The DESSC and the Steering Committee of the DESCEND (DEveloping Submergence SCiencE for the Next Decade) Workshop (held in October of 1999) finalized the text for proceedings of the UNOLS supported Workshop and posted these to the UNOLS Web site in their entirety in the Fall. The Proceedings are too long, however, to be of immediate use for publicizing the key findings and recommendations of the meeting. Text for an 8-page glossy brochure was put together by the steering committee and DESSC. With expert editorial, drafting, and artisitic assistance from WHOI, the brochure was published in

December and distributed at the Fall 2001 DESSC meeting. The brochure represents the executive summary of the UNOLS supported DESCEND. It also incorporates critical parallel efforts that took place subsequent to the Workshop. The "Key Recommendations" in this brochure represent the future needs of submergence science in the US community, as we face a decade of high expectations and the potential for monumental discoveries in the oceans.

The Brochure will be mailed to members of the scientific communities who use submergence assets and tools and will also be forwarded to members of congressional staff offices, the Ocean Caucus, funding agencies and others. We are encouraging recipients within the submergence community, to use the brochure as a basis for efforts to help educate the rest of the scientific community, various federal funding agencies, congressional offices, and the new administration in Washington with regard to the vast potential that exists for research in submergence science. As a community, we need to make these educational efforts ourselves whenever the opportunity arises. Additional materials and information regarding the Workshop is available at the UNOLS web site

<http://www.unols.org/dessc/descend/descend.htm>, from the UNOLS office or can be obtained by contacting the DEep Submergence Science Committee <http://www.unols.org/dessc/>.

DESSC is here to help you help the community of submergence science researchers and those who support us to achieve the exciting potential outlined in the research priorities of the DESCEND Workshop. A follow-up meeting to pursue the technological developments recommended by the Workshop participants will be organized for the near future.
 

After multiple attempts and much consternation, the 2001 ships’ schedules are as set as they will be. Special thanks go to the West Coast schedulers, UNOLS Office, ROV scheduler, Agency Program Officers, and especially the affected scientists for the hard work and flexibility to fit most of the science into workable schedules. Much of the problems stemmed from not enough days, ROV’s, and ships to satisfy everyone. Part of the problem was an increase in requested ship time. The total number of days requested for 2001 (as of Feb. 9) is 5,945. In 2000, the total number of ship days was 5,053. The increase in ship time in 2001 is spread among all categories of vessels: In Class I and II, the increase was 365 days; in Class III, 118 days; in Class IV, 264 days; and in the small vessels, 145 days. These increases are also spread among the funding agencies, with NSF showing a 735-day increase in requested time and the Navy having a 164-day increase. The ‘Other’ category shows a 7-day decrease from 2000. The percent utilization reflects the increase. Class I and II ships show a potential 99.3% utilization, (with a range of 107.3 – 34.0%) vs. an actual 84.1% utilization (98.7 – 57.7) in 2000. Class III ships show a 69.9% rate (98.5% - 0%) in 2001 vs. 62.8% (68.4 – 41.5); Class IV show 101.2% (148.9 – 83.9) vs. 84.9%(140.6 – 46.1); and the small ships have a 116.4% (193.6 – 67.3) rate vs. 94.4% (176.4 – 67.3) in 2000. The calculations in 2001 include data from HEALY while the 2000 calculations did not. The Class III ships reflect the lay up of EDWIN LINK for 2001.

CY 2001 ended the 2-year trial period for the Letter of Intent process of beginning the scheduling scheme. Almost all responses I received from schedulers with regard to the Letter of Intent concept were positive and in favor of it. Therefore, we will adopt it as SOP for the SSC. In fact, there already is one letter of intent submitted for CY 2002.

The 2000 RVOC meeting was hosted by Oregon State University at the Hatfield Marine Science Center on 24-26 October. Present were operators, funding agency representatives, and others representing U.S. and foreign organizations involved in the operation of oceanographic research platforms. The latter group included, The Canadian Defence Research Establishment, Southhampton Oceanography Centre (UK), Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation ( Australia), SACLANT Undersea Research Center (NATO), Glosten Associates, Military Sealift Command, Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, and Sea Education Association.

