Improving water quality assessments through a hierarchical bayesian analysis of variability

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 44, Issue 20, 2010, Pages 7858-7864

  Gronewold, Andrew D ^a   Borsuk, Mark E ^b  

^a NOAA EARTH SYSTEM RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^b DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN APPROACHES; CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT; HIERARCHICAL BAYESIAN; HIERARCHICAL BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; IN-SITU; LABORATORY SCALE; MANAGEMENT DECISIONS; MARGIN OF SAFETY; MODEL-BASED; MULTIPLE SAMPLING; POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION; POLLUTANT LOADINGS; SOURCES OF VARIABILITY; TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCIES; WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS; WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENTS; WATER QUALITY MEASUREMENT; WATERBODIES;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; POTENTIAL FLOW; QUALITY MANAGEMENT; REGULATORY COMPLIANCE; WATER CONSERVATION; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER POLLUTION; WATER QUALITY; WATER SUPPLY;

QUALITY CONTROL;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; ERROR ANALYSIS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; LABORATORY METHOD; POLLUTION CONTROL; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; SAMPLING; STANDARD (REGULATION); WATER QUALITY;

ARTICLE; BAYESIAN LEARNING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PREDICTION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SAFETY; WATER ANALYSIS; WATER POLLUTANT; WATER QUALITY; WATER SAMPLING;

