Meeting of July 11 2008

Owned by Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Nov 21, 2008 by Larry Talley - NOAA Federal (Unlicensed)Version comment

NMFS e-signature Working Group

We met July 11, 2008 in the Amelia Earhart room at Touchstone Consulting.  Present were Karen Sender, Larry Talley, Richard Kang, Susan Molina, Logan Gregory, Dayna Matthews, Tom Gleason, Bob Hogan, Steve Holden and Jared Jonker.

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.
        • May need authority from executive level to clear roadblocks.
      • 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
  • 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"?