A brief overview of pertinent meeting topics follows:

• The Safety Committee will begin reviewing the RVOC Training Manual with the intention of evaluating its potential for serving as the required training document for STCW and ISM certification.
• Chris Gobey representing SACLANT gave a brief summary of their effort to interface ISM into the science component on their vessels. Formal procedures are being developed for the operation of every piece of science equipment coming on their ships. The process will take about 6 months and will involve the development of Safe Operating Procedures (SOP) for all installed and transient science equipment on their vessels. In addition to developing SOPs for science equipment, all ship personnel have gone through Risk Assessment Training.
• Dr Andrew Forbes with the Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation in Hobart, Tasmania, and Major Michel Caron with the Canadian Defense Establishment, introduced us to their organizations and give a brief review of the capabilities of their research vessels.
• Hervey Andrew, Vice President of Marsh Marine and Energy spoke on the status of maritime insurance and warned that premiums will be increasing in the near future. Operators were encouraged to work with their brokers so they understand our efforts to reduce the risks of operating the fleet.
• A number of organizations including, University of Alaska, Florida Institute of Oceanography, University of Delaware, WHOI, Skidaway, and Sea Education Association presented plans for building new vessels at their institutions or reviewed progress on vessels already under construction.

On the second day the meeting broke into 3 working groups, ISM Work Group, Personnel Recruitment and Retention Work Group, and Quality of Service Work Group. They met for about 2 hours after which the Chair of each group summarized their discussions.

Tom Smith, University of Alaska, reported on the ISM Group activities. The UNOLS Chair and representatives from NSF and ONR were asked to comment. Each felt that ISM would eventually be required of all our vessel’s but were willing to abide by the RVOC recommendation concerning implementation for vessel’s not required to do so under current regulation. The need for scientists to be aware of the impact of ISM on their projects and the need for the RVTECH to be included in the development of ISM scientific procedures and standards were both addressed. A list of recommendations were presented for consideration by the RVOC:

• All operators should implement ISM but no time limit should be set for small operator implementation.
• Formal standards should not be developed, however, the large RVOC Institutes should make their ISM documentation, etc. available for use by other Institutes. It was felt that good cooperation and communications between all RVOC members during ISM implementation would produce a close de facto standard.
• Institutes involved in developing ISM believe consultants would not be effective in producing a usable ISM but all felt that conducting an assessment audit by ABS was a very useful first step toward ISM implementation.
• RVOC should keep in touch with RVTECH concerning ISM implementation. Tom Smith was tasked with contacting the RVTECH committee on this matter.
• UNOLS should develop a home page for ISM to ease the intra-Institute communications concerning their implementation progress
• Any quality management system implemented by UNOLS should reinforce and not be separate from ISM. A separate QM system is not wanted.
• An effort needs to occur to impress on scientists that ISM will affect them. A short message in the UNOLS newsletter was suggested as an initial effort.
• The following position was developed for presentation at the RVOC business meeting, " The RVOC recommends and supports the goals of the ISM code and accordingly urges its adoption by all UNOLS operators as soon as practical."

Steve Rabalais, LUMCON, chaired the Quality of Service Group. The group made numerous recommendations that they felt would improve the quality of service provided by the fleet. Members agreed that a successful quality program would affect crew retention and have a positive impact on operating costs. It is important that everyone in the organization, from the top down, buy into the effort and that customer satisfaction be viewed by all as a very important component of the program. Suggestions for improvements to Cruise Assessment Form included: a brief description, on the form, of how the information will be used, and an improved efforts to make sure that all scientists on the ship, not just the chief scientists, have access to the form. Feed back to the science community on what UNOLS is doing to improve quality is needed.

