|
Monitoring Frequency
Effective monitoring is an essential component of any effective TMDL
program. Proper interpre-tation
and understanding of environmental conditions, causes, and trends
absolutely require
accurate, timely monitoring.
In most of the US, water quality and quantities in streams and lakes
can change dramatically over
short periods of time. These changes can be due to weather effects
(such as rapid temperature
increases or decreases or precipitation) or to human activities like
water removals, water inputs,
or intermittent pollutant inputs.
As a result, wherever possible, it is best to monitor water quality
and flow continuously. How-ever,
for several important parameters (e.g., total N and P,
orthophosphate, TSS), this is not yet
technically feasible in the field. In other cases, the field methods
are not yet sensitive enough to
meet all monitoring requirements. Instead, "grab" samples
are collected regularly (weekly,
biweekly, monthly), with some parameters measured in the field and
others in the laboratory.
Sampling Requirements – Grab or Discrete Samples
Often the frequency of sampling is specified or implied in the rules
that initially establish the
TMDL. These are frequently met by collecting grab (instantaneous)
samples taken by field crews
that make the circuit of sites on a regular basis: weekly, biweekly,
or monthly are most typical
intervals. For example, in the Tualatin River TMDL rules, compliance
is based upon the median
monthly concentration or load, although the frequency of monitoring
is not specified. Samples
have been collected at weekly, biweekly, or monthly intervals, and
the median concentration
determined from these data.
Continuous Monitoring vs. Grab Sampling
"Grab" or discrete samples can easily misrepresent loading
unless numerous samples are taken to
illustrate the flush effect. The flush effect refers to high
concentrations in the first flush of runoff
from an area after a long dry period; much of the load can enter the
water in a short time, which
is hard to catch unless continuous monitoring is being done.
Depending upon when a grab
sample is taken, it may underestimate or overestimate the average
condition by an order of
magnitude. With sufficient data collection, a distribution can be
created; however, this does not
show how the pollutants are flushed off the watershed, so water
quality managers can miss
important design information for BMPs and other controls. Continuous
monitoring – augmented
by a smaller grab sampling program – provides this information.
Continuous monitoring allows extreme weather events to be identified
and evaluated for their
impacts on the water body. It also allows researchers to track the
stream’s ability to recover, and
the duration of the recovery period. The data gleaned from continuous
monitoring can be used to
develop or validate models. Last, continuous monitoring can be the
most effective – and cost-effective
– way to acquire data. As environmentalist Greg Aamodt of Carver
County Environ-mental
Services in Chaska, Minnesota noted in "TMDL Rules Drive Water
Monitoring" in the
January 1999 issue of WaterWorld, "If you don’t have a regular
regimen with an automatic
system, you can’t replicate it with humans - it’s just
impossible. And it’s a stretch of the imagina-tion
that you’re going to have someone out there in a storm event taking
samples every hour."
Continuous, unattended monitoring technology is not available for all
parameters. While tem-
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 52
perature can be conveniently and reliably monitored over the long
term, many TMDL
parameters – such as total nutrient concentrations or
orthophosphate – do not have adequate
equipment available for continuous monitoring. To compensate, some
innovators are
exploring the correlations between some hard-to-measure TMDL
parameters and the param-eters
on multi-parameter continuous monitoring equipment.
WWETCO (Wet Weather Environmental Engineering Company), an
engineering firm in Georgia
highlighted in the following case study, will be evaluating surrogate
parameter relationships and
data from continuous monitoring instruments in a Columbus, Georgia
study. They have found
good correlations between conductivity and ammonia, for example. Now,
the company plans to
develop regression equations and examine predicted versus measured or
portability of data.
Most TMDL programs have not required continuous monitoring initially.
However, as sensors
for nitrate and ammonia become more sensitive and stable, and as
correlations are better under-stood,
it would make good sense to include more continuous monitoring
requirements. In these
cases, to determine loads, flow and concentration, data can be
integrated over time to produce
precise measurements of load during any given time interval.
