United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Information
Resources Management
Washington DC 20460
GIS
MANAGEMENT STUDY
EVALUATION OF
CURRENTLY INSTALLED
GISs
EPA/O1RM
r
r
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. Overview 1-1
II. Findings and Conclusions II-l
III. Case Studies III-l
A. Region I III-4
B. Rhode Island 111-12
C. Region III 111-22
D. Chesapeake Bay Program 111-24
E. Region IV and Georgia 111-31
F. Florida 111-41
G. Environmental Research Laboratory-Corvallis 111-50
IV. List of Interviewees... IV-1
-------
OVERVIEW
-------
1-1
I. OVERVIEW
The material presented in this report represents a task, Evaluation of
Currently Installed GISs, under the EPA GIS Management Study, conducted by
American Management Systems, Inc., under contract 68-01-7281 for the Systems
Integration Branch, Program System Division, Office of Information Resources
Management (OIRM). The objectives of this study are to:
o Identify and characterize Agency requirements for GIS applications as
they relate to program decision-making at EPA Headquarters, EPA
Regions, and States (build on Surface Water Monitoring Study and
Ground-Water Data Requirements Analysis)
o Summarize "lessons learned" in support and management of GIS
systems/demonstration projects (such as EMSL-LV, Region IV)
o Identify GIS support requirements and alternative approaches
o Develop a plan for GIS program development
o Develop a procurement framework that realistically represents Agency
GIS needs
o Obtain Agency management approval of "best" support alternative(s).
The task reported here encompassed the following activities:
o 3 Regions, 3 States, the Chesapeake Bay Program, and the Environmental
Research Laboratory-Corvallis were visited:
Region I, Region III, Region IV
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) and
the University of Rhode Island Environmental Data Center (EDC)
Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) and the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) Water Resource Division District Office
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER).
o Interviews with over 40 key management and technical staff were
conducted
o Each GIS effort was synthesized as a case study that included several
major topics:
Project history
Environmental regulatory program applications
Future applications
Spatial environmental data
Overview of GIS hardware/software
-------
1-2
Organizational structure/staffing
Costs
Benefits
Critical success factors
Constraints.
This evaluation was undertaken with the following objectives:
o Develop a Comprehensive Checklist of Relevant Issues
o Detail the Critical Success Factors and Constraints of GIS
Implementation
o Identify a Framework for GIS Applications as a Data Integration Tool
("A guide for doing business").
In the next chapter we present our Findings and Conclusions.
-------
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
-------
II-l
II. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
In this section we present our findings and conclusions. In Figure 2.1 we
present an overview of the Management and Technical Issues we feel are
important. These issues are described in eleven categories below:
1. Data Sources Need to be Identified for Each Data Set (e.g., location of
data, methods of collection, costs)
o Region I has invested significant resources in the Cape Code project
to inventory appropriate environmental data.
2. Data Specifications (e.g., formats, scales) Are Not Uniform Between Data
Sets—Data May Require Extensive Reformatting
o The Chesapeake Bay Program has been collecting data for more than 5
years and today its environmental data base contains approximately 100
million data elements and over 500 data files. Georeferencing has
been developed for many of these data files.
3. Data Standards Are Not Easily Established and Require Extensive Resources
to Implement "Post Facto"
o The Chesapeake Bay Program has established data standards and made a
commitment to enforce strict data submission guidelines for all
contractors and researchers.
o The USGS and Georgia have expended many contract hours reformatting
data sets so that they could be incorporated into ARC/INFO.
4. Validation of Data is of Concern to All
o Every person engaged in GIS implementation communicated the need to
establish data validation processes.
o Both Region IV/Georgia and Rhode Island have made compromises to
provide products knowing that more data validation would have ensured
better QA but weighed this against the need to have concrete GIS
"products" at an early stage in the project development.
o Georgia and USGS spent 60% of their original contract support time to
validate the various State and local data sets.
o The CBP invested 8-10 man-years of effort to validate data and provide
lat/long coordinates for data that previously had no specific
geographic reference.
o The ERL-Corvallis has implemented data validation procedures to ensure
data integrity.
-------
AN OVERVIEW OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL ISSUES
Identify
Data Sources-
Data
Reformatting
Data '
Validation
CIS
Implementation
and Applications
Data Standards
Communications
I a
/DO
OOI
DO I
ID DO QD DD DO DD DO DO
_Q DD 00 DO DO DO 00 DO
QDDO DO 00000000QQ
Digitizing
StafTing
Part of
a Toolbox
Data Sharing
Hardware/Software
ro
-------
II-3
Managers and Technical Staff Expressed Frustration Over the Lack of Open
Communication and Information Exchange Among Agency and Related GIS Users
o Rhode Island feels particularly isolated and desires, in particular,
to establish a more active estuary GIS network (e.g., with CBP).
o A description of products (e.g., aerial photos) and data sets (e.g.,
maps specific data bases) that already exist at on-going GIS programs
would be useful so that duplicative efforts are avoided (e.g., share
EMSL data with Region I).
o Several GIS programs have developed ARC/INFO "Macros" and the sharing
of these routines would facilitate GIS use.
Most of the Needed Data Requires Digitization: An Expensive and Resource
Intensive Process. This Process is Often a Bottleneck.
o The Georgia demo used the expertise of two GIS technicians to digitize
and create the data bases.
o Rhode Island had to contract outside the University for digitizing
services so that the data analysis could proceed quickly.
Data Sharing Between States and Regions is Not Easily Achieved in Most
Cases: Guidelines and Procedures Need to be Established
o Region IV has States and Agencies issuing several different GIS
systems (e.g., Intergraph at TVA and Florida; ARC/INFO at Georgia and
the Region).
The Shortage of Trained GIS Staff Limits the Full Potential of System Use:
Significant Resources and Management Commitment Are Required to Attract
and Keep These Individuals
o At present, the full complement of Intergraph software routines is not
used and GIS support to interested Florida programs is handicapped
because of the shortage of trained staff.
o The slow process of developing in-house GIS expertise must be weighed
against the advantages and disadvantages of contracting out for these
services (e.g., comparison between Rhode Island and Florida).
The Selection of a Specific GIS Hardware/Software System Depends on
Numerous Factors: There Are No Universal Solutions, Each Situation Must
be Considered on its Own Merit
o Florida has been able to gain a multitude of benefits from using an
Intergraph because of its close affiliation with Florida State
University.
o Region I feels ARC/INFO is the logical system to acquire, since all
its Environmental/Natural Resource State Agencies have or will shortly
have this system.
-------
II-4
10. Staff Support for GIS Implementation and Applications Requires a
Combination of Technical/Program Skills: IRM/ADP Management Alone Will Not
Make the Grade
o Region IV has developed a central "core" of GIS and program experts to
support Regional GIS activities.
o Region III believes that-each program will need to provide staff "on
loan" to ensure that GIS benefits reach each program appropriately.
o Each State visited, as well as others we are knowledgeable about, have
or desire a full-time GIS Coordinator (e.g., Rhode Island, Florida).
11. GIS is Only a Tool to Provide Data Integration Capabilities: Regions and
States Know This is One Tool in the "Tool Box"
o Each Region and State expressed enthusiasm about GIS as a mechanism
for spatial data integration.
o The Region I IRM Branch has provided extensive cartographic and
digitizing services to programs for some time.
o The CBP has been conducting estuary geographic analysis for years --
even before CBP gained access to GIS software.
o Region IV has created OIEA to facilitate integrated environmental
analysis, with ARC/INFO as only one of its services.
During our investigations we also became aware of some very positive
benefits associated with GISs. We feel it important to outline these observed
benefits of operating a GIS for environmental regulatory and management
applications. These benefits are presented under four general categories:
o Using a GIS Forces Development of Uniform, Centrally Accessible,
Geographically Referenced Data.
— Data entry requires establishing decision rules for formatting
non-uniform data.
-- Data dispersed among Agencies, organizations, local governments
and researchers are assimilated in a central facility.
— Data are centrally accessible through a DBMS once entered into the
GIS.
— Geographic data analyses can be conducted for specific sites and
Regions as a result of uniform spatial formats.
o An Integrated Spatial Environmental Data Base Improves the Ability to
Identify Environmental Problems: Specific Programs Have Been Able to
Do a Better Job.
— Numerous Agencies identified the utility of GIS in investigating
potential ground-water contamination problems. This information
-------
II-5
resulted in revising land-use policy and implementing corrective
actions (e.g., Rhode Island, Region IV, Georgia, Florida).
— The integration of point and non-point pollution impact data with
living resource data provided realistic profiles of the status of
several estuaries (e.g., Narragansett Bay, Chesapeake Bay) which
in the past were difficult, if not impossible, to create.
— Risk assessment, an Agency priority, can be conducted with a GIS.
Region IV, Georgia, and EMSL are vigorously pursuing this
application.
A GIS Assists Managers to Prioritize Resource Allocations for Program
Activities: Choices Can be Made on How Best to Approach an
Environmental Problem.
Managers developed
prioritized remedial
supplies (e.g., DER).
ground-water
actions for
monitoring
contaminated
.strategies and
drinking water
— In Georgia, siting sanitary landfills at the county level reduced
the number of sites needing field investigation and remaining
sites were defined according to selection criteria.
— Region IV Superfund staff identified and prioritized Superfund
sites for ranking and adding to the NPL.
o Perhaps Most Importantly, is the Use of GIS Products for Disseminating
Information: Maps and Graphics Have High Impact.
— GIS products are used to communicate environmental issues to
managers, government officials, and the public (e.g., the Region
III Water Management Division Director used GIS produced maps of
Chesapeake Bay pollution impacts to living resources at a
multi-State legislative session. The result was a commitment to
support Bay clean-up activities).
In addition, we provide the following insight in terms of
constrai nts/1imi tations:
o GIS Applications Have Been Limited in Scope to Relatively Small
Geographic Areas and Program Applications.
o Many Managers and Technical Experts Expound the Usefulness of GIS
Without Having Practical Hands-on Experience -- A Degree of
Uncertainty Remains in Terms of Environmental Regulatory and
Management Applications.
o Most GIS Applications Are for Program Planning and Evaluation of
Environmental Conditions -- Few Permitting and Compliance Applications
Have Been Noted.
o GIS Applications for Environmental Regulatory and Management
Applications Are in Their Infancy — There is Still Much Work to Be
Done.
-------
II-6
Lastly, We present five major conclusions to date based on our visits and
evaluation:
o A commitment of substantial resources by the Agency to support GIS
implementation and applications will be needed to assist
Regions/States/Programs fully realize the benefits of GIS. No one GIS
provides an optimal "organizational" solution.
o Guidance for GIS data standards and data validation techniques is
needed. EPA should support these activities to facilitate data
sharing.
o A multidisciplinary team to support data integration consisting of ADP
specialists, scientists, and program experts is to be encouraged.
o The Agency needs to spearhead a compaign that aids communication among
GIS users and provides a mechanism for disseminating GIS related
information to the user community.
o The Agency should develop GIS training programs and GIS technology
transfer procedures through "Centers of Excellence" such as EMSL-Las
Vegas, ERL-Corvallis and Region IV.
-------
CASE STUDIES
-------
III-l
III. CASE STUDIES
This section contains our detailed case study reports for Region I, Rhode
Island, Region III, the Chesapeake Bay Program, Region IV and the Stat2 of
Georgia, and Florida. To facilitate synthesizing this information we provide
an overview of sites visited, GIS hardware/software, program application and
organizational structure in Table 3.1.
-------
TABLE 3.1
AN OVERVIEW OF SITES VISITED, CIS HARDWARE/SOFTWARE,
PROGRAM APPLICATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Sites Visited
CIS
Hardware/
Software
Program Applications
Organizational Structure
Region I
ARC/INFO
Conduct Ground-Water Assessment
— Locate and map threatened water supply
sources
IRM Branch Staffing Support
-- Graphic System Expert (10%)
~ Ground-water Expert (50%)
-- Cartographer (75%)
- Digitizing (50%)
Rhode Island
ARC/INFO
Conduct Ground-Water Assessment
~ Locate and map threatened water supply
sources
Conduct Water Quality Assessment
~ Determine conditions and trends
— Determine nature and extent of impact
RIDEM
-- CIS Coordination
~ Ground-Water Expert
University of Rhode Island EDC
-- Director (100%)
— Operations Manager (100%)
- Digitizing (2 people 50% each)
~ Additional Work-study
students
Region in
IRM Branch CIS Technical Core Group
(PLANS)
— ADP personnel
~ Program experts (Detailed for
6-8 months)
Chesapeake Bay
Program
ARC/INFO
Evaluate Toxic Pollution to Bay
-- Locate and map existing and historic waster
disposal sites
General Data Center Support
-- Data Management
Coordinator (100%)
- Contractor Staff (12 full-time)
IN3
-------
TABLE 3.1 cont'd
AN OVERVIEW OF SITES VISITED, GIS HARDWARE/SOFTWARE,
PROGRAM APPLICATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
-Continued--
Sites Visited
GIS
Hardware/
Software
Program Applications
Organizational Structure
Region IV
ARC/INFO
Conduct Air Quality Assessment
- Display monitoring stations
-- Determine violations to show problems
Evaluate Solid/Hazardous Waste Sites
- Locate and prioritize sites based on HRS
criteria
~ Target water supply well monitoring
~ Prioritize RCRA enforcement actions
Office of Integrated Environmental
Analysis (All Full-time)
- Chief
~ Air program scientist
— Remote sensing/environmental
scientist
- Water pollution engineer
-- GIS technical specialist
Georgia
ARC/INFO
Determine Vulnerability of Drinking Water Sources
— Identify and map drinking water supplies
— Prioritize monitoring
Evaluation of Sanitary Landfills
- Locate and map aquifers and recharge areas
uses
- 2 full-time GIS experts
GAEPD
-- GIS liasion (20%)
Florida
Intergraph
Micro-based GIS
Conduct Ground-Water Assessment
- Target wells for cleanup and alternative water
sources
- Integrate public and private well water quality
data
— Prioritize monitoring
Indentify Contamination Sources
— Identify extent of EDP well contamination
~ Identify responsible parties and initiate
corrective action
Conduct Water Quality Assessment
— Report on conditions and trends (305b report)
— Establish priorities for water quality monitoring
and controls
DER Bureau of Information Systems
- Systems manager (10%)
Bureau of Ground-Water Protection
- GIS technical analyst (100%)
-------
AN OVERVIEW OF SITES VISITED, CIS HARDWARE/SOFTWARE,
PROGRAM APPLICATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
-Continued-
Sites Visited
GIS
rdwa
Software
Program Applications
Organizational Structure
ERL - Corvallis
ARC/INFO
Evaluate Acid Deposition Impact to Surface
Waters
— Identify effected watersheds
~ Understand ecological process
Determine Chemical Status of Lakes and Streams
— Characterize chemical status of lakes and
streams
Contractor Support
~ Coordinator
— Systems Operator
— Digitizing and Map Archiving
(4 people)
— Applications (scientists part-time)
-------
III-4
— GIS CASE STUDY —
REGION I AND THE CAPE COD
AQUIFER MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Project History
EPA Region I has an active interest in geographic analysis and recently
participated in a GIS application in Cape Cod. As part of the Planning and
Management Division, the Information Management Branch (IRM) has been
supporting Region I program data integration needs, including various types of
geographic analysis, for many years. Four of the Region's six states are
currently using ARC/INFO for environmental work. Massachusetts is currently
developing a strategy to acquire ARC/INFO. Furthermore, there already exists
a New England ARC/INFO users group that meets regularly to share experiences
and exchange ideas and knowledge.
