Lecture Notes Course 3

Course 3:
Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment

UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education Course 3
OLC Water Quality Assessment Page 2
Course 3: Water Quality Monitoring and
Assessment
Table of Contents
Unit 1 Concepts of monitoring and assessment
Unit 2 River basin monitoring
Unit 3 Lakes and reservoirs Unit
4 Water Quality variables
Unit 5 Monitoring frequencies and Optimization
Unit 6 Field and laboratory work
Unit 7 Water quality assessment and reporting
Unit 8 Groundwater monitoring
Unit 9 Cost aspects

Unit 1 – Concepts of monitoring and assessment
In this unit we will give a short overview of:

1. Different types of monitoring, in relation to the set objectives
2. Components of a typical monitoring cycle
A good overview can be found in Chapter 2 of the book of Chapman (1996). Below (and in
the Power Points) follows a reduced version.
1.1. Definitions and types of monitoring
Water quality monitoring can be defined as “the programmed process of sampling,

measurement and recording of various water characteristics, often with the aim of assessing
conformity to specified objectives”.
Various objectives can be listed for carrying out water quality monitoring such as:
Type of monitoring Objectives

Ambient monitoring - Status and trend detection
- Testing of water quality standards
- Calculation of loads
Effluent monitoring - Calculation and control of discharge standards
- Monitoring of plant performance
Early warning - Warning for calamities
- Protection of downstream functions
Operational monitoring - Monitoring for operational uses such as irrigation,
industrial use, inlets for water treatment works.
The design of a monitoring network will highly depend on above objectives of the programme.
In this way, only the essential data is collected and needless waste of money, effort and time is
avoided. Furthermore, periodical evaluation of the monitoring programmes is essential, to
check whether the objectives are still met.
Exercise (see answers at the end of this Unit):

Categorise the following statements concerning information needs, into the different types
of monitoring networks given above:
 I want to know if, last year, the swimming water in Europe has been up to standard
 Does the industry live up to their permits?
 Can this water be used for irrigation?
 Can the water companies downstream the river safely take in water in the coming days?
 Has the water quality of this lake been improved this year, compared to last year?
One can distinguish three levels of monitoring:
 Simple monitoring, based on a limited number of samples, simple analysis or
observations, and data treatment which can be performed by simple software
programmes
 Intermediate-level monitoring, requiring more variables, stations, and specific
laboratory equipment and PCs for data handling
 Advanced level monitoring, involving sophisticated techniques and highly trained
technicians and engineers for sample analysis (e.g. micropollutants) and data handling,
often using mainframe computer systems.
Not every laboratory can perform all analyses; it is better then to involve "Central labs". In the
following, an overview will be given on the design of monitoring programmes in surface
waters, on site selection, monitoring frequency and parameters, etc.
1.2. The monitoring cycle
Over the last decades, much attention has been given to the various factors that determine a
successful water quality monitoring programme. Useful information can be found in specialised
handbooks, e.g. Chapman, 1996, and in (downloadable): Bartram,
J. & R. Balance (eds.), 1996. Water quality monitoring. Chapman & Hall, New York, 383 pp.
(http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/resourcesquality/wqmonitor/en/
Fig. 1 shows the water quality monitoring cycle. In the following chapters, the various stages
in this monitoring cycle will be highlighted.
Fig. 1. The monitoring cycle
Meybeck, 1992, in Chapman (1996) defined ten basic rules for successful water quality
assessment:
1. Clear objectives, in line with the available resources;
2. A clear understanding of the water body, by preliminary surveys;
3. A choice of the appropriate media (water, sediment, biota);
4. A choice of parameters, stations and frequency, etc. in line with the objectives;
5. A choice of methods, instruments, laboratory facilities, etc. in line with the
objectives;
6. A good reporting scheme;
7. Integration of water quality and hydrological monitoring;
8. A good Quality Assurance and Control (QA/QC) programme;
9. Clear recommendations to the decision makers;
10. A regular evaluation of the monitoring programme.
Although not specifically mentioned by Meybeck, also the available recources (funds,
manpower, training, facilities, etc.) must always be taken into account as well.
The design of a monitoring programme should be based on clear and well thought-out aims and
objectives and should ensure, as much as possible, that the planned monitoring activities are
practicable and that the objectives of the programme will be met. The design of a water quality
monitoring programme, the selection of sampling stations, the frequency of sampling, the
parameters to be analysed, etc. all depend greatly on the objectives of the programme. No
monitoring programme should therefore be started without defining these objectives; also they
should be evaluated regularly!
When a new programme is being started, it is very useful to begin with a survey of the region.
The duration of such surveys will be between a few months up to a year, and should preferably
include the different seasons. Of course, much information can already be derived from
previous, historical monitoring data.
In the survey, insight can be acquired on the general water quality characteristics of the region
and variations herein, the different pollution sources, and on the hydrological variables.
Assumptions on representativeness of stations, of mixing regimes in rivers, etc. can be tested.
The survey period is of great value for the field and laboratory workers for gaining experience
and fine-tuning of the procedures for sampling, storage and analysis of samples. They can also
help to refine the logistical aspects of monitoring, such as difficulties in transport and
accessibility.
A description should be made of the monitoring area, with at least:

- Definition of the area, and schematisation in clear, not-overloaded maps
- A summary of the environmental conditions and processes, including human activities,
such as population, land use, industries, hydraulic structures, (ground)water extraction
sites and recreational areas;
- Meteorological and hydrological information, including hydrographs of river flows, and
precipitation/evaporation data at stations as close as possible to the water course;
- A summary of actual and potential water uses.
Fig. 2 shows a schematic representation of the water balance of a lake as an example output
while describing the monitoring area.
An example of a pollutant source inventory is presented in Fig. 3, for the watershed of Lake
Vättern in Sweden. The emphasis is put here on water uses and their specific water quality
requirements, particularly in the future. Economic trends should be
predicted for at least five years ahead since monitoring design; implementation and data
interpretation take a long time.
It cannot be over-emphasised that the benefits for an optimal monitoring operation, drawn for
careful preliminary planning and investigation, by far outweigh the efforts spent during this
initial phase. Mistakes and over-sights during this part of the programme may lead to costly
deficiencies, or overspending, during many years of routine monitoring!
Fig. 2. (left) Schematic

representation of the water balance
of a lake
Fig. 3. (right) Pollutant source inventory for the Lake Vättern basin, Sweden (Chapman,
1996)
Action List for Unit 1
(Answers for exercise in Ch. 1.1.: ambient; effluent; operational; early warning; ambient)
Look and listen to the PowerPoint presentation available under “Lecture”.
Read Chapter 2 in Chapman (1996).
Unit 2 – River basin monitoring

In this Unit we will have a look at rivers - their definition, special characteristics, why it
is important to monitor them, and how to do this.
2.1. General characteristics of rivers
2.1.1. Overview
Rivers are lotic or flowing water environments and by themselves are confined to a channel
or riverbed, but they receive water from a large area which is called a
catchment, watershed or river basin. Rivers can have different morphometries, i.e. geometric
looks. They can form straight channels, like they do in mountain areas, or be strongly
meandering and braiding, such as in floodplains. Streams consist of clear water flowing over
shallow gravel riffles separated by deeper pools that collect organic debris. Rivers are muddier,
larger and deeper and usually lack riffles and pools.
There are three main types of streams:

- Ephemeral streams regularly exist for short periods of time, usually during a rainy
period, and may have defined channels even when they are dry.
- Intermittent streams flow at different times of the year, or seasonally, when there is
enough water from rainfall, springs, or other surface sources such as melting snow or even
discharge from a wastewater treatment facility.
- Perennial streams are those that flow year-round.
Below you can find an example on one of the most important perennial rivers in Africa:
The Okavango River and Delta

The Okavango River (Namibia & Botswana) is the only perennial river in Africa that flows
eastward without reaching the ocean. Instead, it empties onto the sands of the Kalahari Desert,
irrigating 15,000 km² of the desert. Each year some 11 cubic kilometres of water reach the delta.
The area of the Okavango Delta fluctuates between 6,000 to 8,000 square kilometres during
the dry season, swelling to 15,850 square km during the flood. Over 150,000 islands dot the
Delta, varying in size from several metres to 10 km.
The waters of the Okavango Delta are subject to seasonal flooding, which begins about mid-
summer in the north and six months later in the south (May/June). The water from the delta is
evaporated relatively rapidly by the high temperatures, resulting in a cycle of cresting and
dropping water in the south. Islands can disappear completely during the peak flood, then
reappear at the end of the season.
2.1.2. Physical parameters

Streams may originate in two ways, either flowing from headwaters such as lakes, or from
springs or groundwater seepage. The direction of stream flow is dependent upon the slope and
obstructions of the landscape. Flow velocity is also determined by the
associated land gradient, which, when steep, not only speeds flow, but also increases sediment
load and deposition.
Rivers and streams, with flowing water, will create currents within the stream or river that wear
away the sides of the channel, slowly shaping it over time. Currents are also responsible for
moving and mixing organic and chemical substances as they enter the water through erosion and
transport through weather (precipitation and wind) and animals (e.g. birds dropping seeds and
plant matter).
For a river system, physical parameters include:

 Stream velocity or current, where one is interested in the rate of particle transport in a certain
direction. Due to turbulent flows of water, the measuring exercise can sometimes be tricky.
 Underlying geology: provides substrate sizes from silt to boulders. This influences the
amount and type of benthic biota (fist-size stones provide the most favourable habitat for
algae and invertebrates).
- Soft/acid-water streams flow over hard granitic, slate or sandstone which release
only few nutrients
- Hard-water streams on limestone or sedimentary rock.
 The gradient of the water which is defined as the drop in elevation over a given stretch of
flow. This is given by the topographical make up of the area in which the river is situated, i.e.
steeper gradients in mountains than in lowlands.
 The cross-sectional area is usually a rough estimate, by using the width and depth at right
angles of the flow direction.
 Another important feature is the discharge rate, i.e. how much water is being transported at
one point in a certain unit of time. This is assessed by multiplying the average velocity by the
cross sectional area and is usually measured in m 3/s. High discharge moments are flood
events.
 Riparian vegetation: the amount, type, height of the riparian vegetation affects the river
temperature per se as well as the diel variations, organic matter input, etc.
2.1.3. Concept of river continuum

