UNOLS FLEET IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
National Science Foundation
Stafford II Building, Room 555
A copy of these minutes can be downloaded as a pdf at <200410ficmi.pdf>
Executive
Summary
The UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee met on Wednesday, October 13,
2004. A major focus of the meeting was
on Academic Fleet Renewal activities and plans. A brief summary of these items and other issues addressed by FIC
are provided in this Executive Summary:
FOFC Long-Range Fleet Plan Update - Bob Winokur, Federal Oceanographic Facilities
Committee (FOFC) Chair, discussed the Committee’s efforts to update their
Long-Range Fleet Plan. The FOFC update
will consist of one integrated Federal Fleet Plan that addresses the needs of
each member agency (not just the Academic Fleet). The FOFC plan will be drafted to be consistent with budgetary
limitations. They hope to have a draft
report available by March 2005. The
planned release date for the report is 30 September 2005. Bob emphasized that a UNOLS fleet plan
should be in “lock step” with the FOFC plan.
There is a need for consistency in the report recommendations.
EWING Replacement – LDEO has purchased a modern seismic vessel to replace EWING. Plans are being developed to convert the
ship into an oceanographic research vessel.
The converted ship is scheduled to go into service in 2006. EWING’s last cruise will take place in early
2005. LDEO has requested that the ship
be named MARCUS LANGSETH.
Regional Class Ships – Regional Class Operational Capabilities have been
drafted and are based on the UNOLS prioritization of the Regional Class
SMRs. The draft document is being
circulated for UNOLS review and comment.
The performance specification for the Regional Class will be drafted
over the next few months. NSF is
developing a request for proposals for design/build teams, which should be
advertised in mid 2005. NSF plans to
advertise the Regional Class operator solicitation in mid summer 2005.
Ocean Class Planning –Phase II of the ONR sponsored Ocean Class study
was completed in the summer. The study
looked at various hull forms including monohulls, SWATHs and X-Crafts.
Revised
Vessel Retirement Dates and SLEP Estimates - UNOLS vessel
operators were polled to determine if vessel retirement dates should be
extended. If so, they were asked to
provide a SLEP cost estimate for a 5-year extension and for a 10-year
extension. There are eleven UNOLS ships >40 m that have
retirement dates prior to 2020 and are potential candidates for SLEPs
(excluding ALPHA HELIX and EWING).
Preliminary findings indicate that most of the ships (>40m) can have
their lifetimes extended 5 and possibly 10 years for an estimated cost of
$1.025M-$5M per ship for a 5-year life extension. Extension of retirement dates for most vessels <40m is not
recommended. It is important to recognize
that the SLEP estimates focus
on maintaining the ship in an operational condition without enhancing the
scientific capabilities of the platform.
Existing Intermediate Class vessels do not meet most
of the desired Ocean Class SMRs and the Regional Class ships fall short of the
Regional Class SMRs in many areas.
Ship Design and Construction Efforts - The ARRV project is on track and the design will
be complete soon. Construction of the
CAPE HENLOPEN Replacement Vessel is well underway at Dakota Shipyard in
Anacortes, WA. Delivery is scheduled
for October 2005.
Fleet Improvement Plan (FIP) Update – FIC agreed that the UNOLS 1995 Fleet Improvement Plan should be
updated. An outline for an updated FIP
document was drafted. They hope to have
a first
draft by the March 2005 Council Meeting with a final draft by September 30,
2005
KILO MOANA Debriefs - A letter was sent to University of Hawaii in
April 2004 listing some of the problem areas that have been reported during the
KILO MOANA debrief interviews.
University of Hawaii has addressed some of these issues. FIC has decided to continue the KILO MOANA
debrief interviews but with a more focused, selective set of questions and
cruises.
ADA Design considerations – Terry Whitledge and Glosten Associates have reviewed the draft report,
“Construction Requirements for Passenger Vessels to Include the Americans with Disabilities Act” to determine how its recommendations could be adopted to the ARRV. Terry has offered to draft a white paper summarizing the ADA design considerations.
Other topics addressed by FIC included identification of
FIC projects/goals/priorities for 2005, membership changes, and winter meeting plans.
Recommendations
The FIC recommends that the 1995 Fleet Improvement Plan be updated. They have established an outline for the
updated document and an associated timeline.
Actions/Tasks
|
Task Description |
Action |
|
Regional Class Actions: |
|
|
·
Review
Regional Operational Capabilities and send to NSF by the end of October 04 |
FIC/RCAC - COMPLETE |
|
·
UNOLS Regional
Class Rep - Recommend a community representative to be the UNOLS rep to the
IPT. [Note – Agency input is needed to complete] |
Dave, Wilf, RCAC,
Office |
|
· Stay engaged in acquisition process § Provide feedback to NSF §
Insure community input |
FIC, RCAC |
|
KILO MOANA Actions: |
|
|
·
Continue Debrief Interviews – focused and more selective |
FIC - Ongoing |
|
·
Obtain feedback from WESTERN FLYER and KILO MOANA
Captains |
Mike Prince |
|
·
Compile Debriefs for posting on the
UNOLS website |
Office -Ongoing |
|
·
Draft Summary document |
Annette & Dave |
|
FOFC Fleet Plan Update - ·
Provide the Working Group information when requested. |
FIC |
|
Amend
SMRs: ·
Amend
Regional and Ocean Class SMR to include ADA requirements (Terry’s white
paper) ·
Carefully review the “Lessons Learned” and PCA
comments. Incorporate as appropriate
into the SMR documents |
RC and OC Steering
Committees - ongoing |
|
PCAR Comments -
Review PCAR comments with regard to facility improvements. |
FIC - Ongoing |
|
Design and Constructions Efforts
- Stay engaged in ongoing design and construction efforts (ARRV, EWING
replacement, CHRV, etc.) |
FIC - Ongoing |
|
Updated Vessel Retirement Dates and SLEP Estimates: ·
Address
report inconsistencies (by Oct 26) and provide draft report to FOFC Working
Group. - COMPLETE Finalize Report |
FIC |
|
Ocean Class Planning – Provided input as requested |
FIC and OCSC – ongoing |
|
Global Class: Update SMRs |
Global Class Steering Committee – ongoing |
|
ADA Guidelines draft White Paper |
Terry Whitledge – ongoing |
|
Update Fleet Improvement Plan: · First draft – March 2005 · Final draft – 30 September 2005 |
FIC – ongoing |
|
Ocean Observatories – Stay in contact with ORION Office. |
Dave Hebert – ongoing |
Appendices
II.
Participant
List
III.
FIC
Meeting Slides
IV.
ORION
Report – Ken Brink’s Slides
V.
ADA
Requirements – Report from Terry Whitledge
Meeting Report:
Welcome and Introduction – The UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee met at the
National Science Foundation (NSF), Stafford II, Room 555, Arlington, VA on
Wednesday, October 13, 2004. Dave Hebert, FIC Chair, opened the FIC meeting at 0830. Agenda items
were followed in the order as reported below except as noted. Meeting participants introduced themselves.
The agenda and meeting participants are included as Appendix
I and Appendix II.
Accept Minutes - A motion was made and approved to accept the minutes from the March 9-10, 2004 FIC Meeting.
Review FIC Action/Task List from March meeting – Dave Hebert reviewed the status of the action items
from the March FIC meeting. All of
the slides presented by Dave during the FIC meeting are included as Appendix III.
