(STAC) Meeting Report

IMOS Science and Technology Advisory Committee (STAC)

Meeting Report

Melbourne Airport 4-5 September 2018

IMOS is a national collaborative research infrastructure, supported by Australian Government. It is operated by a consortium of institutions as an unincorporated joint venture, with the University of Tasmania as Lead Agent. www.imos.org.au

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... 3 Prioritisation Process ...... 5 The Science and Technology Advisory Committee ...... 7 The Structure of IMOS Facilities ...... 8 Assessment by Facility ...... 9 1. Broadscale ...... 12 2. Backbone ...... 16 3. Regional ...... 23 4. Program level ...... 28 Portfolio balance ...... 31 ATTACHMENT 1 – STAC membership ...... 33

Executive Summary

The IMOS Science and Technology Advisory Committee (STAC) met on 4 and 5 September 2018 in Melbourne. The meeting’s objective was to provide scientific and technical advice for the prioritisation of NCRIS investment in IMOS facilities. This meeting included discussions on the continuation of existing facilities and sub-facilities, the growth of existing facilities and sub- facilities, and the potential for new or aspirational activities, as identified in the IMOS Five Year Plan (‘the Plan’). This report outlines the key elements of background papers provided to and discussions had by the STAC and provides a summary of advice on the relative priorities identified.

The prioritisation process concluded the following:

Broadscale  Argo: It was agreed that there be ongoing commitment to core Argo plus a funding uplift of ~46% for ice-capable and Biogeochemical (BGC) Argo.  Ships of Opportunity (SOOP): Continuation of the SOOP Facility is supported, with some potential for enhancement through industry partnerships  Satellite Remote Sensing: The IMOS Strategy is well on track in regards to SRS, and there will be a continued focus on SST, ocean colour, altimetry, and surface waves. Growth funding will be provided to respond to recommendations of the Ocean Colour Radiometry Task Team and to seize opportunities arising from new altimetry missions.  Animal Tracking: IMOS plans to continue this work, in close collaboration with the Argo facility.

Backbone  Deep Water Moorings: The Southern Ocean Time Series (SOTS) site and East Australian Current (EAC) transport array will be maintained. Additional, one-off investment in a US led Indonesian Through Flow (ITF project) is supported.  AUV: The AUV-based Integrated Benthic Monitoring program should be stabilised and expanded in line with the highest priorities expressed by the AUV Steering Committee. The community will be asked to redevelop the 2018-22 continuation plan and budget into an expanded program on that basis. Additional investment will also be made in marine image analysis subject to clear feedback from the community as to the most appropriate way forward. Revised proposals will come back to STAC for review.  Citizen Science – Reef Life Survey: The National Reef Monitoring Network proposal submitted by the Reef Life Survey proponents is not supportable in its current form. Further discussion will be undertaken with the proponents, including whether all of the resources requested are essential, and whether other partners could contribute. If IMOS is to invest, it needs to be into a network that can be sustained over time. If these discussions progress to the stage where a viable proposal emerges, this will come back to STAC for review.  National Mooring Network (NRS + OA, Waves): Continued investment by IMOS in the National Reference Station Network has strong support, with expansion into marine microbes presenting an exciting new frontier, as well as the potential for inclusion of ichthyoplankton subject to user and stakeholder support. Ongoing IMOS investment in ocean acidification at current levels is justified, although consideration may need to be given as to the exact nature of what is being done, where and how, through a broader discussion with the relevant science and stakeholder communities. There was strong support from STAC for IMOS beginning to invest directly in in situ wave measurements. IMOS will maintain a watching brief on the issue of observing ocean sound, nationally and internationally.  Australian Microbiome Initiative: Inclusion of a marine microbial component is an exciting scientific development for IMOS, and the partnership with Bioplatforms Australia (BPA) demonstrates the power of NCRIS as a national collaborative research

infrastructure program. Pathways to impact is a key issue in the next phase. Opportunities to expand through coastal sampling and biobanking need more discussion and development before they are to be properly evaluated by STAC.  Animal Tracking: The IMOS acoustic telemetry program is now well on track, and we have an exciting opportunity to explore the redesign of a component of the observing system in response to user and stakeholder requirements.

Regional  Ocean Gliders: The current IMOS Ocean Glider program will be maintained, refined and strengthened, with an increment in event-based sampling of marine heatwaves subject to an acceptable proposal which will come back to STAC for review.  National Mooring Network (shelf arrays): The shelf arrays component of the National Mooring Network will be continued at its current level, with redistribution of assets in the northwest, and strategic enhancements in the northern GBR and Bonney Upwelling.  Ocean Radar: Continued investment by IMOS into a national Ocean Radar network is warranted, with additional co-investment supporting a revised network (following consolidation in the 2017-19 funding period) underway in NSW and WA.  Wireless Sensor Network: At this stage, allowance has been made for continuation at the base level on a 2018-22 timeframe.  Remote Regions – Surface Drifters: Overall, STAC found the proposal on surface drifters to be unconvincing in the context of IMOS as an Australian Government funded research infrastructure focused on sustained observing. IMOS will be unable to act on its aspirations to develop remote regional observing capability based on its currently available funding for the 2018-22 period.

Program level  IMOS Office, AODN and OceanCurrent: The Board has agreed to fund the IMOS Office, AODN and OceanCurrent ‘off the top’ and advice from STAC was not sought on the relative priority of these investments. It was agreed that AODN and OceanCurrent need to remain accountable for what they are delivering, as with other Facilities. STAC will have an ongoing role in reviewing the scientific and technical performance of IMOS across all four key performance indicators and will be provided with an appropriate level of information to do this at future meetings.  New Technology Proving Capability: STAC will oversee development of the process to guide wise investment of IMOS new technology proving resources. It was noted that some of the growth opportunities in the Five-Year Plan and identified by other means may be more suitable for funding under New Technology Proving than for direct funding as a facility priority at this stage.

This report from the 4-5 September STAC meeting, plus additional feedback on proposals coming back to STAC for reconsideration, will provide the basis for recommendations on 2018-22 funding to be considered by the IMOS Board at its next meeting, on 26 November 2018.

Prioritisation Process

IMOS Strategy 2015-25 The IMOS Strategy 2015-25 identified strategic priorities constructed around three imperatives: Need, Capability and Impact. The vision enunciated by the IMOS Strategy is that by 2025, Australia will have a continuously growing time series of essential ocean variables for marine and coastal environments. This will enable cutting-edge research on contemporary problems, and provide a scientific basis for informed decision making about our vast and valuable marine estate. When the IMOS Strategy was developed, long-term funding was not secure. The Strategy’s intent was to lay the strategic foundations for the prospective continuation of IMOS.

The National Science and Implementation Planning Process IMOS has been guided by science and implementation planning since its inception. The community put significant effort into developing Node Science and Implementation Plans in 2009-10, including taking them through international peer review. The six Node Plans were then evolved into a single National Plan with six Node chapters. The latest revision was completed in November 2015, and resulted in a 2015-25 IMOS National Science and Implementation Plan that underpins this process. The National Science and Implementation planning process provides clear evidence that the Australian marine and climate science community can collectively support a national approach to integrated marine observing, with Node components that reflect regional priorities. Australia has attracted significant international interest and support for this ambitious and exciting approach.

Preparation for the National Research Infrastructure Roadmap: IMOS Five Year Plan With the announcement of the Research Infrastructure Roadmap process in early 2016, and with the IMOS Strategy and National Science and Implementation Plan in place, IMOS embarked on focused five year planning for the realisation of long-term funding. Part of this process was the identification of continuation and focused growth scenarios for existing IMOS facilities, along with the potential for aspirational growth into new areas. At the time of the IMOS Five Year planning process, the level of NCRIS funding was not known, nor was the level of co-investment from partners. Therefore, the Plan was framed around a scalable model of potential investment, built on proposals submitted by Facilities under both focused continuation and growth scenarios. The IMOS Five Year Plan provides much of the input required for STAC to consider relative priorities on a 2018-22 timeframe, including drawing on Facility level continuation and growth proposals as appropriate.

New Technology Proving: Annual Planning Meeting 2018 The importance of IMOS having a strong pool of technological advice and processes to implement new technological approaches, was raised and discussed at the Annual Planning Meeting. It was widely agreed that a new technology proving capability should form part of the IMOS investment portfolio in the next stage. In establishing STAC, the membership has been designed to include senior technologists from within the IMOS community to assist in implementing this capability at Program level.

Budget 2018 The Budget 2018 decision will enable the strategic vision for IMOS, to deliver a continuously growing time series of essential ocean variables, to become a reality. The Budget 2018 announced that the Government will provide an additional $1.9 billion over 12 years from 2017-18 ($393.3 million over five years) to implement the Research Infrastructure Investment Plan, informed by the 2016 National Research Infrastructure Roadmap. Key issues relevant to IMOS from this announcement were:  Subject to ongoing performance and future national priorities, the NCRIS commitment presents an opportunity for IMOS to be sustained out to 2029.  Operational funding, which was already approved for 2018-19 ($16.46M), will be extended for another four years (to 2022-23) with indexation.

 New investment of $22M has also been made available over a five-year period, from 2017-18 to 2021-22. The $22M is a mix of much-needed capital re-investment, and increased operating expenditure.  See Figure 1.

