NOAA F leet Societal Benefit Studdy...NOAA Fleet Societal Benefits Study, Final Report i Foreward: Interpreting the Value Estimates from the NOAA Fleet Societal Benefit Study NOAA

FINA

NO

March Abt AssBethesd

CoronaLouisvi

AL REP

AA F

2018

sociates Ida, Mary

a Environille, CO

PORT

Fleet

Inc. yland

nmental C

t Soc

Consultin

cietal

ng

WrittMarinwww.

l Ben

ten under conne & Aviatio.omao.noaa.

nefit

ntract for theon Operation.gov

Stud

e NOAA Offns

dy

ffice of

Prepared b

Abt Asso

Corona E Prepared f NOAA’s

The NatioAviation survey shCommissNOAA Sm

by:

ociates Inc.

Environme

for:

Office of M

onal OceanOperationships and nisioned Officmall Boat Pr

.

ental Consu

Marine and

ic and Atms (OMAO) mne aircraft.cer Corps, Orogram.

ulting

d Aviation

ospheric Amanages an. ComprisedOMAO also

Operation

dministratind operatesd of civilian manages t

ns

on's (NOAAs NOAA's flens and officthe NOAA D

A) Office ofeet of 16 recers of the Diving Prog

f Marine anesearch anNOAA

gram and th

d d

he

NOAA Fleet Societal Benefits Study, Final Report

Table of Contents

Forward .................................................................................................................................................................................. i

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................. vi

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Overview of Research Approach ............................................................................................................................. 3

1.3 Report Organization ................................................................................................................................................. 5

2. Value of Products and Services Dependent on the NOAA Fleet ............................................................................ 7

2.1 Coral Reefs: Coral Status and Trends Report .......................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Sea Level Rise: Sea Level Rise Viewer ................................................................................................................. 10

2.3 Bathymetry/Hydrographic Surveys: Nautical Chart Products ............................................................................... 11

2.4 Seasonal Forecasts: ENSO Outlook ....................................................................................................................... 12

2.5 Ecosystem Management: National Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports ........................................................... 13

2.6 Fisheries Management: Fisheries Stock Assessment ............................................................................................. 14

2.7 Tsunamis: Short-term Inundation Forecasts for Tsunami Models ........................................................................ 15

2.8 Harmful Algal Blooms: Forecasts and Mitigation Capability (Gulf of Maine) .................................................... 16

2.9 Hypoxia: Hypoxia Watch (Gulf of Mexico) .......................................................................................................... 18

2.10 Ocean Noise: Ocean Noise Mapping ..................................................................................................................... 19

2.11 Hurricanes: Hurricane Outlook .............................................................................................................................. 20

2.12 Fleet Emergency Response Services ..................................................................................................................... 20

3. Monetized Benefits of Select Products and Services ............................................................................................. 23

3.1 Methodology for Estimating Value of NOAA Fleet ............................................................................................. 24

3.2 Coral Reefs: Coral Status and Trends Report ........................................................................................................ 24

3.3 Sea Level Rise: Sea Level Rise Viewer ................................................................................................................. 26

3.4 Bathymetry/Hydrographic Surveys: Nautical Chart Products ............................................................................... 27

3.5 Seasonal Forecasts: ENSO Outlook ....................................................................................................................... 29

3.6 Ecosystem Management: National Marine Sanctuaries Conditions Report .......................................................... 33

4. Cost-Effectiveness of NOAA Ships and Charter Vessels for Select Data Collection Efforts............................... 36

4.1 Marginal Cost of Using the NOAA Fleet .............................................................................................................. 36

4.2 Cost-Effectiveness Case Studies ............................................................................................................................ 37

4.3 Capacity, Availability, and Other Factors Affecting the Use of Charter Vessels ................................................. 42

5. Summary of Lessons Learned and Recommendations for Next Steps .................................................................. 44

5.1 Conclusions and Lessons Learned ......................................................................................................................... 44

5.2 Recommended Next Steps ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A. Value Chain Descriptions for Select NOAA Products

Appendix B. Efficiency and Effectiveness of Using Contract Vessels

Appendix C. Interviews with Charter Providers

Appendix D. Acknowledgements


i

Foreward: Interpreting the Value Estimates from the NOAA Fleet Societal Benefit Study NOAA managers and scientists routinely make difficult decisions about how to allocate public investments to study, protect and restore the nation’s oceans and coasts. One of the most important considerations in these decisions is the value that will be returned to the public. Thus, NOAA is often asked to demonstrate the economic benefits of its investments, preferably in dollar terms. Despite the uncertainty associated with such estimates, they provide evidence that investments are being managed to produce societal benefits and a basis for comparing benefits and costs. For some decisions, such as those involving public health or safety, economic considerations are secondary. However, even in these situations, managers need to make choices that involve tradeoffs – decisions that call for economic analysis.

The NOAA Fleet Societal Benefit Study provides important new evidence about the value of NOAA’s ships to the nation and how the cost of using these assets compares to that of contract vessels. Major results from this study include: “value chains” describing how data from the fleet support products and users; estimated annual dollar values of selected products; and mission-specific cost comparisons between NOAA and contract ships. The study, funded by NOAA and completed by Abt Associates in 2017, was conducted to support NOAA’s on-going efforts to modernize the current NOAA fleet. As the senior NOAA staff managing this project, we concluded, after receiving the final report and fielding questions about the value estimates in particular, that some additional context on interpreting the study results would be useful. We therefore added this Forward to provide additional comments on methods, to introduce some similar recent value estimates for NOAA ships, and to reinforce the challenges of estimating economic value for public goods, even when methods, assumptions, and sources are fully described. Key considerations when interpreting the Societal Benefit Study findings The following topics are particularly important considerations regarding the methods and sources used in the Societal Benefit Study and the overall interpretation of the value estimate results. Data denial: The model used by NOAA to set priorities across its observing systems provided important inputs to this analysis, particularly for estimating the degree to which the quality of final products would be affected by the absence of data from NOAA ships. This model is designed to minimize bias towards any one system and provides estimates of the impact of data denial that are based on extensive input from the subject matter experts who also use the data to generate final products. However, these estimates of the impact of data denial have not been confirmed via “denial of data experiments.” Denial of data experiments are commonly used for this purpose but were beyond the scope of this study. Further, the role that could be played by the private sector in responding to any future diminished capacity of the NOAA fleet was not assessed. Any such role would result in private sector costs and benefits whose analysis was also beyond the scope and resources of this study. Use of existing data: All estimates of value for the Societal Benefit Study were based on existing data and past research. And although the products selected for the Study was based, in part, on the availability of existing analyses, these materials were often dated or incomplete. This affected both the absolute value of dollar estimates and the comparability of dollar estimates between the products analyzed. For example, the value of nautical charting products is based on a 2007 study conducted before the now widespread use of electronic nautical charts. This study estimated the value of a marginal improvement in nautical charts, not their total value, and excluded key beneficiaries such as commercial fishermen and military users. The probable result is that the value of nautical charting products is understated in the Societal Benefit report. Accrual of value to users versus the economy: Estimating the value of environmental goods and service is challenging not only because the price people would be willing to pay for clean water or healthy marine mammals is not revealed in economic markets, but also because much of the presumed value accrues directly to individual users or consumers whose interests and behaviors are difficult to discern. While economists have methods to estimates of these values such as through the use of surveys to estimate society’s willingness to pay for the benefits that they receive, these methods are expensive and time


ii

consuming to employ. Therefore, even when existing studies were not sufficient to precisely estimate values for the five products selected, additional investigations or analyses were beyond the scope of our study. Product quality versus value: The study team assumed a direct correspondence between product quality and value. For example, if the loss of data from the NOAA fleet was expected to reduce the quality of a product by 5 percent, a corresponding 5 percent decline in value to users was assumed. In some use cases, however, the impact of a 5 percent degradation in product quality might be negligible whereas, in other cases, the product might be rendered useless. The simplifying assumption used in this study is reasonable but has not been verified by independent studies. Comparability of product value estimates: The summary value estimates presented in the Societal Benefit report are all reported in 2016 dollars. However, because different methods were used to derive these estimates, combining the results may present challenges. For example, a value estimate derived from market values (sea level rise viewer) is perhaps not comparable to a value estimate derived via contingent valuation (corals). Readers of the final report are advised to consider these factors before using or referencing the study results. Comparable recent value estimates

In 2012, NOAA conducted an internal, preliminary assessment of the economic benefits of the NOAA fleet. Although the 2012 study remains unpublished, there are some interesting and useful intersections with the Societal Benefit Study that highlight the challenges of estimating economic value. This is most usefully revealed by contrasting the methods and results for two products or themes where the studies overlapped – Nautical Charting Products and National Marine Sanctuaries Condition Reports.

Nautical Chart Products . NOAA’s 2012 study estimated that the NOAA fleet accounts for $12 million annually to the overall value of nautical charts, compared to a lower-bound estimate of $17 million annually in the Societal Benefit Study. Although the results are similar, the methods used to generate these two estimates vary significantly. The 2012 study is based on estimates of the increased loadings of commercial vessels, reduced number of groundings of commercial and recreational vessels, and reduced loss of life associated with the use of nautical charts. The Societal Benefit Study estimate is based on surveys that assessed the willingness of nautical chart users to pay for improved nautical charting. While the Societal Benefit Study estimate is larger, it also likely understates the full value of nautical charts because, as stated above, (a) it assesses the only the marginal value of improved nautical charts and not their full value, and (b) some users were not included in the results, notably commercial fishermen and military users.

National Marine Sanctuaries Conditions Reports. NOAA’s 2012 study estimates that the NOAA fleet contributes $10 million annually to the value of products and services developed by the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries that manages the sanctuary sites (though not specifically the Conditions Reports), compared to a lower-bound estimate of $605 million annually in the Societal Benefit Study for the Conditions Reports. There are several probable reasons why these findings are so different. First, the 2012 study reflects an older estimate of the total value of the economic impact of the National Marine Sanctuaries sites ($4 billion annually) while the Societal Benefit Study reflects the more recent and more commonly cited figure of $8 billion annually. However, the most important factors may be that (a) differences in estimates of the degree to which economic values from the National Marine Sanctuaries sites are likely to be eroded without the products and services provided by ONMS, and (b) the degree to which these products and services depend on the NOAA fleet. The value estimates could certainly be improved by a closer investigation of these two factors.

Interestingly, NOAA’s 2012 study also recommended that future studies of the economic value of the NOAA Fleet should employ a value or logic chain relationship between products and users - the method used to underpin the Societal Benefit Study - to ensure more accurate value estimates.

In Summary

The table below contrasts the analysis methods and underlying basis of the value estimates for each of the products evaluated in the Societal Benefit Study. We suggest these contrasts are important to note for two reasons in particular. First, adding the dollar value estimates of different products together, even though they are all rendered in 2016 dollars, presents challenges that readers should be aware of. And second, further, more refined analysis of these products would likely lead to different dollar values – some lower and some higher – than the current study results.


iii

Methods and Underlying Basis for Benefit Estimates

Coral Status and

Trend Report

contingent valuation

(willingness to pay)

reflects values derived from NOAA‐funded meta‐

analysis of recent work

Sea Level Riser

Viewermarket‐based

based on an EPA study of net benefits from

implementation of climate change adaptation

measures

Nautical Chart

Products

contingent valuation

(willingness to pay)

because key sectors/users (e.g. military, commercial

fishermen) were not included in source studies, these

products are almost certainly undervalued

El Nino Southern

Oscillation Outlookmarket‐based reflects value of ENSO data for agriculture sector only

National Marine

Sanctuaries

Condition Reports

economic impact

analysis

economic impacts of site use, including commerical and

recreational fishing and research

The value chains developed for the Societal Benefit Study will help support NOAA’s capacity to write “value stories” that explain how data from the NOAA fleet contribute to the quality of its products, and how specific users benefit in specific ways. These value stories provide a useful context to help decision-makers assess the reasonableness of dollar estimates by explaining the manner, extent, mechanisms, and degrees of impact. They also provide a basis for conducting sensitivity analysis to identify the assumptions under which investments in the NOAA fleet break even which, in turn, allow subject matter experts to make subjective judgements about the reasonableness of those assumptions. Value chains also provides a basis for soliciting input that can improve future estimates. Finally, understanding how users benefit from NOAA products can provide insights into how to modify these products to make them even more beneficial.

In summary, the primary objective for the Societal Benefit Study was to estimate the societal benefits of NOAA fleet. The results strongly indicate that the benefits associated with operation of the NOAA fleet, even when only five of more than 600 fleet-dependent NOAA products are assessed, significantly exceed the cost of operations. Stated another way, the savings realized by not operating NOAA ships would appear to be more than offset by a loss of societal benefits.

Charles Alexander Jeffery Adkins Chief, Planning and Performance Senior Economist Management Division ISS Management NOAA Office of Marine and Aviation Operations Office of the NOAA Chief Economist 8403 Colesville Road, Suite 500 2234 Hobson Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20910 Charleston, SC 29404 [email protected] [email protected]


iv

Executive Summary The purpose of this study is to identify and monetize the benefits associated with a subset of key NOAA products and services that are dependent on the NOAA Fleet, and assess the cost-effectiveness of using charter vessels as a substitute for NOAA’s ships for some data collection efforts. The project team developed estimates of the societal benefits for five of the 638 products and services supported by the NOAA Fleet, finding that the value added by the NOAA Fleet to these five products alone significantly exceeds annual operating costs.

Value of Products and Services Dependent on the NOAA Fleet The NOAA Fleet supports over 600 products and services across the agency’s 26 mission service areas. To demonstrate the societal benefits associated with fleet data collection activities, the project team developed qualitative “value chains” for 12 products (Table ES-1) that are highly dependent on the fleet and/or have a relatively large societal benefit, meaning they affect decisions made in important sectors of the economy and/or result in significant savings or increased well-being for U.S. households.

Table ES-1. Product Value Chains developed for this report

(see Table 3 in main report for descriptions of the value chains)

1. CORAL REEFS: Coral Reef Status and Trends

Report

7. TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis Inundation Forecast Model

2. SEA LEVEL RISE: Sea Level Rise Viewer 8. HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS (HABS): HAB Forecasts

and Mitigation Capability (Gulf of Maine)

3. BATHYMETRY/ HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYS:

Nautical Chart Products

9. HYPOXIA: Hypoxia Watch (Gulf of Mexico)

4. SEASONAL FORECASTS: El Nino Southern

Oscillation (ENSO) Outlook

10. OCEAN NOISE: Ocean Noise Mapping

5. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: National Marine

Sanctuary Conditions Report

11. HURRICANES: Hurricane Outlook

6. FISHERIES MANAGEMENT: Fisheries Stock

Assessments

12. EMERGENCY RESPONSE

Next, we selected five products for further evaluation based on criteria developed in coordination with the NOAA Office of Marine and Aviation Operations (OMAO) project team and NOAA’s Observing Systems Council. For these products, we developed monetary estimates of the anticipated benefits that the product provides, and estimated the portion of this anticipated benefit that is attributable to the NOAA Fleet. This study found that, for these five products, 15 to 37 percent of their value is directly attributable to the NOAA fleet ($0.77 billion to $3.39 billion, Table ES-2). In addition to the five products included in this study, the project team also recommended monetization of a sixth NOAA product – fish stock assessments conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). However, during this study, we learned that NMFS recently initiated research to estimate the value of this product. To avoid duplication of effort, OMAO will incorporate the results of NMFS’ analysis, when it is completed, with the findings of this research.

Cost-effectiveness of NOAA Ships and Contract Vessels

The second component of this study is an assessment the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the use of contract vessels as a substitute for NOAA’s ships for some data collection efforts. We examined several case studies that compared the marginal cost of using NOAA ships for specific individual missions to estimated costs for using contract vessels to provide the same services and support as the NOAA ship and meet the same mission requirements.


v

Table ES-2. Societal benefits (billions of dollars) of select NOAA products and associated value of NOAA Fleet (see Sections 2-3 of main report and Appendix A for more details)

Value Percent

CORAL REEFS: Coral Status and Trends Report

$0.590 - $1.190 $0.090 - $0.710 15.0% - 60.0%

SEA LEVEL RISE: Sea Level Rise Viewer

$1.480 $0.030 - $0.560 2.0% - 37.5%

BATHYMETRY/HYDRO-GRAPHIC SURVEYS: Nautical Chart Products

$0.058 - $0.120 $0.017 - $0.048 30.0% - 40.0%

SEASONAL FORECASTS: El Nino Southern Oscillation Outlook

$0.560 - $1.300 $0.026 - $0.270 4.6% - 20.0%

ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: National Marine Sanctuary Condition Reports

$2.420 - $5.180 $0.610 - $1.800 25.0% - 35.0%

Annual Anticipated Benefits Attributed to NOAA Fleet

Annual Anticipated Benefit of Product

Value Chain/Product

The single case study involving a single purpose mission of limited scope (TAO maintenance without supplemental scientific research) showed a contract vessel to be the most cost-effective option. The case studies of multi-disciplinary research missions indicated that there are examples where contract vessels are more cost effective and others where NOAA ships are more cost effective.

These case studies were not conclusive regarding the factors that determine cost-effectiveness. Geography could be one factor. NOAA ships appeared more cost effective for the research missions conducted in the remote tropical Pacific, while contract vessels appeared more cost effective for those conducted in U.S. coastal waters. These results, however, could also be related to the specific NOAA ships examined. These case studies where contract vessels were more cost effective involved NOAA ships with higher marginal costs than the average for NOAA’s fleet overall.

We also conducted a limited examination of the capacity and availability of contract vessels, along with other factors that could affect NOAA’s use of contract vessels. NOAA successfully contracts with a large number of different contract vessel providers and individual vendors report good availability to provide support. Specific projects, however, may have requirements (e.g., vessel capabilities, project scheduling, or location) that are not a good match for a very large number of contract vessels. Of NOAA contracts for vessel services active in fiscal year 2015, just over half received only one offer and almost 70 percent had two or fewer offers. Data are not available on the number of solicitations that received no bids.

In general, contract vessel availability appears to be greater for smaller vessels with more limited capabilities. The individual vessels that are the most obvious substitutes for NOAA ships (UNOLS vessels) are also the least available. There may, however, be opportunities for NOAA to make greater use of contract vessels during periods when those vessels have greater availability (i.e., outside of the summer months).


vi

Lessons Learned This study provides NOAA with a systematic process for assessing the value of individual observing systems and data streams through the development of value chains for the products and services that depend on them. NOAA can use the general approach to assess the value of Fleet-dependent products and/or additional observing systems (e.g., OMAO aircraft).

While this study represents a significant first step in demonstrating the value of the NOAA Fleet, it is limited in scope. Under this contract the project team was only able to develop value chains for 12 Fleet-dependent products, and quantify the value of 5 products. In addition, we were not able to conduct original valuation analyses; our monetary estimates of value therefore depend on existing studies and estimates from the literature, which are also subject to limitations and caveats. We were also only able to conduct a limited number of interviews, which we conducted with product experts from within NOAA.

In addition, throughout the study we learned that it is difficult to isolate the effect of individual data streams on the performance of a given product, given the interdependency of data that most products rely on. Thus, it is difficult to attribute an exact percentage of product value to the NOAA Fleet. We have attempted to reflect this uncertainty by providing a reasonable range of values using Fleet data-dependency estimates provided by TPIO and the subject matter experts.

The data used as inputs to this analysis represent the best available information. However, the studies upon which the quantifications are based were often few in number and, as with any study, limited in their accuracy, completeness, and broader applicability. Estimates of the contribution of the NOAA fleet to final products and services are based on extensive research and analysis by NOAA’s Technology, Planning, and Integration for Observation office (TPIO) but this work has its own limitations and the results have not been independently verified (as with a “denial of data” analysis). In short, the resulting values represent an empirical first step in the direction of developing more accurate and complete estimates of the value of NOAA products and services and the share of that value attributable to the NOAA fleet. A more scientifically rigorous analysis would require additional primary data collection and analysis which, if performed comprehensively, would be cost-prohibitive. This study does establish a scientifically sound process for assessing the societal benefits of the NOAA fleet and identifies critical information requirements that should be used to inform future research agendas.

Despite these challenges, which are inherent in most economic analyses, our use of published studies and extensive interviews with subject matter experts established a highly credible range of value estimates. We are confident that these estimates establish the significant value of the fleet’s contributions and provide materially relevant data to support future decisions at NOAA regarding the fleet.

We also learned that a number of factors complicate comparing the cost-effectiveness of contract vessels to NOAA’s fleet. When using contract vessels, contract costs alone may not account for the full cost to NOAA of completing a given mission. Furthermore, a day at sea aboard a contract vessel is not necessarily equal to a day at sea aboard a NOAA vessel. NOAA ships often collect multiple data streams and/or conduct multiple missions simultaneously. Although some contract vessels have similar multi-data stream/multi-mission capabilities, many such vessels are better suited for individual projects and a more limited set of data. These “economies of scope” mean that multiple contract vessels can sometimes be required to replace the output of a NOAA vessel.

NOAA ships also have greater endurance than many smaller contract vessels. Therefore, they can remain at sea for the duration of long projects without returning to port. In addition, NOAA ships often can be scheduled and positioned to transition directly from one project to the next without significant travel time. Therefore, the use of contract vessels can entail more transit days (i.e., at the start and finish of the discrete projects for which they are hired and, in some cases, to resupply during longer projects).

Given these factors, it is not appropriate to compare aggregate data on the cost of contract vessels to the cost of using the NOAA fleet. Instead, the comparison must account for mission-specific details. The case study approach we used here attempts to account for these factors and provide a one-to-one comparison of contract vessel costs to NOAA fleet costs.


vii

Recommended Next Steps There are several ways that NOAA could further refine the value chain and monetary value estimates from this study. First, many of the value chains and quantitative study estimates could benefit from additional interviews with NOAA experts as well as external product users. These interviews would provide a better understanding of the decisions that users make based on the information that the products provide, as well as how the NOAA Fleet contributes to each product. Additional analyses could also be conducted to further refine our monetary estimates. However, this would require primary data collection. Finally, to further inform investment decisions and focus resources, NOAA may also want to expand this analysis to include more fleet-dependent products and/or additional observing systems.

To better examine the factors that determine the cost-effectiveness of contract vessels, NOAA could conduct additional case studies. If carefully selected, additional case studies could help isolate the factors that contribute to cost-effectiveness (e.g., geography, specific NOAA ships used, length of mission, time of year).

A more detailed assessment of existing and future contract vessel capacity and availability would also be useful. The voluntary interviews with vendors that we conducted for this study were limited in number and not geographically representative. A more thorough, perhaps statistically selected, survey incorporating more detailed questions about vessel availability and capabilities could provide a greater understanding of the industry. A detailed examination of NOAA’s contract records, beyond the limited descriptive data in USAspending, might also provide more comprehensive data on the industry’s size and capabilities.

NOAA Fleet So

1. IntrodThe National society througimportant socsignificant invOperations (Omonetize the bFleet, and asscollection effoStudy, which contract with

Backg1.1NOAA is respprotect the 3.4predict changwhich OMAOfor NOAA’s dcollection, wh

The NOAA Ffrom large ocfor charting thacross the Excagency’s progfisheries, hyd1). NOAA lininformation tostocks, and m

Per NOAA’s and/or the opeacross NOAAvital to the echydrographic navigation anof coastal areplanning and

Physical, chemspecies and reyear.3 These tset accurate c

1 NOAA. 2016https://www.om2, Ibid 3 NOAA Officehttp://sanctuari

ocietal Benefits

duction Oceanic and A

gh its data collecietal benefits, avestments in its

OMAO) initiatebenefits associess the cost-eff

forts. This reporAbt AssociatesNOAA’s Offic

ground ponsible for co4 million squar

ges in weather, O supports. OMdata collection hen availability

Fleet, managed eanographic rehe nation’s coaclusive Economgrams. Many orographic, and

ne offices, othero keep U.S. por

make important

Office of Techerational platfo

A’s 26 mission onomy and heasurvey activiti

nd support the $eas also informd emergency m

mical, and biolesources, includtypes of observatch limits for

6. The NOAA Flmao.noaa.gov/sit

e of National Maies.noaa.gov/scie

Study, Final Rep

Atmospheric Adection activitieand meet grows fleet resourceed the NOAA Fiated with a subfectiveness of urt provides an os and Corona Ece for Coastal M

ollecting, sharinre nautical mileclimate, ocean

MAO maintainsinfrastructure.

y coincides with

by OMAO andesearch vessels astal waters (Tamic Zone and if the ships fulfoceanographicr U.S. governmrts open to mareconomic and

hnology Planninorms that the shservice areas. Aalth of the natioies to map and $4.6 trillion in ms tsunami inumanagement.

logical observading National M

vations also servthe $54 billion

T

eet Plan: Buildintes/default/files/

arine Sanctuarieence/socioecono

port

dministration’ss and the produ

wing demands foes. To inform itFleet Societal Bbset of key NOusing contract voverview and s

Environmental Management (B

ng, and utilizinges of ocean in os, and coasts. Ts and operates a NOAA also coh data collectio

d operated by Ncapable of exp

able 1).1 NOAAnternationally;

fill multiple misc data in suppoment agencies, critime commerpolicy decision

ng and Integrathips maintain, sAs described inon. For exampldevelop nauticeconomic acti

undation mode

ations from fleeMarine Sanctuave as the basis

n domestic fish

Table 1. NOAA

ng NOAA’s 21st

/documents/The%

s. 2015. Nationaomic/factsheets/w

1

s (NOAA’s) fleucts and servicefor environments investment d

Benefit Study. TOAA products a

vessels as a subsummary of keyConsulting (CoBPA EA-133C

g scientific infoour Exclusive EThis mission rea fleet of vesseommissions coon needs.

NOAA Corps, ploring the worA ships are stat they are specissions, enablin

ort of NOAA’s communities, ace, understand ns.2

tion for Observsupport the devn the 2016 NOAle, the Nationalcal charts, whicivity generatedling and storm

et vessels allowaries, which gefor fisheries st

A Fleet Comp

t Century Fleet. A%20NOAA%20

al Marine Sanctuwelcome.html. A

eet of ocean vees that these ac

ntal data collectdecisions, NOAThe purpose of and services thabstitute for NOy findings fromorona) conduct

C-14-BA-0039)

formation to helEconomic Zoneequires extensivels and aircraft ontract vessels

includes 16 resrld’s deepest octioned in homepially equipped ang the collection

long-term goaland businesses

d changes to the

vation (TPIO), velopment of 6AA Fleet Plan,

al Ocean Servicch in turn facilid by U.S. seapom surge predict

w NOAA to effenerate nearly $tock assessmen

position

Available: 0Fleet%20Plan_F

uaries and LocalAccessed 5/3/201

essels provides ctivities supportion, NOAA wi

AA’s Office of this study is toat are dependen

OAA’s ships form the NOAA Flted under Abt A), Task Order C

lp the U.S. unde, as well as to ve data collectithat serve as thand aircraft for

search and survceans to smalleports around thand designed ton of a wide varls and mission

s around the nate planet, monito

data collected 38 NOAA pro, these productce relies on fleeitate safe and eorts each yeartions, which ar

fectively manag$8 billion in locnts, which allow

Final_31OCT.pd

l Economies. Av17

significant valurt. To maintain ill need to makMarine and Av

o identify and nt on the NOAr some data leet Societal BeAssociate’s priC-007.

derstand, manaunderstand an

ion capabilitieshe mobile platfr some types da

vey ships, ranger ships responhe U.S. and opeo support the riety of atmospservice areas (tion rely on thior the health of

from NOAA sducts and servi

ts and services et charting and fficient marine

r. Accurate mare critical for u

ge and protect kcal economies w fishery mana

df. Accessed 5/3

vailable:

ue to these

ke viation

A

enefit ime

ge, and nd s, forms ata

ging sible erate

pheric, (Figure is f fish

ships, ices are

e apping urban

key each

agers to

3/2017.


2

Ship Length Class Primary Mission1

Homeport Ship Age (years)

Rainier 231 ft. Ocean 2 Newport, OR 49

Fairweather 231 ft. Ocean 2 Ketchikan, AK 49

Oregon II 170 ft. Regional 1 Pascagoula, MS 49

Hi'ialakai 224 ft. Ocean 1, 2, 3 Honolulu, HI 32

Oscar Elton Sette 224 ft. Ocean 3 Honolulu, HI 29

Okeanos Explorer 224 ft. Ocean 1, 2 Davisville, RI 28

Gordon Gunter 224 ft. Ocean 1 Pascagoula, MS 27

Nancy Foster 187 ft. Ocean 1 Charleston, SC 26

Thomas Jefferson 208 ft. Ocean 2 Norfolk, VA 25

Ronald H. Brown 274 ft. Global 3 Charleston, SC 20

Oscar Dyson 209 ft. Ocean 1 Kodiak, AK 13

Henry B. Bigelow 209 ft. Ocean 1 Newport, RI 11

Pisces 209 ft. Ocean 1 Pascagoula, MS 9

Bell M. Shimada 209 ft. Ocean 1 Newport, OR 8

Ferdinand R. Hassler 124 ft. Regional 2 New Castle, NH 7

Reuben Lasker4 209 ft. Ocean 1 San Diego, CA 4

1. Mission 1: Assessment and Management of Living Marine Resources Mission 2: Charting and Mapping Mission 3: Oceanographic Monitoring, Research, and Modeling

Source: NOAA. 2016. The NOAA Fleet Plan: Building NOAA’s 21st Century Fleet.

harvest,5 directly affecting the $153 billion U.S. commercial fishing industry.6 In addition, NOAA ships and buoy systems collect oceanographic monitoring data that directly feed weather models, forecasts, and oceanographic circulation models. Without this data, weather and climate forecasts would be less accurate, resulting in adverse impacts related to severe storm and emergency planning, coastal management, and planning for the U.S. agricultural industry, which supported $992 billion of economic activity in 2015.7

The NOAA Fleet also serve as an important component of the nation’s ocean-related emergency and disaster response network. Fleet emergency response services include surveying commercial ports following hurricanes and major storms to ensure their channels are free from debris and other navigational hazards. These surveys must be conducted before affected ports can be re-opened. The ability of NOAA vessels to immediately provide these surveys can significantly reduce the amount of time ports remain closed, allowing

4 NOAA Ship Reuben Lasker did not start operations until 2014 5U.S. Department of Commerce. 2014. Fisheries Economics of the United States. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-163, p. 6. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 6 NOAA. 2016. The NOAA Fleet Plan: Building NOAA’s 21st Century Fleet. 7 U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. 2016. Ag and Food Sectors and the Economy. Available: Accessed 5/3/2017. Value includes agriculture and related food sectors.

NOAA Fleet So

Figure 1. NO

for the deliveractivities incluresponse to mthreats. NOAA

While the NOeconomic secrequirementsrecapitalizatiby maximizinvessels, whenfleet-dependecomplement t

Overv1.2To demonstra638 NOAA p“value chain”decisions they

8NOAA. 2016.

NOAA Fleagency’s loNOAA’s N

NOA

ClimAn iresp

WeSocito w

HeaMarsust

ResCoaenvi

Ent

ocietal Benefits

OAA’s Next Ge

ry of emergencude locating an

major oil and chA ships are als

OAA Fleet andctors, OMAO s, aging ships, on.8 To addres

ng the socioecon appropriate. Aent NOAA prodthe NOAA Flee

view of Resate the societal roducts and ser

” (Figure 2), dey make based o

The NOAA Fle

eet data collectioong-term goals aNext Generation

AA Next Gener

mate Adaptatioinformed societyponding to clima

ather-Ready Niety is prepared

weather-related

althy Oceans rine fisheries, htained within he

silient Coastal Castal and Great ironmentally an

terprise-wide C

Study, Final Rep

eneration Stra

cy supplies andnd mapping debhemical spills, ao often called u

d associated dafaces several cevolving techn

ss these challenonomic benefitsAccordingly, Nducts and servicet’s data collec

earch Apprbenefits associrvices that the Nscribing how d

on the informat

eet Plan: Buildin

on activities are and 26 associate

n Strategic Plan,

ration Strategic

on and Mitigaty anticipating aate and its impa

Nation d for and responevents

abitats, and bioealthy and produ

Communities aLakes commun

nd economically

Capabilities

port

ategic Plan Lo

d important ecobris fields in thand surveying oupon to provid

ata collection challenges in mnologies, and

nges, NOAA des derived from

NOAA retained ces, and 2) asse

ction efforts.

roach iated with fleetNOAA Fleet su

data from the fltion the produc

ng NOAA’s 21st

critical to the ded mission servand the numbe

c Plan Goal

tion and acts

nds

odiversity are uctive ecosystem

and Economiesities are

y sustainable

3

ng-term Goal

onomic activityhe ocean for avour nation’s poe routine searc

activities provmanaging the limited resouresires to undersfleet data colleAbt Associateess the cost-eff

t data collectionupports. For ealeet support/feect provides, and

Century Fleet.

development of ice areas. The f

er of fleet-depen

Fleet

ms

s

ls

y to resume. Adviation disastersorts and waterwch, rescue, and

vide importantfleet, includin

rces available stand how to opection activitiess to 1) estimatefectiveness of u

n activities, theach of the 12 pred into the prodd how this resu

a 638 products following showsndent products th

t-Dependent Pr

dditional emergs, conducting sways in responsevacuation serv

t benefits to song expanding/cfor maintenanptimize the vals and leveragine the societal busing contract v

e project team froducts, we devduct, the users

ults in value to s

and services ths NOAA’s longthat directly sup

roducts

137

195

206

63

37

gency responsecientific surveyse to national srvices.

ociety and acrochanging missnce and lue of its marinng the use of cobenefits of a subvessels to

focused on 12 oveloped a qualof the product,society.

at support the g-term goals, perpport each goal.

e ys in ecurity

oss sion

ne fleet ontract bset of

of the litative , the

r

NOAA Fleet So

To select the iidentify produmeaning theywell-being foractivities acrovalue chains, hierarchical mline offices w

Next, the reseevaluation. Fothe portion ofmonetization

The

The

Datacontr

The with

Figure 2. Va

ocietal Benefits

initial subset oucts and service

y affect decisionr U.S. househo

oss NOAA linewe relied on in

model developewithin NOAA

earch team woror these producf this benefit thranked highest

product likely

product has a s

a are available tract

product has ouh additional mea

alue Chain Dia

Study, Final Rep

f 12 products fes that are highns made in impolds. In additione offices and minformation fromed by TPIO, an

rked with OMActs, we developat is attributablt among the fol

has significant

significant depe

to robustly qua

utput data that casures.

agram for NOA

port

for which we dehly dependent oportant sectors n, we aimed to ission service am the NOAA O

nd conducted in

AO and NOAAped monetary ele to the NOAAllowing criteria

t benefits for so

endency on dat

antify/monetize

can be validate

AA Products

4

eveloped valueon the fleet andof the economyselect a subset

areas. As descrObserving Systn-depth intervie

A’s Observing Sstimates of the

A Fleet. The pra (Table 2):

ociety

ta from the NO

e the societal be

d as being criti

e chains, we wod/or have a relay and/or result t of NOAA proribed in more dtem Integrated ews with subjec

Systems Counce benefits that throducts we sele

OAA Fleet

enefits of the p

ical for a specif

orked with OMatively large soin significant s

oducts that refledetail in SectionAnalysis (NOSct matter exper

cil to select fivethe product proected for furthe

product within t

fic use and sho

MAO and TPIOocietal benefit, savings or increct the many din 2, to develop SIA-II) Value Trts from the var

e products for fovides, and estimer evaluation an

the scope of th

ows improveme

O to

reased ifferent the Tree, a rious

further mated nd

his

ent

NOAA Fleet So

In addition to product -fish study, we leareffort, OMAO

The second coThis componeselected data available infousing the existhe study usesavailable at thwell as informproviders, bot

Rep1.3The remainde

Sect

Sectfurth

SectFleet

Sect

App

Appinclu

Appcond

Appaffili

ocietal Benefits

the five produstock assessmerned that NMFO will incorpor

omponent of thent of the studycollection activ

ormation on thesting capacity os cost data for the outset of thismation, both quth private and p

port Organier of this report

ion 2 presents t

ion 3 summarizher evaluation.

ion 4 summarizt and contract v

ion 5 provides

endix A contai

endix B contaiuding supportin

endix C providducted as part o

endix D providiations of the d

Study, Final Rep

ucts included inents conducted S recently initi

rate the results

his study is an ay includes sevevities using cone capacity and aof the NOAA Fthe NOAA Flees project. It also

uantitative and public sector.

ization t describes the g

the value chain

zes the results

zes and presenvessels for spec

a summary of

ins the full valu

ns the full repong details.

des a summary of the cost-effec

des the names odozens of NOA

port

n this study, theby the Nationa

iated research tof NMFS’ ana

assessment the eral quantitativentract vessels aavailability of cFleet to the costet for fiscal yeao relies on costqualitative, fro

general method

ns for each of th

of the economi

ts the findings cific data collec

key findings

ue chain write u

ort on the cost-e

of the project tctiveness analy

of the authors oAA subject matt

5

e project team aal Marine Fisheto estimate the lysis, when it i

efficiency ande case studies aas a substitute tocontract vesselt of using contrar 2015, the mot data from NO

om interviews w

dology and resu

he 12 products

ic valuation for

of the cost-effection activities

ups for the 12 p

effectiveness o

team’s intervieysis.

of this report, thter experts who

also recommeneries Service (Nvalue of this p

is completed, w

d cost-effectiveassessing the coo NOAA’s mals. The case sturact vessels. Asost recent year

OAA’s recent cwith NOAA su

ults of our rese

s and services th

r the five produ

fectiveness anals.

products we an

of using NOAA

ews with contra

he project teamo contributed to

nded monetizatNMFS). Howeroduct. To avo

with the finding

eness of the useost-effectivene

arine fleet. It alsudies compare ts a basis for anfor which comontracts with v

ubject matter ex

earch, as follow

hat the project

ucts and servic

lysis, comparin

nalyzed as part

A ships versus c

act vessel provi

m from OMAOo the report.

tion of a sixth Never, during thioid duplication gs of this resear

e of contract veess of conductinso summarizesthe marginal co

nalysis, this pormplete cost datavessel providerxperts and vess

ws:

team analyzed

ces we selected

ng the use of N

of this research

contract vessel

iders, which w

O, and the name

NOAA s of rch.

essels. ng s ost of rtion of a were s, as

sel

d.

for

NOAA

h.

s,

we

es and


6

Table 2. NOAA Products and Services Evaluated for NOAA Fleet Societal Benefits Study9

Value Chain/NOAA

Product Qualitatively

Assessed

NOAA Mission Service

Area

NOAA Line

Office/Owner

Societal

Benefits

Dependence

on ship‐

based data

collection

Value can

be

assessed

Output/

value is

validated

1. CORAL REEFS: Coral

Reef Status and

Trends Report

RESILIENT COASTS –

Res i l ience to

Coasta l Hazards and

Cl imate Change

NOS/Coral Reef

Conservation

Program

Med/High Medium Yes Yes

2. SEA LEVEL RISE: Sea

Level Rise Viewer


Res i l ience to

Coasta l Hazards and

Cl imate Change

NOS/Office for

Coasta l

Management

High Med/Low Yes Yes

3. BATHYMETRY/

HYDROGRAPHIC

SURVEYS: Nautical

Chart Products


Marine

Transportation

NOS/Office of Coast

SurveyMed/High High Yes Yes

4. SEASONAL

FORECASTS: El Nino

Southern Oscil lation

(ENSO) Outlook

CLIMATE – Cl imate

Predictions and

Projections

NWS/Nationa l

Centers for

Environmenta l

Prediction/Cl imate

Prediction Center

High Medium Yes Yes

5. ECOSYSTEM

MANAGEMENT:

National Marine

Sanctuary Conditions

Report


Planning and

Management

NOS/Office of

Nationa l Marine

Sanctuaries

Med/High Medium Yes Yes

6. FISHERIES

MANAGEMENT:

Fisheries Stock

Assessments

HEALTHY OCEANS –

Fisheries

Monitoring

Assessment and

Forecast

NMFS/Office of

Science and

Technology

Medium High Yes Yes

7. TSUNAMIS:

Tsunamis Inundation

Forecast Model

WEATHER READY

NATION ‐ Tsunami

OAR/Paci fic Marine

Environmenta l

Laboratory

High Med/Low Likely Yes

8. HARMFUL ALGAL

BLOOMS (HABS): HAB

Forecasts and

Mitigation Capability

(Gulf of Maine)


Coasta l Water

Qual i ty

NOS/Nationa l

Centers for Ocean

Coasta l Science

Medium Med/Low Likely Yes

9. HYPOXIA: Hypoxia

Watch (Gulf of

Mexico)


Coasta l Water

Qual i ty

NESDIS/Nationa l

Centers for

Environmenta l

Information

Med/Low High No Yes

10. OCEAN NOISE:

Ocean Noise Mapping

HEALTHY OCEANS –

Protected Species

Monitoring

OAR/ Paci fic Marine

Environmenta l

Laboratory

Medium Medium No Yes

9 Assessing the value of products with a “No” ranking would require original data collection beyond the scope of this project.

NOAA Fleet So

2. Value This section coservices that dchain, we desc

How Segm How The

bene

To develop theon how data frused informatiNOSIA-II is a mission servicunderstand theorganized base

The followingproduct, key udetailed value value.

Co2.1Product BackProgram (CRCother more detdevelopment, CRCP, while tsampling methnational pictur

Dependency oobservation sythe Status and NOAA projectclimate indicat

Using NOAA methodology tpersonal dive bcoral reef moncan cover the lProgram.

Users: The Stadecisions to alReport Card, athe ecosystemmaking spherepublic.

ocietal Benefits

of Producontains a summ

depend on data ccribe:

w data from the fments of society

w users make decoutcomes or va

efits that these p

e value chains, wrom the NOAA ion from TPIO’hierarchical mo

ce impacts. Basee impact of singed on NOAA’s

sections providusers, and the so

chain descriptio

ral Reefs: kground: NOAACP), is developintailed reports fothat will providthe more detailehodologies acrore of coral reef h

on NOAA Fleeystems over a w

Trends Report ts. Ocean profiltors.

ships and obserthat underpins thboats, are more

nitoring could nolong distances a

atus and Trendsllocate resourceand the more de’s health. Thesee, the data and in

Study, Final Rep

cts and Semary of the valuecollected from N

fleet feed into thy that use the procisions based onlues resulting frroducts provide

we conducted inFleet informs ths NOSIA-II Vaodel that documed on a survey ogle or multiple o

Strategic Plan G

de a summary oocietal benefits aons, as well as d

Coral ReA’s National Cong Coral Reef S

or local resourcede a summary ofed reports informss jurisdictions,health.

t: The Report Cide geographic Cards is heavily

le data collected

rvation systems he national statuexpensive and

ot be done withand access the re

s Report Card ws to coral reef p

etailed jurisdictioe management andicators also p

port

rvices Depe chain descriptiNOAA ships an

he product oduct n the informatiorom those decise to society.

n-depth interviehe product, the

alue Tree to bettments the relationof more than 50observing systemGoals and 26 as

f the value chaiassociated with diagrams that tr

ef Status aoral Reef MonitStatus and Trende managers. Thef standardized inm the managem, CRCP could n

Cards and underregion. The stray reliant on bend during NOAA

to perform dataus and trends rescarce, limiting

hout the use of Nemote locations

will be viewed bprotection. Educonal reports, to

actions protect cprovide useful in

7

pendent onions that the prod/or observing n

on the product pions. These dec

ews with NOAAusers of the pro

ter understand hnship between d0 NOAA subjec

ms on the key prsociated missio

ns for each of ththe product (sumace the flow of

and Trendtoring Program ds Report Cardse Status and Trendicators for all

ment of specific cnot roll-up indica

rlying indicatorsatified random s

nthic and other hA ship marine bio

a collection helpeport. Other shipg the timeframe NOAA vessels. Fs associated with

y U.S. Congrescators and local

monitor reefs acoral reefs and thnformation for a

n the NOAoject team devenetworks that th

provides cision outcomes

A subject matteroduct, and the prhow data from thdata sources, mct matter expertroducts and serv

on service areas.

he 12 products, mmarized in Tadata from the N

ds Report (NCRMP), as p

s for high-level ends Report Carl U.S. coral reefcoral reef areas.ators across site

s require the colsampling designhabitat mappingological survey

ps the CRCP adp-based data colfor critical samFor example, Nh the Pacific Re

ssional leaders aresource manag

and design eductheir associated academic and pr

AA Fleet loped for 12 NOhe ships maintai

s or values ultim

r experts, who product’s value the fleet support

mission requiremts, NOSIA-II allvices it supports.

including a briable 3). AppendNOAA Fleet thr

part of the Coradecision-maker

rds are a new prf jurisdictions m. Prior to this efes and therefore

llection of data n that NCRMP ug surveys, perforys also feed into

dhere to the stanllection options

mpling. Some effNOAA vessels aeef Assessment

and NOAA leadgers will use theation programs benefits. Outsidrivate researche

OAA products ain. For each val

mately represent

provided informto society. We ats each product.

ments, and respeclows NOAA to s. The model is

ef description odix A contains mrough to the pro

al Reef Conservrs, along with mroduct, currently

monitored by NOffort to standarde could not prov

by multiple uses to collect drmed in part by the report card

ndardized sampls, such as contraforts associated

are the only shipand Monitoring

dership as they me Status and Trethat further enh

de of the decisioers, as well as th

and lue

the

mation also

ctive

of the more duct’s

ation many y under OAA’s dize vide a

data for

’s

ling act

with ps that g

make ends hance on-he

NOAA Fleet So

ocietal Benefits Study, Final Repport

8

NOAA Fleet Soocietal Benefits Study, Final Repport

9

NOAA Fleet So

Benefits to Soopportunity fovalues (such ato-pay for thecoral reefs.

Several studiecommissionedstates and terrindicated that(2016 USD),1

protection andexistence of d

Sea2.2Product Backpopulous, anderosion, habitweb-based macorrespondingand socioeconadaptation opNOAA’s Offi

Dependency geospatial datInundation FoNOAA Fleet)NOAA Fleet incorporates tgauge observathe SLR View

Several other Geological SuProducts and performed maVulnerability

Users: Primarscientists and flooding. Sevplanning. Forcity. As part oplanners and ereceived a coafrom the SLR

10 Brander, L. MCoral Reef Con11 Unless otherConsumer Pric12 LIDAR is a r

ocietal Benefits

ociety: Coral ror recreational as snorkeling oe existence of c

es have estimatd a study with tritories with cot the total econo11 including dird habitat functidiverse natural

a Level Rise:kground: Sea d economicallytat loss, and seaap viewing toog data, and expnomics. This intions and strateice for Coastal

on NOAA Fleta for US coastorecast Model p). VDatum, a secollects into bathese DEMs, asations, coastal

wer as new data

federal agenciurvey provides Services condu

apping for seveResearch Insti

ry users of the engineers inteeral U.S. comm

r example, begiof this process, engineers usingastal resilience

R viewer into a

M., Van Beukerinservation Progrrwise indicated, vce Index. remote sensing m

Study, Final Rep

reefs provide thactivities. The

or recreational foral reefs; and

ted these benefthe objective o

oral reefs.10 Theomic value of crect use values ions for commeecosystems (no

: Sea Level Level Rise thre

y viable areas inawater intrusionol that provides planatory informnformation alloegies. As of 20Management (

eet: NOAA shital areas (note tproduct describeparate softwarathymetric-topos well as LIDAflooding thresha inputs as beco

es and educatiobase elevation

uct analyses thaeral outlying coitute provides S

SLR viewer inrested in assess

munities have ainning in 2013,OCM demons

g the SLR viewgrant to implepost-Hurricane

ing, P. 2013. Thram, Silver Sprinvalues in this rep

method that stan

port

he U.S. with vase goods and sfishing) and assamenity value

fits for the U.S.of producing ane results of thiscoral reef servisuch as swimmercial and recreon-use values).

Rise Viewereatens many con the country. Ln. The Sea Levcoastal manag

mation concernows users to ide15, the SLR vi(OCM) develop

ps contribute tothat the Nauticabed in Section 2re tool developographic Digita

AR12 and Condiholds, and otheome available.

onal institutionn data for Louisat support tool’oastal territorieSocial Vulnerab

nclude coastal psing communitalready incorpo, the City of Chstrated sea levewer. The City suement the stratee Sandy compr

e Total Economng, MD. port updated to 2

nds for Light Det 10

aluable goods aervices in turn sociated tourisms, which are in

. using standardn aggregate totas study, which ices in the U.S.

ming, diving, aneational fisherie.

r oastal areas in tLow-lying coasvel Rise and Cogers, communitning sea level rientify potentialiewer covers alps and updates

o the SLR Viewal Charts produ2.7 also depended by multipleal Elevation Mitioned DEMs (er jointly develo

ns contribute dasiana, and the N’s flood frequens, and the Univbility Index dat

planners, floodpty-level vulneraorated the SLR harleston, Southl rise effects onubsequently de

egy. In another ehensive resilie

mic Value of U.S.

2016 USD were

tection and Rang

and services incprovide differem benefits; non

ncreases in prop

d economic tecal economic vaincluded a met amounts to mond snorkeling; es; and welfare

the U.S., includstal areas are esoastal Floodingty planners, andise inundation,l community vull coastal territos/maintains the

wer through thuct described ind on hydrograp

e NOAA line ofModels (DEMs)

(DEMs conditioped inputs, in

ata to the SLR vNOAA Center ency capabilitieversity of Southta.

dplain managersability and planViewer or und

h Carolina, anan streets, landmeveloped a Seacase, the City ence plan.

. Coral Reefs: A

updated using th

ging http://ocean

cluding food, cent types of econ-use values, superty values du

chniques. In 20alue for coral reta-analysis of eore than $3.95 indirect use va

e values associ

ding some of thspecially vulne

g Impacts Viewd other users w, flood frequenulnerabilities anory in the U.S. SLR Viewer.

he collection of n Section 2.3 aphic survey datffices, combinefor specific ar

ioned to a highnto the SLR Vie

viewer. For exfor Operationa

es. The Universh Carolina Haz

s, municipal renning for sea lederlying data inalyzed sea levemarks, and infraa Level Rise strof New York i

A Review of the L

he Bureau of La

nservice.noaa.go

coastal protectioonomic benefituch as willingn

ue to proximity

013, CRCP eefs from the sexisting literatubillion per yea

alues such as coated with the

he most develoerable to floodi

wer (SLR Viewwith visuals, cy, marsh impand assess approexcept Alaska

f hydrographic and the Tsunamta provided by es the data thateas. OCM

her specificationewer. OCM up

xample, the U.Sal Oceanographsity of Hawaii zards and

epresentatives, evel rise and conto their adaptael rise impacts oastructure to cirategy, and has incorporated da

Literature. NOA

abor Statistics

ov/facts/lidar.htm

on, and ts: use ness-to

even ure, ar oastal

oped, ing,

wer) is a

acts, opriate .

and mi

the t the

n), tide pdates

S. hic

and oastal ation on the ity

ata

AA

ml

NOAA Fleet So

Other users indata for resea

Benefits to Sosea level rise.contingency p

Several studieand NOAA’s to flooding naadaptation actcumulatively

Bat2.3Product Backnautical chartto provide nauHydrographicsafe and efficscientific, andnations’ coastcommercial mNavigational information th

Dependency bathymetry damission). Theprocessed datSea Level RisSection 2.7 alany hazardoucorrespondingappropriate L

NOAA also pgeneral, it is twhen such cohydrographic Regulations (FTitle IX whera contract mepotential contdata from hydsources of infand the U.S. C

13 Rao, K. 2016http://www.zill14EPA. 2015. CAtmospheric P5/3/2017.

ocietal Benefits

nclude universirch.

ociety: The SL Users can eva

plans to protect

es have estimatSLR maps, est

ationally by 21tions (plus somover time throu

thymetry/Hykground: NOAt products that cutical charts anc Services Imprient maritime t

d commercial ats. Nautical Ch

mariners. ThereCharts (ENC).hat can help wa

on NOAA Fleata NOAA useese ship's officeta to NOAA hyse Viewer prodlso depend on hs features foung nautical chartocal Notice to

purchases hydrothe intent of NOontracts are the

data and servicFAR) and the Fre appropriate. chanism for ustractors have spdrographic survformation incluCoast Guard an

6. “Climate Chanlow.com/researcClimate Change Programs, EPA 4

Study, Final Rep

ities, scientific

LR viewer allowaluate potential t critical infrast

ted the costs oftimates that app00.13 And, the

me additional cough 2100 (disc

ydrographicAA’s National cover the coast

nd related hydrorovement Act otransportation aactivities, coastharts come in twe are two digita The RNC is a arn mariners of

eet: Four ships s to develop na

ers and crew usydrographers anduct described ihydrographic sund during these t right away. TMariners to en

ographic surveyOAA to contracmost appropriaces from qualifFederal PropertCommonly kno

se in situations pecialized technveys services coude the U.S. Arnd the U.S. Pow

nge and Housing

ch/climate-changin the United Sta

430-R-15-001. A

port

and engineerin

ws users to quiimpact on coa

tructure and mi

f sea level rise aproximately 1.U.S. EPA estimosts) associatedcounted at 3%).

c Surveys: NOcean Service

ts of U.S. statesographic informof 1998 (and amand commerce.al zone manag

wo forms, papeal formats for el

simple digital f dangers ahead

in the NOAA autical charts (sse special technnd cartographerin Section 2.2 aurvey data provsurveys that mhe U.S. Coast G

nsure that the pu

y data and othect for hydrograate and cost efffied sources in ty and Adminiown as the "Brwhere the profnical expertiseontractors and rmy Corps of Ewer Squadrons.

g: Will a Rising ge-underwater-hoates: Benefits of

Available: https://

11

ng groups, priva

ckly and easilystal properties itigate property

and coastal floo9 million homemates that natiod with sea level.14

Nautical Che (NOS), Offices and territoriesmation by the Cmendments). T. They also proement and plan

er and digital. Dlectronic chartsimage of the p

d and provide o

Fleet are dedicsee Table 1 fornologies to acqrs, who compiland the Tsunamvided by the N

might endanger Guard Navigatublic is made a

er information aphic services wfective methodaccordance wistrative Servicerooks Act" for Afessional nature. NOAA obtainfrom OCS’s N

Engineers (USA.

Tide Sink all Hoomes-12890/. Af Global Action. /www.epa.gov/c

ate entities, and

y visualize poteand associated

y damage.

oding. Zillow, es worth $882 onal costs of prl rise and storm

hart Producte of Coast Survs, as well as theCoast and Geod

The charts serveovide importantnning, and homDigital charts ars, Raster Nauti

paper chart, whother informati

cated to hydrogr a listing of eacquire and procele it into the nami Inundation F

NOAA Fleet). Cvessels to NOA

tion Center alsoaware of the ch

for nautical chwhen qualified d of conductingith its legal authes Act of 1949Architect/Engie of the servicens approximate

Navigation RespACE) surveys o

omes?” Zillow.cAccessed Februar

U.S. Environmecira/climate-actio

d NGOs who u

ential coastal fld resources and

using its propebillion are at riroperty abando

m surge will am

ts vey (OCS) proe Great Lakes.detic Survey Ae as navigationt information f

meland securityre more populaical Charts (RN

hile the ENC inion critical to a

graphic surveysch NOAA vessss data on boar

ation’s nauticalForecast ModeCrew members AA cartographo publishes this

hange.

harts from severd commercial sog these functionthorities, the Fe9 (40 U.S.C. 54ineering (A/E) es to be procureely half of its hponse Teams. Oof Federal chan

com. Available: ry 5, 2017. ental Protection on-benefits-coas

use the viewer a

looding due to d help focus

erty value databisk of being losonment and promount to $5 trill

duces over 1,0 NOAA is auth

Act of 1947 andnal aids, supporfor at-sea enginy efforts along oar, particularly NC) and Electrocludes much m

a safe passage.

s that provide sel and its primrd. They send t charts (note thl product descrimmediately r

hers, who updats information i

ral other sourceources exist, anns. NOAA procederal Acquisit41 et seq.), inclu

contracts, Titleed requires that

hydrographic suOther significannels and ancho

Agency, Office stal-property. Ac

and

future

base st due otective lion

00 horized d the rting neering, our among

onic more

mary the hat the ribed in eport te the in the

es. In nd cures tion uding e IX is t

urvey ant orages,

of ccessed

NOAA Fleet So

Users: FederaFor example, waters on eacthey operate. ENCs. Recreaor GPS mappcharts are alsoneed additionshoreline infr

NOAA’s nautpolitical bounNOAA produprivate sectorinfrastructure

Benefits to Sonavigate blindhazards with cproduct can btime is expens

Because of unvalue is to exaAuthorities, Uincome and loinformation.

In addition, byexpertise, whimaintain overresponsible.

