nws requirements process and relation to ppbes suggestions to move svw capabilities forward kevin j....

NWS Requirements Process and Relation to PPBES

Suggestions to move SVW capabilities forward

Kevin J. Schrab

NWS/Office of Science and Technology

Kevin J. Schrab - SVW Workshop - Miami, FL - 5-7 June 20062

Outline

• Basic requirements issues

• What is OSIP?

• What is PPBES?

• NOAA/NASA Joint Working Group (JWG) on Research and Operations

• Suggestions to move forward


Basic Requirements Issues

• 2 main issues that require slightly different approaches– Improve ability to display and manipulate data

(esp. in AWIPS) – short & long term issue– Move data requirements forward so solution

space can be explored – longer term issue

• Suggested approaches after brief review of OSIP, PPBES, and NOAA/NASA JWG


OSIP

• Slides from Paul Hirschberg (Chief, Science Plans Branch, OST)


Operations and Services Improvement Process (OSIP)

• Requirements-based management process approved by NWS Corporate Board in June ’05.

• Standard, systematic, and disciplined process to:

– Evaluate needs and opportunities

– Develop requirements

– Implement solutions

• Goals:

– Ensure corporate review and prioritization

– Implement enterprise solutions

• Unify current single-system improvement processes– e.g., MODELS, AWIPS have independent processes

– Reduce costs, speed deployment, & meet user expectations sooner


OSIP“end-to-end”

• Requirements Validation– Is need/opportunity worth pursuing – is it a requirement?

• Is it within our mission and aligned with Strategic Plan• Are customers asking for it; is it mandated?• Will operational products, services, and/or efficiency be improved?

– What is the priority?

• Project (Solution) Management

– What is concept of operations?

– How does solution map to current and/or new operational systems?

– How will it be developed/transitioned?

– How will it be sustained?

– Is it the most cost-effective solution, what are the alternatives?

– How will development/transition and O&M be resourced?

• Does Solution Meet Initial Intent?


OSIP Five Stage Process

Need/Opportunity

Collection &

Validation

Stage 1

• Define and ValidateNeeds andOpportunities

Concept Exploration

&Definition

Stage 2

• Perform Exploratory Research

• Develop Concept of Operations and Operational Requirements

AppliedResearch

&Analysis

Stage 3

• Perform Applied Research

• Develop Requirements

• Analyze Solutions

Operational Development

Stage 4

• Develop/AcquireOperational Systems

Deploy, Maintain, &

Assess

Stage 5

• Implement Solutions

• Begin O&M

• Assess Results

G1 G2 G3 G4

Gates or Key Decision PointsGates or Key Decision Points


Process Oversight

Gate Oversight

Review and Approval (KDPs)

Process Logistics

Develop Information and Plans

OSIP Players

G1 G2 G3 G4

AppliedResearch

&Analysis

Concept Exploration

&Definition


Deploy, Maintain, &

Assess

Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5

Need-OpportunityCollection

&Validation

Stage 1

DAA

OSIP Manager

S&T/Ops Committee

FIRC Oversight

Ops/S&T Committee

Ops Committee

IWTs IWTs IWTs IWTs


OSIP Transition from Research to Operations

AppliedResearch

&Analysis

Concept Exploration

&Definition


Deploy, Maintain, &

Assess


Need/Opportunity

Collection &

Validation

Stage 1

Three places to insert research into process and begin transition• Stage 1: Identify opportunity

@G1: Justify opportunity, Define Con.Expl. plan -- success criteria, schedule, cost

• Stage 2: Perform “exploratory” research@G2: Evaluate exploratory research, Is there an operational need?

Can CONOPS/Operational Requirements be developed?

