IMCC/MSHA/OSM Benchmarking Workshop on Underground Mine Mapping

October 15 and 16, 2003

The Galt House Hotel

Louisville, KY

NOTE: On Day Two of the Benchmarking Workshop, attendees participated in
an interactive discussion of several topics that were introduced by a
panel of presenters during four roundtable sessions. The following notes
reflect some of the discussions that took place during those sessions.

# Roundtable Session I: Acquiring and Preserving Map Images

Presentation by PA Bureau of Deep Mine Safety

They scan at 300 DPI in color and save to TIFF

They use a Vidar Color Scanner

It preserves details on the map

The intention is to preserve and scan the maps as a visual equivalent of
the original

Presentation by Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy

Scans in color at 200 to 300 DPI depending on the level of detail in
document

Save as TIFF 6 format for Archive

Compress as Mr. SID for daily use

Anyone can view Mr. SID files with free SID viewer

They have a portable scan station that they can take to remote locations
for scanning maps. This is essential to their acquisition of many maps
because many people won't let maps off site.

They use a Color Track 5400 scanner that takes maps up to 12mm thick.

Georeference using AutoCAD Map

Presentation by OSM regarding OSM Mine Map Repository

Repository began scanning 5 to 6 years ago

Started at 100 DPI, then 200 and now 400 DPI

Just purchased a new 54 inch scanner and will scan all original maps
that come in. Will not abandon the aperture card process.

Several questions were raised by the moderator prior to an extended
period of discussion, as follows:

Of the 20 states represented at the workshop:

How many states have capability to scan Answer. 12

How many states have laws in place that require submission of\
mine maps Answer: 10 (coal)

4 (noncoal)

How many states receive signed and certified coal mine maps Answer 9

How many receive signed and certified non coal maps Answer 4

How many states require final non-certified coal maps Answer 2

How many states required to keep and preserve maps Answer 9

How many states required to keep maps in secure location Answer 4 or 5

How many accept electronic mine maps Answer 9

MSHA requires submittal of final coal mine closure map for all mines.
Some district offices send these to OSM and others do not.

Some companies go out of business before closure and maps are not
submitted.

MSHA has no map submittal requirement for non-coal mines.

While OSM has a mutual agreement with some MSHA district offices to
receive closure maps, this is not a requirement of MSHA and not all
districts do it.

West Virginia started last fall acquiring mine maps

Effort includes talking to many groups and organizations including:

-   Coal associations

-   Engineering and survey firms

-   Professional Engineering Board

-   Survey Board

Effort includes:

-   Acquiring maps of old mines

-   Editing database and comparing it with the OSM database

-   Taking a fresh look at map requirements for active mines, talking to
    operators about electronic submittal, getting information for all
    active mines

-   Getting final maps of all current mines by providing resources to
    mine companies such as a checklist of information to be included on
    final map (georeferencing info required).

MSHA asked how states get companies to release maps.

WV stated that persistence prevails. They have continued to work with
operators on issues like liability and confidentiality. Some companies
are developing disclaimers to deal with liability.

Virginia has been successful by just persisting. Also, VA gives the
company something back by making scanned mine map and database
information available to mining companies for new permits and other
actions. VA puts a disclaimer on all data released.

Illinois said that they have had great success with some companies and
less with others. IL gives electronic copies of all scanned maps back to
the mining company. IL suggested that all states send copies of scanned
maps to the OSM MMR as an archive or national storehouse. 17 states
replied that they would do this if asked by OSM.

North Carolina said that we need a document maintenance plan for
electronic data.

IL stated that the national MMR must have a data upgrade plan or data
will become obsolete.

It was asked how many states have a quality controlled facility to store
and preserve paper maps long term. Seven states responded that they do
have one. It was also asked how many states have facilities to store
maps properly (i.e. flat and climate controlled). The answer was four.

We learned that OSM MMR does not keep original paper maps. They are
microfilmed and/or scanned and returned to sender.

Wyoming uses state archives to store paper maps. IL has a dedicated mine
map storage facility. Others states are able to work their state
archivists as well. In fact, ten states indicated that they have state
archive facilities or agencies that can store maps.

PA stated that the compact disk is not an appropriate long term data
storage medium. It was suggested that people use a redundant server for
this process.

Illinois stated that we may need Federal requirements for final mine
maps on non-coal mines, similar to those for coal mines.

IL also said that we need a MSHA requirement that all district offices
send final closure maps to OSM-MMR.

BLM stated that we need a statute requiring submittal of all final mine
maps.

OK stated that we should scan every unique map, not just the latest map
for a mine. Early maps and operation plan maps may contain a lot of
detail that the final map may omit. We especially need to capture
surface features.

New Mexico wants a database of all company lineages to find out who has
the old maps. New Mexico has not scanned any mine maps yet.

Ohio stated that they would like to see a general list of sites where
people would look for mine maps.

