Mud Reporting: Streamlined Process and Data Management
GPS & GIS Implementation Strengthens Compliance for WES Biosolids Program
1. 2012
WES Biosolids Program GPS & GIS Implementation
Susan Ottersen
GIS Analyst/Engineer Tech III
Water Environment Services
Clackamas County
4/16/2012
1|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
2. A: System -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
1. Name of the System and ESIG™ Award Categories: ---------------------------------------------------------- 4
2. Executive administrator letter: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
3. Summary: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
4. Three user testimonials: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
B: Jurisdiction--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
1. Name of jurisdiction: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
2. Population served by the organization:-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
3. Annual total budget for jurisdiction: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
4. Chief elected official: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
5. System Contact: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
C: System Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
1. What motivated the system development? -------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
2. What specific service or services was the system intended to improve? ------------------------------- 6
3. What, if any, unexpected benefits did you achieve? --------------------------------------------------------- 7
4. What system design problems were encountered? ---------------------------------------------------------- 7
5. What differentiates this system from other similar systems? -------------------------------------------- 10
D: Implementation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11
1. What phases did you go through in developing the system? --------------------------------------------- 11
2. Were there any modifications to the original system design? Why? What? ------------------------ 11
E: Organizational Impact ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
1. What user community does the system serve and how? -------------------------------------------------- 12
2. What are the ultimate decisions/operations/services being affected? If appropriate,
provide a few examples including, but not limited to: screen input/output forms, paper
products, or other descriptive graphics ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12
3. What were the quantitative and qualitative impacts of the system? ---------------------------------- 14
4. What effect has the system had on productivity? ----------------------------------------------------------- 15
5. What, if any, other impacts has the system had? ------------------------------------------------------------ 16
6. How did the system change the way business is conducted with and/or service delivered
to clients? Give specific examples comparing the old way with the new ---------------------------- 16
2|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
3. F: System Resources ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16
1. What are the system’s primary hardware components? Give a brief list or description of
the hardware configuration supporting the system . ------------------------------------------------------ 16
2. What are the system’s primary software components? Describe the primary software and,
if a commercial package, any customizations required for the system. ------------------------------ 16
3. What data does the system work with? List and briefly describe the database(s) ----------------- 17
4. What staff resources were required to implement the system? (approximate staff and
consultant time as FTE’s) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
5. Comment on anything unusual about the resources used to develop your system, such as
data, software, personnel and financing. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
APPENDIX A: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18
APPENDIX B: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
APPENDIX C: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
3|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
4. Application for 2011 URISA ESIG™
A: System
1. Name of the System and ESIG™ Award Categories:
Single Process System
2. Executive administrator letter:
See Appendix A.
3. Summary:
Water Environment Services (WES) began its Biosolids program in the 1980’s. Then, environmental
requirements were more lenient and record maintenance sporadic where now greater attention to
environment safety has produced stricter standards from the program’s regulator, Oregon’s Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ). In 2009, an internal assessment revealed that WES was not meeting
the regulator’s record keeping and soil testing standards and, from a management perspective, was not
managing program risk associated with land application of liquid biosolids. Compelled by the risk of
scraping the Liquid Biosolids Program altogether unless practices were brought into compliance and risk
managed, WES took steps to ensure compliance and mitigate program risk. WES achieved that due, in
part, to this GPS/GIS project, which provided for greater internal controls that enhanced field
management and narrowed the variance associated with spraying onto fields and for stakeholders,
strengthened customer service and documentation for the farming community, neighbors, and
regulators.
Biosolids spreading is not a precise application and, as discovered with WES’ internal audit / assessment,
can generate land-application risk. DEQ has strict guidelines for application of Biosolids to agricultural
land with specific distances from buildings, water supply wells or springs, streams, ditches, roads, and
other features. Given those regulatory guidelines, WES faced several issues:
Lacking in WES’ liquid Biosolids program was a method to track all land-application updates at
the farms that were receiving the liquid Biosolids on their fields.
Needed was a system that recorded precisely where biosolids were applied and, more
importantly, identified the location of land-sensitive buffered zones and if buffer violations
occurred during application.
