Click for next page ( 32


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 3.1 SINGLE CIVILL\N AGENCY In 1973 the Federal Mapping Task Force presented several alternatives for the consolidation of the federal activities for mapping, charting, geodesy, and sur- veying. We have reviewed these venous proposals and strongly support the choice they madea new civilian organization. Therefore, we, too, recom- mend the creation of a central civilian mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and multipurpose cadastral agency, which we would call the Federal Survey- ing and Mapping Administration. The statement made by the 1973 Task Force in support of this recommen- dation meets repeating: The Federal Survey Administration will bring together into one agency the significant (MC&G) [mapping, charting, and geodesy] programs (and supporting data-collection activities) that are systematic and national in scope and multipurpose in concept. It will be given the capabilities and mandate required to plan, establish priorities, weigh alterna- tives and priorities, and operate MC&G programs so that they can provide optimal sup- port to national objectives with quicker and better products. Accordingly, it will be structured to respond vigorously and coherently to Federal, state, and local requirements for organized and accurate spatial data, whether presented graphically on conventional map and chart formats or in digital form via tape or printout. By exercising its new capabilities and by taking aggressive community leadership, we expect the Federal Sur- vey Adrriinistration to reduce expenditures for overhead and slow down and then stop the uncoordinated growth of MC&G activities and eventually bring about reduction in single-purpose programs. 31

OCR for page 31
32 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW We believe that the roles of the federal and state governments should be clearly defined and understood in order to achieve these objectives. The key points of these roles are outlined in the following sections. 3.1.1 Role of Federal Agency Mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying (including legal survey platting), and the mutipurpose cadastre can and should seine a wide circle of activities. If the proposed Federal Surveying and Mapping Administration is to fill its role fully, it should not be closely allied with any one of the benefiting fields, be it forests, minerals, oceans, or another activity or discipline. Close alliance with one of these as a "parent" organization will tend to limit its effective- ness in sewing the needs of the others. Thus the mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and multipurpose cadastre activities should be placed together in a separate organization, ready to serve all needs equally. When the strategy of the Executive Office of the President is determined, the proposal should include the essential actions to define the role of the Fed- eral Surveying and Mapping Administration (FSMA) and its authority for coordination with other federal agencies. These actions must also establish the lead-agency role for each of the various functions or services of the new administration. This Panel concludes that the plan should also include the following: . Responsibility for the preparation of statements of the national needs for surveying and mapping and the requirements for carrying out the pro- grams. A clear expression of intent that, in the formation of an FSMA, author- ity be provided for the most effective organization of the mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and multipurpose cadastre activities, and for the inclu- sion of all operational resources such as survey equipment, ships, and person- nel. Recognition of the fact that some elements of mapping, charting, geod- esy, surveying, and multipurpose cadastre activities are carried on in several federal agencies that may not be brought into the FSMA, and provision should be made for the review and coordination of these activities by the FSMA. Emphasis on the improvements in service that this consolidation could provide, although potential cost savings are significant, the improvements in service would be more important. A point of concern has been the relationship of the Department of Defense (DOD) hydrographic and oceanographic survey ships, personnel, and asso-

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 33 elated resources to DMA management. Before DMA was formed the Navy had six ships assigned to survey operations. That number has now been reduced to two, and sometimes only one is in operation. A more serious aspect has been the division of personnel between the sur- veying and charting operations in the DOD. The personnel engaged in car- tographic activities are not getting survey experience nor are the hydrographic and oceanographic survey personnel assigned to the charting program. There are significant benefits to the total program when the professional personnel have this broader experience. In the National Ocean Survey, with 16 ships in operation, the surveying and charting functions are fully integrated. With the development of a highly automated system it is essential that the ships, personnel, and associated equipment not be separated from the charting pro- gram. 3.1.2 Role of State and Local Governments The Federal Mapping Task Force (FMTF) report mentioned the contributions of state and local governments to the national surveying and mapping efforts in only an incidental manner. It recommended the continuation of coopera- tive programs for the establishment of control survey networks and mapping projects that do not interfere with national priorities. It recommended that the County Highway Maps and the Urban Mapping programs be continued with emphasis on the coordination and monitoring of the programs by the federal agencies that provide most of the funds for the projects. The federal mapping and surveying organizations have legislative mandates to perform certain activities that provide the public and the governmental agencies with the necessary surveys and maps for the analysis, planrung, and execution of programs to benefit the citizens of the United States. The 1973 FMTF report indicated that the federal agencies use of the most popular maps (Geological Survey 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles) was about 25 percent of the total, while the state, local, industry, and public use was about 75 percent; the federal agencies use of horizontal control surveys was 47 per- cent, while the locally oriented use was 53 percent. The primary federal map- ping and surveying organizations have made a great effort to satisfy the local needs for surveying and mapping products by establishing readily available data centers and increasing the number of local outlets for maps. Even though the recognition of local interest in surveying and mapping products is evident, there has been little effort to integrate the local capabili- ties for producing the surveys and maps into the national program. At pres- ent, many of the local surveying and mapping projects are directed by fed- eral, state, and local agencies that have only one objectivea single-purpose ~ ,:

OCR for page 31
34 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORG~IZATIONAL REVIEW survey or map for the particular project. There is a need for centralized moni- toring of these efforts, to reduce the wasted effort resulting from the diverse local projects. In several instances, the 1973 FMTF report recommended bet- ter coordination, maintenance of standards, use of uniform specifications, and monitoring of local programs by federal agencies. At one time the federal agencies were the only organizations capable of executing large control survey projects or extensive mapping programs. The recent development of electronic distance-measuring instruments, Doppler . satellite-suney methods, and inertial positioning systems enables the state and local surveyor to achieve results comparable with those of the federal agency surveyors. The availability of computers, adjustment programs, data- handling systems, and remote access to federal data files and computer pro- grams provide the local agency with the tools to handle most control survey projects. Photogrammetric techniques, data systems, computer plotting, and copying processes provide extensive mapping capabilities at a local level. Several states and local governments have established control surveying and mapping organizations; most notably the States of North Carolina, Min- nesota, Georgia, and Connecticut and Los Angeles County and the City of Chicago. Many of the state highway departments have capable control suney- ing and topographic mapping organizations. The work of these organizations could be integrated into the national programs at minimal cost and little in- crease in personnel. With slight modifications In procedures and formatting, much of the state highway department and Corps of Engineers control sur- veys could be included in the national data files. Local expertise and availability are particularly valuable In the mainte- nance of control survey monuments and cadastral monuments. A state or local representative is more accessible than remote federal agencies in most cases where important monuments are about to be destroyed; it is estimated that the cost of perpetuating a survey monument or erecting a reference monument is about 10 percent of the cost of a complete resurvey to estab- lish ~ comparable monument. It is recommended that the Federal Surveying and Mapping Administra- tion: Sponsor cooperative programs with state and local governments and that the budgetary procedures recognize these programs and Maintain liaison representatives in each state to monitor the surveying and mapping activities in the community, to coordinate the activities involv- ing federal funds in order to avoid duplications and waste, to apply national specifications where federal funds are involved, and to encourage the use of national specifications and standards so that local projects may be incor- porated into the national surveying and mapping programs. l

OCR for page 31
- Organization Alternatwes 35 3.2 THE PROPOSED DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (1979) 3.2.1 Brief Descnption of the Department In March 1979 President Carter announced that plans would be developed for a new department covering the field of natural resources. It was indicated that it would consist of most of the present Department of the Interior plus the Forest Service from the Department of Agriculture and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) from the Department of Commerce. In April 1979, a preliminary plan for a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to "pro- mde nublic information and discussion regarding the ourDose and composi- lion" of the new department. By May 1979 specific plans had been developed for the new department. At that time, however, President Carter concluded that other, more critical, legislative matters should be given primary attention and that, consequently, the proposal for creating a DNR would not be submitted to the Congress. Although action was set aside at that time, the preparatory work that had been done in OMB developed a full justification and description for a new Department of Natural Resources. The following comments are drawn from or are based on the plan developed in OMB. In planning the new department, primary consideration was given to the basic resources, including, among others, the oceans, land, forests, and minerals. Comparatively little attention was given to surveying, mapping, and charting. Some pertinent comments were made, however, as follows: . Civilian mapping and charting activities are performed primarily by the Departments of the Interior and Commerce and are further scattered among numerous user agencies. The extensive study on this subject initiated by oMs (Federal Mapping Task Force Report, 1973) is cited. Although NOAA is a major component of the Department of Com- merce, the most extensive working relationships for NOAA are outside of that department. After noting that NOAA programs are highly compatible with a mission of a Department of Natural Resources, comment was made that NOAA and the Department of the Interior now have several competing or duplicate func- tions. Mapping and charting was cited as an example. As planned, a Department of Natural Resources would have consisted of five major administrative units: oceanic and atmospheric resources; land and

