Minutes

MINUTES of the ASF USER WORKING GROUP MEETING / 18 - 19 May 1998
[prepared by Donna Sandberg and Barb Severin, ASF]

The ASF User Working Group Meeting was held at the Alaska SAR Facility in
the Geophysical Institute Globe Room of the University of Alaska,
Fairbanks, Alaska on May 18 and 19, 1998 and the following members were
present at the meeting: Leslie Morrissey acted as Chair, Jon Ranson, Bryan
Isacks, Mark Fahnestock, Harry Stern, Gary Minden, Eric Rignot, Cheryl
Bertoia, Ronald Kwok, Bruce Chapman, Verne Kaupp, Prasad Gogineni, Ben
Holt, William Pichel and and Paris Vachon.

Those absent were as follows:  Mark Drinkwater, Vanessa Griffin, Kenneth
Jezek, Darryl Lakins, Antony Liu, Peter Mouginis-Mark, David Nichols, Paul
Ondrus, Earnest Paylor, Keith Raney, Howard Zebker.

Guests were as follows:   Tom Bicknell, David Cuddy and Ken McDonald.


               *****DAY ONE - 18 MAY - MORNING SESSION*****


OPENING AND INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Joan Wadlow, Chancellor, University of Alaska Fairbanks, was introduced by
Craig Lingle, ASF Acting Director. Chancellor Wadlow spoke briefly about
the growth and potential of UAF and the important role the Alaska SAR
Facility has in UAF's future.

Syun Akasofu, Director, Geophysical Institute, was the next speaker. He
mentioned that ASF has been stepping up to the task of filling more data
requests, has survived difficult times undergoing reorganization, and has
had many successes this past year. He mentioned the ADRO, AMM, the
development of closer ties with JPL, NIC, and the future IARC, as important
to ASF development.

1. Craig Lingle then gave an overview of ASF and some of the science
results done with ASF data. He also stated our production levels have been
rising and he expects higher production levels in the future.

Prasad Gogineni, NASA's ASF Project Scientist, thanked the UWG members for
attending. He pointed out that the impact of SAR imagery has resulted in an
exponential increase in SAR users, and in particular that interferometric
use of SAR data is also increasing. There are four major projects supported:
1. Arctic Snapshot
2. AMM (resulting in the release of a new NRA)
3. Boreal Forest Mapping
4. Amazon Mapping
He wants UWG recommendations for near- and long-term priorities, as well as
membership recommendations. Ideally, the chair should fill a three-year
term and there should be a one-third turnover in the members representing
different areas of research every year.

Verne Kaupp, ASF Chief Scientist, informed the group of the unexpected
political demands on Peter Mouginis-Mark's time and of Dr. Mouginis-Mark's
subsequent resignation as chair of this UWG. Dr. Mouginis-Mark will remain
a member. Dr. Leslie Morrissey was asked to act as chair for this meeting.
The agenda had been set up to follow Dr. Mouginis-Mark's perspective of
ASF, which may or may not fit others' perspectives; however, it was decided
to let the agenda stand, due to time constraints. During this first
meeting, the primary goal is to get to know one another and to examine ASF
from a user perspective (vis a vis PMM's agenda). There are forms available
to record and number problems, issues/concerns, etc., which can be given a
number, collected, and tracked. Donna Sandberg will record minutes and
collect any forms the UWG wishes to generate. Dr. Kaupp proposed that
future official UWG meetings be held in March and September and that one of
the first orders of business is to write the ASF Five-Year Science Plan.
Please see his viewgraph #11 "UWG Strategy" in the UWG book.

Leslie Morrissey, University of Vermont and acting UWG Chair, thanked the
UWG members for coming and thanked ASF for hosting the meeting. She
believes we can work together towards a positive future. As SAR users, the
UWG members have a vested interested in the success of ASF. Her corporate
history grows from membership in the last ASF UWG called PoDAG (Polar DAAC
Advisory Group; it also concerned itself with NSIDC). She expressed
concerns that UWG members focus on receipt of data in a timely fashion and
stressed the importance of the user interface.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE - LYN MCNUTT
Lyn McNutt, ASF Senior Scientist and SHEBA Co-I, gave an ASF-interpretation
of the Gettysburg address stressing the importance of the continuation of
SAR data use. As a former member of PoDAG, she explained that PoDAG was
initiated because of the NASA DAAC structure, that we are the interface
with many foreign flight agencies, and that ASF and NSIDC are the only
teaching institution DAACs.

INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION - UWG MEMBERS

Harry Stern, University of Washington Polar Science Center, spoke about the
SAR data. His depth of experience with ASF is listed in his viewgraphs. A
bright spot on one of his sea ice images was, in fact, a ship. Dr. Stern is
also affiliated with the SHEBA Project office.

Jon Ranson, NASA/GSFC Biospheric Sciences Branch, has received no products
from ASF but has a vital interest in successful data distribution to
researchers. His research is in the northern boreal forest biomass and
forest ecosystem dynamics. He has looked at the sensitivity of radar in
interpreting the tundra-tiaga interface with respect to climate change
indicators.

Mark Fahnestock, University of Maryland and GSFC, uses SAR interferometry
for ice sheet study. For his work on the Greenland Ice Sheet, he has
primarily obtained SAR data through the ESA Order Desk in Frascati. He will
look at the US RADARSAT Order Desk, ASF, in light of knowledge gleaned from
successful interactions with the ESA Order Desk.

Gary Minden, University of Kansas, is not a SAR user. He has used Landsat
data but is more interested in the computer processing and computer
networking aspects of SAR processing.

Eric Rignot, JPL Research Scientist, uses radar data mostly from ESA and
has received good service. He currently has two ADRO projects with ASF. One
merges SAR with Landsat to study tropical forest regrowth (he has not
received a lot of data). The other uses interferometry to study the
Greenland Ice Sheet. He has also participated in the Antarctic NRA,
attempting to find good SAR pairs over the Dry Valleys, but, out of 750
images available in the archive, only 12 qualified for interferometric
pairs. For his Pathfinder research, he wishes to use SAR and Landsat
combined with GRS data.

Cheryl Bertoia, NIC, has been affiliated with ASF since ERS-1 and seen ASF
undergo changes. She believes the enterprise view of ASF has brought
improvements. The newly constructed ASF-NIC interface plan is good and
provides working points of contact. They are able to use ASF SAR data to
find kinds of ice for operating vessels on and under the ocean. The
operational turnaround time for reception of data is less than six hours.
The NOAA archive of SAR satellite data is freely available to
US-government-sponsored users. The success rate of ASF operational data is
routinely high. NOAA will be operating the RADARSAT II US Order Desk.

Bryan Isacks, Cornell University, emphasized that for the university
community at large it is easier to get data from ASF than from ESA. A big
breakthrough in data use is interferometry. He was able to obtain true
multi-temporal data from ASF and shifted research from Patagonia to Alaska.
He has ongoing studies regarding Chilean earthquakes and geomorphology,
studies in Southeastern Alaska and British Columbia, and combines SAR views
of glaciers with mesoscale atmospheric models.

Paris Vachon, CCRS, is not an ASF data user but uses SAR data over
Vancouver Island to detect ship locations. This use of data has
successfully become a product from OMW. They also have tracked an oil spill
from Japan. ERS data are used for wind retrieval and in studies of
low-pressure gyres. He showed examples of low-pressure areas both over
ocean and partially over land. The center of the low-pressure area shown in
SAR corresponds directly to the actual low-pressure center.

Leslie Morrissey, University of Vermont, studies methane exchange rates in
circumpolar areas considering growing season length, seasonal inundation,
etc. SAR data have worked out well. In the complexity of the wetland cycle,
SAR data have higher backscatter as the water table increases and, as the
water table increases, the methane emissions increase.

Ron Kwok, JPL, heads up the Arctic Snapshot efforts and uses a lot of SAR
data. The RGPS needs sequential SAR observations of the Arctic Ocean. He
showed an initial list of products that will be available from the RGPS.

