Great Miami River at Hamilton were well above normal. The percentages of Bacteroidetes with human specific markers in comparison to the entire Bacteroidetes population ranged from 3.19 to 4.37. The sample with the lowest percentage of human fecal Bacteroidetes was collected on August 17, 2011 when flow in the Great Miami River at Hamilton was near baseflow conditions. The sample results suggest that human sources of fecal Bacteroidetes are at least a significant contributor if not the primary contributor of fecal Bacteroidetes in the Great Miami River near Fairfield.

Table 3 – qPCR results for Great Miami River and Hamilton Outfall samples

Human Qualitative General Percent Flow Specific Contribution of Date Location Marker Human Conditions Marker Human Fecal Quantified* Marker Quantified* Pollution Great Miami Runoff 4/5/2011 19,500 853 4.37 Major Contributor River Event Great Miami Runoff 6/13/2011 36,000 1,150 3.19 Major Contributor River Event 6/13/2011 Hamilton Outfall — 9,700,000 2,000,000 20.62 Primary Contributor Great Miami 8/17/2011 Baseflow 206,000 989 0.48 Contributor River 8/17/2011 Hamilton Outfall — 389,000 30,900 7.94 Primary Contributor Great Miami Runoff 9/27/2011 733,000 31,400 4.28 Major Contributor River Event * Numbers reported as copy numbers per 100 mL

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 36

The qPCR results for this investigation are semi-quantitative and do not allow for a precise quantification of fecal sources. It is important to note that qPCR analysis does not differentiate between cultivable and noncultivable microbes (Noble and others, 2005). It is likely that a significant amount of the fecal Bacteroidetes entering the Great Miami River from the wastewater treatment plant outfalls upstream of the sampling site were inactivated from disinfection processes. Further studies that pair culture-based methods with qPCR are needed to better understand how concentrations of cultivable fecal indicators vary with time and flow. Furthermore, the small sample size for this investigation prevents drawing any broad conclusions as to the relative contributions of human sources of fecal Bacteroidetes under differing flow conditions. Nevertheless, MST could prove to be a useful tool in future studies seeking to identify primary sources of fecal contaminants in the Great Miami River Watershed in the future. D. Groundwater Quality Assessment

MCD conducts routine groundwater sampling to assess the quality of water within the buried valley aquifer. Groundwater samples are analyzed for trace metals, major ions, nutrients, semi- volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

During 2011, eight municipal supply wells were sampled in the Great Miami River Watershed (see Figure 19).

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 37

Figure 19 – 2011 Groundwater Sampling Locations

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 38

E. Exceedances of National Drinking Water Standards

National Primary Drinking Water Regulations are legally enforceable standards by the U.S. EPA that apply to public water systems. Primary standards protect public health by limiting the contaminant levels in drinking water. National Secondary Drinking Water Standards are advisable guidelines addressing contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste, odor, or color) in drinking water. The U.S. EPA recommends, but does not require, that water systems incorporate secondary standards.

One of the sampled wells was found to have a concentration of arsenic that exceeded the Primary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for drinking water set by U.S. EPA. Groundwater samples from seven wells were also found to exceed a secondary MCL for one or more of the analytical parameters listed in Table 5. See Appendix I, Groundwater Sampling Results for all analytical results.

Table 5 – Detections reported at or above MCLs

Primary MCL Exceedances Parameter U.S. EPA MCL, mg/L Times Exceeded Arsenic 0.01 1 Secondary MCL Exceedances Parameter U.S. EPA MCL, mg/L Times Exceeded Iron 0.3 4 Manganese 0.05 4

Total Dissolved Solids 500 4 Sulfate 250 1 Note: mg/L = milligrams per liter

F. Major Ions

The three most abundant ions found in the groundwater samples collected in 2011 by concentration are calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Calcium and Magnesium are the primary components of hardness. The range of groundwater hardness in samples was 238 to 565 milligrams per liter (mg/L) as calcium carbonate. Major ion chemistry is used as a general indicator of groundwater quality and helps identify regional differences and changes in water quality over time (St. Johns River Water Management District, 2006). Water with hardness concentrations exceeding 180 mg/L is considered to be very hard (AGWT, 2003). All of the groundwater samples analyzed in 2011 had hardness concentrations in the very hard range.

Other major ions present in the groundwater of the Great Miami River Watershed are flouride, chloride, and sulfate. Flouride was detected in six of the eight groundwater samples with a median concentration of 0.50 mg/L. None of the fluoride detections in the 2011 sampling event exceeded the primary or secondary MCL. The U.S. EPA has set both a primary and a secondary

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 39 drinking water standard for fluoride. The primary drinking water MCL for fluoride is 4.0 mg/L. The secondary MCL for fluoride is 2.0 mg/L to protect against dental flourosis. Chloride was detected in all eight groundwater samples, with a median concentration of 30.85 mg/L. Sulfate was also detected in all groundwater samples, at a median concentration of 48.7 mg/L. The secondary MCL for both chloride and sulfate is 250 mg/L— multiple times the median amounts detected in the samples. There was one detection of sulfate above the secondary MCL. G. Nutrients

The different forms of nitrogen and phosphorus are referred to collectively as nutrients. In 2011, six of the eight groundwater samples contained nitrogen concentrations as nitrate plus nitrite above the detection limit of 0.02 mg/L. The highest nitrate plus nitrite nitrogen detection in a sample was 2.75 mg/L. This is below U.S. EPA’s MCL of 10.0 mg/L. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen was present at detectable concentrations in five out of the eight groundwater samples. Total phosphorus was detected in one of the eight groundwater samples at 0.127 mg/L. There was no detection of orthophosphate in groundwater samples. H. Trace Metals

Trace metals frequently detected during the 2011 study include arsenic, barium, boron, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, molybdenum, strontium, and zinc.

