Slide 1

METHODS BOARD An Update from the Aquatic Sensor Workgroup Dan Sullivan, USGS co-chair, Methods and Data Comparability Board National Water Quality Monitoring Council

Slide 2

Outline The Aquatic Sensor Workgroup (ASW) Tools developed by the ASW: laying the groundwork for sensors QA NEMI-ACT web portal Data Management Specifications Input on USGS/CUASHI Workshop

Slide 3

Aquatic Sensor Workgroup (ASW) The ASW is a subcommittee of the Methods and Data Comparability Board, a workgroup of the National Council Objective: 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.

Slide 4

ASW Objectives Develop SOPs for the calibration, QA/QC, maintenance, and deployment of field-based aquatic sensors Make 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 projects Recommend types of sensors for the National Monitoring Network

Slide 5

ASW Membership Industry States Govt.

Slide 6

Sensors QA Initiative FY08-10 Website Deployment Guide QA (ACRR) Matrix Data Elements Glossary

Slide 7

http://watersensors.org

Slide 8

QA and Deployment Guide Overview Guides are designed as checklists Important to know site details/specific sensor requirements Maintenance intervals data quality Document everything

Slide 9

Field Deployment Guide & QA Matrix

Slide 10

1. System Selection

Slide 11

Whats in the Matrix? The basic sensors that are in wide use for monitoring (NPS Vital Signs): Temp. SC D.O. pH Turbidity Depth ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential)

Slide 12

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 quality

Slide 13

QA Matrix

Slide 14

QA Matrix SC example

Slide 15

The Future of Sensors? Water Quality Anytime, Anywhere (B. Hirsch) Capabilities, reliability, and deployment of sensors will continue to increase Several networks in planning stages Mississippi River Basin sediment pilot Great Lakes Areas of need: data & databases Specifications Data analysis

Slide 16

ASW Initiatives FY11- NEMI-ACT web portal Data Management Specifications Data Quality Objectives

Slide 17

NEMI-ACT web portal Access traditional analytical and sampling methods from NEMI along with sensors information from ACT Over 4,000 sensors in ACT database Side-by-side comparisons Format for standardizing performance criteria for sensors w/in single manufacturers, reported performance for a given analyte can be different for different models

Slide 18

NEMI-ACT status Web portal is functional Details and layout still being worked out ACT redesign NEMI redesign

Slide 19

NEMI-ACT: whats next Screen capture

Slide 20

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.

Slide 21

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

Slide 22

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, NOAA

Slide 23

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 sensors Need for EPA-accepted criteria for sensors for ambient monitoring

Slide 24

ASTM D-19 workgroup standard reference samples ASW will provide input and comments First meeting Jan. 19 Met with EPAs Forum on Environmental Measurements in September

Slide 25

Data Quality Objectives State-led Guidelines 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.

Slide 26

Acknowledgements Revital Katznelson, PhD, contract lead Gayle Rominger, Rob Ellison, Mike Cook, Danielle Dumont,YSI, Inc Chuck Dvorsky, Texas CEQ Chuck Spooner, US EPA Mike Sadar, Hach Co Cristina Windsor, In-Situ Janice 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 presentation

Slide 27

Questions and Comments Dan Sullivan (608) 821-3869 djsulliv@usgs.gov watersensors.org