UNOLS FLEET IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Moss Landing Marine
Laboratories
March 10-11, 2009
Meeting Minutes
Executive Summary:
The UNOLS Fleet Improvement
Committee met at Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) and Moss
Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML) on March 10-11, 2009. The first day of the meeting focused on the
draft Fleet Improvement Plan, fleet acquisition efforts, the SMR update
project, and new technologies and systems.
Day two of the meeting
included a joint session with the UNOLS Council. Reports and updates on Fleet renewal activities
were provided. Agency representatives
reported on budget projections and facility acquisition efforts. The Fleet Improvement Plan was endorsed by
the UNOLS Council with the addition of a recommendation to implement green
technology to the fleet.
Appendices
|
I |
|
|
II |
Participant List (pdf) |
|
III |
FIC Action Item List (pdf) |
|
IV |
|
|
V |
|
|
VI |
|
|
VII |
SMR Update Project (pdf) |
|
VIII |
ISS Software (~2.95 MB pdf) |
|
IX |
|
|
X |
|
|
XI |
|
|
XII |
Bubble-Sweep Down Study - PowerPoint (3.9 MB) with link to Video Clip (12.2 MB) Bubble-Sweep Down Study - pdf without Video Clip (2 MB) |
|
XIII |
Weatherbird II Update (1.7 MB pdf) |
FIC Action Items – New and Continuing
·
Keep abreast of new technologies entering the UNOLS
fleet (e.g., the over-the-side handling system on the RV Hugh Sharp and
RV Kilo Moana, WHOI Long-Coring System)
·
Ocean Observatories - Stay in contact with OOI Office.
·
Design and Construction Efforts - Stay engaged in ongoing
design and construction efforts (Regional Class, ARRV, Ocean Class, etc.)
· Keep informed on projects related to improvement of the UNOLS fleet (e.g. fuel saving, Integrated Survey System, bubble sweep down mitigation)
·
Continue SMR Update Project
·
Fleet Improvement Plan Implementation – identify
strategies for moving forward with
Meeting
Report:
Day 1 – March
10th
Call the Meeting: The UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee (FIC)
met on March 10-11, 2009 at MBARI and MLML in Moss Landing, CA. Dave Hebert, FIC Chair, called the meeting to
order at 0830 and provided an opportunity for introductions. The meeting agenda was followed in the order
recorded in these minutes. The meeting
agenda is included as Appendix I and the meeting
participant list is Appendix II.
Accept
the minutes of the October 2008 FIC Meeting - Annette pointed out a typo: in the
title change 2007 to 2008. The meeting
minutes were accepted with the correction. (Cochran/Suchy)
Review FIC Action/Task List - Dave Hebert reviewed FIC’s action item list. The list is contained in Appendix III.
Opportunity for Agency
Comments:
National Science Foundation
(NSF) - Bob Houtman reported that it has been a busy time at NSF. NSF is slated to receive $3B from the
Stimulus funding (ARRA). They are trying
to put together a plan on how the funds will be spent for OMB. The plan must include jobs. It is a challenge putting this all together.
Office of Naval Research (ONR) – Tim
Schnoor reported that the budget has been a challenge and funds are only
available for operations. They cannot
fund maintenance or upgrades. Hopefully
these can be supported in 2010. The Navy
isn’t benefitting from the stimulus funding.
Fleet Improvement Plan (FIP) – The draft
FIP document has been provided to the Council for review. Discussion:
·
Maureen Conte – Should the plan be updated in terms of OOI? Dave said that there are Ship Time Requests
for OOI. The OOI office is looking at
various options. It would be very
difficult to figure out now how OOI plans will evolve.
·
Marc – He feels that we should move on and publish the FIP as is.
·
Mike Prince – He endorses Marc’s idea. This will be a living document.
·
Tim Schnoor – In the recommendations, remove the line about
“consideration given to geographic placement” in regard to the Ocean Class
vessels.
·
Jon Alberts – Some of the ship retirement dates are here now.
·
Bob Houtman – During the ship inspections, they will look at the
physical condition to determine how much life is left in these vessels. They will use this information to make long
term plans regarding demands on the fleet and the use. They need to know how much money it will take
to keep the ships running. This will be
an open process.
It was suggested to make the following changes:
·
Any ship with retirement dates in 2008 and 2009 change to 2010
·
Change “retire” to “projected end of service life”
·
Page 54 – “remove geographic placement”
·
Change projections to match 2010
·
Add an asterisk for ships nearing retirement dates to say that the
conditions of these ships are being evaluated.