Sea2.4Product Backtemperatures,describes a yewhich sea-surtemperatures in tropical raindroughts, hurrpublic and priClimate PrediEl Nino and Lprecipitation p

Dependency Atmosphere/Ooceanographineeded for theon TAO moor

15 American Asports.org/advoc

ocietal Benefits

al and internatiThe U.S. Coas

ch trip (e.g., cruLarger vessels ational boaters ing applicationo mandatory fo

nal navigationalastructure as th

tical charts are ndaries (e.g., EEucts and servicer. This includes, tsunami inund

ociety: By provdly and can chaconfidence, wh

be estimated basive, nautical c

nique use of naamine the valu

U.S. seaports suocal consumpti

y collecting hyich ensures tharall data quality

asonal Foreckground: The convective raiear in which serface temperatuaffect seasonalnfall affect wearicanes, tornadivate sector betiction Center (CLa Nina conditipredictions for

on NOAA FleOcean (TAO) ac and meteorole TAO buoys trings include w

ssociation of Porcating/content.as

Study, Final Rep

ional regulationst Guard requiruise lines, ferrie

regulated undeare not require

ns from third-paor the internatiol support. Nauthey enter ports

also the authorEZ). The informes, as well as prs products and idation modelin

viding the mosart out the safeshich in turn allosed on avoided

charts also prov

autical charts ine of U.S. ports upport nearly $ion (2014 USD

ydrographic datat it remains an y and provides

casts: El NinEl Nino – Sou

infall, surface aa-surface tempures are cooler l tropical rainfaather patterns t

does, and other tter prepare forCPC) creates anions. CPC usesthe U.S.

eet: One of the array. The TAOlogical data. Thto transmit the dwind speed, air

rt Authorities. Uspx?ItemNumbe

port

ns require manyres commerciales, tug boats) toer the Safety ofed to use NOAAarty software conal shipping intical charts are with which the

ritative source mation containroducts/plannininformation rel

ng, and more.

st up to date naust and most effows them to avd losses from covide value in te

n the national anto the national

$4.6 trillion in tD).15 This would

ta using NOAAinformed consbenefit to all p

no – Southeruthern Oscillatiair pressure andperatures are abthan average. D

all patterns fromthroughout the weather-relate

r ENSO-relatednd disseminates the ENSO Ou

main inputs toO array consistshe NOAA Fleedata from thesetemperature, re

Undated. Exportser=21150. Acces

12

y vessels to carl and light como carry large-scf Life at Sea coA nautical char

companies that ndustry. As newessential to heley are unfamili

for maritime rened in NOAA’sng efforts develated to protect

utical informatficient route to void unnecessarollisions and grrms of savings

nd international economy. Acctotal economic d be significant

A ships, NOAAsumer of the hyproducts that de

rn Oscillatioon (ENSO) cycd atmospheric cbove the long-teDuring El Ninom Indonesia to world, includind events, as we

d conditions in es the ENSO Outlook and othe

o the ENSO Ous of 70 buoys m

et maintains thee moorings elecelative humidit

s, Jobs & Economssed 5/3/2017.

rry nautical chammercial sector

cale, detailed ponvention are rrts; however, thare based on Nw cargo ships clping ship crewiar.

egulation (inclus nautical charteloped by otherted species hab

tion, NOAA hetheir destinatiory slow-downsrounding, injur

s in the amount

al shipping inducording the Amactivity, and ptly lower witho

A develops and ydrographic daepend on hydro

on Outlook cle represents acirculation oveerm average, wo and La Nina the west coast

ng the frequencell as temperatueach season, N

Outlook. The ENer tools to infor

utlook is data frmoored in the Pe TAO array inctronically throty, salinity prof

mic Growth. Av

arts and relatedvessels that tra

paper charts of required by fedhey often use m

NOAA’s nauticcontinue to inc

ws understand w

uding accidentts also directly r government abitat, placement

elps ensure thaton. They can als. Thus, much ory and possiblyt of time spent

ustry, one waymerican Associprovide $1.2 bilout up-to-date n

d maintains its hata that it purchographic data fo

annual changeser the equatoriawhile La Nina dyears, changest of South Amecy and severityure and precipi

NOAA NationaNSO Outlook drm seasonal tem

rom the TropicPacific Ocean tncluding the solough satellites.files, sea surfac

vailable: http://w

d NOAA produansit the same Uthe waters in w

deral law to usemobile chart plocal charts. Nautcrease in size, thwater depths an

t disputes) and informs severa

agencies and tht of marine

t ships do not lso avoid navigof the value of y death. Becausat sea.

y to understand iation of Port llion in personanautical chart

hydrographic hases. This helpfor which NOA

s in sea surfaceal Pacific. El Nidescribes a yeas in Pacific Oceerica. These chay of storms, floitation. To helpal Weather Servdescribes the stmperature and

cal that collect lar panels and r Basic measurece temperature

www.aapa-

ucts. U.S.

which e otters tical hey nd

al e

gational this se ship

their

al

ps AA is

e ino

ar in ean anges

oods, p the vice’s tatus of

radios ements

e, and

NOAA Fleet So

subsurface temNWS models

The ENSO Oprovides data Hurricane Oudependent dat

Users: The instakeholders. Department oagencies whomanagement Outlook to maproducts thereadverse effectthose related t

There are alsoagriculture, redecisions on wdecisions abopreparatory d

Benefits to Soepisode is critexample, Adaper year in ec$228 million gate value of

ENSO-relatedbillions of dolprepare for prOutlooks to m

Eco2.5Product Backthese protectesanctuaries suunderwater ar

National Marwithin marinetheir resourceupdated everymanagement r

16 Adams, R., KInformation. C

ocietal Benefits

mperatures. Octhat are also u

utlook also depon ocean subs

utlook product ita, the ENSO O

nformation provPublic sector u

of Defense, U.Sse operations oagencies, such ake decisions ae are informed ts from El Ninoto agriculture,

o many private etail, energy, fiwhich crops to ut quantities ofecisions (e.g., u

ociety: Severaltical in helpingams et al. (1995onomic benefit(2016 USD). Atotal crop prod

d forecasts of thllars in damageredicted eventsmake appropria

osystem Mankground: NOAed marine ecosyupport endangercheological sit

ine Sanctuary Ce sanctuaries fre protection andy five years to eresponses.

K. Bryant, B. Mcontemporary Ec

Study, Final Rep

cean profile infused to inform t

pends on data fsurface temperais also dependeOutlook relies o

vided in the ENusers of this infS. Agency for Inor decisions areas the Tampa

about reservoir by the ENSO O

o or La Nina. Owater resource

sector users ofsheries, and ouplant and when

f seasonal itemundertake main

l studies have sg farmers and o5) found that imts for the agricu

At the time the duction for the s

he potential fore costs. For exa, which can red

ate preparatory

nagement: NAA manages 1ystems encompered species andtes.

Condition Repom outside pred improvementexamine trends

cCarl, D. Legler

conomic Policy.

port

formation, whicthe ENSO Outl

from the ARGOatures, salinity,ent on the TAOon a variety of

NSO Outlook aformation inclunternational Dee impacted by sBay Water Autreleases. Emer

Outlook to prepOther state and es, transportatio

f CPC outlooksutdoor recreation to plant them

ms to stock. Indintenance to pre

shown that predther types of bu

mproving ENSOultural sector instudy was condsoutheast regio

r extreme climaample, nationalduce response cdecisions, resu

National Ma3 National Marpass more thand a variety of h

orts serve as anessures. The Cot goals, and infos, identify how

r, J. O’Brien, A. ISSN 1074-3529

13

ch is collected look.

O array, a glob and velocity. T

O and ARGO arin-situ and sate

affects the decisude NOAA, Feevelopment, Ushort-term climthority, use prergency managepare and allocalocal agencies

on and energy.

s that use the Eon/tourism. For

m. Private retailividual househoepare for anticip

dicting the life usinesses plan O forecasts by n the southeastducted, these e

on.16

ate episodes likl and state emecosts. Individu

ulting in avoide

arine Sancturine Sanctuarie 600,000 squar

habitats ranging

n important tooondition Reporform future man

the status of v

Solow, and R. W9. Vol XIII: 10 –

directly from N

al array of 3,80These floats arrrays – see Secellite data to de

sions and manaederal EmergenU. S. Departmenmate variations.edicted precipitement agenciesate resources to affected by EN

ENSO outlook ar example, CPClers or grocery

holds also use Cpated winter st

cycle and strenfor, avoid or m33% would re

t U.S., while a estimates repres

ke floods and dergency manageual households aed damage cost

uary Condies and two natire miles of marg from coral re

ol for managingrts help managenagement plan

various resource

Weiher. 1995. Va– 19.

NOAA vessels

00 free-driftingre deployed by ction 2.11) In aevelop predicti

agement actionncy Managemennt of Agricultur. For example, tation levels fos use informatioo areas that wilNSO-related co

as a prediction C outlooks canchains can use

CPC products totorms).

ngth of a Pacifmitigate potentiesult in $151 m100% accuratesented about 2

droughts can alers can use CPand businessests.

itions Reporional marine mrine and Great efs, to deep-sea

g and protectiners determine is for the sanctues has changed

alue of Improve

, is assimilated

g profiling floatthe NOAA Fle

addition to fleeton products.

ns of many diffnt Agency, re, and state anwater resource

orm the ENSO on from CPC ll likely experieonditions inclu

tool. These incn inform farmere the data makeo make approp

fic warm or colial losses. For

million (2016 USe forecast woulto 3 percent of

so save the U.SPC forecasts to bs can also use C

rts monuments. Tog

Lakes waters. Ta canyons, to

ng the resourcesf they are achieuary. The repord, and establish

d Long-Range W

d into

ts that eet (the t-

ferent

nd local e

ence de

clude rs’ e priate

ld

SD) ld yield f farm-

S. better

CPC

gether, The

s eving rts are

h

Weather

NOAA Fleet So

Dependency Reports. For eThey also colabundance, ansource of ocea

While most sabe critical for (i.e. they can NOAA vesselfor longer pernot accessible

Users: The pruses data frommanagement

The Conditionin the Conditithe public abothem. Universand to fill in g

Benefits to Soeducation proprovide. Natiorecreational aecosystem dirand indirectlynational marineconomies fro

Fish2.6Product Backstock assessmabundance of Marine Fisherwith data and

NOAA fisherregulations thFishery ManaConservation international oof fish stocks

Dependency abundance, caand to collect fishermen’s lofish stock data

17 NOAA Offichttp://sanctuari

ocietal Benefits

on NOAA Fleexample, NOAlect data througnd distribution.anographic dat

anctuaries havegathering datahandle weatherls also have sufriods. This alloe using the sanc

rimary purposem the Conditionactions related

n Reports are aion Reports helout resources insities and indepgaps that furthe

ociety: The Naograms related tonal Marine Sa

activities such arectly but who y to coastal econe sanctuaries om diverse acti

heries Manakground: NOA

ment involves cof fishery stocks ries Service (Nresources to as

ries managers phat prevent overagement CouncAct to set annu

organizations a.

on NOAA Fleatch, and biologbiological data

ogbooks, obsera is a primary p

ce of National Mies.noaa.gov/scie

Study, Final Rep

eet: The NOAAAA vessels colle

gh observation. NOAA weathta for the Cond

e access to on-sa in seasons andr and sea statesfficient crew tows sanctuary sctuary vessel b

e of the Conditin Reports to deto resource pro

also an importalp sanctuary stan the sanctuarypendent non-prer contribute to

ational Marine to marine sanctanctuaries provas fishing and svalue their exisnomies that sergenerate approivities like com

agement: FiAA conducts stollecting, analyand, to the ext

NMFS) managessess approxim

primarily use Nrfishing and prcils in the U.S.,ual catch limitsalso rely on NO

eet: NOAA usegical. NMFS ua that inform strvations from fpurpose for 10

Marine Sanctuarieence/socioecono

port

A Fleet provideect data throug

n stations and acher buoys, manydition Reports o

site vessels, thed locations whes during which o be able to contaff to spend mecause of the d

ion Reports is tevelop Sanctuaotection, conse

ant tool for the aff design site-

y, why they are rofit organizatioo management a

Sanctuaries Cotuaries, which

vide a range of snorkeling) andstence. Furtherrvice the activi

oximately $8 bimmercial fishing

isheries Stoctock assessmenyzing, and repotent possible, ps roughly 475

mately 200 stock

NOAA stock asrovide optimal , which are requs for their regioOAA’s stock as

es three primaryuses NOAA Fletock the assess

fishing vessels, of the 16 ships

es. 2015. Nationomic/factsheets/w

14

es key data thatgh seafloor mapcoustic surveysy of which are

of each sanctua

ey serve differeere conditions small craft wo

nduct operationmore days at seadistance from p

to inform sanctry Managemen

ervation science

sanctuaries’ edspecific educatimportant, andons often use thand protection

ondition Reporin turn helps tobenefits, includ

d benefits accrur, many on-site ities. For exampillion annually g, research and

ck Assessments to help manorting populatioredict future trfish stocks (theks each year.

sessments to seyield for commuired by mandaon based on besssessments for n

y types of dataeet vessels and ments. Catch dand telephone

s in NOAA’s fl

nal Marine Sanctwelcome.html. A

t supports manypping surveys ts on fish and mserviced by th

ary.

ent roles than thare too harsh f

ould be limited ns 24 hours pera, and reach de

ports.

tuary managemnt Plans, whiche, research, and

ducation and oution and outread what behaviohe Condition Rof marine reso

rts directly conto protect the imding on-site usuing to individue activities gene

mple, NOAA res(2015 USD) in

d recreation/tou

ent nage commercion informationrends in stock ae number has v

et catch limits amercial fishermate of the Magst available scinon-federal an

a to develop stacontract vesse

data typically ce interviews. Cofleet (see Table

tuaries and LocaAccessed 5/3/201

y conclusions ithat characteriz

marine mammalhe NOAA Fleet

the NOAA Fleefor the operatio

under a small r day, and can meeper parts of th

ment decisions.h guide future pd education.

utreach programach programs thoral changes areReports to identources.

tribute to regulmportant benefiser benefits (e.guals who do noerate income disearch indicaten local coastal aurism-related ac

ial and recreation to determine cabundance. NOvaried as new s

and to set and men. This includgnuson-Stevensientific data. Cond joint jurisdic

andard fish stocels to conduct acomes from docollecting abund1 for a listing

al Economies. Av17.

in the Conditioze sanctuary hal species diverst, also serve as

et. NOAA vesson of smaller ve

craft advisory)maintain operahe sanctuary th

Specifically, Nplanning and

ms. The informhat teach membe needed to protify research ne

lations, policiesits the sanctuarg., through ot use the marinirectly to partic

es that togetherand ocean depectivities.17

onal fish speciechanges in the

OAA’s Nationaltocks are added

enforce other des eight Regios Fishery oastal, state andctional managem

ck assessmentsabundance survckside monitordance and bioloof each NOAA

vailable:

on abitat. sity, a

sels can essels ). ations hat are

NOAA

mation bers of otect eeds,

s, and ries

ne cipants , endent

es. A

l d),

onal

d ment

: veys, ring, ogical A

NOAA Fleet So

vessel and its collection.

Users: Fish stnecessary to mdata, stock asestablished tamuch catch ismanage non-Fmanaged stoc

Fish stock assof fish populaand scientists products suchnational databfish species ar

Benefits to Sopopulations th($54 billion wRecreational s

NOAA’s fish status informamore than woworth $400 mwould have to

In addition, sespecies, reflecsustainable ca

Tsu2.7Product Backof tsunami floreal-time tsunand the site-spevents. They

Dependency for EnvironmDEMs map ouhow tsunamisNCEI relies o

18 NMFS. 2016https://www.stAccessed 5/3/219 NOAA. 2016https://www.om

ocietal Benefits

primary missio

tock assessmenmaximize the losessments allow

argets, and adjus sustainable inFederal fish stocks that straddle

sessments also ation and catch and public age

h as the Living base that helps re under pressu

ociety: Effectivhat rely on them

without importssaltwater fishin

stock assessmation so that thould otherwise bmillion dollars. No reduce their c

everal studies hcting the value atch limits and

unamis: Tsukground: NOAooding in U.S. nami forecastinpecific TIMs, palso support co

on NOAA Flemental Informati

ut the elevations of various waon high resoluti

6. Fisheries Econ.nmfs.noaa.gov/

2017. 6. The NOAA Fmao.noaa.gov/sit

Study, Final Rep

on). These ship

nts support sustong-term sustaw scientists and

ust catch limits n general. In addocks. Internatioe international

enable regionatrends. This in

encies to develoOceans report,inform consum

ure and adjust t

ve managemenm for food conss) and 1.4 milliong generates $6

ments provide Rey can more acbe permitted. ANOAA estimat

catch quotas by

have shown thathat society plapreventing ove

unami InundAA’s Tsunami coastal regions

ng and to createplay an importaommunity risk

eet: The Inundaion (NCEI), pan of various feaave heights andion bathymetry

nomics of the UnAssets/economi

leet Plan: Buildites/default/files/

port

ps are equipped

tainable fisheriainable yield ofd regional fisheand stock targedition to fisher

onal managemeboundaries.

al management n turn helps theop research pri, which informmers of the susttheir consumpt

nt of fisheries issumption and ron jobs to the U61 billion in sal

Regional Fisheryccurately set caAs an example,tes that withou

y approximately

at U.S. residentaces on them. Ferfishing of key

dation ForecInundation Fo

s. These modele tsunami inundant role in comassessments, p

ation Forecast Mart of the Nationatures in a certa

d amplitudes wiy data, some of

nited States, 201cs/publications/F

ing NOAA’s 21s

/documents/The%15

d with special t

ies by providinf the fishery. Foeries managemets accordinglyries managemenent entities simi

councils to dee management ciorities. Stock as the public of tainability of seion or recreatio

s essential for trecreation. U.SU.S. economy les.18

y Managementatch limits, ther, 3.1 billion pou

ut the accurate sy 10%, a $40 m

ts are willing toFish stock assey species.

cast Modelsorecast Models s, also known a

dation maps (Tmmunity responplanning, and pr

Models dependnal Environmeain geographic ill translate into

f which is collec

4. NOAA NatioFEUS/FEUS-20

st Century Fleet. %20NOAA%20

technologies an

ng fisheries manor example, by

ment councils toy. The data allont councils, stailarly use the a

evelop short-, mcouncils develoassessments are

f the status of fieafood. This inonal fishing hab

the commerciaS. commercial f

each year (0.81

t Councils and reby allowing cunds of Walleystock assessmemillion annual i

o pay to protecessments contri

s are used to preas standby inun

TIMs) for specifnse and evacuatreparatory/miti

d on DEMs creental Satellite D area. This infoo inundation zocted from NOA

onal Marine Fish014/Report-and-c

Available: 0Fleet%20Plan_F

nd experienced

nagers with they providing histo compare the sows managers tates use stock aassessments to o

medium-, and loop appropriate e also used in oish stocks, and nformation allowabits accordingl

al fishing industfisheries contrib1 million jobs w

other fisheriescommercial fisye Pollock werents, regional fiimpact.19

ct many differenibute to this val

edict the potentndation modelsfic regions andtion activities digation actions

eated by NOAAData and Informormation is impones/levels. ToAA vessels (no

heries Service. Achapters/FEUS-2

Final_31OCT.pd

d crew to suppo

e information torical and currstatus of stocksto determine hoassessments to oversee jointly

ong-term projemanagement p

other NOAA FishWatch, a ws users to seely.

try as well as thbute $153 billiwithout import

s managers withherman to catc

re landed in 201ishery manager

nt types of fishlue by ensuring

tial height and s (SIMs), are u

d communities. during tsunami s.

A’s National Cmation Service.portant for kno

o develop the Dote that the Sea

Available: 2014-FINAL-v5

df Accessed 5/3/

ort data

rent s to ow

y-

ections plans,

e which

he on ts).

h stock ch 14, rs

h g

extent used in

SIMs,

enters .

owing DEMs,

Level

5.pdf.

/2017.

NOAA Fleet So

Rise Viewer phydrographic/

In addition tobathymetry dadata from the Tsunami (DAthroughout thWhile the fleeas 2014.

Users: Informrelated to tsunspecific TIMsTIMs to undeactions.

States and induse informatioinfrastructurepreparatory acuse this data t

Benefit to Soevents, therebeconomic losstsunami mitigdamage causeand/or mitigatlocation of theeffectiveness

However, welexample, expeCA in 1964 an11 deaths in Cin damage and1964 event diin impacts canresponse and value of the inforecasting abreducing losse

Har2.8Product Backalgae can groweffects on peodomestic animproblems in d

20 Personal comManager, on Ja

ocietal Benefits

product in Sect/bathymetry da

data from the ata collected byNational Wate

ART) network. Nhe U.S. and its tet does not curr

mation from thenami response s into evacuatioerstand how the

dividual commuon from SIMs , such as nuclections. There isto conduct furth

ociety: The Inunby decreasing thses, such as un

gation and respoed by tsunamistion actions hae tsunami, the aof the warning

ll-planned resperts often cite tnd 2011. A tsu

Crescent City, wd no deaths in tid not benefit frnnot all be attrimitigation plannundation forecbilities. The reses and injuries

rmful Algal kground: Algaw or “bloom” oople, fish, shellmal deaths, shedrinking water.

mmunication witanuary 5, 2017.

Study, Final Rep

tion 2.2 and theata provided by

NOAA Fleet, Ny private vesseer Level ObservNWLON is a nterritories. DARrently maintain

e Inundation Foand evacuationon plans for vare forecasted tsu

unities also useand TIMs to asar power plants also a large dher research on

ndation Forecahe impacts of tnecessary response practices , it is difficult td not been impamount of time

g system.

ponse actions anthe difference i

unami producedwhile a tsunamthe same locatirom having a reibuted to tsunamnning, as well acast is the inforsults of this resor deaths assoc

Blooms: Foae are simple pout of control cfish, marine m

ellfish toxicity,

th Rocky Lopes,

port

e Nautical Chary the NOAA Fl

NCEI also usesels to develop Dvation Networknetwork of 210RT is an array n the DART ne

orecast Modelsn. NOAA workrious tsunami s

unami wave hei

e SIMs and TIMssess inundatiots, water and wemand for the

n tsunamis, incl

ast Models helpthese events, inonse and evacuis still relativelto quantify the plemented. In ae available to im

nd mitigation ein damages assd by the 1964 G

mi produced by ion. These evenesponse plan inmi response, itas the value of rmation it provearch will imprciated with tsun

orecasts andplants that live icreating Harmf

mammals and biadverse public

National Tsuna

16

rts product desleet).

s coastal and mDEMs. To devek (NWLON) an0 long-term conof 39 buoy sys

etwork, NOAA

s directly informks with local emscenarios. Duriight will affect

MS to develop on risks and to mastewater infradata from SIMluding examini

p communities ncluding numbeuation costs avly unknown. Wdamages that w

addition, the exmplement resp

efforts can signociated with tw

Great Alaska Ethe 2011 Greatnts produced wn place, but thet does speak to information in

vides to academrove the effectinami events.

d Mitigationin both saltwatful Algal Bloomirds. There are c health effects

ami Hazard Mitig

scribed in Secti

marine LIDAR elop the inundand the Deep-Ontinuously operstems that detec ships have bee

ms communitymergency manaing an actual tst their commun

tsunami mitigamake decisionsastructure, and

Ms and TIMs froing ways to bet

better plan forer of lives lost, oided by more

While some studwould have occ

xtent of damageponse actions, th

nificantly reducwo tsunami eve

Earthquake caust Tohoku, Japa

waves with sime 2011 event dithe potential b

n models such amic researchersiveness of resp

n Capabilityter and freshwams (HABs), whseveral speciesincluding shel

gation Program A

ion 2.3 also dep

data, historic sation forecasts,

Ocean Assessmerating water levct and measureen charged with

y and regional pagers to conversunami, community, and take ap

ation plans. Fos about the locahospitals, and om U.S. univertter predict tsun

r and respond to property dama accurate forecdies have calcucurred if effectes depends on the accuracy of

ce the impacts oents that impacsed over $50 bian, earthquake r

milar amplitudesid.20 While thisbenefits associaas SIMs and TI, who are using

ponse/mitigatio

y, Gulf of Mater. In some cahich result in tos of HABs thatllfish poisoning

Administrator D

pend on the

soundings, and NOAA incorp

ent and Reportvel stations e tsunami waveh this task as re

planning effortsrt SIMs and siteunities referencppropriate resp

or example, planation of criticalimplement othrsities. Academnami threats.

o potential tsunage, and other casts. The valueulated the amoutive evacuationthe magnitude f the forecast, a

of tsunamis. Foted Crescent Cillion in damagresulted in $5 bs and duration. s significant deated with tsunamIMs. An additiog this data to im

on actions, furth

Maine ases, colonies ooxic or harmfult can lead to wig, and taste and

Deputy Program

porates ing of

es. ecently

s e-ce the ponse

nners l

her mics

nami

e of unt of ns and

and the

or City, ge and billion The crease mi onal mprove her

of l ild and d odor


17

HABs have occurred in all coastal areas of the U.S., with different species affecting different regions. This study focuses on HABs in the Gulf of Maine because NOAA ships contribute data that support HAB forecasts in this region and several studies have estimated the economic value of these forecasts. Blooms of the species Alexandrium fundyense in the Gulf of Maine have resulted in restrictions on commercial and recreational shell fishing. The toxins from Alexandrium fundyense can accumulate in shellfish, and if consumed by humans, can cause severe illness or death from paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP).

In response to HAB and hypoxia threats, Congress passed the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act in 1998, which led to the development and funding of integrated regional HAB and hypoxia research programs through NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (which is part of NOAA’s National Ocean Service). Today large regional ecosystem programs addressing HAB issues have been implemented in three areas of the U.S., including the Gulf of Maine, Gulf of Mexico (in Florida and Texas), and the Great Lakes. These programs make up the NNCCOS’s Harmful Algal Bloom Operational Forecast System (HAB-OFS).

The HAB-OFS forecasts assess and predict the extent of the algal blooms, allowing state and local managers to more effectively sample and monitor these areas. This allows managers to make decisions about beach closures, shell fishing restrictions, and other HAB-affected activities. In the Gulf of Maine, NOAA plans to transform the HAB-OFS from a pilot program started in 2008, to operational seasonal and weekly forecasts starting in 2017.

Dependency on NOAA Fleet: The HAB forecasts for the Gulf of Maine rely on several data sources that depend on the NOAA Fleet, including NOAA’s HAB cyst maps 21, Northeastern Regional Association of Coastal Ocean Observing Systems (NERACOOS) moorings, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Science Center hydrographic surveys.

Aside from data collected by the NOAA Fleet, the HAB-OFS also relies on satellite imagery, other remote sensing data, atmospheric data, field observations, models, public health reports and buoy data to provide large spatial scale and a high frequency of observations required for these forecasts. Much of this data comes from NOAA or other federal sources.

However, institutions outside of government are also involved in research that supports HAB forecasts. In the Gulf of Maine, three universities help gather and analyze data. Canadian scientists have also been involved in research for HAB Forecasts in the Bay of Fundy, which borders both Maine and the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

Users: Local authorities use HAB forecasts to guide management decisions and protect public health. In the Gulf of Maine, state shellfish managers are responsible for sampling and testing different areas of the coast to assess the toxicity levels of the water and the shellfish. These managers use the HAB forecasts to determine where they should sample and perform these tests. If toxic levels of shellfish poison are detected, state shellfish managers must determine how much of the beach or the intertidal and submerged lands will be closed to shell fishing until subsequent tests show that the HAB has dissipated. In Maine, weekly forecasts also help managers carve out exception areas where shell harvesters can work even when much of the coast is closed.

The aquaculture industry also uses HAB forecasts to make management decisions. In the event of a HAB, states may monitor the area more frequently and companies may try to harvest their shellfish early.

Benefits to Society: HAB forecasts allow state shellfish managers and public health officials to close fishing areas and beaches more selectively and precisely, minimizing economic impacts associated with lost landings, and lost tourism while effectively protecting against adverse public health outcomes. Several studies have estimated the socioeconomic impact of HABs. For example, Athearn (2008) estimates lost sales of soft-shell clams associated with a strong 2005 HAB event in Maine amounted to approximately $2.21 million (2016 USD).22 A separate study estimated the direct economic 21 Alexandrium fundyense forms toxic blooms annually, depositing seed-like cysts in the ocean bottom sediments in the fall that remain dormant in the winter and bloom again in the spring. NOAA maps these cysts, and uses these data to initiate HAB forecast models for the upcoming algal bloom season in the spring and summer. 22Athearn, K. 2008. Economic Losses from Closure of Shellfish Harvesting Areas in Maine. University of Maine at Machias. Available: http://www.machias.edu/ assets/docs/appliedResearch/eco_losses_shellfish_jan08.pdf.

NOAA Fleet So

impacts of theand $20 milliothe softshell c

Knowing the accurate HABportions of bethese closuresvalue of HABthe responses forecast is appfrequent, the fother year andannually. The(2016 USD),

Hyp2.9Product Backthe US, and thcause food weprogram (Hypfor the peak aresearchers, paddition, Hyp

Dependency Southeast Aretake measuremnorthwest Flocreate dissolvtransmit the la

Users: The inentering upstreducational toMexico Watenutrient reduchypoxic zoneAnnual NOAthe follow-upmodelers of GHypoxia WatNorthern Gulmodels used t

Benefits to SoGulf of MexicLouisiana and

23 Jin, D., E. ThNew England.”24 Jin, D. and Pthe Gulf of Ma

ocietal Benefits

e same event inon (2016 USDclam and musse

extent of past eB forecast can beaches to ensurs and cut the lenB forecasts in th

are highly effeproximately $7forecast is not d the responsese study estimatedepending on H

poxia: Hypokground: The he second largeeb alterations, fpoxia Watch) hannual hypoxic policymakers, fpoxia Watch ma

on NOAA Fleea Monitoring aments of DO anorida. Every onved oxygen mapatest data and m

nformation provream of the Guool for researchershed Nutrient ctions, relies on. In every year A/NGI (Northe activities stren

Gulf of Mexicoch data is also f of Mexico Ecto predict fishe

ociety: Hypoxico. The economd Texas accoun

hunberg, and P. ” Ocean and CoaP. Hoagland. 200aine.” Woods Ho

Study, Final Rep

n Maine and M) for Massachuel fisheries.

economic impabe. Before thesre public safetyngth of time thhe Gulf of Mainective. The resu795,000 (2016 U100% accurates are effective, ed the net preseHAB frequency

oxia Watch,hypoxic zone

est in the worldfaunal mortalit

has published nperiod. The m

fishermen, the paps and data pr

eet: Each year fand Assessmennd other water

ne to three daysps based on themaps to Gulf hy

vided in Hypoxulf of Mexico ohers, educators,

Task Force, wn Hypoxia Watsince 2010, Hy

ern Gulf Institungthen commun hypoxia, and tcritical to the s

cosystems and ries responses

ia impacts the fmy of the Gulf nted for approx

Hoagland. 2008astal Manageme08. “The Value oole Oceanograph

port

Massachusetts,23

usetts. These es

acts due to strose forecasts wery. However, as hat they are closne, assuming aults of this studUSD). This va

e, and the respothe total value ent value of they, accuracy of

, Gulf of Mein the Gulf of M

d’s coastal oceaties, and habitanear real-time, w

maps and data fopublic, and othrovide a 15-yea

from early Junent Program (SEquality variabl

s, they transmit ese data, publisypoxia science

xia Watch is usf the progress o, and decision-m

which has a goatch maps and dypoxia Watch pute) Gulf Hyponication and cothe users and stsuccess be usedHypoxia Assesto future scena

food supply foof Mexico incl

ximately $470 m

. “Economic impent, 51, 420-429of Harmful Algahic Institution Ma

18

at $2.7 millionstimates includ

ng HAB eventre available, puforecasts improsed, minimizin

a HAB occurs edy indicated thalue falls to $68

onses are not efof a 100% acc

e forecasts overprediction, and

exico Mexico is the lan. In addition t loss. Since 20web-based maporm an importa

hers base their uar baseline of th

e through mid-EAMAP), scienles near the seathe data to NC

sh the maps ande partners.

sed to inform mof their efforts.makers. For ex

al to reduce the data for informaproducts have

oxia Research Coordination bettakeholders, red in of three nessment Programarios of hypoxia

r commerciallyludes significanmillion, or two-

pact of the 2005. l Bloom Predicti

Marine Policy Cen

n (2016 USD) de lost revenue

ts, it becomes cublic health offove, decision-m

ng economic imevery 10 years,at the annual va8,000 (2016 USffective. Howevcurate forecast ir 30 years rangd responses.24

largest area of oto impacting fi

001, NOAA’s Gps and data on ant part of the sunderstanding ohe Gulf hypoxi

-July, as part ofntists aboard tha floor over theCEI scientists ad underlying da

managers that c. It also serves xample, the inte

size of the hypation on the caualso been used

Coordination Wtween physicalesulting in betteew projects supm, that are focua extent and se

y and recreationnt fishery and t-thirds, of total

5 red tide event o

tions to the Nearnter.

in economic imand associated

clear how valuaficials would hamakers can nar

mpacts. One stu, the forecast isalue of a 100%SD) per year if ver, if a HAB eincreases to ov

ges from $57.2

oxygen-depletefisheries, hypoxGulf of MexicoGulf region di

scientific basis of the Gulf Hyic zone.

f the combinedhe NOAA reseae continental shat Stennis Spaceata online for p

control the amoas an essential eragency Missipoxic zone throuses and season

d to inform procWorkshops. Thel, biological, aner planning for

pported throughused on advanceverity.

nally-importantourism activityl U.S. revenue

on commercial s

rshore Commerc

mpacts for Maid economic effe

able a timely anave to close larrrow the scope udy examined ts 100% accurat

% accurate HABf a HAB event ievent occurs evver $3 million

million to $1 m

ed coastal watexic conditions co Hypoxia Watssolved oxygenupon which

ypoxic Zone. In

d state/federal arch vessel Orehelf from Texase Center, MS, wpublic use, and

ount of nutrientbaseline datas

issippi River/Gough watershednal dynamics oceedings of theese workshops nd socioeconom

adaptive meash the NOAA cing ecological

nt fish species iy. For examplefor shrimp

hellfish fisheries

cial Shellfish Fish

ine, ects in

nd rge of the te, and B is less very

million

ers in can tch n (DO)

n

egon II s to who

ts set and Gulf of d of the e and

mic sures.

l

in the e,

s in

hery in

NOAA Fleet So

landings.25 Weconomists hacommercial ahas not yet behypoxic condhigher numbe

Oce2.10Product Backexploration ananimals use sooffspring. The

To better und(OST) develoconsists of twCetSound’s cpredictive envmigratory patspatial, and frbetter underst

Dependency data collectedheavily reliandata collectedservicing 10 otime and colle

Users: Resoureduce adversManagement,addition, CetSimpacts, knowProcedure. Boavailable undthrough the w

Benefits to Somating soundconducted numrehabilitationprograms thatoverall benefihousehold per

25 NOAA NatioHighlights from2014/Outreach26 Seafood pric27 A cetacean i28 Lew, D.K (2for Policy Use.

ocietal Benefits

While knowledgave already dem

and recreationaleen demonstratditions, there is ers of smaller sh

ean Noise: Okground: Humnd extraction, mound signals toey also rely on

erstand the impoped two web-bwo working grou

etacean27 mappvironmental factterns. CetSounrequency charatand the effect o

on NOAA Fled from NOAA vnt on data from d from NOAA vocean noise refecting empirica

urce managers use impacts of o, and other govSound’s producwn as the Oceaoth CetMap anerlying data (in

website or by re

ociety: Reducid cues to operatmerous studies. These studiest protect specifits can be similr year or more

onal Marine Fishm the Annual Reh-materials/NOAces reveal impacs a member of c

2015). Willingnes. Front. Mar. Sci

Study, Final Rep

e gaps still exismonstrated habl fishing patterned to affect ovean economic lohrimp, which s

Ocean Noiseman induced ocmilitary sonar, o communicateenvironmental

pacts of rising based mapping ups that developing working gctors to estimatnd’s underwateracteristics of maof man-made n

eet: CetMap incvessels, as welNOAA Fleet hvessels and othference stationsal evidence man

use both mappicean noise on m

vernment agenccts formed the

an Noise Strategd SoundMap ancluding geogrequest.

ng the impactste normally ands over the past s use establishefic species. Whlar. These studito benefit char

heries Service. 2eport. Available:

AA%20FEUS201ts of a major ecolassification of lss to Pay for Thri. 2:96. Availabl

port

st on the impacbitat loss, migrans, reducing therall populationoss to fishermesell for lower p

e Mapping cean noise, whiand other sour

e with other anil sound cues th

ocean noise levtools through N

op mapping toogroup, or CetMte density and dr sound mappinan-made undernoise for propo

corporates the l as by outside habitat and prother sources to ms placed througn-made noise a

ing tools and asmarine life. Forcies routinely uinitial scientifigy, including th

are web-based praphic informat

of man-made d by permittingseveral decaded survey methoile these prograies28 have showrismatic mamm

2016. Fisheries E https://www.st.

14%20web_readological disturbalarge aquatic mareatened and Ene: http://journal.

19

ct of the hypoxation shifts, and

he economic vitn levels of browen. Hypoxia neprices than large

ich is caused byrces, threatens mimals, such as what are vital to s

vels on marine NOAA’s Cetac

ols, and two unMap, produced ti

distribution of ng working grorwater noise. Cosed activities.

best available dentities such atected species s

map ocean noisghout U.S. wateand its impacts

ssociated data tr example, the

use these tools tc basis for NOhe implementaproducts availation system lay

ocean noise cag normal migrats to estimate ecods to determinams are not spe

wn that househomal species in U

Economics of thenmfs.noaa.gov/A

dy3.pdf. Accesseance. Available: ammals that inclundangered Marinfrontiersin.org/a

xic zone on indid reproductive tality of these iwn shrimp in th

egatively affecter shrimp. 26

y commercial smarine life andwhen communsurvival.

life, NMFS, Ocean & Sound

nique products -ime-, region-, acetacean and f

oup, SoundMapCetacean and so

datasets for speas universities asurveys. Soundse. NOAA shipers to track cha.

to plan, analyzU.S. Navy, Bu

to comply withOAA’s 10-year ation of the Oceable to the publyers) and metad

an protect speciatory patterns. Economic valuene how much pecifically tied tolds are willing

US waters (such

e United States, Assets/economiced 2/3/17. http://www.pnaudes whales, dolne Species: A Rearticle/10.3389/f

ividual speciesdisruption. Th

industries. Whihe northern Guts the growth of

shipping trafficd ecosystems inicating with po

Office of SciencMapping effor- CetMap and and species-spefish invertebratp, generated m

ound maps enab

ecific areas andand conservatiodMap similarlyps contribute daanges in ocean

ze, and make deureau of Oceanh environmentavision for addrean Noise Policlic. Additionalldata for both m

ies by allowingEconomists andes for similar sppeople are willito man-made og to pay up to $h as right whale

2014. U.S. Deptcs/publications/F

as.org/content/11lphins, and porpeview of the Litefmars.2015.0009

s, scientists andhese impact ile the hypoxiculf of Mexico, df shrimp result

c, oil and gas n many ways. Ootential mates o

ce and Technolrt (CetSound) wSoundMap. ecific maps thaes, and their

maps of temporable ocean plann

d species, incluon groups. CetMy utilizes a variata to this produnoise trends ov

ecisions on hown and Energy al standards. In ressing ocean ncy and Ocean Nly, NOAA mak

mapping tools, e

g natural defend scientists havpecies protectioing-to-pay for

ocean noise, the$82 (2016 USDes), which can

t. of Commerce.FEUS/FEUS-

14/7/1512.abstrapoises. rature and Prosp

96/full.

d

c zone during ing in

Ocean or

logy which

at use

al, ners to

uding Map is iety of uct by ver

w to

noise Noise kes either

se and ve on and

e D) per

add up

.

act.

spects

NOAA Fleet So

to a significanspecies repres

Hur2.11Product BackNOAA’s Huron expected ahurricanes, mit states the “lthe start of thewidely used/ainitiate and im

Dependency the TAO and section 2.4 fodata collected

Additional someasurementsabout the upc

Users: More managers, fedthe upcomingtourism compBusiness Admagencies like instruct the pu

Benefits to Sowith total lossHurricane Ouproperty damexample, Jambetween 1900improved hurhurricane forethat this valueaccuracy.31 Emimprovements

Flee2.12Background:often called u

29 NOAA Natio(2017). https://30 Jamieson, GWashington, D31 Considine, Tof Mexico.” Jo32 Emmanuel, Kand Society, 4(

ocietal Benefits

nt value for spesent the value t

rricanes: Hukground: NOArricane Researcactivity for the u

major hurricaneslikely” ranges oe hurricane seaaccessed onlinemprove hurrican

on NOAA FleARGO arrays r a discussion o

d through the V

urces of globals. CPC synthesoming hurrican

than 80 millionderal agencies, g hurricane seaspanies make seaministration proFEMA with thublic on prepar

ociety: Since 1ses exceeding $utlook helps keyage, mortality

mieson and Drur0 and 1990 becrricane forecastecast informatioe would increasmmanuel et al.s in seasonal hu

et Emergen: NOAA ships

upon to provide

onal Centers for/www.ncdc.noaa., and Drury, C.

D.C. T., Jablonowski, ournal of AppliedK., F. Fondriest,(110 – 117).

Study, Final Rep

ecies preservatithat society pla

urricane OuAA’s CPC prodch Division andupcoming hurrs, and accumulof activity for tason), and updae NOAA produne preparednes

eet: The Hurric(note that the Eof the TAO and

Voluntary Obser

l temperature asizes data fromne season.

n U.S. citizens and members o

son. Members oasonal operatioomotes the Outheir ready.gov wring for these st

1980, 35 major $500 billion. Thy stakeholders and morbidity,ry (1997) deterause of improvt information toon helped to avse to more than (2012) also fourricane foreca

cy Responseare a key part

e the following

r Environmental a.gov/billions/ 1997. Hurricane

C., Posner, B., ad Meteorology, 4 and J. Kossin. 2

port

ion and habitat ces on them.

utlook duces the Atlan

d National Hurrricane season inated cyclone enthe upcoming sates it in early Aucts. Communitss.

cane Outlook reENSO Forecastd ARGO arrayrving Ship Pro

and weather datm these various

are potentiallyof the public usof the business

onal changes batlook and recomwebsite, the Natorms.

hurricanes (thohe average annbetter prepare

, societal costs rmined that losved hurricane foo oil and naturavoid $10 million $19 million (2ound potentiallyasts.32

e Services of the U.S. oceemergency res

Information (NC

e mitigation effo

and Bishop, C. 243, 1270–1281. 2012. Potential E

20

improvement.

ntic Hurricane ricane Center. Tn the Atlantic Rnergy. The Outseason. CPC reAugust (mid-seties, businesses

elies on data frot product also d

ys). The Hurricagram, which th

ta come from lasources and fee

y threatened by se the Hurricans sector also useased on the infommends preparational Hurrican

ose causing at nual losses fromfor the hurricanassociated withs of life associa

forecasts.30 Conal gas produceron (2016 USD)2016 USD) pery significant sa

ean-related emesponse services

CEI) U.S. Billion

orts at the U.S. F

2004. “Value of h

Economic Value

Society’s will

Outlook in colThe HurricaneRegion, includitlook is probab

eleases the Hurreason). The Hus, and other sta

om various soudepends on theane Outlook alhe NOAA Flee

and-based statieds it into clim

hurricanes eacne Outlook to fe the Hurricane

formation foundredness efforts ane Center, and

least $1 billionm these 35 stormane season, whih evacuation, aated with hurrinsidine et al. (2rs in the Gulf o) per year in unr year with a 50avings for the in

ergency and dis:

n-Dollar Weathe

Federal Emergen

hurricane foreca

e of Seasonal Hu

lingness-to-pay

llaboration withe Outlook serveing the numberbilistic in naturricane Outlook

urricane Outlooakeholders use

urces, includinge TAO and ARlso uses sea suret is a part of.

ions, weather bmate models to m

ch year. State afocus their resoe Outlook. Ford in the Outloofor small busin

d the Red Cross

n in damages) hrms is nearly $1ich can lead to and lost busineicanes exponen2004) estimatedof Mexico. Thennecessary evac0% improvemensurance indus

saster response

er and Climate D

ncy Managemen

asts to oil and ga

urricane Forecast

y to protect thes

h hurricane expes as a general gr of named store, which mean

k in late May (pok is one of thethe Outlook to

g data collectedRGO arrays; seerface and weath

balloons, and samake predictio

and local emergources and prepr example, coasok. The Small nesses. In addits, use this Outlo

have struck the16 billion.29 Threductions in ss activity. For

ntially decreased the value of y found that excuation costs, aent in forecast stry associated

e network, and

Disasters

t Agency, FEMA

as producers in th

ts. Weather, Clim

se

perts at guide rms, s that

prior to e most

d by e her

atellite ons

gency pare for stal

tion, ook to

e U.S. he

r ed

xisting and

with

are

A,

he Gulf

mate,


21

Survey our nation’s ports and waterway in response to national security threats, helping enable the ability to rapidly re-open ports after they have been secured

Deliver emergency supplies, conduct hydrographic surveys so that ports can be re-opened, and assess hazardous materials, during and after hurricanes and other major storm events

Locate and map debris fields in the ocean for aviation and shipping disasters Conduct a range of scientific surveys in response to major oil spills Perform search, rescue, and evacuation services.

Dependency on NOAA Fleet: NOAA vessels have unique technologies and experienced crew members that, when combined with their availability across an expansive geographic area, can provide superior, timely, and cost-effective response services in many emergency situations.

NOAA Fleet emergency response activities most commonly include hydrographic surveys/data collection and mapping. For example, after hurricanes and large storm eventsat the request of the U.S. Coast Guard, crewmembers on NOAA vessels conduct hydrographic surveys to ensure safe navigation and re-opening of affected ports. NOAA also uses ship hydrographic survey technologies, which include complete seafloor mapping systems, to map debris fields from aviation disasters. This enables the quick recovery of victims and flight recorders. In addition, many of fleet’s vessels are equipped with biological, chemical, and acoustic data collection equipment necessary for toxicity and water quality testing. NOAA is frequently called upon to employ these capabilities in response efforts for major oil and chemical spills and hurricanes, where a range of immediate testing is often required.

The vast geographic area across which the fleet operates also contributes to NOAA’s response capabilities, because it typically means that at least one NOAA vessel can respond to an emergency location in a timely manner. Fleet vessels can also enter areas that require military or security clearance (e.g., military ports), whereas most contract vessels cannot. Finally, as the administrator of all NOAA Fleet activities, OMAO can easily coordinate across line offices to ensure that NOAA’s other critical needs are being met throughout the emergency response period.

Together, these factors often make it much more feasible and cost-effective to utilize NOAA fleet vessels for emergency response activities, rather than having to pay contract vessels, which will likely charge premium prices (e.g., through time and materials contracts) for emergency situations, or other potential responders.

Benefits to Society: NOAA ships’ disaster response capabilities are often essential to subsequent efforts in each emergency scenario. For example, pre- and post-event hydrographic surveying allows major ports and harbors to reopen to commercial shipping after hurricanes and other disasters, as well as following national security threats. The ability of NOAA ships to immediately survey ports allows important economic activity to resume. In 2015 alone, 1.39 billion short tons accounting for $1.56 trillion worth of U.S. goods moved through U.S. ports. Imports and exports via water represented 71% of U.S. imports and exports by weight and almost 42 percent of cargo value in 2015.33

Debris field location and mapping helps other federal, state, and local groups tailor search and rescue operations for air disasters. Ships already designed for scientific data collection can easily be redeployed to help with critical sampling after major oil spills. These efforts save lives, allow for the continuation of commercial activities and the assessment of natural resource damages. In addition, crew members on NOAA Fleet vessels often perform relatively routine search and rescue activities as required by International Maritime law and provide relief supplies to affected populations during emergencies. These activities have saved many lives over the course of the fleet’s history.

The ability of NOAA’s fleet to respond to emergencies also can result in cost savings relative to other potential responders. As noted above, NOAA Fleet vessels have unique technologies and are staffed with scientists and engineers

33 Foxx, A., Perez, T. and Pritzker, P. (2016, March 7). U.S. Ports: Investing in Engines of Economic Development and American Competitiveness [U.S. Department of Transportation Blog]. p.1. Retrieved March 14, 2017 from https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2016/03/us-ports-investing-engines-economic-development-and-american-competitiveness. Statistics available at North American Transportation Statistics at http://nats.sct.gob.mx/go-to-tables/table-7-international-merchandise-trade/table-7-1-international-merchandise-trade-by-mode/


22

with expertise in hydrographic and scientific data collection, which accounts for a large majority of response activities, thus gaining significant efficiencies compared to finding vessels and forming crews specifically to respond to emergencies. In addition, NOAA ships are typically relatively easy to reroute with minimal impact to normal program activities. Thus, NOAA vessels can often provide superior, more cost-effective and timely response capabilities compared with other potential responders that may first need formal contractual authorization from the government.


23

3. Monetized Benefits of Select Products and Services As detailed in Section 1, we worked with the NOAA/OMAO project team, TPIO, and the National Observing Systems Council, to select five NOAA products for further evaluation and quantification:

Coral Reefs: Coral Reef Status and Trends Reports Sea Level Rise: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer Bathymetry/Hydrographic Surveys: Nautical Chart Products Seasonal Forecast: ENSO Outlook Ecosystem Management: National Marine Sanctuaries Conditions Reports

For these five products, we estimated the monetary value or benefits that the product provides to society, and the percentage of this value that can be attributed to the NOAA Fleet. To estimate the benefits associated with each product, we relied on estimates from existing studies and literature, and applied these estimates (or range of estimates) to the relevant product. Collecting primary data to support an original valuation analysis was beyond the scope of this contract.

To estimate the percentage of the products’ value that can be attributed to the NOAA Fleet, we relied on data provided by TPIO from the NOSIA-II model, as well as input from NOAA subject matter experts. Our estimates for the contribution of the NOAA Fleet are based on “denial of service,” which is intended to capture the percentage decrease in performance that the product would experience if the NOAA Fleet was not available to provide necessary data inputs. Section 3.1 provides additional detail on the methodology we used to assess the contribution of NOAA ships to the value of individual products.

Table 4. Societal Benefits of Select NOAA Products and Associated Value of NOAA Fleet1

Value Percent

CORAL REEFS: Coral Status and Trends Report

$0.590 - $1.190 $0.090 - $0.710 15.0% - 60.0%

SEA LEVEL RISE: Sea Level Rise Viewer

$1.480 $0.030 - $0.560 2.0% - 37.5%

BATHYMETRY/HYDRO-GRAPHIC SURVEYS: Nautical Chart Products

$0.058 - $0.120 $0.017 - $0.048 30.0% - 40.0%

SEASONAL FORECASTS: El Nino Southern Oscillation Outlook

$0.560 - $1.300 $0.026 - $0.270 4.6% - 20.0%

ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT: National Marine Sanctuary Condition Reports

$2.420 - $5.180 $0.610 - $1.800 25.0% - 35.0%

Annual Anticipated Benefits Attributed to NOAA Fleet

Annual Anticipated Benefit of Product

Value Chain/Product

1. Benefits of El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Outlook represent benefits associated with U.S. crop

agriculture only. However, many other sectors benefit from ENSO information

NOAA Flee

M3.1As noted aattributed tcontains inproducts. Tspecific proBased on ascore.” A sall expecta

TPIO also NOAA Flecontributinreduced prproducts is

TPIO adjusstreams onscores. Forthese scoreus with rawWe used thindividual

In additionexperts. Wfully reflecexperts to ebuoy systemperformanc

The unweiof estimatesociety.

The data uquantificatand broadeextensive rthis work hanalysis). Iand compleNOAA fleewhich, if p

34 NOAA N(NOSIA-II)https://nosc.35 When devsum of a prothe interdepproducts. Thmission serv

et Societal Benef

Methodologybove, we reliedto the fleet: thenformation on hTo develop thisoducts, asking a scale of 1 to 1score of 1 indications and excee

asked the subjeeet) from produng to a given product score cor

s known as “sw

sted the swing n NOAA’s missr this study, wees provide a betw “unweighted”he unweighted products.

n to the unweighWhen interviewi

ct the impact orestimate the pems it supports.ce that would o

ghted swing sces for assessing

sed as inputs toions are based

er applicability.research and anhas its own limIn short, the resete estimates oet. A more scieerformed comp

National Environm

Methodology R.noaa.gov/tpio/dveloping the swinoduct’s swing scendency of data his adjustment revice areas.

fits Study, Final R

y for Estimad on two source NOSIA-II mo

how individual s data, TPIO suthem to rate ho

100, the averagcates that the preds some.

ect matter expeuction of the prroduct, the “prorresponding to

wing weighting”

scores providesion service aree were interestetter assessment” swing scores swing scores to

hted swing scong experts at thr value of NOAercentage of the We also asked

occur if data fro

cores and informg the contributio

o this analysis rwere often few. Estimates of tnalysis by NOAitations and thesulting values rf the value of N

entifically rigorprehensively, w

mental Satellite,

Report. NOAA Tdocs/NOSIA-II-Mng scores for indores across all dasources. To addr

esulted in “weigh

Report

ating Value es of data to es

odel and input fdata sources a

urveyed more thow well their pe rating across roduct provides

erts to considerroduct, and howoduct delta” is tremoval of the

” in NOSIA-II.

ed by the subjeceas, rather thaned in using the ut of the ship’s ffor NOAA shi

o help us determ

ores, we also rehe product leve

AA ships on theeir product’s tod the subject mom the fleet wa

mation from suon of the NOA

represent the bw in number anthe contributionAA’s Technoloe results have nrepresent an emNOAA productrous analysis wwould be cost-p

, Data, and InforTechnical ReportMethodology-Redividual data streata sources, amoress excessive tohted” swing scor

24

of NOAA Fstimate the percfrom NOAA suand observing shan 500 NOAAroducts meet usubject matter

s no value, whi

r the impact of w that would afthe difference be data source. C. The product d

ct matter expern individual prounadjusted scofull impact on pips and the obsmine the contri

elied on input gel, some expreseir individual potal data inputs

matter experts toas not available

ubject matter exAA Fleet as a pe

est available innd, as with any n of the NOAAgy, Planning annot been indepempirical first stets and services

would require aprohibitive. Thi

rmation Service. t. doi:10.7289/Veport-v1.93-NOSeams, TPIO founounted to greater otal product deltares, which provid

Fleet centage of totalubject matter exsystems contribA subject matteusers’ and staker experts represile a score of 1

removing indivffect the status between the prCharacterizatiodeltas are also r

rts to better refloducts.35 This rores from NOAproduct performserving systemsibution of the N

gathered directlssed concerns tproducts We the

that comes froo estimate the pe.

xperts allowed ercentage of th

nformation. Hostudy, limited

A fleet to final pnd Integration endently verifieep in the directand the share o

additional primahis study does e

2015. NOAA OV52V2D1H. AvaSC.pdf. Accessend that the “total r than 100% for mas, TPIO adjusteded a better asses

l product benefxperts. The NObute to the perfer experts with eholders’ needssents the produ00 means that

vidual data souquo score. For

roduct’s status on of data sourcreferred to as “

flect the impact resulted in “wei

AA subject mattmance. Therefos they support NOAA Fleet to

ly from NOAAthat the TPIO serefore asked t

om the NOAA percentage decr

us to develop he product’s ove

owever, the studin their accuraproducts and sefor Observatioed (as with a “dtion of developof that value atary data collect

establish a scien

Observing Systemailable: ed 5/25/2017.

product delta,” wmost products, wed the swing scorssment of the da

fits that can be OSIA-II model formance of speknowledge of s and expectati

uct’s “status quothe product me

urces (such as tr a given data squo score and

ce impacts to “swing scores.”

t of various datighted” swing ter experts becaore, TPIO prov(e.g., buoy sys

o the value of

A subject matterswing scores dithe NOAA prodFleet and/or threase in produc

a reasonable raerall value to

dies upon whiccy, completeneervices are bas

on office (TPIOdenial of data”

ping more accurttributable to thtion and analysntifically sound

m Integrated An

which representswhich is indicativres for individualata streams on NO

ecific

ions. o eets

the ource the

” 34

a

ause vided tems).

r id not duct

he ct

ange

ch the ess, sed on O) but ” rate he sis d

nalysis

s the ve of l OAA’s


25

process for assessing the societal benefits of the NOAA fleet and identifies critical information requirements that should be used to inform future research agendas.

3.2 Coral Reefs: Coral Reef Status and Trends Report Monetary Value of the Coral Reefs in the U.S.: Coral reefs provide the U.S. with valuable goods and services including food, coastal protection, and opportunity for recreational activities. These goods and services in turn provide different types of economic benefits, including: recreational use values and associated tourism benefits; non-use values, such as willingness-to-pay for the existence of coral reefs; and amenity values, which can be measured by increases in value of properties located near coral reefs.36,37

Brander and van Beukering (2013) summarized studies of the benefits of coral reefs for U.S. states and territories with coral reef areas, including American Samoa, Florida, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the North Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.38 Across all locations and benefit categories, the authors estimated the total economic value of coral reefs in the U.S. to be approximately $3.954 billion per year (2016 USD, Table 5).

Table 5. Annual total economic value of coral reefs in the U.S. (2016 USD)

State/Territory Area of coral reef

value (ha) Total value (millions)

American Samoa 22,200 $13

Florida 36,000 $201

Guam 7,159 $161

Hawaii 165,990 $2,022

Puerto Rico 12,642 $1,265

North Marina Islands 6,494 $75

U.S. Virgin Islands 34,400 $217

U.S. 284,885 $3,954

This estimate does not completely cover all coral reefs in each geographic location – for instance the study for the North Mariana Islands only covered Saipan, for Puerto Rico, the study only covered the reef areas in the eastern part of the territory, and for Hawaii, only the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are covered. Brander and van Beukering (2013) do not expect the underestimation of total value due to lack of geographic coverage to be large. However, the studies also do not cover all of the ecosystem service values in each location. For instance, Florida only covers direct use values but not non-use values, which can be significant.

Value of Report Cards and NOAA Fleet Contribution: The Status and Trends Report Cards will inform decisions by U.S. Congress and NOAA leadership regarding the allocation of resources to protect coral reefs, while the associated jurisdictional-level reports will play a significant role in the direct management of these resources. For

36 Non‐use values reflect the fact that many individuals who do not use a specific resource (e.g, National Marine Sanctuaries, national parks, Great Lakes) for recreation or other purposes still value their existence. Individuals may value these resources for the ecosystem services they provide, because they may want the option to use them in the future, or because they recognize their importance for future generations. Economists often use willingness‐to‐pay studies to assess the non‐use value of specific resources and environmental goods and services. 37 Brander, Luke and Pieter van Beukering, 2013. “The Total Economic Value of U.S. Coral Reefs: A Review of the Literature”. Coral Reef Conservation Program. National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration. Available: https://data.nodc.noaa.gov/coris/library/NOAA/CRCP/other/other_crcp_publications/TEV_US_Coral_Reefs_Literature_Review_2013.pdf. Accessed 1/20/17. 38 Ibid.

NOAA Flee

purposes obe attributeapproxima

Based on TReport Carestimate thattributableto $711 mi

Value of co

Percent of Status and

Value of S

Percent of value attrib(billions)

Total Ann(billions)

Sea3.3Value of Pand are proby the U.Samplified bmeasures cshorelines value of abstudy also approxima

The Valueestimates thto $810 bildivide this to 2016 US

To estimatassociated can use as

39 Melillo, JAssessment40 U.S. EPAhttps://www41 This studyaccounts for

et Societal Benef

f this report, wed to these prodtely $0.593 to

TPIO’s unweigrds can be attribhat 60% of the de to the NOAAillion (2016 US

oral reefs (billi

coral reef valuTrends Report

tatus and Trend

Status and Trebutable to NOA

nual Benefits o

a Level RisePotential Damaojected to rise 2. EPA estimateby sea level riscan reduce this could reduce th

bandoned propeindicate that mtely $790 billio

e of the Sea Lehat implementillion by 2100 (2value over 86

SD, total annua

e the value of twith adaptationa first step in a

., T. Richmond, . Appendix 5: Sc

A. 2014. “Climatw.epa.gov/cira/cly applied a 3% dr the time value

fits Study, Final R

we estimate thatducts. Thus, the$1.185 billion

hted swing scobuted to the NOdata used in the

A Fleet is estimaSD) of the valu

TabCoral Reefs

ons)

ue attributable tt Card

ds Report Card

ends Report CarAA Fleet

of NOAA Fleet

e: Sea Level ages in the U.S2 to 6 or more fes that sea levele will total $5 timpact. For ex

he impacts assoerty, residual st

mitigation measuon, if these mea

evel Rise Viewing effective ad2014 USD),41 ayears from 201

al avoided costs

the SLR Viewen planning and

assessing vulne

and G. Yohe, Ed

cenarios and Mote Action Benefilimate-action-bendiscount rate to eof money.

Report

t between 15% e value of the Cper year.

ores from NOSOAA Fleet. One report cards cated to be 15%e of the Report

ble 6. Annual Bs Status and T

Lower-bo

o

d

rd

t

Rise VieweS. From Sea Lfeet by 2100, dl rise impacts ftrillion for the

xample, the studociated with setorm damages, ures to reduce asures are adop

wer and NOAAdaptation optioa savings of $414 to 2100 to gs associated wi

er, we need to ad implementatioerability and de

ds. 2014. Climatdels. U.S. Globaits: Coastal Propnefits-coastal-prestimate the valu

26

and 30% of thCoral Reef Stat

IA-II, 15% of tn the other handcomes from NO

% at the lower ent Cards can be

Benefits of NOrends Report

ound estimate

$3.95

15%

$0.593

15%

$0.090

er Level Rise: Glodepending on thfrom inundationcoterminous Udy estimates th

ea level rise to $and costs of prgreenhouse ga

pted.40

A Fleet Contribons will reduce 4.19 trillion, incget an annual vaith adaptation m

account for howon. The SLR viciding on actio

e Change Impacal Change Researperty”. Coastal Aroperty. Accesseue of damages in

he $3.954 billiotus and Trends

the value of Cod, NOAA subjeOAA ships. Thnd and 60% at directly attribu

OAA Fleet, Cards (2016 U

Upp

obal sea levels he emissions scn of coastal pro

U.S. by the yearhat protective c$810 billion throtective adapt

as emissions co

bution. The EPthe impacts/co

cluding the cosalue of $48.7 bmeasures amou

w it contributesiewer is a mapp

ons to mitigate

cts in the United rch Program. DO

Action Benefits Red February 5, 20n future years in

on coral reef vas Report Cards

oral Reefs Statuect matter expe

herefore, the pethe upper end.

uted to the NOA

USD)

per-bound est

$3

30

$1.