|
Task Description |
Action |
|
|
Regional Class Actions: |
||
|
·
UNOLS Regional
Class Rep - By summer 2004, UNOLS needs to recommend a community
representative to be the UNOLS rep to the IPT. [Note – Agency input is needed
to complete] |
Dave, Wilf, Tim, Office – ongoing |
|
|
·
Prioritize Regional Class SMRs by July
2004 |
COMPLETE |
|
|
·
Form Regional Class Advisory Committee
(RCAC) |
COMPLETE |
|
|
Ocean Class Phase II
Study – Held FIC and JJMA phone/web conferences |
COMPLETE |
|
|
Ocean Commission
Report – Drafted a unified Council response by
5/20/04. |
COMPLETE |
|
|
KILO MOANA Actions: |
|
|
|
·
Continue Debrief Interviews |
Ongoing |
|
|
·
Obtain feedback from WESTERN FLYER and KILO MOANA
Captains |
Ongoing |
|
|
·
Send Letter to UH with list of problems |
COMPLETE |
|
|
·
Compile Debriefs for posting on the
UNOLS website |
Ongoing |
|
|
FOFC Fleet Plan Update - ·
Encourage the Agencies to update the FOFC plan and
provide the Working Group information: ·
Update the projected
retirement dates and provide SLEP estimates (first draft complete, addressing
inconsistencies) |
Ongoing |
|
|
·
Update ship utilization projections to
include ocean observatory facility needs (presented by P. Wiebe to FOFC) |
COMPLETE |
|
|
Amend
SMRs: ·
Amend
Regional and Ocean Class SMR to include ADA requirements ·
Carefully review the “Lessons Learned” and PCA
comments. Incorporate as appropriate
into the SMR documents |
RC and OC Steering
Committees - ongoing |
|
|
FIC Membership – Nominations are needed to replace Chris Measures |
Ongoing |
|
|
PCAR Comments -
Review PCAR comments with regard to facility improvements. |
Ongoing |
|
|
Design and Constructions Efforts
- Stay engaged in ongoing design and construction efforts (ARRV, EWING
replacement, CHRV, etc.) |
Ongoing |
|
Academic Fleet Renewal Activities and
Plans:
FOFC
Plans for Update of their Academic Fleet Long-Range Renewal Plan –
Bob Winokur, Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC) Chair, discussed
the Committee’s efforts to update their Long-Range Fleet Plan. FOFC members have agreed that the update
will consist of one integrated Federal Fleet Plan that addresses the needs of
each member agency (not just the Academic Fleet). The National Oceanographic Research Leadership Council (NORLC)
has been briefed and they endorse FOFC’s plan.
Bob reported that FOFC has moved forward slowly with the update. In spring 2004 a questionnaire was sent to
each FOFC agency about their respective fleet renewal plans. A retreat was held in the summer. They hope to accelerate their progress and
will meet again at the end of October.
They hope to have a draft report available by March 2005. The planned release date for the report is
30 September 2005.
At
the summer retreat FOFC drafted the report’s outline. NSF, NOAA, ONR and the USCG have indicated that they each have
fleet renewal plans. The coordinated
Fleet Renewal Plan is expected to include eight or nine chapters. The writing assignments will be made during
their October 28th meeting.
Some
of the issues that FOFC will address while drafting the update include:
·
Academic Renewal Plan – lessons learned since
the first draft.
·
They will try to identify which agencies have
money to support renewal and which do not.
·
The length of time it takes to build a ship and
how this factors into the plan’s timeline for renewal.
·
Is it possible to partner between agencies?
·
Lease versus ship ownership – Although it
doesn’t seem to make economic sense to lease general-purpose oceanographic
ships, leasing of special purpose ships will be evaluated.
·
They will also discuss strategies for marketing
the plan.
Bob
emphasized that FOFC would like to work with UNOLS. If UNOLS drafts their own fleet plan, he emphasized that it
should be in “lock step” with the FOFC plan.
There is a need for consistency in the report recommendations. There will be a lot of competing interests
for Federal funds. FOFC and UNOLS must
be able to sell the plan. The two plans
should be unified.
Discussion
followed:
Bob
Knox suggested linking the renewal plan to the Ocean Commission report as a
possible marketing strategy. Bob
Winokur commented that the Ocean Commission report recommendations are still
being reviewed. This is still a work in
progress. The report includes a couple
hundred recommendations, many of which require funding. There will be a lot of competition in a very
tough funding climate.
Bob
Knox also emphasized that the Service Life Extension Program estimates that
were compiled by UNOLS (and will be reviewed later in the meeting) were put
together because they were requested by the agencies. UNOLS does not view the SLEPs as a good option. Instead plans should move forward for
renewal.
Dan
Schwartz asked if the FOFC agencies with non-academic research ships have
generated their Fleet renewal plans.
