Assessment of Water Column d

collected in response to a fly a

release on the Delaware Rive

Delaware River Basin CommJohn R. Yagecic, P.E.June 19, 2006
Executive Summary

• Ash basin leak at PPL’s Martin’s Creek power plant Augu

2005 released ~100 million gallons of ash and water into tDelaware River;

• The States of PA & NJ requested that DRBC compile and 

water column data from agencies and PPL;

• The results of this effort are as follows:Arsenic

• Some apparent exceedance of PA human health arsenic 

immediately after the release in the vicinity of the release. exceedances are not observed upstream of the release.

• Apparent signature of release observable downstream bu

arsenic criteria.
Executive Summary (contin

Lead• Apparent exceedances of PA and NJ lead criter

immediately after release in the vicinity of the re

Aluminum• Some short term local exceedance of PA alumin

criteria from release, but background and high flaccount for most of the observed concentration.

Manganese• Manganese concentrations appear to be backgr

concentrations.
Executive Summary (contin

Copper• Short term copper exceedances of PA criteria at 

and downstream.

Selenium• Selenium concentrations appear to be backgrou

concentrations.

Mercury• Mercury data almost completely below reporting 
Brief Background

• Ash basin leak at PPL’s Martin’s Creek power plant 

23rd-27th, 2005 released ~100 million gallons of ash 

into the Delaware River;

• Agencies and PPL met at DRBC on November 3, 20

review data collected up to that point;

• DRBC agreed to compile and assess data from agen

PPL;

• Agencies and PPL agreed that DRBC and PPL shou

perform separate but parallel assessments;

• Agencies and PPL previewed DRBC draft assessme

March 2, 2006. Recommended expansion of the daminor changes.

• This Document:

– Results of DRBC’s assessment;– Narrowly focused on data – not an assessment of reg

issues.
Post-Release Water Column

Sampling Effort

Data received by DRBC as of 12/200

Organization

Samples

Collected

Sampling

Days Locations

P

PPL >1,700 84 16 

NJDEP 47 2 9 

PADEP 36 8 16 

NJWSA 21 21 1 

DRBC 9 2 4-5 

PWD 4 14 

USGS 2 2 1 

Total >1,819
Post-Release Sampling Eff

0

5,000

10,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,000

8/20/2005

8/22/2005

8/24/2005

8/26/2005

8/28/2005

8/30/2005

9/1/2005

9/3/2005

9/5/2005

9/7/2005

9/9/2005

9/11/2005

9/13/2005

9/15/2005

9/17/2005

9/19/2005

9/21/2005

9/23/2005

9/25/2005

9/27/2005

9/29/2005

10/1/2005

10/3/2005

10/5/2005

10/7/2005

10/9/2005

10/11/2005

10/13/2005

10/15/2005

10/17/2005

10/19/2005

10/21/2005

10/23/2005

10/25/2005

10/27/2005

10/29/2005

10/31/2005

11/2/2005

11/4/2005

11/6/2005

Date

Delaware River Flow at Belvidere (CFS)

Discharge (CFS)

DRBC NJDEP NJW

PADEP PPL PWD USGS

Release
Wide Range of Flows During Sam

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 

Percentage of Time Flow Exceeded

Flow at Trenton (CFS)

Flow at Trenton (CFS) High Flow Events Mean Flow August 26th to October 

Mean daily flow August 26th to 

7th, 2005.3,070 CFSExceeded 95.3% 

October 9, 200578,900 CFSExceeded 0.59% of time.

October 14, 200549,900Exceeded 2.29% of time.
Criteria at the time of relea

(some criteria have subsequently cha

Pennsylvania• Chapter 16. Water 

Quality Toxics Management Strategy –Statement of Policy;

• CCCs, CMCs, and 

Human Health Criteria.

• Governing (most 

stringent) PA criteria;

– Human Health for arsenic;– CCC for all others.

New Jersey• Surface Water Q

Standards N.J.A(June 2005);

• For the Delaware 

NJ defers to DRBcriteria where DRhave criteria;

• Where DRBC do

use FW2-NT critnon-saline water
88%

75%

50%

13%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Arsenic Total

Lead Total

Aluminum Total

Manganese Total ‡

Copper Total

Barium Total

Beryllium Total

Chromium Total

Cobalt Total

Molybdenum Total

Nickel Total

Analytical Parameter

% of Results Exceeding Either a PA or NJ Criteria

Prioritization of Analytical Parame

*For prioritization only – not for regulatory purpose

To prioritize the comparison of results to applfirst compared samples with paired metals anthe computed criteria based on the sample spThis screening showed that arsenic, lead, alumanganese, and copper were potentially the interest. This screening did not differentiate b(estimated) results and un-flagged results. In screening did not consider the location (upstrof release) of the sample. Finally, only a smaincluded paired metals and hardness data. Athe parameters of interest using this screeninperformed a more comprehensive compariso

