Mr. McDonald will testify on H.R. 1399, a bill to reauthorize the Hydrographic Services Improvement (HSIA) Act of 1998, sponsored by Rep. Don Young (R-AK). HSIA authorizes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to acquire hydrographic data, provide hydrographic services, conduct coastal change analyses necessary to ensure safe navigation along the coastal areas of the United States, and improve the management of coastal change in the Arctic. The legislation also directs the Comptroller General (GAO) to compare the cost of NOAA conducting hydrographic surveys compared to contracting with the private sector. 

In relation to H.R. 1399, Mr. McDonald will discuss the Digital Coast Act, H.R. 1382.  

The hearing will take place at 10:00 AM (EDT) in Room 1324 of the Longworth House Office Building on Capitol Hill and will be webcast live on the Committee's website. 

Want to learn more? MAPPS will hold more in-depth sessions on UAV regulations and sensors for surveying and mapping, as well as a session on privacy during the MAPPS Summer Conference to be held July 22-26, 2013 in Rockport, Maine. Register today to attend!

Is your firm not yet a member of MAPPS?

MAPPS is offering a special membership promotion for firms that are not current members. The association invites principals of firms to attend the Summer Conference at the non-member rate. If the firm joins MAPPS prior to the end of the conference on July 26, 2013, the firm will be credited with the difference between the member and non-member rate. That is a 56% savings. The reimbursement will be credited toward the firm's 2013 membership dues in MAPPS. Register today!

A look at the tax law affecting the entire family of 501(c) organizations is in order, to include IRS oversight and enforcement of commercial activities of nonprofit organizations and UBIT, as well as how the IRS is lax in enforcing the law to prevent unfair nonprofit competition with private enterprise.

Recently, the Exempt Organizations Division of the IRS, the very office now the subject of several investigations, conducted a Colleges and Universities Compliance Project, which looked at the UBIT payments (or lack thereof) of colleges and universities. The April 25, 2013 IRS Report, according to a news article, "found increases to unrelated business taxable income for 90 percent of the colleges and universities examined, totaling about $90 million. There were over 180 changes to the amounts of unrelated business taxable income reported by colleges and universities on Form 990-T; and disallowance of more than $170 million in losses and net operating losses that could amount to more than $60 million in assessed taxes."

As Accuracy in Academia has reported, at the same time the IRS Exempt Organizations Division was targeting conservative groups, it was being lax on universities engaging in commercial activities without paying UBIT on revenue from such activities, in unfair competition with private sector, tax-paying companies.

The underlying difficulty of tax fairness among exempt organizations and nonprofits is deeper and more longstanding. Gilbert M. Gaul and Neill A. Borowski of The Philadelphia Inquirer won a Pulitzer Prize for their investigation that identified rampant abuses of America's nonprofit tax laws. Many of the issues raised in this series are still evident today.

A 1980 report by the Small Business Administration also singled out universities as a major source of tax dollar-supported unfair competition with private companies, particularly small firms -- "Unfair Competition by Nonprofit Organizations With Small Business: An Issue for the 1980s” (June, 1984). SBA offered testimony, when requested by the House and Senate Small Business Committees in 1988 and 1996 and conducted some research on non-profit competition in 1999. 

Many MAPPS member firms encounter unfair competition from universities. Look, for example, here, here or here, to see just a sampling. We’ve held sessions at MAPPS meetings on university competition.

The 1995 White House Conference on Small Business made this a priority issue when its plank read, "Congress should enact legislation that would prohibit government agencies and tax exempt and anti-trust exempt organizations from engaging in commercial activities in direct competition with small businesses.” That was among the top 15 vote-getters at the 1995 Conference and was number one among all the procurement-related issues in the final balloting.

An entire book has been written on this issue, Unfair Competition: The Profits of Nonprofits, James T. Bennett, Thomas H. DiLorenzo, Hamilton Press, 1989. 

The Ways and Means Committee last held extensive hearings on this problem in 1987 and had GAO conduct an investigation. The Small Business Committee has also held hearings, but that was back in 1996.

I testified before the House Ways and Means Committee in February and later participated in a Roundtable hosted by Rep. Reichert and Rep. Lewis, who make up the House Ways and Means Committee Special Panel on Tax-Exempt Organizations.

To help Congress address this issue in more detail, focused on university competition with geospatial firms, please submit your examples of university competition to John "JB" Byrd, MAPPS Government Affairs Manager.

Despite being a long time participant in policy issues, such as Congressman Doug Lamborn’s legislation, the "Map It Once, Use It Many Times” Act, H.R. 1604, MAPPS has been the subject of recent criticism that has been based largely on myth. Let’s look some facts regarding Rep. Lamborn’s legislation.

Myth: MAPPS is leading a private sector takeover of Federal mapping activities in the United States.

In fact, MAPPS’s support for greater utilization of the private sector in Federal mapping is based on decades of independent studies and recommendations … including many by the government itself.

As long ago as 1932, a committee of the House of Representatives expressed concern over the extent to which the government engaged in activities which might be more appropriately performed by the private sector. Among the activities identified as engaged in government competition with the private sector was mapping. Each time a study has been conducted on the Federal surveying and mapping ("geospatial”) establishment, a common conclusion has been reached. Whether conducted by the White House, Congress, the agencies themselves, OMB or independent Federal research organizations, these studies recommended more contracting in this field. The following are excerpts from these studies:

private cartographic contract capability is not being used sufficiently. We found this capacity to be broad and varied and capable of rendering skilled support ... Contract capability is a viable management alternative ... Its use should be encouraged in lieu of continued in-house build-up

Office of Management and Budget

Task Force on Mapping, Charting, Geodesy and Surveying, 1973

The Investigative Staff recognizes...contract surveys...it is essential that this option be explored more fully...early consideration must be given to the use of qualified private contractors

House Appropriations Committee

Investigative Staff

Study of BLM and Forest Service Cadastral Survey Programs, 1980

commercial resources offer time-proven expertise and professionalism in a wide range of cartographic activities.

National Academy of Sciences

Study on NOAA's Office of Charting and Geodetic Services, 1985

The private sector can play an important role in providing BLM with the massive amounts of data it requires for its three LIS (land information systems) components. BLM can avoid investing in necessary labor and technology by drawing on the capabilities of the private sector for the data gathering phase

Bureau of Land Management

"Managing our Land Information Resources", 1989

(contracting) is an important management tool to raise productivity, cut costs and improve the quality of Government services (the advantage of which is) efficiency, quality and innovation in the delivery of goods and services ... specific areas where the Government could place greater reliance on private sector providers include ... map-making activities

Budget of the United States Government, FY 1990

Office of Management and Budget, January, 1989

(USGS should be) allocating adequate NMD resources to information management and user/donor coordination, and if necessary, increasing these relative to traditional data production programs

National Academy of Sciences

"Spatial Data Needs", February, 1990

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will experiment with a program of public-private competition to help fulfill its mission ... The experience of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which contracts out 30 to 40 percent of its ocean floor charting to private firms, shows that the private sector can and will do this kind of work.

Office of the Vice President

"Creating A Government That Works Better & Costs Less"

Report of the National Performance Review, September, 1993

Thirty-nine federal departments, agencies and bureaus, including the U.S. Geological Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Army Corps of Engineers, Defense Mapping Agency and National Mapping Division of the Department of the Interior, employ 7,000 workers and spend approximately $1 billion in surveying and mapmaking. Mapmaking is a service that is readily available from private industry at competitive costs. All government mapmaking activities should be opened to bids from private-sector suppliers.

Heritage Foundation

"Cutting the Deficit and Improving Services by Contracting Out", March, 1995

"During the course of our hearings, it became abundantly clear that there are certain activities that the Federal government has performed in-house which can and should be converted to the private sector. Areas such as architecture and engineering, surveying and mapping, laboratory testing, information technology, and laundry services have no place in government. These activities should be promptly transitioned to the private sector.”

Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY)

Debate in Senate on his legislation that became the FAIR Act,

Congressional Record, July 27, 1998

Direct that US commercial satellite imagery be the primary source of data used for government mapping … facilitate the acquisition of commercial imagery for other Federal agencies … expand the market for the imagery.

Memo from Director, CIA to Director, National Imagery and Mapping Agency (now National Geospatial – Intelligence Agency)

Central Intelligence Agency, 2002

The fundamental goal of U.S. commercial remote sensing space policy is to advance and protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by maintaining the nation's leadership in remote sensing space activities, and by sustaining and enhancing the U.S. remote sensing industry. Doing so will also foster economic growth, contribute to environmental stewardship, and enable scientific and technological excellence. In support of this goal, the U.S. Government will: Rely to the maximum practical extent on U.S. commercial remote sensing space capabilities for filling imagery and geospatial needs for military, intelligence, foreign policy, homeland security, and civil users;

White House

"Commercial Remote Sensing Space Policy”, May, 2003

The roles and responsibilities of decision-makers must evolve if we are to leverage geospatial information and tools to our best advantage. This entails building and maintaining different relationships and enabling new and creative ways to do business. To accomplish this:

The role of government should shift from implementer to facilitator/enabler and role model, allowing agencies to become more flexible and responsive.

Different relationships should be established, both horizontally across functions and vertically across levels of government and the private sector, to ensure that resources are used most effectively.

The committee concluded that to respond to a world in which data and technology are evolving more rapidly that the institutions that use them, a new model for development and use of geospatial information by the transportation system is needed...The actions necessary to make widespread use of geospatial data in a systematic way could be achieved through a focused alliance and collaboration among public, private, and academic communities. A key is in recognizing that the role of federal agencies is to enable state and local agencies and the private sector to carry out their missions. A practical role, rather than to mandate data requirements, would be to solicit data from data owners and providers and to encourage data sharing among agencies, users, and decision makers.

The past decade has shown that it is impractical for federal and state transportation agencies to collect, maintain, and develop comprehensive geospatial data sets to support broad decision-making activities. A more viable approach appears to be to encourage agencies -- public or private -- that are closest to the source to collect and maintain data necessary for their missions and to facilitate sharing of these data while developing expertise to integrate them into broader decision-support environments."

Transportation Research Board (TRB)

"Geospatial Information Infrastructure for Transportation Organizations: Toward a Foundation for Improved Decision Making", 2004

"Historically, state DoT’s have used Federal highway money, as well as their transportation funds, to build in-house capabilities in surveying, mapping, engineering and planning … states have their own crews, equipment and capabilities that duplicate services available from private firms. States often have airplanes and cameras for mapping aerial photography, analytical stereoplotters (mapping computers), GPS satellite surveying receivers, LIDAR systems, photographic laboratories and other expensive equipment to perform services already available, from private firms. Some state DOT's even market these services outside their own agency, performing work for other state agencies, city and county government, even non-government organizations, in direct competition with the private sector.”

Reason Foundation

"Building Highways or Bureaucracies?”, 2004

Myth: MAPPS member firms profit from inefficiency, redundancy and lack of coordination through a business model of "Capture it Once, And Sell It To As Many Difference Agencies as Possible".

This charge shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how Federal contracting operates. Historically, when a government agency has contracted for mapping and geospatial data, it has done so on a "fee for service" basis. Any agency enters into a contract with a private sector firm, the firm collects and processes the data, and the data, developed to the agency’s standards and specifications, is delivered to the agency with all rights, including the right of ownership. The agency puts the data in the public domain for access and utilization by other agencies, and the general public.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found "federal agencies had not effectively implemented policies and procedures that would help them to identify and coordinate geospatial data acquisitions across the government. As a result, the agencies make duplicative investments and risk missing opportunities to jointly acquire data.” This duplication is not only from agency-to-agency, but there is government duplication of the private sector. When a government agency starts, or carries out, an activity that is already available from the private sector, is that duplication any less wasteful than when agency A duplicates agency B? Indeed, Federal agencies are required to comply with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-16, which requires that agencies, "search all sources, including the National Spatial Data Clearinghouse, to determine if existing federal, state, local or private data meets agency needs before expending funds for data collection” (emphasis added).

Myth: MAPPS now wants to charge citizens for data that has historically been free, through a new tax or user fee.

The idea of a user fee to finance government’s need for geospatial data is neither new nor original to MAPPS. The concept was suggested in a National Academy of Sciences report, Beyond Mapping: Meeting National Needs Through Enhanced Geographic Information Science(2006) and was previously proffered by the now-defunct Spatial Technologies Industry Association (STIA) and discussed in the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) more than a decade ago.

It is no secret that MAPPS has a task force that is studying the idea of a user fee to finance. Articles have been published and presentations have been made to groups throughout the community. It has been an open and inviting process. The Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO), representing every major association in the field, has agreed to engage in a dialogue on the concept. MAPPS has not concluded that any proposed user fee would be assessed on data. Moreover, H.R. 1604 does not establish or assess such a fee; it only authorizes a study of the user fee concept. If one does not believe a new and more effective way to raise money for basic government framework data is needed, then one must be satisfied that nearly 20 years after President Clinton issued an Executive Order calling for a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), the nation now has robust, current, accurate, accessible, interoperable, and complete geodetic control, cadastral, orthoimagery, elevation, hydrography , administrative unit, and transportation data.

Myth: H.R. 1604 will gut the Federal mapping workforce

The legislation sets forth an important set of inherently governmental functions for Federal employees in government agencies and calls for an evaluation of the respective roles and responsibilities Federal, State, local, regional, tribal, private sector, academic, and nonprofit institutions in geospatial activities. The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) has long advocated attention to roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders, players, and sectors in building the NSDI. Such a definition was also called for by the National Academy of Public Administration in its report, Geographic Information for the 21st Century: Building a Strategy for the Nation(1998). As detailed above, increased use of the private sector and better definition of the role of government in mapping and geospatial activities has long been recommended in government studies.

Myth: Universities only create their own cartography labs to create the campus map

Scores of universities have become "entrepreneurial” and created entities that actually market their services outside the university itself, in direct competition with the private sector. This is not a small or recent problem. University competition with private enterprise has recently been the subject of an IRS investigation and a Congressional hearing. Want proof of university competition with the private sector? Look, for example, here, here or here, to see just a sampling.

Myth: Google, Microsoft, Apple and even Amazon are making sizable investments in spatial data, therefore if you are a true believe in free market capitalism, the government doesn’t need to be involved

Ever look at the data in many of these firms’ archives or platforms? Their data source is commonly the Federal government. Congress found "there are millions of sq km of ortho imagery and terrain published to Google Earth and Maps that has been contributed to Google through partnerships with local, state, and federal programs. These include: USDA-FSA (NAIP), USGS/EROS (DOQQs, current and historical aerial imagery, historical satellite imagery, terrain), and the National Archives … the largest single source of sub-meter aerial coverage that Google has is the direct result of USGS partnerships with state, regional, and local governments for aerial collections.”

