Forwarded from the Geonet list ... not sure if this has been seen on
this list already ...
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: CUAC Report 2007
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:03:54 -0500
From: Zellmer, Linda R <[log in to unmask]>
To: maps-l
Hello,
Below you will find the final report from the CUAC meeting which was
held at the USGS in Reston in April. It arrived when Clara and I were at
GSIS in Denver, so we apologize for the delay. Linda Zellmer
*CARTOGRAPHIC USERS ADVISORY COUNCIL (CUAC)*
*2007 AGENCY PRESENTATION MINUTES*
*APRIL 26-27, 2007*
*US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RESTON, VA*
*Sponsor*
Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, US Geological Survey
*CUAC Representatives in Attendance*
Joe Aufmuth, University of Florida, ALA/MAGERT
Michael Fry, University of Maryland, WAML
Anne Graham, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, NEMO
Katie Lage, University of Colorado, WAML
Mary McInroy, University of Iowa, ALA/GODORT
Clara P. McLeod, Washington University, GSIS
Anita Oser, SLA, Social Science Division, G&M
Daniel T. Seldin, Indiana University, NACIS
Wangyal Shawa, Princeton University, ALA/MAGERT
Joy Suh, George Mason University, ALA/GODORT
Thelma Thompson, University of New Hampshire, NEMO
Linda Zellmer, Indiana University, GSIS
*Federal Agency Presenters*
* *(in order of presentation)
Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, US Geological Survey
Andrew V. "Drew" Douglas, Customer Relations, DHS Federal Emergency
Management Agency Enterprise GIS Solutions
Valerie Martens, Cataloging Supervisor, US Government Printing Office
(GPO) – agency discussion session
Betsy Kanalley, Assistant Program Manager, USDA Forest Service,
Geospatial Services Group
Eric M. Hubbell, Program Analyst, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Sam Wear (for Rob Dollison), USGS Geospatial One-Stop
Billy Tolar, Standards Program Manager, FGDC/USGS
Jenny Runyon, U.S. Board on Geographic Names
Timothy Trainor, Assistant Division Chief for Geographic Areas and
Cartographic Data Products, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division
Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, United States Geological
Survey
John Hebert, Chief of the Geography and Maps Division, Library of Congress
Brett Abrams, Electronic Records Archivist, National Archives and
Records Administration
*Written Agency Report*s* Submitted*
Department of Energy
*Federal Agency Presentation Schedule*
*Thursday, April 26, 2007*
*1:15 – 3:45pm: Agency Presentations Session I *
*1:15 – 1:30 Welcome*
CUAC Chairs and Richard Huffine, USGS
Introduction of all members and agencies present
*1:30 – 2:00 Andrew V. "Drew" Douglas, Customer Relations*
DHS Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Enterprise GIS Solutions
*2:00 – 2:30 Valerie Martens,* Cataloging Supervisor, US Government
Printing Office – agency discussion session
*2:30 – 3:00 Betsy Kanalley, Assistant Program Manager*
USDA Forest Service, Geospatial Services Group
*3:00 – 3:30 Eric M. Hubbell, Program Analyst, *U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
*Friday April 27, 2007*
CUAC Chairs and USGS
Introduction of all members and agencies present
*8:45 – 9:15 Sam Wear (for Rob Dollison), *USGS Geospatial One-Stop
*Billy Tolar*, *Standards Program Manager*, FGDC/USGS
*9:15 – 9:45 Jenny Runyon, *U.S. Board on Geographic Names
*9:45 – 10:15 Tim Trainor, Assistant Division Chief for Geographic Areas
and Cartographic Data Products, *U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division
*10:30 – 11:00 Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, *United
States Geological Survey, Host of CUAC 2007
*11:00 – 11:30 John Hebert, Chief of the Geography and Maps Division,
*Library of Congress
*1:15 – 1:45 CUAC Liaison written agency reports*
Member agencies unable to attend
*1:45 – 2:15 Brett Abrams, Electronic Records Archivist, *National
Archives and Records Administration
*Introductory Session Remarks*
*Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, US Geological Survey*
*Agency Presentation Minutes*
*Andrew V. "Drew" Douglas, Customer Relations, **DHS Federal Emergency
Management Agency Enterprise GIS Solutions, **“Disaster Cartographic
Products at FEMA”*
/(submitted by Wangyal Shawa)/
Andrew Douglas started his presentation by giving a history of disaster
cartography at FEMA, starting from 1992 when they used MapInfo software
to map Hurricane Andrew, to the establishment of the Geospatial
Management Office in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) when they
merged into DHS in 2003. During the 2005 hurricane season, FEMA produced
3,000 unique map products created by FEMA headquarters with only 12
staff members. Mr. Douglas said they generated a lot of unique maps;
these maps and data are part of the national records and need to be
stored in libraries and made available to the public. However, they have
certain concerns about what information and which formats of their
products need to be made available to the public. He said that FEMA’s
primary duty is to help people during disasters. They make status and
logistic maps for decision makers to show where shelters are located and
how many people are in each shelter, etc. They also make disaster
declaration maps which are based on governors’ requests for disaster
assistance.
FEMA uses different geospatial data products including the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) base product called Homeland
Security Infrastructure Protection (HSIP) Gold, which is made available
to all federal agencies involved in homeland security. The base product
includes critical infrastructure, schools, medical facilities,
utilities, transportation, dams, etc. FEMA not only uses the NGA HSIP
Gold data (these data are not shared with the public) but also use other
datasets such as demographic data from the Census and meteorological
data from the National Meteorological Center, to create hurricane
forecasts, hurricane projected and actual paths, determine people likely
and actually effected by hurricanes as well as generate disaster maps.
These maps help planners by giving them good ideas of how to prepare for
the disaster and how to help people to recover from the disaster.
Mr. Douglas showed sample of maps done by FEMA. Some of their titles are:
1. 2004 Hurricane Season- Named Storms: Atlantic, Caribbean, and
the Gulf of Mexico
2. 2005 Hurricane Season-Named Storms: Atlantic, Caribbean, and the
Gulf of Mexico
3. Hurricane Florence - Advisory number 37
4. Hurricane Katrina – Advisory 23 – Elderly Population in Wind Swath
5. Hurricane Katrina Peak Wind Gusts by County
6. Hurricane Katrina – Advisory 23A – Evacuation Orders
7. Hurricane Katrina Damage Overview
8. Hurricane Katrina – New Orleans - Area Road Closures and
Probable Flooding Areas as of 8/29/05
9. Hurricane Katrina – Allocated Space for Evacuees as of 1800,
Saturday, September 3, 2005
10. Presidential Disaster Declarations: December 24, 1964 to
February 27, 2006
To access FEMA geospatial data he suggested we visit this URL
_www.gismaps.fema.gov_
<../../Documents%20and%20Settings/mapper/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Local%20Settings/Temp/www.gismaps.fema.gov>
*Valerie Martens, **US Government Printing Office – agency discussion
session*
/(submitted by Michael Frey)/
In lieu of a formal presentation, Ms. Martens distributed a handout to
CUAC members summarizing developments at GPO and addressing topics
brought to GPO’s attention by CUAC members prior to the meeting. Items
from that handout pertinent to the map librarianship community include:
_Map-related statistics_
From October, 2006 through February, 2007, GPO distributed 1,685,575
tangible copies of 3,842 titles (print, microfiche, CDs, DVDs and
in-house maps). USGS map distribution during the same period included 59
titles and 12,673 copies. From October 2006 through March 2007, 7,171
online titles and 3,294 PURL links to agency titles outside of GPO
Access were added, for a total of 10,465 new online titles. These
additions bring the total number of titles to 216,822, and the total
number of titles linked from GPO Access to 51,248, for a total of
268,070 titles accessible through GPO Access. From June 1, 2006 to April
15, 2007, GPO cataloged approximately 259 maps (GPO’s chief map
cataloger was ill for approximately 2 months, and returned to work on a
part-time basis for one month).
_FDsys_
The U.S. Government Printing Office’s Future Digital System (FDsys) will
preserve, authenticate, provide version control, and provide access to
digital content from all three branches of the U.S. Government. FDsys
will be a comprehensive, systematic, and dynamic means for preserving
digital content free from dependence on specific hardware or software.
The system will automate many lifecycle processes for digital content
and make it easier to deliver content in formats suited to customers’
evolving needs. FDsys will be released for agency and public use in late
2007. [For add’l details about FDsys, see
_http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/proceedings/07spring/fdsys-0407.pdf_.]
_USDA Soil Surveys_
The Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) is the publisher of the Soil Survey Reports, and these
publications have been available for selection by the libraries in the
FDLP for many years. The NRCS has traditionally issued the Soil Surveys
as a printed set: one printed book and one printed map, packaged inside
a file folder.
In 2006, the NRCS made a publishing decision to release some Soil Survey
reports with parts in different formats. This has generated a
significant number of inquiries to Library Services and Content
Management (LSCM) because libraries think that the FDLP has
inadvertently distributed incomplete sets.
LSCM is working with the NRCS in an effort to identify which titles are
being published with parts in different formats. We have communicated to
NRCS that the seemingly random choice of formats for the distribution of
each Survey causes confusion in the libraries and may hamper access to
these important and useful documents.
NRCS has indicated their goal is to publish all Surveys online. Until
that goal is realized, NRCS will continue to print parts of Soil Surveys
in different formats. For example, the Soil Survey of Anson County,
North Carolina, was only printed in book form and the maps were
available online only. The book was classed A 57.38/33:AN 8 with Item
Number 0102-B-33 and shipped on Shipping List 2006-0035-S.
Conversely, the Soil Survey Map of Washington County, Vermont, is
currently being processed for shipment to the FDL's. For this Survey,
the manuscript that accompanies the map is online only. The class for
this title is A 57.38/45:W 27/MAPS and it will appear on an upcoming
shipping list.
At present, there is no indication in the printed documents that the
additional content is available online only. We recommend that libraries
consult the NRCS Soil Survey website at
http://soils.usda.gov/survey/online_surveys/ to determine the online
availability of Soil Survey materials before sending an inquiry to LSCM.
Notes on GPO cataloging records will help identify the parts of Soil
Surveys that have different formats. GPO cataloging records will be
either a map only record (when a map is in print, but not the book) or a
book only record (when there is a book in print, but no map) with a note
stating "Book not distributed to depository libraries in tangible form"
or "Map not distributed to depository libraries in tangible form,"
respectively.
GPO appreciates the community's patience while we work with the NRCS
going forward.
In addition to the handout, Ms. Martens fielded questions and comments
from CUAC members. She was clear that maps were outside her area of
expertise, and she agreed to forward CUAC’s comments [see below] to
appropriate parties within GPO. (Policy-related questions, for example,
may be directed to Laurie Hall at [log in to unmask])
Topics raised by CUAC members included:
_Geospatial Metadata_. CUAC asked for geospatial metadata from Fed’l
agencies to be converted to MARC format so the data can be more readily
found, and suggested that GPO use a metadata format for their digital
projects (e.g., FDsys) that’s export-friendly. CUAC expressed continued
interest in FDsys’s ability to incorporate geospatial metadata in all of
GPO’s relevant digital initiatives. Ms. Martens indicated that
geospatial metadata searching can be added to FDsys as a future feature,
but clarification is needed as to exactly what is wanted (e.g., lat-long
coordinates).
_FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps_. CUAC asked GPO to distribute Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) through the Depository program.
_Cataloging digital maps and geospatial data._ CUAC asked for more
routine identification and cataloging of digital geospatial data, maps,
etc. from Fed’l agencies. Existing electronic publications from USGS and
EPA, for example, don’t always have cataloging records. Fed’l agencies
should be working more closely with GPO to make sure items have records.
Ms. Martens noted that GPO’s staff is limited to 2 map catalogers, as
well as a cataloger working more than half-time on EPA docs. She
directed CUAC to Proceedings of the 2007 Spring Depository Library
conference, which included a Depository Library Council session on Web
harvesting. [See pg. 124 at
_http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/proceedings/07spring/transcripts-0407.pdf_.]
_Lost Documents_. CUAC asked about procedures for notifying GPO about
lost docs. Ms. Martens: lost docs are a big priority for GPO, and
they’ve made enormous progress in the last couple years. The most
efficient way to notify GPO is through AskGPO. Libraries can also send
electronic docs to GPO for cataloging.
_GPO’s Digital Projects_. CUAC asked if there was a complete list of
GPO’s digital projects and initiatives. CUAC: Is there any way to merge
existing digital project indexes and consolidate them into a single
repository?
_Distribution_. CUAC noted a continuing “disconnect” between what’s
produced by federal agencies (e.g., FEMA’s event-specific maps) and
what’s collected by GPO and distributed to depositories. Agencies are
still producing items in print and electronically, but what’s
distributed to depositories continues to decrease in number, and what’s
available online changes over time. CUAC called for GPO to collect items
that agencies aren’t motivated to keep in perpetuity. (Legacy
publications come through GPO pretty well, but new products and titles
seem to be under the radar.) Ms. Martens: If you find items like this,
let us know and we’ll look into it. CUAC: Libraries could never keep up
with that on an item-by-item basis. We need a comprehensive approach to
dealing with how information is being published now.
*Betsy Kanalley, Assistant Program Manager, **USDA Forest Service, *
*Geospatial Services Group*
/(submitted by Katie Lage)/
Ms. Kanalley began her presentation with an overview of the Forest
Service structure, land management responsibilities, and programs. Her
talk covered strategic goals for Forest Service geospatial programs, the
new Forest Service Geodata Clearinghouse, Forest Service data on Google
Earth, print on demand mapping services, and the map sales program.
The Forest Service geospatial programs are moving towards an integrated
business model. They are integrating their mini data centers into three
main centers, Portland, Kansas City, and Albuquerque. Kansas City will
be the main data center, with Albuquerque working on development and
testing of applications and acting as a backup to ensure continuity of
operations for Forest Service data centers.
Geospatial information is gathered from various resource applications in
programs that the Forest Service manages, such as fire, forest
management, range, cultural resources, and more.
Future mapping efforts will focus on acquiring and producing data to
support field needs,. Acquisition and production of elevation data and
ortho-rectified imagery will continue. The Forest Service is also
focusing on keeping data up to standards for content, accuracy,
completeness, and documentation (metadata). They will continue to
produce thematic maps and 1:24,000 and 1:126,720 (1:63,360 for Alaska)
The new Forest Service print on demand (FSPOD) mapping capability will
be available to the public via Forest Service Geodata Clearinghouse in
the near future. The user will be able to select a 1:24,000 quadrangle
extent and print the map or save it in PDF format. FSPOD uses ArcGIS
Server 9.2 to produce 7.5’ 1:24,000-scale maps over FS lands of the
conterminous United States and 15’ X 20-22.5’ 1:63,360-scale maps for
Alaska. These products are either based on the traditional quadrangle
footprint, or on a user defined center point. The FS is working with
the USGS, as they develop a similar map on demand capability, in
cooperation with States and other partners.
Ms. Kanalley introduced the FSGeodata On-Line Geospatial Clearinghouse
(_http://fsgeodata.fs.fed.us_ <http://fsgeodata.fs.fed.us/>), for
discovering, assessing, and delivering USFS geospatial data. There is a
gateway for raster data (coming soon), vector data, maps, and other
data, including regional datasets. She referred a question about
archiving data in FSGeodata to Dave George, the clearinghouse manager.
Forest Service geospatial data can also be found in Google Earth. The FS
has partnered with Google to provide forest boundaries and recreation
sites and pop-up information windows with links to forest service
information and FSGeodata.
Ms. Kanalley briefly reported on new prices for USFS printed maps,
showed the new plastic material some maps are being printed on, and
reminded the group that they can be purchased through the USGS store and
from the National Forest Store or Forest Service visitor centers. She
brought examples of maps and forest atlases (for Region 5) for CUAC
members to look over.
Q: Are there maps of just wilderness areas?
A: These should be available in the new print-on-demand mapping. Ms.
Kanalley may also be able to help provide something like this.
USFS maps are available through the USGS store (_http://store.usgs.gov/_).
*Eric M. Hubbell, Program Analyst, **U.S. Environmental Protection Agency*
/(submitted by Joy Suh)/
Eric Hubbell presented “Enterprise GIS at EPA” at the CUAC meeting on
Thursday, April 26, 2006. He began by introducing the geospatial teams
within EPA whose functions have been developing Web applications and
enterprise architecture for GIS and introduced Dave Wolf, the geospatial
team leader who also attended this meeting. Eric’s presentation covered
background, GIS development at EPA, GIS public applications, data
service offered, technology and future directions of geospatial program
within the agency.
The mission of EPA is to protect human health and environment. Since
multiple offices within EPA oversaw each of EPA’s strategic goals
(consisting of clean air and global climate change, clean and safe
water, land preservation and restoration, healthy communities and
ecosystems, and compliance and environmental stewardship), this resulted
in a wide range of data sources. The challenges were to get the programs
to agree to share and then put the data in a common format. EPA
developed Envirofacts Data Warehouse in 1995 to provide a single public
access site for environmental data related to air, water, and land
across the United States. Location or place (such as zip code and city)
is a key to view local community data.
GIS applications have been increasingly important within and outside of
EPA since the first introduction of GIS at EPA in the mid-1980s. Each of
the10 regional offices has a geospatial team. EPA’s Office of
Environmental Information develops enterprise architecture solutions.
After developing Environfacts in 1995, the office developed EnviroMapper
(EM), the first Web based application by using a Web-based GIS
application. EM now offers specific programs which answer questions as
specific as: “Are there environmental concerns located surrounding my
construction projects?, “Is this area a potential environmental justice
site?, or “Are there significant sources of pollution where I live?.
The following specific GIS applications are able to address such concerns:
• _Window to My Environment (WME_) is a collaborative effort at
the local, state, and national level. This is an interactive tool to
generate maps, demographic statistics, environmental facts and
conditions (watersheds and air quality, etc) in location of choice. It
allows data searches by zip code, city, and state.
• _NEPAssist_ is an EPA centric program, which allows
visualization on a regional basis of automated EPA’s environmental
impact statement submissions. It assists with initial reviews under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPAssist provides reports and
reviews of potential environmental concerns on the project sites.
• _Environmental Justice_ (EJ) is similar to WME, but assesses
regional statistics according to the following topics: health, social,
economic, and environmental concerns.
• _EM for Hurricane_s and Rita Site along with mapping offers
images of the area affected by Hurricane Katrina from Global Explorer.
Two Web sites that provide data services are:
• _Geographic Image and Feature services_
(_http://geodata.epa.gov_ <http://geodata.epa.gov/>) for superfund
sites, permit application sites, toxic inventory sites, etc
• _Geospatial Data Download services_
(_http://epa.gov/enviro/geo_data.html_) available in XML, shape files,
or feature class files, eventually KML files.
Technology used at EPA is based on ArcIMS for mapping server, ESRI’s
ArcSDE (spatial data engine), and Oracle Spatial (GIS extension to
database). EPA also uses a service-oriented architecture (Web Service,
XML), including data from USGS NWIS (National Water Inventory System),
FWS NWI (National Wetlands Inventory), EPA STORET, ESRI ArcWeb Services,
and USGS Terra Server Aerial photos and topographic maps.
Eric concludes by sharing the future direction of information technology
used at the EPA. He notes the importance of GIS and the intent of data
sharing and more GIS services on the Web.
Questions and Discussion:
CUAC members had a question about availability of hard copies of EPA
basins to the library community in the future (whether through the
depository program or direct request it from the agency). Dave Wolf
responded that EPA has been trying to upload all the data on the Web and
suggested that libraries should regularly download data at their own
convenience and can contact the EPA for historical data. New NLCD
(National Land Cover Data, 2001 source) is now available. CUAC members
also inquired about possibility of formal partnership between EPA and
university communities for sharing the web applications and data created
by EPA as back up sources for access and archiving. Further concerns
and discussion centered on archiving issues and how these Web
applications and data will be accessible 50 years from now. EPA is
looking forward to working with NARA for data archiving. CUAC members
also appreciated EPA’s development of these Web applications since it
has proved useful for students to do environmental analysis without GIS
knowledge.
For further information, please contact Eric Hubbell ([log in to unmask])
Web Sites for Further Information:
• EnviroMapper - _http://epa.gov/enviro/html/em/_
• Window to My Environment (WME) - _http://www.epa.gov/enviro/wme/_
*Sam Wear, **USGS Geospatial One-Stop*
/(submitted by// //Anne Graham//)/
Geospatial One-Stop (GOS), an intergovernmental project managed by the
Department of the Interior and USGS in support of the President’s
Initiative for E-Government that encourages collaboration to leverage
government geospatial resources and best practices by providing access
to national geospatial data. An outcome of the Geospatial One-Stop
E-gov project is Geodata.gov, a portal to our nation’s (local, regional,
national) digital geographic data.
The Geopatial One-Stop portal (_www.geodata.gov_
<http://www.geodata.gov/>) provides access to many different kinds of
digital geographic information. The actual geographic data does not
reside in the portal, but rather the portal is an exploration system to
a collection of pointers which reference different geospatial files,
information and data. Essentially the portal contains records about the
files, like a huge card catalog, or a national metadata catalog. These
documented data sets contain many layers of information such as aerial
imagery, elevation data, ground control, land cover, surface waters,
transportation and structures.
The portal consists of different components: a metadata catalog with a
search application; a map viewer; a data partnership marketplace; and
community of interest collaboration tools. The National Map provides the
primary base map of GOS. The National Map is a critical asset,
providing a seamless base of topographic data upon which other data,
discovered in the portal, can be draped. Interoperability standards
allow The National Map to be leveraged by GOS.
The National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) refers to the
technology, policies, standards and human resources necessary to acquire
process, distribute, use and maintain spatial data by the Federal
Government. Geospatial One-Stop is one of the key components in
furthering the building of the NSDI. The GOS catalog is built upon
harvesting copies of the metadata contained in the earlier NSDI
collections and expanding the ways governments can publish their data to
this national collection.
Partners are federal agencies, states, cities, counties (local
governments, where the richest and most detailed data is being
developed), tribes, academia, and the private sector. The biggest
challenge for the Federal government is to provide sufficient incentives
to enable more local government information to be incorporated into the
building of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure.
State, Local and Federal web map services are a great resource for the
public to access the most current data. GOS is a repository for
pointers to these publicly available data services. Data can be
described with metadata and downloaded from GOS.
In addition to searching the entire collection of metadata, the GOS
portal is organized around topical themes of information that are
organized into data ‘Communities’. In addition, to data themes the
portal contains the following primary organizational tabs to help with
navigation:
_Communities tab_ – provides a way for users to share information with
each other about specific topics, such as fire, local government,
historical collections.
The communities tab can be a pointer to a web site, or to a large amount
of downloadable data.
One local community example is the metadata about Spokane web mapping
service.
The Library tab within the Communities gives links to pertinent web sites.
_Maps tab_ shows popular maps.
The National Map is where different kinds of live web mapping services
that can be fused and mapped within the national map pointed to with GOS.
_Marketplace tab_ allows you to see what data others are trying to
acquire so that you can develop partnerships for acquiring datasets.
There are approximately 125,000 records in GOS and the content continues
to grow each year.
The home page interface is customizable with a login and maps and
searches can be saved. The following enhancements have been recently made:
_GOS 2.1 Enhancements:_
· Improved Harvesting
· Improved Metadata Management tools
· Spatial Ranking of Search Results (better ‘geographic fit’ in
search)
· Access Metadata from the Viewer
· Provide More Feedback to publishers
_Next Steps:_
· Publishing content to the web
· Viewer Improvements: better Open Geospatial Consortium Web
Mapping Service support, faster base maps, 3-D viewer, possible KML support.
_Questions/comments_*:*
· Loading from multiple distributed map services can cause viewing
and downloading time differences.
This interface has been very nice.
How do all the data delivery portals fit together? Sam: I will provide
the group an outline that came out of a meeting of several groups under
the NSDI. The groups worked to get people to understand the difference
between all the portals of the NSDI. GOS is where those different
technologies come together. The hope is that metadata records for all
NSDI data will be placed in GOS.
*Jenny Runyon, **U.S. Board on Geographic Names*
/(submitted by Mary McInroy)/
The Board on Geographic Names (BGN) was established by Executive Order
in 1890 and is the longest-standing standards body in the United
States. The BGN’s mission, in 1890 as it remains today, is to oversee
decisions affecting “…geographic names and principles of geographic
nomenclature and orthography.” At first interested only in US entities,
the BGN gradually expanded its interests to include foreign names and
other areas of interest to the United States, a process that accelerated
during World War II. In 1947, the BGN was recreated by Congress in
Public Law 80-242.
A listing of BGN membership and organization can be found on their web
site at _http://geonames.usgs.gov/_. Members of the BGN represent
federal agencies concerned with U.S. geographic information, population,
ecology, and the management of public lands.
The BGN’s Domestic Names Committee (DNC) includes multiple members from
the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, Homeland Security,
the Library of Congress, the U.S. Postal Service, and the Government
Printing Office. The BGN also includes an Advisory Committee on
Antarctic Names (ACAN). Staff support for the DNC and ACAN is provided
by USGS.
BGN’s Foreign Names Committee agency members are from the Commerce,
State, and Defense Departments, as well as the CIA and the Library of
Congress. This committee includes Advisory Committees on Underseas
Features and Extraterrestrial names, with staff support provided by NGA.
The BGN deals with the standardization of names, not their regulation.
Standardizing of geographic names and locations prevents incorrect,
inaccurate, or contradictory feature data from appearing simultaneously
in multiple applications, a circumstance which could have serious and
potential catastrophic consequences in such areas as: national
security, emergency preparedness and response, site selection &
analysis, and all levels of communication.
Members of the Domestic Names Committee meet each month at the
Department of the Interior in Washington D.C. to agree on the geographic
names to be used in federal products. The full BGN (Domestic and
Foreign Names committees) meets quarterly at USGS. These BGN decisions
on official (i.e., BGN approved) geographic names and locations are
mandatory only for federal products, i.e., they are not binding for
state and local governments, although most would agree that names should
be consistent throughout all levels of government and the private
sector. Although names and locations may have historical listings or
variant spellings, there is only one official geographic name for each
feature. The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the
authoritative federal source for official domestic geographic names and
locations. GNIS is searchable online at
http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/index.html, and can be downloaded
entirely or in user-selected sections. The GEONet Names Server (GNS),
developed and maintained by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
(NGA), is the official repository of foreign place-name decisions
approved by the BGN. Also the GEONet Names Server, like the GNIS, is
cumulative, i.e., name listings are not deleted except in cases of
obvious duplication. Names and locations of man made features are
determined by the authoritative local source and are not subject to
formal BGN review and decision. However, their names and locations are
recorded in the GNIS, and as such are considered official for federal
use.
To build the GNIS database, beginning in the 1970’s, the BGN collected
names and locations from the 1:24K USGS topographic maps, then moved on
to U.S. Forest Service visitor maps and NOAA charts. Beginning in 1982
and continuing today, the BGN is in Phase II of a state-by-state data
compilation effort, which involves collecting names from other federal
sources, state and local sources, and other current and historical maps
and documents (the final two states are expected to be completed in
2010). Also, since 2002, the BGN has initiated Phase IIA, which
involves updating names and locations (primarily new structures and
cultural features) for the 46 most critical urban areas as identified by
NGA for homeland security. The BGN so far has standardized over two
million names in 66 feature classes, i.e., broad categories such as
summits, streams, canals, rapids, woods, and populated places. Cultural
features are the fastest-growing part of the database.
The BGN works closely with a network of fifty State Geographic Names
Authorities (SNA’s), which solicit local input and provide
recommendations to the BGN on name proposals (new names and name
changes). The SNA’s, many of whom represent state government agencies,
also work closely with their GIS communities and other partners to
coordinate names activities and to assist in the GNIS data compilation
effort. Some SNA’s are comprised of one individual in academia, while
others are formal boards established by state legislatures. Several
SNA’s also serve as their state’s archivist or are affiliated with their
state’s historical society. The BGN is also developing partnerships
with many tribal authorities, and in compliance with the Executive Order
requiring tribal consultation on matters of interest to the federal
government, will seek the input of any interested tribal government on
any name proposal it receives. Several tribes are working closely with
the BGN to incorporate names of indigenous significance into the GNIS.
The work that BGN does supports, among others, the following federal
programs: Geospatial One Stop (GOS), The National Map, the National
Atlas, the National Hydrography Dataset, the National Elevation Dataset,
and FGDC standards development.
BGN is currently working with ANSI to make the GNIS Feature ID# the
“official code” for the nation. The GNIS Feature ID# is currently
official for the federal government, but establishing it as a national
standard would permit its usage throughout both the government and
private sector and would create a standard within the international
community.
Google Earth currently uses GNIS and GEONet as two of its primary
sources for names, although it also gathers names from a number of other
non-standardized sources. The official names issue is not a large
problem with US names, but the foreign geographic names used on Google
Earth are definitely not standardized. The BGN is attempting to urge
Google Earth to indicate that the BGN is the only official source for
these names, and to also allow Google Earth’s users to feed any
updates/corrections back to the BGN.
The BGN is an active participant in the international arena, primarily
through the United Nations Group of Experts of Geographical Names, and
also through its annual geographic names training course, conducted
under the auspices of the Pan American Institute for Geography and History.
BGN web site at _http://geonames.usgs.gov/_ includes a brief history of
BGN, as well as links to GNIS and NGA’s GEONet Names Server for domestic
and foreign place names respectively. A form to propose or change a
domestic geographic name can be found here also. In addition, the BGN
site links to other geographic place name sites for US states and a few
foreign countries, as well as other general geographic names sites, e.g.
ASU’s “Place Name Servers on the Internet” and the “Fuzzy Gazetteer.”
*Tim Trainor, Assistant Division Chief for Geographic Areas and *
*Cartographic Data Products, **U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division*
/(submitted by Joe Aufmuth)/
Tim Trainor, Assistant Division Chief for Geographic Areas and
Cartographic Data Products, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division*
*began with an overview of presentation topics which included geographic
and cartographic products, a 2010 Census update, a review of geographic
programs, a FIPS and ANSI transition update, a MAF/TIGER system status
update.
_Geographic Products__*.*_* *Tim informed CUAC that TIGER/Line 2006
Second Edition is available and that TIGER/Line Shapefile, a new
product, will be available fall of 2007. The Tiger format is being
sunset and Census is moving forward with the shape file format. GML is
also being looked at as a possible format. He reminded CUAC that two
editions, of the shape files will be available each year, spring and fall.
_Cartographic Products._ The March 2007^ printing of the 110th
Congressional District Wall Map is available through a GPO contract.
Large format maps of Congressional district changes in Georgia and Texas
individual CD maps are in progress and will be available on the Census
website. CBSA wall map will not be printed. It has been revised and is
available on line. Hurricane Mapping
_http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/emergencies/index.html_ has
produced a series of maps, both location based and thematic that has
also led to a special redesign of the traditional census tract reference
maps. The redesign produced a simpler and more generalized product.
Maps in the Statistical Abstract for 2007 are available.
_2010 Census Update._ Census 2010 is underway. Letters were sent out
to 40,000 community leaders and were invited to participate by sharing
their address lists to help revise and check the Census Bureau’s address
list in preparation for questionnaire mailouts for the 2010 Decennial
Census. This Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) is a massive
operation that has produced a software product available to local
governments to aid them in their address list review. It is a “low
level GIS” that includes software and Census data, and will allow local
governments to also update geographic data. The data will then be sent
back to Census for inclusion in their database.
Two address canvassing dress rehearsal sites have been chosen in
preparation for 2010, the San Joaquin, Stockton area and 9 counties in
North Carolina. The Census Bureau is sending out enumerators road by
road to capture housing locations using handheld GPS units. These units
also will be used following the mailout of questionnaires in a follow up
operation to acquire responses from households that did not return their
questionnaires.
The American Community Survey (ACS) is taking the place of the Census
long form sample questionnaire. ACS surveys will be published annually
for communities with populations greater than or equal to 65,000, a 3
year average for populations greater than or equal 20,000 and a 5 year
average for every area down to block groups. The data will be published
in accordance with Census Bureau confidentiality and non disclosure
thresholds.
_Geographic Programs_. LUCA, the Local Update of Census Addresses, was
discussed above. There was a Statistical Areas Federal Register notice
2010 draft proposal for census geography related to census tracts, block
groups, census designated places (CDPs), and county subdivisions. The
proposal included geographic criteria to accommodate the ACS by
proposing the minimum population threshold the same for block groups and
tracts. The proposal also adds a housing unit threshold. It also
modifies CDP definitions because some with no population were reported
in 2000. Census County Divisions (CCDs) are proposed for elimination
because they were originally offered for states that did not have legal
subdivisions of counties, so data would be available for lower levels of
geography. Comments that have been received on CCD’s indicate an
interest in keeping CCDs. Minor Civil Divisions (towns, townships,
etc.) will remain unchanged. A final Federal Register notice will
specify the final criteria. Separate proposals in 2008 will address
Alaska Native Village Statistical Areas and Tribal Statistical Areas.
A pilot project with Montana, the Bureau of Land Management, and the
USGS centers on identifying issues for incorporating the spatial data
for the Public Land Survey System into the MAF/TIGER System. The goal
is to take advantage of the conformance of community boundary data with
the PLSS as this is a valuable land reference system in the Midwest and
West. The potential PLSS project is slated as a post 2010 activity.
_FIPS and ANSI Update._ FIPS is no longer being used as a standard.
Tim reminded the group that the Census Bureau is responsible for codes
for States, Counties, and Congressional Districts. He also stated that
the Census works on behalf of OMB to help with CBSAs and related areas.
The overall change is a transition from FIPS to ANSI. Data users have
expressed concerns about not being able to sort databases on ANSI
codes. As a result, Census is maintaining the 5 digit code for places
and county subdivisions (formerly FIPS). Census will carry codes for
States and Counties until 2012 and reassess. Formal FIPS and ANSI codes
are being used for the 2010 census.
_MAF/TIGER System Status._ Census is working to realign the road
network layer to be more accurate in position in order to have better
spatial relationships with GPS data collected for each housing unit.