60

$0.7

have risen by 8cenario modeleoperty and fromr 2100 (2014 Ucoastal measurehrough 2100. Thtation measures

ould further red

PA study of seaosts of sea levest of adaptationbillion (2014 Uunts to $49.4 bi

s to the reductiping product thimpacts. Based

States: The ThirOI:10.7930/J0Z3Report. Availabl017. 2014 USD. The

alue for the U.Samounts to

us and Trends erts in coral reeercent of valuab. Thus, $90 milAA Fleet (Tabl

timate

.95

0%

185

0%

711

8 inches since ed.39 A 2014 stum storm surge t

USD). Adaptatioes such as armohis includes thes. Results of th

duce total costs

a level rise impl rise from $5 t

n measures. WeSD). Escalatinillion.

ion in avoided chat decision mad on input from

rd National Clim31WJ2. le at:

e discount rate

S. can

efs ble llion le 6).

1880, udy that is on oring e

he to

pacts trillion e g this

costs akers

m

mate

NOAA Flee

subject maViewer’s c

In additionViewer canthe data usthe data in to NOAA suse the 2%from the SLapproxima

Annual VaAdaptationPercent of Viewer Value of SPercent of attributableTotal AnnFleet (billi

Bat3.4Value Estination’s poplanning anprotection NOAA Offbased on a containing by users).43

charts, the including $commerciaapproximabetween 20

While this it serves ascommercia

42 The 3% eproject teathe SLR Vie43 Kite-PowOffice of Co44 Leveson, Consulting. 45 Values foPrice Index.

et Societal Benef

atter experts andcontribution to

n, data from then be attributed ed in the vieweVDATUM comships (50% of t

% TPIO estimateLR Viewer attrtely $30.0 mill

Table 7

alue of Sea Levn (billions) value attributab

LR Viewer (biSLR Viewer ve to NOAA Fle

nual Benefits oions)

thymetry/Himates for Nauorts and throughnd analysis, incof the marine e

ffice of the Coasurvey asking specific charac

3 Assuming a mauthor estimat

$15.3 million/yal users, and $2tely $57.9 mill007 and 2016.4

study providess a lower boundal fishing vesse

estimate is basam believes thiewer in terms o

well, H. 2007 Useoast Survey. I., (2012). Sociop. 47

or recreational an.

fits Study, Final R

d our understanthe overall valu

e NOSIA-II moto the NOAA Fer comes from mes from NOAtotal data from e as the low enributable to NOlion to $556 mi

7. Annual Bene

vel Rise

ble to SLR

illions) value eet of NOAA

Hydrographiutical Chart Phout U.S. watecluding hazardenvironment, aast Survey to es

users what thecteristics identiminimal differeed that the com

year in consume2 million/year ilion/per year (245

s an order of md estimate, largels, or marine re

sed on our undis represents aof reducing poe and Value of N

o-Economic Stud

nd commercial c

Report

nding of the proue of adaptatio

odel indicates thFleet. On the oVertical Datum

AA ships. TherVDATUM * 7

nd of the range OAA ships. Thiillion (2016 US

efits of NOAA

Lower-b

$

ic Surveys: NProducts: NOAerways. Nauticaous material spnd coastal zone

stimate the beney would be wiified ence between thmbined benefitser surplus for rn producer surp

2016 USD), acc

magnitude estimgely because thesource manag

derstanding of a conservative otential impactNautical Charts a

dy: Scoping the

onsumer surplus

27

oduct, we use 3on and associate

hat approximatther hand, NOA

m Transformatirefore, 37.5% o75% ships sharand 37.5% as tis yields an annSD, Table 7).

A Fleet, Sea Le

bound estimat

$49.4

3%

$1.48

2%

$0.0296

Nautical ChAA’s nautical cal charts also supill response, ae managementefits of nauticalling-to-pay fo

he nautical chas of nautical chrecreational useplus. We estimcounting for th

mate of the value study did not

gers, among oth

how stakeholdestimate of ths of SLR.

and Nautical Cha

Value of NOAA

s and producer s

3% as a rough ed avoided sea

tely 2% of the bAA subject maion (VDATUM

of the value of tre of VDATUMthe upper end onual benefit est

evel Rise View

te

hart Produccharts support support improve

as well as effort. In 2007, Kite

al charts for recor ‘ideal’ nautic

arts that were avharts amounted ers, $27.5 milli

mate that today,he increase in fo

ue of nautical cht include militahers. In addition

ders use the pre value of the

art Data in the U

A’s Coastal Map

surplus increased

value represena level rise impa

benefits associatter experts estM), and that appthe SLR VieweM). For estimatof the range of timate for the N

wer (2016 USD

Upper-boun

$49

3%

$1.

37.5

$0.5

cts safe and efficieed environments related to ho-Powell condu

creational and ccal charts (i.e.,

vailable at the to $47.5 millio

ion/year in con, this value amooreign flag ship

harts, the authoary and other fen, since the stu

roduct to makedata and tools

United States. Pre

pping Program F

d to 2016 USD u

nting the SLR acts.42

iated with the Stimate that 50%proximately 75er can be attribtion purposes, w

f the percent of NOAA Fleet of

)

nd estimate

9.4

%

48

5%

556

ent navigation antal/ecological meland securit

ucted a study focommercial venautical charts

time and ideal on (2007 USD)

nsumer surplus ounts to ps visiting U.S

ors acknowledgederal users, udy was conduc

e decisions. Ths incorporated

epared for NOAA

inal Report. Lev

using BLS Consu

SLR % of 5% of buted we value f

at our

ty, or the ssels,

),44 for

. ports

ge that

cted in

he into

A

veson

umer


28

2007, digital nautical charts have become even more popular, now allowing for weekly updates that provide additional value to users.46

In a more recent study, NOAA (2013) evaluated the benefits associated with the Physical Oceanographic Real Time System (PORTS), a decision support tool that combines nautical charts and other data critical for navigation (e.g., information on water levels, currents, waves, water temperature, bridge heights, winds, visibility, atmospheric pressure, and air temperature) to provide mariners with accurate and reliable real-time information about environmental conditions in seaports. This “coastal intelligence” helps mariners make better safety and economic decisions. PORTS was first introduced in Tampa Bay in 1991 and as of 2013, was available at 58 of the nation’s 175 major seaports (which account for 75% of the total tonnage that passes through U.S. seaports). NOAA estimates that the value of PORTS amounts to more than $238 million per year at the 58 major seaports where it is available, in terms of reduced marine accidents, increased marine transportation efficiency (including increased cargo capacity and reduced transit delays), and oil spill reduction and containment benefits (Table 8).

Table 8. Value of NOAA PORTS to the U.S. Economy

Benefit Annual Benefits at 58 Ports

w/access to PORTS ($, Millions)a,b

Potential Annual Benefits from 117 Ports without

access to PORTS ($, Millions)

Total current and potential benefits

($, Millions)

Commercial traffic – increased cargo capacity $131.6 $44.8 $176.4 Commercial traffic – reduced delays in transit $ 84.1 $31.7 $ 115.8 Oil spill reduction and containment $3.9 $1.9 $5.7 Reduction in commercial marine accidents Property damage Morbidity and mortality $ 18.7 $10.8 $29.5 Reduction in recreational boating accidents Property damage Morbidity and mortality $0.3 $0.3 $0.7 Total $238.6 $89.5 $328.1 Source: Wolfe, K. and McFarland, D. 2013. An Assessment of the Value of the Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System (PORTS) to the U.S. Economy. NOAA National Ocean Service. a. Benefits associated with enhanced commercial and recreational fishing experiences were excluded from this table because

they mostly relied on data/information that was not derived from nautical charts.

b. All values updated from 2010 USD using Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. Value of Nautical Chart Products and NOAA Fleet Contribution. While the NOAA PORTS 2013 study included benefits associated with the entire PORTS system and associated data inputs, PORTS is heavily reliant on nautical charts. For this analysis, we assumed that 50%, or $119.4 million (2016 USD), of the $238.6 million value of PORTS can be attributed nautical charts; we used this estimate as an upper bound value for the benefits of nautical charts for marine transportation. As a lower end of the range, we used the willingness-to-pay estimate of $57.9 million per year.

Based on information from TPIO and NOAA subject matter experts, approximately 30% (TPIO estimate) to 40% (subject matter expert estimate) of the value of nautical charts can be attributed to the NOAA Fleet. Thus, the annual value of the NOAA Fleet contribution to nautical charts amounts to between $17.4 million and $47.8 million per year (Table 9). While we provide a range of estimates, we believe they both represent a lower bound for several reasons. First, they reflect benefits associated with marine transportation only; they do not reflect the other benefits and uses of nautical charts, such as those related to coastal zone management, homeland security, and ecological management. In

46In addition, because survey respondents knew how much they paid for nautical charts, this could have resulted in an anchoring bias, leading to more conservative estimates of value.

NOAA Flee

addition, thwith nautic

Annual valuMarine TranPercent of nattributable Total Annu(billions)

S3.5Value of EENSO foreaccuracy a informationmakers in sadvantage decisions aand gas if tdistributorsmerchandi

In additionforecasts topotential bsoutheastermillion anddeveloped savings we

In additionoutbreaks. in nature. Eproactive mexample, pemergencyheavy rain.$3.2 billionactions werstorminess preparedne

Value of Ecrop agricuincrease ec 47 Available48 Weiher, R49 Sharda, VSmall to Mi50 NOAA Ncontent/uplo

et Societal Benef

he value of PORcal charts at the

Tabl

ue of Nautical Chnsportation (billinautical chart valto NOAA Fleet

ual Benefits of N

easonal ForENSO Informaecasts, and can year before th

n and other toosectors affected(Table 10). For

about what cropthe coming wins and consumerse to anticipate

n to private induo make decisioenefits of usingrn U.S. Using Ad $490,000 in aa drought man

ere associated w

n, ENSO can reIn the absence

Emergency manmitigation stratprior to the 199y management a. Actual storm n (2016 USD) ire taken. Althoduring each E

ess.50

ENSO Outlookulture. Several conomic gains,

e at: http://citeR. and H.L. Kite-V. and P. Srivasta

d-Size CommunNational Weatheroads/PPI-Weathe

fits Study, Final R

RTS focuses one remaining 117

le 9. Annual B

Lharts for ions) lue

NOAA Fleet

recasts: ENSation: Over thnow predict they occur.47 Sea

ols. ENSO is thd by seasonal vr example, farmps to plant. Simnter is forecast rs.48 Private ret

e shifts in seaso

ustry sectors, dns that result ing ENSO forecaAuburn, Alabamavoided water pnagement plan bwith more seve

esult in a range e of any forewanagers and othegies and alloc7-1998 El Niñoagencies and Flosses in the 19in damages res

ough portions ol Niño, NOAA

k and NOAA Fstudies have shrelative to a “n seerx.ist.psu.e-Powell. 1999. Aava. 2016. Valuenities. Dollar year Service. 2011. Ver-Econ-Stats-10

Report

n 58 of the nati7 major ports,

Benefits of NOA

Lower-bound

$0.0

$

SO Outlookhe last 40 years,hese events, andasonal outlookshe largest drivervariations in temmers can use semilarly, energy

to be colder thtailers or groceonal needs.

decision-makern significant soasts to manage ma as a case stpurchases durinbased on seaso

ere drought con

of natural disaarning of near fuher decision macate resources ao, NOAA’s Na

FEMA spent an997- 1998 El Nsulting from theof the $1.6 billiA believes that a

Fleet Contribuhown that indivno forecast” sce

edu/viewdoc/dAssessing the Ecoe of ENSO-Forecar not reported. Value of a Weat0-13-11.pdf

29

ion’s major seaor elsewhere w

AA Fleet, Nau

estimate

0579 million

30%

$0.0174

k , NOAA and otd their expecteds of temperaturr of climate varmperature and easonal forecasdistribution co

han usual, thereery chains can u

s working in thocietal benefits.water resourcetudy, the researng 1999-2000 anal forecast inf

nditions.49

asters, includingfuture climate cakers can use seaccordingly, whational Weathern estimated $24Niño were closee intense 1982-on difference aa significant po

ution: In the Uvidual farmers enario (e.g., by

ownload?doi=onomic Impacts casted Drought In

ther-Ready Natio

aports – it doeswithin the U.S.

utical Charts (

Upp

thers have drasd impacts on dre and precipitariability on theprecipitation to

sts of precipitatompanies can ineby avoiding shuse seasonal cl

he public intere. For example, es in small to mrchers found thand 2007-2008formation. Stud

g severe drougconditions, mitieasonal climatehich can result r Service (2011

45 million (201e to $1.6 billion-1983 El Niño,are due to diffeortion of the sa

U.S., one of the can use foreca

y planting crop

=10.1.1.210.38of El Niño and Bnformation for th

on. http://www.p

s not capture beExclusive Eco

(2016 USD)

per-bound esti

$0.1

40

$0.0

stically improvdifferent regionation make use e seasonal timeo help turn climtion and tempencrease stockpihortfalls that arlimate forecasts

est can use seasa 2016 study a

mid-sized commhat the city cou8, respectively,dy results also

ghts, floods, wiligation optionse forecast infort in significant c1) reports that C6 USD) preparn (2016 USD),, for which littlerent intensitiesavings came fro

sectors most imasts to maximizs that perform

1&rep=rep1&tBenefits of Imprhe Management

performance.noa

enefits associatonomic Zone.

imate

119

%

478

ved the accuracns, with 70% to of ENSO scale. Decision

mate events to trature to makeiles of heating re costly to boths to rearrange

sonal climate analyzed the munities of the ld have saved $ if they would showed that hi

ldfires, and diss tend to be rearmation to devecost savings. FCalifornia’s ring for storms, compared to ole preparatory s and durationsom heightened

mpacted by ENze revenues or best under exp

type=pdf roved Forecasts.

of Water Resou

aa.gov/wp-

ted

y of o 80%

n-their oil h

$1.2 have igher

sease active elop For

s and over

s of

NSO is

pected

urces of


30

ENSO conditions). Chen et al. (2002)51 estimated the value of ENSO forecasts for both U.S. agricultural producers and consumers, accounting for changes in supply and demand, and the associated impact on prices for agricultural goods. Assuming farmers optimize their decisions based on forecast information, the authors estimated that the total economic benefits of ENSO forecasts ranged from $295 and $700 million per year (1996 USD) for crop agriculture,52 depending on forecast accuracy and ENSO phase definition.

51 Chen, C., B. McCarl, and H. Hill. 2002. Agricultural Value of ENSO Information Under Alternative Phase Definition. Climatic Change. 54:305-325. 52 Including wheat, sorghum, corn, and soybeans.

NOAA Fleeet Societal Beneffits Study, Final RReport

31

NOAA Flee

et Societal Beneffits Study, Final RReport

32


33

The authors also estimated that ENSO forecasts resulted in an additional $54 - $104 million (1996 USD) in benefits to foreign producers and consumers, due to global nature of the agricultural markets.

Agricultural yields for the crops assessed in Chen et al. have increased by 90 percent since 1996, the year assessed in their study.53 For this reason, we increased the figures in Chen et al. by 90 percent, reflecting the assumption that the additional crop production would also benefit from the use of ENSO forecasts. This yields an estimated value of ENSO information for U.S. crop agricultural producers and consumers of between $560 to $1,328 million per year (2016 USD). Including foreign surplus, total annual benefits amount to between $719 to $1,410 million (2016 USD), with higher foreign surplus associated with lower U.S. benefits.54 However, benefits to foreign nations are not a strong argument for U.S. investments in the NOAA Fleet. For this reason, we did not include benefits accruing to foreign nations in our benefit estimates for this product.

The unweighted TPIO swing score representing the NOAA ship impact on the ENSO Outlook is 4.6%. This estimate includes the TAO and ARGO arrays, which the fleet support. NOAA subject matter experts estimated a much higher dependence on the NOAA Fleet, indicating that the ships and observing systems they support account for approximately 50% of the Global Ocean Data Assimilation System (GODAS), which supports ENSO prediction and monitoring reflected in the Outlook. In addition, the subject matter experts indicated that there is no substitute for the data collected by the TAO array, and therefore, by maintaining the TAO buoys, the NOAA Fleet contributes significantly to the value of the Outlook. Recognizing that GODAS accounts for only a part of the total production of the Outlook, we attributed 20% of total benefits of the ENSO Outlook to the NOAA Fleet as the upper end of our range. Given that NOAA data serve as the primary resource for ENSO forecasts/publications in the U.S. (not just the ENSO Outlook), we did not attempt to separately value the Outlook as being distinct from other forecast products.

Based on existing studies we know that seasonal climate forecasts that are dependent on ENSO information can result in $560 to $1,328 million dollars in benefits each year in the U.S. agricultural sector alone. Approximately $26 to $266 million (2016 USD) of this total can be directly attributed to the NOAA Fleet (Table 11).

Table 11. Annual Benefits of NOAA Fleet, ENSO Outlook (2016 USD)

Lower-bound estimate Upper-bound estimate Annual value of ENSO Forecast for U.S. agricultural (crop) producers and consumers, and associated foreign surplus (billions)

$0.560 $1.33

Percent of forecast value attributable to the product

100% 100%

Percent of value attributable to NOAA Fleet 4.6% 20% Total Annual Benefits of NOAA Fleet (2016 USD)a

$0.0258 $0.266

a. Represents benefits for U.S. crop agriculture sector, including U.S. producer and consumer surplus

3.6 Ecosystem Management: National Marine Sanctuaries Conditions Report Background: The National Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports directly contribute to regulations, policies, management actions, and education programs related to marine sanctuaries, which in turn helps to protect the important benefits that the sanctuaries provide, including: 53 The 90% increase in production value accounts for price changes from 1996 to 2016 for each of the four crops included in the study, which included inflation-related effects, increases in the acreage cultivated, and increased productivity (output per acre). 54 Foreign surplus updated to 2016 values based on Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index.


34

Market benefits, which reflect the positive local economic impacts associated with sanctuary-related activities, such as tourism, recreation, and commercial fishing

Non-market benefits, including benefits for individuals and recreators who directly use and/or passively enjoy sanctuary resources, as well as benefits for those who do not visit or use the sanctuaries, but who value the important habitat and species protection services they provide.55

The market benefits associated with National Marine Sanctuaries represent the direct spending/revenues generated by sanctuary-related activities, and the additional economic activity (i.e., sales, income, employment) that this spending creates as it ripples through the local economies in which the sanctuaries are located.

NOAA and others have conducted several studies to examine the market benefits associated with individual sanctuaries. Most of these studies have focused on tourism and recreation because these activities account for the largest portion of sanctuary-related economic activity. In total, NOAA estimates that spending on coastal tourism and recreation in areas adjacent to all National Marine Sanctuaries amounts to $5.2 billion (2015 USD) per year. After accounting for multiplier effects in the economy, this spending generates more than $7.3 billion in total economic activity (i.e., sales/output).56

In addition, NOAA estimates that commercial fishing activity associated with the sanctuaries generates approximately $463 million (2015 USD) in total economic activity per year. This estimate includes revenues associated with commercial fish landings, as well as for businesses that supply the fishing industry, and spending by individuals (e.g., fishermen) that benefit from the increase in commercial fishing revenues. Finally, NOAA estimates that spending by the federal government, educational institutions, and non-profit groups for sanctuary-related research generates approximately $200 million (2015 USD) in economic activity per year.57

In total, NOAA reports that tourism, recreation, commercial fishing, and research activities associated with the sanctuaries generate more than $8 billion (2015 USD) per year in economic activity in adjacent local economies.58

In addition to positive economic effects for local economies, National Marine Sanctuaries provide benefits to individuals who directly use sanctuary resources for recreational activities such as boating, fishing, snorkeling, or other more passive beach activities. The values associated with these activities result in what economists refer to as “use benefits.” There are also many individuals who may not use the sanctuaries directly, but who value their existence for various reasons. The values that these individuals derive from National Marine Sanctuaries are known as “non-use benefits.”

Economists refer to use and non-use benefits as non-market benefits because there is no market in which their price, or value, is determined. For example, when users of sanctuaries go on a scuba diving trip, there is no cashier taking their money as they enter the water. Similarly, it is difficult to capture the value that individuals hold for the species protected by the sanctuaries. While there is no established price for these services, economists employ a variety of methods for measuring these benefits indirectly.

While NOAA has not conducted a comprehensive study of the nonmarket benefits associated with all marine sanctuaries, several studies provide insights into the magnitude of different types of use and non-use benefits at individual sites. For example, in 2012 NOAA conducted a national survey to assess how much households within the U.S. would be willing to pay to expand the boundaries of the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (Gulf of Mexico) from its current three banks to nine additional banks. Results of the study indicated that households were willing to pay $36 to $111 (2015 USD) per year to expand the sanctuary – a total of $4.1 to $12.7 billion (2015 USD)

55 Wiley, P. 2003. Valuing Our National Marine Sanctuaries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - National Ocean Service Office of Management and Budget - Special Projects 56 Personal communications, Bob Leeworthy, Chief Economist, NOAA/NOS/Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. April 11, 2017. Based on studies of market benefits at individual National Marine Sanctuary sites. 57Ibid. 58 NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. National Marine Sanctuaries and Local Economies. Available: http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic/factsheets/welcome.html. Accessed 5/3/2017.


35

across all U.S. households. Since most of the survey respondents did not use/visit the sanctuary, these totals represent non-use values.59

Another study estimated the use values associated with recreating on artificial and natural reefs in Monroe County (Florida Keys) for residents and visitors. Employing an on-site survey, the authors estimated that the total use benefits associated with these resources amounted to more than $69 million (2015 USD) per year at this site. This included values for residents and visitors for reef -related activities such as boating, fishing, scuba diving, and snorkeling.60

Total Value of National Marine Sanctuaries: The amount that individuals spend to participate in sanctuary-related tourism or recreation (or the amount that businesses benefit from these activities) provides an indication of how much they value these activities, and therefore how much they value the sanctuaries themselves. Similarly, commercial fishing revenues made possible by the sanctuaries provides an indication of sanctuary value for this industry. Thus, the $8 billion in market benefits associated with all sanctuaries serves as order-of-magnitude estimate for the sanctuaries’ total use value. However, the market benefits represent a lower-bound estimate of value for several reasons. First, individuals may be willing to pay even more to enjoy National Marine Sanctuaries – in this case, total spending is not equal to total value. In addition, NOAA’s market value estimates include only the money spent or revenues generated in the economies adjacent to the sanctuaries; it does not represent for example, the amount that tourists spend to get to the sanctuary location (e.g., on plane tickets, etc.).61

The market benefits associated with the sanctuaries do not capture non-use benefits. However, based on the study on the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, we know that U.S. households would be willing to pay $36 to $111 per year to expand just one site. This means that across the 116 million households in the U.S., total non-use values amount to between $4.2 and $12.9 billion per year (2015 USD) for the expansion of that Sanctuary. Thus, it is not hard to imagine that households would be willing to pay at least this much to maintain the non-use benefits associated with all 13 National Marine Sanctuary sites.

Based on the studies described above, the total use and non-use values of the sanctuaries amount to at least between $12.2 and $20.9 billion per year (Table 12).

59 Stefanski, S. F., and J. Shimshack. 2015. Valuing Marine Biodiversity in the Gulf of Mexico: Evidence form the Proposed Boundary Expansion of the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Marine Resource Economics. 31(2): 211-232. 60 Johns, G. M., Leeworthy, V. R., Bell, F. W., & Bonn, M. A. Socioeconomic Study of Reefs in Southeast Florida. NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. 61 To estimate use value, economists use well-established methods such as travel cost models or willingness-to-pay surveys. Economic impacts/market benefits are not typically included in benefits analysis. However, due to limited available data, we are applying market benefits to provide an order of magnitude estimate of use value.


36

Table 12. Annual Economic Value of National Marine Sanctuaries (billions, 2016 USD)

Lower-bound estimate Upper-bound estimate

Annual use value of National Marine Sanctuariesa

(based on market benefits) $8.0 $8.0

Annual non-use value of National Marine Sanctuaries

$4.2 $12.9

Total annual economic value $12.2 $20.9

a. Includes $8 billion in use benefits and $4.1 to $12.9 billion in non-use benefits per year.

Value of National Marine Sanctuaries Condition Reports and NOAA Fleet Contribution: NOAA and other stakeholders rely heavily on the National Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports to make decisions about sanctuary management. Thus, they contribute significantly to the sanctuaries’ value by protecting the important benefits they provide. Based on input from subject matter experts, we estimate that 20% to 25% of the total value of National Marine Sanctuaries can be attributed to use of the Conditions Reports, which improve management actions that maintain the benefits associated with the Sanctuaries and prevent their future degradation. Thus, the total value of the Conditions Reports amounts to between $2.4 and $5.2 billion per year. Based on information from TPIO and NOAA subject matter experts, 25% to 35% of the value of the Conditions Reports can be attributed to the NOAA Fleet. Thus, the benefits associated with fleet inputs amounts to approximately $0.61 to $1.8 billion per year (Table 13).

Table 13. Annual Benefits of NOAA Fleet, National Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports (2016 USD)

Lower-bound estimate Upper-bound estimate

Annual value of National Marine Sanctuariesa

(billions) $12.1 $20.9

Percent of National Marine Sanctuary value attributable to Conditions Reports

20% 25%

Value of Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports (billions)

$2.42 $5.23

Percent of Conditions Reports value attributable to NOAA Fleet

25% 35%

Total Annual Benefits of NOAA Fleet (billions)

$0.605 $1.83

a. Includes $8 billion in use benefits and $4.1 to $12.9 billion in non-use benefits per year.


37

4. Cost-Effectiveness of NOAA Ships and Contract Vessels for Select Data Collection Efforts

This project included an assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of using contract vessels. Specifically, we examined several case studies to compare the cost-effectiveness of using contract vessels as a substitute for NOAA’s Fleet for certain data collection activities. We also examined available information on the capacity and availability of contract vessels. This section summarizes and presents conclusions from the cost-effectiveness analysis. Appendix B presents complete details.

4.1 Marginal Cost of Using the NOAA Fleet As a basis for the cost-effectiveness analysis, we used cost data for the NOAA Fleet for fiscal year 2015, the most recent year for which complete cost data were available at the outset of this project. Specifically, we used these data to compare the marginal cost (as opposed to total cost) of operating the NOAA Fleet to the cost of using contract vessels to accomplish the same goals. This approach assumes that NOAA will not make dramatic changes to the overall mix of contract versus fleet ship time employed or radically alter the composition of its fleet in the immediate future. In other words, we assumed that substitutions would take place at the margins.

Given this assumption, it is not appropriate to account for the entire budget associated with NOAA’s marine operations in the comparison. Some elements of the budget (e.g., fixed maintenance costs, certain support and management costs) are not reduced when NOAA Fleet missions are accomplished using contract vessels. Some of these fixed costs would be reduced only by extreme substitution to the extent of eliminating one or more ships from the NOAA Fleet. Other fixed costs would still be required even in a hypothetical scenario where the NOAA fleet were completely replaced by contract vessels. These costs are associated with functions (e.g., safety and compliance) that would be required regardless of which vessels NOAA uses to acquire ocean observations.

With this approach in mind, we used data from OMAO’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer for fiscal year 2015 to estimate the variable (or marginal) operating cost for each ship in the NOAA fleet.62 We used data provided by OMAO on fiscal year 2015 days at sea for each ship to calculate the cost per day at sea (Table 14). These costs include only variable costs that are proportional to the level of effort expended. They exclude fixed costs that would not be reduced by substitution at the margins. Therefore, they are not comparable to costs for the NOAA fleet reported in certain other sources. For example, costs developed for the NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team63 cover the total cost of all of OMAO’s observing systems, including fixed costs. Appendix B provides more details on the derivation of these costs.

62 “OMAO Ship Cost Effectiveness Combined Submission_022317.xlsx.” Spreadsheet received via e-mail from Linda Mallinoff, OMAO Office of Chief Financial Officer. February 23, 2017. 63 The NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team was a team of senior subject matter experts from across NOAA established to summarize the relevant legal, policy and programmatic at-sea mission needs to describe the NOAA Fleet core capabilities to support NOAA’s missions. The Team documented the extent to which these needs are currently addressed and describe the capability gap that will exist absent fleet recapitalization. The Team developed a Fleet Plan, sequencing the planned end of service life of current vessels, and acquisition of new vessels (to include all phases of acquisition).


38

Table 14. Fiscal Year 2015 Marginal Cost of Using the NOAA Fleet

Ship 2015 Days at Sea Marginal Cost

Total ($) $/Day at Sea

Bell M. Shimada 190 8,803,356 46,333

Fairweather 136 8,027,114 59,023

Ferdinand R. Hassler 203 5,180,034 25,517

Gordon Gunter 175 6,290,749 35,947

Henry B. Bigelow 172 6,151,592 35,765

Hi’ialakai 202 6,332,617 31,350

Nancy Foster 166 5,345,956 32,205

Okeanos Explorer 168 9,722,189 57,870

Oregon II 191 5,079,373 26,594

Oscar Dyson 192 8,538,806 44,473

Oscar Elton Sette 145 5,366,281 37,009

Pisces 131 6,169,307 47,094

Rainier 141 8,100,746 57,452

Ronald H. Brown 233 8,427,715 36,170

Reuben Lasker 80 4,754,080 59,426

Thomas Jefferson 119 6,278,611 52,761

TOTAL 2,644 108,568,526 41,062

Note: The totals presented here include variable direct cost along with those indirect costs that are proportional to level of effort, but exclude fixed costs. Therefore, they are not comparable to costs derived elsewhere (e.g., for the NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team), which cover the total cost of all OMAO observing systems, including fixed costs.

4.2 Cost-Effectiveness Case Studies NOAA currently uses contract vessels to support a variety of operations. Examples include fisheries surveys, deployment and maintenance of buoys, and collection of hydrographic data. Vessels employed by NOAA also include research vessels, both public sector and privately owned, for scientific data collection. NOAA also uses vessels from partner federal agencies, including the U.S. Coast Guard and the National Science Foundation. In some cases, this usage is a no-cost exchange of ship time. In other cases, NOAA reimburses the partner agency.64,65

In fiscal year 2015, NOAA used approximately 2,700 days at sea aboard contract vessels, roughly equal to the total days at sea executed by the NOAA fleet (2,644, as shown in Table 14). NOAA’s use of contract vessels has remained fairly stable during the last few years: contract vessel days at sea varied by 11 percent or less from fiscal year 2014 to fiscal year 2016.66 Although data are also available on the total cost of these contracts, it is not appropriate to compare

64 NOAA. 2016. The NOAA Fleet Plan: Building NOAA’s 21st Century Fleet. V3.1. NOAA Internal Use Only – Pre-decisional. October 4. 65 O’Clock, Bill. 2016. “Charters.” Presentation at NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team Meeting and Supporting Spreadsheets. Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. May 10. 66 O’Clock, Bill. 2016. “Charters.” Presentation at NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team Meeting and Supporting Spreadsheets. Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. May 10. Data do not include no-cost exchanges of days at sea with partner agencies.


39

these aggregate data to the cost of using the NOAA fleet. Factors that must be considered in comparing unit costs for NOAA ships and contract vessels include the following:

Data on contract vessel costs generally reflect the contract price only. Some contracts cover “bare boat” costs only, while others encompass a more complete scope of support for the mission (e.g., fuel, crew to operate deck equipment supporting the mission). Even when the contract covers more than “bare boat” costs, there can be other costs associated with the use of contract vessels that are not reflected in the contract price. Examples of these additional costs can include: costs for provisions for NOAA staff aboard the contract vessel, mobilization and demobilization of NOAA staff and equipment, and calibration of instruments used aboard the contract vessel. On the other hand, some contracts encompass other services in addition to use of vessels. In particular, NOAA contracts for hydrographic surveys are structured as data buys that purchase a quantity of data instead of a number of days at sea. In addition to providing ship time to collect the data, the contractor also provides quality assurance/quality control and data processing and formatting according to detailed specifications.67

A day at sea aboard a contract vessel is not necessarily equal to a day at sea aboard a NOAA vessel. NOAA ships often collect multiple data streams and/or conduct multiple missions simultaneously. Although some contract vessels, such as certain University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) ships,68 have similar multi-data stream/multi-mission capabilities, many vessels are better suited for individual projects and a more limited set of data. These “economies of scope” mean that multiple contract vessels can sometimes be required to replace the output of a NOAA vessel. In addition, NOAA uses NOAA ships for advancing technology through testing new equipment and procedures, maintaining and building expertise within the science field and marine operations.

NOAA ships have greater endurance than many smaller contract vessels. Therefore, they can remain at sea for the duration of long projects without returning to port. In addition, NOAA ships often can be scheduled and positioned to transition directly from one project to the next without significant travel time. Both of these factors mean that the use of contract vessels can, in some cases, entail more transit days (i.e., at the start and finish of the discrete projects for which they are hired and, in some cases, to resupply during longer projects).

Contract vessels used for missions with NOAA personnel aboard must meet certain safety standards.69 Aggregate data on contract vessel costs include missions without NOAA crew aboard. The vessels used for these missions might not meet these standards and, therefore, not be comparable to NOAA ships. In addition, some contract vessels provide services that the NOAA fleet cannot (e.g., data collection in shallow waters). The aggregate data include such missions.

Given these factors, a comparison of cost-effectiveness must account for mission-specific details. Accordingly, we used a case study approach to account for these factors and provide a one-to-one comparison of contract vessel costs to NOAA fleet costs. Table 15 identifies the example missions we examined, along with key mission parameters and estimated costs.

The case studies reflect missions that support three different NOAA line offices. Each of the cases studies involves a different NOAA vessel. Three of the case studies (TAO array maintenance, sanctuary ecosystem assessment surveys for Greater Farallones and Cordell Banks, and reef assessment and monitoring in American Samoa) are of missions that support NOAA products and services evaluated in detail in preceding sections of this report.

67 NOAA. 2016. NOS Hydrographic Surveys: Specifications and Deliverables. Office of Coast Survey, National Ocean Service, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. March. 68 NOAA’s use of UNOLS ships includes both no-cost exchange of ship time and cases where NOAA pays the institution operating the UNOLS ship in a manner similar to a commercial charter. 69 “Vessel Chartering Info.” Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Available at: http://www.omao.noaa.gov/learn/headquarters/safety-environmental-compliance/vessel-chartering-info. Accessed January 12, 2017.


40

For each case study, we estimated the cost of using the NOAA ship based on the marginal costs estimated in Table 14. The contract vessel cost estimates in each case study cover providing the same services and support as the NOAA ship and meeting the same mission requirements. The contract vessel cost estimates include adjustments necessary to make an equivalent comparison. Appendix B provides complete details of the cost estimates. It also includes further discussion of the results for each case study. The following paragraphs provide a summary:

1. The case study of TAO array maintenance covers two scenarios. The first scenario is a mission with scope limited to routine maintenance and servicing of the TAO array, along with deployment of Argo and surface drifting floats. The second scenario is a mission that also incorporates scientific research that is directly related to operating the array. If the scope is limited to the first scenario, a commercial contract vessel can complete the mission more cost-effectively than the NOAA ship Ronald H. Brown. The commercial contract vessel would not be equipped, however, to supply all the requirements of the second scenario. Substituting for the Ronald H. Brown in the second scenario requires the use of a UNOLS ship equipped to collect the underway ocean observations and support the related supplemental science. In this scenario, the Ronald H. Brown is more cost-effective than the alternative of using a UNOLS vessel.

2. The 2014 California Current Cetacean and Ecosystem Assessment Survey (CalCurCEAS) expedition was originally planned for the NOAA ship Reuben Lasker. When the Reuben Lasker did not come on line as scheduled, the expedition was instead conducted aboard the R/V Ocean Starr, a contract vessel that was formerly a NOAA ship. Even after accounting for certain adjustments required to make the comparison equivalent, the cost of using the Ocean Starr for CalCurCEAS 2014 was much lower than the estimated cost of using the Reuben Lasker. Although fiscal year 2015 marginal costs for the Reuben Lasker may not be representative of normal operations,70 more recent cost data are unlikely to change the conclusion. The cost per day for the Ocean Starr for CalCurCEAS 2014 was lower than the marginal operating cost for any NOAA vessel (even the Ferdinand R. Hassler, which had the lowest marginal cost in 2015, as shown in Table 14). Although the Ocean Starr reportedly is nearing the end of her useful life and not being maintained for longevity,71 she was still in operation as of July 2016.72 Information about the Ocean Starr’s future availability and price is not available.

3. The 2016 Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys (SEAS) project in the Greater Farallones and Cordell Banks National Marine Sanctuaries was conducted aboard the NOAA ship Bell M. Shimada. Commercial contract vessels available near the project location have endurance and/or berthing limitations such that multiple vessels or trips would be required to substitute for the Bell M. Shimada.73 The transit time involved in bringing in a more capable vessel from farther away could be significant, particularly compared to the relatively short nine-day project duration. Given these limitations, a NOAA subject matter expert suggested a vessel operated by the nearby Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) as a potentially efficient substitute if the Bell M. Shimada were not available.74 The MBARI ship Western Flyer could supply the mission requirements at a slightly lower cost than the Bell M. Shimada. MBARI, however, does not actively seek out research assignments for its vessels from other organizations, so the Western Flyer would be available only under specific, case-by-case circumstances.

4. The 2015 Pacific Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (RAMP) in American Samoa was conducted aboard the NOAA ship Hi‘ialakai. Given the remote location and length of mission, commercial alternatives to using the Hi‘ialakai are limited. Outside of the commercial sector, however, an alternative would be the R/V Tangaroa, operated by the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA). The Tangaroa could supply the mission requirements, but the cost would be substantially higher than using the Hi‘ialakai. Scheduling the Tangaroa could also require substantial lead time.

70 The Reuben Lasker was at the start of her service life in 2015 and only executed 80 days at sea. 71 E-mail communication with Michael Gallagher, National Marine Fisheries Service. February 9, 2017. 72 “2017 Cruise Schedule.” California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations. Available at: http://calcofi.org/cruises/561-cruise-schedule.html. Accessed March 8, 2017. 73 Ship Time Request for Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys: GFNMS and CBNMS v3. January 12, 2015. 74 Personal communication with Jan Roletto, Research Coordinator at the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. January 10, 2017.


41

For the case study considering a mission of limited scope (the first TAO maintenance scenario, which excludes supplement scientific research), the commercial contract vessel was more cost effective. This result is not surprising, given that the NOAA ship included in the comparison is better equipped than necessary for the limited scope. The case studies also show, however, that even for the multi-disciplinary research missions to which NOAA ships are best suited, cost-effective contract vessel alternatives can sometimes be available. The case studies are not conclusive regarding the factors that determine cost-effectiveness for these research missions. The two case studies where contract vessels came out ahead (CalCurCEAS and SEAS) were for missions in U.S. coastal waters, while the research missions where NOAA ships were more cost-effective (TAO maintenance including research and RAMP) were in the more remote tropical Pacific, suggesting that region of operation is a key factor. This result, however, could be related to the specific NOAA ships examined instead of geography. CalCurSEAS and SEAS involved NOAA ships with marginal costs higher than the average for NOAA (Reuben Lasker and Bell M. Shimada). TAO maintenance and RAMP involved NOAA ships with marginal costs below NOAA’s average (Ronald H. Brown and Hi‘ialakai).75

75 See Table 14.


42

Table 15. Summary of Cost-Effectiveness Case Studies

a. b.

NOAA Line Office

National Weather Service

National Weather Service

National Marine Fisheries Service

National Ocean Service

National Ocean Service

Year 2015 2015 2014 2016 2015

Mission

Mooring maintenance and servicing and float deployment

Mooring maintenance and servicing and float deployment, plus related scientific sampling and research

Study of cetacean species and their ecosystem, plus physical oceanographic and El Nino sampling

Assessment of National Marine Sanctuary conditions, resources, and ecosystem

Ecosystem monitoring and research in coral reef habitat, plus data collection on ocean acidification

Location Tropical Pacific Tropical Pacific U.S. West Coast U.S. West Coast Tropical Pacific

Days at Sea 40a 40a 120a 9b 103b

NOAA Ship Estimated

Costc

Ronald H. Brown : $1,446,800

Ronald H. Brown : $1,446,800

Reuben Laske r: $7,131,120

Bell M. Shimada : $416,997

Hi'ialakai : $3,229,050

Contract Vessel Estimated

Costd

Contract vessel: $955,560

University National Oceanographic

Laboratory System vessel:

$1,710,000

Contract vessel: $2,459,353

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research

Institute vessel: $403,300

New Zealand Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research vessel:

$5,404,185

Most Cost-Effective Option

Contract vessel (by 34%)

NOAA ship (by 15%)



NOAA ship (by 40%)

Vessel Actually Used

Contract vesselNOAA ship and UNOLS ships

Contract vessel NOAA ship NOAA ship

Other FactorsScope does not include related research

Not the top priority for UNOLS ship

Contract vessel may be near end of useful life

Contract vessel available only on a case-by-case basis

Foreign vessel

C a s e S t u d i e s

California Current Cetacean and

Ecosystem Assessment Survey

Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment

Surveys: Greater Farallones and Cordell Bank

Pacific Reef Assessment and

Monitoring Program: American

Samoa

Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array Maintenance

a. Same mission length, including transit time, for NOAA ship and contract vessel substitute. b. Contract vessel cost incorporates additional days at sea for transit. c. Based on the marginal cost estimated in Table 14. d. Estimated costs to supply the same mission requirements as NOAA ship, including adjustments to make the comparison equivalent.


43

4.3 Capacity, Availability, and Other Factors Affecting the Use of Contract Vessels As part of the cost-effectiveness analysis, we also examined available data about the capacity and availability of contract vessels, along with other factors that could affect NOAA’s use of contract vessels. A primary source for this part of the assessment included a set of informal, voluntary interviews with nine contract vessel providers. We also used data downloaded from USAspending.gov, a publicly accessible U.S. government website that provides searchable, transaction-level information on federal contracts and grants.76 Appendix B provides more details on both of these sources. Observations from this part of the analysis, also discussed in greater detail in Appendix B, include the following:

Data are not available on the number of vessels with capabilities useful to NOAA that might be available under contract. Statistics, for example on the total number of research and fishing vessels, however, suggest that the overall size of the industry is large. NOAA successfully contracts with a variety of different providers. Data on vessel contracts filtered from USAspending show that NOAA had transactions with more than 130 individual vendors under approximately 200 unique contracts in fiscal year 2015.77

Individual vendors interviewed are generally willing and available to provide support, even to the extent of modifying their vessels to suit project needs. It is important to note, however, that the vessel availability is greater for smaller vessels with more limited capabilities. The individual vessels that are the most obvious substitutes for NOAA ships (UNOLS vessels) are also the least available.

Most of the vendors interviewed (six of the nine) reported that their availability is greater with more advance planning. The lead time required to access contract vessels varies depending on the length of the project and on the size of the vessel. For longer projects aboard larger vessels, more planning is required, however: often a year or more in advance. For context, the missions conducted by NOAA’s fleet in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 spanned a range of lengths (Figure 4), with an average of approximately 25 days at sea.78

A majority of the vendors interviewed (five of the nine) reported that their vessels are busiest during the summer months. In spite of competing priorities during the summer, however, the interviewees reported good availability, particularly with advance planning. NOAA ships execute missions year-round, but, like contract vessels, they are busiest during the summer (particularly June). The NOAA fleet, however, also executes a significant number of days at sea outside of summer (particularly March through April and October).79 These schedule data suggest there may be opportunities to utilize contract vessels when those vessels have greater availability.

Despite the overall size of the contract vessel industry and the reports from vendors interviewed of generally good availability, specific projects may have requirements (e.g., vessel capabilities, project scheduling, or location) that are not a good match for a very large number of vessels. The number of such NOAA projects could be significant, based on the available data about the number of vendors bidding on these projects. These data show that, of NOAA contracts for vessel services active in fiscal year 2015, just over half received only one offer and almost 70 percent had two or fewer offers.80 Data are not available on the number of solicitations that received no bids.

Figure 4. Length of Missions Conducted by NOAA Fleet

76 Data downloaded for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for fiscal year 2015 from https://www.usaspending.gov/DownloadCenter/Pages/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed November 18, 2016. 77 See Appendix B for information on how we identified charter contracts in the USAspending data. 78 Based on data provided by OMAO. Excludes fleet services and program support activities (e.g., inspections, shakedowns, sea trials, and transit not assigned to a specific line office) and scheduled missions where actual days at sea were reported as zero. 79 Based on total days at sea in each month for the entire fleet, as derived from data provided by OMAO (Ibid). 80 Data downloaded for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for fiscal year 2015 from https://www.usaspending.gov/DownloadCenter/Pages/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed November 18, 2016.

NOAA Flee

AfoinStinth

Inprhaprflwfa

81 Time seriAccessed M

et Societal Benef

All nine of the vor their servicesncreases (in thetatistic’s produ

ndustry have rehe exception of

nstitutional factrograms have cave the mechanrocess may creeet time availab

which they mustactors.

ies data downloa

March 7, 2017.

fits Study, Final R

vendors intervies. Outside of m

e range of two tucer price indexmained fairly s

f a 5 percent de

tors that differ contract vehiclenisms or budgeate an incentivble to the progt use contract v

aded for produce

Report

ewed identifiedmajor changes into three percentx for the water stable during thecrease in betw

across NOAA es in place thatet to access conve to use contraram (i.e., these

vessels). See Ap

er price index for

44

d fuel prices as n fuel prices, mt) in the prices transportation

he last five yeareen 2015 and 2

programs also t allow easy accntract vessels. Fact vessels for pe programs receppendix B for

r NAICS catego

the major factmost interviewe

for their servicindustry likewrs, changing by2016).81

affect the use cess to contractFor still other pparts of their meive a fixed allspecific examp

ory 483 from http

tor that would aees predicted oces. The U.S. B

wise shows that y less than 3 pe

of contract vest vessels. Othe

programs, the flmission by limit

ocation of NOAples of each of

ps://www.bls.go

affect future pronly small annuBureau of Laboprices in this

ercent per year

ssels. Some er programs do fleet allocation ting the total NAA fleet time athese institutio

v/ppi/data.htm.

rices ual or

(with

not

NOAA above onal

NOAA Fleet So

5. Summ

Conc5.1This study deproducts it supspecies, increthe five produapproximatelyfor NOAA ve

This study prostreams throurelied on datadevelop the v

While this stuUnder this cothe value of 5addition, we wexisting data awe conducted

In addition, thperformance oattribute an exproviding a reexperts.

Another sourcsubset of five to limitations assumptions e

The data usedquantificationbroader applicextensive resework has its oshort, the resuestimates of thscientifically comprehensivsocietal benefresearch agen

Despite these interviews wiestimates estadecisions at N

ocietal Benefits

mary of Le

clusions andmonstrates thepports. The NOased revenues

ucts that we moy $0.77 and $3essels.

ovides NOAA ugh the developa from the TPIOalue chains, an

udy represents antract the proje

5 products, that were not able toand estimates f

d with product e

hroughout the sof a given prodxact percentageeasonable range

ce of uncertainNOAA producand caveats. T

embedded in th

d as inputs to thns are based wecability. Estimaearch and analyown limitationsulting values rehe value of NOrigorous analy

vely, would be fits of the NOAndas.

challenges, whith subject mattablish the signifNOAA regardin

Study, Final Rep

ssons Lea

d Lessons Levalue of data c

OAA Fleet suppfor economic s

onetized as part.39 billion per

with a systemapment of value O NOSIA-II mond to inform ou

a significant firect team was onare dependent

o conduct origifrom the literatuexperts from w

study we learneduct, given the e of product vae of values usin

ty stems from tcts. While thes

To address this he studies.

his analysis repere often few inates of the contysis by NOAAs and the resultepresent an empOAA products asis would requcost-prohibitiv

AA fleet and ide

hich are inhereter experts estaficant value of ng the fleet.

port

rned and R

earned collection activports a wide rasectors, and inct of this researcyear, which is

atic process forchains for the podel as well as

ur valuation of f

rst step in demonly able to devt on data collecinal valuation aure. We were a

within NOAA.

ed that it is diffinterdependenc

alue to the NOAng Fleet data d

the studies thatse studies rely ouncertainty, we

present the best n number and, atribution of the’s Technology,s have not beenpirical first stepand services an

uire additional pve. This study dentifies critical

nt in most econablished a highlf the fleet’s con

45

Recomme

vities and otherange of benefitscreased safety ach, the benefitssignificantly g

r assessing the products and sestructured inte

fleet-dependen

onstrating the vvelop value chated from the fleanalyses; our malso only able t

ficult to isolate cy of data that

AA Fleet. We hdependency esti

t the project teaon standard ecoe have attempte

available inforas with any stue NOAA fleet t, Planning and n independentlyp in the directiond the share of primary data codoes establish al information re

nomic analysesly credible rang

ntributions and p

endations f

r services the Ns, including theand economic ps attributed to thgreater than the

value of indiviervices that deperviews with Nnt products.

value of the NOains for 12 of meet and/or the o

monetary estimato conduct a lim

the effect of inmost products

have attemptedimates provide

am relied on toonomic methoded to provide r

rmation. Howeudy, limited in tto final productIntegration for

ly verified (as won of developinthat value attri

ollection and ana scientifically equirements th

s, our use of puge of value estiprovide materi

for Next S

NOAA Fleet pre protection of prosperity for Uhe NOAA Flee

e annual OMAO

idual observingpend on them.

NOAA subject m

OAA Fleet, it imore than 600 pobserving systeates of value thmited number o

ndividual data rely on. Thus,

d to reflect this ed by TPIO and

o develop moneds and models, reasonable rang

ever, the studietheir accuracy,ts and services r Observation owith a “denial ong more accuraibutable to the Nnalysis which, sound process

hat should be us

ublished studiesimates. We areially relevant d

Steps

ovides throughkey resources U.S. residents. et amount to beO operating bu

g systems and dThe project tea

matter experts

is limited in scoproducts, and qems it supportsherefore dependof interviews, w

streams on the it is difficult touncertainty by

d the subject m

etary estimates they are also s

ges and describ

s upon which t, completeness,are based on

office (TPIO) bof data” analysate and compleNOAA fleet. Aif performed

s for assessing tsed to inform fu

s and extensivee confident thatdata to support

h the and For

etween udget

data am to

ope. quantify s. In d on which

o y atter

for the subject be key

the , and

but this sis). In ete A more

the future

e t these future

NOAA Fleet So

As part of thismarine fleet fcontract vessetwo types of vdata streams aships, have sima more limitedreplace the ou

To account foseveral case sa single purpovessel to be thare examples case studies wNOAA ships contract vessealso be relatedinvolved NOA

We also condcould affect Nvessel providerequirements of contract veoffer and almsmaller vesselships (UNOLof contract ve

Reco5.2There are sevquantitative stusers. These ithat the produconducted to However, thisNOAA may asystems (e.g.,

To better examcase studies. Ieffectiveness

A more detailvoluntary interepresentativeavailability ancontract recorthe industry’s

82 Data are not

ocietal Benefits

s research we afor certain data els is approximvessels are not and/or conductmilar multi-datd set of data. Tutput of a NOA

or these factors studies of speciose mission of he most cost-efwhere contract

were not concluappeared more

els appeared md to the specifiAA ships with

ducted a limitedNOAA’s use ofers and individ(e.g., vessel ca

essels. Of NOAost 70 percent ls with more lim

LS vessels) are aessels during pe

ommended Neral ways that Ntudy estimates interviews wouucts provide, asfurther refine os would requirealso want to exp OMAO aircra

mine the factorIf carefully sele(e.g., geograph

led assessment erviews with vee. A more thorond capabilities rds, beyond thes size and capab

available on the

Study, Final Rep

also examined tcollection activ

mately equal to idirectly compa

t multiple missita stream/multi

These “economiAA vessel.

and make equfic missions thlimited scope (ffective option.t vessels are m

usive regardinge cost effective ore cost effectic NOAA shipshigher margina

d examination of contract vessedual vendors repapabilities, projAA contracts fo

had two or fewmited capabilitalso the least averiods when tho

Next Steps NOAA could fcould benefit f

uld provide a bes well as how thour monetary ee primary data pand this analy

aft).

rs that determinected, additionahy, specific NO

of existing andendors that we ough, perhaps scould provide

e limited describilities.

e number of solic

port

the cost-effectivities. In termsits use of own arable for a varions simultaneoi-mission capabies of scope” m

ivalent comparhat could be con(TAO maintena. The case stud

more cost effectig the factors tha

for the researcive for those cos examined. Thal costs than th

of the capacity els. NOAA sucport good availject schedulingr vessel service

wer offers.82 In ties. The indivivailable. Thereose vessels hav

further refine thfrom additionaetter understanhe NOAA Fleestimates, particcollection. Fin

ysis to include m

ne the cost-effeal case studies

OAA ships used

d future contracconducted for statistically sela greater underiptive data in U

citations that rec 46

iveness of usins of the numberfleet. In many riety of reasonsously. Althougbilities, many v

mean that multi

risons betweennducted by eithance without suies of multi-disive and others wat determine coch missions cononducted in U.She case studies whe average for N

and availabilitcessfully contrlability to prov

g, or location) thes active in fiscgeneral, contraidual vessels the may, howeverve greater avail

he estimates frol interviews widing of the dec

et contributes tocularly our esti

nally, to further more fleet-dep

ectiveness of cocould help isol

d, length of mis

ct vessel capacthis study wereected, survey inrstanding of the

USAspending, m

ceived no bids.

ng contract vessr of days at seacases, however

s. For example,gh some contracvessels are bettiple contract ve

n contract vesseher type of vessupplemental scsciplinary reseawhere NOAA

ost-effectivenesnducted in the rS. coastal watewhere contractNOAA’s fleet o

ty of contract vracts with a largvide support. Sphat are not a gocal year 2015, jact vessel availhat are the mostr, be opportunilability (i.e., ou

om this study. ith NOAA expcisions that useo each productimates for Nautr inform investmpendent product

ontract vessels,late the factorsssion, time of y

city and availabe limited in numincorporating me industry. A dmight also prov

sels as a substita executed, NOr, the missions, NOAA ships ct vessels, suchter suited for inessels can some

els and NOAA sel. The single cientific researcarch missions iships are moress. Geography remote tropica

ers. These result vessels were moverall.

vessels, along wge number of dpecific projectsood match for ajust over half rlability appearst obvious substities for NOAAutside of the sum

First, many of perts as well as ers make based . Additional antical Charts andment decisionsts and/or additi

, NOAA could s that contributeyear).

bility would alsmber and not g

more detailed qdetailed examinvide more com

tute for NOAAOAA’s current u

conducted by often collect m

h as certain UNndividual projecetimes be requi

ships, we examcase study inv

ch) showed a cindicated that the cost effective.could be one fa

al Pacific, whilelts, however, comore cost effec

with other factodifferent contras, however, maa very large nureceived only os to be greater ftitutes for NOA

A to make greatmmer months)

the value chainexternal produon the informa

nalyses could ad the ENSO Ou

s and focus resoional observing

d conduct additie to cost-

so be useful. Thgeographically questions aboutnation of NOAA

mprehensive dat

A’s use of these

multiple NOLS cts and ired to

mined volving contract there . These

factor. e ould ctive

ors that act ay have umber one for AA ter use ).

ns and uct ation

also be utlook. ources, g

ional

he

t vessel A’s ta on

Appendix A: NOAA Fleet Data Value Chains

A-1

Appendix A: NOAA Fleet Data Value Chains for Select Products and Services

Appendix A contains the full value chain descriptions for the 12 NOAA products and services evaluated as part of the NOAA Fleet Societal Benefits Study, including:

Coral Reef Status and Trends Report Sea Level Rise (SLR) and Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer Nautical Chart Products El Nino Southern-Oscillation (ENSO) Outlook National Marine Sanctuary Conditions Reports Fisheries Stock Assessments Tsunamis Inundation Forecast Models Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) Forecasts and Mitigation Capability, Gulf of Maine Hypoxia Watch, Gulf of Mexico Ocean Noise Mapping Hurricane Outlook Emergency Response Services

1. Coral Pro1.1

The National the Coral ReeStatus and Trealong with mamanagers. Thcurrently undstandardized imonitored by more extensiv

The CRCP, a NESDIS and reefs to develconsolidated ajurisdictions adevelop 15 tothat reflect theindicators witthresholds, anto set fundingactivity that thnot roll-up indthe process of

NO1.2The report cargeographic reReport is heavthe Nancy Fomapping.83 Bucard’s climate

Using NOAAsampling metas charter persuch the PacifPacific IslandThe long distawith NOAA s

Pro1.3

83 “Two NOAANational Ocean11-26/two-noaa

Reefs: Cooduct Backg

Coral Reef Moef Conservationends Report Caany other more

he Status and Trer developmenindicators for aNOAA’s CRC

ve, tailored rep

matrix programheadquartered op status indicaand standardizeand presented ao 19 biologic (fie health of specthin each categnd presented in g priorities needhey support. Prdicators across f developing th

OAA Fleet Drd and underly

egion. The stratvily reliant on bster provide muoys and satelle indicators alo

A ships and obsthodology that sonal dive boatfic Reef Assess

ds Fisheries Sciances and remoships.

oduct Interm

A ships deployednic and Atmospha-ships-deployed

oral Statusground onitoring Progrn Program (CRards for high-lee detailed reporrends Report C

nt, that will provall U.S. coral reCP. In addition,orts for the juri

m spanning NOfrom the Natioators since the ed sampling mat the national lfish and benthiccific coral reef ory (e.g. fish, ba report card t

ded to ensure thrior to this effosites and there

he first two pilo

ata that Feeing indicators rtified random sbenthic and oth

multi-beam sonalites also collecong with ocean

ervation systemunderpins the nts, are more exsment and Monience Center anote locations of

mediaries an

d to Caribbean toheric Administratd-caribbean-map

s and Tren

ram (NCRMP)RCP), is developevel decision-mrts for local resCards are a newvide a summareef jurisdiction, the CRCP proisdictional leve

OS, NMFS, OAonal Ocean Serprogram was e

methodologies solevel. CRCP usc) and climate if attributes and benthic, climateo high-level dehe continued he

ort to standardizefore could not ot Status and Tr

ed the Produrequire the collsampling designher habitat mapar, echo soundect data on oceanprofile data co

ms to perform dnational status

xpensive and scnitoring Progrand funded by thf the Pacific co

nd Dissemin

o map coral reefstion. Accessed Ja

p-coral-reefs-expA-2

nds Repor

, as part of ping

makers, ource

w product, ry of s oduces el.

