assessment and spatial distribution of …...1nhpc ltd., tawang hydro-electric project stage i,...

International Journal of Geology, Earth and Environmental Sciences ISSN: 2277-2081 (Online)

An Open Access, Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jgee.htm

2014 Vol. 4 (1) January-April, pp. 184-195/Dabral et al.

Research Article

© Copyright 2014 | Centre for Info Bio Technology (CIBTech) 184

ASSESSMENT AND SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF QUALITY OF

GROUNDWATER IN MAHI-NARMADA INTER STREAM REGION

GUJARAT INDIA USING WATER QUALITY INDEX (WQI)

*Sumit Dabral1, Bindu Bhatt

2, Janak P Joshi

2 and N Sharma

3

1NHPC Ltd., Tawang Hydro-Electric Project Stage I, Nehru Market, District: Tawang – 790104,

Arunachal Pradesh, India 2Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,

Vadodara 390 002, Gujarat, India 3Department of Geology, Faculty of Science, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,

Vadodara 390 002, Gujarat, India *Author for Correspondence

ABSTRACT

With the development of irrigation activities, industrialization, urbanization etc. more and more

groundwater resources are being explored in nature. Due to ever increasing demand of water, which is a limited resource, the quality is equally important as quantity. Decline of water quality in general, and

groundwater in particular is of great concern to developing countries and especially in India, being second

largest populated country. Many issues arise that not only involve premeditating the contaminated water,

but also preventing such situations occurring in future. Therefore, assessment and mapping of groundwater quality is an important aspect, because the physical and chemical characteristics of

groundwater determine its suitability for agricultural, industrial and domestic usages. To this end, an

attempt has been made to determine spatial distribution of groundwater quality in the study area based on the: (1) an integrated analysis of physical–chemical parameters, (2) Ground Water Quality Index (GWQI)

calculation. The results will be valuable to the planners and decision makers to formulate policy

guidelines for efficient management of the groundwater resources. WQI study indicates that out of 99 samples, 19% samples are in excellent water category, 48% are in good category, 21% in poor, 5% in

very poor category and 7% of the samples are undesirable for drinking.

Keywords: Ground Water, Physico-Chemical Parameters, Quality Rating, Water Quality Index

INTRODUCTION

Water provides variety of purposes such as a source of water supply for domestic and industrial use,

irrigated agriculture, livestock and mining activities. However with increasing industrial development, irrigation network and other anthropogenic activities, the quality of water has dramatically changed.

Ascertaining the quality is crucial before its use for various purposes such as drinking; agricultural,

recreational, and industrial uses (Sargaonkar and Deshpande 2003; Khan et al., 2003). Water quality

indices identifies a single value to the water quality of a source on the basis of one or the other system which translates the list of constituents and their concentrations present in a sample. One can then

compare different samples for quality on the basis of the index value of each sample. There are several

parameters which are referred as expression of quality but all the parameters are not considered uniformly

all over, as the requisite parameters may vary regionally and accordingly the definition of the quality varies as per the purpose. The drinking water important for health of individual, irrigation water for crop

yields soil physical conditions, soil fertility needs, irrigation system performance and longevity, (Bhatt &

Joshi, 2012) and industrial water for multitude of use in various processes can have different standards.

Water quality index (WQI) is a very useful tool for communicating the information on the overall quality

of water (Abassi 1999; Pradhan et al., 2001; Adak et al., 2001). WQI was used to determine the

suitability of the groundwater for drinking purposes (Tiwari and Mishra 1985; Singh 1992; Subba Rao

1997; Sahu and Sikdar 2008; Bhatt, 2011a,b).




Research Article


The Study Area The study area constitutes a part of Mahi - Narmada inter stream region. It has a distinct physiographic

boundary and is bordered by the Gulf of Cambay in the West, the rocky uplands in the East, Mahi River in the North and Narmada River in the South and sprawl in an area of about 11,000 sq km. The area lies

between 72º 30’ E and 73º 43’ E longitudes and 21º 40’ N and 22º 53’ N latitudes (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Study Area

MATERIALS AND METHODS Data collection:

For geochemical analysis of ground water, post monsoon 2003 water samples were collected on a well-

spaced grid pattern from different geomorphic regions of the study area (Figure 2). A total 101 water

samples were collected from shallow (Hand pump) and deeper aquifers (Tube well) in and around 60 villages and samples were analyzed in laboratory for major and minor chemical constitutes. Water

analysis was done using ‘Standard methods for the examinations of water and waste water’ (APHA,

2000).




