Personal tools
Document Actions

November 14 FGDC Coordination Group Meeting

[Agenda]

[Attendees]

Action 1:  Ivan will route the E-Gov annual report to the SAOGI, CG and LoB Task Force as soon as it is available for review. 

Action 2:  Upon receipt of the draft E-Gov Annual Report, please send your comments and edits to Leslie Armstrong (larmstrong@fgdc.gov). 

Action 3:  Please submit your completed Annual Report survey to Roxanne Lamb (rhlamb@usgs.gov) if you have not already done so.  [table of reports received] 

Action 4:  Please submit action photos depicting your agency’s work on the ground, or with collaborating partners, to be included in the Annual Report (rhlamb@usgs.gov

Action 5:  Please provide your status graphics to be included in the Annual Report to Vaishal Sheth (vsheth@fgdc.gov).  [status graphics guidelines] [status graphics example] 

Action 6:  Subcommittee and Working Group chairs, if you have not already done so, please submit your 07 workplans and 06 reports to Alison Dishman (adishman@fgdc.gov). 

Action 7:  If you would like to submit a success story -- CAP success, new partnerships or other update on building the NSDI -- to be included in the winter FGDC Newsletter, please send Bonnie Gallahan (bgallahan@fgdc.gov) by November 30. 

Action 8:  Jon Sperling will identify those who are interested in the issue of spatio-textual search engines for grants and other programs.  (Bill Wilen, Jim Jancaitis, David LaBranche, Wendy Blake-Coleman all expressed interest) 

Action 9:  If you have interest in the standards and activities of the Geospatial Intelligence Working Group, or are interested in joining, please contact Billy (btolar@fgdc.gov

Action 10:  Billy Tolar will provide regular updates to the FGDC CG on the GWG activities. 

Action 11:  Doug Nebert will brief the CG on the OGC activities at the December 5 CG meeting. 

Action 12:  Please contact Anne O’Connor (Anne.v.o.connor@census.gov) to participate in the Subcommittee on Cultural and Demographic Data.   

Action 13:  Alison will arrange a SDSFIE and GSA federal facilities profile briefing for the CG. 

Action 14: The SCCDD will look into creating a subgroup that focuses on cultural data.  

Action 15:  Please insure that your SAOGI provides Alison (adishman@fgdc.gov) with a vote on the FACA by November 30. 

Action 16:  At our December 5 CG meeting, John Mahoney / Ivan DeLoatch will report on the legal decision regarding subcommittee and working group membership under FACA.

 

Action Items from last meeting – Alison Dishman, FGDC

[presentation]

Regarding Action 2:  Ivan had requested examples of the Geo LoB’s benefits to your agency, to be included in the OMB E-Gov Annual Report to Congress.  The draft report will be sent out to agencies for final review within the next week.  Some agencies didn’t provide much material, so we took text we had from other data calls to fill in text for you.  When you review the document we would welcome your revision of that text. 

The draft report was sent to OMB on Friday, November 10.  OMB is reviewing the submission and preparing the E-Gov annual report and it will be distributed to all agencies for official review and comment in the next couple of weeks.  You should have this on your radar screen and contact the individual who you feel may give you the opportunity to respond to the document. We don’t know timeline schedule OMB will give us for review. 

Action 1:  Ivan will route the E-Gov annual report to the SAOGI, CG and LoB Task Force as soon as it is available for review. 

Action 2:  Upon receipt of the draft E-Gov Annual Report, please send your comments and edits to Leslie Armstrong (larmstrong@fgdc.gov). 

Q:  What are the follow on actions?  Will it be a refinement of the data call instead of actual findings?
A:  You will have an opportunity to look at this report and then another BDR will occur. 

 

Annual Report Update – Roxanne Lamb, USGS

[presentation] [table of reports received

We are pleased with your input.  It looks like we will meet our deadline.  We have received 11 success stories already. Thanks to all the agencies that shared their stories with us. 

Timeline:  The report will be written by Dec 15 to allow time for editing.  It will then be reviewed by team of writers, be sent to the CG for review, and then go to the printer by early January. 

