Dirk Felton RTP, NC February 12-13, 2008 Air Quality Data Summit: Session: Inventory of Data Systems Data provider perspectives.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Comprehensive Provincial Air Emissions Inventory to Support AEMERA, ESRD and the AER Richard Melick Emissions Inventory Scientist Air Policy.
Advertisements

Emission Inventory System Reports Course Sally Dombrowski
Preventing and Resolving Reporting Errors Using Monitor Data Checking Software (MDC) Louis Nichols Clean Air Markets Division.
1 Improving Customer Service Through Electronic Data Management & Paperless Data Delivery ~~~~~ The USEPA Region 2 Experience Linda M. Mauel Chief, Hazardous.
School Monitoring Initiative Overview and Status June 11, 2010 Jonathan Miller National Air Data Group Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards U.S.
1 Air Quality System (AQS) Presence on the Network Nick Mangus US EPA, Office of Air and Radiation.
How Will Georgia-Florida Wildfires Affect Regional Air Quality Planning? Wes Younger Georgia Environmental Protection Division.
Why do we lose analyzer data? Monitor malfunction DAS malfunction Power outages Environmental problems Wildlife damage Vandalism Operator error.
EPA PM2.5 Modeling Guidance for Attainment Demonstrations Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS February 20, 2007.
Operational Quality Control in Helsinki Testbed Mesoscale Atmospheric Network Workshop University of Helsinki, 13 February 2007 Hannu Lahtela & Heikki.
Working together for clean air Approved Regional Method (ARM) Demonstration Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Mike Gilroy, Erik Saganic Puget Sound Clean Air.
AQS Concepts. In This Section We Will Talk About AQS Concepts 2 AQS Background History AQS as part of a monitoring program Types of Information in AQS.
Maintaining and Updating Windows Server 2008
Air Quality Data Analysis Using Open Source Tools
1 AQS Ambient Monitoring Topics AQS Conference August 20, 2008 David Lutz.
Presented by: Mike Hamdan South Coast Air Quality Management District Diamond Bar, CA Presented at: The Tribal Air Monitoring Training, Pechanga Reservation,
What to compare against the validation templates (see templates in course webpage: Resources/Validation%20Templates%20from%20Red.
Overview of Mini-Edit and other Tools Access DB Oracle DB You Need to Send Entries From Your Std To the Registry You Need to Get Back Updated Entries From.
Input Design Objectives
Chapter 8: Systems analysis and design
Air Quality System Precision and Accuracy Data Transaction Generator (AQSP&A) Training Session.
DWINSA 2007 Website. Website Purpose Allow states to track status of questionnaires Allow systems >100K or states to upload project data.
Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals Tribal Air Monitoring Support Center Melinda Ronca-Battista Brenda Sakizzie Jarrell Southern Ute Indian.
AMP255 – Precision and Bias Data Report 2008 AQS Conference The AMP255 Precision and Bias Data Report August 22, 2008 Presented by Jonathan Miller EPA.
E X P E R I E N C E Y O U R A M E R I C A Management of Air Quality Monitoring Data Debbie Miller National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior.
AQS Development and Enhancement Plans AQS Development and Enhancement Plans AQS CONFERENCE Jake Summers June 9, 2010.
Introduction to Standard Reports. Standard Reports 2 How to get information out of AQS Standard Reports Site / Monitor Metadata Detail Data Reports “
1 Guest Speaker: Brandy Toft Leech Lake Ojibwe.  Overview of FRM/FEM/ARM status, requirements, and reporting  QC (routine checks, audits, and method-
Emission Inventory System Reports Course Sally Dombrowski
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Overview What we’ll cover: Key questions Next steps
Quality Control/ Quality Assurance Annabelle Allison ITEP/TAMS Center.
Quality Control – Part II Tim Hanley EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
