U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Intergraph User Group ASPRS 2006 Annual Conference Reno, Nevada Overview of the USGS Plan for Quality Assurance of Digital Aerial Imagery

2 The major players: Manufacturers Data Providers Procurement officials End-users Introduction

3 Outline Background ASPRS Panel recommendations USGS Plan for Quality Assurance of Digital Aerial Imagery Status and schedule Summary

4 Why calibration at USGS? Photogrammetric methods for map generation Map production primarily done in-house Quality assurance measure for aerial photography from aerial contractors Leadership role in standards development Unbiased, independent agency with technical expertise Quality assurance for The National Map Background

5 USGS Camera Calibration History USGS responsible for calibration services for film camera in United States since 1973 USGS operates Optical Sciences Lab (OSL) in Reston, VA with a custom-built calibration instrument Current policy requires current (within 3 years) camera calibration report on file before award of contract The “Catch-22” problem for digital sensors

6 Continue to provide analog calibration services Develop and implement digital calibration capabilities Develop standards for camera and sensor calibrations Develop and implement in-situ calibration methods ASPRS Recommendations

7 Stage 1: Initiation Stage 2: Contagion Stage 3: Control Stage 4: Integration Stages of New Technology

8 Initiation:Research and pilot projects Contagion:Wild enthusiasm and demand Control:Refined standards and format Integration:DOQs critical to enterprise operation Example: DOQs

9 Lack of information: What, where, why, and how? The unknown: Does it perform as claimed? Business decision: Does it make business sense? Lack of experience: What I can or can not do? Operational changes: What are the best practices? Lack of standards: What are the specifications? Overcoming inertia: Acceptance by clients? The Barriers to New Technology

10 An independent validation of manufacturer’s specifications Development and monitoring of “best practices” Standardized procurement specifications Uniform quality assurance measures The Formula for Quality

11 Development and of a comprehensive quality plan Acceptance and use by Inter-Agency Digital Image Working Group agencies Requirement by other agencies and contracting offices Acceptance by general user community What the USGS Proposes

12 The major players: Manufacturers Data Providers Procurement officials End-users Your Perspective

13 The USGS Perspective Image products and services for customers Contracts with Data Providers Occasional procurement of sensor systems Specialized geospatial data for research projects End products for The National Map

14 USGS Plan for Quality Assurance Four major parts covering two major processes:  Data Production: Manufacturers Certification Data Providers (flyers) Certification  Data Purchasing & Acceptance Contracting Guidelines Data Acceptance Standards

15 The USGS Plan Data Procurement: Contracting Guidelines & Boilerplate Tool Data Users and Inspectors: Acceptance Standards Sensor Manufacturers: Manufacturers Certification Data Providers: Data Providers Certification User Needs Data Procurement Domain Data Generation Domain Final Product

16 Manufacturers Certification Aerial Digital Imaging is in its “Wild West” phase  Anything & everything being tried  Some metric-quality systems  Many “other” systems How does the customer know which can produce mapping-quality data? USGS to offer “type certification” of mapping-quality digital aerial sensors  Must be stable, well-quantified, repeatable  Able to routinely generate mapping-quality data When operated properly!

17 Communicates specifications Provides evidence of system performance Independent certification helps to promote sensor systems Supports verification of Data Provider’s system Type certification eliminates burden of calibration for each sensor sold in the United States (1 time vs. n times) Eliminates need for USGS to have custom-built calibration instrument for calibration purposes Benefits of Manufacturers Certification

18 Data Providers Certification Second half of data generation is the flyers/Data Providers’ data processing USGS to provide Data Providers Certification Focused on processes and process control  Ensures that Data Providers are operating sensors in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions and limitations  Ensures that Data Providers follow quality procedures Desire to ensure reliability, repeatability, and trust

19 Provides evidence of performance of products Independent certification helps to promote product specifications and Data Provider’s capabilities Documents Data Provider’s quality assurance plan and “best practices” One certification for Data Provider and not for each camera Data Providers no longer have to send cameras to OSL for calibration, reducing down-time and shipping expenses Benefits of Data Providers Certification

