Filename: irmwt_notes_slc_5-apr-99.rtf Last edited: 1400-12-apr-99

April 5-7, 1999
Salt Lake City, UT

Motion: Validate notes from Riverside meeting as corrected.

Seconded and carried. Will be posted to web site.

Use decision based agenda divided into action items and information items. Don't have to stick to numerical order of agenda; evaluate timeframe needed and do shortest ones just before lunch or breaks. Staff work is already done by person assigned that agenda item; vote on at the meeting. It is most important that agenda action items are in two weeks before the meeting, plus any reading material that goes with it, to provide the agencies time have discussions and make decisions. Staff work has to be done up front. Each person's agency must be informed of items, so it doesn't become a personal agenda, rather than an agency agenda. It is also important to have the right voting membership at meetings, not just a substitute proxy. Those attending must be able to make decisions for their agency.

To make meetings more effective it was agreed to conduct between-meeting conference calls, especially to discuss topical items, updating each other.

Motion: Liz will take notes and act as collection point for assembling agenda. $$ from committee to pay travel and/or salary stipend. Failing that the duties will be rotated among members.

Discussion: A rough draft agenda should be produced at end of meeting for next meeting. An actual draft agenda could come out halfway through meetings (every four months) and final out two to three weeks before meeting. Members are the only ones who can place something on the agenda, but input is allowed from non-members. Items should be distinguished either as an action item or information item. All agenda items all must have a sponsor and be brief in their content; they must also include an estimate time frame. The ``Executive Secretary'' (Liz) also pulls stuff from last minutes needing additional action. This person would also be the repository, and be responsible for agenda organization. The Chair, however would make the decision whether an item goes on the agenda or not. Liz and Mike will discuss the details for the next agenda and will email to members.

Other options for responsibility of above duties could be the IRM-PMO or the IRMWT Chair.

Notice of meetings is not getting out to the local Coordination Centers. Location of Coordination Centers decides where we have meetings so that they can attend. They need to be notified well in advance. Next meeting is in Rhinelander Su will advise the Coordination Center of meeting so they can attend.

Motion was seconded and carried.

Gladys Crabtree will be taking over for Nancy DeLong as NPS rep. Su DaWalt will be rotating out; suggestions for replacement candidates will come from NASF through Jim Hall of Texas. Chair will make final decision re: replacement. BLM may be rotating their position with John Gebhard rotating out and Shari Aikens or other BLM rep coming in. Nothing has been made official. Mike requests that John come along as advisor because of his long-term knowledge on the team. Steve Haglund will be moving on in 9 months due to retirement. He will be replaced with a new liaison from NWCG.

IRM working team list dated Feb. '99 is totally out of date. Liz will update, and also add mailing addresses to the current list on agenda.

Several team members have included in their performance evaluation their role on the team, which places emphasis on priority by the agency. This also provides an avenue for feedback by individual agencies.

Motion: Suggest to host agencies that members have team membership performance on their performance evaluation.

Seconded and carried. Mike will inform Jim Stumpf.

Discussion: Mike feels that for the IRM working team to be successful, the Chair should be rotated, perhaps every 1½ to 2 years. There is nothing in charter regarding length of appointment. Rotating chair is imperative to give adequate attention to infrastructure of the group. John G. and Cal will work on charter, then take to NWCG for approval.

Motion: 2-3 members look at charter and NWCG stand, then make recommendations for how the chair will be rotated, among other things.

Seconded and carried.

There are questions from the US Fire Administration (USFA) on out why there are 3 fire statistics projects going on. Congress has mandated US Fire Administration to carry all fire statistics nationwide. NWCG decided they had too many projects going and put theirs (IFRS) on hold. Agencies involved with other projects need to think about where they need to go from here. How much has been spent by other two (BLM & FWS) that could have gone to original effort?

It was suggested that the IFCC advisory group look at this issue.

Motion: Send a letter to give notification to NWCG re: USFA concerns. Question whether we are still supporting the strategy document stating a single statistics program.

Discussion: Letter will be drafted by Jon Stiles, John Gebhard, Scott Bradshaw, Barry Mathias, then carried forward to chair and agreed upon by members via electronic review. Due date of draft letter to IRM working team is 4/22. Letter will identify concerns regarding more than one effort going on, with projects not related to NWCG; individual agency actions inconsistent with NWCG directions, and the resources that are being expended on separate projects that could have been used towards IFRS. Jon Skeels will talk with Stan Stewart to find out more. Afterward have an IRM working team conference call to see what other action might be needed.

