6470
EPA
       United States
       Environmental Protection
       Agency
Office of Information
Resources Management
Washington DC 20460
                             21M-101V
                             February 1991
          Guidance for Developing
          Image Processing
          Systems in EPA

          EPA System Design and
          Development Guidance:
          Supplement to Volumes A & B

-------
                             Table of Contents
Executive Summary...........................	1
I. Acquisition Process for Image Processing Systems in EPA	.......	.......7
   A. IPS Committee	7
   B. Overview of the IPS Acquisition Process	8
      1.  Define Mission Needs	9
      2.  Gain IPS Committee Concurrence	10
      3.  Conduct Feasibility Study	12
      4.  Obtain Director, OIRM Approval	13
      5.  Perform Detailed Requirements Analysis and System Design	13
      6.  Acquire and Implement System	14
II.  Mission Needs Study[[[	15
   A. Define Organizational Mission	17
   B. Describe Current Document Management System	19
   C Define Document Management Problems	23
   D. Identify Document Management Needs	23
      1.  Document Access	24
      2.  Document Storage	24
      3.  Document Distribution	25
      4.  Document Control	25
      5.  Document Processing	26
   E. Identify Possible Solution Areas	28
      1.  Document Access	29
      2.  Document Storage	29
      3.  Document Distribution	30
      4.  Document Control	30
      5.  Document Processing	,	31
   F. Obtain IPS Committee Concurrence and Direction	31
III. Feasibility Study	.,		35
   A. Determine Operational Cost Baseline	36
   B. Develop Feasibility Alternatives	40
   C Determine Feasibility Alternatives Costs	41
      1.  Investment Costs	42
      2.  Operational Costs	44
      3.  Annualized Feasibility Alternatives Costs	46

-------
                               Table of Contents
                                                                      Page
Appendix A: Document Management Framework.........................................	.53
Appendix 8:  Document Management Approaches .....~~.....................................61
   I.  Document Management Solutions	61
      A. Paper          	61
      B,  Micrographics  	62
      C  Image Processing Systems	64
      D. Hybrid Image Processing Systems	64
   IL Document Management Alternatives	67
      A. Paper - Technological Complexity	67
          1.  Movable Filing Systems	67
          2.  Computer-Based Indexing	68
      B.  Micrographics  	68
          1.  Media      	68
             a.  Microfilm  Rolls	68
             b.  Microfiche	69
             c  Jacketed Microfilm	69
             d.  Aperture Cards	69
          2.  Technological Complexity	69
             a.  Computer-Aided Retrieval (CAR)	70
             b.  Computer Output to Microfilm (COM)	70
             c  Digitized Microfilm	70
      C  Image Processing Systems	71
          I.  Media      	71
             a.Magnetic Storage	71
                1.  Magnetic Tapes	71
                2.  Magnetic Disks	71
             b.  Optical Storage	72
                I.  Compact Disk/Read Only Memory	72
                2.  Write Once Read Many (WORM)	72
                3.  Erasable Optical Disk	73
          2.  Technological Complexity	73
             a.  Storage and Retrieval Systems	73
             b.  Archival Systems	74
             c  Document Processing Systems	75
Appendix C: Average Unit Costs.............................................-..*.............................^
Appendix D: Mission Needs Study Document Outline ........................................81
Appendix E: Feasibility Study Report Outline[[[^
Appendix F: IPS Policy Document.....	..	............	89

-------
                       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
      This  document provides guidance for EPA  managers interested in
determining whether electronic image processing technology may be a cost-
effective alternative for their information management needs.  It explains
how to define mission needs and how to conduct a feasibility study, the first
steps necessary to justify investment in an imaging  system.  These analyses
are key documentation in the government's budget and procurement process
for acquiring  and implementing information technology and systems. The
term "image processing systems" (IPS) is defined for this guidance document
as the storage/ retrieval, processing and control of document images (i.e.,
document pages, maps, drawings, etc.) in electronic digital form.

      1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

      The purpose of this guidance is  to advise EPA managers on how to
successfully demonstrate the need to make a capital investment in an  image
processing system — first to their own management, then to the Director of
the Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) and, if warranted,
finally to budget and oversight  officials in the Office of Management and
Budget  (OMB)  and the General Services  Administration (GSA).   This
guidance covers the initial documentation EPA managers should expect to
influence  their  decisions about  imaging systems with  preliminary
assessments of:

      •     The nature of their document management needs

      •     Any  specific  document processing   and  records
           management  problems  that   impede  organizational
           effectiveness

      •     The  options available  to  meet their  needs and solve
           particular problems

      •     The economic, technical and organizational feasibility of
           an electronic imaging system solution.

Just how much detailed documentation is required to obtain agreement is
generally in proportion to the magnitude of the investment.  Investments
associated with IPS frequently  include much more than the costs of vendor-
provided hardware and software and may  include  such new or additional
resources as:
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 1

-------
                                                Executive Summary
      •     Facilities, equipment and contractor services

      •     Customized applications software

      •     Office procedural manuals and updated records retention
            schedules

      •     Conversion .and .storage costs, for historical and existing
            records

      •     Human  resources ~ both training and new roles for
            management and processing.

Early identification of needs as well as a focus on the range of realistic options
should help to clarify whether and how IPS could  significantly improve the
performance of the organization.  A clear understanding of the management
objectives for undertaking major enhancements in document and records
management programs helps managers evaluate the full potential impact of
changes, benefits and costs they may experience if they decide to invest in an
imaging system.

      IPS is a relatively new and complex technology.  Early experience in
EPA and other  organizations with prototype image processing  systems
indicates that guidance addressing the particular characteristics of these
systems is important to managers.  One of  the major  lessons from these
prototypes is that IPS is a fundamentally new way of performing many office
and  program, functions.   Imaging systems offer  innovative and effective
processes for document  creation, distribution, manipulation, storage and
retrieval.   To justify both  the  expenditure of funds  and the inevitable
disruption in established document handling procedures, an IPS system
should not simply perpetuate current document management practices  by
automating them.  An IPS solution should make use of  the unique features
of IPS technology to improve document management while at the same time
supporting the overall objectives and priorities of the organization.

      2. DOCUMENTATION SUPPORTING EPA DECISIONS

      Image processing technology is powerful, but it not necessarily the best
solution for all  document and  records management needs.  The formal
definition of mission needs and assessment of feasibility outlined in this
guidance document should give managers the written analyses they need to
determine relatively quickly:

      •     Whether they should invest in further, more detailed and
            expensive assessments of specific IPS solutions
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA            Page 2

-------
                                                Executive Summary
      •    How large an investment over what period of time may
           be  needed  before  improvements  start  paying  off
           (including conversion, facility and staff costs mentioned
           above.)

Preliminary cost, benefit and return-on-investment  (ROD estimates  are
essential ..to..meet.-Federal .oversight .requirements  in the budget and
procurement process. Both the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and
the General  Services Administration (GSA)  have  criteria and  dollar
thresholds governing the acquisition of information technology and systems.
If these are met, substantial documentation on  the need for and projected
return on the investment may be required.

      This  guidance covers the basic questions  and  topics that must be
addressed in the mission needs analysis, preliminary design and options
analysis for information systems.  The products  of these analyses  —  the
Mission Needs Study and the Feasibility Study — address basic documentation
needs for review within EPA  and by oversight  agencies.   This guidance
document supplements Volumes A and B of the Agency's System Design and
Development  Guidance  and, like them, offers generic guidelines.  Each
program manager's document and records management needs, however,
have  unique as well as common  concerns.   Some  needs are met with
substantial investments in "major"  or "high-end" systems; some  can be
satisfied with  relatively inexpensive "low-end" systems.   The early
identification of the scope of the solution determines the extent of detailed
analysis and documentation that may be needed to determine and justify the
investment in an imaging system.

      This  guidance  was  produced  under the  auspices  of  the  Image
Processing  Systems (IPS) Committee, whose charter is to ensure that EPA
investments in IPS meet the Agency's overall needs and priorities.  Appendix
G  presents the  IPS  Committee Charter.  The Committee designed the IPS
acquisition  process described in this guidance to promote its oversight role
and to begin building an understanding of the Agency's full range of strategic
needs for imaging  systems.  The IPS Committee serves as a senior-level
oversight and advisory body.   Its recommendations  inform the Director,
Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) who is responsible for
exercising  EPA's delegation  of  procurement  authority  by  approving
investments in information technology and systems, including IPS.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 3

-------
                                                 Executive Summary
      3. ORGANIZATION OF THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

      Chapter I of this guidance provides an overview of the entire process
for acquiring image processing systems in EPA in six distinctive but iterative
decision-making phases:

      •     Define "Mission Needs"

      •     Gain IPS Committee Concurrence

      •     Conduct Feasibility Study

      •     Obtain Director, OIRM Approval

      •     Perform Detailed Requirements and System Design

      •     Acquire and Implement System.

A: noted earlier, this guidance document offers supplemental information to
assist EPA offices  with the first four steps of the process for image processing
systems.  The  fifth phase of  system acquisition involves extensive, indepth
analyses  outlined in Volume C  of the System  Design  and  Development
Guidance.   Two  new guidance documents  support the sixth  phase of
acquisition and implementation. They are entitled Image Processing Systems:
Implementation Guidance — Parts I and II:

      9     Part  I IPS  Contract  Hardware,  Software and Services
            Description — provides a list of all hardware and software
            components  available on  an  EPA contract  for  image
            processing systems.

      •     Part  II Acquisition  and Implementation Guidelines —
            provides a summary of acquisition procedures, hardware
            configuration design, training guidelines, site preparation
            guidelines, installation and  testing guidelines, operations
            guidelines and support responsibilities.

The IPS acquisition process overview in Chapter I also defines the role and
outlines the procedures the IPS Committee will follow in exercising its role to
ensure the productive  introduction and use of electronic image processing
technology and systems in the Agency.

      Chapter n describes how EPA offices decide whether IPS is a solution
they  should further explore by documenting their  needs for improved
document processing and official records  management.  The chapter also


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 4

-------
                                                 Execulive Summary
describes the criteria the IPS Committee applies in concurring, from a broader
Agencywide  perspective, with program managers'  decisions that image
processing technology is a good potential candidate to address particular
problems and enhance overall organizational  effectiveness.

      Chapter HI presents a methodology for conducting a feasibility study to
get as early an assessment as possible of whether IPS is a reasonable solution
to. pursue-in-terms x>f economic justification, technical  capability and
organizational  realism.  This  chapter  summarizes how  to address the
estimated costs  and benefits of alternative solutions in a relatively quick and
inexpensive analysis.  The results assist EPA program managers in deciding
whether more time-consuming and expensive detailed systems requirements
analyses appear warranted.  The results of the feasibility study then assist the
IPS Committee  in recommending and the Director, OIRM in approving the
decision to acquire image processing technology and systems.

      This guidance also includes six appendices.  Several apprendices have
reference  materials which  may be useful in assessing mission need and
feasibility, such as comparative assessments  of the relative  advantages and
costs of paper, micrographics, image processing and hybrid image processing
systems.  EPA documents which may be useful in developing image
processing systems, such as the Agency's policy on IPS implementation, are
also included as appendices.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 5

-------
 I. ACQUISITION PROCESS FOR IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS IN EPA
      The need for guidance and an acquisition process specifically tailored
for image processing  systems  (IPS) became apparent from the Agency's
experience with early IPS prototypes.  The distinctive requirements  and
characteristics  of image processing  systems  involve considerations beyond
those  encountered  in  general  automated  data  processing system
development.  The term "image processing systems" is defined for  this
guidance  document as the storage, retrieval,  processing and  control of
document images (i.e., document pages, maps, drawings, etc.) in electronic
igital form.

      To ensure that EPA offices interested in using image processing benefit
from this early IPS experience, the EPA  Administrative Systems Council
created an IPS Committee, whose charter is to advise the Director, Office of
Information  Resources  Management (OIRM)  and  members of  the
Administrative Systems  Council on proposals  to implement  advanced
records and information management systems employing the use of digital
imaging,  storage and communications technologies.

      This chapter describes the role of the  IPS Committee and  the overall
process it has established for image processing system acquisition.
A. IPS COMMITTEE

      The IPS Comittee is chaired by the Deputy Director, OIRM and draws its
membership from senior technical managers within OIRM and the National
Data Processing Division (NDPD in OARM/RTP) as well as senior program
managers knowledgeable  about image  processing and its use in  EPA.
Appendix G presents the Committee's charter which includes definitions of
its objectives; membership and structure; and operation.

      The essential role of the IPS Committee is to ensure the  successful
introduction of this new  and complex technology which has significant
impact on not only on individual offices but also on the Agency as a whole.
The Committee and its members are to ensure that new proposals for IPS
benefit from what the Agency has begun to learn from hands-on experience
with electronic imaging systems. In addition to technology transfer, they are
also  to ensure coordination and prevent expensive duplications of effort
where offices may have similar needs. The Committee should also advise
EPA managers and the Director, OIRM-of opportunities for integration and
efficiencies of resource utilization, e.g., where all EPA Regional offices or
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 7

-------
                                                Chapter I - Introduction
laboratories may  benefit from the innovative system developed by  one
organization.

      The  Committee  has recommended the  Agency's  policy  for  IPS
acquisition and has published this guidance document as its initial activities
in overseeing the  productive  introduction and  utilization  of image
processing technology in EPA.

                               Exhibit M

          Acquisition Process for Image Processing Systems
                                                        Acquire and
                                                       Implement System
                                               Perform Detaied
                                             Requirements and System
                                                  Design
                                       Obtain Drector,
                                       OIRM Approval
                       Gain IPS
                       Committee
                      Concurrence
B. Overview of the IPS Acquisition Process

      EPA's process for  acquiring image processing systems includes  six
distinctive but iterative decision-making phases as shown in Exhibit 1-1:

      •     Define "Mission Needs"
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
PageS

-------
                                              Chapter I - Introduction
      •    Gain IPS Committee Concurrence

      •    Conduct Feasibility Study

      •    Obtain Director, OIRM Approval

      •    Perform Detailed Requirements and System Design

      •    Acquire and Implement System.

This process follows the basic analysis  and decision-making structure of
Volumes A, B and C of the Agency's  System Design  and  Development
Guidance which  begins with identification of "mission need" and concludes
with system acquisition and implementation.

      The IPS acquisition process is distinguished from EPA's more generic
systems development process only by its emphasis on the critical importance
of the first step  of defining mission need and the additional step of IPS
Committee concurrence.  The following sections  outline  the  purpose,
documentation and results of  each of the six phases of the IPS acquisition
process.

      1. DEFINE MISSION NEEDS

      The purpose of this phase is to conduct assessments which help EPA
managers conclude that an image  processing systems is an appropriate
alternative for improving their document processing  and official records
management. This first  step is critical to the rest of the acquisition process
because it defines the management objectives and the improvements which
promote the Agency's mission that managers should expect from  their
investment in IPS.  These definitions  of the concerns  the imaging system
should address are also invaluable aides  to decision-making throughout the
remaining feasibility, design, acquisition and implementation phases.

      The data collection and analysis tasks to determine the needs for an
image processing system do not require elaborate technical assessments. They
do, however, demand careful examination of an organization's document
processing and records management  program.   If an organization maintains
current records  retention  schedules and regularly assesses  its document
handling procedures, these tasks can be completed efficiently to answer key
questions about:

      •    Management Need — Are documents and official records
           -being managed-to help meet  the organization's mission?
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 9

-------
                                              Chapter I - Introduction
      •     Management Opportunity — Are changes in -document
            handling and records management warranted to enhance
            staff and office productivity?

      •     Alternative  Solutions — What alternative document
            management approaches  might meet these needs and
            enhance productivity?

