|
|
| APPENDIX E |
APPENDIX E: ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS OF STEWARDSHIP ASPECTS
The purpose of this appendix is to summarize the costs and benefits of various aspects of a stewardship data system and support many of the observations and findings presented in Chapter 4 of this report. Because there is currently no system at DOE to address stewardship data, this appendix describes the various costs of other information management systems that contain components that would be similar to the components of a DOE stewardship data system. This appendix also describes some of the benefits of a stewardship system.
E.1 Introduction
To identify the costs and benefits, the project team developed a general model of the records management process, building off of the model presented in Chapter 3. A graphical description of this model is presented in Figure E-1. A series of general steps are taken as data are generated and preserved. Similarly, a series of general steps are taken as data are accessed.
The potential problems with records management include several key issues: 1) the failure to identify information correctly for retention; 2) the loss or abandonment of a record; 3) incomplete supporting information for archiving of the record; and 4) an inability to or difficulty in accessing the record. The model we used to represent these problems is presented in Figure E-2. As shown, problems with the records management can occur at any stage (e.g., as data are generated, indexed, etc.). Also shown are the steps in data analysis. The creation, use, and management of data are dynamic processes. As data are created, they may be included in a document (e.g., an Environmental Assessment). As future analyses are conducted, that use the data contained in the document, the data may be retrieved either directly from the original source of the data or from the document in which it was published. There may be difficulties if the data must be retrieved from the document, rather than from the original source, depending on the complexity and magnitude of the data and the use to which the data is to be put.
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
| APPENDIX E |
E.2 Department of Energy Benchmark Costs
This section presents benchmark costs from a variety of DOE sources, including complex-wide records management systems, as well as site-specific systems. It also provides examples of costs placed upon organizations due to the lack of preservation of data.
E.2.1 OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION
DOE's OSTI manages several programs to disseminate scientific and technical information:
| Paper Copy | Electronic Documents | ||||
| Step | Handling | Scanning | Other | Handling | Other Costs | Description | Retrieve, File, Assign Bar Codes | 300 dpi, No OCR Cleanup Maintenance | Programming Indices & Other | Coordinate and Troubleshoot Maintenance | Programming Indices & Other |
| Cost/Page | $ 0.05 | $ 0.14 | $ 0.003 | $ 0.021 | $ 0.003 |
| Cost/Document | $ 6.54 | $ 17.64 | $ 0.38 | $ 2.69 | $ 0.38 |
| Source: Conversation with Kelly Dunlap, U. S. DOE, OSTI, November, 1997. Assumes 126 pages per document. Estimates taken from experience in managing approximately 2,600 documents. | |||||
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
E. 2.2. OFFICE OF HUMAN RADIATION EXPERIMENTS
The DOE Office of Human Radiation Experiments was established in March 1994 to catalog Cold War radiation experiments on human subjects. Relevant historical documents were identified from DOE's estimated 3.2 million cubic feet of records. Presenting the results of this research on the Internet was deemed key to DOE being more open and responsive to the American public.
Over 200 staff in Washington, D.C., and around the country spent most of their time in 1994 in an effort to find, declassify if necessary, evaluate, and make publicly accessible and usable DOE's records related to human experimentation with radiation. These records included records in the custody of DOE and important private institutions that explain why human-subject research was performed. The approximately 3.2 million cubic feet of DOE records survive in dozens of locations from coast to coast, many of which are cataloged poorly, if at all. The stated goal of the radiation experiment program is to leave a roadmap to the information that is available.
Three categories of information are presented on the program's web site:
The series descriptions were used to target more detailed searches for individual documents. These documents were copied and sent to the Coordination and Information Center (CIC) in Las Vegas, Nevada. The CIC scanned and indexed the document into Internet-ready files. As of 1994, approximately 13,000 documents, comprising more than 150,000 pages were scanned in this manner. Additional documents have been added to the collection. The documents are available at http://www.eh.doe.gov/home.html.The information is fully searchable by personal names, places, technical, and many other keywords. Because of the large number of organizations invloved in this effort, there is no estimate available for the total cost of identifying, collecting, and preserving this information.
