1. SAS Progress on Program and Long- Range Planning Mike Coffin IODP Science Advisory Office Ocean Research Institute University of Tokyo

2. IODP Science Advisory Structure (SAS) All SAS committees and panels: 7 Japanese + 7 American + 4 ECORD (3 voting, 1 non-voting) >150 Scientists

3. SAS-IMI-IO Interactions IODP-MI Operations Committee (OPCOM) IODP-MI Operations Committee (OPCOM) Phase I Annual Program Plan Development Phase I Annual Program Plan Development Complex Drilling Projects (CDPs) Complex Drilling Projects (CDPs) Project Management Project Management Expedition/Site Naming Expedition/Site Naming Publications Publications

4. SAS-IMI-IO Interactions IODP-MI Operations Committee (OPCOM) IODP-MI Operations Committee (OPCOM) Draft presented by IODP-MI Draft presented by IODP-MI ‘independent’ SAS Operations Committee (OPCOM) ‘independent’ SAS Operations Committee (OPCOM) iPC WG - Keir Becker, Secretary iPC WG - Keir Becker, Secretary Terms of Reference approved by iPC - Hajimu Kinoshita & Ted Moore, Co-Chairs Terms of Reference approved by iPC - Hajimu Kinoshita & Ted Moore, Co-Chairs Terms of Reference approved by IWG (12 Aug 2003) - Leinen and Yoshida, Co-Chairs Terms of Reference approved by IWG (12 Aug 2003) - Leinen and Yoshida, Co-Chairs

5. iPC OPCOM WG Keir Becker, University of Miami, USA Keir Becker, University of Miami, USA Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Philippe Pezard, Université Montpellier II, France Philippe Pezard, Université Montpellier II, France Nick Pisias, Oregon State University, USA Nick Pisias, Oregon State University, USA Alister Skinner, British Geological Survey, UK Alister Skinner, British Geological Survey, UK Asahiko Taira, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Asahiko Taira, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan

6. interim Planning Committee (iPC) Jamie Austin, University of Texas at Austin, USA Jamie Austin, University of Texas at Austin, USA Andrew Fisher, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA Andrew Fisher, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA Kathryn Gillis, University of Victoria, Canada Kathryn Gillis, University of Victoria, Canada Peter Herzig, Technische Universität Bergakademie, Freiberg, Germany Peter Herzig, Technische Universität Bergakademie, Freiberg, Germany Benoît Ildefonse, Université Montpellier II, France Benoît Ildefonse, Université Montpellier II, France Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Kenji Kato, Shizuoka University, Japan Kenji Kato, Shizuoka University, Japan Jeroen Kenter, Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands Jeroen Kenter, Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands *Hajimu Kinoshita, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan *Hajimu Kinoshita, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Chris MacLeod, Cardiff University, United Kingdom Chris MacLeod, Cardiff University, United Kingdom Larry Mayer, University of New Hampshire, USA Larry Mayer, University of New Hampshire, USA *Ted Moore, University of Michigan, USA *Ted Moore, University of Michigan, USA Delia Oppo, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, USA Delia Oppo, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, USA Kiyoshi Suyehiro, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Kiyoshi Suyehiro, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Yoshiyuki Tatsumi, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Yoshiyuki Tatsumi, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Zuyi Zhou, Tongji University, China Zuyi Zhou, Tongji University, China

7. Terms of Reference General Purpose and Mandate: to recommend the most logistically and fiscally effective means to achieve IODP scientific objectives General Purpose and Mandate: to recommend the most logistically and fiscally effective means to achieve IODP scientific objectives Consensus and Quorum: reach all decisions by consensus; quorum shall be required consisting of 2/3 of the scientific participants and 2/3 of the management representatives Consensus and Quorum: reach all decisions by consensus; quorum shall be required consisting of 2/3 of the scientific participants and 2/3 of the management representatives