To review additional research done on surrogate parameters, refer to
a paper entitled Highway
Stormwater Runoff Quality: Development of Surrogate Parameter
Relationships, published in
Water, Air and Soil Pollution 94 (307-347) 1997. The objective of
this research was to identify
parameters that could be used as surrogate parameters as a means of
decreasing costs of collec-
Multi-Parameter Sampling Equipment
Monitoring is the toughest part of the whole TMDL process, and often
the most expensive
part of the process as well. For this reason, it is critical to make
informed instrumentation
choices that take into account monitoring technology that generates
credible, defensible,
quality data that is easy to use and maintain.
Often, nonload water quality measurements are needed (e.g. dissolved
oxygen, tempera-ture,
chlorophyll, conductivity, pH, and turbidity) as part of a monitoring
plan to determine
ecosystem health. Multi-parameter water quality monitoring equipment,
capable of taking
simultaneous measurements of key parameters through either long-term
continuous monitor-ing
or discrete sampling, can offer significant advantages and cost
savings.
Multi-parameter equipment is ideal for streams where little current
information on water
quality data exists. It is light and compact, easy to use, simpler to
maintain and transport
than a collection of individual meters, and offers more quality
control features over the
alternative single-parameter meters. Equipment prices vary depending
on the number of
parameters to be measured. A basic multi-parameter instrument that
simultaneously
monitors dissolved oxygen, conductivity, temperature, pH, salinity
and TDS is very afford-able.
Additional parameter probes can be added to many multi-parameter
instruments.
Prices differ considerably depending on parameter.
Available parameters that can be measured simultaneously either
continuously or discretely
are dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll, turbidity, depth or vented level,
open channel flow,
conductivity, temperature, pH, ORP, salinity, TDS, chloride, ammonia
and nitrate.
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 53
Case Study: Wyoming
The Wyoming Conservation Districts started a massive water quality
research effort by building a
solid foundation: a clear definition of "credible data,"
training to collect it and equipment
to do the job properly.
To fill significant gaps in water quality data in Wyoming, the State’s
Conservation Districts
determined that they needed to gather a great deal of stream data.
The districts took the lead on
collection because of their statutory responsibility for water
quality as well as their rapport with
landowners on a local basis.
But perhaps more important than the quantity of the data was the
quality – the districts realized
they needed to emphasize "credible water quality data" from
the start.
The first step was defining "credible data" to the
satisfaction of the districts as well as US EPA
and other state and federal agencies. A working group of agency
members came up with this
definition, which was accepted by all agencies involved in the state’s
water quality efforts:
"Scientifically valid chemical, physical and biological data
collected
under an accepted sampling and analysis plan, including quality
control,
quality assurance procedures and available historical data".
In 1998, Wyoming’s Legislature appropriated an additional $367,000
for conservation districts to
purchase equipment, attend training, conduct in-field monitoring, and
complete analytical
analysis resulting in the collection of credible, court-defendable
data.
Working with the state’s Department of Agriculture and Department
of Environmental Quality
and guided by US EPA and DEQ protocol, the districts selected a suite
of equipment that could
be shared across the state. They purchased a YSI 600R Multi-Parameter
probe (able to simulta-neously
measure temperature, pH, conductivity and dissolved oxygen), a flow
probe, a surber
sampler for macro-invertebrates, an integrated sampler for the water
column, hand-held Global
Positioning System (GPS) units and other physical field measuring
equipment.
In order to have consistency and credibility in the water quality
sampling efforts statewide,
Wyoming’s conservation districts have initiated the following
five-phase training effort for all 34
of Wyoming’s conservation districts.
