Ground water is also an important source of water supply for municipalities, agriculture, and industry that has become contaminated by chemicals that are sparingly soluble in water, such as chlorinated solvents presents a serious ecological and human health risk. It is well documented that environmental pollution depends mainly on human activities (industry, agricultural cultivations, and domestic use) and to a lesser extent, to other natural phenomena, which contribute to this, like volcanoes, earthquakes². The population density in big cities as well as industrial development and intensive land cultivation in which chemicals are involved, con-tribute to increased gathering of anions, heavy metals and toxic substances (pesticides and their metabolites) in both water and soil^{3- 8}. Moreover, groundwater pollution depends on insufficient management of urban, industrial and domestic wastes, organic compounds and pathogenic microorganisms, which are found in groundwater receivers. Additionally, excessive and uncontrolled uses of detergents, pesticides and fertilizers have a negative impact to quality of water receivers^9-12. Especially, irrigation in hot and dry areas contributes in the transfer and deposition of inorganic compounds and salts in unsaturated soil’s zone. Due to evaporation the concentration of salts is increased in superficial water and in case that it is transferred in deeper layers its concentration in salts increases by a factor of two or three than that of normal water. Contaminants and nutrients which are carried by groundwater flow and discharged into coastal waters have a considerable influence on environmental management of coastal zones. Common problems include salt-water intrusion due to overpumping of groundwater and brine discharges from desalination plants, as well as coastal water pollution by plume leachate from contaminated coastal aquifers^13-16.

Groundwater is an important source of fresh water in Paradip Area, supplying water for domestic and irrigation use. Groundwater can be regarded as a renewable natural resource, if there exists a balance between the recharge and abstractions of the aquifer. If pumping exceeds the total amount of recharge, ‘‘groundwater mining’’ occurs and the aquifer is no longer sustainable¹⁷. The mis-management of water resources in an area causes negative effects including depletion of the aquifer storage, groundwater level decline, seawater intrusion in coastal areas, land subsidence, quality deterioration and environmental problems in other water bodies (wetlands, surface water). In addition, social and economic impacts include the ensuring of agricultural production and tourism development and increased costs associated with deeper pumping boreholes¹⁸. Many concepts (safe yield, optimum yield, groundwater sustainability, renewability) are used in the management of groundwater systems^19-20. In groundwater management the concept of safe yield has been used by several hydrogeologists to establish the limits of pumpage from an aquifer²¹. Safe yield is the rate at which groundwater can be withdrawn from an aquifer without causing an undesirable adverse effect^22-23. This rate depends on hydraulic parameters of the aquifer, the location of boreholes, economic and environmental criteria and other factors. Safe yield refers to a groundwater management goal that attempts to achieve and maintain a long-term balance between the annual amount of groundwater and the annual amount of recharge in an are²⁴.

Study Area:

The study area has been concentrated in the industrial zone of Paradip in the Jagatsinghpur district of Odisha. The study area is situated at 20⁰15’ 56.44” north latitude and 86⁰14’ 34.62” east longitude. The study area and its surrounding are covered with marshy lands and mostly with water bodies like small creeks, big and small rivers, irrigation canals and sea. The surface elevation of the study area varies between 0.6 metres to 3.0 metres above mean sea level. Paradip area is very much industrially active. Paradip Port Trust, Paradeep Phosphates Ltd., Indian Farmers Fertiliser Co-operative, SKOL Breweries Ltd. and Paradip Carbon along with some medium and small scale industries have developed in the study area. The developmental activities enhanced the promotion of industrial set up at Paradip belt. The Paradip area, currently is in the initial stages of developing multi-level planning processes dealing with the important environmental and social issues facing the region over the next twenty years. Paradip has been identified as the planning zone for generating development scenarios are aimed at enhancing the quality of life, equity maintenance, ecological homeostasis and obtaining least environmental degradation (by 2031AD).

Paradip area is very much prone to frequent and severe cyclonic storms and very windy. The prevalent wind direction is south and south-west. The average annual rainfall is 1865 mm most of which falls during June to September. Paradip weather is highly humid due to the influence of the sea. The mean relative humidity is 80% and the average wind speed varied from 20 to 27 kmph. The maximum temperature goes upto 40⁰C in summer while the minimum temperature is 12⁰C in winter.

