Noaa corporate office nominations
What were the results of the actions in either quantifiable or qualitative terms?
Download 1.54 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Section 3 - Additional Information: How long did it take to complete the accomplishment When was the accomplishment completed/implemented/deployed
- What is the short-term impact (1-2 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department=s mission
- What is the long-term impact (3-5 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department=s mission
- Does the accomplishment affect other bureaus/Department or other Federal agencies If so, how
- Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in science, technology, or automation If so, how
- Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in non-scientific areas such as customer service or administrative support If so, how
- Doug Marcy NOS Nomination 80 (Originally submitted as Hurricane Katrina nomination) Full name of nominee(s)
- Nominator’s name and major Line or Staff Office
- I. Certificate citation
- SECTION 2 - AWARD JUSTIFICATION What was the specific goal, challenge or problem related to the Department’s mission and/or strategic plan
- What was the context in which the nominee addressed the goal, challenge or problem
- What specific actions did the nominee take to address the goal, challenge or problem
- What were the results of the actions in either quantifiable or qualitative terms
- SECTION 3 - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION How long did it take to complete the accomplishment
- What is the short-term impact (1-2 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department’s mission
- What is the long-term impact (3-5 years ) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department’s mission
- Does the accomplishment affect other bureaus/Department or other Federal agencies
- Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in science, technology, or automation
- Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in non-scientific areas such as customer service or administrative support
- Dan Hytrek Group OGC Nomination 81 Group Nomination
- Nominator
- Certificate Text For negotiating an agreement to significantly improve conditions for salmonids affected by the Oroville Facilities Hydroelectric Project. Justification
What were the results of the actions in either quantifiable or qualitative terms? Federal, state and local officials complimented WFO Tulsa for having these services in place before the event, and for being able to augment the services so rapidly. Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry expressed his regards directly to the WFO Tulsa WCM. Section 3 - Additional Information:
The overall concept of a decision support web page driven by the local forecast database evolved for several years. The response to specific requests during these critical times took less than one hour.
The short-term impact is that the WFO Tulsa demonstrated that it can deliver impact services by using the forecast database common to all WFOs. Therefore, all WFOs could implement such services very quickly.
The NWS can develop a full suite of risk assessment techniques using the forecast database to enhance the situational awareness of a wide variety of emergency responders on various geographic and temporal scales.
The technique of developing risk assessment graphics and text from the NWS database could be used to support the Federal Emergency Management Agency and it’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security.
WFO Tulsa’s use of base forecast data that are already being produced to provide a detailed risk assessments demonstrates an ingredients-based approach to hazardous weather forecasting that forces a forecaster to consider the implications of their most basic decisions. Thus, placing a higher emphasis on the basic forecast and necessitating the consideration of how a base element affects the potential for hazardous weather. An example would be resolving the conflict of forecasting a tornado outbreak, when base data does not suggest there will be high levels of atmospheric instability.
WFO Tulsa’s support of emergency responders during the November, 2005 fire event demonstrated a unique and partnership-based technique. Using a formula provided by local officials, a NWS office utilized its own forecast database to derive a risk assessment for fire spread. This approach can be applied to a number of hazards and strengthen relationships among all levels of government, while at the same time providing the public with better information. Doug Marcy NOS Nomination #80 (Originally submitted as Hurricane Katrina nomination) Full name of nominee(s): Doug Marcy Major Line or Staff Office for each nominee: NOS Position title and grade: Physical Scientist, Grade 13 Past awards: none Nominator’s name and major Line or Staff Office: Cindy Fowler, NOS What is the significance of this accomplishment? NOAA has critical data that are needed in support of decisions in hazards mitigation, pre-storm, and post-storm recovery planning. Many of these data have additional value when converted to GIS formats and viewed in context with external data. Doug developed a process for NOAA data to be used by DHS in pre-positioning federal resources and search and rescue efforts. I. Certificate citation: For outstanding leadership in geospatial mapping support to the nation before, during, and after the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season. II. Program Booklet (not required for Admin or Bronze Award) III. Justification: SECTION 1 - DEFINITIONS
