EPA-600/4-76-050
September 1976
Environmental Monitoring Series
    PROCEDURES FOR  EVALUATING OPERATIONS  OF
                      WATER  MONITORING  NETWORKS
                                Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
                                       Office of Research and Development
                                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                             Las Vegas, Nevada 89114

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency,  have been  grouped into five series.  These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The five series are:

     1.    Environmental Health Effects Research
     2.    Environmental Protection Technology
     3.    Ecological Research
     4.    Environmental Monitoring
     5.    Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING series.
This series describes research conducted to develop new or improved methods
and  instrumentation for the identification and quantification of environmental
pollutants at the lowest conceivably significant concentrations. It also includes
studies to determine the ambient concentrations of pollutants in the environment
and/or the variance of pollutants as a function of time or meteorological factors.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion  Service. Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                                EPA-600/4-76-050
                                                September 1976
              PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING
       OPERATIONS OF WATER MONITORING NETWORKS
                         by
        Ruth W. Shnider, and Edwin S. Shapiro
                URS Research Company
                   155 Bovet Road
             San Mateo, California 94402
               Contract No. 68-03-0473
          Edward A. Schuck, Project Officer

    Monitoring Systems Design and Analysis Staff
Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
  Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
               Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
        U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
   ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
               LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114

-------
                                 DISCLAIMER
     This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory-Las Vegas, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                       11

-------
                                   PREFACE
     The procedures detailed herein are a "first cut" at the development of
a mathematical basis for the evaluation of monitoring network operations.
Since the relative importance of the components of network operations is a
function of monitoring network objectives, no single evaluation technique is
universally applicable.  For this reason and because of the complex nature
of this subject, the evaluation methods developed herein are applicable only
to monitoring networks whose main objective is to document compliance with
or progress toward attainment of promulgated ambient water-quality standards
and/or regulations.

     A necessary restriction placed on development of this evaluation proce-
dure was that it be consistent with existing regulations promulgated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning site selection, network
design, sampling methodology and quality assurance procedures.   Substantial
changes in these regulations will require modification of the evaluation
procedure.

     Identification of the seven major operational components of a water-
quality monitoring network with the stated main objective was accomplished by
an on-site study of five networks judged by the EPA Regional Offices to be
among the best operating networks.  The major characteristics identified are:
1.  Network Design, 2.  Personnel, 3.  Facilities and Equipment, 4.  Sampling,
5.  Quality Assurance, 6.  Data Distribution and Dissemination, and 7.  Agency
Interactions.  While the on-site studies served to identify the operational
components, they did not provide sufficient data for a mathematical assignment
of the relative weights for these components.  To provide the latter, the
opinions of governmental experts in the monitoring field were solicited and
the results statistically analyzed.  Values of the weighting factors so derived
have been carried to the third decimal place because these factors are nor-
malized values of over 40 responses.  It will be noted, therefore, that users
of these evaluation techniques will be comparing the operational characteris-
tics of their network against mathematically derived functions of the opin-
ions of over 40 experts.  While this approach admittedly has drawbacks, it is,
as stated, a "first cut" approach.  A separate document describing the mathe-
matical treatment of the expert opinion data and derivation of the relative
weights of operational components will be furnished by the Project Officer
upon request.

     Finally, it will be noted that application of this procedure is complex
and can be carried out only by personnel directly involved in operation of
the monitoring network.  Depending on the magnitude of the network, this
application may require inputs from several individuals with a total manpower
investment of up to 5 man-days.  This latter, however, is a small price if it
leads to a more technically optimum and cost-effective monitoring operation.

                                       iii

-------
     The procedures in this manual have not been field tested;  however,  such
an evaluation is planned for the immediate future.  In the interim we encour-
age users of this manual to submit their observations and suggestions for
improvement.
***************************************


                          NOTICE TO USERS OF THE MANUAL
     At the time this manual was prepared, the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Title 40, Part 130, required each State to prepare a "Basin Plan," as
defined in the Glossary, in the quotation from 40 CFR 130, June 3, 1974.
This "Basin Plan" was used as a basic unit in evaluation procedures used in
the manual.  During the time required for review and final preparation of
the manual for publication, 40 CFR 130 was revised and terminology was
changed.  The term "Basin Plan" was deleted, and the replacing term "water
quality management plan" is now used; the term "Basin" was deleted, and the
terms "State planning area," "approved planning areas" and "designated area-
wide planning area" are now defined and used in the current CFR revision
dated November 28, 1975.  The terminology used in the manual is familiar to
potential users, and State Basin Plans are in existence; therefore, the older
terminology has not been changed to that in the latest CFR revision.  Follow-
ing alphabetical definitions of the older terminology in the glossary,
definitions of these new terms are quoted from the November 1975 revision
of the CFR, so that correlation can be made between old and new terminology.
                                        IV

-------
                                   CONTENTS
DISCLAIMER	     ii
PREFACE	    iii
LIST OF FIGURES	    vii
LIST OF TABLES	viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS	     ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 	      x

SECTION I.     INTRODUCTION  	      1

SECTION II.    COMPILATION OF THE DATA BASE	      6

     II.A   Information on Primary Network Design and
            Parameters Monitored 	      6
     II.B   Information on Personnel	     11
     II.C   Information on Facilities, Equipment, and Standards  ...     12
     II.D   Information on Data Dissemination and Utilization  ....     17
     II.E   Information on Budgetary Allocations 	     17

SECTION III.   AREA OF NETWORK PLAN AND DESIGN	     19

     III.A  Rating of Number of Fixed Stations 	     19

          III.A.I  Stations by Category  	     19
          III.A.2  Rating of Stations Monitoring Point
                   Source Discharges 	     23
          III.A.3  Rating for the Element	     24

     III.B  Rating of Effectiveness of Station Location  	     24
     I II.C  Evaluation of Area of Plan and Design	     26

SECTION IV.    EVALUATION OF PERSONNEL 	     27

     IV.A   Budgetary Allocations  	     27
     IV.B   Technical Services Personnel Qualifications  	     29

          IV.B.I   Experience Rating and Procedural Steps  	     29
          IV.B.2   Special On-Job Formal Training Rating
                   and Procedural Steps  	     31
          IV.B.3   Rating of Personnel Qualifications  	     34

     IV.C   Evaluation of Area of Personnel  	     34

-------
                             CONTENTS (continued)
                                                                         Pat
 SECTION V.     EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF FACILITIES AND
                EQUIPMENT	     35

      V.A    Office Facilities  	     35
      V.B    Laboratory Facilities  	     36
      V.C    Laboratory Instruments 	     36
      V.D    Laboratory Instrument Qualifications 	     37
      V.E    Field Facilities 	     37
      V.F    Field Instruments  	     37
      V.G    Area Evaluation	     37

 SECTION VI.    EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF SAMPLING	     40

      VI.A   Rating of Parameters Monitored 	     40
      VLB   Rating for Frequency of Monitoring	     40
      VI.C   Evaluation of Area of Sampling	     46

 SECTION VII.   EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF QUALITY ASSURANCE	     48

      VILA  Field Instrument Calibration	    48
      VII.B  Field Instrument Maintenance  	    48
      VII.C  Field Measurement Controls  	    48
      VILD  Laboratory Instrument Calibration	    48
      VILE  Laboratory Measurement Controls	    48
      VII.F  Factors Affecting Laboratory Supplies 	    49
      VII.G  Area Evaluation	    49

 SECTION VIII.   EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF DATA DISTRIBUTION
                AND DISSEMINATION	    53

 SECTION IX.    EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF AGENCY INTERACTION	    54

 SECTION X.      OVERALL EVALUATION OF NETWORK OPERATIONS 	    56

 SECTION XL    EVALUATION OF BUDGET ALLOCATION TO TECHNICAL
                SERVICES	    57

     XL A   Basic  Data	    57
     XLB   Rating for Budget Allocation to Surface Water Quality
             Monitoring,  Laboratory and Data Analysis Personnel  ....    58
     XI.C   Rating for Budgetary Allocation to Compliance Personnel . .    58
     XI.D   Evaluation of Technical Services Budget Allocation  ....    62

SECTION  XII.    REFERENCES 	    63

SECTION  XIII.   GLOSSARY OF TERMS  	    65
                                       vx

-------
                               LIST OF FIGURES
Number                                                                   Page

  1  Rating for station location 	   26
  2  Determination of administrative personnel budget
     allocation	   28
  3  Budgetary-allocation-to-administrative-personnel rating 	   30
  4  Experience rating curve 	   32
  5  Rating for on-job training program  	   33
  6  Rating for monitoring frequency of trace metals/toxic
     materials and biota	   47
  7  Rating for monitoring frequency of plankton 	   47
  8  Rating for monitoring frequency of other water quality
     and hydrological parameters 	   47
  9  Determination of technical services personnel budget
     allocation	   59
 10  Surface water monitoring, laboratory, and data analysis 	   60
 11  Compliance personnel budget allocation rating 	   61
                                      vii

-------
                               LIST OF TABLES


Number                                                                   Page

  1       Summary of indicator parameters for six area types
          in regions of average rainfall and for an arid region  ....     4
  2       Primary network information  	     7
  3       Personnel information  	    11
  4       Information on facilities, equipment and standards 	    12
  5       Data dissemination and utilization 	    17
  6       Information on budgetary allocations 	    18
  7       Rating of existing stations by category  	    20
  8       Rating of stations monitoring point source discharges  ....    24
  9       Score for effectiveness of station locations 	    25
 10       Ratings for facilities	    38
 11       Evaluation of parameters monitored 	    41
 12       Weighting factors for indicator parameters by category ....    42
 13       Frequency of monitoring	    45
 14       Rating for quality assurance 	    50
 15       Evaluation of data distribution and utilization  	    53
 16       Overall evaluation of network operations 	    56
 17       Basic budget data	    57
                                     Vlll

-------
                      LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS

A.A. Spectrophotometer
Algal nut.
Alkal/acid.
Avg.
Bact. param.
Engr.
EPA
freq.
I.R.
mfr.
mtls.
PL
Ref.
Refrig.
Rel. R
Spec. Cond.
Spectrophoto.
SS
Stat. control
Std.
Temp.
Turbid.
USGS
U.V.
vol. anal.
atomic absorption spectrophotometer
algal nutrients
alkalinity/acidity
average
Bacteriological parameters
Engineering
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
frequency
Infra-red
manufacturer
metals
Public Law
Reference
Refrigerator
Relative Rating
Specific Conductance
Sp ectrophot omet er
Suspended Solids
Statistical control
standard
temperature
turbidity
U.S. Geological Survey
ultra-violet
volumetric analysis
SYMBOLS

COD
DO
pH


STORET
TKN
TOG
chemical oxygen demand
dissolved oxygen
the hydrogen-ion activity in gram
 equivalents per liter, used to
 express both acidity and alkalinity
symbol for the water quality data
 storage and retrieval system
 developed by and for the EPA
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Total organic carbon
                                       IX

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGMENT


     Many individuals at the five water networks visited and the respondents
to the Letter Survey have been helpful in developing the material used in
these recommended procedures.  For all assistance received from them and from
the members of the URS in-house panel of experts, the project management ex-
tends its sincere gratitude.

     Mr. Edward Schuck, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, served as Proj-
ect Officer, assisted by Mr. Leslie Dunn and Mr. Les McMillion.  Mrs. Ruth
Shnider served as Project Manager, Dr.- Wesley Bradford visited and compiled
the information on the five networks studied, and Dr. Edwin Shapiro developed
the theory and prepared the material for Sections III and XI.

-------
                                  SECTION I

                                INTRODUCTION
     This manual presents procedures for performing an evaluation of the
major factors affecting the efficiency and effectiveness of an existing
surface-water quality monitoring and standards compliance network.  Two
basic simplifications are used:  (1) the assumption that the primary pur-
pose of water quality monitoring is to document progress toward attaining,
or the maintenance of, both ambient and discharge water quality objectives;
(2) only the primary network is considered in the evaluation scheme.  This
fixed network must meet a wide range of long-term objectives and is oper-
ated by that organization with the responsibility for monitoring water
quality and compliance in the area.  Many organizations (federal, state,
private) may operate monitoring stations within any given network area.
Stations from which data effectively contribute to the knowledge of the
responsible organization may be considered a part of the primary network
system, even though that organization does not bear their cost.  Stations
that are ineffective in aiding the responsible organization to meet water
quality objectives are not considered part of the network.

     The evaluational techniques presented in this manual are achieved by
subdividing network operations into a set of Areas such as Plan and Design,
Personnel Qualifications, Facilities and Equipment, and Quality Assurance.
Each Area is evaluated individually, based on rating major Elements that
comprise the functions of the Area and influence the effectiveness of
output.  Each Area evaluation cannot -- and does not attempt to — deal
with all the complexities involved, since such an effort would be ex-
tremely lengthy and time-consuming.  However, evaluational results are
meaningful because the techniques used should make apparent any signifi-
cant deficiency in an Area or an Area Element, and indicate the need
for an in-depth detailed examination.  For each Area, a method is pro-
vided for integrating the Element ratings into an Area Evaluation.  Sim-
ilarly, a method is provided for the integration of Area evaluations,
resulting in an overall network evaluation.