This concept was developed in the 1980’s for North American streams (so only partially true for
other regions) and describes how energy flows change with stream order (see Fig. 4). First order
stream, so small ones with no input except from runoff, will be narrow and shaded by trees with
a large amount for nutrients coming from the detritus of falling leaves, etc., so allochtonous
(external) production. Higher order streams will be wider and allow sunlight to penetrate, thus
allowing for autochtonous (own or internal) energy production. Subsequently, this concept
also divides benthic organisms into different types of consumers: shredders in the first order
streams that chew on leaf and branch parts; scrapers, that remove biota (also called Aufwuchs)
from macrophytes and will be found in the intermediate areas; and collectors, which are the
filter feeders that take up the very fine particles of the large river beds.
Fig. 4 River continuum concept
Stream order is also associated to the
Strahler number, where a higher number is
associated with increased branching. Only
when streams with the same Strahler number
merge, a higher number is assigned; in all other
cases the highest number is retained (see below
figure).
2.2. Monitoring
After having set the objectives of the monitoring (e.g. trend monitoring, early warning) the
selection of sampling stations can be differentiated into:
 The macrolocation of the stations such as:

- Background or baseline stations
- State/district boundaries
- Impacts of major pollution loads (cities, industries, irrigation areas, etc.)
- Recreational areas.
 Microlocation, defining the exact position of the monitoring sites:

- Usually after complete mixing of the river
- Sites with guaranteed accessibility (e.g. at bridges).
Processes affecting water quality and their influence should be taken into account when
monitoring stations are selected. Monitoring stations of rivers should be established at places
where the water is sufficiently well mixed after a discharge (ranging from a few 100 metres for
narrow brooks to > 10 km for wide rivers, see figure below; see Bartram and Balance, 1996). A
bridge can be an excellent place for a sampling station: it is easily accessible and, often, a bridge
is a hydrological gauging station (however make sure that you sample UPSTREAM of the
bridge). As mentioned before, it is essential that water discharge and water quality parameters
are measured simultaneously, because they are often interrelated. The spatial distribution of
water quality stations within a river basin must be chosen in relation to the monitoring
objectives, the expected variations, and the overall resources.
Certain objectives, such as for compliance towards potable water supply extraction, require
samples for concentration measurements, whereas others, e.g. for protection
of downstream lakes, require loads (discharge x concentration) assessments as well. In the
latter case, a single station at the mouth of the river may be sufficient.
Fig. 5. Left: Mixing patterns in a river; Right: Water discharges vs. ortho-phosphate
(filtered) and PCB concentrations (unfiltered samples) in the river Seine, France (from
Chapman, 1996). Note that for the latter component, increased discharges sometimes
are related with increased PCB concentrations. (Sept.-Dec; why?)
The location of sampling stations (Fig. 6) should be immediately upstream and downstream of
major confluences and water use regions (e.g. urban centres, agricultural areas including
irrigation zones, and industrial complexes). Also, monitoring stations should be located at
national, state or municipal boundaries, generally put: at the boundaries for the regions of water
quality monitoring authorities. As can be seen in Fig. 6, the sites also include “base line” or
background stations, and “impact stations”.
Fig.6. Selection of monitoring sites in rivers (distance border-sea ~ 40 km)

Summarizing for Fig. 6, and using the earlier defined monitoring types :
 Station #1 at the border (ambient + early warning); since the neighbouring country or
district will also have a monitoring station here, these may be combined, if possible
(e.g. left/right bank, as in the Netherland/Germany border on the river Rhine).
 Station #2, for intake drinking water (operational station for drinking water company;
the water quality will be very similar to that of station #1). Also (an) ambient/effluent
station(s) downstream of the city
 Ambient station(s), e.g. #3, in recreational area (lake).The number of stations will, for
example, depend on size and homogeneity of the lake (see Course 3.3.).
 An operational station #4, managed by the "Irrigation Authority". Also (a) groundwater
station(s) may be needed, for impact of the irrigation area (see Course 3.8., on
groundwater monitoring).
 Ambient station #5 for monitoring seawater intrusion
 Any case one ambient station #6 upstream of an industrial area, and one downstream, #7
(see hereafter). Effluent monitoring is needed for each industry.
 "Background" or "baseline" station(s) downstream of unaffected area(s).
The choice of stations for the industrial area deserves critical attention. It should be avoided that
new monitoring sites have to be selected for every new impact (e.g. new industry) in the
watershed. Instead, industries can be obliged to monitor their effluents themselves, of
course under strict enforcement and control by the regulatory body. Self-monitoring can be of
the discharger’s own interest; it will provide valuable information to the industries about
production efficiencies and ways to reduce spillage. The discharge permit can regulate the
maximum amount of pollutants' discharges, related with the presence of other discharges and
with the water quality standards for the receiving water body. This practice of emission
control (effluents), together with immision control (water quality) has been a successful
procedure in the Netherlands.
As mentioned before, it will take many kilometres for complete mixing of the river and
discharge water of the industrial zone. This "non-mixed" behaviour can in fact beneficially be
used by monitoring the left and right bank (and middle, as "intermediate") of the river. Since
each polluter has its own "fingerprint" (organic micropollutants; BOD, ammonia and phosphate;
E-coli; heavy metals, etc.) it will be possible to monitor the individual polluters by using one
ambient monitoring station, directly (e.g. 10 km.) downstream of the industrial zone; see
PowerPoint lecture 3.2.
Due to optimisation of water quality monitoring, e.g. by statistical evaluation, the number of monitoring
stations in the Dutch surface waters has largely been reduced over the last decades (see PowerPoint lecture
3.2.); see also Course 4.
 Look and listen to the PowerPoint presentation available under “Lecture”.

 Read chapter 6 in Chapman (1996)
Further Reading
 Book of Bartram and Balance (1996). Water quality monitoring; see Ch. 1.2.
 In additional materials: Proceedings of "Conferences Tailor Made 1-4", texts on
"WISE" and on the "European Union Water Framework Directive."
Unit 3 – Lakes and reservoirs
3.1. Characteristics
3.1.1. Origins
Most lakes on the surface of the Earth are fresh water and most are in the Northern Hemisphere.
More than 60% of the lakes of the world are in Canada. Finland is known as The Land of the
Thousand Lakes, having 187,888 lakes. Many lakes/reservoirs are man-made and are built to
produce electricity, for recreation, to use the water in the industry, farming, or in houses. In this
unit we will have a look at general characteristics of lakes, their importance and several aspects
of monitoring.
There are a number of natural processes that can form lakes. A recent tectonic uplift of a
mountain range can create bowl-shaped depressions that accumulate water and form lakes. The
advance and retreat of glaciers can scrape depressions in the surface where water accumulates;
such lakes are common in Scandinavia, Patagonia, Siberia, and Canada. The most notable
examples are probably the Great Lakes of North America. Lakes can also form by means of
landslides or by glacial blockages. Salt lakes (also called saline lakes) can form where there is
no natural outlet or where the water evaporates rapidly and the drainage surface of the water
table has a higher-than- normal salt content. Examples of salt lakes include Great Salt Lake, the
Aral Sea, and the Dead Sea. For the Aral Sea (see PowerPoint), the surface water area has, due
to large over-abstraction for irrigation, shrunk by some 75% between 1960 and 1995.
Small, crescent-shaped lakes called oxbow lakes can form in river valleys as a result of
meandering. The slow-moving river forms a sinuous shape as the outer side of bends are eroded
away more rapidly than the inner side. Eventually a horseshoe bend is formed and the river cuts
through the narrow neck. This new passage then forms the main passage for the river and the
ends of the bend become silted up, thus forming a bow-shaped lake. Crater lakes are formed in
volcanic craters and calderas which fill up with precipitation more rapidly than they empty via
evaporation. Sometimes the latter are called caldera lakes, although often no distinction is made.
Most lakes are geologically young and shrinking since the natural results of erosion will tend to
wear away the sides and fill the basin. Exceptions are those such as Lake Baikal and Lake
Tanganyika that lie along continental rift zones and are created by the crust's subsidence as two
plates are pulled apart. These lakes are the oldest and deepest in the world. Lake Baikal, which
is 25-30 million years old, is deepening at a faster rate than it is being filled by erosion and
may be destined over millions of years to become attached to the global ocean. The Red Sea,
for example, is thought to have originated as a rift valley lake.
3.1.2. General Characteristics

Lakes, as lentic (non-flowing) environments, have numerous features in addition to lake type,
such as drainage basin (also known as catchment area), inflow and outflow, dissolved oxygen,
nutrients and pollutants levels, pH, and sedimentation. Changes in the level of a lake are
controlled by the difference between the input and output
compared to the total volume of the lake. We discussed the water balance of lakes before, in
Course 1.3.
Lakes can be also categorized on the basis of their richness in nutrients, which typically affects
plant growth (as we saw in the unit 2.3. and 2.6.). Nutrient-poor lakes are said to be
oligotrophic and are generally clear, having a low concentration of plant life. Mesotrophic
lakes have good clarity and an average level of nutrients. Eutrophic lakes are enriched with
nutrients, resulting in plant growth and algal blooms. Hypertrophic lakes are bodies of water
that have been excessively enriched with nutrients. These lakes typically have poor clarity and
are subject to devastating algal blooms. Lakes typically reach this condition due to human
activities, such as heavy use of fertilizers in the lake catchment area. Such lakes are of little use
to humans and have a poor ecosystem due to decreased dissolved oxygen.
Further, we can divide lakes into three zones: the littoral zone, a sloped area close to land; the
photic or open-water zone, where sunlight is abundant; and the deep-water profundal or benthic
zone, where little sunlight can reach. The light depth or transparency is measured by using a
Secchi disk, an about 20-centimeter (8 in) disk with alternating white and black quadrants. The
depth at which the disk is no longer visible is the Secchi depth, a measure for transparency. The
Secchi disk is commonly used to test for eutrophication.
3.2. Monitoring (see also Chapman 7.5)
Lakes and reservoirs can be subject to several influences that cause water quality to vary from
place to place and from time to time. Conducting preliminary surveys is therefore a prerequisite
for successful monitoring. Assessment of bathymetry (depth contours) is required, as well as
research on (in)homogeneity, overall sediment mapping (e.g. grain size distribution), etc.
In general, it can be stated that the number of stations needed for lake monitoring strongly
depends on the (in)homogeneity of the lake. For a vertically as well as horizontally mixed lake,
one station, anywhere, will be sufficient. The criterion for "well-mixed" will mainly be based
on statistical evaluation (see Course 4). Also here, often large cost reductions can be achieved
by optimising the monitoring.
In general, more stations will be needed for:

 Large and/or irregularly shaped lakes, again using above criterion, which can then be
expanded as follows: "one station per homogeneous area"
 Large variations in water depth and sediment composition (the latter affecting water
quality).
Finally (or in fact, as the first criterion to be asked; see Course 3.1.), the monitoring
objectives must be taken into account (see PowerPoint), e.g.:
 Ambient monitoring of overall water quality
 Input/output budgets
 A "one-time" intensive research on the impact of, for example, an industry.
There are various factors that can cause inhomogenities in the water quality of lakes and
reservoirs:
- In case of eutrophication, it can be expected that the oxygen contents will be high
(often > 150% saturation) during the day-time primary production of the algae;
minimum DO contents may be expected just before sunrise; similar diurnal trends can
be expected for the pH values. In case of year-trend analysis, it is therefore
recommended, for a station, to always sample at about the same time of day (and to note
down, as always, the time of sampling).
- Vertical variations can often be connected to the occurrence of thermal

stratification found in many deeper lakes in the summer season. Due to the closing
off from the atmosphere, anaerobic conditions may evolve in the lower layer, the
hypolimnion. This is coinciding with clearly enhanced nutrient (P, N, Si, etc.) levels.
In these stratified lakes, the monitoring scheme should in any case include samples of
the epilimnion, hypolimnion (preferably just above the bottom) and 1 m above and/or
below the thermocline.
Reservoirs are often characterised by different zones, each with different water qualities.
Thus, the riverine zone has usually higher sediment and nutrient loadings, leading to more
eutrophic conditions, than the lacustrine (lake) zone.
For water quality monitoring purposes, sampling stations should be positioned in each of the
zones. Special attention must be given to extraction sites for potable water supply, which are
usually on the lacustrine side of the reservoir.
In DeGray lake, USA the original water quality monitoring scheme included 15 transects. By
statistical evaluation of the differences between stations, the number of stations could be
reduced to only five (see Fig. 7).
Fig. 7A. DeGray lake, USA, with the original 15 sampling stations. Fig. 7.B.
Chlorophyll a concentrations in each transect; the arrows indicate the five sites, after
optimization, that represent the overall water quality of the reservoir (From Chapman,
1996.)

Read chapter 7 (7.1 and 7.2) in Chapman (1996)
Further Reading
Book of Bartram and Balance (1996); see Course 3.2.

Unit 4 – Water Quality variables
4.1. Physico-chemical variables
There are different media which can be used for aquatic monitoring, viz. water, particulate
matter and living organisms. The quality of water and particulate matter is determined by
physical and chemical analysis, whereas living organisms can be used for so-called biological
water quality monitoring (see 4.2.).
The choice of the water quality variables will depend on the objectives of the programme, the
occurrence of the variables (it has no use to produce, year-after-year, lists with “non-
detectables”), the potential impacts (toxicity) and financial resources. Water used for irrigation
will require quite different monitoring variables than water used for recreational purposes or
drinking water extraction. A short overview will be presented here of the different water quality
variables:
 Temperature: a basic parameter, important for all chemical and biological processes.
Large fluctuations are to be expected in deep lakes and reservoirs. The temperature should
always be measured in situ.
 Colour: is influenced by natural (e.g. humic acids) and anthropogenic sources; it may be
important in view of the aesthetic quality of the water. E.g., iron (Fe3+), though not harmful,
will give a red colour to the (drinking) water and will then, though hardly toxic, not be
consumed.
 Odour: is often caused by decomposition of organic compounds yielding organic acids,
sulphides, etc. Odour is often an indication for bad water quality conditions (reduced O2),
when H2S will be formed (smell of "rotten eggs").
 Total suspended solids (TSS): may especially be increased in rivers ("turbidity”) during
storm floods; TSS may carry the large bulk of micropollutants.
 Electrical Conductivity (EC): this easily determinable parameter presents a good measure
for the total ions present in the water; in many cases there is a good correlation with the
NaCl concentration.
 pH: just as temperature a basic water quality parameter, of importance to virtually all
biological and chemical processes; it should be measured in situ. In most natural waters, pH
values will be between 6 and 8. As mentioned before, high pH (>9-10) may be found in
eutrophic lakes and reservoirs during day-time.
 Dissolved oxygen (DO): is an essential component for all aquatic life cycles;
concentrations < 2 mg O2/L will lead to deaths of most fish species. The theoretical
maximum levels, i.e. solubility (ca. 10 mg O2/L) will largely be exceeded during day- time
in eutrophic lakes and reservoirs. At higher temperatures the O 2 solubility will show a clear
decrease (see PowerPoint Course 3.6.). DO is mostly measured in situ, with a DO probe,
but there is also a laboratory procedure ("Winkler titration").
 Degradable organic matter: high concentrations are due to wastewater discharges.
As mentioned before, the term can be expressed as COD or BOD: Chemical and
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, and is thus related to the dissolved oxygen levels.
 Ammonium: high levels (> ca. 2 mg NH4+-N/L) usually indicate pollution by
wastewaters; ammonia exerts a relatively high “oxygen demand” in the conversion to
nitrate. At high pH (> 9.5), ammonium is mainly in the (toxic) NH3 - form.
 Nitrate and nitrite: high levels of NO -3 may be due to fertilizer run-off and/or to
nitrification. Nitrate can be the “limiting nutrient” for algal growth, especially in
saline and brackish waters. Nitrite (NO -) is2 an intermediate in both the NH + → 4NO -
(nitrification)
3 and NO - → N3 (denitrification)
2 reactions. NO - levels are
2 usually
< 0.1 mg/L; relatively high values often indicate inefficient conversions.
 Phosphorus compounds: inorganic dissolved phosphate (ortho-phosphate) is usually the
limiting nutrient for algal growth in fresh waters, leading to minimum (near-zero) values in
the summer in lakes and reservoirs; the “total phosphorus” concentration is much more
constant during the year. Ortho-phosphate is, at
normal pH, dominantly present in the (quite soluble) HPO 2- and H PO - forms,
4 2 4
rather than as (insoluble) PO 3- .
 Major ions (Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, K4 +, Cl- , SO 2-, HCO -, etc.): these are mainly due to
4 3
geological, climatic and geographical conditions, and are less coming from anthropogenic
sources. In this respect, these parameters can be monitored less intensively than the before
mentioned ones, also because of their less adverse (or even beneficial) effects. For irrigation
purposes, high Na+ values are unfavourable for the soil structure (decreased permeability);
therefore a low SAR (sodium
adsorption ratio) is preferable:
√
SAR=[Na+]/( ([Ca2+]+ [Mg2+])/2) ,expressed in milli-equivalents/L; see PowerPoint
Unit 3.6.4.
 Alkalinity and acidity: representing the pH buffering capacity of a water sample with
respect to acids and hydroxides addition, respectively. The terms are dominantly brought
about by the CO2/(bi)carbonate/CaCO3 (limestone) system in nature.
 Other inorganic variables such as sulphides, silica, fluoride and boron should be
monitored in case of serious problems (e.g. high F- contents in groundwater, from mineral
rocks). The same holds for arsenic, a major problem in many groundwaters (e.g. in
Bangladesh).
 Microbiological indicators such as E coli and faecal coliforms can be associated with
micro-organisms that cause diseases. Most of these originate from domestic wastewater
discharges.
 Eutrophication status/algae primary productivity, often expressed as the chlorophyll-a (chl-
a) concentration. Values can vary from < 3 µg/l to > 100 µg/l depending on the trophic state
of a water body.
 Heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Zn, Hg, Cu, etc.): usually these components are not part of basic
monitoring programmes, because of the complexity of analysis in the often low
concentration ranges encountered in practice. The dominant fraction is found in the
particulate phase; therefore determination in lake sediments often yields interesting results,
e.g. on the history of the pollution sources (see Course 2.4.).
 Organic micropollutants such as PCBs (poly-chloro-biphenyls), PAHs (polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons), and pesticides (DDT, aldrin, dieldrin, atrazine, etc.) can only
reliably be measured in advanced monitoring programmes. These micropollutants, together
with the heavy metals, have a strong tendency for bioaccumulation in the food chain.
 Hydrological parameters (flow, discharge) are part of routine river monitoring
programmes. Flows (m/s) can be measured with calibrated propellers or, more advanced,
using ADCP (Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler). River discharges (m 3/s) can then be
evaluated from the "wetted area" (m2) of the river bed.
For most purposes, 15-30 parameters will be sufficient to adequately describe the basic
water quality. The list of variables for the basic WHO-GEMS monitoring programme (see
Table 1) contains some 20 standard variables. Nowadays, a more
comprehensive list of parameters in the GEMS programme will additionally include (see
http://www.gemstat.org ):
 SAR
 BOD and/or COD
 Total and organic nitrogen
 Microbiology: Giarda and Cryptospiridium spp.
 (Heavy) metals; arsenic
 Organic micropollutants such as organo-chloro pesticides and PCBs .
Table 1.Variables used in GEMS/WATER programmes for basic monitoring (from:

Chapman, 1996)
In case of very limited resources, a minimum list of parameters could be:
- Hydrology, for rivers

- Total suspended solids/turbidity
- Temperature and pH
- Electrical conductivity
- Dissolved oxygen
- Nitrate, ammonia and ortho-phosphate; periodically: total P and N.
More complex, expensive programmes may analyse >100 variables. In the

Netherlands, the complete list of variables has, over the last decades, increased to
some 250 parameters, most of them as micropollutants (see Fig. 8.). To avoid a strong increase
in the monitoring cost, much optimization has been reached with respect to the monitoring
frequencies and, especially, the number of stations.
300
PCB's
250 Organic micropollutants
Pesticides
Metals
Number of parameters per parametergroup
Radiochemistry
200 Organic pollution
Eutrofication
General parameters
150
100
50
0
1952
Year
Fig. 8. Increase in the number of monitoring parameters between 1952 and 2002 in the
fresh "governmental waters” of the Netherlands. (From: unpublished Report Dutch
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment). (↓ = optimization programmes)
4.2. Biological Water Quality Monitoring
4.2.1. Introduction
Water quality can be described in terms of physical, chemical and biological characteristics.
Changes in the water quality can produce diverse biological effects in the aquatic ecosystem,
ranging from a complete disappearance of fish life, to subtle changes in the behaviour of water
flees. Changes like these indicate that the ecosystem and its associated organisms are under
some stress, e.g. caused by a spillage of pollutants into the water stream. Since the biological
community has a much longer “memory” (viz. at least the life time of the organisms) than the
physico-chemical water environment, biological methods can be extremely useful in the
assessment of water quality.
A number of techniques can be differentiated in biological water quality monitoring:
 Biomonitoring, to characterize the quality of ecosystems. The most widely applied

biological method used in this respect is the monitoring of indicator bacteria (e.g. E
coli spp.) for faecal pollution. Toxicity tests can be performed with a wide range
of chemicals and organisms, under many different conditions in water and sediment
systems. For the monitoring of lake eutrophication, the occurrence of certain algae
species is a good indicator. Another common technique is the monitoring of presence or
absence of different species families, of macro-invertebrates (4.2.2.).
 Bioaccumulation monitoring, making use of the accumulation of especially heavy

metals and organic micropollutants in fish, mussels, etc. (see 4.2.3.).
 Early warning biomonitoring, in which the behavioural changes of e.g. fish under
sudden water quality changes, is monitored (see 4.2.4.).
When designing a monitoring programme, biological methods should be considered along with
physico-chemical approaches for a proper interpretation of results. Financial savings can
sometimes be made by using biological methods to “trigger’ the need for intensive and sensitive
chemical analyses.
A disadvantage of biological methods is that it can be difficult to relate observed effects to the
“environmental disturbance”; the response of organisms may also be influenced by their life
stage or reproductive condition. Biological monitoring methods can therefore best be developed
and interpreted by experienced biologists, though e.g. the BMWP method (see hereafter) can be
carried out by any non-specialist .
4.2.2. Biological monitoring with macro-invertebrates