MSHA stated that the Library of Congress has a mine map collection. Also
has maps by state. This collection is called the Sanborn Collection and
is available via the web.

Someone suggested that paper maps are the only acceptable Archive medium
right now.

Other issues/topics that were raised during this session included the
following:

-   Deterioration of maps: how do we protect maps and bring them forward
    into the future?

-   What should we scan -- the original or a copy?

-   Quality control is critical, especially in terms of protection and
    storage.

-   We need scanning solutions

-   Cataloguing and indexing is also critical

-   We should focus more resources on georeferencing and rectification

-   How do we define what a "final" map is and what we do with it?

-   Liability concerns: how do we get companies (both land and mining)
    to release maps? Issues here include: proprietary information;
    potential legal liability; use of disclaimers; sharing information
    back with the companies; and use of the information we receive as a
    "footprint", not a "hammer".

-   Potential use of OSM's national mine map repository for all maps
    (digital copies)

-   Storage of original maps -- use of state archivist agencies here.

-   Storage -- CD (digital) v. original paper copies of maps

-   Standards for submittal of maps for active coal and noncoal mines

-   Importance of capturing unique map characteristics, usually on
    oldest available maps.

-   Resource for contacting mining companies who mined in the past

-   Guidelines for what states are attempting to capture in their
    mapping efforts.

# Roundtable Session II: Moving Maps to GIS

Kentucky -- they reprocess the file to best fit 32 colors. It was stated
that KY started scanning maps 6 months ago. Started at 200 DPI, 24 bit
color, then reprocess to 32 color 8 bit data. They use MS Photoshop with
Active X to automatically reprocess image files overnight. Have an ACAD
utility they build in-house for semi-automatically georeferencing. They
enter 2 points then enter or point and click to set the scale. Then you
pick other points with a snap to grid feature.

West Virginia - has a rough set of guidelines for georeferencing. They
use the following features, in order, as tie points for maps:

-   Standard coordinates

-   Geologic features

-   Mine features

-   Railroads

-   Oil and gas wells

-   Transmission lines

-   Roads

-   Property lines

-   Streams

WV has other guidelines including:

-   Don't do anything that distorts the mine features

-   Estimate average positional error at 10 meters

-   Use GIS as index to detailed mine maps, but do not actually display
    the mine maps in the GIS for public.

-   Comply with FGDC metadata rules

Illinois made several suggestions. Scan and save all maps as
uncompressed TIFF for archive purposes. You can then compress the images
for use in GIS or other. Never fold maps during scanning. Cut and splice
if necessary. Never rubbersheet maps.

MSHA asked which states have state funding for mine map efforts. Answer:
3

How many rely solely on Fed funds -- Answer: 6

How many have no funding specifically earmarked to do anything on mine
maps. Answer: 7. Of these, six state are not doing any mapping; one
state is doing mapping.

It was also asked how many states require a geo-referenced coordinate
system for their mine mapping effort? Answer: 8.

Indiana suggested that map collection efforts be sensitive to user needs
and comments.

Illinois asks companies to place permanent markers at all shafts and
record the location with the courthouse. This is not by statute but
simply by request. IL asked if other states do it. The answer was no.

Someone stated that today's mine maps do not contain the details that
old maps had.

Someone suggested national guidance on:

Organizing maps

Indexing maps

Managing maps

Software

Hardware

Data management

Someone suggested we need a coordinated effort to compile a standard
model and examples of a GIS.

Someone also suggested that OSM needs to discuss setting up a web site
or message board for tech transfer on mine maps, possibly a list server.

Other topics/issues raised during this session included the following:

-   Georeferencing is an art form

-   Digitizing makes it easier to use data

-   Capturing and attributing information

-   Image processing -- minimize user intervention

-   Data validity -- source document impact on uncertainty and error

-   Importance of funding/resources to make sure of newer technologies
    for georeferencing and digitizing

-   GIS can serve an index to more detailed mine maps

-   Database management and indexing: potential data model and/or
    guidance; mechanism to share this information.

NOTE: At this point in the proceedings, several states who did not make
formal presentations on Day One were invited to provide an overview of
what is occurring in their respective state regarding mine mapping
efforts. Among the presentations were the following:

Kansas \-- Ken Nelson with Kansas Geological Survey stated that KS has
just started moving mine maps to GIS. Has a scanner available and lots
of computing hardware. Uses ArcSDE for other GIS data. He lacks money
for staff to do mine map georeferencing.

Missouri \-- Cheryl Seeger said Missouri Geological Survey has made no
concerted effort to find mine maps or move to GIS. They have a large
color scanner but no staff time. The maps that they do have are stored
flat.

