Appendix 2 - TTB Baseline Enterprise Architecture v3 0.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Dated: October 31, 2006

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU (TTB)

1310 G Street N.W.

Washington D.C. 20220

Baseline Enterprise Architecture

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

BASELINE ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

U.S. Department of the Treasury Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Version 3.0 Baseline Enterprise Architecture 10/31/2006

VERSION 3.0

Vers. Release Date Revision Summary

3.0 October 31, 2006 TTB’s Initial Stand-Alone Baseline Architecture document.

Note: Baseline, Target and Transition Documents were broken out separately from initial consolidated document, TTB Enterprise Architecture, Version 2.2 (December 2005)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Scope

1.3 Intended Audience

1.4 Background

1.5 EA Framework

1.6 EA Mission and Goals

1.6.1 EA Mission

1.6.2 EA Goals and Objectives

1.7 TTB Goals

1.7.1 TTB Organizational Structure

1.7.2 TTB Vision and Mission

1.7.3 Strategic Goals and Objectives

1.7.4 Strategic-to-EA Goal Relationships

1.8 Methodology

1.8.1 Architectural Drivers

1.8.2 Analysis and Decomposition

1.8.3 Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)

1.9 Plans for Evolving the TTB Baseline Enterprise Architecture

1.10 Principles

1.10.1 Introduction

1.10.2 Principles Summary

1.10.3 Principles Detail

2. Baseline EA

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Business Layer

2.2.1 Business Environment

2.2.2 TTB Business Reference Model (BRM)

2.3 Performance Layer

2.3.1 TTB Performance Measurement

2.4 Applications/Services Layer

2.4.1 Applications/Services environment

2.4.2 TTB Service Component Reference Model (SRM)

2.5 Data Layer

2.5.1 Data Environment

2.5.2 TTB Data Reference Model (DRM)

2.6 Technology Layer

2.6.1 Technology Environment

2.6.2 TTB Technical Reference Model (TRM)

2.7 Security Layer

2.7.1 Security Environment

Appendix A – TTB Offices and Divisions Appendix B – TTB Context Diagram and Major Information Flows Appendix C – TTB Business Function Descriptions Appendix D – TTB BRM Mapping Appendix E – TTB Authorized Software List

Appendix F – SRM to BRM Mapping Appendix G – TTB SRM/BRM Mission System Distribution Appendix H – TTB SRM Mapping Appendix I – TTB Baseline TRM Mapping Appendix J – Acronyms

FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1 – Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Reference Models Figure 2 – TTB EA Framework Figure 3 – TTB Organizational Chart Figure 4 – TTB Strategic-to-EA Goal Relationships Figure 5 – Relationship of Laws and Regulations to TTB Strategic Objectives Figure 6 – Service-Oriented Architecture Figure 7 – TTB Stakeholders Figure 8 – TTB Business Reference Model Figure 9 – TTB PRM Framework Figure 10 – EA Performance Measures Figure 11 – TTB IT Strategic Goals and Performance Measures Figure 12 – Baseline TTB Application Architecture Characteristics Figure 13 – TTB Baseline Application Architecture (high level) Figure 14 – Baseline Data Management Architecture Figure 15 – FEA DRM Structure Figure 16 – Baseline Application and Data Standards and Specifications Figure 17 – Baseline Infrastructure Standards and Specifications Figure 18 – TTB General Support Services (GSS) Administration Figure 19 – TTB Headquarters Local Area Network (LAN) Figure 20 – TTB NRC Local Area Network (LAN) Figure 21 – TTB E-Mail Architecture Figure 22 – TTB Internet Connectivity Figure 23 – Qwest Data Center (Sterling, VA) Figure 24 – Qwest Data Center (Denver, CO) Figure 25 – TTB Wide Area Network (WAN)

Table 1 – TTB Strategic Goals and Objectives Table 2 – Principles with Rationale and Implications Table 3 – TTB Systems Inventory

1. Introduction

1.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau’s (TTB) Enterprise Architecture (EA) program is to increase the quality and speed of the Office of Chief Information Officer’s (OCIO’s) response to the Bureau’s mission needs. The EA is a comprehensive set of interrelated models that represent the Bureau’s mission, goals, operations and information infrastructure.

The EA program is a set of coordinated processes that develop, maintain, disseminate and apply information captured in the EA. The EA program is integrated with TTB’s strategic planning, configuration management, capital planning, and portfolio management processes. By providing these processes with detailed and comprehensive information on how the Bureau’s mission, operations and information infrastructure are inter-related and interdependent, the EA program ensures that enterprise-wide and OCIO initiatives are executed in the most effective manner possible.

There is also a compliance function to TTB’s EA program activities. Among the legislative and regulatory drivers the Bureau is responding to with its EA program are the following:

• The Clinger-Cohen Act, 1996 (Pub. L. 104-106, Division E)

• Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

• OMB Circular A-130, Revised, (Transmittal Memorandum No. 4), 2003

TTB recognizes that, while data and information are key components of an architecture, standards for hardware and software alone do not create the most efficient organization. EA is a blueprint developed and maintained to explain and guide how IT and information management elements will work together to effectively accomplish the mission, goals, and objectives of the organization.

