The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Issue Paper

1. The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Issue Paper Stewardship Conference April 14, 2009 Denver Colorado.

2. Overview • Completion of the high resolution NHD for the nation was a major milestone and accomplishment • State and federal partners contributed significantly to the development of the NHD • These partners had high expectations regarding return on investment and committed their organizations to the use of Dataset • Discussions within partnering organizations identified risks associated with USGS support levels for stewardship of the NHD • A core group of NHD Stewards and others who were intimately involved in the NHD Program determined that an Issue paper would be a good way to convey these concerns to USGS in a constructive manner.

3. Developing the NHD Issue Paper • Following a number of discussions a decision was made to summarize concerns in an Issue Paper to be sent to the USGS Director • An iterative process to develop the Paper followed • A small group formed to create an initial draft • This draft was shared with the NHD technical group • The Paper was eventually distributed to all identified NHD Stewards • End result: This was a true grass roots effort that reflected, to the best of our ability, the view of the Stewardship Community from across the nation

4. Primary Authors of Paper • Katie Hattenhouer, Arkansas • LorriPeltz-Lewis, California • David Anderson, Florida* • Linda Davis, Idaho • Ricardo Lopez-Torrijos, New York • Dan Wickwire, Oregon • Bill Kaiser, Oregon • Paul Caffrey, Wyoming • Tommy Dewald, U.S. EPA • Brian Sanborn, U.S. Forest Service

5. Overriding Goal • To assist USGS in getting the resources that were needed to sufficiently support the NHD Stewardship Program • To protect the significant investment made in this dataset at both the national and state levels

6. USGS Support Areas Examined in the Issue Paper Support to the following: • Project Management • Development of key applications • Staffing for stewardship positions • USGS training program • IT infrastructure and staffing

7. Project Management Concerns • USGS was not employing a strong enough approach to project Management (standard PM practices) • The project “list” contained too many tasks to allow for prioritization or forward progress • There was poor overall communication between USGS and the stewardship community • Changing priorities were poorly communicated • Key projects, needed to support the Stewardship Community, were not moving forward

8. Recommendations • Fill NHD Technical Project Manager position • Initiate an approach to Project Management that coordinates management of related projects • Apply higher level of discipline to Project Management following industry standard practices • Communicate Project Management decisions • Use well-defined requirements to justify budgets • Solicit Project Management support from benefiting partners where possible

9. Application Support • Development and delivery of key applications seemed to be languishing • Due to lack of staffing, there was an inability to take on development of new applications • Progress on applications was not uniformly communicated to stewards • Extended timelines were resulting in increased costs and other in-state challenges for the stewards

10. Recommendations • Work towards adding or shifting application development resources to better meet USGS commitment to NHD Stewardship • Work with Stewardship Community to determine needed implementation timelines for key applications • Explore creative solutions for increasing programming resources

11. Staffing of Key Stewardship Positions • Technical POC positions were not fully staffed across nation • The long vacant Technical Project Manager position had not been filled • POCs were multi-tasking between technical support and providing training • There was a perception that the POCs time was split between NHD and other programs • There was frustration on the lack of progress on and/or loss of Stewardship Agreements

12. Recommendations • Staff all POC positions • Ensure that the support role of the POCs is not diluted by responsibilities for other datasets • Given that the POCs are responsible for assisting with State Stewardship Agreements, ensure that they provide timely support to their development

13. Training Program • There was a perception that the training program was not as well organized as it should be • Standard training strategies and plans were not available for review • POCs were multi-tasking and this could be detrimental to both training and technical support roles • The training need would grow exponentially in coming years…. Would USGS approach to training be up to this task?

14. Recommendations • Limit the multi-tasking of POCs • Evaluate a strategy for hiring dedicated trainers • Further develop the NHD training strategy to account for anticipated increased need for training • Explore opportunities to use State Steward resources to supplement existing USGS training program

15. IT Infrastructure and Support • USGS had just upgraded its IT infrastructure and was dramatically improving turn-a-round time on NHD transactions • There was strong sentiment that USGS needed to ensure that infrastructure and staffing continued to grow with anticipated expansion of stewardship activities

16. Recommendations • Ensure that IT infrastructure and staffing are in place to meet level of service specified in NHD Stewardship Agreements

17. Actions and Timeline • Issue Paper provided to Director Myers on May 9, 2008 • Cover letter accompanying Paper requested a response from the Director • Director’s response received on June 24, 2008 • The response provided specific actions that USGS was undertaking to better support the NHD • Response requested that Stewardship Community provide ongoing feedback to USGS ……

18. Contact Information Dan Wickwire U.S. Bureau of Land Management Oregon State Office 505.808.6272 Dan_Wickwire@blm.gov