NOAA

 U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | Regional Collaboration Team

NOAA’S

ALASKAREGIONALCOLLABORATIONTEAM

Integrated Services PlanARCTic
Table of ContentsExecutive Summary .................................................................................................1Introduction & Background ..................................................................................2Current NOAA Services in Alaska ........................................................................9National Weather Service ......................................................................................9NOAA Fisheries Service ..........................................................................................9NOAA’s Offi ce of Marine and Aviation Operations .................................... 11National Ocean Service ....................................................................................... 11NOAA’s Offi ce of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research ............................. 14National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service ....... 17ARCTic Achievements .......................................................................................... 20What to Expect in Alaska in 2020 .................................................................... 26Scenarios for Long-Term NOAA Planning and Investment .................... 32

Extending to the Arctic, Alaska’s culturally diverse people, infrastructure, economy, and ecosystems are already experiencing the eff ects of climate change. Obtaining a better understanding of these early impacts will provide an integration of science and decision-making for adaptation on a global scale.

NOAA

Executive SummaryNOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team (ARCTstrategic product and service enhancements. In cservices within the Alaska Region and built mechaIntegrated Services Plan (ISP) documents this eff oplan for in the Alaska Region. The plan covers bacoccurring in the state of Alaska, twenty two scenatopics NOAA should address.The ARCTic was established in the fall of 2006. It ctional Marine Fisheries Service, National Ocean SeService, and Offi ce of Oceanic & Atmospheric Rese

the ARCTic developed a prospectus for bringing tassess the agency’s activities, and identify the joinboth an Integrated Services Assessment (ISA) and beginning of a living and evolving process.Eight ARCTic regional working groups were estabworking groups met during the fall of 2007 and dbers either expected to happen in Alaska (e.g., momake happen (e.g., reduction in aviation fatalities)the vision papers. They form the bulk of the doculong term plans. The 22 planning scenarios described in this plan aClimate

– Alaska Climate Services Partnership– Climate Change Impacts – Observing and M– Coastal Erosion Collaboration

Weather & Water

– Aviation Weather– Aviation Services – Unmanned Aircraft Syst

Integrated Water Resources – Precipitation Freque

– Integrated Water Resources – Climate Chan– Sea Ice Decision Aids, Ecosystem Impacts, A

Commerce & Transportation

– Marine Navigation & Safety– Mapping and Reference Framework for Alas– Bering and Chukchi Sea Oil and Gas Develo– Alternative Energy Support

Ecosystems

– Arctic Fisheries– Ocean Acidifi cation– Integrated Ecosystem Assessments for Coas– Improving Coastal Observations in Alaska– Ecological Forecasting for Coastal Change

Mission Support

– International Law of the Sea Treaty– NOAA Ocean Environmental Literacy/Plane

All of these scenarios call on NOAA to do three thifoundational infrastructure such as geodetic contcollaboration with a particular emphasis on enhan
Within the agency, the ISP will 

provide input to NOAA Strategic Planning; the agency’s annual Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBES) process; and as the driver for the ARCTic’s annual work plans. Externally, we plan to use it as a basis for dialog on how to address regional issues in collaboration with partners. We hope this document will foster a rich discussion that will ultimately lead to greater internal and external collaboration, better NOAA services in the Alaska Region, and ultimately the achievement of common goals.Introduction & Background The Arctic is a vast, largely unknown region on the planet. As America’s Arctic state, Alaska has a valuable contribution to better 

understanding climate change in the Arctic and across the globe. Global climate models have projected that the Arctic is an area where changes to the climate may be the largest in the world. The models predict a greater warming for the Arctic than the rest of the world and Alaska arctic and subarctic regions are already experiencing environmentally and economically-signifi cant climate change. Observed data indicate that over the last 50 years, mean annual surface temperatures have increased 3-5  ̊F with some of the largest increases occurring along Alaska’s North Slope. The extent of the sea ice reached an all time low in September 2007, shattering the previous record in 2005 by 23 percent. It was also 39 percent below the long-term average from 1979 to 2000. Additionally, winter freeze up and spring melt is now arriving more than three weeks later and earlier, respectively. Some waters around Alaska are showing an increase in sea level. On land, an increased seasonal thaw depth of the active layer is causing accelerated permafrost thaw. There is increasing evidence of changes in 

2 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

Alaska’s rich marine ecosystem has some of the most productive and sustainable fi sheries in the world

represents 54 percent U.S. coapercent U.S. continental shelfpercent of the land area is fedlocal or native corporation lanpercent of all U.S. parklands aof all wildlife refuges are in AlAlaska holds many records anlandmarks such as North Ameearthquake and tsunami (the tude Good Friday Earthquake resulting 115 foot tsunami anfoot tsunami in Lituya Bay in 1Nation’s greatest concentratioNorth America’s tallest mountMcKinley at 20,320 feet), the Nfarthest-north city (Barrow), a40 active volcanoes.Social and Economic ConAlaska’s strategic air and watechallenges and opportunities homeland security and economent. The Ted Stevens Anchotional Airport is ranked fi rst in landed weight of cargo aircrain the world for cargo throughover half of Alaska’s populatiothe three largest cities, many in communities not connecteThese communities rely on avyear-around access. Alaska’s recosystem has some of the mtive and sustainable fi sheries (~$4 billion in 2006, about hacatches). The Bering Strait is a chokepoint that links both the and Northeast arctic passages Asian, Russian, and European The Aleutian Islands serve as a ridor for the Great Circle Routmerce from the U.S. west coasAsia. No other marine system has such extreme weather an(environmental hazards), vast distances (larger than the commarine system), and an exten(~44,000 miles). Alaska has extensive oil and gessential to the Nation’s econonational security. The Alaska loses approximately $1 millioduring a shutdown. Prudhoe on Alaska’s Beaufort Sea coast

storm frequency and intensity, as well as shifts in storm tracks. These observations are consistent with what is expected from warming arctic con- ditions and indicate how climate change may aff ect weather patterns and human activities. For example, there is a greater incidence of aviation icing conditions especially along the coasts of the Bering and Chukchi Seas. There are more frequent high amplitude weather episodes such as coastal sea ice breakouts and interior thaws; heavy precipitation causing local fl ooding; low water events aff ecting river transporta- tion and subsistence; episodic high wind events; and more variable weather aff ecting forests and resulting in a record 2004 wildfi re season where 6.5 million acres burned. In addition, lakes are shrinking and in cases catastrophically draining and winter/spring temperatures are increasing. In the face of such a broad range and magnitude of changes, an assessment of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) current products and services is critical to understanding and anticipating evolving stakeholder require- ments and ensuring NOAA is prepared to meet current and future needs. This document incorporates NOAA’s ARCTic initial Integrated Services Assessment (ISA) into an Integrated Services Plan (ISP) which presents a vision for future agency services. NOAA’s Alaska Region Extending into the Arctic, Alaska’s culturally diverse people, infrastructure, economy, and ecosystems are already experiencing the eff ects of climate change. Obtain- ing a better understanding of these early impacts will provide an integration of science and decision-making for use not only in Alaska but also in adaptation strate- gies employed in the U.S. and around the world. The geography and environment in Alaska, also known as “The Great Land” or “The Last Frontier,” is surrounded by the Pacifi c Ocean, Bering Sea, Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea, and the Arctic Ocean. While Alaska is geographically isolated from the contiguous 48-states, it is internationally 

connected and the only U.S. state to border two nations. The geographic scale of the state becomes evident when one considers Alaska is over twice the size of Texas and 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team
agement (fi sh and mammal). Assessing, 

monitoring, and predicting the responses of coastal and marine ecosystems in Alaska to the loss of sea ice and ocean acidifi cation are primary initiatives related to this eff ort. In addition, further tsunami monitoring, research, and inundation modeling continues to be a priority. NOAA’s Regional Collaboration Initiative: http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/regional_collaboration.htm)Components of NOAA have been serving Americans for over 200 years. Nautical charts have been produced since 1807, weather forecasts since 1870, and fi sheries stewardship began in 1871. In 1970, these organizations were brought together under one agency to observe, predict and protect our environment.In the Executive Order establishing NOAA, President Nixon, declared:

“The oceans and the atmosphere are interacting parts of the total environmental system upon which we depend not only for the quality of our lives, but for life itself. We face immediate and compelling needs for better protection of life and property from natural hazards, and for a better understanding of the total environment – an under- standing which will enable us more eff ectively to monitor and predict its actions, and ultimately, perhaps to exercise some degree of control over them.” These words ring as true today as they did almost 40 years ago and underscore the interrelationship between the issues NOAA addresses and thus the need for the com- ponents of the agency to combine forces to achieve together what none of them could accomplish alone. Understanding and dealing with climate change is a case in point. To protect the fi sheries that provide our nourishment, livelihoods, and recre- ation, it will take an understanding of the connections between weather, oceanogra- phy, biology, and other disciplines. Will the habitat our marine resources need to sur- vive and prosper change due to increasing melt water from glaciers, sea level changes, water temperatures, ocean and bay chem- istry and current patterns, etc.? It will take the combined strength of all NOAA entities and external partners to address these and other questions to develop more accurate predictions and forecasts, mitigate climate impacts and assist society in planning for 

the future.

4

For all the contributions NOAA has made to the Nation and the world, much more can and will be done to enhance the knowledge and understanding of the earth’s climate system through improved integration of its assets and expertise toward current and future environmental and economic challenges. NOAA’s Regional Collaboration Initiative is designed to identify shared internal and external regional interests and goals as the focal point to address regionally-distinct priorities bringing to bear the full breadth of NOAA’s capabilities. The roots of this initiative date back to 2002 and 2003, when the NOAA Administrator established fi ve regional pilot programs to improve coordination within the agency and raise NOAA’s visibility to its constituents. Four years later in 2006, NOAA Leadership assessed the pilot programs and provided guidance to establish the Regional Collaboration Initiative. Believing that it is at the regional scale that NOAA can blend the place-based needs of customers and partners with its priorities and responsibilities as a federal agency, eight geographic areas were identifi ed for this eff ort and teams of key individuals from each of NOAA’s line offi ces were established. 

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

Priority Area Task Teams (PATT)As part of this eff ort, NOAA also identifi ed four national strategic priorities to advance through regional collaboration: Hazard Resilient Communities, Integrated Ecosystem Assessments, Integrated Water Resources Services, and Outreach and Communications. For the Alaska Regional Team, that means putting NOAA expertise and resources toward erosion and fl ooding; conducting a wide-scale assessment of Alaska marine ecosystems; investigating the impacts of glacier, permafrost melt, and droughts on our air and river transportation systems and fi re seasons, and improving outreach and education eff orts across Alaska, such as greater use of the university’s Sea Grant Program and curriculum development with the university and school districts.

NOAA is already actively engahigh priority partnership activregions and Alaska is no excepregional collaboration eff ort, tstrengthen NOAA’s ability to sexisting activities and, in addinew ways to add value in the Nationally, all teams were givearching task to establish closewith external stakeholders anand improve the eff ectivenessutility of NOAA’s information, services. In Alaska, the team tthe agency’s history of collabothe state to heart and developleading to expanded internal interactions and the developmdocument. This ISP is a fi rst lofuture of NOAA in Alaska and where the agency should inveto emerging changes to regioand economic interests and o

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

The guiding principles set forth for the regional and priority area task teams are the following: (1) NOAA will advance its goals for regional collaboration through existing authority and accountability structures. This eff ort does not entail changes to NOAA’s organizational structure. (2) The overarching purpose of regional collaboration is to improve NOAA’s productivity and value to customers. (3) All those participating in this eff ort will strive to identify, acknowledge, and apply NOAA’s full range of capabilities, within and across regions, as needed to improve NOAA’s productivity and value to customers.
Overview of the ARCTic ISA/ISP 

Process Adoption of ISP as an ARCTic ActivityThe initial guidance to the NOAA regional teams was simple: respond to new external stakeholder and partner demands and improve the eff ectiveness, value, and utility of NOAA’s products and services. As a part of the work plan for fi scal year 2007, the ARCTic developed a prospectus for bringing together the agency and customers to build cross-awareness, assess the agency’s activities, and identify the joint goals we and our customers share. This project, known as the ISA/P is expected to be just the beginning of an evolving process. MethodologyThe ARCTic identifi ed three objectives for the project:

1. Assess current NOAA services within 

Alaska Region with a focus on consistent services and service requirements. The partners we engage for input should include experts encompassing all aspects of NOAA’s Alaska Region service areas with an emphasis on weather, climate, marine, and aviation elements.

6

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

the Arctic Marine Shipping Asthe Alaska Ocean Observing SHydrographic Working GroupSensor User Group, and the mStatewide Digital Mapping IniThe fi rst meeting was held Au2007 at the NOAA/NOS KasitsLaboratory (KBL) near Seldovipurpose of the meeting was fopants to get to know each othand services and develop a strassessing where NOAA should and invest in the region’s futucomplished the fi rst 2 of 3 comthe ISA and set the course for Eight ARCTic regional working established as the structure fo

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team (ARCTic) NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team was formed in late 2006 and consists of employees of the National Weather Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Ocean Service, National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service, and Offi ce of Oceanic & Atmospheric Research. Our purpose is to develop and implement strategies for addressing priority areas as appropriate for Alaska. We do this by: 1. Establishing supporting teams and ad hoc working groups as necessary to iden- tify priority areas and achieve the goals of this eff ort. 2. Acting as the primary channel of communication of the eff ort to NOAA programs, offi ces, and employees within their region. 3. Identifying needs of regional customers, stakeholders, and partners. 4. Working with the Priority Area Task Teams, external partners, and each other to develop and implement strategies for addressing the national programmatic priority 

areas and other priority areas as appropriate for the region. 5. Developing and implementing an Alaska-specifi c outreach and communication strategy. 6. Participating in the NOAA National Outreach and Communications Task Team. 7. Participating in the four programmatic areas (Hazard Resilient Communities, Integrated Ecosystem Assessments, Integrated Water Resource Services, and Outreach and Communications) as appropriate for the region. ARCTic focuses on Aviation Weather; Climate Change; Ecosystem Assessment; Communications, Education, & Outreach; Integrated Water Resources; Marine Navigation and Safety; Remote Sensing and Technological Innovation; and Sea Ice with internal and external partners and customers through the working groups based on the issues above established through the Integrated Services Assessment and Plan (ISA/P) process, as well as existing networks and mechanisms. 

2. Strengthen and promote open relations with key stakeholders.3. Develop an approach for strategic 

product and service enhancements in concert with key partners and stakeholders.To meet these objectives, the project was divided into two phases: the ISA and the ISP. 

Integrated Services Assessment (ISA)The ISA consisted of workshop style meetings with external customers and compiling information from many Alaska focused sources including the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, the Arctic Observing Network, the NOAA Alaska Regional Integrated Science and Assessment (RISA) Program, 

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

Participants in the ISA represented a crosssection of these disciplines:• Climate• Ocean and Atmospheric Observations • Research (Basic and Applied) • Search and Rescue (SAR)• Oceanography (Open Ocean & Coastal) – Physical (includes Chemical) and Biological (Open, Coastal, Estuaries)• Tsunamis, Coastal Currents, and Fresh Water Discharge• Native and Cultural • Transportation – Aviation, Marine, and Land • Homeland Security, Emergency Management • Mapping, Charting, and Geodesy (MC&G) • Marine (Biological) Sciences • Hydrology • NOAA Informational Services (Weather & Climate) • Social-Economic Sciences• Communications
8

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

ing the assessment, which resulted in a set of vision papers that describe diff erent aspects of Alaska’s future (10-20 years) and what NOAA’s role can be in these areas. The eight working groups are: Aviation Weather; Climate Change & Impacts; Communications, Education & Outreach; Ecosystem Assessment; Integrated Water Resources; Marine Navigation & Safety; Remote Sensing; and Sea Ice. Participation in the working groups varies and includes ARCTic team members, participants from the KBL meeting, and additional internal and external specialists who bring topical knowledge and capabilities to the discussion. 

Each Vision Paper consists of the following components:

• Vision

The world as it would be/as we would like to see it. 

• Background

Sets the background and/or context of the vision. 

• Objective

Objectives that if accomplished would help achieve the vision. 

• Mission (NOAA’s Role) 

NOAA’s role in achieving the vision; addresses what the Agency can control. 

• Gap Analysis

Where we are vs. where we need to be. 

• Immediate Actions

What we can do/are doing now and in the near future. 

• Benefi ts & Risks

Benefi ts of fi lling the gap and risks associated with both taking actions to fi ll the gap as well as the consequences of not taking action. Draft Vision Papers developed by the working groups were reviewed at the second ISA meeting held at the Federal Building Annex in Anchorage, Alaska, October 30-31, 2007. This meeting provided the input for the development of the ISP.

Integrated Services Plan (ISP)The ISP was developed from November 2007-January 2008 by NOAA ARCTic members. It describes the ISA/P process and recommends areas for investment for NOAA between now and 2020. This document is strategic in nature and, as such, does not constitute commitments to specifi c activities or budgets. It is, however, intended to inform and guide NOAA planning, programming, and budgeting as well as give a focus for existing resources and activities.Intended Uses of the PlanThe ARCTic expects this plan will be used both internally and externally to NOAA. We see it as a starting point to foster further discussions on these and other subjects with customers and NOAA Staff . As it evolves, we will use it internally as input to NOAA Strategic Planning; the agency’s annual Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBES) process; and 

the ARCTic’s Annual Work Plan. Externally, the members of the team intend to use the ISP as a focus for cross-NOAA relationships with customers. The intent is to capture the shared visions well enough that they will be used in customer plans and meetings, and foster and solicit collaboration from additional persons and entities that can help Alaskans to reach shared goals and objectives. This document is the culmination of the initial ISA/P eff ort and provides the ARCTic’s view on areas for future NOAA investment in Alaska. It serves as a beginning of the dialog on the regional issues and provides a means of developing a joint pathway to address Alaskan regional concerns. 