OCR for page 31
36 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORG~IZATIONAL REVIEW forest resources; water resources; geology and minerals; and parks, recreation, and wildlife. It was stated that "the integrity of NOAA functions" would be retained in the new department. To the present NOAA programs would be added the off- shore oil and gas leasing and enforcement activities of the Geological Survey and Bureau of Land Management. Obviously, it was planned that NOAA would remain intact and would become the Oceanic and Atmospheric Re- sources Administration in the new department. Similarly, it was planned that the Forest Service would become the domi- nant force in the Land and Forest Resources Administration, which would include most of the present functions of the Bureau of Land Management. The Geology and Minerals Administration would consist of the Geological Survey, less its Conservation Division. It was stated that the Geological Sur- vey would continue with three major operating divisions: geologic, water re- sources, and topographic. Thus the DNR plan did not specify significant organizational changes in any of the surveying, mapping, charting, geodesy, and cadastral activities at the time of formation of the department. However, it is clear that it was anticipated that regrouping and consolidation within these activities would be worked out after DNR was formed. Surveying and mapping activities of the Geological Suney, Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management and surveying and charting activities of NOAA are cited as areas in which sub- stantial cost savings could be realized, with specific reference to printing and distribution and to more efficient use of expensive equipment. It seems evi- dent that the reorganization planners in OMB concluded that considerable reorganizing of mapping, charting, geodesy, and surveying should be carried out but chose to leave the detailed planning and action to be worked out after the major components were together in the same department. 3.2.2 Status of Proposed Department of Natum1 Resources (1979) Insofar as information is available to the Panel, there is no plan for renewed action on a DNR at this time. It seems evident, however, that there was clear belief in OMB that bringing together the identified activities in a new depart- ment was justifiable and that, if accomplished, it would be generally benefi- cial. The plan in OMB to put together a file on the findings, conclusion, and justification developed during the March-May 1979 period suggests a belief that the completed work may be useful in a reactivation of the proposal in the future. 3.2.3 Shortcomings of Proposed Department of Natural Resources ( 1979) It might be a disappointment to advocates of consolidation that the plan for DNR did not include extensive immediate changes in the field of mapping, ~ :

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 37 charting, geodesy, and surveying as carefully worked out in the interdepart- mental study of 1973. However, the Panel realizes that on each of the many occasions in the past when consolidation within this field has been recom- mended, the opposition from the involved agencies prevented any change. Also, in spite of the extensive study of the problems involved, there has been no clear agreement on how the various activities should be put together. The OMB in 1979 recommended a two-step strategy for reorganization of map- ping, charting, geodesy, and surveying functions at the federal level: first, to bring the major agencies together in a new department and, second, at a later time to consolidate the surveying and mapping activities of the various com- ponents of the new department (Office of Management and Budget, 1979~. Despite the problems involved, this Panel does not agree with this strategy. We stipulate that the civilian mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and multipurpose cadastre activities should, at this time, be consolidated in an in- dependent agency. This agency can be placed within a new Department of Natural Resources, or as an interim measure within an existing department, but it should be independent of other organizational elements whose primary interests lie in other directions. 3.3 PROBLEMS DUE TO PRESENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND PROPOSED REMEDIES In the following sections we identify some of the major problems of the in- volved agencies as now organized and make suggestions for interim improve- ments. Brief descriptions of the present organizational structure of each agency are given in Appendix A. A problem that is common to all surveying and mapping agencies is the difficulty in generating support for programs when the operating agency is deeply embedded in the "parent" organization. It is also a formidable task to prepare and have approved statements on national needs and goals for map- ping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and the multipurpose cadastre when these activities are a minor function of the organization. This Panel believes that this problem, in the interim prior to the formation of a Federal Surveying and Mapping Administration, can be partially overcome by restructuring OMB Circular No. A-16 (see Section 3.3.7~. 3.3.1 Geological Survey The Geological Survey was one of several principal participants in the FMTF report study; and subsequent to the time of the report and its recommenda- tions, the agency was able to implement several of the recommendations in coordination with, and with the cooperation of, many of the other federal mapping, charting, geodesy, and surveying (MCG&S) agencies. Notable lit