Figure 1: Federal Budget Outcome for IMOS

Of primary importance is meeting the requirements of the Department of Education and Training (the Department), who administer NCRIS funding on behalf of Australian Government. The first major milestone has been achieved with the University of Tasmania (as Lead Agent for IMOS) signing the NCRIS funding agreement in late June 2018. This enables all of the funding to flow, subject to IMOS meeting its agreed milestones.

The IMOS Board has responsibility for approving business plans and progress reports provided to the Department in line with the NCRIS funding agreement. The Board met on 24 May 2018 and authorised the University of Tasmania to sign the NCRIS funding agreement. It also approved a 2018-22 planning process proposed by the IMOS office. The Board met on 21 August 2018 to review progress and will meet again on 26 November 2018 to consider final recommendations on allocation of ongoing and new funding.

Key points to note about the IMOS 2018-22 planning process are as follows:  The planning process, of which STAC is part, will cover the four financial years from 2018-19 to 2021-22. Baseline funding (of $18.2M) will be available in 2022-23, and will be held in reserve pending further information about NCRIS funding for 2023-29.  The process is guided by the IMOS Decadal Strategy 2015-25, National Science and Implementation Plan 2015-25, and IMOS Five Year Plan (2017-22). It is noted that funding available is not sufficient to fully implement all growth opportunities identified in the Five-Year Plan. IMOS received 75% of the funding required to implement in full.  At the request of the IMOS Office, Facility Operators have provided four-year budgets for the period 2018-22 based on an approved scope of work in the current year (2018- 19), plus indexation and allowance for capital replacement. These budgets indicate that 83% of available funding will be taken up by a continuation of the current program. This leaves $15M to invest in growth opportunities, 40% of that anticipated in the Five Year Plan.

The Science and Technology Advisory Committee

Introduction IMOS is strategically moving towards actively planning for use and impact in its next phase. As such, it has been agreed to move to a whole-of-program-level analysis of societal and cultural, environmental, economic and policy drivers that will be linked to major research themes and big science questions. Evolving our current Node Steering Committee into a STAC and reviewing the current Node structure is part of this process.

Node Steering Committee to STAC The Node Steering Committee has been comprised of representatives from the five regional IMOS Nodes and the Bluewater and Climate Node, plus the AODN Director and IMOS Scientific Officer. The Nodes have contributed significantly to the success of IMOS and there is no intention to move away from a Node structure.

That said, we have experienced the limitations of a ‘sum of Nodes’ approach to prioritisation at a whole-of-IMOS level, and the challenges for Nodes to actively drive use and impact with no dedicated resources, and in an environment where we have collaborative research infrastructure funding but often competitive research funding schemes. The IMOS Office has worked to mitigate these weaknesses in the Node model by driving research partnerships, modelling partnerships, operational partnerships, and partnerships with related research infrastructures.

With multi-year funding now in place and a positive outlook for long-term funding, it is timely for IMOS to think about how to strengthen its advisory and implementation processes for the next stage. Through discussion at the 2018 Annual Planning Meeting, Node Steering Committee meetings and Board meetings, it has been decided to evolve the Node Steering Committee into a National Science and Technology Advisory Committee (STAC). It was decided that the inaugural meeting of the STAC would be held on 4-5 September 2018, as part of the IMOS 2018-22 planning process.

It is important to note that creation of STAC does not diminish the importance of Nodes. In fact, it highlights the need to evolve the Node structure so as to enhance engagement. Priorities include acknowledging different drivers on the GBR relative to rest of Queensland, creating a new Victorian Node to take advantage of burgeoning interest in this region, and creating a mechanism for engagement in the Northern Territory in response to the user needs analysis.

The STAC The STAC will play a critical role in representing scientific opinion on behalf of the marine and climate research community. This frames the scientific rationale for IMOS, in order to develop research goals and identify the need to obtain specific streams of data. The STAC will also regularly provide advice to the IMOS Office on assessment of the technical implementation by facilities and sub-facilities, and scientific merit of research undertaken with IMOS data.

The goal is to ensure STAC processes are informed by whole-of-program-level ‘socio- economic’ analysis, and bring together:  consideration of science priorities from Node-driven science planning, as well as  feedback from research partnerships, operational partnerships, modelling and forecasting partnerships, and research infrastructure partnerships To achieve this, STAC endorsed the use and impact framework presented by Indi Hodgson- Johnston.

STAC will draw heavily on IMOS Nodes, with its core membership coming from the existing Node leadership community. This core will be complemented by additional members to address disciplinary gaps, integrate technology evaluation, and ensure diversity. Draft terms of reference for the STAC were discussed at the meeting on 4-5 September meeting and will now be finalised and agreed. Related to this, the IMOS Node Policy also needs to be reviewed, and more specific terms of reference developed for each Node. It was recognised that while all Nodes have things in common, they are all different and their structure, and governance should reflect the diverse nature of the IMOS community. What next for STAC? During the September 2018 meeting, it was decided that going forward, the STAC would have four primary roles:  Defining and identifying science priorities  Evaluating relevant IMOS performance indicators  Providing advice on new technology proving  Driving the formation, scope and direction of IMOS Task Teams

The Structure of IMOS Facilities

In the IMOS Five Year Plan, proposals were based around the structure of Broadscale, Backbone and Regional facilities. This structure will continue to be used for 2018-22 planning.  Broadscale facilities cover the open ocean and are globally connected.  Backbone facilities link the Broadscale to the Regional and provide national capability where a ‘sum of regions’ approach is inadequate for the questions to be answered.  Regional facilities provide necessary intensification in areas of Australia’s marine environment with high social, economic and environmental value.  Program level was also considered, and this includes consideration of the IMOS Office, the AODN and IMOS OceanCurrent.

Assessment by Facility

As noted above, the Budget 2018 decision will enable IMOS to continue the current program out to 2021-22 (with indexation and capital replacement), and undertake some but not all of the growth opportunities identified in the Five Year Plan (and some others). This requires an assessment by facility, of both continuation and growth.

Background papers were provided to the STAC covering: 1. What’s on the table? i.e. What facility investments are under consideration for continuation and growth, noting that ‘aspirational growth’ in the Five Year Plan has not been funded. 2. Should we continue to do everything we’re doing now? 3. What growth opportunities should we take up, or not? 4. Have all things been considered?

Using the background papers, the STAC considered and provided advice on proposals for the continuation and growth using the following criteria.

Continuation criteria are drawn from well established ‘traffic light’ reporting to the Board on the four key performance criteria of deployment and recovery of equipment, availability of data, uptake and use of data to produce scientific outputs, and relevance and impact of those outputs to Australian society, economy and environment. Facilities and sub-facilities are assessed as on track, some issues/being resolved, or not on track. The assessments against continuation criteria provided to STAC for consideration were drawn from the 2017-19 Funding Guidelines, amended for any material changes.

The most appropriate growth criteria are considered to be science priority, technical readiness, and pathway to impact. Science priority is assessed as high, medium, or low based on the collective advice of STAC members, drawing on Node science and implementation planning and other relevant inputs. Technical readiness is assessed at mature, pilot, or concept in line with the Framework for Ocean Observing which included guidance on readiness levels. It is important to note that ‘technical’ readiness encompasses the relative maturity of requirements, observations, and data and information. Pathway to impact is assessed as in place, ready, or developing, based on performance assessment and impact analysis.

Through discussion at the STAC meeting, relative priorities of the various proposals for growth and continuation of facilities, and sub-facilities, as well as new proposals, were assessed under the following categories:  Continuation: facilities and sub-facilities where it was broadly agreed that continuation of activities was appropriate.  Grow now: where growth through extension of existing facilities and sub-facilities or enhancement to do new things was broadly agreed to be ready to occur, subject to revision of budgets, liaison regarding project planning, and identification of clearer pathways to use and impact.  Grow now*: at the 4-5 September STAC meeting, we did not have sufficient information on all growth proposals to support, or not. There were a number of growth proposals that were assessed as being worthy of ‘staying on the table’ subject to further development of a plan and budget for reconsideration by STAC. These are identified as ‘Grow now with an asterisk’.  Grow later: where growth through extension of existing facilities and sub-facilities or enhancement to do new things was broadly agreed to be more suitable for future consideration due to science priority, technical readiness, and maturity of pathways to use and impact.

 Out of scope: where it was broadly agreed that a proposal did not meet the requirements of IMOS as an Australian Government funded national collaborative research infrastructure.

A summary of STAC advice is shown in the table below, followed by more detailed facility and sub-facility-level assessments (Broadscale, Backbone, Regional and Program).

