USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr2000422

A Synopsis of Technical Issues of Concern for Monitoring Trace Elements in Highway and Urban Runoff

Abstract

Trace elements, which are regulated for aquatic life protection, are a primary concern in highway- and urban-runoff studies because stormwater runoff may transport these constituents from the land surface to receiving waters. Many of these trace elements are essential for biological activity and become detrimental only when geologic or anthropogenic sources exceed concentrations beyond ranges typical of the natural environment. The Federal Highway Administration and State Transportation Agencies are concerned about the potential effects of highway runoff on the watershed scale and for the management and protection of watersheds. Transportation agencies need information that is documented as valid, current, and scientifically defensible to support planning and management decisions. There are many technical issues of concern for monitoring trace elements; therefore, trace-element data commonly are considered suspect, and the responsibility to provide data-quality information to support the validity of reported results rests with the data-collection agency. Paved surfaces are fundamentally different physically, hydraulically, and chemically from the natural surfaces typical of most freshwater systems that have been the focus of many traceelement- monitoring studies. Existing scientific conceptions of the behavior of trace elements in the environment are based largely upon research on natural systems, rather than on systems typical of pavement runoff. Additionally, the logistics of stormwater sampling are difficult because of the great uncertainty in the occurrence and magnitude of storm events. Therefore, trace-element monitoring programs may be enhanced if monitoring and sampling programs are automated. Automation would standardize the process and provide a continuous record of the variations in flow and water-quality characteristics. Great care is required to collect and process samples in a manner that will minimize potential contamination or attenuation of trace elements and other sources of bias and variability in the sampling process. Trace elements have both natural and anthropogenic sources that may affect the sampling process, including the sample-collection and handling materials used in many trace-element monitoring studies. Trace elements also react with these materials within the timescales typical for collection, processing and analysis of runoff samples. To study the characteristics and potential effects of trace elements in highway and urban runoff, investigators typically sample one or more operationally defined matrixes including: whole water, dissolved (filtered water), suspended sediment, bottom sediment, biological tissue, and contaminant sources. The sampling and analysis of each of these sample matrixes can provide specific information about the occurrence and distribution of trace elements in runoff and receiving waters. There are, however, technical concerns specific to each matrix that must be understood and addressed through use of proper collection and processing protocols. Valid protocols are designed to minimize inherent problems and to maximize the accuracy, precision, comparability, and representativeness of data collected. Documentation, including information about monitoring protocols, quality assurance and quality control efforts, and ancillary data also is necessary to establish data quality. This documentation is especially important for evaluation of historical traceelement monitoring data, because trace-element monitoring protocols and analysis methods have been constantly changing over the past 30 years.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert F. Breault, Gregory E. Granato. 2000. A Synopsis of Technical Issues of Concern for Monitoring Trace Elements in Highway and Urban Runoff. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr2000422

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona