|
|
  |
Summary Minutes Approved by
the NOAA Science Advisory Board THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 2000 Official Call to Order and
Review of Meeting Format Dr. Uhart officially called the fifth meeting of the NOAA Science Advisory Board (SAB) to order at 8:00 A.M. and explained the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) guidelines for the meeting. Welcoming remarks and review
of purpose of the NOAA SAB and expectation of meeting with NOAA
Strategic Planning Leads Dr. Baker reviewed the purpose of the SAB and the importance of the role it plays in developing NOAA science policy and developing science programs. He suggested that the SAB should offer to meet with the transition team and brief new people. The FY 2002 budget will be the first one the new Administration will see. Questions and Discussion Mr. Douglas asked how the SAB's recommendations on the FY 2002 budget will be treated. Dr. Baker replied that he will ask for them to be written and formally presented to him, in a formal response process. ACTION ITEM: The Chair of the SAB shall officially transmit the Boards recommendations and statements regarding the FY 2002 budget initiatives to Dr. Baker. Dr. Maxwell asked if it is possible to put together a strategic plan just for research, like Sea Grant. Dr. Baker replied that NOAA has been successful in educating OMB in Sea Grant research and added that it is harder to get the money to manage, store and analyze data than it is to build the instruments and systems to collect the data. A discussion ensued on how to best utilize NOAA partnerships and the SAB in the strategic planning process. Questions include funding research and linkages with other agencies. Dr. Baker said that one way for NOAA to survive is to link with other agencies. Dr. Rice stated that partnerships
are fundamental to research surviving everywhere. NOAA could
look at improving partnerships in the areas of mission-oriented
research (fish stock assessment) and with monitoring and assessment
of data. NOAA's Climate Service's Initiative Dr. Evans outlined NOAA's Climate Services initiative as an introduction to presentations on NOAA's decadal to centennial change and seasonal and interannual climate forecast presentations of initiatives to follow. He explained the strategy from which the two initiatives were developed. Presentations from NOAA Strategic
Planning Teams: Dr. Livezey explained that the goal is an integrated NOAA Climate Services System Program. Services come out of the research, observations, and model predictions. The strategy through FY 2006 is fix what is broken, provide services and conduct research. About 1/3 of the FY 2002 SI budget initiative is for research, both basic and applied. Of the 5 recommendations from the 1999 constituent workshops, only climate/weather links and assessment of high-impact event risk has money in the President's FY 2001 budget. The 2000 workshops endorsed the FY 2001 COOP rescue initiative and the FY 2002 surface observing system modernization and supported increasing NOAA attention to climate services and stakeholders, but called for more structure. The 2000 workshops resulted in 4 recommendations: the need for intraseasonal forecast services, integrated regional assessments, institutionalizing mechanisms for technology transfer from lab to operations, and training/education to NWS field and private sector meteorologists and climatologists. He presented the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) Initiative and other initiatives including educational/outreach plans. He explained how climate services will be organized within the NWS reorganization and the formation of an OAR Climate Services Program Office. Questions and Discussion Dr. Washington asked if GOOS just a NOAA responsibility. Dr. Livezey said that GOOS is international, with responsibilities shared with other nations. Dr. Hanna asked if NOAA is able to turn its customers into paying customers and recover costs. Dr. Livezey responded that policy and statute dictate that NOAA can only recover cost of reproduction, unless we have specific authority for fees, which we have in some areas. Dr. Washington strongly supports NOAA's support of the international efforts in the oceans. It may be easier to sell climate services to OMB and Congress if we package them more towards the NWS side. Dr. Evans said that OAR tried for climate services in the FY 2001 budget. The idea was not to parcel out but to build up a unified climate services program. Dr. Pietrafesa thinks what is broken is C-MAN (Coastal-Marine Automated Network), buoys, etc. There is a part of the ocean observing initiative, but not included in the seasonal to interannual initiative, and there is a coastal initiative that may address this. Dr. Brown applauds an integrated view, NOAA should show that there is international leveraging of the NOAA part. Dr. Hanna asked how to present the market value of these services. Mr. Douglas asked the legislative authority to recover costs. Ms. Fruchter explained that we are partnering with the private sector and, any fees we charge, they are for a narrow set of people that need the information. Dr. Alexander asked how NOAA has incorporated some recent papers, such as the Malone Paper. Dr. Livezey replied that they are linked because they are the same people. Dr. Brown about the US position on open access to data and information. Dr. Livezey explained that many foreign countries are charging for special products and that he supports NOAA and US position. There is a value. NOAA will have to learn to change the way they do business because of the impact. Dr. Greenwood supports the open access to data. Continuation of Presentations
