NOAA Climate Test Bed CTB Response to SAB Recommendations(FY06)
______
31January 2006
Table of Contents Page
Overview...... 3
1.0 Purpose of the SAB Meeting ...... 4
2.0 List of CTB Action Items ...... 5
3.0 CTB Response to SAB Recommendations...... 6
3.1Programmatic and Science Priorities...... 6
3.2Transition Project Teams...... 7
3.3Community Involvement...... 7
3.4Model Output Access and Distribution...... 10
3.5Meetings...... 10
3.6SAB Membership...... 11
Appendix A. SAB Written Report...... 12
Overview
A NOAA Climate Test Bed (CTB) Science Advisory Board (SAB)Meetingwas held on the 24th of October, 2005in conjunction with the 30th Annual Climate Diagnostics and Prediction Workshop at The Pennsylvania State University in State College, Pennsylvania. The SAB Meeting included a discussion of Key Scientific Challenges for the CTB and some preliminary feedback on CTB progress and future science priorities. Subsequently, theSAB provided a formal written report with a series of recommendations for the CTB to consider. The CTB response to the SAB recommendations is given in this report. The CTB response includes a set of Action Items to be carried out by the CTB to address many of the issues raised by the SAB.
The CTB ManagementTeam wishes to take this opportunity to thank the SAB for their thoughtful and comprehensive advice,which has made a substantial contribution to the successful evolution of the CTB.
1.0Purpose of the SAB Meeting
The CTB Science Advisory Board (SAB) Meeting was held during the evening of 24th October 2005. The SAB is an external advisory body that works with the broader climate community to provide the CTB with independent expert advice on high-priority scientific challenges, including reviews of implementation strategies to meet these challenges. At the meeting the SAB was charged to review CTB FY05 Progress, CTB FY06 Plans and to provide independent expert advice (in the form of a written summary report) on future (FY07+) CTB science priorities.
The open portion of the SAB Meeting included several presentations by CTB staff (CTB FY05 accomplishments and FY06 plans; status of CDEP/CTB FY06 Competitive Grants Program; status of the CTB Science Priorities and Transition Plan). The SAB Meeting was held during the 1st Annual NOAA CTB Meeting, which was intended to focus the climate research, operations and applications communities on the CTB mission to accelerate research and development into improved NOAA climate forecasts, products and applications. See the CTB web site for all oral and poster presentations:
2.0 List of CTB Action Items
The following is a list of CTB Action Items developed from the SAB recommendations. The CTB Action Items are organized into three categories:Programmatic and Science Priorities, Community Involvement, Model Output Access and Distribution. The CTB Management Team, the Climate Science Team, the Oversight Board and CTB Employees are expected to contribute to the completion of these actions
Programmatic and Science Priorities:
Action 1: Establish high level Programmatic Priorities in consultation with NCEP and NOAA Senior Management(CTB Management Team).
Action 2: Establish Scientific Priorities needed to accomplish Programmatic Priorities in
consultation with the CST, OB and TPT’s (CTB Management Team).
Action 3: Include a statement of plans and accomplishments in FY06 TPT Annual Reports
(CST Co-chairs and TPT Team Chairs).
Action 4: Prepare a Science Plan and Implementation Strategy (SP&IS) that articulates CTB Programmatic and Science Priorities (Higgins and the CTB Management Team).
Action 5:Prepare a Management and Operations Plan (MOP) (Higgins and the CTB Management Team).
Action 6: Vet SP&IS and MOP with OB, CST and SAB (Higgins, Laver, Mo, Schubert, Busalacchi).
Action 7:Revise CTB NTOP’s and milestones to reflect CTB Programmatic and Science Priorities (Higgins, Kousky).
Community Involvement:
Action 8:Hold the2nd CTB SAB meeting in June 2006 as a stand alone meeting. (Gelman, Pan, Higgins, Ji)
Action 9:Add a link to the CTB webpage on the main NCEP webpage (Silva)
Model Output Access and Distribution:
Action 10:Develop a Data Policy for distribution of CTB climate information (Pan, CTB Management).