Research Article


Methodology:

Representative water samples were collected from in air tight, high density polyethylene bottles (HDPE);

each bottle was previously washed with diluted hydrochloric acid and distilled water. Infield measurements of parameters like temperature, electrical conductivity (EC, µS/cm at 25ºC), Total

Dissolved Salt (TDS) and pH were carried out using portable field measurement instruments. The

analysis was carried out as prescribed in the manual ‘Standard Methods for the Examinations of the Water and Waste Water, 20

th edition’. The chemical parameter like alkalinity, total hardness, calcium hardness,

magnesium hardness, chloride was done with titration method. Major cations like Na++

, Ca++

, K+

were

analyzed with systronics 128-Flame Photometer. While parameter like sulfate, nitrate and fluorite were

analyzed with UV- Spectrophotometer.

Figure 2 Sample Sites in the Study Area.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The physical and chemical parameters of groundwater samples were analyzed and the values obtained are

shown in Table 1. And there variations are discussed hereafter.




Research Article


Table 1 Detailed Physical and Chemical Analysis of Post Monsoon 2003 Water Samples.

Sr.

No

Taluka Village pH

TDS

mg/L

Ca

mg/L

Mg

mg/L

Total Hard.

mg/L

Chloride

mg/L

Sulfate

mg/L

Fluoride

mg/L

Nitrate

mg/L

WQI

1

Jam

busa

r

Kaliari 7.70 960 63.00 5.51 180 158 767 2.10 9.00 115

2 Kaliari 7.15 850 44.00 86.05 464 105 700 0.26 16.50 17

3 Kaliari 7.50 446 63.20 23.86 256 60 550 0.20 1.30 15

4 Sindhav 7.10 1140 71.80 45.37 366 286 1017 0.36 0.30 18

5 Kora 7.60 918 55.80 0.16 140 142 833 1.85 18.50 94

6 Kora 7.20 824 54.70 30.96 264 121 700 0.25 20.00 17

7 Kora 8.30 566 28.10 0.00 70 70 120 1.10 4.00 67

8 Nadiad 7.40 974 67.50 5.70 192 201 590 0.46 1.60 28

9 Nadiad 8.09 650 37.00 23.23 188 58 360 0.35 0.50 26

10 Dabha 7.62 3734 80.40 135.9 760 1923 2650 0.43 0.90 29

11 Dabha 7.50 626 34.70 60.35 335 37 520 0.42 15.50 29

12 Dabha 7.69 7600 615.8 29.73 1660 4024 4000 0.89 5.70 56

13 City 7.91 2132 233.6 42.94 760 695 2600 0.44 95.00 35

14 Nada 6.65 81000 6115 201.9 16100 59189 50000 3.8 3.2 _

15

Am

od

Machhhcsara 7.60 532 28.70 48.20 270 32 167.00 0.10 0.90 9

16 Machhhcsara 7.80 2104 88.10 9.72 260 340 1100 0.76 1.60 47

17 Dadapor 7.35 1186 65.30 45.43 350 527 400 0.42 5.30 27

18 Dadapor 8.27 1758 81.40 108.56 650 750 1433 0.33 27.50 28

19 Dadapor 7.40 1200 46.50 0.95 120 320 550 0.56 4.00 33

20 Asnera 7.74 4320 217 169.65 1240 1989 1500 0.50 15.00 36

21 Asnera 7.95 2326 86.70 22.72 310 1075 1250 1.07 14.50 68

22 Asnera 7.80 932 45.60 49.12 316 130 220 0.22 0.80 17

23 Dora 7.60 1822 200.2 89.93 870 850 833 0.31 0.20 21

24 Dora 7.80 344 10.10 67.74 304 47 150 0.14 1.90 12

