Q3/FY 1999
REI Integrated Program Management Plan
••••••••••••••••^l^HBm^H
"Putting the Pieces Together"
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 1
n. Task Commitments 6
Task Area A: Agency-Wide Reinventing Environmental Information Management 6
Tasks and Milestones 8
Performance Measures 9
Task Area B: Data Standardization Program 11
Tasks and Milestones 13
Performance Measures 16
Task Area C: Specific Data Standards 19
Tasks and Milestones 21
Performance Measures 24
Task Area D: Facility Identification Initiative Phase HI 25
Tasks and Milestones 27
Performance Measures 30
Task Area E: Electronic Reporting 34
Tasks and Milestones 35
Performance Measures 38
Task Area F: One Stop State Partnership 41
Tasks and Milestones 45
Performance Measures 4*>
Task Area G: Systems Reengineering Coordination 51
Tasks and Milestones 53
Performance Measures 5(>
111. Conclusion 5*>
* Thi* document wa« printed on recycled paper
-------
QUARTER 3/FY1999 REINVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
INTEGRATED PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PLAN
"Putting the Pieces Together"
I. INTRODUCTION
EPA's Commitment to Reinvent Environmental Information
In July of 1997, the EPA Administrator and Deputy Administrator directed the Agency to advance and accelerate efforts to reinvent
environmental reporting, strengthen its capacity to use information effectively to manage environmental programs, and enhance the
public's access to the information they need to make decisions about their health and environment. More specifically, the
Administrator and Deputy Administrator committed EPA to adopt formal data standards, provide universal access to electronic
reporting, reengineer the Agency's national data systems, and to invite all 50 States to join in this process through the One Stop
program.
With assistance from the Common Sense Initiative (CSI) Council and other stakeholders, an Agency work group developed the
Reinventing Environmental Information (REI) Action Plan to translate these commitments into a detailed plan of action. The REI
Action Plan is focused on building a critical foundation for the Agency - a foundation that will enable better data quality, burden
reduction for reporters, enhanced public access, more coordinated systems modernization/reengineering, and data standardization
throughout the Agency. Specifically, the Action Plan commits EPA to the following:
• Data Standards—EPA will issue interim standards for six key data types by the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and incorporate
these standards in all EPA national systems by the end of FY 2003. Data standards establish a common language among users
of environmental information.
• Electronic Reporting—All parties reporting to EPA shall have voluntary access to electronic reporting by the end of FY 2003.
• State Partnership—REI must be implemented in partnership with Slates if it is to succeed. The One Stop program and the
State/EPA Information Management Work Group provide opportunities for EPA and States to set goals for improving anil
hharing information and agree on policies and programs to achieve these goals.
-------
• Systems Reengineering Coordination—EPA national data systems shall incorporate all data standards and provide access to
electronic reporting by the end of FY 2003.
FY1999 REI Implementation—"Putting the Pieces Together"
FY 1999 is a pivotal year for REI. Efforts in FY 1998 have focused on developing pieces of the infrastructure necessary to reinvent
information management at EPA. As completion of this infrastructure draws near, the focus of REI will shift toward implementation
in the systems and States. Whereas most FY 1998 tasks were performed by REI teams working independently, the project teams must
now work closely together to ensure that their pieces are integrated to support Agency-wide REI goals. The FY 1999 commitments
and FY 1998 accomplishments are described briefly below:
• Data Standards—The data standards program is on schedule to finalize standards and business rules in Calendar Year 1999,
and begin implementation in National and State systems. Currently, two final standards and business rules have been finalized,
(date (Y2K), and Standard Industrial Code/North American Industrial Classification System (SIC/NAICS)); and four interim
standards have been approved (Facility Identification Initiative (FII), Latitude/Longitude, Biological Taxonomy, and Chemical
ID).
• Electronic Reporting—The electronic reporting (ER) group will complete Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) standards
development in FY 1999 and move toward implementation by resolving core legal policy issues. The ER group will also begin
pilot tests of Internet and digital signature technologies and work through specification and pilot tests of Agency electronic
reporting infrastructure components.
• State Partnership—One Stop continues to award grants to additional States, and is taking a larger role in coordinating State
involvement in the development and implementation of various REI commitments. Through FY 1998, a total of 21 One Stop
grants have been awarded to participating States, and EPA plans to award up to eight new One Stop grants in FY 1999. EPA's
goal is to invite all States to join One Stop by FY 2003. The focus in FY 1999 is to provide technical assistance to States and
conduct a number of pilot projects in selected One Stop States to "test-implement" aspects of the REI program.
• Systems Keen^ineenng—Systems reengineering coordination efforts will shift toward beginning implementation of data
standards; providing a forum for systems managers to discuss key issues, such as electronic reporting; and working closely with
States to coordinate reengineering/moderni/alion activities. Successful implementation of REI commitments in the national
systems requires coordination among REI project team leads, Stales, and systems managers. During FY I4*1)1), the systems
-------
reengineering coordination team will help ensure that all stakeholders are able to successfully work together to implement REI
commitments.
1999 will also be a landmark year for EPA because it is reorganizing its Information Resources Management (IRM) functions. In a
December, 1998 memorandum, Administer Browner announced a reorganization of the Agency's information management activities
around three new offices: Information Policy and Collection; Information Technology and Services; and Information Analysis and
Access. REI components will be integrated into the Information Policy and Collection office. In the transition to the new information
office, REI leaders are poised to work closely with the Agency to support this new structure for providing effective management of
environmental information. This focus on providing quality environmental information is a strong affirmation of EPA's commitment
to "Protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment—air, water, and land—upon which life depends" (EPA Strategic
Plan, 1997). Many REI activities have already begun to address issues highlighted by the reorganization; as such, REI will pave the
way for ongoing improvements in the way the Agency handles environmental information collection, management, and access.
Coordinated Action Through an Integrated Program Management Plan
During this second year of REI implementation, all Offices responsible for implementing REI have developed a section of this REI
Integrated Program Management Plan. The Plan describes the FY 1999 activities that these Offices will pursue toward meeting their
independent REI commitments, and outlines tasks that they will coordinate with other REI project teams to meet REI commitments as
a whole. In this way, the Program Management Plan demonstrates how REI teams are working together to achieve common Agency
information management reform goals.
The Program Management Plan is considered a work plan for completing REI tasks during FY 1999 and a "living document" that may
be amended and updated following the quarterly meetings of REI team leads to ensure the Agency meets its commitments. The Plan
includes task commitments in the following areas: Agency-Wide REI Management, Data Standardization Program, Specific Data
Standards, Facility Identification Initiative (FII) Phase III, Electronic Reporting, One Stop State Partnership, and Systems
Reengineering Coordination.
Through a series of quarterly and monthly team lead meetings, the REI team leads continue to meet to discuss coordination
opportunities and make commitments to work together. These commitments arc presented in two ways:
-------
First, each task area has a "Tasks and Milestones" matrix. Every task in the matrices has been assigned an "intelligent"1 task
number to help identify related tasks that will require coordination with other REI teams. A "Coordinating Task #(s)" column
at the far right of each matrix notes these tasks so the reader can refer to their relevant sections of the Plan. For example, the
following table indicates that Data Standards task 3 (DS 3) must be coordinated with One Stop task 4 (OS 4), and Systems
Reengineering task 9 (SR 9):
Task*
DS3
Tasks/Milestones
Create concepts for and architectural
view of Agency data
Start Date
1 1/30/98
End Date
3/31/99 •
Deliverable
Architectural views published
inEDR
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwater, Marian
Cody, Beverly
Hacker
Coordinating
Task #(s)
OS 4
SR9
A reader can gain insight on the task interrelationships by referring to the Plan section for each task. Tasks which have been
completed are indicated with a check-mark (•) next to the end date.
• A second way this Plan helps integrate REI activities across projects is by including a matrix that cross-walks all integrated
commitments to their related project areas (attached as Appendix A: Integrated Project Commitments). Reading from left to
right, the matrix shows the interdependencies of the REI project teams (the project named on the left leads the coordination
activity with the projects listed across the top).
Following approval of the final draft of the Quarter 3, FY 1999 Program Management Plan, the Quarter 2 Timeline will be updated to
display the REI commitments and tasks described in the text below, including denotation of the party responsible for each task, all due
dates, and an indication of completed tasks, and tasks that have missed their target completion date. The timeline is also envisioned
as a "living" product that will be updated quarterly to facilitate the tracking of REI progress.
1 "Intelligent" task numbers mean thai (he lusk urea name has been abbreviated to precede the tusk number (e.^., RH1 Miiniigomcnt = KM 1. RMJ., ;
Date Standards » US I, DS2...; facility Identification Initiative = fill, ['112...; Hlcctronic Reporting = liUI. KR2...; One Stop = OS1, OS:..,; Systems
Kccnginecring « SKI, SK2,,.).
-------
REJ Annual Performance Measures
At the June 16 and 17 quarterly meeting of REI team leads, the REI team developed short and long-term performance measures for
each of the project teams. The team developed these performance measures as a way of determining the effectiveness of REI in
meeting its goals, demonstrating progress, and helping to guide future performance improvements. The short-term performance
measures and are intended to measure performance for FY 1999 goals, while the long-term measures will apply to performance for FY
2000 goals and beyond. Information is provided on the performance area to be measured, the type of data that will be collected and
measured, and the target performance goal (number or percentage) that the measurement results should achieve. Performance
measures are detailed in each team's section of the Plan, following the Tasks and Milestones matrix.
The Program Management Plan as a Communications Tool—Many Audiences, Many Messages
As a communications document, the Plan speaks to at least four audiences. First, the Plan includes task, deadline, and responsible
party information to help project managers communicate and coordinate across projects. Second, the Plan provides a thorough,
readable overview of all REI activities to inform senior managers and engage them in the important decisions upon which progress
will depend. Third, the Plan offers a road map of EPA activities to State stakeholders who are already in the process of implementing
information management and information technology reforms that must dovetail with the Agency's evolving framework. And finally,
the Plan clarifies for national systems managers the tasks and schedules for data standards, electronic reporting, and other REI work
that will provide the tools for their modernization and reengineering efforts.
In addition, this plan compliments the communications efforts of the REI components. All of the REI teams are working to
communicate with the broader Agency IRM community and with stakeholders. For example, the REI management team has
developed Internet and Intranet sites to help communicate REI information to the broader Agency and stakeholder community and the
systems reengineering coordination team has developed a status booklet for the systems managers to communicate about REI progress.
These and other tools are all relevant to the integrated plan and help enable achievement of the REI commitments.
-------
IL TASK COMMITMENTS
Task Area A: Agency-Wide Reinventing Environmental Information Management
Lead Office: Office of Information Resources Management
REI National Program Manager: George Bonina
Project Manager: Barbara Chancey
Background and Status
The REI program requires a comprehensive management process for monitoring project progress, continually reviewing and updating task
plans, allocating budgets and staff, and analyzing and resolving difficult management issues as they arise. During F Y1998, the first year of REI
progress, the REI management team implemented several management strategies to supplement existing processes (e. g., Investment Review
Process) and structures (e.g., the Systems Modernization Fund) to ensure that REI commitments were met Some of the strategies launched
last year included:
* Actively involving and supporting senior management—The REI management team supported and reported to the REI Subcommittee
(REI SC) of the Executive Steering Committee (ESC) for IRM, the body of senior Agency managers responsible for overseeing REI.
