First Annual IOOS Implementation Conference

31 August – 2 September, 2004

A Summary of Consensus Recommendations by the Conferees

The First Annual IOOS Implementation Conference was held in Arlington, VA during 31 August – 2 September, 2004. The Conference brought together representatives from coastal states and the Great Lakes region with representatives from NOPP Federal Agencies to discuss and recommend priorities for establishing an initial Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) that includes both global ocean-climate and coastal components. Recognizing that implementation of the global component is well underway, the Conference focused on first steps for developing the coastal component and on coordinated development of the coastal and global components.

The results of this Conference and subsequent guidance from the Federal Agencies will be used by Ocean.US to revise the preliminary IOOS Development Plan. This revision will be posted on the Ocean.US web site for a 1 month public comment period following an announcement in the federal register. Based on these inputs the plan will undergo final revision and, given the approval of the Ocean.US Executive Committee, the First Annual IOOS Implementation Plan will be transmitted to the NORLC in December for approval at its winter meeting early in 2005.

There was a strong consensus among the conferees on the following recommendations:

(1) Implement the plan for developing the Data Management and Communications (DMAC) subsystem of the IOOS1;

(2) Establish Regional Associations; and

(3) Implement coastal ocean data assimilation experiments as pilot projects to facilitate coordinated development of the coastal and global components.

Although there was strong consensus on the immediate need to implement the initial national backbone of the coastal component of the IOOS, there was not a strong consensus on a focused set of priorities. These recommendations and those for the high priorities listed above are summarized below.

______

1

1. Summary of DMAC Recommendations

Participants in the IOOS Implementation Conference provided a consensus endorsement of the May 2004 DMAC Implementation Plan. It was also agreed that the Plan would be revised and finalized following a formal, open 30-day public comment period announced by a Federal Register Notice. The Conference participants were in agreement that significant changes are unlikely to the basic DMAC roadmap strategy and approach presented in the current Plan because it has already been subjected to three formal technical and public reviews. Once finalized, the recommendations made in the updated Plan regarding data and metadata standards and best management practices will be officially adopted as the initial, formal guidance for IOOS/DMAC data providers, users, and stakeholders.

In order for Federal agencies to incorporate DMAC priority needs for FY 05-06, and FY 07 into their budget planning and implementation processes, the following summary is provided based on current information. It is understood that if the additional, public review indicates that course corrections are necessary, these details will be provided to the agencies.

The rationale for the strategy and recommendations presented in the next sections has been described in detail in the DMAC Plan and in the Draft Preliminary IOOS Development Plan, and endorsed by the IOOS Implementation Conference participants. The activities proposed for FY 2005-2006 are critical for establishing the initial DMAC subsystem. Such a framework must be made available as quickly as feasible to provide a foundation for integrating existing and emerging IOOS data streams.

1.1 DMAC Recommendations for FY 2005-06 Priority Activities

The Conference participants approved by consensus the following priority DMAC investment recommendations for FY 2005-06. These recommendations are consistent with those contained in Table 6 of Part II of the draft IOOS Development Plan (provided here for reference in the Appendix as Table 1), distributed prior to the IOOS Implementation Conference.

  • DMAC Steering Team. Ocean.US will establish an IOOS DMAC Steering Team to coordinate and oversee the evolution of DMAC standards, and ensure that the DMAC standards process is conducted in an open and balanced manner.
  • DMAC Expert Teams. Ocean.US will organize expert teams to address key IT standards as identified in the DMAC Plan. Experts from the emerging Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS) and relevant international data management standards activities will be invited to participate.
  • Interagency Coordination. The Conference provided a consensus endorsement of the proposed recomendation for the EXCOM agencies to seat an IOOS DMAC Implementation Oversight Working Group (IOWG). The role of the IOWG will be to coordinate the implementation of DMAC within the federal agencies.

