U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

31–549 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

BLUE TECHNOLOGIES: USE OF NEW MARITIME 

TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND 

MISSION PERFORMANCE 

(115–44) 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 8, 2018 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-transportation?path=/ 

browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/transportation 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania, Chairman 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee, 

Vice Chair 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California 

ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, Arkansas 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

BOB GIBBS, Ohio 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois 

MARK SANFORD, South Carolina 

ROB WOODALL, Georgia 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana 

JOHN KATKO, New York 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina 

MIKE BOST, Illinois 

RANDY K. WEBER, SR., Texas 

DOUG LAMALFA, California 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania 

PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan 

JOHN J. FASO, New York 

A. DREW FERGUSON IV, Georgia 

BRIAN J. MAST, Florida 

JASON LEWIS, Minnesota 

VACANCY 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

JOHN GARAMENDI, California 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., Georgia 

ANDRE ́ CARSON, Indiana 

RICHARD M. NOLAN, Minnesota 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut, Vice 

Ranking Member 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois 

JARED HUFFMAN, California 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida 

DONALD M. PAYNE, JR., New Jersey 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan 

MARK DESAULNIER, California 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Chairman 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana 

DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina 

RANDY K. WEBER, SR., Texas 

BRIAN J. MAST, Florida 

JASON LEWIS, Minnesota, Vice Chair 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania (Ex Officio) 

JOHN GARAMENDI, California 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JARED HUFFMAN, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon (Ex Officio) 

(III) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... v 

WITNESSES 

PANEL 1 

Rear Admiral Michael J. Haycock, Assistant Commandant for Acquisition 

and Chief Acquisition Officer, U.S. Coast Guard: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44 

PANEL 2 

Eric J. Terrill, Ph.D., Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development 

Center, Scripps Institution of Oceanography: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 48 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 58 

Michael B. Jones, President, The Maritime Alliance: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 66 

Thomas S. Chance, Chief Executive Officer, ASV Global, LLC: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 70 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 73 

Christopher J. Coyle, Member, International Ocean Science and Technology 

Industry Association: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 77 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 81 

H. Tuba Ozkan-Haller, Ph.D., Professor and Associate Dean, College of Earth, 

Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 89 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 94 

Rear Admiral Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, Consortium for Ocean Leadership: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 96 

Responses to questions for the record from Hon. John Garamendi, a 

Representative in Congress from the State of California .......................... 102 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Rear Admiral Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, Consortium for Ocean Leadership, post-hearing supplemental 

information to remarks made to Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in 

Congress from the U.S. Virgin Islands ............................................................... 39, 42 

Page

IV 

ADDITIONS TO THE RECORD 

Written statement of Brian Wynne, President and CEO, Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International ............................................................. 106 

v 


Insert offset folio 1 here 31549.001

jilill S!>!JU$ter 

4Cbairman 

(l[:ommittee on m:ran~portation anb 1fnfra~tructure 

<m:.s. ~ou~e of 1\epre~entatitle~ 

Wa~blngton, 1JBQC 20515 ~eter ill. lill<.:fa;ia 

'!aanking Jlllember 

ChristopherW. Vits~m, StaffDirector Katherine W, Dedrick, Demoeratlc StaffD!rector 

May4,2018 

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER 

TO: 

FROM: 

RE: 

Members, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

Staff, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

Hearing on "Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve 

Efficiency and Mission Performance" 

PURPOSE 

The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation will hold a hearing on 

Tuesday, May 8, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., in 2I67 Rayburn House Office Building to examine 

emerging maritime technologies. The Subcommittee will explore how such technologies could 

improve U.S. Coast Guard mission performance and enhance the safety and efficiency of 

maritime transportation. The Subcommittee will hear from the Coast Guard, representatives of 

industry, and academia. 

BACKGROUND 

The Coast Guard performs II official statutory missions including search and rescue, 

aids to navigation, law enforcement, and interdiction of illegal drugs. These missions have direct 

and significant impacts on commerce, property, and life in the United States. In 2017, the Coast 

Guard rescued or assisted nearly I2,000 people in response to the aftermath of hurricanes 

Harvey, Irma, and Maria. 1 The Coast Guard's missions not only support disaster relief, but are 

also essential to supporting the U.S. economy through its regulation, oversight, and enforcement 

of the U.S. Maritime Transportation System (MTS). The MTS remains is integral to the 

country's commerce, carrying 73.5 percent by weight and 46.6 percent by value of U.S. 

international merchandise.2 In 2017 as a specific example, the Coast Guard's domestic 

1 USCG. FY2019 Budget Overview. https://www.uscg.mil!Portals/O/documents/budget/2019"/o20BIB FINALw.pdf 2 U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics and Federal Highway Administration. 

2013 Freight Facts and Figures. 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freightlfreight analysis/nat freight stats/docs/13factsfigures/index.htm 

(as of August 2014). 
vi 


Insert offset folio 2 here 31549.002

icebreakers conducted more than 5,300 hours of icebreaking to facilitate the movement of $1.5 

billion of cargoes through ice-impeded waters of the Great Lakes and Eastern Seaboard.3 

Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA), which is the effective understanding of the global 

maritime domain that could impact the security, safety, economy, or environment of the United 

States, is an important component critical to the Coast Guard's mission performance. As one of 

the military sea services, the Coast Guard gathers and distributes MDA information to other 

governmental and non-governmental partner agencies as it conducts each of the 11 official 

missions within a multi-layered security framework. 

Congress continues to be interested in the Coast Guard's successful adoption and 

integration of new and emerging technologies. In the !15th Congress, versions of the Coast 

Guard Authorization Act of2017 introduced in the House (H.R. 2518) and in the Senate (S. 

1129) included a section requiring the Coast Guard to enter into an arrangement with the 

National Academy of Sciences (Academy). This arrangement would allow the Academy to 

prepare an assessment of existing and emerging unmanned technologies that could be used by 

the Coast Guard. The assessment will analyze how the use of new and emerging MDA 

technologies can assist the Coast Guard to carry out its missions at lower costs, expand the scope 

and range of the Coast Guard's MDA, use its personnel and assets more efficiently, and identify 

adjustments in any Coast Guard policies, procedures, and protocols to incorporate these new 

systems and technologies. 

Blue Technologies 

"Blue technology" is a term that describes a wide swath of technologies and systems that 

support, sustain, and integrate the U.S. and global ocean economy. Accordingly, systems and 

technologies such as autonomous vehicles, sensors (both remote and in situ), ocean observation 

platforms, and hydrographic services, among many others fall under the term. The integration of 

advanced blue technologies could improve operational efficiencies and the Coast Guard's 

mission performance, as well as MDA. Emerging maritime technologies may contribute to 

enhanced operational flexibility, improved understanding of the maritime environment, and 

optimal deployment and use of conventional Coast Guard assets (e.g., cutters, aircraft, small 

boats, etc.). 

Search and Rescue 

Rescue 21 is the Coast Guard's advanced command, control and direction-finding 

communications system that can locate distressed mariners at sea and on navigable rivers 

using Very High Frequency (VHF) radio transmissions. The system identifies the 

location of callers in distress through a line of bearing from the source of VHF radio 

transmissions to a radio tower, thereby significantly reducing search time. This directionfinding capability is a significant improvement over the legacy National Distress and 

Response System (NDRS), especially for mariners who may not be able to provide 

accurate positions. However, Rescue 21 relies solely on VHF radio transmissions, which 

is likely less prevalent than cell phones, particularly for mariners on smaller commercial 

3 USCG. FY2019 Budget Overview. https://www.uscg.mil/Portals/O/documentslbudget/2019%20BIB FINALw.pdf 

2 
vii 


Insert offset folio 3 here 31549.003

and recreational vessels. The Coast Guard has an ongoing project assessing the use of 

cell phone technology to locate distressed mariners in mayday and search and rescue 

scenarios. 4 This project is scheduled to be completed in March 2019. 

Integrated Communications 

Efficient and reliable communications between Coast Guard shore-side facilities, 

ships, small boats, and aircraft are critical to MDA and Coast Guard mission 

performance. The Coast Guard is currently recapitalizing its offshore assets with an 

integrated communications platform. The Command, Control, Communications, 

Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) acquisition program 

acquires and integrates electronic sensors and computer networking, data processing and 

information-sharing equipment, to better enable Coast Guard Service members to 

perform mission tasks, develop situational awareness and improve coordination with U.S. 

agencies and allied nations. The C4ISR program also provides command and control 

equipment that enables cutter crews to navigate, maneuver, target and fire weapons; 

collect and analyze sensor data; and perform other tasks to support ship operations. The 

ability of all Coast Guard assets to successfully communicate with one another will assist 

the Coast Guard in conducting missions in a more efficient and cost-effective manner. 

Unmanned Systems 

Unmanned Maritime Systems (UMS), commonly described as autonomous and 

radio controlled Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs), and Unmanned Underwater 

Vehicles (UUVs), operate in surface or subsurface aquatic environments with the 

potential to increase MDA and support Coast Guard missions. Recent developments in 

radar and sensor technologies, power generation, transfer and storage, as well as delivery 

and recovery methods have led to a tipping point where investment in UMS could 

potentially provide a significant enhancement to Coast Guard operational capability. In 

partnership with other federal agencies, the Coast Guard has an ongoing project assessing 

UMS for Coast Guard missions, including understanding the scope of available platforms 

and evaluating the needs for full-scale application.5 This project is scheduled to be 

completed in July 2018. 

In the above-surface domain, there is an ongoing Coast Guard program to install 

small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) on National Security Cutters (NSC) in order to 

maximize NSC at-sea mission performance. This program was funded at $6 million in 

fiscal year (FY) 2017 and $500,000 in FY 2018, and the FY 2019 President's budget 

requested $6 million. Additionally, the Coast Guard has another ongoing project, in 

collaboration with Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Homeland 

Security, exploring the use of land-based, long-range and ultra-long endurance UAS, 

which could provide multiple days of surveillance while employing advanced optics, 

4 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Portfolio. 

March 2018. Project #1108. 5 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Portfolio. 

March 2018. Project #7808. 

3 
viii 


Insert offset folio 4 here 31549.004

wide-area surface surveillance, and detection technologies6

• This program was funded at 

$18 million in FY 2017. H.R. 2518 includes authority for the Coast Guard to establish a 

land-based unmanned aircraft system program that would be under the control of the 

Commandant of the Coast Guard. H.R. 2518 passed the House on July 20, 2017 as 

Division E in the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act (H.R. 2825) and 

the provisions of H.R. 2518 are included in S. 1129, which is awaiting Senate Floor 

action. 

Source: Loretta Haring. Research. Development, Test and Evaluation Spotlight: 

Aircraft System. Coast Guard Compass. Jan 9, 2018. 

As UAS become more widely available and affordable, concerns are being raised 

regarding the risk that unauthorized UAS may jeopardize Coast Guard operations. In 

March 2018, the Coast Guard MH-65 Dolphin helicopter crew from Air Station Port 

Angeles in Washington state was conducting training exercises near the airport when the 

crew maneuvered to miss a drone at an estimated distance of 50 feet. 7 The drone had not 

been authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration to fly within the five-mile radius 

of the airport. This incident highlights a need to better manage increased interactions 

from unauthorized UAS activities with Coast Guard surface and air assets. The Coast 

Guard has an ongoing counter-UAS project evaluating methods to search, detect, 

mitigate, and defeat illicit, illegal or threatening use of unmanned aircraft systems in a 

6 Loretta Haring. Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Spotlight: Long-Range, Ultra-Long Endurance 

Unmanned Aircraft System. Coast Guard Compass. Jan 9, 2018. 7 USCG news release, Mar 20, 2018. https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDHSCG/bulletins/le3927a 

4 
ix 


Insert offset folio 5 here 31549.005

maritime environment.8 This project is scheduled to be completed in December 2020. 

S.1129 includes a section that would provide the Coast Guard with authority to address 

and mitigate threats posed by unmanned aircraft to the safety and security of a Coast 

Guard vessel or aircraft or any vessel or aircraft the Coast Guard is assisting or escorting. 

Automatic Identification Svstem (A!SI 

AIS is important for both safe navigation and MDA aspects of the Coast Guard's 

missions. AIS is a VHF-based, short-range communication system that provides a 

common platform for vessels to electronically exchange relevant vessel data (e.g., vessel 

identification number, vessel type, position, course, and speed) with other nearby vessels 

and shore-based AIS receivers. AIS data is overlaid on electronic charts to provide 

vessel operators with near real-time information on positions, courses, and speeds of 

other vessels. Several private companies have developed enhanced AIS systems that 

leverage navigation data from satellite and other sources and integrate it into a single 

common operational picture that can be viewed on several platforms including smart 

phones. 

Navigation Services 

The Coast Guard maintains a system of over 47,000 federally owned, lighted and 

unlighted, buoys, beacons, and other aids-to-navigation (A TON) that mark 25,000 miles 

of waterways and navigable coastal waters. In recent years, the Coast Guard has 

augmented its physical A TONs with electronic or virtual A TONs, using AIS technology.9 

Electronic A TONs may enhance MDA and form an improved view of maritime traffic 

within or near U.S. and territorial waters. Use of electronic A TONs have been limited in 

the U.S. Arctic due to the lack of major ports and minimal maritime traffic. To address 

navigation safety and risks in the Arctic, the Coast Guard has an ongoing project 

examining a next generation Arctic Navigation Safety Information System including a 

near shore system and extended range AIS. 10 

Maritime Boundaries o(Exclusion 

To conduct port security or environmental remediation, the Coast Guard may 

need to temporarily exclude unauthorized users from a maritime location. For example, 

during the 2016 Democratic and Republican National Conventions, the Coast Guard 

issued temporary security zones in the waters near the events, where unauthorized vessels 

were not permitted to enter without permission from the Captain of the Port. 11 To 

communicate the boundaries of exclusion to maritime users, the Coast Guard may use a 

combination of physical markers and manned patrols. There is an ongoing Coast Guard 

project to improve ways to mark, communicate, and patrol the boundaries of a maritime 

8 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Porifolio. 

March 2018. Project #7812. 9 USCG Report to Congress. May 4, 2016. Electronic Aids to Navigation. 10 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Portfolio. 

March 2018. Project #6211. 11 81 Federal Register48331; 81 Federal Register 41811 

5 
x 


Insert offset folio 6 here 31549.006

area of exclusion, without a dependence on manned Coast Guard patrols. 12 Using novel 

technology to successfully fulfill missions while decreasing reliance on manned patrols 

enhances Coast Guard operational flexibility. 

Data Analytics 

Data analytics improves decision-making through the use of modeling and 

simulation based on collected data. The Coast Guard has an ongoing project to estimate 

vessel violation probabilities in marine vessel inspections. This project identifies factors 

that influence a vessel's probability of having a violation and develops tools to optimize 

detection with limited inspection resources. 13 The use of data analytics within the Coast 

Guard advances optimal deployment of assets and personnel. 

12 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Por!folio. 

March 20 !8. Project #5921. 13 USCG Acquisition Directorate. Research, Development, Test & Evaluation. FY18 RDT&E Project Por!folio. 

March 2018. Projects #7532 

6 
xi 


Insert offset folio 7 here 31549.007

WITNESS LIST 

Rear Admiral Michael J. Haycock 

Assistant Commandant for Acquisition and Chief Acquisition Officer 

United States Coast Guard 

Mr. Eric J. Terrill, Ph.D. 

Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

Mr. Michael B. Jones 

President 

The Maritime Alliance 

Mr. Chris Coyle 

Member 

International Ocean Science and Technology Industry Association 

Mr. Thomas S. Chance 

Chief Executive Officer 

Autonomous Surface Vehicles, LLC 

Ms. Tuba Ozkan-Haller, Ph.D. 

College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences 

Oregon State University 

Rear Admiral Jonathan W. White, USN, Ret. 

President and Chief Executive Officer 

Consortium for Ocean Leadership 

7 
(1) 

BLUE TECHNOLOGIES: USE OF NEW MARITIME TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND MISSION PERFORMANCE 

TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME

TRANSPORTATION, 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Duncan Hunter (Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. HUNTER. Good morning. The subcommittee will come to 

order. 

Today the subcommittee will hear testimony on how emerging 

maritime technologies can improve the efficiency and performance 

by the Coast Guard. 

The Coast Guard performs many important missions, from defense readiness and migrant and drug interdictions, to search and 

rescue operations and fisheries law enforcement. However, since 

2010, annual administration requests for the Coast Guard have not 

been adequate for the Service to acquire new assets to perform its 

11 missions at a rate that keeps up with those mission needs. 

This subcommittee has urged the Coast Guard to strongly advocate for the resources it needs to acquire the assets necessary to 

conduct its missions. The National Security Cutter acquisition program has exceeded the program of record; the Fast Response Cutter acquisition program is getting close to completing the program 

of record; while the Offshore Patrol Cutter and polar icebreaker acquisition programs are only just beginning. 

The reality of the Coast Guard’s operational situation is that 

even with new assets, the Coast Guard has a big job to do. This 

subcommittee recognizes that technology can be a tool to fill any 

operational gaps in a cost-effective manner. 

Unmanned systems, navigation technologies, and new cell phone 

technologies are all tools that the Coast Guard can use to improve 

their mission performance. These technologies can improve the 

Coast Guard’s maritime domain awareness and help the Coast 

Guard more effectively target the use of expensive manned assets. 

The Coast Guard needs to use every tool out there. 

The Coast Guard cannot accomplish all their missions by simply 

putting their service men and women on cutters, helicopters, and 

planes. The Service needs to be smart and strategic about where 

2 

to place its assets and use its personnel. This is where data and 

technology can help. 

For example, Indonesia has partnered with Google to catch illegal fishing in realtime. Google co-founded Global Fishing Watch, an 

online mapping platform. Fishermen, or pirates, turn off their 

tracking system when they are illegally fishing, but Google’s mapping platform is able to use machine learning to study vessel movement patterns to locate them. 

This was all done using Government-owned vessel monitoring 

system data in the mapping platform and adding new raw satellite 

imagery to produce a detailed footprint of fishing activities, revealing 5,000 previously invisible boats, and allowing Indonesian law 

enforcement to address illegal fishing in its waters. 

This subcommittee will keep pushing the Coast Guard to be innovative. The types of technologies we will discuss today can help 

the Coast Guard strategically and more effectively use its assets. 

There is no replacement for trained and capable servicemembers, 

but if the Coast Guard makes better use of technology, this can 

make servicemembers’ jobs more effective and safer. 

I held a roundtable in San Diego in February and met with a variety of companies that are working on new maritime technologies. 

I know we have some of those panel members with us today as well 

as other experts. I look forward to learning about the current technologies that exist right now and the technologies that the Coast 

Guard is using and working on to use in the future. 

Lastly, I want to say when we are at the Joint Harbor Operations Center there in San Diego where the Coast Guard operates 

out of, now you have a Harbor Police desk inside the Coast Guard 

operations center where you can see the entire Coronado Bay, all 

of the San Diego Bay, all of the Naval Institution, everything. You 

can see around the entire area in realtime. 

And the Coast Guard cameras are operated by National Guardsmen. When the two National Guardsmen who were watching the 

Coast Guard cameras, and this was about 2 months ago, left to go 

to Ukraine, I think, or Georgia to help train people, those two seats 

were empty. The Coast Guard did not have anybody there. 

So even with the technology and the cameras and the assets to 

be able to look at the entire San Diego Bay, they were saying, 

‘‘Well, that is great, but we cannot do it because we lack two people.’’ So that was not a technology issue. That was a manning problem, which they are fixing now. 

But it was great to see at least that technology being in place 

and tied in with the Harbor Police and everybody else in the San 

Diego Bay region. 

So I would like to thank our witnesses for being here today and 

I look forward to hearing their thoughts on these issues. 

And I yield to Ranking Member Garamendi. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, thank you so very much. 

I appreciate the opportunity to delve into these blue technologies 

and discuss their potential to transform how we envision both the 

maritime infrastructure and emerging information systems and the 

technologies that drive advancements in science and industry. 

The hearing could not come soon enough. Over the past decade, 

countries around the world, especially China and the European 

3 

Union, have turned their attention to their coasts and oceans to investigate the potential of maritime-related industries, ocean resources as a major source of new jobs and economic growth. 

The U.S. would be well advised not to ignore this push by other 

nations to expand their economic opportunities in the maritime 

economy. If we do ignore it, we risk falling behind the development, 

testing, and deployment of the new blue technologies driven by marine data that is easily accessible, interoperable, and we squander 

future opportunities to develop new products, services, and applications to strengthen and diversify our maritime economy. 

Fortunately, many of the folks here have not been sitting idly on 

the sidelines. In fact, each of our witnesses here this morning can 

attest to numerous achievements thus far and examples of innovation. 

For instance, a leading edge, very high frequency-frequency modulation—VHF–FM—communication systems, known as Rescue 21, 

is the Coast Guard’s new advanced command, control, and direction-finding communications system that has enabled the Coast 

Guard to execute its search and rescue missions with far greater 

agility and efficiency. 

Another example is the physical oceanographic real-time system, 

or PORTS [Physical Oceanographic Real-time System], a decision 

support tool developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration that improves the safety and efficiency of the maritime commerce and coastal resource management through the integration of real-time environmental observations, forecasts, and 

geospatial information. 

I am sure we will hear from witnesses about these and other activities. 

A recent article in the Maritime Executive focused on Russian 

activities in the Baltic and eastern Mediterranean to jam and disrupt GPS systems that vessels rely upon, and we will explore some 

of that with our witnesses. 

Considering that many blue technology systems rely on satellite 

telemetry and precision signals for timing, navigation, and communication, what would happen to these new assets, whether they are 

unmanned gliders or maritime electronic navigational systems, if 

their GPS signals were disrupted either intentionally or unintentionally. 

Presently, the U.S. has no active domestic backup timing and 

navigational system should GPS go down, and I think you have 

heard me speak on this before. So I will not go on further, except 

to say that former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter said it correctly. GPS is a single point of failure. So a piece of work we need 

to do. 

A fascinating hearing. We are going to hear from others. There 

is so much that we need to do in this domain and in this area so 

that the blue technology systems are American and used by our 

mariners and our military. 

So with that in mind, let me conclude by welcoming our witnesses. I look forward to hearing from you, and I hope to engage 

all of you in questions. 

I yield back my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman from California. 

4 

And this is a great panel, which we have one person—— 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Can I go? 

Mr. HUNTER. Oh, Mr. DeFazio is recognized for an opening statement. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. It is early, Duncan. Thank you. 

Thanks very much for having this hearing. You know, this is an 

area where the Government should be investing a significant 

amount more money in acquiring new technologies, not just for the 

Coast Guard, but for those who research the oceans. 

Seventy percent of Earth’s surface: ocean. We have explored thoroughly about 10 percent of it, and 50 to 80 percent of the life on 

Earth exists in the oceans. 

You know, we are a maritime Nation. It is incredibly critical to 

our future that we not be left mired in the 20th century when other 

nations are employing 21st-century technology to better understand our oceans and in some cases exploit our oceans, in some 

cases exploit to the point of being unsustainable. We need to better 

understand the majority of Earth’s surface. 

And I really want to thank the chairman for holding the hearing, 

and I want to acknowledge Dr. Tuba Ozkan-Haller. She is a professor of civil and construction engineering at Oregon State University. She is the associate dean of the College of Earth, Ocean, and 

Atmospheric Sciences. 

We had a little brief discussion beforehand. I know that for one 

thing we have underfunded the deep-ocean buoys. I have been 

working both for earthquake detection, remote sensing out near 

where the tectonic plates meet off the northern California-southern 

Oregon coast. 

And I have also been very concerned about the lack of capability 

of just doing more mundane things like detecting wave heights and 

directions and that for coastal shipping safety and mariners, and 

others, and also so we can better understand these oceans if we 

want to deploy or hope to deploy wave generation systems or wind 

generation systems on the ocean’s surface. We need to know a lot 

more about what is going on out there. 

So I think this is critical for the Coast Guard, critical for the 

United States of America, critical for the future of our economy. 

With that, I thank the chairman and yield back the balance of 

my time. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the ranking member of the full committee 

for being here. It is always a great honor to have him and shine 

some light on what we are doing here as well. 

I just want to say when I got into this about 6 years ago when 

I became the subcommittee chairman, I had gone to somewhere in 

Silicon Valley and saw a thing that the guy that invented Java was 

working on, floating surfboards that can sense oil in the water and 

has sensors on it and can drive themselves infinitely, for a long 

time. 

So I came back, and it was one of my first subcommittee hearings here, and I asked the Coast Guard. We went through all of 

the language in Coast Guard regulations to see what they would 

classify that as, and it came back as ‘‘floating debris.’’ That is what 

the Coast Guard lawyers would call it, the guy who invented Java’s 

5 

surfboard that can sense stuff. It was classified as ‘‘floating debris.’’ 

That was 6 years ago. 

I think things have changed. So if you could tell us how things 

have changed, it would be great. 

Rear Admiral Michael Haycock, Assistant Commandant for Acquisition and Chief Acquisition Officer for the United States Coast 

Guard, you are recognized. 

Thank you for being here. 

TESTIMONY OF REAR ADMIRAL MICHAEL J. HAYCOCK, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT FOR ACQUISITION AND CHIEF ACQUISITION OFFICER, U.S. COAST GUARD 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member 

Garamendi, distinguished members of the subcommittee, Congressman DeFazio, thank you for the opportunity to speak about the 

Coast Guard’s ongoing efforts to pursue new technologies and solutions that have great potential to enhance our mission success. 

I thank you for your oversight and your continued support of our 

Service, and I ask that my full written testimony be included as 

part of the official record. 

As the Assistant Commandant—— 

Mr. HUNTER. Do you mind pulling up the microphone a little bit 

closer to you, too? Thank you. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Is this better? 

As the Assistant Commandant for Acquisition, I have several opportunities to testify before this body on the Coast Guard’s programs, to revitalize our aging fleet of cutters and aircraft, boats 

and support systems. And with the support of the Congress, and 

especially this subcommittee, we are making real progress towards 

delivering the assets and the capabilities that our men and women 

in the field need to execute the missions for the American people. 

Our continued operational success will require a broad portfolio 

of complementary programs and activities that are built upon a 

foundation of innovation, integration, and strategic vision. 

One such program is the Coast Guard’s Office of Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, which supports research and innovation across the entire span of the Coast Guard’s missions. The 

Coast Guard RDT&E project portfolio is closely aligned with the 

mission needs and the priorities that are identified by our operational community. 

Because the program is relatively modest, we are constantly 

looking at ways to best leverage partnerships with DHS [Department of Homeland Security] and DoD [Department of Defense] research entities, national laboratories, academia, and industry to 

best support the Coast Guard’s needs. 

One example of leveraging partnerships is our Research and Development Center’s effort with the DHS Science and Technology Directorate to form the DHS/Coast Guard Science and Technology Innovation Center, also known as the STIC. This joint Coast Guard 

and DHS team is focused on rapidly transitioning innovative technologies into the hands of our operational community. 

We are also working with DHS Centers of Excellence on projects 

related to maritime cybersecurity and in the Arctic as well. 

6 

We are also at the table with the Defense Advanced Research 

Projects Agency, also known as DARPA, to look at counter-UAS 

[unmanned aerial systems]. We have conducted in situ burning 

testing at the Joint Maritime Test Facility in Mobile, Alabama, 

through partnerships with entities such as the Bureau of Safety 

and Environmental Enforcement and the Naval Research Laboratory. 

We also collaborate with industry through numerous cooperative 

research and development agreements, also known as CRADAs. 

These agreements are mutually beneficial in providing industry 

partners with access to real world requirements while keeping the 

Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments in technology. 

We have formalized these cooperative R&D agreements with industry leaders such as Mercury Marine, Lockheed Martin, Conoco 

Phillips, and several others, and right now we are looking at a 

number of ways to increase the number of partnerships with smaller innovative technology companies as well. 

This year marks the RDT&E program’s 50th anniversary, and 

throughout the program’s history, it has delivered products and capabilities that are vital to carrying out or Coast Guard missions. 

Projects have been driven by events such as Exxon Valdez, hurricane responses, Deepwater Horizon, and the recent sinking of the 

SS El Faro. We have led research in oil spill mitigation, development of electronic navigation, and other research areas important to mariner 

safety and commerce. Last year was one of our busiest years to 

date. When the Coast Guard swung into action as Hurricane Harvey swept through the gulf coast, the RDT&E program was there. 

We used our innovative crowd sourcing platform to collect realtime lessons learned from responders on scene. The responders told 

us stories about sending 50 small rescue boats and 28 helicopters 

into the storm with limited ability to track the rescuers or the assets that they were in. 

The Research and Development Center in New London, Connecticut, immediately sprung into action and began prototyping 

small, affordable, off-the-shelf tracking devices that could provide 

our operation commanders with options for greater situational 

awareness even under the most challenging conditions. The program is nimble, and it is able to respond quickly. 

In addition to meeting emergent needs, the R&D program is 

working to help strategically position the Coast Guard for the future. With the ever-increasing level of automation within the Maritime Transportation System, we are working to stay ahead on 

cybersecurity challenges and threats. The program is developing 

improvements to communications capability and domain awareness 

in the Arctic, and we are collectively excited about the potential improved mission effectiveness made possible by machine learning 

and artificial intelligence and augmented reality and other emergent technologies. 

The program is looking at potential Coast Guard uses for autonomous and semi-autonomous systems from the seafloor to space, as 

directed by Congress. 

Technology changes at a very rapid pace, and the researchers 

and the engineers and innovators in our RDT&E program are 

7 

poised to find efficiencies, reduce risk, and explore technologies to 

optimize mission performance. 

As the Service moves in new directions, research and development will be increasingly vital to provide this knowledge for the 

Coast Guard. 

I thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today, and 

I look forward to your questions. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Admiral. I appreciate it. 

I want to bring up a couple systems and a couple example of 

things that are not crazy. They are not seafloor to space. They are 

not big disruptors, but something like the long-range acoustic device, the LRAD, which when I was in San Diego, they had a couple 

on Coast Guard ships now. I think one or two little cutters have 

been using them down in Florida. 

The Navy has had these for over 5 years on every single Navy 

ship, and for everybody that is watching or listening, it is a speaker, and you are really loud when you talk on it. That is what it 

is. It is called long-range acoustic device. You can hail people at 

like 100 meters away, and they can hear you in the pilothouse of 

the boat when you are yelling at them. 

I thought it was amazing that the Coast Guard are the people 

who yell at people to get out of an area don’t have that, and the 

people who shoot at people do have that. Literally every Navy ship 

has them, and the Coast Guard is still testing as of 2 months ago, 

after 5 years of Navy use. 

That is unacceptable. There is no reason to be testing something 

that the Navy has been using for 5 years on literally every single 

Navy surface ship that is now on one Coast Guard ship. 

Another example are Predators. You talk about autonomous vehicles, remotely piloted vehicles, unmanned vehicles, artificial intelligence vehicles. You don’t have them. Everybody else has been 

using them but you. 

You are the smallest force. You have the fewest number of people. You get the least amount of money every year, and you are the 

slowest to adopt technologies that can leverage your undermanned 

Service in accomplishing your 11 missions. But you are the slowest 

to adapt those technologies, and that is why we are having this 

hearing today. 

So I guess the first question I have is a number of unmanned 

marine systems are being developed that have the ability to act as 

a force multiplier. We are talking about any kind of UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] that has a maritime sensor, and that is 

quite a few now, and you can slap different maritime sensors on 

any kind of UAV, big or small. 

Such systems have long endurance. It can detect illicit vessel 

traffic, and some can even act as a visual deterrence, and who 

knows yet what we can have them do when it comes to turning off 

motors, doing things like that where they can zap these fast boats 

if there is not a marine layer or something like that where they 

can see. 

So has the Coast Guard explored the use of these systems to improve demand awareness in transit zones? 

And what role do you foresee in the future? 

8 

And let us go back to the previous Commandant. Admiral 

Zukunft said that he did not want Predators or UAVs off the coast 

of San Diego or Florida. He wanted them flying over South and 

Central America so they could get good keys and cues on the bad 

guys coming north, not necessarily when the boat is going 70 miles 

an hour in the ocean off of Orange County. 

So that was what he had talked about and kind of his vision, and 

I would like to hear now how that is going to play into what you 

think and what the new Commandant thinks of doing that, or 

whether he wants to see UAVs off the coast of Orange County. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Thank you. 

The unmanned aviation systems come in a variety of capabilities 

and sizes. So the one you are talking about or most recently were 

talking about were the semi-long range and ultra-long endurance 

UAVs. 

And thanks to Congress and this subcommittee, we received 

money in fiscal year 2017 to actually explore that and actually do 

a demonstration of that. 

We have worked with folks at DHS, in particular, the PEO [Program Executive Office] for UAV systems at DHS, and Customs and 

Border Protection as well, and we have been working together for 

the last year or so to put that program into place, and I am excited 

to announce that we actually issued the request for proposals last 

week to actually get that demonstration in place to see how that 

technology can be used in the Coast Guard for long range. 

In kind of the middle-range area, we make great strides on a 

small UAS that we can deploy on our ships. So we actually have 

kind of a prototype system over the last several years with Coast 

Guard cutter Stratton. So we deployed a UAS onboard for three or 

four deployments, and that UAS has provided great capabilities, 

and our crews love them. They provide maritime domain awareness 

on sight. 

Mr. HUNTER. What is it? What UAS system or what UAS? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. It is the Insitu ScanEagle, sir. 