The REI SC is led by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) with support from the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Policy (OP)
and the Associate Administrator for the Office of Reinvention (OR).
• Establishing the role of the National Program Manager—The NPM built consensus among stakeholders; developed task
recommendations; maintained and reviewed project priorities, schedules, budgets, and staff; and identified policy and technical issues for
resolution
• Communicating REI activities to internal and external stakeholders—The management team designed and developed Internet and
Intranet Web sites for REI and completed four progress reports to update stakeholders on REI commitments.
These management strategies helped clarify the lines of authority, enabled the early identification and resolution of issues, enhanced
communication among all parties, and supported team contingency planning. As year two of REI implementation is underway, the REI
management team recognizes there is still much work to be done.
-------
Implementation Strategy
The management team's approach for FY 1999 includes rigorous use of this Program Management Plan as a management tool, the
scheduled release of quarterly progress reports, the provision of administrative support where needed, streamlining of the Directives
Clearance Process, and expansion of the REI Internet and Intranet Web sites. In addition, the management team will coordinate with
the Office of Information Transition and Organizational Planning (ITOP) to ensure proper placement of REI components in the new
organization.
First, the team will use the Program Management Plan as a tool to communicate to senior managers the status and progress of the
national systems in implementing REI commitments. The Plan also provides a work plan for meeting important FY 1999 REI
milestones. Second, the team will publish quarterly progress reports containing critical early warning information on tasks
experiencing difficulty. This reporting mechanism will allow REI project managers to pro-actively manage schedule slippage by
conducting resource and contingency planning to ensure accomplishment of REI commitments. The progress reports, like the Program
Management Plan, also will serve to communicate accomplishments, goals, and issues for resolution.
On a third front, the team will provide administrative support to key areas of the REI management infrastructure by producing reports;
presenting briefings; and managing REI meetings, including overseeing meeting logistics and the recording of minutes. Fourth, the
team expects that the continued modification and streamlining of the Directives Clearance Process will facilitate prompt resolution of
policy and technical issues; it also will accelerate the current data standardization process and the development of electronic reporting
capabilities. The team plans to closely track the evolution of the new clearance process to ensure its proper role in REI
implementation. And finally, the management team will expand and enhance the REI Internet and Intranet sites. Such site
development activities, in addition to the production and distribution of brochures, papers, "flash cards," and briefings, will
dramatically improve communication to many internal and external stakeholders.
-------
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan—: Agency-Wide REI Management
Task #
RM 1
RM2
RM3
RM4
RMS
RM6
RM7
Tasks/Milestones
Support REI SC, ESC for IRM, and CIO
Develop pre-briefings
Develop issue papers, pre-meeting materials,
and presentations
Coordinate REI SC meetings; record notes;
and distribute meeting notes
Ensure REI communication to internal and
external stakeholders
Develop REI FY 1999 Integrated Program
Management Plan and quarterly updates
Develop REI FY 1998 Accomplishments
and FY 1999 Commitments Report, and FY
1999 Accomplishments and FY 2000
Commitments Report
Start Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
9/1/98
9/1/98
9/1/99
End Date
Q1/FY1999*'
Q2/FY1999 •
Q3/FY1999 •
Q4/FY1999
Q2/FY1999^
Q3/FY1999*/
Q4/FY1999
1 2/1 5/98 •
10/7/99
Deliverable
n/a
Pre-briefings
Issue papers, pre-meeting
materials, presentations
Meeting minutes
Presentations, papers, &
briefings
Quarterly Integrated
Program Management
Plan for meeting all REI
commitments for OIRM,
OR, & OP
Accomplishments and
Commitments Reports
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, George Bonina,
Barbara Chancey
OIRM, George Bonina,
Barbara Chancey
OIRM, George Bonina,
Barbara Chancey,
Suzanne Annand
OIRM, Barbara
Chancey, Suzanne
Annand
OIRM, George Bonina,
Barbara Chancey.
Suzanne Annand
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
Coordinating
Task #(s)
All; see note
below.
All
All
All
All
All
All
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Agency- Wide REI Management
Task #
RMS
RM9
RM 10
RM 11
RM 12
Tasks/Milestones
Draft REI Quarterly Progress Reports
Develop Intranet Web site
Maintain Intranet Web site
Develop Internet Web site
Maintain Internet Web site
Start Date
Quarterly
12/1/98
Ongoing
8/1/98
Ongoing
End Date
Q1/FY1999^
Q2/FY1999t/
Q3/FY1999^
Q4/FY1999
3/28/99 •
1 2/30/98 •
Deliverable
Quarterly Reports
Produce Web site
Update Web site
Produce Web site
Update Web site
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
OIRM, Barbara Chancey
Coordinating
Task #(s)
All
All
All
All
All
Note: This task area does not include "Coordinating Task #(s)" as it is assumed that each Agency-wide REI management task involves coordination across all REI project areas.
Performance Measures
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
Short Term
1. REI project teams receive timely information and coordination support from
REI management that is needed to complete efficient and effective development of
their individual components
2. Senior managers receive timely and useful information from REI management
about REI projects to make critical decisions
Annual customer satisfaction survey
Annual customer satisfaction survey
Ninety percent of customers satisfied
with support received
Ninety percent of customers satisfied
with support received
iMng Term
\. KHI management provides the communication and coordination support
iic-cir-.sary lo help Klvl projects implement individual components
Annual customer satisfaction survey
Ninety pcicent of cuMoiucis s.uisluxl
with support ivceued
-------
Issues/Challenges
• Responsiveness ofREl SC and ESC. Second-year commitments are especially critical for the long-term success of REI;
therefore, the REI SC and the ESC must be prepared to make timely decisions to advance the process.
• Decentralized IRM Community. One of the most significant challenges is to establish among all EPA IRM managers and
professionals a sense of shared goals and a unified management infrastructure to achieve those goals. The Agency must move
from a culture of individual programs with disparate IRM goals to a culture where all parties are working to achieve common
goals.
• REI Communications. All the REI components will be communicating and coordinating with their stakeholder groups. The
REI management team must ensure that REI messages are coordinated to ensure consistency across the REI program.
Resources
This task area is led by the REI National Program Manager, George Bonina, and supported by OIRM staff who are experts in the
management of REI. Successful management of REI requires that the management team work closely with REI project teams from the
Office of Policy, the Office of Reinvention, Program Offices, States, and organizations such as the Environmental Council of the
States (ECOS) and the Common Sense Initiative (CSI) Council. Although the management team is responsible for coordinating REI
activities in all project areas (e.g., data standards, electronic reporting, national systems reengineering), it is primarily responsible for
REI implementation oversight, support to the Agency's senior IRM management bodies, and communication across the project areas.
The REI management team employs contractor support for several of its tasks, including support to the REI SC, development of
accomplishments and quarterly reports, and the development and maintenance of its Internet and Intranet sites.
10
-------
Task Area B: Data Standardization Program
Lead Office: Enterprise Information Management Division, Office of Information Resources Management
Project Manager: Marian Cody
Background and Status
Data standardization is the process of developing agreed-upon formats and definitions for the common data the Agency collects and stores in its
information systems. Data standards are essential building blocks for data quality because they enable data comparability among and between
information systems. The goal of the data standardization program under REI is to set into place a formal management process that will
effectively deal with data problems resulting from inconsistent data definitions and formats in Agency information systems. The program will
enable EPA to efficiently and effectively obtain, use, and reuse accurate documentation, standards, data, and other information to fulfill IRM and
Agency missions. It lays the foundation for data integration and sharing, a foundation critical to sharing environmental data internally as well as
with State partners and consumers outside the Agency. This foundation will help establish EPA's information and data resource environment of
the future.
Once data standards are established, they are recorded in various reference tools to make them more meaningful and accessible to users and to
facilitate data sharing. The Agency has created the Environmental Data Registry (EDR) as its primary reference tool for recording data
standards. The registry's purpose is to register and standardize computer-stored data to make it shareable among EPA, the States, private
industry, and the international community. The EDR contains definitions, formats, concepts, representations, and sources of information about
environmental data. In the future, the EDR will group data elements into logical entities, facilitating the development of information systems that
use and reuse standard data formats and definitions. The EDR is operated by an EPA Data Registration Authority within the Enterprise
Information Management Division. The Data Registration Authority helps formulate business rules for information and data management, and is
responsible for certifying the metadata procedures for information management. The data registry system will be built in phases to maintain the
flexibility to support emerging information management policy, procedures, and technology.
Implementation Strategy
The primary focus in FY 1999 will be to expand the foundation and institutional framework for the data standardization program. This
framework includes developing formal processes and business rules to help strengthen the Agency's efforts to integrate data standards into
everyday business practices. Under REI, the Agency will develop formal processes to register the many different ways Agency systems
represent environmental data and reach consensus on preferred common representations for data used across multiple
11
-------
information systems. Through data registration and standardization processes, EPA plans to integrate the use of standards into its
everyday business practices. A critical independent task is to communicate the need and benefits that accrue from the use of data
standards. This task must happen early in the program development process so that Agency personnel understand that data standards
are important and can be applied easily through the use of the EDR. A second critical task is to establish a Data Standards forum for
all relevant stakeholders (e.g., States, program offices). This forum will focus on obtaining feedback and guidance on the development
and direction of the data standardization program. The effective use of this forum will help ensure the acceptance of the new data
standardization process throughout the Agency.
A third critical task is to develop a data standardization prioritization process. Initial analyses indicate that there are a number of data
elements that are shared across program systems. As a result, a large number of data elements will need to be standardized, a process
is needed to help prioritize which standards are given priority. Finally, to further encourage adoption of the data standardization
process across the Agency, the EDR will be enhanced to make it more accessible and a more integral part of program systems. One
such enhancement is an interface for regulation writers, which will facilitate the use of standard environmental terminology in future
Agency regulations and the systems supporting the implementation of these regulations. Incorporating standards into regulations will
ensure that the programs that evolve from these regulations will carry standardized data from the beginning.
The data standardization team will also be coordinating with a number of different REI teams to meet REI commitments. The team
will work with the Facility Identification Initiative (FII) team to coordinate the final FII standard with Facility Registry System (FRS)
requirements and the transfer format protocol. The data standards team will also coordinate with the Electronic Reporting/Central
Receiving Function (ER/CRF) team to conduct EDI-related data analyses to build the capacity to house EDI transaction sets in the
EDR and incorporate standards within EDI transaction sets. The One Stop team will play a pivotal role in the data standardization
process. Since States play such a critical role in implementing Federal environmental laws, it is essential that States are partners in the
data standardization process. Both the data standardization team and the Electronic Reporting team will need to work with the States
to ensure the utility of their work for the States. The data standards program will also work with the Systems Reengineering
coordination team to keep systems informed about the progress of data standards promulgation and what will be required of them to
implement standards, as well as identifying needs for tools to aid implementation of standards in the systems.