Arsenic was present at detectable levels in three of the eight groundwater samples collected. The highest detected concentration was 23.1 µg/L, which is more than twice the U.S. EPA primary MCL of 10.0 µg/L. Arsenic is known to occur naturally in the aquifers of the Great Miami River Watershed. It originates from the rocks and minerals that are present in the aquifer material itself. The presence of iron oxides and the redox conditions present in the aquifer tend to be two of the controlling factors in determining the presence of arsenic in groundwater (Thomas, 2007).

Tested for but not detected in any of the groundwater samples are: aluminum, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium. I. Semi-volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)

One well was tested for SVOC compounds in 2011. No SVOC compounds were detected in the groundwater sample.

J. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

Groundwater samples were collected from two wells for analysis of VOC compounds in 2011. No VOC compounds were detected in either groundwater sample.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 40

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Record amounts of precipitation occurred in the Great Miami River Watershed during 2011. The record precipitation produced much above normal runoff in rivers and stream and groundwater recharge. Groundwater recharge in 2011 occurred in two large spring pulses and a late fall pulse. Groundwater elevations at most of the MCD observation wells in the buried valley aquifer started 2011 at below normal levels and rose to much above normal levels during the spring in response to a much wetter than normal spring. Groundwater elevations declined during the summer and early fall, but began to rise again in October as the fall of 2011 brought much above normal precipitation to the watershed. Groundwater elevations finished out the year at much above normal levels. The 2011 water budget for the Great Miami River Watershed shows net storage of water in the aquifers and soils of the watershed from the beginning to the end of the year.

The nutrients phosphorus and nitrogen are present in surface waters at concentrations that are indicative of nutrient enrichment.

Emerging contaminants associated with wastewater from home sewage treatment systems and municipal wastewater treatment plants were detected at very low concentrations in streams and aquifers throughout the Great Miami River Watershed. Twenty one emerging contaminant compounds were analyzed and seventeen were detected in one or more water samples. The concentrations of emerging contaminants in the buried valley aquifer system do not appear to pose a significant health risk to local drinking water supplies that use drinking water as their source water.

In a previous study, MCD determined that the fecal indicator organism E. coli often exceeds OEPA Class A primary contact recreation standards indicating that sources of fecal contaminants are impacting the Great Miami River and its tributaries (MCD, 2011). In 2011, MCD staff used Microbial Source Tracking (MST) techniques to identify the human component of the fecal indicator Bacteroidetes in water samples collected in the Great Miami River near Fairfield. These results suggest that human sources of fecal Bacteroidetes can be a significant contributor of fecal Bacteroidetes in the Great Miami River at certain times of the year.

Groundwater data collected in 2011 reinforces previously drawn conclusions that groundwater resources in most areas are of high quality and remain suitable for use as a source of drinking water. This assumption is based upon the low number of exceedances of primary drinking water standards. However, groundwater in the Great Miami River Watershed is generally very hard and often needs to be softened in order to improve the aesthetics of finished drinking water. Naturally occurring arsenic is frequently present at detectable concentrations in all major aquifers and concentrations above drinking water maximum contaminant levels are not uncommon. Private well owners are encouraged to test the water quality of their well on a periodic basis.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 41

REFERENCES

Alley, W.M., Reilly, T.E., and Franke O.L., 1999, Sustainability of ground-water resources. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186, 86 p.

American Groundwater Trust (2003). Solutions to Water Hardness Problems. The American Well Owner. 1. From URL: http://www.agwt.org/info/pdfs/hardwatersolutions.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.

Debrewer, L.M., Rowe, G.L., Reutter, D.C., Moore, R.C., Hambrook, J.A., & Baker, N.T. (2000). Environmental Setting and Effects on Water Quality in the Great and Little Miami River Basins, Ohio and Indiana. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 99-4201.

Dufour, A. P., 1977, Escherichia – the fecal coliform, in Hoadley, A., and Dutka, B.J., eds., Bacterial Iindicators/Health Hazards Associated with Water: American Society for Testing and Materials, STP 635, p. 48-58.

Environmental Literacy Council. (2008). Phosphorus Cycle. From URL: http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/480.html. Accessed July 6, 2009.

Helsel, D.R., and Hirsch, R.M. (1992). Statistical Methods in Water Resources. Amsterdam, Elsevier Publishers, 529 p.

Klaer, F.H., Jr., & Thompson, D.G. (1948). Ground-water Resources of the Cincinnati Area, Butler and Hamilton Counties, Ohio. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 999.

Miami Conservancy District (2001). State of the Aquifer, Lower Great Miami Sub-basin. Report 01-01.

Miami Conservancy District (2002). State of the Upper Great Miami Subwatershed. Report 02- 08A.

Miami Conservancy District (2011a). Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCPs) in the Streams and Aquifers of the Great Miami River Basin, Report 2011-18.

Miami Conservancy District (2011b). Bacterial Indicators of Pathogens in the Great Miami River Watershed, Southwest Ohio. Report 2011-05.

Miami Conservancy Disrict (2012). Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations and Loads in the Great Miami River Watershed, Ohio 2005 – 2011, Report 2011-43.

Noble, R.T., Griffith, J.F., Blackwood, A.D., Furhman, J.A., Gregory, J.B., Hernandez, X., Liang, X., Bera, A.A., and Schiff, K. (2005). Multitiered Approach Using Quantitative

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 42

PCR to Track Sources of Fecal Pollution Affecting Santa Monica Bay, California. Applied Environmental Microbiology 2006 February; 72(2): 1604.

