EPA-600/4-76-019
April 1976
Environmental Monitoring Series
MONITORING GROUNDWATER QUALITY:
DATA MANAGEMENT
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING series.
This series describes research conducted to develop new or improved methods
and instrumentation for the identification and quantification of environmental
pollutants at the lowest conceivably significant concentrations. It also includes
studies to determine the ambient concentrations of pollutants in the environment
and/or the variance of pollutants as a function of time or meteorological factors.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service. Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/4-76-019
April 1976
MONITORING GROUNDWATER QUALITY:
DATA MANAGEMENT
by
Norman F. Hampton
General Electric Company— TEMPO
Center for Advanced Studies
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Contract No. 68-01-0759
Project Officer
George B. Morgan
Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las Vegas, U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication,
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LIST OF TABLES
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
SECTION I - INTRODUCTION
Purpose i
Scope 2
SECTION II - CONCLUSIONS 3
SECTION III - RECOMMENDATIONS 4
SECTION IV - GROUNDWATER INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
REQUIREMENTS 5
General 5
Information to be Managed 7
Station Descriptions 7
Quality Criteria 9
Geologic Data 10
Hydrologic Data 11
Water Quality Parameter Identifiers 12
Water Quality Measurements 15
Temporal Data 15
Information Qualification Data 16
DMA Status Data 17
Information Indexing 18
Data Collection 18
Data Communications 21
Data Storage 23
Data Processing 26
Data Retrieval 27
(continued)
iii
-------
CONTENTS - Continued
Page
SECTION V - EXISTING SYSTEMS 32
General 32
STORET 32
WATSTORE 48
NAWDEX 51
SECTION VI - PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING
SYSTEMS 54
SECTION VII - REFERENCES 57
APPENDIX — METRIC CONVERSION TABLE 60
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 61
iv
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure No. Title Page
1 User access to groundwater data base. 24
2 STORET system-station storage format. 39
3 STORET system-station type codes. 41
4 WATSTORE Water Quality File - data 53
storage format.
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page
1 Menu of candidate water quality parameters 14
for groundwater monitoring.
2 Summary of information to be managed by 19
groundwater MIS.
3 Existing environmental data management 33
systems.
4 Computerized information indexing systems. 34
5 Generalized data base management packages. 35
6 STORET supported sections of PL 92-500. 36
7 Established STORET parameter codes - 45
groundwater specific.
8 Parameters maintained in WATSTORE ground- 49
water site inventory file.
9 USGS numeric codes for geologic age 52
identification.
10 Proposed additional STORET parameter codes. 55
v
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Dr. Richard M, Tinlin, Dr. Lome G. Everett, and the
late Dr. Stephen Enke of General Electric-TEMPO were re-
sponsible for management and technical guidance of the
project under which this report was prepared.
The cooperation of many individuals who provided in-
formation on existing and proposed data management sys-
tems is acknowledged with sincere thanks. In particular,
special thanks are due to Mr. Phil Taylor of the U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency and to Mr. Doug Edwards of
the U.S. Geological Survey.
The following officials were responsible for admini-
stration and technical guidance of the project for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
Office of Research and Development (Program Area Management)
Mr. Albert C. Trakowski, Jr.
Mr. John D. Koutsandreas
EMSL-Las Vegas (Program Element Direction)
Mr. George B. Morgan
Mr. Edward A. Schuck
Mr. Leslie G. McMillion
Mr. Donald B. Gilmore
The following personnel of the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency are to be thanked for their review and con-
structive criticism of the report: Mr. Edward M. Notzon,
Monitoring and Data Support Division, Washington, D.C.,
Dr. Pong N. Lem, Monitoring Systems Research and Develop-
ment Division, EMSL-Las Vegas, and Mr. Paul Thorpe, Data
Services Branch, EMSL-Las Vegas.
vi
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
This is one of a series of five reports on the general
subject of monitoring groundwater quality. The basic report
in the group is Monitoring Groundwater Quality: Monitoring
Methodology (Todd et al., 1976), which outlines a procedure
for creating a monitoring program for groundwater quality
under the general supervision of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. As an essential supplemental reference
to the methodology volume, this report presents the informa-
tion needed for development and utilization of an effective
groundwater quality management program.
PURPOSE
The development of a management information system (MIS)
entails the identification of system requirements, system
design, organizational design, system procedures design, and
if necessary programming, implementation, testing, debugging,
documenting, and training. The intention of this report is
to identify the system requirements of a comprehensive ground-
water quality monitoring program MIS and to survey the existing
capabilities which may serve to satisfy those requirements.
For those groundwater monitoring agencies whose needs are
not met by existing capabilities, this report presents generic
specifications and guidelines for the structuring of a computer-
ized groundwater surveillance data management system. In
addition, the inventory of existing data management capabilities
(including generalized data base management packages offered by
commercial vendors) presented by this report may provide the
framework for developing the desired capabilities. The inventory
of existing data management systems which is presented here is
not intended to be comprehensive. Rather, existing systems were
selected for inclusion on the basis of their significance and
relevance.
It is hoped that the discussion herein will convey to the
groundwater quality manager the scope and breadth of the field
of information management systems and that it will expose him
to the alternatives available to him in structuring an informa-
tion management capability suitable to his needs.
SCOPE
Effective groundwater quality management requires that
relevant information be available to the decision maker in a
-------
concise, comprehensive, timely, economical, and reliable
manner. Realization of these goals can be accomplished
with the assistance of any one of various tools including
file drawers, microfilm, and digital computers. The choice
of one of these alternatives will depend, for the most part,
on the volume of data involved and the frequency of inter-
action with the data base.
The discussion here is concerned with the groundwater
information management requirements of all levels of govern-
mental monitoring agencies (Federal, State and local). In
recognition of the volume of information which is likely to
be generated by many of these agencies, this report is directed
at outlining a comprehensive computer system capability intended
to satisfy these requirements. The system described will afford
management of ambient groundwater quality information, percolate
quality information, compliance monitoring information, and
other data relevant to the management of groundwater quality
including citations of groundwater research documentation.
-------
SECTION II
CONCLUSIONS
A nationwide groundwater monitoring program will produce
a large volume of highly diversified information. The best
use of this information can be realized only if efficient
information management is exercised as an integral element
of the overall monitoring program.
The prevalent proximity of the groundwater data user to
the source of the data as well as the specialized needs of
individual users indicates that decentralized (localized)
groundwater data management systems are appropriate. A
centralized (Federal) data management system is called for
as well, however, for the coordination of the national ef-
fort (making data available for multiple users and uses
.and minimizing redundant data collection and analysis activ-
ities), the provision of interim groundwater data manage-
ment support, the achievement of economies of scale, and
the encouragement of local compliance with national ground-
water monitoring requirements. Consequently, the develop-
ment of comprehensive groundwater information management
capabilities should be undertaken at the Federal, State,
and, where necessary, local levels. Whereas the volume of
data likely to be involved at the Federal level dictates
the need for a computerized system, below the Federal level
this is not necessarily so.
A comprehensive groundwater data management capability
is composed of three major components: maintaining the
data generated by groundwater surveillance, 'indexing that
data so that it can be accessed expeditiously, and main-
taining concise citations of relevant groundwater research
documentation. At the Federal level these capabilities
can be provided adequately by existing or proposed com-
puterized information management systems with only minor
modifications. Below the Federal level it may be necessary
to develop a computerized capability to maintain ground-
water surveillance data, a task which has already been ac-
complished by some States (e.g., California, Colorado,
Tennessee, and Texas). Data indexing and the management
of document citations are capabilities which can be pro-
vided, to agencies below the Federal level, by existing
Federal systems.
-------
SECTION III
RECOMMENDATIONS
The management of groundwater surveillance data at the
Federal level can be satisfactorily achieved by application
of the Storage and Retrieval (STORET) system currently
operated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Suggestions for modifications to this system which will im-
prove its effectiveness for managing groundwater data are
presented in Section VI of this report. The STORET system
is also available to State and local users whose partici-
pation is encouraged by the EPA. A system which is designed
for a broad-based user population is characteristically not
responsive to unique individual requirements, however, and
State and local users should consider the merits of develop-
ing computerized systems designed specifically for their
needs. In addition it should be noted that STORET is not
now used on a major scale for groundwater analyses and a
major new STORET user community will require a further
evaluation and commitment of resources by the EPA.
Groundwater data indexing capabilities, which allow the
data user to expeditiously locate pertinent groundwater
data and examine its nature prior to accessing the data
itself, can be provided to Federal, State, and local users,
by the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX) proposed and
currently being developed by the U.S. Geological Survey.
The community of water data collectors and users should
support and coordinate with this effort.
The Water Resources Scientific Information Center, U.S.
Department of the Interior, provides computerized storage
of and access to document citations through use of the
Remote Control System (RECON) and the General Information
Processing System (GIPSY). These capabilities are avail-
able to all categories of groundwater investigators and are
generally sufficient to meet their needs.
-------
SECTION IV
GROUNDWATER INFORMATION MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
GENERAL
A complete MIS requirements analysis would call for a survey
of the potential users of the system to enable the development
of system specifications. Critical factors to be considered
by this survey would include the following:
Information to be managed
Data volumes
Frequency of interaction with the data base
Responsiveness requirements
Where and how the source information is to be
generated
Required data qualification procedures
Required output documents.
For this report, an intensive user survey was superseded by the
application of gross but reasonably utilitarian assumptions.
The assumptions corresponding to the critical factors listed
above are:
Information to be managed will include monitoring
station descriptions (i.e., location, hydrogeology,
local water use, etc.), physical and chemical
measurements of water samples together with
sampling dates, and citations of groundwater
research documentation.
The groundwater surveillance data base will be
moderately large (expanding monotonically) consist-
ing of millions of data elements requiring exten-
sive storage capabilities. Once the initial data
b^e jfestSbllShed, input data volume will be
relatively low and output volume in response to
user queries somewhat greater.
-------
Frequency of interaction (updates and queries)
with the data base will be moderate.
Updating and interrogating the groundwater data
base does not require quick system response with
several days turnaround generally being adequate.
Interrogating information indexing files (water
quality data file descriptions and document
citations) does require quick system response
(i.e., real time), however, to allow for browsing.
Source information will be generated at locations
distributed throughout the U.S. with concentra-
tions in areas of high population density. In
general, source information will be generated at
locations relatively close to the users of the
information.
Data qualification requirements include input
data editing and provision for specific station,
sample, and measurement comments to reflect spe-
cial conditions.
Output will be alphanumeric text, tables of
primary data and computed statistics, and
pictorial presentations. Reports will generally
be generated on a demand basis with the possible
exception of violation reports, associated with
compliance monitoring, which may be triggered.
Within the framework established by these assumptions, this
section will present a further discussion of the information
content of the proposed groundwater MIS as well as a discussion
of the fundamental functions to be performed by this system.
These functions are data collection, data communication, data
organization and storage, data processing, and information
retrieval and display. The nature of these functions will be
described as well as the alternative technologies available to
accomplish them. Those technologies which are best suited to
a groundwater monitoring program will be identified.
-------
INFORMATION TO BE MANAGED
An effective groundwater monitoring MIS will be capable of
maintaining the following types of data:
Station Descriptions
Quality Criteria
Geologic
Hydrologic
Water Quality Parameter Identifiers
Water Quality Measurements
Temporal
Information Qualification Data
Monitoring Agency Status Data
Information Indexing
The individual data elements comprising these information
categories will be discussed in the following paragraphs. Each
data element will be identified as system specific (i.e.,
applicable system wide)/ station specific/ sample specific, or
measurement specific. Further, those data elements which will
be required for retrieval or computational operations will be
specified as searchable, indicating that they must be stored as
formatted data.