12
-------
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan — Data Standardization Program
Task*
DS 1
DS2
DS3
DS4
OS 5
Tasks/Milestones
-Capture data and meanings from EPA
systems in the EDR
-Reconcile and clean up conflicting data
-Standardize meanings & formats for certain
categories of EPA data (e.g., OW for
harmonizing STORET/SDWIS/NODC)
-Capture scientific metadata in EDR
-Establish DQI workgroup
-Register elements in EDR
-Conduct analysis of what is meant by
scientific metadata
-Develop FY 2000 work plan
Create concepts for and architectural view of
Agency data
System enhancements (pilot active link
between I'iDR and program system)
Hnhancc l!.l)H ability to link standard data
elements wilh non-standard data and
e;jh;j(ice access, interfaces, and search
IfiflCllONS
Start Date
Ongoing
1/1/99
1 1/30/98
Ongoing
Ongoing
End Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Q2/FY1999
•
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
3/3 1/99 •
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
-Reconciled and cleaned
up data from 2 systems
-3 groups of harmonized
data published
-Data Quality Indicators
(DQI) workgroup
established to validate QA
elements and definitions
-Reconciled data quality
elements published in
EDR
-Work plan developed for
other metadata elements
Architectural views
published in EDR
n/a
Integrated terminology
function in FDR search
engine
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD, Marian
Cody, Larry Fitzwater;
Each system will be
assigned staff liaison
OIRM, EIMD, Tom
Maloney
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwater, Marian
Cody, Beverly I lacker
OIRM, F1MD, Larry
Fit/water, Bruce
Bargcmeycr
OIKM. FIMm.aiTV
Fit/wain. Bruce
BlIIJHMHt.'UM
Coordinating
Task #(s)
FII18
SR6, 11, 12
n/a
OS 4
SRl>
n/a
I R 11
SR 0
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Data Standardization Program
Task#
DS6
DS7
DS8
DS9
DS 10
US II
Tasks/Milestones
Develop, maintain program-specific systems
(Chemical Registry System — CRS,
Biological Registry System — BRS)
Develop regulation writer interface (develop
requirements and select an Agency
regulation to pilot)
Rationalize reporting by identifying
requirements for forms registration,
registering one form in EDR
Refine IDM program policies:
-Update Data Standards policy
-Create information stewardship policy
-Assess need for data registration /data
registrar policy
Market the IDM Program, the EDR, the
importance of data standards, and the
concept of data stewardship (establish
ongoing communications with related
offices — electronic reporting, data quality)
-Hslablish forum for data standardi/alion
process
Create electronic discussion group & hold
meetings for standards
Start Date
10/01/98
FY2000
1/30/99
Ongoing
Underway
11/1/98
Q3/FY2000
Ongoing
10/01/98
End Date
Ongoing
FY2000 (*)
9/30/99
Ongoing
May/FY99 •
FY2000 (+)
(*)
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
Web-accessible sites
Regulation writer
requirements
Forms published in EDR
-Revised chapter for data
standards policy
-New manual chapter for
information stewardship
policy
-Issue paper on need for
data registration / data
registrar policy
-Briefings
-IDM Intranet site
-Status reports
-Forum established
-Hlectronic discussion
group created
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwater
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwater, Bruce
Bargemeyer, Beverly
Hacker
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwater, Geoff Steele
OIRM, EIMD, Marian
Cody, Beverly Hacker,
Tom Maloney
OIRM, EIMD, Marian
Cody, Tom Maloney,
Beverly Gregory
OR, John Sullivan
Coordinating
Task #(s)
SR6
n/a
SR6
SR6
RM5
F.R 17
OS 21. 2.1
SR 11, I1)
Ml 1
I;R 10
os s, :i
SR .'. (.. 1 .'
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— -Data Standardization Program
Task*
DS 12
DS 13
DS 14
DS 15
DS 16
DS 17
DS 18
DS 19
Tasks/Milestones
Coordinate final FII standard with FRS
Coordinate data standards and transfer
format protocol with the FII/FRS team
Coordinate data standards development with
EDl-related data analyses
Incorporate EPA data standards in EDI
transaction sets and build the capacity to
house in the EDR
Develop data standards in partnerships with
States
Provide technical expertise to the standards
development process including to State
stakeholders
Provide and administer the EDR as the
standard and transaction set registry for use
by EPA and States
Keep systems informed about progress of
data standards promulgation and what will
be required of them to implement standards
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
Final FII standard
incorporated in FRS
Transfer format protocol
and data standards
coordinated with FRS
Completed data standards
coordinated with EDI
analyses
EPA data standards
incorporated in EDI
transaction sets, and
included in the EDR
Data Standards that
include Agency and State
input
n/a
EDR established as
transaction set registry for
EPA and States
Up-to-dale documentation
of progress of data
standards and what is
required for system
managers lo implement
llicin
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD
OIRM, EIMD
OIRM, EIMD in
partnership with OP
OIRM, EIMD in
partnership with OP
OIRM, EIMD in
partnership with OR
OIRM, EIMD in
partnership with OR
OIRM, EIMD in
partnership with OR
OIRM, H1MD
Coordinating
Task #(s)
FII 6- 10, 19,20
SR 13
FII 16
ER 10, 12
ER 1, 10
ER 11
OS 11,21,25
OS 22
Fll 18
OS 23
SR :. ii. i:
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Data Standardization Program
Task#
DS20
Tasks/Milestones
Work together to identify needs for tools to
aid implementation of standards in the
systems
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
Deliverable
Identification of needs for
system implementation
tools
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD
Coordinating
Task #(s)
SR2,6, 11, 12
Key from above: (*) Other priorities are taking more time than anticipated
(+) Stewardship policy development is more complex than anticipated
Performance Measures
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
Short Term
I. Number of standards released as final with business rules
2. Number of national systems with applicable data registered in the
Environmental Data Registry (EDR)
3. Number of data groups harmonized in EDR
Final standards with business rules
Answers to standards questions contained in the
Application Review Process
Statistics from the EDR
The remaining four REI standards
approved as final
Eight national systems with data
registered in the EDR
Three groups of harmonized data
recorded in the EDR
Long Term
\ , Number of national systems implementing all applicable standards
2. Percentage of new or revised Agency inlbi mation collection instruments
using data standards
Random, periodic program system compliance
assessments
Statistics from the Agency information inventory
and central receiving limolion
All thirteen RHl systems with
successfully implemented applicable
standards within the time frame*
established in the 1\H Action Phut
Seventy percent ol now and icviscd
information collection mstmmcnt>
use data slaiul.iiils
-------
Issues/Challenges
Throughout this implementation process, the REI staff will face a number of issues and challenges. Many of these issues have already
surfaced as a result of the initial attempts to standardize some data elements. Each of these challenges is articulated below:
• Coordination with States. Because most data comes to EPA through States, working with States is the key to good data
standards. The challenge is to establish an appropriate mechanism for States to participate in developing standards and business
rules.
• Stewardship Assignment. Success of the data standards program is predicated on individual Program Offices accepting
stewardship responsibilities for their data and actively participating in the standardization process. The viability of the standards
program would be at risk if Program Offices perceive this role as being excessively burdensome or contrary to their interests.
The challenge for the data standards program is to articulate clearly the multiple levels of data stewardship and gain Program
Office acceptance and buy-in of this role.
• Confidentiality/Security Issues. Although data standardization is a tool to promote the sharing of information, issues of
confidentiality and security must be recognized. OIRM staff will ensure that any system that is developed adequately addresses
these issues.
• Adequate Resources. Improving data management can lead to a number of benefits for the Agency. However, these benefits are
often difficult to articulate and measure. Data management is like any other management—immediate return on investment is
not always easy to quantify. However, the results of bad management have long term consequences. Because funding and other
resources are increasingly dependent on proven success, the Agency must develop indicators of success and communicate the
benefits of achieving their objectives to Agency personnel. An additional challenge is to help the Agency understand that n data
standards program carries with it a cost beyond systems development. The costs of ensuring coordination and building
consensus among stakeholders must be accommodated within funding structures.
Resources
OIRM staff will oversee the development and implementation of a formal Information and Data Management Program with
recognizable registration and standardization processes as well as continued enhancement of the EDR as the program's primary
support tool. EPA Program Offices will assume data steward responsibilities for data pertinent to their programs.
17
-------
Contractor assistance to provide data management expertise will be available to support EDR operations. To develop and maintain a
viable standards program, the Agency must ensure the integrity of the EDR by retaining the established expertise, building on the
experience gained, and perpetuating an environment of technological excellence within the context posed by Federal contracting
procedures.
18
-------
Task Area C: Specific Data Standards
Lead Office: Enterprise Information Management Division of the Office of Information Resources Management
Project Manager: Marian Cody
Background and Status
The REJ Action Plan identified six types of data that are common to many Agency systems and noted how standardization would facilitate data
sharing and system integration. These standards will be approved under the new standardization process. The REI priority standards are:
facility identification, latitude/longitude (location), SIC/NAICS, date, biological taxonomy, and chemical identity.
EPA has begun work on standardizing data. For instance, a standard for calendar date was established in July, 1997. In 1990, the Agency
finalized its Locational Data Improvement Project (LDP) to ensure collection and documentation of accurate, consistently formatted latitude
and longitude coordinates for points of environmental concern, EPA is also partnering with U.S. and Canadian Federal agencies, State
agencies, academic institutions, museums, and non-governmental organizations to develop and maintain the Integrated Taxonomic Information
System (ITIS), which provides the biological taxonomy data standard called for in the REI Act ion Plan. Another project, the Key Identifiers
Project, was an effort to establish standards for facility and chemical identification data. In December, 1997, the Facility Identification
Workgroup agreed upon a set of facility data elements that have been approved as interim data standards. In 1987 EPA established the
Chemical Abstracts Service name and registry number system as the data standard for chemical identification. Inconsistent program
implementation and evolving program needs have necessitated that this standard be revisited. The Agency has also taken steps to recognize the
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) and the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) as standardized codes for the
identification of economic classifications and to accommodate the transition from (SIC) to (NAICS). In establishing these standards, the
primary role of the REI staff is to ensure the widespread use of these data standards and encourage the movement to standards-based
approaches for managing information. While it is clear that progress has been made on establishing standards, the Agency has had limited
success in enforcing these data standards, and none has been adopted consistently across Agency systems.
-------
Implementation Strategy
Establishing the REI priority data standards involves not only developing and promulgating standards, but also a number of other
activities to support their widespread and ongoing use. Successful implementation requires constant communication with EPA's
partners in environmental regulation, including the States and other Federal agencies.
The Environmental Data Registry (EDR) will be the primary tool used to facilitate the Agency's routine use of these data standards
across systems. As outlined in Task Area B, the use of EDR will be promoted and its capabilities will be enhanced so it can be
accessed easily and made more available. This will ensure that data standards are widely incorporated into Agency business practices.
Information and Data Management program staff will participate in standard setting and coordination organizations, including the
Environmental Data Exchange Network. This participation will help in establishing a common environmental vocabulary across
government agencies and other organizations.
IDM program staff and Program Offices will also will need to make systems changes. EDR and other data management systems will
need to be enhanced as these standards continue to evolve. Agency personnel will need to be kept informed and offered training on the
EDR and how to create good metadata.