Norris, S.E., & Spieker, A.M. (1966). Ground-water Resources of the Dayton Area, Ohio. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1808.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources (1999). Ground Water Investigation Report. In the Vicinity of Trenton, Ohio Butler County, St. Clair Township Technical Report of Investigation 99-2.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (2001). Biological and Water Quality Study of the Stillwater River Watershed: OEPA Technical Report Number MAS/2001-12-8.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Biological and Water Quality Study of Twin Creek and select tributaries, 2005: OEPA Technical Report EAS/2007-10-03.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (2008). Total Maximum Daily Load Program. From http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/tmdl/index.html. Accessed July 6, 2009.

Reutter, D. C. (2003). Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Streams of the Great Miami River Basin, Ohio, 1998-2000. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 02- 4297.

Richards, R.P. (1998). Estimation of Pollutant Loads in Rivers and Streams: A guidance document for NPS programs. Project report prepared under Grant X998397-01-0, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, Denver. 108 p.

Rutledge, A.T. (1998). Computer Programs for Describing the Recession of Ground-Water Discharge and for Estimating Mean Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge from Streamflow Data – Update. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4148.

______(2000). Considerations for use of the RORA Program to Estimate Groundwater Recharge from Streamflow Records. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-156.

Rowe, G.L., Shapiro, S.D., and Schlosser, P. (1999). Use of environmental tracers to evaluate ground-water age and water-quality trends in a buried valley aquifer, Dayton area, southwestern Ohio. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 99- 4113.

Shaffer, K.H., & Runkle, D.L. (2007). Consumptive Water-Use Coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin and Climatically Similar Areas. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5197.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 43

Sheets, R.A., and Bossenbroek, K.E. (2005). Ground-Water Flow Directions and Estimation of Aquifer Hydraulic Properties in the Lower Great Miami River Buried Valley Aquifer System, Hamilton area, Ohio. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5013.

Spieker, A.M. (1968). Ground-water Hydrology and Geology of the Lower Great Miami River Valley, Ohio. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 605-A.

St. Johns River Water Management District (2006). Spring Water Quality. From URL: http://sjr.state.fl.us/springs/waterquality.html. Accessed July 6, 2009.

Seurinck, S., Defoirdt, T., Verstraete, W., and Sciliano, S. D. (2005). Detection and Quantification of the Human-Specific HF183 Bacteroidetes 16S rRNA Genetic Marker with Real-Time PCR for Assessment of Human Fecal Pollution in Freshwater. Environmental Micobiology 2005 7:2 p. 249.

Thomas, M.A. (2007). The Association of Arsenic with Redox Conditions, Depth, and Ground- Water Age in the Glacial Aquifer System of the Northern United States. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007- 5036.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (2000). Ambient Water Quality Criteria Recommendations, Information Supporting the Development of State and Tribal Nutrient Criteria, Rivers and Streams in Nutrient Ecoregion VI. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Report 822-B-00-017.

U. S. Geological Survey (1999). Subunit Survey and Supply Well Survey Data. From URL: http://oh.water.usgs.gov/miam/gwq_data.html. Accessed October 20, 2009.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 44

Appendix A - Precipitation Data

YEARS MEAN OF 2011 STATION OF DEPARTURE RECORD** TOTAL RECORD* Alcony 31 39.45 59.05 19.60 Arcanum 52 39.70 56.43 16.73 Beechwood 39 40.51 62.15 21.64 Bellefontaine 39 40.46 62.20 21.74 Brookville 41 39.17 60.97 21.80 Centerville 48 41.97 63.54 21.57 Collinsville 41 41.09 55.19 14.10 Covington 55 38.75 58.14 19.39 Dayton 129 38.26 60.86 22.60 De Graff 50 38.16 56.24 18.08 Eaton 92 40.21 56.57 16.36 Englewood Dam 85 38.63 61.73 23.10 Ft. Loramie 91 35.87 51.79 15.92 Franklin 82 39.72 66.72 27.00 Germantown Dam 90 39.12 59.33 20.21 Greenville 107 37.92 51.95 14.03 Hamilton 94 40.22 64.02 23.80 Huffman Dam 80 38.79 61.81 23.02 Ingomar 77 39.20 59.95 20.75 Lakeview 86 36.90 56.18 19.28 Lockington Dam 91 36.85 57.72 20.87 Miamisburg 87 40.84 63.58 22.74 Middletown 88 40.15 61.90 21.75 New Carlisle 87 38.93 60.34 21.41 Oxford 81 39.92 59.85 19.93 Piqua 97 39.12 56.33 17.21 Pleasant Hill 91 36.98 56.72 19.74 St. Paris 75 39.96 56.91 16.95 Sidney 113 38.14 56.33 18.19 Springboro, South 34 40.62 61.62 21.00 Springfield North 46 40.68 60.20 19.52 Springfield, WPC 101 39.09 58.72 19.63 Taylorsville Dam 86 39.72 63.92 24.20 Tipp City 88 38.38 57.60 19.22 Troy 80 36.86 57.12 20.26 Union City 43 37.24 51.58 14.34 Urbana 130 39.14 57.16 18.02 Versailles 93 37.99 53.91 15.92

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 45

West Carrollton 48 40.85 60.81 19.96 West Liberty 49 38.05 62.56 24.51 West Manchester 83 39.69 60.02 20.33 West Milton 75 36.91 53.68 16.77 Average for Watershed 39.05 58.89 19.84

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 46

Appendix B - Summary of Precipitation, Runoff, & Base Flow Data

2011 2011 Mean Mean Mean Baseflow USGS Drainage Time Precip 2011Runoff 2011 Surface Baseflow Runoff Surface Baseflow Index Station Name ID Area Period (in) (in) Runoff (in) (in) (in) Runoff (in) (in) (%)

Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff 3260706 40.4 1992 - 2011 56.24 29.56 11.36 18.20 17.51 5.75 11.76 67 Loramie Creek near Newport 3261950 152.0 1965 - 2011 58.14 28.16 21.43 6.73 13.25 9.75 3.50 26 Great Miami River at Sidney 3261500 541.0 1927 - 2011 56.33 29.85 15.35 14.50 12.88 6.69 6.19 48 Greenville Creek near Bradford 3264000 193.0 1931 - 2011 51.95 25.88 13.60 12.28 13.25 6.31 6.94 52 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill 3265000 503.0 1935 - 2011 56.72 25.43 17.53 7.90 12.65 7.62 5.03 40 Mad River near Urbana 3267000 162.0 1940 - 2011 57.16 25.45 5.97 19.48 13.33 2.48 10.85 81 Mad River at Eagle City 3267900 310.0 1966 - 2011 60.20 29.06 9.40 19.66 14.83 3.52 11.31 76 Mad River near Springfield 3269500 490 1915 - 2011 58.72 26.11 8.61 17.50 14.29 3.92 10.37 73 Wolf Creek at Dayton 3271000 68.7 1939 - 2011 60.86 28.35 18.70 9.65 13.89 8.02 5.87 42 Holes Creek near Kettering 3271300 18.7 1998 - 2011 60.81 36.12 28.70 7.42 21.27 15.28 5.99 28 Twin Creek near Germantown 3272000 275.0 1927 - 2011 59.33 28.67 19.52 9.15 13.81 8.22 5.59 40 Sevenmile Creek at Camden 3272700 69.0 1971 - 2011 60.81 28.60 18.49 10.11 15.32 8.32 7.00 46 Great Miami River at Hamilton 3274000 3630.0 1928 - 2011 64.02 29.83 17.25 12.58 13.22 6.33 6.89 52 www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 47

Appendix C - Calculated Groundwater Recharge Data

Period of Period of Record Mean Station Name USGS ID Drainage Area (mi2) Record 2011 GW Recharge (in) Annual Recharge (in) Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff 3260706 40.4 1992 - 2011 21.18 12.72 Loramie Creek near Newport 3261950 152.0 1965 - 2011 10.75 7.35 Great Miami River at Sidney 3261500 541.0 1927 - 2011 19.72 7.91 Greenville Creek near Bradford 3264000 193.0 1931 - 2011 14.70 8.19 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill 3265000 503.0 1935 - 2011 10.81 6.24 Mad River near Urbana 3267000 162.0 1940 - 2011 24.03 11.96 Mad River at Eagle City 3267900 310.0 1966 - 2011 23.48 12.64 Mad River near Springfield 3269500 490.0 1915 - 2011 21.43 11.48 Wolf Creek at Dayton 3271000 68.7 1939 - 2011 11.89 6.47 Holes Creek near Kettering 3271300 18.7 1998 - 2011 10.42 7.25 Twin Creek near Germantown 3272000 275.0 1927 - 2011 10.27 6.29 Sevenmile Creek at Camden 3272700 69.0 1971 - 2011 13.06 8.40

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 48

Appendix D - Groundwater Observation Well Hydrographs

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 49

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 50

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 51

This well is measured monthly by grab samples using the tapedown method, so there is not a continuous collection of data as at the other well locations reported in this Appendix.

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 52

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 53

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 54

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 55

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 56

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 57

Appendix E - Statistical Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations

Stillwater River (at Englewood, Ohio)

Concentrations (mg/L)

Number of Number of 25th 75th Constituent Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 156 75 0.05 0.12 0.20 0.18 0.20 1.62 Nitrite 156 23 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.16 Nitrate 156 154 0.10 0.98 3.64 3.76 5.63 10.70 Orthophosphate 156 89 0.04 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.38 Total Phosphorus 156 156 0.05 0.09 0.14 0.18 0.21 0.59 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 156 109 0.25 0.50 0.59 1.16 1.32 14.10

Upper Great Miami (north of Dayton, Ohio)

Concentrations (mg/L)

Number of Number of 25th 75th Constituent Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 153 153 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.61 Nitrate + Nitrite 153 153 0.31 1.27 2.41 2.88 3.90 8.38 Orthophosphate 153 153 0.06 0.10 0.15 0.19 0.24 2.70 Total Phosphorus 153 153 0.04 0.15 0.21 0.27 0.30 5.90 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 153 153 0.07 0.64 0.80 0.93 1.05 11.00

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 58

Mad River (at Fairborn, Ohio)

Concentrations (mg/L)

Number of Number of 25th 75th Constituent Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 69 36 0.05 0.09 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.98 Nitrite 69 9 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Nitrate 69 69 1.25 2.21 2.56 2.48 2.75 3.30 Orthophosphate 69 64 0.08 0.11 0.14 0.17 0.18 1.96 Total Phosphorus 69 69 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.33 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 69 24 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.53 0.50 2.12

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 59

Appendix F - Statistical Summary of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations

Stillwater River (at Englewood, Ohio) Concentration (mg/L) Number of Number of 25th 75th Parameter Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 145 106 0.05 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.20 2.74 Nitrate + Nitrite 139 139 0.45 1.68 3.28 3.40 4.69 12.10 Soluble Reactive Phosphorus 142 97 0.03 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.44 Total Phosphorus 145 145 0.03 0.10 0.14 0.19 0.24 0.88 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 145 130 0.15 0.50 0.76 0.94 1.21 3.35 Total Nitrogen 139 139 1.31 2.90 4.23 4.55 5.74 14.34

Upper Great Miami River (at Huber Heights, Ohio) Concentration (mg/L) Number of Number of 25th 75th Parameter Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 143 143 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.36 Nitrate + Nitrite 140 140 0.05 1.27 2.56 2.72 3.77 8.20 Soluble Reactive Phosphorus 134 134 0.02 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.39 Total Phosphorus 143 143 0.02 0.13 0.16 0.23 0.23 1.90 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 143 143 0.37 0.62 0.85 0.97 1.18 5.36 Total Nitrogen 140 140 0.50 2.23 3.54 3.76 4.66 9.43