Action 3:  Please submit your completed Annual Report survey to Roxanne Lamb (rhlamb@usgs.gov) if you have not already done so.  [table of reports received] 

Action 4:  Please submit action photos depicting your agency’s work on the ground, or with collaborating partners, to be included in the Annual Report (rhlamb@usgs.gov) 

Action 5:  Please provide your status graphics to be included in the Annual Report to Vaishal Sheth (vsheth@fgdc.gov).  [status graphics guidelines] [status graphics example] 

Action 6:  Subcommittee and Working Group chairs, if you have not already done so, please submit your 07 workplans and 06 reports to Alison Dishman (adishman@fgdc.gov). 

Q:  Will all the CG members be able to review the Annual Report document?
A:  The review team will look at the document first and then the CG will have a chance to review as well. 

Action 7:  If you would like to submit a success story -- CAP success, new partnerships or other update on building the NSDI -- to be included in the winter FGDC Newsletter, please send Bonnie Gallahan (bgallahan@fgdc.gov) by November 30. 

 

CAP Update – Gita Urban-Mathieux, FGDC 

The CAP should be posted on Grants.gov by this Friday.  The text is ready to go; it will be posted as soon as we get the final signed paperwork.

 

Spatio-Textual Search Engine – Jon Sperling & Prof. Hanan Samet

[presentation

[Hanan Samet (hjs@cs.umd.edu)] 

The University of Maryland, supported in part by the National Science Foundation Digital Government Program, is working with HUD/PD&R to geoenable unstructured documents on the HUD server using STEWARD (Spatio-Textual Extraction on the Web Aiding Retrieval of Documents).  STEWARD could be useful for any agency interested in document retrieval, data exploration and knowledge discovery.   

STEWARD is a document search engine similar to Google that retrieves data based on spatial proximity – using a keyword and location specifier. A document tagger identifies proximity – using the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS).  The goal is to use textual cues to find locations, not just street addresses. 

STEWARD has a nice user interface with something substantial underneath – search results are powered by SAND spatial browser, which has a library of functions enabling the user to build a spatial spreadsheet through a multi-layered approach.  Build an index and store it to use it for further processing.  The software is available to anyone with an Internet connection and browser.   

The system currently uses HUD documents but they would like to use other people’s documents – can look at different applications and user needs.  They are also looking for funding to support this work.  This has been done on the cheap.  It’s not a big project. 

Q.  USDA has a need for a common research information system – a repository for grants.  STEWARD accomplishes a lot of the things that they would like to do.  Google maps’ base map is useful for general users but you can’t add your own data easily.  How might you do that?
A.  The SAND browser lets you insert your own data.  We currently use the Google map because it has an API and we are working on the cheap and wanted to move quickly.  The SAND database would replace Google’s, to allow you full flexibility to enter any data.   

Comment:  EPA has great interest in this kind of functionality and has been considering an enterprise license.  They request that Hanan talks with their enterprise service providers.  EPA has a requirement to include the term “geospatial” in their grant opportunities.  STEWARD could be used as a tool to do front analysis on the grants -- grants guidance and policy. 

Comment:  Any kind of a system would need to be able to query on an 8-unit huc for interagency coordination – agencies need to know how to tag.  If you are working in a watershed you would like to be able to know what other people are doing in that watershed.  We should look at the top 10 units we are using to come up with the key categorizations. 

Comment:  DoD has contracts with Google and Microsoft – would like to put them in contact with Professor Hanan.   

Comment:  LoB is looking across Federal government contracts and tools.  At least 3 FGDC member agencies have interest in unstructured data searches.  We should work together to do a comparison of functionality and licensing issues.  We need to be cognizant that if we use Google there will be licensing issues  

This can be discussed in the LoB Common Services - look at the functionality of STEWARD before agencies make investments separately. 

Action 8 – Jon Sperling will identify those who are interested in the issue of spatio-textual search engines for grants and other programs.  (Bill Wilen, Jim Jancaitis, David LaBranche, Wendy Blake-Coleman all expressed interest)

Q:  Have you attempted to experiment with real-time data? 
A:  Right now it is static but the project has been limited by funding.   

 

Geospatial Intelligence Working Group Update - Billy Tolar, FGDC 

  • Inaugurated Jan 2005 – trying to develop standards and reduce duplication of effort.  Populating the registry of standards.
  • Billy Tolar serves as the FGDC representative, Karen Irby is the outgoing chair, and Mark DeMulder is incoming chair.
  • DISR (DoD Information Technology Standards Registry) is updated 3 times a year
  • Next GWG Plenary is May 07 

Billy represents the CG at the GWG meeting, FGDC’s vote is recorded in those sessions. 