Appendix D outlines the content of a  Mission Needs Study  to respond to
these and other questions EPA managers will raise before deciding that IPS
appears to merit further investigation.

      Defining the nature of management  problems and opportunities to be
gained helps in identifying the range of alternatives which may address the
problem. These alternatives are described in Appendix B and include:

      •     More efficient  paper document-based approaches,
            enhanced with  computer  indexing, bar-coding  of file
            folders to aid tracking , and other 'low-tech" refinements.

      •     Microform-based approaches, including  microfilm and
            microfiche,  which  may also be  enhanced  with
            computerized indexing and retrieval

      •     Image  processing involving  the conversion of paper
            document images into electronic digital information,
            which is  then  stored, retrieved  and  processed
            electronically

      •     Hybrid approaches involving combinations of the above
            technologies.

At this phase, results of the mission needs analysis help EPA managers define
their records  management  requirements, evaluate the extent to which
improvements depend upon enhancements to their records programs and
whether information technologies may  be a  part  of  the  management
solution.

      2. GAIN IPS COMMTTTEE CONCURRENCE

      If EPA program managers determine that IPS is an option they would
like  to  pursue further, they  contact members of the IPS Committee and
review the results of their mission needs assessment to ensure the successful
introduction of this advanced technology into their offices.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 10

-------
                                               Chapter I - Introduction
      In reviewing the mission needs analysis, the IPS Committee does not
seek to "screen out" requests for image processing — apart from those that are
clearly not appropriate applications of the technology — as much as it seeks to
offer guidance to sponsoring organizations, based on the Committee's
experience with imaging.

      In giving its concurrence  to proceed  with a feasibility study, the
Committee may request that the sponsoring organization address specific
issues in its analysis, such as giving consideration to  a particular alternative
involving a hybrid of technologies.

      The Committee may  also use the mission needs analysis to determine
whether the scope of  the proposed document  management  application
should be broadened (or narrowed), or whether other  organizations may
have a collateral interest and might be brought into the process. For example,
an important responsibility of the Committee is to ensure that duplicative
feasibility studies are not  conducted, such as the same program office in
several  regions independently analyzing  identical applications.  In these
instances, the Committee will  advise the Headquarters program office and
interested regional  program offices to coordinate efforts through a joint
feasibility study.

      The IPS Committee also may exercise its coordinating role when an
application offers the potential of supporting operations  in another office or
functional  area beyond the sponsoring office.   For example, an image
processing application in one  program area may benefit an administrative
function (or another program area) that uses  the same  documents or data
associated with those documents.  Cost recovery for Superfund site cleanup is
one  clear  example of  an activity involving both  programmatic and
administrative documentation that transcend organizational and data system
boundaries. In these situations, the Committee may request coordination so
that as  the application  development progresses, the  opportunity for cross-
functional /cross-organizational support is realized.

      Ensuring the efficient use of the Agency's image processing equipment
is another responsibility of the IPS Committee. Because of the high capital
costs of large image processing systems, the Committee must encourage the
sharing  of IPS hardware, when practical.  If two  divisions within a
Headquarters  office, for  instance, have  pending  requests that  appear
promising, it may be less costly to host their applications on one larger image
processing platform than  on  two smaller platforms.   The same  need to
coordinate equipment use applies to EPA regional offices as well.  While it is
premature at  the  mission needs  analysis step  to determine hardware
capacities, it is not premature for the Committee to request that the feasibility
analyses for such applications  be coordinated.  In fact, the economy of scale
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 11

-------
                                               Chapter I - Introduction
gained through combining applications on a single IPS-platform  might
permit economic feasibility when independent platforms would not.

      Because the mission needs analysis serves as the foundation for all
following analysis and development efforts, it is essential that it be done
thoughtfully, yet not involve an elaborate technical analysis.  Errors in
understanding the relationship of document management needs to the
mission of the sponsoring office, if not caught at this point in the process, can
be very expensive to correct later.
      3. CONDUCT FEASIBILITY STUDY

      If the IPS Committee concurs  that image processing is a potential
solution worthy of  further evaluation, then  the sponsoring  organization
conducts a feasibility study. This study involves further definition of the
alternatives and a comparison of their respective life cycle costs and benefits
to determine the most appropriate solution for the  document  management
needs.  It is the Committee's responsibility to evaluate the results of the
feasibility study and the sponsoring organization's  conclusions if image
processing is recommended  as the most appropriate solution and advise the
Director, OIRM in approving the proposed system.

      Chapter HI of  this document presents the methodology the Committee
requires for conducting the feasibility study.  Several  general points about the
feasibility step of  the IPS development and acquisition process are worth
noting in this introductory chapter.

      The term "feasibility", as it is defined for this  process,  encompasses
several dimensions,  including:

       •     Economic  justification — Is  the cost of the proposed
            solution acceptable?

       *     Technical  capability —  Is the recommended solution
            technically  possible?

       •     Organizational realism — Is it realistic  that the proposed
            solution can be implemented by the target organization?

      The actual determination of feasibility is complex because it involves
weighing these factors with the benefits derived from managing documents
in  a way that better supports the  organization's mission.  Baseline
characteristics that are  developed in  the Mission Needs Study are  used  to
perform economic analysis for each  of the alternatives.   These economic
considerations are then  combined with the technological, organizational and
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 12

-------
                                               Chapter I - Introduction
mission needs considerations  in order to determine  the  most  feasible
alternative.

      The feasibility study elaborates on the alternative solutions identified
in the mission needs analysis, yet it is still conducted at a fairly high level.
An investment to develop detailed requirements and design should only be
made for the most appropriate alternative selected as a result of the feasibility
study.  Thus, a sponsoring organization needs to define its alternatives only
to the extent required to support analysis presented in Chapter ffl.

      Nonetheless,  in some cases the IPS Committee may  request further
analysis by the sponsoring organization to clarify ambiguities or to  test
different cost factors.  This  is why. it is important at the  outset for the
sponsoring organization to dearly understand the Committee's objectives for
the feasibility analysis.

      4. OBTAIN DIRECTOR, OIRM APPROVAL

      If the feasibility analysis concludes that an image processing-based
solution is the most appropriate,  then the sponsoring organization receives
authorization from the Director, OIRM to proceed with development of the
application.  The Director will consult the IPS Committee for advice in
making this decision to approve,  disapprove or direct additional analysis
before the procurrement of an imaging system or a detailed design study may
begin.

      If image processing is determined not to be the appropriate solution,
then the sponsoring EPA managers decide whether to proceed with another
alternative that  does not include  image  processing technology.    The
development  and implementation of a solution other than IPS would occur
outside the process described in this guidance document.

      5. PERFORM DETAILED REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS AND SYSTEM DESIGN

      After  receiving authorization to  proceed  with IPS application
development,  the  sponsoring  organization  will  begin to  specify  the
application's detailed user and system requirements, and the system's design.
This analysis will build on the foundation begun in the mission needs  and
feasibility steps.

      The guidance for  sponsoring organizations  at  this step of  the
development process  is contained  in the  EPA  System  Design  and
Development   Guidance,  Volume  C:   System  Design, Development,  and
Implementation.
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 13

-------
                                               Chapter I - Introduction
      During this  step of  the  development  cycle,  the  IPS Committee's
interaction with the sponsoring organization will be similar to the interaction
between OIRM  and the NDPD for a major  system development effort.
Periodic progress  meetings may be held, mutually scheduled by  the IPS
Committee and sponsoring EPA program office. These meetings will  serve to
keep the Committee apprised of progress  and significant problems.  The
meetings will also provide an opportunity for the Committee to gain  insights
that may be.helpful to pass along to the other IPS applications developers, as
well as offer guidance to the EPA office developing its detailed requirement
and design specifications.

      At present, image processing systems are considered "major" systems,
as defined by the EPA System Design and Development Guidance, by virtue
of their scope of operation or magnitude of costs.  The documentation and
review  requirements  specified throughout this present guidance  for IPS
applications is consistent with the requirements for all major applications.

      6. ACQUIRE AND IMPLEMENT SYSTEM

      At the  appropriate stage of IPS system design, the acquisition  process
will begin. This point is determined by EPA program managers leading the
development  of  the  imaging system.  Written authorization  from  the
Director,  OIRM  is required under the Agency's  delegations of ADP
procurement  authority to invest in the necessary equipment and  services
from the appropriate Agency contracts.  Actual implementation is expected to
follow a project management and implementation plan defined as part of the
detailed system design.

      Guidance on the acquisition and implementation step of this process is
contained in two separate documents on  Image   Processing Systems:
Implementation Guidance:  Parts I and II:

      •     Part  I IPS  Contract  Hardware,  Software and  Services
            Description  — provides a list of all hardware and software
            components available  on an  EPA  contract fcr image
            processing systems.

      •     Part  II Acquisition and  Implementation Guidelines  —
            provides a summary of acquisition procedures, hardware
            configuration design, training guidelines, site preparation
            guidelines,  operations   guidelines  and  support
            responsibilities.

The average timeframe in  the  federal government  for the overall
process from mission -needs through acquisition and implementation
of a major information system is  approximately 18-to-36 months.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 14

-------
                     II.  MISSION NEEDS STUDY

      This chapter discusses the process used to perform a Mission Needs
Study for a system  in which the use of  image processing technology is
contemplated.  It also discusses the concurrence process and criteria used by
the IPS Committee when reviewing Mission Needs Studies.

      The Mission Needs Study should identify the management objectives
and any specific records management concerns.  These will  define the
feasibility and  requirements for an improved document management system.
Since the focus of this manual is  on imaging systems which deal with the
manipulation and storage of documents,  the focus of  the Mission Needs
Study will be  on records management issues in an EPA program area.  A
range of  alternatives to meet the defined needs must be assessed to arrive at
tentative  conclusions regarding the most appropriate technological approach
to the problem.

      The  most critical aspect  of the Mission Needs Study is providing
sufficient detail to demonstrate the nature of the program's needs without
getting lost in detailed data collection and analysis. The study is not meant to
be extensive or costly because no feasibility for implementing the system has
been established.  On the other hand, enough information must be developed
to narrow the  options sufficiently to focus the Feasibility Study on the most
appropriate document management solutions  to the  problem.  Establishing a
sharp focus for the Feasibility Study will greatly reduce the effort and cost
necessary to conduct the study and will allow the study team to concentrate
more effort in  identifying the most promising solutions.

      Another critical issue is   the  effectiveness  of existing  records
management policies, procedures, operations and personnel.  Any of these
aspects of the records management program that are outdated, ineffective or
unresponsive  to the  EPA  program's needs must  be corrected  before
information technology solutions are worth the  investment.  Any new
system built upon weak document processing, insufficient staff resources  or
obsolete  records retentions schedules risks perpetuating  the  existing
problems. Some problems, in fact, might be aggravated with the introduction
of  some  technologies.  Because of its  central  role in the  successful
introduction of IPS,  the program's records management should be reviewed
and clearly understood prior to the establishment of system requirements.

      Exhibit H-l illustrates the process used to conduct the Mission Needs
Study.  This is the first step in the development process, and in many ways,
the most critical.  The high-level mission needs identified in this study will
become the foundation for  all future feasibility and requirements analyses.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 15

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
They will also serve as the primary rationale to justify the .cost and effort
necessary to acquire the system.

                              Exhibit IM

           Steps for Conducting the Mission Needs Study
                                           JBMtofl MM* Study OooumtalQuUn*
                              Docurmnl Mmiganmit
                                 Problem)
                           Currant Document
                          Management Syซtปm
      Appendix D provides an outline for the written report which describes
the results  of the Mission Needs Study.   The document  contains  the
following chapters:

      •     Chapter I (Introduction) provides  a general introduction
            to the purpose of the study, the process used to conduct it,
            and the sources of information for the study.

      •     Chapter  II (Organizational  Mission) describes  the
            organizational purpose, goals, objectives and functions of
            the sponsoring organization and its records management
            policies.

      •     Chapter  in (Current Document  Management System)
            describes the existing document management system and
            its strengths and weaknesses.

      •     Chapter IV (Problem Definition)  defines the document
            management problems  which exist that hinder the
            organization in meeting its goals and objectives.
                                               m
      •     Chapter  V  (Mission Needs)  describes the  document
            management .needs required to .access, store, process and
            control the documents maintained by the current system.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 16

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
           Chapter VI (Possible Solutions) provides-a description of
           potential solutions to the  problem with a rationale for
           each describing how  it solves the problem  and meets
           defined needs.

      Exhibit II-2 identifies the methodology for conducting the  Mission
Needs Study.  The remainder of this chapter provides a description of this
methodology including the activities necessary to conduct the study and
produce the study document.
                             Exhibit II-2

                   Mission Needs Methodology
C j, ซw

*-
s %%%





PRQ9UHOEFMIIKMI


                                 DETERMINES
                                tlBSON NEEDS
                                 IDENT1FCS

A. DEFINE ORGANIZATIONAL MISSION

     The first step in conducting the Mission Needs Study is to identify and
document the goals, objectives and  functions of the organization which are
supported by an existing system. In general terms the organizational mission
defines what the organization does today and where the organization is going
tomorrow.  The organizational mission is  one element which establishes the
framework for identifying its document  management needs.  Exhibit II-3
identifies the major components comprising the organizational mission.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 17

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
                              Exhibit II-3

                Organizational Mission Components
                    ORGANIZATIONAL MISSION
                                            '// FUNCTIONS '//,
      In order to identify these needs effectively, the mission must be defined
in the context of the Agency's overall goals and priorities.  For example, is the
broad mission of the program to enforce EPA regulations by successfully
prosecuting violators of EPA permits or to manage contracts which promote
more effective  performance by the  Agency?   The  mission  should
encompasses all areas of the organization which are affected by the current
document management system or could be affected by implementing a new
system.  Depending on the scope of the  system, the organizational  mission
may be defined for a specific branch, division, program office, regional office
or the entire Agency.

      Laws, regulations  and administrative policies  and procedures have a
controlling influence on  the characteristics of records management systems.
These issues must be well understood if the system is to ultimately serve the
needs of the organization.

      To warrant the expenditure of funds, an IPS system should not simply
perpetuate current document management practices by automating  them.
An  IPS solution should make use of the unique features of IPS  technology to
improve document management while  at the  same time support the overall
objectives  and strategy of top management in information management.

      IPS  systems may be used for a wide range of applications within an
organization.  Certain applications may be more strategically important than
others. For example, there may be an immediate need to reduce the number
of documents which are  lost during a key phase of their processing.  There
may, however, also be a strategic need to  change the overall process  through
which different staff in various locations interact as a document goes  through
various stages of review and use. Potential users must appreciate the features
and capabilities that IPS technology offers to determine if an IPS can be
implemented cost-effectively to meet immediate and longer-term program
needs.

Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 18

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      The complexity of an IPS varies with the application  goals.   Some
systems intended for limited use in a single organization may be small,
standalone systems  that do not require extensive document processing or
networking capability.  On the  other hand, systems which  will be used
throughout the Agency and require integration  of information from many
different sources could become very large and complex.

      Additionally, a range of sensitive, human resource management issues
may surface with a  proposal to consider an IPS system.  IPS systems may
establish new  information-access  hierarchies,  allowing  rapid  access to
documents by persons who previously followed structured procedures to
obtain them.  Access control and document processing capabilities might be
built into an IPS system to ensure that only authorized persons have access to
documents or that documents must be processed in a specific way.