Mr. HUNTER. ScanEagle, got you. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Yes. So that is a catapult-launched asset that 

we launch off the flight deck. We launch it up in the air. It provides intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance capabilities. 

We have had to develop policy to make that happen, but it has 

been working phenomenally. It has contributed to drug busts in 

theater, to a number of these things, and the crew loves it. 

And I am excited to announce that probably in about 2 weeks we 

will be issuing or we will actually be awarding a contract to put 

that capability on eight NSCs for the next 5 to 8 years. 

And that is technology that our fleet loves, and they are going 

to be really excited to get that deployed. 

Finally, in kind of the short range, kind of the hand-launched 

area, our Assistant Commandant for Capabilities has authorized 

our small boat field units to go out and procure some of the smaller 

UAS to test them, find out what sort of utility they have in the 

field, and then we will use those lessons learned to go out and create a policy and then go after a kind of a standard asset. 

Mr. HUNTER. The last thing I would recommend, you have had 

Special Forces, Army and Navy and Marine Corps, and the Navy 

9 

just in general, on small boats launching UAS for a decade now, 

for about 10 years. So they are about 10 years ahead of you, the 

non-sea services are already ahead of you, including Army and Marine Corps sea service. 

I think you have got some catching up to do. Can you tell me 

really quick the difference between launching an unmanned vehicle 

off of a Navy ship compared to launching an unmanned vehicle off 

of a Coast Guard ship? 

Do the ships float differently or what is the difference? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. So the primary difference between the way 

we use our ship-launched UAS and probably the Navy is we have 

slightly different mission sets, and so we need our assets to provide 

ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] for long periods 

of time. So we are looking for assets that can be up for 12 or more 

hours off the ship to kind of increase our awareness of what is 

going on around the actual ship itself. It increases our visibility. 

We have to contend with weather. We typically find ourselves 

going—— 

Mr. HUNTER. Wait. The question is: What are the differences? 

So the Navy contends with weather. They contend with different 

ship sizes and different things, too. So when you are in the ocean 

and a Navy ship is in the ocean. It is the same size ship. What is 

the difference between them being able to launch UAS and having 

been doing so for years and the Coast Guard? 

I mean, what is the technical difference of launching a UAS off 

a Coast Guard ship in the same ocean that a Navy ship is sitting? 

They are the same size ships. They are in the same ocean. What 

is the difference? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. There are no technical differences between 

the two assets. 

Mr. HUNTER. Should there be a Navy-Coast Guard joint program 

office for unmanned systems as well, like the icebreaker so we can 

get everybody on the same page? 

Because the Navy has more money, as we all know, more people, 

more testing, the ability to do this because they have been doing 

it for longer. They are not jumping through hoops anymore. 

I mean it is a great system to probably copy in your own way 

is what I am saying. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. As you know, our integrated program with 

the Navy on icebreakers has been a phenomenal endeavor so far. 

We have made great progress. 

I don’t know that we need that for the UAS because we have actually made phenomenal progress on this endeavor as it is so far. 

We are on the cusp of actually deploying that here on all of the 

NSCs. So I don’t know that we need help at this point in time. 

It might have been helpful if we had done it years back, but I 

think we are in a good place, sir. 

Mr. HUNTER. But, again, you are talking about ScanEagle, which 

is extremely old technology with hopefully new sensors on it, but 

this is not groundbreaking, right? 

It is a little bit late to the game, but better late than never. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Well, I don’t know what system we will actually be deploying because we have not awarded that contract yet. 

The prototype was ScanEagle. We have not identified any major 

10 

issues with ScanEagle. That UAS has done phenomenal for us, and 

we are really excited about awarding the contract and getting this 

permanently on the ships. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you. 

I yield to the ranking member, Mr. Garamendi. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. The chairman is working on a line of questioning that I think is really important here, and that is the adoption of new techniques and technology. And apparently the Coast 

Guard in its adoption process is slow to adopt, and the questions 

that I would like to get to really are the organizational structures 

that would retard the adoption of new technologies, new techniques, equipment, and so forth. 

Let us start with the budget for the development, testing, and evaluation program. I think you are requesting like $17.2 million, 

which is 47 percent less. Why? 

And if this particular budget or line item is critical in the adoption of new techniques, technologies, and equipment, why the reduction? 

Or maybe this isn’t where the problem lies. Could we just go into 

that for a few moments? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Our R&D budget has been fairly consistent 

over the years. I am wondering if you are talking about the 47 percent because of the $18 million plus-up for the long-range UAS. You know, we have been operating at around $18 million for the 

last several years for the R&D budget, and that gets us where we 

need to go. It would obviously be better if we had more, but we find 

ways of getting around that by leveraging the other entities out 

there that have done some of this work. 

One of the things we are trying to prevent ourselves doing is recreating the wheel, duplicating efforts done by others. And so one 

of the things we do is we partner with the national laboratories, 

the Naval Research Lab. 

We just recently got into an agreement with the Air Force, the 

first of its kind, to leverage some of the stuff they are working 

with; you know, working with the DHS Science and Technology Directorate. 

So we do these things to kind of augment that and make up for, 

you know—— 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, you know, all well and good. The notion 

of working with other agencies and using their knowledge and testing, excellent. How then does that get into the operations of the 

Coast Guard? 

How do you transition that information? 

I am looking at the organizational structure. There is something 

here that isn’t working smoothly. Technologies are readily available, techniques, but the Coast Guard isn’t adopting them. 

As the chairman was driving into this, what is it in this organizational structure that is retarding the integration of these new 

systems into the Coast Guard’s daily operations? 

If it is not this RDT&E, apparently that is not important, and 

you are able to make up for the less money by utilizing other agencies. Then that information, that knowledge from other agencies 

has to find its way into the Coast Guard. How does it get there? 

How is it acquired? 

11 

Admiral HAYCOCK. There are a number of ways we do this. One 

of the things we tried to do recently is we are trying to spur more 

innovation within the Service. So we have stood up an Innovation 

Council, which has senior leaders here at headquarters that are engaged in RDT&E efforts, to provide guidance and oversight. 

We have created a crowd sourcing platform that has gotten great 

use over the last year or so, where we basically allow folks at all 

levels in the organization, from military, civilian, you know, young, 

new sailors all the way up to senior officers can all provide input 

on various topics that we put in the crowd sourcing platform. That 

allows us to get new ideas to go after. 

The second thing we do is we use that information to create a 

portfolio of things we believe are the best return on investment for 

the Coast Guard. 

Since I arrived in CG–9 last spring, one of the things I have 

asked the Research and Development Center to do is place a greater emphasis on the actual transition of the research and development efforts into products that the operational Coast Guard can 

use. So now our folks up there, when they do this, they also look 

at, OK, what is the next step in the process. How do we go about 

putting this into the operational user’s hands in the Coast Guard? 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Can you develop and deliver to the committee 

a portfolio, the word you used, of ideas, products, techniques, technologies that are currently being looked at by your organization? 

Something is amiss here, the adoption and the openness to new 

ideas. Like how does an individual from—I don’t know—say 

Scripps who has developed a great sensing device that could be 

used on one of your ships get to your office so that you can acquire 

that knowledge, that technique? 

In other words, is your door open? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Yes, sir, the door is definitely open, and we 

are excited about opportunities to do this sort of thing. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. There is a whole series of questions. I can go 

on for some time here about this. We sense that there is a slowness, a reticence within the Coast Guard to adopt new techniques, 

new technologies, new equipment. The chairman gave three different examples a moment ago. 

What is it about the organization that is retarding the acquisition of these new systems? 

Just for example, we know that the Offshore Patrol Cutters are 

someday going to get out there. In the meantime we have ancient 

equipment that is not terribly reliable. What are we doing in the 

intervening period to use these new systems, to understand the domain, the maritime domain? 

Are we open to that? Are you open to that? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. We are open to that. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. And what are you doing in your openness? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Well, part of it is we need to know that it exists, and that is one of the key roles our Research and Development 

Center plays, is getting out there and finding out what sort of technology exists. 

So the folks at the R&D Center are constantly on the prowl. 

They are out there visiting folks. They are doing research online. 

They are attending conventions. They are having meetings with 

12 

technology centers, things of that nature so that we are aware of 

those capabilities. 

The next step, after you have been made aware of this, you have 

got to prioritize it and make sure you are using your resources for 

those things that bring the best value to the operator out in the 

field. 

We have a process for that, and that process starts usually in the 

end of the summer, and we get input from the field, and then we 

later in the winter we actually bring people together. Usually we 

get an external look from the Naval Research Lab, S&T, the chief 

scientist for DHS. We will bring all of these senior folks into the 

room, and we will go through all of these projects in detail to determine which ones make the most sense for the Coast Guard to go 

after. 

And then we put that portfolio together, and then that is the 

marching orders for the R&D Center, and they go out and they go 

after this. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Your title is Commandant for Acquisition and 

Chief Acquisition Officer, and I know this committee puts a lot of 

pressure on you for things like icebreakers and other major pieces 

of equipment. I think we are putting more pressure on you about 

these other systems, not the big ones, but all of the systems that 

make the icebreaker more effective, more efficient; the Offshore Patrol Cutters more effective, more efficient. 

And these are not the big, flashy things, but these are UAS, 

other devices that expand the ability of the Coast Guard to carry 

out its many, many tasks. 

And so just since you have such broad shoulders, in addition to 

the major acquisitions and the recapitalizations that are underway, 

these other things, my question really goes and my issue really 

goes to the organizational structure that provides the open door for 

these systems to be brought to the Coast Guard and then implemented along the way. 

So I am going to drive at that. Right now I think I have taken 

much more time than I would otherwise have available, but the 

specific question: How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the blue technology industries and firms sufficient to 

keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest development and innovations? 

So this is an organizational question for which I will be driving, 

and I suspect the committee will drive, too. 

So thank you very much for that. I yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the ranking member. 

Mr. Graves from Louisiana is recognized. 

Mr. GRAVES OF LOUISIANA. Admiral, thank you for being here. 

I want to start out with something that is perhaps not in your 

column but affects the Coast Guard nonetheless. We recently had 

a boating accident off the coast of Louisiana where three folks were 

out there, and I have been on the phone with numerous Coast 

Guard men and women over the past several days, including the 

commander sitting behind you, and I do want to give a big shoutout to the Coast Guard for their efforts on that search and rescue. 

That is our mission. 

13 

I know you had a lot of assets out there. I know you were working very closely with the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries, the Plaquemines Parish Sheriff’s Office. Certainly all 

lives are important. 

One of the gentlemen who was lost really had a transformational 

effect. My own town of Baton Rouge started a church after the 

Billy Graham crusade and saved a lot of lives in many, many ways. 

So I just want to thank all of the men and women of the Coast 

Guard for their efforts overnight and countless hours and airplanes, helicopters and boats, assisting in that mission. Very, very 

important. So thank you. 

Changing gears a little bit, can you talk a little bit? Your testimony makes reference to some of the research and development 

and perhaps advances that you have made in oil spill technology. 

You talk specifically about in situ burns at your facility in Alabama. 

Can you talk about other advancements that the Coast Guard is 

involved in, but perhaps also collaboration with industry in the 

aftermath of Deepwater Horizon? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. First, thank you for recognizing the efforts of 

the Coast Guard. The folks that go out there and do the rescues, 

they don’t do it for the recognition, but they do appreciate the fact 

that people notice. They are just doing what they are trained to do, 

and we appreciate the support, and we appreciate the support of 

the committee, as well. 

The Joint Maritime Test Facility down in Alabama is a great national asset. We partner with BSEE [Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement] and Department of Energy and others to 

make best use of that. 

Technology is changing all the time, and as we look at things like 

response to oil spills, we can use that facility to try different techniques to mitigate the oil spill. So that facility is up and running 

and we get great support on that, and we get a lot of collaboration 

with industry to make that happen. 

We take our oil spill responsibilities very seriously, and one of 

the things we have recently done—I think the committee will be 

happy to know—is we have looked at things like how do you recover oil that is sinking in the water column. How do you detect 

it and go after it? 

So we actually just completed a test recently here in that endeavor, looking at how do you best recover that. So we have got some 

great data from that. We are going to use that data to figure out 

what is the next step in that endeavor to improve our ability to 

mitigate oil spills. 

Mr. GRAVES OF LOUISIANA. First, I just want to ask if you all 

could on the record or perhaps coming back and giving us a briefing on updates on some of the efforts by private industry to improve safety techniques because certainly you need to be working 

in collaboration with them. 

I know that they have made substantial progress in new safety 

techniques and collection devices and other things, and I think it 

is important that the Coast Guard and industry are working very 

closely together. 

14 

Again, I have been briefed on a lot of technology they have developed, and it really is impressive. 

In regard to the oil sinking, the only time I have really seen that 

happen is in the case of Deepwater Horizon when you all hit it with 

the dispersant below the surface. Otherwise I think the oil comes 

up. The only other instance is when it binds with the fine silts and 

sands and, therefore, changing the weight of it. 

But I think there are a lot of lessons learned from Deepwater Horizon that can be applied if there, and we all hope there is not, if 

there is another oil spill disaster like that. 

But, again, I would like to follow up with you on some of those 

technologies. 

Next, Arctic strategy. We sent a letter last month to the Commandant and the CNO [Chief of Naval Operations] regarding a 

joint Arctic strategy. I think a number of us are very concerned, 

and I think I can speak for everyone up on this panel. All of us 

are very concerned about the apparent separate or siloed Arctic 

strategy approaches by the Navy and the Coast Guard. 

Obviously, both of you are critical in that region. We have seen 

the advances of Russia, China, and other countries. We have discussed it ad nauseum in this committee about the fact that the 

United States is far behind other Arctic nations in terms of capabilities, icebreaking and others. 

Could you talk a little bit about the importance of a joint strategy, what you all are doing to have a joint strategy with the Navy? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. You have indicated, and I think we would recognize, that working together with the Navy is an important part 

of the Arctic strategy, and I think we would welcome that and we 

would go after that. 

I don’t have the details because that is more of an operational 

concern. I would really need to get back to you on that one, sir. I 

wish I could answer that. 

Mr. GRAVES OF LOUISIANA. Admiral, again, I think it is very important that we have a joint strategy. You all worked seamlessly 

with the Navy in other parts of the world. You do a great job. You 

have a common mission. Your platforms are compatible. I think 

that all of us feel very strongly that having a similar relationship 

with the Navy in the Arctic is important. 

The last question: Could you talk a little bit about, and I think 

this is in your wheelhouse, the role of dynamic positioning autonomous vehicles and others in the Arctic and how perhaps advances 

in regard to Arctic platforms, how those two issues come into play 

there? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Autonomous systems are a very important 

part of the future in the Arctic. We need to make sure that vessels 

navigating in the Arctic regions and those that are taking station 

up there for resources, oil exploration, that sort of thing are safe 

and can operate up there, basically responding to all of the risks 

and such. 

So we welcome the opportunity to work with industry to further 

explore those things. 

You talked a little bit about the Deepwater Horizon and some of 

the folks down in your area that have developed some interesting 

lessons learned and some technologies. We welcome the opporVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:45 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\115\CG\5-8-20~1\31549.TXT JEAN
15 

tunity to work with those folks to take advantage of those technologies. 

Really what it comes down to, sir, is if we are aware of something that goes on, we are interested in trying to take advantage 

of it and leverage it for the purposes of maritime safety. 

Mr. GRAVES OF LOUISIANA. I just want to clarify that I am talking about for purposes of the Coast Guard’s assets, the role that 

dynamic positioning and autonomous in Coast Guard assets, but I 

know I am over time. Let me yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman. 

Ms. Plaskett, you are recognized. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you very much. 

Thank you so much for being here and providing this testimony 

in what I think is really important technology that you are working 

on. 

I wanted to ask you questions that were more related not so 

much to the research, but the application of the technology in different areas, and the first one is with regard to some of your duties 

and your mandate in the Caribbean related to illegal drug trafficking. 

There is a tremendous flow of drugs and weapons between the 

U.S. Virgin Islands, the British Virgin Islands, the area of Puerto 

Rico. On all sides, all of these islands are completely surrounded 

by water, and you all stand in many instances as the first line of 

defense for us in the flow of those drugs and weapons from the Virgin Islands into the mainland. 

And what I was wondering is some of the technology that you 

have spoken about today and is in your written testimony. What 

is the application of those technologies in that area, and how might 

it be used to further stem the flow of those illegal drugs and weapons? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. So some of the technologies that can be used 

up there include biometrics and improving our intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities through the use of UAS. In 

particular, the biometrics, we have employed that starting with our 

110-foot patrol boats a number of years back, and we have actually 

taken that program and expanded it to other assets, such as the 

Fast Response Cutters. 

Really our key is to identify those threats before they make landfall, push our borders out, and so our use of things like the UAS 

and having that ability to identify those threats far out is probably 

the first key. 

Ms. PLASKETT. And how does the technology do that? 

How do you improve the maritime domain awareness to be able 

to do that since there is no way you could have sufficient number 

of actual vessels in the waters to be able to protect the islands? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Thank you. 

We work with other agencies in terms of law enforcement. So we 

work with DoD employing some of their ISR capabilities. We work 

with the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] and other organizations, and we share information. 

So the information that we get, that we get from our assets, we 

feed that common operational picture for the other agencies, and 

we extract information from that as well so we can do a better job 

16 

at being at the right place at the right time to engage with the 

trafficking. 

Ms. PLASKETT. OK. I guess I was just trying to drill down into 

was there any specific technologies that would be more helpful or 

that you have been testing to be able to utilize in this area, but 

I understand your joint work with HIDTA [High Intensity Drug 

Trafficking Areas], in particular, and DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] and others is really a first line of defense is what you 

are saying, correct? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. That is correct. 

Ms. PLASKETT. OK. One of the other things that is a concern to 

me, particularly the announcement. For many years we had an oil 

refinery in the Virgin Islands, and it is my understanding that our 

Governor is closing the deal on that reopening. 

Because the natural resources of the island are so particularly 

important to us, I am very concerned, and there are discussions of 

an underwater pipeline to be able to keep the vessels further offshore and pipe them into for refining. 

Can you tell me? I always have a concern about maritime accidents, as oil spills or grounding pose detrimental impact. 

Is the Coast Guard pursuing any new technologies to respond to 

oil spills or other maritime disasters which occur not just in the 

Caribbean, but on the gulf, in California, and other areas as well? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. The R&D Center has a lot of different 

projects that we work on, and we get $500,000 a year coming out 

of the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. We put that money to good 

use trying to find ways to mitigate accidents that have already occurred and to prevent accidents from occurring as well. 

Our prevention folks, the community of the Coast Guard that 

tries to prevent these sorts of things, works hard to train their people to make sure they know how to go about identifying problems 

before they occur, and then we try to share information we get, and 

we hold people accountable when they don’t do what they are supposed to do to keep things safe. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Is this the use of crowd sourcing that you were 

talking about? 

In other areas that you have utilized, is this also utilized in oil 

spills or other natural disasters? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. PLASKETT. OK. And from that crowd sourcing, are there 

partnerships that you have with private sector technology companies that might be utilized for more rapid response and mitigation 

of the damages from some of these? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Yes, there are lots of opportunities there. The 

cooperative research and development agreements are one method 

we use to get with industry, to form partnerships. 

We provide an opportunity for them to get on the Coast Guard 

assets and test things, and then we have the opportunity to learn 

more about it and figure out how to adapt that for use in the Coast 

Guard. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Do you find that is really helpful having those 

partnerships with those technology companies or others? Is that 

working well, not just in terms of the technology and its applicaVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:45 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\115\CG\5-8-20~1\31549.TXT JEAN
17 

tion, but as Ranking Member Garamendi said, then being able to 

adapt to the culture of the Coast Guard, as well? 

Admiral HAYCOCK. Yes. These CRADAs have been very, very 

beneficial to us. It is a great relationship we have with our partners, and we are looking for ways to create more. 

Ms. PLASKETT. OK. Thank you. 

No further questions at this time. I yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentlelady. 

I think to Mr. Graves’ questions, too, really quickly, you are the 

Chief Acquisition Officer of the Coast Guard. So when he talks 

about the operation, I understand you are not the operational guy 

for the Coast Guard, but you are going to be the one answering and 

hearing all the operational needs when they ask you to then acquire a piece of gear to meet those needs. 

So you know. You have the answer to his question, whether you 

know it or not, because you are hearing what they want to acquire, 

and you will hear because that is what your job is. 

So, Mr. Graves, to your point, the Admiral is the Chief Acquisition Officer for the Coast Guard. So he is not the operational requirements guy for the polar icebreaker, but he is going to be getting all of the requests for all the gear that will fulfill the operational requirement needs. 

So you are the right guy to talk to, and I think you will have 

those answers going forward on what the Joint Program Office is 

looking for to be able to fulfill all needs, and I just hope that we 

make that bigger. 

I think you got my point earlier. There is no difference launching 

a UAS from a Coast Guard vessel and a Navy vessel. There is no 

difference. 

There is no difference shooting off of a Coast Guard vessel and 

shooting off of a Naval vessel. There is no difference launching a 

helicopter off a Coast Guard vessel and a Naval vessel as long as 

they are the same sized vessels. There is no difference, in the 

ocean, on a ship, and it is the same thing. 

So why did it take 5 years to get a loudspeaker on Coast Guard 

ships? It is a mounting issue. I know you cannot mount it where 

the guns are and stuff. I get it, but it took 5 years to get a speaker, 

which is one of the Coast Guard’s core competencies, is to keep people out of certain areas where you yell at people. 

It is not a Navy core competency, but it took 5 years. I was so 

surprised that the Coast Guard did not have these LRADs on the 

ship. It blew my mind, and that the Navy did. It should have been 

vice versa. 

But I just hope that you look at not necessarily Joint Program 

Offices, but look at what the Navy is doing and not recreating the 

wheel, not doing RDT&E because you don’t need to. They have already done it. 

And if we can change the rules or change the law so that you 

can piggyback on the Navy more so that you don’t have to go 

through steps A through D and you can just jump to E, that would 

be great, and I think that is what we are kind of pushing for here. 

So, Admiral, thank you very much. Thanks for being here, and 

thank you for your testimony and service. 

Admiral HAYCOCK. It is an honor to be here. 

18 

Mr. HUNTER. And we are going to move to the second panel. 

While everybody is moving around, I will introduce. Actually we 

can wait. Take your time. 

All right. Lady and gentlemen, welcome. We will now move to 

the second panel. 

We will hear from Dr. Eric Terrill, director of the Coastal Observing Research and Development Center at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. That is a great place. I go there all the time, 

to surf, back in the old days. 

Mr. Michael Jones, president of The Maritime Alliance. 

Mr. Chris Coyle, member of the International Ocean Science and 

Technology Industry Association. 

Mr. Thomas Chance, chief executive officer of ASV Global. 

Dr. Tuba Ozkan-Haller, professor and associate dean at the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences at Oregon State 

University. 

And Rear Admiral Jonathan White, president and chief executive 

officer of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership. 

Dr. Terrill, we realize, too, that you have to leave at 11:45. So 

just feel free to hop up and roll when you have got to go. We now 

recognize you to give your statement. 

TESTIMONY OF ERIC J. TERRILL, PH.D., DIRECTOR, COASTAL 

OBSERVING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, 

SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY; MICHAEL B. 

JONES, PRESIDENT, THE MARITIME ALLIANCE; THOMAS S. 

CHANCE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ASV GLOBAL, LLC; 

CHRISTOPHER J. COYLE, MEMBER, INTERNATIONAL OCEAN 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION; H. 

TUBA OZKAN-HALLER, PH.D., PROFESSOR AND ASSOCIATE 

DEAN, COLLEGE OF EARTH, OCEAN, AND ATMOSPHERIC 

SCIENCES, OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY; AND REAR ADMIRAL JONATHAN WHITE, U.S. NAVY (RET.), PRESIDENT AND 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CONSORTIUM FOR OCEAN 

LEADERSHIP 

Dr. TERRILL. Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, 

and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to be here today and discuss new maritime technologies. 

As I was introduced, my name is Eric Terrill, and I am the director of the Coastal Observing R&D Center at Scripps in San Diego 

and have 25 years’ experience as an oceanographer, leading basic 

and applied research programs around the globe. 

In the interest of brevity, I shall forgo Scripps’ very long history 

of supporting national defense objectives, but that legacy is captured in my written testimony. 

So my testimony, I will address three points: the merits of the 

Coast Guard developing partnerships with organizations and agencies that specialize in conducting maritime RDT&E; using existing 

maritime technologies tailored to the Coast Guard mission; and exploitation of data and products from existing networks to enhance 

Coast Guard mission readiness. 

In 2002, at Joint Harbor Operations Center, the one that was referred to in your introductory remarks, Chairman, was developed 

after the events of 9/11, and in the center, dispatchers worked side 

19 

by side across a whole range of agencies, including National Guard, 

Customs and Border Protection, ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement], and various other personnel. 

And the JHOC is an analog for the type of interagency 

partnering that will be required if there is an expectation to efficiently field modern blue technologies with the Coast Guard. 

In the history of Scripps, my organization has maintained a 

strong emphasis on the development, testing and evaluation of 

maritime platforms and sensors for the purposes of persistent 

ocean sampling, and in many cases, these capabilities are directly 

relevant to the men and women who provide maritime security to 

our Nation. 

UUVs, or unmanned underwater vehicles, continue to develop as 

a frontier technology for subsurface exploration and sensing advances. These vehicles, with appropriate sensors, payloads can assist the Coast Guard in detecting and tracking oil spills of unknown origin; finding sunken wrecks and assessing their potential 

to leak bunker oil; mapping bathymetry hazards in marine habitats; and detecting IUU, or illegal fishing activities. 

Unmanned surface vessels are maturing, as well, as another 

maritime platform for consideration to serve the maritime security 

mission, and contrary to underwater vehicles, their ever-present 

surface expression provides and always-on communication, ISR, 

and navigation capabilities with GPS. 

In my experience with unmanned surface craft, you referred to 

your trip up to Silicon Valley to see debris 6 years ago. That debris 

has now matured to a commercially available platform through a 

company called Liquid Robotics. We have had a wide range of successes in a range of operating environments with that platform. 

And applicability to the Coast Guard includes ship traffic monitoring, fisheries protection, ocean sea state characterization, and 

monitoring of currents in support of oil spill trajectory analysis; 

communication gateways between surface craft and ship routing. 

Unmanned aerial systems are another tool that could be 

transitioned. A lot of discussion earlier this morning on that. An 

emergent technology of interest in that regime is the hybrid UAS 

that allows for vertical and takeoff from a fixed location, but transit with a fixed wing similar to an Osprey. So now you have not 

the load-out that you might have with a catapult type system or 

the ScanEagle. 

These capabilities are only now in development for use from 

ships operating on the high seas. 

Scripps recommends partnering within the Department of Defense. They are already making investments in developing maritime surveillance tech systems. Office of Naval Research is an example of an Echelon 1 command which invests in RDT&E to routinely conduct small scale demonstrations for developing and testing new concepts of operations and technologies and leverages the 

expertise and testing of their program managers in operating efficient RDT&E programs. 

Science and technology in a spiral development with an emphasis 

on at-sea testing allows the capability to incrementally evolve and 

improve at lower risk. Successful demonstrations can be 

transitioned to support operations, while unsuccessful demonstraVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:45 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\115\CG\5-8-20~1\31549.TXT JEAN
20 

tions provide valuable lessons learned before you field it to a whole 

fleet. 

Along the U.S. coast, there is a wide network of 168 high-frequency radars sponsored by NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration]. Through MOUs [memorandums of understanding] they provide this information to the Coast Guard for missions, such as oil spill and response and search and rescue and operations. 

This is an operational network. However, the opportunity remains elusive to continue to exploit that system because it is only 

funded at the 50-percent level at which it was originally earmarked 

or identified in a national plan to get that radar network in operation. 

So in closing, I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to testify on the role of marine technologies and provide suggestions for U.S. to leverage ongoing investments and use new 

maritime technologies to improve maritime mission performance 

and efficiencies. 

Thank you. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Terrill. 

Mr. Jones, great to see you out here. You are recognized. 

Mr. JONES. Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, 

members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity. 

I am president of The Maritime Alliance. We are a nonprofit industry association founded in 2007 and based in San Diego. We are 

a leading voice for blue tech nationally and internationally. 

We are a multiyear strategic partner with the U.S. Department 

of Commerce and received a grant to organize the first ever U.S. 

Maritime Technology Export Initiative. 

In 2017, we helped form the BlueTech Cluster Alliance, the first 

international coalition of blue tech clusters. 

The Blue economy is enormous and growing. It is blue tech that 

allows us to understand ocean problems, and blue tech is critical 

to develop solutions to these problems. And blue tech companies 

are providing the innovative tools and services that permit emerging ocean industries to develop. 

The Maritime Alliance has over 90 members from across the U.S. 

and internationally. In conjunction with our international cluster 

partners, we have access to thousands of companies. 

The following are some maritime issues that The Maritime Alliance blue tech member companies are addressing that may be of 

interest to the Coast Guard. 

First, on autonomy software and autonomous vessels. Multiple 

TMA [The Maritime Alliance] member companies are involved in 

autonomy in the air, on, and under the water. As examples, Boston-based Sea Machines Robotics recently announced a contract 

with Maersk, the world’s largest shipping company, to try out the 

world’s first artificial intelligence powered situational awareness 

system aboard a containership. 

And San Diego-based Planck Aerosystems’ drone intelligence improves real-time situational awareness via autonomous takeoff and 

landing from moving vessels at sea. 

Second, under big data, enormous amounts of ocean data are 

being collected. Redlands, California-based Esri, the world’s leading 

21 

GIS software mapping company, is helping unlock the potential of 

data to improve operational and business results. 

And San Diego-based XST provides big data consulting services, 

including high-definition, hyper-local weather prediction. 

Third, in cybersecurity, we know good cyber hygiene, training, 

and innovative technologies and services are needed to protect the 

logistics chain. Philadelphia-based Gnostech helped mitigate 

cybersecurity risk from sea to shore. 

Fourth, in ocean observation, the Integrated Ocean Observing 

System, IOOS, is the national-regional partnership focused on 

ocean observation and enjoys wide industry support. 

TMA was coauthor of ‘‘The Ocean Enterprise,’’ the first ever national scale assessment of the value of ocean observation published 

in February 2016 that identified over 400 U.S. companies in 36 

States, representing over $7 billion in revenue. 

Fifth, in pollution mitigation, San Diego-based Earthwise 

Sorbents is pioneering high-performance algae-based, not petroleum but algae-based sorbents to clean up oil and chemical spills 

on land and in water. 

Seattle-based Marine Construction Technologies has patented an 

innovative pile design that reduces noise pollution from impact pile 

driving by 80 to 90 percent. 

Sixth, port and maritime efficiency and security. Durham, North 

Carolina-based PortCall and San Ramon, California-based 

OceanManager have developed maritime software to help port and 

shipowners to be more efficient. 

Richmond, California-based WAM–V produces a watercraft using 

patented suspension technology to radically improve seagoing capabilities. 

And seventh, in predictive analytics, Seattle-based ioCurrents 

gathers real-time data on important assets on commercial vessels 

into a central database onboard to permit automated analysis within the cloud’s availability and backup. This allows operators to predict and preemptively resolve likely equipment failures. 

So following are some ideas for the subcommittee to consider to 

enhance the Coast Guard’s ability to identify, test, and incorporate 

blue tech: 

Increase travel funding to attend blue tech oriented events; 

Increase funding to evaluate blue tech products and services; 

Enhance the on-ramp to make it easier to identify innovative 

technology and services; 

Enhance the Innovation Council with regional meetings alongside blue tech events; 

Make regional tech scouting part of someone’s role; 

Establish a secondary innovation center on the U.S. west coast; 

Promote blue tech collaboration with other U.S. Government 

agencies in the marine domain; 

Promote blue tech collaboration and transfer to and from other 

countries’ forces. 

Thanks for the opportunity to testify today. We are grateful to 

the members of the subcommittee for focusing on blue tech. The 

Maritime Alliance stands ready to be a resource to this committee. 

I request that the entirety of my written testimony be entered 

into the record of this hearing. 

22 

Thank you. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you very much. 

I just want to sing Michael’s praises. No one has done what he 

has done yet, creating a blue tech consortium that someone can go 

to as a single point. They have this for everybody else, but no one 

thought to do it on the water, and it is pretty amazing, a lot of 

money, and it gives the Coast Guard and the Navy and other organizations a single point to go to say, ‘‘Hey, what is out there?’’ 

But thank you for all that you are doing. 

Mr. Chance, you are recognized for your statement. 

Mr. CHANCE. Thank you very much. 

To help us stay on schedule, I will summarize my written testimony. 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, and distinguished members of the committee, I am honored to testify today 

regarding the use of new maritime technologies to improve the efficiency and mission performance of the U.S. Coast Guard. 

As CEO of ASV Global, the world’s largest and most experienced 

unmanned surface vehicle company, I can speak as to where unmanned vessel technology is today and where it is going. 

However, before I do so, let me commend the work of the U.S. 

Coast Guard and this subcommittee for its long history of outstanding service. The Coast Guard is saving lives, fighting crime, 

and defending our country on a daily basis, and the citizens of this 

country should never take that for granted. 

Unmanned surface vehicles, or USVs, are simply unmanned 

boats. Our company alone has delivered more than 100 USVs to 

military and commercial users across the globe. These USVs have 

ranged up to 40 feet in length, up to 1,000 horsepower, and endurance in excess of 30 days. However, we currently have several inquiries, both commercial and military, for unmanned vessels in the 

80-foot to 200-foot range with endurance up to 3 months. 