Current NOAA Services in AlaskaNational Weather Service (NWS)NOAA NWS Alaska Region’s mission is to provide weather, hydrology and climate forecasts, and volcanic ash and tsunami warnings for the state of Alaska and its surrounding waters for the protection of life and property and the enhancement of the national economy. The NWS Alaska Region is comprised of three Weather Forecast Offi ces (WFOs), 12 Weather Service Offi ces (WSOs), the AlaskaPacifi c River Forecast Center (APRFC), the Alaska Aviation Weather Unit (AAWU), the Anchorage Center Weather Service Unit (CWSU), the West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center (WC/ATWC), the Anchorage Electronics Unit (AEU) and the Alaska Region Headquarters (ARH). The Alaska Region Headquarters staff manages all operational and scientifi c meteorological, hydrologic, and oceanographic programs of the region including observing networks, weather services, forecasting, climatology, and hydrology. Some of the unique services provided by our Alaska Region offi ces include:

• Operation of the U.S. Tsunami Warning System via the West Coast and Alaska 

Warning Center (WC/ATWC) in Palmer. The 

Assessing, monitoring, and predicting the responses of coastal and marine ecosystems in Alaska to the loss of sea ice and ocean acidifi cation are primary initiatives for NOAA

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

WC/ATWC provides tsunami wcoastal communities and leadhazard mitigation eff orts in thparedness, education, and traCanadian coastal regions and of all of U.S. States except Haw

• Operation of the Alaska 

Weather Unit (AAWU), which pdetailed aviation forecast prodof Alaska. The AAWU also manAnchorage Volcanic Ash Advis(VAAC) - one of only nine such worldwide. The Anchorage VAand warning responsibilities iAnchorage Flight Information far eastern Russia. 

• Production of the telev

“Alaska Weather”, a cooperativpublic television station KAKM age. This daily 30-minute shoone it its kind in the country) pdetailed depiction of weather and is hosted by one of our mfrom the Anchorage WFO. 

• An extensive marine for

warning area, which spans frodian Border to the Russian BoDixon Entrance (55 degrees Nnorth. This includes the Gulf oBering Sea/Aleutian Islands, aCoast. 

• Operation of an Ice Fore

within the Anchorage WFO. Tproduces graphical analyses otemperatures and sea ice as wsea ice forecasts throughout tTo fi nd additional information NWS offi ces in Alaska please rfollowing link: http://www.arhwxoffi ces.php.NOAA Fisheries ServiceNOAA Fisheries’ mission in Alathe NOAA strategic goal of ecagement. The Alaska Ecosysteis composed of 4 recognized LEcosystems (LMEs) (Beaufort, Bering, and Gulf of Alaska). Thcurrent priorities and services 
include: 

• Fishery research, management and 

enforcement in the Federal waters of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (3-200-mile zone off Alaska).

• Carrying out NOAA’s marine resource 

stewardship mission through robust fi shery 

and marine mammal research programs.

• Contributing to NOAA’s understanding of Climate Change, particularly related 

to loss of sea ice off Alaska and its impacts to marine resources.

• Guiding regional fi shery management in close collaboration with the North 

Pacifi c Fishery Management Council, a federal advisory body established by Congress.

• Implementing fi ve Secretary of 

Commerce approved Fishery Management Plans.

10

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

• Incorporating ecosystem approaches 

to management, relating multispecies and habitat interconnectivity. 

• Fulfi lling in-season management 

responsibilities for halibut and sablefi sh Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) programs.

• Expanding Market-Based Management Systems (LAPPs, IFQ, CDQ, Cooperatives) to generate economic stability to fi sheries and fi shery dependent communities.• Conducting fi sh and marine mammal stock assessment surveys and fi shery 

observer programs.

• Carrying out NOAA’s co-management 

responsibility under MMPA and ESA for the sustainable harvest of marine mammals by Alaska Natives.

• Protecting and restoring essential 

fi sh habitat.

• Consulting with other agencies on 

living marine resources issues. Expanding permit application and review cabability.

• Coordinating, reviewing and providing comment on Corps of Engineers, 

Department of Transportation, Minerals Management Service, and other agencies resource development projects.The organization’s regional headquarters is in Juneau with fi eld offi ces located in Anchorage, Kodiak, Dutch Harbor, and St Paul. Research components are located at NOAA Fisheries laboratories in Juneau, Sitka, Kodiak, and Seattle, Washington. Enforcement offi ces are located in Homer, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Seward, and Sitka. 

Offi ce of Marine and AviationOperationsNOAA Offi ce of Marine and Aviation Operations operate a wide variety of specialized aircraft and ships to complete NOAA’s environmental and scientifi c missions. Aircraft are managed by the Aircraft Operations Center (AOC), located at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida. Ships are managed by the Marine Operations Center (MOC) and located in various locations around the United States including two vessels located in Alaska, one home ported in Kodiak, AK, and another in Ketchikan, AK. NOAA Ship MILLER FREEMAN and NOAA Ship OSCAR DYSON primarily support fi sheries and ecosystem monitoring including Pollock, Cod, and Hake stock assessments, marine mammals surveys, as well as essential fi sh habitat monitoring. NOAA Ship RAINIER and NOAA Ship FAIRWEATHER primarily support nautical charting eff orts along Alaska’s 44,000 mile of coastline, some of which has never been surveyed. In addition to their primary focus, many of these vessels conduct projects in support of weather and Tsunami warning buoy deployments. Five NOAA aircraft support projects across the main NOAA line offi ces. Projects complete in 2007 include:

• Winter Storms Project for NWS and 

NESDIS

• Snow Survey mission for NWS• Alaska Airport Surveys for NOS• Steller Sea Lion survey for NMFS• Alaska Harbor Seals survey for NMFS• Beluga Whale survey for NMFS• Bowhead Whale Feeding 

Study(BOWFEST) for NMFS

• Bowhead Whale Aerial Survey Program (BWASP) for Department of InteriorMinerals Management Service with observers from NMFS onboard.

In other years, NOAA Aircraft have worked on Lidar Hydrographic surveys for NOS and air quality monitoring for OAR.

National Ocean ServiceThe National Ocean Service (Nand services in Alaska includewater level observations and tdictions; coastal meteorologictemperature and current dataservices (hydrographic surveycharts, navigation response techemical spill response; geodand coastal ocean science. NOassets in the state include: the Laboratory; Port of Anchorage Oceanographic Real-Time Sysand National Water Level Obsework (NWLON) stations. NOS operational support for the KaBay National Estuarine Resear(KBNERR), which is operated bDepartment of Fish and GameDivision. NOS has relatively febased in Alaska, but provides to Alaska from out-of-state offi provides extensive imagery ansets for Alaska, such as coastaphy, nautical charts, coastal suenvironmental sensitivity inde

NOAA offi ces in Alaska
drographic surveys, estuarine bathymetry, 

and geodetic control points. Metadata for this information and access to many of the data sets are available via the Internet. The Kasitsna Bay Laboratory (KBL) is the only NOS-owned and operated facility in Alaska. KBL is the Alaska fi eld laboratory of the Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research, under the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS). NCCOS partners with the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) to conduct collaborative research and education activities at the laboratory. KBL research focuses on understanding the response of subarctic coastal and estuarine ecosystems to change – 

particularly climate variability, land and resource use, and extreme events. The mission is to provide federal, state, local and tribal agencies with the information, tools, and training needed for scientifi cally-based resource management, using an integrated approach to understanding the ecosystem. Research areas include: trophic dynamics, marine biodiversity, fi sh habitat, coastal monitoring, mariculture, cold water diving and application of emerging underwater technology to ecosystem assessment. KBL supports fi eld and laboratory studies with fl owing seawater and dry laboratories, a scuba facility for year-round cold water diving, dock, small boats, and housing for up to 48 people. The laboratory also supports 

12 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

establish or validate datum remarks and provide data and itidal predictions and other cotions.CO-OPS’ National Current ObsProgram has been in Alaskan 2001 collecting currents data historic tidal current predictiotion in the US Tidal Current Ta150 predictions in areas such Prince William Sound and Souhave been updated or added including the addition of new tions. In FY08, CO-OPS is deprent meters in northern Southand will update the 100-year ostation at North Indian Pass. IFY10, CO-OPS will measure cupredict tidal currents at over 4Kodiak, Afognak and Dutch Hing Unimak Pass. In future yewill measure currents in the oIsland chain. In 2003 and 200deployed HF-Surface Current (HF-SCM) to better understancurrent movement in Cook InCO-OPS intends to deploy HFWilliam Sound to assist with Aand hopes to use that data to dictions in the Tables as well.The Anchorage PORTS®, opertively between CO-OPS and thtime community in the Port oprovides quality-controlled dadisseminated in real-time to losafe and effi cient navigation. age system currently includes and meteorological measuremstations, in Anchorage and NiThe NOS Offi ce of Coast Survea regional presence in the fi elcustomers and act as ambassamaritime community. The Naager for Alaska is based in Ancfocuses primarily on resolving navigation questions, educatients on emerging charting teand their uses, and soliciting fNOAA’s navigation products afrom the commercial maritimThe navigation manager also tify the challenges facing mar

formal and informal marine science educa- tion and outreach activities, to include graduate and undergraduate classes and research, as well as K-12 programs. At 365,000 acres of lands and waters, the KBNERR is the largest of 27 reserves in the National Estuarine Research Reserve System and encompasses vast subtidal zones, intertidal expanses, extensive marsh systems and terrestrial forests. The KBNERR mission is to enhance understanding and appreciation of the Kachemak Bay estuary and adjacent waters to ensure that these ecosystems remain healthy and productive. Research priorities include: larval and ju- venile fi sheries recruitment and life history dynamics, coastal dynamics (natural and anthropogenic), land use change, natural hazards, ocean productivity, and long-term water quality monitoring. The reserve of- fers a variety of educational programs and activities targeted at coastal decision mak- ers, K-12 students and teachers, as well as residents and visitors to the local area. For additional information on Kachemak Bay Reserve, please visit: www.kbayrr.org. The NOS Center for Operational Oceano- graphic Products and Services (CO-OPS) operates 24 long-term continuously op- erating tide stations in the state of Alaska which provide data and information on real-time water level, tidal datums and rela- tive sea level trends, and which are capable of producing real-time data for tsunami and storm surge warning. These stations are located at Ketchikan, Port Alexander, Sitka, Juneau, Skagway, Elfi n Cove, Yakutat, Cordova, Valdez, Seward, Seldovia, Nikiski, Anchorage, Kodiak, Alitak, Sand Point, King Cove, Adak, Nikolski, Atka, Unalaska, Nome, Red Dog Dock (north of Kotzebue) and Prudhoe Bay. NOS also provides tidal water level and current predictions for coastal stations. Historical water level and current information is available for stations occu- pied for shorter durations. Several short- term tide stations are also occupied in Alaska each year by CO-OPS in partnership with Offi ce of Coast Survey and National Geodetic Survey. These gauges provide vertical control for hydrographic surveying and shoreline mapping surveys, and also 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Integrated Services 

Climate change is already impacting our environment, seasons, and communities. Observable changes, many of which have regional and global implications, are underway across the Arctic
tation. These agents assist the Coast Survey 

in overseeing NOAA’s nautical chart data collection and information programs to meet constituent needs for information to navigate safely and effi ciently. The Geodetic Advisor is a jointly funded NOS employee that resides in the state to provide liaison between NOS and the host state. The Geodetic Advisor guides and assists the state’s charting, geodetic and surveying programs through technical expertise. This program also provides technical assistance in planning and implementing Geographic/Land Information System: (GIS/LIS) projects. Currently the NOS Navigation Manager for Alaska is also serving as the Geodetic Advisor. NOAA’s Scientifi c Support Coordinators (SSC) provide guidance to reduce risks to coastal habitats and resources from oil and hazardous chemical spills. The Alaska SSC is based in Anchorage and works directly with U.S. Coast Guard spill response teams by providing critical scientifi c support to the federal On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) during spills of oil or hazardous materials. SSCs use oil spill trajectory estimates, chemical hazards analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of biological and human-use resources to help the OSC make timely operational decisions. SSCs provide guidance, experience, and resources to develop spill preparedness plans that help identify the spill response action with the greatest environmental benefi t. The National Status and Trends (NS&T) program, run by the NCCOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment, includes Mussel Watch and Benthic Surveillance projects in Alaska. Mussel Watch is the longest continuous contaminant monitoring program in U.S. coastal waters, analyzing chemical and biological contaminant trends in sediment and bivalve tissue collected at over 280 coastal sites from 1986 to present. There are eleven sites that have been monitored in Alaska, with fi ve sites in southeast Alaska, Prince William Sound and Homer that are currently monitored on an ongoing basis. Additional Mussel Watch sites are being collected to improve spatial coverage for the resource management and public health needs of state agencies 

(ADF&G, DEC) and Alaska Native organizations. The Benthic Surveillance Project analyzed chemical and biological contaminant trends in sediment and fi sh tissue collected at 183 coastal sites from 1984 to 1993. The database includes: sediment, fi sh liver and fi sh bile chemistry for over 100 organic and inorganic contaminants, and associated diseases in the fi sh livers. There are twelve previously sampled Benthic Surveillance sites in Alaska, with 2007 sampling in Kachemak Bay. NS&T data and related assessment reports are available via the Internet (http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/coast/nsandt/welcome.html).The NCCOS Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research sponsors the Northeast Pacifi c Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamic (GLOBEC) research program, which seeks to understand the eff ects of climate change on the distribution, abundance, and production of marine animal populations in areas important to the regional and national economies. The NOS Data Explorer provides direct Internet access to primary NOS imagery and data holdings for coastal photography, nautical charts, coastal survey maps, environmental sensitivity index maps, hydrographic surveys, water level stations, estuarine bathymetry, geodetic control points and the Historical Map and Chart Collection. Extensive datasets for Alaska coastal areas can be accessed through this geographic driven search engine at NOS Data Explorer. In addition, NOS is the home of the IOOS Program Offi ce and the Pribilof Islands Environmental Restoration Project. 

NOAA’s Offi ce of Oceanic andAtmospheric ResearchNOAA’s Offi ce of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) supports NOAA’s Ecosystem, Climate, and Weather and Water Goals in Alaska. Ecosystem-related activities within OAR are conducted by two laboratories: Alaska Sea Grant, the Offi ce of Ocean Exploration and Research, and the National Undersea Research Program. Both the Pacifi c Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) in Seattle, Washington and the Earth System Research 

14 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

There are expanded opportunities and challenges in NOAA’s marine ecosystems monitoring and management

Laboratory (ESRL) in Boulder, CO, provide fi sheries research. PMEL conducts EcoFOCI in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska, in conjunction with the Alaska Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and partners at the University of Alaska – Fairbanks, the Cooperative Institute for Arctic Research (CIFAR), and others. The goal of EcoFOCI is to determine the infl uence of the physical and biological environment on marine populations and the subsequent impact on fi sheries. EcoFOCI scientists integrate fi eld, laboratory, and modeling studies to determine how varying biological and physical factors infl uence large marine ecosystems in Alaska. Providing effi ciency to fi shery 

assessments, the Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) conducts surveys in the Alaskan coastal waters using NOAA Fish Lidar. The per kilometer cost of a survey using Lidar from a small aircraft is less than 10 percent of a ship survey, and the depth 

penetration is more than 3 timvisual survey.NOAA’s National Sea Grant Cois a federal-university partnergrates research, education, anAlaska Sea Grant addresses prand marine issues aff ecting 54 the U.S. Current research and projects address impacts on tdustry, wiser utilization of fi shenvironmental issues, economship, and diversifi cation of Alaeconomy. OAR also has a signifi cant undresearch capability. The vision Offi ce of Ocean Exploration a(OER) is “to make the unknowknown.” OER research and dissions fi t into four areas: (1) maphysical, biological, chemical, logical aspects of the ocean; (

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team 
Alaskan and Arctic waters since 2001 to 

conduct seafl oor mapping of geological features and biodiversity in the Arctic and Bering Sea, seamount exploration in the Gulf of Alaska, benthic communities in Bristol Bay, and exploration of shipwrecks in Southeast Alaska, among others. Complimenting OER, NOAA’s Undersea Research Program (NURP) provides undersea scientists with tools and expertise that they need to work in the undersea environment, from the shoreline to the deep sea. NURP is comprised of a network of six regional centers. Based at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, NOAA’s Undersea Research Center for the West Coast and Polar Regions (WCPR) supports undersea research and scientifi c investigation in those areas. Developing a greater understanding of the habitats and life cycles of fi sheries, which are a tremendously important resource in these regions, is a priority at WCPR. OAR’s climate-related activities include climate monitoring observatories and networks, short term forecast decision aids and long term climate research. The Barrow Observatory is one of six baseline observatories supported by the NOAA’s Climate Observations and Monitoring 

16

NOAA is leveraging and enhancing its diverse set of partnerships to proactively prepare for and respond to the potential immediate and future impacts of climate change on people, societal infrastructures, local/regional economies, and ecosystem changes

Program and operated by the NOAA OAR/ESRL Global Monitoring Division, located in Boulder, CO. The observatories are part of a global network monitoring atmospheric constituents that cause climate change and depletion of the ozone layer. The Barrow Observatory measures ozone, greenhouse gases, stratospheric ozone depleting gases, air quality gases, aerosols, and radiation above the observatory and monitors air pollution (arctic haze) fl owing across the Arctic from Eurasia to Alaska. The Barrow Observatory is host to 25 cooperative research projects from various universities and government agencies from around the nation. In addition, ESRL is participating in several long-term climate research programs near Barrow. Radiometers and cloud radars routinely measure important properties of clouds that aff ect climate such as cloud height, thickness, particle type (ice or water), water content, and ice content. Ultimately, the knowledge of how arctic clouds aff ect the global climate system will be improved so that better predictions can be made regarding how man and nature might change climate. Barrow, along with Nome and St. Paul Island, are sites where ESRL operates an ultraviolet radiation (UV) monitoring network. These measurements are taken 

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

as part of the ESRL GMD Radiation group’s research on the Earth’s surface radiation budget. Research eff orts are devoted to the extent and cause of observed variations in long-term radiation and meteorological measurements, using satellite observations and climate model calculations. To measure the distribution and trends of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4), the two gases most responsible for humancaused climate change, ESRL operates a Cooperative Global Air Sampling Network, including a station at Shemya, AK. Other greenhouse gases and carbon monoxide are also measured. Shemya is a very remote location that samples air coming from the Asian continent. These measurements help determine the magnitude of carbon sources and sinks at northern latitudes in Asia.Fairbanks is one of the locations in the United States where ESRL takes column measurements of the amount of ozone between the earth’s surface and the top of the atmosphere. These measurements are used to determine the amount of ultraviolet radiation reaching the earth’s surface. Excess ultraviolet radiation is responsible for human skin cancer and is also harmful to other biogenic organisms. These are important, as column ozone measurements monitor changes in the stratospheric ozone layer resulting from human-produced chlorine and bromine compounds that destroy ozone. 