The only system that made sense as a solution which identified and tracked data was implementing a
GPS system with mapping in ArcGIS.
The GPS/GIS project used Trimble GPS technology (handheld devices for field mapping and dashboard
devices for truck drivers) and ArcGIS mapping software to manage all steps associated with the
application of liquid biosolids onto agricultural fields. Included was the education of staff who mapped
the fields using the Trimble 2008 GeoXt handheld unit equipped with TerraSync software and the
Biosolids drivers, responsible for liquid land application, who used the EZ Guide 500 dashboard truck
device.
4|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
5. Lack of field staff buy-in and active participation would have rendered this project a failure. Staff that
mapped the agricultural fields with the handheld devices and drove the land-application trucks with the
dashboard truck device were the end users of this technology and identified the obstacles in using this
GPS/GIS application.
4. Three user testimonials:
See Appendix B.
B: Jurisdiction
1. Name of jurisdiction:
Clackamas County Service District No. 1, Water Environment Services of Clackamas County (WES)
2. Population served by the organization:
Clackamas County Water Environment Services (WES) manages sanitary sewer and surface water
services for over 150,000 people in two special districts located within Clackamas County and operates
seven wastewater treatment facilities; three of these facilities produce biosolids. Facilities that produce
liquid biosolids are located in Clackamas County Service District No. 1: Kellogg Wastewater Treatment
Plant and Hoodland Treatment Plant.
Clackamas County Service District No. 1 provides retail sanitary sewer and surface water management
services to unincorporated portions of North Clackamas County as well as the City of Happy Valley,
Damascus, Boring, the communities of the Hoodland corridor, Fischer’s Forest Park near Redland, and
wholesale wastewater treatment services to the cities of Milwaukie and Johnson City. These services are
largely funded by revenues derived from rates and fees for development.
3. Annual total budget for jurisdiction:
Clackamas County Service District No. 1: Proposed FY2012-13 Operating Budget of $27,232,000 and
Capital Budget of $11,361,000.
4. Chief elected official:
Mike Kuenzi, Director
150 Beavercreek Road
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
5. System Contact:
Susan Ottersen, GIS Analyst/Engineer Tech III
150 Beavercreek Road
5|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
6. Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Phone: 503-742-4613
Fax: 503-742-4565
susanott@co.clackamas.or.us
C: System Design
1. What motivated the system development?
Water Environment Services operates a liquid biosolids program out of the Kellogg Creek (KC)
Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Hoodland (HD) Sewage Treatment Plant. WES’ liquid program is
the largest liquid biosolids land application program in the state of Oregon. WES generates 13,000,000
gallons of liquid biosolids annually serving over 100 different fields. WES also manages a cake biosolids
program out of the Tri-City (TC) Wastewater Treatment Plant. Both KC and TC require biosolids to be
removed daily from the plant do to capacity issues, which has been occurring since the 1980’s. With the
increased DEQ requirements, it compelled WES to implement a more accurate and stringent monitoring
program.
The land application of liquid biosolids is particularly challenging. The liquid land application program
serves farmers within 15 miles of the KC plant. This area is mostly zoned residential/rural, where the
agricultural land application sites are adjacent to homes, schools, roads, and other denser populated
areas. It is a patchwork quilt of fields in an ever expanding populated area that provides little room for
error. For example, the largest field is a mere 33 acres. In contrast, our cake program in Eastern Oregon
serves farmers with areas in the 200 – 500 acre ranges.
The land application of biosolids in Oregon is regulated by the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ) which authorizes all sites for biosolids application. Every site must be authorized by DEQ
and each site has unique requirements based on its location.
After an internal audit / assessment in 2009, it was clear that there were opportunities to improve our
compliance with DEQ rules and our relationship with neighbors adjacent to land application sites. Key
findings included:
Application on unauthorized land
Over application of biosolids on some fields resulting in elevated Nitrates in the soil
Subjective boundaries around sensitive features resulting in repeated buffer violations
Soil samples not taken or sampling sites not recorded
Daily spreading records not being maintained
Interruption of field application because of rain, equipment problems, staffing, etc. There was
no clear record of where spreading had stopped.
