Impact of Stormwater on Olentangy River Water Quality

Fisher, Recupero, Schlichting, Staugler

4/23/2018

ENVENG 2100 - Section 6190 - Dr. John Lenhart

The Ohio State University
Abstract
This laboratory research project discusses how the water quality of the Olentangy River is altered
by storm events. The Olentangy River is a vital natural resource for numerous counties in central
Ohio—providing drinking water to residents of the area and irrigation water to grow crops, wash
materials, and perform societal functions. One of the most significant occurrences that affects the
quality of the river water are storms. To investigate how stormwater could improve, or diminish,
the quality of this river water, several samples taken from the river before, during, and after a
major storm were analyzed. It was predicted that the overall quality of the river water after the
storm would be worse than before the storm.

In order to execute this investigation and test the hypotheses, seven samples of water were
analyzed. Two samples were collected directly from the Olentangy River. One same was taken
before the storm and one after. Three samples were collected from an outfall source flowing into
the river: one before the storm, one within seven minutes of the storm starting, and one after the
storm. In addition to this, one sample of direct rainwater was collected and one sample of natural
runoff was collected. After testing each sample’s turbidity, conductivity, pH, alkalinity,
phosphorus content, hardness, and total organic carbon (TOC) content, it was determined that the
storm generally worsened the water quality of the Olentangy River.

1
Table of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..3

Materials & Methods……………………………………………………………...………………5

Results & Discussion……………………………………………………………………………...7

Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………………....16

References……………………………………………………………………………………..…17

Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………..…..18

2
Introduction
The Olentangy River is known to all of central Ohio for providing drinking water and a steady
water supply for farmers and city residents alike. The river water is thoroughly treated through
quality testing done at Columbus Water Treatment Plants (WQAL, 2015); however, the river’s
various interactions constantly alter the quality of the water. When a storm occurs, the
stormwater mixes with the river in a number of ways—via natural runoff, combined sewer
overflows (CSOs), and directly with the river. The role these different paths of entry play in the
overall quality of river water and how much a typical storm would alter the current methods of
purification was therefore investigated.

Each of the water samples to be tested were obtained through various methods and location
choices. Two samples involving direct interaction with the Olentangy River were taken at the
intersection of Lane Avenue and Olentangy River Road. The CSO location for the three outfall
samples was chosen due to its short walk from the first location—at the intersection of Woodruff
and Olentangy River Road. The rainwater sample was collected by leaving a clean, empty bucket
outside of a group member’s home on East 14th Avenue, and the natural runoff was collected
from Glen Echo Ravine. This ravine was chosen because it only exhibits water flow during a
storm and drains into the Olentangy River, while collecting soil, dirt, and other natural organisms
and pollutants in its path. The pre-storm samples were collected approximately one hour before
the storm, and the post storm samples were collected one hour after the storm subsided. The
samples were all contained in one-liter plastic containers, supplying enough of a sample for
experimentation while remaining transportable.

Three hypotheses for composed for this project:

1. Rainwater falling directly into the river will generally dilute the species of contaminants
present in the river, while rainwater flowing into the river from surrounding areas via
groundwater routes, CSOs, and through natural runoff will introduce new chemical
species and solutes.

3
 2. Water entering the river from CSOs will have more contaminant species (higher
concentration of TSS and phosphorus) going into the river than groundwater or natural
runoff will have.
3. Water will be more “contaminated” (have a higher concentration of TSS, hardness, and
phosphorus) after a storm.
Based off of these hypotheses, the parameters were chosen to test for in order to complete the
objective of determining whether a storm worsens the quality of the Olentangy River or enhances
it. Seven tests were done, including: turbidity to measure total suspended solids, conductivity to
gauge the amount of species present, pH, alkalinity, phosphorus content, hardness, and total
organic carbon (TOC).

