Northwest Association of Networked Ocean Observing Systems

1

• Northwest Association of Networked Ocean
  Observing Systems
• The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS)
  Regional Association for the Pacific NW

2
What are we?

• A user-driven coastal ocean observing system
• ocean includes inland marine waters (head of
  tide to EEZ)
• user-driven means users define priorities,
  delivery
• A system designed to produce and disseminate
  ocean observations and related products deemed
  necessary to the users, in a common manner and
  according to sound scientific practice
• A regional organization through which to
  integrate and sustain existing observing
  capability, to strategize for new operational
  systems, and to provide easy access to data, data
  products, model forecasts, etc. about regional
  marine conditions

http//www.nanoos.org
3
Who are we?

• Jan Newton, Ph.D., (UW), NANOOS Coordinator
• Interim Steering Committee
• David Martin, Ph.D., (UW)
• Antonio Baptista, Ph.D., (OHSU)
• Jack Barth, Ph.D., (OSU)
• Mike Kosro, Ph.D., (OSU)

4
A brief history of NANOOS

• But first its important to understand the
  national context for NANOOS
• NANOOS is intended to be the PNW Regional
  Association of the Integrated Ocean Observing
  System (IOOS)

5
IOOS Background
The National Oceanographic Partnership Program
(NOPP) Was Established by Legislation in Public
Law 104-201 FY 1997 National Defense
Authorization Act

• 1. To promote the National Goals of
• - Assuring National Security
• - Advancing Economic Development
• - Protecting the Quality of Life
• - Strengthening Science Education and
  Communication
• through Improved Knowledge of
  the Ocean
• 2. And to Coordinate and Strengthen
  Oceanographic Efforts in Support of these Goals
  by
• - Identifying and Carrying out Partnerships
  among Federal
• Agencies, Academia, Industry,
  and Other Members of the
• Oceanographic Scientific
  Community in the Areas of Data, Resources,
  Education, and Communication
• - Reporting Annually to Congress on the Program

6
National Ocean Research Leadership Council (NORLC)
Chair Administrator, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Vice Chair
Secretary of the Navy Vice Chair Director,
National Science Foundation Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Deputy Secretary Department of Energy
Administrator Environmental Protection
Agency Commandant United States Coast
Guard Director United States Geological
Survey Director Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency Director Minerals Management
Service Director Office of Science and
Technology Policy Director Office of
Management and Budget
7
Ocean.US is established under the auspices of
NOPP

• NORLC-commissioned reports in 1998 1999
  recommended establishment of a national
  capability for integrated and sustained ocean
  observations prediction
• In May 2000 (1) The NORLC directed the
  establishment of Ocean.US
• (2) Formation of Ocean.US
  announced to Congress.
• To manage the development of an Integrated and
  Sustained Ocean Observing System (IOOS) for
  research operations in the following areas
• Detecting and Forecasting Oceanic Components of
  Climate Variability
• Facilitating Safe and Efficient Marine Operations
• Ensuring National Security
• Managing Marine Resources
• Preserving and Restoring Healthy Marine
  Ecosystems
• Mitigating Natural Hazards
• Ensuring Public Health

8
IOOS Will be an Integrated System
9
A brief history of IOOS

• NOPP established by law in 1997
• NORLC oversight of NOPP
• NORLC recommends an IOOS in 1998-1999
• NOPP establishes Ocean.US in 2000 to implement a
  user-driven IOOS
• Global IOOS and Coastal IOOS
• Coastal IOOS to have two components
• National Backbone
• Regional Associations

10
IOOS Global System

• Full implementation of Argo and the global ocean
  time series observatories.
• Successful completion of the Global Ocean Data
  Assimilation Experiment (GODAE).
• Optimizing the global network of observations,
  and
• Enhancing the ocean time series observatories
  with key biological and chemical sensors.