from NOAA Strategic Planning Teams Dr. Albritton described the strategic planning team's current activities, FY 2001 augmentations, constituent input, FY 2002 plans and long term plans. Questions and Discussion Dr. Brown asked how the climate change, the Levitas article, and climate forcing agents fit together within their plan? Dr. Albritton explained that observing systems, the second part of the NOAA climate services initiative, will address this. Components in the ocean observing system initiative will specifically address the Levitas article. Dr. Rice stated that the North American chemistry part of the initiative is not a new initiative but a new way of thinking of things. Dr. Albritton explained that there is no FY 2002 initiative in this area. We are not ready to describe a new national research agenda. Secondly, climate service deserves the emphasis. Dr. Rice asked for examples of the end-to-end pilots. Dr. Albritton explained that NESDIS will be connected in real-time to state and national insurance facilities. Extreme events and information and interpretation of extreme events will be available Dr. Sorooshian asked if the inclusion of water vapor is in response to the National Academy of Sciences report. Dr. Albritton explained the current trends in tropospheric water vapor. Dr. Hanna asked if there was discipline integration in the international assessment and how it was shared with other components in NOAA. Dr. Albritton explained that there was a good national integration of disciplines. On the international level, it still must be improved; there was almost no social integration. Dr. Pietrafesa if there is any attention to data management in the budget breakouts. Dr. Albritton explained that data management is in the NESDIS component for data recovery, digitizing nondigital files. Presentation from NOAA Strategic
Planning Teams Dr. Uccellini presented the FY 2002 initiatives for the advance short-term warning and forecast services team. Six strategies were used to formulate the FY 2002 to FY 2006 budget plan: sustain a modernized infrastructure, build upon the success of previous efforts, improve dissemination and use of weather information, accelerate technology infusion, operationalize space weather forecasts, and improve new service programs (e.g., aviation and marine). He presented the results of the FY 2000 constituent planning and priorities workshops. Questions and Discussion Dr. Stevenson-Hawk asked the relationship with the University of Maryland. Dr. Uccellini responded that there was a relationship with the meteorology department. She wanted a copy of the white paper. Dr. Uccellini said he would provide a copy in a couple of weeks. ACTION ITEM: Louis Uccellini will provide a copy of the white paper to Denise Stevenson-Hawk. The Board discussed the value of satellite radiances on predictability and how the lack of radiances of value over land is a hindrance. In response to a question by Dr. Pietrafesa, NOAA would improve radar data through dual polarization and an open system architecture. Dr. Sorooshian noted that there are still radar coverage holes in the west due to terrain. Dr. Gober wondered about the relationship between science and application. How much is basic research and how much is applying research to operations? Are there any data on how successful it is in getting money for operations vs. research? Dr. Uccellini responded that NOAA gets about 1/10 of what NSF gets. There is now a new line in the budget. The NWS part of the budget is operations and OAR and NESDIS are research. But much of the NESDIS is support for operations. Dr. Sorooshian extended his congratulations on the joint data center with NASA. Dr. Alexander asked if there are any new initiatives on tsunami. Dr. Uccellini said that it is number two for OAR and lower for the other line offices. They have the buoys out there and now it is time for maintenance and outreach. The objective is to lower the false alarm rate. Presentation from NOAA Strategic
Planning Teams Ms. Davidson presented two initiatives. One is the out of the box initiative called Predict and Reduce Watershed Impact of Coastal Storms (PREWICS). It engages the interactions between the ocean, atmosphere, and humans. It will build an end-to-end capability, observer to user, capability. There will be three pilot projects: St. Johns River, Florida, and Southern California. Margaret provided breakouts of the budget based on different factors, e.g., line office, team, science, observations, and operations. There are talks with the NSF for social science research and programs because NSF gets money for social science but NOAA does not. USGS is building a linked initiative. For Sustain Healthy Coasts there are 4 initiatives: habitat for coastal life; sustainable coastal communities; creating new value from the sea; and coral reef watch. She reviewed the outcomes of the 2000 constituent policy and planning workshops. Questions and Discussion Dr. Stevenson-Hawk noted that the pilot programs are presented as taking over 5 years and asked if they will be completed in 5 years. Dr, Davidson replied that, if the concept is proved, then the framework can be taken to other regions. There will then be a national system. Dr. Hanna asked if NOAA has thought of the research priority process. In response, Dr. Davidson will provide the 2-page table to the SAB. Dr. Rice where the 6.5M goes
on the decision support line. This could involve many disciplines.