After collecting the samples and performing the proper experiments to complete the objective,
many important trends and takeaways were observed. The water from the CSO was generally
cleaner than the river water itself, based off of turbidity and phosphorus content; however, the
conductivity value was extremely high. This led the belief that the outfall was a mix of light
sewage with natural spring water, due to the juxtaposing clarity (low turbidity) and high amount
of species present (high conductivity). Due to the conclusion that the stormwater negatively
impacted the quality of the Olentangy River, it was gathered that Columbus water treatment
plants must alter their filtration/purification methods mostly to account for the increase in
turbidity.

This report details the disciplines implemented and the data acquired from the investigation on
stormwater effect on the water quality of the Olentangy River. The materials and methods
section will discuss the means of collection and testing of each of the samples. The results and
discussion section will thoroughly cover all of the data acquired along with the trends and
takeaways associated with each sample. The conclusion section will gather all of the information
found in this report and relate it back to the three hypotheses, while delivering the final
statements on why the Olentangy River is negatively affected by storms. The references section
will contain the citations to any information gathered from an outside source, and the appendix
will contain raw data and calculations used to summarize data found in the report itself.

4
Materials and Methods
Sampling Methodology
In order to accurately determine the effects of rainwater on the Olentangy River, it was necessary
to collect samples from all sources of rainwater runoff into the river prior to and post a storm
event. The following is a list of the seven water samples that were tested:

● Olentangy River Pre-storm (Between Woodruff Avenue and Lane Avenue)

● Olentangy River Post-storm (Between Woodruff Avenue and Lane Avenue)
● River Outfall Pre-storm (Under Woodruff Avenue on east side of river)
● River Outfall Post-storm (Under Woodruff Avenue on east side of river)
● River Outfall Initial Flush (At corner of Lane and Olentangy Rd on west side of river)
● Natural Runoff (Ravine at Glen Echo park which leads into river)
● Rainwater (Directly from rainstorm over Columbus, Ohio)

These sampling locations, along with the river section to be analyzed, are depicted in ​Figure 9​ in
the appendix. The land use along the Olentangy River consists of 56% cropland, 14% urban,
14% forested, and 13% pasture according to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Gibson, 2012). These locations were chosen in accordance to the components of water analysis
desired; inputs during a storm event into the Olentangy River in the campus area. The data
presented in this report was collected during the week of April 2nd. Using this data

Analytical methods
Many analytical methods were utilized to assess the effect of the rainstorm event on the
Olentangy River during the week of April 2nd, 2018. The water quality parameters of interest
that were analyzed include: pH, turbidity, phosphate, hardness, alkalinity, conductivity, and total
organic carbon. These methods derived from ​Environmental Engineering Analytical Methods
Laboratory Manual​ (Lenhart, 2015). Color and odor of the samples was noted on site as well as
the location of sampling, and analyzed the remaining parameters of interest in the laboratory
setting ​(Figure 11)​ .

Turbidity was measured using a standard UV-Vis spectrophotometer. The spectrophotometer

was calibrated using a given standard, while cuvettes were filled with each of the samples. The
filled cuvettes were placed in the spectrophotometer, one at a time, to measure the light
absorbance. The turbidity value was directly equivalent to this absorbance value.
Conductivity was measured using a single probe, and was calibrated using a given standard
solution. By inserting it into each of the samples, the two electrodes contained in the probe itself
conducted a current and provided a single reading value of conductivity, in µs/cm. The
conductivity value directly relates to the amount of species present in a solution; the higher the

5
conductivity, the more species present. This is why conductivity was significant to the
understanding of the quality of the river water, and analyzing this data provided more
information to answer the main objective.

A standard glass-membrane electrode was calibrated using standard sample buffers with pH 4, 7,
and 10 to assess the pH of all samples accurately. The pH of each sample was measured using a
probe that measures the difference in electrical potential between samples of a different pH.

Alkalinity was measured by titrating each sample to a pH of 4.5 with sulfuric acid. Bromocresol
green was used to indicate this. The volume of acid added to the known volume of sample was
used to calculate alkalinity as mg/L as CaCO​3​, which is shown in equation 1.