Leidos Corporation recently built a 132-foot USV, while the Norwegians and the Chinese are starting to build USVs up to 260 feet 

in length. 

In addition to USVs that cannot accommodate personnel, industry has built dozens of optionally unmanned vessels. Optionally unmanned allows the asset to be deployed with a full crew onboard, 

a reduced crew, or no crew at all. 

Finally, ASV Global has upgraded several existing vessels to optionally unmanned. By upgrading to optionally unmanned, existing 

assets can experience the progression to unmanned without losing 

existing capabilities. 

Just as driverless cars have a steering wheel and a driver’s seat, 

the current pragmatic approach to driverless vessels is to allow 

them to drive autonomously while remotely supervising their operation over a radio or satellite telemetry link. 

At the same time, COLREG [International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea] compliant collision avoidance software 

continues to mature so that remote supervision can eventually be 

phased out. 

Economics is the driving force towards the use of unmanned vessels. When you go from manned to unmanned ships, you don’t need 

a galley and a mess. You don’t need bunk rooms, hallways, heads, 

23 

washing machines, dishwashers, freezer, stairways, workshops, a 

meeting room, or a large bridge. In a sense, an unmanned vessel 

is a hull with diesel tanks, engines, and a rack of computers and 

sensors. 

While I don’t want to trivialize what is necessary for unmanned 

vessel operations, the capital cost of an unmanned vessel can be far 

less than that of its manned equivalent. 

In addition to reduced capital costs, unmanned vessels can offer 

reduced daily operating costs as vessel personnel are condensed to 

those remotely supervising operations and those maintaining unmanned vessels while at port. 

Finally, CONOPS, such as offshore stationing, can substantially 

reduce operating costs. 

USVs can offer persistent maritime domain awareness, where 

unmanned or optionally unmanned vessels, large or small, can remain on station for weeks at a time, while providing intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance, as well as interception and to a 

degree, interdiction. 

Coast Guard personnel at land-based command centers can dispatch predeployed unmanned vessels to intercept and assess. Nonlethal weapons, such as prop-net entanglement systems, can be 

used by USVs to stop suspect vessels until manned Coast Guard 

vessels can arrive and apprehend. 

Offshore stationed USVs can be used for drug interdiction, illegal 

fishing interdiction, border protection, collision investigations, 

search and rescue, pollution incident investigations, and investigation of the numerous reported suspect vessels in distress. 

Coast Guard vessels of all sizes are candidates for upgrades with 

collision avoidance bridge aids to mitigate maritime collisions. Future ship build programs should certainly consider fully unmanned, 

partially unmanned, and optionally unmanned ships. 

These are just a few of the many applications of unmanned surface vessel technology that can be considered by the U.S. Coast 

Guard. While additional appropriations are necessary for the Coast 

Guard to capitalize on unmanned technology, the economic and 

strategic advantages are likely to be overwhelmingly positive as 

they are with other unmanned technologies in the military and 

commercial sectors. 

I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Chance. 

Mr. Coyle, you are recognized for your statement. 

Mr. COYLE. Good morning. My name is Christopher Coyle. I want 

to thank the chairman, ranking member, and distinguished committee for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today about 

blue technologies, an exciting field. 

Today I am representing IOSTIA, the International Ocean 

Science and Technology Industry Association, which represents 

businesses and organizations that provide technology and services 

for sectors that sustainably and commercially utilize the oceans. 

As an example of this hearing, IOSTIA provides a unified public 

policy voice for those in the industry space. 

During the day I work for Exocetus Autonomous Systems, a company that designs, manufactures, and services deep-sea robots, auVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:45 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\115\CG\5-8-20~1\31549.TXT JEAN
24 

tonomous underwater vehicles, or AUVs, in business development 

and strategic partnerships. 

I also lead the company’s data and analytic initiative for the 

company’s XPRIZE entry. In fact, Exocetus was named a semifinalist in the Shell Ocean Discovery XPRIZE for mapping the 

ocean floor. We were only one of 19 teams selected from around the 

world out of 1,400 entrants. So we are extremely proud of this 

moon-shot award. 

In addition, Exocetus is a semifinalist in NOAA’s prize for detecting chemical and biological signals underwater. 

Our oceans cover 70 percent of the planet. Yet only 10 percent 

of the ocean floor has been mapped. We know more about the surface of the moon than we know about what lies below the surface 

of our waters. 

How is that possible? 

Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson have spent billions 

of dollars of their own wealth and raised billions more from Silicon 

Valley investors. It is sexy and exciting. Yet, they have reenergized 

the planet’s interest in outer space, intergalactic travel, and potential colonization of other planets. 

But it is entirely misguided. The final frontier to be discovered 

is our oceans. The next space race is our oceans. Our planet depends on the access to healthy and plentiful oceans. Blue tech 

should be the focus, not space. 

As population growth climbs, as migration to concentrated coastal areas continues, as farmlands around the world shrink, as more 

and more people become dependent on fish protein, as seas play a 

more herculean role in carbon capture, oceans need to be today’s 

focus for emerging technology, investments, and U.S. Government 

attention. 

And so blue technology is the critical technology to encourage as 

our children grow into adults and take on leadership roles. 

This past week, I came across an article entitled ‘‘Can the U.S. 

Navy Brave the Waves of Autonomous Warfare?’’ I will hand the 

article to your staff in case you would like to include it in the 

record today. 

The article’s thesis is that AUVs offer greater efficiency, mission 

range, and lower cost of capital than other more traditional naval 

means. AUVs will prove to be cheaper to operate, put fewer seamen 

in harm’s way, and therefore, assume greater levels of risk. 

AUVs are more expendable and can augment a fleet to do search 

and reconnaissance. Last July, DARPA contracted BAE Systems to 

build small AUVs to detect enemy subs. Today, AUVs are working 

on sea sensing and mine countermeasure tasks. 

By 2025, the Navy’s AUVs will support undersea warfare by 

going into denied waters that are either too deep or too shallow for 

manned platforms. 

AUVs will continue to provide greater benefit to the U.S. Coast 

Guard for port and waterway security, maintaining aids to navigation, marine environmental protection, oil spill protection and response, marine pollution laws, fisheries, ocean shipping lanes, and 

in support of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2017. 

My company, Exocetus, is a quintessential example of a sound 

U.S. Government collaboration. Exocetus was started with a $15 

25 

million Federal grant to develop its buoyance engine resulting in 

three patents on the engine design and one on the retrieval system. 

Today, we are proud to say the Navy presently is using our AUVs. 

To me, the most exciting thing about AUVs are the sensors and 

the integration of all the emerging technologies, such as cloud computing, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and blockchain to 

process the big data and analytics that will provide essential information and intelligence for our national security, coastal erosion, 

port security, shipping lanes, laying fiber optic cables for communication, internet and media companies, and meteorological disturbances, to name just a few. 

The future for blue technology is bright. The million-dollar question is: Are we going to seize this amazing opportunity and support 

and invest in brandnew industries that will create high-paying jobs 

of the future, or are we going to continue to kick the can down the 

street? If we don’t, the Chinese and the Russians will. 

I am convinced that the potential for the blue economy and blue 

tech will be the next biggest revolution that we have seen in decades. The best way to predict the future is to create it. 

Thank you and I look forward to answering any of your questions. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Coyle. 

Dr. Ozkan-Haller, you are recognized for your statement. 

Dr. OZKAN-HALLER. Thank you, Chairman Hunter, Ranking 

Member Garamendi, and members of the subcommittee, for the opportunity to testify today on blue technologies developed within 

academic settings and how they can support the Coast Guard’s 

mission. 

I am a professor at Oregon State University, and I conduct research on the prediction and forecasting of ocean conditions. My 

work also explores ways to present forecast results to make them 

most usable for various stakeholders, including bar pilots, the fishing community, the National Weather Service, and the Coast 

Guard. 

My testimony today will focus on the potential for wave forecasting systems and other forecasting innovations to help advance 

operational capabilities of the Coast Guard, including safe navigation and identification of illegal activities at sea. 

The development and refinement of these forecasting tools heavily relies on observations of the ocean both from long-term observing platforms, as well as from innovative autonomous platforms 

that you have already heard about this morning. 

Today I will stress that strategic investments are required in 

technology development and in continuing education activities to 

ensure the effective utilization of these technologies to meet the 

mission objectives of the Coast Guard. 

First, ocean wave and current forecasts are analytical tools that 

can help stakeholders understand and predict ocean conditions. Recent advances in predictive models allow for detailed and high-resolution forecasts of ocean conditions. 

Forecasts in the open ocean can be used during search and rescue operations to narrow down the geographical area of interest. 

Forecasts near navigational inlets are a critical capability at many 

26 

challenging inlets where transit through the river mouth and over 

the river bar can be treacherous. 

The mouth of the Columbia River, often colloquially referred to 

as ‘‘the graveyard of the Pacific,’’ is one such example. Twenty-four 

billion dollars of cargo moves through the Columbia River system 

annually. The Coast Guard makes decisions about bar closures that 

halt vessel traffic, and the cost of a bar closure to the local economy 

is significant. 

One of the groups that plays a role in bar closure decisions is the 

Columbia River Bar Pilots. They require accurate forecasts 10 

hours in advance because of the time required by a tanker released 

from the upriver port to reach the river mouth. 

Once there, most of these tankers are too big to turn around, so 

the hazard of making a wrong decision can mean a disaster on the 

bar. 

For the last 5 years, the Columbia River Bar Pilots have been 

utilizing our wave forecasts to inform their decisionmaking on navigational planning. We have worked extensively and iteratively with 

the bar pilots to create an interface that meets their needs and 

maximizes their ability to use the results. 

They now use forecasts for the computation of under-keel clearance values, as well as for recommendations regarding the closure 

of the bar, along with, perhaps more critically, the timing of the reopening of the bar. 

Additionally, predictive forecasting capabilities also now show 

promise for identifying illegal activities at sea. Illegal, unreported, 

and unregulated activities at sea can be challenging to assess and 

predict. The key challenge is that vessels committing IUU activities 

turn off their GPS transponders and, therefore, go dark. 

New solutions for predicting IUU activity using mathematical 

models based on conflict systems theories are currently emerging, 

and these methods exploit the fact that vessel traffic responds to 

the presence and absence of other vessels in the area whether they 

are visible to us or dark. So observing the behavior of the visible 

fleet carries clues about the movement of the dark fleet. 

While this research is still in very early stages, further development of these methods could aid in more efficient and effective patrol strategies. 

Finally, there is rapid advancement in research and technology 

innovation, but strategic investment in technology development by 

the user, in this case the Coast Guard, is critical to assure that any 

technology of interest is designed to meet their specific capability 

objectives. 

Our experience with wave forecasting products suggests that the 

needs of the bar pilots are quite different from the needs of the 

tuna fishing industry, for instance. Hence, close engagement is 

needed during the development phase of the products, and coordinated education is essential to assure the effective utilization of 

blue technologies by Coast Guard personnel. 

In closing, research and innovation in the field of ocean wave and 

current forecasting is proving to be increasingly significant in its 

potential to be translated into technology and information systems 

for the Coast Guard. 

27 

I thank the subcommittee for your efforts to consider the role of 

technology innovation and applications for efficiently and effectively advancing critical Coast Guard capabilities, and I would be 

pleased to answer any questions. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Doctor, for your testimony. 

Admiral White, you are recognized for your statement. 

Admiral WHITE. Thank you, Chairman Hunter and Ranking 

Member Garamendi and honored members of the subcommittee. 

During my 32-year career in the Navy, culminating in my assignment as oceanographer and navigator in the Navy, I worked with 

the Coast Guard at sea and ashore. Thus, it is with great respect 

and appreciation for their service that I am before you today to discuss blue tech on behalf of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership, 

which represents the Nation’s leading ocean science, education, and 

technology institutions, industries, and others with the mission to 

shape the future of ocean science, and many of those institutions 

are represented on this panel today. 

There are three important ideas to take away from my testimony. 

One is that ocean knowledge enables the U.S. Coast Guard to 

achieve its missions through enhanced maritime domain awareness. 

Two, that blue tech is vital to understanding the ocean. 

Three is that blue tech innovation relies on ocean science, technology, engineering, and math education or ‘‘ocean STEM,’’ as I call 

it. 

This flow from mission success, from ocean knowledge, from blue 

tech, from ocean STEM education is the best way to understand 

how marine technologies not only improve efficiencies and performance, but are the very foundation that the Coast Guard relies on 

to meet its mandated missions now and in the future. 

Now I am going to dive into my first two themes on ocean knowledge and blue tech as they enhance maritime domain awareness. 

The late Admiral James D. Watkins, former Chief, Naval Operations, used to declare that oceanography won the Cold War, meaning that our superior ocean knowledge provided us with operational 

and strategic advantage over the Soviet Union. 

It is paramount that the Coast Guard maintains its strategic advantage in the maritime domain against today’s threats to our security and safety. Ocean research and blue tech provide the critical 

base to ensure this strategic advantage continues. 

We must be able to exploit our superior knowledge of the ocean 

environment to ensure home field advantage at both the home and 

away games. We can only do that if we have unsurpassed ocean 

knowledge, which brings me to the importance of blue tech. 

So how do we monitor, explore, map, and better understand the 

ocean environment that makes up 71 percent of our planet and surrounds our maritime Nation? It is ocean science and technology, 

and blue tech has provided our Nation with the knowledge advantage against myriad marine threats. 

The Coast Guard, like all of our maritime forces, must optimize 

technological development to best understand the environment to 

meet its mission objectives while minimizing risk to personnel. 

28 

For example, the autonomous ocean vehicles and sensors that we 

have talked about already today with ever-increasing endurance 

and proliferation enhance our ocean knowledge and understanding, 

but can also serve a dual use of surveillance and monitoring and 

of the activity on, under, and above the ocean surface. 

With collaborative partnerships among Federal agencies, ocean 

science and technology institutions and industry, these are essential to actualizing the potential of blue tech like this to fulfill the 

Coast Guard’s missions. 

In my written testimony, I go into more detail on what it looks 

like in the real world with examples of how understanding the 

ocean and using blue tech will advance our Nation, whether it is 

helping the Coast Guard to catch the vessels fishing around the 

world illegally in our own waters, or allowing us to safely and 

sustainably maximize new economic opportunities in the changing 

Arctic, or continuing to improve our preparations in responses to 

hurricanes and storms that threatened our safety and security. 

I would be happy to expand more on those examples during questions. 

So it is clear to me without continuing to grow our ocean STEM 

education base, the Coast Guard will be unable to maximize technology developments and meet their missions. Other nations are 

advancing rapidly with the hope of overtaking the U.S. in the global scientific and technical fields as a super power. Increasing our 

ocean STEM education and training will ensure our sailors and civilians have the requisite skills to embrace new and emerging blue 

tech ahead of competing entities and threats. 

I encourage this committee to join others in supporting Federal 

investments in the prioritization of STEM education to enable programs like those at the Coast Guard Academy and develop the next 

generation of maritime innovators and servicemembers. 

It is really rather simple. Greater technology requires greater 

technicians, and that requires enhanced ocean STEM education. 

To respond to our ocean’s physical, chemical, and biological 

changes while maintaining security around our geopolitical maritime boundaries and ensuring the safety and prosperity of those 

within them, the Coast Guard must know the ocean. 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, and Members, 

the ocean science and technology community appreciates the interest that this subcommittee has in blue tech, and I want to reiterate 

those three points: 

Ocean knowledge enables the Coast Guard to achieve its missions through enhanced maritime domain awareness; 

Blue tech is vital to understanding the ocean; 

And blue tech innovation relies on ocean STEM education. 

I thank you for the time and the opportunity to be before you, 

and I am ready to answer questions. 

Mr. HUNTER. Admiral, thank you. 

I am going to take us back to the late 1990s when the Air Force 

was looking at these unmanned aerial vehicles. At that time it was 

Predators. So picture a bunch of Air Force officers, mostly generals 

and colonels, all pilots, the head of the Air Force, and we come up 

and we say, ‘‘Hey, we would like you guys to look at unmanned 

aerial vehicles.’’ 

29 

And they are like, ‘‘What do you mean? Ones that we are not in 

flying?’’ 

We say, ‘‘Yeah, ones that you can fly from the ground that a 19- 

year-old can fly with an Xbox controller. How about those?’’ 

And the Air Force said, ‘‘Go pound sand,’’ or, ‘‘go pound clouds.’’ 

I don’t know what the Air Force says, but the Air Force said no 

because a bunch of pilots in the Air Force did not want an unmanned aerial vehicle. It was a culture shift for them. 

This Congress, and it was back in the day, the late 1990s, the 

appropriators in the Armed Services Committee said, ‘‘Air Force, 

you will have Predators. Here you go. Here are some Predators. 

Learn how to do it.’’ 

The Air Force had to accept that, and it was a massive culture 

change for them because they had a lot of excuses, airplanes hitting each other; not a real pilot flying them; a lot of different 

things. 

We now see in warfare what a Predator does or a ScanEagle or 

a Pioneer or any of these different things that we use to support 

our men and women around the world very inexpensively and effectively. 

It seems like that is where the Coast Guard is at now, except the 

analogy would be different. It would be if the commercial world had 

been using Predators for 5 years and the Air Force finally jumped 

onboard. That is where the Coast Guard is now. 

So they are behind the commercial world. They are behind the 

Navy. They basically don’t exist in this world at all, except for looking at different programs and testing and evaluating them. They 

are not playing yet, while this stuff is being used commercially. 

So it has gone backwards, and I guess our job in the committee 

and your job letting us know what is available is to make them 

adapt and change so that they can be more effective. 

So, Admiral, I guess my first question to you is you have things. 

You have RPVs, remotely piloted vehicles, unmanned underwater 

vehicles, autonomous vehicles. You have the liquid robotic surfboard which can be maneuvered and is autonomous, too. It can be 

programmed. You have an unmanned surface vehicle right now in 

San Diego in Point Loma that the Navy is using. It was going to 

be in the big RIMPAC [Rim of the Pacific Exercise] coming up. 

They are going to actually use it, one of the first autonomous vehicles there. 

I guess I am throwing this all at you, Admiral, to start off with 

because you were in the Navy while they have gone through these 

kinds of changes in culture of looking at these things as well. They 

are much more embracing of this, it seems, than the Coast Guard 

is, and I guess the question is: why is that? 

And what can we do in this committee to make the Coast Guard 

embrace what the Navy has and kind of get out of the culture of 

‘‘wow, if we cannot drive the boat, we don’t want anybody to drive 

the boat’’? 

And I would end with this. At least for cuing, meaning foreseeing 

the bad guys driving, the Coast Guard could spend $20 million tomorrow and have a 50-mile line coming out from San Diego with 

surfboards that could recognize any ship going over 40 miles an 

30 

hour. That exists very easily right now that can tip and cue them 

then to go get it. 

The Coast Guard’s reason is we cannot catch these guys. We 

don’t see half of them. When we see them, we can usually hit them. 

It is hard to see these panga boats coming up the coast of California. 

You can create a tripwire really easily. It is not in their concept 

of operations. They talk about it, but the technology has existed 

now for years, and it is out there. They are not doing it. 

So I guess the question to you is: Coming after 30 years in the 

Navy, being their oceanographer, being the guy watching the culture in the Navy, where is the Coast Guard in terms of culture, 

and is that what needs to be changed, looking at Mr. Garamendi’s 

questions earlier in the last panel? 

Is that what needs to be changed in the Coast Guard or is it really that they need to change laws and regulations to do these little 

things, or is it a personality issue? 

Admiral WHITE. I certainly won’t perceive to have the knowledge 

that our predecessor on the panel does of the Coast Guard’s acquisition and research process, but I will tell you that the Navy’s is 

the strongest pretty much in the world. 

Over time we have showed the innovation, whether it is submarines, it is landing airplanes on aircraft carriers, and many 

things that you have talked about. That ocean research enterprise 

that the Navy has put forward has really adopted transformational 

changes which have impacted all of these services. 

The Navy has always been committed to that. They spend a lot 

of money. They have a research, development and transition enterprise that, again, is like none other. 

The Coast Guard and Navy work very closely, but in many ways, 

my own opinion is that the Coast Guard is always on the front 

lines. They are always right there. There are things going on on 

our coast, and they are stretched because of the operational type 

of responses and the operational readiness and preparedness, ‘‘semper paratus,’’ that they always have to actually be there. 

I believe there are opportunities, as I mentioned in my testimony, across agency working together in partnerships through 

things like the National Ocean Partnership Program Act, which 

was entered into operations in the 1997 National Defense Authorization Act. 

Partnerships between the Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation, DoD, NOAA, and others can advance the research 

and technology and transition if they are used appropriately, and 

I believe that is the type of avenue that you, sir, and your Members 

and partners in Congress can go forward and try to advance the 

research, development, and acquisition process of the Coast Guard. 

Mr. HUNTER. What would you say was the biggest impediment 

for the Navy when it came to do an autonomous ship, for instance? 

Because I have been in a room where you have a bunch of captains going, ‘‘We are not going to have a driverless ship. Every 

Navy ship will be captained.’’ I mean, that was a culture issue. 

Admiral WHITE. And when Secretary Mabus made the announcement 4 years ago at the Sea-Air-Space Exposition that the F–35 

31 

would be the last generation of manned fighter aircraft, naval aviators’ jaws dropped on the table, as you can imagine. 

So but what you have, I think, is a workforce based in STEM 

education over many decades who understands the importance of 

embracing new ideas and technology. I think that has been the 

U.S. Navy’s strength. Especially now you see that more than ever. 

So I think embracing that culture and blending that culture with 

industry and the academic institutions, which the Navy also does 

through its Office of Naval Research and the laboratories that were 

actually talked about, that is how the Navy has managed to do 

that. 

But a lot of it is personality driven, and the U.S. Navy and the 

Coast Guard, I believe they have the right personality and the people in leadership to do that. It is just a matter of giving them the 

tools, the time, and the resources to do it right, sir. 

Mr. HUNTER. So to extrapolate then on what you said, you are 

saying the Coast Guard is so operational all the time, it is your 

opinion that they don’t necessarily have time to look into these 

things and operationalize them or it takes longer? 

Admiral WHITE. Yes, sir. I believe they are stretched. I don’t 

think they have time or the resources, and I don’t think we in the 

Federal Government have the partnerships across the agencies to 

be able to accelerate transitions of the great work that the other 

members on this panel are doing in industry and academics. 

Mr. HUNTER. But the catch-22 is that if the Coast Guard did 

some of these things, they would have more people to do other 

things and the ability to have some space there because of the leverage you get by employing autonomous anything in sensors. 

Admiral WHITE. Yes, sir, but I always caution that we did learn 

a hard lesson in the Navy early on. Unmanned does not mean totally unmanned. It takes people to operate these systems, more and 

more technology, more and more knowledge, as I talked about it as 

well. 

So I do caution you to not think too much that we are going to 

free up a lot of people because there is plenty of mission for the 

Coast Guard, the Navy, and all of our forces out there, sir. 

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you, Admiral. 

Mr. Garamendi, you are recognized. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. First I want to thank the panel, an extraordinary panel, and a wide variety of information, from basic research to applied, and then the actual business of building the various systems. It is extraordinary. 

And your testimony probably two or three flights across the 

country for the chairman and I to absorb all of the data that you 

have given me. So thank you so very much for that. 

I have got about 20 different questions, and about 5 minutes in 

which to ask all of the questions. But really honing in on the culture of the Coast Guard here—but before I go to that, your testimony and, really, your work is based upon the application of 

science and research, much of which is funded through the various 

Federal organizations—National Science Foundation; for example, 

U.S. Navy, another example that was given here a moment ago. 

That is really beyond the scope of what we are talking about today. 

32 

But it is the application of that science, and the development of 

the various techniques and technologies that come from it that we 

are focused on. And most particularly on the culture of the Coast 

Guard. 

I am sorry that the admiral left, but the reality is that there is 

within the Coast Guard two things operating, it seems to me. First 

the culture is not one of adapting quickly new techniques and technologies. And secondly, a lack of money to do so, if in fact that culture did exist. 

So my—really, my questions go to—from your points of view and 

the work that you do, how can we encourage the Coast Guard to 

more quickly adopt the systems that you have developed, the research that you may have available, and just that area. So how can 

we motivate change or otherwise encourage the Coast Guard to be 

a first adopter of a technology? 

Dr. Terrill, then right on down the line we can go at it. 

Dr. TERRILL. Sure. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Money. 

Dr. TERRILL. Well, I am not prepared to discuss procurement reform. But, as an observation, what I have seen in the Department 

of Defense, especially those parts of the Department of the Defense 

with seawater in their veins, is that the organized, vertically integrated programs that bring together the operational fleet all the 

way down to the R&D community, as part of these test beds or exercises that provide opportunities to demonstrate technologies to 

those in uniform, having them work together so that there is early 

adoption within those with uniforms so that they can be the apostles within their own organization to start—many times there is 

not an awareness of what the capabilities are. And having opportunities for the young lieutenants to actually be observant of the capabilities goes a long way, at least within the Navy. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you. 

Mr. Jones? 

Mr. JONES. So we’re not really the National Science Foundation 

level. We are talking about companies that are selling technologies. 

And my experience is the Coast Guard is extraordinarily operationally oriented. And so, to try and get the attention of people in various areas is very difficult. They want it to go through New London. 

And I think one of the things that could be done—again, this is 

a cultural issue—is to encourage them to be looking for technologies, and to give them an opportunity to meet with industry. 

I had a former Coast Guard officer say to me that some years 

ago he felt that it was much easier for him to work with and meet 

with technology companies, and that they no longer have their tech 

forum which they used to have 5 years ago, 6 years ago. They are 

no longer encouraged the same way—again, this is somebody telling me, so I am saying this thirdhand—that he felt like there 

wasn’t the same exchange of information and opportunity between 

industry and Coast Guard. And again, that is a cultural issue. 

So what I proposed was that each sector have people whose job 

it is—maybe it is 15 percent of the deputy commander’s job—to go 

find technology, meet with industry, so they can funnel it up to 

33 

New London, rather than having it all centralized, and potentially 

putting something on the west coast. 

So I think there are cultural things that—notwithstanding the 

fact it is extraordinary and operational every day, saving a life, you 

know, plus its military role—I think there are things that can and 

should be done. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chance? 

Mr. CHANCE. Sure, I would certainly second what you just said 

on the concept of having somebody concentrate on that, on meeting 

with industry and finding out what is available today. 

I would also say that this hearing is already having its effect. 

You know, I am looking at it aggressively, which I probably didn’t 

as much as I should have in the past, and now we are lining up 

meetings with the Coast Guard RDT&E. And seeing the funding 

that the Coast Guard has got more recently to be able to push in 

this direction is certainly going to help hugely. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you. 

Mr. COYLE. I can’t speak necessarily to the culture of the Coast 

Guard, but I can say that some of the challenges that the Coast 

Guard probably faces in implementing some of this new technology, 

you see that same hesitancy within the tech community and the investment community, and the potential of the blue economy. 

And so, trying to get IBMs and the Intels and the Oracles of the 

world to take those lessons learned in emerging technology and 

apply them to the ocean, the investment community, has been a 

herculean task. And I have only been doing this for a year. But 

that also allows for an enormous amount of opportunity to address 

those problems. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you. Professor? 

Dr. OZKAN-HALLER. Thank you for this question. I have spent the 

last 25 years of my career developing software tools that I thought 

could be useful for many entities or industries. And every time I 

tried to take these tools to these entities or industries, I got resistance. 

I found that the path past that resistance in almost every single 

instance has been the idea that these tools should be co-developed, 

that the stakeholders should be involved in the development process through the development process. 

And also, the second piece has been educational partnerships, 

where folks are brought together and brought along. Perhaps that 

could be one of the ways in which we could encourage industry, 

academia, and the Coast Guard to work together to really understand what the key issues are, the barriers are that are preventing 

adoption, and work our way past those together. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Admiral? 

Admiral WHITE. I said a lot already. I will just say that the 

Coast Guard has been successful many years in innovating. Look 

at the work they have done at the Joint Interagency Task Force, 

in combating a lot of transnational criminal activities through intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. Look at the work they 

have done against illegal fishing activities such as high seas drift 

nets, going back—more modern entities, as well. 

The Coast Guard can and does innovate. I still get back to I 

think in many ways it is a problem of resources, and that you have 

34 

got to invest the resources upfront in the longer term—rapid transition of the tech that is out there. But I know we all believe it is 

something that has to be done, so I think we need to look hard at 

the resources that are available to the Coast Guard to work in 

partnership with the Navy and the others to address these gaps, 

sir. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. It would be a serious error for me to try to sum 

up all that you said, but it seems to me that there are a couple 

of things here. 

First of all, the culture of the Coast Guard: Take care of today’s 

problem, operational words that are used. That, I think, goes to the 

incentives of the—if promotion included innovation, the innovation 

of an officer or of a—any individual of the 42,000, if their promotion also included their interest in innovation and bringing innovation online, so now you build a different cultural attitude. 

Secondly, the resource, which is a problem that the Coast Guard 

does have to deal with. I guess we have to deal with it. And we 

noted the 47-percent reduction in the research technology. 

And the third is interaction with other governmental agencies. 

They seem to be the three lessons that I would draw from this. 

Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the ranking member. I would like to differentiate, too, between super high-tech stuff that is in its infancy 

stages and is nascent—and a floating surfboard that can sense if 

there is oil in the water that has been around for 5 years or 

longer—longer than that, actually, I just saw it 5 or 6 years ago. 

That’s not rocket science. 

And just in the same way, if you look at the southern border and 

you have a border fence now, you have basically an obstacle planted, what it has allowed the Border Patrol to do is spread their people out. Because there is a high-speed road and a fence. So if someone sees something, someone can get there in 1 minute on a quad. 

They can cover a mile in 30 seconds and they are there. 

It is the same with the Coast Guard. I don’t get the adapting of 

new things, when it is really just a surfboard that can cue you on 

a ship coming at 50 miles an hour, or a storm, or oil in the water. 

That is not rocket science, that is not crazy, and it is not even new 

any more. But when it takes the Coast Guard 5 years to put a 

loudspeaker on a small cutter, we are looking at decades before 

they will allow a surfboard with a sensor that costs $500,000. 

It is not where I am talking big money, either. I am talking 

small money, in terms of being efficient and effective. 

With that, Mr. Lowenthal, you are recognized for your questions. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank the 

panelists for being here. 

I just wanted to mention first—and then I will have some questions—that I represent the port area of Long Beach, California, 

which is right adjacent to L.A. And so I have had the good pleasure 

of visiting with the port pilots the CDIP [Coastal Data Information 

Program] buoy network in the San Pedro Bay. And I know the 

value of the information that these devices both collect to our ports’ 

pilots, and to researchers, oceanographic researchers, and to the 

entire maritime community. And so every year I lead a letter in the 

Congress supporting robust appropriation for the CDIP program. 

35 

And also another program, which I am so impressed with also is 

one that I think Dr. Terrill at Scripps really led the effort, and that 

is the Under Keel Clearance Precision and Navigation Project. We 

have these huge tankers coming in and the ability to get in and 

out of our ports with very, very little clearance is so, so important. 

And it—really, the more we can do that, that reduces the inefficiency of offshore lightering, which is something we would like to 

eliminate, or do as—you know, as much as possible, because that 

just adds another step and another danger to the process. 

But I want to get back to the testimony of Dr. Ozkan-Haller and 

all the others about partnerships across Government agencies. You 

all talked about, I think, academia, the private sector, how we need 

these robust initiatives connected across these multiple entities 

and geographic—I want to know, what can the Congress do about 

that? What do you think, if you were going to advise us to take 

some very concrete steps to promote the partnerships that you are 

talking about? Could you give us some—just dig a little deeper and 

give us some examples of what you would like us to do? 

Dr. OZKAN-HALLER. Thank you very much for this excellent question. 

Partnerships between Federal agencies are really key, and they 

are key not just for the problem that you just mentioned, but for 

a variety of other problems that are related to the coastal zone, be 

it, for instance, coastal flooding due to storm events, or be it energy 

production from waves or tidal currents across the coastal zone. 

I think, you know, I have always felt that I have been very fortunate to work in a field where there are multiple Federal agencies 

interested in funding research and development. That is great, you 

can really expand your portfolio. But at the same time, sometimes 

certain tasks fall through the cracks, where no one agency feels— 

especially mission agencies—feel like it falls squarely within their 

purview to get something done. 

And sometimes some of the supplied work that we have been 

talking about, some of this transitioning the research into the 

hands of the folks who would actually use it, tends to fall through 

the cracks. This is one of the reasons why I wanted to stress how 

important it is to make the strategic investment in the technology 

development piece, in the actual transition, that last missing link 

to really make it easy for folks on the ground to utilize these. 

Admiral White mentioned the National Oceanographic Partnership Program. I am part of the Ocean Studies Board of the National Academies. And as part of that we talk about that program 

a lot as a potential conduit for getting agencies to work together. 

There has been some resistance in doing so, partially, I think, because of who is in the leadership position of the NOPP program at 

any given time. 

I have been told there are only two ways to get agencies to work 

together, and you all can tell me if this is correct or not. One is 

they are all buddies and friends and they get along, and so therefore they work together anyway. Or otherwise, they have to be told 

from above to work together. So maybe that is a place where this 

committee can come in. 

Thanks for the opportunity—— 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. So we are good at—we are the tellers. 

36 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Anybody else want to add something to that, in 

terms of how we create or, really, the role that the Congress should 

play in fostering and promoting partnerships, especially across 

Federal agencies? 

