• The UNOLS Ad-Hoc Committee continues work to establish best practices in Data Management
• FIC project to establish target and threshold values for Science Mission Requirements (SMR). Community Ocean Class SMR survey is underway.
• Fleet Improvement Plan – all chapters are drafted.
• UNOLS Policy and Procedures Regarding Committee Recommendations to Federal Agencies have been established – these have already been used twice.
• Other Committee Activities will be reported later in the Meeting.
• Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) - Information for the UNOLS Community was drafted and is available at: http://www.unols.org/info/UNOLS_TWIC_INFO_051408.pdf
• TWIC cards are required for unescorted access to secure vessels and facilities.
• UNOLS recommends that scientists who use secure vessels/facilities obtain TWIC cards
• TWIC regulations are being phased in across the country and will be fully implemented by April 15, 2009.
• Once they are in place, foreign students and researchers will still be able to go to sea on UNOLS research vessels, but may require an escort to gain access to the ship at certain secure facilities.
• Foreign students on certain visas cannot get access, hoped that this policy would be changed, but it was not.

UNOLS continues to stay abreast of on-going Fleet Renewal activities

• Regional Class
• Ocean Class
• Alaska Region Research Vessel

2008 Issues

• Fleet Operations in 2009 –The cost of 2009 ship operations for NSF and ONR are circa $13M and $6M over budgeted funds for a total projected shortfall of about $19M.
• Escalating Ship Operation Costs - The estimated total fleet ship operating costs are almost $1M more than they were in 2008 (1% increase) but the number of days supported is reduced by just over 13% dropping from around 4,400 operating days to just over 3,800.

• R/V Marcus G. Langseth began science operations as a UNOLS Vessel - February 2008
• First UNOLS 3-D seismic cruise – Summer 2008
• The cruises were very successful. The data was great. The chief scientists were very happy with what they were able to accomplish.

• UNOLS Chair-Elect (2-year term)
• Operator Representative (3 year term)
• UNOLS Council Member At-large (3-year term)

• Award contract in April 2009
  • 3 months later begin design reviews. (participation by UNOLS)
  • This will go on for 18 months.
    • Detailed design and cost proposal due.
  • Then down select

• Phase II – Feb. 2011
  • There is going to be a lot of activity.
    • Design reviews every two months
  • FY13 – trials take place.
  • Delivery of OC1 – 2014
  • Delivery of OC2 – 2015.

• Navy requests participation of 2 UNOLS representatives (1 primary, 1 alternative) to ensure coverage at all design reviews

• Navy requests participation of one rep from each operating institution throughout phase I-III (Post Delivery).

• FSV 5 preliminary design moving forward
• FSV 6 requirements being refined in anticipation of funding
• Rude decommissioned in March
• John N. Cobb decommissioned in August
• Okeanos Explorer commissioned in August
• Bell M. Shimada (FSV 4) launched in September
• Pisces (FSV 3) projected delivery in October

• Lack of work from “Other” and NOAA in 2009 compared to 2008, creates higher day rates for NSF and Navy and the potential need to lay up ships.
• Higher percentage of 2009 cruises on large vessels compared to 2008 increases the average cost per day of the fleet. – Large ships are more expensive.
• Higher fuel costs, which impact large vessels more (50¢/gal change = $1,250 per day change in day rate for Global Ships)
• Other inflationary costs for personnel, maintenance, regulatory compliance, etc.

• Waite Institute - Seward Johnson
• Survey work - Walton Smith
• N.J. Wind farm work - Sharp
• Scallop Survey - Sharp
• German and Private Survey work - Kilo Moana

1. Lay up one NSF Intermediate Class ship on the east coast and fund only a partial schedule for Seward Johnson due to economical alternatives for several cruises that still meet the funded science requirements.
2. Determination of whether to lay up Endeavor or Oceanus to be based on input from the operating institutions regarding cost of operations, contributions to operations, and the impact and cost of lay ups for the non-operating vessel’s institution.
3. Plan on a partial lay up for the New Horizon with no new NSF funded cruises.
4. NSF ship operations would fund approximately $6M of 2009 operations from FY2010 funds with supplemental awards if a National Science Board (NSB) waiver were not available.
5. NSF would attempt to find an additional $6M to $7M from other program funds.
6. ONR would attempt to find an additional $6M from other program funds.
7. Ship Operators would continue to find ways to reduce costs.
8. Operators of Global and Ocean Class vessels would work to effectively schedule and support the known work from other funding sources.
9. Operators of Intermediate, Regional and Local Class vessels would seek appropriate opportunities to support research and education programs supported by other funding sources including their own institutions.

