Post on 30-Mar-2015
A Bureau of Land Management
Field Office Approach
Documenting Business Requirements
Carlsbad Field Office
Current Office Processes Segregated review Data isolation
Physical Nature of Information Paper maps Analog files and folders
Loss of Institutional Knowledge Retirements
Reactionary Mode of GIS Professionals Can you make me a Map?
Internal Office Restraints
Project Folder
Current Office Processes
Analysis
DATA
10 days
Analysis
DATA
9 days
Analysis
DATA
18 days
Analysis
DATA
20 days
Wildlife
Soil-Air-
Water
Archaeology
Recreation
Range
Analysis
DATA
15 days
Example
Physical Nature of InformationRealty
Range
Archaeology
Physical Nature of InformationMineral
s
Archaeology
Wildlife
Epidemic loss of Information Retirements Relocations
Dysfunction Workflow How was this data collected and used? Two steps forward, three steps back
Loss of Institutional Knowledge
Functioning Workflow
ResourceResource
DataData
Dysfunctional Workflow
ResourceResource
DataData
Reactionary Mode of GIS
Pictures of maps and plotting devices
November 2005 Field Office Archaeologists High Workload
1,500 NEPA projects High Turn Over
7 months
Can GIS Help?
Geographic Information Systems
Project Folder submitted to Archaeology
NEPA documents matched up with survey and site maps
Wait For ReportNO
Yes
Record of review
Federal Surface/Split Estate
Identify Surface owner
Arch review for NEPA adequacies
NO
Yes
Contact Archaeologist
Positive
Negative
Verify
Notify Client
Eligible
Not Determined
Not Eligible
Adverse Effect
No Adverse Effect
No effect
Determination of EffectTest/Move/Abandoned
Build conditions of approvalIf necessary
Mitigation strategy sent to State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO)
If Bureau of Reclamation or State of New Mexico -
Consult with Agency Archaeologist
BLM to implementSurface owner’s concerns
Sign Off
1 2
2A
3 56
6A
5A
5A1 5A2
5B
6A16B1
6B2
6B3
6B4a
6B4b
6B4c
6B5a
6B5b
6B5c
6B5a1
6B1a6B1b
8
9Build conditions of
approval to achieve no effect
Determination of Eligibility6B4
Addendum reportor sundry
5B
6B5c1
Wait For Report
Review Complete
Field check
Negative/Positive ArchReport received
Database and analogSite maps updated
Database and analogSite maps updated
Field check
4
7
Needed Spatial Information
Archaeological Report
Documenting BusinessRequirements
Office Processes Data Workload Data – Workflow interactions
NEPA related projects are routed to resource specialists
for internal review.
Arch report contains scale sensitive
information that is transferred to 7.5
topographic maps (sites & surveys).
Archaeologists are responsible for determining if arch resources would be impacted by activity.
Arch site boundaries information is used to determine location.
Archaeologist review last.
Topographic maps have been used since the
late 70’s and are difficult to read and
make determinations.
Due to increased Oil/Gas activity, resource staff spends large
percentage of time reviewing projects
Arch survey information is used to determine if adequate survey has been
completed.
Waiting for arch survey reports to be submitted to
BLM by contract archaeologists.
Topographic maps have been lost, stolen or
misplaced.
Large amount of time is spent manually matching up Arch reports with NEPA projects.
Multiple maps exist for both project data and site boundaries. Certain areas of
field office contain multiple topographic maps for same area (up to 7).
If Archaeologist had issue with project, location was relocated
and review process began again.
Arch data is considered proprietary and maps are locked in cabinets from other BLM staff.
Approximately 1,100 reports are gathered yearly.
Maps are degraded and updated daily as new information becomes available.
Documenting BusinessRequirements
Add screen shot of current Archaeology GIS
Documenting BusinessRequirements
Add screen shot of current Arch report in GIS
Documenting BusinessRequirements
Developing a Field Office Needs Assessment
• ESRI Design strategy
Requirements
Assessment Stages-People
Assessment Components-Procedure
Assessment Elements
Manager Support
Assessment Team
Resource
Collaboration
Assessment Stages
One-on-One Manager Interaction Introduce project goals and review documentation
Manger Meeting Approval for Needs Assessment
Document Comments, Concerns & Issues The process needs to remain transparent to entire staff
Public Display of Support Will lay the foundation for assessment process
Manager Support
One-on-One Resource interaction Considered a continuation for support and approval Review project goals, workload, resource responsibilities
Document comments, concerns and Issues Available manager input Document any new input or concerns
Resource Collaboration
Team Interaction Team meeting Project goals and objectives established
Roles & Responsibilities Lead and Support roles
Document comments, concerns & Issues
Assessment Team
Identify Resource Functions
Map out Workflows
Gather remaining components
Review Process
Resource Interviews
Resource Overview Summary of resource or program functions and
procedures To be written by GIS professional
Major Functions Identify and document all resource functions
Resource Staff Identification of positions
Current Hardware and Software
Assessment Components
Level of Technological Usage Description
BrowseMap CreationQuery and DisplayMap OverlaySpatial Modeling
Current Capabilities
Resource Data Maps, files, databases, GIS data, spreadsheets
Summaries To be written by GIS professional
Workflow Gain insight on interactions between resource staff and
information.
Workflow
Matrix Detailed information on individual steps within workflow
Process stepsDescriptionsData sourceData InputTimeOccurrenceFrequenciesOutput
MatrixWorkflow Matrix Grazing Permit Renewal
Process Step
Description Data SourceData Input
Time Occurrence Yr Freq Output
1List created by RAS of permits that
will expire by grazing yearRAS Y 1
List of Allotments that are up for renewal that will be divided between
the range staff
2 Traditional monitoring analysis Monitoring File, ES Guides 40hrs EAs
scheduled
Calculated totals for range condition, use and % cover and
composition
3Evaluate Rangeland Health
AssessmentsMonitoring File 2hrs E As Needed
Standards and Guideline Determination sheets filled out
4 Write initial draft of EAGIS, Standard Assessments
NEPA 24hrs EA posted for internal review
5 Internal NEPA review NEPA Wildlife BA is written if T&E species
involved, all specialists complete review, FONSI signed
6Copies of maps and EA prepared
for certified mailing 4hrs E
7EA available for public comment
period 30days
8Decision Record written addressing any public comments if necessary
30mins (no comments) 40hrs (if responding to
comments)
9Signed Decision Record protest and
appeal period 15days 10 year permit issued
Data List Identify data used during workflow process
Process stepData LocationData DetailsTypeOwnershipProprietaryStandardsMetadata
Data ListGrazing Permit Renewal Data List
Process Step
Data location Data Details Type Ownership
Proprietary
Standards
Metadata
1 RAS Digital/Spatial BLM-National
4 Base.lyrSurface ownership, Section, Township,
RangeDigital/Spatial NMSO N N N
4 Range allotments Allotment number Digital/Spatial CFO N Y N
4 Cave/Karst Potential Digital/Spatial CFO Y N N
4 Soils Description Digital/Spatial NRCS N UKN UKN
4 Special Areas Type Digital/Spatial CFO N N N
4 VRM Class Digital/Spatial CFO N N N
4 Flood Plains 100yrEddy Cty Digital/Spatial--Chaves
Cty Analog/AspatialFEMA N UKN UKN
4 Elevation Level Digital/Spatial
4 T & E Species Location Digital/Spatial
Assessment StagesManager SupportResource
CollaborationAssessment TeamResource Interviews
Finalize Needs AssessmentAssessment
Components Resource Overview Major functions Resource Staff Current Hardware &
Software Level of Technological
Usage Current Available
Capabilities Existing Resource data Workflow Summaries Workflows Matrix Data List
Comments, Questions or Concerns?
OBJECTIVE
To investigate and develop resource and field level financial analysis for the Carlsbad Field Office (CFO).