Dr. Greenwood asked about the offshore movement of pollutants and how do you deal with invasive pollutants. Dr. Davidson explained that there could be atmospheric deposition. It is a challenge, but we must start to understand what is under our control and then look at those areas outside of our control. NOAA is a player at the able of EPA's smart growth initiative. Dr. Rice asked if social scientists involved. Dr. Davidson replied that there was, though Sea Grant. She went on to explain that there is not a significant part of this initiative for social science because of the budget limit. The amount of resources available would determine the number of pilots. Marine biotechnology and aquaculture are included. Dr. Rice said that forecasting plays an important role. There is a thin talent pool of those that can use the forecast products. Is NOAA doing anything structured to take the value of forecasting and make that knowledge and technology available to other areas that do not have the forecasting tools? Dr. Uccellini said that there is not a unified effort. Mr. Douglas asked if there are efforts in habitat characterization and understanding. How do you know that it is at a scale useful to managers? Dr. Davidson replied that the programs are designed based on questions posed. They are question-driven. Little or none have been characterized. It is a part of the initiative to do an inventory of what has been done. Mr. Douglas asked if you can you use a pilot area that has a problem and demonstrate to the managers how characterization can help. Mr. Roger Griffis offered that it is being done with coral reefs. Dr. Rice stated that international efforts have been very slow in coming up with characterization schemes and developing ways to carry them out. Dr. Beeton asked that, if we
assume you will only get 10% of what you ask for, how do you
distribute the funds? A question for all of team leads. Ms.
Davidson hopes the board can help the teams determine this. Dr.
Livsey stated that in the passbacks, the teams were asked for
their priorities when the budget came back lower than requested.
These are discussed within each team. He would be looking to
the SAB for constructive statements. Dr. Albritton said that
his team will prioritize, as they have done before. SAB comments
could be useful in that perspective. Comments by the SAB for
next year and beyond would be useful. Dr. Uccellini explains
that it is frustrating; there is a lot of effort with relatively
little funding payoff. Dr. Stevenson-Hawk asked how goals and performance measures are formulated. Dr. Uccellini explained that we are trying to identify the next level of skill. It is a realistic expectation, but not a guarantee. Mr. Douglas stated that this Board does not want to do anything to set back the planning process up to this point. How can we focus on the charge that we have? He said that at the priorities and planning workshop for Sustain Healthy Coasts, characterization does not have a lot of support because coast owners think it is threatening. Dr. Brown suggested there are old and new ways of approaching problems. ENSO just happened. Sustained efforts sometimes lead to revolutionary improvements. He has doubts on the scalability of characterization. Dr. Davidson agreed that has to be addressed. Dr. Gober believes that innovation comes form integration and interdisciplinary research. Dr. Rice said that research across disciplines is what is important. Is it too late for the SAB to actually do something about the FY 2002 budget? We can be helpful in advising on how NOAA can make some meaningful initiatives successful (funding). Can we improve the will to fund? Dr. Uccellini replied that the Board can help with advice on what the team responses will be to prioritize the DOC and OMB passbacks. The SAB discussed the critical nature of climate services. The Board members would like talking points of NOAA high priority initiatives. A list of appropriators in both House and Senate would be useful. ACTION ITEM: Provide the Board
with a list of appropriators in the House and the Senate. |