1. technology and computing
2. operating systems
3. linux

COVER SHEET FOR PROPOSAL TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT/SOLICITATION NO./CLOSING DATE/if not in response to a program announcement/solicitation enter NSF 01-2
FOR NSF USE ONLY
NSF PROPOSAL NUMBER
NSF 96-50
FOR CONSIDERATION BY NSF ORGANIZATION UNIT(S)
(Indicate the most specific unit known, i.e. program, division, etc.)
EAR - INSTRUMENTATION & FACILITIES
DATE RECEIVED NUMBER OF COPIES DIVISION ASSIGNED FUND CODE DUNS# (Data Universal Numbering System)
EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN) OR
TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN)
FILE LOCATION
IS THIS PROPOSAL BEING SUBMITTED TO ANOTHER FEDERAL
AGENCY?
YES
NO
IF YES, LIST ACRONYMS(S)
SHOW PREVIOUS AWARD NO. IF THIS IS
A RENEWAL
AN ACCOMPLISHMENT-BASED RENEWAL
840412668
NAME OF ORGANIZATION TO WHICH AWARD SHOULD BE MADE
ADDRESS OF AWARDEE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE
3340 Mitchell Lane
Boulder, CO 80301-2260
UNAVCO, Inc.
AWARDEE ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)
6250001876
NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE
ADDRESS OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)
IS AWARDEE ORGANIZATION (Check All That Apply)
(See GPG II.C For Definitions)
FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION
TITLE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
REQUESTED AMOUNT
PROPOSED DURATION (1-60 MONTHS)
283,092
$
SMALL BUSINESS
MINORITY BUSINESS
WOMAN-OWNED BUSINESS
Support for UNAVCO, Inc. and Pre-Plate Boundary Observatory \(PBO\)
Planning Activities
6
REQUESTED STARTING DATE
SHOW RELATED PREPROPOSAL NO.,
IF APPLICABLE
10/01/01
months
CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) IF THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ANY OF THE ITEMS LISTED BELOW
BEGINNING INVESTIGATOR (GPG I.A)
VERTEBRATE ANIMALS (GPG II.C.11) IACUC App. Date
DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (GPG II.C)
HUMAN SUBJECTS (GPG II.C.11)
PROPRIETARY & PRIVILEGED INFORMATION (GPG I.B, II.C.6)
Exemption Subsection
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (GPG II.C.9)
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES: COUNTRY/COUNTRIES INVOLVED
or IRB App. Date
HISTORIC PLACES (GPG II.C.9)
SMALL GRANT FOR EXPLOR. RESEARCH (SGER) (GPG II.C.11)
PI/PD DEPARTMENT
PI/PD POSTAL ADDRESS
Dept. of Earth, Atm. & Planetary Scis.
PI/PD FAX NUMBER
617-253-1699
NAMES (TYPED)
HIGH RESOLUTION GRAPHICS/OTHER GRAPHICS WHERE EXACT COLOR
REPRESENTATION IS REQUIRED FOR PROPER INTERPRETATION (GPG I.E.1)
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Room 54-622
Cambridge, MA 02139
United States
High Degree
Yr of Degree
Telephone Number
Electronic Mail Address
PH.D
1983
617-253-5941
[email protected]
MS
1977
303-497-8042
[email protected]
PI/PD NAME
Thomas A Herring
CO-PI/PD
Wayne Shiver
CO-PI/PD
CO-PI/PD
CO-PI/PD
NSF Form 1207 (10/00)
Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATION PAGE
Certification for Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators:
I certify to the best of my knowledge that:
(1) the statements herein (excluding scientific hypotheses and scientific opinions) are true and complete, and
(2) the text and graphics herein as well as any accompanying publications or other documents, unless otherwise indicated, are the original work of the
signatories or individuals working under their supervision. I agree to accept responsibility for the scientific conduct of the project and to provide the
required progress reports if an award is made as a result of this proposal.
I understand that the willful provision of false information or concealing a material fact in this proposal or any other communication submitted to NSF is a
criminal offense (U.S.Code, Title 18, Section 1001).
Name (Typed)
Signature
Social Security No.*
Thomas A Herring
Co-PI/PD
Wayne Shiver
Co-PI/PD
Co-PI/PD
Co-PI/PD
Date
SSNs are confidential
and are not displayed
*ON FASTLANE SUBMISSIONS*
PI/PD
Certification for Authorized Organizational Representative or Individual Applicant:
By signing and submitting this proposal, the individual applicant or the authorized official of the applicant institution is: (1) certifying that
statements made herein are true and complete to the best of his/her knowledge; and (2) agreeing to accept the obligation to comply with NSF
award terms and conditions if an award is made as a result of this application. Further, the applicant is hereby providing certifications
regarding debarment and suspension, drug-free workplace, and lobbying activities (see below), as set forth in Grant
Proposal Guide (GPG), NSF 01-2. Willful provision of false information in this application and its supporting documents or in reports required
under an ensuring award is a criminal offense (U. S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001).
In addition, if the applicant institution employs more than fifty persons, the authorized official of the applicant institution is certifying that the institution has
implemented a written and enforced conflict of interest policy that is consistent with the provisions of Grant Policy Manual Section 510; that to the best
of his/her knowledge, all financial disclosures required by that conflict of interest policy have been made; and that all identified conflicts of interest will have
been satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated prior to the institution’s expenditure of any funds under the award, in accordance with the
institution’s conflict of interest policy. Conflict which cannot be satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated must be disclosed to NSF.
Debarment Certification
(If answer "yes", please provide explanation.)
Is the organization or its principals presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded
from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency?
Yes
No
Certification Regarding Lobbying
This certification is required for an award of a Federal contract, grant, or cooperative agreement exceeding $100,000 and for an award of a Federal loan or
a commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan exceeding $150,000.
Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and Cooperative Agreements
The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:
(1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence
an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection
with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement,
and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, ‘‘Disclosure Form to Report
Lobbying,’’ in accordance with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers including
subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this
certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the
required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
AUTHORIZED ORGANIZATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE
SIGNATURE
DATE
NAME/TITLE (TYPED)
TELEPHONE NUMBER
ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS
FAX NUMBER
*SUBMISSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS IS VOLUNTARY AND WILL NOT AFFECT THE ORGANIZATION’S ELIGIBILITY FOR AN AWARD. HOWEVER, THEY ARE AN
INTEGRAL PART OF THE INFORMATION SYSTEM AND ASSIST IN PROCESSING THE PROPOSAL. SSN SOLICITED UNDER NSF ACT OF 1950, AS AMENDED.
Page 2 of 2
A.
Project Summary
The University NAVSTAR Consortium (UNAVCO) was created in 1984 to secure very expensive Global
Positioning System (GPS) equipment for community use in geophysical research. In the intervening years, the
membership of UNAVCO has grown from a handful of universities to over 100 international institutions engaged in
promoting and enhancing the use of GPS for multi-disciplinary Earth sciences research. A Facility was established
to support Principal Investigators using GPS, to test and develop new technology enhancements, and to archive data
and data products for future studies. The explosive growth in applications of GPS, in addition to its increased
precision, have brought the user community to the edge of new possibilities including the proposed Plate Boundary
Observatory (PBO). PBO is envisioned as a facility that would create a four-dimensional image of plate boundary
deformation across the western US over a broad range of temporal and spatial scales in unprecedented detail using
GPS and strainmeter techniques. This opportunity builds on previous success in a wide range of GPS and strain
applications including studies of earthquake dynamics, plate motion and associated modeling, postglacial rebound
and constraints on viscosity structure, global mass redistribution, volcanic processes and many others. These
successes are due to the hard work and ingenuity of many community Principal Investigators (PIs) assisted by the
equipment, engineers, technology developments, software tools, data processing techniques, global infrastructure,
and data/data products made available by UNAVCO.
The UNAVCO community has, however, historically operated in a somewhat distributed business mode with a
loosely-affiliated membership, multiple centers of technical development and facilities support, and leadership
provided through an elected Steering Committee and appointment of a Scientific Director. The primary UNAVCO
Facility has always been operated indirectly by host institutions such as the University of Colorado and the
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR). The fact that the primary UNAVCO grant passed
through these host institutions implies an indirect control of funds and resources by the primary architects of
UNAVCO. There is now a broad community consensus that UNAVCO must formalize its status as an independent
nonprofit research organization and that future grants for activities such as operation of GPS facilities and the PBO
should pass directly to UNAVCO. In addition, the community desires that the focus of UNAVCO be broadened
beyond just GPS. Accordingly, the community has created a Colorado nonprofit research organization called
UNAVCO, Inc. whose new mission is to advance high-precision geodetic and strain techniques such as GPS.
This proposal is the first request for National Science Foundation (NSF) support of UNAVCO, Inc. activities
including an interim President and several pre-PBO planning activities previously reviewed and approved by the
EarthScope Working Group. The plan proposed is for UNAVCO, Inc. to operate with a part time President who
stays affiliated with his host institution while a search for a full time President is conducted. Based on the outcome
of that search, UNAVCO, Inc. will submit a follow-on proposal for support of the President and a small office in
Washington, D.C. The President s responsibilities will include, among others, those currently filled by the
Scientific Director. The goal is greater control of resources and priorities for the community, increased costeffectiveness of operations, and the ability to meet the community-mandated management responsibilities for PBO.
UNAVCO, Inc. understands it has many legal, contractual and financial responsibilities to meet in order to succeed
in this important first step and we very much view it as a collaboration between the community represented by
UNAVCO, Inc. and the NSF Division of Earth Sciences.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
For font size and page formatting specifications, see GPG section II.C.