• Project Director: Capt. Dan Oliver
• Construction Manager: Mr. Gary Smith
• Program Manager: Dr. Terry Whitledge
• Science Operations: Steve Hartz
• Marine Science Technical Director – Marc Willis (Oregon State University)
• Technical Support: Dirk Kristensen (Glosten Associates) et al.

• Length: 242 feet
• Beam: 48 feet
• Draft: 19 feet
• Endurance: 44 days
• Icebreaking capability: 2.5 ft at 2.5 knots
• Crew: 20
• Scientists: 26
• Cruising speed: 12 knots

• hull lengthened to 242 feet – Archimedes principle requires more floatation for added steel necessary to meet ice classification requirements
• improved crew berthing – habitability issue
• eliminated trawl fishing gear – cost reduction
• greater guidance/emphasis on u/w radiated noise
• ABS review of drawings, CG review of GA
• greater detail on science requirements

• In phase 1 of a 4 phase project
• Phase 2 delayed by NSF – no FY09 funding
• Finalizing design refresh and development of project documentation
• ARRV Oversight Committee established
• Revised PEP delivered to NSF 9-19-08
• Preparing for Final Design Review (FDR) with NSF - October 20-23, 2008

• How technological advances such as Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) and ocean observing systems will affect the role and characteristics of the future UNOLS fleet with regard to accomplishing national oceanographic data collection objectives.
• The most important factors in oceanographic research vessel design. Do specialized research needs dominate the design criteria and, if so, what are the impacts on costs and overall availability?
• How evolving modeling and remote sensing technologies will impact the balance between various research operations such as ground-truthing, hypothesis testing, exploration, and observation.
• How the increasing cost of ship time will affect the types of science done aboard ships.
  The usefulness of partnering mechanisms such as UNOLS to support national oceanographic research objectives.”

Day Two

Marcia McNutt, UNOLS Chair, called day-2 of the meeting to order at 0830.

UNOLS Council Election Results

Dr. Bruce Corliss, Duke University was elected to the Chair-Elect position. Dr. Kenneth Coale, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML) was elected as an Operator Representative and Dr. Robert Pinkel, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) was re-elected to a second term as an At-Large Representative.

UNOLS Fleet of the Future – UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan (FIP) Recommendations – Marcia McNutt and Dave Hebert (Appendix XI)

The meeting participants were provided with the Findings and Recommendations from the Draft UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan, which were posted at:

http://www.unols.org/meetings/2008/200810anu/FIP2008_draft_Findings_Rec.pdf

Marcia McNutt and Dave Hebert lead a discussion that focused on the following set of questions. What is the right mix and number of ships needed to support your current and future research and education projects? Does the fleet envisioned in the Draft UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan match the expectations you have for your work and that of your colleagues? Are the findings and recommendations articulated in the Fleet Improvement Plan the right ones that will lead to the UNOLS Fleet of the Future that meets the needs of the community?

There was a great deal of discussion, which was helpful in focusing some of the intent of the recommendations in the Improvement Plan. Captain Houtman did point out that NSF and ONR considered the Atlantis to be a General Purpose Global research vessel with special capabilities to handle the DSV Alvin and should not be classified as a special purpose vessel. The same is true for the Langseth although it is acknowledged that the General Purpose capabilities need improvement.