Bruce Chapman, JPL, works with JERS-1 data to study Amazon multiseasonal
changes as part of the GRFMP and the American boreal forests as part of the
GBFMP. He is an ADRO investigator studying both low and high flood levels
of the Amazon basin. He needs ASF SAR data and would not have begun these
projects without ASF. There have been a few delays in getting the data but
data received so far have been good.

Bill Pichel, NOAA, is interested in the goals of the operational SAR
implementation effort. SAR applications are of interest over his Coastwatch
regional sites, for oil spill monitoring, and for correlating
meteorological signatures. Perhaps polar lows appear in SAR. He is
interested in merging SAR and GOES data.

Prasad Gogineni, NASA ASF Project Scientist, mentioned that these kinds of
applications efforts are important for NASA to receive input as NASA
produces an applications brochure annually. He would especially like to see
examples from ASF in one-paragraph write-ups for future work with ASF.

Ben Holt, JPL Polar Oceanography Group, wears two hats. One hat is his
research on summer sea ice characteristics. He is one of the authors on the
original ASF Science Plan (1983) and is an ADRO investigator using Arctic
Snapshot data. He is also a SHEBA PI working on mapping of closed ice and
is an ESA PI. His second hat is as a representative to the ASFD panel
replacing Frank Carsey. He is interested in providing encouragement and
guidance for incorporating user requirements into the ASF system. He
mentioned the second science plan for ASF, 1989, and the guide for RADARSAT
upgrades. If there is to be a third phase, he wants to be involved.

ASF OVERVIEW-VERNE KAUPP
Verne Kaupp presented a brief overview of ASF functions, mentioning special
considerations and a basic description of how the ASF system works. In his
system description he emphasized that ASF has two distinct processing
capabilities, the ASP and the PP & SP. He noted that the ASP is in need of
replacement-it is good and fast, but aging and the lack of spares are of
increasing concern. Additionally, the ASP is not Y2K compliant. ASF-related
production issues and contingency plans are of concern. Following this was
a preview and highlights of the ASF presentations that would be given
during the rest of the meeting.

ISSUES AND CONCERNS - VERNE KAUPP
(This session replaced "Purpose of UWG and Expected Accomplishments" due to
Peter Mouginis-Mark's absence.)
Verne Kaupp discussed considerations that needed to be kept in mind for
this meeting-the UWG is new, and ASF is currently in transition in many
ways. He described his view of what the UWG needs to accomplish over the
next year, including drafting and revising a 5-year science plan, an
assessment of current status, identification and prioritization of issues
and concerns, and recommendations. He listed topics he believes the UWG
should address, including short- and long-term system issues, and the
critical need for users to pressure NASA for new mission support, new NRAs,
generation of publications, mining existing data archives, and a long-term
plan for SAR. The most important item here was that ASF does not have
agreements with CSA and ESA for reception of Radarsat-2 and Envisat-1 data.
This led to the call for white papers on The Critical Role of SAR
in Earth System Science, with which Prasad can sell future SAR missions to
NASA HQ.

WHAT IS THE UWG MANDATE? - DISCUSSION, LESLIE MORRISSEY
Leslie Morrissey led the discussion with other members regarding what the
mandates would be for the User Working Group. Prasad Gogineni stated that
he had invited UWG members representing large programs on an ex-officio
basis (i.e., non-voting) on purpose so that the large programs would not
drive the UWG. It was decided that if UWG members give advance notice of
inability to participate in a meeting, their delegate could attend as a
stand-in. Discussion continued about agency-level interactions regarding
SAR research fundings, the budget for ASF, program priorities from PIs, new
satellite systems, the role of the UWG as an advocate for the entire user
community and a promoter of the need for SAR. Cheryl Bertoia recalled that
a goal of the first UWG was to develop a set of PR slides so that all
members could use them.


               *****DAY ONE - 18 MAY - AFTERNOON SESSION*****


ASF USER SERVICES AND THE USER INTERFACE - JIM CONNER
Jim Conner described the User Services Office and its mission through a
viewgraph presentation discussing the mission, status, plus major problems
and what was being done to address these problems. Viewgraphs contained pie
charts describing the types of users and their projects; the users'
discipline; user - DRF;  Jim Conner further described in detail the User
Services Basic Service Line; how the line flowed and current status. Prasad
Gogineni stated that a high priority issue is how much data still resides
in the foreign ground stations (Gatineau, Prince Albert Satellite Station,
etc.).

