GIS Conceptual Proposal 9/23/2013

Current Geographic Information System (GIS) Conditions

Prepared by the DTSC GIS Team (GIST)

Fiona Renton, Rick Fears, Keith Kihara, Debra Taylor, Bud Duke and Scott Warren

9/19/2013

Table of Contents

GIS Team (GIST) Introduction

GIST Charter

GIST Limitations

Current DTSC Application and Use

Internal Application and Alignment

External Application and Alignment

GIS Tasks in the Draft Strategic Plan

Goal 1: Strategy 1.2; Action 1

Goal 2: Strategy 2.1; Action 2

Goal 2: Strategy 2.1; Action

Goal 3: Strategy 3.3; Action 1

Goal 3: Strategy 3.1; Action 4

GIS Use

Table 12012 – 2013 Usage Comparison

Table 2Use Comparison

Table 3 Estimated Use Charged to Projects

Future Application

Table 4Potential Applications

Technical Requirements

Technical Constraints

Organizational Requirements

Organizational Constraints

Current Business Needs

Organizational Goals and Schedule

Cost and Functionality

Moving Forward

Proposed Tiered Use/Deployment Approach

Appendix A Letter

Appendix B GIS Team Charter Executive Summary December 2010

Appendix B Input for IT Strategic Plan

Appendix C GIS Usage Evaluation (2012)

Appendix D GIS Cost Estimates

Appendix E 2012 Presentation Slides

GIS Team (GIST) Introduction

The DTSC Geographic Information System Team (GIST) was formed to promote a unified, consolidated and strategic approach to GIS data management, data and application use, storage, accessibility, analysis and presentation. When formed, GIST was envisioned to be the primary GIS interface with internal stakeholders including; management, information suppliers (internal and external), and storage (OEIM), planners, trainers and users.

GIST was also charged with aligning DTSC efforts with sister agencies and BDOs, CalEPA, the Governors Information Office (GIO), USEPA and with national and international standards. The goal was to establish seamless, efficient interoperability with internal and external stakeholders to promote coordinated data storage, accessibility, interoperability and use.

External stakeholders include; the GIO, Water Boards, CalEPA, Department of Water Resources, Department of Conservation, USEPA, elected officials, Environmental Justice Communities, the public and others.

GIST was designed to focus DTSC efforts on implementing GIS using current resources, while also planning for, and if possible building a long term sustainable Enterprise GIS for DTSC.

GIST Charter

The original GIST charter was approved in December 2010 and included 21 members of whom only 4 were tasked with GIS data and tool development. Of these staff only two remain at DTSC, one position was redirected to a Safer Consumer Products Programmer, the other remains unfilled. The GIS Team completed the first phase to use existing GIS technology for pilot projects and core work, but did not complete the long term plan for GIS at DTSC. The team setup standards for GIS and has standards that are aligned with the California Office of Technology Office of GIS, USEPA and other state agency partners. The team also completed pilot projects , but did not complete the needs assessment.

GIST Limitations

GIST was formally recognized as a Team in 2009. Under Ray Leclerc’s leadership, (the current sponsor),GIST came together and established ties with CalEPA, Department of Water Resources, the California Office of Technology Office of GIS and USEPA GIS. Internally, GISTassembled and set-up a GIS library providing access to data from over 100 data sources. GIST also established preliminary standards for maps and metadata (data that accompanies a map feature which details the origin of the data and any changes that have been made to that data).

But compliance with the team standards or alignment with team best management practices is voluntary. While GIST was setting up standards and assembling information, Programs began exploring how they want to use the tool. Programs independently launched their own GIS productsand in some cases duplicated effort or established incongruent approaches to the use of GIS.

This initial use of GIS has reached a critical pointwhen activitiesshould be streamlined and standardized. Coordination of effort and planning for department wide needs, adds value, is efficient andsustainable. In summary, it’s time DTSC stop developing separate but incompatible GIS products and create a department wide shared GIS service. A shared GIS service will allow future GIS services to be provided in an efficient and coordinated way.

Geographic Information System (GIS) Environment

DTSC maintains 17 ESRI ArcGIS desktop software licenses that are used by power GIS users. DTSC staff also use free ArcGIS Explorer software and GoogleEarth (free version).

DTSC maintains an internal GIS server that hosts a GIS library accessible by all DTSC offices. It contains over 200 GIS data layers. There is also a GIS server that hosts internal interactive map applications.

See the diagram below that shows the GIS infrastructure. Currently all the data is manually integrated. EnviroStor cleanup and permitting data is updated monthly, HWTS DTSC data is updated as needed manually. Data from some departments is also downloaded manually. Other departments provide us with links of GIS data sources that they server our in real time such as CDPH Licensed Health Care Facilities, SWRCB NPDES permits and SWRCB water rights points of diversion.

DTSC staff also store a lot of local GIS data that is not shared in the GIS library. This is local analysis and is often site specific and does not need to be centralized, however many staff PCs and the network are not adequate to run ArcGIS remotely. The new standard issue PCs are only just adequate to run the software, but may not be in 3 years.

Also regional staff do not have adequate network band width to run ArcGIS software in some regions (specifically in Berkeley and Cypress) and regional staff do not have adequate network storage space, so many staff have resorted to using personal unencrypted drives that are not backed up or secure.

DTSC ESRI GIS Software License Inventory / Number of Licenses
Desktop Software
ArcGIS Desktop ArcInfo Concurrent / 8
ArcGIS Desktop ArcEditor Concurrent / 2
ArcGIS Desktop Arcview Concurrent / 5
Spatial Analyst Concurrent – Extension / 9
3D Analyst Concurrent – Extension / 6
Geostatistical Analyst Concurrent – Extension / 1
Publisher Concurrent – Extension / 1
Data Interoperability Concurrent – Extension / 1
Single Use ArcView with extensions / 1
Enterprise software
ArcGIS Server Enterprise Basic (ArcSDE) / 1
ArcFIS Server Enterprise Standard / 1
Data Services Subscription
ArcGIS Online Geocoding Standard Subscription / 4

Current DTSC Application and Use

At this time, the bulk of our GIS Knowledge, Skills and Abilities rest in the hands of a few skilled individuals. Experimentation occurs in pockets in several locations within the Department and work products have evolved in relative isolation. At this moment we have onehighly skilled statistician and GIS analystwith a strong knowledge of the interworking’s of GIS infrastructure. One change here could totally derail DTSC’s GIS abilities.

GIS application primarily resides with a small group of geologists that are leading the Cleanup Program effort. We have one strong user in Enforcement and experimental use in toxicology. Most of the use revolves around the relatively superficial geospatial display of data which only scratches the power GIS offers.

Users reside in the Cleanup Program, Hazardous Waste Management Program (primarilyEnforcement and Emergency Response). There is no set protocol or work request process so requesters go to individual usersto request outputs. In the future, we will need to begintracking;work requests, product quality, product distribution and use, productivity, production costand return on investment so we can measure GIS use/impact. The EnviroStor GIS request system is little used and almost always is routed to the same individual.

As a result of the disparate requests, maps generated in GIS are being provided internally and externally with minimal guidelines and standards. There has been little or no attention paid to developing legal guidelinesfor confidentiality and disclaimers fordata sharing. The lack of clear product quality and review guidelines could result in the release of confidential data (which could endanger our ability to access confidential data),poorly constructed maps (containing errors, inaccuracies or misleading information) and the production of maps based on unverified data which could damage our reputation with the public.

InternalApplication and Alignment

GIST is a completely voluntary team. Use of guidelines, standards and processes developed by the team are completely voluntary and some staff in the Programs are unaware of standards developed by the team. The lack of requirements to follow established guidelines, standards and processes, and a potential lack of awareness can result in duplication of effort and/or the Programmatic development of contradictory guidelines and standards.

While trying to develop demonstration projects and establish standards, the team has operated on a virtual shoe-string. However we do have significant accomplishments.

Since the Team’s formation in 2009, the GIS Team has applied GIS to:

Technical Settings to;

  1. Link contaminated sites to drinking water impacts (I710 North project),
  2. Evaluate local drycleaner sources to regional groundwater plumes (Visalia),
  3. Link indoor air risk to contaminated groundwater and soil gas (Modesto),
  4. Enhance USEPA PA/SI Grant site identification (SPGIT Tool)
  5. Screen school sites for the potential for exposure to naturally occurring asbestos (DTSC Schools Program),
  6. Validate proposed excavation soil volumes in draft NEPA EIS (SSFL),
  7. . Thermostat tracking [Policy and Program Support Division (PPSD; Hazardous Waste Management)].

Community Settings to:

  1. Demonstrate the link between regulated sites and generators to environmental justice communities,
  2. Show contaminated drinking water resources statewide (DPH Well Data).

Management Settings to:

  1. Show site distribution and oversight overlap,
  2. Coordinate with sister BDOs, and
  3. Integrate with OEHHA’s California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool(CalEnviroScreen).