The study area covers an area of 25 km radius considering Kujang at the center consisting of many villages. Besides these villages, Paradip Port Trust, Paradip Phosphates Ltd, Indian Farmers and Fertiliser Cooperative, Township, and railway colony are the four main human habitations in the study area.

The major rivers in the study area Mahanadi, Nuna and Paika. Other minor rivers are Chitrotpala, Gobari, Jatadhari, Haldia Nallah, Mahanga and Atharabanki. A number of creeks have been formed in the coastal areas. The flow directions of most of the rivers are controlled by tidal effect of sea. River Mahanadi flows from northwest to southwest in the study area. Rivers like Chitrotpala and Nuna branches out from Mahanadi in the north and drains into Bay of Bengal in the East. Nuna River branches out as Gobari, which joins sea at Jambu. Atharabanki River is a tidal creek of Bay of Bengal flowing along the boundary wall of Paradip Phosphates Ltd and joins Mahanadi River near its confluence with Bay of Bengal. Taldanda Canal, which caters the need of domestic, agricultural and industrial water requirements, flow from west of study area, which originates from river Mahanadi at Cuttack.

The most important source of water for the domestic purposes in the region is ground water. Groundwater availability is plenty in the region though a borewell in the study area show salinity due to seawater intrusion. Groundwater in the area is mainly due to the accumulation of water below the ground surface, caused by rainfall and its subsequent percolation through pores and crevices. Percolated water accumulates till it reaches impervious strata consisting of confined clay or confined rocks. Occurrence of ground water is controlled by landform, structure and lithology. Groundwater extraction is by means of dug wells, dug cum driven well, bore wells and open wells.

The groundwater table ranges from 4.5 to 13 meters depth in the study area. At the moment, the area has a rich groundwater recharge potential except for a few villages where seawater intrusion into groundwater systems is observed. It must be ensured that in the future, during digging up of wells or drilling for bore or tube wells that there is no seawater intrusion which may be attributed to the geological conditions, as it is a common phenomenon observed in coastal areas. Moreover, depletion of the available groundwater also plays an important role in the increase in the salinity.

Ground water Availability and Potentiality:

The amount of water that may be extracted from an aquifer without causing depletion is primarily dependent upon the groundwater recharge. Thus a quantitative evaluation of spatial and temporal distribution system in an optimal manner.

Quantification of the rate of natural groundwater recharge is a basic pre-requisite for efficient groundwater resource management in the study area. It is particularly important in regions with large demands for groundwater supplies, where such resources are the key to economic development. However, the rate of aquifer recharge is one of the most difficult factors to measure in the evaluation of groundwater resources. The main techniques used to estimate groundwater recharge rates are the Darcian approach, the soil water balance approach. Estimation of recharge, by whatever method, is normally subject to large uncertainties and errors.

Rainfall is the principal means for replenishment of moisture in the soil water system and recharge to ground water. Moisture movement in the unsaturated zone is controlled by capillary reach, the water table is defined as natural ground water recharge. The amount of this recharge depends upon the rate and duration of rainfall, the subsequent conditions at the upper boundary, the antecedent soil moisture conditions, the water table depth and soil type in many arid and semi-arid regions, Surface water resources are limited and ground water is the major source for agricultural, industrial and domestic water supplies. Because of lowering of water tables and the consequently increased energy costs for pumping, it is recognized that ground water extraction should balance groundwater recharge in areas with scarce fresh water supplies. The objective can be achieved either by restricting ground water use to the water volume which becomes available through the unsaturated zone from the land surface to the regional water table. When water is supplied to the soil surface, whether by precipitation or irrigation, some of the arriving water penetrate but instead accrue at the surface or flow over it. The water, which does penetrate, is itself later partitioned between that amount which returns to atmosphere by evapotransipiration and that which seeps downward, with some of the latter re-emerging as stream flow while the remainder recharges the ground water reservoir.