25

Vag

ra

Keshwan 7.30 3680 359.2 66.36 1170 3299 8000 0.78 245 49

26 Keshwan 7.84 8888 322.7 14.39 865 1350 500 0.69 165 50

27 Keshwan 8.17 646 43.70 19.17 188 147 295 0.15 0.20 13

28 Janiadara 8.00 684 38.10 31.31 224 80 380 0.45 1.00 32

29 Kalam 7.80 2776 295.5 56.41 970 1330 1100 0.33 29 27

30 Kalam 7.40 3800 319 236.55 1770 3556 1800 0.43 0.20 27




Research Article


31 Vachhnad 8.22 486 34.10 10.90 130 80 60 0.59 1.30 40

32 B

har

uch

Manad 8.30 658 34.60 47.05 280 152 200 0.38 0.60 28

33 Manad 7.40 782.0 42.60 229.3 1050 162 375 0.44 0.70 27

34 Sarnar 7.60 6144 388.6 31.51 1100 2379 1200 0.20 5.00 16

35 Vasdada 8.25 418 31.20 28.70 196 111 101 0.50 0.40 35

36 Paguthan 7.70 1800 74.60 119.97 680 732 813 0.50 9.50 35

37 Paguthan 7.10 844 28.10 120 564.00 245 130 0.32 0.90 17

38 Uparali 7.91 1756 70.80 183.03 930 707 760 0.32 3.70 25

39 Uparali 7.60 432 15.40 83.00 380 90 240 0.32 1.20 22

40 Kavitha 7.10 2728 167.5 248.29 1440 1282 390 0.38 2.20 21

41 Kavitha 8.05 1718 81.40 171.74 910 752 700 0.32 2.60 25

42

Pad

ra

Masar 7.30 3332 322.7 39.90 970 1570 2200 0.44 13.50 28

43 Masar 6.90 2140 216.6 182.0 1290 907 1350 0.14 15.00 --

44 Dhobikuva 7.33 872 53.20 16.32 200 135 220 0.74 4.50 41

45 Dhobikuva 7.88 982 20 160.4 710 155 700 0.50 13.50 36

46 Ambada 8.45 1368 67.50 13.72 225 222 550 2.20 5.00 124

47 Ambada 8.48 1762 82.80 5.65 230 402 825 1.14 14 75

48 Darapura 7.75 3656 70.50 168.63 870 947. 4400 0.50 3.70 35

49 Sarsavani 7.61 1546 75.60 53.76 410 447 601 1.00 2.10 58

50

Kar

jan

Chorbhuj 7.68 1546.0 88.10 143.37 810.00 660 440.00 0.32 2.30 24

51 Karamadi 7.64 2346 217 164.79 1220 385 1350 0.32 14.50 25

52 Dhavat 7.51 1120 55.00 77.44 456 292 650 0.38 22.50 27

53 Kanthariya 8.21 612 24.70 81.24 396 130 240 0.38 5.20 30

54

Vad

od

ara

Shankarda 7.10 2146 83.60 255.45 1260 581 4000 0.42 6.10 23

55 Sewasi 7.33 940.00 43.30 10.18 150.00 120 220.00 0.80 14.00 45

56 Sewasi 7.29 1680 167.5 30.56 544 542 650 0.50 22.50 31

57 City 7.57 1072 64.80 26.29 270 145 875 1.90 20.50 100

58 Makarpura 7.22 1020 41.30 111.02 560 247 788 0.62 14.50 35

59 Makarpura 7.86 1320 23.20 3.42 72 147 240 3.80 4.50 174

60 Ankhi 7.67 2140 232.2 19.49 660 835 3300 0.44 3.20 31

61

Sav

li

Amarapura 8.42 602 35.20 48.63 288 35 70 0.74 17.50 53

62 Amarapura 7.40 806 39.10 39.46 260 43 140 0.74 16.00 44

63 Gothada 7.57 3290 250.9 260.86 1700 740 4400 0.50 15.50 35

64 Gothada 8.01 498 27.20 51.54 280 62 300 0.62 1.60 41

65 Gothada 7.82 168 37.70 15.03 156 20 110 0.20 0.60 16




Research Article


66 Manjusar 7.10 446 29.20 17.27 144 36 110 0.56 2.00 27

67 Manjusar 7.40 322 16.00 45.70 228 19 110 0.32 0.30 20

68 Kadachhcla 7.76 1478 67.50 61.10 420 300 800 0.88 325.00 61 69 Kadachhcla 7.42 3676 387.8 18.63 1045 1395 2800 0.62 120.00 41

