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?