Phase I Watershed Hydrology and Stream Dynamics (3 days)
Phase II Developing a Water Quality Monitoring Plan (3 days)
Phase III Equipment use, care, maintenance and calibration (2 days)
Phase IV In-field, on-the-job training collecting credible data with
the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality (5 days)
Phase V Data interpretation and analysis (4 days)
According to Bobbie Frank, the Executive Director of the Wyoming
Association of Conservation
Districts, the software that accompanies the multi-parameter
equipment, EcoWatch for Windows,
helps landowners see what the water quality data really means – an
effective educational tool for
making water quality issues more tangible and understandable.
(Bobbie Frank, 1999, Personal Communication.)
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 54
tion and measurement of highway stormwater runoff quality data. The
findings of the
research indicate that total suspended solids, total dissolved
solids, total volatile solids, and
total organic compounds are effective surrogate parameters for many
metals, ionic species,
and nutrients.
Currently, for those who have TMDL monitoring plans that include
general monitoring to assess
ecosystem health or who are responsible for water bodies with
insufficient water quality data,
monitoring with multi-parameter equipment has proven to be more
economical than intermittent
sampling by field crews. After tallying up labor costs for
intermittent field sampling and the
costs of a number of different individual field meters and then
comparing the quality of data
collected, the cost/benefits of multi-parameter equipment for both
continuous and discrete
sampling is clearly apparent and very justifiable.
However, because of the large amounts of data collected in the
continuous monitoring mode,
effective data analysis and management are critical for rapid and
accurate interpretation of
results. Tools such as BASINS and EcoWatch for Windows become
indispensable for making
sense out of mountains of information. Those software tools are
discussed later in this paper.
Case study: Georgia Watershed Study
An engineering firm is gaining confidence in long-term, unattended
monitoring equipment and
developing correlations that will ultimately lower the cost of water
monitoring by cutting labor
costs and lab fees and significantly improve wet weather data
collection capabilities.
Wet Weather Engineering and Technology, LLC (WWETCO), is monitoring
the Middle
Chattahoochee River Watershed in Georgia and Alabama for the Columbus
Water Works and
other partners including the U.S. EPA, the Georgia Environmental
Protection Division (EPD), the
Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), Georgia Power
and the Mead
Corporation. The monitoring team also includes the Columbus State
University and Auburn
University.
The Chattahoochee River flows from northeastern Georgia through
Atlanta, then along the
Georgia/Alabama border through the panhandle of Florida and into the
Gulf. The study watershed
shown in the following map consists of the drainage areas contiguous
to the Chattahoochee River
below West Point Dam and above the Walter F. George Reservoir. Nine
dams along this highly
regulated river between West Point and Columbus provide power, water
supply, fishing and
recreational uses. The watershed contains growing urban centers along
the I-85 and I-185 corri-dors
with the Columbus metropolitan area in the center.
Objectives of the study include:
w Source
Water Assessment and Protection
w Methods
to measure the health of the watershed and reactions to wet weather
stresses
for assessment of compliance with water quality standards and
beneficial uses providing
a framework for TMDL issues
w Cost
and performance criteria for several CSO treatment technologies
including
solids removal and disinfection
w BASINS
Model development and calibration
w Stakeholder
and public participation
The study area plays a significant role as a model for interstate
water resource coordination on
water quality and quantity issues. Information from the watershed
program is being peer re-viewed
by a team of national experts coordinated by the Water Environment
Research Foundation
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 55
(WERF) and is being
disseminated through
multiple outreach
vehicles including
workshops, newsletter
articles, journal publi-cations,
flyers and
brochures and through
an internet project web
site, www.wwetco.com
Water quality issues in
the watershed include
those contaminants
associated with
stormwater runoff from
urbanized areas. The
U.S. Geological
Survey’s National Water
Quality Assessment
(NAWQA) Program
findings for the entire
Chattahoochee River
indicate that higher
nutrients, pesticides,
trace elements and
organic compounds with
poorer biological
conditions are found to
be relative to the degree
of urbanization with the
majority contribution
from stormwater runoff.
The Georgia EPD will
implement TMDLs for
the Chattahoochee River
by 2002. The Middle Chattahoochee River Watershed study will provide
the database and
methodology framework from which the EPD will develop appropriate
TMDLs, if any.
Among other investigations, WWETCO is examining surrogate monitoring
parameters between
laboratory data from samples collected and continuous instrument
readings using YSI probes.
Discrete sampling includes water quality analysis of nutrients,
metals, total organic carbon, total
suspended solids, and chemical and biochemical oxygen demand. Water
quality samples are
programmed on a flush-weighted (a form of flow-weighted sampling)
basis, with various auto-mated
sampling devices. Flush-weighted sampling is sequenced to obtain more
samples at the
beginning of the event and less samples as the event progresses
(pollutant-weighted sampling).
This approach has been shown to produce significant correlation
between accumulative volume
and pollutant mass for different antecedent conditions.
WWETCO’s eighteen-month monitoring program includes 35 monitoring
stations for flow, water
quality and aquatic biology, including 12 sampling sites on creeks, 7
on the mainstem of the river
WWETCO Middle Chattahoochee River Watershed Study
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 56
and 16 within the combined sewer system treatment facilities. Six YSI
continuous monitors
are used throughout this monitoring network measuring ORP, DO, pH,
EC, T, and turbidity.
The YSI probes are placed in parallel with automatic samplers for dry
and wet weather
monitoring, and rotated among many of the 35 sampling stations. The
YSI probes are also
used to track and monitor wet weather plume migration throughout the
reservoir and river
system. The YSI equipment is serviced and calibrated every two weeks.
One of the project’s hypotheses states that "wet weather
loadings from a watershed can be
measured by time series water quality probes and correlated with
parallel discrete bottle sampling
and constituent analysis to provide a means to use water quality
probes and flow to measure
event-based and long term watershed contributions or changes in water
quality parameters as a
result of watershed controls or disturbances."
If this hypothesis proves to be correct, the methodologies developed
in this study can be used by
other practitioners to quantify wet weather loads, to provide
measurements for watershed assess-ment
studies, to prepare TMDL allocations and to evaluate wet weather
controls and benefits.
Upon completion of the program, applications using continuous
monitoring technology in
conjunction with discrete sampling efforts are anticipated to show
tremendous savings over
conventional field monitoring with significantly improved data
collection capabilities for long-term
water quality compliance documentation within the watershed.
Case Study: Field-Testing Continuous DO Probes
Chesapeake Bay is a tough place to deploy continuous monitoring
equipment for dissolved
oxygen. Researchers on the Bay deployed a pair of probes to study
accuracy, durability and
resistance to fouling. The results were impressive.
Dissolved oxygen is a key indicator of the health of coastal waters,
which makes it a critical
parameter for federal, state, and university researchers studying the
Chesapeake Bay.
Unfortunately, biofouling and high levels of hydrogen sulfide
interfered with older continuous
monitoring equipment. Every four weeks in the summer, the Chesapeake
Bay Observing System
must invest two full research vessel days and six technician days to
refurbish or replace old
sensors in three underwater monitoring stations.
Upon the introduction of Rapid-Pulse technology, the US EPA, Maryland
Department of Natural
Resources and the University of Maryland Center for Environmental and
Estuarine Studies
deployed two YSI 6000 multi-parameter instruments (called "sondes")
within the pyrocline in 20-
meter-deep water, where they would encounter optimum conditions for
biofouling and hypoxia.
The sondes were placed just 1 meter apart to ascertain
precision/reproducibility. After a month of
conditions ranging from hypoxia (complete oxygen depletion) to
saturation (maximum potential
concentrations), data analysis showed that the sondes tracked each
other reliably, agreeing with
each other to within 0.25 mg/L.
For more information, visit http://www.ceob.nos.noaa.gov
(Chesapeake Bay Observing System, 1997)
© 1999,
YSI Incorporated 57
|