Station Descriptions
Station descriptive data consists of information which
specifies the station type (i.e., pumped well, unpumped well,
unsaturated zone, information monitoring, compliance monitoring,
etc.), the party responsible for monitoring the station, a
unique station identifier code(s), a unique location (three-
dimensional) , and directions for locating the station in the
field. With the exception of the last item, all of this informa-
tion should be searchable. Information providing instructions
for locating stations in the field can be stored as narrative
text along with other special station specific information which
is not required for retrievals or computations (e.g., oil
lubricated well subject to bearing leakage, continuous-slot
stainless steel well screen, etc.).
-------
The groundwater monitoring station type can be specified as
coded information in a field of five characters or more.
Station type data would be formatted as follows:
1st character
Sample extraction method - pump, bail/ or probe
2nd character
Type data - quality, hydrogeologic, and/or
DMA status data
3rd character
Type site - municipal, industrial, or other
4th character
Location - saturated zone, zone of aeration/
or surface
5th character
Monitoring justification - information,
compliance,and/or other
Combinations of attributes can be represented uniquely by
coding individual attributes numerically with either a 1, 2,
or 4, so that the combination 1 and 4, for instance, could be
coded uniquely in one position as a 5.
The designated monitoring agency (DMA) responsible for
monitoring the station should be stored as an "agency" code in
a searchable field so that, for instance, all stations being
maintained by a particular DMA can be retrieved. In addition,
the narrative text associated with a station can contain,for
example, the names of specific individuals having responsibility
for a station together with their phone numbers.
Each station will require a unique identifier code. This
identifier will be maintained permanently within the MIS and
provide access to station data even if and when a station
becomes inactive. Provision should be made for storing and
retrieving multiple station identifier codes for the case where
a DMA uses multiple codes for alternative retrieval schemes or
where more than one DMA is monitoring the same station and
station codes have not been standardized.
-------
Station descriptive data to be maintained by the MIS must
include information regarding political jurisdiction (e.g./
state, county, city, irrigation district, park district, etc.)
as well as a unique areal location. To specify a unique areal
location, indication of either the township, range, section, etc.
or the familiar conventional geographic coordinate system
(latitude/longitude) will be most practicable. The degree of
precision associated with the measurement of a station's
coordinates should also be stored. Additionally, the depths
of both the monitoring station hole and intake screen should
be stored as station specific information. It should be noted
that in cases where, for example, either a monitoring well is
equipped with multiple intake screens or a thief sampler is
used, individual sample depths may not correspond to either the
well depth or existing water level.
Other major station specific information categories not
discussed above are applicable quality criteria, geologic data,
and hydrologic data.
Quality Criteria
Information pertaining to established quality criteria which
a groundwater quality MIS should accommodate as station specific
data includes current and projected land use, current and pro-
jected water use, demographic data/ economic data, designated
protected water uses, applicable permit data (compliance dates
and monitoring requirements - parameters and frequency), and
water quality criteria (either ambient or discharge limitations).
Demographic and economic data as well as current and proj-
ected land and water use in the neighborhood of a monitoring
station is information, typically generated by local planning
agencies, which reflects the significance of groundwater
pollution in the environs of a monitoring station. This informa-
tion need not be used for retrieval or computational operations
and consequently can be satisfactorily stored in the narrative
text associated with each monitoring station.
The development of a comprehensive groundwater quality moni-
toring program will entail the systematic identification and in-
ventory of principal aquifers and, preferably, the designation of
protected uses for these aquifers. In the process of developing
the inventory of principal aquifers, full use should be made of
the "Catalogue of Aquifer Names and Geologic Unit Codes" compiled
by the Office of Water Data Coordination (OWDC), U.S. Department
of the Interior (USDI) (Price and Baker, 1974). Aquifer protected
use designations would be codified and searchable. Protected use
categories would include public water supply, agricultural and
Q HICJION HI LIBRART
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTlCTION AGSROT
-------
industrial use with allowance made for the possibility of sub-
categories of the latter two.
Permit data, other than imposed discharge limitations,
should not be required for retrieval or computational op-
erations and can, therefore, be stored in the narrative
text associated with compliance monitoring stations. In-
formation content would be similar to that contained in
NPDES applications and permits including permit numbers,
compliance dates, and monitoring requirements. If permit
numbers are required for search operations, they can be
used as secondary station identifiers.
Permit specified discharge limitations and/or the water
quality criteria associated with the designated protected
uses established for an aquifer can be stored with the
characteristics of each monitoring station as appropriate.
Ambient quality criteria to be stored may be those pub-
lished by EPA in "Proposed Criteria for Water Quality"
(EPA, 1973) with provision made for updating these criteria
as they are modified. Although it is not likely that they
will be needed as record keys, the inclusion of discharge
limitations and ambient water quality criteria within the
monitoring data base as searchable information will allow
efficient generation of exception reports.
Geologic Data
In order to uniquely identify the source of groundwater
samples, some geologic data is required, in addition to
geographical coordinates, to specify the aquifer from which
the sample originated. In the case where a monitoring sta-
tion taps more than one aquifer, aquifer identification is
particularly essential and must be provided as sample spe-
cific (i.e., input in conjunction with each set of water
quality analysis data) rather than station specific data.
The requirement for providing aquifer identification can
be satisfied by storing the established aquifer name, if
available, or else the geologic formation name and age
associated with the monitored aquifer (e.g.. Mount Simon
formation - Cambrian age or glacial drift - Pleistocene
age). It should be pointed out that the latter form of
identification is not preferred since aquifers and geologic
formations do not necessarily coincide completely. Aquifer
identification can be codified and standardized, and search
operations facilitated by application of USGS proposed
modifications to the stratigraphic coding system developed by
the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (Price and
Baker, 1974).
10
-------
Additionally, information regarding the physical properties
and chemical constituency of the water bearing materials
(aquifer, unsaturated zone, or topsoil) may be necessary,
particularly if the synergistic effects between these materials
and introduced pollutants are to be modeled. This information
may reflect material type and waste attenuation characteristics.
If a model is to be computer accessible by the groundw*ater
quality MIS, then the information required by the model should
be searchable. Otherwise, it can be stored with the narrative
text associated with each station description. Frequently,
information regarding the characteristics of water bearing
materials is generated by drillers during the installation of
a well and is available in the form of well logs.
Hydrologic Data
An efficient groundwater quality monitoring system will
require an MIS capable of accommodating a wide range of hydro-
logic information. In general, this type of information has
previously been determined, particularly in areas of rigorous
groundwater development, and a groundwater quality monitoring
program will only demand gathering and storing it. Hydrologic
information is necessary to the monitoring program to predict
the movement of pollutants, isolate the source of the pollution,
and interpret the relationship between groundwater and surface
waters.
Most hydrologic information will be station specific and
can, therefore, be stored concurrently with the establishment
of station descriptions in the data base. In cases where many
stations penetrate the same homogeneous medium, it may be
possible to store the characteristics of that medium under only
one station together with a list of the other stations common to
that medium. Major hydrological data elements will include the
following:
Water bearing material depth, thickness, and
areal extent •
Permeability
Aquifer transmissivity and storage coefficient
Hydraulic gradient (vector)
Water table elevation (sample specific)
Area and magnitude of natural and artificial
recharge and discharge
Station sampling device (e.g., pumped well, suction
lysimeter, neutron probe, etc.) operating characteristics
11
-------
Hydrologic measurements required for computations such as
to determine hydraulic diffusivity or specific flux will be
require^ to be stored as searchable information.
Water Quality Parameter Identifiers
The selection of the water quality parameters to be main-
tained in a groundwater monitoring MIS poses one of the
principal design considerations related to the development of
the system. This is because of the large number of candidate
variables. In many information systems, the data description
(i.e., the variable identification) is imbedded in the program
logic. However, because of the large number of variables
involved in groundwater monitoring, a generalized data storage
system is more appropriate. This requires that data identifica-
tion be independent of the programs, that is, the data descrip-
tions must themselves be data inputs to the system. Consequently,
the list of water quality parameters maintained can be virtually
open ended.
Stipulating the types of quality measurements to be
included in a monitoring system is extremely difficult, due to
the large number of potential contaminants involved. In 1972
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published "Water Quality
Criteria - 1972" at the request of and funded by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA). Subsequently these recommenda-
tions were presented nearly intact by the EPA in "Proposed
Criteria for Water Quality" (EPA, 1973).
The National Academy of Sciences report propounded criteria
which would serve to preserve water quality for the following
purposes:
Public Water Supplies
Agricultural Uses
Industrial Uses
Recreation and Aesthetics
Freshwater Aquatic Life and Wildlife
Marine Aquatic Life and Wildlife
12
-------
In general, only the first three of these would be affected by
groundwater quality. The criteria proposed by the NAS for
these three use categories and those imposed by U.S. Public
Health Service (USPHS) water standards would serve as a frame-
work for identifying significant water quality information to
be provided by a groundwater information management system
(USPHS, 1962). A composite list of the parameters for which
the NAS and USPHS have established criteria regarding public,
agricultural and industrial use is presented in Table 1.
The set of quality parameters to be examined by any
individual groundwater quality monitoring program would,for
the most part, be a subset of Table 1, which could be considered
as a menu of water quality parameters. The sample set to be
surveyed at any one groundwater quality surveillance station
could be selected, at least partially, from this menu.
Additional parameters, not appearing in Table 1, might be
included as dictated by specific situations.
The justification for presenting Table 1 as such a menu
rests with the fact that the NAS and the USPHS deem these
parameters to be significant, as it is these parameters for
which criteria have been developed. The list in Table 1 is by
no means exhaustive, however. The inadequacy of the list for
compliance monitoring purposes is reflected, for example, by
"The Toxic Substances List" published in 1973 by the U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW); National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. This document
identifies 11,000 "toxic," chemically unique, substances
(HEW, 1973). It is reasonable to assume that any one of these
substances could find its way to a subsurface water reservoir,
either by intentional or unintentional introduction, and
achieve significance. A groundwater information management
system would be required, therefore, to be flexible enough to
accommodate a large and inconsistent set of variables.
As stated previously, a centralized groundwater quality MIS
is called for to provide support of local efforts. In general,
however, a centralized data repository would require more
succinct and less detailed information than would be required
by decentralized (localized) data banks. Compendiousness can
be accomplished by summarization, aggregation, and the use of
status indicators. The Council on Environmental Quality has
funded (jointly with EPA and USGS) an ongoing study entitled
"Comparative Evaluation of Techniques for the Interpretive
Analysis of Water Quality" which will provide methodologies
for generating concise data and will help to satisfy the
inherent requirements of the centralized system component.
13
-------
TABLE 1. MENU OF CANDIDATE WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR
GROUNDWATER MONITORING.