Key ideas discussed included the extent to which the new Ocean Class vessels will be capable of covering a good portion of the work now carried out by Global Class vessels. There will be some limitations, but Kilo Moana has already proved that they can cover some work previously scheduled on Global vessels. It was pointed out the ARRV is approaching the size of a Global, even though it will have fewer berths for science. The planned Ocean Class AGORs will likely be somewhat smaller, but still capable vessels, so it is difficult to predict exactly to what extent these vessels will handle work now done from Global Class vessels.

With regards to the numbers of larger vessels available, it was noted that by 2025, there would only be three Global Class vessels and four Ocean Class vessels unless action is taken on the recommendations in the Improvement Plan. At the same time six Intermediates and three Global Class vessels will be retired unless a service life extension is undertaken for Thompson or other vessels. The reaction to the recommendation to start now on the planning process for two new Global Class vessels was mixed. It was thought that it would be a difficult sell for Navy funding and alternatives are few for a ship of that size and cost.

Some discussion focused on utilization and partnerships. Projections for future utilization depend on information that is hard to know, such as to what extent the Ocean Observing Initiative will add to the demand for ship time, to what extent will NOAA continue to need to charter time on UNOLS Vessels, or how NOAA’s own renewal efforts will affect demand for UNOLS vessels or provide time for academic researchers. It was emphasized that we need to do a better job of working with these other partners. Julie Morris suggested that this was clearly an issue for the JSOST and IWG-F to work on.

Future funding for research and education in the ocean sciences is dependent on a lot of factors, many of which are outside our community. Budget deficits, wars, and the increasing costs of entitlement programs make it difficult to successfully argue for additional funding. Global Climate Change and the health of the oceans are important societal issues and may be a driver in greater support for ocean science research. Nancy Rabalais pointed out that much of this research is carried out in coastal regions, which supports the need for smaller regional and coastal research vessels. Other than the tentative plans of the NSF to build one to three Regional Class vessels if construction funding can be found, there are no real plans to replace many of the smaller vessels in the fleet. The FIP recommends the timely replacement of these vessels by institutions, state governments, and regional partnerships. Several people including Nancy felt this would be difficult without federal help and jeopardized an important component of the fleet.

No matter what pathway we follow, partnerships, prioritization, and efficient use of infrastructure funds will be necessary. In addition, partnerships and collaboration with regards to operation and maintenance costs will be necessary.

UNOLS Committee Reports

Marcia McNutt introduced UNOLS Committee Chairs who reported on their committee’s issues and activities.
Fleet Improvement Committee (FIC) – David Hebert (Appendix XII)

Dave reviewed the process underway for updating the Science Mission Requirements (SMRs) so that they more clearly indicate minimum threshold levels and target values for key components such as the number of berths, lab sizes, deck area, science load, range, speed, sea keeping, etc. In addition, a priority level is being defined for these different elements. The FIC is starting with the Ocean Class SMR and will use it as a template for updating the others. The Ocean Class SMRs are being used currently to finalize the performance specifications for the Ocean Class AGORs and the work done so far on values and prioritization is being shared with the Navy.

Dave also reviewed the content, schedule, and remaining tasks for completing the UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan, which is targeted for early next year.

Stewart Lamerdin raised the issue of having just one UNOLS representative on the Ocean Class design project. Many felt that this was a huge time commitment and wondered how one person could know about everything necessary to do the job properly. Peter Wiebe asked whether that one person could come to the UNOLS community to seek feedback. Chris MacDonald said that there would be constraints about what can be disclosed during the competition period. It was clear that further discussion with ONR and NAVSEA about the nature of UNOLS representation on the AGOR project would be needed and they were open to further dialog.

Research Vessel Operators' Committee (RVOC) – Pete Zerr, RVOC Chair (Appendix XIII)

Pete started by mentioning the highlights of the April 2008 RVOC meeting held at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia. The committee heard the usual update on the world insurance market and legal issues affecting oceanographic research vessels from the UNOLS legal advisor, Dennis Nixon. A major focus was new winch and wire monitoring technology and the impact of the proposed new safety standards for safe working loads on oceanographic cables and wires.

A major task of the RVOC in partnership with RVTEC has been the revision of the UNOLS Research Vessel Safety Standards (RVSS). The RVSS serves as a reference for vessel operators as to where they can find applicable rules and regulations and they provide scientists with some direction relative to the safety aspects of science equipment and scientific personnel. They apply standards to all UNOLS vessels, whether or not they are USCG Inspected, based on regulations for inspected vessels and good practices. Vessels operators must adhere to the UNOLS RVSS in order to be designated as a UNOLS vessel. The NSF and Navy Inspection teams use the RVSS to ensure compliance.

The first edition was published in May 1976 and this revision will result in the ninth edition. The RVSS are reviewed and republished every three to five years.

The major change during this revision affects the overall organization. We have revised the overall structure of the standards to uniformly show those requirements mandated by laws and regulations, those required by the UNOLS RVSS in addition and any further recommendations, best practices or resources. The chapters were reordered and a few chapters and appendices were added.

• Chapter 5: Added chapter on Personal Safety with sections covering alcohol and drug policies, sexual harassment and accommodations for persons with disabilities.
• Chapter 11: Added chapter on Human Occupied Vehicle (Submersible) Safety.
• Appendix A – UNOLS Rope and Cable Safe Working Load Standards.
• Appendix B – UNOLS Load Handling System Design Standards; (still under development)
• Appendix E – Sexual Harassment Brochure.

A near final draft has been circulated to RVOC and RVTEC and revisions are expected to be completed in about 3 weeks, at which time they will be submitted to the UNOLS Council for approval.

It has long been recognized that there is a need to establish consistent safe working loads for wire ropes and cables in the UNOLS fleet. One goal of this standard is to minimize damage to cables and handling equipment, and the loss of scientific equipment, while still permitting the science objective to be met. Appendix A defines the operating requirements, or loading limitations on wire, and are expressed in terms of Factor of Safety (FS) on the Nominal Breaking Load (NBL). Appendix A also defines the inspection and testing requirements for wire.

Research Vessel Technical Enhancement Committee (RVTEC) – Stewart Lamerdin, RVTEC Vice-Chair (Appendix XIV)

Stewart Lamerdin reported on RVTEC activities in 2008 and plans for the RVTEC Annual Meeting to be hosted by Florida State University in October 2009.

New topics of interest include data archival, which will influence how shipboard technicians deal with data collection, data formats, and how the data is eventually transmitted and archived. Bill Martin and several other sea-going technicians participated in the NSF Legacy Workshop in September and will participate in the pilot project – Rolling Deck to Repository (R2R) that will work on the specific processes for improving data archiving and availability.

The upcoming RVTEC meeting will include focus groups for HiSeasNet and SWAP.

Arctic Icebreaker Coordinating Committee (AICC) – Carin Ashjian, AICC Chair (Appendix XV)

Dr. Ashjian reported on the activities of the AICC in 2007 and 2008 and covered science operations for Healy and the Polar Class Icebreakers in 2008 and planned for 2009.

The committee held meetings in Seattle during late November 2007 and at NSF in Arlington in June 2008. In December 2007, Carin and Healy Commanding Officer Captain Ted Lindström met with the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission during their meeting and discussed the plans for BEST cruises in the Bering Sea.

The committee conducted debriefs of the 2007 cruises and the first two 2008 cruises. These debriefs always result in some constructive suggestions for improvement. In addition, as a result of discussions during the two committee meetings and a teleconference in February 2008, the committee has become a little “recommendation happy” with five formal recommendations:

1. That the NSF review and define new requirements for medical pre-cruise assessment for science participation and on-board medical expertise for US icebreaker Arctic cruises
2. That the NSF support the proposed replacement of the existing Healy Seabeam system with a Kongsberg EM122 multibeam system during a planned dry-dock in 2010
3. That the NSF purchase a laboratory van to be used on the icebreakers, and, when not needed, to be part of the UNOLS van pool.
4. That the NSF and the CG enable Science of Opportunity (SOO) on non-science missions on board Polar Sea and other icebreakers through open calls to the community
5. That the NSF support upgrades/maintenance to existing science equipment on Polar Sea and that the NSF continue to support the Polar Star in caretaker status until a decision is made regarding replacement or refurbishment of the Polars. This recommendation required and received UNOLS Council review and endorsement.