The TTB EA is a cohesive information structure defined by (1) the Bureau’s mission and supporting business activities, (2) the data and information integral to bureau operations, (3) the technologies deployed to support business operations, and (4) the processes necessary for transitioning to or implementing new technologies in response to changing business needs. Thus, the value of the EA lies in the relationships, interactions, and dependencies inherent to business operations.

1.2 SCOPE

The TTB EA program integrates all of its component divisions into a single Bureau EA. The OCIOfacilitates understanding and use of the TTB EA. The offices and divisions listed below are each represented in the organizational charts and functional descriptions in Appendix A.

TTB Offices and Divisions:

• ADMINISTRATOR

1. Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC)

2. Office of the Chief of Staff (OCS)

• FIELD OPERATIONS

3. National Revenue Center (NRC)

4. Tax Audit Division (TAD)

5. Trade Investigations Division (TID)

6. Risk Management Staff (RMS)

• HEADQUARTERS OPERATIONS

7. Advertising, Labeling, and Formulation Division (ALFD)

8. Regulations and Rulings Division (RRD)

9. International Trade Division (ITD)

10. Scientific Services Division (SSD)

11. Knowledge Management Staff (KMS)

• MANAGEMENT

12. Office of Finance and Performance Budgeting (OFPB)

13. Office of Acquisition and Facilities Management (OAFM)

14. Office of Human Resources (OHR)

15. Office of Training and Professional Development (OTPD)

16. Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO)

1.3 INTENDED AUDIENCE

The Baseline EA is applicable to all divisions and offices within TTB, representing the current state of the Bureau’s business, performance, applications/services, data, technology, and security.

• Program and Staff Office Business and IT Managers – TTB businesses and IT executives should understand and support the EA mission, goals and objectives, in conjunction with acknowledging the current state of the EA.

• Program/Project Managers – Program and project managers that are responsible for IT initiatives should be in agreement that the current state of TTB initiatives is accurately depicted.

• Office of the Chief Information Officer – All OCIO staff should be familiar with the Baseline EA. As members of the office with primary responsibility for planning and deploying systems and technology in support of the Bureau’s business, the OCIO staff needs to understand the current state of the Bureau and the specific services and technologies that are employed.

• The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – TTB will submit its most current EA document to OMB. OMB will use it as a benchmark to verify the progress that the Bureau has made in transitioning from the Baseline EA to the Target EA.

• Peer Agencies – TTB collaborates with other federal agencies in the implementation of its programs. The Baseline EA will help these partnering entities understand TTB’s approach to its business and supporting technology.

1.4 BACKGROUND

The EA program was developed and is currently maintained within the OCIO. In recent years the EA program has matured into a process that aids in strategic planning, configuration management, capital planning, and portfolio management. TTB’s current EA baseline evolved from a Technical Architecture, which originated at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). The Bureau’s Baseline EA was developed using the preexisting Technical Architecture and the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF).

The data contained in the EA originates in the OCIO, but when appropriate, must be reviewed and approved by TTB Stakeholders. Data is collected through interviews conducted between members of the Bureau’s IT Governance Team and TTB Stakeholders and through the review of existing documentation.

1.5 EA FRAMEWORK

Although slightly modified, the EA framework is modeled after the FEAF. The TTB EA framework selection is also consistent with the Department of the Treasury’s EA framework, including use of the reference models released by OMB.

Figure 1 – Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Reference Models

To facilitate efforts to transform the federal government to one that is citizen-centered, results-oriented, and market-based, the OMB has instituted the FEAF as a business-based framework for government-wide improvement. The FEAF has been constructed through the collection of interrelated "reference models" depicted above, designed to facilitate cross-agency analysis and the identification of duplicative investments, gaps, and opportunities for collaboration within and across federal agencies.

Each layer of the EA continues to evolve around an associated OMB reference model. The TTB EA is composed of the following layers, depicted in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2 – TTB EA Framework

Business Layer

Performance Layer

Applications/Services Layer

Technology Layer

Data Layer

S E

C U

R

ITY

The Business Layer describes the business processes of TTB from an enterprise-wide perspective.

The Performance Layer describes the performance management structure TTB utilizes in assessing and correcting business process performance challenges.

The Applications/Services Layer defines the types of systems and applications required to manage the data and support the business processes.

The Data Layer identifies the data and information needed to support the business.

The Technology Layer defines the technological infrastructure (hardware, software, and communications network technologies) that supports the systems and applications identified in the applications/services layer.

Security defines the processes and standard technologies used to secure the TTB IT Infrastructure and ensure compliance with IT security mandates. Security plays an integral role in all layers of the EA

The linkages and relationships within the various layers of the architecture are as important as the layer-specific information contained in the EA. The linkages between the layers provide insight into the effect of a change in one element of the architecture on other elements in other layers of the EA. By analyzing these linkages, TTB can analyze the potential impact of any strategic, operational or infrastructure initiative. Independent of initiative-related analysis, the EA also supports the discovery of redundancies, overlapping functionality, performance bottlenecks and potential security issues, any of which may be analyzed and corrected, based on information contained within the EA.