E.2.3. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
Enacted in 1966, the FOIA provides any person a statutory right, enforceable in court, of access to federal agency records. There are nine exemptions allowed to protect some records from disclosure and three special law enforcement record exclusions. Unless exempted from disclosure or excluded from the Act's coverage, virtually every record possessed by a federal agency must be made available to the public in one form or another.1
The Department of Energy Headquarters and Field Offices receive thousands of FOIA requests each year. The number of requests submitted for 1994 through 1996 are presented in Table E-2. The number of requests for 1994 and beyond do not include the number of requests for documents received at the 14 DOE Reading Rooms, which are located at various DOE sites and contain anywhere from 500 documents (PETC) to 313,701 documents (Nevada Test Site). Prior to 1994, the number of FOIA requests also included the number of requests for documents at DOE Reading Rooms. The number of requests submitted in 1992 and 1993 were 8,247 and 11,391, respectively.2
1"Freedom of Information Act Guide & Privacy Act Overview," U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, September 1996 edition.
2DOE FOIA Annual Report for 1994.
| APPENDIX E |
| 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | |
| Number of FOIA Requests Received | 2,949 | 3,136 | 2,837 |
| Total Cost of Administering FOIA | $4,909,553 | $5,124,366 | $5,515,453 |
| Approximate Unit Costa | $1,665 | $1,634 | $1,944 |
| a Calculated by dividing the Number of FOIA Requests Received by the Total Cost of Administering FOIA. Source: DOE Annual FOIA Reports for 1994, 1995, and 1996. |
|||
The total costs of administering the FOIA program are also shown in Table E-2. The costs include: Departmental personnel (salary and fringe benefits), litigation proceedings, overhead costs (training, traveling, subscriptions, printing, duplicating, and mailing), and other associated expenses for all program areas and field operation activities to administer the Freedom of Information Act. The approximate unit cost shown in is calculated by dividing the total annual cost by the total number of requests. The number of FOIA requests received and the approximate unit cost are shown in Figure E-3.
| Average Age of Requests (days) | |
| 1991 | 1,265 |
| 1992 | 1,196 |
| 1993 | 699 |
| 1994 | 603 |
| 1995 | 472 |
| Source: Freedom of Information Act: Progress and Accomplishments in the DOE, February, 1996. | |
DOE is required to respond to each FOIA request within 10 days; however, the request may not be completed for a much longer time period. The average age of requests submitted to DOE for 1991 through 1995 is shown in Table E-3. The average age of requests roughly correlates to the time required to respond to FOIA requests. As shown, the average age was reduced from 1,265 days in 1991 to 472 days (approximately one and one-third years) in 1995.
Not all FOIA requests are directed to the Environmental Management (EM) Program Office; requests may be made to any of the DOE Program Offices. DOE's FOIA Office does not track the number of requests for each program within DOE; however, of the 261 pending FOIA requests from January 1 through November 19, 1997, 24 of the requests (approximately 10 percent) were directed to EM.
E.2.4. LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROJECT
The LANL Environmental Restoration Project maintains the Facility for Information Management Analysis and Display (FIMAD) database containing the results of several million environmental sample analyses conducted to support cleanup at LANL. FIMAD users include the LANL Environmental Restoration Project, other programs at LANL, and state and national regulators.
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
FIMAD contains about 26,000 records of field data. Each record contains information regarding the samples collected, including the beginning and ending depths, the sample location, the sample identification number, sample results, and quality control data. Each record may contain data regarding multiple samples; FIMAD includes sample results for three to four million analytical points (which is approximately an average of 135 analytical points per record).3 FIMAD also contains the Screening Action Levels (SALs) for analyses of concern to the Environmental Restoration Project.
FIMAD allows users to merge the analytical data with geographical information to produce maps. As an example of a map that can be produced by FIMAD, FIMAD can plot the locations at which the concentration of chromium exceeded the SALs at a particular depth onto a map of LANL. FIMAD contains geographical information for each analytical point, as well as digital photographs of LANL, airborne images, hydrogeological data, watershed management information, and information regarding LANL infrastructure (e.g., locations of buildings and telephone lines). Users may access FIMAD on the Internet to generate maps directly or may submit a request to LANL to produce a particular map(s).
About 10 to 12 people are required to enter and edit data, maintain FIMAD, and generate the maps. About half of the personnel enter and edit data, and the other half maintain FIMAD and generate the maps. The hardware required includes 30 servers, based on a UNIX platform. The data are preserved in an Oracle database. Data for about 500,000 analytical points are entered into the system every year. Using the approximation of 135 analytical points per record, the 500,000 analytical points roughly translates into 3,700 records. Data are submitted electronically and in hard copy reports, which must be reconciled if there are discrepancies. About 3,000 maps are generated by FIMAD every year. When FIMAD was first installed, the annual cost was approximately $2 to 4 million. Currently, the annual cost of maintaining FIMAD is approximately $1.8 to 2.1 million.4
To calculate the approximate cost of entering and editing data, the project team divided the annual cost of maintaining FIMAD (about $2 million) by two (as discussed above, roughly one-half of the staff supports the entering and editing of data). Therefore, it appears to cost about $1 million per year to enter and edit approximately 3,700 records of data and about $1 million per year to maintain the GIS data and produce 3,000 maps displaying a variety of technical data.
E.2.5 OAK RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROGRAM
Pursuant to the DOE "Roadmap to the Year 2000" plan, the Environmental Restoration (ER) program at Oak Ridge has consolidated documents from 10 records centers at the K-25 plant into two records repositories. These records are searchable in an electronic index. The ten separate centers were created on an ad hoc basis throughout decades of plant operation (e.g., engineering would store its plans and drawings in one area, the budgetary staff would store financial records in another, etc.). DOE's goal is to turn over K-25 to private entities by the year 2010. This program reflects the fact that future stewards of the K-25 plant do not want to be burdened by record management activities. The cost for records management has been difficult to identify because there is not a specific line-item for records management; funding for records management is included in the administrative budget. DOE staff are currently working on identifying those records that should be turned over the future stewards of the site, and who should have access to the records.
Because records have a limited retention time, and NARA has not set standards for electronic file archiving, Oak Ridge has not engaged in scanning legacy documents. Much of the legacy information is stored on microfilm. Both legacy records, and records created on a going-forward basis are managed pursuant to DOE's records schedules.
3Conversation with Martha Menzel, FIMAD Tabular Data Manager, LANL, November, 1995.
4Conversation with Steve Bolivar, FIMAD Project Leader, LANL, November, 1997.
| APPENDIX E |
Table E-4 illustrates the scope of ER's document management activities at Oak Ridge. Active record volume has grown three-fold over the past five years. This is in part due to the recently lifted moratorium on records disposal during that time, initiated by DOE in response to inquiries regarding human radiation experiments. Legacy records are stored in boxes. These boxes are bar coded, and entered into a database, searchable on a limited basis by key word. The procedures used by staff to index these records involved randomly checking three places in each box to ascertain what types of records were available. This procedure did not fully characterize the legacy documents; however, it was deemed adequate by site staff given the limited requests for legacy ER data.
| Record Type | Volume of Records (cubic feet) |
| Active Records (1993) | 4,000 |
| Active Records (1997) | 12,000 |
| Legacy Records (1997) | 14,000 | Source: Conversation with Debbie Matteo, Oak Ridge, December 1997. |
A company known as Delphi Systems (Boston, MA) prepared a study of several document manage-ment systems for Oak Ridge ER. Based on this study, ER decided on a proprietary document management system known as Documentum. A preliminary analysis of benefits associated with electronic records management was initiated prior to system implementation, which identified the following benefits:
Active records and data have been managed on an ongoing basis for three years through the Documentum system at Oak Ridge ER. The Documentation software package is a completely integrated document management and workflow system, centered around a distributed document database server. Documentum is an object-oriented system, meaning that almost any type of document/data can be stored and retrieved in its native format. Document viewing may occur via third party viewers (e.g., over the Internet). Editing capabilities are provided on a Documentum workstation by launching the native application.
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
Documentum has the capability to store full documents, or to store only a filing profile. The filing profiles are fully-customizable. CMC Consulting (Atlanta, GA) assisted the Savannah River Site in making Documentum compatible with NARA records management regulations. The customized Documentum system used by Savannah River was adopted by Oak Ridge ER.
| Task | Approximately Annual Cost |
| Scoping | $300,000 |
| Initial Project Installation | $3,000,000 |
| Yearly Records Management Cost | $1,500,000 |
| Source: Conversation with Debbie Matteo, Oak Ridge, December, 1997. | |
The Documentum system, and associated improvements in the record management systems at Oak Ridge ER have allowed staff to manage the increased volume of active records with fewer staff: while active records have increased five-fold (see above) full time records management staff have has been reduced from 40 to 25.