Action 9:  If you have interest in the standards and activities of the Geospatial Intelligence Working Group, or are interested in joining, please contact Billy (btolar@fgdc.gov) 

GWG is the official Communities of Interest for Geospatial – established in September.

Copyrighted standards – GWG is leading on this – has signed a MOU with INCITs to get 50 standards for the working group – 3 year agreement 

DISR will be replaced eventually – and we will have to look at moving users into the newer form of the system 

Q:  Can civilian agencies participate in the GWG? 
A:  DOE has become a member in their own right; there is a process for civilian agencies to join the GWG.  Please contact Billy for information (btolar@fgdc.gov). 

Q:  The customer base for the work of GWG is the defense sector but we can leverage that work for the civil work we are doing.  Have you identified opportunities that would transfer to the civil sector?
A:  Yes, there is a common interest in standards.  There are a lot of areas where we are doing similar things within our own communities.   

The business side of DOD participates on the GWG.  Spatial data standards for facilities and environment (SDSFIE) aren’t in the DISR – working to get it in there.  The standards in there are the sorts of data we all use.  The SDSFIE has gotten input from states and locals – there is a crossover.  It’s a great opportunity for FGDC input in to data standards and architecture – the ability to share info across defense sector in the civilian world – share information with municipalities. 

GSA has federal facilities profile – USDA requires facilities and properties management to know about attribution and positional accuracy related to facilities   

NGA agrees with these comments and emphasizes the link to DoD Architecture activities.  DoD has a strong working relationship with DHS, FBI etc to share geospatial data.  One complication arising from the growth of the CIO community – the new director of National Intelligence CIO mandated use of OGC Web Services Standard.  The DNI is using that across the whole defense community.  So it’s not only the voting process by the working group – there is also significant interest in decision making going on at the highest levels. 

Action 10:  Billy Tolar will provide regular updates to the FGDC CG on the GWG activities. 

Last year we agreed that Billy and Doug would brief you all periodically prior to a meeting and bring up standards and issues that would need your input. 

Action 11:  Doug Nebert will brief the CG on the OGC activities at the December 5 CG meeting. 

Suggestion:  We should have a matrix to show the commonalities between the efforts of the GWW and CG to focus our efforts.  A lot of the same people are in both groups, lots of overlap. 

 

Subcommittee on Cultural and Demographic Data - Anne O’Connor, Census

[presentation]
[Street Address Data Standard Executive Summary
[Street Address Data Standard Presentation]
[Street Address Data Standard Dictionary Summary]

The Subcommittee on Cultural and Demographic Data (SCCDD) will have their annual meeting this winter.   

CG members are requested to send an agency representative, we need more involvement – social, cultural and demographic data touches on all of your agencies.  A new issue is common housing terminology for disaster situations.  The SCCDD welcomes participation by the community that works with cultural data (like archeological sites) and historic areas (like battlefields). 

Action 12:  Please contact Anne O’Connor Anne.v.o.connor@census.gov to participate in the Subcommittee on Cultural and Demographic Data.   

NIST is no longer maintaining the FIPS codes -- they are being migrated to ANSI standards.  Because various agencies handle different parts of the FIPS codes – each will be handled differently. 

URISA has done an incredible job with the Street Address Data Standard.   The data standard was developed outside the Federal government with Census serving as a champion.  [Executive Summary] 

This address standard will not alter what is required by United States Postal Service (USPS Publication 28) but will give it a firmer foundation and create a profile that shows the relation between the two. 

Q:  The Facilities standards – GSA facilities profile – how do street addresses of facilities fit into this Street Address Data Standard?
A:  There are two points of intersection – street address and name.   

Comment:  It would be helpful to have a guidance document for the address standard – a 1 pager that describes the issues and how it would enhance current systems – to let people know how it affects them and how it will change their business. 

Action 13:  Alison will arrange a SDSFIE and GSA federal facilities profile briefing for the CG. 

Q:  Is there a proposed standard for boundary definition?
A:  They are on the FGDC website 

NPS and USFS have done some work on cultural data.  DoD is interested in pushing that forward – it has a business need for dealing with cultural data more efficiently. We could create a working group to focus on this.  NPS has information on battlefields and artifacts that need to be reported as federal requirements. 

Action 14: The SCCDD will look into creating a subgroup that focuses on cultural data.  