SECTION 2 - AWARD JUSTIFICATION What was the specific goal, challenge or problem related to the Department’s mission and/or strategic plan? This effort addresses the DOC Strategic Goal to observe, protect, and manage the Earth’s resources to promote environmental stewardship and the DOC Management Integration Goal to achieve organizational and management excellence. It particularly speaks to NOAA’s goal to improve decision making when it comes to natural hazards and have NOAA serve society’s need for weather and water information. Putting the information into a format that was more user-friendly increased the use and impact of important information and greatly benefited the end-user in a way that would not have been possible otherwise. It allowed for improved emergency preparedness (pre-positioning) within DOC, DHS, and other government partners. In addition, the data were provided in a form useful for real-time search and rescue support. What was the context in which the nominee addressed the goal, challenge or problem? Doug was in a unique position to bring together his technical skills, understanding of NOAA, specifically NWS, and DHS FEMA agency procedures, and subject matter expertise in hazards to improve access to critical natural hazards support data. What specific actions did the nominee take to address the goal, challenge or problem? Doug developed procedures for DHS to use and apply NOAA data, including the 6-hr flash flood guidance, 24-hr Stage III rainfall, 120-hr QPF/6 hr- flash flood guidance difference, cumulative rainfall using stage III, H*wind datasets, HPC QPF, Significant River Flood Outlook, SLOSH model output, NDFD wave height, NDFD wind speed, and TPC NHC forecast track and 3-day error cone with GOES and NEXRAD. He organized and led a technical team to use these procedures and develop data and map products to support decision making in advance of Atlantic land-falling hurricanes during the past three hurricane seasons. Doug perfected the process and led a team to develop a concise tutorial (How-To Guide) for DHS staff to access and apply NOAA data. This tutorial is being used by DHS in preparation for the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season and will help leverage NOAA data by increasing its use throughout DHS during future hazard events. What were the results of the actions in either quantifiable or qualitative terms? Doug was instrumental in providing NOAA data and map products for the past three years, but specifically during the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season he led a team of seven technical staff to produce more than 100 map products and critical datasets used by DHS FEMA and HSOC before or during landfalling hurricanes. DHS used the data for advance spatial analysis in both search and rescue and pre-positioning of federal resources. Furthermore, Doug’s proactive approach with the NOAA Data Tutorial has already contributed to training and planning for the 2006 Atlantic hurricane Season. The tutorial is in the process of being used in outreach efforts by DHS and FEMA hurricane planning. The tutorial will be used in key DHS trainings on natural hazards planning, including the NOAA / DHS emergency managers training at the National Hurricane Center. SECTION 3 - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION How long did it take to complete the accomplishment? The accomplishment resulted from efforts during the last three years (starting during Hurricane Isabel, 2003) but proved extremely valuable during the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season during major hurricanes, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. What is the short-term impact (1-2 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department’s mission? Significant results have been realized by the use of NOAA data by DHS in support of the nation for three hurricane seasons. Products have been developed and continue to be improved that enhance storm preparedness. DHS has used the products to assist with pre-positioning resources for post-event search and rescue operations. What is the long-term impact (3-5 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department’s mission? Long-term impacts will be a continued reduction in the uncertainty of decision making in hazardous weather conditions. The data will result in additional information to support search and rescue and help with the positioning of federal resources. The seamless integration of NOAA data in times of natural disasters is the ultimate long-term goal. The positive economic impact to the nation by improved decision making along with enhanced protection of lives and property are outcomes of this effort. Does the accomplishment affect other bureaus/Department or other Federal agencies? DHS FEMA regions and HSOC are the target beneficiary of this data, but a secondary audience of state and local emergency managers is also being targeted. Internal NOAA offices already receive these products via the NOAA ICC. Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in science, technology, or automation? (Technological Advancement) Many of the NOAA NWS data were in formats that were not useable by GIS or mapping systems outside of internal NWS systems. Doug helped develop software and procedures to convert NWS data formats into GIS. He developed a process to display forecast data on easy to read and understand map products and provided datasets for further integration and spatial analysis. Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in non-scientific areas such as customer service or administrative support? This project provided customer service in the form of map products and data which were used for daily briefing packages to DHS FEMA regional offices, joint field offices, the DHS HSOC, and the NOAA ICC. These products enabled the recipients to improve decision making before, during, and after an event. 