tuesday, 26 august 2003
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Research and Advisory Board Meeting National Consortium on Remote Sensing in Transportation Environmental Assessment August 26-27, 2003. Tuesday, 26 August 2003 - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT

Research and Advisory Board MeetingNational Consortium on Remote Sensing in TransportationEnvironmental AssessmentAugust 26-27, 2003
Tuesday, 26 August 2003 2:30 Welcome & Introductions – Roger King, Director, NCRST-E
2:45 Review of program 3:00 Transportation Corridor Workshop Recap and Discussion5:00 Wrap-Up5:30 Catfish Dinner
Wednesday, 27 August 2003
7:30 Continental Breakfast8:15 Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Review8:25 Agenda Review8:30 Multimodal Vulnerability -- Case Study in Pipeline Vulnerability and Ecosystem Response (Gunnar Olson)9:00 Intergraph RRL Presentation9:15 Future Research Directions: Setting the Stage (KT and Roger)9:50 Break10:10 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- Z/I Imaging (Phil Kern)10:30 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- RESOURCE21 (Tom Koger)10:50 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- SimWright (Lonnie Hearne)11:10 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- HSA (Gay Smith)11:30 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- GeoKnowledge Group (Karen Schuckman)11:50 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- Intergraph and Keigan Systems (Orlando McDowelle)12:10 Lunch (Barbeque -- Please email Chuck with your preference of pork, chicken or vegetarian) 1:15 Future Research Discussions -- (Chuck O'Hara, Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, Charlotte Coker)
Deploying RSSI in Transportation Corridor Impact Assessment and Planning Decision Support Systems and Analysis Tools Policy and Data Products 2:00 Background: The CSX Relocation EIS Project – K. Thirumalai and Claiborne Barnwell
2:15 Break2:30 Distributed Learning Seminar: Remote Sensing and the CSX Railroad Relocation EIS Project3:20 Industry Directions and Needs: Project Opportunities -- DMJM + Harris (Barry Brupbacher)3:40 Discussion: Research Deployment Activities for NCRST-E -- Advisory Committee Input 4:40 Action Items, Plans, and Follow Up Tasks5:00 Finish

Geospatial Information for Corridor Analysis and PlanningGICAP 2002Radisson Hotel, Memphis, Tennessee7-9 August, 2002
Presentation Session 1: High Priority and Special System Corridors David Ekern: Context Sensitive Design, A Role for Remote SensingPresentation Session 2: NAFTA Corridor (I-69) EPA Region 4: Streamlining the NEPA Process, A Collaborative Effort Benefits of a Regional Remote Sensing DatabasePresentation Session 3: Mississippi I-10 Corridor and CSX Rail Relocation EIS, DMJM + Harris: Remote Sensing and the CSX Railroad Relocation EIS MDOT Corridor Analysis Major ProjectsPresentation Session 4: Corridor Working Session Alaska Transportation Corridors: Current Status and Proposed Expansions Fast-Track Utility Corridor MappingPresentation Session 5: Future Directions in Data and Applications Virginia Future Directions Interoperability Future Directions in Transportation Application of Remote Sensing/GIS
Breakout Session: Technical and Operational Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Institutional and Policy Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Economic Challenges and OpportunitiesBreakout Session: Technology Outreach DirectionsBreakout Session: Educational/Training Outreach DirectionsBreakout Session: Research and Development Directions
Summary and Wrap Up

CONTEXT SENSITIVE CONTEXT SENSITIVE DESIGNDESIGN
A Role for Remote SensingA Role for Remote Sensing
GICAP 2002 WORKSHOPGICAP 2002 WORKSHOP
August 8, 2002August 8, 2002David S. Ekern, P.E. - Assistant David S. Ekern, P.E. - Assistant
CommissionerCommissioner
Minnesota Department of TransportationMinnesota Department of Transportation

DEFINING SUCCESSDEFINING SUCCESS
Creating a project which will Creating a project which will leave a lasting positive leave a lasting positive impact on the people it serves impact on the people it serves and the area it affects.and the area it affects.
A philosophy defining success A philosophy defining success as being in harmony with the as being in harmony with the community and the community and the environment.environment.

