U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Enterprise Architecture Program
FY2009 Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
DRAFT
&EPA
(£1
OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
-------
REVISION HISTORY
Version Number Date Description
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
5/1/2009
5/5/2009
5/13/2009
5/13/2009
5/14/2009
5/29/2009
6/10/2009
6/18/2009
7/1/2009
Initial Draft of Performance, Business and Data Chapters
Initial Consolidation of all five architecture layer chapters and strategy
layer chapter
Enterprise Target Architecture, including EATeam Comments
Priority updates, Recommendations Section and Appendix added
Services Architecture section revised
Comments were incorporated from the Enterprise Architecture
Working Group
Chief Architect review to tighten wording and clarify
Additional Changes from Post Management (MISD, OTOP, CIO, IIS)
Review
Edits per comments from CTO and OEI's Quality Staff
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary 1
1.1 Vision 1
1.2 Concept of Operations 2
1.3 Key Target Recommendations by Layer 4
2. Document Background 7
2.1 Background and Strategy 7
2.2 Audience 7
3. Strategic Architecture 9
3.1 EPA's Major Goals 9
3.2 Targeted Areas for Improvement - Strategic Plan Change Document 10
3.3 NPM Priorities 11
3.4 EPA's Information Access Strategy 11
3.5 Administration Priorities 12
4. Performance Architecture 13
4.1 Overview 13
4.2 Performance Architecture Framework 16
4.3 Performance Architecture Target Recommendations 20
5. Business Architecture 22
5.1 Background 22
5.2 Overview 22
5.3 Business Architecture Drivers 25
5.4 Key Business Architecture Themes 26
5.5 Target Business Architecture 27
6. Services Architecture 30
6.1 Service Layer Background and Overview 30
6.2 Target Services Approach 31
6.3 Target Services Oriented Architecture Overview 33
6.4 Target Recommendations 45
7. Target Data Architecture 49
7.1 Overview 49
7.2 Data Architecture Goals 49
7.3 Enterprise Data Architecture 50
7.4 The Data Reference Model (DRM) 54
7.5 Framework for Managing Distributed Data Assets 55
7.6 Target Data Architecture Recommendations 67
8. Technology Architecture 71
8.1 Overview 71
-------
8.2 Technology Target Themes 71
8.3 EPA Initiatives for Achieving the Target Vision 76
Appendix A-Documents Referenced 79
Appendix B - Business Requirements and Technology Solutions Diagram 82
Appendix C - EPA Data Lifecycle Framework 83
Appendix D - EPA Core Mission Areas Data Map 84
in
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1: EPA Target Architecture Framework 2
Table 1: Enterprise Target Architecture Intended Audience 7
Figure 2: Strategic and Performance Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People 14
Figure 3: Performance Layer Relationships 14
Figure 4: Federal Enterprise Architecture Performance Reference Model 16
Figure 5: EPA's Performance Architecture Layer 17
Figure 6: Business Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People 23
Figure 7: Target Business Architecture Framework 24
Figure 8: Segment Alignment to Agency Goals 28
Figure 9: Service Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People 30
Figure 10: Services Layer Diagram 31
Figure 11: Services Oriented Architecture Overview 33
Figure 12: OSWER Example 34
Figure 13: EPA Services Inventory 39
Figure 14: Business Application Services Inventory Snapshot 40
Figure 15: Business Application Services Inventory Snapshot (continued) 41
Figure 16: Common Enabling Services Inventory Snapshot 42
Figure 17: Common Enabling Services Inventory Snapshot (continued) 43
Figure 18: Data Wrapped Web Services Inventory Snapshot 44
Figure 19: Technology Tools Inventory Snapshot 44
Figure 20: Data Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People 49
Figure 21: EPA's Conceptual Data Model for Core Enterprise Systems 50
Table 2: Comparison of Data Exchange Options 53
Figure 22: DRM Standard Areas 54
IV
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Figure 23: DMBoK's Functional Framework for Data Management 55
Figure 24: Authoritative Data Source (ADS) Framework 56
Figure 25: Authoritatative Data Source (ADS) Designation and Management: A Three-Phase Approach 57
Figure 26: The Federal DAS Federal Data Quality Framework 58
Table 3: EPA Data Reference Model (DRM) Framework Matrix 59
Figure 27: Data Lifecycle Framework with data quality activities 59
Figure 28: Data Security Target State - Managing Risk for Information Systems 61
Figure 29: EPA Enterprise Metadata Framework 64
Figure 30: Technology Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People 71
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Vision
The vision of this target is to help the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) move towards a more
service oriented architecture, with the intent of enabling more agile application development,
leveraging reusable components (services and data), and making our Agency-wide tools and services
more interoperable, at lower cost, and with shorter development and deployment life cycles. The target
will enable EPA to more effectively share environmental information within the agency and with states,
tribes, and other federal agencies. This target architecture integrates the various layers of the
architecture, namely, the strategic, performance, business, service, data and technology layers which
provide EPA with a robust framework to quickly realign and respond to opportunities and threats on its
planning horizon while at the same time delivering solutions and leveraging enterprise/program-centric
capabilities.
The target is founded upon key principles including improved transparency while continuing protection
of privacy and confidential information, optimization of our technical infrastructure, effective record
keeping and enhanced search/discovery tools for data, documents and records, web content, and
services. One essential element governing and guiding the achievement of these principles will be
improved governance including: an Enterprise Architecture (EA) Review Board to provide investment
and segment reviews, to help ensure modernization and development efforts are in line with the
enterprise target architecture, a Services Governance Board to help guide the emerging services
oriented architecture by developing and implementing standards and procedures regarding services,
and a Data Governance Board to guide the Agency's data efforts for better discovery, access, share-
ability, quality, etc.
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
1.2 Concept of Operations
Organizations/
Groups/People
EPA's Target Architecture
Performance Layer
Measurements ) ( Metrics
Strategic Layer
Goals ) i Objectives
Make Decisions
Business Layer
Business "^ /^"Business
Functions J ^ Processes
Perform Actions
Services Layer
Technology
Layer
Generate/change
Services
~^
Control/Access
Display
Calculations
Data Layer
Data/Content
Example relationships between elements in the target architecture
Figure 1: EPA Target Architecture Framework
Figure 1: EPA Target Architecture Framework illustrates the interrelationships between all the layers of
EPA's target architecture: Strategic, Performance, Business, Services, Technology and Data.
People (and groups and organizations) are the joining forces in EPA's Target Architecture, and
technology is shifting to put the person first.1 People, groups and organizations have goals (strategic
layer), do work (business layer) and are measured (performance layer). They also request, generate and
change information (data layer) that is enabled through common services (services layer) supported by
technology (technology layer).
1 Key Consideration from FY 2009 National Program Manager Priorities, April 2009.
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
The target states for each of the layers are defined in various chapters of the Target Architecture and
provide specific frameworks with which segment, investment, and business owners should align
resources and efforts. The following summaries refer to the above diagram and the linkages across
layers of the architecture.
Strategic Layer: EPA's strategic planning efforts, mission, goals and objectives, and the resulting
environmental and human health outcomes the public can expect affect the business priorities and
performance measurements set by the Agency. Strategic planning affecting the agency's target
architecture is discussed in Section 3:
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Strategic
Performance Layer: Performance measurements and metrics provide the means to evaluate success of
IT investments and their impacts on strategic outcomes. Performance is managed at the investment,
segment, and agency levels. The way in which data from business processes and functions is passed
through services and is used to inform decision makers is detailed in Section 4: Performance
Architecture.
Business Layer: The business layer includes the mission critical actions and activities performed by
people and the business drivers that ultimately shape the services, data, and technology considerations
of the Agency. Section 5: Business Architecture describes the key internal and external factors that
affect the business of the agency.
Services Layer: Interfaces provide the means for people to get access to information needed to conduct
business functions through business, data and technology services which allow people to find,
transform, integrate, display, and use data. Services can be arranged for a particular purpose into
applications and systems. Services ultimately connect people to other people (using voice or text),
documents or files (in digital or image format) to our environment (in terms of models or simulations),
and serve as a bridge between the higher level Business Layer and lower level Data and Technology
Layers. The target approach to developing and enhancing the agency's shared services and tools to
create an environment where services are reusable and separated from the data is detailed in Section 6:
Services Architecture.
Data Layer: Services connect people with data and content. The establishment of enterprise and
business data services to enable more efficient and effective data sharing is fundamental to the EPA
Data Architecture strategy. Section 7: Target Data Architecture describes how enterprise data services
may be associated with the adoption of data standards and target authoritative data sources (ADS) to
make up the EPA Target Reference Data Architecture.
Technology Layer: Technology tools and hardware provide storage and conduits for the data and
services. EPA's continuous efforts to enhance its IT infrastructure to take advantage of the best in
emerging technologies in order to support the needs of its widely diverse offices and constituents are
detailed in Section 8: Technology Architecture. The technology layer activities enable information
sharing in the service layer and support the overall flow of information throughout the agency.
1.3 Key Target Recommendations by Layer
1.3.1 Performance Recommendations
• Define meaningful Enterprise Architecture (EA) performance metrics at the Agency, Segment,
and Investment levels that are: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realizable, and Time Bounded
• Mature performance measurement capabilities and processes to promote the success of
achieving outcome goals and demonstrating measurable results.
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
• Include EA-related performances measures and key performance indicators and coordinate with
the Agency's Performance Improvement Officer
• Utilize Performance Indicators Inventory, Scorecard and EPAStot tools to standardize and
communicate performance outcomes, resulting in a clear line of sight that supports the
decision-making processes
1.3.2 Business Recommendations
• Further develop segment architectures and focus efforts on identifying, consolidating, and
reusing/sharing common processes, technology, and services across segments
• Continue business process modeling activities to create a baseline for identifying common
business processes and services
• Use government-wide solutions where possible and map our business areas to the Federal Lines
Transparency: EPA supporting ARRA
The President has made it clear that every taxpayer dollar spent on our economic
recovery must be subject to unprecedented levels of transparency and
accountability. As a recipient of Recovery Act funding, EPA fully supports the
President in making funding dollars transparent to the public.
With regard to Stimulus funding, EPA pledges to:
• Ensure that funds are spent effectively,
• Ensure our projects will aid in the economic recovery and benefit the
environment,
• Ensure recipients will incorporate innovative technologies and environmental
best practices into their projects, and
• Ensure the transparency and accountability as we spend the funds.
EPA's Target Enterprise Architecture will support the Agency in achieving its
pledge by ensuring that all facets of the Enterprise are aligned with EPA's
Strategic Plan, i.e. Performance, Business, Services, Technology and Data. This
alignment will provide a clear line of sight through the agency, resulting in better
quality data and information. EPA will rely on such enhanced information to
provide full disclosure of the spending of Stimulus funds to the public.
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
of Business (LoBs) and the Federal Transition Framework (FTF)
• Maintain applicable alignment to the Federal Enterprise Architecture Business Reference Model
1.3.3 Services Recommendations
1.3.3.1 Governance Recommendations
• Establish an Services Governance Board to provide authoritative standards, guidance, direction,
and oversight for implementing services across multiple segments and coordinating with other
federal agencies
• Set standards for web services and web-enabled service development to ensure compatibility
and reusability across the enterprise
• Set up the infrastructure to enable SOA including consideration of an enterprise service bus
(ESB) which will facilitate the use of services.
1.3.3.2 Recommendations for Changes to Common Enabling Services
• Evaluate technology tools and application functionality that exist in the Agency to see what
should be offered as Common Enabling Services
• Package Services/Tools together and offered as a suite rather than addressed on a case-by-case
basis, and make Agency standard services interoperable, addressing their current
incompatibilities
• Consider the implementation of a Metadata Management tool (e.g., Informatica's metadata
manager as an add on to our current ETL tool) as a service to assist the Agency in managing vast
amounts of programmatic data in separate systems
• Expand the use of single sign on capability embedded in Identity & Access Management (I&AM)
services
• Implement a Standard Digital Signature Mechanism
• Consider the SOA aspects of Central Data Exchange (CDX) and National Environmental
Information Exchange Network (NEIEN) and determine which aspects are appropriate to be
leveraged for wider Agency usage and where other SOA best practices should be leveraged
(uses information)
• Use the Geospatial Data Gateway (GDG) as a Best Practice for Metadata Management
• Consider developing a general tracking service to support workflow and tracking capabilities
• Research the use of a Digital Document Conversion/Storage Service
• Consider the evaluation and selection of a standard report generating tool to be used across the
Agency
• Implement a statistical sampling tool that can assist the Agency with observing and monitoring
data in different applications
1.3.4 Data Recommendations
• Develop a profile of the federal Data Reference Model (DRM)
• Implement the EPA profile of the DRM
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
• Identify an initial critical (or key) dataset - that is, a small group of data which is mission critical
across the agency - and ensure enterprise-level quality for this data set
• Direct the Enterprise Data Architecture (EDA) Program to create a proactive, enterprise service
organization focusing specifically on governing critical data management issues and challenges
faced by EPA programs and their partners
• Institutionalize security with an ongoing, ever-evolving process built on policies, designated
security roles, risk and vulnerability analyses, supporting documentation, training and
education, testing and monitoring activities, and enterprise investment strategies
• Identify a core set of reference/master data and have both a process and software in place to
maintain this data set agency-wide
• Continue progress on the metadata maturity model and work to identify the maturity of key EPA
applications
1.3.5 Technology & Application Recommendations
• Consolidate and optimize computer rooms, servers, and storage infrastructure and operations
and leverage technology to increase efficiency in hosting capacity and management
• Increase investment in the wide area network in order to meet its current and anticipated
demands
• Acquire Internet connectivity and "Trusted Internet Connection" perimeter security through the
Networx Managed Trusted Internet Protocol Services (MTIPS) offering
• Implement enterprise management of desktops, including the Federal Desktop Core
Configuration, in order to increase security and operational efficiency
• Enhance and streamline the Agency's technical infrastructure for enterprise collaboration,
communication, and content management
• Continue development and use of the Agency's enterprise identity and access management
infrastructure
• Implement an enterprise Web Content Management System (WebCMS) for the creation,
management, and publishing of Web content
• Adopt, promote use of Green IT in future infrastructure technology design, configuration and
implementation
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
2. Document Background
2.1 Background and Strategy
The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 established a formal requirement for all Executive Branch Agencies to
have an enterprise architecture (EA) and to use it for planning investments in information technology
(IT). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has defined a target EA as a comprehensive series of
principles, guidelines, models and standards that enables the Agency to align the acquisition,
development and management of its IT assets with its business goals and functions. EPA created its first
Target Architecture, a forward looking document that established the vision for the Agency's EA, in 2002
and has refined it over the years since.
However, recent technological advances (Web 2.0, Cloud Computing, etc.) and federal government
initiatives encouraging services oriented architecture, infrastructure, etc. necessitate a broad revision to
our Target Architecture. The Federal CIO Council's Practical Guide to Services Oriented Architecture
(PGF-SOA),2 and OMB's most recent Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework3 which called for
agency target architectures to cover services rather than applications, emphasize this new direction for
agency architecture. Version 3.0 of EPA's Target Architecture is a strategic framework that enables
EPA's enterprise processes, functions, and services to meet the demands of current and future business
needs4 and establishes a target state vision for the enterprise that will enable agile development and
deployment of applications and databases to adapt to changing business needs. The Agency target will
have implications for EPA's defined segments and associated programs/investments.
2.2 Audience
The Enterprise Target Architecture is applicable to all EA stakeholders throughout the Agency. The
benefits to the primary stakeholder groups are described below:
Table 1: Enterprise Target Architecture Intended Audience
Stakeholder
EPA Senior Leadership and
Quality Information Council
(QIC)
Interactions with the Target Architecture
The Target will provide insight into the direction for IT development and service definition,
and can provide a focus for determining investment and project priorities.
Performance Improvement
Officer
The Target provides insight into the direction for the agency that could be influenced and
encouraged with application of the right performance metrics. Although not yet appointed,
the PIO has been established by Executive Order.
Chief Architect and EATeam
The Target will enhance coordination and planning of EPA EA program activities via an
authoritative plan. The Target is formally documented and managed by the EA Team and is
approved by the Chief Architect.
The Practical Guide to SOA is available at: http://smw.osera.gov/pgfsoa/index.php/Welcome
3 Improving Agency Performance using Information and Information Technology (Enterprise Architecture
Assessment Framework v3.0) December 2008
4 Additional information supporting the Target definition is available in Appendix B - Business Requirements and
Technology Solutions Diagram.
-------
Stakeholder Interactions with the Target Architecture
EA Working Group (EAWG) and
Segment Leads
EA Review Board
Investment Managers (System
Managers)
Managers of Enterprise Tools
an Services
Development of the Target document provides a focal point for discussion of target
architecture options and ideas. The Target will help the EAWG coordinate EA efforts across
the Agency and inform Segment Leads on the Agency-wide efforts affecting their segments.
The Review Board is a target concept, and though yet to be established, the board would
ensure that segments and solutions are moving towards the Target Architecture. The Target
will help the Board identify criteria by which to evaluate future investments.
The Target will better inform System Managers as they prepare to modernize their systems
over time. As the Agency moves towards a services oriented architecture, system managers
will need to de-couple their applications from the data, enabling more agile system
adaptation and faster, less costly development and maintenance.
The Target encourages tools to be established as suites of services that are interoperable,
thus making it easier for system developers to tap into multiple Agency-wide tools.
Enterprise Tool/Services managers will continue to maintain and enhance enterprise-wide
tools and services.
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
3. Strategic Architecture
The target architecture is guided by a strategic approach including the EPA Strategic Plan, and the
National Program Manager's (NPM) priorities5 (as outlined in the operating principles and goals of the
2009 NPM guide),6 Administration priorities,7 and the EPA Information Access Strategy.8
3.1 EPA's Major Goals
EPA's Strategic Plan goals are used to guide the Agency at a high level and allocate human, capital, and
technological resources. Below are high level descriptions of EPA's 5 core strategic goals based on
the 2006-2011 Strategic Plan. Other cross-cutting programs and strategies, critical to supporting these
five goals will continue, but are not addressed in EPA's Strategic Plan, and are not included in the
discussion below.
EPA intends to issue the draft of a new 2009-2014 Strategic Plan for public review and comment in 2009.
According to EPA's 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Change Document, EPA's overarching framework of
mission-driven strategic goals and objectives will remain unchanged from the current 2006-2011
Strategic Plan. Anticipated changes to the Strategic Plan are discussed a little further on in this section.
EPA's five major goals are as follows. For details on the objectives and sub-objectives, please
consult the current EPA Strategic Plan.
3.1.1 Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Protect and improve the air so it is healthy to breathe, and risks to human health and the environment
are reduced. Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing partnerships with businesses and other
sectors.
3.1.2 Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Ensure drinking water is safe. Restore and maintain oceans, watersheds, and their aquatic ecosystems
to protect human health, support economic and recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat for
fish, plants, and wildlife.
3.1.3 Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration
Preserve and restore the land by using innovative waste management practices and cleaning up
contaminated properties to reduce risks posed by the releases of harmful substances.
3.1.4 Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and ecosystems using integrated and
comprehensive approaches and partnerships.
FY 2009 National Program Manager Priorities, April 2009
6 http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/npmguidance/index.htm
7 http://www.epa.gov/administrator/memotoemployees.html. Memo to Employees, January 2009.
8 http://www.epa.gov/nationaldialogue/FinalAccessStrategy.pdf
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
3.1.5 Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Protect human health and the environment through ensuring compliance with environmental
requirements by enforcing environmental statues, preventing pollution, and promoting environmental
stewardship. Encourage innovation and provide incentives for governments, tribes, businesses, and the
public that promote environmental stewardship and long-term sustainable outcomes.
3.2 Targeted Areas for Improvement - Strategic Plan Change Document
According to the September 2008 document titled: 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Change Document,
(made available to the public for review and comment in September 2008), the EPA's Strategic Plan
update will focus on a limited number of targeted areas where the Agency believes it can make the
most significant improvements in advancing the Agency's mission of protecting human health and
the environment. For the latest details, please consult the 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Change
Document or EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer web pages for any updates regarding the
release of Draft and Final 2009-2014 Strategic Plan.9 At this time, EPA is not providing an analysis of
what impacts the 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Change Document will have on DME investment
sequencing plans or today's target strategy. Potential changes to 2009-2014 Strategic Plan will be
addressed in a Final 2009-2014 Strategic Plan. The EA Program will work with Segment Leads and
other stakeholders to identify potential changes that should be considered as part of subsequent
updates to this Target Enterprise Architecture.
The 2009-2014 Strategic Plan Change Document, dated September 2008, states that the Agency is
focusing on a limited number of targeted areas where new or significant changes in strategies or
performance measurement are most critical in helping the Agency to better achieve and measure
environmental and human health outcomes. These targeted areas include:
• Reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
• Impacts of Global Climate Change
• Contaminants
• Environmental Indicators, Monitoring, and Related Information
• Improving Program Implementation in Indian Country
• Sustainable Agriculture
• Import Safety
• Research Strategic Directions and Targets
• Enforcement/Compliance Measurement Approach
Most of these involve cross-program activities, which will result in outcomes under more than one
strategic goal. In developing this set of targeted areas, EPA considered data and analyses from many
sources, including program priorities, trend analyses, and scientific data and reports.
9 http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
3.3 NPM Priorities
Each of EPA's National Programs has Program Management Priorities that are outlined in the NPM
Guides.10 However, because of the cross-cutting, information-centric nature of the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI), the guiding principles of this office seem most appropriate to include
in the Agency's Target Architecture. As transmitted in an e-mail from the CIO on April 27, 2009, the
goals of the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) are:
• Goal 1: Promote and Facilitate Transparency
• Goal 2: Champion Collaboration and Participation
• Goal 3: Maintain an Agile and Secure Infrastructure11
• Goal 4: Coordinate and Deliver Access to High Quality Information12
Alignment with these OEI NPM goals will help ensure that target activities share a common
developmental framework of enterprise-driven traits, expected values, and highly desired
benchmarks which help EPA in moving toward service oriented architecture.
3.4 EPA's Information Access Strategy
On December of 2007, EPA launched a National Dialogue on Access to Environmental Information.
Between January and mid-June of 2008, OEI met with people throughout the country who use
environmental information to learn about their information needs and access preferences. EPA
assembled the thousands of comments received into the Information Access Strategy, offering
direction for future efforts to enhance access to EPA's environmental information. There are many
common needs and findings across EPA audience groups. Overall, audience stakeholders expressed
a desire for improved methods in finding information, understanding information, and using
information effectively. In January 2009, EPA released the Information Access Strategy. After
analyzing the extensive feedback from EPA audiences, EPA narrowed its findings to four core
recommendations for improving information access:13'14
• Recommendation 1: Enable people to find environmental data and information at EPA
and other Federal Agencies.
• Recommendation 2: Improve people's understanding of EPA data and information to
promote appropriate use.
10 http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/npmguidance/index.htm
11 EPA's Environmental Management System goals drive energy conservation and pollution reduction efforts within
EPA.
12 Also supported by EPA's Information Access Strategy.
http://www.epa.gov/nationaldialogue/index.html
14 http://www.epa.gov/nationaldialogue/FinalAccessStrategy.pdf, see page 11 of Information Access Strategy
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
• Recommendation 3: Organize EPA information and data into formats that promote
better understanding and facilitate desired uses.
• Recommendation 4: Use new Web technologies to empower people to find,
understand, and use environmental information and data.
3.5 Administration Priorities
Each one of these recommendations align with Obama Administration's values and principles
calling for more transparency and open Government. For example, a January 21, 2009, directive
addressing Freedom of Information Act15 requests called for all agencies to adopt a presumption in
favor of disclosure, for timely disclosure and access to information by the public through the use of
modern technology to inform citizens about what is known and done by their government. On
January 21, 2009, the President issued another memorandum for the Heads of Executive
Departments and Agencies16 calling for the establishment of a system of transparency, public
participation, and collaboration that harness new technologies to: promote easy access and make
information readily available to the public; increase opportunities for public participation; and
collaborate among various government and other stakeholders. EPA will release, in the Summer of
2009, a five multiyear Information Access Implementation Plan that pursues these
recommendations.
In addition, the new EPA Administrator has identified 3 values that will guide her work here at EPA. The
most relevant value for the Target Architecture is that "EPA's actions must be transparent." This value
will drive our efforts on the web and other communication media to make information available to all
(unless there is a bona fide need to keep the information secure, confidential, etc.) and to "reach out to
all stakeholders fairly and impartially, that we consider the views and data presented carefully and
objectively, and that we fully disclose the information that forms the bases for our decisions" and "take
special pains to connect with those who have been historically underrepresented in EPA decision-
making."
In addition, the Administrator has identified 5 priorities that will initially receive her personal attention:
• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions
• Improving air quality
• Managing chemical risks
• Cleaning up hazardous-waste sites
• Protecting America's water
These priorities are very much in line with EPA's Strategic Plan.
' http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Freedom_of_lnformation_Act/
5 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Transparency_and_Open_Government/
10
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
4. Performance Architecture
4.1 Overview
Measuring performance and making adjustments to improve results are two essential activities in
managing programs effectively. EPA's performance management system continues to evolve and
improve and has matured to the point where the Agency is recognized as a leader in the federal
government.17 EPA is doing more to foster a performance management culture and is also doing more
to communicate performance results to the public, partners, and stakeholders. The Administrator has
established the EPA Performance Management Council to increase focus on the use of performance
information for decision- making.18 The President has also directed each agency to have a Performance
Improvement Officer to guide its performance improvement efforts.19
The performance architecture is critical to successfully implementing the enterprise target service
oriented target architecture strategy.20 The agency will leverage the existing EPA-wide performance
measurement system and reporting tools in order to report to executives and managers the value and
progress of selected SOA initiatives and will work with segment/program and solution owners to build
meaningful performance metrics from the bottom up. The performance architecture supports the
overall EA vision of improving accessibility, reusability, reliability and overall quality of data through
tiered measurement.
This section defines EPA's Performance Architecture Framework and provides a roadmap for EPA in
terms of moving toward their target architecture in the area of performance.
7 EPA's FY 2008 Performance and Accountability Report, pgs. 8-10, http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/par/2008par/
index.htm
18 EPA's FY 2008 Performance and Accountability Report, pgs. 8-10, http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/par/2008par/
index.htm
19 Executive Order 13450
20 Practical Guide to Federal Service Oriented Architecture, of the Federal CIO Council, June 30, 2008, section 4.1.3.
11
-------
Organizations/
Groups/People
EPA's Target Architecture - Strategic and
Performance Layer Alignment
Strategic Layer
Goals ) ( Objectives
Performance Layer
" ^N X"~"
Measurements ) ( Metrics
Figure 2: Strategic and Performance Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People
Figure 3: Performance Layer Relationships, as depicted in this cross-section of the Target Architecture
Overview diagram, organizations, groups and people have responsibilities that tie to the agency's
strategy and performance goals.
Business Layer
Emergency Management
Enforcement & Compliance
Research & Science
Water Quality
Substance Management
Land Quality
Air Quality
Services Layer
• Business Services
• Common Enabling Services
• Data Web Services
• Technology Tools
Technology Layer
• User Environment Technologies
• Application Hosting Infrastructure
• Networks and Telecommunications
• Information Security Technologies
Data Layer
• Reference Data Architecture
• Metadata Architecture
• Data Governance
• Security Guidelines
• Quality Guidelines
Figure 3: Performance Layer Relationships
Figure 3: Performance Layer Relationships" illustrates the interrelationships between the Performance
Layer of the Target Architecture, and the other layers: Business, Services, Technology and Data.
12
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Performance measurement sets the stage and foundation for the moving pieces of architecture and
provides a means to evaluate success against Agency goals. Within the EA context, this layer also
provides the means to evaluate the success of IT investments and their impacts on strategic goals along
the line of sight of products and services provided by segments, programs, and the enterprise.
Since performance outcomes are often attained over multiple years of cumulative results, this requires
analysis of how well investments and segments are using shared services and enterprise tools to
transform inputs into valuable outputs. As a result, one key benefit of a measurement system is to
increase awareness of how well the enterprise works.21 The Performance Architecture may emphasize
measures that enable senior managers to make better strategic- and tacit-informed decisions about:
• Investments, services, or activities that can best influence outcome goals
• Other enterprise/segment investments, resources, or capabilities that can be leverage to
support program mission
• The value being delivered to its customers
• Opportunities for performance improvement
The OMB EA Assessment Framework v 3.0 states that information and information technology, as
enablers of program performance improvements, must be evaluated in the context of the enterprise-
wide performance architecture.22 Performance measurements can be leveraged to determine the
maturity and effectiveness of the agency's enterprise architecture, to support investment and
implementation decisions, and achieve measurable results.
Figure 4: Federal Enterprise Architecture Performance Reference Model below illustrates the value of
measuring performance as defined by the FEA PRM.
21 Source: Thor, Carl G., Journal of Cost Management, May/June 2000, pp. 18-26, The Evolution of Performance
Measurement in Government.
22 OMB, December 2008, Improving Agency Performance Using Information and Information Technology
(Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework v3.0) section 2.4.
13
-------
Strategic Outcomes
MISSION AND
BUSINESS RESULTS
Services for Citizens
Support Delivery
of Services
Management of
Government Resources
aiSTOMER RESULTS
Customer Benefil
Service Coverage
Timeliness and
Responsiveness
Service Quality
Service Accessibility
OUTCOMES:
Mission and business-critical results
aligned with Levels 1 and 3 of the
BRM Results measured from a
customer perspective.
PROCESSES AND ACTIVITIES
Financial
Productivity
Cycle Time and Timeliness
Quality
Security and Privacy
Management and Innovation
OUTPUTS:
The direct effects of day-today
activities and broader processes
measured as driven by desired
outcomes. Aligned with Level 2 of
(he BRM
Human Capital
TECHNOLOGY
Technology Costs
Quality Assurance
Efficiency
Information and Data
Reliability and Availability
Effectiveness
Other Fixed Assets
/
I
INPUTS:
Key enablers measured through
their contribution to outputs and,
by their extension, outcomes.
PALUE.
Figure 4: Federal Enterprise Architecture Performance Reference Model
4.2 Performance Architecture Framework
An effective performance architecture framework requires measurements that are appropriately scaled
to the needs of the organization. Taking into account internal and external factors, EPA has identified
three levels at which the Agency will monitor and measure performance: the Agency Level, the Segment
Level and the Investment Level. Based largely upon the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Performance Reference Model (PRM), and EPA's Strategic
Architecture described above, EPA's Target Performance Architecture advises Agency stakeholders and
investment managers on how to make connections between the performance measures of an
investment and the investment milestones, which map to the segment performance milestones and
ultimately the Agency's strategic goals.
Figure 5: EPA's Performance Architecture Layer illustrates the hierarchy and alignment of the Agency,
Segment and Investment performance measures, and the sources of performance criteria.
14
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Strategic Goals
EPA Strategic Plan
EPA's Report on the Environment
Segment
Performance Milestones
Segment Reports
Segment Transition Planning
Investment
Measures
Milestones
CPIC Business Cases
Enterprise Transition Plan
CPIC Business Cases (PRM
Alignment)
Figure 5: EPA's Performance Architecture Layer
These measures must be appropriately aligned with the following internal and external factors:
• The FEA Consolidated Reference Model
• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
• Executive Order 13450
• The Agency's Strategic Plan and Goals
• EPA's Annual Performance Plan
• EPA's Performance and Accountability Report
• EPA's Capital Planning and Investment Control
• EPA's Information Access Strategy
• EPA's EA Value Measurement Framework and 2007 Performance Review Report
• Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)
15
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Performance measures at each of these three levels should map directly to EPA's primary strategic
goals and objectives. This will ensure that resources at all levels of the Agency are working towards
the mission of protecting human health and the environment. EPA's Performance Layer is
structured so that the different components within the investment, segment and agency levels,
align and provide a clear picture of how the Agency is performing. At the same time, the
Performance Layer needs to offer a level of flexibility to accommodate change. Such change can
come from government initiatives (e.g., ARRA), new legislation, or even from an increased emphasis
on a particular area (e.g., climate change).
4.2.1 Agency-Level Performance
In order to ensure that the Agency can adequately assess whether or not it is meeting its strategic goals
and objectives, performance must be measured at the Agency level. For example, following on the
themes identified in the strategic layer of the Target Architecture, as well as guidance through the FEA
PRM, EPA should establish a framework to measure how well data is being shared at the Agency level,
within the Agency to support senior management's decision-making, across the Agency and with our
partners, customers, constituents, etc. The main FEA PRM categories that should be considered at the
Agency level include:23
• Mission and Business Results Measurement Area
• Customer Results Measurement Area
• Processes and Activities Measurement Area
• Technology Measurement Area
• Human Capital Measurement Area
On an annual basis, EPA reports its Agency-level performance via the Performance and Accountability
Review (PAR). Performance reporting guidance established by OMB will guide the format of EPA's
annual measurement activities and is subject to change by administration. In addition to these
programmatic measures directly associated with a goal and objective from the Annual Plan, non-
programmatic measures are included in the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process.
4.2.2 Segment-Level Performance
Based on OMB suggested guidance,24 EPA has classified their 14 business lines/segments into three main
categories: Core Mission, Business Service, and Enterprise Service. In continuing with the 'Invest' phase
of the Performance Improvement Lifecycle, EPA has identified target solutions and performance
milestones for each segment and has aligned these solutions to the Agency's target EA. The three
categories of segments are:
• Core Mission Segments - These segments represent the Agency's unique service areas defining
the mission or purpose of EPA (environmental and health protection) and align to the FEA BRM
(services for citizens).
Source: OMB, October 2007, FEA Consolidated Reference Model Document, Version 2.3.
Source: FF/A Practice Guidance: "Value to the Mission" November 2007
16
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
o Air Quality Management and Climate Change
o Water Quality Management
o Land Quality Management
o Substance Management
o Emergency Management
o Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
• Business Service Segments - These segments define the common or shared business services
supporting core mission segments at EPA, and align to the FEA BRM (mode of delivery, support
delivery of services, management of government resources).
o Research and Science
o Internal Controls and Oversight
• Enterprise Service Segments - These segments define EPA's common or shared IT and
administrative services supporting core mission and business service segments and are aligned
totheFEASRM.
o Geospatial Services
o Administrative Services
o Information Management
o Financial Management
o IT Infrastructure Management
o Information Sharing
Beginning in FY2009 and per OMB requirements, EPA will develop performance measures at the
segment level, and subsequently report on them.
4.2.3 Investment-Level Performance
At the most granular level, each investment included in EPA's Target Architecture must define
performance measures to assess progress/effectiveness of the investment. The GPRA and OMB
guidance require outcome-oriented or output-based goals for all capital investments. Detailed guidance
for investment owners on best practices for developing investment performance measures are detailed
in EPA's Exhibit 300 Guide for CPIC BY2011 Exhibit 300s dated April 9, 2009.25 In short, investment
owners must relate their investment's performance measures back to the Agency's strategic mission,
goals and annual performance plan.
4.2.3.1 FEA PRM
To provide consistency across investments and across the government, each investment is required to
follow the FEA PRM (available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/e-gov/fea/ see "Consolidated
25 For updated Exhibit 300 Guidance beyond the FY 2011, please visit the CPIC Web page at the Chief information
Officer's or Chief Architect's WEB page.
17
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Reference Model") including the Lines of Business (LoBs) that are relevant. The PRM provides a
framework to measure the success of IT investments and their corresponding impact on strategic
outcomes. The PRM leverages performance measurement best practices from the public and private
sectors and helps produce performance information in a standardized manner so that it can ultimately
be used to make key business decisions.
4.2.3.2 Investment-Level Performance Measurements
Given the structure and intent of the PRM, there must be a measure defined for each of the FEA PRM
required measurements areas at the investment level:
• Mission and Business Results
• Customer Results
• Processes and Activities
• Technology
Best practices in the Exhibit 300 Guide include defining performance information based on criteria for
"SMART" (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realizable, and Time Bound), and developing performance
information that is customer and user-related. Performance Information should include measurable
investment outcomes or outputs and not in-process metrics.
4.3 Performance Architecture Target Recommendations
4.3.1 Performance Process
EPA already has in the Performance Process, a Performance Improvement Officer for the Agency as well
as members of the Performance Management Council and a Performance Indicators Inventory. One
recommendation is to leverage the EPA Performance Process to help further the goals of the EA
Program and the Target Architecture. The EA Program would work with Segment leads and
management to design performance based outcome measures for a selected number of EA and SOA
initiatives and/or supporting investments, and track and communicate the progress made on these
initiatives. Measures are already being developed at the investment segment and Agency level for EA.
The performance indicators would be periodically communicated to all stakeholders through the
performance measurement process. Stakeholders would include, but would not be limited to, senior
management, investment owners, investment project managers, segment owners, and members of the
CPIC Review Team.
To support the implementation of this recommendation, the EA Program would develop an
implementation plan in consultation with appropriate EA, CPIC and performance measurement
governing parties as well as sponsors of SOA and other EA initiatives.
4.3.2 Performance Tools
To facilitate tracking and management of the measures/indicators, our second recommendation is that
the SOA and other EA performance measures should be entered into the central Agency Performance
Indicators Inventory. Appropriate stakeholders would be trained in the Performance Measurement
Process and the contents of the Performance Indicators Inventory tool, so that they could provide the
18
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
best information possible, and accurately reflect the performance of the investment/segment/Agency.
Appropriate collaboration and integration of measurement efforts will be needed among OCFO, EA CPIC,
Segment leads, and other stakeholders to minimize duplicative reporting and limit reporting of new
measures to what is relevant and show links between investment and business results and the progress
made towards a service oriented target enterprise architecture.
4.3.3 Performance Scorecard
Finally, we recommend leveraging EPA's existing corporate performance score card as a mechanism to
monitor the progress made in implementing selected SOA initiatives and in communicating the results
and benefits SOA initiatives have delivered for EPA. Currently, at an Agency level, the Performance
Scorecard reports on the standardized performance measures of the agency. These performance
measures and metrics include those reported in the Exhibit 300s. The scorecard data could also include
for selected SOA initiatives new performance measure descriptions, mappings to the EPA strategic goals,
prior year measures (target and result), current year measures (target, result, whether the target was
achieved, and whether the current year result improved from the prior year), and the measurement
type.
The Performance Scorecard and review process is supported at EPA by a tool called EPAStot. Launched
in June of 2008, EPA tracks and makes publicly available "fresh and frequent" data in its EPAStot
Quarterly Report. This "short cycle" data shows regional performance on a subset of priorities and is
another key component of EPA's performance management system. The data provides senior managers
with information that can be used to make programmatic adjustments in a more timely fashion and is
used by EPA's Deputy Administrator as the basis for quarterly discussions with national and regional
program managers.
Analysis of regional performance has led to the identification and dissemination of a number of best
practices and innovations taking place in particular regions or states. These efforts complement the
Performance and Accountability Report and serve to further increase accountability and transparency
for the work the Agency does to protect human health and the environment. 26 EPAStot may prove
critical to enable the transition to migrate towards a new service oriented enterprise target architecture
by reporting on the progress, metrics, and results of high-priority service oriented architecture initiatives
including the dissemination of lessons learned and best practices.
26 EPA's FY 2008 Performance and Accountability Report, pgs. 8-10, http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/par/2008par/
index.htm
19
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
5. Business Architecture
5.1 Background
The 2002 Target Architecture put into motion a number of initiatives responsible for progress to date,
such as the use of Business Transformation Frameworks, the documentation of hundreds of business
processes and the use of Federal Lines of Business (LoBs). In addition, program offices at EPA have been
working hard to leverage the enterprise-wide tools depicted in out 2002 target architecture and
subsequent updates.
These activities, highlighted below, constitute the basis for the 2009 Target Architecture. This revised
architecture builds upon and leverages past success.
The primary business architecture activities to date include:
• Creation of a common business framework for planning, budgeting and EA processes. EPA
worked closely with representatives from the CPIC team to align processes and streamline
enabling business functions.
• Integration of EPA's architecture with the FEA reference models. EPA has mapped our business
functions to those of the Federal Business Reference Model.27 In addition, EPA has defined
business segments.
• Development of a business model that ensures a line of sight to overall Agency Strategic Goals
and down through all layers of the Target Architecture. This also ensures integration with
Agency performance measurement.
• Business process modeling throughout the Agency to create a baseline for identifying common
business processes. This process allowed us to begin identifying areas of duplication as well as
potential opportunities for reuse, sharing, and collaboration.
• Use of enterprise-wide tools leveraged to save money and time in development and usage.
5.2 Overview
At a very high level view, EPA's Business is fairly stable. We continue to have most of the same business
areas we had in 2002, with some additions such as Climate Change. Thus, we have chosen not to revisit
all of the BRM mappings submitted in our Target Architecture in 2002, although they do, for the most
part, are still valid.
What has changed, is our vision for business applications. EPA's 2002 Target Architecture focused on
using enterprise-wide tools, and we have made good progress in this direction, with many applications
EPA Business Reference Model v.2.1a
20
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
using the EPA Portal, CDX, Identity and Access Management, etc. With the advent of Service Oriented
Architecture (SOA) and the Federal drive in this direction28, however, we see a new opportunity to make
those tools more compatible with one another and more easily accessible for use by application
developers.
The new vision will involve even more provision and leveraging of common enabling services, and a
decoupling of business applications and the data they serve. There are, after all, many ways in which
our data can be used for multiple audiences and processes, and serving our data up as services, as well
as enabling applications to tap into our many data sources more generically, will enable us to be more
agile in meeting new requirements from the many drivers discussed below, as well meet the growing
external demand for data accessible for mash-ups.
EPA's Business Architecture describes the means by which we organize our work to best meet Agency
and stakeholder needs and close the gap between business and technology, leveraging common efforts
and minimizing redundancy.
Figure 7: As depicted in the Target Architecture Overview diagram, organizations, groups and people
make decisions and perform actions that occur within the business layer. This chapter discusses the
target state of the business layer at EPA.
Organizations/
Groups/People
Make Decisions
Perform Actions
EPA's Target Architecture - Business
Layer Alignment
Business Layer
'Business'"
Processes
Figure 6: Business Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People
See Practical Guide to Federal Services Oriented Architecture (PGF-SOA) June 30, 2008
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/e-gov/pgfsoa.aspx ) from the Federal CIO Council.
21
-------
Figure 7: Target Business Architecture Framework29 will provide a business-driven strategy that allows common enterprise processes to be agile
and responsive. This view establishes an approach to aligning essential business processes and functions with supporting and enabling services
and IT resources. The strategy will ultimately result in valuable, cost-effective and reusable services that support essential business processes,
mission needs and EPA's varied stakeholder groups.
EXTERNAL
DRIVERS
ARRA
Climate Change
New Legislation
Current Events
Etc.
BUSINESS
ARCHITECTURE
VISION
Integrating internal, external and
mission goals into the core
business lines of the agency
through information sharing and
process streamlining.
INTERNAL
DRIVERS
Target Vision
Strategic Goals
Administrator &
Regional Priorities
PAR
LINES OF BUSINESS (selected)
Substance
Management
Emergency
Management
EXTERNAL
DRIVERS
Technology Trends
Cross-Agency Initiatives
Etc.
AGENCY BUSINESS PROCESSES/FUNCTIONS (selected)
IT Infrastructure Human Resources Grants
I
Figure 7: Target Business Architecture Framework
Lines of Business and Agency Business Processes/Functions in diagram represent a sampling of the Agency's portfolio. Please refer to EPA's Business
Reference Model for an extensive list of lines of business.
22
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
5.3 Business Architecture Drivers
The Business Architecture is impacted by a dynamic environment of internal and external factors (as
illustrated in Figure 7). These drivers require EPA's Business Architecture to be nimble and responsive to
changing business needs and customer expectations. A key to keeping current and aware of changing
influences is starting and sustaining a dialogue, and sharing information, with key Agency partners,
collaborators, and stakeholders.
It is critical to realize that the influence of business drivers cascades down to the other layers of the
Target Architecture. Business drivers ultimately shape the services, data, and technology considerations
of the Agency. In the end, to continue to effectively meet and potentially exceed the Agency's objectives
and deliver on the stakeholder value propositions (e.g., provide access to data) all levels of the Agency
architecture must be able to quickly adapt and adjust to key business drivers. The EA Program staff will
consult with Segment Leads and other stakeholders on business drivers that may impact the Target
Service Oriented Architecture in order to address them in subsequent updates of this document.
The key internal and external drivers influencing Agency business include:
5.3.1 Internal Drivers
• Agency Strategic Goals: EPA's lines of business and supporting process and functions are in
direct alignment with the five Agency strategic goals. Therefore, business owners and managers
should respond to any changes to those goals or particular focus areas with a review of existing
business processes. This will help identify potential gaps or areas to improve, as well as highlight
existing processes that can be leveraged to support revised strategic goals.
• EPA Administrator's Priorities: The Administrator's five priority areas (greenhouse gases, air
quality, chemical risk, hazardous waste sites and water) are not new business areas for the
Agency, but will receive increased or more focused attention.30 Therefore, it is critical to
maintain an awareness level that promotes responsive and agile processes and functions to
meet evolving areas of emphasis within the business.
• Regional Priorities: While EPA's regions align their business activities to overall Agency Strategic
goals, the Regions may also have specific interest areas that impact a particular state or region.
Knowing these priorities is essential to developing services that are specific enough to meet
regional needs.
• EPA's Information Access Strategy: The goals and objectives of the Information Access Strategy
are important business considerations. Themes including environmental information
development, management, and access all have business implications, as do the uses of that
information in research, program implementation, and public participation.
• Performance and Accountability: The progress EPA is making towards meeting Agency strategic
goals is directly related to the performance of its various business areas. Therefore,
accomplishments or challenges identified by the achievement of key performance measures are
30 Jackson, Lisa P. Memo to EPA Employees, January 23, 2009.
23
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
an important contextual factor that could result in revised approaches to achieve better
business results.
5.3.2 External Drivers
• American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) of 2009: ARRA seeks to spur technological
innovation in science and health and to invest in environmental protection and other
infrastructure that will benefit our economy. The business activities of various EPA lines of
business directly support Recovery Act projects in areas such as water, air, and land quality.
With the Act's emphasis on transparency and accountability, particular business processes (e.g.,
producing quality environmental data) should be prepared to accommodate impacts on
business needs.
• Climate Change: Even though the issue of climate change is not new, changes in direction
(based on EPA Administrator, Presidential or legislative priorities) or emphasis on the topic can
have impacts on the types of EPA business services offered to government and citizens. At a
business and programmatic level, this could impact Agency initiatives, programs, grants, or
research areas. It may also influence environmental data collection and reporting functions and
the supporting information technology infrastructure.
• Current and Notable Events: EPA's business and program areas often need to respond to
emerging events and issues as a result of emergencies such as natural disasters or accidents, as
well as research and developments from scientists, industry, and the international community.
While EPA's business areas strive to be proactive they must also be nimble and adaptable in
response to external factors, such as current events, to ensure responsiveness to EPA's varied
range of stakeholders, especially in the area of delivering important environmental information
and data.
• Legislation and Congress: This category of drivers encompasses existing legislative drivers such
as the Clinger Cohen Act of 1996 or the Clean Air Act, as well as future Congressional and
legislative acts. It is important for EPA's primary business areas to be aware of existing business
processes and to be prepared to modify them in response to new direction and mandates.
• Government-wide and Cross-Agency Initiatives: Similar to legislation, this category also
includes existing and future initiatives that EPA may need to lead, comply with, or respond to.
Efforts such as eRulemaking and Data.gov may have ramifications on existing business processes
and functions and consequently other layers of the Target Architecture.
• Technology Trends: Technology advancements are constantly evolving and entering the
marketplace. These innovations can offer the opportunity to improve business processes and
functions. Maintaining an awareness of trends is an important consideration to ensure EPA's
business functions are as efficient and effective as possible.
5.4 Key Business Architecture Themes
The key themes impacting the formation of EPA's Target Business Architecture stem from past efforts
and vision for the Agency's future. The five themes are described below from a strategic perspective and
are accompanied by specific goals or targets (Section 5.5). By highlighting these thematic areas, EPA
24
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
strives to establish a framework that leverages industry and government best practices, but is unique to
the Agency's characteristics and business needs.
1. Embrace a Service Oriented Architecture: A service-oriented approach to architecture
development not only benefits the efficiency and effectiveness of agency processes, but also
ultimately allows EPA to best serve its customers and achieve its mission.
2. Align with the Performance Architecture: With a consistent approach to performance and
common high-level Agency goals, the individual business units have the ability to work
collaboratively to identify common processes, functions, and resources that all support the
same overarching objectives.
3. Categorize Common Business Functions into Segments: EPA has identified common business
functions and categorized them into lines of business that represent what the Agency does.
Segment architecture efforts will revolve around identifying, consolidating, and reusing/sharing
common processes, technology, and services. As a result, EPA will reduce duplication and
enhance efficiency, effectiveness, and responsiveness.
4. Use Government-Wide Solutions: Mapping our business areas to the Federal LoBs and the
Federal Transition Framework (FTF) Initiatives illustrates our continued efforts to use
government-wide solutions. The FTF provides a common, organized structure for adopting
government-wide initiatives that positively impact the Agency. As a result, EPA's architecture
will allow the agency to remain well-informed and be agile, responsive, and collaborative to best
serve Agency and stakeholder needs.
5. Model Agency Business Processes: EPA's LoBs have already made great strides toward
characterizing the critical components and aspects of their primary business functions. These
models act as a knowledge repository that is available Agency-wide as a resource for additional
process improvement. They offer baseline data to improve business, service, and technology
decision-making by emphasizing the tenets of collaboration, reuse, alignment, integration, and
responsiveness.
5.5 Target Business Architecture
EPA's Target Business Architecture not only is comprised of the individual architectures for each line of
business or segment, but also contains goals and objectives to best achieve the Target state. Below are
four goals that business/segment owners should strive to attain. The accompanying FY2009 Enterprise
Transition Plan outlines the detailed plan for moving toward these targets.
1. Define Usable, Business-Driven Segment Architectures: EPA's Enterprise Architecture Program
has already worked to map EPA's lines of business to the Federal BRM. In addition, the recently
updated categorization of business areas into segments further defines this mapping (Figure 8:
Segment Alignment to Agency Goals). The target vision is for segments to create a business-
driven architecture framework that is actionable and usable, not just theoretical. The segment
architectures align to the goals of the Agency (see Strategic layer description above):
25
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Goal-specific segments
Cross-cutting segments
Air Quality Management and Climate Change
Internal Controls and Oversight
Research and Science
Water Quality Management
Geospatial Services
Land Quality Management
Financial Management
Emergency Management
IT Infrastructure Management
Substance Management
Information Sharing
Information Management
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Administrative Services
Figure 8: Segment Alignment to Agency Goals
2. Implement and Sustain a Service-Oriented Approach: Business owners should strive to
incorporate the principles of SOA into their business models and frameworks as well as core and
enabling processes. SOA should not be viewed only as a methodology or buzz word, but should
become the way the Agency approaches business. The future vision for business/segment
owners is comprehensive implementation of the principles of reuse, reduction of redundancies,
cost-savings, shared understanding, standards, and non-IT -centric business and customer
driven operations. Once these principles are implemented, EPA's business owners need to
collaboratively develop a framework to evaluate progress and identify critical success factors
and barriers to sustained implementation.
3. Use the Performance Architecture as a Tool: Business units should use the performance
architecture as a guide to develop the key performance indicators, milestones, goals and
objectives for their core and enabling business processes and functions. The Federal PRM is a
framework based on common business tools, such as the Balanced Scorecard, that provide an
organized approach to developing performance goals based on stakeholder needs and that
leverage the organizational capital (e.g., common business processes) of the Agency. Business
owners should review their business model and associated performance measures to ensure
alignment with the various levels of Agency objectives (e.g., Strategic, Segment, Investment). In
addition, EPA should establish an information sharing mechanism to promote consistency and
reuse of common business performance measures.
26
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
4. Leverage Existing Process Modeling for Analytics: Existing business process models should be
elevated to analysis with an enterprise-level business tool, rather than be only a program or
process artifact. Agency business owners and other relevant stakeholders should begin to use or
increase current use of existing process models for analysis. When possible, Agency personnel
should engage in collaboration across lines of business or business functions to promote
process improvement. Business decisions (and ultimately architectures) should reflect analysis
of information contained in process models and adequately weigh future considerations and
alternatives against currently available resources. With this target, EPA strives to further reduce
duplicative efforts and be agile in the face of internal and external drivers.
27
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
6. Services Architecture
6.1 Service Layer Background and Overview
The OMB has requested that EPA's EA Program develop an updated Target Architecture to define the
Agency's vision and plans over the next 5 to 10 years, and include a Services Layer in that Target
Architecture. This Services Layer Architecture serves as one of the core components of EPA's updated
Target Architecture, and captures the business and technical services that are anticipated as future
needs of the Agency. In order to effectively identify all of the Agency's current and future service needs,
EPA has leveraged an analytical methodology. This methodology is built on the principles of working
towards a SOA, whereby services are developed for compatibility and broad reuse. The primary benefits
of SOA include reduction of costs over time for development and maintenance of systems, and the
ability for programs to rapidly respond to changing requirements and priorities. When properly applied,
SOA eliminates stovepipes and promotes collaboration. EPA plans to leverage SOA tools and best
practices to ensure all programs continue to meet their performance goals by more efficiently and
effectively utilizing resources.
The Services Layer is a critical component for any EA. Serving as a bridge between the higher level
Business Layer and lower level Data and Technology Layers, the Services Layer is driven by the business
needs defined within the Business Layer. Improvements have immediate impacts to the business and
mission, but also have significant impact on how data and technologies are governed and managed. In
order to successfully implement a SOA framework, it is important to have a well-communicated vision
and includes stakeholder participation.
As depicted in the Target Architecture Overview diagram in Figure 9: Service Layer Alignment to
Organizations, Groups and People, EPA's organizations, groups and people request, generate and
change information, which occurs within the services layer.
Organizations/
Groups/People
Request
Information
Generate/change
information
EPA's Target Architecture -
Alignment to Services Layer
Services Layer
Interfaces
Services
r ^
' Control/Access
Display )( Web Services
.— -
Data Input ) ( Data Discovery X Calculations
Figure 9: Service Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People
28
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
6.2 Target Services Approach
In defining the Target Services Layer, the first step is to establish a sense of ownership and foster
collaboration between the different segments and stakeholders across the Agency. Several working
sessions were held, and key terms and definitions of the services vocabulary were standardized. Terms
used to identify various services were extracted from existing services documentation and validated
with select members of the EPA Enterprise Architecture Working Group (EAWG). These standardize
terms may be registered in the Agency's Terminology Services to gain further acceptance. Once the
terminology around services was standardized, the team identified data sources to capture the list of
supporting sub-services that define each service type, including its definitions, attributes, and any
additional information. Vital information was collected during working sessions moderated by the Chief
Architect with segment and technology service owners. Other information sources, including the
Repository of EPA Applications and Databases (READ), Exhibit 300s, best practice documents, and recent
technology developments were leveraged in the modeling of the Services Layer. The result is a current
snapshot of the Agency target architecture, but establishes a framework by which to continuously
monitor and manage ongoing changes to the architecture for the Services Layer.
Business Application Services
Common Enabling Services
Data Wrapped
Web Services
Technology
Services
Technology
Tools
Figure 10: Services Layer Diagram
As OMB guidance has moved away from using the term "application" to describe systems, EPA is moving
to adopt the "service" terminology to describe both enterprise services and services provided by
program-specific systems and applications. This includes services provided by legacy systems,
enterprise-wide services, non-technology services, technology services, and web services. Furthermore,
EPA breaks out services into Business Application Services, Common Enabling Services, Data Wrapped
Web Services, Technology Services, and Technology Tools for architectural purposes. Figure 10: Services
29
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Layer Diagram, shows the primary structure of how EPA looks at services and tools from the Services
Layer. This structure allows EPA to inventory and track enterprise service and tool usage for promoting
a Services Oriented Architecture. Definitions for the Services Layer include:
• Business Application Services - Services provided by systems that are specific to a particular
program or business function. At EPA, these include the major (Exhibit 300) and some non-
major (Exhibit 53) programmatic systems/applications to enable the mission and business
operations. Certain components of the Business Application Services can leverage current and
future Common Enabling Services, which includes technology and data wrapped web services.
• Common Enabling Services - Common and reusable services that typically span multiple
programs and business functions. Common Enabling Services can be technical or non-technical,
and will include many Technology Services, which intersect with the Technology Layer and some
Data Wrapped Web Services, intersecting the Data Layer. The services provided by the Central
Data Exchange (CDX) are a good example of common enabling services for data exchange.
These shared services are supported through a common specification which reduces cost,
simplifies integration and uses configuration to eliminate the programming of services in many
cases.
• Data Wrapped Web Services - Web services that expose data for reference and consumption
by other applications, tools, or users. Data wrapped web services are usually intended for
machine-to-machine interaction but can also be used directly by users, depending on the
interfaces developed. Additional details of how EPA plans to fully utilize its authoritative data
assets are detailed in the Target Metadata Architecture section (Section 4.5) of the Target Data
Architecture.
• Web Services - An application interface designed to support interoperable machine-to-machine
interaction over a network. They are frequently application programming interfaces that can be
accessed over a network and executed on a remote system hosting the requested service(s).
• Technology Services - Services offered by technology products that can be leveraged by
Business Application Services or other Common Enabling Services. Technology services are
sometimes developed using Technology Tools.
• Technology Tools - Software applications that are available for use with minimal support and
responsibility from the owner. Unlike technology services, these are typically customized
Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) products or licenses to reusable applications.
The approach for information collection is designed not to collect information about all EPA services at
one point in time. Instead, the focus is to collect relevant information of EPA services at the appropriate
level of granularity on an ongoing basis. As more information becomes available over time and changes
are identified, the Services Layer will be periodically updated to reflect the architectural changes.
30
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
6.3 Target Services Oriented Architecture Overview
The Target SOA Overview is a big picture view of how services could work together to deliver long-term
value. The purpose of a practical SOA strategy is to enable business functions by reusing and simplifying
the consumption of services while minimizing the involvement of developers and users in the service
layer. This approach eliminates the proliferation of services and minimizes the complexity of binding
new clients to each service. A real SOA architecture solves many business functions with the same
services as opposed to applications that solve one discreet set of business functions. Figure 11: Services
Oriented Architecture Overview, illustrates the main components of a working SOA, by using the
terminology established in the Services Layer Diagram and examples of EPA services and tools.