Yes, Admiral White. 

Admiral WHITE. Thank you, sir. I should mention that there has 

been a piece of legislation that has been entered into the process, 

I believe, by Congressman Panetta and Congressman Palazzo 

called Commercial Engagement Through Ocean Technology Act of 

2018. It’s CENOTE, by short. This is an act that is meant to basically make NOAA work more closely with Navy to test and develop 

autonomous vehicles and other blue tech that we have talked about 

today. 

The Coast Guard was not called out in that specific piece of legislation right now. But that type of legislation, I would encourage 

you to take a look at it. Is it something that you might want to 

look at with the Coast Guard? And—but those type of vehicles—— 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. That would be one of the vehicles that you are 

talking about that would foster that kind of relationship between 

NOAA and the other agencies? 

Admiral WHITE. Yes, sir. It would be a teller type of role that you 

would be playing. 

The same with NOPP [National Oceanographic Partnership Program]—by the way, which again is an act from the year of 1996, 

enrolled in the 1997 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act]. 

But, you know, could use probably a fresh look and some fresh telling, as well. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you. 

Yes, Mr. Jones? 

Mr. JONES. I assume that you are involved, as you are naming 

new Commandants and people like that. And to the extent that you 

ask questions about innovation and technology, I think that is very 

telling, particularly for younger officers as they are coming up, that 

they see that that is an area of particular interest. 

And I would like to just note that the new Vice Commandant, 

Charlie Ray, did come down, and we put on an event for him. I 

think we had 10 companies present. He said he’d never done that 

before, and he was fabulous. Not only did he make a lot of companies really feel good that he wanted to be open, he brought people 

with him that followed up. And that kind of regional interface, the 

ability to talk to industry, to know that leadership is interested— 

again, thinking of these innovation councils going on a regional 

basis—I think could have a lot of benefit. Also, younger officers can 

get involved. 

So I think that things can be done without great cost that can 

really help change, but particularly, when you make that an issue 

at approval levels, the highest levels. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman. I want to ask a really quick 

question before we go to Ms. Plaskett. 

Is there a kind of symposium that the Coast Guard has every 

year? The Army has a big AUSA [Association of the United States 

37 

Army] convention, where every tactical killing thing known to mankind is there at the convention center here. The Marine Corps does 

the same thing. The Air Force has a Big Safari, the Navy has got 

a big symposium. Have any of you been invited to the Coast Guard 

technology symposiums on stuff that is out there? 

Mr. JONES. So I am told the last one was 5 or 6 years ago. 

Mr. HUNTER. That is good. Nothing has happened since then? 

Mr. JONES. I am sorry? 

Mr. HUNTER. Nothing has happened, technologically in 5 or 6 

years, so that is understandable. 

Mr. JONES. I have a feeling it was probably cost-driven. But they 

had contracted with NDIA to do an innovation forum. 

And I think one other way to address that, rather than putting 

on their own forum, let’s say in Washington, DC, a lot of the smaller companies don’t necessarily know about it. And maybe the way 

to address it is to have officers go to tech forums in parts of the 

United States. So it reduces their cost, and they can go to where 

technologies already are being shown. 

Mr. HUNTER. Yes, Doctor? 

Dr. OZKAN-HALLER. I would also argue that certainly the local 

Coast Guard officers that are within my area, the mouth of the Columbia River and other treacherous inlets in the Pacific Northwest, 

do interact with companies, as well as with academic institutions, 

but at a much more local scale than what you are referring to. But 

those interactions, clearly, I think, are also useful. 

Mr. HUNTER. And there is a different dynamic, too. Because if 

you are in San Diego and you make a new thing for the Marines, 

you can go to Camp Pendleton, give a regiment or battalion that 

is deploying the gear, they can go to play with it and actually test 

it, do operational testing, and come back. The Coast Guard cannot 

do that. They don’t have the rules and regulations set up. 

So even from my loudspeaker example, the LRAD, they had to 

go up all the way through, I think, at the admiral level or the captain level in the Coast Guard to be able to put that on a small cutter in San Diego in order to test it. It wasn’t just a thing that the 

local commander there could say, ‘‘Hey, guys, we are going to test 

a loudspeaker,’’ pop it on one of the cutters. They had to get a person who specializes in that, who was already doing it in Florida, 

and then took that—it is just not as—it is not easy at all, actually, 

at the local level or at the small unit leader level. 

Ms. Plaskett, you are recognized. 

Ms. PLASKETT. [No response.] 

Mr. HUNTER. Ms. Plaskett, you are recognized. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Yes, thank you very much. 

Mr. Chance, I wanted to ask you a question. You all were at the 

first panel and the discussion that was had at that time. I had a 

discussion with the testifier then about the use of technology with 

the Coast Guard in terms of interdictions on drugs and weapons. 

He talked quite a bit about unmanned aerial systems and their relationship with other law enforcement entities. 

What would be the use and the efficacy of using UUVs, as well 

as USVs in this area? Is that a possibility? 

Mr. CHANCE. Sure. USVs, which is my area of expertise, I can 

tell you would lend itself tremendously. 

38 

For example, we are now converting a 38-foot patrol craft, optionally unmanned, that can stay and loiter offshore for weeks at a 

time, running a radar, looking for vessels that need to be investigated. So this vessel and the data on board would be monitored 

back at a control center on shore, or even on a Coast Guard cutter. 

And so, if the Coast Guard decides that they want to investigate, 

they can dispatch that vessel out and be able to interrogate it via 

the satellite base, through the link to the VHF radio, and actually 

talk to that vessel. Or if they can’t communicate that way, through 

a hailer and then over the satellite link. And if necessary, they can 

even, as I mentioned in my testimony, deploy a net system that entangles in the prop that will stop that vessel until the Coast Guard 

can reach them and investigate that situation. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Interesting, really great. Thank you. 

I had a second question for Admiral White. This was with regard 

to the investment that is being made. Do you happen to have any 

statistics or information that speaks to the amount of venture capital that is being invested in the types of technology that you discussed, and various blue technology and its growth? 

Admiral WHITE. I don’t have those at my fingertips, ma’am, I 

apologize. But I will get an analysis of that for you and get it back 

to you. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Would you say that the magnitude of that is how 

much less that is than space or other areas or—what are the ways 

that we can get VC funding into this area? 

Admiral WHITE. I will go back to the comments by one of my cohorts on this panel, is that I think that it is absolutely—there is 

an order of magnitude difference in the investment that we are 

making in exploring space and trying to understand what is going 

on in oceans on planets that we will never live on—for many generations, at least—whereas we need to pay more attention to our 

own ocean and our own interspace that we have here. It is an order 

of magnitude difference—— 

Ms. PLASKETT. Is—— 

Admiral WHITE [continuing]. In terms of technology—— 

Ms. PLASKETT. Is there a role that Congress can play in 

incentivizing or getting the private sector and these venture capital 

groups, private equity groups, to be engaged in this? 

Admiral WHITE. I think working across the various committees 

between your committee, looking at the science committee, all the 

actual committees, and focusing and really trying to balance what 

is really important to our population right now. And the maritime 

and maritime transportation, maritime safety and security environment has to be paramount for the reasons that we have all talked 

about. And I just believe you can help elevate sort of the understanding, not just by the folks here in DC, but by our population, 

writ large. 

We all love space. We all want to be Captain Kirk, which means 

it is either our Navy or our Coast Guard—— 

Ms. PLASKETT. Or Uhura. 

[Laughter.] 

Admiral WHITE. Even better. But as we do that, we need to understand that it is a change in perception of that. It is a level of 

importance. And that is through ocean literacy, and ocean underVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:45 Sep 21, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\115\CG\5-8-20~1\31549.TXT JEAN
39 

standing, and the STEM, ocean STEM that I talked about, which 

would drive education of the next generation of our maritime Nation. We should be vested in ocean STEM as a mandate to drive 

this type of discourse going forward, ma’am. Thank you for the 

question. 

[RADM Jonathan White provided post-hearing supplemental information to his 

remarks to Delegate Stacey E. Plaskett below:] 

VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN SPACE

$18.4 billion in private money (e.g., seed money, prize money, venture capital, private equity, etc.) has been invested in the space industry since 2000. 

From 100 in 2011 to more than 1,000 in 2016, the number of space companies has grown exponentially. To date, 2015 has been the largest venture 

capital (VC) investment year at $1.891 billion (more than all previous years 

combined) from 50 VC firms. The bulk of this money came from Google’s 

$1 billion investment in SpaceX. 2017 was not far off that record with 

$1.596 billion in VC investments from 87 VC firms (up from 44 in 2016). 

As of 2017, more than 250 VC firms had invested in space activities with 

16 making repeat investments. 

Experts report that investors see dual function in the technology they are 

supporting (e.g., satellite imagery data management can serve industries 

beyond space) and believe this has been a key driver for investments. 

VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN OCEANS

Tracking private investments in startup companies and technology is very 

difficult unless the transactions are made public or specific industry-titled 

venture capital funds are created. Venture capital funds are investment 

funds that manage the money of investors who seek private equity stakes 

in small- to medium-sized companies and startups. To date, the U.S. does 

not have any blue technology or blue economy VC funds. Additionally, due 

to the lack of funds, there are no robust efforts to track this information 

like there are for space. Any VC investments in blue technology to date 

have occurred through nonspecific VC funds or individual investments. 

Experts in marine technology recognize the need to establish a designated 

fund to drive (and monitor) investments and are working towards this goal. 

In 2017, an important first step was taken by forming the global BlueTech 

Cluster Alliance coalition. By bringing blue tech companies together, investors can easily and efficiently see the breadth of technology available and 

how it works together. This partnership also allows the ability to leverage 

expertise and share financial investments, including international money to 

foster growth in the maritime domain. 

WHAT ARE OTHER NATIONS DOING? 

Other nations are advancing rapidly. China, Singapore, and the United 

Kingdom are already identifying gaps and are making substantial federal 

investments in basic research, technology development, education programs, and workforce training. In January 2018, the National Science 

Foundation (NSF) reported that for the first time, China produced more scientific publications than the U.S. As a metric for discovery and advancement, this is a concerning data point showing our Nation faltering in global 

science primacy. 

Additionally, confidence in China’s science and technology innovation was 

evident with $10.7 billion from VC investments in the second quarter of 

2017. While the value is lower than investments in U.S. technology ($18.7 

billion during the same time), it shows a dramatic increase (214 percent) 

from 2013 when less than $5 billion was invested for the entire year. 

In the blue technology sector, seven nations are called out as leaders in 

ocean innovation; they are members of the global consortium BlueTech 

Cluster Alliance (BTCA): 

• Portugal (Forum Oceano) 

40 

• Ireland (Marine Institute) 

• Canada (Oceans Advance) 

• Spain (PLOCAN) 

• France (Pole Mer Mediterranee) 

• U.S. (The Maritime Alliance) 

• U.K. (U.K. Blue Growth Network) 

Additionally, all of these nations except the U.S. are members of the United 

Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, giving them a leg up on unity 

when considering partnerships and combined initiatives. 

WHAT CONGRESS CAN DO

Elevate the visibility of and investment in marine technologies through various legislative tools, including appropriations, authorizations, hearings, 

and briefings. Look for nontraditional legislative vehicles to address the 

issue. 

Through reauthorization of the National Ocean Partnership Program 

(NOPP) Act of 1996, specifically task the NOPP agencies to analyze and 

track U.S. VC investments on blue technology. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. And that actually leads to the second 

question I had. And we talked about the private sector. I wanted 

to talk about education. 

The Virgin Islands has one of the premier maritime or marine 

biology programs. But in other areas related to ocean STEM, I 

think that there is a dearth of degree options of areas that young 

people can go into. 

Particularly, my question was, are there ways that we have tried 

to increase communities of color, or other minorities—African 

American, people of color, Latinos—in this area? 

And what are the ways that we can drive interest for individuals 

who live on the coast, communities of color that are tremendously 

affected by food insecurities, climate change, that is affected by the 

oceans? Does anyone on the panel have any thoughts? Please. 

Mr. JONES. First, to your first question, there is not one blue tech 

investment fund in the United States today. There is not one. 

There are a number of people focused on space, but there is not one 

venture fund in the United States that is really focused on blue 

tech. 

We are doing our third year, part of Blue Tech Week, a Blue 

Tech Pitchfest, and we are reaching out around the United States. 

So I think there are roles for the SBA and other agencies—could 

try and help make—fund organizations that would invest in blue 

tech companies. 

Related to education, we, this year have a major effort in particular to reach out to underserved communities. In a place like 

San Diego, where the cost of housing is very high, it is very hard 

to bring somebody in and—technical workers. So we believe that 

we are going to have to grow our own entrepreneurs and our own 

technical workers. 

So we have started an internship program with heavy emphasis 

on underserved communities. We got some funding from our—a 

local foundation. We have just started an immersion program. It 

will be a pilot program. This year we will do 2 weeks. 

We also started a blue STEM—we used to call it ocean STEM, 

but we want to be more comprehensive than that, so we are talking 

blue STEM—with the San Diego Unified School District. We have 

41 

picked a middle school and a high school. We are creating an academy and a workforce pathway. We are working with our workforce 

development agency, with all of our universities to really start at 

the earliest levels. And once we can create a replicable model, we 

plan to put it all across San Diego County and then across the 

country. 

So it is something that we are spending a lot of time on, is this 

whole component of education. We know it is critically important 

to bring females and other underserved communities into this. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Coyle? 

Mr. COYLE. Can I get back to your investment question? I think 

there are—as Mr. Jones mentioned about there is no blue tech 

fund, I think that is one avenue, in terms of—whether it is sovereign wealth management, asset management, private equity, 

venture capital, there is huge opportunity on that. I was just at a 

conference in Santa Monica about what is being done in that regard in the Middle East. 

I was just at a conference 2 weeks ago at Yale University on the 

impact investment side, which is looking at how do you make profit 

and do good in the same equation. And if you look at the chairman 

of BlackRock, I think, sending these CEOs letters about maybe a 

month ago that their portfolio companies not only have to make 

profit, but actually have to make an impact, that is fundamental. 

When you have got one of the biggest asset management companies in the world, you have got the investment community—there 

were plenty of Wall Streeters that were there, banks that are now 

fundamentally looking at this as—not as just donating to a nonprofit—as how do we use technology to return profit and make societal difference? That is fundamental. That’s not happened in the 

investment community. 

And so I think there is a role that Government can play 

incentivizing the investment community to pay more attention to 

emerging blue technology. 

Ms. PLASKETT. OK. Yes? 

Admiral WHITE. For 21 years there has been the National Ocean 

Sciences Bowl, started by Admiral Watkins again. It is a high 

school ocean quiz bowl competition. It brings together multiregions 

across States and around the country, not just coastal, but Idaho 

and Colorado. And this is a high school quiz bowl that, unfortunately, is not being utilized to its full potential today. It was meant 

to—actually designed to be run by a combination of resources from 

multiple Federal ocean agencies under the NOPP Act, originally. 

This is an opportunity to work with aquariums in inner cities 

and underrepresented populations, to grow not just at the high 

school, but even the middle school level, and really use the ocean. 

Because the aquariums and parks—ocean attracts people. They 

want to engage in understanding it. We have a great opportunity 

through this program and other programs being run through the 

education partnerships and through other agencies. 

Not enough attention is being paid to this, in my opinion, writ 

large, and it would be a great opportunity to ask some hard questions of the agency. You have got tools out there. Why are you not 

utilizing them to their fullest potential? 

42 

[RADM Jonathan White provided post-hearing supplemental information to his 

remarks to Delegate Stacey E. Plaskett below:] 

IMPORTANCE OF STEM EDUCATION

Good information enables well-founded decisions. Having a foundation in 

STEM education can make life easier, from understanding mortgage payments and computer basics to natural processes like erosion and weather. 

A society that understands how physical parameters contribute to climate 

and natural hazards can make better informed decisions when building 

homes or preparing for storms. To remain a leader in science and innovation it is critical to educate the next experts in ocean science and STEM. 

When looking at science course availability, fewer than 50 percent of high 

schools offer education in Earth or environmental science. 

• 98 percent offer biology 

• 94 percent offer chemistry 

• 85 percent offer physics 

• 48 percent offer environmental science or ecology 

• 48 percent offer Earth or space science 

• 24 percent offer engineering 

These subjects can help make complex concepts easier to comprehend because they provide real-world examples across multiple disciplines (e.g., 

physics, geology, physiology, chemistry, biology). 

U.S. STEM and geoscience jobs are projected to grow by 12.5 and 14 percent respectively from 2012–2022. In 2016 there were 26 million STEM related jobs, but in some disciplines the workforce is aging rapidly (47 percent 

of American geoscientists in the private sector and 43 percent in the Federal Government were over the age of 55 in 2016). We’re looking at a cliff 

in geoscience workforce. Additionally, the blue economy is projected to double by 2030 to over $3 trillion and 40 million jobs. These jobs demand an 

ocean-STEM educated workforce and that must start during primary education. 

DIVERSITY IN STEM AND O–STEM 

A 2018 survey reported, Hispanics and blacks comprise 16 and 11 percent 

of the U.S. job market respectively, and when looking at STEM careers 

their representation is much lower (e.g., life science 7 and 4 percent, engineers 8 and 5 percent, physical scientists 7 and 6 percent, respectively). The 

survey asked why Hispanics and blacks are not working in STEM, and the 

top reported reasons were: limited access to quality STEM education (42 

percent), not encouraged to pursue STEM at a young age (41 percent), and 

don’t believe they can succeed in a STEM career (33 percent). If you examine ocean sciences (graduate students awarded master’s degrees) a greater 

lack of diversity is observed, with Hispanics, blacks, and multirace individuals making up 4, 1, and 2 percent of the degrees awarded. 

However, underrepresentation goes beyond race, including gender and financial disparity. The 2018 study showed 69 percent of individuals with 

non-STEM careers were interested in a STEM career during high school 

and college and the main reason they chose not to pursue the field was due 

to cost and time barriers. 

HOW DO WE CULTIVATE THE DIVERSE AND INNOVATIVE FUTURE OF STEM? 

Since most high school curricula don’t include oceanography, informal educational programs like the National Ocean Sciences Bowl (NOSB) or community initiatives like Pop-Up/Drill-Down Science are increasingly important to introduce students to (and get them excited about) ocean science 

and blue technology. 

The 21-year-old NOSB promotes collaboration, teamwork, innovation, critical thinking, and professional development, all valuable skills for the O– 

STEM workforce. Specifically, 2,000 participants annually from across the 

Nation, including Alaska, Hawaii, and noncoastal regions. From 2004–2010, 

funding was used to increase diversity, specifically targeting minorities and 

underserved communities. The pilot program highlighted minority and 

43 

underrepresented students’ interest in ocean science and NOSB; students 

lose interest when programs and access are not stable. With concerted efforts and dedicated funding, diversity was nearly doubled. In fact, the 2018 

competition year had a participant makeup of 50 percent female, 34 percent 

non-Caucasian and 66 percent Caucasian (averaged 37 percent non-Caucasian and 63 percent Caucasian over the last 5 years). 

Pop-Up/Drill-Down Science is a 5-year pilot program specifically designed 

to expose communities, across age ranges, to Earth and ocean sciences 

through an immersive ‘‘pop-up’’ exhibit entitled In Search of Earth’s Secrets. The exhibit debuted in March 2018 with the following goals: 

• Increase access to and awareness of ocean and Earth science and careers, 

especially in disadvantaged communities, by bringing the exhibit and associated activities and scientists themselves to nontraditional venues 

ranging from block parties, local festivals, malls and parking lots to libraries, museums, and science centers 

• Create a sustainable model for STEM learning in informal environments 

• Increase interest in the scientific drilling and research activities of the 

International Ocean Discovery Program among the general public (children, teens, and adults) who attend the Pop-Up/Drill Down Science 

events 

• Foster partnerships between educators and scientists that lead to broader 

dissemination of scientists’ research and the larger vision of NSF 

Programs like the National Ocean Sciences Bowl and Pop-Up/Drill-Down 

Science are essential for many underserved communities because it might 

be the only way they are getting exposure to and knowledge about the 

ocean. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. 

Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to ask these 

questions. 

And Mr. Jones, I think that the island of St. John, where we are 

actually about to rebuild our school, would be a great place for you 

to try another pilot out for these young people. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentlelady. If there is no further questions, I thank all the witnesses for their testimony and the Members for their participation. 

The subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

44 


Insert offset folio 8 here 31549.008

u. s. Department of 

Homeland secuntv 

United States 

Coast Guard 

Commandant 

United States Coast Guard 

TESTIMONY OF 

2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20593-7000 

Staff Symbol: CG-092 

Phone: (202) 372-4411 

FAX: (202) 372-8302 

REAR ADMIRAL MICHAEL J. HAYCOCK 

ON 

"COAST GUARD- BLUE TECHNOLOGY" 

BEFORE THE 

HOUSE COAST GUARD & MARITIME TRANSPORTATION SUBCOMMITTEE 

MAY8,2018 

Introduction 

Good morning Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of the Committee. It is my pleasure to 

be here today to discuss the Coast Guard's efforts to pursue technologies and solutions that have 

the greatest potential to enhance the service's acquisition and mission execution. 

The Coast Guard is very thankful for this Committee's enduring support of our acquisition, 

construction and improvement programs, particularly in fiscal year 2018. This support is critical 

to the Service's efforts to recapitalize its aging fleet of cutters, aircraft, boats and support systems, 

and to address a growing backlog of shore construction and facility needs. Coupled with the 

supplemental funding for hurricane response activities, your legislative actions have enhanced our 

ability to prepare for and respond to mission needs, including future disasters. 

The U.S. Coast Guard is the world's premier military, multi-mission, maritime service responsible 

for the safety, security and stewardship of U.S. waters and hundreds of miles seaward. At all 

times, a military service and branch of the U.S. Armed Forces, a federal law enforcement agency, 

a regulatory body, a first responder, and a member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, the Coast 

Guard stands the watch and serves a nation whose economic prosperity and national security are 

inextricably linked to broad maritime interests. 

The Coast Guard's breadth of missions, competencies, and authorities create unique research 

opportunities and challenges. The Coast Guard's Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation 

(RDT &E) program supports research and innovation across all of our mission areas, including 

search and rescue, drug and migrant interdiction, oil spill and natural disaster response, 

commercial vessel inspections, maritime cybersecurity, and many others. 

Coast Guard Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Program 

This year marks the RDT&E program's 50-year anniversary. The office was established in 1968, 

followed by the creation of our Research and Development Center (R&D) Center in New London, 

CT, four years later. Since that time, the Coast Guard RDT&E program has developed an 

impressive resume of nearly 2000 products, from studies to prototypes, which have enhanced 

Coast Guard missions and informed Coast Guard leadership decision-making. 
45 


Insert offset folio 9 here 31549.009

At any given time, the Coast Guard RDT&E Program is working on more than 70 projects in 

support of Coast Guard operators. The RDT &E program focuses on applied technologies and 

enhances mission execution by facilitating the transition of new or existing technologies into the 

service's operational forces, while also providing Coast Guard leadership with knowledge 

necessary for making strategic decisions. The RDT&E program includes the Coast Guard 

Innovation Program, developed to best harness the creativity of the Coast Guard workforce to 

address enterprise challenges. 

Cooperative Research and Development 

The Coast Guard RDT&E program partners closely with Department of Homeland Security and 

Department of Defense research entities, national laboratories, academia, and industry to leverage 

vital lower Technical Readiness Level or "TRL" research. Coast Guard RDT&E recently teamed 

with the DHS Office of Science and Technology (DHS S&T) to form the CG/DHS S&T 

Innovation Center (CG-STIC). CG-STIC is focused on projects intended to rapidly move highTRL technologies into the hands of operators. 

With a finite research budget to address a broad mission spectrum, finding willing partners is 

especially important. Coast Guard RDT&E's list of partners and partnership agreements is wideranging and is perhaps best exemplified through how Coast Guard RDT &E has worked with DHS 

S&T Office of University Programs at institutions across the nation. These efforts include work 

with the University of Southern California to inform policy decisions on maritime cybersecurity, 

as well as the University of Alaska to identify Arctic technology priorities. Coast Guard 

researchers also work alongside the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSSE), 

the Naval Research Laboratory, and the Department of Energy at our nation's only facility for 

maritime full-scale in-situ oil burn research, the Joint Maritime Test Facility (JMTF) in Mobile, 

Alabama. 

While academic institutions are a vital resource for research, the Coast Guard also focuses on 

building partnerships with industry. Coast Guard RDT &E maintains a dozen Cooperative 

Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) with industry firms. CRADAs are mutually 

beneficial; they provide industry direct access to understanding end-user needs, while keeping the 

Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments in private-sector technology. As an example, the 

Coast Guard collaborated with Mercury Marine to explore diesel outboard technology. The project 

allowed Mercury to refine their product based on real-world operations, and helped the Coast 

Guard explore moving toward a single-fuel surface fleet. Coast Guard RDT &E currently has active 

CRADAs with Lockheed Martin, Conoco Philips, and many others. 

In addition, the R&D Center partners with DHS S&T to introduce technology solutions into Coast 

Guard operations through DHS prize competitions. Leveraging innovative approaches like the 

prize authority allows the Coast Guard to crowd-source good ideas from the public to help address 

operational challenges. 

Transitioning Research & Development: Supporting Future Operations Today 

The Coast Guard's research project portfolio is closely tied to service mission needs. Coast Guard 

RDT &E uses its innovation crowdsourcing platform to collect project ideas from the entire 

workforce. This raw list of ideas is prioritized by program managers, operational commanders, 

and other subject matter experts throughout the service. Potential projects are vetted by Coast 

Guard senior leaders and prioritized to ensure alignment with service priorities. 

2 
46 


Insert offset folio 10 here 31549.010

RDT &E program research generally focuses on higher TRL applied research, to concentrate 

efforts on how to adapt proven technologies to enhance Coast Guard missions. Evaluation ofhighTRL technology often includes testing commercial off-the-shelf products in actual Coast Guard 

operating environments. 

Over the years, Coast Guard RDT &E products have provided vital support to operational 

commanders. In the 1970s, the program developed "oil fingerprinting" to help Captains of the Port 

identify oil spill responsible parties. In the 1980s, the program helped develop navigation 

technologies, such as differential GPS, that were crucial to modem international commerce and 

mariner safety. 

Today, RDT&E is working on a full spectrum of unmanned and counter-unmanned systems. 

Current projects include various unmanned and autonomous platforms (subsurface, surface, air, 

and space) and their advanced sensors capabilities, as well as systems to counter threats from 

unmanned aerial platforms. The program has developed and tested non-lethal munitions, 

technology to identify hoax search and rescue callers, and continues to lead national research 

focusing on oil spill mitigation. 

The RDT &E program is agile, and capable of responding quickly to mission need. After the recent 

loss of the SS El Faro, Coast Guard RDT&E aided the investigation by testing the flotation of 

survival suits similar in age and type to those carried aboard the ship. The program supported 

several recent project ideas, related to operator requirements identified during the active 2017 

hurricane season. Responders requested evaluation of asset tracking capabilities, social media 

distress notifications, and other issues that arose during the storm response. RDT&E work is now 

underway in these areas to help enhance first responder safety and mission performance. 

The Coast Guard RDT&E program endeavors to respond to emergent needs, while also helping 

Coast Guard leadership position our service for the future. Coast Guard RDT &E has also begun 

exploring machine learning, cubesats, augmented reality, and other emergent technologies. With 

the help of Congress and this Subcommittee, the program is now evaluating unmanned aircraft 

systems, low-cost maritime domain awareness, and research important to the development of the 

Coast Guard's future fleet of icebreakers. 

Maturing the Program and Future Direction 

As the pace of cultural and technological change accelerates, so too do threats and opportunities 

in the maritime domain. The Coast Guard RDT&E program is increasingly vital for developing 

and assessing technologies and policies for future missions. The increasing intensity of natural 

and manmade disasters require the Coast Guard to continually find better ways to mobilize, 

communicate, and coordinate among responding agencies and volunteers. 

Autonomous ships, and the growing operational complexity in our nation's ports and waterways, 

will challenge traditional approaches to maritime governance and risk mitigation. Increasing 

human activity in the Artie will likely strengthen the demand for Coast Guard presence in this 

extreme operating domain. Coast Guard RDT &E will continue to provide knowledge and tools to 

manage risk in these areas. 

3 
47 


Insert offset folio 11 here 31549.011

The Coast Guard RDT &E program faces some of the same challenges as other government 

agencies in attracting and retaining subject matter experts needed to understand and leverage 

technology in areas such as cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. Many professional scientists 

and engineers in government service are retirement-eligible, and the RDT &E program is exploring 

opportunities to better develop a pipeline of subject matter expertise able to address the research 

needs of the future. 

Conclusion 

Over the last 50 years, the Coast Guard RDT &E program has helped make our nation more 

resilient by improving the Service's response to disasters and emerging mission demands. The 

Coast Guard's breadth of missions and authorities requires a robust RDT &E program to ensure we 

are always ready to face the threats of tomorrow. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today and for your ongoing support of the 

women and men of the Coast Guard. !look forward to your questions. 

4 
48 


Insert offset folio 12 here 31549.012

WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF 

Dr. Eric Terrill 

Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography 

University of California San Diego 

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 

AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

BLUE TECHNOLOGIES: USE OF NEW MARITIME TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE 

EFFICIENCY AND MISSION PERFORMANCE 

Introduction 

May 8, 2018 

Washington, D.C. 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to be here today to discuss new maritime technologies. My name is Eric Terrill 

and I am the Director of the Coastal Observing Research and Development Center (CORDC) at 

University of California San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Scripps), where I also 

received a Ph.D. in Physical Oceanography-Applied Ocean Sciences. I have 25 years' experience 

as an oceanographer leading basic and applied research programs around the globe. We partner 

with a number of federal and state agencies in our efforts to support national science and technical 

needs to sense and improve our understanding of the maritime environment. 

A better part of my career has been dedicated to the field of ocean observing, environmental 

sensing, marine technology, and maritime domain awareness. I established CORDC as a research 

and development center within Scripps Marine Physical Laboratory, one of four original NavyUniversity applied Research Laboratories established in World War II in response to the need for 

academic innovation to support national security. Engineers, data analysts, and ocean scientists 

serve as an interface between Navy Research Development Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), 

Department of Defense operational commands, mission-driven commands, and agencies such as 

the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA). I 

also have extensive experience working with industry to develop, improve, and evaluate new ocean 

technologies and unmanned platforms; the key subject matter of this testimony. I have served on 

transition and government review teams and Federal Advisory committees including a FACA 

oversight committee for the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS). I presently serve on a 

Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) working group sponsored by U.S. Pacific Command 

(PACOM) to develop MDA solutions for small island nations in the western Pacific including the 

Republic of Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia. Lastly, I co-founded Project Recover, a 

private-public collaborative, which conducts global searches using Unmanned Underwater 

Vehicles (UUVs) and DoD methodologies to locate WWII-era aircraft crash sites - to date 
49 


Insert offset folio 13 here 31549.013

locations of 22 aircraft associated with 60+ MIA have been documented and reported to the 

Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency. 

I had the opportunity to review the Government Accountability Office report 18-13 on Coast 

Guard: Actions Needed to Enhance Performance Information Transparency and Monitoring, as 

well as the Coast Guard Reauthorization Act of 2017 legislation and will address some of these 

recommendations in my testimony. 

Because many Scripps scientists and students are involved in maritime technologies, I sought input 

for my testimony from experts at Scripps. Aspects of my testimony on the specifics of technologies 

and data management are drawn from these colleagues. Some of these programs and labs may be 

familiar from my past testimony to this Subcommittee in 2013 on Maritime Domain Awareness. I 

will again provide background information for these programs, but the technologies discussed are 

either new and emerging or have a different application for USCG missions to aid in efficiencies. 

My testimony is organized as follows: 1. Samples of historic and ongoing ocean observation 

programs are provided as examples of the research community's role in blue technologies. 2. 

Unique partnerships to expand and leverage resource capabilities; and 3. Closing 

recommendations for action. 

1. Scripps Research History Leads to Critical Ocean Technology Development 

Scripps research areas of expertise relevant to the USCG mission include the mapping of ocean 

currents, mixing of ocean waters, Arctic prediction, sensor development, unmanned platforms, 

numerical ocean forecasting, maritime domain awareness including surveillance, and ocean waves. 

Scripps has technical expertise across all facets of marine technology, with some examples 

including sensor networks, data management and exploitation, unmanned underwater and surface 

vehicles, aerial drones, and airborne and satellite remote sensing. Founded in 1903, Scripps 

Institution of Oceanography became a part of the University of California in 1912. Scripps has a 

long history of supporting national defense objectives and has provided recommendations and 

technologies to "improve the efficiency, safety and security of maritime transportation" with a 

focus on the "better use and integration of maritime domain awareness data." 

During World War II, Scripps oceanographers worked closely with the Navy to create surf and 

swell forecasts for successful Allied landings in North Africa, the Pacific, and the beaches of 

Normandy. Just as important, Scripps educated active duty weather officers so they could apply 

this new forecasting science on a daily basis to plan operations. 

In 1975, Scripps researchers launched the Coastal Data Information Program (CDIP), a program 

that measures, models, forecasts and publicly disseminates real-time coastal wave information, 

and that now includes a network of over 70 wave buoys in 22 states and island territories. The 

conditions at the ocean surface impact all at-sea operations, and the data are critical for the 

operational maritime community to ensure safe and efficient navigation for military, commercial, 

and recreational maritime traffic, search and rescue efforts, and are relied upon by dredging project 

managers for safe operations. 