Teddy Roosevelt once said, "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

MAPPS has always been in the arena. Whether one agrees with policies MAPPS supports, such as Congressman Doug Lamborn’s legislation, the "Map It Once, Use It Many Times” Act, H.R. 1604, or not, MAPPS puts forward proposed solutions. Others fail to do so, resorting only to critiques of MAPPS and being "cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat”.

Content Management Regions A, B and C – Apr 2013

Aeronautical Charts Production and Text Production – May 2013

Maritime Content Management, Atlantic and Pacific Regions – May 2013

Commercial Airborne – June 2013

Land Use/Land Cover – July 2013

Global Ortho Image Services – July 2013

 

Firms should monitor FedBizOppos for official updates. 

Questions should be directed to the Contracting Officer, Ms. Susan Pollmann at (314) 676-0174, unclassified email at Susan.Pollmann.GDS@nga.mil.

That is a frequently asked question. 

The federal law was codified in 1972 ("Brooks Act”, 40 U.S.C. 1101 et. seq. and implemented in part 36.6 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), 48 CFR 36.6) to protect the interest of taxpayers. It is federal law because over the life of a project, the engineering and related design services account for less than one-half of one percent of total costs. Yet, these important services play a major role in determining the other 99.5 percent of the project's "life cycle costs”, such as construction, operation, and maintenance.

While many services performed under the Brooks Act are not related to construction, such as surveying and mapping activities that support resource management, program administration, E-911 and a variety of other non-design or construction projects and applications, the savings are nonetheless realized.

The process has been so successful at the federal level that it is recommended by the American Bar Association in its model procurement code for state and local government. Some 47 states have enacted their own competence and qualifications based selection laws for architecture, engineering, surveying and mapping services. Others use it as standard procedure. No state has a specific law requiring bidding of these services.

The rationale for Congress codifying a practice that had been successful for more than 100 years before Congress passed, and President Nixon signed the Brooks Act on a bipartisan basis in 1972 was quality, public safety, and cost-effectiveness.

QBS was recognized as a competitive process in the landmark Competition in Contracting Act (P.L. 98-369) which Congress enacted in 1984 in response to the coffee pot and toilet seat scandal in the Pentagon. During an earlier Senate debate on the federal A/E selection law, Senator Gurney of Florida said, "any Federal procurement officer...will tell you that competition based on professional-technical qualifications is every bit as hot and demanding as competition based on price, perhaps more so.” 

Government contracting officers, who are accustomed to buying specific products, rather than professional services, gravitate to low bids. As Senator Henry "Scoop” Jackson of Washington State said on the floor of the U.S. Senate during debate on the federal QBS law, a "contracting officer faced with widely ranging price proposals or bids would be under pressure to accept the low price.”

Among the studies which have concluded that QBS in fact has saved tax dollars include An Analysis of Issues Pertaining to Qualifications Based Selection by Paul S. Chinowsky, PhD (University of Colorado) and Gordon A. Kinsley, PhD (Georgia Tech). It found that government agencies that use qualifications-based selection are better able to control construction costs and achieve a consistently high degree of project satisfaction than those using price based procurement methods.

The study drew from a database of approximately 200 public and private construction projects in 23 US states, included transportation, water, commercial, and industrial projects, ranging in size from relatively small projects to those costing hundreds of millions dollars. Its authors compared various procurement methods, including QBS, Best Value, and Low-Bid, with such factors as total project cost, projected life-cycle cost, construction schedule, and project quality outcome. Results showed that using QBS to procure the design component of a construction project "consistently meant lower overall construction costs, reduced change orders, better project results and more highly satisfied owners than in other procurement methods.”

The authors, both experts and noted researchers in the engineering and construction field, concluded that QBS should continue to be the procurement method of choice for public contracting officers seeking to acquire A/E services to meet increasingly challenging infrastructure needs.

A specific study comparing costs between agencies that use QBS and those that select on price also found that the QBS process saves money. Selecting Architects and Engineers for Public Building Projects: An Analysis and Comparison of the Maryland and Florida Systems compared projects in Florida, which used QBS, with those in Maryland, which for a period of time employed price competition. The comparative study found Maryland’s A/E selection process was significantly more time consuming and expensive than Florida’s. In Maryland, the necessity of preparing detailed programs on which A/Es can base price proposals results in added expense to the state in the form of administrative staff, time delays and consultant costs, and overall budget. The increased administrative costs in Maryland resulted from the necessity of preparing detailed programs on which A/Es can submit price proposals. These additional system costs were not evident in Florida. While A/E fees were lower in Maryland than in Florida, the added costs of the Maryland process far outweighed the savings in A/E fees that resulted from a process in which the state developed detailed programs and A/E selections were made with price as an initial factor.

Since Maryland’s law requiring selection based on price went into effect, there was an 11.6 percent increase in personnel and a 17.9 percent increase in the budget (in constant dollars) for construction projects.

Maryland’s A/E selection process took considerably longer to complete than Florida’s. The total delay relating to the A/E portion of the capital construction process in Maryland was almost 10 months. The delays occurred while detailed program descriptions were being prepared, during the actual selection process and during the design and approval phase. The Maryland Department of General Services completed the A/E portion of the capital construction process, from the point that funds are approved to the beginning of the actual construction cycle, in 31 months. The same steps are completed, on average, in 21 months in Florida agencies.

The study concluded that Maryland’s A/E selection process was significantly more time consuming and expensive than Florida’s. In Maryland, the necessity of preparing detailed programs on which A/Es can base price proposals results in added expense to the state in the form of administrative staff, time delays and consultant costs.

As a result, the Maryland legislature repealed its bidding law and enacted a state "mini-Brooks Act” or QBS statute.

The United States is fortunate that major building failures are rare. After incidents such as the collapse of the Hyatt Regency in Kansas City (MO) and the implosion of the roof of the Hartford (CT) Civic Center, Congress investigated these incidents and issued a report on "Structural Failures in Public Facilities” in 1984. It found, "procurement practices that lead to or promote the selection of architects and engineers on a low bid basis should be changed to require prequalification of bidders with greater consideration given to prior related experience and past performance.” The chairman of the subcommittee conducting the study and publishing the report was then Rep. Al Gore, Jr. (D-TN).

No study making an "apples to apples” comparison of bidding versus qualifications selection has ever been conducted on surveying, mapping or geospatial services. However, numerous agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report high satisfaction with the process.

The simple answer is yes, QBS saves money. The famous showman, P.T. Barnum is well known for saying, "There’s a sucker born every minute”. What is less known is that Barnum also observed, "The smartest way of deriving the greatest profit in the long run is to give people as much as possible for their money.”?

The Council on Federal Procurement of Architectural and Engineering Services (COFPAES), of which MAPPS is a member, will host a workshop on successful implementation of the qualifications based selection (QBS) process for procurement of professional A-E and related services on Tuesday, May 14 in Washington, DC.

The workshop is designed for Federal, state and local government personnel responsible for contracting for professional A-E services, including surveying and mapping, as well as private practice professionals and firm personnel involved in marketing, business development, and contract administration. Click here to learn more.

3D, terrestrial scanning and mobile mapping markets play an important role in the surveying, spatial data and geographic information systems field in the United States. The commercial focus of SPAR International is particularly aligned with the objectives of MAPPS, which is to promote the business interests of the profession.

On Monday, April 15, the Colorado chapter of MAPPS (CO-MAPPS) held a meeting at the conference featuring Jorge Diaz, Program Administrator, Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade and Danielle Blakely, Sr. International Trade Specialist with the U.S. Department of Commerce Export Assistance Center of Denver who discussed opportunities in the international market and resources within the state of Colorado for businesses, including grants and financial assistance, to assist firms with exporting. The session was a prequel to the MAPPS International Markets Conferenceto be held November 13-14 in Alexandria, VA.

I made a presentation on Wednesday, April 17, on the "Opportunities and Threats" facing the 3D marketplace. I provided an overview on the new demand for surveying and mapping as a result of the MAP-21 Act enacted into law in July 2012 and an update on the anticipated demand for LIDAR in the United States as a result of the proposed US Geological Survey’s 3D Elevation Program (3DEP). I also highlighted legislative hurdles facing the profession using new technologies such as unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

Two weeks ago, Idaho became the second state to have legislation signed by the governor affecting the use of unmanned aerial system. The new law, which will take affect July 1, includes an exemption for the use of UAVs "in mapping or resource management.” This is a signification exemption for the surveying and mapping community with the recognition by the legislature for the use of the technology.

As the association of the leading firms in airborne, terrestrial, mobile and bathymetric scanning market, MAPPS has been in the forefront of advocacy of this technology, use of the private sector in the collection, processing and value-added application of 3D data, and qualifications based selection for those services. SPAR International is an event that features the latest developments in the technologies and capabilities the private sector can provide to the market.

SPAR Point Group, conference organizer of SPAR, announced on April 10 that it acquired International LiDAR Mapping Forum (ILMF) and European LiDAR Mapping Forum (ELMF) from UK-based Intelligent Exhibitions.

This is the third time that MAPPS has partnered with SPAR International. MAPPS had a booth in the exhibit hall to meet with members, prospects and members of the user community.

Status of UAV Legislation at the State level in the U.S. as of April 18, 2013. Source ACLU.

"We commend President Obama and his administration for their recognition of the importance of elevation data for the Nation and the proposed investment in geospatial activities that can save tax payers dollars by accurately mapping the nation with modern technology,” said John Palatiello, MAPPS Executive Director. "In light of the recent GAO report calling for a reduction in duplication of mapping activities, the 3-D Elevation Program (3DEP) is an example of a program that can achieve this goal by leveraging various agency investments and contracting with the private sector to reduce government duplication of and unfair competition with the private sector. Through the leadership of USGS, the 3DEP program is also reducing duplication within the government by bringing agency stakeholders together to ‘map it once and use it many times’ through the coordination of mapping data needs.”

The USGS will use the Geospatial Products and Services Contract (GPSC) as the acquisition vehicle for the collection of LIDAR and IFSAR data for the 3DEP program. USGS is working with states and other federal agencies to increase the area in which data is collected and to reduce duplication.

3DEP is highlighted within the "Natural Hazards” program with the Department of the Interior Budget for USGS (page 56) and includes $9.0 million for the 3DEP program for the collection LIDAR, $1.0 million for IFSAR data collection and mapping in Alaska and an estimated $850,000 for the collection of priority ecosystem assessments, which will consist of LIDAR acquisition.

This is only the President’s proposed budget. To be fully funded, 3DEP and other programs within the President’s budget will need to receive appropriations from Congress. MAPPS will continue to work with Congress and advocate the value that is realized by government agencies and the citizens of the United States by investing in geospatial technologies and utilizing the capabilities and services provided by the private sector.

"The Government Accountability Office should be commended for its investigation into duplication among Federal agencies and its particular attention to geospatial activities. MAPPS looks forward to working with Congress, GAO and the agencies on reform initiatives.

To put this issue in perspective, I would like to read a passage to you and ask if this sounds familiar:

‘The last major study of Federal surveying and mapping nearly 40 years ago found a disturbing proliferation and duplication of activity among many different agencies. Today these activities are found among an even greater number, suggesting that over the years the conventional budgetary process alone could not constrain the growth of surveying and mapping outside the core agencies, which apparently were not getting the job done. Now a new generation of problems — urban sprawl, pollution, energy crisis — are
creating additional pressures which threaten even further lag in services and diffusion of effort. This can be corrected by improving efficiency through new technology and by centralizing management, which together offer the key to a better ratio of expenditure to service.’

That is not from the 2013 GAO report, but from a 1973 OMB Report. We've had a problem with duplication in Federal mapping for 80 years, and it hasn’t been fixed.

Not only is there duplication from one agency to another, but the government duplicates and competes with the private sector.

I’m quoting again from the 1973 OMB report:

‘Private cartographic contract capability is not being used sufficiently. We found this capacity to be broad and varied and capable of rendering skilled support to Federal MC&G (mapping, charting and geodesy) programs. Contract capability is a viable management alternative, and using it would be consistent with the President's desire to limit the size of the Federal payroll.’

Again that’s not 2013, its 1973. The President mentioned is not Obama, or Bush, or Clinton or Reagan, but Nixon. The private sector in mapping is even more qualified and capable than it was 40 years ago.

The problem is not that we’re not spending enough on mapping, the problem is we’re not spending smart enough. Among our Federal employees, there are good people stuck in a bad system.

The economy of the United States can grow, jobs can be created, and the Federal debt can be lowered through better mapping and geospatial data of our Nation. A better structure and new systems must be implemented to eliminate duplication among agencies, as well as eliminate government competition with and duplication of the private sector.

Programs such as the "Digital Coast” activity in NOAA, "Data Acquisition as a Service” being developed by the Federal Geographic Data Committee, the "3DEP” or "Three-Dimensional Elevation Program” being launched by the USGS, are great first steps toward better coordination and effective utilization of the private sector.

Legislation such as the Map It Once, Use It Many Times Act by Representative Doug Lamborn of Colorado, and the Digital Coast Act by Representative Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland and Representative Don Young of Alaska, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform or FLAIR Act, by Representatives Ron Kind of Wisconsin and Rob Bishop of Utah, as well as by Senators Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee of Utah are serious and meaningful legislative proposals to reform Federal mapping activities.

Congress also bears some responsibility for the fact that scores of Federal agencies have mapping and geospatial activities in stove-pipe or silos. Responsibility for oversight and authorization of Federal geospatial activities is spread among more than 30 House and Senate committees and subcommittees.

Change is long overdue. MAPPS commends GAO for highlighting this problem and we stand ready to help Congress, GAO and the Obama Administration with effective solutions that benefit our Nation.

Note:

Previous GAO studies on mapping or "geospatial" duplication:

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-94

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-703

Comprehensive OMB Task Force report, 1973.

http://archive.org/details/FederalMapping00n

The Salary Survey is Coming...The Salary Survey is Coming!


Clip art licensed from the Clip Art Gallery on DiscoverySchool.com

MAPPS is once again conducting its Salary and Non-Cash Benefits Survey. This is the most comprehensive compensation survey in the geospatial profession. It is the best way to benchmark your firm's wage and income with others in the community.

The salary survey is one of the most requested documents by private sector firms when submitting salary information for procurement negotiations and by Human Resource managers to benchmark the benefits to the rest of the geospatial community. MAPPS members have said that this survey is invaluable and worth the cost of membership in the association.

The survey will be web based. It will be emailed to member firms beginning April 15.

In order to have a homogenous universe, the survey will only be sent to Regular Member Firms (US service and data firms).  Associate Members (hardware and software providers, consultants and non-US firms) will not participate in the survey, but will receive a free copy of the final report.  Regular Member Firms that complete the survey form will receive a free copy of the final report.

The final report will be available for purchase by Regular Member Firms that do not participate in the survey, and to non-members at a premium price.

