Attachment 1 - ARV PEP (Aug 2023).pdf

Antarctic Research Vessel

Project Execution Plan

Version 5, January 2023

Prepared by the Antarctic Support Contractor for the

National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs

ARV Project Execution Plan January 2023

Page i

Version History

Version # Date Section

(if applicable) Author/Editor Change Details

1 August 2021 All

C. Chuhran

H. Anthonysz

B. Hirsch

100% submittal

2 May 2022 All H. Anthonysz PD Phase 50% Submittal

3 December 2022 All H. Anthonysz PD Phase 95% Submittal

4 December 2022 All V. Hiles Final edits 1,2,7,7.4

5 January 2023 All H. Anthonysz PD Phase 100% submittal edits

6 January 2023 All L. Avila

H. Anthonysz PDR Panel final edits

Page ii

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1. Scientific Objectives

1.2. Scientific Requirements

1.3. Facility/Infrastructure

1.4. Scientific and Broader Societal Impacts

1.4.1. STEM Education

1.4.2. Presidential Priorities and Directives

1.5. Facility Divestment Plan

2. Organization

2.1. Vessel Integrator Internal Governance, Organization and Communication

2.2. Vessel Integrator Roles and Responsibilities

2.3. NSF Internal Organization and Communication with Vessel Integrator

2.4. Community Relations, Outreach and Engagement

2.4.1. Stakeholder Outreach

2.4.2. General Communication

2.5. Partnerships

2.5.1. NSF Directorates and Divisions

2.5.2. U.S. Government Agency Partnerships

2.5.3. International Partnerships

3. Design and Development

3.1. Project Development Plan

3.1.1. Design Stage Key Deliverables and Decisions

3.1.2. Key Terms and Definitions

3.1.3. Conceptual Design Phase

3.1.4. Preliminary Design Phase

3.1.5. Regulatory Review

3.1.6. Final Design Phase

3.1.7. System Engineering

3.1.8. Vessel Operator Selection

3.2. Development Budget and Funding Sources

3.3. Development Schedule

3.3.1. Reviews and Meetings

3.4. Transition to MREFC Construction

4. Construction Project Definition

4.1. Summary of Total Project Definition

4.2. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

4.3. WBS Dictionary

4.4. Scope Management Plan and Scope Contingency

4.5. Cost Estimating Plan, Executive Summary, and Baseline Budget

4.5.1. Cost Estimating Plan

4.5.2. Executive Summary

Page iii

4.5.3. Baseline Budget

4.6. Budget Contingency

4.7. Cost Book, Cost Model Data Set, and Basis of Estimate

4.8. Funding Profile

4.9. Baseline Schedule Estimating Plan and Integrated Schedule

4.9.1. Schedule Summary

4.9.2. Schedule Details

4.9.3. Construction Project Milestones

4.10. Schedule Contingency

5. Staffing

5.1. Staffing Plan

5.2. Hiring and Staff Transition Plan

6. Risk and Opportunity Management

6.1. Risk and Opportunity Management Plan

6.1.1. Definitions

6.1.2. Key Roles and Responsibilities

6.1.3. Risk Management

6.1.4. Issue Management

6.1.5. Opportunity Management

6.2. Risk Register

6.3. Contingency Management Plan

6.3.1. Contingency Management Approach

6.3.2. Integration with the Master Schedule

7. Systems Engineering

7.1. Systems Engineering Plan

7.2. Systems Engineering Requirements

7.2.1. Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) and Requirements Verification Matrix (RVM)