8. Terms of Reference Membership: Chair, SPC Chair, SAS representatives (3), IO representatives (3), IODP-MI (1); ≤3-year terms Membership: Chair, SPC Chair, SAS representatives (3), IO representatives (3), IODP-MI (1); ≤3-year terms Liaisons, Observers, and Guests: Liaisons - lead agencies (2); chair of SSEPs, SciMP, PPSP, SSP, ILP, and TAP (7) Liaisons, Observers, and Guests: Liaisons - lead agencies (2); chair of SSEPs, SciMP, PPSP, SSP, ILP, and TAP (7) Meetings: twice per year; drilling schedules must be approved by the SPC and SPPOC Meetings: twice per year; drilling schedules must be approved by the SPC and SPPOC

9. Phase I Annual Program Plan Development FY04 - Done (kudos to Jamie Austin, John Farrell, I FY04 - Done (kudos to Jamie Austin, John Farrell, I SAS Office, et al.) SAS Office, et al.) FY05 - March (SPC ranking) - July (SPPOC Annual Program Plan consideration) FY05 - March (SPC ranking) - July (SPPOC Annual Program Plan consideration) FY06 - June (SPC ranking) - December (SPPOC Annual Program Plan consideration) FY06 - June (SPC ranking) - December (SPPOC Annual Program Plan consideration) Unknown: non-riser operations post-April 2005 (March 2004 notification?) Unknown: non-riser operations post-April 2005 (March 2004 notification?)

10. Nature, 4 December 2003 Science, 12 December 2003 Press Expeditions to Drill Pacific, Arctic, and Atlantic Sites Eos, 13 January 2004

11. 2004-2005 IODP Expedition Schedule FY04 FY05

12. SAS FY05/FY06 - +0.25/+0.75 Years

13. Prospective FY05 Expeditions (with OPCOM) 519 - South Pacific Sea Level (Tahiti and Great Barrier Reef), Camoin et al. 519 - South Pacific Sea Level (Tahiti and Great Barrier Reef), Camoin et al. 564 - New Jersey Sea Level, Miller et al. 564 - New Jersey Sea Level, Miller et al. 589 - Gulf of Mexico Overpressure, Flemings et al. 589 - Gulf of Mexico Overpressure, Flemings et al. [545 - Juan de Fuca Ridge Flank Hydrogeology (Part II), Fisher et al.] [545 - Juan de Fuca Ridge Flank Hydrogeology (Part II), Fisher et al.]

14. March 2004 SPC Ranking Deep Biosphere and Subseafloor Ocean Deep Biosphere and Subseafloor Ocean 547-Full4Oceanic Subsurface Biosphere 547-Full4Oceanic Subsurface Biosphere 553-Full2Cascadia Margin Hydrates 553-Full2Cascadia Margin Hydrates 555-Full3Cretan Margin 555-Full3Cretan Margin 557-Full2Storegga Slide Gas Hydrates 557-Full2Storegga Slide Gas Hydrates 573-Full2Porcupine Basin Carbonate Mounds 573-Full2Porcupine Basin Carbonate Mounds 584-Full2TAG II Hydrothermal 584-Full2TAG II Hydrothermal 9.2. Environmental Change, Processes, and Effects 9.2. Environmental Change, Processes, and Effects 482-Full3Wilkes Land Margin 482-Full3Wilkes Land Margin 548-Full2Chicxulub K-T Impact Crater 548-Full2Chicxulub K-T Impact Crater 581-Full2Late Pleistocene Coralgal Banks 581-Full2Late Pleistocene Coralgal Banks 595-Full3Indus Fan and Murray Ridge 595-Full3Indus Fan and Murray Ridge 9.3. Solid Earth Cycles and Geodynamics 9.3. Solid Earth Cycles and Geodynamics 522-Full3Superfast Spreading Crust 522-Full3Superfast Spreading Crust