Continuation criteria Growth criteria Facility Sub-Facility Assessment Science Tech Path to Deploy Data Use Impact priority ready impact Core on track on track on track on track Continuation Ice (now high mature in place Grow Now core) Argo BGC high pilot ready Grow Now

Deep high pilot developing Grow Later

XBT on track on track on track on track Continuation

BGC on track on track on track on track Continuation being being APS on track on track Continuation resolved resolved TRV on track on track on track on track Continuation Ships of Opportunity SST on track on track on track on track Continuation

ASF on track on track on track on track Continuation being being Bio-Acoustic on track on track Continuation resolved resolved Industry medium mature in place Grow Now vessels SST being being on track on track Continuation Products resolved resolved SRS on track on track on track on track Continuation Collections Ground on track on track on track on track Continuation Stations Altimetry Satellite on track on track on track on track Continuation cal/val Remote Altimetry – Sensing high pilot in place Grow Now SWOT Ocean being being on track on track Continuation Colour resolved resolved OCR Task high mature in place Grow Now Team recs Surface new (tbd) Continuation Waves Animal Animal on track on track on track on track Continuation Tracking tagging not on being being being SOTS Continuation track resolved resolved resolved Deep Water being being EAC on track on track Continuation Moorings resolved resolved ITF high mature ready Grow Now being - on track on track on track Continuation resolved Enhanced high pilot in place Grow Now* Fleet AUV Marine high pilot in place Grow Now* Imagery Reef Life high mature in place Grow Now* Survey NRS being on track on track on track Continuation network resolved National Water Mooring sampling high mature in place Grow Now Network dbase (NRS) Ichthyoplank medium pilot developing Grow Now ton

Continuation criteria Growth criteria Facility Sub-Facility Assessment Science Tech Path to Deploy Data Use Impact priority ready impact National Acidification being being on track on track Continuation Mooring Moorings resolved resolved Network Waves high mature in place Grow Now (other) Buoys Bioinformatic high mature developing Grow Now DNA medium pilot developing Grow Now* Australian Biobank Microbiome Coastal Initiative sampling program high pilot developing Grow Now* (microbes etc.) Animal Acoustic on track on track on track on track Continuation Tracking Telemetry being being - on track on track Continuation resolved resolved Enhanceme nt in NSW low pilot ready Grow Later Ocean and WA Gliders Tropical

gliders high pilot ready Grow Now* Event-based

sampling on on being on track track track resolved Qld and Nth Continuation Australia Northern high mature in place Grow Now National GBR Mooring NSW Continuation Network (shelf Near Real low pilot developing Grow Later arrays) Time South Continuation Australia Bonney high mature in place Grow Now Upwelling WA Continuation being being being being - Continuation Ocean resolved resolved resolved resolved Radar Co-invested high mature developing Grow Now systems Wireless being being Sensor - on track on track Continuation resolved resolved Networks Surface - medium mature developing Out of Scope Drifters

1. Broadscale

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Argo Core on track on track on track on track 5,756,479 Ice (now core) high mature in place 672,411 BGC high pilot ready 2,000,000 Deep high pilot developing - STAC papers and discussion:  Continued investment by IMOS to underpin the Argo Australia Facility in delivering Australia’s contribution to the core mission of the global array is clearly justified on all criteria. IMOS investment combined with investment by CSIRO, BOM, Defence, ACE CRC and NESP ESCC Hub will deliver 40 of the 50 floats pa required to maintain design density in our region. Discussions with BOM and Defence regarding sustained investment in floats pa to recognise the operational utility of Argo need to continue. Whether the Antarctic Science Collaboration Initiative (ASCI) funding which will replace ACE CRC from 1 July 2019 will continue to invest in Argo Australia is uncertain. In the near term, an additional investment of $2M/~72 floats over two years by CSIRO via the Science and Industry Endowment Fund (SIEF) is very welcome, and will likely offset the above factors through 2019 and 2020. Care needs to be taken to ensure that on a 2021-22 timeframe, co-investments in Argo Australia are at the level required to maintain design density of core Argo in the Australian region. IMOS will not and should not be expected to plug any gaps left by a falloff in co-investment.  Ice capable Argo is now considered part of the core mission, and IMOS pilot scale investment in the EIF phase has contributed to this maturation. The Five Year Plan growth proposal for an additional 5 ice capable floats pa warrants support. Understanding the effects of a warming ocean on the Antarctic cryosphere is a grand science challenge, and this growth proposal provides a cost-effective way for IMOS to increase its relevance and impact in this context.  Biogeochemical (BGC) Argo is considered to be the next step for Argo Australia in terms of technical readiness and path to impact. The global community is forging ahead, and a critical mass of science capability and capacity is building in Australia across CSIRO, UTAS/IMAS, BOM, Curtin and others. It is time for Australia to commit to being part of the global BGC Argo array. These floats are undeniably expensive, and the Five Year Plan Growth proposal requested ~$2.5M for 2-3 floats pa (8-12 over 4 years). Subsequent discussion between the IMOS Office and the lead proponent (Tom Trull, CSIRO) indicated that some of the salary support requested from CSIRO could be taken out to bring the cost back to ~$2M over 4 years. It is accepted that this is basically the ‘entry price’ for IMOS. We either invest at this level or not at all. The discussion at STAC concluded that investment is warranted. An international workshop being held in Hobart on 5-8 November provides a good opportunity for planning deployment of the new IMOS floats. Particular attention must be paid to data QA/QC in collaboration with international programs. As BGC floats are much more expensive and lower density it will be particularly important for the IMOS community to have input into deployment planning.  Deep Argo is the other potential enhancement that could be undertaken with growth funding. The high science priority of better measuring change in the deep ocean is accepted. Relative to core/ice/BGC Argo, Deep Argo is considered to be on a future horizon for IMOS, noting that NCRIS funding available is only 75% of that to which we aspired in the Five Year Plan. N.B. The view expressed by Steve Rintoul (CSIRO/Bluewater and Climate Node Co-Leader) is that BGC and Deep Argo are at the same level of readiness. This would suggest that readiness is not a discriminator in terms of relative priority. At this stage, with growth funding ~62% oversubscribed, it does not appear that we can afford do both. STAC support for BGC Argo was, on balance, stronger than for Deep Argo. Consideration will be given to begin investing in Deep Argo at the scale proposed in the Five Year Plan ($377K) if/when funding does become available.

In summary, ongoing commitment to core Argo plus a funding uplift of ~46% for ice-capable and BGC Argo positions the Facility to greatly enhance its use and impact off an already high base.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Ships of Opportunity XBT on track on track on track on track 652,366 SST on track on track on track on track 578,466 Air Sea Fluxes (ASF) on track on track on track on track 447,166 BGC on track on track on track on track 1,180,142 Tropical RVs on track on track on track on track 299,918 APS on track on track being resolved being resolved 2,022,956 Bio-Acoustics on track on track being resolved being resolved 775,782 Industry vessels medium mature in place tbd STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that most of the Ships of Opportunity (SOOP) Sub-Facilities are very mature and continued investment by IMOS is warranted. These include those measuring physics (SST, XBT, ASF), BGC (pCO2), as well as delivery of underway measurements from the AIMS tropical research vessels and co-invested underway measurements from the Spirit of Tasmania (Victorian EPA).  IMOS supports a CPR-based Australian Plankton Survey (APS), which is part of the Global Alliance of CPR Surveys (GACS). Whilst very mature technology, CPR remains labour intensive and comparatively expensive. We need to keep an eye on technical innovation (using laser, optical and other approaches). The Zooplankton Ocean Observing and Modelling (ZOOM) Task Team due to report at the end of 2018 is expected to provide recommendations to improve the utility of CPR and other zooplankton data for biogeochemical and ecosystem modelling.  IMOS also supports a Bio-Acoustics program using echo-sounders on research and commercial/fishing vessels to measure the distribution and abundance of mid- trophic organisms at basin scales. A key motivation for this work is to improve estimates of biomass of mid-tropic organisms, which remains a large uncertainty for the ecosystem modelling community. The EU-funded Mesopelagic Southern Ocean Prey and Predators (MESOPP) project is providing one pathway for uptake and use. Broadening collaboration and increasing utility of this data stream requires ongoing attention in the next phase.  Industry partners already contribute their vessel platforms for use by a number of SOOP Sub-Facilities. After a recent WAIMOS Node meeting, a representative from Shell approached the IMOS Office about instrumenting platform support vessels (PSVs) in northern Australia, and this is being explored for SST and XBT. The Rio Tinto vessel Wakmatha already supports pCO2 and CPR work in the Gulf of Carpentaria/GBR and there is potential to add more value to this line (e.g. processing NRT SST). These opportunities will be explored further and are likely to be very low cost. It was noted that other opportunities exist, including data from fishing vessel longlines and nets. Notwithstanding the fact that SOOP is cost effective, care needs to be taken to ensure that there is science demand for the data and that it will have impact.

In summary, continuation of the SOOP Facility is supported, with some potential for enhancement through industry partnerships.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Satellite Remote SST Products on track on track being resolved being resolved 868,922 Sensing SRS Collections on track on track on track on track 235,939 Ground Stations on track on track on track on track 200,895 Altimetry cal/val on track on track on track on track 1,356,272 Altimetry – SWOT high pilot in place tbd Ocean Colour on track on track being resolved being resolved 934,705 OCR Task Team recs high mature in place tbd Surface Waves new (tbd) 833,349 STAC papers and discussion;  The Five Year Plan notes that continued investment in Satellite SST and Altimetry calibration/validation/ collection, and data processing/management/products, is warranted. The suite of SST products being made available by BOM is under review based on usage analytics and user feedback. Modest investment in ground station reception at Cape Ferguson will continue for now.  The potential to enhance Altimetry calibration and validation to fully exploit the SWOT mission launched in 2020 was identified in the Five Year Plan. A revised proposal has been submitted by Christopher Watson (UTAS) and Benoit Legresy (CSIRO) et al. and is considered supportable by the STAC. The revised budget needs to be reviewed as it is 56% higher than the Five Year Plan. Further work is also needed on articulating the pathways to impact for this work, noting that the societal benefit of research into sea level rise, in general, is clear.  The Five Year Plan notes that continued investment in Ocean Colour Radiometry (OCR) is warranted at some level. Continuation of the national Bio-Optical Database and national data processing/management/product delivery is clear, with the exact nature of investment in OCR calibration and validation requiring further consideration based on recommendations from the IMOS OCR Task Team.  The OCR TT delivered its report in June 2017 and it proposed that IMOS investment be enhanced to fund the top five recommendations. These actions will: secure the role of Lucinda Jetty Coastal Observatory as an IMOS contribution to the global AERONET system; reinstate in-water optical measurements and water quality sampling to support ocean colour algorithm development and validation, as well as BGC modelling; maintain en-route DALEC deployments by IMOS for OCR validation; ensure the IMOS Bio-Optical Database continues to support national and international calibrations and validation of ocean colour sensors; ensure that IMOS supports Australia’s ongoing international engagement with various international space agencies and projects such as ESA’s Sentinel3 ocean colour validation team.  With input from the Forum for Operational Oceanography (FOO) Surface Waves Working Group, new investment in collection and distribution of ocean surface wave data from current and next-generation satellites was approved under the IMOS 2017-19 funding guidelines and will be continued to 2021-22. Related investment in in situ wave measurement is considered under Backbone.  The Five Year Plan included aspirational growth for which IMOS has not been funded to deliver. This included two opportunities in satellite remote sensing.  There is international interest in developing a ‘bluewater’ OCR calibration and validation site at the IMOS Rottnest Island National Reference Station. While IMOS is not disinterested in this idea, it was concluded that as aspirational growth it is outside the scope of 2018-22 funding.  There are also opportunities to begin working with the sea ice community in the ice zone which cannot be realised at this stage.

