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 R1
Federal Surveying and Mapping: An Organizational Review Panel to Review the Report of the Federal Mapping Task Force on Mapping, Charting, Geodesy and Surveying, July 1973 Committee on Geodesy Assembly of Mathematical and Physical Sciences National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1981 ;
OCR for page R2
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the Councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy under the au- thority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a private, nonprofit, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in the conduct of their services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. It is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences. Available from Chief, National Mapping Division 516 National Center U.S. Geological Survey Reston, Virginia 22092
OCR for page R3
Committee on Geodesy Ivan I. Mueller, The Ohio State University, Chairman Duane C. Brown, Geodetic Services, Inc., Indialantic, Florida Daniel B. DeBra, Stanford University Adam Dziewonski, Harvard University Edward M. Gaposchkin, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory John C. Harrison, University of Colorado George E. Jones, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., New Orleans William M. Kaula, University of California, Los Angeles Byron D. Tapley, University of Texas, Austin Charles A. Whitten, National Oceanic and Atmospheric A~Tninistration (re- tired) Liaison Members William J. Best, U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research John D. Bossier, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Frederick J. Doyle, U.S. Geological Survey John Filson, U.S. Geological Survey Leonard Johnson, National Science Foundation Armando Mancini, Defense Mapping Agency Thomas E. Pyle, Office of Naval Research (National Ocean Survey, 1981) Carl F. Romney, Advanced Research Projects Agency Pitt G. Thome, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Staff Hyman Orlin, National Research Council, Executive Secretary Penelope Gibbs, National Research Council, Project Secretary ·.— 111
OCR for page R4
Pane} to Review the Report of the Federal Mapping Task Force on Mapping, Charting, Geodesy and Surveying, July 1973 Charles A. Whitten, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (re- tired), Chairman Charles H. Andregg, Defense Mapping Agency (retired) George E. Jones, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., New Orleans Robert H. Lyddan, U.S. Geological Survey (retired) Ivan I. Mueller, The Ohio State University Norman Porter, Norman Porter Associates, Bronx, New York Liaison Representatives Allen E. Anderson, Defense Mapping Agency Arthur K. Stellhorn, Department of Housing and Urban Development John D. Bossier, National Geodetic Survey Frederick R. Broome, U.S. Bureau of the Census Thomas Fischetti, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ruppert B. Southard, U.S. Geological Survey Bernard W. Hostrop, Bureau of Land Management Edward D. Johnson, Federal Highway Administration Marvin White, U.S. Bureau of the Census Staff Hyman Orlin, National Research Council, Executive Secretary IV
OCR for page R5
Preface The National Research Council's report Geodesy: Trends and Prospects (Com- mittee on Geodesy, 1978, page 5) states: "We recommend that the 1973 Report of the Federal Mapping Task Force on Mapping, Charting, Geodesy and Surveying of the Office of Management and Budget be re-examined and updated. Additional emphasis of this re-examination should be on coordina- tion of the capabilities of federal agencies in earthquake prediction, space techniques, and instrument development." The objective of that recommendation served as the general directive to this Panel to review the scientific accomplishments in geodesy that might be attributed to that 1973 Task Force report, to identify the scientific and oper- ational surveying and mapping functions that have changed since 1973 be- cause of advances in technology or shifts in national priorities, to identify those activities recommended in 1973 toward which little, if any, progress has been made, and, in so far as possible, to determine the reasons for the lack of response. In addition, the Panel considered it beneficial to identify some of the problems closely associated with surveying, mapping, and geodesy but not considered in the 1973 study and to give special consideration to the 1979 proposal of the President of the United States for the formation of a Depart- ment of Natural Resources and to the relevance of such a department to the topics considered in this study. An examination of earlier studies of federal surveying and mapping activi- ties indicated that, though there has been a significant change in technology, the surveying and mapping functions are essentially the same today as they v
OCR for page R6
n PREFACE were at the time of those earlier studies. In addition, the problems that were noted then (see Appendix B) are also evident today. The many efforts to re- solve these problems by consolidating federal surveying and mapping pro- grams under a single agency have not been realized. This Panel has not en- deavored to develop an organizational structure for a single agency, but a re- port by the Federal Board of Surveys and Maps, 1920-1922, recommended such a structure (see Appendix B), which, with some additions and deletions due to some functional changes in the last 60 years, might serve as a model for a reorganization of federal surveying and mapping functions. The membership of the Panel represents the private engineering sector and the academic community as well as government agencies involved in survey- ing, mapping, and related activities. The members of the Panel were assisted by staff officers of the Office of Management and Budget, whose expressions of interest in the present study provided encouragement to the Panel.
OCR for page R7
Contents S~ 1.1 A Single Agency 1.2 Actions Resulting from 1973 Recommendations 1.3 Role of State and Local Governments 1.4 Role of the Defense Mapping Agency 1.5 Principal Recommendations 1.6 Conclusion 2 Federal Mapping Task Force Report, 1973 2.1 Summary of the 1973 Report 2.2 Progress toward Achieving Federal Mapping Task Force Recommendations 2.2.1 Horizontal Control 2.2.2 Vertical Control 2.2.3 Gravity 2.2.4 Aerotriangulation 2.2.5 Mapping 2.2.6 Cartographic Data Base 2.2.7 Nautical and Aeronautical Charting 2.2.8 Cadastral Surveys 2.2.9 Space Techniques 2.2.10 Data Banks ·e V11 l 2 3 3 3 s 6 7 10 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17 17
OCR for page R8
2.3 Problems toward Achieving Federal Mapping Task Force Recommendations 2.3.1 Single-Purpose Projects 2.3.2 Directive for Coordination 2.3.3 Cooperative Programs with State and Local Agencies 2.3.4 Crustal Movement 2.3.5 Cadastral Surveys 2.3.6 Digital Data Bases 2.3.7 Research and Development 2.4 Program Update since the FMTF Report 2.4.1 Geodynamics 2.4.2 Cadastre 2.4.3 Highways 2.4.4 Coastal Zone 2.4.5 Urban Development 2.4.6 Conclusion 3 Organ~zabon Alternatives 3.1 Single Civilian Agency 3.1.1 Role of Federal Agency 3.1.2 Role of State and Local Govemments 3.2 The Proposed Department of Natural Resources (1979) Brief Description of the Department Status of Proposed Department of Natural Resources (1979) Shortcomings of Proposed Department of Natural Resources (1979) 3.3 Problems Due to Present Organizational Structure and Proposed Remedies 3.3.1 Geological Survey 3.3.2 National Ocean Survey 3.3.3 Bureau of Land Management 3.3.4 National Aeronautics and Space Administration 3.3.5 Other Agencies 3.3.6 Rapport with Users Conclusion 4 Relationship of the Defense Mapping Agency to Civilian Agencies 4.1 Background 4.2 Defense Mapping Agency Expenence 4.3 General Relationships ·.. V111 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 23 25 26 27 29 30 31 31 32 33 35 35 36 36 37 37 39 41 43 44 45 45 46 46 46 48
OCR for page R9
4.4 Current Interactions 4.5 1973 Report Recommendations Applicable to the Defense Mapping Agency 4.6 Interaction between the Defense Mapping Agency and a Single Civilian Agency 5 Conclusion Appendix A Present Organizational Structure A.1 U.S. Geological Survey A.2 National Ocean Survey A.3 Bureau of Island Management A.4 National Aeronautics and Space Administration A.S Defense Mapping Agency Appendix B Prior Surveymg and Mappmg Studies Appendix C OMB Circular No. A-16, Revised May 6, 1967 References LO 48 50 51 52 54 54 56 58 60 62 64 78 82
OCR for page R10