1.6 EA MISSION AND GOALS

Key elements for the explicit definition and effective implementation of the TTB EA program include EA-specific mission and goals that are in alignment with bureau strategic goals and objectives.

1.6.1 EA Mission

Guided by the strategic objectives of TTB, the EA is consistent with the legal requirements of the Clinger-Cohen Act and OMB Circular A-130. The EA mission statement is as follows:

The mission of TTB’s Enterprise Architecture (EA) is to develop and implement an evolving, performance-based architecture that, aligned with the overall TTB mission and strategic goals, enables enterprise-wide data integration. The TTB EA will enable the Bureau to provide an accessible source of consistent, reliable, accurate, useful, and secure information and knowledge to TTB, our workforce, other agencies, and stakeholders to support effective delivery of services, enable effective decision-making, and foster understanding of our capabilities and accomplishments.

1.6.2 EA Goals and Objectives

The EA seeks to continually solicit bureau and OCIO support to meet the following EA goals and objectives:

EA Goal 1: Perform strategic planning for and investment management of IT systems.

• EA Objective 1-1: Establish effective management and decision-making policies and procedures, particularly for IT investments.

• EA Objective 1-2: Enable rapid change in business processes and applications.

• EA Objective 1-3: Develop the integration between EA, Capital Planning Investment

Control (CPIC), and strategic planning.

EA Goal 2: Provide direction for systems development and transition activities in support of business needs.

• EA Objective 2-1: Guide the engineering of TTB information systems and technology infrastructure across various domains.

• EA Objective 2-2: Facilitate configuration management (CM) to control system changes and documentation.

EA Goal 3: Provide an integrated view of the enterprise.

• EA Objective 3-1: Create a basis for understanding the interrelationships among TTB business organizations, their operational processes, and supporting information systems.

• EA Objective 3-2: Provide a blueprint for incorporating and supporting the strategic IT vision, goals, and objectives.

1.7 TTB GOALS

Since the earliest days of this country, revenue from alcohol and tobacco products has helped sustain the U.S. economy and fund the federal government. Public safety and revenue protection are the main objectives of TTB, and are the focus of its employees on a daily basis. The bureau is dedicated to protecting the public and collecting all the revenue legally due from the commodities it regulates. The more TTB strives to clearly define its goals within the mission, the more effectively it will be able to meet its goals.

1.7.1 TTB Organizational Structure

On November 25, 2002 President George W. Bush signed into law the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

One provision of this act divided the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) into agencies – ATF which moved to the Department of Justice, and TTB, which remains in the Department of the Treasury. The two agencies separated on January 24, 2003.

TTB will administer, enforce, and implement the federal laws and regulations related to the production and taxation of alcohol and tobacco products, as well as the statutes that impose Federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition. The major functions of the Bureau include:

• Collecting alcohol, tobacco, firearms and ammunition excise taxes and classifying alcohol and tobacco products for excise tax purposes;

• Investigating applications, and issuing permits, for the operation of distilleries, wineries, breweries, and tobacco manufacturers, importers and exporters;

• Regulating the operations of various industrial users of distilled spirits, including manufacturers of nonbeverage products, tax-free and denatured alcohols;

• Collecting approximately $100 million in occupational taxes annually;

• Regulating the production, packaging, bottling, labeling and storage of alcohol and tobacco products;

• Ensuring that labeling and advertising of alcohol beverages provide adequate information to the consumer concerning the identity and quality of the product;

• Preventing misleading labeling or advertising of alcohol beverages;

• Regulating the marketing and promotional practices concerning the sale of alcohol beverages by producers and wholesalers. This is done primarily through the investigation of allegations of illegal trade practices; and

• Enforcing provisions of the Alcohol Beverage Labeling Act which mandates that a government warning statement appear on all alcohol beverages for sale and distribution in the United States.

TTB is organized into Headquarters Operations and Field Operations, with Headquarters maintained in Washington, DC. Field offices are located in the states of Washington, California, Texas, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Puerto Rico. While this new agency is much smaller in size than its predecessor, its focus on only revenue collection and consumer protection will allow its personnel to provide specialized attention and service to its customers.

The organizational structure of TTB is shown below in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – TTB Organizational Chart

1.7.2 TTB Vision and Mission

The vision of TTB is

“an organization of people who value each other and who treat each other and their customers with the respect that they deserve. We intend to uphold the laws, for which we are responsible, in a fair, equitable and appropriate manner, affording all an opportunity to have their opinions heard without prejudice. We intend to carry out our mission without imposing inappropriate or undue burden on those from whom we collect taxes and those we regulate.”

TTB’s mission is

“to collect taxes owed, and to ensure that alcohol beverages are produced, labeled, advertised and marketed in accordance with Federal law. Our objectives are to protect the revenue, protect the consumer and promote voluntary compliance.”