A presentation on the survey results will be offered at the MAPPS Summer Conference, July 22 - 26, 2013 at the Samoset Resort in Rockport, Maine.

The survey will be conducted by Compdata Surveys, an independent third party professional data collection company. Individual firm responses and data will be treated with complete confidence. No MAPPS staff or member will see any firm's information.

MAPPS Regular Member Firms are encouraged to participate in the survey. The better the response from the membership, the better the quality of the final data will be. 

Not a member of MAPPS? Join the association today! By joining, your firm is able to participate in the survey and receive a free copy of the final report.

At that time, we did a study that found that as much as 1/3 of an A/E firm's revenue was in accounts receivable at any point in time. If that point in time was the end of the firm's tax year, and the firm was legally required to use accrual accounting, then the firm would have to pay tax on income – 1/3 of its annual revenue – not yet realized, and in some cases, income that would never be realized. This was viewed as a great burden on small A/E firms.

This argument helped us save the day for A/E firms' ability to continue to use cash accounting in the 1986 tax reform bill that became law.

The Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives has released a discussion draft for 2013 Tax Reform, part of its broader effort on comprehensive tax reform that significantly lowers rates while making the tax code simpler and fairer. This draft is specifically focused on tax provisions affecting small business.

• Summary
• Press Release
• Fact Sheet
• Discussion Draft Text
• Technical Explanation

The draft proposes to continue cash accounting for certain professional service firms, but limits it to firms with gross receipts of $10 million or less.

What are your thoughts? How frequent is use of cash accounting for geospatial (or broader architecture, engineering, surveying and mapping) among firms with income over $10 million? Should the $10 million cap be raised? What should MAPPS advocate?

Let us know.

What distinguishes MAPPS for many other organizations is we make things happen.

Current legislation in the New Hampshire state legislature is a case in point. State Representative Neal Kurk (R-Weare) pre-filed a bill in December, 2012 "prohibiting images of a person’s residence to be taken from the air”.

As it turns out, that was not text from the bill, but simply a description used with the placeholder before the legislature went into session.

A number of blogs, web sites, and publications began posting stories about the bill. None included quotes from State Rep. Kurk or otherwise indicated the authors bothered to contact the lawmaker to inquire about the motivation or intent of the bill.

MAPPS did contact him and pointed out the problems a bill "prohibiting images of a person’s residence to be taken from the air” would pose for the aerial survey community, the background on the law, and the many applications of aerial imagery of residences provide to the health, welfare and safety of the good people of New Hampshire. Rep. Kurk immediately replied by email, indicated the bill had not yet been written, and that the issues raised by MAPPS would be addressed.

When the bill was introduced, HB619, I called Rep. Kurk to discuss continuing MAPPS concerns on the impact on private sector airborne surveys. We had a mutually beneficial 40-minute conversation. I provided information about which he was unaware, and he informed me of the specific concerns he was attempting to address – specifically invasive privacy intrusions and unwarranted governmental and law enforcement searches, particularly using a unmanned aerial vehicle or "drone”. He thanked me for my interest, indicated he was writing a substitute for his own bill, said the information I provided will useful in drafting the substitute, and that he was not interested in adversely affecting the legitimate business activities of firms in the geospatial profession.

His issue, and the specific language of the bill, will be to prohibit the use of drones (UAVs) by law enforcement for surveillance or to fire a weapon. With regard to surveillance, it will only apply to (1) the inside of a building and (2) imagery wherein individual persons are recognizable/identifiable. The bill will NOT affect imagery of the outside of any home or other structure. The prohibition above can be waived if the drone/imagery is by government, WITH a warrant by a court, or by a private firm with the consent of the affected/imaged person.

It does not go after normal aerial photography or satellite imagery.

We had quite a conversation on commercial imaging satellites, the origin and content of the FAA bill passed by Congress in 2012 and currently being implemented by FAA (regarding certification of UAVs), and Federal vs state law on airspace, remote sensing satellites, and related issues.

That substitute has been filed. The substitute has been narrowed to only address drones. It no longer would affect manned helicopter or fixed wing aircraft platforms, and since it is limited to airspace over New Hampshire NOT subject to Federal regulation, it would not affect commercial remote sensing satellites.

However, the substitute still limits and prohibits UAV data acquisition. It defines government to include a contractor and it does assign criminal penalties. And while it attempts to prevent weapons on-board drones, I fear he might have defined LIDAR as a laser-type weapon! The good news is we have an open dialogue with Rep. Kurk and we can continue to work through these remaining issues.

The point is, contacting legislators, even those in states other than your own, is effective. Rather than watching things happen, or wondering what happened, MAPPS makes things happen. If a bill is passed into law in New Hampshire, it will be very different than its original intent because MAPPS got involved. The authors of blogs, web sites, and publications who wrote about the bill without contacting its sponsor did the public and its readers a disservice.

Subscribe to Spatially Speaking MAPPS members login to the MAPPS website and subscribe to the blog to get the latest alerts! Not a member? Subscribe to our RSS feed.

 

 

I was reminded of that passage when reflecting on the fact my predecessor as MAPPS President, Jeff Lovin, upon assuming office, launched an "I'm In" campaign. Stickers with pink pigs were distributed to members who volunteered to serve on a MAPPS committee. The pig was a symbol of an old joke about a bacon and eggs breakfast -- the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

It is gratifying that we have so many members of MAPPS who are committed to our profession and our association.

I am pleased to announce the appointment of two members to important positions to represent MAPPS. Susan Marlow (Smart Data Strategies, Franklin, TN), who was recently to fill a vacant position on the MAPPS Board, will also be the MAPPS Delegate to the Coalition of Geospatial Organization (COGO – www.cogo.pro). Susan has already been serving us on a COGO Data Sharing Working Group. Additionally, Kurt Allen, PLS, (Photo Science, Bowie, MD) will be the MAPPS Alternate Delegate to the Council on Federal Procurement of Architectural & Engineering Services (COFPAES – www.cofpaes.org).

In order to provide more MAPPS members a way to give back to their profession and association, I am renewing Jeff’s call. While not resurrecting pig stickers, I would like to offer members a chance to get richer by giving freely of their time and talent.

Most MAPPS committees are open to any interested member. Committees generally meet at our summer and winter meetings. Some hold conference between these meetings. All can collaborate, communicate and deliberate via committee pages on the MAPPS web site.

To become a member of a MAPPS committee, follow these simple steps:

• Login to the MAPPS website using your unique username/password
• Select the committee(s) you would like to join.
• Select Join Group
  
• Your membership in the group will be approved by a staff member.

By volunteering to serve on a MAPPS committee, you will help your profession and association by contributing some of your knowledge and expertise. In return, you will be enriched by having an opportunity to network with and learn from other professionals who share a particular interest. Committees generally plan and recommend the programs and activities of MAPPS; keep the Board of Directors of trends and issues affecting the profession, the market and the association; and recommend policies to the Board.

The following are the committees of MAPPS, and their respective charges, that are open to participation by the members --

Program Committee - plans and provides the programs for the Winter and Summer meetings of MAPPS; evaluates, organizes, and secures speakers for the technical sessions and group discussions, and works with staff to coordinate such program with the social events on the conference schedule. Mike Tully, Aerial Services, Inc., Cedar Falls, IA, Chairman.

Aerial Acquisition Committee - provides a forum for members involved in the acquisition of imagery and data from aerial platforms; identifies issues for presentation to the MAPPS Board and takes such action on issues as directed by the MAPPS Board; recommends policies to be taken by the MAPPS Board; and provides input to the Program Committee on sessions, speakers and topics to be addressed at MAPPS conferences affecting aerial photography and other data acquisition. Richard Crouse, Richard Crouse & Associates, Frederick, MD, Chairman.

Commercial Remote Sensing & Licensed Data Committee – provides a forum for members involved in the operation of commercial remote sensing satellites and those offering licensed geospatial data in the marketplace; identifies issues for presentation to the MAPPS Board and takes such action on issues as directed by the MAPPS Board; recommends policies to be taken by the MAPPS Board; and provides input to the Program Committee on sessions, speakers and topics to be addresses at MAPPS conferences affecting the practice of commercial remote sensing and offering licensed geospatial data in the marketplace. Mark Baker, Esri, Redlands, CA, Chairman.

Associate Members Committee – provides a forum for the principals of Associate Member firms in MAPPS to assure that these firms are fully integrated in the activities of MAPPS; is a vehicle for the MAPPS Board to solicit these member’s input on issues; provides input to the Program Committee on sessions, speakers and topics to be addresses at MAPPS conferences affecting Associate Members interests, and assists the Board and Membership Committee in recruiting new Associate Members to MAPPS. Don Carswell, Optech, Vaughan, ONT, Chairman.

Government & University Competition Committee – monitors activities by Federal, state and local government agencies, as well as universities, wherein such entities perform activities that are commercial in nature and unfairly compete with the private sector; recommends actions for MAPPS to police such situations; recommends legislation, policies and other remedies for consideration by the Legislative Affairs Committee and the MAPPS Board. Marvin Miller, Aerometric, Maple, Grove, MN, Chairman.

Emerging Markets & Technologies Committee – identifies new markets, technologies, and demands for geospatial services, data and technologies; assists the Program Committee with recommendations for sessions and speakers to keep the membership informed of such emerging markets; assists the Legislative Affairs Committee with recommendations for legislation or policies needed to assure that MAPPS member firms have access to these markets and to remove any barriers to entry by MAPPS member firms; develops programs and activities to facilitate MAPPS member firms ability to participate in exporting and engaging in projects outside the United States; plans MAPPS programs and activities to educate and inform MAPPS members about participating in the international market; advises the Board of actions it should take to facilitate MAPPS engagement in the markets, and recommends to the Legislative Affairs Committee and the Board such legislation and policies that may be necessary to enable MAPPS members to fully engage in exporting and international market opportunities;. Mark Brooks, Magnolia River, Huntsville, AL, Chairman.

GeoInt Committee – provides a forum for MAPPS member firms engaged in providing geospatial intelligence data, products, services and technology; acts as a liaison with the US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation on education and information programs; is a liaison to government agencies engaged in geoint activities; plans programs for MAPPS member firms; recommends to the Legislative Affairs Committee and the Board legislation and policies that may be necessary to enable MAPPS members to fully engage in the geoint market. Bart Bailey, B Cubed, LLC. , Springfield, VA, Chairman.

State Chapters Committee – leads the effort to create MAPPS state chapters based on the model originally established in Pennsylvania; assists members in states who wish to form chapters; promotes the establishment of chapters among the membership; and advises the MAPPS Board of policies MAPPS should consider to facilitate the creation and success of state chapters within the association. Gerry Wingate, GRW, Lexington, KY, Chairman, Mike Shillenn, Photo Science, West Chester, PA, Vice Chairman.

Infrastructure Committee – monitors activities by Federal, state and local government agencies related to climate change, energy, highways, underground utilities, and other aspects of infrastructure wherein there is demand for geospatial data, identifies opportunities to utilize the services and data products of MAPPS member firms, considers the need for the development and advocacy of policies or legislation to enable the full utilization of geospatial assets in energy, environment, and infrastructure; recommends actions, legislation, policies and other remedies for consideration by the Legislative Affairs Committee and the MAPPS Board, provides a forum for discussion of such issues by interested MAPPS members, and assists the Program Committee in developing sessions, speakers and programs at MAPPS conferences to address and educate the full membership on these issues. Brad Adams, Woolpert, Dallas, TX, Chairman.

Cadastre Task Force – monitors activities by Federal, state and local government agencies on issues related to parcel data, development of cadastre systems, and creation of geo-enabled land inventories; coordinates efforts in support of the proposed Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform (FLAIR) Act, recommends legislation, policies and other remedies for consideration by the Legislative Affairs Committee and the MAPPS Board. Susan Marlow, Smart Data Strategies, Franklin, TN, Chairman.

HSIA/Oceans & Coastal Task Force – monitors activities by Federal, state and local government agencies related to implementation of the Hydrographic Services Improvement Act (HSIA), and other ocean and coastal mapping, remote sensing and geospatial issues, considers the need for the development and advocacy of policies or legislation to enable the full utilization of geospatial assets in hydrographic, ocean and coastal programs and recommends actions, legislation, policies and other remedies for consideration by the Legislative Affairs Committee and the MAPPS Board, provides a forum for discussion of such issues by interested MAPPS members, and assists the Program Committee in developing sessions, speakers and programs at MAPPS conferences to address and educate the full membership on these issues. Kurt Allen, Photo Science, Bowie, MD, Chairman

Join a MAPPS committee today.

In that presentation, I challenged everyone with a homework assignment -- to read the final report of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), "Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: Recommendations For Businesses and Policymakers,".

When the FTC issued its original draft report for public comment, MAPPS responded and mobilized dozens of individuals and member firms to do the same. The membership took action to the point where an FTC official said the geospatial issue attracted more comments than any other aspect of the Commission’s draft.

The issue was that FTC proposed to protect the privacy of individual citizens’ "sensitive” data, including "precise geolocation data” that included, for example, an address. However, FTC did not define the term "precise geolocation data” and the report recommended that before any firm could collect, store, or use such data, it would be required to "provide prominent disclosures and obtain affirmative express consent before using consumer data in a materially different manner than claimed when the data was collected..."

MAPPS called compliance with requirement "impractical to the point of impossible" for geospatial firms. The proposed regulatory language threatened information that is collected by private firms and government entities to perform E-911 and emergency response management, environmental protection, homeland security, mortgage foreclosure monitoring/early warning systems, master planning, and many other tasks that are conducted by geospatial professionals.

When issuing its final report, FTC only provided a single footnote to address the geospatial community’s concerns. It said, "With respect to use of geolocation data for mapping, surveying or similar purposes, if the data cannot reasonably be linked to a specific consumer, computer, or device, a company collecting or using the data would not need to provide a consumer choice mechanism. Similarly, if a company takes reasonable measures to de-identify smart grid data and takes the other steps outlined above, the company would not be obligated to obtain consent before collecting or using the data.”

MAPPS has been working with allies, such as other geospatial associations in the Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO – www.cogo.pro) and the federal government’s Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC – www.fgdc.gov) and the National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC - www.fgdc.gov/ngac) to convince the FTC that it has not adequately addressed the geospatial community’s concerns and has established an untenable standard.

Call to Action

In its final report, the FTC urged the private sector to "accelerate the pace of its self-regulatory measures to implement the Commission’s final privacy framework. Although some companies have excellent privacy and data security practices, industry as a whole must do better.” It went on to offer the following ominous warning, "to the extent that strong privacy codes are developed, the Commission will view adherence to such codes favorably in connection with its law enforcement work. The Commission will also continue to enforce the FTC Act to take action against companies that engage in unfair or deceptive practices, including the failure to abide by self-regulatory programs they join.”