In addition, IRM staff have already trained in the use of ARC/INFO, both
from the user and system management perspectives, through a cooperative
ARC/INFO activity with the Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management. The resident IRM contract staff presently provide extensive
in-house cartographic and digitizing services that has, for example, resulted
in the location of over 5,000 FINDS sites. Region I IRM staff have also
played a significant role in the Cape Cod Aquifer Management Project (CCAMP)
which will be discussed in detail below.
The Cap Cod Aquifer Management Project
Cape Cod has long been recognized as having vulnerable water resources.
In recognition of its importance as a regional water supply, Cape Cod's
Aquifer was designated a Sole Source Aquifer in 1982, the first in New England
and the 12th nationwide. Subsequently, EPA's Region I office and the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE), in
cooperation with the U.S. Geologic Survey and the Cape Cod Planning and
Economic Development Commission, initiated a collaborative two-year effort in
August, 1985 aimed at improving the coordination in ground-water management at
the federal, state, regional and local levels of government.
Cape Cod's Aquifer, comprised largely of sand and gravel outwash deposits,
forms a lucrative ground-water resource from which all Cape Cod residents
obtain their drinking water. The porous nature of the subsurface environment,
which contributes to the plentiful recharge of the ground water,- also enhances
the vulnerability of the aquifer to the passage of contaminants. To compound
this, the number and variety of waste-producing activities on Cape Cod has
been increasing as the County grows at the fastest rate in New England. This
growth stresses existing potable water supplies as well as the local
governmental agencies charged with their protection.
The Cape Cod Aquifer Management Project (CCAMP) involves the examination
of existing ground-water protection programs at all levels of government and a
consideration of environmental trade-offs, comparative cost considerations,
current institutional structure, data management issues, and the pooling of
technical expertise.
-------
III-5
Land uses, having a direct bearing on the quality of both surface and
ground-water, have already caused considerable damage to ground-water quality
on Cape Cod. Historically, lack of information about the functional
characteristics of the aquifer has been largely responsible for the
preponderance of ill-suited land uses characteristic of the peninsula. It ^as
not until the late 1960's and early 1970's with the advent of investigations
by the U.S. Geological Survey and other geologists on Cape Cod , that
questions regarding the protection of the water supply began to be addressed.
At the same time Cape Cod was developing at an unprecedented pace.
Although the CCAMP project is expected to have broad application in terms
of revising institutional approaches to resource management, it is focusing
initially on two Cape Cod towns, Barnstable and Eastham. These towns
represent the spectrum of characteristic problems facing Cape Cod communities.
While Eastham and Barnstable are quite divergent in terms of urban/rural
characteristics, they typify the variety of complex management challenges
facing the Cape Cod region. Barnstable contains a major business and
population center, a wastewater treatment facility, and extensive public water
supply systems. In contrast, Eastham is a rural community, removed from
population centers and completely dependent on private wells.
Initially, CCAMP participants selected a series of ground-water management
issues to be examined and set up three specialized work groups to focus on
these issues. The subgroups, discussed below, are concerned with development
of scientific understanding of the aquifer, management of data pertaining to
the aquifer, and analysis of institutional arrangements to govern use and
•abuse of the ground-water resource.
o Aquifer Assessment Group. This group provides the scientific founda-
tion for the project. Members, largely geologists and hydrogeo-
logists, are charged with reviewing specific data, assumptions and
analytical techniques upon which ground-water protection programs and
regulations are based at all levels of government. The Aquifer
Assessment group will also evaluate the threat of contamination from
various sources, determine the relative acceptability of various land
uses, and make recommendations on land use management approaches.
o Data Management Group. The data management group serves a variety of
functions associated with accumulating, collating and analyzing data.
Members include data processing specialists and highly-trained
computer technicians. The group's agenda includes identification of
existing ground-water data bases and assessment of unmet data needs,
integration of all available data bases to make them widely accessible
to various governmental agencies, and development of Geographic
Information Systems and computer graphic capabilities as long term
management tools.
o Institutions Group. The Institutions group is composed of government
planners, managers and administrators. Their charge is to evaluate
programs at each level of government which deal with an established
list of priority contamination sources found in the study area and to
formulate recommendations about improved program coordination and new
approaches to ground-water management.
-------
III-6
Presently, several functions of the Data Management Group are being
supported through an Interagency Agreement between USEPA Region I and the U.S.
Geological Survey's Water Resource Division's New England District Office's
ARC/INFO.
Use of the GIS in the CCAMP
The Data Management activities associated with the CCAMP project include
the identification of appropriate data sets, collection of new data, and
extensive quality assurance/quality control of acquired data sets. This
project is developing a digital data base for the: (1) zone of contribution
(ZOC) to a selected group of wells for the town of Barnstable, and (2) a
portion of the town of Eastham.
Computer-generated 'base' maps of the Barnstable ZOC and the town of
Eastham will be generated from an assemblage of digital data: the boundary of
the ZOC, primary transportation routes, town boundaries, well locations,
aggregated land use (commercial, residential), water-table contours, and
ground-water flow lines. The risk to the quality of ground-water near
existing and planned public water-supply sites will be assessed by overlaying
and aggregating waste-source data on the base map. Data from the following
waste sources will be collected:
o Underground Storage Tanks (UST). Attribute data desirable for
analysis include number, volume, age, material, content, and location
by land parcel.
o Toxic and Hazardous-Material Sites. Regulated facilities, location
by parcel, volume, character of material, and known contamination
extent.
o Waste water. Municipal sewage-disposal sites, ground-water discharge
sites, sewered/unsewered areas, feed lots, known septic systems.
o Road salt. Salt storage areas, volume, type of cover (shed, plastic,
no cover). If data are available, road application rates.
A digital data base of Cape-wide information is being developed for
general information and reference purposes. Depending on data availability
and validation, Cape-wide data coverages may include landuse (USGS, 1:250,000,
1971), FINDS waste sites (USEPA), public water-supply and waste sites (DEQE
Atlas), water-table contours (USGS), and the water-table lenses (CCAMP).
To date, EPA has played a major role in identifying and assimilating
information on UST's local authorities. A second activity has been the
synthesizing of other environmental data on local tax assessor parcel maps. A
summary of those activities is presented below:
o UST information was collected and verified.
This information is maintained by the local fire marshal.
There is no standard reporting process or central repository of
those data.
-------
III-7
The Town of Barnstable, for example, has 7 fire marshals.
EPA and DEQE worked closely together to verify this data, and
visited the LIST sites to confirm reported locations.
This data was incorporated into the USGS'ARC/INFO data base.
o A pilot study was undertaken in the town of Barnstable to determine
the feasibility of collecting data at the site-specific parcel level.
DEQE and EPA staff reviewed available parcel maps to verify the
location of properties and associated attribute information for
1500 parcels.
These maps contained useful information on potential sources of
ground-water contamination (e.g., types of industrial
facilities).
Generally determine what types of information are required to
develop a prototype Well-Head Protection Program.
Future Applications
Region I has indicated its interest in applying CIS for several other
program activities:
o The Bays Program. The Bay Program is a cooperative effort undertaken
by the EPA, Massachusetts Division of Water Pollution Control (DWPC),
Office of Coastal Zone Management (CAM), and Division of Marine
Fisheries (DMF), with the intent to manage the pollutants released to
Buzzards and Massachucetts Bay and Boston Harbour and the necessary
remedial actions to preserve the Bay's shellfish resources. Specific
objectives, listed in the current Buzzards Bay workplan, to which a
GIS would be of immediate benefit, include:
The development of a data management system to store and analyze
baseline monitoring information, in order to assess long-term
trends in water and sediment quality, fisheries resources, and
land use. This information will also be used to help design a
sound ambient monitoring program.
The identification of the relative importance of various inputs
of coliforms to contaminated shellfish areas.
The determination of the extent and sources of toxic
contamination in the sediments and biota of the Bay.
Prioritize key enforcement actions for the program in terms of
Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO's), and industrial and municipal
dischargers.
The education of the public in restoration and maintenance of
resources by developing a series of workshops and public
presentations.
-------
III-8
Water quality data for the Bay is already stored using the
Statistical Analysis System (SAS) and could easily be entered into
ARC/INFO. EPA is also prepared to enter into a Cooperative Agreement
with USGS to obtain the digitized 1:250,000 quadrangles for tue
entire Buzzards Bay area. This data will be provided in Digital Line
Graph (DLG) format, which is compatible with the ARC/INFO system.
o The Lead in Soils Initiative. Concentrations of lead in soil in some
areas of residential Boston are an order of magnitude higher than the
levels that the Centers for Disease Control determined contribute to
elevated levels of lead in blood, especially in young children. In
addition, one out of every four children in some urban Boston
neighborhoods was lead poisoned in the last five years. As part of
the investigation into the problem, extensive information about the
problem has been assembled (e.g., incidence of poisonings, levels of
soil contamination, location of properties of greatest concern,
property ownership, building type and condition and zoning designa-
tion). Some of this information has already been digitized by the
Office of Environmental Criteria and Assessment (ORD) and some of it
is resident on a DBASE application in Region I. The ARC/INFO system
would improve the understanding of the geographic distribution of the
lead poisoning problem in Boston.
o Superfund Site Management Program. The Information Management Branch
believes there is potential for use of a GIS in the Superfund Site
Management program for supporting efforts underway at active National
Priority List (NLP) sites. At present there are approximately 57
such sites in New England. Superfund Site Managers currently use a
variety of site maps prepared by contractors as part of the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) process. These maps are
manually prepared and contain baseline information from a USGS
quadrangle and one additional layer.
Presently, the Site Manager must combine two or more maps visually.
Examples include zones of contribution combined with ground-water
flow, contaminant levels combined with wetland or flood plain
information, and others. Useful data include:
Wetland boundaries
Flood plain boundaries
Ground-water contours
Contaminant concentrations
Drainage basin boundaries
Bedrock contours
Background information (from USGS quadrangles)
Spatial Environmental Data
The presently available, and soon to be acquired data are listed in Table
1.
-------
Table 1. - Data Types
III-9
Datai/
Point Coverages (est. number of points)
- Underground storage tanks (200)
- Regulated facilities (15-35)
- Public water-supply wells (10-15)
- Hazardous waste disposal sites (2-15)
(landfills, junkyards, transfer
stations)
- Municipal sewage disposal discharge (1)
- Road salt piles (2-5)
- Public water-supply test sites
- Spills and Leaks (SPOT)
- Geographic names
Line Coverages
- Primary transportation routes
- Water-table contours
- Ground-water flow paths
- Town boundaries
- Hydrography (ponds, wetlands)
- 'DRASTIC' contours
Polygon (area) Coverages
- Barnstable ZOC
- Landuse, aggregated parcel level
or better
- Zoning CCPEDC
- Public water-supply service areas (5)
- Planned growth zones (proposed changes)
- Planned water-supply ZOC's
- Known contamination plumes in aquifer
- Sewered service areas
- Seasonal -use areas
Digital
Source Data
Available
EPA yes
EPA, DEQE yes
USGS yes
DEQE
USGS
DEQE
CCPEDC
DEQE
USGS yes
USGS
USGS
USGS
USGS
USGS
EPA
CCPEDC
CCPEDC
CCPEDC
CCPEDC
CCPEDC
USGS, EPA, DEQE
CCPEDC
CCPEDC
Extent
f\ i
B/E^/
B/E
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
B/E
B/E
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
Capewide
B/E
B
B
B/E
B
B/E
Capewide
B
E
'. Within Barnstable ZOC, unless otherwise noted
* B (Barnstable), E (Eastham)
-------
111-10
Overview of GIS Hardware/Software
The ARC/INFO system is located at the USGS District Office, and Regi:n I
staff conducts GIS activities at the USGS site. The ARC/INFO software is
maintained on PRIME 9952 mainframe. Peripheral hardware include several colc~
graphic display devices (Tektronix 4000 series), an Altek 4860 digitizer and
several plotters (Tektronix 4696 ink jet plotter; Zeta 3653; HP7475 desktop).