E.2.6 FOCUS SITE
This section includes several cost benchmarks from the focus site, including the estimated direct and indirect costs for records management and document control in 1997. This section also includes several examples of the costs associated with re-creating data.
E. 2.6.1 Direct and Indirect Records Management Costs
At the focus site, costs for records management are both direct and indirect. Direct costs mean any cost taken on by the project using the support, while indirect costs mean any cost taken on as over-head. Projects contain tasks (line items) that represent the types of things being done on each project. Using the Rocky Flats Closure Project Life-Cycle Baseline, tasks were identified as records management tasks if the work was, by definition, records management. Records management at the focus site includes: records storage/retrieval, litigation support, library services, imaging services, record oversight, document control, and correspondence control. In all, 179 tasks were related to records management. Records management at the focus site comprise one percent of the total budget. Direct costs account for one-fifth of the total records management cost. Table E-6 details the costs of records management at the focus site.
| Total Cost Thousands) | Average Yearly % of Total Cost | |
| Direct Document Management | $ 11,974 | 0.20% |
| Indirect Document Management | $ 45,565 | 0.84% |
| Total Document Management | $ 57,539 | 1.03% |
| Total Other | $ 6,384,845 | 98.99% |
| Costs for document management include: (1) records management costs; (2) discovery and other legal costs; and (3) document control costs.
Source: Rocky Flats Closure Project Life-Cycle Baseline, Rev1 |
||
| APPENDIX E |
E. 2.6.2 Dose Reconstruction Phase II of a dose reconstruction for the focus site is currently taking place. During Phase I, ChemRisk performed calculations based on unclassified records at the site. This involved searching through records onsite, and offsite at the Denver NARA records repository. The initial study was prepared over the course of two to three years. The Phase I team encountered such a large volume of non-indexed records that they were forced to spot-check every box for useful information. Almost the entire cost of performing the Phase I study was spent on searching for records.
Phase II of the reconstruction involved going through classified records in the 881 Vault. This process took two professionals approximately one month to complete. These two staff searched through approximately 2,000 boxes of material (~ 2,400 cubic feet). The staff used "records receipts," which were not always complete to aid in their search of each box. Data gaps existed that forced the study team to extrapolate their results through months of missing records. They were aided somewhat by the Environmental Master File, which pointed them to certain useful boxes, and contained a limited number of scanned records.
A comprehensive automated records management system may have saved up to 75 percent of the labor hours spent on Phase II of the reconstruction study, reducing labor costs and allowing more time to be available for the study.5
E. 2.6.3 Search for Reactive Materials and Hazards
As a result of the discovery of reactive materials in several buildings at the focus site that were not previously known to be there, such as actuators and hydrides, the focus site is conducting a search to identify the use and management of reactive materials and materials of other hazardous potential at the focus site. Several methods are being used to conduct the search: taking a chemical and nuclear materials inventory, recording process knowledge, searching cargo containers and storage lockers, and surveying all site personnel and retirees.6 The total cost of re-generating records to identify the reactive materials and hazards, by conducting the search described above, is currently unknown, but is likely very high.
E. 2.6.4 Trench 1 Cleanup The focus site is planning to cleanup "Trench 1;" however, the records for the waste buried in Trench 1 (beginning as early as the 1950s) are minimal. The only records available are sample data records, indicating that 90 to 125 barrels of "special" or miscellaneous" wastes are buried in Trench 1. As a result, the search for information has been focused on interviews with past site employees. As of November 20, 1997, the costs for searching the records and conducting the interviews was approximately $56,000 (two persons working full-time for three months). No additional information to assist the planning of the cleanup has been gathered. As a result, the cleanup will be conducted assuming the highest risk scenario, which will result in higher remediation costs. Personnel will use the highest level of personal protective equipment and additional sampling will be conducted significantly more than typically required.7
5Conversation with Dr. Kathleen Meyer, December, 1997.
6"Search for Reactive Materials and Hazards -RGC-223-97," Memorandum from Robert Card and Jerry Harden to all Rocky Flats personnel and retirees, November 12, 1997.
7Fax from Laura Tyler, Rocky Mountain Remediation Services, November, 1997.