Administrator

Chief of Staff

Assistant

Field Operations

Industry Liaison

Headquarters

Operations

EEO & DA

Management

Chief Counsel

Chief Information Officer

Deputy Administrator

Risk Management

Staff

National Revenue Center

Deputy Assistant

Trade Investigations

Division

Tax Audit Division

State Liaison

Knowledge Management

Staff

Advertising, Labeling and Formulations Division

Regulations and Rulings Division

International Trade Division

Scientific Services Division

Finance and Performance

Budgeting Division

Acquisition and Facilities

Management Division

Human Resources

Division

Training and Professional Development

Division

Deputy Chief Counsel

Tobacco Enforcement

Programs

1.7.3 Strategic Goals and Objectives

The following table outlines the strategic goals and objectives in accordance with the TTB Strategic Plan.

Table 1 – TTB Strategic Goals and Objectives

Strategic Goals Objectives

1. Collect the Revenue Provide the most effective and efficient system for the collection of all revenue that is legally due; eliminate or prevent tax evasion and other criminal conduct; and provide high quality service while imposing the least regulatory burden.

1.1. Improve service to the taxpayer and reduce the burden of compliance with federal law.

1.2. Collect all the revenue that is legally due.

1.3. Prevent tax evasion and identify other criminal conduct in the regulated industries.

2. Protect the Public Prevent consumer deception; ensure that regulated alcohol and tobacco products comply with federal commodity, safety, and distribution requirements; and provide high quality customer service.

2.1. Ensure that regulated products meet commodity and safety requirements established by federal law, provide information to the public and reduce the burden on industry.

2.2. Prevent consumer deception, ensure compliance with federal distribution requirements, and provide information to the public.

3. Refine Management Practices Ensure that all TTB programs operate at optimum efficiency and effectiveness and with full accountability, by providing high quality management and administrative support.

3.1. Implement a performance-based management system for

meeting TTB’s mission.

3.2. Employ information technology to support program

management and improve TTB mission performance through the deployment of information systems that are secure, compatible and cost effective.

3.3. Use financial management systems to support TTB strategic management and financial accountability by providing information that is useful, timely, and reliable, and that assists the Bureau in optimizing decision-making.

3.4. Manage human capital to support TTB programs and the

achievement of bureau goals by building and sustaining a work environment conducive to performance excellence, and personal and organizational development.

1.7.4 Strategic-to-EA Goal Relationships

TTB’s EA vision and mission statements communicate the bureau’s commitment to using the EA as a strategic tool to aid business decisions and evaluate opportunities to improve its service to citizens. A key step in gaining the greatest benefit possible from the EA is to understand how it supports and affects the realization of strategic goals. Figure 4 below depicts the relationship between the TTB strategic and EA goals.

Figure 4 – TTB Strategic-to-EA Goal Relationships

EA Goal 1.0 Perform strategic planning for and investment management of IT systems.

EA Objective 1.2 Enable rapid change in TTB Business processes and applications.

EA Objective 1.1 Establish effective management and decision-making policies and procedures, particularly for IT investments.

EA Objective 1.3 Develop the integration between EA, Capital Planning Investment Control (CPIC), and strategic planning.

EA Objective 2.1 Guide the engineering of TTB information systems and technology infrastructure across various domains.

EA Objective 3.2 Provide a blueprint for incorporating and supporting the strategic IT vision, goals, and objectives of the TTB.

Strategic Objective 3.2 Employ information technology to support program management and improve TTB mission performance through the deployment of information systems that are secure, compatible and cost effective.

Strategic Objective 3.2 Employ information technology to support program management and improve TTB mission performance through the deployment of information systems that are secure, Strategic Objective 3.1 Implement a performance-based management system for meeting TTB’s mission.

Strategic Objective 3.4 Manage human capital to support TTB programs and the achievement of Bureau goals by building and sustaining a work environment conducive to performance excellence, and personal and organizational development.

Strategic Objective 3.1 Implement a performance-based management system for meeting TTB’s mission.

Strategic Objective 3.2 Employ information technology to support program management and improve TTB mission performance through the deployment of information systems that are secure, compatible and cost effective.

Strategic Objective 3.3 Use financial management systems to support TTB strategic management and financial accountability by providing information that is useful, timely, and reliable, and that assists TTB in optimizing decision-making.

Strategic Objective 3.1 Implement a performance-based management system for meeting TTB’s mission.

Strategic Objective 3.2 Employ information technology to support program management and improve TTB mission performance through the deployment of information systems that are secure, compatible and cost effective.

Strategic Objective 3.4 Manage human capital to support TTB programs and the achievement of Bureau goals by building and sustaining a work environment conducive to performance excellence, and personal and organizational development.

Strategic Objective 3.1 Implement a performance-based management system for meeting TTB’s mission.

EA Objective 3.1 Create a basis for understanding the interrelationships among TTB business organizations, their operational processes, and supporting information systems.

EA Objective 2.2 Facilitate configuration management to control system changes and documentation.