Bob Winokur replied that he plans to discuss this at the UNOLS Annual
Meeting. The Navy ships are relatively
new, but if you factor in the 10-year process for construction, planning for
renewal will need to be addressed soon.
NOAA’s fleet is old, but they have been building some new ships and they
have been successful in obtaining ships through Navy transfers. Beth White added that NOAA has now
transferred seven Navy ships into their fleet.
They have removed all of the T-AGOS ships from service.
Peter
Wiebe remarked that UNOLS has compiled utilization projections to 2020. Is FOFC planning to do this same thing? Bob Winokur replied that the agencies will try
to do this and they have gotten some of the numbers together.
Peter
asked how new initiatives will be factored into the renewal plan. Many of the ships that were built ten years
ago did not anticipate the needs and directions that we are now learning about,
such as, ocean observatories. There has also been Navy’s shift in research
interest from deep water to the littoral zone.
Tim
Cowles remarked that a year ago UNOLS and some FOFC members were concerned that
the academic renewal plan would be consumed by an integrated agency renewal
plan. As FOFC now moves forward with an
integrated plan, how can we ensure that the Academic Fleet renewal will stay on
track and will not be overtaken? Over
the last five years a lot of effort has gone into defining future science
directions and requirements, how will the other agencies do this in the next
six months? The other major concern is
that the academic plan will be constrained by budget limitations. By presenting an integrated plan the
competition for funds will be more evident.
A separate academic fleet plan would be more focused and would clearly
identify the community’s facility needs.
Bob
Winokur explained that Navy research ships would have to compete for AGOR
funds, with or without an integrated renewal plan. The interagency plans should not be in competition with each
other. Each agency will be required to
articulate their real needs as well as address fiscal realities. One of the first steps for FOFC is to
identify their budget. The facilities
that are identified by the updated FOFC plan would need to be able to be
supported. Beth White added that NOAA’s
renewal plans haven’t impacted the academic fleet plans. NOAA has been able to get new fisheries
vessels and Navy ship transfers. A
unified plan has a better chance of succeeding. In fact, it might strengthen the academic renewal plans.
There
was discussion on how the FOFC plan and UNOLS plan could be in
“lock-step.” The FOFC plan will be
drafted to be consistent with budgetary limitations. However, if budgets expand and additional research can be
supported, the facilities needed to support the research must be
articulated. A UNOLS Fleet plan could
project facility needs based on future research directions and demand. In order for FOFC and UNOLS to be in
“lock-step,” the FOFC plan can be viewed as the high priority facility
needs. The UNOLS Plan could reinforce
the facility requirements outlined by the FOFC plan, but also articulate the
facility requirements in an expanded budget scenario.
Bob
Knox commented that earlier in the year a few UNOLS representatives met with
agency representatives and discussed the topic of the Fleet Plan update. At that time there was indications from the
agencies that it would be good for UNOLS to create its own document. Before UNOLS begins to draft their plan, we
would like to get agency feedback. Bob
Winokur replied that if it is drafted in such a way so that it is not contradictory
it could be useful.
Peter
Wiebe commented that UNOLS has been trying to project what the ship use will be
for the future. Even if there is level
funding, a fleet larger that thank indicated in the FOFC Plan, figure 17 is
needed. If FOFC plans to reduce the
fleet, we need to alert the community.
They need to be able to think about how they can accomplish their
science in the future. Bob Winokur
replied that we shouldn’t have to think small, however, we just need to think
realistically. As research needs and
directions change, the fleet composition must be re-evaluated. The FOFC plan is
only addressing ship needs. The NORLC
has questioned FOFC as to when the other facilities will be addressed.
Niall
Slowey commented that UNOLS isn’t putting together a wish list of fleet
needs. The future Fleet identified in
the FOFC plan cannot meet current research needs. The oceanographic community will not be able to accomplish all of
today’s research programs with the future FOFC fleet.
NSF
Fleet and Facility Renewal Activities - Mike Reeve reported on
renewal activities at the National Science Foundation (NSF). The Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV)
was approved for inclusion the Major Research Equipment (MRE) account and is
listed for funding in FY06. In February 2005 NSF will have a better idea of the
budget status.
