Meeting Minutes

 

UNOLS Council Meeting

March 21-22, 2007 (Wednesday and Thursday)
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
March 21st, Wednesday - 8:30AM-5PM in the T-29 Martin Johnson House, La Jolla.

March 22nd, Thursday - 8:30AM-Noon in the Marine Facilities conference room, Point Loma.

 

A pdf version of these minutes are available at <200703cncmi.pdf>

 

Executive Summary:

 

The UNOLS Council met at Scripps Institution of Oceanography on March 21-22, 2007. Day one of the meeting included a joint session with the UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee.  Reports and updates on Fleet renewal plans and implementation were provided.  The Council will reform a subcommittee to review non-operational ship time recommendations for 2008.  A new activity that was initiated during this meeting was to create a subcommittee to inventory best practices for capturing and archiving data and meta-data.  The JOI/CORE merger plans were discussed, as well as, UNOLS’ role in the new organization.  Plans for the 2007 Annual Meeting on October 11-12 were discussed.  Dr. Arden Bement, NSF Director will be invited as the keynote speaker. 

 

Action Item List:

 

#

Task Description

Assignment/Status

1

2007/2008 UNOLS Council slate

·         Confirm Nomination Committee membership and Chair - Bruce Corliss, Peter Ortner and Eileen Hofmann

·         Solicit Nominations

·         Present draft slate during the July phone conference

 

·    Marcia

 

·    Office

·    Nom Committee

2

Review Non-Operational Ship Time recommendations:

·         Confirm Ad-hoc committee membership

·         Request that Agencies working with SSC provide recommendations by July

·         The ad-hoc committee will review agency recommendations regarding non-operational periods

 

·    Office/Marcia

 

·    SSC

 

·    Subcommittee

3

R/V M.G. Langseth UNOLS Vessel Designation – Send letter of approval to LDEO with contingencies for successful completions of reflagging, conversion and NSF inspection.

Office & Marcia

4

Annual meeting room - Send an email to NSF on 3 April to confirm the meeting room.

Kate

5

Annual meeting Keynote Speaker - Confirm NSF Director - Arden Bement.  (Dolly will check calendar).

Office and Dolly

6

July Council Phone/Web Conference – Week of July 9th. Confirm data and time

Office

7

UNOLS Office RFP

At the July meeting, the Council will address two charter issues:

1)      Opening the Office host to all UNOLS Institutions (extend beyond operators).

2)      Changing the term from 3-year to 5-year to conform to NSF timelines.

·         Include this item on the October Annual meeting agenda - Announce that there will be a solicitation for host institution.

 

·         Office and Marcia

 

8

UNOLS Representation at JOI/CORE Board meetings – Request that UNOLS Chair or Vice-Chair be invited to participate in on the Board of Trustees meetings.

Marcia

9

Form Subcommittee on Data Management Best Practices - Create a subcommittee to inventory best practices for capturing and archiving data and meta-data. 

·         Draft a subcommittee task statement.  This can be further refined once the subcommittee is in place

·         Put out a call for volunteers and ask for a brief statement of their interests and expertise, have they worked with policies and/or procedures. 

·         Have the committee in place by the summer meeting.

 

 

 

 

·    Marcia

 

·    Marcia & Office –

 

 

·    Marcia & Office

10

Create a model of a future fleet schedule – Create a model (or models) of future fleet schedules using past schedules as a basis, but include ship time for observatory work.    Also model schedules with the O&M for observatories in place of other work.   Draft a procedure for the modeling and the assumptions/criteria for Council/FIC review.

Mike Prince

11

UNOLS Brochure – Redraft the brochure.  Simplify text and any charts.  If charts are included, they should be easily interpreted by the general community.  The brochure should have a “forward thinking” tone.  It should be printed on recycled paper and state that clearly.

Office with input from the Council

12

Develop Webpage(s) for Science and Educational Opportunities – incorporate FIC suggestions, request Nixon review, finalize.

DeSilva

13

Ocean Class SMRs - Over the next two months verify whether or not these SMRs still represent the community’s requirements.  Prioritize the SMRs with input provided by Navy on constraints.