SUCCESSFUL PROJECTSUCCESSFUL PROJECTELEMENTSELEMENTS
Community Community Acceptance Acceptance
Environmental Environmental Compatibility Compatibility
Engineering andEngineering and
Functional CredibilityFunctional Credibility
Financial FeasibilityFinancial Feasibility

MAKING SUCCESSMAKING SUCCESSHAPPENHAPPEN
Visionary Leadership/ Visionary Leadership/ Attitude of ExcellenceAttitude of Excellence
Personal Personal PerseverancePerseverance
Planning with Public Planning with Public InvolvementInvolvement
Creative Funding Creative Funding AttitudeAttitude
Integration of Integration of ExpertsExperts
Flexible/Innovative Flexible/Innovative DesignDesign
Learning from Learning from Success and FailureSuccess and Failure
Sharing the ResultsSharing the Results

USING THE TOOLSUSING THE TOOLS
PLANNINGPLANNING– Department Strategic PlanDepartment Strategic Plan– District Long Range Corridor District Long Range Corridor
PlansPlans– Performance Goals/TargetsPerformance Goals/Targets
FUNDINGFUNDING– Area Transportation PartnershipsArea Transportation Partnerships
TECHNOLOGYTECHNOLOGY– CADCAD– Remote SensingRemote Sensing

FASTER-CHEAPER-FASTER-CHEAPER-BETTERBETTER
Internal Re-engineeringInternal Re-engineering Streamlining the Streamlining the
Conventional ModelConventional Model Innovations in ContractingInnovations in Contracting Utilizing the Private SectorUtilizing the Private Sector PartneringPartnering Cooperative RelationshipsCooperative Relationships
– Public/PublicPublic/Public– Public/PrivatePublic/Private


MS Delta I-MS Delta I-6969

Identify High Priority Ecological Areas
Project Project GoalsGoals
Identify Potential Mitigation Areas
Streamline NEPA process

Urban areas
Find the best “ecological pathway” between the hubs.
Eco-HubEco-Hub
Eco-HubEco-Hub
Ecological Cost Surface AnalysisEcological Cost Surface Analysis
Agriculture


Where are the best places to restore wetlands?

Benefits of New Approach
• Shared Baseline Data Early in Process leads to:
• Better Analyses Earlier in Process – Higher Quality Work
• Better Partnerships and Communication
• Early Identification of Key Eco Issues
• Avoidance of Project Delays
• Avoidance of Duplicated Efforts
• Supporting EIS info meets Agency Expectations
• Quicker Turnaround and Timely EIS Reviews
• Baseline data for future projects

BENEFITS OF A REGIONAL REMOTE SENSING / GIS DATA
BASE
Tools to help us to make better decisions, save time
and money in planning and developing
Transportation Projects.

BENEFITS OF A REGIONAL REMOTE SENSING / GIS DATA
BASE• Use Available Imagery from Public Archives
accessible via World Wide Web where possible• Avoid Redundant Data Acquisition if possible• Coordinate Between Agencies to Acquire New
Data For Multiple Uses with one Flight Plan• Analyze Data Using Automated Image
Classification Systems• Store Data in Web Retrievable Formats• Collect and store prepared data layers• Revise Imagery on Routine Cycle

• Information available to State DOTs, FHWA, EPA, Corps of Engineers, TVA, USGS, USFS,
NPS, etc.• Information centralized with easy on-line
retrieval• Proposed information for support of multiple
studies– Synoptic view medium resolution satellite imagery– High resolution (1-meter) satellite imagery– Prepared products:
• Theme maps• Contour maps• Flood zone maps, etc.
• More intensive data for special study areas– Multispectral imagery and Lidar elevational data
BENEFITS OF A REGIONAL REMOTE SENSING / GIS DATA
BASE