EA Goal 2.0 Provide direction for systems development and transition activities in support of business needs

EA Goal 3.0 Provide an integrated view of the enterprise.

Strategic Objective

EA Objective

EA Goal

1.8 METHODOLOGY

1.8.1 Architectural Drivers

The EA is influenced by several architectural drivers including legislation, management, operations, social influences, and technology. The following list cites some of the specific laws and regulations considered by TTB in creating its EA program:

• Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO) PL 101-576

• Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 PL 104-106

• Customer Relations and Stakeholder Expectations

• E-Government Act of 2002 (E-Gov) PL 107-347

• Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1996 (FARA)

• Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA)

• Federal CIO Council Documents

• Federal Enterprise Architecture Reference Model Framework

• Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA)

• Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Amendments (5 USC § 552)

• Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA)

• Government Management Reform Act of 1994 (GMRA)

• Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) 105-277

• Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)

• Government-wide Management Reforms

• OMB Circulars A-130 and A-11

• Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) PL 104-13

• Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD-63)

• Privacy Act (5 USC § 552a)

• Section 508, Rehabilitation Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. ‘794d)

• Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2003 (SARA)

Figure 5 illustrates the alignment of federal laws and regulations to bureau strategic objectives in support of the TTB Strategic Plan.

Figure 5 – Relationship of Laws and Regulations to TTB Strategic Objectives

Strategic Objective

1.2

Strategic Objective

3.2

Strategic Objective

3.3

Strategic Objective

3.4

Strategic Objective

3.1

E-Government Act of 2002

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Amendments

Privacy Act

Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996

Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1996 (FARA)

Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA)

Section 508, Rehabilitation Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. ‘794d)

Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002

(FISMA)

Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA)

Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)

OMB Circulars A-130 and A-11

Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO)

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)

Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD-63)

Government Management Reform Act of 1994 (GMRA)

Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)

1.8.2 Analysis and Decomposition

Business Drivers

Several statutory authorities and responsibilities lie with the TTB. These mission drivers include the Homeland Security (HLS) Act, Internal Revenue Code (IRC), Federal Alcohol Administration (FAA) Act, Alcohol Beverage Labeling Act, and the Webb-Kenyon Act. Each of these regulations is detailed in the following sections.

Homeland Security Act

The HLS Act renders functions of the ATF into two new organizations. This HLS Act creates TTB within the Department of Treasury and moves certain law enforcement functions of ATF to the Department of Justice.

Under the HLS Act, TTB is responsible for administration and enforcement of:

• Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 USC (IRC);

o Chapter 51 (Distilled Spirits, Wine and Beer) o Chapter 52 (Tobacco Products and Cigarette Papers and Tubes) o Sections 4181-4182 (Firearms and Ammunition Excise Taxes)

• Federal Alcohol Administration Act, 27 USC chapter 8 (FAA Act)

• Alcohol Beverage Labeling Act of 1988 (Health Warning Statement)

• Webb-Kenyon Act, 27 USC section 122.

The HLS Act transfers enforcement of the National Firearms Act, 26 USC Chapter 53, to the Attorney General, who must coordinate this tax enforcement with the Secretary of the Treasury.

Internal Revenue Code

The IRC of 1986, as amended includes tax laws related to income, payroll, and excise taxes for the United States. The IRC includes most federal tax statutes.

Chapters 51 and 52 provide for excise taxation and authorize operations of alcohol and tobacco producers and related industries. These provisions include:

• Classification of alcohol and tobacco products for excise tax purposes;

• Permits methods of operation for distilleries, wineries, breweries, industrial alcohol producers and users, and tobacco manufacturers importers and exporters;

• Regulation of the operations of distilleries, wineries, brewers, and of various industrial users of distilled spirits, including manufacturers of nonbeverage products, tax-free, and denatured alcohols;

• Imposition of various occupational taxes;

• Regulation of the production, packaging, bottling, labeling and storage requirements related to these commodities;

• Issue permits and regulate operations for tobacco importers, tobacco manufacturing premises and export warehouses;

• IRC sections 4181 and 4182 provide for excise taxes for firearms and ammunition.

Federal Alcohol Administration Act

The FAA Act provides for regulation of those engaged in the alcohol beverage industry, and for protection of consumers.

• To ensure the integrity of the industry, the FAA Act includes provisions to:

– Require a permit for those who engage in the business as a producer, importer, or wholesaler of alcohol beverages;

– Issue, suspend, and revoke permits;

– Ensure the integrity of the industry by preventing persons who are not likely to operate in accordance with the law from entering the trade;

– Protect the revenue and consumers by ensuring the integrity of the industry members.

• To protect consumers, FAA Act includes provisions to:

– Ensure that labeling and advertising of alcohol beverages provide adequate information to the consumer concerning the identity and quality of the product;

– Require that alcohol beverage bottlers and importers to obtain a certificate of label approval

(COLA) or an exemption certificate before the product may be bottled, imported, sold or distributed in the United States;

– Prevent misleading labeling or advertising that may result in potential for consumer deception regarding the product.