The report also said, "the Commission calls on individual companies, trade associations, and self-regulatory bodies to adopt the principles contained in the final privacy framework, to the extent they have not already done so. For its part, the FTC will focus its policy efforts on the five areas identified (in the report) … vigorously enforce existing laws, work with industry on self-regulation, and continue to target its education efforts on building awareness of existing data collection and use practices and the tools to control them.”

What should we do? Please view my presentation and the full FTC Report.

What are your suggestions for self-regulation? What should be the "privacy code” for MAPPS members? What are the "existing data collection and use practices” in the geospatial profession? Is it practical to "provide prominent disclosures and obtain affirmative express consent before using consumer data in a materially different manner than claimed when the data was collected..."?

Again, while MAPPS fights the FTC regulations, we must prepare to meet the standards the Commission has set so that if our effort to change the Commission’s view is not successful, you the members are in compliance with this federal regulatory requirement and not subject to an enforcement action by the FTC.

If you have comments and suggestions please include them below.

Subscribe to Spatially Speaking

MAPPS members login to the MAPPS website and subscribe to the blog to get the latest alerts! Not a member? Subscribe to our RSS feed.

Beginning in January 2009, MAPPS has conducted a biannual survey to gauge members’ view on the economic climate. Conduced in January and June of each year, the brief survey of member firms collects data that is more qualitative than quantitative in nature to take a snapshot of current conditions as well as determine attitudes about the coming months.

"One of the benefits of membership in MAPPS is to give members a sense of community. Rather than feeling alone in the wilderness, MAPPS member firm principals know they are part of a larger profession and organization, and that there are other principals, owners and senior executives in geospatial firms who are experiencing the same challenges. Whether it is face-to-face networking at conferences or virtual networking through the MAPPS economic survey, the association provides the peace of mind that all geospatial firms are in it together,” said MAPPS President Richard "Dick” W. McDonald, PLS.

"I encourage every member firm that is a data or service provider in the United States to participate in the survey,” McDonald said. "The more participants we have in the survey, the better the quality of results will be.”

In an economy where you are counting every dollar, it is good to know you can count on MAPPS! 

Subscribe to Spatially Speaking 

MAPPS members login to the MAPPS website and subscribe to the blog to get the latest alerts! Not a member? Subscribe to our RSS feed.

If you have not yet registered, here is the last of the Top Ten reasons.

Regular registration rates HAVE BEEN EXTENDED to January 4. Register before January 4 and SAVE. Late fees will go into effect January 5.

The conference will feature a program of first-class business, technical education, and market opportunities. You will enjoy an education program focused on markets, technologies and business practices; networking to build business-to-business relationship; and ways to better manage a surveying, mapping or geospatial company.

To ensure you receive the special MAPPS conference rate be sure to make your reservations at the Trump International Resort before January 4. Reservations cannot be guaranteed due to availability after January 4 and the hotel rate will increase! The hotel is easily accessible from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL) and Miami International Airport (MIA).

Attend the MAPPS meeting as a non-member*, if your firm joins by the end of the conference on January 31 the difference between the non-member and member rate will be credited to your firms membership! Register for the conference before December 29 and you could receive a $770 credit! Register for the conference here.

 
Attend the MAPPS meeting as a non-member*, if your firm joins by the end of the conference on January 31 the difference between the non-member and member rate will be credited to your firms membership! Register for the conference before December 29 and you could receive a $770 credit! Register for the conference here.

In lieu of flowers, a memorial fund has been established in Don's name for Saron United Church of Christ W3830 County Road J, Sheboygran Falls, WI 53085 and Sharon S. Richardson Community Hospice W2850 County Road 28, Sheboygan Falls, WI 53085.

Condolences can be sent to Marlene Mohr, 22 Point Elkhart Drive, Elkhart Lake, WI 53020.

As a professional, you are required to stay current with trends, practices, and techniques in your field.

MAPPS meetings are a relaxed, enjoyable and effective way to earn your continuing education units (CEU's), professional development hours (PDH's) or other requirements for keeping current.

MAPPS will issue a "certificate of completion" for attendance at its Winter Meeting, January 27 - 31, 2013 at the Trump International Hotel in Sunny Isles Beach, Florida. This certificate is for your files and use, as applicable, for any licensing or certification program. The program provides first-class business, technical education, and market opportunity information. The education program will include: 

Mergers and acquisitions; human resources: performance evaluations and 360 reviews; health care reform: implementation in your firm and family; wealth management; National Geospatial Advisory Council (NGAC) update; indoor mapping; sensor fusion; automated feature extraction; thermal mapping; asset management; Florida market for geospatial services; Federal agency updates; location/mobile mapping; ethics; privacy issues and geospatial firms; legislative issues roundtable; geospatial excellence awards; CFO issues panel; and an important session on "big data" with Amazon, Esri, Microsoft and Google all presenting.

Register today. Join us in Florida for education and information. Check out full conference information.

To ensure you receive the special MAPPS conference rate be sure to make your reservations at the Trump International Resort before January 4. The hotel is easily accessible from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL) and Miami International Airport (MIA).

#5

New technologies are revolutionizing the profession and may impact your business.

To ensure you receive the special MAPPS conference rate be sure to make your reservations at the Trump International Resort before January 4. The hotel is easily accessible from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL) and Miami International Airport (MIA).

Since 1999, MAPPS has engaged the firm MultiState Associates, Inc. (www.multistate.com) to monitor legislation in every State House. This early warning system provides private geospatial firms an ability to know about every bill introduced that could pose an opportunity or threat to their professional practice.

Using web-based technology and human intelligence in every state capitol, Multistate can identify any legislation with key words important to the MAPPS membership, such as mapping, surveying, photogrammetry, geospatial, geographic system, etc.

Once a bill has been introduced, a notice is sent to MAPPS staff, including a link to the text of the legislation and the key word. The MAPPS staff analyzes the legislation to determine its relevance to the membership. Notice of the bill’s introduction is often sent to key MAPPS member firm principals in that state. Additionally, bills are listed in Capitol Coverage, an electronic newsletter published twice a month, an exclusive benefit to MAPPS members that highlights the aforementioned state legislation, Federal legislation, procurement opportunities and relevant geospatial news.

Recently, the MAPPS-MultiState Program worked to perfection. A bill in the New Hampshire state House of Representatives was pre-filed for the 2013 session. While the text of the bill is not yet available, the short title was a warning bell, "prohibiting images of a person's residence to be taken from the air.” Upon being notified of this potentially harmful legislation, MAPPS staff contacted the bill’s sponsor. The state representative promptly responded, indicating the bill had not yet been drafted and that it was not intended to impact the legitimate business of aerial surveying, photogrammetry or remote sensing. Lines of communication between MAPPS and the state representative are now open and we are now in discussions on drafting a bill that accomplishes both our objectives.

In some cases, when MultiState informs MAPPS that a hearing on an important bill is scheduled, MAPPS staff will alert members in that state in an effort to deploy a firm principal to the capitol to testify. When a bill to include photogrammetry as the practice of land surveying, without a grandfather provision for experienced and qualified practicing photogrammetrists, was introduced in South Dakota several years ago, a principal of Horizons, Inc. (Rapid City, SD) was alerted, drove to the state capital of Pierre, and told lawmakers the bill would legislate him out of business. The bill was immediately amended to remove all references to photogrammetry. When a similar proposal was offered in South Carolina, MAPPS engaged Multistate to retain a lobbyist who was successful in immediately putting the brakes on the bill until an equitable grandfather provision could be added. Today, as a result of the MAPPS intervention, dozens of photogrammetrists are licensed to practice in South Carolina.

With the growth of state chapters in MAPPS, the Multistate system is an added arrow in the association’s quiver to keep members alert, aware and engaged in state level activities. Political intelligence is important to successful business, and MAPPS helps its members know how the landscape may be changing in their state.

In an economy where you are counting every dollar, it is good to know you can count on MAPPS.

MAPPS Executive Director John Palatiello today issued the following statement on the passing of former Representative Jack Brooks (D-TX):

"I am deeply saddened by the news of the passing of former Congressman Jack Brooks yesterday in Texas at the age of 89. I first met Mr. Brooks in the 1970s when I was a Congressional staff assistant and he was our next door neighbor in the Rayburn House Office Building. When I entered the architecture, engineering, surveying and mapping community in the 1980s, I began working first hand with him to preserve, promote, protect, defend and extend the "Brooks Act”, the 1972 law that codified qualifications based selection for federal procurement of architecture, engineering and related services. That law has affectionately and respectfully become commonly known as the "Brooks Act". We also worked together on the 1988 amendment to the Act that updated the definition of A-E services, including clarification of the law’s application to surveying and mapping services.

While many of today’s professionals did not personally know Jack Brooks, his legacy lives on not only in federal law (Public Law 92-582, Public Law 100-656, and Public Law 100-679, codified in 40 USC 1101 et. seq. and 48 CFR 36.6), but also by the fact that almost every state has enacted its own state law, known as a "mini-Brooks Act”, and the process is included in the American Bar Association’s Model Procurement Code for State and Local Government.

While we are still working to assure uniform utilization of the time-tested competency and qualifications process for surveying, mapping and what we today call geospatial services, the Brooks Act stands as a trailblazing method of procurement. Years before "best value”, "past performance” and other qualifications and competency-based metrics for government acquisition became commonplace, Mr. Brooks recognized that quality above low price was in the taxpayer’s best interest. Our Nation is a better place and the envy of the world because of the service and leadership of Chairman Jack Brooks in Congress.

MAPPS members past and present join me in extending our deepest sympathies and paying our respects to the family of Jack Brooks.”

The report is a rather damning indictment of the agencies' activities. There has been little improvement in coordination since the last time GAO looked at this (Better Coordination Needed to Identify and Reduce Duplicative Investments,GAO-04-703, June 23, 2004), and in some aspects, the situation has worsened.

MAPPS was consulted in the development of this study by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), the panel’s ranking Republican, who requested the GAO review. Their committee has broad jurisdiction, including governmentwide policies, and has the ability to facilitate oversight and investigations of government activities.

While the report does not mention H.R. 4233, the "Map It Once, Use It Many Times” Act, introduced by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO), chairman of the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over USGS, the home of the Federal Geographic Data Committee’s executive secretariat, GAO suggests that reforms, reorganizations and processes called for in the bill be implemented. Not the least of which are improving coordination and reducing duplication, to include a national strategy for coordinating geospatial investments.

Nor did GAO discuss the enactment of section 100220 of PL 112-141, the provision in the FEMA portion of the MAP-21 Act that calls for an innovative, coordinated funding pool for the collection of elevation data for flood mapping and other purposes. Other major items missed by GAO were reorganization ideas, such as a consolidated surveying and mapping administration, as was previously recommended by OMB in 1973 (the OMB report is not available on-line, but a history of federal mapping and geospatial coordination is found at http://www.fgdc.gov/ngac/a-history-of-spatial-data-coordination.pdf) and the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) (http://www.napawash.org/pc_management_studies/napa_report.html). Moreover, while GAO dedicated considerable attention to the Department of Commerce and its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), GAO did not address the inefficiency, waste and duplication in NOAA’s aerial photography function (http://www.oig.doc.gov/Pages/LightAircraftFleetShouldBePrivatized-PerformanceAuditNOAA-STD-9952.aspx). Furthermore, there was no mention of the duplication that exists due to the interpretation by the Census Bureau (also part of the Commerce Department) of Title 13 restrictions on sharing geospatial data. Finally, while the report has a detailed discussion of parcel data, it fails to mention section 1094(3) of Public Law 111-203, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (commonly referred to as "Dodd-Frank”), which amended the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), to authorize the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to collect the "parcel number to permit geocoding” on mortgage transactions.

I was disappointed that GAO only interviewed me and apparently did not talk to anyone else in the private sector. The study team did not address issues I raised, such as how the government duplicates and competes with the private sector and how the language in OMB Circular A-16, or its Supplemental Guidance, on such duplication is either insufficient or ignored.

To be fair, there are positive things happening within various agencies, and progress is being made, to improve coordination, avoid duplication and enhance opportunities for the private sector. GAO acknowledged the USGS effort on a National Enhanced Elevation Assessment, which MAPPS has supported, that effort’s maturity into a viable 3DEP initiative was not mentioned. MAPPS has worked closely to make 3DEP a reality, and the MAP-21 provision, mentioned above, is a notable development. GAO endorsed the establishment or designation of a senior geospatial official in cabinet agencies, something MAPPS has long advocated. It was MAPPS, after all, that was instrumental in securing legislation that created a Geospatial Management Office in the Department of Homeland Security. Moreover, the successful coordination and partnership efforts carried out by the NOAA Coastal Services Center through its "Digital Coast" activity, which MAPPS has called a "best practices” model in testimony before Congress, also did not attract GAO’s attention. Additionally, GAO failed to recognize that USGS, through the Geospatial Information Office at Department of the Interior and the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), is developing a "Data as a Service” component to the Geospatial Platform that will enable agencies to utilize QBS, ID/IQ contracts and provide substantive opportunities for numerous private sector firms.

Senator Lieberman is retiring and while Senator Collins is term-limited as the ranking member of the governmental affairs committee, she is expected to remain on the panel. Nevertheless, the report provides valuable information for oversight and reform by Congress and the Obama Administration. Moreover, it throws another log on the fire of examples of government duplication compiled by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) , who is next in line to succeed Senator Collins on the GOP side of the committee. The new chairman is expected to be Senator Tom Carper (D-DE), whom MAPPS has assisted with issues such as a geo-based federal land inventory.

In these perilous times, one expense that entrepreneurs should resist eliminating is membership in key associations. Such organizations provide a return on investment that can help a firm survive a recession. Terminating a firm’s membership in an association can be short sighted – penny wise and pound foolish, to use an old expression. Here are a few reasons why.

The geospatial community is very different from other professions, as well as industries in other fields. Today, surveying, mapping and GIS projects require a multitude of skills, talents, capabilities, specialties, and capacity. Often, one firm cannot reasonably or profitably accomplish a full project. Rather, firms engage in teaming, partnering and prime/sub contracting on many projects. Many associations are a great way to stay connected with "coop-etition” or "competimates” – firms that are sometimes competitors but also a partner or source of business.

Bob Hickey, Senior Vice President of Photo Science, Inc. West Chester, PA, says attending MAPPS conference is an enormous savings in time and money. "I can see 20 clients - principals of firms we work - with, at a MAPPS meeting, where it would take me weeks, and thousands of dollars in airfare, hotels, and other expenses to see these same colleagues separately.”

Numerous MAPPS membership surveys have indicated that such networking is a top rated benefit of membership in MAPPS. Many firms use their membership in the association as a primary business development strategy.

"When we joined MAPPS, we immediately recognized it as a venue to develop sources of business,” said Dave Hart, President of Continental Mapping Consultants, Inc., Sun Prairie, WI.