      On a more basic level, it is important to consider the people who will
actually be operating, using and managing the system. Most office documents
and official government records are  handled by many people throughout the
organization.  The system must ultimately be responsive to all of their  needs -
- and some groups will have distinctive needs not shared by others.  People
have different reactions to automation of their work.  They may not share the
same motivation  to  improve paperwork handling effectiveness and may
resist change, regardless of the benefits to the organization. Also, the ability to
process more work electronically in a unit of time may  create a heavier
workload for operators and users, as well as the  temptation for managers to
expect more  work.   These human  factors must also be considered in the
Mission Needs Study.

      It is important to understand that the overall effectiveness of an IPS
system is not  determined by the capabilities of the hardware and software — it
is determined by the ability of people who take advantage of these capabilities.

B. DESCRIBE  CURRENT DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

      Having identified organizational goals  and objectives, it is  now
necessary to evaluate the current document and records management  system
of the organization.   Is it expected  that a proposed system will improve an
existing document management and processing  capability? Or should the
new system be designed as a complete replacement of the existing system?
These questions can only be  answered and justified by achieving  a good
understanding of the current system.

      The results of this analysis should provide an overall description of the
lifecyde of documents critical to the operations and performance of the
program office.  The lifecyde of key documents begins with creation, through
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 19

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
active use to storage and disposition, either as  an archival  record or
destruction. Reference to the organization's retention  schedules is essential
at this stage of analysis. The retention schedules provide an inventory of the
important documents in the office; identify which documents are  official
governments records; and define disposition dates and procedures for each
document.

      After establishing the set  of documents and  records  used in the
paperwork supporting the office's functions,  it is useful  to distinguish
different types of documents - by how they are created and how they are used.
One approach to organizing the office's many different types of documents
into categories for further analysis might look like this:

      •     Forms — where the graphic format and size dimension of
            the  document are standard but the specific information
            requiring action changes (e.g.,  purchase requisitions  and
            requests for personnel action)

      •     Reference materials —  where the documents are not
            changed by the holding office which uses this information
            to perform its work on a routine basis  (e.g., regulations,
            contract  terms and  conditions,  policy  and guidance
            documents, and publications from other sources)

      •     Working and official documents — where the documents
            are  either created or modified  by processes in the office
            while  the documents are being developed or are held  as a
            record  of an  official  action of  the  United  States
            Government  (e.g., correspondence, record of decision,
            memorandum of understanding, regulations, court briefs
            and research reports)

      •     Archival  materials — where the documents are not
            changed by the office which either uses this information
            in its work on an infrequent basis  (i.e., for historical
            trends) or is required by law to maintain inactive records
            on-site (e.g., dockets).

Some method for organizing all the program office's documents into useful
categories  helps create  meaningful  document profiles.   These  profiles
establish a functional description of the document categories, including how
they are processed and maintained under the current records management
system. Data collected for these document profiles are typically represented by
the kinds of questions illustrated in Exhibit n-4.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 20

-------
                                    Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
                           Exhibit II-4
                  Document Management Profile
                What documents are retained?
                What is the average number of pages per document?
                What locations are served by the systems?
                What is the mix of color and size?
                Where are the documents stored?
                Who uses the documents?
                Who manages and  controls the documents?
                Why are the documents created?
                Why are the documents retained?
                How many documents are received daily? Annually?
                How many document are retrieved daily?
                How many documents are processed daily?
                How many documents are stored? How many pages?
                How are the documents organized?
                How are the documents managed and controlled?
                How long are the documents retained?
                How are the documents disposed?
                How many documents will exist  next month?
                  Next year?  In five years?
                How many users are served by the system?
                How often are the documents accessed?
                Are the documents double-sided?
                Are there security requirements (e.g. Privacy Act)?
                Do the documents contain official signatures?
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 21

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      In addition to preparing a document profile, it is important to develop
an overall system  description, including identifying the strengths  and
weaknesses of the current system. The objective is to retain the strengths and
correct  the weaknesses of the current system in order to implement a
successful document management solution that solves the problems.  Exhibit
n-5 identifies the major components of the current system description.

                              Exhibit II-5

              Current System Description Components
         ORGANIZATIONAL MISSION
, - '
CURRENT SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
\ SYSTEM \^1
^ STRENGTHS vN
I
!X DOCUMENT 0
|X PRORLE 0
> SYSTEM y
^WEAKNESSES'


      Information collected for the document  profile and  the  system
description can be obtained using the following techniques:

      •     Circulating survey questionnaires

      •     Conducting  interviews  with management  and staff
            personnel

      •     Conducting  additional research  by analyzing system
            documentation and/or observing system operations.

The survey questionnaire  should  be designed  to elicit quantifiable
information  concerning characteristics  of documents managed by the current
system. The wording of the questionnaire should be phrased carefully so that
it can be easily understood. In other words, technical data processing terms
should be removed and  specific references to documents (e.g., document
acronyms [DMR], form  numbers [SF-52], etc.) should  be used where
appropriate.

      Chapter HI of the Mission  Needs Study  Document, as shown in
Appendix D,  should provide document profiles and description of the
current  document management  system including  system objectives,
responsibilities of operating staff, document profiles, process flow diagrams
showing inputs, processes and outputs, mid system strengths and weaknesses.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 22

-------
                                    Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
C. DEFINE DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS

      The document management problems which currently exist must be
clearly defined in order to identify the document management needs and
ultimately  determine the  best technological  solution.   The  problem
essentially identifies unmet document management needs or deficiencies of
the existing system. These deficiencies define what the existing system cannot
perform in order to -meet -organizational -goals and objectives. Similar to the
system strengths and weaknesses described above, these system deficiencies
are also defined within the context of the organizational mission.

                             Exhibit II-6

                  Problem Definition Components
                          DBGAMZAIMNtt. IM8CN
                                                  CWMENT*V*rEMJ)ESCflU>IKM
                                                              ireim  n
                                                            ' Wl/UOCaEI/1
                                                            - - ' ' ' I
      In  addition  to  defining any problems, it  is also important the
sponsoring office understands the implications of changes that may occur
when correcting these problems.  An organization might create a new group
or remove an existing group of staff to support a new document management
system, or the organization might develop new  procedures for document
management.  Depending on the scope and complexity of the problem and
the  solution implemented, these changes may have a significant impact on
the  organization.

      Identifying the strengths and  deficiencies of the existing system will
establish  the  framework for defining  the  document management needs.
Chapter IV of the Mission Needs Study Document, as shown in Appendix D,
should provide an overall statement of the problem, as well as deficiencies of
the  existing system.

D.  IDENTIFY DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT NEEDS

      Description of the current system and definition of  the document
management  problem establish the framework  for determining  what
capabilities an improved document management system should  provide.
The description of strengths and weaknesses of the current system can portray
how current and future document management  needs can and cannot be
met. Combined together, these elements can provide a foundation for system
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 23

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
enhancement that will preserve existing strengths, correct system weaknesses
and eliminate deficiencies. The following criteria provide an effective basis
for technology selection in the final step of the mission needs process.

      1. DOCUMENT ACCESS

      This need addresses which documents in the system are retrieved and
used by managers and staff in the program office  and the  type of access
required. Some of the issues to consider are:

      •     Frequency of access:  Is access to documents frequent or
            seldom?   Does access  vary  over time?   If access is
            infrequent, then a non-IPS solution may be most cost-
            effective, such as microfilm or microfiche.

      •     Speed of  access:  Length  of time  required to access
            documents (rapid or slow)?

      •     Single user or  multi-user access: How many users will
            need to  access  the  same document or set of  related
            documents at the same time?

      •     Other access characteristics:  Do access characteristics
            change over  time?  Are the  accessed documents usually
            related?  If so, how?  Access characteristics, such as what
            type of information is  typically needed  (specific
            information or general information), type of access (from*
            one  document to another in  sequential order or random)
            and  how many documents are accessed at the same time
            (single or  many per access), all affect the technology
            decision  and  ultimate system characteristics.

      2. DOCUMENT STORAGE

      Storage requirements define how long and  under what conditions
documents must be available in the system. Some of the issues which should
be considered are:

      •     Storage  quantity: What is  the total current document
            volume?  How many documents  must  be stored by the
            system?  What is the annual growth?

      •     Storage  duration:  How long must documents be stored in
            the system?  If documents must be stored for a long time,
            then.the ability of the storage media to remain reliable
            over time becomes an issue.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 24

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      •     Storage mandate:  How long must the documents be
            retained to satisfy the  legal, statutory and disposition
            requirements set forth in the Agency records disposition
            schedules?  Do any of these requirements limit the range
            of acceptable storage media?

      •     Active or inactive documents:  How long do documents
            stay active?  Does  access to documents become very
            infrequent with age?

      3. DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION

      Distribution  requirements relate to the extent to which documents
must be delivered to multiple points in the organization in order to facilitate
other tasks.  Some of the issues that relate to this requirement are:

      •     Extent of internal and external distribution: Is document
            distribution required? How many copies of the document
            are typically  distributed,  both internal to the parent
            organization and to external organizations.

      •     Type of distribution: Is the whole document distributed,
            or  is  only  a portion  of the document  necessary?
            Alternatively,  is it necessary to distribute only  data from
            the document? Are documents distributed in  groups or
            individually?

      4. DOCUMENT CONTROL

Document control relates to the security and accountability requirements for
documents in the system. These concerns are defined by the requirements of
the Privacy  Act Program  and legislation protecting confidential business
information and  computer matching.  In  financial  and administrative
documents,  there are also objectives  to minimize vulnerability  to waste,
fraud and abuse.  The following issues influence the selection of technology
in this area:

      •     Security requirements:  How extensive are security
            requirements for documents in the system? Who sets the
            security requirements?  Are  they sufficient as they
            currently exist?

      •     Document  accountability:  How extensive is  document
            accountability? Do the  documents have intrinsic value if
            control  of- the  document is  lost?   Who  sets   the
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 25

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
            accountability requirements?  Are they sufficient as they
            currently exist?

      •     Security for portions of documents or for data from
            documents:  Do different security requirements exist for
            different parts of the same document? Is document level
            security/accountability required?

      5. DOCUMENT PROCESSING

      Document processing is the extent of document flow, modification or
use of the document in the routine business of the organization.  If the
document goes through extensive review or modification during the creation
process,  or if routine business processes depend upon utilization  and
modification of the document, then  document processing is involved.  The
following issues relate to this requirement:

      •     Single or multiple persons processing documents:  Are
            documents typically processed by one person or by many?
            Are multiple offices involved?   Is there a specified
            sequence of document flow during processing?

      •     Internal and external  document processing:  Are  the
            documents  reviewed  or   modified  by  external
            organizations?   Are documents processed  in groups or
            one by one? Are documents processed concurrently?  Is
            there  a requirement that documents be processed in a
            specified time?

      A set of baseline characteristics must be developed to compare the
current document management system to the  possible solutions.  These
baseline characteristics are a subset  of the mission needs and establish the
foundation for performing economic analysis.  In order to perform an equal
comparison of the current system to  each of the possible solutions, these
baseline characteristics define the  reasonable set  of mission needs
characteristics that  should  be reflected in  the current system.  Once
established, these baseline characteristics are constant for all of the alternative
solutions.

      Exhibit n-7 presents a sample set of baseline characteristics that are used
to select the range  of alternative solutions.  These characteristics are a subset
of the document management profiles presented in Exhibit H-4.  However,
the  document management profiles reflect only the current system  In
comparison, the  baseline characteristics incorporate the mission needs  that
should be reflected in the current system.  The baseline characteristics are
further discussed in Chapter ffl - Feasibility Study. Exhibit n-8 identifies the
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 26

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
components that  are used  to derive the mission needs and depicts  the
baseline characteristics as a subset of those needs.

                             Exhibit 11-7

                      Baseline Characteristics
                What is the average number of pages per document?

                How many documents are received daily? Annually?

                How many documents are retrieved daily?

                How many documents are processed daily?

                How many documents are stored?

                  How many pages are stored?

                How many users must the system support?

                How many locations must the system serve?

                How many documents will exist next month?

                  Next year?

                  In five Years?

                How long must the documents be retained?
      As shown in  Appendix D, Chapter V  of the Mission Needs Study
Document  should  describe the document  management  needs of  the
organization in terms of access, storage, distribution, control and processing.
In addition, the baseline  characteristics should  be included for use in
determining economic feasibility conducted in the next development phase.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 27

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
                              Exhibit II-8

                     Mission Needs Components
                                     ' ' ' ' A
                                     FIMOTM /I;
                                     ^^^p^^l1
E. IDENTIFY POSSIBLE SOLUTION AREAS

      The final step of the Mission Needs Study process is to determine
appropriate  technology solution  options  that can   meet  program
requirements.  Exhibit II-9 identifies the possible  document management
solution areas. These possible solutions include:

      •     Improved paper-based systems

      ฎ     Microform systems using microfilm or microfiche

      •     Image Processing Systems

      •     Hybrid combinations composed of combinations of the
            above categories as well as other MIS technologies

Appendix B summarizes each of these solutions, which should be understood
before proceeding with the Mission Needs Study.

      Exhibit n-10 provides an illustration of the relationships between the
Titeria utilized to describe mission needs in the previous section and the
jasic technologies available  as system  solutions.  This  exhibit  does not
consider  cost in the analysis, but merely depicts how well  the needs criteria
generally apply to the functionality of the solution areas.  Appendix A
provides a  more detailed comparison of the requirements characteristics to
the system solutions.   The following discussion  amplifies the information
highlighted above under Section E.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 28

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
                              Exhibit II-9

             Possible Document Management Solutions

                                                   CIMRBITซr*TBI
                                               . ITCTBI SjCoOCIMBCT>
      L DOCUMENT ACCESS

      Generally, image processing technology is most advantageous where
the solution requires  frequent  access to large volumes of documents.
Simultaneous access to paper documents by several users is difficult to
manage without creating copies of the document.  Finally, increasingly
complex and demanding access  requirements increase  the likelihood that
image processing technology may be an appropriate solution for the problem.

      2. DOCUMENT STORAGE

      Image processing systems are most appropriate in cases where large
quantities of documents must be stored in the system. Technologies such as
Write Once-Read Many (WORM) optical disks offer large storage capacity at a
low cost and good long-term storage reliability.  If some documents in the
system are very active and others are inactive, then perhaps a hybrid system
combining image processing with  another technology is appropriate.

      Image processing is a relatively new method for  storing information
and, therefore is still in the early stages of acceptance by courts and regulatory
agencies.  A legal precedent has  not been established, to  date, for the
admissibility of information stored on  optical storage medium  in a court of
law   In current document management systems, micrographics remains the
best legally acceptable medium to  ensure document integrity and reliability.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 29

-------
                                     Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      3. DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION

      If distribution  of multiple documents  or portions of documents is
required, an image processing system may be a suitable alternative.   In
general, IPS is best suited for applications requiring shared corporate databases
of documents distributed to multiple areas.

                             Exhibit 11-10

         Comparison of Document Management Solutions
Requirements
Categories
Document Access
Document Storage
Document Distribution
Document Control
Document Processing
Paper
Q
O
Q
ซ
9
Micrographics
e
Q
9
ซ
9
Key: Efficient: ^& Somewhat ^\
™ Efficient: ™
Image Processing
•
•
•
Q
•
inฃnici€nit i \
      4. DOCUMENT CONTROL

      If security requirements are  high, a number of options exist for
enhancing  document security, including microfilm and IPS.  Extensive
document accountability may also indicate the need for an image processing
system.  Additionally, if sensitivity  requirements are different for various
portions of the document or for data elements on the document, an image
processing solution may be appropriate.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 30

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      5. DOCUMENT PROCESSING

      If documents are processed by multiple persons, in multiple offices,
externally to the Agency or if processing is done to batches of documents,
image processing technology may be appropriate.