The 2001 meeting will be held in Rhode Island, in conjunction with RVTEC. Steve Rabalais and Tim Askew were chosen as the new Chair and Vice Chair. An ad hoc Personnel Committee was formed to address questions raised about crew recruitment and training. Matt Hawkins has completed a salary review of small ships and Steve Rabalais will be attending the Ship Operations Cooperative Program meeting in March to explore the possibility of RVOC becoming a member.
 
 

Since September 2000 AICC activities have been transitional; we’ve transitioned from oversight of science testing on HEALY to helping to facilitate paying missions on the Coast Guard icebreakers, and we’ve had a transition of personnel- Jim Swift has stepped down as chair (but remains a committee member) and Lisa Clough has been named the new AICC chair. Joe Coburn has completed his AICC membership, and Dan Schwartz has agreed to attend AICC meetings as an ex-officio RVOC representative. Dale Chayes will be filling a similar ex-officio role for RVTEC. With the open slot left by Joe Coburn, expiration of Dan Lubin’s term in September 2001, and a request for an early replacement by Glenn Cota, the AICC will have three seats to fill by September 2001.

All three USCG icebreakers will be involved in science missions this summer- the POLAR STAR will be supporting NSF funded science off St. Lawrence Island beginning in March, the HEALY will be supporting two NSF funded missions in the eastern Arctic Ocean beginning in July, and the POLAR SEA will be supporting science of opportunity in July and August in the western arctic- predominantly the Chukchi Sea with a potential entry into Russian waters. The AICC last met January 25 and 26, 2001 to discuss planning for these missions, as well as several other topics.

The meeting began with presentation of the Coast Guard Distinguished Public Service Award to Jim Swift. This is the highest award the Coast Guard can give to a civilian unless there is a lifesaving event, which was just about the only thing Jim did not have to do during his chairmanship! The award recognizes Jim’s truly outstanding work over the last 4.5 years.

The AICC then received an update on UNOLS activities, including the ARRV (Arctic Regional Research Vessel) from FIC and AICC member Terry Whitledge. It is anticipated that the AICC will play a role in oversight of the ARRV if requested, and we look to be included in updates on the ARRV in the future.

The outlook remains positive for NSF's Arctic marine science programs. In addition to the SBI initiative, a new multi-agency initiative, SEARCH, looks promising. NSF has requested that AICC consider mechanisms by which underway data can be collected as CG icebreakers work in remote areas. Responsibility for quality control of the data, and personnel issues for the USCG were discussed, and AICC will continue to work with NSF and other UNOLS groups to more clearly define needs and realities of the underway data issue.

For the first time we had a second agency reporting at an AICC meeting. Tom Murray updated the AICC on a potential arctic initiative by NOAA under the Ocean Exploration Initiative. It is anticipated that the initiative will be known as ISARB (International Survey of Arctic Ridges and Basins). At the present time no funds are available for the proposed arctic work.

In keeping with our science advocacy role, and in conjunction with our transition to facilitating science on Coast Guard icebreakers, the AICC received reports from several individuals involved with logistic aspects of icebreakers both in the Arctic and the Antarctic. Vernon Asper from ARVOC (the Antarctic equivalent of AICC) had several useful suggestions including how the Antarctic vessels handle underway data collection and how ARVOC has been able to interact with paying customers by various means including formal post-cruise phone conversations. Terry Tucker (CRREL) updated us on HEALY’s performance during ice trials; the data have not yet been officially released, but the bottom line is HEALY exceeded her icebreaking requirements. Commander Bob Kaylor (USCG Polar Operation Division) presented a brief on the capabilities of the Coast Guard helicopters available on all icebreaker missions. The helos are a valuable science asset but they do sometimes impact over the side science operations. There will be a subgroup that will move towards standardizing what constitutes acceptable over the side deployment of science gear during launch and recovery of the helicopters.