Fleet Design
and Acquisition Efforts:
Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV) – Marc Willis provided a
status report on the ARRV. His slides
are included as Appendix IV. The complete ARRV design package is available on the ARRV
website http://www.sfos.uaf.edu/arrv/. The ARRV
schedule was accelerated to qualify for ARRA stimulus funding.
Discussion:
·
Dave Checkley – What is the timeline. Bob Houtman – ARRV sea trials are planned in
2013 and the ship will enter service in 2014.
·
Vernon Asper – Is there a buy American clause in the ARRA and will
this impact the project? Bob Houtman – Yes. They are working to comply with all
constraints.
·
Al Suchy – The design review panel made some recommendations
regarding the ship’s stability. Marc – The
stability issues are being addressed.
The panel recommended anti-roll tanks.
The tanks had been considered early in the process, but removed. Now they are being suggested again. The ship design is being revisited with a
vessel of greater length and anti-roll tanks.
There are a lot of unknowns.
Ocean Class –Tim Schnoor (ONR)
and Chris MacDonald (PEOShips) provided the status report on the Ocean Class AGOR
project to build two vessels. Their
slides are included in Appendix V and
include the:
·
History/Status
of Acquisition Efforts
·
History
of Specification Development
·
Acquisition
Schedule
·
Proposed
UNOLS “At-Large” Representation
·
Proposed
Operator Representation
The Ocean Class AGOR Phase
I/II Solicitation will be release in March 2009 and proposals are due in June
2009. The contract awards are expected
in August 2009 and the first design reviews would follow in November 2009. If all proceeds on schedule, the ships would
enter service in FY2014.
Tim reported that
it is ONR’s intention to fund one person who could represent UNOLS interests in
the design and construction process.
They are reasonably confident that it would occur. Hopefully by the first design review this
would be in place. They would not fund
an alternate representative.
Chris said that the
Navy wants one voice from the community.
He doesn’t want to be in the position of deciding which to go with. He understands the need for an advisory group
and thinks that it can be an option. The
group wouldn’t be formed until after the operators are selected.
Discussion:
·
Dave Hebert explained the importance of a UNOLS advisory
group for the Ocean Class. Individuals
with expertise in the various research disciplines are needed for advice.
·
Annette – Would ONR like any input regarding a UNOLS
Rep? Tim – At this time, input is not
needed.
·
Chris – The first design reviews are planned for October
2009 and the Rep should be in place at that time.
·
Houtman – Will the Navy RFP for ship design/build
teams be for one ship with an option for a second? Chris – the RFP will be for two ships. Tim – The bid process will also be for two
operators. So the operators will be
known when we try to form the advisory groups.
·
Tim – They do not have a date for the RFP for
operators, but it will likely be by summer 2009. The operator institutions would not be
represented on the advisory groups.
Regional Class Designs – Bob Houtman reviewed the NSF Phase I
designs for the Regional Class ships.
His slides are contained in Appendix VI. He started off by saying that NSF has not
given up on the Regional Class acquisition.
However, contracts are being
closed out with NAVSEA and the NSF/NAVSEA MOU is being terminated.
NSF will move the program forward.
Both RCRV designs are complete.
In the Spring/Summer 2009, NSF will convene design selection committee
to provide a down-select recommendation to NSF.
Members include some original RCRV Technical Advisors from Phase I
(UNOLS ship operators, technical support, scientists) plus ship
design/construction experts ~10 total.
In the fall 2009, NSF will make a final design decision.
NSF will develop a solicitation for “Construction and Operation of
the RCRV” following the ARRV process model.
If construction funds are identified, the following schedule is planned:
·
2010 Release Solicitation/Review Proposals
·
2011 Shipyard Selection
·
2012 Construction
·
2015 Operations
They don’t expect the RCRV project to be a MRE-FC project which is
a separate funding line. They expect
that the RCRV will have to come out of GEO and OCE mid-size infrastructure
funds.
NSF is still on a continuing resolution and don’t know their 2009
and 2010 budgets.
Discussion:
·
Marcia – Does NSF own the ship designs? Bob Houtman – Yes. In the down-select process, it would be just
for the design. There are no plans to
use the original teams.
·
Annette – Would the solicitation be for one ship with options for
additional vessels? Bob Houtman – Yes.
·
Dave Checkley – Will funds be available in OCE? Bob – It is difficult to tell.
·
The model would be for one institution to manage the construction
for all options.
·
Dave Hebert – Will the mid-size infrastructure budget
increase? Bob – The budget is about $15M
- $20M per year. However, there are
other competing projects. As OOI ramps
up it will require funding for operations from OCE. They would have to save up.
Mid-morning
Break
SMR
Update Project - Dave Hebert provided an update
and gave some background on the project.
