[Attendees]
Summary of Actions:
Action 1: The Coordination Group unanimously voted to forward
the Framework Data Standard to the FGDC Steering Committee for
consideration of endorsement at the May 1 meeting.
Action 2: BLM (Bob Dahl) to provide comments in writing to Julie
Binder Maitra on the BLM Standards endorsement process.
Action 3: Larry Sugarbaker will supply feedback on the tools
repository.
Action 4: Suggest that there be a central point of contact for
Circular A-16 within the FGDC Secretariat.
Action 5: EPA, NOAA to forward grants and contracts
language to Lew Sanford and the Grants and Contract Work Group.
Welcome and Introductions – Ivan DeLoatch, FGDC
FGDC Staff Director Ivan DeLoatch welcomed the Coordination Group,
provided an overview of the meeting and took roll call. The FGDC
Executive Committee will meet for the first time on April 11. The
Executive Committee will draft a charter and will initially be looking
at issues involving Imagery for the Nation. Most of the meeting will be
devoted to understanding IFTN. An Executive Committee pre-brief and
planning meeting will take place on April 2 between Jim Cason, Ivan
DeLoatch and Karen Siderelis.
The National Geospatial Advisory Committee will have their first two
day meetings on April 15 -16 at the Department of the Interior and the
American Institute of Architects (AIA) boardroom in Washington D.C.
When possible, subsequent NGAC meetings will be held one day prior to
the FGDC Steering Committee meetings to encourage interaction between
the two groups. The public is invited to comment during the April 16th
meeting.
The next Steering Committee meeting will be held on May 1 at AIA.
Action Items from the last CG meeting – Pat Phillips, FGDC
Framework Data Standard – Julie Binder Maitra, FGDC
[presentation]
Julie provided an overview of the Framework Data Standard, a brief
history of the standard and why the standards are vetted through the
FGDC endorsement process.
Framework data theme covers all seven theme layers, elevation,
cadastral, hydrography, government units, orthoimagery, geodetic
control and transportation. The transportation is then divided again
into waterways, transit, roads, rail and air. The air layer has not yet
been complete.
The Framework Data Standard is being endorsed by FGDC to make it freely
available and without access or usage constraints that the ANSI
copyright holds.
Q. The Framework Data document was submitted to INCITS, were
there significant changes between ANSI and the FGDC standard?
A. Both versions are the same except for stripping out the ANSI
copyright.
Q. If ANSI approves a standard, then FGDC endorses that?
A. No, it is done the other way around, the FGDC endorsement is
first, then ANSI endorsement.
Statement: Ivan thanks everyone for expediting this
process. We had been pursuing this since 2002. This has been vetted
extensively!
Statement: NIST chairs standards processes and NIST recognizes
all FGDC standards.
Q. Do address standards exist?
A. Yes, Census is producing address standards. Randy Fusaro will
provide the WIKI address.
Statement: FIPS codes are not ANSI endorsed. They should be
recognized. NIST dropped FIPS codes.
Action 1: The Coordination Group unanimously voted to forward
the Framework Data Standard to the FGDC Steering Committee for
consideration of endorsement at the May 1 meeting.
Statement: BLM has a standards endorsement process in where new
content data do not have to be crosswalked.
Action 2: BLM (Bob Dahl) to provide comments in writing to Julie
Binder Maitra on the BLM Standards endorsement process.
The National Map Customer Research - Larry Sugarbaker, USGS
[presentation]
Larry provided an overview of The National Map customer research. The
objective of the research is to:
- Improve collective understanding and knowledge of customer needs for base map data and related information services.
- Receive feedback on topographic map prototype products.
- Develop recommendations for improving marketing, product branding
and customer services.
Nothing about the customer research will change the vision of TNM.
The research will help frame the direction of TNM 3-5 year plan.
The primary needs of TNM comes from its from customers base, collecting
customer requirements and taking advantage of partner data.
The Customer interview process was kicked off at the ESRI Federal Users
Conference in February in Washington D.C. The objective is to have 200
interviews. One set of questions asks clients to comment on the 7.5
minute topographic quads and other products.
The Business case for improving TNM will be complete in October
2008.
Q. Do we have the appropriate A-16 themes? The FCC licenses
structures, and is interested in finding who owns the county boundaries
in oceans, they are not published data.
A. We too are interested in finding the right source for
boundaries in the oceans.
Statement: Bob Pierce has done an excellent job in linking 35
themes. 18 of the themes are managed by the Department of the
Interior.
Statement: The BLM Public Land Survey System boundaries data are
not developed by aerial photography or remote sensing. We continue to
believe that TNM will have integration abilities because it is
geographic concentric and it is built into TNM.
Statement: The Minerals Management Service is a leader or
co-leader in 5 A-16 themes. The Marine Boundary Work group is working
on the off-shore cadastral theme.
Action 3: Larry Sugarbaker will supply feedback on the tools
repository.