Street center line accuracy will be 7.6 meters, and there are
independent checks on positional accuracy. Census has been working on
the project for the past 4 years. The number of files completed for the
MTAIP is approximately 2600 counties. The remaining 600 counties will
be completed by April 2008. The MAF/Tiger project has been on schedule
and on budget since it started. Behind the Census products a new data
model has been completed and is going through adjustment. Legacy TIGER
data is migrating to the MAF/TIGER database. The new database is
currently supporting 2010 Dress Rehearsal activities. The functions
provided by original TIGER software applications are in development.
Most cartography products being produced by the Census are for field
operations to conduct the census and are not intended as public
products. A data products group is forming to propose and develop post
2010 products. Census is looking at redesigning the American FactFinder.
_Questions._ Several questions were asked by CUAC concerning the ACS 5
year data, future of paper census maps, the Urban Atlas, TIGER to
Shapefiles, GPO distribution. And Appreciation was expressed for Tim’s
work on the Census. In answer to the questions Tim responded that the 5
year ACS data is a floating average of the previous 5 years down to the
block group level and that 2010 will be the first release of ACS 5 year
data. He noted a high variance is anticipated in the data due to the
sample size. He commented that Census will be using ~120 plotters to
produce office and field maps. He continued to say that 2010 Census
maps will be available in PDF format. If paper maps are desired Census
has a service to plot and ship for cost. Census sheets are being
designed to reduce the number of maps resulting in lower cost to the
consumer. Mr. Trainor commented that while he would like to redo the
Urban Atlas series there is no plan to do so at this time. Lastly he
reiterated that the Shapefile product will be available twice per year.
Boundary files will be adjusted during the ACS cycle of communities that
provide the boundary changes. Lastly, he commented that there are no
plans to convert the historic census data to shapefiles.
*Richard Huffine, National Library Coordinator, **United States
Geological Survey*
*David Soller, Geologist, U.S. Geological Survey, and *
*Chief, National Geologic Map Database Project*
/(submitted by Linda Zellmer)/
David Soller reported on the National Geologic Map Database
(URL:_http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ngmdb/ngm_catalog.ora.html_), an index to
geologic maps for the United States. A graphical search interface using
Google Maps is available for selected states. In addition, a new feature
available shows the number of maps that meet the search criteria. Other
improvements include links download GIS data if it is available, links
to a scanned image of the map and links to the scanned image in the
Publications Warehouse. Because not everyone has the Plug-In available,
the images are also available as an image that does not require a
plug-in. The USGS is keeping track of the number of times a publication
from a particular organization is accessed through the site, so that
they and the contributing agencies are able to track use statistics.
USGS is willing to share information on what they have scanned with
others to eliminate duplication of effort. The site also contains links
to all of the Digital Mapping Techniques reports that have been issued
since the meetings began in 1997 (_http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Info/dmt/_).
These reports contain information on the development of digital mapping
technology in the Earth Sciences. A new site on standards and guidelines
is being developed as well.
Richard Huffine, the new National Library Coordinator of the USGS
Libraries, presented the agency update for the USGS. He spoke about how
the information provision side of USGS is evolving and being managed and
the various components of the geospatial information office, which
includes the USGS Libraries. Several statements over the last few years
indicate that science at the USGS is becoming more integrated, rather
than divided between various sub-disciplines (hydrology, geology,
biology, etc.).
Information services drive a lot of the work at USGS. USGS provides
answers to questions via the telephone, e-mail, mail, and even
Blackberry. The USGS is developing several information resources in the
individual science programs, such as the National Water Information
Network (NWIS) and the National Biological Information Infrastructure
(NBII). Information Services includes people, tools and processes.
People are involved in understanding what the users need, building tools
such as the Publications Warehouse, Frequently Asked Questions and the
Science Topics are tools that help provide access to USGS information.
The Natural Science Network consists of Science Information and Library
Services, Knowledge Management and Information Delivery. Information
services includes the Library as well as the people who respond to
questions vial e-mail and the telephone (1-888-ASK-USGS). Tools are
being developed to help manage USGS (Knowledge Management). These tools
include the Frequently Asked Questions, Portals, Wikis, and other tools
to help USGS collect, manage and create new information resources.
Information Delivery includes the Publications Warehouse, the
digitization and scanning efforts and the USGS Store. USGS is working
towards providing access to information via print on demand or digital
delivery so that users can decide how to use the information on their
own. Information Delivery also includes the USGS web site, which is a
distributed network on servers located throughout the country. The web
site is being revised and upgraded so that information can be located
more readily. One of the new parts of the USGS web site is the Science
Topics section. The Science Topics site is based on an organized
database and thesaurus so that information resources can be organized
and identified more readily. An alphabetic index is also available on
the Science Topics site so that people who want to browse alphabetically
can do so. The USGS is also working with Science.gov so that the
thesaurus at USGS works with scientific information from other science
agencies. The Frequently Asked Questions database and Ask USGS systems
are presently separate but this may change over time.
Publications Warehouse is still evolving, as is the USGS publications
program. The USGS is centralizing publication functions so that the work
is being done by a centralized group. The Warehouse is still growing,
and a version 2 is being developed that will have persistent URLs,
better links to documents and other work. It is possible to sort by
title, report number date and author. The Contents link provides
information on the number of items in each series, and whether the
publication is available online. There have been questions about why the
USGS is serving DJVU, including from GPO. Part of the reason is the file
size. The USGS working towards providing pdf in addition to LizardTech
formats. They are also working on developing a simple documented
standard for USGS digitization so that the standards can be shared with
outside organizations that are thinking of scanning USGS publications.
They are working on a digital library plan for USGS that will include
all of the publications issued by the USGS during its history.
The Geospatial Programs Office works with other government agencies to
provide leadership and guidance to the agencies that are developing and
providing access to geospatial information. The decision on what to
print is within the Science Programs Office. USGS has a process in place
to print maps and will continue to maintain that process as long as
there is a process in place to produce the maps. The National Map is
taking on a lot of the function of producing updated maps. USGS may not
continue to update maps as they have done in the past. USGS is in the
process of partnering and testing with Delaware and Florida to allow
state agencies to update the National Map, so that they contribute the
information that would update the information on the quadrangles. They
are not going to be able to continue to update the maps as they have
done in the past. USGS will continue to do lithographic printing, but
will also be distributing data as well.
The historical scanning project for USGS topographic maps is continuing,
however the primary priority at present is to scan the topographic maps
for the southeastern United States before hurricane season begins.
*Dr. John Hebert, Chief of the Geography and Maps Division, **Library of
Congress*
/(submitted by Dan Seldin)/
Library of Congress is a collector of cartographic materials and
provider of information.
Need for scanning standards. Set a floor for resolution that all can
work with. LC G&M scanning for Congress at 300 DPI.
LC has been trying to set up a plan to work with USGS to scan the
quads. No one collection, LC, USGS or NARA, has a complete set of
quads. All three need to work together.
At Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division collects maps while
the Science and Technology Division collects science materials that
compliment the maps.
