150 likes | 301 Views
BP/ARCO GeoTracker User Experiences. California CUPA Form February 2002. View/Add Facilities Screen. View Associated Facilities. Results of Search Associated Facilities. Example: Two Users Claim Same Site. Results of View Submittals. Effort Required.
E N D
BP/ARCO GeoTracker User Experiences California CUPA Form February 2002
Effort Required • BP’s Time to claim site and release to consultant • Consultant’s time to claim sites and enter data ongoing basis • Labs time and effort to generate EDF • BP’s time to have wells resurveyed
BP’s Effort • Finding sites in GeoTracker • Many don’t list ARCO Facility Number • Can’t search by Facility Number • Sites W/wrong or different address • Sites with different name • Sites with different city • Sites missing in GeoTracker • Non-ARCO consultants claiming ARCO Sites
Consultant Effort • Find site in GeoTracker • Claim site • Upload field points • Check Laboratory EDF and upload • Check and upload survey data • Upload site maps and field data • Averaging 1 to 2 hours per submittal to find, claim, review and upload EDFs
Laboratory EDF • BP/ARCO Primary Labs: Sequoia, Del Mar, Pace, and STL • These labs all are providing EDF • Had problems with complex COELT format • Difficulties with evolving valid value list • Now moving from “Startup” to Production mode for EDF submittals
Laboratory Effort • Some Laboratories have added staff to process the volume of EDFs • Due to the dynamic nature of the process, labs find it hard to fully automate generating EDFs
BP/ARCO XYZ Data • BP/ARCO conducted new horizontal surveys to be compliant with AB2886 • New X-Y surveys completed December 2001 and are being uploaded by the site consultants • BP/ARCO is using existing Z data which is being uploaded by the site consultants • BP/ARCO offered to help the State Water Resources Control Board test the XYZ upload feature
LUST vs UST • LUST database is dynamic • UST database is static • Found plotting problems in both databases • Many sites and wells not plotted in correct location, especially in UST database • Suggest there be a section in the GeoTracker FAQ that discusses the difference in quality of LUST vs UST data
Suggested Improvements • Add a way to search for sites by Agency • Add a way to search on additional data entered in “Field Point Name” file • Provide feed back that sites not found in GeoTracker have been added so users can claim them
Summary • For the first several months the GeoTracker user interface was constantly updated as many “bugs” were being fixed • ARCO’s consultants now fluent in the GeoTracker process • All of BP/ARCO’s labs can produce EDF • Labs moving to a “production” mode for EDF from a startup mode but have a ways to go • GeoTracker is still an evolving system