INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE FOR METEOROLOGICAL SERVICES AND ... - DOC by pk89NWpp

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 14

									    INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE FOR METEOROLOGICAL SERVICES AND
                   SUPPORTING RESEARCH (ICMSSR)

         COMMITTEE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND
                        COMMUNICATIONS (CEISC)

                Record of Action and Action Items for 2005-1 Meeting

                                   May 17-18, 2005
                               Silver Spring, Maryland

                                MEMBERS PRESENT

                         Mr. Fred Branski, NOAA/NWS, Co-Chair
                     Mr. Michael R. Howland, USAF/AFWA, Co-Chair

DOD:                  CDR David Pashkevich, USN
DOT/FAA:              Mr. Kevin Browne
DOT/FHWA:             Mr. James Pol
NOAA/NWS/NCEP:        Mr. Bruce Webster

                        Ms. Mary M. Cairns, Executive Secretary

                                       GUESTS

DOD:                  Col. Mark Weadon, USAF
DOT/FHWA:             Mr. Donald Carver, OFCM
                      Mr. Kenneth Leonard
                      Mr. John Loynes
                      Mr. David Pace, SAIC
NOAA/CIO:             Mr. Carl Staton
NOAA/NWS:             Ms. Deirdre Jones
                      Mr. Ronald Jones
OFCM:                 Mr. Kenneth Barnett
                      Mr. Michael Szkil, NWS

Date Draft Issued:    June 1, 2005
Date Final Issued:    December 12, 2005


                               Tuesday, May 17, 2005


I        Welcome

        Mr. Michael Howland (CEISC Cochair, DOD/USAF/AFWA)
        Mr. Fred Branski (CEISC Cochair, DOC/NOAA/NWS)

         Mr. Branski and Mr. Howland welcomed the members and guests.



                                          1
II        Administrative Remarks

         Ms. Mary Cairns (CEISC Executive Secretary)
             o Approval of ROA 2004-2
             o Agenda review/changes
             o Update CEISC contact information
             o Status of Action Items

      1. The Record of Actions 2004-2 was approved by the Committee.
      2. The agenda was reviewed, with no changes. Members provided changes to
         contact information, as needed.
      3. Action items were reviewed, with no changes or comments. The current action
         items from the Working Group from Meteorological Codes were also reviewed for
         information.
      4. Ms. Cairns noted that all briefings were available on the CEISC web site
         [http://www.ofcm.gov/ceisc/ceisc.htm]. The meeting notes which follow focus on
         various slides in the presentations.

III       Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) Initiative Informational Briefing

         Mr. James Pol (DOT/ITS Joint Program Office)

      1. Enabling a vehicle infrastructure, a communications network in able to support a
          number of applications for road use.
      2. FCC allocation of 75MHz, approx 300 ft to get the data from the vehicle.
      3. For safety applications, speed is essential to alert drivers. Communications is
          suppose to be 2-way, from car to roadside, and roadside to car to warn (e.g., of
          crashes). Question from Mr. Howland…is the 802.11p a variation of a-c for these
          standards? Answer (Mr. Pol) Yes. It is an outgrowth of WiFi.
      4. These road side units will be deployed along roads, ARINC is developing them.
          The speed will give you about 3-4s warning based on the 300ft range. Antennae
          are very small (18”x12”). 400,000 would be deployed.
      5. Working towards funding for highway authorization law (congress). Comment
          from Mr. Howland…about $1500-2000 for navigation for new cars. Mr. Pol said
          they are still working on how the public/private sector will join as investors in this
          new technology,
      6. Driving force of this initiative is safety.
      7. Pie chart represents deficiencies which need to be addressed. Weather is 15%,
          visibility and surface road conditions (e.g., icing, wet).
      8. Some discussion on the quality of data, obtain signal from noise, etc.
          UCAR/NCAR is being funded to begin a look at this type of data. Some
          standards should be developed for this data….tags, GPS, etc (Ms. Jones).
          There is a lot with privacy issues.
      9. How to apply weather data, and make effective decisions, etc., VII opens up a lot
          of opportunities.
      10. Review of coalition members.
      11. Preliminary conclusions. VII is technically feasible, but lot of privacy issues, data
          ownership, etc. Version 1.0 of the architecture is available. FHWA is looking to
          establish workshops to focus on specific issues, e.g., privacy principles, over the
          next 6-12 months. Mr. Branski asked about data policy procedures, have they
          considered this yet? Mr. Pol replied that public data elements have been