     The final section of the manual presents an analysis of the cost-
effectiveness of network operations, based on information available at
this time.  Adjustments in the analytical results can readily be made if
more information is made available.

     The procedures presented for evaluation of network design are based
on the assumption that the State Basin Plan is designed to meet defined
water quality objectives, and that it locates and lists all significant
discharges, characterized by parameters; locates all monitoring stations,
both existing and planned, along with parameters monitored at each;

-------
lists and maps each segment;  and classifies  each.   These requirements are
all stated in the Federal Water Pollution Control  Act  (PL  92-500),  1972,
and in the Code of Federal Regulations,  (CFR),  Title 40, Parts  130  and  131,
1974.  Recommended evaluation techniques also  consider that monitoring  re-
quirements are a function of parameters  that affect water  quality,  and  the
major parameters vary with regional characteristics, activities,  and/or
land use.  In an initial effort to develop a systematic approach  to such
requirements, six basic land-use types of areas are defined,  with a set
of parameters proposed as indicators of  water  quality  for  each  area.  Any
one or any combination of these types of areas  may be  encompassed by the
network.  It is suggested that one measure of  network  efficiency  is the
degree to which these parameters are monitored in  the  receiving waters
for each area-type.  Proposed basic areas and  indicator parameters  for  the
receiving waters of each area are:


     A.    Cities with heavy industry, commerce, and high population
          density, that create the major waste burden  for  the re-
          ceiving waters.

          Major parameters:   DO, pH, Turbidity/Suspended Solids,
          Biota/Species Diversity, Bacteriological Parameters,
          Trace Metals.

     B.    Urban/Suburban areas, where the major discharge  to  the
          receiving waters is domestic sewage and  runoff from
          residential areas.

          Major parameters:   DO, Algal Nutrients,  Turbidity,  and
          where recreational  areas are included, Bacteriological
          Parameters.

    C.    Watersheds/Wilderness areas, where surface water quality
          is  essentially unaltered, i.e., the impact of human acti-
          vity  and/or land development has not significantly changed
          the natural  condition of surface waters.

         Major parameters:   DO, Algal Nutrients,  Temperature,
         Trace Metals  if the areas include  metallic deposits,  as
         most such  areas do.

    D.   Farming areas,  where the water quality is dominated by
         agricultural  drainage.

         Major parameters:  DO, Algal Nutrients,  Bacteriological
         Parameters, Turbidity/Suspended Solids.

    E.   Eutrophic or Potentially Eutrophic areas, where water
         quality is rapidly degrading.

         Major parameters:  Algal Nutrients (including TOC),  DO,
         Turbidity, Temperature.

-------
     F.   Mining areas and areas of geothermal activity, where the
          natural conditions of the surface waters are affected by
          leachate or runoff from mines.

          Major parameters:  Trace Metals, Toxic Materials, pH,
          Alkalinity/Acidity, Turbidity/Suspended Solids, Specific
          Conductance.
     The indicator parameters for each area may require modification as a
result of the regional characteristics with respect to rainfall, i.e.,
whether the region is one of average or normal rainfall, or whether it is
arid.  Major indicator parameters for an arid region should be included
with those of the specific area if it lies in an arid region, defined as
one where water consumption within the area consistently exceeds net annual
precipitation and necessitates reuse of water.  Parameters particularly
affecting water quality are:  pH, Alkalinity, Algal Nutrients, Specific
Conductance, Bacteriological Parameters.  Table 1 presents a tabulated
summary of the six Areas and Indicator Parameters.

     The operations of the existing network are evaluated, in this proposed
methodology, with respect to several factors:  (1) the State Basin Plan;
(2) recommendations in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
document Model State Water Monitoring Program, June 1973; (3) area type
and representative or critical locations for monitoring indicator para-
meters; and (4) requirements as indicated in a nationwide survey of qual-
ified personnel involved in water quality monitoring.

     Reference standards used in evaluating facilities, equipment, and
quality assurance are taken from the U.S. EPA, Handbook for Analytical Quality
Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories, 1972; U.S. EPA, Methods for
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, 1974; U.S. EPA, Biological Field
and Laboratory Methods, 1973; U.S. EPA, Model State Water Monitoring Program,
June 1975; and pertinent published Federal regulations.  Weighting factors
used in some evaluations are derived from analysis of the weightings given
the various Elements and their components in the nationwide survey noted
earlier.

     To carry out the recommended procedures for evaluation, a map of the
network showing existing station locations and the State Basin Plan for the
area in which the network is located will be needed.  It would also be
valuable to have at hand the first four reports noted in the preceding para-
graph, fully documented in the list of References.

     The manual consists of the next ten Sections numbered with Roman numerals,
Section II is the Compilation of the Data Base, to be recorded in Tables
2 through 6.  Table 2 concerns general network information on participating
agencies, station locations, and parameters monitored at each; Table 3 con-
cerns personnel qualifications; Table 4 deals with facilities, equipment
and standards; Table 5 concerns data dissemination and utilization; and
Table 6 requires information on budgetary allocations.  Some information
should be available from files of the network and some from the Basin Plan;

-------
                    TABLE 1.   SUMMARY OF INDICATOR PARAMETERS FOR SIX AREA TYPES IN
                   	REGIONS OF AVERAGE RAINFALL AND FOR AN ARID REGION	
Municipal/Industrial

DO
Bacteriological  Parameters
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
pH
Biota/Species Diversity
Trace Metals
Urban/Suburban

DO
Algal Nutrients
Bacteriological Parameters
Turbidity
Watershed/Wilderness

DO
Algal Nutrients
Temperature
Trace Metals
Farming

DO
Algal Nutrients
Bacteriological Parameters
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Eutrophic or Potentially

DO
Algal Nutrients
Turbidity
Temperature
Mining/Geothermal

PH
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Specific Conductance
Alkalinity/Acidity
Trace Metals
Toxic Materials
                                 Arid Region

                                 Algal Nutrients
                                 Bacteriological Parameters
                                 pH
                                 Specific Conductance
                                 Alkalinity

-------
personal inspection will be required for some data.  When Section II is com-
pleted, the evaluation procedures of each of the following Sections can be
completed in a short time.  The entire task, including Section II, should
take no more than 5 days.

     A Glossary is located at the end of the manual to ensure uniformity of
meaning of the terminology used.

-------
                                 SECTION II

                       COMPILATION OF THE DATA BASE
In this Section, the information needed to carry out the evaluational pro-
cedures for each Area considered will be tabulated in Tables 2 through 6.
11.A  INFORMATION ON PRIMARY NETWORK DESIGN AND PARAMETERS MONITORED

     Source Information: Network Map and Basin Plan
     Tabulation of Data: Table 2

     In Table 2, information is to be recorded on the number of stations in
each of a number of categories.  "Categories" are activity-monitoring loca-
tions, for which parameters requiring monitoring can be correlated with Area
Indicator parameters, defined in the Introduction.  Additional information
to be recorded concerns:  (1) whether stations are located  in regions that are
arid, or of average rainfall;  (2) the parameters monitored; and  (3) the fre-
quency of sampling.

     The determination  and recording of such information for all stations
 of a network would provide information for a complete evaluation of the net-
 work design and  of the  network monitoring effectiveness, but the task could
 be prohibitively time-consuming.  To avoid such a situation, inspect the
 station  categories listed in Table 2, and select, for broadest application,
 one  segment or  subbasin in the network that includes the maximum number of
 such categories.  Record information in Table 2 for this one segment, and use
 it as  representative  of the network.  Note that stations located in bays or
 estuaries  do not form a category, but should be included in a downstream group
 of the category that  evaluates effects on the receiving waters of activities
 applicable to  the particular situation.

      A critically located station will usually provide extremely valuable in-
 formation  because it  will monitor effects on water quality of more than one
 activity,  and  thus serve in a  cost-effective way.  Therefore, in the tabula-
 tion of Table  2  list  each station in every category for which it is used.
 For  instance,  the upstream receiving water station of a pair bracketing a
 municipal  and  industrial center may at the same time monitor the receiving
 waters downstream of  irrigated farmland.  Such a station should therefore be
 counted  in  categories  5.a and  13.b.  However, the Region type of the activity
 being monitored  may differ, and the parameters monitored may also differ in
 the  two  categories, and should be so indicated.

     As noted above,  the network map and Basin Plan should provide the infor-
mation needed to  complete Table 2, the format of which has been designed to
allow rapid retrieval of information for use in the evaluations of several

-------
                                                              Table  2.    PRIMARY  NETWORK  INFORMATIOiN
*  CATIONS, WCATIOW. MMMFITIIS, TO Moin*»i«  FWQUESCY
   1,  •Jusber of significant point source  discharges  in selected representative sepaent or subbasin
:. Total number of stations in segment

:,, Sysber of effectively contributing fixed stations in the selected segment pei
STATION CATEGORY NUMBER OF STATIONS

. . (a) upstream
: ',c. sunons sn receiving waters
"" ' (bj downstream
(a) upstream
, ',i . sratioRs monitoring
VL inJiiSinal centers. «• .
(bj downstream
(a) upstream
\c. ?'jiions ncmitoring * ' ^
,j[ in/suburban areas- ^ dwnsireaa
' V-. -.;,(: iors it Jn^irs; water
s.,:f!v intakes.
•.,'. -,',a'tor,s at reservoirs:
• , \.\ ^tailors in recreational
vi'fr ""Vies
(a) upstrear
:s:cj stJ' 10E.S.
ft) dowr.strean
., V, stations monitoring eutrophK
•;r potential eutrophic »ater bodies.
f
i,. ,'.fi, stations at norths of significant
tributaries to rains t em rivers or bays-
;:. •.„>. station monitoring <»! upstrea.
irrigated fana land.
fbj downstream
Region
j type
Arid | Avg.

i
i
I







f
, , (a) upstream 1
i-i. -a. stations monitoring j
r,ir,ing or gMtkrnai areas: (b) downs,r(M
:'• \e. uprtreafn boundary stations
It. .So, downstream boundary stations
i". Representative location in rivers,
coastal areas, i impoundment!
IS. Total Activities Monitored
i
.4... 	 ,

_j 	
~


._

i
" 	 ' T~ '





Region
type
Aric

i
j




	


| Avg
4—
~i —
H — 	 -
\ 	
-j — : 	
	
	


i



	





Agency Niaber of t

xisting plus planned per Agen
=y

Parameters and Sampling Frequency aonitored at exiiting stations i
*
.It
i
| !
•j — *-
|— f~

~f —
i
i

— ,._>.-...
|

— f~

|
j
-


_i^ 	
i 	





Algal i
nutri- c
ents
V S F V
i ,
i ;

!
44 —
:
!
4-4--
|L
i
i
i






pec.
end,/ ^
SS F
S F VJS
j |
I
i !
r ~ f
_j_j 	
i ' !
I
I
j
i i
i j ;
I 5 -
( {
t i '•
> 	 , 	 L
T H r

I
I |


i

Mill
acid. T
K S F S
	 [ I

j
_™L_

I
i
; I
» -t +
j
'
• I
|
j
i i
i

-JO---
u 	
j
j

i i

nil
Trace
•etals
e«p. toxic (
mis.
S F 1 S f 1
1
"~~t 	 I
•
j !

[ -
| , ,
1 ;
_,
1
i ' [
-L~~ 	 L — , 	 1™
i i i i
! i :
I
i


It
j

i
i
'00 TOC
S F \ S
...~L— 	 -1™— 4— ~
\ :


; ! 1
i

i > :
i i i
i i
i | i
j ]
|
i i
i i
! !
Hr
1
I


Bacter
parani.
v S 1
-




1
	 p

+
j

i i
1

j
. Turbid
SS
\j<; r
j 4

~ — t"
— f-4-
_
i i
i
i j
!
_j — +,.
\
— -f -"t—-


j
!
s
— L
Biota
/ specie
diver
sity*
v|c
1 |


\ \
I ;
1
	 -*. — (....
___
j



i
Strean
flow

^ 	 , 0
]
1
.-4 .
i
i t
i ^

J—L-i




"'
...... ;._^.r. _
-t— \ —
; I


i

itage c
water
iurfacc
elev.


1
!
-— r-

- 	 -+-
4 — , —
— I — , —
I

i
j
_p_.
j
i I
i
!
Tidal ;
stage i
1
V < F
I...