3.0CTB Response to SAB Recommendations
The SAB recommendations and CTB responses follow. The SAB recommendations were extracted verbatim from the SAB written report (see Appendix A). When appropriate, specific CTB actions are also listed.
3.1Programmatic and Science Priorities
SAB Recommendation1: An overall scientific strategy and prioritization for the CTB is needed, spanning sensitivity tests, parameterization studies, and coupled hindcasts as a function of resources ($$$, computing), that explains how such activities fit into and support the overall vision for the CTB.
CTB Response 1: The CTB Management Team has been working with NCEP (CPC, EMC) management to establish a prioritized short list of high level institutional priorities for accelerated transition of science into operations (Programmatic Priorities). The current set of Programmatic Priorities (subject to revision) are:
•NOAA/NCEP Climate Forecast System Improvements
•Multi-Model Ensemble Prediction System
•Climate Reanalysis - AnOngoing Analysis of the Climate System
•Regional Applications and Decision Support
The CTB Management Team is working with the CTB Climate Science Team (CST) and Transition Project Teams (TPT’s) to identify and articulate specific scientific priority areas (Science Priorities) needed to accomplish the Programmatic Priorities. The Science Priorities are listed in detail in a draft of the CTB Science Plan and Implementation Strategy, which has been drafted over the last two months.
SAB Recommendation 2. In terms of reporting, next year we would like to see a restatement of the FY06 plans for each TPT and what was accomplished (and what was not) in FY06 mapped against those plans.
CTB Response 2: The CTB Management Team will ask the TPT’s to do this in their annual reports and at the June 2006 SAB meeting.
SAB Recommendation 3. The CTB Management Team should prepare a science and implementation plan, separate from the management and operations plan, with a more comprehensive and realistic delineation of science questions and priorities, commensurate with available resources and consistent with NOAA strategic requirements.
CTB Response 3: As mentioned above, the CTB Science Plan and Implementation Strategy (SP&IS) and a separate Management and Operations Plan (M&OP) have been drafted over the past 2 months. These plans are currently being vetted by CTB Management, the OB, and the CST. We aim to provide a draft of these plans to the SAB prior to the June SAB meeting. This should provide the SAB with more useful guidance for providing advice on future (FY07+) science priorities. The CTB Science Priorities will be incorporated into the NCEP Technical Operating Plan (NTOP’s).
CTB Actions:
Action 1:Establish high level Programmatic Priorities in consultation with NCEP and NOAA Senior Management (CTB Management Team).
Action 2: Establish Scientific Priorities needed to accomplish Programmatic Priorities in
consultation with the CST, OB and TPT’s (CTB Management Team).
Action 3: Include a statement of plans and accomplishments in FY06 TPT Annual Reports
(CST Co-chairs and TPT Team Chairs).
Action 4: Prepare a Science Plan and Implementation Strategy (SP&IS) that articulates CTB Programmatic and Science Priorities (Higgins and the CTB Management Team).
Action 5:Prepare a Management and Operations Plan (M&OP) (Higgins and the CTB Management Team).
Action 6: Vet SP&IS and M&OP with OB, CST and SAB (Higgins, Laver, Mo, Schubert, Busalacchi).
Action 7:Revise CTB NTOP’s and milestones to reflect CTB Programmatic and Science Priorities (Higgins, Kousky).
3.2. Transition Project Teams
Recommendation 4.Strong recommendation that the CTB review the organization of the Transition Project Teams as it goes through the exercise of narrowing its priorities, and that it reconstitute them to focus on those priorities
CTB Response 4: The TPT’s are the functional core of the CTB. They have been quite effective in carrying out CTB experiments. However, we agree that some flexibility is needed to adjust the TPT’s as CTB science priorities are refined and focused. Some changes are anticipated in FY07, including a recombination of TPT’s involved in CFS improvements and (possibly) the addition of a Reanalysis TPT. The TPT’s include external PI’s, so the ultimate balance of TPT activities depends on the level of funding.
