Transcript Template Tool

TSS Project Update
WRAP AoH Meeting
Seattle, WA
April 26, 2006
Outline
• TSS task and budget update
• Crosswalk of TSS tools and SIP
requirements
• TSS documentation
• Metadata
• “Template Tool” overview
• GIS topics
• TSS version control
Work Plan Tasks – TSS Project (1)
• Task 6: Perform TSS requirements analysis and scoping
study.
Completed; serves as basis for ongoing
development.
• Task 7a: Acquire and prepare the relevant databases.
New IMPROVE equation implemented in TSS.
Site-specific model results in TSS (version a).
Emissions layers currently being uploaded to GIS
tools (version b).
• Task 8: Develop data review interfaces based on user
requirements.
Ongoing – data tools include “dynamic” and “static”
tools.
Significant work expected on this task 1/06 – 10/06
Work Plan Tasks – TSS Project (2)
• Task 9: Develop data exchange protocols and guidelines.
Will likely be scoped during this phase of work but not
implemented until after 10/06.
• Task 10: Develop method to capture on-line user feedback.
Web site feedback mechanism in place; will require some
enhancement.
• Task 11: Travel.
Ongoing as required.
• Task 12: Additional project support.
New task designed to cover:
- Tracking WRAP work projects for inclusion in the TSS
- Project management responsibilities
- Additional travel
AoH Phase 2/TSS Budget Update
Budget Description
Initial Budget
2006 Additions
Total Budget
Total Spent
Total Remaining
Time Period
07/05 - 10/06
03/06 - 12/06
07/05 - 12/06
07/05 - 04/06
02/06 - 12/06
Team Member
CIRA
ARS/ENV/IM
$ 60,000 $
124,000
$ 11,000 $
127,000
$ 71,000 $
251,000
n/a
$
120,000
n/a
$
131,000
Total
$ 184,000
$ 138,000
$ 322,000
Regional Technical Work for
Haze Planning
• Technical analyses & displays are to support
December 2007 haze plans that show
“reasonable progress on emissions reductions”
toward visibility improvement goals for each
Class I area
• Technical Support System characteristics:
– Transparent results for key technical data
– Addresses RHR-required elements of haze plans
requiring regional technical support
– “Agnostic” with respect to any particular haze plan
TSS Tools and SIP Requirements
• TSS tools designed to:
– Produce specific products required in SIPs
– Provide for independent investigation of TSS
data sets and support an overall
understanding of visibility issues, while not
necessarily fitting into the SIP outline
• Review of product requirements:
– IWG SIP outline (Fall 2005)
– Tom Moore (TM) Technical Support System
Background Document (March 2006)
IWG SIP Outline
(Fall 2005)
• Items in red are/will be
directly supported by the
TSS
• The IWG SIP Outline has
been modified since Fall
2005, but these products are
still required
• IWG will have opportunity to
comment at April 27 training
SIP Cover #1
SIP Submittal Letter
SIP Submittal letter enclosure (Authorizing statutes)
SIP Completeness Checklist
Executive Summary
(required)
(optional)
(required)
(Optional)
SIP Cover #2
1. Regional Haze Background
1.1. What is Visibility Impairment
(optional)
1.2. State description (Class I Areas list/maps)
(optional)
1.3. Visibility History
(optional)
1.4. Existing Visibility Protection in State
(optional)
1.4.1. Monitoring Strategy
1.5. Federal Land Manager Consultation
(required)
[Note: Refer to Appendices for contact letter & notice of SIP Hearing]
1.6. Collaboration with Tribes (strongly suggested/required if tribal source impacts CIA )
2. Regulatory Overview
2.1. Monitoring Strategy
2.2. Establishing Reasonable Progress Goals
2.2.1. Baseline Conditions
2.2.2. Natural Conditions
2.2.3. Glide path
2.2.4. Consideration/Consultation of RPG factors
2.2.4.1. Costs of compliance
2.2.4.2. Time necessary for compliance
2.2.4.3. Energy and non-air quality environmental impacts of compliance
