Transcript EPA Network Exchange Challenge Grant

Network Exchange Challenge
Grant
UIC Class II Data Flow:
Montana, Mississippi, Alaska, Nebraska,
North Dakota, Utah,
and California
April 25, 2007
Mark Layne/ALL Consulting
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Grant & IPT
Current Status
Experience of Process
Involved States Data Management Systems
(RBDMS)
• Central Project Node
• Application Development
• Future
Grant & State IPT
• Class II Primacy States
• Challenge Grant to the State of Montana – Board of Oil and
Gas Conservation (Members: MT, AK, CA, NE, ND, UT &
MS)
• MBOGC Chosen due to Favorable State Contract Management
(Low Overhead)
• Included two contractors – GWPC and ALL Consulting
• Formed own IPT Group and Joined EPA’s
• GWPC – Management of Outreach, IPT and Node Funds
• ALL Consulting – Application Development & Outreach
Current Status
• MT, AK, MS, NE, ND, UT – Logical Mapping
Completed
• CA – In process of Development of DMS
through separate effort (MS & OK)
• Montana – Focus as a test state
– Physical Mapping, XML, In Application
Development
• Mississippi – Next for Physical Mapping
Experience of Process
• Challenges – Submission of UIC Summary Data (How
to use to gain National Picture)
• Concerns over how data to be interpreted
• Willing to meet and discuss concerns and try to address
• States decided to apply for Grant so that they could
have cooperative effort with the Network Exchange
effort
• Consultants have acted as Middle Men
• Good working with IPT and having access to process
States Data Management Systems
• Risk Based Data Management System (RBDMS)
• Application managed by the GWPC and State
Stakeholders Committee
• DOE Top 100 projects (20th Century)
• Current in-place in 22 Oil & Gas States and with
some success in other Classes of UIC Wells
• Core set of common UIC datasets
• UIC Data Schema partially based on RBDMS
Central Node
• Part of Proposal to House Central Node at
GWPC for member States to Submit to
– States may have existing nodes but not be located in
same cities
– Different Network configurations
– Different Platform
– Multiple Departments
• Control and make uniform
Application Development
•
•
•
•
•
Platform
Validation Local
Review Data Payload
Generate Payload & Test
Release Data to EPA
Application Development: Platform
• SQL Server 2000 and SQL Server 2005
– Mimic National UIC DB
• Visual Studio Development 2005
– C # Language
– WinForms Application
– Enterprise Library
• Issues
– Validation WSE 2.0 vs WSE 3.0 Protocols
– How to validate through own Node?
Application Development: Data
Application Development: Validation
Local
• Validate Local Data for Accuracy (RBDMS)
• Validation Tool for SQL Server Databases
• Provides a means for Program Managers to
review their data in familiar format
Application Development: Import
and Validate
Application Development: Validate
Report
Application Development: Review
Payload
• Provide for ability to review extracted data
• Provide ability to filter non-validated data from
payload
Application Development: Payload –
Current Development
• Develop XML Payload
– Done
•
•
•
•
Schematron
Review Schematron Validation (Repeat)
Review at UIC Data Store
Release Payload Dataset as Validated Submission
Future
• Immediate:
– Discussion with Exchange Network Guru’s on
Authentication Processes
– Complete Pilot of MT for IPT workgroup
– Complete Physical Mapping of MS
• Application available to all UIC Agencies and
other Network Exchange members if desired
• Discussion on being 2.0 Node?
Contact Information
Mark Layne, Ph.D., P.E.
ALL Consulting
[email protected]
www.all-llc.com
Questions