‡NJ Manganese criteria were not applicable 

manganese was retained as an indicator paraAt the request of the states, we also assesse
Hardness Ranges from Lowe

Delaware Existing Water Quality 

0

102030405060708090

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 

Miles Downstream from Fly Ash Release

Hardness (mg/L)

25th Percentile Median 75th Percentile

Where PA or NJ criteria were based on hardness, we computed criteria using hardness measurements from the Lower Delaware Monitoring Program for establishment of existing water quality. values were measured between 2000 and 2004. Over 430 hardmeasurements were made within the area of interest during thamonitoring period. Quartiles of hardness results are shown her
Spatial Grouping of Results

based on Arsenic and Aluminum Sam

0

100200300400500600700

-13.490

-3.640

-1.370

-0.800

-0.130

-0.100

-0.090

-0.020

0.030

0.100

0.200

5.130

5.180

8.900

8.970

9.100

10.380

10.900

19.210

19.400

26.500

29.900

36.860

37.200

37.700

38.800

45.470

45.500

56.800

57170

Miles Downstream From Release

No. of Samples Collected

No of Samples analyzed for Aluminum or Arsenic

Upstream Easton 

Near Downstream At Release

The data showed that metalconcentrations were changinin both space and time. To better isolate temporal changes, we broke the data sets into spatial groups baseon location and the number samples collected in each area.
Arsenic Results
Arsenic Concentrations Upstream of R

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations Measured Upstream of Release

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/2

Date and Time

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) Arsenic Total J-Flagged (ug/L) Arsenic Non-DetPA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ Arsenic Criteria (ug/L)

Most results upstream of the release were nonOf the quantified results, all were below the PA criteria, but all were above the NJ arsenic crite
Arsenic Concentrations at Rel

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations Measured in the immediate vicinity of the Re

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/2

Date and Time

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) Arsenic Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ Arse

In the immediate vicinity of the release, initial concentrations in excess of the PA arsenic criteria were observed, with concentrations falling below the PA criteria shortly after the release. All quantified concentrations exceeded the NJ arsenic criteria.
Arsenic Concentrations near Downst

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations Measured 0.1 to 0.2 miles

downstream from release

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) Arsenic Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ Arsenic Criteria (ug/L)

Arsenic Water Column Concen

Measured 5.13 to 5.18 miles downstre

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/200

Date and Time

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) ArsPA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ 

A comparison of time series arsenic measurements at two downstream ranges shows that most resultPA arsenic criteria, but all quantified results exceeded the NJ arsenic criteria. Both plots suggest resuarsenic during the mid-October storm events.
Arsenic Concentrations near Ea

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations Measured between RM 8 and 11 (Easton

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/2

Date and Time

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) Arsenic Total J-Flagged (ug/L) Arsenic Total NonPA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ Arsenic Criteria (ug/L)

Near Easton, all results were below the PA arsenic criteria, but all quantified exceeded the NJ arsenic criteria. Again, some apparent resuspension is obduring the mid-October storm events.
Arsenic Concentrations in Est

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations Measured in the Estuary

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

10/8/2005 10/9/2005 10/10/2005 10/11/2005 10/12/2005 10/13/2005 10/14/2005 10/15/2005 10/16/2005 1

Date

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total (ug/L) Arsenic Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Arsenic Criteria NJ Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) DRBC Arsenic Criteria (ug/L)

Some arsenic results were collected in the estuary during mid-October (note change in the X-axis). DRBC also has an arsenic criteria that applies to the estuary only. All results were below the PA and DRBC arsenic criteria, but aquantified results exceeded the NJ arsenic criteria. Since results were collemid-October only, no comparison can be made to the period immediately aftrelease.
Arsenic Concentrations by Dista

from Release, August 26, 200

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations on August 26, 2005

0.010.101.00

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 

Miles Downstream from Release

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

PPL PPL Non-Detects DRBC DRBC NoNJDEP NJWSA PADEP PADEP NPWD PA Arsenic Criteria NJ Arsenic Criteria

We plottecollected by river mgood agrresults coagenciesa decreaconcentrthe relea
Arsenic Concentrations by Dista

from Release, August 27, 200

Arsenic Water Column Concentrations on August 27, 2005

0.010.101.00

10.00

100.00

1,000.00

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 

Miles Downstream from Release

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

PPL NJDEP NJWSA USGS PA Arsenic Criteria NJ Arse

A similar day (Augsuggests arsenic cshifted doresults aarsenic cquantifiabthe NJ ar
Percentiles of Arsenic Measurem