Healy science operations in 2008 included three cruises for the Bering Ecosystem Study (BEST), a National Oceanographic Partnership Program (NOPP) sponsored mooring cruise and two cruises dedicated to the Extended Continental Shelf mapping efforts. The Polar Sea conducted a cruise from late March to mid May in the Bering Sea conducting seal surveys for NOAA researchers. Another cruise on Polar Sea to the Bering and Chukchi Seas is planned this fall and it is hoped that will include the possibility for science of opportunity participation. The Polar Star remains in caretaker status. Meanwhile, the Coast Guard has become more active in the Arctic as part of their Arctic Domain Awareness efforts. The USCGC Hamilton, a 378 foot High Endurance Cutter (White Hull) conducted operations in the Arctic during August and September including marine mammal observations with participation by the USGS, UAF, and World Wildlife Fund (WWF). The buoy tender Spar also worked in the Arctic during the same time frame and the Coast Guard has been conducting regular flight operations over the Arctic with C130’s from Kodiak.

In 2009 Healy and maybe Polar Sea will support continued BEST cruises, ECS mapping, NOPP mooring work and polar bear surveys. The Knorr and Point Sur will also support the July BEST cruise. The Polar Sea will also be in standby status for the Antarctic breakout. A scheduling meeting is planned for later this month.

AICC will finish the debriefs for the remaining 4 cruises from 2008 and continue to work on their action items. The next meeting will be held in Seattle in December and the committee chair will participate in a Town Hall meeting at AGU organized by the Arctic Research Commission. The committee has recently appointed three new members, Lee Cooper, Don Perovich and Erica Key.

DEep Submergence Science Committee (DESSC) – Annette DeSilva

Annette DeSilva provided a report on behalf of Deb Kelley, DESSC Chair who could not attend. Annette gave a quick review of DESSC activities and plans for their fall meeting to be held in San Francisco the day before AGU. The meeting will use a slightly more streamlined format with fewer formal reports and more opportunity for discussion and feedback.

The committee continues to conduct debriefs with users of the Alvin, Jason and the AUVs Sentry and ABE. ABE was added as NDSF facilities in 2008. These debriefs have proven very useful for identifying needed improvements and how well changes are working once implemented. For example, the new ROV control vans were put into service in 2008. The design of the new vans reflect feedback received from Jason users. DESSC is now starting to get feedback on how they are working out.

A major focus of the committee has been working with the Replacement Human Occupied Vehicle (RHOV) oversight committee providing advice to WHOI and NSF on options for moving forward either with the full 6,500-meter replacement vehicle or with an upgraded Alvin.

Other topics addressed during the year have been the DVD archiving policy for Jason, standard calibration procedures for the Magnetometer, and HD cameras. A new science direction is the possible use of NDSF assets in the polar regions.

Marcus Langseth Science Oversight Committee (MLSOC) – Steve Holbrook, MLSOC Chair (Appendix XVI)

Dr. Holbrook reported on the initial science operations on R/V Langseth, Committee activities, and plans for the fall meeting. It has been a very exciting year with four major cruises completed, all successful. Two legs on either side of Costa Rica and Nicaragua involved 2-D seismic reflection using a streamer up to 8 km long, a record for a UNOLS vessel. These cruises involved the deployment of Ocean Bottom Seismometers (OBS) and land instruments and on the west coast; two ship operations with the New Horizon. On this second leg, they were also able to profile ocean temperature measurements and image mixing using the reflection data. The next cruise involved shooting to OBS only and resulted in excellent data. A theme throughout the cruises was that the quality of the sound source far exceeded previous capabilities in our fleet. Finally, after running a short test cruise to work out the details of deploying a full 3-D array a very successful 3-D cruise was conducted at the East Pacific Rise. PIs were uniformly pleased with the data and overall success of their cruises, but there are still many items that need to be addressed before the Langseth is fully ready. Langseth has one more cruise scheduled for 2008 that is just beginning in and just offshore of Yakutat Bay in Alaska. Next year after a stand down period in Astoria, the schedule includes 245 days of which 191 are NSF funded and 54 are funded by collaborators in Taiwan. The work will all be 2-D or air guns only with OBS in the Lau Basin, Taiwan and on the Juan de Fuca’s Endeavor Ridge.