Quantification of groundwater recharge is a major problem in many water-resource investigations. It is a complex function of meteorological conditions, soil, vegetation, physiography characteristics and properties of the geologic material within the paths of flow. Soil layering in the unsaturated zone plays an important role in facilitating or restricting downward water movement to the water table. Also the depth to the water table is important in ground water recharge estimations. Of all the factors controlling ground water recharge, the antecedent soil moisture regime probably the most difficult of all measures in the evaluation of ground water resources. Estimates are normally and almost inevitably subject to large errors. No single comprehensive estimation technique can yet be identified from the spectrum of those available, which does not give suspect results.

The habitation within the study area is scattered and the drinking water source is groundwater in most of the village. Therefore, every village has open well and tube well. Among these the selection of open or tube well samples has been considered as per their utilisation for domestic and drinking purpose.

Methodology:

Groundwater from dug wells, tube wells and hand pumps cater to the drinking water needs of the villages in the region. The quality of groundwater was assessed by taking samples and analysed as per Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) norms. The methodology followed for sampling and analysis is as follows:

Reconnaissance survey was undertaken and monitoring location were selected based on the following consideration:

· Location of the aquifer

· Usage and source

Twenty-two number of water samples in the study area was collected from groundwater source. The water samples were collected and analysed for physical and chemical characterisation as per CPCB guidelines and approved methods.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

The seasonal variation of twelve major parameters of ground water namely pH, Conductivity, Turbidity, Total Dissolved Solid (TDS), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Chlorinity, Total Hardness (TH), Nitrate, Sulphate, Fluoride, Sodium and Potassium for the year 2008 and 2009 at 22 locations of the study areas has been considered for the calculation of seasonal variation for a period of two years. The seasonal variations of ground water quality are depicted in Table-1 and Fig.2.

Table-2:Ground Water Quality during Different Seasons

Location	pH			Conductivity, mmhos/cm			Turbidity, NTU
Location	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer
GW-1	6.92	6.77	6.72	8.3	8.1	7.9	6.1	5.4	3.3
GW-2	7.41	7.33	7.18	4.6	4.7	4.3	5.3	4.5	2.9
GW-3	7.55	7.54	7.49	3.7	3.8	3.4	10.1	10.3	9.2
GW-4	7.03	6.99	6.94	3.3	3.1	2.8	9.4	8.6	7.7
GW-5	7.52	7.37	7.32	3.2	2.9	2.6	5.3	4.4	3.5
GW-6	7.17	7.09	6.94	1.9	1.7	1.4	16.1	16.2	15.0
GW-7	7.37	7.36	7.31	3.6	3.4	3.7	13.2	12.3	10.7
GW-8	7.69	7.65	7.60	6.8	7.5	7.1	4.3	3.1	2.9
GW-9	7.04	6.89	6.84	0.8	1.1	0.9	4.1	4.4	3.8
GW-10	7.67	7.59	7.44	2.3	2.1	1.9	7.2	6.5	6.1
GW-11	7.00	6.99	6.94	4.6	4.7	3.9	12.4	11.2	10.3
GW-12	7.37	7.33	7.28	1.1	0.9	0.7	7.6	8.4	7.5
GW-13	7.17	7.02	6.97	0.6	0.4	0.3	7.3	8.1	7.9
GW-14	7.59	7.51	7.36	3.7	3.6	3.2	4.2	4.7	3.9
GW-15	6.55	6.54	6.49	4.5	4.3	3.9	18.1	20.2	24.3
GW-16	7.53	7.49	7.44	1.4	1.3	1.1	16.4	16.8	15.7
GW-17	7.38	7.23	7.18	1.7	1.5	1.8	5.8	5.9	4.9
GW-18	7.20	7.12	6.97	6.5	6.9	6.3	4.7	5.3	4.5
GW-19	7.17	7.16	7.11	7.3	7.4	6.9	12.2	11.4	10.1
GW-20	6.68	6.64	6.59	3.8	3.6	3.3	13.1	12.3	10.6
GW-21	7.19	7.04	6.99	3.4	3.2	2.8	5.7	4.9	3.8
GW-22	7.66	7.58	7.43	2.5	2.7	2.3	18.2	17.1	18.5