Section
Total No. of
Pages in Section
Page No.*
(Optional)*
Cover Sheet (NSF Form 1207) (Submit Page 2 with original proposal only)
A
Project Summary
(not to exceed 1 page)
1
B
Table of Contents
(NSF Form 1359)
1
C
Project Description (plus Results from Prior
NSF Support) (not to exceed 15 pages) (Exceed only if allowed by a
specific program announcement/solicitation or if approved in
advance by the appropriate NSF Assistant Director or designee)
15
D
References Cited
1
E
Biographical Sketches
F
Budget
(Not to exceed 2 pages each)
5
5
(NSF Form 1030, plus up to 3 pages of budget justification)
3
G
Current and Pending Support
H
Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources (NSF Form 1363)
1
I
Special Information/Supplementary Documentation
0
J
Appendix (List below. )
(Include only if allowed by a specific program announcement/
solicitation or if approved in advance by the appropriate NSF
Assistant Director or designee)
(NSF Form 1239)
Appendix Items:
*Proposers may select any numbering mechanism for the proposal. The entire proposal however, must be paginated.
Complete both columns only if the proposal is numbered consecutively.
NSF Form 1359 (10/99)
C.
Project Description
1.
Background
a.
History of UNAVCO
The creation of the University NAVSTAR Consortium (UNAVCO) grew out of the early possibilities afforded by
the Global Positioning System (GPS) to measure the movement of features on the Earth at unprecedented accuracy
(cm’s) with a degree of speed and mobility not previously available with other space-based systems. Very Long
Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), for example, measured points on the Earth relative to distant space bodies very
accurately but required huge fixed antennas and sophisticated processing which limited its application to a few
discrete points spaced over the Earth. The major impediments to the use of GPS in its early days were obtaining the
very expensive receivers (~$250,000) needed to collect the data and then creating the infrastructure and techniques
to make the measurements with sufficient accuracy to meet the research goals of the geodesy and geophysics
community. The holy grail of the research community was to make cm-level measurements anywhere on the globe.
If mobile GPS techniques could be developed with this level of accuracy, then the fields of earthquake study,
volcano monitoring, measurement of glaciers and sea level change, and many other Earth science applications would
explode.
In 1984, a group of university Principal Investigators (PIs) wrote a proposal to the National Science Foundation
(NSF) for funding of the first pool of GPS receivers requested by the U.S. Earth sciences research community. The
proposal was successful and the first three Texas Instruments model 4100 GPS receivers were purchased and
UNAVCO was thereby created. The initial emphasis of the newly formed GPS consortium was to ensure the
efficient and fair use of these very scarce receivers. To this end, a set of bylaws were enacted, a steering committee
to represent the broad user community was elected by the first members, and the beginnings of the UNAVCO
Facility to assist researchers using the GPS equipment were created at the University of Colorado. The Facility was
moved administratively under the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) in 1992 to improve
the organizational support available and to promote the atmospheric applications of GPS.
Since its inception in 1984, UNAVCO has grown from six member institutions to over 100 universities and
laboratories. Its primary focus was to support and promote the use of GPS for high-accuracy geosciences research.
While UNAVCO in its early days focused on the beginnings of a GPS measurement capability on behalf of the
university community, many other groups were busy in developing precise GPS measurement techniques and
applications. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
was instrumental in developing improved GPS receiver and data processing technology, in improving the global
infrastructure including precise orbits for the GPS satellites, and in pioneering many of the early Earth science
research applications through major GPS campaigns in South America and Asia. Groups at MIT and Scripps
developed processing techniques still in widespread use. An international group, now called the International GPS
Service (IGS), banded together to implement the global network of continuously operating stations needed for very
precise orbit determination and developed standards and techniques for the dissemination of the data to a global
audience. With this improved infrastructure, measurements of increasing accuracy were being made, over
increasing baseline lengths, over a greater portion of the globe. The early results were simple vectors showing
motions over several years along faults and between major plates, but the door was opening to increasingly
sophisticated models of the Earth relying on combined data sources including seismic, GPS, and other traditional
geologic and geophysical data.
Meanwhile, the membership of UNAVCO grew through the 1990’s as more and more university PIs embraced the
use of GPS in their studies and GPS receivers became increasingly affordable and available. UNAVCO was a key
player in negotiating the increased capability and reduced price of GPS receivers with major vendors over the years,
a key factor in the growth of research applications. The activities of the growing UNAVCO community and its
Boulder, Colorado Facility continued to be funded primarily by the NSF but there was growing interest on the part
of NASA for a multi-agency funded GPS facility. Starting in the mid-1990’s, the UNAVCO Facility assumed from
JPL the responsibility for supporting NASA-funded PIs using GPS and started a multi-year collaboration with JPL
to support the NASA GPS Global Network (GGN), which is a critical component of the IGS network. Likewise, the
UNAVCO community became better organized and sophisticated in its activities including developing working
groups, convening annual meetings, and development of advocacy materials such as posters and brochures.
With this background of accomplishments, the UNAVCO community undertook in the late 1990’s the major step of
organizing itself as a legally-constituted, independent entity, capable of receiving government funds directly. The
emerging scale of GPS-related activities and need of the community to have direct control of its funds and resources
led to the creation in April 2001 of UNAVCO, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation. This step was a look
backward at history recognizing the need to evolve organizationally but it also looked forward to the responsibilities
and opportunities afforded by the EarthScope initiative, specifically the Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO). This
proposal is the first effort by UNAVCO, Inc., the descendant of the University NAVSTAR Consortium, to seek
direct funding support from the NSF to continue its mandate of promoting and applying GPS technology and
capability to understanding the dynamics of the Earth. UNAVCO, Inc. understands it has many legal, contractual,
and financial responsibilities to meet in order to succeed in this important first step and we very much view it as a
collaboration between the community represented by UNAVCO, Inc. and the NSF Division of Earth Sciences.
b.
Examples of Prior Results - Geophysical Applications of GPS
UNAVCO Inc. was formed to advance the application of high precision geodetic and strain techniques such as GPS
to scientific problems in Earth sciences. We present in this section a small selection of recent results obtained with
GPS to highlight the types of problems that are being addressed by the UNAVCO community and to illustrate both
the capabilities of GPS and potential problems that can arise. Extensive prior results from GPS applications can be
found in the 1999-2003 UNAVCO proposal to NSF that is available at the Web URL
http://www.unavco.org/research_science/publications/proposals/nsfproposal2000.pdf. GPS is a system that allows
very accurate position determination and measurement of the characteristics of the medium through which the GPS
signal propagate [see, for reviews, Segall and Davis, 1997; Herring, 1999]. The accuracy of the position
measurements and the averaging time needed to achieve this accuracy essentially determine the applications
appropriate to GPS. In many cases, the desired measurement is the linear rate of change of the positions of points
attached to the Earth, and from these velocities, rates of strain accumulation can be determined. In many locations
around the world, secular rates of change have been measured with accuracies of 1 mm/yr or better. However, it is
becoming clear that in many places, secular motion does not provide a complete representation of the movements of
the Earth’s crust. The most apparent deviations from secular motion are the co-seismic displacements that occur
during earthquakes, the postseismic transients that follow earthquakes, and episodic volcano deformation.
Whereas the measurement of secular motions with GPS is relatively straightforward, interpretation of non-secular
variations is much more difficult. The first-order question often is: does the transient represent signal or noise?
One of the primary functions of UNAVCO Inc. is to disseminate information concerning the origins and
interpretations of non-secular variations in GPS measurements. This activity particularly focuses on those variations
that fall into the noise category, e.g., GPS receiver and antenna failure modes and monument stability, and how the
effects of noise can be minimized. Such an undertaking is critical to future applications of GPS but I soften beyond
the scope of individual PIs. Addressing such fundamental questions is a primary reason for the existence of an
organization like UNAVCO, Inc. UNAVCO, Inc. will specifically undertake those tasks that facilitate the
applications of accurate deformation measurements to Earth science. Through the consortium structure it is possible
for the community to share expertise in both the technical and scientific aspects of accurate deformation monitoring.
To make the point more specifically about what can be measured effectively with GPS, we summarize below several
very recent scientific results from GPS that were made possible by the facilities, equipment, technology, and
enhanced capabilities made possible by UNAVCO. These specific examples relate to earthquake dynamics, crustal
deformation associated with subduction, glacial rebound and constraints on viscosity structure, and volcanic
processes.
Earthquake Dynamics; Izmit, Turkey; August 17, 1999.
One of the best geodetically measured earthquakes in recent years occurred near Izmit, Turkey on August 17, 1999.
Reilinger et al. [2000] report on the initial results for both co-seismic and post-seismic deformations from this
earthquake and there have been numerous papers published since then with most of them making extensive use of
the GPS results from the region. Fortunately, with this earthquake there were 10 continuous GPS sites installed in
collaboration with UNAVCO operating in the region at the time of the earthquake and another 18 campaign GPS
sites that were observed frequently enough after the earthquake to allow reliable determination of postseismic
deformation. The area was also well covered by Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) images before
and after the earthquake. One of the geophysically interesting aspects of this earthquake is its relationship with the
Duzce earthquake that occurred 87-days after Izmit.
An example of the site coverage and some of the modeling results for this earthquake are shown in Figure C.1. The
figure shows a comparison of the observed postseismic motions 80-days after the earthquake with one dynamic
model calculation (reproduced, Figure 6, from [Hearn et al., 2001]. The particular viscoelastic model used in this
case is only one example of the types of models being tested with these data. There are places where this model
does not fit the measurements well while other models do fit the measurements, but in general no models are
completely consistent with the GPS results at this time.
Figure C.1. Observed and one particular model for postseismic motions after the Izmit earthquake (reprocessed
from Hearn et al. [2001]).
