CARTOGRAPHIC USERS ADVISORY
COUNCIL (CUAC) 1999 MEETING MINUTES
PRINTING OFFICE (GPO)
first speaker was Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief of the Depository
Administration Branch of GPO Library Program Service (LPS), who set the
stage for CUAC’s primary mission of getting maps and cartographic and
spatial data into the depository program. Robin began with a synopsis of
the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). Depository libraries date
back to the formation of the Government Printing Office in 1895. There are
1350 depository libraries in the United States, and 50 of those
libraries are Regional libraries that are mandated to receive all material
distributed by the FDLP and keep it in perpetuity. The other libraries are
selective in nature. They have the opportunity to select the items they
wish to receive for the year, and they may deselect at any time. After
material is 5 years old or older, they may discard this material by sending
lists of these items through their Regional libraries. All depository
libraries must be open to the public and provide free access to all
government data. All government information must be processed and made
accessible on whatever catalog or access tools the library provides.
distributed by the Depository Program include paper, microfiche, and
tangible electronic formats. Dissemination to libraries in an online-only
format has now also begun for some information products. The maps in the
program include those from USGS, BLM, Forest Service, National Park
Service, NOAA, FEMA, and NIMA.
services that the Program offers to federal agencies include paying for the
distribution of the products through a very efficient distribution system.
They can provide a list of libraries that receive agency products so that
an agency can know who the likely users of their products are. GPO catalogs
the products using the OCLC network. Long term access for users and for
agency use is assured. The FDLP sponsors programs that include
opportunities for federal agencies to speak to the librarians in
attendance. When printing is done by GPO, printing of publications for the
Depository Program comes out of the GPO budget and not the agency budget.
When printing is obtained by the agency outside GPO, then printing of
copies for the depository program must be paid for by the agency.
about GPO’s mandate under Title 44 of the U.S. Code that states that
all government, publicly funded publications will be made available to GPO
for the distribution to libraries in the FDLP. Exceptions are publications
that are for internal use only or documents that are classified.
biggest challenge is cooperative publications that depend upon sales for
cost-recovery. These are publications that are done with endowment funds,
private funds, and/or agreement with a second or third party. Although
these are more of a challenge to obtain for the FDLP, GPO still will ask
for them. Robin explained the technicalities of how orders are ridden from
regional offices, like the Denver Regional Printing Office and how the cost
to the agency works for different types of print orders. Fugitive
documents— those that escape the distribution program— remain a
constant challenge. The Library Program Service has a position devoted to
contacting agencies to try to get an appropriate number of copies. If
sufficient paper copies cannot be obtained, an order for fiche copies is
made. This process is paid for by GPO.
products are new for them. In the electronic environment they refer to
dissemination instead of distribution. For these products they ask the following
questions: Does it fit the scope of the program, and does it look like it
will be around long enough to make a permanent record for it? If so, they
catalog the product and send information to the depository libraries via
the online U.S. Government Publications Catalog or via some other locator
service, such as the Browse Electronic Titles, which is an agency
listing and then a list by title. The URL is put into the cataloging
with constantly changing addresses on the Web for the online-only products
they disseminate, they use the Persistent Uniform Resource Locator (PURL)
which is software provided through OCLC that will allow an address to be
found on the Web even if it changes from what it originally was when the
record was created. They also still put in URLs. This project is about two
years old now and is still in a developmental stage. Robin made this plea
to the agencies: When a change is made to an agency Web site, please notify
GPO so appropriate changes can be made to the links to the site in the
record. If a site or data at the site is being given up, GPO especially
wants to be informed so that the material can perhaps continue to be made
accessible through the GPO server or through a partnership with a
the FDLP serves at the direction of Congress. The FDLP's budget is around
$30 million, under the Superintendent of Documents, who also directs the
sales program. There are around 150 people employed in this part of GPO.
next addressed specific concerns with the distribution of depository map
products. There are ongoing problems with the distribution of NIMA
products. Previously NIMA maps were distributed directly from the agency,
just as USGS maps are. About a year ago, the distribution responsibility
was given to the Defense Logistics Agency, and there have been problems
ever since. There have been no changes to the selection profiles for the
last six years, and there are other problems as well. GPO now has brought
the distribution of NIMA maps back into GPO. But now GPO is still having
problems with getting accurate numbers of maps from NIMA. Most are arriving
with insufficient copies to ship. They are still in negotiation with them
to resolve the problems. Shipping lists will be separate for these maps,
and they will be dropped into the depository boxes or a separate mailing to
separate housing sites.
and others from GPO have been working with USGS for the past couple of days
on their distribution process, and updating this process. Through a new
memorandum of understanding, shipping (or sending) lists for USGS maps will
now come in depository boxes, or separately for separate housing sites.