OCR for page 31
38 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORG~IZATIONAL REVIEW examples were the evolution of the National Mapping Program, which pro- vided for more program flexibility resulting in more diverse products in response to user needs; the establishment of the National Cartographic Infor- mation Center; the development of intermediate-scale map series for the Soil Conservation Service for regional planning and the Bureau of Land Manage- ment for land management (this series was then made a part of the Geological Survey's standard quadrangle mapping program); the enhancement of an ac- tive and efficient program to produce orthophoto products; the evolvement of a digital data production program; and, most recently, the implementation of an internal reorganization to centralize the MCG&S activities of the Geo- logical Survey in the new National Mapping Division. Because of the decentralization of federal MCG&S activities, the focus has been turned to interagency coordination. The Geological Survey has had, and continues to schedule, periodic program and technical coordination meetings with federal agencies at all levels, depending on the particular subject matter and detail involved. These meetings with the Defense Mapping Agency, Na- tional Ocean Survey, Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, National Park Service, Tennes- see Valley Authonty, and others have all resulted in useful exchanges of in- formation. There has not been any apparent indication that these past coordi- nation efforts have been anything less than productive and contributory; but there is still much to be gained, both in financial and manpower resources, by the continuing effort for greater coordination. The division of resources has been, and win continue to be, a deterrent to the progress of developing a single multipurpose distal cartographic data base. Each agency annually encounters difficulty in supporting and securing appropriations to support their particular digital-data-production and data- application activities. The questions that anse within the Office of Manage- ment and Budget as well as Congressional appropriation committees about the proliferation of digital~ata-production activities have resulted in several studies as to which agency should be responsible for the digital cartographic data base. There was a strong recommendationin the FMTF report to develop a multipurpose digital cartographic data base, and this has been a primary ef- fort of the Geological Survey for the past 6 years. However, while some fund- ing was made available to proceed with hardware procurement and software development, funds to proceed with any level of significant data production have not been forthcoming (see Section 2.2.6 for recent funding proposal). The procurement, installation, and application of much of this new tech- nology has also proven difficult to implement. Some of this can be attributed to the time needed to develop in-house expertise in technical areas, but it is impossible to quantify the loss (primarily in time) that has been caused by the division of the combined federal resources. There have been significant

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 39 contributions made to the Geological Survey by other agencies to advance the effort to implement a digital-data-production capability, but it cannot be projected where the program would be today if the federal efforts had been pooled. Therefore, there is a need for all agencies involved in digital data ac- tivities, be it production or data requirements to support programs, to com- municate their needs and activities to the Geological Survey (see Section 2.2.6 for proposed lead-agency role). The prevailing division of responsibilities for geodetic control, cadastral surveys, and map compilation continues to present a formidable problem. This was addressed in the FMTF report, and it remains a problem to the Geologi- cal Survey in undertaking the mission to produce multipurpose quality prod- ucts. The availability of easily accessible and accurate control and public-land- survey data is a mandatory requirement in the production of mapping products, be they graphics or digital cartographic data. This problem is com- pounded by the time required initially to research the availability of data and the subsequent laborious effort to depict control and dissimilarly referenced cadastral information on cartographic products. The past and current efforts by the Geological Survey to compile much needed mapping of Alaska is a prime example of how a division of resources can affect efficient production of required cartographic information. There continues to be an ever-present need to consolidate the activities of cadastral surveys and the geodetic control network to focus upon one accurate and coordinated geographic reference system. The lack of sufficient funding is again the most resounding cause for the deficiencies in adequate geographic reference data; and it appears that the solution of this problem will remain elusive as long as there is a division of resources, both financial and manpower, among the federal agencies responsi- ble for cadastral surveys, geodetic control surveys, and mapping. Conse- quently, there is yet a strong requirement that these important MCG&S ac- tivities be consolidated and coordinated to the fullest to ensure that adequate and accurate control and reference-system information are available when needed. 3.3.2 National Ocean Survey The FMTF made recommendations for the expansion or extension of several of the programs or subprograms of the National Ocean Survey (NOS). Most of these recommendations implied the use of additional resources, that is, personnel, increased appropriations, or the transfer of funds from other agen- cies. The National Geodetic Survey of NOS has had difficulty in its attempt to respond to these recommendations. The Task Force recommended "expansion of the National Geodetic Data Base to include selective control of less than second-order accuracy." The