BAYES THEOREM; PROBABILITY; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; WATER;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 77958059601     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es100657p     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. National Research Council. Assessing the TMDL approach to water quality management; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 2001.
2. Houck, O. A. The Clean Water Act TMDL program: Law, Policy, and Implementation; 2nd ed.; Environmental Law Institute: Washington, DC, 2002.
3. Cooter, W. S. Clean Water Act assessment processes in relation to changing U.S. Environmental Protection Agency management strategies Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 5265-5273
4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress (2002 Reporting Cycle), EPA 841-R-07-001; 2002.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance for 2006 Assessment, Listing and Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 305(b) and 314 of the Clean Water Act; 2005.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Section 303(d) List Fact Sheet; 2007.
7. Chapra, S. C. Engineering water quality models and TMDLs J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage.-ASCE 2003, 129, 247-256
8. Benham, B. L.; Baffaut, C.; Zeckoski, R. W.; Mankin, K. R.; Pachepsky, Y. A.; Sadeghi, A. M.; Brannan, K. M.; Soupir, M. L.; Habersack, M. J. Modeling bacteria fate and transport in watersheds to support TMDLs Trans. ASABE 2006, 49, 987-1002
9. Muñoz-Carpena, R.; Vellidis, G.; Shirmohammadi, A.; Wallender, W. Evaluation of modeling tools for TMDL development and implementation Trans. ASABE 2006, 49, 961-965
10. Borsuk, M. E.; Stow, C. A.; Reckhow, K. H. Predicting the frequency of water quality standard violations: A probabilistic approach for TMDL development Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 2109-2115
11. Gibbons, R. D. A statistical approach for performing water quality impairment assessments J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2003, 39, 841-849
12. Gronewold, A. D.; Borsuk, M. E.; Wolpert, R. L.; Reckhow, K. H. An assessment of fecal indicator bacteria-based water quality standards Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 4676-4682
13. Reckhow, K. H. On the need for uncertainty assessment in TMDL modeling and implementation J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage.-ASCE 2003, 129, 245-246
14. Shirmohammadi, A.; Chaubey, I.; Harmel, R. D.; Bosch, D. D.; Muñoz-Carpena, R.; Dharmasri, C.; Sexton, A.; Arabi, M.; Wolfe, M. L.; Frankenberger, J.; Graff, C.; Sohrabi, T. M. Uncertainty in TMDL models Trans. ASABE 2006, 49, 1033-1049
15. Freedman, P. L. Navigating the TMDL Process: Evaluation and Improvements; Water Environment Research Foundation and IWA Publishing: 2003.
16. Noble, R. T.; Fuhrman, J. A. Virus decay and its causes in coastal waters Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1997, 63, 77-83
17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Protocol for Developing Pathogen TMDLs; Technical Report EPA 841-R-00-002; Office of Water (4503F), United States Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2001.
18. Boehm, A. Enterococci concentrations in diverse coastal environments exhibit extreme variability Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 8227-8232
19. El-Shaarawi, A. H.; Esterby, S. R.; Dutka, B. J. Bacterial density in water determined by Poisson or negative binomial distributions Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1981, 41, 107-116
20. Dufour, A. P.; Strickland, E. R.; Cabelli, V. J. Membrane-filter method for enumerating Escherichia coli Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1981, 41, 1152-1158
21. McBride, G. B.; Ellis, J. C. Confidence of compliance: a Bayesian approach for percentile standards Water Res. 2001, 35, 1117-1124
22. Gronewold, A. D.; Wolpert, R. L. Modeling the relationship between most probable number (MPN) and colony-forming unit (CFU) estimates of fecal coliform concentration Water Res. 2008, 42, 3327-3334
23. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Oyster and Mosquito Creeks total maximum daily load (TMDL) report for shellfish condemnation areas listed due to bacteria contamination, 2009.
24. Donigian, A.; Imhoff, J.; Bicknell, B.; Kittle, J. Application guide for the hydrologic simulation program-FORTRAN 1984.
25. Chen, C.; Herr, J.; Ziemelis, L. Watershed Analysis Risk Management Framework: A decision support system for watershed approach and total maximum daily load calculation; Report TR-110709; Electric Power Research Institute; Palo Alto, CA, 1998.
26. Food and Drug Administration and Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference. National Shellfish Sanitation Program-Guide for the Control of Molluscan Shellfish; 2005.
27. McBride, G. B. Preparing exact Most Probable Number (MPN) tables using occupancy theory, and accompanying measures of uncertainty NIWA Technical Report 2003, 121, 62
28. McCrady, M. H. The numerical interpretation of fermentation tube results J. Infect. Dis. 1915, 17, 183-212
29. Cochran, W. G. Estimation of bacterial densities by means of the 'most probable bumber' Biometrics 1950, 6, 105-116
30. Woodward, R. L. How probable is the most probable number J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1957, 49, 1060-1068
31. Edberg, S. C.; Allen, M. J.; Smith, D. B. National field-evaluation of a defined substrate method for the simultaneous enumeration of total coliforms and escherichia coli from drinking water-comparison with the standard multiple tube fermentation method Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1988, 54, 1595-1601
32. Ott, W. Environmental statistics and data analysis; Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, FL, 1995.
33. McBride, G. B. Using statistical methods for water quality management. Issues, problems and solutions; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2005.
34. Eisenhart, C.; Wilson, P. W. Statistical Methods and Control in Bacteriology Bacteriol. Rev. 1943, 7, 57-137
35. Christian, R. R.; Pipes, W. O. Frequency distributions of coliforms in water distribution systems Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1983, 45, 603-609
36. Beliaeff, B.; Mary, J. Y. The most probable number estimate and its confidence-limits Water Res. 1993, 27, 799-805
37. Lunn, D. J.; Thomas, A.; Best, N.; Spiegelhalter, D. WinBUGS-A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility Stat. Comput. 2000, 10, 325-337
38. Gelman, A. Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (Comment on Article by Browne and Draper) Bayesian Anal. 2006, 1, 515-534
39. Gelman, A.; Hill, J. Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, 2007.
40. Boehm, A.; Ashbolt, N.; Colford, J. M.; Dunbar, L.; Fleming, L.; Gold, M.; Hansel, J.; Hunter, P.; Ichida, A.; McGee, C.; Soller, J.; Weisberg, S. A sea change ahead for recreational water quality criteria J. Water Health 2009, 7, 9-20
41. Griffith, J.; Cao, Y.; McGee, C.; Weisberg, S. Evaluation of rapid methods and novel indicators for assessing microbiological beach water quality Water Res. 2009, 43, 4900-4907
42. Converse, R.; Blackwood, A.; Kirs, M.; Griffith, J.; Noble, R. Rapid QPCR-based assay for fecal Bacteroides spp. as a tool for assessing fecal contamination in recreational waters Water Res. 2009, 43, 4828-4837
43. Gronewold, A.; Qian, S.; Wolpert, R.; Reckhow, K. Calibrating and validating bacterial water quality models: A Bayesian approach Water Res. 2009, 43, 2688-2698
44. Stow, C. A.; Borsuk, M. E. Assessing TMDL effectiveness using flow-adjusted concentrations: A case study of the Neuse River, North Carolina Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 2043-2050
45. Smith, E. P.; Ye, K. Y.; Hughes, C.; Shabman, L. A. Statistical assessment of violations of water quality standards under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, 606-612
46. Gronewold, A. D.; Borsuk, M. A software tool for translating deterministic model results into probabilistic assessments of water quality standard compliance Environ. Model. Soft. 2009, 24, 1257-1262