      Appendix A provides a more detailed view of these relationships, and
Appendix B provides a brief description of the technological alternatives that
are currently available.  Utilizing the mission needs developed above and this
information, the sponsoring office identifies the  solution(s) that are  most
appropriate. The primary purpose of this process is to narrow the scope of the
Feasibility Study to only those solution areas which are appropriate to the
problem so that effort expended in the Feasibility Study can be as productive
as possible.

      As shown in Appendix D, Chapter VI of the Mission Needs  Study
should provide for each candidate solution, the name and description  of the
solution as well as a rationale why it may be an  appropriate alternative to
further analyze in the Feasibility Study.

F. OBTAIN IPS COMMITTEE CONCURRENCE AND DIRECTION

      Exhibit 11-11 summarizes the primary criteria the IPS Committee will
reference  when reviewing Mission Needs Studies.  These criteria are
intended to  ensure that the evaluation of projects is done fairly, consistently
and in a manner which is in the best interests of the Agency. Each of the
criteria identified in Exhibit n-11 is summarized below.

      Consistent with agency priorities:    The problem  solved by the
candidate system must be consistent with mission requirements and Agency
priorities or it is unlikely that  sufficient staff and financial resources will be
found to sustain system operation over time.

      Sufficient resources:  At a minimum, sufficient  financial or staff
resources must be available to conduct the Feasibility Study or there is little
point in conducting the  Mission Needs Study.   An  IPS system can be
expensive.  If the resources are not available to procure and maintain it, then
it is unlikely the system will become a reality.

      Clear statement of the problem: If the problem has not been articulated
clearly, it is likely that the sponsoring office has not completely thought
through the situation. Again, lack of clarity at this stage can be fatal.

      Mission goals and organizational context: For the system to be a
success, the sponsoring office must have-articulated clearly mission goals and
the organizational  context so that  requirements and design efforts are
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 31

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
correctly focused.  If this is not done, the system development effort will be
flawed from the start.

      Proposed solutions consistent with the stated requirements: Has the
sponsoring organization correctly linked the mission needs with the correct
technology choices?  Have any choices been overlooked?  The Committee
may wish to provide additional direction to the sponsoring organization in
this area.

      Demonstration of insight into the problem: IPS systems can be large,
complex and expensive. Additionally, they often result in significant change
in the business procedures of the organization.  The organization must have
the management  and technical sophistication  to  manage  properly the
development and implementation process, or the system is likely to fail.

      IPS a candidate solution for the system: If IPS does not appear to be
candidate solution, then the development effort is  not within the jurisdiction
and interest of the Committee. Therefore, the Mission Needs Study need not
be brought before the Committee for review. If IPS is asserted as a proposed
solution, it should be supported by mission needs described in terms of access,
storage, distribution, control and processing requirements.

      Other considerations:   Each system is different,  and the Committee
reserves the right to suggest other considerations as necessary.

      Additional  guidance:  By  providing  additional guidance, the IPS
Committee can insure that Feasibility Studies are performed consistently and
in accordance with Agency policy.

      The above criteria will be applied to evaluate the results obtained from
the Mission Needs Studies. Careful attention to ensure that these issues are
addressed in the Mission  Needs Study will facilitate the evaluation process
conducted by the IPS Committee.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 32

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
                             Exhibit 11-11
                      IPS Concurrence Criteria
                     Is resolution of this problem consistent with
               Agency priorities?
                    ..Are . sufficient  resources  available  to
               undertake the Feasibility Study?
                     Is the problem dearly and accurately stated?
                     Are organizational purpose and mission
               goals stated dearly and correctly?
                     Are proposed solution areas consistent with
               the stated mission needs?
                     Does   the   sponsoring  organization
               demonstrate insight into the problem and identify
               steps needed to correct the situation?
                     Is IPS a potential solution in this case, and is
               that assertion supported by a description of:
                     1.  Access Requirements?
                     2.  Storage Requirements?
                     3.  Distribution Requirements?
                     4.  Control Requirements?
                     5.  Processing Requirements?
                     6.  External Requirements?
                     Are there any other considerations  which
               should be applied to mis project?
                     Should any additional guidance be provided
               to the  sponsoring  organization to  direct  the
               activities of the Feasibility Study?
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 33

-------
                                      Chapter II- Mission Needs Study
      The Mission  Needs Study  determines the high level mission needs
and  identifies potential document management solution(s) to address  the
defined problem.   The results of this study establish the foundation  for
conducting  the next phase  of the Systems Development Life  Cycle —
Feasibility  Study.   The  analysis for assessing the feasibility of possible
solution(s) consists of four steps:

      •     Determine an  operational cost baseline for the current
            document management system

      •     Develop feasibility alternative(s) based on the problem
            and needs defined in the Mission Needs Study

      •     Determine feasibility alternative(s) costs providing  an
            annualized  estimate  of the  investment  costs  and
            operational costs

      •     Develop  a feasibility recommendation based on  the
            analysis  of economic,  financial, technological  and
            organizational  considerations.

      Each of these steps is discussed in detail in the following chapter.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 34

-------
                       in. FEASIBILTDlSlIIOY
      Following IPS Committee concurrence with the conclusions of the
Mission Needs Study, a feasibility study must be conducted to determine if a
proposed solution can be justified within the context of existing constraints.
This chapter provides an overview of  the feasibility analysis process to be
        A    A                                   J     J   i
followed in conducting such a study.

      The process, shown in Exhibit ffl-4, consists of four steps, and addresses
the feasibility of the solution(s) approved  for  consideration  by  the IPS
Committee, as a result of  the Mission Needs Study process discussed in
Chapter H  First, in order to form the- comparative basis for determining the
feasibility of the solution(s), an operational cost baseline derived from the
strengths and weaknesses of the existing document management approach
must be quantified.  Second,  based on an understanding of the  existing
mission needs and following EPS Committee direction concerning the scope
of the proposed solution(s), a more specific alternative should  be developed
for the proposed solution(s). Third, an analysis of the investment costs and
operational  costs of the specific feasibility altemative(s)  must be conducted.
Estimation of operational costs will serve to reflect a substantial portion of the
anticipated  benefits for  an alternative.   Finally, other  factors,  such  as
technological and organizational issues, as well as additional mission needs
unmet by the current document  management  approach, should  then  be
included in the analysis to provide support for,  and understanding of, the
feasibility recommendation.
              Steps for Conducting the Feasibility Study
                                                               Document Outline
                                              Develop
                                              Feasibility
                                               mmendation
                                         Determine
                                         Feasibility
                                      Alternatives) Casts
ftuabBBf Altimtttot
                                   Develop
                                Feasibility Alternatives
                               Operations!
                              Cost Baseline
Guidmee for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
      Exhibit m-2 describes the methodology that underlies-this process.  In
order to assess the feasibility of selected alternatives, three major economic
analyses must occur:

      •     Operational costs associated with the existing system must be
            analyzed and developed into an annualized baseline cost.

      •     Investment costs and operational costs of the selected feasibility
            alternative must be analyzed and developed into an annualized
            feasibility alternative cost.

      •     Annualized baseline and feasibility alternative costs must be
            compared  primarily in terms of net present value  to determine
            basic economic feasibility.

The  result of the net present value analysis is then included  with any
additional intangible benefits.  Other pertinent feasibility factors, such as
organizational or  technological  issues,  as well as the extent  to  which an
alternative supports overall mission needs, also must be considered in
making the final feasibility determination.

A. DETERMINE OPERATIONAL COST BASELINE

      A quantitative baseline must be developed so that a proposed solution
can be  compared with the present document management system.  This
operational  cost baseline information is the foundation for any economic
analysis. Exhibit ni-3 summarizes the minimum set of categories that should
be considered in  developing the annualized baseline cost. As can be seen,
once the basic characteristics  of the existing system have been identified,
annualized storage, retrieval and processing baselines can be estimated.

      The relevance  of each of the major baseline cost categories — storage,
retrieval and processing — to  the current setting must be determined on a
case-by-case basis. In each case,  the baselines should serve only to reflect an
estimate of  those activities that are actually being performed within the
current  setting. For  example,  not every existing system  will have extensive
document processing activities associated with it; such capabilities may not
even be currently possible. Some systems may serve primarily as document
repositories, with only  minimal retrieval requirements.

      It is important to understand that the operational baseline may not
reflect the full set of capabilities outlined in the Mission Needs Study; the
current document management approach  simply may be  incapable of
meeting the full set of document management needs.  An awareness of the
weaknesses of the current approach, as well as those needs that are currently
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 36

-------
                                           Chapter III - Feasibility Study
         M ANALYZED
         ltMBOF
                               Exhibit III-2

                       Feasibility Methodology
                               OE1ปMNE
                                          J
                                                 •MCHHMUITZB)
                                                     I Of

                            COHMIIEDTO •
                                                     WICefct&^^^l
                               XBTHC
                               FACTOM
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page37

-------
                                           Chapter HI - Feasibility Study
                               Exhibit III-3

                Baseline Operational Cost Categories
                                ofto
                                ofp*
                            nm mMk, MH ytv, MM
 SPACE
  QuMtratfrntoffloori
 MATEMALKEOUWENT
  OunlKy Bid ซMt of fltkig >yซtMn
  (ปซ.ซ• MMN*. toWv, Me J

 PEnONNELCOSra
  tmป4 en atMng* Dm* lor
  •lorag*, kKMkig irahnH. Mnkig,
      ng*
                            HATEHUUS
                              •ซ•ซ 00 MlMII M< MX Of
PERSONNEL
     Mirag*
     kickidkifl
                                                        :;5-:ป*sajNEroocE88tMQ COSTS 5
unmet/ can play a significant role in determining the feasibility of a proposed
solution.  In fact, the correction of current weaknesses and the provision of
additional capabilities is generally the primary reason for seeking approval to
implement  a  new solution.   The key  consideration to  keep in  mind
concerning the baseline system is that it serves as an analytical basis against
which proposed solutions are compared.

      Personnel  costs should  be estimated based  on current average wage
rates including overhead/fringe benefits for FTEs normally performing the
indicated activity.  Personnel costs are primarily determined based upon the
time distribution of document handling and the amount of time associated
with specific document activities. Factors that can be used  to estimate space,
materials or equipment costs are included in Appendix C.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                      Page 38

-------
                                             Chapter III - Feasibility Study
      Once all costs associated with each of these areas, have been estimated,
the total annual costs for the baseline system can be determined.  Annual cost
increases as the result of additional storage space costs per year should also be
considered.  Exhibit ffl-4 presents a summary format  of annual baseline
information required  to conduct  the  comparative economic  analysis,
described below, of the selected feasibility alternatives.  Any special issues that
might have a significant impact on the current storage  and retrieval costs,
such .as  off-site  document  storage  facilities  or  unusual  retention
requirements, should be considered in the baseline analysis,  as  appropriate.
Careful attention to the external usages or interfaces required in the  current
system should assist in the identification of relevant factors.
                                Exhibit m-4

                  Annualized Baseline Cost Summary
                                  •A8SUNE SYSTEM

                                                                       ซOBTS|
                                  COST SUMMARY
                       TOTAL ANNUM. STORAGE SPACE COST*

                       TOTAL ANNUAL STORAGE EOUPMENT/MATEMAU COSTS

                       TOTAL ANNUAL STORAGE PERSONNEL COSTS

                       TOTAL ANNUAL HETWEVAL MATEIULS COSTS

                       TOTAL ANNUAL RETMEVAL PEIUONMO. COSTS

                       TOTAL ANNUAL PROCESSING PERSONNEL COSTS
                       TOTAL AD
                                     SPACE!
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 39

-------
                                          Chapter III - feasibility Study
      Results of the operational cost baseline analysis should .be presented in
Chapter n of  the Feasibility Report.  This chapter should include a brief
description of  the  current document management  setting,  its  major
characteristics/ and the extent to which it meets overall mission needs.  The
baseline  category estimates should be presented  along with any major
assumptions or unusual conditions that impact the overall baseline.

B   ^EVELOPitAsiBiurY ALTERNATIVES

      The process described in Chapter n of this guidance document should
result in one or more proposed solutions with the potential to address the
identified  requirements.   The IPS Committee may provide additional
direction as to the type, scope and complexity of the  alternatives to be
considered  for  feasibility analysis.   In  addition, determination of the
operational baseline should provide a clearer understanding of the problem
to be resolved by the selected feasibility alternative(s).  Therefore, three key
factors influence the development of feasibility alternatives:

   •  High-level requirements developed for the Mission Needs Study

   •  Direction provided within the IPS Committee concurrence

   •  Understanding gained through analysis of the current problem.

The purpose of this step is to take these key factors into consideration and,
together with information about applicable technologies, develop one or
more alternatives sufficiently detailed  to allow a  meaningful analysis of
feasibility.

      It may be helpful to think of the feasibility alternatives as an "educated
guess"  as to how a proposed solution could address the problem identified in
the Mission Needs Study.   The feasibility alternative serves only as an
analytical tool for determining the effectiveness of  a  proposed solution as
compared to the current system.  Once feasibility has been determined for a
particular solution, the actual implementation option may differ significantly
from the  alternative developed  to assess  feasibility.  TThis can only be
determined once detailed system requirements have been defined, a process
that  occurs  only after the feasibility of one or more alternatives have been
established.

      Appendix  B,   Document  Management  Approaches,  contains
information  that,  when  used  in  conjunction  with the high-level
requirements  developed within the Mission Needs Study, will allow the
selection and development of feasibility alternatives consistent with the
direction  of the IPS Committee  concurrence.  Appendix B presents an
overview of possible technologies that facilitates a general understanding of


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 40

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
the fundamental characteristics of the solutions  to- be considered.   The
alternatives presented in Appendix B are not intended to be comprehensive
in scope.  They are however, intended to  provide a range  of system
alternatives that can serve as a basis for developing appropriate feasibility
alternatives that have been adjusted or tailored to more precisely reflect the
problem resolution identified as necessary in the Mission Needs Study.

      The development of feasibility  alternatives represents a subjective
process of matching an understanding of the problem with an understanding
of potential solutions, factoring in any special direction or considerations
provided by the IPS Committee.  Sound judgement must be exercised on the
part of the staff responsible for the feasibility study at this point. The accuracy
of the feasibility analysis, and  consequently  its future utility  within  the
systems development life cycle, depends on the appropriateness of the scope
and complexity of the alternative(s)  selected.   The more accurate  and
comprehensive the understanding of  the problem  and  the potential
solutions, the more appropriate the selection of the feasibility alternatives. It
is therefore important to acquire the best possible understanding of  the
various aspects and implications of each solution before developing  the
feasibility alternative(s).

      A  description  of each feasibility alternative should be presented  in
Chapter ffl of the Feasibility Report. Each description should include the basic
structure and components of the feasibility alternative, a summary of the
anticipated strengths and weaknesses of such a configuration,  and  the
rationale for its applicability in addressing the identified problem.

C.  DETERMINE FEASIBILITY ALTERNATIVES COSTS

      As with the baseline analysis, an annualized estimate of the  costs
associated with each feasibility alternative is necessary. Whereas the baseline
analysis includes only operational costs, the feasibility  alternative analysis
must also address the additional investment costs that would be associated
with the implementation of the alternative technology. In order to  maintain
consistency with the baseline analysis, it is assumed that, at a minimum, each
alternative  encompasses  the  same  storage, retrieval, and   processing
conditions as the baseline system.  Results of  the  cost analysis  for each
potential alternative should be  presented in Chapter IV of the Feasibility
Report.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 41

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
   L INVESTMENT COSTS

      Feasibility alternative investment cost categories are  summarized in
Exhibit ffl-5. Equipment costs (hardware and software if applicable), startup
costs and other costs are to be estimated for each feasibility alternative.

