R.L. Haney | Search USGS

USGS2010

Impact of sampling techniques on measured stormwater quality data for small streams

Science-based sampling methodologies are needed to enhance water quality characterization for setting appropriate water quality standards, developing Total Maximum Daily Loads, and managing nonpoint source pollution. Storm event sampling, which is vital for adequate assessment of water quality in small (wadeable) streams, is typically conducted by manual grab or integrated sampling or with an automated sampler. Although it is typically assumed that samples from a single point adequately represent mean cross-sectional concentrations, especially for dissolved constituents, this assumption of well-mixed conditions has received limited evaluation. Similarly, the impact of temporal (within-storm) concentration variability is rarely considered. Therefore, this study evaluated differences in stormwater quality measured in small streams with several common sampling techniques, which in essence evaluated within-channel and within-storm concentration variability. Constituent concentrations from manual grab samples and from integrated samples were compared for 31 events, then concentrations were also compared for seven events with automated sample collection. Comparison of sampling techniques indicated varying degrees of concentration variability within channel cross sections for both dissolved and particulate constituents, which is contrary to common assumptions of substantial variability in particulate concentrations and of minimal variability in dissolved concentrations. Results also indicated the potential for substantial within-storm (temporal) concentration variability for both dissolved and particulate constituents. Thus, failing to account for potential cross-sectional and temporal concentration variability in stormwater monitoring projects can introduce additional uncertainty in measured water quality data. Copyright ?? 2010 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America. All rights reserved.

Journal of Environmental Quality↗

USGS2006

Cumulative uncertainty in measured streamflow and water quality data for small watersheds

The scientific community has not established an adequate understanding of the uncertainty inherent in measured water quality data, which is introduced by four procedural categories: streamflow measurement, sample collection, sample preservation/storage, and laboratory analysis. Although previous research has produced valuable information on relative differences in procedures within these categories, little information is available that compares the procedural categories or presents the cumulative uncertainty in resulting water quality data. As a result, quality control emphasis is often misdirected, and data uncertainty is typically either ignored or accounted for with an arbitrary margin of safety. Faced with the need for scientifically defensible estimates of data uncertainty to support water resource management, the objectives of this research were to: (1) compile selected published information on uncertainty related to measured streamflow and water quality data for small watersheds, (2) use a root mean square error propagation method to compare the uncertainty introduced by each procedural category, and (3) use the error propagation method to determine the cumulative probable uncertainty in measured streamflow, sediment, and nutrient data. Best case, typical, and worst case data quality scenarios were examined. Averaged across all constituents, the calculated cumulative probable uncertainty (%) contributed under typical scenarios ranged from 6% to 19% for streamflow measurement, from 4% to 48% for sample collection, from 2% to 16% for sample preservation/storage, and from 5% to 21% for laboratory analysis. Under typical conditions, errors in storm loads ranged from 8% to 104% for dissolved nutrients, from 8% to 110% for total N and P, and from 7% to 53% for TSS. Results indicated that uncertainty can increase substantially under poor measurement conditions and limited quality control effort. This research provides introductory scientific estimates of uncertainty in measured water quality data. The results and procedures presented should also assist modelers in quantifying the quality of calibration and evaluation data sets, determining model accuracy goals, and evaluating model performance.

Transactions of the ASABE↗