Service Program Team Decision Page |

Service Program Team Validation Decision Information

Analysis and forecast guidance to support integrated (atmosphere/ocean/ice) environmental forecast services for high latitudes (Arctic, Antarctic), and Great Lakes

ocean/ice areas.

Request Number: 18-026

Service Program Team: Marine (Lead)

SPT POC: Darren Wright

CaRDS Analyst: Carlos Diaz

Answer the following and include details for any “NO” answers.

Question YES NO

Q1: Is the request Title, SCOPE, and applicability well defined in the request form? Enter changes, issues or questions needing resolution. Specify if this request is ‘Transformational’ in Nature.

X

Q2: Is request appropriate for the NWS? If no or unclear from original request, provide details.

X

Q3: Have all necessary stakeholders been engaged and are they in agreement? List stakeholders which have been engaged and details on any opposing views. At a minimum, ensure having Approve/Not Approve (or Neutral - ‘thumbs-sideways’) response from all SPT members. List all stakeholders in Table 1.

X

Q4: Is there a clear benefit to the NWS by providing this capability? Provide details; basically answering the question – Is this worth doing?

X

Service Program Team Decision Page |

Answer the following and include details for any “YES” answers.

Question No YES

Q5: Are there any potential conflicts or issues with policy which should be discussed and addressed? Provide details on any issues which were addressed, and any which still need to be looked at.

X

Q6: Is there any change in working conditions or other issue requiring NWSEO review? Provide details on those addressed, and any which still need to be looked at.

X

Q7: Is this request a duplicate or of such nature that it should be merged with an existing request/requirement or capability? Or, Is something like this already being done in another region?

X

Q8: If implemented, will this request result in a New (or a substantial change) product or service available to the general public or NWS “Partners”? Note that any new/enhanced data sets (observations, model guidance, forecast products) needed to meet this new requirement will need to go through standard 10-102 process.

X

Detail any other issues or coordination required which were not captured in the previous questions. Ensure Service Delivery Portfolio(s) engaged – add details in Table 1 and Decision Summary as appropriate. .

Service Program Team Decision Page |

Table 1: Stakeholders.

Office or Organization Name For voting members indicate: Approve, Neutral or Not approve

AFS/Marine SPT Lead Darren Wright Lead, Vote: Approve (12/4/18)

ARH Rebecca Heim Vote: Approve after comments/suggestions in google doc are incorporated (12/17/18) - Done

CRH Brian Hirsch Vote: approve 3/5/19

ERH Kim McMahon Vote: ER approves (12/17/2018). Suggest clarity /further defining “high latitudes”.

NCEP/NHC E. Rappaport, C. Landsea Vote: Approve (12/4/18) C. Lansea

NCEP/OPC D. Figurskey, J. Sienkiewicz Vote: Approve (12/5/2018) after some wording cleanup of the version I (DJF) saw at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mhZKLTBPthSqpLNWoIbkApC8qewTesW5636CAGSGaWo/edit

NDBC D. Petraitis Vote: Neutral (12/4/18)

NWSEO P. Maloit Advisor: No significant comments.

PRH Bill Ward Vote: Approve 3/5/19

SRH Melinda Bailey Vote: SR approves 12/14/2018. Suggest to clarify the

Mission Need to include specific forecast parameters that is needed. The following statement seems excessively broad:

Such guidance will require analysis and forecast parameters that fully represent the interactions across the interfaces between the medium of ocean/lake/river surface, atmosphere, ice, waves, and ocean/lake at depth.

J.S: we had significant debate concerning listing parameters and

made the decision to keep this request to a high level, in essence,

proposing the requirement for coupled modeling to meet the

predictive needs for ice prone waters of the high and mid-latitudes.

WRH Jeffrey Lorens Vote: Approve (11/21/18)

← List Service Delivery Portfolio(s), POC, and their feedback →

w/DIS Craig Hodan Advisor/Concurrence - Concur. No significant comments.

w/Obs M. Potochney Advisor/Concurrence NA

w/STI D. Myrick / H. Tolman

Advisor/Concurrence - Concur (7/28/2020) with comment: The only thing that needs updating is the timing in section 4. Originally, we expected this to go into the GEFS FY20Q4 or early FY21. As that version was descoped, it is now expected to go into operation early FY24, as all global models are unified.

← List other SPT/CPTs engaged, and their comments/concurrence →

Service Program Team Decision Page |

Aviation Bruce Entwistle Vote/Concurrence: Concur (4/13/20)

Water Resources Mary Mullusky Vote/Concurrence: Concur 12/11/18

Analysis & Nowcast Y-J Kim Concur with a recommendation: Check with US Navy (NRL) on any relevant info. they can provide.

IDSS Andy Foster (acting) Concur

Policy Wendy Levine

Concur with recommendation. Note that any new/enhanced data sets (observations, model guidance, forecast products) needed to meet this new requirement will need to go through standard 10-102 process.

SPT DECISION and RECOMMENDATION

SPT Decision on this request is: (click Twice on desired option ‘circle’, then right-click and select check mark)

✓ Approved by SPT

The SPT recommends that this request be: Approved by AFSO

Date completed and Forwarded to AFS: 7/29/2020

AFS Director Disposition: Date: 8/14/2020

For approval of high level requirements

√ Approve and Schedule for MDC

○ Resolve Issues and come back

○ Not Approved by AFS

○ Other: