Activities/Accomplishments of the U.S. GOOS Steering Committee

1. Activities/Accomplishments of the U.S. GOOS Steering Committee Mark Luther and Worth Nowlin SECOORA Workshop Sept. 12, 2006

2. History of USGSC The U.S. GOOS Steering Committee was formed in 1998 at the request of Dr. D. James Baker, Jr., Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere at NOAA, on behalf of interested Federal agencies. The group was requested to help in the development of information concerning options on how to match the needs of user groups with the observations and products required to meet those needs, addressing what is working well, what is not working well, the impediments we face at present, and the opportunities we face for the future.

3. History of USGSC • The first meeting of the U.S. GSC was held 16 December 1998 in Washington, DC. • Reviewed the history of the Saxton/Weldon request and discussed response • Original U.S. GOOS Steering Committee members: T. Malone, W. Nowlin, C. Cooper, L. Crowder, M. Davidson, L. Fu, E. Harrison, J. Hindle, J. Mjelde, R. Molinari, Z. Powell, and S. Weisberg. • Other Attendees: D. J. Baker (NOAA), M. Cole (NOAA), M. Johnson (NOAA), P. Pan (EPA)

4. US GSC Membership • Chair Worth Nowlin Texas A&M University • Vice-Chair Mark Luther University of South Florida • Vice-Chair Stephen Weisberg California Coastal Water Research Project Authority • Bob Cohen Weathernews • Charlie Colgan University of Southern Maine • Margaret Davidson Coastal Services Center, NOAA • Brian Dorsch Marine Services & Consulting • Frederick Grassle Rutgers University • Ed Harrison NOAA/PMEL • Paul Kelly Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Task Force • Phil Mundy NOAA/NMFS • Jeffrey Reutter Director, Ohio Sea Grant College Program • Evan Richert State of Maine/USM • Liaison to Ocean.US Tom Malone Ocean.US Office

5. Accomplishments of the USGSC • Assist in the preparation of key documents for the development of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). • Nowlin and Malone report • Frosch report • Ten-year Implementation Plan for Building a Sustained Ocean Observing System for Climate prepared by the Office of Global Programs • Report of the Ocean.US Workshop (Airlie House). • These reports provided the basis for establishment of the Ocean.US Office and for development of a plan for the U.S. IOOS.

6. USGSC Activities • Prepare a strategy for development of the U.S. coastal ocean observing system. • Provide “suggestions” to the federal agencies involved in development of the U.S. IOOS, especially working through the Ocean.US Office. • Work with nascent regional associations to aid in the development of observing systems that conform to GOOS design principles.

7. USGSC Activities • Identify users and assess products needed from the coastal component of the U.S. ocean observing system. Assign priorities to users and products. This has been done on a regional basis; initial assessments have been made for U.S. Coastal regions.. • Maintain awareness of draft and pending national legislation bearing directly on the development of a U.S. IOOS. Provide inputs as feasible.

8. USGSC Activities • Enhance awareness by users and government representatives of activities related to the development of the U.S. IOOS. A Communications Subcommittee was formed and encouraged the development of a Communication Plan for the IOOS and the hiring of a professional communicator for the Ocean.US Office.

9. USGSC Activities • Encourage pilot projects to further the evolution of observing system elements. • Maintain an inventory of studies of the economic benefits of a GOOS and promote/encourage additional assessments. Studies of the economic benefits of regional coastal observing systems in U.S. waters are of special interest. • Assist with the preparations for the Arlie House Workshop and the follow-up report, particularly budgetary requirements.

10. USGSC Activities • Encourage Ocean.US to adopt an Implementation Plan. Prepared a draft plan. • Encourage the NOAA Administrator to provide additional support to the U.S. contribution to the global (climate and marine services) module of GOOS. Provide reviews of documents related to this module. • Suggest and advocate for the formation of a National Federation of Regional Associations. Created concept of RA’s and NFRA, Drafted IOOS Resolution, organized Summit

11. Why should USGSC continue? • Provide “unbiased neutral counsel”* for IOOS entities, both federal and non-federal – no other group has this charge • Insure coordination with international GOOS activities • Provide Corporate memory, continuity • Non-FACA – More flexibility * D. Martin, Personal Communication

12. Highlights of US GSC XIIFeb. 8-10, 2006, CSC • Updates on RA’s, NFRA, Federal Legislation, Ocean.US, Private Sector activities, Global Module of IOOS • Discussion on what remains to be done to help move IOOS forward • Overview of National Water Quality Monitoring Network for U.S. Coastal Waters and Their Tributaries • Report on IOOS Public Health Workshop, January 2006

13. Major foci for the future • Defining the National Backbone • Building a North American GOOS Regional Alliance • Re-orient IOOS focus on products rather than observations Enhance U.S. participation in the global component of GOOS • Defining the role of the U.S. GSC in IOOS Education and Outreach

14. New Initiative • Develop straw plan for IOOS focusing on 3 areas: Coastal Inundation/Disaster Resilience; Marine Operations; Public Health; to build upon Implementation Plan • Will convene “expert teams” in each area • Straw plans will be merged and given to RA’s and Federal Agencies for review • How can this activity be coordinated with/contribute to IOOS-RFQ development?

15. Next meeting Sept. 13-14, 2006 Major topics: • Future structure, leadership of USGSC • Development of Global GOOS • Developing the IOOS within the Federal government • Regional Development of the Coastal component of the IOOS • An initial design for the U.S. Coastal IOOS • IOOS Education and Outreach

16. Options for the future • Remain independent – would allow maximum flexibility but must find stable source of funding • Become subcommittee of ORRAP – would provide stable funding but would limit activity • Become subcommittee of Ocean Studies Board – stable funding but potentially more restrictive

18. Alliance for Coastal Technologies Partner Institutions University of Alaska University of Michigan Cooperative Institute for Limnology & Ecosystems Research Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System Moss Landing Marine Laboratories Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute Skidaway Institute of Oceanography