The capabilities that have all been successfully tested include:

• 3D acquisition: 4x6 km streamers
• 2D acquisition
• Hi-res acquisition
• OBS deployment recovery
• XBT/XCTD/XCP deployment during seismic operations
• High-quality sound source
• Onshore-offshore source capability

Improvements since MGL0804 (first cruise) include:

• Passive Acoustic Monitoring System (PAM) spare onboard
• New shot-time logger acquired and tested
• 2D towing arrangement refined & improved (float head of streamer)
• Additional gun tow ropes acquired for full suite of tow depths (3, 4.5, 6, and 9 m)
• Progress in SEGD -> SEGY conversion (headers etc.)
• Shipboard website (“how-to”) improved
• Real-time QC shot monitor installed
• Gravimeter working
• Science staffing hires: Dave Martinson, Robert Steinhaus - These people are from industry and are making a big difference.

MLSOC activities include bi-annual meetings with the last meeting held in San Diego during May when the Langseth was in port at the Scripps Marine Facility. The next planned meeting will be the day before AGU and will involve a format similar to DESSC meetings. The MLSOC Chair has conducted informal debriefs with Chief Scientists and has made himself available for pre-cruise planning questions. Interactions with the operator (LDEO) center around recommendations for improvements and monitoring the implementation of those improvements.

The committee has identified a number of areas of concern or risk for future operations including some personnel issues related to recruiting and retaining technical support people. Other areas include habitability on the ship, especially in the multi-person cluster cabins (“snake-pit”) and in common areas. There are some equipment issues such as general-purpose winches, magnetometer towing, streamer replacement and air-gun spares. In the engine room, compressors need some attention and in general, maintenance procedures and training on the systems need to be addressed. Marine mammal issues, software, and data flow will all need continual attention.

Long-term issues include finding an appropriate pathway for replacing or upgrading the streamer, which are already beyond their rated age. For MLSOC defining their role with regards to scheduling and long range planning, broadening the funding base for operations beyond NSF, and lowering the bar for access to the ship and it’s data are all on the agenda. The committee will also begin to look at ways to stagger the rotation of members and start looking for new members next year. Marcia McNutt commented that they should look at users for future membership.

Scientific Committee for Oceanographic Aircraft Research (SCOAR) – Mike Prince

SCOAR had no activity for the past year as we are still searching for a chair. They had some good suggestions for Chair, but none that were available to take on the duties at this time. The question is do we need a committee. If we want to continue, we need to re-energize that group. Most felt that it was worth keeping the committee and that Mike and the Council should find and appoint a Chair. Dan Schwartz was suggested as a possible candidate to get the committee going again.

Ad Hoc Committee on Data Management Best Practices – Mike Prince (Appendix XVII)

The committee has met several times during the past year and has developed a set of recommendations about the data and documentation that should be routinely reported for every cruise leg:

1. Cruise summary (ship name, cruise id, dates/ports, personnel, data inventory, etc);
2. Navigation (ship track i.e. time & position);
3. Cruise event log (“everything over the side”, including both science and engineering).

Much of this documentation is already routinely collected by the operators and/or the UNOLS Office, and needs only to be standardized and centralized. Every ship in the fleet today uses GPS and could report navigation data to a central repository. Refer to the appendix for details of the data collection requirements.

The committee has reported their recommendations and solicited feedback at the last RVTEC meeting and will do so again at the upcoming meeting. The committee has also been involved in other closely related data management activities, in particular the NSF Legacy of Ocean Exploration (LOE) project and the NSF Rolling Deck to Repository (R2R) project. The R2R will serve as a one-year pilot project to develop a prototype system for obtaining the recommended data and information.