In addition to the basic INFO DBMS from Henco and ARC, the ESRI software
developed for storing cartographic data, other ARC/INFO software subsystems
include:
o NETWORK - applications module for modeling network files (e.g.,
minimum path, routing optimization, address matching);' and
o Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) - applications module for
structuring and modeling digital terrain data (e.g., contour maps,
viewshed creation, slope mapping).
Organizational Structure/Staffing
The Information Management Branch provides staff support to the CCAMP
program. Two EPA staff members work on the project; a cartographer works
seventy-five percent (75%) and a ground-water/computer application specialist
spends one-third to one-half time. Another EPA employee, a graphics system
expert, spends 10% of his time on the project and digitizing activities are
the equivalent of 50% of a man-year. The GIS'applications supported by USGS
use the services of highly-trained ARC/INFO experts for data input, analysis,
and generation of maps.
Costs
Numerous people are involved with data gathering and analysis. The
staffing of the project amounts to approximately $63,000. Additional costs for
data support services are difficult to estimate.
Benefits
Since the CCAMP project is still in progress and GIS applications have
only recently begun, potential benefits will be briefly discussed.
o Foremost is the assimilation of dispersed and non-standardized
environmental data from numerous agencies into a uniform, accessible
data base..
o Region I, and the other cooperating organizations are developing a
data base with extensive QA/QC.
o The pilot project will demonstrate the utility of using a GIS for
Well-Head Protection data needs and understanding relevant issues.
o The Region I IRM staff believe that the development of the GIS will
assist future modeling efforts, ground-water risk assessments, and
support State environmental management programs.
-------
III-ll
Constraints
Region I believes the acquisition of an ARC/INFO would improve its
capability to integrate environmental data. The IRM Branch Chief is convinced
that EPA Region I will be able to cooperate more readily with States in tho
area of data integration and analysis with an ARC/INFO.
-------
111-12
— CIS CASE STUDY —
THE RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Project History
In 1984 the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM)
conducted a feasibility study for establishing a statewide GIS data management
system. The final report recommended that DEM acquire a GIS and that ARC/INFO
software would best serve DEM needs. In the summer of 1985, the Department of
Natural Resources Science at the University of Rhode Island (URI) was awarded
a grant from DEM to create a center of GIS data input/output and begin
developing the GIS database. In January 1986, ESRI installed ARC/INFO on an
existing Prime 9955 computer at the URI Computer Center. The necessary
peripheral hardware was purchased and placed at the Environmental Data Center
(EDC) at URI and was fully operational in February 1986.
In Rhode Island, as in many other states, protection of ground water
resources has become a priority environmental concern. Ground water
contamination not only results in potential risks to public health but also
degrades, often permanently, a valuable resource that represents a critical
reserve of water for drinking and other uses. Over the past 10-15 years, nine
public wells and upward of 450 private drinking water wells in the State have
been found to be contaminated as a result of sources such as leaking
underground storage tanks, hazardous waste sites, surface impoundments,
landfills, road salt storage and application, failing septic systems and
cesspools, pesticide use, and improper disposal of household hazardous
substances. Vigilant regulation of known pollution sources and careful
planning is required to ensure adequate and clean ground-water supplies for
future needs at both the state and local levels.
The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management obtained authority
to regulate pollution to ground-water in 1983, and in 1984 was designated by
the Governor as the lead agency in developing a comprehensive program to
protect the State's ground-water resources. In 1985, a Ground-water
Protection Act (GWPA) was passed which authorized the RIDEM to carry out a
number of tasks to gather the necessary information and establish a framework
for ground-water protection. These tasks include conducting a study of the
State's ground-water resources and current and projected use, classifying
ground-water, establishing standards for ground-water protection, and making
recommendations regarding land use controls for ensuring the most beneficial
use of ground-water at the local and regional levels. All of this is to be
accomplished by 1989.
The second major RIDEM GIS application has been associated with the
Narragansett Bay Project. In this program, numerous environmental data sets
have been entered into the GIS and mapped. Previously, these data had not
been available for analysis in one computing environment nor available for
integrated data analysis.
-------
111-13
Environmental Regulatory Program Applications Using the GIS
The GIS applications in RIOEM have been undertaken as pilot programs to
provide technical staff and management with: an understanding of how GIS
applications can help meet long and short term program objectives; define the
advantages and limitations of these applications and the GIS operating system;
and to document the various trial applications for specific geographic
analysis. A summary of these activities is presented below.
Using the GIS in the RIDEM Ground^water Protection Program
To carry out the mandates of the Ground-Water Protection Act .and uphold
•the State's overall commitment to developing a comprehensive ground-water
protection program, effective means to inventory, manage, and analyze many
types of environmental data are required for successful GIS application. To
accomplish these objectives, RIDEM has embarked on a well-defined process that
includes the following components:
o Identify available information by compiling a comprehensive catalogue
of available information pertaining :o the resource in question.
Since such a catalogue of information was not available for Rhode
Island's ground-water resources, one of the first tasks was to define
the existing base of information on the most relevant topics.
Through a joint project with the USGS, .the RIOEM has inventoried
all published information gathered by the USGS or in State-USGS
cooperative projects pertaining to the State's hydrogeology.
The inventory includes a description of the information in terms
of the topic, source(s), scale(s), and date(s) of publication.
To supplement this effort, the RIDEM staff inventoried other
.sources of information pertaining to ground-water within the
agency and at other appropriate State agencies. Additional
published and non-published information not included in the USGS
inventory were identified in this manner.
o Determine the priority for automating data. The priority for
automating specific information depends upon the required information
to meet program objectives and characteristics of the existing data
base. Criteria need to be established to decide what existing
information is most suitable for automation.
o Determine information requirements for each of five program elements
(ground-water classification; technical assistance for local
ground-water protection planning; regulation of pollution sources;
enforcement and emergency response; and monitoring and
investigation), of the Rhode Island Ground-Water Protection Program
in which application of ARC/INFO would be most beneficial. The
approach is to identify the principal objectives within each of these
program areas and the desired outputs associated with each objective,
and to define the specific data and characteristics needed to produce
each output.
-------
111-14
o Although this assessment is still in progress, the RIDEM has thus far
identified significant gaps in the existing information base -- i.e.,
information that either does not exist or which is not of acceptable
quality. Many instances where the available information, although
acceptable, is not of optimal quality have also been found.
o Evaluate the suitability of information for automation based on the
following criteria:
is the information acceptable in terms of resolution, leve1 of
detail, accuracy, currentness, etc.? If not, can new or revised
information be obtained within an acceptable time frame that can
be used, and therefore automated, instead?
will automating the information increase the effectiveness with
which it is utilized to an extent that justifies the costs
associated with the automation process?
is the information compatible, or can it readily be made
compatible, with other data with which it will be integrated?
o Identify the appropriate geographic coverage for automation. The
geographic study area for automation refers to the area! unit that is
considered as the focus for digitizing geographic information.
The USGS topographic quadrangle (scale = 1:24,000) is the basic
area! unit in the RIGIS library. Automation for most topics
will therefore proceed one quadrangle at a time according to the
priority established for each of the 37 quadrangles which cover
the State.
Using the ARC/INFO for Ground-water Programs
Based on the above criteria, the Kingstown Quadrangle in southern Rhode
Island was selected as the first quadrangle for GIS input.
o Data entry consisted of digitizing the following information from
existing maps.
— political boundaries
— roads and railroads
— power transmission lines
— surface hydrography
— glacial geology
— public water supply wells
— pollution sites (e.g., salt storage sites, injection wells,
landfills, surface impoundments, underground tanks)
o Data analysis focused on a northern portion of the outwash in
this region defined by the boundaries of surface water drainage
basins to the Chipuxet River and the Chickasheen Brook.
Potential water supply services were identified by developing a
transmissibility map from saturated thickness and hydraulic
conductivity, as defined by USGS reference reports.
-------
111-15
These data were used to generate a "principal aquifer"
delineation and recharge areas to the principal aquifers.
An existing land use map for the region acquired from the Tcwn
of South Kingstown was also digitized with 5 out of 7 land use
categories considered potential threats to ground-water quality.
Potential sources of ground-water pollution were mapped and
included underground storage tanks, salt storage sites, sewage
disposal sites, and landfills.
These data layers were integrated in a common spatial scale to
show "threatened" water supply sources.
A final analytical product was the digitization of the Town's
zoning map and integration with the above data layers to show
zoned areas that are incompatible with maintaining good
ground-water quality.
o Hard copy products of all of these analyses were produced to
illustrate the spatial relationships and identify "areas of concern".
Using the GIS for Estuary Programs
The second GIS application involved the Narragansett Bay Program. High-
lights of this activity are summarized below:
o This GIS application is under the direction of a Bay Data Management
Coordinator who assists, the EDC access appropriate data sets.
o The GIS serves as a Bay Program data archive, and provides data
analysis capabilities for numerous applications including:
mapping of shellfish closure areas
showing the impact of municipal wastewater treatment facility
discharges into the Bay by mapping the results of field dye
studies and inputs from a low and high water plume model.
digitizing aerial photos from different time periods to evaluate
brown tide impacts.
evaluating the impact of the manufacturing of tin on estuary
ecosystems by inputting water quality monitoring data into the
ARC/INFO data base and transferring the frequency data sets to
the SAS environment for subsequent data analysis.
Future Applications
RIDEM has indicated its interest in expanding the use of ARC/INFO to
generate State-wide Ground-water classification maps, provide maps and data to
towns and for the Well-Head Protection Program.
Spatial Environmental Data
The data sets used for the above discussed applications are listed in
tables 1 and 2.
-------
111-16
TABLE 1
Coverages Used in the Kingston Quad Pilot Project
Coverage Source Scale
Drainage Basin Boundaries RIDEM 1:24,000
Hydrography USGS Kingston Quad 1:24,000
Transportation USGS Kingston Quad 1:24,000
Till and Outwash Deposits USGS Geologic Bulletin No. 9 1:31,680
Saturated Thickness USGS Water Supply Paper 1821 1:24,000
Hydraulic Conductivity USGS Water Supply Paper 1821 1:24,000
Land Use Town of South Kingstown 1:24,000
Zoning Town of South Kingstown 1:24,000
Pollution Sites RIDEM 1:24,000
Water Supply Wells RIDEM 1:24,000
Power Transmission Lines USGS Kingston Quad 1:24,000
i
Protected Areas USGS Kingston Quad 1:24,000
-------
111-17
TABLE 2
NARRAGANSETT BAY PROJECT - ARC/INFO AND RIGIS TASKS
DATA SET
CSO DATA SET
DESCRIPTICN
BLACKST.WOONASQ.MOSHASS,
PAWTUXET
TYPE
OF DATA
SCALE
POINT 1:24,000
UP RIVERS TO SAMPLING STATIONS POLYGON
DIGITIZE CSO RIVERS
NB BASE MAP BOUNDARIES
CSO RIVERS
SUBSURFACE TOPOGRAPHY (NOAA) NOS DATA FOR NARR BAY
LAND USE IN NB DRAINAGE USGS GIRAS DATA
WATER QUALITY MAP OF NB NOAA
LINE
POINT
POLYGON
POLYGON
WATER QUAL & MGMT CLOSURES SHELLFISH & FINFISH/NAUTICAL POLYGON
CHARTS
1:24,000
1:24,000
TIN
1:250,000
1:40,000
1:40,000
QUAHAUG STATIONS
QUAHAUG DISTRIBUTION
CO-OP SAMPLING STATIONS
RIPDES DATA
PROV R. & MT. HOPE BAY
PROV R. & MT. HOPE BAY
MAP FOR REPORTS
POLLUTANT DISCHARGES ON
RI RIVERS IN NB DRAIN.
POINT
POINT
POINT
POINT
KREMER & NIXON,CHINMAN & NIXON POLYGON
MODELLING SEGMENTS
SUB-BASIN BOUNDARIES NARR BAY DRAINAGE BASIN
SEDIMENT DISTRIBUTION IN NB MCMASTER DATA
PROV. R. OXYGEN CROSS-SECTIONAL PROFILE
SHIPPING CHANNELS NARR BAY CHART # 13221
MODEL SEGMENTS SWANSON'S CIRCULATION MODEL
METALS IN QUAHAUGS, SEDIMENT THIBAULT AND KERN DATA
CRMC WATER QUAL CLASS FROM CRC MAPS
PLANKTON TRANSECT MAP SMAYDA DATA
BROWN TIDE DISTRIBUTION 1985 AERIAL PHOTOS
SHELLFISH DENSITY PRATT OATA
DISTRIB. OF MICROBIAL INDIC. CABELLI DATA
POLYGON
POLYGON
POINT
POLYGON
POLYGON
1:40,000
1:24,000
1:40,000
CANTOR MAPS
1:40,000
1:40,000
POLYGON 1:24,200
POLYGON VARIOUS
GREENWICH COVE BATHYMETRY
EPA-ERLN: SURFACE AREA, VOLUMES
AT MLW, MHW DIGIT., ANALY., MAP
-------
111-18
Overview of GIS Hardware/Software
The configuration of the GIS and associated hardware systems is presented
in Figure 3.2. ARC/INFO was installed on a Prime 9955 computer with 12 MB of
main memory and a 315 MB disk dedicated to GIS datasets. For the first year
of the project the EDC was equipped with a Calcomp 9100 digitizer, Tektronix
4107 and 4109 terminals, a Visual System 550 terminal, a Tektronix 4692 ink
jet printer, a Calcomp 1044 GT plotter, an IBM PC-XT, and a 300 cps dot matrix
printer connected to the PC. All devices were connected to the Prime with an
8-port multiplexor and modem operating at 9600 baud. In addition, a Tektronix
4107 was installed at the DEM offices in Providence and was connected to the
Prime with a 4-port multiplexor and modem. Recently, a second Calcomp 9100
digitizer was installed at the EDC and a Tektronix 4692 ink jet printer was
installed at DEM.