11
The National Backbone

• Measure and process variables needed by all
  regional systems
• Including Biological measurements (e.g., PaCOS)
• Satellite remote sensing
• Reference, sentinel stations
• Link to global system
• Data standards exchange protocols
• Capacity building

Wave Height
Ocean Color
Surface Temperature
12

• Primary interface with user groups outside
  federal agencies.
• Focal point for data analysis and product
  development that will have local, regional and
  national applications.
• Terrestrial influence measurements
• Many national backbone RD projects will be
  first done in regional observing systems.
• Development of regional systems is a very high
  priority

13
(No Transcript)
14
A brief history of NANOOS

• Received 100K 1st year planning grant from NOAA
  Coastal Services Center (late 2003)
• Pacific Northwest Regional Ocean Observing System
  Workshop
• 23-24 October 2003, Portland State University,
  Portland, OR
• Signed a Charter establishing NANOOS
• Appointed an Interim Steering Committee
• David Martin (UW)
• Jan Newton (UW)
• Antonio Baptista (OHSU)
• Jack Barth (OSU)
• Mike Kosro (OSU)
• Two pilot proposals submitted to NOAA CSC one
  funded
• NANOOS Governance Workshop 5-7 May 2004, Oregon
  HS Univ. Beaverton, OR
• Gained consensus on Governance Structure and
  Approach
• Held a User Needs Forum
• Gained consensus response on prioritization for
  federal and regional activity
• 2nd year NOAA governance grant with support for
  Coordinator approved and received
• Hired NANOOS Coordinator (J. Newton) on 1
  November 2004
• Awaiting results of 3rd year proposal

15
Potential NANOOS partners/participants (not
exclusive) Academia (UW, OSU, OHSU, WWU, PSU,
UO, etc.) NOAA (PMEL, NWFSC, AFSC, NOS HAZMAT,
etc.) US Coast Guard (primarily 13th District) US
EPA, USGS, US Army Corps of Engineers, US
Navy Tribal Governments Northwest Indian
Fisheries Commission Washington and Oregon Sea
Grant Programs Washington State Ferries
Washington Depts of Ecology, Fish Wildlife,
Health, Natural Resources, etc. Oregon
Depts of Environmental Quality, Fish Wildlife,
Geology Mineral Industries, Land
Conservation Development, etc. National
Estuarine Research Reserves (South Slough,
Padilla Bay) Olympic Coast National Marine
Sanctuary Puget Sound Water Quality Action
Team California Coastal Commission,
etc. Institute of Ocean Sciences, etc,
Canada NGOs (Surfrider Foundation, TNC, People
for Puget Sound, etc.) Regional Aquaria and
Marine Science Centers Marine Exchanges of Puget
Sound and Columbia River Northwest Marine Trades
Association Fishermans and Shellfish Growers
Associations West Coast Seafood Processors
Association The Boeing Company and other
technology/data industry WET Labs Inc., Seabird
Inc., Biospherical, and other marine sensor
industry
16
Next Steps

• Actively engage stakeholders, broaden diversity
  of participants
• Formulate and sign a Memorandum of Agreement
  (MOA) between partners/participants
• Hold a 3rd NANOOS Planning Workshop in early
  2005 to finalize governance plans and begin to
  build system design

17
Workshop Goals

• Inform NANOOS membership regarding progress,
  status, updates
• Engage with respect to the MOA
• Identify regional priorities for observing
  system data products and design.

18
The National Federation of Regional Associations
(NFRA)
19
NFRA Meeting AgendaFeb 16-18, 2005
To progress on moving the ocean observing system
forward by focusing on NFRA and RA development

• 1. Purposes
• - Facilitate development of the NFRA as an
  organization
• - Prepare for 2nd Annual IOOS Implementation
  Conference in May
• - Share strategies among Regional Associations
• - Provide updates on RA, COTS, and Ocean.US
  activities
• 2. Desired Outcomes
• - NFRA agreement on DRAFT Mission Statement and
  Terms of Reference agreement on
  direction of DRAFT Bylaws
• - Identification of RA actions prior to May 2nd
  meeting - agenda
• - Recommendations for 2nd Annual IOOS
  Implementation Conference
• - Agreement on benchmarks for implementing
  communication strategies and COTS/ONR work
  group plans (from RA perspective)
• - Enhanced communication coordination among
  various ocean observing entities and
  activities