2. What specific service or services was the system intended to improve?
6|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
7. WES provides a service of delivery and land application of liquid biosolids to privately owned agricultural
land. The land owner in the past was defined as our customer; now the adjacent neighbors and
community at large are included in this definition of customer. Our service extends to them by assuring
protection of their wells, surface water and minimizing odors.
The ability to continue this service is dependent on maintaining compliance and gaining reasonable
acceptance in the community. The use of GPS/GIS guided land application has allowed us to achieve
both.
3. What, if any, unexpected benefits did you achieve?
A. Better customer service, less customer complaints and educational opportunities. This required on
the ground mapping of the land to locate all sensitive features, including adjacent wells. This
resulted in contact with neighbors and the opportunity to talk with them about the program and
provide contact information if they have any concerns before, during or after the land application.
We believe the increased contact with neighbors, in combination with respecting buffers, reduced
complaints during and after land application events. Now, when complaints do occur, we respond
with a site visit to share with the complainant how we run our program, and assure them we are
doing the land application as safely as possible to protect human health and the environment. This
provides an opportunity to educate the community on our program and to share how we use
GPS/GIS in the protection of health and the environment.
B. Land-owner financial support. We are now able to recover a portion of land-application costs from
the farming community where before, politically, this would have been unlikely.
C. Better regulatory relationship. CCSD#1 now realizes a stronger relationship with the regulating
agency, DEQ due, in part, to this GPS/GIS application.
4. What system design problems were encountered?
Problem 1a: Blank screen with initial ArcGIS created shapefile when used in EZ Guide 500 GPS unit.
Cause:
The EZ Guide 500 directory files are hard coded into the system.
Initial Solution:
Create an easy file in the EZ Guide 500 resolved the hardcoded directory file structure and the
hardware bridging. (AgGPSDatatemplatetemplateFarmtemplateField)
7|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
8. Problem 1b: Blank screen with initial ArcGIS created shapefile when used in EZ Guide 500 GPS unit.
Cause: The shapefile created in ArcGIS was based on the Oregon State plane Zone 15 coordinate
system. EZ Guide 500 GPS unit uses the geographic coordinate system of WGS NAD 1984 which
in the shapefile created in the truck GPS unit creates a positional (.pos) file for the unit to
properly determine its real world location.
Solution: Create an original template shapefile within the EZ Guide 500 unit and transfer the
positional file into each ArcGIS created field shapefile. Note: there is a distance restriction from
the original .pos file. In order to read shapefiles for instance, in another county, a new
positional file must be created.
Problem 2: EZ Guide 500 GPS unit distorts/warps true circle buffers around point features, i.e., wells.
Cause:
The reason for the distortion is that the truck hardware does not allow for the mathematical
computation of circles labeled as buffered zones around any point feature found within
geographic field boundaries. ArcGIS map software reads true circle objects, while Trimble truck
GPS hardware does not, thus creating distorted buffers in shapefiles.
Solution:
Within ArcGIS, vertices were added to the arc of the true circle giving the GPS unit in the truck
the ability to convert the arc to its true geographic position, mitigating the chance of land-
application error risk. See Image D.
8|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
9. Shapefile of RSA viewed in ArcGIS
Warped shapefile over SDE file
Problem 3: The truck Trimble GPS hardware misplaces and repositions ArcGIS created vertices that
provide ghost polygons and false areas, which, again, as in problem 2, creates land-application error risk.
Cause:
The truck GPS unit cannot read a complex multipart polygon possibly do to (a) compute the
longitude and latitude of vertices created in ArcGIS (b) Truck GPS unit character field truncates
the character length of the ArcGIS vertices positional location causing an accuracy issue.
Solution:
Explode a multi-part polygon into separate shapefiles which are then applied as separate shapes
that constitute one field. Once land-application is completed and the spread data are
downloaded, data are merged as one multipart polygon.
9|Page
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
10. Original RSA boundaries of 1 field with 3
associated polygons.
Scrambled boundaries because of vertices
relocations
5. What differentiates this system from other similar systems?
Every stage, from field mapping to regulatory reporting, uses GPS technology and ArcGIS mapping
software to comply with regulatory requirements. Mapping process is comprehensive, robust, updating
and analyzing field application changes that enable WES to manage every step associated with liquid
biosolids land application.