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 60

Mad River (near Dayton, Ohio) Concentration (mg/L) Number of Number of 25th 75th Parameter Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 141 42 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.60 Nitrate + Nitrite 141 141 1.03 2.20 2.50 2.48 2.70 5.19 Soluble Reactive Phosphorus 141 111 0.04 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.50 Total Phosphorus 141 141 0.09 0.12 0.15 0.19 0.21 0.75 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 141 108 0.15 0.38 0.50 0.70 0.85 3.93 Total Nitrogen 141 141 2.27 2.96 3.26 3.37 3.53 7.76

Great Miami River (near Fairfield, Ohio) Concentration (mg/L) Number of Number of 25th 75th Parameter Samples Detections Minimum Percentile Median Mean Percentile Maximum Ammonia 146 46 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.23 0.20 3.31 Nitrate + Nitrite 145 141 0.10 2.07 2.74 2.90 3.53 7.68 Soluble Reactive Phosphorus 145 131 0.04 0.10 0.15 0.16 0.19 0.77 Total Phosphorus 146 146 0.09 0.20 0.26 0.30 0.36 0.80 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 146 137 0.15 0.66 0.99 1.18 1.57 3.50 Total Nitrogen 145 145 1.94 3.40 3.91 4.31 4.79 9.68

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 61

Appendix G - Phosphorus Concentrations and Discharge Values

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 62

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 63

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 64

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 65

Appendix H – Emerging Contaminant Results

Date BisPhenol A UNID Sampling Location Units Sampled Class Acetaminophen Atenolol (BPA) Butalbital MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg A ng/L 5/11/2011 Duplicate 7.9 19.0 <10 <5 BUT50020 Fairfield Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Effluent 3.3 470.0 15.0 15.0 MON50011 Miamisburg Effluent ng/L 5/11/2011 Effluent 8.9 280.0 <10 6.8 BUT50015 Hamilton Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Eflluent 230.0 290.0 26.0 13.0 MCD1000 ng/L 5/11/2011 Field Blank <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50007 FP1B ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50008 HSC-1S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50009 HSC-1D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50010 HSC-2S ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50011 HSC-2D ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50012 HSC-4D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 BUT50013 HSC-4S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <10 <5 MON10009 Miamisburg Production Well #8 ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <1 <5 <10 <5 Warren County Production Well ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <1 <5 <10 <5 WAR10008 #5 BUT50006 GMR at Bolton WTP ng/L 4/12/2011 River 82.0 11.0 <10 <5 BUT50014 GMR at Hamilton Low Dam ng/L 4/14/2011 River 15.0 14.0 12.0 <5 BUT50016 Fairfield WWTP ng/L 4/14/2011 River 20.0 18.0 19.0 <5 BUT50017 GMR at Wayne Madison Bridge ng/L 4/14/2011 River 14.0 18.0 17.0 <5 BUT50018 GMR at Middletown Boat Ramp ng/L 4/14/2011 River 26.0 14.0 12.0 <5 CHA50002 Mad River at Urbana ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 <5 <10 <5 GRE50003 Mad River at Huffman Dam ng/L 5/11/2011 River 55.0 <5 <10 <5 MIA50011 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill ng/L 4/13/2011 River 13.0 <5 <10 <5 MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg ng/L 5/11/2011 River 7.2 20.0 <10 <5 Stillwater River at Englewood ng/L 4/13/2011 River 12.0 <5 <10 <5 MON50004 Dam MON50005 GMR at Huber Hts ng/L 4/13/2011 River 9.7 8.8 <10 <5 MON50006 GMR at Dryden Road ng/L 5/11/2011 River 12.0 11.0 <10 <5

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 66

MON50007 GMR at West Carrollton ng/L 5/11/2011 River 7.1 31.0 <10 <5 MON50009 GMR at Miamisburg Boat Ramp ng/L 5/11/2011 River 7.6 15.0 <10 <5 SHE50004 GMR at Sidney ng/L 4/13/2011 River 7.3 <5 <10 <5 Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 8.0 <5 <10 <5 BUT50019 Gregory Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <1 <5 <10 <5 CHA50001 Kings Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 15.0 5.7 <10 <5 CHA50003 Nettle Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 2.7 7.6 <10 <5 LOG50003 Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff Stream Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <1 <5 <10 <5 MON50008 Holes Creek Stream

Date UNID Sampling Location Units Sampled Class Carbamazepine Cotinine Diazepam Estradiol MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg A ng/L 5/11/2011 Duplicate <5 7.2 <1 <1 BUT50020 Fairfield Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Effluent 90.0 37.0 1.7 <1 MON50011 Miamisburg Effluent ng/L 5/11/2011 Effluent 98.0 31.0 <1 <1 BUT50015 Hamilton Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Eflluent 55.0 39.0 2.3 <1 MCD1000 ng/L 5/11/2011 Field Blank <5 <1 <1 <1 BUT50007 FP1B ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well 21.0 <1 <1 <1 BUT50008 HSC-1S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <1 <1 <1 BUT50009 HSC-1D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <1 <1 <1 BUT50010 HSC-2S ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <1 <1 <1 BUT50011 HSC-2D ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <1 <1 <1 BUT50012 HSC-4D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well 6.0 <1 <1 <1 BUT50013 HSC-4S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <1 <1 <1 MON10009 Miamisburg Production Well #8 ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well 11.0 <1 <1 <1 Warren County Production Well ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <5 <1 <1 <1 WAR10008 #5 BUT50006 GMR at Bolton WTP ng/L 4/12/2011 River 5.4 9.1 <1 <1 BUT50014 GMR at Hamilton Low Dam ng/L 4/14/2011 River 5.7 9.2 <1 <1 BUT50016 Fairfield WWTP ng/L 4/14/2011 River 5.7 8.1 <1 <1 BUT50017 GMR at Wayne Madison Bridge ng/L 4/14/2011 River 7.1 8.7 <1 <1