Seconded and carried.

Jon Skeels gave a progress report on the ROSS project. The contract has been awarded and the project is in the design phase. Nancy DeLong is the Boise coordinator. The project is expensive and finances continue to be an issue. Also at issue is support for Interagency Help desk, which will be broader than ROSS. This item will be on next IRMWT agenda. Jon will write a letter to the IRMWT on what he/we want and need from agencies. Also being developed is a one-page cheat sheet for dispatchers on how to use.

Jon would like the entry point for ROSS to be www.nwcg.ross.gov rather than going through USDA, which requires moving it from Boise to Kansas City. NWCG.gov would still be on FWS server. Dottie will move the entry point. Scott will follow up.

Bill Brimberry in the process of wrapping up the business analysis, which identifies business entities/requirements. Next will be a structure data analysis. They will end up with a design recommendation. Delays have occurred, due to scoping and administrative problems. Expected completion in October. Scope changes include addition of maps and interaction with other systems such as ROSS.

Many concerns were voiced regarding different qualifications systems. Is there a need to put together an NWCG or IRM sanctioned team to develop interagency system? Currently no system meets everyone's needs, including differing security issues, and data does not transfer between all systems. Authority for use as a human resources system must be obtained, and notification given through the Federal Register.

All 50 states have agreed on IQS. It has been distributed to 4-5 training sessions, and was well received. Version 2 is in process, approved and funded. It will start in Oct and be distributed prior to end of FY00. The IQS meeting schedule is April 19-23 and May 17-21. It will go through a structure analysis May 13-15. There is potential for DOI/feds to use IQS. Their needs could be incorporated as Version 2 is developed.

There are three choices. Do we want to share data between 3 systems? Do we want common access? Do we want a single system?

Su DaWalt, John Gebhard, and Mike Barrowcliff will put together a charter and letter to NWCG from IRMWT regarding needs and activities at the ground level, and possibly developing a common data system, and identifying what strategy to take.

Homepage counter not working, reverts back to one when the system shuts down. When running, it was about 100 hits a day. Jim Stumpf has given the okay to put the interagency fire situation reports button on homepage. Discussion centered around links between the different agency home pages and the NWCG and/or NIFC home page. Mike stated that the FS link should go to Washington office home page rather than NIFC home page. Jack Sepp, the Branch Chief of Internal Affairs, is trying to pull all home pages together under or linked to NIFC home page. NIFC 100,000 hits a month.

Concerns were expressed on the system being down. We need a quantitative target for acceptable downtime. Anytime a down system is encountered, Dottie should be notified. We also would like to see all systems there with Uninterrupted Power Supply.

Draft a memorandum to FWS to formalize the service they are providing. Include need for verified backups, statistics tracking, UPS coverage.

Seconded and passed.

NWCG IRM-PMO proposal:

Options:

1. accept as proposed
2. revise and submit with recommendation to accept as revised
3. Hold/ table

1. reaffirm commitments
2. strengthen IRMWT resolve

Recommend alternative 2 with a & b from alternative 3.

Costs:

1999 salary table x 1.25 x salary

(4) GS-13 positions; recommend advertise @ GS-334-12/13 $284,755 to $370,175

(Would still have to be classified by individual agencies doing the hiring.)

It was decided later that 41% would be a more realistic benefit percentage to account for increased FERS employees.

Travel $40,000

Computerization $40,000

Office space $5,000

NIFC + 5.98 sq. ft @ 500 sq. ft $2,990

Total overhead $85,000

Total cost $369,755 to $455,175

The Albuquerque NWCG meeting resulted in the decision to keep NWCG budget stable. We are to go forward with the IRM-PMO, but with no funding from NWCG. They have to be funded by agencies. FS has earlier position that they can provide FTE's, and funding. With the NWCG standard formula of 60% FS funding, that would leave one position to be funded by DOI. DOI needs to do scoping, to see what is already being accomplished that fits into this role.

Recommend to NWCG to advertise three IRM-PMO positions, two as FS and one from DOI.

Group performed wordsmithing exercise, clarified confusing issues. Members will make notes on the document and Barry will make actual changes and get back to the team before the next conference call.

IRM-PMO Position description:

IRM-PMO and IRMWT is a partnering relationship. PMO brings issues to team and makes recommendations, but team determines the standards. 35% of the job involves assistance to working team, doing staff work for them, and taking on issues that require full time attention.