EWING
Replacement – Earlier in the year Lamont Doherty Earth
Observatory (LDEO) proposed that EWING be replaced with a modern seismic vessel
rather than undergo a mid-life refit.
After review, NSF agreed and the seismic vessel, WESTERN LEGEND, was
purchased by LDEO. NSF will purchase
the ship from LDEO over the next five years.
Plans are being developed to convert the ship into an oceanographic
research vessel. These plans will be
put out to bid to shipyards. Selection
of a yard is expected in spring 2005.
LEGEND will go into service in 2006.
EWING’s last cruise will take place in early 2005. NSF has received a letter from LDEO
requesting that the ship be named MARCUS LANGSETH.
Replacement
Human Occupied Vehicle (HOV) – Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) submitted a proposal to NSF to replace ALVIN
with a deeper diving HOV. NSF reviewed
the proposal favorably and they have entered into a four-year cooperative
agreement with WHOI. Funding will be in
a phased approach, based on successful outcomes of the early phases.
Regional
Class Ships – Plans for design and construction of Regional
Class ships are moving along. NSF is
developing a request for proposals for design/build teams, which should be
advertised in mid 2005. From the
proposals received, two teams will be selected. NSF plans to advertise the Regional Class operator solicitation
in mid summer 2005.
Regional
Class Operational Capabilities have been drafted. These take into account the UNOLS prioritization of the Regional
Class SMRs. The ship design will be
based on the operational capabilities.
Comments from UNOLS regarding the operational capabilities need to be
provided as soon as possible. The
performance specification for the Regional Class will be a more detailed
document than the Operational Capabilities.
JJMA, NAVSEA and NSF will be drafting the Performance Specifications
over the next few months. They will be
looking for comments from UNOLS. NSF
would like to be able to send it out to UNOLS for review in increments instead
of having to wait until the entire document is drafted. Pete Kilroy remarked that because of the
sensitive nature of the document, it would need to be discussed with their
legal counsel before releasing it. They
need to make sure that none of the potential design/builders of the ships get
an advanced copy of the performance specifications. The confidentiality of the solicitation needs to be
maintained. The issue and options for
maintaining confidentiality will be considered further.
Bob
Knox asked if the solicitation for operator would be for selection of all three
ship operators. Mike Reeve replied that
this has not been settled yet.
Ocean
Class Planning – Phase II Study and Next Steps
–Phase II of the ONR sponsored Ocean Class study was completed in the
summer. The study looked at various
hull forms including monohulls, SWATHs and X-Crafts. The study’s findings are available in JJMA PowerPoint
presentations posted on the UNOLS website at <http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/ocean/ocean_class.html#OCphase2>.
In other ONR sponsored activities, Curt Collins has been funded to conduct a
motion study that compares the WESTERN FLYER with the POINT SUR. Matt Hawkins has been funded for a handling
system study.
Ocean
Observatory Facility Needs – Ken Brink, Ocean Research Interactive
Observatory Networks (ORION) Project Director, was invited to the FIC meeting
to discuss ocean observatory facility needs and timelines. The ORION Project Office is working to define
the science plan and the execution plan for the ocean observatory initiative.
Ken’s presentation is included as Appendix
IV.
The
ocean observatory facility needs will place heavy demand on the already heavily
utilized UNOLS Global vessels. The
ocean observatory facility needs are equivalent to using THOMPSON and REVELLE
full-time. In the current FOFC plan
KNORR and MELVILLE are retired at the end of their service life without
replacement. As a result, by 2020 there
will be fewer ships available than there are today to support both the
traditional ocean research plus the added support required by the ocean
observatories. The large ships will
require modifications (heavier lift and fueling capability) to support ocean
observatories. Additionally, changes
would be needed in the UNOLS scheduling process to allow more flexible
scheduling of facilities to support event response activities and to respond to
unplanned maintenance/repairs. ORION
plans to evaluate the depressed cable industry for potential vessels for
charter/lease/purchase.
Discussion
followed. Dan Schwartz asked if there
are any plans to prioritize the OOI installation list. Ken replied that the plan is for
installation over five years, FY06 to FY10.
The most innovative items would be installed last.
