Informal summary sent by Jim Cobb, Kentucky Geological Survey, May 9, 1996: ************************************************************ States/U.S. Geological Survey Meeting on Digital Geologic Mapping held on May 2, 1996 Kentucky Geological Survey Lexington, Kentucky Meeting Summary The main focus for this meeting was digital geologic mapping and the philosophy, methods, technology, personnel, and data needed for the National Program. Don Haney began the meeting with a brief background and history of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Act of 1992. This meeting was attended by 35 people representing 12 states, the U. S. Geological Survey, several non-survey state agencies, and the University of Kentucky. Seven state geologists were present from Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Louisiana, and Nebraska. Present at the meeting were three individuals with official positions in the geologic mapping program: Tom Berg, current chairman of the AASG Digital Standards Committee and member of the Advisory Committee of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program; Don Haney, current member of the Advisory Committee of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program; and David Soller, manager of the USGS Geologic Mapping Database. The meeting started at 9:00 am and ended at 4:00 pm and included a working lunch. The meeting began with six prepared talks lasting till after the lunch break (agenda attached). The second session in the early afternoon, was a round-table discussion to voice concerns. The final session was to work for consensus from the group as to what issues are most important and what actions can be taken to address the issues. The list of participants and agenda are attached. The discussion was wide-ranging and in-depth on a number of subjects. These subjects are as follows: digital standards, attribution of vectors, database construction, costs, and FGDC requirements. 1. Concerns over digital standards a. Standards must be established for digital maps. These standards must be developed and agreed upon by the USGS and the AASG. b. The existing standards in USGS Open-File report 95-525 are mainly traditional cartographic standards and do little to guide the construction of electronic data for digital geologic maps. c. There must be a clear understanding of the metadata that is applied to geological spatial data before digital maps and databases become standardized and uniform. 2. Concerns over Database and Attribution a. The discussions over attribution and database showed that these two topics are difficult if not impossible to separate. b. The form and content of data to accompany digitized lines from geologic maps is a basic issue that needs to be resolved? GIS software such as ARC-INFO and others will not provide all the data fields necessary to describe the geology. c. There is a need for a workshop on attribution and metadata for digital geologic map information. d. The USGS should facilitate development of standards that go beyond OF-95-525 and address attribution and digital database construction. Dave Soller (USGS) states he has set a self-imposed time limit of three months for this process. e. There is concern over file size versus computer memory capacity needed to create and manipulate digital geologic information. f. There is concern over the ability to send digital geologic map files over the Internet. Some of this concern relates to file size. g. An issue of efficiency in building digital geologic databases was voiced. This issue has to do with both having appropriate and adequate technology to collect line data and related metadata, and to have standards ensuring that sufficient data is collected to characterize each line. It was mentioned that "user" groups could help each other and the USGS could help by offering training and workshops. There is a need for training and workshops for sharing methodology, technology, standards, and experience. The AASG and USGS should co-sponsor such activities. h. It is recommended that AASG form a subcommittee under the Geologic Mapping Digital Standards Committee to work on issues related to "attribution" and to host a meeting in the near future to focus on "attribution." There were a number of volunteers for this and a high level of interest in attending a future meeting on this topic. i. The following is a list of names of those volunteering for work on an "attribution "subcommittee and workshop: Jim Cobb (KY), Don McKay (IL), Dave Soller (USGS), Warren Anderson (KY), Rick Hill (IN), Les Howard (NE), Ian Duncan (VA), Scott McColloch (WVA), Tom Thompson (MO), Jim McDonald (OH). Don McKay and Jim Cobb volunteered to chair or help organize this effort. 