                                                2
         considered, and this interface will be available to Clarus. Mr. Branski noted that
         the international arena is aware of this, but wanted to know what might be going
         on. Mr. Pol was not aware of any activity at the ISO level (European, Japan,
         etc.). Mr. Branski said possibly the frequency management becomes difficult to
         deal with.
     12. A proof of concept in targeted for mid-2006. The scope of this is still being
         discussed. Mr. Branski said this would be a good time to coordinate…Mr. Pol
         said this could be done with Clarus.

         DOT/ITS/FHWA Issues, Q&A

         Mr. Howland said we should be involved when you are considering the
         environmental data, to leverage standards and quality. Mr. Pol said this summer
         another version of the software would be available (of the VII). The scientists at
         the National Center for Atmospheric Research will be working on the data
         aspects.

IV       NOAA Enterprise Architectures

        Mr. Carl Staton (NOAA/CIO)

         [Note: Mr. Staton did not have briefing slides.]

     1. NOAA is looking towards implementing enterprise common IT infrastructure
        capabilities.
     2. What are we considering? (No priority in this order) a) HPC for research. We
        have an acquisition (proposals due this week), we have collected all of NOAA’s
        requirements for the R&D, seeking solutions to solve these collectively (given to
        vendors). NOAA will manage this as a single solution. Mr. Staton will head a
        board to manage and develop the plan for this. B) Networking. NOAA’s
        networking architecture will be based on the MPLS activity (an MPLS cloud)
        through Sprint. The architecture will have the “cloud” with the major campus
        connected (SEA, BOU, DCA, NWS Regions). NOAA will move toward this with
        time, based on cost-savings. It is anticipated that the “NOAA Network” [NOAA
        Net] will be run by the NWS for NOAA. C) email (60-70 email servers) Need to
        look at this network and possibly re-do. D) a security wrapper will be placed
        around the NOAA Net, that will reduce the IT security measures. E) desktop
        issue…this needs to be addressed F) IT training. This office really needs to take
        a better look at IT skills and address the training across the board. HPC and
        Networking activities are most relevant here.
     3. For the HPC…statement of objectives/needs…left it to the vendors to state the
        connectivity. NOAA has also looked at emerging high-bandwidth services (such
        as National Lambda Rail) which have the potential to support distributing work
        across NOAA resources and offer opportunities for savings such as common
        storage [collect once, store once, and distribute multiple times]. This should
        allow NOAA to become a leader in this area. Current backup (Fairmont) site is
        operational.
     4. Networking capabilities.
     5. Other. Getting NOAA data, geospatial one-stop data usage, into the same form.
        In the last NOAA TOPOFF exercise, NOAA provided a product (dispersion) to
        upper management. Lawrence Livermore surpassed, mainly due to presentation