In 1998, Scripps led the development of the revolutionary array of ocean monitoring sensors 

known as the Argo network. Launched in 2000, the Argo program now deploys a global array of 
50 


Insert offset folio 14 here 31549.014

more than 3,800 free drifting profiling floats to gather subsurface ocean data. Combined with 

satellite observations, these data make it possible to operate global and regional ocean analysis 

models similar to those for weather forecasting in the atmosphere. They provide enormous 

amounts of new information on the ocean's changing state at weekly to seasonal to year-to-year 

timescales. These observations are critical for accurate model analyses that forecast the state of the 

interior of the ocean, and its fluctuation with a changing climate. 

An existing framework that connects local stakeholders to readily accessible ocean information is 

accomplished through a network of regionally operated ocean observing systems that feeds data 

to a federal backbone. This system is the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), initiated 

18 years ago at an interagency planning office (Ocean. US) that has evolved to being managed from 

a formal program office within NOAA. IOOS consists of eleven Regional Associations who 

operate local ocean measurement platforms, generate tailored products, and connect data to a 

federal data backbone that is supported by a set of standards. IOOS has shared many successes 

including providing on-scene environmental information to many of the extreme events that the 

country has been faced with (tracking pollution at the Tijuana Estuary, 2017 Hurricanes Harvey, 

Irma, and Maria, countless Northeasters, the Refugio oil spill in Santa Barbara, and Deep Water 

Horizon Oil Spill in Gulf of Mexico to name a few). As a decision support system, IOOS 

observations provides many of the 'behind-the-scenes' environment data that is leveraged for day 

to day decision making. 

2. Leveraging Existing Resources Key for Successful Implementation of Unmanned 

Systems 

In 2002, a Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC) was developed after the events of September 

11, 2001. This center became a model for others to follow nationally and across the globe. In this 

center, Harbor Police Dispatchers work side-by-side with the United States Coast Guard, United 

States Navy, California National Guard, and Customs and Border Protection personnel. This 

system helps to facilitate information sharing, plus provides a fast and timely response to potential 

incidents to the Department's area of operations. 

The San Diego JHOC is an incredible example of the Coast Guard and other enforcement agencies 

leveraging access to resources and data that could serve as a model for other Coast Guard and 

Maritime Transportation authorities. This type of interagency partnering is required if there is an 

expectation to field modern blue technologies to operational agencies for a common maritime 

maritime domain picture in support of Homeland Security. JHOC demonstrates the value of 

establishing centers for communities with maritime jurisdiction to streamline collaborations and 

make processes more efficient, especially as the Coast Guard and Subcommittee consider 

expansion of implementing new technologies including unmanned platforms into operations. 

Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) or Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) continue 

to develop as the frontier technology for subsurface exploration and sensing advances. These 

platforms have matured from developmental prototypes to operational tools as evidenced by Navy 

initiatives to integrate the platforms into fleet operations. Examples of the technologies include 

buoyancy driven gliders, such as the SPRAY system developed by Scripps for wide area 

environmental surveillance and propeller powered vehicles such as the REMUS (Remote 

Environmental Monitoring UnitS), originally designed by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 
51 


Insert offset folio 15 here 31549.015

(WHOI) and now available commercially from Hydroid Inc. These platforms can carry 

specialized payloads to sense the ocean and are tailored for persistent observation of the ocean 

(gliders), or highly detailed surveys (propeller driven vehicles). Both vehicles can employ 

different payload packages, and a have been demonstrated to competently sense ocean currents, 

light transmission, temperatures, seabed topography, and seafloor imaging. These same sensors 

can assist the USCG in detecting and tracking oil spills of unknown origin, finding sunken wrecks, 

mapping bathymetry and hazards, and detecting illegal fishing activities. Sensors now exist to 

allow for direct measurement of suspended oil and petroleum byproducts. 

Unlike ship-mounted sensors, propeller driven underwater vehicles have a distinct advantage to 

navigate a grid or terrains with consistent and thorough geo-positioned tracks. Scripps currently 

has been operating for over a dozen years and performs a variety of ocean sensing missions 

including mapping wastewater, river discharges, and mapping hazards, benthic habitats, and areas 

of archeological significance including sunken ships and missing aircraft that support the national 

mission of finding and returning MIA from past wars. 

Figure 1. Left Panel: REMUS 100 passing over a sunken WWII aircraft; Center Panel: En route to a small 

boat deployment for two REMUS !00s and Right Panel: En route to a shore deployment of a REMUS 100. 

Unmanned Surface Vessel (USVs): Scripps has several years' experience operating self-powered 

unmanned surface vessels called a Wave Glider; commercially available from the Boeing owned 

Liquid Robotics Company. A unique attribute of this system is the propulsion of the platform 

through harnessing the omnipresent ocean surface waves; allowing 100% of the power generated 

by the onboard solar panels for all electrical requirements. The system can carry onboard payloads 

as well as act as a gateway between underwater sensors and aerial assets including manned and 

unmanned aircraft. It can be used for a variety of applications that span basic scientific observation 

of the ocean to serving as a tactical communications platform filling capability gaps already 

identified by military users. Additional assessment capabilities for general Maritime Domain 

Awareness data needs, including payloads that allow for detection of small surface craft needs to 

be matured. The large footprint of the USV holds promise for supporting the launch and recovery 

of small aerial systems and deployment of ocean sensors. In my review of unmanned surface 

platforms, this one is the most mature and experienced at operating in a range of ocean 

environments. Capabilities in support of USCG include ship traffic monitoring, fisheries 
52 


Insert offset folio 16 here 31549.016

protection, ocean sea state characterization, and monitoring of currents in support of oil spill 

trajectory analysis, communication gateways between surface craft, and ship routing. 

Figure 2. Left. The submerged portion of the wave glider. Right. A wave glider recovery from a surface 

craft. 

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS): Scripps has a long experience in developing, testing, or 

adapting technologies from other communities, and transitioning them into the maritime 

environment. Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) are no different, and Scripps scientists have led 

efforts to harden and adopt fixed wing and multi-rotor aircraft for use from research vessels. This 

same capability could be transitioned to USCG vessels. An emerging technology of interest are 

hybrid UAS that allow for vertical take off and landing (VTOL), but transit with a fixed wing; 

similar to an Osprey airplane. 

Unmanned systems and data feeds can be of increasing use and benefit for Coast Guard to achieve 

its mission goals for surveillance, identifying aquatic invasive species in ballast water, 

identification of oil leaks and spills, tracking direction for oil spills, and other security operations 

in support of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing. As the Coast Guard and 

Congress work together on identifying resources to allow greater access to unmanned system 

technologies to help the Coast Guard meet its mission goals, mulit-agency partnership are 

recommended to allow for rapid communication of lessons learned and experience. 

Tools needed for interfacing to data: 

The Government Accountability Office report on the USCG implementation of the Common 

Operational Picture (COP) identified a number of concerns regarding data sharing and displays. 

The use of mapping overlays for data visualization can be extremely useful for displaying 

observations that assist in USCG missions such as search and rescue operations, marine safety and 

security, marine environmental protections, and ice operations. There is a wealth of direct 

observations and derived products that can be integrated into these systems including, but not 

limited to: 

1.) Automatic Identification System (AIS) 

2.) Bathymetry 

3.) Navigational Charts 

4.) Waves 
53 


Insert offset folio 17 here 31549.017

5.) Surface and subsurface currents 

6.) Satellite imagery 

7.) Ice distribution 

Many of these observations are available in a common data format that can be self-describing, 

machine-independent and delivered through a web service. Examples of these observations are 

found within the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) which, for many gridded products, 

utilize a Network Common Data Format (NetCDF) for file structure and are distributed via a 

Thematic Real-time Environmental Distributed Data Service (THREDDS). The Open Geospatial 

Consortium (OGC) provides recommendations and examples of data formats and services for data 

sharing and delivery. These technologies are developed and have proven examples for in-situ time 

series data (e.g. AIS, temperature, wind speed, salinity); gridded data and model output (e.g. HF 

radar derived service currents, waves, ice coverage); and imagery feeds (e.g. remotely sensed 

ocean color, pictures, charts). The data can also be displayed via open source- online platforms 

such as OpenLayers and Google Earth for unclassified interfaces or desktop applications such as 

TOPSIDE emerging from the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) as a result of ONRsponsored MDA and surveillance programs. 

3. The Role for Technology Demonstrations, Technology Transitions, and Modular, 

Problem Driven Applications 

A significant investment of time, funds, and process documentation is required for a full-scale 

analysis of developing technologies for USCG applications and implementation. Process studies 

through demonstration projects at established testbeds are one means to efficiently determine 

applicability and feasibility of new technologies. Scripps recommends developing partnerships 

with agencies within the Department ofDefense that are already making investments in developing 

maritime surveillance systems. The Office of Naval Research (ONR) routinely conducts smallscale demonstrations to develop and test new concepts of operations and technologies, and 

leverages the expertise of their program managers in operating efficient Research, Development, 

Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) initiatives. These science and technology investments have the 

ability to provide a low cost, flexible, and timely analysis of capabilities that can transition to 

operational users. Science and technology in a spiral development allows the capability to 

incrementally evolve and improve with lower risk. Successful demonstrations can be transitioned 

to support operations, while unsuccessful demonstrations provide valuable lessons learned and 

save significantly on a USCG-wide full-scale information technology guidance procedure. 

For the last decade, ONR has made investments at Scripps and elsewhere, to develop, test, and 

evaluate new sensors and operation procedures for improving tactical ocean and atmospheric 

environmental information collection. One example of ocean technology development driven by 

emerging mission requirements is ONR's investment in autonomous vehicles. The employment of 

unmanned air, surface and subsurface platforms has transformed environmental sensing in the 

maritime environment. Unmanned platforms, outfitted with appropriate payloads, have conducted 

unprecedented open water autonomous missions and data collection in support of improving ocean 

forecasts. Through a robust communications architecture and data fusion software, in-situ 

collections are now available at time and space scales applicable to the investigation. The 

investment in maritime technologies and platforms has resulted in the development of tactics, 
54 


Insert offset folio 18 here 31549.018

techniques and procedures that are applicable to today's discussion of Blue Technologies and the 

use of new maritime technologies to improve USCG efficiency and mission performance. 

Denwnstrations and Partnerships: 

Scripps research helps identify threats, challenges, and risks in marine environmental 

management and conservation and surveillance and enforcement. Specifically, the technologies 

being developed and evaluated address the following issues: 

• Ecosystem Based Management of the Large Marine Ecosystem 

• Performance assessment and enforcement of local Marine Protected Areas 

• IUU Fishing- industrialized 

• Transshipment - Contraband 

• Fishing Aggregation Devices (FADs) 

• Poaching 

• Human smuggling 

The use of emerging technologies such as unmanned platforms and fusion of data from 

commercially available satellite data with in-situ sensors and numerical weather forecasts can 

assist in efficiently overcoming the tyranny of distance that is common with surveilling large 

maritime EEZ. The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) is the largest in the world, spanning 

over 13,000 miles of coastline and containing 3.4 million square nautical miles of ocean- larger 

than the combined land area of all fifty states. Contained within our EEZ are Marine Protected 

Areas, where natural and/or cultural resources are given greater protection than the surrounding 

waters. 
55 


Insert offset folio 19 here 31549.019

Boundal)' of U.S. national waters c::J MPAs that prohibit commen:lal fiShing 

- MPAs that aliow commarcial fishing 

Figure 2. The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone spans over 13,000 miles of coastline and covering 

3.4 million square nautical miles of ocean. Contained within our EEZ are Marine Protected 

Areas. 

The physical expanse of our EEZ and MPA creates a challenge for monitoring. Today, few data 

are collected and synthesized in a manner that allows for deterrence, detection, interdiction, and 

prosecution of illegal activities, including illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing; 

transshipment of contraband; and human trafficking or ecosystem-based management decisions. 

Data collected through deployment of new maritime sensing technologies will increase monitoring 

and surveillance of the EEZ and also allow our government to assess environmental issues such as 

sea level rise, coastal erosion and other maritime related issues in order to take appropriate actions. 

Along the California coast, the network of HF radar stations measures surface currents over a range 

of up to 200 km. I have previously discussed this program and its benefits for maritime domain 

awareness. Although the network was originally funded to track oil spills, and brings tremendous 

value for surveillance, it is also essential for search and rescue missions, marine navigation, and 

fisheries and water quality management that fall under the USCG' s jurisdiction. The data is fed to 

operational watch standers within the National Weather Service, and at Coastguard Search and 

Rescue support centers. HF radar technology is also being developed for over-the-horizon ship 

tracking applications and is an emerging technology for maritime domain awareness. However, 

this opportunity will remain elusive under the current funding model for this national asset as the 

network is funded only at 50% operational capability of the $1OM/year build out plan as identified 

in the U.S. IOOS National Surface Current Mapping Plan. 
56 


Insert offset folio 20 here 31549.020

Dynamic Under Keel Clearance at Nation's Ports and Waterways 

Sponsored by Andeavor, the nation's biggest oil refiner, the Under Keel Clearance Precision 

Navigation project at the Port of Long Beach highlights the importance of technology for publicprivate partnerships. Combined, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are the busiest port in 

the United States, and host a significant portion of California's economy. As vessels become more 

economically efficient, vessel length and draft have been increasing in size. During long-period 

wave activity, in which swells last over 12 seconds, conditions can cause a dangerous loss of draft 

(9.6 ft of draft for every degree of pitch) reducing the under-keel clearance to below safe levels. 

The objective of the Under Keel Clearance project is to minimize the offshore lightering, so that 

the deeper crude oil tankers can transit into the port. In partnership with NOAA which provides 

water depth, tides and wave forecast models, CDIP is providing high resolution wave observations 

and short term forecasts. To date, 32 additional deep draft tankers have been able to transit safely 

into the port. Every foot of additional draft equates to 40,000 barrels of crude oil valued at an 

approximately additional $2M in trade value. These efforts are critical for the economic, 

environmental and safety of marine operations. 

Arctic Challenge: Monitoring and Promoting Safe Passage 

The Arctic presents another set of challenges for ocean technology development. Arctic ice has 

begun to retreat, and is forecasted to continue doing so for the coming decades. This implies that 

what was learned about Arctic acoustics during the Cold War is now obsolete. One program 

tackling the change in the Arctic acoustic environments is the Canada Basin Acoustic Propagation 

Experiment (CANAPE). The overall objective of CANAPE is to determine the fundamental limits 

to the use of acoustic methods and signal processing imposed by ice and ocean processes in the 

new Arctic. Characterizing the changing operational environment in terms of ice coverage and sea 

state will be required before new infrastructure, including floating offshore platforms, can be 

designed to operate in this extreme environment. Partnerships developed with other federal oceanminded agencies including the Navy, NOAA, National Science Foundation, and DARPA should 

be considered to leverage the respective investments of those agencies in improving U.S. sensing 

and forecasting capability for the Arctic. 

Additionally, maritime commerce, including the world's navies, is expected to begin taking 

advantage of new Arctic shipping lanes during summer months. Commercial activity on the sea 

floor is also expected to grow. In response to changes in atmospheric and oceanographic 

conditions, large areas of the Arctic Ocean previously covered by pack ice and "insulated" from 

the wind and surface waves are now exposed. This change has lead to Arctic pack ice cover 

evolving into the Marginal Ice Zone. The emerging state of the Arctic Ocean features more 

fragmented thinner sea ice, stronger winds, ocean currents and waves. Modeling difficulties are 

compounded due to unique "local effects" including downslope winds, channeling and barrier jet, 

and shallow water storm surge. Lastly, the scarcity of in-situ data in the region limits situational 

awareness for maritime operations and numerical modeling. 

CDIP will be deploying a new wave buoy offshore from the port of Nome in July 2018. Nome is 

the northernmost deep water port in Alaska that is called on by tankers, tugs and barges, passenger 

ships, government vessels, fishing and research vessels. Northern communities are heavily 

dependent on the safe operation of this port that is affected by weather and currents. In addition, a 

pilot program will assess the feasibility of expendable wave buoy technology in the harsh extremes 
57 


Insert offset folio 21 here 31549.021

of the Arctic. These small wave buoys are easily deployed by hand and require no special training 

to deploy. The ease of deployment and relatively low cost afford the opportunity to seed areas with 

in-situ sensors to help close the data shortfall and advance Arctic Ocean wave modeling. 

These technologies allow stakeholders and government entities a better understanding of ice cover 

in the Arctic as traffic in the area increases. This could help inform many of the Coast Guard's 

statutory missions including navigation, Cutter operations, defense readiness, and enforcement. 

Conclusion 

In closing, I would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to testify on the role of ocean 

technologies and provide suggestions for the U.S. to leverage ongoing investments and use new 

maritime technologies to improve efficiency and mission performance. Scripps' scientists are 

leaders in research and operational use of maritime technologies and have a long history with 

national defense-related science, as and organization, we are privileged to be in a position to 

provide national service to this increasingly important topic. I believe that development of 

partnerships between USGS and other agencies (e.g. ONR, NAVY, NA V AIR, DARPA) for 

purposes of pursuing defense-related observational strategies and unmanned vehicle operations is 

very important. 

Scripps recommends developing these partnerships with agencies that specialize in conducting 

maritime ROT &E (e.g. ONR) to provide low cost demonstrations of emerging technologies that 

can then be applied to full-scale operations, providing valuable feedback and business case 

requirements such as risk, cost, and manning requirements. Designing problem driven, modular 

applications for USCG missions will improve data reliability and performance as well as reduce 

complexity for watch standers. The use of data products from existing networks such as high 

frequency radar, wave buoys, and research vessels will significantly improve all aspects of USCG 

missions. 

Additionally, leveraging joint operations such as Joint Harbor Operations Centers (JHOC) or the 

Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF) will combine staffing, technologies, data services, and 

resources from multiple sources for improved response capabilities. 
58 


Insert offset folio 22 here 31549.022

Dr. Eric Terrill, Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego 

Responses to Questions for the Record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

Question: In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and 

Development budget, and if you agree, what would be a reasonable fonding level? 

Answer: Yes, Research and Development (RDT &E) funding should be commensurate with 

USCG current and future mission portfolios. Investment in RDT &E that will enhance 

operational safety, mission efficiency, and is embraced by the USCG as a priority. This will 

enhance overall readiness and mission success. USCG RDT &E needs are very similar to 

DOD/naval RDT &E requirements, and should be coordinated. Naval R&D has a track record of 

civilian continuity in supporting technical issues, yet this community is relatively untapped in 

supporting USCG. 

Question: Do you agree that the economic impact of the Ocean Economy is likely to continue to 

grow, and that Blue Technologies offer new opportunities for growth and expansion within the 

larger US. ocean economy? 

Answer: Yes. Sea lines of communication (SLOC), i.e. maritime routes between ports, used for 

trade, logistics and naval forces, underpins virtually all international commerce and our 

economy. A robust investment plan, identifying key business opportunities and investment 

priorities, which leverage Blue Technologies is a prudent course of action. Coastal populations 

only continue to grow, which is both a driver on Blue Tech, as well as a pressure on the marine 

environment. 

Question: Would a national strategy be helpfol in promoting and advancing Blue Technology 

innovation, or, is it best left to market forces to shape this outcome? 

Answer: A collaborative roadmap/strategy is required to analyze, identify and scope out a 

common vision for the specific Blue Growth technology area, domain or value chain. This effort 

would also recognize unique national, security and scientific interests. Blue Economy extends 

much further than USCG, so difficult to comment if they should be the driver. 

The maritime industry's ubiquitous presence around the world will always dominate SLOC. The 

collaborative development of an overarching strategy that calls on representatives from the 

Government, academia and the extended maritime industry (technology, shipping, ports) has the 

best chance of addressing salient issues for a national strategy. 

Question: Are foreign competitors better positioned than US. firms to take advantage of the 

foture global Blue Technology market? If so, what actions could be taken to improve the 

competitiveness of US. firms? 
59 


Insert offset folio 23 here 31549.023

Or. Eric Terrill, Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego 

Responses to Questions for the Record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

Answer: I can only offer an observation that foreign entities appear to be better organized at this 

time. Our national interests are best protected by substantive collaborative engagement (as 

described above) followed by commensurate action, i.e. priority, policy, funding, etc. 

Question: Are the Coast Guard's present arrangements or methods to interact with Blue 

Technology industries and firms sufficient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest 

developments and innovations? 

Answer: No, US<:;G R&D priority and funding do not match the current level of attention Blue 

Technology is receiving. A national priority tied to objectives and a budget is required. 

Independent, ad hoc engagement may prove ineffective. As indicated above, a partnership 

approach with the naval R&D enterprise is necessary for effective, efficient, and rapid 

technology insertion into USCG concepts of operation. 

Question: How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology 

industry? Should the Coast Guard establish a new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as 

it has done for other issues? 

Answer: There is an organizational vacuum regarding Blue Technology- who is the lead agency, 

what are the objectives, commensurate funding, etc.? A national priority tied to objectives and a 

budget is required before the USCG R&D can engage substantively with industry or academia. 

Centers of Excellence of have been tried before under DHS, and were not effective in 

establishing a pull for their activities. 

Question: Assuming that you agree that the Coast Guard would benefit immediately and directly 

by investing more funding in Blue Tech research and development and in acquiring Blue 

Technology systems to supplement or enhance Coast Guard operations, what systems should be 

priorities for the Coast Guard to make R&D investments? 

Answer: Ad hoc technical solutions addressing unvetted requirements is an unproductive 

solution. Formalized objectives based on a strategy are required to address shortfalls in a 

meaningful way. A vertically integrated system that establishes basic through applied R&D 

efforts, with demonstrations and technology testbeds is a suggested mechanism for stimulating 

technology insertion into the USCG. Office ofNaval Research has a strong record in using a 

similar strategy for addressing emerging naval issues. 

Question: Considering that most, if not virtually all, Blue Technology systems in some way rely 

on satellite telemetry and Global Positioning System signals, how much of a risk are cyber 

threats to Blue Technology systems? Are cyber threats slowing down market growth for Blue 

Technologies? Can we design and build these systems to be robust and resilient enough to fond 

off cyber-attacks? 
60 


Insert offset folio 24 here 31549.024

Dr. Eric Terrill, Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of california San Diego 

Responses to Questions for the Record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

Answer: Internet based communications architecture is subject to compromise. Mitigations 

include a communications architecture which uses RF to local nodes for data relay, e.g. buoy 

nodes, unmanned surface vessels, unmanned aerial vehicles, etc. for coastal operations. All 

cybersystems have threats and vulnerabilities, but I don't believe are the rate limiting step in 

demonstrating Blue Technologies of value. 

Question: Do you agree that a land-based back up signal for GPS, such as e-LORAN, is a 

necessary investment to ensure continuity and reliability across all forms of Blue Technologies? 

Answer: Yes, if the data collection is viewed as a security, defense or economic interest meriting 

backup. However, I have not reviewed the trade-off study between GPS threats, methodologies 

to overcome (encryption) and the analog risks that exist for a land-based system. 

Question: In the Arctic, what are the most pressing challenges that Blue Technologies could be 

applied to solve? Would it be helpfol for Congress to authorize an Arctic Blue Technology 

Demonstration Program? 

Answer: The national strategy for Blue Technology should address this question. As the Arctic 

opens, monitoring and in situ measurements are the best use of Blue Technologies, specifically 

for: prediction of new shipping lanes, environmental monitoring, shoreline change prediction, 

national territorial claims, SLOC, mineral resource exploration and exploitation, and atmospheric 

and oceanographic conditions. 

Question: Integrated ocean observations appear to be critical in our understanding of the ocean 

environment and our interaction within that environment. What would it take to fond and build 

out the entire architecture for the Integrated Ocean Observation System? 

Answer: The national Integrated Ocean Observation System primarily lacks directed funding. 

IOOS is the emerging strategy for Blue Technology, and government, Regional operations, and 

IOOS stakeholders should collaborate to endorse the existing studies that identifY what the 

sensing shortfalls are, e.g. atmospheric, surface waves, thermohaline, geomorphologic, etc. and 

devise the appropriate sensors and sensing strategy (spacing, report timing, data ingest, 

assimilation, analysis, modeling). The 

Question: Are there certain Blue Technologies that should be integrated folly into the 

infrastructure of the maritime transportation system to ensure safe maritime transportation and 

an efficient and reliable marine supply chain for the U.S. economy? 

Answer: Collaboration with industry may help refine requirements. The International 

Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)/International Maritime Organization may be 
61 


Insert offset folio 25 here 31549.025

Dr. Eric Terrill, Director, Coastal Observing Research and Development Center 

Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of california San Diego 

Responses to Questions for the Record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of california 

useful contacts. Improved seaway predictions (waves, waterlevels, winds) are required to 

support the growth of very large containers ships from using existing port infrastructure. 

Question: Does Blue Technology provide real potential for new job creation and diversification 

in the U.S. maritime workforce? Can Blue Technology attract more young people to look at 

career opportunities in maritime-related work; including traditional careers at sea or in ports 

and shipyard? 

Answer: Yes, an industry exists today and will likely expand. STEM education programs can 

facilitate the technical educational foundation. Although the maritime-related field already is 

paid well, the nature of the work precludes many from pursing this a career. 
62 


Insert offset folio 26 here 31549.026

THE MARITIME 

ALLIANCE 

Promoting 61ueTech 

and Blue Jobs' 

Testimony of Michael B. Jones 

President, The Maritime Alliance 

Before the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee 

Of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 

At a hearing titled, "Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies 

to Improve Efficiency and Mission Performance" 

May 8, 2018 10 am 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 

opportunity to be here this morning to address this important topic. I am Founder and President ofThe 

Maritime Alliance (TMA)- a non-profit industry association founded in 2007 and based in San Diego. We 

are a leading voice for Blue Tech nationally and internationally. Our Mission Statement is "Promoting 

Sustainable, Science-Based Ocean & Water Industries". Originally focused on San Diego- the largest U.S. 

Blue Tech (ocean and water tech) cluster- we have a growing number of members in the U.S. and abroad. 

TMA has been a multi-year Strategic Partner with the US Dept. of Commerce and we are the organizer of 

the 1" ever US Maritime Technology Export Initiative working with small to medium-sized companies 

from across the country. In 2017, we helped form the Blue Tech Cluster Alliance (BTCA)- the 1" 

international coalition of Blue Tech clusters -with 91eading Blue Tech clusters from 7 countries. 

I am here today to provide an overview of the Blue Economy and Blue Tech in the U.S. and touch on select 

company technologies that could provide benefits to the U.S. Coast Guard in its diverse missions. 

The State of the Blue Economy and Blue Tech 

The Blue Economy is enormous and growing rapidly. The 2016 OECD report "The Ocean Economy in 2030" 

predicted that it will double in size from $1.5 trillion in 2010 to over $3 trillion in 2030 while providing 40 

million jobs globally. Special attention is given to emerging ocean-based industries. Blue Tech companies are 

providing the innovative tools and services that permit these industries to develop. It is Blue Tech that 

allows us to understand ocean problems (coral reef die-off, marine debris, mines, ocean chemistry changes, 

over-fishing, pollution, plastics, sunken vessels, temperature rise, tsunami generation and propagation, 

etc.) ... and Blue Tech is critical to develop solutions to these problems. The pace of Blue Tech development is 

accelerating due to increased public awareness and attention regionally, nationally and internationally. 

Some countries and regions have focused heavily on the oceans including China, EU countries, Norway, and 

others. As an example, Norway adopted an Ocean Strategy in 2017 -the first industry strategy ever 

developed by Norway. In addition, the United Nations has proclaimed a Decade of Ocean Science for 

Sustainable Development from 2021-2030, which will provide a common framework to support the 

achievement of Sustainable Development Goal14 on the ocean. 

The State of the Industry 

An increasing reliance on ocean resources (from aquaculture to deep sea mining to offshore wind energy) 

and the need to improve the way humans interact with the ocean (from more efficient vessel technology 

to broad environmental stewardship) will drive the Blue Economy and Blue Tech. The user base is 

broadening as capabilities increase and prices decrease due to technological advancement, competition 

and economies-of-scale as market sectors grow. A sector like maritime robotics- platforms and sensorsis very strong in the U.S. due particularly to military, oil & gas and scientific demand, which sets the stage 

for large export sales -often 50% or greater. Another sector like ship building is supported domestically by 

the Jones Act and military procurement, but not as competitive internationally, while specialty areas can 

be quite strong such as high-efficiency turbines and technologies to defend against invasive species in 

ballast water or on hulls. 
63 


Insert offset folio 27 here 31549.027

Some countries have focused heavily on new ship related technologies. Examples include autonomous 

vessels, e-navigation, wing sails on vessels, and more. Norway formulated an ambitious, national 

maritime strategy in 2015 to ensure a competitive regulatory framework, a competent maritime 

administration, a focus on environmentally friendly shipping, high-quality worker training, and to promote 

advanced R&D and rapid testing. It promotes synergy between industry sectors (aquaculture, fishing, oil & 

gas, shipbuilding, vessel automation, etc.) to develop maritime solutions. 

The Potential for Blue Technologies to Support USCG Missions 

The Maritime Alliance has over 90 members from across the U.S. and internationally- mostly leading 

edge Blue Tech companies. In conjunction with BTCA cluster partners, we have access to thousands of 

companies in a growing number of countries. Innovative technologies in the U.S. can be exported as 

products and services ... and innovative technologies abroad can be imported to develop Blue Jobs in the 

U.S. Following are select maritime issues that TMA-BiueTech member companies are addressing that may 

be of benefit to the Coast Guard as it seeks more efficient options to address its core missions. 

Autonomy Software and Autonomous Vessels: Multiple TMA member companies are involved in autonomy 

in the air, on and under the water. Boston-based Sea Machines Robotics recently announced a contract 

with A.P. Moller-Maersk (Maersk), of Copenhagen, Denmark, to trial the world's first AI-Powered 

Situational Awareness system aboard a container ship by combining computer vision, Light Detection and 

Ranging (LiDAR) and perception software to augment and upgrade transit operations. San Diego-based 

Planck Aerosystems' drone intelligence improves real-time situational awareness via autonomous take off 

& landing from moving vehicles and vessels at sea, which has many uses in the ocean domain from fishing 

vessels to coastal mapping to spill detection I management to anti-piracy to special forces. Fugro's 

Houston-based U.S. headquarters is using data telemetry with remote command and control software to 

provide navigation, positioning and survey services to customers using shore-based command centers, 

eliminating the need for onboard surveyors (in some cases), while enhancing safety and efficiency. 

Big Data (GIS Mapping Software. location Platforms, Spatial Data Analytics & Weather Prediction!: 

Enormous amounts of data are being collected by military, NGOs, NOAA, oil & gas, research/scientists, 

shipping, and other ocean stakeholders. Redlands, CA-based Esri- the world's leading GIS software 

mapping company- is helping unlock the potential of data to improve operational & business results. 

San Diego-based XST, Inc. provides Big Data consulting services including high-definition, hyper-local 

weather prediction for joint, maritime, expeditionary and special warfare operations. 

Cybersecurity in the Maritime Domain: This is a rapidly developing concern. In the Port of Antwerp, hackers 

working with a drug-smuggling gang repeatedly breached digital tracking systems to locate containers 

holding large quantities of drugs and allowed gang drivers to collect containers ahead of scheduled 

collection times. A June 2017 cyberattack snarled shipping terminal operations worldwide and cost the 

shipping giant Maersk upwards of $300 million. Good cyber hygiene, training, and innovative technologies 

and services are needed to protect the logistics chain from ship to shore. Philadelphia-based Gnostech 

helps mitigate cybersecurity risks from sea to shore. 

Likewise, jamming and spoofing of GPS is a major concern in maritime. In the last several years we have 

seen an increase in this activity with container ports idled, AIS safety systems disabled, and ships' 

positions being reported miles from their actual locations. GPS' vulnerability to disruption is a significant 

obstacle to safe use of remotely-operated and autonomous systems. One way to address this is by 

establishing an e-Loran system to complement and backup GPS. 
64 


Insert offset folio 28 here 31549.028

Ocean Observation: The ocean enterprise-for-profit and not-for-profit organizations which support ocean 

measurement, observation and forecasting-is a critical component of maritime commerce and the Blue 

Economy. The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®} is the national-regional partnership that is 

focused on this important mission and enjoys wide industry support. TMA was co-author of "The Ocean 

Enterprise- A study of U.S. business activity in ocean measurement, observation, and forecasting", the first 

ever national-scale assessment of the size, scope, and value of the ocean enterprise, which was jointly 

published by IOOS and NOAA in February 2016. The study identified more than 400 firms in 36 states 

representing over $7 billion in annual revenue driving innovation across many industry sectors. These 

companies are important for the economy and critical for the maritime transportation industry. 

Pollution Mitigation: San Diego-based Earthwise Sorbents is pioneering high performance, sustainable, 

recycled, and repurposed algae-based sorbents to clean-up oil and chemical spills on land and in water. 

These sorbents can absorb 9x their weight and are hydrophobic (i.e. do not leach back into water when 

saturated). Seattle-based Marine Construction Technologies has patented an innovative pile design that 

reduces noise pollution from impact pile driving by 80-90%. Less pile driving noise equals faster permitting, 

smaller zones of harassment/harm and fewer project delays thereby saving money and time while being a 

better ocean steward. 