National Geospatial Advisory Committee update, John Mahoney, USGS
[presentation]
John gave the current status on the upcoming meeting for the National
Geospatial Advisory Committee. The first meeting on April 15, Jim
Cason, Anne Hale Miglarese and Steve Wallach will provide opening
remarks and there will be some administrative tasks to go over and a
presentation on FACA rules. There will be a NGAC roundtable where the
members themselves will give presentations. During the second day,
there will be an opportunity for the public to comment. Anyone wanting
to make comments must sign-up at the registration table outside the
Boardroom. Comments should be kept between 3-5 minutes. If time does
not allow for all comments then those will be submitted in writing. All
comments will be made part of the public record and will be
electronically distributed to the Committee
members.
The NGAC potential study issues are organized into
Structural/Foundation Issues:
- OMB Circular A -16
- Investment strategy
- National Spatial Data Infrastructure
- Standards/ Inoperability
- Other topics
And potential Programmatic Issues:
- Imagery for the Nation
- The National Map
- National Land Parcel Data
- Climate Change
- revitalizing the role of the U.S. national mapping function
Statement: Jim Cason would like to hone the topics down to what
the committee can work on this year, plus, longer term issues. We have
7 months left in the year. The turn over in leadership does not
preclude us from doing work now.
Statement: We have to be realistic and 2 or 3 issue this year
would be realistic. All of the issues are good, we are trying to be
diligent on the ones we choose, and much planning has gone into this to
ensure we have the NGAC participation.
Statement: The AIA Boardroom holds approximately 140-150 people.
There is a concern there may not be enough seating since the meeting is
open to the public. It is suggested that only one Coordination Group
member per agency plan to attend due to space limitations. Anyone can
provide comments to the Committee at anytime. The website is www.fgdc.gov/ngac
Q. The role of the NGAC, what is different about it?
A. This is an advisory group that serves a different role than a
science group.
Geospatial LoB Update – John Mahoney, USGS
[presentation]
All of the work groups are in various stages of maturity.
Joint Business Case Work Group– Roxanne Lamb
Major Tasks
- Revisions /updates to Exhibit 300, increase OMB scores to at least 31
- Earned Value Management Reporting
Comment: There will not be an OMB pass back this year. There
will be very little change in FY09. JBC will still be scored.
Lifecycle Management Work Group – Wendy Blake Coleman, EPA
Major Tasks
- Evaluate existing geospatial data lifecycle; develop common standards terminology and processes for the stages of the data lifecycle; establish data steward responsibilities and performance measures associated with the phases of the lifecycle. Identify common capabilities to allow cost- beniffit ROI for shared services associated with each lifecycle phase.
- Review component themes of A-16 and reconcile with user
needs.
The Theme Team is led by Zeke Lee and David LaBranche and they are
working on how to add or subtract themes.
One of the next steps is to provide theme and dataset definitions for
FGDC review.
We are involving into a world of service. What are the processes for
deleting and adding items from A-16? We want to make the A-16
theme definitions operational and vet it through the Coordination
Group.
Comment: Did your work group look at more near time fixes as
opposed to complete reengineering?
Action 4: Suggest that there be a central point of contact for
Circular A-16 within the FGDC Secretariat.
Performance Management Work Group – John Mahoney, USGS
Major Tasks
- Transition LoB TF to FGDC Coordination Group
- Review and revise FGDC organization to align with LoB objectives
- Complete LoB Performance Management Plan
- Review OMB Circular A-16 to identify desired near-term and longer-term changes, particularly with respect to data themes and theme leads; secure FGDC Steering Committee and OMB approval of changes
- Develop and submit GEO Lob Strategic Plan to OMB per passback guidance
- Align FY09 FGDC Cap grant solicitation with JBC and Program Management Plan objectives and guidance documents
We plan to raise the issue of revision of the Charters at the May 1
Steering Committee meeting and have them completed by October.
Statement: Ivan suggests that the revisions get codified by June
at the latest.
Common Services Work Group - Matt Leopard, EPA
Major Tasks
- Expand smart-buy (and alternatives) efforts for geospatial data and technologies
- Implement MOUs/SLAs/ELAs for common geospatial services
Statement: Ivan thanks Matt for accelerating this work and
taking significant steps forward. This work group can serve as a model
for others.
We want to promote certain services through this type of group by
getting everyone together to discuss.
Q. We would like to get feed back on tools that can be
registered on our site. Have you had any initial feedback yet? And are
you including independent agencies? When will the tool registry
begin?
Q. Are we just piloting this registry now?
Grant and Contacts Work Group, - Lew Sanford, DOJ
Major Tasks
- Develop and Implement common grants language for geospatial information and services
- Develop and implement geospatial requirements language for Federal Contract (FAR, DFAR)
Q. How will this work apply in accountability?
A. It is higher level guidance. We are staying in touch with OMB
on this. We are working with Rob Dollison and GOS so that contracting
officers can check the standards from GOS.
Q. Have we come to a consensus on language?
A. There is a draft language but folks want to soften it.
Action 4: EPA, NOAA to forward grants and contracts language to
Lew Sanford and the Grants and Contract Work Group.
Announcements/ Discussion/ Wrap Up
The Census Bureau announces that TIGER/Line Shapefiles are now
available for download at the following URL: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/index.html