In summary, the IMOS strategy in satellite remote sensing is now well on track. Our focus on SST, ocean colour, and altimetry has been expanded into surface waves. IMOS national efforts are embedded in the relevant international coordination mechanisms i.e. GHRSST for SST, IOCCG for OCR, and OSTST for Altimetry OSTST. The critical role Australia plays in southern hemisphere cal/val is well supported via SOOP for SST (see above), Lucinda Jetty/DALEC for OCR, and Bass Strait for Altimetry. There are exciting new developments with the SWOT mission for altimetry, and buoy-based in situ measurements for waves (see below).

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Animal Tracking Animal Tagging on track on track on track on track 1,903,929 STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that the satellite Animal Tagging sub-facility provides high-resolution ocean observations in high latitudes that are difficult if not impossible to obtain by other means, and provides information about the way in which these top predators use oceanographic features within the Southern Ocean ecosystem.  IMOS plans to continue this work, in close collaboration with the Argo Facility.  It is noted that organisational and logistical support from the Australian Antarctic Division needs greater clarity, with the current animal tagging program heavily reliant on logistics and support provided by the French Polar program.

In summary, IMOS plans to continue this work on a 2018-22 timeframe.

2. Backbone

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Deep Water Moorings SOTS not on track being resolved being resolved being resolved 4,088,450 EAC on track on track being resolved being resolved 2,317,049 ITF high mature ready 200,000 STAC papers and discussion:  The IMOS Five Year Plan supports continuation of the Southern Ocean Time Series (SOTS) site, and the East Australian Current (EAC) transport array. Both have a key dependency on vessel access via the Marine National Facility (Investigator).  Recent difficulties with SOTS deployments were discussed, and it was noted that the Sub-Facility won’t be considered ‘on track’ until a successful recovery and redeployment is achieved in March 2019.  Measured scientific use and demonstrated impact for the Deep Water Mooring Facility remains modest relative to the level of investment, noting that there is an inherent lag in this type of science.  Articulation of impact in the use of data by broader research communities and collaborations needs to be identified, along with clarification of the uptake of that research into program, policy and management areas. In the STAC discussion, an example was given of an EAC transport calculation based on the IMOS mooring data being used in a high-profile international publication, with citation of the relevant paper but no acknowledgement of IMOS. Our systems of acknowledgement and measurement need to become sophisticated enough to capture this type of use and impact.  The IMOS transport array in the Indonesian Through Flow (ITF) was suspended in October 2015 and IMOS has no plans to lead the recommencement this work. An opportunity has however arisen to partner in a WHOI-led, NSF-funded project to recommence ITF monitoring. An IMOS contribution to this globally significant work is supported on the understanding that appropriate acknowledgement is made of current and past investment.  The Five Year Plan included a growth proposal to undertake measurement of tropical fluxes to improve understanding of climate variability and improve predictions on intra-seasonal to quarterly time scales. Noting comments above about Southern Ocean fluxes, and capability/capacity constraints within the national community, the priority on a 2018-22 timeframe is to sustain and make maximum use of observations and data from the existing flux program. Expansion into tropical fluxes will need to be considered over the longer term.

In summary, the IMOS Deepwater Mooring Facility promises high scientific return, but carries high risk with respect to deployment and data availability. These risks will need to be very carefully managed if its full potential is to be realised in the next phase. Additional, one-off investment in the US-led ITF project is supported.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact AUV - being resolved on track on track on track 1,744,299 Enhanced Fleet high pilot in place tbd Marine Imagery high pilot in place tbd STAC papers and discussion:  IMOS is using the AUV Facility to implement a continental scale Integrated Benthic Monitoring program. Overall this program has been very successful. It does rely on co-investment of vessel support by partner agencies which has proven difficult to secure on multi-year timeframes. Image processing is also something of a bottleneck.  The Facility has basically operated using one, mid-sized, robotic vehicle, the Sirius. Some use has also been made of a smaller, less capable IVER vehicle. The Sirius is aging, and a NextGen AUV has been under development for some time. After significant delay, it is pleasing to see that the NextGen will undergo its first trial in Australian waters in the coming months and is expected to be operational within the IMOS program by the end of 2018.  Noting the size of Australia’s marine estate and the relevance of integrated monitoring for marine ecosystem management, the Five Year Plan included an aspirational goal to grow a national fleet of AUVs. The level of growth funding required to achieve this goal was not secured, but there is scope to grow the program at a more modest level.  A review of the Integrated Benthic Monitoring program was concluded in July 2016. One of the recommendations was to establish a program Steering Committee, chaired by Neville Barrett (UTAS/IMAS). Guidance has been sought from the Steering Committee as to priorities for next stage investment. From a meeting held on 29 August 2018, relative priorities identified were as follows: o Funding to support implementation of the NextGen AUV as a replacement for Sirius, covering staff and operating for the increased demand it will create, is the highest priority. Consideration should be given to duplication of that capability over the medium term. Support for vessel deployments ($5-10K per region/campaign) is seen to be highly desirable in this context, particularly in some regions. IMOS needs to be careful not to dis-incentivise partner agencies from co-investing vessel support where they are willing and able to do so. o Completion of an effective image processing pipeline is the other highest priority. In the first instance, this needs to enable manual annotation of images, and availability of the value-added, annotated datasets. Squidle+ is the tool that has been developed, though it’s noted that there’s a proliferation of tools in the marine image analysis space, and IMOS needs to ensure it is investing in information infrastructure that has broad community buy-in (funding collaboration, not competition). Outputs from a national Marine Image Analysis workshop being held on 6 September will provide further clarification. Automation of annotation is of great interest, but the fundamentals need to be completed first. Automation may be more suitable for funding via other mechanisms at this stage (e.g. ARC LIEF, ARDC). o Exploring the use of AUVs with ASVs, drifting buoys etc. to improve efficiency was seen as interesting, but more a priority for new technology proving. o It was also noted that the focus of the program could be expanded into ‘flat’ habitats such as seagrasses using smaller vehicles (e.g. IVERs), which could bring in other operating institutions. In a less than aspirational growth environment, it is perhaps best to consider this expansion of scope at a later date.  The Five Year Plan also included a proposal to make use of the UTAS Explorer class AUV nupiri muka. Based on a recent UTAS AUV facility workshop, the IMOS Office is of the view that this vehicle is some years away from being ready to make any contribution to our sustained observing system. Its priority in the medium term will be to deliver against milestones in the ARC-funded Antarctic Gateway Partnership and follow-on Strategic Research Initiative for Excellence in Antarctic Science.

In summary, the AUV-based Integrated Benthic Monitoring program should be stabilised and expanded in line with the highest priorities expressed by the AUV Steering Committee. The community will be asked to redevelop the 2018-22 continuation plan and budget into an expanded program on that basis. Additional investment will also be made in marine image analysis subject to clear feedback from the community as to the most appropriate way forward. Revised proposals will come back to STAC for review.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Citizen science – Reef - high mature in place tbd Life Survey STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan noted that there is potential for enhancement of IMOS to include a Citizen Science component. As a research infrastructure, we need to remain clearly focused on producing data of sufficient quality to be used in peer reviewed publications, and in analyses and products that will be used by managers and decision makers.  Reef Life Survey (RLS) is a well-established, high profile, citizen science project that meets these criteria. IMOS, IMAS and RLS have worked together to bring some RLS data into the AODN. There is potential to grow this relationship, complementing the ‘below diver depth capability’ of our AUV Facility, working together on image processing and data management, and better integrating IMOS physio-chemical data with RLS ecological data.  The consensus emerging from ongoing discussions with RLS is that IMOS should not invest directly in citizen diver-based surveys, but that there may be a role to play in data management and analysis (including photo-quadrats). This needs to be considered in conjunction with AUV etc. marine image analysis (see above).  Graham Edgar (UTAS/IMAS) et al submitted a proposal for a National Reef Monitoring Network (NRMN), with a new IMOS Facility ‘to collate, clean, store and distribute data obtained during shallow reef surveys conducted by the University of Tasmania, conservation management agencies in WA, SA, Victoria, Tasmania and NSW, and skilled citizen scientists operating within RLS, including surveys of the Australian Marine Park estate contracted by Parks Australia’. N.B. The scope of the NRMN is beyond just RLS. The proposal was for 3FTE/$420K pa, or $1.68M over four years. This is virtually the same as the focused continuation budget for the AUV Facility over the same period ($1.744M). The three positions are a data manager, a data officer, and a technical officer.  STAC discussion confirmed the high quality, use and impact of RLS and related data, and its complementarity with other IMOS/AODN datasets. There was not however strong support for a standalone Facility. It was felt that any IMOS investment should be focused on the integration of national reef monitoring network data into our extant national system. The level of investment requested was considered too high in the context of comparable Facilities.