7.2.2. Requirements Reviews and Acceptance

7.2.3. Drawing and Specification Development

7.3. Interface Management

7.4. QA/QC Plan

7.4.1. QA/QC Roles and Responsibilities

7.4.2. Acquisition and Supplier Surveillance

7.4.3. QA/QC Across Project Phases

8. Configuration Control

8.1. Configuration Control Plan

8.2. Change Control Plan

8.2.1. ARV Change Process

8.3. Document Control Plan

8.3.1. Document Controls

8.3.2. Access Control

8.3.3. Archiving

Page iv

9. Acquisitions

9.1. Acquisition Plan

9.1.1. Acquisition Strategy

9.1.2. Acquisition Schedule and Funding Sources

9.1.3. Design Stage Acquisition Details by Phase

9.1.4. Construction Stage Acquisition Details

9.2. NSF Approval Process and Project Controls

9.2.1. NSF Schedule of Approval Actions

9.2.2. NSF Project Controls

9.2.3. NSF Project Off-ramps

10. Project Management Controls

10.1. Project Management Control Plan

10.1.1. Project Management Control Systems

10.1.2. Project Management Controls Organization

10.2. Earned Value Management (EVM) Plan

10.2.1. Organization (EIA-748 Guidelines 1 to 5)

10.2.2. Planning, Scheduling and Budgeting (EIA-748 Guidelines 6 to 15)

10.2.3. Accounting (EIA-748 Guidelines 16 to 21)

10.2.4. Analysis and Management Reports (EIA-748 Guidelines 22 to 27)

10.2.5. Revisions and Data Maintenance (EIA-748 Guidelines 28 to 32)

10.2.6. EVMS – Training

10.3. Financial and Business Controls

11. Site and Environment

11.1. Environmental Aspects

12. Cyberinfrastructure

12.1. Cyberinfrastructure

12.1.1. ARV Cyberinfrastructure for Science

12.1.2. ARV Shipboard Cyberinfrastructure for Ship Operations

12.1.3. USAP Cyberinfrastructure for Science and Operations

12.1.4. ARV Project Support Information Technology and Communications

12.1.5. ARV Cyberinfrastructure Interface Management

12.2. ARV Cybersecurity

12.2.1. Governance

12.2.2. Cybersecurity Resources

12.3. Code Development Plan

12.4. Data and Archiving Approach

12.5. Cyberinfrastructure in the Context of the Project Activities

12.5.1. Cyber Infrastructure in the Context of the Project activities

12.5.2. Coordination among Delineation Entities for ARV Project Cyber Infrastructure and Cybersecurity Activities

13. Environmental, Safety, and Health

13.1. Environmental, Safety, and Health (ESH) Plan

13.1.1. Introduction

13.1.2. ESH Plan Modifications and Revisions

Page v

13.1.3. Additional Resources

13.2. Governing Documents

13.2.1. Federal

13.2.2. State and Local (TBD)

13.2.3. International

13.2.4. NSF

13.2.5. USAP

13.3. ESH Project Organization / Roles and Responsibilities

13.3.1. Vessel Integrator

13.3.2. Shipbuilder Responsibilities

13.3.3. Vessel Operator Responsibilities

13.3.4. NSF Authority

13.4. Deliverables and Reporting

13.5. Training

14. Review and Reporting

14.1. Reporting Requirements

14.1.1. Recurring Meetings

14.1.2. Recurring Reports

14.1.3. Non-Recurring Reports

14.2. Audits and Reviews

14.2.1. Reviews

14.2.2. Audits

15. Commissioning

15.1. Integration and Testing Plan

15.2. Operational Readiness Plan

15.2.1. Purpose

15.2.2. Responsibilities

15.2.3. Scope

15.2.4. Procedure

15.3. Concept of Operations

15.3.1. Introduction

15.3.2. Assumptions

15.3.3. Operating Concept

15.3.4. Scientific Operational Areas

15.3.5. Cost Estimates

15.4. Funding Segregation Plan

15.4.1. Transition from Design Stage to Construction Stage

15.4.2. Construction Stage Execution

15.4.3. Project Completion

16. Project Closeout Procedure

16.1. Purpose

16.2. Authorities and Mandates

16.3. Responsibilities

16.3.1. Vessel Integrator

Page vi

16.3.2. Finance Property Administrator (Mission Integrator)

16.3.3. Mission Integrator/Vessel Operator ILS Manager

16.3.4. Project Manager (Vessel Integrator / Mission Integrator)

16.4. Procedure

16.5. Project Closure Process Steps

16.6. Project Closeout Checklist

Glossary

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Project Timeline for the ARV Replacement Project

Figure 2: Advancing NSF research priorities requires enhanced icebreaking to move past the current “barrier” presented by the extent of winter sea ice

Figure 3: Schematic diagram of how a research vessel with enhanced icebreaking capabilities integrates and supports a wide array of research platforms and science in Southern Ocean (Figure adapted from Yoon et al. 2018)

Figure 4: Scientists, educators, and support crew on a 2013 Nathaniel B. Palmer Ross Sea, Antarctica expedition

Figure 5: Vessel Integrator Project Organization

Figure 6: Design Lifecycle from the NSF’s RIG

Figure 7: PDP Summary Schedule

Figure 8: Construction Schedule Summary

Figure 9: ARV risk management process

Figure 10: Risk Level Matrix

Figure 11: ARV Systems Engineering Life Cycle

Figure 12: Requirements Development Process

Figure 13: Interface management process

Figure 14: ARV Configuration Control Roadmap

Figure 15: Project management control systems

Figure 16: Earned Value Management process overview

Figure 17: ARV Management Structure in a government-owned/contractor-operated model

Figure 18: Map of Scientific Operational Areas

Figure 19: Project Closure Flowchart

Table of Tables

Table 1: Strategic Goals (SG) and Strategic Objectives (SO) from NSF’s Strategic Plan for FY 2018-2022

Table 2: U.S. priority research questions that rely on ship-based infrastructure

Table 3: Summary points from the 2019 Report of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the USAP’s Research Vessel Procurement

Table 4: Key Performance Parameters

Table 5: Other Vessel requirements

Table 6: ARV General Characteristics

Table 7: ARV Project Roles and Responsibilities

Page vii

Table 8: Vessel Integrator On-Site Construction Team

Table 9: Mission Integrator

Table 10: Standard USAP communications mechanisms

Table 11: Design Stage Key Deliverables and Decisions

Table 12: Preliminary Design Drawings

Table 13: Preliminary Design Analyses / Technical Documents

Table 14: Bid Design Drawings

Table 15: Bid Design Analyses/Technical Documents

Table 16: Design Funding by FY

Table 17: Design Review Matrix

Table 18: Design Stage Review Summary

Table 19: ARV Key Performance Parameters

Table 20: Total Project Cost (TPC)

Table 21: WBS summary used in USAP capital projects

Table 22: ARV Construction WBS Summary

Table 23: MREFC Estimate Range

Table 24: MREFC Construction Stage Monte Carlo

Table 25: ARV FY Funding Profile

Table 26: Construction Stage Milestones

Table 27: Construction Stage Schedule Contingency

Table 28: Qualitative Probability or Liklihood of Occurance

Table 29: Consequence or Impact of Risk Occurance

Table 30: QA/QC Responsibility Matrix

Table 31: Baseline Change Approval Thresholds

Table 32: Key contracting/funding points and NSF project decisions and off-ramps

Table 33: Schedule of NSF Approval Actions

Table 34 - Information Asset Inventory Spreadsheet Requirements

Table 35: Ice capable research vessels employed by the USAP since the opening of Palmer Station