The PMO should receive copies of all the latest strategic planning and assessments from the different agencies, and provide an analysis to the IRM working team. The position is an application architect: it provides a library of information about all wildland related software but it is not a library of software, it doesn't keep code. This position establishes a common grammar. It is a repository manager, to include policy, procedures.

We will wait for NWCG approval of the position description and charter, etc. before distributing to possible applicants. This group, plus Jon Steels and Bill Brimberry, should panel applications.

Steve Haglund and Don Latham will state very simply what each position is going to do, listing two to three bullets on what they will do for the agencies, and how we will use them.

Each member needs to go to agency with this information before we go to NWCG. Interior might want to get together ahead of time to come to some kind of an agreement on how they are going to split up the responsibilities of who provides what. IFCC advisory group can also go to the directors to help grease the skids.

Jim Stumpf can then make the presentation to NWCG.

Jessica Wade from BLM gave a presentation of an ongoing interagency effort in Utah, which combines two systems, ArcView & GIS. The custom project runs off of scripts, and can show maps of the whole state or a district view. It is specially designed to show many geographic and manmade features, includes topo maps, can be queried, and has ability to have new fires added to its database. The database can be exported. It gives narrative when requested. Custom buttons can link directly to other programs. The program can print poster-size maps.

Sheldon Wimmer is the contact. (801) 539-4091

This affordable cad technology is in ArcView format, and was Beta tested in CA last summer.

It will enhance dispatch by identifying resources, then moving them to the committed window.

The map info provides tool to move crews up a ridge or to a specific location, which is a good safety feature. They are hoping in the future to link with 911.

Both programs used here are off-the-shelf software. Companies are willing to work with and help user. Currently there is no active national-level champion for this business application. Nationally we are not worried about initial attack. But, there is a national need because everyone is looking for the same tool. We need to be listening to the front-line local units and helping them with their needs and priorities.

Interagency email integration status:

NPS is waiting to move to LotusNotes until Client 5 is out, which is very similar to ccMail. BLM will have a more difficult transition. FWS already moved, BIA will move with NPS.

Firewalls and local area networks:

Haven't taken to management yet because of lack of getting everybody together. Some security problems may stem from specific agency restrictions that may not be actual policy. We are not yet seamless between agencies. A lot of the problems come from misunderstanding and lack of communication. CIO's have offered their assistance if it's a firewall issue

Gladys Crabtree, Scott Bradshaw, Sheri Aikens, Andrea, and Mike Barrowcliff will get together to try to work out differences.

Lots of rumors are circulating regarding adoption of new (and different) operating systems within the various agencies. Configuration, compatibility, and consistency issues are still confused.

CIO ``white paper'' request for priorities:

IRMWT recommendations to CIO were ranked by CIO priorities.

It was determined that all our recommendations fit into several, if not all, of the CIO priority categories, and that we should submit them as written.

The teams ranked CIO response to IRMWT needs as follows: (on a scale of 1-5, 1 being lowest)

Internet 2

Communications ? (We don't know what we have out there.)

Radios 1

Records 2

Data standards/sharing 1

Email 2

Co-location 1 globally/4 locally (in spite of policy)

We recommend they add categories 8-10 (I didn't get what these were) to better reflect the needs of their customers.

CIO wants closer rapport with the IRMWT. We should invite agency CIO's to attend IRM working team meeting, and attend theirs, maybe even getting a spot on their agenda. Chair would be the one to attend their meeting.

Motion:

IRM working team supports CIO request for IRMWT representation at CIO meetings. Needs letter from us through NWCG to CIO's.

Seconded and carried. John G. will help Mike F. draft letter.

State travel $ 6500.00 Estimate all will be spent.

ROSS implementation $120,000.00 All spent, per project plan.
Additional money going to maintenance.

NWCG www      $10,000.00 $1,000 for printer, toner, etc.

CASE tool          $10,000.00 All spent.

NIFC messaging - $ 20,000.00 Don't need, all returned.

IRM-PMO $108,000.00 $35,025 spent.

It was decided that all excess money should go to ROSS.

There is a problem of getting money transferred in a timely fashion to meet year-end deadlines. Money needs to be transferred as soon as possible. Such message should be forwarded to Jim Stumpf.

We would like the ROSS team to explore FFF fund potential for reimbursement of ROSS maintenance costs. It might be palatable to distribute those costs widely throughout the users. The Help desk could be funded directly out of emergency funds, because it would only be manned during fires.

Budget Process:

· Funding needs to be guaranteed through life of project (3-5 years). Long range budget planning is essential/intrinsic to IRMWT.