National Wetlands Inventory Maps have begun to arrive from NARA in Seattle where they are being produced.
They are much improved, beautiful fiche. We probably have lots of
duplicates, because some of them were very poorly filmed and many were
redone. We just need to make sure that we have one complete set and treat
others as duplicates. There is a problem with the new set from Seattle, however, and
that is what is holding them up. They were filmed six to a set even if
there were not enough to fill that many fiche, so there are lots of blank
fiche. Robin will need to reformat them before she has all of the copies
made for the libraries. The 1st generation silver master runs
about $8/fiche and goes to NARA
as part of the GPO collection every four years, while 2nd
generation silver is used to reproduce from and then it goes to LC. If GPO
needs it later, it can go to LC to get it. The diazos, which are what the
depository copies are, cost just 6 – 10 cents each. Originals go to
cataloging, but after they are cataloged they are boxed up and go on to NARA and LC.
Print-on-demand of nautical charts was announced last year. The nautical
charts are being printed under a CRADA, which frequently means cost
recovery and that the product will fall outside the program. NOAA did offer
to send one copy of each chart to GPO, however. GPO negotiated for just one
chart a year out of the six that were being produced. These they will
distribute to libraries. If a library needs the charts more often GPO would
facilitate that arrangement with NOAA.
This is a CRADA product and is available on the Web. There are three map
sheets that have gone to the depositories that are part of the Atlas and
these have been cataloged and are in OCLC.
There is a new release of the TIGER line files. These should be in our
libraries very soon.
There are two new products. GAP analysis data CD-ROMs and the RMP Submits.
Depository libraries are being surveyed regarding these products. All
libraries must respond, including Regionals. The USGS Biological Resources
Division Gap Analysis Program (GAP) is the primary Federal program for
mapping and assessing the status of biodiversity in the U.S. Data for each
state will appear on 1 to 4 CDs depending on the size of the state and data
complexity. The viewing software for the GAP Analysis data is on disc 1
only, which is the California
disc. Anyone wanting to select their own state only should remember to also
select the California
disc in order to get the software.
Management Program requires that chemical plants, power plants and all
industrial facilities that are required to submit information to EPA submit
a Risk Management Plan (RMP). RMP Submit is an EPA software package for
facilities to use in submitting Risk Management Plans. This has been
prepared under Congressional direction. The Plans were suppose to be a Web
product. However, a senator became concerned about putting this type
information on the Web, especially with the danger of nuclear and/or
terrorist attack, and stopped the plan for putting it on the Web. The part
of the data that will not be on the Web is call the Offsite Cost Analysis,
or OCA data. GPO is still hoping to get some of the data, minus the
sensitive stuff. It is not certain at this point whether this information
will become available. What is currently available, and being surveyed for
is a CD-ROM product that will require the depository library to store the
software and information from the user on their hard drive until the plan
is copied. This is the reason that a survey is necessary.
Robin then posed some questions for CUAC. She has asked that we address
these issues before the end of our meeting.
- What is the
role of physical maps in depository map libraries, especially in light
of the transition to electronic data?
- What is the
role of shipping lists…is there a possibility that GPO could go
to a shipping list posting on the web?
- What is the
role of the availability records in the cataloging of maps. The
availability records are the ones which identify the different
editions of maps.
- What is the
trend between GIS collections and the paper map collection. What is
the interelation between the two. Are they existing together or
separately. What impact do we see on the program?
speaker was Steve Gregonis, the Region II GIS Coordinator for the National
Forest Service (NFS). The main points of his discussion were data
dissemination and archiving data. Over the last few years, NFS has set
priorities on assembling a GIS base for use in planning. This data, in
turn, is made available for analysis. They are having a problem with
standards—roads, vegetation, etc. Other problems are occurring with
the texture of the data—how detailed the data is. Steve’s group
is attempting to raise their level of service so that it can be offered to
NFS and the individual National Forests. For example, NFS is using GIS
extensively in compiling each National Forest’s 5-year Service Plan.
GIS is speeding the updating of those document. The 5-year plans are public
documents that come through the Depository Program.
digitizing for the base maps and many of the layers for Region II have been
completed. The problem arises in archiving the data—whether it be in
paper or digital format. As NFS tries to archive the data, they are having
problems finding out where the data originated. In order to correct this,
NFS is attempting to attach metadata to each data set using the Federal
Geographic Data Committee standards. But the task of adding metadata is
daunting. Currently, Steve’s Region has thousands of sets of data,
but only a few have metadata.
is being made available. Several of the Service Plans will soon be released
on CD-ROM. However, most of the data sets are only available through the
agency that compiled it. In response to this, the Region is attempting to
put together a library of regional data. NFS is working in cooperation with
local authorities, including state and local governments, to establish data
clearinghouses. On a national level, NFS is attempting to standardize their
data so that information can be shared. They have set up three modules
(infrastructure, vegetation, water), and hope the data will be able to fit
into these categories. The project is very big and will take time to be
GIS data has caused many problems for NFS. One of the biggest is that GIS
data can change without notice. Steve explained that in the GIS field, most
expect this. Currently, the whole way of archiving data is somewhat
informal, but because of some recent Freedom of Information inquiries, that
is becoming more formal. Steve pointed out that there is a big difference
between archiving a map and archiving data.