AR and rvice’s Office festablished in 2o that trends inses data from sindicators, and ecosystem serve, socioeconomecision-makersealth and produze sampling meprovide a natio

rends Report C

uct lection of data n that NCRMPpping performeer sonar, and otn acidification ollected during

data collection and trends repo

carce, limiting tam (RAMP) whhe CRCP, couldoral reef jurisdic

nation

s, explore deep sanuary 25, 2017

plore-deep-sea

Appendix

rt

for Coastal Man2000. Between n coral reef ecoships, buoys, c

d uses surveys tvices relative tomic) and regions such as the U.uctivity of thesethodologies aconal picture of

Cards.

by multiple obP uses to colleced in part by NOther capabilitieand thermal strmarine biologi

helps the CRCort. Other shipthe timeframe fhich is NCRMPd not be done wctions make so

ea”. Office of M: http://www.om

Product: CoraReport

Line Office: NReef Conserva

Mission ServiCoral Reefs

x A: NOAA Fle

anagement, has 2010 and 2013

osystems could charter ships, anto collect socioo a historical stn are then avera.S Congress anse resources ancross jurisdictif coral reef heal

bservation systet data for the SOAA cruises. N

es for coral reeftress, which feeical ship survey

CP adhere to th-based data colfor critical samP in the Pacificwithout the useome of these pr

Marine and Aviatimao.noaa.gov/fin

al Reef Status a

National Oceanation Program

ice Area: Prote

eet Data Value

monitored cor3 NOAA be compared a

nd satellites to economic indictandard. The aged, comparednd NOAA leadend the economicons, the CRCPlth. The CRCP

ems over a widStatus and TrenNOAA ships suf and fish habited into the repoys.

he standardized llection option

mpling. Some ec, conducted bye of NOAA vesrograms only p

ion Operations. nd/media/articles/

and Trends

n Service, Cora

ect and Monito

Chains

ral

across

cators

d to ership c

P could P is in

de nds uch as tat ort

s, such fforts y the ssels. ossible

/2015-

al

or

Appendix A:

NOAA contraNetwork (IANthen organize

The CRCP is and other fedeindividual basjurisdiction-le

Use1.4U.S. Congresallocate resouMarine Proteceducation proindicators incpublic.

The Status ancondition of tMonitoring biscientists, andstressors.86 Clresilient or vudiscuss in the decisions.

Soc1.5Coral reefs propportunity foincluding: useexistence of creefs).88 Severa meta-analysA.1 shows pe

Various stressjurisdiction-lethe NOAA Flthereby helpin

84 “EnvironmenMaryland Centhttp://ian.umce85 “National Coand Atmospherhttps://www.co86 “National CoAtmospheric A87 “National Coand Atmospher88 Brander, LukReef Conservathttps://data.nodpdf. Accessed 189 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

acts with The UN) to generate ts it in a format

in the final staeral agency leasis with jurisdicevel reports.

ers of the Prsional leaders a

urces to coral rected Area mana

ograms that furtluded in the rep

nd Trends Repohese ecosystemiological trendsd coral reef manlimate indicatoulnerable reef a

next section, s

cietal Benefirovide the Unitor recreational e values (e.g., scoral reefs); andral studies havesis of these studer-hectare value

sors threaten coevel report are leet into severang to protect co

ntal Report Cardter for Environms.edu/work_with

oral Reef Monitoric Administratiooris.noaa.gov/mooral Reef Monito

Administration. Aoral Reef Monitoric Administratioke and Pieter vantion Program. Nadc.noaa.gov/coris1/20/2017.

Data Value Cha

University of Mthe final reportt that is more ac

ages of developadership, nonprctional coral re

roduct and NOAA leaeef protection. agers, can use tther enhance thports provide a

ort Card providms in the contexs such as coral nagers to evalurs, including th

areas.87 While bsocioeconomic

its ted States with activities. The

snorkeling) andd amenity value estimated thedies,89 Table A.es for specific e

oral reefs and teffective tools

al indicators, thoral reefs and th

d Production: How

mental Science. Ah_us/environmenoring Plan Socioeon. Accessed Janonitoring/resourcoring Program: TAccessed Januaryoring Program: Mon. Accessed Jann Beukering, 201ational Ocean ans/library/NOAA/

ains

Maryland Centet card. IAN inteccessible to the

ping its official rofit organizatioeef managers an

adership will usJurisdiction-levthe Status and he ecosystem’s a wealth of info

des decision-maxt of three genediversity, fish

uate managemehermal stress, obiological and c

indicators in p

valuable goodsse goods and sd associated toues (e.g., as mea

ese benefits for 1 presents the ecosystem serv

he ecosystem sfor presenting e CRCP createhe important ec

w healthy is youAccessed Januaryntal_report_card_economic Monitonuary 20, 2017: ces/ncrmp_socio_Tracking Biologicy 20, 2017: httpsMonitoring Climanuary 20, 2017: h13. “The Total End Atmospheric A/CRCP/other/oth

A-3

er for Environmegrates multiple report card’s

roll-out plan, aons, and the pund other manag

se the Coral Stavel decision-mTrends Report health.85 Outsi

ormation for ac

akers at all leveeral topics of inabundance, an

ent strategies inocean acidificatclimate indicatoparticular link th

s and services iervices in turn urism benefits; asured by increthe United Stasum of coral re

vices.

services they prcoral reef heal

es a product thacosystem servi

ur ecosystem?” Iny 25, 2017: _production/ oring Componen

_econ_onepagercal Trends”. Cor://www.coris.noate-Driven Impahttps://www.coriconomic Value oAdministration. her_crcp_publica

mental Science le datasets and audience.84

and the programublic for its repgement partner

atus and Trendmakers, includin

Card to effectiide of the decis

cademic and pr

els with a basicndicators: biolo

nd habitat compn response to fition, and variouors influence ththe economic v

including foodprovide differe non-use valueeases in propertates using standeef benefits by

rovide. Both thlth to various uat stakeholders ices they provid

ntegration and A

nt”. Coral Reef C

r.pdf ral Reef Informaaa.gov/monitorin

acts”. Coral Reef is.noaa.gov/monof U.S. Coral ReAvailable:

ations/TEV_US_

Integration andcompares the d

m targets the Uport card. NOArs to dissemina

ds Report to mang local resourcively monitor rsion-making sprivate researche

c understandingogical, climate,position allowsishing, climate,us ecological ihe value of cor

values of coral r

d, coastal protecent types of eco

es (e.g., values rty values due tdard economic U.S. state or te

he status and trusers. By incorp

can use to infode.

Application Netw

Conservation Pro

ation System. Nang/biological.htm

f Information Sysnitoring/climate.heefs: A Review o

_Coral_Reefs_L

d Application data to threshol

U.S. Congress, NAA works on anate the more det

ake decisions toce managers anreefs and desigphere, the data ers, as well as t

g of the status a, and socioecon

s researchers, , and pollution mpacts, identif

ral reefs, whichreefs to manag

ction, habitat, aonomic benefitpeople hold fo

to proximity to techniques. Ba

erritory, while

rends report andporating data frorm decision-m

work. University

ogram. National

ational Ocean andml stem. National Ohtml of the Literature”

iterature_Review

lds,

NOAA n tailed

o nd gn

and the

and nomic.

fy h we gement

and ts, r the coral

ased on Figure

d the rom

making,

of

Ocean

d

Ocean

”. Coral

w_2013.

State/T

Americ

Florida

Guam

Hawaii

Puerto

CNMI

USVI

UnitedSource:Coral R

Figure A.1. MNumber of vaSource: Brande

Figure A.2 deNOAA fleet a

Ta

Territory

can Samoa

a

i

Rico

d States Edwards, Peter

Reef Conservation

Mean ecosystealue estimates fer, Luke and Piet

emonstrates theand other sourc

able A.1. Total

Area

E.T. 2013. “Sumn Program.

m service valufrom the differeter van Beukerin

e value chain asces that it depen

l coral reef val

a of coral reef v

mmary Report: T

ues (2007 USDent studies are

ng, 2013

ssociated the Snds on, and how

A-4

lues for the Un

value (ha)

22,2

36,0

7,1

165,9

12,6

6,4

34,4

284,8The Economic V

D). provided in pa

tatus and Trendw it ultimately

Appendix

nited States (2

Total va

200

000

159

990

642

494

400

885 Values of U.S. Co

arentheses.

ds Report Cardprovides value

x A: NOAA Fle

2007 USD)

alue (millions,

oral Reefs, 2001-

ds, including the to society.

eet Data Value

US$)

$11

$174

$139

$1,747

$1,093

$65

$187

$3,416-2011”. NOAA

he data from the

Chains

1

4

9

7

3

5

7

6

e

Appendix A:

Figure A.2. N

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

ain: Coral Re

A-5

efs Status andd Trends Repoort

2. Sea Pro2.1

Sea level rise most developLow-lying cohabitat loss, aFlooding Impof Coastal Maprovides coasvisuals, correslevel rise inunsocioeconomicommunity vuall coastal terrGreat Lakes r

Dat2.2NOAA ships areas. VDatumvessels into bDEMs, as wecoastal floodinew data inpufor San Francwith new postlevel rise scen

Several other Geological Suthe SLR Viewand Services cprovided blocHawaii Schooand the Univedata.

Use2.3The primary urepresentativeSeveral commplanning. Forimpacts of sea

90 “Climate Achttps://www.ep91 “Sea Level RAdministration92 “Coastal Louhttp://www.noa26, 2017. 93 “Sea Level Rhttps://coast.no94 City of Charsc.gov/Docume

a Level Rioduct Backg

threatens manyed, populous, aastal areas are

and seawater inpacts Viewer (Sanagement (OCstal managers, csponding data, ndation, flood fics91 This inforulnerabilities aritory in the Unregion, but data

ta that Feedcontribute to thm, a software tathymetric-topll as LIDAR anng thresholds,

uts become avacisco Bay, coast-Sandy LIDARnarios from the

federal agenciurvey, in additiwer, provides bconducts analyck group analysol of Ocean andersity of South

ers of the Prusers of the SLes who are intemunities in the Ur example, in 20a level rise on t

tion Benefits: C

pa.gov/cira/climaRise – Map Viewn. Available: httpuisiana added to aanews.noaa.gov

Rise Viewer: Datoaa.gov/digitalcorleston, 2015. SeentCenter/View/

se: Sea Leground y U.S coastal aand economicaespecially vuln

ntrusion. 90 The SLR Viewer), dCM), is a web-bcommunity plaand explanato

frequency, marrmation allows and assess appronited States exca collection for

d the Produche SLR Viewerool developed

pographic Digitnd Conditionedand other joint

ailable. For exatal Texas, OregR elevation dat

e 3rd National C

es and educatioion to collaboraase elevation d

yses that supporsis in the past, ad Earth ScienceCarolina Haza

roduct and RLR viewer are c

rested in assessUnited States h013, the City othe city.94 As p

oastal Property”ate-action-benef

wer: Sea Level Rps://www.climatNOAA Sea Lev

v/stories2015/12

ta Updates”. Digoast/tools/slr.htmea Level Rise Str/10089. Accesse

evel Rise V

areas, which areally viable areasnerable to floodSea Level Rise

developed by Nbased map viewanners, and othery information

rsh impacts, anusers to identiopriate adaptatcept Alaska. Nthat product d

ct r through the cby multiple NOtal Elevation Md DEMs (DEMtly developed inample, in 2015,gon, and the Uta.93 In 2017, O

Climate Assessm

onal institutionating with the Odata for Louisiart tool’s flood fand may do so e and Technoloards and Vulner

Related Procoastal plannerssing communithave incorporatf Charleston, S

part of this proc

”. Climate Actionfits-coastal-propeRise and Coastal te.gov/maps-datavel Rise Viewer”21715-coastal-lo

gitalCoast. NOAml. Accessed Janrategy. Decembeed February 5, 20

A-6

Viewer

e some of the s in the countryding, erosion, e and Coastal

NOAA’s Officewing tool that er users with concerning sed fy potential tion options andOAA publisheoes not involve

collection of hyOAA line offic

Models (DEMs)Ms conditioned t

nputs, into the OCM added n.S. Virgin Islan

OCM released ament.

ns contribute daOCM on two Sana. The NOAAfrequency capaagain for futur

ogy performed rability Researc

oducts s, floodplain mty-level vulnerated the SLR Vi

South Carolina cess, OCM used

n Benefits Reporerty. Accessed JFlooding Impac

a/dataset/sea-lev”. National Oceauisiana-added-to

AA Office for Conuary 27, 2017. er, 2015. Availab017.

Appendix

y.

e

ea

d strategies. Ases a companione NOAA Fleet

ydrographic andces, combines t) for specific arto a higher speSLR Viewer. O

new land covernds. Most recenan enhanced Be

ata to the SLR vSLR mapping toA Center for Oabilities, and thre versions of tmapping for sech Institute pro

managers, scientability to sea leiewer or underbegan to workd the SLR View

rt. US EPA. AvaJanuary 26, 2017cts”. Climate.govvel-rise-map-viewanic and Atmospo-noaa-sea-level

oastal Manageme

ble at: http://ww

ProductFlooding

Line OffOffice fo

Mission and Adap

x A: NOAA Fle

s of 2015, the Sn Lake Level V

vessels.92

d geospatial dathe data collectreas. OCM incoecification), tideOCM updates tr, elevation, andntly, NOAA reeta viewer that

viewer. For exools that led to

Operational Ocehe Bureau of Lathe viewer. Theeveral outlyingovides Social V

tists and engineevel rise and corlying data intok with OCM to wer to demons

ailable: 7. v. National Oceawer. Accessed Japheric Administrl-rise-viewer.htm

ent. January 26,

ww.charleston-

t: Sea Level Rig Impacts View

fice: National Oor Coastal Man

Service Area:ptation Strateg

eet Data Value

SLR viewer coiewer tool for t

ata for US coastted from NOAAorporates thesee gauge observthe SLR Viewed levee data upemapped seven t includes local

xample, the US o the developmeeanographic Prabor Statistics he University ofg coastal territoVulnerability In

eers, and munioastal flooding. their adaptatioanalyze the po

strate the effect

anic and Atmospanuary 26, 2017ration. Availableml. Accessed Jan

2017. Available

se and Coastal wer

Ocean Service,nagement

: Climate Mitiggies

Chains

overs the

tal A e vations, er as

pdates states l sea

ent of roducts has f ories, ndex

icipal . on otential t of sea

pheric 7. e: nuary

e:

,

gation

Appendix A:

level rise on slevel rise stratto implement and sea level Planning and Recovery Tooand services,

Other users indata for reseainfrastructure area. The newdifferent sea linfrastructure

Various privaZillow and Syperform assesLLC has deveSLR vulnerabthe underlying

The SLR viewNOAA providaccess vieweron the SLR Vand local agenorganizationsviewer and un

Soc2.4The SLR Viewassociated witThis in turn inimpacts on vu

Several studieproperty abanstorm surge wapproximately

95 ‘Stories fromat: https://coast96 The City of Nregarding New97 “Stories fromManagement. A98 “Stories fromAvailable at: ht99 “SLRViewer100 “Climate Ahttps://www.ep101 “Climate Chhttp://www.zill

NOAA Fleet D

streets, landmartegy, and has rthe strategy.95 rise risks into aSustainability

ol, which helpeand building co

nclude universirch. The Univedata, land use

w viewer allowslevel rise scena.97

ate entities also yndeste LLC, fssments. Zilloweloped a uniquebility, as part ofg data, as well

wer is availabledes technical ar and data regis

Viewer to differncies, universit. Several of thenderlying data

cietal Benefiwer allow planth future sea lenforms planninulnerable popul

es have estimatndonment and pwill amount to $y 1.9 million h

m the field: Buildt.noaa.gov/digitaNew York, 2014

w York City’s Rem the Field: CreaAvailable at: httpm the Field: Undttps://coast.noaar – Outreach Cap

Action Benefits: Cpa.gov/cira/climahange and Housilow.com/researc

Data Value Cha

rks, and infrasteceived a coastIn another cas

a post-Hurricanworked with F

ed the city consode upgrades d

ities, scientific ersity of Floriddata and vulne

s local, non-exparios, including

use the data unfor example, arew uses the data e flood vulneraf OCM’s Digitas a variety of

e, along with sessistance for thstry, and metadrent groups throties, research agese entities creagain recognitio

its nners, emergencevel rise and unng decisions, whlations, and pre

ted the costs ofprotective adap$5 trillion throuomes worth $8

ding the Case foralcoast/stories/ch4. Background naesiliency Plan. Thating a Customizps://coast.noaa.g

derstanding Coma.gov/digitalcoaspture”. Doug MaCoastal Propertyate-action-benefing: Will a Risin

ch/climate-chang

ains

tructure to city tal resilience gre, the City of Nne Sandy comp

FEMA, the U.Ssider coastal anduring the post-

and engineerina, for example,erability indicepert planners in

g adaptation opt

nderlying the Se two private sto assess the vu

ability applicatialCoast platfor

f other coastal v

everal other coahe tool via Digidata is availableough workshopgencies, privatate apps that fuon through artic

cy managers, anderstand the pohich helps to aveserve or enhan

f sea level rise aptation actions (ugh the end of 882 billion are a

r a Comprehensiharleston-slr.htmarrative to suppohe Office of the zed Sea Level Rigov/digitalcoast/

mprehensive Floost/stories/beyondarcy, NOAA. Pe

y”. U.S. EPA. Cofits-coastal-propeng Tide Sink all ge-underwater-ho

A-7

planners and erant of $766,88

New York usedprehensive resil. Army Corps

nd emergency p-Sandy recover

ng groups, and , combined floos to develop a nn the Tampa Btions related to

SLR Viewer to ector companieulnerability of ion.98 While thrm, the SLR Vivulnerability to

astal analysis toital Coast. Usere in a separate dps and conferente companies, aurther dissemincles, presentati

and others to viotential impactvoid property dnce coastal eco

and coastal floo(plus some addthe century.100 at risk of being

ive Sea Level Riml. Accessed Febort New York CiMayor. ise Viewer to Asstories/tampa-vi

od Risk with NOd-floods.html. Acersonal communioastal Action Beerty. Accessed FHomes?” Zillowomes-12890/. A

engineers. The 87 on behalf ofd the SLR Viewlience plan. Thof Engineers, a

planning, coastry.96

NGOs who usod data from thnew SLR vieway area to prior

o transportation

develop their oes that use NO

f home values tohere are many aiewer, enables

ools, easily and

ools, on OCMrs can access udata catalog. Innces; these grouand non-governnate or use NOAons, and throug

isualize the loct on coastal prodamage, maint

osystems.

oding. The U.Sditional costs) a Zillow, using

g underwater by

ise Strategy in Cbruary 5, 2017. ity’s cooperation

ssist Planners iniewer.html. Acce

OAA Data”. NOAccessed Februaryication. January

enefits Report. AFebruary 5, 2017w.com. Available

Accessed Februar

City subsequenf the Charlestonwer to incorporhe city’s Officeand NOAA to dtal protection, c

e the SLR viewhe SLR viewer

wer specificallyritize adaptatio

n, institutional,

own sea level rOAA’s SLR dat

o sea level riseadditional toolsusers to accessquickly.

’s DigitalCoastunderlying datan addition, OCMups include fednmental and intAA’s data. Addgh social medi

al potential inuoperties and asstain critical infr

S. EPA estimatassociated withNOAA’s SLR y 2100.101

Charleston, South

n with the Feder

n Florida”. NOAAessed February 5AA Office for C

ry 5, 2017. 10, 2017.

Available at: 7. e at: ry 5, 2017.

ntly developedn Resilience Nrate coastal flooe of Long-Termdevelop the Sacritical infrastru

wer and underlyr with critical y for the Tampaon options undeand emergency

rise assessmentta or DEMs to e, while Syndess available to as a mapping too

t website. In ada through a dataM conducts ouderal, state, couternational ditionally, the Sa outlets.99

undation level sociated resourrastructure, min

tes that the costh sea level rise

R maps, estimate

h Carolina. Avai

ral Administratio

A Office for Coa5, 2017.

Coastal Managem

d a sea Network oding

m andy ucture

ying

a Bay er y

t tools.

ste, assess ol and

ddition, a utreach unty,

SLR

rces. nimize

ts of and es that

ilable

on

astal

ment.


A-8

The SLR viewer has enabled communities and areas to assess vulnerability in dollar terms on a local scale. An analysis performed by the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact Counties (Monroe, Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach), as well as the South Florida water Management District, local universities, NOAA and other federal agencies, revealed that a one-foot rise in sea level could yield $4 billion-worth of vulnerable homes, and a three-foot scenario could result in $31 billion in vulnerable homes in the Southeast Florida region102

Figure A.2 presents the value chain for the SLR Viewer, including the data from the NOAA Fleet and other sources that the tool depends on, and how the tool ultimately results in value to society.

102 Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact Inundation Mapping and Vulnerability Assessment Work Group. 2012. Analysis of the Vulnerability of Southeast Florida to Sea Level Rise.

Appendix A:

Figure A.2. N

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

ain: SLR View

A-9

wer

3. Bat Pro3.1

NOAA providinformation foengineering, sactivities.103 Ndata support sprotection of and economicService (NOSproducing a sof U.S. states

NOAA’s nautnavigation (informs, as papNOAA lithogto the public. printing operademand (PODchart from thepurchasing thpaper charts twebsite.

In today’s woformats for elsimple digitalwarn marinerinformation sy(ECDIS) to dithe mariner hamodeling andlike the Globacounterparts. Hydrographic

NO3.2The NOAA flCharts. Four oFerdinand R.

103 NOAA is reServices Improcontributor to UGuard chart car104 “NOAA’s Shttps://www.na105 “What is a N106 Personal Co11, 2017. 107 “What is a N

thymetry/oduct Backgdes nautical ch

for the safe navscientific and oNOAA’s nauticsafe and efficiethe marine envc prosperity forS), Office of Couite of over 1,0and territories

tical charts shoncluding locatioer charts and e

graph nautical cHowever, the F

ation as a cost-D) distributors. e NOAA websi

he most up to dahroughout the

orld, electronic lectronic chartsl image of the ps of dangers ahystems; they utisplay the chartas the most up

d other scientifial Positioning SElectronic cha

c Organization

OAA Fleet Dfleet conducts hof the ships in NHassler, Raini

esponsible for provement Act of 1U.S. commitmenrriage regulation

Suite of Nauticalauticalcharts.noaNautical Chart?”ommunication w

Nautical Chart?”

/Hydrograground arts and relatedigation of mari

other commercical charts and aent navigation, vironment, coasr the Nation. Noast Survey (O000 nautical ch, as well as the

ow water depthons of dangers lectronically. Pcharts in large rFederal Aviatiosaving measureThese distribu

ite. NOS updatate version of tworld. Individu

charts are mors, Raster Nauticpaper chart, whhead and providtilize a computt data and the sto date inform

ic activities. ThSystem (GPS) arts are the lega(IHO) and Inte

ata that Feehydrographic suNOAA’s fleet ier, and Thoma

roducing nautica1998 (and amendnts for nautical cns. l Charts.” NOAAaa.gov/mcd/learn” (2002). NOAA

with Rachel Medl

” (2002) NOAA

aphic Surv

d hydrographicitime commercial and industriassociated hydrhomeland secustal zone manaOAA’s NationCS) is respons

harts that cover Great Lakes. 1

s, shoreline of to navigation),

Paper charts areruns and sell thon Administrate on April 13, 2

utors take ordertes each chart othe chart the mouals can also p

re popular and mcal Charts (RNhile the ENC cade other informterized system ship's position.

mation to make ahe ENC and theand have differ

al equivalent ofernational Mari

ed the Produurveys that provare primarily d

as Jefferson. Ea

al charts pursuandments). NOAAcharts under the i

A Office of Coasnnc_chartsuite.ht

A Office of Coastley, Chief of Cu

Office of Coast A-10

veys: Naut

c ce, ial rographic urity, gement,

nal Ocean ible for the coasts

104

adjacent land, , anchorages, ae more traditionhem to commertion took over f2014. Instead, rs from the pubonline every weoment it is prinurchase and pr

mandated for cNC) and Electroarries a signific

mation critical tcalled an ElectThe ENCs dig

a safe passage.eir associated Erent capabilitief a paper chart iitime Organiza

uct vide some of th

dedicated to hyach of these shi

nt to the Coast anA’s mapping and

international Saf

st Survey. tml t Survey. https://stomer Affairs B

Survey. https://w

Appendix

tical Chart

prominent topoand other featurnal, and are lesrcial chart agenfederal chart prNOAA has for

blic and print theek. Thus, indinted.106 NOAArint charts for fr

certain commeronic Navigationcantly greater ato a safe passagtronic Chart Digital format allo This same da

ECDIS system es, and limitatioif the ENC andation (IMO) spe

he bathymetry ydrographic surips use full bot

nd Geodetic Survsurveying activ

fety of Life at Se

/www.nauticalchBranch of the Na

www.nauticalch

Product: Na

Line Office:Office of Co

Mission ServCommunitiesTransportatio

x A: NOAA Fle

t Products

ographic featurres.105 Nauticalss in use today.nts who would roduction in 19rmed partnershhe most up-to-dividuals can be

A-certified vendfree directly fro

rcial vessels. Tnal Charts (ENamount of inforge. ENCs are bisplay and Infoows quicker upata can also be urely on satellit

ons compared td ECDIS meet ecifications.107

data NOS usesrveying, includttom coverage

vey Act of 1947ities for safe navea Treaty, direct

harts.noaa.gov/mavigation Service

harts.noaa.gov/m

autical Charts

National Oceaast Survey

vice Area: Ress and Economion

eet Data Value

s

res, aids to l charts come i. NOAA used tthen distribute

999 and closed hips with print-date version of certain that thedors print and som NOAA’s O

There are two diC). The RNC rmation that ca

basically geograormation Systempdates, which mused for ocean te positioning sto their paper International

s to maintain Nding Fairweatheecho sounding

and the Hydrogvigation are a pritly sustaining Co

mcd/learnnc_chaes Division on J

mcd/learnnc_char

an Service,

silient Coastal ies, Marine

Chains

in two to print e them d the on-

f the ey are sell CS

igital is a

an help aphic m means

systems

Nautical er,

g

graphic imary

oast

art.html January

rt.html

Appendix A:

technology toalso have 2-6 data on boardshoreside pro

In addition, crvessels to NONavigation Cmade aware o

Com3.3NOS also receexample, Hyddevelop nauticonsist of 27-sonar capabilisearching for and can be usresponsible fo

A significant and underwatcartographersdredging in ch

Finally, NOAProgram withcan report any

Com3.4In addition to use electronicthe RNCs andto the NOAAinto Nautical

108 “Survey Ve109 “How Publihttps://www.na110 “Navigation111 “NOAA R/V112 “How Publihttps://www.na

NOAA Fleet D

o measure watesmaller boats o

d the ship. The dcessing centers

rew members iOAA cartograph

enter also publof the change.10

mplementareives hydrogradrographic Survical charts. In a-foot small boatities as the NOdangers to naved in shallow,

or surveying th

source of pertiter constructions analyze these hannels or new

AA also receiveh the U.S. Powey chart discrepa

mplementarnautical charts

c nautical chartd ENCs that NO nautical chartsCharts in a wa

ssels.” (2016). Nications are Updauticalcharts.noan Response TeamV Bay Hydro II.ications are Updauticalcharts.noa

Data Value Cha

r depth and ideor launches to data is passed ts for quality co

immediately rehers, who updalishes this infor09

ry Data aphic survey davey Services C

addition, the Ofts and the Bay AA survey ves

vigation.110 Becinland waterwae near shore ar

nent data is fron permit informsurveys and pe

w construction.1

es information fer Squadrons (Uancies to NOA

ry Products s produced by Ns to build mappOS produces tos, these apps ary that makes it

NOAA Office ofated.” NOAA O

aa.gov/mcd/learnms.” NOAA Offi” NOAA Officeated.” NOAA O

aa.gov/mcd/learn

ains

entify navigatiosurvey shallowto NOAA hydrntrol and comp

port any hazardate the correspormation in the a

ata from other fContractors provffice of Coast SHydro II, a 55'

ssels and focus cause of their smays where the Nreas of the natio

om the U.S. Armmation for federermits to determ112

from the recreaUSPS) and the

AA online. If the

NOAA and cerping applicatioo provide nauticre automaticallyt easier for thes

f Coast Survey. hOffice of Coast Sun_chartupdate.htfice of Coast Sure of Coast Survey

Office of Coast Sun_chartupdate.ht

A-11

onal hazards. Tw areas.108 The rographers and pilation to the n

dous features fonding nauticalappropriate Lo

federal and statvide a about hSurvey operates' aluminum caton surveying t

maller size, theNOAA fleet veon's 175 major

my Corps of Eral channels, anmine necessary

ational boating Coast Guard A

e update is dee

rtified POD venons for recreatiocal chart informy updated. NOse software dev

https://www.nauurvey. tml rvey. https://wwwy. https://www.nurvey. tml

The Fairweatheship's officers cartographers

nation’s Nautic

found during thl chart right awcal Notice to M

te agencies, as half of the hydros six Navigatiotamaran. Thesethe depths of these vessels canessels cannot gU.S. ports.111

Engineers, whicnchorages and y updates to nau

community thrAuxiliary. USPemed critical it

ndors, there areonal boaters. Tmation to their

OS is currently wvelopers to use.

uticalcharts.noaa

w.nauticalchartsnauticalcharts.no

er, Rainer, and and crew acquat the Office o

cal Charts.

hese surveys thway. The U.S. CMariners to ens

well as the privographic data t

on Response Tee vessels have mhe ever-changin

n be more econogo – for exampl

ch provides NOinland waterwautical charts be

rough a CoopePS members an

is applied to th

e several softwThe developers

users. Any timworking to form.

a.gov/hsd/survey

s.noaa.gov/nsd/noaa.gov/nsd/bayh

Thomas Jefferuire and processof Coast Survey

hat might endanCoast Guard sure that the pub

vate sector. Forthat NOAA useeams (NRTs) wmany of the samng seafloor andomically deplole, they are

OAA with surveays. NOAA ecause of shoal

erative Chartingnd the Coast Guhe nautical char

ware companiesof these apps r

me changes are mat the data th

yplatforms.html

nrt.html hydro.htm

rson s the y's

nger

ublic is

r es to which me d

oyed

ey data

ling or

g uard rt.

s that rely on made at goes

Use3.5Nautical Char“navigational Guard and the

Commercial aferries, tug anhave a large-sNOAA-certifiwith each chawith NOAA.1

18,695 public

Most users redownloads ofSOLAS class ENCs.118.

Recreational bnautical chartSystems (GPS

Nautical chartdraft and needrequired to uswhether their avoid U.S. po

In addition, NExclusive Ecoa record for reand other accinautical chartand the privatcharts.

3.6 Soc 113 Personal Co11, 2017. 114 “Print-on-D115 Personal Co11, 2017. 116 Leveson, I.,Consulting. p. 117 Ibid. 118 Personal Co11, 2017. 119 Ibid. 120 “What is a N

ers of the Prrts and their relcharts and pub

e by the interna

and light commnd tow vessels, scale, detailed pfied print-on-deart to ensure tha115 In 2011, direc sales of the C

ly on electronif ENCs totaled

(meaning they

boaters are not t products throuS) or mobile de

ts are also impd more logisticse NOAA nautiship can enter.

orts and go else

NOAA’s nauticonomic Zone, Eeconstructing thidents. Charts tts directly inforte sector. Figur

cietal Benefi

ommunication w

Demand Paper Chommunication w

(2012). Socio-E27

ommunication w

Nautical Chart?”

roduct and Rlated products hblications publiational maritim

mercial sector vrely heavily on

paper chart of temand vendors at it meets reguect users and voast Pilot chart

c Nautical Cha141.6 million,

y are regulated

required to useugh third-party evices.

ortant for the inal support to nical charts to un. If mariners ca

ewhere to unloa

al charts are thEEZ). Further, he event and asthat are used torm several othere A.3 presents

its

with Rachel Medl

harts.” NOAA Owith Rachel Medl

Economic Study

with Rachel Medl

” (2002) NOAA

Related Prohave many useished by the Na

me community.

vessels that trann NOAA Nautithe waters in wthat sell Nauti

ulatory requiremvendors downlot books.116

arts for navigatiwhile downloaunder the Safe

e NOAA nautisoftware appli

nternational shavigate new wanderstand wateannot rely on naad their cargo.1

he authoritative when a marine

ssigning liabilio reconstruct ther NOAA produ

the official NO

ley, Chief of Cu

Office of Coast Sley, Chief of Cu

: Scoping the Va

ley, Chief of Cu

Office of Coast A-12

oducts es. Federal reguational Ocean S

nsit the same Uical Charts. Th

which they operical Charts.114 Tments. There aroaded 210,843 p

ion purposes, inads of RNCs am

ety of Life at Se

cal charts by laications on elec

hipping industryaters. When a ner depths and thautical charts a19

source for mare accident occuty in a court of

hese incidents cucts, as well asOAA products

stomer Affairs B

Survey. https://wstomer Affairs B

alue of NOAA’s

stomer Affairs B

Survey. https://w

Appendix

ulations requireService.”113 Th

U.S. waters on ehe Coast Guardrate. This chartThe vendors prre 20 to 25 of tpaper nautical

including both mounted to 97.ea (SOLAS) co

aw. However, tctronic chart pl

y. Cargo ships new ship arrivehe port shorelinas an accurate a

ritime regulatiours, the Nauticaf law. These evcan also be useds products deveand services th

Branch of the Na

www.nauticalcharBranch of the Na

s Coastal Mappin

Branch of the Na

www.nauticalch

x A: NOAA Fle

e certain vesselhese regulation

each trip, such d requires each t can be printedrovide a Certifithese vendors tcharts from NO

ENCs and RN.6 million.117 Lonvention) are

they often indirlotters using G

continue to inces at an Americne infrastructurand up-to-date

on and politicaal Chart in use vents include grd for training peloped other gohat directly dep

avigation Service

arts.noaa.gov/podavigation Service

ng Program Fina

avigation Service

harts.noaa.gov/m

eet Data Value

ls to carry s are set by the

as cruise lines,of these vessel

d through any oicate of Authenthat work direcOAA, and ther

Cs. In 2011 Larger vessels inrequired to use

rectly use NOAlobal Positioni

crease in size acan port, they are to determineproduct, ships

al boundaries (eat the time servrounding, collipurposes.120 Finovernment agenpend on nautica

es Division on J

d/index.html es Division on J

al Report. Leves

es Division on J

mcd/learnnc_char

Chains

e Coast

, ls to of the nticity tly

re were

n the e

AA ng

and are e

may

e.g. ves as ision, nally, ncies al

January

January

on

January

rt.html


A-13

The greatest value that NOAA’s nautical charts provide is safety for navigators. By providing the most up to date information, ships do not navigate blindly and can chart out the safest and most efficient route to their destination. They can also avoid navigational hazards with confidence, which in turn allows them to avoid unnecessary slow-downs. Thus, much of the value of this product can be estimated based on avoided losses from collisions and grounding, injury and possibly death. Because ship time can be expensive, Nautical Charts also provide value in terms of savings in the amount of time spent at sea.

Because of its unique use in the international shipping industry, another way to consider the value of Nautical Charts is to examine the value of U.S. ports to the national economy. According the American Association of Port Authorities, U.S. seaports generate nearly $4.6 trillion in total economic activity, and provide $1.2 billion in personal income and local consumption.121 This would likely be significantly lower without up-to-date Nautical Chart information.

In 2007, Kite-Powell conducted a study for the NOAA Office of the Coast Survey to estimate the benefits of ideal nautical charts for recreational and commercial vessels, based on a survey asking users what they would be willing-to-pay for ‘ideal’ nautical charts.122 Assuming a minimal difference between the nautical charts that were available at the time and ideal charts, the author estimated that the combined benefits of nautical charts amounted to $47.5 million (2007 USD),123 including $15.3 million/year in consumer surplus for recreational users, $27.5 million/year in consumer surplus for commercial users, and $2 million/year in producer surplus. We estimate that today, this value amounts to approximately $57.9 million/per year (2016 USD), accounting for the increase in foreign flag ships visiting U.S. ports between 2007 and 2016.124

While this study provides an order of magnitude estimate of the value of nautical charts, the authors acknowledge that it serves as a lower bound estimate, largely because the study did not include military users, commercial fishing vessels, or marine resource managers, among others. In addition, since the study was conducted in 2007, electronic nautical charts have become even more popular, allowing for more frequent updates that provide additional value to users.125 The study also does not include the economic activity generated by value-added products that use ENC data as inputs. The development of these products creates jobs, wages, and additional economic output.

Figure A.4 demonstrates the value chain for nautical charts, including the data from the NOAA Fleet and other sources that the charts depend on, and how the charts ultimately result in value to society.

121 “Exports, Jobs & Economic Growth.” American Association of Port Authorities. http://www.aapa-ports.org/advocating/content.aspx?ItemNumber=21150 122 Kite-Powell, H. 2007 Use and Value of Nautical Charts and Nautical Chart Data in the United States. Prepared for NOAA Office of Coast Survey. 123 Leveson, I., (2012). Socio-Economic Study: Scoping the Value of NOAA’s Coastal Mapping Program Final Report. Leveson Consulting. p. 47 124 Values for recreational and commercial consumer surplus and producer surplus increased to 2016 USD using BLS Consumer Price Index. 125In addition, because survey respondents knew how much they paid for nautical charts, this could have resulted in an anchoring bias, leading to more conservative estimates of value.

Figure A.3. NOAA Key Products that Rely Directly on NOAA Nautical Charts

• Marine Cadastre: Political Boundaries; Marine Infrastructure, Habitat, Mammals; Renewable Wind/Tide Energy Potential

• National Marine Sanctuary Condition Reports

• National Marine Sanctuary: Monitoring Reports

• Sanctuary Science Reports: Conservation Series, Biological-Geographic Reports

• Sea Level Rise Impacts: Coastal Ecosystems

• Operational Response Services: National Marine Sanctuary

Source: TPIO (2017)

Figure A.4. N

Contra

NOAA Fleet D

acts for hydrog

Data Value Ch

graphic servic

ain: Nautical

es

A-14

Charts

Appendixx A: NOAA Fleeet Data Value Chains

Appendix A:

4. Season Pro4.1

The El Nino –to-year changsurface air prePacific. 126 Eltemperatures describes a yeaverage.127 DOcean temperIndonesia to ttropical rainfaincluding the as well as tem

To help the puNational WeaENSO Outlooinform season

NO4.2One of the maconsists of 70The NOAA flShips go to eabiological act

Basic measurand subsurfacradiation, barotemperature r

In addition to including conENSO Outlootemperature a

Com4.3A second sousubsurface temto a depth of a

126 “What is ENhttp://www.cpc127 Ibid. 128 “Project: Trhttp://www.om129 For examplehttp://www.om130 “TAO Refrehttp://tao.ndbc.131 Ibid. 132 “What is Ar

NOAA Fleet D

nal Forecaoduct Backg– Southern Oscges in sea surfacessure and atml Nino describeare above the lear in which se

During El Nino ratures affect sethe west coast oall affect weathfrequency and

mperature and p

ublic and privaather Service (Nok describes thnal temperature

OAA Fleet Dain inputs to th0 buoys mooredfleet maintains tach buoy once tivity, or local f

ements on TAOce temperaturesometric pressueadings and sa

data from the nductivity, tempok. The Voluntand weather dat

mplementarurce of data for mperature, saliabout 2 km and

NSO (El Nino/Soc.ncep.noaa.gov/

ropical Atmosphmao.noaa.gov/fin

e the Ronald H. mao.noaa.gov/finesh Sampling.” (.noaa.gov/proj_o

rgo?” Argo – par

Data Value Cha

ast: El Ninground cillation (ENSOce temperature

mospheric circules a year in whlong-term averaa-surface tempand La Nina yeasonal tropicaof South Amerher patterns thro

severity of stoprecipitation.

ate sector betterNWS) Climate e status of El Ne and precipitat

ata That Fehe ENSO Outlod (“moorings”)the TAO array a year to perfofisherman.

O moorings incs at 10 levels.13

re, salinity andlinity profiles f

TAO array, CPperature, and dtary Observing ta.

ry Data the ENSO outlnity, and velocd then come ba

outhern Oscillat/products/analys

here Ocean Buoynd/projects/3418-

Brown providednd/projects/2751-(2011). NOAA’soverview/sampli

rt of the integrat

ains

no – South

O) cycle repress, convective rlation over the ich sea-surfaceage, while La N

peratures are coyears, changes ial rainfall patterica. These chanoughout the wo

orms, floods, dr

r prepare for exPrediction Cen

Nino and La Nition predictions

eed the Prodook is data from) in the Pacific and transmits rm necessary m

clude wind spe30Additional sed ocean currentfrom the TAO

PC also relies odepth (CTD) an

Ship Program,

look is the ARGcity of the uppeack to the surfac

ion)?” (2012). Nsis_monitoring/e

y Service.” (2016-tropical-atmospd maintenance fo-tropical-atmosps National Data ing_ndbc.shtml

ted global observA-15

hern Oscill

ents year-rainfall, equatorial

e Nina ooler than in Pacific rns from nges in orld, roughts, hurrica

xpected ENSO-nter (CPC) creaina conditions. s for the U.S.

duct m the Tropical AOcean that colthe data from t

maintenance in

eeds, air temperensors can colles.131 The ENSarray.

on ocean profilnd expendable b, which the NO

GO array. Thiser 2000 meters ce to automatic

NOOA National ensostuff/ensofaq

6). NOAA Officphere-ocean-buoyor TAO Buoy in phere-ocean-tao-Buoy Center.

vation strategy. h

lation Out

anes, tornadoes

-related conditates and dissemCPC uses the E

Atmosphere/Ollect oceanograthese moorings

ncluding repairi

rature, relative ect data on rainO Outlook reli

e data collectedbathythermogra

OAA fleet is a p

s global array oof the ocean.13

cally transmit t

Weather Serviceq.shtml#ENSO

ce of Marine andy-service November 2015

-buoy-array-main

http://www.argo

Product: El Outlook

Line Office:Climate Pred

Mission SerPredictions a

tlook

s, and other we

tions in a givenminates the ENENSO Outlook

cean (TAO) araphic and meteos electronicallying any damag

humidity, sea nfall, short wavies on weekly s

d directly fromaph (XBT) datpart of, also pro

of 3,800 floats p32 The ARGO their data. They

e Climate Predic

d Aviation Opera

5. ntenance

o.ucsd.edu/

l Nino Southern

: National Weadiction Center

rvice Area: Cliand Projections

eather-related e

n season, NOAANSO Outlook. T

k and other too

rray. The TAO orological data

y through satelle caused by

surface temperve and long-wasea surface

m NOAA fleet vta, to develop thovide sea surfa

provides data ofloats go undery require much

ction Center.

ations.

n Oscillation

ather Service,

imate, Climate s

events,

A’s The ols to

array a.128 ites.129

rature, ave

vessels, he ace

on rwater

h less

maintenance tFleet.

The ENSO O

Data from theand the North

Pro4.4The ENSO Oand a blog. ThNino/La NinaNino/La Ninaoutlooks.133 C

CPC also issuClimate and Sand include p

Finally, CPC about ENSO amonthly ENS

Use4.5CPC providesstakeholders. users include term climate vfederal, state a

The ENSO blblog uses lessthe blog as m

The informatimanagement Bay Water Aureleases. Emeto areas that waffected by EN

There are alsorecreation/tou(USDA). Theexpected prec

133 “ENSO: ReEnvironmental134 “El Nino/SoCenter/NCEP/Nhttp://www.cpc135 “ENSO Blo136 Personal com

than the TAO a

utlook also use

e TAO array anh American Mu

oduct Dissemutlook is dissemhe ENSO weeka conditions in a conditions thrCPC updates thi

ues monthly ENSociety. These recipitation and

disseminates inand other short

SO updates.135

ers of the Prs information cInternal users oFEMA, DOD,variations. CPCand local stake

log is meant fors technical langeans of commu

ion provided inactions of manuthority may loergency managewill likely expeNSO-related co

o many private urism. For exame ENSO informcipitation levels

cent Evolution, Prediction. http

outhern OscillatiNWS/Internationc.ncep.noaa.gov/

og.”(2016). Climmmunication wi

array because t

es satellite data

nd other sourceulti-Model Ense

mination minated in fourkly updates, prothe world. Therough the ENSOis information

NSO Diagnostidiagnostic discd temperature p

nformation frot-term climate f

roduct and Rcontained in theof this informa USAID, and s

C provides brieeholders.

r the public andguage than the ounication from

n the ENSO Ouny different typook at predictedement agencies

erience adverseonditions inclu

sector users ofmple, CPC has

mation can infors and other fact

Status and Predi

p://www.cpc.ncepion (ENSO) Diagnal Research Ins/products/analys

mate Prediction Cith

there are no van

a on Outgoing L

es is incorporateemble. CPC us

r ways: throughovided by CPCe update containO Alert Systemevery Monday

c Discussions icussions providpredictions for

m the ENSO Oforecasts in a le

Related Proe ENSO weeklyation within NOstate and local aefings on the in

d is mostly useother products various stakeh

utlook and assoes of stakeholdd precipitation s use ENSO-re

e effects as a reude those relate

f the ENSO outa longstanding

rm farmers’ dectors. In Decem

ictions.” (2017).p.noaa.gov/prodgnostic Discussistitute for Climatsis_monitoring/eCenter. https://ww

A-16

ndalism issues.

Longwave Rad

ed into numericses the results o

h web disseminC, describe the rns a value for t

m Status, and Uy.

in partnership wde more technicthe upcoming

Outlook throughess technical an

oducts y updates and d

OAA include Nagencies whose

nformation cont

ed by people wiand is more re

holders.136

ociated dissemiders. For examplevels in the E

elated informatisult of El Nino

ed to transporta

tlook, including collaboration cisions on whic

mber 2016, the D

NOAA Climateducts/analysis_mion - 8 Decembete and Society.

enso_advisory/enww.climate.gov/

Appendix

. ARGO floats

diation (OLR) t

cal models throof these models

nation, weeklyrecent evolutiothe Oceanic Ni

U.S. seasonal pr

with the Interncal detail on cumonths.134

h its ENSO blond more readab

diagnostic discNWS weather foe operations ortained in the EN

ith an interest ieadable. NOAA

ination venues ple, a water res

ENSO Outlook ion to appropri

o or La Nina. Oation and energy

ng agriculture, rwith the U.S. Dch crops to plaDepartment of

e Prediction Cenmonitoring/laninaer 2016” (2016).

nsodisc.pdf /news-features/d

x A: NOAA Fle

are not suppor

to develop prec

ough the Climas to develop the

y presentations,on, status, and pino Index (ONIrecipitation and

national Researcurrent El Nino/

og. This blog gble manner. Th

cussions primarforecast officesr decisions are NSO Outlook

in short-term clA has received p

can affect the dsource managerand make deci

iately prepare aOther state and lgy.

retail, energy, fDepartment of

ant and when toInterior’s Clim

nter and Nationaa/enso_evolution NOAA Climate

department/enso-

eet Data Value

rted by the NO

cipitation predi

ate Forecast Sye ENSO Outlo

monthly discupredictions for I), the status ofd temperature

ch Institute for/ La Nina condi

gives informatiohe blog also pro

rily to governm. Other governimpacted by shto these variou

limate forecastpositive feedba

decisions and r, such as the Tisions about resand allocate reslocal agencies

fisheries, and of Agriculture o plant based onmate Hub hosted

l Centers for n-status-fcsts-wee Prediction

-blog

Chains

OAA

ictions.

ystem ok.

ussions, El

f EL

r itions,

on ovides

ment nment hort-us

ts. The ack on

Tampa servoir sources

outdoor

n d a

eb.pdf

Appendix A:

briefing in Wstakeholders uwhen to plantbenefit from t

Private retailewarmer winteparticipants frthe same infoquestions andsend many sn

The energy sebenefit from thave a large imexpected normdays or less h

Finally, the inthe 1-Month agreater numbe

Soc4.6For a forecastavailable. Sevcritical in helpincorporatingoutput and proof the forecasas high as $24ENSO-relatedsectors.

ENSO-relatedStates billionsto better prepahouseholds anavoided damaincrease in wiroofing contraaccelerated mduring heavy

Figure A.5 dedepends on, a

137 “Strong El Nhttp://www.eia138 Weiher, R. I139Solow, A.,et140 McNew, K.

NOAA Fleet D

est Texas with understand shot their winter wthe forecasting

ers or grocery cers may affect prom various grormation from t

d used this infornow shovels or

ector serves as the informationmpact on fuel mmal or below nheat days.

nformation in thand 3-Month Cer of users, the

cietal Benefit to have econoveral studies haping farmers plNOAA’s ENS

oduce benefits st.139 McKnew 40 million (200d predictions ca

d forecasts of ths of dollars in dare for predictend businesses cage costs. Tiesbinter precipitatiactors, as peop

maintenance is awinter storms.

emonstrates theand how this ult

Nino helps reduca.gov/todayineneImproving El Nit al. 1998. The v2000. The Valu

Data Value Cha

private stakehort-term climatewheat. Through

information pr

chains may useprivate retail stocery chains inthe Diagnostic rmation to adjuwinter coats to

another exampn provided in thmarkets due toormal temperat

he ENSO OutloClimate Outlook

reby increasing

its omic value, it mave shown that lan for, avoid oSO forecasts int

to the U.S. eco(2000) estimat

00 USD)—or oan result in sign

he potential fordamage costs. Fed events, whiccan also use theberg (2000) repion, prior to thele repaired or ra reduction in t

e value chain astimately results

ce U.S. winter hergy/detail.php?iiño Forecasting:alue of improved

ue of El Niño For

ains

olders and sciee forecasts inclthese briefings

rovided by the

e the data to reaock purchasing

ncluding WalmDiscussions an

ust their inventoo areas expected

ple of a private he ENSO Outlochanges in win

tures, the fuel m

ook feeds sevek, Sea Ice Foreg the value of t

must be true thapredicting the

or mitigate poteto planting deconomy of up toed that the valu

one to two percnificant benefit

r extreme climaFor example, nch can reduce re ENSO Outlooports that on the winter of 199replaced roofs ithe risk or exten

ssociated the Es in value to so

eating demand aid=25952 The Potential Ed ENSO predictrecasts in Agricu

A-17

entists to discusuding the ENSs, stakeholders CPC.

arrange merchag decisions. Th

mart on the recond Weekly Updory for seasonad to have mild

industry that isook. For exampnter heating demarket can adj

ral different NOecast, and climathis product.

at better decisiolife cycle and s

ential losses.138

cisions, farmerso $300 million pue to society ofent of the valuets for the water

ate episodes liknational and staresponse costs aok to make appe U.S. West Co

97-98, there wein anticipation nt of damage to

El Nino Outlookociety.

and fuel prices.”

Economic Benefiion to U.S. agricultural Commod

ss ENSO forecSO Outlook and

have the tools

andise based onhe CPC recentlyord El Nino fromdates. The partial products. Fowinters.

s affected by Eple, mild and wemand.137 If fueust depending

OAA productsate analysis too

ons can be madstrength of a P

8 For example, s in the United per year (1998f ENSO forecae of productionr, energy, trans

ke floods and date emergency mand avoid weatpropriate prepaoast, where El ere reports of hof predicted Eo the inside of

k, including the

(2016). U.S. En

its. NOAA. culture. Climaticdity Markets: Th

casts. The goal d use that infor necessary to g

n seasonal expey held a briefinm last year. Thicipants also as

or example, they

ENSO conditionwarmer wintersel market decison where there

s, including theols. These prod

de if a better weacific warm orSolow et al. (1States could in

8 USD), dependasts on corn ston.140 In additionsportation, retai

droughts could managers can uther-related dam

aratory decisionNiño frequentl

heavy demand fl Niño storms. structures due

e data from the

nergy Informatio

c Change 39:47-e Case of U.S. C

was to help rmation to deciget the maximu

ectations. Mildng with over 10he briefing inclusked specific y would not wa

ns, and that thes due to El Ninosion makers leae will be more

e Hurricane Outducts reach an e

eather forecast r cold episode i1998) found thancrease agriculding on the accrage decisions n to these sectoil, and tourism

also save the Uuse ENSO foremages. Individ

ns, resulting in ly brings a greafor the servicesThe benefit ofto leaking roof

e NOAA Fleet t

on Administratio

60. Corn Storage.

de um

d or 00 uded

ant to

erefore o can arn of heat

tlook, even

is is at by ltural curacy

can be ors,

United ecasts dual

at s of f this fs

that it

on.

Figure A.5. NNOAA Fleet DData Value Chain: ENSO Ou

A-18

utlook

Appendixx A: NOAA Fle

eet Data Value Chains

Appendix A:

5. Eco Pro5.1

NOAA’s NatiNational Marmonuments. Tmore than 600The sanctuariof habitats ranunderwater arpromote the rthrough conseoutreach, and

NMS Conditiprotecting thedetermine if thfor the sanctuthat threaten t

Individual sansanctuary releassessment ofcondition repoappropriate ma variety of tosanctuary anseducation and

NO5.2The NOAA flexample, NOAcollect data onbird and mamConditions Reinforms hypox

While most saFleet. The NOoperation of scomposition, spend more ddistance from

Ultimately, Nexample, for t 141 Gittings, S. Marine Sanctua142 “About.” (2143 “Frequentlyhttp://sanctuari144 Ibid. 145 Personal com10, 2017. 146 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

osystem Moduct Backgional Ocean Seine SanctuariesTogether, these0,000 square mies support thounging from corrcheological sitesponsible andervation, researcommunity en

ion Reports sere resources withhey are achievi

uary.143 Specificthese resources

nctuaries withineases an updatef sanctuary resoorts are meant

management resopics includingwers the questi

d outreach, and

OAA Fleet Dfleet provides kAA vessels parn species abun

mmal observatioeports include xia forecasts, a

anctuaries haveOAA research vsmaller vessels,so it is importaays at sea, and

m ports. They ar

NOAA vessels stheir 2010 Con R., Broughton, Karies., pp. 2

2016). NOAA Nay Asked Questionies.noaa.gov/scie

mmunication wi

Data Value Cha

Managemeground ervice (NOS) cs (NMS) and twe protected mar

miles of marine usands of endanral reefs, to deetes.141 The goald sustainable usrch and monitongagement.142

rve as an imporhin marine saning their resourcally, the repors, and the propo

n the NOS Offed Condition Rources and focuto examine tren

sponses. Towar keystone specions with the g

d management a

ata That Feey data that serrticipate in habdance, diversiton stations and information fro

and processed h

e access to a savessels are criti, such as April,ant to get measureach parts of

re also able to c

streamline the dndition Report t K. (2016). “Guid

ational Marine Sns.” (2015). NOence/condition/fa

ith Jan Roletto, R

ains

nt: Nation

urrently maintawo national marine ecosystemand Great Lakngered species

ep-sea canyons,l of the sanctuase of the oceanoring, education

rtant tool for mctuaries from orce protection arts summarize tosed managem

fice of NMS proReport every fivuses on charactnds, identify hords that end, allcies, keystone hgoal of relating actions.

eed the Prodrves as the basi

bitat characterizty and distribut

acoustic surveom water qualihydrographic d

anctuary vesselical for gatheri, May and Juneurements durinthe sanctuary t

conduct researc

data collection the Greater Far

de for Developin

Sanctuaries. httpAA National Ma

faq.html

Research Coordi

A-19

nal Marine

ains 13 arine s encompass

kes waters. s and a variety , to aries is to ’s resources n and

managing and outside pressurand improvemethe current conent responses t

oduce the repove years. The fiterizing the speow the status ol of the reports

habitats, humanthe report resu

duct is for many conzation for NMSion of fish and

eys. Other NOAity surveys (e.gdata from NOA

, these vessels ng data in sease.146 Some sancng each seasonthat are not accch in deeper are

process ensurirallones Nation

ng National Mar

://sanctuaries.noarine Sanctuarie

inator at the Gre

e Sanctuar

res. The Conditent goals, and i

ndition of resouto these pressur

orts, with suppoirst condition reecies and habitaof various resou answer the sam

n influences, anults back to san

nclusions in theS through seafld marine mammAA ship data thg., harmful alga

AA ship bathym

can be smallersons where the ctuaries see larg. NOAA vessecessible using teas of individu

ing that it is conal Marine San

rine Sanctuary C

oaa.gov/about/ es.

eater Farallones N

Product: NConditions

Line OfficOffice of N

Mission SeCommunitand Manag

ries Condi

tion Reports heinforms future

urces in the Sanres.144

ort from NMS heport serves asats in the sancturces has changme set of 17 qund climate channctuary-specific

e NMS Conditoor mapping su

mals within the hat are often inal blooms), oce

metry surveys.

r and less effecsanctuary vessge seasonal ch

els also allow sathe sanctuary vual sanctuaries.

omprehensive anctuary was abl

Condition Report

National Marine

National Marins Reports

ce: National OcNational Marin

ervice Area: Rties and Economgement

itions Rep

elp sanctuaries management p

nctuary, the pre

headquarters. E a baseline tuary. Subsequged, and establuestions that tonge impacts.145

c regulation,

tion Reports. Fourveys. They asanctuary thro

ncorporated intoean profile data

tive than the Nsel is too harsh anges in specieanctuary staff t

vessel because o

and timely. For e to complete

ts.” NOAA Nati

e Sanctuary on Ja

ne Sanctuary

cean Service, e Sanctuaries

Resilient Coastamies, Planning

ports

plans essures

Each

ent lish ouch on 5 Each

or also ough o the a that

NOAA for the

es to of the

onal

anuary

al g

sampling for tlike the Bell Meach Conditio

NOAA weathReports of eacthat contribut

Com5.3Some of the dchartered vessSanctuaries alcruises are abspecies and m

The Conditionexplored five projects withibottom profili

Use5.4The primary pmanagement Sanctuary MaCouncils comjurisdictional key resourcescases, NOS Nthreats describout the goals sanctuary.156 research, and

The ConditionReports notesneed to be donappropriate m

In addition, thorganizations

147 Ibid. 148 Personal com10, 2017. 149 Ibid. 150 “R/V Fulmahttp://monterey151 Ibíd. 152 “2016 Naut153 Ibid. 154 “Advisory C155 Personal com10, 2017. 156 “Manageme157 “Frequentlyhttp://sanctuari

the entire sanctM. Shimada on on Report.

her buoys, manych sanctuary. Te to these Cond

mplementardata used for thsels. For exampll use one sanct

bout 10 hours inmarine reserves

n Reports also National Mari

in each sanctuaing data.153 The

ers of the Prpurpose of the Nof the sanctuaranagement Plan

mprised of sanctpartners from

s in the sanctuaNMS will publibed in the repoand priorities fThe Managemeducation.

n Reports also s where the sanne. Together, t

management act

he sanctuaries athat use the da

mmunication wi

ar.”(2013). Montybay.noaa.gov/m

ilus Expedition.”

