Edited Version
October 27, 1999 Transcript
EIIP Tech
Arena Online Presentation
"National
Pipeline Mapping System"
Steve Fischer
National Pipeline
Mapping System Project Manager
Office of Pipeline
Safety
U.S. Department
of Transportation
The original unedited transcript
of the October 27, 1999 Tech arena presentation is available in EIIP
Virtual Forum Archives <http://www.emforum.org>. The following
version of the transcript has been edited for easier reading and comprehension.
Typos were corrected, date/time/names attributed by the software to
each input were deleted but the content of questions and responses are
as stated by each participant. Answers from the participants to
questions by the audience are grouped beneath the appropriate question
to facilitate meaning.
[Opening]
Amy Sebring:
Welcome to the EIIP Tech Arena!
For the benefit of our first-timers,
when you see a blue web address, you can click on it and the referenced
Web page should appear in a browser window. After the first one,
the browser window may not automatically come to the top, so you may
need to bring it forward by clicking on a button at the status bar at
the bottom of your screen.
We will start with a presentation,
and then follow with a Q&A session for your questions and comments.
Right before we begin the Q&A portion we will review the procedure.
Please do NOT send direct messages
to the speaker or moderator as it makes it difficult for us to follow
the discussion. Background information for today's session may
be found at http://www.emforum.org/varena/9901027.htm
[Introduction]
Today I am pleased to introduce
Steve Fischer, National Pipeline Mapping System Project Manager for
the Office of Pipeline Safety of the U.S. Department of Transportation,
who is here to tell us about the NPMS project. Steve has considerable
background in GIS, including the city of Niagara Falls, NY and is educated
as a geographer. Welcome Steve, and thanks for being with us today.
[Presentation]
Steve Fischer: Hello,
my name is Steve Fischer and I am with the US Department of Transportation,
Office of Pipeline Safety. Thank you for joining in on our discussion
of the National Pipeline Mapping System. Amy, SLIDE 1 please.
[SLIDE 1]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide1.htm
The USDOT Office of Pipeline
Safety (OPS) Mission Statement --- To ensure the safe, reliable, and
environmentally sound operation of the nation's pipeline transportation
system.
The Accountable Pipeline
Safety and Partnership Act states that the OPS must adopt rules
requiring a pipeline operator to create and maintain accurate maps that
identify the location of the operator's natural gas transmission, significant
distribution, and major hazardous liquid pipeline facilities in the
state ... to inform a state of the presence of facilities.
The OPS decided to work with
industry to determine how to best meet the intent of the Congressional
mandate. Two Mapping Quality Action Teams (MQAT) were formed consisting
of OPS, federal and state agency, and pipeline industry representatives.
The first mapping team was a policy group who devised the idea of a
National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS). The second mapping team
was a technical group who took the findings of MQAT I and developed
the standards to guide the creation and operations of the NPMS.
The NPMS will be a full-featured
geographic information system (GIS) containing the type of data that
we are responsible for regulating. The data will include natural
gas transmission, liquid trunkline, and LNG facility data. The
NPMS will serve as a valuable tool in helping to identify the spatial
relationship between the pipelines that we regulate and their environments
that we must protect. Amy, SLIDE 2 please.
[SLIDE 2]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide2.htm
These other layers that we
will analyze in conjunction with the pipeline layer will include Unusually
Sensitive Areas - both drinking water and ecological, highly populated
areas, and areas prone to natural disasters and/or high consequences
as the result of a pipeline release. Amy, SLIDE 3 please.
[SLIDE 3]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide3.htm
The OPS is currently working
with pipeline operators and our regional offices in collecting test
pipeline data from operators to illustrate the benefits of the NPMS
once it is completed. This project includes identifying those
pipelines that are at high risk due to earthquakes, flooding, landslides,
hurricanes, and other lesser natural disasters.
In addition, we are identifying
those pipelines that pass through high consequence areas - such as highly
populated areas. By identifying those pipelines at risk, our regional
offices will be more efficient in managing their resources when determining
their pipeline inspection schedules. Amy, SLIDE 4 please.
[SLIDE 4]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide4.htm
The second Mapping Quality
Action Team developed two standards documents. The documents are
commonly referred to as the "Operator Standards" and the "Repository
Standards." The most current version of the documents is
from March 1999. Amy, SLIDE 5 please.
[SLIDE 5]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide5.htm
As part of this voluntary initiative,
The OPS is asking that pipeline operators provide the NPMS with either
digital data or maps of their natural gas transmission, liquid trunkline,
and/or LNG facility data. The operators must meet certain data content
and submission requirements. The "Operator Standards"
provide the details to operators so that they may accurately provide
their data to the NPMS. The geospatial accuracy of the NPMS is +/- 500
feet. From our discussions with the operators, most operators
should easily be able to exceed this accuracy goal. Amy, SLIDE
6 please.
[SLIDE 6]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide6.htm
The NPMS has been structured
to consist of a single National Repository and multiple state repositories.
Amy, SLIDE 7 please.
[SLIDE 7]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide7.htm
The state repositories are
either a state university or agency within the state. The state
repositories work to collect and process the pipeline data within their
state boundaries. Several of the state repositories are agencies
that have been working with the pipeline industry for years and are
very knowledgeable in collecting and processing pipeline data.
Amy, SLIDE 8 please.
[SLIDE 8]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide8.htm
The National Repository is
a contractor working on behalf of the OPS. The National Repository
is responsible for working with the state repositories, collecting and
processing data for those states without a repository, and for creating
a seamless national pipeline data set.
The National Repository is
responsible for the final quality control process of the data.
They are using a sub-contractor whose sole responsibility is to perform
the quality control process. Amy, SLIDE 9 please.
[SLIDE 9]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide9.htm
There are currently nine state
repositories. The states represented include California (liquids
only), Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Kentucky, Pennsylvania,
and New Jersey. Contacts for the individual state repositories can be
found in the "Operator Standards" beginning on page VI. Amy,
SLIDE 10 please.
[SLIDE 10]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide10.htm
Not only do the Standards address
the content and format for submitting the data, the Standards also describe
where the operator is to send their data. If the submission
is all digital data, the operator can submit their entire system to
the National Repository OR divide up their data and submit part to the
states with a repository and the remaining to the National Repository.
If the submission is hard copy maps, the operator must submit the maps
that are within a state repositories jurisdiction to that repository
and then the remaining maps would go to the National Repository.
Amy, SLIDE 11 please.
[SLIDE 11]
http://www.emforum.org/varena/NPMS/Slide11.htm
In conclusion, with the exception
of our base map of scanned USGS 1:24,000 quads that we purchased from
a private vendor, all data contained within the NPMS will be made publicly
available. The goal of the NPMS is to have 70% of the pipeline
data in the NPMS by the end of the year 2000.
Thank you very much and now
I would like to entertain questions.
Amy Sebring: Thank you
very much, Steve. I am sure we will have some good questions for
you. Audience, please enter a question mark (?) to indicate you
wish to be recognized, go ahead and compose your comment or question,
but wait for recognition before hitting the enter key or clicking on
Send. We now invite your questions or comments. We will give you
a moment to think!
[Audience
Questions]
Question:
Amy Sebring: Steve is
any of this data available now? From the state repositories or
from national?
Steve Fischer:
The NPMS is in the early stages of collecting the pipeline data.
There are states that are part of the NPMS who already have data that
they have been collecting. The state with the most digital data
is Texas.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
Does the national repository have a procedure yet for requesting data?
Steve Fischer: The formal
request for data has actually come directly from OPS. We have
been working with the trade associations in getting their members to
submit data.
Question:
Jon Kavanagh:
I missed the first bit of the lecture, but is there any information
collection for incidents that occur?
Steve Fischer:
OPS has been collecting data on incidents in a separate database.
We are looking at being able to join the data from the incidents database
with the pipeline data from the NPMS.
Question:
Libbi RuckerReed:
I am sort of confused. Will this be available online? In
an overlay type of format? For visual looking? Or just paper
data?
Steve Fischer:
There will be several options available for either obtaining the digital
data directly or viewing on an Internet application. It will depend
on the abilities of the end user. Paper will also be available from
the repositories as mapping products.
Question:
Rick Tobin:
I'm sure this has been considered, but I'll ask anyway. What precautions
are you taking to protect this data from those who would perform terrorist
acts? I remember one law enforcement official who was very upset
to find out that I had old maps (now rare) that show pipelines and power
lines all over the U.S.
Steve Fischer: This
has been an ongoing issue for the mapping teams and the NPMS to address.
Our conclusion is that a lot of the type of data needed by a terrorist
is not being collected by the NPMS, i.e., pumping stations, valve locations,
etc. If a terrorist wants to inflict damage on a pipeline facility,
they would have no problem going out into the field and finding markers.
Question:
Lars Thompson: Is the
data being collected being coordinated with Local Emergency Planning
Committees to assist with compliance with SARA Title III requirements?
Steve Fischer: No.
Most of the coordination has been between other federal and state agencies.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
Steve, do you see any other states coming on as state repositories?
Any in the works?
Steve Fischer: Yes,
there will be a continuing effort to add more states as state repositories.
We are currently reviewing three states and we will place another Commerce
Business Daily announcement in Jan. 2000 for additional state repositories.
Question:
Amy Sebring: Other questions
for Steve? While we are waiting, can you give a brief description
of some of the types of data; for example, is emergency contact information
included?
Steve Fischer: No. The
intent of this database is not really for emergency response.
It is intended to allow OPS to view pipelines in relation to the environment
and people that we need to protect. It is also meant as a tool
to allow OPS to better utilize our inspection resources to better target
pipelines at risk.
Comment:
Lars Thompson: It would
seem the data is excellent for planning environmental risk assessment
in the developing of new communities and especially schools.
Steve Fischer: At a
local level, I would think that would be an appropriate utilization
of the data. However, just remember that we are only talking,
at this time, natural gas transmission and liquid trunkline data.
Question:
Lars Thompson: Do you
see this data filtering down to the local level for planning and response
activities?
Steve Fischer: The data
will be made available through our normal FOIA type processes.
Question:
Isabel McCurdy: FOIA?
Steve Fischer:
Freedom of Information Act. It is the process to request information.
However, we might have a less formal process for asking for the date
--- that is left to be determined by the attorneys.
Question:
Amy Sebring: Steve,
will this data be shared with the various One-Call systems?
Steve Fischer: As far
as the data being used by One-Call Systems, that will really be the
decision of the One-Call. They are certainly welcome to use the
data and incorporate their specific needs.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
Will the state repositories be setting up their own access procedures?
Steve Fischer:
What do you mean by access?
Amy Sebring: Procedure
to request data by the public.
Steve Fischer: OK.
Most states have processes similar to FOIA. The data will be available
directly from a state repository or directly from the national repository.
We will most likely try to have the option of downloading the data directly
from the NPMS homepage <http://www.npms.rspa.dot.gov>.
Question:
Amy Sebring: Liquid
trunklines -- does the data contain the material transported and does
this change frequently? How will the data be updated?
Steve Fischer: Yes,
the commodities transported in the liquid lines will be included as
an attribute. We will be asking operators to provide updates to
their data submissions on a regular basis. I would refer anyone
interested in looking at the specifics of what we are collecting to
either look at the standards on the NPMS homepage or contact the national
repository and request a copy of the "Operator Standards."
Question:
Amy Sebring:
Steve, will the NPMS only apply to interstate lines?
Steve Fischer: No, we
are collecting inter and intrastate transmission and trunkline data.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
I believe you are accepting commonly used GIS formats. Will you
maintain all the formats for the national?
Steve Fischer:
We are accepting a wide variety of formats from the operators but we
will be maintaining the data within the NPMS in the format
used by the individual repository.
Most systems can read and write
to other software packages.
Question:
Amy Sebring: You are
using the Federal Geographic Data Committee standards for metadata?
Steve Fischer:
Yes.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
When you start looking at the hazards analysis, will you share this
info in some way?
Steve Fischer:
The other data layers that we use to determine the hazards and consequences
are available to anyone interested in receiving a digital copy.
That will continue once we get the NPMS data.
Question:
Amy Sebring: What is
your strategy for acquiring data? I assume you are working with
the states that have repositories first?
Steve Fischer: Our strategy
has been to work with the trade associations to identify their largest
members. We have contacted hem and have discussed their timeline
for submitting data. Our state repositories are working to collect
data from the intrastate operators. After we receive the data
from the large operators, who for the most part can provide digital
data, we will start working to collect the data from the smaller operators.
States such as Texas, that already have a lot of pipeline data in digital
format, will work to try and use that data as the submission by the
operator. That will require adding attributes that the state doesn't
collect and metadata.
Question:
Amy Sebring:
Will paper submissions be digitized?
Steve Fischer:
Yes, we are urging operators that plan on migrating themselves to digital
within the next year or so to wait and submit digital to us. For
those operators who are not planning on moving to digital, we will accept
their paper maps and digitize them. They do have to meet paper
map submission requirements before they can submit.
Final Question:
Amy Sebring:
I think this is very timely to provide standards at a point when larger
operators most likely are or will be going digital?
Steve Fischer: I agree.
We are trying to get as many federal and state agencies to adopt our
standards.
Amy Sebring:
This could be a tremendous resource for those with the same type of
local responsibility to protect the public.
Steve Fischer: I agree.
Amy Sebring:
I feel we need further dialogue on this aspect perhaps.
Steve Fischer: Yes,
considering that a lot of municipalities are unaware of pipelines running
through their jurisdictions.
Amy Sebring: I know
OPS does good work on this issue, and there is a need for wider distribution
of its findings, including incident histories. Thank you very much for
being with us today, Steve. We hoped you enjoyed it. Please stand
by for a moment while we take care of some business.
Steve Fischer: Great.
Thanks. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to contact me.
<steven.fischer@rspa.dot.gov>.
Phone is 202-366-6267
Amy Sebring: Update
on the pledge drive, we are getting close to the bitter end folks.
Two new pledges since yesterday, John Hardcastle and Jill Tokarsky.
That brings us to 80; only 20 more to go! < //bell http://www.emforum.org/pledge.wav>.
Thanks John and Jill!
[Upcoming
Events]
Next week we are planning a
Tuesday Round Table session to revisit with some of the IAEM members
that participated in the professional exchange trip that went to Italy
recently. I hope we can view some photos.
Next Wednesday, Bob Swan of
Dewberry & Davis will join us in the Library to present his paper,
The Debris Management Cycle: An Overview. Please note that the
paper is in our User Docs section of our Virtual Library.
Thanks again, Steve and thank
you, audience. We will adjourn the session for now, but you are
invited to remain for open discussion. You no longer need to use
question marks.