On Monday, April 30, 2007, German Chancellor Angela Merkel officially
transferred ownership of the Waldseemüller map to the United States at a
ceremony at the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress has had
the map in its possession since 2001 and acquired it in 2003, but
because it is on the German list of national treasures, it has to be
formally transferred to the United States. John Hébert attended and
spoke at an official conference honoring Waldseemüller at the University
of Freiburg, Germany on April 17, 2007. At this conference, the German
postal service issued a stamp honoring the map, showing all 12 sheets.
The Library of Congress is working with NIST to create a display case to
preserve the Waldseemüller map. The map will go on display in December
2007.
The Geography and Map Division has been in contact with various levels
of USGS discussing the periodic archiving of the National Atlas and
National Map. LC would probably take a snapshot every 6 months.
Several groups have come to G&M to scan maps. Academica Sencia of
Taipei Taiwan has been scanning Chinese maps with a camera. The are all
the public domain maps from the beginning. These scans are being cataloged.
Nautical charts are being readied to be moved to Fort Meade, Maryland.
The Division has collected about 120,000 sheets of nautical charts from
around the world. A complete inventory had to be created before the
move. The Division will put the inventory online via the online
catalog. If this is successful, G&M will begin inventorying the set map
collection. Pre-1970 materials are not cataloged and are unknown
outside the Division.
The Geography and Map Division has signed an agreement with the Korean
National Library to preserve Korean atlases and maps. They will be
scanned and put online. The project will begin in the summer of 2007
and last 2 years.
The Geography and Map Division has scanned 10,000 maps in 10 years. All
the scanned maps have been cataloged. These have included the
Waldseemüller map, Jedediah Hotchkiss civil war map collection and World
War II maps. Copyright has limited the scanning of maps. A group in
Barcelona wanted to have a set of German maps of Spain from World War II
scanned. It took 4 months to get copyright permission from Germany the
scan this set.
In reference, the Division has a project to finish converting the 1981
Sanborn fire insurance map guide to an online version this summer. The
scanned Sanborn maps will be attached to the online guide as the
scanning is completed. University of Texas and Sanford University want
to have a cooperative scanning project of Texas and California
Sanborns. University of Texas will have a 3 week pilot scanning project
in May 2007 with their own people. Stanford is planning a similar
project. Several other Sanborn scanning proposals have not panned out.
Universities of Colorado and Florida have scanned their Sanborns.
Any maps the Library of Congress scans are in the public domain because
they were out of copyright and produced with public funds. All scanned
maps are put on the web. The scanning priorities are set by the G&M
Division’s published cartobibliographies and reader demand.
LC G&M is acquiring 19th century county atlases on Ebay and
encapsulating and post binding them. In the process, they are being
scanned.
*Dr. Brett Abrams, Electronic Records Archivist, *
*National Archives and Records Administration*
/(submitted by Clara McLeod)/
Brett began his discussion by reviewing NARA’s mission and stating that
he would focus his remarks on describing what activities NARA had been
involved in for the last year. In reviewing NARA’s mission, he
reiterated that NARA, as an archival agency, is still concerned with the
preservation of the “original,” which includes geospatial data. He noted
that the mission of NARA remains to assist all federal agencies in
managing their records, preserving those of “enduring” value during
designated retention periods, and assuring that the value of the records
is retained. Then Brett stated that the following three initiatives
were targeted for last year’s focus: (1) the development of the open
geospatial consortium(OGC) and developing application schema and
archival profiles using GML and single feature profile and (2) working
with the Geospatial One Stop Portal Community to assure access to the
historical collections, which is a collective goal of NARA, LC, and
others, and (3) the increased scanning of historical maps and working
toward digitization issues and concerns. He reported that significant
progress had occurred in the first two areas.
On the first initiative, he noted that the Historical Data Working
Group/FGDC that he chairs succeeded in getting a proposal taken to the
Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) to develop a data preservation working
group within the technical committee (OGCTC) which was accepted. This
created the Data Preservation Working Group of the OGC, which NARA
joined in March 2007. The first meeting of this group was held April
17, 2007. He further explained that the goal of the OGCTC is to get
private industry, international and national government agencies, state
and local governments, and universities involved in developing open
standards related to geospatial information and determine what current
level of interest exists among the OGCTC . Brett stated that the second
issue here is a source of funding for this initiative. Brett suggested
that an opportunity exists here for universities and groups that CUAC
represents to work with the DPWG. A GML standards body already exists
in the Technical Committee. The question is how to continue progress in
achieving the universal geospatial standards, looking at what currently
exists: GML, Simple Feature Profile, Spatial Data Transfer Standards
(SDTS) or FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata.
He mentioned that the electronic records geospatial holdings now
include: The Fish and Wildlife’s Wetlands Inventory and Wildlife Refuges
Files; the Forest Service’s Fire Management Maps; the Bureau of Land
Management’s Forest Inventory Operations, Oregon; the Bureau of the
Census, Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Reference
System (TIGER/Line), 1990 and 1992 issuances and the Geographic Base
File/Dual Independent Map Encoding (GBF/DIME) File, 1980. The Tiger and
geographical phase files are in ASCII flat file format and some data is
in shapefile format. The reason for this is that there are published
specifications for shapefile data currently. This approach has endorsed
the SDTS and GML current version with the Simple Features Profile to
maintain the data. He reiterated that only USGS used SDTS at this
point, that GML and Simple Features Profile are not currently robust
enough to maintain topology and that the problem remains that the
information can’t be maintained in a bundle, thus it is available from
sites where the information is being stored, which is a basic reliance
on external access to the information and not valuable for archival
purposes. He stated that the NWME (Custodial Division) continues to
gain experience in various types and formats of records.
The second initiative cited by Brett was the development of NARA’s
portion of the Historical Collections Community (HCC) on the Geo-Spatial
One Stop Portal (GOS), working with LC. Brett stressed that the
organizations represented by CUAC can also be involved here. He said
that the site would benefit from greater participation from our
institutions or organizations by establishing communities or links to
GOS. Links could be to just the descriptive information (which is what
NARA currently does) or to catalogs or to the data and maps. He then
demonstrated the HCC Community on GOS at the website: geodata.gov.
In discussing the third initiative, Brett noted that the scanning of
historical maps was an area that had not seen much movement last year.
It requires critical involvement from all stake holders in pooling
knowledge, efforts, and resources. NARA continues to scan slowly. Here
he mentioned that this initiative was more related to some of the
activities occurring within the library’s mapping community. It also
related to his past contact with CUAC exploring the idea of jointly
sponsoring a conference similar to the maps in transition one held in
2005 at the Library of Congress which would address issues of archiving
and digitization, bringing together a community of stakeholders. This
might also be accomplished by doing seminars in various parts of the
country. He stated that it is still an objective to promote the
awareness of the historical dimension to geospatial data, and that this
has been financed in whole or part by federal funds. He stressed the
importance of facilitating the maintenance of historically valuable
geospatial data and making it available to future generations.
Brett concluded his presentation by suggesting that we go to
_www.fgdc.gov_ <http://www.fgdc.gov> and look at the working groups that
are available for membership and reminded us that this site provides
libraries with materials related to the various topics of preserving,
archiving and accessing geographical and geospatial data. Participation
in discussion groups here would be valuable for the mapping community.