Organizational Structure/Staffing
A DEM employee was assigned to be the DEM GIS Coordinator. This person
was responsible for organizing and prioritizing which datasets the EDC was to
enter and what GIS analyses were to be conducted. The DEM GIS Coordinator
attended the ESRI training session and was familiar with all aspects of GIS
processing. Originally the GIS Coordinator was a half-time position, which
developed into a full-time responsibility six months after the project began.
At present, however, this position is vacant. EDC staffing consisted of a
full-time Director, a full-time Operations Manager, two half-time graduate
students, and varying numbers of undergraduate work-study students. The
Director of the EDC acted as the liaison between the GIS lab and DEM. The
Operations Manager coordinated the activities of the graduate and
undergraduate student staff.
Costs
The majority of equipment and salaries for EDC staff are being provided by
the RIDEM. The total cost of equipment, software and operation of the GIS for
the two year operational period is $160,000 per year, with an annual
operations cost thereafter estimated to by $120,000 per year. The majority of
the funding for the first two years of operation is being provided through the
Ground-Water Protection Program and the Narragansett Bay. Project. The
University is providing as a project sharing contribution the computer center
support services, which is estimated to be worth $40,000 for the two year
period. These figures do not include the costs of staff involvement by DEM
staff.
Benefits
Based on RIDEM reports and interviews, the benefits of implementing the
ARC/INFO system fall into the broad category of improved program management as
a function of more effective use of environmental information. This benefit
is highlighted below.
-------
, FIGURE 3.2
Overview of Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management's GIS
Department of Environmental
Management
University of Rhode Island |
Multi-User
Tektronix 4692
Ink-Jet Printer
1_
/aaaaaa
jaaanaBB
4-Port
Multiplexor
Tektronix 4107
University Computing Center
Prime 9955
12 MB CPU
EDC Dedicated 315 MB
Calcomp 9100 Digitizer
Visual 550
Calcomp 9100 Digitizer
Environmental Data Center
( 8-PortMultiplexor]
^ 9600 Baud J
Dot Matrix
Printer
IBM PC-XT
Calcomp 1044
GT Plotter
Tektronix 4692
Ink-Jet Printer
-------
111-20
o Data integration. The ARC/INFO system acts as a central repository
for numerous spatial environmental data sets. These data are entered
in a standard format, permitting an integrated analytical view.
o The incorporation of divergent data sets from numerous sources that
have not been previously integrated is a function of the desire to
provide a broad range of multiple applications. A GIS is not the
only way that these data can be made available, but it serves as an
important catalyst to accomplish this task.
o ARC/INFO maps, with color coded symbols, enhance data analysis by
providing graphics that are more easily understood than extensive
tabular results.
Critical Success Factors
The successful use of GIS at RIDEM can be attributed to the factors
summarized below:
o Technical support for the ARC/INFO program has been provided through
the University of Rhode Island's Environmental Data Center. This
center of excellence has been responsible for all hardware/software
support. Qualified support staff are trained at the EDC and act as a
service bureau for RIDEM.
o Management support through the creation of a GIS coordinator for
RIDEM has enabled senior-level program management direct input to the
GIS activities. Furthermore, this position has been essential for
enlisting specific program support and maintaining day-to-day contact
with the EDC. The existence of a full-time EDC (director, who is
responsible for technical operations and liaison to the RIDEM GIS
coordinators) has been instrumental in contributing to the successful
operation of ARC/INFO.
o Recognition of the need for strategic planning can be traced back to
the initial requirements analysis in 1984. GIS implementation at
RIDEM was accomplished in a well-designed implementation program.
o Additionally, providing short-term results, although considered
preliminary and at times suboptimal products, demonstrated "real
applications" to maintain political inertia with minimal hindrance to
long-term goals. Providing GIS products to local government
officials has also demonstrated the utility of this technology at a
grass-roots level.
Constraints
The RIDEM ARC/INFO implementation program has made great strides during
its short operational tenure. Several factors have been identified that have
slowed or inhibited the program. These are:
o The shortage of program staff available to work with the ARC/INFO
system has slowed the implementation process. Although RIDEM has had
-------
111-21
a GIS Coordinator , this position is at present vacant which has
inhibited the GIS activities.
Since the ARC/INFO is running on a university mini-computer, peak
demands do cause GIS processing to be bogged down on occasion.
Although frustrating, this phenomena is predictable and EDC staff can
work around this constraint.
RIDEM and EDC staff expressed concern over the lack of communication
between similar EPA programs (e.g., Chesapeake Bay/USGS ARC/INFO
pilot) and the exchange of ideas and experience. Although not a
constraint, it was felt that the GIS program could benefit from this
knowledge.
-------
111-22
— GIS CASE STUDY —
PLANNING FOR GIS IMPLEMENTATION
IN REGION III
Background
Region III is engaged in a initiative by which the Region may explore,
gain familiarity with, and develop a capability in managing data using a GIS.
Program managers have been faced with the complicated task of processing and
integrating a wide variety of environmental and spatial data. The Office of
Policy and Management, Information Resources Management (IRM) Branch, is the
lead Regional office to undertake this Merit Proposal over a one and one-half
year period at an estimated cost of $75,000. The IRM Branch Chief has
indicated that his office has provided extensive support to the Regional
program office for data processing and integration and that GIS is another
tool to be provided.
Process
An initial activity will be a regionally-offered two week GIS course at
the University of Pennsylvania's School of Landscape Architecture and Regional
Planning. Interested persons will be invited to participate in this program
to gain a .familiarity with spatial data manipulation and analysis using an
Intergraph GIS.
A second initiative will be the implementation of a pilot study, in
conjunction with the Environmental Services Division. The proposed pilot
study is the Cedar .Island, Virginia, Advanced Identified Project. This pilot
study will use a GIS to assist in the advanced identification of wetlands by
automating the present traditional methods of accessing, storing, and
analyzing appropriate natural resource data. This is a logical extension of
the Water Management Division's extensive regional wetlands mapping program
that has been conducted during the past two years.
Another potential application is in the area of human health. The
production of maps showing epidemiological information will benefit program
activities dealing with public health oversight. For example, geographic
regions faced with contaminated ground-water reserves due to leaking
underground storage tanks can be analyzed by integrating data- on the
population at risk, drinking water consumption, water quality and hydrologic
parameters. These data layers can be evaluated separately or in various
combinations. Additionally, Region III plans to use the GIS to graphically
depict trends, provide statistical summaries and provide modeling
capabilities.
Organization/Structure
Region III is planning to develop a technical core group, consisting of
ADP staff that will work through IRM with program personnel detailed for a 6-8
month period to work on GIS. The program offices have expressed support for
-------
111-23
this approach because they will not loose staff and will gain valuable GIS
expertise for future program directions. The IRM Branch Chief has also
idicated that Region III GIS activity will be conducted, whenever possible, in
close partnership with those State organizations already using GISs (e.g., New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).
-------
111-24
— CIS CASE STUDY —
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
Project History
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) was commissioned by Congress in 1975.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in cooperation with other federal,
state and private institutions began a concerted effort in 1976 to study the
primary sources of Bay pollution. In 1981 the research phase ended* and for
the next two years, the agencies involved analyzed and integrated their
findings.
Reports from this scientific research phase verified what many people
already knew, but more importantly, it initiated a cooperative political
management structure to address the problem. In December 1983, chief
executives from Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, D.C., and EPA
signed the Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The parties to the Agreement called for
preparation and implementation of coordinated plans to improve and protect the
water quality and living resources in the Bay.
In addition, cooperative agreements have been signed between EPA and other
federal agencies that share the environmental responsibility for the Bay.
These agencies include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), The Army Corps of Engineers (COE), the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS), the Geological Survey (USGS), and Soil Conservation Service (SCS).
These Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)s were intended to create joint ventures
of scientists and managers to make more efficient use of public funds and
other institutional resources involving Chesapeake Bay.
The CBP has been interested in GIS since early 1984. During the spring of
1985, the US Fish and Wildlife Service was permitted to use the CBP Computer
Center to develop a GIS project to show its applicability to Program goals.
About the same time, the CBP performed a study of GIS software products and
projects being used in the Bay area. That study concluded that existing CBP
software could not fully support the critical Program data management tasks,
and recommended using GIS to enhance data integration and management.
Environmental Program Applications Using GIS
CBP has used GIS for three pilot projects: toxics, living resources/water
quality, and non-point sources.
Toxics - the Elizabeth River area study of toxic pollution
This three year pilot study between EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) began in the summer of 1985. Its purpose was to investigate the
feasibility of using GIS to pinpoint existing and historic hazardous waste
disposal sites. Historical aerial photographs were obtained and interpreted
by staff at EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) to
determine land use. The data were then digitized by UGS using ARC/Info on a
PRIME computer at their National Mapping Division in Reston, VA. Various
other data, i.e., hydrology, transportation, population, public water/well
-------
111-25
sites, were obtained from local and national data bases. On top of these
data, the USGS Water Resources Division staff in Richmond, VA overlayed EPA's
National Priority List hazardous waste sites.
Preliminary results of the Elizabeth River study have clearly shown the
feasibility of using GIS to investigate proximity of hazardous waste sites to
public and private water supplies. This information could be used to target
sites for cleanup and/or monitoring. The project has also shown how
historical land use data can be used to discover potential hazardous waste
sites, that might otherwise go undetected, i.e., current data showing poor
water quality could be traced to a historical land use practice, or vice
versa.
Living Resources - Linking Water Quality to Living Resources Criteria
The CBP is using the public domain MOSS family of GIS software to show how
living resources, i.e. finfish and shellfish, critical habitats are matching
up with water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Striped bass
spawning and oyster spat distribution data are being overlayed with seasonal
water quality monitoring data to see how these areas overlap. Water quality
model simulations are also being overlayed on the distribution areas to
recommend alternative pollution load control strategies to the states.
Non-Point Sources - Targeting Non-Point Source Pollution Control
Two CBP GIS pilot projects are ongoing in the non-point source pollution
program. FWS is using detailed, subwatershed stream reach maps of the
Choptank River, together with water quality monitoring station data and a
regression model to pinpoint areas of non-point source pollution. They are
using the enhanced version of MOSS, called AutoGIS, on the CBP CC VAX 11/780
computer.
The other GIS pilot for non-point sources is vested with the Virginia
Department of Soil and Water Conservation. They are using the MAPS grid, and
Henco's INFO data base management system on a Virginia Tech PRIME computer.
The application is using soils data, the Universal Soil Loss Equation, and
slope data to target county conservation districts for implementation of Best
Management Practices (BMPs).
Future Applications
Future CBP GIS applications will expand the current pilot projects in the
toxics, living resources/water quality, and non-point source areas. The CBP
has indicated its interest to expand the Elizabeth River Project area to other
toxic "hotspots" in the Bay basin. Also there is interest to integrate
pollution loading and subsequent surface and groundwater quality modeling with
GIS. CBP would like to try combining GIS with expert systems or other
knowledge-based software to further the potential of the technology.
Spatial Environmental Data
CBP has been acquiring Chesapeake Bay data since its inception. This has
resulted in an environmental data base that contains over 100 million data
-------
111-26
points stored in Statistical Analysis (SAS) format. Data cover the entire
64,000 square mile Chesapeake Bay basin, and date back as far as the early
1900s.
Much of the data base is geo-referenced with associated latitude and
longitude, hydrologic unit, or some other spatial parameter. It can therefore
be used as the basis for developing a more specific and integrated GIS data
base. The current CBP data base contains the following types of data:
- Coliform
- Cultural (land use and population)
- Discharge (point and non-point source loadings)
- Flow (fresh water inflow from tributaries)
- Nutrients (water quality data organized by study and Bay segment)
- Physical (tides, climate, and current)
- Resources (fisheries, SAV, and other biological)
- Toxics (in sediment and water)
As a result of the ongoing and planned GIS applications, a spatial data
base is being developed at CBP. The current GIS data base includes the
following types of data:
- Land use/land cover
- Hydrology by watershed
- Agricultural practice
- Pesticide application
- Timber survey
- Shellfish, finfish
- Waterfowl
- Bathymetry
- Political boundaries
- Shoreline
- Topography
- RCRA/CERCLA
- Transportation
Numerous data sets are still required by CBP to perform its intended
applications. To identify existing Chesapeake Bay GIS data bases, the CBP
Data Management Coordinator convened a regional GIS conference. The May 1987
event was attended by close to 100 participants, representing roughly 50
public and private institutions. From that initial meeting, a Chesapeake Bay
Basin GIS Workgroup was formed to coordinate the development of a regional GIS
data base, and to address other GIS issues, like data mapping standards, data
sharing mechanisms, and data base documentation requirements.
CBP CC Hardware/Software Configuration
The current CBP CC hardware and software are supporting GIS applications,
but with minimal results. Numerous problems with both the MOSS public domain
and the AutoGIS software require mixing and matching data, software, and input
and output devices. All GIS functions: storage, analysis, and presentation
are affected. CBP has thus recently procured ARC/Info as an EPA pilot GIS
site. Installation of ARC/Info is scheduled for the fall of 1987.
