IOOS: First Annual Implementation Conference Washington, D.C. David L. Martin, Ph.D.

1. Development of Regional Associations and of the National Federation of Regional Associations ( NFRA) IOOS: First Annual Implementation Conference Washington, D.C. David L. Martin, Ph.D. Chair, NFRA Organizing Committee August 31, 2004

2. Convergence of Interests and Capabilities – Leading to IOOS Note: Regional interests are implicit throughout

3. What will IOOS Look Like? • Global Component (nearly entirely a Federal responsibility – for both operations & research support) • Coastal Component • National System (‘backbone’) – Mostly Federal • Networks regions into a national federations and link environmental changes that propagate across regions • Federation of Regional Observing Systems • Regional federal entities, state & local government with involvement with academia, Tribal, private industry, NGOs and other stakeholders -- increase temporal/spatial resolution of backbone & increase variables measured and products produced

4. Primary interface with user groups outside federal agencies. • Focal point for data analysis and product development that will have local, regional and national applications. • Terrestrial influence measurements • Many national backbone R&D projects will be first done in regional observing systems. • Incorporate sub-regional systems • Development of regional systems is a very high priority with Congress and the Commission on Ocean Policy

5. Required Characteristics of Regional Efforts • A Solid Governance Structure • Describing governing and executive bodies, the roles and responsibilities of members, and how decisions are made/modified, etc. • Provision of an acceptable business plan that is endorsed by stakeholders • Articulate Regional system goals IAW seven IOOS goals, specify products and customers, conform to protocols, be capable of 24/7 ops providing timely user-driven products, describe sources of funding, provide a budget, etc. This should become the Regional Strategic Plan • Describe the process by which the governance structure and business plan were developed/improved • Easy to list, rigorous to implement, and . . . how do we agree and/or accomplish these? How do we formalize and empower the “We” in the various U.S. Regions?

6. Regional Associations Provide the Legitimizing Framework • For the Individual U.S. Regions: • They provide a focal point for a Regional Consortia of stakeholders to whom accountable (performance based) transfers of Federal resources can occur • Enhance intra-regional connectivity and collaboration • Priorities, technology transfer, science, etc., etc., etc. • As Part of a National Federation of Regional Associations • Lessons learned from other RAs (best practices, etc.) • Facilitates seamless interconnectivity (interoperability) between Regions • Demonstration to national leadership of maturity (vice bickering) • Ease pressure for Congressional earmarks/plus-ups as RAs become the vehicle of choice for directed regional ocean observing resources • Etc., etc.,

7. Regional Associations are Formed to: • Oversee & manage the design and sustained operation of integrated Regional observing systems addressing societal needs • Agree and establish Regional geographic boundaries • Incorporate sub-regional efforts within the integrated system • Obtain and disperse funds to operate and improve Regional observing systems • Ensure the timely provision of quality controlled data and information to users and private sector data and product providers

8. Governance System for RAs: Reaching Consensus • A wide range of stakeholders needs to be approached, educated and encouraged to participate • Tribal leaders, private sector, Academia,Regional Federal agencies, other state/local governments, NGO’s, etc. • Interactions in a number of Region have accelerated during past year • Need to identify the MANY others – a Region’s constituents must help. • Regional participants must remain engaged with colleagues in other Regional Associations, Ocean.US and others in D.C. and the nation • e.g., Regional Observing System “Summit”: Regional Interoperability Forum, attend RA meetings nearby, etc. • e.g., Various RAWorkshop attendees include national and international representatives from adjoining regions • Regions are developing mechanisms to address the “hard” issues.

9. Because RA Governance Means More Than Merely Getting Along . . • What is the governance mechanism for the RA? How is the Regional Association to be chartered for a multi-state role (with international connectivity if applicable)? • What roles will various entities agree to play? And what will they not do? • What is the role of Regional Federal agencies (or Tribal, state, local, etc.) in the Regional Association hierarchy and decisions? • What is the role of non-governmental entities (private sector, academia, NGO’s etc) ? • How are differences between stakeholders arbitrated? • Prioritization/scheduling of observing systems • Allocations of resources • How are “boundaries” between regions determined? - e.g., For the PNW, what is the geographical extent of “Northern California”? • These issues and others have been identified and discussed at various fora • Arriving at equitable solutions will take time and discourse – ignoring such issues is not an option • Ocean.US (e.g., the entire federal structure in Washington, D.C.) will NOT solve Regional governance issues. • Regions must do this for themselves

