Developing the process for assessment of sites proposed to CryoNet A review of relevant processes and recommendations for GCW Starkweather Boulder, CO – December, 2015

Relevant Global Programs (Contacts) GAW (Tarasova, Klausen) BSRN (Long) NDACC (Hannigan) TCCON (Strong) GRUAN (Matruilli)

GAW (SIP - Annex 2) 1. Applicants check requirements are met by referring to site req’s. 2.Applicant registers station with GAWSIS & sends completed template (initial or upgrade status) to governing body. 3. A signed a letter of agreement (LoA) provided by network/station contains a list and the characteristics of the station(s). Regional station status are evaluated by the relevant SAG(s), depending on the measurement programme. JSC OPAG EPAC is responsible for evaluating applications for Global station status. As soon as a letter of acceptance is sent by the WMO Secretariat, the station is recognized as such in the GAW Programme and will be displayed in GAWSIS. 4. Data and metadata submission is required in due time after acceptance of a station in the GAW Programme as specified in Box 9 of the GAW Strategic Plan: [WMO, 2007c].

BSRN – 58 sites since late 90’s Candidate Site representative makes a presentation at biennial meeting BSRN Membership gives input/guidance A perceived commitment to longevity and accuracy of measurements, as well as commitment for a station scientist (which is a basic requirement) are significant factors. A site is not officially a BSRN site until they have submitted data to the BSRN Archive and that data has passed the BSRN quality testing! Final Decision made by BSRN Project Manager

NDACC – 70 sites since late 80’s Goal: to observe long term trends, and annual/seasonal cycles; be prepared and support satellite validation. Uses several instrument types; consequently functional working groups based on instrument type allow focus on technique specifics and improvement thereof. The WG maintain criteria for new groups/sites, standards for inclusion which are often upgraded. Blind intercomparisons used to be performed but are largely cost prohibitive. Other methods of employing standards and intercomparing instruments / data / algorithms are performed on the recommendations of the WG’s. So many checklists. There is an NDACC Steering committee where there are two reps from each WG. There are affiliated groups like AGAGE and ESRL and there reps are on the SC. There are often agency reps from NASA or NOAA or ESA. The SC governs the archive. WG chairs are voted in for 3 years. Decision making is more consensus then majority though votes are taken for the chairpersons. There really are no deciders. Changes tend to be implemented through presentations and discussions.

TCCON – 28 sites since 2000’s Instrument-based network (Bruker 125HR FTIR spectrometers). Everyone has to process their data using the same version of the retrieval code. New sites will be considered by the TCCON Steering Committee by application. Decision making is generally consensus based on: – Demonstration of required hardware and facility with TCCON processing is required. – New sites are considered provisional until demonstration of accuracy with in situ profiles. There are no site visits but sites are supposed to have aircraft overflights with in situ measurements to become full TCCON sites.

GRUAN – eventually sites The aim of GRUAN is to make long-term reference quality measurements of essential climate variables in the upper atmosphere. Generally, GRUAN provides certification for a data product, not for a station. GRUAN Working Group is decision body. After an (iterative) review process, so far all applying stations (better: their data products) have been certified consentaneous. Once certified, the station will run through a re-certfication process after some years (this has not yet happened since the network is still in buildup-phase). As a reference network, GRUAN is not open for any station, but seeks to design the station network to effectively advance GRUAN’s scientific objectives. There has been a "Network Expansion Workshop", where regions of interest have been defined (see report). report

IASOA – 10 sites since 2007 New stations give presentation to SSC – Longevity – Relevant Observations – Data Policy SSC gives input/guidance about the site Final Decision made by SSC (majority vote)

Processes reflects type(s) of requirements Location-based – “Representative”, believe not to be subject to “contamination”, long-term Technology-based – Instrument Platforms (e.g. solar tracker) – Telecommunications/Power Protocol/Quality-based – Practices followed, program(s) of observations followed – Site Maintenance – Data submitted AND passed QC’s Policy-based – Accepting data sharing policy – Metadata and data formatting – Documenting & maintaining site information – Participating in science groups – Collaboration with end users

Topics to Consider Given the application & requirements… Types of expert group review – Single parameter reviews could be made by discrete expert groups – Pass-through acceptance from contributing programs (e.g. GTN- G, GTN-P) – Integrated stations require broader body Governing/deciding body & decision making process (consensus, majority, dispute resolution) Steps to final fulfillment – Data submission – Data quality check On-going quality assurance

For reference: CryoNet Station Requirements Stations must be active. Observations are made and quality controlled according to CryoNet best practices. The responsible agencies are committed, to the extent reasonable, to sustaining long-term observations of at least one cryosphere component. There must be a commitment to continue measurements for a minimum of four (4) years. The station location is chosen such that cryospheric measurements are representative of the surrounding region. User needs have been considered in the observation design process. Personnel must be trained in the operation and maintenance of the station. Standard in situ meteorological observations, when available, are made with documented quality. A logbook for observations and activities that may affect observations is maintained and used in the data validation process. The data and metadata, including changes in instrumentation, traceability, and observation procedures, are submitted in a timely manner to a data centre that is interoperable with the GCW portal. The station characteristics and observational programme information are kept up-to-date in the GCW station information database. Station metadata are also provided to the WIGOS Information Resource (WIR) and updated regularly.