Benthic macro-invertebrates, such as mayflies, shrimps and maggots, have widely been used in
biological water quality monitoring. They have a fixed position in the stream bed, which makes
them susceptible to the passing water for 24 hours per day. In this way they can serve as good
“integrating monitors” during their whole life cycle (a few weeks to less than a year).
Additionally, the organisms are relatively easy to sample with nets, and (if not on species level)
to be identified.
The benthic macro-invertebrates are especially good indicators for organic pollution in
rivers and streams, with the related effects on the dissolved oxygen levels; the relative
tolerance of some key groups to organic pollution is presented in Fig. 9.
The quantitative assessment (counting) of the presence of the different taxonomic families, or
even species, leads to “biological scores”, e.g. in the “saprobic index”, the “Trent” and
“Chandler Biotic Indices”, or in the “Biological Monitoring Working Party” (BMWP) (see e.g.
http://www.cies.staffs.ac.uk/origbmwp.htm).
As mentioned before, the above method is relatively simple and cheap, and it offers good
integrative results. The measurements should regularly be repeated, say, in a frequency of 1-2
times per year to detect long term trends in the water quality.
Disadvantages of the method are:
- The biological communities also depend on the substrate present (sand, boulders, clay,
etc.).
- Comparison between different regions (climates, altitudes) is may be difficult; this
holds even for the upstream/downstream regions of rivers.
Fig. 9. Relative tolerance to organic pollution of some key groups of aquatic macro-
invertebrates.
4.2.3. Bioaccumulation monitoring

Many organisms have been found to accumulate certain contaminants in their body, especially
into the fatty tissues (bioaccumulation). Contaminants can be ingested together with the
normal food, or may be passively adsorbed through the body surface. When an organism which
has accumulated a contaminant is eaten by another organism, the latter again accumulates the
contaminant to a, perhaps, lethal level. This increase in concentration in the sequential stages of
the food chain is known as biomagnification (see Course 2.4.).
This can be a way of detecting measurable concentrations of micropollutants, without having to
rely on sophisticated instruments, as would have been necessary in case of analysis of the
original water sample. An application of this is the “World Mussel Watch Programme”,
comparing micropollutants’ levels in mussels world-wide. The mussels are placed in nets,
lowered into the water and left for some time there. After that, the increase in the
micropollutants' levels can easily be assessed.
4.2.4. Early warning biomonitoring

Biological early warning systems rely on an immediate biological response in the test organisms
placed in the water system under consideration. The further action usually
takes the form of a more detailed investigation of the causes, including chemical monitoring. If
these systems are used nearby important water intakes, the water inlet may temporarily have to
be closed down.
In practice, the position of the sampling sites will be set by the “response time” required for
sampling, analysis and interpretation.
Common organisms used in early warning biomonitoring are fish like goldfish; see Fig.
10a.Normally, the fish will move upstream; however in case of some “stress”, like a pollutant,
the fish will move away with the stream, touching a sensor. When an (often automated)
recording system has registered a certain exceedance level, an alarm will warn the supervisors,
who can then take appropriate measures. Although the system is quite susceptible to “false
alarms”, it is still often used at water extraction points of drinking water companies.
Another early warning biomonitoring system makes use of the specific swimming activities, and
changes herein in case of stress, of Daphnia spp, the water flea; see PowerPoint). A third
example is the behaviour of mussels, Dreissena spp. When a toxicant enters the water, the
mussels will close their valves. This can again be registered by a computer, which will activate
an alarm in case of exceedance of some “normal behaviour level”; see Fig. 10b.
Fig. 10.a A dynamic fish test for continuous monitoring of toxicity in water. (From:
Chapman 1996); Fig. 10.b An example of a “mussel monitor”
b
4.3. Water Quality Monitoring in the European Union Water
Framework Directive
Fig. 11.Member states of the European Union (2014)
The European Union consists of 28 Member countries (2014). In the EU Water Framework
Directive (EU-WFD), established in 2000, aim is to reach good water quality statuses for all
surface and ground waters by the year 2015. For this, often international River Basins must be
founded (see e.g.: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/index_en.htm). Detailed information
on the EU- WFD has been uploaded on the platform.
With respect to surface water quality monitoring, an overall pragmatic approach is chosen, in
which, because of the diversity in e.g. socio-economic circumstances within the EU, Member
states may apply the monitoring principles in a flexible way, as long as deviations are
“defendable”, “transparent” and of limited time–frame. Up to a certain level, the monitoring is
thus “tailor-made”.
In the EU-WFD, monitoring of the following categories of parameters takes place (see the
Course Unit PowerPoint for the detailed list of variables, in rivers and lakes monitoring) :
 “Chemical” monitoring:
o Temperature, pH, alkalinity, conductivity, etc.
o DO, temperature;
o Nutrients
o Priority substances: heavy metals and organic micropollutants. At the
moment, the list consists of >150 parameters. However monitoring is only
necessary for those substances which can be expected to occur.
 “Ecological monitoring”:
o Plankton, fish, macro-invertebrates, etc.
o Hydromorphology, e.g. hydrology, "continuity" (presence of dams as barriers
for fish migration; of shallow/deep parts in rivers).
For the overall assessment of water quality, both the Chemical ("one out, all out!") and
Ecological Status should be “good”; see Fig. 12.
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
Water-quality status = Chemical status + Ecological status
Chemical status
Bad status Good status

Yardstick
biotic elementsBad abioticstatus

Poorelements
status
Moderate status
Good status
High status
(differs moderately from type specific
(slight changes
conditions)
from type spec.
(close
conditions)
to undisturbed conditions)
targetmax. ecol. reference statuspotential

Ecological status
Fig. 12. Overall water quality assessment in the EU-WFD. Both for the chemical
and ecological status, minimally the “target status” should be reached.
4.4. Recent developments in water quality monitoring

Over the last decades, there have been new methods and techniques such as (see
PowerPoint):
 Ferry Boxes;
 GIS, remote sensing, the latter for e.g. eutrophication (chl-a) and turbidity
 Sensors, often automated, for pH, salinity, nutrients, etc.
 Smart phones.
oint presentations available under “Lectures", including Unit 4.2.: "Biological Monitoring" and 4.3.: "Recent developments". For the la
Unit 5 – Monitoring Frequencies and Optimizations
5.1. Monitoring frequencies
The monitoring frequency at stations where water quality varies considerably should be higher
than at stations where the quality remains relatively constant. Statistics show us that the
reliability of our conclusions increases with the square root of the number of
observations; see also Course 4 on “Data handling and presentation”.
The required monitoring frequency will also be dependent on the objectives of the
monitoring programme.
- In trend analysis, monthly intervals will generally suffice.
- Early warning monitoring may need a daily or even hourly frequency to ensure
sufficient time for taking appropriate measures in case of calamities.
Finally the frequency will depend on the available human and financial resources. The
monitoring frequency for the GEMS/WATER stations varies between 1-2 x per month, for
rivers, once per month, or lower, for lakes, to once per year for large, stable ground water
aquifers (see Table 2.).The low frequency for baseline stations: streams and headwater lakes,
is due to the monitoring objectives for these stations: "trend monitoring over the years".
Further, it can be seen that (maybe in contrast to expectations), the monitoring frequency for
rivers in higher in smaller river basins.
Table 2. Monitoring frequency for GEMS/WATER stations

As mentioned before, individual samples at a given station should, as much as possible, be
obtained at the same time of the day because of diurnal variations in water quality (dissolved
oxygen, pH). Exceptional conditions of stream flow are frequently of interest, because it is at
maximum and minimum flow rates that extreme values of water quality are reached. An
illustration of this can be observed in Fig. 13 in the monthly frequency
Fig. 13. Daily discharges during 1987 at Ecublens-les-Bois on the Venoge river.
Monthly sampling intervals and the periods sampled for storm events are also indicated
(from Chapman, 1996).
of sampling in the Venoge river (Switzerland). We see that in the normal monthly sampling
routine, many storm events (assessed by daily discharge measurements in the river) have been
missed. This problem could partly be solved, using the same financial resources, by
synchronising the water quality measurements with the discharge regime, e.g. by using
automated samplers.
Above problems with short-duration storm events are especially present for small river basins,
say < 1000 km2. For large river basins (>100,000 km2) these events are much more “smoothened
out”; here, monthly intervals sampling will generally yield reliable, representative results, cf.
Fig. 14.
Fig. 14. Optimum ranges of

sampling frequencies for
riverine fluxes of total
suspended solids and major
ions as a function of river
basin areas (Chapman,
1996)
5.2. Some aspects of optimization
Optimization of monitoring programmes is an indispensable tool for acquiring best possible
results, for least cost; statistical tests are commonly used here; see Course 4. These
programmes can entail, amongst others, a reduction in the number of monitoring stations and/or
frequency or a reduction in the number of parameters. An important concept is the "allowable
error" or "detectable trend", indicating the level of accuracy that is necessary to still be able to
come to meaningful conclusions (e.g. whether or not this year's phosphate levels in a lake have
decreased significantly compared to last year's data). Fig. 15 illustrates the sharply decreased
number of monitoring stations in the Dutch "governmental fresh waters", between 1978 and
1996. The cost savings were used for being able to cope with the ever expanding list of
monitoring parameters (see Fig. 8).
Fig. 15. Overview of the monitoring stations in the Dutch governmental fresh waters
between 1972 and 1996. (From: unpublished Report Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure
and the Environment)
Monitoring frequencies in the EU-WFD
The minimum monitoring frequencies for the various categories are presented in Table
3. Frequencies are often higher, e.g. in the Netherlands: 1x per month for physico-
chemical variables.
Quality Element Rivers Lakes Transitional Coastal l