3.3 Community Involvement
Recommendation 5. The best basic rule in engaging other communities is to go to them. The most efficient way to start this process would be through overview, update and topical talks at large national meetings. A follow-up process would entail participation at various topical workshops and conferences, such as those sponsored by AMS, CLIVAR, GEWEX, and various NOAA work groups and committees. Key CTB participants should be encouraged to act as emissaries for this activity in their travels and interactions.
CTB Response 5: Given the scale of CTB activities at present, it is logical to continue to organize CTB Special Sessions in conjunction with the Annual CDPW and to hold a stand alone Annual SAB meeting. The CDPW continues to be a good venue for the CTB to engage the climate community that has a vested interest in intraseasonal to interannual climate prediction and applications (also see CTB Response 14). As the CTB grows, we will continue to reevaluate the scope and duration of CTB Meetings, and possibly add an Annual PI meeting. The CTB Management Team will also expand participation inNational meetings (e.g. AMS and AGU) and topical workshops as appropriate. The CTB Management Team will continue to engage CLIVAR, GEWEX and other national and international research communities/programs seeking science advice on best achieving CTB goals(Programmatic Priorities). Papers published under the CTB will be identified as such in the acknowledgements.
CTB Actions:
Action 8:Hold the2nd CTB SAB meeting in June 2006 as a stand alone meeting. (Gelman, Pan, Higgins, Ji)
Recommendation 6. Add links to CTB on the main NCEP web page.
CTB Response 6:A link to the CTB webpage will be added on the main NCEP web page.
CTB Actions:
Action 9:Add a link to the CTB webpage on the main NCEP webpage (Silva)
Recommendation 7. Rather than try to directly reach the broad applications community, the best strategy for the present would be to target toward those intermediaries who bridge between research/operations and applications.
CTB Response 7:The CTB Management Team agrees with the SAB that the best strategy for the present is to target intermediaries (e.g. the applications research community/programs). The CTB has formed the “Climate Prediction Services Team” with NWS/Climate Services Division to identify, prioritize and meet user needs for climate forecast products.
Recommendation 8: In providing guidance for the suite of specific activities on which to focus, one explicit goal could be to make progress each year on critical issues of broad interest in each of the major geographic regions of the United States.
CTB Response 8: We agree with the SAB recommendation on regionally specific application products. This is consistent with a Programmatic Prioritiy on Regionally Specific Forecasts (section 3.1). Making progress on critical issues of broad interest in major geographic regions of the US then becomes the driver for CTB Science Priorities (section 3.1).
Recommendation 9: The revised approach to the proposal solicitation and panel selection as presented by Ming Ji seems to be a step in the right direction.
CTB Response 9: We will proceed with the alternate approach presented by Ming Ji at the SAB meeting (i.e. the Joint Hurricane Testbed model) for the next round of CTB Competitive Transition Projects. In particular, the burden will be on the CTB to ensure that a proposed activityis relevant and that there is substantial collaboration with / contributions by the CTB.
Recommendation 10: The role and magnitude of NCEP base resources supporting the CTB relative to NCEP employees competing for CDEP funding in response to CTB priorities would benefit from a more specific delineation.
CTB Response 10: CTB Management recognizes the core issue raised by the SAB concerning the NWS commitment of base resources. Though newFull Time Equivalent (FTE) Federal Employees have not been hired into the CTB, more than half of the CPC Development Branch staff and several EMC Climate Modeling Branch staff have been refocused on CTB projects. This represents a majorshift in attention towards CTB programmatic and science priorities (CFS improvements; multi-model ensemble prediction system; regional products and decision support) and is a real NCEP commitment. The CTB has its own Annual Operating Plan that aligns with the NCEP Technical Operating Plan to ensure that there is no duplication of effort with other NCEP Centers. Moreover, the CTB has attracted new funds ($100K in FY04; $300K in FY05; $450K in FY06) to carry out CTB transition projects and to enhance CTB support staff. Though growth has been slower than desired, there is every expectation that additional funds will support an increasing number of collaborative projects with the community. NCEP is uniquely positioned to carry out transition projects to accelerate improvements in NOAA climate forecasts, products and applications.