1Dan Hytrek Group OGC Nomination #81 Group Nomination: (1) Dan A. Hytrek, Attorney-Advisor, GS-14, Office of the Under Secretary/OGC/GCSW (2) Rodney R. McInnis, Regional Administrator, ES, NMFS/SWR (3) Steven A. Edmondson, Supervisor Fisheries Specialist, ZP-4, NMFS/SWR (4) Howard L. Brown, Fishery Biologist, ZP-3, NMFS/SWR (5) Eric Theiss, Fishery Biologist, ZP-2, NMFS/SWR Nominator: Judson Feder, Regional Counsel, Office of the Under Secretary, OGC/GCSW What is the Significance of the Accomplishment? The nominees substantially improved conditions for salmonids through a complex agreement requiring fisheries and wildlife protection, mitigation, and enhancement for the Oroville Facilities Hydroelectric Project (Oroville Project) in California, a central component of one of the largest public water distribution projects in the world. Certificate Text For negotiating an agreement to significantly improve conditions for salmonids affected by the Oroville Facilities Hydroelectric Project. Justification 1. What was the specific goal, challenge or problem related to the Department=s mission and/or strategic plan? For the first time in California, NOAA forged a consensus among multiple state agencies, approximately 25 water users, environmental interests, an Indian tribe, and various local and municipal organizations with widely disparate interests to substantially change the operations of a large hydroelectric project in order to improve conditions for Central Valley spring-run chinook salmon and California Central Valley steelhead in the Feather River, both salmonid species listed as Athreatened@ under the Endangered Species Act. The Feather River is a major tributary to the Sacramento River, which is the primary source of fresh water in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta. The Oroville dam (the primary facility of the Oroville Project) is the tallest dam in the U.S., and is one of the centerpieces of the California State Water Project, which is a key supplier of water to farms in the Central Valley, as well as municipal/other users in both northern and southern California. 2. What was the context in which the nominee addressed the goal, challenge or problem? The context was the relicensing of the Oroville Project by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The relicensing process gave NOAA an opportunity to develop mandatory fishways prescriptions to provide passage for anadromous fish such as salmon and steelhead, as well as recommend license conditions for the protection, mitigation, and enhancement of such species. These prescriptions and recommended conditions result in conditions effective for the 30-50 year term of a license. In lieu of simply issuing a mandatory fishways prescription, NOAA chose to negotiate a settlement for substantial habitat enhancement for the threatened salmonids at issue, which reserving authority to issue a prescription. 3. What specific actions did the nominee take to address the goal, challenge or problem? In coordination with other Federal players, these five nominees took the legal, management, and program leads in representing NOAA at the negotiations, cajoled the other parties into agreement, drafted significant portions of the settlement documents, and coordinated settlement terms to be consistent with the eventual biological opinion on the operations of the Project. They exercised patience, perseverance, tact, and legal acumen in articulating NOAA=s positions to the diverse parties, with respect to the biological needs of salmon species in the Feather River as they are affected by the Oroville Project. 4. What were the results of the actions in either quantifiable or qualitative terms? A complex, multi-party settlement agreement was negotiated that will change operations of a huge hydro-electric project; the changes affect millions of people in large parts the state. Although the salmonids conserved cannot yet be Acounted@, the agreement is expected to result in a significant improvement in conditions for salmonids, in accordance with the Administration program to administer the Endangered Species Act. 5. How long did it take to complete the accomplishment? When was the accomplishment completed/implemented/deployed? The majority of the settlement negotiations took place between October 2004 and March 2006, with a settlement agreement finalized in March 2006, and with follow up continuing into July 2006. 6. What is the short-term impact (1-2 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department=s mission? The settlement agreement will change the operations of the Oroville Project such that positive impacts in improving conditions for salmonids will begin within 2 years. 7. What is the long-term impact (3-5 years) of the accomplishment on the bureau and/or Department=s mission? The settlement agreement will continue to have positive impacts on the conditions for salmonids in the Feather River for much longer than 5 years, as described above. 8. Does the accomplishment affect other bureaus/Department or other Federal agencies? If so, how? The accomplishment guides FERC in determining what license conditions to impose upon the operator of the Oroville Project for the benefit of salmonids. 9. Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in science, technology, or automation? If so, how? This settlement agreement resulted in a major advancement in science, by improving conditions for salmonids in the Feather River and preserving the biodiversity of Sacramento River anadromous fish. 10. Did the accomplishment result in a major advancement in non-scientific areas such as customer service or administrative support? If so, how? The settlement agreement negotiations built positive relationships with the project operator and other stakeholders, including NOAA, other Federal and state fisheries and wildlife agencies, State water contractors, and non-governmental organizations, that will help in the implementation of the expected 50-year term of this license as well as similar actions for other projects in California. Directory: Word Word -> Illinois state board of education Word -> Ccm module 4 Persons, Families, and Corporate Bodies Associated with a Work Word -> Northern territory of australia Word -> Number: caveat in the [Will/Will and Codicil/Estate of] Word -> Word Wall Chants Use these as fun ways to practice word wall words at home! Word -> List of accessible executive records Word -> To visit our student-to-student file sharing network Word -> What We Owe Jehovah’s Witnesses Word -> PriceWaterhouseCoopers Archive 148 linear feet in 98 record cartons and 4 flat boxes. Biography/History Word -> Guide to Preparedness Download 1.54 Mb. Share with your friends:
|