EMAP-National Coastal Assessment Program Level Database EMAP-West Alaskan Province Alaska 2002 and 2004 Station Location and Visit Data


CATALOG DOCUMENTATION

EMAP-NATIONAL COASTAL ASSESSMENT PROGRAM LEVEL DATABASE
EMAP-WEST ALASKAN PROVINCE ALASKA 2 0 02 and 2 0 04
STATION LOCATION AND VISIT DATA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.	DATA SET IDENTIFICATION

2.	INVESTIGATOR INFORMATION

3.	DATA SET ABSTRACT

4 .	OBJECTIVES AND INTRODUCTION

5.	DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING METHODS

6.	DATA MANIPULATIONS

7.	DATA DESCRIPTION

8.	GEOGRAPHIC AND SPATIAL INFORMATION

9.	QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE

10.	DATA ACCESS

11.	REFERENCES

12.	TABLE OF ACRONYMS

13.	PERSONNEL INFORMATION

1.	DATA SET IDENTIFICATION

1.1	Title of Catalog document
National Coastal Assessment Database
2002 and 2004 Alaskan Province
Station Location and Visit Data

1.2	Authors of the Catalog entry
Larry Cooper

Southern California Coastal Water Resources Project

1.3	Catalog revision date
8 September 2011

1.4	Data set name

Station Location and Visit Information

1.5	Task Group
EMAP-West

1.6	Data set identification code
1/ 2

1.7	Version
1

1.8	Requested Acknowledgment

If you plan to publish these data in any way, EPA requires a standard statement for work it has
supported: "Although the data described in this article have been funded wholly or in part by
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency through its EMAP-National Coastal Assessment Program,
it has not been subjected to Agency review, and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views
of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred."

2.	INVESTIGATOR INFORMATION

2.1	Principal Investigator

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC), Division of Water

2.2	Investigation Participant-Sample Collection
NA

3.	DATA SET ABSTRACT

3.1 Abstract of the Data Set

The Station Location data present a record of where samples were taken at stations during the
2002 project on the South-central Coast of the State of Alaska. In 2002, 50 core EMAP sites were
sampled in addition to 25 sites that the ADEC added to further characterize the two major
waterbodies of the south-central Alaskan coast (Cook Inlet and Prince William Sound). Forty-two
sites were sampling in 2004. The latitude and longitudes reported are the actual locations that
were visited. Visit information includes the date and number of the sampling visit and the water
depth at the time of the visit. The two (2) character mailing code for the State inside whose
geopolitical boundaries the station lies is reported. The Estuary defines the specific river,
bay, creek or other small water body in which the station is located.

-------
3.2 Keywords for the Data Set

Estuary, latitude, longitude, state, station location, EPA region, depth

4. OBJECTIVES AND INTRODUCTION

4.1 Program Objective

EPA's National Coastal Assessment (NCA), is a five-year effort led by EPA's Office of Research
and Development to evaluate the assessment methods it has developed to advance the science of
ecosystem condition monitoring. C2000 represents the current state of evolution of EPA's
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP). EMAP was originally designed to provide
a quantitative assessment of the regional extent of environmental problems by measuring status
and change in selected indicators of ecological condition. EMAP provides a strategy to identify
and bound the extent, magnitude and location of environmental degradation and improvement on a
regional scale.

4.2 Data Set Objective

The objective of the sampling design is to provide a statistically defensible strategy for
collecting information about selected indicators of ecological condition and their variability.
The design is flexible to allow alternative future uses.

4.3 Data Set Background Discussion

The EMAP-Estuaries sampling design on which C2000 is based combines the strengths of systematic
and random sampling with our understanding of estuarine systems. It provides a design that will
allow probability-based estimates of the status of the Nation's estuarine systems, the
variability associated with that status, its spatial and temporal components, and the temporal
trends associated with changes in these systems. The Coastal 2000 sampling design is based on a
single, annual sampling season of each station during the Index Period. The design differs from
previous EMAP designs in that existing monitoring programs were incorporated where appropriate.
'Biased' programs, such as those designed to evaluate the effects of a treatment plant, would
NOT be appropriate for inclusion. Working with the states, the C2000 design team was able to
identify a large number of sites that are currently being monitored and meet the criteria for
being unbiased in their location. Many were randomly located in the original monitoring design.