Port & Maritime Efficiency and Security: Durham, NC-based PortCall is a front-end platform for digital 

ports. It synchronizes vessel scheduling between ports, pilots, agents, and others. San Ramon, CA-based 

Ocean Manager develops maritime software to help ship owners and managers operate their vessels safely 

and efficiently and is now on over 850 vessels worldwide. Richmond, CA-based WAM-V produces a unique 

watercraft using suspension technology to radically improve seagoing capabilities so the ultra-light, easy-toassemble/disassemble and crate vessel can perform in sea conditions where an ordinary boat cannot safely 

operate. It has been used in port security and ship inspection in various configurations including using it like 

a "mini-aircraft carrier" with quadcopter on the stabilized upper platform and tethered ROV that can work 

underwater. 

Predictive Analytics: Seattle-based ioCurrents gathers real-time data from important assets on commercial 

vessels such as alarm panels, cargo, engines, generators, PLCs, etc. into a central database on a small, 

dedicated, low-cost computer to permit automatic onboard analysis with in-the-cloud availability and backup. This allows operators to predict equipment failures thereby enhancing efficiency and safety of vessels. 

Failures at sea of even a small component can create high downstream cost that can result in a costly Coast 

Guard intervention to assist the vessel, downtime for the customer, and reporting requirements about the 

nature of the failure. By identifying failing assets before failure, the customer may order parts in advance 

for installation at the next port-of-call and downtime can be minimized. 

Recommendations to facilitate U.S. Coast Guard assessment of Blue Technologies 

The Coast Guard is a unique, internationally respected, multi-mission, maritime force. Its three major roles 

-maritime safety, maritime security, and maritime stewardship- span the maritime domain. TMA has 

interfaced with many fine USCG officers and staff and has been honored to have high-level speakers at our 

events. Following are some ideas we suggest that the Subcommittee consider to enhance USCG ability to 

identify, observe, test, and incorporate Blue Tech: 

Increase travel funding to attend events where BlueTech is being shown I demonstrated; 

Increase funding to test and evaluate BlueTech products and services; 

Enhance the on-ramp to make it easier for innovative technology and services to be presented; 

Enhance the Innovation Council with regional meetings alongside shows to better find BlueTech, 

to avoid the cost/time to organize similar USCG events, and promote more contact with industry; 
65 


Insert offset folio 29 here 31549.029

• Make regional "Tech Scouting" part of someone's role (e.g. Deputy Sector Commander); 

• Establish a secondary Innovation center on the U.S. West Coast; 

• Promote Blue Tech collaboration and transfer to and from other U.S. government departments 

and agencies, operating in the marine domain (Navy and NOAA); and 

• Promote Blue Tech collaboration and transfer to and from other countries forces. 

Conclusion 

Thank you for the opportunity to testifY today. We are grateful to the members of this Subcommittee for 

focusing on Blue Tech and how it can help improve efficiency and mission performance. The Maritime 

Alliance stands ready to be a resource to this committee. I would be happy to answer any questions you 

have. 
66 


Insert offset folio 30 here 31549.030

SUBCOMMITIEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

"BLUE TECHNOLOGIES: USE OF NEW MARITIME TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY 

AND MISSION PERFORMANCE" 

MAY8,2018 

Responses from Michael B. Jones, President, The Maritime Alliance, to questions for the 

record from Hon. John Garamendi 

WITNESS QUESTIONS FOR RECORD 

Thank you for your thoughtful and concise statements and participation at the hearing. 

have some general questions that I would like to ask each witness to get your reactions and 

to see if there is a consensus among witnesses. 

• In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and Development 

budget, and if you agree, what would be a reasonable funding level? 

• ANSWER: Yes. I don't know what current funding is, but it is not enough. We find 

that R&D folks don't even have the budget to fly from Oakland to San Diego to speak or 

attend events where they would see innovative BlueTech and interact with 

manufacturers. 

Do you agree that the economic impact of the Ocean Economy is likely to continue to 

grow, and that Blue Technologies offer new opportunities for growth and expansion 

within the larger U.S. ocean economy? 

ANSWER: Absolutely. "The Ocean Economy in 2030" report published by the OECD 

in 2016 expects the Ocean Economy to double from $1.5 trillion in 2010 to $3 trillion in 

2030 ... and that ignores most Blue Tech sectors since there is no way to gather that 

economic information today. The Blue Economy and Blue Tech are major growth 

opportunities. 

Would a national strategy be helpful in promoting and advancing Blue Technology 

innovation, or, is it best left to market forces to shape this outcome? 

ANSWER: A national strategy would be incredibly valuable. The most important 

benefit would be a national recognition of the importance of the ocean and water 

economy, Blue Economy and Blue Tech, which is largely invisible today. Blue Tech 

allows us to find and do things underwater that were not feasible or economical5-10 

years ago. An "ocean race" has begun and governments around the world are focusing 

resources on it for economic and military reasons. Countries from China to France, 

Ireland, Norway, Portugal and the UK have or are developing national strategies. China 

has a major national effort to develop Blue Tech clusters and a Blue Water navy. Norway 

announced its national ocean strategy in Spring 2017- it's 1" ever industrial policy. U.S. 

companies will fall behind without the focused support that other countries are 

providing. 

Are foreign competitors better positioned than U.S. firms to take advantage of the future 

global Blue Technology market? If so, what actions could be taken to improve the 

competitiveness of U.S. firms? 

1 
67 


Insert offset folio 31 here 31549.031

• 

• 

• 

ANSWER: Foreign competitors benefit from significant national and in the case of the 

European Union -multilateral- benefits not available to U.S. companies. These 

include: 1) strategies that organize government assets and staff to provide worldwide 

support for select industries (e.g. autonomous vessels, maritime robotics, and port 

development); 2) better Blue Economy and Blue Tech economic analysis at national and 

regional levels; 3) financial and organizational support for organized, regional BlueTech 

clusters; 4) better research, R&D and export funding programs; 5) newer, better testing 

facilities; 6) better educational and technical training programs; 7) less likelihood of 

ITAR or EAR-like restrictions on dual usage technology; and 8) faster update of new 

technologies by government agencies. A suite of actions as part of a national strategy 

are needed to address this deficiency. 

Are the Coast Guard's present arrangements or methods to interact with Blue 

Technology industries and firms suflicient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest 

developments and innovations? 

ANSWER: No. The Coast Guard does a good job with limited resources, but it could 

enhance its capabilities by having the time and resources to find, evaluate, test and field 

new innovative technologies. 

How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology industry? 

Should the Coast Guard establish a new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as it 

has done for other issues? 

ANSWER: The Coast Guard could promote a culture of innovation by making that part 

of its evaluation process from regional stations to senior command. CG stations are very 

operational and it is difficult to arrange for regional officers to look at innovative 

technologies, attend local events, or meet with companies. That means that everything 

is centralized. A Blue Tech Center of Excellence would be very valuable, but it would 

need to have funding and staff for outreach, travel, and testing. 

Assuming that you agree that the Coast Guard would benefit immediately and directly 

by investing more funding in Blue Tech research and development and in acquiring 

Blue Technology systems to supplement or enhance Coast Guard operations, what 

systems should be priorities for the Coast Guard to make R&D investments? 

ANSWER: Blue Tech improves constantly and the CG should opportunistically look for 

and test technology that help it full fulfill its three missions: Maritime safety, Maritime 

security, and Maritime stewardship. Some are obviously important like autonomy; cyber 

security / secure comms; fighting invasive species; robotics; and surveillance. 

Considering that most, if not virtually all, Blue Technology systems in some way rely on 

sateDite telemetry and Global Positioning System signals, how much of a risk are cyber 

threats to Blue Technology systems? Are cyber threats slowing down market growth for 

Blue Technologies? Can we design and build these systems to be robust and resilient 

enough to fend off cyber-attacks? 

ANSWER: Cyber threats endanger all systems on land, in the air and at sea. Cyber at 

sea is different than on land because there are typically many different systems 

manufactured by different companies with crews (on the commercial shipping side) that 

are constantly changing. We can and must develop cyber hygiene processes and 

2 
68 


Insert offset folio 32 here 31549.032

• 

systems that protect the commercial shipping system, but there are big risks 

... particularly when we are relying on an ever-smaller number of ports for the big 

container vessels. We should think strategically in addition to tactically. 

Do you agree that a land-based back up signal for GPS, such as e-LORAN, is a 

necessary investment to ensure continuity and reliability across all forms of Blue 

Technologies? 

ANSWER: Yes, absolutely. Both land-based and newer space-based systems that 

complement GPS are needed. 

In the Arctic, what are the most pressing challenges that Blue Technologies could be 

applied to solve? Would it be helpful for Congress to authorize an Arctic Blue 

Technology Demonsttation Program? 

ANSWER: There is so much that we don't know about the ocean, but that is 

particularly true in the Arctic, which is opening up to research and exploitation as never 

before. I believe that Congress should authorize Blue Tech Demonstration Programs in 

the arctic, but also in U.S. marine protected areas. We should promote these areas with 

expedited approval and funding to allow U.S. companies to test technologies to create 

"baseline data" in conjunction with academia, government and military organizations, 

which creates a win-win situation for academia, companies and government. 

Integrated ocean observations appear to be critical in our understanding of the ocean 

environment and our interaction within that environment. Wbat would it take to fUnd 

and build out the entire architecture for the Integrated Ocean Observation System? 

ANSWER: The U.S. I OOS system is the ''tip of the spear" in terms of gathering ocean 

data. Data are facts from which information is derived, and information needs to be put 

in context in order to make smart, informed decisions and promote economic, 

environmental and social benefits. IOOS and the Big Data projects at NOAA are 

extraordinarily valuable for the country to make informed decisions and should be 

promoted. 

Are there certain Blue Technologies that should be integrated fUlly into the 

intrasttucture of the maritime ttansportation system to ensure safe maritime 

ttansportation and an efficient and reliable marine supply chain for the U.S. economy? 

ANSWER: There are many technologies that can help enhance the maritime 

transportation system. These include: 1) AI and autonomous vessels; 2) e-navigation; 3) 

real-time monitoring of vessel performance; 4) secure communications; 5) enhanced 

hydrographic monitoring; 6) technologies to enhance capabilities of medium-size ports 

and reduce dependence on a small number of mega-ports, and 7) research and later 

deployment of floating ports to improve efficiency while reducing Homeland Security 

and ocean rise risks. 

Does Blue Technology provide real potential for new job creation and diversification in 

the U.S. maritime workforce? Can Blue Technology attract more young people to look 

at career opportunities in maritime-related work, including ttaditional careers at sea or 

in ports and shipyard? 

3 
69 


Insert offset folio 33 here 31549.033

ANSWER: Absolutely. There are a growing number of opportunities in traditional, 

good paying Blue Economy and Blue Tech jobs. For example, from a March 22, 2016 

article in USNI News: "By 2022, the United States wiU need "70,000 new people" for the 

nation's maritime Beet, but the Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, N.Y., and the 

six state maritime academies only graduate 900 per year and are at capacity, Paul 

]aenichen Sr., the head of the U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD), told the House 

Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee on Tuesday." This need 

must be met by commercial companies that could be incented to expand. Many 

BlueTech companies are growing rapidly, but struggle to attract new talent. To a large 

extent that is because Blue Tech has been largely invisible with little information 

available about it versus better understood industries like biotech, clean tech, and 

telecomm. This will change as it becomes better studied by the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis (Dept. of Commerce) and understood for the important sector that it is. The 

U.S. Departtnents of Education and Labor should focus on this national opportunity. 

Michael B. Jones- President, The Maritime Alliance 

Submitted: July 16, 2018 

4 
70 


Insert offset folio 34 here 31549.034

TESTIMONY OF 

THOMAS S. CHANCE 

CHIEF EXECTUTIVE OFFICER, ASV GLOBAl, LLC 

BEFORE THE 

U.S. HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

MayS, 2018 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, I am honored to testify today 

regarding the use of new maritime technologies to improve the efficiency and mission 

performance of the US Coast Guard. As CEO of ASV Global, the world's largest and most 

experienced unmanned surface vehicle company, I can speak as to where unmanned vessel 

technology is now and where it is going. However, before I do so, let me commend the work of 

the Coast Guard and this Subcommittee for its long history of outstanding service. The Coast 

Guard is saving lives, fighting crime, and defending our country on a daily basis, and the citizens 

of this country should never take this for granted. 

Unmanned surface vehicles, or USVs, are unmanned boats. like unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) 

and unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs), unmanned surface vessels are revolutionizing the 

world we live in. Our company alone has delivered more than 100 USVs to military and 

commercial users across the globe. These USVs have ranged up to 40 feet in length, up to 1000 

horsepower, and endurance in excess of 30 days. However, we currently have several inquiries, 

both commercial and military, for unmanned vessels in the 80' to 200' range with an endurance 

of up to three months. Leidos Corporation recently built a 132' USV, while the Norwegians and 

the Chinese are starting to build USVs up to 260' in length. 

In addition to USVs that cannot accommodate personnel, ASV Global as well as others in the 

industry have built dozens of new optionally unmanned vessels. Optionally unmanned allows 

the asset to be deployed with a full crew on board, a reduced crew, or no crew at all, and it allows 

the execution of unmanned missions as well as manned missions. Finally, ASV Global has 

upgraded several existing vessels to optionally unmanned. By upgrading to optionally 

unmanned, existing assets can experience the progression to unmanned without losing existing 

capabilities. 

Unmanned vessels are being used for a variety of applications. In the military sphere, USV 

technology is being leveraged in mine hunting, mine sweeping and mine disposal, anti-submarine 

warfare, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), electronic warfare, and UAV 

Page 1of3 
71 


Insert offset folio 35 here 31549.035

operations. From a commercial perspective, USVs are used for hydrographic and oceanographic 

surveys, underwater positioning and communications, marine mammal detection, oil spill 

dispersant deployment, oil spill boom towing, maritime firefighting, fish stock assessment, 

regional security, asset inspection, seismic operations, limited ROV operations, deployment of 

unmanned underwater vehicles, and deployment of aerial drones. Within the next few years, we 

will see larger USVs with longer endurance supporting much wider missions. 

Just as driverless cars have a steering wheel and driver's seat, the current pragmatic approach to 

driverless vessels is to allow them to drive autonomously while remotely supervising their 

operation over a radio or satellite telemetry link. Situations requiring high speeds in high traffic 

areas are being avoided completely. At the same time, COLREG collision avoidance software 

continues to mature, so that remote supervision can eventually be phased over to full 

autonomous control. 

Economics is the driving force towards the use of unmanned vessels. When you go from manned 

to unmanned ships, you don't need a galley and mess area. You don't need bunk rooms, 

hallways, heads, washing machines, dishwashers, freezers, stairways, workshops, a meeting 

room, or a full bridge. In a sense, an unmanned vessel is a hull with diesel tanks, engines, and a 

rack of computers and sensors. While I don't want to trivialize what is necessary for unmanned 

vessel operations, the capital cost of an unmanned vessel can be far less than that of its manned 

equivalent. 

In addition to reduced capital costs, unmanned vessels can offer reduced daily operating costs as 

vessel personnel are condensed to those remotely supervising operations and those maintaining 

the unmanned vessels while in port. Maintenance of unmanned vessels is less than that of their 

manned counterpart as there is no personnel support equipment (such as refrigerators) to break. 

Finally, CONOPS such as offshore stationing can substantially reduce operational costs. 

Unmanned vessels can be applied in two general ways. First, as force multipliers, where they are 

deployed and monitored from a manned mother ship. Second, they can work independent of 

other vessels, leaving port and transiting over the horizon to operate for weeks at a time while 

being monitored from a command center via satellite. Both methods are proven. 

A byproduct of unmanned vessel technology is the bridge aid which would include COLREG 

collision avoidance software and the associated collision avoidance sensors. The bridge aid can 

be used to advise the ship's captain on navigation maneuvers, or, if necessary, it can be set to 

override manual systems to insure a collision is avoided. 

Page 2 of3 
72 


Insert offset folio 36 here 31549.036

Potential applications of unmanned vessel technology to the USCG are widespread. USVs can 

offer persistent maritime domain awareness, where unmanned, or optionally unmanned vessels, 

large and small, can remain on station for weeks at a time while providing intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance, as well as interception, and to a degree, interdiction. For 

example, ASV Global recently converted a 38' offshore patrol craft to optionally unmanned. That 

vessel will be able to patrol a region for up to two weeks at a time, as well as investigate suspect 

vessels. 

With long endurance unmanned patrol craft stationed for long periods offshore, Coast Guard 

personnel at land-based command centers can dispatch deployed unmanned vessels to intercept 

and assess. VHF radios on the USVs can be accessed by the command centers via satellite relay 

to provide communications and two-way hailing options with intercepted vessels. Non-lethal 

weapons, such as prop I net entanglement systems can be deployed by USVs to stop suspect 

vessels until manned Coast Guard vessels can arrive and apprehend. Offshore stationed USVs 

can be used for drug vessel interdiction, illegal fishing interdiction, border protection, collision 

investigations, search and rescue, pollution incident investigations, and investigation of the 

numerous reported suspect vessels in distress. 

launches and rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) installed on Fast Response Cutters, Offshore 

Patrol Cutters, and National Security Cutters can be upgraded to optionally unmanned giving the 

ship's officer the choice of dispatching these small boats with or without personnel. 

Smaller USVs can be deployed from land or sea and programmed to replace missing channel 

markers and buoys by self-anchoring on location. Smaller USVs can also provide waterborne 

patrols of critical maritime infrastructure, harbor security, and swimmer detection. 

Coast Guard vessels of all sizes are candidates for upgrades with collision avoidance bridge aids 

to mitigate maritime collisions. Future ship build programs should certainly consider fully 

unmanned, partially unmanned, and optionally unmanned ships. 

These are just a few of the many applications of unmanned surface vessel technology that can 

be considered by the US Coast Guard. While additional appropriations are necessary for the 

Coast Guard to capitalize on unmanned technology, the economic and strategic advantages are 

likely to be overwhelmingly positive as they are with other unmanned technologies in the military 

and commercial sectors. 

I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Page 3 of3 
73 


Insert offset folio 37 here 31549.037

Asv unmanned 

~: 

SUBJECT: 

WITNESS: 

DATE: 

BLUE TECHNOLOGIES: USE OF NEW MARITIME TECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE 

EFFICIENCY AND MISSION PERFORMANCE 

WITNESS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FOR THE RECORD 

U.S. HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD & MARITIME TRANSPORTATION 

TESTIMONY DATE: May 8, 2018 

THOMAS CHANCE, CEO, ASV GLOBAL (UNMANNED VESSEL TECHNOLOGY) 

JUNE 19, 2018 

1. In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and Development 

budget, and if you agree, what would be a reasonable funding level? 

Answer: It appears that the USCG's RDT&E budget was substantially reduced in the last 

couple of years from approximately $36m to $18m. I believe that the USCG's RDT&E budget 

should be restored to at least the $36m level with the additional funding being directed 

towards test and evaluation (T&E) and less towards (R&D). I believe the total amount of 

funds (even at $36m) are inadequate for USCG R&D, and that the private sector is more than 

willing to invest in the necessary I R&D to produce products to fill the needs of the USCG. In 

summary, funds should be increased for T&E, but the USCG does not, and frankly cannot, 

compete with the speed and efficiency of private sector's R&D efforts. The USCG should 

spend their scarce resources on evaluating technologies that can be used, or modified by the 

manufacturer and used, by the USCG in short order. 

2. Do you agree that the economic impact of the Ocean Economy is likely to continue to grow, 

and that Blue Technologies offer new opportunities for growth and expansion within the 

larger U.S. ocean economy? 

Answer: Blue Technologies, including unmanned technology, have been, and will continue 

to grow and provide economic opportunities in both commercial and military sectors 

domestically as well as internationally. 

3. Would a national strategy be helpful in promoting and advancing Blue Technology 

innovation, or, is it best left to market forces to shape this outcome? 

Answer: I would say that a national strategy forces a plan to be made now, and execution of 

that plan over time. Without a national strategy, plans can evolve over time with technology 

evolution, so that execution can capitalize on what makes sense in the present, as opposed 

to what made sense years earlier when the roadmap was established. So, unless a national 

strategy can attract national funding, I don't see it being beneficial. 

Page 1 of4 
74 


Insert offset folio 38 here 31549.038

Asv unmanned 

~: 

4. Are foreign competitors better positioned than U.S. firms to take advantage of the future 

global Blue Technology market? If so, what actions could be taken to improve the 

competitiveness of U.S. firms? 

Answer: My firm, ASV Global, is building unmanned vessels in Europe as well as in the US. 

Foreign competitors, particularly in the Scandinavian countries, are heavily subsidized by 

their governments to capitalize on unmanned ship development opportunities. The funding 

is primarily used to position those companies to compete on an international platform with 

the development of large unmanned ships. The US government should subsidize US 

companies' development efforts before it is too late. In the case of the unmanned vessel 

business, it is an industry that will be in existence for many decades, if not for centuries. The 

US cannot afford to start off so far behind and miss this major industry development. 

5. Are the Coast Guard's present arrangements or methods to interact with Blue Technology 

industries and firms sufficient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments 

and innovations? 

Answer: I am not sure. 

6. How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology industry? 

Should the Coast Guard establish a new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as it has 

done for other issues? 

Answer: A Blue Technology Center of Excellence means to me that the USCG will send money 

to some university who will 1) make up some stuff to study, and 2) spend a lot of its funds to 

insure it gets continued funding. In short, I would not establish another center of excellence. 

7. Assuming that you agree that the Coast Guard would benefit immediately and directly by 

investing more funding in Blue Tech research and development and in acquiring Blue 

Technology systems to supplement or enhance Coast Guard operations, what systems 

should be priorities for the Coast Guard to make R&D investments? 

Answer: As stated, I would recommend that the USCG receive more funding to test and 

evaluate technology, not try to develop technology internally. I believe the USCG can hugely 

benefit from unmanned surface vehicle {USV) technology. Specific examples include the 

following: 

USVs can offer persistent maritime domain awareness, where unmanned, or minimally 

manned vessels, large and small, can remain on station for weeks at a time while providing 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, as well as interception, and to a degree, 

interdiction. For example, ASV Global recently converted a 38' offshore patrol craft to 

optionally unmanned. That vessel will be able to patrol a region unmanned for up to two 

weeks at a time, as well as investigate suspect vessels, while being supervised from a USCG 

office via a satellite link. 

Page 2 of4 
75 


Insert offset folio 39 here 31549.039

Asv unmanned 

~: 

With long endurance unmanned patrol craft stationed for long periods offshore, Coast Guard 

personnel at land-based command centers can dispatch deployed unmanned vessels to 

intercept and assess. VHF radios on the USVs can be accessed by the command centers via 

satellite relay to provide communications and two-way hailing options with intercepted 

vessels. Non-lethal weapons, such as prop I net entanglement systems can be deployed by 

USVs to stop suspect vessels until manned Coast Guard vessels can arrive and apprehend. 

Offshore stationed USVs can be used for drug vessel interdiction, illegal fishing interdiction, 

border protection, collision investigations, search and rescue, pollution incident 

investigations, and investigation of the numerous reported suspect vessels in distress. 

launches and rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIBs) installed on Fast Response Cutters, Offshore 

Patrol Cutters, and National Security Cutters can be upgraded to optionally unmanned giving 

the ship's officer the choice of dispatching these small boats with or without personnel. 

Smaller USVs can be deployed from land or sea and programmed to replace missing channel 

markers and buoys by self-anchoring on location. Smaller USVs can also provide waterborne 

patrols of critical maritime infrastructure, harbor security, and swimmer detection. 

Coast Guard vessels of all sizes are candidates for upgrades with collision avoidance bridge 

aids to mitigate maritime collisions. Future ship build programs should certainly consider 

fully unmanned, partially unmanned, and optionally unmanned ships. 

8. Considering that most, if not virtually all, Blue Technology systems in some way rely on 

satellite telemetry and Global Positioning System signals, how much of a risk are cyber 

threats to Blue Technology systems? Are cyber threats slowing down market growth for 

Blue Technologies? Can we design and build these systems to be robust and resilient 

enough to fend off cyber-attacks? 

Answer: Reliance on satellite telemetry and GPS in the marine environment is a vulnerability 

for many Blue Technologies. Radio spectrum jamming can impact sat comms and GPS, and 

spoofing has certainly proven to impact GPS. Land based supervision of maritime assets via 

satellite must provide for cyber-security, but that is much easier than dealing with jamming 

and spoofing. I don't think any of these threats are slowing Blue Technologies. I do think 

industry can fend off cyber-security issues, but jamming and spoofing is a federal government 

level problem. 

9. Do you agree that a land-based back up signal for GPS, such as e-LORAN, is a necessary 

investment to ensure continuity and reliability across all forms of Blue Technologies? 

Answer: E-LORAN would be more accurate and robust than LORAN-C, but would largely 

suffer the same ionospheric issues inherent in any low frequency (100kHz) radio positioning 

system. That said, E-LORAN may be the best alternative to GPS. I would defer to those in 

Page 3 of4 
76 


Insert offset folio 40 here 31549.040

Asv unmanned 

~: 

DARPA working on alternatives to GPS, as well as to tests that may have occurred with the 

development of E-LORAN in South Korea. 

10. In the Arctic, what are the most pressing challenges that Blue Technologies could be applied 

to solve? Would it be helpful for Congress to authorize an Arctic Blue Technology 

Demonstration Program? 

Answer: I am not sure. 

11. Integrated ocean observations appear to be critical in our understanding of the ocean 

environment and our interaction within that environment. What would it take to fund and 

build out the entire architecture for the Integrated Ocean Observation System? 

Answer: In 2012, the Jet Propulsion laboratory estimated the cost of building out a global 

integrated ocean observing system at $55 billion dollars. 

12. Are there certain Blue Technologies that should be integrated fully into the infrastructure 

of the maritime transportation system to ensure safe maritime transportation and an 

efficient and reliable marine supply chain for the U.S. economy? 

Answer: As mentioned in the last paragraph of #7 above, bridge aids that can warn and 

potentially adjust a ship's course in a COLREG compliant manner would likely dramatically 

reduce maritime collisions since most are due to human error. 

13. Does Blue Technology provide real potential for new job creation and diversification in the 

U.S. maritime workforce? Can Blue Technology attract more young people to look at career 

opportunities in maritime-related work, including traditional careers at sea or in ports and 

shipyard? 

Answer: As the CEO of the world's leading unmanned surface vehicle company, ASV Global 

is centered in Blue Technology. Blue Technology is already creating thousands of high 

technology, high paying jobs. At the same time, it is offering efficiencies that will provide 

opportunities for growth in the short and long term. New unmanned vessel technology 

including unmanned ships, freighters, patrol vessels, and a wide variety of other ships will 

revolutionize the maritime industry. Yet as indicated in #4 above, foreign countries are 

investing heavily in the unmanned vessel industry, putting America's foreign competitors at 

a major global market advantage that will grow over time. Because of this, the US is already 

pretty much behind the eight ball. 

Page 4 of4 
77 


Insert offset folio 41 here 31549.041

?:JJIOSTIA ~· 

ADVANCING THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

Testimony 

Christopher J. Coyle 

Chief Strategy and Revenue Officer 

Exocetus Autonomous Systems 

Member 

IOSTIA.com International Ocean Science and Technology Industry Association 

Before the Congress of the United States 

U.S. House of Representatives 

U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

U.S. House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

Congressional Hearing 

Blue Technologies: 

Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve Efficiency and Mission Performance 

2167 Rayburn House Office Building 

Tuesday, May 08, 2018, !O:OOam 

712 H Street NE, Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

202.389.9009 ( 0) 

info@IOSTIA.org (e) 

WWWiostiaOfi(W) 

1 
78 


Insert offset folio 42 here 31549.042

Good morning, my name is Christopher Coyle. 

I want to thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to speak with you today about 

future blue technologies; a very exciting field. 

Today, I am representing I OSTIA (10-sha), the International Ocean Science and Technology 

Industry Association, which represents marine technology businesses and organizations 

that provide technology and services for sectors that sustainably and commercially utilize 

the oceans. 

And, as an example of this hearing, IOSTIA also provides a unified public policy voice for 

those in our ocean technology space. 

During the day, I am the Chief Strategy and Revenue Officer for Exocetus Autonomous 

Systems, of Wallingford, CT, which designs, manufacturers and services deep-sea robots, 

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles or AUVs. 

I also lead the company's data and analytic initiative for the company's XPRIZE entry. In fact, 

Exocetus was named a semi-finalist in the Shell Ocean Discovery XPRIZE for mapping the 

ocean floor. We were one of only 19 teams selected from around world, out of 1,400 entrants, 

so we are extremely proud of this moon-shot award. In addition, Exocetus is a finalist in 

NOAA's prize for detecting chemical and biological signals underwater. 

Our oceans cover 70% of the planet yet only 5% of the ocean floor has been mapped. We 

know more about the surface of the moon, than we know about what lies below the surface 

of our waters. 

How is that possible? 

Elon Musk, jeffBezos and Richard Branson have spent billions of dollars of their own wealth 

and billions more from investors to explore space. It's sexy and exciting. They have reenergized the planet's interest in outer space, intergalactic travel, and potential colonization 

of other planets. But it is entirely misguided. 

The final frontier to be discovered is our oceans! 

The next space race is our oceans! 

Our planet depends on the access to healthy and plentiful oceans. 

Our oceans and blue tech should be the focus; not space. 

712 H Street NE, Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

202.389.9009 (o) 

info@!OSTIA.or£ (e) 

www iostia org (w) 

2 
79 


Insert offset folio 43 here 31549.043

As population growth climbs, as migration to concentrated coastal urban areas continues, as 

farmlands around the world shrink, as more and more people become dependent on fish 

protein, as seas play a more herculean role in carbon capture, oceans need to be today's focus 

for emerging technology, investments, and U.S. government attention. 

And so blue tech is the critical technology to encourage as our children grow into adults and 

take on leadership roles. 

This past week, I came across an article entitled "Can the U.S. Navy Brave the Waves of 

Autonomous Warfare". I'll hand the article to your staff in case you'd like to include it in 

the hearing record. 

The article's thesis is that AUVs offer great efficiency, mission range, and lower cost of capital 

than other more traditional naval means. 

AUVs will prove to be cheaper to operate, put fewer seamen in harm's way, and therefore 

assume greater levels of risk. 

AUVs are more expendable and can augment a fleet to do search and reconnaissance. 

Last july, DARPA contracted BAE Systems to build small AUVs that can detect enemy subs. 

Today, AUVs are working on sea sensing and mine counter measure tasks. 

By 2025, the Navy's AUV fleet will support undersea warfare by going into denied waters 

that are either too deep or too shallow for manned platforms. 

AUVs will continue to provide greater benefit to the U.S. Coast Guard for port and waterway 

security, maintaining navigation, marine environmental protection, oil spill protection and 

response, marine pollution, fisheries, ocean shipping lanes, and in support of key 

components of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2017. 

My company, Exocetus, is a quintessential example of a successful and sound U.S. 

government collaboration. 

Exocetus was started with a $15M federal grant to develop its buoyance engine. This 

government investment resulted in three (3) patents on the engine design and one (1) on 

the retrieval system. 

Today, we are proud to say that both the Navy and Coast Guard are presently using our AUVs. 

712 H Street NE, Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

202.389.9009 ( 0) 

info@IOSTIA.org (e) 

www iostia org (w) 

3 
80 


Insert offset folio 44 here 31549.044

To me, the most exciting thing about AUVs are the sensors and the integration of all the 

emerging technologies such as cloud computing, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and 

blockchain to process the big datajanalytics that will provide essential information and 

intelligence for our national defense, coastal erosion, port security, shipping lanes, laying 

fiber optic cables for communication, internet & media companies, and meteorological 

disturbances -to name just a few. 

The future for blue technology is bright. 

The million-dollar question is, are we going to seize this amazing opportunity and support 

and invest in brand new technologies, that will create high paying jobs of the future, or won't 

we? I can assure you that Russia and China will. 

I am convinced that the blue economy, sparked by advances in blue tech, will be the next 

biggest revolution. 

The best way to predict the future is to create it! 

Thank you and I look forward to answering any of your questions. 

712 H Street NE, Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

202.389.9009 ( 0) 

info@IOSTIA.org (e) 

wwwiostia org (w) 

4 
81 


Insert offset folio 45 here 31549.045

®I OSTIA ADVANClNG THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

!OSTIA greatly appreciates the opportunity to respond to these thoughtful questions from 

Representative Garamendi. Because several of the questions presented are broad, we have 

sought input from our wider membership and affiliated organizations to ensure we provide 

concise and substantive responses. While many of the questions !OSTIA is well qualified to 

weigh-in on, we are not authorities in all subject areas. However, we have attempted to 

provide at least a general answer for each question. Organizations and individuals providing 

supporting information are recognized at the end of this document. 

1. In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and Development budget, 

and if you agree, what would be a reasonable funding level? 

This question may be best asked of the Coast Guard as they are best positioned to elaborate on 

how increased funding would impact their adoption of novel technologies. However, in general 

we believe that increased funding coupled with strong and effective connections with industry 

and academia would benefit the Coast Guard, industry, and spur innovation across the various 

sectors of the blue economy. 

2. Do you agree that the economic impact of the Ocean Economy is likely to continue to grow, and 

that Blue Technologies offer new opportunities for growth and expansion within the larger U.S. 

ocean economy? 

Yes, the various industry sectors that rely on ocean technologies are broad and among the most 

diverse in the U.S. economy. Essentially any human-marine interaction requires some form of 

technology to safely and efficiently realize economic benefit. The obvious industry sectors with 

the most potential include maritime/shipping, offshore & renewable energy, aquaculture, and 

seabed mining. Our ability to monitor, measure and map will continue to provide a significant 

competitive advantage for both business and national security. Technology applications impact 

wide areas including; our ability to discover and protect of cultural sites; the preservation of 

endangered species and habitats; the safe navigation; recreational activities; fishing; storm 

preparedness; weather modeling and prediction; documentation of climate change, and of 

course national security. 

