Satellite Observations of the Earth’s Environment
Accelerating the Transition of Research to Operations
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract 50-DGNA-1-90024 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), with technical participation by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its subagencies.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-08749-X (Book)
International Standard Book Number 0-309-50782-0 (PDF)
Library of Congress Control Number 2003107186
Copies of this report are available free of charge from:
Space Studies Board
National Research Council
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2003 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OTHER REPORTS OF THE SPACE STUDIES BOARD
Assessment of Directions in Microgravity and Physical Sciences Research at NASA (prepublication) (2002)
Assessment of the Usefulness and Availability of NASA’s Earth and Space Mission Data (2002)
Factors Affecting the Utilization of the International Space Station for Research in the Biological and Physical Sciences (prepublication) (2002)
Life in the Universe: An Assessment of U.S. and International Programs in Astrobiology (2002)
New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy (prepublication) (2002)
Review of NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise Applications Program Plan (2002)
“Review of the Redesigned Space Interferometry Mission (SIM)” (2002)
Safe on Mars: Precursor Measurements Necessary to Support Human Operations on the Martian Surface (2002)
The Sun to the Earth—and Beyond: A Decadal Research Strategy in Solar and Space Physics (2002)
Toward New Partnerships in Remote Sensing: Government, the Private Sector, and Earth Science Research (2002)
Using Remote Sensing in State and Local Government: Information for Management and Decision Making (2002)
Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities (2001)
The Mission of Microgravity and Physical Sciences Research at NASA (2001)
The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples (2001)
Readiness Issues Related to Research in the Biological and Physical Sciences on the International Space Station (2001)
“Scientific Assessment of the Descoped Mission Concept for the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST)” (2001)
Signs of Life: A Report Based on the April 2000 Workshop on Life Detection Techniques (2001)
Transforming Remote Sensing Data into Information and Applications (2001)
U.S. Astronomy and Astrophysics: Managing an Integrated Program (2001)
Assessment of Mission Size Trade-offs for Earth and Space Science Missions (2000)
Ensuring the Climate Record from the NPP and NPOESS Meteorological Satellites (2000)
Future Biotechnology Research on the International Space Station (2000)
Issues in the Integration of Research and Operational Satellite Systems for Climate Research: I. Science and Design (2000)
Issues in the Integration of Research and Operational Satellite Systems for Climate Research: II. Implementation (2000)
Microgravity Research in Support of Technologies for the Human Exploration and Development of Space and Planetary Bodies (2000)
Preventing the Forward Contamination of Europa (2000)
“On Continuing Assessment of Technology Development in NASA’s Office of Space Science” (2000)
“On Review of Scientific Aspects of the NASA Triana Mission” (2000)
“On the Space Science Enterprise Draft Strategic Plan” (2000)
Review of NASA’s Biomedical Research Program (2000)
Review of NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise Research Strategy for 2000-2010 (2000)
The Role of Small Satellites in NASA and NOAA Earth Observation Programs (2000)
Copies of these reports are available free of charge from:
Space Studies Board
The National Academies
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001
(202) 334-3477
www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/ssb.html
NOTE: Listed according to year of approval for release. |
COMMITTEE ON NASA-NOAA TRANSITION FROM RESEARCH TO OPERATIONS
RICHARD A. ANTHES,
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research,
Chair
SUSAN K. AVERY,
University of Colorado,
Vice Chair
MARK R. ABBOTT,
Oregon State University
GRANT C. AUFDERHAAR,
The Aerospace Corporation
GEORGE L. FREDERICK,
Vaisala Meteorological Systems, Inc.
RUSSELL KOFFLER,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (retired)
PETER R. LEAVITT,
Weather Information, Inc.
WILLIAM L. SMITH,
NASA Langley Research Center
RICHARD W. SPINRAD,
Office of the Oceanographer of the Navy
PAUL D. TRY,
Science and Technology Corporation
CHRISTOPHER S. VELDEN,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Committee on Earth Studies Liaisons
MICHAEL H. FREILICH,
Oregon State University
WILLIAM B. GAIL,
Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corporation
Staff
PAMELA L. WHITNEY, Study Director
RICHARD LESHNER, Research Associate
CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN, Senior Project Assistant
CATHERINE A. GRUBER, Senior Project Assistant
SPACE STUDIES BOARD
JOHN H. McELROY,
University of Texas at Arlington (retired),
Chair
J. ROGER P. ANGEL,
University of Arizona
JAMES P. BAGIAN,
Veterans Health Administration’s National Center for Patient Safety
ANA P. BARROS,
Harvard University
RETA F. BEEBE,
New Mexico State University
ROGER D. BLANDFORD,
California Institute of Technology
JAMES L. BURCH,
Southwest Research Institute
RADFORD BYERLY, JR.,
University of Colorado
HOWARD M. EINSPAHR,
Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute (retired)
STEVEN H. FLAJSER,
Loral Space and Communications, Ltd.