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
E. 2.6.5 Facility Characterization At the focus site, a facility characterization and inventory was performed during 1993, 1994, and 1995 that identified the nature and extent of contamination within the major facilities at the site. With a change over of the site contractor and several rounds of personnel reductions, personnel knowledgeable of the data and control of the data itself were lost. During initial characterization efforts of a major plutonium facility at the site, the characterization data were recovered from a stack of computers that were pending dispositioning. Recovery of the data resulted in a cost avoidance of nearly $1.5 million over the next two to three years for re-creation of the characterization data.
E. 2.6.6 Document Production to Support Litigation On June 6, 1989, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) began an investigation of the focus site. Unannounced, FBI investigators targeted specific focus site offices, where they knew particular doc-uments to be located, and began taking documents off site. On the first day of the investigation there was no record of which documents the FBI had seized and removed from the site. By the sec-ond day, the focus site records management office developed a process for cataloging and copying the documents prior to removal by the FBI. When requested, the FBI returned the documents seized on the first day for cataloging and photocopying by the focus site records management office. However, it is unknown whether all of the documents seized were returned; it is possible that some documents, potentially including vital records and/ or original records (i. e., focus site does not have a copy), may not have been returned.
The litigation support office at the focus site is currently facing the challenging task of producing documents seized by the FBI during the investigation to support on-going litigation (e.g., Cook and Stone cases described below). When particular requests are submitted for documents involved in the FBI investigation, the focus site must determine: (1) whether the document existed and (2) where the original and/ or copy of the document is located. When the focus site is unable to find a document, it is often difficult to know whether the document ever existed or whether it was among those seized on the first day of the investigation and was not returned to the focus site for cataloging and copying.
The litigation support office must produce many other documents to support on-going litigation, in addition to those related to the FBI investigation. During the litigation process, the production of documents can consume up to 100 percent of the time of the personnel in the litigation support office, particularly during the trial. At other times, the production of documents may require as little as five percent of their time. The percent of time required depends upon at what stage of the litigation process the case is in, the number of documents being requested, and the ease of identifying, searching for, and obtaining the documents.
Most litigation involves activities and decisions made in the past; many of the documents required are historical and may not currently be in use (e.g., they may have been generated by the focus site contractor that is no longer at the site). Thus, the largest problem facing the litigation support office is producing abandoned records.
The ability of the litigation support office to produce a document is partially dependent on the thoroughness of the generator of the document. If the generator of the document placed the document into the focus site records management control process, the litigation support office may be able to identify whether the document still exists. Depending upon the length of time between the generation of the document and current litigation activities, many of the documents may already have been destroyed according to the DOE records retention schedules. If the document has not been
| APPENDIX E |
destroyed, the litigation support office may then be able to identify where it is located. If the generator of the document did not place the document into the focus site records management control process, the effort to identify whether the document exists and where it is located becomes more difficult. For instance, the person who generated the document may no longer hold the same position s/ he held when generating the document. There are several scenarios for what s/ he did with the document, including the following:
The consequence of failing to produce a document is that the focus site office is not able to fully support the litigant in the case.
The focus site litigation support office is currently supporting two cases that are requiring a consid-erable amount of time and effort to conduct the search for documents: Cook case and Stone case. The Cook case (Marilyn Cook, et al. v. Rockwell International and Dow Chemical Company) is a class action suit in which the plaintiffs are concerned about their families health and safety and their property values due to possible contamination from offsite releases from the focus site. The Stone case (United States of America, ex rel. James S. Stone v. Rockwell International) is a false claims act in which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages and civil penalties for the wrongful conduct and acts of Rockwell. The total cost for document production for these cases is difficult to assess. Since their filings in 1989, the litigation support staff has spent several years' worth of time in document production, sometime requiring the full attention of all staff (up to six people), as well as personnel from across the site. The total number of documents produced to date have included over one mil-lion pages for each case.8
E. 2.7 WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT The cost for managing records at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is approximately two per-cent of the total budget (about $4 of $182 million). This cost includes equipment (e.g., scanning technologies), supplies, labor, and litigation support. Records are maintained in an active records system, an inactive records system, and in multiple inventories in the field. WIPP maintains an electronic index of all records, including a description of the records and their location. Some records are also maintained and can be retrieved electronically.9
E. 2.8 YUCCA MOUNTAIN SITE The Yucca Mountain site is close to completing the development of a records management system that achieves traceability and transparency of archived records. The system developed and main-tained by TRW was put in place to fulfill the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Subpart J, which states the needs for the system in order to obtain a license to dispose of high-level waste (HLW) at Yucca Mountain. This proposed geologic repository is still in the early stages of development and much like the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), it will face close scrutiny by agencies such as EPA before any waste is approved for disposal there. The records system was designed to allow storage and retrieval of data needed to support the viability assessment application. For fiscal year 1998, two percent ($ 6 million) of the operational budget for Yucca Mountain is allocated towards its records man-agement system. Nearly 720,000 documents that were previously stored on microfilm must be con-verted to an image file. Yucca Mountain estimates that 50 percent of the legacy data will be imaged by the end of fiscal year 1998. Currently two-thirds ($ 4 million) of the records management budget
8Conversation with Andrea Wilson (Source One Management, Inc.) of the focus site litigation support office.
