3d elevation program multiyear plan

+ 1 +

Diane Eldridge

3DEP Data Acquisition Coordinator

March 1, 2017

3D Elevation Program

Multiyear Plan

+ 2 + 2

Apply lidar technology to map bare earth surface

elevations and 3D data of natural and constructed

features

Increases the data quality level to enable more

accurate understanding, modeling, and prediction

Goal to complete acquisition of national lidar

coverage with IfSAR in Alaska in 8 years

Address the mission-critical requirements of 34

Federal agencies, 50 states, and other

organizations documented in the National

Enhanced Elevation Assessment

ROI 5:1, conservative benefits of $690 million/year

with potential to generate $13 billion/year

Leverage the capability and capacity of private

industry mapping firms

Achieve a 25% cost efficiency gain by collecting

data in larger projects

Completely refresh national elevation data holdings

with new products and services

3D Elevation Program (3DEP)

+ 3 + 3 3D Elevation Program Mission Critical Applications

Geologic Hazards

Aviation Safety

Annual Benefits

Rank Business Use Conservative Potential

1 Flood Risk Management $295M $502M

2 Infrastructure and Construction Management $206M $942M

3 Natural Resources Conservation $159M $335M

4 Agriculture and Precision Farming $122M $2,011M

5 Water Supply and Quality $85M $156M

6 Wildfire Management, Planning and Response $76M $159M

7 Geologic Resource Assessment and Hazard

Mitigation $52M $1,067M

8 Forest Resources Management $44M $62M

9 River and Stream Resource Management $38M $87M

10 Aviation Navigation and Safety $35M $56M

:

20 Land Navigation and Safety $0.2M $7,125M

Total for all Business Uses (1 – 27) $1.2B $13B

Flood Risk Management

Infrastructure

NEEA Refresh is underway in partnership with NOAA

Improve requirements and benefits based on what

users know and need today

Plan for next cycle after national coverage is achieved

– what repeat rate and QLs are needed?

+ 4 + 4

3DEP Growth Strong coordination and increasing investments (FY13-16)

6.7% of the lower 49 and territories was acquired in FY16 - 32% increase in investment and

43% increase in square miles acquired over FY15 level

3DEP data have been contracted for 26% of the entire US (lidar between FY13-16 and IfSAR

between FY10-16)

3DEP Lidar Data Acquisition Funding

(QL2 or better, all partners)

Map shows lidar from FY13 – FY16

+ 5 + 5

3DEP Funding BALLPARK Estimate of Gap Across All Partners/Total Program Includes Alaska IfSAR

Complete Acquisition in 2020

(Accelerated program)

Complete Acquisition in 2023

(8 year program)

+ 6 + 6

3DEP Governance

3DEP Executive Forum

Facilitates executive collaboration on

strategies to fund and implement 3DEP for

the benefit of all its stakeholders

Provides direction to 3DEP Working Group

3DEP Working Group

Coordinates implementation of 3DEP

Agency 3DEP WG

Primary Member

Bureau of Land Management Brian Hadley

Department of Homeland Security Scott McAfee

Department of Transportation Michael Traffalis

Environmental Protection Agency TBD

Federal Aviation Administration Joseph Jackson

Federal Communications

Commission Donald Campbell

Federal Emergency Management

Agency Paul Rooney

US Forest Service Everett Hinkley

US Fish and Wildlife Service Kenneth Elsner

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration Kirk Waters

National Park Service

Natural Resources Conservation

Service Steven Nechero

Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement Kamiliah Pendleton

US Department of Agriculture Brian Vanderbilt

US Army Corps of Engineers Nancy Blyler

US Geological Survey Diane Eldridge

American Association of State

Geologists Harvey Thorliefson

National States Geographic

Information Council Phil Worrall

+ 7 + 7

3DEP National Multiyear Plan Background

■ 3DEP Executive Forum tasked the 3DEP

Working Group to develop plan to:

■ Move from an annual, opportunistic process

to a unified multi-year plan

■ Move from patchwork irregular acquisition

footprints to a defined planning and delivery

unit

■ Implement a phased approach beginning in

FY18

■ Benefits

Facilitate greater investments and leveraging

through longer planning lead times

Defined units facilitate planning and

understanding costs, allow for improved

reporting and justification of investments

Presents a plan for nationwide coverage

Move from this…

…to something more like this

+ 8 + 8

3DEP National Multiyear Plan 3DEP Working Group Goals

■ Identify and document plans of Federal agencies to acquire 3DEP data,

distinguishing between funding plans vs. areas of interest

■ FY18 – collect Federal plans, initially for 2 years; not all agencies are

positioned to participate, but a few key agencies have agreed to do so

■ Outyears – work towards planning for national coverage over multiple years

■ Develop a cost share model for Federal investments

■ Determine Federal investments on a state-by-state basis

■ Overall concept is 2/3 Federal and 1/3 state funding across the nation, but

ratios will vary depending on presence of Federal lands and other Federal

data needs in each state

■ National Plan made up of 50+ State Plans - Work with States and other non-

Federal partners to develop joint state-based plans to leverage Federal and non-

Federal funds to complete national coverage

■ Manage the collective plans and program information on the GeoPlatform and

Elevation Community pages

+ 9 + 9

3DEP National Multiyear Plan Costshare considerations

■ Amount of Federal land – for example, land management agencies provide 50%

and USGS 50% of costs

■ Amount of private agricultural land – guides NRCS investment

■ Amount of high, moderate and low risk areas – guides FEMA investment

■ Under discussion

■ How to include other Federal agencies

■ How to use USGS funding to fill in gaps

■ Hitting the right balance, keeping non-fed share fair/justifiable

Theoretical

scenario -Percent costshare

of each partner –

Does not take

existing data/

projects into

account

+ 10 + 10

Current Funding Split

On the whole, within range of 2/3 Federal 1/3 Non-Federal costshare

Investments split between BAA (fair and equitable competitive process

for non-Federal partners to receive Federal support) and other

partnerships (mostly Fed-to-Fed)