In summary, the NRMN proposal is not supportable in its current form. Further discussion will be undertaken with the proponents, including whether all of the resources requested are essential, and whether there are other partners who could contribute. If IMOS is to invest, it needs to be into a network that can be sustained over time. If these discussions progress to the stage where a viable proposal emerges, this will come back to STAC for review.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact National Mooring NRS network on track on track being resolved on track 3,098,620 Network (NRS) Ichthyoplankton medium pilot developing tbd Water sampling dbase high mature in place tbd STAC papers and discussion:  N.B. The cost shown above is not the full cost of the NRS network. This only includes centralised costs plus Maria Island and North Stradbroke Island. Costs associated with Yongala and Darwin are in the Queensland and Northern Australian moorings budget, Rottnest Island is in WA, Kangaroo Island is in SA and Port Hacking is in NSW (see Regional). We estimate the full cost of the NRS Network to be ~$2.15M pa or $8.6M over four years.  The NRS Network sites include both continuous moored-sensor sampling, and monthly/quasi-monthly vessel-based sampling. The foundations of the NRS Network actually lie in vessel-based sampling. This is what has provided the very long running time series at Port Hacking, Maria Island, and Rottnest Island. In recent years, it is the NRS Network continental scale vessel-based sampling and its rich environmental context that has proven to be most useful for the plankton and marine microbial communities. Piloting national scale deployment of a standard, moored, multi-sensor instrument, with on-board processing and inbuilt bio-fouling controls (the WQM) has only been partially successful, and the moored-sensor component of the NRS Network was rationalised in the 2017-19 period. Continued investment by IMOS in the current, seven site, National Reference Station Network is warranted.  Similar to the way in which the marine microbial community leveraged the NRS sampling program, IMOS commenced pilot scale ichthyoplankton sampling in early 2015. This is a more serious commitment, involving net sampling on vessels and lab identification. Historical datasets were rescued and AFMA funded an analysis project. The results have shown promise and a Nature Scientific Data paper has been accepted. Iain Suthers (SIMS/UNSW) has been leading the charge and has come back to the National Fisheries Research Providers’ Network (RPN) seeking support to take the work to the next stage, which is to establish a baseline in the seasonality and spatial distribution of the eggs and larvae of key fish species. IMOS has taken the position that if there is clear user and stakeholder support, via RPN and including AFMA and FRDC, then we will consider investing in the technical support required to continue the sampling. Feedback from the latest RPN meeting was positive (particularly from AFMA), though the discussion was complicated by a companion proposal from Tim Ward (SARDI) to do DNA Barcoding using samples from their sardine surveys (the data from which has not yet found its way into the new ichthyoplankton database). In summary, IMOS will commit to bringing ichthyoplankton sampling in to the NRS program (at 5 of 7 sites) if we can be satisfied that it has ongoing user and stakeholder support.  The NRS water sampling database is maintained by CSIRO in Brisbane, and sits outside the core AODN information infrastructure. It needs upgrading, and we need to agree on how best to do this.  Noting comments above about challenges with the WQM-based moored instrument component, there has been some discussion within the national mooring network community about re-including additional variables at NRS sites, specifically oxygen, fluorometry, and turbidity. The significant increase in cost of instruments was noted (from ~$11K up to $58K) as were issues with respect to calibration and quality control. The was no firm proposal on the table and it was considered best to focus on getting maximum value from the NRS network as currently configured, and take advantage of leveraging opportunities (marine microbes, ichthyoplankton). The issue of oxygen was further discussed under ocean acidification.  Microplastics is a hot topic that has been raised in several IMOS meetings and workshops, including at the Annual Planning Meeting. A good discussion was held by STAC. Noting that the size of the problem is yet to be quantified, the consensus was that we know it’s big, that there are a lot of other programs already involved, and that solutions will lie in land-based measures. At this stage, we cannot identify a clear and useful role for IMOS on the issue of microplastics. It should be noted that the considerable support IMOS provides to enabling and improving ocean circulation modelling is an important contribution to the general issue of marine debris.

In summary, continued investment by IMOS in the National Reference Station Network has strong support, with expansion into marine microbes presenting an exciting new frontier, as well as the potential for inclusion of ichthyoplankton subject to user and stakeholder support.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact National Mooring Acidification Moorings on track on track being resolved being resolved 2,273,155 Network (other) Waves Buoys high mature in place tbd STAC papers and discussion:  IMOS ocean acidification (OA) moorings were deployed at three sites (Maria Island, Yongala, and Kangaroo Island) to cover both tropical and southern temperate waters. For various reasons, a fourth site at Heron Island which pre-dated IMOS has subsequently been brought into the network and Yongala has been paused. These moorings measure CO2 and pH at high precision and in near real time. They conform with international standards and form part of the Global Ocean Acidification Observing Network (GOA-ON). The Five Year Plan notes that providing sustained observations to inform ocean acidification research remains a priority for IMOS, but that increased emphasis needs to be placed on bringing together the science communities working on carbon chemistry and on biological responses. This was being discussed between CSIRO, AIMS and the IMOS Office at the time of bringing Heron Island into our system, but for various reasons these discussions stalled. Interestingly, while ocean acidification is considered in the RIMREP Physical and Chemical Environment Expert Group Report, the report makes no mention of the IMOS Heron Island site. To assist in reenergising this discussion, AIMS (Lyndon Llewellyn) agreed at the STAC meeting to provide IMOS with a brief update on the status of their OA research on the GBR. Bronte Tilbrook provided a very useful update on ocean acidification measurements and research which was included in the STAC background papers. It notes a number of issues with respect to the current sampling and makes some recommendations which will need to be considered. It also notes that, consistent with IMOS impact analysis, the issue of ocean acidification has a much higher profile internationally (e.g. via SDG14) than it does within Australia at the moment. Bronte notes that effort needs to be made to engage the relevant government departments on this issue, and that IMOS should be involved. In summary, ongoing IMOS investment in ocean acidification at current levels is justified. Consideration may need to be given as to the exact nature of what is being done, where and how, through a broader discussion with the relevant science and stakeholder communities.  The Five Year Plan notes that enhancement of IMOS to include wave measurements is considered to be well-justified. A new Satellite Waves Sub-Facility was established under 2017-19 funding and will be continued (see Broadscale). The Forum for Operational Oceanography (FOO) Working Groups (WGs) are providing a new source of advice on priority research infrastructure investments with relevance and impact in the area of real time services. The Surface Waves WG has run a comprehensive consultation process on national priorities across the ‘four pillars’ of FOO, led by Diana Greenslade (BOM). A high priority that has emerged is for additional in situ wave measurements. Using a published analysis of the current Australian wave observation network, a discussion paper on priority locations was developed. Five priority locations were identified – Eastern Tasmania, Arafura Sea/Gulf of Carpentaria, Torres Strait, Shark Bay, and Spencer Gulf. Given the paucity of wave observations in offshore locations around Australia, IMOS will give these priority in the first instance (ruling out Shark Bay and Spencer Gulf). Torres Strait is of considerable interest to AMSA from an operational perspective, and therefore not as high priority for IMOS as a research infrastructure. This leaves Eastern Tasmania and Arafura Sea/Gulf of Carpentaria. The proponents recommended Eastern Tasmania as the highest priority. Impact analysis undertaken by the IMOS Office suggests that investment in Arafura Sea/Gulf of Carpentaria as the second highest priority is also justified. In summary, a revised plan and budget for these two locations will be requested, and a Wave Buoy Sub-Facility established. Importantly, data from the new Sub- Facility will be included in the JCOMM International Wave Model Verification Project. In general, there was strong support from STAC for IMOS beginning to invest directly in in situ wave measurements.  IMOS paused its Passive Acoustics work (led by Curtin University) in the 2017-19 period, in part due to budget constraints, but more due to the fact it was not meeting our criteria for performance as a national collaborative research infrastructure. There is no appetite for recommencing the work under those arrangements. That said, the issue of ocean sound is likely to be of increasing importance in the future, and it is being developed as an Essential Ocean Variable (EOV) under GOOS. The NESP Marine Biodiversity Hub has been active in mapping ship noise, and the IMOS Office met with the Hub Leader and Project Leader to discuss their forward plans. They are looking to expand beyond ship noise to consider wind (using intensity modelling), seismic, and possibly recreational/small vessels. It was also noted that AIMS have a newish project underway with the oil and gas industry (Quadrant). From this discussion it was clear that the datasets built up through the IMOS Passive Acoustics Sub-Facility were useful in determining spectra for each vessel but were not suitable for ongoing monitoring, both due to the type of instrumentation used and the fact that we chose the location of our sites for other purposes. It should also be noted here that DSTG have also worked with Curtin to use the existing datasets. The Five Year Plan growth scenario reserved $1.2M over four years for potential investment in ocean sound (based on the annual budget for the Passive Acoustics Sub-Facility). In summary, the view is that IMOS has other higher priorities in the next stage. The datasets created will remain available for use and reuse. IMOS should maintain a watching brief on the issue of observing ocean sound, nationally and internationally.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Australian Microbiome Bioinformatics high mature developing 420,000 Initiative DNA Biobank medium pilot developing tbd Coastal sampling high pilot developing tbd STAC papers and discussion:  In 2012, IMOS commenced sampling at National Reference Stations in support of an Australian Marine Microbial Biodiversity Initiative led by CSIRO and UNSW. A community white paper on marine microorganisms developed in 2014 as part of the National Marine Science Plan then led to investment by Bioplatforms Australia (BPA) in a three year ‘marine microbes’ project (2015-18). BPA investment provided the sequencing to complement IMOS ‘pelagic’ sampling and analysis, coastal/benthic sampling by Universities and AIMS, and bioinformatics from CSIRO and others. This project has progressed well and a new three-year collaborative research project has been negotiated. The Australian Microbiome Initiative is a joint initiative with BPA, IMOS, CSIRO (National Collections/Environomics FSP), Parks Australia, and various other partners (including SIMS and AIMS). It requires a combination of water sampling, chemistry, sequencing, data management, bioinformatics and project management to be successful. In addition to ongoing support for pelagic water sampling and chemistry, IMOS has agreed to increase its contribution by $140K cash pa for three years ($420K in total) to support an additional position in the bioinformatics hub. Justin Seymour (UTS/SIMS/NSW-Node Leader) will represent IMOS on the Steering Committee for the Australian Microbiome Initiative, supported by the IMOS Office as required.  Notwithstanding the exciting science that is coming out of the marine microbial work, significant emphasis needs to be placed on developing pathways to impact over the next three years. Governance of the Australian Microbiome Initiative reflects this, with an End User Strategy working group reporting to the Steering Committee. The IMOS user and stakeholder community needs to be engaged on this front if the work is to have a long-term future in our program.  A complementary proposal has been received from Jodie van de Kamp (CSIRO) et al to leverage the DNA extraction required for the Australian Microbiome Initiative to create a DNA Biobank. The proposal states that “The DNA BioBank will provide an accessible archive of planktonic DNA extracts to the broader scientific community that can be used to interrogate, explore and study the bacterial, phytoplankton, zooplankton communities and potentially macro-organisms through environmental DNA (eDNA)”. This is an interesting idea, requiring investment of ~$100K pa by IMOS. STAC, however, expressed caution as to how the scope of the proposed Biobank would actually be managed through time, and whether the potential user base had actually been tested. A firm decision wasn’t reached at the meeting. The IMOS Office will facilitate further discussion with the proponents and the host organisation (CSIRO) and if a full proposal is developed, this will come back to STAC for review.  As noted above, the BPA marine microbes project also had a coastal/benthic component based on ad hoc sampling. The IMOS Five Year Plan noted that “Opportunities to grow the network ‘inshore’ will be explored. It is conceivable that long term sampling programs run by partner organisations could be turned into a coastal NRS network by implementing standard sampling procedures and data management practices for an agreed suite of essential ocean variables. Marine biosecurity is one driver for such a development.” Coastal sampling for the Australian Microbiome Initiative provides one way for IMOS to explore the feasibility of this approach. Justin Seymour is facilitating a discussion with potential partners in the GBR, Sydney region, Melbourne region, and SA Gulfs. An important component of this discussion will be testing the potential for pathways to impact being created through RIMREP on the GBR, MEMA in NSW etc. There is no firm proposal on the table at the moment. Paul Van Ruth (SARDI) et al have provided a document on extending the SA regional mooring array into the SA Gulfs which contains useful information, though IMOS is not at all wedded to the idea that a coastal sampling program requires more moorings. Frequency of sampling will be an issue in coastal and estuarine systems, and indications from the marine microbes work to date indicate that at least weekly (vs monthly/quasi-monthly for the NRS network) will be required. Coming at this challenge from a new technology proving perspective could be interesting for IMOS. For example, CSIRO has developed a Sample Filtration and Archiving (SaFA) instrument that could potentially enable higher frequency sampling at much lower cost, and STAC supported the suggestion that this be explored. If these discussions progress to the stage where a viable proposal emerges, this will come back to STAC for review.