External Application and Alignment

In addition to internal alignment, GISThas worked closely with the Department of Water Resources GIS group, USEPA GIS and the California Office of Technology- Office of GIS to ensure our GIS data is in a similar interoperable format. We have informally worked with the State Water Board to try and align activities and preserve interoperability.

The State Water Quality Control Board has already integrated GIS into their business model and provides output to the public in the form of GeoTracker GAMA data(see ).

GIS Tasks in the Draft Strategic Plan

Tasks involving the application of GIS are in the DTSC Strategic Plan in areas of:

  • Outreach (Goals 1: Strategy 1.2, see below),
  • Enforcement Coordination and outreach (Goal 2: Strategy 1.2, and Goal 2: Strategy 2.1, see below),
  • Prioritization (Goal 3: Strategy 3.3, see below)
  • Pilot Projects (Goal 3: Strategy 3.1, see below)

Goal 1: Strategy 1.2; Action 1Engage stakeholders through outreach and help build collaborative relationships can benefit from GIS’s ability to show where consumers reside vs. the distribution of products incorporating unhealthy product constituents. For example, contaminated sheet rock used in buildings; DTSC could use GIS to identify buildings constructed in a particular timeframe that are more likely to have used contaminated sheet rock. Or the distribution of unhealthy constituents in toys etc. could be implied by identifying the likely consumer base).

Goal 2: Strategy 2.1; Action 2Enforcement/Hazardous Waste Management Program: Use GIS for the public’s benefit. Enforcement and Emergency Response Division has rolled out the use of CalEnviroScreen mapping tools to help prioritize discretionary inspection and enforcement workload. Additionally, these GIS mapping tools are being used to help prepare enforcement cases for referral.

Goal 2: Strategy 2.1; Action3Increase collaboration between Enforcement, Criminal Investigations and CUPAs. GIS can be used to visually showproximity and patterns of Enforcement, Criminal Investigation and CUPA investigation and enforcement actions to help coordinate activities.

Goal 3: Strategy 3.3; Action 1Prioritize orphan sites and NPL match sites can benefit from GIS by showing proximity to human receptors, or to Environmental Justice or sensitive communities.

Goal 3: Strategy 3.1; Action 4Cleanup Program: three GIS Pilot Projects independently refer to application of Geographic Information Systems (GIS).

The Goals and Strategies laid out above clearly belong to individual Programs, but there is no broader goal drawing these applications together and aligning actions. Especially in cases of limited resources, this can result in competing priorities.

GIS Use

As stated earlier, the original GIST charter called upon GIST to operate within the confines of the existing network and available, pre-existing software. In short, we were charged with launching GIS with what we had. But we were also charged with developing a plan for the future. This section provides a glimpse into GIS use over the past two years.

During the period between June 13, 2012 to July 27, 2012 (28 work days), DTSC GIS license use was on the order of 1,185 hours. In the first quarter of 2013, license use was on the order of 1,350 hour. During the 28 day test period, in 2012, our maximum license capacity was reached or exceeded on four days (~14% of the days in the test period). The following table (Table 1) presents a rough comparison of 2012 and 2013 usage by office location (for details of the 2012 data, see Appendix C; GIS Usage Evaluation by Mike Sorensen. For details of the 2013 data, see Appendix D, GIS Cost estimates by Fiona Renton).

Table 12012 – 2013 Usage Comparison

HQ / R1 / R2 / R3 / R4 / Clovis
28 days, mid 2012; 1,350 hours
(ArcInfo use, see Appendix C) / 35.2% / 32.3% / 18.1% / 0.6% / 3.2% / 10.5%
First Qtr. 2013: 1,185.3 hrs.
(ArcGIS use, see Appendix D) / 16.1% / 41.5% / 27.9% / 0.4% / 3.3% / 9.3%

Data Limitations: These figures refer to the use of GIS tools which would include training, and self-instruction etc., and in the case of headquarters, may include or consist primarily of GIS infrastructure development by Tom Bakke, Mike Sorensen and Fiona Renton. Therefore the actual number may be biased and should be used as general indicators. Furthermore, the use of ArcInfo (see Table 1, 2012 data) is compared to use of ArcGIS (Table 1, 2013 data), which may not be a direct comparison. The percentages shown above do not account for the number of users in a Region (all use may be by one user in one Region compared to use by many users in another). Finally, usage does not imply productivity.

Table 2, presents a general comparison of GIS use (where data is available) for the periodbetween June 13, 2012 and July 27, 2012 (28 work days). Data for Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) use was not available and so it is difficult to determine the usage between HWMP and Cleanup. Presumably usage has changed since 2012, but it seems as if the preponderance of use remains with the Cleanup Program.