Percentiles of Water Column Arsenic Measurements from 5 Location Ranges

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 

Percentiles

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Upstream At Release Near Downstream Near Estuary PA Arsenic Criteria (ug/L) NJ Arsenic Criteria (ug/L)
Comparison to Pre-Release Arsenic D

(1992-Present) found in NWIS and STO

Comparison of Pre- and Post-Release Arsenic Concentrations

0.1

1

10

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 

Miles Downstream from Release

Arsenic Total (ug/L)

Arsenic Total Post Release (ug/L) Arsenic Total Post-Release Non-DeteArsenic Total Trenton Range Pre-Release (ug/L) Arsenic Total Riegelsville Range Pre

36 Data Points

34 of which were Non-D

at concentrations ranging 

1 to 3 ug/L.

9 Data Points

8 of which were Non-Detect at 

1 ug/L.

Comparison of phistorical arsenic Riegelsville and Thigher concentrathe release.
Lead Results
Lead Concentrations Upstream of Re

Lead Water Column Concentrations Measured Upstream of Release

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/

Date and Time

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Lead Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) PA Lead Criteria (75th Percentile HaNJ Lead Criteria (ug/L)

Results from most lead samples of the release were non-detect. concentrations exceeded the PA lead criteria. Most results were criteria. In mid-September, PPL capacity of their contract analytchanged to a new laboratory, reto the lead reporting limits and dresolution of the lead data. It shthe new lab provided slightly befor arsenic, the primary parameDecember 2006, PPL returned and the lower lead reporting lim
Lead Concentrations at Rele

Lead Water Column Concentrations Measured in the immediate vicinity of the Rele

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1

Date

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Lead Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) PA Lead Criteria (75th Percentile HaNJ Lead Criteria (ug/L)

Lead samples collected at the rvalues that exceed the NJ lead after the release, with concentraover time. All quantifiable concexceed the PA criteria. Again, treporting limits in mid-Septembecomparison to criteria impossibdata.
Lead Concentrations near Downs

Lead Water Column Concentrations Measured 0.1 to 0.2 miles downstream from release

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Lead Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) PA Lead Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)NJ Lead Criteria (ug/L)

Lead Water Column Concentrations Measured 5.13 to 5.

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/200

Date and Time

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) LeaLead Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA PA Lead Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) NJ 

Lead samples collected downstream of the release are mostly below the NJ lead criteria. All quantifconcentrations appear to exceed the PA criteria. Again, the change in reporting limits in mid-Septemcomparison to criteria impossible for non-detect data.
Lead Concentrations near Ea

Lead Water Column Concentrations Measured between RM 8 and 11 (Easton)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/2

Date and Time

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total J-FlaggedLead Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Lead Criteria (25th Percentile HaPA Lead Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) NJ Lead Criteria (ug/L)

Lead samples collected near Easton show a few values that ecriteria immediately after the release. All quantifiable concenexceed the PA criteria. Again, the change in reporting limits imakes comparison to criteria impossible for non-detect data.
Lead Concentrations by Distance 

Release, August 26, 2005

Lead Water Column Concentrations on August 26, 2005

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 

Miles Downstream from Release

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total J-Flagged (ug/L)Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Lead Total Criteria (25th Percentile HaPA Lead Total Criteria (Median Hardness) (ug/L) PA Lead Total Criteria (75th Percentile HaNJ Lead Total Criteria (ug/L)

Lead results collected on Aplotted by River Mile show concentration moving from downstream. Some conceboth the PA and NJ lead crthe release site, with lower downstream.
Lead Concentrations by Distance f

Release, August 26 and 27, 200

Lead Water Column Concentrations on August 26, 2005

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Miles Downstream from Release

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Total J-Flagged (ug/L)Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Lead Total Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)PA Lead Total Criteria (Median Hardness) (ug/L) PA Lead Total Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)NJ Lead Total Criteria (ug/L)

Lead Water Column Concentrations on 

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 

Miles Downstream from 

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total (ug/L) Lead Lead Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA LePA Lead Total Criteria (Median Hardness) (ug/L) PA LeNJ Lead Total Criteria (ug/L)

A side-by-side comparison of lead samples collected on August 26 and 27, 2005 plotted by River Mile decrease in concentration at the release site. Unlike arsenic, there is no apparent downstream moveconcentration peak.
Comparison to Pre-Release Lead Da