Implementation of these tasks will promote the adoption of a standards-based approach for interaction with the Agency's State
partners in environmental regulation. Specifically, IDM Program staff will be coordinating with State partners to address language
differences in State statutes that impact the priority data standards.
20
-------
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Specific Data Standards
Task#
DS21
DS22
DS23
DS24
DS25
DS 20
Tasks/Milestones
Establish REI priority standards, business
rules, and related infrastructure
Date (Y2K) Standard:
-Approve final business rules
-Approve final standard; publish in EDR
Facility ID:
-Publish interim business rules
-Collaborate on phase III
-Draft final business rules
-Submit to REI SC; publish final standard
SIC/NAICS:
-Finalize business rules, submit to REI SC
-Finalize standard, submit to REI SC
Lat/Long:
-Approve interim standard
-Develop business rules
-Submit final standard and business rules to
REI SC; finalize final standard
Biological Taxonomy:
-Develop interim standard
-Submit to RW SC
-Develop business rules
-Subrnil final slandard lo Rlil SC
-Publish final standard
Start Date
Ongoing
QI/FY99
Ongoing
11/98
6/30/98
End Date
12/17/98 •
12/17/98 •
1 1/30/98 •
Q2 & Q3 •
Q4/FY1999
9/30/99
12/1 7/98 •
12/17/98 •
12/17/98 •
6/30/99
Q4/FY1999
9/30/99
1/30/99 •
Q3/FY99 •
Q4/1-Y99
QI/FY2000
I2/3I/W
Deliverable
REI priority standards and
business rules established
Standard and business rules
published in EDR
Final standard finalized
Standard and business rules
published in EDR
-Interim standard published
-Final standard published in
EDR
-Interim standard published
-Final standard published-
Inleiim Standard
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD, Marian
Cody, Larry
Fitzwater; Program
Offices
OIRM, EIMD, Geoff
Steele
OIRM, EIMD,
Beverly Hacker
OIRM, EIMD, Linda
Spencer, Beverly
Gregory
OIRM, EIMD, Robert
Lewis
OIRM, EIMD, Larry
Fitzwuter
(I-IMD)
Coordinating
Task #(s)
Fill, 2
OS 22
SR2.6, 11
n/a
FII 1-2, 16, 19,21-22
OS 2 1,24-26
SR 13
n/a
n/a
n/a
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— -Specific Data Standards
Task#
DS27
DS28
Tasks/Milestones
Chemical Identification:
-Develop interim standard
-Submit to REI SC
-Develop business rules
-Submit final standard and business rules to
REISC
-Finalize final standard
LDEP:
-Provide contract/grant support to Regions
after an approved project plan
-Gather locational values of documented
origin
-Expand the Web documentation of
locational values in Envirofacts
Start Date
10/97
1/1999
4/1999
1/1999
End Date
1/30/99 •
6/30/99 •
Q4/FY99
Q1/FY2000
12/31/99
8/1999
9/1999
6/1999*'
Deliverable
-Interim standard published
-Final standard finalized
-Commitment notices
-Total of 500,000
values of data documentation
-All Lat/Long values results in
EF Queries will have
documentation
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, EIMD, Tom
Maloney
OIRM, Pat Garvey
Coordinating
Task #(s)
OS 7
n/a
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Specific Data Standards
Task#
DS29
DS30
DS31
Tasks/Milestones
ITIS:
-Hire Director
-Establish interagency management
structures to ensure accountability
-Expand partnership to meet goals of NPR
Access America
-Increase number of names meeting highest
credibility rating by 25,000
-Test alternative database development
approach
-Identify 6 new data contributors
(Stewards)
-Update of Taxonomic Workbench
-Redesign of Web site
Participate in standards setting/coordination
organizations
Establish a standards -based approach for
interaction with partners in environmental
regulation
Start Date
4/98
Ongoing
Ongoing
5/99
1/1999
3/1999
Ongoing
Ongoing
End Date
7/99
9/99
Ongoing
9/99
7/99
9/1999
1/1999 •&
8/1999
12/1999
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
Management structure
-Additional partners
-Database content update
-New, documented approach
-Involvement of additional
expert taxonomists as ITIS
"Data Stewards"
-Updated Taxonomic
Workbench
-Enhancements to ITIS Web
site
n/a
-Terminology Reference
System (TRS) built out
-TRS populated with
common environmental terms
-Requirements identified for a
"reg writer" interlace
Responsible
Organization
uses
uses
uses
DDT*
DDT and NODC
Barbara Lamborne
USDA
USGS/DDT/USDA
OIRM, EIMD, Bruce
Bargemeyer, Linda
Spencer, Larry
Fitzwater
OIRM, EIMD, Bruce
Bargemeyer, Larry
Fitzwater, Linda
Spencer, Beverly
I lacker
Coordinating
Task #(s)
SR6
OSS, 21
OS 22
23
-------
Performance Measures
The performance measures detailed under Task Area B, Data Standardization Program, will also be used to measure performance
under Task Area C, Specific Data Standards.
Issues/Challenges
The issues and challenges the REI staff faces under this task area are similar to those described in Task Area B, and include the
following: Stewardship Assignment; and Adequate Resources. The role of Program Offices as data stewards continues to be critical to
the successful establishment of these six initial data standards and the incorporation of data standards into ongoing business practices.
This has proven to be especially challenging in the development of the initial priority data elements because they are elements that
appear in multiple program systems. Because the systems were developed independently, each system represents similar data
differently. System managers may perceive that compliance with data standards will mean significant changes to their systems. As is
already evident from the limited success of facility ID, SIC/NAICS, and Lat/Long elements, this perception must be addressed through
outreach, training, and communication of the benefits of the data standards program and explication and clarification of appropriate
approaches and techniques to comply with standards requirements in cost effective ways. Finally, the challenge of characterizing
existing data standards and incorporating these old standards into new standards also remains an issue.
Resources
OIRM will provide the staff support to establish and manage the standardization process, to participate in ongoing dialogue with our
environmental trading partners (including the States), and to interact with national and international standard-setting organizations.
There will be contractor support available for data management expertise, to further develop and refine the EDR capability, to augment
EPA representation with national and international standard setting organizations, and to provide other technical and logistical
assistance as needed. As in Task Area B, EPA Program Offices must assume data steward responsibilities for data pertinent to their
programs for the standardization process to be successful.
24
-------
Task Area D: Facility Identification Initiative Phase III
Lead Office: Office of Information Resources Management
Project Manager: Mike Holman
Background and Status
In 1995, EPA's Executive Steering Committee (ESC) for Information Resources Management (IRM) established the Key Identifiers project to
address developing a common approach to identifying facilities in individual media-specific environmental information systems. This project
established an interim set of standard data elements to identify facilities and provided the capability to link facilities across EPA's media-specific
information systems. This phase of the project was successfully completed with the release of an interim Facility Identification Data Standard in
February 1998 and the October 1998 release of the Facility Linkage Application that identifies and links facilities across multiple programmatic
information systems. In October 1998, the REI Subcommittee of the ESC established a revised set of goals for facility identification and
evaluated the proj ect's success against these new goals. The Subcommittee determined that a new phase, which builds on the previous phase's
success, was needed to meet all the goals. The four goals for facility identification established by the REI Subcommittee in October 1998 are:
• Reduce the reporting burden on the regulated community
• Create an authoritative, up-to-date source of facility data for EPA, the States and the public
• Improve the quality of facility identification data
• Provide an "anchor" to link facilities, manage electronic reporting, and accept integrated data from States and industry
The Agency has made considerable progress in implementing the project. EPA has established an Interim Facility Data Standard (to provide an
objective measure by which data quality can be measured), created a Facility Linkage Application (FLA) in Envirofacts to link facilities, and
established a network of Regional and State data stewards to clean up facility linkages. The REI Subcommittee of the ESC has assessed
progress, reassessed the goals of the project, and determined that the Agency needs to move from the Facility Linkage Application to a Facility
Registry System (FRS) to ensure that all project goals are achieved.
The FRS will help manage the integration of the Agency's facility data by ensuring facilities are properly identified and linked to their
environmental information. The FRS will establish a central information resource of definitive facility information, assigning each facility
with a unique Faci lity Registry Identifier, which will ensure accurate linkages, enable electronic reporting, central receiving
25
-------
and integrated reporting. The FRS information will use the existing FLA to provide linkages to media-specific program information.
The FRS is being built in full conformance to the Facility Identification Template for States (FITS) model.
Implementation Strategy
Based on discussions since its initial release, the draft Interim Facility Data Standard requires updates to the list of data elements and
the definitions of those data elements to meet the REI goals for the Agency. Input will be incorporated to update the standard by
engaging Regions, Program Offices, States, and other interested stakeholders. The updated Facility Identification Data Standard will
be used in the development of FRS to ensure that FRS will be able to map to the Program Office systems and State data systems as
they implement the standard.
The FLA is in production and is currently being used by the data stewards and OIRM to create and update the facility linkages. This
linkage effort will continue to support the establishment of a high quality reconciled database of facility linkages. The FLA also will
undergo updates during the year to provide functionality needed by the data stewards, respond to the needs of Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) coordinators, and improve the functionality of the application and its ability to manage facility linkages. It is possible that
with further study by Enterprise Technology Services Division (ETSD) of Internet security issues, new requirements will be placed on
Internet applications to respond to new EPA policy.
FRS development consists of requirements gathering, design, and development and testing of the application. It will support Program
Office needs as they are identified and prioritized. Supporting documentation will be made available on the FRS Web site to help
keep the community informed of major milestones and development details. This includes a strategy paper that addresses the need for
data quality criteria, overall requirements, and potential data sources. The FRS development team will work closely with ETSD to
provide necessary documentation and other resources to successfully implement FRS in an EPA environment.
The team will coordinate its efforts with the Facility Identification Data Standards team to submit data element definitions and
relationships for population of the Environmental Data Registry (EDR) and to provide information about FRS requirements for
finalization of the Facility Identification Data Standard. The team also will work with the Electronic Reporting/Central Receiving
Facility (ER/CRF) team to ensure that FRS requirements are consistent with ER/CRF requirements; with One Stop and the States to
develop and implement a facility registry system that is FITS-compatible; and with the systems reengineering team to communicate
with programs/systems managers about what is required to incorporate the Facility Identification Data Standard, clean up facility
linkages and data, and implement FRS.
26
-------
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Facility Identification Initiative (FII) Phase III
Task#
Fill
FII 2
FII 3
FII 4
FII 5
FII 6
I'll 7
Tasks/Milestones
Establish forum for finalization of the
Facility Identification Data Standard; hold
national workshop including public
comment period to finalize standard
Complete Facility Identification Data
Standard
(draft, review with OECA, program
systems, finalize, approve and publish)
Improve facility linkages by supporting
Data Stewards, establishing procedures,
and enhancing the FLA
Validate linkages by establishing criteria by
which Data Stewards can validate linkages
and by enhancing the FLA
Continue to maintain the FLA by releasing
updates on time, responding to Data
Steward requirements, and adding data
quality reports
Meet with stakeholders to gather
requirements for FRS; provide briefings,
and develop meeting agendas and minutes
and refer users to the FRS Web site
Develop FRS Requirements Document
(prioritise requirements, develop Data
Model for FRS Application, distribute to
liTSU, and post on FRS Web site)
Start Date
Ongoing
In progress
5/1999
1/1999
10/1998
End Date
6/1999*^
9/1999
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Completed foi-
l/1999 FRS
Release •
6/I999*/
Deliverable
National workshop
Final Facility
Identification Data
Standard
Improved facility linkages
Linkages in Facility
Linkage Application with
validated flag set
New releases of the
Facility Linkage
Application
Briefings, meeting agendas
and minutes — leading to
FRS requirements
FRS requirements
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, George Bonina,
Marian Cody
OIRM, Marian Cody,
Beverly Hacker,
Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM. Mike Holman.