Tim
Cowles recommended that the ocean observatory needs should be considered by the
FOFC plan update. Ken reported that he
has briefed FOFC on the ORION plans and projections.
Marc
Willis cautioned that a scaled back ocean observatory installation might not
necessarily result in a linear decline in ship demand. Once a node is installed it will have to be
serviced.
Break
Revised
Vessel Retirement Dates and SLEP Estimates - Dave Hebert provided background
information on the recent effort to update vessel retirement dates and develop
Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) estimates. This year the UNOLS vessel operators were polled
to determine if they thought their respective vessel retirement dates should be
extended. If so, they were asked to
provide a SLEP cost estimate for a 5-year extension and for a 10-year
extension. FIC
was concerned that the SLEPs would be perceived as a good option for delaying
Fleet renewal. For this reason, the
operators were asked to show how the capabilities of their current
ships compare to the Ocean Class and Regional Class SMRs. These SMRs identify
the requirements necessary to support future science.
Most
of the operators have provided responses.
Inconsistencies in the report are being identified and addressed. Once these are addressed the report will be
finalized. Dan Rolland commented that they
have some seakeeping analysis data that might be useful to the large ship
operators in their comparisons with the Ocean Class seakeeping SMRs.
Al
Suchy remarked that the ship operators provided a considerable amount of time,
effort and information for this project.
A lot of thought went into their responses.
Beth
White requested a copy of the preliminary report for the next FOFC working
group meeting. UNOLS will try to
address inconsistencies in the report and then provide a preliminary copy to Beth
prior to the FOFC meeting.
Ship
Design and Construction Efforts – Full status reports
on design and construction efforts will be provided at the Annual Meeting. There was an opportunity for brief
updates. Terry Whitledge reported that
the ARRV project is on track and the design will be complete soon. Just a few items are outstanding. They anticipate the ice classification for
the ARRV to be approved. If it is not
approved, they will probably have to file for waiver. Over-the-side handling plans are being kept open, until
recommendations from the handling system symposium are available. The ARRV Web page is available <http://www.sfos.uaf.edu/arrv/>. There will be time for community review of
the design. Construction of the CAPE
HENLOPEN Replacement Vessel is well underway at Dakota Shipyard in Anacortes,
WA. Delivery is scheduled for October
2005.
Fleet
Improvement Plan (FIP) Update – Dave Hebert opened
the discussion on the Fleet Improvement Plan (FIP) and asked the FIC if an
update to the 1995 report is needed.
There are number of new factors that should be considered:
-
Future science initiatives
-
Ocean observatory facility projections
-
Updated vessel retirement dates
-
Updated Fleet utilization trends (Appendix
III, slide 19)
-
Ship construction plans and realistic timelines
-
Future Fleet operating costs
-
The FOFC Plan update will be based on budget
realities.
There
have been many studies since the 1995 FIP that have estimated future facility needs
based on emerging research directions.
These include the Future documents and the Cowles/Atkinson report, and
the Chave Report on ocean observatory facility needs. All of these studies should be examined to determine if the
future needs identified by them could be met with the Fleet of the future.
Dave
presented slides (Appendix III,
slide 20-21) showing the estimated Fleet operating costs for 2004 as compared
to the estimated cost for the Fleet in 2020.
The 2020 estimate is based on the FOFC Fleet as indicated in Figure
17 of their report. The daily rates for Regional Class and Ocean
Class vessels are based on estimates from the recent JJMA studies. In 2020 there will be few ships available than
there are now. In reviewing the chart
it was recommended that the smaller, local ships would likely be replaced
with institution/state support and that replacements should be included in
the 2020 Fleet. With the addition
of the local ships, there still would be approximately 1000 fewer operating
days available to support sea-going science.
The operating cost of the 2020 fleet is estimated to be roughly level
with the operating cost of the 2004 fleet (2004 dollars). Tim Cowles commented that it is important to articulate the shortfall
in ship day availability in 2020. This
needs to be included in an updated fleet improvement plan.
FIC
agreed that the UNOLS 1995 Fleet Improvement Plan should be updated.
