Climate Change Sub-Segment Architecture Status and Current Direction

1. Climate Change Sub-Segment ArchitectureStatus and Current Direction Gene Durman: Office of Air and RadiationAugust 3, 2010

2. Overview • Program Office CC Activities Baseline • Recap of the February 20 EA Workshop at which Baseline was presented • Presentation at OEI National Symposium • Mid-Project Assessment • Manager’s perspective on preparing for potential Congressional action • Priorities for remainder of FY 2010 • Selected Next Steps • Architecture for CC Research & Development activities • Architecting information flows on research results to outside users • Developing integrated CC forecasts and cost/benefit analysis for future policy • Sub-issue: Use of Social Media for CC R&D – methods for integrating in Troux tool • Architecture at the interagency level • Architecting delivery of services using the BRM Mode of Delivery layer Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

3. Crosswalk with Federal Segment Architecture Methodology (FSAM) Climate change segment architecture currently in Steps 1, 2, 3 http://www.fsam.gov/docs/FSAM_Complete_v1_1.pdf page 2 (e-page 5)

4. Phase 1 ActivitiesNovember 2009 – February 2010 Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

5. Cross-cutting Nature of Climate Climate Issues • CC issue cross-cuts at Services to Citizens layer of the BRM • Across EPA • Across Government • Some activities are wholly CC-related (e.g., Mandatory Reporting Rule) • Other Solutions must integrate into existing priorities New AQMCC Segment Old AQM Segment Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

6. STRATEGIC GOALS Mitigation Adaptation Local Planning & Zoning Reqmt’s CAFE Standards Mandatory InfrastructureInvestments GreenCleanup PROGRAM APPROACH Methane Programs Voluntary RegionalPrograms Waste Wise Conceptual Structure of Climate Change Sub-Segment Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

7. Phase 1 Activities (November – February) Interviews Analytics Mapped activities on EPA Org chart Drivers (statutes, EOs, rules…) Programs and Initiatives Data flows in, across EPA, out Outside partner impacts Public NGOs States/locals/tribes Other Federal Agencies • 42 Interviews conducted • Most offices covered, more planned • Talks with SMEs and program leaders (branch chief & above) • Programmatic direction • What is new • What data/information req’d • Future directions Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

8. Recap of EA Workshop Phase 1 Activity • Workshop held at SRA on February 20 • Attendance from across agency, approximately 30 people • LMI (Logistics Management Institute, outside firm working with DOE) attended at their own request • Strongly positive feedback (esp. from OW and OSWER) • Continue on same course • Contact rest of group as needed • Administrator’s office asked to be kept informed • Contracting pause until May The workshop presented interactive diagrams showing data flows into and out of climate change programs, databases, and applications. Material was divided into Mandatory initiatives (programs where compliance is mandated by statute or exec order) and Voluntary programs (information transfer such as Energy Star). Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

9. Mapping compatible with Troux, but aimed at Management rather than Architects Phase 1 Activity Diagramming for Climate Change uses the familiar EPA organization chart as its ground layer. Data flows, systems, and users are shown in layers. The Visio diagram itself uses objects that contain information that the Troux (formerly Metis) tool and upload and display. Target audience: Management and program personnel. The old Metis tool is now upgraded to Troux, but uses Metis-style graphics. Aimed at the professional architect, the interface is not suitable for presentations to management or program offices. Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

10. Presentation: OEI National Symposium Phase 1 Activity • Panel discussion • Chair: David Prompovitch, Acting EPA Chief Architect • Presenters: Gene Durman OAR, Vince Allen (OW), Lisa Jenkins (OSWER) • Theme: DOD-type OV-1 drawing • One for each of the presenters and their programs (Lisa Jenkins concept) • Very brief discussion of architectural drawings and methodology Although the presentation included some discussion of the Workshop diagrams, it focused on the above interactive diagram, a pictorial presentation of the programs affected by climate change in OAR, OW, and OSWER. Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

11. Mid-Project AssessmentJune 2010 Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

12. How can the CC architecture help top management? Situation today • Congress could act on CC relatively soon, ranging from… • Slight modifications to business as usual, to • Major redirection to market-based solutions (carbon tax, cap and trade) • New mandates likely to involve • Cross government activities, most likely partnering with DOE • Emphasis on research and reporting, new tools, data sharing and transparency, some form of market-based approaches Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

13. How can the CC architecture help top management? What managers are asking What the CC segment can offer Ability to put new priorities in context quickly Comprehensive overview of baseline CC operations Who is doing what, how they relate, how information is flowing, how it links to current obligations and budget A structure for presenting this at internally and among agencies Identification of gaps among programs, research efforts, and interagency relationships How to link models and data for more efficient reporting, baseline assessment, and options evaluation • How can I be best prepared to take on whatever policies might emerge? • What machinery can I put in place now to best position my program for future eventualities? • What am I doing now that could be adapted to other uses? • What impacts will policy option X have on my existing CC and non-CC related activities? Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

14. Themes for FY 2010 CC segment continuation • Research and its relation to programs’ and agency priorities • Map CC research to program priorities, data transparency requirements, public needs • Begin mapping of interagency climate models, impacts models, and economic benefits models to describe integrated baseline for present and future policy • Interagency delivery of CC-related services to citizens • Begin process of mapping EPA’s contributions to CC services to other agencies’ services • Use BRM Mode of Delivery as the organizing concept for service categorization Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

15. Continued Coordination with EA Program • Forum for inter-program coordination • EAWG and Workshop have been valuable forums for communication • May conduct additional workshops or other meetings as new issues emerge • Troux development • Integrate Visio work to date into the EPA tools • Use Troux to develop interactive analytics not possible in Visio • Interagency development • As interagency relationships are developed (e.g., with DOI), EA Program will be involved • Special issues development • Some issues discovered by CC Segment are really general—of potential concern elsewhere in FSAM • E.g., Social media modeling within FSAM and Troux • Budget crosswalk • Changes in BAS structure since 2005 have made it difficult to duplicate earlier budget work • Need methodology to do management-level budget analysis for CC Sub- Segment, perhaps other segments Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

16. Priority Next StepsJuly 2010 – September 2010 Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

17. Continuation of Program Mappings New Activity Filling in gaps, validating previous results Document activities in other offices Additional interviews with offices/regions not yet reached OCSPP, OA, OIA, ORD, regions (see next) Fill in links between AA-ships Provide some contacts with key outside agencies (e.g., DOE, USDA) • Further interviews with main offices already contacted • OAR, OW, OSWER, OEI • Validation and further details of existing material Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

18. CC Architecture for Research New Activity Disseminating research results to external users Architecting major climate and cost/benefit models Future mitigation programs are likely to be market based Analytics will integrate climate forecasts + impacts models + benefits models = basis for trades Will enable next generation of trading after CAMDS-type cap and trade • Showing research as series of projects is not useful • APPROACH: focus on how CC-related projects and programs deliver results to programs, partners, public • Emphasize how research + combinations of authoritative data + innovative info/analytic tools = benefit to states, locals, etc. Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

19. CC Architecture for Research New Activity The Problem Our Approach Concentrate on projects whose results will be used by specific audiences Map projects to EPA offices interested in results Map project results to outside users (e.g., state/local govs) Emphasize projects whose results will be distributed using IT services Web services Dedicated analytic tools Etc. • Many individual research projects relate in some way to climate change issues • Simply enumerating individual research projects in the architecture tool (Visio, Troux) doesn’t add much value—a text list of projects would be just as useful • Projects’ results can be of interest to multiple audiences • Internal EPA offices • External Fed agencies • Non-fed gov’t and public Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

20. Interagency Services to Citizens New Activity The Problem Our Approach Develop a view of Services that puts the Service itself at the center of the model Model to illustrate: what it is, and how it is delivered Use the BRM Mode of Delivery as the Reference Model Show all contributing agencies and data flows Discover redundancies and gaps • The Federal Gov’t provides many climate-related Services to Citizens • Information and data • Direct services (planning, emergency response) • Grants and other funding for infrastructure • Etc. • Some services are provided jointly by more than one agency • EPA + DOE, EPA + DOT, etc. Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment

21. Interagency Climate Impacts Modeling Architecture New Activity The Problem Our Approach Begin the process of mapping links between the pieces, including EPA and other players Major climate models (NOAA, universities, etc.) Major impact models (heat effects, stormwater effects, etc.) Valuation models (ecosystem services, etc.) The results will be preliminary, but the architecture discipline seems ideal for this purpose Our project can provide a methodology for raising this architecture to the management level • Long range response to Climate Change, no matter what form it takes (cap & trade, carbon tax, etc.) must rely in the end on an integration of • Climate forecasts • Models of the effects of these climate forecasts on air, water, land resources • Valuation or risk assessment of those effects • All these pieces exist or are being built, but there is no mapping of how they fit together Status Rpt on Climate Change Sub-Segment