Questions asked following the presentation included:
* How do we go about contributing our contributions to HCC in GOS?
Will your staff accept URLs to our locations? What is the process
to follow if we wanted to contribute material? Would we need for
you to give us login and password info.
GOS can accept specifically institutional related materials. The
development of the metadata for the site linked to would (could) be
developed by NARA. In conjunction with GOS, Brett said that if he was
told by someone what it is that they would like to do and what kind of
material was involved, specifics could be worked out. One thing to
consider when submitting data to you is positional accuracy in that
everyone does not create data in the same way. Will a standard exist for
this? No. NARA would be responsible for its own data and metadata.
* What does NARA want from the mapping community?
NARA hopes that as institutions (agencies) develop certain standards,
they will find a way to communicate their work - the best practices - to
NARA so that they will have something to spearhead. The objective is to
gather the best worked out ideas on this and promote them as such. The
question still remains that we have to first discover what standards we
are talking about—for geo-tiffs, digital materials, etc. What NARA is
attempting to do is to provide some guidelines or standards or something
along that line. An example of this might be the Library of Congress
working with _________ and coming up with scanning guidelines for the
historic maps. Here they archive the original and have a copy available
the way it exist now in order to be able to take the copy, rectify it,
put it into GIS, do things with it from that standpoint.
* What are agencies now doing when they approach NARA?
There appears to be consideration of an initiative to figure out how to
enrich the digitalization process to provide for more things to get
digitized and a wider variety of things to get digitized. There is
outreach, but there is outreach to organizations and small companies to
digitize some of the materials that NARA has. There are agencies that
have come to NARA wanting them to get some of their old stuffs and
digitize it and the process would then provide us with the reference
copy of it. But in that respect, that’s kind of duplicative effort
because I imagine that NOAA and some of these other agencies would
probably put that stuffs up on their own sites. So, that’s where we are
now.
* If universities have preservation projects and more than happy to
contribute their URLS to those locations and or look for back-ups
and storage of the information, will NARA be willing to accept it
because it is something else that another institution has done?
No, I would imagine that you would be responsible for your own data and
we for basically, accountability and other issues like that. One of the
things about the metadata is obviously that that kind of material is
described in there. And this particular portal might not link to the
data, but will provide a searching mechanism for locating it so that it
can be linked to. So the data will be stored somewhere else where the
data maybe accessible.
* What is being done with the comments or suggestions received from
groups that have funded projects (North Carolina, University of
California, Stanford) from NARA or LC dealing with the issue of
archiving geospatial data itself: trying to figure out format, the
GML option as well as the open source standards.
NARA’s funding has been minimal related to geospatial data. We have
worked with San Diego super-computing center and what they have done is
taking existing data and well and built the GIS version with it. The
thing that they are doing right now is working with Vancouver City
geospatial data and trying to figure out about archiving issues related
to a live system.
* Is there a membership fee for joining OGCTC ?
Yes. In order to join them, you have to be a member and to be a member,
you have to pay them.
* What is happening with the geospatial line of business and all
these business models you had to write for them?
There will be an RFP eventually, for program management office, which is
going to run the development of the common solution target architecture.
I believe some of the written documents might be public, already; I
don’t know if that’s true or not. Also, the next, the initiatives
towards funding have been taken…and the next level is trying to bring
together all the parties that are members of the circular a16.
From NARA’s perspective, there will be some form of records management
built into the architecture for the system. Just postulate for a minute
about the machine being able to tag various things: To say, this data
set or this set of records will be stored temporally for 20 years, or 50
years, or permanently stored in this location and not sent to the
archives, or just be sent to some other locations after a 25 year period.
* How do you get involved in the historical data working group?
You can just send me (Brett) information and we’ll put you into the
group. There are many working groups including the geo-spatial, aerial
photography, digital efforts, digitalization efforts and paper maps. But
also groups working on questions about material formats, what’s the best
and what are the best practices for these particular sets of information.
* How can we support you as an organization?
All organizations can write letters - letters that would basically
state your interest in pursuing this activity (standards or
guidelines)and a commitment to attending workshops, conferences or
seminars on the subject to get the goal accomplished. This information
will be taken to the person who is the chief information officer for
NARA, and he will share with appropriate channels. Citing the need to
have useful standards or guidelines from NARA concerning geospatial
archiving to help move the geospatial archiving issues forward, we could
request that NARA take the initiative in organizing a conference or a
meeting to talk about this issues, and then we would have some sort of
guidelines for standards. This would allow presentations by those
involved to share their experiences. Then we begin to tackle the
question by example. The other issue is that support in the form of
funding for this initiative is also needed. International involvement
should also be expected.
In summary, there is still much work to be done in the realm of
geospatial archiving. There are currently no particular standards or
guidelines for geospatial archiving, and the need still exists for a
platform that can deal with any software or operating system. CUAC
would like NARA to coordinate the activities of other agencies that are
also interested in geospatial archiving, so that guidelines could be
developed. Another possibility is that NARA could develop a common
location (a repository) for storing foundational material so that
everyone is aware of what work is being done and knowledge about ongoing
and past projects can be more easily disseminated. NARA needs support
from the mapping community in its quest to get funding to initiate
activities in archiving geospatial data, including locating ongoing
projects, sponsoring presentations by those engaged in these activities
and conferences to get different organizational types together.
*Written Agency Reports Submitted*
*Donna Heimiller, and Pamela Gray-Hann Department of Energy, *
*National Renewable Energy Laboratory*
/(submitted by Anita Oser)/
NREL's GIS holdings are focused on renewable resource datasets.
Currently our FTP site (_http://www.nrel.gov/gis_) has geographic
shapefiles of annual wind power class (for 35 states and an older
national assessment), annual and monthly solar resource for 40 km and a
new 10 km coverage (direct normal and tilt=latitude collector), and
biomass resource. We also provide access to 11 stand-alone Geospatial
Toolkits that have been created for international projects, to provide
those countries with some limited GIS querying capability. These
toolkits include renewable resource, infrastructure and other base data
for the country as part of the installation package.
There are other datasets that can be provided upon request, but aren't
distributed on the FTP site. Some of these datasets require review of
need and management approval before they can be sent. These include the
original raster power density datasets that the wind power class
shapefiles are created from; supplemental/unvalidated wind speed and
power information for different heights above ground and time scales;
wind measurement data; and solar modeled hourly values.
For users who don't have GIS capabilities, our latest internet map
server (IMS) site "United States Atlas of Renewable Resources" is one of
our dynamic maps that allows the user to view solar, wind, biomass and
geothermal resources along with other reference layers such as counties,
places, federal lands, etc. This site is still under development but
can be accessed through NREL's _http://www.nrel.gov/gis/_ web page.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linda Zellmer
Head, Geology Library
Geology Building, Room 601
1001 E. 10th Street
Bloomington, Indiana 47405-1405
Phone: (812) 855-2275 Fax: (812) 855-6614
[log in to unmask]
|