Table 36: List of ARV science capabilities by ice coverage

Table 37: Time Phasing of Funding Types

Page viii

Appendices

Appendix # Title

1 Science Mission Requirements (SMR)

2 Development Schedule

3 WBS Dictionary

4 Scope Management Plan

5 Scope Delineation Plan

6 Basis of Estimate / Cost Book

7 Integrated Master Schedule

8 RESERVED

9 Risk Register

10 Risk and Contingency Analysis

11 RESERVED

12 Contingency Management Plan

13 Systems Engineering Plan

14 Configuration Control Plan

15 Master Document List

16 Requirements Traceability Matrix

17 Integration and Testing Plan

18 Operational Readiness Plan

References

Projects Change Control Board & Project Baseline Change Request Process (PPI-SOP-0013)

Quality Management Plan (QA-PLN-0002)

Distributed Quality Assurance Plan (QA-PLN-0003)

1. Introduction

The Project Execution Plan (PEP) for the Antarctic Research Vessel (ARV), following herewith, is used to guide the construction of the next generation Antarctic icebreaking research vessel.

Direction for this effort is provided by the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Antarctic

Infrastructure and Logistics (AIL) Section, Office of Polar Programs (OPP), within the

Directorate for Geosciences. The format conforms to the PEP Components table found in the

Research Infrastructure Guide (RIG): NSF 21-107 (December 2021).

Figure 1: Project Timeline for the ARV Replacement Project

The ARV Replacement Project (Figure 1, above) includes the design, construction, and delivery of a new, more technologically advanced and capable icebreaking research vessel that ensures the United States research community has a viable platform for supporting Antarctic science through 2060 and beyond.

The PEP describes activities encompassing all scope from conceptual design to vessel’s readiness for operations at the completion of the post-delivery trials. Terminology used throughout to describe these activities are summarized here:

Research and Related Activities (R&RA) Design Stage – this stage includes

Conceptual, Preliminary, and Final Design phases as defined in the RIG. The design stage is fully described in the Project Development Plan (PDP) (Section 3). The R&RA

Design Stage is also addressed in PEP Sections 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 14. The R&RA

Design Stage is complete after it is approved by NSF after the Final Design Review

(FDR). At this point a contract design will be negotiated for construction by a

Shipbuilder, pending Congressional award of Major Research Equipment and Facility

Construction (MREFC) funding.

Major Research Equipment and Facility Construction (MREFC), Construction

Stage – this stage includes performing construction work, conducting testing, undergoing science trials, and delivering the ARV including doing necessary engineering to transition the contract design into production-ready documents. The construction stage baseline is described in Section 4 and addressed in Sections 5 – 10, 12, 13, 15, and 16. The MREFC

Construction Stage is complete after the one-year Shipbuilder warranty period is complete and after completing science and ice trials, and project closeout. After these tasks are completed, the vessel will be fully transitioned into the United States Antarctic

Program (USAP) and is ready to support science in the Southern Ocean and complete the mission.

1.1. Scientific Objectives

The current USAP research vessels, ARSV Laurence M. Gould (LMG) and RVIB

Nathaniel B. Palmer (NBP), are nearing the end of their design service lives, are not up-to-date regarding some regulatory matters and cannot be readily retrofitted to support newer technologies and research objectives. Acquiring a next generation icebreaking research vessel is essential for the U.S. to continue to maintain a global scientific leadership role in the Southern Ocean. After conducting multiple studies, the NSF requested refining the vision, objectives, and science requirements for NSF’s Antarctic and Southern Ocean research to support this vessel need. These reports build on a series of previous USAP advisory efforts, and include:

National Research Council (NRC) study, Future Science Opportunities in

Antarctica and the Southern Ocean (NRC, 2011a)1

Blue Ribbon Panel study, More and Better Science in Antarctica through Increased

Logistical Effectiveness (BRP, 2012)2

Multi-discipline committee report, Polar Research Vessel Science Missions and

Requirements Refresh Project (UNOLS, 2012)3

NRC report, A Strategic Vision for NSF Investments in Antarctic and Southern

Ocean Research (NRC, 2015)4

1 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13169/future-science-opportunities-in-antarctica-and-the-southern-ocean 2 https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/usap_special_review/usap_brp/rpt/index.jsp 3 https://www.unols.org/polar-research-vessel-science-mission-requirements-smr-refresh-project 4 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13169/future-science-opportunities-in-antarctica-and-the-southern-ocean https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/usap_special_review/usap_brp/rpt/index.jsp https://www.unols.org/polar-research-vessel-science-mission-requirements-smr-refresh-project https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) report, Science and

Technology for America's Oceans: A Decadal Vision (NOAA, 2018)5

OPP Advisory Committee report, Report of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the U.S.

Antarctic Program's Research Vessel Procurement (NSF, 2019)6 below

These reports reflect The Project’s extensive efforts to gather ideas and scientific findings from a diverse community of researchers across the United States. These reports conclude that investing in a world-class polar research vessel with modern scientific tools advances the research capabilities of the Nation and fosters and accelerates uniting approaches to better understand Antarctic marine processes and the societal impacts they have on geology, ecosystems, and climate. The cutting-edge capabilities provided by the ARV enables NSF-supported researchers to address priority research areas that are central to addressing US priorities for the region. The ARV also significantly advances NSF’s

Strategic Goals and Objectives, shown in Table 1, as described in the following sections.

Table 1: Strategic Goals (SG) and Strategic Objectives (SO) from NSF’s Strategic Plan for FY 2018-2022

Supported Strategic Goals (SG)

SG1. Expand knowledge in science, engineering, and learning.

SG2. Advance the capability of the Nation to meet current and future challenges.

Supported Strategic Objectives (SO)

SO1.1: Advance knowledge through investments in ideas, people, and infrastructure.

SO1.2: Advance the practice of research.

SO2.1: Support research and promote partnerships to accelerate innovation and to provide new capabilities to meet pressing societal needs.

SO2.2: Foster the growth of a more capable and diverse research workforce and advance the scientific and innovation skills of the Nation.

The new, world-class ARV must include modern scientific tools coupled with enhanced capabilities compared to those of the NBP. These advancements are essential for polar researchers to further our understanding of Antarctic and Southern Ocean environments.

These modernity’s would also enable the project to better address specific decadal research priorities identified in the 2015 National Research Council report, “A Strategic Vision for

NSF Investments in Antarctic and Southern Ocean Research” (NRC, 2015)6 and “The

National Global Change Research Plan 2012–2021: A Strategic Plan for the U.S. Global

Change Research Program (NSTC 2012)”7. Key scientific questions from these reports are highlighted in Table 2 below.

5 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A- Decadal-Vision.pdf

6 https://oeab.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/Documents/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A- Decadal-Vision.pdf 7 https://downloads.globalchange.gov/strategic-plan/2012/usgcrp-strategic-plan-2012.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://oeab.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/Documents/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://oeab.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/Documents/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://downloads.globalchange.gov/strategic-plan/2012/usgcrp-strategic-plan-2012.pdf

Table 2: U.S. priority research questions that rely on ship-based infrastructure

A Strategic Vision for NSF Investments in Antarctic and Southern Ocean Research (2015)8

How fast and by how much is sea level expected to rise?

How do Antarctic biota evolve and adapt to the changing environment?

Future Science Opportunities in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean (2011) 9

How does Antarctica plan to contribute to changes in global sea level?

What is the role of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean in the global climate system?

What is the response of Antarctic biota and ecosystems to change?

What role has Antarctica played in changing the planet in the past?

What can records preserved in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean reveal about past and future climates?

How has life adapted to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean environments?

Critical infrastructure for ocean research and societal needs in 2030 (2011) 10

What are the critical interactions among ocean, ice, land, and atmosphere in Polar Regions and how are they going to influence physical and biological changes?

How are the extent and characteristics of sea ice and icebergs going to change in the future and how can the impacts of sea ice change be mitigated?

The ability to address high-priority research questions in the Southern Ocean requires ship-based access to scientifically important ice-covered seas where few observations exist, particularly during winter months (SG1).

The most critical science drivers justifying an ARV include research capability used to understand (a) the rates and processes controlling the extent of sea ice and glacial ice, (b) the potential outsized role of the polar ocean in the global climate system and carbon cycle, and (c) changes in polar ecosystems and organisms in response to environmental change

(Dunbar et al., 2012; SG1 and SG2)11. In addition, given the vastness of the Southern

Ocean and its extreme remoteness, vessel access is critical for fundamental scientific exploration and enabling as-yet-unknown discoveries (SG1; SO1.1, and SO1.2).

Previous USAP research vessel expeditions showed us it is clear the Southern Ocean is responding in measurable ways to increased atmospheric CO2, but the associated mechanisms of response are poorly understood because of seasonally and spatially-biased sampling resulting from limited access into the sea ice. For example, a 2022 oceanographic cruise focused on factors causing glacial instability near the high-priority, Thwaites glacier region was heavily impacted by limited vessel access due to ice conditions. The Thwaites glacier is one of the most important features in the world when studying glacier dynamics and sea level rise. One estimate is that by 2100, global sea levels rise could exceed two

8 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research 9 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13169/future-science-opportunities-in-antarctica-and-the-southern-ocean 10 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13081/critical-infrastructure-for-ocean-research-and-societal-needs-in-2030 11 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2012.96 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21741/a-strategic-vision-for-nsf-investments-in-antarctic-and-southern-ocean-research https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13169/future-science-opportunities-in-antarctica-and-the-southern-ocean https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13081/critical-infrastructure-for-ocean-research-and-societal-needs-in-2030 https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2012.96 meters (Oppenheimer and Alley, 2016). The potential for collapse of the West Antarctic

Ice Sheet and unstable elements of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet remains the largest uncertainty in projections of future sea-level rise worldwide. Modeling predicts, unlike the

Greenland Ice Sheet, Antarctic region ice-mass loss is triggered primarily by warmer ocean waters that thin ice shelves. Undercutting by the warmer ocean waters reduces the ice shelf buttressing effect and allows for faster seaward flow of non-floating ice into the ocean

(Alley et al., 2015)12.