Alkalinity(CaCO3)
Ammonia
*Arsenic
a Aluminum
*Barium
Boron
*Cadmium
Chloride
*Chromium (total)
Color (eg. platinum-cobalt
color units)
Copper
*Cyanide
Dissolved Oxygen
Fluoride
Foaming agents (MBAS)
Hardness
Iron
*Lead
Manganese
*Mercury
*Nitrate-Nitrogen
•fNitrilotriacetate (NTA)
Odor
Oil and grease
Organics-Carbon Adsorbable
*Pesticides
Insecticides-Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
Insecticides-Organophosphate and Carbamate
Herbicides-Chlorophenoxy
*Nitrite.-Nitrogen
PH
Phenolic compounds
i Phosphate
+Phthalate Esters
•fPolychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCB)
Radioac tivity
*Selenium
*Silver
i Silicon
Sulfate
i Suspended Solids
Temperature
Total dissolved
solids (TDS)
Turbidity
Viruses
Zinc
*Carbon Chloroform(extrac-
a Beryllium table)
*Total Coliform
*Fecal Coliform
a Bicarbonates
a Cobalt
a .Lithium
a Molybdenum
a Nickel
a Sodium
a Vanadium
i Calcium
i Potassium
i Industrial impact only
a Agricultural impact only
+ No criteria currently established
* Significant health ramifications
14
-------
Water quality parameter identifiers will be codified and
system specific. Since water quality parameters are system
specific, the system administrator rather than the DMAs will
have responsibility for depositing and maintaining this type
of data in the groundwater MIS. An individual DMA can establish
a special parameter identifier by petitioning the system
administrator who will judge the validity, redundancy, and
applicability of the new parameter before including it in the
data base.
Each water quality parameter identifier entry will consist
of two data elements. One will be an alphanumeric descriptor
reflecting the common name of the parameter and the units of
measure in which numeric measurements associated with that
parameter will be reported. In order for the system to
accommodate various units of measure, it will be necessary to
assign different parameter identifiers for each one. The
second data element comprising a parameter identifier will be
the system administrator assigned numeric code associated with
that identifier. Every effort should be made to organize these
codes in a hierarchical fashion so that parameters of a similar
nature will be grouped together.
Water Quality Measurements
The results of physical and chemical analyses of groundwater,
soil, and geologic material samples will be stored as water
quality measurement data which will represent the bulk of the
information to be managed by the groundwater MIS. This informa-
tion will be required for both retrieval and computational
operations and must, therefore, be stored as searchable data.
Each measurement data element is measurement specific and must
be stored in conjunction with information which specifies the
parameter measured (parameter code), the sample analyzed
(sample date), and the station sampled (station identifier code).
Efficient utilization of the fields set aside for analytical
measurements can be realized by also using them to store sample
specific data such as sample depth or sample specific
reliability indicators.
Temporal Data
In order to provide reasonable utility, a water quality
information system must be capable of reflecting trends. This
would require maintaining water quality data as time series.
Water quality data updates need, therefore, to be appending
operations rather than destructive updates. Consequently, a
water quality data base can be expected to grow monotonically
and linearly (if fluctuations in the number of stations and
parameters observed are disregarded).
15
-------
If water quality data are collected at a constant frequency,
it is only necessary to store the data collection rate and
initial collection date once for each station (as station
specific data). It would also be essential to make provision
for entering information regarding interruptions in the period
of record.
When data are not collected at a constant frequency, which
is most often the case with groundwater monitoring, the date of
sampling must be recorded as sample specific data with each new
set of water quality measurements which is input. Provision
for storing dates as searchable information must be incorporated
into a groundwater monitoring information system so that any
subset of the period of record data set may be retrieved.
It should be noted that in contrast with surface water monitor-
ing, recording calendar dates is usually sufficient to fix the
location of a groundwater monitoring sample in time (i.e.,
clock times are not required). This is due to the far"less
dynamic nature of groundwater phenomenon.
In situations where significant vertical stratification of
water chemistry is present it will also be necessary to record
and store the pumping time in hours prior to the collection of
either a simple grab or composite sample. Additionally in the
case of composite samples taken over time, it will be necessary
to record and store the duration (in hours) of the composite
sampling period.
Information Qualification Data
There is a cogent need for a data qualification capa-
bility in any water quality monitoring information system.
To accomplish this the system should include, in addition to
data verification, a comprehensive edit function, prefer-
ably computerized, which would operate prior to data storage.
The edit check can be based on comparison of input data with
previous trends, allowable data ranges, and established
units of measure. Data failing any one of these checks
should not be modified but rather flagged and reported as
suspect. The capability to compare input data with allow-
able ranges imposes an additional data requirement which
can be satisfied by storing these ranges as station specific,
searchable data.
Improvements in the value of a data base can also be at-
tained by allowing "reliability indicators" to be input and
stored as nonsearchable data. These indicators could be of
the type that reflect, for example, station performance
anomalies, unusual sampling conditions, unusual methods of
measurement, measurement precision, or which reflect quali-
tative judgments of the "goodness" of data. Reliability
indicators should be stored either as station specific (in
the narrative text), sample specific (as a water quality
measurement) or measurement' specific (in a special field)
as appropriate.
16
-------
DMA Status Data
A nationwide or statewide groundwater quality monitoring
program may involve the periodic inspection of DMA facilities
to determine the "operational status" of monitoring programs and
equipment. In addition, where a DMA or other agency has ground-
water pollution control functions/ the "readiness status" of a
control unit in terms of its ability to respond to a pollution
incident may also be evaluated. •Consequently, a comprehensive
groundwater quality MIS should be capable of maintaining this
type of information. Most efficiently/ a DMA or pollution
control unit would be regarded as a station by the MIS/ an
inspection tour regarded as a sampling iteration, and status
data as water quality measurements with parameter codes being
established accordingly.
The operational status of a DMA will be estimated based upon
its ability to monitor the stations, parameters, and at the
frequencies required. An operational status index could be
established where, for example:
1 = 100 percent monitoring effectiveness
2 = 90 percent monitoring effectiveness
3 = 80 percent monitoring effectiveness
4 = 70 percent monitoring effectiveness
5 = 60 percent monitoring effectiveness or worse.
A "readiness index" could be formulated which would reflect
the ability of a DMA or other pollution control unit to respond
to a pollution incident. This index would be a function of
personnel on hand, personnel training, equipment on hand, and
equipment reliability. The "readiness index" could take the
form of a numeric grade where, for example:
1 = able to respond effectively within 1 day
2 = able to respond effectively within 2 days
3 = able to respond effectively within 3 days
4 = able to respond effectively within 4 days
5 = able to respond effectively within 5 days or more.
17
-------
Estimating the operational and readiness ratings of individual
DMAs or pollution control units would be the responsibility of
the national or state groundwater quality monitoring program
administrator.
Information Indexing
Information indexing allows ready access to abstracts of
existing data sets. The groundwater quality MIS should provide
indexing of two major categories of data sets: water quality
data files present in the MIS data bank, and groundwater research
documentation.
Water quality data file abstracts will provide information
regarding activities at each station in the monitoring program
and should be accessible by station identifier, geographical
coordinates, aquifer code, political jurisdiction, station type,
or agency code. Information contained in the water quality file
abstract will be station specific and would include parameters
monitored, monitoring frequency, and period of record. All of
the information required by the water quality data file index
will exist elsewhere in the MIS so that this index can be system
generated and will not require user input.
Research documentation indexing will require special user
input. Data elements to be stored, all of which should be
searchable, will be document titles, author names, report
numbers (access numbers), performing and sponsoring organiza-
tions, report dates, textual abstracts, keywords, and
geographical area of interest.
Summary
Table 2 presents a list of the data elements to be managed
by the groundwater quality MIS.
DATA COLLECTION
Data collection, in the context of MIS design, is the process
of translating information into machine readable form. The
primary factors considered in selecting data collection systems
are purchase cost, operating cost, reliability, responsiveness,
and minimizing the bottleneck created by relatively high internal
computer processing speeds and low input speeds.
Total MIS expenditures are particularly sensitive to data
collection costs since data entry typically accounts for 20 to
40 percent of electronic data processing costs (Ferrara and
Nolan, 1973). In addition, the data entry process represents
the single greatest source of error in a MIS. The significance
of the imbalance between input speeds and central processing
18
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION TO BE MANAGED BY
GROUNDWATER MIS.
1. System Specific Data
Water Quality Parameter Names
Units of Measure
Parameter Codes
2. Station Specific Data
Station Type
Sample Extraction Method
Type Data
Type Site
Location(i.e.,saturated zone, unsaturated zone,
or surface)
Monitoring Justification
Responsible Monitoring Agency
Station Identifier Code(s)
Geographic Coordinates and Associated Measurement Precision
Station Location (township, range, section, etc.)
Station Depth (hole depth and screen depth)
*Field Location
*Responsible Individual
*Station Specific Information Qualification
Quality Criteria
*Demographic and Economic Data
*Land Use
*Water Use
Permits
*Stipulated Monitoring Program (Parameters
and Frequency)
*Compliance Schedules
Discharge Limitations
Ambient Criteria
Political Jurisdiction Code
Geological Data
Aquifer Code (may be sample specific)
Geochemical Information
Hydrologic Data
Aquifer Depth, Thickness, and Areal Extent
Aquifer Transmissivity and Storage Coefficient
Hydraulic Gradient
Permeability .
*Area and Magnitude of Natural and Artificial
Recharge and Discharge
*Station Sampling Device Operating Characteristics
19
-------
Table 2 - Continued
3. Sample Specific Data
Sample Date
Pumping Duration
Composite Sample Duration
Sample Depth
Water Table Elevation
*Sample Specific Information Qualification
4. Measurement Specific Data
Physical-Chemical Analyses
*Measurement Specific Information Qualification
5. DMA Status Data
Monitoring Effectiveness Index
Pollution Control Readiness Index
6. Information Indexing
Water Quality File Abstracts
Parameters Monitored
Monitoring Frequency
Period of Record
Research Documentation Citations
Titles
Authors
Report Numbers
Performing and Sponsoring Agencies
Report Dates
Textual Abstracts
Keywords
Geographical Area of Interest
*Not searchable
20
-------
unit (CPU) speeds can be illustrated by the fact that a keypunch
operator can punch and verify roughly four cards a minute, a
card reader can read about 1,000 cards a minute, and a moderately
sized CPU can process about 100,000 cards a minute or more
(Schwab and Sitter, 1969).
There is a wide variety of available capabilities which will
provide automated support of the data collection phase of a
computerized MIS. These include conventional keypunch, buffered
keypunch, key-to-tape, key-to-disc, remote "dumb" terminals,
remote "intelligent" terminals, mark sensing, magnetic ink
character recognition, and optical character recognition (OCR)
devices. These nine options are listed more or less in order of
increasing implementation cost and, correspondingly, increasing
speed and reliability. The devices listed all have applicability
to groundwater data entry. Selection of equipment by each ground-
water data depositor will depend primarily upon the magnitude
of data flow. If necessary, to further minimize the bottleneck
which can occur at the data input interface, buffered input
units and overlapped input systems can be installed at the
centralized groundwater computer data bank.
An additional category of devices available to the data
depositor, which has particularly attractive applicability to
groundwater monitoring, is source data automation. Source data
automation is the process of capturing primary data in machine
readable form. Examples of such equipment are automatic
digital recorders used in conjunction with Keck groundwater
level recorders, automatic laboratory chemical analysis equip-
ment and robot water quality monitoring stations. The advantages
of source data automation are that it produces data which are
easily converted into other machine-useable form, reduces the
opportunities for introducing errors, and lowers clerical costs.
DATA COMMUNICATIONS
User interaction with a management information system can
be segregated into four major activities: 1) file creation;
2) file updating; 3) information requests; and 4) information
reception. Computerized management information systems accom-
plish these functions in one of two modes: 1) batch; or 2)
real-time/interactive.
User access to the groundwater surveillance data base should
be in the batch mode whereas access to the information index
system component should be in the real-time mode, at least for
retrievals. Although user interaction with a batch processing
system allows optional use of telecommunication links with the
system, telecommunication is mandatory for real-time processing.