Multiyear state plans will help unite BAA and other partnerships into a

unified approach

FY16

USGS FEMA NRCS Other Feds Non-Fed

Broad Agency

Announcement 24% 7% 23% 3% 43%

Other

Partnerships 11% 49% 26% 3% 11%

Lidar Subtotal 18% 27% 24% 3%

29% 71%

IfSAR 61% 0% 4% 19% 17%

Total 24% 23% 21% 5%

27% 73%

+ 11 + 11

3DEP National Multiyear Plan

Lidar costs are dynamic – good news is that costs are going down!

New technologies like geiger mode and single photon lidar will change the

cost structure – but we don’t yet know the full lifecycle costs including

processing and storage

3DEP keeps tabs on costs and seeks continual improvement

Average cost per square is calculated and reported in the 3DEP annual report –

based on both GPSC and cooperative projects

We need to validate data from vendors proposing significantly lower costs or new

technologies – consistent quality is critical to national coverage

Goal is to use new tiling scheme to develop multiple terrain-based cost estimates

to replace the national average – to help cost planning

Cost Planning Considerations

+ 12 + 12


■ Recommendation is to use an adapted version of the

“Albers1kTiles” schema (1 km x 1 km tiles)

■ Benefits

■ 1 square km is small enough to approximate watersheds, county

and state boundaries, etc., without adding excessive area to

projects

■ Tile sizes are equal in area no matter their location in latitude or

longitude

■ Avoids slivers and unnecessary overlap between projects and

more orderly approach to nationwide coverage

■ Recommendation and next steps will be discussed at the 8

PM session – please join the conversation!

Recommended National Tiling Scheme

+ 13 + 13


■ Potential mechanisms

■ 3DEP State Plan Task Force

■ Existing elevation committees

■ Coordination with update to NEEA requirements and benefits

■ Goal to be public and inclusive

■ Public meetings sponsored by NSGIC/the State and USGS via the liaison

■ National webinars to provide information to all stakeholders

■ Work with AASG as the other state group in the 3DEP WG

■ Other options

■ Potential project with NSGIC

■ Jointly develop template(s) for state plans

■ Support for states to participate in developing plans

■ Develop and implement pilot state projects

■ Help to identify authoritative POC/champion for NEEA update

Developing Collaborative State Plans

+ 14 + 14

Multiyear Plan Implementation

Timeframes depend on how processes mature and resources are put in

place to move towards nationwide coverage

Phased approach

Opportunistic Transitional Fully Systematic

FY16/17 funding level Increased funding Reach full funding

Federal AOIs do not

distinguish areas to be funded

Federal plans distinguish areas

to be funded for a few key

agencies

Federal plans distinguish areas

to be funded for all agencies

Custom/irregular projects Start to use tiling scheme Full use of tiling scheme

Costshare determined on

case-by case basis

Start to change to a more

predictable cost model

Standard cost model in full use

BAA and Fed-only investments

are independent

State plans incorporating both

Federal and non-Federal

inputs begin to be piloted

State plans fully drive joint

investments

Fully Systematic FY21? - on

Opportunistic Approach FY15 - 17

Transitional State FY18 - 20?

+ 15 + 15

3DEP

■ FY15 annual report; new infrastructure, landslides, agriculture

and other factsheets available at

https://nationalmap.gov/3dep/3dep_pubs.html

■State factsheets available at

https://nationalmap.gov/3dep/3dep_statefactsheets.html

Resources







+ 16

Thank you!

+ + 17


■ Future 3DEP collections should be planned using an adapted version of the

“Albers1kTiles” schema

■ Albers Equal Area projection (EPSG:6350), XYZ units in meters

■ Each tile is 1 square km in area

■ A standard national tiling naming convention that represents the XY location for

each tile, for ease of searching

■ Tiles can be grouped or block nested by various attributes (counties/states/HUCs),

but each tile should be part of one and only one group (1:1 relationship)

■ Benefits

■ 1 square km is small enough to approximate watersheds, county and state

boundaries, etc., without adding a lot of area to projects

■ Tile sizes are equal in area no matter their location in latitude or longitude

■ Avoids slivers and unnecessary overlap between projects and more orderly approach

to nationwide coverage

Recommended National Tiling Scheme

+ + 18


■ A minimum number and acceptable configurations of tiles needs to be determined to

avoid “tile slivers” between projects and inefficient project boundaries

■ A nested block tiling scheme/naming convention needs to be built around “TileID”, so

that tiles can be grouped together for larger-area acquisition purposes

■ A “State” field for each 1k x 1k tile, grouping tiles into states

■ A “County” field for each 1k x1k tile, grouping tiles into counties

■ A “HUC_12” field for each 1k x1k tile, grouping tiles into HUCs

■ Each tile should have one and only one State/HUC/County ID, by majority intersection

■ U.S. islands and territories - Establish a 1k x 1k tiling scheme; each can be an

independent group of tiles and does not need to be in Albers Equal Area, but

whatever equal area projection makes the most sense for each island

■ Categorize tiles into terrain types to develop multiple cost estimates to replace the

nationwide average cost estimate

Recommended National Tiling Scheme – NEXT STEPS

3d elevation program multiyear plan

Documents