Equation 1: A​ lkalinity
Alk (eq/L)=[(mL standard)*(normality of standard)]/(mL sample), where normality=0.02N

Conversion from eq/L to mg/L CaCO3​ :​

Alk (eq/L) * (1 eq/1 eq) * (1 mol CaCO​3​ / 2 eq) * (100.1 g/mol) * (1000 mg/ 1 g)

Phosphorus concentration was determined using the stannous chloride colorimetric method.
Phosphate in samples was complexed with molybdate and then reduced with stannous chloride to
create a blue complex. Absorbance of each sample was measured using a standard UV-Vis
spectrophotometer set to 690 nm. Standards were used to create a calibration curve and the
phosphate concentration of each sample was extrapolated from this curve.

The total organic carbon (TOC) concentration was determined via high-temperature combustion
using a Shimadzu TOC-V analyzer. Samples were filtered at 0.45 m prior to analyses to remove
particulate matter. To eliminate the influence of inorganic carbon, samples were acidified prior
to analyses with hydrochloric acid to a pH of 2 – 3 and bubbled with nitrogen gas. Calibration of
the instrument was conducted using a 5-point calibration curve prepared using standardized
potassium hydrogen phthalate standards. Sample analyses included check standards and reagent
blanks after every 10 samples (see appendix).

Hardness was measured by titrating samples with EDTA to create complexes with any
multivalent cations in the samples. These complexes were colored using a chelating agent and an
indicator. Once a color change was observed, the volume of EDTA needed was used to calculate
hardness as mg/L CaCO​3​.

6
Results and Discussion
Results from all seven tests can be found below compiled in ​Table 1​. The trends observed in the
data found support the first hypothesis but refute the second hypothesis.The third hypothesis was
inconclusive compared to the first two.

The first hypothesis states that the rain water will dilute the contaminants in the Olentangy. The
observed trends support this; however, dilution of all input water sources due to rainwater was
not considered; therefore, many of the outside sources flowing into the Olentangy also
experienced diluted species. So, while the outside sources still introduced more species to the
river than those already existing in the water it was at a much more diluted level. Overall, the
river water was diluted more than before the storm. This point does not completely support the
last hypothesis—that the river would be more contaminated post-storm, but there was still an
overall increase in turbidity and phosphorus content, which was correctly predicted in the same
hypothesis.

The second hypothesis states that the CSO water will contain more species than natural runoff;
this is not supported by the conductivity data. The more species present the more conductive the
water. Since the outfall values were consistently at least twice as large as the natural runoff
results, the water collected from the runoff must have significantly more species than the natural
runoff.

The third hypothesis states that water will be more contaminated, or have a higher concentration
of TSS and phosphorus as well as more hardness after a storm. Data collected here is not as
conclusive. Water taken directly from the Olentangy certainly saw an increase in phosphorus
concentration, as did outfall from the combined sewers. However, this trend was reversed for
hardness; both the Olentangy and combined sewer outfall samples saw a clear decrease in
hardness as the storm event progressed.

7
 Table 1:Analysis of River Interaction with Storm Event Summary Table
Alkalinity Hardness
Turbidity Conductivity (mg/L Phosphorous (mg/L TOC
Sample (NTU) (µs/cm) pH CaCO3) (mg/L P) CaCO3) (mg/L C)
Olentangy
River Pre-storm 151 481.4 7.67 99 0.331 204.4 5.859
Olentangy
River
Post-storm 310 371.2 8.93 98.5 0.453 139.6 5.364
River Outfall
Pre-storm 1.55 1350 7.93 222.5 0.011 398.4 2.488
River Outfall
Initial Flush
~7min 109 982.9 7.86 169.3 0.072 202 4.018
River Outfall
Post-storm 23.1 632.6 7.77 128.4 0.053 190 3.630
Natural Runoff 395 378.6 7.67 169.24 0.868 182 8.163
Rainwater 2.59 26.6 5.74 9.2 0.015 31.2 2.262
Check Standard 105 209.9 10.15 76 0.28 232 5.398
Blank-DI Water 0.09 1.92 5.13 7 0.044 10.4 ----
Olentangy
River Pre-storm
Check #2 154 478 7.81 99.3 0.298 180 ----