His slides are contained in Appendix VII. The project tasking is
also available at <http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/smr/update08/index.html>. The webpage also includes:
· Maintain between 70° - 75°F (20° - 24° C). Meet the requirements for 80% of the anticipated environmental conditions. Change this to operate all the time in a wider range.
· We may need to articulate this further to address lab spaces. The narrow temp range might be needed in the lab spaces and would have to account the head loads as well.
Lunch
SMR Update Project – We wrapped up the morning
discussion on the SMR table review. Mike
Prince will finalize the table with the comments received.
Presentation on the ISS-2000 Integrated
Survey System – Pam Clark (JJMA/Alion) gave a presentation on the ISS-2000
software package that is used for surveying and integrates inputs from the
sonar systems, dynamic positioning system, and data acquisition systems, all
with a graphic user interface (GUI). SAIC’s Newport office developed this. They
develop the software for the hydrographic surveys for NOAA. Pam’s slides are included as Appendix
VIII.
ISS-2000 is a real
time data acquisition system. An
integrated survey system is not stated in the UNOLS SMRs. They would like to suggest
including ISS-2000 for data format providing a uniform data collection and
system on the new Ocean CLASS AGOR.
Pam provided some
background on the ISS usage for NAVOCEANO and NOAA (see slides). The ISS & SABER use on UNOLS ships has
included R/V Kilo Moana and R/V Roger Revelle.
ISS-2000 provides:
ISS-2000 consists of
a 4U rack mounted computer and dual monitors.
The ISS-2000 computer is built with a timing card for timing
synchronization. The computer uses
multiple port expansion digi-boards for serial interfaces. ISS-2000 uses a VLAN for setting up isolated
IP networks to minimize data traffic.
The operator can
control many of the equipment settings from ISS-2000 software through Parameter
Control interfaces. It does not increase
the number of operators required and provides a single control interface for
different equipment. Once the network is
established data archiving can be set to “auto-Data Archiving” to archive files during data acquisition.
Some additional features of the ISS include:
·
ISS-2000 is designed to automatically
alarm the operator when the system is exceeding the operator set parameters, allowing
the operator to monitor the integrated system in real time.
·
The ISS Navigation Display allows the
operator to view the data in real time while monitoring the survey progress and
navigation information.
·
Multibeam data can be viewed in real
time to verify data quality.
·
ISS-2000 can handle positioning of
towed arrays using proven algorithms.
·
ISS-2000 collects swath bathymetry and
beam amplitude imagery data in GSF Format.
GSF is designed to efficiently store and exchange information produced
by geophysical measurement systems before it has been processed into either
vector or raster form. Generic Sensor
Format (GSF) is a standard file format for bathymetry data and widely used in
the maritime community (US and the UK).
The ISS-2000
GSF supported equipment is listed in Pam’s slides.
Discussion:
·
Dave
Checkley – What is the cost of the system?
Pam – There is an initial cost for the installation package. $75k and then there is annual upgrade costs of
$5k.
·
Dave
Checkley - Is the source code open? Can
you adapt it as you like? He would like
to tailor the system for his own use.
Pam – The vendor would want to do that.
Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) Projections
-Status report on Final Design Review and Implementation plans - Dave Hebert reviewed
the OOI status as provided by the OOI Office (see Appendix IX). Sue Banahan wrote to say that OOI is waiting for
guidance from NSF and for now the projections that were presented to FIC in October
2008 still stand.
The
OOI Final Design Review (FDR) was held in November 2008. OOI is pending NSB approval with construction
to start in summer 2010. During the
interim period, OOI will carryout demonstration projects, reduce risks, and prepare
for acquisitions.
The
OOI project components include:
·
3
Global scale nodes in Southern Ocean, Station Papa, and Irminger Sea
·
5
Regional scale nodes in NE Pacific, cabled plate-scale observatory
·
Coastal
scale assets in the Mid-Atlantic Bight shelf-break (Pioneer Array) and NE
Pacific continental slope (Endurance line)
·
Each
scale incorporates mobile assets
·
Cyberinfrastructure
to enable adaptive sampling, custom observatory view, collaborative analysis
·
Interfaces
for education and public engagement
Discussion:
·
Marcia
McNutt – At the Ocean Leadership meeting they were told that this OOI plan (as
presented in the slides) was totally changed and that it was public. Is that the case? There are huge changes for the Regional Scale
Node (RSN).
·
Bob
Houtman - This is a clearly a topic that has the interest from a lot of
groups. NSF’s number one objective is that
OOI does not miss a funding opportunity in 2010. If OOI does not get approved by the NSB during
their spring 2009 Board meeting, and OOI is not deemed for ready for
construction, the chances for OOI implementation are greatly diminished. Since FDR in October 2008, NSF (through the
Director) has reviewed the OOI design and has developed a variant.