(1992-Present) found in NWIS and STO

Comparison of Pre- and Post-Release Lead Concentrations

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

-20 0 20 40 60 80 

Miles Downstream from Release

Lead Total (ug/L)

Lead Total Post-Release (ug/L) Lead Total J-Flagged (ug/L) Lead Total Non-DeteTrenton Pre-Release Range (ug/L) Riegelsville Pre-Release Range (ug/L)

44 Data 

21 of whic

Non-Detect 

9 Data Points

7 of which were

Non-Detect at 1 

ug/L

Comparison of phistorical lead raand Trenton indappear to be faihistoric range. each historic radetection limits. data which apperange is consisteach site, one qmeasurement arange was obse
Aluminum Results
Aluminum Concentrations Upstream of Re

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations Measured Upstream of Release

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Aluminum Criteria (ug/L) 

Upstream of the release, aluminum water column concentrations the PA aluminum criteria and the EPA recommended aluminum ccoincident with the mid-October storm events, suggesting resuspematerial as a likely contributor to water column aluminum.
Aluminum Concentrations at Rel

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations Measured at Release

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/2

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Aluminum Criteria (ug/L) 

In the vicinity of the release, higher aluminum concentrations in excEPA recommended aluminum criteria are observed immediately afHigher concentrations are observed again during the mid-October sconsistent with the upstream sites.
Aluminum Concentrations 

upstream and at release

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations M

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/20

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) 

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations Measured Upstream of Release

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Aluminum Criteria (ug/L) EPA Criteria (ug/L)

A side-by-side comparison of the upstream and release site plots suggests an initial increase in watealuminum at the release site, followed by a storm related increase that is consistent with the upstream 
Aluminum Concentrations at 

downstream locations

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations Measured 0.1 to 0.2 miles

downstream from release

10

100

1,000

10,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Aluminum Criteria (ug/L) EPA Criteria (ug/L)

Aluminum Water Column Concentrations Meas

downstream from releas

10

100

1,000

10,000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/20

Date and Time

Aluminum Total (ug/L)

Aluminum Total (ug/L) Aluminum Total Non-Detects (ug/L) 

One measurement 

(11,300 ug/L)

off the scale

A side-by-side comparison of plots for the 2 near downstream ranges shows an initial increase in wataluminum concentration after the release, followed by storm related increases in mid October. The sinitial concentration increase is more apparent at the second downstream range, even though that rathe initial release site. We observed this difference in structure for other analytical parameters as weexplanation is that the second downstream range is shallower and has a higher velocity, keeping morsuspension. By contrast, the first downstream range is more of a pool and may tend to dampen the srelease. As with lead, a change to a higher aluminum reporting limit interferes with direct comparison recommended criteria for non-detect data.
Regression of Paired Alumin

Concentrations

Regression of Paired Aluminum Observations Upstream and At Release

y = 0.8253x + 140

R2 = 0.6899

0

500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

Aluminum Upstream of Release (ug/L)

Aluminum at Release (ug/L)

At Release Match (1:1) Linear (At Release)

Regression of Paired Aluminum Observations U

0

1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 

Aluminum Total Upstream of 

Aluminum Total Near Easton (ug/L)

Near Easton Match (1:1) 

Bivariate plots of aluminum concentrations at the release site and at Easton versus the upstream consuggests that portion of the variability in the downstream concentrations is explained by the upstream each location, however, a subset of values not following this relationship is apparent.Our interpretation is that the initial peaks are associated with the release, but subsequent peaks stronupstream storm related pattern.
Manganese
Manganese Concentrations Upst

of Release

A plot of manganese water column concenupstream of the release shows a strong resmid-October storms, including concentratioexcess of the NJ manganese criteria.

Manganese Water Column Concentrations Upstream of the Release

1

10

100

1000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 

Date and Time

Manganese Total (ug/L)

Manganese Total (ug/L) Manganese Total Non-Detects (ug/L)
Manganese Concentrations

Upstream of and at Release

A side-by-side comparison of plots of manganese water column concentrations upstream and at the relboth sites show a strong response to mid-October storm events, including concentrations in excess of tcriteria. There are no apparent elevated concentrations of manganese at the release site relative to the fact the range of concentrations for the upstream sites is slightly higher than for the release site.