Pre-storm outfall had the lowest measured turbidity of all collected samples at 1.55 NTU. Outfall
turbidity increased by a factor of 50 during the storm event, and post-storm outfall was about 15
times greater than pre-storm outfall. The Olentangy pre-storm sample was measured at 151
NTU. Post-storm river water was measured at more than double this value. Natural runoff had
the highest measured turbidity at 395 NTU, while isolated rainwater was measured at 2.59 NTU.

Clear trends can be seen in regards to turbidity. It was observed that after a storm event, the
turbidity of the Olentangy River increased; this observation is reinforced by the observation that
the turbidity of the Natural Runoff was the highest recorded value. As seen in Figure 2, upriver
from the sampling is primarily bordered by riverbanks comprised of vegetation, silicate minerals,

8
and soil distancing the river from direct contact with infrastructure. When a storm event occurs,
the water must flow through this riverbank collecting natural runoff qualities and thereby
increasing the overall turbidity of the river after an event. The turbidity recorded for the CSO
initial flush indicates that more suspended particles are introduced during the initial onset of a
storm event; while after a sustained duration the outfall is significantly less turbid. This
observation is consistent with first flush data recorded by Noraliani Alias in Ecological
Engineering volume 64. The relative percent difference between the check Olentangy River
sample and the original sample was found to be 1.97% difference; indicating that this
measurement was within acceptable limits.

Figure 1: Turbidity Data

The conductivity of the pre-storm samples were significantly higher than samples taken
post-storm, as seen in ​Figure 2​. As Table 1 shows, the conductivity of the Olentangy water
pre-storm was 481.4 µs/cm, while the post-storm Olentangy sample measured 371.2 µs/cm. For
the outfall samples, this trend can be seen as a progression. The pre-storm outfall measured at
1350 µs/cm, the outfall initial flush measured at 983.9 µs/cm, and the post-storm outfall
measured at 632.6 µs/cm. As expected, rain water measured at a very low conductivity at 26.6
µs/cm. The natural runoff measured similar to the post-storm Olentangy measurement at 378.6
µs/cm.

9
 Figure 2: Conductivity Data

The pH levels of each sample were measured to be in a similar range, as seen in ​Figure 3.​ The
Olentangy pre-storm, outfall pre-storm, post-storm, initial flush, and natural runoff samples all
were recorded in the pH range of 7.65-7.95. A small trend to note is that the outfall pre-storm,
initial flush and post-storm were recorded at pH levels 7.93, 7.86 and 7.77 respectively.The two
outliers to this range were the post-storm Olentangy and the rain water samples in opposite
directions. The post-storm Olentangy was recorded at a more basic level of 8.93; the rain water
was recorded at a more acidic level of 5.74.

Most of the samples recording the similar pH levels was expected. The water sources did not
differ too much, and therefore presented the same hydrogen levels. Since most of the water
sources flow into each other, it was expected that they all maintain relatively the same pH level.
The outfall trend shows how the acidic rain water noticeably lowered the pH of the water
throughout the storm. The Olentangy post-storm pH level is harder to explain, however. The best
explanation would consider the fact that as stream flow lessens, pH levels spike back to their
original pH level (Rupert 6). However, this still does not explain why the pH spiked as much as
it did, as it went above the original pH. Part of that could stem from the fact that the samples
were taken later in a week that had a lot of rain, and therefore the original pH level was not the
actual original pH. While this would not account for all the of the change, it would explain the
pH returning to a higher level.