• Stage 3: Perform “applied” research supporting valid operational need.@G3: Evaluate applied research, use results to build operational analysis

G1 G2 G3 G4


OSIP Web Site

https://osip.weather.gov/

Access website by using your NOAA email username and password

Can access

• OSIP 101

• Current Projects

• Document Templates

• Reports

• Caldendar


PPBES Overview


PPBES Cycle


W&W Programs and Line Offices

Office of Program Planning & Integration Lead

Mission Goal3

Weather and Water

Environmental Modeling

Science, Technology, and Infusion

Air Quality

Local Forecasts and Warnings

Weather Service AA

Ocean Service AA

Satellite & Information Service AA

Fisheries AA

Research AA

Hydrology

Marine & Aviation

Operations AA

Line Offices (functional units)

Pro

gra

ms

= Key team member

Ou

tco

me

s

Tsunami

Coasts, Estuaries, and Oceans

Space Weather

matrix team non-matrix teamLegend:


Weather and WaterPrograms and Managers

• W&W Goal Lead – George Smith (Deputy – Ward Seguin)• Air Quality (AQ) – James Meagher• Coasts, Estuaries and Oceans (CEO) – Paul Scholz• Environmental Modeling (EMP) – Fred Toepfer• Hydrology/ Water Resources (HYD) – Gary Carter• Local Forecasts and Warnings (LFW) – Dennis McCarthy• Science, Technology and Infusion (STI) – Marty Ralph• Space Weather (SWX) – Ron Zwickl• Tsunami (TSU) – David Green


Commerce & TransportationPrograms and Managers

• C&T Goal Lead – Steve Barnum• Aviation Weather (AWX) – Kevin Johnston• Marine Weather (MWX) – Therese Pierce• Surface Weather (SFC) – Mike Campbell


PPBES

• Following slides from Paul Hirschberg (Chief, Science Plans Branch, OST)


Continuing Need to RoadmapPPBES: How We Doing?

• With PPBES -- An improvement

– Alleviating cross-LO “stove-pipe” challenges associated with “end-to-end” research to applications (R2A) improvement initiatives

• However, we’re not there yet

– Cross-LO/cross-Program improvement projects still difficult to achieve

• PPBES Challenge -- Solving Rubrik’s Cube

– Difficult to sustain necessary coordination and focus while navigating all groups involved and paper trail

• Focusing mechanism needed

– Motivation for Goal “Roadmapping”

NW

S

NE

SD

ISN

OS

OA

R

PA&E

NOSC

NEC

W&W

NEP

ResearchCouncil

PPI

Budget

NWS

OAR

CIOCouncil

ST&I

LFW

MOD

CEO

HYD

AQ

NESDI

NOS

SPW

Trans.Board


Proposed Goal PPBES: • A “federation” of Programs and LOs

closely working together to reach W&W Goals

• Horizontal and Vertical (Diagonal) interaction strong

• Goal R2A plans, programs, budgets, and capabilities integrated

PPBES: Continuing Need to Roadmap Proposal: Integrate Planning Across Goals

R&D OperationsTransition

Current Goal PPBES: • A “confederation” of Programs and LOs

loosely working together to reach W&W Goals

• Horizontal (within programs/LOs) interaction stronger than vertical (across programs/LOs)

• Goal R2A plans, programs, budgets, and capabilities fragmented

LFW NWS

HYD

AQ, OAR, NWS

MOD, OAR, NOS, NWS, NESDIS

TSU, OAR, NWS

SPW, NWS

CEO, NOS, NWS, OAR

Capabilities

ST&I, OAR, NESDIS, NOS, NWS

W&W

ST&I AQ HYD MOD CEO TSU LFWOAR NESDIS NOS NWS

W&W


PPBES: Continuing Need to Roadmap Proposal: Develop W&W S&T Roadmap

• Purpose: –To set direction, promote cross-program investment, and align LO execution

• Characteristics:– Outcome/Performance-Measure Based

–“End-to-End” Research to operations Observations to delivering information to users

–Integrated Across:• Goal portfolio of products, services, and information provision; and• Major S&T systems

– Dynamic• Adjusting to new information and decisions


PPBES: Continuing Need to Roadmap

Proposal: W&W Roadmap Matrix• Expand STIP Matrix to encompass W&W mission• Produce Roadmaps with cross-program/LO teams