21
-------
A telecommunication link requires a terminal to enter data,
modems to encode (in a form acceptable to the transmission
channel) and decode data, and a transmission channel. Trans-
mission channels can be ordinary telephone services such as
provided by WATS (best suited to widespread, high volume data
flow), dial-up service such as provided by TWX or TELEX (best
suited to widespread, low volume data flow which is likely to
be the case for groundwater surveillance), or dedicated private
line (best suited to high volume data flow concentrated between
a few points)(House, 1974). The major factors to be considered
in the selection of a transmission service will be responsive-
ness, reliability, and implementation and operating costs.
Data security will not be a significant consideration for
groundwater surveillance information.
An ideal groundwater monitoring information system will
provide flexible data flow procedures for both data submission
to and data retrieval from the groundwater surveillance data
base. The requirement for flexible data flow procedures is
imposed by the desirability of wide system usage and the like-
lihood that data depositors and data users will have variable
transmitting and receiving capabilities. It is important to
note that access to the groundwater quality data base should
be provided to users with unsophisticated communication capa-
bilities as well as to those users with highly sophisticated
capabilities.
All information management systems benefit from the respon-
siveness of real-time access to computerized data bases.
However, provision of real-time capabilities does not always
result in the most efficient allocation of data management
resources. Since the management of groundwater surveillance
data does not necessitate dynamic information flows relative
to many other information management functions, real-time
systems are not included in the recommendations presented below,
Data collectors should be allowed to submit groundwater
data for storage (both file creation and file update)
in the following modes:
Formatted nonmachine readable
Formatted machine readable (i.e., punch cards,
paper tape, or magnetic tape)
Remote access batch (i.e., teletype of card reader)
22
-------
Data users should be allowed to request groundwater quality
data via the following modes:
Telephone inquiry
Letter inquiry
Teletype batch inquiry
The system should be capable of transmitting data retrievals
in any of the following modes:
Nonmachine readable hardcopy
Punch cards
Dial-up remote teletype or remote printer (batch)
Magnetic tape (to promote intermachine compatibility,
options for number of tracks, bits per inch, parity
convention and blocked or unblocked output should be
provided)
Figure 1 is a diagram showing user access to the proposed
groundwater MIS as well as interfile data flow. Unary data is
information not subject to update except where errors necessitate
corrections. Multiple data is information subject to update
(time series data) and therefore multiple data flow channels
are likely to support a high volume of data traffic. The content
of the files depicted in Figure 1 is described in the following
section which discusses data storage requirements.
DATA STORAGE
The development of the data storage component of a MIS
entails the selection or fabrication of hardware devices, data
organization schemes, and data base management software
packages. Factors to be considered include cost, storage space,
response time and current and future use of information stored.
Three general classifications of hardware are available
for data storage: internal, secondary, and external. In-
ternal storage is best utilized for holding programs and
data being immediately executed. Internal storage media
include magnetic core, thin films, magnetic rods, and
plated wire devices all of which are characterized by high
access speeds and costs. Secondary storage is not an in-
tegral part of but is directly connected (on-line) to the
CPU. Secondary storage devices include magnetic disc,
drum, card, and tape peripherals characterized by moderate
access speeds and costs. External storage is n&t directly
connected (off-line) to the CPU. External media include
removable disc packs, magnetic tape, punched cards, and
paper tapes all characterized by low access speeds and
costs (Lobel and Farina, 1970).
23
-------
RESEARCH
ABSTRACTS
(UNARY)
INFORMATION
INDEXING
INFORMATION
DEPOSITOR
7
STATION
DESCRIPTIONS
(UNARY)
I
FILE DESCRIPTIONS
EDITOR AND
BATCH
PROCESSOR
DOCUMENT
CITATIONS
WO DATA
FILE INDEX
HYDROLOGIC
CHARACTER
ISTICSFILE
LATITUDE/
LONGITUDE
FILE
POLITICAL
JURISDICTION
FILE
INFORMATION
REQUESTOR
MASTER
STATION
FILE
WQ
DATA
(MULTIPLE)
EDITOR AND
BATCH
PROCESSOR
SYSTEM
, ADMINISTRATOR
7
PARAMETER
CODES
(UNARY)
EDITOR AND
BATCH
PROCESSOR
STATISTICAL
REQUESTOR
1 J
INPUT DATA FLOW
OUTPUT DATA FLOW
Figure 1. User access to groundwater data base.
-------
Figure 1 depicts all of the groundwater data files as being
in secondary storage and resident in on-line magnetic disc or
drum, both of which provide random access. Magnetic cards could
also be used but they are not widely compatible. Although drum
storage allows access speeds nearly an order of magnitude greater
than disc, disc storage is adequate for storing groundwater data
and will provide significant storage cost savings compared to
drum storage. Additional storage cost savings can be realized
if removable disc packs are used (as external storage) and
placed on-line only during certain time intervals and if certain
low priority data sets (e.g., seldomly accessed water quality
data) are structured for sequential access and archived on off-
line magnetic tapes.
Data files are structured using one or a combination of
three basic organizational concepts: sequential, random, and list.
Sequential files store records in a specified sequence relative
to other records so that the next logical record is also the next
physical record. Sequential organization permits rapid access
to a series of records logically related to one another but is
cumbersome for updating and retrieving individual records out
of sequence.
Random organization requires the establishment of a predict-
able relationship between a record key and the direct address
of the location where the record is stored. In most cases this
will require a "dictionary look-up" process as part of each
record retrieval. Random access allows rapid retrieval of indi-
vidual records or data items where only a small portion of the
data file is affected but is not well suited to retrievals of
multiple records.
List structures (simple, inverted or ring) incorporate
pointers in each record which point to other records that are
logically related to the first record. Of particular applica-
bility to the management of groundwater data are inverted list
structures which make every data element available as a record
key. For instance, a station type code could be used as the key
to a record which contained pointers to every station of that
type. The inverted list approach allows very rapid (and there-
fore inexpensive) retrievals but requires a great deal of storage
and does not foster easy file updates. Therefore, inverted list
structures can best be used for files which are small and
which are frequently accessed but infrequently updated.
As shown in Figure 1, unary station descriptive data should
be stored in four separate, directly accessible disc files as
follows:
25
-------
The Hydrology file will contain hydrologic character-
istics of water bearing -media and sampling devices
as listed in Table 2.
The Latitude-Longitude file will list each station
number by its latitude and longitude.
The Political Jurisdiction file will list each station
number by its associated political jurisdiction code
(state, county, city, etc.).
The Master Station file will contain all station
specific data including station specific narrative
text.
The first three files described above can best be structured
as inverted lists since they will likely be frequently accessed
and infrequently updated. The Master Station file can be random
using station identifiers as record keys.
The Groundwater Data File, shown in Figure 1, will reside in
disc storage. This file will contain all sample specific and
measurement specific groundwater surveillance data as well as
DMA status data (see Table 2). The Groundwater Data File can be
organized as a random file also using station identifiers as
record keys.
The Parameter Code Dictionary should also reside in disc
storage and be structured as a random file using parameter codes
as record keys.
The Groundwater Data File index should be random and use
station identifiers as record keys. The Document Citation file
will actually consist of a number of randomly accessible sub-
files. The Master Document Citation file would contain all
information regarding each document and would be accessible by
report numbers which would serve as record keys. Additional
files would list report numbers by and, correspondingly, be
keyed by document title, author, agency, etc. iUJ-I19J-y'
DATA PROCESSING
Computerized data processing is accomplished either in
batches or on a continuous (real-time) basis. Batch processing
requires the accumulation and preprocessing of a g^oup of tranl-
actions all of which will be computer processed at one ?ime
Real-time processing, on the other hand, accepts and processes
transactions as they occur. Both processing modes can accept
input data from either remote or local terminals. The basic
difference between the two processing methodologies, as seen by
the system user, is the difference in response time with the
turn-around time for real-time processing being significantly
26
-------
Real-time processing should be implemented only where rapid
system response is really needed since batch processing permits
more efficient and economical hardware utilization by requiring
less system redundancy. Therefore, only accession to the ground-
water information indexing components of the groundwater MIS
requires real-time processing. This requirement is imposed by
the users' need to interact intellectually (browse) with the
information indexing data base.
Batch processing associated with access to the Groundwater
Data File will be composed of editing, sorting, storing, retriev-
ing, and statistical operations. Input editing will examine
input data for format errors, check the validity of codes,
(parameter codes, aquifer codes, etc.) and compare water quality
data with acceptable ranges. For compliance monitoring the input
editing module can also be used to compare water quality data
with established water quality standards and prepare violation
reports as necessary. The sorting and storing processes will
organize the data and update the appropriate files. The
retrieval commands, access the appropriate data files, organize
the requested information, and format output reports. The
statistical processor would function in conjunction with the
retrieval routines to operate on raw data as designated by the
information requestor. The statistical processor would be
required to generate extreme values, first and second moments,
regression and correlation coefficients, logarithms, daily
loading (for source monitoring), and coordinates necessary to
create plots.
DATA RETRIEVAL
Data retrieval is the process of translating information
which is meaningful only to machines into a form which is mean-
ingful to humans. Designing the data retrieval component of an
MIS requires identifying the information to be output, specifying
the retrieval procedures acceptable to the system, developing
the required retrieval software, determining output formats, and
selecting hardware.
The data retrieval component of the proposed MIS which
accesses the Groundwater Data File will be required to yield both
alphanumeric and pictorial output. The system should be capable
of providing alphanumeric output which will include the following
types of information:
27
-------
Measured parameters
Number of observations
Beginning and ending sampling dates
Raw data
Minimum and maximums
Arithmetic means
Standard deviations
Regression coefficients
Correlation coefficients
Percentiles
Confidence intervals
Daily loadings
Logarithms
Station descriptive paragraphs
User requests for pictorial (graphic) displays may require the
following types of plots:
Physical-chemical variations with time
Physical-chemical variations with sample depth
Monitoring stations located geographically
Physical-chemical variations with distance
Vertical bar charts
Circular diagrams
Radial vector diagrams
Pattern diagrams
Trilinear diagrams
28
-------
The last three information presentation techniques listed above,
which may be unfamiliar to some readers, are described by Hem
(1959) .
The groundwater monitoring MIS can offer the data user the
most powerful capabilities if it can provide a wide range of
useful retrieval procedures. A retrieval procedure is character-
ized by the information required by that procedure as user input
to the system to enable the system to locate data and generate
output.
The groundwater monitoring MIS user should be able to request
data from the system by specifying one or a combination of the
following information elements:
Station number
Range of station numbers
Latitude and longitude
Polygon (specified by the latitude and longitude
of its vertices)
Political jurisdiction
Sampling date
Range of sampling dates
Sampling depth
Range of sampling depths
Monitoring agency
Maximum or minimum parameter values
The user should be able to implement a number of these procedures
in conjunction with each other so that Boolean retrieval strat-
egies can be applied. In addition he should be able to request
that various data manipulation and statistical operations be
performed and to dictate, to some extent, the format of the
output which he receives.
Factors involved in the selection of data retrieval hardware
include considerations of speed, cost, flexibility, reliability,
noise, number of copies needed, and formatting (i.e., require-
ments for number of characters per line, number of lines per
page, and plot sizes). Retrieval hardware can be categorized
according to the following distinctions:
29
-------
Impact, non-impact, cathode ray tube (CRT), digital
plotter, microfilm, or voice response.
Serial, which produces 10 to 200 characters per
second (cps) or parallel, which produces 300 to
10,000 cps (Lorber, 1972).
Full character or dot matrix.
In general, impact printers produce full characters either
one at a time (serially) or a line at a time (parallel). Impact
printers provide good legibility and multiple copies (a con-
straining factor for many applications) but, in general, are
noisy and subject to relatively frequent breakdowns because
of the large number of moving parts which they require.