A Regional Data Base Is A Solution To A Recognized Concern
• new high-resolution satellites• high-altitude airborne sensors• low-altitude airborne sensors• State GIS Archives• The Internet, the World-Wide-Web, and Public Data Sources
These technologies support Applications in Transportation Development, Environmental Conservation, and Natural Resource Management
• GPS for location• digital cameras• digital image processing
and distribution
“One of the Biggest Difficulties in Using Remote Sensing and GIS is Getting the Right Data, in the Right Format, at the Right Time”
There is a convergence of accessible technologies:

Imagery Acquisition May RequireMulti-agency Partnering
• Imagery acquisition costs may be reduced by multi-agency partnerships
– National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and– USGS Geospatial Data Clearinghouse
• Partnerships may be:– State/Federal– In-state– Multi-state– Consortia
• Partnering involves costs and trade-offs;– Cooperation required on image scale, format, dates, etc.

Once Imagery Received, It Must Be Processed to Be Useful
• Imagery is unlike tabular Census Bureau data
• “Value-added” operations required to produce useful information:
land use mapping or geo-information requires interpretation
• May not have required technical skills within existing staff
• Imagery processing may require new computer software/hardware

Strategies for Overcoming the Strategies for Overcoming the BarriersBarriers
• Training and Continued Education• Outreach programs to assist in technology
transfer• Vendors need to highlight and promote
transportation applications• Research funding to promote applications• Transportation professionals need to
document and publish results of applications

Future Uses of ImageryFuture Uses of Imagery
• Socio-economic characteristics– demographics– travel demand and forecasting
• Natural environmental conditions• Infrastructure inventory/management• AND, with other information:
– property values– R-O-W analysis– construction impacts– vegetation species classification
New sources of high-resolution imagery canprovide valuable information concerning:

BENEFITS OF A REGIONAL REMOTE SENSING / GIS DATA
BASE• Use Remote Sensing Imagery and
Data to:– Save Money– Save Time– Make and Support Better Decisions– Better Communicate Decisions,
Criteria, and Tradeoffs to Public and Customers

CSX Railroad Corridor Analysis

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
What are our Tasks?
What data do we need and in what sequence?

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
Our No. 1 Task is to begin recording constraints and possible alignments. We cannot prepare an Environmental Impact Statement without a physical description of the project.
The No. 1 item that we need is a digital image of the corridor under study.

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
The No. 2 item that we need would be contours at intervals of 5 feet or
less.
In Remote Sensing terms, we need a digital terrain model as soon as possible.

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
The No. 3 task is the Agency and Public Involvement process

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
What other data is needed as soon as possible?
The existing roadway traffic counts, intersections and links, and the most up-to-date forecasts
Similar data for other modes
Land Use, especially to determine sensitive noise and air receptors
Wetlands
Floodplains
Water Quality
Air Quality
Ambient Noise
Environmental Justice

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
Continued…Recreation and other public lands,
especially Section 6(f) properties.Cultural Resources and other Section 4(f)
propertiesPublic FacilitiesFarmlandFloral and Faunal HabitatsExisting Hazardous sitesAnd more…

REMOTE SENSING and the CSX RAIL RELOCATION EIS NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop Session 3
How do we usually obtain this data?Local, State, and Federal resource agencies
Environmental documents for recent projects in the area
Original Research, usually by specialist sub-consultants

ALASKA TRANSPORTATION ALASKA TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORSCORRIDORS
CURRENT STATUS & PROPOSED EXPANSIONS

Current Highway SystemCurrent Highway System

95% of Alaska = Wetlands95% of Alaska = Wetlands

Disturbed Permafrost Always Disturbed Permafrost Always ThawsThaws
ice

Inadequate Analysis and Inadequate Analysis and DesignDesign

Alaska Transportation ProjectsAlaska Transportation Projects
Past– Alaska Railroad– Alaska Highway– Parks Highway– TAPS & Dalton Highway– Fiber Optics
Future– ANGTS– ARR Extension

