--
Edward Cranswick                Tel: 303-273-8609
US Geological Survey, MS 966    Fax: 303-273-8600
PO Box 25046, Federal Center    cranswick@........
Denver, CO 80225-0046  USA      E.M. Forster said, "Only connect".

Tom-
    I think that Dave Wald is the single most important person for the useful
development of ANSS because he is the one working to develop an active feedback
relationship  with the
ultimate users of the groundmotion recorded where people live -- the people
themselves.
    I see that Dave Wald has not been included as a participant in the ANSS
planning and that is a serious oversight if you are seriously planning to make
this project relevant to the Internet citizens of seismogenic regions who are
already more connected with each other and with what is shaking than we are.
-Edward

"Heaton, Thomas" wrote:

> Dear CNSS members,
>
> The following is an update on CNSS issues.  Please note that we
> will have a meeting of the CNSS at 7:00 PM on 11 April 2000 at
> the SSA meeting in San Diego.  The update will also be available at
> http://www.cnss.org/.
>
> Tom Heaton
>
> CNSS  Update
> 3/13/2000
> Tom Heaton
> heaton_t@...........
>
> This is to update you on recent developments that are relevant to the
> Council on the
> National Seismic System (CNSS).  This is an important time for US
> seismographic
> networks; there are two major proposals that are in the planning stages
> (ANSS and
> USArray) and one new consortium to further strong-motion recording has been
> started
> (COSMOS).  These proposals present operators of regional networks with
> challenging
> new opportunities, and if they are successful, seismographic systems will be
> very
> different 10 years from now.  Strong-motion and regional seismic networks
> will be an
> integrated 4,000-station system (ANSS); an 800-station, low-noise,
> very-broad-band
> network will slowly roll across the nation (USArray); and the US National
> Seismographic
> Network (USNSN) will be expanded from its present 40 stations to 75
> stations.  These
> bold visions of the future raise many critical questions.  What will be the
> relative roles of
> the USGS, IRIS, individual universities, and state agencies?  ANSS and
> USArray both
> propose extensive regional broad-band networks; how will they be
> coordinated?  Will
> ANSS and USArray operate independent data management systems?  These and
> many
> other questions must be answered in the coming months.
>
> Annual Meeting
>
> The CNSS annual meeting will be held from 7:00 pm to 10:00 on Tuesday 11
> April 2000
> in the Pacific/Surf/Tropic Room of Hanalei Hotel during the Seismological
> Society of
> America meeting in San Diego.  I anticipate that the new ANSS and USArray
> initiatives
> will be the main topics of discussion at this meeting.  In particular, we
> will discuss the
> proposed management structure of the ANSS that was developed at the first
> meeting of
> the Interim Steering Committee.  We will also discuss recent efforts to form
> a software
> standards committee for seismic networks.  If you have other items that you
> would like to
> put on the agenda, please mail them to me. We will post updated information
> on this
> meeting at the CNSS web site (http://www.cnss.org/).
>
> ANSS  Interim Steering Committee
>
> The USGS hosted the first meeting of the ANSS Interim Steering Committee
> that was
> held in Albuquerque on 29 Feb. 2000.  Thanks are extended to John Filson,
> Harley Benz,
> Jill McCarthy and Joyce Costello, who organized this historic meeting.  The
> purpose of
> the meeting was to begin development of an implementation plan for the ANSS
> and to
> develop a proposed management structure.  The overall goals of the ANSS have
> been
> widely discussed at previous meetings and are described in "Requirements for
> an
> Advanced National Seismic Sysytem" (USGS Circular 1188).
>
> Participants in this meeting were chosen by the key agencies that represent
> a wide variety
> of groups with a stake in ANSS.  These include the SSA, EERI, IRIS, CNSS,
> COSMOS,
> USGS, TriNet, PEER, MAEC, MCEER, and WSSPC.  Tom Heaton(CIT), Walter
> Arabasz (U of Utah), and Lind Gee (UCB) represented the CNSS at the meeting.
> Also
> attending the meeting were Jonathan Bray (PEER/UCB), Jim Davis (State of
> CA), Goran
> Ekstrom (IRIS/Harvard), Arch Johnston (MAEC/U of Memphis), Lucy Jones
> (TriNet/USGS), Steve Malone (SSA/UW), David Oppenheimer (USGS), Kaye
> Shedlock
> (USGS), David Simpson (IRIS), Paul Somerville (EERI/Woodward-Clyde), and
> Carl
> Steppe (COSMOS).
>
> Development of a proposed management structure was a key issue at this
> meeting.  The
> relative importance of regional centers and the role of national management
> was a hot
> topic.  There was a strong consensus that the number of regional centers
> should be a
> relatively small number.  This will require significant changes from our
> current structure
> of many independent networks.  In anticipation of this change, several
> California
> networks are planning to join together in the California Integrated Seismic
> Network
> (CISN), which is described below.
>
> It is important that other regions begin to explore workable management
> structures that
> can meet the needs of their region.  There was consensus that individual
> regions must
> have a strong management structure, but this does not necessarily imply that
> all activities
> reside in one physical location.  The formulation of implementation plans
> for individual
> regions is difficult and critical.  If individuals have some strong opinion
> about the
> management of seismic instrumentation in their part of the US, then they
> should begin
> talking with others in their region about what a workable regional center
> may look like.
>
> Support for ANSS
>
> There are four separate steps that are necessary for funding to be allocated
> to the ANSS;
> both the House and the Senate must authorize it, and both the House and the
> Senate must
> appropriate it.  While it is not necessary, it is also extremely helpful if
> the President's
> proposed budget also contains ANSS funding.  The President's proposed FY2001
> budget
> requests $4.2M for ANSS.  While this is far too little to allow serious
> implementation of
> ANSS, it is viewed by some as an important step to full funding of ANSS.
> That is, the
> issue of ANSS has been formally introduced into the appropriations process.
> Congress
> could still pass an appropriation bill with the full funding.  Now is the
> time to contact
> appropriations committee members in both the House and Senate.  The
> following is
> a summary of the status of ANSS legislation.
>
> 1.      House authorization.  ANSS has already been authorized by the House
> at level of
> $38 M per year for FY2000 through FY2004 (see http://thomas.loc.gov/ and
> search on HR1184).  This authorization has been referred to the Senate.
> 2.      Senate authorization.  A similar bill (see http://thomas.loc.gov/
> and search on
> S1639) authorizing ANSS was introduced in the Senate and is pending before
> the
> Senate Commerce Committee, which is chaired by Senator John McCain (AZ).
> Undisclosed sources indicate that Senate authorization is likely, although
> Senator
> McCain has been occupied with his recent presidential campaign.
> 3.      House Appropriation.  This is the probably the most critical action
> item.
> Support for ANSS can be sent to
>
> The Honorable Ralph Regula
> Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior
> Committee on Appropriations
> U.S. House of Representatives
> B-308 Rayburn House Office Building
> Washington, DC 20515-6023
>
> with a cc to
>
> Joel Kaplan, Staff
> Subcommittee on Interior
> Committee on Appropriations
> U.S. House of Representatives
> B-308 Rayburn House Office Building
> Washington, DC 20515-6023
> [Tel: 202-225-2081]
>
>         The following congressmen are also on this critical committee.
>
>  Norman Dicks, Wash.
>  Jim Kolbe, Ariz.
>  John P. Murtha, Penn.
>  Joe Skeen, N.M.
>  James P. Moran, Va.
>  Charles H. Taylor, N.C.
>  Robert E. (Bud) Cramer, Jr., Ala.
>  George R. Nethercutt, Jr., Wash.
>  Maurice D. Hinchey, N.Y.
>  Zach Wamp, Tenn.
>  Jack Kingston, Ga.
>  John E. Peterson, Penn.
>
> 4.      Senate appropriation.  This is also a very important committee,
> since House and
> Senate bills must go to conference.  Letter of support should be sent to
>
> Senator Slade Gorton,
> Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior
> Committee on Appropriations
> United States Senate
> SD-131 Dirksen Senate Office Building
> Washington, DC 20510-6033
>
> with a cc to
>
> Ginny James, Staff
> Subcommittee on Interior
> Committee on Appropriations
> United States Senate
> SD-131 Dirksen Senate Office Building
> Washington, DC 20510-6033
> [Tel: 202-224-7233]
>
> Other members are in order of rank,
>
> Republicans: (8)
> Slade Gorton (WA), Chair
> Ted Stevens (AK)
> Thad Cochran (MS)
> Pete Domenici (NM)
> Conrad Burns (MT)
> Robert Bennett (UT)
> Judd Gregg (NH)
> Ben Nighthorse Campbell (CO)
>
> Democrats: (7)
>
> Robert Byrd (WV), Rnk. Mem.
> Patrick Leahy (VT)
> Ernest Hollings (SC)
> Harry Reid (NV)
> Byron Dorgan (ND)
> Herbert Kohl (WI)
> Dianne Feinstein (CA)
>
> CISN
>
> Planning for a California Integrated Seismic Network has occurred over the
> past 12
> months.  This planning effort has included the Southern California
> Seismographic
> Network (USGS/Pasadena and CIT), the Northern California Seismographic
> Network
> (USGS/Menlo Park and UCB), the California Strong Motion Instrumentation
> Program
> (Calif. Div. Mines and Geology), and the US National Strong Motion Program
> (USGS).
> This planning effort is a natural follow-up to the TriNet Project
> (http://www.trinet.org/),
> which has been operating for more than 3 years.  A FEMA earthquake
> mitigation grant
> provided 5 years of funding to develop and operate the TriNet system in
> southern
> California.  FEMA funding for this project will terminate at the end of
> 2001.  The current
> managers of TriNet (CIT,USGS, and CDMG) have stated their intentions to
> replace the
> TriNet structure with a new statewide structure that also includes UCB and
> USGS/Menlo
> Park.  The goals of CISN are virtually identical to those of ANSS, and it is
> viewed that
> CISN is a likely candidate of an ANSS regional center.  CISN has also been
> actively
> pursuing financial support from the State of California.
>
> USArray  http://www.iris.iris.edu/USArray.html
>
> USArray  has been included as a proposed Major Research Equipment (MRE)
> initiative
> by NSF (see page 19 of
> http://www.geo.nsf.gov/geo/adgeo/fac_lrp/facilities_plan.pdf).
> Support for USArray appears to be strong and there will be extensive
> discussion of this
> project at both the SSA Annual Meeting (April 10-12) in San Diego
> (http://www.ssay2k.ucsd.edu/), and at the IRIS Annual Workshop in Rockport,
> Me. (May
> 7-10, http://www.iris.edu/workshop00_info.html).
>
> Coordination between ANSS and USArray is a key issue.  In particular, if
> both initiatives
> are funded, then it must be decided how data are managed when USArray
> stations are
> interspersed among ANSS stations.  Should separate data management
> facilities be
> developed for ANSS and USArray?  If USArray is funded and ANSS is not
> funded, then
> strategies must be developed to cope with the policy problems raised by
> having a high-
> quality broad-band network for basic research (USArray), while being stuck
> with an
> antiquated seismic monitoring system.

--
Edward Cranswick                Tel: 303-273-8609
US Geological Survey, MS 966    Fax: 303-273-8600
PO Box 25046, Federal Center    cranswick@........
Denver, CO 80225-0046  USA      E.M. Forster said, "Only connect".