Peter
Wiebe recommended that in order for FOFC and UNOLS to be in “lock-step,” they
should meet together. A two-way
exchange is needed.
Lunch
Break
UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan Outline – The FIC drafted an outline for an updated FIP. Assignments were also identified. The draft outline and assignments are as
follows:
UNOLS Fleet Improvement Plan Outline:
·
Executive
Summary / Intro
·
Identify Future
Science Initiatives:
-
Physical - Dave
-
Biological -
Terry
-
MG&G - Niall
-
Chemical – Jim B
-
Education –
Clare
-
Ocean
Engineering -
-
Cross cutting
initiatives (Observatories (broad)) – Jim C
·
Current Fleet
Composition and Utilization Trends - Office
-
Current Fleet
Description
-
Updated vessel
retirement dates and SLEP costs
-
Fleet Trends
-
Geographical utilization
·
Future Fleet
Projections – Office and others
-
UNOLS and FOFC
Plan Fleet Projections -
-
Ship
Construction Plans and realistic timelines
-
Addition of
other facility projections (Ocean observatory, etc)
-
Other Facilities
– aircraft, deep submergence facilities
-
Scheduling and
operating modes
-
Shortfalls:
-
Differences between FOFC and UNOLS
FIP
-
Consequences of not carrying out SLEPs
-
Tradeoffs between various scenarios
- Peter
-
Extensions and
expansions beyond the FOFC Plan
-
Future Fleet
Composition
·
Fleet Budget
Projections and Requirements
-
Ship
Construction Cost
-
Future Fleet
operating cost estimates
·
Recommendations
There was discussion on how the two reports, one
from FOFC and one from UNOLS, would be perceived. Bob Knox remarked that the UNOLS report would identify the
facility needs that are required to meet future science directions. Peter asked if a projection could be made on
how science would be impacted by a smaller fleet in 2020. What are the consequences of not expanding
the fleet?
Next, the FIC established a draft for the project
timeline:
·
Finalize
outline and assignments– 15 November 04
·
Coordinate with
FOFC - winter
·
Draft text and
prepare projections – 28 Feb 05
·
First Draft –
March Council Meeting
·
Community
review – April 1-30, 2005
·
Second draft –
Spring/Summer Council Meeting
·
Circulate
second draft for comment – Sept 1
·
Final draft –
September 30, 2005
Global
Class Mid-Life Refit Planning and Science Mission Requirements
– Dave Hebert discussed the status of plans to update the 1989 Global Class
SMRs. Based on a 30-year service life,
THOMPSON will be approaching its mid-life in 2006. At the last meeting it had been decided that the Global Class SMRs
should be reviewed and updated as needed based on new science needs. The updated document would be useful as mid-life
plans for the Global vessels are considered. Dave showed a series of slides, Appendix
III, slides 22-25.
Dan
Schwartz stated that ONR hasn’t identified funding for the THOMPSON mid-life
refit. The ship MOSA account has been
suggested to support the mid-life, but NSF has made it clear that this is
unacceptable. Dan suggested that perhaps
a mid-life refit account should be established. At the earliest, University of Washington will submit a proposal
in fall 2005. Updated Global Class SMRs
would be useful to reference. Tim
Cowles stated that UNOLS should emphasize the need for mid-life refits.
Special Note: John Freitag revisited the topic of funding for Global Vessel mid-life refits later in the day. His comments are included here. John reported that the Oceanographer of the Navy views the UNOLS Navy-owned Global ships as relatively “new,” so they do not need to be refitted in the very near future. As a result, no money is being budgeted for major refit periods. If the Global refits were to be supported, the funds would need to come out of ONR core program funds. John is not optimistic about the availability of funds. He indicated that they have been funding some improvement projects, but doesn’t see funding for major projects. Instead of a dedicated mid-life refit period, it is likely that improvements and upgrades will be implemented during periods of opportunity over a number of years when funding is available.
KILO MOANA discussion
(Appendix III, slides 26-41) - Dave Hebert reported that
a letter was sent to University of Hawaii in April 2004 listing some of the
problem areas that have been reported during the KILO MOANA debrief interviews.