 

FACA Update – John Mahoney, FGDC

[presentation

A vote was taken to move forward on the FACA at the Oct 23 Steering Committee meeting.  A few agencies were not present, some deferred and a few voted against.  There was a sense that the Steering Committee members needed more information.  This presentation fleshes out those explicit details. 

Lynn Scarlett, chair of the FGDC, submitted a memo to your SAOGI on November 9, requesting a vote on the creation of a FACA from those that were not present at the time of the vote or deferred.  This also gives those that voted against pursuing a FACA a chance to reconsider their vote with the information provided today.  The memo requested that the votes be provided to Alison Dishman (adishman@fgdc.gov) by November 30. 

Action 15:  Please insure that your SAOGI provides Alison (adishman@fgdc.gov) with a vote on the FACA by November 30. 

The idea of creating a FACA began during the Future Directions activity [Future Directions report].  One of the report’s three recommendations was to legislatively establish a National Geospatial Coordination Council.  This recommendation was not approved, although the Steering Committee requested that we investigate ways to broaden the participation of the non-Fed community. 

The Geo LoB explored ideas for advancing governance for NSDI.  A National Geospatial Advisory Council would provide a means to organize external participation into the NSDI, providing input on a formal basis. 

We worked with OMB, the DOI Solicitor’s Office and the GSA Office of Committee Management to look at our three governance options – Status Quo, non-FACA Subcommittee or FACA Committee. 

Consensus advice was that a FACA Committee would provide the most effective means of establishing an intergovernmental subcommittee.  Because Steering Committee meetings will be closed when the agenda includes pre-decisional and budget information, the status quo is not effective for external communication.   

Please see the presentation for a listing of the options examined, FACA requirements and potential membership categories. [presentation

NSDI governance activities will transition as follows:

  • The functions of the current Geospatial LoB Task Force will migrate to the FGDC Coordination Group
  • The FGDC Steering Committee, consisting of designated Senior Agency Officials for Geospatial Information (SAOGIs), will to focus on federal governance activities
  • External stakeholders will participate in NSDI governance  through the new National Geospatial Advisory Council (FACA committee)

At last month’s Coordination Group meeting there was a question – if the FACA is established, will non Feds be able participate in the working groups?  We need to get a ruling on that – there is still some ambiguity.  Those workgroups develop a set of recommendations but the Steering Committee makes the final decision.  We may be covered by that process.   

Suggestion:  The list of stakeholders to be considered for FACA should include standards components – ANSI, OGC, INCITS, etc.  We also might want to look at international groups such as GEOSS, whose work might affect our standards. 

Q:  If subcommittees and working groups have to be under a FACA - does each meeting have to be advertised?
A:  No – subcommittees don’t require the same kind of notification requirements 

Q:  What is the nomination and approval process for state and local governments and local groups to be on this committee?  What assurances that current participants will be part of the new group?
A:  Current participants can help identify the categories.  We will provide Lynn Scarlett with FGDC membership’s recommendations. 

Q:  NSGIC is an organization – where would it fall?
A:  Probably as State Government. 

Comment:  NSGIC supports the creation of a FACA.  FACA isn’t a closed door process – it will give everyone a voice at the table. 

Comment:  When we have a call for nominations we need to consider that we are picking a perspective – the person who will represent the perspective of that sector. The most challenging part of the FACA is establishing the membership. 

Comment:  We need to look to other FACAs to learn about nomination and approval process.  Federal agencies need to know this to decide if they want to support FACA concept. 

Q:  What is the FACA’s level of input? 
A:  Advisory only.  About 75 to 80% of advice is usually taken, but Feds need to make their own policy decisions. 

Q:  Who provides resources for travel support?
A:  DOI would cover travel support - typically the sponsoring agency supports the FACA financially.  It is not something you can do through an interagency process.  

Action 16:  At our December 5 CG meeting, John Mahoney / Ivan DeLoatch will report on the legal decision regarding subcommittee and working group membership under FACA. 

Comment:  The FACA needs to be set up so it is run by an unbiased arbiter.  As we move forward we want to keep this aboveboard and avoid the appearance of filtering. 

 

Geospatial Line of Business Update – Ivan DeLoatch, FGDC 

There are currently four GeoLoB work groups looking at targeted areas.  They are doing groundwork before the Geo LoB recommendations take effect in February.   

 

The next Coordination Group meeting will take place on December 5, 2006. [meeting information]

 

Last Updated: Nov 30, 2006 02:52 PM
Spinner Image