Wolf, Forest Service Geometrics Group Leader for the Rocky Mountain Region
(Region 2), continued the discussion. He stressed that hard copy maps would
still be available because that is the way the public wants them. In
addition to the print, we will begin to see more products in electronic
form, CDs, and on the Web. Mr. Wolf asked if libraries wanted print and
electronic products, to which we answered yes.
updating universe has changed. Where traditionally printed updates to maps
were produced on a cyclic basis, electronic databases are under continuous
revision. The question is when to produce a printed update. The Forest
Service is partnering with USGS to produce updates of the quad maps for
forest lands and visitor maps. Production of these updates is progressing.
decried the lack of national coordination in the Forest Service to handle
production and distribution questions. No standards are being adopted
concerning new base map features identified in electronic products. What
products will be produced, what will be archived, and will it be free? He
gave the example of the National Forest maps that are produced on funds
from sales receipts. The data producing the maps is integral to the mission
of the agency but the printed product is not. Does that meet the criteria
for inclusion in the depository system?
left us much insightful information on the mapping efforts and practices of
the Forest Service and many questions federal agencies producing maps and
map librarians need to contemplate and answer.
Dave Eckhart (for Mike Pucherelli)
Eckhart works with the Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Group of
the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) at the Denver Federal Center. This Group
builds spatial databases for Bureau and for other agencies. The data comes
from several sources:
- paper maps;
- models (for
instance, there is a current project relating to modeling dam failure
which uses DEM and TIGER data); and
sensed data (this is the source of the bulk of their data).
of some of the remotely sensed source data that BOR uses include:
conventional and digital aerial photography; LIDAR for high resolution DEM
data; AVIRIS from NASA; AVHRR meteorological satellite data; Landsat data
(used mostly for crop imaging); data from the French SPOT satellite and
from Indian satellites; radar data; and airborne video (mostly for river
the work the Group does relates to crop mapping, using high resolution data
to define boundaries and low resolution (Landsat) data to determine
what’s growing on the land. Also, they’re involved with a lot
of water quality mapping for large reservoirs.
the archiving of their data sets, metadata is part of final output. The
Principal Investigator for a project is responsible for making sure the
metadata is completed and that it meets Federal Geographic Data Committee
(FGDC) standards. The metadata is made available on a Bureau server. The
user must browse by project names—the metadata on the server is not
searchable by keyword. Most of the digital data, however, are not available
except by contacting the person listed in metadata. The Remote Sensing and
Geographic Information Group does keep a digital copy of the data in its
office, but the original is sent to the client. In general, final products
from projects are not accessible except from the client, and it will
probably have been updated from the time it was delivered to them by the
Bureau’s Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Group.
next few months over one hundred clearinghouse servers containing metadata
will become searchable from FGDC Clearinghouse home page. These nodes will
be hosted by many agencies dealing with spatial data, such as the BOR and
the USGS. Due the vast size of the data, however, actual data will probably
not be online any time in the near future.
Fugal, Records Manager at the Bureau of Reclamation, provided a brief
overview of her operations. All government agencies are required to create
records related to the work of the agency. The creator of each record
determines whether the record is permanent or temporary. Permanent records
belong to the National Archives, which requires submission of records in
paper, not electronic, format. The permanent record cutoff is the end of
each calendar year. The records are transferred to the Federal Record
Center 10 years after the cutoff. The FRC then transfers the records to
Archives 30 years after the cutoff.
increased use of various electronic formats, submission of Bureau of
Reclamation records to the National Archives has been at a stand still. GRS
20 (General Records Schedule, National Archives) will enable agencies to
schedule electronic records by February 2000. If an agency’s
electronic database is certified by DOD, Archives will approve records
management in electronic format and transfer custodial responsibility of
the electronic records to the agency. The Bureau of Reclamation will be
using RIMS, which is one of the three databases approved by DOD. The other
two are TRIM and FOREMOST.
agency will be responsible for maintaining their records in an electronic
format that is continually accessible. It is the intention of the Bureau of
Reclamation to migrate permanent electronic records, including e-mail and
web site information, as necessary to maintain accessibility.