Biological
Phyto-Plankton 6 months 6 months 6 months 6 months
Other aquatic flora 3 years 3 years 3 3
Macro invertebrates 3 years 3 years 3 years 3 years
Fish 3 years 3 years 3 years
Hydromorphological
Continuity 6 years
Hydrology continuous 1 month
Morphology 6 years 6 years 6 years 6 years
Physico-Chemical
Thermal Conditions 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months
Oxygenation 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months
Salinity 3 months 3 months 3 months
Nutrient Status 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months
Acidification Status 3 months 3 months
Other Pollutants 3 months 3 months 3 months 3 months
Priority Substances 1 month 1 month 1 month 1 month
Table 3. Minimum monitoring frequencies for the EU-WFD surface water
Unit 6 – Field and laboratory work

6.1. Fieldwork
6.1.1. Sampling, preservation and field measurements( cf. Fig. 16-18)

The fieldwork associated with the collection and transport of samples will account for a
substantial proportion of the total cost of a monitoring programme. Therefore, the sampling
expeditions should always be planned carefully and carried out in such a way that efforts are not
wasted. This holds e.g. for checking the necessary equipment and chemicals. It is good practice
to follow a checklist of all necessary items and activities (see Table 3). Clear sampling
protocols must have been set up beforehand.
Table 3. Checklist for preparing fieldwork. (From: Bartram and Balance, 1996)
Personnel that carries out the fieldwork must be fully trained in both sampling techniques and
field test procedures, and must have a good idea of the monitoring objectives in order to react in
a sound way in case of problems, such as inaccessibility of a regular site.
The water samples should be collected in clean, pre-rinsed glass or polythene bottles, and
must then can then be stored in a way that is dependent on the chemical constituents to be
analyzed (see Table 4). For lake monitoring a suitable depth water sampler can be used in case
of stratified conditions. Other typical lake monitoring techniques include:
 Secchi disc readings, for a crude estimation of light penetration and eutrophication
 Sediment traps (which should have a cylindrical shape (in contrast to Fig. 16)), for
monitoring sedimentation and resuspension rates
 Sediment grab samples and vertical sediment core samples.
The sample bottles should always be clearly labelled with all relevant information (site, water
depth, date, time, etc.). All relevant information (date, time, worker’s name, river flows,
weather conditions,..) should also be noted in a special worksheet or notebook (see Fig. 18).
Fig. 16. Sampling procedure in a river, and lake monitoring techniques. (From:Bartram
and Balance, 1996)
The type of samples taken could either be:

 Grab samples, taken from selected location, depth and time , or
 Depth integrated;
 Time integrated (often automated samplers are used in this case).
 Discharge integrated, e.g. for industrial effluents.
Fig. 17. top left: Secchi disc; top right: field instruments
DO, pH, EC, temperature; below: field kit analysis
After sampling, a filtration may be necessary in order to differentiate between the “dissolved”
(over 0.45 µm filter) and the “particulate” phases of the chemical variables.
Some determinants should be analyzed directly in the field (electrodes for EC, pH, O2,
temperature). It is recommended not to carry out these measurements in the sample bottle itself
(could cause contamination!). Many other constituents may be analyzed in the field as well,
with the help of field kits. The reliability of these is usually somewhat less than for laboratory
equipment, though marked quality improvements have been reached over the last few years.
Finally, for the determinants to be analyzed in the laboratory, preservation protocols with
respect to cooling or addition of preservatives should carefully be adhered to (see Table 4). In
all cases changes in the sample composition must be avoided or minimized.
Fig. 18. Example page from a field notebook. (From: Bartram and Balance, 1996)
Determinant Material of sample Method of preservation Maximum
container: storage time
Polythene; glass;
borosilicate glass
Ca, Mg, Na, K P, acid washed HNO3, pH 1-2 1 month
Anions (Br, F, Cl, NO3, P or G 1-5ºC or freeze -20ºC Up to 1 month.

PO4, SO4) Filter on-site
Alkalinity, HCO3 P or G Cool to 1- 5ºC 24 hours
BOD P or G 1- 5ºC or freeze to -20ºC 24 h.; 1 month,

respectively
COD P or G H2SO4, pH 1-2 1 month
Nitrogen, ammonia P or G H2SO4, pH 1-2 and 21 Filter

cooling 1-5ºC
days. on-
site
Nitrogen, nitrate P or G HCl, pH 1-2 or cool to 1 day - 1 month
1-5ºC or freeze –20ºC
Nitrogen, nitrite P or G HCl, pH 1-2 or cool to 1 day – 1 month
1-5ºC or freeze –20ºC
N, Kjeldahl and TN P H2SO4, pH 1-2 or freeze 6 months in dark,
to -20ºC TN: 1 month
Phosphorus, total P/G/BG acid washed 1 H2SO4, pH 1-2 or freeze 6 months
to -20ºC
Phosphorus, dissolved P/G/BG acid washed Cool to 1- 5ºC or freeze 1 Filter
to -20ºC
month.
on-site
Chlorophyll-a P or G (brown) 1-5 0C or freeze to -20ºC 1 day, 1 month,
respectively
Heavy metals, except Hg P/BG acid washed HNO3, pH 1-2 6 months
Mercury BG acid washed HNO3, pH 1-2, add 1 month

K2Cr2O7 (0.05%)
Mineral oil G pH 1-2 with HC or 1 month
H2SO4 l
Organo-chlorine pesticides G 1-5 0C 1 day-1 week
Table 4. Recommended preservative treatments and maximum permissible storage times for
selected water quality variables, according to ISO 5667-3 (2008). (From:
http://www.2dix.com/pdf-2011/iso-5667-3-pdf.php)
1
Both for dissolved and total P: detergents often contain phosphates, so should not be used for cleaning !
Overview: Handling and Preservation of Water Samples
See also PowerPoints of Fred Kruis and of Centre of Water Management, the Netherlands
Waters are susceptible to change as a result of physical, chemical or biological reactions which may take
place between the time of sampling and the analysis. If precautions are not taken, at the time of sampling,
changes may occur rendering analytical data unrepresentative.
Changes may occur due to:
 consumption of certain constituents by bacteria, algae etc.;
 certain compounds being oxidised by the dissolved oxygen in the sample;
 precipitation from the liquid, e.g. calcium carbonate, aluminium hydroxide;
 loss into the vapour phase;
 absorption of carbon dioxide from the air, changing the pH value;
 adsorption of metals and certain organic compounds onto the container's surface;
 depolymerisation of polymerised products and vice versa.
These changes will be affected by the storage temperature, exposure to light, the nature of the container
used and the time between sampling and analysis. In adverse conditions, changes can occur in just a
few hours. Fortunately, preservatives are available to prevent these changes. However, it must be borne in
mind that methods of preservation are less effective with heavily contaminated samples than with those
with light contamination.
See also discussion on "representative" and "valid" samples, in the PowerPoint of Fred Kruis. General
Considerations (see also previous text, Table and figures):

 In most cases, fill the sample containers to the brim and stopper them so that no air is left
above the sample.
 Use an appropriate container. For example, polyethylene bottles should not be used for hydrocarbons,
since adsorption on to the bottle's surface is likely to occur.
 Glass containers are suitable for most determinations. Brown bottles should be used in case
photosensitive reactions are likely to occur.
 Containers must be clean. Whilst this may seem obvious, scrupulous cleanliness is important due to the
low detection levels now being adopted. For P determination, care must be taken not to use detergents
containing phosphates !!
 Samples should be kept at a temperature below that at the time of filling. Cooling between 2 degrees
and 5 degrees (i.e. in melting ice, refrigerator or cool bag with ice packs) is adequate, but not suitable
for long-term storage.
 Suspended matter, sediment, algae and other micro-organisms should be removed at the time of
sampling by filtration or centrifuging or immediately on receipt at the laboratory. Filtration should not
be carried out if the filter is likely to retain one or more of the constituents to be analysed.
 Generally filtration is achieved by use of 0.45 micron filter paper.
6.1.2. Hydrology
Knowledge on the water flow and discharge of rivers is essential in water quality monitoring.
Discharges have a direct influence on water quality, since “Dilution is not the solution to
pollution”, but it helps....
In the following, we will follow International Standards ISO 748-1979(E). In order to

accurately determine stream flow, measurements must be made of its width, depth, and speed
(velocity) of the water at a representative number of horizontal and vertical
points across the stream. To develop a stream-stage/stream flow relation (rating curve), the
stream flow must be measured at a number of different stages. A propeller is a common apparatus
for doing that (Fig. 19).
Stream velocity (m/s) will be different for both the transect (width) of the river as well as its
depth; cf. Fig. 19, so velocities will have to be measured in a number of segments. In practice, a
river width of 10 m is, for example, divided into 5 segments; at each of the 5 points, the
"average" water velocity is determined at 2, 3,.. water depths, to come to a depth-averaged
velocity (m/s). Together with the width of segment (in above case: 2 m), and its depth (=water
depth at the segment), we arrive at the discharge (m3/s).
Fig. 19. Propeller for river flow measurements; schemes for discharge determinations
v= v0.2 + v0.8
2
A more simple method is using a floating object like an orange. Estimating its velocity (m/s),
e.g. 10 times over a distinct river stretch, and computation of the cross-sectional area (depth x
width, m2) will lead to an estimation of river discharge, m3/s. A correction factor, usually 0.8 or
0.9 x may be necessary to account for the lower stream velocities deeper into the river.
6.2 Physico-chemical analyses
6.2.1. Methods and cost

In the use of the analytical techniques in the field and laboratory, well validated, robust standard
methods must be used, e.g. according to the book of "Standard Methods" APHA/AWWA/WEF
(2012). It is useful to make an operational differentiation into:
- “Conventional”, cheap methods:

- Titrations for e.g. chloride, alkalinity, hardness, chlorine.
- Spectrophotometric determinations (for phosphate, ammonia, nitrate, iron,
etc.)
- Selective electrodes (pH, oxygen, fluoride, redox potential, etc.).
- “Advanced”, expensive methods such as:

- Atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) for (heavy) metals
- Gas chromatography (GC) for pesticides, PAHs, etc.
- HPLC (High-performance liquid chromatography) for e.g. amino acids and sugars.
The latter category has some 10-20 more investment cost than the conventional techniques.
Besides, these instrumentations need much operational manpower, expertise and
maintenance, good facilities as well as strict quality control. If possible, combined
facilities within one geographical region (capital, district) should be used here; in many
countries, monitoring laboratories are indeed organized in lower level regional laboratories,
for basic determinations, and more advanced, higher level central laboratories.
As an example, below list presents representative commercial prices (2009), in a well-

equipped Certified laboratory in Indonesia, all in US dollars:
• BOD; COD: $10 per analysis

