See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275959528

Post-Audit of a Water Quality Model Applied to the East Branch Du Page River

Conference Paper · July 2010

CITATIONS READS
0 63

2 authors, including:

Charles Melching
Melching Water Solutions LLC
81 PUBLICATIONS 1,763 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Charles Melching on 07 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Post-Audit of a Water Quality Model Applied to the East Branch Du Page
River
Charles S. Melching1 and Erin G. Smith2
1
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Marquette University, P.O. Box 1881, Milwaukee, WI,
53201-1881, USA, email: charles.melching@marquette.edu
2
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., 777 Taylor Street, Suite 1050, Fort Worth, TX, 76102, USA, email:
smitheg@cdm.com

Abstract
A QUAL2E model was calibrated and verified to diel survey data collected on August 8-9 and July 18-19,
1983, respectively, for the East Branch Du Page River. This model then was applied to a diel survey period of June
24-25, 1997 as a post-audit of model performance. Between 1983 and 1997 two of nine wastewater treatment plants
(WWTPs) were closed or combined with other WWTPs, and three of the WWTPs applied improved treatment
techniques and operations leading to greatly reduced effluent concentrations. Thus, the post-audit is a stringent test
of the QUAL2E model. The post-audit simulation results agree very well with the measured dissolved oxygen (DO)
concentrations through river kilometer 12.9, and then substantially undersimulate the measured DO in the last 12.9
km. From these results it might seem that the QUAL2E model is unable to accurately simulate the results of the
large change in loadings. However, the post-audit simulation results for carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand
and ammonia show reasonable agreement with the measured data, so the simulation of these two oxygen consuming
processes should be reasonable. In the model large sediment oxygen demand (SOD) rates were applied in the final
14.0 km to match observed DO concentrations in 1983. The large reduction in loads to the lower reaches of the
river have reduced the source material for the SOD and the SOD rates have substantially decreased over the 14 years
between the diel surveys (reductions of 47 to 85% were estimated in this study). Thus, to properly evaluate the
results of water-quality management measures a means to adjust the SOD rates to account for future reductions
resulting from decreases in organic loads to the stream are needed.

Keywords—water quality modeling, post audit, water quality management, dissolved oxygen

