1. NOAA Science Advisory Board Fire Weather Research Working Group (FWRWG) John T. Snow 2 Oct 07

2. Terms of Reference 1 Background – rationale and need for the WG NOAA SAB Charge – ensure NOAA’s fire weather research priorities match those of its land management partners and other interested parties outside the fire community who are increasingly using NOAA’s products and services – explore opportunities to leverage current NOAA-internal and external collaborative fire weather research efforts to ensure improvements to NOAA’s fire weather products and services are implemented in a timely manner Fire Weather Research Working Group (FWRWG) Charge – Specific charge to the WG  see next slide – Also includes eight specific questions in the areas of science and science planning; transition of research to operations; resource planning Term -- One year  see Timeline

3. Terms of Reference 2 … carry out an independent review of current fire weather research being conducted by NOAA and other federal agencies, and in universities and elsewhere, and examine how the results of that research are being further developed and transitioned to operations by NOAA. … examine fire weather-related research efforts conducted by groups external to NOAA and identify areas of commonality where research activities might be leveraged for mutual benefit. … develop findings and recommendations to ensure these research results lead to improved operational fire weather information and forecasts. … examine related research within NOAA not necessarily specific to fire but which could result in improved fire weather services or other NOAA emergency support operations.

4. A Tight Timeline 1-2 Oct ‘07 – 1 st Meeting, Silver Spring, MD Jan ‘08 – 2nd Meeting, southern California (exact location TBD, perhaps Riverside, CA USFS Lab or San Diego WFO) Apr ‘08 – 3rd Meeting, Boise, ID Jun ‘08 – 4 th Meeting, National Weather Center, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Aug ‘08 -- Preliminary report reviewed by SAB Sep ‘08 – Near-final report out for public comment (Fed. Reg. announcement + 30-day comment period) Nov ‘08 – Final report accepted by SAB + numerous teleconferences, particularly after the 2 nd meeting, when report development begins

5. Working Group Procedures 1 Working Group members were selected for their personal expertise and experience and in such a way as to give balance and independence to the WG – Members are expected to participate all meetings – No substitutes, seconds – As a last resort, a WG member may call in for part of a meeting

6. Working Group Procedures 2 Meetings will consist of portions open to the public and executive sessions restricted to WG members and invited NOAA support staff Presentations are intended to be information briefings, not scientific seminars In the interest of time and to maintain focus, questioning of speakers is restricted to members of the WG and NOAA support staff

7. Working Group Procedures 3 The observations, findings, and recommendations developed by the WG are considered “draft” and “confidential” until accepted and released by the NOAA SAB – Draft observations, findings, and recommendations are to be discussed/shared only with other WG members and NOAA support staff

8. Working Group Procedures 4 Report processing – SAB review of preliminary report – Fed Reg notice and 30-day public comment period – SAB review and acceptance of the final report – Transmittal with cover letter to the Administrator of NOAA – Formal response back to SAB and then to WG

9. Web Site Administrative materials – travel, lodging Terms of Reference Meeting materials Contributed materials – Western Governors Association Resolution

10. The Report 1 Audience: multiple −NOAA SAB −NOAA Senior management  Administrator, AA’s −NOAA Research Council −Dept of Commerce −OMB, aka The White House −The Congress −Professional communities 2008 election None of the above are experts on fire weather  write at the Scientific American level; minimize jargon, acronyms

11. The Report 2 Overriding focus: the research and development + technology transfer that needs to be done in the next 3 to 5 years to provide incident meteorologists and other forecasters with fire weather responsibilities the best possible tools and supporting infrastructure for them to provide support to their customers = wildfire managers, etc… The WG should focus on what needs to be done, not on how NOAA should do it. Decisions on funding, organizational, or personnel matters are the purview of NOAA management

12. The Report 3 Each of the substantive sections of the report will consist of brief introduction followed by a sequence of [observation, finding(s), recommendation(s)] – Observation = facts, data, description of the current situation – Finding = conclusions, need, requirement – Recommendation = what needs to be done to address the need/how to meet the requirement “Less is more”  a few well-stated recommendations will lead to more positive results than a long shopping list Can assign priorities  “top five”

13. The Report 4 1 st draft outline Executive Summary – JTS – 4 to 6 pages Acknowledgements – JTS – 1 page Introduction – JTS – 2 to 4 pages -- propose, description of the process “Fire and climate change” -- Pre-fire – about one-quarter of the report During the fire (incident management) – about one-half of the report; tools for incident meteorologists and the techno-infrastructure that supports these individuals; includes smoke and air quality issues in the region around the fire Post-fire – debris flows, environmental issues Other considerations -- Concluding remarks – JTS -- 1 or 2 pages References -- Appendices – Terms of Reference – Meeting agendae – Acronyms, jargon

14. A Tight Timeline 1-2 Oct ‘07 – 1 st Meeting, Silver Spring, MD Jan ‘08 – 2nd Meeting, southern California (exact location TBD, perhaps Riverside, CA USFS Lab or San Diego WFO) Apr ‘08 – 3rd Meeting, Boise, ID Jun ‘08 – 4 th Meeting, National Weather Center, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Aug ‘08 -- Preliminary report reviewed by SAB Sep ‘08 – Near-final report out for public comment (Fed. Reg. announcement + 30-day comment period) Nov ‘08 – Final report accepted by SAB + numerous teleconferences, particularly after the 2 nd meeting, when report development begins

15. The Report 5 Good draft outline – before 2 nd meeting  your thoughts in two weeks, then teleconference or two before the end-of- year holidays Initial writing assignments – by close of 2 nd meeting Initial writing assignments will be due 3 weeks before 3 rd meeting  1 st composite draft will be reviewed at that meeting; have we answered the questions?; additional writing assignments Additional writing assignments will be due 3 weeks before 4th meeting  2 nd composite draft reviewed at 4 th meeting  preliminary report to SAB ~four weeks later