One of the primary applications of models for postseismic deformation is to assess how the occurrence of an
earthquake affects the stress and the probability of an earthquake occurring on other faults in the region.
Qualitatively, the occurrence of the Izmit earthquake changed the stress regime in the region of the Duzce
earthquake so as to make this section of the fault more likely to rupture [Parsons et al., 2000]. However, there is still
much that is not understood about the processes that occur immediately after and in the months-to-years following
earthquakes. Only recently have there been data sets available that allow these processes to be studied in both space
and time.
The application of GPS in areas of seismic hazard allows unprecedented insights into the dynamics of earthquakes.
Over the years, UNAVCO has sought to ensure that data from such events, and GPS data in general, are available to
all in the scientific community through the development of the GPS Seamless Archive. Increasingly it has become
clear that not only data but also processed results should be disseminated as widely as possible. The complexity and
detail available from the Izmit earthquake is just one example where many investigators could use these results to
develop better dynamic models of the earthquake process.
Crustal Deformation in a Subduction Zone; Alaska Transient Anomaly
Southern Alaska is one of the premier locations in the world for the study of crustal deformation associated with
subduction. The 1964 Alaska earthquake (Mw 9.2) was the second largest ever recorded instrumentally. The rupture
zone was about 700 km long and 150-250 km wide, with an average slip of 15-20 meters. GPS results for the
contemporary (1992-1999) deformation show significant spatial variations in present-day deformation across the
region that can be explained by a combination of heterogeneity in the coupling of the shallow seismogenic zone and
rapid continuing postseismic deformation. The pattern of deformation is not static in time. Fifteen survey-mode
GPS sites supported by UNAVCO show a change in velocities of about 20-30 mm/year starting in early or mid-1998
(Figure C.2). Sites that were moving northward prior to 1998 began to move rapidly southward. Elsewhere in
southern Alaska the velocities of all sites are constant in time, except for one site in Homer on the Kenai Peninsula
which also shows a significant change in time. The area where a temporal change in velocity is seen lies above an
edge of the inferred postseismic transient. Coupling models for 1992-1997 and 1997-2000, show that the major
change is postseismic creep on an area roughly 100 by 150 km2 north of Anchorage in the 1997-2000 model that is
absent in the pre-1997 model. A significant area of the plate interface that had been creeping at the average rate of
plate motion suddenly accelerated to approximately twice the rate of plate motion. It is not known whether this
change occurred over a period of seconds, hours, days, or months because of the discrete sampling of the time series
but it most likely occurred over a time period less than several months. Inspection of station position time series
shows that there was not a significant offset due to a seismic or aseismic event, but the absence of continuous GPS
data before late 1998 does not allow the time at which the velocities changed to be determined. Some of the
transient nature seems to be continuing because the time series for some sites is slightly non-linear, with the rate of
southward motion perhaps slowing down in the most recent data.
208˚
62˚
209˚
210˚
211˚
212˚
62˚
km
0
50
30 mm/year
20 mm/year
10 mm/year
61˚
208˚
61˚
209˚
210˚
211˚
212˚
Figure C.2. Velocities relative to North America for the time periods 1992-1997 (black arrows) and 1997-2000
(white arrows), with 95% confidence ellipses. All sites with horizontal velocity uncertainties less than 5 mm/year
are shown.
The physical phenomena occurring in this area and their implications about future earthquakes are not understood.
Given the wide spread nature of the change, it is unlikely that it is GPS equipment related, nor is the reference frame
likely to be the origin given that sites outside the region do not show this change. This area is one of the focus areas
for PBO and should yield insights into subduction zone plate coupling and the dynamics of subduction zones.
Glacial Rebound and Constraints on Viscosity Structure
The enormous ice sheets of the last glacial period left their imprint throughout northern North America and
Scandinavia. Their effects can be seen in numerous geological features which hold clues, not only to the ice sheet
extent and eventual retreat but also to how the Earth has responded to these varying loads. This response depends
critically on the Earth's viscosity profile. In fact, observations of this glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) process
provide what are arguably the best existing constraints on the global-scale viscosity of the Earth's mantle. These
viscosity values have important implications for mantle convection, at least to the extent that the mantle can be
represented as a Newtonian fluid during the convective process.
In Fennoscandia, GPS data have been used to determine the three-dimensional (i.e., horizontal and vertical) crustal
velocity field associated with the glacial isostatic adjustment process. UNAVCO supported several observational
campaigns for this project and many of these campaign sites have been converted to continuous GPS sites. This
region which comprises the modern countries of Sweden, Norway, and Finland was nearly completely glaciated
during the last ice age cycle. Previously, relative vertical crustal deformation rates were inferred from the tidegauge record or leveling. Some information regarding the "absolute" vertical rates was available from gravity
observations, but only over a very sparse network. No observations had ever been obtained regarding horizontal
motions, with the exception of some previous space geodetic observations, again on a very sparse network from
which the GIA pattern was not evident. Johansson et al. [2001] used the GPS data obtained on the new dense
network to make the first dense map of GIA deformation in Fennoscandia (Figure C.3).
The Fennoscandian velocity field can be used to constrain the profile of viscosity deep in the mantle [Wahr and
Davis, 2001]. In a preliminary study, Milne et al. [2001] used these observations to determine a lower bound on the
average viscosity in the upper mantle (above a depth of 670 km) of 4 x 10^20 Pa s and bounds on the thickness of
the elastic lithosphere of 90-170 km. Sensitivity to the viscosity of the lower mantle is weaker; Milne et al. [2001]
placed (95% confidence) limits on the average viscosity of the lower mantle of 5 x 10^21-5 x 10^22 Pa s. These
model values were also shown to satisfy independent constraints related to the geological record of Fennoscandian
uplift.
The Fennoscandian GPS velocity field is a rich data set. In addition to the mantle viscosity study, Milne et al.
[2001] used these data to determine the first model-insensitive set of GIA-corrected sea-level rates for Fennoscandia
and obtained a regional sea-level rise of 2.1 +/- 0.3 mm/yr. Moreover, the residual (best-fit GIA model subtracted)
horizontal crustal velocity field ruled out ongoing Fennoscandian neotectonic motions at levels greater than 1
mm/yr. Davis et al. [2001] outline an approach to use the GPS data to determine a more accurate model for the
history of the Fennoscandian ice sheet. Such a study would not only result in an improved GIA analysis using
geodetic data, but it would also provide constraints on otherwise poorly known paleoclimate parameters.
The continuing measurements in this area are supported mainly by the local countries and serve local infrastructure
needs as well as addressing the scientific questions raised above. As the secular velocity estimates in this area
improve in accuracy, it will be possible to make finer discriminations between models of viscosity structure in the
region. In time, these models can be compared to those obtained in seismically active region to address questions
concerning the differences in rheology between active and non-active seismic regions.
Figure C.3. (a) Radial and (b) horizontal rates from the Johansson et al. [2001] study (after Milne et al. [2001]).
The error bars in (a) show the 1-sigma uncertainties. The error ellipses (b) are 1-sigma.
Volcanic Processes on a Local Scale; Kilauea Volcano; January 30, 1997 Dike Intrusion
Continuous GPS measurements preceding the January 30, 1997 eruption on Kilauea volcano, Hawaii, constrain the
temporal evolution of deformation associated with dike propagation in unprecedented detail [Owen et al., 2000].
Figure C.4 shows the horizontal displacements spanning the intrusion/eruption as determined from a combination of
campaign and permanent GPS data. Rift extension due to dike emplacement and contraction due to deflation of a
shallow magma chamber beneath the summit of Kilauea are clearly visible in the data. The dike inferred from
nonlinear inversion of the GPS data is 2.0 m thick, aligned with the surface fissures, and dips steeply to the south.
Owen et al. [2000] showed that extension between the GPS stations NUPM and KTPM (Figure C.5) began nearly
coincidentally with the onset of tremors, approximately eight hours before the eruption. NUPM, located north of the
East Rift Zone (ERZ), displaced to the north, while KTPM, and KAEP located south of the ERZ, displaced to the
south, consistent with dike intrusion into the rift. The extension began rapidly and then slowed with time, even
before the onset of the eruption. Segall [2001] showed that the displacement time history places strong constraints
on the growth of the dike prior to and during the eruption.
Figure C.4. The horizontal displacements spanning the intrusion/eruption as determined from a combination of
campaign and permanent GPS data.
Figure C.5. Extension between the GPS stations NUPM and KTPM.
Volcanic areas of this type show a wide variety of non-secular position variations that can be directly related to
magma flow at depth. Continued monitoring here and comparisons between the types of motions seen at other
volcanoes will lead to a better understanding of the dynamics of volcanic systems and potentially may lead to
precursory observations of a major volcanic event.
Volcanic and Tectonic Processes on a Regional Scale; Long-term GPS Measurements of the Yellowstone
Hotspot
The Yellowstone hotspot region includes a 16 Ma, 300 km by 800 km region of active volcanism and tectonics (the
Yellowstone-Snake River Plain System, YSRP) that interacts profoundly with the overlying North American plate.
Active geologic processes associated with the hotspot have affected fully 30% of the northwestern U.S. Tectonically
the YSRP encompasses the aseismic Snake River Plains (SRP) and a surrounding tectonic parabola of high
seismicity and active faulting including the 1959 M 7.5 Hebgen Lake event, the largest historic Basin-Range
earthquake. The University of Utah, with considerable support from the UNAVCO Facility, observed a 140-station
campaign GPS network in 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993 1995 and 2000 and operates a 13-station continuous GPS
network (Figure C.6).