1. Post-Audits of Water Quality Models

A post-audit of a model is the subsequent examination and verification of model predictive performance
following implementation of an environmental control program (Thomann, 1982). Whereas most water-quality
models applied for design of pollution control and water-quality management programs have been calibrated and
verified to data collected for the water body of interest, post-audits of models are much less frequent. Donigian
(1983) noted that “post-audit analyses are rare (unfortunately) for any type of modeling exercise.” Further,
Thomann (1982) stated
“it is apparently rare that following a forecast and a subsequent implementation of an environmental
control program, an analysis is made of actual ability of the model to predict water quality responses.
…Somehow it seems that once a facility has been constructed, the federal and state agencies,
municipalities, and industries are somewhat reluctant to return to the scene of a water quality problem
to monitor the response of the water body.”
Whereas these quotes both are nearly 30 years old, a review of the water-quality modeling literature reveals only a
relatively small number of published model post-audits as detailed in the following paragraphs.
Thomann (1987) summarized the post-audits in an extensive study of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP)
improvements on receiving water bodies done by Hydroqual (1983). In this study, post-audits were done for six
river water-quality models that predicted the effects of WWTP improvements from primary to secondary treatment
and from secondary to nitrification and advanced waste treatment. Thomann (1987) identified the following key
results of these post-audit studies:
• The average root mean square (RMS) error of dissolved oxygen (DO) simulation was 0.9 mg/L, which was
slightly larger than the average RMS error of calibration for these models, which was 0.7 mg/L.
 • The post-improvement comparisons indicated that the DO models tend to overpredict actual DO
concentrations at levels less than 7 mg/L.
• With a detailed model developed using reasonably extensive (and expensive) data sets, the RMS error in
the predicted post-improvement DO concentrations relative to measured values is about 0.9 mg/L, whereas
simplified desk top analyses double that error.
Several water-quality models of portions of the Great Lakes have been post-audited. Bierman and Dolan (1986)
post-audited a phytoplankton model of Saginaw Bay of Lake Huron. Comparisons were made between a priori
model simulations and an extensive set of survey data acquired in 1980 after the implementation of controls on
phosphorus loadings. Bierman and Dolan (1986) found that the trends of the simulation ranges were consistent with
the measured response of the bay to the reduced phosphorus loads, but the absolute values did not agree in all cases.
Di Toro et al. (1987) did a post-audit of a eutrophication-dissolved oxygen model of Lake Erie. They concluded that
the International Joint Commission target pollutant loadings were reasonably accurate forecasts of the loadings
required to achieve the goal of elimination of anoxia in Lake Erie. Lam et al. (1987) did a post-audit of another
model of Lake Erie. Their post-audit analysis supported the hypothesis that the sediment oxygen demand (SOD)
rate is related to the phosphorus loading. In the central basin of Lake Erie the simulated DO concentrations showed
excellent agreement with the measured values over a 16 year period.
Mossman and Schnoor (1988) did a post-audit of a Dieldrin bioconcentration model. They found predictions
made with a simple bioconcentration model worked well describing the input of dieldrin to the Coralville Reservoir,
Iowa, U.S. after the use of dieldrin was banned. The models, both total body residue and oil-normalized, were found
to be valid for a period of more than 20-years in the post-audit study. Rutherford (1991) did a post-audit of a steady-
state DO model. The post-audit found the model can predict day-to-day variations of DO concentrations under
average waste loading conditions, but not when there are sudden large changes in waste load. Rutherford (1991)
found the model reliably reproduced the general improvement in river DO concentrations resulting from improved
effluent treatment. Finally, Lung (1996) did a post-audit of the AESOP model applied to the upper Mississippi
River between St. Paul, MN and Lock and Dam No. 2. The original model was calibrated for data collected in 1973,
1976, 1977, and 1980, in 1985 advanced secondary treatment was applied at the Metro WWTP in St. Paul, and the
post-audit data were collect for a low-flow period in 1988. For the post-audit period it was found that the model
kinetic coefficients remain unchanged, except for the carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) rate and
the algal growth rate. The new CBOD rate was consistent with literature values reported for advanced secondary
treatment and the algal growth rate is within the range of values determined for the various years of the calibration
period. Thus, the model was concluded to have reliably predicted the outcome of WWTP upgrades.
The objective of this paper is to present a post-audit of a QUAL2E model applied to the East Branch Du Page
River near Chicago, Ill., U.S. This case study will provide one more example of the usefulness of post-audit
analyses and of the usefulness of a typical calibrated and verified QUAL2E model to predict the performance of
various water-quality management strategies.

2. East Branch Du Page River

2.1 River Conditions and QUAL-II Model
The East Branch Du Page River (hereafter East Branch) drains a 205.4 km2 area in the western suburbs of
Chicago, Ill., U.S. In the 1980s the river received the effluent from 9 WWTPs over its 40.2 km length either directly
or through its tributaries. By the 1990s the number of the WWTPs had been consolidated to the current number of 7
WWTPs. In either case, the East Branch is a classical effluent dominated stream.
In the early 1980s the East Branch was prone to low DO concentrations with diel surveys in July and August of
1983 finding DO concentrations as low as 1.5 and 0.9 mg/L, respectively. Because of the poor water quality in the
East Branch in the 1980s, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) jointly developed a QUAL-II model (NCPIASI, 1982) for simulation of water quality in the East Branch,
West Branch, and main stem of the Du Page River (Freeman et al., 1986). The development of this model involved
diel sampling of 60 water-quality constituents on July 18-19, 1983 and August 8-9, 1983, as well as tracer
measurements of the travel time and reaeration-rate coefficient for 60 reaches in the Du Page River system (Freeman
et al., 1986). The QUAL-II model was calibrated using the August data and verified using the July data.
The QUAL-II model included only the lower 30.4 km of the East Branch, thus, the effluent from 2 of the 9
1980s WWTPs (and 2 of 7 1990s WWTPs) was accounted for in the upstream inflows to the model. The calibrated
model then was used by the IEPA to develop water-quality management strategies for the Du Page River system.
One of the results of the modeling was that fairly stringent permit limits were applied to the WWTPs discharging to
the East Branch as listed in Table 1.
 In the late 1990s, after upgrades to and consolidation of several of the WWTPs the IEPA began the
development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for the East Branch. The TMDL study involved a new diel
study of water-quality constituents in the East Branch on June 24-25, 1997 (CH2M-Hill, 2004). The original goal of
this project was to apply the QUAL-II model calibrated and verified to conditions in 1983 to the conditions in 1997,
reflecting the tightened permit limits in Table 1, as a post-audit of the predictive capabilities of the QUAL-II model.

Table 1. Current 5-Day Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD5) and Ammonia as Nitrogen
(NH4-N) Permit Limits for the Wastewater Treatment Plants Discharging to the East Branch Du Page River
in the QUAL-II Model Domain (after CH2M-Hill, 2004)
Wastewater Treatment Plant Daily Max Monthly Ave Daily Max Monthly Ave
CBOD5 CBOD5 NH4-N NH4-N
(mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
Downers Grove Sanitary District 20 10 3 1.5
Glendale Heights 20 10 3 1.5
Du Page Woodridge Green Valley 20 10 3 1.5
Bolingbrook #1 40 20 3 1.5
Citizens Utility Company #2 40 20 3 1.5

2.2 QUAL2E Model

The original goal of this study was to reconstruct the QUAL-II model of Freeman et al. (1986) within the
QUAL2E model (Brown and Barnwell, 1987) and apply it to the conditions of the June 1997 study. Whereas
Freeman et al. (1986) includes substantial details of the original QUAL-II model, it does not include vital
information on the channel geometry, which are needed by QUAL2E, especially width data that are need to convert
SOD coefficients from g/ft-day in QUAL-II to g/ft2-day in QUAL2E. Further, neither the USGS Illinois Water
Science Center nor the authors still had copies of the original QUAL-II input data. Thus, it was necessary to
develop a QUAL2E model using the geometry data collected for the TMDL study (CH2M-Hill, 2004), and to
calibrate and verify this model to the August 1983 and July 1983 data, respectively. In the calibration, the reaction
coefficients listed in Freeman et al. (1986) were used as much as possible, and the goal of the calibration was to
duplicate the water-quality constituent concentration trajectories shown in Freeman et al. (1986) as much as
possible. For example, Figure 1 shows the simulated and measured DO concentrations for the original QUAL-II
model and the QUAL2E model.
Relative to the original QUAL-II model values of the SOD rate, rate coefficient for ammonia oxidation, benthos
source rate for ammonia, and benthos source rate for dissolved phosphorus had to be changed for at least some
reaches as listed in Table 2. All other parameters were the same as those used in the original QUAL-II model.

16

14
Dis s olved O xyg en (mg /L )

12

10

0
20 15 10 5 0
R iver Miles Above Mouth

Figure 1. QUAL2E Calibration Results for Dissolved Oxygen (left) Where the Solid Line Comprises the
Simulated Values and the Open Squares are the Measured Values, and the Original QUAL-II Calibration for
Dissolved Oxygen (right) after Freeman et al. (1986), Where the Vertical Axis is in Milligrams Per Liter
(note: American units are used for position to maintain consistency with Freeman et al. (1986)).
 Table 2. Comparison of Calibrated Model Parameter Values in the QUAL-II and QUAL2E models of the
East Branch Du Page River
Reach Rate Coefficient for Benthos Source Rate for Benthos Source Rate for Dissolved
Ammonia Oxidation (day-1) Ammonia (mg-NH4-N/ft2-day) Phosphorus (mg-P/ft2-day)
QUAL-II QUAL2E QAUL-II QUAL2E QAUL-II QUAL2E
1 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
2 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
3 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
4 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
5 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
6 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
7 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
8 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
9 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
10 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
11 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0
12 0.3 0.1 0 0 0 0
13 0.3 0.1 0 0 -66.67 -33.34
14 0.3 0.1 0 0 -58.06 -29.03
15 0.3 0.1 -33.33 -12.5 -47.62 -23.81
16 0.3 0.1 -92.90 -35.0 -46.45 -22.73
17 0.3 0.1 -304.8 -97.0 -60.95 -30.48