Councils.” (2016mmunication wi

ent 101.” (2015)y Asked Questionies.noaa.gov/scie

tuary in nine dahabitat charac

y of which are These buoys codition Reports.

ry Data he NMS Conditple, the Montertuary vessel, thn length.149 The.150 This data h

rely on data cone Sanctuaries

ary by collectinese data are als

roduct and RNMS Conditio

ries, in turn, benn Review Procetuary staff, memlocal, state, trib

ary, each Condish a manageme

ort.155 The Sancfor sanctuary, a

ment Plan affect

serve as an intnctuaries are achhe reports helptions.

also work closeata from the Co

ith Jan Roletto, R

terey Bay Nationmarineops/about/

” (2016). NOAA

6). NOAA Natioith Jan Roletto, R

. NOAA Nationns.” (2015). NOence/condition/fa

ays using the Bterization and s

serviced by thollect data on w

148

tion Reports is rey Bay, the Grhe R/V Fulmar.e vessel collect

helps inform ma

ollected on char in 2016 along

ng important daso often used in

Related Proon Reports is tonefits society bess. Aside frommbers of the pubal and federal ition Report alsent plan a few yctuary Managemand guides the fts all sanctuary

ernal reportinghieving resourc

p NOAA better

ely with organiondition Report

Research Coordi

nal Marine Sanc/fulmar/welcome

A National Marin

onal Marine SancResearch Coordi

al Marine SanctuAA National Ma

faq.html A-20

Bell M. Shimadspecies compo

he NOAA Fleetweather and oce

collected by otreater Farallon. The Fulmar gts baseline dataanagement dec

rtered vessels. the U.S. West

ata including spn the Condition

oducts o inform sanctuby []. The Conm sanctuary staublic that repreagencies.154 In

so describes preyears after theyment Plan sumfuture project p

y activities inclu

g tool for NOAAce protection anr understand the

izations, such ats in their indep

inator at the Gre

ctuary. e.html

ne Sanctuaries. h

ctuaries. http://sainator at the Gre

uaries. http://sanarine Sanctuarie

Appendix

da vessel.147 Thsition are used

t, also serve as ean conditions,

ther vessels, innes, and the Corgoes about 40 ma on emerging mcisions and Con

One such vesst Coast.152 The pecies surveys n Reports.

uary managemendition Reports aff, the process esent different in addition to suessures that thry develop a Co

mmarizes existinplanning and muding resource

A and the Depand improvemee state of the sa

as universities apendent researc

eater Farallones N

http://sanctuaries

anctuaries.noaa.geater Farallones N

nctuaries.noaa.goes.

x A: NOAA Fle

he data gatheredd to answer the

a data source f including ocea

ncluding sancturdell Bank Nat

miles offshore tmanagement isndition Reports

sel is the E/V NNautilus suppoand sonar bath

ent decisions. E serve as an imalso involves Sinterests and in

ummarizing thereaten these resondition Reportng programs an

management dee protection, co

artment of Coment goals, and wanctuary netwo

and independench projects. Th

National Marine

s.noaa.gov/scien

gov/managemenNational Marine

ov/management/

eet Data Value

d by NOAA ve17 questions w

for the Conditioanographic var

uary vessels andtional Marine to collect data assues such as ins.151

Nautilus, which orted a variety hymetry and sub

Effective mportant input iSanctuary Advndustries, and e current conditsources. In most that addressesnd regulations, cision-making

onservation scie

mmerce.157 Thewhere more woork, and develo

nt non-profit his research lea

e Sanctuary on Ja

nce/nautilus16/

nt/ac/welcome.hte Sanctuary on Ja

/mgt101.html

Chains

essels within

on riables

d

and its nvasive

of b-

into the visory

tion of st s the lays at the

ence,

e ork may op

ads to

anuary

tml anuary

Appendix A:

further undersprovides fundinformation gand state agenFor example, the Bell M. Shidentify feedinNational MarFrancisco Bayidentify when

Finally, the Cin the Conditithe public aboneeded to prosymposiums eUniversities a

Soc5.5The NMS Cofor the protecthey support.

NMSs are deswildlife viewea range of benor commerciawho value thebenefits, beca

Further, manyin coastal ecosuccess of mamarine sanctuannually in lorecreation/tou

In addition, thNOAA, and aresources, incgood exampleCoast Guard o

158 Ibid. 159 Personal com10, 2017. 160 “Whale Conservices/conser161 Personal com10, 2017. 162 Ibid. 163 NOAA. Untreasures! Avai164NMS Socioe

NOAA Fleet D

standing and beding to indepengaps identified incies to use thein the San Fran

himada (a ship ng hot spots.159

ine Fisheries Sy. The new lann NOAA should

Condition Reporion Reports helout what key reotect them.161 Eetc. with the ulalso support and

cietal Benefindition Reporttion of key reso

signated for theers and recreatinefits, includinal fishing) and ieir existence orause there is no

y of the on-site onomies that serany businesses,uaries. NMS reocal coastal andurism-related ac

he NMS Condiacademic and ocluding endange of this is the ron actions to re

mmunication wi

nservation.” (20rvation-science/ommunication wi

ndated. West Coailable: http://saneconomic Factsh

Data Value Cha

etter managemndent academicin the Conditio

e datasets from ncisco Bay arein the NOAA

9 Based on the ervice, and thees reduced oved install speed

rt is an importalp sanctuary staesources are in

Each site designtimate goal of d fundraise for

its ts directly contrources, the con

eir irreplaceablion seekers.163 g direct on-siteindirect benefitr enjoy them pao established pr

activities assorvice the activi, millions of dosearch indicate

d ocean dependctivities.164

tion Reports heother research oered species anresearch condueduce whale de

ith Jan Roletto, R

17). Point Blue: oceans-and-coasith Jan Roletto, R

ast National Marctuaries.noaa.go

heet: http://sanctu

ains

ment of importan researchers an

ons Reports.158 the Condition a, an organizatfleet) and the Fresults of this r

e U.S. Coast Guerlap of foraginadvisories to m

ant tool for the aff design site-the sanctuary,

ns classroom aninstilling a deg

r education and

ribute to regulantinued use and

le resources, mThe ecosystem

e user benefits ts accruing to iassively. Theserice for them in

ciated with maities – these areollars in sales, aes that togetherdent economies

elp to identify rorganizations. Tnd key habitat, ucted by Point Beaths by ship st

Research Coordi

Conservation scsts/whale-conserResearch Coordi

rine Sanctuaries:ov/about/travel-wuaries.noaa.gov/

A-21

nt marine habitnd organizationNon-profit resReports to info

tion called PoinFulmar cruises research, Pointuard to redesignng areas and cominimize whale

sanctuaries’ edspecific educatwhy they are i

nd website activgree of environmd outreach effor

ations and policd enjoyment of

aking them idem services and o(e.g., such as aindividuals whoe use and non-un the marketpla

arine sanctuariee known as marand thousands or, national maris from diverse a

research and inThis research cas well as info

Blue that directtrikes.

inator at the Gre

cience for a healtrvation/ inator at the Gre

: Unique travel ewriter-brochure.p/science/socioec

tat and protectens to conduct reearch groups aorm important nt Blue Conser to study the dit Blue worked w

gn ship traffickiommercial ship e deaths due to

ducation and oution and outreaimportant, and vities, outdoor mental stewardrts conducted b

cies related to mf these resource

eal travel destinopportunities th

associated with o do not use thuse benefits areace.

es generate incorket benefits. Fof jobs, directlyine sanctuaries activities like c

nformation gapcan serve to furorm regulationstly informed N

eater Farallones N

thy planet. http:/

eater Farallones N

experiences broupdf onomic/factshee

ed species. Foresearch to help also sometimes conservation a

rvation Scienceistribution of wwith the sanctuing lanes that letraffic. This re ship strikes.160

utreach prograach programs thwhat behaviorevents, summe

dship within eaby the sanctuari

marine sanctuaes, and the econ

nations for oceahat the sanctua

h educational prhe marine ecosye often referred

ome for busineFor example, Ny depend on thgenerate appro

commercial fish

ps, which are inrther protect ans that affect all

NOAA’s recomm

National Marine

//www.pointblue

National Marine

ught to you by A

ets/national-syste

r example, NM them tackle partner with fe

and regulation we has used data whales and krilluaries, NOAA ead into San esearch also he0

ams. The informhat teach membral changes are er camps, ach visitor.162 ies.

aries, which pronomic activity t

an lovers, mariaries provide rerograms, recreaystem directly bd to as non-mar

esses and indivNMS reports thahriving nationaloximately $8 bhing, research

n turn filled by nd maintain san

marine resourcmendations to

e Sanctuary on Ja

e.org/our-scienc

e Sanctuary on Ja

America’s underw

em.html

S often

federal work. from

l and

elped to

mation bers of

ovide that

ine esult in ational but rket

iduals at the l illion and

nctuary ces. A the

anuary

ce-and-

anuary

water


A-22

Finally, the educational value of the sanctuaries cannot be understated. As noted above, NMS uses the Condition Reports to inform sanctuary outreach and education programs. These programs serve to educate the general public about the sanctuaries, and marine resources in general. These efforts can further protection through education, and increase the value that society places on these resources.

Figure A.6 demonstrates the value chain associated NMS Condition Reports, including the data from the NOAA fleet that they depend on, and how this ultimately results in value to society.

Appendix A:

Figure A.6. N

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

ain: National

A-23

Marine Sancttuary Conditioons Report

6. Fis Pro6.1

As part of fulocean resourcmanage comminvolves colledetermine chacommercial atrends of stoc(NMFS) manapproximatelyand TechnoloStock assessmAssessment, a

Fisheries manoverfishing anmanagement set annual catorganizations Stock assessmthe status of f

NO6.2NOAA uses tand biologicabiological datfishermen’s lofish stock datatechnologies acatch monitorsystems and rsampling, and

Data collectiomonitoring, aand robotic anelectronic fish

into mathemarates.168

165 “Stock AsseAtmospheric AMarch 22, 2017166 “Fish Stockand Atmospherhttp://www.nm167 “Fish Stockand Atmospherhttp://www.nm168 “Stock Asseand AtmospherMarch 22, 2017

heries Maoduct Backgfilling NOAA’

ces and their hamercial and rececting, analyzinanges in the abuand recreationalk abundance. Tages roughly 5y 200 of those

ogy coordinatesments fall underand Forecast M

nagers primarilynd provide opticouncils in thetch limits for thalso rely on N

ments are also ufish stocks, and

OAA Fleet Dthree primary tyal data. NMFS uta that inform sogbooks, obsera is a primary pand experiencering, advanced robotic and autod electronic fish

on methodologidvanced monitnd autonomoush tags.167 NMF

atical models th

essment Prioritiz

Administration. A7.

k Assessment 10ric Administratio

mfs.noaa.gov/stork Assessment 10ric Administratio

mfs.noaa.gov/storessment Basics –ric Administratio7.

anagementground

s responsibilityabitat, NOAA ccreational fish sng, and reportinundance of fishl fishing and, toThe NOAA Na500 fish stocks,stocks each ye

s NOAA’s natior the Healthy O

MSA.

y use NOAA simal yield for cU.S., which ar

heir region baseNOAA’s stock aused in other Nd FishWatch, a

ata That Feypes of data to uses NOAA shstock the assessrvations from fpurpose for 10 ed crew membemonitoring equonomous undeh tags.166

ies depend on wtoring equipmes underwater veS feeds the abu

hat produce tim

zation”. NationalAvailable at: http

1 Series: Part 1—on. Available at:ries/2012/05/05_1 Series: Part 1—on. Available at:ries/2012/05/05_– Data Types”. Non. Available at:

t: Fisherie

y for the stewarconducts stock species. A stockng demographihery stocks in ro the extent po

ational Marine F with data and ar.165 The NMFonal stock asse

Oceans Fisherie

stock assessmencommercial fishre required by med on best availassessments for

NOAA productsnational databa

eed the Proddevelop standa

hips and chartersments, while cfishing vessels, of the 16 ships

ers that supportuipment attachrwater vehicles

which categoryent attached to tehicles, non-exundance, catch,

me series of hist

l Marine Fisherip://www.st.nmfs

—Data Required: _23_12stock_ass—Data Required: _23_12stock_assNational Marine: http://www.st.n

A-24

es Stock A

rdship of the nassessments tok assessment ic information tresponse to ssible, predict Fisheries Serviresources to asFS Office of Scessment enterpres Monitoring,

nts to set catchhermen. This inmandate of thelable scientificr non-federal as such as the Liase that helps i

duct ard fish stock ar vessels to concatch data typicand telephone

s in NOAA’s flt various data c

hed to traditionas, non-extractiv

y the sampling traditional sam

xtractive hydroa, and biologica

torical, current,

es Service Offics.noaa.gov/stock

d for Assessing U

sessment_101_pd for Assessing U

sessment_101_pFisheries Servic

nmfs.noaa.gov/st

Appendix

ssessment

nation's o help

to

future ice ssess cience rise.

h limits and othncludes each o

e Magnuson-Stc data. Coastal, and joint jurisdiivingOceans reinform consum

assessments, innduct abundanccally comes froe interviews. Cofleet. These shipcollection methal sampling geve hydroacoust

falls under, anmpling gear, vis

acoustic technoal data

, and forecast f

ce of Science andk-assessment/stoc

U.S. Fish Stocks”

part1.html. AcceU.S. Fish Stocks”

part1.html. Accece Office of Scietock-assessment

Pro

LinFish

MisOceAss

x A: NOAA Fle

t

her regulations tof the eight regitevens Fishery state and inter

ictional manageport, which inf

mers of the susta

ncluding abundce surveys, as wom dockside mollecting abundps are equippedhodologies, incear, visual survetic technology

nd can include esual surveys usology for abun

fish abundance

d Technology. Nck-assessment-p

”. NOAA Fisher

ssed March 22, ”. NOAA Fisher

ssed March 22, ence and Technot/stock-assessme

oducts: Fish St

ne Office: Natiheries Service

ssion Service Aeans Fisheries Msessment, and F

eet Data Value

that prevent ional fishery Conservation A

rnational ement of fish sforms the publainability of se

dance data, catcwell as to colle

monitoring, dance and biolod with special luding electroneys using imagfor abundance

electronic catching imaging sydance sampling

and fishing mo

National Oceanicprioritization. Ac

ries. National Oc

2017. ries. National Oc

2017. ology. National Oent-101. Accesse

tock Assessmen

ional Marine

Area: Healthy Monitoring, Forecast

Chains

Act to

stocks. lic of afood.

ch data, ect

ogical

nic ging

h ystems g, and

ortality

c and ccessed

ceanic

ceanic

Oceanic ed

nts

Appendix A:

Pro6.3NOAA dissemways. The Spconsumption.and results froindex that mecommercial aaffiliates are ivital informat

Additionally, with scientistsscientists and Fishery-Indepvessels.173 Ev

Fish stock assof the status oanalyses as wnational databof consumer i

Use6.4Fish stock assmake sound dRegional Fishand stock metsustainable inassessments tjointly-manag

Outside of infmedium-, andcouncils decid

169 “Species InfAvailable at: ht170 “Status of Uhttp://www.nm171 “Assessmenand Atmospher172 “Fishery-IndOceanic and A173 National OcFisheries Servihttp://www.st.n174 “Our Livinghttp://www.st.n175 “FishWatch176 “Science anNational Ocean177 “Fish Stockand Atmospherhttp://www.nm178 National OcNational Marin

NOAA Fleet D

oduct Intermminates the resuecies Informat Scientists, maom the most reeasures the perfand recreationalincluded in the tion on the statu

NOAA fisheris and related pafishery manag

pendent Surveyvery year, NMF

sessment data fof living marine

well as featured base on sustainissues related to

ers of the Prsessments suppdecisions. For eheries Managemtric targets acco

n general, and do manage non-ged stocks that

fluencing catchd long-term prode between var

formation Systemttps://www.st.nm

U.S. Fisheries”. Nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/nt Summaries anric Administratiodependent Surve

Atmospheric Admceanic and Atmoice Office of Scinmfs.noaa.gov/Ag Oceans (OLO)nmfs.noaa.gov/Lh U.S. Seafood Fnd Technology Snic and Atmosph

k Assessment 10ric Administratio

mfs.noaa.gov/storceanic and Atmone Fisheries Serv

Data Value Cha

mediaries anults of the fish ion System (SI

anagers, and mecent stock asseformance of Fel fishing.170 EigFSSI.171 Both

us of U.S. fish

ies disseminateartners who ad

gers up-to date y System (FINSFS provides an

feed into two ade resources in tarticles on impable seafood tho seafood, such

roduct port sustainableexample, by proment Councils ordingly. Stockdecide the best -Federal stocksstraddle intern

h limits, fish stoojections of fishrious managem

m Public Portal”mfs.noaa.gov/sisNOAA Fisheries/fisheries_eco/st

nd Trends”. Natioon. Available at:ey System (FINS

ministration. Avaospheric Adminience and Techno

Assets/FINSS/do”. NOAA Fisher

LivingOceans.htmFacts”. NOAA Fitock Assessmen

heric Administra1 Series: Part 1—on. Available at:ries/2012/05/05_ospheric Adminivice National Ta

ains

nd Disseminstock assessme

IS) houses bothembers of the pessments.169 NOederally-managghty-five of thethe FSSI and Sstocks.

es fish stock assvise or participfishery-indepenSS) allows userannual report t

dditional NOAthe United Statportant and relehat includes dath as fraud, insp

e fisheries by providing historito compare thek assessment daway to repleni

s. International national bounda

ock assessmenth population an

ment options, an

”. NOAA FishersPortal/. Accesses. National Oceaatus_of_fisherieonal Marine Fish: http://www.st.nSS)”. National Mailable at: http://wstration. 2013. Fology. January 1

ocuments/FINSSries: Office of Sml. Accessed Misheries. Availab

nt Program”. Natation. Available —Data Required: _23_12stock_assstration. 2001. M

ask Force for ImpA-25

nators ents to scientish regional and npublic can acceOAA also releaged fish stocks ae roughly 185 aSIS provide the

sessment data tpate in regionalndent data thrors to view and qto Congress on

AA products. NOtes called the Oevant issues.174

ta on specific spection, and hea

roviding fishercal and currente status of stockata also allowssh depleted stomanagement e

aries.177

ts permit regionnd catch trendsnd allows scien

ies Service. Natied March 22, 20anic and Atmospes. Accessed Marheries Service Onmfs.noaa.gov/stMarine Fisheries www.st.nmfs.noFisheries Indepe10, 2013. AvailabS-SI%20Public%cience & Technoarch 27, 2017. ble at: https://wwtional Marine Fiat: http://www.s

d for Assessing U

sessment_101_pMarine Fisheriesproving Fish Sto

sts, fishery mannational stock

ess this web-baases the Fish Stand ranks themannual assessme public and fis

through discussl management ough digital maquery data coll

n the status of U

OAA producesOur Living Oce4 NOAA also pspecies as well alth.175

ries managers wt data, stock asks to establishes managers to docks.176 In additentities similarl

nal managemen.178 This in turn

ntists to develop

ional Oceanic an17.

pheric Administrrch 22, 2017.

Office of Sciencetock-assessmentService Office o

oaa.gov/finss/indendent Surveys Sable at: %20User%20Man

ology. Available

ww.fishwatch.gosheries Service O

st.nmfs.noaa.govU.S. Fish Stocks”

part1.html. Acces Stock Assessmock Assessments

nagers, and the assessment dat

ased portal and tock Sustainabi

m based on impments performedshery managers

sions and workcouncils. NOAapping and tabulected by NOA

U.S. fish stocks

s a more compreans Report. Thproduces FishW

as information

with the informsessments allowed targets, and determine how tion, states canly use the asses

nt councils to dn helps fishery p research prio

nd Atmospheric

ration. Available

e and Technologyt/reports. Accessof Science and Tdex. Accessed MSystem (FINSS)

nual%20V5.0_0e at:

ov/. Accessed MOffice of Sciencv/stock-assessme”. NOAA Fisher

ssed March 22, ment Improvemen

s. NOAA Techn

public in severta for public download sumility Index (FS

portance to d by NOAA ans with up-to-da

kshops it conduAA also provideular reporting.1

AA and charteres.

rehensive repohis includes res

Watch, a web-ban on various asp

mation necessarw scientists anadjust catch limmuch catch is

n use stock ssments to over

develop short-,management

orities.179

Administration.

e at:

y. National Oceased March 22, 20Technology. Nat

March 22, 2017. . National Marin

01182013.pdf

March 27, 2017. ce and Technologent/about ries. National Oc

2017. nt Plan: Report oical Memorandu

ral

mmaries SI), an

nd its ate and

ucts es 172 The ed

ort card source ased pects

ry to d mits

rsee

,

.

anic 017. tional

ne

gy.

ceanic

of the um

While the pubthe publicly-afish species ar

Soc6.5Effective manthem for foodimports) and fishing generain 2014.181

Even though oare under a cointernational fNOAA’s fish accurately setWhile some inassessments wfeel comfortabmanagers andexample, 3.1 bwithout the fiapproximately

Figure A.7 prdepend on, an

NMFS-F/SPO-States, 2014: EMemorandum N179 “Regional Fhttp://www.nm180 NMFS. 201https://www.stAccessed 5/3/2181 Ibid. 182 National OcSustainable FisPlan: Report ofMemorandum N183 National OcDepartment of

blic probably davailable informre overfished a

cietal Benefinagement of fisd consumption 1.4 million jobates $61 billion

only 20 of the onstant threat ofisheries, regiostock assessm

t catch limits, thnformation on

would not provble setting any

d scientists to mbillion pounds shery-independy 10%, resultin

resents the valund how the asse

-56. October, 20

Economics and soNMFS-F/SPO-1

Fishery Managemmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/

6. Fisheries Eco.nmfs.noaa.gov/

2017.

ceanic and Atmosheries; Nationalf the National MNMFS-F/SPO-5ceanic and AtmoCommerce. Oct

does not use themation throughand adjust their

its sheries is essenand recreation.

bs to the U.S. ecn in sales.180 Co

179 fish stocksof overfishing.1

onal managemements provide m

hereby allowinstocks would bide enough datthing other tha

more confidentlof Walleye Po

dent surveys, reng in a loss of a

ue chain for fishessments ultim

01; National Ocociocultural Stat163. May, 2016. ment Councils”. /management/coonomics of the UAssets/economi

ospheric Adminil Oceanic and At

Marine Fisheries S56. October, 200ospheric Adminitober 31, 2016.

e stock assessmh web portals an

consumption o

ntial for the com. U.S. commercconomy each yommercial fish

s for which NO82 Given the hi

ent councils mamanagement coung commercial be available thrta for regional man conservatively estimate stocollock were lanegional fisheryapproximately

h stock assessmately result in b

eanic and Atmotus and Trends S

NOAA Fisherieouncils/ United States, 20

cs/publications/F

stration. 2016. 2tmospheric AdmService National

01. stration. 2016. T

A-26

ment data and rend the national or recreational

mmercial fishincial fisheries co

year (0.81 millihermen harveste

OAA determineistory of overfiay set overly struncils with stocfisherman to carough more limmanagement co

e catch limits. Ack status and thded in 2014, w

y managers wou$40 million do

ments, showingbenefits to soci

spheric Adminis

Series. National M

es. National Oce

14. NOAA NatioFEUS/FEUS-20

2016 Quarter 4 Uministration. 200l Task Force for

The NOAA Fleet

Appendix

esults as much FishWatch dafishing habits

ng industry, as ontribute $153 ion jobs withoued $5.5 billion

ed a stock statuishing for manyrict limits on cack status informatch more than

mited stock asseouncils and the

Accurate stock herefore set mo

worth $400 milluld have to red

ollars due to ov

g the different diety.

stration. 2014. FMarine Fisherie

anic and Atmosp

onal Marine Fish014/Report-and-c

Update through D01. Marine Fisher Improving Fish

t Plan Building N

x A: NOAA Fle

as fishery manatabase allow anaccordingly.

well as the pop billion ($54 bi

ut imports). Reworth (9.4 bill

us in 2016 werey fish stocks inatch to avoid stmation so that tn would otherwessments, it is leir scientific adassessments al

ore appropriate lion dollars. NO

duce their catchverly conservati

data sources tha

Fisheries Economs Service. NOAA

pheric Administ

heries Service. Achapters/FEUS-2

December 31, 20eries Stock Assesh Stock Assessm

NOAA’s 21st Ce

eet Data Value

nagers and scieny user to see w

pulations that rillion without creational saltwlion pounds) of

e overfished, fisn U.S. and tock depletion.they can more

wise be permittelikely that limitdvisory councilllow fishery catch limits. A

OAA estimatesh quotas by ive catch limits

at the assessme

mics of the UniteA Technical

tration. Availabl

Available: 2014-FINAL-v5

016. NOAA Fishssment Improvem

ments. NOAA Te

entury Fleet. U.S

Chains

entists, which

ely on

water f fish

sheries

.

ed. ted ls to

As an s that

s.183

ents

ed

e at:

5.pdf.

heries ment

echnical

S.

Appendix A:

Figure A.7. N

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

ain: Fisheries

A-27

Stock Assessmments

7. Tsu Pro7.1

NOAA’s Tsunmodels that cacoastal regionmodels (SIMstsunami inund

SIMs, and thecommunity plResearch Cenof TIMs in paProgram (NTHagencies formtsunamis in th

NTHMP workTIMs are typiforecast scenainformation frresponse and planning, and

NOAA’s NTWthe SIMs that

NO7.2Tsunami Inunfor EnvironmThis informatinundation zolarge geograpbegun to deve

NCEI relies oNOAA vessel

To develop thvessels, as we

Com7.3There are manfrom bathymeand historic so 184 Personal co185 Wiley, P. CInundation Pro186 Ibid. 187 Personal comon January 27, 188 Ibid.

unamis: Toduct Backgnami Inundatioalculate the heins.184 These mos), are used in rdation maps (T

e site-specific Tlanning for tsun

nter (NTRC) crartnership with HMP).185 NTH

med by NOAA he U.S.

ks with local anically developearios and wavefrom the Nationkeep their com

d mitigation act

WCs also rely osupport these

OAA Fleet Dndation Forecas

mental Informatition is importanones and levels phic areas in selelop DEMS for

on high resolutils, to develop D

he Tsunami Forell as data from

mplementarny other data soetry data from toundings, as w

ommunication wi., Honeycutt, M

oducts and Servic

mmunication wi2017.

Tsunami Inground on Forecast Moight and extentodels, also knowreal-time tsuna

TIMs) for specif

TIMs, play an inami events. N

reates SIMs andthe National T

HMP is a consoat the direction

nd state officiaed for potential

heights. In thenal Tsunami Wmmunities safe. tions related to

on SIMs to devforecasts does

ata that Feest Model depenion (NCEI). DEnt for knowing in various comlect U.S. coastar select internat

ion bathymetryDEMs.188 The D

recast Inundatim the Voluntary

ry Data ources that feethe NOAA flee

well as bathyme ith Michael Ang., Rolleri, J., andces.” National O

ith Kelly Stroker

nundation

odels represent t of tsunami flown as standby

ami forecasting fic regions and

important role iNOAA’ s Natiod supports the d

Tsunami Hazardortium of federan of Congress i

als and communly affected area

e event of a tsunWarning Centers

The mapping tsunamis.

velop short-termnot rely on dat

ed the Produnds on Digital EEMs map out thow tsunamis

mmunities. The al regions to sutional locations

y data and hydrDEMs rely on t

on Model, NTRy Observing Sh

d into the DEMet, DEMs rely oetry data collect

gove, NOAA Tsud Huffer, H. (201Oceanic and Atm

r, Associate Scie

A-28

Forecast

a series of ooding in U.S. inundation and to create

d communities.

in long-term nal Tsunami development d Mitigation al and state in 1995 with th

nities to build eas, showing inunami, state ands (NTWC) and data from TIM

m tsunami foreta collected by

uct Elevation Modthe elevation ofof various wavNCEI produce

upport tsunami s at the request

ographic survethis data to acc

RC also uses ohip Program, wh

Ms and the Tsunon coastal and ted by private v

unami Program M13). “Towards a

mospheric Admin

entist at Coopera

Appendix

Modeling

he objective of r

evacuation mapundation levelsd local officialsthe pre-run TI

Ms also support

ecast informatioNOAA vessels

dels (DEMs) crf various featurve heights and es approximateforecasting an

t of the NTWC

eys, some of whcurately map ou

ocean profile dahich the NOAA

nami Inundatiomarine Light Dvessels.189

Manager, on JanBetter Understaistration.

ative Institute for

Product: Model

Line OffiAtmosphe

Mission SNation - T

x A: NOAA Fle

reducing the po

ps based on TIs associated wis use short-termMs to guide thcommunity ris

on. However, ts.

reated by NOAAres in a certain amplitudes wi

ely 200 DEMs nd modeling effC.187

hich is collecteut the areas of

ata directly collA fleet is a part

on Forecast MoDetection and R

nuary 5, 2017. anding of the Va

r Research in En

Tsunami Inund

ice: Office of Oeric Research

Service Area: WTsunami

eet Data Value

otential impact

Ms.186 A seriesith alternative tm forecast heir immediate sk assessments

the information

A’s National Cgeographic are

ill translate intothat cover smaforts. NCEI has

ed/conducted binterest.

lected from NOt of.

odel overall. ARanging (LIDA

alue of NOAA

nvironmental Sc

dation Forecas

Oceanic and

Weather Ready

Chains

ts of

s of tsunami

,

n from

Centers ea. o all and s also

y

OAA

side AR),

iences,

st

y

Appendix A:

To develop thand Reportingnetwork is antethered to a sprocess.190 Cuhowever, the from the Natideveloping SI

In addition to Database and The database functions at cresearchers stmodels, the D

Use7.4Information frrelated to tsunsite-specific Tsets guideline

During an actwould affect tNOAA’s Tsunsubsequent tsuan earthquakealong with the(banner alonglocal emergen

After the firston the predict

NTWC worksTIMs, scale bminutes.196

It is importanincluding partmanagers wil 189 Personal co190 “DART 4G Marine Enviro191 Personal com192 Wiley, P. CInundation Pro193 Ibid. 194 Ibid. 195 Personal com196 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

he Tsunami Forg of Tsunami (Darray of 39 bu

surface buoy. Turrently, a charNOAA fleet monal Water LevIMs because it

the DEMs, thethe Method ofis made up of ertain locationstudy tsunami be

DEMs, and info

ers of the Prfrom the Tsunamnami response TIMs into mitiges for how mitig

tual tsunami, cotheir communitnami Emergenunami, and pine occurs off thee first bulletin gg the bottom of ncy officials rec

t alert, emergented wave ampli

s to get out moback their respo

t to note that thts of Washingtol not have time

ommunication wDeep-ocean Asnmental Laborammunication wi., Honeycutt, M

oducts and Servic

mmunication wi

Data Value Cha

recast InundatiDART) networ

uoy systems. EaThis detects andrtered ship nam

maintained DARvel Observationis used to valid

e Tsunami Inunf Splitting Tsuna collection of s along known ehavior and ma

ormation from t

roduct and Rmi Inundation and evacuationgation and evacgation plans an

ommunities refty and related r

ncy Centers wornpoint the locate coast to the timgoes to Weathe

f the TV), and tceive this infor

ncy managers bitude and the re

re refined inforonse and take a

he time and dison and Oregon

e to adjust their ith Michael Angsessment and Re

atory. ith Michael Ang., Rolleri, J., andces.” National O

ith Michael Ang

ains

on Model overrk and the Natiach buoy consid measures tsun

med the Bluefin RT as recently n Network (NWdate the model

ndation Model nami (MOST) mtsunami propaand potential e

ake long-term pthe DART and

Related ProForecast Mode

n. First, NTHMcuation plans fond evacuation m

ference the TIMresponse actionrk as quickly ations most at risme that the firser Forecast Offthe National Wrmation from th

begin to executesults of their p

rmation in a sea more measure

tance from the n, the time to thr response base

gove, NOAA Tsueporting of Tsun

gove, NOAA Tsud Huffer, H. (201Oceanic and Atm

gove, NOAA Tsu

A-29

rall, NOAA alsional Water Levists of a bottomnami waves as conducts all neas 2014, and m

WLON) also faand can be use

also relies on tmodel. NCTR

agation model rearthquake zonpredictions aboNWLON, to u

oducts el directly infor

MP works with lfor various tsunmaps should be

Ms to understanns. For exampleas possible to assk. This processt amplitude nufices, NOAA W

Weather Service hese sources.

te their full resppre-run site-spe

econd and thirded approach, if

earthquake souhe coast can be ed on up-to-date

unami Program Mnami 4th Generat

unami Program M13). “Towards a

mospheric Admin

unami Program M

so relies on dataevel Observatiom pressure cente

they pass overecessary maint

may do so in theactor into the med in real-time

the results of twcreates and ma

runs that are prnes. The MOSTout tsunamis.193

ultimately creat

rms communitylocal emergenc

nami scenarios.e created.194

nd how NWTCe, after an earthssess the likelyss takes approxumbers and locWeather Radio, standard disse

ponse protocol ecific TIMs. M

d alert, which alwarranted. The

urce and the coas short as 20 e forecast infor Manager, on Jan

ation Tsunami M

Manager, on JanBetter Understaistration.

Manager, on Jan

a from the Deeon Network (NWer at the bottomr and plays a ketenance on DAe future. Tidal

models. This daforecasting.192

wo other modeaintain the Propre-computed foT numerical sim3 NCTR uses thte SIMs and su

y and regional cy managers to NOAA funds

C’s forecasted thquake of a cery wave height/aximately five mcations are publ, Emergency Aemination proce

and issue evacMeanwhile,

llows managerese alerts are u

oast varies by eminutes. In thermation and wi

nuary 5, 2017. Measurement Sys

nuary 5, 2017. anding of the Va

nuary 5, 2017.

ep-Ocean AssesWLON). The Dm of the ocean ey part in the fo

ART buoys;191 gauge observa

ata is important2

ls, the Propagapagation Datab

or tsunami sourmulation modehe results from

ubsequent TIM

planning efforo convert SIMs

these processe

tsunami wave hrtain magnitudamplitude of a

minutes from thlished. The aler

Alert System Needures.195 State

cuation orders b

rs to re-examinusually out with

event. In some ese cases, emerill have to rely

tem.” NOAA Pa

alue of NOAA

ssment DART that is

forecast

ations t in

ation base. rce l helps

m these s.

rts and

es and

height e,

he time rt etwork e and

based

e their hin 20

areas, rgency solely

acific

on the first wasecond and th

States and indevent occurs. decisions abohospitals, andinundation zoshelters for pe

There is also further researpeople face. T

Soc7.5The National thereby decrepotential livesdecisions relaresponse prepprovide for m

The value of tdamage causeand/or mitigatmitigation actresponse, prepcommunity hawarning syste

However, it issystem, can siassociated witEarthquake caTohoku, Japawaves with sibenefit from himpacts cannopotential beneinformation in

197 Personal comDeputy Program198 Ibid. 199 Ibid. 200 Ibid; Wiley,Inundation Pro201 Personal comDeputy Program

arning. In otherhird alerts provi

dividual commuFor example, put the location

d implement othone, communitieople directly a

a large demandch on tsunamis

They also consi

cietal BenefiTsunami Inundasing the impas lost. In terms ated to the locatparatory actions

more effective e

tsunami mitigaed by tsunamistion actions hations). In additiparation, and eas to implemenem/communica

s clear that welignificantly redth two tsunamiaused over $50

an, earthquake rimilar amplitudhaving a responot all be attribuefits associatedn models such

mmunication wim Manager, on J

, P. C., Honeycuoducts and Servicmmunication wim Manager, on J

r cases, such asided by the em

unities also useplanners use inof critical infra

her preparatoryies can developaffected by inun

d for the data frs. In particular,ider the potenti

its dation Model h

acts of these eveof mitigation p

tion of critical s. In the event ovacuation proc

ation practices i, it is difficult td not been impion, the extent vacuation, but

nt response/evaation.

ll-planned mitigduce the impaci events that im0 billion in damresulted in $5 bdes and durationnse/evacuationuted to tsunami d with having a as SIMs and T

ith Rocky LopesJanuary 5, 2017.

utt, M., Rolleri, Jces.” National Oith Rocky LopesJanuary 5, 2017.

s Hawaii, the timergency center

e SIMs and TIMnformation fromastructure, suchy actions. In thp alternative resndation.198

rom SIMs and these users exial for tsunami

helps communients, includingplanning, havininfrastructure, of a tsunami, hcesses, reducing

is still relativelto quantify the plemented (or aof damages assalso on the ma

acuation action

gation efforts ats of tsunamis.

mpacted Crescenmage and 11 deabillion in daman, even though plan in place wmitigation, oucomprehensiv

TIMs provide.

s, National Tsuna.

J., and Huffer, HOceanic and Atms, National Tsuna.

A-30

ime to the coasr to modify thei

MS to develop m SIMs and TIMh as nuclear po

he event that crisponse actions,

TIMs from U.Sxamine ways to

threats in areas

ities to better plg property damang accurate TIMas well as the p

having the pre-rg damage to pe

y unknown. Wdamages that w

alternatively thesociated with tsagnitude and los, the accuracy

and response acFor example,

nt City, CA. Aaths in Crescenge and no deat

h they originatewhile the 2011 utreach & educave Disaster Resp

ami Hazard Miti

H. (2013). “Towamospheric Admin

ami Hazard Miti

Appendix

st is much longir response.197

appropriate tsuMs to assess in

ower plants, waitical infrastruc, such as the us

S. universities.o better predict s that are not ty

lan for and respage and other eMs allows complanning of effrun SIMs and Teople and prope

While some studwould have occe extent to whisunami events

ocation of the tsy of the forecas

ctions, combineexperts often c

A tsunami prodnt City. A tsunaths in the same ed in different l event did.201 Wation, and disasponse Plan in p

igation Program

ards a Better Undistration. igation Program

x A: NOAA Fle

ger so local offi

unami mitigationundation risksater and wastewcture is locatedse of alternative

. Academics usthe tsunami thrypically consid

pond to potentieconomic losse

mmunities to maficient evacuatiTIMs and assocerty.200

dies have calcucurred if effectich damages wnot only depen

sunami, the amst, and the effec

ed with an effecite the differenduced by the 19ami produced blocation. Thes

locations. The While this signister planning, iplace, as well a

m Administrator

derstanding of th

m Administrator

eet Data Value

icials can use th

on actions befos and to make water infrastrucd within an expe power source

se this data to creats that many

dered threat are

ial tsunami evees, and the numake more informion routes and ciated response

ulated the amoutive evacuationere reduced bynd on effective

mount of time a ctiveness of the

ective warning nce in damages964 Great Alaskby the 2011 Grse events produ1964 event didificant decreaseit does speak toas the value tha

he Value of NOA

Chains

he

ore an

cture, ected es or

conduct y eas.199

ents, mber of

med other e plans

unt of ns y e

e

s ka reat uced d not e in o the at the

AA


A-31

An additional value of the Tsunami Inundation Forecast Model is the educational value it provides to universities looking to learn more about tsunami threats.202 Using these data scientists can improve their forecasting abilities allowing emergency managers to improve their responses during these events. This in turn will lead to further future benefits in the form of avoided losses and injuries or deaths due to future tsunamis.

Figure A.8 demonstrates the value chain associated Tsunami Inundation Forecast Models, including the data from the NOAA fleet that they depend on, and how this ultimately results in value to society.

202 Wiley, P. C., Honeycutt, M., Rolleri, J., and Huffer, H. (2013). “Towards a Better Understanding of the Value of NOAA Inundation Products and Services.” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Figure A.8. N

NOAA Fleet DData Value Ch

ain: Tsunami

A-32

Inundation F

Appendix

Forecast Mode

x A: NOAA Fle

eling

eet Data Value Chains

Appendix A:

8. HaMa

Pro8.1Algae are simfreshwater. Incontrol creatinwhich producmarine mammHABs that cashellfish toxicodor problemall coastal areaffecting diffeseven regionsand regional e

Flori Wes Lake Gulf Was Calif Ches

In response to(HABHRCA)coordinated bdetecting and local economand Texas), thOperational F

The HAB-OFoperational Hto more effectrestrictions, anthe HAB-OFS

This discussioforecasts in thGulf of Maine

203 “Harmful A204 “Harmful Ahttps://coastals205 Ibid. 206 “Mitigatinghttp://celebratin207 “Harmful Ahttps://coastals208 “Harmful Ahttps://coastals209 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

armful Algaine oduct Backgmple plants that n some cases, cng Harmful Al

ce toxic or harmmals and birds.2

n lead to wild acity, adverse pu

ms in drinking weas of the Uniteerent regions os where HABs economies:

ida and easternstern Gulf of Me Erie (cyanobaf of Maine (Aleshington Coast fornia Coast (msapeake Bay (m

o this threat Co) in 1998.206 Th

by NOAA’s Napredicting HAies.207 Today lahe Gulf of MainForecast System

FS relies on datHAB forecasts.

tively sample and other HAB S. NOAA antic

on focuses on Hhis region and se will transform

Algal Blooms,” NAlgal Bloom (HA

cience.noaa.gov

Harmful Algal ng200years.noaa

Algal Bloom (HAcience.noaa.gov


Data Value Cha

gal Blooms

ground live in both saolonies of algagal Blooms (H

mful effects on 203 There are seand domestic aublic health eff

water.204 HABs ed States, with f the country. Nand can have la

n Gulf of MexicMexico (Karenia

acteria), exandrium fund(Pseudo-nitzsc

multiple speciesmultiple specie

ongress passed the HABHRCAational Centers ABs, monitoringarge regional ene and the Gre

m (HAB-OFS).

ta from a varietThe forecasts pand monitor HAresponse actio

cipates that sev

HAB forecasts several studies m from a pilot p

NOAA National OAB) Forecasting”v/projects/detail?

Blooms.” (2012a.gov/transforma

AB) Forecasting,v/projects/detail?AB) Forecasting,v/projects/detail?

ains

s: Forecast

altwater and ae can grow out

HABs) or “red tpeople, fish, sh

everal species oanimal deaths, fects, and taste have been spodifferent speciNOAA has idenarge impacts on

co (Karenia bra brevis),

dyense), chia), s), and s).205

the Harmful AA led to the dev

for Coastal Ocg their toxicity ecosystem progeat Lakes. Thes

ty of sources, inpredict and asseAB areas.208 Thns. NOAA’s g

veral new region

for the Gulf ofhave estimatedprogram started

Ocean Service. A” (2016). NCCO?key=144

). NOAA Celebrations/habs/welc,”(2016). NCCO?key=144 ,”(2016). NCCO?key=144

A-33

ts and Mit

t of tides,” hellfish, of

and otted in es ntified n local

revis),

Algal Bloom andvelopment and fcean Science (Nand determinin

grams have beese programs ma

ncluding data cess the extent ohis in turn inforoal is to ultimans will be oper

f Maine becausd the economicd in 2008, to op

Available at: httpOS Projects Explo

rates 200 years ocome.html#then

OS Projects Explo

OS Projects Explo

Pr

LiReLaCe

MW

tigation C

d Hypoxia Resfunding of inteNCCOS), that fng their effects

en implementedake up the NNC

collected from of algal bloomsrms decisions a

ately develop arational over th

se NOAA shipsc value of theseperational seas

p://oceanserviceorer. Available a

of Science, Servi orer. Available a

orer. Available a

roduct: Harmfu

ine Office: Offesearch - Great aboratory, Natioenters for Coas

Mission Service Water Quality

Capability,

search and Conegrated regionafocus on develos on local wildld in the Gulf ofCCOS’s Harmf

the NOAA fles, allowing statabout beach cl

a national foreche next decade.

s contribute dae forecasts. HAsonal and week

e.noaa.gov/hazarat:

ice, and Steward

at:

at:

ful Algal Bloom

fice of Oceanict Lakes Environonal Ocean Ser

stal Ocean Scie

Area: Resilien

Gulf of

ntrol Act al programs, oping tools forlife, humans anf Mexico (in Flful Algal Bloom

et, to develop te and local maosures, shellfisast capacity thr209

ata that support AB forecasts forkly forecasts sta

rds/hab/

dship. Available

ms Forecasts

c and Atmosphenmental Researrvice - Nationa

ence

nt Coasts-Coas

r nd lorida m

anagers shing rough

HAB r the arting

at:

eric rch al

stal

in 2017. In thresult in adve

NO8.2The HAB foremap of cysts ovoyage duringwill use theseincorporate inmaintenance fmoorings.211 Tincorporated i

Ships from thand 2016, the2015, the Hencourse of five

Com8.3In addition to ships, the HAfield observatobservations rEnvironmentahas been used

Specific data Data Server, tNOAA Centeproduction ansupported the

Many institutigather and anof Maine. In ascientists hav

210 “Harmful AAvailable at: ht211 “Project: NEhttp://www.om212 “Modeling ahttp://p5.neraco213 “Project: Sphttp://www.omSurvey of the Nhttp://www.om214 “Project: GuOperations. Av215 “NOAA HaForecasting.” (216 Ibid. 217 Ibid.

e Gulf of Mainrse public heal

OAA Fleet Decasts for the Gof harmful algag which scienti

e sediment sampnto the forecastfor the NortheaThese mooringinto HABs fore

he NOAA fleet e Gordon Guntenry B. Bigelow e days.214

mplementarthe cyst map,

AB Forecasts alstions, models, prequired for theal Health Sciend for developin

sources for thethe NOAA Nater for Operationnd outreach. NOe scientific deve

ions outside ofalyze data, the addition, the We also been inv

Algal Cyst Sampl

ttps://coastalscieERACOOS Moo

mao.noaa.gov/finand Satellites.” (oos.org/projects/pring Ecosystem

mao.noaa.gov/finNortheast U.S. S

mao.noaa.gov/finulf of Maine Harvailable at: http:/armful Algal Blo2013). NOAA Ti

ne, the primary th effects. Thu

ata That FeGulf of Maine rae along the Neists collected mples to determiting of HAB evastern Regionalgs collect real-tiecast models.21

also support Her helped condconducted a H

ry Data the NERACOOso rely on datapublic health reese forecasts.21

nces have fundeg and validatin

e HAB Forecastional Data Buonal OceanograpOAA Coastal Selopment.217

f government arUniversity of M

Woods Hole Ocevolved in the de

ling Lays Grounence.noaa.gov/neoring Maintenan

nd/projects/3726-(2011). NERACO/modeling.html

m Monitoring Surnd/projects/3567-Shelf.” (2015). Nnd/projects/3423-rmful Algal Bloo//www.omao.no

oom Operational ides and Curren

concern assocus, HABs result

eed the Prodrely on data froew England co

more than 55 seine the presencvents along the l Association oime weather an2

HAB Forecasts duct EcosystemHarmful Algal B

OS moorings, aa from several oeports, and buo5 NOAA, Natioed research sinng the HABs fo

sts include the Noy Center (winphic Products aServices Center

re also involveMassachusetts eanographic Inevelopment of

ndwork for 2017 ews/habs/harmfu

nce.” (2016). NO-neracoos-mooriOOS Integrated

rvey.” (2016). N-spring-ecosyste

NOAA Office of M-ecosystem-monom Forecast Supaa.gov/find/projForecast Systemts. Available at:

A-34

iated with HABt in restrictions

duct om several NOAast for use in H

ediment core sace and abundan

New England of Coastal Oceand ocean data a

by conducting m Monitoring Su

Bloom Forecas

and the NMFS other sources. Foy data to provional Science Fce the early 19

orecast model.2

NOAA Nationand data), and NOand Services cor and NOAA N

ed in this resear– Dartmouth, U

nstitution particHAB Forecast

Gulf of Maine Ful-algal-cyst-sam

OAA Office of Maing-maintenanceOcean Observin

NOAA Office of Mem-monitoring-suMarine and Avianitoring-integratepport Survey.” (2ects/3486-gulf-m

m (HAB-OFS): Ahttps://tidesand

Appendix

Bs is paralytic s on shellfish ha

AA ships. TheHAB forecasts. amples throughnce of cysts of t

coast in 2017.2

an Observing Salong with othe

NMFS NFSC urveys for the Nst Support Surv

NFSC HydrogFor example, thide large spatiaoundation, and

990s, including 216

al Weather SerOAA CoastWa

onducts bloom National Center

rch. In the GulfUniversity of N

cipates in the rets in the Gulf of

Forecast.”(2016)mpling-lays-grouarine and Aviatioe ng System. Avail

Marine and Aviaurvey ; “Ecosys

ation Operationsed-pelagic-surve2016). NOAA Ofmaine-harmful-aAssisting HAB M

dcurrents.noaa.go

x A: NOAA Fle

shellfish poisoarvesting.

e NOAA ship P The ship went

hout the Gulf ofthe harmful alg210 The Pisces

Systems (NERAer platforms in

Hydrographic NMFS NFSC.2

vey of the Gulf

graphic Surveyhe HAB-OFS ual scale and a hd the National I

both field and

rvice, the GNOatch (remote seanalysis, and s

rs for Coastal O

f of Maine, threNew Hampshiresearch for the f Maine, as the

). NCCOS Newsundwork-2017-gon Operations. A

lable at:

tion Operations.stem Monitoring s. Available at: ey-northeast-us-s

Office of Marine aalgal-bloom-foreMitigation throuov/hab/overview

eet Data Value

oning, which ca

Pisces helped but on a seven-daf Maine. Reseaga A. fundyensealso provides ACOOS) the area which

Surveys. In 20213 In Novembf of Maine over

ys provided by Nuses satellite imhigh frequency Institute of

d laboratory dat

OME Oceanogrensing data). Thsupports forecaOcean Science b

ee universities re, and the UnivBulletin. Cana

ere are large

s and Features gulf-maine-forecAvailable at:

. Available at: Integrated Pelag

shelf and Aviation ecast-support-surugh Early Detectw.html#overview

Chains

an

uild a ay archers e to

h is

015 ber r the

NOAA magery, of

ta, that

raphic he

ast both

help versity

adian

cast/

gic

rvey tion and

w

Appendix A:

Alexandrium provinces of N

Pro8.4HAB forecastissued prior tothat date, and follow this sa

Both forecastThe global moNOAA Real Treferred to as

The weekly umanagers, pubHAB season. about the locasome cases, thstakeholders t

Use8.5There are manSubscribers revariety of typrepresentativemembers of thare primarily also include u

HABs forecashealth. State slevels of the wsample and pemanagers musubsequent teofficials do no

The HAB foreselectively an

218 Ibid. 219 Personal comBlooms (PCM 220 “Harmful Ahttps://coastalsResearch Labo221 “Great Lakehttps://www.gl222 Personal comBlooms (PCM 223 Ibid. 224 Jin, D., E. TNew England.”225 Ibid. 226 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

blooms and higNew Brunswic

oduct Dissemts for the Gulf oo the bloom seaa forecast of bme format.219

s depend on hiodel used for foTime Operationthe Gulf of Ma

updates are emablic health offiThe format of

ation, size and mhe Bulletin inclto make import

ers of the Prny users of the eceive seasonaes of users, inces, regional obshe fishing/aquawithin NOAA

users in the EPA

sts are used by shellfish managwater and the sherform these test determine hosts show that thot consider the

ecasts allow stand precisely, the

mmunication wiHAB) Program,


oratory (GLERL)es HABs and Hylerl.noaa.gov/resmmunication wiHAB) Program,

Thunberg, and P” Ocean and Coa

Data Value Cha

gh shellfish toxk and Nova Sc

mination of Maine have ason, usually in

bloom condition

gh-resolution mforecasts is beinnal Forecast Syaine Operation

ailed to a subscicials and reseaeach Bulletin vmovement trajludes graphs oftant manageme

roduct and RHABs forecasl and weekly fo

cluding federal serving systemaculture industrand the FDA (

A and the Mid-

local authoritiegers are responhellfish. These

ests. If toxic levow much of thehe HAB has dicommercial co

ate shellfish maereby minimizi

ith Dr. Quay Dor, on February 24

AB) Forecasting,v/projects/detail?). Available at: hypoxia.” NOAA Gs/HABs_and_Hyith Dr. Quay Dor, on December 1

. Hoagland. (200astal Manageme

ains

xicity in the Bacotia.218

been distributen March, and 2ns for the comi

modeling of theng transitioned ystem (RTOFSal Forecast Sys

criber list of vararch scientists twvaries by regioectory of algal f the winds andent decisions th

Related Prosts, many of whorecasts and arand state gove

m representativery, makers of H(with indirect in-Atlantic Fishe

es and other punsible for sample resource manavels of shellfishe beach or the iissipated.224 Thosts associated

anagers and puing economic i

rtch, Acting Pro4, 2017. ,”(2016). NCCO?key=144; “Greahttps://www.glerGreat Lakes Envypoxia/ rtch, Acting Pro

12, 2016.

08). “Economic ent, 51, 420-429

A-35

ay of Fundy, wh

ed in two form2) weekly updating week (HAB

e region, in whfrom the HYC

S). The nested sstem (GoMOFS

rious stakeholdwice a week du

on but generallyblooms, predic

d currents affechat minimize ri

oducts hom subscribe tre kept informeernment agencies, and CanadiaHAB sensors annterest due to try Council.223

ublic decision-mling and testingagers use the Hh poison are fouintertidal and sese closures arwith these clo

ublic health offimpacts due to

ogram Manager,

OS Projects Exploat Lakes HABs arl.noaa.gov/res/Hvironmental Rese

ogram Manager,

impact of the 20.

hich borders bo

ms during the pilates that provideB Bulletin). It i

hich regional mCOM (HYbrid Cset of models foS).

ders including suring a HAB evy provides bloocting its locatiocting the bloomsks to the local

to receive HABed via the NE Pes, research/ac

an scientists.222

nd toxin tests, atheir responsibi

makers to guidg different area

HAB forecasts tund in the sam

submerged landre motivated bysures when ma

ficials to close flost landings o

Prevention, Con

orer. Available aand Hypoxia.” NHABs_and_Hypearch Laborator

Prevention, Con

005 red tide even

oth Maine and

lot phase: 1) a e both a hindcais expected that

models are nesteCoordinate Oc

for the Gulf of M

state and local vent and once

om analysis incon within the n

m.221 This informl population.

B forecasts fromPSP Listserv. Scademic institut2 Industry subscand consultingility to regulate

de their efforts tas of the coast tto determine w

mpled shellfish, ds will be closey public health aking these dec

fishing areas anor lost tourism.2

ntrol, and Mitiga

at: NOAA Great Lakoxia/ ry (GLERL). Av

ntrol, and Mitiga

nt on commercia

the Canadian

seasonal forecast of the bloomt future forecas

ed in a global mcean Model) to Maine will be

coast resourcea week during

cluding informanext 3-4 days.22

mation is used

m NOAA. ubscribers incltions, industry cribers include

g firms. Federale food sources)

to protect publito assess the to

where they shoustate shellfish

ed to shellfishinconcerns and t

cisions.225

nd beaches mo226 In Maine, w

ation of Harmful

kes Environment

vailable at:

ation of Harmful

al shellfish fisher

ast m up to sts will

model. the

the ation

20 In by

lude a

e l users ), but

ic oxicity uld

ng until these

ore weekly

l Algal

tal

l Algal

ries in

forecasts alsois closed.227 Informer managLegislature to

Members of ta HAB is predleads to an increcurrently exon fish at indithe extent to w

Soc8.6HAB forecastselectively anadverse publistudy estimatelosses in Mainsame event inand other souThis estimate event led to anthe indirect imwere spatially

A more recenon commerciatemporary po

Knowing the accurate HABportions of bethese closuresshellfishing an

One study exathe accuracy operfect, and th$713,000. Th

227 Personal comBlooms (PCM 228 Ibid. 229 Personal comBlooms (PCM 230 Costa, P.R. Fish and Fishe231 Athearn, K.Available at: ht232 Jin, D., E. TNew England.”233 Ibid. 234 Evans, K. Sshellfish harve235 “Satellites SService. Availa

help managersn some cases, tger in the Maino budget enoug

the aquaculturedicted, harvestecrease in frequxposed to HABividual, populawhich HAB for

cietal Benefits allow state sh

nd precisely, thec health outcomed the impact one to be $1.98

n Maine and Marces. This studincludes lost rn increase in sh

mpacts of a HAy linked, meani

nt study examinal soft-shell clallution closures

extent of past eB forecast can beaches to ensurs and cut the lennd tourism.235

amined the valuof the forecast,he responses aris value falls to

mmunication wiHAB) Program,

mmunication wiHAB) Program,(2016). “Impact

eries, 17, 226-24, (2008). Economttp://www.mach

Thunberg, and P.” Ocean and Coa

., Athearn, K., Cst: The case of s

See Red, Blue anable at: https://w

s carve out excthese forecasts ne Department oh funds for mo

e industry can aers can use HAency, intensity

Bs. More effortsation, and commrecasts should

its hellfish managereby minimizimes. Several stuof lost harvestemillion for softassachusetts usy estimated the

revenue in the shellfish import

AB event on theing that shellfis

ned the impact am harvests in Ms contributed to

economic impabe. Before thesre public safetyngth of time th

ue of HAB for and the effectire highly effecto $61,000 per y

ith Dr. Quay Dor, on February 24

ith Dr. Quay Dor, on February 24t and effects of p

48. mic Losses from

hias.edu/ assets/d. Hoagland. (200astal Manageme

Chen, X., Bell, Koft-shell clams i

nd Green: Monitwww.nesdis.noaa

ception areas wcan help state of Marine Reso

onitoring for the

also use the HAAB forecast infoy, duration and s are being madmunity levels.23

influence fishe

gers and public ing economic iudies have esti

er sales of shellft-shell clams.23

sing data from ese impacts ransoftshell clam as to make up foe seafood indussh closures in M

of temporary pMachias Bay, Mo a loss of $3.6

acts due to strose forecasts wery. However, as hat they are clos

recasts in the Giveness of the rtive, the study fyear if HAB ev

rtch, Acting Pro4, 2017.

rtch, Acting Pro4, 2017. paralytic shellfish

m Closure of Shedocs/appliedRese08). “Economic ient, 51, 420-429

K. P., & Johnsonin Machias Bay, toring Harmful Aa.gov/content/sat

A-36

where shell fish officials secureources used thee season.228

AB forecasts to ormation to hargeographic disde to understan30 The results o

ery managemen

health officialsimpacts associamated the socifish due to a st31 A separate stthe NMFS, the

nged from $2.4and mussel fishor the drop in lstries. Finally, tMaine may resu

pollution closurMaine. Over th

6 million in forg

ng HAB eventre available, puforecasts improsed, minimizin

Gulf of Maine, cresponse. Assufound that the a

vents are less fr

ogram Manager,

ogram Manager,

h poisoning toxi

llfish Harvestingearch/eco_lossesimpact of the 20.