Services Oriented Architecture Overview
r
'usiness Application Services
Business
Application
Service
Business
Application
Service
Business
Application
Service
Business
Application
Service
Business
Application
Service
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS
Workflow Foundation
Orchestration (BPEL)
|
GOVERNANCE / SECURITY
Common Enabling Services
(Examples Shown)
Figure 11: Services Oriented Architecture Overview
Most EPA systems are currently developed to meet specific, point-in-time programmatic and business
needs. These systems provide a Business Application Service to the actors (users), who provide and
consume data. Many of the systems or components of systems have similar functionality to other
systems. Without a SOA framework, similar functionality will continue to exist across multiple systems
and be developed and managed in a stovepipe fashion.
31
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
By leveraging SOA, EPA has already developed a variety of shared services and tools (i.e., Data Wrapped
Web Services, Common Enabling Services, Technology Services, and Technology Tools), ultimately
creating an environment where services are reusable and separated from the data, allowing the Agency
to respond to changing requirements more efficiently and effectively. All of the services are also being
inventoried in the Reusable Component Services (RCS) directory, which enables service discovery. The
RCS can be accessed directly to query for services available for reuse.
Data Wrapped Web Services provides a standardized method for accessing data from where it resides.
These web services can be leveraged by Business Application Services directly or through Common
Enabling Services. They can also be designed with a user interface, allowing actors to access the service
directly. With the use of web service wrappers, data wrapped web services can also be set up to access
data from legacy systems.
Common Enabling Services
(Examples Shown for SEMS)
1
ICERCLIS)
Figure 12: OSWER Example
As shown in the OSWER Example in Figure 12 above, the SEMS system provides a Business Application
Service of Superfund Enterprise Management. The legacy CERCLIS system may have data that can still
be useful. In this case, CERCLIS is able to continue to share its legacy data with other systems by
applying a web services wrapper around it to make it a Data Wrapped Web Service. Also shown in the
diagram is the highlighted reuse of select Common Enabling Services by SEMS (Identity & Access
Management and potentially ECMS as a service). Within a SOA working environment context, other
EPA programs would be able to reuse and customize SEMS business service to meet their needs
regardless of the working environment and legacy system where SEMS operate. In addition, life cycle
development will be faster and design and deployment costs will be lower while providing an expedited
and reusable solution to other business problems.
32
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
SEMS: Transforming the Superfund Program
The Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) is a new investment that will transform the
Superfund program by improving operational effectiveness, reducing costs, streamlining business
processes, and enhancing information management capabilities. SEMS will integrate OSWER's
three primary Superfund data collection, reporting and tracking systems - CERCLIS, SDMS and ICTS -
into a single system that will meet immediate and strategic Superfund needs. In the near term,
system interfaces between existing Superfund systems will be established in order for SEMS
development to occur while still allowing Superfund operations to continue. The long-term goal is
for the three existing systems to retire with SEMS replacing them as the single official source of
primary Superfund site activity data, records, and support documentation for SEMS internal and
external stakeholders and customers to access and for the Agency to measure results against.
SEMS will also consolidate the Superfund program's disparate technical assets into a national
management system with a single architecture on an Agency platform; adapt to shifting
programmatic priorities and changing operational needs; and address the growing demands of
content management, data exchange, and geospatial visualization. SEMS will serve as a model for
how the Federal Government serves the public, the regulated community and partner agencies
alike, and the consolidation will minimize risks to the Federal Government.
As SEMS progresses through its lifecycle, additional modules will be added that enable geo-
locational representation, permit retrieval of analytical data, and offer new customer user
interfaces. SEMS will reduce redundancies by consolidating Superfund site level searches, sharing
information among systems, and simplifying site searches - all within a single system.
SEMS is positioned to take advantage of enterprise architecture components and EPA's SOA, and
will serve as a nexus linking SEMS Program Office data to systems in other program offices and
organizations, such as EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Office of
Environmental Information, and the Department of Justice.
As a result, SEMS will provide better service to citizens by establishing strong information
management controls, cross-platform search functionalities, and efficient content delivery. SEMS
will form a flexible and adaptive technological framework in support of Program decision making
and lines of business.
Furthermore in the Services Overview Diagram, Common Enabling Services provides reusable
functionality to many Business Application Services, either directly or with the help of an Enterprise
Service Bus (ESB). Common Enabling Services includes services considered Technology Services, some of
which are enabled as standardized web services. Non-standard or complicated technology web services
may need the use of web services wrappers to standardize and simplify interaction with the service.
33
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
In addition to Services, Technology Tools are also offered across EPA and play an important role in the
SOA. Technology Tools are typically software applications that can be copied and customized to support
Business Application Services. Technology Tools can also be implemented as a Technology Service, if it
can be designed to continuously provide a service to more than one Business Application Service. There
are many instances of similar Technology Services and Technology Tools, and it is important to make the
distinction of what qualifies as a service and what are considered tools.
The Services Overview Diagram references the ESB. The ESB is an important building block of EPA's SOA
vision, especially as more services become available and it becomes harder to manage and coordinate
with multiple services. The ESB is a service-oriented infrastructure that acts as an integrator of web
services. It could be set up to identify, aggregate, and orchestrate multiple web services without having
to coordinate individually with each individual web service. The ESB works with a Service Description
and Registration Discovery (UDDI) component to set rules for registering and accessing services. A UDDI
registry (in this case, the RCS) would include details on all services available at EPA. The ESB and RCS
would together maximize the coordinated use of services for the Agency. Definitions for the SOA
Overview Diagram include:
1) Business Application Services - (Same as previously defined in Section 6.3)
ACTORS
2) Actors - Individuals or organizations that use and benefit from SOA,
essentially the service consumers. Actors include business analysts, architects,
developers, service providers, customers, etc. Data/service consumers are able
to discover services through the RCS or by going through the Business
Application Services, which can be set up to utilize common enabling services
behind the scenes.
3) Data Wrapped Web Services - (Same as previously defined in Section 6.3)
4) Web Services Wrapper-This is typically used to standardize or simplify the
access and use of complex web services. It could also be applied to standardize
the data access for legacy systems as a standard data wrapped web service.
5) Common Enabling Service - (Same as previously defined in Section 6.3)
6) Technology Services - (Same as previously defined in Section 6.3)
34
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
I i r~i r~i
7) Technology Tools - (Same as previously defined in Section 6.3)
8) Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) -The ESB helps to set the foundation for SOA
by simplifying the integration and reuse of business and common enabling
services. An ESB can be used to connect old systems or applications, orchestrate
their interactions with newer systems or applications, and make them broadly
available as services for regular use.
8.1) Workflow Foundation & Orchestration (BPEL) - Business Process
Execution Language (BPEL) is a specific language that is used for the
execution of business processes using Web services. Essentially, BPEL
enables a top-down approach of SOA through the orchestration and
coordination of multiple web services. Thus, BPEL provides an easy and
straightforward way to compose many web services into standard business
processes.
8.2) Service Discovery - This can be described as a set of rules for
registering and retrieving details about a business and its services. A UDDI
registry and the RCS catalog may include details on business services, but
the major purpose of a registry is to publicize what Web services are
available within the EPA.
8.3) Service Management and Quality of Service (QoS) - This can be
described as specific SOA management technologies that enable
organizations to align processes with their business goals to optimize SOA
service delivery. QoS really focuses on how individuals are being serviced
by SOA with an emphasis on user satisfaction and business profitability.
8.4) Unified Messaging and Communication Foundation - Refers to a
standard way by which messages are exchanged. In order for actors to
request and send messages, there needs to be a standard process in place
in order to handle multiple requests from many actors. A Unified
Messaging and Communication foundation essentially provides a basis for
message requests to be processed efficiently back to the requester.
8.5) Application Adaptors/Message Transformation - Refers to when the
ESB translates messages received into something comprehensible for all
other systems and applications. It is also able to route the messages to the
appropriate service (web service, data service, or if it needs to pull
information from a legacy system, etc.).
35
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
9) Service Metrics - Metrics provide a concrete way for users to define how
successful a new business process or architecture is working. The use of service
metrics allows for targets to be set, outcomes to be assessed at the end of
implementation, and an estimation of return on investments. For example,
service metrics could be used to measure the time it takes for a message
request to come back to an actor, the number of requests that are successfully
fulfilled within a given period, or the time it takes for an actor to collect
information from the services directory.
10) Governance/Security-The set of policies, procedures, technical
specifications, and security practices which enable organizations to implement
and manage SOA. The purpose of SOA security architecture is to enable the
implementation of a variety of services and to securely allow these services to
operate together on a safe platform. Governance and Security could involve
organizational governing bodies such as a services governance board, or
activities that include defining a set of business security requirements,
monitoring the adherence of these requirements while actively looking for any
breaches, and being able to diagnose these breaches and plan the appropriate
corrective actions.
6.3.1 EPA Services Inventory
The Services Inventory is one of the primary outputs of our methodology. It is a list of the various tools
and services, organized by the categories established in the Services Layer Diagram. The inventory
includes information collected about the service, which were used for discovering commonalities across
EPA. As illustrated in Figure 14, EPA is able to capture relationships for related tools and services from
the different categories of tools and services. This information allows EPA to continuously identify
potential new tools and services needs.
36
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
To further illustrate the power of the inventory, information collected can be displayed or hidden from
the boxes. Additional fields, color coding, and symbols can be added as information becomes available.
Currently, the inventory includes information pertaining to each type of service or tool. The example
below shows a zoom-in of a Business Application Service box, highlighting the attributes being displayed
for the inventory.
[WQ-WATERSPQ] Waters
Program Query
Source READ
[WQ-ENVIROMWATER]
Source READ
[RS-RSINTCOM] Research
Internal Communication
Source ASI portal and ORD
Status ExBting
[RS-LABREVAUD]Lab
ReviewJAuditing
Source ASI portal and ORD
A
Source: ASI portal and ORD tasking
documentation
Systems: AIRQUEST
Status: Existing
Provides analysts and readers
"with a code to uniquely
identify each service
-Sample attributes that are
intended to give additional
descriptors for the service
Figure 13: EPA Services Inventory
37
-------
Business Application Services (By Segment) - Page 1 of 2
Business Application Services with
Existing Systems
Business Application Services with
Major Planned Changes
Air Quality Management and
Climate Change
[AQ-AQDTCMGMT] Air
Quality Data Collection &
Management
Source: READ
Systems: AQS
[AQ-RADINFSTRPT]
Radiation Information
Storage & Reporting
Source: READ
Systems: R ad Net
[AQ-AQDATAMART]Air
Quality Data Mart
Source: READ
Systems: AQSMart
[AQ-EMISDTCMGMT]
Emissions Data Collection &
Management
Source: READ
Systems: ElSys
[AQ-VEINFOMGMT] Vehicles
and Engines Information
Management
Source: READ
Systems: Verify
[AQ-CAMDBS] Clean Air
Markets Division Business
Management
Source: READ
Systems: CAM DBS
[AQ-NVLABDM] NVFEL Lab
Data Management
Source: READ
Systems: LDMS
[AQ-FCDTCMGMT] Fuel
Compliance Data Collection
& Management
Source: READ
Systems: DCFUELS
[AQ-EMISMODEL] Emissions
Modeling
Source: READ
Systems: EMF
[AQ-PUBAIRPOLSHR] Public
Air Pollution Information
Sharing
Source: READ
Systems: AIRNOW
[AQ-PARTNTRK] Partnership
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: ISTAR
[AQ-AQUESTDW] AirQuest
Data Warehouse
Source: READ
Systems: AIRQUEST
[AQ-MOTOESIM] Motor
Vehicle Emission Simulation
Source: READ
Systems: MOVES
Water Quality Management
[WQ-WTCONTAMIS] Water
Contamination Information
Sharing
Source: READ
Systems: WCIT
[WQ-DWINFARCH] Drinking
water information archive
Source: READ
Systems: Drinking Water
Loading and Archiving System
[WQ-WTGRANTRPTRK]
Section 31 9 Grants
Management
Source: READ
Systems: CRTS
[WQ-BASINS] Better
Assessment Science
Source: READ
Systems: BASINS
[WQ-HYDROWQS]
Hydrologic and Water
Quality Management
Source: READ
Systems: Hydrologic and
Water Quality System
[WQ-NATMDLTRK] Water
Program Tracking
Advisories
Source: READ
Systems: PRAWN
[WQ-UNDERGIC]
Underground Injection
Control
Source: READ
Systems: UIC
[WQ-ENVIROMWATER]
Enviromapper for Water
Source: READ
Systems: EFW
[WQ-WTQUALTRK] Water
quality tracking
Source: READ
Systems: WQSITS
[WQ-ENVIRMETHIS]
Environmental Methods
Information Sharing
Source: READ
Systems: NEMI
[WQ-EBEACHES] Electronic
Beach Assessment
Source: READ
Systems: eBeaches
[WQ-NATMDLTRK] National
Assessment & TMDL
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: ATTAINS
[WQ-SDWIS] Safe Drinking
Water Information
Management
Source: READ
Systems: SDWIS
[WQ-STORET] Storage and
Retrieval Information
Management
Source: READ
Systems: STORET
Research* Science
[RS-RSINTCOM] Research
Internal Communication
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: AIRQUEST
[RS-RISKINFST] Risk
Information Storage
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: IRIS
[RS-PUBDATATRK] Public
Data Request Tracking
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: PIRTS
[RS-WORKRQTRK] Work
Request Tracking
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: WRTS
[RS-LABCATRK] Lab
Corrective Action Tracking
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: LCATS
[RS-INTRESMGMTJ
Integrated Resource
Management
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: IRMS
[RS-ACQMGMT] Acquisition
Management
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: EPA Acquisitions
Systems
[RS-ENVINFMS]
Environmental Information
Management
Source: READ
Systems: EIMS
[RS-ENVSCICON]
Environmental Science
Connector
Source: READ
Systems: Environmental
Science Connector
[RS-FACILTRK] Facility
Tracking
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: FTS
[RS-INTACCMGMT]
Integrated Accountability
Management
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: IAMS
[RS-RECMGMTTRK] Records
Management Tracking
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: RMD
[RS-RSFINMGMT] Research
Financial Management
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: OMIS
[RS-TRAVMGMT] Travel
Management
Source: ASI portal and ORD
tasking documentation
Systems: GovTrip
Figure 14: Business Application Services Inventory Snapshot
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Business Application Services (By Segment) - Page 2 of 2
H Emergency
H Management
I
Management Portal
Source: READ
Systems: EMP
[EM-EMNOTIFY] Emergency
Notification
Source: READ
Systems: ERNS
[EM-RISKMPDTCMGMT] Risk
Management Plan Collection
and Management
Source: READ
Systems: SRMP
[EM-CAMEO] Computer Aided
Management of Emergency
Operations
Source: READ
Systems: CAMEO
[EM-WEBEOC] Web
Emergency Operation
Source: READ
Systems: WebEOC
Business Application Services with
Existing Systems
Business Application Services with
Major Planned Changes
I!iTHffl!I!R!iTff!JH;^
Oversight
[CO-IGAUDIT] IG Audit,
Program Evaluation, and
Investigation Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: IG Project/Program
Management System
[CO-IGENTMGMT] IG
Enterprise Information
Management
Source: READ
Systems: iGEMS
[CO-IGTIGER] IG Enterprise
Resource Management
Source: READ
Systems: TIGER
[CO-AUDITTRACK] Audit
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: Autoaudit
[CO-IGOPSRPT] IG Operations
and Reporting
Source: READ
Systems: IGOR
Enforcement & Land Quality Management Substance
Compliance Management
[EC-AIRFACTRK] Air Facility
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: AFS
[EC-WATERPCINFO] Water
Permit Compliance
Information Sharing
Source: READ
Systems: PCS
[EC-INTCOMPYRPT]
Integrated Compliance
Reporting
Source: READ
Systems: ICIS
[EC-WASTEINTRK] Waste
international/information
tracking
Source: READ
Systems: WITSNET
[EC-ENFDTWARE]
Enforcement Data Warehouse
Source: READ
Systems: Enforcement Data
Warehouse
[EC-CRIMCASERPT] Criminal
Case Reporting
Source: READ
Systems: CCRS
[EC-ENFCOMPRPT]
Enforcement and Compliance
Query
Source: READ
Systems: Enforcement and
Compliance Query System
[LQ-ADMINTRK]
Administrative Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: Admin
[LQ-BRWNGRANPERTRK]
Brownfields Grants
Performance Information
Collection/Management
Source: READ
Systems: ACRES
[LQ-PERSONTRK] Personnel
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: PTS
[LQ-RCRADTCMGMT] RCRA
Data Collection and
Management
Source: READ
Systems: RCRAInfo
[LQ-RCRACBITRK] RCRA CBI
Information Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: RCRA CBI System
[LQ-SEDIREMTRK] Sediment
Remedy Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: SRTT
[LQ-OSWERPAT] OSWER
Performance Assessment
Source: READ
Systems: PAT
[LQ-CIMCPUB] Cleanups
Information for Public (visual
maps)
Source: READ
Systems: CIMC
[LQ-CERCPAD] CERCLIS
Public Access Data Mart
Source: READ
Systems: CPAD
[LQ-PUBARCHSITEINFO]
Publishing Archived Site
Information
Source: READ
Systems: Archived Sites
[LQ-OSTRIWA] OSRTI Web
Applications
Source: READ
Systems: OSRTI Web
Applications
[LQ-ANALYTICSVRTRK]
Analytical Services Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: ANSETS
[LQ-SFENTERMGMT]
Superfund Enterprise
Management
Source: READ
Systems: SEMS, CERCLIS,
SDMS, ICTS
[LQ-GRNTPERTRK] Grant
Performance Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: TAG
[LQ-TRAINTRK] Training
Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: Training
[LQ-STATEAUTHTRK] State
Authorization Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: STATS
[LQ-INFOREQTRK]
Information Request Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: IRTS
[LQ-DRUMWSTTRK] Drummed
Waste Data Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: DrumTrak
[LQ-SFEFACTS] Superfund
Electronic Facts Sharing
Source: READ
Systems SeFacts
[SM-TOXSUBINFMGMT] Toxic
substance information
management
Source: READ
Systems: MTS
[SM-PESTINFMGMT] Pesticide
Information Management
Source: READ
Systems: OPPIN
[SM-PESTREGINFMGMT]
Pesticide Registration
Information Management
Source: READ
Systems: PRISM
[SM-PERSAWRDTRK] Track
personnel information and
awards
Source: READ
Systems: HROB Portal
[SM-TOXCONTTRANS] Toxic
Substances Control Act Data
Transmittal System /Chemical
Abstract Service
Source: READ
Systems: TDTS/CAS
[SM-SUBCBITRK]CBI
Information Tracking
Source: READ
Systems: CBITS
[SM-TRIMGMT] Toxics Release
Inventory Management
Source: READ
Systems: TRI Explorer, TRIPS,
TRI-MEweb
Figure 15: Business Application Services Inventory Snapshot (continued)
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Common Enabling Services (Including
Technology Services) Pg 1 of 2
Administrative Financial Geospatial
Services Management
[AS-FCMGMTJ Facilities
Management
[AS-AUDITI] Auditing/
Inspecting
[AS-PNLACq Personnel
Access and Security
(e.g., EPASS)
[AS-FEETRK] Fee Collection/
Track Payments
[FM^CQCON] Acquisition/
Contract Administration
(e.g., EAS, ICMS)
[FM-GRTMGTJ Grants
(Performance) Management
(e.g., IGMS)
[FM-FINDTMGMTJ Financial
Data Management
(e.g., FinRS, OARM Data Mart)
[GS-GEOBUS] Geo-Enabling
Business Processes
[GS-GEOANA] Geospatial
Analytical Services
[GS-GEOENTJ Geospatial
Enterprise Licensing Service
Human Resource Management
[HR-RECRUI] Recruiting
(e.g., Ez-Hire)
[HR-PYROLL] Payroll
(e.g., People-Plus HR)
[HR-CARDEV] Career
Development and Retention
[HR-BENMGTJ Benefits
Management
(e.g., People-Plus HR)
[HR-RETMGTJ Retirement
Management
[HR-PRSADM] Personnel
Administration
(e.g., IRMS, People-Plus HR)
[HR-EDUTRN] Education and
Training
[HR-COMM] Communication
Research &
Development
[RD-RSCCON] Research
Consultation
[RD-RESANA] Research
Analysis
[RD-RSCTST] Research
Testing
[RD-RSCPUB] Research Data
Sharing/Publication
Figure 16: Common Enabling Services Inventory Snapshot
Current w/o Changes
Current w/Changes
Potential Target Svc/Tool
New Target Svc/Tool
Web Enabled
40
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Common Enabling Services (Including
Technology Services) Pg 2 of 2
]
Information Technology (IT), Data Management
[IT-UETECH] User
Environment Technology
-Common Operating System
-Applications
-Devices
-Platform
[IT-APPHSTJ Application
Technology/Hosting
-Application Servers
-Database Servers
-Development Environments
-Virtualization
-Security
&
[IT-DATHSTJ Data
Technology/Hosting
&
[IT-HLPDSK] Help Desk (CIS)
[IT-SECURE] Information
Security Services
[IT-DISCOVER] Discovery
Services
[IT-DATXCH] Data Collection/
Exchange
-Authenticate
-Receive
-Signature/Encrypt
-Content Transmission/
Validation
-Distribution
-CROMERR Secure Exchange
[IT-NETTEL] Network and
Telecommunications
[IT-MTAMGT] Meta Data
Management
£>
[IT-DATRANS] Data
Transformation/
Standardization
[IT-DATPUB] Data Publishing/
Reporting
[IT-ENTIDX] Enterprise
Indexing & Search
-^
, ,
[IT-WEBCMG] Web Content
Management
[IT-TRANSC] Transcription
(Scanning/OCR/Tagging Data
5?