                                               3
        of the data. Mr. Howland made a comment that DOD really needs to work in this
        environment. He sees an opportunity to bring this together will the other
        agencies.
    6. Question from CNMOC. Now that there is a backup…does this change the
        backup capabilities with the other agencies? Will this be something that COPC
        will address? Is there a specific system that NOAA is using to capture EA
        [Enterprise Architecture] in? Mr. Staton said there is a tool (?), but the
        requirements were not described very well. OMB gave NOAA a level “2” in EA
        (OMB demands a level “3”), due to lack of clear description of a high-level
        architecture. This is currently being worked within NOAA.
    7. Mr. Howland, regarding net centric operations for USAF. Is this a good focus?
        Mr. Staton says yes, will be going that way. Improving web services is #1.
        Developing a NOAA intranet [IBM blue pages] with web pages. NOAA
        management would define what goes into the web for elements (customize to
        each person), put all training to web-based.
    8. Presidents Management Agenda is an important issue to NOAA. Mr. Howland
        stated DOD has taken hits by not complying with some IT issues.
    9. HPC. Mr. Staton wants to ensure Congress thinks NOAA first when you think
        modeling.
    10. Geospatial referencing to data. NOAA is behind the curve on this issue.
    11. Mr. Howland mentioned work in the DOD/USAF attempt to standardize desktops,
        which has saved money.
    12. Col Weadon asked Mr. Staton to comment on NOAA data/products for the
        private sector (pending legislation). What affect would that have on the NOAA
        data distribution? Mr. Staton did not know. He said that the President is the only
        one to comment on that, NOAA does not have a comment/opinion.

        NOAA Enterprise Architecture Issues, Q&A

        Discussion. On the availability of the data, web services to the public, can we
        provide this data, in as few and standard formats (can we do it), what steps do
        we take to move into that direction, to provide the data for commerce? Mr. Pace
        asked if there was a Point of Contact? Mr. Staton says they are still in the
        thinking stages for this “model”, this is a group of senior managers (NOS, NWS,
        PPI, etc), who are beginning to look at the issue.

V       Overview of the Joint Planning and Development Office and the Weather
        Integrated Product Team - Informational Briefing

       Col. Mark Weadon (DOD/USAF & NOAA)

    1. Col Weadon presented the background of the purpose and history of the JPDO.
       This includes the Public Law which established the JPDO.
    2. Question…What is Vision 100? This is the Century of Aviation Reauthorization
       Act which established the JPDO
    3. There are six major departments/agencies, but also private industry is part of the
       JPDO (Next Generation Aviation Traffic System [NGATS] Institute).
    4. A web site has the plan of the JPDO and the structure and work. The web site is:
       http://www.jpdo.aero/site_content/index.html.
    5. Administratively JPDO is the main office.



                                            4
     6. JPDO Goals: “curb-to-curb” Question from Mr. Branski…Are the Goal numbers of
         reduction also curb to curb? Don’t know. What about the triple of the capacity??
         The FAA provides several sites which contain NAS statistics, including delays
         due to weather, etc. These can be found at: http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/
         and in particular under the “Airline Statistics” section.
     7. Ms. Cairns asked if there were safety goals with JPDO? Col Weadon replied,
         nothing specific. FAA has their 5-year goals, etc.
     8. Budget for JPDO. Still under review.
     9. There are 8 Integrated Product Teams, with multi-agency membership.
         Agencies are designated leads.
     10. Weather IPT, lead by Mr. Mark Andrews, NOAA/NWS. There are 6 sub-element
         IPTs for the weather focus.
     11. 4-D weather information is a focus for many of the weather IPTs. Get the
         weather information rapidly to weather decision-makers.
     12. FY07 budget is in progress. Most of the planning involves short-term wins with
         longer-term goals.

VI       Network Enabled Operations Efforts at the FAA

        Mr. Kenneth Leonard (DOT/FAA)

     1. Mr. Leonard reviewed briefly Col Weadon’s talk. He pointed out one Integrated
        Product Team, lead by Col Rhodes, called the Shared Situational Awareness- in
        which weather is a large component – focuses on a common data cloud [Def:
        The common data cloud is the collection of weather information residing in
        multiple databases and servers which are all individually joined to the network
        and whose contents is available to other systems on the network.]
     2. Mr. Leonard wants help from CEISC to help accomplish the 6 Goals of the
        Dissemination sub-IPT, in particular #2 (standards and policies). Collective
        solutions mean cost savings for everyone. He also wants to encourage
        collaboration across the agencies, to see that we all work together. The last
        item, develop or adopt a set of compatible weather policies and standards, is
        also an area where CEISC can help with agency collaboration.
     3. There is current work already going on within the agencies, which can be shared.
     4. We should all be working towards a common mental model.