10
 Figure 3: pH Data

The alkalinity levels as seen in ​Figure 4​ display how the water’s ability to neutralize acid
throughout a storm varies. The Olentangy samples show that the river’s alkalinity stayed
consistent at 99 mg/L CaCO​3 and​ 98.5 mg/L CaCO​3​ throughout the storm despite changes in the
outfall and high level in the natural runoff. The outfall value began at 222.5 mg/L CaCO​3
pre-storm and dropped throughout the rainfall to 128.4 mg/L CaCO​3​ post-storm, dropping
steeply in the first minutes of the storm to 169.3 mg/L CaCO​3​.

The Olentangy sample’s alkalinity remaining consistent is a good result to have. This means the
river’s ability to neutralize any acids that would enter it throughout a storm stays consistent.
However the slight decrease in alkalinity could help explain the spike in pH in the post-storm
Olentangy sample. According to Joseph Piñol, “at high flows alkalinity decreases, and
therefore… pH increases” (221). This result from the pH level does not occur in every river, but
partially occurred here. While the slowing of the river flow from its fastest flow causes a small
spike in pH, the decrease in alkalinity from the much higher river flow the post-storm sample
was taken would also cause a spike in pH in this case.

11
 Figure 4: Alkalinity Data

Plants and animals depend on phosphorus as a nutrient for growth; it is a limiting nutrient in low
concentration systems (Wasley, 2007). However, human activities, specifically agricultural
fertilization, have caused uncontrolled loading of phosphorus into water systems (see ​Figure 17)​ .
These higher levels of phosphorus can lead to overgrowth of algae causing hypoxia from the
consumption of dissolved oxygen during growth. It was found that the Natural Runoff sample
had the highest level of phosphorus; while the CSO Pre-storm had the lowest level of
phosphorus. The CSO in general does not have significant levels of phosphorus when compared
to the Olentangy River sample; indicating that the CSO input did not have a large effect on the
river’s quality in regards to phosphorus. However, there was an observable spike of phosphorus
concentrations during the Initial Flush and Post-storm CSO samples; demonstrating that the
campus area infrastructure contains phosphorus that collects during a storm event. The majority
of phosphate comes from agriculture interactions with stormwater in the form of runoff and
erosion as described in ​Figure 17.​ The data recorded demonstrates that natural runoff greatly
affects the river composition due to the large area of interaction between natural systems
providing phosphorus and the river system. The storm event on April 3rd covered large portions
of agriculture north of the sampling location; this is another source of the river’s increase in
phosphorus post-storm (​Figure 13)​ .

12
 Figure 5: Phosphorus Data

The Natural Runoff sample was observed to have the highest concentration of organic carbon;
while the Rainwater and Outfall Pre-storm samples were observed to have the lowest
concentration. Carbon sources present in the environment include elemental, inorganic, and
organic. Inorganic carbon generally enters water systems through interaction with silicate from
soil. The amount of carbon found in a source of water indicates how organic, or inorganic, the
system is. The higher the TOC content, the more amount of oxygen there is consumed by
microorganisms, providing a less than ideal environment for life in the water system. In this
analysis, the overall TOC decreased from before the storm to after. Despite the natural runoff
having a high level of carbon, the decrease in the overall value can be attributed to the rainwater,
which had the lowest TOC content, and the outfall, which saw consistently lower values than
every other sample with the exception of rainwater. The method used to analyze the TOC is a
measure of the non-purgeable organic carbon (NPOC), this carbon is generally dissolved or
particulate in the water sample (Reckhow, 1999).

13
 Figure 6: TOC Data

The pre-storm Olentangy and outfall samples showed clear spikes in the hardness data, as seen in
Figure 7.​ The pre-storm Olentangy hardness measured at 204.4 mg/L CaCO​3​, while the
post-storm Olentangy only measured 139.6 mg/L CaCO​3​. The pre-storm outfall measured
originally at 398.4 mg/L CaCO​3​, compared to the measurement approximately seven minutes
later, to which it dropped to 202 mg/L CaCO​3​. The post-storm outfall only dropped slightly from
the initial flush reading to 190 mg/L CaCO​3​. The rainwater had a much lower hardness
measurement than all the other samples at 31.2 mg/L CaCO​3​.