15. Ongoing External Reviews (FY06?)

16. SAS FY07 - +0.25 Years

17. SAS FY07 - +1.25 Years

18. Annual Program Plan Timing (0.25 vs. 1.25 years) IO Issues, e.g., IO Issues, e.g., Co-chief selection Co-chief selection Prospectus Prospectus Scientific staffing Scientific staffing Technical staffing Technical staffing Clearances Clearances Logistics, including purchase of long lead-time items Logistics, including purchase of long lead-time items

19. Complex Drilling Projects (CDPs) Multi-platform and/or multi-part expeditions that require a long-term commitment from the IODP Multi-platform and/or multi-part expeditions that require a long-term commitment from the IODP Consist of overview proposal and one or more component proposals Consist of overview proposal and one or more component proposals

20. Complex Drilling Projects (CDPs) 537-CDP3: Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project 537-CDP3: Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project 537A-Full3: Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Stage 1 537A-Full3: Costa Rica Seismogenesis Project Stage 1 603-CDP3: NanTroSEIZE Overview 603-CDP3: NanTroSEIZE Overview 603A-Full2: NanTroSEIZE Reference Sites 603A-Full2: NanTroSEIZE Reference Sites 603B-Full2: NanTroSEIZE Mega-Splay Faults 603B-Full2: NanTroSEIZE Mega-Splay Faults

21. Project Management iSAS Project Management WG Report iSAS Project Management WG Report SPC Consideration of WG Report (March 2004) SPC Consideration of WG Report (March 2004) SPC Consideration of New Scoping Groups (March 2004) SPC Consideration of New Scoping Groups (March 2004)

22. iSAS Project Management WG Jamie Austin, University of Texas, USA Jamie Austin, University of Texas, USA Keir Becker, University of Miami, USA Keir Becker, University of Miami, USA Tim Byrne, University of Connecticut, USA Tim Byrne, University of Connecticut, USA Harry Doust, Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands Harry Doust, Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Hisao Ito, Geological Survey of Japan Barry Katz, ChevronTexaco, USA Barry Katz, ChevronTexaco, USA Yoshihisa Kawamura, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Yoshihisa Kawamura, Japan Marine Science and Technology Center, Japan Kate Moran, University of Rhode Island, USA Kate Moran, University of Rhode Island, USA John Thoroughgood, British (Beyond?) Petroleum, USA John Thoroughgood, British (Beyond?) Petroleum, USA

23. Project Management WG: Recommendations Recognizes 8 distinct phases, separated and by clear milestone decision points: Recognizes 8 distinct phases, separated and by clear milestone decision points: 1. Initiation - science proposal received and nurtured Review to establish maturity of project (SAS/SSEPs) Review to establish maturity of project (SAS/SSEPs) 2. Appraisal and evaluation - proposals accepted and key documents prepared Review to rank and prioritise proposals (SAS/SPC) Review to rank and prioritise proposals (SAS/SPC) 3. Selection – Proposal becomes a project, operational planning commences, DPG formed to manage all further activities, co-chief scientist(s) nominated Project & well concept peer review (OPCOM) Project & well concept peer review (OPCOM) 4. Extra survey definition – contingent on need to acquire more site specific data Survey, well plan and science integration review (OPCOM/CMO/IO) Survey, well plan and science integration review (OPCOM/CMO/IO) 5. Survey execution and incorporation – follow up to phase 4 Final pre-operational review (OPCOM/CMO/IO)) Final pre-operational review (OPCOM/CMO/IO)) 6. Operations – drilling activities carried out (IO) 7. Post-operation – review of operation, budgetary efficiency and scientific achievements (SAS, CMO, IO) 8. Scientific Performance Review - evaluation of CDP (CD-PEC) Note that phases 4, 5 and possibly 8 are contingent – they will normally be needed only for complex, riser-type projects Note that phases 4, 5 and possibly 8 are contingent – they will normally be needed only for complex, riser-type projects

24. Phase (I – VIII) Proponent activities Project management Project Development (SAS) SSEPS SSP PPSP SciMP TAP-ILP SPC SPPOC IMI OPCOM IO Key to slide Activities of the decision- making bodies: highest authorities at the top Activities of the proponents or project team Activities of the SAS evaluation and advice panels Note: activities in lined boxes show where input is required. Unlined boxes show discretionary advice/activities