At Yellowstone, unprecedented temporal deformation of the caldera includes more than 1 m of uplift (1923-1985
revealed by precise leveling), followed by an unexpected change to subsidence in 1985 observed by GPS with
caldera contraction up to 1.5 cm/yr. This deformation pattern was followed by an unexpected change, return to uplift
beginning in 1995, measured by GPS and InSAR and coincident with notable increases in seismicity – the definition
of a “living, breathing” caldera. Regionally, the Yellowstone Plateau exhibits 4 to 5 mm/yr of NE extension that
added to aseismic SRP NE extension but is reduced to 2 mm/yr across the Snake River Plain. Focused studies of the
Hebgen Lake fault revealed that from geodetic observations begun in 1972, up to 6.1 mm/yr of horizontal NE
extension that has decayed to ~3.9 mm/yr by 2000 based on GPS campaigns. Analytic models of these data show an
exponential decay that can be fit by gravitational relaxation for a 30-50 yr Maxwell time. Faults, post caldera
volcanic vents and parallel NW alignments of earthquakes across the Yellowstone caldera, however, reveal a
dominant pattern of NE extension of up to 4-5 mm/yr. On the other hand, a decade of precise leveling and campaign
GPS measurements across the Teton fault, adjacent to Yellowstone, showed an unexpected signal of hanging-wall
uplift of up to 1.5 cm and regional NW extension, opposite to that expected to normal fault loading. The results
suggest that interseismic loading rates for normal faults, commonly assumed to be linear, must be evaluated on a
site-specific basis. Also, time-space clustering, fault stress interaction and joint volcano-earthquake occurrence need
to be incorporated into earthquake hazard evaluations.
Again in the Yellowstone region, much of the motion is secular but transient events have occurred and will likely
occur in the future. In areas of active volcanism, real-time communication of data is important and is another area in
which the community shares resources and expertise. In this case, we also see the benefits of shared data. The data
from the BARGEN network, installed by CalTech with UNAVCO support to study the Basin and Range Province,
provide important control for the YSRP network. The network has also taken advantage of the mix of continuous
GPS to provide temporal coverage and campaign GPS to provide spatial density.
Figure C.6. Tectonic setting and regional GPS velocities and fault slip rates for the Yellowstone Hotspot, 19872000.
c.
Organization and Management Plan
The prior successes of the UNAVCO community as documented above have led to the inevitable step of seeking an
independent entity for coordination of future activities, especially at the proposed scale of the PBO. Recognizing
the need, however, to ramp up the activities of UNAVCO, Inc. at a manageable and sustainable pace, a phased
approach has been developed to move from the present state of loose organizational affiliations and management
responsibilities to a more formal and capable independent entity. Under the present structure, UNAVCO, Inc.
operates with a part-time President serving as chief operating officer, a part-time Scientific Director engaged in
scientific planning especially related to the PBO, and a full-time Facility manager overseeing UNAVCO’s primary
operational facility. The elected Board of Directors, currently chaired by Geoff Blewitt of the University of NevadaReno, selects the President and Scientific Director, makes corporate policy, and sets priorities for budgeting and
resource use.
At present, UNAVCO, Inc. President James Davis of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) is
uncompensated, Scientific Director Tom Herring of MIT is partially compensated via a subcontract from UCAR
which is the current UNAVCO grantee, and Facility Manager Wayne Shiver is a UCAR employee. Under this
structure, the elected and appointed officials of UNAVCO, Inc. have no direct control of agency funds awarded on
behalf of the community they represent. The system works based on goodwill and the knowledge that the
community sets goals and priorities through election of the Board and the proposal peer review process. UNAVCO
principals must be attuned to these community goals and priorities or risk loosing support and agency funding. The
GPS research community and sponsors, however, have stated the desire for more direct control of the organization,
management and funding of UNAVCO, especially with the prospect of a large-scale GPS project such as PBO. This
proposal is the first step in that direction.
The primary corporate goals over the next 18 to 24 months are for the President and Scientific Director positions to
be merged into a full time President/Chief Operating Officer and for the position to be successfully filled, for the
opening of a modest corporate office in Washington, DC, and for UNAVCO, Inc. to demonstrate an adequate
accounting system as required by the NSF Prospective New Awardee Guide (NSF 99-78) to receive funds. With the
receipt of the funds requested in this proposal, UNAVCO, Inc. will start a process that will lead within the next two
years to the submission of independent proposals to the NSF and NASA for the conduct of community and facility
activities in support of GPS research, including both those anticipated for PBO and those covered under existing
grants. Figure C.7 shows this timeline in graphic form. The timeline is impressive in the amount of effort required
and the milestones that must be achieved in a relatively short span of time.
search commences
for full-time President
first UNAVCO, Inc.
proposal submitted
to NSF
initial NSF funds
available to
UNAVCO, Inc.
(~timeframe)
follow-on proposal
for President's office
submitted to NSF
UNAVCO, Inc.
legally formed
24 Apr 2001
President begins operations
in Wash., DC; PBO management/implementation plan
submitted as necessary
(~timeframe)
12 Sept 2001
30 Dec 2001
new facility/
community
grant awarded
to UNAVCO, Inc.
begin PBO submit UNAVCO
(~timeframe) facility/community
proposal to NSF
30 Mar 2002
30 Mar 2003
1 Oct 1999
FY2000
1 Oct 2000
FY2001
1 Nov 2001
FY2002
1 Oct 2002
FY 2003
1 Oct 2003
FY2004
new 4-year
award
annual report and
budget submitted/
approved
annual report and
budget submitted/
approved
annual report and
budget submitted/
approved
end of 4-year
grant
Figure C.7. Timeline for UNAVCO, Inc. milestones (above the line) relative to the current four-year NSF grant
administered via UCAR (below the line).
To achieve the goals and timeline outlined in Figure C.7, the following actions must take place. The current terms
of Drs. Davis and Herring, President and Scientific Director respectively, will be extended to March 2002. This
proposal is critical to funding Dr. Davis during this interim period since no other funding mechanism seems viable
given UCAR and NSF Grants and Agreement’s reticence to fund UNAVCO, Inc. activities through a UCAR
subcontract. Dr. Herring’s activity as Scientific Director will continue to be funded via a UCAR subcontract to MIT
using existing funds. A search for the new full-time UNAVCO, Inc. President will commence immediately under
the direction of the Board of Directors.
Assuming the successful outcome of the President search process, a follow-on proposal to fund the salary and
activity of the new President and a small Washington, DC office will be submitted to the NSF in December 2001.
The intent is to approach other university-based research consortia with offices in Washington, DC such as the
Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) about their willingness to sublease a small office. The
goal is to have the President ensconced in his/her offices by March 2002 working on behalf of the UNAVCO, Inc.
member institutions, the broader GPS research community, and the PBO initiative. The primary responsibilities in
the first year of this position will be building a strong member consortium representing U.S. universities and other
institutions using GPS technology, responding to proposal and other organizing and planning priorities for the PBO,
and starting the development of the next UNAVCO facility/community proposal to the NSF which must be
submitted in April of 2003.
The UNAVCO organization last depicted formally in the FY2000 proposal to NSF will evolve in several significant
ways in the next several years (Figure C.8). As seen on the left of the figure, the current UNAVCO organization has
many “virtual” relationships given the distributed work of the community and the lack of a clear and direct chain of
command between the old Steering Committee, facility and other community activities. Once UNAVCO, Inc.
submits its proposal for continuation of the facility and community work currently realized through the UCAR grant,
the chain of command will be significantly clarified as will the lines of authority and responsibility. The President
will be a direct employee of UNAVCO, Inc. reporting to the Board of Directors and the Facility Manager will report
directly to the President (right side of Figure C.8). All funds will be directly controlled by UNAVCO, Inc. All
policies, procedures and practices for the conduct of UNAVCO, Inc. business will be established by the Board and
implemented and enforced by the President.
The issue of how the UNAVCO Facility will be managed and operated in the long term will be decided by the Board
of Directors prior to submission of the next NSF facilities proposal. Several options for operating the Facility exist
including direct management of Facility staff as UNAVCO employees, a negotiated subcontract to UCAR for
continued administration of the Facility, or the issuing of a competitive community request for proposal for
operation of the Facility. The UNAVCO community and sponsors will be consulted as to the preferred approach,
also taking into consideration the cost-effectiveness, efficiency, and impact on support operations of the various
models.
Figure C.8. UNAVCO structure before and after the implementation of the timeline shown in Figure C.7.
The next section provides details of the specific UNAVCO, Inc. activities that require funding support under this
proposal. These activities fall into the general categories of support for the President’s Office and pre-PBO planning
and coordination. It should be emphasized again that funds are being requested in this proposal only for the interim
operations of UNAVCO, Inc. until March 2002.
2.
Proposed Activities
UNAVCO, Inc. must have the ability to operate as a corporation during the interim period between now and the
establishment of a full time President and Washington, DC office if the milestones of Figure C.7 are to be achieved.
The proposed mechanism is for Dr. Davis to establish and maintain the basic administrative, financial management,
and contracts management capability through the use of shared resources at his home institution and purchased
services of a contracts specialist. The mechanism for accomplishing this is discussed in the following section.
a.
President’s Office
Considerable thought has been given as to how most efficiently and cost effectively to meet the needs of corporate
UNAVCO on an interim basis. The possibility of a rented office in the Boston area in proximity to Drs. Davis and
Herring along with temporary, part time administrative support was considered and determined to be impractical and
inefficient. The logistics and time involved in Drs. Davis and Herring moving between offices as they perform
SAO, MIT and UNAVCO responsibilities was deemed grossly inefficient. Also, having paid administrative staff
on-site, even when work might not be available, was not deemed cost effective.