[IT-ECMSSV] Document
Management Services
-Email Records
-Records Management &
Repository
-My ECMS(FYIO)
[IT-PORTAL] Portal
H
,
[IT-GENTRACK] General
Tracking
(Including performance
tracking)
3*
[IT-GENAUDITJ General
Auditing
[IT-DTQUAL] Data Quality
Services
[IT-BIZINTEL] Business
Intelligence & Analytics
-Application Platform
-Application Development
-Application Hosting
-Technical Consulting
[IT-COLLAB] Collaboration
(DCS)
-To be real time
-Social networking
-Dynamic documents
-Mashups
-Rich network applications
-«"3
[IT-TRMREG] Terminology
Services
<~p
[IT-SIGNENCR] Signature and
Encryption
[IT-INFDIS] Information
Distribution (Subscription/
Push)
?
[IT-ENTREF] Enterprise
Reference Services
s?
[IT-IAMGT] Identity & Access
Management
-Web Access Management
(WAM)
-Provisioning
-SSO for other government
apps
-SSO for non-web apps ._
-Smart Card Login •/•'
[IT-EXTTRLD] ETL Services
•$t
Figure 17: Common Enabling Services Inventory Snapshot (continued)
Current w/o Changes
Current w/Changes
Potential Target Svc/Tool
New Target Svc/Tool
-"£ Web Enabled
41
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Data Wrapped
Web Services
[DW-WQEXCH]
Water Quality
Exchange
[DW-GEOSRH]
Geo-Enabled
Search
[DW-WEBMAP]
Web Map
[DW-UNINDX]
UVIndex
•$>
[DW-METACS]
Metacart a Search
[DW-STORET]
STORETWeb
#
Figure 18: Data Wrapped Web Services Inventory Snapshot
Technology Tools
[TT-ECMSTL]
ECMS Tools
[TT-DATMRTJ Data
Mart Tools
[TT-GEOTLS]
Geospatial Tools
[TT-METAED]
Metadata Editor
[TT-MODSIM]
Modeling/
Simulation
[TT-ETLINF]
Extract,
Transform, and
Load (Informatica)
[TT-DATWHS]
Enterprise Data
Warehouse Tools
[TT-MAPTRK]
MapTracker
[TT-PKIENC] PKI
Encryption Tools
[TT-BUSANA]
Business
Intelligence &
Analytics (OBIEE,
BO, SAS)
[TT-WEBPUB] Web
Service Publishing
(UDBI)
[TT-CLPSHP] Clip
& Ship Utility
[TT-DIQSIQ] Digital
Signatures
Figure 19: Technology Tools Inventory Snapshot
42
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Summary of Services Inventory
The Services Inventory shown in Section 6.3.1 are snapshots of the current data collected for each type
of service/tool. All boxes in the inventory utilize a common symbol to indicate whether or not the
service is web-enabled. Business Application Services include an attribute for the systems/investments
that currently provide each service. Common Enabling Services include a color coding that represents a
summary status of the service for the Target Architecture:
• Current without Changes (light blue) -Existing service/tool without significant changes planned
• Current with Changes (blue) - Existing service/tool with potential changes
• Potential Target Service/Tool (light green)- Proposed new service (no formal agreement from
EPA)
• New Target Service/Tool (green) - New service (agreement from EPA)
The Common Enabling Services inventory is the central component to the Service Layer of EPA's Target
Architecture. As EPA is transitioning towards SOA, the inventory shows examples of services that EPA
plans to establish in the next five years, as well as the services that are going to be developed or where
changes are planned. The inventory can be used as a management roadmap and communication tool to
coordinate all planned changes across the enterprise. As a result, services and tools can be deployed
more efficiently and drive business improvement.
6.4 Target Recommendations
Based interviews conducted with program office staff, referenced documentation, and analysis
performed for the Services Layer, the following recommendations represent the culmination of
proposed changes for the current Target Architecture update of FY2009 Q3. The recommendations
include new services, improvements to existing services, and overarching recommendations around
governance for SOA. EPA considers all of the proposed changes as the current plan. As plans change
over time, EPA will update the proposed recommendations as appropriate. Recommendations are
grouped around Governance and Common Enabling Services.
6.4.1 Governance Recommendations
6.4.1.1 Services Governance Board
EPA currently does not have a governing entity to manage the development and use of SOA. Although
this plan serves as the basis for identifying and capturing future services, a governing body is necessary
to provide authoritative standards, guidance, direction, and oversight for implementing services across
multiple segments and with other federal agencies. Governing boards are most effective when it is
comprised of key decision makers from all program offices. It provides a forum for proposed changes
across the enterprise and allows the representatives to make decisions that will impact individual
program priorities.
43
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
6.4.1.2 Services Standardization
A successful SOA requires easily consumable services based on well supported industry standards.
Services need to be discoverable, accessible, and most importantly, interoperable. EPA will need to set
standards for web service and web-enabled service development to ensure compatibility and reusability
across the enterprise. Approval by the (proposed) Governance Board will be necessary to gain buy-in
from all potential service developers. Additionally, services need to have a standard set of criteria for
qualifying it as a service. EPA will identify the exact criteria to ensure all consumers of services can be
certain of what to expect when leveraging EPA services.
6.4.2 Recommendations for Changes to Common Enabling Services
6.4.2.1 Enterprise Tools as Services
EPA understands that the difference between a tool and a service primarily lies in the accountability and
expectations of what is being used or provided. The term service typically comes with a higher
expectation of accountability from the provider than a tool. In many cases, a tool can easily be offered
as a service and vice versa. As a general recommendation for the Target Architecture, all technology
tools that exist in the Agency should be evaluated to see if they could be better utilized as a Common
Enabling Service. By doing so, program staff can tap into these tools and technologies resulting in a
reduction of duplication and potential cost savings.
6.4.2.2 Package Service/Tool Suites
EPA is looking to address the concern from program offices with regards to compatibility of EPA
standard services and tools. Tools and services should be packaged together and offered as a suite
rather than addressed on a case-by-case basis. Each service/tool suite would need to provide guidance
on its ability to work together with other services. Examples of potential suites are:
• Portal/WAM/ECMS
• CDX/Data Warehouse/Data Mart/BIAT/ETL
• CDX/Metadata services/Data Services
Bundling services/tools will help consolidate service functionalities and save cost on buying individual
services to support different program offices.
6.4.2.3 Metadata Management Service
As detailed in the Data Target Layer, EPA will consider the implementation of a Metadata Management
tool as a service to assist the Agency in the process of collecting vast amounts of programmatic data in
separate systems. Informatica Metadata Manager has been identified as a common tool to better
enable EPA with the ability to harvest and catalog the Agency's data assets.
6.4.2.4 Single Sign-On
EPA is looking to expand the use of its single sign-on (SSO) capability embedded in its I&AM services. The
SSO mechanism needs to be implemented as a standard service for all applications used by EPA users.
True SSO is the process whereby a single user authentication and authorization can permit the user to
access all computers and systems (browser-based and client/server based) without the need to enter
44
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
multiple passwords. Applications, systems, and services being developed by EPA need to utilize this
service for authentication and access control if the Web Access Management (WAM) component of
IA&M is not capable of delivering. By developing and expanding its use the Agency will realize a
significant increase in satisfaction from its users as well as a cost saving benefit from the reduction of
help desk calls logged daily.
6.4.2.5 Implementing a Standard Digital Signature Mechanism
EPA will consider the integration of a reusable digital signature mechanism. Building off what CDX has
already created for CROMERR compliance, this tool will assist the Agency in reducing the amount of
hardcopy documents that have to be stored and signed by an approver, manager or supervisor. The
digital signature mechanism is designed to electronically allow individuals to apply their unique
authenticated signing to a document received through automation. The digital signature reassures the
authenticity of the author, and it also provides flexibility for users to answer requests during a time most
convenient to their schedules. The benefit is a seamless, paperless process that will enable EPA to
reduce costs by improving the storage of the data and helping to eliminate hardcopy documents.
6.4.2.6 Implement CDX as an Agency standard for information collection using SOA
EPA will leverage CDX experiences in using SOA to further migrate towards becoming a service-oriented
organization. Many aspects of the Exchange Network and CDX operation provide an architectural model
for data exchange between systems, partners, and users, which EPA should built upon when
implementing other service solutions. Recognizing and adopting the reusable components and
processes of the Exchange Network Node architecture, accompanied with the development of
appropriate Agency standards, would save time and increase the information interoperability within the
Agency and beyond.
6.4.2.7 Geospatial Data Gateway (GDG) as a Best Practice for Metadata Management
(More information to be provided at a later time.)
6.4.2.8 General Tracking Service
EPA will consider developing a general tracking service to support workflow and tracking capabilities.
Many of the systems that are used by the EPA have a common need for tracking. This service provides
users with the ability to track various elements of information including approvals, documents,
packages, and information requests in near real time. This standard tracking service is not intended to
replace the existing systems; it offers a common and customizable set of functionalities to help enhance
existing systems and ease the development of future tracking needs throughout the Agency. Analysis
and research has shown us that many of the systems at EPA do show a need for a tracking capability
however it would be beneficial to implement a service that is re-usable across the Agency, as it will save
the Agency money and have re-usability across many different systems.
6.4.2.9 Digital Document Conversion/Storage Service
The ability to convert hard copy documents into digital media documents and store them is an
important capability to the EPA. The Agency would like to have the ability to take advantage of a service
that can provide the easy automation of paper records into digital documents. This service is sure to
reduce the number of paper documents that are stored in unsecured areas around the Agency. In
45
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
addition, it will also provide cost savings and reduce clutter because the information that is being
converted will be easier to query and store and will ultimately save on time used to search through
stacks of records. Often coupled with a document management service, a transcription service should
have the capability to scan hard copy documents, perform optical character recognition (OCR), and tag
searchable keyword data prior to storage. This service will ultimately become a reusable service at the
EPA and will provide cost savings on similar services purchased independently.
6.4.2.10 EPA Standard Reporting Tool
EPA will consider the evaluation and selection of a standard reporting tool to be used across the Agency.
A reporting tool will significantly reduce maintenance, cost, and data degradation. The ability to have a
standard tool that can be used to run reports on data from different systems will reduce the number of
redundant systems performing the same function. Many federal agencies have implemented standard
reporting tools in an effort to ensure that they are minimizing their cost on system maintenance and
reducing the number of reporting applications across the Agency. The Exchange Network model
deploys data services based on a standard query specification which allows one application to discover
and consume all Network web services deployed anywhere and at any time (Network Web Client).
6.4.2.11 Re-usable Statistical Sampling Tool
EPA will implement a statistical sampling tool that can assist the Agency with observing and monitoring
data in different applications. This analysis will identify different variables and data content currently
entered into the Agency's systems. Furthermore, it has the ability to partially or fully automate the
process of auditing specific information loaded into systems. For example, if there is a need to audit the
number of grants awarded over the amount of $5,000.00 in the grants application, the statistical
sampling tool can be designed to flag those transactions. Depending on the application, the tool can be
programmed to sample specific data, documents, or transactions at anytime. The ability to incorporate
this provides the ability to enforce policy through changes in business process or practice.
6.4.3 Other Recommendations
6.4.3.1 Enterprise Service Bus
EPA will look to implement an ESB which will facilitate the use of services. The ESB is a software
infrastructure that simplifies the integration and flexible reuse of business components within SOA by
reducing the size and complexity of interfaces between those applications and services. The ESB
mediates the incompatibilities of applications and IT resources, orchestrates their interactions, and
makes them available broadly as a service for additional uses. EPA understands that an ESB does not
implement a SOA but provides the features with which one may be implemented. The ESB will provide
the agencies systems with components messaging, standard security, and reusable standards-based
messaging system.
46
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
7. Target Data Architecture
7.1 Overview
Data is an essential asset for EPA. As such, it is essential that core data, critical to the agency's mission is
recorded and managed in a consistent way. While it is challenging, given the distributed nature of EPA's
data assets to manage all data consistently, there exist best practices and guidelines to address the
management of the agency's core data. This chapter highlights how to apply best practices specific to
EPA's current environment and identifies a framework for the EPA Data Architecture.31
As depicted in the Target Architecture Overview, Figure 20, diagram, organizations, groups and people
have attributes that are managed within the data layer.
Organizations/
Groups/People
Have Attributes
EPA's Target Architecture -
Alignment to the Data Layer
Data Layer
—^
Data/Content ) ( Data Assets
Figure 20: Data Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People
7.2 Data Architecture Goals
The Data Architecture strategy describes the structures and specifies, at a high level, the different data
groups and items used by a business in its day to day operations and through its IT systems and
applications. The Data Architecture complements the Enterprise Architecture to achieve multiple goals,
including:
• Helping stakeholders find data quickly and easily
• Fostering consistent quantitative and qualitative data
• Fostering a higher degree of collaboration between an organization and its constituents
• Optimizing return on investment for managing data
Please refer to the full EPA Target Data Architecture document for additional information. This chapter
represents a subset of the overall target for data.
47
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
7.3 Enterprise Data Architecture
7.3.1 Logical Architecture
The logical architecture vision is a conceptual model evolving the enterprise data architecture at EPA in
the future. It shows how the following layers interact with each other to provide meaningful, accurate,
and timely information.
• Applications Layer
• Business Intelligence Layer
• Services Layer
• Data Layer
• Metadata Layer
• Security Layer
The logical architecture flows directly from the Business Reference Model (BRM) and shows the data
flows between the processes that make up the decomposed services within data flow diagrams (DFD).
7.3.2 Core Enterprise Systems
EPA's core enterprise systems are the physical representation of the Logical Architecture. The core
enterprise systems represent the physical layer of the process/activity and external interface nodes of
the DFD as shown in Figure 21:
Business Reference Models
Business
Service
Federal Data Stores
EPA S
Data <^
Stores \,
EPA Program Data Stores
Regional Data Stores
External
' Interfaces
State/Local/Tribal Data Stores
Industry Data Stores
Figure 21: EPA's Conceptual Data Model for Core Enterprise Systems
48
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
7.3.3 Technology Guidelines
The technology guidelines will examine the guidelines for the technology stack represented in the
Logical Architecture and provide the technical requirements on which the EPA Core Enterprise Systems
will be integrated to meet the vision of the Logical Architecture.
7.3.4 Services Guideline
Enabling the Service Architecture requires that the Data Architecture be mapped directly to specific
services identified in that Architecture. Each EPA Segment will coordinate its Service Architecture and
Data Architecture development. This ensures that each data service can be traced to a specific business
need implemented in the Service Layer. The EPA Service Architecture identifies three broad categories
of services: Common Enabling Services, Data Wrapped Web Services and Business Application Services
as detailed in Section 6: Services Architecture.
To formally establish the linkage between the EPA Service Architecture and the EPA Data Architecture
for both categories of services, the EPA leverages the Target Business Data Mapped to Key Business
Processes Template-known as the Create, Read, Update, and Delete (CRUD) Matrix - from the OMB
Federal Segment Architecture Methodology.
The Services Inventory Roadmap in the Services Architecture section provides a summary list of the
existing services and proposed services to help EPA implement SOA architecture. The coordination
between the data architecture and services architecture is critical as enterprise services will be managed
by the EPA Enterprise Data Architecture (EDA) program in conjunction with the EPA EA program. The
EDA will ensure that enterprise data architecture priorities are identified and built out in conjunction
with the EPA Service Architecture and work with the appropriate segment to design, develop, and
implement the enterprise services. The EDA will also support the segments with identifying their
business data service priorities and will support the segments with identifying which Electronic Data
Interchange (EDI) option is appropriate for the data service, with the end goal of enabling data wrapped
web services.
7.3.5 Data Services
The establishment of enterprise and business data services to enable more efficient and effective data
sharing is fundamental to the EPA Data Architecture strategy. Enterprise data services may be
associated with the adoption of data standards and data services associated with target authoritative
data sources (ADS) and make up the EPA Reference Data Architecture. For example, geospatial services
can include standardized mapping services for data as served by an ADS leveraging established
geospatial data standards. Such enterprise services may also involve standardization of target business
processes for consumers and producers of ADS information.
The Service architecture provides the framework for the Business data services so that they are more
tightly coupled to standardized business processes and are supported by target authoritative data
sources. They generally are more segment specific, although they can provide an enterprise solution for
particular processes. In addition to providing the framework for data services the Services architecture
49
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
ensures that the services abstract data and functions so that they are "loosely coupled" and no longer
dependent on the underlying applications and platforms.
Web services are a subset of both enterprise and business data services that are useful for consistent
data exchange. Exposing data via web services is one of the most efficient ways of providing data to all
of the other required business systems while maintaining the data in a single authoritative source for
easier stewardship. While this vision of a mature SOA is part of EPA's target architecture, there are
interim steps that EPA will take in order to achieve that vision. These interim steps, particularly as they
relate to data, will adhere to EPA Services Guidelines.
7.3.6 Enterprise Data Exchange Approaches
Data exchange is the process of importing, sharing, combining, and exporting data that resides in
different locations and data stores to provide information by processing the data using pre-defined
processes. Frequency and accuracy in data exchange becomes critical when the volume of data
increases along with the breadth and volume of the audience. In the case of EPA, the information
audience is made of different groups (e.g., public, government regulators, lawmakers, etc).
There are many approaches available within EPA's architecture for exchanging information. For
example, EPA's National Environmental Information Exchange Network (NEIEN) exemplifies EPA's core
data exchange approach for regulatory and other data (such as Brownfields, homeland security and
emergency response exchanges with states and other federal agencies); it represents a commitment to
providing standardized and secure information collection and exchange. Data exchange with EPA's
partners in response to regulatory requirements is only one example of the many ways EPA exchanges
information to accomplish its mission. EPA is implementing multiple strategies to meet the differing
requirements for data exchange. These requirements run the spectrum of needs from exchanging
financial information between Federal government institutions to research data among EPA, academic
and industry scientists. Below is the matrix of data exchange approaches that can be applied to meet
the of EPA's data architecture.