      Equipment costs are to be based on the best available component prices
for the specific alternative.  Appendix C contains certain cost information that
can  serve as an initial point from which to develop the equipment cost
estimate.  Hardware prices, however, may vary dramatically from vendor to
vendor and may also change over time, particularly  as new technologies
mature.  It is important therefore to verify  current component costs before
costing the feasibility alternative.  If appropriate,  leasing or lease-to-purchase
options should be considered.  Hardware prices should also include all costs
involving  component  installation,  power and  network  cabling   (if
appropriate) and documentation.  The specific types and numbers  of
components will differ according to each alternative but should generally be
consistent with the scope and complexity necessary to solve the identified
problem.

      If a feasibility alternative has a software component, its costs should
include all required system, database and/or application software, and any
software licensing  or  maintenance fees, as applicable.  The cost of any
necessary custom application development may vary widely, depending on
the  particular system or application.   Development of a  "workflow"
document processing system could significantly increase software costs.

      In addition to hardware and software costs, the startup costs associated
with each feasibility alternative must be  considered. Costs in this category
should include an estimate of any extraordinary administrative costs incurred
in the justification and procurement  of the alternative,  as  well as  an
allowance for unanticipated miscellaneous expenses incurred during startup.
These miscellaneous costs can be estimated at approximately five percent of
the equipment costs.   Other startup costs include an estimate of the costs
associated with any user and system administrator training required by  the
alternative.  These training costs generally rise as  the feasibility alternative
increases in scope and complexity.  Finally,  costs associated with  the
conversion of existing  documents into the format required by the proposed
alternative must be considered, if indicated.  The  overall cost of document
conversion will vary significantly from alternative to alternative, both with
respect to  the technology selected, as well as  the scope of the solution
required.

      Other costs may need to be included for a given feasibility alternative.
Identifying and estimating these costs, such as conversion costs, is dependent
on the scope and type of the alternative(s) selected.


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems  in EPA           Page 42

-------
                                          Chapter in - Feasibility Study
      Conversion costs can become particularly important in determining
feasibility.  Some alternatives, for example, are more feasible if adopted for
future use while using existing or inexpensive storage options which avoid
what can be significant conversions costs.
      Additional areas that warrant consideration include personnel
or  additions,  particularly  in  document  management  areas;
operational changes  necessitated by the  implementation of
alternative, in order to fully capture the benefits of that alternative;
on existing system resources, especially if the proposed alternative
integrated into an existing systems environment; and, impacts on
organizations that use the existing information.
 changes
internal
a given
 impacts
 is to be
external
                              Exhibit III-5

         Feasibility Alternative Investment Cost Categories

1

tvansnmsnuOK
             HVESTUEMT COSTS
      EQUMEMT COSTS
       STORMS COSTS
       CONVERSNN AND OTHER COSTS
                                    JHMMJBEDKMBW
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
 Page 43

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
      2. OPERATIONAL COSTS

      In addition to developing an investment cost estimate, a quantitative
estimate of operational costs associated with each feasibility alternative must
be developed.   Operational costs  should reflect an estimate of the cost
reductions in overall operations that could be anticipated through  the
implementation of an  alternative.   Exhibit ni-6  summarizes feasibility
alternative operational cost categories.  It can be seen that these cost categories
are similar to the baseline operational cost categories described in Section B,
above.

      Essentially, it is this  similarity that ultimately enables the economic
comparison of each  potential alternative with the baseline system.  By
estimating the operational costs in similar categories, a comparable measure
of the anticipated impact of the alternative can be determined. This impact, or
"benefit", can be quantified relative to the operational baseline to determine if
the life-cycle savings associated with the "benefit"  adequately offsets  the
investment costs required  to implement the feasibility alternative.

      This approach  to developing and using operational costs primarily
serves to estimate direct, quantifiable costs for the purpose of the above
comparison. These costs include such items as storage space costs and storage
materials.   However, other impacts, such as in the areas of document
processing times, are indirectly addressed as well.

      In developing the operational costs for  the various alternatives,
changes  with respect to the baseline  operational costs  are  of primary
importance. The nature and extent of these changes will depend upon the
scope and complexity of  the proposed alternative itself. Careful attention
must be paid to the potential for improvement in each of the cost categories.
Assumptions concerning the proposed system can influence the operational
cost  estimate  significantly.   The information  contained  in Appendix B
concerning the characteristics of potential solutions should be considered in
formulating these assumptions.

      Typical  considerations include the reduction in space associated with
microfirraohics storage as  comoared to tjaoer svstems  or thp fart that r>pr-
     '+*  *          %x         *        *  *     ^               " ~" ~~'    f
square-foot space costs for automated  systems may be higher as a result of
electrical or environmental requirements.  In addition, media costs may differ
considerably by solution.  Finally, and of major importance in  determining
potential savings, consideration must be given to the significant changes that
may occur in the area of personnel costs associated with document storage,
retrieval  and nroeessina.  The costs assoriatprl with Hnrumpnt stnraerp mป\r
             A        t*             	 	   ~    .  -~ -     o—   j
remain unchanged, or be only slightly altered, due to the offsetting of the
time and  effort to physically label and store paper files with the effort to
photograph or scan and index documents in micrographics or digitization


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 44

-------
                                         Chapter III - Feasibility Study
solutions.  The costs associated with document retrieval and processing,
however, may change  dramatically  as the  technologies  in proposed
alternatives assume a major role in document management,  document
retrieval  effort may be reduced as the alternative technologies enable rapid,
more efficient document location and access.  Document processing effort
may be  reduced through delays,  timely association of subsequent file
documents or more accurate document delivery.
                              Exhibit ffl-6

         Feasibility Alternative Operational Cost Categories
                           MSfUNECHAIUCTEMSTlCS
j



•"> \


-
% \

- WWRllENrCOtT*
                                                  ^M&fflMSilW*""
                                                   STOfUOE COSTS

                                                      SPACE
                                                      EOUFMENTMATEMALS
                                                      MATENALS
                                                   PROCESSMQ COSTS
                            AtMUAUZEDKAMMUTV
                                        "
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                     Page 45

-------
                                          Chapter HI- Feasibility Study
   3. ANNUAUZEDFEASIBIUTYALTERNAITVECS) COSTS

      Once all costs associated with the categories in both the feasibility
alternative operational costs and investment costs have been estimated, the
total annual cost estimate of the feasibility alternative may be developed.
Exhibit m-7 presents a summary format of  the annual feasibility alternative
information required to conduct the comparative economic analysis described
in Section D, below.

D.  DEVELOP FEASIBILITY RECOMMENDATION

      The feasibility recommendation to the EPA managers basically consists
of an assessment of economic feasibility and consideration of other factors
that might influence any decision to proceed with further development of a
proposed solution.  The process that results in the overall recommendation
includes a determination of  economic feasibility primarily through  net
present  value  (NPV)  analysis.  Economic  feasibility is augmented by
considerations of technical and  organizational feasibility.   Additional
considerations, including indirect or intangible benefits, should be addressed
also, particularly when mission needs dictate solutions that are not readily
cost-justifiable.  Exhibit III-8  depicts the components contributing to  the
development of the feasibility recommendation.

      The feasibility recommendation should be included as Chapter V of the
Feasibility Report which is outlined in Appendix  E of this document. The
recommendation  report should include the costs  of each alternative under
consideration as described in Section C, above, in support of the economic
feasibility analysis.   The recommendation report should also include  a
discussion of additional feasibility considerations  described below  for each
alternative, as appropriate.   Based on the analysis of these considerations, a
specific recommendation and associated rationale should be made in  the
report, identifying the alternative best suited for addressing mission needs.

   1= ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

The economic analysis becomes useful only when the estimated costs and
savings  are considered in  cash flow terms over the life cycle  of each
alternative.  Savings are best understood when discounted to determine their
present value, since the value of -noney changes over time due to factors
such as inflation.  Investment costs are typically incurred at the outset of a
project, with benefits, or savings occurring throughout the life cycle.  The life
cycle of an alternative should be determined based on the type of alternative
being analyzed; a six-to-ten-year range is typical.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 46

-------
                                                 Chapter III - Feasibility Study
                                   Exhibit III-7

           Annualized Feasibility Alternative Cost Summary
                                 FEASIBILITY ALTERNATIVE
          INVESTMENT COST*
OPERATIONAL COSTS
                                    COST SUMMARY
                     TOTAL ANNUAL STORAGE SPACE COSTS

                     TOTAL ANNUAL STORAGE EQUIPMENT/MATERIALS COSTS

                     TOTAL STORAGE PERSONNEL COSTS

                     TOTAL RETRIEVAL MATERIALS COSTS

                     TOTAL RETRIEVAL PERSONNEL COSTS

                     TOTAL PROCESSING PERSONNEL COSTS

                                    plus

                     EQUIPMENT, STARTUP AND OTHER COSTS

                     TOTAL ANNUAL SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

                                    plus

                     TOTAL ADDITIONAL ANNUAL SPACE COSTS (IF ANY) .
                                 ANNUALCED FEASIBILITY
                                  ALTERNATIVE COST
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
               Page 47

-------
                                          Chapter III-Feasibility Study
                              Exhibit m-8

              Feasibility Recommendation Components
      There  are many  techniques  employed to evaluate  the  economic
feasibility of a proposed alternative.  The net present value technique is
relatively straightforward, consisting of five steps.

   1.  Annual costs are listed for the existing system. These costs  reflect the
      annualized baseline cost as described in Section A, above and should
      indicate any year-to-year increases, as appropriate.

   2.  Annual costs are  listed for each potential alternative.  These costs
      reflect the annuaiized baseline cost as described in section C,  above.
      Investment costs should be included in the first year.

   3.  Net annual  cash flows are then computed by subtracting the costs for
      each potential alternative from baseline  costs  on a yearly basis.
      Investment costs result in a significantly negative cash flow in the first
      year. It is anticipated that the cash flow would gradually improve as
      alternative savings are factored in annually.

   4.  Net annual  discounted cash flows are then computed by applying the
      appropriate discount factor to account for the time value  of money.
      OMB Circular A-94 directs that a discount factor  of 10%  is consistent
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 48

-------
                                         Chapter III - Feasibility Study
      with current policy.  The effect of this step is -to present future cash
      flows in terms of current dollars.

   5.  A cumulative discounted cash flow is then determined, with the final
      cash flow amount representing the NPV of each potential feasibility
      alternative.

The  resulting cumulative  discounted  cash flow, or  NPV,  represents  a
convenient way in which to examine the economic feasibility of a potential
alternative as compared to the baseline system.  In addition, the NPV of
different alternatives can be compared as well to assist in the selection of the
best approach. Exhibit ffl-9 presents a simplified example of NPV over a five
year life cycle.

      It is important to note that determination of NPV is based on many
assumptions  that  can  significantly  effect the outcome  of the analysis.
Assumptions  concerning the discount  rate and the length of the life cycle are
critical.  Assumptions concerning whether to apply investment costs  at the
outset, or to amortize them across the life cycle must be made.  Depreciation,
if applicable, can effect the outcome, as can assumptions concerning the
ultimate salvage or resale value of equipment. Finally, the assumptions that
provide the rationale  for the selection of a  particular alternative and that
underlie the entire cost collection framework will have a major influence on
the ultimate NPV outcome.
                              Exhibit III-9

                    Example of Net Present Value
Annualized Baseline Cost
Annualized Alternative Cost
Net Annual Cash Flow
Net Discounted Annual Cash Flow
Cumulative Discounted Cash Fbw
Net Present Value
Yearl
$100,000
$152,500
($52,500)

($52.500)
Year 2
$110,000
$75,000
$35,000
$29,000
($23.500)
Years
$120,000
$75,000
$45,000
$34,000
$10,500
Year 4
$130,000
$75,000
$55,000
$38,000
$48,500
Years
$140,000
$75.000
$65,000
$40,000
$88.500
$88,500
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 49

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
      Once NPV has been determined, return on investment (ROD may be
computed, if deemed necessary.  ROI also is useful in comparing different
alternatives.  ROI is the percentage return for an alternative based upon the
present value of the estimated cost savings,  or benefits, that result from its
implementation.   In the example given in Exhibit III-9, ROI  would  be
computed as  NPV divided by alternative investment cost [(($88500/$77500) -
1)* 100%] or, a 14% return on investment over the life cycle of the feasibility
alternative. Traditionally, a 10% ROI is considered the minimum acceptable
limit for OMB approval of system acquisitions.

   2.  NON-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

      While economic feasibility analysis serves as the primary influence in
the development of a feasibility recommendation, additional intangible factors
often  sway the balance in favor of one atlernative or another.  As with many
other  elements of this process, these non-economic considerations are "checks
on reality" and will  vary greatly from alternative to alternative.  This final
section is intended only to present a brief overview of some areas of possible
importance.

      Technical feasibility considerations should come into play particularly
when  an  alternative under consideration  involves  new or  unproven
technology.  Extremely complex solutions also should be examined in this
light.  Sometimes technology may not have matured to the point of providing
a reliable, effective solution, as in the current  capabilities to efficiently perform
machine reading of handwriting.  Complex alternatives may have to be
reevaluated and  broken down into smaller, more manageable alternatives
with a vision toward integration  at some future time.

      Each potential alternative also should be examined against the structure
and culture of the organization.  Implementation of an alternative may result
in unacceptable organizational changes, such  as the elimination of a work unit
or the absorption of one unit into another. Other organizational factors must
be considered, including the availability of personnel with  the  technical
competency to utilize the new system and a willingness to make necessary
procedural changes.   Management support must be available at all levels so
that  adequate  resources  are  provided to insure  the success of  the
implementation.   Awareness of these  and  other organizational factors,
including the availability of funding for the  proposed alternative, are among
the important considerations to be included in the feasibility analysis.

      Finally, numerous other benefits may result from the implementation
o: of  the potential alternative.  However, many of the benefits may not be
readily  quantifiable or  may not be  realized  in  the  initial phases of
implementation because significant changes in the organization's business
practices may be necessary first. Even so, these benefits may be of considerable


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 50

-------
                                          Chapter III - Feasibility Study
importance to overall feasibility determination.  Examples of these indirect or
intangible benefits include:

   •  Improvements in management ability to distribute,  monitor, and
      control workload

   •  Reductions in clerical document management errors

   •  Improved document integrity and security

   •  Improved employee morale and retention rates, particularly at the
      clerical level

   •  Increased opportunities  to  integrate the new system with existing
      systems,  thereby providing  better organizational information  access,
      with possible further cost reductions

   •  Improved timeliness and quality in responding to external "customer"
      information requests

   •  Increased opportunities for streamlining operations

   •  Increased flexibility in staff utilization

   •  Increased opportunities to implement standards

   •  Reduction  or  improvement  of  off-site  (archival)  document
      management storage.

While it may not be possible to quantify these benefits and include them in
the economic analysis, they nevertheless should be examined, presented as
perceived strengths and weaknesses of each alternative, and incorporated as
part of the feasibility recommendation, as indicated in Appendix E.

      Finally, the capabilities provided by a potential alternative may meet a
specified need that cannot otherwise be met; or, the capabilities provided by
an alternative may greatly exceed the capabilities  of the baseline system in
meeting the full set of mission needs.  In such cases, these  considerations
should become significant factors influencing the feasibility  determination.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 51

-------
                             Appendix A



                   Document Management Framework
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 53

-------
                   Appendix A: Document Management Framework
      APPENDIX A:  DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

      Tables  A-l  through  A-5  compare  three primary  document
management solutions — a manual paper-based process, a micrographic
process  and a document image processing solution. The tables show the
relative efficiency with which each of these three solutions satisfies document
management requirements in five major categories.   The requirement
categories pertain to a general user or users' work environment and identify
potential user requirement characteristics within each category.  Each of the
five requirement categories highlighted in a separate table and is defined as
follows:

      1.  ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS. This category reflects the characteristics
as to how many users retrieve documents, the frequency of retrieval of those
documents, the attributes of the documents, portions of documents or data to
be retrieved and general security and timing restrictions pertaining to the
retrieval of the documents.