ERSL also operates from Fairbanks a new and growing small aircraft-based North American network of sampling sites (Carbon America) to measure vertical profi les of important greenhouse gas concentrations. Air is sampled above the surface up to approximately 25,000 feet above sea level using a reasonably small, light, and economical automated system to measure CO2, CH4, and other greenhouse gases. This data will improve global carbon cycle models. In addition, ESRL contributes to a consensus seasonal forecast and other products for the fi re season for Alaska and other states. This new climate decision-support tool provides information for a seasonal fi re danger outlook used by the National Interagency Coordination Center for fi res to make proactive short- and long-range decisions for strategy development and resource allocation, and to improve effi ciency and fi refi ghter safety. 

Supporting weather and water hazards, OAR is active in Tsunami and Volcanic Ash research. The Tsunami Research Program at the Pacifi c Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL), seeks to mitigate tsunami hazards to the U.S. coasts. Research and development activities at PMEL focus on: 1) improved tsunami measurement technology and the design of optimal tsunami monitoring networks, 2) improved models to increase the speed and accuracy of operational forecasts and warnings, and 3) improved methods to predict tsunami impacts on the population and infrastructure of coastal communities. PMEL conducts these activities in collaboration with the states and the National Weather Service, including the West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center in Palmer. Volcanic ash is an extreme hazard to aircraft, having caused more than $250M in damage during the past 20 years. ESRL, in collaboration with other federal and state agencies, has developed and installed the Volcanic Ash Coordination Tool (VACT). The tool enables the Anchorage Volcanic Ash Advisory Center to generate ash forecasts, diagnose eruptions, and 

presence of ash. Cutting across these categorieNOAA Arctic Research ProgramCooperative Institute for Arcti(CIFAR). The Arctic Research Offi ce (ARa focal point for NOAA’s researin the Arctic, Bering Sea, North North Atlantic regions. The offi ages the Arctic Research Initiaother funds allocated to it, supinternal NOAA and extramurarepresents NOAA on the InterResearch Policy Committee, levolvement in the Arctic Monitsessment Program, and providcontact between NOAA and ttive Institute for Arctic Researcthe International Arctic Reseathe University of Alaska FairbaCIFAR is a cooperative institutNOAA and the University of Asored by NOAA Research. CIFAresearch in collaboration with wide variety of issues critical tincluding fi sheries oceanogragraphic studies, sea ice dynamspheric research, climate dynavariability, tsunami research aand environmental assessmentoring. CIFAR works closely wers from the eight countries oCouncil on climate impact ass

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team
the station include the ARGOS Master and 

Orbitography beacons, U.S. Climate Reference Network Station, and a CORS GPS. NESDIS also maintains a satellite ground station in Pt. Barrow to provide telemetry and command support for the POES primary spacecraft while also supplying high latitude real-time HRPT observations of the Arctic for use by the NWS, AFWA, AOOS, AVO and UAF researchers.One example of an innovative operational achievement to improve data and information services to Alaskan customers is a new way of processing polar winds using NASA’s AQUA satellite, real time MODIS data. AVHRR satellite data (30-40 passes per day) received at the Pt. Barrow ground station is also being used to operationally produce polar winds products.Another example of NOAA’s collaboration in the arctic region was with the Canadian Space Agency. NOAA and NASA established an agreement with the Canadian agency to use RADARSAT-1 (R-1), Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data for identifying arctic sea ice and coastal winds. This demonstration ran from 1997 until May 2008 and documented the critical utility of SAR data to meet NOAA Missions in the following areas:

· Coastal wind patterns, especially 

through bays and passes. This data aided forecasts of dangerous gap winds like the ones that capsized the /F/V Pacifi c Lady/ in November 2007.

· Sea ice location, concentration, and 

motion along the coast. This data fed NWS 

18

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

ice forecasts as R-1 is the only platform that can see through the clouds. This kind of ice information is especially important to villages and towns where subsistence is still actively practiced as subsistence hunters will travel out onto the ice to hunt and fi sh when food supplies get low.

· Sea ice edge, location, concentration 

and motion off shore. This proved critical to the safety of commercial fi shing vessels that fi sh right up against the sea ice edge

· Storm surge, coastal fl ooding and 

erosion. This is especially important for the northwest coast of Alaska where villages such as Kivalina, Shishmaref, Point Hope, Barrow, and Newtok are in peril of destruction from fl ooding and erosion of their coastline. This region has a low coastline being aff ected by permafrost thawing and the lack of sea ice to dampen storm waves from crashing freely into the shore.

· River ice break-up monitoring. The 

spring break-up of river ice often leads to disastrous fl oods. The SAR data allowed state-wide monitoring and advance warning for emergency managers.In sum, it became rapidly apparent that the SAR data impacted our information on coastal winds, river and sea ice, storm morphology, waves, oil spills, fl ooding, glacial change, and volcanic eruptions. NOAA is now exploring options to acquire SAR data on an operational basis.Research, Data and Information ServicesAlthough not physically located in Alaska, the NOAA National Data Centers (NNDC) consist of three discipline-oriented national data centers - Climate, Geophysics, and Oceans – that manage and provide longterm archive and access to NOAA data including Alaskan data. The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) located in Asheville, NC, has a statutory mission to provide long-term storage and public access to the climate observations of the U.S., Alaska, and to use these observations to describe the climate of the U.S. As apart of this role, NCDC operates and manages the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/uscrn/ which provides reference climate observations. Currently, 

4 USCRN stations are operational in Alaska: Fairbanks CDA, Pt Barrow, Sitka, and St. Paul Is. Between 2009 and 2013, a total of at least 29 USCRN stations will be installed and operational. These sites will provide a convenient platform for additional permafrost monitoring sensors. NCDC manages the Climate Data Modernization Program (CDMP) migrating data and information from analog format (paper and microfi lm) to digital format. Historical Alaskan records are part of this project.The National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) located in Boulder, CO, archives earth observations from space (satellites including DMSP and GOES), space weather and solar events, bathymetry and global relief, marine geology and geophysics, natural hazards (tsunami, volcanic ash and eruption, and signifi cant earthquake), as well as geomagnetic and gravity data and models. NGDC stewards the NOAA observational data associated with the Nation’s Tsunami Program, including the Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunami (DARTTM), coastal tide gauge, past tsunami event and impact data and imagery, coastal relief (bathymetry and LiDAR) data and related products. NGDC works with partners at state, local, and federal agencies to assess the tsunami hazard to communities based on these historic tsunami data. One of NGDC’s strongest connections to Alaska is its coastal digital elevation modeling in support of tsunami forecast, warning, and inundation mapping. NGDC is the designated data center supporting the U.S. characterization of an Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) as set out under Article 76 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) located in Silver Spring, MD, is a national repository and dissemination facility for global oceanographic data which acquires and preserves a historical record of the Earth’s changing environment to be used for operational applications and ocean climate research. NODC’s mission is to ensure that global oceanographic data sets are maintained in a permanent archive and easily accessible to include Arctic region ocean observations collected by NOAA Arctic program buoys and ice stations, as well as the Alaska Ocean Observing System (AOOS) observing 

types include ocean currents, level, temperature, waves, and ocean biological data. NODC NOAA Central Library NetworCentral Library, located in Silvprovides information and reseto NOAA staff and the public. NOAA libraries are located in AAuke Bay Laboratory Library, NFisheries Science Center, Auke ratories; and (2) the Ted SteveResearch Institute, Juneau, AKof collection and services: the includes books and journals oscience, marine biology, zoolobiochemistry, oceanography, ronmental eff ects (eff ects of o

marine litter, etc.). W.F. Thomprial Library, NMFS Alaska FisheCenter, Kodiak, AK. Descriptioand services: the collection injournals, reports, and reprints biology and fi sheries, as well aCommission Reports from 187letins from 1881. The Center for Satellite ApplicResearch (STAR) is the science DIS that transfers satellite obsthe land, atmosphere, ocean, from scientifi c research and deinto routine operational produmeaningful information. STAR related to Alaska include the dof products to detect or forecahazards to aviation, (e.g., volcafog, and low clouds, icing, turbconvective wind gusts), operaproducts (accurate daily maps tactical ice monitoring; and acterm forecasts of sea ice), and use in meteorological applicatspheric winds, cloud propertieradiation). 

AQUA, AURA, and European METOP. During the summers of 2005-2007, FCDAS also provided direct downlink data capture services from USGS LANDSAT-5 for extensive Alaska mapping and wildfi re management in cooperation with the University of Alaska and the U.S. Geological Survey. The FCDAS has received and transferred 10,885 LANDSAT-5 scenes into the National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data Archive. By mid-2008, FCDAS is scheduled to assume operations for the COSMIC constellation of U.S. and foreign satellites and French CNES JASON-2 mission. Launch supports are a regular part of activities at the site, the most recent of which include NOAA-18 POES, as well as a new DMSP spacecraft. The Fairbanks facility also provides a downlink for the International COSPAS-SARSAT program. The FCDAS SARSAT system provides emergency beacon response for the North Pacifi c, Alaska, Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean. The Alaska Personal Locator Beacons (AK PLB) Program established in 1994 utilizes a transmitted coded signal that is received by a COSPAS, SARSAT, or GOES satellite and relays the signal to a ground station that calculates the PLB location and transmits the information to the U.S. Mission Control Center. The USMCC recognizes the specially coded beacons as an AK PLB and transmits a distress message directly to the Alaska Rescue Coordination Center (AKRCC) at Fort Richardson just north of Anchorage. The AKRCC then uses state, local or federal assets to conduct the search and rescue. Other instruments located at 

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN
While NOAA entities in Alaska have 

collaborated for years, the advent of the ARCTic has provided a formal and sustained mechanism that has produced a number of accomplishments for both the agency and our customers. Several of these are detailed below. In addition, the development of this document and the intangible benefi ts of expanded networking are producing results and fueling even higher expectations for the future.Climate ChangeInput to Alaska Climate Impact Assessment CommissionThe Alaska Climate Impact Assessment Commission was established in 2006 by the State Legislature to prepare a comprehensive overview of the likely impacts of climate change aff ecting Alaska, and steps we can take to mitigate that impact. In developing the overview the commission is considering facilities and infrastructure, 

identifying fi nancial implications of climate change, and helping local Alaskan communities with planning activities. The NWS Alaska Region and NOAA Fisheries Alaska Fisheries Science Center participated in a hearing organized by the Alaska Climate Impact Assessment Commission on April 12, 2007 and other ARCTic members have provided subsequent information related to this ISP at the request of commissioners and individual assisting them. The report of the Commission will likely contain many NOAA related themes and recommendations.

Marine Navigation & SafetyNOAA-USCG Partnership Increases Data, SafetyNWS staff in Kodiak, AK, working with the USCG District 17 have put together a plan to provide training in three critical areas for the USCG: surface observations reporting, heavy weather, and ice reconnaissance. The fi rst briefi ng is essentially done and NWS AK Regional HQ is reviewing it. The second will focus on heavy weather recognition and avoidance with a “North Pacifi c/Bering Sea/Gulf of AK” slant. The third could 

20 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

NOAA is prioritizing and developing a baseline of observations to eff ectively monitor, evaluate, and assess climate change and variation in the Arctic region

be on ice reconnaissance with help from the Ice Recon crews at the NIC at Suitland. The initial focus will be on the Kodiak USCG “Fish” school as part of the briefi ng school for cutters that will be conducting patrols in the Bering Sea.Digital Ice AnalysesDigitization of the Sea Ice AnalysisThe database produced by the Anchorage Forecast Offi ce Ice Forecaster remains a very high priority for the Alaska Region. The archive consists of over 24 years of high spatial resolution, hand analyzed ice analyses preserved almost exclusively on paper. The analyses is of much fi ner temporal (3 times per week as opposed to one) and spatial resolution than what is produced at the National Ice Center. The Alaska Region and the UAA Engineering Department have established a project to transfer archived analyses into a geospatial information systems (GIS) format such as the ESRI shapefi le. The ice analyses will then be available to the NWS as well as all NOAA customers for use in decision support systems (DSS), ecosystem analysis, as well as ocean and ice forecast models. Currently a small number of ice analyses have been transferred by UAA graduate students. Dialogue is underway to determine the full scope of the project.Resource Management2008-2009 Integrated Ocean & Coastal Mapping Project (IOCM) in Kachemak BayOcean and Coastal Mapping provides information that is critical to many management decisions. NOAA alone needs bathymetry, habitat, and topographic data and maps for its missions. Currently, the data for each is collected separately at a great collective expense. NOAA, as part of the Interagency Working Group on Ocean and Coastal Mapping, has initiated a select number of pilot projects to determine if/how effi ciencies can be found. The primary objectives of the multi-year project in Kachemak Bay are to demonstrate multiple uses of ocean and coastal mapping data and defi ne the process for planning and conducting IOCM surveys on a regular basis. Specifi cally, the Kachemak Bay project will show how one hydrographic survey can support habitat information for ecosystem based management, 

emergency management, and development as well as NOAA charts. Activities will include surveys, shoreline imagery ancontaminant sampling, and ptidal substrate and habitat mament. Additional activities sudebris surveys and removal, cmodeling, V-Datum developmvdatum.noaa.gov/), watershemodeling, and inundation mabe incorporated if funding anavailable.At the time of publication, eacline offi ce, USGS, USACE, and participating from the federal Department of Fish & Game aState Parks are contributing frthe local/regional governmenPeninsula Borough, City of Hoof Seldovia, Seldovia Village TGraham village, and Nanwaleinvolved; and we’re expecting from Cook Inlet Regional CitizCouncil (CIRCAC), Alaska OceaSystem (AOOS), and Cook Inlewell.Through the collaborative eff opartners, we expect the followcomes:

• Ecosystem Based Mana– Assist ADF&G and NOA

fi shery and habitat resource mboth off shore and nearshore.

– Benthic habitat with or 

features, such as reefs, moundnacles, sand waves, etc.

– Address unknowns for 

EFH descriptions, such as juve(nursery) areas.

– Aid to assess anthropog

induced) processes that may oaff ect benthic habitat. i.e. coament, marine dredge disposagas pipeline route.

– Application to other em

start putting several pieces to

• Safe Navigation– Provides mariners with 

charts for safe navigation.

• Economic Developmen– Provides USACE and Cit

with information for Homer Hsion. 

– Provides Alaska Industr

ment and Export Authority m

ARCTic Achievements
provided by the NOAA’s Climate Program 

Offi ce and other external entities.The fi rst stage of the AUTC proposal focused on the transportation corridors of Alaska. NWS Offi ce of Hydrologic Development is working with UAF to determine the appropriate technical approach, work allocation and schedule and will now be incorporated with the NWS secured funding and subsequent participation. This would allow the entire state to be updated and added to the world-class, NOAA Atlas 14 publication. UAF has started their component in August 2008, and overall project completion is expected in 2011. Remote SensingDMSP Real-Time SupportIn early 2007, the US Air Force (USAF) decided to reduce the number of DMSP (Defense Meteorological Satellites Program) fi eld ingest terminals (Mark IVB) across the country and announced that the Elmendorf Air Force Base (AFB) downlink would be decommissioned on October 31, 2007. NWS AR has been directly receiving realtime DMSP data from Elmendorf AFB since 1992 and the loss of this data would have resulted in degradation of services and major impacts on the operational forecasts provided by the NWS. The USAF and NWS Alaska Region worked together on a solution that would continue the real-time capture and transfer of DMSP data in Alaska by utilizing the capabilities of the NESDIS Fairbanks Command and Data Acquisition Station (FCDAS) at Gilmore Creek, AK. This partnership ensured that real-time DMSP data would be available for operational and research use. USAF, NWS AR and University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) personnel met at the FCDAS on June 27, 2007, to put together a proposed plan that would test the capture, ingest, processing, and distribution of DMSP data by September 1, 2007. The capture system was rapidly developed and integrated into DMSP operations at the FCDAS and by mid August real-time supports were being scheduled using FCDAS developed software with 18-25 real-time DMSP fi les captured and disseminated to users daily. The FCDAS data transfer and University of Alaska (UA) Geographic Information 

22

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Network of Alaska (GINA) data distribution to NWS AR and AFW was operationally verifi ed on schedule with autonomous operations commencing on August 30th. Subsequently, USAF leadership changed, and the decision to decommission the MARK IVB was reversed but the partnership continues to the benefi t of all involved with the FCDAS continuing to capture 18-25 DMSP passes and UA GINA processing the data for use by NWS Alaska Region, the university community, and the public at large.The DMSP real-time Operational Line Scanner (OLS) data is available via the UA GINA swath viewer program at http://sv.gina.alaska.edu. High Latitude POES HRPT Observations IncreasedIn support of the NWS AR and UAF researchers, the FCDAS increased Barrow real-time supports at Barrow from 8 per day to over 40 supports per day during the 2nd Quarter of FY07. The data is transferred to UAF GINA for distribution to NWS, AVO, AOOS, and IARC researchers. FY07 4th Quarter total for additional Barrow supports scheduled locally by the FCDAS is 3,088 observations.Our ability to leverage the NESDIS CDAS has allowed the team to ensure an uninterrupted fl ow of satellite data to the Alaska Region. In addition, participation on the team has enabled members to gain new access to satellite imagery and to initiate development of new satellite data applications. In FY07, the NOAA Scientifi c Support Coordinator (SSC) worked with the University of Alaska GINA to access high-resolution satellite imagery purchased by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife. The SSC used this imagery to help address coastal management issues along the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastline. Along with the Alaska Clean Seas, the North Slope industry oil spill cooperative, the entire ANWR coast was fl own using the satellite imagery as a guide and a reference. Particular attention was directed to locations of the off shore barrier islands and whether or not it would be feasible to boom the openings between them or to use defl ection booming to prevent oil from reaching the main ANWR shoreline. 

Alaska Statewide Digital Mapping SPOT Satellite Receiving Ground StationThe State of Alaska is acquiring a new SPOT satellite capture, processing, and archive system based in Fairbanks. The system will create higher-resolution images covering the state’s land and off -shore territories every 3-4 years at the lowest cost possible. Additionally, the SPOT satellites will be tasked to perform frequent repeat coverage to monitor areas of concern and rapid change and to provide emergency response. These multi-color images, at 2.5-meters spatial resolution, are suffi cient to accurately evaluate coastal erosion, assess coastal storms, monitor sea ice, plan and monitor infrastructure development, respond to emergencies, and ensure eff ective resource management. Images will be directly sent from the SPOT satellites to the NOAA Fairbanks CDA ground station in real-time, eliminating the cost and delay of satellite storage and transmission. Every pass over Alaska will be captured. Large data volumes will be processed rapidly into distributable products, assuring access to current information. The image data will be freely available to everyone via the web. Level 0 and higher data will be available to all government and university users for research, operations, and policy making at no additional cost. The SPOT sensors will provide numerous benefi ts to NOAA scientists, operations staff , and end users of NOAA warnings, forecasts, and analyses. SPOT data will be a 

cornerstone element of the ACollaboration. 

