and have the identical format? Or is there room for flexibility, that they might have a different look and feel? We were hoping that they had the same look and feel. But we shall see. Now, whereas it's intended for the NOAA Administrator, I suppose the NOAA Administrator can decide how he or she would plan to use these papers, just for her own use, or his use, or how to share with other people. I don't know that that's our decision to make. Because we are providing advice to the NOAA Administrator. So I assume that it is the Administrator's decision what to do with these fact sheets. Does anybody have any questions of me on, or comments? MEMBER ATKINSON: Yes. Atkinson. If we've got 20 minutes, do you want us to do ten presentation and ten comments? MEMBER MAUNE: That would be about right. MEMBER ATKINSON: Yes, okay. MEMBER MAUNE: Yes. If each person
function. Another community distribution function that tells us what is going to be the chance of getting dated for certain vertical level at the end of the century. So that's the dotted line on the top left over there. Once we have those two we can create a ratio. And that's the big graph in the middle of the slide. The dark line tells you what, how much your inundation frequency will increase as you move to the end of the century. The dark line is for linear rise. So continuing the 6.3 millimeters for Pleasure Pier, all the way to the century. And the dashed line as with an acceleration. I'll talk to that a little more. And one of the take-home messages there is that when you look at that ratio, it's estimated to be about six times for water levels around one meter and a lot less around two times for Hurricane Ike type. So when you think about nuisance flooding, they're not devastating, but in
we had, but reporting mean lower-low water. And headquarters said we could. So the impact to the permitees and to the berth owners and that kind of stuff is, we're not dredging the channel any deeper or shallower, we're just now reporting in mean lower-low water. So it's a foot difference in reporting here in Galveston. It's two feet down in Corpus Christi. So, that communication, to the harbor pilots and to the ports, is what we're going through right now, port by port. Next question. At the past panel meeting, in Charleston, we explored some of the challenges and promise of eHydro to allow better sharing of Corps of Engineers survey data with NOAA. From your perspective, how is eHydro working for your district and is NOAA able to apply your survey data to the charts in a timely manner? It's a good question. For our district, so far, we are serving it up at the district website. That memo that came out a couple weeks ago is looking at it more as a national
operate." And I can change the last sentence. "These problems have led to," what I said was, "reduced efficiency and in some cases loss of an entire year's survey time." MEMBER MAUNE: Yes. MEMBER MILLER: We could say something like -- instead of reduced efficiency we could say what you were suggesting. MEMBER MAUNE: If the productivity is now 20 percent of what it was when they were new or something like that. I have no idea what the percentage is, but if there's some way we can use statistics to our benefit here to say how less productive they are now than they were before it would help, in my opinion. I think I'm going to need to switch on to some other papers. We've got a whole bunch of topics to go. So thank you, Joyce, for your work on this. And I was hoping we'd be able to agree on this today, but it looks like not. And so I am proposing we -- Susan's holding her hand up.
As you heard from Juliana's presentation yesterday, 2022 NAD 83 and NAVD 88 will be replaced with a geometric and geopotential reference frame. So the first paragraph is just the basic information about some technical information about the new reference frames. Key difference is we're going from a plate fixed datum to a reference frame that includes the velocities of the coordinates. So I was involved in when we went from NAD 27 to NAD 83 and NGVD 29 to NVA 88. And it was a learning curve. And so we need to do the same thing. We need to prepare our users for this because this will be a little different transformation than when we've gone from previous datums because those were both plate fixed to plate fixed. So you see on the, go down to the second page and there's a graphic. You can see the extent of the change or the estimated change in the horizontal will be approximately one to two meters. And then the ellipsoid height, the component of the
last few years. And we've heard a lot of different stakeholders say that the CO-OP sites are very good. I would encourage any time it's possible, we've heard time and time again at almost every meeting that, you know, the Navigation Response Teams walk on water and that they're -- you know, they're a blessing. And so I think anything that can be done to show them off is a good idea. Go down one more. I don't know if there's another one there. Continued expansion of blogs and websites. It's kind of a no-brainer. Back up one, or back up just a little. Yes. This is my own observation. If I ask a taxi driver in an average city what NOAA is, none of them know. And you say weather service and they say, oh yes, they do the weather. But I think it would be -- you know, to better engage is that -- I don't know how but NOAA should put out some sort of a uniform message that -- because nobody really, you know, NOS, CO-OPS, NGS, we understand that but I don't think the public does at all, you know? As far as they're concerned, NOAA is the