3. Concerns over FGDC a. There is concern that the requirements imposed by FGDC amount to an unfunded mandate that could cost states money but have no provisions for support or training. It was voiced that funding might be available through state GIS offices to help with this issue. b. USGS might consider offering training in issues related to FGDC. c. State surveys should be encouraged to be outward-looking in planning and preparing their digital products to be the most useful to society. 4. Concerns over Costs a. There was a feeling that the AASG Peer Review Committee had a difficult time deciphering cost issues that related to digital geologic mapping. b. The AASG should consider forming a subcommittee to explore the costs involved with creating various digital geologic maps and the costs required to prepare these maps for a national archive and database. c. There is still sufficient misunderstanding about field mapping costs that AASG should have this same subcommittee review costs associated with basic field mapping. d. Because a number of states do not have equipment to digitize geologic maps and can not now participate in GIS and digital geologic mapping there should be some consideration given to this issue so that those states are not discouraged from getting into this field in the future. 5. Actions recommended a. It is recommended that AASG and the USGS co-sponsor a meeting/workshop in August, 1996, to work on issues related to attribution of geologic map information and metadata. This meeting should be before the next round of NCGMP proposals and meeting of the Peer Review Committee. A list of those interested is given under 2.i. above. b. It is recommended that AASG form a subcommittee of interested state geological survey personnel to track and participate in the development of attribution, metadata, and database issues. c. It is recommended that the AASG and the USGS co-sponsor a meeting/workshop in September 1996 on data-capture techniques. This meeting should be held in St. Louis as a convenient meeting place. d. It is recommended that AASG form a subcommittee to study costs of digital geologic mapping as well as field-related mapping costs. The results should be widely circulated. e. It is recommended that the USGS step up efforts to get guidelines, if not standards, on database, attribution, metadata, file structure, and related issues as soon as possible. The AASG should be involved in setting these guidelines. f. It is recommended that a meeting such as this one be held at least annually, but initially more often if possible, to transfer technology, information, and share experience etc. KGS volunteers to be a site for such a meeting. ____________________________________________________________ Agenda Opening Remarks-- Don Haney, Member, Advisory Committee of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program First Session-- Tom Berg-- Chairman, AASG Digital Standards Committee Dave Soller-- Manager, U.S.G.S. National Digital Geologic Map Database Don McKay-- Digital Geologic Mapping at the Illinois State Geological Survey Warren Anderson -- Digital Geologic Mapping at the Kentucky Geological Survey Steve Cordiviola-- Costs of Digital Geologic Mapping. Lunch at KGS-- 11:30 Second Session--All Participants Round Table Discussion on Pitfalls and Obstacles to Digital Geologic Mapping-- technology, standards, and cooperation; Database Construction; State/federal Cooperation; Other Summary Session-- All Participants Summarize consensus and problems Make recommendations Decide future actions Adjournment-- 4:00 _____________________________________________________________ List of Attendees and Mailing List 1. James C. Cobb Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 