• Nutrients:
- PO 4-P, NO3-N, NH4-N: $5 per analysis
- Ptot., Ntot. : $10 per analysis
• Chl-a: $15 per analysis
• E-coli (MPN): $10 per analysis
• Heavy metals (AAS): $35 per analysis in water; $75 in sediment and biota. Per
analysis, all main heavy metals except Hg are analyzed together.
• Pesticides (GC-MS): $50 per analysis (of a group of pesticides) in water; $100 in
sediment and biota
• Cost for Biological Water Quality Assessment: $ 50 per station (labour cost only).
Table 5 gives an overview of analytical "cost" for water quality variables, expressed as
investment cost, labour time and operational costs. The data comes from 1996 and present
investment cost may be quite different (not necessarily more expensive!).
Table 5. Analytical cost for water quality parameters (1 ECU  1 US)
6.2.2. Analytical quality assurance and control (QA/QC)

Quality control will be necessary in all stages of the monitoring cycle such as in (re)defining
objectives, stations and monitoring frequencies. A special item is quality assurance and control
(QA/QC) in the laboratory. In certified, top-quality laboratories in the world, the allocated
resources for QA/QC will be some 20% of the total budget.
QA/QC in the laboratory involves:

 Well-trained, critical personnel, working in adequate facilities (instrumentation, cooling,
space, storage facilities, etc.) and under optimum working conditions; the management
structure of the laboratory should be defined clearly.
 The daily running of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the whole routine of sample
handling (receipt, storage, analysis, disposal), and the use of well-validated, robust standard
procedures of analysis.
 Accurate and controlled reporting of the data.
 A frequent control of methods, instruments (calibration !) and personnel.
The laboratory staff should be involved in the preparatory steps before the analysis: sampling,
storage and transport. They must also be familiar with the objectives and the general set-up of
the monitoring programme. Day-to-day practices for assuring high quality data involve: using
clean glassware and chemicals; careful, scrupulous adherence to the prescribed methods, and
tidiness on the work floor. This can be summarised with the term: Good Laboratory Practices
(GLP).
Specialised Quality Control and Assurance in the laboratory may be carried out via a number of
techniques, which generally involve some statistical tests for the reliability of the laboratory
results. See PowerPoint Course ..
 Accuracy (estimated average close to actual one), vs. precision (repeatability);
 Rounding off correctly; how to deal with "outliers"
QA/QC methods could either be:

Internal control, usually carried out on a daily basis, by e.g.:
 Use of blanks, duplicates and of “spiked” samples; these samples should be
unrecognizable for the analysts to avoid extra-careful working;
 Checking the ionic balance, and use of other “tricks” (e.g. PO4-P < Ptot.; dissolved heavy
metals < total heavy metals);
 Shewhart Control Charts: see Annex and PowerPoint.
In any case, samples should for some time be stored in a refrigerator to enable possible re-
analysis.
External control, which may be carried out 1-2 times per year:
 Samples of “Certified Reference Material" (CRM) of known composition can be used to
critically check the whole analysis cycle in the laboratory;
 Inter-laboratory checks (“Ring" or "Round Robin” tests), such as carried out in the GEMS-
WATER monitoring programme. Ring analyses give insight in the general errors made in
the group of laboratories as well as in the performance of the individual laboratories.
The laboratory supervisor should always be aware of the tendency of analysts to simplify
procedures; this may lead to completely erroneous results. Also, the supervisor should create an
open atmosphere, where it is possible to make mistakes and discuss them. Finally, it must be
realized that 100% perfect results can never be reached. The quality goals will always be a
compromise between the quality needed and the available resources.
Table 6 presents a list of seven monitoring data, and describes errors in the various results. Use
is made of, amongst others, the ionic balance, in which the concentration sum of the major
cations must be equal (5-10% error allowed) to that of the anions; concentrations are expressed
in μequivalents/L: μ-eq/L = |μmole/L x charge|. Typical errors indicated in Table 6 are:
 Incorrect ionic balance

 Incorrect rounding off, e.g. pH = 7.72. Final analysis results can never have more
significant figures (s.f.) (e.g. 6 s.f. in result: 8.32865 mg/L), if the values on which this
result are based (like pipette and burette readings in titration) have 3- 4 s.f.
 Interchanging of columns; incorrect multiplication with factor 10, 100,..
In all cases, an "Expert opinion" is needed to make decisions how to make corrections; see
assignment...
Table 6. Example of a list with “questionable data” (From: Chapman, 1996)
ANNEX: Shewhart Control Chart; see PowerPoint on QA/QC
the Centre of Water Management, the Netherlands. This organisation is a part of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment a
wetland.
YouTube illustrations
Water sampling, Secchi disc reading, on-site measurements: https://(part 1) https://(part 2)
The following movie shows sediment sampling techniques:

Unit 7 - Water Quality Assessment and Reporting
7.1. Water Quality Assessment
Water quality assessment can be defined as the evaluation of the physical, chemical and
biological nature of water in relation to natural quality, human effects and intended uses
(irrigation, drinking water, ecology, etc.). Water quality assessment is, together with reporting,
an essential last step in the monitoring cycle. Here, conclusions are drawn with respect to “the”
water quality, in relation to the water quality standards and guidelines set for different water
uses. Important information on year-to- year trends in water quality can be also made in this
evaluation stage.
In the setting of guidelines as well as in the evaluation of water quality, use is often made of
statistical parameters such as medians and 90th percentiles. Also in effluent permits
statistically related standards are often given with respect to the exceedance of concentrations,
e.g.: maximum levels, “never” to be exceeded, together with 90th percentiles, indicating the
levels that only for 10% of the effluent samples may be exceeded. A “median concentration” is
the value that is exceeded in 50% of the cases; a 90th percentile phosphate concentration of 0.5
mg/L indicates that this concentration is exceeded in only in 10% of the monitoring data. For
further details on statistical assessment of water quality data, see Course 4.
“Water quality indices” are commonly used for an overall interpretation of the monitoring data.
For physico-chemical parameters, the water quality indices are based on lumping together
different parameters. At least 30 water quality indices are currently being used over the world,
with the number of variables ranging from 3 up to 72. Practically all of these include at least
three of the following parameters: O 2, BOD and/or COD, NH4-N, PO4-P, NO3-N, pH and TSS.
Before you continue with the lecture notes, please read the paper of Helmond &
Breukel (1997), available in the Additional Reading section.
A frequently used index is the Prati index; see the Table below (and full paper in Additional
Materials); see also explanations in the PowerPoint.
Some disadvantages of water quality indices are:
 They only give an overall picture of water quality, lumping together the various parameters
involved.
 “Comparing apples with pears”: some of the parameters involved may be more important
than others. Weighing factors can therefore be introduced. E.g. weighing factors = 4 could
be assigned to BOD and DO, vs. a factor = 1 for relatively unimportant factors such as
water temperature.
 A situation may arise that the overall water quality index is up to standard, whereas the
water quality with respect to one, or a few parameters, may be extremely bad. A solution
could be to base the value of the overall water quality index upon the “worst case
parameter."
Table 7. Components of the "full" (above) and "simplified" Prati index for water quality
assessment. The below Index is based on 8 variables, and rates the water quality from
class 1 (unpolluted) up to class 5 (extremely polluted).
Class 1 2 3 4 5
index interval 0.1-1 1-2 2-4 4-8 10
pH 6.5-8.0 6.0-6.4 & 5.0-5.9 & 3.9-4.9 & <3.9 &
8.1-8.4 8.5-9.0 9.1-10.1 >10.1
% O2 88-112 75-87 & 50-74 & 20-49 & <20 &
113-125 126-150 151-200 >200
20
BOD5 (mg/L 0.0-1.5 1.5-3.0 3.0-6.0 6.0-12.0 >12.0
COD (mg/L) 0-10 10-20 20-40 40-80 >80
Suspended 0-20 20-40 40-100 100-278 >278
solids (mg/L)
NH3 + NH4+ (mg/L) 0-0.1 0.1-0.3 0.3-0.9 0.9-2.7 >2.7
-
NO3 (ppm) 0-4 4-12 12-36 36-108 >108
Cl- (ppm) 0-50 50-150 150-300 300-620 >620
Example (simplified PRATI index): use the above transformation formulas to calculate the sub
indices and then calculate the average to obtain the overall index.
Parameter value Points
pH = 4.5 6.0
O2 = 70% 2.5
BOD 520 = 5 ppm 3.5
COD = 20 ppm 2.0
Susp. solids = 35 ppm 2.0
4 NH3 + NH + = 0.8 ppm 3.5
3 NO - = 20 mg/L 2.5
Cl- = 100 ppm 1.5
= 23.5
Then the Prati index = /n = 23.5/8 = 2.9, so between 2 and 4 --> class 3 (moderately
polluted).
7.2. REPORTING
The whole system of water quality monitoring is aimed at the generation of reliable data, which
must then be processed and presented in a way that is understandable, also for the non-
specialist. Much too often, water quality data are buried in annual reports, with the data
presented in tabular forms only, without any statistical assessment, interpretation or graphical
presentation. Only with this latter processing, the actual water quality data can be compared
with the objectives set, and appropriate measures, if necessary, can be taken.
A clear and understandable reporting of data is therefore a last and essential step in a water
quality monitoring programme. It can always be shown to be cost-effective, since it enables
optimization (usually a reduction of future efforts) of the water quality monitoring programme.
For the data handling and management, computer software can be used for the processing of
numerical data and performing statistical tests, as well as for carrying out graphical
presentations. Statistical tests comprise calculations of means, medians, standard deviation, the
exclusion of “outliers”, carrying out regression and variance analysis, etc. In the (statistical)
processing, much care should be taken that the integrity of the original “parent” data base is
always secured.
GIS (geographical information system) is specifically designed to relate monitoring data to

geographical locations, in the form of maps. Data on surface and ground water quality can thus
be overlain with data on population, land use or geology.
Graphs can communicate complex ideas with clarity, efficiency and precision. The general
objective is to concentrate a large amount of quantitative information in a small space, so that a
comprehensive overview of that information is readily available to the reader. Examples of
graphical presentations are: bar graphs, time series and “box and whisker plots” (see Fig. 20);
see Course 4.
Fig. 20. upper graph: Bar graph with 95% confidence intervals; lower graph: Box-and-
whisker plots to display time series information. (From: Chapman, 1996)
Finally, the water quality monitoring report must show a clear structure, and be understandable, also
for non-specialists. It must at least contain:
- A short summary;
- An introduction on the objectives of the programme;
- A description of the region;
- The different methods used, both in the field and the laboratory, including QA/QC protocols;
- A clear presentation of the results followed by an analysis of these results;
- Conclusions and recommendations for the decision makers.

Complete the exercise in the PowerPoint; it will further be discussed during the Course 3.
ASSIGNMENT WQA-5
whenever possible) both the physical-chemical and biological water quality data. Focus on both monitoring and assessment. Do not re
Further Reading
Chapman (1996), Chapter 5.