      2.  STORAGE OF DOCUMENTS.  This category defines the volume of
documents to be stored, whether the documents are "active" (i.e., still in effect
and/or in current use) or "inactive" (i.e. no longer in effect and/or seldom
used), and the retention and disposition of  the documents as  set by the
Agency records disposition schedule.

      3.  DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS.  This category characterizes the
user(s) requirement in regard to distributing documents internal and external
to an organization, the scope of the document distribution requirement, the
frequency and scheduling  of documents for distribution and the nature of
what must  be distributed (e.g., single documents, multiple documents,
data/information from documents).

      4.   CONTROL OF DOCUMENTS.  The control  of documents is
characterized by the level of security requirements for documents, portions of
documents, selected  data from  documents  and the extent of document
accountability required by users.

      5.  DOCUMENT PROCESSING.  Document processing is defined in
terms of requirements to  act upon or process documents in a prescribed
manner, by a specified number of people, involving internal and/or external
organizations and offices with consideration of processing time.  Document
processing is distinct from the category of Access  to  Documents^because
processing is implicitly "workflow" related whereas access to  documents
essentially represents the retrieval and display of documents.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 54

-------
	Appendix A:  Document Management Framework

      It is assumed that the tables should reflect the -general capability of a
particular solution  to satisfy a specific requirement, without consideration of
costs.   Another assumption is that each of the solutions  considered  (i.e.,
paper, micrographic, image processing) was optimally configured/organized
for purposes of comparison.  Essentially, the best manual paper solution
would be compared to the best micrographic or image processing solution for
a given requirement characteristic.  Therefore, with all things being equal, the
tables are intended to jeflect the relative appropriateness of each solution.

      The factors  considered in assigning  the  relative  values for each
solution are:

      •    Effort  required  on  the  part of the user(s) to  satisfy  the
            requirement given each optimized solution

      •    Complexity of the solution in terms of management and control
            required to be exercised by the user(s)

      •    Comprehensiveness of  the solution in terms  of  satisfying the
            specific requirement and providing additional flexibility.

      The tables are not  intended to suggest  a  hierarchy  or to convey
priorities of requirements or solutions.  Those considerations must be left to
the judgement and  needs of the users.  For example, the criticality of a single
requirement and the selection of  the most efficient solution to satisfy that
requirement may outweigh all other possible solutions applicable to  other
requirements.  This comparative consideration is reserved for EPA managers
to determine the importance and value of the solution.
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 55

-------
                  Appendix A: Document Management framework
                         Table A-l

      Comparison of Document Management Solutions

                    Access to Documents
          Requirements
           Categories
                      Paper
               Micro-
              •graphics
          Image
        Processing
         Frequently
         Infrequently
         By Single User
         By Multi-User
       Sequentially by User
      On Demand by Users
      For Specified Data
       For General Information
       Within Specified Times
       Restricted to Select Users
       Single Documents
       Multiple Documents
       Specified Portions of
       Documents
    Key
Efficient:
Somewhat
Efficient:
Inefficient:
O
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                                 Page 56

-------
                 Appendix A: Document Management Framework
                         Table A-2

      Comparison of Document Management Solutions

                   Storage of Documents
         Requirements
           Categories
                      Paper
               Micro-
               graphics
          Image
        Processing
       Small Quantity
       Medium Quantity
      Large Quantity
       Short Period of Time
       (1 -12 Months)
      Long Period of Time
       (More Than 12 Months)
      Is Discretionary by User
      Is Specified by Law or
      Other Authority
       Active Documents
       Inactive Documents
                       o
    Key
Efficient:
Somewhat
Efficient:
Inefficient:
O
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                                Page 57

-------
      	Appendix A: Document Management Framework

                          Table A-3

      Comparison of Document Management Solutions

                  Distribution of Documents
         -Requirements
           Categories
                      Paper
               Micro-
               graphics
          Image
        Processing
       Wide External
       Distribution
       Low External Distribution
       Wide Internal
       Distribution
       Low Internal Distribution
       Distribute Select Portions
       of Documents
       Distribute Documents
       Within/At Specified
       Time
       Distribute Data From
       Documents
       Distribute Single
       Document
       Distribute Multiple
       Documents
                        o
    Key
Efficient:
Somewhat
Efficient:
Inefficient:
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                                 Page 58

-------
     	Appendix A: Document Management Framework

                         Table A-4

      Comparison of Document Management Solutions

                   Control of Documents
         Requirements
           Categories
                      Paper
               Micro-
               graphics
          Image
        Processing
      High Security
       Requirement
      Low Security
       Requirement
       Extensive Document
       Accountability
       Limited Document
       Accountability
       Security of Portions of
       Documents
      Security of Select Data
       From Documents
    Key
Efficient:
Somewhat
Efficient:
Inefficient:
:    /~\
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                                 Page 59

-------
      	Appendix A: Document Management framework

                          Table A-5

       Comparison of Document Management Solutions

                    Document Processing
          Requirements
           Categories
                      Paper
                Micro-
               graphics
          Image
        Processing
       One Person Processing
                                   O
       Multi-Person Processing
                                   O
       Single Office Processing
                                   O
       Multi-Office Processing
       Specified Sequence of
       Document Flow and /or
       Approval
       Agency Internal
       Agency External
       Single Document
       Multiple Documents

       Concurrent Processing of
       Single or Multiple
       Documents
                        O
                                   D_
       Processing Completed
       Within Specified Time
                                   Q
    Key
Efficient:
Somewhat
Efficient:
Inefficient:
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                                 Page 60

-------
                              Appendix B



                    Document Management Approaches
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 61

-------
                    Appendix B: Document Management Approaches
       APPENDIX B: DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT APPRO ACHES


I.     DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS

      This  section provides a description and characteristics of possible
document management solutions that can serve as a basis for developing
appropriate-alternatives-in--the Feasibility Study.  This  appendix is  not
intended to be comprehensive in scope.  Instead, the information presented
provides an overview  of possible technologies which should help EPA
managers gain a general understanding of the fundamental characteristics of
the solutions.

   A. PAPER

      Paper is still the  most common form
of information storage.  This storage media
has  historically  set  the  standard  for
convenience,  cost  and  functionality of
information transfer. The  main drawback to
paper is the space required to store large
volumes of documents.  In addition, a paper
filing system can require extensive time and
effort  to  retrieve documents  and  the
resources required to manage the overall
system can be quite expensive.
      The physical characteristics of paper include a wide range of sizes,
colors, thicknesses and compositions.  In addition to the information stored
on the document, these physical characteristics can also convey a message. As
compared to other storage media, this  feature  is very unique.  Table B-l
defines the basic advantages and limitations of paper.

      The expected lifetime of a paper document depends on the type of
paper used and environmental conditions in which it is stored. The life span
of paper can range from a few days to hundreds  of years.  Many inexpensive
types of paper use a high acid content which tends to deteriorate rapidly (e.g.,
newspaper).  In addition,  the ink chemicals tend to have an effect on the
durability of paper.  Environmental conditions such  as heat, light and
moisture can directly affect the life span of a document, but some forms of
high-quality, acid-free paper can be expected io last for 1GG years or more.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 62

-------
                     Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

                            Table B-l

                      Paper Characteristics
      Advantages:           • Standard Media for Information Transfer
                            • Admissible as Legal Evidence

                            • Can Handle Any Display Format and Size

                            • Easy to Reproduce Information

                            ป Easy to Update Information

                            ซ Easy to Manually Browse Documents


      Limitations:           ฐ Requires Large Storage Space
                            • Retrieval Time May Be Slow

                            • Large Volumes Can Be Difficult to Manage and
                              Expensive to Move
                            e Easy to Lose or Damage Documents

                            0 Changes May Be Difficult to Identify and Track
      Paper storage techniques are based on the physical filing of documents
involving a trade-off between file integrity and access.  If an application
requires the tight control of documents, access to these  files is usually
restricted.   This commonly occurs by storing documents in a centralized
location. On the other hand, if document access is a significant requirement,
then copies of the original document are made and stored in decentralized
locations convenient for the user.  Most  organizations use a  combination of
centralized  and decentralized filing techniques.   Sensitive  documents  are
commonly  stored in  a centralized  location  with restricted  access  and
frequently used documents are stored in multiple,  decentralized locations.

      Regardless of the storage and  retrieval  system, once  the volume of
paper  documents  exceeds the available  space, obsolete or seldom-needed
documents must be either disposed of or stored in a more remote location.
Despite a variety of disadvantages, paper will always remain a very common
and popular media for storing information.

      B. MICROGRAPHICS

      Micrographics uses  a photographic  process in which an image  of a
paper document is transferred by a camera onto unexposed film. The film is
then-exposed, 
-------
                     Appendix B: Document Management Approaches
•density is quite high, but, special filming, processing, reading and printing
equipment are required.  However, a service bureau may be contracted to
perform many of these operations. Table B-2 identifies the major advantages
and limitations of micrographic systems.

                                      Micrographic systems  require an
                                optical viewer to expand the  image to a
                                readable  size.    These  viewers are
                                available   with   a   variety   of
                                magnifications, screen sizes  and image
                                retrieval  capabilities.   Most viewers
                                project an image of the document on a
                                screen,  and  the  user  controls the
                                spooling  of microfilm or movement  of
                                microfiche until  the  desired document
                                image  is in  view.   Micrographics
                                printers are available  that will allow the
                                user  to  produce a paper copy of the
                                image on demand.
                            Table B-2

                  Micrographics Characteristics
      Advantages:
      Limitations:
• High Storage Capacity

• Admissible as Legal Evidence

• Well Proven and Tested Technology

• Easy and Cost-Effective to Duplicate Film
• Can Display Most Document Formats
• Low Conversion Costs


• Retrieval Time May Be Slow

• Film May Be Difficult and Expensive to Update

• Film Can Be Easily Lost or Damaged

• May Be Time Consuming to Browse Documents
      Micrographics  has proven  to be a very cost effective solution for
    ications having-specific document storage and retrieval requirements.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
                                    Page 64

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

This document management solution continues to be a. viable technology for
solving many document storage problems.

      C IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS

      From a broad perspective, image processing systems convert images to
a digital format that can be manipulated by a computer. When an image is
recorded using a digital process/ it is  scanned and then transformed into
binary digits - ones and zeroes. This digital format can then be viewed at a
computer terminal, printed, stored or transmitted to other users.

                                Magnetic
                                Storage!
                                             Optical  Disc Jukebox
                                                 Laser Printer
      As opposed to a photographic process that can record continuous tone
variations, electronic digitized images can only record a limited degree of
detail.  Varying degrees of both intensity and color are represented by a
specific digital value. This is analogous to placing a fine window screen over
an image and recording only the parts of the image that can be seen through
the holes in the screen.

      Virtually any media that can store digital information can be used to
store digitized images.  The most  common  forms of digital media  are
magnetic tapes and disks and optical disks. Digital information also can be
recorded on tapes, disks or cards.  A description of these media is provided in
Appendix  B, Section n - Document Management  Alternatives.  Table B-3
identifies the major characteristics of image processing systems.
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 65

-------
            	Appendix B:  Document Management Approaches

                             Table B-3

             Image Processing System Characteristics
      Advantages:           • High Storage Capacity
                             • Rapid Access to Documents

                             • Easy to Reproduce Information on Paper

                             • Difficult to Misplace or Damage Documents

                             • Enhances Document Security and Integrity

                             • Can Simultaneously View Single Document
                             • System Can Be Easily Expanded

                             • Can Integrate With Other Technologies/Systems


      Limitations:           • High Equipment Costs
                             • High Document Conversion Time and Costs
                             • May Require Environmentally-Controlled Room
                             • High Maintenance and Support Costs
                             • Inability to Access Documents During System Downtime
                             • No Decision on Legal Admissibility
      D. HYBRID IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS

      Hybrid image processing systems use  a host of various technologies
that maximize  the performance, efficiency and cost  effectiveness of
information processing for a given application.  The overall solution for a
given application may incorporate  multiple document storage technologies
(1=6=, paper-based, micrographics and electronic imaging)  as well  as  other
complementary information technologies such as:

      •     Bar Coding

      •     Text Processing

      •     Optical Character Recognition (OCR)

      ~     iiiฃv_LiGriiC i^raia AiiicrCiiailgc vi^i

      •     Electronic Forms
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 66

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

      •     Network Architectures

      •     Facsimile Transmission

      •     Electronic and Voice Mail.

      Hybrid image processing systems can be very appropriate where an
application contains a large, diverse and complex set of requirements.  For
example,  an application may have  a wide range of information needs,
consisting of text and image data, each having a unique set of requirements
for storage, access, process and control. A micrographics solution may be
most suitable for those documents which are archived and rarely accessed.
Those documents which are needed on a frequent basis or are distributed to
several persons within a office may be best supported by an electronic imaging
solution operating on a local area network.  In addition, these images may be
transmitted using a facsimile format to field offices or external organizations.
All of these technologies may be integrated in providing an overall cost-
effective solution for information processing which best meets the needs of
the users.
II.   DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES

      This section identifies feasibility alternatives for each of the document
management solutions identified above.  These feasibility alternatives are
organized in two categories:  media type and technological complexity. In
general, the media type provides the means for storing information (e.g.,  -
paper, microfiche, optical disk).  Each solution is  also subdivided into feasible
alternatives which are defined in various levels  of technological complexity.
These complexity levels range from a basic alternative providing the essential
components of a technology to a more sophisticated alternative providing  a
higher degree of automation and functionality.

      A. PAPER

      Numerous techniques have been developed to improve
the effectiveness of paper storage and retrieval tasks and to
reduce paper storage volumes including:

      •     Movable filing systems using mechanical and electrical features
            to reduce the amount of access space needed between filing
            cabinets and shelves.

      •     Computer-based indexing systems to identify the storage location
            and control the distribution of paper documents.

Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 67

-------
	Appendix B:  Document Management Approaches

      I. Movable Filing Systems

      Movable filing systems use  various equipment to improve access to
individual documents  including  rotary carousels and  banks of shelves
mounted on rollers.  The shelves can be manually rolled  in either direction
to gain  access to individual files.  When they are not in use, entire banks of
shelves  can be rolled together to eliminate the space normally taken for aisles.
These types of filing systems allow documents to be stored at much higher
storage  densities than standard paper-based systems.

      Other types of paper systems  use electrically operated filing drawers and
shelves. An operator can  simply press a button to move shelves using an
electrical conveyor.  This allows the operator to scan rows of documents and
stop the conveyor when the desired document comes into view.

      2. Computer-Eased Indexing

      In addition to using movable  filing systems a computer data base can be
added to reference the location for  each of the documents.  The location and
description  of each  document can be keyed into the system, along with
tracking information to identify who has a  particular document when it is
being used.  This data base can also interface with the electrical conveyors in
order to automatically retrieve a particular filing shelf.

      Regardless of the level of automation incorporated into  a paper-based
system, once the volume of paper documents exceeds the available space,
obsolete or seldom-needed documents must be either disposed of or stored in
a  more remote location.  This basic  constraint  remains  a primary
disadvantage for paper-based systems.

      B. MICROGRAPHICS

      There are several alternatives available for a micrographics solution.
These alternatives can offer the best combination of functionality, technology
and cost for many applications. These alternatives are described below by
media type and technological complexity.

