USGS OFR 02-370: I-Team Initiative and Geology Framework Layers

Digital Mapping Techniques '02 -- Workshop Proceedings
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-370

The I-Team Initiative and Geology Framework Layers -- Making Sure Geology is Included

By Patrick J. Kennelly¹ and Grant C. Willis²

¹Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
Montana Tech of the University of Montana
Butte, MT 59701-8997
Telephone: (406) 782-8633
Fax: (406) 496-4451
e-mail: pkennelly@mtech.edu

²Utah Geological Survey
P.O. Box 146100
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-6100
Telephone: (801) 537-3355
Fax: (801) 537-3400
e-mail: grantwillis@utah.gov

INTRODUCTION

Most geological surveys are experienced in preparing geographic information system (GIS) data for their key geology-based customers. However, the GIS world is much bigger than just the geologic community. In fact, geologic data are not even considered one of the key layers in most federal, state, and local GIS databases. In our discussions with other digital geologic data producers, we find that geological surveys often fail to be an active part of broad-based GIS consortiums. This commonly results in missed opportunities to secure funding to produce and maintain geologic data as well as missed opportunities to assure that geology is properly included in government and land-manager GIS databases. These databases are generally the primary source of geographic information, including geology based, that are used in important policy and land-management decisions that significantly impact the general public, as well as the geologic community.

The U.S. President's Management Council recently identified 23 federal government initiatives that relate to Electronic Government (E-Gov). Of these, four have an important GIS component: Homeland Security, The National Map, Geospatial One-Stop, and Implementation Team (I-Team). In this paper, we briefly summarize the first three initiatives, but focus on the I-Team Initiative, which has the most application to the science of geology.

Homeland Security Initiative

The Homeland Security Initiative has the following goals:

Interoperability of the systems that process homeland security information
Commonality of the processes that collect, manage, and disseminate geospatial information
Implementation of a comprehensive national security spatial data infrastructure

Much of the Homeland Security effort using GIS has been related to the group of cities referred to as "120 Cities for Domestic Preparedness." The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is currently involved in a broad effort to collect GIS data such as orthoimagery over these key locales.

The National Map Initiative

The goal of The National Map Initiative is a seamless, continuously maintained set of geographic base information across the United States. This base information would be similar to layers that currently appear on paper USGS topographic base maps. Whereas the average age of these paper base maps is 23 years, the vision of The National Map Initiative is to provide updates within seven days of approving the change.

One current pilot project of The National Map Initiative has a geologic component. The Missouri Pilot Project is working in cooperation with the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program to support multi-hazard risk assessment, mitigation, and emergency planning. The study area comprises four USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles (scale 1:24,000) with flooding and seismic risk. Geologic data will be integrated with updated National Map Initiative base themes. For an example, see USGS Web site .

Geospatial One-Stop Initiative

The Geospatial One-Stop Initiative goals are to

initiate interaction between federal, state, and local agencies about existing and planned spatial data collections,
provide an online access point to geospatial data, and
provide standards and models for the geospatial framework data content

I-Team Initiative

The Implementation-Team (I-Team) Initiative, the focus of this paper, is envisioned as a "bottom-up" approach. Its goal is to implement the construction of key framework layers through interagency cooperation and partnerships. These layers will compose the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, and the contributing agencies will work in cooperation with the Federal Geographic Data Committee and the Federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB). I-Teams will be separate from, but work in cooperation with, technology advisory groups and financing solution teams (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Schematic of I-Team implementation strategy (from http://www.fgdc.gov/I-Team/).

Interaction Among These Initiatives

These four initiatives incorporate GIS into E-Gov with considerable overlap. For example, to create base layers for The National Map, the framework layers produced through I-Team activities will be needed. These layers in turn will affect standards, models, and distribution processes related to Geospatial One-Stop.

I-TEAMS

Team Makeup and Goals

Most I-Teams are constructed at the state level; however, they also can be constructed at a multistate level (for example, Rocky Mountain states); or around a major theme (for example, Colorado River users). The central concept of an I-Team is to assemble all GIS data producers, suppliers, and users who have an interest in the geographic area of concern. Team members commonly consist of representatives of state agencies (transportation, agriculture, public safety, governor's planning council, school trust land administrations, and geological surveys, among others); federal agencies (Forest Service, Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, military, and others); local governments (city and county units, water districts, law enforcement agencies, and others); academia (university geography, geology, and other departments; school districts; and others); and private interests (gas and electrical utilities, pipeline companies, communications companies, and others). There is probably an I-Team in your state. State geological surveys may need to actively seek out and join I-Teams. Most states have an agency that is designated as the coordinating agency for GIS information that should be aware of any I-Teams in your area.

The I-Team members first develop a list of key "framework" layers for their database and identify the most likely sources for each layer. The team then develops a plan to assemble and maintain the database, assigns or recommends duties to team members, and encourages the formation of cooperatives to streamline data assembly, coordinate efforts, and increase efficiency.

Generally, I-Teams begin with the seven framework layers identified by the Federal Geographic Data Committee: cadastral (public land surveys and ownership), elevation, geodetic control, government units, hydrography, digital orthoimagery, and transportation. I-Teams then typically identify additional key framework layers. For example, because the Montana Geographic Information Council also recognizes geology, hydrologic units, soil, and land use/land cover as priority themes, these themes were included in Montana's I-Team Initiative. In the Utah Framework Implementation Plan, demographics, wetlands, geology, wildlife habitat, climate, ground cover, land use, soils, telecommunications infrastructure, critical facilities and infrastructure, and environmental hazards were identified as additional key themes.