– both product line & S&T capability representatives

Integrated Roadmaps Vertically and Horizontally

Notional W&W Roadmap Matrix


OSIP & PPBES LinkagesMG3

Goal Lead

LFW PM

STI PM

HYD PM

EMP PM

SPW PM

AQ PM

CEOPM

Other MGs

Other MGPrgs

PPBES Program Managers• Monitor information flowing through Gates (Bottom up)

– Requirements, Priorities, Resource Needs• Initiate needs/opportunities through Process (Top Down)• Drive PPBES program adjustments when solutions cannot be resourced within current program• Facilitate multi-LO process as necessary

AppliedResearch

&Analysis

Concept Exploration

&Definition


Deploy, Maintain, &

Assess


Need/Opportunity

Collection &

Validation

Stage 1

G1 G2 G3 G4

Report on Activities of the NOAA/NASA

Joint Working Group (JWG)on

Research and Operations

Chet Koblinsky

Director, Climate Program Office - OAR

Co-Chair, NOAA-NASA R&O JWG

Brief to NOAA Transition Board

May 12, 2006

From JWG Brief by Chet Koblinsky


Overview

• Purpose

• Background

• JWG Agency Report #1

• Near-Term Opportunities

• Links to NOAA PPBES

• Working Schedule

• FY09 Opportunities

• Supporting details in backup slides.



Purpose

• To provide an update on the activities of the NOAA-NASA Joint Working Group on Research and Operations (JWG).

• To describe JWG process to identify FY08 and FY09 opportunities.



Background• JWG established December 2005 by Interagency Agreement on

Terms of Reference (ToR)• JWG oversight: Greg Withee/NOAA, Bryant Kramer/NASA• JWG Co-Chairs: Chet Koblinsky/NOAA, Jack Kaye/NASA• NOAA Members

– Stan Wilson/NESDIS

– Louis Uccellini/NWS

– Tom Karl/NESDIS

• NASA Members– Michele Rienecker/GSFC

– Jim Gleason/GSFC

– Bruce Wielicki/LARC



BackgroundFunctions and Responsibilities of JWG from ToR:

The Joint Working Group will conduct the following functions: the first three of these will be included in a report to the Administrators of NASA and NOAA, due January 31, 2006, to the signatories of this agreement.

i. Establish and document an organizational and performance framework for this R&O activity, including agency and user community roles.

ii. Recommend a process to guide and facilitate the enhancement of NOAA operational capabilities by transitioning the use of appropriate results of NASA research capabilities and to facilitate use of NOAA operational capabilities in support of NASA missions.

iii. Recommend near-term opportunities for transitioning capabilities - both NASA capabilities to support NOAA operations and NOAA capabilities to support NASA research.

iv. Facilitate input from other appropriate agencies and the NASA-NOAA user community to: (a) identify candidate capabilities for transition, and (b) participate in the development of the transition implementation plans, as appropriate.

v. Conduct periodic reviews of progress on implementation of approved plans for transitioning capabilities.

vi. Develop required reports in response to congressional direction.



Outline of JWG Agency Report #1• Introduction• Transition Issues and Organizational Framework• Approach to Process

– Identify Opportunities– Establish Transition Teams to:

• Evaluate ability of opportunity to achieve transition• Assess what would be required to effect a successful transition

• Opportunity Categories– Observing Capability Transition (implementing operational satellite

observations to continue measurement streams begun in research programs)

– Mission Extension: (extending research missions beyond their prime missions when those missions have both research and operational uses)

– Data Record Development and Stewardship (creation of long-term data records that extend the research data records)

– Data utilization (acceleration of the operational use of data from research programs)

– Tools and Standards Transition (development of tools and standards that can be used for both research and operations)



Opportunity Categories

Near Term Mid Term Long Term NASA funded and deployed effort, demonstrated operational benefits,