In summary, inclusion of a marine microbial component is an exciting scientific development, and the partnership with BPA demonstrates the power of NCRIS as a national collaborative research infrastructure program. Path to impact is a key issue in the next phase. Opportunities to expand through coastal sampling and biobanking need more discussion and development before they are able to be properly evaluated by STAC.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Animal Tracking Acoustic Telemetry on track on track on track on track 3,182,728 STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that continued investment by IMOS in a nationally coordinated acoustic Animal Tracking network is warranted.  The acoustic telemetry community has achieved a paradigm-shift towards open access to biological data. There are now 71 million detections of 133 species in the national database, with 60 million species detections openly accessible. The power of a national network has been demonstrated, including through the outputs of the Task Team on ‘Synthesis and national scale analysis of IMOS acoustic telemetry data’.  To get to this stage it has been necessary to build the network ‘bottom up’, and the next step is to have users and stakeholders provide more ‘top down’ input into a national network design. Discussions have been underway for some time with the Research Providers Network (RPN) of the National Fisheries and Aquaculture Research Development & Extension Strategy, the NESP Marine Biodiversity Hub, and the Species Conservation Section of the Australian Government Department of the Environment. A list of priority species for which acoustic tracking is an appropriate research tool has been identified, and FRDC has funded a project to: 1. Use existing national acoustic telemetry data to examine movement patterns and connectivity of priority species identified by the Fisheries Research Provider Network 2. Determine where the national array can be improved to produce data for use by regional and national fisheries managers 3. Provide a national-scale update on telemetry data for priority species and a proposal to improve the network to increase fisheries benefits of the national tracking scheme  A deliverable of the FRDC project is a ‘business plan for redistribution of IMOS ATF infrastructure to improve monitoring of priority species’, by June 2019  At this stage we are assuming that redesign required can be achieved within the continuation budget for the Facility, noting that this is budgeted at an average of ~$800K pa for the next four years (including capital replacement) vs ~$465K pa in 2017-19. Whether or not this is achievable will to some extent depend on the ability of partners to co-invest is ongoing operation of a redesigned network. For example, at a recent Victorian stakeholder meeting, enthusiasm was expressed for reviving the idea of having receiver arrays either side of Bass Strait – the so called ‘Bass Strait Gates’. One reason this could not be implemented when first proposed many years ago was that the local logistical support could not be secured. It will be interesting to see if this will be different in the next stage of IMOS.

In summary, the IMOS acoustic telemetry program is now well on track and we have an exciting opportunity to explore the redesign of a component of the observing system in response to user and stakeholder requirements.

3. Regional

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Ocean Gliders - on track on track being resolved being resolved 4,941,481 Enhancement in NSW, low pilot ready - WA and EAC Tropical gliders high pilot ready - Event-based sampling tbd STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that IMOS will continue investing in an Ocean Gliders Facility, with deployment priorities guided by the major regional modelling and analysis programs that have strong user bases and clear pathways to impact. This value chain is largely already in place across the five IMOS Regional Nodes, noting that there is a need to mature the use of gliders in some regions from a pilot mode of exploration and discovery, to a sustained observing mode of building datasets for use and reuse. A brief summary of use by region is as follows. In NSW the plan has been to develop a shelf climatology using the glider data. In WA the focus is now on the Two Rocks transect. In Queensland/GBR the emphasis is on assessment of eReefs modelling, and the efficacy of this approach needs ongoing consideration, particularly in the context of RIMREP priorities. In SA the focus is now on the Bonney upwelling. With a new mooring site planned for this location (see below) we need to think about whether this remains the best use of glider investment in the region. Summer and winter missions across Bass Strait will continue for now. Establishment of a new Victorian Node provides a mechanism for considering whether or not this is the best use of glider investment in the region.  There is also a need to increase the level of ‘hard’ (vs ‘soft’) scientific output from this Facility i.e. more papers and projects relative to presentations. It is possible that there is under-reporting of current use and uptake e.g. secondary uses of glider data in model assessment not being adequately reflected.  The Five Year Plan also notes that there is potential to extend the Ocean Gliders Facility on the continental shelves of NSW and WA where the use of gliders is most mature. Noting comments by region above, a view emerged that we are perhaps best to focus on maximising the use and impact of continued investment at current levels for now. In trying to balance whole-of-IMOS investment across existing Facility activities and new opportunities, the sense was that we will potentially generate higher returns in other areas.  Another opportunity identified was to concentrate the use of remaining Seaglider assets to conduct an experiment in measuring the EAC with gliders in conjunction with the Deepwater Mooring EAC transport array. The objective is to understand what role gliders can play along with other technologies in cost effective monitoring of boundary currents. Using IMOS strategic funds, a first stage pilot was conducted in March-May 2018. Once the data are analysed we’ll have a better idea as to the potential utility of this approach. We have reserved enough strategic funds to undertake a second pilot around the next EAC Deep Water Mooring voyage in September-October 2019 if necessary.  A growth proposal was also received to establish a tropical ocean glider sub- facility to support event-based response deployments of gliders in the Great Barrier Reef. It proposed that operational efficiencies would be achieved for unscheduled glider missions to respond to significant environmental events (e.g. floods, warming events) not otherwise be captured by scheduled, quarterly missions. STAC used this opportunity to stimulate a broader discussion about event-based sampling. This covered marine heatwaves, tropical cyclones, harmful algal blooms, and flood events, and noted that approaches other than glider missions should be considered. In summary, the view that emerged is that use of gliders in marine heatwaves is the event-based sampling opportunity most plausible for IMOS in the next stage. Richard Brinkman (AIMS), Ming Feng (CSIRO) and other interested STAC members will be asked to form a small group from the broader community to develop a proposal in this area. The nascent Glider User Group may be able to assist. This proposal will come back to STAC for review.