20
NFRA Mission Statement

• The National Federation of Regional Associations
  (NFRA) exists to represent the interests and
  needs of the Regional Associations, as defined
  by the IOOS Implementation Plan, which will
  design, operate, and improve regional coastal
  ocean observing systems (RCOOSs) on behalf of
  users of the coastal waters and Great Lakes of
  the United States. To fulfill this mission, the
  NFRA
• Fosters communication between the Regional
  Associations and the Federal agencies that
  establish standards and protocols for an
  integrated ocean observing system, operate the
  backbone of the national system, and help fund
  the Regional Associations
• Serves as an advocate for the Regional
  Associations to the federal agencies, the
  Congress and the general public
• Participates with the federal agencies and
  Ocean.US in establishing, standards, protocols,
  and best practices for coastal ocean observing
  systems
• Promotes the science, technologies, education,
  and management required for continuous
  improvement and reliable operation of coastal
  ocean observing systems among the Regional
  Associations and with the federal agencies and
• Promotes understanding of the potential of an
  integrated ocean observing system to meet
  societys needs as identified in the seven
  societal pillars of the IOOS.

21
NFRA Terms of Reference

• The objective of NFRA is to make major
  contributions to the attainment of a robust and
  sustained national presence for Regional
  Associations (RAs) from around the country, as a
  key component of the IOOS.
• As a means of attaining this objective the
  NFRA will
• Initiate key actions to enable effective
  coordination, integration, and implementation of
  regional coastal ocean observing systems in close
  collaboration with Ocean.US, the U.S. Global
  Ocean Observing System Steering Committee, and
  applicable federal agencies
• Establish, when requested, collective agreements
  between and among RAs to promote more effective
  inter-regional collaboration
• Develop and advocate coordinated views of coastal
  ocean observation, prediction, and science to the
  Congress, the federal government, program
  sponsors, international bodies, and others
• Facilitate linkages between Regional Associations
  and national organizations representing industry,
  education, and scientific enterprises in relation
  to their goals, plans, and programs
• Serve as a venue for the exchange of policy and
  technical information between and among Regional
  Associations
• Facilitate the education and outreach programs of
  Regional Associations
• Encourage and foster Regional Association
  responsiveness to user communities
• Promote capacity building
• Promote sharing of facilities and infrastructure
  and other resources
• Encourage interdisciplinary design,
  implementation and use of observing
  infrastructure.

22
NFRA Terms of Reference (cont)

• Members
• Members shall initially be those nascent Regional
  Associations that have received competitive
  federal funding to begin regional partnership
  building and collaboration efforts. Initially,
  each RA shall have two (2) members on the NFRA
  Organizing Committee, at least one of whom must
  be from a non-academic institution/agency.
  Further, upon the agreement of the Organizing
  Committee, the RA providing the Chair of the
  Organizing Committee may be permitted to have
  three (3) representatives. Upon the eventual
  incorporation of the NFRA, the Organizing
  Committee will be dissolved and renamed the NFRA
  Governing Board.
• Affiliates
• Affiliated organizations may be federal agencies,
  national, international or nongovernmental
  organizations concerned with operations and
  research within the coastal ocean environment
  and/or education related to ocean and coastal
  environments and resources, with which it is
  mutually beneficial that the NFRA maintains
  collaborative relationships. Designation of
  Affiliate status will be with the consensus of
  the Membership. Affiliates may participate fully
  in NFRA meetings and other activities however
  approval by Affiliates will not be required to
  establish NFRA consensus.

23
NFRA Terms of Reference (cont)

• Meetings
• The NFRA will convene at least once every year in
  open plenary session. Each Regional Association
  and Affiliate will designate a principal
  point-of-contact for communication and
  coordination between meetings. Attendance at
  plenary meetings of the Partnership shall be open
  to all Members and Affiliated Organizations.
  Representatives of the Regional Associations
  should have the requisite authority to commit the
  resources of such.
• Chairperson, Vice Chairperson Secretariat
• During the period of time that the NFRA
  Organizing Committee exists, the Chairperson and
  Vice-Chairperson of the Organizing Committee
  shall be selected and approved by vote of the
  Organizing Committee for a period of time
  determined by the Committee. Upon receipt of
  sufficient funding for financing the NFRA, an
  Executive Director of the NFRA will be selected
  by the Organizing Committee (or Governing Board
  as appropriate) and will be responsible for the
  day-to-day management and operation of the
  organization, under the direction of the NFRA
  Organizing Committee or Governing Board.
• Each Regional Association may designate a
  representative to serve on the NFRA secretariat
  to be involved in overseeing the activities of
  the organization and to guide the work of the
  Executive Director of the NFRA between plenary
  meetings.