70 Nahra 7.40 680 49.30 0.46 125 63 225 1.14 4.80 58

71 Nahra 7.70 510 36.20 0.00 90.40 38 180 1.00 1.80 53

72 MotiBhadol 7.10 980 38.60 135.99 656 249 860 0.50 17.50 27 73 MotiBhadol 7.40 1630 86.80 63.97 480 607 590 0.56 4.70 35

74 Khakharia 7.55 420 34.60 25.66 192 44 220 1.00 3.70 56

75 Khakharia 7.75 274 21.50 20.00 136 90 120 0.44 0.80 29 76

Wag

hodia

Kamrol 8.00 684 39.80 19.59 180 72 225 1.34 4.90 78

77 Kamrol 8.08 1800 66.80 0.05 167 372 2750 0.88 2.90 54

78 Abhrampura 8.01 924 46.90 34.72 260 174 305 0.88 7.00 57 79 Abhrampura 8.05 800 43.80 23 204 120 220 1.00 4.30 62

80 JunaRampura 8.22 1000 53.10 4.72 152 128 170 0.88 0.30 53

81 JunaRampura 8.04 1346 72.70 1.09 186 258 1125 0.94 10.00 60

82 Falod 7.62 222 26.40 30.15 190 42 80 0.44 1.00 29 83 Falod 7.47 10465 967.7 54.35 2640 4768 3200 0.88 295.0 58

84 Gorej 8.00 2014 91.40 32.02 360 285 2050 0.94 1.20 58

85 Nimeta 7.31 4350 446.8 137.13 1680 1250 14000 0.82 1.20 45 86 Khervadi 8.15 1538 67.10 4.48 186 372 1575 2.80 0.90 139

87

Dab

ho

i

Rasulpura 7.30 1200 64.30 23.19 256 670 1300 1.00 1.60 51

88 Rasulpura 7.60 716 42.30 36.54 256 410 400 0.74 3.20 45

89 Nariya 7.35 1266 42.20 27.85 220 190 800 2.20 3.20 100 90 Anguthan 7.95 1242 72.70 7.40 212 190 900 7.00 6.80 297

91 Anguthan 7.40 1800 87.80 25.46 324 420 1250 2.60 0.80 113

92 Tarsana 7.60 2070 88.10 1.95 228 560 4300 0.94 1.20 53 93 Tarsana 7.50 988 53.40 23.97 232 156 600 0.98 3.00 55

94 Tarsana 7.40 2104 87.80 -0.01 219.20 602 2200 1.14 12.20 61

95 Bhimpura 7.60 548 38.10 10.90 140 85 75 0.82 3.00 48 96 Bhimpura 7.80 1663 74.50 -0.01 186 205 640 13.00 1.40 452

97

Sin

or

Nanahabipura 7.55 750 46.50 68.01 396 184 380 0.32 5.30 23

98 Mindhol 7.40 800 33.30 104.21 512 242 305 0.38 8.40 26

99 Surasamal 7.42 860 37.60 88.97 460 181 275 0.38 10.00 26 100 Vaniad 7.68 552 35.60 18.25 164 58 90 0.88 3.10 52

101 Motafofaliya 7.66 702 32.10 68 360 114 150 0.44 9.20 31




Research Article


pH

The pH of the water sample in the study area varies from 6.65 (minimum) to 8.48 (maximum) having a

mean value of 7.66 and 0.36 standard deviation. Overall ground water is alkaline in nature and shows increasing trend from eastern hilly zone to western coastal plains. However, groundwater of Nada, pH

6.65 (Jambusar Taluka) and Masar, pH 6.9 (Padra Taluka) villages are acidic in nature. Figure 3

represents pH variation in the groundwater of the study area.

Figure 3: pH Distribution in the Study Area.