Non-impact printers will best satisfy the requirements of
accessing groundwater monitoring data. Non-impact printers
can be either serial or parallel printers which, in a majority
of machines, produce dot matrix characters. Ink-jet and electro-
static printers are two types of non-impact printers which offer
speed, reliability, portability, competitive purchase cost, and
quiet operation. The disadvantages which are normally character-
istic of these devices are high operating costs (e.g., electro-
static printers require special paper), the inability to produce
multiple copies, and slightly poorer image quality than is
provided by impact printers.
CRT displays produce dot matrix characters, either serially
or in parallel as well as graphics. Although CRT displays,
themselves, are unable to generate permanent records they are
fast, reliable, and economical to purchase and operate. In
addition, these devices afford great flexibility by virtue of
the optional peripheral equipment which may be attached, such
as hard copy output, light pens, and information storage
capabilities. CRT terminals would be most appropriate for
accessing groundwater information indexing files.
Digital plotters which produce permanent graphic displays,
are available at a wide range of prices and, correspondingly,
with a wide range of capabilities. Microfilm systems can receive
output directly from a CPU, via either paper to film or' CRT to
film, and provide the advantages of a compact, inexpensive,
external storage medium. Microfilm systems generate output in
the form of microfilm (normally 16 mm film) , aperture cards
(normally 35 mm film), or microfiche (which records many pages
of data on one frame of film).
30
-------
With the exception of voice response units, which are used
most extensively by operations which interface with the public,
any of the above mentioned hardware options may find appropriate
applications in a groundwater monitoring program. The selection
of specific retrieval hardware components will depend upon the
requirements of individual data requestors and of interfacing
with the central system. The central system should be designed
to be flexible so that it represents a minimal constraint on
the selection of user output hardware.
31
-------
SECTION V
EXISTING SYSTEMS
GENERAL
This section presents a survey of existing or proposed
information management systems which are relevant to the manage-
ment of groundwater monitoring information. Table 3 lists some
of the water resources data management systems which are
currently operational together with some of their more pertinent
characteristics. Table 4 presents a selection of computerized
information indexing systems/ both operational and proposed,
which provide data file or research documentation abstracts.
Table 5 presents several generalized data base management
packages, offered by various commercial vendors, which may
afford capabilities suited to the needs of specific groundwater
data management efforts.
The discussion which follows describes in further detail
some of the more pertinent systems listed in Tables 3 and 4.
Readers with particular interest in one of these systems are
referred to the associated users and systems documentation.
STORET
The Storage and Retrieval System (STORET) was developed
initially by the U.S. Public Health Service and is currently
operated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, where it
is undergoing further development. This system is intended to
provide federal assistance to the states in the performance of
water quality management and to insure compliance with PL 92-500,
Table 6 presents a list of those sections of PL 92-500 which are
supported by STORET. Providing the states access to a central-
ized information retrieval system realizes economies primarily
in the areas of system maintenance and user assistance. To
date, 42 of the states are utilizing STORET.
The STORET system consisted of two basic files: the Water
Quality File (WQF) and the General Point Source File (GPSF).
Primarily because of high operating costs, the GPSF was deac-
tivated during February of 1975 and is to be replaced by a less
expensive but also less powerful generalized information re-
trieval system called the "Interim Enforcement System." One
aspect of this interim measure will be the provision of the
capability to store self-monitoring and compliance data in the
WQF with each discharger being treated as a station and SPDES
permit numbers serving as station identification numbers.
32
-------
TABLE 3. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.
System flame
GJ
Storage and
Retrieval System ^j
National Water Data
Storage and
Retrieval System (2)
ORSANCO Robot
Monitor System (3)
Groundwater Quality
System (4)
Admi"; °*:rator
EPA
WATSTORE USGS
Ohio River Valley
Water, Sanitation
Commission
California
Information
Water quality
Surface and ground
water physical and
chemical data
Surface water
quality
Storage
location
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Groundwater
Computer System
Water Information WISE
System for Enforcement (5)
Tennessee State
Groundwater Data
Retrieval System (6)
Well Hydrograph Data DSWELL
Storage and Retrieval
System (7)
Groundwater Observation GOWN
Well Network (8)
Arizona Water AMIS
Information System (9)
1. EPA, 1971.
2. Edwards, 1974.
3. Klein et al., 1968.
4. Welsh, 1973.
5. Guenther et al. , 1973.
6. Wilson et al., 1972.
7. Friedrichs, 1972.
8. Gilliland and Treichel, 1968.
9. Foster and DeCook, 1974.
Michigan
DNR
Tennessee Department
of Conservation
ERDA
Han ford
Canada
Arizona Water
Commission
Water quality and
discharge inventoi
Groundwater yield
and quality
Well hydrograph
Well logs, well
data, hydrographs
Water resources
Groundwater quality Centralized
and hydrographic
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
43,000 wells IBM 371/58-OS/HVT
25,000+ wells IBM 370/155
None
1,400 wells
22 WQ wells
75,000 wells
800 springs
300 wells
IBM 1130
CDC 3300
Burroughs B5500
IBM 370-OS
PDF-9
75,000 wells IBM 360/165
2,500+ wells DEC-10
-------
TABLE 4. COMPUTERIZED INFORMATION INDEXING SYSTEMS
co
System Name Acronym
Remote RECON
Control
System
General GIPSY
Information
Processing
System
Environmental ENDEX
Data Index**
Oceanic and OASIS
Atmospheric
Scientific
Information
System**
National NAWDEX
Water Data
Exchange
World Science UNISIST
Information
System
Inter- IRS
national
Referral
Systeir.
Hater Resources
Information
Program
Smithsonian SSIE
Science
Information
Exchange
Administrator
ERDA
University of
Oklahoma
NOAA
NOAA
(Environmental
Data Service,
1974)
uses
UNESCO
U.N.
Environmental
Program,
Nairobi
University of
Wisconsin -
Madison
Smithsonian
Science
Information
Exchange, Inc.
File Content
Document
citations
Document
citations
Data file
descriptions
Document
citations
Type and
sources of
water data
Type and
source of
Global
Research
Documentation
Type and
source of
Global
Research
Documentation
Document
citations
Research in
progress
Retrieval
Options
Keywords,
publishers
countries,
authors, etc.
Author, any
word(s) in
abstract, title
Geographic
area (sq) ,
institution.
discipline
Title, keyword,
author, publica-
tion, etc.
Station code.
WRC Basin code.
L at/Long.
Developmental
De ve lopme n ta 1
Free form
questions
Free form
queries
Subject
Energy/
Environmental
Selected water
resources
abstracts*
Environmental
Atmospheric,
water and earth
resources
Surface and
ground water
Scientific
Environmental
Water Resources
Scientific
File Size
700,000
citations
80,000
citations*
3,000 file
references
10,000,000
citations ,
33 files
Developmental
Developmental
Developmental
70,000
citations*
170,000
research
projects
Computer System
IBM 360/75
IBM 360/65*
IBM 360/65
IBM 360/65
plus others
IBM 370/155
De ve 1 opmenta 1
Developmental
IBM 360/75
IBM 370/135
Department of the Interior, Water Resources Scientific Information Center information base.
GIPSY is also used to access some modules of the ENDEX and OASIS data bases.
-------
TABLE 5. GENERALIZED DATA BASE MANAGEMENT PACKAGES.
u>
tn
System
Name
DYL-250/260
IMS
MARK IV
TOTAL
ADABAS
PANVALET
RAMIS
RSVP
Vendor
Dylakov Computer
Systems, Inc.
IBM
Purchase
Price
$8 K+***
Informatics, Inc. $7.5-35 K**
Cincon Systems, $26,500+***
Inc.
Software AG
$120 K***
Pansophic $5 K+***
Systems, Inc.
Mathematica, Inc. $28 K***
Honeywell Infer- $ 4 K+***
mation Systems* Inc.
* 'Velke, 1972}
** (Steig, 1972)
*** (Datapro Research Corporation, 1974)
Minimum
Core Req'd Compatability
32 K
$1316/mo.*** 128 K
20 K
SYSTEM 2000 MRI System Corp. $1 -4 K/mo.* 128 K
31 K(avg.)
30 K
50 K(avg.)
120 K
22 K
IBM 360/370
IBM 360/370
IBM 360/370,
Univac 70/90/
9400
IBM 360/370,
CDC 6000,
Univac 1106,
1108, 1110
IBM 360/370,
CDC Cyber,
H 200/2000,
Univac 70
IBM 360/370,
Univac 9000
Applicability
IBM 360
IBM 360/370
Index sequential files,
report writing
Extremely flexible
but complex
Infrequent, large
retrievals from
large data base
On-line direct
access, inverted
files
Complex interrelation-
ships between data
files
Extremely large data
bases, many files
IBM 360/370 Library maintenance
Hierarchial structured
data bases
User oriented
-------
TABLE 6. STORET SUPPORTED SECTIONS OF PL 92-500
(after Conger, 1975).
Title I - Research and Related Programs
' Sec. 104 - Research, Investigations, Training and Information
1 3
' Sec. 104(a) (5) - National Water Quality Surveillance System (NWQSS)
2 3
' Sec. 105 - Grants for Research and Development
Sec. 106 - Grants for Pollution Control Programs
Sec. 107 - Mine Water Pollution Control Demonstrations
Sec. 108 - Pollution Control in the Great Lakes
Sec. 113 - Alaska Village Demonstration Projects
Sec. 114 - Lake Tahoe Study
Title II - Grants for Construction of Treatment Works
3
Sec. 201 - Construction Grant Facility Plan
Sec. 208 - Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan
Sec. 209 - Basin Planning
2
Sec. 210 - Annual Operation and Maintenance Survey
Title III - Standards and Enforcement
Sec. 303 - Water Quality Standards and Implementation Plans
Sec. 303(e) - River Basin Water Quality Management Plans
Sec. 305(b) - Water Quality Inventory
Sec. 308 - Inspections, Monitoring and Entry
Sec. 311 - Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Sec. 314 - Clean Lakes
Sec. 315 - National Commission on Water Quality
Sec. 316 - Thermal Discharges
Sec. 318 - Aquaculture
36
-------
Table 6 - Continued
Title IV - Permits and Licenses
3Sec. 402 - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Sec. 403 - Ocean Discharge Criteria
Sec. 404 - Permits for Dredged or Fill Material
Title V - General Provisions
2'3Sec. 516 - Reports to Congress
3Sec. 516(b) - Economics of Clean Environmental Report
1Requires Federal information management support
2Requires dissemination of information.
Groundwater implications.
37
-------
The WQF measures the ambient quality of water bodies
throughout the nation and the GPSF measured the quality of
point source discharges throughout the nation. The software
which updates, manipulates, and retrieves data from these
files is coded in the PL/1 programming language. Updates
and retrievals are done in the batch mode with input provided
by card readers or low to medium speed remote terminals.
Output reports are generated on a demand basis only.
The WQF contains information which can be segregated into
three categories. The first of these categories consists of
information which describes the source of water quality samples
(i.e., water quality monitoring stations). This descriptive
information is required only when the stations are established,
in or deleted from the STORET system data base or when the
descriptive information is changed. The input data content and
format for station descriptions is presented in Figure 2.
Header cards 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are optional inputs. A detailed
description of the procedure for using all of these station
storage cards can be found in available STORET documentation.
Only a brief description of the mandatory agency and station
cards is provided here.
The agency header card contains general information pertain-
ing to a station or group of stations involved in a single
station storage or retrieval operation. The agency header card
is used in the following manner:
The agency identifier which associates data with the
contributing organization must be provided in
columns 1 through 8.