        Mr. John Loynes (DOT/FAA)

     1. System Wide Information Management (SWIM) is an International Civil Aviation
        Operations (ICAO) term. The EA network for aviation. “The right data, to the
        right user at the right time.”
     2. Weather is one of the applications of SWIM.
     3. SWIM network. This is really a system-wide network. Several slides were
        presented to describe and visualize SWIM.
     4. An example of accessing weather products was provided, using Terminal
        Doppler Weather Radar, CWIS and RAPT. The Frame Relay Network (FTI)
        would be used. The current situational awareness is complicated, but SWIM can
        help provide the same information for all aspects of the NGATS.

         FAA Network Operation Issues, Q&A



                                            5
           Col Weadon suggested that CEISC should help with definitions, metadata
           format, etc. Mr. Leonard said we have to keep data distribution/dissemination
           and applications separate, with a focus on interoperability and connectivity
           (commonality). Mr. Leonard asked if CEISC is the right place to help with some
           of the standards that are needed here? Mr. Howland replied, for environmental
           data, yes, for network standards, no. Mr. Howland did not know what is going on
           from a Federal CIO arena. Mr. Howland feels we have a better handle on where
           the CEISC can help. This would be in the areas of XML and web services,
           cross-network security, and geostandards, metadata registry. Mr. Branski
           inquired about the availability of SWIM architecture documents. Mr. Loynes will
           provide access to the documents.

VII        Update on Action Item 03-1.5. Formation of the CEISC Working Group for
           Frequency Management

          Mr. Kenneth Barnett (WG/FM Executive Secretary)
               o WG/FM TOR
               o White paper

           Expected action: Appoint agency representatives

           Mr. Barnett presented an update on the status and next steps of the WG/FM.
           The main issue is to identify and complete the agency members, meet, and
           approve the Terms of Reference.

VIII       XML Services and Needs in the National Weather Service

          Mr. Ronald Jones (NOAA/NWS/CIO)

       1. Using XML to transfer weather data for about 15-18 months.
       2. XML is an accepted industry standard. This allows easy access, and breaks the
          data away from the presentation of the data.
       3. NWS is updating various data every 60-90 seconds.
       4. Example: severe weather warnings. Used a standard scheme (CAP). There are
          always problems, and it puts on an additional level.
       5. Easy to use, Emergency Management can use it easily.
       6. RSS, Real Simple Syndication. These are XML feeds, and updates very often.
       7. Would like a common weather schema.
       8. Mr. Jones provided examples of text products.

           XML Issues, Q&A

           There was a discussion of XML services. Mr. Howland related that DOD has
           already developed an XML schema. The question was asked about using XML
           for grids. XML can be used for a descriptor, or indexing schemes (e.g., image,
           gridded volume). You can use GRIB2 for information.


VIX        Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS) or
           World Meteorological Organization Committee for Basic Services
           (WMO/CBS) Update Briefing


                                              6
         Mr. Fred Branski

      1. Mr. Branski discussed the last WMO/CBS meeting. The WMO Executive
         Committee meets after every CBS committee. The recommendations must be
         approved by the WMO Executive Committee prior to them becoming effective.
      2. Major recommendations. A) The expert team on data representation, CBS, has
         their formal tasking changed to include XML. The next meeting of the EC will be
         this fall. Mr. Jeff Ator, NWS, is the lead for that, and Mr. Branski is the head of
         the code migration. XML should probably not be used for mass transportation.
         B) Georeferencing. C) Metadata definitions together with ICAO.
      3. Discussion on the extent to which XML has been used, both in Federal and
         private industry.
      4. 4. Mr. Branski briefed the status of GEOSS. The permanent office will be co-
         located with WMO. The office will have the United Nations status as other offices
         at WMO. CENR has GEO under it. There was a workshop held this last week to
         review the GEOSS Plan.
      5. 5. Mr. Howland asked about priorities for the US and international tasking. Mr.
         Branski said the tasks are prioritized in the plans.