• Coastal processes: SPOT 

ports work on coastal storms and inundation) and erosion, major concern to both Federapolicy makers. Billions of dollaare anticipated in the coming 

• Sea ice: The high spectr

resolution of SPOT data, with temporal coverage, is ideal for sea ice melt and especially the controlling the evolution of sualbedo, a factor of prime impounderstanding of Arctic and gchange.

• Flooding: NWS river for

have rapid, enhanced access ttion imagery aiding creation oand warnings during breakup events.

• Climate change: All of t

plus additional eff ects such as permafrost degradation, increand associated carbon releaseexacerbated by climate changtracked and understood using lite data.

The representation of NWS and NMFS will allow for a comprehensive site selection. The APRFC hydrologists do not specialize in habitat conservation particularly as it relates to anadromous fi sh.Special roles of line offi ces or partners – NWS and NMFS are taking the lead but are also working with NOS and their partners such as the Kachemak Bay Research Reserve.

Precipitation Baseline for Engineering & Environmental StudiesPrecipitation frequency estimates (PFE) are a climate-related precipitation tool. The PFE data are commonly used to reduce the risk of runoff -related loss of life and property, and to prevent pollution. They provide rainfall related criteria used extensively by the engineering and environmental communities for the design of structures such as sewers and drainage systems, for environmental studies and design, and for sediment control. The criteria are used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to update National Flood Insurance rate maps and by the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Program to regulate pollution control in streams. The statewide PFE data currently available for Alaska is contained in two reports by the Department of Commerce called Technical Papers 47 and 52, last revised in 1963 and 1965, respectively. NOAA’s NWS recent updated analyses in the Lower 48 indicated diff erences up to 30% between the old and new estimates. The Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information’s Subcommittee on Hydrology has endorsed the work being performed by NWS and recommended the updates be extended to the rest of the country. The updates for Alaska will cost approximately $800,000 over a three-year period. The University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the State of Alaska currently have support for half of the project. UAF obtained $200K from the Alaska University Transportation Center (AUTC) grant proposal which then qualifi ed them for matching funds from the Alaska Department of Transportation. The additional funds are being 

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

Alaska has extensive oil and gas reserves essential to the nation’s economy and national security. The Alaska oil pipeline loses approximately $1 million per hour during a shutdown.
24 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

The CEO Work Group in collaboration with a number of partners received funding under the Preserve America grant to develop a dataset for SOS that highlights the 1871 whaling fl eet and links it to current and future communities, navigation, and safety issues in our rapidly changing Arctic. NOAA Fisheries has also initiated a Mentor/Intern Program for high school and university students to assist in the development of fi sheries and marine mammal datasets. Based on this experience, the NWS partnership with the Anchorage School District Gifted Mentor Program could be utilized in the same manner. The student, mentor, and program coordinator work together in preparing a project that will expose the student to a real-life work environment, which is well suited for creating a multi-generational draw for SOS.NOAA’s ARCTic External WebsiteThe CEO Work Group developed an external website that highlights the integration between NOAA agencies and external partners. This website is currently posted on the PPI website at: http://www.ppi.

noaa.gov/NOAA_ARCTic/noaa_arctic.html. The website includes links to members, stakeholders, ARCTic activities, ARCTic plans, and more. This ISP will be posted on the website.

Virtual AlaskaThe CEO Work Group secured funding through NOAA Fisheries for the start up costs for Virtual Alaska and a module specifi c to fi sheries, marine mammals, and 

the ecosystem. The environment supplements NOAA’s Virtual World, an ongoing project based in Second Life, which is a 3-D virtual world. The ARCTic is partnering with other line offi ces and stakeholders to expand Virtual Alaska over time. Recently, the ARCTic partnered with the University of Alaska, Juneau School District, and the U.S. Forest Service to establish a curriculum that includes content development for Virtual Alaska. The curriculum highlights climate change in Alaska. Other modules could eventually feature expansion on climate change, glacial ice melt, melting permafrost, Alaskan wildlife, tourism, Alaskan villages, and more.

“One NOAA” EventsThe CEO Work Group collaborated with other line offi ces to host a “one NOAA” booth at Pacifi c Marine Expo in Seattle, Washington in November. The large display showcased NOAA Weather Service, NOAA Fisheries Service, NOAA Law Enforcement and NOAA National Ocean Service.During the Alaska Marine Science Symposium in Anchorage, AK, in January, the ARCTic hosted a workshop to highlight the ARCTic’s purpose and gain feedback on the ARCTic Integrated Services Plan. A number of ARCTic team members representing various line offi ces participated in the workshop.Information CampaignsThe ARCTic partnered with a TV Meteorologist/Producer for the NOAA National Weather Service Alaska Region to interview stakeholder Molly McCammon, Director of AOOS. The outreach segment was broadcasted by Anchorage KAKM-Channel 7, an affi liate of PBS Television Network.Having an integrated NOAA team in Alaska has both enabled collaborations that would not have occurred otherwise and expanded existing partnerships and collaborations to provide more comprehensive services to our customers. Key to this is the ARCTic’s ability to bring a bigger picture view of emerging opportunities and leverage the capabilities and assets of a broader range of users. Another factor in the ARCTic’s ability to enhance collaboration and engagement with agencies, academics, and other entities is the team’s focus on important, multi-dimensional issues that NOAA cannot address alone. Doing this has fostered a focus on common interests and laid the groundwork for achieving goals once thought out of reach.
26 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

Alaska, also known as “The Great Land” or “The Last Frontier” is sorrounded by the Pacifi c Ocean, Bering Sea, Chukchi Sea, and the Arctic Ocean

What to Expect in Alaska in 2020

One of benefi ts of integrating across the agency and establishing more regular contact with our customers is the increased understanding of emerging trends in the environment and industry. The following sections describe our understanding of expected and/or desired changes in Alaska between now and 2020. Given the complexity of many of these issues and the lead time necessary for agency action, we view the topics listed below as the core of what NOAA needs to plan for in order to be able to provide the services Alaskans and all Americans demand.

Climate Change Impacts on Alaska and the Adjacent Arctic Maritime Environment

This section of the ISP highlights key climate impact areas that the ARCTic and its non-NOAA partners have identifi ed as priorities. One criterion for selecting these specifi c areas is that NOAA has a responsibility to provide useful and meaningful information, products, and services that are of direct value to Alaskans and other Arctic region decision makers and planners. The regional NOAA line offi ces in Alaska, in collaboration with regional partnerships, can reasonably expect to improve on existing and introduce new products and 

services in response to adaptation and coping with climate change. The vision papers associated with this ISA and ISP refl ect specifi c actions being explored to address current gaps and potential future needs that NOAA must plan for in order to meet its mission in Alaska and the larger Arctic region.Recent real world observed changes in the Arctic region demand that scientists re-evaluate current Arctic models and look more closely at the most recent rate and extent of observed changes to guide them in adjusting the performance of the models. Typically, historical observations and conditions are used to initialize forecast/prediction models. However, the time has come when the “traditional” approach to modeling requires a fresh perspective to capture current observed trends. Recent sea ice and permafrost conditions reveal that current models are not forecasting the actual rate and extent of change in these two critical observed physical conditions in Alaska and the Arctic region. Other observed conditions also appear to be more severe than predicted. Native Alaskan elders are coming to NOAA asking for assistance because the “old ways” no longer are useful in predicting sea ice and other conditions necessary to support subsistence hunting for the winter.Temperature and precipitation trends are two essential climate variables that most directly infl uence the Arctic region and impact a wide range of societal and environmental factors. Signifi cant physical characteristics readily measureable and monitored are sea ice, precipitation, sea surface temperature, sea level change, and the thawing of the permafrost and glaciers. Changes in these characteristics present opportunities and challenges to people and ecosystems. Less sea ice will cause shifts in the migration patterns of marine mammals, 

as well as the productivity oand other levels in the marichain. Open coastal waters resulted in extensive and raerosion in west coast commas Shishmaref. Similarly, on Slope, wind driven wave erostorms in September and Oeroded 100 feet of shoreline Halkett. Through the Alaska Baseline Assessment, USACE compilecommunities that according munity, an interested agencholder, is experiencing somsion problem. To date, 181 have been identifi ed. Of thmately 90 communities can ered coastal communities wother communities being wtidal infl uence along rivers. increases the extent of coastion and threatens coastal eand infrastructures. Permafhas aff ected terrestrial and rine environments and threland transportation routes tcollapse of the ground surfaof lakes and wetlands, toppcollapse of structures in susareas, and accelerated coasselect locations. The impact of climate chantied to social and economic risks. Key areas of concern alow and have driven the selsion papers in this ISP. It is irecognize that all the vision inter-related on the basis of and coping with the impactchange on society and the eThere are numerous climate pacts listed in the Arctic ClimAssessment Report, which ineed to focus on a few immrisk ones, such as:
28

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

Law of the Sea Treaty. This requires examination and evaluation of signifi cant ecological issues.Northwest and Northern (across Russia) Passages - Navigation and Maritime Hazards Accidents – Related to sea ice: Open water over greater areas, for longer periods of time will provide the incentive to increase ship traffi c. This requires focus on relevant issues such as navigation accidents, oil spills, search and rescue, etc.Native Way of Life Issues – Related to sea ice, as well as fresh water run off from glacial melt changing coastal ocean chemistry: Hunting whales, seals and walrus; changes in food chain tied to sea ice; sea surface temperature; ocean water chemistry (salinity, ocean acidifi -cation); and the food chain connected to walrus and seal feeding patterns, mating habits, denning, etc. There are indications that certain fi sh stocks are mov- ing northward as the sea temperature increases. This requires expanding/com- pleting/sustaining the arctic maritime observing systems and monitoring/as- sessing trends to determine the change in and on the marine ecosystems. Drought-Increase wild fi res and more – Related to changing weather patterns/ precipitation trends and connected to permafrost thawing: immediate actions that will address observations, monitor- ing, and assessments include deploying the U.S. Climate reference Network to Alaska; updating Precipitation Frequen- cy Estimates (PFE) for Alaska; and fully integrating with the NSF lead-U.S. multi- agency/international Arctic Observing Network (AON). NCDC already produces Drought Monitor Reports that include Alaska.

Assessing and coping with climate change will require a broad coalition of subject matter expert partners within Alaska. Key players in the state include NOAA (including operational units and the NOAA Arctic Research program); the NOAA Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) at the Alaska Climate Research Center (ACRC); UAF; NOAA Cooperative Institute for Arctic Research (CIFAR) at UAF; International Arctic Research Center (IARC) at UAF; the Alaska State Climatologists (SC); the Alaska Ocean Observing System (AOOS); the North Pacifi c Research Board (NPRB); coordinating bodies such as the Arctic Research Consortium, and North Slope Science Initiative; individual federal, state, and local agencies, such as the EPA, USCG, USGS, NPS, USDA, DOT, etc.; and industry. In addition, organizations from outside the state will also contribute. Some of these players are: the Western Regional Climate Center (RCC) in Reno, NV, the NOAA National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), NOAA Pacifi c Marine Environmental Lab (PMEL) in Seattle, WA, and the NOAA Earth Systems Research Lab (ESRL) in Boulder, CO. Internationally, the Arctic Council and its six working groups provide a forum to coordinate the eff orts across the Arctic nations.Climate change is also being taken seriously in the State government. In 2006, the legislature established an 11 member Alaska Climate Impact Assessment Commission and the governor formed a Climate Change Sub-Cabinet. The Commission is tasked to develop a comprehensive overview of the likely impacts of climate change in Alaska and identify steps that can be taken to mitigate them. The Sub-Cabinet was formed to advise the governor and the legislature on the preparation and implementation of an Alaska climate change strategy. In the wake of the release of their fi nal 

commission report on March 17, 2008, several advisory boards have been tasked to examine state adaptation and response options.

Commercial Development of the Arctic Ocean As ice cover decreases around the Arctic Ocean, many industries have begun to evaluate potential opportunities presented by newly opened waterways, particularly the Northern Sea Route along the Russian coast and the Northwest Passage through the Canadian Arctic. While the potential for of these Trans-Arctic routes are clear, the economics and many other factors remain to be worked out, leaving the development of these sea lanes as a long term prospect. A review of recent and on going arctic shipping assessments suggest that increased regional shipping will likely increase in the short term, beginning in the Barents Sea via expanding the already existing resource exports from northern Russia. Regional shipping aff ecting Alaska in the foreseeable future is likely to come in the form of increased oil and gas development and fi shing.Increases in oil and gas activities are already underway. In January 2008, the Minerals Management Service (MMS) approved a Development/Production Plan for British Petroleum’s Liberty Prospect in the nearshore waters of the Beaufort Sea. Liberty will be developed from shore using extended reach drilling and may see production within 5 years. On February 6, 2008, MMS held a Chukchi Sea Lease Sale that brought a record breaking $2.6 billion from 667 bids on 488 blocks. Additional Lease Sales are expected in the Beaufort Sea (late 2009 and 2011) and Chukchi Sea (2010 and 2012) over the coming years. These sales require the owners to 

explore the lease over a ten If companies are successful resources, the fi rst productioChukchi Sea will be in the 1timeframe. Seasonal explorapaigns into the Arctic currenof 15-20 vessels and are expbecome commonplace. In athese vessels, an increasing research vessels can be expregion to assess and monitomental baseline conditions, pacts of oil and gas exploratand to detect changing trenecosystem.We held Chukchi Sea Lease February 6, 2008. The Sale wbreaking with 667 bids on 4and brought in about $2.6 bhigh bids. From this, we expclose to 488 leases. We’re alto hold Beaufort Sea lease s2009 and 2011, plus additiothe Chukchi Sea in 2010 and expect an increase in the neof industry-submitted explodevelopment plans here on OCS. However, this will be apace. If companies are succing resources, we would not production from the Chukchand more likely 15 years. In approved a Development/PPlan for BP’s Liberty Prospecshore waters of the Beauforbe developed from shore used reach drilling and may setion within 5 years. Other pfrom the Beaufort Sea will dthe results of any future expIncreased fi shing has the poadd vessel traffi c volume to as we begin to evaluate comfi sh species ecosystems in thIncreasing water temperatulonger open water season is 
30 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Expanding Homeland Security and Military ActivitiesThe National Defense, Homeland Security, Fisheries Enforcement, Pollution Prevention and Response, and Search and Rescue aspects of the changing Arctic have prompted the USCG and the U.S. Military to signifi cantly increase their operations in the region. In 2008, the USCG is planning to initiate both air and sea operations in the Arctic. At sea, the icebreaker Healy will continue its Law of the Sea mapping mission and the icebreaker Polar Sea will conduct Homeland Security related shipping and navigation assessments. Meanwhile, the cutter Spar will conduct a waterways analysis and management system mission along the North Slope. Bridging land and water, Barrow will likely be home for a tailored force package deployment that will focus on learning how to operate in the Arctic environment. Prudhoe Bay will see the arrival of a maritime security unit from Anchorage. Meanwhile, other Coast Guard members will engage with the coastal communities and help them adapt to dealing with large ships and other changes on the horizon.Similarly, the U.S. Alaska Command is planning for an increased presence in the Arctic. Two initial actions are to develop a strategy for defending U.S. interests in the Arctic and initiating routine air and sea surveillance. Important to both entities is the choke point of the Bering Strait. In 2007, the USCG had to “fl y the line” in a show of force between the U.S. and Russian fi shing fl eets that as 

a result of following their prey northward had reduced their normal separation from over 50 miles to less than a half mile. This underscores the need for the International Maritime Organization to set rules for the Arctic - a process that 

even if started in 2008 is likely to take 10 years to accomplish. These trends and projections signifi cantly increase the requirements for NOAA 

activities in Alaska. No corner of the agency is unaff ected. Climate research and services; weather; nautical charts; tides and currents; positioning; remote sensing; and fi sheries surveys are just a few of the agency functions that will be called for to address these changing conditions. With these prospects in mind, the ARCTic worked with representatives from key partner and customer organizations to identify scenarios for long term planning.

Satellite Data over Alaska and the Arctic RegionAlaska and the Arctic Region experience an incredible diversity of environmental phenomena, yet ironically the region is one of the most data-sparse areas in the world. Polar orbiting satellite-borne sensors off er one of the most cost eff ective means of gaining repetitive information on Alaska and Arctic weather and the environment on scales ranging from synoptic to mesoscale in a systematic manner over such a data-sparse region. Because of Alaska’s high latitude location, polar satellites can provide coverage about every 2 hours at high resolution.A new generation of satellite sensors to better monitor, detect and track weather and the environment are being designed (i.e., NOAA NPOESS) and some are actually in orbit. This replacement of older satellites will begin in earnest in 2009 and continue through 2020. These satellites involve not only our domestic and research satellites, but include foreign systems with unique sensors that will provide additional information on 

the environment and the weather. These new satellites off er increased capabilities and open new science opportunities for observing and learning about the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, lithosphere and biosphere systems. As an example, climate change is producing reduced ice cover in the Bering/Chukchi/Beaufort Seas, making coastlines vulnerable to coastal fl ooding and erosion. It is critical to capture rapidly moving storms with strong winds moving over large sea ice free areas that can produce large waves and storm surges that aff ect low lying coasts of northern Alaska. New and improved sensors will provide a greater knowledge and confi dence of Arctic weather systems, thus resulting in improved lead times and quality of warnings and forecasts to the public, marine and aviation communities. In addition, the high resolution data will also provide critical information to our partners and collaborators on potential eff ects on the ecosystem, climate change, and social and economic ramifi cations. To meet the expanding customer needs for timely, high resolution satellite data over Alaska and the Arctic, NOAA NWS, National Environmental Satellite and Data Service, along with the University of Alaska have formed a partnership to utilize the NOAA Fairbanks Command and Data Acquisition Facility (CDA) with its multiple satellite capture systems as the “NOAA Regional Downlink” for Alaska. The CDA will be responsible for capturing a diverse number of multi-satellite data and sharing that data with the National Weather Service, Alaska Region and its partners. 
32 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

Scenarios for Long-Term NOAA Planning and Investment

Based on the trends we identifi ed, our working groups identifi ed a series of likely scenarios related to NOAA. This 

document is the fi rst iteration of describing these possible futures and is intended to promote further discussion and collaboration. These scenarios describe aspects of the future of Alaska as either how we expect it to be (e.g., environmental changes) or how we hope to infl uence it (e.g., increased safety). Each of these scenarios represents a conjunction of interests and goals between NOAA and its partners, constituents, and customers. Once the common ground was identifi ed, we embarked on an eff ort to defi ne NOAA’s role in these scenarios and near and long term actions the agency should 

consider undertaking.