      2. Media

      Micrographics film can be  stored in various forms including  rolls,
cartridges or sheets.  These forms are generally categorized  as four major
media types:  microfilm rolls, microfilm cartridges, microfiche and aperture
cards. A brief description for each media type is provided below.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 68

-------
                    Appendix B: Document Management Approaches
      a. Microfilm Rolls

      Using  microfilm  rolls,  documents are
sequentially photographed on a film roll typically
100 or 215 feet long using 16-mm or 35-mm film.
A  100  foot  roll of  16-mm  film   contains
approximately 2,400 images containing 8 1/2" X
11" pages.  The film  rolls are  usually stored  in
open reels or enclosed  cartridges.
      b.  Microfiche
                            Microfiche stores photographic images of
                       documents in a grid format on a small rectangular
                       piece (fiche) of film.   Each microfiche measures
                       approximately 4" X 6" and typically contains up to
                       98 images.  It can be stored at a density of about 120
                       sheets per inch.  Many of EPA's documents are
                       stored in this format, with one document usually
                       stored on a single fiche.
      c Jacketed Microfilm

      Jacketed  microfilm uses  a combination  of  microfilm  roll and
microfiche storage techniques.  Standard roll film is cut to the appropriate
length, based on the width of the jacket, and then inserted into dear plastic
jackets containing channels for  film. The photographic images are initially
developed on microfilm rolls and then stored in rows  similar to microfiche.
This format permits relatively easy updates to a jacket by adding or removing
film slides.

      d. Aperture Cards

      Aperture cards use a standard computer punch card to store a piece of
35-mm film.  The film is mounted in a window  and information can be
encoded on the card  in  order that  the image be sorted  and  retrieved.
Although multiple images can be stored, there is commonly one image stored
per card.  Aperture cards are frequently used for  engineering applications
containing detailed architectural drawings, geographical maps, charts, etc.

      Due to the archaic punch card technology, aperture card applications
are now commonly being replaced with microfiche-sized aperture  cards,
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
Page 69

-------
^	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

which allows the combined  storage of large format 35 mm  images and
normal-sized document images.

      2.  Technological Complexity

      Various types of micrographics systems are available that combine the
high  document storage densities of micrographics with  the  electronic
capabilities of a computer. These types of hybrid micrographics systems can
offer substantial improvements for storing and accessing documents.  A few
of these  hybrid alternatives are described below including computer-aided
retrieval  (CAR) systems, computer output to microfilm (COM) systems and
digitized microfilm systems.

      a.  Computer-Aided Retrieval (CAR)

       CAR systems have proven to be a  very effective solution for the
storage of archived documents which require infrequent  retrieval.  During
operation of a CAR system, documents  are photographed on microfilm and
descriptive information  is entered for each document in a computer data
base.  A frame number or an image mark may be encoded on the film next to
each image. The computer database retains the frame number or image mark
and associates this information with the  document description.

       To retrieve the document, the  descriptive information is entered, and
the computer then directs an automated image reader to manipulate the film
and retrieve the  image associated with the document.  Various types of
electronic conveyors and robotic-arm mechanisms have been used to retrieve
images stored on microfilm rolls, microfiche and aperture cards.

       Microfilm supported  by  CAR systems can be a  good "transition
medium".  Film-based images can be scanned, converted to a digital format
and transmitted to an optical disk system.  The computer-based  film index
associated with each document can be accessed through the image processing
system.  Older documents can then be stored and maintained on film which
relieves the need to store the same images on optical disk

       H  Computer Output to  Microfilm (COM)

       COM systems can print computer-generated data and scanned images
directly onto film. This bypasses the step of producing a paper copy of the
data.   This type of system is very effective where large amounts of computer
data or images stored on magnetic or  optical media must be permanently
archived. This allows the storage space on the magnetic or optical media to be
freed and used again.  Once the space on the storage media has been erased or
overlaid with new-data, the only methods available to transfer the data from
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 70

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

microfilm back to the digital media is to manually type the data or scan the
document on film via a digital scanner.

      c Digitized Microfilm

      Another type of micrographics  system converts document images
stored on film to digital data that can be processed by a computer. These
systems are  sometimes referred to as automated  document storage and
retrieval systems (ADSTAR) or videomicrographics systems.  To facilitate
rapid access to the images, the film rolls are automatically retrieved and the
selected images are automatically located on the media. The image on film is
then converted,  via a  scanner, to a digital format  where a computer can
electronically process and send the document to a computer terminal or
printer.  The image can also be transmitted over a computer network and
stored on magnetic or optical media.

      C IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS

      Image  processing systems use computer technology to convert images
to digital values in order to manipulate and store the information. These
digital values represent bits of information that compose text and image data.

      1. Media

      Using image processing systems, digitized information can be stored on
magnetic  and optical media.  In  addition, each media type can store the
information on tapes,  disks and cards.  A description of each medium is
provided below.

      a. Magnetic Storage

      With magnetic storage media the  digital
values  that compose  text  and  image
information  are recorded  as  a sequence of
electrical  charges on  a  magnetically-coated
surface.   Types of magnetic  media include
magnetic tape, disks and cards.  There are wide
variations in the data storage capacities  and
access speeds of magnetic media.
      1. Magnetic Tapes

      Information recorded on magnetic tape must be accessed sequentially.
In order to read a record or document at the end of a tape, the entire tape
must be passed through the reading device, resulting in slow access time.


Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 71

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

Storage  capacities for  magnetic tape generally range  from five to ten
megabytes of data on a 100 foot length of tape. Because the storage capacity for
magnetic tape is relatively high and the cost per tape is low, this media is best
suited for data  processing systems that contain a large volume of transaction
processing with little or no need for random data access.

      2.  Magnetic Disks

      Because  magnetic disks rotate  continuously at  a high  speed,
information can be retrieved very quickly — usually within a fraction of a
second.  However, in comparison to magnetic tape, their storage capacity is
usually more limited.  Magnetic disks include two types:  hard disks and
floppy disks.  Removable floppy  disks  are commonly used in personal
computers and  provide a very portable storage media. Hard  disks, compared
to floppy disks, are usually not removable but generally have a much higher
storage capacity.

      The storage capacity for magnetic disks varies widely, depending on the
size of the computer.  Removable floppy disks used in personal computers
generally hold from 720 to over 1,400 kilobytes  of  data.  Hard disks can
provide a higher storage capacity as a result of greater precision between the
read/write heads on the disk drive unit and the media. A hard disk used by a
personal computer typically holds from 20 to over 200 megabytes. Hard  disks
used by mini-computers and mainframe  computers vary widely in storage
capacities, ranging from 500 megabytes to over 2 gigabytes of data per disk.

      b. Optical Storage

      Optical storage media contain digital values
that  compose text and  image  information
recorded by a  laser light as a series of holes or
bubbles on a reflective disk surface.  The disks can
be read by reflecting laser light from the recorded
information through a  detector  back  into a
computer.

       As with magnetic media, optical storage devices come in various forms
including tapes, disks and cards. A common way of characterizing optical
storage  is by  the  permanence of  the stored information  on  the media.
Prerecorded storage media  are those which can only be read; information
cannot be added  or changed after the prerecorded information  has  been
"burned" on the media.  Another category of optical media allows the user to
record information one tim*> and then rcneatedlv read this information.  The
third category  of optical media is similar  to magnetic media — the user can
repeatedly read, record and erase information. Some of the common media
types for each of these categories are described below.
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 72

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

      1. Compact Disk/Read Only Memory (CD/ROM)

      CD/ROM contains prerecorded text or image information that can only
be read, not changed.  This media type grew out of the compact disks (CDs)
used for audio reproductions. After a CD/ROM disk has been stamped with
the information from the  master disk, no information can be changed or
added to that disk. This type of optical storage is very popular as a publishing
medium.   Many  trade associations and publication companies  are now
distributing their periodicals on CD/ROM.

      2. Write Once Read Many (WORM)

      Optical storage media that allow the user to record information one
time  and  then subsequently read this information  repeatedly are called
WORM devices. A WORM disk can generally hold from one to six gigabytes
of data per disk. The write once  nature of WORM provides a secure storage
medium  that  prevents  alteration of  the document.   This can provide
substantial benefits for an archiving application  or where documents are
highly sensitive and must be tightly controlled.

      3. Erasable Optical Disk

      Erasable optical media generally function like  magnetic media;
information can be repeatedly  written to and  erased  from the storage
medium. Erasable optical disks generally store from one to four gigabytes of
data per disk.  Introduced  in the  past few years to the commercial industry,
erasable optical media have become a  viable alternative to magnetic media
where storage requirements  are  very high  and information must be
repeatedly updated.

      2. Technological Complexity

            a. Storage and Retrieval Systems

      Most optical disk systems are  used  for  storage and retrieval of
document images.  Documents are scanned and  stored  on an optical disk
(WORM or erasable disks)  and then  displayed  on a monitor, reprinted,
transmitted to another location or copied to another disk.  After scanning,
paper documents  are  either stored locally, archived at a remote location or
destroyed.

      Optical disk systems used primarily for document storage and retrieval
are justified by several benefits when compared to conventional paper-based
systems.  These benefits include:
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 73

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

      •     Documents can be stored at a higher density.  Depending on the
            resolution and compression factors,  one 12"  optical disk  can
            store from  20,000  to  70,000  images and have  the storage
            equivalent to five four-drawer filing cabinets.

      •     Documents  can  be   permanently  and  securely   archived.
            Documents cannot be changed once written to a WORM optical
            disk.  Most  vendors guarantee no significant deterioration will
            occur to the  data on the optical disk for 10 to 30 years, assuming
            that  the disks  are   stored  according  to  manufacturer's
            specifications.  After  this period of time, the data can be
            transferred to another optical disk or other storage medium.  An
            additional copy of the disk can be stored in another location to
            reduce the chances of image loss or damage.

      •     Documents can be retrieved rapidly.  Document retrieval  can
            usually occur in a matter of seconds.  This eliminates the time
            commonly wasted when retrieving paper documents and also
            causes minimal interruption of work.

      •     Documents can be filed  using a cross-indexing  method.  Paper-
            based systems usually  contain  documents filed by one specific
            index. Using a computer database documents can be searched by
            multiple  criteria.  For example, users can search for a specific
            document by name, date, account number, Chemical Abstract
            Service (CAS) number, or any combination of descriptive
            information.  Of course, this  cross-indexing method is  not
            limited to optical storage systems, but  can be used in conjunction
            with paper-based or  micrographics systems.

      •     Documents are always available for use.  In contrast to paper-
            based systems, documents stored on optical disk can  be viewed
            simultaneously by multiple users located at different monitors.
            In  addition, the document   cannot be refiled  improperly;
            something that can happen easily with a paper-based system.

      •     Document security is enhanced.  Because document images are
            stored on optical disks, access can be controlled by  physically
            locking the transportable disks in a filing cabinet or vault. Also,
            passwords can be used to limit access to the documents on the
            system. An audit trail can be easily incorporated that maintains
            detailed information relating to document access.

      Compared to micrographics  systems, optical disk  systems can offer
faster document access, improved image quality, greater storage density and
simultaneous access by multiple users to a single  document. These benefits
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 74

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

can add up to increases in productivity and efficiency.   However, these
benefits must be weighed against the higher equipment and startup costs for
optical disk systems and the issue of legal admissibility for optical media.

      b. Archival Systems

      Optical storage archival systems are used primarily for the long term
storage of documents requiring infrequent access. Documents are scanned
and stored on optical media (usually WORM or erasable disks) at a very high
storage capacity. The primary objective for an archival system is to maximize
disk storage density, sometimes compromising on image quality to increase
density.  The design for this type of system focuses on storing the highest
number of images on a disk, with limited consideration given for the time
required to access and retrieve the documents.

      c. Document Processing Systems

      In addition to document storage and retrieval, another feature that can
provide significant benefits for an optical storage  system is automated
document processing.   This capability allows  information to be added,
validated or extracted from a document as it automatically passes through
different stages of processing.  Instead of a paper document  manually
following a  processing  path,  an electronic  form  of  the document is
automatically  passed from one station  to the  next using the  computer
terminal to view the  document.

      An optical  storage  system can therefore simplify  and  accelerate
document processing activities.  For example, upon entering the mail room,
an application requesting approval for manufacturing a new chemical would
be scanned into the optical storage system. The document would then be
indexed and automatically forwarded to various computer terminals based on
the review and approval processing cycle.  Additional reference information
from  the computer data base can also be viewed  on the monitor while
processing the document.  Once the processing cycle is complete, additional
descriptive information can be  added to the document index  based  on
decisions made.

      Document processing systems may offer the same advantages as those
listed above for storage  and retrieval systems.  In addition, those systems that
perform automated document processing also may provide benefits primarily
as a result of the networking capabilities. These benefits can include:

      •     Electronic document  transmission.  Not  only can documents be
            retrieved rapidly, they can also be transferred automatically from
            desk  to desk.  In addition, documents can be queued for
            processing using an electronic in-basket.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 75

-------
	Appendix B: Document Management Approaches

      •     Pacing, sequencing, prioritizing and  tracking  of-documents.  The
            pace and sequencing of work in a paper-based system is usually
            controlled by batches, based upon time of receipt.  Yesterday's
            work is processed in total  before today's work is begun.  In
            contrast, an automated document processing system moves a
            document  to the next station immediately following completion
            of the prior task.  A time sensitive  document can be expedited
           -through -the .system by. assigning a high priority. An electronic
            audit trail can also be used to track documents and review
            progress of work.

      •     Integration with other systems.  Document processing systems
            can be integrated with other image processing or data processing
            systems.  As a document follows its processing path, users can
            simultaneously view  data or documents from other  systems in
            order to retrieve or validate needed  information.