DISCUSSION - USER SERVICES AND THE USER INTERFACE
(This session was waived until after presentation of "DAR to Distribution"
material by Greta Reynolds.)

ASF FROM DAR TO DISTRIBUTION OF DATA - GRETA REYNOLDS
Greta Reynolds presented a "behind-the-scenes" look at the complex system
involved in data distribution after a DAR is placed. The complexity of the
system along with all the manual procedures over which ASF does not have
control were brought forth in order to clarify some of the problems in
dealing with "invisible" data at foreign ground stations.

The timeline from DAR to distribution of data is only theoretically one
month. More data requests go in than come out and acquisition priorities
are set by other agencies. NIC is able to obtain data in near real time by
way of direct agreements with the foreign ground stations. Questions were
raised about the reliability of the McMurdo path and the fact the ASF
doesn't know if the data is good until it arrives here. The reliability of
the data we scan and dub is estimated at 90%.  Ben Holt took an action item
to follow up on this question of reliability of McMurdo data and
reliability of data from other foreign ground stations.

ASF has developed a short-term solution in the TrakTeam Database but a
long-term solution must provide better order tracking. Currently, there is
no way for a user to access information and therefore, PIs often do not
know whether their data have even been acquired. Lyn McNutt and Nettie
LaBelle-Hamer will investigate use of ECS order tracking software or pieces
thereof for implementation of long-term ASF order tracking. Members of the
User Working Group will also investigate these issues.

***UWG SPECIAL EXECUTIVE SESSION*** - LESLIE MORRISSEY
(The postponed open discussion session was waived and the decision made to
enter immediately into closed executive session.)
All minutes from the UWG Executive Sessions will be written and distributed
by Harry Stern and Leslie Morrissey.


               *****DAY TWO - 19 MAY - MORNING SESSION*****


LARGE PROGRAMS
ADRO - VERNE KAUPP
ADRO project funding lasts for one more year, however Prasad Gogineni
stated that status remains TBD. NASA does not want to cut off projects that
have not received requested data. Since ADRO investigators did not get
their data on time, he is recommending a one-year extension. Also, another
NRA for three years will be coming outin 2000. The initial science goal of
the ADRO was to understand the geophysical and biological processes in the
Earth system with a focus on climate processes and Earth habitability.

INDIVIDUAL USERS - VERNE KAUPP
ASF serves 91 PIs who are members of the U.S. University research
establishment or of non-profit research establishments and whose research
represents both polar and non-polar investigations. ASF plans acquisitions,
downloads data, retains a master archive, and processes and distributes all
data. ASF also develops user tools, prototypes new research capabilities,
coordinates RADARSAT allocation and foreign station data acquisitions, and
helps to mine the data archive.

RGPS AND AMM - NETTIE LABELLE-HAMER
The RADARSAT Geophysical Processor System data needs are merged with those
of NIC in the Arctic Snapshot as there is overlap in coverage requested for
both. RGPS data acquisition started in October of 1996 and continues to
date. ScanSAR data are processed to a level 1 product.

OPERATIONAL USERS - GRETA REYNOLDS
In addition to National Ice Center and NOAA operational users, ASF also
serves an NSF science drilling project at Cape Roberts, Antarctica.

GLOBAL FOREST MAPPING - CYNTHIA WILLIAMS
There are two components of the NASDA-planned Global Forest Mappings. One
is the Global Rain Forest Mapping Project which will obtain contiguous
JERS-1 SAR satellite coverage of the Earth's tropical rainforests. ASF will
be a receiving station as well as perform data processing and distribution
for Central/South American data, including the Amazon basin. ASF will
incorporate data from NASDA's Earth Observation Research Center and
contribute to the GRFM Working Group.