OCR for page 31
40 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORG~IZATIONAL REVIEW NGS reports that the Geodetic Survey Data Base has been expanded to in- clude third-order surveys from those agencies cooperating in the Federal Geo- detic Control Committee. The Geological Survey and the Bureau of Land Management are converting survey data according to "Input Formats and SpecificationsNational Geodetic Survey Data Base." These data, plus all additional third-order data submitted in format, will be adjusted and included in the data base. Defense Mapping Agency data files have been furnished but are not in format and require analysis. The NGS lacks the resources to digitize, analyze, and adjust data that are not submitted in proper format. An increase in funding to review, analyze, and adjust data for the vertical datum program was requested but was denied. Currently, no vertical control data of less than second-order accuracy can be added to the data base. One must conclude that much of what has been accomplished was done by "reprogramming," that is, using funds that had been intended to support other parts of the total pro- gram. The progress that the NGS has made in establishing the National Geodetic Survey Data Base is directly related to programs for the new adjustments of the horizontal and vertical control networks. The support for the data base funds and personnelhas been drawn from the network programs or the total program. Neither procedure is a satisfactory solution. It is essential that additional funds be provided to support the National Geodetic Survey Data Base. Its functions will continue long after the new adjustments have been completed. The service to the total surveying community is a part of the re- sponsibility assigned by OMB through the Federal Geodetic Control Commit- tee. The Task Force made similar recommendations involving the "continuance of cooperative (geodetic) programs" and the "building of a nationwide hori- zontal control system [with] resources . . . transferred from funds (estimated $1.5 million annually) which are expended by HUD clients for control sur- veys of unknown quality and reusability." The transfer of funds suggested in the latter recommendation has not taken place and would require formal ac- tion by the OMB and approval by Congress. The NGS has been able to make some progress through cooperative programs with a few states and other fed- eral agencies, but the NGS has experienced a major difficulty because of per- sonnel ceiling policies. A possible solution is the use of contractual services for more of the technical work. We believe that this can be done. It has been demonstrated by the Geological Survey for some of its cooperative mapping programs. The recommendation that "the National Geodetic Program manager be given responsibility to (1) coordinate all federal civil Earth-model develop- ment activities that contribute to the National Geodetic Networks, and (2) accomplish geodetic measurementsto support polar-motion and crustal 1:

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 41 movement investigations or studies" does produce some interaction between agencies that are investigating geophysical phenomena closely associated with these geodetic measurements. The precise repeat surveys made by the Geo- logical Survey in California support their earthquake hazards and earthquake prediction programs. NASA is coordinating a broad national and international program in the application of space technology for the study of crustal dy- namics and earthquake research. The NGS supports both of these agencies in these special studies. However, we believe that the fundamental practical rea- son for monitoring earth rotation and polar motion is to provide the correc- tions required for reducing astronomic and geodetic measurements to a common reference frame. The time-varying aspects that are the geodetic by- products for the support of geodynamics frequently have a greater dramatic appeal to those responsible for providing the funding for the basic geodetic programs. These are matters to be resolved by interagency coordination with OMB and Congressional interaction. Reorganization or regrouping of agencies would not necessarily provide an effective solution. Inquiries to the Division and District Offices of the Corps of Engineers dis- closed that those offices expend more funds than does the NOS on hydro- graphic surveying. We recognize that the Corps of Engineers surveys are proj- ect oriented. However, many of those surveys are of the "single-purpose" classification. One of the statements in the 1973 report refers to another marine aspect: "The marine geophysics and oceanographic programs operated by NOAA, Coast Guard, and Navy, and those funded by the National Science Foundation are not sufficiently coordinated. Classified data collected by the Navy often are unavailable (even sanitized) to the civilian agencies." Greater coordination could be effected if the scope of OMB Circular No. A-16 were broadened to include hydrography and oceanography with direct control of ships, equipment, and personnel. A review of the activities of the Federal Geodetic Control Committee (FGCC) indicates that the major efforts are in the interests of engineering geodesy with little consideration to the program for cadastral surveying, to the needs of research and development, and to the geodetic requirements for geophysics. The FGCC should be restructured to include subcommittees for cadastral sure eying, for research and development, arm for geodyn~nics {in- c~ding polar motion and coastal movementJ. 3.3.3 Bureau of Land Management The 1973 FMTF report contained two recommendations related to the cadas- tral survey program: (1) that the cadastral surveying functions of the BEM (excluding corner search and boundary marking) be transferred to a new cen- tral surveying and mapping agency and (2) implementation of a combined