Membership in associations also often leads to referrals. The more the staff of the association knows about your firm, the more likely they are to provide a referral. The MAPPS office regularly gets calls from entities seeking a firm for geospatial services. We always give multiple recommendations, or refer the inquirer to the MAPPS web site, but when a specific capability, technology or geographic area is requested, it is helpful that we know the MAPPS members’ specializations.

The MAPPS staff is also a cost effective resource for its member firms. We save our members time and money responding to inquiries that would otherwise take a firm hours to investigate. Questions about small business set aside policies in the Federal government, where to get SF330 software, who offers professional liability insurance for mapping firms, how is the Service Contract Act implemented, or who has an aircraft and camera in South America are just a few of the questions we’ve recently answered for members. The cost of membership in MAPPS, and access to the staff, is significantly less that the cost of using an outside attorney or consultant to answer these questions. While the MAPPS staff does not provide legal advice, we often have information about laws, regulations, legislation and government policies at our fingertips. In many cases, our knowledge is first hand, as we’ve been involved in working with Congress or the government agencies on these issues.

MAPPS is also a great advocate for individual firms. When a member firm of MAPPS encounters a government agency engaging in unfair competition, for violating a Brooks Act requirement, that firm can bring the incident to the attention of MAPPS staff for action. Such breaches of MAPPS-endorsed policy are brought to the attention of proper authorities for remedy and rectification, in the name of MAPPS in order to protect the anonymity of any firm. Correcting a wayward government agency’s action that violates MAPPS principles, and does not result in favoritism of one member firm over another, is a service MAPPS staff provides to its members. Again, retaining outside help on such a matter is not only costly, but exposes a firm in front of the very client-agency with which the firm is attempting to do business.

How can one cut costs? Firms are looking at more cost effective ways to market, sell, promote, partner and collect information. One business development executive recently said rather than having a booth at some conferences, he’s opting for a sponsorship. That provides exposure without all the expense of the staff, shipping and materials of the exhibit hall. Another said he is cutting back on production personnel attendance at technical conferences in favor of business development employees attending conferences where potential clients, with "coop-etition” or "competimates” are in attendance.

Relationships are not like a spigot. They cannot be turned on and off and expected to always be the same. They take care and feeding. A short term absence from membership in MAPPS can lead to long term damage.

In an economy where you are counting every dollar, it’s good to know you can count on MAPPS.

We are grateful for your help carrying the message that economic growth and a vibrant free enterprise system arefundamental to the cause of creating jobs, prosperity, and opportunity for all. In the final days of the campaign, we have two final requests.

First, please send a note to your employees and stakeholders reminding them of the importance of voting. I'd encourage you to direct them to www.VoteForJobs2012.com to find their polling location and compare their candidates on key business issues.

MAPPS members in Alabama met in September to discuss the formation of a state chapter in the Yellowhammer State.  Jeff Lower, MAPPS President-Elect (Magnolia River Corporation), will speak at the conference to provide an overview on MAPPS activities at the national level and discuss the formation of a state chapter in Alabama. 

More information about the conference is provided below.

Conference 2012 FORMERLY THE ROCKET CITY GEOSPATIAL CONFERENCE November 8-9, 2012 - Davidson Center for Space Exploration - Huntsville, Alabama Register Today! Register today for the GEO Huntsville Conference ... and join with others in the Southeast to explore the opportunities for small- and medium-sized business in geospatial intelligence, commercial earth observation systems, GIS, and much more. Registration is only $195 ($75 for students) for this two-day conference.   GEOINT and Commercial Earth Observation Systems The key themes for the conference center on the opportunities for geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) application development as well as those for commercial earth observation systems (i.e. small satellites, etc.) and remote sensing.   Opportunities for Small and Medium Sized Businesses The conference will offer special sessions to hear from the small business directors of the following agencies on how to better work with their agencies: NASA National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Lifecycle Management Command (AMCOM) U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC) U.S. Army Corp of Engineers "Invest in Huntsville" This special plenary panel will feature the C-level executives from major Huntsville-based corporations to discuss how they see the development of future technology investment opportunities that support the expansion of their organizations. Panelists include: Dr. Marc Bendickson, CEO, Dynetics Mr. Steve Hill, CEO, AEgis Technologies Joe Ritch, Counsel, Sirote and Permutt; chairman, Tennessee Valley BRAC Committee John Gulley, Sr. VP, SAIC and chairman, Huntsville/Madison County Chamber of Commerce Technology Committee Joe Fehrenbach, COO, Intergraph Government Solutions. Ronnie Hoff, Founder, Magnolia River Corporation Don't Miss These Other Plenary Sessions Themes for the conference encompass the following topics: Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) and National Security Commercial Earth Observation Systems Energy and geospatial technology integration "Ethical Hacking" demonstration and Cybersecurity Issues Geospatial Law and Policy Special Invitation from Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle As Mayor of Huntsville and on behalf of the businesses, government agencies, and universities of our city, I would like to invite you to attend the GEO Huntsville Conference. For many years, we’ve worked extremely hard to collaborate to strengthen our workforce and leverage the technological expertise in our city. Now, we’ve taken the extra step of identifying three technology initiatives that we believe will catapult Huntsville to the forefront of geospatial technology and prepare our economy for future growth. For more information, please visit the conference website. Keynote Speakers Vice Admiral (ret.) Robert Murrett Formerly, Director, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) Currently, Deputy Director, Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism, Syracuse University   Dr. Mike Griffin CEO, Schafer Corporation Formerly, Chief Adminstrator, NASA Guest Speakers Dr. Myra Gray Deputy G-3/5, Strategy and Concepts, U.S. Army Materiel Command Maj. Gen. (ret.) Barbara Fast Vice President, CGI Federal; formerly, Director, Intelligence, Joint Task Force, Iraq John Gulley Vice President, SAIC & Chairman, Huntsville/Madison County Chamber of Commerce Technology Committee Dr. John Horack Vice President, Space Systems, Teledyne Brown Engineering   Sponsors Organizational Sponsors City of Huntsville Huntsville/Madison County Chamber of Commerce United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation Venue The conference will be held at the Davidson Center for Space Exploration, 5 Tranquility Base, Huntsville, Alabama. The venue is adjacent to the U.S. Space and Rocket Center and sessions will be held in the auditorium.  Contact Us The conference is produced by Directions Magazine. Those with questions about the program should call Joe Francica at 256-650-0205, 256-509-3661 or email info@geohuntsville.com Those with questions about exhibiting or sponsoring the event should call Jane Elliott at 847-242-0412 or email info@geohuntsville.com. Register today! The registration fee is only $100 each day or $195 for both days of the event. Don't delay ... register now! Join the GEO Huntsville LinkedIn Group Directions Media, 1001 Green Bay Road, Ste. 145, Winnetka, IL 60093 256-650-0205 or 847-242-0412

Today marks the 40^th anniversary of the enactment of the Brooks Act. On October 27, 1972, President Nixon signed into law the legislation providing for qualifications based selection (QBS) of architecture, engineering and related services, including surveying and mapping, or what we now call "geospatial” services.

Traditionally, government procurement procedures properly have emphasized awarding contracts to the lowest bidder, or using price as a dominant factor. For many goods which government purchases -- paper, office equipment, desks, even construction services -- this process serves the government and the taxpayer well. Specifications can be written, products can be inspected and tested, and safeguards can be built in to assure saving money.

Sometimes, however, agencies mistakenly assume professional surveying and mapping services fall into this category.

Unfortunately, the assumption ignores the increase in costs to administer the preparation of detailed scopes of work and bid specifications, evaluation of numerous bids, and to remedy serious consequences of unprofessional surveying and mapping. Quality, therefore, should always be the primary focus in the competition for surveying and mapping procurements. Only after high quality performance is ensured should the focus turn to the contract price.

Fifty states impose strict educational and registration or licensing requirements for surveying professionals, and many now include mapping, photogrammetry and GIS activities in such licensing laws. The high standards established by organizations like MAPPS for their members exemplify the professional nature of their work.

State licensing standards and government procurement regulations for professional services should be designed to protect the public health and safety during and after contract performance. Indeed, some state licensing boards prohibit licensed professionals under their jurisdiction from engaging in competitive bidding to secure work. 

If inaccurate, a map could cloud land titles or jeopardize subsequent construction designs, planning activities or program management that must rely on accurate mapping data. Just as a poorly designed dam can burst, subjecting the state to huge claims, so too can a poorly planned or executed map unleash a flood of problems, creating an impediment to the expeditious completion of a government project, causing substantial loss of time and money, and jeopardizing the public safety. Like a well made dam, a high quality map will stand the test of time and will ensure that the government can proceed with its design, construction or resource planning project based on complete and precise groundwork.

In addition to the direct cost of the contract, the government must be concerned about such consequent indirect costs as physical destruction of property or clouded claims that could result from poor quality workmanship. The E-911 system an ambulance uses to get to your house is not related to architecture, engineering or construction, yet an accurate map can mean the difference between life and death.

The government should negotiate contracts for these services independent of other professional design, construction or information technology services to ensure that specialized mapping skills and technologies are evaluated properly and not overlooked. In this manner, the government will benefit from direct control of both the quality of the services and the map's development.

The use of negotiated procedures directs the focus of procurement activity where it should be, on the quality of the mapping services specifically suited to a given contract. All competitors must submit their qualifications to the procuring agency; the agency assesses the relative expertise of the competing firms; and the one most qualified firm is selected for the particular procurement. Such procedures produce a more cost effective survey than can be achieved under price bidding or best value procedures.

Negotiated procedures afford built-in protection, since either the selection process eliminates unqualified firms, or the negotiations reveal a firm's comparative lack of expertise. In either case, the problem is discovered before the contract is awarded, not after the job is done. Under price bidding procedures, however, the low bidder wins, regardless of the marginal capabilities it may have demonstrated previously.

The extreme difficulty of defining adequately, in advance of negotiations, the quantity and quality of the mapping and photogrammetric services to be secured is likely to lead to misunderstandings as to the scope of the services to be rendered and the expectations of the government concerning the services and the desired project. The negotiating process allows the government to work as a team with qualified professionals to refine the government's contract requirements and develop more tailored, economical mapping. Thus, in the pre-contract stage, the agency benefits from the professional's years of experience and demonstrated competence.

The government saves substantial administrative costs of preparing detailed specifications that would be required under price bidding procedures to avoid widely varying interpretations by competing bidder. The government also saves significant personnel costs if it can employ a few specialists to review qualifications, negotiate contracts and specialists to review qualifications, negotiate contracts and monitor or inspect performance -- rather than maintain the large staff needed to process numerous bids received on each procurement and evaluate the qualifications of each of those bidders, as well as execute and monitor contract performance. 

Negotiated procedures ultimately result in more efficient, economical procurements for the competing professional firms as well as the government, because of the very nature of surveying and mapping. Since only the top ranked firms need to prepare boundary analyses and detailed estimates on the work, other competitors are free to pursue other contract opportunities without wasting money on a contract they will not win. 

The government benefits from the mapping professional’s fiduciary obligation to their client. Emphasis on the quality of the work establishes a relationship of cooperation and trust, whereas price competition pits honest professionals against competitors who are willing to cut corners or deliver substandard services to bid low. When the low bid is the primary selection criterion, the interests of unscrupulous or inexperienced contractors are advanced over the interests of the public. The low bid map often is inaccurate or incomplete because the government will pay far more, or contract with another to complete the project begun by the low bidder who went bankrupt trying to meet an unreasonably low contract price. Rather than an adversary relationship, which is promoted in competitive bidding procedures, the mapping professional should negotiate their work, and work as a team.

The government must be mindful of the indirect or hidden costs, such as legal fees, court expenses and insurance claims that it can incur when boundary, trespass and other property disputes are caused by outdated or erroneous maps. By negotiating contracts with private mapping professionals, the government can save in-house costs and increase mapping outputs significantly. Historically, more firms compete, and thus the government gets a better service at a fairer price, when QBS is used. Government inspection or quality control of a mapping project to monitor contract compliance is much more difficult than inspection of manufactured products or other professional services. The map's geographic scope is often immense, and the only effective way the government can check for accuracy is to retrace the entire map. Even a trained eye cannot find a map's critical flaws that could threaten the public's safety and its pocketbook in future years. Unlike materials, a map cannot be adequately sampled before and thoroughly tested after production. The client or owner is totally dependent upon the integrity of his mapping professional -- you might say he is at his mercy -- for even a bad mapping plan can look good. It often takes months or years before errors and problems are discovered.

Maps are tied to existing control points on the ground, the location and condition of which are uncertain until a survey is performed. Legal descriptions of boundaries may, or may not, indicate physical monuments. These physical monuments may or may not be still in existence on the ground. If they do exist, they may or may not be the original monuments, and they may or may not fit other physical evidence in the area. One cannot price the unknown.

Mapping is usually dependent on other exiting surveys and recorded documents. The evaluation of such surveys or documents is a matter of judgment which cannot be made until the professional has researched the project, both in the field and in the repository of deeds. He may find that as the result of his new work, the existing survey may have to be rerun to achieve the accuracy required by the client, even though the records of the existing survey indicated otherwise beforehand. He may find deeds or other documents that will affect the interpretation of the client's land description. These conditions may not be known, nor even suspected, until the survey is substantially started.

Mapping is weather dependent. Cloud cover, storms, excessively hot weather, floods, rain, wind and other inclement conditions can delay or prolong an aerial photography and mapping project for indefinite periods of time. Precise leveling is extremely sensitive to the vagaries of weather. Fog affects sighting lengths. Wind affects instrumentation and measurement. Cloud cover prevents collection of data on project areas. Delays cost money. The decision to stop or delay the operation should be based on a determination that the quality of the result will suffer, rather than on a profit-loss motive.

The accuracy of a map depends upon the manner and the conditions under which the work is performed and not just on the accuracy of closures. A map could close within specified tolerances, but the work could be unacceptable because of the methods used.

By requesting bids, a client assumes the responsibility for defining the scope of the services required and, thus, does not take any advantage of the knowledge and background of qualified professional engaged in providing such services. All too few administrators and even engineers are knowledgeable in mapping, and their inadequacy in this regard is apparent in their requests for bids. The knowledgeable person is aware of the indeterminate nature of mapping. The reputable professional, if he is to bid, must either attempt to anticipate the many possible problems, determine which problems he feels will occur, and bid accordingly, or bid so high that he can include every possible condition (in which case he undoubtedly will not be the successful bidder). If an honest attempt is made and unforeseen conditions occur, the mapper faces the decision to adhere to the specifications, thereby producing an inferior product (which he cannot ethically do) or perform the work to the best of his ability, thereby operating at a loss. Either way, the client/taxpayer is the ultimate loser.

Numerous cases can be cited to prove that the lowest bid does not necessarily result in the lowest overall cost. The old cry, "Bid as low as you dare, but make your money on the extras," is inevitable and the resulting relationship between the government client and his surveyor assumes an arms length status which is not only not conducive to the completion of professional assignments, but in fact, effectively eliminates any exercise of professional judgment on the part of the mapper.