Table-3:Ground Water Quality during Different Seasons

Location	TDS, mg/l			COD, mg/l			Chlorinity, mg/l
	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer
	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer
GW-1	2737	2753	2763	118.8	114.7	127.3	1319.0	1218.0	1316.0
GW-2	792	802	807	71.3	68.9	59.7	146.9	160.4	167.8
GW-3	814	819	844	69.4	74.8	63.5	176.3	189.9	194.9
GW-4	866	841	857	219.3	231.9	225.6	218.1	231.4	241.5
GW-5	701	717	727	68.9	71.7	48.3	164.8	186.2	192.7
GW-6	551	561	566	297.3	328.1	311.5	106.3	119.1	127.9
GW-7	917	922	947	67.7	81.7	83.2	268.5	285.6	282.1
GW-8	1819	1844	1860	659.4	744.9	730.8	694.4	748.1	753.0
GW-9	475	485	495	223.5	247.0	218.6	84.4	95.8	104.2
GW-10	126	136	141	76.9	81.6	68.3	18.7	21.5	26.7
GW-11	1240	1235	1260	217.6	273.4	249.5	437.0	458.4	463.0
GW-12	586	611	627	148.4	163.8	157.1	152.4	162.8	167.2
GW-13	253	269	279	298.6	337.5	235.7	76.3	83.6	89.3
GW-14	713	723	728	68.9	78.4	71.4	114.3	127.3	136.5
GW-15	163	158	183	36.3	29.0	26.4	68.7	73.6	72.8
GW-16	186	181	191	56.4	58.9	44.7	84.2	91.2	97.9
GW-17	768	793	798	288.3	317.4	271.4	217.3	229.7	234.2
GW-18	1549	1565	1590	98.2	107.3	76.9	207.4	212.6	236.3
GW-19	2173	2183	2199	217.5	224.8	198.6	211.1	238.1	243.6
GW-20	218	223	233	48.9	57.7	52.8	908.3	1024.5	1087.0
GW-21	1170	1195	1200	65.1	78.4	76.5	392.6	447.6	453.8
GW-22	396	412	437	136.8	187.3	167.6	73.4	89.1	81.2

Table-4: Ground Water Quality during Different Seasons:

Location	TH, mg/l			NO₃, mg/l			SO₄, mg/l
Location	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer
GW-1	633	704	765	5.92	6.51	7.08	94	115	128
GW-2	1216	1367	1454	3.42	3.80	4.71	89	93	97
GW-3	261	296	322	2.48	2.76	3.85	68	79	83
GW-4	243	285	317	18.21	20.93	23.04	84	96	93
GW-5	214	268	315	2.11	2.64	3.11	117	123	126
GW-6	230	233	253	6.70	7.36	8.29	56	68	74
GW-7	219	243	259	2.54	2.82	3.43	73	87	89
GW-8	184	207	225	10.76	11.96	13.22	57	61	65
GW-9	161	183	203	1.57	1.80	2.37	36	48	51
GW-10	54	64	75	0.68	0.85	1.81	18	23	36
GW-11	392	490	533	9.21	10.12	11.44	79	84	86
GW-12	162	164	174	5.08	5.64	6.23	39	42	47
GW-13	134	149	162	3.31	3.68	4.20	25	38	42
GW-14	215	242	269	6.26	7.20	8.17	93	108	117
GW-15	49	56	66	2.04	2.55	3.39	21	27	30
GW-16	59	69	75	0.84	0.92	1.74	27	31	36
GW-17	51	64	68	0.85	0.94	1.26	65	79	84
GW-18	281	284	309	22.36	24.84	27.04	116	129	135
GW-19	113	125	139	3.13	3.60	4.83	589	654	668
GW-20	53	60	70	2.04	2.55	3.65	33	47	54
GW-21	231	262	285	16.19	18.40	20.17	118	129	138
GW-22	30	36	38	11.19	13.16	14.35	34	46	51

Table-5:Ground Water Quality during Different Seasons:

Location	F, mg/l			Na, mg/l			K, mg/l
Location	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer	Post Monsoon	Winter	Summer
GW-1	0.76	0.84	0.90	528.4	543.3	551.2	7.4	10.1	9.6
GW-2	0.81	0.90	0.95	98.3	107.8	116.6	10.3	9.5	11.4
GW-3	0.51	0.57	0.62	79.1	85.3	91.0	6.8	7.1	6.9
GW-4	0.54	0.62	0.68	83.5	90.6	94.9	18.6	20.1	21.5
GW-5	0.57	0.71	0.81	124.2	138.7	147.6	20	23	24
GW-6	0.82	0.90	0.98	59.3	65.2	71.3	31.4	36.1	38.2
GW-7	0.63	0.71	0.75	198.1	211.4	236.0	30.8	35.4	37.6
GW-8	0.79	0.87	0.95	496.3	523.0	537.0	11.8	13.4	16.1
GW-9	0.55	0.63	0.70	53.3	65.8	77.9	14.7	17.3	19.1
GW-10	0.31	0.38	0.45	19.2	27.1	34.6	6.8	8.5	9.2
GW-11	0.64	0.70	0.76	163.3	187.4	195.3	7.4	10.7	8.9
GW-12	0.63	0.71	0.75	94.7	107.1	116.4	6.4	8.5	7.8
GW-13	0.32	0.36	0.39	37.2	48.6	51.3	5.7	6.4	9.2
GW-14	0.49	0.57	0.63	124.4	132.3	145.2	6.9	8.4	7.8
GW-15	0.25	0.31	0.37	26.1	32.7	38.7	7.7	8.9	9.4
GW-16	0.39	0.43	0.47	23.5	26.2	31.9	5.9	4.6	6.5
GW-17	1.13	1.25	1.33	227.3	243.4	256.0	21.1	23.3	25.6
GW-18	1.71	1.90	2.06	125.2	134.8	147.5	59.9	61.1	63.2
GW-19	0.81	0.94	1.04	548.4	589.6	593.0	15.7	17.3	19.7
GW-20	0.48	0.60	0.70	48.2	54.4	60.7	3.2	4.9	6.2
GW-21	0.42	0.48	0.52	261.0	277.0	283.4	25.7	29.8	28.5
GW-22	1.20	1.41	1.50	129.8	135.6	146.2	6.2	7.8	9.4

Winter Season:

pH of water samples varying between 6.54 to 7.65 and within the prescribed drinking water standards. The variations of Conductivity in ground water of the study area during winter season were within the range 0.4 - 8.1 mmhos/cm. The Turbidity of the samples was within the range of 3.1 - 20.2 NTU (Table-2 and Figure-2). TDS of water samples is observed to be minimum 136 mg/l at Madhuban to maximum 2753 mg/l at Belari Nuagaon. The high concentration of TDS at Belari Nuagaon may be attributed to seawater intrusion into the ground water. The measured COD value in ground water ranged from 29.0 - 744.9 mg/l. The observed Chlorinity values varied from 21.5 - 1218.0 mg/l (Table-3 and Figure-2). Total hardness of water samples varied between 36 mg/l at Tirtol to 1367 mg/l at Balitutha. The concentration of Nitrate varied from 0.85 - 24.84 mg/l. The sulfate concentrations in ground water were found to be within the range of 23 - 654 mg/l (Table-4 and Figure-2). Minimum Fluoride of 0.31 mg/l is observed at Paradip Garh and maximum is observed 1.90 mg/l at Ponkappal (Table-5 and Figure-2). Sodium concentrations of ground water were within the range 26.2 - 589.6 mg/l, whereas the observed Potassium concentration values were 4.6 - 61.1 mg/l, respectively.

Summer Season:

pH of water samples collected from ground water is varied between 6.49 to 7.60. The pH of all the ground samples was within the prescribed drinking water standards. The observed conductance values of ground water during summer season were within the range 0.3 - 7.9 mmhos/cm. During summer season the ground water turbidity was within the range 2.9 - 24.3 NTU (Table-2 and Figure-2). TDS of water samples is observed to be minimum 141 mg/l at Madhuban to maximum 2763 mg/l at Belari Nuagaon.