X         Discussion

         Ms. Mary Cairns

          Ms. Cairns briefly reviewed the action items as a result of today’s discussions.

XI        Adjournment

          The meeting was adjourned until the following day, at 4:00 p.m.


                                 Wednesday, May 18, 2005


XII       Committee for Operational Processing Centers (COPC)/Working Group for
          Cooperative Support and Backup (CSAB) Coordination Efforts -
          Informational Briefing

         Mr. Michael Howland (8:05-8:45)
              o Centralized Communications Management Joint Action Group
              o Operational Community Modeling Joint Action Group
              o Operational Data Acquisition for Assimilation Joint Action Group
              o HPC/IT Working Group

      1. Mr. Howland presented an overview of COPC and CSAB.
      2. COPC has representatives from the major computer centers with DOC and DOD.
         CSAB serves as an executive committee for working the main issues.
      3. The JAG/CCM is designed to handle the communication issues between the
         centers. The JAG/OBS is more for quality control and acquisition for
         observations.



                                               7
      4. The SPP (Shared Processing Program) is outside of OFCM. SPOWG worked on
         issues with METSAT backup issues. The SPOWG shared the same JAG/CCM.
      5. Due to the many overlaps between COPC, SPP, and now WRF, the structure
         was reviewed and restructured.
      6. The JAG/CCM is focused more on the capacity of the communications between
         Centers, not on standards. They track and monitor communications for
         improvements and needs between the Centers.
      7. The current proposal is to form a National Operational Processing Center
         Program Council, which reports to FCMSSR.
      8. The WG for HPC/IT (High Performance Computing/Information Technology) has
         also been proposed under COPC. This is still under consideration.

XIV       Discussion on Status of Working Groups and Joint Action Groups

         Mr. Michael Howland and Mr. Fred Branski
              o Current issues being addressed in Meteorological Codes
              o CIDE – Continue or not? Status of “red” and “green” books
              o Disestablish JAG/DR and JAG/CR?

          References:
                1. Standard Telecommunication Procedures for Weather Data Exchange
                (FCM-S3-1991; “green”)
                2. Standard Formats for Weather Data Exchange Among Automated
                Weather Information Systems (FCM-S2-1994; “red”; see OFCM
                publications on-line)

1. Working Group for Meteorological Codes (WG/MC) [Mr. Branski]

Mr. Branski discussed the various aspects of the WG/MC focus for the code migration
issue. This would include the visual display replacement mentioned by Ms. Jones
yesterday.

2. Working Group for Communications Interfaces and Data Exchange (WG/CIDE).

The issues for CIDE, and the needs of the agencies were discussed. It was critical that
over the past year, CEISC was briefed on their needs/issues to better determine what
the CEISC groups should work on. The members present voted to support the
continuance of the WG/CIDE. A new TOR needs to be drafted, along with guidance to
CIDE on areas to focus on, and suggested action items.

The members reviewed the Red and Green books (publications). It was decided to
modify or inform users that much of the material is out of date. However, some of the
legacy systems are still using the described graphics. Corrections or changes to the
books should be issued by OFCM.

3. XML Issues

Discussion on the XML issue, and where does this fit. Have a JAG that directly reports
to CEISC. At a future time, this could be changed to report to one of the WGs (e.g.,
CIDE).



                                            8
Stand up the JAG, make the guidance clear as to what is needed in the TOR.
The membership up front needs to be consumers: JAG/XML.
       [So that customers using web services will be able to easily use data.]

Output will be standards. Could be adopted by WMO, or be an exception to WMO.
Input to the code group at WMO.