3. Post Audit of QUAL2E Model

Once the QUAL2E model was calibrated and verified for the August and July 1983 data, respectively, it was
applied to the flow, waste load, and temperature conditions of June 24-25, 1997 without any changes to the model
parameters. The flow rate at the downstream end of the East Branch was 1.35 m3/s in August 1983, 1.97 m3/s in
July 1983, and 1.86 m3/s in June 1997. Thus, the flow for the post-audit period was similar to the flow for the
calibration and verification periods. However, as listed in Table 3 the WWTP effluent concentrations were
tremendously lower in 1997 compared to 1983, especially for 5-day CBOD (i.e. CBOD5) at the Du Page County
Woodridge Green Valley, Bolingbrook #1, and Citizens Utility #2 WWTPs and for ammonia as nitrogen (NH4-N)
at the Du Page County Woodridge Green Valley and Bolingbrook #1 WWTPs.
Figure 2 shows the comparison between measured and simulated CBOD5, NH4-N, nitrite plus nitrate as
nitrogen, and dissolved phosphorus concentrations for the post-audit period. The simulated CBOD5 agrees well
with the measured values of CBOD5 for the post-audit, and considering the large reductions in CBOD5 loads in
1997 compared to 1983 this is a powerful confirmation of the usefulness of the model. Between River Kilometers
(RK) 30.4 and 12.9 the agreement between the simulated and measured NH4-N concentrations also is good. From
RK 12.9 to 7.2 the simulated concentration are slightly above the range of the measured values, but in the final 7.2
km the simulated concentrations decrease to zero, which is below the range of the measured values. Dissolved
phosphorus, similarly is well simulated from RK 30.4 to 12.9, but in the last 12.9 km the simulated values are
substantially below the range of the measured values. For nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen the simulated concentration
passes through the range of the measured concentrations at only 3 of 10 measurement locations (i.e. RK 29.8, 9.0,
and 7.1), whereas for all other locations the simulated concentration is substantially higher than the range of the
measured values.
Table 3. Wastewater Treatment Plant Flows and Effluent Constituent Concentrations in 1983 and 1997
Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharge (m3/s) DO (mg/L) CBOD5 (mg/L) NH4-N (mg/L)
Glenbard
August 1983 0.374 8.2 4.4 0.32
July 1983 0.450 8.2 4.1 0.80
June 1997 0.340 7.0 1.0 2.98
Downers Grove
August 1983 0.334 6.3 5.6 2.00
July 1983 0.357 8.3 9.1 2.10
June 1997 0.261 7.3 1.0 1.25
Du Page County Woodridge Green Valley
August 1983 0.183 5.5 31.0 15.0
July 1983 0.230 3.4 46.0 10.0
June 1997 0.212 8.1 2.5 0.22
Bolingbrook #1
August 1983 0.046 5.3 110.0 18.0
July 1983 0.046 7.2 50.0 14.0
June 1997 0.051 9.1 1.0 0.16
Citizen’s Utility #2
August 1983 0.063 6.7 25.0 0.49
July 1983 0.073 7.6 24.0 2.00
June 1997 0.041 7.2 1.8 0.21

4 Meas ured
2.5 Measured
S imulated S imulated
A mmonia as Nirog en (mg /L )

2.0
3
C B O D5 (mg /L )

1.5
2
1.0

1
0.5

0 0.0
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
R iver K ilometers Above Mouth R iver K ilometers Above Mouth