Total Dissolve Solids (TDS)

Most of the groundwater samples show high concentration of TDS in the study area. About 70% of the

samples fall below the permissible limit of TDS while 30% of the samples are unfit for drinking purpose.

Minimum and maximum TDS observed is 168 mg/l & 81000 mg/l with a standard deviation of 8071.8 and a mean value of 2445.2 mg/l. In case of shallow phreatic aquifers, particularly from coastal plains

TDS show high concentration while the concentration tends to decrease towards western part. The Falod

village from Waghodia Taluka of Vadodara district sample from the alluvial plains shows very high TDS (>10,000 mg/l) value. This exceptionally high TDS in inland aquifer may be attributed due to lack of

lateral continuity of the extent of groundwater therefore; groundwater may be classed as connate type.

Figure 4: Total Dissolved Solids Distribution in the Study Area.

Total Hardness (TH)

About 71% of the samples fall below 600 mg/l concentration while 29% of the analyzed samples fall

above the permissible limit of drinking water. TH concentration show wide variation in the concentration level, minimum observed value out of 101 samples is 70 mg/l, maximum is 16100 mg/l with a standard

deviation of 1618.9 and a mean value of 664.8 mg/l. The shallow aquifer sample of Falod village from

WaghodiaTaluka of Vadodara district has exceptionally high TH value of 2640 mg/l.




Research Article


Figure 5: Total Hardness Distribution in the Study Area.

Calcium

The permissible limit of calcium for drinking water is 200 mg/l (WHO 1993). Calcium concentration for post monsoon 2003 season indicates that about 83 samples are within the permissible limits while 18

samples are above the prescribed limit of drinking water. Minimum concentration observed is 10.1 ppm

while max. is 6115ppm with a mean value of 164.8 and 613.6 as standard deviation.1

Figure 6: Calcium Distributions in the Study Area.

Magnesium

The study area shows higher concentration of Mg++,

at times value is higher than Ca++

because like Ca, Mg is normally present in ionic form in solution and once in solution it has greater tendency to remain in

that state (residence time) than does calcium (Dabral, 2009). The permissible limit of magnesium in

drinking water is 150 ppm (WHO, 1993). The distribution in the study area indicates that about 13 samples are beyond the permissible limit while 88 samples are within the permissible limit. The average

concentration indicates that the minimum value is 0.0 ppm while maximum observed is 260.9 ppm with

61.5 ppm as a mean value and 65.8 of standard deviation.

Figure 7: Calcium Distributions in the Study Area




Research Article


Chloride

The chloride concentration in the study area indicates increasing trend from east to west specifically in the

domains of recharge and discharge area. The eastern hilly zone in both shallow and deeper aquifers show overall low chloride concentration. The chloride concentration increases in the central part and that is

mainly due to high use of chloride containing fertilizers in agriculture fields. As we move westward to

alluvium plain and coastal plain chloride concentration further increases. The minimum observed value is 19 mg/l while maximum value is 59189 mg/l, mean is 1131.7 mg/l and standard deviation of 5894.1.

Figure 8: Chloride Distributions in the Study Area

Sulfate

Looking to the sulfate distribution in the study area, on an average the concentration is on the higher side which is due to inherent salt concentration in coastal and alluvial aquifers and up to some extent land use

pattern. Presently 12.6% of the total land is under cultivation wherein sulfate in fertilizer form is

excessively used in agriculture. Moreover, increase in sulfate content may also be attributed to the enrichment of salts due to evaporation, leading to calcium sulfate, magnesium sulfate salts etc. Minimum

and maximum observed value is 60 & 50000 ppm with a mean of 1624.3 ppm and having 5184.8 as

standard deviation.

Figure 9: Distribution of Sulfate in Groundwater Samples of Study Area

Fluoride

In the study area the fluoride concentration in groundwater beyond the permissible limit is found in limited number of samples while others are within the safe limit. Out of 101 samples, 10 no. of samples

were found to exceed the permissible limit and rests were within the permissible range. This high

concentration may be attributed to the source of water and geological formation of the area. Area is underlined by basaltic rocks and the presence of fluoride in groundwater is attributed mainly due to

presence of fluoride bearing minerals in these rocks. Also, source of fluoride may be attributed from the

upstream located fluorspar mine at Amba dongar, as sub-surface flow accumulation. The concentration




Research Article


ranges between 0.1 and 13 mg/l, details on statistical analysis indicates a mean value of 0.94 ppm while

standard deviation is 1.5 (Dabral, 2013).