 

FIC

14

Continue Review of the Post Cruise Assessment Reports (PCAR) - This committee needs some information from Mike

PCAR Committee: Bob Collier (chair), Mary Jane Perry, Matt Hawkins, and Mary-Lynn Dickson.

15

Codes of Conduct - The Impact of Scientific Studies on the Environment – stay informed. 

Office

16

Frequency Spectrum Management –RVTEC subcommittee will survey the RVTEC representatives on use of the frequency spectrum.  They will liaison and provide input to CORF, Government managers and Otis Brown.

RVTEC

17

RVTEC/PI Communications – Identify mechanisms for improving communications between the RVTEC and sea-going scientists.

RVTEC and Council

18

Articles about UNOLS – Draft articles for EOS and other journals about UNOLS and the need for Fleet renewal

 

19

ADA Guidelines for UNOLS Vessels – Draft an ADA Guidelines document for UNOLS Vessels that will address structural modifications as well as provide procedural guidelines.

FIC – Terry Whitledge

20

HOV Safety Standards – Develop a Safety Standards document for HOVs

DESSC Subcommittee on HOV Safety

21

Fleet Improvement Plan Update - Finalize all sections and projections.

FIC & Office

 

 

Appendices:

 

Meeting Summary Report

 

Wednesday, March 21, 2007:

 

Introduction - The UNOLS Council met at Scripps Institution of Oceanography on March 21-22, 2007. Day one of the meeting included a joint session with the UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee.  Marcia McNutt, UNOLS Chair, called the meeting to order at 0830 and provided an opportunity for participant introductions. The meeting agenda (Appendix I) was followed in the order reported below.  The meeting attendance list is included as Appendix II. 

 

A motion was made and approved to accept the minutes of the October 2006 Council Meeting (Rob Pinkel/Margo Edwards).

 

 

Agency Reports, Budget Projections, Future Fleet Utilization, and Fleet Renewal Activities:

 

National Science Foundation (NSF) - Dolly Dieter provided the report for NSF.  The Agency is working under a continuing resolution at the FY06 budget levels with some increases.   There are no new starts under the MRE account, but they have asked for an exception.  When NSF gets their final budget authority for FY07, they will have to spend the funds quickly.  NSF is optimistic about the FY08 budget, but uncertain about the 2009 budget level, which they are starting work on.

 

Regional Class Research Vessel (RCRV) Acquisition – NSF and PEO-Ships requested a stop work order on the Regional Class design efforts last fall.  The new work specification to resume work by the two design teams is expected within days.  The RCRV designs were growing too large and expensive to build or operate.  NSF has now put a cap of 155 feet length and made other changes to stay within budget.  They have also raised the cap on construction costs.  One estimate has the current budget to build these vessels as high as $40M, which is a number that approaches a level that might preclude using "mid-size" infrastructure funds.   NSF will have to review what they can afford.  If they have to pursue MRE funds, the project would get delayed.  NSF will wait to see what comes from the RCRV design efforts, as this will determine if they can move forward.  Until these matters are settled, NSF will wait on the ship operator selection.  All of their large infrastructure projects (ARRV, Drill ship, OOI) are behind schedule and over budget.  It is not the best time to build ships as there is currently a shipyard boom and everything is more costly.  The Ocean Sciences Division of NSF has so many large acquisition projects in the queue that they are under careful scrutiny by the highest administrative levels at NSF.

 

Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV) – NSF held a weeklong panel review for the ARRV design with only one proposal from the University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF).  The panel did a very thorough job, looking carefully at all aspects of the proposal.  A phased approach to the construction and awarding of the funds was recommended.  The project must stay close to the budget, because even a 10% overrun would result in an increase of $10M to $15M.

 

Marcia asked if new people with large project management experience would be hired to support NSF in their acquisition efforts.  The projects will have to include this type of project management expertise.  Dolly replied that NSF is recruiting a new section head and will also hire an IPA to help with infrastructure project management.

 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) - Beth White provided the NOAA report.  NOAA, like NSF, does not have a final FY07 budget yet.  Their Continuing Resolution spending plan must still be approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the pertinent Appropriations Committee.  They have finalized FY07 allocation plans based on the current understanding of the continuing resolution.  The FY07 budget will not support as many operating days for the NOAA fleet or UNOLS charter as in FY06.