In summary, the current ocean glider program will be maintained, refined, and strengthened, with an increment in event-based sampling of marine heatwaves subject to an acceptable proposal.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ 23

Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact National Mooring on track on track being resolved* on track 7,366,064 Network (shelf arrays) Qld and Nth Australia 7,366,064 Northern GBR high mature in place tbd NSW 3,671,020 Near Real Time low pilot developing - South Australia 2,706,660 Bonney Upwelling high mature in place tbd WA 2,168,272 STAC papers and discussion:  N.B. The costs shown above for shelf arrays include some costs of the NRS network. Yongala and Darwin are in the Queensland and Northern Australian moorings budget, Rottnest Island is in WA, Kangaroo Island in in SA and Port Hacking in in NSW (see Backbone). We estimate the full cost of the shelf arrays to be ~$2.6M pa or $10.5M over four years.  The Five Year Plan notes that IMOS will continue to invest in a Moorings Network Facility at current scope and scale, with some redistribution of assets from Joseph Bonaparte Gulf to the Kimberley and Pilbara regions of NW WA. WAIMOS has formed a working group to provide advice on a potential redistribution in the northwest, which includes representatives from oil and gas and consulting. Again, we see the positive influence of FOO in strengthening industry engagement in IMOS planning. At the moment we are assuming that any redistribution will be cost neutral, but this assumption may need to be reconsidered once the process has concluded. As noted under Backbone/Deep Water Moorings (see above), IMOS will provide some support to a WHOI-led proposal to reoccupy the Indonesian Through Flow and the WAIMOS working group should at least consider this in its deliberations.  Three growth opportunities were identified for the Moorings Network Facility – (1) reoccupy the northern GBR (clearly a strategic gap given recent coral bleaching), (2) monitor the Bonney upwelling region which is emerging as a ‘hot spot’ for various reasons, and (3) maturing of pilot projects to deliver near real time data from moorings, most likely requiring relocation of capability from where it could be developed, to where it will have most use and impact in the future.  Proposals received for the northern GBR and Bonney upwelling need to be reviewed and updated, and the proponents will now be asked to do this.  Discussion about near real time led to a view that at $500K over four years, greater return on investment will be achieved through support for other growth opportunities. Potential for near real time moorings will remain under consideration, subject to user pull, cost effectiveness and co-investment.

In summary, the shelf arrays component of the National Mooring Network will be continued at current level, with redistribution of assets in the northwest, and strategic enhancements in the northern GBR and Bonney upwelling.

* As noted in the 2017-19 Funding Guidelines, uptake and use of mooring data is solid and impact is being demonstrated. This use and impact, however, is coming off a very high level of IMOS investment, and we should be striving to extract more value from the mooring data. Efforts are underway to achieve this. Note that is this case, the assessments are provided at whole of Facility rather than Regional/Sub-Facility level. We see no great value in making relative assessments across regions.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Ocean Radar - being resolved being resolved being resolved being resolved 3,672,543 Co-invested systems high mature developing 350,000 STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that continued investment by IMOS in a national Ocean Radar network is warranted. The network was rationalised under 2017-19 funding, but pleasingly, additional co-investment has begun to support a revised network consolidated on the NSW and WA coasts, along with SA Gulfs.  NSW State Government has co-invested in an additional site near Newcastle to observe the EAC separation zone.  The Western Rock Lobster fishery, via FRDC, has co-invested to reposition one of the decommissioned CODAR units at Dongara to provide new information on surface currents and support forecasting activity.  Woodside has just agreed to co-invest in repositioning of a decommissioned WERA system off Ningaloo, which will provide new information on ocean circulation in this region that will be of interest to many users and stakeholders.  It was noted that IMOS will need to provide additional investment of $350K over four years to enable this network consolidation to be fully implemented, and to support ongoing operation and data delivery for all sites over the 2018-22 timeframe.  For Ocean Radar, there is a relatively low level of ‘hard’ scientific output to date. This reflects the need to mature this Facility in terms of its use and impact.

In summary, the Ocean Radar Facility has much latent potential, and it is hoped that the developments outlined above will enable us to better realise the benefits on offer.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Wireless Sensor - on track on track being resolved being resolved 557,087 Network STAC papers and discussion:  The Wireless Sensor Network Facility has been rationalised over time, winding back to a base level of infrastructure at the research intensive island stations on the GBR where it has had some utility.  IMOS was planning to transition out of the Wireless Sensor Network Facility on a 2017-19 timeframe based on low usage. It turned out that the cost to fully decommission on this timeframe exceeded the cost to maintain a base network focused around Island Research Stations. The decision was therefore made to stay this course in the medium term.  Back to back bleaching of the GBR and RIMREP Program Design activity present opportunities for use and impact to be greatly increased, and this needs to be fully explored in making a decision about what next.  At this stage allowance has been made for continuation at the base level on a 2018-22 timeframe.

In summary, next steps for the Wireless Sensor Network Facility will be determined in the context the major GBR research initiatives, with which IMOS is well engaged.

Facility Sub-Facility Continuation criteria Growth criteria $ Deploy Data Use Impact Science Tech Path to priority ready impact Remote regions - - medium mature developing - Surface Drifters STAC papers and discussion:  The Five Year Plan notes that IMOS is not investing in region-specific ‘Facilities’, but rather investing in National Facilities responding to the needs of multiple Regions. Two areas of investment made in earlier phases came under review from this perspective. The Wireless Sensor Network on the GBR (see above), and the satellite animal tracking of sea lions in the Great Australian Bight. The GAB animal tracking was ceased under 2017-19 funding.  Moorings, gliders and radars have provided the bulk of the IMOS regional capability up to now, and continuation and growth of these Facilities is addressed in previous sections. Notwithstanding the great utility of these technologies, they are relatively expensive. One reason is that moorings and gliders are vessel dependent. The IMOS strategy is to provide intensive regional observing capability using a combination of these technologies where there is a large catchment of science users and a clear pathway to impact. It is implausible for IMOS to implement this kind of intensive regional observing capability in more and more regions across Australia’s vast and valuable marine estate. Alternative approaches need to be considered in order to grow the spatial relevance of IMOS by cost effective means. This led to component of the Five Year Plan focused on observing in ‘remote regions’.  In addition to sensor networks and satellite tagging, other technologies proposed in a remote regions’ context included different types of surface drifters.  Remote regions (along with autonomous systems) was one of two areas of aspirational growth in the Five Year Plan. As noted elsewhere, IMOS has not been funded for aspirational growth at this stage. Our capacity to realise a remote regions capability on a 2018-22 timeframe will therefore be very limited, if at all. Taking a longer view, it needs to remain in our strategy as a growth priority.  A Surface Drifter proposal was submitted under the Five Year Plan for ~$1M (four year equivalent). This was for a combination of SVPB drifters and AIMS-developed ‘AusDrifters’.  In considering the potential role of surface drifters in IMOS, it seemed sensible to seek advice from the FOO Surface Currents Working Group. A revised proposal was received for a combination of SVPB, Metocean iSLDMB, and SPOT drifters totalling $995K pa or ~$4M in total. The IMOS Office advised that this was overly ambitious. A third proposal was received for a combination of SVPB and SPOT drifters for $235K pa or $940K in total. This is the proposal provided to STAC for consideration.  Overall, STAC found the proposal unconvincing in the context of IMOS as an Australian Government funded research infrastructure focused on sustained observing. Anticipated benefits with respect to observing the EAC did not seem well founded with no involvement of the Deepwater Mooring and Ocean Radar Facilities, or other IMOS Facilities active in the EAC. Anticipated benefits with respect to the Gulf of Carpentaria were also weak, choosing to emphasise ghost nets and ill-defined connections to modelling activities. STAC could not support this proposal. It was noted that the surface drifter proposals have a flavour of event-based sampling, and this may provide an alternative lens (see above). The $4M proposal noted that “IMOS has twice previously considered the establishment of ocean drifter facilities, but not prioritised this at the level necessary to receive funding”. It will therefore be important for the IMOS Office to discuss this decision with the FOO Surface Currents Working Group to ensure the rationale for our decisions is at least understood.

In summary, IMOS will be unable to act on its aspirations to develop remote regional observing capability based on currently available funding for the 2018-22 period.

4. Program level

As noted in the Five Year Plan, IMOS needs the following Program level capabilities:

 A properly resourced IMOS Office with an appropriate skill mix and leadership succession plan.  A properly resourced Australian Ocean Data Network (AODN) Facility, enabling open access to marine data beyond the IMOS data collections.  An OceanCurrent, consistent with our strategy to place increasing emphasis on the delivery of value-added products.  A new technology proving capability. The Board has agreed to fund the IMOS Office, AODN and OceanCurrent ‘off the top’, and advice from STAC was not sought on the relative priority of these investments – see below.