Alaska Climate Services PartnershipVisionLong-term planning in Alaska will be guided in 2015 by an Alaska Climate Services Partnership. BackgroundClimate change experts have long said that impacts will be greatest and observed fi rst in the high latitude Arctic regions of the globe. Alaska is already experiencing climate change related impacts such as shortening of the ice season, loss of multi-year polar sea ice, retreat of glaciers, increased storm intensity, shifts in precipitation patterns, increase risk of wildfi res, permafrost thaw, coastal erosion and inundation, and signifi cant changes in ecosystems. Congress is considering legislation regarding the establishment of a National Climate Service. In response, NOAA and other agencies are developing a draft National Climate Service strategy plan and concept of operations that would rely heavily on NOAA's extensive U.S. 

infrastructure, and leverage partnerships at the international, national, regional, state, and local levels, as well as academia. In 2007-2008, Alaska State Legislature commissioned and completed an Alaska Climate Impact Assessment Study (Mar 17, ‘08). Also in 2007, the Governor of Alaska established a Climate Change Sub-Cabinet and charged it with the development and implementation ofa state climate change strategy. Since formation, the Sub-Cabinet has established four working groups. The Immediate Actions Work Group delivered its fi rst Recommendations Report on Climate Change in April 2008. State funding has already been applied to these actions. The Mitigation and Adaptation Advisory groups will deliver their recommendations in the spring of 2009. The fourth group, Research Needs, is also expected to be active in 2008-9. With Alaska at the forefront; it is time for NOAA and its partners to characterize the climate services partnership in the state.

Objective• Develop an Alaskan Climate Services Partnership that provides decision-makers with information for climate change adaptation and 

mitigation actions.• Bridge the Gap between NOAA and State Agencies. Improve communications between NOAA scientists and state government agencies (such as the Alaska Departments of Fish and Game, Environmental Conservation, and Natural Resources) on climate science, the 

potential impacts, and data needs for those agencies concerning climate change.

Mission (NOAA’s Role)• Continue to be a recognized leader in providing science-based research and operational products, and services relevant to Alaska and the Arctic region.• Play a leadership role in the development and implementation of an Alaska Climate Services Partnership.• Advocate for Alaska and the Arctic region in the larger National Climate Service Partnership.• Provide a distribution mechanism for Alaskan and National Climate Products and Services• Work with other federal agencies, academia and the research community to transition research to operations• Identify and address unique Alaska-specifi c climate issues 

Gap AnalysisThe demand for relevant and reliable Alaska climate data, information, and ssive and coordinated clearing house or service available to provide the inforrequire to plan immediate response, adaptation, or mitigation actions across the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is too large a scale to be usAlaska needs:• a forum for users to identify needs (products and services) appropriate for • a mechanism to leverage and coordinate all entities providing climate info• a specifi c set of services (including the national services) appropriate for A• a mechanism to distribute and provide access to the climate services in the • a comprehensive inventory of current research, monitoring and data collecImmediate ActionsNOAA can take immediate steps to improve/initiate: • Identify existing NOAA organizations that support NOAA Alaskan custome• Inventory and catalog existing NOAA Alaska regional products and service• Provide common portal for access and contacting Alaskan NOAA-based ac• Expand collaboration with academia and the research community as well a• Increase dialogue with stakeholders and customers regarding climate imp• Maintain and continue to develop NOAA’s relationship with the Alaska Clim• Engage partners and stakeholders in the development of the concept and • Maintain an active NOAA Alaskan Regional Team to facilitate engagement • Identify existing NOAA activities that will support state immediate action, Benefi ts & Risks• Building the state's knowledge of the actual and foreseeable eff ects of clim• Developing appropriate measures and policies to prepare communities in • Improving understanding of the causes and impacts of climate change th• Focused and coordinated Alaska/Arctic customer driven fora and approach pressing customer specifi c needs• Improved capability to support the development and implementation of pand strategies that cope and respond to regional climate change impacts aff • Improved knowledge of ongoing Alaskan operational and research activitisity, and business costs while accelerating results driven outcomes benefi ciathe Nation.• Alaska specifi c customer information and access portal for data, informatio• Stimulate private sector entrepreneurial business development and oppor• Enhancing local preparation for, and response to coastal inundation, sea ic• Sustaining eff orts to integrate and keep engaged wide range of partners. services in view of wide range of users and partners. • Risks of creating the partnership include the diversion of resources from exservice providers; and the potential to create additional bureaucracy.Dependencies: Cooperation and coordination with multiple federal, state, lo

public business sectors (NSSI, Alaska Pilots Assoc., AK Mariners Assoc., etc. ), WRCC, ACCAP, RISA, etc.), and international partners (Canada, IARC, AON, etc
34 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Climate Change Impacts – Observing and MonitoringVisionFor the Arctic region, defi ne climate change impacts on socio-economic factors and ecosystems and contribute to executable plans for adaptation and coping with impacts.BackgroundRecent real world observed changes in the Arctic region indicate the projections of current models are in some cases not adequately forecasting the recently documented rate and extent of change. One example is the annual arctic sea ice patterns with regard to extent and duration. Scientists need to reevaluate current arctic models and look more closely at the recent rate and extent of observed 

changes to guide them in evaluating and adjusting the performance of the models. Typical historical observations and conditions are no longer proving to be a solid basis for plausible future projections and predictions as evidence over the past few years. Researcher scientists require adequate quality and number of observations to monitor the present rate of change. Applied scientists need access to more 

observations and improved models to assist in the daily operational monitoring and generation of forecasts for use by the public.

This vision paper focuses on improving the access to and utility of newly taken observations to support monitoring the current “state of the climate” changes in the Arctic region. While the initial focus is on NOAA observing systems, the intent is to create an inventory and improved access to as many observing systems, NOAA and non-NOAA, operating in the Alaska/Arctic region. It contributes to NOAAplans for additional observations in the region and associated data management and access capabilities. This vision paper is directly associated with other Alaskan Regional Team vision papers, which directly or indirectly are associated with climate change and impacts related issues. 

Objectives• Close critical observational gaps.• Improve monitoring of change across Alaska through timely analysis of new observations linked to the historical observational records.• Contribute to the development, testing, validation and improvements to operational models that provide predictive analysis and probabilities for design and delivery of decision support tools and information meaningful and useful to Alaskan planners.Mission (NOAA’s Role)Provide climate change monitoring and analyses in support of national, regional, state, and local requirements for planning adaptation and coping strategies, and implementation of action plans that address socio-economic benefi ts and responsible environmental stewardship.Gap AnalysisObserving and Monitoring: • Lack comprehensive inventory of all observing systems that can contribute to measuring and monitoring climate change trends across Alaska and the adjacent marine environment. This includes NOAA, NPS, USDA, USGS, Federal/State DOT, and Others. • Lack comprehensive inventory of data management archive and access locations for observations, data, and information.• Lack central web-based “gateway” to easily access Alaska/Arctic data and information.• Comprehensive solar radiation monitoring network in Alaskaa quality-controlled, comprehensive, and searchable climatological database for Alaska.Applied Research to Operational Applications:• Lack Priority List (and associated plan of action for development and transition to operations) for Alaskan decision support tools and other climate change impact related analysis and information from Alaskan user communities.• Lack Alaskan User driven list of applied research topics and relevant priority.

Immediate Actions Observing and Monitoring:• Complete inventory of NOAA observing systems in Alaska. Leverage existiAOOS• Begin deploying USCRN stations in Alaska.• Experiment with HF Radars for wave and current observations• Begin inventory of non-NOAA agencies, i.e. AOOS, NPS, USDA, USGS, etc. DSlope Science Initiative, and GINA• Develop list for NOAA bottom mounted off shore wave sensors - priority pl• Submit list to NOAA NOS LO, IOOS, and Climate Goal GOOS for additional ttions.Applied Research to Operations Applications:• Utilize the Alaskan Governor’s Climate Change Sub-Cabinet Committee fi nquirements in Alaska.• Conduct or collaborate on a comprehensive inventory of current research.• Install (examine and tune for future operational runs) NWS NCEP and otheUAF supercomputer to better support arctic maritime communities and opefor:• extreme events and identifying the associated synoptic drivers.• Include Alaska coastal zone projects under the NOAA Hazard (coastal) Resi• AK candidate HCN sites added to offi cial USHCN list of sites.• Review satellite data for the Arctic region received at Fairbanks for potentia• Communicate with the University of Alaska regarding potential joint activi• In collaboration with the Sea Grant College Program, the federal and state 

collect anecdotal and historical photo information on changes to local cond

Benefi ts & Risks• Increase value and utility of satellite and other remote/in-situ measuremen• Reduced (defer/minimize) cost of implementing adaptive-coping strategie• Increased support to Alaskan economic sectors, such as marine transporta• Improved model performance and better defi ned of uncertainty limits.• NOAA not prepared to provide adequate climate information services acroin natural resources exploration, maritime/aviation transportation, and chanaround Alaska and the Arctic region.
Habitat Conservation Program

36 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Aviation WeatherVisionEnhance NOAA’s NWS aviation weather forecasts and warnings to contribute towards a continued reduction in the fatality rate for pilots in Alaska through 2015.BackgroundWhile pilot fatality rates in Alaska have decreased 51% during the period 2000-06, they remain well above the national average. A 2006 

study by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health reported that the commercial pilot’s accident rate was fi ve times higher than the national average. The disproportionate accident rate for Alaska is partly the result of the utter reliance of air travel between 

communities which have no road or other year-around access. Many of these fl ights are conducted in single engine aircraft, which are often most subject to the infl uences of weather. Given the size of the state (one fi fth the size of the 48 contiguous states) exposure to weather is unavoidable. Improved weather forecasts, education and outreach eff orts have played a role in the reduction of accidents during this decade, yet more remains to be done to bring this accident rate in line with the rest of the nation. The recently observed changes in coastal weather, and enlarged forest fi re burns also impact aviation, making accurate and detailed aviation forecasts an absolute necessity.

ObjectiveContinue to contribute towards the reduction in the number of fatal aircraft accidents in Alaska through 2015 by providing more detailed and accurate forecasts and warnings delivered to aviators in a format which best meets their needs.Mission (NOAA’s Role)• Provide aviation weather forecast products with increased accuracy and spatial detail.• Provide products that are easy to access, clear in their content, and tailored to pilots’ needs. • Work closely with aviation community to develop and implement pilot education eff orts regarding aviation weather.• Conduct outreach eff orts throughout the aviation community to ensure our customers have a clear understanding of the products and services available to them through NOAA’s NWS. Gap AnalysisAviation Forecast Services:• Allow NOAA’s NWS to be able to translate advances in the science of meteorology towards improved operational aviation forecasts and 

warnings. • Ensure these aviation forecast and service improvements are consistent with our customers’ needs.Education:• Continue eff orts to educate our customers in two areas:• Alaska weather and climate, with a focus on the unique meteorological hazards inherent to aviation operations in Alaska.• How to interpret and best utilize our aviation forecast products. Outreach:• Ensure our customers have a clear, concise knowledge of what aviation forecast products are available to them and how to access those products.

Immediate ActionsAviation Forecast Services:• Conduct a thorough review of the current 37 National Weather Service (NWS) Terminal Aerodrome Forecast (TAF) sites across the state to ensure they are representative of the needs of the aviation community. • Continue development of an Aviation Weather 4-Dimensional Gridded data set (NextGen Weather Information Database). This will provide forecasters at the NWS’ Alaska Aviation Weather Unit (AAWU), as well as forecasters at our NWS Weather Forecast Offi ces (WFOs) throughout the state, with a common meteorological data set. This will allow for a more accurate, consistent suite of aviation weather 

forecast and warning products. • Actively pursue the acquisition of additional weather data, to include addi

expansion of Tropospheric Airborne Meteorological Data Reporting (TAMDAprojects. • Leverage the centralized services of the NWS’ National Centers for Environmforecasters with additional forecasting support and information.• Explore through research and development the ability to predict forest fi re • Implement a graphical Volcanic Ash Advisory (VAA) at the U.S. Volcanic Ash graphic will depict 0, 6, 12, and 18 hour forecast positions and tops of ash clodispersion model output. This graphic will satisfy International Civil Aviation • Partner with Flight Service on eff orts to develop single internet site tying tEducation:• Develop a comprehensive “Alaska Weather Atlas for Pilots”. This atlas would which would be available in both hardcopy and interactive Internet version.• Examine the feasibility of producing pilot training segments on aviation foInternet home page. • Investigate the possibility of developing an aviation segment to be includeSecond Life. Outreach:• Revise NWS’ Alaska Aviation Weather Unit’s current “Alaska Aviation Forecaavailable from other aviation partners. • Produce “Alaska Weather” educational segments on KAKM-TV which highli“Alaska Weather”, a cooperative eff ort between public television channel KAweek across Alaska. Included in each show is an educational/public service aviation community. • Develop a single Internet site which would tie together all relevant weathe

into a single geographically referenced, layered map using GIS/ArcView-type home page could provide that resource. Also investigate the possibility of p• Explore the possibility of deploying weather kiosks to smaller airports acroThese kiosks could tie in NWS aviation forecast products to Flight Services w

Benefi ts & Risks• Signifi cant growth in the science of meteorology has occurred over the paadvances towards NWS aviation forecast services will result in little or no qua

• Alaska is unique in both the number and diff erent types of aviation weathe

must be in place to provide pilots and Flight Service briefers with this criticaaviation accident rates. • New meteorological technologies will produce more accurate aviation foreout increased outreach and education of these new aviation forecast produc• Unless these multiple resources are integrated into a single, easy-to-navigathe reduction in pilot fatalities. • NOAA is not prepared to provide adequate climate information services acsurge in natural resources exploration, maritime/aviation transportation, and 

and around Alaska and the Arctic region.
Habitat Conservation Program

38 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Aviation Services – Unmanned Aircraft SystemsVisionBy 2015, Alaska agencies will have the ability to operate Unmanned Aircraft Systems to enable long term monitoring and scientifi c studies of arctic climate change and weather including but not limited to: arctic pack ice (e.g., age, distribution, and thickness); river ice breakup jam threats (ice condition, location of jams, fl ooding extent); arctic boundary layer and clouds (e.g., energy balance, clouds, and aerosols); populations and habitat (e.g., ice seals, walrus, caribou, and birds); provision of observations for prediction of high impact weather (e.g., coastal erosion, wildfi re suppression, volcanic ash, and oil spill response); homeland security surveillance activities (e.g., pipeline and border control); and ocean and terrestrial observation (e.g., ocean and coastal mapping and ocean color).BackgroundRoutine monitoring of key atmospheric, ice and ecosystems conditions is very diffi cult in the Arctic. Access to the arctic airspace is limited severely by current airspace restrictions, and the lack of certifi cation of these aircraft. Most of these restrictions are directly related to the ability of an agency/operator of UAS to obtain certifi cate of authorizations (COA) from the Federal Aviation Administration. COAs to date 

have depended on visual fl ight rules (e.g., daylight, with limited cloudiness) and visual line of site with chase aircraft. Additionally, arctic conditions include frequent cloudiness and long intervals without daylight during periods when NOAA missions would be required. Use of chase aircraft off shore would poise a greater risk to fl ight crews in a region without search and rescue, and cannot stay on station with 

UAS for as long as the UAS fl ights.

ObjectiveClimate change is occurring throughout the arctic environmental system, and current observation systems are not adequate to detect the full suite of changes that are underway. There is an urgent need for enhanced, coordinated and sustained observing sites, systems and networks in the Arctic. Observations provide essential data on the magnitude, variation and rate of current and past environmental change, and are vital for the initialization, calibration and validation of computer models that allow simulation of the arctic environmental system and its global connections.Mission (NOAA’s Role)The NOAA UAS project in the Arctic is poised to explore use of UAS to fi ll key observational gaps, jointly with the Climate Goal.Gap Analysis Climate changes are already occurring in the Arctic. The nation should apply 21st Century science and observations to address these changes. The need for measurements in the remote, and yet important, regions in and around Alaska, particularly for climate change, weather prediction and marine mammal monitoring are critical.Immediate Actions• Work with the UAS project manager to streamline the COAs process for NOAA missions in a “warning area”.• Urge FAA and UAS manufactures to certify their craft, including provision for “sense and avoid” so that they may fl y unencumbered in the National Airspace System (NAS).Benefi ts & RisksAn enhanced monitoring network will improve NOAA’s ability to forecast hazards that threaten life and property in a timely fashion. 

Marine Navigation & SafetyVisionProvide an integrated and concise suite of NOAA products and services for tand environmentally sound maritime operations. BackgroundAlaska’s marine environment is one of the most challenging in the nation. Nforecasting everything from hurricane force storms in the Bering Sea, ice conabundance, and space weather eff ects on GPS systems and radio communicmarine transportation system continues to grow and expand. Over 100 cruiyear. Unimak Pass, a major commercial route through the Aleutian Islands, s25% over 2006 and an additional 5-10% annual growth rate is expected. Recters to commercial and recreational interests. New sea routes, development an increase in the types and quality of NOAA products for the Arctic. Objective• Develop an initial assessment of current NOAA marine products and servicAleutians and Arctic.• Integrate across line offi ces existing and newly developed NOAA marine p• Combine NOAA and external partners’ observations and infrastructure to pand to identify trends in all aspects of the system.• Participate in International oil in ice studies and experiments in order to asmishap in the Arctic. Mission (NOAA’s Role)Have a full understanding of marine users’ information needs to be better poto remote Alaskan waters as maritime activities and research increase.Gap AnalysisAn overall analysis of the adequacy of NOAA products and services for the mwhere integration or modifi cation would better serve the community. Curre

waters. Work with internal and external partners as well as maritime stakeho

marine transportation system usage will go a long ways in fi lling this gap. InAlaska), increasing energy prices, and the impact these two issues will have 

Immediate ActionsCreate an index of NOAA products and services currently available to the matide, currents, ice and weather information, emergency response tools, envirLook for areas of integration. Conduct Information exchange with the marine community regarding curreproject, integrate space weather forecast/indices into HF/Navtex marine foreweather impacts on satellite navigation and radio communications.Conduct a study in cooperation with the Marine Exchange of Alaska to devetomatic Identifi cation System) vessel tracking and communications infrastruBenefi ts & RisksThe benefi ts of concise integrated NOAA products are the prevention or imp

environmental harm, loss of property and interruption of commercial activit

production of raw materials. The risks of not providing the above information are the diminishment of than increase in marine casualties due to the non-availability of information to 
Habitat Conservation Program

40 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Mapping and Reference Framework for AlaskaVisionBy 2020, Alaska will have a geospatial reference frame that will meet national standards of accuracy and resolution to support detailed 

digital mapping with in the state as well as fast accurate GPS positioning with sub-foot accuracy both horizontally and vertically. 