The responsibilities of UNAVCO’s previous and present Scientific Directors have been successfully accomplished
while they remained in their home institutions. Dr. Herring, for example, is funded under a UCAR-MIT subcontract
and his compensation, travel, administration, and computing support is accounted for within the subcontract. MIT
made the institutional commitment to support Dr. Herring in his UNAVCO role. In the case of Dr. Davis,
UNAVCO, Inc. has approached the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) for a similar arrangement
regarding his services as UNAVCO, Inc. President. This approach is deemed the most cost effective and efficient
means of fulfilling the leadership and senior administrative needs of UNAVCO, Inc. while a full time President is
being recruited. The requirement for financial management and contracts expertise will be purchased from a service
that is well versed in meeting government requirements for receiving and managing funds and in subcontracting
according to government regulation.
President’s Duties
The functions to be performed by Dr. Davis as UNAVCO, Inc. President will be similar to those of any Chief
Executive Officer of a research nonprofit organization such as IRIS or UCAR. He will be responsible for
overseeing and participating in meetings of the Board of Directors, briefing the Directors on UNAVCO activities,
and reviewing and approving UNAVCO, Inc. proposals, budgets and operating plans. The Board of Directors and
an appointed UNAVCO Membership Committee will respond to member applications as the organization grows but
Dr. Davis will be the primary interface to ensure compliance with membership criteria established within the
bylaws. He will be the primary day-to-day contact with member institutions and representatives in all matters
related to UNAVCO business. Finally, Dr. Davis will ensure UNAVCO, Inc. is operating in accordance with its
bylaws and all applicable laws of the State of Colorado.
Additional duties for Dr. Davis include being the primary interface with NSF in ensuring that the financial
management system previously established meets NSF Grants and Agreement’s requirements for receipt of funds.
This will require the selection and managing of the service that will maintain the system and represent UNAVCO in
any required reviews or audits. Preliminary negotiations will need to commence regarding establishment of a
Cooperative Agreement between the NSF and UNAVCO, Inc. for receipt of PBO and other facility/community
funds. UNAVCO, Inc. will have to start considering issues of how its facility and community support issues might
be addressed in the future including how to operate its facility.
The third primary area of responsibility for Dr. Davis will be taking the leadership role in responding to the
community mandate for UNAVCO, Inc. to manage PBO. Various plans for management, operational deployment,
hardware/software configuration, technology development/evaluation, data management and archiving, and
subcontracting must be developed by the community under UNAVCO leadership prior to operational deployment of
PBO. These tasks will be undertaken based on plans developed by the community at a series of workshops that are
described in the next section of this proposal. To be successful, PBO needs a strong institutional tie, visionary
leadership, and solid management. UNAVCO, Inc. is being created by the community in part to meet these needs.
Dr. Davis will be the principal UNAVCO player in ensuring the early planning success of PBO and the future fulltime President will be a leader in EarthScope and PBO implementation. Dr. Herring will continue to provide
scientific leadership as PBO develops and his and Dr. Davis’ responsibilities will be merged under the new
President.
Finance/Contracts Manager’s Duties
UNAVCO, Inc. will secure through the use of private funds the services of an expert in government research
funding, funds management, accounting, and contracts to develop the initial financial management and accounting
system for UNAVCO, Inc. Funds are requested in this proposal for this same individual to be the primary point of
contact for the establishment of a grant mechanism between NSF and UNAVCO, Inc. for the receipt of future funds.
This individual will also in the future execute various subcontracts for other community activities including at some
point the subcontracts for the Seamless Archive project currently in place with Scripps and MIT and the GPSVel
project conducted by the University of Nevada-Reno. This individual will also work with the UNAVCO, Inc.
administrative staff to arrange the PBO workshops discussed below and to pay for services related to these
workshops. Dr. Davis has identified a candidate for the Finance/Contracts Manager firm that is familiar with SAO
and UNAVCO operations, and NSF funding regulations.
During this interim period of operations, UNAVCO, Inc. will propose to NSF a gradual transition of funds that
currently go through the NSF-UCAR Cooperative Agreement to start being passed directly to UNAVCO, Inc. The
criteria will be that all facility funds will continue to pass through UCAR and all community activity funds will go
directly to UNAVCO, Inc. This will save costs in terms of UCAR overhead charged on these funds. The possibility
also exists for other agency funds to be awarded to UNAVCO, Inc. so the plan is to transition to an indirect cost
system as soon as practicable, certainly before the next facility/community proposal is submitted to NSF in March
2003.
b.
Pre-Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO) Workshops
In preparation for Earthscope, the Earthscope Working Group in consultation with the community and the NSF has
decided on a number of activities that will advance the rapid deployment of Earthscope instrumentation. UNAVCO
Inc. is taking the lead role in organizing those activities associated with the PBO component of Earthscope,
including several workshops described below. These activities are summarized here and are described more
completely in the document entitled “Moving EarthScope Forward” developed jointly by Southern California
Earthquake Center (SCEC), IRIS, and UNAVCO in concert with the EarthScope Working Group.
GPS Monumentation and Instrumentation Workshop (Co-conveners Tom Herring, Ken Hudnut, and Chuck
Meertens)
The question of monument type and specific equipment requirements for PBO will involve considerable analysis
before deployment. This workshop and the preparatory work in advance of it will provide a means of making
informed decisions on four key technical issues amongst others:
•
•
•
•
the best GPS monument type for a given geologic area and ground type.
type of receiver, telemetry and power systems needed based on available infrastructure at sites.
type of antenna to be used due to both cost considerations and the new proposed L5 civilian GPS
frequency.
desirable electromagnetic (EM) characteristics of sites.
The primary goal of the workshop is to identify and characterize the various sources of noise in GPS data sets from
which the above technical questions can be answered. One of the critical actions is to establish a consensus
regarding the various sources of noise and errors by collecting results from existing analyses of data and then
determining the noise budget. A key question to answer is: What parts of the error budget can be attributed to
monument noise, EM environment noise, local environment noise (e.g., ground water effects), equipment, or longterm systematic errors in the GPS system itself (the "common-mode" error)? Much of the background information
needed for this effort can be obtained by examining studies done for the SCIGN array which attempted to address
many of the same questions, updated with the five-years of data since collected from the SCIGN array and from
many other regional arrays that have been installed globally in the last few years. The primary efforts will be
accumulation and analysis of results prior to the workshop, the workshop meeting where “lessons learned” will be
assessed, a follow-up plan for collecting data to better answer lingering questions, and a set of technical
recommendations to the PBO Steering Committee. The $20K requested here is for the workshop only.
Strainmeter Workshop (Co-conveners Paul Silver, Evelyn Roeloffs, and Duncan Agnew)
Strainmeters are one of the two primary instrument types for PBO and a workshop dedicated to the technical and
scientific aspects of this component is critical for the deployment of the PBO. The workshop will be held in fall
2001 and will be organized by Paul Silver, Evelyn Roeloffs, and Duncan Agnew, with assistance from Alan Linde
of the PBO Steering Committee. We anticipate a two-day meeting with approximately 40 attendees, including the
entire strainmeter community, as well as members of the broader geodetic community who want to learn more about
strainmeters. The following issues will be addressed:
•
•
•
•
•
status of current data sets and observed phenomena
site selection, drilling, and installation
data processing
data management
optimizing scientific return
The goals of the proposed $40K workshop are to develop data processing and archiving standards, standardized
analysis techniques, methods of integrating GPS and strainmeter data, and approaches to meeting the necessary
strainmeter production capacity goals required for PBO.
GPS Backbone Coordination with other Countries (Co-conveners Jeff Freymueller, Wayne Thatcher, and
Yehuda Bock)
Incorporating an understanding of tectonic processes occurring in Mexico and Canada is critical to making an
accurate interpretation of the integrated North America-Pacific plate boundary behavior. To address this issue, two
small workshops are proposed to coordinate PBO activities with these two countries. These meetings will bring
together scientists, surveyors, and government representatives of the respective governments and PBO participants
to find common ground for establishing PBO-grade backbone stations in western Canada and Mexico. The Canada
workshop will be held in the Seattle, Washington area and the Mexico workshop in San Diego, California. The
programmatic focus of both workshops will be to help accelerate measurement programs in Canada and Mexico.
The science focus will be to show how understanding the tectonics and processes occurring in these regions will
impact our interpretation of results from PBO. The $25K budget request will go towards travel and meeting
expenses for both of the two-day, ten person workshops.
PBO Management Workshop (Co-conveners Brian Wernicke and Jim Davis)
UNAVCO, Inc. has been given a community mandate to manage the PBO project in the event it is funded as an NSF
Major Research Equipment (MRE) initiative. The first order of business is to assemble key members of the PBO
community of participants to discuss the organization of PBO management as an operational activity of UNAVCO,
Inc. The PBO Steering Committee has been working diligently for almost two years to frame the key scientific
questions to be addressed by PBO and to determine the most appropriate allocation of equipment resources to
achieve those goals. The community now needs to catch up with the scientific side of the house to make the key
determinations about how the community will actually manage and implement the PBO.
Among the fundamental issues to be addressed are:
•
•
•
How will a PBO Director be selected and to whom will he/she report within UNAVCO, Inc.?
What will be the decision making and budgetary authority of the PBO Director?
How will the community make implementation decisions about the PBO facility?
•
•
How will prime contracts and subcontracts for the implementation of PBO be determined and managed?
What will be the relationship between the PBO Director/Program and other government and nongovernment entities with a stake in PBO, e.g., the U.S. Geological Survey, SCEC, individual participating
universities, etc.?
Other organizational, management, and implementation issues will, of course, arise as the community comes to grips
with the details of how the PBO is to be implemented. The essential first step toward building a community
consensus is to have an inclusive discussion among the interested PBO participants to ensure that we have framed
the correct issues and identify a process for developing approaches to satisfying a broad constituency. The first step
in this process is to convene a workshop with representatives from UNAVCO, Inc., the UNAVCO Facility, SCIGN,
SCEC, and major participating universities. Brian Wernicke of CalTech has agreed to chair the workshop and along
with Jim Davis, UNAVCO, Inc. President, will be the co-conveners. The proposed $14K workshop is anticipated to
take two days and involve a total of ten participants. The time and location will be confirmed with a preliminary list
of participants once funding is available.
c.