Unit 8 - Groundwater pollution and monitoring
8.1. Groundwater pollution
8.1.1. Introduction
Ground water is an important source for drinking water extraction. If of good quality, it needs
only limited treatment before consumption to reach the quality criteria for drinking water. A
strong exchange exists between surface and ground waters. This may lead to ground water
pollution from surface water, or vice versa.
Increasing trends of ground water pollution can be observed world-wide, due to e.g.:
 Input of untreated domestic wastewater (BOD, SS, nutrients, bacteria and viruses,
etc.)
 Industrial spills; mining (BOD, SS, micropollutants)
 Agriculture (N0 3- , pesticides, Cl- ..) ,
 Pit latrines and other on-site sanitation systems
 Precipitation (acid rain, air-borne pollutants,..)
 Waste dumps (domestic and hazardous wastes).
The approach towards ground water pollution has often been : "out of sight, out of mind".
However, since remediation of ground water pollution is a) difficult (it involves complicated
techniques); b) slow (usually anaerobic microbial decay processes are involved), and c)
expensive (it has been estimated that for the clean-up of the polluted ground water in the USA,
US$ 15 billion will be needed), it follows that pollution prevention is a very important
strategy.
8.1.2. The fate of pollutants in the groundwater

See the PowerPoint Course 8, for general concepts in groundwater flow, e.g. porosity,
permeability, and aquifer. The fate of contaminants in the groundwater is determined by
transport processes as well as by physico-chemical and microbiological reactions.
The advective flow of groundwater, as determined by factors such as terrain slope and soil
permeability, is typically cm’s/day. However, for non-permeable clays this may be a factor 103
– 106 lower. In these latter soils, the main transport of pollutants in the groundwater works via
molecular diffusion, typically in the order of cm’s/year.

Reactions that can occur in the groundwater include:
- Adsorption and precipitation, which will especially take place on the “fine” sediment
material, viz. the clay particles. Above reactions will results into a retardation of
many contaminants: PO 3-, metals, organic micropollutants,
4 etc. Pollutants like NO -
-
and Cl will however3 hardly slow down by these reactions.
- Microbiological degradation of organic compounds; denitrification (NO -  N 3 ); die-

2
off of bacteria and viruses. Most pathogens do not survive long in groundwater: at
200C, a 90% reduction usually occurs within 10 days. However, some species may
survive for more than 200 days as a result of the absence of ultraviolet light, oxygen,
and because of the existing lower temperatures in the soil.
- Complexation, redox reactions and dissolution at low pH (especially for heavy

metals).
Example
Bacteria and virus decay proceeds via an exponential function: Nt =
N0 x 10-kt
N0 , Nt : number of bacteria, viruses at t= 0, t k

: decay rate constant (day-1)
For a decay rate k = 0.1 day-1, to reach 99.9999% reduction (“6 log-reductions”): Nt/N0
= 10-6 (or: N0/Nt = 106)
10
log (N0/Nt) = 6 = kt  t = 6/0.1 = 60 days.
With a travel speed for groundwater of 10 cm/day, then at 10x60 = 600 cm (6 m.)
distance, we have theoretically reached above reduction in bacteria/viruses.
8.1.3. Case studies

A) Gaza, Palestine
(http://commerce.iugaza.edu.ps/Portals/20/Users/016/16/16/WATERS~1.PDF)
The problems in this region are mainly connected to the limited water resources. The abstraction
rates are amounted at a factor 1.5-3 times the natural replenishment rate of the acquifer. The
overpumping of groundwater wells thus leads to sea water intrusion, and irrigation with this
water causes soil salinisation. Typical chloride levels for drinking water wells in Gaza are >
200-1500 mg Cl-/L, much higher than the WHO standard of 250 mg Cl-/L. Nitrate levels > 500
mg NO3-/L are reported, i.e. 10 times the WHO standard. Most of the irrigationwater in the
Gaza area is reused, leading to high nitrate, chloride and pesticides levels.

Other sources of ground water pollution are:
- domestic wastewater recharge, resulting into high pathogens, BOD, SS and nitrate levels;
- fertiliser usage in intensive agriculture, again giving rise to high nitrate leaching rates.
The above problems are enhanced by the unfavourable geology of the region (sandy bottom), in
which transport rates of the ground water are much higher than in clayey areas.
B) Nassau County, USA

Here a serious ground water pollution has occurred since the early 1940, caused by a metal
plating industry mainly discharging Cr6+ and Cd2+. At present, this has resulted into a pollution
plume some 1300 m long, 300 m wide and 21 m thick (See Fig. 21). Typical values found in the
ground water are:
- > 10 mg Cr6+/L (with a WHO guideline for drinking water of 0.05 mg/L)
- > 10 mg Cd2+/L (WHO guideline: 0.005 mg/L)
1. Topography of the Nassau County study area, and Cr(VI) concentration isolines (mg/L) in the groundwater pollution plume (Chapm
C) Groundwater wells protection in The Netherlands

To avoid pollution of groundwater wells, the water authorities in The Netherlands have
introduced a specific “zoning of land use restictions” (see below figure 22).
Here we see stricter rules for land use and other activities close to the extraction wells:
- First 30-150 m (catchement area): only water extraction activities are allowed
- 1000-2000 m (protection area): strong restrictions exist with respect to agricultural
practices, housing, industrial and commercial activities, etc.
- The remaining recharge area, with somewhat less stringent restrictions.
In many parts of the world, both in developed and developing countries, we see similar
protection measures for water extraction points.
Here, beneficial use is made of the natural
degradation of the pollutants in the (slow- flowing)
ground water.
Fig. 22. Zoning for groundwater

wells Protection in the Netherlands
8.2. Groundwater quality monitoring
8.2.1. Design of the monitoring network

In the previous Units, we limited ourselves to the monitoring of rivers and lakes. Although
groundwater monitoring is more complicated and time consuming than surface water sampling,
we can basically follow the same “monitoring cycle” as described before.
First of all, objectives have to be set for the groundwater monitoring. These objectives can, as
in the case of surface water monitoring, be manifold, e.g.:
 To assess and understand the general quality of the groundwater, as an aid to optimal
management of groundwater resources (ambient monitoring, operational monitoring).
 To identify locations of major pollution sources and the movement of pollutants in the
aquifer (ambient monitoring, effluent monitoring).
 To determine the compliance with regulations and standards (effluent monitoring).
 To determine the nature and impact of an accidental pollution event (early warning
monitoring).
Before establishing a groundwater monitoring network programme, preliminary surveys should

be made, lasting from a few months up to a year. The surveys include investigating the main
features of the groundwater quality such as: pollutant sources, hydro-geological conditions,
background values, and possible seasonal trends. Sampling during these preliminary surveys is
nearly always limited to existing wells, boreholes and springs.
The second part of the programme than entails longer-term groundwater monitoring in which
the location and number of stations, sampling frequency and number of variables
is established. Here the aim is to minimise costs, at the same time still meeting the objectives of
the programme.
Number and location of sampling stations

As indicated before, this will largely depend on the objectives of the groundwater monitoring
programme, as well as on size and complexity of the area and financial limitations. In The
Netherlands, for example, a national groundwater quality monitoring programme has been
established, principally directed towards diffuse sources of pollution. The network comprises
380 stations (i.e. a relative high density of 1 per 100 km2), with emphasis on areas of
importance for drinking water supplies. Compared to this, the density may still be higher (as in
Germany: 1/35 km2), or, usually, much lower. This holds especially for larger and/or less
developed countries.
With respect to the locations of the sampling stations, existing wells for drinking water
extraction are usually not the most suitable locations for most monitoring objectives (except for
operational monitoring). Hydro-geological conditions such as groundwater flow rates and
directions will be the main considerations in locating monitoring stations in relation to possible
pollution sources; therefore much expertise is needed in these fields in order to establish a
suitable monitoring network. The installation of specially constructed observation boreholes to
specified depths, offers the best chance of obtaining samples that are reasonably representative
of conditions in the aquifer. Construction procedures include drilling and installation of a well
screen and filter, similar to the construction of extraction wells.
Sampling frequency
Sampling frequency will, amongst others, be a function of the type and objectives of the
assessment programme, the nature of the groundwater body (e.g. its (in)homogeneity), and
financial resources. Because of the generally long residence time and the relatively slow
changes in groundwater quality, less frequent sampling is required than for surface water
bodies. Thus, background and trend monitoring could be based on annual samples for large
groundwater bodies and quarterly samples for smaller aquifers. (Much) more frequent sampling
may be required for pollution source studies, especially if these are close to a potable water
supply, and/or in case of rapid groundwater. Have a look at this (18 min.) YouTube movie to
see how sampling is done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_5RcnaFn_w
8.2.2. Case studies
Groundwater monitoring in Germany

In Germany, the responsibility of groundwater monitoring lies within the 16 Federal States
(Länder). The monitoring scheme consists of three types:
 Basic or reference monitoring stations, for trend detection, control for compliance with
standards, impact assessment, etc.
 User related (operational) stations, especially for drinking water (also as early
warning)
 Emission related monitoring (agriculture, waste dumps, etc.).
The measured variables basically follow the GEMS list (Table 1). Depending on preliminary
surveys it may then be decided to either reduce the number of parameters in the routine
monitoring, or include additional parameters such as heavy metals, organic micropollutants,
etc. In Germany, the frequency for monitoring the baseline and trend stations is 2-4 times per
year.
Groundwater pollution due to a waste dump in Toronto, Canada

In this case, land filling of municipal and industrial waste took place over the period 1940-1976.
At the end of this period, the landfill covered 5.4 ha, with a thickness of 5- 10 m. A preliminary
survey showed that a pollution plume extended about 700 m. north of the landfill, in the
direction of the groundwater flow. The zone of contamination was separated by a clay and silt
layer from a deeper aquifer, which was used for water supplies. In the extensive monitoring
programme, it was decided to construct multi- level groundwater sampling points to enable
regular water samples to be taken from many depths. As a simple indicator for the spread of
pollutants, the non-reactive Cl - ion was chosen; its spread indicates the maximum possible
transport rate of pollutants (see Fig. 23).
Fig. 23. Cl- contours in

groundwater under a
waste dump, Toronto,
Canada (Chapman,
1996).
• Look and listen to the PowerPoint presentation available under “Lecture”.
YouTube illustrations
 Movie (18 min.) on groundwater sampling
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_5RcnaFn_w
Further Reading
 Chapman (1996), Chapter 9