Table 2Use Comparison

(Retrieved from Appendix C, page 2, Program Usage 2012)

2012 Programmatic Use Comparison / %
Cleanup Program (Based on 2012 data) / ~65%
OEIM/IT (may include ER/EO time) / ~34%
HWM Permitting / ----
HWM P2 (now PPSD) / ~1%

ER/EO = Emergency Response/Emergency Operations Center

The following table (Table 3) shows GIS License usage during the test period in 2013 [see column 2, % of Total Time (the test period is presumed to be roughly three months)]. Frequent GIS users were surveyed to obtain anestimate of the percentage of their usage actually charged to a project. Column three provides their estimate of time during the first three months of 2013 not charged to a project and column four shows their estimate of time charged to a project. The numbers presented are estimates and may be misleading because there was only one GIS user surveyed in R2 and he is a very accomplished GID user. R1 numbers also include an accomplished GIS user and several experienced users on the Santa Susana Field Labs (SSFL) project where costs are charged to the project. R3 usage was not estimated. R4 usage includes estimates from two users in the early stages of learning GIS. Clearly, the more users learning to use GIS will increase the non-billable time and decrease the billable time. As mentioned earlier, this table is based on estimates, accurate Performance Measures should be collected.

Table 3 Estimated Use Charged to Projects

(Retrieved from Appendix D, page 3, Program Usage by location 2013)

2013 Estimated
Use Comparison / % of Total Time / Approx.% non-Billable / Approx. % Billable
HQ / 16.1%
R1* ** / 41.5% / 40% / 60%
R2 / 27.9% / 10% / 90%
R3 / 0.4% / -- / --
R4 / 3.3% / 67% / 33%
Clovis ** / 9.3% / 20) / 80%

* Includes Santa Susana ** Includes time for USEPAPA/SI Grant

Future Application

Safer Products may become a big user, (add text)

Drinking water protection may

Enforcement?

Cleanup?

Table 4 (below) presents a list of potential GIS applications and the Program which may be able to apply or may benefit from applying the tool.

Table 4Potential Applications

Tasks / Enforce / Permit / Cleanup / Safer Products / ER
Resource Tracking
Project/Resource Distribution / x / x / x / x / X
Region vs Project Distribution / x / x / x / x / X
PM vs Project Distribution / x / x / x / x / x
Project Tracking
Permit Status / x
Inspection Status / x / x
EJ Communities vs Sites / x / x / x / X
Mines and Plumes in Surface and Groundwater / x / x
Orphan Sites vs. Vulnerable Communities / x
Deed Restrictions / x
Enforcement Cases / x / X
Urban Sprawl/Complaints / x / x / x / x / x
Locate Thermostat Recycle Locations / x
Forecasting
P2dw -SPGIT / x / x
P2dwDrinking Water Contaminant/impact potential
P2dw-Drinking Water Impacts vs. Threat / x / x
P2dw-Identify Indoor Air Risk vulnerable areas / x / x / x
Socio-economic
Parcel data / x / x / x / X
EJ Communities / x / x / x / x
USEPA Region 9 Social Vulnerability Index for prioritization / x
Sensitivity analysis and sensitive areas / x / x / x / x
PM Use
Access Cal Enviroscreen / x / x / x
Cumulative impacts mapping and presentation / x / x / x / X
Tracking complaint locations and trends / x / X
Track drug labs to predict future drug lab areas / x / x
Professional Support Use
Groundwater Plume Locations/Relationships / x / x
Indoor Air Risk predictions / x / x
Groundwater Plume Locations / x / x
Political
Show Completed Cases to Stakeholders / x / x / x / x
Show Orphan Sites to stakeholders / x
Show NPLs sites/expenditures to stakeholders / x
USEPA
Track USEPA Sites and backlog / x / x
USEPA PA/SI Reports (based on SPGIT) / x

Technical Requirements

  • Metadata standards for all released documents,
  • Work Request tracking system for EnviroStor requests with regional GIS Operators (already exists, but rarely used)
  • A formalized GIS Program with a GIS manager
  • Funded and maintained IT GIS infrastructure to support current and future GIS projects
  • Cleanup staff should be allowed to bill GIS and data analysis to sites (is this reasonable?)
  • Legal guidelines and limitations statement,
  • Authorized DTSC GIS Users and a formal process for releasing documents and metadata standards,
  • Released File document library and a SharePoint site where staff can access approved and/or released documents.
  • DTSC ESI regulations need to be in place that include plume maps

Technical Constraints

DTSC data pdfs unusable/expensive to convert; need to expand