PBO Simulation and Network Design
The Plate Boundary Observatory will deploy large arrays of strainmeters and GPS receivers to study plate boundary
deformation at frequencies ranging from Hz to DC. Important goals are to study transient strain events, silent
earthquakes, post-earthquake processes, and time dependent deformation accompanying volcanic eruptions. The
scale and scope of the experiment is unprecedented and demands a careful and thorough design phase. Up to this
point, we have determined the overall level of instrumentation, the approximate mix of instrumentation, and the
scientific targets that have the highest scientific merit, with approximate allocations to each of these areas. In this
next phase, we propose to carry out a formal network design study. This will allow us to optimize the placement of
instruments to maximize the detection and characterization of strain phenomena. Evaluating network performance
will be a crucial part of the siting process, particularly when we are faced with siting limitations. We will be able to
decide between alternative siting plans based on performance. We thus propose a design and simulation phase to
ensure that PBO is as close to optimal as possible for studying the targeted processes.
The important question that needs to be addressed for each candidate process is: How will our ability to detect and
characterize a given process (e.g., transient fault slip) vary with station spacing and mix of instrumentation?
Detection and characterization suggest different deployment strategies, and the tradeoffs need to be understood
before PBO is deployed. One approach that could be informative is to simulate displacement and strain signals from
a variety of processes (e.g., silent earthquakes, transient post-seismic slip, dike propagation) for a given network
design (e.g., mix of instruments and station geometry). The synthetic signals would be inverted using a variety of
inversion schemes to determine how well the source processes can be retrieved. It will thus be necessary to develop
metrics to measure network performance. The network geometry will then be modified and the process repeated.
The preferred network designs will be those that optimize the design metrics for the given candidate process. The
inversion approach should allow for a variety of models and data types, and all signals from the deformation
network should be analyzed simultaneously. Of special importance is being able to distinguish local non-tectonic
processes (e.g., benchmark wobble) from spatially coherent tectonic or volcanic processes.
In all, this task is expected to take a year of post-doctoral time, which is estimated to cost $80K. We propose to
announce a call for mini-proposals for those interested in accomplishing this task. This will take the same form as
the mini-proposals submitted to the 2nd PBO workshop, and we will form a panel to make the final award decision.
Goals of the effort include developing error spectra and error models for different instrument types including GPS,
borehole strain, and long baseline strain; developing design metrics for measuring network performance for both
detection and characterization; developing synthetic source models (e.g., slow earthquakes, transient slip, dike
propagation); testing candidate networks with various sources; and, determining optimal network designs.
3.
Scientific Benefits and Outcomes/Anticipated Results
This proposal juxtaposes two seemingly incongruous elements, scientific advancement and institution building. The
history of the UNAVCO community and the research examples presented in this proposal, however, show that
having a centralized focus to develop new technology and capability can result in significant scientific achievement.
This proposal requests the resources to take the past accomplishments and applications of GPS and related
technologies achieved by the UNAVCO community to new levels. The GPS equipment, engineering support,
technology developments, data processing tools, archived data, and community-building venues historically
provided by UNAVCO will continue. There will be a new focus, however, on greater efficiency and costeffectiveness in operations, direct control of financial and other resources, greater collaboration at the community
level on hardware and software design, production of more standardized data collection systems, increased synergy
in data archiving, provision to a broader community of a suite of data products, a gradual and measured ramping up
of capability to the scale of PBO, and finally and perhaps most important a greater sense of collegiality and
community among the users and advocates of GPS and related technology.
To accomplish these admittedly ambitious goals, the UNAVCO community needs support to create capability,
practices, and its own institutions based on how best to serve its research support needs. This first step of accepting
direct responsibility for receipt and accountability of funds is critical. At a minimum, UNAVCO, Inc. is being asked
in the next few years to mature to the point of accepting and responsibly managing over $3 million in inter-agency
funds per year. If EarthScope and PBO succeed, UNAVCO, Inc. is being asked in the same time frame to develop
capability to the point of accepting and responsibly managing five times that amount of funds. The goal, of course,
is not to manage money but to advance our scientific understanding of the Earth, especially the most complex and
dynamic components of the Earth such as the western U. S. plate boundary. This proposal contributes to both the
detailed early planning needed for the successful implementation of PBO and to creation of those longer-term
institutions essential to the future disciplines of precise geodesy and strain measurement and all the promise they
hold for advancing Earth sciences.
D. References
Davis, J. L., J. L. Fastook, G. A. Milne, H.-G. Scherneck, J. M. Johansson, J.-O. Naslund, and
L. L. Dimitrova, A new method for improving glaciation history and paleoclimate
parameters using space geodetic data, to be submitted to Glacial Isostatic Adjustment and
the Earth System, edited by J. X. Mitrovica and L. L. A. Vermeersen, American
Geophysical Union, 2001.
Hearn, E., R. Burgmann, and R. Reilinger, Dynamics of Izmit Earthquake Postseismic
Deformation and Loading of the Duzce Earthquake Hypocenter, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., in
press, 2001.
Herring, T. A., Geodetic Applications of GPS, Proceedings of the IEEE, 87, 1, 92—110, 1999.
Johansson, J. M., J. L. Davis, H.-G. Scherneck, G. A. Milne, M. Vermeer, J. X. Mitrovica, R.
A. Bennett, B. Jonsson, G. Elgered, P. Elosegui, H. Koivula, M. Poutanen, B. O.
Ronnang, and I. I. Shapiro, Continuous GPS measurements of postglacial adjustment in
Fennoscandia, 1. Geodetic results, submitted to J. Geophys. Res., 2001.
Milne, G. A., J. L. Davis, J. X. Mitrovica, H.-G. Scherneck, J. M. Johansson, and M. Vermeer,
Space-geodetic constraints on glacial isostatic adjustment in Fennoscandia, Science, 291,
2381-2385, 2001.
Owen, S., P. Segall, M. Lisowski, M. Murray, M. Bevis, and J. Foster, The January 30, 1997
eruptive event on Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii, as monitored by continuous GPS, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 27, 2,757-2,760, 2000.
Parsons, T., S. Toda, R. S. Stein, A. Barka and J. H. Dieterich, Heightened odds of large
earthquakes near Istanbul: An interaction-based probability calculation, Science, 288, pp.
661-665, 2000
Reilinger, R., S. Ergintav, R. Burgmann, S. McCluskey, O. Lenk, A. Barka, O. Gurkan, E.
Hearn, K. Fleigl, R. Calmak, B. Aktung, H. Ozener, and M. Tokoz, Coseismic and
postseismic fault slip for the August 17 1999, M=7.5, Izmit, Turkey, Earthquake, Science,
289, 1519–1524, 2000.
Segall, P., P. Cervelli, S. Owen, M. Lisowski, and A. Miklius, Constraints on dike propagation
from continuous GPS measurements, J. Geophys. Res., in press, 2001.
Segall, P., and J. Davis, "GPS Applications for geodynamics and earthquake studies", Ann.
Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., vol. 25, pp. 301-336, 1997.
Wahr, J., and J. L. Davis, Geodetic constraints on Glacial Isostatic Rebound, submitted to
Glacial Isostatic Adjustment and the Earth System, edited by J. X. Mitrovica and L. L. A.
Vermeersen, American Geophysical Union, 2001.
E.
Biographical Sketches
Thomas A. Herring
Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 54-618
Cambridge, MA 02139
Tel.: 617-253-5941; Fax.: 617-253-1699
E-mail: [email protected]
a. Professional Preparation:
University of Queensland
University of Queensland
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Surveying
Geodesy
Geophysics
B. 1976
M. 1976
Ph.D. 1983
b. Appointments:
1997-Present
Professor of Geophysics, MIT
1992-1997
Associate Professor of Geophysics; Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric & Planetary Sciences, MIT
1989-1992
Kerr-McGee Associate Professor of Geophysics, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric, & Planetary
Sciences, MIT
1983-1989
Research Associate, Harvard University
c. Publications:
Geodesy by radio interferometry: The application of Kalman filtering to the analysis of VLBI data, T.A. Herring,
J.L. Davis, and I.I. Shapiro, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 12561-12581, 1990.
Effects of atmospheric azimuthal asymmetry of the analysis of space geodetic data, G. Chen, G. and T.A. Herring, J.
Geophys. Res., 102, 20,489-20,502, 1977.
Southern California permanent GPS geodetic array: Continuous measurements of regional crustal deformation, Y.
Bock, S. Wdowinskii, P. Fang, J. Behr, J. Genrich, S. Williams, D. Agnew, F. Wyatt, H. Johnson, S. Marquez,
B. Oral, K. Hudnut, R. King, T. Herring, K. Stark, S. Dinardo, W. Young, D. Jackson, and W. Gurtner, J.
Geophys. Res., 102, 18,013-18,033, 1977.
Estimating Regional Deformation from a Combination of Space and Terrestrial Geodetic Data, D. Dong, T.A.
Herring, and R.W. King, J. Geodesy, 72, 200-214, 1998.
Geodetic constraints on the rigidity and relative motion of Eurasia and North America, M.G. Kogan, G.M. Steblov,
R.W. King, T.A. Herring, D.I. Frolov, S.G. Egorov, V.Y. Levin, A. Lerner-Lam, and A. Jones, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 27, 2041-2045, 2000.
Other Significant Publications
Diurnal and semidiurnal rotational variations and tidal parameters of the Earth, T.A. Herring and D. Dong, J.