While the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) exemplifies EPA's core data integration approach, this
approach may not be the ideal choice in each case. For example, there may be a small data exchange
between two internal EPA systems that is more efficiently facilitated by a custom point-to-point
integration. Below are four data exchange approaches that can be applied to various parts of the EPA's
data architecture. The matrix in Table 2 compares these different data exchange options.
. Approach 1: Custom Point-to-Point Integrations: A direct point-to-point link is created between
applications for each business function.
. Approach 2: Messaging or EAI (Enterprise Application Integration) Tools: Source systems "publish"
enterprise messages to a common bus; application "subscribe" to relevant messages and act on
them.
. Approach 3: Web Services: Functionality to be integrated is exposed via XML on an open protocol
such as SOAP. Other systems can consume this service if needed. Inputs and outputs to the web
services are XML
50
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Approach 4: ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) Tools: A standard set of tools and processes used to
extract, transform and load large volumes of data between systems. Very useful in populating a data
warehouse
Table 2: Comparison of Data Exchange Options
Concept
Strengths
Weaknesses
When to
Use
Enterprise
Application
Integration
(EAI Tools)
Publish/Subscribe
mechanism
• Most suitable for
real time data
needs
• Loosely coupled
Reliability
guaranteed delivery)
• Enables real-time
business decisions
• Out of box
adapters for many
enterprise systems
High upfront cost
• Relatively complex
design patterns
Real time data is
important
• High volume, low
footprint data
exchange
• Many consumers
of the same data
Point to Point
Custom code for
each integration need
• Suitable for
complex integration
needs
• Tightly coupled
Familiar technologies
and processes
• Many point to point
integrations already
exist
• No major upfront
investment required
Costly over time
• Tight coupling
• Scalability issues
• Opportunities for
reuse are slim
Should be rarely
used
• When defined
enterprise strategy
cannot work
• Proto typing
Web Services
Standards based
integration
• Most suitable for
inter-organization
integration
• Loosely coupled
Standards based
integration
• High degree of
reuse
• Wide tool support
including open
source
• Low upfront
investment
Lack of transaction
support
• Not a publishing
model
• Less established
technology
Integration model is
request/reply
• Real time
requirements
• High volume,
moderate data
Extract.
Transfer, Load
(ETL Tools)
Suitable for large
volumes of data
• Generally used to
move data
between two or
more databases
Metadata driven
approach
• Graphical User
Interface (GUI)
tools for most
tasks (little
coding)
• Extremely
efficient for large
data volumes
High upfront costs
• Complexity of tool
• Batch oriented
In conjunction with
a data warehouse
51
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
7.4 The Data Reference Model (DRM)
The purpose of the Data Reference Model is to enable information sharing and reuse throughout the
EPA, by standardizing enterprise-level data descriptions throughout the EPA infrastructure, and
managing this data through uniform data management practices and widely accepted established
standards in the corporate business community.
7.4.1 Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference Model (DRM)
The standard areas of the FEA DRM Abstract Model are depicted in the figure below. This framework
provides a roadmap to be used by enterprise architects and data architects to guide their efforts in
supporting data sharing within the Community of Interests (COI) that they support.
\
Data Description
Data Groups, Data Assets,
Reference Data
Data Context
Taxonomy. Controlled
Vocabulary, Semantics
Figure 22: DRM Standard Areas
The DRM can provide value for agency data architecture initiatives by:
• Providing a means to consistently describe data architectures
• Bridging data architectures
• Facilitating compliance with requirements for good data architectures
7.4.2 The EPA Data Reference Model
The EPA DRM serves the purpose of promoting information sharing, reuse, and repeatable process
management that identifies common data entities which support shared missions across platforms. The
data model also manages data across multiple networks, and supports the access and exchange of data
through standardization which remains flexible and client defined. The model promotes cross-
community and cross agency data sharing.
52
-------
7.5 Framework for Managing Distributed Data Assets
7.5.1 Data Governance
Information interoperability and sharing continues to challenge the EPA's ability to improve efficiencies
and deliver valuable services to its public, private, and government constituents. The successful
management of information and data as an enterprise asset is of critical importance. To achieve the
vision of maximizing the value of enterprise data assets, EPA will establish an Enterprise Data
Architecture (EDA) Program to create a proactive, enterprise service organization focusing specifically on
critical data management issues and challenges faced by EPA programs and their partners.
The EDA program's principles are based primarily on federal enterprise architecture best practices.
These standardized methodologies are leveraged as proven, value-added strategies to strengthen data
architecture across the Agency. In addition to federal best practices, the EDA program is influenced by
the data management association's (DAMA) data management body of knowledge (DAMA-DMBOK)
functional framework, which classifies nine data management functions.
Meta Data
Data
Architecture
Analyst* &
Design
Document,
Record &
Content
Management
Data
Warehousing
& Business
Intelligence
Management
Reference &
Master Data
Management
Database
Management
Data Security
Management
Data Quality
Management
Figure 23: DMBoK's Functional Framework for Data Management
The EDA program must also manage relationships with governance bodies and working groups which
cross multiple program offices and provide the Agency-wide perspective. These include the Quality
Information Council (QIC) The Information Network Subcommittee (INS) and the Enterprise Architecture
Workgoup (EAWG). These relationships are the most effective means to solidify the program.
The EDA program will also interact with external data collaborators in the same fashion as the internal
programs. It will deliver technical services in support of improving exchange standards and techniques
53
-------
to improve overall exchange efficiency and data quality. In either scenario, program office leadership
endorsement is critical.
7.5.1.1 Authoritative Data Source Designation and Implementation
The Enterprise Data Architecture (EDA) program will also support the segments in identifying
authoritative data sources (ADS) for their data assets by providing the enterprise perspective for their
top down and bottom up analyses through the development of the EPA data architecture, by
coordinating the rationalization process, and giving final designation approval. See Figure 24 for the
Authoritative Data Source (ADS) framework the EDA will use as its model to map towards the EPA Data
Map depicted in Appendix D
"To-Be Business and Data Architecture Development
Data Taxonomy and Cohesion, Business Processes
Database Assessment and Registration
Database Fit
Registered Metadata and Access Mechanisms
Rationalization Database Harmonization and Structuring
and
Designation
Common Ontology
Logical Model
Data Analysis and Rationalization
Trusted Authoritative Data Source
Migration Plans
Approved System Inventory
"As-ls" System Architecture Assessment and Scoring
Visible and
Accessible
Understandable
Trusted and
Reliable
Figure 24: Authoritative Data Source (ADS) Framework
To support the ADS designation process, the EPA will leverage the Department of the Interior (DOI) ADS
Designation and Management Approach, shown in Figure 24.33
Phase 1 -ADS Candidate Designation: ADS candidate designation occurs within the EPA Segment
Architecture Development Process. The Core Team (which can represent a Segment or a Business Area
within a Segment) conducts a comparative analysis of all systems using data of the same or similar
theme or information class to ensure information requirements from known consumers or potential
consumers are or can be accommodated in the designated candidate ADS. They will document the
' Framework leveraged from the DOI presentation at The MIT Information Quality Industry Symposium, 2007.
! From DOI OCIO Directive 2008-020.
54
-------
results of this analysis in the ADS Assessment and Candidate Designation Report, which is submitted to
the Segment for approval. The Core Team will rely on the appropriate EPA Solution Architectures for
this analysis, when available. An example Solution Architecture can be found in Appendix D.
Phase 2 -ADS Acceptance: The Segment owning the candidate ADS will review the core responsibilities,
identify gaps, define a funding strategy, establish performance metrics, develop a roadmap for
transition, and submit this information in a Segment ADS Acceptance Report. The segment will seek
initial approval from the EDA which will then work with the EPA EA team for formal approval.
Investment Review will provide their approval based on the EPA EA approval.
Phase 1-
Blueprint ADS Candidate Designation
S Acceptance
Establish ADS
target
Evaluate legislative
requirements
Qualitative analysis
of common IT
investments
ID duplicative IT
investments
Quantitative
analysis of data
sources and
management
processes
Produces ADS
Assessment and
Candidate
Designation Report
Approval of
designated ADS by
Co re Team
Segment
Evaluation
Evaluation of
'andidate ADS
Evaluate Segment
core ADS
responsibilities
Develop ADS
funding strategy
Establish high-level
transition plan
Produce Segment
ADS Acceptance
Report
EDA Evaluation
Enterprise
Evaluation of
Candidate ADS
EDA rev lev/ Core
Team and
Segment ADS
Reports
Initial approval by
EDA for ADS
recommendation
for data theme •'
information class
EA approval of
EDA decision
Investment Review
approval of
decision
Phase 3-
Transition
jlementation
Implementation &
Maintenance
Serve Requirements
and Measure Progress
Detailed transition pla
Establish services for
enterprise and
business data
Plan incremental
transition
Establish information
exchange description
and agreements
'
Figure 25: Authoritatative Data Source (ADS) Designation and Management: A Three-Phase Approach
Phase 3 -ADS Transition and Implementation: The Segment owning the candidate ADS will develop a
detailed transition plan that describes how legacy data sources will be migrated to the officially
designated ADS. The owning segment will establish data services and describe information exchange
requirements and service level agreements (SLA) for internal and external information sharing partners.
7.5.2 Data Quality Guidelines
The EPA EDA program has developed a Data Quality Management approach with the EPA Data Quality
community as one of its key components to ensure it strengthens Data Architecture goals. The EDA
Working Group will work with the EPA Senior Quality Management Official, the Assistant Administrator
for Environmental Information, EPA Quality and Information Council (QIC) and the EPA Quality Staff to
harmonize data quality processes with the target data architecture.
EPA organizations may define data quality standards based upon internal users' and external
stakeholders' expectations and requirements for the data. EPA organizations will work together to
promote the usage and maintainance of a consistent set of data quality standards. This will help to get
agreement on the data quality standards across EPA Each organization will determine the level of
55
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
acceptance, the "fitness for use" or the requirement level for each standard. EPA organizations may
also evolve a new and more highly evolved sub-standard applicable to their program. The sub-standard
will be assigned a name different from the parent standard. For example, there should only be one data
definition for timeliness and an enhanced program-specific timeliness data standard with a new name.
The EPA Enterprise Data Architecture (EDA) program has established Data Quality Management as one
of its key components ensuring that the Data Architecture goals will be better met. The EDA Working
Group will work with the EPA Senior Quality Management Officials, the CIO and the EPA Quality Staff to
harmonize data quality processes with the target data architecture.
As part of its continous improvement process, EPA plans to establish a quality procedure for
implementing a Data Quality Improvement (DQI) initiatives. This procedure will describe the major
activities that comprise a successful agency DQI initiative. EPA plans to promote an approach similar to
the one outlined in the Federal DAS Federal Data Quality Framework as shown in figure 26. Prior to the
implementing a DQI initiative, EPA programs will be encouraged to develop a written DQI Business Plan
with the appropriate level of approval. At the conclusion of each DQI initiative, EPA plans to save the
data quality products in an enterprise metadata repository.
Identify Data Quality Scope
Set Data Quality Metrics and Standards
Assess Data Ag ainst DQ Metrics
Assess Information Architecture
and Data Definition Quality
Evaluate Costs of Non-Quality
Information
Assess Presence of Statistical
Process Control (SPC)
Implement Improvements and Data
Corrections
Develop DQ Governance, Data
Stewardship Roles
Perform Information Value Cost
Chain (VCC) Analysis
Conduct Root Cause Analysis
Develop Plan for Continued Data
Quality Assurance
Educate the Government Culture
Figure 26: The Federal DAS Federal Data Quality Framework
7.5.2.1 EPA Data Quality Management Framework
EPA plans to establish a Data Quality Framework with data quality policies and procedures that can be
incorporated into existing agency business processes that are part of their EA. This framework will
address data quality objectives that enhance data sharing, data context and data descriptions. The EDA
Working Group will work with the EPA Senior Quality Management Official, the Assistant Administrator
for Environmental Information, EPA Quality and Information Council (QIC) and the EPA Quality Staff to
56
-------
harmonize data quality processes with the target data architecture. The proposed EPA Data Quality
Framework can be found in Table 3.
DRM Framework
Data Sharing
Data Context
Data Description
DAS Data Quality Objective34
Minimize the data collection burden
Designate Authoritative Data Sources
(ADS)
Establish data architecture standards
Enterprise Metadata Repository
EPA Data Quality Management Support
Data is corrected and quality is improved
and certified, enabling consuming
applications to trust the ADS.
Through the assessment process, potential
ADS are identified with recommendations to
EDA for desianation (See Section 4.1.1)
Data architecture standards are mapped
directly to data assets and refined as
needed
Enterprise metadata is certified as to its
quality, enabling higher quality search
results, an enterprise meta data
management approach is developed and
implemented
Table 3: EPA Data Reference Model (DRM) Framework Matrix
The EPA has developed Data Quality Assessment guidance that can be used to assess the type, quantity,
and quality of environmental data to determine if the data are suitable for its intended purpose. EPA
has also developed Environmental Data Verification and Validation guidance. More information can be
found at the EPA Quality System web site: http://www.epa.gov/quality/qa_docs.html#guidance. The
EPA has also directly incorporated the DAS data quality activities into its data lifecycle framework and
Data Lifecycle Framework
Planning &
Design
Collection &
Acquisition
Data Processing &
Conversion
Data Storage
Access &
Transport
Develop DQ Plan
I ndentify DQ Scape
Set DQ Metrics and
Standards
•f Conduct Root Cause
Analysis
Perform Information
Value Cost Chain
(VCC) Analysis
Evaluate Costs of
Non-Quality
Information
Assess Information
Architecture and Data
Definition Quality
Assess Presence of
Statistical Process
Control
•f Implement
Improvements and
Data Correction
* Develop Plan for
Continued Data
Quality Assurance
•f Develop I Save Data
Quality Products to
Enterprise Metadata
Repository
Figure 27: Data Lifecycle Framework with data quality activities
the four listed represent the DRM data quality features. For more information about these features and the data
quality features for the other layers, see the Federal DAS Data Quality Framework Version 1.0.
57
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
mapped them to the EPA data lifecycle activities as shown in figure 27 and in Appendix C.
7.5.3 Data Security Guidelines
With an increasing dependence on IT, the ever-growing complexity of federal IT infrastructure, and a
constantly changing information security threat and risk environment, information (data) security has
become a mission-essential function. The E-Government Act of 2002 recognizes the importance of
information security to the economic and national security interests of the United States. Title III of this
act, entitled FISMA, is the primary legislation governing federal information security programs, and
requires each federal agency to develop, document, and implement an agency-wide program to provide
information security for the data and information systems that support the operations and assets of the
agency.
7.5.3.1 Federal Data Security Framework
Agencies should identify applicable security requirements based on relevant legislation, regulations,
federal directives, and agency-level directives. Agencies should also ensure that information security
governance structures are implemented in a manner that best supports their unique missions and
operations.
7.5.3.2 EPA Data Security Overview
The data security process at EPA progresses cyclically. The information system, once launched, moves
continuously through periods of security control selection, implementation, assessment, authorization,
and continuous monitoring. Then, although the information system itself may only be created once, the
nature of the data contained within it may change over time, as may the regulatory, physical and
network environment surrounding it. Thus, the data and the information system may then be subject to
a new round of control selection and implementation at the very least, and assessment, authorization
and continuous monitoring for certain. Indeed, data must not be secured just once, when the
information system is built and has been subject to a C&A process. Instead, the Agency must be vigilant,
constantly applying both National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and agency-specific tools
and tests to the data to verify that any remaining risk is mitigated to the extent possible, and accepted
when necessary.
7.5.3.3 EPA Data Security Target State
To manage its data security process, EPA applies a Risk Management Framework, much like the Data
Security Life Cycle developed by NIST and detailed by Dr. Ron Ross.
58
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
C CATEGORIZE
reformation System
FIPS 200 / SP 800-53
t MONITOR
Security State
SELE
Security Controls
Select baseline security controls;
apply tailoring guidance and
supplement controls as needed
based on risk assessment.
MU
Information System
SP800-70
IMPLEM
Security Controls
V
ENT II
mtrols
si1
ASSESS
Security Controls
1
Implement security controls within
enterprise architecture using sound
systems engineering practices; apply
security configuration settings.
: • :•••• • •• •• .• r •'.- ••••• • --less
.. ; .... ...;.. ; .... :Y|
:-••::•:: • :••• :•• : ••.•••;• : - irity
•.-:..-•-: • • •• - =: ' . : n).
Figure 28: Data Security Target State - Managing Risk for Information Systems35
• Categorize Information System
• Select Controls
• Implement Security Controls
• Assess Security Controls
• Authorize Information System
• Monitor Security State
7.5.3.4 Reference Data Architecture
A robust reference data strategy and architecture helps identify and manage key enterprise data assets
such as the common reference data and master data, which is defined as data of the core business
entities. Most enterprises build reference data sources that are designed as the single source of truth
for a particular data domain.
The EPA is working towards implementing a SOA. To achieve the SOA goal, the reference data
architecture is used to ensure that the required applications can successfully leverage existing, multiple
data sources in order to paint a true picture of the state of the enterprise. Not only must the reference
data architecture physically and logically connect these sources, it must bridge disparate data models,
' SELECT Step relates specifically to SP 500-53 r2.
59
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
query languages, programming interfaces and protocols to create a semantically consistent pool of data
that the application needs.
The EPA reference data registry architecture will identify the relationships between data values to
categorize the data in groups.
7.5.3.5 Reference Data Standards
Data governance and metadata are part of the reference data strategy and architecture and are critical
to managing reference data across EPA. The efficient organization of the reference data relies upon an
integrated metadata architecture and ongoing management of the Agency's core reference data.
Metadata is used to facilitate the understanding, characteristics, and management usage of reference
data. Data governance is critical for the successful implementation of reference data architecture as
changing a value in a reference data table can have unpredictable effects on what appears in reports,
perhaps hiding information.
To avoid reference data replication and duplication, it is critical to implement enterprise wide data
standards. The EPA has laid the ground work for data standards by establishing the Data Standards
Branch (DSB) within OEI. EPA works closely with federal agencies, states, tribes, and other information
trading partners in the global community to develop data standards. By its nature, the data standards
program is a part of EPA's Enterprise-wide Data Architecture and EPA's Quality Systems. A major
objective of the DSB is to facilitate and enable the mapping of data elements to common meanings. The
EPA has implemented data standards governance through the DSB.
7.5.3.6 Reference Code Sets
Reference code sets are repeatable code sets that are a part of enterprise data and facilitate data entry,
indexing, and searching. Reference data differs from other types of data in that individual values
typically require definitions. Reference data codes have definitions, not just corresponding
descriptions. These definitions may not be formally stated, but they need to be understood to use the
reference data. For instance, reference data is used to control business rules: if a business rule includes
an actual data value, this will nearly always be reference data (i.e., a code). The semantics of the code
value control the logic of the business rule. Codes are also important in reporting hierarchies, where
users must understand what is meant by each of the categories appearing in a report.
Within EPA, the DSB helps manage several key reference data sets and related metadata in the System
of Registries (SoR). Specifically, the non-human value lists and code sets provided by the Data Registry
Services will continue to support the key reference data developed within the Agency such as the Facility
Registry System and the Substance Registry System. In addition, business-specific taxonomies are
managed through the Terminology Services.
7.5.3.7 Master Data
Master Data can be defined as the 'golden copy' or 'single version of the truth' of core information
required to create and maintain an enterprise-wide system of record for entities spanning all
organizational business functions. It is important to understand that Master Data does not apply to all
data in an organization. Master Data are those elements which represent the core business of the
60
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
organization and they are a subset of the organization's overall data. Master data at EPA will consist of
Business entities such as Facilities, Assets (environmental and other), Programs, Partners, Regulations,
etc. These are examples of the core business entities around whom EPA carries out its daily business.