Replacement Human Occupied Vehicle Status – Bob Detrick (Appendix XVIII)

Bob Detrick provided an update on the status of the project to build a new 6,500-meter human occupied submersible that would replace Alvin.

Key events to date include:

• Successfully formed both hemispheres in June 2008
• Sphere insert forging process has begun
• Initial heat treatment of spheres has been completed
• Machining of spheres has begun
• Electron Beam (EB) weld procedure has been successfully tested, and scheduled for ABS approval
• Sphere completion on track for mid-July 2010

Bob showed the workflow and pictures that illustrate the forging process for the Titanium sphere and he covered key elements of the vehicle design. (See appendix).

Next Bob reviewed some key events in the process that have led to a decision to proceed with a phased approach. Starting in June 2007 WHOI entered into a contract with Lockheed Martin (LM) for vehicle design and construction. By January 2008, they had received a detailed cost estimate that was considerably higher than previous estimates and budgets. After a review by the RHOV Oversight Committee (RHOC) and NSF of the cost estimate, it was decided to explore a phase approach for the RHOV. A conceptual design for this phased approach was developed and reviewed. In August, WHOI and NSF made a joint decision to pursue this phased approach and at the end of September, the contract with Lockheed Martin was terminated.

The phased approach would start with a 4500 meter Alvin upgrade using the new 6500 meter sphere. The goals of this approach would be to satisfy as many of the RHOV design goals as possible, keep many of the RHOV improvements leveraging those design efforts and to reduce the overall project cost. They would also ensure that the design would allow for later upgrade to the full 6500-meter capability. The presentation includes a list of the RHOV goals that would be accomplished and those that would not in the initial phase. The ability to upgrade to 6500 meters and to add enhanced 3-D HiDef imaging, microfiber for high bandwidth and two-way communications to the surface at a later date are still feasible. This plan would involve cross-decking some major components from the existing Alvin. The presentation includes a list of items and shows graphically the elements of the Alvin upgrade that would come from the RHOV effort, that would be new and those that would come from Alvin. There is also a chart comparing the specs of the current Alvin with the Alvin upgrade.

This phased approach comes with new risks to the project including NSF approval of the re-scoped project using the large facilities process including Preliminary and Final Design Reviews. They will also need ABS certification of the frame and pressure vessels and there will be schedule delays, and the need for additional management and engineering resources. At the same time significant risks associated with the foam, the variable ballast system, and the A-Frame capacity will be avoided until later.

The timeline includes submitting WHOI’s management plans, etc. to NSF on October 15, a Preliminary Design Review in June 2009, and a Final Design Review in the fall of 2009. If approved the project would go forward such that the personnel spheres are completed by mid 2010, the Alvin is taken out of service in the fall of 2010 and by mid 2011, the new vehicle becomes operational.

2008/2009 UNOLS Goals and Priorities – Marcia McNutt (Appendix XIX)

Due to a lack of time, Marcia referred everyone to the posted report in Appendix XIX. This report outlines the vision and mission of UNOLS along with goals for the coming year.

UNOLS Report – Mike Prince (Appendix XX)

Refer to Appendix XX for a list of departing Council and Committee members. UNOLS also took the opportunity to thank Dolly Dieter and Beth White for their support and partnership with UNOLS over the years. Dolly retired from NSF and Beth from NOAA during the past year. Certificates of appreciation were presented to Peter Ortner and Peter Wiebe who are both ending their final terms on Council.

Also covered in the report are the UNOLS Dues accounting and upcoming UNOLS meetings calendar.

The Council thanked and congratulated Mike Prince and Kate Sawyers for their support of the UNOLS Council and for the Annual meeting preparations.

Mike took this opportunity to thank the UNOLS Staff, Kate Sawyers, Laura Dippold, Annette DeSilva, Aaron Payne and Dennis Nixon.

A motion to adjourn was made by Peter Ortner and seconded by Peter Wiebe; their last official acts as members of the UNOLS Council. Meeting was adjourned at 1230 pm.