The estimated costs, based on the May 2004 DMAC Plan are:

DMAC Activity / FY 2005 / FY 2006 / Potential Agencies Affected
Oversight and Coordination (#1 & 3) / $36K / $72K / All
Standards Development (#2) / 685 / 946 / All
TOTALS / $721K / $1,026K

These estimated costs are in addition to whatever investments the federal agencies are currently making in DMAC-related data management areas. The outcomes of these recommendations will provide a basis for outyear investments. The estimated costs do not include the resources needed for the actual implementation of software components nor the procurement of hardware.

Table 7 in Part I of the IOOS Development Plan (provided here for reference in the Appendix as Table 2) summarized concrete, initial recommendations to IOOS/DMAC data providers based on the May 2004 DMAC Plan. This guidance includes actions that can be taken by data providers immediately in order to ensure interoperability with IOOS as it evolves. Cost estimates for implementation by individual agencies were not available because of the large number of systems involved, and their varying levels of maturity and compliance with DMAC guidelines. However, it is suggested (as a target goal) that agencies invest in DMAC activities approximately 10% of the amount invested in relevant observing activities.

1.2 DMAC Recommendations for FY 2007 Priority Activities

The Conference recommendations regarding investments for the FY 2007+ timeframe were consistent with those contained in the DMAC Plan. Additional recommendations provided during the Breakout Sessions also enumerated specific, agency-focused activities that are also consistent with the DMAC Plan. These activities fall into three major categories (the table from IOOS Development Plan is provided for reference in the Appendix as Table 3):

  • An interoperability framework. The Conference recommended that the continuation of DMAC standards oversight, coordination, and development efforts that began in FY 2005-06 (see Section A, Items 1-3 above).
  • An interoperability infrastructure1. These investments will augment current federal program activities, and also address core DMAC infrastructure needs of the Regional Associations. They focus on acquisition or updating of hardware; software to enable interoperability; network capacity building; expansion of data archive center capacity; standards implementation; and enhanced national systems integration.
  • Design and demonstration. A number of specific activities were proposed during the Conference that fall into this category.2 These activities include pilot projects to: evaluate, test, and involve end-users in capability demonstration projects; implement new technologies; and conduct end-to-end integration of observational data across sectors, disciplines, geographic areas, and organizations. A summary of the more significant recommendations is presented below, with suggestions as to the relevant agencies affected by each recommendation.

DMAC Implementation Plan
Needs Area / Representative Breakout Group Priority Recommendations / Potential Affected Agencies
Inventory of current programs/efforts /
  • Inventory NOAA & EPA coastal & estuarine data sets, especially bottom, habitat and ecosystem-related, and by extension each IOOS core variable observing effort.
/
  • All Agencies

Data discovery needs /
  • Assure agency data inventories are” registered” and accessible through IOOS portal
/
  • All Agencies

End-to-end integration activities /
  • Enable stream gauge observations integration
  • Enable wave observations integration
  • Interconnect HF radar & fixed sensor wind & wave data
/
  • USGS & NOAA
  • ACOE, NOAA & Navy
  • NOAA, USCG & Navy

Metadata development /
  • Develop Lagrangian metadata for AUV’s
  • Develop imagery metadata & characterization to enable fusion and assimilation
  • Integrate species-level information (e.g., genetics, habitat, life history, etc.)
/
  • NSF & Navy
  • NASA, NOAA, USGS & Navy
  • NSF & NOAA

Semantic data model(s) development /
  • Semantic data model to enable imagery fusion w/models
  • Fusion of spatial & tabular nutrient data fields
/
  • NASA, NOAA, Navy & USGS
  • EPA & NOAA

Data transport needs /
  • Develop mechanisms for providing satellite data
  • Interconnect HF radar & fixed sensor marine wind data
/
  • NASA, NOAA & USGS
  • USCG, NOAA , ACOE & Navy

Data archival needs /
  • Develop climatologies of oxygen, chlorophyll, nutrients and pCO2 observational data
/
  • EPA, NOAA & ACOE

QA/QC needs /
  • Enable integration of stream gauge data into national network across all observing elements
/
  • USGS and NOAA

Due to time constraints, projected costs and timeframes for the above activities could not be developed during the Conference.