24
NFRA Terms of Reference (cont)

• Funding
• As detailed in the first IOOS Implementation
  Meeting (August 31st September 2nd, 2004),
  initial funding for the Executive Director, NFRA
  office staff, and operating/travel expenses will
  be sought from the federal government (estimated
  at 500,000 per year total). The Executive
  Director will prepare and present a budget and
  cost-sharing plan for approval by Members.
  Members and Affiliates will bear their own costs
  for attending meetings and participating in
  activities of the NFRA. Members are invited to
  share the costs of other NFRA activities through
  voluntary contributions, which may be financial
  or in-kind (such as hosting meetings, organizing
  workshops, conducting pilot projects, financing
  publications, employing consultants, providing
  for their own costs of communications, and other
  such activities.) NFRA members are also
  encouraged to pursue opportunities for securing
  funds from private sources on behalf of the NFRA,
  in consultation with the full NFRA membership.
• Working Groups
• The NFRA may establish, as mutually agreed,
  working groups on a continuing basis or on an ad
  hoc basis, as appropriate, to investigate
  specific areas of interest, cooperation, and
  coordination and to report at subsequent plenary
  meetings. Representatives of each Member and
  Affiliate are invited to participate in any
  working groups. The continuation of working
  groups will be reviewed and approved at the
  annual plenary meetings. Wherever possible, the
  NFRA will work through existing mechanisms and
  will establish its own working groups only where
  either a) the topic is entirely contained within
  the NFRA/IOOS objectives and activities or b) no
  adequate forum presently exists.

25
NFRA Terms of Reference (cont)

• Adoption and Amendment
• The NRFA Organizing Committee drafted these Terms
  of Reference (TOR) in December 2004.
• NFRA TOR provided to Ocean.US for further
  transmittal to the Ocean.US Executive Committee
  (EXCOM) in January 2005.
• NFRA TOR reviewed, modified and approved by the
  NFRA Organizing Committee at its annual meeting
  in February 2005.
• The Organizing Committee (or Governing Board) may
  amend these TOR during any annual meeting.
• Any number of amendments or an entire revision
  may be submitted and voted upon at a single
  meeting and will be approved and adopted upon
  receiving a majority vote of the members at that
  meeting.

26
NFRA Bylaws

• Articles I - XIII (Note dependent on State in
  which incorporated)
• Specifies that NFRA is to be a non-profit
  corporation to be incorporated with the National
  Capital Region
• Specifies composition, powers, and duties of
  Governing Board (NFRA Organizing Committee morphs
  to this). Details specifics of an Executive
  Committee who are authorized to hire and oversee
  the activities of the Executive Director of the
  NFRA. The Executive Director of the NFRA is
  responsible for hiring NFRA staff.
• For the NFRA meeting
• Achieve consensus on the future desired general
  structure (non-profit corporation) of the NFRA
  physically located within the NCR and the
  articulated structure of the Governing Board and
  Executive Committee as described in the DRAFT
  Bylaws.

27
West Coast Industry Workshop
28
A Workshop to Explore Private Sector
Interest and Roles in the U.S. IOOS Focus West
Coast (fall 2005)

• WORKSHOP GOAL Define the interests and
  potential roles of the private sector in the west
  coast regional/coastal ocean component of the
  U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS).
• WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES
• Introduce the U.S. IOOS and specifically the
  plans for the Pacific Northwest (NANOOS), central
  California (CeNCOOS,) and southern California
  (SCCOS) Coastal Ocean Observing Systems, (and
  AOOS?) including
• ? Observing system elements and networks ?
  Data management
• ? Modeling systems and products ? Outreach
  (communications, training, etc.)
• ? Governance
• Identify the basis for public/private/academic
  sector interactions in the context of U.S. IOOS,
  including
• ? Modes of cooperation ? Potential areas of
  conflict
• ? Business opportunities
• Develop plan-of-action, including
• ? Public relations ? Follow-on
  communications
• ? Demonstration project initiation ? Plans
  for advocacy

29
Exploring Potential Roles of Industry

• Ocean.US now has an Industry liaison (Andy
  Clark) onboard.
• They are hosting an Industry Day March 18, 2005.
  