NOAA currently expending funds to support transition

Under development and/or deployed by NASA,

NOAA evaluating potential operational benefit

Under study or concept development by NASA,

NOAA anticipates potential future operational benefit



Links to Ongoing NOAA Budget Execution

• FY2006 Execution

– Develop and execute plan for $4M earmark – NOAA team’s for each effort are in place, NASA has been encouraged to participate

• Sea Surface Height, Surface Vector Winds, Ocean Color

• FY2007 Budgeting

– Ocean Surface Topography Mission

• Program funds for ground station development and pre-launch calibration/validation work are in place



Links to NOAA PPBES • FY2008 Budgeting

– Respond to FY2008 PDM

• W&W to assess feasibility of Solar Wind BAA proposals

• NOSC to analyze impact of loss of NASA research capabilities on NOAA operational products and services – recommend research capabilities that require transition to operations

• Satellite sub-goal to consider additional inter-satellite calibration of instruments and development of improved product suites that may be required by mandate in Energy Bill (Climate Change). Develop recommendation for inclusion in FY08 budget formulation (e.g., NOAA/NIST Initiative)

• JWG provide input to NOAA Transition Board on JWG-identified transitions

– Provide letter to Congress with submission of FY08 President’s Budget request, identifying the NASA/NOAA R&O activities.



Links to NOAA PPBES • FY2009 Planning

– Workshop held April 24-26 to identify potential opportunities

– Provide input to Mission Goals by June 1 for preparation of POPs

– Provide Transition Plans to Goals by August 31, for preparation of Program Plans

• Down-select opportunities as programs move through NOAA, DoC (and NASA) and OMB.

• Submit report on FY09 R&O activities identified in the FY09 Pres Bud with its submission in February, 2008.



Working Schedule

NASA & NOAAJWG Formed

JWG First Report

7/06

11/064/06 5/06

FY-09OpportunitiesSelected

2/07

Final Report to CongressDescribing FY08 R&O activities in PresBud

1/06 9/06

TransitionTeamsFormed

Cross-NOAA Team Re-constituted(for $4M)

NOAA FY09 POP InputSubmitted

JWG Second Report

Transition Teams Develop Plans

Transition Plans Completed (Defining steps necessary for successful transitions)

Draft Report to Congress(about FY08 opportunities)



Workshop to Identify FY09 Opportunities

• April 24-26, 2006 @ University of Maryland Conference Center

• Attendees:– Total: 102 (48 NOAA; 36 NASA; 3 USGS; 5 Navy or DoD; 10 other)

• Agenda– Section 1: Atmosphere– Section 2: Data Utilization– Section 3: Oceans– Section 4: Hydrology and Cyrosphere– Section 5: Energy and Radiation– Section 6: Operational Satellites and Data– Section 7: Atmospheric Composition– Section 8: Land– Summary

[Space Weather measurements to be addressed via telecon]



• NOAA view on priority opportunities discussed at Workshop:• Observing Capability Transition

– Jason-3– Operational Satellite Improvement Program (OSIP)

• Mission Extension: – Extend NASA missions that are priority measurements in NPOESS-era (continuity)

• Aqua, Terra, Quikscat, Jason-1,solar

• Data Record Development and Stewardship – Coordinate with NASA on maintenance of long-term records, prioritize on continuity of measurements

into the NPOESS-era– Address data latency issues– SST Science Team

• Data utilization – Address within NOAA the coordination of JCSDA and SPoRT with forecast improvements (e.g. WRF).– Evaluate and test GOES-R HESS utility.– Expand objectives of JCSDA to address emerging issues (hydrology)

• Tools and Standards Transition – Reanalysis– ESMF– Calibration and Validation for continuity issues– OSSEs– Adjoint method for data assimilation

Workshop to Identify FY09 Opportunities

Backup Slides



Senate language in the NOAA FY05 budget for NOAA

– “Provide NOAA the capability to transition NASA remote sensed ocean measurements into operational products for the user community”

