Dan Sullivan USGS cochair Methods and Data Comparability Board National Water Quality Monitoring Council Outline The Aquatic Sensor Workgroup ASW Tools developed by the ASW laying the groundwork for sensors QA ID: 713559
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "METHODS BOARD An Update from the Aquatic..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
METHODS BOARD
An Update from the Aquatic Sensor Workgroup
Dan Sullivan, USGS co-chair, Methods and Data Comparability Board
National
Water Quality Monitoring CouncilSlide2
Outline
The Aquatic Sensor Workgroup (ASW)Tools developed by the ASW: laying the groundwork for sensors QANEMI-ACT web portalData ManagementSpecifications
Input on USGS/CUASHI WorkshopSlide3
Aquatic Sensor Workgroup (ASW)
The ASW is a subcommittee of the Methods and Data Comparability Board, a workgroup of the National CouncilObjective: to convene a workgroup of experts to consider efforts to address challenges:SOPs have not kept pace with technology
No central repository for information about SOPs, sensor performance, etc.Slide4
ASW Objectives
Develop SOPs for the calibration, QA/QC, maintenance, and deployment of field-based aquatic sensorsMake recommendations for the creation of a database to store relevant information on sensors to allow potential users to make informed decisions on the use of sensors for their projectsRecommend types of sensors for the National Monitoring NetworkSlide5
ASW Membership
IndustryStatesGov’t.Slide6
Sensors QA Initiative FY08-10
WebsiteDeployment GuideQA (ACRR) Matrix
Data ElementsGlossarySlide7
http://watersensors.orgSlide8
QA and Deployment Guide Overview
Guides are designed as checklistsImportant to know site details/specific sensor requirementsMaintenance intervals – data quality
Document everythingSlide9
Field Deployment Guide & QA MatrixSlide10
1. System SelectionSlide11
What’s in the Matrix?
The basic sensors that are in wide use for monitoring (NPS “Vital Signs”):Temp.SCD.O.
pHTurbidityDepthORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential)Slide12
QA (ACRR) Matrix
List of actions you can do to:Affect (act to influence the outcome)Check
(test to evaluate or verify)Record (documentation)Report (communicate the data quality indicator)Used in conjunction with users manual, result will be data of known and documented qualitySlide13
QA MatrixSlide14
QA Matrix – SC exampleSlide15
The Future of Sensors?
“Water Quality – Anytime, Anywhere” (B. Hirsch)Capabilities, reliability, and deployment of sensors will continue to increaseSeveral networks in planning stages
Mississippi River Basin sediment pilotGreat LakesAreas of need: data & databasesSpecificationsData analysisSlide16
ASW Initiatives FY11-
NEMI-ACT web portalData ManagementSpecificationsData Quality ObjectivesSlide17
NEMI-ACT web portal
Access traditional analytical and sampling methods from NEMI along with sensors information from ACTOver 4,000 sensors in ACT databaseSide-by-side comparisonsFormat for standardizing performance criteria for sensors
w/in single manufacturers, reported performance for a given analyte can be different for different modelsSlide18
NEMI-ACT status
Web portal is functionalDetails and layout still being worked outACT redesign NEMI redesignSlide19
NEMI-ACT: what’s next
Screen captureSlide20
Data Management
The QW monitoring community needs better data management procedures to deal with the large amount of data generated by remotely-deployed sensors. Sensors provide unique challenges in almost every phase of data management, from what data should be collected and stored (the content of the data) to data transfer.Slide21
Data Management
SOP for basic data verification, validation, and error calculation to connect the outcome of quality checks with the data, plus a standardized set of data qualifiers List of data elements/data fields that need to be recorded (*DRAFT long list is complete) Recommendations for a streamlined process of sensors’ data correction, i.e., alteration to correct for drift and fouling, using consistent procedures/algorithms and consistent categories for the extent of corrections Slide22
Data Management
Recent presentations to the Board ASW include:Functions of data processing and analyzing software, Ed Quilty, Aquatic Informatics
Overview of DIF and DMAC, Charly Alexander, NOAASlide23
Specifications
Technology performance standards and test criteria designed specifically for field sensors and natural environmental conditions are required to allow inter-comparison of sensor specifications and the data generated by field sensorsNeed for EPA-accepted criteria for sensors for ambient monitoringSlide24
ASTM D-19 workgroup – standard reference samples
ASW will provide input and commentsFirst meeting Jan. 19Met with EPA’s Forum on Environmental Measurements in SeptemberSlide25
Data Quality Objectives
State-ledGuidelines for questions to ask:What do you want?What do you need?What can you afford?
Goal: SOP or guidance document on how to write a DQO tailored to the collection and use of sensors data. Should be helpful for designing and implementing and estimating costs for a continuous monitoring program.Slide26
Acknowledgements
Revital Katznelson, PhD, contract leadGayle Rominger
, Rob Ellison, Mike Cook, Danielle Dumont,YSI, IncChuck Dvorsky, Texas CEQChuck Spooner, US EPAMike Sadar, Hach CoCristina Windsor, In-SituJanice Fulford, USGS
And a review board consisting of experts from NPS, ACT, US EPA, USGS, ORNL, and VT
Special thanks to Andy Ziegler, USGS-KS for some of the slides in this presentationSlide27
Questions and Comments
Dan Sullivan
(608) 821-3869djsulliv@usgs.gov
watersensors.org