I want to speak to you today regarding state activities and initiatives in managing environmental information. I'd like to give you four messages:
1) States generate most of the data in EPA's national data systems;
2) States are driven to manage this data effectively because they must have it to operate their own programs;
3) States have become the greatest innovators in the management of environmental data, and
4) States are working with EPA and the public to make this data available.
First, States collect and provide about 94% of the environmental pollutant information contained in federal program data systems (report attached: "Environmental Pollutant Reporting Data in EPA's National Systems"). This includes data from the regulated community and direct measurements of environmental quality. It includes data for water, air, waste and drinking water. States provide EPA nearly all the environmental pollutant and compliance data it uses to manage the environment. Data that EPA passes on the to the public through programs such as Envirofacts often originates in the state environmental agencies.
Second, states use this data themselves to manage their own programs, and so are driven to make sure that the data is managed usefully. This became especially true during the 1990s as the States assumed more and more of the delegated programs from EPA. More States over the past two years have invested in information technology and moved toward data integration. This increases the effectiveness of environmental program management and provides for sharing and exchange of information, and thus improved public access to data and improved data quality. States work together through ECOS to share experiences and knowledge and thereby assist one another and EPA in developing capabilities to manage environmental information. Some States have made significant investments of state funds and others have relied heavily on federal funds coming through EPA's One-Stop program. Such federal funding has been particularly helpful to smaller States such as ours.
My third point is that the conditions I have already mentioned have led the States to become great innovators in environmental data management.
In my home state of Utah, our agency has developed a standard used by all programs to identify facilities and link them between program databases. We also created a global data catalog to allow public access to information contained in our databases. We have developed an electronic reporting capability to allow regulated facilities to report required information and to provide for sharing of that information among the media programs within the department. From these efforts, we developed an Internet access capability that will allow public access to information 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. We especially wanted to make permitting and compliance information available.
Other States have also made remarkable progress in this area. For example,
1) Pennsylvania was one of the first states to present timely multi-media compliance information on facilities on line to the public. They are now sharing that system with other states.
2) The State of Washington's led other states in developing a de facto national standard its Facility Identification Template for States is now in its second version and is being used by at least 25 states to help them jump-start their data reinvention efforts, saving each State about a quarter of a million dollars.
3) New Jersey's Environmental Management System fully integrates all regulatory and permitting systems one of the first anywhere to do so when it's completed later this year.
4) Virginia's Centralized Enterprise Data System was created in 18 months, merging 77 legacy systems that were not compatible into a single integrated system. The State itself invested $12 million of its own State tax dollars to create this system. Virginia is now offering the system to other States at no cost.
5) New Hampshire is integrating its environmental databases by linking facility and site data, and has begun making site remediation, UST, and air permitting information accessible via the Internet.
My fourth and final point is that States are committed to working with our federal partners in making our data available to the public. The states and EPA created the State/EPA Data Management Workgroup in January 1998. We developed a vision statement and a set of operating principles (see attached: "State/EPA Vision and Operating Principles for Environmental Information Management"). These define a framework for a new way for states and EPA to do business together. They commit States and EPA to a partnership in building locally and nationally accessible information systems. Major accomplishments of the workgroup include:
1) the creation of a data standards council,
2) the development of a vision for a national data exchange network,
3) establishment of a joint process for addressing burden reduction in data reporting and
4) a discussion forum and action plan for public access to environmental data. A full summary of the activities of the workgroup is attached for your information.
Conclusions and Plans
States are making significant accomplishments in environmental data management. But the cost is high. Currently, the President's budget proposes $30 Million for environmental information management (proposed as $16 million for States and $14 million for EPA). States believe that this funding is essential in addressing a new vision of environmental information management. States and EPA will use this funding to develop data exchange standards, and enhance the capability of both states and EPA to exchange data. Continued federal investment is critical for this vision to be realized, and we need to make sure that all States have a full opportunity to participate. Collective investments in standards development will be needed to make such a network viable.
States envision a national environmental information exchange network that recognizes that the agencies that collect information would be responsible for its stewardship, and will provide access to such information through the network. Such a network is based on common standards that will provide a common base for information access, exchange and use; but will allow flexibility in meeting individual state and EPA needs regarding data housing and handling. This would move the focus away from a common national data "system" towards a focus on data quality and interpretation, while providing states, EPA and others the ability to use their on-going work to create "portals" for access to information sources. This will require both state and EPA effort to make such an exchange work and must be developed in such a way that all states, both large and small can participate in the exchange. (A copy of the working version of the State-EPA "Shared Expectations for a National Environmental Exchange Network" document is attached).
Given the impact of decisions made based on environmental information and the need to assure its accessibility and accuracy, it is important that States and the federal government continue to work together to develop and utilize data management technology in a sound, responsible and efficient way. There is a long way to go, but significant progress is being made. States have provided leadership in this important effort and are committed to continuing to do so to assure that the ever-increasing demands for information are met and that necessary information is available for responsible environmental decision making.