Other agencies use GIS or GPS in various forms.
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 1. Post Biosolids Spray: Walks outline of
spray to calculate total acreage using a
handheld device for billing purpose.
Virginia Beach, VA 1. Maps fields with GPS handheld device and
creates GIS maps to record soil types and
features.
Metro Wastewater Reclamation District, Denver, 1. Uses GPS technology to map swaths where
CO liquid biosolids have been applied.
Clackamas County Service District No. 1, Water 1. Maps fields with GPS handheld device and
Environment Services, Clackamas County creates GIS maps to record sensitive
features .
2. Creates shapefiles in ArcGIS to use in truck
GPS unit with all required buffers.
3. Maps swaths where liquid biosolids have
been applied
4. Uses spread maps for post-application to
analyze any buffer violations
5. Creates reports using maps for regulatory
documentation showing compliance
Program comparisons.
10 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
11. D: Implementation
1. What phases did you go through in developing the system?
a) Reviewed current processes that included the development of process maps for current practices
b) Examined regulatory requirements on land-application constraints (buffered land zones) and
reporting procedures
c) Accessed accuracy needs for field application and recommended a 1-meter accuracy variance for
handheld devices based on land-application spraying methods and equipment cost
d) Discussed data and equipment needs with end users
e) Analyzed time-line requirements with program managers
f) Researched fleet GPS systems for driver use
g) Trained myself on handheld GeoXT, handheld device software TerraSync & truck GPS unit EZ Guide
500 and related software
h) Developed TerraSync Data Dictionary to represent all required DEQ sensitive features
i) Trained staff for on handheld device application (handheld GeoXT device and software TerraSync)
j) Trained BAT II Supervisor on the uploading & downloading of data onto EZ Guide 5000
k) Trained drivers in use of GPS unit and calculating spray width.
l) Mapped new processes associated with GPS and GIS application in liquids biosolids program
2. Were there any modifications to the original system design? Why? What?
A. Python programs were developed to execute command-line programs that were once done
manually. Before the Python programs, each command for BUFFER, ERASE, etc for each applicable
sensitive feature for each field, which for agricultural field could contain up to 20 buffers per field.
As a result of incorporating the Python programs for command lines, the buffering process become
a 15-minute task or less where before it would take from 3 hours to 5 hours to execute per field.
Python buffering program interface
11 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
12. B. The completion of uploading and downloading data onto and off of the truck GPS unit became more
efficient when that task was shifted from the GIS specialist / Engineer Technician 3 to the Biosolids
Application Technician. A savings of 1 - 3 hours per field was generated from this task shift for the
GIS Analyst as the BAT 2 was already in the field for pre-field application authorization.
E: Organizational Impact
1. What user community does the system serve and how?
User Community How served
Biosolids Provide guided land application via truck mounted units that display field and its
Application buffer zones.
Technicians (land- On-going mapping updates field’s annually to capture site usage changes that
application truck affect buffer zones and spreadable acres.
drivers) Assures proper agronomic loading rates due to actual spreadable acres vs.
acreage of the entire site.
BAT 2 and Assure staff are performing as requested
Supervisor Eliminates manual flagging of sensitive areas
Identify needs for training
Knowledge transfer of field locations and unique requirements
Manager Overall program management including
Selecting sites
Understanding potential problems based on mapping; locating potential new
sites that meet select criteria (slope, soil type, adjacent properties, etc)
Assuring all sensitive features are accounted for and mapped.
2. What are the ultimate decisions/operations/services being affected? If appropriate, provide a
few examples including, but not limited to: screen input/output forms, paper products, or
other descriptive graphics
A: The imagine below shows the technology process that Water Environment Services developed for
managing field application of liquid Biosolids. Affected was staff and data flow because, before this GPS
and GIS project, all processes were done manually. Before this project, burden for reporting compliance
fell upon the shoulders of the drivers and the manager who supervised the drivers. This included
‘coloring in’ of vague maps of farm fields of areas that where biosolids had been spread. With the
implementation of this project, this tracking transferred from the drivers to other staff such as the
engineer, source control technician, the surface water technician and water quality analyst.
Two Major Decisions
The first decision related to the field mapping that had to be conducted before spraying began using
GPS and GIS technology. For end-users, WES had to guarantee that data flowed smoothly from the
hand-held device to the truck dashboard device and then to ArcGIS and finally back to the truck
dashboard device where sensitive land areas identified buffers that would not be sprayed with liquid
Biosolids. The process itself guaranteed the smooth flow of data and thus the process map serves as the
solution for timely, smooth data flow.
12 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
13. The second decision centered on determining eligible fields using the data results from the initial field
mapping that had been performed by the surface water technician and water quality analyst. Before
any liquid biosolids was applied onto a field, analysis results determine if a field was still viable for land
application by calculating a final spreadable acreage. An analysis of the final size of the field and the
‘cutting up’ of the field do to buffers would determine if the cost and risk of spread violations was still
beneficial for WES and farm.
Application of Liquid Biosolids using GPS Units
Determining Eligible Farms GPS Data
Biosolids Application Technician
START
AND b)
EXP t & Bo
, Jane
hryn
(Kat Uploads
Selects fields to spray
(Applies rating data
Identifies eligible methodology. Sets of field
agricultural fields priority on the order of to be
agricultural fields that sprayed
will be sprayed.)
Downloads closed Files the following:
fields Farm and Remaining
TAZimportBiosolids_GPSB_Uploads to EZAgGPSdataWES Uploads new fields Spreadable Acreage map
Deletes fields where Soil sampling map
swath data has been
mapped
SW Tech and Water
Quality Analyst
Maps the GPS
agricultural field Pathfinder
using Trimble Office
Geo-XT unit Software
TAZimportBiosolids_GPS A_FieldVerifield Downloads
*.SSF files
Another source control
Digital copies of maps
technician
Maps soli GPS
sampling site Pathfinder TazImportBioSolids_GPSJPGs
using Trimble Office
Geo-XT unit Software <farmname>RSA.jpg = Map of Remaining Spreadable Acres
Downloads <farmname>SS.jpg = Map of Soil Sampling Locations
*.SSF files <farmname>Spread.jpg = Map of Application Spread
TAZimportBiosolids_GPS Soils
Exports to .shp formatted
specifically for Easyguide
Engineering Technician 3
` 500 unit
TAZimportBiosolids_GPS
ArcGIS Software:
Creates farm and
Buffers for and excludes
GPS Remaining
water wells, ditches, roads,
Pathfinder Spreadable Acreage
low points, > 12˚ grades
Office map
and residential development
Software Creates soil sampling
from agricultural field.
map
Converts *.cor file into
*.SHP shape file
Makes Produces polygon
differential Imports into
showing boundaries of Spatial Data Scrubs data for
corrections to field (to be sprayed) Engine (SDE) topology errors
*.ssf. using the *.SHP shape Software
Creates *.COR file
file
Application of Liquid Biosolids using GPS Units
Spraying of Biosolids on Field Data Analysis
CON’D
Biosolid Application Technician
Down
loads
previous Swath Map
data
ArcGIS
Software:
Creates swath
Engineering Technician 3
map
`
TAZimportBiosolids_GPSDownLoads
Imports shape
file into SDE
13 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
14. B: An established set of maps for each step of the process is created, reviewed and finalized by both the
BAT II Supervisor and the Biosolids Manager.
The series of maps include:
A soil sampling location map
An RSA map
And a Spread map
See Appendix C for examples.
3. What were the quantitative and qualitative impacts of the system?
Quantitative:
Complaints are resolved between WES and the complainant rather than being elevated to the County
Commissioners level. Zero complaints were elevated to mayors or Council members since
implementation. While historical data is incomplete, staff recalls this happening on numerous occasions.
Year Total number or Estimated complaints
recorded complaints to elected officials
2004* 4 unknown
2005 6 unknown
2006 7 unknown
2007 9 3
2008 9 5
2009 14 unknown
2010 11 0
2011 6 0
*First year the complaint database went on-line
Qualitative:
14 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
15. A more professional program that considers risk management as a critical component to
program management.
Enhanced dialog with neighbors as a result of well mapping. This results in an opportunity to
share this technology and reassure them WES was managing the Liquids Biosolids Program as
safely as possible.
Knowledge transfer regarding field locations and buffered areas.
Validation of acres spread for billing purposes
Validating correct spreading occurred if compliance or complaint situation presents
Land Application Technicians appreciate hard buffers; subjective buffers cause problems.
4. What effect has the system had on productivity?
A. A processing time line has been set for each step of the biosolids tracking once the land application
has been completed.
a) BAT 2 downloads spread data and advises GIS Analyst
b) GIS Analyst has 2 days to create spread map and then advises BAT 2
c) BAT 2 has 3 days to do post-application check using ‘Spread Map’.
d) Biosolids manager has 5 days to finalize all data and maps are in farm binder for that
particular land application
These turn around dates are tracked by the Biosolids Manager and analyzed/reviewed quarterly.
Biosolids team has a meeting to review timeline productivity.
15 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
16. B. The BAT 2 Coordinator no longer has to take time to walk the field marking sensitive features with
flags for each field. This has added 1-3 hours of extra time for tracking and properly recording
information for post-application procedures.
C. The drivers now have quicker turn around times on the land application as there is no longer the
issue of reapplying biosolids on already sprayed areas. They now know exactly where to start or
stop the application procedure without having to wait and discuss with other drivers at the field.
5. What, if any, other impacts has the system had?
Risk management and general confidence in the land application component of the program.
6. How did the system change the way business is conducted with and/or service delivered to
clients? Give specific examples comparing the old way with the new
1. This system had significant changes to the way business is conducted. In the past, before the
implementation of this GPS/GIS application, the drivers were limited to using a printed tax map and
then colored in the areas where they applied Biosolids. Consequently, biosolids were land applied
with little consideration for buffers and correct acreage (resulting in fields being overloaded and
risking groundwater contamination or runoff to surface water). In addition, Technicians were
persuaded by farmers to apply on land that was not authorized by DEQ to receive biosolids. With
mapping, all of these challenges are now under control.
2. There was also no review of the field after application to assess proper spreading. Now with the
mapping, field inspections are made with the spread map, and closure can occur with confidence
that the driver applied correctly. This has provided a mechanism for the Supervisor to know when
training might be needed.
F: System Resources
1. What are the system’s primary hardware components? Give a brief list or description of the
hardware configuration supporting the system .
Trimble EZ-Guide 500 Lightbar Guidance System
Trimble GeoXT 2008 with TerraSync
2. What are the system’s primary software components? Describe the primary software and, if a
commercial package, any customizations required for the system.
ArcGIS 9.3 – after outlining the processes, a series of small python programs were developed to speed
up processing.
16 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
17. 3. What data does the system work with? List and briefly describe the database(s)
Wells Roads (public & private) Power Lines Wind Mills
Buildings Ravines Trees Streams
Water Slope Septic Tanks Drain Fields
Culvert Ditches Field Boundary Special Requests
Buffers
4. What staff resources were required to implement the system? (approximate staff and
consultant time as FTE’s)
It was a significant undertaking to get this operational. Equipment and software needed to
be purchased; our GIS Technician required some time to resolve problems in the field with
recording and/or downloading and all fields required GPS mapping; all fields required
mapping. Estimated FTE to become fully operational with few problems was 2.0 over the
course of 1 year.
5. Comment on anything unusual about the resources used to develop your system, such as
data, software, personnel and financing.
Did not have an immediate buy-in by drivers, as they were not favorable of computer tracking. Did not
want to deal with ‘electronic’ equipment and thought the system was going to be complex and
cumbersome and waste time. After a few field applications, the drivers now are very favorable of the
spread tracking and with training have found the units to be easy to use. The truck GPS units were
chosen mainly for the general simplicity of the unit and the larger screen. There was also a cost issue
determinant, but if needed a higher end unit could have been purchased. The EZ Guide GPS unit is a
mid-level Agricultural GPS system.
17 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
18. APPENDIX A:
18 | P a g e
2012 URISA AWARD APPLICATION