OIRM. Mike Holman
Coordinating
Task #(s)
DS 11,21,23
OS 8, 25
SR2, 13, 14
DS21.23
SR2, 13
SR2, 13
SR2, 13
SR2, 13
os i:
FR 13
OS 20
SR :, 13
PS i:
FR 13
OS .'d
SR .\ 1 \, .\\
21
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Facility Identification Initiative (FII) Phase III
Task#
FII 8
FII 9
FII 10
FII 11
FII 12
FII 13
FIJ 14
FII 15
Tasks/Milestones
Develop Strategy for registry development
and operation
Define data quality criteria for FRS
Determine source for FRS facility
information by reviewing available facility
data and making recommendation on source
for quality facility data
FRS design (document "how" system is
implemented, distribute to ETSD, and post
on FRS Web site)
Develop and test FRS (assign appropriate
development and test efforts)
Load data (TRI and RMP*Info) into FRS
database; coordinate with ETSD
Install production FRS system at ETSD
(coordinate with ETSD as needed)
Identify Stales to work with facility
warehouse data transfer
Start Date
1/1999
2/1999
4/1999
6/1999
4/1999
7/1999
9/1999
End Date
3/1999-
Initial
Delivered; •
Ongoing
Updates
12/1999
Ongoing
7/1999
8/1999
9/1999
9/1999
Completed •
Deliverable
Strategy paper for registry
development and operation
Validation rules for data
elements
Sources for FRS data in
priority order
FRS design
FRS system
Populated FRS database
Operational system in
production
Pennsylvania, Washington
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, Mike Holman
FRS Workgroup
FRS Workgroup
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, Mike Holman
OR, Mary McCutTny
John Sullivan
Coordinating
Task #(s)
DS 12
ER 13
OS 26
SR2, 13
DS 12
OS 26
SR2, 13
DS 12
SR2, 13
n/a
SR2, 13
SR2, 13
n/a
os :<>
2H
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Facility Identification Initiative (FII) Phase HI
Task*
FII 16
FII 17
FII 18
FII 19
FII 20
FII 21
Tasks/Milestones
Finalize data transfer formats
(incorporate updates based on
modifications to the Facility Identification
Data Standard)
Work with States to clarify data issues to
integrate data into FLA and establish a
procedure to manage and track data issues
Submit data element definitions and
relationships among data elements to the
data standards program for population in
the EDR
Provide information about FRS
requirements to the data standards
programs for finalization of the Facility
Identification Data Standard
Coordinate requirements, design, and
development of a FRS with States and
ensure compatibility with FITS
Communicate with programs/systems about
what is required to incorporate the Facility
Identification Data Standard, clean up
facility linkages/data, and implement FRS
Start Date
1/1999
End Date
4/1999-
Initial
Complete; •
Updates
Ongoing as
Needed
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
Data transfer formats
State data integrated in
FLA
Data elements and
relationships populated in
the EDR
Final input to the Facility
Identification Data
Standard
FRS requirements, design,
and development
coordinated with States
and ensure compatible
with FITS
System requirements for
the standard. Facility
linkages/data cleanup, FRS
implementation
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, Mike Holman;
OR, John Sullivan
OR, Mary McCaffery,
John Sullivan;
OIRM, Mike Holman
OIRM, EIMD, Marian
Cody, Mike Holman
OIRM, EIMD Mike
Holman
OIRM Mike Holman
OIRM, EIMD Marian
Cody, Mike Holman
Coordinating
Task #(s)
DS 13,23
OS 11,26
DS 1, 18
DS 12,23
DS 12
SR 13
DS 23
OS 24
SR 2, 11. 12, 14
29
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Facility Identification Initiative (FH) Phase ///
Task#
FII22
Tasks/Milestones
Coordinate with ER to ensure that FRS
requirements are consistent with ER/CRF
requirements
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
Deliverable
FRS requirements
consistent with ER/CRF
requirements
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, Mike Holman, in
partnership with OP and
the FRS Workgroup
Coordinating
Task #(s)
ER12
Performance Measures
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
Short Term
1.
2.
3.
Facility data standard finalized and business rules established
FRS implemented with 30,000 facilities
Number of facility linkages validated
Final standard with business rules
Reports from FRS indicating number of facility
records maintained
Reports from FLA indicating the number of
linkages validated
The data standard and business rules
approved as final
30,000 facilities loaded into initial
release of FRS
Five percent increase in number of
facility linkages validated
Long Term
1.
2.
3.
Number of facilities added to FRS
Number of program systems implementing FRS
Number of States submitting quality assured data to FRS
Reports from FRS indicating number of facility
records maintained
Reports from FRS showing PCS, RCRIS, and
AIRS/AFS facilities in FRS
Reports from FRS indicating State-submitted
data
I0c/c increase in number of
facilities added to FRS
Integrate PCS. RCRIS and
AIRS/AFS facilities in FRS
Integrate Washington and
Pennsylvania State data in FRS
Issues/Challenges
Throughout the implementation process, the staff will face a number of issues and challenges. These issues are related to finali/ation
of the Facility Identification Data Standard, use of and enhancements to the FLA, development of FRS, and coordination with State
efforts. Some of these challenges include:
30
-------
Coordinate with States. Since most data comes to EPA through State delegated programs, working with States is the key to the
ability to implement the data standard in EPA's data systems. The challenge is to develop a standard that can be followed by all
parties in representing facility information.
Finalize the Current Facility Identification Data Standard. While the date for the final release of the new standard is
September 1999, the initial list of the new data elements and definitions must be completed within a short time frame if they are
to be available to guide the development of the FRS. The challenge is to get early agreement from all interested parties.
Note: The FRS System is being developed as the Facility Identification Data Standard is being revised. The major elements of
the new Data Standard need to be determined by April 1999 in order to support the development schedule for FRS, which
requires release in September 1999. If there are major changes to the Facility Identification Data Standard in late summer 1999,
it will be difficult to incorporate them into FRS prior to the initial September release.
Encourage Active Participation of the Regions and States in the Linkage Cleanup and Validation Process. Cleaning up the
linkages for the large number of facilities that exist within EPA data systems requires the commitment of resources throughout
the Agency and States. The Regions and States are where the facilities are actually managed and known, therefore they have the
knowledge that is necessary to support this effort. The challenge is to have them remain focused on this effort as other projects
compete for their time and energy.
Determine Valid Facility Linkages. A major activity will be to mark as valid those facility linkages that have been determined
to be correct. The challenge here is how to determine that a facility linkage is valid, and how to properly mark the record to
document the reason for the validation. The TRI database can be used as a source for validation as facilities have reported other
permits to the EPA under that program, however, other sources must be found that can increase the number of valid linkages.
Maintain the focus of the FLA. Since the release of FLA in September 1998, there have been requests to add functionality that
is unrelated to the core process of managing facility linkages. The challenge is to keep the usage of the FLA focused on
managing facility linkages and to prevent the linkage identifier from being used outside of the system.
Coordinate with TRI and RMP*Info Prior to Completion of the System. The team will need to meet with TRI and Risk
Management Plan Information (RMP*Info) program office team members to gain knowledge of their data quality experience
and apply those standards to FRS. In addition, the team will need to identify early on the anticipated number of records for each
program system and to do an initial analysis of those facilities that are captured in both program systems.
31
-------
Define Business Rules Associated with the FRS. The business rules in terms of what are the data elements, their definitions, and
relationships and the "constraints on changes" to the data values need to be captured as part of the requirements gathering
process and in support of the data model development. This information needs to be defined early on in the development
process.
Define Business Rules Associated with the Final Facility Identification Data Standard. The business rules in terms of how the
FRS is to be managed with in the Agency and the policies and procedures needed to implement the Standard.
Maintain Aggressive Schedule for the September FRS Release. Requirements need to be captured and confirmed early on.
Requirements that change, or are identified as new beyond the spring of 1999, will need to be assessed in terms of the impact to
the schedule. The September Release is intended to provide basic functionality, that is, creation of the "authoritative" record for
TRI and RMP*Info data, search and reporting capabilities. Subsequent releases will provide an Add and Update interface and
accommodate the requirements defined by the FRS Workgroup as they define the business rules for facility registration for the
Agency.
Managing inconsistencies between the States Facility Lists themselves and with the FRS. The challenge is to have a Facility
Identification Data Standard that is agreed to by all parties to enable facility data transfers to go smoothly as each party can
completely identify the matching data in their systems. Criteria will need to be established to determine what data is included
and not included as various State data issues occur. This will be resolved on a case-by-case basis.
Support of Data Stewardship. The States will need to supply the data and updates to the data to ensure accuracy and currency.
The parties having an active data stewardship program concentrating on providing the highest quality data will be critical to the
success of the process.
Maintain Adequate Resources. Although improving the Agency's data management through FRS will benefit EPA, State, and
other stakeholders in a number of ways, these benefits are often difficult to define and measure. The challenge, then, is to
develop performance measures to show the return on investment being realized due to the improved integration and
management of EPA's facility data as an Agency resource. Such measures would encourage commitment of the needed
resources by the EPA Offices, Slates, and other stakeholder groups that currently control them. This challenge of justifying and
acquiring adequate resources is further compounded because long-term FRS goals require sustained resources at both the
Federal and State levels.
32
-------
Resources • FLA
FLA is currently being used by OIRM and the data stewards to create and update facility linkages. Cleaning up the linkages for the
large number of facilities that exist within EPA data systems requires the commitment of resources throughout the Agency and the
States. OIRM is working closely with the regions, States, and program offices who actually manage the facilities to leverage the
expertise necessary to support this effort.
Resources - FRS
OIRM will continue to meet as needed and coordinate with the national systems managers and OECA to ensure their requirements and
concerns are met (e.g., for OECA, the issue of parent company identities and economic activities for sector analyses). In addition,
OIRM is coordinating efforts with the States (through ECOS and One Stop) to transfer facility data and linkages between States with
developed facility systems and EPA. Resources are required from OIRM, One Stop, State and regional data stewards, and ECOS for
these activities. Contractor support is being used for both the FLA enhancements and linkage support and FRS development.
