1

The National Environmental Information Exchange

Network

Update

National Congress of American Indians

Exchange Network Tribal Meeting

Albuquerque, NM

March 24-25, 2009

2

Today’s Topics

• Regional Strategies for Exchange Network Implementation & National System Flow Priorities

• Climate Change • Node 2.0 • Tribal/EPA EIN Management &

Technology Council and Full EN Implementation

3

Regional Strategies for Exchange Network Implementation

Vision for an Enhanced Regional Role with the Exchange Network

• EPA Regions will foster connections and communications with existing and potential Network customers and promote regional utilization of the Network.

4

Exchange Network Regional Strategic Actions• Engage in Programmatic Outreach and Communication• Convene Network Partners• Continue to Participate Actively in Governance and

Administration• Leverage the Unique Role of OEI Lead Region ENLC Delegate• Support Regional Utilization of the Exchange Network• Continue Supporting Exchange Network Grant

Administration• Leverage the Network for Other EPA Grant Program• Establish Regions as Centers of Leadership• Coordinate with Tribes and Engage Network Tribal

Participation• Work with Network Governance to Implement the Regional

Strategy

More Info: http://www.exchangenetwork.net/operations/enlc/

EN_RegionalPlan_v1.0.doc

5

National System Flow Priorities

• EPA’s “reinforced” emphasis to work with tribes & states on concrete plans to flow data

• ECOS Resolution: State/EPA Commitment to Full Implementation of EN Strategic Plan national system flows:

– Facility ID

– Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS)

– Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)

– Air Quality System (AQS)

– National Emissions Inventory (NEI)

– Beach Notification

– Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

– Air Facility System (AFS)

– Integrated Compliance Information System - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (ICIS-NPDES)

– Water Quality Exchange (WQX)

• Tribal Resolution: Tribal/EPA Commitment to implement targeted flows (i.e., FRS, WQX, AQS, Open Dump for HIS/EPA)?

6

State-EPA EIN Management & Technology Council?

1. Collaborate on exchange of ideas/info to save agencies time & money - more efficiently achieve future info management goals.

2. Provide forum to discuss current-future business & IT policy including BMPs, resources, training and other critical issues

3. Participate in evaluation, funding, and development of new management programs, technologies and applications.

4. Identify, discuss, and resolve key state and federal policy issues in info management.

5. Solicit and provide input and recommendations into proposed guidelines, rules, and decisions.

6. Engage broader group of organizations w/experience in environmental info to interact with state agencies with primacy for administering environmental programs and EPA

7

Council Membership

Council Members - IT Division Managers, Information Resource Division Managers, Information Systems Admins, CIOs, others w/similar decision-making authority in states and EPA.

1. Council Membership with full voting privileges open to state agencies with primacy for administering environmental programs, EPA and tribes.

2. Multiple members are permitted from each State and each program office in the EPA but voting is limited to

3. Voting members should designate an alternate to attend Council meetings or vote in their absence.

4. Non-voting membership status is created for senior info tech managers in other federal/state agencies, including, but not limited to:

• State departments of health, natural resources, & ag

• CDC, DOI, USGS and NOAA

• Non-profit orgs - Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA), NCAI and Natureserve.

8

Decision

• Do the tribes want to create something similar?– Tribal-EPA EIN Management &

Technology Council

• Does NCAI want to serve as the “sponsoring” organization?

9

Flow Costs – Tools for Thought

Return on Investment (ROI) and Business Process Analysis Project

Michigan New Jersey Pennsylvania Washington

AQSeDMRSDWISTRI

AQSRCRASDWIS

AQSeDMRRCRASDWIS

AQSRCRATRI

Total Annual Operational Cost Pre-EN ($/year) $1,622,120 $1,266,519 $1,352,807 $311,560

Total Annual Operational Cost Post-EN ($/year) $834,407 $672,789 $710,181 $272,294

Initial Capital Investment ($) $1,095,940 $845,233 $1,002,390 $139,422

Post-EN Annual Maintenance Cost ($/yr) $107,983 $75,831 $105,609 $19,014

Post-EN Annual State Savings ($/year) $679,730 $517,899 $537,017 $20,252

ROI Summary

Average ROI (5 year basis) 62% 61% 54% 15%

Payback period (years) 1.6 1.6 1.9 6.9

10

Flow Costs – Tools for Thought

Economic Baseline Project

• Example Data Flow – Yurok Tribe

… More details on this tomorrow ….

Design PhaseDevelopment

PhaseMaintenance &

Support

Calculated Cost Range Per Phase

$0 to $26,000 $0 to $42,000 $0 to $20,000

Actual Cost Per Phase (from Survey)

$24,000 $12,000 $7,000

11

Climate Change

• EPA’s draft mandatory reporting rule for GHG reporting from large GHG sources to develop carbon regulations under either:

– carbon tax, or

– market-based, cap-and-trade program

• The GHG gas emissions covered:

– carbon dioxide (CO2),

– methane (CH4),

– nitrous oxide (N2O),

– hydrofluorocarbons (HFC),

– perfluorocarbons (PFC),

– sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) as well as other fluorinated gases expressed mtCO2e

12

Climate Change

• GHG emissions sources required for GHG emissions data collection to begin 1/1/2010, w/annual reporting to EPA starting 2011:

– All suppliers of specified industrial gases & fossil fuels.

– Manufacturers of vehicles and engines.

– Facilities emitting 25,000 mtCO2e or more GHG emissions/yr

• EPA estimates ~ 13,000 facilities fall w/in rule scope, w/power plants mentioned specifically.

• Public hearings in April w/public comment for 60 days.

13

Climate Change

• EN working with TCR, California Climate Action Registry (CCAR), EPA, several states to pilot exchange of GHG data using Consolidated Emissions Reporting Schema (CERS)

– demonstrate data exchange of batch historical GHG data from CCAR to TCR using EN nodes & client tools

– proof of concept for future flow of GHG emissions from States/Provinces/Tribes to TCR

– explore using this data exchange to support voluntary batch uploads data from business entities to TCR and EPA

• Windsor Solutions developed FCD, and has/will have contract w/CA for flow testing

• ECOS to provide some level of funding

14

Node 2.0 Summary of Features

Node 2.0 Feature Name New to Node 2.0 Upgrade from 1.1

Doc/Literal Encoding

MTOM

SOAP 1.2

Parameter Encoding

Sync. Status Response

Expanded Status Response

NotificationURI

Recipients

Notify

GetServices

Execute

Query Paging

More on this topic tomorrow ….

15

More Info?

Mike Beaulac

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

Lansing, MI

beaulacm@michigan.gov

517-241-7808