25. Project activities Operations management Project evaluation SAS Off SSEPS SSP PPSP SciMP TAP-ILP external SPC SPPOC IMI OPCOM IO Project Planning Phase 12346785 SAS Function OPCOM IMI / IO IO SPPOC IO CD- PEC PROPOSAL NURTURING reviews RANKING/DATA PREPARATION DPG/CoCHIEF /SCHEDULE PLAN/COLLECT EXTRA DATA INCORPORATE NEW DATA DRILLING OPERATION POST_DRILL REVIEW WHOLE CDP REVIEW EVALUATION RISK ASSESSMENT

26. Project Management WG: Recommendations Adoption in principle of the Project Management system as described, with its phased structure and defined review points, providing assurance that the project(s) is ready to proceed further Adoption in principle of the Project Management system as described, with its phased structure and defined review points, providing assurance that the project(s) is ready to proceed further Pilot application to selected early IODP projects, including simple and complex ones (eg NanTroSEIZE) Pilot application to selected early IODP projects, including simple and complex ones (eg NanTroSEIZE) Evaluation of its effectiveness, applicability and flexibility after a period of 1 – 1.5 years Evaluation of its effectiveness, applicability and flexibility after a period of 1 – 1.5 years Propose clarifications and modifications as appropriate Propose clarifications and modifications as appropriate PMS must be usable by the IODP community – this proposal provides a framework to identify what will be needed and what will work and what not

27. SPC Consideration of WG Report Doust presentation and WG Report discussion at March 2004 SPC meeting Doust presentation and WG Report discussion at March 2004 SPC meeting SPC (+IMI+IO?) WG to form at March 2004 SPC meeting SPC (+IMI+IO?) WG to form at March 2004 SPC meeting New WG to report at June 2004 SPC meeting New WG to report at June 2004 SPC meeting New WG report to July 2004 SPPOC meeting New WG report to July 2004 SPPOC meeting

28. Scoping Groups Arctic - post-scoping (March 2004 SPC opportunity), now in implementation (iSAS) Arctic - post-scoping (March 2004 SPC opportunity), now in implementation (iSAS) Indus - being formed (September 2003 SPC) Indus - being formed (September 2003 SPC) South Pacific Sea Level (GBR?) - March 2004 SPC? South Pacific Sea Level (GBR?) - March 2004 SPC? New Jersey Sea Level (also ICDP) - March 2004 SPC? New Jersey Sea Level (also ICDP) - March 2004 SPC? Costa Rica CDP - March 2004 SPC? Costa Rica CDP - March 2004 SPC? Nankai CDP - March 2004 SPC? Nankai CDP - March 2004 SPC?

29. Expedition/Site Naming SciMP Expedition/Site Naming WG, Rick Murray, chair SciMP Expedition/Site Naming WG, Rick Murray, chair Input from Input from JDESC JDESC USSAC USSAC ESO ESO Murray to present recommendations at March 2004 SPC meeting Murray to present recommendations at March 2004 SPC meeting Recommendations to the SPPOC finalized shortly thereafter Recommendations to the SPPOC finalized shortly thereafter

30. Publications SPC Publications WG, Ken Miller and Yoshiyuki Tatsumi, co-chairs SPC Publications WG, Ken Miller and Yoshiyuki Tatsumi, co-chairs JDESC JDESC USSAC USSAC ESSAC ESSAC SciMP Recommendations, Rick Murray and Eiichi Kikawa, co-chairs SciMP Recommendations, Rick Murray and Eiichi Kikawa, co-chairs Miller and Murray to present respective recommendations at March 2004 SPC meeting Miller and Murray to present respective recommendations at March 2004 SPC meeting Recommendations to the SPPOC finalized shortly thereafter Recommendations to the SPPOC finalized shortly thereafter