To understand how to move iteratively toward an enterprise Master Data Management (MDM) system,
it is critical to examine how master data is processed by operational business transaction applications
and analyzed by business intelligence applications.
Master Data Management is required to achieve the following:
• A common definition of the core business entities across the organization.
• A single version of the truth, golden copy, of the core business entities' data (master data
entities).
• Utilize the master data repository to ensure that no duplicates of the existing master data are
entered into the system.
• Dynamic sharing of the master data in the MDM repository to the different source and
downstream systems such as the Enterprise Data Warehouse to support decision support
systems.
• Accurate representation of the state of the business, i.e., accurate analysis of the different
transactions and master data to achieve the true state of business operations, effectiveness of
program campaigns, usage of funds allocated, etc.
• Application of data standardization and quality rules to data before and during data acquisition
and storage.
• Implementation of data governance by workflows for master data in the applications.
Master data refers only to an organizations enterprise-wide, mission critical data - that data which must
be the same throughout the enterprise. The development of a Master Data Management program is at
its infancy at EPA. The target state is to have a mature MDM program that is catalogued and maintained
in enterprise data registries such as DSB's OneData Registry and the EA Program's Architectural
Repository Tool (IMPART).
7.5.4 Enterprise Metadata Architecture
The primary purpose of metadata is to make it simpler to categorize, store, and find data. As such, it is
critical that deployed systems effectively implement metadata. Metadata supports enterprise
information access strategies by answering three primary questions:
• What data exists?
• What does the data mean?
• How is the data accessible?
The enterprise metadata architecture proposed for EPA is a cross-cutting framework of policy,
standards, communication, implementation, and continual evaluation required for enabling a consistent
metadata capability. This framework allows the EPA to answer the three questions posed above across
all of its data resources. The proposed metadata framework is consistent with EPA enterprise data
61
-------
architecture goals. It is intended to be business driven, standards based, flexible, and services oriented.
The overall strategy for this framework is to start simply, leverage participation and existing resources to
the maximum extent possible, and limit the burden on existing systems or processes as possible. As
outlined in Figure 29, EPA's proposed enterprise metadata framework can be broken down into
components and managed as a self-perpetuating cycle.
Standards and Policy
Development
Lessons Learned and
Performance Measures
Enterprise Metadata
Framework
Governance
Communication and Outreach
Implementation Assistance
Figure 29: EPA Enterprise Metadata Framework
7.5.4.1 Standards and Policy Development
A consistent set of rules needs to be defined and applied for metadata capabilities to operate efficiently.
The standards and policy component of EPA's enterprise metadata framework supplies the guidance to
ensure metadata is defined, developed, sustained, and used efficiently across the Agency. This
component considers technical and operational factors in how standards and policy are developed and
seeks to improve operations of the enterprise metadata framework overall by leveraging Agency
metadata implementation lessons learned.
7.5.4.2 Governance
Once new standards or policies are defined, they must be presented to senior leadership for formal
endorsement. The governance component supplies the documentation and communications expertise
to convey changes to enterprise metadata standards or policies for management consideration and
approval. Recommendations are appropriately characterized, alternatives are identified, and potential
costs and risks detailed for any potential change. Artifacts of this component include:
62
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
• Formal enterprise metadata policy
• Formal enterprise metadata procedures
• Formal enterprise metadata standards
• Enterprise metadata framework reporting
• Enterprise metadata support requirements
Opportunities for EPA within this component include establishing formal enterprise metadata policy,
standards and procedures. EPA can also formally define and establish the framework required for
sustaining metadata architecture and appoint an enterprise metadata steward(s) with a charter of
operations to manage the framework.
7.5.4.3 Communication and Outreach
EPA is a large agency comprised of diverse program offices. Therefore, communications planning is
essential to ensure all stakeholders are aware of the EPA metadata business case and supporting
requirements. Stakeholders are both internal and external which means communication planning should
also provide a consistent message regarding how requirements can be supported but tailored to fit
specific business contexts. There are a variety of communication mechanisms to use when
implementing the communications plan. Some examples include the EPA portal, EPA website, wikis, and
WebEx. These mechanisms should be leveraged according to the audience and provide for both real
time and archived information retrieval. The designated enterprise metadata steward(s) is charged with
developing and carrying out the communications plan including set-up and maintenance of supporting
mechanisms. Artifacts of this component include:
• A detailed communications plan
• Enterprise metadata wiki
• Best practices library
• Training materials
Opportunities for EPA within this component include establishing enterprise metadata as a key
discussion topic at agency conferences or workshops, further expanding the use of existing
communication resources such as the enterprise metadata wiki, steering potential users to existing
repositories or tools, and developing a set of re-usable training materials.
7.5.4.4 Implementation Assistance
Implementation assistance consists of a varied set of technical or financial resources which can be used
to implement different aspects of enterprise metadata. A designated enterprise metadata steward(s)
will provide overall consulting expertise on a more direct and hands on basis than is available during
training. This may include helping data owners understand where metadata fits into their business
processes or how existing metadata practices can be modified or optimized to comply with enterprise
standards. Consulting should occur before any new or modified metadata effort is implemented by a
program office to ensure enterprise requirements are met as well as to identify and catalogue any novel
approaches for possible inclusion as best agency metadata practices.
63
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Tools should also be available to support specific steps in the metadata process to include customizable
metadata development tools, metadata storage locations, harvesting procedures, and service oriented
search mechanisms. Artifacts of this component include:
• A manual defining the enterprise metadata framework implementation
• Technical specifications for enterprise metadata services
• Common metadata tools
• Catalog of new metadata implementation approaches
Opportunities for the EPA within this component include establishing enterprise metadata as a key
discussion topic at agency conferences or workshops, further expanding the use of existing
communication resources such as the enterprise metadata wiki, steering potential users to existing
repositories or tools, and developing a set of re-usable training materials.
7.5.4.5 Lessons Learned and Performance Measures
EPA's goal is to advance the sharing, retrieval and understanding of enterprise information assets.
Consistently formed and applied metadata is critical to this goal. To assess how far along the EPA is
towards achieving this goal, some metrics are required. The EPA metadata maturity model provides a
means for applying measurable criteria to how a program office or the agency overall is developing and
using metadata. A final role of the lessons learned and performance measures component is to maintain
this maturity model, improving or updating it as conditions warrant, and provide a continual reference
for the level of metadata maturity across the agency. Artifacts of this component include:
• Defined, documented, and formally approved best practices
• Metadata return on investments
• A current metadata maturity model
• Metadata maturity assessments for program offices and the agency overall
Opportunities for EPA within this component include establishing mechanisms for reviewing program
office metadata efforts, defining metadata maturity metrics to establish metadata levels of maturity,
and implementation of performance measures and return on investment reporting.
64
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
7.6 Target Data Architecture Recommendations
The following recommendations are distilled along the primary components presented in the preceding
section. For more detailed information, please reference the EPA Enterprise Data Architecture Strategy
document.
Data Reference Model
The Federal Enterprise Architecture DRM provides a comprehensive framework for the data referencing
initiatives of EPA. EPA should:
• Develop a profile of the federal DRM
• Implement the EPA profile of the DRM
By integrating required metadata elements into a federated approach to identifying data assets, this will
provide the necessary framework to guide the data management efforts for the EPA
Data Quality
The EPA should identify an initial critical (or key) dataset - that is a small group of data which is mission
critical across the agency - and ensure enterprise-level quality for this data set. To identify this data, the
EPA EDA group must set up a centralized data governance structure (see Data Governance) to
determine the initial data set and undertake the following steps:
• Perform a Data Quality Assessment Process: Select the information group candidates based on
impact and priority, assessing the data definition and data architecture quality, determining the
desired quality standards, assessing the current level of data quality, measuring the non-quality
data costs, and interpreting and reporting the state of data quality. The outcome of the
assessment is a set of recommended follow-on actions for review by the EDA and the Principal
Data Stewards for the data, who are accountable for reviewing and accepting the follow-on
actions.
• Initiate the Data Quality Improvement Process: A proactive effort to minimize the incidence of
defects in the data by attacking the causes of non-quality data (for example the implementation
of Data Stewards or programmatic data entry quality control).
• Undertake a Data Quality Correction Process for the identified data: This is a one-time effort to
eliminate existing defects in the data and should be taken as a complementary action to the
improvement of the producing processes.
• Execute a Data Quality Certification Process: In this process the quality of data is independently
verified and certified.
65
-------
Success Story: EPA's Office of Water (OW)
"EA is the key to managing investments during bad financial times" as Vince Allen of EPA's OW has
experienced first-hand. The OW has been leveraging EPA's EA processes to support OW's investment
decisions. Through EA, program teams have had the tools necessary for focusing on enterprise solutions,
helping to bridge the gap between program owners and IT experts.
A key issue for the OW has been the lack of program integration across the OW databases. To try and
remedy the lack of integration and streamline business, the OW conducted a gap analysis (called the
Business Improvement Planning and EA Gap Analysis) to identify areas of opportunity to recognize
efficiencies in program processes and identify potential IT solutions. Identified gaps were then closed,
leading to an increased quality in reporting and data sharing.
As a result of the quality of reporting, the OW staff is realizing the value in leveraging EA to forecast and
articulate program needs, ultimately ensuring the Agency meets its strategic goals. By having and
maintaining an enterprise-wide focus, resources can be focused on the processes and investments that
are going to have the greatest impact in realizing efficiencies, streamlining processes and reducing costs.
Data Governance
To achieve the vision of maximizing the value of enterprise data assets, EPA must direct its EDA Program
to create a proactive, enterprise service organization focusing specifically on critical data management
issues and challenges faced by EPA programs and their partners. The EDA program's principles are
based primarily on federal enterprise architecture best practices and include:
• An EDA program, including the Enterprise Data Architecture Working Group (EDAWG) that
formalizes and tracks authoritative data sources for key agency data assets.
o Develop charter, scope, governance, processes, tools, and plans
o For key agency data determine Data Stewards
o For data resolution questions put in place a Data Governance Board
• Encouraging EDA Communities of Interest (COI)
• Developing a centralized, searchable repository of enterprise-level data services
Data Security
The security of an agency's data cannot be addressed through one-time events or quick fixes, such as
firewalls ortri-annual certification and accreditation exercises. Instead, effective data security is an
ongoing, ever-evolving process built on policies, designated security roles, risk and vulnerability
analyses, documents, training, testing and monitoring activities, enterprise investment strategies and
the incorporation of security across the entire system development lifecycle.
66
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
The ultimate objective is to conduct the day-to-day operations of the agency and to accomplish the
agency's stated missions with adequate security, or security commensurate with risk. Specifically, the
agency should assign adequate resources to ensure that it follows the two guidelines below.
1. NIST SP 800-53 (r2) lays out the security requirements ("controls") for each impact level and
classifies them according to whether they are Management controls, Operational controls, or
Technical controls.
2. OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III, requires executive federal agencies to:
o Plan for security (wo CPIC, program budgeting and SDLCprocesses)
o Ensure that appropriate officials are assigned security responsibility
o Periodically review the security controls in their information systems (wo self-
assessments, document updates and other continuous monitoring activities)
o Authorize system processing prior to operations and, periodically, thereafter (wo
Certification and Accreditation)
Master Data and Reference Data
Reference data uniquely identifies an entity. 'Customer,' 'branch,' and 'product' are good examples. This
type of data is often inconsistently and redundantly stored within an organization. Master data can be
distinguished from static or reference data. Reference data can be viewed as items that don't change
over time or within the organization (e.g., U.S. states). These will be defined the same way in all systems
for the foreseeable future. Master data, on the other hand, can change relatively rapidly over time or
within a company. EPA, as part of its data quality and data governance effort, must identify a core set of
reference/master data and have both a process and software in place to maintain this data set agency-
wide.
Some steps the agency should undertake to identify key reference and master data are:
• Identify relationships between data values to categorize the data in logical groups
o Support concept of "Authoritative Data Source" and systematically develop an
inventory of data assets
o Store data sets and value sets in a central repository such as OneData
• Link reference data code sets, in the EPA SOR for Data Registry, to business rules to increase
transparency and clarity
• Implement and follow data standards and governance process to ensure control of reference
data sets and decrease disruption due to un-planned and un-approved changes to the data sets
o Stewardship at the source - Each domain must have a READ data steward who knows
the reference data business definitions and priorities
o Use subject matter experts as 'Domain Stewards' to identify and manage reference data
code sets
• Collect and manage metadata for the reference data sets in a central place such as READ
o Coordinate governance and metadata management activities with DSB
67
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Meta Data
The Enterprise Data Architecture group has developed and applied a metadata maturity model to an
initial cross-section of enterprise data stores, as detailed in the EPA Metadata Framework assessment.
Steps the Agency should take to further its metadata development and management include:
• Develop and begin implementing a Metadata Architecture for the Agency
• Identify and implement a Metadata Management tool as a service to assist the Agency in the
process of collecting programmatic data in separate systems. Informatica Metadata Manager
has been identified as a common tool to better enable EPA with the ability to harvest and
catalog the Agency's data assets
• An enterprise metadata procedure should be developed that compliments existing metadata
procedures (FGDC for structured geospatial data, Dublin Core for Data.Gov)
Further work to identify the maturity of key EPA data stores is reflected in the broader companion
document, the EPA Target Data Architecture. These will be leveraged in positioning the Agency's data
assets for greater discovery by internal data search engines such as the 'EPA Data Finder 'as well as
future uploading to Data.Gov. Developing a Metadata Procedure that is applied and managed centrally
by OEI will greatly aid in the 'findability' of Agency data assets.
68
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
8. Technology Architecture
8.1 Overview
EPA prides itself on a highly functional, standards-based, efficiently managed information technology
infrastructure. Since its inception the Agency has strived to design, deploy, and manage its
infrastructure based on enterprise principles, and has enjoyed the benefits of having a single national
data center, a single enterprise-managed wide area network and Internet point of presence, a single
Agency email system, and highly standardized application platforms, file and print services, and local
area networks. EPA continuously seeks to enhance its IT infrastructure to take advantage of the best in
emerging technologies in order to support the needs of its widely diverse offices and constituents, while
maintaining its enterprise approach to technology management.
As depicted in the Target Architecture Overview diagram, organizations, groups and people have
attributes and need access to information which is enabled by the technology layer.
EPA's Target Architecture -
Alignment to the Technology Layer
Organizations/
Groups/People
Services Layer
Technology
Layer
Applications T Systems
Request
Information
omputer/ >./Document
Generate/change
information
Connect Discove ) (Control/Access^ Display ^)(J/Veb Services
N/^—:—~~\^
Mash-ups ) ( Data Input ) ( Data Discovery )( Calculations
Data Layer
-x
Data/Content ) ( Data Assets
Figure 30: Technology Layer Alignment to Organizations, Groups and People
Toward that end, EPA has developed the following technology infrastructure target states and planned
or in-progress implementation initiatives.
8.2 Technology Target Themes
Agile and Optimized Hosting Infrastructure and Services, toward Cloud Computing and Green IT
While most of EPA's major national applications are hosted in its National Computer Center, hosting is
also done today in many other locations throughout the Agency. Regional Offices, Laboratories, and
some Program and Regional field offices - over 40 facilities nationwide - host their own email, file
69
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
services, and local applications, which have resulted over the years in "server sprawl." EPA plans to
significantly improve the efficiency of its hosting activity through a multi-year, Agency-wide optimization
effort.
While certain applications will be good candidates for software-as-a-service and/or cloud computing
solutions as those markets develop, EPA will necessarily continue to host many of its mission-critical and
sensitive applications, and plans to do so in a way that maximizes agility, scalability, resiliency, and
efficiency. EPA envisions a highly standardized and virtualized server and storage infrastructure,
ultimately serving applications to all Agency offices from three to five Enterprise-managed data centers.
Reaching this target state will take at least five years. As a transitional step toward that goal, Program
and Regional Offices are already engaged in optimizing their local hosting infrastructures through
implementation of virtualization technology, standardization of hosting platforms and operational
practices, and enterprise acquisition of hardware and application software.
The optimized hosting infrastructure EPA envisions will provide the Agency greater hosting capacity,
greater scalability, greater availability through improved failover, and much faster time to market for
new applications and test and development environments, all at reduced overall cost. The Agency's
internal hosting operations will leverage the same principles and technologies as industry-leading
commercial service providers, providing an EPA utility-computing capability that will complement
Federal and Internet-based cloud computing offerings.
EPA naturally has great interest in minimizing the adverse affects of its information technology
operations on the environment. The dramatic reduction in the number of servers deployed in the
Agency will significantly reduce energy consumption. EPA will furthermore standardize on server and
storage products, data center design attributes, and infrastructure configurations specifically intended
to reduce carbon footprint.
Standardized desktop configuration and management/support
A standard, enterprise-managed desktop configuration, compliant with OMB's Federal Desktop Core
Configuration (FDCC), will offer EPA advantages such as accelerating desktop deployment, containing
the overall cost of desktop ownership, and reducing the amount of "hands-on" maintenance or problem
calls for each computer. A managed, standardized desktop will significantly enhance network security
by preventing the installation of unauthorized software, establishing uniform computer security
settings, and facilitating faster application of security patches, and will provide application developers
with greater assurance that their applications will work properly when deployed.
EPA has for years had a standard core set of desktop software. The Agency envisions building upon that
foundation with these standard configurations and enterprise-level desktop configuration, management
and support.
In the future, EPA envisions leveraging application virtualization and thin client technologies for selected
classes of desktops and use cases. These approaches will simplify desktop administration and will
70
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
contribute to the Agency's Green IT objectives by utilizing desktop devices that use considerably less
energy than a fully equipped PC.
Sufficient and highly-available WAN capacity
EPA's Wide Area Network (WAN) has not kept pace in recent years with the dramatic network capacity
demands imposed by today's Internet-based applications and communications convergence. In support
of EPA's environmental priorities and mission critical business, the Agency is looking toward a WAN and
Internet connectivity with the capacity and availability to fully satisfy the needs of its Program Offices,
Regional Offices, partners, and the public, now and into the future. Key considerations contributing to
the WAN vision include:
• Web applications that are increasingly video- and geospatially-based
• Rapidly increasing requirements for internal and external collaboration, including Web 2.0 and
social networking technologies
• Greater use of the WAN for voice and video telecommunications
• Larger sets of geospatial data being exchanged among EPA sites and traded with partners
• Consolidation of hosting infrastructure into fewer, larger data centers, so that users are
geographically separated from the email, file, and application servers that house their data
The requirements for the EPA WAN will continue to grow, and it will continue to be more and more
mission critical. EPA will require a WAN with greater capacity, lower latency, and greater reliability to
accommodate future requirements. In addition to increasing raw capacity, the next generation EPA
WAN will see greater use of optimization technologies (caching, compression, protocol acceleration) and
Quality of Service increase efficiency and improve performance of critical network traffic.
EPA's overall network and telecommunications management practice encompasses not just its WAN,
but Agency Internet access, perimeter security, and IP address management as well. The Internet access
provided by the future EPA network will also provide the capacity and high availability required by
Agency offices and external customers and stakeholders, secured through a Federal-compliant Trusted
Internet Connectivity architecture. The WAN and Internet connectivity will support IPv6 and other
future protocols as they emerge; EPA's perimeter will be configured to support receipt of externally
submitted IPv6 packets, and the Agency will adopt IPv6 within its internal network as Agency and
Federal requirements dictate.