MICHAEL H. FREILICH,
Oregon State University
DON P. GIDDENS,
Georgia Institute of Technology/Emory University
RALPH H. JACOBSON,
The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (retired)
MARGARET G. KIVELSON,
University of California, Los Angeles
BRUCE D. MARCUS,
TRW, Inc. (retired)
HARRY Y. McSWEEN, JR.,
University of Tennessee
GEORGE A. PAULIKAS,
The Aerospace Corporation (retired)
ANNA-LOUISE REYSENBACH,
Portland State University
ROALD S. SAGDEEV,
University of Maryland
CAROLUS J. SCHRIJVER,
Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory
ROBERT J. SERAFIN,
National Center for Atmospheric Research
MITCHELL SOGIN,
Marine Biological Laboratory
C. MEGAN URRY,
Yale University
PETER W. VOORHEES,
Northwestern University
J. CRAIG WHEELER,
University of Texas, Austin
JOSEPH K. ALEXANDER, Director
AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD
MAJ GEN WILLIAM W. HOOVER,
U.S. Air Force (retired),
Chair
A. DWIGHT ABBOTT,
Aerospace Corporation (retired)
RUZENA K. BAJCSY,
National Science Foundation
ROBERT W. BAKER,
American Airlines, Inc. (retired)
JAMES (MICKY) BLACKWELL,
Lockheed Martin (retired)
ANTHONY J. BRODERICK,
Aviation Safety Consultant
SUSAN M. COUGHLIN,
Aviation Safety Alliance
ROBERT L. CRIPPEN,
Thiokol Propulsion (retired)
LT GEN DONALD L. CROMER,
U.S. Air Force and Hughes Space and Communications Company (retired)
JOSEPH FULLER, JR.,
Futron Corporation
RICHARD GOLASZEWSKI,
GRA Incorporated
JAMES M. GUYETTE,
Rolls-Royce North America
JOHN L. JUNKINS,
Texas A&M University
JOHN M. KLINEBERG,
Space Systems/Loral (retired)
ILAN M. KROO,
Stanford University
JOHN K. LAUBER,
Airbus Industrie of North America, Inc.
LT GEN GEORGE K. MUELLNER,
U.S. Air Force (retired) and Phantom Works, The Boeing Company
DAVA J. NEWMAN,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JAMES G. O’CONNOR,
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (retired) and Pratt & Whitney
LT GEN MALCOLM R. O’NEILL,
Lockheed Martin Corporation
CYNTHIA SAMUELSON,
Logistics Management Institute
KATHRYN C. THORNTON,
University of Virginia
HANSEL E. TOOKES II,
Raytheon International, Inc.
DIANNE S. WILEY,
Phantom Works, The Boeing Company
THOMAS L. WILLIAMS,
Northrup Grumman–Air Combat Systems
GEORGE M. LEVIN, Director
BOARD ON ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES AND CLIMATE
ERIC J. BARRON,
Pennsylvania State University,
Chair
RAYMOND J. BAN,
The Weather Channel, Inc.
ROBERT C. BEARDSLEY,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
ROSINA M. BIERBAUM,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
HOWARD B. BLUESTEIN,
University of Oklahoma
RAFAEL L. BRAS,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
STEVEN F. CLIFFORD,
University of Colorado/Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences
CASSANDRA G. FESEN,
Dartmouth College
GEORGE L. FREDERICK,
Vaisala Meteorological Systems, Inc.
JUDITH L. LEAN,
Naval Research Laboratory
MARGARET A. LEMONE,
National Center for Atmospheric Research
MARIO J. MOLINA,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MICHAEL J. PRATHER,
University of California, Irvine
WILLIAM J. RANDEL,
National Center for Atmospheric Research
RICHARD D. ROSEN,
Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc.
THOMAS F. TASCIONE,
Sterling Software, Inc.
JOHN C. WYNGAARD,
Pennsylvania State University
CHRIS ELFRING, Director
Preface
The operation of environmental data services is an important and challenging responsibility. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the agency charged with providing operational weather, climate, ocean, and space weather data, must ensure that these data are available 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, to a host of users around the world. Once of interest mainly to operational meteorological institutions and academic researchers, these data are now being used by a growing and increasingly diverse set of users for making business decisions, managing natural resources and the environment, mitigating and responding to hazards and emergencies, and planning recreational activities, among other uses. The growth in the number and types of data users is putting continued pressure on NOAA to meet new and evolving user needs and, at the same time, to satisfy the expanding requirements of existing data users.
The growing needs for environmental data are coupled with opportunities for more effective environmental information services, for new types of observations, and for improvements in prediction capabilities and in products offered by advanced technologies (both hardware and software) and by research that offers insights into improved understanding and use of the data. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) plays a key role in this process as a provider of new technologies. Other agencies, such as the Department of Defense (DOD), have functioned both as technology providers to NOAA’s environmental data system and as users of the system. How the process for transitioning NASA’s research and technologies into NOAA’s operational services could be improved is the subject of
this report. Two forces—the mission to meet operational requirements and the opportunities to improve and expand predictive capability and services—create a dynamic tension that is inherent in decisions about how and to what extent NASA research and technologies can be transitioned into NOAA’s operational service system.