It is imperative that in situ measurements are made adjacent to the Antarctic Ice Sheet’s rapidly changing ice-ocean conditions to quantify the variability in critical parameters. It is also important researchers have access to areas proximal to the ice sheets to test and refine theories of ice sheet behavior (Scambos et al., 2017)13. Data obtained in these regions increases our understanding of physical parameters controlling ice sheet collapse, enabling predictive models (Robel et al., 2019) to generate more accurate findings. Increased icebreaking capabilities would also provide researchers the access needed to collect essential data on various factors. For example, factors such as how wind forcing is entraining warm seawater over the continental shelf break, through bathymetric troughs, such as to the Thwaites Glacier ice front (Scambos et al., 2017; SG1 and 2; SO1.1).

Having enhanced and predictable future access to high glacial instability regions are key to understanding the factors that control how fast and how much sea levels could rise in the future.

In Figure 2, the left image shows the current operational limits of the NBP with those areas where operations are not permitted shown in red. On the right is an image with the operational areas available with the proposed ARV icebreaking capabilities. In the proposed scenario, all ice-covered areas would likely be accessible by the ARV, thus opening up critical regions for future scientific research.

12 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-060614-105344

13 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.04.008 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-060614-105344 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.04.008

Figure 2: Advancing NSF research priorities requires enhanced icebreaking to move past the current “barrier” presented by the extent of winter sea ice

An increased icebreaking ability allows researchers to access new targeted regions where they have scientific interest as shown in Figure 2 (above).

Ship-based interdisciplinary science is also essential to continue organismal and system-level integrated research to better protect and conserve Antarctic ecosystems and highly-adapted biodiversity that impact global ocean function, productivity, and fisheries.

The Southern Region has commercially important fish species, such as krill and toothfish, and harbors unique biodiversity that functions as a reservoir for a myriad of future discoveries. Native Southern Ocean organisms have adapted to the region’s extreme conditions over many millions of years, and this unique biota is now challenged by measurable environmental change and the direct impacts of human activity. For example, the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Oceans and Cryosphere report (IPCC, 2019) highlighted that warming and sea ice changes around Antarctica in the

21st century may move nutrient supplies south due to shifts in upwelling regions and ocean stratification.

Extended times at sea using vessels with longer vessel ranges and larger interdisciplinary teams are critical to collect the data needed to evaluate complex questions related to ecosystem response. It would also enable functioning in a changing ocean possible for this and other important predictions (SO2.1). Recent results have been uncertain in this regard, especially related to the joint need to facilitate interdisciplinary research teams. In addition, recent results have proven questionable in the installation of long-term, in situ instruments to provide time-series data in a natural environment that can better detect the impacts of ocean changes (e.g. Convey and Peck, 2019). The ARV’s enhanced capabilities enable

U.S. oceanographic leadership to develop important capabilities and capacity to support these types of experiments not only in International Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), but also other target regions which are scientifically important (SG2; SO1.1, and SO1.2). For example, the region in the Ross Sea adjacent to the U.S. McMurdo Station reaches farther south than any other body of water in the world. Here, ocean circulation and sea ice conditions are changing rapidly (Smith, et al., 2012)14, and increased access to this ice-covered sea is needed to study impacts on ecosystems as part of the Ross Sea marine protected area (MPA). In addition, greater access to the Ross Sea and other areas are important to facilitate interdisciplinary studies that combine approaches across physical, chemical, and biological oceanography evaluating the fundamental changes in ecosystem structure and function. A modern ARV provides researchers a needed platform to conduct interdisciplinary research by deploying interrelated suites of modern sensors and autonomous instruments. This action quantifies all elements critical for understanding the polar marine environment (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Schematic diagram of how a research vessel with enhanced icebreaking capabilities integrates and supports a wide array of research platforms and science in Southern Ocean (Figure adapted from Yoon et al.

2018)

14 https://cm.ccamlr.org/measure-91-05-2016 https://cm.ccamlr.org/measure-91-05-2016

Enhanced capability is especially important for evaluating carbon cycle variability over a wide range of temporal and spatial scales (Gray et al., 2018)15.

Today’s ship-based scientific research in the Southern Ocean includes, among other valuable efforts, the need to install and service moorings to monitor ocean properties or to deploy autonomous robotic sampling systems. Newer technologies and improvements in ocean multi-beam and seismic reflection sensors and autonomous arrays, used and deployed by modern ships, now allow for multidimensional profiles of architecture and bathymetry components in fjords and glacier fronts. These advances help define present and past ice sheet dynamics that are unattainable by satellite or airborne geophysical methods. Resulting data can be used to refine ice-proximal dynamic topography and sea level measurements.

Furthermore, the need to collect long sedimentary records, high-resolution seafloor images, and time-series of ocean water properties, to measure circulation changes, document ecosystem variability, and characterize the grounding line requires an icebreaking research vessel’s capability to deploy autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), gliders, and moorings in ice-covered seas (e.g. Smith et al., 2012; SG1 and 2; SO1.1, 1.2, and 2.1). The use of remote and automated scientific systems continues to develop and expand, and these advances must be matched by advances in the support vessels that have access to ice-covered seas essential for deploying, maintaining and recovering these large and technologically complex instruments.

Ship-based science is also important for atmospheric sciences through shipborne radar and ground-truthing data used for remote sensing. Ship-based measurements help to refine important climate models and better understand the specific mechanisms associated with wind change, eddy activity, and ocean-ice interactions. These tools are generating vast amounts of information which is critical to predict the future behavior of Earth's climate system.