It was however agreed that AODN and OceanCurrent need to remain accountable to the IMOS community for what they are delivering, as with other Facilities. STAC will have an ongoing role in reviewing the scientific and technical performance of IMOS across all four key performance indicators and will be provided with an appropriate level of information to do this at future meetings.

New Technology Proving

STAC discussed the design and implementation of a New Technology Proving capability within IMOS. The concept of this capability was introduced in the Five Year Plan, and was further discussed at the 2018 Annual Planning Meeting.

The Five Year Plan stated that IMOS would invest in pilot Facilities to test the utility of platforms and sensors in light of different policy drivers, changes in scientific understanding, technological innovation and other new requirements. Cognisant that core IMOS capital investment lies in mature technologies, the advancement of technology capacity across the criterion of enhancement and expansion, effectiveness, and efficiency is identified as being of critical importance for IMOS into the future. In recognition of the significance of this for the long-term future of IMOS, the Board has approved a recommendation from the IMOS Office that we reserve $500K pa for four years ($2M in total) for New Technology Proving.

It was noted that the drive for efficiencies through use of technology has proven very difficult to achieve in practice. In the 2009-13 IMOS Strategy, there was an explicit focus on driving down the cost per observation which met with limited success. The marine science community is adept at identifying expanded requirements with expanded funding, but we find it much harder to get more observations and data from the same level of funding (greater effectiveness), or the same observations and data from a lower level of funding (higher efficiency). It was further emphasised that in operationalising a new technology proving capability, IMOS should not set itself up to specify an ever-expanding and more expensive system. We must also use this opportunity to operationalise effectiveness and efficiency.

Improving IMOS advisory and decision making processes to better balance enhancement, efficiency and effectiveness through the selection, assessment, and adoption of new technologies was one of the core concepts behind the evolution of the Node Steering Committee into a Science and Technology Advisory Committee.

A major task for the first meeting of STAC was to advise on a process to guide wise investment of IMOS new technology proving resources. It should be noted that some of the growth opportunities identified in the Five Year Plan, and by other means, may be more suitable for funding under New Technology Proving than for direct funding as a facility priority at this stage.

With respect to the New Technology Proving capability, STAC discussed criteria, process and evaluation. Key points from this discussion are summarised below. Further work needs to be done out of session to turn these points into a draft set of guidelines, policies and processes for consideration and approval by STAC.

1. The criteria for assessment The STAC discussed how they would evaluate the proposed projects against clear criteria. This included discussions on:  Identification of strategic areas of need; o Discussion at the 2018 Annual Planning Meeting identified some candidate areas. o In terms of enhancement, examples included eDNA, in situ nutrients, coastal water quality (including citizen science), and bigger Zooplankton using laser etc. technologies. o In terms of effectiveness, examples included getting more observations per deployment through additional battery packs, or increasing power availability in situ by harnessing ocean energy. o In terms of efficiency, examples included using the fishing fleet to collect subsurface measurements, and reducing the frequency of servicing and maintenance through biofouling reduction.  Justification of the level of need for the proposed technology through evidence of user demand;  Evaluation of the proposed new technology in terms of the Framework for Ocean Observing technical readiness levels (TRLs), with priority given to TRLs 4 (trial), 5 (verification) and 6 (operational);  Having a broad definition of ‘new technology', recognising that projects could include both ‘hard' and ‘soft' technologies, spanning from ‘new kit in the water', through improved work flows, to new analysis techniques;  The potential for return on investment to IMOS through greater efficiencies, effectiveness and enhancement;  The timeframe for the pilot, recognising that to ‘prove’ technological efficiency, effectiveness and enhancement requires an appropriate amount of time;  The identification and evaluation of intended pathways to use and impact of the project, noting that pathways may be more or less clear and certain in the context of piloting emerging technologies;

 Whether modelling could be used to test the likelihood of achieving the intended outcomes identified in the proposal;  Whether funding for the project would be more suitable to an ARC LIEF or other funding bodies, particularly in the cases of novel technologies;  Whether a ‘cap’ in the size of a pilot was appropriate so that various projects across various strategic areas could be funded.

2. The process to call for proposals and self-assessment The STAC discussed the processes of calling for, or identifying, proposals. This included:  The appropriateness of ‘calling' for proposals as opposed to identifying and inviting particular proposals in areas of specific need;  The process of lodging expressions of interest;  The identification of potential co-investment;  The support for a self-assessment tool that could be used by proponents to assess proposals against clear criteria before they reach the IMOS Office/STAC.

3. The evaluation of pilots Given the new technology funding concept is to ensure IMOS is in a position to take advantage of new innovations in the ocean observation space, the evaluation of pilots is of critical importance. STAC discussed the evaluation of the pilots after the fact, including points on:  Whether the pilot demonstrated pathways to sustained observing; addressed identified user needs; addressed IMOS strategic priorities;  There is a future availability of funding;  The confirmed return on investment to IMOS through greater efficiencies, effectiveness and enhancement.

Next steps: The information generated through this discussion will be used to design guidelines, a self-assessment tool, and an evaluation and decision making process for consideration and approval by STAC. It is likely that the IMOS Office will seek to outsource the design and development work to a suitably qualified group within the IMOS community to assist in moving forward in a timely fashion.

Portfolio balance

Noting that a number of growth proposals ‘on the table’ are subject to further development of a plan and budget for reconsideration by STAC, the IMOS Office has sufficient information to make a ‘first pass’ assessment as to what the IMOS portfolio would look like before and after investment of the new funding as outlined above.

Approximately $75.5M or 83% of total 2018-22 funding would go to continuation of the existing program as scoped in 2017-19. Continuation budgets include indexation, proper capital replacement, and some minor adjustments to baseline funding where justified.

This leaves approximately $15M (17%) for growth. Growth funding would therefore represent a 20% increment on continuation funding at whole of program level.

In relative terms, this set of decisions would see some change in the shape of the portfolio – see table and graph below.

The Backbone component would grow from 29% to 31% of total, receiving an above average rate of growth funding (28%) through increased investment in AUVs/marine imagery, wave buoys, and marine microbes. The Broadscale component would stay stable with a 24% growth rate. There would be a slight reduction in the Regional component (12% growth rate), consistent with a focus on extracting greater value from existing investments (moorings, gliders, radars) and the fact that growth aspirations in remote regions capability won’t be realised on the 2018-22 funding available. The Program component would decrease in relative terms as the IMOS Office, AODN and OceanCurrent do not grow proportionally with the rest of the portfolio. The growth here is in New Technology Proving.

2017-19 2018-22 Growth Broadscale 25% 25% 24% Backbone 29% 31% 28% Regional 25% 24% 12% Program 21% 20% 13% 100% 100% 20%

Relative Growth rates (n = 20%)

13%

24%

12%

28%

Broadscale Backbone Regional Program

In summary, this portfolio level assessment seems to makes sense in the context of the Five Year Plan, to the extent it has been funded.

In order to add further rigour to the above portfolio assessment, it is informative to provide additional information at Facility level. The graph below highlights relative investment/dis- investment by Facility. Where the orange (2018-22) line is above the blue (2017-19) line, the investment is increasing, and vice versa. In summary, the quantum and trajectory of shifts at Facility level are not unexpected, and seem consistent with the Five Year Plan.

Portfolio balance - Facility 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

2017-19 2018-22

Most of the growth (78%) is concentrated in six ‘facilities’ i.e. AUV/marine imagery, wave buoys, marine microbes, new technology proving, Argo, and satellite remote sensing.

Whilst the other seven ‘facilities’ are low/no growth, consistent with the Five Year Plan, it is important to note that annual continuation budgets for 2018-22 are on average 15% higher than 2017-19 budgets due to indexation and capital replacement. This isn’t classified as ‘growth’ per se, but the whole portfolio is benefiting from 2018-22 funding.

ATTACHMENT 1 – STAC membership

The inaugural STAC membership builds on the Node Steering Committee:  All of the current Node leadership will be included in the first instance  Technology evaluation will be explicitly included in the science prioritisation process  Membership of the committee will be expanded to address disciplinary gaps  Membership of the committee will be expanded to provide greater diversity

At the 4-5 September meeting which generated this report, attendance was as follows:

Nodes Leaders Additional members Tech/Data/Office BW&C Steve Rintoul (CSIRO) Diana Greenslade (BOM) Mark Underwood Pete Strutton (UTAS) Jess Melbourne-Thomas (CSIRO) (AAD) WA Jeff Hansen (UWA), acting for Nicole Jones (on leave) Ming Feng (CSIRO) David Antoine (Curtin) Q Richard Brinkman (AIMS) Michelle Heupel (AIMS) Lyndon Llewellyn (AIMS) Russ Babcock (CSIRO) NSW Justin Seymour (UTS) Martina Doblin (UTS) Tim Ingleton (NSW OEH) SA Paul Van Ruth (SARDI) Charlie Huveneers (Flinders) SEA Daniel Ierodiaconou Nicole Hill (UTAS) Sebastien Mancini (Vic) (Deakin) Emily Ogier (UTAS), for (AODN), acting for Roger (Tas) Vanessa Lucieer (UTAS) part of the meeting Proctor (on leave) IMOS Office: Tim Moltmann (Director), Ana Lara-Lopez (Scientific Officer), and Indi Hodgson-Johnston (Assistant Director). Jo Neilson (Project Manager) and Emma Sommerville (Operations Manager) sat in as observers given the focus on 2018-22 funding. Apologies: Bronwyn Gillanders (Adelaide)

University of Tasmania Private Bag 110 Hobart Tasmania 7001 http://www.imos.org.au