Manganese Water Column Concentrations Upstream of the Release

1

10

100

1000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Manganese Total (ug/L)

Manganese Total (ug/L) Manganese Total Non-Detects (ug/L)

Manganese Concentrations at 

1

10

100

1000

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/200

Date and Time

Manganese Total (ug/L)

Manganese Total (ug/L) Manganese T
Percentiles of Manganese Concentra

Upstream of and At Release

Percentiles of Manganese Concentrations Upstream of at At Release

1

10

100

1000

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 

Percentiles

Manganese Total (ug/L)

Upstream At Release

A comparison of the percentiles of measured manganese concentrations further confirms that concentrations at the higher than upstream concentrations throughout the rangconcentrations.
Copper Results
Copper Concentrations Upstr

Copper Water Column Concentrations Measured Upstream of Release

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1

Date and Time

Copper Total (ug/L)

Copper Total (ug/L) Copper Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Copper Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) PA Copper Criteria (75th Percentile H

A review of water column copper concentrations upstream of indicates a handful of quantifiable concentrations, including a exceeding PA copper criteria. Again, a change in reporting lithe resolution of the measurements after mid-September, and meaningful comparison to the PA criteria impossible for non-d
Copper at Release

Copper Water Column Concentrations Measured at the Release

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/

Date and Time

Copper Total (ug/L)

Copper Total (ug/L) Copper Total Non-Detects (ug/L)PA Copper Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L) PA Copper Criteria (75th Percentile H

At the release, copper concentrations may be decreasing immthe release. This trend, however, is no longer discernable aftreporting limits.
Copper Near Easton

Copper Water Column Concentrations Measured between RM 8 and 11 (Easton

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1

Date and Time

Copper Total (ug/L)

Copper Total (ug/L) Copper Total J-Flagged (ug/L)Copper Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Copper Criteria (25th Percentile HPA Copper Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)

Near Easton, water column copper concentrations appear to the initial release, but the change in reporting limits obscures few samples exceeded the PA copper criteria.
Copper by Miles from Release 

August 26th and 27th, 2005

Copper Concentrations by Distance downstream from Release on August 26, 2005

1

10

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Miles Downstream from Release

Copper Total (ug/L)

Copper Total (ug/L) Copper Total J-Flagged (ug/L)Copper Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Copper Criteria (25th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)PA Copper Criteria (Median Hardness) (ug/L) PA Copper Criteria (75th Percentile Hardness) (ug/L)

Copper Concentrations by Distance downstream fro

1

10

100

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 

Miles Downstream from 

Copper Total (ug/L)

Copper Total (ug/L) CCopper Total Non-Detects (ug/L) PPA Copper Criteria (Median Hardness) (ug/L) P

A side-by-side comparison of copper concentration measured on August 26 and 27, 2005 plotted by that higher concentrations observed near the release on August 26th have decreased by August 27th

there is no apparent downstream movement of a concentration peak.
Selenium Results
Selenium Concentrations Upst

of and at the Release

Selenium Water Column Concentrations Upstream of the Release

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/2005 12/14/2005 1/3/2006 1/23/2006 2/12/2006

Date and Time

Selenium Total (ug/L)

Selenium Total (ug/L) Selenium Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Selenium Criteria (ug/L) NJ Selenium Criteria (ug/L)

Selenium Water Column Concentrations Ups

1

10

100

8/16/2005 9/5/2005 9/25/2005 10/15/2005 11/4/2005 11/24/200

Date and Time

Selenium Total (ug/L)

Selenium Total (ug/L) Selenium Non-Detects (ug/L) PA Selen

A side-by-side comparison of water column selenium concentrations measured upstream of and at thnearly identical, suggesting that the release did not contribute to water column selenium concentratio
Mercury

• All mercury measurements (1,805) w

non-detect except for one sample collected 0.2 miles downstream of threlease on 10/13/05;

• About 65% of the samples had a rep

limit of 0.2 ug/L and about 35% of thsamples had a reporting limit of 0.5 
Conclusions

Arsenic• Some apparent exceedance of PA arsen

criteria immediately after the release in thvicinity of the release. These exceedancnot observed upstream.

• Apparent signature of release observable 

downstream but below PA arsenic criteria

• Any quantifiable concentration of arsenic 

exceeds NJ criteria (both upstream and downstream).
Conclusions (continued

Lead• Apparent exceedances of PA and NJ lea

criteria immediately after release in the vthe release.

• Most quantifiable lead concentrations exc

criteria (including upstream).

Aluminum• Some short term local exceedance of PA 

aluminum criteria from release, but backgand high flows account for most of the obconcentration.
Conclusions (continued

Manganese• Manganese concentrations appear t

background concentrations.

Copper• Short term copper exceedances of P

criteria at release and downstream.
Conclusions (continued

Selenium• Selenium concentrations appear to b

background concentrations.

Mercury• Mercury data almost completely belo

reporting limits.
Assessment of Water Column d

collected in response to a fly a

release on the Delaware Rive

Delaware River Basin CommJohn R. Yagecic, P.E.June 19, 2006