 Groundwater monitoring in the European Union Water Framework Directive: see
Additional material Course 3.2.
 UN/ECE Task Force on Monitoring & Assessment (2000), available at:
http://www.unece.org/env/water/publications/documents/guidelinesgroundwater.pdf
Unit 9 - Cost aspects of monitoring
9.1. Cost of a monitoring programme
In this Unit we will have a look at main aspects related to costs involved in monitoring. “Water
quality monitoring” constitutes the efforts undertaken to obtain quantitative and qualitative
information on the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of water. Similarly to other
investigative activities, the monitoring of water quality involves the spending of resources
(costs), necessary to achieve the final programme goals. Thus, by costs we refer to the
burden sustained in order to perform a certain activity, to accomplish certain production
activities, or to achieve certain goals. It is the value of money that has been used up to
produce something, and hence is not available to be used again.
In water quality monitoring activities, costs refer to the total expenses burden from the desk
studies up to information dissemination to the final users; these are all required costs for the
monitoring activities. Required costs are those expenses each monitoring study will incur. The
total monitoring costs will depend on the number of study sites and sampling stations required.
Shared costs are for items which are often used infrequently and could be shared between
different groups or projects.
The implementation of a monitoring programme requires access to resources, including a well-
equipped laboratory, office space, and equipment for field work, transport and the availability
of trained personnel. In addition, factors such as sample collection, analytical services and
reporting should also be considered. Thus, the minimum cost of any monitoring activity is
determined by the purpose of the programme (surveillance, operational, investigative – refer to
previous units for further details on monitoring types and objectives).
The costs involved in monitoring activities generally consists of the following:
• Equipment and maintenance - equipment, parts, man-hours
• Sample collection and shipment - man-hours, shipping costs
• Analysis - cost of analytical services
• Results - man-hours (data review, analysis, filing)
The total cost of a network operation is thus build up by:

• the costs of field visits, sample collection, discrete sample collection and other
maintenance needs;
• the costs of analytical determinations in the laboratory or measurements by field
monitoring instruments (equipment rental/purchase); and;
• the costs for data-processing, including database maintenance and reporting.
The cost of a particular component is generally given by the specific frequency of the activity
multiplied by its unit cost. However, the component and unit costs generally should cover not
only the direct expenses but also some amortized recovery of capital investments associated
with each component and all other indirect expenses.
As a rule of thumb, once a programme has been developed and implemented, it is relatively
inexpensive to expand the spectrum of analyses as compared to the field portion of the costs for
new programme. This is because usually the same effort that is used to collect samples for
several parameters is the same as needed to collect
samples for one or two analyses. With this type of programme expansion, care must be taken
that the initial purpose of the programme is not compromised. Inadequate planning often leads
to vastly increased field time and cost because of continuous repairs, resampling, data retrofits,
and eventual revamping of the entire sampling station design. If a company has several
monitoring sites in various places, expenditures spent in this manner can be quite significant. To
avoid this problem, one needs a clear focus and well-defined monitoring purpose combined with
wisely spent money, experienced consultation, and proper equipment.
Some of the pitfalls that increase cost are:

 Lack of careful planning
 No distinct objectives
 Inappropriate equipment
 Erroneous programming or alteration of the programming
 Lack of systematic maintenance
 Change in focus which is not carried all the way to the instrumentation, and
 Incompatible add-ons.
All of the above also increase the data analysis time due to mismatched or missing data. While
the system design directly influences the operational costs, the work required to analyse the
data is often ignored in initial cost assessment. This may be due to the lack of a defined purpose
for the program, or because the data collection programme is meant to solely meet the needs of
a government agency. In designing a monitoring program, this is not sufficient. The data
resulting from the sampling should be the reason the programme was initiated in first place. In
any monitoring program, the receipt and review of the data are the most important of all of the
factors to be considered. Where the importance of the monitoring is acknowledged, it is not
uncommon for a manager to spend a considerable amount of time reviewing and analyzing the
data that is collected.
Cost should not be the only consideration in a monitoring programme. Careful systematic
planning when it comes to water monitoring is essential. While the initial dollar figure is
meaningful, one must remember that it will (in most cases) be the least of the total
expenditures. Inappropriate, poorly constructed equipment may waste manpower and effort. To
avoid some of the common pitfalls, the process of the programme design should consider the
following:2
1. Determine the general needs and have a written statement of the monitoring programme
purpose.
2. Determine whether monitoring can provide all or part of the necessary information.
Describe the information needed.
3. Make a good faith estimate of the equipment and operational costs according to specific
situations (costs varies according to objectives and network).
4. Determine the need for additional information to be combined with monitoring data such
as purpose, collection method, intervals, etc.
2
Boman, B.; Wilson, C. and E. Ontermaa (2008). Water Quality Monitoring Programs for Environmental Assessment of Citrus
Groves. Circular 1407, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of
Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Available at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.
Sanders, T.; R. Ward; J. Loftis; T. Steele; D. Adrian and V. Yevjevich (1983). Design of Networks for Monitoring Water Quality.
Water Resources Publications. Colorado.
5. Decide how the monitoring data are to be collected. Have a written statement that specifies the
degree of automation, frequency, and sampling sites.
6. Determine what data is needed and why it needs to be collected. Record the specific details of
the analysis and characterization processes.
7. What are the requirements for data validity? Begin to establish a QA/QC (quality
assurance/quality control) programme, including sample preservation, storage time, and
collection method (additional information may be collected at local certified laboratories).
8. Determine what equipment is needed, what it is supposed to do, and how the equipment
functions. Determine type, cost, configuration, maintenance needs, and tolerance to the
environment.
9. Speak to the analysis laboratory and other service providers to clarify their role, what items they
will provide, how they will perform the analysis, and how much it will cost. Determine whether
a contract is needed.
10. Develop a record system and a written description of the programmes and their purposes.
11. Establish a maintenance schedule in writing. Provide time for test runs and record problems,
needed improvements, etc.
9.2. Optimisation of Water Quality Monitoring Networks
Water quality monitoring should consider specific information and data requirements from
stakeholders (watershed managers, policy makers, scientists, communities and civil society,
NGO’s and other water users).
Statistical optimization of a monitoring programme is essential to increase monitoring

performance, while minimizing the costs. However, optimization is rarely achievable, if ever,
possible at the start of the programme, since it would require a large amount of knowledge about
the statistical characteristics of the variables being monitored; such information is almost never
available at the design stage. Even when historical data is available or when a network has been
in operation for some time, it is probably more reasonable to talk about improving system
performance than optimizing it. Generally the performance optimisation of water quality
monitoring networks is related to the collection and generation of the same amount of
information required for decision making process using less financial resources
In that sense, to improve performance of a monitoring network, research is needed to determine

how much data is adequate. Performance optimization requires an objective function relating
information and costs. Optimization cannot be incorporated in the design of a monitoring
network unless there is a specific management use of the data with the associated benefit of
avoided costs.
The primary goal of an optimisation process is to simplify parameter schedules and therefore to
save resources. This can be done by providing screening information to determine appropriate
parameters to be sampled and also by identifying indicator parameters that are easy to measure
and interpret. Finally relevant data to end users is produced and the efficiency and performance
of the monitoring programme is increased.
Past experiences on this matter have been reported in many locations (Sanders et al., 1983;
Breukel et al., 2001 (MTM-3; see additional material Course 3.2). As an example, the network
optimisation programme at the IJsselmeer area (the Netherlands) revealed after statistical
research, that higher sampling frequency (12 times a year) at less locations (50% less)
provides more information than a lower frequency at large number of locations, and reduces the
cost by 35-50% (see Breukel et al., 2001); cf. Fig.15. In the same case it was advised to select
parameters which could be analysed with the same analytical method/run to allow a cost-
effective operation of the laboratories.
As stated before, the major constraint for the application of any of the above techniques is the
availability of complete data sets on water quality for all the monitored stations. Thus, a first
sampling stage with dense monitoring stations should be undertaken in order to collect more
data (Nunes et al., 2005). After determining the spatial covariance of those stations, the
performance optimization of the water quality monitoring network can be recommended.
Further Reading
beiro (2005). Optimal estuarine sediment monitoring network design with simulated annealing. Environmental Management 78, 294-

Lecture Notes Course 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture Notes Course 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Course 3:

Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment

Unit 1 Concepts of monitoring and assessment

Unit 2 River basin monitoring

Unit 3 Lakes and reservoirs Unit

4 Water Quality variables

Unit 5 Monitoring frequencies and Optimization

Unit 6 Field and laboratory work

Unit 7 Water quality assessment and reporting

Unit 8 Groundwater monitoring

Unit 9 Cost aspects

UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education Course 3

In this unit we will give a short overview of:

1.1. Definitions and types of monitoring

Water quality monitoring can be defined as “the programmed process of sampling,

Type of monitoring Objectives

Exercise (see answers at the end of this Unit):

1.2. The monitoring cycle

Fig. 1. The monitoring cycle

A description should be made of the monitoring area, with at least:

Fig. 2. (left) Schematic

Action List for Unit 1

Unit 2 – River basin monitoring

2.1. General characteristics of rivers

There are three main types of streams:

The Okavango River and Delta

2.1.2. Physical parameters

For a river system, physical parameters include:

2.1.3. Concept of river continuum

 The macrolocation of the stations such as:

 Microlocation, defining the exact position of the monitoring sites:

Fig.6. Selection of monitoring sites in rivers (distance border-sea ~ 40 km)

 Look and listen to the PowerPoint presentation available under “Lecture”.

3.1.2. General Characteristics

3.2. Monitoring (see also Chapman 7.5)

In general, more stations will be needed for:

- Vertical variations can often be connected to the occurrence of thermal

Action List for Unit 3

Look and listen to the PowerPoint presentation available under “Lecture”.

Book of Bartram and Balance (1996); see Course 3.2.

4.1. Physico-chemical variables

Table 1.Variables used in GEMS/WATER programmes for basic monitoring (from:

In case of very limited resources, a minimum list of parameters could be:

- Hydrology, for rivers

More complex, expensive programmes may analyse >100 variables. In the

4.2. Biological Water Quality Monitoring

A number of techniques can be differentiated in biological water quality monitoring:

 Biomonitoring, to characterize the quality of ecosystems. The most widely applied

 Bioaccumulation monitoring, making use of the accumulation of especially heavy

4.2.2. Biological monitoring with macro-invertebrates

4.2.3. Bioaccumulation monitoring

4.2.4. Early warning biomonitoring

Fig. 11.Member states of the European Union (2014)

Water-quality status = Chemical status + Ecological status

Bad status Good status

biotic elementsBad abioticstatus

targetmax. ecol. reference statuspotential

4.4. Recent developments in water quality monitoring

Action List for Unit 4

Table 2. Monitoring frequency for GEMS/WATER stations

Fig. 14. Optimum ranges of

Quality Element Rivers Lakes Transitional Coastal l

Table 3. Minimum monitoring frequencies for the EU-WFD surface water