PARK SERVICE INTERMOUNTAIN SUPPORT OFFICE
Brian Carlson, GIS Specialist
Intermountain Region is comprised of 84 National Parks and Monuments. The
GIS Program Office in Lakewood, CO, provides technical assistance to those
units in providing GIS development, with GIS issues and needs, and with
support to the units. Offices are located in Denver and Albuquerque and is
staffed with six permanent employees, three temporary employees, and six
students. Two cooperative agreements exist: the first with the University
of New Mexico Albuquerque and the second with the University of Denver.
Three students from each institution gain experience with their work at NPS
and with GIS.
84 Park Service units, 63 units utilize some level of GIS. Sixteen are staffed
with full-time GIS personnel. ArcView3.1 (ESRI) is the standard software
used, and ARC/INFO is utilized at 16 park units.
Fiscal Year 98, $90,000 was provided to distribute to the 84 units in the
Intermountain Region. Funding was used to support a GIS meeting on a
biannual basis, hardware, software, and training salaries.
Fiscal Year 99, $88,000 was provided to distribute and 47 proposals were
submitted with 10 proposals chosen for funding. In addition, $15,500 was
set aside for metadata training.
Fiscal Year 2000, $88,000 will be available. A call for proposals and
review is underway. Funds have been set aside for an Intermountain GIS
conference and a metadata initiative involving training. Additional funding
sources are also being pursued.
requests for GIS technical assistance have been received, some similar to
earlier project proposals. They have involved data searches and
assessments, global positioning system (GPS) data collection, scanning,
digitizing, metadata, data conversion, and General Management Plan support.
The General Management Plans operate on a 10-15 year cycle.
projects have included: a cultural landscape inventory at Golden Spike NHS;
utilizing GPS to locate features; an ethnographic overview of Capitol Reef
National Park; a wetlands assessment of Great Sand Dunes NM; National
Historical Trails Mapping; a geological map of Fossil Butte NM; and a
bighorn sheet habitat suitability analysis of Mesa Verde National Park.
Intermountain Region of the NPS has embraced metadata and the development
of standards as required by Executive Order 12906. The NPS has developed
metadata collection guidelines and are in federal agency compliance.
the Intermountain Region, as of August 1998, 25 datasets were online,
compliant and searchable. As of May 1999, 220 datasets are available
online. Software evaluations have been completed, and training for GIS
professionals is being provided. The Intermountain Region of NPS has
provided three classes and trained approximately 30 people in metadata
collection utilizing "metamaker."
currently trying to streamline the process by customizing to make
"metamaker" easier to use. Projects involve inventory of data
themes, identify and prioritize data, determine proprietary versus
non-proprietary data, participate in the Colorado Ecosystem Project (which
is a metadata library project), and develop an implementation plan for the
84 parks in the eight states. They are providing assistance for the parks
and writing grants to help take care of metadata backlog.
information may be obtained through the internet. The National NPS GIS
Programs web address is http://www.nps.gov/gis and the Intermountain GIS
Program web address is http://126.96.36.199/gis/intro.htm.
question and answer session followed and provided additional information.
digital information: the Intermountain Regional Office maintains a
core set of dataset themes while the individual park unit may contain
the core and more.
other regions having university cooperative programs:
and Alaska regions are the two largest, with the Intermountain responsible
for more parks than any other region. The cooperative program has existed
12 years with Albuquerque having the longer coop agreement. The University
of Denver program just started that last October.
- Recently a
map showing congressional districts and parks in the region has been completed
for the Intermountain Region Office.
- The Office is
developing digital line graphs (DLG) for parks, and are working with
- The Office
is working with ESRI on vegetation of parks—very
detailed–developing interim publications.
- Through the
FGDC the Intermountain Region data are available via the Internet are
searchable. All files are in e00 format.
FEDERAL GIS USERS GROUP
Carlstrom, GIS Specialist with the National Park Service Intermountain
Support Office, gave a brief overview of the Colorado Federal GIS Users
Group which meets periodically to share information on projects that are
underway. The meetings are open to any federal agency with GIS
functionality. Participants include the Bureau of Land Management, Bureau
of Reclamation, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Bureau of the Census,
and the National Park Service. Ingrid Landgraf is the point person for the
Users Group, which has been meeting for about 2 ½ years. Members of
the Users Group share information on an FTP server maintained by the National
Craig Skalet, Chief of the Information Services Branch
presentation, Craig Skalet gave a brief, general overview of what USGS is
and described some of the changes that have occurred in the Agency. He
discussed the National Mapping Program and its products. He put special
emphasis on the Rocky Mountain Mapping Center and its efforts to improve
the promotion and delivery of map products. He also provided an historical
view and update of the Landsat Earth Remote Sensing Satellite Program.