• The FAA Act includes provisions to preclude unfair trade practices. These provisions:

– Regulate the marketing promotional practices concerning the sale of alcohol beverages; and

– Regulate practices such as exclusive outlets, tied house arrangements, commercial bribery, and consignment sales.

The Alcohol Beverage Labeling Act of 1988

The Alcohol Beverage Labeling Act of 1988 mandates that a government health warning statement appear on all alcohol beverages for sale or distribution in the United States.

The Webb-Kenyon Act

The Webb-Kenyon Act prohibits the shipment of alcohol beverages into a state in violation of the receiving state’s laws. This statute provides additional authority to enhance enforcement of FAA Act requirements.

1.8.3 Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)

Service orientation is an approach to designing software systems. A service-oriented architecture (SOA) is an architecture of systems consisting of modular software components with standardized component-access and usage interfaces that are independent of any specific platform or implementation technology.

More importantly, a SOA enables software components to become standard services that can be invoked on demand, rather than repeatedly designed and programmed. In SOA, a “service” is typically a group of software components that together carry out a high-level function or business process, such as placing an order or making a credit approval on a purchase. At its most basic, a SOA is simply a collection of standardized services on a network that communicate with one another in the context of a business process. This approach dramatically eases integration in heterogeneous environments and provides a major enhancement in agility.

All services share some common characteristics:

• Services have interfaces that are platform or implementation-technology independent. Services are exposed using standards-based, identical interfaces that make them easy to use and reuse, and guarantee dynamic interoperability.

• Services are “loosely coupled.” Services can be created without any forethought as to how or who will consume them. In addition, changes made to the service implementation will have no ripple effect on the consumers.

• Services are “coarse grained.” Services focus on high-level business processes using standard interfaces, and thus mask he underlying technical and operational complexities of how a service is implemented.

• Services are modular. A service represents a discrete unit of business, application or system functionality. Multiple services an be combined to deliver more valuable services. This modular approach gives organizations great flexibility in system design. By reassembling services into a new configuration, a business can create a new business service to support a different business objective.

As a strategy for creating a flexible and agile technical architecture, SOA has gained considerable momentum in recent years, largely due to the advent of standards-based Web services. There are some powerful business drivers for implementing SOA today:

IT Agility and Lower Costs SOAs make IT more responsive to changing business demands and requirements. Reconfiguring business services is simple, fast and low-cost.

Maximizing Enterprise Application Investments SOAs are not a rip-and-replace strategy—they wrap and reuse business functions from existing enterprise applications and make them available to a significantly broader audience without change. SOA encourages reuse and avoids unnecessary duplication and reinvention.

Facilitating New Applications Web service-based SOAs smooth the development and management of composite applications.

Composite applications improve business performance by pulling together information from multiple applications without complicated and time-consuming IT processes.

Standards—Foundation for the Future SOAs that use standards-based components and interfaces provide ubiquitous interoperability with all applications and services, making IT more flexible and dramatically simplifying integration.3 This paper discusses how to capitalize on the advantages of SOA by adopting an enterprise foundation for SOA governance and business service lifecycle management. The paper presents a management framework for enterprise architects and acts a guide for implementing an SOA. In addition, it reviews the technical, organizational and process issues involved, and offer recommendations on building a SOA infrastructure.

The evolution to a SOA requires new thinking about service oriented application design, the creation and reuse of business services that leverage existing enterprise applications, the lifecycle management of business services, and the IT deployment roadmap for new SOA infrastructure. SOA provides the design approach for a new generation of modular, standardized business services. The business service lifecycle provides both the control and a logical way to map business and technology requirements into a SOA model. A business-driven SOA strategy will help focus on the goal of Dynamic Business Interoperability.

The SOA business service lifecycle helps clarify the service oriented pathway; the Business Services Registry provides the visibility, management and control of the SOA information. Both lead to Dynamic Business Interoperability, dramatic business results and an agile IT.

One shared service that’s currently used by TTB is Pay.gov. Additional services will be identified in the Target Enterprise Architecture document. Figure 6 illustrates the concept of a SOA.

Figure 6 – Service-Oriented Architecture

1.9 PLANS FOR EVOLVING THE TTB BASELINE ENTERPRISE

ARCHITECTURE

The EA team and IT Governance team has worked in collaboration with representatives from the Applications, Data, and Infrastructure groups within the OCIO to develop the Target Architecture and Transition Strategy. The direction of the Target EA is driven by several factors: the requirement of TTB to be in compliance with federal mandates, the needs of the bureau, and technology modernization. A gap analysis exercise was performed following the completion of the Target Architecture. From the Gap Analysis, the EA team has developed a five year Transition Strategy that will transform the Bureau from its current Baseline EA to the Target EA, based upon defined transition programs.

Project managers from TTB Applications, Data, Infrastructure, and Security groups will use the Target Architecture and Transition Strategy to develop the necessary detailed project plans and work breakdown structures to move to the Target Architecture. The Target Architecture and Transition Strategy will also be used during the CPIC process to secure funds for the necessary projects to make the transition from the Baseline to the Target Architecture.