An interesting observation from this data is the significant drop in hardness within the first seven
minutes of the storm within the outfall samples. The hardness level does not decrease much more
after that time period, suggesting that hardness decreases and is affected almost exclusively in
the first minutes of the rainfall. The hardness levels lowering is consistent with the idea that the
rainwater affects all the samples individually. The rainwater, having a much lower hardness,
lowers the hardness in all the samples. In terms of the hypotheses, these results support the first
two hypotheses, but contradicts the last hypothesis. The river water contaminants were diluted by
the rainwater throughout the progression of the storm. The higher hardness measurements also
indicate more contaminants in the outfall water than that originally in the river water. However,
as all the samples decreased in hardness, and therefore decreased in potentially harmful
multivalent cations, the river water quality actually increased after the storm according to this
test.

14
Total hardness has two categories: carbonate and noncarbonate. While alkalinity represents the
carbonate hardness, the noncarbonate value stems from the difference between the total hardness
value (measured here) and the alkalinity. As all samples’ hardness values besides the natural
runoff were greater than the alkalinity as seen in ​Figure 7​, this means all of the samples had a
significant level of noncarbonate hardness; therefore, the concentration of multivalent cations
that are not due to carbonate or bicarbonate were generally much more prevalent and were
affected more significantly throughout rainfall than the alkalinity, or the carbonate hardness.
While the outfall noncarbonate levels dropped significantly in the first minutes of the rainfall, the
carbonate levels dropped at a constant rate throughout the rainfall.

Figure 7: Hardness Data

It should be noted that precision for duplicate samples was generally very precise. ​Table 2​ in the
appendix compiles this data. Duplicates for turbidity, conductivity, pH, and alkalinity tests all
were precise within 2%, and duplicates for phosphorus and hardness tests were precise within
11% and 13%, respectively. Because of these generally low values, it can be assumed that the
tests performed were fairly precise.

15
Conclusions
Numerous samples taken from the Olentangy River were collected and analyzed in order to
determine the impact stormwater has on the quality of the river water. Distinct trends were
observed when comparing many of the samples; the turbidity, pH, and phosphorus content
increased from before the storm to after, the conductivity and hardness values decreased, and the
alkalinity and TOC values remained largely unchanged from their readings before the storm.
Although the conductivity decreased, it was determined that the increase in phosphorus content
was of higher concern to the quality of water than the amount of species present. As discussed in
lecture, an increase in phosphorus content leads to eutrophication, which reduces levels of
dissolved oxygen and not only leads to issues with water quality control, but can potentially
harm wildlife living in the river and wildlife that relies on the river for drinking water. Turbidity
also has a more significant impact on the water quality than the hardness. More turbid waters
retain more heat, reducing the amount of oxygen able to dissolve into the river environment
(EPA, 2012). This acts in a similar manner to the phosphorus content, as the amount of oxygen
available to wildlife decreases. These facts indicate that turbidity of water is integral to river
organism growth. Therefore, out of the tests performed, the phosphorus and turbidity water
quality parameters have the most negative impact on the Olentangy River environment.

Of the three hypotheses made, there were many components that were accurately predicted. The
first hypothesis, stating that rainwater would dilute contaminants and that CSOs and natural
runoff would introduce new species, was found to be accurate. The second hypothesis, predicting
that the water entering from CSOs would have more species present than the natural runoff, was
disproven. Finally, the third hypothesis, stating that the water would be more contaminated from
increases in hardness, turbidity, and phosphorus content post-storm, was inconclusive; however,
this is not to say that the overall water quality improved. The turbidity and phosphorus change
agreed with the hypothesis, while the hardness change refuted it. Although this does disprove the
completeness of the third hypothesis, it is believed that the phosphorus and turbidity have a much
more significant impact on the quality of water than the hardness. As a result of these findings, it
was concluded that stormwater has an overall negative effect on the quality of the Olentangy
River, presenting a number of issues related to each of the analyses done and significantly
altering the phosphorus content and turbidity of the water.