	 . ,
-—*- -r '
- ' 1 -i
;
— 	 I-H
-f ^
: |
	 f-— 1~— .
— J...-4- —
1 u
— — 1

* E * fxtsting stations f AS you record number per Region type, * No. stations Mmi taring the paraseter $ SatpHng; code A for automatic
P « Planned stations indicate also the maber of diichawe by Region type, i.e., 3/n, or 5/a, code M for manual
                                                points (0)  that are nonitored,  i.e.,
                                                4/60 or J/3D,
           F • frequency; code the frequency                                        **   K'cord plankton separately froi other
           representative of nost stations in                                           biological paraieters:
           category:                                                                   ,
           P • daily     bM • blvntnly             SY • senlmnually                    K
           • • »eekly     Q • quarterly (seasonally!  C • continuously
           
-------
network operational Areas.  Each item is numbered.  These numbers will be used
as "Source Reference" identifiers in the evaluation tables.  For uniformity
of format, there is a column for S, Kind of Sampling, below each parameter,
although only Manual Sampling applies for some parameters.

     To proceed with the compilation of the data base, determine and indicate
on the network map those areas of the selected segment that are of average
rainfall, and those that are arid (if there are differences to be noted in
Table 2).  Then record in Table 2, as indicated in the following Procedural
Steps, data that pertain to the selected segment.

Step 1

     From the Basin Plan, determine the number of "significant" (as defined
in the Glossary) point-source discharges in the segment, and record the number
in Table 2, item 1.

Step 2

     Record in item 2 the total number of fixed stations in the segment,
regardless of whether the stations contribute to primary network information.

          (In the following Steps, include only stations that
          contribute effectively to the primary network information, and
          are located in the receiving waters.)

Step 3

     Record in item 3 the number of Existing fixed stations, per Agency,
e.g., 8/local, 3/State, 2/USGS, 2/EPA, etc.  Similarly record the total Planned
(existing plus those to be added, per Agency), according to the Basin Plan.

Step 4

     Use the network map and the Basin Plan to determine the information
needed in item 4.  Record the number, per Region type, of stations monitoring
effects of point-source discharges, both Existing (in column labeled E) and
Planned (column labeled P) stations upstream of the discharges in
item 4.a, and downstream, item 4.b. For each number of stations, also record
the number of discharge points (D) monitored, e.g., 4/6D, 3/3D, etc.

Step 5

     For each group of stations (upstream and downstream) listed in Step 4,
record the following:  (1) number of stations monitoring each parameter listed
--if both Region types are checked within one group, indicate the number of
stations by Region type for each parameter, using "n" to indicate average
rainfall and "a" to indicate arid, e.g., 3/n, 2/a; (2) the kind of sampling
(automatic or manual); (3) code the frequency as indicated on the Table.  If,
within a group, the frequency varies, record that most typical.

-------
Step 6

     Follow the procedures of Steps 4 and 5 for each of the listed categories
(items 5 through 17) that are applicable to the segment.  Regarding item 17,
the definition of Representative Point" is provided in the Glossary.

Step 7

     When all the stations are listed, by category and Region type, through
item 17, sum the totals for each Region type.  For categories 4.a and 4.b,
count the number of discharge points monitored, rather than the number of
stations.  Record the totals for each Region type in item 18.  These totals
provide an accounting of the number of activities monitored in the segment,
by Region type.
                                        10

-------
II.B  INFORMATION ON PERSONNEL

     Source of information:  Personnel Files
     Tabulation of Data:     Table 3

In Table 3, the first column lists general categories of network technical
positions.  The specific positions may vary with networks.   Fill in the appli-
cable positions, and the remaining information needed in the table.
                       TABLE 3.  PERSONNEL INFORMATION
1. Position
and
section

2. Years in
present
position

3. Starting
position
(if other
than present)
4. Salary of
starting
position
today
S. Salary
today


6. Years
with
network

7. On- job
training*
availability

Administration
Water monitoring
Laboratory
Data analysis
Compliance-engr.
*Courses made available by the network.
                                        11

-------
 II.C   INFORMATION ON FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND STANDARDS

     Source of  Information:  Inspection of facilities, laboratory
                             procedures, records, and discussions
                             with monitoring and laboratory super-
                             visory personnel.

     Tabulation of Data:     Table 4

     There are  seven sections in Table 4, each of which consists of a series
of questions with space provided for the answers.  Non-metric units of square
feet are used in this text as referenced in the source materials used.  The
conversion factor is sq. ft. x  0.0929 = m2.  All the information requested
will be used in the evaluations.  Much of the information regards laboratory
equipment and procedures.  If the network does not operate its own laboratory,
determine the information regarding the laboratory that performs analyses
for the network.

	TABLE 4.  INFORMATION ON FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND STANDARDS	

1.   Office Facilities

     a.   What  is the percentage of office personnel  with  a minimum of
          100 sq. ft. per person ? 	%
     b.   Are appropriate reference sources available, either in a
          library or on Division bookcases? 	

2.   Laboratory Facilities and  Equipment

     a.   Space

          (1) What is the percentage of laboratory personnel with a
              minimum of 150 sq. ft. per person? 	%
          (2) Is there sufficient bench-top space to  provide for per-
              manent setup of equipment, glassware, reagents, etc.? 	
          (3) Is hood space adequate? 	
          (4) Are drawers available for keeping  items in an orderly
              fashion? 	
          (5) Is there a separate locked area for enforcement samples? 	

     b.   Cleanliness

          (1) Is a check list maintained to assure area cleanliness?
          (2) Is a check list maintained to assure hood cleanliness?
          (3) Are safety showers available? 	
          (4) Are exits free of debris, etc.? 	
                                        12

-------
                         TABLE 4.   (continued")
c.   Environmental control

     (1) Is there separate refrigerator/freezer space for sample
         storage? 	
     (2) Is a separate area provided for dark, dry storage? 	
     (3) Are stock reference materials stored in a separate cold  area?
     (4) Are hoods on independent exhaust systems? 	
     (5) Are all hoods in working order? 	

     Equipment

     (1) If at least two units of permanent glassware set ups  (e.g., for
         titrations, COD, TKN, etc.) are available, record a value of
         1; if only one setup is available, record 0.5. 	
     (2) What percentage of calibrated volumetric glassware is of
         borosilicate glass, Class A designation? 	%
         What is approximate total number of volumetric glass con-
         tainers? 	
     (3) What percentage of plastic vessels or containers is of Teflon,
         polyprolylene, or high density polyethylene? 	%
         What is the approximate total number of plastic containers?
     (4) What is average age of equipment?
         1 to 3 years 	,
         3 to 6 years 	,
         6 to 10 years 	
     (5) Express as a decimal number the number of the six standard
         porosities of fritted ware that are available. 	
     (6) Is fritted ware properly stored and classified? 	
     (7) If each of the following is available, record a 1, if not,
         a zero:
         (a) incubator	;
         (b) still 	;
         (c) ovens 	;
         (d) water baths 	;
         (e) recorders 	;
         (f) NBS-certified thermometer 	;
         (g) compressed air	;
         (h) constant voltage supply	;
         (i) selective ion electrodes 	.

e.   Supplies (chemicals, reagents, gases)

     (1) Are supplies appropriately stored? 	
     (2) Are supplies appropriately handled? 	
     (3) Are standard reference materials used? 	
     (4) Is an inventory maintained? 	
     (5) Are established purchasing guidelines used?  	
     (6) Are chemicals dated on receipt of  shipment?  	
                                   13

-------
                       TABLE 4.  (continued")
Laboratory Instruments and Maintenance

a.   If each of the following instruments is available, record a 1,
     if not, a 0.

     (1) Both gross and fine analytical balances 	
     (2) Potentiometer (pH meter)                	
     (3) Conductivity meter                      	
     (4) Turbidimeter                            	
     (5) Visual spectrophotometer                	
     (6) Ultraviolet spectrophotometer           	
     (7) Infrared spectrophotometer              	
     (8) Atomic absorption spectrophotometer     	
     (9) Total carbon analyzer                   	
    (10) Gas chromatograph                       	
b.   Instrument specifications

     (1) Are analytical balances of appropriate sensitivities and proper
         mountings for tests performed (as defined in the EPA Handbook
         for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
         Laboratories)? 	
     (2) Are pH meters available with both normal and expanded scales?
      (3) Is the Turbidimeter used the Hach Model 2100A or equivalent?

      (4) Are the sensitivity and precision of the laboratory instruments
         sufficient to measure all necessary parameters as specified in
         the EPA manual, Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and
         Wastes? 	

     Instrumental and analytical method calibrations

     (1) Are there documented calibration schedules for all instruments?
     (2) Are these schedules according to Manufacturer's recommendations?

     (3) Has documentation been used to modify the schedule? 	
     (4) Are balances serviced at least once per year? 	
     (5) Are Class S weights available for periodic checks on balances?
     (6)  Are these checks documented? 	
     (7)  Are color standards or their equivalent used to verify wave-
         length settings of spectrophotometers? 	
     (8)  Are these results documented? 	
     (9)  Are volumetric analyses checked against primary standards?
                                   14

-------
                            TABLE 4.  (continued)
4.   Field Facilities, Instruments, and Maintenance

     a.   Facilities:

          (1) What is the percentage of stations with permanent housing? 	3
          (2) Is there at least one fully equipped mobile laboratory per
              Basin? 	
          (3) Is there at least one portable equipment vehicle per Basin? 	
          (4) Are portable refrigerated containers always available? 	

     b.   Field instruments

          If the following portable field instruments are always available,
          record a 1, if not, a 0.

          (1) pH meters 	
          (2) Conductivity meters 	
          (3) DO meters 	
          (4) Portable wet analytical gear 	

     c.   Fixed monitors

          (1) At what percent of the stations are there fixed monitors? 	\

     d.   Calibration of field instruments

          (1) Are calibrations documented at beginning and end of each day's
              use for all meters used for field measurements? 	
          (2) Are fixed continuous sensor calibrations checked and documented
              at least weekly? 	
          (3) Are calibration frequencies checked against manufacturer's
              recommendations? 	
          (4) Is documentation used to modify calibration schedule? 	

     e.   Maintenance of field instruments
          (1) Is regular maintenance on a documented schedule? 	
          (2) Is documented maintenance used to modify the schedule?
          (3) Is the schedule compared with manufacturer's recommendations?


     f.    Controls on field measurements

          (1) Is instrument down time documented and evaluated? 	
          (2) Is transmitted data validated? 	
          (3) Are secondary standards validated? 	
          (4) Is there a preventative maintenance schedule? 	
          (5) Are statistical control chart techniques used? 	
                                        15

-------
                       TABLE 4.   (continued)
5.   Analytical Measurement Controls

     a.   Sample  containers, preservation   techniques, and holding times

               Is  glass used for  all organic analyses?
           (2) Are preservation  techniques  those  cited  in Methods  for
              Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastewater  (Ref.  2)?
           (3)  If  techniques  other  than  those of Ref.  2  are used,  are  data
               on  a variety of  sample  types provided to  document use of the
               techniques? 	
           (4)  Are holding times  those cited in Ref. 2?  	
           (5)  If  other  than  Ref. 2 holding times  are  used, are data cited
               on  a variety of  sample  types to document  the use? 	
           (6)  Are volumes of samples  sufficient for all needed/desired
               analyses? 	

      b.    Analytical  methods used

           (1)  Do  analyses use  procedures  in recognized  manuals such as EPA,
               GS, SM, ASTM,  and/or those  published in scientific  journals?

           (2)  Is  each method written  up and on file for review? 	
           (3)  Are test procedures  for  compliance monitoring  those  defined
               in 40 CFR 136? 	
           (4)  Are statistical  control  chart  techniques used? 	

      c.    Cleaning methods

           (1)  Standard cleaning methods  (for glassware and equipment)  are
               followed,  adapted to analyses  to be performed, 	%  of the
               time;
           (2)  Special  cleaning requirements  (for spectrophotometers,  trace
               metals,  organic  analyses)  are  followed 	%  of the time;
           (3)  Filters  are cleaned  by standard methods"     % of the  time.

      d.    Validation techniques

           (1)  How many replicate analyses  are performed  to every set or to
               approximately every  20 samples? 	
           (2)  Is  use made of (a) blind samples 	;  (b) split samples
               (c)  spiking samples  in field at times of collection 	?
           (3)  How many spiked  samples  are  run to approximately every
               20  samples? 	
           (4)  Is  there an on-going interlaboratory  comparison  program? 	
6.   Documentation

     a.   Is a documented check  list maintained  on:

          (1) Compressed air purity? 	
          (2) Distilled water purity? 	

                                      16

-------
                       TABLE 4.   (continued)
           (3) Deionized water purity? 	
           (4) Vacuum  system  freedom  of  impurities? 	
           (5) Reagent and  solvent preparation and standards? 	

     b.   Are corrections  of bench records  crossed out,  not erased? 	
     c.   What percent of  data records  are  dated and signed? 	
     d.    Is a written chain-of-custody procedure available and in use? _
     e.   What percent of  analyses are  recorded in permanent form? 	~~
     f.   What is the form:   (a) unbound sheets 	;
           (b) bound notebooks
     g.   Are samples identified by  number? 	
     h.   Are all samples  logged in? 	

