Implementing a corporate wide GIS quick and efficiently
Greg McCool
Administrator Pipeline AM/FM
El Paso Corporation, Eastern Pipeline Group
Nine Greenway Plaza
Houston, Texas 77046
Abstract
The El Paso interstate transmission system is now comprised of five major natural gas pipelines
that span the nation. The combined pipelines are El Paso Natural Gas, Southern Natural Gas,
Tennessee Gas Pipeline, and Coastal companies’ ANR and CIG. Although the pipeline
companies will be organizationally merged, field functions and relative activities will remain in
their current locations. El Paso Corporation elected to consolidate its existing GIS into a
corporate environment that relies heavily on the distribution of information via the company’s
intranet. We will present the overall structure of El Paso’s system and the many challenges of
utilizing multiple components and vendors.
Introduction
This paper was written to address a large-scale “deadline driven” GIS implementation while
concurrently managing internal issues relative to company change. The focus is less on explaining
technology and more on defining techniques and methodologies used to assist in the GIS selection
and implementation process.
El Paso grew from approximately 10,000 to over 60,000 miles of interstate pipeline in less than
four years through mergers and acquisitions. In the transition, one directive passed down from El
Paso management was for a newly appointed GIS transition team to design and implement a
common GIS solution for all of the El Paso corporation pipelines by December 31, 2001. On the
surface, this task seemed straightforward, but upon further investigation, there were challenges far
greater than simply choosing technology and converting data. Indeed, the team charter also
involved the daunting tasks of standardizing business processes, migrating all company facility data
to one data model and sharing common applications. These efforts presented a host of both system
and people challenges. The system challenges were related to establishing new criteria for system
design and data conversion. People issues included the many biases and preferences stemming
from historical cultures, which surfaced during the initial evaluation of existing systems and
processes. The team needed to find common ground, so before continuing any point forward
system evaluation, we took a step back and focused intensely on team values, vision and guiding
principles. This strategy was a success in that it not only provided criteria for future system
decision-making; it was also instrumental in establishing a unified culture of El Paso employees
and GIS vendors.
GIS project preparedness
GIS team selection
After the management team communicated the high level GIS scope to the selected core GIS
representatives, it was then time to assemble a talented, experienced and well-rounded GIS team.
Prerequisites for the team included: 1) proper Engineering and Operations representation from the
original three El Paso regional offices located in Houston, Birmingham, and El Paso and 2) an
appropriate mix of discipline experience such as survey, drafting, mapping, engineering,
compliance and information technology. After selecting the final team, all representatives were
brought together for the initial project kick off meeting. To be successful, it was imperative that
open and professional communication among internal GIS team members be established because
this group consisted of varying cultures entrenched in company biases. During this meeting, the
team brainstormed to determine an ongoing communication plan and strategy. This included the
definition of all GIS stakeholders. Selected representatives were assigned to actively communicate
GIS activities back to their respective stakeholders and coworkers. This effort was beneficial as it
provided a forum in which status and concerns could be expressed via a familiar face during a time
of corporate transition.
Project management tools and methodology
Fundamental project management concepts were essential in bringing the GIS project assignments
to a prompt and cost effective closure. These basics included the detailed tracking of applications
development and conversion for all internal and vendor activities. Specific attention was given to
the preparation of timelines, progress and cost tracking mechanisms. Prior to initiating work, a
team session was conducted with the vendors to break down project deliverables into logical work
outputs, then a weight factor was assigned to every work output. This inherent controls
functionality allowed for the immediate comparisons of accrued vendor costs to the percent
complete. An internal project controls representative was brought in to help gather reports and
compile multiple vendor reports into an overall project report.
Because of project size, it was not feasible to resolve every issue in a group setting. Thus, on a
regular basis the project lead delegated individual and sub team assignments. Each task was given
a detailed description and completion date then tracked accordingly. Additional project
management and communication activities included ad hoc and monthly work sessions, monthly
status reports, weekly conference calls, use of a project web site and an ongoing proliferation of
emails.
GIS standardization
Definition of processes
Prior to developing new processes and standards, the team defined and evaluated existing
processes. This painstaking task was accomplished by consolidating all of the existing processes,
side by side, into one master matrix. Also included in the matrix was a “wish list” for future
process automation and new enhancements. Given the results of the existing process assessment,
the next task was to consolidate and define new common processes for the all of the pipelines. The
objective for this exercise was to promote innovating over incrementing (i.e., be careful not to
incrementally add layers to an outdated process or application that required innovation or rework).
Major consideration was also given to the end users and the application of technology during the
final design of processes. The two deliverables from this session included both an expanded matrix
spreadsheet (including both the old and new processes) and workflows covering GIS related work
activities. The end result was a series of processes that fully integrated Engineering and Operations
activities into the GIS lifecycle.
Definition of standards
Sub teams immediately began to develop standards required to populate the long-term system data
requirements. The IT sub team designed a common data model to support all point forward
business processes while Engineering and Operations sub teams focused more on the
standardization of GIS related data. The data standardization effort included activities relative to
data requirements, data type, data collection methodologies, data codes and data accuracy standards.
Unfortunately, there were some areas in which standardization was not a feasible option. We were
careful to make these cases the exception and not the rule. The effort was successful in that we
developed common standards for all five pipelines with very few exceptions.