9Conversation with Barbara Compton of Day and Zimmerman, February 25, 1998.
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
is allocated to the reprocessing of legacy data currently on microfilm while one-third ($ 2 million) of the budget covers processing of records as they are generated.10
Requirements of the Yucca Mountain records management system are based on licensing requirements. Although the types of records kept will be similar to stewardship data, a requirements analysis was not performed assessing stewardship needs.
The records management system implemented at Yucca Mountain has created new understandings of the vital steps involved in developing an efficient records archive: detailed analysis of current systems of records management to facilitate conversion to electronic data management system (version control, routing, access control); early determinations on necessary retrieval types; design of indexes which allow for this type of retrieval; establishment of controlled vocabulary for indexing purposes; and functionality to allow the generator (subject matter expert) of documents to add categories for indexing purposes.
E.3 Other Federal Agencies Benchmark Costs
This section presents benchmark costs from other federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
E. 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA's Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM), along with the EPA Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Work Group, developed the EPA Spatial Data Library System (ESDLS). A repository for the Agency's new and legacy geospatial data holdings, users of ESDLS can access these data holdings through various GIS applications.
Maps on Demand (MOD)( http:// www. epa. gov/ enviro/ html/ mod/ index. html) is part of the ESDLS (http:// www. epa. gov/ enviro/ html/ esdls/ esdls_ over. html). This service generates maps that display envi-ronmental information for the entire United States. MOD accesses data available through the EPA Envirofacts Warehouse. Maps are requested online and an email is sent when it is ready. The email includes information on where the maps are posted for viewing or downloading.
The SiteInfo application of ESDLS creates maps and reports, such as EPA-regulated facility, demographic, and safe drinking water information for areas surrounding any given location in the United States (lower 48 states). The query allows the user to access maps of facility locations and view the surrounding demographics, Geographic Retrieval and Analysis System (GIRAS) land use and land-cover, as well as physical and cultural features.
The Zip Info application of ESDLS maps and reports provide information about EPA-regulated facilities, demographics, and safe drinking water information for areas within any given ZIP Code in the lower 48 United States. Similar map searches can be done by county and watershed.
The Facility Density Mapper application allows users to map and assess the concentration of EPA-regulated facilities in a given area. Facilities are identified by a valid Facility Indexing System (FINDS) identification number assigned by EPA. These maps can include demographic data, such as population density, ethnic population distribution, and socioeconomic information. Additional, information about infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and buildings can be included. A variety of facilities that are regulated by EPA can also be mapped using data bases that have been designed to hold information about those facilities. Examples of EPA regulations and the data bases that are associated with them include the NPDES Water Discharge requirements (the PCS data bases),
10Communication with David Warriner, DOE Records Manager, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office.
| APPENDIX E |
Superfund (CERCLIS), RCRA (RCRIS), Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), Air Monitoring require-ments (AIR/ AFS), and the Safe Drinking Waster Act (SDWIS).
The cost of producing the ESDLS was several million dollars (the exact amount was not obtainable). The costs included converting maps to electronic files, purchasing hardware and software, maintain-ing up-to-date data, and labor hours. EPA is currently developing an interactive GIS database to allow access to these data.