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 67

BUT50018 GMR at Middletown Boat Ramp ng/L 4/14/2011 River 7.0 8.5 <1 <1 CHA50002 Mad River at Urbana ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <1 <1 <1 GRE50003 Mad River at Huffman Dam ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 15.0 <1 <1 MIA50011 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 5.7 <1 <1 MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 7.4 <1 <1 Stillwater River at Englewood ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 5.9 <1 <1 MON50004 Dam MON50005 GMR at Huber Hts ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 9.5 <1 <1 MON50006 GMR at Dryden Road ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 5.6 <1 <1 MON50007 GMR at West Carrollton ng/L 5/11/2011 River 7.1 8.2 <1 <1 MON50009 GMR at Miamisburg Boat Ramp ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 6.0 <1 <1 SHE50004 GMR at Sidney ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 3.7 <1 <1 Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <5 6.4 <1 <1 BUT50019 Gregory Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <5 <1 <1 <1 CHA50001 Kings Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <5 5.2 <1 <1 CHA50003 Nettle Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 9.7 2.5 <1 <1 LOG50003 Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff Stream Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <5 3.9 <1 <1 MON50008 Holes Creek Stream

17 alpha- Date Ethinyl UNID Sampling Location Units Sampled Class Estradiol Fluoxetine Gemfibrozil Ibuprofen MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg A ng/L 5/11/2011 Duplicate <5 <5 16.0 8.5 BUT50020 Fairfield Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Effluent <5 18.0 830.0 28.0 MON50011 Miamisburg Effluent ng/L 5/11/2011 Effluent <5 14.0 3.5 12.0 BUT50015 Hamilton Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Eflluent <5 11.0 270.0 250.0 MCD1000 ng/L 5/11/2011 Field Blank <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50007 FP1B ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50008 HSC-1S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50009 HSC-1D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50010 HSC-2S ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50011 HSC-2D ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 68

BUT50012 HSC-4D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 BUT50013 HSC-4S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <5 <5 <1 <1 MON10009 Miamisburg Production Well #8 ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <5 <5 <1 <1 Warren County Production Well ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <5 <5 <1 <1 WAR10008 #5 BUT50006 GMR at Bolton WTP ng/L 4/12/2011 River <5 <5 19.0 19.0 BUT50014 GMR at Hamilton Low Dam ng/L 4/14/2011 River <5 <5 25.0 16.0 BUT50016 Fairfield WWTP ng/L 4/14/2011 River <5 <5 25.0 16.0 BUT50017 GMR at Wayne Madison Bridge ng/L 4/14/2011 River <5 <5 30.0 19.0 BUT50018 GMR at Middletown Boat Ramp ng/L 4/14/2011 River <5 <5 23.0 18.0 CHA50002 Mad River at Urbana ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <5 <1 <1 GRE50003 Mad River at Huffman Dam ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 <5 5.4 9.4 MIA50011 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <5 3.1 7.4 MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 <5 16.0 8.4 Stillwater River at Englewood ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <5 5.9 14.0 MON50004 Dam MON50005 GMR at Huber Hts ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <5 20.0 13.0 MON50006 GMR at Dryden Road ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 <5 9.9 4.2 MON50007 GMR at West Carrollton ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 <5 11.0 11.0 MON50009 GMR at Miamisburg Boat Ramp ng/L 5/11/2011 River <5 <5 14.0 5.5 SHE50004 GMR at Sidney ng/L 4/13/2011 River <5 <5 1.3 <1 Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <5 <5 <1 11.0 BUT50019 Gregory Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <5 <5 <1 <1 CHA50001 Kings Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <5 <5 12.0 11.0 CHA50003 Nettle Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <5 <5 1.4 <1 LOG50003 Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff Stream Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <5 <5 <1 <1 MON50008 Holes Creek Stream

Date Perfluorooctane UNID Sampling Location Units Sampled Class lopromide Sulfonate-PFOS Progesterone Sulfamethoxazole MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg A ng/L 5/11/2011 Duplicate <10 5.4 <1 33.0 BUT50020 Fairfield Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Effluent <10 10.0 <1 310.0

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 69

MON50011 Miamisburg Effluent ng/L 5/11/2011 Effluent <10 4.1 <1 350.0 BUT50015 Hamilton Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Eflluent 13.0 2.1 <1 520.0 MCD1000 ng/L 5/11/2011 Field Blank <10 <0.2 <1 <1 BUT50007 FP1B ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <10 1.1 <1 21.0 BUT50008 HSC-1S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <10 1.6 <1 6.3 BUT50009 HSC-1D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <10 <0.2 <1 <1 BUT50010 HSC-2S ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <10 <0.2 <1 <1 BUT50011 HSC-2D ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <10 <0.2 <1 1.3 BUT50012 HSC-4D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <10 2.4 <1 4.0 BUT50013 HSC-4S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <10 26.0 <1 9.0 MON10009 Miamisburg Production Well #8 ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <10 7.9 <1 59.0 Warren County Production Well ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <10 <0.2 <1 6.9 WAR10008 #5 BUT50006 GMR at Bolton WTP ng/L 4/12/2011 River <10 8.7 <1 45.0 BUT50014 GMR at Hamilton Low Dam ng/L 4/14/2011 River <10 2.3 <1 52.0 BUT50016 Fairfield WWTP ng/L 4/14/2011 River <10 2.5 <1 53.0 BUT50017 GMR at Wayne Madison Bridge ng/L 4/14/2011 River <10 39.0 <1 60.0 BUT50018 GMR at Middletown Boat Ramp ng/L 4/14/2011 River <10 10.0 <1 52.0 CHA50002 Mad River at Urbana ng/L 4/13/2011 River <10 <0.2 <1 5.0 GRE50003 Mad River at Huffman Dam ng/L 5/11/2011 River <10 6.9 <1 13.0 MIA50011 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill ng/L 4/13/2011 River <10 4.3 <1 17.0 MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg ng/L 5/11/2011 River <10 4.3 <1 34.0 Stillwater River at Englewood ng/L 4/13/2011 River <10 1.0 <1 19.0 MON50004 Dam MON50005 GMR at Huber Hts ng/L 4/13/2011 River <10 4.0 <1 33.0 MON50006 GMR at Dryden Road ng/L 5/11/2011 River <10 4.4 <1 28.0 MON50007 GMR at West Carrollton ng/L 5/11/2011 River <10 6.5 <1 26.0 MON50009 GMR at Miamisburg Boat Ramp ng/L 5/11/2011 River <10 8.4 <1 29.0 SHE50004 GMR at Sidney ng/L 4/13/2011 River <10 1.1 <1 11.0 Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <10 8.7 <1 <1 BUT50019 Gregory Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <10 <0.2 <1 <1 CHA50001 Kings Creek Stream