1.10 PRINCIPLES

1.10.1 Introduction

The development and implementation of architecture is an ongoing and iterative cycle. With each iteration, TTB’s architecture matures and progresses. However, while the detailed elements defined within individual layers of the architecture (e.g. a business process, application or technical standard) may change with relative frequency, the bureau has established a more stable vision and approach for the development and implementation of the EA. In this way, the many stakeholders involved in EA activities at both the bureau and division levels share a common direction and purpose in their efforts.

1.10.2 Principles Summary

TTB has adopted a set of architecture principles to ensure that EA supports the Bureau’s business and technology requirements. The principles help to establish a common vision to ensure that strategic objectives are not compromised by tactical decision-making.

The following principles guide the development and implementation of the EA:

1. TTB maintains a single bureau-wide EA with a federated approach to developing, maintaining and implementing the architecture.

2. TTB’s mission and business drive the design of the EA.

3. Architectural decision-making is results-oriented and measurable.

4. The EA ensures that information management decisions are made to provide maximum benefit to TTB and the public at a minimum cost to the organization.

5. The EA leverages and aligns with government-wide architectures and solutions wherever practical.

6. The EA promotes sharing, re-use, and common solutions.

7. The EA reduces complexity through the use of enterprise standards.

8. Information and data are managed as enterprise assets.

9. Security and privacy are integrated into all architectural layers.

10. The EA will be planned and managed through a formal governance process.

These principles have broad implications for not only for members of the TTB Governance Team, but also for business and IT decision-makers, project managers, initiative owners, systems staff and contractors, and others.

1.10.3 Principles Detail

Table 2 below summarizes not only the implications for each of the principles, but also the rationale for their selection. As a general rule, these principles have a broad base of support across government and industry.

Table 2 – Principles with Rationale and Implications Rationale Implications

1. TTB maintains a single bureau-wide EA with a federated approach to developing, maintaining and implementing the architecture

• TTB’s EA identifies economies of scale, streamlines interactions and communication with stakeholders and reduces stovepipes and unnecessary duplication.

• TTB is mandated by the Clinger- Cohen Act and OMB Circular A- 130 to develop and enforce a single EA.

• TTB’s Federated approach to EA ensures centralized decision-making for architectural decisions with bureau-wide impact, while allowing for autonomy in architectural decision-making at the business line and office level where appropriate.

• Strategic planning, resource allocation and IT investments are optimized at the bureau level.

• TTB must execute a collaborative EA governance model that leverages existing resources, culture, and experience in a team-oriented approach designed to develop, maintain, implement and enforce the architecture.

• TTB respects unique program-specific mandates, roles, and functions.

• Data, applications, and infrastructure are assets and resources of the entire enterprise.

• Individual TTB offices or programs may have to concede their architectural based decisions for the greater good of the entire enterprise.

• All TTB organizations and lines of business “own” EA. All TTB organizations and lines of business have a stake in the definition and implementation of EA.

2. TTB’s mission and business drive the design of the EA.

• Integration of business and IT planning and strategy ensures that IT effectively enables and supports TTB’s mission.

• TTB’s EA supports the bureau’s mission, vision and strategy by streamlining business processes and information flows and effectively applying enabling technologies.

• Information management and architecture decisions are an equally shared responsibility of all business units within TTB, and are made to ensure that services help accomplish business objectives.

• TTB’s business and IT leaders must engage in strategy development and planning together.

• Program staff must actively participate in the definition and implementation of TTB’s EA.

• All TTB organizations must participate in the development of systems and services to ensure that providers and customers have a clear understanding of services to be provided, and to guarantee that TTB complies with external laws and external and internal policies and regulations.

• Major new or replacement information system investments will be approved only after work processes have been examined for modernization or reengineering opportunities.

• New systems will be designed to be flexible enough to evolve with changing business, functional, and technological requirements.

3. Architectural decision-making is results-oriented and measurable.

• TTB’s EA is a planning framework and tool for defining and implementing enabling technologies to support business and information needs. It is only effective if it produces demonstrable results that are valued by the enterprise.

• Selection of technologies is founded on effective and efficient use of information in support of TTB’s business.

• Metrics are developed and used to assess improvements obtained from EA decisions.

Rationale Implications

4. The EA ensures that information management decisions are made to provide maximum benefit to TTB and the public at a minimum cost to the organization.

• TTB’s EA fulfills business and information requirements while reducing duplicative investments.

• Compliance with EA is a prerequisite for IT investment.

• All TTB divisions have a stake in defining EA as it affects their funding for IT investments.

• Governance mechanisms are required to ensure investments conform to the architecture. Sound business justification is required for exceptions and/or waivers.

• Data, systems, and technology are designed and used to optimize that value of the services provided and should promote and enhance quality, effectiveness, efficiency, and/or functionality for the internal and external customer of TTB.

5. The EA leverages and aligns with government-wide architectures and solutions wherever practical.

• Government-wide solutions, such as the Presidential E-Gov and LOB initiatives, provide cost savings for the Federal government.