Background Alaska is the only state that does not have digital imagery and elevation maps at nationally accepted standards. The sheer size and remoteness of the state has precluded this in the past. The underlying horizontal and vertical reference datums, NAD 83 and NAVD 88 are the foundation of our nation’s National Spatial Reference System (NSRS), which is the geodetic control system of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), as mandated by OMB circular A-16. However, in Alaska the NSRS does not have the density of control points to support sub-meter accuracies for mapping and positioning activities. In the case of the vertical datum, NAVD 88, it does not even provide coverage to the entire western half of the state. Today, almost all spatial mapping and data collection is GPS based. It is essential for the NSRS to have the accuracy needed to support positioning activities in Alaska. A number of projects in Alaska will be signifi cantly more accurate and useful if they are built on an updated and accurate NSRS. For example, accurate fl ood modeling and fl oodplain determination depend greatly on vertical accuracy of the vertical datum used in creating fl oodplain maps. To monitor sea level rise and coastal erosion, vertical datum accuracy is also critical. Tsunami inundation models and 

wild fi re predication and control are other areas where accurate positioning and mapping is essential. Many of these are being addressed 

through the Alaska State Digital Mapping Initiative (SDMI). However, the high resolution and accuracy of the digital elevation model SDMI is planning will only be as good as the underlying reference frames, or datums, that it is built on. 

Objective• To improve the current NSRS in Alaska to meet national mapping standards.• To increase the density of CORS stations within Alaska especially in coastal regions. To support NGS’s GRAV-D plan through planning and budgeting process as a mean to improve NSRS in Alaska• Assist in the Alaska SDMI to ensure the products are available to all NOAA line offi ces who’s work involves Alaska issues.Mission (NOAA’s Role) To fully develop the horizontal and vertical datums in Alaska upon which all geospatial data is based and support the Alaska SDMI to 

provide digital imagery and elevation models that will be benefi cial to a wide range of NOAA products and services 

Gap Analysis Two main aspects of a National Spatial Reference System need to be addressed in Alaska. The fi rst is the coverage and density of the continuously operating GPS reference stations or CORS. Currently Alaska has about 30 CORS. Increasing the number of CORS through cooperation and collaboration with internal and external partners will increase the accuracy of positions determined through GPS and 

will connect remote area of the state with the NSRS. Second, in order to determine orthometric heights (“elevations above mean sea level”) a geoid model (part of Earth’s gravity fi eld) is needed to covert GPS measured (ellipsoid) heights to the more physically meaningful orthometric heights. (Orthometric heights determine the direction of water fl ow). Currently the geoid model for Alaska has as much as 2 meters of error. NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey (NGS) has developed the GRAV-D plan to conduct a nationwide gravity survey with the aim of developing a high accuracy geoid model for the nation. Alaskan coastal areas are one of the fi rst areas to be addressed in that plan. This survey would provide the vertical accuracies needed to for many geospatial data users, especially those interested in fl ooding, 

coastal erosion and other height related issues.Immediate Actions • The Arctic Regional Collaboration Team should show support for NGS’s GRAV-D plan in annual budget and program input processes • Collaboration across NOAA line offi ces and external partners should occur to co-locate a CORS station at existing or planned facilities • Show support for and assist Alaska’s SDMI and provide input to fi nal data products Benefi ts & RisksA well defi ned NSRS covering all of Alaska that is able to support modern GPS surveying techniques and GIS is a fundamental step in providing accurate positioning for the future. With the importance of the Arctic and climate change in this region, the risk of not addressing this is signifi cant. A well defi ned and robust reference system is central to all spatial data collected or produced in Alaska.

Arctic FisheriesVisionIn 2015, commercial fi shermen could be harvesting groundfi sh species nortBackgroundAs ocean temperatures rise, highly migratory fi sh such as walleye Pollock antion and could migrate northward from the southeastern Bering Sea, througtwo species comprise the majority of commercial catch in the $2billion groufi shing fl eet will likewise want to move northward during the summer monthistorical fi shing patterns will require new infrastructure along the Chukchi Senforcement confl icts, elevate the risk of oil spills and lost fi shing gear, and cObjectiveContinue marine resource stock assessment surveys in the US Exclusive Econthe Chukchi and Beaufort Seas off Alaska. Calculate relative and absolute ababundance levels will support a new fi shery. Determine if changes in ocean 

fi sh and marine mammal stocks.

Mission (NOAA’s Role)To understand and predict changes in the environment, and to conserve aneconomic, social, and environmental needs. Gap AnalysisThere presently exist very little information of fi sh species distribution, abunmust be undertaken to assess current fi sh and marine mammal species, theiresult in loss of sea ice, increased water temperature and changes to upwellimust continue in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands region to monitor shiftProduce products and services that can be used by managers and the indusImmediate ActionsNOAA must start planning for scientifi c research in the Chukchi and BeauforSurvey in August 2008 through collaboration with the Alaska Fisheries ScienMinerals Management Service.. Data from the 2004 and 2008 Russian-Amerbaseline information. In addition NOAA should: • Establish network with coastal residents for purposes of collecting data,• Sponsor- joint US-Russia scientifi c projects, and • Support the establishment of a regulatory regime (a Fishery Management 

tion of marine species until suffi cient research has been conducted.

Benefi ts & RisksDetermine the environmental baseline for fi sh and marine mammal resourcof overfi shing resident stocks as the commercial fl eet expands into the area. 

from fi shing disturbance. Scientifi c information can be used as the basis for sessment surveys will provide the information needed to determine whetheBeaufort Seas. Continued stock assessment surveys are needed in the Berin
Habitat Conservation Program

42 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Bering and Chukchi Sea Oil and Gas DevelopmentVisionBy 2015, the North Aleutian Basin and the Chukchi Sea/Hope Basin will be known as one of the largest oil and gas discoveries of recent times. By 2025, this region will become a major producer of oil and gas for the North American market. BackgroundThe U.S. Department of Interior Minerals Management Service (MMS) recently proposed an oil and gas program for 2007-2012 that includes one lease sale in the southwest corner of the North Aleutian Basin Planning Area-an area of about 5.6 million acres that includes most of the southeastern Bering Sea continental shelf and all of Bristol Bay. Any sale would be subject to environmental reviews, including public comment, before any development could proceed. The proposed lease sale is currently scheduled for 2011, but environmental studies may begin as early as 2008. Currently, there are no existing leases in the North Aleutian Basin.In 2008, the fi rst Chukchi Sea/Hope Basin lease sale since 1991 was held and resulted in a record number of tracts receiving bids. The total value of the bids off ered surpassed $3.4 billion and the total value for the bids accepted exceeded $2.6 billion. Such a successful sale refl ects the heightened interest in this region by the oil and gas industry. Mitigating potential environmental impacts of industry activity 

on subsistence hunting requires increased knowledge on marine mammal abundance and behavior in the Chukchi Sea region.

ObjectivesDevelop an up-to-date database for marine resources in the region for use in evaluating potential oil and gas development projects and 

their environmental eff ects.

Mission (NOAA’s Role)To understand and predict changes in Earth’s environment and to conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our Nation’s economic, social, and environmental needs.Gap AnalysisConsiderable biological information was obtained as part of the 1970’s MMS OCSEAP. Since then most resource surveys on marine fi sheries and marine mammals have been undertaken by NOAA Fisheries and USFWS. Independent research on marine species, marine habitats and oceanography has produced other data. An analysis is needed to determine where data gaps exist and where new data collection eff orts should be focused. In addition, detailed wave/storm climatologies, expanded response capabilities, and expanded marine navigation services including marine weather and ice forecasts are needed for safe oil and gas operationsImmediate ActionsThrough the NPRB and other overarching organizations, all physical, biological, and economic data need to be identifi ed and cataloged for future use. Continue and expand resource surveys throughout the region. NOAA is reviewing the emerging requirements to defi ne marine navigation requirements and identify priority actions. In addition the agency is establishing new marine off shore weather forecast zones in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas as well as enhancing their ice forecasting capacity.Benefi ts & RisksThe MMS estimates the North Aleutian Basin may contain as much as 750 million barrels of oil. But the basin’s potential for nearly nine trillion cubic feet of natural gas makes it particularly attractive for exploration and development. If developed, the basin’s energy resources may be worth $37 billion over the next 30 years.The proposed North Aleutian Basin lease sale lies within some of the world’s most lucrative commercial fi sheries and pristine wildlife habitat. The exvessel value of Bering Sea king and tanner crab, much of which is caught within the proposed lease sale area, was approximately $55 million in 2007. The nearby Pribilof Islands snow crab fi shery was worth about $56 million in 2007. The Bering Sea region also is home to herring, halibut, Pollock, cod, and other groundfi sh fi sheries that together are valued at more than $2 billion each year.Within the North Aleutian Basin, and east of the proposed lease sale, lies Bristol Bay, which is the center of one of the largest salmon fi sheries in the world. Commercial, subsistence, personal use and sport fi sheries defi ne the region’s people, communities and economy. In 2007, Bristol Bay fi shermen harvested nearly 30 million salmon, mostly sockeye, worth almost $108 million. Trophy hunters, photographers, eco-tourists, and others are attracted to the region’s several national and state parks, refuges, and monuments. The basin also is 

considered essential habitat for endangered species including the North Pacifi c right whale and Steller sea lion.

Ocean Acidifi cationVisionIn 2015, NOAA will have enough information about the potential eff ects of obe in a position to explore adaptive management techniques to mitigate adBackgroundApproximately 30-50% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions are absorbed is expected to reduce surface ocean pH by 0.3-0.5 units over the next centurlast 20-200 million years. Ocean acidifi cation reduces the calcium carbonate 

carbonate saturation have been observed in the North pacifi c since the induOcean acidifi cation likely will impact the ability of marine calcifi ers, such as ccium carbonate. This will occur principally because of a reduction in the avaand plates. In addition, ocean acidifi cation may elicit broad physiological resous pathways. For example, changes in ocean pH may aff ect the availability toxins to bacteria and phytoplankton, and internal CO2 concentrations of m

and marine mammal species through reduced abundance of marine calcifi eaff ect reproductive success of commercially important species by reducing dbroadcast into the ocean. Coldwater corals provide shelter for structure-orieeff ects imply that ocean acidifi cation may have important impacts on many an interagency committee to develop an ocean acidifi cation research and mObjectives• Understand processes of how high carbon dioxide levels aff ect calcifi catio

in order to develop models to forecast the impacts of ocean acidifi cation in A• Understand whether/how well marine calcifying organisms can acclimatiz

• Understand how species (important for economic, social, and biological rethan recent historic states.• Develop adaptive management techniques to mitigate impacts of Alaska oMission (NOAA’s Role)• The NOAA Alaska Fisheries Science Center is responsible for conducting scof fi sheries and marine mammals in the US Exclusive Economic Zone (e.g. 20Gap AnalysisThe AFSC, as part of its integrated ecosystem strategy to studying living marplans research in four areas to address the threat of ocean acidifi cation: • Conduct research targeted at understanding species-specifi c physiologica• Develop models to forecast the population, community and ecosystem im• Develop scenarios to forecast social and economic consequences of these • Collaborate with NOAA’s Pacifi c Marine Environmental Laboratory to moniImmediate ActionsThe AFSC has a well-developed single species and ecosystem modeling capfects of ocean acidifi cation (scenarios) and integrate studies of species-spec• Collaborate with NOAA’s Pacifi c Marine Environmental laboratory to monitplans to conduct long-term monitoring of ocean acidifi cation in the North P

platforms to PMEL scientists as well as collect data during its fi sheries and m• Explore partnerships with Sea Grant and the University of Alaska’s Institute social and economic consequences.

Benefi ts & RisksThe risk of not taking action is that we will be unable to understand the poteMitigative actions that may be possible through adaptive management requThe benefi t is that we may be able to maintain stability both of the ecosyste
Habitat Conservation Program

44 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

International Law of the Sea TreatyVisionBy 2020 the U.S. will have successfully defi ned the outer limits of an extended continental shelf (ECS) as set out under Article 76 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), enabling better management of the living and non-living resources of the ECSover which it has sovereign rights.BackgroundUnder Article 76 of UNCLOS, coastal states may extend their sovereign rights for exploring, exploiting, and managing natural resources 

on and below the seabed and subsoil beyond the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This includes oil and gas resources and living resources such as clams, crabs, scallops, sponges, and mollusks that live on the seabed, but does not include rights to conventional (non-sedentary) fi sh stocks. The Gulf of Alaska, the Bearing Sea, and the Arctic Ocean all have potentially vast ECS regions. Under UNCLOS, nations submit scientifi c data and reasoning to extend their continental shelf to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which, if supported, strengthen the legal certainty underlying the country’s assertion of entitlement. NOAA is leading the data management and integration eff ort supporting the multi-agency United States eff ort to characterize its ECS. 

Objective• Establish and maintain a long-term central database and metadata repository to support the analyses and compilation of the United States ECS submission to the CLCS.• Develop an ecosystem management plan for the resources within the potential U.S. ECS. • Provide products and services extending to the limits of US jurisdiction.Mission (NOAA’s Role)• Acquire, ingest, steward and serve data for analysis to defi ne the U.S. ECS.• Manage living marine resources within the expanded area of the potential U.S. ECS.• Provide navigation services to support shipping safety within the expanded area.• Provide forecasts and warnings to protect lives and property.Gap Analysis• We know very little about the depth, shape, and geophysical characteristics of the seabed and sub-sea fl oor for our northern waters and virtually nothing about the resources they contain.• There is currently no comprehensive Alaska spatial data compilation to support the data analysis and development of the U.S.ECS submission to the CLCS.• Regular fi sheries surveys are not conducted in the Chukchi and Beaufort Sea• NOAA weather forecasts and warnings do not cover the expanded area of the potential U.S. ECS.• Bathymetric information is extremely limited north of the Bering Strait.Immediate Actions• Coordinate and collaborate with the U.S. Task Force managing the ECS project.• Design a data management system to support the integration and analysis of data. • Continue arctic seafl oor mapping.• Extend arctic fi shing survey beyond currently planned area. • Collaborate across agencies to leverage available research funds to manage the ECS area. • Extend marine forecasts to the extent of the potential U.S. ECS.Benefi ts & Risks• Better accounting and understanding of the living and non-living resources of the U.S. ECS within the Gulf of Alaska, the Bering Sea, and the Arctic Ocean. • Sovereign rights over the resources on and under an extended area of the seabed.• Increased weather and navigation information will support safe vessel operations.• Fishery data will allow for eff ective management and law enforcement.• Input into climate and circulation models helping scientists predict future conditions in the Arctic.• Negative impact on international relations and domestic management capabilities in the region.• Falling behind neighboring States undertaking work to support their claims to ECS in the Arctic.• Potential loss of fi shery resources.• Potential confl icts between oil and gas, shipping industries, and marine mammals and other threatened species.

Integrated Ecosystem Assessments for Coastal AlaskVisionIn 2015, NOAA will have substantially improved and integrated coastal ecosyinformation and tools for scientifi cally-based decisions on resource manageBackgroundAlaskan coastal ecosystems, to include human communities, are experiencin

increasing coastal development, including off shore oil and gas activities, laralso continue to be threatened by natural and manmade coastal hazards, in(including hurricane force) storms, coastal erosion, harmful algal blooms, anscience-based information and decision support tools that are integrated acresources and protect community and ecosystem health. NOAA is moving to 

ment responsibilities by adopting ecosystem approaches to management (Ework for marine and coastal resource decision making. More simply, it meancontrast to individual species or single issue management, EAM considers a man factors bearing on societal choices regarding resource conservation ansupport EAM. NOAA senior management has articulated the need for ecosyunanswered questions as to how these approaches can actually be implemeAlaska coastal environments provide a key testing ground for these eff orts, bties in the state and degree of change it faces in the immediate future.

Objective• Conduct Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (IEAs) at appropriate spatial scSlope), regional (e.g. Cook Inlet, Prince William Sound) and local (e.g. Kachemlevel eff orts, particularly in the Pacifi c Ocean. • Conduct pilot projects on improving new technology to ecosystem characMission (NOAA’s Role)NOAA has multiple, cross-line offi ce management responsibilities in coastal federal, tribal, academic, non-profi t and industry partners. NOAA envisions grated, multidisciplinary framework, to more eff ectively support coastal manments in observing systems and ecosystem forecast models. NOAA will also capabilities to address Alaska’s remote environments and challenging condipartnerships between NOS (NCCOS and OCS), NMFS (AFSC and Alaska RegioGap AnalysisNOAA is limited in our ability to meet mission goals in coastal Alaska due to frameworks for natural science and socioeconomic information that suppor

ness of most of the Alaska coast also requires both novel and integrated app

Immediate Actions• Conduct a pilot coastal IEA at a local (bay or estuary) spatial scale in collab• Participate in an ecosystem assessment and research eff orts of NOAA budg• Entrain university participants in the Alaska IEA planning.• Explore need for Alaska-specifi c, NOAA-sponsored IEA workshop. • Explore linkages with terrestrial issues such as freshwater infl owBenefi ts & RisksBenefi ts include providing more scientifi cally-based and integrated informa

ability of Alaskan coastal communities to proactively adapt to short- and lonmore eff ective targeting of future NOAA investments in research, observing Alaska coastline. The risk of not making these investments will be less proacincreased economic costs for communities to adapt to the changing ecosyst
Habitat Conservation Program

46 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Improving Coastal Observations in AlaskaVisionIn 2015, NOAA will have new operational coastal observing system capabilities to provide Alaska coastal managers with the real-time and climatological information necessary for scientifi cally-based decisions on resource management and coastal development planning.BackgroundAlaskan coastal ecosystems, to include human communities, are experiencing changes associated with accelerating climate change and increasing coastal development, including off shore oil and gas activities, large-scale mines, and increased population. These ecosystems also continue to be threatened by natural and manmade coastal hazards, including tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, severe (including hurricane force) storms, harmful algal blooms, invasive species (including pathogens) and oil spills, among others. Half of the coastline of the U.S. is in Alaska, and existing coastal observations in Alaska are inadequate to support existing and future NOAA and other federal and state agency resource management, marine transportation, emergency response and public health responsibilities in the state. The Alaska Ocean Observing System (AOOS), with NOAA and other partner funding, has started to address these observing gaps, with initial eff orts concentrating on physical parameters and within Prince William Sound. NOAA’s Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) program addresses these issues at a national level.Objectives• Sustain and expand existing NOAA, other federal agency, AOOS and state of Alaska operational coastal observing networks.• Initiate new monitoring networks, particularly of biological parameters such as harmful algal blooms, to provide information that is currently missing, but critical to natural resource and public health management. • Conduct pilot projects on improving the application of existing and new technology to making observations in challenging and remote Alaskan coastal environments. Mission (NOAA’s Role) NOAA operational coastal observation networks include: CMAN stations; NDBC buoys; tide gauges; National Estuarine Research Reserve 

(NERR) System-wide Monitoring Program (SWMP) stations, and the National Status and Trends Program contaminant monitoring (Mussel Watch and Benthic Surveillance Projects). NOAA also provides funding for AOOS, which supports additional observing networks. 