The total dissolved solids were observed to be more than the prescribed standards at samples collected from Belari Nuagaon and Rahama. The high concentration may be attributed to seawater intrusion into the ground water. The measured COD value ranged from 26.4 - 730.8 mg/l. The observed Chlorinity values varied from 26.7 - 1316.0 mg/l (Table-3 and Figure-2). Concentration of Chlorides was observed to be more than maximum permissible limits in the sample collected from Belari Nuagaon and Ram Nagar. Total hardness of water samples varied between 38 mg/l at Tirtol to 1454 mg/l at Balitutha. The total hardness values were observed to be more than the maximum permissible limits for drinking waters in the samples collected from Balitutha and Belari Nuagaon. The observed Nitrate values varied from 1.26 - 27.04 mg/l. Nitrate concentration was observed to be very high in the samples collected from Ponkappal, Ersama and Sandakud respectively. The sulfate concentrations in ground water were found to be within the range of 30 - 668 mg/l (Table-4 and Figure-2). Minimum Fluoride of 0.37 mg/l is observed at Paradip Garh and maximum is observed 2.06 mg/l at Ponkappal (Table-5 and Figure-2). The concentration levels of Sodium were within the range 31.9 – 593.0 mg/l and the values of Potassium were within the range 6.2 - 63.2 mg/l respectively.

CONCLUSION:

On the whole it has been observed from the analysis that the ground water quality in the study area is good and does not show any alarming levels of pollutants: Fluoride is the only exception, which can be attributed to the soil characteristics of the region as Fluoride concentration in ground water was observed in sampling points that were far away from industrial activities (e.g. Ponkappal, Tirtol etc)

The ground water in some locations are found to be polluted due to various industrial activities as well as domestic activities. Some water quality parameters have already exceeded the limit and some parameters are approaching towards the limit because of leaching, percolation and other such phenomenon for ground water.

The present study represents an in-depth investigation of the current status of ground quality of Paradip area industrial complex over a period of more than two years. The industrial complex and its surroundings have been growing fast due to rapid urbanisation and industrialisation in the last four decades. This has resulted in environmental degradation with regard to both surface water and ground water. As such the present environmental status of Paradip area is becoming alarming. So several preliminary steps can be adopted to achieve the objective for effective pollution prevention for abating from new or modified sources by investigating the nature of pollutants and their control techniques, understanding of the legal and administrative powers available to put these techniques into effect and investigation of the implementation of the anticipatory control power. However, if proper environmental management is not followed, then the situation may degrade further. So new heavy industries should not be allowed to set up in Paradip Area because of the high pollution load already existing in that area.

REFERENCES:

1. Finkl CW Jr (ed) (1994) Coastal hazards, perception, susceptibility and mitigation. J Coast Res 12:372 (special issue)

2. J. Drever, (1997). The Geochemistry of Natural Waters: Surface and Groundwater Environments, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River.

3. P. Daskalaki, K. Voudouris and P. Diamantopoulou, (1998). Hydrochemical study of North Peloponnesus quaternary and pliopleistocene aquifers, Proc. Int. Conf. Protection and Restoration of the Environment IV, Sani, Greece,.

4. A. Antonakos and N. Lambrakis, Hydrodynamic characteristics and nitrate propagation in Sparta aquifer, (2000) Water Res., 34 3977–2000.

5. A.R. Hill, Nitrate distribution in the groundwater at the Alliston region of Ontario, Canada, Ground Water, (1982) 20 696–702.

6. B. Steinich, O. Escolero and L. Marin, (1998). Salt-water intrusion and nitrate contamination in the Valley of Hermosillo and El Sahuaral coastal aquifers, Sonora, Mexico,Hydrogeology J., 6 518–526.

7. J. Pacheco and A. Cabrera, Groundwater contamination by nitrates in the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, (1997) Hydrogeology J.,5 47–53.

8. S. Hesske, A. Parriaux and M. Bensimon, Geochemistry of spring waters in Molasse aquifers: typical mineral trace elements, (1997) Eclogae Geol Helv., 90 151–171.

9. E.S. Manahan, Environmental Chemistry, (1994) 6^th edn., CRC Press, USA,.

10. D.C. Adriano, Trace Elements in the Terrestial Environment, (1986) Springer-Verlag, New York,.

11. A. Kabata-Pendias and H. Pendias, Trace Elements in Soils and Plants, (1992) 2nd edn., CRC Press, London,.

12. A. Karkanias, Industrial pollution in Thessaly – protection measures, (1987) Proc. 1st Panhellen, Symposium of Chemistry, Athens, Greece,.

13. Bear, J., Cheng, A.H.-D., Sorek, S., Ouazar, D., Herrera, I., (1999). Seawater Intrusion in Coastal Aquifers e Concepts, Methods and Practices. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

14. Purnalna, A., Al-Barwani, H.H., Al-Lawatia, M., (2003). Modelling dispersion of brine waste discharges from a coastal desalination plant. Desalination 155, 41e47.

15. Ataie-Ashtiani, B., Volker, R.E., Lockington, D.A., (2002). Contaminant Transport in the Aquifers Influenced by Tide. Australian Civil Engineering Transactions, Institution of Engineers, Australia, CE43, pp. 1e11.

16. Mao, X., Prommer, H., Barry, D.A., Langevin, C.D., Panteleit, B., Li, L., (2006). Three dimensional model for multi-component reactive transport with variable density groundwater flow. Environmental Modelling and Software 21 (5), 615e628.

17. Sophocleous, M. (2005). Groundwater recharge and sustainability in the High Plains aquifer in Kansas, USA. Hydrogeology Journal, 13, 351–365.

18. Brown, L. J., Dravid, P. N., Hudson, N. A., and Taylor, C. B. (1999). Sustainable groundwater resources, Heretaunga plains, Hawke’s bay, New Zealand. Hydrogeology Journal, 7, 440 -453.

19. Gau, H.-S., and Liu, C.-W. (2002). Estimation of the optimum yield in Yun-Lin area of Taiwan using loss function analysis. Journal of Hydrology, 263, 177–187.

20. Sharp, J. M. (1998). Sustainable groundwater supplies—an evolving issue: Examples from major carbonate aquifers of Texas, USA. Proceedings of the international groundwater conference (pp. 1–12). February 1998, Melbourne.

21. Sakiyan, J., and Yazicigil, H. (2004). Sustainable development and management of an aquifer system in western Turkey. Hydrogeology Journal, 12, 66–80.

22. Dottridge, J., and Jaber, N. A. (1999). Groundwater resources and quality in northeastern Jordan: Safe yield and sustainability. Applied Geography, 19, 313–323.

23. Heath, R. C., and Spruill, R. K. (2003). Cretaceous aquifers in North Carolina: Analysis of safe yield based on historical data. Hydrogeology Journal, 11, 249–258.

24. Jacobs, K., and Holway, J.M. (2004). Managing for sustainability in an arid climate: Lessons learned from 20 years of groundwater management in Arizona, USA. Hydrogeology Journal, 12, 52–65.

Received on 10.01.2011 Modified on 17.03.2011

Asian J. Research Chem. 4(6): June, 2011; Page 949-956

Sl. No	Location	Code	Sl. No	Location	Code
1	B.Nuagaon	GW-1	12	Mangarajpur	GW-12
2	Balitutha	GW-2	13	Marsaghai	GW-13
3	Denkia	GW-3	14	Nuagaon	GW-14
4	Ersama	GW-4	15	PGarh	GW-15
5	G.Kujang	GW-5	16	Paradip	GW-16
6	Garh Romita	GW-6	17	Patakura	GW-17
7	Jamboo	GW-7	18	Ponkappal	GW-18
8	Karnasi	GW-8	19	Rahama	GW-19
9	Kujang	GW-9	20	Ram Nagar	GW-20
10	Madhuban	GW-10	21	Sandakud	GW-21
11	Mahakalpara	GW-11	22	Tirtol	GW-22