An "unlocking key" is an alphanumeric code which is
input via columns 17 through 24 of the agency card
and which is mandatory for all station storage and,
if requested by the data contributor, for all
retrieval operations.
Columns 25 through 61 are provided to accommodate
the name, location and telephone number of the
individual responsible for storing the station
description. Information in this field, thouqh
required as input, is not stored as a part of the
STORET data base. P
Column 62 is used to record the units in which the
sample depths are to be reported and allows the
entering of either an F (feet) or an M (meters).
38
-------
••critor cost
-
~ «"T~i i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 — n — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T'l ii i i i LI
ACEHCV C
It - It » - il »
Hi i i i i — r i i i"i i i i i i i — i — iiii
ARD
CODE
_ " "" "1
1
•••«•-
• 1 1 1
COM-
r«OL
A
STATrOM CA.I10
sc^ut- r
nee MO.
RIME STATION CODE ...„.., Ml SECOKOAHV STATIC
- «••» J— .Ml>» I«.»NW |l.f, /...IH,,
. . ." '^ 3 "
I
rr ~T: ~ - - -
""'
t cou...
CITY
1
'"
=°
It.
Df
HEADED CARD 1
INfrJo 'M.WIHI
' • . J t - 1 I
u>
vo r~
«..., 5
trSlu *•
;
IITG-MO. "
' - 1 «
_• «j^o ii • n K - u ii -u ii . »t a . ji a « » - S! i" .j« 35
I T_
ii^i "sr itvtL ""L" "•«•»««» «V.U,-,L«. ««,« "j^
H-I I___ HI^uI
HEADER c«
J_ _, _,
HgAOES C/
H-«H«I (TATCIIAHC MAJ-!•!
( yt*
0
J^
tRD J
Hi ii MI mil 111 ii mi in
T
E
Figure 2. STORET system-station storage format.
-------
HEADER CARD 4
IULANN.
« - «
I I III I I II I II
I I I II II I II III I II I I! I I III II II III
III MM MM II I MM II IIITTT
TT
HEADER CARD S
ST*TIO**COOE
DESCRIPTION 1T-TB*
n
M INI 11 mm mi in n n 11 n 111 n in n n n 111 n i n 111 n n in 11 n n 1111
n
'IS
I I I I I N I I I I I I I I M I Ml III 1 I I 11 I I I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I II. I I M 1 I I I II
HIM 11 in in n ni in i n i n n 111 n M 11111 n i n 11111111 n n inn 11 r
nrfiif m Mini fnrniin MINI i INI iiinii iinnnii nn
Figure 2 - Continued
-------
Columns 63 through 65 may be used (optionally) to
stipulate (by inputting a 1 in the appropriate
column) that it is desired to store latitude-
longitude, RMI code, and/or the state-county-city
code as a secondary station number(s).
Columns 66 through 73 must be used to provide a
station type code. Station type, codes are constructed
as shown in Figure 3.
(0)
IT1
Not used:
Type of Data:
Other (1)
Water Quality (2)
Flow, Tide, Well
Level (4)
Type of Site:
Other (1)
Municipal (2)
Industrial (4)
State of Water:
Raw (before treatment)
Partial (at interim
point) (2)
Treated (after avail.
treatment) (4)
(1)
Locations A&B:
Ocean (01)
Lake (02)
Stream (04)
Well (10)
Land (20)
Unused (40)
Location C:
Tidal (1)
Other (e.g. , land,
non-tidal) (2)
Vessel (4)
Source of Sample:
Direct from Stream
etc., (1)
Intake (2)
Outfall (4)
Notes: , , -j_j
1) On Storage every digit must be coded
2) Retrieval - every digit must be coded
Figure 3. STORET system-station type codes.
41
-------
Columns 74 through 77 are used to stipulate the date
after which data cannot be retrieved without
providing an unlocking key.
Columns 78 and 79 are used as a card use control and
are coded with a CD to change the unlocking date, a
CT to change the station type, or left blank for
other types of operations.
For the agency card an A is required in column 80.
The station card is also mandatory and provides a vehicle
for inputting information specific to individual stations.
In addition to its use in the establishment of a station in the
STORET data base, it is also used to delete a station, to change
a station location, or to update water quality data. The
station card is completed as follows:
The first field of the card, columns 1 through 3, will
contain a sequence number which corresponds to the
entries in the same field of all other location and
water quality cards for the same station. This field
is not stored but rather used for resorting in the
event the card deck becomes disarranged.
The second field, columns 4 through 18, is used to
enter the primary station code (alphanumeric) into
storage. In general, only the first 6 characters
of this field are used.
The three fields consisting of columns 34 through 45,
46 through 57, and 58 through 67 are used to store
secondary station codes if required. Secondary
station codes are used in the event, for example
that several organizations are storing water quality
information derived from the same station but have
assigned different codes to that station.
The next three fields (columns 68 through 69 70
through 72, and 73 through 77) are numeric and are
used to store state, county, and city codes respec-
tively. State and county codes are those adopted by
the National Bureau of Standards. City codes are
based upon codes adopted by the U.S. Postal Service.
Columns 78 and 79 are for card use control This
field is coded with an "NS" if an original storaqe is
being executed, with »DD» to delete all data associated
with a station, with "DS" to delete both the station
and all data associated with the station, with "CN"
to change secondary station numbers, with "CC" to
change or delete station descriptive data, and with
blanks for water quality data updates.
42
-------
Column 80 of a station card is coded with an S.
Sampling stations are located areally by stipulating either
geographical coordinates (header card 0), hydrologic index
(header cards 1 and 2) or both. Locating sampling stations by
geographical coordinates allows the retrieval of data from all
stations located within a polygon simply by specifying the
vertices of that polygon. Hydrologic indexing, referred to as
River Mile Index (RMI) coding, offers an extremely powerful
tool since it defines the hydrologic relationship between a
sampling point and the rest of the river system. A complete
RMI requires between 15 and 112 numeric characters and is
composed of the following codes:
Major basin code (2 characters)
Minor basin code (2 characters)
Terminal stream number (3 characters)
Indexes defining direction and level of flow
Mileages between confluences
Stream level code (2 characters)
As of November 1975, use being made of the various sta-
tion locating schemes is presented below (Conger, 1974).
Stations
Total 197,000
RMI 28,000
Geographic 160,000
Both (RMI and Geo.) . 15,000
Neither 24,000
Political 193,000
Although RMI coding represents a useful tool, relatively little
use is being made of it undoubtedly because of the level of
effort required to generate the code. Most of the stations which
have been stored in the WQF using both RMI and geographic
coordinates are located in only two areas, the Tennessee and
Columbia River basins.
43
-------
The second category of information stored in the WQF
data base is water quality parameter identification. Each
water quality measurement which is stored in the file must
be accompanied by a numeric 5 character parameter identi-
fier code. The 5-character water quality parameter identi-
fier code is stored in a 3-byte field in packed decimal
format which allows the storage of 2 numeric characters per
byte. The parameter identifier codes are also stored in a
cross reference (dictionary) file together with the alpha-
numeric descriptors which the codes represent.
The WQF can store up to 100,000 parameter identifiers
but only about 2,000 identifiers are currently stored.
Eighty-five percent of the water quality data in the WQF
is stored under only 187 of the existing identifiers, how-
ever. An effort has been made to commit specific ranges
of parameter codes to sets of parameters with similar char-
acteristics. For example, the range of codes 00300-00365
has been dedicated to measurements of oxygen demand.
Of particular interest is the fact that the range of
codes from 84,000 to 84,999 has been set aside for identi-
fiers pertinent to groundwater monitoring. To date, the
code 84,000 has been designated as a geologic age code and
84,001 as an aquifer name code. The remainder of the range
is uncommitted. Additional parameter codes which have been
established specifically to accommodate groundwater moni-
toring are presented in Table 7.
The third category of information in the WQF is the water
quality measurements themselves together with the depth of
the sample and the date and time the sample was taken. The
water quality measurements are stored in 4-byte words in
standard IBM 370 floating point format (single precision).
Originally the input module of the STORET system was de-
signed to store only numeric data in the water quality meas-
urement field. System modifications have been accomplished,
however, that allow the storage of alphabetic characters,
required for aquifer descriptions, in the fields associated
with parameter codes 84,000 through 84,999.
The STORET Water Quality File also allows remarks to be
input along with water quality measurements. The system
accepts remark codes into a 1-character (1-byte) field,
one of which has been set aside for each water quality meas-
urement field. The remarks are stored in "Extended Binary
Coded Decimal Interchange Code" (EBCDIC) which allows any
one of 256 alternative remark codes. These remarks are used/
for example, to indicate that the stored data element is
not accurate, a field measurement, a lab measurement, a
lower limit, or an upper limit.
44
-------
TABLE 7. ESTABLISHED STORET PARAMETER CODES - GROUNDWATER
SPECIFIC (EPA, 1971). Celsius (BM*)
ui
Code
72000
72001
72002
72003
72004
72005
72006
72007
72008
72009
72010
72011
72012
72013
72014
72015
72016
72017
72018
72019
72020
72040
72041
72042
72043
72044
72045
Output
Format**
XXXXXX . X
xxxxxx.x
XXXXXX. X
xxxxxx.x
XXXXXX . X
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
XXXXXX. X
xxxxxx.x
xxxx.xxx
XXXX . XXX
xxxxx.xx
xxxx.xxx
xxxxx.xx
xxxxxx.x
xxxxxx.x
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
xxxxx.xx
xxxxx.xx
xxxxx.xx
xxxxx.xx
xxxxxx.x
xxxxxx.x
xxxxxx.x
xxxxx.xx
Parameter Description
Elevation of land surface datum (ft.*** above MSL)
Total depth of hole (ft. below land surface datum)
Depth to top of water-bearing zone sampled (ft.)
Depth to bottom of water-bearing zone sampled (ft.)
Pump or flow period prior to sampling (minutes)
Sample source code (BM* well data)
Sampling condition code (BM* well data)
Formation name code (BM* well data) (AAPG**** code)
Total depth of well (ft. below land surface datum)
Elevation of land surface in feet (BM*)
Resistivity (ohm-meters) (BM* well data)
Acids, organic (Mg/1) (BM* well data)
Specific gravity, temperature, degrees Celsius (BM*)
Specific gravity (BM* well data)
Resistivity, temperature, degrees Celsius (BM*)
Depth to top of sample interval (ft. below LSD)
Depth to bottom of sample interval (ft. below LSD)
Series code (BM* well data)
System code (BM* well data)
Depth to water level (feet below land surface)
Elevation in feet above MSL
Observed drawdown (ft.)
Specific capacity in gpm/ft. of drawdown
Pump efficiency (percent)
Brake horsepower
Total dynamic pumping head (ft.)