Alaska’s Commercial CorridorAlaska’s Commercial Corridor

Hurdles for Transportation Hurdles for Transportation DevelopmentDevelopment
Land StatusNational Interest Economic Justification Lack of Modern Corridor Analysis

NCRST-E GICAP 2002 Workshop
Future Directions in Data and Applications
Dan WidnerVirginia Department of Transportation

Future Directions in Data and Applications
Highlight Two Efforts in Spatial Data Development and Associated Applications
1. Virginia Base Mapping Project
2. I-81/I-77 Interchange Visualizations

Virginia Base Mapping Program
• Wireless E 911 Board funded• Fly entire state in Spring 2002• Products:
– True color digital orthos at 3 scales– “break lines” for hydrography data set– Digital Terrain Model
• VDOT centerlines, Orthos, DTM, hydrography and address file supply statewide base map data for future spatial data development

²²
²
²
²
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
4142 43 44 36Addresses – E 911
Planimetrics & Cadastre
Stakeholder Driven Guidelines, Standards, and Leadership guide
local government data development
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
4142 43 44 36
VDOT Street Centerline
Digital Orthophotography
Base Imagery
Hydrography
R-2
R-1
R-15
Digital Orthophoto Base


I-81/I77 Interchange Visualizations
• Desire to use spatial data and GIS tools to provide accurate and realistic visualization of a construction project.
• Provided by Prof. Randy Dymond, Virginia Tech University, Civil and Environmental Engineering GIS (CEEGIS)

How Geospatial Interoperability can enable NCRST-E
How Geospatial Interoperability can enable NCRST-E
•Myra Bambacus•Program Manager
•Geospatial Interoperability Office•NASA ESE Applications Division

49
Pu
bli
c
Tools &Tools &TechnologyTechnology
InteroperabilityInteroperability
Pri
vate
Geospatial Interoperability
Digital Digital ResourcesResources
Collecting Collecting DataData
Enabling Citizens Enabling Citizens and Communitiesand Communities
EarthEarth
ApplicationApplicationss

50
Geographic Imagery Vision
• Imagery is dominant form of geographic info
– Archives approaching petabyte; ingesting a terabyte per day
– Tens of thousands of datasets, catalogued but not yet on-line
• Most imagery will never be directly accessed by humans
– Information communities: auto-summarization, Mining based on geographic concepts
• Hurdles to moving imagery online: technical, legal, business
– Existing standards for exchange of imagery
– Commercialization of imagery acquisition
• The ultimate challenge:to enable geographic imagery from many sources to become an integrated digital representation of the Earth widely accessible for humanities critical decisions

51
Standards Terminology Distributed ServicesProtocols
Pu
bli
cP
riva
te
… simultaneous use of multiple geo-spatial data sets …
Interoperability
InteroperabilityInteroperability

FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN TRANSPORTATION
APPLICATIONS OF REMOTE SENSING / GIS
Coming Opportunities to make better decisions, save
time and money.

Indicators of Trends
• FHWA National Strategic Goals– The Vital Few
• Reauthorization Hearings for TEA-21

Opportunities for Applications of Remote Sensing
• Highway Safety Analyses• Baseline and Historical Environmental or Natural
Resources Analyses and Prospective Monitoring• Impact Analyses for Alternatives and Project—
Project GIS– Direct Impacts– Secondary and Cumulative Impacts
• Traffic Flow Analyses• Congestion Mitigation Analyses

Opportunities for Applications of Remote Sensing, Continued
• Analyses for Context Sensitive Design / Solutions
• Data Acquisition for Transportation Planning and Modeling
• Data Base for Land Use Analyses and Models• Air Quality Analyses• Water Quality Analyses