10 Meas ured
7 Measured
Nitrite + Nitrate as Nitrog e (mg /L )

S imulated S imulated
Dis s olved P hos phorus (mg /L )

6
8
5

6
4

3
4

2
2
1

0 0
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
R iver K ilometers from Mouth R iver K ilometers Above Mouth

Figure 2. Comparison of Simulated and Measured CBOD5, Ammonia as Nitrogen, Nitrite Plus Nitrate as
Nitrogen, and Dissolved Phosphorus for the Post-Audit Period of June 24-25, 1997.
 Figure 3 shows the comparison between measured and simulated DO concentrations. As was the case for
ammonia and dissolved phosphorus the simulated DO concentrations agree well with the measured values between
RKs 30.4 and 12.9. In the last 12.9 km the simulated DO concentrations are substantially less than the measured
values. In the original QUAL-II model and the QUAL2E model developed in this study, the reaches in the final
12.9 km had been assigned the highest SOD rates in the system: 2.64 to 5.79 g/m2day with an average of 3.78
g/m2day in this stretch versus 0.61 to 2.74 g/m2day with an average of 1.18 g/m2day in the upstream reaches. It is
reasoned that the high SOD rates resulted from the high CBOD5 loads coming from the Du Page County Woodridge
Green Valley (RK 11.9), Bolingbrook #1 (RK 8.9), and Citizens Utility #2 (RK 3.9) WWTPs into the lower 12.9 km
in 1983. Further, since these three WWTPs were discharging far lower CBOD5 loads in 1997, it is likely that the
SOD rates in the lower 12.9 km might also have substantially decreased. Further, the reach from RK 14.0 to 12.9
also had a high SOD rate, which was attributed to back water from the most affected reach. Thus, the SOD rates for
the lower 14.0 km were recalibrated to match the measured DO concentrations. The results of the recalibrated SOD
rates also are shown in Figure 3. The initial and recalibrated SOD rates are listed in Table 4. As can be seen in
Table 4, reductions in the SOD rate in the lower reaches of the East Branch ranging from 47 to 85% were needed to
match the measured DO concentrations in the June 1997.

Table 4. Changes in Sediment Oxygen Demand Rates in the Lower Reaches of the East Branch Du Page
River Needed to Match Measured Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations for June 24-25, 1997.
Reach River Kilometers Initial SOD (g/m2day) Recalibrated SOD (g/m2day) Percent Reduction
11 14.0 – 12.9 2.74 1.37 50
12 12.9 – 11.8 5.79 0.86 85
13 11.8 – 10.0 3.95 0.86 78
14 10.0 – 7.1 3.71 0.86 77
15 7.1 – 5.3 3.07 1.40 54
16 5.3 – 2.6 3.53 1.40 60
17 2.6 – 0 2.64 1.40 47

9
Measured
9 Measured
S imulated S imulated
8
8
Dis s olved O xyg en (mg /L )

Dis s olved O xyg en (mg /L )

7
7
6
6
5 5
4 4
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
R iver K ilometers Above Mouth R iver K ilometers Above Mouth

Figure 3. Comparison of Simulated and Measured Dissolved Oxygen for the Post-Audit Period of June 24-25,
1997 Using the Originally Calibrated Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD) Rates (left) and the Recalibrated
SOD Rates for the Lower 14.0 km (right).