, T. (2016). MeaMaine. Ocean &

Algal Blooms frotellites-see-red-b

Appendix

harvesters cane resources to me seasonal HAB

make managemrvest their shelstribution of HAnd the longer-teof this researchnt actions.

s to close fishinated with lost laioeconomic imptrong HAB evetudy estimated e Division of M4 million in Maheries.232 The slocal supply. Ththe study foundult in price incr

res (either due heir nine-year sgone revenue,

ts, it becomes cublic health offove, decision-m

ng economic im

considering botuming a HAB oannual value o

requent, the for

Prevention, Con

Prevention, Con

ins derived from

g Areas in Mains_shellfish_jan0005 red tide even

asuring the impa& Coastal Manaom Space.”(2015blue-and-green-m

x A: NOAA Fle

n work even whmitigate the effB forecast to co

ment decisionslfish early.229 AABs, fish are merm effects of t

h may indicate t

ng areas and beandings, lost topact of HABs.

ent in 2005. Ththe direct econ

Marine Fisherieaine to $18 millstudy also founhis increase in d that soft-shelreases in New Y

to HAB eventsstudy period fro27.4% of total

clear how valuaficials would hamakers can nar

mpacts to many

th the frequencoccurs every 10of HAB forecasrecast is not per

ntrol, and Mitiga

ntrol, and Mitiga

m harmful algal b

ne. University of 08.pdf. nt on commercia

act of pollution cagement, 130, 195). NOAA Satell

monitoring-harm

eet Data Value

hen much of thefects of HABs.onvince the Sta

s. For example,As climate chanmore likely to bthe resulting toto fisheries ma

eaches more ourism, and/or For example, o

he study estimatnomic impacts es in Massachuslion in Massach

nd that the 2005imports may m

ll clam price inYork.233

s or sewer overom 2001-2009revenue.234

able a timely anave to close larrrow the scope y industries incl

cy of the HAB 0 years, the forsts amounts to rfect, and the

ation of Harmful

ation of Harmful

blooms to marine

f Maine at Machi

al shellfish fisher

closures on comm96-204. lite and Informat

mful-algal-bloom

Chains

e coast One ate

, when nge be oxins anagers

one ted of the setts husetts. 5 HAB mitigate ncreases

rflows) ,

nd rge of luding

event, ecast is

l Algal

l Algal

e fish.”

ias.

ries in

mercial

tion ms-space

Appendix A:

responses are value of a perof HAB forecresponses.236

Figure A.9 pr

Figure A.9. N

236 Jin, D. and Pin the Gulf of M

NOAA Fleet D

not effective. Hrfect forecast incasts ranges fro

rovides a diagra

NOAA Fleet D

P. Hoagland. (20Maine.” Woods H

Data Value Cha

However, if a Hncreases to oveom $51.3 millio

am of the value

Data Value Ch

008). “The ValuHole Oceanogra

ains

HAB event occr $3 million pe

on to $0.9 milli

e chain associat

ain: Harmful

e of Harmful Alaphic Institution

A-37

curs every otheer year. Resultsion, depending

ted with HABs

Algal Bloom F

lgal Bloom PrediMarine Policy C

er year, and thes indicate that t

on HAB frequ

s in the Gulf of

Forecasts in th

dictions to the NeCenter.

e responses are the net present uency, accuracy

f Maine.

he Gulf of Ma

earshore Comme

effective, the tvalue over 30 yy of prediction,

aine

ercial Shellfish F

total years , and

Fishery

9. Hy Pro9.1

The hypoxic zdepleted coasworld’s coastconditions canhabitat loss.23

Since 2001, N(Hypoxia Wamaps and dataannual hypoxthe scientific band others baaddition, Hypthe Gulf hypo

Hypoxia WatEnvironmenta

NO9.2Each year froAssessment Pother water quthree days, ththese data, puhypoxia scien

Use9.3Hypoxia Watof the hypoxicHypoxia Watof Gulf hypoxnot a forecast Watch DO dahypoxic zone

The informatiis an essential

237 Scientific Ahttps://www.co238 NCEI, 2016Atmospheric A239 NCEI, 2016Atmospheric A240 NCEI, 2016Atmospheric A

ypoxia Waoduct Backgzone in the Gultal waters in thal oceans.237 Inn cause food w8

NOAA’s Gulf oatch) has publisa on Gulf regio

xic period. The basis upon whise their underst

poxia Watch maoxic zone.

ch is a cooperaal Information

OAA Fleet Dm early June th

Program (SEAMuality variablesey transmit the

ublish the mapsnce partners.240

ers of the Prch offers the fic zone in the Gch website throxia, for which tof hypoxic con

ata are critical iand its ecolog

ion provided inl baseline datas

Assessment of Hyoastalscience.noa6. Gulf of MexicAdministration. h6. Gulf of MexicAdministration. h6 Maps and DataAdministration. h

tch, Gulf oground lf of Mexico is

he US, and the n addition to im

web alterations,

of Mexico Hypshed near real-ton dissolved oxmaps and data ich policymaketanding of the aps and data pr

ative project am(NCEI), and C

ata That Fehrough mid-JulMAP), scientists near the sea fle data to NCEI s and underlyin

roduct and Rirst look at the s

Gulf. This informough contour mthe DO data fronditions, but rainputs to 3D timical impacts.

n the Hypoxia Wset for research

ypoxia in U.S. Caa.gov/publicatioo Hypoxia Watc

https://www.ncddo Hypoxia Watc

https://www.ncdda from 2015 to Phttps://www.ncdd

of Mexico

s the largest aresecond largest

mpacting fisherifaunal mortali

poxia Watch protime, web-basexygen (DO) for

form an imporers, fishermen, Gulf Hypoxic Zrovide a 15-yea

mong the NationCoast Watch-Ca

eed the Prodly, as part of thts aboard the N

floor over the cscientists at St

ng data online f

Related Proseason’s hypoxmation is acces

maps and the unom Hypoxia Wather a mappingme-variable, hy

Watch can direhers, educators,

Coastal Waters (Cons/detail?resouch. National Cendc.noaa.gov/hypch. National Cendc.noaa.gov/hypresent. National dc.noaa.gov/hyp

A-38

ea of oxygen-in the ies, hypoxic ities, and

ogram d contour

r the peak rtant part of the public, Zone. In ar baseline of

nal Marine Fisaribbean/Gulf o

duct he combined staNOAA researchontinental shelennis Space Ce

for public use, a

oducts xia conditions assed by users innderlying DO d

Watch data are cg of current andydrodynamic, a

ectly affect both, and decision-m

CENR 2010): urce=d596/N/PZ7nters for Environpoxia/ nters for Environpoxia/

Centers for Envpoxia/products/

Appendix

sheries Service of Mexico Reg

ate/federal Souh vessel Oregonlf from Texas toenter, MS, whoand transmit th

and provides crn two main wadata, or throughcritical inputs. Td historical DOand biogeochem

h up- and downmakers. The in

790pPMbl3+Menmental Informa

nmental Informa

vironmental Info

Product: H

Line OfficeSatellite, DaNational CeInformation

Mission SeCommunitiQuality

x A: NOAA Fle

(NMFS), Natigional Node.239

utheast Area Mn II take measuo northwest Flo create contouhe latest data an

ritical informatays – either direh forecast and mThe Hypoxia WO data. Howevemistry models t

nstream managnteragency Mis

e3eaMWtPPGzVation. National O

ation. National O

ormation. Nation

Hypoxia Watch

e: National Envata, and Informenters for Envirn

ervice Area: Ries & Economi

eet Data Value

ional Centers fo

Monitoring and urements of DOorida. Every on

ur maps based ond maps to Gul

tion for managectly from the management m

Watch product er, the Hypoxiathat characteriz

gement practicessissippi River/

VXDW7CdGobGOceanic and

Oceanic and

nal Oceanic and

h: Gulf of Mexi

vironmental mation Service,ronmental

Resilient Coastaes, Coastal Wa

Chains

or

O and ne to on lf

gement

models itself is a ze the

es, and /Gulf

GM=

ico

al ater

Appendix A:

of Mexico Wathe hypoxic zdynamics of tcauses of the resulting fromthrough repor

In every year Gulf Hypoxiacoordination bHypoxia Watmonitoring anmanagement nthrough ecolothrough the Nfocused on adof fisheries to

NOAA-suppoMaintaining tLouisiana Matarget ecosystsystems, charpicture of the

Hypoxia Watfor educating managers to cRiver watershprovided by thof hypoxia miinfluence the residue managloading are vomanagement.2

Soc9.4Hypoxia impatheir food sou

241 5th Annual NEffects on Fishhttp://sero.nmf242 2016 NOAAgulf-of-mexico243 NOAA Norhttps://coastals244 Meckley, TCoordination Whttps://service.n245 Mississippi https://www.nr246 Gulf Hypoxhttps://service.nReference.pdf

NOAA Fleet D

atershed Nutrieone by watershthe hypoxic zonhypoxic zone,

m runoff from Trts and presenta

since 2010, Hya Research Coobetween investch outputs are nd mitigation oneeds, and iden

ogical modelingNOAA Northerndvancing ecologo future scenari

orted scientists these data is imaster Plan, Landtem restorationtered research Gulf hypoxic z

ch and forecaststakeholders, p

characterize thehed. Twelve stahe HTF, includitigation allowiU.S.D.A.’s Migement projectoluntary, a stro246

cietal Benefiacts the food suurces leave due

NOAA/NGI Hyp

heries in the Nortfs.noaa.gov/habitA Press Release o-predicted rthern Gulf of Mcience.noaa.gov. et al., 2016. Gu

Workshop. Septencddc.noaa.gov/River Basin Hea

rcs.usda.gov/wpsxia Monitoring Sncddc.noaa.gov/

Data Value Cha

ent Task Force hed nutrient redne. This informand to differen

Texas rivers. Hations.

ypoxia Watch pordination Worted researchers particularly im

of ecosystem imntifying ways tg tools”.241 Hypn Gulf of Mexigical models uos of hypoxia e

use the DO damportant to the H

dscape Conservn goals that incl

vessels, and glzone.244

t/management politicians, mane multiple factoate agencies widing the Hypoxing them to useississippi Riverts to reduce hyp

ong scientific fo

its upply for comm to lack of oxy

poxia research Cthern Gulf of Mtat_conservationon Gulf hypoxic

exico Ecosystemv/research/pollutiulf of Mexico Hyember 12-13, 20/rdn/www/mediaalthy Watersheds/portal/nrcs/det

Stakeholder Com/rdn/www/media

ains

(Hypoxia Taskductions, reliesmation is imporntiate between hHypoxia Watch

products have brkshop, which h

and stakeholdmportant to meempacts. For exto “best predictpoxia Watch daico Ecosystemssed to inform wextent and seve

ata and maps toHTF and othervation Cooperalude the hypoxiliders complim

model results tnagers and citizors affecting thithin the Missisxia Watch data,e the most effecr Basin Healthypoxic effects inoundation with

mercially and regen, fish and sh

Coordination Woexico:

n/hcd_headlines/c zone seasonal

ms and Hypoxia ion/hypoxia/ngoypoxia Monitori16. Accessed: a/documents/actids Initiative. Uniail/la/programs/f

mmittee, 2007. Tea/documents/acti

A-39

k Force, HTF), on Hypoxia Wrtant to delineahypoxic region

h products are r

been used to inhas an overarchers to advance

eting workshopxample, the 5th t and assess theata will be critis and Hypoxia water quality anerity.242

o help plan shipr management eative Mississippic zone region”ent the NOAA

that rely on Hyzens about Gule hypoxic zonessippi Watershe, helps these agctive managemy Watersheds In the Gulf.245 Wincreased mon

ecreationally-imhrimp crowd in

orkshop: Advanc

/homenews_hypforecast: http://w

Assessment Proomex ng Strategy. Six

ivities/2016-worted States Deparfarmbill/rcpp/?cerms of Referenivities/stakehold

, which has a CWatch maps andate natural fromns driven by Mroutinely presen

nform proceedihing goal to strmanagement o

p objectives on Annual Works

e effects of diveical to the succAssessment Prnd resource ma

p and glider surefforts that aimpi River Basin/”.243 Other syst

A-supported and

ypoxia Watch dlf of Mexico hye, including nued have nutriengencies better ument strategies. Initiative, whicWhile state actionitoring efforts

mportant fish snto areas with b

cing Ecosystem

oxiamodeling.htwww.noaa.gov/m

ogram:

xth Annual NOA

rkshop/HypoxMrtment of Agricu

cid=stelprdb1097nce. September 3ders/Hypoxia-Sta

Coastal Goal tod data for infor

m manmade (e.gississippi Rivented by NOAA

ings of the Annrengthen commof the hypoxic advancing Gul

shop focused onersions and hyp

cess of three nerogram (NGOManagers of the p

rveys of the hypm to mitigate Gun/Gulf Hypoxiatems such as fixd state cruises t

data are also a sypoxic zone. T

utrient loading fnt loading reduunderstand the Data on the hyh supports nutrons to reduce w

s helps ensure e

species in the Gbetter oxygen l

Modeling of Hy

tml media-release/av

AA/NGI Hypoxia

MonStrat.pdf ulture. Accessed7321 3, 2007. Accesseakeholder-Comm

o reduce the sizrmation on seasg. nutrient load

er runoff and thA NCCOS to th

nual NOAA/NGmunication and

zone and its imlf hypoxia n prioritizing fpoxia on fisher

ew projects supMEX), which apredicted respo

poxic zone. ulf hypoxia (e.

a Initiative) or txed observatioto complete the

source of informThese models alfrom the Missi

uction goals, anstatus and progypoxic zone alsrient, tillage, anwatershed nutrieffective

Gulf of Mexicolevels, which c

ypoxia and Diver

verage-dead-zon

a Research

d January 4, 2017

ed: mittee-Terms-of

ze of sonal ding) hose he HTF

GI

mpacts.

fishery ries ported

are onses

g. that n e

mation llow ssippi

nd data gress so nd ient

o. As can

rsion

ne-for-

7:

f-

lead to compeharvested by fcatch availablHypoxia Wat

The economyapproximatelythe impact of migration shifpatterns, but cdemonstrated conditions, lanot present.248

Figure A.10 s

Figure A.10.

247 Committee Working GroupTechnology. Wreport.pdf.. Ac248 Smith, Marthttp://www.pna

eting for food ifishermen. Hyple for harvest. Tch can help com

y of the Gulf ofy $470 millionthe hypoxic zofts, and reproducan also reduceto affect overarger shrimp are8

shows the value

NOAA Fleet D

on Environmentp on Harmful Al

Washington, DC. cessed Februarytin D. et al. 2017as.org/content/ea

n smaller habitpoxia can also Tourism can almmercial and r

f Mexico includ, or two-thirds,

one on individuuctive disruptioe the economic all population le priced signifi

e chain for the

Data Value Ch

t and Natural Relgal Blooms, HyAvailable at: ht

y 3, 2017. 7. Seafood pricesarly/2017/01/24/

tats where it is affect shrimp sso be affected recreation fishe

des significant , of total U.S. rual species, scieon.247 These imvitality of thes

levels of brownicantly higher i

Hypoxia Watc

hain: Hypoxia

esources. 2010. Sypoxia, and Humttps://obamawhit

s reveal impacts /1617948114.ful

A-40

easier for fishespawning and mas fish availablermen better pl

fishery and tourevenue for shrientists and econ

mpacts not onlyse fishing indusn shrimp in the in relation to sm

ch and related p

a Watch, Gulf

Scientific Assessman Health of thetehouse.archives

of major ecologll?tab=author-in

Appendix

es and shrimp tmigration, negale for recreatiolan where to fis

urism activity. Lrimp landings. Wnomists have a

y alter commercstries. While thnorthern Gulf

maller shrimp t

products.

f of Mexico

sment of Hypoxe Joint Subcomms.gov/sites/defau

gical disturbancenfo.. Accessed Fe

x A: NOAA Fle

to be consumedatively as well

onal fishing cansh to avoid hyp

Louisiana and While knowledalready demonscial and recreathe hypoxic zonf of Mexico, duthan when hypo

xia in U.S. Coastmittee on Ocean ult/files/microsite

e. PNAS 2017. Aebruary 3, 2017.

eet Data Value

d by predators as the amount

n be reduced. poxic areas.

Texas accountdge gaps still exstrated habitat ltional fishing

ne has not yet buring hypoxic oxic conditions

al Waters. InteraScience and

es/ostp/hypoxia-

Available at: .

Chains

or of

ted for xist on loss,

been

s are

agency

-

Appendix A:

10. Oc Pro10.1

Ocean noise, gas exploratiothreatens maruse sound sigcommunicatinenvironmentaNational MarTechnology (NOAA’s Cetaunderstand thmarine life. Cmapping tools

CetSound’s cpredictive envcomplements BIAs include migration, or

CetSound’s ucharacteristicsaverage soundmaps incorpoareas in U.S. Eof four localizexploration an

Having both cnoise for propaddressing ocPolicy and Oc

NO10.2OST worked groups to devspecies, incluFleet habitat a

model for the Science Cente

249 “Underwateat: http://cetsou250 “Phase 1 – Chttp://cetsound251 “Biologicallhttp://cetsound252 “Phase 1 – Chttp://cetsound253 “What is Sohttp://cetsound254 “Participanthttp://cetsound

NOAA Fleet D

ean Noiseoduct Backgwhich is cause

on and extractiorine life and econals to commung with potential sound cues thine Fisheries SOST) developeacean & Sound

he impacts of riCetSound consis, CetMap and

etacean mappinvironmental facthese maps wiareas within thhabitat for sma

underwater souns of man-maded field maps asrate two aspectEEZ waters of zed events of knd activity.253

cetacean and soposed activitiescean noise impacean Noise Pro

OAA Fleet Dwith more than

velop CetSoundding from outsand protected s

U.S Atlantic aers, the New Je

er Noise and Maund.noaa.gov/indCetSound”. Ceta

d.noaa.gov/cetsouly Important Are

d.noaa.gov/imporCetSound”. Ceta

d.noaa.gov/cetsououndMap?” Cetad.noaa.gov/soundts.” Cetacean &

d.noaa.gov/partic

Data Value Cha

: Ocean Nground ed by commercon, military sonosystems in ma

unicate with othial mates or offhat are vital to ervice (NMFSed two web-basd Mapping effosing man-madests of two workSoundMap.

ng working groctors to estimatith informationhe U.S. Exclusiall and resident

nd mapping woe underwater nos well as more lts of mapping d

f the continentaknown noise-pr

ound maps at ths. CetSound’s pacts, known as ocedure.

ata that Feen 30 other NOAd mapping toolsside entities sucspecies surveys

and Gulf of Meersey Departme

arine Life”. Cetadex. Accessed Jaacean & Sound Mund. Accessed Jaeas”. Cetacean &rtant. Accessed Jacean & Sound Mund. Accessed Jaacean & Sound Md-index. AccesseSound Mapping

cipants. Accessed

ains

Noise Mapp

ial shipping tranar, and other sany ways. Oceaher animals, sufspring. They asurvival.249 NO), Office of Scised mapping to

ort (CetSound),e ocean noise lking groups tha

oup, or CetMapte density and d

n on biologicallyive Economic Zt populations.25

orking group, Soise. SoundMaplocalized and cdeveloped by s

al U.S., Hawaii,roducing human

heir disposal alproducts formethe Ocean Noi

ed the ProduAA agencies, fis.254 CetMap inch as universitis. A recently pu

exico, for exament of Environm

cean & Sound Manuary 30, 2017Mapping. Nationanuary 30, 2017

& Sound MappinJanuary 30, 2017Mapping. Nationanuary 30, 2017

Mapping. Nationed January 30, 20g. National Oceand January 30, 20

A-41

ping

affic, oil and sources, an animals ch as when

also rely on OAA’s ience and ools through , to better evels on at develop the

p, produced timdistribution of y important areZone (EEZ) tha51

SoundMap, genp’s website off

comprehensive separate workin, and Alaska wn activity such

llows ocean plad the initial sciise Strategy, in

uct isheries sciencencorporates theies and conservublished cetace

mple, utilized damental Projecti

Mapping. Nation. nal Oceanic and .

ng. National Oce7. nal Oceanic and .

nal Oceanic and A017. nic and Atmosph

017.

me-, region-, ancetacean and feas (BIAs) for at are critical fo

nerated maps ofers larger (regexamples of sh

ng subgroups: ewhere sound is l

as military son

anners to betterientific effort to

ncluding the im

e centers, and oe best availablevation groups, aean density

ata from Northion, the Univer

nal Oceanic and

Atmospheric Ad

eanic and Atmos

Atmospheric Ad

Atmospheric Ad

heric Administra

Products: Mapping T

Line OfficService, Of

Mission SeProtected SAssessmen

nd species-specfish invertebratwhich sufficie

for animal repro

of temporal, spaional or ocean hort-term noiseextensive predilikely to be pronar training and

r understand thowards NOAA

mplementation o

outside privatee datasets for paand is heavily r

east and Southrsity of St. And

Atmospheric Ad

dministration. A

spheric Administ

dministration. A

dministration. A

ation. Available

CetMap and STools

ce: National Maffice of Scienc

ervice Area: HSpecies Monitonts

cific maps that es.250 CetMap nt data do not eoduction, feedi

atial, and frequbasin) scale an

e events.252 Theictive modeling

oduced; and mad oil and gas

he effect of manA’s 10-year visiof the Ocean N

and academic articular areas reliant on NOA

heast NOAA Fidrews, the Univ

dministration. A

Available at:

tration. Availabl

Available at:

vailable at:

at:

SoundMap

arine Fisheries e and Technolo

Healthy Oceansoring and

use

exist. ing,

uency nnual ese g of apping

n-made ion for

Noise

and AA

isheries versity

Available

le at:

ogy

s

of North Carobased on an emodels, probacetacean data

SoundMap simnoise sources modeling resu(BOEM) provsound-producTen ocean noNOAA ships collect empiri

Pro10.3Members of CGIS files for COST subsequLight, and So

Both CetMapunderlying da

NOAA perforinterest in souapproximatelyconservation and impacts inNetherlands OEnvironment.

NOAA has a high-profile eorganizationsthese users.

Additionally, impacts.

Use10.4

255 “Habitat-BaLab. Duke Uni256 “What is Cehttp://cetsound257 “Phase 1 – Chttp://cetsound“Sound Field DAvailable at: ht258 National OcFinal Symposiuhttp://cetsound259 National OcModelling to In“http://cetsoun2017.

olina, and the Vstablished hierability of occuravailability, N

milarly utilizeddue to oil and

ults from the Bvides 2D and 3cing naval activise reference stservice these bical evidence o

oduct IntermCetMap’s workCetMap, both fently takes the und Research I

and SoundMaata (including G

rms outreach tound-producing y 170 representadvocacy groun 2014 that incOrganisation fo.259

close relationshemitter of ocean. Through prof

the Ocean Noi

ers of the Pr

ased Cetacean Diversity. AvailabetMap?” Cetacea

d.noaa.gov/cda-inCetSound”. Ceta

d.noaa.gov/cetsouData Availabilityttp://cetsound.noceanic and Atmoum Report of a T

d.noaa.gov/Assetceanic and Atmonform Managemd.noaa.gov/Asse

Virginia Aquarirarchy of informrrence models,

NOAA models o

d a variety of Ngas explorationeaufort Sea, anD seismic surv

vities such as actations are plac

buoys and may of man-made no

mediaries anking group fromfor new modelidata and maps

Inc. helps Soun

ap are web-baseGIS layers) and

o educate the gactivities. In 20tatives from go

ups.258 NOAA acluded the Interor Applied Scie

hip with the Un noise, the Bufessional relatio

ise Strategy gar

roduct

ensity Models fo

ble at: http://seaman & Sound Mapndex. Accessed Jacean & Sound Mund. Accessed Jay: Overview”. Ceoaa.gov/sound_dospheric AdminiTechnical Worksts/cetsound/docuospheric Adminiment of Cetaceanets/cetsound/doc

ium and Marinmation and modrecords of presor re-models de

NOAA and nonn, BP Explorat

nd the Resourcevey results fromctive sonar traiced throughout drop new ones

oise and its imp

nd Disseminm Duke Univering results as ws and develops ndMap generat

ed products avad metadata for b

eneral public a012, NOAA deovernment agenalso participaternational Whalentific Research

.S. Navy, who ureau of Ocean onships and wo

rners press cov

or the U.S. Atlanmap.env.duke.edpping. National OJanuary 30, 2017Mapping. Nationanuary 30, 2017etacean & Sounddata. Accessed Jastration. 2012. Mshop held May 2

uments/symp-docstration. 2014. “

ns and Anthropogcuments/Predicti

A-42

ne Science Centdeling types: hsence, and expensity primarily

n-NOAA data stion (Alaska) Ine Evaluation O

m the Gulf of Mining in HawaiiU.S. waters to

s or replacemenpacts, as oppos

nation rsity’s Marine G

well as previouswebsite portals

te the predictive

ailable to the puboth mapping t

and specific meemonstrated nencies, scientists

ed in an internating Commissioh, and the Neth

not only providEnergy Manag

orking groups N

verage that help

ntic and Gulf of du/models/Duke-Oceanic and Atm7. nal Oceanic and . And d Mapping. Natianuary 30, 2017

Mapping Cetacea23-24 in Washincs/CetSound_Sy

“Joint Workshopgenic Noise”. Apng%20Sound%2

Appendix

ter.255 NOAA shabitat-based deert knowledge.

ly using habitat

sources to map nc. and JASCO

Office of BureauMexico.257 The i. NOAA ships

o track changesnts. The Fleet ased to relying o

Geospatial Ecos model resultss that the publie models of an

ublic. Additiontools, either thr

embers of the oear-final CetMas, consultancie

ational workshoon, the Office oherlands Minist

des data for sogement (BOEMNOAA further

ps NOAA educ

Mexico (2015 v-EC-GOM-2015mospheric Admi

Atmospheric Ad

ional Oceanic an7. ans and Sound: M

ngton, D.C. 83 ppymposium_Repop Report: Predictpril 15-16, 201420Fields%20Rep

x A: NOAA Fle

selects surveysensity models, . After an initiat-based density

ocean noise. FO research LTDu of Ocean EneU.S Navy provs also contributs in ocean noisealso provide anon predictive m

ology Lab creats that lacked GIic can easily acnthropogenic un

nally, NOAA mrough the webs

oceanic commuap and SoundMes, regulated indop on underwatof Naval researtry of Infrastru

und field mappM) and various

disseminates C

cate the public

version)”. Marin5/. Accessed Januinistration. Avai

dministration. A

nd Atmospheric

Modern Tools op. Available at: ort_Final.pdf ting Sound Field4. Available at: port_Final.pdf”.

eet Data Value

s from these soustratified densi

al data assessmy models.256

For known manD provide sounergy Managemvides data on spte in a couple we trends over timn opportunity to

modeling.

te the standardIS layers. NOAccess. Similarlynderwater noise

makes availablesite or by reque

unity who haveMap products todustries, mediater sound mapprch Global, the

ucture and the

ping but is alsonon-governme

CetSound produ

on ocean noise

e Geospatial Ecouary 30, 2017. ilable at:

Available at:

Administration.

r Ocean Manage

ds-Global Sound

Accessed Janua

Chains

urces ity

ment of

n-made d

ment pecific

ways. me. o

ized AA y, Heat, e.

e est.

e an o a, and ping

o a ental ucts to

e

ology

ement.

dscape

ary 31,

Appendix A:

CetMap and Sknowledge ganoise on marieducating the analyze, and mallows for impseasonally res

NOAA’s Oceunderstand nocombined Cetimpacts of shiand risk metritraffic managusing SoundMrecommendatspatial and temand assessmenMaritime Admimpacts in keyand encouragthat NOAA wareas. 262

NOAA’s ONwhich ocean mgovernment ahabitat, and CProtection CoInternational M

Soc10.5CetMap and Sconsolidated duseful tool forunderstanding

260 “Phase 2 - NAvailable at: ht261 Gedamke, JAvailable at: ht31, 2017. 262 Ibid. 263 National OcAddress Oceanhttp://cetsound264 InternationaAdverse ImpacCirc%20883%

NOAA Fleet D

SoundMap’s maps and buildinine species; devpublic and stak

make decisionsproved charactsident marine s

ean Noise Stratoise impacts ontMap’s mappinipping vessels ics in the modeement actions.2

Map model predtions, which NOmporal measurnt of transitingministration to y spawning loce the implemen

work with the U

S identifies thirmanagers may

are responsible CetSound’s proommittee approMaritime Orga

cietal BenefiSoundMap tooldensity data for ocean planning of migratory p

NOAA’s Ocean Nttp://cetsound.no

J. et al. Ocean Nottp://cetsound.no

ceanic and Atmon Noise Issues”. d.noaa.gov/Assetal Maritime Orgacts on Marine Li20Noise%20Gu

Data Value Cha

mapping tools hng understandinveloping tools fkeholders on ns on how to redterization and mspecies that are

tegy Roadmap n critical marinng tool methodto Baleen Wha

el, but their fram261 In the secondictions and prOAA usually cres such as avoig vessel noise. T

evaluate chroncations associatntation of new,

U.S. Navy to as

rteen domesticbe able to addrfor many of thducts can still i

oved guidelinesanization, the U

its ls provide a varr compliance, ing for proposedpatterns. Sound

Noise Strategy”oaa.gov/ons. Accoise Strategy Rooaa.gov/Assets/c

ospheric AdminiOcean Noise Str

ts/cetsound/docuanization. “Guidfe”. April 7, 201idelines%20Apr

ains

help NOAA achng of noise impfor assessment

noise impacts.26

duce adverse immanagement ofnot captured b

includes two ce life and habitology with higales off Southermework could nd study, a separoduced recommcommunicates tiding certain arThe team suggenic impacts in ated with federa, voluntary guidsess overlap of

policy acts sucress noise issue

he decisions thainfluence theses for voluntary UN agency that

riety of benefitidentify data gad activities anddMap similarly

. Cetacean & Socessed January 3

oadmap. Nationacetsound/docume

stration. “Spreadrategy Roadmap

uments/Roadmapdelines for the Re14. Available at: ril%202014.pdf.

A-43

hieve its’ four ppacts; integratint, planning, and60 Both mappinmpacts. The bref noise impactsby empirical so

case studies thatat through cetaher resolution rn California. Tbe used to evalarate team studmendations to pto relevant actireas or time perested that NOAacoustically senal actions and pdelines to quietf training activi

ch as the Endanes.263 Howeverat can reduce noe decisions. In 2underwater no

t creates regulat

ts to different uaps and necessa

d for alternativey provides a us

ound Mapping. N31, 2017. al Oceanic and Aents/Roadmap/O

dsheet of Potentip Appendix C. Sep/ONS_Roadmaeduction of Undhttp://cetsound.Accessed Janua

primary goals fng managemend mitigation of ng tools and dateadth of knowls on marine lifeound data collec

at highlight theacean and sounshipping data tThe scientists r

aluate the consedied the impactprotect these c

ion agencies thrriods to reduce

AA work with tnsitive federallpredicted growtt commercial sity with acoust

ngered Speciesr, organizationsoise impacts on2014, for exam

oise reduction fation and standa

users. CetMap pary specificatioe NEPA analysseful tool for oc

National Oceanic

Atmospheric AdmONS_Roadmap_

ial Authorities (eeptember, 2016.

ap_Final_Appendderwater Noise fr.noaa.gov/Assetsary 31, 2017.

for the Ocean Nnt actions to mi

noise-making ta can help resoledge gained fre and habitat, inction.

e ability of oceand modeling. Into identify and recognized the equences of potts of noise on spcritical spawninrough consultae impact, waterthe U.S. Coast ly designated arth in East Coasships. These scitically sensitive

s Act and the Ms and entities oun critical marin

mple, the Marinfor member govards for the shi

products provions for data intsis, and improvcean planners t

c and Atmosphe

ministration. Sep_Final_Complete

e.g. Statutes, Ex. Available at: dixC.pdf. Acces

from Commercias/cetsound/docu

Noise Strategy:inimize effects activities; and ource managerom these two tn particular on

an managers ton the first, sciencharacterize noneed for uncertential shippingpawning groun

ng grounds. Thations, includedr noise monitorGuard and U.Sreas, evaluate st shipping trafientists also proe federally desi

Mitchell Act unutside of the fe

ne species and ne Environmentvernments in thipping industry

de current and tegration, provive current to predict noise

ric Administrati

ptember, 2016. e.pdf. Accessed

xecutive Orders)

ssed January 31, al Shipping to Aduments/MEPC.1-

: filling of

rs plan, tools

o ntists oise rtainty g nds ese d ring, S.

ffic, oposed ignated

nder ederal

t he y.264

ide a

e

ion.

January

to

2017. ddress -


A-44

impacts of proposed activities. In addition, it offers a more robust picture of the cumulative effects of noise on marine species and habitat and an improved tool for forecasting and scenario building.265

Private firms have created sound mapping tools in the past, but not on the geospatial scale achieved by SoundMap. SoundMap’s products provide a cost-efficient single web portal for ocean planners, decision-makers, and regulators to assess current and potential impacts on marine life and habitat.

Reductions in man-made noise can provide protection for and increase the population of species by allowing natural defense and mating sound cues to operate normally and by permitting normal migratory patterns. Economists and scientists have conducted numerous studies over the past couple decades to estimate economic values for similar species protection and rehabilitation. These studies use established survey methods to determine what people are willing to pay for particular ecosystem services related to specific species. This can include recovery or protection programs, improved status, and population increases. While these programs are not specifically tied to man-made noise, the overall benefits can be similar. This review of the studies have shown that households are willing to pay up to $80 per household or more 266 (in 2013 dollars) to benefit charismatic mammal species in US waters (such as right whales), which can add up to a significant value for species preservation and habitat improvement.

Figure A.11 shows the value chain diagram for ocean noise mapping.

265 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2012. Mapping Cetaceans and Sound: Modern Tools or Ocean Management. Final Symposium Report of a Technical Workshop held May 23-24 in Washington, D.C. 83 pp. Available at: http://cetsound.noaa.gov/Assets/cetsound/documents/symp-docs/CetSound_Symposium_Report_Final.pdf 266 Lew, D.K (2015). Willingness to Pay for Threatened and Endangered Marine Species: A Review of the Literature and Prospects for Policy Use. Front. Mar. Sci. 2:96. Available at: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2015.00096/full

Appendix A:

Figure A.11.

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

hain: Ocean N

A-45

Noise Mappingg

11. Hu Pro11.1

NOAA’s NatiCenter (CPC)collaboration Research Div

The Hurricanactivity for thincluding the hurricanes, anactivity for anranges of acticlimate mode

Various stakeJune to Novemway through tmore than 3,0behind the an

NO11.2The Hurrican(TAO) array, Pacific Oceantransmits the researchers abair temperaturdata on rainfa

Ships go to eabiological actprovides on thAtlantic Ocea

The Outlook dtemperature aof.

Com11.3

267 “NOAA 20Center. http://w268 Ibid. 269 “Project: Trhttp://www.om270 For examplehttp://www.om271 “TAO Refrehttp://tao.ndbc.272 Personal comJanuary 5, 2017

urricanes: oduct Backgional Weather ) produces the Awith hurricane

vision and Natio

e Outlook servhe upcoming hu

number of namnd accumulatedny particular gevity. It is basedls that directly

eholders use thember, CPC relethe season. NO

000 reporters. Calysis and sum

OAA Fleet De Outlook useswhich is maint

n that collect ocdata from thesebout the state ore, relative humall, short wave

ach buoy once tivity or local fihe El Niño andan and the Cent

does rely on soand weather dat

mplementar

16 Atlantic Hurr

www.cpc.ncep.n

ropical Atmosphmao.noaa.gov/fin

e the Ronald H. mao.noaa.gov/finesh Sampling.” (.noaa.gov/proj_ommunication wi7.

Hurricaneground Service (NWSAtlantic Hurrice experts at NOonal Hurricane

ves as a generalurricane seasonmed storms, hurd cyclone energeographic area.d on predictionpredict hurrica

e Hurricane Oueases the Outlo

OAA publishes CPC also publis

mmarizes key fin

ata that Fees data from varitained by the Nceanographic ae moorings ele

of the ocean andmidity, sea surfand long-wave

a year to perfoisherman. The

d La Nina phenotral and Eastern

ome data collecta collected thr

ry Data and

ricane Season Ouoaa.gov/product

here Ocean Buoynd/projects/3418-

Brown providednd/projects/2751-(2011). NOAA’soverview/sampliith Dr. Gerry Be

e Outlook

) Climate Predcane Outlook in

OAA’s Hurrican Center.267

l guide on expen in the Atlanticrricanes, majorgy. It does not p The Outlook i

ns of large-scaleane activity.268

utlook to improook in late Maythe Hurricane shes a technicandings.

ed the Produious sources in

NOAA Fleet. Tand meteorologctronically throd the atmospheface temperature radiation, baro

rm necessary mdata from the Tomenon. El Nin Pacific Ocean

cted directly byrough the Volun

d Intermedia

utlook Issued: 1ts/outlooks/hurri

y Service.” (2016-tropical-atmospd maintenance fo-tropical-atmosps National Data ing_ndbc.shtml ell, Lead Forecas

A-46

k

diction n ne

ected c Region, r predict which ois probabilistic e climate factor

ove hurricane py, prior to start Outlook online

al write-up of th

uct ncluding data coThe TAO array gical data.269 Though satellites.ere. Basic measre, and subsurfaometric pressur

maintenance, inTAO array is piño and La Ninn.

y the NOAA flentary Observin

ate Products

1 August 2016.”icane.shtml

6). NOAA Officphere-ocean-buoyor TAO Buoy in phere-ocean-tao-Buoy Center.

ster and Meteoro

P

L

MP

Appendix

of these stormsin nature, whi

rs that influenc

preparedness. Wof season, and e and issues a phe Outlook, wh

ollected by theconsists of 70

he NOAA fleet270 Monitoring

surements on Tface temperaturre, salinity and

ncluding repairparticularly impna strongly influ

eet,272 includinng Ship Program

s

” (2016). Nation

ce of Marine andy-service November 2015

-buoy-array-main

ologist at the NO

Product: Hurr

Line Office: N

Mission ServicPredictions and

x A: NOAA Fle

s will make lanch means that ice hurricane ac

With the hurricad updates it in epress release abhich explains th

e Tropical Atmobuoys moored

t maintains the g data from the TAO moorings res. Additional d ocean current

ring any damagportant becauseuence the hurri

g ocean profilem, which the N

nal Weather Serv

d Aviation Opera

5. ntenance

OAA Climate Pre

ricane Outlook

National Weath

ce Area: Climd Projections

eet Data Value

ndfall or levels it states the “lik

ctivity, as well a

ane season spanearly August, mbout it, sendinghe science and

osphere Ocean(“moorings”) TAO array andTAO array tellinclude wind ssensors can cos. 271

ge caused by e of the informicane pattern in

e data and sea sNOAA fleet is a

vice Climate Pre

ations.

ediction Center o

her Service

mate, Climate

Chains

of kely” as

nning mid-g it to data

n in the d l speeds, ollect

ation it n the

surface a part

diction

on

Appendix A:

A second sousubsurface temto a depth of amaintenance tbut the floats from land-bas

Data from theinto climate ma long archivepredictions abOutlook incluClimate ForecDynamics LabWeather ForeMeteorology feeds into the Forecasters rebecause of thehurricane patt

Use11.4The Hurricanfor the hurricaAs shown in FapproximatelyAugust 2016 published, thestakeholders, federal departAtlantic Oceathe President,participate in public on socisessions, the minterviews anstakeholders fmillion U.S. cAgencies likeHurricane CenHurricane Ouhurricane seas

Members of tOutlook and rprovided in th

273 “What is Ar274 Personal comJanuary 5, 2017275 “NOAA 20Center. http://w276 Personal comJanuary 5, 2017277 Ibid.

NOAA Fleet D

urce of data for mperature, saliabout 2 km andthan the TAO aprovide import

sed stations, we

e TAO array, thmodels that syne of gridded mobout the upcomudes dynamicalcast System (Cb (GFDL), the

ecasting (ECMW(UKMET) offiEl Niño South

ely on the ENSe impact of La terns.

ers of the Pre Outlook is usane season andFigure A.12, thy 131,500 viewOutlook had 13e authors of theincluding state

tments such as anographic and and members interviews witial media throumost popular od other interactfocus on preparcitizens are pote FEMA with thnter, and the R

utlook helps ageson.

the business secrecommends prhe Outlook dire

rgo?” Argo – parmmunication wi7. 16 Atlantic Hurr

www.cpc.ncep.nmmunication wi7.

Data Value Cha

the Hurricane nity, and velocd come back toarray because ttant data used ieather balloons

he ARGO arraynthesize this datodel climate da

ming hurricane sl model predict

CFS), NOAA GEuropean Cen

WF), and the Uice.275 Data frohern OscillationO outlook to pNina and El N

roduct and Rsed by a varietyd is widely distrhe May 2016 Ows online (uniqu34,000 (uniquee Outlook hold e, local and emthe Hurricane

d Meteorologicaof the public. Th magazines an

ugh Reddit Askof which had 27tions with the predness. In gententially threateheir ready.gov

Red Cross, use tencies and deci

ctor also use threparedness effectly impacts bu

rt of the integratith Dr. Gerry Be

ricane Season Ouoaa.gov/productith Dr. Gerry Be

ains

Outlook is the city of the uppeo the surface to there are no vanin the Hurricans, and satellite m

y, and other souta. These modeata that is used season. The Hutions from the N

Geophysical Fluntre for MediumUnited Kingdomm the TAO arr

n (ENSO) outlopredict hurricanNiño on seasona

Related Proy of interests toributed and pub

Outlook garnereue visitors), whe visitors). Whebriefings with ergency managCenter and theal Laboratory, The authors alsnd interact withk Me Anything7,000 participanpublic and otheneral, more thanened by hurricawebsite, the N

this Outlook toision-makers to

he Hurricane Ouforts for small business decisio

ted global observell, Lead Forecas

utlook Issued: 1ts/outlooks/hurriell, Lead Forecas

A-47

V

A

s

SS

ARGO array. er 2000 meters automatically ndalism issues.ne Outlook. Othmeasurements.

urces feed els create to make

urricane NOAA uid m Range m ray also ook. ne activity al

oducts o prepare blicized. ed hile the en it is key

gers, e NOAA Congress, so h the question

nts. These er n 80 anes.

National instruct the puo better focus t

utlook. The Smbusinesses.277 C

ons. Nonetheles

vation strategy. hster and Meteoro

1 August 2016.”icane.shtml ster and Meteoro

Figure A.12. HViewership S

May 2016 Outnormal Atlantilikely this year

Unique visito

Page views -

Unique page

(82% of reade

August 2016 Ohurricane seasstrongest sinc

Unique visito

Page views -

Unique page

(76% of reade

Source: PersoSusan BuchanPublic Affairs, May 1, 2017.

This global arrof the ocean.27

transmit their d. The NOAA Fher sources of g.274

ublic on prepartheir resources

mall Business ACPC does not css, it is not hard

http://www.argoologist at the NO

” (2016). Nation

ologist at the NO

Hurricane OuStatistics

tlook. Headlinec hurricane ser

ors (users) - 1

158,271

views - 145,2

ers were new v

Outlook. Headson still expec

ce 2012 (Augu

ors (users) - 1

146,710

views - 133,9

ers were new v

onal Communinan, Acting Di National Wea

ray of 3,800 flo73 The ARGO data. They requ

Fleet does not sglobal ocean te

ring for these stwhen preparin

Administration collect data on d to imagine ho

o.ucsd.edu/ OAA Climate Pre

nal Weather Serv

OAA Climate Pre

utlook Online

e: Near-eason is most

31,517

274

visitors)

dline: Atlantic cted to be st)

24,581

956

visitors)

ications, rector of

ather Service,

oats provides dfloats go underuire much less support these flemperature dat

torms.276 The ng for the upcom

promotes the how the inform

ow the informa

ediction Center o

vice Climate Pre

ediction Center o

data on rwater

loats a come

ming

mation ation

on

diction

on

could significchanges based

Soc11.5Since 1980, 3losses exceedOutlook helpsdamage, mort

Several studiefor both sociedetermined thhurricane foreforecast informexisting hurriwhen this foreinsurance indu

Figure A.13 dthey depend o

278 NOAA Nati(2017). https://279 Jamieson, GWashington, D280 Considine, Tof Mexico.” Jo281Emmanuel, Kand Society, 4(

cantly impact ced on the inform

cietal Benefi5 major hurric

ding $500 billios key stakeholdtality and morb

es have attemptety and individuhat loss of life aecasts.279 Consimation to crudcane forecast inecast is 50% mustry associate

demonstrates thon, and how thi

ional Centers for/www.ncdc.noaa

G., and Drury, C.D.C. T., Jablonowski, urnal of AppliedK., F. Fondriest,(110 – 117).

ertain businessmation found in

its anes (those cau

on. The averageders to better prbidity, societal c

ted to value huual industry secassociated withidine et al. (200e oil and naturanformation is $

more accurate.28

d with improve

he value chain ais ultimately re

r Environmental

a.gov/billions/ 1997. Hurrican

C., Posner, B., ad Meteorology., , and J. Kossin. 2

s sectors. For exn the Outlook.

using at least $e annual losses repare for the hcosts associate

urricane forecasctors. For exam

h hurricanes exp04) used the coal gas producer$8 million per y80 Emmanuel etements in seaso

associated the Hesults in value t

l Information (N

e mitigation effo

and Bishop, C. 243, 1270–1281. 2012. Potential E

A-48

xample, coasta

1 billion in damfrom these 35

hurricane seasod with evacuat

sts based on themple, using dataponentially decost-of-evacuatiors in the Gulf oyear, and that tt al. (2012) alsoonal hurricane

Hurricane Outlto society.

NCEI) U.S. Billio

orts at the U.S. F

2004. “Value of h

Economic Value

Appendix

al tourism comp

mages) have strstorms is near

on, which can ltion, and lost bu

e costs and dama from 1900 tocreased over thon to estimate tof Mexico. Thethe value rises bo found potentiforecasts.281

look, including

on-Dollar Weath

Federal Emergen

hurricane forecas

e of Seasonal Hu

x A: NOAA Fle

panies make se

ruck the Unitedrly $16 billion.2

ead to reductiousiness activity

mages that theyo 1990, Jamiesohis time period the value of im

ey found that thby more than $ially significan

g the data from

her and Climate D

ncy Management

sts to oil and gas

urricane Forecast

eet Data Value

easonal operatio

d States with to278The Hurricanons in property y.

y can help to avon and Drury (because of imp

mproved hurricahe current value$15 million pernt savings for th

m the NOAA Fle

Disasters

t Agency, FEMA

s producers in th

ts. Weather, Clim

Chains

onal

otal ne

void, 1997) proved ane e of r year he

eet that

A,

e Gulf

mate,

Appendix A:

Figure A.13.

NOAA Fleet D

NOAA Fleet D

Data Value Cha

Data Value Ch

ains

hain: Hurrica

A-49

ane Outlook

12. Fle Bac12.1

Many maritimand non-goveDuring, and imtechnologies aassess damag

Depending onresponders, inNOAA Line Oincluding portRed Cross, an

The NOAA Fprovide the fo

Surv Deliv

mate Loca Cond Perfo

NOAA vesselarea, can provevent of an emmore seamles

NO12.2As described collection andhydrographic NOAA also udebris fields f

Four NOAA ssurveys, whicsmaller boats survey ships adetailed and pto an event pr

Besides hydrocollection equmajor oil spill

282 Pers. comm283 SSS is a spe200 meters. SSScan Sonar”. N2017. 284 “NOAA’s Hhttp://www.pub

eet Emergeckground me-related natuernment organizmmediately folare often needees, and/or colle

n the nature andncluding the U.Offices and divt authorities, m

nd others, to lau

Fleet is a key paollowing emerg

vey our nation’ver emergencyerials, during anate and map deduct a range of

form search, res

ls have unique vide superior, timergency, OMss response effo

OAA Fleet Cbelow, NOAA

d mapping. Forsurveys to ens

uses ship hydrofrom aviation a

ships, includingch NOS primar(called launch

are equipped wprecise data on rovide an imme

ographic surveyuipment necessls and hurrican

m. Megan Greenaecialized system SS is normally usNOAA Office of

Hydrographic Sublicaffairs.noaa.g

ency Resp

ural disasters anzations. These llowing these eed to perform sect scientific da

d extent of the .S. Coast Guardvisions. These a

maritime ship piunch coordinat

art of the oceangency response

s ports and waty supplies, condnd after hurrica

ebris fields in thf scientific survscue, and evacu

technologies thimely, and costAO can easily ort.282

apabilities tA Fleet emergenr example, aftersure safe navigaographic surveyand maritime di

g Fairweather,ily uses to updes) that can be

with side-scan ssubsurface obs

ediate baseline

y capabilities, msary for toxicitynes, where a ran

away, Technical

contained in a ssed with single bf Coast Survey. A

urvey Ships Aid gov/grounders/d

ponse Serv

nd emergency sevents include

events, highly ssearch and rescuata.

disaster or emed (USCG), U.Sagencies work ilots, Air Natioted land-, air-, a

n-related emerge services:

terway in respoduct hydrograpanes and other he ocean for avveys in responsuation services

hat, when combt-effective respcoordinate flee

that Supporncy response acr hurricanes anation and re-opy technologies, isasters. This e

, Ferdinand R. ate the nation’slowered into thonar (SSS) andstructions.283284

comparison to

many NOAA vy and water quange of immedia

Advisor, Officesmall, towed instbeam or multi-beAvailable at: http

the Nation Durindisasterresponse.

A-50

vices

situations requie hurricanes, oilskilled crew meue activities, pr

ergency, the US. Army Corps with other fede

onal Guard, Fedand ocean-base

gency and disas

onse to nationaphic surveys so

major storm evviation and marse to major oil s

mbined with theiponse services iet response acti

rt Emergencctivities most c

nd large storm epening of affect

which includenables the quic

Hassler, Rainis suite of 1,000he water for sud single- or mu4 In addition, th

o conditions aft

vessels are equiality testing, wate testing is of

of Coast Surveytrument that caneam sonar to gatps://www.nautic

ng Disaster Reco.html. Accessed

Appendix

ire a coordinatel spills, terrorisembers and vesrovide relief se

.S. has a varietof Engineers (eral, state, locaderal Emergenced response eff

ster response n

al security threathat ports can

vents ritime disastersspills

ir availability ain many emergivities across N

cy Responsecommonly incluevents, crewmeted ports as dir

e complete seafck recovery of

ier, and Thoma0 nautical charturveying in shaulti-beam sonarhe hydrographiter a hurricane o

ipped with biowhich can be beften required.

y, NOAA, Februn provide accuratther all necessarycalcharts.noaa.go

overy Efforts”. NFebruary 6, 201

x A: NOAA Fle

ed response byst attacks, and ossels equipped ervices, re-open

ty of potential m(USACE), U.Sal, and non-procy Managemenforts.

network, and ar

ats be re-opened,

s

across an expangency situationNOAA’s line o

e Efforts ude hydrographembers on NOArected by the Ufloor mapping svictims and fli

as Jefferson, cots. These ships

allow areas. NOr technology, wic surveys that or disaster.

logical, chemiceneficial to resp

uary 2, 2017. te acoustical imay bottom coveraov/hsd/SSS.html

NOAA.gov. Ava17.

eet Data Value

y U.S. governmother disasters.with specific

n affected ports

maritime-based. Navy, and mufit organizationnt Agency (FEM

re often called u

and assess haz

nsive geographns. In addition, ffices, resulting

hic surveys/datAA vessels con

U.S. Coast Guarsystems, to mapight recorders.

onduct hydrogreach have 2-6

OAA’s hydrogrwhich provides

NOS conducte

cal, and acoustponse efforts fo

aging up to a ranage specificationl. Accessed Febr

ailable at:

Chains

ment .

s,

d ultiple ns, MA),

upon to

ardous

hic in the g in a

ta nduct rd. ap

raphic

raphic

ed prior

tic data or

nge of ns. “Side ruary 6,

Appendix A:

The vast geogbecause it typvessels can alcannot. Finallensure that NO

Together, thesresponse activand materials NOAA/OMAthey can respoincident befor

Em12.3The followingthe NOAA Flroutine search

12.3.1 Hur

Aside from roprovide relateships conductemergency re

USCG typicastorm, a hurriknocking ovemoving the loThese changeto enter the poimmediately c

Reopening ponaval vessels ports.285 Seveand New Jers$200 billion (that ocean comwaterways, Nof millions of

In some casessupplies. For Navy to makePort re-openinfollowing the

285 Young, StepBlog of the U.Sdisaster-an-all-286 “About the Accessed Febru287 National Ocat: http://ocean

NOAA Fleet D

graphic area acrpically means thlso enter areas tly, as the adminOAA’s other c

se factors oftenvities, rather thcontracts) for

AO has a standaond quickly in re they respond

mergency resg sections provleet provides, inh and rescue ac

rricanes

outine search ane to hurricanes t hydrographic lief.

lly closes potencane can cause

er/damaging oilocation of maines create a potenort. Accurate pclear sub-surfa

orts and harborto continue no

eral estimates hey, for exampl

($550 million pmmerce for the

NOAA’s emergf dollars of dail

s, the re-openinexample, durine a relatively qung of many affhurricane. In a

phanie. 2012. “OS. Coast Guard. -hands-on-deck-ePort”. The Port Auary 7, 2017. cean Service, 20

nservice.noaa.gov

Data Value Cha

ross which the hat at least onethat require ministrator of all Ncritical needs ar

n make it muchan having to paemergency situ

ard agreement ithe event of an

d.

sponse servivide an overviewncluding servic

ctivities.

nd rescue activand large coastsurveys of por

ntially-affectede hazardous situl platforms, wan shipping channtially hazardoost-hurricane mce hazards so t

s, such as Newrmal operationave been placee, estimated th

per day, on avere entire nation iency response ly commercial a

ng of ports can ng Hurricane Suick determina

fected ports, whaddition, naval

Opening U.S. porNovember 1, 20evolution/. AcceAuthority of New

012. “Hurricane Rv/hazards/hurric

ains

NOAA Fleet o fleet vessel calitary or securiNOAA fleet acre being met th

h more feasibleay charter vessuations, or evenin place with thn emergency; U

ices w of the emergces related to h

vities, the emergtal storms. Durrts and importan

d ports and shipuations for wat

ashing land-basnnel navigationous situation fomapping of watthat vessels can

w York, Baltimons. USCG repored on the value at the value of rage).286 A 201is worth more tcapabilities canactivity to resu

allow for the dandy, NOAA v

ation on possiblhich directly allvessels from N

rts after disaster012. Available atessed February 7w York and New

Response”. Naticanes/nosrespons

A-51

operates also coan respond to anity clearance (ectivities, OMAroughout the em

and cost-effecsels, which willn using other ghe Federal EmeUSACE require

gency and disashurricanes, avia

gency responsering and after hnt waterways,

pping lanes 24 ter-based trafficsed objects suchn buoys, and byr commercial, terways allows

n re-enter econo

ore and Norfolkrts that 95% ofof cargo that m

f all cargo that p12 study by NOthan $1 trillionn reduce the nu

ume.

delivery of essevessels’ rapid sle subsurface oleviated a regio

Norfolk Naval B

: An all-hands ot: http://coastgua7, 2017. w Jersey. Availa

ional Oceanic anse12.pdf. Access

ontributes to Nn emergency lo

e.g., military poAO can easily coemergency resp

ctive to utilize Nl likely charge

government-owergency Manages that an arran

ster response seation disasters,

e activities thathurricanes and assess hazardo

to 48 hours bec in and aroundh as cars and shy changing the recreational, or

s partner agencomically signif

k after Hurricaf all goods in thmoves through passed through

OAA’s Nationan.287 By speedinumber of days

ential relief supsurveying and cobstructions. Thonal fuel shortaBase that were

on deck evolutionard.dodlive.mil/2

able at: http://ww

nd Atmospheric Ased February 7, 2

NOAA’s responocation in a timorts), whereas moordinate acros

ponse period.

NOAA Fleet vpremium price

wned vessels. Fogement Agencyngement be in p

ervices, and asoil spills, natio

t NOAA ships other major sto

ous materials, a

fore a hurricand ports by sinkhipping containnatural topograr government-o

cies, such as USficant waterway

ane Sandy, allowhe U.S. economU.S. ports. Th

h that port aloneal Ocean Servicng up the procea port is closed

pplies, such as fcharting responhis led to the Uage that occurre scrambled to s

n.” Coast Guard2012/11/opening

ww.panynj.gov/p

Administration. 2017.

nse capabilitiesmely manner. Nmost charter vess line offices t

essels for emeres (e.g., throughor example, y (FEMA) so thplace for each

sociated value,onal security, an

most commonorm events, NOand provide

ne strikes. Durinking harbored shners out to sea,aphy of the seaowned vessels SCG and USACys and ports.

wed commercimy come throughe Port of New e was greater thce (NOS) reporess of clearing d, allowing hun

fuel and food nse allowed the

USCG Captain ored in the days sea to avoid da

d Compass, Officg-u-s-ports-after

port/about-port.h

May, 2012.Ava

, NOAA essels to

rgency h time

hat

, that nd

nly OAA

ng the hips, , a floor. trying CE, to

ial and gh U.S. York han rts that

ndreds

e U.S of the

amage

cial -

html.

ailable


A-52

were able to return to port. Unnecessarily operating naval vessels at sea can be extremely expensive, not only monetarily but also operationally in terms of disrupting normal naval activities.

As part of the hydrographic data collection efforts associated with hurricane response, scientists and engineers on NOAA vessels work closely with mapping partners from sister agencies, such as USACE and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to coordinate mapping efforts using an Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping approach. The objective of this approach is to reduce redundancies and meet multiple missions with the same datasets. These datasets help state and federal partners with recovery from an event and to begin preparing for the next one.288

In addition to hydrographic surveys, the NOAA Fleet also provides scientific support to hazardous materials response efforts in the wake of hurricanes. For example, NOAA ships have conducted post-hurricane surveys to identify vessels or containers that may be leaking fuel, oil, or other hazardous materials. During Hurricane Katrina, NOAA ships collected data to assess potential seafood contamination from these sources. In many cases, NOAA Fleet crew members also conduct search and rescue activities and deliver emergency supplies during or directly following a hurricane event.

Figure A.14 provides several examples of emergency response activities that NOAA ships have provided for major hurricane events.

12.3.2 Aviation disaster search

NOAA Fleet vessels have assisted in aviation disaster searches by conducting hydrographic surveys and field scans, and developing detailed maps of the search areas. For example, after the 1996 TWA Flight 800 crash off the coast of New York State, NOAA Ship Rude, in conjunction with a shore-side NOAA team, created accurate maps of the debris field, allowing U.S. Navy divers to quickly recover the crash victims and the flight data recorder. After the Egypt Air Flight 990 crash in 1999 (31 October 1999), the NOAA ship Whiting scanned the seafloor south of Nantucket to find the primary debris field. NOAA’s efforts allowed a remotely operated U.S. Navy vehicle to complete the search. Finally, the NOAA ship Rude also played key roles in the 1999 plane crash involving John F. Kennedy, Jr, ultimately finding the wreckage using side-scan and multi-beam sonar.

288 Written Statement by Jeffrey L. Payne Ph.D., Acting Director, Office for Coastal Management, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency. November 21, 2014.


A-53

Figure A.14. Examples of Major Hurricane Response Activities by OMAO Fleet, 2005 – 2016

Hurricane Katrina (2005)

NOAA Ship Nancy Foster quickly outfitted with multi-beam and SSS technology to conduct seafloor surveys on approaches to Mobile, Alabama, helping to reopen the port. The ship then conducted environmental damage and toxic contamination surveys.

NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson diverted from its working grounds to conduct surveys around entrances to Pascagoula and Gulfport, Mississippi, helping to quickly reopen those ports. The ship’s crew also replaced lost and damaged tide gauges, which measure oceanographic and meteorological parameters.

Hurricane Irene (2011)

• NOAA Ship Ferdinand Hassler conducted 300 lineal miles of hydrographic surveys in Hampton Roads, Virginia in less than 48 hours to assess seafloor changes and search for underwater hazards, helping U.S. Coast Guard to restore port operations. The value of commerce through Hampton Roads amounts to $5 million per hour.

Hurricane Sandy (2012)

• NOAA Ship Thomas Jefferson surveyed for possible hazards to navigation throughout the Ports of New York and New Jersey before those ports were reopened, and later conducted surveys in Long Island Sound. In 2012, the value of cargo through the Ports of New York & New Jersey was $24 million per hour.

• NOAA Ship Ferdinand Hassler supported U.S. Coast Guard efforts to reopen Port of Virginia by surveying Chesapeake Channel.

Pacific Island Hurricanes (2015)

July 2015 – NOAA Ship Oscar Elton Sette delivered water and provided emergency transportation support to inhabitants of Agrihan and Pagan Islands, Northern Mariana Islands

August 2015 – NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer diverted track and evacuated four researchers from a monk seal camp on Tern Island, French Frigate Shoal ahead of Hurricanes Kilo and Loke.