16
References

WQAL. “City of Columbus.” ​Drinking Water Quality and Monitoring​,

www.columbus.gov/utilities/water-protection/wqal/Drinking-Water-Quality-and-Monitoring/

“5.5 Turbidity.” ​EPA​, Environmental Protection Agency, 6 Mar. 2012,

archive.epa.gov/water/archive/web/html/vms55.html.

FLOW. Friends of the Lower Olentangy Watershed. “Glen Echo Ravine.” ​Olentangy Watershed,​
18 Jan. 2018, wiki.olentangywatershed.org/watersheds/glen-echo-ravine

Gibson, Russ. “Section 319: Nonpoint Source Program Success Story.” ​Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency,​ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Office of Water, 1 June 2012,
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/oh_olentangy.pdf

Grant, Michael. “Relations Among Rainstorm Runoff, Streamflow, pH, and Metal
Concentrations, Summitville Mine Area, Upper Alamosa River Basin, Southwest Colorado,
1995–97.” ​U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2​ 001.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri014027/pdf/wrir01-4027.pdf
 
Piñol, Joseph. “Streamwater pH, relationships in alkalinity, pCO2 and discharge some forested
Mediterranean catchments.” ​Journal of Hydrology. ​1997. 131. 205-225.
https://ac.els-cdn.com/002216949290218K/1-s2.0-002216949290218K-main.pdf?_tid=3167f9ba
-3793-499c-bf6d-162677d21f32&acdnat=1524511023_e37bf5d77608a77affa2a713da78b83e

Reckhow, David A. “Analytical Chemistry for Environmental Engineers and Scientists.”

CHAPTER XXII,​ University of Massachusetts, 1 Sept. 1999,
www.ecs.umass.edu/cee/reckhow/courses/572/572bk22/572BK22.html

N. Alias, A. Liu, A. Goonetilleke and P. Egodawatta, ​Ecol. Eng.,​ 2014, ​64​, 301–305
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.01.008

Wasley, Dennis. “Phosphorus: Sources, Forms, Impact on Water Quality - A General

Overview.” ​Water Quality-Minnesota Pollution Control Agency​, MPCA, 8 July 2007,
www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw3-12.pdf​.

TOC. “Methodology for extra analyses run on 2018 ENVENG 2100 Lab Projects.” Dr. Lenhart,
2018.

17
Appendix

Table 2: Precision Analysis for Duplicate Samples

Alkalinity Hardness
Turbidity Conductivity (mg/L Phosphorous (mg/L
Sample (NTU) (µs/cm) pH CaCO3) (mg/L P) CaCO3)
Olentangy River
Pre-storm 151 481.4 7.67 99 0.331 204.4
Duplicate Sample 154 478 7.81 99.3 0.298 180
Average 152.5 479.7 7.74 99.15 0.3145 192.2
Precision (%) 1.97 0.71 1.81 0.30 10.49 12.70

Figure 8: Calibration curve for phosphorus levels in samples

18
Figure 9: Map of Sample Locations (labeled)

19
Figure 10: CSO Values of Turbidity, Conductivity, Alkalinity, and Hardness over a storm event occurrence

Figure 11: CSO Values of pH, Phosphorus, and TOC over a storm event occurrence

20
 Figure 12: Picture of Three Samples showing color

Figure 13: Map of Storm Event Coverage for Sampling April 3rd, 2018

21
Figure 14: Olentangy River Discharge Data from USGS

22
Figure 15: Olentangy River Turbidity, Conductivity, Alkalinity, and Hardness Values Before and After
Storm Event

Figure 16: Olentangy River pH, Phosphorus, and TOC Values Before and After Storm Event

23
Figure 17: The Phosphorus Cycle

24