·
Marcia
– Has this happen to other NSF programs?
Houtman – This has occurred at various levels but typically over longer
time frames.
·
Bob
– The variant brings the project better in alignment with the project focal
points. The Director of NSF has phoned
the NSB chair to let them know that the project has a modified scope and
direction. Tom Killeen has been
involved. They are looking at a 4th
global node off Argentina. They are
adding a line off of Washington. There
is a reduction in the number of RSN nodes.
The variant retains the mid-plate observatory, but without sensors. Two nodes are removed.
·
Bob
– This direction was taken in Jan/Feb. NSF
has convened a blue ribbon panel to look at the variant design (two weeks ago).
·
Marcia
– She hopes that this group looks at the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. They have removed the items that were cheaper
to maintain and inserted the items that are most expensive.
·
Bob
– It is pre-decisional at this point, but it is a scope that is being
considered. It is a different approach. O&M estimates are being developed. They don’t want O&M to have an unlimited
budget. In terms of construction dollars
the new plan is less expensive, but in terms of operations, it is higher.
Discussion:
· Al Suchy – What has been the cause of the delivery delay? Marc – There were a few issues with working with Caley. Also, ABS wasn’t familiar with the SWATH vessel. There were disagreements between the ABS Houston and London offices.
· Mike Prince mentioned that NERC experienced many problems with their Caley system on the Discovery.
· Maureen Conte expressed the concern over the trace metal issues associated with the handling system. Why go this way? Mike Prince – It opens the weather window and allows hands-free operations.
WHOI Long-Coring System – Dave Hebert summarized user feedback from the Knorr cruise on Jan 12 – Feb 23, 2009. Steve D-Hondt was the Chief Scientist and his comments along with images are included in Appendix XI.
All scientific objectives of the expedition were met, through a combination of long cores (piston and gravity), short gravity cores, and very short multi-cores. The long piston coring capability enabled them to identify the deepest penetration of oxygen ever observed in marine sediment. One or two long piston cores were recovered at 8 of 11 sites. The longest of these was 41 m. The long-coring system was successfully used as a long gravity corer (at sites 3 and 4). Cores with lengths of 18m and 21m were recovered in this manner.
Break
Hugh R. Sharp User Debriefs – Dave lead a discussion on the debrief questions for the Hugh R. Sharp. A draft set of standard user debrief questions was prepared by Jim Bauer.
Reduced Fuel Consumption by Improved Directional Stability on Z-Drive Ships – Tim Schnoor reported that the cost for Carderock to conduct a study on reduced fuel consumption by improved directional stability on Z-Drive ships was too high to move forward. The Navy would like to see the fuel cost saving estimate for their survey ships.
Weatherbird II Improvements – Al Hine sent a set of slides that were presented at the meeting. See Appendix XIV. The slides provide the ship status and improvements that have been implemented on Weatherbird II. The ship dedication was held at the USF College of Marine Science Pier and the first cruise is scheduled for March 20, 2009. The vessel is owned by the University of South Florida and operated by the Florida Institute of Oceanography representing 11 state universities, RSMAS, Mote Marine Lab, and state labs. The slides include images of the various lab spaces and decks.
·
Marcia
– She wonders if the OCRV SMRs should state that it is “critical” for 40 days
endurance. Chris McDonald – The
endurance may not have a huge impact on the vessel design.
·
Chris -
11 knots cruising speed is being considered for this vessel.
·
Pam Clark–
The towing requirements were driving the horse power requirements which in turn
resulted in 11 knots cruising speed.
·
Al
Suchy – The science party requests increases in ship speed to pick up lost days;
it happens all of the time. With these
SMRs, we won’t have the ability to do this.
The ships have to go flank speed often.
If you are going into the world’s ocean you need to have speed.
·
Marcia
– The scientists need to plan their cruises with contingencies.
·
Question
- Why is the ship’s draft included in the SMR document? Reply - Scientists want to work in areas
where the ports have water depth constraints.
·
Chris –
The OCRV design has a 17 ft maximum depth.
·
FIC was
asked to review the rest of the SMR items and provide feedback.
Adjourn
Day 1 at 5:00 pm.
Day 2 – Wednesday, March 11th: Moss Landing Marine Laboratories – Seminar Room
Day 2 was a joint session between the FIC and Council.
The minutes for the joint session are included with the Council minutes
and are available at http://www.unols.org/meetings/2009/200903cnc/200903cncmi.html.
The FIC meeting adjourned at noon on March 11,
2009.