The IOOS Development Plan (Part III, Table 5) referenced earlier identified a number of design and demonstration activities that are consistent with the Conference recommendations listed above. The DMAC Plan provided cost estimates for those design and demonstration activities, along with the other activities recommended for FY 2007. The estimated costs are summarized below (additional details can be found in the Appendix, Table 3):

DMAC Activity / FY 2007 / Potential Agencies Affected
Interoperability framework / $7,052K / All
Interoperability infrastructure / 6,860* / All
Design and demonstration / 3,800 / All
FY 2007 TOTAL / $17,712K

*NOTE – Some of these costs may also be accounted for in the Regional Association estimates of costs for DMAC implementation provided earlier in this document.

______

1 Estimated infrastructure costs were published in the May 2004 DMAC Plan. It should be noted that the IOOS Regional Associations are now in the process of developing more specific cost estimates for their DMAC implementation (rough order estimates of ~$500K per region per year), which may include some duplication. Ocean.US will provide a reconciliation of these estimates in the future.

2 The breakout groups at the Conference identified 27 DMAC-related recommendations/requirements. The complete list of Breakout Group recommendations is provided in the Appendix as Table 4.

2. Regional Development Recommendations(FY 05 – 06)

It is recognized that there is a need for a locally relevant, nationally coordinated IOOS. It is also recognized that

  • the effects of climate and human activities (which converge in the coastal zone) differ regionally throughout the nation;
  • user priorities for data and information on marine and estuarine systems change from region to region; and
  • coordinating the required mix of platforms (e.g., ships, satellites, aircraft, autonomous underwater vehicles), data streams, data management activities, and models that will constitute the IOOS necessitates exceptional levels of coordination and collaboration among Federal Agencies and between the federal government and Regional Associations (RAs).

Clearly, the IOOS must evolve to meet state, regional and federal needs. To these ends, a national consensus has been achieved to establish (1) RAs that meet established criteria for governance and operations and develop regional coastal ocean observing systems (RCOOSs) employing IOOS design principles and (2) a National Federation of Regional Associations (NFRA) to coordinate the development of RCOOSs nationwide and represent regional user needs at the federal level. The following recommendations are considered to be of the highest priority by conferees (total cost = $9.9M in FY05; $12.7M in FY06):

  • Fund RA’s and NFRA sufficiently (Priority 1)

This is the highest priority for the Regional effort and should be funded preferentially over the other Regional requests which are also of extremely high priority. It is critical that the RA’s and the NFRA receive sufficient funds to allow them to initiate and complete the substantial efforts involved in the RA Certification efforts. Present levels of funding (e.g., $100K annually) will not permit success given the extensive outreach, private sector engagement, economic analysis and user needs assessment required to fully articulate the requirements of RCOOS efforts. Requested funding provides minimum resources necessary to allow successful attainment of these objectives by FY07.

RA Estimated cost (11 RAs at $0.5M each): $5.5M in FY05 and FY06)

NFRA estimated Cost: $0.5M in FY05 and FY06

  • Fund necessary DMAC activities (Priority 2)

The National IOOS DMAC effort is not part of the Regional effort but is unanimously supported by all RA’s since the national DMAC effort must succeed before Regional DMAC efforts can be properly structured. Thus, the Regions support the full funds requested by the national DMAC effort. Regionally, we request modest funds for FY05 ($100K per region) to allow initial integration of extant regional systems and request $200K per region in FY06 to allow incorporation of the results from the national DMAC effort in the regions.

National IOOS DMAC effort estimated cost: $0.7M in FY05 & $1M in FY06

Regional DMAC effort estimated cost: 11* $0.3M = $3.3M ($1.1M in FY05 & $2.2 FY06)

  • Fund Regional Pilot Projects (Priority 3)

We request funds to allow all regions to initiate pilot projects in their regions using the results from NOPP funded socio-economic analyses to guide their selection and design. Such pilot projects provide the mechanism to entrain private sector data users and data product suppliers, provide opportunities to showcase successes to build regional and national constituencies using the NFRA infrastructure and provide a mechanism to begin the development of new technologies necessary to address regional RCOOS needs and share these successes throughout the RA assemblage.