33
-------
Task Area £: Electronic Reporting
Lead Office: Office of Policy
Project Manager: David Schwarz
Background and Status
As identified in the REIAction Plan, the Agency commits to developing standards and protocols to promote consistent and universally avail-
able electronic reporting (ER) for environmental data This REI goal will reduce the burden of environmental reporting for regulated facilities, as
well as the cost to states and EPA of processing and accessing the data reported—among other things, facilitating the use of data for compli-
ance monitoring and enforcement. ER will also improve data quality and greatly increase the speed and ease with which this data can be made
available to the public. By taking a standards-based approach, the Agency will be able to foster and take advantage of marketplace solutions to
the technological challenges of enabling environmental ER. While this technical infrastructure and the accompanying legal framework are being
put in place, the Agency will continue to use its legacy approaches in the few cases where ER is currently available for environmental reports.
EPA can benefit from advances in electronic reporting used by other Federal agencies and by the private sector. However, traditional electronic
data interchange (EDI) as currently practiced in the business community falls short of meeting EPA's needs in two respects. First, the signature
and security procedures that are adequate for business transactions do not fully satisfy authentication requirements for a compliance document
that may play a role in criminal proceedings (see discussion under "Issues/Challenges"). Second, EDI likely requires too much technical sophis-
tication to be feasible for regulated small businesses, so EDI must be supplemented with "friendlier" and less costly technologies such as those
offered by Intemet/Web-based "smart forms." Work is under way to research and pilot more advanced approaches that may address these
needs whi le maintaining an appropriate connection with American National Standards Institute (ANSi)-based standards and focusing on such
issues as Internet/Web-based ER architectures, security, and digital signatures. The leading product of these efforts will be an EPA cross-media
electronic reporting and recordkeeping rule that specifies standards and requirements for legally valid electronic submissions whether using
traditional EDI architecture or the Internet.
Implementation Strategy
Coordination and supervision of the efforts to develop and finalize electronic reporting capabilities within UFA will he led by the OtVieo olTolk'y
(OP), Support to OP will be provided by the Agency CIO.
34
-------
The following table presents the tasks that need to be completed in order to implement electronic reporting in coordination with other
REI teams. The primary focus in FY 1999 will be on the completion of EDI standards development for environmental reports,
resolution of core legal policy issues, pilot tests of Internet and digital signature technologies, and specification and pilot tests of
Agency electronic reporting infrastructure components. ER will coordinate with the Data Standards Program, Facility Identification
Initiative (FII), One Stop, and Systems Reengineering Coordination to achieve common REI goals including: standardized data
elements, central receiving function (CRF) support, and ER implementation support.
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Electronic Reporting
Task*
ER 1
ER2
Tasks/Milestones
Complete draft EDI standards
development for all data submissions to all
national systems that are not currently
addressed
Complete and publish interim State ER
guidelines that address reporting to
delegated States
Start Date
FY98
FY97
End Date
Q4/FY99
Q4/FY99
Deliverable
-Business process analysis
reports for major program
systems (AIRS, BRS, PCS,
RMP, TRI) completed •
-National EDI standards/
implementation guidelines
for all data submissions
addressed
-New EPA-specific ANSI
X12 transaction set
developed to support
integrated, cross-media
compliance reporting
- Business process analysis
and international standards
development for trans-
border exchange of
hazardous waste and
pesticide data
Published interim guidelines
Responsible
Organization
OP in partnership with
system "owners"
OP
Coordinating Task
#(s)
DS 14
OS 27
SR2, 6, 15-17
OS 27-30
SR2
35
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Electronic Reporting
Task#
ER3
ER4
ER5
ER6
ER7
ER8
Tasks/Milestones
Initiate cross-media consolidated
rulemaking to provide EPA legal
framework for electronic reporting
Complete pilot tests of Internet-based
implementation scenarios using software
and hardware-based digital signatures and
biometrics
Develop requirements analysis and
implementation plan for Agency Public
Key Infrastructure (PKI) digital signatures
Develop requirements analysis (including
system security) and implementation
options for Agency "central receiving
facility"
Continue development of Agency EC/EDI
testbed to prototype "central receiving
facility"
Support One Stop Program demonstration
of State integrated Electronic Reporting
Start Date
Q2/FY99
Q1/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
10/98
End Date
Ongoing
Q4/FY99
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Q2/FY2000
Deliverable
-Development plan
Technical reports to serve as
basis for ER signature
policy
Requirements document
-Requirements document
-Cost/benefit analysis
-Data receiving facility for
EDI and Internet
submissions
-EDI/EC software
assessment report
Implementation setup for
three EDI applications in
PA
Responsible
Organization
OP
OP
OP in partnership with
OIRM, ETSD
OP in partnership with
the NSB
OP in partnership with
OIRM, ETSD
OP in partnership with
OR
Coordinating Task
#(s)
SR2
OS 29
SR2, 15-17
OS 27, 28
SR2, 15-17
OS 27-29
SR2, 15-17
OS 27-29
SR2, 15-17
OS 6, 9, 17, 19,29
SR 15
36
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Electronic Reporting
Tasktf
ER9
ER 10
ER11
ER 12
ER13
ER 14
ER15
ER 16
Tasks/Milestones
Coordinate with One Stop to continue
support of limited State/Federal EDI
implementations for NPDES, safe drinking
water, hazardous waste, and air programs
Coordinate the development of data
transfer sets to include EPA data standards
and well-formed EPA data elements
Provide data transfer sets for inclusion in
the EDR
Develop data transfer sets to ensure that
facility-based reporting includes FII
standard data elements
Participate in development for FRS to
ensure that it supports central receiving
Coordinate ER/CRF requirements,
regulation development, and cost benefit
analysis with One Stop and Program
Offices
Provide technical support and
infrastructure for State/EPA exchange
Coordinate with One Stop in conducting
State pilots
Start Date
Q2/99
10/98
Q2/99
End Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Q4/99
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverable
-Air, hazardous waste, and
drinking water state EDI
implementations
-Proposed hazardous waste
ER rule
-Proposed and draft final
NPDES ER rule
Data transfer sets inclusive
of standardized data
elements
Data transfer sets for
inclusion into the EDR
Data transfer sets including
FII standard data elements
FRS capable of supporting
central receiving
ER/CRF requirements,
regulation development ,
and cost benefit analysis
Technical support and
infrastructure for State/EPA
exchange
State pilots implementing
ER
Responsible
Organization
OP, OECA, OW, and
OSW
OP in partnership with
OIRM, EIMD
OP in partnership with
OIRM, EIMD
OP in partnership with
OIRM
OP in partnership with
OIRM
OP in partnership with
OIRM
OP in partnership with
OR
OP in partnership with
OR
Coordinating Task
#(s)
OS 27, 28
SR 15-17
DS 11, 13, 14
DS5, 15
DS 13
FII 23
FII 6-8
OS 6, 9, 26-29
SR 15-17
OS 6, 9, 27-29
OS 19,29
37
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan— Electronic Reporting
Task#
ER17
Tasks/Milestones
Communicate progress and what will be
required of system managers to implement
ER/CRF
Start Date
Ql/99
End Date
Q4/99
Deliverable
ER/CRF progress and
requirements communicated
to system managers
Responsible
Organization
OP in partnership with
OIRM
Coordinating Task
#(s)
DS 10
SR2, 5,6
Performance Measures
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
Short Term
1. Define and pilot test EDI transaction set formats (i.e., standard data transfer
formats) for all major EPA reports related to major EPA environmental databases
(these reports include: the discharge monitoring report and self-monitoring report under
NPDES, the hazardous waste manifest and biennial report under RCRA, the Risk
Management Plan, the Toxic Release Inventory, Safe Drinking Water laboratory
reports, and one or more reports related to AIRS)
2. Complete overall system architecture design and detailed system specifications for
the Central Receiving Facility
3. Prepare complete draft notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for final review of
the Agency's Cross-Media Electronic Reporting and Recordkeeping Rule
Project deliverables, (e.g., progress reports
and products)
System architecture design and detailed
system specifications for CRF
Draft NPRM for the Agency's Cross-
Media Electronic Reporting and
Recordkeeping Rule
Completion of EDI transaction set
format development for all major
EPA reports related to major EPA
environmental databases
Completion of all Central Receiving
Facility design work
Completion of NPRM ready for final
Agency management review
Long Term
1 . Of the data that regulated companies submit directly to EPA, the percentage of data
that are submitted electronically
Electronic transaction data from CRF logs
and from State and local agencies
Within the first five years of starting
ER/CRF production, reach an annual
electronic reporting rate of more
than 5Q7< for the universe of data
submitted directly to Hl'A
38
-------
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
2. Of the data that regulated companies submit to State or local environmental agencies
under EPA-authorized or delegated programs, the percentage of data that is submitted
electronically (This measure must be applied carefully, insofar as State implementation
of electronic reporting will largely not be within the control of EPA, but the measure
should provide some indication of the relative success of EPA leadership in this area)
Electronic transaction data from State and
local agencies
Within the first five years of starting
ER/CRF production, reach an annual
electronic reporting rate of more
than 30% for the data submitted to
State or local agencies under EPA
authorization or delegation
Issues/Challenges
• Ability to Meet FY 2000 Goal of One ER Approach Available for Every Major Reporting Program. From a technical
perspective, given completion of EDI standards development and current availability of an EDI gateway (translator and VAN
connection) managed by ETSD, it is theoretically correct to say that EPA will be in a position to receive EDI-submitted reports
by the end of FY 2000. The ability to actually implement EDI by this deadline, however, is contingent on the necessary
legal/regulatory framework being in place by this time. Unfortunately, EPA is unlikely to have this for all programs by 9/30/00
(see, #2 and #3, below). What may be available by then is: (1) a rule providing for EDI submission of Discharge Monitoring
Reports (DMRs) with paper certification, (2) provision for EDI (and possibly Web-based) submission of safe drinking water
laboratory reports, (3) provision for some Web-based submission of Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) forms, and (4) email
submissions of the Risk Management Plan. In addition, EPA will likely be supporting some State implementations of at least
EDI and/or Web-based submissions of Hazardous Waste Manifest forms and air emissions inventory reports. Finally, legacy,
diskette-based electronic data collection will still be available for the Toxic Release Inventory and the Biennial Report. All of
this, taken together, should be enough to claim interim success.
• The Vehicle and Timeframe for Establishing the Agency's Legal Framework for Electronic Reporting. The FY98 REI Program
Management Plan proposed that the Electronic Reporting project—as an Agency-wide REI initiative—would provide the cross-
Agency legal framework through the development and issuance of a policy statement, scheduled for release in late 1999, and
that individual Program Offices would then undertake rulemaking to the extent that this was needed to supplement policy.
Based on two year's experience working with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program on its
electronic reporting rule, it now appears that rulemaking will be needed in addition to policy in almost all cases where electronic
reporting is introduced into a compliance program. Given this fact, and the time and effort required for program-by-program
rulemaking, it is now clear that the REI goal of universal access to electronic reporting by 2003 can only be met if the REI plan
includes sponsorship of a consolidated cross-program electronic reporting rule. Therefore, this FY 1999 Plan proposes that the-
Electronic Reporting initiative convert the current policy effort to rulemaking. This will extend the limefrume for providing the
39
-------
required legal framework beyond FY 1999, likely to 2001 or 2002; however, the result will be a firm, uniform and enforceable
regulatory foundation for electronic reporting across all the Agency's programs.