A broad coalition of design-related organizations supports qualifications-based selection procedures for surveying and mapping services. The Federal competence and qualifications-based selection law was codified in 1972 to protect the interest of taxpayers. It is Federal law because over the life of a project, the engineering and related design services account for less than one-half of one percent of total costs. Yet, these important services play a major role in determining the other 99.5 percent of the project's "life cycle costs", such as construction, operation, and maintenance. The same is true of the associated mapping or geographic information systems (GIS) project.

This process has been so successful at the Federal level that it is recommended by the American Bar Association in its model procurement code for State and local government. The ABA model code specifically includes surveying and mapping. More than half the States have enacted their own competence and qualifications-based selection laws for architecture, engineering, surveying and mapping services. Others use it as a standard procedure. No state has a specific law requiring bidding of these services.

Then-Representative Jack Brooks (D-TX) had foresight and vision when he wrote the Brooks Act in 1972, decades before "best value” and "past performance” became part of the procurement lexicon. It is a law that works and one that should continue to promote professionalism, quality, excellence and value.

The 'Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act', or MAP-21, passed by Congress and signed into the law by the President in July, includes some of the most significant provisions of law ever benefiting the geospatial community and creating market opportunities for MAPPS member firms. 

These include:

The Restore Act, providing for restoration of the gulf coast, including mapping, in the aftermath of the Deepwater horizon incident;

A FEMA flood mapping reform title, with numerous provisions creating a demand for new data, including elevation data through LIDAR and other technologies;

The Highway bill portion includes:

Section 1103, clarifying that state DoTs expending Federal highway funds must use the qualifications based selection (QBS) process for all architecture, engineering, surveying or mapping contracts,  NOT just those related to construction projects;

Section 1111, creating a location-based national bridge and tunnel inventory;

Section 1112, enhancing the Highway Safety Improvement Program, including the geolocation of attribute data on a roadway;

Section 1517, strengthening law requiring State DoTs to use the private sector for surveying and mapping; and,

Section 53001. Use of Funds for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) activities.

At this breakfast, I will  brief members on these provisions and discuss a strategy for how MAPPS can influence their implementation.

Additionally, we are honored that Dr. Jerry Johnston, Geospatial Information Officer of the Department of the Interior and Vice-Chairman of the National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) will discuss how the FEMA provisions on flood and elevation mapping will work in concert with the USGS's proposed 3DEP Program.

This is a member-guest breakfast. MAPPS members should register themselves  and the principal, owner, partner, or senior executive professional of a private firm NOT currently a MAPPS member firm as a guest for FREE to help recruit a new members to MAPPS and build our profession and organization. Please contact MAPPS to provide the name and contact information for your guest.

The cost of the breakfast is $50.00 and payment must be made on-site. If you are planning to attend,  please contact Sally Palatiello, 703-501-4367 now. If you have already registered, we have you covered.

The MAPPS-ASPRS Joint Conference is  October 29 - November 1, 2012  at the Tampa Marriott Waterside Hotel, Tampa, FL  For information and registration, click here.

If your firm is a contractor to a federal agency, or does work for state or local government agencies that receive federal funds, or if you are just a taxpayer, there are a number of deadlines, milestones and actions in the coming weeks and months that deserve your attention, for they will impact task orders, cash flow, the volume of work under those contracts, and your taxes.

Over the next six months, the following will occur, and many will directly impact your firm.

The new fiscal year starts today, October 1. Congress failed to enact regular appropriations bills, so a "continuing resolution” to fund government activities and functions through March 27, 2013 was passed. At that time, the new Congress will have to decide on spending levels for the remainder of the fiscal year.

On November 7, an election for President, all 435 seats in the U.S. House, 33 seats in the U.S. Senate, as well as numerous governors, state legislators and local offices will be on the ballot.

After the election, the current Congress will return to Washington for a "lame duck” session. But it will have fewer than 19 days to consider legislation.

Numerous tax provisions expire on January 1, 2013. Consideration of these tax provisions will be a top priority for the lame duck Congress. Many economists fear that failure of Congress to act on preventing automatic increases in taxes will result in a double-dip recession.

In addition to the expiring tax provisions, a number of new taxes included in the Affordable Care Act (health care law) go into effect beginning January 1, 2013.

When Congress and President Obama finally reached agreement on a debt limit increase in the summer of 2011, they put in place a process that will result in an automatic "sequestration” or budget cuts, of $1.2 trillion over ten years, scheduled to go into effect on January 2, 2013, unless Congressional action is taken prior to that date to avert the sequestration.

The prospect of these tax and spending changes has been deemed a "fiscal cliff”.

In January, 2013, a new Congress will be sworn into office, a President, regardless of who wins on November 7, will have an Inauguration, and a State of the Union address will be given to Congress.

Whether Mitt Romney is elected, bringing in a new administration or Barack Obama is re-elected, prompting a turnover in Cabinet members and other political appointees, the Senate will be faced with numerous confirmation hearings and votes.

Once January turns to February, the President’s fiscal year 2014 budget must be presented to Congress. And the debt limit, which was increased in a contentious showdown in the summer of 2011, is expected to be reached once again, requiring a vote in Congress estimated to be in February or March.

Are you paying attention? MAPPS staff will keep the membership informed of activities related to all these important actions. Stay engaged, read the MAPPS materials via the blog, website, Facebook, Twitter and MAPPS meetings and conferences.

In an economy where you are counting every dollar, it’s good to know you can count on MAPPS.

Recently the Virginia Information Technology Agency (VITA), manager of the Virginia Geographic Information Network (VGIN), issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a statewide mapping project.

The procurement raised several important issues.

In 2005, the Virginia General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed, a bill that clarified that "the determination of topography, contours and/or location of planimetric features using photogrammetric methods or similar remote sensing technology” was the practice of surveying. The law, and its implementing rules, provides for a "grandfather period” during which scores of practitioners became licensed as a "surveyor photogrammetrist”. The Code of Virginia provisions are § 54.1-400, § 54.1-111. The licensing board implementing rules are in 18 VAC 10-20-310.

As the process to include photogrammetry in the surveying licensing program moved through discussions among various stakeholders, which included MAPPS, a compromise was reached in which an exception from licensing was granted for mapping "not used for the design, modification, or construction of improvements to real property or for flood plain determination.”

However, any such "exempt” service required that each such map include a disclaimer stating that the data may not be used for the design, modification, or construction of improvements to real property or for flood plain determination.”

Virginia has a "mini-Brooks Act” which requires qualifications based selection (QBS) for "professional services”, which includes surveying. (Code of Virginia, § 2.2-4301)

If a service is a professional service, a licensed profession is required to seal and be in responsible charge of the work. For government contracts, QBS is also required. If a service is exempt, the aforementioned disclaimer is required.

VITA RFP 2012-13 included neither.

Among the requirements in the price-based RFP, respondents were asked to offer 3 inch resolution orthophotos at 1” = 50’ scale mapping (see Section 5.2.5 in Appendix E of the RFP). This is a scale generally associated with preliminary design engineering. In fact, the orthoimagery Product Sheet for the Virginia Base Map Program (VBMP) website lists ‘land development’ and ‘civil engineering’ under the heading ‘Typical Uses’ in reference to the 3 inch resolution upgrade.

The RFP also ‘requires’ respondents to offer 2 foot contours (see Section 5.7.6 in Appendix E of the RFP). This is a product generally associated with land development planning. In fact the contour Product Sheet on the VBMP website lists ‘land development’ under the heading ‘Typical Uses’ in reference to the 2’ contour upgrade.

All of the above would seem to indicate that the mapping to be conducted for VBMP may be interpreted to be useful for ‘the design, modification, or construction of improvements to real property’ and therefore not exempt from statutes or procurement procedures that are appropriate for such mapping.

On September 25, the Virginia board of licensure for Architects, Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Certified Interior Designers and Landscape Architects (APELSCIDLA) of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation formally and unanimously determined the scope of work in the RFP is the practice of surveying.

The licensing board ruled VITA has NOT included the disclaimer required by § 54.1-402(C) of the Code of Virginia or the board’s regulations (18 VAC 10-20-310).

Given that the Code of Virginia, § 2.2-4301 requires qualification based selection for procurement of professionals services, (which, by § 54.1-400, § 54.1-111 includes photogrammetric mapping services) that are used for the design, modification, or construction of improvements to real property, the board determined that the VBMP RFP is not in compliance.

The APELSCIDLA Board will advise VITA/VGIN in writing that the scope of work in its procurement is indeed the practice of surveying in Virginia and requires that work be sealed by and under the responsible charge of a Virginia licensed surveyor or surveyor photogrammetrist, in which case the procurement is for professional services subject to the VA mini-Brooks Act, OR the procurement, and each map produced thereunder, must include a disclaimer that such data may "NOT be used for the design, modification, or construction of improvements to real property, or for flood plain determination."

While APELSCIDLA does not have jurisdiction over procurement, in either case the current procurement is not in conformance and from a practical standpoint must be re-competed, inasmuch as adding the disclaimer as a contract requirement after proposals were submitted will materially affect the procurement.

It is significant that an Assistant Attorney General was present at the September 25 meeting and concurred with APELSCIDLA's interpretation.

MAPPS, the National Society of Professional Surveyors (NSPS) and Virginia Association of Surveyors (VAS) urged the APELSCIDLA board to investigate and clarify this matter. It is important that VITA be aware of its responsibilities under state law. MAPPS member firm principals particularly needed this board interpretation in order to assure their own compliance and conformance with Virginia law, particularly if one is licensed in Virginia as a surveyor or surveyor photogrammetrist. These same issues have affected MAPPS members with regard to the recent NGA and USDA procurements. There is an old adage that "ignorance of the law is no excuse”. MAPPS seeks to have the law clarified and explained so its members are fully informed and in compliance.

Click here to submit your vote!

Name the Blog Contest Guidelines:

• All members will have the opportunity to vote for their favorite finalist until October 5.
• The name of the blog will be announced October 31 at the MAPPS Member-Guest Breakfast during the MAPPS/ASPRS Fall Specialty Conference.
• The winner will receive a $200 gift certificate to the world famous Joe’s Stone Crab Restaurant in Miami, Florida located near the site of the 2013 MAPPS Winter Conference*

Don't forget to subscribe to the MAPPS blog to be alerted with the latest information from MAPPS!

Past conferences have featured the General Services Administration, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Federal Highway Administration, State Department Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations, U.S. Agency for International Development, and Millennium Challenge Corporation. COFPAES is assembling a similar line-up this year, so register today!

Registration for COFPAES organization members (AIA, ASCE, MAPPS, NSPE, or NSPS) is $195. The cost for non-members is $245.

Click here to view the preliminary agenda and register.

Over the past few months, the FAA has made it increasingly difficult for operators to perform aerial LIDAR missions by classifying mapping LIDAR as a harmful laser. With the help of LiDAR manufacturers and operators that make up the MAPPS membership, the association has been working with the FAA to address this issue. However, just like the "laser pointer” law that started the confusion, the MAPPS membership has been diligent in commenting on similar directives that could affect the use of LIDAR technologies.

Airborne LIDAR systems used for mapping are neither surveillance nor searchlight systems. However, language in the proposed policy that includes "installations of fully enclosed laser device..” can sweep the surveying and mapping LiDAR systems into the FAA regulatory scheme. This blanket policy, without knowledge of the niche mapping LiDAR market could affect many LIDAR businesses.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the determining government body for classification and ratings of laser systems. MAPPS member firms that are producers of airborne mapping LIDAR instrumentation all comply with 21 CFR 1040.10. These LIDAR systems are designed to be used as airborne mapping systems with careful attention to design and manufacture for the airborne environment.

As confusion has already taken place within FAA, MAPPS is seeking a specific exemption for mapping LiDAR in 14 CFR parts 27 and 29 Rotorcraft.

Firms that manufacture LiDAR systems and geospatial professionals who perform collection services are encouraged to submit comments to the FAA prior to the August 31 deadline.

Continuing your legislative advocacy this month, you will have additional opportunities to engage your Members of Congress on legislation important to the geospatial profession. Congress has adjourned for the August recess, and Members of Congress will spend significant time back in their states and districts meeting with constituents, such as you and your employees, over the next few weeks. With the November elections looming, this recess is an excellent opportunity to meet or reconnect with your respective U.S. Senators and Congressman. Whether you’re hosting your member of Congress for a tour of your headquarters or a related facility, or attending a town hall meeting, or luncheon hosted by a civic group, take a few minutes to discuss issues important to your firm, the profession, and to MAPPS.

This week’s focus will be on the Federal Prison Industries (FPI) Reform legislation. The Federal Prison Industries Competition in Contracting Act, H.R. 3634, requires Federal Prison Industries (also known as UNICOR) to compete for its contracts minimizing its unfair competition with private sector firms and their non-inmate workers and empowering Federal agencies to get the best value for taxpayers’ dollars. Reforming FPI through this legislation would prevent Federal inmates from engaging in geospatial activities including GIS and CADD services.

Has your member of Congress cosponsored H.R. 3634 or the soon to introduced Senate companion legislation?

If so, please thank them for cosponsoring this bill. If not, please ask them to cosponsor utilizing these talking points.

If your member of Congress proves tough to reach this week, then make sure to communicate cosponsorship of FPI Reform with their staff either in the district or state, or the Congressional staff based in Washington, DC. When you receive a commitment to cosponsor the FPI Reform, or if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach me.

Legislation recently passed by Congress and signed by President Obama will result in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in geospatial activities.

The "Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” (MAP-21) commonly known as the Highway Bill, included reauthorization of Highway and FEMA Flood programs, enacted on July 6, in one of the most significant geospatial-related legislative actions in years.

In a presentation to MAPPS members and guests at a luncheon during the Esri International Users Conference in San Diego, MAPPS Executive Director John Palatiello said the bill includes numerous provisions sought and recommended by MAPPS. "This bill reflects creative thinking by MAPPS members to develop ideas and recommendations that ultimately became law.” Palatiello also singled out the work of MAPPS government affairs manager John Byrd for successfully shepherding through Congress proposals developed by numerous MAPPS committees and task forces. "We are fortunate to have such effective representation,” he said.

Included in the new law are transportation-related provisions that:

• strengthens the law against state department of transportation (DoT) competition with the private sector, by mandating that States use the private sector to maximum extent possible for surveying and mapping;
  
  
• clarifies that qualifications based selection (QBS) be used by state DoTs on Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)-funded state DoT projects, not just those construction-related, as FHwA had interpreted earlier law;
  
  
• authorizes a new, robust intelligent transportation systems (ITS) program;
  
  
• creates the "RESTORE” Act, allocating Deepwater Horizon fines and penalties to gulf coast restoration activities in TX, LA, MS, AL, FL, including mapping; and
  
  
• extends the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund that provides money for hydrographic surveys by the Corps of Engineers and NOAA.