7.   Specified Quality Assurance Program

     a.    Is there a  written quality assurance program? 	
     b.   Has a Quality Assurance Officer,  or equivalent, been appointed,
          and is required  training being provided?
     c.   What finite percentage of monitoring resources is formally
          committed to quality assurance and related activities? 	
II.D  INFORMATION ON DATA DISSEMINATION AND UTILIZATION

Determine from office files and discussion with personnel, answers to
the questions of Table 5, and record the results in the Table.

	TABLE 5.  DATA DISSEMINATION AND UTILIZATION	

1.   What is average data turnaround time, i.e., time from data analysis
     until it is available to a user?
2.   Are data supplied to STORET?

3.   Are water quality data released to the public at least annually?

4.   Are the data used to develop and/or support models?

5.   Do data support enforcement actions if needed?

6.   Does data flow routinely to the next higher Agency?
     (i.e., if local to State, if State to U.S. EPA)




II.E  INFORMATION ON BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS

Office files should contain needed information on budget allocations to
be recorded in Table 6.
                                      17

-------
                                    TABLE 6.   INFORMATION ON  BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS
     Water monitoring  agency
oo
                                                                      Number basins in network
      Indicate whether major  emphasis is:  Water quality monitoring

                                          Compliance 	

      A.   Budget  information

          1.   Total budget $	
          2.    Budget  for activity

          3.    Percent of total
     Personnel

4.   Salaries and Benefits

5.   Percent of activity
      budget (2)

6.   Percent of total
      budget (1)
                                                                                       Technical Services
                                           Administration and         Water quality    Lab  and data
                                           public information          monitoring        analysis
                          7.   Total personnel budget

                          8.   Percent of total budget
                                                                                                   Compliance


                                                                                                   $	

-------
                                 SECTION  III

                       AREA OF NETWORK PLAN AND DESIGN
In this Area, ratings are carried out only for two Elements -- the number
of stations in the  selected  segment and station location.  The latter was
definitely weighted the most important factor among the experts queried
in the Letter Survey.  Site  characteristics were considered next in impor-
tance, for obvious  reasons.   Poor quality of certain Site Characteristics,
such as Site Accessibility,  ease of access to the water, and design of
fixed instrumentation could  affect quality control (of prime importance
since that affects  data validity) and sampling frequency.  However, not
only can quality definition  of  these three items be subject to personal
bias, but also the  compilation  of information needed to determine the
quality (including  actually  visiting the sites) could be too lengthy a
task to fit the constraints  of  gathering data and performing the planned
network evaluation  within five  days.  Therefore, only the two Elements are
considered in this  Area.  A  Rating is derived for the number of Stations,
first.
111.A     RATING OF NUMBER OF  FIXED STATIONS

     This Element  is  divided into  two  sub-Elements, scored separately.  The
scores are then combined  to derive the Element rating.

III.A.I   Stations by Category

     For this  evaluation, the  number of  stations monitoring each category is
given a score, using  the  State Basin Plan as the reference standard.

     The methods for  the  first two scores are detailed to clarify the proce-
dure.  The remaining  ones are  listed in  order.  Procedures are stated in
"Steps," with  corresponding "Steps" indicated in Table 7, along with the
Source Reference  (items in Table 2).   All information needed is recorded in
Table 2.  Fill in  only those Procedural  Steps for which categories are appli-
cable in the selected segment.

Step 1

     a.   Record on the first  line of  Table 7, in the column labeled "No. E,"
the number of  existing stations for all  Region types, upstream of discharges
(sum the numbers for  item 4.a,  column  E).

     b.   Record on the same line  in the column labeled "No. P," the total
number of Planned  stations monitoring  upstream (sum the item 4.a numbers in
column P).


                                         19

-------
              TABLE 7.  RATING OF EXISTING STATIONS BY CATEGORY
E = number of Existing Stations, per category, items 4 through 17, Table 2.

P = total number of Planned Stations per category, items 4 through 17,
    Table 2.

Score = No. E divided by No. P.
Source ref. No. E No. P Score
Table 2
Step 1.
Step 2.
Step 3.
Step 4.
Step 5.
Step 6.
Step 7.
Step 8.
Step 9
Step 10.
Step 11.
Step 12.
Step 13.
Step 14.
Step 15.
Step 16.
Step 17.
Step 18.
Step 19.
Step 20.
Step 21.
Step 22.
Item
4. a
4-b
5. a
S.b
6. a
6.b
7.
8.
9.
10. a
10. b
11.
12
13. a
13. b
14. a
14. b
15
16
17
Sum =
Sub-Element rating r, =

NOTE:  The closer the value of r, is to 1, the closer the number of
       stations is to the required number.
                                       20

-------
     c.   In the column labeled "Score," record as a decimal number the value
of No. E divided by No. P.  This number provides a score, when expressed as
a percent, of the number of existing stations monitoring upstream of point
source discharges with respect to the Basin Plan number of stations.

Step 2

     a.   Record on the second line of Table 7, in the column labeled No. E,
the number of existing stations for all Region types (sum the numbers in
item 4.b, column E, Table 2) monitoring downstream of point source discharges.

     b.   Record on the same line, in the column labeled No. P, the total
number of Planned stations monitoring downstream of point source discharges
(sum the numbers in item 4.b, column P, Table 2).

     c.   In the column labeled score, record as a decimal number the value
of No. E divided by No. P.  This number, expressed as a percent, expresses
the degree to which the existing number of stations monitoring downstream of
point source discharges meets requirements of the Basin Plan.

Steps 3 through 20 are a repetitive operation of Steps 1 and 2 for the fol-
lowing inputs:

Step 3

     The number of stations monitoring the waters upstream of municipal and
industrial centers;

Step 4

     The number of stations monitoring downstream of municipal and industrial
centers;

Step 5

     The number of stations monitoring upstream of urban/suburban areas;

Step 6

     The number of stations monitoring downstream of urban/suburban areas;

Step 7

     The number of stations monitoring water-supply intakes;

Step 8

     The number of stations monitoring reservoirs;

Step 9

     The number of stations monitoring recreational water bodies;

                                       21

-------
 Step 10

      The  number  of  stations monitoring upstream of watershed/wilderness areas;

 Step 11

      The  number  of  stations monitoring downstream of watershed/wilderness
 areas;

 Step 12

      The  number  of  stations monitoring eutrophic or potentially eutrophic
 water bodies;

 Step 13

      The  number  of  stations at mouths of significant tributaries to mainstem
 rivers or bays;

 Step 14

      The  number  of  stations monitoring upstream of irrigated farmland;

 Step 15

      The  number  of  stations monitoring downstream of irrigated farmland;

 Step 16

      The  number  of  stations monitoring upstream of mining or geothermal areas;

 Step 17

      The  number  of  stations monitoring downstream of mining or geothermal
 areas;

 Step 18

      The  number  of  upstream boundary stations;

 Step 19

      The  number  of  downstream boundary stations;

 Step 20

     The number  of  stations in representative  locations  in rivers,  coastal
areas, impoundments;

Step 21

     Sum the scores for all categories of stations for which number of stations

                                       22

-------
was scored, and record the number in Table 7.

Step 22

     Divide the sum of Step 21 by the number of categories evaluated, and
record the value in Table 7.  This decimal, expressed as percent, provides an
overall rating r^ for the sub-Element, the Number of Stations by category
in the Primary network segments.  If the segment is representative of the
network, this will serve as a network rating.


III.A.2  Rating of Stations Monitoring Point Source Discharges

     Monitoring receiving waters above and below point source discharges
serves as a check on the Permit monitoring in the effluent streams, and is a
necessary function for compliance and enforcement.  A rapid evaluation of such
monitoring is detailed in the following seven Procedural Steps.  Table 8 is
provided for recording, and the Source Reference items in Table 2 are noted
for each Step in the Table.

Step 1

     Record the total number of point source discharges in the segment.

Step 2

     Sum and record the number of discharges (D) monitored upstream  (see
footnote to item 4, Table 2).

Step 5

     Divide the number recorded in Step 2 by the number in Step 1, and record
the answer in the score column.

Step 4

     Sum and then record the number of point source discharges monitored
downstream.

Step 5

     Divide the number in Step 4 by the number in Step 1, and record the
answer in the score column.

Step 6

     Sum the two scores.

Step 7

     Divide the sum by 2 to obtain the value of r2, the rating of  the  sub-
Element, Point Source Discharge Monitoring in the segment.  Since  this  segment
                                       23

-------
 was selected as representative of the network,  the  rating  (where 1 is the op-
 timal value) should also be representative of the network.

      If the value of Step 7 is 1, the monitoring with  respect to point source
 discharges is optimal.   The percentage less than 1  indicates the percentage
 of point source discharges that are not being monitored.


        TABLE 8.  RATING OF STATIONS MONITORING POINT SOURCE DISCHARGES
Steps
Step 1.
Step 2.
Step 3.
Step 4.
Step 5.
Step 6
Step 7
Source Ref .
Table 2
Item
1.
4. a
	
4.b

Sum score Step 3 +
Sub-Element rating
Number of
Point Number
Discharges Monitored Score
' ' ' *•
•. ' ^ -, -. f
. r ....>. 	 ._
4 *
Step 2/Step 1
•, f f*,
f f "" f f
Step 4/Step 1
score Step 5 =
r2 = Step 6/2 =
 III.A.3  Rating for the Element

      Calculate R.,  the rating  for  this Element by summing the following  two
 products:

      From Table 7,  record  the  value of r, 	x  (.80) =

      From Table 8,  record  the  value of r2 	x  (.20) =

                                             Element Rating  = R,  = 	
III.B  RATING OF EFFECTIVENESS OF STATION LOCATION

The rating of the effectiveness of station location is actually based  on
cost-effectiveness.  It is assumed that each station is properly  located
to monitor effects on the receiving waters of those activities designated
for the station to monitor.  In this element, the number of stations in
the primary network segment is compared with the number of activities
                                        24

-------
monitored,  to  determine the ratio.   In general,  station locations  are
considered  effective if the number of activities monitored is  greater  than
the  number  of  stations.

      There  may be exceptions to the general definition of an effective
station location, due to specific regional problems that may require more
than one station to monitor effects of only one  activity.   Such  stations
are  usually part of the secondary network.  If such conditions exist in
the  segment chosen for evaluation,  and if the stations are considered  part
of the  primary network, the Rating of this element  does not change, but the
condition should be noted for special consideration.

      The procedures are listed as Steps,  with Table 9  for recording values
of items in Source Reference Table 2.  Figure 1  is  provided for  the evalua-
tion.

Procedural  Steps

Step 1

      Record in Table 9 the sum of the existing effectively contributing
stations in the segment.   (They are listed by Agency,  but  record the total
number,  item 3.}

Step 2

      Sum the existing totals for the two  Region  types  in item 18, and  record
that number as "Total Activities" in Table 9.

Step 3

      Divide the total of Step 2 by  the value  of  Step 1,  and record the value
as the  score.
	TABLE 9.  SCORE FOR EFFECTIVENESS OF STATION LOCATIONS	

                       Source Ref.
                        table 2.        Number of       Total
	          item	stations      activities      Score

Step 1                     3


Step 2                    18


Step 3
(Step 2/Step 1)
                                       25

-------
Step 4

     Locate the score for Station Location on the horizontal axis of Figure 1,
locate the intersection of that value on the plot, read the Element Rating on
the vertical axis, and record it.

                    R_ = Element Rating = 	.
     The closer the Element Rating value is to 1, the more cost-effective are
the station locations.
        o.6
     PJ
        0.2
                                 ±ti
                      1.5
    2
SCORE
2.5
              Figure  1.  Rating for  station location
III.C  EVALUATION OF AREA OF PLAN AND DESIGN

The Evaluation of this Area is derived by summing the weighted Ratings of both
Elements.

     From Section III.A.3, Rj = Rating for number of Stations 	

                                Then RA = RX x (.386) = 	.

     From Section III.B, R2 = Rating for Station Effectiveness = 	

                              Then RB = R2 x (.614) = 	.
    Area Evaluation = R.  +
    The optimal  area evaluation is 1.
                                        26

-------
                                 SECTION  IV

                           EVALUATION OF  PERSONNEL
In this Section, two Elements  are  Rated:   (1) Optimal Budgetary Alloca-
tions to Administrative  and non-Administrative Personnel;  (2) Technical
Services Personnel Qualifications.  The two Element ratings are then
weighted using  factors derived from the Letter Survey, and combined to
provide an Area Evaluation.
 IV.A  BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS

     In this Element,  the Rating  is  derived from information in Table 6 and
 from Figures 2 and  3.  The procedure is described in the following Steps.

 Procedural Steps

 Step 1

     From Table 6,  item  7, the Total Network Personnel Budget    =  	

 Step 2

     From Table 6,  item  2, the Total Technical Services Budget   =  	
           (Sum of Monitoring  + Lab 5 Data Analysis + Compliance)

 Step 3

     The value of Step 1 divided  by  Step 2                       =  	

 Step 4

     From Table 6,  record the value  of item 6 for Administration
 and Public Information                                          =  	

 Step 5

     Locate the point  on Figure 2 that represents the value determined in
 Step 3 along the horizontal axis  and the value in Step 4 along the vertical
 axis.