Montana I-Team

In Montana, four statewide groups are concerned with GIS data. The Montana Geographic Information Council was created by the Governor in 1997 and provides policy level direction and promotes efficient and effective use of geographic information. The Montana Interagency GIS Work Group acts as a forum for the exchange of information regarding the acquisition of new geospatial data, the existence of current geospatial data, and information relating to agency geospatial projects. The Montana Interagency GIS Work Group encourages agencies to minimize the duplication of digital data, implement transfer technologies for the exchange of data, develop data standards, and share resources in completing interagency projects. The Montana Local Government GIS Coalition was initiated by local government GIS practitioners in July 1995 to facilitate and advance the implementation and development of GIS technology in city and county government through communication and data sharing. The Montana GIS User's Group provides opportunities for education, training, and conferences.

Utah I-Team

In Utah, the Geographic Information Systems Advisory Council, which encompasses federal, state, and local government, academia, and the private sector, has led the statewide data coordination effort under a joint agreement forged in 1997. At that time the state and nine federal agencies signed a memorandum of understanding to cooperate in the production, acquisition, and dissemination of GIS data, creating the Utah Framework Implementation Team (Utah I-Team). Over the next two years, the Utah I-Team defined the 18 priority layers listed in Table 1, assigned responsibilities, set goals, developed budgets and schedules, and set standards. They also established the primary target scale for all data as 1:24,000. In the process of setting goals and working with the agencies they represent, they identified many of the State's most serious issues. The Utah I-Team then determined which data themes are required to successfully address each issue. This analysis is summarized in Table 1. The first three issues in the table represent the Governor's top priorities.

Table 1

BUILDING THE GEOLOGY FRAMEWORK LAYER

In explaining how to build a geology framework, we will the use the Utah plan as our example. The Utah Geological Survey (UGS) has been a member of the Utah I-Team from its inception, but did not play a major role until early 2001. At that time, as the Utah I-Team plan gradually took shape, the UGS was requested to develop a detailed model and plan for the geologic framework layer.

Prior to UGS involvement, the Utah I-Team viewed the geologic layer as simply consisting of one seamless data layer that they referred to as "surface geology" and assumed that it would be at a scale of 1:24,000. As the UGS staff became more involved, they pointed out that at current rates of mapping, it will require 100 years to complete 1:24,000 scale geologic map coverage of the state. The UGS instead recommended a more complex, but more practical system of three layers of geologic map data: 1:500,000 scale, which was already available in GIS format; 1:100,000 scale, which is the primary focus of their STATEMAP geologic mapping program; and 1:24,000-scale mapping in specific areas with high-priority needs (primarily centered around rapid urban growth). In addition, they recommended that geologic hazards and economic geology be added as parts of the core geology layer. Thus, the I-Team eventually decided to divide the geology layer into three parts (geologic maps, geologic hazards, and economic geology), with seven sublayers (Table 2). This plan did not include every type of geologic data, but instead struck a balance between the overly simplistic map first conceived and the endless "wish list" that a group of geologists could conjure up.

Table 2. The Utah I-Team Geology Framework Layer developed in early 2001.

Geologic maps

Geologic map of Utah (scale 1:500,000; was complete in GIS format)
Geologic maps of 30 x 60 minute quadrangles (scale 1:100,000; about 10% were in GIS format)
Geologic maps of 7.5-minute quadrangles (scale 1:24,000; none were in GIS format)
Geologic hazards (most were in GIS format)

Seismicity maps (includes database of historic earthquakes)
Landslide maps (various scales)
Quaternary fault map (scale 1:500,000, plus detailed maps of some areas)
Geologic resources

Large georeferenced database of oil, gas, tar sand, oil shale, coal, metallic resources, nonmetallic resources, and data on various other commodities

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The I-Team framework plan addresses the needs of the GIS community in most states, multistate associations, and geographic-oriented groups. I-Teams are commonly looked upon as the primary source of GIS data for most government policy-making and management decisions. Commonly, I-Teams are the loudest voice in legislative and other decision-making circles, influencing funding and setting local and state GIS standards and procedures. Although geology is only a small part of this much larger GIS community, we believe that it is important for geological surveys and other geology groups to actively seek out, join, and then promote geologic issues on I-Teams in their state or region. In defining and creating geology layers for your I-Team Framework plan, we recommend the following:

Remember that you are part of a much larger group, most of whom do not understand geologic principles or purposes. You will need to patiently explain geology's role and importance many times, and at the same time listen supportively as others explain the role of their respective disciplines.
Keep your framework layer simple. You can't include everything. The framework most likely will include only the major layers that have the broadest application. Certainly, most state geological surveys have many additional types of data (such as geophysical maps, alteration maps, and paleontologic data) that they may want to put in GIS format. Such information can be completed and released outside of the realm of the framework plan.
Build on your existing goals, plans, and databases. The I-Team framework plan is not intended to make you change your focus. Instead, it is your opportunity to assure that geology is included in the larger multi-interest GIS community.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the members and staff of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program who have advanced the development of geologic databases at local, state, and national levels. We also thank the many people who developed and worked behind the scenes to make the 2002 Digital Mapping Techniques Workshop in Salt Lake City, where this paper was first presented, a success. Finally, we thank our reviewers, Edmond Deal at the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, and Kent Brown, Robert Biek, and William Case at the Utah Geological Survey.

RETURN TO Contents

National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program | Geologic Division | Open-File Reports

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/2002/of02-370/kennelly1.html
Maintained by David R. Soller
Last modified: 19:15:42 Wed 07 Dec 2016
Privacy statement | General disclaimer | Accessibility

Digital Mapping Techniques '02 -- Workshop Proceedings U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-370