Major Needs
• Infrastructure to Support Regional or National Datasets
• Comprehensive and Reliable Database on Cost-Effectiveness of RS / GIS Solutions in Transportation
• Clearinghouse for Multiple Agencies on Data Sharing and Data Acquisition

Break Out Sessions
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Breakout Topics
Research and Development Directions Institutional and Policy Challenges Technical and Operational Challenges Economic Challenges Education and Training Challenges Technology Outreach Challenges

Research and Development Directions
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Brainstorm Challenges
Methodology for remote sensing data applications, and tools and a library for central distribution (pathfinder/NIMA)
Means for non-remote sensing users to find out about data and uses
Matching tools with data Opportunities and barriers presented by relevant laws,
policies, and regulations in the jurisdictions in which a particular corridor exists or will exist

Brainstorm Challenges
A Data Acquisition Planning Tool to determine optimal acquisition data needed (accuracies, cost, resolution, etc.)
Examine strategies to integrate data across scales throughout the project life cycle
Survey the educational pipeline for remote sensing and mapping science professionals in training
Survey projected needs for professionals

Brainstorm Challenges
High resolution data: who is using, how is it being used, who has tool kits, how is it being acquired and archived? If not being used, why?
Better standardization of generally accepted professional practices (land cover land use classes and methods, etc.)
Characteristics of a model remote sensing and geospatial technologies program for a state DOT

Institutional and Policy
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Brainstorm: Institutional Challenges
Insufficient interagency coordination among agencies that acquire remotely sensed data.
Agency inability to understand missions of other agencies.
Lack of resident remote sensing expertise within agencies.
University departmental structure does not provide rewards and or incentives for multi-disciplinary collaborations.
Lack of institutional education regarding intellectual property and licensing.

Brainstorm: Institutional Challenges
Lack of trust among institutions. Lack of vertical communication and commitment within
an agency. Dysfunctional data sharing mechanisms among
agencies with aligned goals. Lack of implementation of spectral, spatial, temporal,
and usage data standards Lack of institutional data standards causes major data
portability problems

Brainstorm: Institutional Challenges
Lack of knowledgeable senior level leadership. Lack of long term commitment to maintaining a data
infrastructure. Lack of understanding of the long term. Institutional inertia which leads to resistance to change.

Brainstorm: Institutional Challenges
Lack of implementing technology to exploit data. Inconsistent goals among academia, industry, and
government. Political interruption of long term goals. Inconsistent requirements among resource agencies
for level of detail at the same stage of environmental analysis.

Brainstorm: Policy / Legal Challenges
Government personnel responsible for acquiring and using data are very often uninformed about laws and policies relevant to the data.
Evolution of laws and policies are in flux within increased national security concerns.
Failure of the procurement framework to recognize the unique needs of technology and data acquisition.

Brainstorm: Policy / Legal Challenges
Need to redefine privacy interests within rapidly changing technological environment.
Use of customary practices in the absence of formal policies (“Because we have always done it this way, that’s why.”)
Need to encourage development of data sharing mechanisms among federal, state, and local governments.

Brainstorm: Policy / Legal Challenges
Complexity of responding to FOIA requests for data that also contain proprietary data or which have national security implications.
Lack of interagency policies and procedures for costing and expensing resources in joint projects.
Inconsistent interpretation of policies for projects that inherently require multiple agencies to take action.

Technical and Operational Challenges and Opportunities
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Brainstorm Challenges
Quality data for historical datasets (lack of metadata)
Lack of upper management knowledge and support
Lack of necessary computer hardware or tools Training of staff, acquiring new expertise,
versus outsourcing alternative

Brainstorm Challenges
Accuracy needed for design, planning, and construction (disparities?)
Better characterize the accuracy of remotely sensed data needed for various applications
Quality data for historical datasets (lack of metadata)
Lack of upper management knowledge and support