The Coast Guard continues to support training of the MSTs (marine science or safety technicians) on board UNOLS ships prior to science deployments. The CG is also paying for the MSTs to obtain training for on-board equipment including SeaBeam and TeraScan. In general, the CG is working towards implementing the same science systems on all three of the Coast Guard icebreakers. The AICC was able to tour the POLAR STAR and get a feel first-hand for the changes being made to the Polar class vessels. In addition to working towards having the same science equipment available on each icebreaker, the same data networks and communications capabilities are being implemented over the long term. The Polar class vessels want it to be known that HEALY is not the only arctic research vessel available to the science community.

The AICC was also able to investigate many of the upgrades to HEALY, several of which were the direct result of science testing that took place this summer. Both the meterological and computer labs have been enlarged. The science conference room received several upgrades to improve quality of life issues. Aft winches and cranes have been or will be moved to provide more working space on the aft decks. Perhaps most importantly, major changes are planned for the winch control system prior to funded science on HEALY this summer.

There will be a final series of shakedown cruises for the HEALY during April and March of this year. While the focus of these cruises will be to get the ship ready for the types of science planned in 2001 (primarily dredging on the Nansen-Gakkel Ridge and testing of an AUV), Jack Bash and John Freitag will be lining up a team of UNOLS technicians to specifically evaluate the winch modifications, the SeaBeam system, and the switch of the ship’s science data network to NOAA provided software. These evaluations will be contained in the science testing reports that will be completed by the AICC under the direction of Jim Swift over the next few months. As it stands now, the only science system that will not be working for the planned trips in 2001is the 300 kHz ADCP. The AICC will need to explore possible strategies for replacing the ADCP, and will seek community feedback for long-range ADCP requirements.

The Coast Guard plans to continue permitting science participation on a "not to interfere" basis on shakedown cruises in the western Arctic. These "Science Of Opportunity" (SOO) cruises have been a popular venue for informal data collection, pre-proposal investigations, and instrument tests. For the first time there may be too many requests to be supported, although it appears that all requests can be accommodated if the cruise is broken down into two segments, SOO as usual, and then a cruise into Russian waters to support potential establishment of a long-term environmental observatory in Chukotka (Russia). No science sampling is planned for the trip in Russian waters. The AICC will be reviewing the SOO requests for logistic feasibility, and potential compatibility with other SOO requests.

The AICC is working with UNOLS to maintain a web site containing a rolling five year plan for US Arctic icebreaker use, beginning with conceptual plans and then updated to show proposal submission and status, and, for the lucky few, scheduling. Judging from the large number of ship time requests already generated there is substantial community interest in Arctic icebreaker use.

To help facilitate planning, the CG will be providing a cruise planning manual on their website. The AICC is currently providing feedback on the manual, and it anticipated that the manual will be on line by the end of February. We anticipate that the planning guide will be a living document, and will look to provide links to science equipment evaluations on the site as well.

Finally the Coast Guard is anticipating several personnel changes over the next few months. CAPT Dave Visneski will be taking over as CO on HEALY this summer- Dave has quite a bit of icebreaking experience, and will be participating in several short trips on HEALY prior to assuming CO duties. CAPT Jeff Garrett will be moving on to PACAREA, and his responsibilities will include continuing contacts with the icebreakers. CMDR Joe Bodenstadt will be replacing CMDR George Dupree as the icebreaker contact in Coast Guard headquarters.

The AICC can be reached by writing to the Chair (CLOUGHL@MAIL.ECU.EDU) or to the UNOLS Office (office@unols.org).

RVTEC held its 2000 annual meeting at Lamont in October. Attendance exceeded expectations and there were some problems with lunch on the first day. We will do a better job of predicting attendance at future meetings.

We had breakout hands-on sessions on SeaNet, 0.322 wire termination and salinometer operation during the meeting. The breakout sessions were judged a success and breakout sessions will be included in the 2001 meeting at URI. Discussions are underway on the topics and leaders.

The 2001 meeting at URI will also overlap with the RVOC meeting and some joint sessions are planned.

RVTEC has initiated a "training" web page that is in its formative stages.

The list server has been sporadically active as is usual.