 

The Ocean Exploration vessel, Okeanos Explorer is undergoing conversion in Todd Shipyard.  It came with an earmark for conversion of $18M, which is not enough to support the entire conversion plan.  Another $9M is required for a telepresence capability and to complete scientific outfitting.  The vessel is expected to be mission ready in July 2008.

 

V.T. Halter Marine is constructing a $15.5M SWATH to replace Rude, NOAA's smallest hydrographic vessel operating on the east coast.  The caterpillar propulsion engines intended for the SWATH were affected by new EPA regulations concerning emissions.  The wait for engines that will meet the new EPA pollution requirements has delayed the project by at least 75 days.

 

NOAA believes the engine problems experienced on the new Fisheries Survey Vessels (FSVs) Oscar Dyson and Henry B. Bigelow have been corrected and the vessels are now operating.  FSVs 3 & 4 delivery is now delayed by a couple months due to the need for VT Halter shipyard to repair structural damage caused by Hurricane Katrina.  A third quarter 2008 and 2009 delivery is now anticipated.  School naming contests resulted in the name Pisces for FSV3 and Bell M. Shimada for FSV4.

 

NOAA is trying to move forward with a shallow water fishery survey vessel design, but has been told by the Department of Commerce that they will need to show solid requirements for the ship in a Fleet Capitalization Plan that is currently being drafted.  NOAA is working closely with Commerce and OMB during the development of the Plan in the hope it will meet with success and be provided to Congress.


Office of Naval Research (ONR) - Bob Houtman provided the report for ONR.  ONR has an FY07 budget and it is similar to past years.  Bob expects that his base budget for FY08 will continue at about $10M with additional funds from other Navy users.

 

For 2007, Melville was taken out of the normal scheduling and is being used for Navy projects in the Far East.  The plus-up money for FY07 has been applied for the extended Navy ship time operations (Melville) and the remainder is being split between the University of Washington (UW), University of Hawaii (UH) and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) for maintenance, ship equipment, etc.

 

Two Ocean Class vessels are identified in the FY08 budget to be funded in SCN budgets in FY11 and FY12.  ONR has sent funds to PEO-Ships to put together a conceptual plan for these ships.  They need to put together the project plan and supporting documents to get a milestone A decision by October of this year.  ONR will ask UNOLS to assist by reviewing the Ocean Class SMRs over the next two months and verifying whether or not these SMRs still represent the community’s requirements.  The Navy will also look at Navy requirements and they will use these to build the documents for the decision A.  Jim Cochran asked if prioritization was something they wanted also.  Bob indicated that prioritization would be very useful.  UNOLS will need information on any Navy constraints to help with the prioritization efforts.

 

Dolly emphasized that it is important to keep the ship design within constraints.  The vessels must have a realistic day rate and construction cost.

 

Rose Dufour asked Beth White for the projection of the support needs for the Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART) project.  Beth didn’t have the projection available.

 

Fleet Renewal Plans:

 

Interagency Working Group on Facilities (IWG-F) Fleet Renewal Plan Update – Bob Winokur provided the report.  He began by first mentioning that Congress provided the Navy with $116M to build a new oceanographic vessel (T-AGS66).  The Navy cannot request any additional funds for the ship’s construction and must keep the acquisition within the budget.

 

Bob thanked UNOLS for their help with the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC) Fleet Renewal Plan.  At the direction of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and OMB, the “Plan” will now be a “Status Report.” The report went through repeated review processes, and although IWG-F thought that they had accommodated all comments, OSTP and OMB disagreed.  In general OSTP and OMB felt that the plan was overly strident and too optimistic. 

 

The Status report addresses the federal fleet through 2015.  Any ship that is not in a budget appropriation had to be removed from the plan.  Through 2015, the federal fleet stays relatively constant.  Past 2015, the size of the fleet is reduced.  IWG-F had to move from stating requirements in the report, to stating missions.  OSTP and OMB questioned the impact new technology would have on ship demand and asked, “Can technology replace ships?”  IWG-F had to address this question, and pointed out that often new technologies do not replace ships, but instead increase demand on ships.

 

IWG-F is now a subcommittee of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST).  IWG-F will provide the draft Status Report to JSOST at their meeting on 22 March. 