 Step 6

     If the point determined  in Step 5 is in the shaded region of Figure 2,
 record in Step 13 the  value 1 as  the Budgetary Allocation  Rating, and pro-
 ceed to Section B.   If the point  is  in the unshaded area,  (above Curve A)
proceed to Step 7.

                                        27

-------
m t>  CH
   "*•* o »
   o <- o ss
   ""' £ d. Q.

     |J|


     JsS
         cr
         3
00
                  o
                  o
               §
               CQ
              tu
              o.
                        0.6    0.7
                                        0.8    0.9     1.0    1-1    1.2    1.3


                                          TOTAL NETWORK PERSONNEL BUDGET




                                          TOTAL TECH.  SERV. BUDGET
1.4    1.5
                     Figure 2.   Determination of administrative personnel budget allocation

-------
 Step  7

      If the point located in Step 5 is not in the shaded region of Figure  2
 (i.e.,  it  is above curve A), determine the value on the vertical axis of the
 location on Curve A immediately below the point, and record the value
 Step  8

      Record the value of item 8,  Table 6

 Step  9

      The  value of Step 7 divided  by Step 8

 Step  10

      The  value of Step 4 divided  by Step 7                          = 	

 Step  11

      In Figure 3,  the line whose  S* value is  closest to the
 value of  Step  9                                                    =

 Step  12

      Locate the value of Step 10  along the  horizontal axis of Figure 3.
 Locate the  intersection of that value  with  the  line determined in Step 11.
 At  the corresponding point on the vertical  axis, read the Budgetary-
 Allocation-to-Administrative-Personnel Rating.  Record the value in
 Step  13.

 Step  13

      Budgetary-Allocation Rating                                    = 	
IV.B TECHNICAL SERVICES  PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

     This Element  is divided  into the  two  sub-Elements of Experience and
On-Job Formal Training,  which are rated  separately, using information in
Table 3, and Figures 4 and  5.  The results are then combined to derive the
Elemental Rating,  using  weighting factors  from the Letter Survey.

IV.B.I  Experience Rating and Procedural Steps

Step 1

     Sum the years (in Table  3,  column 2)  that all Technical Services Person-
nel (i.e., all non-Administrative Personnel) have been in their present posi-
tions, divide by the number of such personnel, and list the result    	,
                                        29

-------
n

E-
UJ
C/D
6
H


§
HH



g
o
E-i
OJ

CJ
a
1.0
      1.2     1.4     1.6     1.8     2.0     2.2    2.4    2.6     2.8




          BUDGETARY ALLOCATION TO ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL






    OPTIMAL  BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS TO ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL



Figure 3.  Budgetary-allocation-to-administrative-personnel rating
                                                                      |[|0.45

                                                                      3.0

-------
Step 2

     On the horizontal  axis  of Fig.  4,  locate  the value of Step 1.
Locate the intersection of that value with  the curve, and read the
corresponding value on  the vertical  axis.   Record that value, the
Experience rating for Technical Services Personnel                  =

IV.B.2  Special On-Job  Formal  Training  Rating  and Procedural Steps

     "Special On-Job Formal  Training" consists of training courses, available
to personnel who have been employed  by  the  network for a minimum of 1 year.
Successful completion of  a course  allows advancement to a higher salary level
more rapidly than by normal  promotion.  If  the network does not offer such
training or make it available  to personnel, skip the calculations of this
Section, and fill in 0  for the Rating in Step  4.  If such training is avail-
able, proceed with the  following Steps  to determine the Training Rating.

     The column numbers in the Procedural Steps reference the numbered
columns of Table 3.

Step 1

     List the number of Technical  Services  Personnel for whom training
programs are available  (column 7)  	.

Step 2

     List the total number of  Technical Services Personnel (column 1)
Step 3

     Divide the number  listed  in Step 1 by the number listed in Step 2 and
record the value of f,  the fraction of Technical Services Personnel for
whom training  is available;                                      f = 	
Step 4

     Use Figure 5 to determine the rating value for training available to
Technical Services Personnel.  The result of Section IV.B.I, Step 1, lists
the average years of experience  in position for Technical Services Personnel.
Four curves are shown  in Figure  5 for average years experience.  Select the
curve that most closely matches  the result of Section IV.B.I, Step 1.  Locate
the intersection of the value of f (recorded in Step 3, above}, which is
plotted on the horizontal axis of Figure 5, with the selected curve.  Then
determine the corresponding value of Training on the vertical axis.  Training
rating =  	  •
                                        31

-------
CM
to
                                          AVERAGE YEARS IN PRESENT POSITION



                                          Figure 4.  Experience rating curve

-------
                     j Average Experience of 1 year
            Average Experience of 3 years ffl|[|H}|t|jj[jH
     Average Experience of 5 years MtiJTuftttllifflTTrriLLCfflini
Training Rating
                                               Average Experience 10 years or moreSfllttffffl
     0.1     0.2     0.3      0.4     0.5     0.6     0.7     0.8     0.9     1.0
             f(FRACTION OF  PERSONNEL  FOR WHOM TRAINING  IS AVAILABLE)
                     Figure 5.   Rating for  on-job training  program

-------
IV.B.3  Rating of Personnel Qualifications

     A Rating of Personnel Qualifications is provided by the sum of the
following two weighted ratings:

     0.554 x Experience rating of Section B.I, Step 2 = 	.

     0.446 x Training rating of Section B.2, Step 4   = 	.

                Personnel Qualifications Rating = Sum = 	.

IV.C  EVALUATION OF AREA OF PERSONNEL

     An Evaluation of the Area of Personnel is provided by the sum of
weighted Element Ratings:

     0.471 x (Budgetary Allocation Rating of Section IV.A, Step 13) = _

     0.529 x (Personnel Qualifications Rating of Section IV.B.3)    = 	

                                              Area Evaluation = Sum =
                                       34

-------
                                   SECTION V

             EVALUATION OF  THE  AREA OF  FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
All Elements concerning  Laboratory equipment and instruments should be
rated.  If the network does not operate its own laboratory, the ratings
should be done with respect to the laboratory that performs the anal-
yses.  All Items rated affect efficiency and effectiveness of opera-
tions.  The information  needed has been recorded in Table 4.  The
rating process is one of recording the value of the Item in Table 10,
multiplying that value by the listed weighting factor, and recording
the "rating" for each Item.  With one exception, the value of each Item
is explicit in Table 4,  either as a percentage, which is recorded in
Table 10 as a decimal number, as a specified numerical value, or as a
"Yes," which has a value of 1, or a "No," which has a value of 0.  The
one value not in Table 4 concerns equipment, which is rated in Element
V.B, and will be defined there.
     Use Table  10  to  record  the values and determine the "ratings" for the
Items of each Element and  the Element Ratings.  The Source Reference is given
in the first column of Table 10 for each  Item, an abbreviated title is given
in the second column,  the  third space is  blank for recording the value of
the Item, and a weighting  factor  is given for each Item in the fourth column.
Weighting factors  are derived from responses to the Letter Survey.  The
product of the  value  and the weighting factor is the "rating," to be recorded
in the fifth column,  for each Item.  The  Element Rating is recorded in the
sixth column, headed  R^.   The methodology is explained in detail for the first
Element, Office Facilities.

V.A  OFFICE FACILITIES

     Only two Items are considered significant in affecting the efficiency of
the operations  in  this Element:   Space Allocation and Availability of Refer-
ence Documents.  The  method  for rating each and for deriving the Element
Rating are given in the following Steps.

Procedural Steps

Step 1

     In Table 10 (at  the end of this Section), record the value for Space
Allocation:  from  the response to item l.a in Table 4, determine the "value,"
i.e., if 100% of office personnel have a  minimum of 100 sq.ft.  (9.29 m'2) per
person, the value  is  1; if 75% of office  personnel have a minimum of 100 sq.ft,
per person, the value is 0.75.
                                        35

-------
 Step  2

      Multiply  the recorded value by the  listed weighting factor of  .467 and
 record  the  result in  the  "rating" column.

 Step  3

      Record the  value for Availability of Reference Documents. If the response
 to item l.b, Table  4  is "Yes," the value is  1; if the response is "No," the
 value is 0.

 Step  4

      The "rating" for the Item is then either 1 x 0.533 =  0.533, or 0.

 Step  5

      Sum the two Item "ratings" to determine the value of  R,  and record the
 result  in the  R.  column.


 V.B  LABORATORY  FACILITIES

 Note:  If the  network does not operate its own laboratory,  these ratings
 and those relating  to Laboratory Instruments should be carried out,
 using information on  the  laboratory that performs the analyses.

      The Element of Laboratory Facilities is divided into  five sub-Elements,
 each  of which  is composed of several  Items.  Follow the procedure detailed
 for Element A  to determine a "rating" for each Item in sub-Element  1, in
 Table 10.   Sum the  five "ratings" and record the result for r^.  Follow the
 same  procedure for  sub-Elements 2 and 3.  In sub-Element 4, the value of
 average equipment age is  given a value,  depending on the response to item
 2.d (4)  in  Table 4.   If the

          average age is  1 to 3 years, the value is 1;

          average age is  3 to 6 years, the value is 0.8;

          average age is  6 to 10 years,  the value is 0.5.

 Follow  the  methodology as above, and  determine and record  "ratings" for r.
 and for  rs.  The Rating for  the Element, R2, is derived by summing
 r,  +  r2  + r3 + r4 + rg and is recorded in the R. column.


V.C   LABORATORY  INSTRUMENTS

     The "value" of each  Item is that recorded for the referenced  item in
Table 4.  Use Table 10 to record the  rating  for each, and  the Element  Rating.
                                         36

-------
V.D  LABORATORY INSTRUMENT QUALIFICATIONS

     For this Element,  if the  response  to referenced items in Table 4 is
"yes," the value of the Item is  1;  if the response is "No," the value is 0.
Record the value and rating for  each item in Table 10, and derive and record
the Element Rating.

V.E  FIELD FACILITIES

     Derive and record  the rating  for each  Item  listed, and for the Element.
The value of each  Item  is determined by the answers in the Source References
of Table 4.  If the percentage of  stations  with  permanent housing is 50% or
more, record the value  as 1.   If the percentage  is less than 50%, the value
is the actual percent divided  by 50%, e.g., if 25% of the stations have per-
manent housing, the value would  be 0.25/0.5 = 0.5.  For the other Items, the
values are 1 if the answer is  yes,  or 0 if  the answer is no.

V.F  FIELD INSTRUMENTS

     Derive and record  a rating  for each Item listed, and for the Element.
The values of the  first four items are  explicit, either 1 or 0.  For the
fifth item, if 50% or more of  the  stations  have  fixed monitors, the value is
1.  If less than 50%, the value  is the  percentage expressed as a decimal,
divided by 0.5.

V.G  AREA EVALUATION

     Record the Rating  for each  Element, multiply that by the listed weighting
factor, and record the  product as  the Relative Rating (Rel R) of each Element
in the Area.  The  Area  Evaluation  is the sum of  the Relative Ratings.  Note
that the maximum score  would be  1.0, or 100%.  Thus, if the Evaluation is
0.94, the major Facilities and Equipment affecting network effectiveness are
within 6% of being optimal.  In  addition, the degree to which each Element is
performing with respect to the Area can be  gauged by how close the Relative
Rating is to the listed weighting  factor, and the efficiency of each Element
can be gauged by how close the Element  Rating is to 1.
                                         37

-------
                         TABLE 10.   RATINGS FOR FACILITIES
Source ref.
  table 4
item number
                               Item
                                       Value x wt.  factor = rating
 l.a.
 l.b.
 2.a.(1)
 2.a.(2)
 2.a.(3)
 2.a.(4)
 2.a.(5)
  2.b.(2)
  2.b.(3)
  2.b.(4)
      CD
      (2)
      (3)
      (4)
  2.C.C5)
2.c
2.c
2.c
2.C
  2.d.(2)
  2.d.(3)
  2.d.(4)
  2.d.(5)
  2.d.(6)
 2.d.
 2.d.
 2.d.
 2.d.
 2.d.
 2.d.
 2.d.
    (7) (a)
    (7)(b)
    (7) W
    C7) (d)
    (7) (e)
    (7) (f)
    (7)(g)
 2.d.(7)(h)
A.  Office Facilities
    Space Allocation
    Availability of Reference
      Documents

B.  Laboratory Facilities

1.  Space
    Individual space allocation
    Bench-top space
    Hood space adequacy
    Drawer space
    Locked area availability

2.  Cleanliness
    Checks on area cleanliness
    Checks on hood cleanliness
    Availability of safety showers
    Debris-free exits

3.  Environmental Control
    Refrig/freezer storage
    Dark dry storage
    Ref. material cold storage
    Separate hood exhausts
    All hoods operable

4.  Equipment
    Permanent set up availability
    Quality of volumetric glassware
    Quality of plastic vessels
    Avg. equipment age
    Fritted ware availability
    Storage of fritted ware