• East Coast to have an Industry Workshop in
  Spring/Summer 2005.

30
IOOS Legislative Update
31
IOOS Legislation

• Last year
• S 1400 was passed unanimously in the Senate and,
  late in the session, the House introduced the
  complimentary HR 5001 bill. Both bills would
  have authorized 100s M for the global, national
  backbone and regional modules of the IOOS. HR
  5001 did not emerge from the House by the end of
  the session (4 committees were involved).
• This year
• S 361 introduced in Senate (provided in your
  packet). Strong bipartisan support from powerful
  Senators.
• House will reintroduce IOOS legislation (text to
  parallel S 361).
• Bipartisan support requested early in Dear
  Colleagues letter from Weldon (R-PA) and Allen
  (D-ME) (provided in your packet).

32
IOOS Legislation

• The odds
• Good news GEOSS is a White House priority and
  Ocean Action Plan stipulates that IOOS will be
  the ocean observing component of GEOSS. Strong
  bipartisan support in House and Senate. Ocean
  Commission strongly endorsed the IOOS.
• Bad news Extremely tight and polarized budget
  year (Iraq, Social Security, etc.). No funding
  is identified in Ocean Action Plan. Congress has
  stated that the 4B cost for implementing
  recommendations in COP report are not executable
  given budgetary pressures.
• Bottom line
• Difficult to say the Hill and the White House
  (OSTP) does understand that many/most of the COP
  Recommendations require an IOOS and weve
  hammered home the message that it is affordable.

33
NANOOS 3rd Year Proposal
34
NANOOS Third Year Proposal

• Based on results of First IOOS Implementation
  Conference (August 2004)
• The highest priority (accepted by Feds) was to
  fund (adequately) the Regional Associations and
  NFRA (estimated at 0.5M/year for two years to
  allow RAs to successfully pursue accreditation).
  
• NOAA (CSC) issued a BAA calling for proposals
  requesting up to 400K for up to three years.
• NANOOS submitted a proposal responsive to this
  BAA.

35
NANOOS Proposal Deliverables
36
Proposal Focuses on Accreditation
Interim Steering Committee
Users Advisory Group
Governing Council
NANOOS Coordinator
Executive Committee Officers, NANOOS Coordinator,
Standing Committee Chairs
DMAC
Education
Workshops
User/Stakeholder Outreach
Standing Committees Operations
Committee Data/Information Management and
Communications Committee Modeling and Analysis
Product Committee Science and Research
Committee Education and Outreach
Committee Nominating Committee
Other NANOOS Priorities
A
B
37
Timeline
38
NANOOS Proposal Deliverables
Specific commitment to expand the existing
Steering Committee (Martin, Barth, Kosro and
Baptista) to explicitly ensure the transition of
a Steering Committee dominated by academic
representatives to a much more broadly-based
steering group representing the diversity of
stakeholder interests (fishing, marine
operations, Tribes, federal and state/local
agencies, etc.) from the Pacific Northwest
Region.
39
The Way Forward
40
Way forward

1. Expand to a NANOOS Steering Committee that
   includes a wider diversity of stakeholder
   interests.
2. Draft and sign an MOA to guide NANOOS in its
   transition from point A to point B.
3. Begin to scope NANOOS system design based on
   user-driven needs for ocean data products.