Figure 10: Distribution of Fluoride in Groundwater Samples of Study Area

Nitrate The permissible limit of Nitrate in groundwater for drinking purpose is 50 mg/l (WHO 1993. There is wide variation in nitrate concentration and groundwater samples show a range of minimum of 0.2 mg/l to

a maximum of 325 mg/l with 18.5 mg/l average and 52.7 as standard deviation. Six samples show high

concentration and they are at Jambusar city BW (95 mg/l) , Keshwan BW & HP (245 & 165 mg/l) , Kadachhchla BW & HP (325 & 120 mg/l) and Falod HP (295 mg/l). Out of 101 samples 95 samples

shows concentration below permissible limit of 50 mg/l (WHO 1992).

Figure 11: Distribution of Nitrate in Groundwater Samples of Study Area

WQI Calculation

Table 2: Showing the details of water quality standards (WHO, 1993), ideal value and weightage

factors to calculate the water quality index (WQI) Sr. No. Parameter *Standard Ideal Value Weightage Factor

1 pH 8 7 0.15063266

2 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 1500 0 0.00080337

3 Calcium (Ca2+) 200 0 0.00602531

4 Magnesium (Mg2+) 150 0 0.00803374

5 Total Hardness (TH) 600 0 0.00200844

6 Chloride (Cl-) 600 0 0.00200844

7 Sulphate (SO4) 400 0 0.00301265

8 Fluoride (F-) 2 0 0.80337417 9 Nitrate (NO3) 50 0 0.02410123

* WHO, 1993 Standard Specification of drinking water




Research Article


For post monsoon 2003 groundwater samples, selected parameters of groundwater quality with WHO,

1993 water quality standards were used to calculate water quality indices. For WQI calculation total 9

parameters were considered and instead of desirable value of each parameter, permissible limit value was used. Details of water quality standard values, ideal values and weightage factor are given in Table-2.

WQI is calculated from the following equation:

1) Quality rating, Qn = 100 [(Vn – Vi) / (Vs – Vi)] Where, Vn: actual amount of nth parameter

Vi: the ideal value of this parameter

Vs: recommended value WHO 1993 for corresponding parameter.

For pH, qpH = 100 [(VpH – 7.0) / (8.5 – 7.0)]

2) Unit weight (Wn) for various parameters is inversely proportional to the recommended standard (Sn) for

the corresponding parameter. Wn = K / Sn

Where, Sn: drinking water quality standard prescribed by WHO 1993

K: constant

n=9

∑ Wn = 1, considered here

n = 1

3) Sub indices, (SI)n = (Qn)Wn

4) The overall WQI was calculated by taking geometric mean of these sub indices.

n=9 n=9

WQI = ∑ (SI)n = ∑ (Qn) Wn

n = 1 n=1

OR n =9

WQI = antilog10 [ ∑ Wn Log10 Qn] n=1

After compiling the results, the concentration of each pollutant was converted into a WQI value, the greater is the level of water pollution, and greater the damage to health.

The WQI scale was divided into five categories, each category describes the range of water quality and its

associated potential health effects. The index was health– based description to provide meaningful information to the public.

Table 3: Water Quality Range WQI Range Remarks % of samples

0-25 Excellent 19.19

26-50 Good 47.47 51-75 Poor 21.21

76-100 Very Poor 5.05

>100 Unfit for Drinking 7.07

For post monsoon 2003 groundwater samples, selected parameters of groundwater quality with WHO,

1993 water quality standards were used to calculate water quality indices. For calculation instead of

desirable value of each parameter, permissible limit value was used. The study indicates that the

groundwater of Nada (Jambusar Taluka) and Masar (Padra Taluka) villages are acidic in nature therefore, they are not taken for WQI studies. However, out of 99 samples, 19% samples are in excellent water

category, 48% are in good category, 21% in poor, 5% in very poor and 7% of the samples are undesirable

for drinking.