In addition to supporting marine science research in remote Antarctic coastal regions, USAP research vessels provide critical science program support to McMurdo Station in the

Ross Sea and Palmer Station on the Antarctic Peninsula as well as other field stations on ice, islands, and land. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) heavy icebreakers continues to support the breakout into McMurdo Station with an icebreaking capability well beyond

NBP or ARV.

In order to provide seamless icebreaking research vessel support in the Southern Ocean and the Antarctic, it is critical The Project stay on schedule. The NBP contract will be extended such that there are no gaps in service, but not indefinitely.

15 https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078013 https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078013

1.2. Scientific Requirements

The “Report of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the U.S. Antarctic Program’s Research

Vessel Procurement”16 identifies the key science requirements to be fulfilled by the new research vessel. The subcommittee reviewed historical science and technical community input on ARV capabilities, surveyed the science community, and provided consolidated and updated recommendations. They verified the UNOLS 2012 Polar Research Vessel

Science Mission Requirements (SMRs), and further expanded and refined the science mission requirements. Table 3 summarizes the science requirements for a new ARV. The

Report was converted and updated with NSF decisions into a SMR matrix (Appendix 01).

The SMR was used to derive detailed vessel requirements which are incorporated into the

SMR Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM).

Table 3: Summary points from the 2019 Report of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the USAP’s Research Vessel Procurement

Key Required Vessel Characteristics

Ability to provide year-round access to ice-covered seas

Ability to collect data and samples within seasonal and multi-year ice

Provide a stable platform for work within and transit across the Southern Ocean

Additional Required Capabilities

High-resolution geophysical mapping (seismic, multi-beam)

Geological sampling (coring, dredging)

Biological sampling (acoustically quiet, nets, trawls, etc.)

Remotely operated and autonomous vehicle deployments

Work boat deployments

Water sampling and water column measurements

Long endurance vessel able to support large science parties for multidisciplinary research

Following significant input from the research community OPP has developed Key

Performance Parameters (KPPs) for the proposed new vessel (Table 4). The KPPs stipulate the quantifiable and measurable system’s capabilities and characteristics are essential for successfully completing ARV’s missions, as identified in the Report of the Ad Hoc

Subcommittee on the U.S. Antarctic Program’s Research Vessel Procurement. The individual KPPs were chosen because each one is a key cost-driver in constructing a new icebreaking research vessel.

Each KPP is linked to a specific scientific mission and organizational goal of OPP and

NSF. The KPPs are limited to those requirements needed to reach the overall desired capabilities of the vessel. Failure to meet a KPP threshold requires an OPP reevaluation of

The Project.

16 https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/opp_advisory/meeting_docs/may2019/RV Subcommittee final report 14AUG2019.pdf https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/opp_advisory/meeting_docs/may2019/RV%20Subcommittee%20final%20report%2014AUG2019.pdf https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/opp_advisory/meeting_docs/may2019/RV%20Subcommittee%20final%20report%2014AUG2019.pdf

Table 4: Key Performance Parameters

Parameter Requirement Threshold (minimum requirement)

Icebreaking The capability to independently break ice

> 4.5 ft at > 3 kts

Meet International Maritime Organization (IMO) Polar Class 3 requirements and obtain PC3 Notation

Endurance Maximum endurance without replenishment

> 90 days underway

Science & Technical Personnel Provisions for messing, berthing, sanitation, and scientific workspaces

Crew and > 55 science and technical personnel

Other requirements for the new ARV that are critical to the success of the new vessel, but are not considered KPPs, are indicated in Table 5. These requirements are necessary to support science and/or safety/Search and Rescue (SAR). Detailed vessel requirements are discussed in Section 7 and included in the SMR and RVM.

Table 5: Other Vessel requirements

Requirements Supports

Science Safety/SAR

Maximum vessel draft to allow for docking at the Palmer Pier

X X

Capacity to transfer 60kgal Antarctic diesel to Palmer Station

X X

Accommodate ≥ 20 standard 20’ containers X X

Full science operational capability in 4’-8’ seas

(SS4)

X X

Routine underway operations in 8’-13’ seas (SS5) X X

Underwater Radiated Noise meets modified ICES 2009 criteria

X

1.3. Facility/Infrastructure

Based on the scientific requirements and objectives described above, the ARV is designed at a preliminary level with program plans describing final design, construction, and delivery. The ARV will be a state-of-the-art, modern polar icebreaking research vessel, capable of supporting year-round science in the Southern Ocean. Vessel principle dimensions and characteristics are described in Table 6 below.

Table 6: ARV General Characteristics

ARV General Characteristics

Length (Overall) 365 ft Science Party 55

Beam 80 ft Crew 29

Draft 32.5 ft Main Deck Lab Space (no vans included)

7,413 ft2

2,375 ft2 (Support spaces)

Installed Power 23 MW Working Main Deck Space

7,7772 ft2

Ice Breaking 4.5 ft @ 3 kts (PC 3) Vans 20

Cruise Speed 11 kts Science Capabilities 50m Piston Core

Range 17,000 nm 36 Bottle CTD Rosette

Endurance 90 days Coring & Oceanographic Traction

Winches

The ARV provides the infrastructure required to sustain life and enable scientific research deep in Antarctic ice-covered waters for extended periods of time, in virtually all weather conditions. These proficiencies range from basic life support functions (berthing, food) to research capabilities and laboratories.

