WQX Lessons Learning

1
EPA Water Quality Exchange Oregons Lessons
Learning
Curtis Cude Data Exchange Specialist (503)
229-6086 Information Services Oregon DEQ April
25, 2007
2
This presentation focuses on lessons Oregon DEQ
continues to learn implementing WQX.
Past experience with water data flows
Struggles faced implementing WQX
Scouting report and recommendations
3
Oregons LASAR came online in 1998 to house all
(air, land, and water) monitoring data.
We cracked the STORET parameter code to enable
backfilling of LASAR.
4
Metadata from one STORET parameter code was
separated into many LASAR fields.
STORET Parameter Code Name
49042 LEAD TCLP SED TOT MG/L

ID Name Modifier (x4) Analytical Method Sample Media Units External ID
1430 Lead Total TCLP Sediment mg/L 49042
5
The current web application to access LASAR was
introduced in 2005
Parameter names were simplified for display.
Station types were introduced from PNW WQX.
6
PNW WQX, completed early 2005, demonstrated the
feasibility of many important EN concepts.
The challenges we didnt tackle included standard
lists for characteristics, taxa, or units little
QA/QC.
7
OW WQX Pilot (late 2005) demonstrated the
feasibility of sending WQ xml to EPA OW Central
Data Warehouse.
This was a successful utilization of existing
infrastructure on a subset of DEQ WQ data.
8
Coinciding with the OW WQX Pilot, DEQ engaged
with SRS for web services and naming.
Kudos to SRS for initially mapping DEQ Analytes
to SRS Substances.
9
One year later, approaching WQX Test, Oregon Node
Workshop faced multiple struggles.
Technical infrastructure changed with new
versions of .NET, SQL Server, and node
configuration. Key personnel reassigned or faced
extended leave.
10
The greatest challenge, still unmet, lies in
resolving mapping analytical characteristics.
11
Native LASAR Parameter table is too flexible and
includes multiple analyte lists, e.g., NELAC, etc.
Prefix 1 Prefix 2 Parameter Suffix 1 Suffix 2
Total Lead
Total Lead
Lead Total
Lead Total
Total Lead

12
LasarWeb tables combine Parameter and 4 Modifiers
into Analyte name, but still need to map all 4719
analyte name/unit combinations

Analyte Name Units
Total Lead mg/Kg Dry
WQX Name Sample Fraction Weight Basis Units
Lead Total Dry mg/Kg
13
The path forward for Oregon will require a focus
on mapping characteristics.
Need staff intern dedicated to mapping LASAR
parameters modifiers to WQX characteristics,
fractions, and bases. Consider reprioritizing
effort to standardize Oregon DEQ systems to SRS.
14
Early implementers of the WQX flow should be
prepared for challenges and stay on the path.
Organizations with a great variety of
characteristic and associated metadata
significantly different from STORET/WQX should
carefully approach alignment with EPA standards.
15
There are other challenges that the WQX team are
aware of, and so should you.
Data validation services (Schematron) are
needed. Primary keys for domain value lists
delivered by web services are needed. Continued
support for and from the WQX team is critical.
16
The WQX data flow will require even closer
coordination between the Lab and IS.
Need to bridge the data standards gap (content
and process). Need to develop processes to
continually align bilaterally changing taxonomies.
Questions? Curtis Cude [phone]