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 70

Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <10 0.7 <1 24.0 CHA50003 Nettle Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <10 0.4 <1 54.0 LOG50003 Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff Stream Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <10 1.2 <1 1.5 MON50008 Holes Creek Stream

Date UNID Sampling Location Units Sampled Class Testosterone Triclosan Trimethoprim MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg A ng/L 5/11/2011 Duplicate <1 <5 7.1 BUT50020 Fairfield Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Effluent <1 110.0 210.0 MON50011 Miamisburg Effluent ng/L 5/11/2011 Effluent <1 8.9 140.0 BUT50015 Hamilton Outfall ng/L 4/14/2011 Eflluent <1 52.0 190.0 MCD1000 ng/L 5/11/2011 Field Blank <1 <5 <1 BUT50007 FP1B ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50008 HSC-1S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50009 HSC-1D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50010 HSC-2S ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50011 HSC-2D ng/L 4/14/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50012 HSC-4D ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 BUT50013 HSC-4S ng/L 4/12/2011 Monitoring Well <1 <5 <1 MON10009 Miamisburg Production Well #8 ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <1 <5 <1 Warren County Production Well ng/L 5/11/2011 Production Well <1 <5 <1 WAR10008 #5 BUT50006 GMR at Bolton WTP ng/L 4/12/2011 River <1 7.3 8.9 BUT50014 GMR at Hamilton Low Dam ng/L 4/14/2011 River <1 6.4 13.0 BUT50016 Fairfield WWTP ng/L 4/14/2011 River <1 5.3 9.8 BUT50017 GMR at Wayne Madison Bridge ng/L 4/14/2011 River <1 <5 12.0 BUT50018 GMR at Middletown Boat Ramp ng/L 4/14/2011 River <1 <5 9.3 CHA50002 Mad River at Urbana ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 <5 <1 GRE50003 Mad River at Huffman Dam ng/L 5/11/2011 River <1 6.0 2.1 MIA50011 Stillwater River at Pleasant Hill ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 <5 <1 MON50010 GMR Below Miamisburg ng/L 5/11/2011 River <1 <5 7.1 MON50004 Stillwater River at Englewood ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 <5 1.7

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 71

Dam

MON50005 GMR at Huber Hts ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 5.6 5.9 MON50006 GMR at Dryden Road ng/L 5/11/2011 River <1 5.7 4.9 MON50007 GMR at West Carrollton ng/L 5/11/2011 River <1 6.6 3.8 MON50009 GMR at Miamisburg Boat Ramp ng/L 5/11/2011 River <1 9.1 4.6 SHE50004 GMR at Sidney ng/L 4/13/2011 River <1 <5 <1 Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <1 <5 <1 BUT50019 Gregory Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <1 <5 <1 CHA50001 Kings Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <1 11.0 3.6 CHA50003 Nettle Creek Stream Headwater ng/L 4/13/2011 <1 <5 <1 LOG50003 Bokengahalas Creek at DeGraff Stream Headwater ng/L 4/14/2011 <1 <5 <1 MON50008 Holes Creek Stream

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 72

Appendix I – Groundwater Sampling Results

BUT10018 DAR10001 DAR10003 MIA10002 MIA10003 MIA10008 MON10001 MON10003 Inorganic Constituents Units MCL Aluminum ug/L <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 Ammonia, Undistilled as N mg/L 0.082 0.498 0.14 <0.0500 <0.0500 1.75 0.065 1.66 Arsenic ug/L 10 <2.00 9.37 <2.00 <2.00 <1.00 23.1 <2.00 6.36 Barium ug/L 2000 112 117 91.5 103 121 505 217 128 Beryllium ug/L 4 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 Boron ug/L 101 87.5 58.3 54.4 <50.0 70.9 <50.0 204 Cadmium ug/L 5 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 Calcium ug/L 72600 88200 104000 80100 98000 89000 100000 96900 Chloride mg/L 250 96.8 7.69 47.6 24.6 35.7 17.5 94.6 26 Chromium ug/L 100 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 Cobalt ug/L 0.628 <0.200 <0.200 0.264 <0.200 <0.200 0.301 0.226 Copper ug/L 1000 3.01 <1.00 1.48 2.47 52.9 8.98 1.79 <1.00 Fluoride, Undistilled mg/L 4 <0.500 0.885 0.293 0.232 0.195 0.93 <0.500 1.56 Hardness as CaCO3 mg/L 278 382 379 308 400 386 393 394 Iron ug/L 300 <100 1320 1110 <100 <100 5430 114 2540 Lead ug/L 15 <0.200 1.37 <0.200 0.282 0.782 0.539 1.21 <0.200 Lithium ug/L <10.0 10.1 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 Magnesium ug/L 23400 39300 29000 26300 37600 39800 34900 36900 Manganese ug/L 50 279 32.5 124 8.44 2.79 31.3 16.8 50.3 Molybdenum ug/L 6.27 17 4.26 2.59 2.35 10.7 2.19 26 Nickel ug/L <4.00 <2.00 <3.00 <7.00 <3.00 <2.50 <4.00 <4.00 Nitrate/Nitrite as N mg/L 10 1.95 <0.0200 0.0684 2.75 1.91 <0.0200 0.361 0.0567 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 1.13 1.62 1.05 <1.00 <1.00 1.73 <1.00 2.04 Phosphate, ortho as PO4 mg/L <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 <0.307 Phosphorus, Total as P mg/L <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 0.127 <0.100 <0.100 Potassium ug/L 4420 1760 2450 1740 2080 1590 2430 2070 Selenium ug/L 50 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <4.00 <2.50 <2.00 <2.00 Silica (SiO2) ug/L 7230 18400 9300 9130 11200 15000 9840 13500 Silver ug/L 100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 Sodium ug/L BU 65300 18600 22800 11600 17900 19300 49300 59800

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 73

Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 500 469 392 493 358 1660 846 544 737 Strontium ug/L 464 3780 358 841 509 3100 355 17900 Sulfate as SO4 mg/L 250 49.9 55.4 84.8 42 47.5 45.3 41.7 253 Thallium ug/L 2 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 <0.200 Total Alkalinity mg/L 232 316 290 248 306 366 330 282 Vanadium ug/L <4.00 <1.00 <4.00 <4.00 <4.00 <4.00 <4.00 <4.00 Zinc ug/L 5000 <6.00 13.7 15.4 <7.00 10.3 63.1 13 <10.0 Organic Constituents Units Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/L <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 Total Organic Carbon mg/L 1.38 1.38 2 0.7 0.7 1.58 0.79 1.43 VOCs Units 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/L 200 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1-Dichloroethane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1-Dichloroethene ug/L 7 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,1-Dichloropropene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/L 70 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 600 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,2-Dichloroethane ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,2-Dichloropropane ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,3-Dichloropropane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 75 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 2,2-Dichloropropane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 2-Chlorotoluene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- 4-Chlorotoluene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Benzene ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Bromobenzene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Bromoform ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Bromomethane (Methyl bromide) ug/L ------<1.0 -- <1.0 -- -- Carbon tetrachloride ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Chlorobenzene ug/L 100 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Chlorodibromomethane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- --

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 74

Chloroethane ug/L ------<1.0 -- <1.0 -- -- Chloroform ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Chloromethane (Methyl chloride) ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L 100 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Dibromomethane ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Dichlorobromomethane ug/L ------<1.0 -- <1.0 -- -- Ethylbenzene ug/L 700 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- m,p-Xylene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Methyl tert-butyl ether ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Methylene chloride ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- o-Xylene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Styrene ug/L 100 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Tetrachloroethene ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Toluene ug/L 1000 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/L ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Trichloroethene ug/L 5 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Vinyl chloride ug/L 2 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- Xylenes, total ug/L 10000 ------<0.50 -- <0.50 -- -- SVOCs Units 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/L 70 ------<5.00 ------1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L ------<5.00 ------1,2-Diphenylhydrazine ug/L ------<5.00 ------1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/L ------<5.00 ------1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L ------<5.00 ------2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------2,4-Dichlorophenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------2,4-Dimethylphenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------2,4-Dinitrophenol ug/L ------<20.0 ------2,4-Dinitrotoluene ug/L ------<5.00 ------2,6-Dinitrotoluene ug/L ------<5.00 ------2-Chloronaphthalene ug/L ------<5.00 ------2-Chlorophenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------2-Nitrophenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine ug/L ------<50.0 ------

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 75

4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether ug/L ------<5.00 ------4-Chloro-3-methylphenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether ug/L ------<5.00 ------4-Nitrophenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------Acenaphthene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Acenaphthylene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Anthracene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Benzidine ug/L ------<50.0 ------Benzo (a) anthracene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Benzo (a) pyrene ug/L 0.2 ------<5.00 ------Benzo (b) fluoranthene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Benzo (g,h,i) perylene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Benzo (k) fluoranthene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Bis(2- chloroethoxy)methane ug/L ------<5.00 ------Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether ug/L ------<5.00 ------Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether ug/L ------<5.00 ------Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Butyl benzyl phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Chrysene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Dibenz (a,h) anthracene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Diethyl phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Dimethyl phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Di-n-butyl phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Di-n-octyl phthalate ug/L ------<5.00 ------Fluoranthene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Fluorene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Hexachlorobenzene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L ------<20.0 ------Hexachloroethane ug/L ------<5.00 ------Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Isophorone ug/L ------<5.00 ------Naphthalene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Nitrobenzene ug/L ------<5.00 ------

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

2011 Water Resources Report for the Great Miami River Watershed 76

N-Nitrosodimethylamine ug/L ------<5.00 ------N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine ug/L ------<5.00 ------N-Nitrosodiphenylamine ug/L ------<5.00 ------Pentachlorophenol ug/L 1 ------<10.0 ------Phenanthrene ug/L ------<5.00 ------Phenol ug/L ------<10.0 ------Pyrene ug/L ------<5.00 ------

Notes: -- = Sample was not analyzed for this parameter Lab Qualifier (1): U = undetected; D = detected; Result: ND = not detected (2) Secondary MCL for Iron in water is 0.3 mg/L (3) Secondary MCL for Manganese in water is 0.05 mg/L (4) Secondary MCL for Total Dissolved Solids in water is 500 mg/L (5) Secondary MCL for Fluoride is 2.0 mg/L

www.miamiconservancy.org/water/groundwater_evalu.asp

The Miami Conservancy District

38 E. Monument Avenue

Dayton, Ohio 45402

Phone: (937) 223-1271

Fax: (937) 223-4730 www.miamiconservancy.org