Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 30 Next »

NMFS e-signature Working Group
July 11, 2008 Meeting Notes

Welcome

  • Larry kicked things off.
    • There is a NMFS policy and procedural directive that implements the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), which says federal agencies can accept e-signatures. Both the law and NMFS policy gives e-signatures them the same validity as a paper signature.
    • As a result, we are working to establish an e-signature program within NMFS.
    • We want to come up with an implementation that will help other programs with the recipe we create in this e-signature working group.

    (More detail on these drivers in Meeting of June 30 2008)

    • While our program was coming along, Susan Molina, with the National Permits System, has come a long ways towards an implementation of eSignature in a specific context.
      • We have been talking about how we can partner.
      • Susan is working to deliver a specific solution
      • We want to expand on her work to develop a broader approach that will hopefully help a wider scope of business-to-government and citizen-to-government eSignature projects.
    • What will we have accomplished by Jan 09?
      • Approved E-Sig implementation plan
      • We will not have done a software development project.
    • What does success look like?
      • Understand the E-sig opportunities and challenges
      • Secured approval from the OCIO, General Counsel (GC), and GC Enforcement Litigation
      • Positioned for software development or procurement.

      (More detail in Charter for eSignature Team)

    • E-Signature is not primarily a technical challenge; it's more of a social change challenge.
  • We reviewed the agenda and Purpose and Outcomes (see slides)
  • We reviewed the Principles Distinction
    • Move on despite ambiguity
    • Listen as allies
    • Get to the point
    • Give criticism with upgrades
    • Finish each part
  • We went over the team introductions.
    • Themes:
      • There is a larger population of people who need a solution than we thought
      • A lot of expertise
      • A strong desire to get things done.
      • Relatively limited amount of time for people.
      • Good representation across regions, but missing someone from Northeast
      • We could use a real Fisheries person.
        • A regulation writer, someone who has done an EIS, NEPA, FMP (Fisheries Management Plan).
          • We should look at PFMC - Pacific Fisheries Management Council
            (Dayna will look into that)
    • NOTES:
      • Distribute periodic updates for stakeholders (weekly or bi-weekly summaries of progress)
      • We should get someone from the North East.
        • Susan's Presentation (See slides)
          • The goals of her project are
            • Consistent national online system for permit applications/renewals/customer service/management
            • They need to find out who the participants are, who their partners are, what they need, etc.
          • Currently not everything is accepted by the national permits team.
          • The technical is the easiest part.
          • The presentation:
            • Most of our users are Existing Permit Owners
            • Should we collect SSNs?
              • NMS has the authority and responsibility to collection SSNs during the permit application process , but local practice is affected by concerns for data protection.
              • We need to examine and document the business risks of not collecting SSNs.
              • SSA will validate the relationship between names and SSNs on a yes/no basis.
              • We need the "green light" from general council in order to clarify authority for NMFS to collect SSNs.
              • Balsinger may need to clarify the legal mandate.
            • The permits are a many to many setup. Many people can own a single permit and a single person can own many permits.
            • It is difficult to track our customers and the agents who are acting on behalf of others.
            • It is then difficult to track exactly who is who and who is participating because of the brokers and the agents involved.
            • Right now we verify identification by sending information through the mail.
            • This could be avoided by using SSNs - it would simplify things.
            • Do we have enough top-level authority to help push buy-in by all the little players?
            • There are people who are able to opt out.
            • For the "signing ceremony" language - it would work better to have the GPEA language than the E-Signature Act language.
  • Timeline
    • Steve reviewed the project timeline.
    • We are currently at the beginning of the second phase in Susan's life-cycle road map.
    • For the alternatives analysis - we can think of this more as an effective due diligence rather than an exhaustive list of alternatives.
      • We should at least mention the heavy weight tech options we are ruling out (at least 1 or 2) and one on the very light weight side that we are also ruling out.
      • Alternatives
        • Light-credit card or permit example (Tuna? where there is no ID proofing currently)
        • NPS-username password
        • EAuthentication
    • We do need to consider the digital divide.
    • The people who are approving (CIO, CG, CGEL, etc) will be looking at this for the first time.
    • We need to figure out who is important to engage in with this process.
    • We should have at least 2 very different environments.
      • Permits, Log Books, Dealer Reports/Fish Tickets.
    • Different solutions for trusted relationships and un-trusted relationships.
    • There is a lot of regional variability.
    • The alternatives are both technology and business process
  • Risk Assessment and Cost Benefit Analysis
    • We will need a lot of help is this section from the larger group.
  • Implementation Plan
    • This will be the next steps document
  • Stakeholder Grid and the Wiki Overview
  • Next Steps
    22%

    Action Items

    1. handler

      Add Leadership Question to the Stakeholder Grid - Larry

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    2. handler

      Look for an East Coast person through John Witzig - Larry

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    3. handler

      Investigate SSNs for her business plan - Susan

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    4. handler

      Does anyone use the adobe system as a means of authentication? - Steve and Larry

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    5. handler

      Should we start up a standing meeting fortnightly? - Steve and Larry

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    6. handler

      Setup the new usernames - Larry

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    7. handler

      Link for the FISH! Video - Jared

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    8. handler

      Set date and time for next meeting to discuss stakeholder analysis grid and draft communications plan - Larry and Steve

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
    9. handler

      Stakeholder Analysis Input Due on Friday, July 18 - Everyone

      Priority MEDIUM
      ltalley
      Jul 14, 2008
  • Concluding Thoughts
    • What is the timeline on Susan's plan being approved?
      • ASAP - within the next two weeks.
    • Larry -
      • This is a great group
      • I'm "jazzed" about where we are and I think we can make it happen.
      • It helps to have people with concrete experience.
    • Thank you to everyone.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other information From the Meeting:

  1. What is my organization?
  2. Where did you grow up and where do you live now?
  3. What is my stake in the process?
  4. How did I come to be a member of this group?
  5. What is my time commitment to this group?
  6. What is my expertise and/or experience?
  7. How do I like to work?
  8. What is the best stereotype/archetype that describes me or "my kind"?
  • No labels