The second component is the Global Boreal Forest Mapping Project which will
map the world's boreal regions for circumboreal baseline/change monitoring,
modeling of regional-circumboreal change, and for use in economic and
social planning. ASF will be a receiving station as well as perform data
processing and distribution for North American scenes and potentially some
Eastern Siberian scenes. Our ASF North American Boreal Mapping Project
(NABMAP) Scientist, who is also a Co-PI for the North American component,
is tasked by ASF with building and coordinating communication among
agencies, PIs and potential users. ASF will contribute to the GBFM Boreal
Mapping Working Group.

The JERS mission data recorder has failed so data outside the ASF mask must
be downloaded somewhere else. Members of GRRM and GBFM are not sure how
much Canadian data exist and are waiting on an MOU which will cover eastern
Canada.

INTERNATIONAL ARCTIC RESEARCH CENTER (IARC) - LYN MCNUTT
The International Arctic Research Center (IARC) under construction adjacent
to the Geophysical Institute will incorporate several research components.
One of them will be a satellite data analysis center and there will also be
a weather service archive. Current functionality among IARC, ASF, UAF and
the Alaska Region Supercomputing Center (ARSC) have been compared and
contrasted. Plans are to create a consortium of organizations to facilitate
research efforts. Two prototype projects have been proposed to determine
functionality:  volcanology and Bering Sea productivity. There appear to be
opportunities for sharing resources between ASF and IARC, e.g. technical
support.  This could be explored more.

PRODUCTION PLANNING - MARC FORBES
Marc Forbes discussed topics such as data ingest, data processing and
distribution and processing goals.  He used a flow chart to show the manual
and automatic transfer of data. Marc further reported on the ASF scanning
and processing, including types of data provided to users.  Please refer to
the presentation viewgraphs for production statistics and historical
breakout by project type.  He also reported on RADARSAT backlogs regarding
acquisition and production.

CALIBRATION - JASON WILLIAMS
Jason Williams' main topics for calibration were division goals, current
status, and the Data Quality Working Group (DQWG).  In the presentation he
gave a summary of 431 orbits.  He stated that for CAL/VAL-submitted DARs we
only get 50% of the data we request regarding mask acquisition. We may
never get the Amazon data we need. He stated that the DQWG is a committee
solution to the role of "Data Manager."  Cheryl Bertoia will be assisting
Jason in regards to the unusual data quality. Jason recommends encouraging
users to contact the User Services AR system. Users can enter a problem
report into the system directly. PRs must be written for anything to be
fixed. There needs to be a "hard list" of PRs regarding data quality issues
and perhaps this list should become part of the quarterly review. Jason
will schedule the next DQWG meeting.

USER POLICY ISSUES - VERNE KAUPP
Reading tape from Tromso is an ASF resource allocation issue. This data is
important to RADARSAT users. The limit of 1519 minutes of on-time for
RADARSAT is imposed on us by an MOU with Canada. We went over this one time
and have not done so since. Some important numbers to consider are:
1) Users request more data than we can provide.
2) What we are able to provide is only 1519 minutes by the MOU.
3) What the users were approved for in their proposals may exceed the MOU.
Prasad Gogineni wants to see this difference, if it exists. We talked about
making the Tromso/DLT problem a higher priority issue.  After April 1,
1998, ASF cannot read tapes from Tromso because of their new format.  What
would it take to add the capability to read DLTs?  We had two "allocation"
discussions.  One involved allocation of processing resources among the
different classes of users: NIC, cal/val, Arctic Snapshot, RAMP, ADRO,
other ASF.  Is the processing capacity  adequate?  When do machines need to
be upgraded or replaced?  The other discussion was how to get our (U.S.)
full allocation of 1519 minutes of Radarsat data per cycle.  If we submit
1519 minutes, there will be some cancellations and we will get less than
1519.  If we submit more than 1519 we run the risk of going over, which is
costly.  Ideally we would have a prioritized list of acquisitions from
which CSA could fill in shortfalls in our allocation if they occur, but CSA
does not keep track of this sort of thing.  And once an acquisition has
been bumped and ASF has been notified, there's usually not enough time to
schedule an alternate acquisition in the same cycle.