41
1. NANOOS Steering Committee Additions

• State government
• Tribal governments
• Non-governmental organization
• Marine Industry
• Technology Industry
• Education/Outreach

42
1. NANOOS Steering Committee Additions

• State government
• Tribal governments
• Non-governmental organization
• Marine Industry
• Technology Industry
• Education/Outreach

Dr. Greg McMurray, Marine Affairs
Coordinator Oregon Dept of Land Conservation
Development Mr. Terry Wright, Division
ManagerNorthwest Indian Fisheries
Commission Mr. Ian Miller, WA Field
Coordinator Surfrider Foundation Mr. Robert
Bohlman, Executive Director Marine Exchange of
Puget Sound Dr. Jay Pearlman, Chief Scientist
The Boeing Company Mr. Patrick Corcoran,
Extension Coastal Storms Spc. Oregon Sea Grant
Program
43
1. NANOOS Steering Committee

• With these additions
• SC increases from 4 to 10 people
• SC regional representation better balanced 5
  from WA, 5 from OR
• SC stakeholder representation better balanced 4
  academics to 6 non-academics (includes 2
  governmental, 2 industry, 1 NGO, 1
  education/outreach)

44
2. Draft MOA
Memorandum of AgreementTo Establish and
Implement the Northwest Association of Networked
Ocean Observing Systems

• This draft MOA for NANOOS
• is on the NANOOS website
• will be presented here
• will be discussed here soliciting
• your initial reactions
• points of contact to review/sign

45
2. MOA Timeline
Present draft MOA to NANOOS Membership at 3rd
NANOOS Workshop
Sign MOA by 1 June
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun 2005
NANOOS Members obtain approval of MOA from their
respective institutions/organizations
46
3. System Design

• To be based on PNW user needs
• This is the objective of the bulk of this
  workshop
• hopefully this is why you are here !

47
MOA
28 February 2005 1100-1200
48
MOA Attributes

• Memorandum of Agreement
• Required for NANOOS to be accredited
• Outlines structure and responsibilities for
  governance, membership, fiscal, data and other
  components of NANOOS
• Non-binding, implies general intention
• Signage membership

49
(Slide from 2nd NANOOS Planning Workshop, May
2004)
Consensus Points

• There was general consensus that NANOOS should
  evolve towards a open-membership, non-profit
  entity at some point in the future
• There was less consensus (expressed) on the
  timing of this evolution
• Accomplishing this in some small number of years,
  in keeping with the schedule for RA
  accreditation and NFRA formation was discussed in
  Plenary
• We should seek legal counsel on issues dealing
  with 501c3
• Now, for information this is not our area of
  expertise
• Later, for execution
• We should draft an initial Governance enabling
  document
• MOA and/or Bylaws to be determined at this
  Workshop
• Post on Web for Public Comment
• Provide vetted Document at next NANOOS Workshop

50
(Slide from 2nd NANOOS Planning Workshop, May
2004)
Distilled (by ISC) Response to Questions
determined from Group Reports

• Do we draft an MOU or MOA for signing soon, or do
  we seek open-membership non-profit corp. and be
  content with status quo until then?
• We should draft an MOA for signing by initial
  institutions (exact makeup TBD) soon. The
  enabling document should expressly articulate
  that this initial Governance structure will
  evolve towards an open-membership, non-profit
  corporate entity in a directed manner.
• How are the Governing Board Members to be
  selected?
• Initial Board Members will be assigned from the
  signatory institutions on the initial enabling
  MOA. The MOA will detail this assignment as well
  as the specific intent to move towards an elected
  Board (to come either from the Membership or
  Chairs of Working Groups no Group consensus
  here) as NANOOS matures. The initial Governing
  Board will select from among its members, an
  Executive Committee.
• Should the Working Groups be aligned FUNCTIONALLY
  or should they be aligned THEMATICALLY?
• Working Groups should be aligned FUNCTIONALLY to
  maximize efficiency (data/products can serve
  multiple Themes) to simplify structure.

51
Draft MOA
Based on your input, the MOA has been edited
since the document presented at the
workshop. Please see the new document, which is
on-line.
52
2. MOA Timeline
Present draft MOA to NANOOS Membership at 3rd
NANOOS Workshop
Sign MOA by 1 June
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun 2005
NANOOS Members obtain approval of MOA from their
respective institutions/organizations
53
2. MOA

• Over the next 40 minutes, and beyond, we
  request
• Your reactions, perceived sticking points, etc
• Point-of-contact for your agency/entity