The USGS has undergone a number of changes under the leadership of its
recent directors - Dr. Gordon Eaton and Charles Groat. During this time
there has been a general realization at the top that earth science problems
must be attacked in an integrated fashion. Until this time, there existed
four independent divisions: National Mapping, Geologic, Water Resources,
and Biological Resources (which came into existence about 2 years ago). The
goal recently has been to reorganize USGS with linkages at the bureau level
programs, which previously had operated separately. Integrated science and
interdisciplinary science goals were to become and continues to be the
priority at USGS. Emphasis now has to be placed on a culture, which focuses
on integrating science and interdisciplinary science goals and which
embraces the concept of integration and teamwork across the divisions. To
promote this concept, Dr. Eaton instituted the formation of councils:
Science, Operation, Information, and Human Resources. The Science Council
brings together and deals with the programmatic issues of the bureau. The
Operational Council, where interdisciplinary teams are formed, works to
integrate all information on a particular subject "in one place, in
the same reference system and easily accessible." The result is that
during the last five years USGS has made great strides in this new
direction. In addition, USGS has tried to become more connected with its
customers and other agencies (Dept. of Interior and Land Management
agencies). Also, there is a focus on the need for cooperative agreements
with other agencies. In fact, in several places across the country,
interdisciplinary teams have been formed to do base studies. The
Information Council deals with the information infrastructure, seeking to
provide a mechanism for consistent communication and to facilitate that
communication across the Bureaus. Projects such as the Ohio National Atlas
and the Gateway to the Earth are examples of what can be accomplished in
this new integrated environment across the divisions. The main goal is to
provide information on the Internet in a cohesive manner – that is,
where the customer can get to a list of all types of information (hazards,
water quality assessment, the basic data sources, the basic cartographic
data) about a particular piece of territory.
In spite of the issues and concerns that come with an attempt to bring four
very different divisions of the USGS together with their separate funding,
USGS will continue to create an environment conducive to integrated
science, cooperative efforts and interdisciplinary science goals. More
programs that focus on end-user partnerships and partnering with the
private sector also can be expected.
Mapping Program Division (NMP):
The division has five operational centers with the overall mission "to
ensure that the nation’s needs for fundamental geo-spatial data and
information are met." This division is broken up into three main
problematic areas: production, research, and Earth Science management and
delivery. The five operational centers are located across the country: (1)
Western Mapping Center- working in the digital ortho-photo area; (2) the
Rocky Mountain Mapping Center – a production and distribution center
for traditional products; (3) Mid-Continent Mapping Center – a
production center; (4) EROS Data Center - working in satellite imagery area
and remote sensing; (5) Headquarters and Mapping Applications Center
– provides the civilian and federal community access to classified
material, and also serves as the headquarters for the USGS. Programs
address the areas of mapping data collection and integration, earth science
information management and delivery and geographic research and
applications. Of the three programs, Earth Science management and delivery
is the main focus of the Rocky Mountain Mapping branch and operation, of
which Craig Skalet is chief. This center is involved in the area of
managing scientific data and delivering it to the customers – whether
delivery is by the Internet, by the business partners network, or
clearinghouses. The programmatic scope of this program includes six main
areas: outreach, information dissemination network, information management
system, archive, distribution and inventory management, and reproduction
and replication. Outreach encompasses press releases, the K-12 educational
programs, conference attendance, trade shows, and legislative education.
The Information dissemination network is the nine earth science information
centers. Information management centers is any of the software networks
that make up the systems that helps do the job of information
dissemination. Archives for the programmatic data is called the operational
database. Distribution and inventory management is the maintenance and
retrieval of map products from the warehouse to the appropriate customers.
Reproduction and replication is use of the photo lab and doing the "as
is" and minor revisions processes.
discussion of the graphics program – the paper map products –
looked briefly at some of the following areas: at the increased use of
alternate and varied "best available" sources, the current views
on restructuring the maintenance of the graphics, the proposals to focus on
the best selling maps and funded partnerships and the place – based
programs liaisons. A lengthy discussion followed on the topic of the
distribution, revision, and current status of updating the map products.
area of distribution, the emphasis is on the customer and enhancing services
provided to them and the maintenance support for these products. Progress
has been made in delivery of products in that the turnaround time is about
4-5 days for map orders. To date, the business partners are subsidizing the
retail customers. The price of a map ordered from USGS today is $4.00; the
operation is not profitable. USGS does not wish to continue the present
level of retailing in the area of map product.
current process of map distribution is being looked at so that it can be
revamped. USGS would prefer to be more of a wholesaler in this area than a
retailer – thus not competing with their business partners
(retailers) for sales. Maps sold now at $4.00 actually cost the agency
$23.00, which covers receiving orders, pulling, preparing for and
distributing. The business partners now subsidize the retail customers. In
the future, USGS would like to bulk distribute to business partners, give
them a discount, and have them set the price for sale to the public.