-------
111-27
Current CBP CC hardware includes:
- VAX 11/780 CPU
- 12 megabytes of memory
- 64 I/O ports
- 6 disk drives
- 2 tape drives
- 3 line printers
- 1 eight pen plotter
- 1 four pen plotter
- 2 medium resolution graphics terminals
- 1 color ink jet printer
- 2 digitizers
With the arrival of ARC/Info, and increased use of mathematical models,
CBP is planning a major hardware upgrade. Planned procurements in FY88 are:
- VAX 8600 CPU
- 1 high speed tape drive
- 9 disk drives
- 1 high resolution, color graphics terminal
- 1 digitizer
- 1 color ink jet printer
Organizational Structure and Staffing
CBP management created by the Bay agreement is headed by an Executive
Council comprised of the agreement signers. The Chair of the Executive
Council rotates between EPA and one of the agreement partners each year.
Under the Executive Council are three committees, the Implementation,
Scientific and Technical, and Citizens committees. The Implementation
Committee has five technical subcommittees to advise it. They are the
Planning, Modeling and Research, Non-point Source, Monitoring, and Data
Management subcommittees. Each committee and subcommittee have
representatives from the participating agencies. Chairship of committees and
subcommittees is spread among the groups involved.
The Data Management Subcommittee has responsibility for all data related
policies and procedures of the CBP. Through its multi-agency representatives,
common data management plans have been developed. These include monitoring
methods, data formats, quality assurance requirements, analytical methods,
documentation standards, and graphic techniques. The CBP agencies have
likewise provided the Data Management Subcommittee with common software and
hardware tools to store, analyze, and present Chesapeake Bay data. The
Program's tool box is the Chesapeake Bay Program Computer Center (CBP CC).
CBP CC provides a full range of services through an EPA staffed Data
Management Coordinator at EPA's Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office (CBLO) in
Annapolis, Maryland. The Center is operated and maintained by a contract with
Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). Computer services include systems
management, data quality assurance and analysis, planning and procuring ADP
equipment, preparing the data management budget, controlling use of the
computer system, and responding to requests for data and presentations. The
-------
111-28
Center is accessible by the EPA CBLO staff, and from remote sites by the
Program participants and by other public and private institutions involved in
the Bay cleanup effort.
Costs
GIS costs for CBP have been minimal until recently. The pilot projects
described earlier have been performed using other agency hardware and
software, except for the FWS Choptank study, and the CBLO Living
Resources/Water Quality Study. The two in-house projects required digitizing
efforts by clerks trained in the procedures, and used primarily donated
hardware and software. About 1.2 man-years has been spent in FY87 on GIS
development in the CBLO, which includes CSC contractor staff. The amount of
VAX 11/780 CPU time accountable to the MOSS software since it has been
installed is negligible. The only significant cost to CBP so far has been in
the reformatting of data. This effort was made primarily to improve the
general documentation and organization of the data base, not primarily for GIS
use. GIS efforts will benefit, though, from the 6-8 man-year task. ARC/Info
and graphics peripherals purchased with CBP FY88 funds will total
approximately $75K.
In FY88 GIS costs could rise significantly. The procurement of the VAX
8600, though not exclusively for GIS, will increase access to ARC/Info, and
thus increase CPU use. The hardware upgrade will cost just over $500K. Staff
resources for data base building and GIS applications is expected to increase
from 1.2 to 2.0, which includes a full-time federal GIS technical coordinator,
and part-time, contracted, digitizing technicians.
Benefits
Benefits of GIS have been acknowledged throughout the CBP management
structure. In the pilot projects in the Chesapeake Bay basin, and from
outside public and private demonstrations, CBP is confident that the
technology can assist the Program goals in three primary ways:
1) Appropriate Technology for Type of Data Collected and Stored
CBP is in a developmental stage called Implementation Phase II. This
stage requires the collection 'and storage of spatial data, or
parameters that contain multiple, connected points represented by
geographic coordinates. For example, defining distribution of a
particular species of vegetation or location of the spawning area of
a certain finfish in the Bay requires a unique data management tool.
A GIS is the most appropriate software tool to collect and store this
type of data.
2) Appropriate Technology for Current Data Analysis Needs
The spatial data being collected during Phase II Implementation are
required for very specific types of analyses. CBP managers are
asking questions that require comparing various types of
geographically dependent data. This means being able to search a
data base for striped bass spawning areas that are in waters within a
range of dissolved oxygen or other survival determining habitat
-------
111-29
parameters. A GIS is the best software tool to provide this type of
analysis of different types of data, from various sources, at
different scales. Other more common analytical packages cannot
provide this type of geographic-based comparison.
3) Appropriate Technology for Data Display and Presentation
CBP Implementation Phase II also requires the ability to display and
present the spatial data analysis results in a meaningful way to
management, Congress, and the public. Graphic representation using
multi-color, shaded maps is far more attractive and informative to a
non-technical audience that tabular or x,y coordinate line graphs. A
GIS is, again, the software that allows multiple types of data to be
displayed on easily recognized base maps.
Critical Success Factors
Critical success factors have been revealed by CBP's limited experience
with GIS applications. They include aspects of both a management and
technical nature.
1) Management Success Factors - Much of CBP's experience with GIS has
relied on established interagency agreements. As a cooperative venture
with limited individual agency funding, CBP has used these agreements to
gather resources to accomplish goals. This is evidenced by the joint
pilot projects involving USGS, USFWS, Virginia, and EPA. Numerous other
agencies have supplied data, including NOAA, Maryland, the Corps of
Engineers, and others. Private donations of hardware and software were
also instrumental in the management of this initial phase. Given the
multi-disciplinary, resource intensive nature of GIS technology
application, cooperation among the CBP agencies has been critically
important.
2) Technical Success Factors - the CBP organizational structure also
creates technical advantages in implementing a GIS program. There is a
pool of technical staff and state-of-the-art technology available among
the Program agencies. The Chesapeake Bay GIS Workgroup is a unique group
of GIS managers and technicians, working toward the same goals. Together,
there is technical expertise to provide an efficient, effective mechanism
for implementing GIS on a basinwide scale.
Constraints
GIS constraints have become obvious, as well, in the CBP experiences.
These constraints can by grouped into three categories:
1) Budgetary Constraints - CBP has been searching for funding for GIS
since 1984. There has been a need for additional hardware each year just
to keep up with growth of CBP CC users and other software use. Until
recently, CBP agencies other than EPA were in the hardware/software
procurement business. Now, only EPA is buying the much needed equipment
and software to keep the computer center ahead of demand. The CBLO has
had to reduce demand at certain times to allow completion of priority
model runs.
-------
111-30
GIS will add another significant demand on the existing VAX 11/780. The
planned, major CPU upgrade to the VAX 8600 is necessary if CBP does not
want to reduce its ability to meet demand in other areas, or establish
rigid scheduling/prioritizing of computer work.
2) Data Constraints - As with any data integration application, GIS
requires consistent, quality controlled data bases. Numerous problems
have been encountered by CBP during the pilot projects with poor quality
data, missing data, or data in the wrong format. In some cases, there is
a complete lack of data to perform certain tasks, or a conflict between
collecting agencies on parameter definitions.
3) Software Constraints - Like data compatibility problems, CBP found
numerous constraints in the ability to use various software products
together. Multiple agencies, using different software are unable to
communicate the each other. There is a general lack of software to
translate or convert from one GIS to another. Given that some software
packages have certain advantages over others for specific applications,
this lack of software flexibility is a major problem.
-------
111-31
— GIS CASE STUDY —
REGION IV AND THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Project History
The Regional Administrator (RA) and senior management consider multimedia
analysis a keystone to their approach for environmental decision making. This
approach has been endorsed by the EPA Administrator as evidenced by the
guidance for preparation of the FY-87 Operating Plan calling for an increased
emphasis on multimedia, environmental results-oriented decision making.
EPA efforts to enhance communication networks and computer hardware at
RTP, Washington, and the Region, although improvements for the conducting of
EPA business, does not, in the opinion of Region IV, provide mechanisms for
improving the use of environmental data in decision making. Similarly, Region
IV feels that projects developed and managed at Headquarters by the Office of
Water and the Regulatory Integration Division (formerly IEMD) of the Office of
Policy Planning and Evaluation are too far removed from the day to day
environmental decision making needs of the Regions and States.
Subsequently, Region IV and the Environmental Protection Division of the
Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GAEPO) have implemented two
overlapping, yet distinct, GIS activities. At the time of this report, June
1987, GAEPD's GIS applications were being supported by the U.S. Geological
Survey's (USGS) Water Resources Division (WRD), Doraville District Office.
Region IVs GIS applications were also initially conducted at the same
facility, but Region IV recently acquired its own ARC/INFO GIS. The State of
Georgia Pilot will be discussed first, followed by the Region IV experience.
The State of Georgia Pilot
In early 1986, EPA Region IV and the State of Georgia agreed to undertake
a collaborative effort to show how GIS could assist Water Management programs.
The USGS WRD Office was selected as the GIS work site since they already were
operating an ARC/INFO GIS that contained several useful Georgia data sets. A
memorandum of understanding was developed between Region IV and USGS that
outlined a GIS demonstration project for developing several state-wide spatial
data bases (e.g., geology, land use). Region IV funded this initial project to
demonstrate the benefits of using a GIS to integrate USGS/State and EPA data
and analyze the data base to support ground-water decisions.
Environmental Regulatory Program Applications Using GIS for the GAEPD Pilot
The GIS applications supported by the Georgia Pilot were undertaken by the
USGS Doraville office in two phases. The first phase focused on a 3-county
(Terrell, Lee and Dougherty) area in the southwest section of the state; and a
second broader application covering the entire state. A summary of the
important GIS data management and analysis processes associated with the phase
I activities are presented below:
o Several digital data sets (e.g., elevation, digital line graphs,
outcrop features, surface hydrography) were purchased by USGS for use
in both phases of the project.
-------
111-32
o The USGS GIS technical staff reformatted several of the data sets.
— The 1978 State MIADS Soil Base had to be converted from 4-acre
grids to polygons by creating a new data base through digitizing
the grid-based maps into polygon files.
— The location of hazardous waste sites was determined using the
HWDMS EPA National data base by downloading to INFO and then
transferring electronically to ARC/INFO at USGS.
o Maps that did not exist in a digital format had to be digitized by the
USGS GIS staff to create new data files and other non-graphic data
sets had to be entered into the GIS with new geographic identifiers
(e.g., RCRA land disposal sites).
o The GIS technical staff used the ARC/PLOT routines to overlay the
following files: RCRA land disposal sites (with 500 and 1000 meter
buffers), municipal withdrawals, and potentiometric maps. This process
consisted of displaying these files on a color video display screen,
and evaluating several display scenarios (e.g., color assignments,
scales and symbol selection). An acceptable display scenario was then
produced as a map on the plotter.
The GIS data, base was used in the Phase I pilot to assist in the
evaluation of potential sanitary landfill sites and to map the location of
hazardous waste sites to assist in planning drinking water monitoring
activities.
o The evaluation process of sanitary landfill siting used the GIS data
base to locate and map aquifers and recharge areas vulnerable to
subsurface ground-water contamination. These sites were eliminated
from further consideration and decision-makers dedicated resources to
investigating other potential sites.
o In addition, RCRA land disposal sites with 5000 and 10000 meter buffer
zones were mapped in conjunction with the location of municipal
surface water and ground-water withdrawals that are the sources of
drinking water supplies. This analysis provided a mechanism to assist
decision-makers prioritize monitoring of drinking water sources to
those most vulnerable to ground-water contamination.
The Phase II GIS applications are similar to Phase I but have an expanded
geographic coverage to the other 156 counties in the state. The Phase II
applications will be continued for the next several years.
The Region IV Approach
Region IV initiated the pilot with the support of GAEPD and evaluated the
GIS as part of an overall Regional data integration initiative. This
initiative was based on a data and reporting requirements analysis that
concluded that EPA managers and staff in Region IV needed better ways to:
o Analyze and report trends in environmental results;
-------
111-33
o Assess ambient data for intermedia impacts;
o Identify emerging problems; and
o Set priorities for program actions based on actual problems.
Furthermore, this study emphasized the need to access various EPA and
other Federal data systems to assess relevant permit, enforcement, and grant
actions for effective environmental results management. A high priority
requirement was the integration of ambient (e.g., STORET, SARODS) and other
program data (e.g., PCS, GICS). Consequently, Region IV endorsed the use of
GIS technology to access and analyze these important EPA data bases.
Additionally, the study recommended that Region IV establish an Office of
Integrated Environmental Analysis (OIEA) to develop the advanced technology
and information management tools required to support effective Regional and
State environmental decision making. The RA implemented many of the report's
recommendations, including the creation of OIEA with the following mandate:
o Develop integrated environmental analysis techniques using the latest
technology ( including but not limited to GIS);
o Provide leadership and act as a catalyst for development of analytical
tools to support multimedia decision making;
o Maintain liaison with Headquarters integrated information management
developments;
o Develop analysis and report techniques for assessing environmental
results;
o Assemble a high quality staff with programmatic and ADP technology
capabilities;
o Provide leadership and serve as a catalyst for joint data integration
projects with other federal agencies;
o Coordinate data collection activities by the Region; and
o Liaison with Regional States.
To date, the OIEA has developed several geographic data integration
products including GIS applications through the use of a recently installed
ARC/INFO system. OIEA is also developing an Automated Results Analysis and
Management System (RAMS) that will:
o identify and prioritize problems and risks;
o relate these problems and risks to regulatory programs; and
o track environmental trends.
-------
111-34
Environmental Regulatory Program Applications Using GIS in Region IV
Region IV has used its GIS capabilities to support several EPA programs.