• Developing Electronic Signature Approaches Acceptable to the Enforcement Community. Currently, there is an ongoing
dialogue between EPA and the Department of Justice (DOJ) - through meetings of a joint working group — on the issue of what
paperless electronic signature devices will meet the evidentiary requirements for use of electronic documents in enforcement
proceedings. At least provisionally, we have agreement on at least one acceptable approach, involving the use of PINs together
with digitized signature images. The next step will be to work though a corresponding agreement that involves the use of PKI-
based digital signatures, which will likely have to be a key element in any Agency-wide electronic signature strategy.
Ultimately, these agreements will be formalized in the Agency's electronic reporting rule.
• Developing Viable, Cost-Effective Approaches to Electronic Archiving. Implementation of ER will have to involve the long-
term maintenance - by both EPA and regulated companies - of archived electronic copies of such things as transmission logs as
well as the data submitted. Currently, there are unresolved issues on how best to assure the integrity and authenticity of such
archives in the face of challenges posed by evolving systems platforms and the vulnerability of magnetic media to deteriorate
over time. These issues must be addressed as a part of the Agency's electronic reporting rule.
Resources
The Office of Policy's (OP) Information Innovation Team (HT) staff will oversee the development of the major components of the ER
initiative, including EDI standards, electronic signature and associated rulemaking, central receiving architecture, and
assistance/outreach to delegated State programs. For virtually all ER activities, ITT's role will largely be one providing both policy
and technical analysis for key issues, together with leading and coordinating a partnership with affected federal offices/entities and
State agencies, including OECA, OGC, the Department of Justice, and such Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) as the National
Governors' Association, ECOS, and the Environmental Law Institute. Such partnerships may also involve foreign governments,
where environmental compliance data moves across borders. In any event, these partnerships will be especially important to support
standards development, rulemaking, and State outreach—with stakeholder workgroup processes central to each of these efforts.
In addition, for all the components of the ER initiative, IIT efforts will involve managing contractor resources. Contractor assistance
will play an especially large role in EDI standards development, designing/planning for central receiving architecture, and
implementing production ER. As production ER rolls out for various programs/States, stewardship for ER activities will shift from
IJT to the responsible program/State managers.
40
-------
Task Area F: One Stop State Partnership
Lead Office: One Stop Reporting, Office ofReinvention
Project Manager: MaryMcCaffery
•^
Background and Status
One Stop, begun in 1996, is a program to build a partnership with States and Tribes to realize the vision of EPA's new information office and the
joint vision and operating principles of the State-EPA Information Working Group. It began as an initiative to demonstrate the feasibility of State
data management reforms using jointly developed data standards, and as an approach to improve State/EPA data sharing, public access, and
electronic reporting. Initial goals were to: reduce reporting burden on regulated communities, integrate data to support place-based and geo-
graphic solutions, enhance public access to environmental data, reduce EPA data costs, and leverage State investments on information manage-
ment
One Stop aims to develop a data-sharing partnership with each State based on common data standards and a shared vision concerning the
goals and scope of environmental data management. One Stop provides one-time grants of $500,000 to help them reengineer State data
management processes and systems. In addition, One Stop, working with the Environmental Council of States (ECOS), organizes State-to-
State technical assistance and is responsible for ensuring that EPA data management policies and programs are coordinated with the overall
vision agreed upon by EPA and ECOS. The RE1Action Plan called for the expansion of One Stop to all 50 States, and focuses attention on
primary REI program objectives. The Plan also highlights One Stop's responsibility for assisting other REI components in implementation of
reforms with States.
During 1997-98,16 additional States were awarded grants and partnered with the One Stop program. The States currently participating in One
Stop are: AZ, GA, IN, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OK, OR, PA, TX, UT, WA, WI, and WV. 1997-98 accomplishments
include:
• Commitment from EPA to create the REI Program, which included many One Stop goals;
• Development of the Facility Information Template for States integration model;
• Framework agreement between ECOS and EPA, new State/EPA Information Management Workgroup with multiparty Action Teams;
• Prototyped data warehouse with National Systems Board, began populating with data;
41
-------
/
I
Task Area G: Systems Reengineering Coordination
Lead Office: Office of Information Resources Management
Project Manager: RubyBoyd
Background and Status
The RE1Action Plan states that central support for national systems reengineering will be provided through the Systems Reengineering Team.
During FY1998, the National Systems Board (NSB) served as the primary mechanism for Systems Reengineering Coordination. The NSB, a
technical advisory group, was created during FY 1998 and is composed of Information Resource Management (IRM) practitioners from across
the Agency. The NSB membership represents 11 AA-ships and the regions.
The NSB held its first meeting on April 2,199 8. The membership decided to hold bi-weekly meetings to permit sufficient time to work on a
number of high priority tasks. Using the REIActionPlan as a starting point, the NSB developed their list of FY 1998 tasks. Alongwiththe
tasks, the Action Plan identifies several REI management challenges that must be overcome to achieve success. These challenges are listed
below and include a brief description of theNSB's role in overcoming them:
• Managingfor success. The NSB is responsible for developing technical implementation solutions.
• Applying REI management tools properly and resolving key issues as they arise. The NSB serves as a forum for recommending
solutions to technical issues as they arise during REI implementation. In addition, the NSB is committed to notifying the appropriate
parties in a timely manner and providing clear options for proceeding.
• Developing shared goals and planning for contingencies. The NSB is dedicated to communicating with system managers to help
identify and mitigate REI risk factors and schedule slippage. The NSB and National Systems Managers (NSMs) work closely to ensure
implementation of REI.
• Managing/ram shared goals and responsibilities. The NSB recognizes the importance of all parties working together to achieve a
team commitment to implementing REI.
51
-------
Next, the NSB prioritized its tasks and selected five high priority tasks on which to concentrate their FY 1998 efforts. The tasks were
selected because they are critical in addressing the REI management challenges. The five high priority tasks include:
3. Establishment and Management of the NSB;
4. Study of Central Receiving (CR) Function;
5. Study of Information Technology (IT) Architecture for Environmental Systems;
6. Analysis of National System Modernization Schedules; and
7. Incorporation of REI Commitments Into the Investment Review Criteria.
In FY 1998, the NSB worked diligently to help the Agency realize the Action Plan commitments. On March 16, 1999, the NSB met to
review its accomplishments, discuss the future of REI related needs, and evaluate its role in supporting the evolving needs of the REI
program. To clearly demonstrate the NSB's work, the NSB developed a list of their FY 1998 Accomplishments. The list maps high
priority NSB tasks to specific NSB work products.
During the discussion of future REI implementation needs, the Board decided it no longer serves as the appropriate mechanism to
address REI program needs. Based on the NSB's FY 1998 Accomplishments, the Board decided to declare success and retire the
NSB. The NSB discussed the critical role of National Systems Managers (NSMs) in the successful implementation of REI. The NSB
determined a need to establish a forum for NSMs. This forum would discuss issues and resolve REI implementation challenges.
Implementation Strategy
As the REI program enters its second year, the focus of the work is changing from planning to implementation—data standards are
nearing finalization and electronic reporting protocols are already being test-piloted. NSMs have until FY 2003 to incorporate the
data standards and electronic reporting into their systems. A key challenge facing the REI team is to effectively support the national
systems managers in implementing the REI standards and protocols in their systems. To address this challenge and ensure successful
implementation of REI, the Systems Reengineering Coordination Team will focus its on assisting NSMs. The Systems Reengineering
Coordination Team is dedicated to supporting NSMs in implementing REI commitments by providing the following:
• Communication—Provide timely, useful information about REI implementation to help NSMs make critical decisions;
• REI Rules and Tools—Develop tools and communication products to increase NSM awareness of REI implementation issues;
• Action Item Tracking Matrix—Assist NSMs in identifying and accomplishing FY 2000 action items;
• Quarterly NSM Meetings—Host quarterly meetings with NSMs to exchange information, engage discussion, and request
comments on REI implementation;
• Increase NSM Visibility—Use knowledge from meetings and interviews with NSMs to identify and raise critical cross-cutting
issues to REI management; and
52
-------
Issue Resolution—Work with NSMs to develop recommendations and resolve issues.
The following table presents the tasks that need to be completed to successfully implement REI in the National Systems in
coordination with other REI teams. The Systems Reengineering team will coordinate with the Data Standards, Facility Identification
Initiative (FII), One Stop, and Electronic Reporting teams to achieve common REI goals.
Tasks and Milestones
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan — Systems Reengineering Coordination
Task#
SRI
SR2
SR3
Tasks/Milestones
Evaluate the performance and
effectiveness of the National Systems
Board (NSB)
Conduct periodic sessions with the REI
NSMs to maintain currency on REI
activities, address issues, and develop
implementation options
Maintain the REI systems profiles,
provide access on Internet, include in EPA
Systems Inventory
Start Date
Q2/FY99
Q1/FY99
Q1/FY99
End Date
7/7/99 •
10/8/98 •
2/1 6/99 •
Q4/FY99
12/1 7/98 •
7/8/99 •
Deliverables
-Decisions NSB roles/
responsibilities in REI
implementation phases (e.g.,
changes in membership,
charter)
-Recommendation to REI SC
on NSB realignment and
specific FY 1999 tasks
-Quarterly meetings,
information exchanges, and
retreat with NSMs
-NSMs focus groups for
issues
-Web site for NSMs and a
discussion database
-System profiles updated
-Internet access to systems
profiles
-Inclusion of REI systems
profiles in EPA Systems
Inventory
Responsible
Organization
OIRM, NSB
members, & REI
National Program
Manager
OIRM & REI
NSMs in
partnership with
other REI
components
OIRM & REI
NSMs
Coordinating Task
#(s)
n/a
RMS
DS 19-21
FII 1-10, 12, 13.21,
22
ER 1-7. 14. 17
OS 17, 18,30
OS 17, 18,30
53
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan — Systems Reengineering Coordination
Task#
SR4
SR5
SR6
SR7
Tasks/Milestones
-Analyze and update the REI systems
modernization schedules
-Analyze and compare NSMs' FY 1999
budget estimates to FY 1999 operational
plans
Track NSMs progress in implementing
REI commitments
Develop REI toolkits and any additional
tools to assist/support NSMs with
implementation
-Review REI-relutcd questions and
systems responses on IT Investment
Review Proposals, help revise the REI-
relaled questions, and identify issues
critical to REI success)
-Provide technical assistance lo NSM's in
uiiriplclmj.' /'/' nivrslmcnl submissions
Start Date
Q2/FY99
Q1/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
End Date
7/8/99 •
7/8/99 •
Q4/FY99
7/8/99 •
Deliverables
-Diagram that shows the
reengineering schedules of
all the REI systems in life
cycle terms;
-Diagram that maps
reengineering schedules of
the REI systems to RE]
commitments
Quarterly updates to the
Implementation Status:
Highlighting National
Systems Progress booklet
-Detailed (a level below
business rules)
implementation guidance tor
each data standard and
electronic reporting
-Additional tools to facilitate
successful implementation of
in the REI systems
-First set of FY99 Rules and
Tools
Recommendations on IT
Review process
improvements to REI
Subcommittee
Responsible
Organization
OIRM & REI
NSMs
OIRM
EIMD, OIRM. in
partnership OP
OIRM
Coordinating Task
#(s)
n/a
RM7, 8
ER 17
DS 1.5.6.8.9.20.