Robust Technical Infrastructure to Support Collaboration, Communication, and Content Management
EPA's scientific and regulatory mission, its need to convey information on human health and the
environment, and its commitment to transparency and openness in conducting its operations make
excellent collaboration a high Agency priority. Collaboration among Agency employees, with our
research and business partners, and with the public is essential to the quality of EPA's work. We plan to
leverage the best in today's rapidly improving technologies, with a combination of externally acquired
Internet-based services and internally hosted software tools, to remain on the cutting edge of
71
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
collaboration capability while maintaining our commitment to enterprise infrastructure standardization
and efficiency.
This vision includes the full range of collaboration services to provide an integrated set of tools enabling
asynchronous and synchronous team collaboration and interpersonal communication, multimedia
management, and web site production and publishing. The agency plans to utilize a well orchestrated
portfolio of complementary technologies and technology services, including web conferencing, virtual
team rooms, portals, blogs, wikis, syndicated web feeds, social networking, instant messaging, video
teleconferencing, and enterprise content management. These capabilities are major technology
underpinnings necessary for achieving EPA's priority to make environmental information more accurate
and more readily available.
EPA will build upon its enterprise content management infrastructure and program to further enhance
its management of records and privacy-sensitive information. The content management architecture is
envisioned to significantly improve search capability - for publicly accessible web content through
enhanced metadata management and web content management and publishing technology, and
"enterprise search" for internal maintained in file systems and the evolving collaboration tools.
Ubiquitous network access and location-independent user experience
EPA personnel are increasingly mobile and are using a more diverse set of endpoint devices than ever
before for their computing and telecommunication needs. The Agency envisions enabling its staff and
approved contractors to experience its technology systems, to the maximum extent possible, in a secure
and consistent way regardless of whether physically located in the office or connected to the Internet,
and across a multitude of ever smaller end-user devices such as smart phones. EPA will strive to provide
remote users the same access from outside the network as they would have inside: access to all their
required systems, with a consistent user experience, in a secure, reliable, and responsive manner. In
order to achieve this, EPA will continue to improve its remote access mechanisms, increase virtual
private network capacity and performance, and increase the granularity of its remote access security
controls. Key to this objective is the use of security technologies that can assess the "health" of the
accessing device and accordingly control access to information resources of differing levels of sensitivity.
Enterprise, service oriented approach to Identity and Access Management
EPA has undertaken an initiative to perform identity and access management from an enterprise
perspective with common technologies and processes across multiple, diverse applications and
platforms. The Agency will continue to evolve its 1AM into a set of integrated enterprise services
envisioned to enable:
• Uniform provisioning and de-provisioning supporting all major agency applications and
application delivery environments
• Web application owners to easily define access and authorization rules for their applications,
and have them enforced by a shared infrastructure service
72
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
• EPA users to seamlessly and securely navigate among applications, web-based and otherwise,
without having to authenticate multiple times
• Participation in a government-wide identity federation
• Adherence to Federal requirements and guidance on security
An enterprise, service-oriented identity and access management system is a key cog in EPA's future
systems development processes.
Enhancements in IT Asset Management, Infrastructure Discovery, and Operational Awareness
In order to obtain the needed levels of performance, agility, and security, EPA must be able to quickly
and accurately ascertain its current assets and level of service for all IT areas. Complete and current
asset inventory information is critical whether evaluating the effectiveness of a current solution,
determining the cost of a proposed solution, or simply planning a technology lifecycle or annual budget.
Currently, EPA's IT asset management is conducted in a somewhat decentralized manner, and its
monitoring of infrastructure components varies across technologies and responsible organizations. EPA
plans to improve its capability to discover and document its enterprise-wide IT assets and to assess in
real time, at an enterprise level, the operational status of key IT infrastructure components. This will be
accomplished through a combination of integrated technology solutions, policy, and improved
operational procedures. Technical solutions will be identified which improve EPA's capability for real-
time infrastructure discovery and characterization, asset inventory management, vulnerability
management, status monitoring, and alerting.
Infrastructure Support for Service Oriented Architecture
As EPA's business applications move increasingly toward a service orientation, the IT infrastructure must
evolve accordingly. The Agency's application runtime infrastructure - its development and deployment
environments, application container and server software, and data manipulation and management
technologies - currently supports interoperability through web services protocols and approaches, and
will continue to do so as application integration technologies evolve. An area for infrastructure
developmental growth is in the management of the services themselves: service registration, discovery,
administration, monitoring, policy management, contract management, quality management, and
security. As more EPA business functionality and information delivery is manifested in shared, reusable
code - consumable software services - these service management activities will take on more
importance, and infrastructure tools will need to be in place to administer them.
Enhanced IT Infrastructure Support for Geospatial Analysis
No discussion of EPA technology targets would be complete without mention of Geographic Information
Systems (GIS), one of the Agency's most strategic technologies. GIS is the key to a broad range of EPA's
application and data analysis capabilities, from publicly accessible maps of environmental interest to
regulatory and enforcement support to emergency response. EPA will continue its initiatives to improve
and simplify the location-enablement and geospatial display of Agency data, through software we
develop, services we acquire, and IT infrastructure upon which those software services are deployed.
73
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Our data- and compute-intensive GIS activities will benefit from the aforementioned improvements in
the Agency's network and hosting infrastructures. Geospatial software services, both provided and
consumed by EPA, are becoming ever more important and prevalent in Agency applications and would
be enhanced through the envisioned service management infrastructure enhancements discussed
above. The use of commercially provided geospatial visualization services will continue to increase and
to complement the GIS capabilities built into EPA's internally hosted applications.
8.3 EPA Initiatives for Achieving the Target Vision
For some of the target end states described above, specific planning and implementation initiatives are
already in progress. The following describes the most significant of those.
Hosting Infrastructure Optimization Initiative
Through the development of its Hosting Infrastructure Optimization Initiative, EPA seeks to consolidate
computer rooms, servers and storage device operations and to leverage technology to increase
efficiency in server/storage capacity and management.
EPA's implementation of hosting optimization will be accomplished through the following discrete
initiatives:
• Standardization and Enterprise Procurement: establishment of enterprise standards for
hosting facilities, servers, virtualization software, and operational hosting procedures across the
Agency, and establishment of consolidated enterprise acquisition vehicles for key hosting
infrastructure technologies
• Local Infrastructure Optimization: Implementation of virtualization and server consolidation at
EPA's current geographically distributed hosting facilities, as a precursor to geographic
consolidation
• Email Consolidation and Optimization: Consolidation of EPA email servers from their current
40+ locations to three to five interconnected data centers, with implementation of
virtualization, standardization of server and storage platforms, standardization of and
operational procedures, and improved email usage and retention policies
As a result of this series of ambitious initiatives, EPA expects improvements to the Agency's IT
environment including: improved Agency hosting capability, with greater agility, scalability and
efficiency; fewer computer rooms; fewer servers; reduced software costs; reduced power consumption
and realization of EPA "Green IT" goals;36 and realization of cost savings and cost avoidance.
WAN 2010 and Managed Trusted Internet Connectivity
36 In addition, Environmental Management System goals drive Green IT efforts including the use of collaborative
tools to reduce travel and carbon output and server consolidation to reduce energy usage.
74
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
EPA plans to increase its investment in its WAN in order to meet its current and anticipated demands.
Many EPA facilities' WAN circuits around the nation are filled to capacity, resulting at times in
substandard Internet, application, and large file transfer performance and hampering the Agency's
efforts to implement video conferencing, enterprise Voice over IP, multimedia web applications, and
server consolidation.
Whereas EPA has received its WAN connectivity through its primary infrastructure support contract, the
Agency intends to begin acquiring it under the GSA Networx contract effective FY2010. Services planned
to be acquired under Networx include increased network capacity, QoS to support voice/video/data
convergence, capability to rapidly increase capacity for particular locations in the event of sudden,
unexpected spikes in demand (a frequent occurrence in EPA), and managed router services.
In the course of its WAN acquisition, EPA also plans to acquire its Internet connectivity and "Trusted
Internet Connection" perimeter security through Networx' Managed Trusted Internet Protocol Services
(MTIPS) offering.
EPA expects to have completed WAN 2010 acquisition and transition by mid FY2010.
"Customer Technology Solutions" - Managed Desktop
Launched in FY09, EPA's Customer Technology Solutions (CTS) service is the sole IT desktop provisioning
and support service for EPA's Program Offices nationwide. CTS is managed by EPA's Office of
Environmental Information on a fee-for-service basis. Previously, Program Offices acquired PCs, PC
support, printers, and other direct-to-the-user technologies and services through a variety of
independent acquisition sources. CTS provides these offices a single, enterprise-managed source for
consistently configured desktops and laptops and support of the user environment.
CTS desktops implement the Federal Desktop Core Configuration (FDCC). FDCC, in conjunction with the
enterprise management which simplifies and improves patch management and other desktop
administration functions, will significantly improve EPA's security posture while increasing overall
efficiency.
Rollout of CTS to Program Office facilities nationwide will be complete in FY10, and the program will be
operational in the years thereafter.
75
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Web Content Management
EPA is in the process of making significant improvements to the delivery of public information over its
web site, www.epa.gov, including implementation of a well-conceived information architecture for the
site's content. The key technology component of this initiative is implementation of an enterprise Web
Content Management System (WebCMS) for the creation, management, and publishing of Web content.
WebCMS will greatly improve the quality of the site's search capability and add efficiency and
consistency to the Agency's content publishing operations.
The WebCMS will be an integral component of the Agency's overall Enterprise Content Management
infrastructure. Its specific functions include requiring the tagging of Web content with metadata as part
of page-creation process; an automated classification engine that applies EPA's standard web taxonomy
to pages based on their content; facilitation of the building of topical sites, using that metadata and its
built-in search engine; enabling "intelligent pages" built dynamically using business rules easily inserted
in pages; and monitoring and enforcement of policies that are difficult to enforce now, such as external
links. WebCMS will also reduce the cost of web page production and remove technical barriers for
subject matter experts to create and manage their own content.
Implementation began in FY09 and will continue through FY10.
76
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Appendix A - Documents Referenced
Referenced Document
Brand Niemann - Working Paper on Target Architecture
Course Description v7
EPA COI minutes white paper
EPA SOA strategy 2006 document
EPA SOA Strategy 2007 document
EPA SOA Strategy Update - 2007
ESC for SOA CO1 10_1 Final
ITGSS Functional Software layer Diagram test 20
ITGSS Vision_Updated
Spring 2008 Kickstart Assignment v2
Target Data Architecture Outline
Victors EPA brief
Web Services Working Group Presentation - 40
3_EPA_FY08_EA_Transition_Strategy_and_Sequencing_Plan[1]
26_ET_Symposium_Pres
40-0093 (Web Services Inventory) 2007-0430
40-0093 (Web Services Inventory) 2007-0430.doc Comments
1 02408 SEMSJobe
1 02408 STORETJobe
200901 08-Exchange_Network_SOA_Target_Architecture
FinRS w Kenyon (based on new diagram v4 (093008))
FY2008_DSA_CAMDBS_Final_Assessment_082008
FY2008_DSA_CDX_Final_Assessment_081908
FY2008_DSA_ECMS_resubmit (08-08-08)
FY2008_DSA_EMP_Final_Assessment (08-07-08)
FY2008_DSA_EPASS_Final_Assessment_Rev 8.1 3.08
FY2008_DSA_eRulemaking_Final_Assessment (081 208)
FY2008_DSA_FinRS_Final_Assessment_081408
File Format
Word Document
3DF
Word Document
Word Document
3PT
3PT
3PT
Visio
Visio
3DF
3DF
3PT
3DF
Word Document
3DF
Word Document
3DF
Visio
Visio
3DF
Visio
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
77
-------
Referenced Document
FY2008_DSA_GEO_Final_Assessment_081808
FY2008_DSA_ICIS_Final_Assessment
FY2008_DSA_MTS_Final_Assessment_081908
FY2008_DSA_PRISM_Final_Assessment_1 01 308(3)
FY2008_DSA_SEMS_Final_Assessment_081908
FY2008_DSA_STORET_Final_Assessment (081 208)
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_CDX_092908_v3
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_EPASS_073008_v1
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_erule v1
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_GEO_082208
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_ICIS_073108_v1
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_MTS_082208
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_PRISM_1 001 08_v2.5
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_SEMS_081908
FY2008_Segment_lnterface_Diagram_StoRetv1
FY2008_solution_interface_diagram_ECMS_v1
FY2008_solution_interface_diagram_EMP_v2
SEMS_SystemScope
SOA Current Inventory Presentation v. 2006.01 .27
SOA-ADAM-DP-2006.01 .05
SOA-ArclMS-DGS-2006.01 .20
SOA-CDX-CC-2006.01 .20
SOA-CDX-CD-2006.01 .1 7
SOA-ECMS-DX-2006.01 .09
SOA-EnviroMapper-DGS-2006.01 .20
SOA-FRS-DX-2006.01 .09
SOA-Geospatial-DX-2006.01 .09
SOA-IAM-DX-2006.01 .09
SOA-MetaCarta-DGS-2006.01 .20
File Format
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Excel
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Visio
Word Document
3PT
Word Document
\Nord Document
\Nord Document
Word Document
\A/ord Document
Word Document
Word Document
Word Document
Word Document
Word Document
78
-------
Referenced Document
SOA-SRS-GR-2006.01 .09
SOA-UVIndex-DX-2006.01 .09
File Format
Word Document
Word Document
79
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Appendix B - Business Requirements and Technology Solutions Diagram
FY2011 Business Requirements ^^Technology Solutions
ncrease ICIS Usage & Evolve Applicat
(A)
ncrease Data Sharing with Customs
Border Inspection (S)
Modernize IDEA with a Replacement
System (A)
Deploy Web Hosting & Content Management (A)
Increase and Standardize Geospatial Data Collection (A)
Increase use of Mash-up Technologies (Geospatial, WEB
2.0, Bl) (A)
Increase Business Intelligence & Analytical Tools
Implement WQ Data Warehouse & Data Marts (A)
Increase Web Services across WQ Segment (A)
Move Hosting Infrastruc.Towards Server Virtualization (A)
Consolidate SDMS and Use
Enterprise Tools (N)
Deploy New SEMS Application
(N)
ncrease Access and Geospatial
Presentation (N)
ncrease Field Use/Handheld
Tools (U)
ncrease Field Capacity
ncrease Emerg. Connectivity
(A)
Widen Access To RMPs
through CDX, SRMP (S)
Public Access (A,N,S)
IT Energy Efficiency (U,A)
Robust Collaboration (A)
Data Exchange (A,S)
Email Optimization (U,A,N)
"Info" Structure Security (S)
Content Management (U,A,N)
Increase Analytical Geospatia
Capabilities (A)
Web 2.0 (A)
Green IT (U,A)
Single Sign On/ID Management
(S)
Efficient Accessibility (N)
Collaborative and Participative Government (A,S)
eDiscovery (S)
Conserve Energy Related to IT (U,A)
HSPD12, Id./Access Management (S)
"Federal Desktop Core Configuration" (U)
IPv6 Mandate (S)
Trusted Internet Connections (TIC) Initiative (N)
Protection of Pll and other sensitive information (S)
NSPD54 (S)
Information Systems Security Line of Business-ISS
LoB (S)
Recovery.gov (S)
Sound Science
Green IT, COOP, and Mobile
Relocations: R1 in 2009; R9 & R10 in
2010
Consolidate Databases, Secure CBI
Data and Convert Legacy Paper
Submissions through MTS (N)
Reengineer New Chemical Process
Through CDX (N)
Implement New Grants Application-
GMLoB (N)
Implement New EAS (Acquisition)
Application (N)
Implement New IA Solution
Implement HR LoB (A)
Expand Science Connector (N)
Increase Scientist Collaboration (N)
Increase Lab Connectivity (N)
Increase Scientific Computing
Capability (A,N)
ncrease Usage of iSTAR (N)
Launch Secure Access Emissions
nventory System (A)
Develop/Deploy New GHG Emissions
Reporting System (A,N)
ncreased Bandwidth to AO MOSS
Sites (N)
ncreased Video/Web Radio Access
(N)
ncreased Webstreaming (N)
Use of Photo Inventory Databases (N)
Next Generation WAN, mcludin
effective capacity increase
IPV6
Trusted Internet Connection
Enterprise VoIP
Enterprise Hosting Infrastructure
Optimization -standardization,
i/irtualization, consolidation
Per-application hosting capacity
Enterprise Collaboration Infrastructure
Scientific Computing Capabilities
Mobile Device Encryption
Federal Desktop Core Configuration
Trusted Internet Connections -
Perimeter Security
Asset & Configuration Mgmt.
Patch & Vulnerability Mgmt.
Desktop Two-Factor Authentication
Email Encryption (FIPS140-2)
Identity and Access Management &
ESSO
Information Systems Security LoB
Situational Awareness and Incident
Response (SAIR)
Remote Access
Driven in Large Part
by Customer Demand
Driven Primarily by External
Forces or Agency Commitments
Discretionary, Per-Office
Infrastructure Investments
80
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Appendix C - EPA Data Lifecycle Framework
Planning &
Design
• Data Steward(s)
I
i
0.
E
i —
.
•E
1
i
i
0
i
o
• Quality Assurance
1 Managers
1 • CPIC Managers
1 • Program Managers
1
Collection &
Acquisition
Data Lifecycle Framework
Data Quality Activities. Governance and Standards
• Data Steward(s)
• Program Managers
• Princ pie Invest gators
• Reg onal Quality
Coordinators
• Subject Matter Expert
Data Processing n^ ^ A g T ^ Data Maintenance &
& Conversion
• Data Steward(s)
• Regional Quality1 Coordinate
• Technical Expert
• Data Steward(s) • Data Steward(s)
rq • Program Enterprise • SME t - Statistical
Architect Analysis
• System Manager of * Business Intelligence
Affected Systems Experts
(Majors and Non- • Public Information and
Majors) Communications
Retirement
• DataSteward(s)
• Program Enterprise
Architect
• System Manager of
Affected Systems
(Majors and Non-
Majors)
• Subject Matter Expert
Data Quality activities derived from DAS Data Quality Framework
• Developing DQ Plan
1 • Identify DQ Scope
1 • Set DQ metrics and
1 standards
1 • Conduct Root Cause
1 Analysis
1 • Perform Information
Value Cost Chain
1 (VCC) analysis
• Evaluate Costs of non-
quality information
•t
o
• Assess information
Arch tectu re and Data
Definition quality
• Assess presence of
Statistical Process Control
*
• Implement Improvements
and Data Corrections
• Develop Plan for
Continued Data Quality
Assurance
• Develop/ Save Data
Quality products to
Enterprise Metadata
Repository
* EPA, FGDC. ANSI and ISO Standards may apply to many stages of the Data Life Cycle | Metadata Requirement Standards |
Standards and Guidance
• EPA National Geospatial Data Policy
• Procedures for Developing and
Managing Geospatial Metadata
Geospatial Metadata
• ISO 19115 Geospatial Metadata
K
Federal Data Quality Policv. Procedures and . rc,ntN D«ttR E^h^mo f"D*) ^homa _rf^"~^ ^V.
Guidance
S ^ \
i
I'tvP I " Locational Reference Table (LRT) Metadata Requirements F f~ P^^V \
! ' Fac^RegisW System (FRS, Metadata Retirements / ^ J V
• OMB Guide! nes for Ensuring and Maximizing '^->' •/
the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of x^ S
Information Dissem nated by Federal Agencies ^v ^"^
• ISO 25012 SQuaRE Data Quality Model
81
-------
EPA Enterprise Target Architecture 3.0
Appendix D - EPA Core Mission Areas Data Map
Federal
Reference Model
COMMONS
Draft Conceptual Data Map
tion Flows by business line of
EPA Core Mission Areas
Kevin J. Kirby,
Enterprise Data Architect
US Environmental Protection Agency
April 22. 2009
82
------- |