2.2.4.4. Remaining useful life of any potentially affected sources
2.2.5. Consultation on RPG’s
2.2.6. Emissions reductions measures needed
2.3. Apportionment of Contribution by Pollutant and Predominant Sources
2.3.1. Contribution from Outside the State
2.3.2. Contribution from natural sources
2.4. Projected Emissions by Pollutant
2.5. Long Term Strategies
2.5.1. Enforcement (description of existing control strategies, authority)
2.6. Demonstration of Reasonable Progress
2.6.1. Weight of Evidence
2.6.2. Consultation
2.7. Periodic Review [NOTE: 5 year average of annual values]
3. National, regional and state-wide strategies
3.1.1. 2018 Baseline/Alternative Control Strategies
3.1.2. Mobile Sources
3.1.3. Enhanced Smoke Management Plans
4. Class I Area Analyses (to be used with Table __)
4.1. CIA #1
4.1.1. Analysis of chapter 2 requirements
4.2. CIA #2, etc
5. Class I Areas (and Tribal Class I Areas) Impacted by (my) State
[NOTE: Same analysis as Chapter 3, but by percentage of apportionment]
TSS Background Doc – Tom Moore
Regional Analysis Results
• Regional overview of monitoring,
modeling, and emissions data
supports:
– IWG: not specified, sec. 4.x
– TM: bullets 5 and 8
• Regional overview of attribution
results supports:
– IWG: sec. 2.3.1 and 2.3.2
– TM: bullets 16 and 17
• Regional WOE analyses will support
regional understanding of how
emissions changes affect visibility
changes
Class I Area Analysis Tools (1)
• Metadata Browser provides site
information/maps to support:
– IWG: sec. 1.2
– TM: not specified
• Analysis Browser (regional and
Class I area “static”) supports:
– IWG: sec. 2.6.1
– TM: bullets 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17
– Also allows for review of model
performance
• Data Query Wizard supports:
– User direct download of data types
• Trends Tool supports:
– IWG: sec. 2.6.1 (WOE analysis; e.g.,
sulfate/nitrate trends)
– TM: bullet 15
Class I Area Analysis Tools (2)
• Composition Tool supports:
– IWG: sec. 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 4.x
(2.4 – emissions by pollutant?)
– TM: bullets 1, 2, 3, 4
• Data Browser supports:
– IWG: sec. 2.2.3, 4.x
– TM: bullets 11, 12, 14, 15
• Offsite Resources support:
– Additional contextual information,
particularly in terms of GIS layers
– Will be used in general
understanding of visibility and
emissions either regionally or locally
TSS Documentation
• Roughly level of detail offered in the AoH Phase I project – links to
more detailed information
• IMPROVE monitoring
–
–
–
–
–
Network description
Important species and why
Old and new extinction equations
Discussion of tracers
Discussion of known uncertainties/problems
• Emission inventory preparation
– Method of preparing inventories by pollutant and source category
– Specification sheets for each version housed on the TSS
• Modeling work
– Overview of modeling techniques
– Concise, practical discussion of overall model performance
– Specification sheets for each version housed on the TSS (see example)
• Other analyses
– Attribution or assessments (PSAT, PMF, other)
– Weight of evidence tutorial
Location of TSS Documentation
• Documentation of data and analyses
types will be place in the Methods
section, accessible from the lefthand navigation pane in the TSS
• This documentation will be
accessible through hyperlinks
elsewhere on the TSS
– Wherever users can download data
(e.g., Query Wizard, other tools)
– As links from Metadata files
WRAP Regional Modeling Center - Simulation Specifications
Scenario Name: 2002 “Clean” Simulation with actual 2002 fire emissions
RMC Code: “clean02a”
Date Specifications Prepared: January ??, 2006
Sample Model
Spec. Sheet
(P. 1)
Time Window for Modeling/Analysis: emissions modeling start date, targeted tech memo
publication date, start simulation January ??, complete results analysis by February ??