E. 3.2 NATIONAL OCEANIC ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION The NOAA Environmental Information Services provides information on data sets available from NOAA data centers and other NOAA data providers. The data sets include data regarding the oceans, atmosphere, nautical charting, weather, coastal zones, and other related subjects. The NOAA data centers include the NOAA National Climactic Data Center, National Geophysical Data Center, National Oceanographic Data Center, and the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Other NOAA data providers include the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service and the NOAA Libraries.
NOAA's Environmental Services Data Directory on the Internet (http:// www. esdim. noaa. gov) allows Internet users to search the databases available from the NOAA data centers and other NOAA data providers described above. The Data Directory allows the user to identify all data sets, including publications and reports, related to the subject( s) of interest and identify where the data are available (either on-line or its physical location). The Data Directory also provides other relevant information regarding the data sets in a metadata format. The metadata format is based upon the standards set by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The information available in a metadata for-mat include the following elements:
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
The Data Directory was started around 1990 and contains descriptions of about 3,000 data sets and 7,000 publications and reports. The cost of maintaining the Data Directory is about $200,000 to $400,000 per year. This cost includes three to four personnel to maintain the Internet site and enter, edit, and maintain the metadata descriptions. The time required to enter the metadata regarding a particular data set varies, depending upon the experience of the staff and the amount of data readily available to complete the description. NOAA estimates that the time required can be as little as one hour, if the staff is familiar with the metadata standard and information regarding the data set is readily accessible, and as great as two days (sixteen hours), if the staff is unfamiliar with the meta-data standard and information regarding the data set is not readily accessible (e.g., the data set is archived and is not currently active).11
Based on the information provided by NOAA, the estimated cost of developing a metadata descrip-tion for a particular data set is presented in Table E-7. The estimated cost of maintaining the meta-data database for NOAA is presented in Table E-8.
| Lower End of Range | Higher End of Range | |
| Number of Hours Per Descriptiona | 1 | 16 |
| Hourly Rateb | $16 | $16 |
| Cost Per Description | $16 | $256 |
| aConversation with Gerald Barton, NOAA, Environmental Information Services, November, 1997.
bEstimated hourly rate. |
||
| Lower End of Range | Higher End of Range | |
| Annual Cost | $200,000 | $400,000 |
| Number of Data Sets | 10,000 | 10,000 |
| Annual Cost Per Data Seta | $20 | $40 |
| aThe Annual Cost Per Data Set is calculated by dividing the Annual Cost
by the Number of Data Sets.
Source: Conversation with Gerald Barton, NOAA, Environmental Information Services, November, 1997. |
||
E. 3.3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION The NRC deals with large volumes of records during everyday activities. These documents support the Agency's policies, decisions and bases for regulatory actions. NRC has recently implemented the Agency Document Access and Management System (ADAMS). Prior to implementing this system, the Agency used 75 local and one central indexing system. The centralized system, NUDOCS, was originally developed in 1978. NUDOCS was similar to an electronic library filing system. It allowed author and title searches of NRC documents. If document retrieval was necessary, staff would have to either search in a very limited hard copy archive, or request that a microfiche version be copied in the Agency's File Center.
11Conversation with Gerald Barton, NOAA, Environmental Information Services, November, 1997.
| APPENDIX E |
The following problems were reported by NRC staff due to this system:
The following document control options were considered by the NRC: status quo, re-platforming NUDOCS, installing a document management system such as ADAMS, which was no compatible with NARA requirements, or installing a NARA-sanctioned electronic system. A cost-benefit study performed by the Agency determined that a NARA-approved electronic management system would be the most effective solution to the NRC's document control needs.
The NUDOCS system is no longer supported by the original vendor, and was not prepared to deal with the year 2000 problem. Attempting to fix the legacy system could potentially cost more than the installation of a new system. Annual costs prior to the ADAMS implementation were approximately $7 million, and included automated purchase and maintenance of systems, contractor support, supplies (e.g., for duplicating paper), and rented space (and the imputed value of government building space) associated with document usage, distribution, and storage. This cost did not include NRC staff time, which was estimated at 350 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) each year.
Document collaboration capability was also desired by NRC. In the past, staff prepared documents and emailed them or distributed hard copies to others for review or additions. Document progress was monitored by email or phone. The ability to keep one centralized current version of a document is an important feature of the ADAMS system. It is designed to be a cradle-to-grave management system for NRC documents. Paper duplication efforts are substantially reduced by the ADAMS system. Document "reuse" or "mining" is now available through cutting and pasting of online text. The ADAMS system has been designed to comply with NARA requirements as the NRC's official electronic record keeping system.