– Observations explicitly mentioned: “ocean winds from scatterometers,…sea level…from altimeters, and…ocean color”

– Initially a one-year $4M level of effort, with no assurance for continuation, it was continued in the FY06 budget

• Continued as “Research to Operations/NASA-NOAA Partnerships”



NASA FY2005 Authorization Act Language (PUBLIC LAW 109–155—DEC. 30, 2005)

SEC. 306. COORDINATION WITH THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION(a) JOINT WORKING GROUP.—The Administrator and the Administrator of NOAA shall appoint a Joint Working

Group, which shall review and monitor missions of the two agencies to ensure maximum coordination in the design, operation, and transition of missions where appropriate. The Joint Working Group shall also prepare the plans required by subsection (c).

(b) COORDINATION REPORT.—Not later than February 15 of each year, beginning with the first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator and the Administrator of NOAA shall jointly transmit a report to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate on how the earth science programs of NOAA and NASA will be coordinated during the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the report is transmitted.

(c) COORDINATION OF TRANSITION PLANNING AND REPORTING.— The Administrator, in conjunction with the Administrator of NOAA and in consultation with other relevant agencies, shall evaluate relevant NASA science missions for their potential operational capabilities and shall prepare transition plans for the existing and future Earth observing systems found to have potential operational capabilities.

(d) LIMITATION.—The Administrator shall not transfer any NASA earth science mission or Earth observing system to the NOAA until the plan required under subsection (c) has been approved by the Administrator and the Administrator NOAA and until financial resources have been identified to support the transition or transfer in the President’s budget request for NOAA



A Research-to-Operations Transition Process How it has been done - sequential

• NASA– Justify a research mission – on whatever basis– Implement the research mission

• Demonstrate the technology – show that it works• Retrieve geophysical products – show that they make sense• Demonstrate scientific utility – show that the products are useful

• NOAA & NASA– Conduct demonstrations in a setting to entrain operational users

• Supply access – timely down-linking and product generation• Provide knowledge of, and tools for, using those products• Demonstrate real/potential benefits – satisfy operational user needs & show value

• NOAA– Justify an operational mission based on cost and benefit– Implement the new/modified systems with a means to ensure continuity– Optimize the performance of the operational system

• Maintain scientific involvement to validate operational products

• NASA & NOAA– Encourage access to data for research use in order to facilitate the development of

improved operational products



A Research-to-Operations Transition Process How it could be done – in parallel

• NASA – at the same time, NOAA enters a complementary wedge in PPBES process– Justify a research mission – on whatever basis– Implement the research mission

• Demonstrate the technology – show that it works• Retrieve geophysical products – show that they make sense• Demonstrate scientific utility – show that the products are useful

• NOAA & NASA– Conduct demonstrations in a setting to entrain operational users

• Supply access – timely down-linking and product generation• Provide knowledge of, and tools for, using those products• Demonstrate real/potential benefits – satisfy operational user needs & show value

• NOAA– Justify an operational mission based on cost and benefit– Implement the new/modified systems with a means to ensure continuity– Optimize the performance of the operational system

• Maintain scientific involvement to validate operational products

• NASA & NOAA– Encourage access to data for research use in order to facilitate the development of improved

operational products



Near-Term OpportunitiesInitial list developed at first meeting of JWG

• Observing Capability Transition– Sea Surface Height from Altimetry

• NASA -- 14 years of sea surface height (SSH) measurements provided by TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason-1

• NASA continues SSH with the Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM – Jason 2), scheduled for launch in 2008.

– NOAA to provide operational command, control, and ground data ingest and processing for OSTM operational customers

• U.S. plans for an operational satellite altimeter after OSTM -- NPOESS altimetry instrument

– Will not provide exact continuation of the SSH record, due to orbital constraints

• JWG recommends examining continuation of Jason series to meet operational requirements for accurate SSH climate record

– Ocean Surface Vector Winds from Scatterometers• NASA – Nearly 10 years of surface vector wind (SVW) measurements

provided by ADEOS and QuikSCAT, JPL developing advanced scatterometer concept

• NOAA – through partnership with Navy, evaluating Windsat/Coriolis and NPOESS CMIS, and to what extent passive measurement meets NOAA operational accuracy requirement for SVW. If limited, JWG may recommend active system



Near-Term Opportunities (continued)

• Mission Extension– Solar Wind

• NASA -- Solar Wind measurements via ACE spacecraft. – Launched in 1997, ACE has exceeded design life (2 years) and mission goal (5 years).

– NASA has dropped ACE z-axis maneuvers to preserve fuel – results in increasing solar wind measurement outages as we approach solar max in 2010.

– 2007 NASA Senior Review will evaluate ACE for possible continuation.

• NOAA issued a Broad Area Announcement in June 2005, and awarded two study contracts in October 2005 (Lockheed Martin/Scripps and Space Services, Inc).

– Three options developed (Smallsat, refurbished DSCOVR, and Commercial Service) – results brought to the NOSC in March.

– NOAA has issued a task to Booz-Allen Hamilton to assist in evaluation of commercial approach business case – results brought to the NOSC in April.

– NASA’s Senior Review Process

• JWG will undertake review of potential operational use of data from the NASA research satellites that will be a part of upcoming NASA Senior Reviews – and will provide results to both NASA and NOAA senior management to assist in their decision making processes




• Data Record Production, Stewardship, Reprocessing– Climate Data Records (CDRs):

• NASA fosters competitive development of Earth System Data Records, including CDRs, as justified by science priorities. Some CDRs will be transitioned for continuing operational production and long-term archival

• Near Term CDR opportunities– Ocean Color CDRs – JWG will assess the present state of production of ocean color

data records (SeaWiFS, MODIS, future NPOESS VIIRS) and provide guidance to NASA and NOAA on the evolution of ocean color data record production, stewardship and reprocessing

– Data Archive and Access:

• NASA and NOAA have substantial information systems which provide both mission critical and long term archives, and supporting services and tools to provide public assess

• JWG will evalue the current state of archive and access of all CDRs and identify gaps in archive/access plans

• JWG will evaluate the ongoing CLASS/MODIS pilot project to establish an interface between EOSDIS and CLASS – and will emphasize implementing a set of common standards to enable NASA and NOAA to effectively exchange data between these systems.




• Data Utilization– Research Testbeds

• Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation and NASA Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center testbeds were established to accelerate use of data from research satellites in operational forecast and/or warning systems.

• JWG will evaluate testbeds on an annual basis, and provide resultant recommendations to senior Agency management

• Tools and Standards Transition– Earth System Modeling Framework

• The JWG will evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to transition NASA’s Earth System Modeling Framework (a standard software platform for Earth system models) to support NOAA’s operational global forecast system

– Calibration/Validation (e.g., MOBY)• The JWG will track progress of the NOAA/NIST FY2008 initiative on inter-calibration of satellite

measurements. This initiative enables integration of observations and products from different satellite systems and instruments to improve accuracy of climate applications. Accurate calibration requires measurements from in situ sources, such as MOBY



NOAA Solar Wind Transition ActivitySupported by Congressional directed support in FY06, FY07

• NOAA Lead: Ron Zwickl (NWS/SEC)

• Near Term Objectives

– Evaluate Results of BAA for Solar Winds

• Announcement Jun 05

• Two contracts awarded Oct 05 (~ $500K total)

– Three options studied

» NOAA Smallsat (LM)

» Commercial Data Buy (Space Services, Inc.)

» Refurbish NASA DSCOVR (LM)

• Booz-Allen-Hamilton evaluating business plan of data buy concept

• March 16 info brief to NOSC; April decision briefing (to be scheduled)



NOAA Sea Surface Height Transition Activity Supported by Congressional directed support in FY06, FY07

• NOAA Lead: Ants Leetma (OAR/GFDL)


– Sign the MOU for OSTM/Jason-2

– Complete ground system with EUMETSAT for OSTM

– Confirm requirements for Jason-3

• How many altimeters? What kind? (frequencies, orbits, etc.)