Progress to date is highlighted below.
o The OIEA has developed a geographic analytical technique that displays
all water monitoring stations and identifies all water quality
violations on a computerized map. Incorporation of NPDES"permit
information allows the mapping of point sources of discharge. Computer
maps showing violations for different time periods are also generated
to track water control progress and prioritize water body problems.
These automated analytical techniques are provided to the States to
assist in development of 305 (b) reports. At present, these
applications are not conducted with ARC/INFO, but with other computer
tools. OIEA plans to incorporate these functions into the GIS in the
near future.
o Computer analysis techniques have been developed to display ambient
air quality monitoring stations and associated violations of air
quality standards. Violations are depicted on the maps to show where
air quality problems exist. Trends analyses are also possible when
data from different time frames are analyzed and displayed.
o The OIEA staff has developed an analytical mapping capability for the
ground-water program that identifies sources of ground-water pollution
from facilities (such as RCRA and Superfund sites) in association with
drinking water wells, population served, and ground-water
vulnerability. These three factors are used to prioritize ground-water
problems.
Future Applications
The GAEPO plans to expand its pilot GIS activities, with the ARC/INFO
system at the USGS/WRD, to the entire State for several other program
activities:
o Siting sanitary landfills. The State Geologist would like to expand
their pilot study conducted in Dougherty county. The integration of
the environmental data enables the local government to make better
informed decisions.
o Hazardous waste management. GAEPD has a need to identify the location
of both RCRA and Superfund sites throughout the state. This will
assist, for example, in ranking Superfund sites to determine
priorities for conducting preliminary assessments and subsequent site
investigations.
o Locating sites for regional reservoirs. In the past, county level
decision-makers have designated potential reservoir sites in areas
unsuitable for such use. The GIS can integrate geologic, topographic
and hydrologic data to enable analysts to better predict water quality
degradation (e.g. as a result of heavy siltation) at potential sites.
o Continue to develop RAMS.
-------
111-35
Region TV's interest in GIS application parallels that of the State of
Georgia. In addition, the Region is interested in using GIS to assist State's
develop their Community Water Systems (CMS) vulnerability analysis,
prioritization of RCRA enforcement activities, and screening of Superfund
sites.
Spatial Environmental Data
GAEDP and Region IV have used some of the same environmental data. These
common and other appropriate data sets and sources are summarized below:
o USGS l:2,000,000-scale Digital Line Graph Data (derived from USGS
National Atlas separates)
Political Boundaries
— state and county
Water Bodies
— perennial lakes or ponds
— intermittent lakes or ponds
-- marshes/swamps
— reservoirs
— islands, etc.
Rivers and Streams
-- shorelines
« river/stream centerlines (coded by length)
-- canals
— ditches
— intercoastal waterway
o USGS Hydrologic Unit Boundaries
o EPA River Reach File (EPA only)
o U.S. Bureau of the Census Block Group Centroids
Thiesson polygons generated from centroids (EPA only)
o U.S. Bureau of the Census DIME Files
o U.S. Bureau of the Census Summary Tape File (STP #3)
demographic and socio-economic date tied to census geography
o USGS 1:250,000-scale Land Use/Land Cover Data
Land Use/Land Cover
Census Tracts
Political Boundaries
Hydrologic Units
Federal Land Ownership
o U.S. Defense Mapping Agency (sold by USGS) 1:2,500,000 Digital
Elevation Models (GAEPD only)
o USGS Public Water Supply Data
-------
111-36
o U.S. EPA (derived from STORET, PCS, WHDMS, GICS)
o Soil Conservation Service MIADS Soils Data
o USGS Geographic Names File
o District Data Bases 1:500,000-scale (GAEPD only)
Rivers
Lakes
Cities
Physiographic Provinces
Runoff Contours
Precipitation Contours
Population Density
Depth to Top of Aquifer
Recharge/Outcrop Areas
Faults
Surficial Geology
Soils Data
Slope Data
o EPA Pesticide Data
o USGS 1:100,000 Digital Line Graphs (June-July 1987)
Overview of GIS Hardware/Software
The discussion below provides details about the ARC/INFO systems.
USGS ARC/INFO
The ARC/INFO software is maintained at the USGS/WRD Doraville office on a
PRIME 9952. Peripheral hardware includes two Tektronix color graphics
terminals (4111 and 4107), a Calcomp 9100 digitizer,, and a HP 7586 plotter.
The GAEPD has access to the USGS Prime via a 2400 baud port. The ARC/INFO
software includes the basic INFO DBMS from Henco and ARC, the ESRI software
developed for storing cartographic data. Other functionally linked ARC/INFO
software subsystems include:
i
o NETWORK- applications module for modeling network files (e.g..minimum
path, routing optimization, address matching);
o Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN)- applications module for
structuring and modeling digital terrain data (e.g., contour maps,
viewshed creation, slope mapping);
o ARC/COGO- applications module for processing legal land descriptions
and related survey data; and
o GRID/TOPO- applications module similar to TIN except for handling
regularly spaced (as opposed to triangulated) three-dimensional
terrain data.
-------
111-37
Region IV
Region IV installed its ARC/INFO in November of 1986. The software runs
on a PRIME 2655 with a standard 3200 BPI tape drive. Two Textronix 4125 are
used for interactive data processing and analysis. Data entry is accomplished
using a Tektronix 4857 digitizer. At the present time OIEA does not have a
high quality, large format plotter but plans to acquire one in the near
future. Optional ARC/INFO software acquired by the Region includes NETWORK,
TIN, and ARC COGO.
Organizational Structure/Staffing
The State of Georgia
The initial GIS applications supported by USGS used the services of two
highly-trained GIS experts for developing the Phase I and Phase II products
for GAEPD. GAEPD has not allocated any technical or program manpower support
to this activity, with the exception of the State Geologist's liaison role and
occasional other staff involvement with GIS output evaluation.
Region IV
The Regional IV use of the ARC/INFO, as previously mentioned, is supported
by the OIEA. At present, OIEA staffing consists of:
o A chief;
o A Ph.D. air program scientist with extensive computer programming
experience;
o A M.S. remote sensing/environmental scientist;
o A M.S. water pollution engineer familiar with permit, grant, and
technical support activities; and
o An ADP/GIS technical expert familiar with EPA data systems and
ARC/INFO.
Plans are to add two other staff positions; one ground-water and one
Superfund specialist. The assignment of these "program" positions is
accomplished by each program allocating an FTE to OIEA.
Costs
The State of Georgia did not buy any software/hardware for conducting the
pilot but entered into an interagency agreement in which $10,000 was committed
by EPA to USGS to support the GAEDP GIS applications. Participation by GAEPD
staff was not calculated as a separate cost. USGS indicated that the actual
project costs exceeded the funding provided, but USGS gained an understanding
of new applications through this project.
The costs associated with the Region IV ARC/INFO acquisition include:
PRIME Upgrade $90,000
2 Graphic Terminals $15,000
-------
111-38
ARC Info Software $17,500
Digitizer $12,000
It is important to note that there are additional costs associated with
data purchase and OIEA staffing. Unfortunately, it is not possible to provide
dollar values for these costs.
Benefits
The benefits to 6AEDP and Region IV as a result of GIS implementation
include data integration, identification of environmental problems,
prioritization of resource allocations based on potential risk, and
information dissemination.
o The use of the GIS for siting sanitary landfills at the county level
saves innumerable resources by reducing the number of sites needing
field investigation. The ability to assemble numerous data sets in one
central computer system with common geographic dimensions provides a
useful analytical capability for State and Regional environmental
regulatory programs.
o Region IV OIEA staff feel that the use of GIS will accelerate the
Superfund site ranking process. At present, only two sites per year
in each state are being added to the NPL. Integration and analysis of
the various environmental data layers has enabled Superfund staff to
identify and prioritize sites. Without using the GIS, these sites.
would have to be evaluated by contractors in the field. Consequently,
the Agency is able to reduce expenditures in this program activity.
o Program managers and senior management can analyze and track
environmental trends more efficiently. This is possible because of the
creation of a state-wide GIS environmental data base containing
pollution impact information (e.g., emission and discharge data) and
ambient data across media for numerous time periods. This data base
also provides a capability to geographically analyze the effectiveness
of controls and conduct risk assessments.
Critical Success Factors
The successful use of GIS at GAEDP and Region IV can be attributed to the
factors summarized below:
o Technical support for the GAEPD pilot was provided by highly trained
GIS professionals. This minimized the "learning curve" time lag
associated with such projects. The "technical center" role of the
Region IV OIEA serves a similar role to provide GIS support to various
programs without requiring program staff to become GIS experts.
o Management/infrastructure support has been instrumental in backing the
original GAEPD effort and Region IV GIS acquisition and
implementation. The EPA Region IV RA and the Commissioner of the
Georgia Department of National Resources have been strong advocates of
this technology. Such high level backing has resulted in EPA Regional
IV program support for the OIEA multidisciplinary team concept.
-------
111-39
o Communication/information exchange has been encouraged between
technical GIS staff at USGS and the appropriate senior GAEPD and EPA
Regional IV management. This process has resulted in important
synthesis of ideas. The dialogue and interaction existing between
Regional, State, and local management levels has been also extremely
important.
o GIS implementation has been a deliberately slow paced process that
avoided a large expenditure at the early stages. Region IV has also
stressed that GIS applications are only one "tool" in the "tool box."
Constraints
Several factors need to be addressed that are limiting the full potential
of the GIS:
o Developing a GIS data base requires extensive data entry processing
before any analysis can be done. The resources required for this
process, the need for "results", and the concern for data validation
compete with each other in trying to get an application up and
running.
o Both GAEPD and Regional IV are concerned with establishing a mechanism
for indicating some kind of confidence limit for each data set. At
present, this is absent in the ARC/INFO environment.
o There is a great need to establish data standards for use in all
phases of state and local data base development to enable data to be
used effectively in the GIS arena.
o ARC/INFO contains hundreds of software routines. The non-expert will
need some type of user-friendly tools (e.g., macros) to be able to use
this technology without ADP support.
o Region IV has states and agencies using several different GIS systems
(e.g., Intergraph at TVA and the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation). The OIEA is presently determining how these important
data bases can be easily linked and incorporated into ARC/INFO.
o Data storage needs are expected to increase rapidly and exceed present
storage capacity. Consequently, Region IV will have to develop
sufficient data storage to maintain efficient data access.
-------
111-41
— GIS CASE STUDY —
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
Project History
Florida's Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) began using a
geographic information system (GIS) in 1984 to help the Bureau of Ground-Water
Protection map the location of pesticide application areas and contaminated
drinking-water supplies. The products derived from the GIS were was used to
provide a comprehensive overview of the activities of numerous State agencies
involved in collecting samples of drinking-water from wells, performing
laboratory analyses of these samples, taking various remedial actions, and
subsequent follow-up monitoring.
Recently, the State of Florida has mandated DER to conduct an ambient
ground-water monitoring program to determine the present condition and future
trends of this critical resource. (In Florida, 86% of the publicly supplied
drinking water comes from ground water.) As part of this effort, DER has
implemented a state-wide geographical "vulnerability" screening tool using a
microcomputer-based GIS. An overview of these GISs and associated activities
is discussed below.
Intergraph System
The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation began making extensive
use of geographic environmental data in the early 1980s in conjunction with
its pesticide monitoring and ground-water protection programs. Initial
concern over the potential threat to Florida's ground-water supply from a
particular pesticide, ethylene dibromide (EDB), required an analysis of
drinking water samples from wells in close proximity to EDB-treated citrus
groves to determine if a problem existed.
In early 1984, the Bureau of Groundwater Protection (see the DER
organization chart in Figure 3.3) developed an EDB pesticides data base on the
Agency's Sperry mainframe. This data base started as a simple file structure
of name and address of sampled well and corresponding EDB laboratory test
results. DER then awarded a contract to the Florida Resource and
Environmental Activities Center (FREAC) at Florida State University to add a
location field for all the records. A simple mapping capability was possible
using the Sperry's Mapper package, a fourth generation software language. Over
time, however, it became more, cumbersome to map. these data with the existing
Sperry hardware and software, and DER decided in the spring of 1984 to use the
Intergraph software maintained on the FREAC VAX minicomputer. Later in 1984,
DER purchased a dedicated Intergraph workstation and plotter and linked them
to FREAC via a high speed communication line. DER acquired a second
Intergraph workstation in 1986.
