1. Strategic Planning for Transportation for the Nation (TFTN) Steve Lewis Geospatial Information Officer, USDOT Director, Office of Geospatial Information Systems, USDOT/RITA/BTS September 23, 2010

2. Background Influenced by several different efforts: In 2008, an “issues brief” by NSGIC called for the creation of TFTN OMB Circular A-16 identifies the USDOT as the “lead agency” for the “transportation theme” of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). Emerging USDOT data requirements for geospatial data for all roads, such as accident reporting for enhanced safety and bridge inventory. Aligned with several initiatives such the emerging federal Geospatial Platform concept. - one element of the “geospatial portfolio”

3. TFTN Concept “Creation and maintenance of high-quality, nationwide transportation data that is in the public domain” An initial focus on street centerlines, but eventually multi-modal Nationwide data spanning all states and territories All roads, not just Federally funded roads Provides a common geometric baseline Road naming Persistent segment ID numbering Advanced functionality is built on top of baseline Data is in the public domain and readily shareable

4. Strategic Planning Effort - History RITA/BTS agreed to fund and manage the effort Funds obligated and contractor selected in October 2009 Koniag Technology Solutions Applied Geographics Suffered through many contracting glitches associated with “end-of-year” money Contract finally awarded in March 2010

5. Strategic Planning Effort – The Process Identify and engage the entire stakeholder community All levels of government Private Sector Citizens (e.g. OpenStreetMap community) Define requirements, challenges and opportunities Document progress already made Existing Datasets Best Practices New Ideas Explore implementation issues Evaluate funding requirements and sources

6. What Has Been Done? - Pre-Award Outreach Meeting of Federal Stakeholders, October 2009 NSGIC Annual Conference, October 2009 National Geospatial Advisory Council, December 2009 Transportation Research Board Annual Meetings, January 2010 ESRI Federal User Conference, February 2010

7. What Has Been Done? – TFTN Workshops AASHTO GIS-T Symposium, April 2010 ESRI International User Conference, July 2010 NSGIC Annual Conference, September 2010 National Association of Regional Councils, September 2010 (webinar) URISA GIS-Pro Conference, September 2010 (next week)

8. What Has Been Done? – Stakeholder Interviews, Summer 2010 U.S. Department of Transportation Safety Asset Management Intelligent Transportation Systems Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) Other Federal Agencies U.S. Department of Agriculture Federal Communications Commission U.S. Geological Survey Bureau of the Census

9. What Has Been Done? – Stakeholder Interviews, Summer 2010 - Continued American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Transportation Research Board I-95 Corridor Coalition

10. Trends from the Workshops and Interviews Near Unanimous Support All of those interviewed and most of those who attended the workshops have indicated their support for this effort Learned of a number of similar efforts underway that benefit from TFTN Safety could be a key to the success of TFTN A geospatial representation of ALL ROADS is needed to meet many of the USDOTs Safety Initiatives A geospatial representation of ALL ROADS is needed for emergency response Lots of federal money for safety initiatives

11. Trends from the Workshops and Interviews “Think Regionally Act Locally” States and counties are beginning to look beyond their borders States and counties are the authoritative data source for their transportation data “Can you live with that?” The Stakeholders have different needs Need to find a baseline that works with everyone Once the baseline is established, the consumers can add their own “special sauce”

14. A Potential Model for TFTN - HPMS FHWA reporting requirements for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) include the submission of a geospatial network of all Federal-aid roads by each State DOT Current reporting requirements for the HPMS could be expanded to require all roads Detailed HPMS attributes would continue to be provided for only Federal-aid roads Annual nature of HPMS reporting provides a data update mechanism USDOT works with states to develop basic standards Reporting requirement would enable states to utilize FHWA funding for creation and maintenance of inventory

15. Obstacles Associated With This Model FHWA has to change the HPMS Reporting Requirements to include all roads in the geospatial submission States are not required to work with neighbors for connectivity No USDOT resources currently available for aggregation, assembly and publication of a nationwide data set The level of quality/accuracy varies from State to State

16. How Can These Obstacles Be Overcome? Through State-level Best Practices Some States work with their local government partners Provide funding and technical support State collects and aggregates the data into a Statewide dataset Involve the e-911 community Examples include Arkansas and Ohio Some states are using public-private partnerships Contracting for creation and maintenance of Statewide inventory Includes a mechanism for posting update requests In some case, the State is allowed to distribute a version of the data Examples include Massachusetts and New York Through possible additional USDOT funding sources

17. Potential Benefits of TFTN Core business benefits to the USDOT To the HPMS program: see HPMS in the context of complete transportation To Highway Safety for nationwide accident mapping To bridge inventory effort Benefits to “sister” federal agencies Reduces costs from redundant nationwide data sets Provides public domain data for sharing with partners Potential collaboration and synergy with other significant mapping programs at USGS and US Census

18. Potential Benefits of TFTN Benefits to State and Local Governments Potentially opens up FHWA resources for statewide road inventories Provides public domain data Facilitates sharing with partners Better data – particularly for rural areas – for GPS-based navigation Easier cross border /multi-jurisdiction coordination and collaboration Benefits to the General Public Consistent data across agencies and programs to support citizen services Publically accessible data for citizen and commercial innovation

19. Examples of what have we heard so far…

20. At the ESRI User Conference Short-term and long-term considerations Short term: don’t forget several nationwide datasets currently exist TIGER Commercial OpenStreetMap Longer term: design and build something new HPMS is not resourced to make a seamless nationwide data set Look at other “process models” too! Public/private partnership Build on TIGER Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) Something “outside-the-box” that we have yet to imagine

21. Census Bureau Interview Takeaways TIGER is a mature product Many users depend on it for a variety of applications National broadband mapping (for Census geometry) Significant improvements in latest TIGER files Positional accuracy improved (7.6 meter) Substantial input from local sources incorporated Research into potential for OpenStreetMap Planning for more frequent updates (depending on funding)

22. USGS Interview Takeaways Requirement for nationwide roads in The National Map (TNM) TIGER did not meet TNM requirements Positional accuracy Depictions of interchanges and dual-carriageways Attributes Costs to retrofit TIGER were prohibitive Have currently replaced TIGER with TeleAtlas data Competitive price, but restricted use Looking at OpenStreetMap and other alternatives, long-term The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) provides a positive example of Federal-State collaboration

23. At the NSGIC Annual Conference Develop a matrix of common requirements and approaches – “what are the shared needs and commonalities?” Develop an inventory of what each state has for statewide street centerlines Develop several success stories as 1-2 page fact sheets, perhaps as “tiered” levels of success The Census Bureau considers itself to be a “Data Integrator,” not a Data Producer per se; boundaries are the “real issue” for Census Bureau, not roads; DOTs might need greater detail Next Generation 911 is and will be a big driver for GIS-based initiatives to build statewide street centerline data sets to support automated routing

24. The Road Ahead More interviews, meetings, surveys, case studies, etc. Through these, we will: Identify what’s working, what’s needed – current practices, requirements, strategies, standards, documentation Identify institutional constraints, capacity, operational authority, motivation, benefits, etc. Formulate strategies for implementation Identify potential sources of funding

25. Questions? Steve Lewis (202) 366-9223 steve.lewis@dot.gov http://www.transportationresearch.gov/TFTN/default.aspx