Drinking Water Challenge Grant Conference CallSummary

May 20th, 1:00pm – 2:00pm EDT

Participants

  • Laurie Cullerot, New Hampshire
  • Dan Burleigh, New Hampshire
  • Pat Bickford New Hampshire
  • Jerry DiVincenzo, Vermont
  • Pete Tenebruso, New Jersey
  • Leslie Latt, Maine
/
  • Bob Peterson, Maine
  • Ellie Kwong, EPA
  • Rich Amirault, Rhode Island
  • Doug Timms, enfoTech
  • Rob Willis, Ross & Associates

Action Items

  • Laurie will distribute URL to ASDWA once the public website is updated.
  • Rob Willis will send an email to the group with both the Participant Agreement and Electronic Signature documents and solicit another opportunity to comment. Deadline is set for Next Friday May 28th.
  • Laurie will ask her attorney to review the Signature Agreement again.
  • Rob Willis will add a Next Steps section to the Knowledge Transfer Document.
  • Group will look at Knowledge Transfer Document outline and comment on its structure and content. Comments are due by next Friday, May 28th. Rob and Doug will begin drafting the document in the next couple of weeks.
  • Rob Willis will distribute future projected call dates.

Meeting Minutes

Agenda and Action Item Review

The workgroup reviewed the agenda items and moved the ADSWA discussion from the end of the meeting to the beginning.

ADSWA Update

Laurie Cullerot updated that group that the project presentation was well received and had plenty of positive feedback.Laurie is working with Doug and Rob to update the Public Website to have all project products easily accessible. Once complete, Laurie will send an update to ADSWA.

Action: Laurie will distribute URL to ASDWA once the public website is updated.

Advisory Committee Update

The Schema Spreadsheet and best practices documents were distributed to the Advisory Committee two weeks prior for review and comment. The group was asked to take a look at the best practices document and schema to become with familiar with modules we would be using. With respect to the schema, the purpose of spreadsheet is to capture the data elements as well as demonstrate a logical grouping of the data elements. The Advisory group was asked: a) Do these make sense? And b) can you map these elements to your own data structure? After the review period, there were no substantive comments. Expectation set for Advisory Committee that barring any new significant information, there would be no changes to Schema.

Leslie and Laurie were the only workgroup members with comments about the Schema Spreadsheet. Leslie inquired how sample depth and weight basis are handled in the Schema.

Doug responded that weight basis can be described as a parameter. Sample depth can be handled in field data. Field “specialized measurement”- a catch-all for many different data. Laurie asked if ID 23.46 SampleLocationTypeCode would also designate the type of station/site from which the sample was taken, i.e., source sample, distribution sample, entry point sample. Doug responded that the definition is from ESAR and Doug will check notes to see if it applicable to source and distribution.

Participation Agreement Template (PAT) Review

Two documents were sent to the group, a template for the Participant Agreement, as well as a Signature Agreement to accompany the PAT. Signature agreement is meant to accompany participation agreement template and is a description of expectations for participants on electronic submission. The goal is to be able to use the templates as a starting point when States begin to draft their own participation packages.

NSB will soon have guidance released on TPAs. This guidance will be important for agreements between the EPA and States. A lot of the information originally conceptualized for a TPA has moved elsewhere. Purpose of TPA is a) to capture information that is not being captured elsewhere and b) serve as a legal mechanism that partners need to have in place for a flow on the Exchange Network.

The group did not have many comments on the PAT or signature agreement. The workgroup participants acknowledged that language should be added that each state should define what a certifier means in their State and that much more will be learned once one State has complete their participation packages using the template.

Action:Rob Willis will send an email to the group with both the Participant Agreement and Electronic Signature documents and solicit another opportunity to comment. Deadline is set for Next Friday May 28th.

Action: Laurie will ask her attorney to review the signature agreement again.

Knowledge Transfer Document

The workgroup walked through a proposed table of contents. The proposed table of contents was modified from the EDMR challenge grant experience and the document is the opportunity to communicate to EPA and share successes and challenges. The only comment on the draft table of contents is to add a Next Steps section.

Action: Rob Willis will add a Next Steps section to the Knowledge Transfer Document.

Action: Group will look at the draft outlineand comment on its structure and content. Comments are due by next Friday, May 28th.

Project Schedule Review

Doug, Laurie, and Rob had previously spoken about project pace. It was thought that most of the “heavy lifting”is now being done by each state as the progress on Implementation. Rob proposed 5calls through end of year with 5-6 weeks between calls: June 30, August 11, Sept 22, Nov 3, Dec15. All calls will be held in the 2:30-4:00pm Eastern time-frame.

Action: Rob Willis will distribute by email future project call dates.