5.  Availability of Support Facilities
    Incubator
    Still
    Ovens
    Water baths
    Recorders
    NBS thermometer
    Compressed air
    Constant voltage source
    Selective ion electrodes
                                                               0.467
                                                               0.533
                                                                            R, = sum =
                                                               0.040
                                                               0.042
                                                               0.041
                                                               0.040
                                                               0.042
                                                               r. = sum
                                                                 057
                                                                 058
                                                                 031
                                                                 030
                                                                 = sum
 0.042
 0.035
 0.031
 0.031
 0.031
r_ = sum  =

 0.045
 0.044
 0.044
 0.036
 0.036
 0.026

 4 = sum  =

 0.022
 0.030
 0.022
 0.022
 0.026
 0.023
 0.023
 0.028
 0.022
r. = sum  =
                                                 38

-------
TABLE 10.   fcontinuedl
Source ref .
table 4
item number


3.a.(l)
3.a.(2)
3.a.(3)
3. a. (4)
3.a.(5)
3.a.(6)
3.a.(7)
3.a.(8)
3.a.(9)
3. a. (10)


3.b.(l)
3.b.(2)
3.b.(3)
3.b.(4)
v » *r » ^ f

4. a. (1)
4. a. (2)
4. a. (3)
4. a. (4)



4.b.(l)
4.b.(2)
4.b.(3)
4.b.(4)
4 c fll








Item
C . Laboratory Instrument s
Availability of:
Analytical balances
Potential (pH meter)
Conductivity meter
Turbidimeter
Visual Spectrophotometer
U.V. Spectrophotometer
I.R. Spectrophotometer
A. A. Spectrophotometer
Total Carbon Analyzer
Gas Chromatograph

D. Lab. Instrument Qualifications
Analytical balances
pH meters
Turbidimeter
Overall sensitivity S precision

E. Field Facilities
Permanent housing
Fully equipped mobile lab.
Portable equipment vehicle
Portable refrigerated containers

F. Field Instruments
Availability of Portable:
pH meter
Conductivity meter
DO meter
Wet-analytical gear
Fixed Monitors

G. Area Evaluation
Record values of: R.
R;
R,
*a
A
BS
Value x wt. factor = rating Rj


0.128
0.102
0.100
0.086
0.118
0.076
0.076
0.120
0.095
0.099 	
R, = sum »

0.25
0.13
0.07
0.55
R4 = su» • 	

0.207
0.255
0.283
0.255
Rs = sum = 	


0.153
0.102
0.256
0.102
0.387 	
R, = sum =
6 	
Values x wt. factor = Rel. R.
0.109
0.184
0.189
0.190
0.149
0.179
               Area Evaluation = Sum Rel. R.
                  39

-------
                                  SECTION VI

                      EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF SAMPLING
 Relative to the Area of Sampling, only two major Elements are considered:
  (1)  Parameters monitored as a function of station location and Region
 types; and  (2) Frequency of monitoring.  Analytical procedures are con-
 sidered in the Area of Quality Assurance.  The selected segment will be
 used as a representative of the network.
 VI.A.     RATING OF PARAMETERS MONITORED

      In the Rating of parameters monitored,  the indicator parameters,  as func-
 tions of Region type and Station-use (defined in the Introduction, Table 1)
 are used as weighting factors in the rating method.   Because tight constraints
 are placed on effluent discharges, indicator parameters are limited,  except
 upstream and downstream of point source discharges.

      Table 11 is provided as a work sheet for rating the parameters monitored
 in each category, and Table 12 provides the weighting factors for the indi-
 cator parameters for the various station categories  and two Region types.   The
 procedures are again indicated in Steps, with Source references in either
 Table 2 or 12, as indicated.  The procedure, the same for each Step through
 21, is as follows:   on the first line for each Step, or category, that is
 applicable, record in Table 11 the Region type (from Table 1) and the "value"
 for each parameter, which is the Table 2 value of N, expressed as a decimal
 number.   On the next line of the Step,  record as the weight, the weight given
 in Table 12 for the appropriate indicator parameters, by category and Region
 types.   On the third line of the Step,  record the rating, which is the product
 of the value times  the weight for each indicator parameter.  Then sum the
 ratings  and record  that sum as the category  rating in the right-hand  column.

      In  Step 21,  sum all the category ratings,  and record the value.   Step 22
 provides the Rating for parameters monitored,  the sum of the category ratings
 divided by  the number of categories considered.

 VLB   RATING  FOR FREQUENCY OF MONITORING

     The segment selected in Section II to provide information for the data
base will again be  used as  representative of the primary network operations.
Parameters monitored have been divided  into  five groups, as shown in  Table 13.
The first Step of this  rating procedure consists of  recording in Table 13 the'
average frequency of monitoring each group of parameters for each applicable
category.  The Source reference items (in Table  2) are listed in the  first
column of Table 13.  Frequency of monitoring, which  was coded by letter in
Table 2,  is interpreted numerically in  this  rating procedure.

                                         40

-------
                       TABLE  11.   EVALUATION OF PARAMETERS  MONITORED
The rating for each parameter is the product of the value times the weight
                     Value of Step 21 divided by number of Categories

-------
      TABLE  12.   WEIGHTING  FACTORS FOR  INDICATOR PARAMETERS BY CATEGORY
1.  Receiving Waters Up-  or Downstream  of Significant
    Point  Source Discharges
      Parameter
Weighting
 factor
     Trace  metals
     Toxic  materials
     Algal  nutrients
     Bacteriological parameters
     Biota/species diversity
     Temperature
     DO
     Specific conductance
     Turbidity
     PH
     Alkalinity/acidity
  0.111
  0.111
  0.102
  0.094
  0.084
  0.094
  0.099
  0.082
  0.057
  0.084
  0.084
    Region of "Normal" Rainfall
 2.  Up- and Downstream of Municipal and Industrial Centers
Weighting
factor
Parameter
Bacteriological parameters
DO
Biota/species diversity
pH
Turbidity/suspended solids
0.237
0.218
0.202
0.175
0.168
3. Up and Downstream of Urban/Suburban Areas
Weighting
factor
Parameter
DO
Bacteriological parameters
Algal nutrients
Turbidity
0.291
0.282
0.2S5
0.171
Arid Region
                                          Parameter
                                          Parameter
                                                                      Weighting
                                                                       factor
Bacteriological parameters
DO
Biota/species diversity
PH
Turbidity/suspended solids
Alkalinity
Specific conductance
Algal nutrients
0.157
0.144
0.133
0.115
0.111
0.1S5
0.078
0.148
                                                                      Weighting
                                                                       factor
DO
Bacteriological parameters
Algal nutrients
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Specific conductance
pH
0.162
0.157
0.142
0.095
0.154
0.136
0.154
                                          42

-------
TABLE 12.   (continued)
4. Drinking Water Uptakes, Reservoirs, Recreational Water Bodies
Weighting Weighting
»«-«•» "" Parameters
Bacteriological Parameters
Toxic Materials
Trace Metals
DO
Algal Nutrients
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Biota/Species Diversity
Temperature
pH
Specific conductance
0.141
0.120
0.120
0.109
0.091
0.091
0.090
0.085
0.082
0.070
S. Watershed/Wilderness area
a. Upstream
Weighting
factor
Parameters
DO
Biota/Species Diversity
Temperature
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Algal Nutrients
Specific conductance
pH
Trace Metals
b. Downstream
Parameters
DO
Temperature
Algal Nutrients
Trace Metals
0.162
0.1SS
0.154
0.154
0.145
0.102
0.068
0.060
Weighting
factor
0.311
0.295
0.278
0.115

Region of Average Rainfall



Bacteriological Parameters
Toxic Materials
Trace Metals
DO
Algal Nutrients
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Biota/Species Diversity
Temperature
pH
Specific conductance
Alkalinity
0.131
0.111
0.111
0.100
0.084
0.084
0.084
0.078
0.076
0.064
0.076
Weighting
factor
Parameters
DO
Biota/Species Diversity
Temperature
Turbidity/Suspended Solids
Algal Nutrients
Specific conductance
pH
Trace Metals
Alkalinity
Parameters
DO
Temperature
Algal Nutrients
Trace Metals
Alkalinity
pll
Specific conductance
0.154
0.147
0.146
0.146
0.137
0.097
0.065
0.057
0.053
Weighting
factor
0.213
0.203
0.191
0.079
0.090
0.090
0.134

Arid Region
6. Upstream and Downstream of Irrigated Farmland
Weighting
factor
Parameter Parameter
DO 0.357
Bacteriological parameters 0.286
Turbidity/suspended solids 0.214
Algal nutrients 0.143

DO
Bacteriological parameters
Turbidity/suspended solids
Algal nutrients
Alkalinity
Specific conductance
pH
Weighting
factor
0.217
0.174
0.130
0.087
0.130
0.130
0.130


             43

-------
                                    TABLE  12.   (continued)
7. Mining or Geothermal Regions
Weighting
Parameter factor
Trace metals
Toxic materials
Specific conductance
pH
Alkalinity/acidity
Turbidity/suspended solids
0.20
0.20
0.20
O.IS
O.IS
0.10

Weighting
Parameter factor
Trace metals
Toxic materials
Specific conductance
PH
Alkalinity/acidity
Turbidity/suspended solids
0.20
0.20
0.20
O.IS
0.15
0.10

8.   Boundary Stations, Up and Downstream
     Parameter
                                     Weighting
                                      factor
                                                          Parameter
DO
Biota/species diversity
Temperature
Turbidity
Algal nutrients
Specific conductance
Alkalinity/acidity
pH
0.168
0.160
0.159
0.159
0.107
0.106
0.071
0.071
Weighting
 factor
DO
Biota/species diversity
Temperature
Turbidity
Algal nutrients
Specific conductance
Alkalinity/acidity
pH
0.168
0.160
0.159
0.159
0.107
0.106
0.071
0.071
9.
     Parameters measured at mouths of tributaries  to mainstem rivers  or  at representative locations  will
     depend on activities being monitored, and therefore will fall into  one of the categories above.
10.  Eutrophic or Potentially Eutrophic Water Bodies
Weighting
Parameter factor
Algal nutrients
DO
Turbidity
Temperature
0.333
0.333
0.167
0.167
                                                                  NONE
                                                     44

-------
                         TABLE 13.   FREQUENCY OF MONITORING
Record for each of the categories  applicable to the segment,  the  average frequency of monitoring
the five groups of parameters  shown.  Express the average frequency numerically, as follows:
     C = Continuous = 30
     D = Daily
     K = Weekly
     M = Monthly
= 20
= 4
= 1.0
bM = bimonthly   =0.5
 Q = Quarterly   =0.33
 T = Three times/
     year       =0.25
SY = Semiannually= 0.167
 Y = Annually   = 0.083
Station category
Table 2.
Source item
Step 1
4a
4b
5a
5b
6a
6b
7
8
9
lOa
lOb
11
12
13a
13b
14a
14b
15
16
17
Step 2
Total
Step 3
No. categories
Step 4
Overall average
(Step 2/Step 3)
Step 5
Rating
Trace metals
Toxic materials
(avg. freq.)






























Plankton
(avg. freq.)






























Other biota
(avg. freq.)






























All other
water quality
parameters
(avg. freq.)






























Step 6 Sum of 5 ratings
Step 7 R_ = Rating
Sum of ratings _


Hydrological
parameters
(avg. freq.)


































                                                 45

-------
Numerical values for each frequency code are given at the top of Table 13.
The values are based on recommended minimum monitoring frequencies listed in
the U.S. EPA, June 1975.

     After recording the average monitoring frequency for each group of para-
meters in each applicable category, if the average frequency in each category
within the group is the same, record that value as the Overall average in
Step 4.  If the frequency varies within the group, carry out the calculations
of Steps 2, 3, and 4, to determine the Overall average.

     Locate the Overall average frequency of monitoring for each group of
parameters on the horizontal axis of Figures 6, 7, or 8 (the figure title
indicates the group with which it is used).   Determine the rating for each
group, i.e., the point on the vertical axis that corresponds to the inter-
section of the Overall average value with the plot.  Record those values in
Step 5.

     Steps 6 and 7 provide the Rating for the Element.  The value of 1 is the
optimal Rating.

VI.C  EVALUATION OF AREA OF SAMPLING

     An Evaluation for the parameters monitored and the frequency of monitor-
ing is obtained by multiplying each Rating times a weighting factor, and sum-
ming the two results.  The weighting factors are derived from the Letter Sur-
vey.

Source              Rating  x  Weighting Factor   =   Relative Evaluation

Table 11 (R^                 0.54

Table 13 (R2)                 0.46                =       	

                                 Evaluation = Sum =
The optimal evaluation is 1.
                                         46

-------



                   0.10.2  0.3
                    OVERALL AVG.
Figure 6.  Rating for monitoring frequency
           of trace metals/toxic materials
           and biota
                   0.1  0.2  0.3
                    OVERALL AVG.