XV        Discussion (Issues, Deliverables, or Next Steps)

         Mr. Michael Howland and Mr. Fred Branski
              o Summary of issues raised during the meeting
              o Recommended next steps (which may include deliverables) to address
                 the issues
              o Next meeting

          Mr. Howland stated that he was pleased with the series of meetings thus far, and
          that most of the items covered have been under the Terms of Reference. In
          summary, these were:

             o   Xml/web services (JAG/XML)
             o   Cross-network security (WG/CIDE)
             o   Geospatial information and standards (WG/CIDE)
             o   Security (WG/CIDE) [this will be a difficult one, identify governing body]
             o   Visual display replacements/symbology (WG/CIDE)
             o   Graphical representation of data (WG/CIDE + WG/MC)
             o   Non-traditional data sets formats/mesonets (WG/MC + WG/CIDE)

          The next meeting will be November 8-9, 2005, in Silver Spring, MD.

XVI       Adjournment

          The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 p.m.




                                               9
                                   New Action Items


Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) Initiative

Action 05-1.1: VII Architecture. Mr. Pol, FHWA, will provide the link (to the CEISC
members) to the Vehicle Infrastructure Integration architecture software site for the
committee (to Ms. Cairns). OFCM will distribute to interested members.
Due: By next meeting.

FAA Network Enabled Operations

Action 05-1.2: Policy and Standards for Network Centric Weather Operations.
The following actions should be taken by the appropriate CEISC WG or JAG. These will
be incorporated in the new Terms of Reference for either the WG/CIDE or JAG/XML.
    1. Identify agency policy and/or standards required to support network centric
        operations in support of weather (/environmental/hydrometeorological/aviation)
        dissemination. This could also include existing, or needed requirements.
    2. Prioritize the problems to address, and develop the standards and draft policy to
        reach an initial operating capability by mid-2006. These data dissemination
        policy and standards can apply to such interagency programs such as GEOSS,
        JPDO and Clarus.
    3. For those issues (policy/standards) outside the realm of CEISCs purview, identify
        an appropriate body to address such standards or policies (or those issues which
        need to be raised to a higher level, e.g., FCMSSR or the Federal CIO Council) to
        address the Federal Enterprise Architecture.
    Due: To be incorporated in TORs by July 29, 2005.

Working Group for Frequency Management

Action 05-1.3: Membership of WG/FM. The membership of the Working Group needs
to be completed. The following people were identified at the meeting: MSgt Tim
Harvey, USAF/AFWA (lead representative for USAF and USA); Mike Fischer (Gilbert
Duke), USN and USM; David Franc, NOAA/NWS. Mr. Barnett will contact the members
for further information.
Due: July 29, 2005.

NWS XML Services

Action 05-1.4: XML Schema. Exchange schema between DOD/AFWA and NWS/CIO
(Mr. Howland and Mr. Jones).
Due: By next meeting.

COPC/CSAB

Action 05-1.5: JAG/CCM. It was suggested by Mr. Branski, that the JAG/CCM, be re-
named the “COPC Centralized Communications Management” (C3M). It will clarify the
role with the processing centers. Provide this suggestion to Mr. Williamson (Cairns).
Due: June 1, 2005.




                                            10
CEISC Structure: Working Groups and Joint Action Groups

Action 05-1.6: Code Migration Tasking for WG/MC. Mr. Branski will draft, for review
by CEISC, guidance to the WG/MC for the National Migration Plan. This will include the
topics that should be covered in the plan, suggested draft completion dates, etc. The
draft guidance is due to CEISC members (i.e., to Ms. Cairns for distribution) by 29 July.
Due: July 29, 2005.