Pumping cost in dollars per thousand gallons
-------
•Ci.
o\
TABLE 7 - Continued
Code
72050
72051
84000
84001
Output
Format* *
xxxxxx.x
XXXXXX.X
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
Parameter Description
Withdrawal of groundwater (millions of gallons/month)
Withdrawal of groundwater (millions of gallons/year)
Geologic age code (USGS)
Aquifer name code (USGS)
*BM - Bureau of Mines
**Can be modified at retrieval
***See Appendix for conversion to metric units
****American Association of Petroleum Geologists
-------
Recent cost and use data for the WQF are presented below
(Notzon, 1975):
Annual operating costs excluding
EPA personnel $1,100,000
Federal, state and local users 240
Cost per user per year $3,667
Observations stored annually 8-10 million
Observations presently in system 30,000,000
Data acquisition cost $150-300 million
Annual storage cost per observation $.01
Processing cost per observation $.011
Retrievals/analysis per year 46,000
Retrieval/analysis cost per job (avg.) $7.58
The General Point Source File consisted of an inventory
of dischargers and abatement plans. More specifically, the
GPSF contained the following information:
1. Inventory of municipal dischargers
2. Inventory of industrial dischargers
3. Inventory of municipalities
4. Fish kills
5. Agricultural permits
6. Mine drainage permits
7. Deep well injection survey
8. Municipal drinking water supplies
9. Construction needs survey
10. Ocean dumping permits
11. Federal government discharges
12. Grant information
47
-------
WATSTOKE
The National Water Data Storage and Retrieval System
(WATSTORE) was implemented in 1971 with the objective of
providing the Water Resources Division of the USGS with a
comprehensive water data management capability. The system
is computerized and operated at the facilities of USGS in
Reston, Virginia. Access to WATSTORE is through a telecom-
munication network which provides data services to 46 dis-
trict offices throughout the country. Data are input to
WATSTORE by remote entry from laboratories and data centers.
The system data base consists of a "Station Header File"
which maintains an index of stations and provides access to
the following files:
The "Daily Values File" contains physical and
chemical data reported daily.
The "Water Quality File" contains the results
of analysis (chemical and physical) of all sam-
ples taken. This includes groundwater samples
generally taken on an infrequent and irregular
basis.
The "Peak Flow File" contains annual maximum
discharge and stage values for surface water
sites.
The "Groundwater Site Inventory File" contains
physical, topographic, aquifer hydraulic and
text data pertinent to groundwater monitoring
sites. Parameters maintained in this file are
presented in Table 8.
WATSTORE retrieval capabilities enable the output of text,
tabular, and graphic reports. Retrieval options include indi-
vidual station, station type (e.g., wells), specific periods,
polygon, political, aquifer code (for groundwater sites), and
individual parameter retrievals. In addition, data for a par-
ticular parameter which falls within a specified range may be
retrieved.
The WATSTORE system is designed to recognize the possibil-
ity that a groundwater monitoring station (well) can penetrate
more than one aquifer and that samples can be drawn from indi-
vidual aquifers separately with the use of screen plugs. There-
fore, WATSTORE allows for the storage of aquifer identifiers
along with the water quality analysis data for each sample.
48
-------
TABLE 8. PARAMETERS MAINTAINED IN WATSTORE GROUNDWATER
SITE INVENTORY FILE (Baker, 1975)
Site Id
Site Type
Record Classification
Source Agency
Project Number
District
State
County
State County*
Latitude
Longitude
Coordinate Accuracy
Local Number
Land Net Location
Location Map Id
Location Map Scale
Altitude
Altitude Method
Altitude Accuracy
Topographic Setting
OWDC Hydrologic Unit
Date Constructed
Date Const. Ace.*
Site Use
Water Use
Second Water Use
Third Water Use
Hole Depth
Well Depth
Well Depth Source
Water Level
Water Level Date
WL Date Accuracy*
Water Level Source
Water Level Method
Site Level Status
Pump
Geohydro Data Source
Last Update*
Verified*
Lift
Lift Type
Lift Date
Lift Date Accuracy*
Intake Setting
Power Type
Horsepower
Major Pump
Manufacturer
Serial Number
Power Company
Account
Meter
Consumption
Pump Maintainer
Standby
Standby Power Type
Standby Horsepower
Geohydrologic Units
Geohydro Top
Geohydro Bottom
Geohydro Unit
Lithology
Lithology Modifier
Aquifer
Aquifer Date
Aquifer Date Ace.
Aquifer Static Level
Aquifer Contribution
Remarks
Remarks Date
Remark
Construction
Const. Sequence No.
Date Completed
Const. Date Accuracy*
Contractor
Const. Data Source
Const. Method
Finish
Seal Type
Seal Bottom
Development Method
Development Duration
Special Treatment
Holes
Hole Top
Hole Bottom
Hole Diameter
Casings
Casing Top
Casing Bottom
Casing Diameter
Casing Material
Casing Thickness
Openings
Opening Top
Opening Bottom
Opening Type
Screen Material
Opening Diameter
Opening Width
Opening Length
Site Visits
Inventory Date
Inventory Person
49
-------
Table 8 - Continued
Hydraulic Data
Hydraulic Seq. No.
Hydraulic Unit Id.
Test Interval Top
Test Interval Bottom
Hydraulic Unit Type
Hydraulic Remarks
Coefficients
Coef. Seq. No.
Transmissivity
Horizontal Cond.
Vertical Cond.
Storage Coef.
Leakage
Diffusivity
Specific Storage
Quality Network(QN)
QN Begin Year
QN End Year
QN Data Source
QN Frequency
QN Analysis Type
Level Network (LN)
LN Begin Year
LN End Year
LN Data Source
LN Frequency
Pumpage Network (PN)
PN Begin Year
PN End Year
PN Data Source
PN Frequency
PN Data Method
Flow Data
Flow Seq. No.
Flow Meas. Date
Flow Date Ace.*
Flow Discharge
Flow Discharge Source
Flow Discharge Method
Flow Prod. Level
Flow Static Level
Flow Level Source
Flow Level Method
Flow Period
Pump Production
Pump Seq. No.
Pump Meas. Date
Pump Date Ace.*
Pump Discharge
Pump Discharge Source
Pump Discharge Method
Pump Prod. Level
Pump Static Level
Pump Level Source
Pump Level Method
Pump Period
Owners
Ownership Date
Ownership Date Ace.*
Last Name
First Name
Middle Initial
Minor Repairs
Repair Seq. No.
Repair Nature
Repair Date
Repair Date Ace.*
Repair Contractor
Performance Changes
Springs
Spring Name
Spring Type
Permanence
Discharge Sphere
Improvements
Number Spring Openings
Flow Variability
Flow Var. Accuracy
Other Data
Type Data
Data Location
Other Ids
Other Id
Other Id Assigner
Field Water Quality
FWQ Sample Date
FWQ Date Ace.*
FWQ Geohydro Unit
FWQ Parameter
FWQ Measurement
Logs
Log Type
Log Top
Log Bottom
Log Source
Well Group(WG)
Number Wells
WG Deepest
WG Shallowest
WG Method
Pond Tunnel Drain
PTD Length
PTD Width
PTD Depth
Cooperator Data
Cooperators Id
Contractor Reg. No.
Inspection Status
Reason Unapproved
Date Inspected
Cooperator Remarks
Laterals
Lateral Number
Lateral Depth
Lateral Length
Lateral Diameter
Lateral Mesh
*System-Generated
50
-------
The aquifer identifiers are stored as 8-character codes based
on the stratigraphic coding system proposed by the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists.
The 8-character code consists of three parts. The first
3 characters are numeric and identify the geologic age (Era-
them, System and Series, respectively) of the aquifer as
shown in Table 9. The next 4 characters constitute an alpha-
numeric mneumonic code which specifies the name of the rock-
stratigraphic unit. The rock-stratigraphic unit name code
is generated by the use of an algorithm which specifies the
order in which characters are to be eliminated from the ori-
ginal term until only 4 remain. The last character of the
8-character is optional and provides for modifiers of the
rock-stratigraphic unit name. For example, the complete code
for the Pliocene Upper Pico Formation in California is 121PICOU
The WATSTORE system currently stores data for several hun-
dred different water quality parameters. The list of water
quality parameters is open ended and is expanded as necessary.
The water quality parameters stored in WATSTORE are coded with
a 5-character code established in cooperation with the EPA
STORET User Assistance Branch so that the parameter codes are
the same in both systems. WATSTORE is equipped with a module
which generates STORET input corresponding to WATSTORE data
file updates. The input formats for storing data in the
WATSTORE Water Quality File are presented in Figure 4.
NAWDEX
The National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX) is a develop-
mental computerized information indexing capability being
implemented by the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geo-.
logical Survey. This effort resulted from a determination
by the U.S. Department of the Interior that accessibility to
water data on a national scale required upgrading.
NAWDEX will consist of a centralized data inventory file
and communications links, not necessarily automated, with
management information systems maintained by the various data
depositors that subscribe to NAWDEX. The centralized data
file will contain monitoring stations descriptions as well as
sources and types (parameters and monitoring frequency) of
available water data. Access to this file is provided by re-
quiring the user to stipulate his interest in either surface
or groundwater and geographical area of interest (e.g., hydro-
logic basin code). The system allows additional information,
as available, from the data requestor to further narrow the
file search (Planning Research Corporation, 1974) .
51
-------
TABLE 9. USGS NUMERIC CODES FOR GEOLOGIC AGE
IDENTIFICATION (Price and Baker, 1974) .
Age Code Age Code
Unknown Age 000 Paleozoic (cont'd)
„ ,An Middle 324
Cenozoic 100 Des Moinesian 325
Quaternary 110 Atokan 326
Holocene 111 Lower 327
Pleistocene 112 Morrowan 328
Tertiary 120 Mississippian 330
Pliocene 121 Upper ** 331
Miocene 122 chesterian 332
Oligocene 123 Meramecian 333
Lower 337
Paleocene 125 Osagean 338
„ or.A Kinderhookian 339
III °—i- 340
h III Mi
Comanchean 218 -PV^=« ^c
Coahuilan 219 ^J-
22? Ulsterian 348
2.2L
227 35
Tric 230 MiStC9an III
SSI. Ill Nia^aran
Middle 234 T~TT~,- X^-,
"7 Or^^ian 357Q
Upper 361
Paleozoic 300 Cincinnatian 362
— Permian 310 Middle 364
Upper 311 Champlainian 365
Ochoan 312 Lower 367
Guadalupian 313 Canadian 368
Lower 317 Cambrian 370
Leonardian 318 u?Per 371
Wolfcampian 319 Middle 374
Pennsylvania 320 Lower 377
Upper 321
Virgilian 322 Precambrian 400
Mis sour ian 323 -
52
-------
U)
1 1
3 < &
e 7 a
9 10 11
17 13
l«]l
'tS 17 1
S 19 23|6a 65 66 67 68J69 70 71 « 73 74 7E, 76JT7 78 79 SO
GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTOR CARD
u*
-
STATION IQtNTlFlCATlCN NUMBER
~T
I
YE*
1
JEGIN DATE El*
IH MO
DAT TEAfl
1
ODATE
TIME
MO DAY
n
G GEOLOGIC UNIT CODE
"T
TmmUTTTTTTl TlTTnnTTT
WATER QUALITY DATACARD
u STATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
i
n
i
Yt
BEGIN DATE E
AR MO
OAV ft*
NO DATE
TIME
1 MO DAY
|
PARAMETER
CODE
WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
VALUE
tXP B P«*»«ETER VAUJE EXP1 P ""^OE" VALUE j IXf H ""^oV6" VALUE Ex' R
:::::::::::: : : ZE...I :.
Figure 4. WATSTORE Water Quality File - data storage format.
-------
SECTION VI
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING SYSTEMS
1. The STORET parameter code dictionary should be appended
to include those groundwater monitoring related parameters
listed in Table 10.
2. The STORET system should be modified to accept multiple
remark codes with individual measurements. It is recog-
nized that a modification of this type would represent
a major commitment of resources.
3. The STORET groundwater data file should be developed
separately from the existing STORET surface water data
file (i.e, the WQF). This will promote faster updates
of the groundwater data file and avoid degradation of update
times for the surface water data file.
4. The STORET groundwater data file should be maintained on a
detachable magnetic disc and placed on-line on the basis
of some constant schedule (e.g., Tuesdays and Fridays from
2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). The periods during which the file
will be on-line can be determined by performing a survey of
potential users.