The following benefits of using ADAMS are expected by NRC:
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
E.4 Commercial Vendors Benchmark Costs
This section presents benchmark costs from commercial vendors in the records management industry. This section also contains examples of savings realized due to the application of particular records management practices.
E. 4.1 OFFSITE STORAGE Industry incurs costs to archive, store, and retrieve documents from long-term storage. Larger vol-umes of material may be stored at a substantial discount (i. e., a large company storing 50,000 boxes and adding 500 per year pays a much lower per box rate than a small firm sending 20 boxes per year offsite). Pierce Leahy is a large national storage company. The costs for document storage at a Pierce Leady are presented in Table E-9.
| Item | Fee |
| Process fee for initial storage ($/ box) | $ 0.95 |
| Storage fee, ($/ box/ year) | $ 1.80 |
| Retrieval search fee ($/ box/ occurrence) | $ 1.50 |
| Retrieval loading fee ($/ box/ occurrence) | $ 1.50 |
| Transportation charge | $ 9.75 |
| Source: Conversation with Pierce Leahy, Sales Department, November, 1997. | |
Costs are customized for each large client. In this case, the client has approximately 92,000 cubic feet of records under management. The per year fee for each box is based on a rate of $0.12/ cubic foot/ month. For very large clients, this rate may be as low as $0.10/ cubic foot/ month.
E. 4.2 MANAGEMENT OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS FileNET Corporation provides client/ server software to organize, manage, store, and access electronic documents. The electronic documents include text, scanned images, faxes, spreadsheets, graphics, CAD drawings, and video. FileNET offers a variety of software packages, depending upon the num-ber of documents and the functionality desired by the customer. The product brands they sell include FileNet, Watermark, Filenet EDM, Greenbar Computer Output to Laser Disk (COLD).12
The FileNET Internet site provides a demonstration software package to estimate the savings of using the FileNET software. Though it appears to be software designed for active management of files, the projected savings indicate the benefits of electronic management of files. The projected savings of applying an integrated solution to a company's electronic documents include the following:
12Based on FileNET Internet Site. (http:// www. filenet. com/ prods/ index. html).
| APPENDIX E |
E. 4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS
E Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) develops the EDR Radius Map Report for sites to meet the government records search requirements of the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments.
Included in the EDR Radius Map Report is the site name, Site EPA ID number, surficial aquifer flow direction, locations of oil and gas pipelines/ electrical lines and measured depth to water. For a given radius around the site, EDR conducts a search of available government environmental information, along with site maps and geologic information. Available "reasonably ascertainable" government records are used as a source for maps and detailed drawings of a requested site. A list and description of the databases the EDR searches is provided below. The cost of an EDR-Radius Map with Geocheck is $195. This cost data is based on information presented in the EDR Web page (http:// www. edrnet. com/). For larger sites, such as the focus site (approximately 6,100 acres), the EDR Radius map is approximately $535. Special contracts can be set up for EDR's services, so prices may vary. The following is a list of databases that EDR searches:
| ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS |
| APPENDIX E |
In addition to EDR Radius Map Reports, EDR also provides other services to support environmental site assessments. For example, EDR can provide a copy of an aerial photograph of a site for each decade (if available). For sites within Virginia, the cost is $95. For sites outside of Virginia, there is an initial search file ($ 49) to identify those photographs that are available.
E.5 Other Benchmark Costs
The OSU Archives and Records Management Program published annual estimates of maintaining a five-drawer filing cabinet in an office. The estimates are summarized in Table E-10. The total annual cost of maintaining an active five-drawer filing cabinet is approximately $2,100. Assuming there are 10,000 pages in a filing cabinet, the cost of maintaining each page is approximately $0.21.
| Item | Approximately Annual Cost |
| Salary & Benefits | $1,912.50 |
| Floor Space | $104.00 |
| Supplies (Active File Maintenance) | $55.00 |
| 5-Drawer Filing Cabinet | $27.50 |
| Total | $2,099.00 |
| Source: OSU Archives and Records Management Program Internet Site (http:// www. orst. edu/ Dept/ archives/ ARMH/ rma42cc. html) | |
|
Last Updated 03/16/1999 (jrjb)