Iowa \-- Mary Howes stated that Iowa has an inventory of 1600 to 1700
mine maps, most are prior to 1940. During the 1980's Iowa used \$30,000
from the AML program to have the state Achiever wash the maps to remove
acids and seal them in Mylar envelopes. The maps are stored flat. They
used AutoCAD to digitize mine boundaries from the maps. Also
photographed all maps in 81/2 by 11 inch and use these photos for
day-to-day work. Today, Iowa has a GIS with mine data stored in it and
maps for 830 mine sites. They know of 2000 mines that may have existed
in the state and need to identify and verify the locations of each. Iowa
is just in the beginning of creating an ARC IMS site.

New Mexico \-- Alysia Leavitt of New Mexico reported that NM has 10,000
to 15,000 abandoned UG mines. They have one room full of mine maps. The
only scanning that is done is the Open File maps and this is a minimal
number. Their next step is to index the maps they have. At this time,
they do not use TIPS for anything related to mine map efforts.

Oklahoma \-- Mary Ann Prichard and Mike Sharp reported that the Oklahoma
Department of Mines has a vault of underground mine maps. Only a few are
scanned. The AML program staff retrieves the ones they need on an
as-needed basis. They have 1500 to 2000 coal maps and 500 lead/zinc
maps. They report that Missouri Southern College in Joplin, Missouri has
the old Bureau of Mines map collection for the Tri-State district. The
Missouri maps are on microfich. Oklahoma and Kansas are on paper and
linen. They know that there were about 100,000 drill holes in the
Tri-State area but they have only about 14,000 drill logs at Missouri
Southern.

Overviews were also presented by NY, WY and CO but were not transcribed
and are unavailable.

# Roundtable Session III: Access/Sharing Information

A key element here is: who is your customer base? It can include the
mining industry; insurance companies; landowners; the general public;
planners (county, city, etc); state agencies (i.e. the departments of
transportation); utilities; consulting firms; lenders; and the news
media.

The use of websites is becoming more useful and practical.

Someone suggested the use of a subscriber service.

A key issue is how the information will be used -- there are different
views and needs

Importance of sharing freely validated data.

# Roundtable Session IV: Next Steps -- Moving into the Future

This session began with an overview from MSHA and OSM about their
respective visions for the future, including potential sources of
funding for state mine map initiatives.

MSHA stated that out of the \$10 million, no-year money that it received
from Congress as a follow-up to the Quecreek incident, \$6 million has
been earmarked for demonstration projects for detecting underground mine
voids. An RFP was issued and responses are due by November 1. Another
\$4 million has been specifically earmarked for digitizing of mine maps.
This money is specifically designated for state grants and grant
proposals are open to the entire mapping effort. At this juncture, MSHA
is considering distributing the money in three increments over three
years: \$2 million by 12/1/03; another \$1 million by 10/1/04; and the
final \$1 million by 10/1 05. However, the agency may re-think their
position on this and choose to make all \$4 million available
immediately, depending on the nature of the state grant proposals.
States were encouraged to submit their proposals to MSHA no later than
November 1. For further information, states were directed to contact
Larry Checca with MSHA at <checca.elio@dol.gov>.

OSM stated that it is hoping to include an amount of money (yet to be
determined) in its budget for FY 2005 to enhance its mine map repository
but also to develop and enhance "centers of excellence" at the state
level that will allow states with advanced experience and information on
mine mapping to share their expertise with other states. OSM would also
like to see funding available to allow those states with larger
workloads related to underground mine mapping to continue their on-going
work and to bring all states up to some base level of performance. OSM
views their initiative as a multi-year funding effort. It will be
primarily focused on coal only, since SMCRA does not address noncoal. As
part of its analysis of funding needs, OSM will be looking at hardware,
software and training needs. For further information, contact John
Craynon of OSM at <jcraynon@osmre.gov> .

Discussion then ensured regarding the types of next steps that might be
appropriate as a follow up to this workshop. Beyond the individual state
funding opportunities with MSHA and future state funding opportunities
with OSM, it was recommended that several select working groups or
committees be formed to refine and explore the following topics:

-   Preserving and archiving maps (including storage and protection and
    a national effort to recover mine maps)

-   Digitizing, scanning and ground-truthing maps

-   Database management (including data validity; minimizing and
    quantifying error; cataloguing and indexing)

-   Access and sharing information (including resolution of the
    liability issues)

-   Future workshops or intergovernmental discussions (perhaps as a
    follow-up to the work of the working groups or committees)

-   National guidelines (that might address mine map indexing,
    archiving, moving paper maps to CDs (digitization), etc.)

-   Interactive web sites or a national mine map bulletin board

-   Hazard prediction

-   Coordinating the map acquisition effort, especially between OSM and
    MSHA

-   Speed up the scanning of MMR maps

-   Avoiding duplication between agencies, ideally through partnering

-   Improve capabilities of all states to use and deliver maps, again
    through partnering

-   Possible new, national regulations or guidelines addressing the
    preparation and submission of closure maps for all coal and non-coal
    mines.

> Notes prepared by Len Meier of OSM and Greg Conrad, IMCC.