21,29
ER 1. 17
OS 4
n/a
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan — Systems Reengineering Coordination
Task#
SR8
SR9
SR10
SR11
SR 12
SR 13
SR 14
Tasks/Milestones
Review IT Systems Modernization Fund
guidance and criteria
Develop REI architecture recommendation
Develop options and analysis for central
receiving function (CRF)
Ensure participation of programs in data
standards development work, and
determine what will be required of
systems and when
Support and enable implementation of
standards when issued
Ensure participation of the programs in
ongoing development of the FI1 standard,
facility linkage/data cleanup efforts, and
development of FRS
Ensure that rules and tools for FII
implementation get to the systems
managers
Start Date
Q3/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q3/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
End Date
Q4/FY99
Q1/FY2000
Q1/FY2000
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Deliverables
Recommendations on
guidance and process to
include IT Systems
Modernization Fund in the
IT investment review process
-Architecture for REI
systems documented
-Recommendation to REI
Subcommittee
Assessment of requirements
for CRF
Requirements for systems to
implement data standards
Implementation of standards
Clean facility data
Rules and tools for FII
implementation
Responsible
Organization
OIRM and IT
Investment Review
Team
OIRM, ETSD,
Architecture Team
OIRM, OP, &
NSM's
OIRM in
coordination with
EIMD and OR
OIRM in
coordination with
EIMD and OR
OIRM in
partnership with
EIMD and OECA
OIRM in
partnership with
EIMD
Coordinating Task
#(s)
n/a
DS3
OS 4, 17, 18,30
OS 28
DS 1, 10, 11 19,20,
21
FII 21, 22
DS 1, 11. 19.20
FII 21, 22
OS 22
DS 1, 12,23
FII 1-10. 12, 13,20
OS 2d
Ml 1,21,22
55
-------
FY 1999 REI Project Management Plan — Systems Reengineering Coordination
Task*
SR15
SR16
SR17
SR18
SR19
Tasks/Milestones
Work with ER/CRF group to
communicate system needs for ER and
CRF
Contribute to the development of business
process models for each system
Reengineer systems to implement ER and
CRF
Communicate progress of and involve
States in decision-making for national
system reengineering efforts with State
partners
Coordinate systems reengineering
workgroups with One Stop workgroups
Start Date
Q2/FY99
Q2/ FY99
Q2/ FY99
Q2/FY99
Q2/FY99
End Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Q4/FY99
Q4/FY99
Ongoing
Deliverables
-Assessment of CRF
requirements
-Rules and tools for ER CRF
Business process models for
each REI system
Systems capable of ER/CRF
Quarterly updates to the
Implementation Status:
Highlighting National
Systems Progress booklet
n/a
Responsible
Organization
OIRMin
coordination with
OP and OR
OIRM in
coordination with
OP
OIRM in
coordination with
OP and OR
OIRM in
coordination with
EIMD,
OIRM in
coordination with
OR
Coordinating Task
#(s)
ER 1,4-9, 14
OS 28
ER 1,4-7, 9, 14
ER 1,4-7, 9, 14
OS 28
OS 27, 30
DS 10
OS 6, 8,9, 11
Performance Measures
Performance Measure
Data Collected
Performance Goal
Short Term
\. Percentage of action items accomplished from the action item matrix
2. Number of tools
manager awareness
and/or communication products developed to support system
of Rlil implementation issues
Collected action items from meetings with
the system managers
Completed tools and/or communication
products
Ninety percent of action items addressed
from the action item matrix
Three tools aiul/or communication products
to support system manager awareness ol l\l;l
implementation issues
56
-------
Performance Measure
3. Percentage of system managers satisfied with support provided by the
Systems Reengineering Coordination Team
4. Use of REI discussion database on the Intranet
Data Collected
Annual customer satisfaction survey
Data on use of discussion database (i.e.,
number of "hits")
Performance Goal
Ninety percent of system managers satisfied
with Systems Reengineering Coordination
support
Fifty percent increase in the number of REI
discussion database hits
Long Term
1. Number of systems managers that have implemented REI commitments by
the established deadlines
Information from Investment Review
Proposal process regarding
implementation of REI commitments
Ninety percent of system managers
implementing REI commitments by the
established deadlines
Issues/Challenges
• Time. The Systems Reengineering Coordination Team requests that NSMs attend and participate in quarterly meeting/retreats.
It may be a challenge for NSMs to maintain their commitment to attending and participation in the NSM forum due to
competing responsibilities.
• NSMs Coordination. The Systems Coordination Team has to work with and coordinate with the following entities: NSMs from
multiple offices, REI Team Leads, and States (on REI Implementation); the Information Technology Management Reform Act
(ITMRA) Board (on IT investment review revisions); the Infrastructure and Desktop Subcommittee (on architecture issues);
Enterprise Technology Services Division (ETSD) (on the architectural vision); and Center for Environmental Information and
Statistics (CEIS) (to resolve the data correction and data quality issues). While a forum for the NSMs is being established, no
similar forum is being created for other focus groups.
• Accomplishing REI Commitments. Ensuring the REI Team members communicate unified and consistent messages is a key
challenge. Both the NSB and NSMs agreed that keeping abreast of the data standard program activities are critical to ensuring
system reengineering plans accomplish the REI commitments.
• Retrofitting. Seven REI systems are in the process of, or planning to undergo, major reengineering. Because many of the REI
standards are not finalized or are not well defined enough to begin the implementation process, many systems may require
57
-------
retrofitting to accommodate the final REI standards. This may potentially result in unplanned expenditures to ensure the system
is compliant with the required data standards.
Resources
OIRM provides the staff to support the Systems Coordination Reengineering team. The Systems Coordination Reengineering team
works closely with NSMs representing each of the REI systems. NSMs attend regular meetings supported by the Systems
Coordination Reengineering team. Together, the Systems Coordination Reengineering team and NSMs strive to increase awareness of
the REI program, develop tools to assist NSMs with REI implementation, and help NSMs identify and resolve REI implementation
challenges. Contractor support is provided to support meetings, conduct technical system analyses, and develop REI
implementation/communication tools.
58
-------
III. CONCLUSION
The REI team has made a tremendous effort to integrate their planned commitments during FY 1999. REI team leads each drafted
individual workplans for accomplishing their FY 1999 REI tasks, and then met for two days in February, 1999 to identify the
coordination activities that are needed between teams. From this quarterly meeting of REI team leads, the FY 1999 Integrated Plan
was drafted to describe the interdependencies of the REI teams and their tasks. In June, the REI team met again for two days to update
the Integrated Plan for Quarter 3 based on project accomplishments, and the addition of new tasks or coordination activities.
Performance measures were also developed at this quarterly meeting to help the REI team gauge its success in reaching its goals.
Implementation of the commitments named in this Plan will enable the overall success of the REI program.
Despite the tremendous progress toward implementation, challenges remain. The reorganization of the information office, budget
cuts, and the complex tasks the REI team is responsible for all challenge the REI team leads. At the REI quarterly meeting in
September, team leads will discuss the implementation challenges they face in FY 2000, as well as the future of the new information
organization. At this meeting, the team leads will also prepare and discuss FY 1999 accomplishments and FY 2000 commitments, and
draft FY 2000 workplans for their individual projects. The REI team will again identify necessary coordination activities across
project teams and follow up with a draft FY 2000 REI Integrated Program Management Plan. In the December timeframe, the REI
team leads will meet again to update the FY 2000 Integrated Plan. Continued coordination of this kind is essential to putting the REI
puzzle pieces together.
-------
Appendix A: Integrated Project Commitments
Coordinating With:
*
Data Standards
Program
Facility
Identification
Initiative (Fll)
Electronic
Reporting (ERV
Central
Receiving
Function (CRF)
State
Coordination
(One Stop)
Syttems
Ftoenglneerlng
Coordination
Data Standards Program
/
• submit data element definitions
and relationships among data
elements to the data standards
program tor population in the EDR
- provide information about FRS
requirements to the data standards
programs for finalization of the
facility 10 data standard
- coordinate the development of
data transfer sets to include EPA
data standards and well-formed
EPA data elements
- provide data transfer sets for
inclusion in the EDR
- support State and EPA process
for developing data exchange
standards
- provide technical assistance to
States tor implementing data
standards in State systems
- ensure participation of programs
in data standards development
work, and determine what will be
required of systems and when
- support and enable
implementation of standards when
Issued
Facility Identification
Initiative (Fll)
- coordinate final Fll standard with
FRS requirements
- coordinate transfer format
protocol with the FII/FRS team
(on hold - pending resolution of
One Stop plans)
/
- develop data transfer sets to
ensure that facility-based
reporting includes Fll standard
data elements
- participate in development of
FRS to ensure that it supports
central receiving
- promote use of the FITS model
by States
• pilot synchronization of State
facility data with EPA facility data
and joint management of facility
data
- ensure participation of the
programs in ongoing development
of the Fll standard and
development of FRS
- ensure that rules and tools for
Fll implementation gat to the
systems managers
Electronic Reporting (ERy
Central Receiving Function (CRF)
- coordinate data standards
development with EDI-related data
analyses
- incorporate EPA data standards in EDI
transaction sets and build the capacity
to house in the EDR
- register data elements with EDR
- coordinate with ER to ensure that FRS
business rules are consistent with
ER/CRF requirements
- participate in ER/CRF business rule
process
- coordinate development of ER
transaction sets
/
- keep communication open between
States and ER/CRF efforts to ensure
that both are moving in a parallel
direction
- Coordinate pilot activities with ER/CRF
- work with ER/CRF group to
communicate system needs for ER and
CRF
- contribute to the development of
business process models for each
system
-help systems implement ER/CRF
State Coordination (One Stop)
- develop data standards in
partnership with States
- provide technical expertise to the
standards development processes
- provide and administer the EDR as
the standard and transaction set
registry
- coordinate requirements of a facility
registry system with States
• develop and implement a facility
registry system that is FITS-
compatible
- coordinate pilot transfer of data
elements from States
- coordinate ER/ CRF requirements,
reg development, and cost benefit
analysis with One Stop and program
offices
- provide technical support and
infrastructure for State/EPA
exchange
- coordinate with One Stop in
conducting State pilots
- coordinate with One Stop and
OECA on PCS modernization/data
translation issues
/
• communicate progress of and
involve States in decision-making for
national system reengineering efforts
with State partners
- coordinate systems reengineering
workgroups with One Stop
workgroups
Systems Reengineering
Coordination
- keep systems informed about
progress of data standards
promulgation and what will be
required of them to implement
standards
- work together to identify needs for
tools to aid implementation of
standards in the systems
- communicate with programs/
systems about what is required to
incorporate the Fll standard, clean
up facility data, and implement FRS
- communicate progress and what
will be required of system managers
to implement ER/CRF
• communicate and coordinate State
reengineering/ modernization plans
(e.g., data models, architectural
platforms, data standards efforts)
with EPA system plans
/
The matrix should be read from left to right. The project named on the left leads the coordination activity with the projects listed across the top.
------- |