To help focus CTB personnel on CTB objectives and to improve community engagement, the CTB management recommends that the position description of the CTB Director be changed to include supervisory authority over CTB personnel. The CTB Director would work directly with CTB personnel to develop GWPS Workplans and to evaluate progress towards CTB Programmatic and Science Priorities as articulated in the CTB Science Plan and Implementation Strategy.
We recognize that CTB personnel should not be competing with the external community for resources available through announcements of Opportunity (AO’s). If a CTB scientist has viable ideas for improving operations, then he/she should implementtheseusing base resources as part of one of the CTB NTOP’s, which is an issue of prioritization for NCEP/CTB senior management.
As the CTB grows at the NOAA level, the roles and responsibilities of the CTB Management, the CTB employees and the relationship to NCEP and other NOAA line offices will only become more complicated if these issues are not addressed. Additional discussions with NCEP and NOAA senior management on these issues are required.
3.4. Model Output Access and Distribution
Recommendation 11. Attention should be devoted to the development and implementation of effective hardware and software tools for disseminating various model products to the interested communities. This data facility should be targeted to meet the needs of the scientific collaborators, as well as the applications community.
Recommendation 12. The design of this facility could benefit from the experience gained from similar efforts undertaken at PCMDI (for the IPCC runs), ECMWF (for the DEMETER and ENSEMBLES projects), CliPAS (Climate Prediction and its Application to Society, in support of the APEC Climate Center in Korea), PMEL (DODS server) and GFDL (NOMADS server).
Recommendation 13. The list of model variables, spatial and temporal sampling intervals, data formats, etc., of the datasets to be made available through the CTB server could be determined after broad consultations with the scientific community. (pg 8, line 13).
CTB Response 11-13: For Recommendations 11 – 13, we have made a good start by providing the entire CFS hindcast data on NOMADS servers and responded to user requests to enhance this product. We have also committed 2 FTE’s to work on development of the NOMADS database and the CTB web page. We do require additional resources for NOMADS server storage capacityand system support to include additional datasets for our CTB collaborators. The CTB Management Team agrees that we can learn from similar efforts at PCMDI, ECMWF, CLiPAS, PMEL and GFDL to enhance and improve the server function in the coming year. The CTB Management Team is developing a more formal “Data Policy” that applies to CTB models and data. This policy will be vetted with the CTB OB and included in the CTB Science and Implementation Plan and published on the CTB webpage.
Action 10:Develop a Data Policy for distribution of CTB climate information (Pan, CTB Management).
3.5. Meetings
Recommendation 14: The SAB sees the need for a dedicated Annual SAB meeting. Early in the developmental stages of the CTB, the SAB may likely need to meet twice per year.
CTB Response 14: The CTB has organized a dedicated (~1.5 day) CTB SAB Meeting for June 29-30, 2006(likely location is in the WashingtonDC area). A preliminary agenda has already been distributed. CTB Special Sessions (CFS Improvments, MM Ensembles; Regional Applications and Decision Support) are planned with the 31stAnnual CDPW in Boulder, CO in October 2006.
3.6. SAB Membership
Recommendation 15: The SAB also recommends that its membership be expanded to have greater international participation and representation from the user/application/private sector. The SAB recommends that Prof. In-Sik Kang of Korea be invited to join the SAB. Perhaps the CTB may want to consider a separate applications advisory board with representatives from, say, the trade associations of the relevant sectors.