Estimated cost (11 regions at $0.5M each): $5.5M ($2M in FY05 & $3.5M in FY06)

3. Priorities for Enhancing the Observing Subsystem of the National Coastal Backbone of the IOOS

Part II of theFirst Annual IOOS Development Plan focuses on FY 2005-06 and recommends the following using existing operational, observing subsystem assets:

  • Initiate the Coastal Component – Develop an integrated approach to water quality monitoring & living resource assessments through more timely provision of the following products: (1) surface and interior fields of nutrients, dissolved oxygen, phytoplankton biomass (Chl) and macrozooplankton abundance (seasonal to decadal scales); (2) spatial extent and condition of benthic habitats (annual to decadal scales); (3) abundance and distribution of living marine resources (including protected species)(seasonal to decadal scales); and (4) land-sea freshwater flows and associated transports of sediments, nutrients and contaminants (episodic to decadal scales).
  • Coordinated Development of the Global and Coastal Components – Extend the global ocean observations to the shoreline forimproved regional weather & climate predictions, more efficient and safer marine operations in coastal waters, more accurate forecasts of natural hazards & their effects, and improved homeland security.

Since the initial observing subsystem is to be built using existing assets, working group recommendations for the observing subsystem focused on enhancements in FY 2007 and beyond. Enhancements using existing operational capabilities are summarized in section 3.1 and those that require research and development are summarized in section 3.2. The latter includes recommended priorities that have already been funded as well as priorities that may be funded in FY 05 or 06. Recommendations that called for integrating data streams from various sources (e.g., in situ and remote sensing; NOAA and USGS tide gauges) are addressed as part of the DMAC recommendations.

In one form or another, most, but not all, recommendations of the working groups are listed below. Similar or complementary recommendations were consolidated. The resulting set of recommendations given below are consistent with the results of the 2002 Ocean.US IOOS Workshop (Airlie House) and recommendations of nascent Regional Associations made to Ocean.US prior to the Conference (IOOS Development Plan, Part III, Table 2). A complete list of recommendations from the Conference is available on request.

3.1Pre-Operational and Operational Elements

A high priority for enhancing the initial IOOS is to begin addressing the problem of under-sampling in space-time and of the core variables. The enhancements recommended below were made with the understanding that under sampling will remain a chronic problem but that steps must be taken to reduce the magnitude of the problem and improve the accuracy of field estimates and model predictions. As a group, the recommendations emphasize non-biogeochemical variables which underscores the need for research to develop in situ sensing of biological and chemical variables.

3.1.1 Begin to address the problem of under-sampling core variables in time and space

3.1.1.1Forcings

Sea surface wind and barometric pressure fields and land-based inputs are important drivers of change in coastal marine and estuarine ecosystems. Thus, increasing the density and continuity of these observations is a high priority as follows:

Winds –NOAA should increase the density of meteorological measurements of the oceans by supplementing the current NDBC network with addition instrumented buoys and automated meteorological measurements on Voluntary Observing Ships (VOS).

Transports from land to sea –USGS should maintain the current stream flow and water chemistry monitoring network and increase the number of streams monitored.

3.1.1.2System Dynamics

Timely detection and predictions of changes in the physical environment (water column and benthos) and biologically structured habitats (sea grass beds, coral reefs, etc.) are critical to achieving the seven goals.In this context, recommendations focused on improving current observational programs as follows:

Current fields – Expand the use of cables to monitor boundary currents and associated transports of heat and water, and make use of data not usually used for this purpose, e.g., USCG GPS equipped Self Locating Datum Marking Buoy used for search and rescue.

Waves, water level and storm surge flooding – Increase the observing network for near; expand NWLON and increase the number of gauges reporting in real-time

Sea ice – Maintain current SAR capabilities and establish in situ calibration and validation program; expand VOS Bering Sea ice edge observations; include Radarsat Geophysical Processing System (RGPS) arctic “snapshots” in NationalIceCenter products