Action 05-1.7: Working Group for Communications Interfaces and Data Exchange
(WG/CIDE). The WG/CIDE status was discussed, focusing on the needs and issues of
the group. It was voted by the members present to continue the activities of CIDE, with
more focus. This discussion also included the “Green” and “Red” books.
1. CIDE will continue to be an active Working Group under CEISC.
2. Membership should include, at a minimum, NOAA/NWS, NOAA/NESDIS,
DOT/FHWA and DOT/FAA.
3. The “Red” book should continue to exist, due to the “red book graphics,” until a new
standard exists, or a new vehicle is identified. CIDE should identify and/or reference
new standards for graphical representation of data. This should include compliance for
508(?).
        Short-term action: Identify those aspects of the document which are obsolete,
and issue a memo from the Federal Coordinator with those sections identified and place
on the OFCM web site.
4. The “Green” book should continue to exist, with documentation on what is currently
needed by the agencies.
        Short-term action: Review the contents of the document, and issue a memo on
what sections are still required/supported for legacy systems.
        Long-term action: Document the listing of the supporting standards for the
exchange of data.
5. A longer-term action: Produce a new guidance document, to document those
protocols and procedures (“purple book”).
6. Draft a TOR and initial guidance to the WG/CIDE. Mr. Branski and Mr. Howland will
draft. This TOR should include a reference to the communication and working
relationship to the COPC/CSAB/JAG/CCM.
Due: By the next meeting.

OFCM Referenced Documents:
1. Standard Telecommunication Procedures for Weather Data Exchange (FCM-S3-
1991; “green”; available in hard copy from OFCM)
2. Standard Formats for Weather Data Exchange Among Automated Weather
Information Systems (FCM-S2-1994; “red”; available at:
http://www.ofcm.gov/homepage/text/pubs.htm.

Action 05-1.8: Joint Action Group for XML (and other web services) (JAG/XML).
The CEISC discussed and agreed to form a Joint Action Group for XML (and other web
services). We will use the nomenclature JAG/XML for recognition as to its purpose. Mr.
Howland will take the lead to draft a TOR for the JAG/XML. This will include:
1. A white paper on XML/web services for both agency use in assigning members to the
JAG, and for use in briefing the need for the JAG. This will be part of the body of the
TOR.
Due: TOR draft due June 30, 2005.



                                           11
2. Conduct a virtual CEISC meeting to discuss JAG/XML. Target late July for the
telcon.
3. Obtain membership and have the first meeting of the JAG/XML. Membership should
include all ICMSSR agencies.
Due: First meeting September 2005.

CEISC Structure

Action 05-1.9: Proposed CEISC Structure. The CEISC proposed structure was
approved by the attending CEISC members. The structure included:
       CEISC
              WG/MC
              WG/FM
              WG/CIDE
              JAG/XML
The JAG/XML reports directly to CEISC. Ms. Cairns will get concurrence from other
members.
Due: By next meeting.

Action 05-1.10: Briefing to FCMSSR. The CEISC will recommend to the Federal
Coordinator that the new CEISC structure be briefed at the FCMSSR level, due to
implications to a national support for WMO and ICAO issues, including GEOSS, federal
agency next generation system development, DHS, etc. Ms. Cairns will brief Mr.
Williamson on the recommendation and report back to CEISC.
Due: By next meeting.




                                         12
                     Status of Open Action Items (as of 5/26/05)

Agenda Item – Changes to Membership Roster:
Action 03-1.1: Members review roster and provide Executive Secretary with any
corrections, alternates, or suggested permanent CEISC members. OFCM is requested
to obtain a representative from DHS, a permanent member from DOT/FHWA and
NOAA/NWS Office of Hydrology as well as possibly Bob Bunge from NWS/CIO.
Status: Mr. James Pol is the designated DOT/FHWA member. On-going.

Agenda Item – Briefing on Status of Working Groups:
Action 04-1.1:
a. CEISC members will review the proposed Terms of Reference for the Working Group
for Meteorological Codes for suggested changed or improvements and clarifications.
Status: Completed. Please reference action item 05-1.6.