August 2015 – NOAA Ship Hi’ialakai evacuated three researchers from Laysan Island, and 3 more from Pearl and Hermes Atoll, and 2 more from Lisianski Island ahead of Tropical Storms Kilo and Loke.

Hurricane Matthew (2016)

NOAA Ship Ferdinand Hassler rode out the storm in North Charleston, South Carolina. The day after the storm the ship conducted channel clearance operations in Charleston Harbor per request of the USCG Captain of the Port (COTP). As soon as the sea state permitted, the ship transited to Savannah, Georgia to conduct channel clearance operation also per request of the COTP.

Source: OMAO. Undated. Presentation: NOAA Fleet Disaster Response.

Responses to (and maps) a search of the NOAA ships well as oil spiefficient searc

NOAA’s detaSafety Board localized searconduct and c

12.3.3 Oil s

NOAA vesselnotably, after quality, seafoship, the NancCurrent. Mandirectly suppoinjured by the

NOAA ships Valdez oil spi

12.3.4 Nati

The fleet’s disin the responsthe Oceanogrbaseline conddetection of ato major portsthis strategic cemployed by additional natwould have b

Based on the Survey beganpriorities of thrisks and thre

12.3.5 Rou

The dispersal operations foractivities are a

Soc12.4

289 “NOAA’s Hhttp://www.pub290 OMAO. Un

crash sites are debris field, tharea. Trajectoryin the search foill responses. Tch and recovery

ailed surveys pr(NTSB) and F

rches. These prcomplete the se

spill response

ls have providethe Deepwaterod safety, and cy Foster, invey of these shiported spill conte oil spill and to

also performedill, and oceanog

ional Security

saster responseses to the terrorapher of the Na

ditions as an inpany changes in s across the coucommercial routhe U.S. Navy

tional security teen required to

success of the n coordinating ihe USCG and Uats at major po

utine search an

of NOAA vesr stranded sailoa relatively rou

cietal Benefi

Hydrographic Sublicaffairs.noaa.g

ndated. NOAA F

typically joint he U.S. Navy cay analysis fromor floating debr

Tailored weathey operations. 28

rovide agencieederal Bureau

rocesses signifiearch and salva

ed sophisticatedr Horizon oil spother critical sc

estigated the ints were involveainment and clo compensate t

d hydrographicgraphic researc

e capabilities alrist attacks on Savy and the USput to a secure seafloor condituntry, such as tute survey in Bto sweep for mthreats in theseo provide an ac

commercial roits commerciallUS Naval Oceaorts.

nd rescue resp

sels throughouors, fishermen, utine occurrenc

its

urvey Ships Aid gov/grounders/d

Fleet Disaster Re

efforts with Uan send out remm the National ris, and NOAAer forecasts from89

s such as the Uof Investigatio

icantly increaseage mission.

d scientific datpill in 2010, secientific data, ateraction of oil

ed in this effort lean-up efforts,the public for it

c, biological, anch to study the

lso yield cost reSeptember 11, SCG, NOAA vUSN seafloor tions that mighthe Port of NewBoston one monmines. These efe areas. NOAAccurate assessm

ute survey in Bly valuable haranographic Off

onse

ut U.S. coastal wand recreation

ce.

the Nation Durindisasterresponse.esponse, PowerP

A-54

SCG, U.S. Navmotely operatedOcean Service

A has used this m the National

US. Navy, U.S Con (FBI) the reqe likelihood of

a collection capven NOAA shiand conducted , dispersants, afor six months

, as well as NOts’ lost use of r

nd sediment toxeffects of the 1

eductions and b2001. Immedia

vessels conductchange compar

ht indicate potenw York and Nenth after the 9/1fforts allowed t

A reports that wment of potentia

Boston followinrbor approach sfice, with the ob

waters makes thal boaters. Acc

ng Disaster Reco.html. Accessed

Point Presentation

Appendix

vy, and the NTd vehicles or di’s Hazardous Manalysis for bo

l Weather Serv

Coast Guard (Uquired informatdiscovery and

apabilities for mips collected fisubsurface oil

and tar balls wis or more. The

OAA’s efforts toresources.

xicity surveys i1990-91 Persia

benefits relatedately followingted hydrographrison database.ntial threats in

ew Jersey. The 11 attack, usingthe U.S. Navy t

without NOAA al threats near t

ng September 1surveys to meebjective of iden

them well-suitecording to NOA

overy Efforts”. NFebruary 6, 201n.

x A: NOAA Fle

TSB. Once a NOivers to performMaterials Respoth plane crashvice allow for s

USCG), Nationtion to supportreduce the tim

major oil spill reish habitat, ocemonitoring act

ithin the Gulf oDWH data colo assess and re

in response to tan Gulf War oil

d to national seg this event, in hic surveys to su. The intent wathe navigationNOAA vessel g similar technto ensure that tships, more exthe port.

11, 2001, NOAet the Maritimentifying potent

ed to perform sAA representat

NOAA.gov. Ava17.

eet Data Value

OAA vessel locm a more detailonse Division

h response plannafer and more

nal Transportatt focused and

me and effort to

esponses. Moseanographic wativities. An eig

of Mexico Loopllection activitiestore resources

the 1989 Exxonl spills. 290

ecurity, as witncollaboration wupply critical as to allow for

n approach chanWhiting perfor

nologies to thosthere were no tensive surveyi

AA’s Office of Domain Awartial national sec

earch and rescutives, these type

ailable at:

Chains

cates led aids ning as

tion

t ater ghth p ies s

n

essed with

quick nnels rmed se

ing

Coast reness curity

ue es of


A-55

NOAA ships’ disaster response capabilities are often essential to subsequent efforts in each emergency scenario. For example, pre- and post-event hydrographic surveying allows major ports and harbors to reopen to commercial shipping after hurricanes and other disasters. The ability of NOAA ships to immediately survey these areas allows important economic activity to resume. In 2015 alone, 1.39 billion short tons accounting for $1.56 trillion worth of U.S. goods moved through U.S. ports. Imports and exports via water represented 71% of U.S. imports and exports by weight and almost 42% of cargo value.291

Debris field location and mapping helps other federal, state, and local groups tailor search and rescue operations for air disasters. Ships already designed for scientific data collection can easily be redeployed to help with critical sampling after major oil spills. These efforts save lives, allow for the continuation of commercial activities and the assessment of natural resource damages. In addition, crew members on NOAA vessels often perform relatively routine search and rescue activities as required by International Maritime law (International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, 1979) and provide relief supplies to affected populations during emergencies. These activities have saved many lives over the course of the fleet’s history.

The ability of the fleet to respond to emergencies also can result in cost savings for U.S. taxpayers. NOAA vessels have unique technologies and are staffed with scientists and engineers with expertise in hydrographic and scientific data collection, which accounts for a large majority of response activities. In addition, NOAA ships are typically relatively easy to reroute with minimal impact to normal program activities. As a result of these factors, and combined with their availability across a wide geographic area, NOAA fleet vessels can often provide superior, more cost-effective and timely response capabilities compared with other potential responders.

The benefits associated with emergency response by NOAA vessels can vary significantly depending on the nature and extent of the emergency or disaster. However, the fleet’s unique capabilities (particularly related to hydrographic surveying), geographic distribution, and skilled crewmembers contribute to its’ key role as part of the U.S. emergency response network.

Figure A.15 depicts the value chain associated with the NOAA fleet emergency response activities.

291 Foxx, A., Perez, T. and Pritzker, P. (2016, March 7). U.S. Ports: Investing in Engines of Economic Development and American Competitiveness [U.S. Department of Transportation Blog]. p.1. Retrieved March 14, 2017 from https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2016/03/us-ports-investing-engines-economic-development-and-american-competitiveness. Statistics available at North American Transportation Statistics at http://nats.sct.gob.mx/go-to-tables/table-7-international-merchandise-trade/table-7-1-international-merchandise-trade-by-mode/

Figure A.15. NOAA Fleet VValue Chain: Emergency R

A-56

Response Activ

Appendix

vities

x A: NOAA Fleeet Data Value Chains

Appendix B: Efficiency and Effectiveness of Using Contract Vessels

B-1


1. Introduction This appendix provides the detailed analysis supporting the discussion in Section 4 of the main body of this report, which addresses the cost-effectiveness of using contract vessels as a substitute for NOAA’s marine fleet for certain data collection activities. This analysis includes several case studies that compare the marginal cost of using the existing capacity of NOAA’s fleet to the cost of using contract vessels. As a basis for analysis, it uses cost data for the NOAA fleet for fiscal year 2015, the most recent year for which complete cost data were available at the outset of this project. It also relies on cost data from NOAA’s recent contracts with contract vessel providers, as well as information, both quantitative and qualitative, from interviews with NOAA subject matter experts and contract vessel providers, both private and public sector.

This appendix is organized as follows:

Section 2 presents data on the marginal cost of using the NOAA fleet

Section 3 discusses NOAA’s current use of contract vessels, including the aggregate cost of this usage

Section 4 presents several case studies that compare the cost of using NOAA ships to contract vessel substitutes for specific example missions

Section 5 discusses factors other than cost-effectiveness that can affect the decision between using NOAA’s fleet and contract vessels, including the capacity and availability of such vessels.

Section 4 in the main body of this report summarizes the results of the analysis.

Note that this Appendix repeats certain narrative and exhibits from the summary in Section 4 of the main body of the report. This repetition is so that readers can see the information presented in context with the complete supporting details without needing to refer back to Section 4.


B-2

2. Marginal Cost of Using the NOAA Fleet The purpose of this analysis is to compare the marginal cost of operating the NOAA fleet to the cost of using contract vessels to accomplish the same goals. Underlying this comparison is the assumption that NOAA will not make dramatic changes to the overall mix of contract versus fleet ship time employed or radically alter the composition of its fleet in the immediate future. In other words, the assumption is that substitutions take place at the margins.

Given this assumption, it is not appropriate to account for the entire budget associated with NOAA’s marine operations in the comparison. Some elements of the budget (e.g., fixed maintenance costs, certain support and management costs) are not reduced when NOAA fleet missions are accomplished using contract vessels. Some of these fixed costs would be reduced only by extreme substitution to the extent of eliminating one or more ships from the NOAA fleet. Other fixed costs would still be required even in a hypothetical scenario where the NOAA fleet were completely replaced by contract vessels. These costs are associated with functions (e.g., safety and compliance) that would be required regardless of which vessels NOAA uses to acquire ocean observations.

Because the costs derived here reflect variable costs only, they are not comparable to costs for the NOAA fleet reported in certain other sources. For example, costs developed for the NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team292 cover the total cost of all of the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations’ (OMAO’s) observing systems, including fixed costs.

To identify the appropriate variable costs, this analysis relies on a document provided by OMAO entitled “Proposal to Document 100% of OMAO Ship Lifecycle Costs”.293 This document identifies and categorizes the costs involved in operating the fleet. For those costs that are not directly attributable to a specific ship, it recommends a method of allocation. This analysis uses the recommended method of allocation to further categorize costs as variable or fixed. The variable costs appropriate for use in this analysis include:

Variable direct costs: direct operating and maintenance costs are those specifically attributable to a given ship. Variable direct costs are those that are proportional to level of effort and include, for example, fuel, supplies, and wages for personnel operating the ship.

Variable indirect costs: although not specifically attributable to a given ship, these costs can be allocated across the fleet in a manner that is proportional to direct operating costs. Therefore, they can be considered proportional to the level of effort expended and part of the marginal operating cost. They include, for example, engineering support costs, which are not directly attributed to a particular ship, but are proportional to the level of maintenance required to keep a ship operational.

The costs used in this analysis do not include:

Fixed indirect costs: like variable indirect costs, these costs are not specifically attributable to a given ship. Although fixed indirect costs can be allocated across the fleet, the recommended method of allocation (e.g., dividing evenly by the number of ships) is not proportional to operating costs. Therefore, unlike variable indirect costs, fixed indirect costs are not proportional to the level of effort.

Maintenance costs from the procurement, acquisition, and construction (PAC) account: although these costs are directly attributable by ship, they are fixed costs (i.e., not proportional to level of effort) based on information provided by OMAO’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer.294

Sunk capital costs or depreciation costs: these costs reflect the initial acquisition cost of the existing fleet. Because these costs have already been expended, they cannot be reduced by substituting contract vessels.

292 The NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team was a team of senior subject matter experts from across NOAA established to summarize the relevant legal, policy and programmatic at-sea mission needs to describe the NOAA Fleet core capabilities to support NOAA’s missions. The Team documented the extent to which these needs are currently addressed and describe the capability gap that will exist absent fleet recapitalization. The Team developed a Fleet Plan, sequencing the planned end of service life of current vessels, and acquisition of new vessels (to include all phases of acquisition). 293 Draft, July 29, 2013. 294 E-mail communication with Linda Malinoff, OMAO Office of Chief Financial Officer. January 19, 2017.


B-3

New ship acquisition costs: these costs are for acquisition of new ships and, therefore, not allocable to the existing fleet.

Exhibit B - 1 provides a more detailed listing of the specific costs included and excluded from this analysis. Given this categorization, OMAO’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer provided data for fiscal year 2015 for each of the costs to be included.295 This analysis focused on fiscal year 2015 because it is the most recent year for which complete cost data were available at the outset of the project. After allocating the variable indirect costs according to the methods recommended in Exhibit B - 1, Exhibit B - 2 shows the variable (or marginal) operating cost for the each ship in the NOAA fleet for fiscal year 2015.

295 “OMAO Ship Cost Effectiveness Combined Submission_022317.xlsx.” Spreadsheet received via e-mail from Linda Mallinoff, OMAO Office of Chief Financial Officer. February 23, 2017.


B-4

Exhibit B - 1: Categorization and Allocation of Operating and Maintenance Costs

Cost Method of Allocationa

Pro

port

iona

l to

Lev

el o

f E

ffor

t / I

nclu

ded

in t

his

Ana

lysi

s

Variable Direct Costs:

Ship Variable Operations (overtime, fuel, ready/provisioning costs)

Directly attributable by ship

Wage Marine Salaries and Benefits

Maintenance (ORF)

Salaries and benefits for NOAA Corps officers assigned directly to ships

Construction Work-In-Progress (CWIP)

Variable Indirect Costs:

MOC: Resource Management Branch Proportional to variable operations cost

MOC: Engineering Proportional to maintenance cost

MOC: Marine Personnel Branch Proportional to ship authorized complement (i.e., permanent crew) MOC: Relief Pool/Augmentation Indirect

CPC: general operating budget Proportional to NOAA Corps salaries and benefits by ship

Not

Pro

port

iona

l to

Lev

el o

f E

ffor

t /

Not

Inc

lude

d in

this

Ana

lysi

s

MOC: Director’s Staff

Divide evenly by the number of ships

MOC: Safety, Training, and Environmental Compliance

CPC: Salaries and benefits for NOAA Corps officers assigned to MOC Shoreside billets

CPC: Salaries and benefits for NOAA Corps officers assigned to OMAO HQb

OMAO HQ Divisions other than Platform Acquisition

MOC: Atlantic Commanding Officer, Operations, and Health Services

Divide evenly by the number of ships assigned to given ports

MOC: Pacific Commanding Officer, Operations, and Health Services

MOC: Port Offices

CPC: Salaries and benefits for NOAA Corps officers assigned to other line offices

Not allocable to fleet

Maintenance (PAC) Not proportional to level of effort

Sunk capital or depreciation costs Already expended and not reduced by substitution

New ship acquisition costs Not allocable to existing fleet

OMAO HQ: Platform Acquisition Division

a. Per “Proposal to Document 100% of OMAO Ship Lifecycle Costs,” Draft, July 29, 2013. b. Some officers are assigned directly to CPC. In theory, the salaries and benefits for these officers could be allocated in the same manner as the CPC

general operating budget. Data are not available, however, to differentiate salaries and benefits for these officers from the total for those assigned to OMAO HQ.

Acronyms and Abbreviations: CPC = Commissioned Personnel Center; MOC = Marine Operations Center; OMAO HQ = Office of Marine and Aviation Operations Headquarters; ORF = Operations, Research, and Facilities; PAC = Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction


B-5

Exhibit B - 2: Fiscal Year 2015 Marginal Cost of Using the NOAA Fleet

Ship 2015 Days at

Sea Variable Direct Cost

Variable Direct Plus Variable Indirect Cost

Total ($) $/Day at Sea Total ($) $/Day at Sea

Bell M. Shimada 190 7,251,994 38,168 8,803,356 46,333

Fairweather 136 6,640,315 48,826 8,027,114 59,023

Ferdinand R. Hassler 203 4,225,987 20,818 5,180,034 25,517

Gordon Gunter 175 5,192,584 29,672 6,290,749 35,947

Henry B. Bigelow 172 5,229,886 30,406 6,151,592 35,765

Hi’ialakai 202 5,350,602 26,488 6,332,617 31,350

Nancy Foster 166 4,434,007 26,711 5,345,956 32,205

Okeanos Explorer 168 7,956,552 47,360 9,722,189 57,870

Oregon II 191 4,195,047 21,964 5,079,373 26,594

Oscar Dyson 192 7,122,348 37,096 8,538,806 44,473

Oscar Elton Sette 145 4,449,664 30,687 5,366,281 37,009

Pisces 131 5,110,911 39,015 6,169,307 47,094

Rainier 141 6,639,398 47,088 8,100,746 57,452

Ronald H. Brown 233 7,074,440 30,362 8,427,715 36,170

Reuben Lasker 80 4,053,373 50,667 4,754,080 59,426

Thomas Jefferson 119 5,143,833 43,225 6,278,611 52,761

TOTAL 2,644 90,070,940 34,066 108,568,526 41,062

Note: Because the totals presented here only include those costs that are proportional to level of effort, they are not comparable to costs derived elsewhere (e.g., for the NOAA Fleet Recapitalization Team), which cover the total cost of all OMAO observing systems, including fixed costs


B-6

3. Aggregate Cost of Using Contract Vessels NOAA currently uses contract vessels to support a variety of operations. Examples include fisheries surveys and deployment and maintenance of buoys. Vessels employed by NOAA also include research vessels, both public sector and privately owned, for scientific data collection. NOAA also uses vessels from partner federal agencies, including the U.S. Coast Guard and the National Science Foundation. In some cases, this usage is a no-cost exchange of ship time. In other cases, NOAA reimburses the partner agency.296,297

As an overview of the extent of NOAA’s use of contract vessels, this section presents data collected to inform the NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team.298 These data represent the best information available from OMAO’s databases associated with NOAA’s use of contract vessels. These data do not include no-cost exchanges of ship time with partner agencies. Exhibit B - 3 shows data on the use of contract vessels for fiscal year 2015.299 Note that the total days at sea for contract vessels (2,736.5) is approximately equal to the total fiscal year 2015 days at sea for the NOAA fleet (2,644, as shown in Exhibit B - 2).

Exhibit B - 3: Fiscal Year 2015 NOAA Use of Contract Vessels

Program

2015 Days at Seaa Cost

Days % of Total Dollars % of Total

NMFS 1,598 58% 13,231,360 30%

NOS Hydrographic Servicesb 610 22% 19,804,427 45%

Other NOS Programs 35.5 1% 278,000 <1%

NWS 286 10% 6,854,000 15%

OAR 198 7% 3,841,852 9%

NESDIS 9 <1% 257,300 <1%

TOTAL 2,736.5 100% 44,266,939 100%

a. Does not include no-cost exchanges of days at sea with partner agencies. b. Days at sea for hydrographic services estimated assuming 2 nautical square miles surveyed per day at sea. c. Acronyms and Abbreviations: NESDIS = National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service; NMFS =

National Marine Fisheries Service; NOS = National Ocean Service; NWS = National Weather Service; OAR = Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Exhibit B - 4 shows the same fiscal year 2015 data as Exhibit B - 3 in comparison to equivalent data for fiscal year 2014 and planned data for fiscal year 2016. As shown in Exhibit B- 4, NOAA’s use of contract vessels has remained fairly stable during the last few years. Days at sea have varied by 11 percent or less from year to year and spending has changed by 16 percent or less.

296 NOAA. 2016. The NOAA Fleet Plan: Building NOAA’s 21st Century Fleet. V3.1. NOAA Internal Use Only – Pre-decisional. October 4. 297 O’Clock, Bill. 2016. “Charters.” Presentation at NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team Meeting and Supporting Spreadsheets. Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. May 10. 298 The NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team (IRT) was a senior-level team of outside experts established to assess the health of the NOAA Fleet of research vessels, requirements for recapitalization, and analysis of operational, maintenance practices and technology infusion. The IRT considered the compelling data-collection requirements that need access to the oceans; the applicable technologies and how they change the requirements; the appropriate fleet size and composition to meet needs; and best approaches to meet this need. 299O’Clock, Bill. 2016. “Charters.” Presentation at NOAA Fleet Independent Review Team Meeting and Supporting Spreadsheets. Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. May 10.

Appendix B:

It might be temcost per day awould not be contracts covefuel, crew to ocosts, there caExamples of tmobilization avessel. On thecontracts for hdays at sea. Incontrol and da

Furthermore, differing capaproviders301 scalculated fromost effectivecontract vesse

300 NOAA. 201NOAA, U.S. D301 See Section

Efficiency and

mpting to use tat sea for compcomplete or acer “bare boat” operate deck eqan be other costhese additionaand demobilizae other hand, sohydrographic sn addition to prata processing

the aggregate dabilities. Due tohow that unit c

om the aggregate substitutes foels include the

16. NOS HydrogDepartment of Con 5 for discussion

d Effectiveness

Exhib

the aggregate darison to the co

ccurate. Specificosts only, whiquipment suppts associated w

al costs can inclation of NOAAome contracts esurveys are struroviding ship tiand formatting

data presented o these differencosts (i.e., dollate data is not n

or NOAA shipsfollowing:

graphic Surveys: ommerce. Marchn of these data so

of Using Cont

it B - 4: Use of

data on NOAAost of the NOAically, the contrile others encomorting the miss

with the use of clude: costs for

A staff and equiencompass othuctured as data ime to collect thg according to d

here reflect a wnces, data collears per day at secessarily repr

s. Factors that m

Specifications ah. ources.

tract Vessels

B-7

f Contract Vess

’s use of contraAA fleet presenract vessel costmpass a more csion). Even whcontract vesselprovisions for ipment, and caler services in abuys that purchhe data, the condetailed specifi

wide range of cected from USAea) can vary byesentative, part

must be conside

and Deliverables

sels over Time

act vessels in Ented in Section ts presented hecomplete scope

hen the contracts that are not reNOAA staff ablibration of insaddition to use hase a quantityntractor also prications.300

contract vesselsAspending.gov y an order of mticularly for coered in compar

s. Office of Coas

Exhibit B - 3 to 2. Such a comp

ere are contracte of support fot covers more teflected in the board the contr

struments used of vessels. In p

y of data instearovides quality

s of differing tyv and interviewsmagnitude. Therontract vessels tring unit costs f

st Survey, Natio

calculate an avparison, howevt costs only. Sor the mission (

than “bare boatcontract price. ract vessel, aboard the con

particular, NOAad of a number y assurance/qua

ypes and with s with contractrefore, an averthat might be thfor NOAA ship

onal Ocean Servi

verage ver, ome e.g., t”

ntract AA of

ality

t vessel age he ps and

ice,


B-8

A day at sea aboard a contract vessel is not necessarily equal to a day at sea aboard a NOAA vessel. NOAA ships often collect multiple data streams and/or conduct multiple missions simultaneously. Although some contract vessels, such as certain University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) ships,302 have similar multi-data stream/multi-mission capabilities, many vessels are better suited for individual projects and a more limited set of data. These “economies of scope” mean that multiple contract vessels can sometimes be required to replace the output of a NOAA vessel. In addition, NOAA uses NOAA ships for advancing technology through testing new equipment and procedures, maintaining and building expertise within the science field and marine operations.

NOAA ships have greater endurance than many smaller contract vessels. Therefore, they can remain at sea for the duration of long projects without returning to port. In addition, NOAA ships often can be scheduled and positioned to transition directly from one project to the next without significant travel time. Both of these factors mean that the use of contract vessels can, in some cases, entail more transit days (i.e., at the start and finish of the discrete projects for which they are hired and, in some cases, to resupply during longer projects).

Contract vessels used for missions with NOAA personnel aboard must meet certain safety standards. The aggregate data in Exhibit B - 3 include missions without NOAA crew aboard. The vessels used for these missions might not meet these standards and, therefore, not be comparable to NOAA ships. Section 5 includes a more detailed discussion of safety standards.

Conversely, some contract vessels provide services that the NOAA fleet cannot (e.g., data collection in shallow waters). The aggregate data in Exhibit B - 3 include such missions.

Given these factors, unit costs calculated from aggregate data are not an appropriate basis for comparing cost-effectiveness. Instead, the comparison must account for mission-specific details. Section 4 uses a case study approach to compare cost-effectiveness while accounting for such details.

302 NOAA’s use of UNOLS ships includes both no-cost exchange of ship time and cases where NOAA pays the institution operating the UNOLS ship in a manner similar to a commercial charter.

Appendix B:

4. CoThis section eattempt to accNOAA fleet cAdditional daindividual con(BLS), and th

The four casemissions suppwhich are thedata buys for Ocean Servic(Sections 4.1,report describ

Tro4.1

Mission Desctropical Pacifiabove, at, anda number of Nmain body of observations.3

The NWS Namaintenance irelied on the Ndata availabiliused a combinarray and maiarray also rousurface driftinOceanic and A

In conjunctionto operating thas well as whResearch also

303 “Project: Trhttp://www.om304 E-mail and 12, 2017. 305 Ibid. 306 Ibid. 307 “NDBC – TAhttp://www.ndb308 “NOAA TAhttp://goosocea2015. 309 E-mail and 12, 2017. 310 “TAO Cruishttp://tao.ndbc.

Efficiency and

st-Effectivexamines cost-ecount for the facosts. These fouata used in the cntracts downlo

he marginal cos

e studies reflectporting the Nattwo line officehydrographic se (NOS). Each, 4.3, and 4.4) abes societal ben

opical Atmo

cription: The Tfic Ocean that cd below the oceNOAA productf this report des305

ational Data Buincluding repaiNOAA ship Kaity from the TAnation of the Nintain data avaiutinely support ng floats for theAtmospheric R

n with the mainhe array. Such ile the vessel is

o includes testin

ropical Atmosph

mao.noaa.gov/finpersonal commu

TAO Performancbc.noaa.gov/tao-

AO Equatorial Paan.org/index.php

personal commu

se Information: r.noaa.gov/refresh

d Effectiveness

veness Caseffectiveness oactors discussedur case studies case studies incaded from USA

st of using spec

t missions that tional Weather es that account surveys (see Ex

h of the cases stare of missionsnefits.

sphere Oce

Tropical Atmoscollect oceanogean surface andts and services,scribes societal

uoy Center (NDiring any damaa'imimoana to mAO array suffer

NOAA ship Ronilability above the deploymene Atlantic Ocea

Research).310

ntenance, TAOresearch includ

s underway to/fng and evaluati

here Ocean Buoynd/projects/3418-unication with K

e Continues to I-performance-coacific Ocean Datp?option=com_c

unication with K

reports of activithed/taoCruiseIn

of Using Cont

se Studies on a mission-spd in Section 3 awere identified

cludes interviewAspending.govcific NOAA shi

support three dService (NWSfor the greates

xhibit B - 3). Ttudies involvess that support N

an (TAO) A

sphere Ocean (graphic and med transmits thes, including the benefits. Many

DBC) uses vessage caused by bmaintain the arred, dropping tnald H. Brown,the 80 percent

nt of Argo profanographic and

O cruises also sodes meteorologfrom and withiion of new sens

y Service.” NOA-tropical-atmosp

Kathleen O’Neil,

Improve.” NOAAontinues-to-imprta Availability Eontent&view=ar

Kathleen O’Neil,

ties.” National Dfo.php?hist=true

tract Vessels

B-9

pecific basis usiand provide a od during discusws with contrac

v, price index dips estimated in

different NOAAS) and Nationalst amount of sphe other two ca a different NO

NOAA products

Array Maint

(TAO) array coteorological da

se data in real-tEl Nino Southy other U.S. an

sels to service tbiological activrray. After the Kto as low as 28 , UNOLS shipstarget perform

filing floats for d Meteorologic

ometimes incorgical and oceanin the cruise trasors, systems a

AA Office of Marphere-ocean-buoy

National Weath

A National Data rove.shtml. PageExceeds Targets.rticle&id=27:no

National Weath

Data Buoy Centee. Accessed Apri

ing selected caone-to-one comssions with NO

act vessel providata from the Un Section 2.

A line offices. l Marine Fisherpending on conase studies are

OAA vessel. Ths and services

tenance

onsists of 70 buata. Each of thetime via satellit

hern Oscillationnd international

the TAO array vity or local fishKa'imimoana wpercent in Mar

s, and commermance level.308,3

the Pacific Macal Laboratory (

rporate scientifn observations ack, to validateand, technologi

arine and Aviatioy-service. Acces

her Service, Nati

Buoy Center. Ae last modified A” Global Ocean aa-tao&catid=13

her Service, Nati

er. Available at: il 26, 2017.

se studies. Themparison of conOAA subject mders (see Secti

U.S. Bureau of L

The first two cries Service (N

ntract vessels otof missions su

hree of the fourfor which the m

uoys moored (“e moorings collte.303,304 The da

n Outlook, a prol organizations

by performinghermen.306 Priowas removed f

arch 2014.307 Sircial contract ve309 Cruises to marine Environm(both part of N

fic research thaduring the mai

e the sensors onies that could u

on Operations. Assed March 8, 20ional Data Buoy

Available at: August 5, 2014.

Observing Syst3&Itemid=247.

ional Data Buoy

ese case studiesntract vessel co

matter experts. on 5), data for Labor Statistics

case studies areNMFS), respectither than contraupporting the Nr case studies main body of th

“moorings”) in lects data fromata collected suoduct for which

s also use TAO

g necessary or to 2012, NDfrom service in ince then, NDBessels to servic

maintain the TAmental LaboratoNOAA’s Office

at is directly relintenance operan the mooringsultimately refre

Available at: 017. Center. January

em. Available atPublished March

Center. January

s osts to

s

e of ively, act

National

his

the m just upport h the

DBC 2012,

BC has ce the AO ory and e of

lated ations, . sh,

y 10 and

t: h 23,

y 10 and


B-10

upgrade, and/or replace the legacy moorings. In a typical year, NDBC requires that at least some of the TAO maintenance cruises incorporate this type of research.311

Mission Requirements: NDBC usually requires about 160 days at sea each year to support TAO servicing, typically using four discrete cruises of 40 days each, including transit.312 In a typical year, these cruises include some that accomplish maintenance only and some that also incorporate related scientific research. Therefore, this case study examines a typical 40-day cruise, given two different scenarios:

1. The cruise includes routine maintenance and servicing of the TAO array, along with deployment of Argo and surface drifting floats.

2. The cruise incorporates related supplemental science in addition to TAO maintenance and float deployment.

Under either scenario, the vessel used to support the mission must provide the following:

Global class endurance, capable of operating for 40 days at sea, including 10 days of transit time into the project area and 10 days of transit out of the project area.313

Accommodations and provisions for a NOAA scientific team of three to five people. Heavy lift capability and large (400 square feet) adjacent deck space for handling the buoys, moorings, and

anchors. Stowage for the deep-sea mooring components, buoys, and bridles (2,000 square feet and 100,000 pounds). Access to, and support in launching and recovering, one small work boat capable of carrying four passengers. Fuel for the voyage. Personnel to run the ship, navigate, and operate deck equipment.

Under the second scenario including related supplemental science, the vessel must also provide the following:314

On-board equipment including: real-time data acquisition and processing system, fathometer or multi-beam sonar with a maximum depth of 6,000 meters, salinometer, thermosalinograph, hull-mounted acoustic doppler current profiler with altitude control, dry lab, and dedicated chamber for conducting salinity measurements.

Additional stowage for additional equipment supplied by NOAA including: conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) rosette, associated recording and processing system, and additional electronics (total 350 square feet and 3,200 pounds).

Equipment and personnel support for deployment and handling of the CTD rosette, salinometer, and thermosalinograph.

NOAA Ship Cost: The NOAA ship Ronald H. Brown can supply the requirements described above under either scenario (although she is better equipped than necessary for the first scenario involving TAO maintenance and float deployment only). For example, in fiscal year 2015, NDBC used approximately 80 days at sea on the Ronald H. Brown for TAO array maintenance.315 At the marginal cost of $36,170 per day estimated in Section 2, the cost of using the Ronald H. Brown for a typical 40-day TAO cruise under either scenario is $1,446,800.

Cost of Contract Vessel Substitute: NDBC has access to several commercial vessels that perform mooring maintenance (including TAO and other buoy systems) through its marine services basic ordering agreements. In fiscal year 2015, NDBC used one of these commercial vessels for TAO maintenance for 9 days at sea at a cost of $215,000, or $23,889 per day.316 Using this same cost per day, the cost of using a commercial contract vessel to substitute for the Ronald H. Brown on a typical 40-day TAO cruise would be $955,560. This cost, however, only covers supplying the requirements for the 311 E-mail and personal communication with Kathleen O’Neil, National Weather Service, National Data Buoy Center. January 10 and 12, 2017. 312 Ibid. 313 These operational and transit days are as recommended by the NDBC subject matter expert for a typical TAO cruise, regardless of the provider used (NOAA ship or charter vessel). 314 For example, see Ship Time Request for Tropical Atmosphere Ocean (TAO) Array RHB1 (subset of TAO 2015 O&M Primary request). May 9, 2014. 315 E-mail communication with Kathleen O’Neil, National Weather Service, National Data Buoy Center. January 18, 2017. 316 E-mail communication with Kathleen O’Neil, National Weather Service, National Data Buoy Center. January 18, 2017.


B-11

first scenario involving TAO maintenance and float deployment. It does not cover a vessel equipped to supply the requirements of the second scenario that includes related supplemental science.

To substitute for the Ronald H. Brown in the second scenario would require the use of a UNOLS ship, such as the R/V Thomas G. Thompson or R/V Roger Revelle, which are equipped to collect the underway ocean observations and support the related supplemental science.317,318 In fiscal year 2015, NDBC used a UNOLS vessel for TAO maintenance for 40 days at sea at a cost of $1.71 million, or $42,750 per day.319,320 This cost would cover supplying the requirements discussed above for the second scenario.321

Discussion: Exhibit B – 5 compares the costs for a typical 40-day TAO cruise (including transit time) under the two scenarios discussed above. Under the first scenario, where the cruise only includes TAO maintenance and deployment of Argo and surface drifting floats, a commercial contract vessel is the less costly than the Ronald H. Brown. In the second scenario where additional equipment and support are required to complete scientific research that is directly related to operating the array, the marginal cost of using the Ronald H. Brown is 15 percent less than an appropriately equipped substitute in the form of a UNOLS vessel.

Exhibit B - 5: Cost-Effectiveness Comparison for Typical 40-Day Cruise Servicing the TAO Array

Scenario Vessel Used Cost ($)

Routine maintenance and float deployment only

Commercial contract vessel 955,560

NOAA ship 1,446,800

Maintenance, float deployment, and related supplemental science

NOAA ship 1,446,800

UNOLS ship 1,710,000

Notes: Commercial contract vessel and UNOLS ship cost based on 40 days at sea using the fiscal year 2015 data

from NDBC described in the text. NOAA ship cost based on 40 days at sea using the Ronald H. Brown at the marginal cost estimated in Section

2.

317 E-mail and personal communication with Kathleen O’Neil, National Weather Service, National Data Buoy Center. January 10 and 12, 2017. 318 Personal communication with Doug Russell, University of Washington and UNOLS Vessel R/V Thomas G. Thompson. February 23, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 319 This rate is slightly higher than approximate rate identified in the interview conducted with the captain of the Thomas G. Thompson (see Appendix C). The cost-effectiveness analysis here uses the data from NDBC because it is in fiscal year 2015 dollars and reflects the rate paid by NOAA, instead of the rate received by the University of Washington. The difference may be due to costs involved in transferring the funds through the National Science Foundation. 320 E-mail communication with Kathleen O’Neil, National Weather Service, National Data Buoy Center. January 18, 2017. 321 An UNOLS vessel would also be capable of supplying the requirements of the first scenario (maintenance and float deployment only), but it is unclear whether or not there would be a reduced cost if NOAA did not employ the vessel’s observational and scientific capabilities.

In addition to each scenario2015 is no lononly 42 days typical in the

As discussed different vendcases due to eclass vessels (matter expert industry, offshlack of availabmaintenance cnumber of bid

As discussed Navy and Nathowever, alsoyear. The R/Vmaintenance d

Cal4.2

Mission Descdisciplinary ecetacean specdistribution. Alevel organisminterest. Opermammal bodyNino biologic

Mission Requup (total 120 322 Ibid. 323 E-mail and 12, 2017. 324 E-mail com325 Personal com23, 2017. See A326 NOAA. 201Marine Fisheri

the difference. The approximnger typical sinat sea to suppofuture.322

above, NDBC dors. Although ease of access a(and several smindicated that hore constructibility with thescruises for whids received for

in more detail tional Science Fo receive high pV Roger Revelleduring 2018, w

lifornia Cur

cription: The Cxpedition, cond

cies (whales, doAdditional objems (prey) and nrations conducty parts and birdcal sampling.326

uirements: Cadays), with 15

personal commu

mmunication withmmunication wiAppendix C for i14. Cruise Instrues Service, Sout

s in cost, there mately 80 days nce the Ronald ort TAO servici

accesses commthe commercia

and schedulingmaller vessels). these commercion, and marinese vessels. In faich it has issuedNOAA’s vess

in Section 5, scFoundation sompriority in the Ue, one of the tw

which will reduc

rrent Cetace

California Currducted by the Nolphins, and poectives includednon-protected ated included: vid specimens, pa6

alCurCEAS 20or 16 scientific

unication with K

h Kathleen O’Neith Doug Russellinterview notes.

uctions – Califorthwest Fisheries

App

are differencesat sea on the RH. Brown has

ing in fiscal yea

mercial vesselsal vessels are n.323 These agreIn addition to

cial vessels alsoe salvage. In spact, NDBC hasd requests for pel contracts in

cheduling UNOmetimes have hUNOLS scheduwo UNOLS shice her availabi

ean and Eco

rent Cetacean aNMFS in 2014orpoises) in the d characterizinapex predators isual surveys, bassive acoustic

14 consisted ofc personnel abo

Kathleen O’Neil,

eil, National Weal, University of W

rnia Current CetScience Center.

pendix B: Effic

B-12

s in availabilityRonald H. Brow

returned to its ar 2017, and th

through marinnot outfitted forements providesupporting NOo likely supporpite of these coms received multproposals (see Sgeneral).324

OLS ships requhigher priority uling process bips NDBC has lity.325

osystem Ass

and Ecosystem , with the primCalifornia Curg the ecosystem(sea birds), andbiopsy samplinc sampling to lo

f 117 days at seoard for each le

National Weath

ather Service, NWashington and

tacean and Ecosy July 17.

ciency and Effe

y for the vesselwn that NDBC Atlantic coast

his level of ava

ne services basir research, NDBe NDBC with a

OAA mooring mrt other uses incmpeting uses, N

tiple responses Section 5 for fu

uires a long leain the scheduli

because they arused for TAO

essment Sur

Assessment Sumary purpose of

rrent and studym within the std identification

ng, photographyocate and recor

ea in five legs, eg. The mission

her Service, Nati

National Data Bud UNOLS Vesse

system Assessme

ectiveness of U

ls suitable to prwas able to schhome port. She

ailability (or les

ic ordering agrBC prefers thisaccess to at leamaintenance, thcluding the offNDBC has notto support sev

urther informat

ad time (a year ing process. The consistently fservicing, is sc

rvey (CalCu

urvey (CalCurCf estimating theying factors thatudy area, resean of cetacean spy, opportunistird organisms, o

plus three dayn departed from

ional Data Buoy

uoy Center. Aprill R/V Thomas G

ent Survey: CalC

Using Contract V

rovide serviceshedule in fiscale is scheduled ss) may be mor

reements with ss mechanism inast six differenthe NDBC subjfshore oil and gt experienced aeral mooring tion in the typic

or more) and thhe TAO cruisesfunded from yecheduled for m

urCEAS)

CEAS) was a me abundance ofat affect their arch on mid-tropecies of specic retrieval of moceanography,

s of staging anm and ultimate

Center. January

l 26, 2017. G. Thompson. Fe

CurCEAS. Nation

Vessels

s under l year for

re

several n some t global ect

gas any

cal

he s, ear-to-

mid-life

multi-f

ophic al

marine and El

d set ly

y 10 and

ebruary

nal


B-13

returned to San Diego with additional port stops between legs in Newport, Oregon, and San Francisco. Requirements for the vessel used to support the mission were the following:327

Capable of operating for up to 24 days at sea. Accommodations and provisions for a NOAA scientific team of up to 16 people.328 Observation platform (e.g., flying bridge) with canopy for visual surveys. Access to, and support in launching and recovering, one small rigid inflatable hull boat. Hydrographic winch with minimum 2,500 meter cable for net tows. Lab space including freezer space for biological samples, refrigerator for cell culture, and fume hood. Stowage for equipment supplied by NOAA including: expendable bathythermograph (XBT) launcher and 18

boxes of probes, two bongo net frames, three pallets of sonobuoys (125 square feet and 1,200 pounds), two boxes of acoustics equipment, acoustic winch (36 square feet and 1,200 pounds), 75 cubic feet of sample jars, four boxes of mammal sampling equipment, five drifting autonomous spar buoy recorder (DASBR), and additional electronics.

Additional on-board equipment including: depth sounder, hydraulic power and connections for winches, power and global positioning system (GPS) connections for NOAA computers, deck hose with water supply, and grappling hook and line.

Fuel for the voyage. Personnel to run the ship, navigate, and operate deck equipment.

NOAA Ship Cost: CalCurCEAS 2014 was originally planned for the NOAA ship Reuben Lasker, which would have supplied the requirements described above.329 In 2015 dollars, at the marginal cost of $59,426 per day estimated in Section 2, the cost of using the Reuben Lasker for 120 days (including three days of staging and set up) would have been $7,131,120.

Cost of Contract Vessel Substitute: When the Reuben Lasker did not come on line as scheduled, the expedition was instead conducted aboard the R/V Ocean Starr, a contract vessel.330 The Ocean Starr was a formerly the NOAA ship David Starr Jordan, which was decommissioned and sold in 2010.331 During CalCurCEAS 2014, the 171-foot research vessel was owned and operated by Ocean Services LLC, a subsidiary of Stabbert Maritime.332,333 The Ocean Starr supplied all of the requirements described above for the cruise, including staging and ship setup, provisioning for the scientific personnel, and a crew willing to do everything asked of them to support the research.

Data from USAspending.gov show that, in fiscal year 2014, NOAA had three transactions with Ocean Services LLC for a west coast charter for a trawl capable vessel, totaling $2,343,280.334 A NOAA subject matter expert confirmed that the cost of using the Ocean Starr for CalCurCEAS was approximately $2.4 million. To escalate this 2014 cost to 2015 dollars, we used the producer price index (PPI) for the water transportation industry – specifically, for North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) category 483.335 Applying the annual average values for 2014 and 2015 for this

327 Ibid. 328 This count includes up to two oceanographic science technicians, who were included as part of the NOAA scientific team on the mission as conducted. As discussed below, these additional personnel would not have been required had a NOAA ship been employed. 329 In addition, it would have required fewer NOAA personnel in addition to the Reuben Lasker’s permanent crew. As discussed below, the cost estimate of the charter substitute has been adjusted to accounts for this difference. 330 Personal communication with Annette Henry, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. December 15, 2016. 331 “David Starr Jordan.” Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Available at: http://www.omao.noaa.gov/learn/marine-operations/ships/decommissioned/david-starr-jordan. Accessed March 7, 2017. 332 NOAA. 2014. Cruise Instructions – California Current Cetacean and Ecosystem Assessment Survey: CalCurCEAS. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. July 17. 333 “Ocean Starr.” Stabbert Maritime. Available at: http://www.stabbertmaritime.com/vessels/ocean-starr/. Accessed March 7, 2017. 334 Data downloaded for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for fiscal year 2014 from https://www.usaspending.gov/DownloadCenter/Pages/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed December 20, 2016. 335 Time series data downloaded for producer price index for NAICS category 483 from https://www.bls.gov/ppi/data.htm. Accessed March 7, 2017.


B-14

industry-specific index to the contract cost results in an escalated cost of $2,350,048.336 Although this adjustment is small, it reflects the change between 2014 and 2015 in prices received by producers in the NAICS category to which Ocean Services LLC belongs, allowing a consistent basis for comparison to the 2015 data on the cost of the NOAA fleet.

The data collected aboard the Ocean Starr were the same as would have been collected aboard the Reuben Lasker. There were, however, certain trade-offs that included the following:337

1. The Reuben Lasker has its own dedicated oceanographic science technicians; the cruise as conducted aboard the Ocean Starr required additional oceanographic technicians among the NOAA personnel.

2. Small boat operations were acceptable aboard the Ocean Starr, but more difficult than they would have been aboard the Reuben Lasker, primarily due to crew training and familiarity.

3. The Reuben Lasker is quieter, so passive acoustic data collection would probably have been improved due to less noise interference.338

4. The Ocean Starr is more maneuverable and the bow deck is closer to the water; these factors improved NOAA’s ability to collect biopsy samples from animals near the bow.339

To account for the labor-related differences identified in items (1) and (2) above, we adjusted the estimated cost of using the Ocean Starr as discussed below. Data are not available to monetize the data collection/data quality differences identified in the other items. Because there are advantages to each ship, these latter items might offset one another to some extent.

The NOAA scientific team aboard the Ocean Starr for CalCurCEAS 2014 included one oceanographic technician. As noted in item (1) above, aboard the Reuben Lasker, the ship’s existing complement of oceanographic science technician would have supplied this labor, the cost of which is included in the marginal cost for the Reuben Lasker estimated in Section 2. Therefore, in using the Ocean Starr, there was an additional labor cost to NOAA, over and above the contract cost. Data are not available on salary and benefits for the specific NOAA oceanographic technicians employed during CalCurCEAS 2014. To estimate the value of the additional NOAA labor, we used a rate of $503 per person-day. This rate reflects the average salary and benefits for fiscal year 2015 for crew serving aboard the NOAA fleet, calculated from the same data underlying the marginal cost estimates for the NOAA fleet in Section 2. Applying this average rate to the 120 person-days of additional NOAA oceanographic technician labor required aboard the Ocean Starr, results in an additional labor cost of $60,360.340 Because this value is based on a 2015 labor rate, no escalation is required.

According to one NOAA subject matter expert, the difficulties with small boat operations aboard the Ocean Starr could have been alleviated by an additional contract deckhand. The subject matter expert estimated the cost of the additional deckhand would have been approximately $400 per day, based on an estimated salary of $200 to $250 per day and incorporating overhead and profit.341 Applying this rate to 120 days at sea results in a labor cost of $48,000 in 2014 dollars.342 Escalating this labor using the appropriate annual average employment cost index (ECI) increases the labor

336 The annual average PPI for NAICS category 483 was 138.5 for 2014 and 138.9 for 2015. Applying these values to the contract cost results in the following calculation: $2,343,280 x 138.9/138.5 = $2,350,048. 337 Personal communication with Annette Henry, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. December 15, 2016; and E-mail communication with Jeff Moore, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. February 15, 2017. 338 Although not a requirement for CalCurCEAS 2014, the Reuben Lasker also has side-scanning sonar, which is often useful for mid-water detection. 339 Note, however, that the Reuben Lasker does have observation decks of appropriate height. 340 120 person-days x $503/person-day = $60,360. 341 Personal communication with Annette Henry, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. December 15, 2016 342 120 days x $400/day = $48,000.

Appendix B:

cost to $48,94(2015 dollars)

Adding these $2,459,353 in

Discussion: EReuben Laskeusing the Oce

Vessel Used

Commercial c

NOAA ship

Notes: Cont

inco NOA

Sect

One explanatimaintained foJuly 2016, hoprogram.346 Oavailability an

Another explarepresentativeexecuted 80 ddramatic, they120 days at se

San4.3Ban

Mission DescBanks NationThe two sanctdesigned to codevelopment same as that wreport describ

343 This calculaextraction, farmaverage of this following calcu344 $2,350,048 345 E-mail com346 “2017 Cruiscruise-schedule347 Ship Time R

Efficiency and

46 in 2015 doll).

labor adjustmen 2015 dollars.3

Exhibit B - 6 coer. Even after aean Starr for Ca

Ex

contract vessel

tract vessel cosrporating the a

AA ship cost bion 2.

ion for the lowor longevity, acwever, when sh

Ocean Services nd price is not a

anation for the e of normal opedays at sea. Althy are unlikely tea even aboard

nctuary Econks Nationa

cription: The Snal Marine Sanctuaries were unollect data to idof managemen

which informs Nbes societal ben

ation uses the emming, fishing, an

ECI was 121.8 ulation: $48,000contract cost + $

mmunication withse Schedule.” Cae.html. AccessedRequest for Sanc

d Effectiveness

lars.343 Again, a

ents to the esca344 This estimat

ompares the coaccounting for talCurCEAS 20

xhibit B - 6: Co

l

st based on actadditional laborased on 120 da

w cost of the Occcording to onehe completed aLLC did not reavailable.

large differencerations for thehough more reto change the cthe NOAA shi

system Asseal Marine Sa

Sanctuary Ecosctuaries was a pndergoing an addentify nearshont plans and regNational Marin

nefits. Activitie

mployment cost ind forestry occupfor 2014 and 12 x 124.2/121.8 =$60,030 of addith Michael Gallagalifornia Cooperd March 8, 2017ctuary Ecosystem

of Using Cont

although this ad

alated contract ted cost accoun

st of using the the additional l014 was much l

ost-Effectivene

tual contract cor costs describeays at sea using

cean Starr may e NOAA subjeca cruise supporespond to a req

ce in cost may be Reuben Laskecent cost data fonclusion. Theip with the low

essment Suranctuaries

system Assessmproject for the dministrative pore or offshore gulatory actionsne Sanctuary Ces conducted du

index (ECI) for tpations download4.2 for 2015. Ap

= $48,946 tional NOAA labgher, National Mrative Oceanic F.

m Assessment Su

tract Vessels

B-15

djustment is sm

cost results in ants for supplyin

Ocean Starr folabor required tlower than the

ess Comparison

ost for the Oceaed in the text. g the Reuben L

be that she is nct matter expertrting the Califoquest for an inte

be that the estimer. The vessel wfor the Reuben e cost of the Ocwest fiscal year

rveys (SEAS

ment Surveys (NOS Office of

process for expapressures, chars in conjunctio

Condition Repouring the SEAS

total compensatided from https://pplying these va

bor + $48,946 ofMarine Fisheries Fisheries Investig

urveys: GFNMS

mall, it results i

a total cost for ng all of the req

or CalCurCEAto make the coestimated cost

n for CalCurC

C

an Starr, escal

Lasker at the ma

nearing the endrt.345 The Oceanornia Cooperatierview, so info

mated fiscal yewas at the start Lasker might cean Starr for C2015 marginal

S): Greater

SEAS) for the f National Maransion to the nracterize sensit

on with this exports, a product fS project includ

ion for private in//www.bls.gov/ealues to the 2014

f additional contService. Februar

gations. Availabl

S and CBNMS v

in a consistent b

using the Oceaquirements disc

AS 2014 to the comparison equivt of using the R

EAS 2014

Cost ($)

ated to 2015 d

arginal cost est

d of her useful n Starr was stilive Oceanic Fisormation about

ear 2015 margiof her service show the diffeCalCurCEAS 2l cost.

Farallones

Greater Farallorine Sanctuarienorth. The SEAtive resources, pansion.347 Thisfor which the mded bird and m

ndustry workers eci/data.htm, Mar4 labor cost estim

tract labor. ary 9, 2017. le at: http://calc

v3. January 12, 2

basis for comp

an Starr of cussed above.

cost of using thvalent, the cost

Reuben Lasker.

2,459,3

7,131,1

ollars and

timated in

life and not bell in operation sheries Investigthe vessel’s fu

inal costs may nlife and only rence to be les2014 was less t

and Cordel

ones and Cordes conducted in

AS project was and support s type of data i

main body of thmarine mammal

in construction,rch 8, 2017. The

mate results in th

cofi.org/cruises/5

2015.

parison

he t of

353

120

eing as of gations uture

not be

s than

ll

ell 2016.

s the his l

e annual he

561-


B-16

observation, acoustic monitoring, habitat characterization, launch and recovery of CTDs, krill sampling during nighttime vertical migration of zooplankton, and corresponding sampling during daylight.

Mission Requirements: The SEAS project consisted of nine days at sea, departing from and returning to San Francisco, traveling into the northern expansion areas of the sanctuaries, distant from the nearest port. Requirements for the vessel used to support the mission were the following:348

Capable of operating for nine days at sea, remaining on station for day and night sampling. Accommodations and provisions for a NOAA scientific team of 10 people. Observation platform for bird and marine mammal observation. Hydrographic winch for CTD with secondary cable of 500 meters for net tows. Lab space including fume hood, refrigerator, and freezer. Stowage for equipment supplied by NOAA including: CTD, hoop net, tucker trawl net, and computer and

monitors (total 69 square feet and 1,600 pounds). Additional on-board equipment including: depth sounder and power and global positioning system (GPS)

connections for NOAA computers. Fuel for the voyage. Personnel to run the ship, navigate, and operate deck equipment.349

NOAA Ship Cost: The Greater Farallones and Cordell Banks sanctuaries share the use of the ONMS vessel, R/V Fulmar with the nearby Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. The Fulmar, however, typically is limited to about 40 miles offshore and cruises of 10 hours in length.350 She berths a maximum of six scientists overnight.351 Therefore, the Fulmar was not capable of supplying the requirements discussed above, especially given the need to investigate the distant northern expansion areas.352 To meet the mission requirements, the project was instead conducted during nine days at sea aboard the OMAO ship Bell M. Shimada.353 In 2015 dollars, at the marginal cost of $46,333 per day estimated in Section 2, the cost of using the Bell M. Shimada for nine days is $416,997.

Cost of Contract Vessel Substitute: Commercial contract vessels available nearby share similar endurance and/or berthing limitations similar to the Fulmar, such that multiple vessels or trips would be required to substitute for the Bell M. Shimada.354 More capable vessels are generally located a greater distance away. For example, the UNOLS fleet in California does not currently include a regional class vessel.355 The transit time involved in bringing in a more capable vessel would be significant, particularly compared to the relatively short nine-day project duration.

Given the limitations and/or distance away of other options, a NOAA subject matter expert suggested that a vessel operated by the nearby Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) might be an efficient substitute if the Bell M. Shimada were not available.356 MBARI is a private, non-profit research institution that operates several research

348 Ship Time Request for Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys: GFNMS and CBNMS v3. January 12, 2015. 349 Although not part of the SEAS project as conducted in 2016 and examined in this case study, piggyback research conducted on this mission can include: ocean acidification studies and exploration for deep sea corals and sponges using an autonomous underwater vehicle, remotely operated underwater vehicle, or camera sled. Both the NOAA ship and the contract vessel substitute can accommodate these types of vessels, although the cost of supplying this requirement is not included in the cost estimates here. 350 Personal communication with Jan Roletto, Research Coordinator at the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. January 10, 2017. 351 “MBNMS: R/V Fulmar Specifications.” NOAA Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Available at: http://montereybay.noaa.gov/marineops/about/fulmar/specifications.html. Accessed March 8, 2017. 352 Ship Time Request for Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys: GFNMS and CBNMS v3. January 12, 2015. 353 “Project: Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys (GFNMS and CBNMS).” NOAA Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Available at: http://www.omao.noaa.gov/find/projects/3499-sanctuary-ecosystem-assessment-surveys-gfnms-and-cbnms. Accessed March 8, 2017. 354 Ship Time Request for Sanctuary Ecosystem Assessment Surveys: GFNMS and CBNMS v3. January 12, 2015. 355 Sanctuary Advisory Council, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Letter supporting a new coastal research vessel for California. December 8, 2016. 356 Personal communication with Jan Roletto, Research Coordinator at the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. January 10, 2017.


B-17

vessels, including the 117-foot R/V Western Flyer. MBARI’s Director of Marine Operations confirmed that the requirements of the SEAS project as described above are within the Western Flyer’s capabilities.357

MBARI’s current rate for using the Western Flyer is $31,100 per day.358 Although the website lists this rate as corresponding to a 12-hour day, the same rate would apply for extended voyages like that for the SEAS project.359 The rate would also cover all of the other requirements described above (e.g., including provisioning for the NOAA science party aboard). Although MBARI is located close to Greater Farallones and Cordell Banks sanctuaries, one day of transit time would still be required at both ends of the project. One day in port would also be required at each end for mobilization and demobilization.360 Therefore, using the Western Flyer would require a total of 13 days (11 at sea and two in port). Using MBARI’s current rates, the total cost for 13 days of using the Western Flyer would be $404,300.361

Discussion: Exhibit B - 7 compares the cost of using the Western Flyer as a substitute for the Bell M. Shimada for the SEAS project. Even with the additional days required to complete the mission, the Western Flyer would be slightly less costly (3 percent) than the Bell M. Shimada.

Exhibit B - 7: Cost-Effectiveness Comparison for SEAS: Greater Farallones and Cordell Banks National Marine Sanctuaries 2016

Vessel Used Cost ($)

MBARI ship 404,300

NOAA ship 416,997

Notes: MBARI ship cost assumes 13 days to accomplish the mission at MBARI’s current rates for the Western

Flyer. NOAA ship cost assumes nine days at sea to accomplish the mission using the Bell M. Shimada at the

marginal cost estimated in Section 2.

Although the results for this case study show the MBARI ship to be slightly more cost-effective, it is important to note that MBARI is not a commercial provider and does not actively seek out research assignments for its vessels from other organizations. MBARI does collaborate with staff from NOAA’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, who sometimes conduct piggyback research on MBARI vessels. The Institute has conducted two dedicated cruises for NOAA in the last decade, but usually only considers such missions on case-by-case basis, such as when the capabilities provided by MBARI not available elsewhere in the NOAA or academic fleet. Scheduling an MBARI ship would also require substantial lead time: approximately a year to guarantee availability for longer missions.362

In addition, budgetary constraints limit individual sanctuaries’ options with regard to the use of contract vessels. When a sanctuary program receives ship time on the NOAA fleet, such as on the Bell M. Shimada for the SEAS project, that

357 E-mail communication with Michael Kelly, Director of Marine Operations, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. March 6, 2017. 358 “MBARI: Rates for Vessels, Vehicles, MARS, Labor, Test Tank.” Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. Available at: http://www.mbari.org/at-sea/mars-ship-rates/. Accessed March 2, 2017. 359 Personal communication with Michael Kelly, Director of Marine Operations, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. March 2, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 360 E-mail communication with Michael Kelly, Director of Marine Operations, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. March 6, 2017. 361 Note that this total is based on current rates, while the NOAA ship costs are in fiscal year 2015 dollars. It might be tempting to use the PPI for the water transportation industry, used elsewhere in this analysis, to de-escalate the MBARI costs to 2015 dollars for more accurate comparison. That PPI has actually decreased in in the last 12 months, however, whereas MBARI’s rates have recently increased slightly, according to the MBARI’s Director of Marine Operations. Therefore, applying this index would not be accurate for MBARI. Since MBARI is not a commercial organization, an appropriate industry-specific price index is not available. Applying a more general index of prices (e.g., the Consumer Price Index) to de-escalate the costs to 2015 dollars would result in a small decrease in the estimated cost for the MBARI ship, but would not change the conclusions about cost-effectiveness substantially. 362 Personal communication with Michael Kelly, Director of Marine Operations, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. March 2, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes.

allocation is pthe sanctuary

Pac4.4

Mission Desceffort with gocommunity.36

Office for Coand delivers aTrends Repor

The NCRMP specific vessequantitative cbelow, howevareas.