1.4. Scientific and Broader Societal Impacts

Broader societal impacts associated with the ARV include considerations related to

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) education and Presidential Priorities and Directives.

1.4.1. STEM Education

In 2018, the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) released two reports:

Science and Technology for America’s Oceans: A Decadal Vision17 and Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for STEM Education.18 The latter report in particular stressed the need for a “robust STEM workforce for the future,” which could only be

17https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A- Decadal-Vision.pdf

18 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED590474 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Science-and-Technology-for-Americas-Oceans-A-Decadal-Vision.pdf https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED590474 realized when “all members of society have equitable access to STEM education and there is much broader participation by those historically underserved and underrepresented in

STEM fields and employment.” These reports, and other recent ones, highlight the United

States is not producing sufficient numbers of well-trained scientists and engineers to ensure a competitive future for the Nation.

“Polar appeal” provides a unique opportunity to promote a scientifically literate citizenry among students on a national basis. For example, NSF’s successful PolarTREC program facilitates mutually beneficial partnerships between scientists and K-12 teachers who join research expedition outreach programs (Figure4).

Figure 4: Scientists, educators, and support crew on a 2013 Nathaniel B. Palmer Ross Sea, Antarctica expedition

Similarly, embedding film and media experts alongside scientists on research vessels, such as those operated by USAP, has enabled high impact media products. These products include documentary films and museum exhibits that have broadly impacted global conservation efforts by helping to change social norms towards critical environmental issues, making policy change more likely. For example, the North-West Passage project19 was a partnership between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA), NSF, and U.S. scientists to create educational materials about the changing

Arctic that generated over one billion hits for their online educational resources. Similar outreach efforts have been conducted in the Antarctic on the NBP and are even more viable from the ARV. The recent Thwaites Glacier expedition included blogs and educational tools on their website.20

Additionally, as part of the Antarctic Southern Ocean Carbon and Climate Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) project, shipboard scientists collaborated with educators and media professionals to inform policymakers and the public about the challenges of climate

19 https://northwestpassageproject.org/ 20 https://thwaitesglacier.org/ https://northwestpassageproject.org/author/gail/ https://thwaitesglacier.org/ change and its impacts on marine life in the Southern Ocean.21 Furthermore, the Thwaites

Glacier Consortium has developed an educational program highlighting the societal impacts of sea level rise resulting from land ice loss occurring on the West Antarctic Ice

Sheet.

Education and outreach supported by research vessels like NBP are critical for ensuring research results have a broad impact on STEM education and for exciting and accessible outreach to the general population (SG2; SO2.2). Capabilities of the ARV further this goal, and as such, the vessel becomes an especially important community resource for educators. Public fascination with the Antarctic environment and USAP research programs provides a highly effective mechanism to engage the next generation of STEM scientists and foster a robust, diverse, scientifically literate U.S. citizenry to recruit, train, and retain a skilled scientific workforce for the future (SO2.2).

1.4.2. Presidential Priorities and Directives

The Antarctic Research Vessel implements the Whitehouse Office of Management and

Budget, and the Office of Science & Technology Policy’s Multi-Agency Research and

Development (R&D) Priorities for the FY23 Budget22 which identifies R&D budgetary priorities, including:

1.4.2.1. Tackling Climate Change:

Climate Science:

“Facilitating public access to climate-related information”

“Improving observational networks”

“Improving modeling capabilities for local-scale, regional climate and related extreme weather events”

“Disaster attribution science, including potential tipping points in physical, natural, and human systems”

Climate Adaption and Resilience:

“Increasing adaption and resilience, including through integration of physical, natural, and social sciences”

Nature-Based Climate Solutions for Mitigation and Adaptation

“Pursuing nature-based climate solutions, including protecting and restoring…coastal, and ocean systems..”

21 https://soccom.princeton.edu/content/broader-impacts 22 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-32-Multi-Agency-Research-and- Development-Prioirties-for-FY-2023-Budget-.pdf https://soccom.princeton.edu/content/broader-impacts https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-32-Multi-Agency-Research-and-Development-Prioirties-for-FY-2023-Budget-.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-32-Multi-Agency-Research-and-Development-Prioirties-for-FY-2023-Budget-.pdf

1.4.2.2. Catalyze Research and Innovation in Critical and Emerging Technologies:

“Agencies should collaborate to promote world-leading research and innovation boosting American industries and quality American jobs”

“Agencies should actively pursue public-private partnerships, as allowable, that will expedite American leadership”

The USAP is mandated under the President’s 1982 Memorandum 6646 to maintain an

“active and influential presence in Antarctica.” 23 Presidential Decision Directive/National

Security Council Article 26, implemented in 1996, further stipulates the “success of the

Antarctic Treaty and the achievement of United States interests through it rest upon the year-round presence in Antarctica maintained by the United States Antarctic Program, the program of scientific research and associated logistics funded and managed by the National

Science Foundation.”24 Influence is measured by presence. In order to maintain an “active and influential presence" throughout the Southern Ocean and on the Antarctic peninsula, the United States scientific community needs a dedicated state-of-the-art research icebreaker with logistical capabilities.

1.5. Facility Divestment Plan

The ARV is designed to have a service life of 40 or more years with a planned mid-life refit after 20 to 25 years. Once it is determined that it needs to be decommissioned, the standard USAP disposal process is followed (subject to revision), as outlined in the RIG and the OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A Process Narrative, of National Science

Foundation - Antarctic Support Contract - External Property, Plant and Equipment, dated

September 30, 2020.