C2000 will attempt to assess the condition of the Nation's estuarine waters through
statistically valid subsampling. Whereas the original EMAP effort was conducted primarily by EPA
and contract staff, C2000 is being implemented in partnership with the 24 coastal states. This
partnership recognizes that each of these entities plays an important role in estuarine
monitoring. Wherever possible, existing state monitoring programs are being incorporated into
the C2000 design. This provides for the maximum utilization of a limited budget, and the
flexibility of allowing states to often maintain historical sampling designs. Many of these
state programs have been in existence for many years, providing a basis for possible C2000
trends analyses. Each state will conduct the survey and assess the condition of their coastal
resources independently. These estimates will then be aggregated to assess the condition at EPA
Regional, biogeographical, and National levels. Through this partnership EPA hopes to build
infrastructure within the coastal states to improve, and make more inter-comparable, the
multitude of estuarine monitoring programs throughout the country.

4.4 Summary of Data Set Parameters

Station location data set values were based on the geographic location of the station,
independent of the station visit.

5. DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING METHODS
5.1 Data Acquisition

5.1.1 Sampling Objective

The navigation goal was to be within a 100 ft radius of the assigned latitude and longitude of a
sampling site.

5.1.2 Sample Collection Methods Summary

The randomly selected Western Pilot sampling locations will be provided to the field crews as
coordinates of latitude/longitude in degrees-minutes, expressed to the nearest 0.01 minute
(i.e., 00 00.00') . The crews will use GPS to locate the site. The acceptable tolerance goal for
siting is that the sampling station be established within 0.01' (+-100 ft) of the given
coordinates. This reflects the accuracy expected from a properly functioning GPS unit of the
caliber that will used for the study. The GPS's performance should be verified on a daily basis.
Field crews will strictly adhere to the above guidelines for siting the station, unless there
are substantiated reasons that prevent sampling within that defined area. All stations were
visited by small boat whenever possible.

5.1.3 Sampling Start Date
14 June 2002

20 July 2004

-------
5.1.4 Sampling End Date

1 August 2002
20 August 2004

5.1.5 Platform

Small boat whenever possible.

5.1.6 Sampling Equipment

Station locations in 2002 were determined using either GPS or differential GPS and are accurate
within a radius of 100 ft. North American Datum of 1983 was used.

5.1.7 Manufacturer of Sampling Equipment
NA

5.1.8 Key Variables

The latitude and longitude of the station location were determined at the time of sampling.
According to EPA Locational Policy: 1. Latitude is always presented before longitude; 2.
Latitude and longitude are recorded as decimal degrees. The specific method of determining the
latitude and longitude was GPS.

5.1.9 Sampling Method Calibration
NA

5.1.10 Sample Collection Quality Control
NA

5.1.11 Sample Collection Method Reference

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP) National Coastal Assessment: Field Operations Manual. Office of Research and Development,
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf
Breeze, FL. EPA/620/R-01/003.

5.2 Data Preparation and Sample Processing
Not applicable

6. DATA MANIPULATIONS

Most values in the Stations data set were assigned, based on geographic location. Areas were
calculated.

6.1 Name of new or modified values
Station Area

6.2 Data Manipulation Description

The statistical area for stations were calculated.

6.3 Data Manipulation Examples
Not applicable

7. DATA DESCRIPTION

7.1 Description of Parameters

7.1.1 Parameter Name

7.1.1.1 Station location information
Attribute Name Format

Description

Province VARCHAR2(4)

Resource Name VARCHAR2(20)

Data Group VARCHAR2(4)

Sampling Year NUMBER(4.0)

EPA Region VARCHAR2(2)

State VARCHAR2(2)

Water Body System VARCHAR2(6)

Estuary Name VARCHAR2(50)

Station Name VARCHAR2(20)

Latitude Decimal Degrees NUMBER(9.3)

Longitude Decimal Degrees NUMBER(9.3)

Station Statistical Area NUMBER(7.2)

Water Body Strata VARCHAR2(6)

Sample Collection Code VARCHAR2(18)

Local Station Name VARCHAR2(20)

Large biogeographic area in which sampling occurred

Program conducting sampling

Data group (project) conducting sampling

Year during which data were collected

EPA Region code of station location

Code for state

Large water body code of station location
Small water body where station located
The station identifier