cobb@kgs.mm.uky.edu 606 257-5500 2. Donald C. Haney Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 haney@kgs.mm.uky.edu 606 257-5500 3. David Soller U.S. Geological Survey 908 National Center Reston, VA 22092 drsoller@soller.er.usgs.gov (703) 648-6907 4. Don McKay Illinois State Geological Survey 615 E. Peabody Dr. Champaign, IL 61820 mckay@glacier.isgs.uiuc.edu (217) 333-0044 5. Rick Sergeant Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 dmanager@fido.mm.uky.edu (606) 257-5500 Fax (606) 257-1147 6. Jim Giglierano Iowa Geological Survey Bureau 109 Trowbridge Hall Iowa City, LA 52242-1319 jgiglierano@gsbth-po.igsb.uiowa.edu 319 335-1594 7. Perry Wigley Nebraska Conservation Survey Div 113 Nebraska Hall Lincoln, NE 68588-0517 pwigley@unlinfo.edu (402)472-3471 8. Warren Anderson Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 warren@kgs.mm.uky.edu (606) 257-5500 9. Carl Merschat North Carolina Geological Survey 59 Woodfin Place Asheville, NC 28801 ballew@aro.ehnr.state.nc.us (704) 251-6208 10. Mike Medina North Carolina Geological 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 jeff_reid@mail.ehnr.state.nc.us (919) 733-2423 11. John D. Kiefer Kentucky Geological Survey 226 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 606 257-5500 Fax 606 257-1147 12. Tom Sparks Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 606 257-5500 13. Lance Morris Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 606 257-5500 Fax 606 257-1147 14. Mark Middendorf MO DNR/Division of Geology P.O. Box 250 Rolla, MO 65402 (573) 368-2147 15. Thomas L.Thompson MO DNR/Div of Geology & Land Survey P.O. Box 250 Rolla, MO 65402 (573) 368-2140 16. Bob Myers MO DNR/Land Survey Program P.O. Box 250 Rolla, MO 65402 myersre@fidnet.com (573) 368-2301 17. Gayle McColloch West Virginia Geological/Econ Suvy P.O. Box 879 Morgantown, WV 26507-0879 mccolloch@geosrv.wvnet.edu (304) 594-2331 18. James Drahovzal Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 drahovzal@kgs.mm.uky.edu (606) 257-5500 19. Bill Shilts Ill. State Geological Survey 615 E. Peabody Dr. Champaign, Ill 61820 shilts@geoserv.isgs.uiuc.edu (217) 333-5111 20. Clark Niewendorp South Carolina Geol. Survey 5 Geology Columbia, SC 29210 (803) 896-7708 21. Ian Duncan Virginia Division of Mineral Res P.O. Box 3667 Charlottesville, VA 22903 duncani@forestryhg.va.state.us (804) 293-5121 22. James McDonald Ohio Geological Survey 4383 Fountain Square Dr. Columbus, OH 43224 jim.mcdonald@dnr.ohio.gov (614) 265-6601 23. Thomas Berg Ohio Geological Survey 4383 Fountain Sq. Dr. Columbus, OH 43224 thomas.berg@dnr.ohio.gov (614) 265-6988 24. Bart Davidson Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 (606) 257-5500 25. Hugh Archer Ky River Authority & (NRC, MSC) 624 Shelby St. Frankfort, KY 40601 kyriver@galileo.mis.net (502) 562-2866 26. Susan C. Lambert Ky Office of GIS 1024 Capital Ctr. Dr.Suite 305 Frankfort, KY 40601 slambert.kirm@msmail.state.ky.U.S (502) 573-1450 Fax (502) 573-1458 27. Terry Hounshell Kentucky Geological Survey 228 MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 (606) 257-5500 28. John Snead Louisiana Geological Survey Box G, University Station Baton Rouge, LA 70893 snead@carto.lgs.lsu.edu (504) 388-3454 29. Bill Marsalis Louisiana Geological Survey P.O. Box G Baton Rouge, LA 70893 (504) 388-8385 30. Les Howard Nebraska Conservation Survey Div 113 Nebraska Hall, Lincoln, NE 68588 lhoward@unlinfo.unl.edu (402) 472-9192 31. Norm Hester Indiana Geological Survey 611 N. Walnut Grove Bloomington, IN 47405 hester@indiana.edu (812) 855-5067 32. Steven Cordiviola Kentucky Geological Survey MMRB University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40506-0107 scordiviola@kgs.mm.uky.edu (606) 257-5500 33. Paul Irwin Indiana Geological Survey 611 N. Walnut Grove Bloomington, IN 47405 Irwinp@indiana.edu (812) 855-7636 34. Rick Hill Indiana Geological Survey 611 N. Walnut Grove Bloomington, IN 47405 hill2@indiana.edu (812) 855-7636 35. Fuhna F. Cheng Dept. of Computer Science University of Kentucky Lexington, KY 40502 cheng@cs.engr.uky.edu (606) 257-6760 36. Larry D. Woodfork WVG & E S P. O. Box 879 Morgantown, WV 26507-0879 woodfork@geosrv.wvnet.edu (304) 594-2331 Fax 304 594-2575