development of the web catalog is one effort to encourage and increase the
use of business partners, by providing them with a tool to promote some of
the most popular products to customers. The goal would be to have the
business partners handle most of the retail orders. The catalog is now in
the very early stages, but a demonstration was given. The catalog will
probably consist of the thirty best sellers. It would allow the customers
to see a list of maps, what the map looks like in some shape or form, where
the map dealer is within the vicinity of the customer. Input from the
business partners is being sought over the next two months in the
development of the catalog; and in September 1999, the catalog should be
ready for testing.
Craig began this discussion by stating that the issues and concerns of the
graphics program - mapping information and its production – are being
addressed. The huge amount of funds which have been invested in these
56,000 map products was noted as well as the need to insure that this investment
is valued as a national asset that should be continued. Each topo-graphical
map cost about $40 – 50,000 and there are 56,000.In discussing the
sales history, it was pointed out that annually 2.7 million maps are sold,
bringing in about 5.6 million dollars. Then about one-half million maps are
distributed free. Sales are decreasing and the agency is not doing a great
job in maintaining the quality and accuracy of the 1:24,000 topos. Monies
allocated for graphics products have become less and less during the last
twenty years due to the addition of new and important products like the
DOQ, DEM and others. But the biggest promotional item of USGS is its
1:24,000 topographic maps because they are what the public associates most
with the USGS agency. Thus, to insure that this national asset continues
will require the division to re-structure the production, revision, and
maintenance associated with these paper products.
present, funding is needed to do map revisions. This will probably involve
looking at recovering some of the cost from sales price, and there is also
a push for funding initiatives to address new monies from Congress to deal
with it. Money that is collected for sales can go back into the
distribution and sales operation of these maps, but monies which are
collected can not be used to do actual revisions of the maps, which would
cost about five to six dollars. Some feel that at least the reprint process
should be recoverable. The reprint process cost about a quarter a map and
the minor revision process costs about seventy-five cents a map. All
revisions would involve about 2,000-2,500 maps per year. 15 million dollars
annually would be needed to do all revisions. But at this time,
appropriated funds can not be used to pay for map revisions and monies collected
from sales can not go back into the revision.
USGS and the Forest Service are doing map revisions, with the Forest
Service doing about 600-700 and the USGS about 800-900. This cooperative
arrangement with the Forest Service should take care of updating about 10%.
The goal in the map maintenance area is to have a topographic maintenance
strategy in place by 2000 that will increase map revisions by a factor of
three from the FY 1996 level - from 300 to 400 a year to 1,000. The
strategy is to look at all maps and build a five-tier classification for
maps which will determine their cycle of revision based on sales
statistics. There would be about 1,000 maps at the top tier - those where
at least 15 are sold each month. Revision for these will be on a 5–7
year revision cycle. The next level (level 2) might be on an 8 year cycle;
level 3 might be on a ten year cycle and level 5 would be those maps where
0-1 per month are sold and that is a large percentage of the total. There
would also be a similar tier to establish the type of revision done -
minor, or basic revisions or "as is".
factors concerning the maps are also being looked at: Where are the maps
that are being sold in higher rates? Where are the mapping priorities for
the country? Why would the consumer buy a new map?
topos will continue to be distributed in paper format and the cooperative
program with the Forest Service will take care of about ten percent of the
revisions. The strategy at USGS will be focus on revision of the maps,
which are high selling - about 1,000 with the overall strategy is to update
topics discussed: (1) There is some talk occurring about reprinting the
100-150 of the high selling 15-minute quads and (2) One more Topographic Users
Conference is planned. Information gathered from the two topographic users
conferences (held in Reston/D.C. area and Denver) were useful in
redirecting and planning the USGS programs.
Array of Products:
Attendees were also given a packet, which described the array of products
offered through the National Mapping Program. Databases and products
mentioned or discussed were:
National Hydrography Database (NHD) which is a cooperative venture
with EPA and the Water Resource Division of USGS and derived from
hydro digital land graphs and EPA RF 3 data.
National Elevation Database (NED) derived from the digital elevation
- The digital
orthophoto quad (DOQ) and the digital elevation models (DEM).
Completion time frame for national coverage is 1-2 years.
- The digital
raster graphics (DRG) and the digital line graphs (DLG). Provision of
access to this data will be through an arrangement/agreement with
Microsoft and the TerraServer. This would provide a mechanism for
direct feed-in. This data can already be looked at and obtained
through the EROS Data Center. It is expected that there would be a
fee for the cost of distribution, even though this information would
be available online only. The DLG used to identify and replace
Imagery product lines – the main line satellite offerings of
earth observation for the last three decades:
Intelligence Photos (1960-1972)
Multispectral Scanner (1972-1992)
thematic Mapper (1982-1996)
- Landsat 7
The program started as a USGS initiative in 1966 - the idea for the mission
coming from USGS scientists who recognized the successful use of remote
sensing technology in previous manned space missions. A number of agencies
have been involved since the inception of the program. The agreement was
for NASA to build, launch, and operate the satellite, while USGS would
receive, archive, process, and distribute the resulting products. EROS Data
Centers would handle the data products, and international ground stations
would handle the products for local applications. During this period the
Department of Agriculture and the Department of Commerce joined effort to
develop this program. In 1972, NASA launched the first satellite (ERTS 1 or
Landsat 1). In 1975, NASA changed the name of the program from ERTS to
Landsat. In 1979 after the launch of Landsat 3, efforts to commercialize
the program began. The Landsat operations were to be transferred from NASA
to NOAA. The goal was to transfer Landsat to the private sector. In 1984, a
contract was signed with NOAA to commercialize the Landsat system. Then in
1985, the commercial operator (EOSAT, a partnership of Hughes and RCA) was
named to operate the system under a ten-year contract.
Landsat 4 and 5
- will build
two new spacecrafts (Landsat 6 and 7)
exclusive rights to market Landsat data collected prior to date of
contract (9/27/85) until expiration date (7/16/94)
- has exclusive
right to market data collected after 9/27/85 for ten years from date
- will receive
all foreign ground station fees
provide $250 for spacecraft development over five years.
EOSAT's contract with NOAA was re-negotiated to incorporate changes
requested by Congress and EOSAT. In 1989, NOAA funds for the Landsat
operations were exhausted, and EOSAT was directed to turn off satellites.
This was the beginning of funding problems and interim solutions, which
lasted through 1992. During 1992, the National Space Policy Directive #5
outlined a strategy to ensure the operations of Landsat missions 4 and 5
and to prepare for the launch of Landsat 6. DOC (Department of Commerce)
was instructed to ensure the operation of Landsat 4 and 5 until Landsat 6
was launched and operational. DoD (Department of Defense) and NASA were
instructed to develop and launch Landsat 7 and define the continuity
requirements after Landsat 7. A management plan for the Landsat program was
developed, which assigned responsibility for the space segment to DoD and
the ground segment to NASA. DoD signed a contract with General Electric to
construct and launch Landsat 7. In 1993, Landsat 6 was launched. With the
loss of Landsat 6, international confidence in the program was damaged, and
this increased the probability of the loss of data continuity. In 1994,
NASA, DoD, and NOAA worked to develop a successful implementation and
strategy for the program. Later that year, NASA, NOAA, and USGS meet about
Landsat ground system and signed a "Management Plan for the Landsat
Program," which described the program objectives and the agency
responsibilities. In 1999, Landsat 7 was launched. There is no plan for
Landsat 8. USGS has stepped in to take over the ground operations. Today,
Landsat 7 is a USGS/NASA operation. Together the agencies will work on
executing assessments of user requirements and what is next after Landsat
7. It is anticipated that any future ventures will be a USGS/NASA effort.
USGS has taken two to three million dollars out of the production budget to
support Landsat 7. A technical working group has been formed, and USGS has
some responsibility for the data management and the ground stations
operation. There are production rates of 250 scenes per day, 140 coming
into the EROS Data Center, 40 going to Alaska, and 70 going to Norway. The
plan is to produce and distribute the user’s product at the cost of
reproduction. That accounts for why the price is where it is. USGS will
assume full responsibility for the Landsat 7 operations in 2001.
Data Center will be pricing the data. Pricing today: $475 a scene for the
level zero, which is raw data not analyzed or manipulated. If you go up to
1R and 1G, it's $600 a scene. They have not set a price on the next level
of data. This is another pricing look, the turnaround theme for Delivery:
when raw data comes in it can probably come out the next day. But if it's
got to be manipulated, it takes another day, and level 1P takes three days.
All Landsat data is copyright free. The pricing history of the Landsat data
was if it was ten years or older the cost was $450 per scene. Otherwise, it
was $4,500 per scene and not many products were sold until they were ten
years old. The sales history of Landsat data is being reviewed and in the
future, the older data will have varied pricing based on a mixed scale
variable. Since the government will own the data, the pricing will be more
data will not be distributed free to libraries. One idea is to distribute
the data with some kind of subscription service charges. Regional consortia
being formed such as the one in California, another in the Northern Plains
(the Dakotas, Kansas, and Wyoming) and another in Virginia were mentioned
as possible sites to pipe Landsat data and other digital products. This
idea is being investigated, and the problem to be dealt with is how to
price the data.
general, the National Mapping Program has to continue to focus on its data
and information maintenance. It must provide a national approach for
availability and access to this data. It must play a robust cooperator role
in seeing that standards are defined and also establishing boundaries for
database quality and content.
raised with questions during and after the presentation:
Q: What was GPR?