Taking the first three alone, investment in technology can be focused in the four key areas: 

• Baseline audits, mapping measurement and documentation technology that includes a 

wide range of data collection, visualization and analysis tools 

• Power, hardware, extraction and cabling- this group are the enabling systems and 

support services to conduct economic activity like energy, rare earth mineral extraction, 

biopharma research and collection, etc. 

• Defense and homeland protection solutions utilizing manned, autonomous and 

unmanned systems to monitor the ocean and subsea environment 

• Communication systems 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostla.org 
82 


Insert offset folio 46 here 31549.046

@I OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOlOGY 

Making Oil and gas exploration safer and more efficient. Cost-effective marine 

renewable energy development requires technology from site survey and assessment 

through installation and maintenance. The renewable technologies themselves have 

seen rapid technology advancements and spurring innovation can only lead to better 

and more affordable solutions. 

• Finally, our need for rare earth elements and other mineable resources available at the 

bottom of the sea will only be accessible utilizing cost-effective ocean technologies 

3. Would a national strategy be helpful in promoting and advancing Blue Technology innovation, 

or, is it best left to market forces to shape this outcome? 

Congress has proposed and debated legislation and the executive branch as offered and 

rescinded orders, but ultimately government has failed to pass an official act codifying a 

comprehensive national ocean strategy. There is strong interest within industry in seeing 

Congress address national security issues, economic development, and spurring the innovation 

required to maintain U.S. competitiveness. By challenging industry and offering a platform for 

strong public-private partnerships, the government could create an effective framework to 

achieve these outcomes. We have also observed a bias favoring academics within key 

organizations and committees and believe that in many cases more balanced representation 

from industry would potentially lead to better outcomes. 

4. Are foreign competitors better positioned than U.S. firms to take advantage of the future global 

Blue Technology market? if so, what actions could be taken to improve the competitiveness of 

U.S. firms? 

Yes, for example the EU ocean industry is widely seen as more cohesive and better organized 

than its counterpart in the U.S. There are several reasons for this not the least of which are the 

challenges created by our geography (e.g. distance between key clusters of our industry). Our 

association also sees an opportunity arising from the start-up/emerging technology sector of the 

industry, but we do have concern about the availability and their access to grant monies. One 

suggestion might be for government to conduct a baseline audit of organizations with a history 

of government funding to evaluate the effectiveness and value of outcomes to ensure that 

taxpayer funded R&D is directed to the most promising and best executed programs. 

5. Are the Coast Guard's present arrangements or methods to interact with Blue Technology 

industries and firms sufficient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments and 

innovations? 

No. In our interactions with the Coast Guard we believe they realize this is a problem. They are 

attempting to establish stronger connections with industry through their innovation program. 

In fact, our organization will be sending a delegation of our members to demonstrate the latest 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostta.org 
83 


Insert offset folio 47 here 31549.047

WI OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

technologies to the Coast Guard. However, while they are keen to engage with organizations 

like ours, the outcome is uncertain. There appears to be a disconnect where innovation meets 

procurement. 

6. How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology industry? Should 

the Coast Guard establish o new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as it has done for other 

issues? 

As mentioned in our previous answer, engagement with industry through hands-on 

demonstration of technology is one way our organization is responding to this need. There is 

certainly a role for industry associations to develop meaningful relationships with technology 

innovation centers, small business programs, and procurement officers. From the industry 

perspective, organizations like DARPA have been effective in stimulating innovation that 

ultimately leads to products and services that can strengthen mission effectiveness. However, 

at the same time it is critical to maintain strong industry engagement to order to be effective. 

Another idea of opportunity is to convene industry and government in regular occurring events. 

It is our understanding that the Coast Guard used to participate in a large annual technology 

exposition in the past called the U.S. Coast Guard Innovation Expo. We would strongly advocate 

for a Coast Guard/Non-Profit partnership to create a new annual event to serve the Coast 

Guard, Navy, and elements of Homeland Security that would focus exclusively on bluetech no logy. 

7. Assuming that you agree that the Coast Guard would benefit immediately and directly by 

investing more funding in Blue Tech research and development and in acquiring Blue Technology 

systems to supplement or enhance Coast Guard operations, what systems should be priorities far 

the Coast Guard to make R&D investments? 

Again, I OSTIA may not be best equipped to answer this question. However, we generally feel 

that the systems and technology essential to the Coast Guard mission include 30 mapping of 

navigation hazards, gathering enhanced metocean data for safety and security. With better 

data, the Coast Guard can become more predictive and responsive in its monitoring. Beyond 

data, clearly investment more robust hardware and equipment such as unmanned systems and 

diver technologies, power and communication systems could have a positive impact on the 

Coast Guard mission. 

8. Considering that most, if not virtually all, Blue Technology systems in some way rely an satellite 

telemetry and Global Positioning System signals, how much of a risk are cyber threats to Blue 

Technology systems? Are cyber threats slowing down market growth for Blue Technologies? Can 

we design and build these systems to be robust and resilient enough to fend off cyber-attacks? 

There are inherent and unavoidable cyber risks in blue technologies and security breaches are 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostia.org 
84 


Insert offset folio 48 here 31549.048

®I OSTIA ADVANCING THE 8USlNFSS OF 0Cf:AN TfCHNOlOGY 

inevitable. Keeping the perimeter locked is not always the most effective approach to 

preventing cyber risk. A key question to ask is what are the enabling solutions to keep 

operations safe and secure? Priority focus should be on identifying intrusion, monitor the 

intrusion, and protecting the system. A comprehensive answer to the question is beyond the 

scope of this Q&A, however IOSTIA would be pleased to organize a briefing to fully explore 

these challenges. 

9. Do you agree that a land-based back up signal far GPS, such as e-LORAN, is a necessary 

investment to ensure continuity and reliability across all forms of Blue Technologies? 

The consensus view of !OSTIA members is no. We are not sure LORAN is relevant for back up 

DGPS now with new technology coming on carrier signals for for Ll-LS GPS receivers. This 

means the cost of corrections are reduced greatly and the hardware to transmit these signals is 

much lower than current control networks and sub stations. The result in this means that 

devices that hold GNSS chip sets (iPhones I smart watches) will be able to position themselves 

with the new carrier signals embedded in the GPS or other orbital satellites and can provide 

decent sub meter location information. With this said, there may recreational uses to be 

considered. 

10. In the Arctic, what are the most pressing challenges that Blue Technologies could be applied to 

solve? Would it be helpful for Congress to authorize an Arctic Blue Technology Demonstration 

Program? 

A thorough examination of the challenges to be addressed by blue technology regarding the 

Arctic, is well beyond the scope of this Q&A. However, the consensus view of our members is 

that the most pressing need is for hydrographic survey and mapping. The technologies needed 

exist and the funding of a demonstration program might lead to an incremental improvement in 

arctic specific technology applications, but not solve the immediate and most pressing need. 

Redirecting funding for additional survey work would likely be a better investment of tax payer 

money. 

11. Integrated ocean observations appear to be critical in our understanding of the ocean 

environment and our interaction within that environment. What would it take to fund and build 

out the entire architecture for the Integrated Ocean Observation System? 

Up-to-date and reliable information about our oceans, coasts and Great Lakes is critical for safe 

and efficient transportation, for managing and planning to protect lives, properties and 

communities and for ensuring healthy, productive coastal environments. The US Integrated 

Ocean Observing System (IOOS) works with 17 Federal agencies and a national network of 11 

coastal observing systems to efficiently and effective gather critical data and to make 

information available to all who need it. 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostia.org 
85 


Insert offset folio 49 here 31549.049

WI OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOWGY 

The entire architecture for the US Integrated Ocean Observation System was estimated in the 

Independent Cost Estimate (ICE) in 2012 at: 

www.iooc.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IOOS Report Volume I 120503.pdf 

www.iooc.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IOOS Report Volume II 120503.pdf 

The Independent Cost Estimate projects $534M/year in non-federal costs to fully implement 

1005 and $65M/year in central functions. 

The 1005 Association has been working to communicate specific gap filling that would be easy 

to implement if additional resources were made available. To date, the campaign has focused 

on HF radars and gliders, a priority for both NOAA and Congress. The FY18 1005 appropriations 

was $6.8M for NationaiiOOS (i.e. central functions) and $35M for RegionaiiOOS Observations 

within the National Ocean Service budget of NOAA. The network is scalable, with each IOOS 

Region scoped at $4M per year in proposed work to NOAA, the program could easily increase 

capacity toward a more complete system. Additionally, IOOS includes R&D components in the 

Coastal and Ocean Modeling Testbed (NOAA's only coastal testbed), the Ocean Technology 

Transition project (competitive grant program to move emerging technologies into operations), 

and the Alliance for Coastal Technologies (sensor verification) funded at $5M in FY18. 

A modest investment of additional funding to operate 1005 at $165M ($130M non federal and 

$15M for central functions) per year would enable meaningful implementation of 1005 

observing, modeling, and data management to meet societal needs. 

1005 Regions (non federal) 

IOOS R&D (non federal) 

1005 Central Functions 

Total 

FY18 funding 

$30M 

$SM 

$6.8M 

$42.8M 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostia.org 

Tier !Increase Sustained system 

$45M $110M/year 

$10M $20M 

$10M $15M 

$65M $145M 
86 


Insert offset folio 50 here 31549.050

WI OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS OF OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

U.S. tOOS has built plans to expand the network by filling gaps in observing capacity in every 

region. The future includes infusing new technologies and innovating to meet societal needs. As 

technologies evolve and develop, IOOS is positioned to innovate and refine observing systems 

while sustaining observing capacity to meet societal needs. By working in a community 

approach to develop and implement national plans. 

IOOS and its partners have completed several national plans that identify needs. These national 

plans guide regional implementation. Each region is able to determine the most cost-effective 

mix of technologies that complement existing resources, to meet societal needs with national 

consistency. 

National plans include: 

National Surface Current Mapping Plan 

Recommends increasing the number of radars to 351 to fill identified gaps. This would 

more than double the amount operating now (-150}. The estimates cost is $23.2M per 

year. 

National Waves Plan 

The 2012 Update by USACOE and NOAA recommends a national backbone of 210 

locations, 190 of which meet the directional wave accuracy and 60 sentinel stations. 

This would require 47 new wave observing locations ranging from the deep ocean to the 

estuaries and providing upgrades to 87 stations and adding 10 roving buoys for short 

term deployment to validate wave models that can be used for virtual wave gauges. 

Costs would be between $15M- $17M per year. 

Toward a national glider network 

The plan recommends adding 15 shallow water operations {suitable for the east coast} 

and 15 deep water lines suitable for the west coast where the continental break is 

closer, which will cost between $9-$12 M to capitalize and $6-SM to operate annually. 

National Moorings Strategy 

The 2017 Mooring Strategy priority recommendation is to add 56 ecosystem moorings 

that can measure a suite of chemical and biological parameters to the existing network 

of 754 moorings. These moorings would include sensors below the water surface to 

address the need for biological variables. 

Ocean Technology Transition 

A key component of the 1005 program of interest to IOSTIA is the Ocean Technology 

Transition project. 'The Ocean Technology Transition project sponsors the transition of 

emerging marine observing technologies, for which there is an existing operational 

requirement and a demonstrated commitment to integration and use by the ocean 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.iostia.org 
87 


Insert offset folio 51 here 31549.051

WI OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS Of OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

observing community, to operational mode. The primary objective of IOOS' OTT project 

is to reduce the "research to operations" transition period for ocean observing, product 

development, and data management technologies for the ocean, coastal and Great 

Lakes." 

Federal Observing Systems 

The ICE estimated that over 83% ofthe nation's ocean observing system is operated by the 17 

IOOS Federal. These programs includes NASA satellite systems, Navy operations, stream gauges 

operated by USGS. The programs are funded by Congressional appropriation and, as such, are 

already planned and budgeted and are necessary for agencies to perform their missions. 

IOOS integrates these existing investments and their related data streams to get more return on 

investment for the American public. 

Note: 

From the industry perspective there are ways to creatively increase operational ocean observing 

impacts without that level of spending. The architecture evaluated in the studies above is circa 

2010 technology. Since then we have seen significant advancements in autonomous marine 

robots, commercial space technologies, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence/machine 

learning. There would be merit in an organized look at a new architecture based on modern 

technology that might deliver the significant benefits of ocean observing at lower cost and with 

increased societal and economic benefits. 

12. Are there certain Blue Technologies that should be integrated fully into the infrastructure of the 

maritime transportation system to ensure safe maritime transportation and an efficient and 

reliable marine supply chain for the U.S. economy? 

Yes. From our perspective a good investment might be in subsea LIDAR scans for safety, 

security and hazards, proper monitoring of shipping lanes and ports and harbors, better 

continental shelf maps, marine/habitat monitoring, and tracking, 

13. Does Blue Technology provide real potential for new job creation and diversification in the U.S. 

maritime workforce? Can Blue Technology attract more young people to look ot career 

opportunities in maritime-related work, including traditional careers at sea or in ports and 

shipyard? 

Yes, it is clear from the success of STEM education programs in the ocean technology space 

stimulates interest in marine careers. The Marine Advance Technology Education organization 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.lostia.org 
88 


Insert offset folio 52 here 31549.052

~I OSTIA ADVANCING THE BUSINESS Of OCEAN TECHNOLOGY 

assesses workforce needs and works closely with high school and community colleges to 

prepare the next generation workforce for blue technology. It is just one successful example of 

an organization funded largely through grants that has been effective in tackling this problem, 

by reaching thousands of aspiring students. !OSTIA also sees opportunity for veterans and 

military (e.g. VR/AR technologies) as viable area to draw upon for talent. Organization's like 

Force Blue are working with veterans through their innovative programs. 

Additional Contributors 

Josie Quintretl, Director, 1005 Association: www.ioosassociation.org 

Neil Manning, COO, 3D at Depth: www.3datdepth.com 

Justin Manley, Managing Director, Just Innovation: www.justinnovationtlc.com 

Colleen Hahn, President & CEO, Gryphon Media Strategies: www.gryphonmediastrategies.com 

712 H Street NE 

Suite 1061 

Washington, DC 20002 

www.lostia,org 
89 


Insert offset folio 53 here 31549.053

Written Statement of 

H. Tuba Ozkan-Haller 

Professor and Associate Dean 

College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences 

Oregon State University 

Before The 

Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

Of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

U.S. House of Representatives 

"Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve Efficiency and Mission 

Performance" 

May 8, 2018 

Thank you Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, and Ranking Member DeFazio for the 

opportunity to testifY today on the potential for maritime technology innovation to support efficiency and 

performance within the United States Coast Guard. I am pleased to provide testimony today on the role 

university-based research can play in providing the Coast Guard with information and tools that will help 

realize effective and efficient operations. 

I am a Professor at the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences at Oregon State University 

(OSU) and have been conducting research on the prediction and forecasting of ocean conditions for more 

than 20 years. As part of this effort, I have helped develop and test various wave and circulation 

prediction systems. I have also been involved with numerous large multi-agency observational campaigns 

to assess and improve the fidelity of ocean forecasts. These field campaigns have at times involved 

standard oceanographic instrumentation, and at other times have invoked innovative new technologies, 

including autonomous sensing. Finally, my work has explored ways in which forecast results can be 

presented and shared to make them most usable to stakeholders, including bar pilots, the fishing 

community, the National Weather Service, and the Coast Guard. Components of this work have involved 

basic research funding from various sources, including the National Science Foundation. Other more 

applied components have been funded by mission-oriented agencies, such as the Office of Naval 

Research, the Army Corps of Engineers, NOAA, and the Department of Energy. The presence of a 

multitude of funding agencies with interest in forecasting tools is encouraging, but it can also mean that 

close inter-agency coordination is imperative to holistically address challenges affecting coastal and atsea operations. 

Overview 

This testimony summarizes current ocean state prediction and forecasting technologies and touches upon 

potential future enhancements that would increase the utility of the forecasts. The focus is on coastal 

regions and inlets where navigational planning and safety are of concern for the Coast Guard, along with 

recreational and commercial stakeholders. The discussion also covers recent efforts aimed at forecasting 

the potential for risk to the beachgoing public, including rip current and sneaker wave forecasts. 

1 
90 


Insert offset folio 54 here 31549.054

Ocean forecasting systems are enabled by a few key efforts. First, building forecasting models requires an 

understanding about the way in which the ocean works. Such an understanding can only be obtained 

through observations of the ocean-atmosphere system, and through careful analysis of the resulting data 

that enables us to hone in on the dominant natural relationships which can then be codified in the 

forecasting models. Such observations can be obtained as part of long-term ocean observing initiatives, 

but sometimes also require specialized innovative approaches to get at observations that are key pieces of 

the puzzle. Second, the accuracy of forecasting results can only be quantified if they are compared with 

observations of the conditions. Such data-model comparisons also guide further development and 

refinement of the forecasts. Finally, engaged educational activities involving the stakeholders and users of 

the forecasts point towards improvements in the forecasts while also training individuals to interpret 

forecast products as intended. This testimony will address all components of the system, including the 

forecast systems, the enabling observations, innovative data analysis, and the engaged educational 

programs required to enable the use of the forecasts for operational purposes. 

Utilizing ocean wave and current forecasts for efficient navigational safety, safe passage, as well as 

search and rescue operations 

Recent advances in predictive models now allow for detailed and high-resolution forecasts of ocean 

conditions. The forecasts include spatially well-resolved information about wave conditions and ocean 

currents in the open ocean, but also near navigational inlets where wave heights are strongly affected by 

tidal currents. 

Although further development and testing is needed, wave forecasts in their current form can aid in 

several activities. For example, forecasts of ocean conditions in the open ocean can be used during search 

and rescue operations to narrow down the geographical area of interest. Forecasts near navigational inlets 

can be especially critical at challenging inlets where the transit through the river mouth can be 

treacherous. The Mouth of the Columbia River, bordering Oregon and Washington, often colloquially 

referred to as the "Graveyard of the Pacific," is one such example. The Coast Guard ships transit the bar 

during large wave events routinely. Further, the Coast Guard, collaboratively with other entities, makes 

decisions about bar closures that halt vessel traffic. Given that $24 billion of cargo moves on the 

Columbia River System annually, the cost of a bar closure to port operations and the local economy is 

significant. 

One of the groups that play a role in bar closure decisions is the Columbia River Bar Pilots, a group of 

captains that are responsible for boarding every vessel that is crossing the bar and piloting it safely into or 

out of the inlet. The Bar Pilots make decisions about releasing vessels into river traffic from ports for 

transit across the bar. They require accurate forecast 10 hours in advance, because a tanker released from 

the upriver port of Portland requires hours to reach the river mouth. Once there, most of these tankers are 

too large to turn around, so the hazards of making the wrong decision are either a disaster on the bar or 

create the need to anchor a fully loaded ship in the river where there is a high likelihood that it will drag 

its anchor and go aground, given the strength of the waves (that routinely reach 30-35 ft) and strong 

currents (up to 4 knots). 

For the last 5 years, the Columba River Bar Pilots have been utilizing OSU's wave forecasts over the area 

of the navigational inlet to inform their decision-making on navigational planning. The forecasts are 

specifically used for the computation of under-keel clearance values for vessels with a large draft, as well 

as for recommendations regarding the closure of the bar along with, perhaps more crucially, the timing for 

the opening of the bar. The forecasts have been developed at OSU and were funded by a variety of federal 

and local funding sources, including NOAA, the Office of Naval Research, and the Department of 

2 
91 


Insert offset folio 55 here 31549.055

Energy. We have worked extensively and iteratively with the Bar Pilots to create an interface for data 

retrieval that meets their needs and maximizes their ability to use the results. Efforts such as these are 

promising avenues to the translation of scientific discoveries to operational settings to increase safety and 

security. 

Although much progress has been made recently to advance ocean forecasting technologies, there are 

several shortcomings that still need to be remedied to increase their fidelity and reliability. For example, 

advancements are needed to further our understanding of wave and ocean currents under challenging 

conditions, for example during storm conditions with large wave heights or for the prediction of rogue 

waves or sneaker waves. Accuracy is limited by our ability to codify natural processes related to wave 

processes (wave growth, swell dissipation, wave breaking processes, among others), circulation processes 

{presence and effect of gyres, data assimilative efforts, salinity temperature variability and ocean mixing), 

as well as wave-circulation interaction processes. Forecasts of conditions at tidal inlets can be especially 

challenging because waves are strongly affected by the tidal velocities that, at times, can cause localized 

wave amplification at the inlet mouth and can lead to navigational hazards. Forecast models need to 

accurately account for these interactions. 

Further, following the weather forecast community, probabilistic forecasts are required for the most 

effective use of these forecasts. These are not currently commonplace and are not yet operational for 

ocean forecasting, but the trajectory of this work is promising. Improved understanding for real-time 

application would enable new technology-based tools to promote safe navigation, as well as safe and 

efficient search and rescue operations. 

Sustained observations of the ocean 

As mentioned above, the development of ocean forecasting models requires a fundamental understanding 

on how the ocean-atmosphere system works so that discovered relationships (for instance, between wind 

speed and wave growth) can be codified in the forecasting models. Such understanding requires the use 

and analysis of targeted observations to develop and test hypothesized relationships. Observations are also 

needed to validate produced forecasts and quantifY the confidence in the produced forecasts extending 

into the future. Finally, real-time observations give us a sense of the actual current conditions and enable 

decision-making about near-term activities. 

Ocean observations efforts benefit from recent improvements in innovative technologies and autonomous 

platforms (such as gliders, Unmanned Underwater Vehicles, and Autonomous Unmanned Vehicles) that 

are providing a look into the ocean that was not possible with previous technologies. While there is 

significant attention on the service support that UUVs or AUVs can provide, these autonomous platforms 

also allow us to sample continuously, at locations that would not be safe for sampling by humans. This is 

of particular value when working near unstable glaciers or during large wave conditions when ships 

cannot safely sample conditions. Advancements in the technology platforms to support ocean 

observations, and the application of observational data to inform real-time understanding and expectations 

of ocean conditions, are critical tools for improving safety and efficiency of ocean operations. 

Innovative ways of employing new technologies to patrol the Arctic or other far parts of the EEZ. 

Recent advances in unmanned vehicles have enabled excursions to areas that were previously not safely 

accessible. Of particular importance to the Coast Guard's Arctic mission objectives, OSU researchers are 

obtaining observations near glaciers that have been made possible by unmanned vehicles that can come 

close enough to the glaciers to obtain previously unobservable information. Such information should 

3 
92 


Insert offset folio 56 here 31549.056

prove crucial in the continued exploration of the Arctic that is becoming increasingly navigable but is 

associated with many unknowns. 

Similarly, advancements in autonomous platforms are enabling new forecasting capabilities of wave 

heights. This has important potential applications for navigation, as well as protecting infrastructure and 

other critical assets. Obtaining wave height information during very large wave events is very 

challenging, and new rugged autonomous observing platforms are enabling such information and 

providing insight into conditions that remain challenging for forecast models, yet are important for 

operations. 

As an example, wave height accuracy for nowcasts usually is around I 0-15%, but new observations 

unearthed that model accuracies for very large waves (wave heights greater than 6 m) are sometimes wellpredicted and at other times severely under-predicted, such as forecasting 5 m waves when the waves, in 

reality, reach I 0 m, a potentially fatal mistake. Targeted new observations from autonomous platforms 

strategically deployed during large wave events have enabled us to pinpoint the environmental conditions 

during which the under-prediction occurred. This discovery enabled us to codify con-ections to the 

forecast results (in this case, using machine learning technologies) to increase the forecast accuracy 

during large wave events. 

Many further discoveries can be enabled by autonomous sensing, and there have been many 

advancements in autonomous vehicle technology. Gliders are now routinely being used to assess the state 

of the ocean. Some challenges still exist, especially near navigational inlets where salinity variations 

cause difficulties in sensing and in buoyancy regulation. As these challenges are being overcome, 

autonomous vehicles will enable further exploration and aid in patrolling functions. 

Exploration through the Arctic or any other parts of the EEZ that is removed from civilization will also 

necessitate considerations of power requirements. This is where energy extraction from renewable 

sources may become important. Candidate sources are energy extraction from waves, or tidal currents, 

and technology development is currently underway. The last 20 years have seen surges in interest in wave 

energy extraction and development. The industry is still very young, and the considered technologies are 

varied and diverse. OSU is currently preparing to construct an off-shore grid-connected wave energy test 

facility with the Department of Energy that will allow technology developers to test and further develop 

their wave energy converter devices and is, therefore, poised to accelerate the development of wave 

energy technologies. Wave energy has promise for offering a viable source of energy in the future with 

potential importance to the Coast Guard's mission in the high seas and remote areas, such as the Arctic. 

Promising emerging technologies geared towards identifying illegal activities at sea 

Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) activities at sea, their location and timing are challenging to 

assess and predict, yet such activities are of concern to the Coast Guard. Maritime JUU activities include 

illegal fishing and the trafficking of people, arms and narcotics. The key challenge is that vessels 

committing JUU activities turn off their GPS transponders and therefore "go dark." In fact, there are 

estimates that project that an an entire fleet of such vessels (a "dark fleet") is currently at work in the 

oceans. And although these vessels cannot be directly tracked, there is nonetheless a need to pinpoint their 

locations, or even provide short-term forecasts of their potential future positions. 

New solutions for predicting IUU activity are currently emerging from academic research. They involve 

the field of mathematical geometry and information theory. These methods were originally developed to 

predict the behavior of complex systems such as the financial markets, but the principles apply in the 

context ofiUU activities. More specifically, because the vessel traffic responds to the presence or absence 

4 
93 


Insert offset folio 57 here 31549.057

of other vessels in the area (whether they are visible or "dark"), observing the behavior of the visible fleet 

and any anomalous behavior within that system carries clues about movement of the dark fleet. Much like 

observations of visible celestial bodies can pinpoint the location of black holes, analysis of the movement 

of the visible fleet {with emerging mathematical methods) is showing promise in identifYing the locations 

and movements of the dark fleet. These methods take advantage of the emerging science of "big data" and 

involve the melding and merging of disparate kinds of data sets to infer infonnation of interest for 

national security. Further developments in this line of research could aid in developing more efficient and 

effective patrol strategies. 

Engaged educational programs that train Coast Guard personnel 

Close working relationships between the scientists who are developing products and the user base are 

crucial in assuring that the forecast products are tailored to the needs of the specific user. Our experience 

with wave forecasting products shows that the needs of the Bar Pilots are quite different from those of the 

tuna fishing industry. Hence, close engagement is needed during the development phase of the products. 

Further, translating scientific and technological advances to application by the Coast Guard will require 

specialized training of Coast Guard personnel. Both of these needs can be met with engaged educational 

activities that are designed to provide input and testing for forecast product interfaces while also helping 

personnel attain an intuitive understanding of the forecasts, their accuracy, and any potential shortfall. 

Note also, that these programs will benefit from close inter-disciplinary linkages between the Ocean 

Sciences and Engineering. 

Such educational partnerships within graduate programs are already in place. For example, OSU houses a 

cross-disciplinary program in Nearshore Oceanography and Coastal Engineering and is engaging with 

Coast Guard students at the graduate education level. Further enhancing such programs with innovative 

hands-on curriculum that includes extensive experiential learning and focusses and tailors the education 

to the needs of the Coast Guard can enable them to engage fully with the latest blue technologies 

available to aid in the mission of the Coast Guard. 

Summary 

University researchers, myself included, are keen on seeing their discoveries translated to application and 

used to increase our safety and personal, national, and resource security. The scientific advances have 

been made possible through investments in science by various agencies. To that end, continued 

encouragement of inter-governmental collaboration in research and development among federal agencies 

invested in ocean sciences and operations is imperative to further advance knowledge for innovation in 

blue technologies. However, while the presence of multiple agencies with interest and investment in the 

research is encouraging, it also results in situations where the translation of the science to application can 

be difficult to fund. This is of particular concern with the constrained budget of the US Coast Guard 

mission, particularly for research and development. Nearshore ocean science is rapidly reaching a point of 

maturity so that numerous forecast technology products can be produced. With strategic investment in the 

Coast Guard for applied research and development and operations of direct importance to the Service 

capabilities, there is real potential to promote significant advancements in safety, efficiency and 

effectiveness of critical mission objectives. 

In closing, I thank the Subcommittee for your efforts to consider the role of technology innovation and 

applications for efficiently and effectively advancing critical Coast Guard capabilities needed for the 

current and future mission objectives. I would be pleased to answer any questions. 

5 
94 


Insert offset folio 58 here 31549.058

Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

"Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve Efficiency and Mission 

Performance" 

May8,2018 

Witness Questions for the Record from The Honorable John Garamendi 

Responses from Dr. Tuba Ozkan-Haller, Ph.D. 

Q: In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and Development budget, and if 

you agree, what would be a reasonable funding level? 

A: Increased investment in the Coast Guard's Research and Development budget would help to further 

advance Service specific efforts to translate research and development, particularly related to blue 

technologies, to support Coast Guard mission capabilities and objectives. Many scientific advances and 

discoveries, including blue technologies, that have proven of value to Coast Guard capabilities have 

been made possible through federal investments in research and development through various federal 

agencies. First and foremost, I urge the Committee to pursue opportunities to provide continued 

legislative encouragement for inter-governmental collaboration in research and development among 

federal research agencies engaged in the ocean, including the Coast Guard. Further, in order to most 

efficiently and effectively ensure that federal investment in scientific advances can be translated to blue 

technologies of direct importance to Service mission objectives and capabilities, the Coast Guard would 

be well served by increased investment to support its own Service specific applied research and 

development objectives. Increased and strategic investment in the Coast Guard for applied research and 

development, including for blue technologies, would position the Service to more efficiently pursue and 

directly engage in efforts to translate innovation in such way that can effectively meet the specific needs 

of Coast Guard operations. Currently, limited resources to the Coast Guard to engage in applied 

research and innovation is a limitation for the development, application, and implementation of blue 

technologies in support of Service capabilities. Some of these R&D funds should be directed towards 

initiatives that enable the co-development of knowledge and related tools by the Coast Guard and 

Universities, further encouraging engaged research on the part of Universities with results that will 

directly feed into Coast Guard needs. While increased investment would be welcome and of value, I am 

not in position to propose a specific amount of increased investment that would be ideal. 

Q: Are the Coast Guard's present arrangements or methods to interact with Blue Technology 

industries and firms sufficient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments and 

innovations? 

A: From the perspective of academia, I can convey positive experiences working with members of the 

Coast Guard to engage in efforts to develop and integrate Blue Technologies into Service capabilities. 

However, limited resources are an impediment to the optimization of these collaborations and the 

potential impacts. A close working relationship between a user and the scientists who are working to 

translate research to technology-based products is crucial to ensure that a developing technology or 

1 of2 
95 


Insert offset folio 59 here 31549.059

system can be best tailored to meet the unique needs of the user. Increased resources to invest in and 

facilitate engagement between university researchers and the Coast Guard is needed to initiate and 

effectively advance the development of products that best meet specific capability objectives unique to 

the Coast Guard. Further, translating scientific and technological advances to application by the Coast 

Guard will require more specialized training of Coast Guard personnel. Increased resources can facilitate 

needed collaborations between the Coast Guard and research institutions for technology innovation as 

well as education and training needs. Such partnerships are already in place, but additional resources 

and commitment could streamline these relationships for efficient and effective outcomes. 

Q: How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology industry? Should the 

Coast Guard establish a new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as it has done for other issues? 

A: Investments in strategic partnerships between academia, industry, and federal agencies are proven to 

create pathways for nimble, collaborative, and timely research and development to meet specific 

mission or sector objectives. My experience suggests a Center of Expertise or Excellence that would be 

designed to facilitate partnerships between research universities and the Coast Guard for efficient 

applied research and innovation to support Service capabilities could enhance the Coast Guard's 

capacity to develop, test, and integrate blue technologies into the Service. Further, these Centers could 

also contribute to the education and training of students and current or future personnel on the cutting 

edge innovations. 

A relevant example of a strategic partnership model in the ocean sciences arena is NOAA's Cooperative 

Institutes. NOAA's cooperative institutes are academic non-profit research institutions that demonstrate 

high levels of performance in conducting research that support's NOAA's mission goals and strategic 

plan. They collaborate with NOAA laboratories to create a strong, long-term collaboration between 

government and university researchers. Further, Cooperative Institutes also provide a mechanism for 

Administration sponsorship of students through fellowships, thus also helping to educate and train the 

next generation of workforce. Extramural research and education partnerships can provide timely and 

cost-efficient mechanisms for advancing cutting edge, translational research of direct importance to the 

Service. 

2 of2 
96 


Insert offset folio 60 here 31549.060

Testimony of RADM Jonathan White, USN (Ret.) 

President and CEO of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership 

Before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 

Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 

Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve Efficiency and Mission Performance 

8 May2018 

On behalf of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership (COL), I appreciate the opportunity to discuss marine 

technologies (blue tech) with subcommittee members today. COL represents the nation's leading ocean science, 

education, and technology institutions with the mission to shape the future of ocean sciences. Geosciences, 

broadly, and ocean science and technology, specifically, strengthen our homeland and national security, support 

a safe and efficient marine transportation system, underpin our economy, contribute to improved human health, 

and further the understanding of complex ocean and coastal processes behind the benefits from the sea upon which 

our nation relies. I consider this amalgamation of the securities that depend on robust ocean knowledge to ensure 

our safety and survival as "ocean security." Many overlaps exist between the missions of the United States Coast 

Guard (USCG) and the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Maritime Administration (MARAD) and ocean 

security. There are three important ideas you need to take away from my testimony today: 

1. Ocean knowledge enables the USCG and MARAD in achieving their missions by enhancing maritime domain 

awareness (MDA). 