Geophys. Res., 99, 18,051-18,072, 1994.
Surface deformation caused by pressure changes in the fluid core, M. Fang, M., B. H. Hager, and T.A. Herring,
Geophys. Res. Lett. 23, 1493-1496, 1996.
The Global Positioning System, T.A. Herring, Scientific America, Feb., 44-50, 1996.
Geodetic Applications of GPS, T.A. Herring, Proceedings of the IEEE, 87, 1, 92-110, 1999.
d. Synergistic Activities:
•
•
•
•
•
Development of the GLOBK portion of GAMIT/GLOBK
Associate Analysis Center for the International GPS Service (http://www.gpsg.mit.edu/~fresh/MIT IGS
AAC.html)
Associate Editor, Journal of Geophysical Research: Editorial Board Journal of Geodynamics, Journal of
Geodesy.
Chair of International Association of Geodesy, Coordination of Space Techniques for Geodesy
(IAG/CSTG) project and subcommission for combination of results from Space Geodetic measurements.
Scientific Director, UNAVCO, 2000-2001.
e. Collaborators:
(i) Collaborators of Last Four Years
Duncan Agnew, UCSD; Michael Bevis, University of Hawaii; Yehuda Bock, UCSD; Bernard Minster, UCSD; Brad
Hager, MIT; David Jackson, UCLA; Robert King, MIT ; Simon McClusky, MIT; Meghan Miller, Central
Washington University; Peter Molnar, MIT; Robert Reilonger, MIT; Zheng-kang Shen, UCLA;
Seiichi Shimda, NIED, Japan;
(ii) Graduate and Post Doctoral Advisors
Irwin I. Shapiro (currently at Harvard University and Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory).
(iii) Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate Scholars of Last Five Years
Gang Chen, An Nguyen, Monchaya Piboon, Katy Quinn (MIT Graduate Students)
Simon McClusky, Dang Yamin (Postdoctoral Fellows)
Wayne S. Shiver
UNAVCO Facility Manager
3340 Mitchell Lane
Boulder, Colorado 80301
Tel.: 303-497-8042; Fax.: 303-497-8028
E-mail: [email protected]
URL: http://www.unavco.ucar.edu
a. Professional Preparation:
University of North Carolina
Naval Postgraduate School
Geology
Oceanography & Meteorology
B.S. 1972
M.S. 1977
b. Appointments:
1994-Present
UNAVCO Facility Manager
1990-1994
Assistant to the President, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
1988-1990
Senior Program Manager, Science Applications International Corporation
1985-1988
Executive Officer, Naval Environmental Prediction Research Facility
1981-1985
Program Manager, Sippican Ocean Systems, Inc.
1972-1981
US Naval Officer
c. Publications:
None
d. Synergistic Activities:
None
e. Collaborators:
Tom Herring, MIT, UNAVCO Scientific Director
Jeffrey Freymueller, University of Alaska-Fairbanks, UNAVCO Steering Committee Chair
Seth Stein, Northwestern University, UNAVCO Scientific Director
Biographical Sketch for James L. Davis
a. Professional preparation
Undergraduate: Michigan State University, Physics, B.S. (with honors), 1981
Graduate: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Geophysics, Ph.D., 1986
Postdoc: Harvard University, Geodesy, 1986–1987; U.S. Geological Survey, NRC Postdoctoral Research Associate, Geodesy, 1987–1989
b. Appointments
Geodesist, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 1981–present
Lecturer on Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, 1998–present
President, UNAVCO, Inc., 2001–present
c. Publications
1. El´
osegui, P., J. L. Davis, J. M. Johansson, and I. I. Shapiro, Detection of transient
motions with the Global Positioning System, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 11,249–
11,261, 1996.
2. BIFROST Project Members, GPS measurements to constrain geodynamic processes
in Fennoscandia, Eos Trans. AGU, 77, 337–341, 1996.
3. Segall, P., and J. L. Davis, GPS applications for geodynamics and earthquake
studies, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 25, 301–336, 1997.
4. Bennett, R. A., B. P. Wernicke, J. L. Davis, P. El´
osegui, J. K. Snow, M. J. Abolins,
M. A. House, G. L. Stirewalt, and D. A. Ferrill, Global Positioning System constraints on fault slip rates in the Death Valley region, California and Nevada,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 24, 3073–3077, 1997.
5. Davis, J. L., and G. Elgered, The spatio-temporal structure of GPS water-vapor
determinations, Phys. Chem. Earth, 23, 91–96 , 1998.
6. Wernicke, B. P., J. L. Davis, R. A. Bennett, P. El´
osegui, M. J. Abolins, R. A.
Brady, M. A. House, N. A. Niemi, and J. K. Snow, Anomalous tectonic strain
accumulation in the Yucca Mountain area, Nevada, Science, 279, 2096–2098,
1998.
7. Milne, G. A., J. L. Davis, J. X. Mitrovica, H.-G. Scherneck, J. M. Johansson,
and M. Vermeer, Space-geodetic constraints on glacial isostatic adjustment in
Fennoscandia, Science, 291, 2381–2385, 2001.
8. Davis, J. L., Atmospheric water-vapor signals in GPS data: Synergies, correlations,
signals, and errors, Phys. Chem. Earth, 26, 513–522, 2001.
9. Johansson, J. M., J. L. Davis, H.-G. Scherneck, G. A. Milne, M. Vermeer, J. X.
Mitrovica, R. A. Bennett, B. Jonsson, G. Elgered, P. El´
osegui, H. Koivula, M.
Poutanen, B. O. R¨
onn¨
ang, and I. I. Shapiro, Continuous GPS measurements
of postglacial adjustment in Fennoscandia, 1. Geodetic results, J. Geophys.
Res., in press, 2001.
10. Wahr, J., and J. L. Davis, Geodetic constraints on Glacial Isostatic Rebound,
Glacial Isostatic Adjustment and the Earth System, edited by J. X. Mitrovica and
L. L. A. Vermeersen, American Geophysical Union, in press, 2001.
d. Synergistic activities
My focus on the accuracy of space geodetic techniques has enabled me to successfully explore new geophysical applications for these methods. My early studies
on modeling of the atmospheric propagation delay have contributed to a general acceptance that this is one of the most important sources of error. Studies that seek to
improve upon atmospheric models are viewed as being vital to the continuing evolution
of the space geodetic technique. GPS is now viewed as a potential tool for measuring
the wet atmosphere for weather prediction.
The atmosphere affects primarily, although not exclusively, the estimate of the
vertical component of site position. My understanding of these errors led me to propose
the use of GPS to determine the three-dimensional velocity field associated with glacial
isostatic adjustment (GIA) in Fennoscandia. Measurement and interpretation of such
a small geodetic signal had not been attempted before. My experience with this project
led Brian Wernicke and myself to propose that continuous GPS might be used to small
variations in deformation across the Basin and Range. Both the Fennoscandian and
Basin and Range projects have been quite successful.
Our focus on the geodetic measurement of GIA has stimulated improvements to
the theory that is used to predict such movements. The algorithms used to predict
GIA now include effects for variations in Earth rotation, time-dependent continent
margins, and “water dumping,” the replacement of the ice load by the ocean load in
some areas.
e. Collaborators and other affiliations
i. Collaborators: R. A. Bennett (Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, SAO), G.
Blewitt (U. Nevada-Reno), G. Elgered (Onsala Space Observatory), P. El´
osegui
(SAO), J. Fastook (U. Maine), T. A. Herring (MIT), K. M. Larson (U. Colorado),
J. M. Johansson (Onsala Space Observatory), V. B. Mendes (U. Lisbon), G. A.
Milne (U. Durham), J. X. Mitrovica (U. Toronto), S. Nerem (U. Colorado), A. E.
Niell (Haystack Observatory/MIT), H.-G. Scherneck (Onsala Space Observatory),
P. Segall (Stanford), M. Simons (Caltech), T. vanDam, J. Wahr (U. Colorado),
B. P. Wernicke (Caltech)
ii. Graduate and postdoctoral supervisors: Ph.D: I. Shapiro (SAO); Postdoc: I. Shapiro
(SAO), W. Prescott, USGS
iii. Advisees: Postdoc: R. A. Bennett (SAO), P. El´
osegui (SAO), P. Jarlemark (Swedish
Testing and Proving), J. Johansson (Onsala Space Observatory), G. Milne (U. Durham), K.-D. Park (SAO); Graduate: L. Dimitrova (Harvard)
SUMMARY
YEAR 1
PROPOSAL BUDGET
FOR NSF USE ONLY
PROPOSAL NO.
DURATION (months)
Proposed Granted
AWARD NO.
ORGANIZATION
UNAVCO, Inc.
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR / PROJECT DIRECTOR
Thomas A Herring
A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI’s, Faculty and Other Senior Associates
(List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets)
NSF Funded
Person-mos.
CAL
1. Thomas A Herring - none
0.00 0.00
2. Wayne Shiver - none
0.00 0.00
3.
4.
5.
6. ( 0 ) OTHERS (LIST INDIVIDUALLY ON BUDGET JUSTIFICATION PAGE)
0.00 0.00
7. ( 2 ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1 - 6)
0.00 0.00
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
1. ( 0 ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES
0.00 0.00
2. ( 0 ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)
0.00 0.00
3. ( 0 ) GRADUATE STUDENTS
4. ( 0 ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
5. ( 0 ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)
6. ( 0 ) OTHER
TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A + B)
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)
TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A + B + C)
D. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000.)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
E. TRAVEL
1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)
2. FOREIGN
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS
0
1. STIPENDS
$
57,715
2. TRAVEL
19,900
3. SUBSISTENCE
0
4. OTHER
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS
( 69 )
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION
3. CONSULTANT SERVICES
4. COMPUTER SERVICES
5. SUBAWARDS
6. OTHER
TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)
I. INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)(SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)
Funds
Requested By
proposer
ACAD SUMR
TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS
0.00
0.00
$
Funds
granted by NSF
(if different)
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
0
0
77,615
775
0
0
0
176,892
27,810
205,477
283,092
(Rate: , Base: )
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)
0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H + I)
283,092
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.D.7.j.)