Description: 2002 Annual 36-km CMAQ air quality model simulation using only “natural” or
background emissions sources.
Purpose/Objective: Evaluate the impact of “natural” emissions and modeling domain
background air quality conditions on visibility at WRAP region Class I areas. Provide insight
into the regional model’s “floor” for analyzing future control strategies and reasonable progress
by excluding anthropogenic emission sources.
Expected Analysis Methods: Specific analysis methods will generally be determined based on
the nature of the simulation and the stated purpose and objectives. These typically involve a
number of standard post-processing products used to elucidate relevant modeling results and
analyses and aid in summarizing and interpreting the simulation results. For the present
simulation these would include:


Standard displays of spatial distribution of concentrations o f relevant pollutants (Sulfate,
Nitrate, PM, OC, EC, etc..) for various temporal periods (daily, monthly, seasonal and
annual totals)
Standard displays of spatial distribution of difference in concentrations between
"clean02" and base02 (or plan02) simulations
Input Data:
Emissions – emission data and QA found at:
http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/emissions/???.shtml






BEIS3 biogenic emissions (includes soil NO emissions)
Natural component of fire emissions (wildfire, wildland fire use, non- federal rangeland
fire)
Windblown fugitive PM dust emissions (from WRAP WB Dust model)
Natural component of NH3 emissions (low soil estimate and wild animals; from WRAP
NH3 model)
Sea Salt impacts to be estimated and added afterwards based on site-specific monitoring
data for Cl from new IMPROVE equation to account for sea salt
Documentation on input data, model settings, and modeling/QA procedures provided
through standard reporting products: WRAP_200506_Emissions_Workplan_$mmddyy.xls
o Simulation schedule and input files
o SMOKE configuration information/settings
o Documentation of problems encountered with corrections, outstanding issues, and
other important information about simulation clean02a
o Parent EI and maps/tables of changes for this run
o Detail dependent on purpose/objective and results analysis methods
Other Inputs and Model Settings




Initial and Boundary Conditions based on natural GEOS-CHEM simulation
Model version, settings and configuration same as for 2002 Base and 2002 Typical
Time period simulated – annual, typical year, meteorology for 2002 used
Lightning NOx emissions not included (for now)
(P. 2)
Results
(P. 3)
Summary tables and maps
Relevant Output Products – data displays found at: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/cmaq/???.shtml




Relevant model output products include daily, seasonal and annual spatial distributions of Regional
Haze contributing pollutants.
Model output concentrations will serve as indication of the modeled “floor” concentrations.
Results may provide indication of relative importance of the various natural emission sources currently
in the modeling inventory
Results of this simulation could be compared with 2002 base case simulation as well as 2002 natural
conditions scenarios
Summary of Key Findings
TBD
Interpretation/Recommendations – report found at: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/docs/???.shtml
TBD
TSS Metadata
Following established metadata standards allows us to:
•
•
•
•
•
Preserve organizational data investments
Instill data accountability and liability
Facilitate data sharing
Make our datasets discoverable through national infrastructure
Prepare for post-October data download and upload functionality
Start with suggested “minimum” set of core elements, and add those
that are necessary to maintain value of dataset and serve state/tribal
users.