      Automated document processing systems are not  appropriate for all
applications.  Software development and maintenance costs are generally
higher than basic document storage and retrieval  systems.  Those applications
that have  highly  procedure oriented, time sensitive or have mandatory
proc •• ~ing cycles  for  documents can gain substantial benefits  using this
technology.
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 76

-------
                               Appendix C
                            Average Unit Costs
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 77

-------
                                     Appendix C: Average Unit Costs
                APPENDIX C: AVERAGE UNIT COSTS

                          (as of August, 1990)
                                     Unit of Cost
Space                                Per Sq. Ft
   Office Space
      Premium Space
      Moderate Space
      Economy Space
   Warehouse Space
   Federal Records Centers

Paper Filing Unit
   4-Drawer Cabinet                    Per Unit
   5-Drawer Cabinet                    Per Unit
   Lateral Shelves (5)                   Per Unit
   Mobile Track Shelves                 Per. Ft.
   Carousel Shelves (7)                 Per Unit

Microform Equipment                  Per Unit
   Microfiche
      Reader
      Reader/Printer, Low Volume
      Reader/Printer, High Volume
   Microfilm  Cartridge
      Reader
      Reader/Printer, Low Volume
      Reader/Printer, High Volume
      Storage Carousel, 480 Cartridge

*IPS Equipment                       Per Unit
   Level I Host Computer
   Level n Host Computer
   PC Workstation
   Scanner
   Printer (Printronix Laser)
   Printer (4216 Laser)
    $30.00
    $22.00
    $13.00
     $8.00
No Charge
      $240
      $330
      $630
       $16
    $1,200
      $150
    $2,000
   $10,000

    $1,200
    $6,000
   $15,000
      $550
  $331,969
  $205,193
    $9,682
    $7,025
   $12^87
    $1,446
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA
      Page 78

-------
                                      Appendix C: Average Unit Costs
Cost Category/Item	Unit of Cost	Unit Cost

Furniture                              Per Unit
   Equipment Table                                             $400
   Reading Table                                                $400
   Chairs                                                       $165

Personnel Costs             Annual Salary (Step 5)
   GS - Level 1                                               $11,990
   GS - Level 2                                               $13,053
   GS - Level 3                                               $14,714
   GS - Level 4                                               $16,517
   GS - Level 5                                               $18,481
   GS - Level 6                                               $20,598
   GS - Level 7                                               $22,887
   GS - Level 8                                               $25,351
   GS - Level 9                                               $28,001
   GS - Level 10                                              $30,834
   GS - Level 11                                              $33,875
   GS - Level 12                                              $40,601
   GS - Level 13                                              $48,281
   GS - Level 14                                              $57,054
   GS - Level 15                                              $67,112
* - A detailed listing of the prices for IPS equipment is available in the Image
Processing Systems:  Implementation Guidance — Part I IPS Contract
Hardware, Software and Services Description.
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 79

-------
                            Appendix D
                Mission Needs Study Document Outline
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 81

-------
	Appendix D: Mission Needs Study Document Outline

    APPENDIX D: MISSION NEEDS STUDY DOCUMENT OUTLINE
I. INTRODUCTION
   A. PURPOSE OF STUDY
   6. INFORMATION SOURCES
II. ORGANIZATIONAL MISSION
   A. PURPOSE AND ROLE
   B. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND FUNCTIONS
   C STRUCTURE, REPORTING HIERARCHY
III. CURRENT DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
   A. PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND FUNCTIONS
   B. DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT PROFILE
   C PROCESS Row DIAGRAMS
   D. SYSTEM STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
IV. PROBLEM DEFINITION
   A. PROBLEM STATEMENT
   B. DEFICIENCIES
v. MISSION NEEDS
   A. DOCUMENT ACCESS
   B. DOCUMENT STORAGE
   C DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION
   D. DOCUMENT CONTROL
   E. DOCUMENT PROCESSING
 Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA         Page 82

-------
                    Appendix D: Mission Needs Document Outline

VI. POSSIBLE DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SOLUTION(S)
   A - N 
     For each solution, provide the following:
   1. Description
   2. Rationale
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA         Page 83

-------
                                Appendix E



                       Feasibility Study Report Outline
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 85

-------
                       Appendix E: Feasibility Study Report Outline
        APPENDIX E: FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT OUTLINE
I. INTRODUCTION
     Summary of High Level Mission Needs.
II. BENEFIT-COST BASELINE
     For the Baseline System, provide the following
   A. CURRENT DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SETTING AND MAJOR
       CHARACTERISTICS
   B. BENEFIT-COST ESTIMATES EXPRESSED AS OPERATIONAL COSTS
III. FEASIBILITY ALTERNATIVES
   A-N 
     For each Feasibility Alternative, provide the following
   1. Basic Configuration
   2. Strengths and Weaknesses
   3. Applicability Rationale
rv. FEASIBILITY ALTERNATIVES BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
     For each Feasibility Alternative, provide the following
   A-N 
     (Expressed as Investment and Operational Costs)
v. FEASIBILITY RECOMMENDATION
   A. COMPARATIVE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
     (Expressed as NPV/ROI)
   B. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
   For  each area below, provide a comparative discussion of the relevant
   aspects of each potential alternative, as appropriate
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 86

-------
  	Appendix E: Feasibility Study Document Outline
   1. Organizational feasibility
   2. Technical Feasibility
   3. Intangible/Indirect Benefits
   4. Mission Needs Considerations
  •^.-OVERALL-RECOMMENDATION
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA           Page 87

-------
                               Appendix F



                           IPS Policy Document
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA          Page 89

-------
OIRM POLICY DIRECTIVE                               90-01
                                                    10/24/90
          IMPLEMENTATION OF IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS

1.   PURPOSE.  This policy establishes  the principles that
     govern the acquisition and use  of  image processing
     -Systems. (IPS)	This.policy, also-defines  the  roles  and
     responsibilities for implementing  these principles.

2.   SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY.   This  policy applies to all EPA
     organizations and their employees.   It also applies to
     the personnel of EPA agents (including contractors) who
     are involved in  the design, development,  acquisition,
     operation and maintenance  of Agency  image processing
     systems.

3 .   BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES.

     a.   EPA is committed to  improving records management
          and has determined that computer technology for
          storage of  image and text  data  is an important
          capability  for achieving  improvements.

     b.   Agency contracts have been established for the
          acquisition of image processing systems  (IPS)  to
          ensure conformance to Agency  standards and to
          promote compatibility, information  sharing and
          responsible management of  advanced  technology.

     c.   Successful  implementation  of  image  processing
          systems requires evaluation of  both the  records
          management  program and the technical design of
          integrated  hardware  and software environments.
          Programs which demonstrate well-organized and
          effective records management  programs often have
          the potential to further  improvement through the
          innovative  application of  computer  technology.
          Programs with records management problems should
          not implement image  processing  systems or other
          technologies before  addressing  fundamental policy,
          procedural  and support, issues fox. 1110x109x119 Liieir
          records more effectively.

-------
     d.   The objectives of this policy are to-:.

           (1)   Improve the effectiveness  of EPA  records
                management.programs  and increase  access to
                information resources  in a manner that
                enhances staff productivity and program
                effectiveness.

           (2)   Manage official government records in
                accordance with appropriate Federal
                legislation, regulations and guidance.

           (3)   Oversee the development and implementation  of
                image processing systems consistent with the
                Agency's strategies, priorities and applicable
                policies and guidance  for  information systems.

4.   AUTHORITIES.

     a.   EPA 2100— Information Resources Management  (IRM)
          Policy Manual  (7/21/87).

     b.   Federal Records Act of 1950, as amended (44 U.S.C.
          3101-3107).

     c.   Paperwork Reduction Act of  1980, as  amended.

     d.   OMB Circular A-130, Management  of Federal
          Information Resources.

5.   POLICY.    it is EPA policy that  all  applications
     requiring  the use of image processing systems must be
     approved by the Director, OIRM.  Approval shall be
     obtained in a two-step process through EPA's  Image
     Processing System (IPS)  Committee.   At the  earliest
     stage, the Committee shall concur in concept  with an
     image processing solution based upon a Mission Needs  ป
     Statement  (See EPA's "System Design  and Development
     Guidance," June 1989) before investment is  made in a
     more thorough assessment of requirements and  feasibility
     in a Preliminary Design and Options  Analysis.  In the
     next step, the Committee shall evaluate the results of
     the Preliminary Design and Options Analysis and forward
     its recommendation for consideration by the Director,
     OIRM.  The Director, OIRM, shall approve, disapprove or
     direct additional analysis before the procurement of an
     IPS system or Detailed System Design, Development and
     Implementation phase of the system lifecycle  may begin.

-------
      a.    EPA must assess whether an image processing system
           is a reasonable solution to pursue in meeting an
           EPA organization's needs to strengthen records
           management capabilities in order to improve
           overall program effectiveness.

      b.    EPA must weigh the benefits and costs of
           alternative problem-solving approaches.
           Alternatives include paper, microform and
           electronic digital media.  Image processing
           systems are powerful, but they are not necessarily
           the best solution to every organization's records
           management needs.

      c.    EPA must ensure coordinated national development
           and management of electronic records management
           systems, especially systems with information of
           "corporate" value which should be shared in a
           meaningful form within EPA and with our domestic
           and international partners in environmental
           protection.

      d.    EPA recognizes that as computer technology for
           capturing, storing, processing and retrieving
           information in image form is evolving rapidly, EPA
           must evaluate Agency requirements continuously to
           ensure the availability of responsive technology
           options.

6.   RESPONSIBILITIES.

     a.    The  Director,  OIRM,  shall  evaluate  recommendations
           of the  IPS Committee and approve  or disapprove
           requests for  image  processing  systems based upon
           the  results of a  Preliminary Design and Options
           Analysis which evaluates the requirements  and
         • feasibility of image processing solutions.

     b.    An Image Processing Systems  (IPS) Committee,
           chaired by the Deputy Director, shall:

           (1)   Advise the Director,  OIRM, on  the  overall
                strategic development,  implementation and
                management of image processing systems and
                technology in the Agency.

           (2)   Develop  and promulgate policies and  guidelines
                governing Agency image processing  systems
                (IPS).

-------
      (3)  Be advised and keep abreast of -EPA initiatives
          and  activities in evaluating and developing
          image processing systems.

      (4)  Concur in concept based upon a Mission Needs
          Statement before any EPA organization invests
          in a more detailed feasibility study through a
          Preliminary Design and Options Analysis  for
          IPS.

      (5)  Offer recommendations to the Director, OIRM,
          on the merits of an IPS request based upon a
          Preliminary Design and Options Analysis.

c.   The Office of Information Resources Management
      (OIRM)  shall:

      (1)  Develop and promulgate policy and guidelines
          governing Agency image processing systems
          (IPS).

      (2)  Provide guidance to Assistant Administrators,
          Associate Administrators and Regional
          Administrators in implementing the
          requirements of this policy.

      (3)  Provide technical advice and assistance  to the
          EPA  in evaluating how computer technology can
          improve records management and in developing
          and  managing image processing systems.

      (4)  Review and approve studies, proposals and
          associated procurement requests in cooperation
          with NDPD for automation of records management
          activities that ensure consistency with  Agency
          policy for records management and information
          systems.

d.   The Office of Administration and Resources
     Management-RTP  (OARM-RTP)  and the National Data
     Processing Division (NDPD)  shall:

      (1)  Develop hardware, telecommunications and
          systems software requirements for image
          processing systems.

      (2)  Establish and manage EPA contracts for the
          acquisition, implementation and support  of
          image processing systems.

-------
           (3)  Review studies, proposals  and  associated
               procurement  requests  in  cooperation  with OIRM
               to ensure  that proposed  image  processing
               systems or .other  selected  technologies  are
               properly used and comply with  the  requirements
               of this policy.

           (4)  Provide technical support  for  optical disk-
               based  image  processing systems,  including
               acquisition,  implementation  and  operational
               support.

     e.   Assistant Administrators,  Associate Administrators,
          Regional Administrators, the  General  Counsel, and
          the Inspector General  shall ensure  that the
          acquisition,  installation  and management  of  image
          processing  systems under their  direction  are in
          accord with this  policy.

     f.   The Senior  Information Resources  Management
          Officials  (SIRMOs) shall:

           (1)  Review system design  and development analyses
               for  image  processing  systems (IPS) to be
               acquired and managed  by  their  organizations  in
               accordance with this  policy.

           (2)  Review procurement requests  and  budget
               proposals  for acquisition  of image processing
               systems (IPS) in  accordance  with this policy.

7.   DEFINITIONS.

     a.    "Image Processing System"  (IPS) is  the  general term
           referring to a  computer hardware  and  software
           system designed to capture, store,  retrieve,
           display, manipulate and produce a facsimile  of data
           which is  in the form of visual  images.

     b.    "Mission Needs  Statement"  is  an analysis  which
           defines the management problem  to be  addressed and
           proposes  an initial system concept  for  more  in-
           depth assessment  as the appropriate response to the
           problem.

     c.    "Preliminary Design and Options Analysis" is an
           assessment  of feasible system alternatives,  their
           costs and benefits which results  in selection of  a
           system design upon which more detailed
           specifications  for system  operations, hardware,
           software  and telecommunications are based,

-------
     d.   "Microform" is based on a photographic process
          using camera equipment in which an image of a
          document is transferred onto film.  The film is
          then stored in roll, cartridge or sheet form.  The
          most common forms of microform are microfilm and
          microfiche.

     e.   "Electronic digital media" is a category of
          computer technology which captures, stores,
          processes and retrieves information, including text
          and image data.  Two main types of digital storage
          include magnetic and optical storage.  Magnetic
          storage contains text and image data as digital
          values on a magnetically coated surface.  Types of
          magnetic media include magnetic tape, disks and
          cards.  Optical storage contains information stored
          as digital values.  Laser technology is used to
          "write" and "read" this information.  Optical
          storage media comes in various sizes and formats,
          including Compact Disk/Read Only Memory  (CD/ROM),
          Write Once Read Many Times  (WORM) and erasable
          disks.

8.   PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES.  Procedures and guidelines
     for the development and management of image processing
     systems (IPS) will be issued under separate cover.

-------
                               Appendix G



                          IPS Committee Charter
Guidance for Developing Image Processing Systems in EPA

-------
                      Charter  for the
            Image  Processing  Systems  Committee
Objective:  The Image Processing Systems (IPS) Committee is
hereby chartered as a committee of the Administrative Systems
Council.  The purpose of the IPS Committee is to advise the
Director, Office of Information Resources Management, and
members of the Administrative Systems Council concerning
proposals for implementation of advanced records and
information management systems employing the use of digital
imaging, storage and communications technologies.  The IPS
Committee shall:

     •    Promulgate policy and guidance for development and
          application of image processing solutions  to EPA
          records and information management requirements;

     •    Provide advice and assistance to EPA offices in
          the conduct and evaluation of Mission Needs
          Statements, Preliminary Design and Options
          Analyses and System Design, Development and
          Implementation studies to ensure compliance with
          Agency policies regarding life-cycle cost/benefit
          analysis and major system procurement;

     •    Review and concur in concept on proposals  for
          image processing systems resulting from Mission
          Needs Statements before EPA offices  invest in
          more extensive Preliminary Design and Options
          Analyses to assess the feasibility of image
          processing solutions;

     •    Approve and guide the procurement and implemen-
          tation of image processing systems in a manner
          consistent with accepted and approved system
          design, as well as Agency strategic  information
          management goals and priorities;

     •    Ensure that image processing system  procurements
          are made from existing, competitive  contract
          vehicles and that equipment and software are
          capable of inter-system sharing of image and index
          data to the maximum possible extent;

     •    Promote the use of digital information and image
          processing systems to enhance delivery of
          information to the public;

-------
           Support a process to continually review and
           evaluate technological developments in digital
           information and image processing which may have
           potential application in the Agency.
Membership ..and Structure:   The  IPS Committee  is  chaired by
the Deputy  Director,  Office of Information  Resources
Management.  Members  include the  following:

     Director,  Information Management and Services  Division,
         OIRM
     Director,  Administrative Systems Division,  OIRM
     Director,  Program Systems Division,  OIRM
     Director,  Financial Management Division,  OC
     Director,  Information Management Division,  OTS
     Director,  National Data Processing Division, RTP-OARM
     Project Manager, Superfund Image Processing System,  RTP-
         OARM
     Project Manager, IPS Contract, RTP-OARM
     Assistant  Regional Administrator for Policy and
        Management - Region III
     Assistant  Regional Administrator for Policy and
        Management - Region IV

Other representatives may be added by the Deputy Director,
OIRM, from  headquarters and regional offices,  as well  as
private contractors.   The role of all members is that  of
advancing the Agency's goals for  information management and
assistance  in implementing IPS in the Agency in  a responsible
and productive  manner, rather than representing  their
particular  organization.

Operation:    The IPS Committee shall conduct its activities
through:

      •     Monthly meetings for approximately the first six
           months/ with quarterly meetings thereafter

      •     Ad hoc meetings — on its initiative or at  the
           request of  a member, the Chair may call meetings
           and/or arrange teleconferences to consult on
           specific issues that require special attention.

      •     Subcommittees — the Chair, acting on behalf of the
           members, may establish subcommittees to identify
           and explore focused technical or information
           management  issues pertinent to image processing
           system impienieiitation.   Such svibcommittees may be
           required to conduct or issue specific program or
           policy analyses or position papers.
                                            ft U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992—650-217

-------