Microcomputer-based GIS
Recently, DER contracted with the University of Florida to develop an IBM
PC-based GIS with a relational data base and mapping capability. This system
-------
FIGURE 3.3
Department of Environmental Regulation
OFFICE
OF THE
SECRETARY
OFFICE
OF
GENERAL COUNSEL
I ENVIRONMENTAL I
- I REGULATION I
! COMMISSION
- COASTAL MANAGEMENT
• SPECIAL PROJECTS
- LEGISLATIVE COORDINATION
- WATER MANAGEMENT COORDINATION
• PUBLIC INFORMATION
ASSISTANT
SECRETARY
DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
PERMITTING
-OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAMS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
PERMITTING &
PROGRAM
COORDINATION
BUREAU OF
PERMITTING
CHBIF s OFFICE
CERTIFICATION flc
TECHNTCAL SUPPORT
NPDE8
POWER PLANT SITING
PROCESSING CONTROL 6(
REPORTS
ENGINEERING SUPPORT
JURISOICTIONAL REVIEW
DEPUT
OP
1 NORTHWEST
PENSACOLA
BRANCH OFFICE
PANAMA CITY
BRANCH OFFICE
SOUTH FLORIDA
DISTRICT
FORT MYERS
BRANCH OFFICE
PUNT A GORDA
BRANCH OFFICE
M AR ATMON
Y O
FIE
ERA
IRE
LD
TIC
-
CTOR
NS
NORTHEAST
JACKSONVILLE
1
BRANCH OFFICE
GAINESVILLE
CENTRAL FLORIDA
DISTRICT
1
BRANCH OFFICE
M ELBOURNE
SOUTHEAST
DISTRICT
WEST PALM BEACH
1
1 BRANCH OFFICE
PORT ST. LUCIB
BUREAU OF
AIR QUALITY
MANAGEMENT
CHIEF'S OFFICE
AIR MONHORV4G
& ANALYSIS
CENTRAL AtR
PERMITTING
DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
BUREAU OF
PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
WATER &
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
BUREAU OF
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
(-CHIEF'S OFFICE
j-SOLIO WASTB/TANKS
I-HAZARDOUS WASTE
BUREAU OF
WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF
INFORMATION
SYSTEMS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
BUREAU OF
LABORATORIES a
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
BUREAU OF
ACCOUNTING
BUDGETING
•CHIEP'S OFFICE
•WATER RESOURCES
PROGRAMS
DRINKING WATER
•BIOLOGY
•CHEMISTRY
PRINT SHOP
SOUTHWEST
DISTRICT
TAMPA
u
CHEF'S OFFICE
WATER QUALJTV ANALYSIS
WATER QUALITY
MONITORING & QUALITY
ASSURANCE
•WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT Bt
RESTORATION
BUREAU OF
GROUND WATER
PROTECTION
•CHIEF'S OFFICE
•OPERATION RESPONSE
•UIC & TECHNICAL
SUPPORT
•PESTICIDES MONITORING
PURCHASING
OFFICE
RESOURCE
MATERIALS
CENTER
DIRECTOR
DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
OPERATIONS
BUREAU OF
RESTORATION
ICMIEF'B OFFICE
[ENGINEERING Sc
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
[PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
^CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF
OPERATIONS
CHIEF'-S OFFICE
TECHNICAL PROJECT
SUPPORT
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
SITE SCREENING
GENERAL. SERVICES
BUREAU OF
WASTE WATER
MANAGEMENT
& GRANTS
CHIEF'S OFFICE
CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
FACILITY PLANNING
DESIGN 8( OPERATIONS
•SPECIAL PROJECTS
•PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
I
-P»
(X)
-------
111-43
called the Florida Waste Source Locator Information System is being tested and
used for identifying "background" wells sampled between 1983 and 1986 as part
of the recently enacted State ambient ground-water monitoring program. The GIS
is a raster-based system using 1 square mile grids based on county tax
assessor records to generate land use categories and associated pollution
indices.
Environmental Regulatory Program Applications Using the GIS
The GIS applications in DER have been primarily dedicated to determining
the extent and severity of EDB ground-water contamination in the State using
the Intergraph system. A smaller level of effort has been used to produce
parts of the 1986 305b report. Recently, a microcomputer-based GIS has been
developed and tested in the ground-water protection program. A summary of
these activities is presented below:
Using the Intergraph System to Determine Pesticide Contamination in
Ground-Water
o Data entry required tape loading and digitization.
-- Well owner and location (via UTM coordinates) information of
wells sampled for pesticide contamination are resident data files
on the State of Florida's Sperry mainframe.'
— The results of all laboratory analyses of drinking-water well
samples collected by the Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services are stored in a data base in the Sperry
mainframe.
— These data sets are reformatted as a routine procedure, dumped to
tape, and subsequently delivered to the FREAC data center for
loading into the VAX.
~ Florida Department of Agriculture maps containing the location,
dates, type of EDB treatment, and amounts of pesticide
application were digitized using the Intergraph workstation.
o Data analysis consisted of overlaying the different data files to
produce maps.
— Software routines that merge pesticide application data with well
data were used to produce maps displaying location and method of
pesticide application and status of sampled wells (contaminated
or non-contaminated).
— Wells located within 300 feet of EDB application were identified.
-- Public drinking-water wells located within 1,000 feet of EDB
applications were identified.
— Ground-water sampling was prioritized based on the above process.
o Ground-water monitoring and corrective action were undertaken based
on this data integration and mapping capability.
— The success of 'corrective action programs (installation of
charcoal filters, drilling of new wells, or hook-ups to city
water supplies) for positively identified EDB contaminated wells
-------
111-44
has been monitored with this spatial data base.
— Regular reporting of progress to the public and State legislature
is provided in both statistical and map formats.
Using the Intergraph System to Produce the State 305b Report
A component of the 1986 Florida 305b (a biannual report describing the
status of the State's surface water quality) report was developed by
conducting data analysis with STORE! (a data storage and retrieval software
system residing on the EPA National Computer Center's IBM mainframe):
o . Water quality summaries were calculated for each river reach using
STORE! River Reach files.
— Water quality for each river reach was determined by using a
water quality index for specific parametric monitoring data in
S!ORE!.
— A STORET map of each river reach was subsequently produced.
o A base map of river reaches for the entire State was created in the
Intergraph data base.
~ The STORET maps were digitized.
— The water quality (good, fair, poor, unknown) for the entire
State and four geographic regions was mapped by color code for
each river basin.
— These maps were incorporated into the State 305b report.
Using a Micro-based GIS for the Ambient Ground-water Monitoring Program
The Bureau of Ground-water Protection is using the micro-based GIS as part
of its ambient ground-water monitoring program:
o Pollution indices are generated to assist in determining the
vulnerability of specific regions and sites.
— A matrix of land use types and tax assessment categories is used
in conjunction with SIC classifications to establish a hazardous
ranking for each square mile grid.
— These rankings are then overlaid with DRASTIC (a numerical rating
scheme that evaluates the potential for ground-water pollution at
a specific site given its hydrogeological setting) maps that are
developed by each Water District to locate "vulnerable" areas.
— Those areas considered highly vulnerable are then targeted as very
intensive study areas (VISAs) and prioritized for future intensive
sampling to determine ground-water trends.
o Future plans are to develop a linkage to the Intergraph system.
— Downloading existing Intergraph data onto the micro GIS and
uploading data from the micro to the Intergraph is under
development.
— These data bases will be linked in the next one to two years.
-------
111-45
Future Applications
DER has indicated its interest in utilizing the Intergraph system for
several other program activities:
o Ambient Ground-water Monitoring program. The 1983 Ground-water Act
requires DER to determine the status and trends of Florida's
ground-water resources via a long-term monitoring effort. This
process, presently utilizing the micro-based GIS, can benefit from
using the Intergraph for evaluating water quality by aquifer segment.
o Underground Storage Tank program. The . Bureau of Restoration is
presently identifying leaking underground storage tanks to conduct a
restoration program. DER can determine the location of tanks through
the Early Detection Incentive program in which owners can voluntarily
turn themselves in or through a second process that integrates
various sources of information (e.g., county Health Department
reports) to rank the potential environmental hazard of each tank. The
Intergraph would be a useful management tool for identifying the
location of leaking tanks. It is also estimated that the State will
be collecting 15,000 well samples a year under this program and this
data could be mapped together with tank registration data.
Spatial Environmental Data
DER uses a Sperry Univac mainframe to archive most of its program data.
The appropriate spatial environmental data from this data base as well as
other data sets and sources are summarized in Table 1.
Overview of GIS Hardware/Software
The configuration of the GISs and associated hardware systems is presented
in Figure 3.4. The discussion below provides'details about the appropriate
systems.
Intergraph
The Intergraph software is maintained by FREAC on a VAX 11/780. Several
State agencies have access to this GIS with DER ensured of sufficient storage
and access through a telecommunications link and separately purchased and
installed storage disk at the FREAC computer center. DER owns 2 Intergraph
workstations. Each workstation has a black and white monitor, color monitor,
digitizer, and stand alone disk storage. DER also has a Calcomp plotter for
producing 24 inch by 36 inch color maps. All DER program data resides in a
Sperry mainframe. This mainframe has no direct link to the Intergraph VAX and
consequently selected data must be reformatted in the Sperry environment and
downloaded onto tape for transfer and incorporation into Intergraph at the
FREAC computer center. In addition, the 6 DER field offices have no access to
the Intergraph but do have direct access to the Sperry.
Micro-based GIS
The custom developed micro-based GIS is designed around an IBM AT
workstation operating with DOS 3.1. This system also has a high resolution
-------
FIGURE 3.4
Overview of Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation
GIS and Related Computer Systems
Florida State University I
Multi-user
VAX 11/780
Intergraph Software
Other GIS's
e.g., Water Districts
Micro-based GIS
ffiM-AT
Environmental
Data Transfer
Dedicated 56 Kb Line
2 Intergraph Workstations Calcomp Plotter
/DDDDDD
faaaaaaa
Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation
State of Florida
J
LJ
Sperry UNTVAC
aaaaaa\
aaaaaa\
Tallahasse and
Field Offices
IBM PCs and Terminals
i
-P>
en
-------
111-47
color monitor display and a color printer. The system at present has a 20 Mb
hard disk storage capacity that will be increased with the addition of a
Bernoulli Box in the near future. Data is maintained on floppy diskettes, with
each county on a separate diskette. The data base is developed in a raster
format with 1 square mile grids. The GIS software does not have the
flexibility to modify scale easily nor provide rubber sheeting of data layers.
There is at this time no capability for digitizing any new data at the DER
workstation since there are no data entry software routines. Whether this GIS
will become available as public domain software through DER is unresolved.
Other Office Systems
In addition to these DER-maintained GIS systems, Water Districts have
their own GISs (Computervision, ARC/INFO) for independent data analysis and
mapping. Often these programs collect independent data. It is also important
to note that many program offices within DER have acquired PCs for individual
program applications.
Organizational Structure/Staffing
The Bureau of Information Systems in the Division of Administrative
Services is responsible for operation of the Intergraph. One systems manager
has responsibility for the Intergraph software, which is only a small part of
his overall responsibilities. Technical staff to operate the system have been
made available within DER program offices. Presently there is only one
full-time GIS technical analyst in the Bureau of Ground-water Protection. In
the past, DER had more GIS technical staff, but staff reductions have
seriously inhibited the efficient use of this system by other program offices.
Senior managers have attended Intergraph classes while other staff have
acquired Intergraph working knowledge through in-house training and user
assistance at FREAC. The Information Systems manager indicated that the ideal
situation would be to have two full-time scientifically trained staff
knowledgeable in both regulatory programs and ADP systems to provide GIS and
microcomputer support.
The micro-based GIS is managed independently of the Bureau, of Information
Systems within the ground-water program office. At present, the DER ADP staff
do not provide any technical support for the IBM AT operations.
Costs
DER did not purchase the Integraph software but pays an annual service fee
of approximately $30,000 to FREAC for system access and data base maintenance.
The cost of purchasing the first Intergraph workstation in 1984 was $55,000
while the second workstation purchased in 1986 cost $45,000. In addition DER
bought a Calcomp plotter for $20,000 in 1984 to produce high quality color
maps. A dedicated 56Kb communication line to FREAC costs $122 per month.
Development costs paid by DER to the University of Florida for the
micro-based GIS will be $287,000. This cost includes providing all hardware
and software to DER but does not include annual updates of the Florida tax
information which is projected to cost between $ 40,000 and $50,000.
-------
II1-48
Benefits
The benefits to DER as a result of GIS implementation include data
integration, identification of environmental problems, strategic planning, and
information dissemination to the public and State legislature.
o Integration of several different sources of data (e.g. EDB
application maps, laboratory analysis of drinking water samples)
provided a unique analytical capability for the pesticide monitoring
program through computer mapping. This integration is also unique for
the ambient ground-water monitoring program. It is reasonable to
conclude that these programs would not have been able to conduct
their business as quickly and efficiently in the absence of these
GISs.
o The integration of different pieces of information (e.g. tax
information, DRASTIC maps, drinking-water supplies) has resulted in a
better understanding of environmental threats to Florida's
ground-water resources. Geographic integration and mapping allow for
specific identification of problems. Using the GIS to integrate these
data sets has resulted in establishing a "baseline" of specific
environmental conditions. Data analysis procedures have been
developed to identify specific "problems". Updating this baseline
data base with new environmental spatial data will also enable
managers to track program progress.
o DER has been required to tackle several monumental environmental
problems in the State of Florida during the past several years. The
GIS has assisted management in developing monitoring strategies (e.g.
pesticide contamination to drinking-water) and prioritizing remedial
actions (e.g. type of corrective action for contaminated wells and.
allocating financial resources).
o GIS products have been used regularly by DER to brief the legislature
as well as educate the public concerning program progress. Maps
showing where problems exist and the locations for corrective action
have proved invaluable to program managers.
Critical Success Factors
The successful use of GIS at DER can be attributed to the factors
summarized below:
o Technical support for the GIS program has been closely associated
with FREAC which serves as a center of excellence in Intergraph
applications and system support. Futhermore, DER does not have to
invest significant resources in maintaining the Intergraph GIS
software. Efficient data exchange protocols exist between the Sperry
and the Intergraph. Trained GIS system operators and analysts have
been available in the past to support program applications.
Presently, DER requires more experienced staff to work with the GIS.
o ' Financial support for purchase and operation of the Intergraph has
been available through specially legislated State environmental
-------
111-49
programs. Funds for staffing, however, have not been part of this
budget allocation.
o Management support has been instrumental in implementing GIS program
applications. This infrastructure support includes State legislature,
DER senior management, and program management support. The successful
GIS program applications with pesticides and ground-water have
interested other programs in using this tool.