Gap AnalysisNOAA and other federal, state, tribal, academic and private partners cannot eff ectively meet multiple mission responsibilities in coastal Alaska due to regional gaps in or complete lack of coastal observations for physical, chemical, biological and socio-economic parameters. The large Alaska coastline cannot be instrumented in the same way as the other half of the U.S. coast, so novel approaches and applications of new technology will be required to eff ectively and effi ciently address these gaps. Immediate Actions• Support sustained funding, through the NOAA budget planning process, for existing NOAA coastal observing networks. • Develop coordinated, regional priorities for the new investments needed for targeted expansions of these networks, using Alaska stakeholder input collected by AOOS and others. • Support sustained funding of operational observing networks operated by non-NOAA partners by providing partners with NOAA requirements for that information. For example, some of the USGS stream gauge data used by NMFS for essential fi sh habitat eff orts may 

require interagency support to compete successfully within the USGS budget process. • Collaborate with NURP, AOOS and other partners to support pilot projects for application of new technology, including remotely operated vehicles and innovative power and data telemetry, to make observations in remote environments. • Partner with existing UAF programs such as those run by faculty of the UAF School of Fisheries and Oceans Marine Advisory Program, who operate community based observation programs in communities such as Unalaska• Investigate collaborative eff orts between NOAA and the State of California for application in Alaska. 

Benefi ts & RisksBenefi ts include providing the sustained, multidisciplinary observations in coastal environments needed for resource management, maritime safety and transportation, emergency response, coastal development, research and other NOAA coastal missions. Withoutthis information NOAA is less able to meet its management responsibilities, and there are increased risks to maritime safety, decreased effi ciency in maritime commerce, increased economic costs for communities to adapt to ecosystem change, and increased risks to public 

health.

Ecological Forecasting for Coastal ChangeVisionIn 2015, NOAA will have developed an initial ecological forecast capability to for scientifi cally-based decisions on resource management and coastal deveBackgroundAlaskan coastal ecosystems, to include human communities, are experiencin

increasing coastal development, including off shore oil and gas activities, lartems also continue to be threatened by natural and manmade coastal hazarsevere (including hurricane force) storms, harmful algal blooms, invasive speAlaska coastal managers need science-based information and decision-suppprotect community and ecosystem health. Ecological forecast models proviand sustainable use by taking or not taking specifi c management actions. Dan integrated understanding of the ecosystem (link to Integrated Ecosystem for input to the models (link to Coastal Observations vision paper). 

ObjectiveInitiate development of a coastal ecosystem modeling capability to support Mission (NOAA’s Role)NOAA’s primary use of ecological forecasts in Alaska is in fi shery stock assessfocused on a single species. At a national level NMFS, NOS/NCCOS and OARcapabilities. NOAA has needs for ecological forecasts that link coastal and o

agement, as well as for coastal management such as shellfi shery manageme

Gap AnalysisNOAA has almost no coastal ecosystem forecast capability in Alaska. Modelassess the risk of action or inaction on their part. Operational ecosystem mofacility infrastructure to develop and run the models, as well as provide outpImmediate ActionsParticipate in NOAA planning eff orts of the Ecosystem Research Program anprovide Alaska Region input to that process. Initiate discussions with federaabout a workshop on ecological forecasting needs for coastal Alaska.Benefi ts & RisksBenefi ts include accelerating the process of identifying requirements for and support in Alaska. An additional benefi t will be to improve guidance for invsessments. Ultimately these models will provide improved decision-supporproactively respond to the accelerating coastal ecosystem changes in Alaskacapabilities now will be less eff ective targeting of resources for observing sycoastal management, and increased economic and public health costs to ad
Habitat Conservation Program

48 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Integrated Water Resources – Precipitation Frequency Estimates, Predictions, and Streamfl ow VisionBy 2015, Alaska will have information about the quantity, timing, and quality of water on key waterways to enable wise decision making about the impacts of low water, high water, fl ood waters, and interactions of freshwater with marine coastal waters. Alaskans will be able to expect infrastructure design and site selection based on updated precipitation frequency and fl ood frequency analyses using data that refl ects the current climatic regime. Additionally, methodologies will be utilized or developed to assess streamfl ow in the many 

ungauged basins throughout the State where ground-based monitoring is not feasible. Improved methodologies for forecasting streamfl ow will be developed.

BackgroundAlaska has 3000+ river systems, with over 90% of those currently unmonitored. All Alaskans rely on inland and coastal waterways in one or more ways, including but not limited to industry, transportation, food, potable water, energy, and culture. River systems provide important habitat for species important to subsistence and commercial interests. Moreover, coastal freshwater discharge plays an extremely important role in the marine ecosystems surrounding Alaska. Precipitation frequency estimates are required for design and construction of infrastructure. Presently, engineers are using an outdated precipitation frequency estimate for design of new structures and the prediction of precipitation amounts is a nascent science in Alaska. Increasing understanding of current and expected conditions in all of these areas will allow sound decision making to improve protection of life, property and the management of Alaska’s biological resources.ObjectiveIncrease the number of rivers that are monitored or modeled to forecast water quantity and quality. Utilize proven and robust techniques, such as forensic (or paleofl ood) hydrology, to determine maximum fl ood exceedance values and fl ood frequencies for Alaska’s numerous ungauged basins. Develop remote sensing capabilities and runoff models to provide tools to quantify aspects of hydrologic budgets at the watershed scale and at time steps ranging from daily to annually. Coordinate an update of the precipitation frequency estimates for design of Alaskan infrastructure. Improve the prediction and verifi cation of precipitation amounts. Increase our knowledge of the impact of water quality and quantity on the freshwater-seawater interface and the ocean and how these characteristics and interactions may be expected to change with various potential climate scenarios.Mission (NOAA’s Role) NOAA uses observations of water quantity and water quality, as well as precipitation predictions, to make forecasts of future conditions. NOAA studies and measures the impacts of these characteristics on the biomes and structure of rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. Other mandates include• Provide climate data and information that meets rigorous scientifi c standards for quality. (Data Quality Act).• Provide access to Climate Data and Information (timely, easy, and convenient) related to the state and changing state of the climate 

system in a variety of formats to NOAA’s customers, Federal Records Act, National Climate Program Act, NARA Records and Guidelines, 

ICSU World Data Center Guidelines & Policy).• Provide monitoring, assessment, and analysis of the climate system through adequate quality observations and measurements ofatmospheric, ocean, and select terrestrial “essential” variables. Global Change Research Act, National Climate Program Act, and National 

Weather Service Organic Act).• Analysis and interpretation of hydrologic data for planning works of improvement (Hydrologic Support to Department of Agriculture: 16 USC 1005)

Gap AnalysisUpdated precipitation frequency estimates must be prepared to support state planning. Currently, there are less than 200 real time river gages in Alaska, with less than 100 of these reporting on any components of water quality. Additional discharge and water quality measurements are needed on key representative rivers. The US Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Streamfl ow Information Program (NSIP) was designed as a nationwide system of federally-funded stream gauges that would provide information for several purposes, including 

fl ood forecasting by NOAA. In Alaska, an analysis was conducted to determine the optimum network design. This analysis was used to 

create the NSIP list of stream-gauges. Geographic Information Systems, precipitation and fl ood frequency studies, new mesoscale meteorological, hydrologic and hydraulic models and techniques, greater forecaster involvement, and advanced remote sensing tools may allow development of novel forms of gridded forecasts as tools for non-gauged areas, as well as gauged areas. Inclusion of new research and models is needed to better understand the physical and chemical characteristics of freshwater-seawater interfaces. 

Immediate ActionsNOAA is working with collaborators such as the USGS, Natural Resources Couse of new and existing observation sites for multiple purposes by adding acal, and general water circulation models are being identifi ed or developed. tion frequency estimate. NOAA’s Alaska Region and one of NOAA’s national cpredictions through real-time collaboration. Benefi ts & RisksAn updated precipitation frequency estimate,enhanced modeling capabilitywill improve NOAA’s ability to forecast hazards that threaten life, property, aBenefi ts of a greater understanding of hydrologic processes derived from a p

specialized forecaster training, are no less than a revolution in the understanalso more modest, but equally important benefi ts, such as the ability to provsary for relocation due to hydrologic, glacial, or sea level threats. The Departmunicipalities benefi t from long-term hydrologic monitoring by using these 

lection and treatment systems, and other roadside drainage features. Undetion in fl oods thus requiring costly repairs. Undersized storm sewer systems water management. Oversized bridges, culverts, and other drainage structuthis same information can benefi t zoning decisions, thus saving life and propunrecognized fl oodplain. Finally, a better understanding and prediction of A

marine fi sheries management. 
Habitat Conservation Program

50 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Integrated Water Resources – Climate Change ImpactsVisionAlaska’s land resource managers, industry, and subsistence users will be provided with near to long-term drought and water availability information for planning and management.BackgroundClimate changes are already occurring in the Arctic. Observed data over the last 30 years show that mean annual surface temperatures have increased by 3-5  ̊C with some of the largest increases occurring on the Alaskan North Slope. As temperatures continue to rise, changes in precipitation and an increase in evapo-transporation are also expected and permafrost will continue to thaw. This may result in an overall net decrease in stream discharge and a net dryer environment with long-term drought issues. To the contrary, headwater glacier areas are expected to see an increase in stream discharge particularly during the spring and fall months.This increase in temperature may also bring about longer, more severe and more widespread fi re seasons in Alaska. Based on annual precipitation, much of interior and northern Alaska can be classifi ed as a desert; however, due to the approximately six months of freezing temperatures that precipitation is only used by vegetation for the other half of the year. With an extended warm season, the water needs of the vegetation will expand as well and the available moisture may be insuffi cient. ObjectiveProvide a better understanding and forecasts of hydrologic changes in Alaska and how these changes (such as the thawing of permafrost and extended warm seasons) impact such diverse areas as wild fi re activity, industrial transport on water and ice, subsistence travel and harvest, and habitat and migration of wildlife.Mission (NOAA’s Role)Work with stakeholders to provide enhanced precipitation estimates and short term and long term drought forecasts including enhanced hydrologic information on water availability, quality, and quantity both for stream fl ow and vegetation.Gap Analysis Alaska stakeholders currently have limited access to precipitation data in a useful form that is available from the regional climate center (Western Region Climate Center). NOAA currently lacks the ability to produce gridded hydrologic modeling for Alaska, and limited ability to provide the tools needed for near and long term drought forecasting.Immediate ActionsNOAA’s Alaska Pacifi c River Forecast Center will continue to monitor the implementation the National Operational Hydrologic Remote 

Sensing Center’s gridded physically-based snow modeling in Alaska. They will also develop techniques that will be needed to run a distributed hydrologic model in Alaska. Additionally, NOAA’s NWS will work with the University of Alaska Fairbanks to integrate regional climate information and permafrost hydrology to produce hydrologic response scenarios.

Benefi ts & RisksThe Alaska Department of Natural Resources has shown that they can mount a successful initial attack on a small fi re with an average 

cost of $5,000 dollars per incident, whereas the cost to suppress a well-developed fi re in Alaska generally ranges between $3 M and $30 M dollars. Improved weather and soil moisture forecasts have obvious and great cost benefi ts for every U.S. taxpayer. There are also signifi cant costs related to infrastructure modifi cations as they relate to thawing permafrost impacts and changes in regional hydrology. 

Traditional knowledge regarding subsistence travel and harvest are valuable and should be documented and supplemented with new data collection. 

Alternative Energy SupportVisionIn 2020, the number of operating wind and ocean energy plants make AlaskBackgroundAlaskan governments and industries are advocating the development and a

such as the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority and the Alato displace diesel in areas of Alaska that make economic sense.’ 

ObjectiveFoster the development and the operations of alternative energy facilities wProactively work with developers in the design stage to address environmenreview stages. Mission (NOAA’s Role)Provide weather, water, and climate products and services to ensure the mo

energy facilities. 

Gap AnalysisRight now, other than hydropower support, NOAA has virtually no relationshmake contacts within the energy industry to identify and understand the reqrequirements and interests of the industry are known, decisions can be madto provide. For example, NOAA has the capability to produce wind climatoloprecipitation), and peak gust estimates. On the ocean side, tidal facilities mations, bathymetric surveys, tidal measurements, circulation modeling, storm 

enhanced by turbidity forecasts, ice and storm surge forecasts, and ocean te

Immediate ActionsIn the near tern, the ARCTic will establish ties with the Alaska Industrial Deveattend relevant energy conferences and meet with the Chamber of Commerlish initial relationships. Current circulation model activities with the USACE information needed to support ocean energy development. Benefi ts & RisksHelping the alternative energy industry in Alaska succeed will pave the way oil dependency. This eff ort will demonstrate products and services needed 
Habitat Conservation Program

52 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Coastal Erosion CollaborationVisionIn 2020, Alaska is provided with coastal hazard products that are responsive number of Alaska communities.Background Arctic Ocean and the warm waters of the Pacifi c generate a stea

weather hazards that make NOAA’s task especially challenging and which msupport. These result in annually damaging events to coastal infrastructure high interest in coastal erosion in Alaska and its threat to various villages and but globally. 

ObjectiveCreate a collaboration of federal agencies and researchers with aff ected villaand their transportation infrastructure so that the impacts of coastal fl oodinMission (NOAA’s Role)Provide weather, water, and climate products and services to ensure appropcoastal hazard threat. Gap Analysis NOAA’s NWS offi ces in Alaska issue Coastal Hazard products (Coastal Flood Wto provide warnings for the protection of life and property. Unlike the occurrevent creates a more serious situation for the next event that may come alonsion and fl ood potential at each coastal village is an important way each NW

each community whenever a coastal hazard event is expected. Utilizing moding, GIS, modeling of storm surge and wave height, etc) melded with routine nated sites at each aff ected community will create and maintain a threat dat

means and technology. This database would be shared with the public via Npublic. In addition to extremely detailed surge and bathymetry needs, addressing cdetailed follow up to re-categorize bathymetry and shore profi le at the very 

Immediate Actions• Develop a ground truth hazard measurement procedure which can then bto a qualifi ed individual. • Prepare outreach and/or education sessions that will also be delivered in ehazards, especially those associated with coastal erosion. (For instance, some Emergency Management’s Fall Sea Storm Guide, annually distributed to eaction). As the database is built and provided in a way that the general public ceach village.• Create a preliminary schedule of visiting the aff ected communities. • Collaborate with USGS, USACE, and others to maximize shoreline mapping Benefi ts & RisksAs shore erosion continues at locations along Alaska’s coast, and as this phen

ness, NOAA will be increasingly called on to provide greater expertise and seto these villages. This will help build NOAA’s expertise and responsiveness to village to assist in providing ground-truth data on a regular basis. A second rground truth data. A third risk is maintaining adequate funding to visit all aff adequate funding to incorporate new technology in the years ahead. 

NOAA Ocean Environmental Literacy/Planet Earth CurriculumVisionBy 2020, establish an ocean literate Alaska through a new integrated Planet Earth environmental degree curriculum in the University of Alaska system and through an array of ocean outreach and education programs targeted to all sectors.BackgroundPlanet Earth Curriculum: There are currently many individual components of an environmental degree at diff erent campuses with programs in marine sciences and engineering. However, there is no meteorology or climate degree program in the University of Alaska. If such an integrated program could be developed that would fi ll the meteorology/climate gaps and tie them all together, we could encourage more Alaskans to work in Alaska after graduation, and hence facilitate the education of Alaskan citizens, municipalities, and industries (and the world) about the interconnections of the planet’s land/water/ice components and how their changes aff ect living things on the planet. Successful implementation of an integrated Planet Earth environmental degree program would not only meet all seven objectives in the Outreach and Communications Team plan, it would position Alaska to be a leading resource of experts in environmental evolution and how to best manage the evolution for the benefi t of all. Ocean Outreach/Education Programs: NOAA would collaborate with a number of partners to develop outreach and education tools, products, and services targeted to all segments including schools (K-12), university students, general public, visitors, Alaskans, and the world. ObjectiveDevelop a NOAA cooperative model of fostering research in a multi-faceted discipline that would establish an ocean literate Alaska accomplished through a curriculum in the University of Alaska and through a myriad of ocean outreach and education programs.Mission (NOAA’s Role)The ARCTic recognizes the importance of public outreach and environmental literacy in Alaska. The unique characteristics of the Alaska Region and the role NOAA plays in addressing economic, social and environmental needs in Alaska provide an opportunity to eff ectively showcase NOAA’s contributions within the region, nationally, and internationally. The ARCTic would support NOAA’s commitment topromote and enhance environmental literacy, both regionally and globally, through partnerships with stakeholders.Gap Analysis The Planet Earth curriculum is a non-traditional program that may take fi ve years to complete and may require several “work study” projects in the fi eld. Successful implementation of an integrated program would position Alaska to be a leading resource of experts in 

environmental evolution and how to best manage the evolution for the benefi t of all. 