10. Criteria for a Certification as a Regional Association • Proof of a Solid Governance Structure that can deliver a Regional IOOS • By incorporating/improving existing assets and engaging regional expertise. It must serve as its own fiscal agent (accept funds, enter enforceable contracts, etc.); it must be insurable unless indemnified legislatively • Adoption of a membership policy • That specifies one or more categories, qualifications, rights and responsibilities; describes how members are added/removed; provides for geographic balance; ensures diverse membership from regional user and provider groups and stakeholders • Creation of a Governing Board • Formally created, public in all transactions IAW State/Fed laws; appoints a Chief Administrative Officer or Executive body; that is bound by procedures, that develops metrics to improve system performance; exercises appropriate powers to ensure its autonomy; is diverse in its makeup

11. Criteria for a Certification as a Regional Association (continued) • Formally involves users who will use the data and information products generated by the RA as evidenced by: • A panel advisory to the Governing Board that includes representatives of a significant share primary users and private sector data and product providers together with a detailed description of how this panel will be used • An active, ongoing outreach and marketing program described in the RA’s Business Plan1 having • A person or entity assigned responsibility for education and communication • Documents how the RCOOS is responsive to needs of users and private sector data and product providers • Establishes processes by which the needs of users and private sector data and product providers and gauged 1Note: Criteria for acceptable RA Business Plan are similarly detailed

12. Criteria for a Certification as a Regional Association (Bus. Plan) • Goals & Objectives • Establish an RCOOS that addresses the 7 societal goals as determined by user groups in the region • Contribute to the development of the IOOS as a whole • Needs, Benefits, Product Development & Marketing • Link to objectives • Prepare a plan for product development & diversifying the user base • Linking Observations to Model and Products • Observations & data transmission • Data management & communications • Data analysis & products • Research & Development • Training • Workforce of trained operators • User community • Funding • Prepare a plan for obtaining, increasing, sustaining & diversifying revenues for design, implementation, operation and improvement

13. The National Federation of Regional Associations Will Assist • Promote Regional observing systems nationwide • Enhance communications between NOPP agencies and RA • Assist in delineation of geographic boundaries • Promote inter-RA collaboration • Guide the development of the backbone • Influence the development and enable the implementation of national standards and protocols.

14. NFRA Organizing Committee Alaska (AOOS):Caribbean: Molly McCammon Jorge Corredor Nancy Bird Roy Watlington Pacific Northwest (NANOOS)Southeast (SEACOOS) David Martin - ChairRick Devoe Steven Rumrilll Andy Clark Hawaii and Pacific Islands: Mid-Atlantic (MARA) Eileen SheaBill Boicourt Chris ChungCarolyn Thoroughgood Central and Northern California (CeNCOOS): Northeast (GoMOOS) Marcia McNuttPhilip Bogden Linda Sheehan Janet Campbell Southern California (SCCOOS): Great Lakes John Orcutt Jeffrey Reutter Marco A. Gonzalez, Esq. Thomas Rayburn Gulf of Mexico (GCOOS): US GOOS Steering Committee Landry Bernard Worth Nowlin Buzz Martin Mark Luther

15. Organizing Committee Initial Tasks • NFRA Mission Statement • Regional RA Summit • Criteria for Certification as Regional Association • Criteria for Acceptable Business Plan • Interactions with Congressional delegations • Primarily Senate version and House mods to S 1400 • Regional priorities for Backbone and RCOOS’s • Provision of near-term (FY05 & 06) and long-term RA and regional RCOOS resource needs • Review of IOOS Implementation Plan • Participants in First IOOS Implementation Conference

16. Regional Effort Resource Needs Assumes ~10 will be established and that all 10 ill be fully operational by Yr 5

17. Regional Effort Summary • The IOOS has global and coastal modules • Coastal efforts consist of both national “backbone” (mostly Federal – e.g., NDBC, CMAN, NWLON, USACE Wave & RSM, USGS stream gauges, etc.) and non-federal Regional efforts • To address regional concerns and build regional constituencies WITHIN the construct of an integrated system • The goal is Regional relevancy with National oversight. • Regional Associations, and a National Federation of these Associations will provide the governance structure to enable this portion of the IOOS • Resource requirements are substantial for RCOOS initial and full operation; they are relatively modest for RA Certification, but several times greater than present RA Partnership building grants (present funding levels do not allow certification in 2 years) • Fundamental issue concerns the level of actionable Federal support of these non-agency Regional efforts (to date, support ≠ sufficient funding)