Constraints
Several factors need to be addressed that are limiting the full potential
of the GIS:
o A SIS Coordinator with full responsibility to direct and manage the
DER GIS activities is needed. Having a person in this role will
assist other DER programs in gaining access to the Intergraph.
o Management and funding support to hire, train, and maintain GIS
technical staff to use the Intergraph hardware. At present the full
complement of software routines have not been used because of the
shortage of staff and lack of familiarity with the entire range of
Intergraph capabilities.
o There is a need to establish more efficient data integration. The use
of the Intergraph could be expanded within DER if other environmental
data residing on the State Univac could be incorporated into the VAX
on a selected basis. Similarily, a wealth of data exists on other
State GISs that selectively could prove useful for various DER
programs.
-------
111-50
— GIS CASE STUDY —
THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY — CORVALLIS
Project History
The Environmental Research Laboratory - Corvallis (ERL-Corvallis) is the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's national center for atmospheric,
terrestial and aquatic ecological research. A major thrust of the
Laboratory's research is understanding the ecological effects of pollutants as
they move through the air, soil, and water.
The Laboratory research programs are organized into several broad areas,
including: the ecological effects of airborne pollutants such as ozone and
acid rain; the effects of toxic chemicals on plants, animals, and ecosystems;
the assessment and restoration of contaminated or degraded environments; the
characterization and assessment of the vulnerability of ecological systems
(e.g., wetlands) to human impacts; and the ecological risks from bioengineered
organisms and other biological control agents.
The Laboratory's research approach to the analysis of environmental
processes is generally holistic, with individual research projects
contributing to an understanding of specific processes occurring within an
ecosystem. Research consists of laboratory, aquarium, greenhouse, aviary, and
field studies on the acute and chronic effects of environmental pollution.
Mathematical modeling, experimental design, and statistical analysis are
applied to help understand and predict changes in natural and stressed
environments. These research activities support the information needs of the
EPA air, water, pesticides, hazardous waste, Superfund, and toxics programs.
The ERL-Corvallis has undertaken several multimedia ecological assessments
during the past decade emphasizing integrated spatial analysis. The
acquisition and implementation of ARC/INFO in April 1985 was a direct
outgrowth of these activities and interests.
Environmental Program Applications Using GIS
GIS applications at ERL-Corvallis include several major efforts which are
described below.
National Lakes and Streams Survey
The relationship between acidic deposition and the acidification of
surface waters has become an important environmental issue in the United
States. Alkalinity and ANC have been used as indices of surface water
sensitivity to acidic deposition. The actual sensitivity of a lake or stream
to acidification, however, depends on the Acid Neutralizing Capacity (ANC)
generated both within the lake and its watershed. Hence, because many
physical, chemical and biological factors, (both aquatic and terrestrial)
collectively determine the biotic composition and chemical environment within
lakes, the response of an aquatic ecosystem to acidic deposition is a
composite of many factors.
-------
111-51
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency initiated the National Surface
Water Survey (NSWS) in 1983, which includes both lakes and streams, to:
quantify the present chemical status of surface waters in the U.S.; assess the
temporal and spatial variability in aqautic chemistry; define the key
biological resources associated with surface waters; and identify temporal
trends in surface water chemistry and biology. Each subsequent phase builds
on the results of the previous one, ultimately identifying those lake or
stream populations upon which to base a regionally characteristic,
statistically sound long-term monitoring project designed to study long-term
trends in chemistry and biological resources.
The ARC/INFO GIS is being used to provide the information needed to assess
the chemical status of lakes and streams in areas of the U.S. containing the
majority of-low alkalinity systems. The GIS is providing data base management
mapping.capabilities to investigate correlations among chemical variables on a
regional basis and to estimate the chemical status of lakes within a specific
region.
Direct/Delayed Response Project
The Environmental Protection Agency's Direct/Delayed Response Project
(DORP) is examining the question "What is the possible long-term chemical
response of surface waters to continued acidic deposition?". The DDRP
requires detailed watershed maps of those characteristics associated with the
effects of acidic deposition. To provide this information, the USEPA
contracted with the USDA Soil Conservation Service to map soils, vegetation,
geology, and depth-to-bedrock on 145 watersheds in the Northeast and 35
watersheds in the Southern Blue Ridge Province. Land use maps are provided by
the EPA Environmental Monitoring and Systems Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The DDRP is integrating data from the intensively studied DDRP watersheds
with data from other sources, including lake chemistry data from the EPA's
National Surface Water Survey (NSWS), U.S. Geological Survey runoff maps, dry
and/or wet deposition estimates, precipitation and evapotranspiration
estimates, existing regional physiographic and land use maps, and 1:250,000
Digital Elevation Models. These data are being used in three levels of DDRP
analysis: system description, single factor response time estimates, and
dynamic systems models.
The influence of key watershed variables on surface water chemistry can be
examined by characterizing or displaying the spatial distribution of
individual and/or aggregated variables (e.g., soils, soils/vegetation
intersection). These spatial characterizations can ultimately be related to
surface water chemistry via statistical, graphical, or cartographic
techniques. Watershed characterization involves describing individual
variables, identifying map units in close proximity to the study lake or
stream reach, and aggregating map units within and between layers.
Characterizing spatial relationships among the watershed variables allows
researchers to develop and test various hypotheses concerning the effects of
individual variables on surface water chemistry. The watershed variables,
particularly soils, that occur closest to the water body might exert the
greatest effect on its chemistry. The influence of these proximal land units
-------
111-52
can be investigated by determining the land area components within certain
distances (either longitudinal or elevational) of the lake or stream reach.
Although a single variable (e.g., soil mapping units) might not adequately
explain the chemistry of surface waters, particular aggregations or
combinations or variables might yield significant results.
A variety of GIS-based cartographic techniques are used to display and/or
interpret regional or sub-regional variations in selected parameters. These
spatial displays are used to explain or predict water chemistry across the
regions of concern. Both analytical (e.g., interpolation of modeled
distributions to points) and descriptive (e.g., depiction of the distribution
of sulfate concentrations in sampled water bodies) processes are used in the
analyses. Outputs include point location maps, circle maps, contour and/or
interpolated maps or datasets, and Thiessen polygon maps.
Future Applications
ERL-Corvallis is in the preliminary stages of determining the role of
ARC/INFO in the new Global Climate program. The objective of this initiative
is to assess the ecological effects resulting from climatic change. The GIS
is expected to provide essential parametric overlay mapping capabilities and
ecosystem level atmospheric modeling results.
The Corvallis Lab has been developing ecoregion mapping products for the
last several years to portray the interrelationships among natural and
anthropogenic factors affecting ecosystem quality. These products are in
great demand by numerous state agencies. ERL-Corvallis is exploring
mechanisms for producing regional and ecoregion map products for this user
community.
Spatial Environmental Data
The data sets and sources used by the ERL-Corvallis in the GIS program are
summarized below:
o USGS l:2,000,000-scale Digital Line Graph Data (derived from USGS
National Atlas separates) containing Political Boundaries (state and
county);
o US EPA National Lake Survey Data Base
o US EPA National Stream Survey Data Base
o Adirondacks Lake Survey Corporation Data Base
o Watershed Maps (1:24,000) for 145 Northeast and 35 Southeast
watersheds
— soils
— geology
— depth to bed rock
— vegetation
-- land use
-------
111-53
o US EPA East Coast Emissions Data for 1984 (S04 & NOx)
o Wet and Dry East Coast Deposition Data for Water Year 1984
o USGS Runoff Data for the East (1951-1980 and Water Year 1984)
o US6S Gaging Station Data (1951-1980 and Water Year 1984)
Overview of GIS Hardware/Software
The ARC/INFO software resides on a dedicated VAX 750. ERL-Corvallis is
presently upgrading its computer system with the installation of a VAX
785/8600 cluster that will also be linked to the VAX 750 for additional
computing capabilities. Peripheral hardware includes eight Tektronix color
graphics terminals (4107 and 4207), two Calcomp 9100 digitizers, a Calcomp
1075 4-pin .plotter and a Calcomp 5800 electrostatic plotter. The ARC/INFO
software includes the basic INFO DBMS from HENCO and ARC, the ESRI software
developed for storing cartographic data. In addition, the Triangulated
Irregular Network (TIN) application module for structuring and modeling
digital terrain data (e.g., contour maps, viewshed creation, store mapping) is
incorporated into the GIS.
Organizational Structure/Staffing
The ARC/INFO GIS activities at ERL-Corvallis are supported by numerous
contractor staff. A GIS Coordinator is responsible for overall administrative
organization, prioritizing work loads among different projects, overseeing GIS
staff, liaison with the lab professional staff and hardware maintenance. This
person dedicates slightly more than half of his time for this GIS role. Three
to four full time employees divide responsibilities for digitizing, map
archiving, and data validation. There also is a full time system operator
responsible for plotter operation and maintenance, and system backup. In
addition each project has the equivalent of one man year devoted to GIS
operations, analysis, program planning and project implementation.
Costs
The costs associated with the ERL-Corvallis ARC/INFO implementation and
operation include:
Acquisition Maintenance
ARC/INFO package with TIN $ 50,000$ 15,000
8 Graphic Terminals $ 32,000 $ 6,000
2 Calcomp Digitizers $ 14,000 $ 600
Calcomp 4-Pin Plotter $ 18,000 $ 3,000
Calcomp Electrostatic Plotter $ 80,000 $ 10,000
General Supplies (plotter paper,tapes) $ 25,000
VAX 750 (dedicated for GIS with System
Industry Disk Drive and Clock Accelerator)$200,000 $ 50,000
Two systems operators cost approximately $100,000 and the estimated cost
to the Laboratory for other GIS contractor support is $400,000 annually.
-------
111-54
Benefits
Benefits of the GIS have been acknowledged throughout the lab management
structure and fall into the broad category of improved understanding of
complex ecological processes through efficient data integration, analysis and
mapping.
o Data integration is accomplished with having the ARC/INFO system
serve as a central repository for extensive ecological field
measurements. These data are entered in a standard format and
subsequently validated.
o Project teams of multidisciplinary scientists are very enthusiastic
about the types of analyses provided through ARC/INFO. Interactive
color graphic displays enable the scientists to evaluate numerous
ecological relationships.
o ARC/INFO maps, with color coded symbols, provide unique display
products enhancing the project teams' analysis capabilities.
Critical Success Factors
The successful use of GIS at ERL-Corvallis is attributed to the following
factors:
o Management support by the Laboratory Director, Administrative
Officer, and Branch Chiefs. These senior managers support the GIS
activities through project funds and central administrative support.
o Technical support for the ARC/INFO is provided through contract
services with Northrop Services, Inc. This support is both
technically competent and scientifically knowledgeable.
o A unique collection of extremely capable multidisciplinary scientists
receptive to learning how to use a "new tool".
Constraints
The ERL-Corvallis ARC/INFO GIS application program is a we11-functioning
operation. The only major problem encountered during the two years of
operation has been insufficient CPU and inefficient processing capabilities as
user demands increased. These problems were minimized with providing Systems
Industry Disk Drives and a Clock Accelerator. The soon to be installed VAX
785/8600 cluster will improve GIS services dramatically.
-------
INTERVIEWEES
-------
IV-1
IV. LIST OF INTERVIEWEES
REGION I
Office of Information Management
Michael MacDougall Chief
Ed Woo Chief, Information Resource Section, GIS Technican
Ethan Mascoop
Robin Fletcher
Narrangansett Bay Project
Katrina Kipp Coordinator
Stephen Hale Data Management Coordinator
RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Marion Gold Former GIS Coordinatort
Ernie Panciera Groundwater Section
UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CENTER
Bill Wright Chairman, Department of Natural Resources
Pete August Director
Tom Faella Operations Manager
REGION III
Information Resource Management Branch
Joe Hamilton Chief
Environmental Systems Division
Rich Fetzer
John Ruggero
Brigitte Farren
Water Management Division
Al Morris Director
-------
IV-2
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
Chuck Spooner Director
Dennis Fuze Data Management Coordinator
Joe Macknis
Lacy Nasteff Contractor CSC
Lowell Bahner Contractor CSC
Jeff Booth U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
REGION IV
Joe Franzmathes Deputy Regional Administrator
Office of Integrated Environmental Analysis
George Collins Chief
Henry Strickland GIS Coordinator
Office of Drinking Water
Al Korgi
Helen Lunsford
Tom Grubbs
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY - DORAVILLE
Jeff Armbruster Chief, Water Resources Division
Bob Pierce GIS Specialist
Jack Alhadeff GIS Specialist
GEORGIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION
William McLemore State Geologist
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
Division of Administrative Services
Jon Winter Chief, Bureau of Information Systems
Rick Mitchell Systems Project Administrator, Bureau of Information
Systems
-------
IV-3
Division of Environmental Operations
John Buickerood Scientific Engineer, Bureau of Restoration
Division of Environmental Programs
Marilyn Glasscock
David Vogal
Rodney Dettan
Gary Maddox
Rick Cope!and
Joe Hand
Groundwater Protection
Groundwater Protection
Groundwater Protection
Groundwater Protection
Groundwater Protection
Water Quality Management
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY — CORVALLIS
Tom Murphy
Charles Frank
Terrestral Branch
Bob Lackey
Aquatics Branch
Spence Peterson
Dixon Landers
Dan McKenzie
James Omernik
Contract Support
Andy Herstrom
Trish Southern
William Campbell
Gary Bishop
Dorothy Martenson
Sue Pierson
Barry Roche!le
Doug Brown
Colleen Johnson
Barb Rosenbaum
Visiting Scientist
Ron Nielson
Director
Administrative Officer
Branch Chief
Branch Chief
Aquatic Team
Watershed Team
Geographer
GIS Coordinator
GIS Technician
Direct Delayed Reponse Program
Direct Delayed Reponse Program
Direct Delayed Reponse Program
Direct Delayed Reponse Program
Streams
Streams
Small Lakes
Small Lakes
Global Climate
(DDRP)
(DORP)
(DDRP)
(DDRP)
------- |