Immediate ActionsCollaborate with the University of Alaska and others to:• Build on existing NMFS and NOS Alaska Native education eff orts to increase minority opportunities within NOAA.• Expand opportunities for students in oceanic and atmospheric sciences.• Implement NOAA science-based mentor programs that encourage students to seek future careers with NOAA.• Coordinate with communities to establish “work study” projects in the fi eld that model an integrated Planet Earth curriculum.• Develop a collaborative network of ocean educators and scientists in Alaska.• Create various ocean outreach and education products that encourage a deeper understanding of NOAA’s role in the complexities of global and regional forces.• Educate Alaskan citizens, municipalities, industries, and the world about the interconnections of the planet’s land/water/ice components and how their changes aff ect living things on the planet.• Develop various outreach and education services that reach out regionally and globally to provide information about the Alaska region.• Provide all Alaskans the information and tools needed to make and/or understand the tough decision that lie ahead with respect to climate change, and better assist each other in dealing with resiliency.• Explore opportunities to incorporate Weather Service Offi ces, Warning Coordination Meteorologists, Sea Grant Extension agents into the strategy.Benefi ts & Risks The benefi ts of a literacy program are immense and would have a direct impact on how NOAA provides products and services in the future. An established partnership with the University that includes a well-developed curriculum would provide the public with tools and resources to have a better understanding and knowledge of climate change in our environment. This curriculum could use some of the ARCTic educational tools that are in place including Science on a Sphere and Virtual Alaska.
Habitat Conservation Program

54 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Sea Ice Observation ProgramVisionEstablish a sea ice observation program to ensure a consistent, coherent sea ice database going forward. BackgroundSea ice observations are not standardized. In addition there is no sea ice observation training program. These circumstances make correlation between sea ice observations and remote sensing tools problematic, and limit the usefulness of human observations.Objective• Identify and engage all stakeholders (e.g., USCG, whaling captains, etc.);• Develop a sea ice observation plan, and training program for observers;• Develop a means to format and disseminate observations to all stakeholders in a timely fashion;• Ensure sea ice observations are archived in a database;• Correlate sea ice observations with imagery from remote sensing tools;• Collaborate with international organizations to work towards consistent products and services.Mission (NOAA’s Role)Serve as a resource and center of gravity for the sea ice observation program at both the national and international levels.Gap AnalysisCurrently the US has no coherent sea ice observation program.Immediate Actions• The NWS Forecast Offi ce in Anchorage has begun collaboration with the US Coast Guard to develop a framework for a sea ice observation program. • This eff ort could be coordinated with similar programs in Canada.Benefi ts & Risks• Increased quantity and quality of arctic sea ice observations will enhance marine safety;• Increased quantity and quality of arctic sea ice observations will improve sea ice models and sea ice forecasts;• An improved arctic sea ice observation program will enhance Search and Rescue eff ectiveness as well as spill and HAZMAT response capabilities. 

Ice AnalysisVisionProvide a clear assessment of the arctic sea ice evolution to enable people to BackgroundSatellite observations indicate arctic sea ice has decreased measurably durinof arctic sea ice data exists prior to the advent of satellite to help better charObjective• Establish an arctic sea ice trend analyses for the Bering, Chukchi and Beaufclimate change and its potential impact on the arctic ecosystem and commesatellite imagery;• Enhance the Alaska Sea Ice Atlas to include a web interface, and real-time • Utilize comprehensive arctic sea ice analyses to better understand polar ocArctic climate;• Utilize comprehensive arctic sea ice analyses to improve global climate moMission (NOAA’s Role)Serve as a resource and a center of gravity for both national and internationa

mized. The NWS Anchorage WFO Ice Desk, National Ice Center, and Nationa

Gap AnalysisCurrently there is no complete geospatially enabled arctic sea ice analysis daempirical observations, human analyses, as well as remote sensing tools.Immediate Actions• The NWS Forecast Offi ce in Anchorage is fi nalizing a proposal to digitize thwaters.• This eff ort could be collaborated with similar eff orts in Canada, Russia, and entire arctic in an internally consistent fashion. Benefi ts & Risks• A complete and accurate historical record is essential in order to make tim• Without a comprehensive sea ice database atmospheric, oceanographic, oproperly.• Without a comprehensive sea ice database critical decisions at the nationament, and the peoples who inhabit the arctic regions are problematic.
Habitat Conservation Program

56 NOAA FISHERIES SERVICE: NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 2007 BUSINESS 

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

Sea Ice Decision AidsVisionDevelop arctic sea ice expert systems that incorporate indigenous knowledge as well as science to assist governmental and business decision makers, and end-users in making consistent, informed choices.BackgroundThere are a variety of independent information sources regarding arctic sea ice. These resources range from anecdotal observations and insight from indigenous people, satellite imagery, buoys, to sea ice forecast models.Objective• Implement a methodology to categorize ice regimes in a consistent manner such as the method the Canadian Coast Guard used for decisions on passage of ships of a certain ice class.• Implement a data mining application to sift through large amounts of data to produce data content relationships, and extract hidden patterns in the arctic sea database; • Improve arctic sea models to enhance simulation and hindcast capabilities as well as sea ice forecasts; • Develop a scalable, interactive Decision Support System (DSS) that integrates all arctic sea ice related resources in a systematic fashion.Mission (NOAA’s Role) Serve as a Center of Excellence for arctic environmental databases, sea ice analyses and forecast models, and DSS.Gap Analysis• No consistent method to categorize ice regimes is used in Alaskan waters; • Very little work has been performed to assimilate science-based and traditional knowledge to provide a more complete understanding of arctic sea ice;• No DSS exists to assist arctic communities, or groups with interests in the Arctic make consistent, informed decisions that aff ect safety 

of navigation, the economy, resource management, and ecosystem protection; • No single source for education and training exists for arctic residents, users and advocates arctic resources, and arctic researchers.• Research and development of sea ice models considerably lags the resources allocated to oceanographic and atmospheric models. 

Immediate Actions• Survey NOAA assets (e.g., NWS AR, National Ice Center, NWS NCEP/CPC and EMC, NOAA Fisheries Service, NCDC, etc.) to determine the Subject Matter Experts, and the current state of activity related to arctic sea ice within NOAA. • Use NOAA SME’s to identify potential external partners and SME’s (e.g., university researchers, village elders, oil/gas/mineral producers, marine shipping companies, etc.)Benefi ts & Risks• A comprehensive characterization of arctic sea ice would provide the necessary baseline for sea ice forecast models and DSS’s;• An improved sea ice decision making process would enhance safety, and socio-economic and public-policy decisions;• Tactical and strategic judgments are problematic without a coherent arctic sea ice decision making process.

Sea Ice Ecosystem ImpactsVisionAdvance our understanding of arctic sea ice dynamics, particularly in responcal, biological, social and economic consequences.BackgroundLong term historical sea ice dynamics are only partially understood, but obsin ice coverage (such as more northerly seasonal extent in the Arctic Ocean) system level impacts may be dramatic, ranging from changes in the demogrture and habitat characteristics, to disruption of commercial and subsistence in the Arctic (e.g., marine transportation, commercial fi sheries and oil/gas deinfl uenced by increased understanding of sea ice dynamics in and of itself, a

its scope and extent and enhance opportunities for its use are critical to incrthe public so that they may make informed decisions of benefi t to both stew

Objectives• Foster the development of systems to create and maintain readily accessibwidest practical range of biological, oceanographic, atmospheric, social and • Facilitate access to these data and promote expansion of the databases the• Increase interest and opportunities for conducting collaborative research bamong interested parties; • Develop strategies to assess ecosystem impacts.Mission (NOAA’s Role) Build on NOAA’s Ecosystem Goal Team eff orts to develop an Ecosystem AppEcosystem Assessment (IEA)for Alaska. Using this work as a catalyst, engage ernmental organizations with interests in the Arctic to coordinate current mpromote ongoing ecosystem scale research.Gap Analysis• Very little has done to coordinate current or future ecosystem observation• No mechanism exists to relate historical arctic sea ice data and associated • An integrated weather, water, and climate database does not exist to suppImmediate Actions• Establish (fund) a pilot IEA in Alaska. This will leverage the information alreMarine Fisheries Service (and others?) in Alaska to lead the development of acome the foundation for practical and predictive information for managers aincluded both a result of climate change and cause of downstream ecosyste• Survey NOAA activities (e.g., NWS AR, National Ice Center, NOAA Fisheries SArctic, particularly those activities linked to ecosystem health;• Use NOAA SME’s to identify and connect with potential external partners (producers, marine shipping companies, etc.) working on corresponding acti• Collaborate with the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy on in• Investigate historical information from older Alaskan ice charts dating bacnorth of Alaska (1954, 1958, 1968)) for placing recent sea ice extremes into cBenefi ts & Risks• Coordinated and collaborated ecosystem monitoring/assessment activitie• A multidisciplinary eff ort would have a greater chance of correctly charactice and thus be in a better position to provide solutions;• Allowing both governmental and non-governmental organizations to proclead to a greater likelihood of incoherent or incompatible public policies.• Delay in eff orts to increase our understanding of ecosystem scale consequand eff orts to accelerate the pace of those eff orts is not only warranted, but 
58 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN 

Summary

The Alaska Regional Collaboration Team and this ProjectThe Alaska Regional Collaboration Team was formed in the fall of 2006 to enhance customer and stakeholder relationships and facilitate collaboration across NOAA and its partners. In 2007, the team embarked on a process to increase mutual awareness among Alaskan NOAA offi ces and key customer groups and develop an approach for strategic product and service enhancements. This document is the fi rst product of that eff ort.This Integrated Services Plan outlines the process the team used to engage key 

customers in assessing where we are now and what conditions and circumstances the agency must plan for in the future. The objective was to fi nd common goals and identify the NOAA role in reaching those objectives.Based on face to face meetings with customers and partners as well as compiled information from many sources such as the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, the Arctic Observing Network, Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment and the NOAA Alaska RISA, the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment, the Alaska Ocean Observing System, we identifi ed the following drivers for future NOAA planning.

Drivers for Future NOAA PlanningClimate change was consistently identifi ed as an overall driver that is impacting and will continue to impact NOAA services in Alaska. Researchers have predicted that Alaska be one of the areas where impacts be felt early and signifi cantly, and current observations indicate that this is proving to be the case. Increased erosion on Alaska’s west coast due to a later arrival and earlier departure of sea ice is threatening to destroy coastal communities such as Shishmaref and Kivalina. Other coastal areas are also feeling the pressure of erosion and inundation, with over 150 communities in danger.The sea ice retreat has been far more rapid than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and has enhanced activity in several sectors. Maritime shipping is one of these areas. The Arctic Council’s Arctic Maritime Shipping Assessment will be released later this year. What is clear already is that while companies might not fully exploit the 40 percent distance savings of using the northwest and northeast passages across the Arctic for decades, more and more vessels are in the Arctic each year. The largest growth is occurring in the cruise ship and regional, and oil and gas exploration sectors. More fi shing vessels are also being seen, although no commercial fi sheries have been established north of the Bering Strait. Decreased sea ice has also enabled increased activity in seafl oor mapping in the Arctic related to resource claims under the Law of the Sea Treaty. Nations are actively researching seafl oor features that would allow them to claim sovereignty over areas with great energy and other resource potential. More traditionally, the February 2008 oil and gas lease sale for the Chukchi Sea yielded a record $2.6 billion in accepted bids. These regions have a lack of maritime transportation support and incident response infrastructure and this is causing concern as the number of vessels plying the Bering, Chukchi, and arctic seas increases. If an incident similar to the sinking of the M/V Explorer cruise ship in the Antarctic occurred off Alaska, the outcome might not be as fortunate. 

Expansions in explorations foand mineral resources and inmaritime shipping have promU.S. Coast Guard and the Depof Defense to signifi cantly incoperations in the Arctic. For increased shipping, oil and gand fi shermen exploring the seas have added requiremenHomeland Security, Fisheries Pollution Prevention and ResSearch and Rescue missions.While the ultimate climate imfi sheries are unclear, ocean tesalinity, acidifi cation and shifmercial fi sh stocks, are topics interest. Reports indicate thamoving: new species of salmcaught off the North Slope anbeing found further and furththe Bering Sea. The impact ofreshwater infl ow to key habiunknown. While we know thfi shery resources are among nerable to the eff ects of oceation and experiments indicatand growth of juvenile blue kadversely aff ected, we need tmore before management acrecommended.Other already signifi cant climin Alaska include: 1) lowering on rivers are preventing suppfrom reaching rural communmeans fuel must be fl own in higher cost; 2) warming temare thawing permafrost and athe growth of wildfi re fuels; 3stream temperatures are excethresholds for salmon reprodgrowth; and 4) changing weaare increasing aircraft icing dthe appropriateness of existinconfi gurations.

Planning Scenarios andRecommendationsWith these prospects in mindidentifi ed 22 vision papers or scenarios where we have comests with our key customers iing NOAA services. Topics cov
In Alaska, economically-signifi cant climate 

change impacts are readily seen at the coasts. NOAA’s range of expertise in climatology, hydrometeorology, oceanography, resource management, and decision support position the agency to take a greater role in addressing the state’s needs. As an outcome of this eff ort, the ARCTic will develop a pilot project with the state to demonstrate the power and return on investment of integrating the agency’s services. On a broader scale, the ARCTic will develop a concept and blueprint for NOAA Climate Services in Alaska and seek collaborators in defi ning an Alaskan Climate Services Partnership. This multi-agency, multi-sector structure will integrate the roles of government, academia, and other appropriate parties in harvesting the best knowledge and tools available for decision support and societal adaptation.Foundational InfrastructureThe ability of the agency to meet its potential in serving Alaska is contingent on the agency devoting sustained committment, creativity, expertise, and resources to establishing and evolving foundational infrastructure. The two components most critically needed are observations and infrastructure for integrated environmental prediction. To meet the vast observation needs of Alaska, new ways of thinking, resources, and partnerships will need to be employed. The solution must be adequate to meet multiple missions and be dynamic enough to evolve as new knowledge and demands arise. In the near term, focus must remain on implementing the Arctic Observing Network, expanding the Alaska Flood Forecasting Observation Network, and integrating priorities of these and other plans such as the Marine Weather Observation Network into regionwide networks such as the Alaska Ocean Observing System. NOAA cannot , for instance, support eff orts to save rural communities and Alaska native communities from being lost if we do not apply our capabilities in an integrated fashion. The agency should link its capabilities on how the climate reduces the ice extent and changes the 

60 NOAA’S ARCTIC INTEGRATED SERVICES PLAN

NOAA’s Alaska Regional Collaboration Team

storm tracks driving the waves and water levels over the topography of the sea fl oor to erode and inundate coastlines forcing evacuations and the need for precise and accurate heights for egress and relocation planning.The fi rst step in meeting this challenge is to collaborate across the NOAA line offi ces and disciplines and the ARCTic is proud to be a part of moving the agency in this direction. However, collaboration alone will not meet future challenges. The second step is to boldly envision the infrastructure it will take to enable truly integrated environmental prediction. NOAA has made strides in coupling forecast models across physical disciplines and in preliminary efforts in ecological forecasting. NOAA must continue to develop the infrastructure to enable oceanographic, meteorological, hydrologic, biological, and other physical models to be interconnected and infl uence each other. Accelerating these eff orts and supporting them with an operational infrastructure is critical to meet its mandates nationwide. These eff orts are particularly important in Alaska. Expanded CollaborationCollaboration among NOAA’s line offi ces and customers will not be enough to address the breadth of the issues facing Alaska’s future. An integration across agencies with regard to products and services is necessary. Two coordinating activities that NOAA is already engaged with are the Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative and the Comprehensive Study of Alaska’s Navigation Transportation System. Developing similar integrating frameworks for coastal erosion and inundation and climate change activities in general should be pursued.Intended Uses of this Plan andNext StepsThis plan is intended for use both inside and outside of NOAA. Internally, it will be used to build awareness of key issues in Alaska. The ARCTic will use it to infl uence the next NOAA Strategic Plan; guide longrange budget planning; and provide a 

focus for annual plans at all levels. Externally, the ISP is intended to foster dialog on regional issues and the appropriate NOAA role in them. As a living document, the ISP does not commit the agency to any specifi c course of action. It does, however, serve as a vehicle for gaining customer, stakeholder, and public input on what investments NOAA should make in Alaska in the coming years. If successful, the resulting rich discussion will lead to greater internal and external collaboration, better NOAA services in Alaska, and ultimately the achievement of common goals.

ARCTic WEBSITEhttp://www.ppi.noaa.gov/NOAA_ARCTic/noaa_arctic.html

Alaska Regional Collaboration Team MembersLaura Furgione, Team Lead NWS Anchorage Integrated WSteve Davis NMFS Anchorage Ecosystems Rich Ferrero NMFS Juneau Kris Holderied NOS Homer Amy Holman, Coordinator NOS Anchorage John Jensen NESDIS Asheville Climate ChaPeter Jones NMFS Juneau Mark Koehn OAR Seattle Carven Scott NWS Anchorage Sea Ice Work Lance Seman NESDIS Fairbanks Satellite Use Chris Strager NWS Anchorage Aviation WeMarla Trollan NMFS Seattle CommunicaJohn Whitney NOS Anchorage Dave Zezula NOS Anchorage Marine NaviExternal Participants in the Integrated Services AsseName Organization WoBarelli, Patrick USCG Sea Brigham, Lawson Arctic Research Consortium MaByers, Kurt Sea Grant CoCasanovas, Karen Alaska Air Carriers Association AvChristie, David UAF West Coast & Polar Region Undersea Research Center Collins, Ray Federal Aviation Administration AvDoolittle, Daniel Alaska Department of Fish & Game EcoEngel, Kevin UAF, Geographic Information Network of AK ReEvans, Diana North Pacifi c Fishery Management Council Co EcoFrenzel, Steve USGS IntGeorge, Tom Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association AvHarding, Richard Penn Air AvHenrich, Tom UAF, Geographic Information Network of AK ReKingeekuk Metcalf, Vera Eskimo Walrus Commission SeKnapp, Michael AK Dept of Transportation & Public Facilities IntMcCammon, Molly Alaska Ocean Observing System Cli CoMotzko, Cecelia Federal Aviation Administration AvPage, Ed Alaska Marine Exchange MaParker, Walter Arctic Council, Bering Sea Forum Av RePawlowski, Bob Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation Payne, John F North Slope Science Initiative CliSexauer, Bruce USACE CliSmith, Orson University of Alaska Anchorage SeSterling, Rob Alaska Division of Homeland Security Av MaTaylor, Ken Alaska Department of Fish & Game EcoWalsh, John UAF, International Arctic Research Center CliWeingartner, Tom UAF, Physical Oceanography EcoWhite, Dan UAF, Institute of Northern Engineering IntZender, Lynn Zender Environmental Health & Research Co
U.S. Secretary of Commerce

Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and

Atmosphere and Administrator, National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration—NOAA 

www.noaa.gov

U. S. Government – 2008