A: Government Performance Results Act.
Q: GNIS – Why is getting connected to the Web site a problem?
A: The Agency had not expected the popularity of the web service and had
not anticipated such high usage. The web site will be going to a
distributed cluster configuration of several platforms using a Sun server
with the design moving on an upgraded oracle base to correct the access
problem. The new design will be completed within a two-month time frame.
(It was also noted that the data did exist on a CD and that the 1998 CD is
a DOS base software.
Q: Where are you on updating of those best selling maps?
A: Our plan is to focus on the high selling 1,000.
Q: Can you not make the argument that you could maintain the updating by
recovering cost from the sale price, if you don’t get other funds?
A: Yes, that’s a piece of it, too, because I am arguing that
let’s make that $15 million, $12 million and I will take the "as
is" parts and minor revision parts, change the pricing of the maps,
and try to market maps better, to get more map sales and cover that piece.
Q: Are you going to hold a third topographic users conference like the one
held here (Denver) about a year and a half ago? (One was also held in
Reston/D.C. area). What became of the results from those conferences?
A: Mark took that information and fed it into the program plan. I
didn’t actually participate in that, but my assumption is that the
info was applied to standards, changes or modification, program
redirection, those sorts of things. I think a third one is planned.
Q: Can we get a list of the map dealers that offer overnight map delivery?
A: List will be sent to attendees.
that offer overnight map delivery are:
30 S. La Patera Ln, Unit #5
Santa Barbara, CA 93117
1004 S. Mebane St.
Burlington, NC 27216
966 N. Main St.
Orange, CA 92867
Discount Topos Inc.
9769 W. 119th Dr., Ste. 12
Broomfield, CO 80020
13900 E. Harvard Ave.
Aurora, CO 80044
(303) 321 2217
441 Wadsworth Blvd., Ste. 124
Lakewood, CO 80226
Global Maps, Inc.
PO Box 5012
Greenville, NC 27835
PO Box 150123
Lakewood, CO 80215
PO Box 260879
Lakewood, CO 80226
Dan Seldin for Fred Anderson
Anderson was not able to attend this year’s meeting in Denver. Dan
Seldin, NOAA liaison, interviewed Mr. Anderson via phone before our
meeting, and submits the following report:
There were no specifics on new aeronautical products, but if new Terminal
Area Charts or Helicopter Charts are released, they will automatically go
into the depository program.
NOAA/NIMA catalogs have recently been produced and should have been sent to
OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION:
Aeronautical Charting will stay with NOAA for the rest of the fiscal year.
be re-authorized by the end of May. It is normally re-authorized at the
beginning of the fiscal year, but problems with Aeronautical Charting
caused Congress to re-authorize for only 6 months at the beginning of the
fiscal year. When the problems were not solved at the end of 6 months, the
authorization was extended 2 more months. Secretary Slater is working with
the Senate. The FAA and DOT want Aeronautical Charting in TASC, but 2 major
interest groups, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) and National
Business Aviation Association (NBAA), want it in the FAA. They are afraid
that a fee for service organization like TASC will raise prices. Jane
Garvey, the FAA Administrator, does not want AC&C as part of the FAA.
the disagreements, no one knows where Aeronautical Charting will go; it could
even stay in NOAA.
CHARTS-PRINT ON DEMAND:
The nautical charts are produced by the NOAA Office of the Coast Survey.
They are proposing that the printing of the nautical charts be printed by a
contractor, using a large format raster plotter on electronic request from
the public or chart agents under a CRADA. 3M Company has been selected as
the contractor, with a subcontractor named Voemela in St. Paul, MN to do
the actual printing and distributing. If this plan is adopted, these might
not be government products that would be in the depository program. Fred
Anderson spoke to the Director of the Coast Survey, who said that it has
not been decided whether the nautical charts would be CRADA or NOAA
products. There are questions about liability and laws that require NOAA to
reimburse the U.S. Treasury with funds from chart sales.
undertaking market testing of print on demand nautical charts through chart
agents in New York, San Francisco, and South Florida. If the market testing
is successful, the program will go nationwide and NOAA would phase out
producing the charts through lithography. These print on demand charts
would cost more, estimated at $20 each, be of poorer quality, but be more
up to date.
librarians want to express an opinion on the print on demand proposal, we
should contact Nancy Foster, the Assistant Administrator of NOAA. Her
e-mail address is email@example.com.