4/25 or 28/2011Early On Spring Data Cleaning 1 Spring Cleaning for Your Early On Data EOTTA Webinar April 25 and 28, 2011 Presented by Allan Knapp and.
Emergency Air Monitoring During Wildfires Jim Homolya USEPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, NC.
October Project Aims related to Monitoring and QA/QC Overall Aim To assess the quality and variety of air quality data collected across Scotland.
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment 2007 Website.
Copyright © 1994 Carnegie Mellon University Disciplined Software Engineering - Lecture 3 1 Software Size Estimation I Material adapted from: Disciplined.
Issue Management Group on Sustainable Management, Geneva, February 2010 The UN GHG Inventory Shoa Ehsani SUN Geneva, Palais de Nation, February 2010.
Updated: 08/10/07 Web Grades Overview MAIS The Office of the Registrar and Michigan Administrative Information Services.
Ozone Update Ben Wells U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Analysis Group February 11, 2014.
Title V Operating Permits: A Compliance and Enforcement Tool Candace Carraway US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
Regulatory Perspectives on Data Quality Nick Mangus US EPA / OAR / Air Quality System (AQS) Team for the Earth Science Information Partners July 13, 2011.
What’s on the Horizon? Allabelle Allison ITEP/TAMS Center.
WESTAR National Air Monitoring Steering Committee Update Spring Business Meeting 2010 Denver, CO Bruce Louks, Idaho DEQ.
LEADS/EMS DATA REPORTS IPS MeteoStar February 22, 2007 GENERAL REPORTS AQI (Air Quality Index) Map AQI (Air Quality Index) Ratings Current Hourly.
Deploy Interfaces POS | Expense | Payables MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9 TH, 2015 Presented by: Claudia Musick Implementation Consultant.
1 Air Quality System (AQS) Status and Plans Part 1: Nick Mangus US EPA Boring Infrastructure Stuff Part 2: Mike Matsko NJDEP (Representing AQDE Team) Interesting.
LEADS/EMS DATA VALIDATION IPS MeteoStar December 11, 2006 WHAT IS VALIDATION? From The Dictionary: 1a. To Make Legally Valid 1b. To Grant Official.
Evaluating temporal and spatial O 3 and PM 2.5 patterns simulated during an annual CMAQ application over the continental U.S. Evaluating temporal and spatial.
Emission Inventory Input Format Eastern Canadian Premiers/New England Governors Conference Data Exchange Workgroup Gregory Stella U.S. Environmental Protection.
PM 2.5 Continuous FEMs; Update and Assessments For NESCAUM Monitoring Meeting April 29, 2011 Tim Hanley – US EPA, OAQPS 1.
WHAT IS THE CHEROKEE NATION? Cherokee Nation Air Quality Data Management Concepts for Quality Data Collection Ryan Callison.
1 RPO Data Analysis/Monitoring Grant Guidance Review Extracted from the EPA’s 3/5/02 RPO 4 th Year Policy, Organizational & Technical Guidance.
Phoenix Metropolitan Area Urban Nephelometer Program Mike Sundblom Arizona Department of Environmental Quality April 13, 2005.
Page ADP PearsonAccess Proctor Training. Page Agenda Test Overview Testing Components Proctor Roles and Responsibilities Overview Administering the Test.
1 Ambient Monitoring Program PM 2.5 Data Lean 6 Sigma Air Director’s Meeting May 2015.
OFFICE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 0 Office of Financial Management Office of Financial Management TALS Draft Conceptual Solution February 24, 2004.
Annual Air Monitoring Data Certification and Concurrence Process 1.
Gary Lear U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation
The University of Delaware Higher Education Consortia
Sites Impacted by ‘Special’ Events
Breakout Session Curriculum Institute, Summer 2018
North Carolina’s Transition to CMDP
Back To Basics: PM2.5 NESCAUM MAC Meeting Newport, RI May 16-17, 2006
PMcoarse , Monitoring Budgets, and AQI
Updating IPR "Guidance" April 2017 European Commission DG ENV C.3
IMPROVE Data Processing
A New Tool for Evaluating Candidate PM FEM and PM2.5 ARM Monitors
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Presentation transcript:

Dirk Felton RTP, NC February 12-13, 2008 Air Quality Data Summit: Session: Inventory of Data Systems Data provider perspectives

The NY State Dept of Environmental Conservation Submits Air Quality data to the following Databases: AQS: Nearly 80 sites, hundreds of parameters, since the 1970’s - Submit, Valid, Certified, Flagged or null AirNow: selected Ozone, PM-2.5 and PM-10 - Submit selected un-validated, modified data (NY’s Network is too dense in urban area: NYC) VIEWS: 2 urban IMPROVE sites - IMPROVE submits and validates NADP/MDN: 2 urban wet deposition and Continuous Hg sites - NADP submits and validates NARSTO: 5 Yr collaboration with NY Supersite - PI/NYSDEC submit Valid and Flagged data

AQS: Input Issues: Difficult format, parameter and method codes limit detail, not suitable for short term studies, no ability to calculate: flows (std vs vol) Retrieval issues: Flags not included automatically (should be), Public, EPA Regional offices and many consultants have difficulty finding data Meta data issues: site data not updated, system does not accept accessory and diagnostic data, scale data not by parameter or complete, no analysis detail or history of changes Correction/certification issues: Should have a method to inform users of changes to datasets or at least institute a version or customer tracking system. Data certification not necessarily meaningful, Blanks not incl. Frustration: downloaded data by parameter creates data sets that are not internally compatible (FRM, TEOM, STN mass), 120 days not long enough for data requiring lab analysis, FEMs not always equal.

AQS Frustration Continued: (This is what normally happens) Data Provider Public & Consultants

AirNow: Input Issues: “FRM-like” data not consistently modified. (Should there be a test?) Need hourly connectivity to monitoring site, Some older data systems limited to Ozone and PM-2.5. Retrieval issues: Limited, Access to un-validated data should be limited. Meta data issues: Access to FRM like adjustments is provided but is rarely used by data users. (may be password protected) Correction/certification issues: Some “error catching” can be implemented by provider but this is difficult in a live system. Buddy system checking should be provided by database. Data not likely to match AQS data. Frustration: Invalid data gets out to the public more often than we would like. Max data thresholds can limit bad data but in extreme conditions (fires) can also limit good data when the public really needs it.

VIEWS : Input Issues: Data input by administrator not data providers. Retrieval issues: Very long delay before data is available, Data sometimes partially available or in draft before it is finalized Meta data issues: Helpful documents provided but cannot be uploaded by data provider. QA data and QA program not sufficient. Correction/certification issues: No data provider input Frustration: Data delays of more than 1 year are common.

NADP/MDN Input Issues: Data input by administrator not provider. Retrieval issues: Limited to public, More availability to providers. Meta data issues: Limited but not usually a problem for a consistent network. Correction/certification issues: Tekran data will be a challenge Frustration: We’ll see, The Mercury program is still being designed.

NARSTO Input Issues: File format is archaic, cumbersome and does not provide enough options. Retrieval issues: ?? I don’t know how. Meta data issues: Some information is included in the input file format. Correction/certification issues: Utilizes Data QC flags (0,1,2) Frustration: Seems like a black hole.

NARSTO: Format for a single data entry

What Data Providers Need: Accurate: verified datasets: State and Locals have to provide very accurate data for use in attainment designations. Ozone PM-2.5 Annual and Daily (98%tile) PM-10 New Lead Standard? (Monthly)

2 -What Data Providers Need: Long term datasets utilizing consistent methods and locations Health Studies SIP/Trend Analysis Haze monitoring

3-What Data Providers Need: Real-Time Public Access: The public, the press and Government officials demand information. This data does not have to be verified. In the past data turnaround was so slow, monitoring Agencies were not even asked unless the inquiry was retrospective.

STN Mass is not the same as mass from the FRM 4- What Data Providers Need: A method to explain data inconsistencies that do not make the Public distrust the provider

This is harder to explain when it effects individual components preferentially: The lower flow rate of the SuperSass sampler makes it more efficient for the collection of volatile species.

The FDMS data indicates that the FRM and the 50 Deg C TEOM did not capture a substantial fraction of PM-2.5 during this pollution episode.

5- What Data Providers Need: An easier method to communicate dataset issues that compromise data quality: Sodium Filter Contamination (After more than 2 Yrs of complaining the Sodium Data was Flagged in AQS)

This data is compromised but it has not been flagged because the Lab Denies that Ammonium concentrations were effected by Na contamination (This data is still in AQS)

Summary: Needs of Data Providers: Access to accurate, validated data (including from other States) Access to long data records (20+ years) Access for the Public for near real-time reports and warnings Easy input of short term special purpose, special study data Method to communicate meta data and nuances to users: flags, inconsistent methods, different sampler type, different lab analyses, errors Method to communicate changes or updates to data sets. NY is currently changing 2006 FRM data to fix error in null reporting

End of Presentation