• Identified opportunities to integrate with other levels of government can yield cost savings and streamline interactions with TTB business partners.

• TTB’s EA and CPIC processes ensure investments are not duplicative of E-Gov and LOB initiatives.

• TTB’s EA leverages government-wide services and solutions when it makes practical business sense to do so.

• TTB’s segment architectures and individual initiatives explore opportunities to better integrate solutions with TTB’s business partners.

6. The EA promotes sharing, re-use, and common solutions

• Sharing, reuse and common solutions provide economies of scale for the bureau and reduce duplication.

• Reusable components and common solutions provide opportunities to reduce IT development costs and development time.

• TTB’s EA governance must emphasize cooperative strategies for satisfying common requirements across the bureau that eliminate unnecessary duplication and incompatibility of systems, data, and business processes.

• Reuse must be a design consideration for all EA components.

• Common solutions can address any architectural layer.

• Investment, design and implementation decisions favor reusable components and common solutions.

• Requirements reflect the needs of all affected business elements and build in flexibility to address unique business requirements.

7. The EA reduces complexity through the use of enterprise standards

• Standardization reduces costs and time for meeting current and future business requirements.

• Enterprise standards provide an important mechanism for streamlining the technology landscape, ensuring the interoperability of systems and improving the stability of the environment.

• Data, applications, and technology are implemented within an architectural framework that is sound, consistent in use, and flexible to accommodate the diverse business of TTB.

• EA governance ensures that technical standards are approved, enforced, and refreshed as necessary. Governance mechanisms allow for exceptions and/or waivers in cases where there is a sound business justification.

• Emerging standards change required IT skill sets and generate requirements for staff training.

• The standards contained in this framework are based on formal or de facto industry standards and or the decisions made within TTB and the government as a whole to ensure quality and safety of technology and data.

Rationale Implications

8. Information and data are managed as enterprise assets.

• Information leveraged across the value chain improves performance, supports decision-making and enables accurate reporting.

• Data will be defined and the quality, integrity, and sharing of the data is managed to ensure an appropriate balance between accessibility and security.

• Enterprise-wide access to data, based on users’ business needs for and rights to that information, is the rule rather than the exception.

Program areas provide the necessary data and information to the bureau as requested and needed taking into consideration restrictions due to data confidentiality, privacy, or “need to know” concerns.

• Data standardization is critical for all information and data types that are common to or shared across more than one TTB division or program.

• Data stewards are assigned for all enterprise data. Stewards have the authority and means to manage the data for which they are accountable.

• Data are captured once.

• The way information is accessed and displayed is sufficiently adaptable to meet the needs of a wide range of enterprise users with multiple access methods.

9. Security and privacy are integrated into all architectural layers.

• TTB safeguards confidential information to enhance public trust.

Information and data must be protected from unauthorized access, use and disclosure.

• TTB must comply with established security requirements, such as the Privacy Act of 1974, FISMA, and OMB A-130 Security of Federal Automated Information Resources (App.III).

• Considering security implications at the outset improves cost management and reduces risk.

• Security planning and management is integrated with all aspects of business and IT planning and governance, including: business, IT and E-Gov strategic planning; CPIC and budget; data management; and, system development, engineering and integration.

• Data and information are clearly categorized based on security, privacy and sensitivity considerations, and rules are clearly defined and universally understood by data users.

• Audit and monitoring mechanisms are used to secure information resources.

• Public access systems are isolated from mission critical resources.

10. The EA will be planned, developed and managed through a formal governance process.

• Formalized governance for EA ensures that it is developed, implemented, and managed consistently throughout the bureau.

• EA governance will include an Enterprise-level architecture review process, at the Architecture Working Group (AWG) and Enterprise Change Control Board (E-CCB) levels.

2. Baseline EA

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The Baseline EA represents the current state of the Bureau’s architecture as it relates to stakeholders, business operations, performance measures, applications, data, technology and security. It represents the “as-is” state and status of the TTB enterprise. This will be the foundation from which the target architecture and transition plans are developed.

2.2 BUSINESS LAYER

The business layer allows for the strategic alignment of investments to the Lines of Business (LoBs) that TTB performs. In addition, this business-driven approach to EA provides a context for the manner in which the other layers of the architecture are used and related. Using the EA as a vehicle, common and unique enterprise-wide solutions will be identified across the Bureau. By developing and analyzing the baseline architecture, redundant systems will be identified and potential enterprise-wide solutions will be championed. This business model is the first step in developing an EA that will analyze investments and resources from a strategic, cross-bureau point of view.

The TTB business layer provides the foundation to support both internal as well as external integration of investments and delivery. There are many benefits that the bureaus and its external stakeholders can derive from proper use of the business layer. Continuous improvement of the business model helps enhance the EA, drive capital planning decision-making, and further the tenets of the President’s Management Agenda. By incorporating the EA and Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) processes, the Business Reference Model (BRM) benefits TTB by:

• Promoting cross-bureau collaboration within the Treasury Department

• Highlighting opportunities to integrate…