 

IWG-F is contemplating what their focus should be next.  The IWG-F charter is to address facilities, not just ships.  Bob would like to suggest that the Group build upon the Ocean Research Priorities Plan (ORPP) to create what might be called an Ocean Facilities Priorities Plan.  The plan would look out 20 years and determine what facilities would be needed to support the recommendations of the ORPP.  They would build a report around the themes identified in the ORPP.  It would be based on science and agency needs.

 

Discussion followed:

 

Marcia thought this was a good strategy because OSTP and OMB were heavily invested in the ORPP.  Also NSF put in a lot of effort to make sure that the ORPP was scientifically sound.  Using the ORPP would mitigate any comments that it was not appropriate to look at facilities planning out in the future.    Putting a facilities plan together with the ORPP will make the whole more acceptable to the community and perhaps to OMB.

 

Margo Edwards asked if the new icebreaker assets that were recommended by the recently released Ocean Studies Board (OSB) report had been included in the IWG-F Status Report.  Bob Houtman replied they were not included by direction because the icebreakers are not appropriated and the icebreaker policy is being developed.

 

Jeff Callahan asked if the status report would be an annual report.  Bob Houtman replied that it would not, but the report would be reviewed at regular intervals.

 

Beth White mentioned that Barbara Moore had made the case during a recent IWG-F meeting that unique facilities such as underwater habitats (Aquarius) should be included in facilities plans.  Marcia explained that Rick Spinrad has suggested an interagency review of major facilities to determine their demand and support needs, as well as, how they might be shared among the agencies.  The review could evaluate which facilities are truly unique and what their demand is.  Those facilities with low demand would be removed from consideration.  The study would help establish the real facility priorities on an interagency basis.

 

Bob Winokur said that there are members of the IWG-F who think the IWG-F should address satellites.  Bob feels that these are already covered by other groups and it is something that he doesn't want to deal with. 

 

Mary Jane Perry asked if facilities such as Toga-Tao arrays and ocean observatories would fit into the facilities.  Bob Winokur thought that the Toga-Tao arrays and other in-place arrays would be included, but is undecided as to whether observatories should be included.  The boundaries on what facilities the IWG-F addresses will have to be defined. 

 

Marcia thought that it might be a good idea to let new facilities like observatories develop more before becoming part of the agenda for UNOLS and IWG-F.

 

Fleet Improvement Committee (FIC) Meeting Summary and Fleet Improvement Plan Recommendations - Dave Hebert (FIC Chair) summarized the FIC meeting that was held just prior to the Council Meeting.  His slides are included as Appendix III.

 

The FIC spent much of their meeting discussing the Fleet Improvement Plan (FIP).  Dave showed the FIP table of contents and the project website.  The FIC has been having phone conferences about every two weeks since October to review the Fleet Plan.

The IWG-F fleet status report will be used by FIC as the baseline for the minimum fleet requirements in the Fleet Improvement Plan.  FIC would then articulate what they felt the requirements were beyond the minimum based on scientific demand.

Through a series of slides, Dave showed how the projections called for in Figure 17 of the 2001 FOFC Fleet Renewal Plan have changed over the years.  Figure 17 is a projection of ship construction through 2020.  The 2001 Plan included “gray” ships, which were ships that UNOLS had recommended for construction (if the budget could accommodate them).  These ships have been removed by the IWG-F status report.  The seismic ship moved forward from 2018 to 2007 with the acquisition and conversion of R/V Marcus Langseth.  The ARRV funding and projected construction will take longer that originally planned and it will not enter the fleet until 2010.  Dolly cautioned that the ARRV is not in the MRE approved budget yet.  She projected that the ARRV would not operate until 2011.  The Ocean Class ships have been reduced from a total of four to two ships.  The revised Figure 17 shows a scaled back renewal plan.

 

Dave explained that to be consistent with the IWG-F status report, they would consider a ship to be operational for a full year even if it only operates one day in that year.  However, there are still some differences between IWG-F and UNOLS in ship service dates (see Appendix III, slide 8).  The UNOLS dates are based on the latest available information.  The timeline shows the new UNOLS dates for ships beginning operation.  These dates will continue to change, for example the ARRV will probably enter the fleet in 2011 at the earliest.

