1. Personal views....”back, then forward”... re oceanographic ship construction Steve Ramberg ser24@psu.edu Steve.Ramberg@ndu.edu 202-685-3578 [Usual Disclaimers = I speak for noone else]

2. UNOLS Ships & Major Platforms With the modern era (post WWII ) of oceanography this became a national responsibility (it still is) Navy assumed this infrastructure responsibility, arguably for both national and own reasons –Legacy of research-oriented Navy –Initially, surplus WWII ships –Strategic dominance of ASW in Cold War –Provided most (large) new construction for 4+ decades Seastory: TENOC report circa 1960

3. On Navy investments Funding source was largely SCN “ship-building” accounts (think large sums of large numbers) –DoD builds a 5 yr budget for Congress (“FYDP”) –“Smooth” budget category profiles (eg SCN) a good idea –Exceptions: FLIP & KNORR/MELVILLE drew on 6.5 (NAVSEA) accounts vs S&T (which is 6.1-6.3 accounts) Navy was seeking a 600 ship Fleet (now aiming at 300) –All hulls counted regardless of size/cost –Oceanographic ships filled SCN planning “dips” nicely –Supported naval oceanography as well as academia Seastory: AGOR-26

4. Some consequences of this framework Vulnerable to single “source” ( ≈ “construct” ) for funding Navy listened, but ultimate authority: –Insisted on multi-purpose, “global” ships (the ASW mission, of course) –Sought input from science community on capabilities (but final judge) –Chose the operators (competitively with help of external reviewers) –Could not provide full (S&T) op funding for ships it built Credit for overall fleet planning (ie “ship exchange”) became de rigueur ONR/NSF worked the problems imperfectly but well –NSF ~ 25% ship ops for Geosciences, ONR32 ~ 10% for “OAS” –NSF took shiptime 100% separate, ONR did PM cost-share (varied) PIs (community?) had little sense for the “how” of ship investments or use, much less “optimization” –On balance, it worked well for several decades, UNOLS a key enabler Seastory: Dolly as a “market force”

5. A glance at the road ahead Remains a national responsibility –Very unlikely any single agency can fill investment role Strategic priorities for ocean-related studies rising? –Argues for multi-year(/agency?) budget planning for infrastructure New National Ocean Policy and governance, NOC –All relevant ocean agencies (and then some?) –Statutory NOPP requirements subsumed NOC Deputy level = NOPP NORLC (SecNav role?) ORRAP remains tied to NORLC (1 of 2 nonFed NOC elements) Whither NOPP IWG-FI? (nee “FOFCC”) NRC/OSB study on ocean science infrastructure for 2030 underway [ large(st?) agency sponsor list]