Figure 7.  Rating for monitoring frequency
           of plankton
              1
              r
            0.5
-•;•! s^^^^tefe^s
... .^-4-4^-" L/^'-j-rH-f+T-'-^-—Eh-')--
                    ?R
                    i^tfc
                   0.5   1          2

                    OVERALL AVG.

Figure 8.  Rating for monitoring frequency
           of other water quality and
           hydrological parameters
                         47

-------
                                  SECTION VII

                  EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF QUALITY ASSURANCE
 Six Elements are rated in this Section.   The rating procedure is similar
 to that in previous Sections.   The value of each item is determined from
 the Source Reference item in Table 4,  listed in the first column of
 Table 14.  As in previous cases,  the Source Reference items provide
 values of 1, 0, or the decimal equivalent of a percentage,  with a few
 exceptions in Elements E and F, which are defined below.   Record R, the
 rating for each Element, in the column headed R..   Element  E contains
 eight sub-Elements, ratings for which are recorded in the column headed
 "rate," and they are summed and weighted at the end of the  Element, as
 indicated in the Table.
 Table 14 is located at the end of this  Section.

 VILA     FIELD INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION

      Record in Table 14 the value and rate  for each  item,  and the Element
 Rating,  Rr

 VII.B     FIELD INSTRUMENT MAINTENANCE

      Record in Table 14 the value and rate  for each  item,  and the Element
 Rating,  R^

 VII.C     FIELD MEASUREMENT CONTROLS

      Record in Table 14 the value and rate  for each  item,  and the Element
 Rating,  R_.
          o

 VII.D     LABORATORY INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION

      Record in Table 14 the value and rate  for each  item,  and the Element
 Rating,  R..

 VII.E      LABORATORY MEASUREMENT CONTROLS

     This  Element is composed of eight  sub-Elements,  each  of which has several
 components.  Calculations  are the same  as those  for  the previous  Elements;
however, each  sub-Element  rating is the sum of the ratings of its components.
The method  for rating the  Element is  given  in  Table  14.  Values for components
of sub-Elements 1 through  4  are  explicit in Table 4.  The  derivation follows
for those values that are  not explicit  for  the remaining sub-Elements.
                                        48

-------
Sub-Element 5, Validation Techniques Values  are  determined  as  follows:

     (1)  if replicate analyses  are performed  at least  for  every set
          of samples  (or approximately  20  samples),  the value  is 1;
          if less frequently,  the  value is 0.

     (2)  The value is 1 if  all  three responses  are  "yes";  value is 0.67
          if two responses are "yes"; value  is 0.33  if  one  response is
          "yes"; value is 0  if there are no  "yes" responses.
     (3)  The value is  1  if spiked samples  are  run  for  approximately
          every 20 samples;  the  value  is  0  if run less  frequently.

     (4)  The value is  1  for a "yes",  0 for a "no".

Sub-Element 6, Documented Check  lists.  The values  are  1 for "yes", 0 for "no".

Sub-Element 7, Records.   The value for item Source  Reference 6.(f) is 1 if
permanent records are in  bound notebooks, 0 if  on unbound sheets.

Sub-Element 8, Quality  Assurance Program.   The  value is 1 if the percentage
of committed resources  is 15% or more.  If  the  percentage is less than 15%,
the value is the decimal  equivalent of the  percentage divided by 0.15.

     The Element Rating R^,  is the sum of the products  of each sub-Element
rate and a weighting factor,  as  indicated in Table  14.

VII.F     FACTORS AFFECTING LABORATORY SUPPLIES

     Record the value and rate for each item and the Element Rating, R^.

VII.G     AREA EVALUATION

     An evaluation is derived for the  Area  of Quality Assurance by summing
the products of each Rating and  its weighting factor.   The weights are given
in Table 14.  A final evaluation of 1  is  the optimal value.
                                         49

-------
TABLE 14-.  RATING FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
Source ref .
Table 4.
4.d.
CD
(2)
(3)
(4)
4.e.
(1)
(2)
(3)
4.f.
CD
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
3.c.
(1)
(2)
(3)
3.c.
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Item
A. Field Instrument Calibration
Field meters
Fixed sensors
Calibration frequency
Use of documentation
B. Field Instrument Maintenance
Documentation of schedule
Use of documentation
Calibration frequency
C. Field Measurement Controls
Downtime documentation/eval .
Validation of transmitted
data
Validation of secondary
standards
Scheduled preventative inaint.
Stat. control chart
techniques
D. Lab. Instrument Calibration
Documented schedules
Frequency as mfr. recommends
Use of documentation
E. Laboratory Measurement Controls
1. Analytical method
calibrations
Balances serviced
Availability of Class S
weights
Documentation of weight
checks
Spectrophotometer. wave-length
verification
Documentation of (7)
Primary std.Ck.of vol. anal.
Weight
Value x factor = Rate Ri
0.273
0.272
0.245
0.210
R.. = Sum =
0.354
0.326
0.319
R0 = Sum =
0.171
0.232
0.218
0.222
0.157
R, = Sum = 	
O ^ ^—
0.357
0.321
0.322 	
R^. = Sum =
0.154
0.210
0.090
0.210
0.126
0.210
r.=Sum =
                  50

-------
                           TABLE  14.   (continued)
Source ref.                                               Weight
Table 4                     Item                   Value x factor = Rate   R.
	__________	L

5.a.      E. Laboratory Measurement Controls

             2. Containers, preservation,
                 holding

    (1)      Glass containers                             0.174
    (2)      Ref.2 preservation techniques                0.194
    (3)      Other preservation techniques                0.155
    (4)      Ref. 2 holding times                         0.148
    (5)      Other holding  times                          0.135
    (6)      Sample volumes                              0.194   	

                                                          r =Sum =	
5.b.         3. Analytical  methods
    (1)      Procedures used                              0.300
    (2)      Procedure write up                           0.210
    (3)      Compliance tests                             0.250
    (4)      Use of stat. control                         0.240   	
                                                          r =Sum =	

5.c.         4. Cleaning methods
    (1)      Standard methods                             0.384
    (2)      Special cleaning                             0.325
    (3)      Filter cleaning                              0.291   	
5.d.         5. Validation  techniques
                                                          r4=Sum
     (1)      Replicate  analyses                           0.253
     (2)      Sample  tests                                 0.283
     (3)      Spike samples                                0.242
     (4)      Interlab.  comparison                         0.22
6. a          6. Documented  check  lists
    (1)      Compressed  air purity                        0.144
    (2)      Distilled water purity                      0.252
    (3)      Deionized water purity                      0.244
    (4)      Vacuum  system  purity                        0.117
    (5)      Reagents and solvents  stds.                  0.243
                                                          r,=Sum
                                                            o
                                         51

-------
 TABLE  14.   (continued)
Source ref.
Table 4
6.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
00

7.
(a)
(b)
(c)
R5= (.15.,:

2.e. F.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6D

G.






Item
7. Records
Bench record corrections
Signed records
Chain-of - custody
Permanent records
Record form
Numbered samples
Samples logged

8. Quality Assurance Program
Written program
Appointed officer
Committed resources
r + (.115)r + (.120)r_ + (.94)r. +
J_ ^ O ^T
+ (.075}r, + (.175)r_ + (.114)rfi
O / o
Factors Affecting Supplies
Storage
Handling
Std. reference materials
Inventory
Purchasing guidelines
Chemicals dated

Area Evaluation
R -
R2 =
R_ =
R4 =
Rs;

Weight
Value x factor = Rate IL

0.117
0.174
0.148
0.142
0.111
0.123
0.185
r_=Sum =

0.328
0.371
0.301 	
(.149Dr5
R5 =

0.150
0.150
0.195
0.183
0.104
0.218
Rc=Sum =


0.191
0.152
0.173
0.188
0.180
0.120
Area Evaluation  =    Sum
               52

-------
                                SECTION VIII

        EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF DATA DISTRIBUTION AND DISSEMINATION
Six Items are rated in this Area as listed in Table 15, along with the
Source References and the weighting factors.  The sum of the Ratings
provides the Area Evaluation.
     Values of the Items in Table 15 are as follows:

     (1)  The value is 1 if data are available immediately after
          processing.  If data are released only on a periodic
          basis, the value is 0.

     (2)  For all other Items listed, the value is 1 if the
          response is "yes", 0 if "no".

     Calculate the Rating for each, and the Area Evaluation, as indicated in
the Table.
	TABLE 15.  EVALUATION OF DATA DISTRIBUTION AND UTILIZATION

Source
Table 5                 Item                        Value x Weight  =  R


  1.       Data turnaround time                           x  0.190  =

  2.       Data supplied to STORET                           0.143

  3.       Data release to public                            0.143

  4.       Data used to develop models                       0.143

  5.       Enforcement support                               0.238

  6.       Data flow to next higher  agency                   0.143

                                              Area Evaluation = Sum =
                                         53

-------
                                 SECTION IX

                EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF AGENCY INTERACTION
 In  this Section, the amount of interaction with other agencies is
 measured by the number of effectively contributing stations operated
 by  other agencies.  The selected segment will again be used as repre-
 sentative of the network.
AMOUNT OF  INTERACTION

     For this Evaluation, all information is in Table 2, items 2 and 3.

Procedural Steps

Step 1

     Record the total number of stations in the segment  (item 2}.  	

Step 2

     Record the total number of effectively contributing stations
operated by other  agencies  (item 3).                          "     	
 Step  3

      Divide  the number in Step 2 by the number in Step 1, and
 record  the decimal value.

 Step  4

      Record  the total number of agencies operating effectively
 contributing stations.

 Step  5

      Determination of Rating for effectively Contributing Stations:
 If the value of Step 3 is 0.25 or greater, the value for Rating is
 1; if it is  less than 0.25, divide the actual value by 0.25 to
determine the Rating.  Record the result as the Rating for the
Percentage of Stations Contributing Effectively = RI =

Step 6

     Determination of Rating for Contributing Agencies:
If the value of Step 4 is 3 or more, the value of the Rating
                                        54

-------
R  is 1; if the number is less than  3,  divide  the  actual
number by 3, to determine the value  of  R_.   Record the
result as the Rating for Contributing Agencies = R =

Step 7

     To Evaluate the Area,  sum the values  of RI and R_, and
divide by 2.

     Evaluation of Area of  Agency Interaction  = R.. H- R2
                                          55

-------
                                  SECTION X

                  OVERALL EVALUATION OF NETWORK OPERATIONS
     A  final  evaluation of network operations is derived by integrating the
 individual Area Evaluations.  The integration is accomplished by multiplying
 each Area Evaluation by a weighting factor derived from the Letter Survey.
 Each weighting factor used is derived from the normalized mean responses for
 the relative  weights of each Area, with respect to meeting the purpose of
 documenting progress toward the attainment, or the maintenance, of both am-
 bient and discharge water quality objectives.
      Record  in Table  16 as the "value" the Evaluation derived in each Section,
 and multiply each by  the indicated weighting factor.  Record each product in
 the column   headed  "Relative Evaluation."  Sum the Relative Evaluations to
 derive  the Overall  Evaluation.  The optimal value is 1.
             TABLE  16.  OVERALL EVALUATION OF NETWORK OPERATIONS
Source
Section III.C.
Section IV. C.
Table 10
Section VI. C.
Table 14
Table 15
Item
Network Plan and Design
Personnel
Facilities and Equipment
Sampling
Quality Assurance
Data Distribution and
Weight
Value x factor =
x 0.167 =
0.152
0.141
0.150
0.157

Relative
evaluation






Section IX,
Step 7
  Utilization                             0.115

  Agency Interactions                     0.118

Sum = Overall Evaluation of Network Operations
                                         56

-------
                                  SECTION XI

            EVALUATION OF  BUDGET ALLOCATION TO TECHNICAL  SERVICES
 In this Section, a Rating  is  derived for the budgetary  allocation to the
 Technical Services portion of the  network.   It  is  considered that Tech-
 nical Services is comprised of two groups:   A,  Water Quality Monitoring
 and Laboratory and Data Analysis;  and B,  Compliance.  The budgetary
 allocation to the personnel in each group is rated separately.  The two
 Personnel Ratings are  then used to derive a  Rating for  the allocation
 to Technical Services.

 XI.A   BASIC DATA

     Record the basic  data for determining Budget  Allocation Ratings in
 Table 17.
	TABLE  17.  BASIC BUDGET DATA	

         Item                                                Value


1.  Total Technical Services Personnel Budget
    (line 4 of Table 6, Monitoring and Analysis
    and Compliance)

2.  Total Network Budget
    (line 1 of Table 6)

3.  Value of Item 1 divided by value of Item 2,
    Network Budget Fractional  Allocation to
    Technical Services Personnel

4.  Total Budget Allocation to Technical Services
    (line 2 of Table 6)

5.  Value of Item 1 divided by value of Item 4,
    Technical Services Budget  Fractional Allocation
    to Personnel
                                        57

-------
 XI.B   RATING FOR BUDGET ALLOCATION TO SURFACE WATER QUALITY
        MONITORING,  LABORATORY AND DATA ANALYSIS PERSONNEL

      The Rating is  derived in the following Steps:

 Procedural Steps

 Step 1

      In Figure 9, locate the intersection of the value of item 3 of Table  17
 along the horizontal  axis,  and  the value of item 5, Table 17 along the
 vertical axis.   If the  intersection point lies in the shaded region, follow
 the procedures of Step  l.a.; if the point lies below the shaded region, fol-
 low the procedure of  Step  l.b.;  if the point lies above the shaded region,
 follow the procedures of Step I.e.

      a.   If the point  lies in  the shaded region, enter the value 1.0
           in Step 2.

      b.   Determine the vertical axis value of a point on curve A
           immediately above the calculated point.  In the lower half
           of Figure 10  find the r* curve closest to this vertical
           axis value.   On  this  r? curve, locate the value determined
           in item 5 of  Table 17, along the horizontal axis.  Then
           read the Budget  Allocation Rating for this point on the
           vertical  axis.   Record this Budget Allocation Rating in
           Step 2.

      c.   Determine the vertical axis value of a point on curve B
           immediately below the calculated point.  In the upper half
           of Figure 10  find the r| curve closest to this vertical
           axis value.   On  this  r* curve, locate the value determined
           in item 5 of  Table 17, along the horizontal axis.  Then
           read the  Budget  Allocation Rating for this point on the
           vertical  axis, and record the value as the Budget Alloca-
           tion Rating in Step 2.

 Step 2

      The Rating of  the  Budgetary Allocation to Surface Water Quality Monitor-
 ing  and Laboratory  and  Data Analysis Personnel = 	.

 XI.C    RATING  FOR BUDGETARY ALLOCATION TO COMPLIANCE PERSONNEL

 Procedural Steps

Step  1

     Follow the instructions of XI.B, Step 1, but use Figure 11 instead of
Figure  10.  Enter the result in Step 2, below.
                                         58

-------
en
to
               ofi
               B4
               o,
               O
               -4


               I
PH





CJ3



M
                CO

                _)
                u
                   1.0
                   0.90
    0.80
    0.70
                    0.60
                    0.50
                    0.40
                    0.30
                              0.10   0.20   0.30   0.40   0.50   0.60    0.70    0.80   0.90      .0


                          NETWORK BUDGET FRACTIONAL ALLOCATION TO TECHNICAL SERVICES  PERSONNEL


                      Figure 9.  Determination of technical services personnel  budget allocation

-------
1.0
0.8
0.08
 0  0
         .10       .20       .30




 TECHNICAL SERVICES BUDGET FRACTIONAL ALLOCATION TO PERSONNEL




Figure 10.  Surface water  monitoring,laboratory, and data analysis
                                      60

-------
O
I-J
_J
<

H
§
03
       TECHNICAL  SERVICES BUDGET FRACTIONAL ALLOCATION TO PERSONNEL



        Figure 11.  Compliance  personnel  budget  allocation rating
                                       61

-------
Step 2

     The Rating of the Budgetary Allocation to
     Compliance personnel =

XI.D   EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL SERVICES BUDGET ALLOCATION

Procedural Steps

Step 1

     Determine the fraction of the total Technical Services
budget (line 2 in Table 6) that is allocated to compliance
monitoring.

Step 2

     Compute 1 minus value recorded in Step 1 above.

Step 5

     The product of the value recorded in XI.D., Step 1 times
the value of the Rating of the Budget Allocation to Compliance
Personnel (XI.C, Step 2) =

Step 4

     The product of the value recorded in XI.D., Step 2 times
the value of the Rating of the Budget Allocation to Surface
Water Quality Monitoring and Laboratory and Data Analysis
Personnel (XI.B., Step 1) =

Step 5

     The sum of the values of Steps 3 and 4 is the
Evaluation of the Technical Services Budget Allocation =
                                        62

-------
                                  SECTION XII

                                  REFERENCES


American Public Health Association,  Standard Methods  for  the Examination of
     Water  and Wastewater,  1975.           "~~	—

Code of Federal Regulations:

     Title  40, Part  124,  "State Program Elements Necessary for Participation
          in the  National Pollutant  Discharge Elimination System," Dec. 22,
          1972, amended July  24,  1973,  later amended  March 18, 1976.

     Title  40, Part  125,  "National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System,"
          May 22,  1973, amended July 16,  1975,  later  amended March 18, 1976.

     Title  40, Part  130,  "Policies and  Procedures for State Continuing Plan-
          ning Process,"  June 3,  1974,  amended  Nov. 28, 1975 without the term
          "State"  in Title.

     Title  40, Part  131,  "Preparation of State  Water  Quality Management"
          Plans,"  June 3, 1974,  amended Nov.  28, 1975.

     Title  40, Part  136,  "Test Procedures  for the Analysis of Pollutants,"
          October  16,  1973.

Federal Register:

     "Water Quality  and Pollutant Source Monitoring,"  Vol. 39, No. 168,
          Appendix A #17, Aug.  28, 1974.

U.S. Congress, Federal Water  Pollution  Control  Act Amendments of 1972, Public
     Law 92-500, 92nd Congress, Oct.  18,  1972.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:

     Biological Field and Laboratory Methods, Office  of Research and Develop-
          ment, National  Environmental  Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio,
          EPA-670/4-73-001, July 1973.

     Guidelines for  Review  of Chemistry Forms,  Robert L. Booth, Technical
          Coordinator,  Methods  Development  and  Quality Assurance Research
          Laboratory,  National  Environmental  Research Center, Cincinnati,
          Ohio, April  1975.
                                      63

-------
Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Labora-
     tories, by Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, National Environ-
     mental Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, June 1972.

Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, Methods Development
     and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory, National Environmental
     Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-625/6-74-003, 1974.

Model State Water Monitoring Program, prepared by National Water Monitoring
     Panel, edited by Water Monitoring Task Force, R.L. Crim, Chairman,
     Office of Water and Hazardous Materials Monitoring and Data Sup-
     port Division, EPA-440/9-74-002, June 1975.
                                   64

-------
                                SECTION XIII

                              GLOSSARY OF TERMS


     The source of each definition is either the Code of Federal Regulations
Public Law 92-500, or as indicated.

     "Administrator" means the Administrator of the U.S. Environ-
     mental Protection Agency.
                                             C40 CFR 124.1 (d)), 1973

     "Basin" means the streams, rivers, tributaries, and lakes and
     the total land and surface water area contained within one of
     the major or minor basins defined by EPA, or any other basin
     unit as agreed upon by the State(s)  and the Regional Adminis-
     trator.  Unless otherwise specified, "basin" shall refer only
     to those portions within the borders of a single State.

                                             (40 CFR 130.2 (1)), 1974

     "Basin Plan" means the water quality management plan for each
     hydrologic basin or other approved basin unit within a State.
     Such plans form a basis for implementing applicable effluent
     limitations and water quality standards, and consist of such
     elements as are necessary for sound planning and program man-
     agement in the basin covered by the plan.   Requirements  for
     the preparation of basin plans are described in Part 131 of
     this chapter.
                                             (40 CFR 130.2 (f)), 1974

     "Biological Monitoring" shall mean the determination of the
     effects on aquatic life, including accumulation of pollutants
     in tissue, in receiving waters due to the discharge of pollutants.

                                             (PL 92-500, Sec. 502 (15))

     "Director" means the chief administrative officer of a State
     water pollution control agency or interstate agency.  In the
     event responsibility for water pollution control and enforce-
     ment is divided among two or more State or interstate agencies,
     the term "Director" means the administrative officer authorized
     to perform the particular procedure to which reference is made.

                                             (40 CFR 124.1 (f)), 1973
                                        65

-------
"Discharge" when used without qualification includes a discharge
of a pollutant, and a discharge of pollutants.

                                        (PL 92-500, Sec. 502 (16))

"Minor Discharge" means any discharge which (1) has a total
volume of less than 50,000 gallons on every day of the year,
(2) does not affect the waters of more than one State, and
(3) is not identified by the State water pollution control
agency, the Regional Administrator, or by the Administrator
in regulations issued pursuant to section 307(a) of the Act,
as a discharge which is not a minor discharge.  If there is
more than one discharge from a facility and the sum of the
volumes of all discharges from the facility exceeds 50,000
gallons on any day of the year, then no discharge from the
facility is a minor discharge as defined herein.
                                        C40 CFR 125.1 (m)), 1975

"Point Source" means any discernible, confined and discrete
conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container,
rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel
or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be
discharged.

                                        (PL 92-500, Sec. 502 (14))

The term "Regional Administrator" means one of the EPA Regional
Administrators.

                                        (40 CFR 124.1 (e)), 1973

"Representative Point" means a location in surface waters,
ground waters, sewer systems, or discharger facilities at
which specific conditions or parameters may be measured in
such a manner as to characterize or approximate the same at
some other location, or throughout a reach, segment, or body
of water.

                                        EPA 440/9-74-002, p. III-4

"Segment" means a portion of a basin, the surface waters of
which have common hydrologic characteristics  (or flow regulation
patterns); common natural physical, chemical, and biological
processes; and common reactions to external stresses, such as
the discharge of pollutants.

                                        (40 CFR 130.2  (m)), 1974

"Significant Discharge" means any point source discharge for
which timely management action must be taken  in order to meet
the water objectives for the basin within the period  of the
operative basin plan.  The significant nature of the  discharge
is to be determined by the State, but must include, at  a


                                   66

-------
minimum, any discharge which is causing or will cause serious
or critical  water quality problems relative to the segment to
which it discharges.

                                         (40 CFR 130.2 (n)),  1974

     "Toxic  Pollutant" means those pollutants,  or combinations of
     pollutants, including  disease-causing agents,  which  after dis-
     charge  and upon exposure,  ingestion,  inhalation  or assimila-
     tion into any organism,  either directly from the environment
     or indirectly by ingestion through food chains,  will, on the
     basis of information available to  the Administrator, cause
     death,  disease, behavioral abnormalities,  cancer, genetic
     mutations, physiological malfunctions (including malfunctions
     in reproduction) or  physical  deformations,  in  such organisms
     or their offspring.

                                         (PL 92-500, Sec. 502 (13))

     The following terms  are defined in the indicated subparagraphs of
40 CFR 130.2, 1975.

     (f)  "Water quality  management plan"  means  the plan for managing
          the water quality,  including  consideration  of the relation-
          ship of water quality to land and water resources and uses,
          on an areawide  basis,  for each EPA/State  approved planning
          area and for those areas designated pursuant to section 208a
          (2), (3), or (4)  of the  Act within a  State.

     (g)  The term "State planning area" means that area of the State
          that is not designated pursuant  to section  208(a) (2), (3),
          or (4) of the Act	Depending  upon the  requirement being
          considered, the State planning area may be  subdivided into
          "approved planning areas" that may include  the entire State
          or portions of  the State defined by hydrologic, political,
          or other boundaries.

     (h)  The term "designated  areawide planning area" means all areas
          designated pursuant to section 208(a)  (2),  (3), or (4) of the
          Act and § 130.13.

     (o)  The term "segment" means a portion of an  approved planning
          area, the surface waters of which have common hydrologic
          characteristics (or flow regulation patterns); common natural
          physical, chemical  and biological characteristics and pro-
          cesses; and common reactions  to  external  stresses, such as
          the discharge of  pollutants.
                                                          •&GPO 692-497-1976
                                         67

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 1. REPORT NO.
   EPA-600/4-76-050
                                                            3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI*NO.
 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

   PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING OPERATIONS OF WATER
   MONITORING NETWORKS
             5. REPORT DATE
              September  1976
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 7. AUTHOR(S)

   Ruth W.  Shnider and Edwin S. Shapiro
             8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.

              URS 7431
 9. PERFORMING ORG'\NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

   URS Research  Company
   155 Bovet  Road
   San Mateo,  California  94402
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

               IHD  620
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

               68-03-0473
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
   Office  of Research and Development
   Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
   Las Vegas.  Nevada  89114	
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

               EPA-ORD,  EMSL-LV
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 16. ABSTRACT
  'The report is designed as a manual to evaluate  the efficiency of surface-water
   quality monitoring  networks whose primary objective is to document compliance with
   or progress toward  attaining ambient water quality standards.  The manual  provides
   methods to evaluate the efficiency of each of seven operational areas;   Network
   Plan and Design, Personnel, Facilities and Equipment,  Sampling Quality Assurance,
   Data Distribution and Dissemination, and Agency Interactions.  A technique is
   presented for the overall integrated evaluation of the operational areas.   A
   final section provides methods to evaluate the  efficiency of budgetary allocations.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                               b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                             COSATl Field/Group
   Water quality*
   Monitoring
   Management methods*
   Cost engineering
   Operations research
   Evaluation*
Water Monitoring Networks

Network  Operations
Evaluation

Water Quality Indicator
Parameters
       13B
       14A
       14B
 3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

   RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED	
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
	78
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------