OCR for page 31
42 FEDERAL SURVEYING AND MAPPING: ORG~IZATIONAL REVIEW geodetic/cadastral program in Alaska to meet requirements for state selection boundaries and for other cadastral surveys in Alaska and to provide geodetic control for multipurpose use. The report was critical of BLM'S failure to lo- cate monuments with reference to a geodetic network. Today much of BLM'S efforts in Alaska are coordinated with other survey- ing and mapping organizations, if possible, to provide multiple use of many of the monuments that are set. However, different priorities and funding arrange- ments among the surveying and mapping agencies prevent even closer coordi- nation of these surveys. The BEM has improved its surveying methods and instruments since 1973 and now requires that public-land-survey monuments have geographic coordinate values (see Section 2.4.24. The BLM Cadastral Survey Division is a service unit that is responsible for the legal cadastral surveys required by federal agencies. These surveys, which are extensive, consist of the initial surveys of federal public lands, including the Outer Continental Shelf lands, the resurvey of public lands, and bound- ary surveys required by various government agencies for the management of federal land. Because of deterioration of ancient surveys, resurveys of ap- proximately 50 million acres are required. There is a large backlog of bound- ary survey requests that are awaiting execution; these are for the BLM'S own resource-management purposes and for other federal agencies. There is considerable concern about the effectiveness of the present cadastral survey program as evidenced by recent studies of the House of Representatives Appropriations Investigative Staff and by the BLM. If the present rate of surveying is continued, it will take several centuries to com- plete the initial surveys and necessary resurveys of the public lands. The BLM has not performed its delegated responsibility to service the needs of other federal agencies in a timely and effective manner. Several federal agencies have developed their own boundary-surveying competence because the BLM has not satisfied their requirements. With the increasing emphasis on multi- purpose cadastres to provide timely information for the management of fed- eral lands, the demands for boundary surveys will increase. The organizational structure of the cadastral survey program within the BLM iS the cause of some of the problems. The cadastral survey function is mixed with resource-management functions at several levels within the BLM organization. As indicated by its title, the Bureau of Land Management is pri- ~narily responsible for the management of lands, and its officials are oriented in that direction; this results in a low priority for cadastral surveys, as re- flected in its budget, staffing, and policies. The management of the cadastral surveying program is fragmented, as noted in Appendix A.3, with a Division of Cadastral Survey in Washington, D.C., 12 state offices, and a Service Cen- ter with 2 branch offices, all of them reporting through several layers of man- agement to the Director of the BLM. There is no national directive for the , . . . . ~ .... j. . . ' '

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 43 cadastral surveying program; program operations are directed in each of several offices with no line responsibility nor authority for the operation of the program. A reorganization of the cadastral survey program, either In a new surveying and mapping organization or at a higher level within the Department of the Interior, should be effected. The reorganization should provide a clear line of responsibility with the appropriate authority from the headquarters office to the field organizations. The cadastral survey organization must have more control over its program operations in order to establish policies, survey stan- dards, practices, and priorities to seine the BLM and other federal agencies properly. An increase in the number of highly qualified surveyors is needed to handle the changing demands of the cadastral survey organization from one that per- forms the initial surveys of public land to one that also provides the required resurveys and boundary surveys for the management of federal lands. The in- creasing number of administrative surveys marking the boundary between existing monuments, many of them intermingled with privately owned lands, requires professionals with the education and experience to handle compli- cated boundary problems. The development of multipurpose cadastre systems with the associated boundary surveying (including legal platting) and mapping requirements calls for surveyors who are educated and trained for that pur- pose. The position classifications and staffing levels of the cadastral survey organization must be increased so that the organization can hire and retain competent personnel to handle the surveying programs. 3.3.4 National Aeronautics and Space Ration As discussed in Section 2.2.9 and Appendix A.4, NASA works closely with the other federal agencies and with the international community in the re- search and development of space techniques for mapping, charting, and geod- esy applications. NASA has not encountered any serious problems due to federal organizational structures during its management of the National Geo- dectic Satellite Program once the question of security classification was re- solved by the Congress in August 1962. Some minor problems have developed over the years in Landsat and other satellite remote-sensing research and development that could be attributed somewhat to government organizational structure. Although NASA, from its conception, was designated a research organization, it found itself constantly being forced to respond to operational land-use and crop-inventory mapping and charting requirements. Yet none of the other federal agencies was willing to accept operation responsibility for a satellite remote-sensing land-obsena- tion system. .