Brainstorm Challenges
Lack of necessary computer hardware or tools Training of staff, acquiring new expertise,
versus outsourcing alternative Accuracy needed for design, planning, and
construction (disparities?) Better characterize the accuracy of remotely
sensed data needed for various applications

Brainstorm Challenges
Educate potential users on the accuracy and characteristics of remotely sensed datasets
Filter remote sensing and application choices with common sense
Operational policy related to data sharing and licensing

Brainstorm Challenges
Items of data security, i.e. endangered species and archaeological sites
Remote sensing technology development and associated applications (many issues)
Benchmark case studies to define process standards

Brainstorm Challenges
Asynchronous temporal considerations Cost constraints, especially for potential local
users – are national datasets a potential solution?
How good is good enough? (over engineering issues)

Brainstorm Challenges
Solutions of technical challenges are coupled with institutional, policy, and economic solutions
Increasing data complexity, such as hyperspectral, will require continued staff training
Licensing and certification of professional staff

Brainstorm Opportunities
Gain acceptance of remote sensing data, products and tools by major federal agencies for use in mainstream tasks (high priority)
Encourage the development of benchmark demonstration projects (high priority)
Distribution of products and results via the internet

Prioritize Items
Gain acceptance of remote sensing data, products and tools by major federal agencies for use in mainstream tasks (high priority)
Encourage the development of benchmark demonstration projects (high priority)
Quality data for historical datasets (lack of metadata)

Break Out SessionEconomic Challenges and Opportunities
in Transportation Corridors
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Topic Description: Discuss the topic and frame a description.
Types of Economic Impacts Spatially Defined Impacts Spatial Data Needs Role for remote Sensed Data

Brainstorm Challenges
Innovative Treadmill Political Incentive State/Country Partnerships – value added products Inflexibility of funding sources Define corridors from an economic perspective

Brainstorm Opportunities
Redefining effective markets Cumulative effects transportation projects Transportation and international trade Ex Post analysis –
– what type of info needed to help with analysis? – Calibrate or update census/other economic data with RS.– Develop economic grids based on economic development with
RS. – Economic classification. – Employment growth in relation to highway.

Brainstorm Opportunities
What is a corridor? Freight movement Ex Ante analysis –
– Type of image required? – Developable land? – Build out analysis? – Landform analysis?

Remote Sensed Economic Data
Ex Ante / Ex Post analysis Population: density, spatial distribution, intercensal
years Business location (1 digit SIC code) Inventories of developable sites Spatial border effects

Remote Sensed Economic Data
Traffic mix VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS Build-out analysis Redefinition of effective markets Define areas of impacts

Break Out SessionEducational/Training Outreach Directions
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Topic Description: Discuss the topic and frame a description.
Professional education/re-education Certification & training (University, technical)

Brainstorm Challenges
Distance Learning (pre-taped lectures, remote videoconferencing)– integrity/credibility and qualifications; identity of
participants– accessibility incl. hardware + software– appropriate & current technology approach– acceptance as valid means of instruction

Brainstorm Challenges
Life-long Continuing Education– Applicable to instructors and students– Support/allowance for training (varied training or degree, etc.)– Responsibility to convey skills to users – software/tools, methodology– On-the-job training including internal and client-side– Developing regulatory (FGDC mapping) + industry standards (ISO)– Sensor data standards re: modeling– Legal issues: use & creation of data products (professional certification +
production of valid data)– GIS, remote sensing, photogrammetry certification– Participation at different Universities, agencies, companies including site visits,
exchange programs

Brainstorm Challenges
University System – Different models– Non-traditional approach; – Req. multidisciplinary training incl. physics, math/statistics– Technical writing– Promotion of GIS topics in varied fields (e.g. geography, civil
engineering)– Cross-reference in different departments– Understanding of map transformations & also creation of presentable
results– Need for real-world experience (internships, co-ops)

Technology Outreach Directions
GICAP 2002
August 7-9, 2002

Technology Outreach Issues
Comparison metrics of time, cost and quality Identification of economic and land use data
gaps Development of indicators to measure
appropriateness of using remote sensing Long-term vs. short-term benefits of using
remote sensing