The example Program (whiProgram (RAthe Pacific Rebreathing apprecovery and samples, and supported NOecosystems.36

Mission RequOahu, Hawaiiwith an intermthe following

Glob Acco Stow

smalinclu

Acceseve

Multshall

Acce

363 Personal com10, 2017. 364 “NOAA's Nhttps://www.co365 Personal com366 “About: Hi’operations/ship367 “Multi-agenPacific Remotehttps://www.pi368 Ship Time RFebruary 13, 20

paid out of the ldoes not receiv

cific Reef As

cription: The Noals that include64 The NCRMPastal Managem

a variety of prort Cards, a prod

relies on vesseels that NCRMPost-effectivene

ver, also provid

mission considich is NCRMP

AMP) was to coemote Islands Mparatus (SCUBAreplacement ofcoral reef mapp

OAA’s ocean ac66,367

uirements: Thi, including a tomediate port be:368

bal class enduraommodations a

wage for equipmll boats and spauding spare comess to, and supp

en passengers wti-beam sonar flow waters. ess to on-board

mmunication wi

National Coral Reoris.noaa.gov/mommunication wi’ialaki.” NOAA ps/hiialakai/abouncy Team of Sciee Islands Marineifsc.noaa.gov/cruRequest for Ame014.

larger NOS buve additional b

ssessment an

National Coral e delivering hig

P is part of the Cment. The NCRoducts to suppoduct for which t

els to collect beP uses, howeveess comparisondes a qualitative

dered here was in the Pacific)

onduct ecosysteMarine NationaA) dives from sf biological andping using mulcidification pro

he 2015 Americotal of nine dayetween legs in A

ance, capable oand provisions ment supplied bare outboard (9mpressor (1,40port in launchin

with SCUBA anfor reef mappin

d hyperbaric de

ith Jan Roletto, R

eef Monitoring Ponitoring/. Accesith Justine KimbOffice of Marin

ut. Accessed Marentists Conducti

e National Monuuise/ha1501.phperican Samoa an

App

udget, not out obudget to replac

nd Monitor

Reef Monitorigh‐quality dataCoral Reef Con

RMP provides srt resource manthe main body

enthic and otheer, vary depend

n specifically foe discussion of

conducted in 2. The objective

em monitoring al Monument. Asmall boats, towd oceanographilti-beam sonar.ogram to monit

can Samoa RAys of transit to American Sam

of operating forfor a NOAA scby NOAA inclu

9,500 pounds to0 pounds), andng and recovernd survey gear.ng and access t

ecompression c

Research Coordi

Program.” NOAssed March 9, 20

ball and Susie Hone and Aviation Orch 9, 2017. ing Interdisciplinument.” NOAA P. Accessed Apri

nd Pacific Remot

pendix B: Effic

B-18

f the sanctuaryce that time usi

ing Program

ng Program (Na, data productsnservation Progscientific informnagers and decof this report d

er habitat mappding on the regor an example mf the NCRMP’s

2015 under the e of the Americand research inActivities condwed-diver survic sea-floor ins. In addition to tor and underst

AMP consisted oand from the stoa. Requireme

r 34 or more dacientific team ouding: a lab vaotal), SCUBA ad additional elering, three addi. o a mapping la

chamber for em

inator at the Gul

AA Coral Reef In017. olst, National CoOperations. Ava

nary Monitoring Pacific Islands Fl 13, 2017. te Island Areas -

ciency and Effe

y’s budget. If thing a contract v

m: America

NCRMP) is an is, and tools to tgram, which ismation requiredcision-makers, describes socie

ping data over agion of the worlmission in the Ps use of contrac

e Pacific Reef Acan Samoa Reen the coral reefducted includedveys of coral restruments, colle supporting thetand the effects

of 103 days at tudy area. The

ents for the vess

ays at sea. of 24 people. an (80 square feand survey geactronics. itional small wo

aunch capable o

mergency use.

lf of the Farallon

nformation Syste

oral Reef Monitoailable at: http://w

g of Coral Reef EFisheries Science

- Reef Assessme

ectiveness of U

he NOAA ship vessel or vessel

an Samoa

integrated and the coral reef cs headquarteredd to track the hincluding cora

etal benefits.

a wide geograpld.365 This casePacific. The dict vessels for A

Assessment andef Assessment f habitats of Amd: self-containeeef ecosystems ection and anale NCRMP, the s of ocean acidi

sea departing fvoyage was co

sel used to sup

feet and 8,000 par for the NOA

ork boats capab

of deploying m

nes National Mar

em. Available at

oring Program. Dwww.omao.noaa

Ecosystems in Ae Center. Availab

ent and Monitori

Using Contract V

time is not avals.363

focused monitonservation

d from the NOShealth of coral ral reef Status an

phic region. The study provideiscussion sectioAtlantic coral re

d Monitoring and Monitoring

merican Samoaed underwater and marine lif

lysis of water data collected ification on cor

from and returnonducted in thrport the missio

pounds), two 19A science team

ble of carrying

multi-beam sona

rine Sanctuary. J

:

December 21, 20a.gov/learn/mari

American Samoa ble at:

ing Program (RA

Vessels

ailable,

toring

S reefs nd

e es a on eef

g a and

fe,

also ral reef

ning to ree legs on were

9-foot m

g two to

ar in

January

016. ine-

and the

AMP).


B-19

Certified operator for hyperbaric decompression chamber. Wet and dry lab space. Personnel support for operation of multi-beam sonar and electronics interface. Fuel for the voyage. Personnel to run the ship, navigate, and operate deck equipment.

NOAA Ship Cost: The 2015 American Samoa RAMP project was conducted using the NOAA ship Hi'ialakai in conjunction with the RAMP program’s 25-foot mapping launch R/V AHI (Acoustic Habitat Investigator). With the exception of the mapping launch, the Hi'ialakai supplied all of the other requirements described above, including access to her three work boats and permanent hyperbaric chamber with dedicated operator.369 In 2015 dollars, at the marginal cost of $31,350 per day estimated in Section 2, the cost of using the Hi'ialakai for 103 days is $3,229,050.

Cost of Contract Vessel Substitute: In the Pacific, the NCRMP does not use contract vessels and relies solely on the Hi'ialakai to conduct its mission. The NCRMP subject matter expert was unable to identify a commercial alternative to using the Hi‘ialakai, given the remote locations and length of typical cruises.370 Outside of the commercial sector, however, an alternative might be the R/V Tangaroa, operated by the New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA). The 230-foot Tangaroa has multibeam sonar and dive support capabilities and operates throughout the Pacific.371,372 Its listed endurance of 60 days is actually greater than the Hi‘ialakai’s (35 days).373,374 Personnel with NIWA confirmed that the Tangaroa could supply the requirements described above.375

NIWA provided a detailed cost estimate for using the Tangaroa to conduct the mission and supply all of the above requirements. For example, NIWA’s estimate includes the use of NIWA’s 22-foot survey boat Rukuwai to conduct mapping in shallow waters. It also includes supplying an approved hyperbaric decompression chamber housed in a 20-foot container with a certified chamber operator. In addition to the 103 mission days, using the Tangaroa would require an additional 34 days, including mobilization and demobilization, in transit between Wellington, New Zealand and Hawaii. NIWA’s estimate includes this additional transit, but it also includes a 20 percent discount, which NIWA would provide in the interest of continuing and strengthening its working relationship with NOAA. NIWA’s estimate to supply all of the requirements above using the Tangaroa, including the additional transit and incorporating the discount, is 7,399,840 New Zealand dollars.376

At the current exchange rate of 0.6834 U.S. dollars to New Zealand dollars,377 NIWA’s estimate coverts to $5,131,049 (U.S.). To convert this current cost to 2015 dollars, we applied the annual average values for 2016 and 2015 for the PPI for the water transportation industry.378 The resulting cost in 2015 dollars is $5,404,185.379

369 Ibid. 370 E-mail communication with Justine Kimball, National Coral Reef Monitoring Program. February 13, 2017. 371 Personal communication with Rob Christie, Manager – Marine Resources, NIWA. February 24, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 372 “Specifications and principal features.” NIWA. Available at: https://www.niwa.co.nz/vessels/rv-tangaroa/specifications-and-principal-features. Accessed March 9, 2017. 373 Ibid. 374 “Specifications.” NOAA Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Available at: http://www.omao.noaa.gov/learn/marine-operations/ships/hiialakai/about/specifications. Accessed March 9, 2017. 375 E-mail communication with Greg Foothead, General Manager – Vessel Operations, NIWA. April 19, 2017. 376 “Preliminary Proposal for Marine Survey in American Samoa and the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument.” April 25, 2017. 377 “NZD to USD Exchange Rate – Bloomberg Markets.” Bloomberg. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/NZDUSD:CUR. Accessed May 2, 2017. 378 Although NIWA is a governmental organization, it operates like a business and tries to maintain its rates in line with the rest of the industry, according to NIWA’s Manager of Marine Resources. Therefore, assuming that this industry-specific PPI could be applicable to NIWA’s prices is reasonable. The analysis applies the annual average index value for 2016 to the current total because 2016 is the most recent full year for which data are available. 379 The annual average PPI for NAICS category 483 was 131.5 for 2016 and 138.9 for 2015. Applying these values to the total cost results in the following calculation: $5,131,049 x 138.9/131.5 = $5,404,185. Note that prices in this sector actually decreased between 2015 and 2016, resulting in a higher cost in 2015 dollars.


B-20

Discussion: Exhibit B - 8 compares the cost of using the Tangaroa as a substitute for the Hi‘ialakai for the 2015 American Samoa RAMP. The cost of using the Tangaroa would be substantially higher than using the Hi‘ialakai. Another factor to consider, if the Tangaroa were to be used, is scheduling. According to NIWA’s Manager of Marine Resource, NIWA’s vessels are committed to certain fisheries projects that have inflexible schedules.380 Any use of the Tangaroa might have to be scheduled around these projects. NIWA’s cost estimate further emphasizes that the Tangaroa has “a busy yet fluid schedule,” so that scheduling her would require advance planning.381 Thus, scheduling the Tangaroa could require substantial lead time for a mission of this length: possibly a year or more.382

Exhibit B - 8: Cost-Effectiveness Comparison for RAMP: American Samoa

Vessel Used Cost ($)

NOAA ship 3,229,050

NIWA ship 5,404,185

Notes: NOAA ship cost based on 103 days at sea using the Hi‘ialakai at the marginal cost estimated in Section 2. NIWA ship cost based on NIWA’s cost estimate to supply the mission requirements, including 34

additional days of transit time, converted to U.S. dollars and de-escalated as described in the text.

The quantitative analysis presented here is specifically for an example coral reef mission in the Pacific, where the NCRMP has historically relied on NOAA ships, not contract vessels. In comparison, for Atlantic coral reef areas, the NCRMP has primarily used small contract vessels to collect data. The NOAA ship Nancy Foster, however, could also be an option for this region if it were available. In fact, at the time of this study, the NCRMP was considering making a ship time request for the Nancy Foster to collect coral reef data near Puerto Rico. If the Nancy Foster were available, one to two weeks of ship time might replace three to four months of sporadic sampling using small contract boats, entailing multiple transits and multiple contracts.383 The NCRMP has not proceeded with the request for the Nancy Foster, however, because the program is allocated a limited budget for days at sea aboard NOAA ships. Using the Nancy Foster would take up part of that allocation and subtract from the days at sea available for the NCRMP’s other missions (e.g., using the Hi‘ialakai where options are scarce). The NCRMP subject matter expert has not yet identified the specific contract vessels that will be used as an alternative to the Nancy Foster in Puerto Rico or developed a cost estimate for them.384 Therefore, a quantitative comparison of the two alternatives is not possible at this time.

380 Personal communication with Rob Christie, Manager – Marine Resources, NIWA. February 24, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 381 “Preliminary Proposal for Marine Survey in American Samoa and the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument.” April 25, 2017. 382 Personal communication with Rob Christie, Manager – Marine Resources, NIWA. February 24, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 383 Personal communication with Justine Kimball and Susie Holst, National Coral Reef Monitoring Program. December 21, 2016. 384 E-mail communication with Justine Kimball, National Coral Reef Monitoring Program. February 13, 2017.


B-21

5. Capacity, Availability, and Other Factors Affecting the Use of Contract Vessels

This section discusses the capacity of contract vessels to support NOAA, including the factors affecting the availability of individual vessels. It also presents available information on future prices for contract vessel services. It concludes by touching on other factors that could affect NOAA’s use of contract vessels.

A primary source for this section is a set of informal, voluntary interviews with contract vessel providers conducted specifically for this study. Exhibit B - 9 identifies the providers interviewed, along with some summary information on the services they provide. Appendix C lists the questions that guided the interviews, along with detailed notes from each interview.

All of the providers interviewed have performed services for NOAA in the past. The interviewees are evenly split between commercial providers and research institutions. They represent a range of vessel capabilities, from small coastal vessels to large research ships with global range and multi-mission capabilities. A limitation is that the interviews only encompassed providers serving the U.S. west coast and Pacific Ocean. Providers serving the east coast, Gulf of Mexico, or Atlantic did not respond to requests for interviews. Note, however, that given the voluntary nature of the interviews and the small sample size, the interview process was not designed to be a statistical survey, only to collect qualitative information.

Exhibit B - 9: List of Contract Vessel Providers Interviewed

Organization Vessels Geographic Region Commercial Providers

Alaska Charter Boats Broker for fleet of research vessels Southeast Alaska

Auklet Charter Services R/V Auklet Southeast Alaska

Homer Ocean Charters Broker for fleet of research vessels Southeast Alaska

Miss Linda Charters R/V Miss Linda Oregon, Washington, and California

Research Institutions

MBARI R/V Western Flyer, R/V Rachel Carson, and R/V Paragon

Canada to Mexico and Hawaii (Western Flyer, Rachel Carson), Monterey Bay (Paragon)

NIWA R/V Tangaroa, R/V Kaharoa, and R/V Ikatere

Pacific and Indian Ocean (Tangaroa, Kaharoa), New Zealand coast (Ikatere)

Oregon State University R/V Elakha, R/V Pacific Storm, and UNOLS R/V Oceanus

Oregon coast (Elakha), Alaska to Mexico (Pacific Storm), Pacific Ocean (Oceanus)

University of Washington UNOLS R/V Thomas G. Thompson and R/V Clifford A. Barnes

Pacific Ocean

Acronyms and Abbreviations: MBARI = Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute; NIWA = New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research; UNOLS = University National Oceanographic Laboratory System

Another source used in this section is data from USAspending.gov, a publicly accessible U.S. government website that provides searchable, transaction-level information on federal contracts and grants.385 Specifically, this study uses data downloaded from USAspending for NOAA contracts for fiscal year 2015.386 To identify contracts specifically for vessels, the analysis examined contract descriptions in conjunction with the vendor’s NAICS code and the product or

385 “About: USAspending.gov.” Available at: https://www.usaspending.gov/about/usaspending/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed March 10, 2017. 386 Data downloaded for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for fiscal year 2015 from https://www.usaspending.gov/DownloadCenter/Pages/DataDownload.aspx. Accessed November 18, 2016.

service code iand was not athe USAspend

E

Program

NMFS

NOS Hydro

Other NOS P

NWS

OAR

NESDIS

TOTAL

Total exclud

Notes: Act NO

abo Spe

desAcronyms andMarine FisherAtmospheric

For NMFS anthan 90 perceapproach usednot unexpectemisses most cData, and Infopercent of NOTherefore, daNOAA’s vessdata allow exavendors used,

Cap5.1

Collection of available undtypes of fishinof internationhas a database

387 “Research Vhttp://www.res

identified in theable to identify ding data with

Exhibit B - 10:

graphic Servic

Programs

ding Hydrograp

tual spending is OS Hydrographic ove and beyond vending identifiedcribed in the textd Abbreviations:ries Service; NOResearch

nd NWS, the vant of the actuald to identify veed, given that thcontract vessel formation ServiOAA’s total speta derived fromsel contracts, esamining details, number of off

pacity and A

comprehensiveer contract wasng vessels. For

nal research shipe of vessels, by

Vessel Specificatsearchvessels.org

e system. Becaall of NOAA’sNOAA’s actua

Completeness

ces

phic Services

as presented in SServices contrac

vessel use. d in USAspendint from all NOAA: NESDIS = Nat

OS = National Oc

alue of contractl spending on cessel contracts ahese contracts spending by Oice. Even with ending on cont

m examining thspecially for Ns about NOAAferors).

Availability

e information os beyond the scexample, the O

p specificationy country of ori

tions Search.” Og/qryshipinfo.asp

App

ause USAspends vessel contracal spending on

s of Vessel Con

A

Section 3. cts are structured

g is the total basA contracts for fitional Environmecean Service; NW

ts identified in contract vesselsappears to missare structured a

Oceanic and Atmthese limitatio

tract vessels, anhe selected contNMFS and NOSA’s vessel contr

on the total numcope of this anaOcean Informas and scheduleigin, authorized

Ocean Informatiop.

pendix B: Effic

B-22

ding’s contract cts. Exhibit B -contract vessel

ntract Data from

Actual ($)

13,231,360

19,804,427

278,000

6,854,000

3,841,852

257,300

44,266,939

24,462,512

d as data buys in

e and all exercisiscal year 2015. ental Satellite, DWS = National W

the USAspends by each of thes most of the spas data buys inmospheric Reseons, however, tnd 80 percent otracts may be rS. This represenracting that are

mber of vesselsalysis. Databasation Center at tes.387 Similarly,d by their gove

on Center, Unive

ciency and Effe

descriptions ar- 10 compares tls presented in

m USAspendin

IdentifiUSAspend

0 12

7

0

0 6

2

0

9 19

2 19

nstead of tradition

sed options value

Data, and InformWeather Service

ding data for fisese programs. Fpending on hyd

nstead of traditiearch and the Nthe data extractof the total if hyreasonably reprntativeness is imnot readily ava

s with capabilites do exist thatthe University , the Inter-Ameernment to fish

ersity of Delawa

ectiveness of U

re brief, this apthe value of co

n Section 3.

ng for Fiscal Ye

ied in ding ($)

Pe

2,024,810

381,284

6,823,830

418,225

0

9,648,149

9,648,149

nal charters, cov

e of transactions

mation Service; Ne; OAR = Ocean

scal year 2015 For NOS, on thdrographic servional charters. TNational Envirted from USAsydrographic serresentative of thmportant becauailable elsewhe

ties useful to Nt identify reseaof Delaware m

erican Tropicalfor species und

are. Available at:

Using Contract V

pproach is impeontracts identifi

ear 2015

ercent Identifi

9

>9

1

4

8

vering services

filtered as

NMFS = Nationanic and

accounts for mhe other hand, tvices. This resuThe approach aronmental Satespending capturrvices are excluhe majority of use the USAspere (i.e., numbe

NOAA that migarch ships or cemaintains a datal Tuna Commisder the purview

:

Vessels

erfect ied in

ied

1%

2%

9%

1%

0%

4%

0%

al

more the ult is also llite, re 44 uded.

pending er of

ght be ertain abase ssion w of


B-23

the Commission.388 These databases, however, do not provide information regarding whether the vessels are available for use under contract or have capabilities suitable for NOAA’s purposes.

In addition to being suitable for the mission and available for hire, vessels used by NOAA under contract must meet certain minimum safety standards and regulatory requirements, particularly if NOAA staff are to be aboard as passengers. The process of determining the specific requirements applicable to a given contract vessel can be complex.389 Requirements can include that the vessel has a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Letter of Designation as an oceanographic research vessel, a USCG Certificate of Inspection, or a USCG Certificate of Documentation as a fishing vessel and Commercial Fishing Vessel Decal.390 These requirements may limit the pool of available contract vessels.

The data on charter contracts filtered from USAspending show that NOAA had transactions with more than 130 individual vendors under approximately 200 unique contracts in fiscal year 2015. Exhibit B - 11 shows data on the number of bids received for each of these contracts. Although a few contracts had a large number of bidders, just over half received only one offer and almost 70 percent had two or fewer offers.391 Therefore, while the overall size of the charter industry may be large, these data suggest that the number of vendors with the capability to support the specific requirements of a given project can be small (i.e., one or two).

Exhibit B - 11: Number of Offers Received for NOAA Charter Vessel Contracts Active in Fiscal Year 2015

Program Number of Contracts

Offers Received per Contract Percent of Contracts Average Range Only one offer One or two offers

NMFS 151 2.1 1 to 9 51% 70%

NOS 20 2.2 1 to 8 55% 70%

NWS 17 4 1 to 18 41% 53%

OAR 4 1.25 1 to 2 75% 100%

TOTAL 192 2.3 1 to 18 51% 69%

Acronyms and Abbreviations: NESDIS = National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service; NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service; NOS = National Ocean Service; NWS = National Weather Service; OAR = Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

The interviews with charter providers also addressed several topics related to capacity and availability. All of the vendors interviewed expressed interest in NOAA work and a willingness to continue supporting it. Nearly all of them predicted they would have very good availability to do so, both in the immediate future and in coming years.

A key exception to the generally high availability is among the larger ships of UNOLS fleet, where there are competing demands for limited ship time. In particular, the R/V Thomas G. Thompson just completed a mid-life maintenance overhaul that reduced her availability during the past year. The R/V Roger Revelle is scheduled for mid-life maintenance during 2018, which will likewise limit availability.392 A commercial vessel broker also indicated that, while overall availability is good, it is dependent on vessel capability, specifically size. Smaller vessels are always more available.393

Most of the vendors (six of the nine) reported that their availability is greater with more advance planning. The lead time required to access charter services varies depending on the length of the project and on the size of the vessel. Operators of

388 “IATTC Vessel Database.” Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. Available at: https://www.iattc.org/VesselRegister/VesselList.aspx?List=RegVessels&Lang=ENG#United_States. 389 For example, see the Minimum Requirements Flowchart available at: https://www.omao.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Visio-Vessel%20Chartering%20Requirements%20Flowchart%20V4.pdf. 390 “Vessel Chartering Info.” Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Available at: http://www.omao.noaa.gov/learn/headquarters/safety-environmental-compliance/vessel-chartering-info. Accessed January 12, 2017. 391 Data are not available on the number of solicitations that received no bids. 392 Personal communication with Doug Russell, University of Washington and UNOLS Vessel R/V Thomas G. Thompson. February 23, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 393 Personal communication with Linda Kadrlick, Alaska Charter Boats. March 2, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes.

smaller vesselreport being avessels, more conducted by distribution o

The majority one of the intecompeting obfishing vesselsummer. EvenExhibit B - 13NOAA ships June). The NO

394 Based on datrials, and trans395 Personal com396 E-mail com

ls report that plable to respond

planning is reqNOAA’s fleetf these mission

of the providererviewees spec

bligation as partls.396 Based on n during summ3 shows the totaexecute missio

OAA fleet, how

ata provided by Osit not assigned tmmunication wi

mmunication with

lanning early ind very quickly wquired, howevet in fiscal yearsns by length.

Exhibit B - 12

rs (five of the ncifically mentioticularly importhe interviews,

mer, however, thal days at sea e

ons year-round,wever, also exe

OMAO. Excludeto a specific lineith Roark Brownh Michael Gallag

App

n the year for owhen needed, wer: often a years 2015 and 201

2. Length of M

nine) reported toned fishing seartant in the sche, research vessehe intervieweesexecuted by the, but, like chartecutes a signific

es fleet services e office) and schen, Homer Ocean gher, National M

pendix B: Effic

B-24

operations in thwithin a week or or more in adv6 was approxim

Missions Condu

that their vesseason.395 A NOAeduling of NMels, like fishings reported goode NOAA fleet iter vessels, theycant number of

and program supeduled missions Charters. Febru

Marine Fisheries

ciency and Effe

he summer is idor even a day. Fvance. For conmately 25 days

ucted by NOA

els are busiest dAA subject ma

MFS charters, mg vessels, also hd availability, pin each month y are busiest duf days at sea ou

upport activities ( where actual da

uary 15, 2017. SeService. Februar

ectiveness of U

deal. Some of tFor longer proj

ntext, the averags at sea.394 Exh

AA Fleet

during the summatter expert, how

most of which arhave greater avparticularly witof fiscal years uring the summutside of summ

(e.g., inspectionays at sea were ree Appendix C f

ary 9, 2017.

Using Contract V

these operatorsjects aboard large length of mi

hibit B - 12 sho

mer months. Owever, identifire commercial vailability outsith advance plan2015 and 2016

mer (particularlmer (particularly

s, shakedowns, sreported as zero. for interview not

Vessels

s also rger issions

ows the

Only ed this

ide of nning. 6. ly y

sea

tes.

Appendix B:

March througthose vessels

Most of the prproject requirevolved into irecommendatwilling to makengaging the

Examining thconclusions asuccessfully cprovide supporequirements of vessels. Th

397 Based on datrials, and trans398 Personal com399 Personal com

Efficiency and

gh April and Ochave greater av

roviders, particrements, more sits current reseations.398 One reke changes, thiservices of a m

he information fabout capacity acontracts with aort, even to the(e.g., vessel ca

he number of su

ata provided by Osit not assigned tmmunication wimmunication wi

d Effectiveness

ctober).397 Thesvailability.

Exhibit B - 13

cularly the comso for longer-tearch configuratesearch institutiis institution co

marine architect

from interviewand availabilitya variety of diffextent of mod

apabilities, projuch projects ma

OMAO. Excludeto a specific lineith Bob Pedro, Mith Monita Chee

of Using Cont

se schedule dat

3. Days at Sea E

mmercial vendoerm projects antion precisely bion, on the otheonsiders safety t when needed.

wees in conjuncy. The overall sfferent providerdifying their vesject schedulingay be large, bas

es fleet services e office) and scheMiss Linda Chartver, Oregon Stat

tract Vessels

B-25

ta suggest there

Executed by N

ors, also reportend contracts. Onbecause of moder hand, reportecarefully befor399

tion with the dsize of the charrs. Individual vssels to suit pro

g, or location) thsed on the avai

and program supeduled missions ters. March 6, 20te University. Fe

e may be oppor

NOAA Fleet by

ed a willingnesne commercialdifications baseed a more consre making majo

data from USAsrter vessel induvendors are genoject needs. Sphat are not a goilable data abou

upport activities ( where actual da017. See Appendebruary 28, 2017

rtunities to util

Month

ss to modify thel vendor even ned on customerservative approor modification

spending suggeustry is large annerally willing pecific projects,ood match for aut the number o

(e.g., inspectionays at sea were rdix C for intervi7. See Appendix

lize charters wh

eir vessels to sunoted that his vr oach. Althoughns, including

ests the followind NOAA and available t, however, maya very large nuof bids receive

s, shakedowns, sreported as zero. iew notes. x C for interview

hen

upport vessel

h

ing

to y have umber ed.

sea

w notes.

Fut5.2

All of the chaservices. Chanof such chang

Outside of maonly small incpercent annuachanged substtransportationreceived by Uindustries andcategory 483,changes with specifically mcurrent value PPI for 2016 w

Exhibit B - 14With the exce

Oth5.3

Three of the cThese factors it to access comeet the missthem.402 Othean individual budget, not ouadditional budprocess may c

400 “Producer PAccessed May 401 Time series March 7, 2017402 E-mail and 12, 2017. 403 Personal com10, 2017.

ture Prices

arter providers inges in fuel pri

ges on relative c

ajor changes increases in the pal increase. As tantially recent

n industry, usedU.S. producers od groups of pro, which is the crespect to a ba

measures price cof the index anwas 131.5, it m

4 shows annualeption of a mod

Exhibit B

Year

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

her Barriers

case studies prediffer across N

ommercial vesssion requiremener programs, homarine sanctuaut of the sanctudget to replace create an incen

Price Index Frequ

24, 2017. data downloade

. personal commu

mmunication wi

interviewed ideices would, of cost effectiven

n fuel prices, mprices for their a point of refertly. These stated elsewhere in tof goods and seducts. In this category to whi

ase period, for wchanges in reland 100 reflects means that price

l average valuederate decrease

B - 14: Produce

s and Incent

esented in SectiNOAA programsels to perform nts (e.g., ancill

owever, do not ary receives shuary’s budget. Ithat time using

ntive to use char

uently Asked Qu

ed for producer p

unication with K

ith Jan Roletto, R

App

entified fuel prcourse, affect bess would be li

ost intervieweeservices. The mrence for their pements are genethis analysis. Pervices. The U

case, we examinch many of NOwhich the indexation to a base p

the percent ches in 2016 were

es for the PPI foe in 2016, price

er Price Index

Annual Av

tives

ion 4 identifiedms. For exampl

mooring mainary science is nhave the mech

hip time on the NIf the NOAA shg a charter vessrters. Specifica

uestions.” U.S. B

price index for N

Kathleen O’Neil,

Research Coordi

pendix B: Effic

B-26

rices as the majboth charter veimited to some

es, including almost common ppredictions, twerally consisten

PPIs measure th.S. Bureau of Lned the PPI forOAA’s contractx is set to 100. period of Decemange in prices e, on average, 3

or the water traes in this indust

(PPI) for the W

erage Index V

136.4

135.1

138.5

138.9

131.5

d institutional fle, the NDBC hntenance. Becaunot required), Nanisms or budgNOAA fleet, thhip time is not sel or vessels.40

ally, the NCRM

Bureau of Labor

NAICS category

National Weath

inator at the Gul

ciency and Effe

jor factor that wessels and the Ne extent.

ll of those williprediction was

wo of the intervnt with the trenhe average chanLabor Statisticsr the water trant vessel providThe PPI for thmber 2003. Thsince Decembe31.5 percent hi

ansportation indtry have remain

Water Transpo

Value

factors that affehas a marine seuse of this mecNDBC finds it get to readily ahat allocation iavailable, the

03 For still otheMP did not proc

r Statistics. https

483 from https:/

her Service, Nati

lf of the Farallon

ectiveness of U

would affect fuNOAA fleet. Th

ing to make a p in the range of

viewees noted thnds observed innge over time is publishes PPInsportation induders belong). PPhe water transpohus, the differener 2003.400 So, igher than in D

dustry for the lned fairly stabl

ortation Indust

Change from

2

-1

2

0

-5

ect NOAA’s uservices contractchanism, when easy to access

access charters.is paid out of thsanctuary does

er programs, thceed with a ship

://www.bls.gov/

//www.bls.gov/p

ional Data Buoy

nes National Mar

Using Contract V

uture prices for herefore, the im

prediction, predf a two to threehat prices have

n the PPI for thein the selling pIs for various ustry (NAICS PIs measure prortation industrnce between thif the annual a

December 2003

last five years.4

e.

try

m Previous Yea

.2%

1.0%

.5%

.3%

5.3%

se of charter vet vehicle that alcontract vesseand schedule For example, he larger NOS s not receive

he fleet allocatiop time request

/ppi/ppifaq.htm.

ppi/data.htm. Ac

Center. January

rine Sanctuary. J

Vessels

their mpact

dicted e e not e water rices

ice ry

he average .

401

ar

essels. llows ls can

when

on for the

ccessed

y 10 and

January


B-27

Nancy Foster, because using the Foster would take up part of the program’s ship time allocation and subtract from the days at sea available for the NCRMP’s other missions.404

From the vendor perspective, the charter providers interviewed did not identify major barriers to working for NOAA. A few interviewees identified paperwork requirements as a minor issue that they have learned to handle. They specifically mentioned difficulties with invoicing procedures that can require additional effort and result in delays in payment of up to several months.405,406 One vendor noted that they account for this effort and the potential delays in their pricing.407

Several interviewees identified incentives to working for NOAA. Most frequently identified was the detailed planning that NOAA does in advance of its projects. Two of the interviewees specifically noted that this planning is better than that of other science parties or organizations, making it easier to work with NOAA.408,409

404 E-mail communication with Justine Kimball, National Coral Reef Monitoring Program. February 13, 2017. 405 Personal communication with Monita Cheever, Oregon State University. February 15, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 406 Personal communication with Roark Brown, Homer Ocean Charters. February 28, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 407 Ibid. 408 Personal communication with Doug Russell, University of Washington and UNOLS Vessel R/V Thomas G. Thompson. February 23, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes. 409 Personal communication with Bob Pedro, Miss Linda Charters. March 6, 2017. See Appendix C for interview notes.

Appendix C: Interviews with Charter Providers

C-1

6. Appendix C: Interviews with Charter Providers As discussed in Appendix B, this project included informal interviews with charter providers in order to gather information capacity within the contract vessel industry to support NOAA and the cost of that support. The following substantive questions guided each of these interviews:

1. Can you provide a brief description of the services that you have provided for NOAA in the past? 2. Do you have additional current or planned capabilities (e.g., additional vessels, other services that that NOAA

might not have used in the past) that you’d be interested in making NOAA aware of? 3. How willing would you be to modify your vessel (e.g., adding hull mounted transducers, adding oceanographic

winches, etc.) to make it more suitable for NOAA charter work? Would the possibility of long term contracts (multi-year) make you more amenable to modifying the vessel?

4. Given competing requirements or requests for your services, what do you predict your availability and capacity to support NOAA might be in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)?

5. What is the lead time required for NOAA to access your services (i.e., from initial scheduling through issuance of a contract to actually going to sea)?

6. Are there limitations on the geographic region in which you can provide support? 7. Are there specific periods of the year when you can or cannot provide support (e.g., seasons where you have

other priorities)? 8. Are there other barriers to or incentives for working with NOAA? 9. What are typical prices of the services you’ve provided NOAA in the past? 10. How do you expect these prices to change in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)? 11. What factors drive these prices? This appendix provides the detailed notes from each of the interviews.


C-2

Interview with Roark Brown, Homer Ocean Charters, Homer, Alaska

(907) 399-1269, [email protected], 2/15/2017

1. Can you provide a brief description of the services that you have provided for NOAA in the past?

Homer Ocean Charters owns/operates a fleet of vessels up to 60 feet and contracts out for additional vessels, including larger ships. Some example projects for NOAA have included deployment of tidal current meters and deployment of a weather buoy. The weather buoy project used a 100 foot vessel when NOAA had difficult scheduling time using a USCG vessel. Projects usually involve at least one NOAA person aboard.

2. Do you have additional current or planned capabilities (e.g., additional vessels, other services that that NOAA might not have used in the past) that you’d be interested in making NOAA aware of?

Willing to do just about any type of mission.

3. How willing would you be to modify your vessel (e.g., adding hull mounted transducers, adding oceanographic winches, etc.) to make it more suitable for NOAA charter work? Would the possibility of long term contracts (multi-year) make you more amenable to modifying the vessel?

They often make modifications. For example, they installed a hull-mounted acoustic Doppler current profilers. This definitely depends on the duration of the contract. For a one-day project, they are not likely to make extensive modifications, but they are willing to “saw the boat in half” if the contract is long enough.


Good, they are almost always able to find an appropriate vessel.


[This question was not answered]

6. Are there limitations on the geographic region in which you can provide support?

Their vessels operate in Cook Inlet and throughout the Gulf of Alaska.

7. Are there specific periods of the year when you can or cannot provide support (e.g., seasons where you have other priorities)?

June to August is always busy in the region because of salmon season. There are also Navy exercises that have engaged a large number of private vessels during late June for the last few years.

8. Are there other barriers to or incentives for working with NOAA?

Not really, although Federal government contracts are always a paper shuffle, although state contracts are sometimes worse. Changing invoicing procedures can result in months of delays in getting paid. They often anticipate this and build a premium into their pricing because of it.

9. What are typical prices of the services you’ve provided NOAA in the past?

Varies depending on the project, but $3,000 to $8,000 per day is typical, including for the buoy deployment project.


C-3

10. How do you expect these prices to change in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)?

Expect small annual increases, but nothing significant unless there are substantial changes in fuel prices.

11. What factors drive these prices?

See above regarding fuel prices.


C-4

Interview with Captain Doug Russell, University of Washington and UNOLS Vessel R/V Thomas G. Thompson, Seattle, Washington

(206) 543-5062, [email protected], 2/23/2017

1. Can you provide a brief description of the services that you have provided for NOAA in the past? The Thompson has supported NOAA extensively over the last few years through the UNOLS ship time request process. Projects have included dedicated NOAA cruises, as well as smaller NOAA projects that piggyback on other cruises. The NOAA exclusive cruises include 40 day mooring maintenance projects (primarily TAO buoys). On these cruises, the University supplies two marine technicians to do the actual maintenance, in addition to the ship time. There will also be a NOAA science team of up to ten people aboard to do ancillary science. When supporting piggyback projects, the University ends up charging NOAA for a portion of the total cruise costs (e.g., one to two days of a 20 to 40 day cruise). The University’s partnership vehicle with NSF makes the charge-back process easy.


The University also has a smaller (55 foot), older vessel (the Barnes) that NOAA has occasionally used. They are partnering with NOAA on design of a new smaller vessel to support fisheries projects and hope for a contribution from NOAA on the construction costs through UNOLS. They also have a pool of scientific equipment available and often consider potential NOAA uses when investing in new equipment.


They have made modifications, albeit minor, for NOAA in the past. They are more than willing to do large modifications. For example, they added large through-ports to support NASA projects during the recent overhaul. It all depends on lead time and funding.


The Thompson is just coming out of a major, mid-life maintenance overhaul which reduced her availability during the past year. Her sister ship, the Revelle, will be in her mid-life maintenance during 2018. This means there will be high demand during 2018-2019. NOAA is involved in the UNOLS ship time process, although it sometimes comes to the table later in the process. The prioritization process is complex. The Navy and NSF get a slightly higher priority in the process, but as a federal agency NOAA also has high priority over other competing organizations. The TAO (and DART) cruises get high priority, in particular, because they are consistently funded from year-to-year.


Ideally, requests are made in February, and firmed up during March and April, for operations during the following year (e.g., requests in early 2017 are made for cruises during 2018). The ship scheduling process is dynamic and changes during the course of a year, but plans made earlier in the calendar year have the best chance for the following year. The lead time, however, can depend on the length of the project. Small projects may be piggybacked in, if the opportunity is there once the major projects have been decided.

6. Are there limitations on the geographic region in which you can provide support? The Thompson operates primarily in the Pacific, sometimes the Indian Ocean. The Revelle operates more frequently in the Indian Ocean. Of the other class UNOLS ships:

The Atlantis travels back and forth between the Atlantic and Pacific The Kilo Moana (University of Hawaii) is primarily near Hawaii in the Pacific The Sikuliaq is in Alaska in the summer and fall, the rest of the Pacific during the remainder of the year The new ocean class vessel planned for UNOLS will support the northern Pacific. It won’t have quite the endurance of the Thompson.


C-5


Summer, really May through October, is jam packed and the Thompson operates mostly in the Washington and Oregon region during this period. In November, it is usually dedicated to student cruises in the same region -- the ship spends a total of 45 days a year, of its usually 260 to 300, supporting University of Washington research. During other parts of the year, the Thompson operates farther out of the region.

8. Are there other barriers to or incentives for working with NOAA? NOAA is easy to work for, because their detailed planning is often better than that of other science parties. The only barrier can be uncertain funding (especially early in the planning process), but the TAO and DART cruises have been consistently funded.

9. What are typical prices of the services you’ve provided NOAA in the past? Rates for the TAO cruises are around $35,000 per day for the ship plus $4,500 per day for the marine technicians (a total of $39,500 per day). Because NOAA requires day rates to be set up front, instead of adjusted at the time of billing (which is the practice NSF employs), there is a 5 percent markup included in what we charge NOAA. Also, there is some fee involved in passing the money through NSF.

10. How do you expect these prices to change in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)? The prices were high this past year because the Thompson was out of service for a time, meaning increased demand. However, typical increases are in the 2 to 3 percent range per year.

11. What factors drive these prices? Fuel is the key factor. For UNOLS in general, there are differences because of the overhead of the different university systems and the geographic regions of operation. The Revelle is more expensive, for example, both because of the University of California system and costs in California in general.


C-6

Interview with Rob Christie, New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), Wellington, New Zealand

+64-4-386-0881, [email protected], 2/24/17


NIWA is a government-owned organization, but operates like a business. Their research includes atmospheric, marine, freshwater, fisheries, geophysical science, etc. About the only thing they don’t do is deep sea geology; in New Zealand, that particular capability is held by a different organization. NIWA consists of about 605 people in 14 offices. About half of their work is through contracts with organizations in New Zealand and the other half with organizations throughout the rest of the world.

NIWA operates three vessels: the 70-meter (330-foot) R/V Tangaroa, the 28-meter (92-foot) R/V Kaharoa, and a smaller, coastal vessel, the R/V Ikatere. NIWA has had very few direct contracts with NOAA, but NOAA has accessed its vessels through subcontracts with the University of Washington and Scripps. NIWA’s vessels have conducted 19 previous cruises for NOAA. They are currently planning the next cruise for NOAA, 15 percent of which will be funded by Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia’s equivalent to NOAA. NIWA meets annually with NOAA leadership and attends the International Research Ship Operators’ (IRSO) conference to talk about collaborating on research worldwide.


NIWA’s ships have permanent crews of their own employees, not contractors. Their crews have long-standing tenures with the organization, an average of 15 years. Their crews are not unionized, so they are quicker to deploy and more responsive. NIWA potentially has a new 35-meter (115-foot) vessel in the pipeline, which will add the capability to deploy ROVs. They currently have a cost-effective drone that can get seabed imagery, but the new ship will add full ROV capability. They also have warehouses of equipment with their own technicians, so they can provide turnkey services.


NIWA modifies its vessels all the time, sometimes extensively, but financial viability is the bottom line. For big modifications, it’s necessary to have a long-term contract or be reimbursed directly.


Both the Kaharoa and Tangaroa have about 150 to 160 days a year available. The limitations are a couple of voyages that are set in stone and unmovable, usually fisheries work set around repeated trawling. Most other projects are not time-specific, which offers some flexibility.


Lead time depends on the complexity of the voyage. NIWA is pretty agile. The geographic region requested and the number of permits required are big factors in determining lead time. This year they already have quite a few months tied up. Ultimately, lead time could be a year for a longer or more complex voyage, two months for less complex trips.


C-7


NIWA’s ships can travel across the Pacific and the Indian Oceans, as far west as Mauritius, including voyages of 45 days at sea without returning to port. They have done about 13 voyages to the Antarctic. They would not rule out working in the Atlantic, but this would require considering the next projects on the schedule because of transit time.


Except for the set fisheries voyages, they are available year-round. Each ship has two crews that alternate months on and off, year-round.


No real barriers. NIWA has a lot of respect for NOAA. Working for NOAA is seen as a prestige job that offers good exposure, so there is an incentive to do it.


Prices are dependent on the project. The last subcontracted project for NOAA on the Kaharoa was deploying ARGO floats and the rate was 11,500 New Zealand dollars per day including fuel. The Tangaroa has not worked recently for NOAA, but has in the past. Their current target day rate for the Tangaroa is 57,500 New Zealand dollars per day including fuel. These prices are ship rates only. Additional science support and equipment would increase the price, possibly up to 80,000 New Zealand dollars per day.


Prices will change in line with the rest of the industry. The new 35-meter vessel would probably replace the Kaharoa and be more expensive.


Fuel and demand from other missions/cruises.


C-8

Interview with Monita Cheever, Oregon State University, Newport, Oregon

541-867-0295, [email protected], 2/28/17


Oregon State owns and operates the 84 foot R/V Pacific Storm and the 54 foot R/V Elakha. It also operates the UNOLS R/V Oceanus. NOAA has used all of these ships for many different projects, including trawls, CTD deployment, water flow measurement, buoy deployment (including DART buoys), and equipment recovery. The vessels have supported both daytime and nighttime operations for NOAA.


The University is not planning any major vessel acquisitions. They are, however, enhancing the Pacific Storm to install a flow-through seawater system for sampling like that on the Oceanus and Elakha. They are installing interface systems that will allow equipment to be transferred and used across vessels. They are installing a new crane at their jetty to support equipment loading. They also have another small vessel (17 foot).


Modifications are possible, but safety is the key factor. In the past, when major modifications were requested, they have engaged a marine architect to evaluate the proposal. Thus, modifications require careful planning; they are not done in a day. But the University is willing to make modifications, subject to this planning, particularly if there is a long term contract involve or the installed equipment could be of future benefit to other projects. For example, after evaluation, they have added major equipment in the past to support a project for researchers from another college.


There is currently availability on their ship schedules and that availability is not expected to change that much. Weather is a bigger challenge than competing demands. The availability of the Elakha has actually increased over the last five years, due to certain projects ending or losing funding. The Pacific Storm also now supports year-round operations.


The Pacific Storm and Elakha are normally ready to go, since they do maintenance during bad weather. The University has even supported projects on one-day notice in the past. And they are willing and able to reschedule projects, even long-term ones, for example, when there are weather delays. Ideally and typically, though, a couple of weeks lead time is required. For NOAA specifically, it is typical to plan and schedule, for example, in January or February for operations in May or June.


The Elakha supports coastal operations (out to 50 nautical miles) close to home, from the Columbia River to Coos Bay. The Pacific Storm has travelled from Baja, Mexico up to Alaska. The Oceanus is global, although it stays on the Pacific side for the most part, because other UNOLS vessels support the Atlantic. Voyages have included South America and the Galapagos Islands, west of Hawaii, the Orient, Dutch Harbor, and Mexico.



C-9

For the larger vessels, summer (April through August) is busy. The Pacific Storm is mostly scheduled for long blocks starting in April, but has open availability for short periods (4 to 5 days) here and there. November through January are less busy, weather permitting. The Elakha has availability all year round, currently scheduled for no more than 15 days a month.


NOAA is easy to work for, and provides cruise plans in advance. Paperwork and invoicing can be challenging with the federal government in general. There are varying invoicing procedures for different groups within NOAA, and some make post-cruise invoicing smoother than others. There can sometimes be delays in payment (a worst case has been six months), which require follow-up effort.


Oregon State’s rates for the Pacific Storm and Elakha are available at: https://fees.oregonstate.edu/. NOAA uses the external rates.


Fuel drives pricing, so it is difficult to forecast. The University’s marine operations are not meant to make huge profits or support the expansion of services, so prices are meant to reflect what the market will bear.


See above.


C-10

Interview with David Janka, Auklet Charter Services, Cordova, Alaska

[email protected], answers received via e-mail, 2/28/17


Auklet Charter Services provides vessel support for extended periods of time throughout the Pr. Wm. Sound region of Alaska. Licensed captain, cook/crew, meals & snacks, bunking w/bedding, skiff use, open deck with hydraulic boom and block, shuttle crews ashore, communications, navigation, general assistance and logistical support. See www.auklet.com for further descriptions and photos.


Possible portable wet lab on deck. Additional hydraulics on the boom. Possibly a transducer well.


I have done this for the Pr. Wm. Sound Science Center and would be more than willing to do it for NOAA. Long-term contracts: definitely.


Our charter season is made up of about 80 percent research/work trip support trips. I try to keep the vessel available throughout the year and always look forward to working with federal agencies especially those I have worked with in the past; NOAA, NMFS, USFWS, USGS, USFS, NRCS, USCG.


If available, very little, less than a week.


Prefer inland waters, especially within Pr. Wm. Sound but depending on the nature, time of year and duration of the charter - Kenai Fiords, Kodiak Is. area, Southeast Alaska, Glacier Bay, Yakutat Bay, Icy Bay. Again, prefer inland waters.


We operate year-round although winter does have its limitations.


Not really. Paperwork is paperwork.


Basic rate is $1200.00 per day with up to 4 passengers. $100.00 per day each additional passenger. Six passenger maximum. Possibly more if a great deal of running time is required, if odd hours are required, if extra assistance is needed on my or my crew’s part, if any special, if location is distant from our homeport of Cordova or additional


C-11

equipment is needed for me to purchase. More Sept-March (off season for regular insurance). An additional $300.00 per day if more than 12 hours of running time is required (second captain required). Possibly more.


We expect prices to change very little unless fuel prices rise substantially or inflation sets in.


Fuel, food, insurance, location, time of year, nature of work.


C-12

Interview with Linda Kadrlick, Alaska Charter Boats, 907-523-0897, Juneau, Alaska

[email protected], 3/2/2017


Alaska Charter Boats owns and operates one vessel, but primarily represents a fleet of vessels, including research vessels, fishing vessels, and pleasure vessels, as a broker. Their fleet has worked for several groups within NOAA. Alaska Charter Boats watches the federal procurement process and prepares bids for the vessels they represent.


Alaska Charter Boats replies to specific requests for proposals. If nothing in their fleet matches the requirements, they sometimes try to locate a vessel for specific projects, although this is not typical of the process for NOAA. A key advantage of the vessels they represent is that their captains and crews are knowledgeable of local waters.


Most of the time, Captains are willing to modify their vessels, if the changes are not too radical. There is definitely more willingness with longer-term contracts.


There’s always availability for the types of vessels NOAA uses. Vessel size is key, though. The smaller vessels are more available. It is hard to predict, though, what the makeup of the fleet of vessels they represent will be in the future.


Alaska Charter Boats reacts to the requirements of the specific request for proposal. More lead time is better, though. Four or five months is ideal for planning, longer for longer jobs.


They represent vessels that serve Prince William Sound, Kodiak, and southeast Alaska waters.


The primary determinant is weather, so obviously there are limitations to going to sea in winter.


Most of the time, the contracting process works well. The specificity of the contracts is helpful in finding the right vessel.


Prices depend greatly on the specific vessel. For the larger research vessels it is around $5 to $6 thousand per day dry rate (without fuel).



C-13

Prices have remained stable over the last few years. It’s difficult to predict the future, but prices might go up a little.


Fuel.


C-14

Interview with Michael Kelly, Director of Marine Operations, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), Moss Landing, California

831-775-1902, [email protected], 3/2/2017

1. Can you provide a brief description of the services that you have provided for NOAA in the past? MBARI owns and operates the 117 foot R/V Western Flyer and the 135 foot R/V Rachel Carson. It also operates the smaller (32-foot) near-coastal vessel R/V Paragon under lease from the University of California, Santa Cruz. MBARI collaborates with NOAA’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, so there are sometimes one to two NOAA staff from the Sanctuary conducting piggyback research on MBARI cruises. NOAA has used the MBARI ships for dedicated cruises only twice in the last decade, in 2006 and 2010. The more recent project supported mapping a wreck using an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV).


With the exception of collaborating with the Sanctuary, MBARI usually only supports NOAA when they have capabilities that are not available elsewhere in the NOAA or academic fleet. The Institute does not actively seek out dedicated research missions for other organization.


MBARI’s existing vessels have some adaptability in configuration. More extensive modification would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.


If NOAA requested support from MBARI ships, short-term availability would be questionable. Their schedules do include contingency days, so shorter projects (5 to 6 days) might be feasible in the short term. For longer cruises, a one year lead time would be best.


See above.

6. Are there limitations on the geographic region in which you can provide support? The Western Flyer and Rachel Carson support research along the entire West Coast from Canada to the Gulf of California in Mexico. Occasionally, they have travelled as far west as Hawaii.


Winter would be more available.

8. Are there other barriers to or incentives for working with NOAA? Not to note.

9. What are typical prices of the services you’ve provided NOAA in the past? MBARI's rates for the Western Flyer and Rachel Carson are available at: http://www.mbari.org/at-sea/mars-ship-rates/. These rates have been very recently updated (in the last several days). Note that although the rates for the Western Flyer are listed as for a 12 hour day, these same rates would apply to extended time at sea without returning to port and could include some nighttime work, subject to crew rest regulations. The rates for the Rachel Carson do reflect a 10 to 12 hour day.


C-15

10. How do you expect these prices to change in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)? The recent update to their prices did not incorporate a large change, maybe a 3 percent increase. MBARI would not anticipate huge changes in the future unless there are dramatic changes in fuel prices.

11. What factors drive these prices? See above.


C-16

Interview with Bob Pedro, Miss Linda Charters, Charleston, Oregon

541-888-2128, [email protected], 3/6/2017

1. Can you provide a brief description of the services that you have provided for NOAA in the past? The Miss Linda is 76 foot charter research vessel. Her biggest projects for NOAA have involved the deployment and retrieval of current measurement devices (upwelling and subsurface) in the San Francisco Bay and adjacent rivers. With a NOAA scientific team aboard, she deployed the devices and retrieved them after a few weeks to change batteries, download data, and redeploy them at new locations.


The Miss Linda has also done research charters for Oregon State University, the Navy, and the States of Oregon and California. She has bid on additional work for NOAA in the Puget Sound region. She is well configured for the deployment and retrieval of remotely operated underwater vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). For example, she just recently finished a project deploying and testing wave gliders for a private company.


Absolutely willing: modifications to better support customers are how the ship has evolved to its current configuration. For example, the A-frame was installed to support the Navy. Existing davits and winch were based on customer recommendations.


The ship is dedicated to supporting research projects, so is generally available as needed. There aren’t competing uses (e.g., fishing) and no current long-term research commitments.


NOAA typically plans early in the year for operations in the summer and this is ideal; the earlier the better. The ship is not always totally booked, though, so there is the potential for quick turnaround.

6. Are there limitations on the geographic region in which you can provide support? Oregon, Washington, and California.


Winter is not busy because most users don’t want to put their equipment in jeopardy, although Miss Linda has done and is currently doing projects during winter. Spring and summer are busier.

8. Are there other barriers to or incentives for working with NOAA? NOAA projects are well organized and the NOAA science teams are professional. This makes them much easier to work with than some other organizations.

9. What are typical prices of the services you’ve provided NOAA in the past? The Miss Linda has standard day rates for a minimum of 6 hours with hourly rates beyond that. However, for multi-day projects like NOAA’s, they typically incorporate a discount, especially on transit days.

10. How do you expect these prices to change in the future (i.e., in the next year, in the next five years)? There haven’t been major price changes recently because fuel hasn’t changed much. Miss Linda’s standard fuel rate (about $20/hour) is not likely to change much unless there’s a major spike in fuel prices (e.g., $1/gallon).


C-17

11. What factors drive these prices? See question 10 above.

Appendix D: Acknowledgements

D-1


This report was developed for NOAA Office of Marine & Aviation Operations (OMAO) by Janet Clements and Jim Henderson, Senior Economists at Corona Environmental Consulting, and Patrick Ransom, Senior Engineer at Abt Associates. Abt Associates team members Christina Cornejo and Michael Duckworth also contributed significantly to the development of this report, and the research and analysis presented herein.

The authors would like to thank the NOAA project team for the support, input, and significant contributions they provided throughout this project:

Charles Alexander, Office of Marine Aviation Operations, project director Cecilé Benigni, OMAO project manager and technical lead Jeffery Adkins, Office of the NOAA Chief Economist, lead economist,

This study relied on extensive input and review from subject matter experts and product support teams across NOAA Offices. We would like to extend our thanks to the following individuals who made it possible to evaluate the benefits associated with a small subset of NOAA products and services that depend on the NOAA Fleet (as indicated), and to assess the cost-effectiveness of using contract vessels for some data collection activities.

Coral Reef Status and Trends Report Susie Holst, Management and Program Analyst, NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program Justine Kimball, National Coral Reef Monitoring Program Coordinator

Sea Level Rise Viewer Doug Marcy, Coastal Hazards Specialist at NOAA Office for Coastal Management Maria Honeycutt, Coastal Hazards Specialist at NOAA Office for Coastal Management

Nautical Charts Lorraine Robidoux, Deputy Chief, Hydrographic Surveys Division Megan Greenaway, Technical Advisor, Hydrographic Surveys Division Richard Brennan, Chief, Hydrographic Surveys Division Ashley Chappell, Chief, Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping

National Marine Sanctuary Condition Reports Jan Roletto, Research Coordinator, Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary

El Nino Southern Oscillation Outlook David DeWitt, Director, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center

Fisheries Stock Assessments Doug Lipton, Senior Scientist for Economics, NOAA Fisheries

Harmful Algal Bloom Forecasts Quay Dortch, Program Coordinator, Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms

Program Steve Ruberg, Acting Supervisor, Observing Systems and Advanced Technology Branch Kimberly Puglise, Oceanographer, NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research


D-2

Tsunamis Inundation Models and Forecasts Rocky Lopes, Deputy Program Manager, NWS Tsunami Program Michael Angove, Tsunami Program Manager Kelly Stroker, Leader, Coastal Sciences Team/Natural Hazards, NOAA National Centers for

Environmental Information

Ocean Noise Mapping Products Jason Gedamke, Director, Ocean Acoustics Program

Hypoxia Forecast, Gulf of Mexico Angela Sallis, Outreach Coordinator, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information Kirsten Larsen, Coastal Data Development Science Advisor, NOAA National Centers for

Environmental Information Alan Lewitus, Branch Chief, Ecosystem Stressors Research Branch, Center for Sponsored Coastal

Ocean Research Kimberly Puglise, Oceanographer, NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Hurricane Outlook David DeWitt, Director, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center Gerry Bell, Lead Forecaster, Meteorologist, NOAA's Climate Prediction Center

Emergency and Disaster Response Megan Greenaway, Technical Advisor, Hydrographic Surveys Division Richard Brennan, Chief, Hydrographic Surveys Division Mike Aslaksen, Chief of NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey’s Remote Sensing Division Sam DeBow, OCS Market Manager, Vice President, Lynker Technologies,

Oil Spill Response and Research (Deepwater Horizon Incident Data Collection) Scott Cross, East Coast Regional Science Officer, NOAA National Centers for Environmental

Information

Endangered Species Support, Mammals Annette Henry, Survey Coordinator, Marine Mammal and Turtle Division, NOAA Fisheries

Technical Support for NOAA Data Streams and Associated Products Martin Yapur, Director, NOAA’s Technology, Planning and Integration for Observation Program

(TPIO) David Helms, Technical Support, NOAA’s Technology, Planning and Integration for Observation

Program Robert Reining, Principal Economic/Business Analyst, MITRE Corporation, TPIO Integrated

System Analysis Team Brant Priest, Research Scientist, Riverside Technology, Inc, TPIO Observation Team Amanda Mitchell, Research Scientist, Integrity Applications Incorporated , TPIO Requirements

Team Matthew Austin, Physical Scientist, Requirements, Planning & Integration Division, TPIO Louis Cantrell, Consultant, Profitable Weather, LLC, TPIO Integrated System Analysis Team Vincent Ries, Senior Analyst, Integrity Applications Incorporated, TPIO Integrated System

Analysis Team


D-3

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Linda Maillinoff, NOAA Office of Marine and Aviation Operations Jeff Moore, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center

Contract Vessel Providers Roark Brown, Homer Ocean Charters Doug Russell, University of Washington and UNOLS Vessel R/V Thomas G. Thompson Rob Christie, New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Greg Foothead, New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Monita Cheever, Oregon State University David Janka, Auklet Charter Services Linda Kadrlick, Alaska Charter Boats Michael Kelly, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute Bob Pedro, Miss Linda Charters

NOAA Observing Systems Council The authors also wish to extend appreciation to the NOAA Observing Systems Council (https://nosc.noaa.gov/), which provided important feedback on criteria used for selecting value chains to evaluate and quantify.

Documents

NOAA F leet Societal Benefit Studdy...NOAA Fleet Societal Benefits Study, Final Report i Foreward: Interpreting the Value Estimates from the NOAA Fleet Societal Benefit Study NOAA