Station location-decimal degrees of latitude
Station location-decimal degrees of longitude
Statistical area (sq. km.) of station
Design strata: large/small/tidal river
Station class-determines sampling regime
Station as identified by project

-------
7.1.1.2 Sampling visit information

Attribute Name	Format	Description

Data Group
Sampling Year
Station Name

Sampling Collection Date
Visit Number
Station Depth
Depth Units

VARCHAR2(4)	Data group (project) conducting sampling

NUMBER(4.0)	Year during which data were collected

VARCHAR2(20)	The station identifier

DATE	Date of sample collection

NUMBER(2.0)	Number of visit to this station

NUMBER(5.1)	Depth of water at station at time of sampling

VARCHAR2(15)	Units of depth

7.1.6 Precision to which values are reported
Station Depth	0.1 meters

Latitude/Longitude 0.0001 deg

7.1.7 Minimum value in data set/7.1.8 Maximum value in data set
2002: Station Depth (m):4m/ 352 m
2004: Station Depth (m):5m/ 493 m

7.2 Data Record Example

7.2.1 Column Names for Example Records

7.2.1.1 Station location information

Province Resource Name	Data Group	Sampling Year EPA Region	State	Water Body

System Estuary Name Station Name Latitude Decimal Degrees	Longitude Decimal Degrees

Station Statistical Area	Water Body Strata Station Class EMAP Station Name

Local station name

7.2.1.2 Sampling visit information

Data Group	Sampling Year Station Name Sampling Collection Date Visit Number

Station Depth Depth Units

7.2.2 Example Data Records

7.2.2.1	Station location

Province,Resource Name,Data Group,Sampling Year,EPA Region,State,Water Body System,

Estuary Name, Station Name,Latitude Decimal Degrees, Longitude Decimal Degrees,

Station Statistical Area,Water Body Strata,Station Class, Local Station Name

Alaskan,Estuaries,EMAP-West,Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation,
2 0 02,10,AK,Cook Inlet,Chinitna Bay,AK02- 0003, 59.815,-153.163,93.05,AK01-003,AK02-0003B
Alaskan,Estuaries,EMAP-West Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation,
2002,10,AK,Prince William Sound,Blackstone Bay,AK02-0034, 60.73,-148.646,60.17,AK01-004,
AK02-0 034B

Alaskan,Estuaries,EMAP-West Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation,
2 0 02,10,AK,Alaskan Blying Sound,AK02- 0063, 59.809,-149.548,455.0,AK01-001,AK02- 0063

7.2.2.2	Sampling visit information

Data Group,Sampling Year,Station Name,Sampling Collection Date,Latitude Decimal Degrees,
Longitude Decimal Degrees,Visit Number,Station Depth,Depth Units

EMAP-West,Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation, 2002,AK02-0003,
08-JUL-20 02,59.815,-153.16 3,1,3.7,m

EMAP-West,Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation, 2002,AK02-0034,
2 5-JUL-2002,60.73,-148.646,1,125.0,m

EMAP-West,Alaskan Province/Alaskan Department of Environmental Conservation, 2002,AK02-0063,
16-JUL-20 02,5 9.809,-14 9.548,1,117.5,m

8. GEOGRAPHIC AND SPATIAL INFORMATION
8.1 Minimum Longitude
-163.14

8.2	Maximum Longitude
-144.959

8.3	Minimum Latitude

55 . 0757

8.4	Maximum Latitude
61.4383

8.5 Name of area or region
EMAP-West

Stations were located in estuaries along the South-central Coast of the State of Alaska in the
United States. The stations are in the Alaskan Province.

-------
9.	QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

9.1	Data Quality Objectives

The acceptable tolerance goal for siting is that the sampling station be established within
0.01' ( + -100 ft) of the given coordinates.

