Managing uncertainty in environmental decision

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 35, Issue 19, 2001, Pages

  Crumbling, Deana M ^a   Groenjes, Cheryl ^b   Lesnik, Barry ^a   Lynch, Kira ^c   Shockley, Johnnette ^b   Van Ee, Jeff ^a   Howe, Robert ^d   Keith, Larry ^e   Mckenna, Jerry ^f  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b US Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District   (United States)

^c USAGE   (United States)

^d TETRA TECH INC   (United States)

^e WPI   (United States)

^f NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; COSTS; MONITORING; RESTORATION;

ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION;

EARTH SCIENCES;

ANALYTICAL METHOD; DATA QUALITY; MONITORING; SITE CHARACTERIZATION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DATA ANALYSIS; LONG TERM CARE; PATIENT CODING; POLLUTION; REVIEW;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION; FORECASTING; HAZARDOUS WASTE; PUBLIC POLICY; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0035476125     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Data Quality Objectives Process for Superfund Interim Final Guidance; EPA 540-R-93-071; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 1993.
2. Office of Environmental Information Management System for Quality; Final Version 1.3, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 2000, Jan. 22, 2001.
3. Guidance for Data Quality Assessment: Practical Methods for Data Analysis (QA/G-9 QA00 Update); EPA 600/R-96/084; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 2000.
4. Crumbling, D. M.; et al. Applying the Concept of Effective Data to Environmental Analyses for Contaminated Sites; EPA 542-R-01-013; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 2001 (http://cluin.org/tiopersp).
5. Fairless, B. J.; Bates, D. I. Pollut. Eng. 1989, 21 (3), 108-111.
6. Smith, R.-K. Interpretation of Organic Data; Genium Publishing Corporation: Amsterdam, NY, 2000.
7. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods; U.S. EPA SW-846; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2001; Draft Update IVB, see chapter 2. (www.epa.gov/SW-846).
8. Office of Inspector General. IG Audit Report; E1SKF7-08-0011-8100240; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 1998 (www.epa.gov/oigearth/audit/list998/8100240.pdf).
9. Homsher, M. T.; et al. Environ. Lab. 1991, 1.3 (5), 10-14.
10. Jenkins, T. F.; Walsh, M. E.; Thorne, P. G.; Thiboutot, S.; Ampleman, G.; Ranney, T. A.; Grant, C. L. Assessment of Sampling Error Associated With Collection and Analysis of Soil Samples at a Firing Range Contaminated With HMX; Special Report 97-22; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, 1997 (www.crrel.usace.army.mil/techpub/CRREL_Reports/ reports/SR97_22.pdf).
11. Jenkins, T. F.; Grant, C. L.; Brar, G. S.; Thorne, P. G.; Ranney, T. A.; Schumacher, P. W. Assessment of Sampling Error Associated With Collection and Analysis of Soil Samples at Explosives-Contaminated Sites; Special Report 96-15; Army Corps of Engineers/Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, 1996.
12. Innovations in Site Characterization Case Study: Site Cleanup of the Wenatchee Tree Fruit Test Plot Site Using a Dynamic Work Plan; EPA-542-R-00-009; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 2001.