 

The FIC members spent a lot of time discussing the UNOLS Fleet Projections, which always get a lot of attention.  In the past, the FIC had used the averages of past years of utilization as the projection.  They are now considering either flat line or curve projections to evaluate various scenarios.  The committee would also like to point out that during the summer months, ships are often used to full capacity to meet demand.

 

The chart showing a comparison of today's fleet with the fleet of 2025 was reviewed and options of looking at the fleet at points other than 2025 should be considered.  For example, the IWG-F status report only projects to 2015, so that might be a year to consider.

 

Other items discussed that are related to the need for additional ships beyond what are included in the IWG-F status report include items such as the Ocean Commission reports, the ORPP, and new initiatives related to global climate change (see Appendix III for additional items).

 

Dave reported on new ships that the Fleet Improvement Plan might recommend that include a vessel between the Regional and Ocean Class size, a Regional Ship that can meet all of the desired SMRs (Intermediate size), and another Global Class vessel.

 

The FIC also reviewed Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) recommendations and costs.  The bottom line is that there is some flexibility that would allow vessels to operate beyond the currently stated retirement dates. The Intermediate Class SLEPS do not enhance science capabilities and these ships will still not meet the Ocean Class SMRs.  (See slides for other SLEP constraints)

 

Toby Garfield pointed out that the Intermediates and Regional ships will be well over thirty years old soon, and given the nominal ten-year timeline to get new ships online we have a real problem facing us.  Dolly said that the agencies were all well aware of this problem.  In some cases some of the work in the ten-year timeline has already begun, and there is flexibility due to the material condition of the vessels in the fleet. 

 

Dave showed the changes in the FIC membership.  Jim Cochran is finishing his first term.  A motion to reappoint Jim Cochran to a second FIC term was approved unanimously.  Nominations to replace Terry Whitledge will be entertained as he is finishing his second term.  They will be looking for a biologist.

 

Beth White asked if there has been any thought on people support.  New ships with advanced technologies will require a different skill base.  Marcia McNutt replied that the Marine Technology Society visited MBARI to discuss this issue.  They are very concerned with this and are beginning to address it.

 

Facility Design, Construction, and Conversion Efforts

 

UNOLS Facilities:

 

Marcus Langseth Conversion Status - Steve Holbrook reported on the first official Marcus Langseth Science Oversight Committee (MLSOC) meeting, which was held earlier in the week on March 19-20 in Galveston, TX.  His slides are included as Appendix IV.  The R/V Langseth is docked in Galveston and the MLSOC had an opportunity to tour the ship and observe the conversion effort.  Steve reviewed some of the major changes to the ship, which include the starboard side deployment deck and the marine mammal observation tower.

 

The terms of reference for MLSOC include providing state-of-the-art seismic acquisition capabilities.  This goal is probably unrealistic because the capabilities have been reduced by removing half the seismic equipment from the ship, however, the facility will be near to state of the art.

 

Other goals are to lower the threshold of expertise needed for users of the seismic facility and to increase the quality and accessibility of archived data.

 

Steve reported that the first meeting was very productive and to some extent was a handing off from the Ewing Replacement Oversight Conversion Committee (EROCC) to the MLSOC during this joint meeting.  The committee is very broad based with representation from industry, marine mammal expertise, and general oceanographic people.

 

The key issues covered during the meeting include:

 

·         Staffing - Staffing of cruises for four different scenarios such as 3D, 2D, OBS deployment with guns only, and general oceanography were considered.  The committee felt that it was critical to provide adequate staffing, especially for 3D cruises.   The model of just having a science officer will not work.

 

Shipboard processing needs were discussed.  Navigation is crucial.  Real-time brute stack capability is required.  Hardware and software will be in place, but not necessarily the onboard processing staff. [Brute stack is a processed seismic record that contains traces (seismic data recorded for one channel) from a common halfway point between a seismic source and a receiver at the Earth's surface. The traces have been added together from different records to reduce noise and improve overall data quality.  A brute stack will allow a first cut look at the data.]

 

·         Lowering the threshold for user expertise was discussed.  This will be difficult, but important.

 

·         Shakedown cruise - The cruise plan is extremely tight and some rearranging was discussed.