5. Some groundwater data should be archived off-line on magnetic
tape. The data set to be archived can be defined either on
the basis of its age (e.g., data over two years old) or on
the basis of its activity level (e.g., stations not accessed
or updated within the preceding year).
6. The proposed STORET groundwater data file should be allowed
to accept compliance monitoring data as well as background
information monitoring data. Discharge permit numbers may
be used as station identifier codes. The fact that a
monitoring station is generating compliance data can be
indicated in the station type code. In addition, the ground-
water data file should be able to accept DMA status data,
with the DMA treated as a station and the DMA code used as
a station code.
7. For the groundwater data file, the eight character STORET
station type code should be modified and interpreted as
follows:
54
-------
TABLE 10. PROPOSED ADDITIONAL STORET PARAMETER CODES
Code Parameter Description
84100 Horizontal permeability (gpd/ft2)
84105 Vertical permeability (gpd/ft2)
84107 Specific yield (dimensionless)
84110 Effective porosity (percent)
84112 Void ratio
84115 Soil bulk density (grams/liter)
84117 Soil moisture content (percent)
84120 Soil exchangeable sodium (percent)
84123 Soil specific gravity (grams/cm3)
84130
84131
84132
84133
84134
84135
84136
84138
84140
84142
84200
84205
84210
84215
84220
84222
84225
84230
84300
Soil gradation
Soil gradation
Soil gradation
Soil gradation
Soil gradation
percent clay or silt fines
percent fine sand
percent medium sand
percent coarse sand
percent fine gravel
Soil gradation - percent coarse gravel
Soil gradation - percent cobbles
Coefficient of soil uniformity
Coefficient of curvature of soil gradation plot
Capillary head (feet)
Hydraulic gradient
Hydraulic gradient direction (degrees from North)
Transmissivity (gpd/ft)
Storage coefficient (dimensionless)
Leakage - downward (gpd/sq. mi.)
Leakage - upward (gpd/sq. mi.)
Diffusivity (gpd/ft)
Specific flux (gpd/ft2) '
Highest use made of aquifer (protected use)
84500 Monitoring agency status index
84505 Pollution control readiness index
84600- Alphanumeric, sample specific comments
84610 10 fields, 4 characters each
55
-------
. Column 1 which is not currently used should be allowed
to accept a code to indicate the sample extraction method
employed at the subject station (i.e., pump = 1, bail = 2,
and probe = 4).
. In column 2 a 1 would indicate DMA status data, a 2 would
indicate water quality dataf and a 4 would indicate
hydrogeologic data.
. In column Sal would indicate information monitoring, a 2
would indicate compliance monitoring, and a 4 would
indicate other.
» In columns 7 and 8 a 10 would indicate monitoring directly
in the saturated zone, a 20 would indicate surface moni-
toring, and a 40 would indicate monitoring of the zone of
aeration.
8. The STORET groundwater data file should store water quality
criteria (ambient or effluent) as sample data. The date
of enactment of the criteria would be stored in the STORET
sample date field and some exclusive value such as 8888 for
ambient criteria and 9999 for effluent limitation would be
stored in the STORET sample time field.
9. STORET retrieval options should be expanded to allow
more extensive Boolean retrieval strategies. It is
recognized that these additions would require setting
up new index and cross-reference files and correspond-
ingly entail a significant additional commitment of
resources.
10. STORET user assistance capabilities and policies should
be expanded to allow non-machine compatible user inter-
face with the data base on a routine basis.
11. Either the GIPSY or the RECON document citation re-
trieval systems should be modified to accommodate poly-
gon type retrievals. This would allow the groundwater
investigator to provide geographic delimiters and re-
ceive research documentation abstracts regarding his
geographical area of interest.
56
-------
SECTION VII
REFERENCES
Baker, C., Written Communication, U.S. Geological Survey,
Water Resources Division, Reston, Va., April 3, 1975.
Conger, C. S., Personal Communication, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Data Processing and User Assistance
Branch, Washington, D.C., November 4, 1974.
Conger, C. S., Written Communication, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Data Processing and User Assistance
Branch, Washington, D.C., March 4, 1975.
Datapro Research Corporation, A Buyers Guide to Data Base
Management Systems, Delran, N.J., 12 pages, December, 1974
Edwards, Melvin D., The Processing and Storage of Water Quality
in the National Water Data Storage and Retrieval System,
U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division,
Reston, Va., 85 pages, 1974.
Environmental Data Service, User's Guide to OASIS - Oceanic and
Atmospheric Scientific Information System, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, D.C.,
1974.
Ferrara, R., and R. L. Nolan, "New Look at Computer Data Entry,"
Journal of Systems Management, Association for Systems
Management, p 24-33, February, 1973.
Foster, K. E., and J. DeCook, Implementation of Arizona Water
Information System (AWIS) Remote Terminal Accessible
Hydrologic Data Sets on DEC-10 Computer, University of
Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 21 pages, 1974.
Friedrichs, D. R., information Storage and Retrieval System
for Well HvdrTaraph Data - User's Manual, Battelle
Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richlanct, Washington,
23 pages, 1972.
Gilliland, J. A., and A. Treichel, "GOWN - A Computer Storage
System for Groundwater Data," Canadian Journal of Earth
Sciences, Vol. 5, p 1518-1524, September 1968.
57
-------
Guenther, G., D. Mincavage, and F. Morley, Michigan Water
Resources Enforcement and Information System, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency/ Office of Research
and Monitoring, Soci©economic Environmental Studies
Series, EPA-R5-73-020, Washington, D.C., 161 pages, 1973.
Hem, J. D., Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Character-
istics of Natural Water, U.S. Geological Survey, Water
Supply Paper 1473, 269 pages, 1959.
House, W. C., ed., Data Base Management, Mason and Lipscomb
Publishers, Inc., New York, New York, 470 pages, 1974.
Klein, W. L., D. A. Dunsmore, and R. K. Horton, "An Integrated
Monitoring System for Water Quality Management in the
Ohio Valley/"Environmental Science and Technology,
Vol. 2, American Chemical Society, p 764-771, October,
1968.
Lobel, Jerome, and M. V. Farina, "Selecting Computer Memory
Devices," Automation, Penton Publishing Co., Cleveland,
Ohio, p 66-70, October 1970.
Lorber, Matthew, "Evaluating Computer Output Printers," Automationt,
Penton Publishing Co., Cleveland, Ohio, p 64-67, March
1972.
Notzon, E.M., Written Communication, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Monitoring and Data Support
Division, Washington, D.C., October 2, 1975.
Planning Research Corporation, Support in the Implementation of
a National Water Data Exchange, Second Quarterly
Progress Report (September-November, 1974), PRC-p-1863,
61 pages, December 1974.
Price, W. E., and C. H. Baker, Catalog of Aquifer Names and
Geologic Unit Codes Used by the Water Resources Division/
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey,
Water Resources Division, Reston, Va., 306 pages, 1974.
Schwab, B., and R. Sitter, "Economic Aspects of Computer Input-
Output Equipment," Financial Executive, Financial
Executives Institute, p 75-87, September 1969.
Showen, C. R., and 0. 0. Williams, Index to Water Quality Data
Available from the U.S. Geological Survey in Machine-
Readable Form to December 31, 1972 - Western Region,
PB-232-794, U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources
Division, Washington, D.C., 520 pages, 1973.
58
-------
Steig, D. B., "File Management Systems Revisited,"Datamation,
Harrington, Illinois, p 48-51, October 1972.
Taylor, P. L., Written Communication, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Data Reporting Branch, Washington,
D.C., November 27, 1974.
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, The Toxic
Substances List, 1973 Edition.National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, Rockville, Maryland,
lOOl'pages, 1973.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Storage and Retrieval
of Water Quality Data. Training Manual, PB-214 580,
Washxngton, D.C., 302 pages, 1971.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Proposed Criteria for
Water Quality, Vol. 1, Washington, D»C., 425 pages,
1973.
U.S. Public Health Service, "Drinking Water Standards," Federal
Register, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
p 2152-2155, March 6, 1962.
Wilson, J.M., M. J. Mallory, and J. M. Kernodle, Summary of
Groundwater Data for Tennessee through May 1972,
Miscellaneous Publication Number 9, State of Tennessee,
Department of Conservation, Division of Water Resources,
Nashville, Tennessee, 1972.
Welke, Larry, "A Review of File Maintenance Systems," Datamation,
Harrington, Illinois, p 52-54, October 1972.
Welsh, J. L., "Ground-Water Quality Data for Planning, Monitoring,
and Surveillance," Proceedings at the Ninth Biennial
Conference on Ground Water, Goleta, California, September
1973.
59
-------
APPENDIX
METRIC CONVERSION TABLE
Non-Metric Unit
Multiply by
Metric Unit
feet (ft)
gallons (gal)
miles (mi)
gallons per day
(gpd)
gallons per minute
(gpm)
0.3048
3.785
1.609
3.785412
3.785412
meters (m)
liters (1)
kilometers (km)
liters/day (I/day)
liters/minute (1/min)
60
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AWIS
BM
CPU
CRT
DMA
DNR
DSWELL
EBCDIC
EMSL
ENDEX
EPA
ERDA
GIPSY
GOWN
GPSF
HEW
IRS
MIS
NAS
NAWDEX
NPDES
NOAA
NWQSS
OASIS
OCR
Arizona Water Information System
Bureau of Mines
Central processing unit
Cathode ray tube
Designated monitoring agency
t
Department of Natural Resources
Well Hydrograph Data Storage and Retrieval
System
Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Environmental Data Index
Environmental Protection Agency
Energy Research Development Agency
General Information Processing System
Groundwater Observation Well Network
General Point Source File
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
International Referral System
Management information system
National Academy of Sciences
National Water Data Exchange
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Water Quality Surveillance System
Oceanic and Atmospheric Scientific Information
System
Optical character recognition
61
-------
ORSANCO Ohio River Valley Water, Sanitation Commission
OWDC Office of Water Data Coordination
RECON Remote Control System
RMI River Mile Index
SSIE Smithsonian Science Information Exchange
STORET Storage and Retrieval system
TELEX Telephone Exchange
UNESCO U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization
UNISIST World Science Information System
USDI U.S. Department of the Interior
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
USPHS U.S. Public Health Service
WATS Wide Area Telephone Service
WATSTORE National Water Data Storage and Retrieval
System
WISE Water Information System for Enforcement
WQF Water Quality File
62
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. 2
EPA-600/4-76-019
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
MONITORING GROUNDWATER QUALITY:
DATA MANAGEMENT
7. AUTHOR(S)
Norman F. Hampton
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
General Electric Company-TEMPO
Center for Advanced Studies
816 State Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION- NO.
5. REPORT DATE
April 1976
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
GE75TMP-70
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1HA326
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-0759
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
4. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA-ORD-Office of Monitoring
and Technical Support
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
The growing concern for subsurface water resources will surely be accompanied by
an expanding groundwater data base, a data base which is already quite large. This
report is intended to point the way towards the efficient management of this data
base which will assure that pertinent information is available when and where it is
needed. The discussion presented here will describe the requirements of groundwater
data management, survey some available capabilities which may serve to satisfy these
requirements and identify the means by which these capabilities can be used to
accomplish the management of groundwater data.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Groundwater Data Management, Groundwater
Quality Data, Water Quality Data,
Monitoring Groundwater, Groundwater,
Aquifers, Aquifer Characteristics
Groundwater Data
Management,
Water Quality Data
08H
09B
13B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
70
Release to public
L
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
•&GPO 691.305-1976
------- |