· IRM budget is huge but only a fraction can be shown within the NWCG. Funding a token chunk (constant $120,000?) shows buy-in/belief in project. We see the value of continuing seed money for ongoing project initiation, in order to ensure a coordinated interagency effort.

· Projects should have a lifecycle analysis what it will cost to build, maintain, etc. so agencies can decide whether they still want to go with it.

· The PMO provides necessary service and coordination and it's funding is our highest priority.

We recommend funding the program manager within NWCG funding, with staff provided by agencies. PMO overhead should also be funded within the IRMWT budget. Take the part of the $108,000 of IRM-PMO that ties to Barry's overhead, add $85,000 overhead for other three positions, and identify as overhead for project management office and lead position. We are concerned that PMO funding be stable, whether inside or outside NWCG, including their overhead.

· We feel there needs to be consistency with approach to long term funding by NWCG for positions.

A memo is due to NWCG by April 29. Mike F. will draft budget recommendation of the group.

Team members will take advantage of opportunities to attend meetings of other working teams, representing the IRMWT.

ROSS overlap w/IQCS teams have agreed to continue working together and meet. Barry recommended that quals should use ROSS as a model, and should involve Yvonne Burgess for coaching and expertise to lead. Quals need additional partnering on the business side, crossing departments. They need to embrace all the systems out there, find out which are most flexible, and to determine that everything is covered. It is also recommended that they have a third party come in a take a look at the quals project. Barry will report this at the next NWCG meeting with the concurrence of the IRMWT.

(Aside note: Barry has redeemed part of his role [looking at two different projects, getting the players together talking about it, and improving both products in the process] and we need to follow up on that.)

Sacs/Gacs conflicts have been discovered.

Mike went to the Training Team Working Group meeting in Orlando. He reviewed with them the need for pneumonics, and the need to reflect old course numbers in new courses as they are replaced.

Some control needs to be put in place on distribution of software, to ensure support for end user. It is recommended that diskettes distributed with courses be labeled in regard to the level of support the user can expect, i.e. level 1, 2, or 3. Definitions of classes need to be totally succinct. We need to come up with firm labeling standards. It will become an interagency requirement at NARTC that software be labeled.

Mike B. and his group will strive to have label determinations in draft by the week of the 3rd of May. It will be discussed via conference call by the team and then given to Buck Latapie to take to the training team meeting in Las Vegas.

#17 new technologies and applications

• Narrow banding Congress mandated narrow band for all federal radios for VHF by Jan. 2005, UHF by Jan. 2007. No additional funds will be appropriated to do this. States have been requested to comply but not mandated, and at this time it appears they will not be converting. Digital radios are expensive but analog compatible, and can program down to lowest technology. Major safety issues may be involved. The whole transition may result in a $100,000,000.00 interagency effort. The Radio Working Team to NWCG recommends we remain wide band analog for the next couple fire seasons. The national fire cache will be testing major company radios over the next fire season. The digital has no squelch, which means it is either on or off; there are no fuzzy, broken, scratchy transmissions. Law enforcement and Fire are most at risk. We may be driven to an interagency fire net.

• Fire planning they are finishing up work on existing NFMAS system; FS will clarify requirements definition for next system.

• Joint fire sciences stuff has no life cycle management to their products. Products may vary in applicability.

• Prototype on lightning data was highly successful. Currently there are problems with licensing. Consequently only 169 sites were identified to receive application.

• Don L. is trying to work up a true fire probability map that will be colored and contoured, to be used instead of lightning data, exclusive of communications.

• The Fire Family + application will integrate and retire 12 applications.

• Joe Frost is now one of two NFMAS COR's.

• Lightning demo with strike data can be provided in ArcView format.

• Fire prevention application in concurrence with all 5 Land Management agencies, will bring BWAP and merge PWA into one common program, FATE. Funds have been identified from all 5 agencies to bring on by end of CY. The program will interface with IIAA.

• Smoke generator will be in Farsight soon.

• "Beyond Behave'' is in process. Fire occurrence data sources are growing.

• PCHA is now Y2K compliant; the interface including PCHA will be released mid-month, and the upgrade to come this year.

The next meeting will be in Rhinelander, WI, the week of AUG 9th. Meeting will start Tuesday at 8:00 and go through Friday noon. Friday will be an optional day to complete action items, notes, conduct side meetings, etc. Access to Rhinelander is via United or Northwest. Su will set up the meeting room and locate lodging. She will also notify the Coordinating Center and make connections and invitations with local cooperators. The per diem is 52/38.

The December meeting will be in Reno the 6th 9th. Great Basin West Zone.

The April '00 meeting will be the week of the 3rd in Redding, CA. North Zone.

August Agenda:

The draft agenda and ``open call'' will be distributed to members by July 9th. Final agenda and associated materials are due by July 23, with preparation materials coordinated through Mike F. Liz will prepare the draft agenda outline, organized with Mike's input. It will be sent out with April meeting notes.

Agenda items:

• Validate SLC notes (done prior to meeting IRMWT/IRMWT2 post on web pg) Liz & Mike F

• IRMWT charter update re: chair rotation Cal, John & Scott

• Follow-on actions/status for IRM-PMO Barry

• Follow-on actions/status for Quals strategy John G., Su, Mike B., & Buck

• Status on quals systems Su, Sheri, & Bill Brimberry

• Fire occurrence NWCG & follow-up Gladys, Scott, Sheri, Andrea, & Mike B

• ROSS update Jon & Barry

• Webserver issues Scott

• Interagency application support (Help Desk) Gladys, Mike B., & Sheri

• Incident based automation Tory via Mike F.

• Working team interactions all

• CIO integration actions/IRM working team priorities Mike F. & Barry

• Current budget status all

• FY99 final budget , plus 3-5 yr. strategy, +/20% Mike F., John G., Steve, & Barry

• Fy00 budget and work plans all

• Coming projects, how much they will cost ?

• Scheduled conference calls logistics, schedules, subject logistics Mike B.; objectives & announcements Barry

• Friday May 7, 0900 MDT/1100 EDT IRM-PMO pre NWCG meeting Barry, objectives & announcements

• Friday June 18th 0900 MDT/1100 EDT After NWCG meeting Mike F.

• Friday July 9th 0900 MDT/1100 EDT After draft agenda all

Evaluation

• Need agenda in advance.

• May need facilitator hard to get everything accomplished. Will try one more meeting with better agenda planning, including time limits, before using facilitator. As members review the proposed agenda, they should estimate how much time they need for discussion.

• May need to plan on a full week; use extra days to complete commitments to action items.

• Any demonstrations should be scheduled at end of session so people can leave if they have to.

• Conference calls need to be scheduled and stuck to.

• Include informational items as handouts, with any questions presented to person aside from meeting.

• If a facilitator is utilized, they need to be someone familiar with subject matter.

• Notes need to be distributed as soon as possible after meeting because of all the action items.

****End of Meeting****

John Gebhard NIFC-BLM
(208) 387-5164 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
jgebhard@nifc.blm.gov

Shari Aikens NIFC-BLM
(208) 387-5700 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
saikens@nifc.blm.gov

Jon Skeels USDA-FS
(303) 275-5746 740 Simms St. Golden, CO 80401
jskeels/r2@fs.fed.us

Nancy DeLong NIFC-NPS
(208) 373-3841 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
nancy_delong@nps.gov

Steve Haglund NIFC-BIA
(208) 387-5575 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
steve_haglund@ios.doi.gov

Gladys Crabtree NIFC-NPS
(208) 387-5214 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
gladys_crabtree@nps.gov

Don Latham USFS Research, Fire Sciences Lab
(406) 329-4848 PO Box 8089, Missoula, MT 59807
dlatham/rmrs_missoula@fs.fed.us

Liz Roberts NIFC-NPS
(888) 211-7328 or PO Box 1144, Fredonia, AZ 86022
(520) 638-7805
liz_roberts@nps.gov
(both message)

Mike Funston USDA Forest Service, F&AM
(202) 205-1504 201 14th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20024
Funston_Mike/wo@fs.fed.us

Phil Murphy Colorado State Forest Service
(970) 491-6303 Colorado State University, Ft Collins, CO 80523
pmurphy@lamar.colostate.ed

Cal Gale USFWS
(404) 679-7190 1875 Century Blvd, Atlanta GA 30345
cal_gale@mail.fws.gov

Scott Bradshaw NIFC-BIA
(208) 387-5373 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
S_bradshaw@nps.gov

Barry Mathias NIFC-BLM
(208) 387-5415 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
bmathias@NIFC.blm.gov

Mike Barrowcliff NIFC-FS
(208) 387-5250 3833 S. Development, Boise, ID 83705
MBARROWCLIFF/WO_NIFC@FS.FED.US

Su DaWalt Eastern States Rep.
(715) 365-8913
dawals@dnr.state.wi.us