HIFLD Presentation Fall 2013

255 views
156 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
255
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Many invalid lat/longs, such as ‘0’ longitude as shown in screenshot
  • HIFLD Presentation Fall 2013

    1. 1. EPA, HSIP and Infrastructure Data Perspectives David Smith Ana Greene Aaron Meyers Lee Kyle 10/30/2013 202-566-0797 202-566-2132 202-566-0690 202-564-4622 Smith.DavidG@epa.gov Greene.Ana@epa.gov Meyers.Aaron@epa.gov Kyle.Lee@epa.gov U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1
    2. 2. EPA Emergency Response • EPA ER focus has traditionally been on ESF-10 (Oil and Hazardous Waste) – shared with US Coast Guard • Responses typically deal with sampling, monitoring, cleanup and remediation after a disaster event • Hurricanes, Flooding, BP Deepwater Horizon, Pipeline
    3. 3. EPA Use of HSIP • Typically EPA has used HSIP as a reference layer, present in many ER tools and Flex Viewer applications • Schools, Hospitals, Vulnerable Populations
    4. 4. Hurricane Sandy • Hurricane Sandy highlighted a need for infrastructure data – and exposed many locational data quality issues in drinking water/wastewater infrastructure • Poor data quality hampered response analysis, triage and prioritization of assessment of drinking water facilities • EPA’s Facility Registry Service aided EPA Region 2 Regional EOC for Hurricane Sandy response
    5. 5. Many DQ issues Vague, incomplete or invalid address Wrong county Drinking water locational data quality problems included missing/invalid lat-long values, wrong county, missing or vague locations and other locational data problems Invalid lat-long data
    6. 6. Drinking Water • Ultimately only a small percentage of SDWIS facilities had any reliable, mappable locational data at all, whether lat/longs, or street addresses that could be geocoded • Data gaps for infrastructure data can be filled via data from other programs and states
    7. 7. FRS and Hurricane Sandy Locational data gaps and incorrect data in SDWIS, as well as supplemental contact information were filled in via EPA Facility Registry Service (FRS) data from other EPA program data sources (TRI and others), and by research by FRS stewards using other public data sources.
    8. 8. Drinking Water • The emergency response community needs reliable data on drinking water infrastructure, but currently that need is not easily being met. • Better locations could be found via other systems, but this was a labor intensive, manual process. • Lack of reliable data slows response time.
    9. 9. Wastewater • Permitting data collected by states via National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) – but is incomplete and poor logic for querying Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) • New data coming online via Clean Watershed Needs Survey (CWNS)
    10. 10. ER Infrastructure Data Needs • Ideally ER community should be able to prioritize and triage in a response, for example assessing infrastructure condition by population served • We find data needs to be tied to other identifiers, i.e. state ID or other programs • May need some additional attributes • FRS team is looking at how to help fill gaps
    11. 11. FRS Pilot Data Products
    12. 12. Thank You / Questions? Topic URL FRS Home Site http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/fii/ FRS Geodata Download http://www.epa.gov/enviro/geo_data.html FRS REST Services http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/fii/FRS_REST_Services.html FRS ArcGIS Server Service http://igeo.epa.gov/ArcGIS/rest/services/OEI/FRS/MapServer EPA Geospatial Program http://www.epa.gov/geospatial/index.html EPA Geodata Gateway https://edg.epa.gov/ EPA Geo Metadata https://edg.epa.gov/EME/ 10/30/2013 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 12

    ×