The UWG will investigate ASF production allocations. Prioritization of ASF
data production may be adjusted by recommendations from the UWG. Users
should be made aware of production allocations. ASF will come up with
target goals to inform the user community as to how long it will be before
a user can reasonably expect to receive data. Also, we need to establish
for each proposal what the expectations of data minutes should be.

***EXECUTIVE LUNCH SESSION*** - LESLIE MORRISSEY
All minutes from the UWG Executive Sessions will be written and distributed
by Harry Stern and Leslie Morrissey.


               *****DAY TWO - 19 MAY - AFTERNOON SESSION*****


ASF FIVE-YEAR SCIENCE PLAN - VERNE KAUPP
Verne Kaupp outlined topics that he believes need to be considered in the
5-year science plan. He requested that the UWG have a draft plan ready for
review at the September meeting.

TOOLS AND PROTOTYPING - RICK GURITZ
The UWG recommended developing a technical white paper, similar to those on
Rick's #9 viewgraph, on the most commonly-asked user questions. The
question was asked if some capabilities should be migrated from tool
capability into data products provided by ASF.  Prasad Gogineni charged
Rick to take the lead in resolving Doppler, QA, and calibration issues and
commended the STEP group for previous work. Input was requested from the
UWG in reference to the suite of user tools made available to the user
community.

DEVELOPMENT PLANS
LZP - TRACY ZEILER
Tracy Zeiler briefly described ASF's proposed role in the Level Zero
Processor / Archive Project. For the design process this includes
developing the project requirements, operational scenarios, screen
mock-ups, and facilities engineering. System development activities would
include designing and developing the Level Zero Controller. ASF's proposal
for these activities was submitted on May 1 to Paul Ondrus at GSFC. Craig
Lingle reported that he had just received word that ASF was being asked to
fund these activities out of their existing budget.

ASFD PERSPECTIVE - TOM BICKNELL
Processing of Level 0 raw signal archive was emphasized in order to rescue
the aging data. Level 0 product options such as CEOS CCSD, FRED and
possibly others were discussed. If Level 0 data were processed, there would
be a reduction in manual operations associated with tape handling. Phase 1
(1998) is to acquire/install the Level 0 processor and robotic archive,
implement raw signal tape migration capability, evaluate level 0 products,
and begin raw signal migration. Phase 2 (1999) will integrate real-time
acquisition to level 0 processor and integrate processing for ScanSAR and
Precision Processors. Phase 3 (2000 and on) will be integration with ECS.
Regarding the Level 0 Archive, this presents opportunities for collecting
information about the data.  Every tape must be scanned.  Along with
creating level 0 products, one could also:
- do some pre-processing and store parameters for faster future processing
- obtain information about the data quality
- create browse images
The UWG and ASFD should explore the cost/benefit of these opportunities.

ASFD PERSPECTIVE - DAVE CUDDY
Dave Cuddy discussed where ASFD is today and where it should be going. In
addition to DAR information presented by Greta Reynolds, he added that
there is no mapping from DARs to image frames. The top JPL data-quality
priority is the location of the Doppler ambiguity for left-looking RADARSAT.

ASF EDUCATION OUTREACH - DONNA SANDBERG
Donna Sandberg gave a brief summary of the development of the curriculum
supplement, Glacier Power and of the status of the ASF Education Outreach.
A Glacier Power CD was distributed in the UWG document produced by ASF.

SUMMARY AND CLOSING REMARKS - LESLIE MORRISSEY
The draft mandate of the UWG was presented. The charter states:

Our mission is to promote the advancement of science and operational
environmental monitoring based on SAR. We make recommendations to ASF and
NASA based on the scientific needs of the user community. We work to ensure
that ASF management and operations fulfill current and future needs.

*** EVENING EXECUTIVE SESSION *** - LESLIE MORRISSEY
All minutes from the UWG Executive Sessions will be written and distributed
by Harry Stern and Leslie Morrissey.

Jeanne Nason, at the request of Vern Kaupp and Craig Lingle, presented the
status of the ASF reorganization process to the members of the UWG
Executive Session. Verne Kaupp pointed out that, if nothing else, this
process has served ASF well in light of generating communication between
disparate ASF Division staff members.


SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS:

[These will appear in a separate document]