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