Technology Outreach Issues
Quantification of upfront planning info for design development, management, and operation.
Reuse of data during several stages of process Complimentary opportunities for use with
remote sensing data Packaging of data and delivery of results

Technology Outreach Issues
Outsourcing of data collection and analysis Integration of contractor data standards Development of guidelines to potential users to
indicate potential usefulness of RS as related to projects of different sizes and types for example AASHTO, ASCE, TRB
Leveraging and exposure to stakeholders

Technology Outreach Issues
Document success stories and disseminate and advocate to potential users
Distributed hubs for data archiving, possibly needed in each state
Formal approval from appropriate federal and state agencies
Formulate regional environmental screening frameworks
Progress from buy in to best practices

Technology Outreach Issues
Target geologist, and other internal champions, at DOT and other agencies as best users for RS and convince upper management to adopt RS practices as official department policies
Getting congressional funding for multi-agency partners
Set up pilot projects under T23 authorization to demonstrate RS at different scales

Technology Outreach Issues
Use GIST and other forums Pool funding sources to support demonstration
projects Student internship programs for agencies

REMOTE SENSINGLearning From Workshop
A PUBLIC SECTOR VIEW
August 9, 2002
NCRST-E GICAP 2002 WORKSHOP
Memphis, Tennessee
David S. Ekern, P.E. – Assistant Commissioner – Mn/DOT
-Associate Director - AASHTO

TRENDS/OBSERVATIONS• Enabling tool/technologytool/technology NOT need/program/activityneed/program/activity• Most Promising Themes:
• Doing current activities faster, better, cheaper (at least 2 out of 3).
• Reliable, Meaningful, Credible• Expanding Abilities to do New Activities.
• Most Effective when Approached as One of Family of Information Source Tools.
• Application to Modal Issues Just Beginning.
• Need to Understand and Deal with INSTITUTIONAL Barriers (awareness, senior management leadership, agency capacity, education).
• Most Successful When Directly Related to Agency Decision Support Systems.
• Need to Learn From Other Technology Deployment Efforts (CADD & ITS).
• Agencies may Need to Evaluate Expectations About Data Quality and Volume.

CHALLENGES - NEXT STEPS
• ENHANCE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER• Move Research to Deployment Faster.• Focusing Research Results at Users.• Focus at a Few Key Products or Services.• Develop Synthesis on Remote Sensing.• Hold Focused Conferences/Workshops.
• PROMOTE INNOVATIVE THINKING• Public/Private Sectors Need to be Innovative and Nontraditional in
approaches to deploying Applications.• Enhance and Revise Procurement Systems.• Funding for Systems Conversion to National Standards.• Shape Thinking based on Planning System Level, Engineering, Operations
Need.
• ENGAGE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS• Fund Association Leadership of the Efforts.• Engage Transportation Community in Geospatial/E-Gov.• Engaging Related Federal Agencies (FTA, FHWA).• Establish long-term MOUs to coordinate Efforts.

CHALLENGES – NEXT STEPS
• EXPAND WORKFORCE AND TRAINING• Focus on Agency Capacity Renewal and Development.• Focus on Private Sector as Source of Skills and Staff.• Programs Targeted Toward New Professionals.• Focus on the Educational Community.
• DEVELOP STANDARDS• Basic Information on Availability, Accuracy, Cost.• Specific Accuracy Requirements for Individual Applications.• Specific Standards Needed to Assure Customer of Product/Service Reliability.
• SPECIFIC RESEARCH NEEDS• Cost/Benefit of Data Collection for PLANNING, ENGINEERING,
OPERATIONS uses.• Metrics and Measuring Tools.• Synthesis on Use in Modes.• Regional Study Application.• Database Development and Maintenance.• Measuring and Monitoring Transportation and the Environment.