The bill also reforms of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) national flood insurance program (NFIP), including numerous MAPPS-initiated provisions initiated in the association’s FEMA task force that:

• Establishes a FEMA technical mapping advisory council, to include a member of a recognized professional surveying association or organization and a member of a recognized professional mapping association or organization;
  
  
• Requires National Flood Insurance Program rate maps use "the most accurate topography and elevation data available”;
  
  
• Requires FEMA to assess the accuracy of current ground elevation data used for hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of flooding sources and mapping of the flood hazard and wherever necessary acquire new ground elevation data utilizing the most up-to-date geospatial technologies in accordance with guidelines and specifications of FEMA;
  
  
• Requires FEMA to develop National Flood Insurance Program flood data on a watershed basis; and
  
  
• Instructs FEMA to develop a funding strategy to leverage and coordinate budgets and expenditures, and to maintain or establish joint funding and other agreement mechanisms with other Federal agencies, such as USGS, and units of State and local government to share in the collection and utilization of geospatial data among all governmental users.

"MAPPS has long been a leader in public policy initiatives that strengthen the geospatial profession and enhance the use of geospatial technologies, services and data products to improve the quality of life for all Americans. These provisions are another example of the important role MAPPS and its member firms play in the community,” Palatiello said.

A presentation including these and other recent MAPPS accomplishments is available here.

To learn about other legislation affecting the profession, be sure to read "Waiting for Congress” in this month’s issue of Professional Surveyor Magazine.

Is your firm planning to enter this year's MAPPS Geospatial Products and Services Excellence Awards? Participation in this program is a great way to get the most out of your marketing dollars. 

• Winners featured in trade magazines and promoted through MAPPS
  
• Winning projects displayed at MAPPS Events throughout the year
  
• All entries displayed at the Awards Reception in Tampa
  

The entry deadline is August 31, 2012. 

Starting this week, you will have additional opportunities to engage your Member of Congress on legislation important to the geospatial profession. Congress has adjourned for the August recess, and Members of Congress will spend significant time back in their states and districts meeting with constituents, such as you and your employees, over the next 4-5 weeks. With the November elections looming, this recess is an excellent opportunity to meet or reconnect with your respective U.S. Senators and Congressman. Whether you’re hosting your member of Congress for a tour of your headquarters or a related facility, or attending a town hall meeting, or luncheon hosted by a civic group, take a few minutes to discuss issues important to your firm, the profession, and to MAPPS.

About COGO

Formed in 2008, the Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO) (www.cogo.pro) is a coalition of 11 voting member and four advisory member national professional societies, trade associations, and membership organizations in the geospatial field, representing more than 30,000 individual producers and users of geospatial data and technology. The coalition's Member Organizations are:

American Congress on Surveying and Mapping (ACSM)

American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS)

Geographic Information Systems Certification Institute (GISCI)

Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS)

United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF)

University Consortium for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS)

Association of American Geographers (AAG)

Cartography and Geographic Information Society (CaGIS)

International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO)

National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC)

Urban Regional Information Systems Association (URISA)

Associate Members:

National Association of Counties (NACo)
National Emergency Number Association (NENA)
Western Governors Association (WGA)
American Planning Association (APA)

• One submission per person.
• Submissions open at on August 1 and will end at 5:00 PM EDT on August 31.
• MAPPS Staff will select three (3) finalists from submissions.
• All members will have the opportunity to vote for favorite finalists September 17 - October 5.
• The name of the blog will be announced October 31 at the MAPPS Breakfast during the MAPPS/ASPRS Fall Specialty Conference.
• The winner will receive a gift certificate to the world famous Joe’s Stone Crab Restaurant in Miami, Florida*

 *Note winner does not receive registration to the MAPPS/ASPRS Specialty Conference or 2013 MAPPS Summer Conference

Complete the official entry form here.

 Special thank you to Woolpert, Inc. for producing the video!

Our guest speakers will be Kevin Gallagher, Associate Director for Core Science, USGS, and Jerry Johnston, the new Geospatial Information Officer (GIO) for the Department of the Interior.

USGS is developing a national elevation program, known as "3DEP" (3-dimentional elevation program). In addition, the USGS is also proposing a "Contracting as a Service" (CaaS) feature for the Geospatial Platform.

Join us to learn about the business opportunities that these new USGS programs may present and other news and developments. And, network with your MAPPS colleagues attending the Esri Users Conference.

This is a member-guest luncheon. MAPPS members should register themselves ($65) and the principal, owner, partner, or senior executive professional of a private firms that is NOT currently a MAPPS member firm as a guest for FREE to help recruit a new member to MAPPS and build our profession and organization.

For questions, please contact Nick Palatiello, Assistant Executive Director for External Affairs at nick@mapps.org or 703-787-6996.

Update - Tuesday, June 3

5:00 PM - The MAPPS Offices will be closed tomorrow, July 4 in observance of Independence Day. We hope everyone has a safe Independence Day!

2:30 PM - Power has been restored at the MAPPS office. Staff will be available this afternoon. Please be aware there could be loss in power as crews continue to provide service to the DC area. We appreciate your patience during this time. 

9:00 AM - The MAPPS office are still without power. Email is still the best form of communication as some cell phone service has been interrupted over the last 24 hours.

Original Post - June 2, 2012

The flash storm that hit the Washington, DC area on Friday night has left the MAPPS office in Reston, VA without power. As of Monday morning the office is without power including phone and internet.  The best way to reach staff is via email today as staff whose power has been restored will be working from home. Please stay tuned to the MAPPS blog, Twitter and Facebook for updates.

The Highway Bill was passed by the House (373-52) and Senate (74-19) on Friday, June 29. MAPPS will provide an update on what this means for the geospatial profession shortly. 

Your immediate action is needed. Congress, both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate, will vote as early as today on the Highway Bill Reauthorization. Text of the conference report is found here.

The two-year highway bill reauthorizes and fully funds the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), the federal funding source for transportation infrastructure projects like roads, highways, bridges, and mass transit. The bill is also an investment in good-paying American jobs, the critical infrastructure investments supported by the bill create or support more than a million jobs, ensure safety and mobility, reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality all across the country. The bill is fully paid-for, and it reduces the deficit over the ten-year budget window. This bill, which will not require any new taxes, and is absent of earmarks, is a positive step and Congress needs to hear from you.

Please contact your Congressman and both U.S. Senators NOW and tell them to vote "YES” on the Highway and Transit Conference Report TODAY.

To locate your Congressman and/or both U.S. Senators, click here. Then, call (202) 225-3121 for the Capitol switchboard.

Thank you for your quick action TODAY.

Update:

The Coffman (CO) Amendment did not pass.  209 votes were cast in favor, 211 votes were cast against it and 11 Representatives did not vote. MAPPS is committed to pursuing pieces of legislation and amendments that significantly limit the federal government's ability to compete with the private sector. Although this is indeed a tough loss, it carries the promise that a significant number of representatives have heard your pleas for a business environment in which the government is no longer your biggest competitor.

To review the vote tally click here.

MAPPS is committed to continue its fight to end government competition in the geospatial profession. If the Coffman amendment had come to pass, it would have reintroduced competition to the contracting of government services and repealed the moratorium on A-76 procedures related to public/private competitions within the Department of Defense.

MAPPS played a vital role in getting this amendment to come to a vote, including being among 24 organizations that co-signed a letter to House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Chairman "Buck McKeon” (CA). The letter called for an end to Pentagon competition with private businesses by advocating the inclusion or removal of certain provisions impacting taxpayers and the private sector.

Video and content originally posted on GeoDataPoint.com

The Map It Once, Use It Many Times Act (H.R. 4233) introduced by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) in March 2012, would streamline federal bureaucracy dealing with geospatial activities. MAPPS, which advocates passage of the bill, is pleased to see that H.R. 4233 is helping to stimulate a discussion on how to best deploy geospatial data, services, products and technologies in the Federal government and with non-federal stakeholders.

To further that discussion, MAPPS will be testifying on the bill in an oversight and legislative field hearing being held by the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, on Thursday, May 3, 2012, in Colorado Springs, Colo. MAPPS will also testify on H.R. 1620, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform (FLAIR) Act. "These legislative initiatives, if enacted, would allow the federal government to have a comprehensive understanding of what agencies are involved in geospatial activities and what land assets the federal government owns and operates,” said Nick Pallatiello, assistant executive director for external affairs. "The obstacles facing the federal government's utilization of geospatial are not technical; they are political and organizational.”

In an interview at SPAR International 2012, Palatiello talked about the Map It Once, Use It Many Times Act. He also addressed other initiatives currently being pursued by MAPPS, including the formation of new state chapters and hot topics on the agenda at the MAPPS Summer Conference. Watch the video above to learn more.

Additional details about the field hearing will be posted following the May 3 event.

Call for Abstracts Extended!

 October 29 – November 1, 2012
Tampa, Florida USA

Click HERE to Submit Your Abstracts Online

New Submission Deadline: April 27, 2012

Ground to Cloud (R)Evolution

This significant conference will focus on all aspects of, Cloud to Ground imagery and techniques, with a twist on the Evolution and Revolution that we all are about to experience in this amazing field.

Don’t be left out, join us for a glimpse of the Ground to Cloud (R)Evolution!

Oral Presentations:

Full details of this conference and abstract guidelines may be found at http://www.asprs.org/ Conferences/Presenters- Volunteers/Paper-Presenters. Don't miss this once a year opportunity to share your work with your professional associates and experience the premier conference in your community.

Poster Presentations:

These will also be part of the technical program. Please use the online abstract form to submit your poster presentation. This form and further details can be found at http://www.asprs.org/ Conferences/Presenters- Volunteers/Poster-Presenters.

These presentations are for technical work ONLY and are not intended for commercial displays.

Workshop Presentations:

Anyone interested in proposing a workshop presentation for consideration should contact John Palatiello, MAPPS Workshop Coordinator, at john@mapps.org by April 27, 2012 for instructions.

For complete details about the MAPPS/ASPRS 2012 Specialty Conference, please visit http://www.asprs.org/ Conferences/Tampa-2012/.

Please submit your abstract from a system that has Internet Explorer 5.5 and above or Netscape Navigator 5.X and above. If you are trying with a compatible browser and the browser takes a long time to load without going to the next stage, please close your browser and start a new submission. If you have reached an error page, please send your abstract to asprsmapps2012@asprs.org in a text/MS word file format in the same order as it appears on the abstract submission page.

DON’T WAIT – SUBMIT YOUR ABSTRACT TODAY.

Submission Deadline: April 27, 2012

PA-MAPPS, the first state chapter of MAPPS, has been driving the effort for the creation of a geospatial coordination council since 2007.

H.B. 1701 brings the state agencies, counties, townships, universities and private sector together to provide coordination of geospatial activities in the Commonwealth.

A number of organizations have provided their support and action for the formation of a council through legislation, including:

• Pennsylvania Mapping and Geographic Information Consortium (PAMAGIC)
• County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania (CCAP)
• PA Chapter of the American Planning Association
• Pennsylvania Bar Association
• Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Association (PMAA)
• The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education GIS Consortium and Affiliates (PASSHEGIS Consortium and Affiliates)

The bill will now be considered by the Pennsylvania Senate.

"There is a capable and qualified private sector in the geospatial field, yet many government agencies duplicate, and in some cases compete with, private firms.  Given the extraordinary cluster of such firms in Colorado, these phenomena particularly concern me.  At a time of record debt and deficits we need to not only eliminate duplication across agencies and programs. We must also weed out government competition with the private sector so federal assets and resources are focused on those things only government can do,” said Rep. Lamborn in a press release.

H.R. 4233 would:  

• consolidate responsibilities for leadership in a National Geospatial Technology Administration within the U.S. Geological Survey;
• merge duplicate federal geospatial programs into the new Administration;
• encourage the uses of commercial data and private sector service providers;
• establish a National Geospatial Policy Commission to provide a priority-setting mechanism that not only includes federal agencies, but Congress and non-federal stakeholders as well;
• provide for acquisition of professional geospatial services on the basis of quality , qualifications and experience of competing firms;
• establish an advocacy function for the dynamic U.S. private sector geospatial community; 
• and coordinate the tens of millions of dollars the U.S.government spends each year on geospatial-related research and development along strategic goals that meet the needs of government and the private sector.

H.R. 4233 is one of the issues MAPPS will be advocating during the Capitol Hill Day next Wednesday, March 28 part of the Federal Programs Conference.

"Congressman Lamborn's bill will help stimulate a discussion on how to best deploy geospatial data, services, products and technologies in the Federal government, and with non-Federal stakeholders. Dozens of studies have identified the need for better geospatial coordination and utilization, but this is the first legislative effort in years to actually put some of these studies' recommendations into place.  Even if some disagree with some particular provision in the bill, Mr. Lamborn should be commended for his leadership," said MAPPS Executive Director John Palatiello  

We’ve secured a special 10% registration discount for our valued members to attend this world-class conference. Click here to register now or use promotional code 103811.

For more information, visit the SPAR International website.

In addition, SPAR Point Group's Sam Pfeifle interviewed John Palatiello, Executive Director about the letter MAPPS sent to the Iowa Governor and DoT on their solicitation for a high-speed laser scanner.

We look forward to seeing you at SPAR International!

MAPPS has sent a letter to members of a Wisconsin State Senate committee in opposition to AB 586 and SB 444.

This legislation makes significant changes to the definition of services that can only be performed by licensed land surveyors. It would adversely affect mapping professionals who currently perform services not related to boundary services. Inasmuch as the bill does not follow the NCEES model law and does not have a grandfather clause, it would legislate out of business highly qualified, competent and experienced mapping professionals. This includes our member firms in Wisconsin. Specifically, section 93 would add construction surveying which includes any mapping in support of infrastructure design or the establishing of construction documentation (planimetric mapping), and section 95 would add geodetic surveying which includes mapping the size or shape of the earth or the precise location of points on the earth’s surface (control surveys). While AB 586 and SB 444 do not specifically mention photogrammetry, these services would be affected nd adversely impacted.

MAPPS made its views known to the organizations supporting this bill when similar legislation was not approved in the last legislative session. We provided those organizations specific proposals to correct the bill in October of 2011, but they were not included in the current version.

The NCEES Model Law was carefully developed after an extensive process that included a nationwide group of stakeholders, such as engineers, surveyors, photogrammetrists, GIS practitioners, and state licensing board members. The Model Law includes a grandfather or "savings” clause to permit a window during which currently practicing photogrammetrists can become licensed as surveyors, limited to their area of competence and expertise – by demonstrating qualifications and experience in the specialty area of photogrammetry, but not tying it to experience, examination or education specific to traditional land surveying.