– Build case for Jason-3 in FY2009 budget

• Develop reports on proposed applications/uses of the data and the technology approach



NOAA Surface Vector Winds Transition Activity Supported by Congressional directed support in FY06, FY07

• NOAA Lead: Bob Atlas (OAR/AOML)


– Confirm requirements for Surface Vector Winds (SVW)

• Hold workshop 1st week of June at Tropical Prediction Center to lay out plan for evaluating the similarities, differences, and synergies for all sources of SVW observations

– Examples are: Windsat, CMIS, ASCAT, QuikSCAT, Dual-frequency MEOSCAT

• Assess options to meet those requirements



NOAA Ocean Color Transition Activity Supported by Congressional directed support in FY06, FY07

• Lead: Rick Stumpf (NOS/NCCOS)


– Include MOBY in Climate/NIST initiative

– Clarify requirements (M. Abbott 2nd workshop at NOAA Cooperative Institute for Oceanographic Satellite Studies)

– Insert Ocean Color requirements in the FY2009 PPBES Planning Phase


Basic Requirements Issues

• I see 2 main issues that require slightly different approaches– Improve ability to display and manipulate data

(esp. in AWIPS) – short & long term issue– Move data requirements forward so solution

space can be explored – longer term issu


Suggestions to Move Forward• Improve ability to display and manipulate data

(esp. in AWIPS)– Use OSIP as path into AWIPS requirements process

(SREC)– Have to answer the “So What?”– Can move to SREC after OSIP Gate 1 or 2 (rather

quickly if requirement is clearly valid and critical)– Need broad support to get high ranking so capability

floats to top of implementation list– Best to have service area advocates (i.e., marine,

tropical) and users “push” requirement instead of the data provider


Suggestions to Move Forward• Move data requirements forward so solution space can

be explored– In NWS, use OSIP to define need

• Probably only need to complete Gates 1 or 2• Continue into AWIPS SREC to make sure data will be exploitable

– Feed into PPBES via NOAA Programs• Define as an observational gap in NOAA Programs (LFW, AVN,

MWX, MOD, CEO, etc) during Planning Phase• Cross-Program and cross-Goal Team synergies are important• Coordination with Satellite Subgoal is critical• Coordinate with NOAA/NASA JWG to explore solution space and

transition issues

– Have to answer the “So What?”


backups


OB8 Schedule5/30/06

A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M

x x x x x x x x x

T - Test DataRequirements FD - Freeze DRsOB6.Final Design, Code, Test OB6 Deploy LP - Live Data for PIT

A = AlphaOB6.1 Maintenance DCT S Deploy B - Beta

7.1 7.2 SREC Requirements Baseline 7.0 Update UpdateOB7.1 Design, Code, Test 7.1 SwIT 7.1 Deploy SVR 9/8/06

A B

OB7.2 Design, Code, Test 7.2 SwIT 7.2 Deploy SVR 12/15/07A B

OB7.2.1 Maintenance DCT S Deploy SVR 2/9/07

8.1 8.2 8.3SREC Requirements Baseline 8.0 Update Update UpdateOB8.1 Design, Code, Test SwIT Deploy SVR 6/1/07

T FD LP A BOB8.1.1 Maintenance DCT S Deploy SVR 7/27/07

OB8.2 Design, Code, Test SwIT Deploy SVR 11/16/07T FD LP A B


OB8.3 Design, Code, Test SwIT Deploy SVR 5/2/08T FD LP A B


FY2009FY2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY2008

nws requirements process and relation to ppbes suggestions to move svw capabilities forward kevin j....

Documents

schrab svw workshop

stage process kevin

cost stage

nws requirements process

svw capabilities forwardkevin

exploratory research

applied research

disciplined process