TSS Metadata Outline
Proposed minimum set of elements (from Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata):
•
<origin>
Data Originator [author]
•
<pubdate>
Date of Publication
•
<title>
Title
•
<abstract>
Abstract
•
<purpose>
Purpose
•
<timeperd>
Time period for data content [single date or date range]
•
<current>
Currentness reference (e.g., ground condition)
•
<progress>
whether data product is preliminary or complete
•
<update>
maintenance and update (e.g., “no update planned”)
•
<bounding>
bounding box coordinates in long/lat
•
<themekt>
theme keyword thesaurus used (e.g., ISO 19115 Topic Category)
•
<themekey>
keywords [usually multiple]
•
<accconst>
presence/absence of access constraint
•
<useconst>
use constraint (place to put a disclaimer)
•
<metd>
date that metadata was generated
•
[Metadata Contact information]
•
<addrtype>
mailing and physical address
•
<cntorg>
Organization
•
<city>
city
•
<state>
state
•
<postal>
ZIP code
•
<cntvoice>
phone number
•
<metstdn>
metadata standard used
•
<metstdv>
version of metadata standard
Proposed additions to the minimum set of metadata elements:
•
Multiple Online_Linkage values (URLs) for navigation to:
– data viewing i.e., IMAT client and/or ArcIMS site
– data download (when ready, and if different than viewing location)
– in-depth documentation, etc.
•
Spatial Reference System (Projection)
•
Attribute Labels, and Attribute Definitions
Tools: “Static” vs. “Dynamic”
Static resources:
“Hard-copy”, non-interactive products that can simply be accessed, browsed,
and downloaded. The user has little or no control over manipulating the base
data or formatting the output – they simply take what they are given.
Dynamic resources:
Interactive tools that can be used to select base data, format output, and
create static products. Such tools usually consist of web forms with controls
and “widgets” to enable various degrees of user interaction. More flexible and
powerful than static products, dynamic tools usually require substantial time
and effort to develop.
Our goal is to find the right balance between static and dynamic in order to get
the most “bang for our buck” by 2006
“Template Tool” Concept
• User selects a graphic type (dynamic charts, but
not dynamic maps)
• User selects data set (monitoring, modeling,
emissions, etc.)
• TSS loads selected data fields into a pre-defined
Excel template
• Template can be “run” on the web to produce
one or more graphics with selected data –
process is transparent to user
• Template can be downloaded as an Excel file so
the user can customize graphics (scales, colors,
formatting, etc.)
“Template Tool” Rationale
• Many tools can be created fairly easily – more
options available than relying on programming
individual tools
• Templates can be modified/replaced by the TSS
team easily
• Templates will generate user-friendly graphics in
standard formats
• User upload of data to the template is possible
• User created templates may also be possible
Simple Template
(Emissions Data)
Complex Template
(Glide Slope/Emissions/Attribution)
GIS in the TSS
Integrated Mapping and Analysis Tool (IMAT):
A lightweight, embeddable component
Can be used to construct composite web pages
Can be “driven” by other components (responds to events)
Can “drive” other components (raises its own events)
Can be used to access arbitrary, remote GIS layers
Arc/IMS website:
A standalone application
Cannot be used to construct composite web pages
Cannot easily interact with other components
Cannot easily provide access to arbitrary, remote GIS layers
Our first line of defense for offering access to new spatial layers
IMAT Functionality - Existing
IMAT – Current Work aka “Cycle 1”
• “Interactive Scaling” and other client-side controls (operated by users)
 collaborative task by ENVIRON and Image Matters
 provides capability to shade features (e.g., county polygons or
model output grid cells) for local-scale area based on values of a
continuous variable
 allows changing colors and other symbology for layer features
• Metadata Catalog
 Implement Catalog Service for the Web (CSW)
 Storage location for metadata from WRAP layers
 Provides connectivity to National Spatial Distribute Infrastructure
(NSDI) distributed Clearinghouse network – allows discovery of
WRAP geodata from any of the 6 Clearinghouse Gateways
 Metadata management through CatMan tool
• Direct Access (“one-click-away”) to metadata from IMAT viewer
IMAT – Planned Work and associated functionality
-------- Cycle 2 --------
 Web Feature Service (WFS) – provides access to WRAP vector
data at the feature level. Makes data available for display, analysis, &
export from TSS, and accessible to external systems as appropriate.