Recently, the State Legislature in the State of Oregon and the Commonwealth of Virginia included licensing of photogrammetrists in its definition of surveying. Those legislatures included such a savings clause or grandfather provision. In addition, all geospatial stakeholders in Oregon and Virginia came together to insure that the resulting legislation did not inadvertently harm the increasingly important applications of these technologies. Similar processes have been included by the other state legislatures that have recently enacted legislation affecting photogrammetry in their Land Surveyors Act, including North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. Such an inclusive process was not followed in Wisconsin.

The MAPPS Board of Directors has adopted a principle stating "any state licensing program for individual practitioners in photogrammetry and other geospatial disciplines must include a "savings” or "grandfather” provision that permits qualified, experienced professionals to continue to practice without disruption in service.” Inasmuch as AB 586 and SB 444 violate MAPPS Board-adopted policy, MAPPS opposes these bills in their present form.

MAPPS concern is based on the fact that such services are currently provided in the commercial market by professional surveying and mapping firms. There are numerous scanner/camera systems owned and operated by private surveying and mapping firms across the United States. These firms have invested heavily in this technology, not only in capital, but in training and development of their personnel as well. Many of these firms have provided mapping, surveying, and geospatial services to the Iowa Department of Transportation for many years. Services such as aerial and ground-based surveying and mapping (commonly known as photogrammetry), aerial photography, land surveying, GIS, and scanning and imagery for mapping have long been contracted to the private sector by federal and state agencies, and many of these services have been contracted to the private sector by Iowa DoT.

Historically, private firms have proven to be more cost-effective in providing surveying and mapping services than in-house DOT production. Scanning and imaging services should be regarded in the same manner, and should be contracted as part of a QBS selection for professional services.

Federal law, which encourages the use of the private sector for highway projects (See 23 USC 306), may prohibit the acquisition of such a unit. Since 1956, the national highway law required the Secretary of Transportation to, "wherever practicable, authorize the use of photogrammetric methods in mapping, and the utilization of commercial enterprise for such services”. The law was amended in the National Highway System Act in 1995 to require the Secretary to "issue guidance to encourage States to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, private sector sources for surveying and mapping services for projects”.

MAPPS said in an economy where States are finding it difficult to fund basic services and face financial difficulties due to high unemployment rates and reduced tax revenues, it does not appear wise or prudent to waste taxpayers’ money on equipment for government operation of an activity when there are private firms that already have such equipment and can be utilized through a competitive procurement process.

MAPPS President Dick McDonald, T-3 Global Strategies (Bridgeville, PA) joined U.S. Representatives Bill Huizenga (R-MI), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Walter Jones (R- NC), and Don Manzullo (R-IL) at a news conference on Thursday, February 16 to announce House legislation that will permit manufacturers and service providers to compete on equal footing for contracts with the federal government by reforming Federal Prison Industries (FPI). Speakers at the media event included John Palatiello, President, Business Coalition for Fair Competition (Reston, VA); Alan Bubes, Chief Executive Officer, Linens of the Week (Washington, D.C.) and Jonathan Long, Program Manager, Propper International (Weldon Spring, Missouri). The event was held in the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center, Room HVC-200 in Washington, DC.

Video of the news conference is available above. Read the news release from Rep. Huizenga.

Currently cosponsored by 12 bipartisan members of the U.S. House and supported by 10 business organizations, H.R. 3634 provides greater competition in federal contracting by permitting private sector firms, including small business, more opportunities by reducing FPI’s unfair advantages. Additionally, H.R. 3634 would prohibit FPI and its inmate workers from having access to a variety of geospatial information, about individual citizens' property or critical infrastructure location.

This bill is virtually identical to H.R. 2965, the bill that passed the House in 2006 by a 362-57 vote (Roll no. 443). MAPPS supported that bill. A companion bill was approved by a Senate committee, but was not enacted into law. However, other piecemeal FPI reforms have been put in place by Congress in recent years.

With unemployment continuing at dangerously high levels, 2012 may be the year Congress enacts a bill that has support from Republicans and Democrats, business and labor.

Like its predecessor, H.R. 3634 includes two provisions significant to MAPPS.

First, the bill prohibits agencies from specifying FPI, or its products, as a source in any Federal agency synopsis/solicitation. There have been incidents where architect-engineer (A/E) contracts have required the A/E firm to specify a FPI product, such as a modular furniture system, in its designs.

Most importantly, the bill prohibits FPI and its inmate workers from having access to a variety of geospatial information, about individual citizens’ property or critical infrastructure location. Specifically, it bans FPI from providing "a service in which an inmate worker has access to personal or financial information about individual private citizens, including information relating to such person’s real property, however described, without giving prior notice to such persons or class of persons to the greatest extent practicable; geographic data regarding the location of surface and subsurface infrastructure providing communications, water and electrical power distribution, pipelines for the distribution of natural gas, bulk petroleum products and other commodities, and other utilities; or data that is classified.”This provision would prohibit FPI from engaging in most, if not all, geospatial activities.

With regard to services, the bill eliminated FPI’s status as a preferred source. A Federal agency can only contract with FPI for services, such as GIS, CAD, scanning, digitizing, if the buying agency’s contracting officers determines FPI’s services meet the agency’s need in a number of criteria, can perform on time, and provides the service at a fair market price. This eliminates enormous advantages FPI has enjoyed in providing services. With regard to products, FPI’s previous mandatory source status is ended in favor of full and open competition.

The bill also prohibits FPI from providing services in the commercial market. Although FPI’s original 1930’s enabling law prohibited prison-made products from commercial market entry, the organization secured a legal opinion during the Clinton Administration that said since Congress mentioned products in the 1930’s, and not services, then sale of prisoner provided services must be permitted, notwithstanding that the United States did not have a service economy in the 1930s. Several state attorneys general have issued similar opinions with regard to state prisons.

Federal Prison Industries, Inc., which operates under the trade name UNICOR, is a self-supporting, wholly-owned government corporation that employs federal prison inmates. A program of the Justice Department’s Bureau of Prisons, FPI offers hundreds of products and services, including a number of data conversion activities.

A number of state prison industry operations have extensive GIS capabilities, including Colorado, Florida, and Texas, to name a few.

A recent MAPPS legislative issues poll found 51 percent of members continue to view prison industry reform legislation as a very important or somewhat important issue.

It has been reported that FPI won a contract from the Corps of Engineers to make signs. The funding came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, ARRA, commonly known as the stimulus bill. While that bill was intended to put law-abiding, unemployed Americans back to work, not to support inmates, the expenditure of Federal ARRA funds on prison industries is being investigated by Congress.

Here is a news story about the bill.

Under H.R. 3634, FPI/UNICOR would be required to submit a detailed analysis of the impact to the private sector before entering into new product markets and would not be able to sell products commercially or internationally; the only customer could be the federal government. It also prohibits agencies from contracting with FPI in which inmates would have access to sensitive or classified information.

"This bill gives the taxpayer the greatest value for their hard-earned money by forcing federal agencies to bid for fair and reasonable prices and for products that best suit their needs. The bill preserves market access for these products or services to the hard-working men and women of our districts. This is simply one more easy, common sense way to preserve jobs and help restore economic security for America," Huizenga said.

"This legislation will protect the jobs of hard-working American taxpayers while providing valuable alternative rehabilitative opportunities to better prepare inmates for a successful return to society. It is a workable, bipartisan solution to the problem," Rep. Maloney added.

"It is time to allow for fair competition for U.S. manufacturers," according to Rep. Frank.

"We should be looking to make government more efficient and cost-effective, and this bill does that. I support this legislation because it will save taxpayer money and open up the contracting process to competition by allowing businesses to bid for these contracts," Sensenbrenner said.

Other examples of the industries FPI competes in include: clothing and textiles, electronics, vehicular components and fleet management, industrial products, office furniture, electronics recycling, and services such as call center and data and document conversion.

The bill has already gathered interest from a broad coalition of business groups and has a bipartisan list of supporters in Congress from all across America. Original co-sponsors include Reps. Donald Manzullo (R-IL), Edward Royce, (R-CA), Patrick Tiberi (R-OH), and John Olver (D-MA).

In the past, studies by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found FPI products and services did not meet agency requirements, were not delivered in a timely manner, and were at times more expensive that the private sector.

There are numerous opportunities for greater private sector participation in the financing and delivery of infrastructure or public works. Dr. Adrian Moore of the Reason Foundation summarized the need for increased utilization of the private sector in transportation when he told Congress in 2004, "the opportunities for private sector participation in transportation services runs a wide range. In many cases government agencies compete with private service providers or have forced private providers out of the market in order to maximize revenue for government services. In such instances the market would provide transportation services if government competition or regulation were removed.” He concluded, "Private sector participation in transportation services will either take the form of market provision or of provision under contract with a government agency in a public-private partnership. Government transportation services should not be allowed to compete with private services, nor should state or local governments ban or restrict private services to reduce competition with government services.”

The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, unveiled by Speaker John Boehner, Representatives John Mica and John J. Duncan, Jr. and other members of Congress, transforms the way the nation will design, build, own, operate and maintain these public works. For the first time in modern history, Congress is considering a bill that encourages, enables and empowers private companies to contribute to the nation’s infrastructure needs. Given the grade of "D” on the American Society of Civil Engineers infrastructure report card, and the estimated $2.2 trillion price tag for bringing these facilities up to a passing grade, private products, services and investment are critically needed. Numerous provisions in the House bill do just that.

H.R. 7 provides for public-private partnerships for new toll highways, provisions to eliminate government competition in rest stops, buses, and other aspects of transportation and infrastructure. There are provisions encouraging use of the private sector for engineering and design services. And most important to MAPPS, the bill provides a long-overdue strengthening of current law regarding utilization of the private sector for surveying and mapping activities.

Since the original enactment of the federal-aid highway program in 1956, the law has provided that the private sector should be utilized for photogrammetric surveying and mapping activities. When Congress enacted the National Highway System Act in 1995, the provision (33 USC 306) was strengthened to require the Secretary to "issue guidance to encourage States to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, private sector sources for surveying and mapping services for projects”.

Other than issuing a 1½ page guidance memorandum in 1998, the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration have done little to implement, enforce or otherwise provide oversight of this provision. As a result, over the past 13 years, the opposite of the intent of Congress has occurred. In many state highway departments, scarce gas tax dollars are dedicated to operating in-house surveying and mapping functions that duplicate and compete with the private sector.

MAPPS members have long complained that a number of state DoT’s have used Federal highway money to build in-house capabilities in surveying and mapping. Numerous states have their own airplanes and cameras for mapping aerial photography, analytical stereoplotters (mapping computers), GPS satellite surveying receivers, LIDAR systems, photographic laboratories, and other expensive equipment to perform services already available from private firms. With the recent advent of mobile mapping systems, private firms are once again experiencing state DoTs purchasing equipment for in-house activities without regard for the availability of mobile mapping services from private firms that have already invested in such systems. Some state DOT's even market these services outside their own agency, performing work for other state agencies, city and county government, even non-government organizations, in direct competition with the private sector.

FHwA has not monitored State compliance with current Federal law and does not conduct audits or in any way perform oversight of State transportation agencies, which are expending Federal funds, to determine if these surveying and mapping programs are being operated in the most efficient and cost effective manner, to fully implement section 306, or to prevent government competition with the private sector.

Section 1707 of H.R. 7 strengthens the current law provision on utilization of the private sector for surveying and mapping by state DoTs. It makes the policy on private sector reliance mandatory rather than discretionary, and requires US DOT and FHwA to take more action on an ongoing basis to assure that states utilize, and do not duplicate or compete with, private mapping firms.

If the debate in the Presidential campaign has taught us one thing, it is that profit is not a dirty word. Harnessing the power of profit and the free enterprise system can advance the Nation’s Infrastructure needs.

Contact your Congressman TODAY and deliver a simple message: "Vote "YES” on H.R. 7”.

"Mr. Lamborn.  Mr. Palatiello, you mentioned government duplication in the mapping area. Can you be more specific on what can be done to avoid this duplication and the expense that goes along with duplication? And I would like to say, I approve of what -- and am happy that President Obama in his State of the Union address addressed duplication. He was talking about salmon, I think, and two different programs. And he used a humorous example, but it is unfortunate that we have to, in this time of huge debts, pay money for duplicative programs. Please continue.

Mr. Palatiello. You are exactly right, and the President did say that salmon in the freshwater are the responsibility of the Interior Department, and once it reaches saltwater, it is the Commerce Department. And then he said he hears it gets more complicated once they are smoked.  Well, the same thing can be said about mapping. You want a topographic map? You go to USGS. You want to add a flood plain? You go to FEMA. You want to show the shoreline? You go to NOAA. So the same type of stovepiping and lack of coordination that the President was talking about with regard to salmon is a direct corollary to the same problem we have with regard to mapping. Now, to the Administration's credit, they have launched something called the geospatial platform, which is an attempt to build a cloud computing environment for sharing of data. And I think that is a very good step in the right direction. The problem is the structure, though. When you have 40-plus Federal agencies doing a variety of different types of mapping, that is a problem.”

1. Pass and sign surface transportation, aviation, water resources, and clean water and drinking water infrastructure authorization bills. Enactment of these authorizations will immediately provide programmatic and fiscal certainty that will help job creators in every state put people back to work.
   
   
2. Pass and sign appropriations bills for the remainder of fiscal year 2012. Short-term continuing resolutions provide little or no certainty to public agencies or those who perform work for them. In fact, our members say that the failure to pass routine authorizations and appropriations bills undermines business confidence.
   
   
3. Increase public-private partnerships. Any effort to reinvigorate the design and construction markets must successfully jumpstart new privately-funded construction. The strength of the private sector market is the single largest determining factor in the health of the construction industry. The best way to boost private demand for construction is to put in place pro-growth policies that will boost economic expansion.

• the current Pay at the Pump method be preserved as the best way for general aviation to help pay for ATC services and the "fee per flight" concept be rejected,
• Identify "Super Committee” members who are aviation friendly and urge them to either reject the fee outright, or adopt wording to exclude flights that are primarily work operations, such as small businesses operating aircraft for aerial surveys.
• Identify FAA activities that can be reformed, eliminated or privatized to save money and explore a more balanced and equitable method of paying for FAA and ATC services that does not unfairly target general aviation generally or aerial survey operations in particular.

"This serves to highlight how closely the reports of agencies with regulatory and enforcement authority, like the FTC, are scrutinized by groups and associations. More likely the FTC's inclusion of "precise geolocation data” was a placeholder nod to location-based tracking and information increasingly sent out by GPS-enabled smartphones. But words matter. Definitions define. And entities are wary of any governmental action that could effect their industry."

"In short, expect the FTC to address geospatial and geolocation issues further within any broader online privacy framework moving forward, though as noted above, the State Attorneys General, like the FTC, appear to have completely missed the broader concerns of this group. "