Transitioning research opportunities into operational service can occur in several ways. One possibility is that the infusion of new technologies, through instruments or advanced sensors, satellite designs, numerical models, or algorithms, will take place within an agency—for instance, between agency research and operational centers. The transition process also involves external agencies and organizations, such as academic institutions and research and development (R&D) laboratories. NASA and NOAA have a history of successful transitions of research that have led to improvements in weather forecasts and climate monitoring. However, these transitions have often been of an ad hoc nature, and many have taken a number of years. A more rapid transition process would pay dividends in that the opportunities for societal benefit from publicly supported research would be more quickly realized.
In April 2001, the Space Studies Board and the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board hosted a pre-project planning meeting at which outside experts and NOAA representatives discussed a range of topics relevant to a long-range vision of the architecture, technology, and customer base of NOAA’s meteorological satellite program. As a result of this meeting, NOAA’s National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) requested that the National Research Council (NRC) convene a committee to study how to improve the process for transitioning research into operations at NOAA. NOAA invited NASA to become an equal partner in this endeavor, and the study was launched.
THE CHARGE
The NRC appointed the Committee on NASA-NOAA Transition from Research to Operations under the auspices of the Space Studies Board, together with the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate and the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, to review the issue of the transition of research into operations and to recommend ways to improve the process. Specifically, NOAA/NESDIS and NASA tasked the committee to do the following:
-
Review the potential layers of new users for future operational measurements and assess the implications of the future set of user communities in terms of future needs and approaches for transitioning from research to operations;
-
Examine examples of the heritage of current NOAA satellite sensors, capture the lessons that can be gleaned from that history, and review possible approaches
-
that would smooth and speed the path from the conception of a research sensor to its eventual deployment in an operational satellite;
-
Recommend principles for determining what levels of in-house capability will be required within NASA and NOAA and their government partners (including international partners) to ensure that there is a spannable distance between R&D experts and operational users;
-
Identify opportunities for new approaches for evaluating new capabilities; and
-
Identify possible approaches to enhance the infusion of new technology into the operational system in the future, and recommend means to implement a more systematic transition process that might shorten the cycle time for major program changes and make the system more responsive to user wishes. These might include still closer collaborations between NASA and NOAA, increased resources within NOAA for the conduct of instrument and satellite development, and the enlistment of international partners in a wide variety of possible roles.
STUDY APPROACH
In conducting its study, the committee held five meetings: the first three were devoted to gathering data, the fourth focused on preparing and revising the draft, and the final meeting was devoted to responding to reviewer comments. During these meetings, the committee considered input from a variety of sources. These included previous NRC reports; briefings and supplementary material provided by personnel from NASA, NOAA, and the DOD; discussions with individuals from international organizations such as the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, with representatives from private sector instrument and satellite development companies, and with public and private sector users of environmental data; discussions with representatives of the Office of Management and Budget and congressional staff; and the expertise and perspectives of members of the committee.
The committee’s efforts have focused primarily on weather and climate because of the rich history of transitioning atmospheric research into weather forecasts and warnings, the importance of weather and climate to society, and the large amount of resources invested in weather and climate research and operations. However, the lessons learned and the recommendations contained in the report are likely to be applicable to transitions of research to operations concerning oceanographic and space weather data, and also to a broader range of federal government agencies, private sector companies, and other institutions.
The committee would like to acknowledge the many individuals who briefed the committee or provided other background material, information, or input. They include Ghassem Asrar, NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE); Ron Birk, NASA ESE
Applications Division; Dave Burridge, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF); Marie Colton, NOAA Office of Research and Applications; Michael Crison, NOAA/NESDIS; Franco Einaudi, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Edward Frazier, TRW, Inc.; Wallace Harrison, NASA Langley Research Center; Jack Hayes, NOAA National Weather Service; Frank Herr, Office of Naval Research; Tony Hollingsworth, ECMWF; Sarah Horrigan, Office of Management and Budget, Science and Space Branch; Joseph Jenney, ITT (retired); Dave Jones, StormCenter Communications, Inc.; Jack Kaye, NASA ESE Research Division; Col. Lawrence Key, U.S. Air Force, Directorate of Weather, Air and Space Operations; Michael Luther, NASA ESE; Max Mayfield, National Weather Service, National Hurricane Center; Robert Murphy, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; David Rogers, NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research; Richard Rood, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Stanley Scheidner, National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System Integrated Program Office; Ray Taylor, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; William Townsend, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; Louis Uccellini, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Prediction; Stan Wilson, NOAA/NESDIS; Robert Winokur, Earth Satellite Corporation; Greg Withee, NOAA/NESDIS; and Erin Wuchte, Office of Management and Budget, Commerce Branch.
Richard A. Anthes, Chair
Committee on NASA-NOAA
Transition from Research to Operations
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Farouk El-Baz, Boston University,
George J. Gleghorn, TRW Space and Technology Group (retired),
Brig. Gen. Albert J. Kaehn, Jr., U.S. Air Force (retired),
Ari Patrinos, Department of Energy,
Joyce Penner, University of Michigan,
Robert J. Plante, Raytheon Systems Company, and
Thomas Vonder Haar, Colorado State University.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of
this report was overseen by Robert A. Frosch, Harvard University, and Maj. Gen. Eugene Fox, U.S. Army (retired). Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.