Agenda Item – Frequency Management:
Action 04-1.2: As a follow-up from Action 03-1.5, the CEISC members discussed the
formation of a Joint Action Group or Working Group under CEISC for frequency
management issues. OFCM followed-up with more information prior to a decision.
    a. OFCM will work with DOC/NOAA to provide further details to a Terms of
        Reference for the proposed group. This will be provided to the CEISC via email.
        (Done.)
    b. CEISC members will review the Terms of Reference and provide input to the
        Secretary for recommendation of JAG or WG. (Done.)
    c. CEISC members will provide Secretary with membership suggestions from their
        respective agencies.
Status: The voting members of CEISC voted to form a Working Group for Frequency
Management. CEISC members not present are requested to provide the Secretary with
their approval (or disapproval) of the formation of the WG/FM (TOR draft attached). No
comment will be assumed concurrence. Agencies are to provide the Executive
Secretary with the name and contact information for the member of the WG/FM.
CNMOC has already provided a contact.
Status: The draft TOR for the WG has been completed and approved by CEISC. It will
be finalized and signed after the WG/FM convenes their first meeting. Agencies need to
provide the WG/FM Executive Secretary, Mr. Kenneth Barnett, with their representative
to the group [on-going].

Agenda Item – GEO:
Action 04-1.3: Mr. Branski briefed the group on the latest information with the Global
Earth Observation (GEO). Mr. Branski will provide the group with as much information
on current plans and initiatives. He should also provide implications to the agencies.
Status: Completed.

Agenda Item – Working Group for Meteorological Codes:
Action 04-2.1: Mr. Jeff Ator, Chair, WG/MC, provided an overview of issues currently
being addressed by the WG/MC. Several action items resulted as directions to the
WG/MC from CEISC. These were:

1. Expand the membership of the WG/MC. This includes NESDIS (L. Cambardella will
provide a member), NASA (S. Ambrose will provide a member), and DOT/FHWA
(Cairns).


                                           13
Status: In progress.
2. The WG/MC was asked to review and update the FMH-12 (e.g., PIREP, AIREP), and
exchange information between agencies using met codes other than standard
international codes (reference HDF5 in FMH-12, but not necessarily include. Could
discuss and provide contacts and web sites for further information.). In addition, the
Road Weather Information Systems standards should also be reviewed and any
changes from standard BUFR should be included in the FMH-12.
Status: In progress.
3. The question of changing the name to “Environmental Codes” was discussed. The
CEISC recommended that the name remain Meteorological Codes. However,
“environmental” could be inserted in section 1a if deemed critical.
Status: Completed.

Agenda Item – “Red” and “Green” books:
Action 04-2.2: Discussion was held on the validity of the “red” and “green” books. It was
decided that both books were out of date, or not needed. However, the agencies were
asked to review and let the Chairs know if the formats and protocols were still being
used. If so, an addendum should be issued on the status of the books.
1. Agencies review the books.
2. OFCM review and report back on how best to provide the addendums, if needed.
Status: OFCM documents were discussed at the May 17-18, 2005 meeting. This action
is considered completed. Please refer to action item 05-1.7.

Agenda Item – Other agency issues:
Action 04-2.3: There was discussion at the meeting on a working understanding of
agency use on XML, and where the agencies were going. CEISC would like to get
briefings from NESDIS, NWS (or NOAA/DOC), and DOD for an assessment of where
the agency is going. The agencies are asked to provide a briefing, discuss, then decide
if further action (e.g., JAG or WG) will be needed on this topic.
Status: XML was briefed at the May 17-18, 2005 meeting. This action is considered
completed. Please refer to action item 05-1.8.

Agenda Item – Topics for Next Meeting:
Action 04-2.4: There were several topics mentioned throughout the meeting which could
provide additional information to CEISC. It was suggested to review these for inclusion
in the next meeting. The issues were:
1. Data explosion (Howland)
2. Briefing with the Federal Council of CIOs. (Howland)
3. Briefing on Vehicle II (Pol)
4. DHS Briefing on IMAAC (Cairns)
5. FAA Agency briefing (Cairns)
6. Mr. Robert Bunge, NOAA/NWS, to brief on XML.
Status: Completed. Several of the topics were briefed at the May 17-18, 2005 meeting.




                                           14

								
To top