23 https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/ant/memo_6646.jsp 24 https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd26.htm https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/ant/memo_6646.jsp https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd26.htm

2. Organization

This section provides detail on overall ARV project organization, functional lines of authority, functional responsibility, and lines of communication between NSF and partners.

2.1. Vessel Integrator Internal Governance, Organization and

Communication

Currently, the acting Vessel Integrator is the Antarctic Support Contract (ASC). Prior to the successful completion of the Preliminary Design Phase, NSF will solicit proposals through an open competition for a Vessel Integrator to successfully carry the ARV project through the Final Design Phase and Construction Stage. In order to provide NSF with maximum acquisition flexibility for the ARV, the award instruments for supporting the project are determined by the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support (DACS).

The following terms are used to designate roles of future potential contractors, institutions or consortiums supporting the ARV Project through delivery to NSF.

Vessel Integrator: Organization responsible for the requirements definition and verification, design, construction, and delivery of the ARV

Mission Integrator: Organization responsible for Vessel Operator, science and logistical planning, and science operations of the ARV

Vessel Operator: Organization responsible for vessel operations, maintenance upkeep and certifications

The term Vessel Integrator is used in the remainder of this document to refer to the current

ASC and future potential contractors, institutions or consortiums.

The primary current oversight mechanisms have been those inherent in the Vessel

Integrator contract itself. The current Vessel Integrator processes, procedures and organization are described in this section

The Vessel Integrator organization chart is shown in Figure 5. This organization is designed to be scalable and will expand and contract based on phasing of the ARV project, funding availability, and future award mechanisms.

Figure 5: Vessel Integrator Project Organization

The ARV Vessel Integrator organization has three components with the following responsibilities:

Systems Engineering: Concept development; detailed requirements development;

design; verification; and configuration control. This element makes extensive use of Vessel Integrator personnel familiar with current vessel operations and requirements as well as vessel consultants.

Construction Management (On-Site): Ship construction, integration, testing and delivery. Components of this team will be established during the R&RA Design

Stage to ensure continuity and proper transition to the MREFC Construction Stage.

The full team will be established at the Shipbuilder site to oversee construction.

Program Management & Controls: Establishing and maintaining the cost and schedule baselines; risk management; information security; environmental safety and health; quality management; document control; procurement; subcontract administration; transition to operations; and integrated logistics/warranty support.

The program management and controls team also receives support from the Mission

Integrator; this organization is responsible for science and logistical planning, and science operations of the ARV, and participates in requirements verification.

The program management and controls team is supported by reach back to senior leadership to provide subject matter and corporate expertise to the ARV program.

Corporate expertise includes personnel, full time or part time as needed, from contracts, subcontracts, procurement, legal, export/import compliance, and finance. Expertise is also provided in fields including scheduling, earned value management, information security, risk management, quality, safety, and environmental.

The Vessel Integrator has a comprehensive set of management plans and processes in place; these plans are regularly audited by corporate financial, procurement, quality, environmental and safety, and export/import compliance personnel, as well as by U.S.

government agencies. The corporate processes, systems, and tools used by the Vessel

Integrator are in compliance with Federal Acquisition Regulations.

2.2. Vessel Integrator Roles and Responsibilities

The roles and responsibilities of the Vessel Integrator’s primary personnel are described in

Table 7, Vessel Integrator’s on-site Construction team in Table 8 and Mission Integrator in

Table 9. Not all positions listed are full time efforts but are expected to be drawn from the

Vessel Integrator’s resource pool as needed to support the project. Level of effort is defined in the Cost Estimate, tab Point-Resources (staff) (Appendix 06.1) and additional information in the Staffing Plan (Section 5).

Table 7: ARV Project Roles and Responsibilities

Contributor Roles and Responsibilities

Program Manager Has overall authority and responsibility for the project for the Vessel Integrator and is the primary point of contact (POC) for the NSF program officer. Responsible for directing the overall planning, coordination, execution, and monitoring of project work; staffing; and overseeing ARV’s transition to operations. Responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable directives governing design, construction, major systems acquisition, transition planning, and operational planning to ensure the vessel meets all applicable regulatory requirements. Responsible for risk management, which includes supporting project-wide assessments of technical, cost, and schedule risks; identifying plans to mitigate threats or take advantage of opportunities; and tracking plans to closure. Measured against the baselines and provide timely reporting of the project status.

Project Manager Primary control account manager (CAM). Responsible for the integration of technical scope, schedule, and resources for the control accounts. Responsible for planning, executing, and monitoring technical components of specific control account scope of work within the scheduled period of performance and the allocated budget.

Deputy Project Manager

Responsible for the integration of technical scope, schedule, and resources for their subgroup. Responsible for planning, executing, and monitoring technical components of specific control account scope of work within the scheduled period of performance and the allocated budget.

Administrative Project Assistant

Administrative Project Assistant is responsible for the daily administrative duties related to the project. These duties include: meetings minutes, scheduling IPTs, and providing administrative support to all members of the team.

Document Control Coordinator

Document control tracking will take place leading up to the first review by the NSF during the PDR phase. Subsequently, version control, approval of revisions and official project archive of approved documents will be the responsibility of the Document Control Coordinator.

Development of future documents in the later phases of the project will follow a similar procedure. Until the promulgation of a document, the primary author will be responsible for tracking evolving drafts.