2. Blue tech is vital to understanding the ocean. 

3. Blue tech innovation and operation rely upon an advanced workforce educated and trained in ocean science, 

technology, engineering, and math (0-STEM). 

This pyramid (mission success ~ ocean knowledge ~ blue tech ~ 0-STEM) is the best way to understand how 

marine technologies not only improve efficiencies and performance hut are the very foundation that the USCG 

and MARAD rely on to meet their congressionally mandated missions. Since we live in a time of rapid 

technological advancements, it means this is not only true in the historic and present sense, but it is especially true 

in looking for the solutions of the future. Finally, it is critical to internalize that neither of the first two ideas can 

be actualized without the third- a strong STEM workforce. 

I'm going to start by diving into my first two themes: understanding the ocean underpins the USCG and MARAD 

in achieving their missions by enhancing maritime domain awareness, and blue tech is vital to ocean security and 

enables understanding the ocean. 

Ocean knowledge enables the USCG and MARAD in achieving their missions by enhancing MDA 

As we have seen since the earliest history of our nation, superior knowledge of the oeean and the maritime 

environment has provided our armed forces with operational and tactical advantages that have ensured victory at 

sea and enabled the successful defense of our nation, sometimes against overwhelming odds. The late Admiral 

James D. Watkins, former Chief of Naval Operations, commented on several occasions that "Oceanography won 

the Cold War," in that our undersea ocean knowledge advantage provided us with operational and strategic 

advantages over the Soviet Union that deterred potential aggression. In numerous conflicts and other operations 

at sea, including search and rescue and law enforcement activities, superior ocean knowledge has ensured mission 

success, enhancing our safety, security, and prosperity. 

It is paramount that the USCG maintains its strategic advantage in the maritime domain against threats to our 

security and safety. Threats such as terrorism, transnational crime, narcotrafficking, illegal fishing, etc., and the 

activities by rogue regimes (e.g., Iran, North Korea) threaten our nation and our homeland security in the maritime 

domain on many fronts. Ensuring robust and sustained funding for and prioritization of federal ocean science, 

technology, and education programs enable partnerships between federal ocean science agencies, research entities, 

industry, and federal maritime operating agencies and are key to ensuring the culture of innovation and initiative 
97 


Insert offset folio 61 here 31549.061

that DHS and DOT need to meet their mission objectives today and tomorrow. Partnerships such as those enabled 

through the National Oceanographic Partnership Program (NOPP)-created by the National Oceanographic 

Partnership Act enrolled in the 1997 National Defense Authorization Act--do just that. 

Ocean research and marine technology development provide the critical foundation to ensure continuity of our 

maritime knowledge superiority that generates advantage. Simply put, our ocean and coastal force must be able 

to win every potential armed conflict at sea, no matter how small or large. Thus, we must be able to exploit our 

superior knowledge of the ocean environment to ensure "home field advantage" at both "home .. and "away 

games.,. 

Blue tech is vital to understanding the ocean 

The ocean contains 1.3 billion cubic kilometers of water. The deepest point in the ocean (the Challenger Deep in 

the Mariana Trench) is more than one mile deeper than Mount Everest is high (36,070 feet), and you can't just 

walk down it to explore it. How do we then explore the unreachable areas and understand what we can't see or 

feel (e.g., salinity, ocean processes)? 

The answer lies in ocean science and technology, which have provided our nation with a knowledge advantage 

against myriad maritime threats. The Navy recently noted, through its Task Force Ocean process, that the nation's 

competitive advantage in understanding and exploiting the ocean environment has diminished and can Q!!]y be reestablished through investment in and prioritization of science and technology research across all federal ocean 

agencies. 

The USCG, like the Navy, must maximize technological development to best understand the environment it is 

sending people into or to develop new ways to meet its mission objective without needing to place anyone 

physically into the environment and possibly in harm's way. A good example of this is the continued acceleration 

of autonomous undersea vehicles (AUV) and other ground-breaking undersea technology by the Navy and DOD. 

The impact of the ocean environment on these systems is even more pronounced than it was for the manned and 

tethered systems of the past. 

Case Studies 

IUUFishing 

Let's dig into what these two look like in the real world. Illegal, unregulated, and unreported (IUU) fishing is the 

term used when pirate fishers catch fish in violation of international agreements and treaties. IUU fishing is a 

global scourge with far-reaching consequences-like funding terrorist activities such as the 2004 al-Qaida 

bombings in Spain. There are clear links between IUU fishing and in addition to terrorism, other transnational 

criminal activity, specifically human, drug, and arms trafficking and smuggling. 

The USCG supports enforcement ofiUU fishing as part of its mission protecting our natural resources, endangered 

marine species, and marine sanctuaries-as well as in its mission to ensure our homeland security. The USCG 

detects and interdicts those fishing illegally in our waters (such as fishers from Mexico catching red snapper in 

the Gulf of Mexico), and enforces U.S. fishery and maritime laws. The Coast Guard estimates boats from Playa 

Bagdad (approximately five miles from our southern border) annually steal, at a minimum, $11 million worth of 

fish from U.S. waters. But their ability to stem the problem is limited- detecting them is hard, and catching them 

even harder, especially when ocean conditions are rough. What role can technology play, not only in spotting and 

catching illegal activity, but in anticipating it? 

We should be gathering data from the sea every possible place - from the air, space, and water (hoats, buoys, 

unmanned autonomous vehicles, gliders, and any other ocean sensor). Imagine what we could learn with an 

increase in ocean data. But don't stop there -now imagine if each ocean sensor, no matter its purpose, incorporated 

monitoring and surveillance technologies, allowing it to serve a secondary enforcement mission. This increased 

data collection would enhance MDA, informing scientists and law enforcement agents where the fish are so they 

can head off illegal fishing activity before it even begins- improving management, monitoring, and enforcement. 

2 
98 


Insert offset folio 62 here 31549.062

This will give them the needed head start to stop illicit activity before it even starts and will allow them to collect 

evidence necessary to prosecute the offenders. Blue tech- helping us understand the ocean, facilitating the USCG 

in its mission. 

Arctic 

For our second example, let's look north. We know the Arctic is dramatically changing, creating drastic increases 

in maritime access and activity. As it continues to do so, the U.S. (as an Arctic nation) has many economic 

opportunities but also faces significant challenges to the security, safety, and sustainability ofthis unique maritime 

domain, including our territory and our exclusive economic zone. Our capability and capacity to monitor and 

respond to threats and hazardous incidents in this dynamic and dangerous region is limited, difficult, and 

expensive, especially when considering ships and other manned craft and their associated support infrastructure. 

The implementation of unmanned and autonomous technology provides great promise for effectively monitoring 

and responding to threats and hazards while minimizing cost and risks to the safety of men and women at sea in 

the Arctic. 

In summer 20 17, the first ship to traverse the Arctic Northern Sea Route without assistance from ice-breaking 

vessels completed its journey. This transformational moment drives home both the opportunity and the imperative 

for the U.S. to ready itself for the new Arctic. The region is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the Earth with 

far-reaching consequences both for these polar residents and for those in the lower 48 states. On a global level, 

Arctic change will fundamentally alter climate, weather, and ecosystems in ways we do not yet understand, but 

we know there will be profound impacts on the world's economy and security. Rapid loss of sea ice and other 

changes will also bring new access to the area's natural resources, such as fossil fuels, minerals, and new fisheries, 

and this new access is already attracting international attention from industry and nations seeking new resources. 

Current Arctic observations are sparse and inadequate for enabling discovery or simulation of the processes 

underlying Arctic system change or to assess their environmental and economic impacts on the broader Earth 

system. One of the National Science Foundation (NSF)'s Big Ideas is the initiative Navigating the New Arctic 

(NAA), which would establish an observing network of mobile and fixed platforms and tools across this polar 

region to document these rapid biological, physical, chemical and social changes, leveraging participation by other 

federal agencies. 

In 2013, the USCG released its Arctic Strategy to guide efforts in the area over the next decade. One of the 

strategy's key objectives is improving awareness, as "Coast Guard operations require precise and ongoing 

awareness of activities in the maritime domain. Maritime awareness in the Arctic is currently restricted due to 

limited surveillance, monitoring, and information system capabilities." 

How do we improve those surveillance, monitoring, and information system capabilities? This is where 

autonomous vehicles come in. Whether we are discussing autonomous undersea vehicles (AUV) or autonomous 

surface vehicles (ASV), these robotic vehicles are programmable and can drive, drift, or glide (depending on their 

design) without humans crewing on board or even remote operators having to control them in real time. This 

technology can even go a step further when we incorporate artificial intelligence (AI). Imagine an AUV or ASV 

that can make decisions- changing its activities or course based on the environmental conditions it is encountering 

or data it has collected. It can make intelligent decisions, such as when, where, or how to sample and could even 

partake in cooperative activities and the transference of capabilities between vehicles. 

Whether it's with AI or without, maritime autonomous vehicles let us explore regions of the Arctic that humans 

can't get to alone. For example, you may remember the AUV nicknamed "Boaty McBoatface." That AUV recently 

spent 51 hours under ice at the opposite pole, traveling 67 miles over the duration, reaching depths of more than 

half a mile below the sea surface. It even spent 20 hours beneath a section of ice shelf 550 meters (1804 feet) 

thick. AUVs and ASVs in their current state allow for new and increased data collection in regions previously 

inaccessible. Just imagine how much more they can do in the future as AI technologies are incorporated. 

Technology helps us learn about the Arctic, which in turn helps the USCG achieve its mission of safety, security, 

and stewardship in the region. 

3 
99 


Insert offset folio 63 here 31549.063

Natural Hazard Forecasting 

For our last example, let's consider hazardous weather events such as hurricanes and other storms that increasingly 

threaten our homeland security, specifically the forecasting of their movement, intensity, and impact. Storm surge 

is often the greatest threat to life and property from coastal storms and hurricanes. Researchers are quantifYing 

how future tropical storm surges may impact U.S. coastal properties, using past patterns of coastal sea-level 

change. From 1990 to 2008, population density increased by 32 percent in Gulf Coast coastal counties, 17 percent 

in Atlantic coastal counties, and 16 percent in Hawaii, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2011, 45 percent 

of our nation's gross domestic product (GOP) was generated in the coastal shoreline counties along the ocean and 

Great Lakes. In 2016, the USCG saved 5,450 lives and responded to 16,298 events. Last year during Hurricane 

Harvey, they saved 4,322 lives in the Houston area alone. A storm surge of23 feet has the ability to inundate 67 

percent of interstate highways, 57 percent of arterial roads, almost half of all rail miles, 29 airports, and virtually 

all ports in the Gulf Coast area. U.S. ports are the heart of the nation's economy, delivering imports and transferring 

exports. When ports are closed due to storms and damage, the nation can lose $600 million to over $1 billion in a 

single day. Data and information on coastal property risk, emergency preparation, and storm forecasting are vital 

to owners, insurers, and the government. 

How can blue tech matter in the face of natural disasters? The U.S. Navy is partnering with academia and the 

petroleum industry to launch ocean gliders in the Gulf of Mexico that autonomously and continually monitor 

seawater conditions (including heat content), aiding in improved hurricane intensity forecasting. These data and 

information enable more timely and informed preparation and emergency response by offshore industry as well 

as coastal communities and facilities. This type of blue tech partnership can be expanded to many other maritime 

safety and security applications through more robust implementation ofNOPP by the federal ocean agencies. 

Blue tech innovation and operation rely on an advanced workforce educated and trained in ocean STEM 

(0-STEM) 

It is clear: without a substantial STEM education base, the USCG (not to mention the Navy, the rest of the 

government, industry, or anyone else) will be unable to depend on advancing technology developments to help 

meet their missions. Blue tech depends on 0-STEM education; therefore, entities (this committee included) 

unused to supporting federal investments in STEM education must consider their futures as intrinsically linked to 

the success of STEM education programs. It's really rather simple: greater technology requires greater technicians, 

and that requires enhanced STEM education. 

A secure, healthy, and prosperous maritime nation belongs to a society willing to evolve its workforce to meet the 

needs of a changing world. A diverse, well-educated, ocean-literate workforce provides the necessary base from 

which innovation grows. In 2016 it was estimated that STEM-based jobs account for up to 26 million U.S.jobs. 

From 2012 to 2022, there is a projected 12.5 percent growth of STEM jobs in the U.S. and a 14 percent projected 

increase in U.S. geoscience jobs in that same period. Coupled with the greying of America's geoscience workforce 

(47 percent of American geoscientists in the private sector and 43 percent in the federal government were over 

the age of 55 in 2016), it is clear we will experience major changes with our innovation workforce. Not only does 

the nation depend on the available pool of scientists, but it also needs those who will train the following generation 

and those whose work supports novel and emerging science solutions. A dynamic workforce moves our nation 

forward. From business professionals who can commercialize scientific advances to technicians who maintain 

observing infrastructure and employees trained in scientific principles, our future depends upon how we will meet 

these demographic and educational challenges. 

Other nations are advancing rapidly with the hopes to overtake the U.S. as a scientific and technological 

superpower. Countries such as China, Singapore, and the United Kingdom are already identifYing gaps and are 

making substantial federal investments in basic research, tech development, education programs, and workforce 

training. In January, NSF reported that for the first time China produced more scientific publications than the U.S. 

A metric for discovery and advancement, this is a concerning data point showing the U.S. is falling behind. 

Another can he found in venture capital investment-confidence in China's science and technology innovation 

was evident with $10.7 billion invested in the second quarter of2017. While the value is lower than investments 

4 
100 


Insert offset folio 64 here 31549.064

in U.S. tech ($18.7 billion during the same time), it shows a dramatic increase from 2013 when less than $5 billion 

was invested for the entire year. 

Like all technology, blue tech involves an interconnected web of disciplines and expertise, including software and 

hardware development; industrial manufacturing; computer programing and data management; and equipment 

calibration, maintenance, operation, and repairs. While innovation and design is an important part of technology 

there is an even larger demand for producing, operating, maintaining, and repairing the technology after it has 

been developed and commercialized. Skilled and knowledgeable technicians could be the limiting factor for blue 

tech growth, and capitalizing on two-year degree programs for blue collar 0-STEM can help. Of the 26 million 

U.S. STEM jobs in 2016, 20-50 percent were seeking applicants with a two-year STEM degree (blue collar). 

Growing recognition for this demand is critical for decreasing the skill gap and building the 0-STEM workforce. 

It is paramount that investments are made to establish this workforce and critical that industry skill needs are at 

the forefront when developing educational, apprenticeship, training, internship, and partnership programs to 

ensure the technologically advanced workforce being produced can be successfully deployed into the waitingjobs. 

A dynamic workforce of the future with abundant technicians knowledgeable in ocean science and trained in blue 

tech platforms is essential for maintaining current and allowing for future blue tech growth. 

Formal and informal education programs train the technologically advanced future workforce and create an oceanliterate society. Currently the U.S. has over 400 college programs educating the next generation of ocean STEM 

workers. While the vast majority of these programs are four-year degrees, there is a distinct opportunity to expand 

two-year programs for the training of blue tech technicians. However, formal education is the not the only factor. 

Getting students and the community involved and interested in blue tech and ocean science is critical. Since most 

high school curricula don't include oceanography, informal educational programs, like the National Ocean 

Sciences Bowl (a program managed by COL) are increasingly important as a way to introduce students to, and 

get them excited, about a career in ocean science. The NOSB promotes collaboration, teamwork, ingenuity, critical 

thinking, and professional development, which are valuable skills for the 0-STEM workforce. With some 

suggesting teenagers choose a major before even graduating high school, it's critical to engage these students and 

open their eyes to opportunities in this arena before it's too late. Additionally, immersive training, such as the Sea 

Grant College Program and NSF's !-Corps program, provide experiences and interactions with the professional 

world that cannot be obtained in the classroom. These programs and many other private internships, 

apprenticeships, and mentoring bridge academia, industry, government, and NGOs. 

Increased 0-STEM education and training will help ensure future USCG sailors have the requisite skills to 

embrace new and emerging blue tech to advance mission capabilities on par with (or ahead of) competing entities 

and threats. The 2012 transition of NOAA Corps officer training to the USCG Academy is an excellent example 

of how cross-agency and cross-community 0-STEM education and training can be implemented to mutual benefit 

related to maritime safety, security, and economic growth. The Navy has extensive 0-STEM education and 

training programs for officers, enlisted sailors, and government civilians that might also benefit the multi-service 

and multi-agency federal maritime work force. 

Meeting the challenge of developing this foundation requires a substantial and focused effort on the education and 

training of the next generation of scientists to ensure we have the intellectual resources to take full advantage of 

new knowledge that will come from this investment in ocean sciences and technology, but it also needs those who 

will train the following generation and those whose work supports novel and emerging technology solutions. A 

dynamic workforce moves our nation forward. From business professionals who can commercialize scientific 

advances to technicians who maintain observing infrastructure and employees trained in scientific principles, our 

future depends upon how we will meet these demographic and educational challenges. 

Conclusion 

To successfully navigate a changing physical, chemical, and biological ocean while maintaining secure 

geopolitical boundaries and ensuring the safety and prosperity of those within them, the USCG and MARAD 

must regain their competitive advantage in knowing the ocean and coastal baseline conditions, changing 

conditions, forecasted conditions, vulnerabilities of maritime and coastal infrastructure, and the threatened 

5 
101 


Insert offset folio 65 here 31549.065

human population. The changing climate and ocean systems are altering when and where our maritime forces 

(uniformed and civilian) may be called to duty but also how they can respond. Rising sea levels increase coastal 

and near shore hazards; extreme weather could impact deployment, intelligence, surveillance, and safety 

capabilities; and the opening of previously inaccessible lands and waters will require additional response and 

rescue capacity. It is through the robust federal support of blue tech, STEM education, and collaborative 

partnerships across the federal family and with ocean science and technology institutions that the USCG and 

MARAD ensure that this will happen - ultimately enabling them to successfully fulfill their missions more 

effectively and efficiently. 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Garamendi, and members of the subcommittee, the ocean science and 

technology community appreciates the interest the subcommittee has in blue tech and I want to reiterate my 

themes: 

I. Ocean knowledge enables the USCG and MARAD in achieving their missions by enhancing maritime domain 

awareness (MDA). 

2. Blue tech is vital to understanding the ocean. 

3. Blue tech innovation and operation rely upon an advanced workforce educated and trained in ocean science, 

technology, engineering, and math (0-STEM). 

We urge the subcommittee to translate their interest in blue tech as a tool for USCG and MARAD to improve 

mission performance into prioritizing federal ocean science, technology, and education investment and programs. 

Working across committees and jurisdictions to do this is the way we ensure the U.S. maintains its superiority, 

security, success, and safety at sea. The ocean science, technology, and education community is well positioned 

to assist the subcommittee in addressing the role blue tech, ocean knowledge, and 0-STEM can be more fully 

actualized for our nation's current and future maritime needs. We greatly appreciate your consideration and look 

forward to working with you to support the ocean science and technology innovation and education that enables 

our maritime superiority, coastal safety, economic prosperity, and ocean security. 

6 
102 


Insert offset folio 66 here 31549.066

RADM Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, 

Consortium for Ocean Leadership 

Responses to questions for the record issued by Hen. John Garamendi of California 

1. In your view, should Congress increase the Coast Guard's Research and Development budget, and if 

you agree, what would be a reasonable funding leveL 

While the Coast Guard budget it out of my purview, I always support increased investments in Research 

and Development budgets. I believe specific, additional funding for USCG-related science and 

technology R&D by the Office ofNaval Research should be explored and strongly considered. 

2. Do you agree that the economic impact of the Ocean Economy is likely to continue to grow, and that 

Blue Technologies offer new opportunities for growth and expansion within the larger U.S. ocean 

economy? 

Yes. Between 2014 and 2015, the ocean economy's contribution to gross domestic product grew by 5.7 

percent, which is twice as fast as the U.S. economy as a whole. Projections show the ocean economy 

doubling its contribution to global value from $1.5 trillion in 2010 to $3 trillion in 2030, and blue 

technologies are foundational to this continued strength and growth. Leveraging advancements in blue 

technologies to improve ocean monitoring is helping grow the ocean economy and support ocean 

industries. 

3. Would a national strategy be helpful in promoting and advancing blue technology innovation, or is 

it best left to market forces to shape this outcome? 

A national ocean strategy that addresses multiple agencies' concerns regarding ocean research and 

development, including blue technology innovation, would be helpful in promoting and advancing blue 

technology innovation. Using an existing vehicle, such as a reauthorization of the National 

Oceanographic Partnership Program (NOPP) Act (PL I 04-20 I, 10 USC 790 1-7903), would be an 

opportunity to require the development of such a strategy. 

4. Are foreign competitors better positioned than U.S. firms to take advantage of the future global Blue 

Technology market? If so, what actions could be taken to improve the competitiveness of U.S. firms? 

Yes. Other nations are advancing rapidly, including China. In the second quarter of2017, China invested 

$10.7 billion in technology (a 214 percent increase from 2013). The U.S. is at a disadvantage because we 

do not have any established blue technology venture capital (VC) firms or specific VC funds. 

Additionally, there are no robust efforts to track U.S. investment in blue technology, in part because 

tracking private investments in startup companies and technology is virtually impossible unless the 

transactions are made public or through specific industry-titled VC funds. 

Experts in marine technology recognize the need to establish a designated fund to drive and monitor 

investments and are working towards this goal. In 2017, an important first step was taken by forming the 

global BlueTech Cluster Alliance coalition. By bringing blue technology companies together, investors 

can easily and efficiently see the breadth of technology available and how it works together. This 

partnership also allows for the ability to leverage expertise and share financial investments, including 

international money to foster growth in the maritime domain. 

Congress can elevate the visibility of and investment in marine technologies through various legislative 

tools, including appropriations, authorizations, hearings, and briefmgs. This would be another opportunity 

where reauthorization of the NOPP Act would allow Congress to specifically task the NOPP agencies to 

analyze and track U.S. VC investments in blue technology. 
103 


Insert offset folio 67 here 31549.067

RADM Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, 

Consortium for Ocean leadership 

Responses to questions for the record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

5. Are the Coast Guard's present a"angements or methods to interact with Blue Technology industries 

andfmns sujflcient to keep the Coast Guard abreast of the latest developments and innovations? 

As indicated during the hearing, no, there appear to be shortcomings. Reauthorization of the NOPP Act 

could address broader concerns among both agencies and industry and provides the opportunity for 

additional interactions with industry. 

6. How could the Coast Guard improve its interactions with the Blue Technology industry? Should the 

Coast Guard establish a new "Blue Technology Center of Excellence" as it has done for other issues? 

Collaboration and partnerships are key. The development of blue technology and a Center of Excellence 

should be done through partnerships with DOD, NOAA, and industry; these interactions can be improved 

by passing legislation encouraging or requiring these partnerships. An example of this is the Commercial 

Engagement Through Ocean Technology Act of 2018 (H.R. 5196/S. 2511 ), which directs NOAA to 

coordinate with the Navy, other federal agencies, industry, and the academic sector when developing 

unmanned maritime technology. Through this partnership, agencies can leverage expertise and resources 

(e.g., test and training ranges, laboratories) to develop technology that meets multiple needs and has a 

range of applications. 

7. Assuming that you agree that the Coast Guard would benefit immediately and directly by investing 

more funding in Blue Tech research and development and in acquiring Blue Technology systems to 

supplement or enhance Coast Guard operations, what systems should be priorities for the Coast Guard 

to make R&D investments? 

Autonomous systems, such as autonomous undersea vehicles (AUVs) and autonomous surface vehicles 

(ASV s), are one clear choice for R&D investments. These systems, and others like them that monitor the 

ocean and its features, could even serve a dual purpose by incorporating monitoring and surveillance 

technologies, augmenting the Coast Guard's surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. This would 

have countless benefits, including helping the Coast Guard more efficiently identifY, intercept, and even 

collect evidence to build cases against illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities. 

In addition to gathering data from ocean-based technologies, the Coast Guard should also explore 

investing in R&D for technologies that will improve ocean monitoring from space. CubeSats, for 

instance, are miniaturized, low-cost satellites often used for research and monitoring of Earth systems. 

The use ofCubeSats to monitor in-situ ocean systems could further supplement the Coast Guard's ability 

to gather ocean observations, especially in the Arctic, where remote observations are important due to the 

region's inaccessibility. 

8. Considering that most, if not virtually all, Blue Technology systems in some wtzy rely on satellite 

telemetry and Global Positioning System signals, how much of a risk are cyber threats to Blue 

Technology systems? Are cyber threats slowing down market growth for Blue Technologies? Can we 

design and build these systems to be robust and resilient enoagh to fend off cyber-attacks? 

There are cyber threats to all GPS technology, including blue technology. In my former role as Navigator 

of the Navy, I worked closely on information warfare missions of the Navy, which were classified. Cyber 

warfare is being explored and addressed by DOD, in conjunction with DHS and other agencies, to 
104 


Insert offset folio 68 here 31549.068

RADM Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, 

Consortium for Ocean Leadership 

Responses to questions for the record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

minimize the threat and ensure we have the necessary resilience to fend off cyber attacks. Innovations 

from these initiatives will benefit blue technology, but the work is already being done. 

9. Do you agree that a land-based back up signal for GPS, such as e-LORAN, is a necessary 

investment to ensure continuity and reliability across all forms of Blue Technologies? 

Yes. Alternatives to GPS, including land-based systems, are important and are being considered by DOD, 

DHS, and other classified entities. This should be closely monitored by Congress. 

10. In the Arctic, what are the most pressing challenges that Blue Technologies could be applied to 

solve? Would it be helpful for Congress to authorize an Arctic Blue Technology Demonstration 

Program? 

Maritime domain awareness in the Arctic is the most pressing challenge blue technology can address, 

particularly as the Arctic landscape changes. Improving surveillance, monitoring, and information system 

capabilities through blue technologies - such as autonomous surface or underwater vehicles -will 

enhance the Coast Guard's ability to fulfill its mission of safety, security, and stewardship in the region. 

Better Arctic observations, as provided by blue technologies, will enable the U.S. to monitor and respond 

to threats and hazards to the area in a timely, safe, and cost-effective manner. 

Authorizing an Arctic Blue Technology Demonstration Program would certainly support the work being 

done on blue technologies. Additionally, the Coast Guard should strengthen its existing collaborations 

with the Navy through the Ice Exercise (ICEX) program and other similar joint efforts to fucilitate the 

sharing of information, strategies, and best practices related to blue technologies. 

11. Integruted ocean observations appear to be critical in our understanding of the ocean environment 

and our interaction within that environment What would it take to fund and build out the entire 

architecture for the Integrated Ocean Observation System? 

Yes, integrated ocean observations are critical to our understanding of the ocean environment, and 1008 

is a critical piece of that. To better answer this question, it should first be posed to federal agencies so 

they can provide a full answer of their prioritized needs from IOOS. This is a perfect example of why we 

have NOPP designated as a leadership authority and why reauthorizing the NOP PAct would improve our 

understanding of our ocean environment. 

12. Are there certain Blue Technologies that should be integrutedfully into the infrastructure of the 

maritime transportation system to ensure safe maritime transportation and an effiCient and reliable 

marine supply chain for the U.S. economy? 

The fmer details of this question are beyond my purview and expertise, but in general, the adoption of 

more autonomous, in-situ, and spaced-based blue technologies to monitor the ocean will reduce 

uncertainties in ocean observations and by extension strengthen maritime transportation infrastructure. 

These will be especially important for transportation in the Arctic, where the area's remote and dynamic 

nature poses challenges to marine transportation. 
105 


Insert offset folio 69 here 31549.069

RADM Jonathan White, U.S. Navy (Ret.), President and Chief Executive Officer, 

Consortium for Ocean Leadership 

Responses to questions for the record issued by Hon. John Garamendi of California 

13. Does Blue Technology provide real potentia/for new job creation and diversification in the U.S. 

maritime workforce? Can Blue Technology attract more young people to look at career opportunities 

in maritime-related work, including traditional careers at sea or in ports and shipyards? 

With the anticipated grown of the blue economy, I expect there will be new jobs and that blue technology, 

as a career option, will attract more people. As we look at the changing ocean and the rapid variations in 

maritime activities associated with information technology and automation, the requisite skills must be 

closely examined and applied to education and training efforts within the U.S. federal agencies (including 

the Department of Education) and should identifY and highlight these efforts, in concert with previous and 

ongoing efforts by the National Academy of Sciences and under the guidance of a program such as 

NOPP. 

Additionally, to ensure students are introduced to blue technologies in time to put them on the appropriate 

career path, I encourage you to support programs such as the National Ocean Sciences Bowl (NOS B). 

Since most high schools don't have oceanography in their curricula, the majority of high schoolers can 

only learn about ocean science and technology-related careers through informal education programs, such 

as the NOSB, which has had a demonstrated impact on career choices. 
106 


Insert offset folio 70 here 31549.070

All H!ltlGS UNMANNED 

Letter for the Record 

Brian Wynne, President and CEO 

Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International 

House Coast Guard & Maritime Transportation Subcommittee 

Blue Technologies: Use of New Maritime Technologies to Improve Efficiency and Mission Performance 

Dear Chairman Duncan and Ranking Member Garamendi: 

The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) is pleased to provide input to you regarding 

the hearing the subcommittee held on May 8, 2018 concerning Blue Technologies. AUVSI is the world's largest 

non-profit organization devoted exclusively to advancing the unmanned systems and robotics community. AUVSI 

has been the voice of unmanned systems for nearly 50 years. We represent corporations and professionals from 

more than 60 countries involved in business, government and education. AUVSI members work in the defense, 

civil and commercial markets. AUVSI and its member companies strongly support the United States Coast Guard's 

(USCG) mission and the development of new maritime technologies that will improve efficiency and mission 

performance to enhance the security of our nation. 

Both the defense and commercial unmanned maritime systems (UMS) markets have experienced substantial 

growth in the last decade. Maritime stakeholders from large shipping companies to significant ports are investing 

in a future where unmanned technology improves operations. Platforms such as Unmanned Underwater Vehicles 

(UUVs), Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs), Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs), and Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(UAS) are frequently employed to promote safety and assist the warfighter. The implementation of unmanned 

technologies is critical to the United States' ability to remain the predominant global military force, as well as 

securing our shores. 

AUVSI maintains a significant presence in the maritime domain. Our organization annually hosts the Unmanned 

Systems Defense. Protection. Security. (USDPS) This conference brings together government decisionmakers for 

networking and presentations. At this year's USDPS there were UMS-focused presentations by Assistant Secretary 

of Defense for Research and Engineering, Mary Miller; Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and 

Atmosphere for NOAA, Rear Adm. Tim Gallaudet; Acting Deputy Director, Tactical Technology, DARPA, JeanCharles lede. 

Additionally, AUVSI organized a member-driven UMS working group primarily focused on the International 

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs). The group's recommendations concerning UMS best 

practices were submitted to the USCG in 2016. 

More recently, AUVSI hosted several meetings with the office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for 

Unmanned Systems. They provided a forum for the Navy and industry representatives to discuss operational 

needs, acquisition processes and the future of UMS. This group is now a standing UMS Advocacy Committee with 

members from every sector of the UMS industry. The UMS Advocacy Committee aims to maintain response to 

military and commercial maritime needs, facilitate maritime growth, and provide a unified industry voice. The 

committee and its members are well positioned to assist the USCG in its efforts to increase the integration of blue 

technologies into broad mission sets. 

2700 S. Quincy Street Suite 400 i Arlington. Virginia 22206 I USA I p: +1 703 845 9671 I t: +1 703 845 9679 1 www.auvsi.org 
107 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 71 here 31549.071

AUVSI, page 2 

The USCG's three pillars of maritime safety, security and stewardship are best supported through collaboration 

and partnership with UMS industry stakeholders. AUVSI consistently aims to bridge the reoccurring gap between 

solution providers and solution enablers. AUVSI members can be innovative and significant resources for the USCG 

Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) program by providing forums to streamline communication 

and discuss operational needs. 

AUVSI also works with its foundation RoboNation, whose mission is to provide a pathway of hands-on educational 

experiences that empower students to find innovative robotics solutions to global challenges. RoboNation focuses 

on STEM and Kindergarten to workforce programs that help students experience robotics at a young age. They 

host several annual events and competitions, including the International SeaPerch Challenge, International 

Ground Vehicle Competition (IGVC), Student Unmanned Aerial Systems (SUAS), International Aerial Robotics 

Competition (IARC), RoboBoat, RoboSub and Maritime RobotX, which has over 3,000 participants. RoboNation 

also has programs that assist underprivileged students with robotics through Kits for Kids and has granted STEM 

kits through funding from the Office of Naval Research. 

On behalf of AUVSI members, particularly those involved in the UMS industry, we again express our appreciation 

for the opportunity to provide these comments. AUVSI has maintained an excellent working relationship with the 

USCG and the Navigation Safety Advisory Council (NAVSAC), and looks forward to continuing to support the USCG 

in its approach to blue technologies. Please contact me whenever AUVSI can be of assistance. 

Sincerely, 

IZ .. __ f.J ltJ- Brian P. Wynne 

President and CEO