UTILIZED DOCUMENTATION• Final Business Case For The Development Of A
Statewide GIS Utility• Geospatial Services Model• Building a Business Case for Geospatial Information
Technology• BLM Geospatial Services Strategic Plan
Future Analysis
Anticipated Operational and Efficiency Benefits for Carlsbad Field Office Rangeland Management
Resource Functions
Direct
User/
Re
source
Local
Regio
nalSoc
ialStr
ategic
Description and Benefits Time Reduction
Explanation: When a grazing permit expires an application is made for a new permit and the permittee is allowed to continue grazing under terms and conditions of the current permit pending the completion of NEPA analysis. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is written to analyze the impacts of livestock grazing on various other resources so that the grazing permit can be renewed. Anticipated Benefits: • Through the use of current technology a list (currently generated from RAS) can be created and managed thru database applications and displayed thru a GIS layer for expiring permits, resulting in process elimination
4 hrs
• A time reduction of two hours can be seen from pre-constructed EA maps that can be made available for printing and mailing out. 20 hrs
* Operational and Efficiency Value
Categories
xGrazing Permit Renewals10 actions per year
OPERATIONAL AND EFFICIENCY BENEFITS Expected gains in efficiency and productivity Less time – Less expense
CONSTRUCTED TABLE Resource functions 5 value categories Description and benefits Time reduction
Anticipated Collateral Benefits for Carlsbad Field Office Rangeland Management
Resource Functions
Direct
User/
Re
source
Local
Regio
nal
Social
Strate
gic
Description and Benefits Field Office Functions Impacted
Grazing Permit Renewals
Explanation: When a grazing permit expires an application is made for a new permit and the permittee is allowed to continue grazing under terms and conditions of the current permit pending the completion of NEPA analysis. An EA is written to analyze the impacts of livestock grazing on various other resources so that the grazing permit can be renewed. Benefits: Internal: Traditional Monitoring, Development of
• By evaluation of RHLAs PFCs are determined if a stream is present and the standards and guides determination sheets are filled out, where the existing documents can be hyperlinked to the allotment boundary for increased data access.
Environmental Analysis, RLHAs, Standards and Guides External: NEPA Review, Wildlife Biological Assessment
* Collateral Value Categories
10 actions per year x
COLLATERAL VALUE BENEFITS Intangible benefits Financial in nature – Best measured in non-financial
terms Supports operational and efficiency benefits
CONSTRUCTED TABLE Resource functions 5 value categories Description and benefits Resource functions (internal/external)
Value Categories and Measures for Collateral BenefitsDirect User/Resource - Benefits directly realized by users within a resource.
Target: Significantly improve accessibility by integrating technological capabilities that captures, analyzes and reports spatial information.
Target: Provide adequate sources and tools for fast access to spatial information when needed.Current: No updated data standards that reflect current data type, no metadata for resource data, current GIS data being utilized is approximately 25.5% inaccurate.
Target: Establish metadata for utilized data, enhance inaccurate data, and supply appropriate data from resource data list to state data steward for standards creation.
Data Quality - Provides sufficiently accurate data and information for users and provides known measures of accuracy, currency, and completeness.
Timeliness - Information is available when needed.
Current: A significant amount of time is spent retrieving and accessing spatial information because much of the needed information is in various formats and locations.
Accessibility - Spatial information is easily accessible by resource staff.
Current: 47 % of the potential users spatial information is in analog form.
VALUE CATEGORIES AND MEASURES FOR COLLATERAL BENEFITS 5 value categories Measures – address benefits for value categories
Listed with current status and targets What do users want?
Non-ROI Value Category and
Measure Curr
ent
Stat
e (F
Y 09
)
Shor
t-Te
rm (F
Y 10
-11)
Mid
-Ter
m (F
Y12-
13)
Long
-Ter
m (F
Y14-
15)
• Data available in digital form• Improvement in ease of access
Timeliness • Average amount of time to retrieve data and generate products• Accurate GIS data• Availability of GIS documentation
Value Benefit Milestone and Rating
Direct User/ResourceAccessibility
Data QualityP
P
F
F
G
G
G
VG
VG
VG
E
E
COLLATERAL VALUE BENEFITS AND GIS MILESTONES Based on the Value Categories and Measures for Collateral Benefits
table 5 value categories Measures and Targets Qualitative Rating Scale Milestones Where are we where do we want to be and how long will it take us
to get there?
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS INVESTIGATIONAll documentation at this point is under investigation
for further use to the Carlsbad Field Office.
Comments, Questions or Concerns?