9.2	Data Quality Assurance Procedures

Because EMAP's probabilistic sampling design is so unbiased, potentially, some of the generated
sites can fall in locations that are not amenable to sampling (e.g., shallow conditions,
inaccessible, rocky bottom, etc.). Upfront planning by the field team can help resolve these
potential problems before they are encountered on the actual day of sampling. Coordinates of
the random locations are made available to the teams months in advance of the field monitoring
in order that they have adequate opportunity to formulate logistical plans. The reasonable
first step is to plot the given sites on NOAA nautical charts to ascertain the spatial
distribution of the sites, then reconnoiter (on paper) the charted locations for obvious problem
situations (e.g., water depth, hazards to navigation, etc.). If suspect sites are encountered
in this exercise, it is suggested that a field reconnaissance be conducted well ahead of the
scheduled sampling to determine actual conditions at the site. If an intended site location
presents an obvious problem, the situation must be reported to the State Implementation Team
Chair and EPA Regional Coordinator, who, in turn, will discuss the specifics with EPA's Project
Officer for the WPCM for resolution options. Depending on the nature of the situation, the EPA
Project Officer may elect to relocate the site within an acceptable range of the original
location, or the site may be dropped from the sampling. Decisions on this level (i.e.,
significant changes to the sampling design) are to be made only by the EPA Project Officer, not
by the field teams.

Field teams, however, will have a limited degree of onsite flexibility to relocate sampling
sites when confronted with unexpected obstacles or impediments associated with locating within
the +-0.01' guideline. If for good reason (e.g., danger or risk to crew, excessive rocky or
shelly bottom, currents, man-made obstructions), the crew chief may move the station up to
+-0.05' (300 ft) of the intended sampling station; every effort must be made to relocate to an
area that appears similar in character to that of the intended site. For example, if the
intended site was in the channel of a stream, then the relocation should be as near to that
situation as possible; it should not be relocated alongside the stream bank. When it is
necessary to relocate the site >0.02', the reason for shift must be documented in the field
record. Any site relocation that exceed 0.05' (300 ft) will be flagged and reviewed before any
data collected from the station are acceptable for inclusion to the study database.

While 0.01 nm is the target criteria for accuracy in siting the station, the crew will be
granted a buffer zone of up to 0.05 nm from the intended position in the event that there are
mitigating circumstances to justify exercising that allowance (e.g., currents, obstacles, boat
traffic, etc). This buffer zone will be used only for those situations when locating within the
0.02-nm goal is not feasible. In cases where the vessel cannot navigate to within 0.05 nm of the
intended site (e.g., the site is actually landlocked or the depth too shallow), the crew will
record the station as unsampleable and referred the situation to the senior field coordinator.
The field coordinator who should review the circumstances and make the final decision to sample
or not. The occurrence of situations like that cropping up unexpectedly in the field would be
less likely if suspect areas were reconnoitered prior to the monitoring window.

10.	DATA ACCESS

10.1	Data Access Procedures

Data can be downloaded from the WWW server at: http://www.epa.gov/emap/nca/html/data/

10.2	Data Access Restrictions
NA

10.3	Data Access Contact Persons
Walt Nelson

USEPA/NHEERL-WED
541-867-4041 (Tel.)
nelson.walt@epa.gov

Data Librarian National Coastal Assessment
U.S. EPA NHEERL-AED
(401) 782-3184 (Tel.)

(401) 782-3030 (FAX)
hughes.melissa@epa.gov

10.4	Data Set Format

Data can be downloaded in Tab delimited format from the web application:
http://www.epa.gov/emap/nca/html/data/

-------
10.5 Information Concerning Anonymous FTP
NA

10.6 Information Concerning WWW

Data can be downloaded from an application on the WWW server:
http://www.epa.gov/emap/nca/html/data/

10.7 EMAP CD-ROM Containing the Data Set
Data not available on CD-ROM.

11. REFERENCES

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP) National Coastal Assessment: Quality Assurance Project Plan 2001-2004. Office of Research
and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology
Division, Gulf Breeze, FL. EPA/620/R-01/002.

12. TABLE OF ACRONYMS

13. PERSONNEL INFORMATION

John Macauley, Quality Assurance Officer
Office of Research and Development

National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory

Gulf Ecology Division

Sabin Island

Gulf Breeze, FL

macauley.j ohn@epa.gov

Walt Nelson

U.S. EPA - Western Ecology Division

200 SW 3 5TH Street

Corvallis, OR 97333

541-867-4041 (Tel.)

nelson.walt@epa.gov

Data Librarian National Coastal Assessment
Raytheon c/o U.S. EPA NHEERL-AED
27 Tarzwell Drive
Narragansett, RI 02882-1197
(401) 782-3184 (Tele)

(401) 782-3030 (FAX)
hughes.melissa@epa.gov

-------