------ Cycle 3 ------
Iterative process with 2- to 3-week cycles planned (currently in Cycle 1)
 “Add layer” button – provides access to layers that are present in
the metadata catalog (can be extended to layers from web services)
 Feature Selection Capability – single or multiple mouse clicks
 Feature Selection Capability – box, polygon, and circle/ellipse
 Feature Selection Capability – on basis of attribute values
(logical statement with boolean operators)
 Web Mapping Service (WMS) – provides service to be ingested for
display through IMAT, or through an external web mapping system.
 “Create AOI layer” button – makes a temporary (cached) layer that
serves as the user’s Area-of-Interest for analysis and/or data export.
------- Cycle 4 -------
 Support for multiple projections
-------- Cycle 5 -------
IMAT – Planned Work and associated functionality
 Web Coverage Service (WCS) – provides access to WRAP raster
data at the cell or nodal level. Makes data available for display,
analysis, & export. Allows access to external systems as appropriate.
 reprojection capability – allows display of layers whose native
projection differs from the RPO Lambert or GCS (Long/Lat)
 implemented as Web Processing Service (WPS)
 Capability to perform summary statistics on set of vector features
from layers (accessed locally or through WFS) for user-defined region
(i.e., the AOI layer)
 Style Layer Descriptor (SLD) – provides access to WRAP data with
symbology dictated by requesting client, either by IMAT, or through an
external web mapping system. Extends current work.
 Summary statistics capability for raster layers for user-defined AOI.
IMAT – Future Work & associated functionality
------------------- Cycle 6 --------------------
Potential Post-October 2006 development:
 Provision of CatMan and MetaMan tools as appropriate. Metaman
provides metadata editing and validation capabilities.
 Design and Implement Registry (Catalog) for contextual geospatial
data and other key WRAP layers available through web services.
 Identify key web services of interest (WMS, WFS, WCS) and
populate the web service Registry with service info and capabilities.
 Data download capability – site with “ftp from HTTP” transfer
capability – develop tools and web pages that utilize the AOI
functionality and the indexed data. Potential output formats include
shapefiles, SDTS format, GML, and ASCII.
 Metadata upload tools
 Data upload tool – allow States and Tribes to upload data to TSS
TSS Version Control – Purpose
• Periodic updates to the TSS databases
and tools will occur after October 2006 for
the following reasons:
– Additional information (new model runs or
user-uploaded analyses?)
– Corrections to existing information
• SIP writers must be able to access the
EXACT data set and tool set used in their
SIPs
TSS Version Control – Method
• Periodically take a “snapshot” of the TSS databases and tools,
including:
– Current monitoring, modeling, emissions data and associated
documentation
– Tools as they currently exist (versions may have different-looking tools)
– Relevant in-house GIS layers and URLs to relevant outside GIS layers
– External analyses uploaded to the TSS
• Keep each version (“snapshot”) of the TSS untouched under a unique
URL – changes to underlying data will not be made even if data sets
are revised (e.g., IMPROVE corrects flows which affect concentrations)
• At any time there will exist these versions of the TSS available on-line:
– Current (contains most up-to-date data/tools, but may change without
notice)
– Version 1 (date specified)
– Version 2 (date specified)
– … Version N (date specified)
• All TSS products will ultimately be branded with the TSS version
number/date
Anticipated Version Schedule
• Current – This option will always be available
and will include most recent updates as they
occur
• Version 1 – October 2006 – State of TSS at the
end of this phase of the project
• Version 2 – Spring 2007? – Anticipated after all
final updates to emissions and modeling
• Version 3 – December 2007? – Anticipated after
SIP process is complete
• Annual versions thereafter
Implications of Version Control
• Users can always look at most recent data, but must be
aware that it could change without notice
• TSS Versions will remain intact, essentially as separate
(though transparent) web sites, so SIP reviewers can
always look up original data products
• States need to understand the differences between
versions, and should select the most recent Version
number (not “Current”) when beginning their SIPS
• What are implications with EPA and stakeholders if
different states use different versions?
– States may start their SIPs at different times
– Interpretation of data not expected to change significantly
between versions