![[Skip Navigation]](/images/pixel.gif){kind=tracking}
|
FGDC Marine Boundary Working Group
Meeting Minutes Priority Issue Summaries, Marine Boundary Working Group, March 15, 2001Issue One: Who Is Responsible? • Issue Two: Absolute Legal Documentation • Issue Three: Standardization • Issue Four: Enforcement Issue One Who is responsible for keeping/developing/sharing boundaries in Government (federal/state/local/tribal) Author(s)
Synopsis There is not a complete understanding/comprehensive list of who is responsible for owning, maintaining, and developing boundaries. Determining points of contact for information regarding a particular boundary or the boundaries for a particular agency/organization will promote further cooperation among those responsible for defining/determining marine boundaries. A similar understanding of who defines, creates, develops marine boundaries and the data that define them is crucial. Trends - What external factors may affect the direction of this problem?
Whom does this issue affect most directly?
Why should this working group address this issue?
What incentives are there for those who take up the challenge?
What is the spatial and geographic context of this issue?
What is currently being done to address this concern? Who is doing it?
What is the future state we are trying to attain?
What are some potential solutions?
Issue Two Problems and issues with defining the absolute legal documentation of the boundary and timing of issues. Author(s)
Synopsis There are a number of questions that arise when attempting to determine or define the absolute legal documentation of marine boundaries. These questions include:
Trends - What external factors may affect the direction of this problem? External factors that may affect the direction of this problem are changes in international or domestic law, changes in agency charters, changes in personnel, and loss of institutional memory. Who is affected by this issue most directly? People who want to use other agencies'; boundaries for their purposes (i.e. development of boundaries) are affected by this issue. A number of problems stem from the legal ambiguities inherent in available boundary data. Why should this working group address this issue? By addressing this issue, the Marine Boundary Working Group would facilitate the creation and sharing of boundaries, and the elimination of costly duplication of effort. The chance of using incorrect or misrepresentations of the boundary would be reduced, and the level of uncertainty would be reduced as well. What incentives are there for those who take up the challenge? By addressing this issue, costly duplications of effort could be eliminated. In addition, ultimately defendable boundaries could be the end result. What is the spatial and geographic context of this issue? Global What is currently being done to address this concern? The Marine Boundary Working Group is currently addressing this and other concerns. A draft marine boundary Web site has also been created, which could facilitate addressing many of the problems inherent in the development, use, and enforcement of marine boundaries. What is the future state we are trying to attain? Public dissemination of information concerning the authorizing or controlling documents for all marine boundaries could alleviate much of the ambiguity and uncertainty. What are some potential solutions? (two - three sentences each) One potential solution would be to find who the authorizing agencies for individual marine boundaries are, conduct an inventory of existing marine boundaries, contact relevant agencies, obtain information of controlling documents, and disseminate that information. Development of a legal precedent for digital boundaries should also be a priority. This could be achieved in part through contacting agencies'; general counsels for legal opinions on creating and disseminating digital boundaries where the controlling documents are maps, charts, or textual descriptions. [Back to top]Issue Three Standardization, or lack thereof Author(s)
Synopsis We would like to see, in five years, a set of standards for developing and documenting marine boundaries that are endorsed by the marine boundary community and the Federal Geographic Data Committee. It will be imperative to coordinate with the land-based cadastral community so that a smooth transition will occur. Trends - What external factors may affect the direction of this problem?
Who is affected by this issue most directly? Developers, users, people out in the field, enforcement, regulated communities, or any other agencies that use marine boundaries. Why should this working group address this issue? Standards build predictability into products. Standards also promote consistency and efficiency. Ultimately, a set of standards for the development and maintenance of marine boundaries would make our lives easier. What incentives are there for those who take up the challenge? The biggest incentives for the development of standards is the potential for legally defensible boundaries. What is the spatial and geographic context of this issue? Spatially, the issue is four-dimensional: x, y, z, and t. The geographic scope of the working group and of marine boundary standards has not been determined. Important issues that need to be defined include data representation; i.e., how lines are mapped and map projections. What is currently being done to address this concern? Within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there is a Locational Data Improvement Committee. The FGDC has accuracy and metadata standards that could be used or built on. What is the future state we are trying to attain?
What are some potential solutions? Our problem is lack of standards. Our solution is the development of standards. [Back to top]Issue Four Ability to enforce digital marine boundaries Author(s)
Synopsis To provide a simple but detailed (technically correct) digital description of all marine areas, understandable to the user community and legally defensible in a court of law.
Trends: What external factors may affect the direction of this problem? Political climate can change; Political interest groups can exert pressure and change priorities; Technology is changing and we are moving toward digital age. There are increasing pressures on the resource - Increased use of oceans; Increased availability of data on the Internet and increased expectations of users that data will be provided over the Internet. Who affected by this issue most directly? User community, legal and law enforcement, and affected government agencies Why should this working group address this issue? To achieve objectives of the legislative intent. Without knowing the location of the intended boundary, the regulations can not be accurately or easily followed. What incentives are there for those who take up the challenge? Foremost is the protection of natural and cultural resources. Increase compliance and financial recovery of damage award, fines, and penalties. Reduce loss of life and property loss. What is the spatial and geographic context of this issue? Global What is currently being done to address this concern? Generally, institutions react on a case-by-case basis involving boundary issues. NMSP has started a process to correct the legal and technical problems. NOAA and MMS MOU created to cooperate on maritime/baseline issues. NPS working with individual tribes to define common boundaries and facilitate solutions. Ad Hoc Committee on US Baseline in place to review US Baseline. What is the future state we are trying to attain? Existing and future digital marine boundaries that are defensible, easily located, useable in spatial information systems and related technologies, and legally enforcement. What are some potential solutions?
|