3. Conclusions
A QUAL2E model was calibrated and verified to data collected in August and July 1983, respectively, on the
East Branch Du Page River. The calibration was made consistent with the original QUAL-II model of the river
developed by the USGS as much as possible. This model then was post-audited relative to data collected in June
1997. Between 1983 and 1997 two of nine WWTPs discharging to the East Branch were closed or combined with
other WWTPs, and many of the WWTPs applied improved treatment techniques and operations leading to greatly
reduced effluent concentrations. The primary changes in the loading to the East Branch between 1983 and 1997
occurred at the Bolingbrook WWTP (RM 5.5) where the effluent CBOD concentration decreased from 50-110 to 1.0
mg/L and the ammonia concentration decreased from 14-18 to 0.17 mg/L, and at the Du Page County Woodridge
 Green Valley WWTP (RM 7.4) where the effluent CBOD concentration decreased from 31-46 to 1.0 mg/L and the
ammonia concentration decreased from 10-15 to 0.22 mg/L. Thus, a post-audit of the QUAL2E model provides
insight on the prediction capability of water-quality models.
The post-audit simulation results agree very well with the measured DO through river kilometer 12.9, and then
substantially undersimulate the measured DO in the last 12.9 km. From these results it might seem that the
QUAL2E model is unable to accurately simulate the results of the large change in loadings. However, the post-audit
simulation results for CBOD and ammonia show reasonable agreement with the measured data, so the simulation of
these two oxygen consuming processes should be reasonable. In the QUAL2E model large SOD rates were applied
in the final 14.0 km to match observed DO concentrations in 1983. The large reduction in loads to the lower reaches
of the river have reduced the source material for the SOD and the SOD rates have substantially decreased over the
14 years between the diel surveys (reductions of 47 to 85% were estimated in this study). Thus, to properly evaluate
the results of water-quality management measures a means to adjust the SOD rates to account for future reductions
resulting from decreases in organic loads to the stream are needed.

References

Bierman, V.J., Jr. and Dolan, D.M. (1986). “Modeling Phytoplankton in Saginaw Bay: II. Post-Audit Phase,” Journal
of Environmental Engineering, 112(2): 415-429.
Brown, L.C. and Barnwell, T.O., Jr. (1987). The enhanced stream water quality models QUAL2E and QUAL2E-
UNCAS: Documentation and user manual, Report No. EPA/600/3-87/007, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Athens, GA.
CH2M-Hill. (2004). Total Maximum Daily Loads for the East Branch of the DuPage River, Illinois, Final Report
submitted to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, available on-line at:
http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/tmdl/report/dupage/east-branch-dupage.pdf.
Di Toro, D.M., Thomas, N.A., Herdendorf, C.E., Winfield, R.P., and Connolly, J.P. (1987). “A Post Audit of a Lake
Erie Eutrophication Model,” Journal of Great Lakes Research, 13(4): 801-825.
Donigian, A.S. (1983). “Model Predictions vs. Field Observations: The Model Validation/Testing Process,” in Fate
of Chemicals in the Environment: Compartmental and Multimedia Models for Predictions, pp. 151-171,
American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.
Freeman, W.O., Schmidt, A.R., and Stamer, J.K. (1986). Assessment of Low-Flow Water Quality in the Du Page
River, Illinois, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4344.
HydroQual. (1983). Before and After Comparisons of Water Quality Following Municipal Treatment Plant
Improvements, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
Lam, D.C.L., Schertzer, W.M., and Fraser, A.S. (1987). “A Post-Audit of the NWRI Nine-Box Water Quality Model
for Lake Erie,” Journal of Great Lakes Research, 13(4): 782-800.
Lung, W.-S. (1996). “Postaudit of Upper Mississippi River BOD/DO Model,” Journal of Environmental
Engineering, 122(5), 350-358.
Mossman, D.J. and Schnoor, J.L. (1989). “Post-Audit Study of Dieldrin Bioconcentration Model,” Journal of
Environmental Engineering, 115(3), 675-679.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement (NCPIASI). (1982). The Mathematical
Water-Quality model QUAL-II and Guidance for Its Use—Revised Version, Technical Bulletin no. 391, 37 p.
Rutherford, J.C. (1991). “Deoxygenation in a Mobile-Bed River—II. Model Calibration and Post-Audit,” Water
Research, 25(12), 1499-1508.
Thomann, RV. (1982). “Verification of Water Quality Models,” Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
ASCE, 108(EE5): 923-940.
Thomann, R.V. (1987). “Systems Analysis in Water Quality Management—A 25 Year Retrospective,” in Systems
Analysis in Water Quality Management, pp. 1-14, Pergamon Press, New York.

View publication stats