Dave reviewed the list of items. Chris
Measures joined the meeting via phone conference and provided the status on
some of the items with feedback received from Brian Taylor.
This is represented in the text below.
Responses are shown in italics.
•
Holding tank capacity - Comments have suggested that the tanks need to be
pumped anywhere between 8 and 24 hours. FIC suggests that the drains be
configured so that uncontaminated seawater after passing through the
scientist’s equipment, may flow directly back into the ocean rather than into
the holding tanks. No action.
In other areas, there have been reports that KILO
MOANA’s dynamic positioning system (DPS) doesn’t work well at slow speeds. The original Lockheed DPS didn’t work and
was replaced with a new Kongsberg-Simrad.
Dan Rolland reported that software problems are being addressed.
The FIC discussed whether or not the KILO MOANA PI
debriefs should be continued in 2005.
The Committee was divided. Some
indicated that additional debriefs were not needed and that enough information
has already been collected. They felt
that most of what we can learn about the ship has been learned. A summary document should be drafted. Others felt that the debriefs were useful
and should be continued. They would
allow us to identify any new problems as well as monitor areas that have
already been identified as areas of concern.
This information can be provided to the University of Hawaii to help
support any proposals for improvements.
In the spirit of compromise, it was decided to continue the debrief
interviews but with a more focused set of questions.
At the last meeting it was recommended that feedback
be obtained from the captains of the WESTERN FLYER and KILO MOANA. Both individuals were also captains of monohulls
previously. Mike Prince volunteered to
contact them.
Break
ADA Design considerations – Terry Whitledge reported on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and how it can be considered in ship designs. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix V. The U.S. Access Board, an Independent Federal Agency, develops and maintains accessibility requirements and enforces accessibility standards for federally funded facilities. They have drafted a report,
“Construction Requirements for Passenger Vessels to Include the
Americans with Disabilities Act.” The definition of Passenger Vessels is very broad
and can be construed to include
research vessels. Terry reported that
the draft document is about 200 pages long.
He and Glosten Associates reviewed the document to determine how its
recommendations could be adopted to the ARRV.
This could perhaps then be used as a set of guidelines for UNOLS vessel
new construction. Terry reviewed the
titles of the 12 Chapters included in the document.
The ARRV design attempts to meet the intent of the ADA guidelines. The ADA design features incorporated into the ARRV include:
• One ADA stateroom accessible via forward lift
• Top bunk in ADA stateroom a Pullman
• One ADA water closet on main deck
• 12:1 slope for interior sills to labs on main deck
• Navigate over 24” weather sill in Baltic room via cargo door and removable ramp
• Four foot wide passageways (36” clear)
• Minimum 32” door widths to mess, lounge, spa, gym, and labs
The guidelines are very specific about audible signals for the hearing impaired and the height of switches. Terry showed a schematic of the ADA stateroom.
Terry offered to draft a white paper summarizing the ADA design considerations. The paper could be added to the SMRs as an appendix.
·
Regional Class:
- Help identify UNOLS representative(s) for the IPT teams.
- Stay engaged in acquisition process (ongoing)
- Provide feedback to NSF
- Insure community input
· Ocean Class: Stay engaged
· Global Class: Update SMRs
· ADA Guidelines - White Paper – Terry
· Update Fleet Improvement Plan
· Ocean Observatories – Stay in contact with ORION Office.
· Ongoing Design and Construction Efforts - Stay engaged in ARRV, EWING replacement planning, and CHRV.
·
KILO MOANA – Continue debriefs (streamlined and
selective)
- Obtain feedback from Captains
Summary document of Debriefs
·
Everything
listed in the above section (2005 Goals, Projects, etc)
·
Review Regional
Operational Capabilities (UNOLS comments should be submitted to NSF by the end
of October) – FIC/RCAC
·
Address
SLEP/retirement date inconsistencies (by Oct 26) – Global Operators, Office,
others
Draft a FIC Report for the Council Meeting – The FIC prepared a report for the Council meeting, which summarizes the recommendations and actions from this meeting. Their slides are available in the minutes of the Council Meeting at <http://www.unols.org/meetings/2004/200410cnc/200410cncap03.PDF>.