20 Contracting Guidelines User community is not sure how to contract for digital imagery  New terms, capabilities, standards, lexicon  Inhibits digital contracting  Addresses boilerplate requiring “USGS Certificate”  Goal is to remove barriers to digital aerial contracts  Encourage digital imaging Created Federal Digital Imagery General Contract Guideline

21 Standardized terms and descriptions make the contracting process easier and more uniform among agencies Guidelines help acceptance of digital sensors and educate end-users on benefits of digital technology Standardized terms and guidelines help contracting officers describe their users needs Standardized performance measures USGS certifications provide a priori acceptance of systems and Data Provider’s “best practices” Manufacturer and Data Providers Certification reduces necessary documentation in the RFP process Benefits of Contracting Guidelines

22 Digital Data Acceptance Standards End-users unsure of how to judge digital aerial data quality  New terms & capabilities (resolution, spectral, etc.)  Each customer understands things differently There is a need for common, uniform definitions and methods for evaluating quality of image data USGS to work with Inter-Agency Digital Image Working Group to develop these standards Goal is a Web-based tool illustrating quality problems, measurement techniques, and standards

23 Data consumers have common standards to evaluate data products More consistent acceptance/rejection criteria among contracting agencies Clearer standards and guidelines helps to eliminate false expectations Ensures high quality products Increases customer satisfaction Benefits of Acceptance Standards

24 Manufacturers Certification (Cost-shared by USGS and manufacturers) Data Providers Certification (100% by Data Providers) Contracting Guidelines (100% USGS and IADIWG funded) Acceptance standards (100% USGS and IADIWG funded) Funding Strategy

25 Manufacturers Certification Guidelines in work now Up to 4 manufacturers to be certified this fiscal year Two factory visits completed; reports pending Four Data Providers have expressed interest working on the initial round of Data Providers Certification First draft of Digital Imagery Contracting Guideline completed and reviewed by limited group  A Web-based tool to help generate contracting language is being developed Status

26 My personal opinion Thanks for the cooperation Cost-benefit Taking the high ground Factory visit completed, report in-progress Another opinion (Suppliers, testing, and quality control) A few details, but no issues Type certification on DMC will be issued Intergraph Manufacturers Certification

27 USGS Plan for Quality Assurance of Digital Aerial Imagery briefed during ASPRS panel session Invite comment from broader community Finalize and obtain ASPRS approval Begin initial Data Providers Certifications Provide briefings to geospatial community Participate in international forum to communicate plans in United States Next Steps

28 Four Phases of Technology Assimilation: Phase 1: Identification and investment Phase 2: Learning and adaptation Phase 3: Rationalization and management control Phase 4: Maturity and widespread acceptance Closing Thought

29 To implement a comprehensive, meaningful process that ensures the quality of data products and services To cooperatively develop the plan with all elements of the geospatial community Education and training also a major component Good for one is good for all To establish a model to support new technologies Summary

30 IADIWG Web site at: For more information

31 Contact: Gregory L. Stensaas Remote Sensing Systems Characterization Manager USGS EROS Data Center nd Street Sioux Falls, SD For issues or comments

32 USGS Manufacturers Review Team Review Team Lead - Gregory L. Stensaas Remote Sensing Technologies Project Manager USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science Center, Sioux Falls, SD Systems Engineering Team Member - Jon Christopherson Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Contractor to the USGS EROS, Sioux Falls, SD Photogrammetric Engineering Team Member - Dr. George Y. G. Lee U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA Geo-Spatial and Software Engineering Team Member - Donald Moe Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Contractor to the USGS EROS, Sioux Falls, SD Radiometric and Physics Team Member - Dr. Robert Ryan Science Systems and Applications, Inc. Contractor to NASA Stennis Space Center, MS

33 Questions or comments? The USGS Plan