Conclusion

The water quality index (WQI) in the study area is calculated to determine the suitability of ground water

for drinking purpose. Large population of the study area depends mainly on groundwater for agricultural,




Research Article


industrial and drinking water especially before 2003 i.e. before the implementation of the canal irrigation

through Sardar Sarovar canal irrigation project in the study area. Therefore, the present study shall be

very useful in providing a baseline for future work in assessing the changes in the groundwater scenario after the advent of canal irrigation. Further, present hydrogeological studies along with WQI provide a

quick assessment about the groundwater quality of the study area. The study indicates that the area which

sprawls for about 11,000 km2

has wide variation in the quality for both shallow and deeper aquifers. Thus the groundwater quality is very dynamic owing to the natural setup and human influence which requires

to be closely monitored especially in the recharge zones so as to maintain the desired quality.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Financial support provided to Sumit Dabral by the CSIR in the form of JRF and SRF (Fellowship no

9/114(121)/2K1/EMR-1) is gratefully acknowledged. Present work is part of Ph.D. work of Sumit Dabral.

REFERENCES Abassi SA (1999). Water Quality Indices, State-of-the art. Journal of Institution of Public Health

Engineers 1. Abbasi SA (1998). Water Quality: Sampling and Analysis (Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi).

Adak MDG, Purohit KM, Datta J (2001). Assessment of drinking water quality of river Brahmani.

Indian Journal of Environmental Protection 8(3) 285–291

APHA, AWWA & WPCF (1995). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Waste Water, 19th

edition (American Public Health Association).

Bhatt B and Joshi JP (2011a). Assessment of Water Quality Index for Ground Water: A Study of an

Industrial city in the State of Gujarat. India Journal of Regional Symbiosis Institute for Regional Development studies, Kanpur 19 83-90.

Bhatt B and Joshi JP (2011b). Statistical Assessment of Water Quality of Ponds –A Study of Vadodara

City. Indian Journal of Environmental Protection 31(6) 515-520.

Bhatt B and Joshi JP (2012). Sustainable management of agricultural lands using GIS:A Spatio-Temporal analysis of irrigation water quality in Vadodara taluka. International Journal Of Geomatics And

Geosciences 2(3) 901-910.

Dabral S (2009). Applied Hydrogeological Studies on the Alluvial Deposits Between Lower Reaches of Mahi and Narmada Rivers, Gujarat, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda.

Dabral Sumit and Sharma N (2013). Detection of Geospatial Variability of Fluoride Concentration in

Mahi-Narmada Inter-Stream Area. International Journal of Geology, Earth & Environmental Sciences 3(3) 140-154.

Pradhan SK, Patnaik D and Rout SP (2001). Water quality index for the ground water in and around a

phosphatic fertilizer plant. Indian Journal of Environmental Protection 21 355–358

Sahu P and Sikdar PK (2008). Hydrochemical framework of the aquifer in and around East Kolkata wetlands, West Bengal India. Environmental Geology 55 823–835

Sargaonkar A and Deshpande V (2003). Development of an overall index of pollution for surface water

based on a general classification scheme in Indian context. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 89 43–67

Singh DF (1992). Studies on the water quality index of some major rivers of Pune, Maharashtra.

Proceedings of Academy of Environmental Biology 1(1) 61–66. Subba Rao N (1997). Studies on water quality index in hard rock terrain of Guntur district, Andhra

Pradesh, India. National Seminar on Hydrology of Precambrian Terrains and Hard Rock Areas 129–134.

Tiwari TN and Mishra MA (1985). A preliminary assignment of water quality index of major Indian

rivers. Indian Journal of Environmental Protection 5 276–279. Todd DK and Mays LW (2005). Groundwater Hydrology, 3

rd edition (John Wiley and Sons Inc).

WHO (1993). International standards for drinking water. World Health Organization, Geneva.

WHO (2004). Guidelines for drinking water quality. Geneva: World Health Organization 540.

assessment and spatial distribution of …...1nhpc ltd., tawang hydro-electric project stage i,...

Documents