OCR for page 31
44 FEDERAL SURVEYING AD MAPPING: ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW In November 1979, Presidential Directive/NSC-54 assigned NOAA respon- sibility for civil operational land remote-sensing activities. The initial system is to be based on Landsat technology, but NOAA iS now responsible for de- ftning and coordinating the future operational system technical requirements and for overall organization and management of the operational program. Once the NOAA operational program is fully implemented, NASA should be able once again to concentrate its efforts and resources on the research and development aspects of the program. 3.3.5 Other Agencies The Federal Mapping Task Force identified 34 other federal agencies engaged in various aspects of domestic surveying and mapping efforts beyond the 5 principal agencies (4 civilian agencies and DMA). These agencies spent $162 million in fiscal year 1972. An additional 11 agencies were identified with $142 million in other activities such as oceanographic surveys, soil delinea- tion, and geological investigations, which were considered closely enough re- lated to be considered by the Task Force. This Panel did not attempt a new inventory of these "other agencies" but believes that the volume of business in "other agencies" has significantly in- creased as the Task Force predicted. Increasing national concern about na- tural resources and the environment has added to the general increase in requirements for surveying and mapping data support. Some improvement in the coordination between these widely proliferated surveying and mapping and related activities, and with those of the five pnn- cipal domestic agencies, appears to have resulted from the Task Force efforts. There has, however, been no attempt within the Office of Management and Budget regularly to bring together information on all of these programs or to provide the overview necessary to assure the most effective and efficient use of this sizable portion of federal surveying and mapping resources. In almost all of these agencies, the organizational submerging of these ac- tivities and the resulting limited visibility impede technical improvement and resource development essential to meeting the increasing requirements. Many of the activities carried out in these agencies would, of course, have to be continued to provide local support services. Examples are local day-to- day cartographic services in the Bureau of the Census and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), continuing local survey support to engineering proj- ects in the TVA and the Mississippi River Commission, and local property surveys by Forest Service Offices and Corps of Engineers Districts. However, the major cartographic and survey projects of such agencies should be made a part of a single national program. The local programs should be carefully coordinated with the national program. Resources related to major projects , ,

OCR for page 31
Organization Alternatives 45 should be transferred to the proposed single civilian agency that would also have the coordination responsibility. 3.3.6 Rapport with Users In addition to the problems that exist within and between agencies, this Panel believes that the relationship with the user community can be strengthened. The requirements for providing the essential services and products within gov- ernment and to the private sector have been emphasized in earlier sections of this report. The reactions and responses of the users of these services must also be considered. An effective means of communication between the agency and the user is the forum provided by national engineering and scientific societies. The American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, the American Society of Photogrammetry, the American Society of Civil Engineers, through its Divi- sion on Surveying and Mapping, and the American Geophysical Union, through its Section of Geodesy, have memberships drawn from government, private industry, and academia. Through the meetings and publications of these soci- eties, there are opportunities to review existing programs, describe proposed programs, and present summaries of relevant research. These societies should be assigned a greater role in the development of national standards for survey- ing and mapping and the establishment of specifications for the procedures associated with these services. In order to use this broader base of expertise, the federal agencies should invite these societies to designate official repre- sentation on those governmental committees that involve the user sector. 3.3.7 Conclusion In Section 2.3 we identified OMB Circular No. A-16 (see Appendix C) on co- ordination of surveying and mapping activities. In this section (3.3) it is evi- dent that many of the problems within the present organizations result from the ineffectiveness of this circular and its use as a coordinating mechanism by the agencies. The essential reason is that the circular does not provide the au- thority for coordination. We believe that by restructuring Circular No. A-16 there can be significant improvements. Therefore, we recommend that, even before the Federal Surveying and Mapping Administration is formed, the Of- f ce of Management and Budget revise the scope of Circular No. A-16 and add cadastral surveying; hydrography and oceanography (including ships, equip- ment, and personnelJ; and research and development for mapping, charting, geodesy, surveying, and the multipurpose cadastre. The revision should pro- vide the authority for more effective coordination of federal civilian pro- grams and should give recognition to the user community and to liaison with national engineering and scientific societies.