0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K)
$
283,092 $
M. COST SHARING PROPOSED LEVEL $
AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $
0
PI / PD TYPED NAME & SIGNATURE*
DATE
FOR NSF USE ONLY
INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
Thomas A Herring
Date Checked
Date Of Rate Sheet
Initials - ORG
ORG. REP. TYPED NAME & SIGNATURE*
DATE
NSF Form 1030 (10/99) Supersedes all previous editions
1 *SIGNATURES REQUIRED ONLY FOR REVISED BUDGET (GPG III.B)
SUMMARY
Cumulative
FOR NSF USE ONLY
PROPOSAL BUDGET
ORGANIZATION
PROPOSAL NO.
UNAVCO, Inc.
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR / PROJECT DIRECTOR
DURATION (months)
Proposed Granted
AWARD NO.
Thomas A Herring
A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI’s, Faculty and Other Senior Associates
(List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets)
NSF Funded
Person-mos.
CAL
1. Thomas A Herring - none
0.00 0.00
2. Wayne Shiver - none
0.00 0.00
3.
4.
5.
6. (
) OTHERS (LIST INDIVIDUALLY ON BUDGET JUSTIFICATION PAGE)
0.00 0.00
7. ( 2 ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1 - 6)
0.00 0.00
B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)
1. ( 0 ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES
0.00 0.00
2. ( 0 ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)
0.00 0.00
3. ( 0 ) GRADUATE STUDENTS
4. ( 0 ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
5. ( 0 ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)
6. ( 0 ) OTHER
TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A + B)
C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)
TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A + B + C)
D. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000.)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
E. TRAVEL
1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)
2. FOREIGN
F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS
0
1. STIPENDS
$
57,715
2. TRAVEL
19,900
3. SUBSISTENCE
0
4. OTHER
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS
( 69 )
G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION
3. CONSULTANT SERVICES
4. COMPUTER SERVICES
5. SUBAWARDS
6. OTHER
TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS
H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)
I. INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)(SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)
Funds
Requested By
proposer
ACAD SUMR
TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS
0.00
0.00
$
Funds
granted by NSF
(if different)
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
0
0
77,615
775
0
0
0
176,892
27,810
205,477
283,092
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)
0
J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H + I)
283,092
K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.D.7.j.)
0
L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K)
$
283,092 $
M. COST SHARING PROPOSED LEVEL $
AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $
0
PI / PD TYPED NAME & SIGNATURE*
DATE
FOR NSF USE ONLY
INDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION
Thomas A Herring
Date Checked
Date Of Rate Sheet
Initials - ORG
ORG. REP. TYPED NAME & SIGNATURE*
DATE
NSF Form 1030 (10/99) Supersedes all previous editions
C*SIGNATURES REQUIRED ONLY FOR REVISED BUDGET (GPG III.B)
F.
Proposal Budget
1.
President’s Office Budget
The UNAVCO, Inc. President’s Office will initially be supported through a subcontract to the Smithsonian
Astrophysical Observatory (SAO). SAO’s budget for this work is provided below as Figure F.1 and includes salary,
leave, fringe benefits, overhead, travel, materials, and G&A. The budget also includes cost for services to provide
for the Finance/Contracts Manager position. The work to be performed was explained in section C.2.a.
F.1. Support to President’s Office
SAO sub-award for temporary president's office
J. Davis (President) 4 months
$32,090
Admin. Asst. 4 months
14,525
TOTAL LABOR
46,615
Leave (14.6%), Benefits (25%), Direct Overhead (22.9%), G&A (11%)
44,480
DomesticTravel (3 trips to Boulder), incl. G&A (11%)
3,726
FedEx, Telephone, Supplies), incl. G&A (11%)
2,071
TOTAL SAO SUBCONTRACT
$96,892
Contract Services
TGB Consulting (Finance/Contracts Manager) for 48 hrs. @ $150/hr
TOTAL
2.
Pre-PBO Workshop Budgets
a.
PBO Monumentation and Instrumentation Workshop
$7,200
$104,092
The requirement and plans for a PBO Monumentation and Instrumentation Workshop are described in section C.2.b.
Participation will be at the invitation of the workshop committee. The budget below reflects the use of the
previously-agreed-to budget of $20,000 developed by the EarthScope Working Group to support the maximum
number of participants. As with all the workshops discussed below, potential attendees will be encouraged to pay
their own way to the extent possible so that all interested parties will be able to attend. The budget in Figure F.2
allows for full-to-partial support for 15 attendees including air travel and room and board for a two-day meeting in
the Boulder, Colorado area. All cost estimates are based on recent experience with similar meetings.
F.2. GPS Monumentation and Instrumentation Workshop Budget Line Items
TRAVEL
Airfare for 15 participants @$725
$ 10,875
Lodging for 15 participants @ $100/day x 2 days
3,000
Miscellaneous expenses (local transportation, car rental, etc. @$50/person)
750
PURCHASED SERVICES
Meeting Room and Audiovisual Costs
1,200
Catering for breaks, lunches, and dinners
3,900
Phone, fax & postage
50
Copy services
50
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES
Workshop supplies
175
TOTAL
$ 20,000
b.
PBO Strainmeter Workshop
The requirement and plans for a PBO Strainmeter Workshop are described in section C.2.b. Participants will be
selected through an open invitation and screening process similar to that used for previous community-wide PBO
workshops. The budget in Figure F.3 reflects the use of the previously-agreed-to budget of $40,000 developed by
the EarthScope Working Group to support the maximum number of participants. All cost estimates are based on
recent experience with similar meetings.
F.3. PBO Strainmeter Workshop
TRAVEL
Airfare for 34 participants @$735
Lodging for 34 participants @ $100/day x 2 days
Miscellaneous expenses (local transportation, car rental, etc.@ $50/person)
PURCHASED SERVICES
Meeting Room and Audiovisual Costs
Catering for breaks, lunch, and dinners
Phone, fax & postage
Copy services
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES
Workshop supplies
TOTAL
c.
$ 24,990
6,800
1,700
1,500
4,624
100
86
200
$ 40,000
PBO Backbone Coordination Workshop
The requirement and plans for two PBO Backbone Coordination Workshops are described in section C.2.b. The
budget below reflects the use of the previously-agreed-to budget of $25,000 developed by the EarthScope Working
Group to support the maximum number of participants. The budget in Figure F.4 allows for full-to-partial support
for eight attendees to the Mexico workshop in San Diego, California for a two-day meeting and for 12 participants at
the Canada workshop for a two-day meeting in Seattle, Washington. All cost estimates are based on recent
experience with similar meetings.
F.4. PBO Backbone Coordination
San Diego Workshop
TRAVEL
Airfare for 8 participants @$700
Lodging for 8 participants @ $100/day x 2 days
Miscellaneous expenses (local transportation, car rental, etc. @$50/person)
PURCHASED SERVICES
Meeting Room and Audiovisual Costs
Catering for breaks, lunches, and dinners
Phone, fax & postage
Copy services
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES
Workshop supplies
Subtotal
$
5,600
1,600
400
150
2,080
35
35
$
100
10,000
Seattle Workshop
TRAVEL
Airfare for 12 participants @$700
Lodging for 12 participants @ $100/day x 2 days
Miscellaneous expenses (local transportation, car rental, etc. @$50/person)
PURCHASED SERVICES
Meeting Room and Audiovisual Costs
Catering for breaks, lunches, and dinners
Phone, fax & postage
Copy services
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES
Workshop supplies
Subtotal
TOTAL
8,400
2,400
600
300
3,120
40
40
$
$
100
15,000
25,000
d.
PBO Management Workshop
The requirement for a PBO Management Workshop is a UNAVCO-identified requirement and not one that was
developed through deliberations of the EarthScope Working Group. The goals for the workshop are described in
section C.2.b. The budget below in Figure F.5 allows support to be provided for 10 participants. The location for
the meeting has not yet been determined. All costs estimates are based on recent experience with similar meetings.
F.5. PBO Management Workshop
TRAVEL
Airfare for 10 participants @$785
Lodging for 10 participants @ $100/day x 2 days
Miscellaneous expenses (local transportation, car rental, etc. @$50/person)
PURCHASED SERVICES
Meeting Room and Audiovisual Costs
Catering for breaks, lunches, and dinners
Phone, fax & postage
Copy services
MATERIAL & SUPPLIES
Workshop supplies
TOTAL
3.
$
7,850
2,000
650
500
2,660
75
65
$
200
14,000
Siting Simulations Subcontract Budget
The requirement for a siting simulation study as part of the PBO planning process was identified by the EarthScope
Working Group and is discussed in section C.2.c. The budget below represents the previously-agreed-to budget of
$80,000. The primary expenditure will be for one year of funding for a post-doc position at an institution to be
identified through a competitive process. The salary and benefits and overhead rates identified in Figure F.S6 are
sample rates that could be expected from universities competing for the position.
F.6. Siting Simulations Subcontract
Stipend
(post doc for 1 year)
Benefits @40% (estimated)
TOTAL SALARY & BENEFITS
University Overhead (25%) (estimated)
TOTAL
4.
$
$
$
45,714
18,286
64,000
16,000
80,000
Summary Total Budget
F.7. Summary Total Budget
F.1.
F2.
F.3.
F.4.
F.5.
F.6.
Support to President’s Office
GPS Monumentation and Instrumentation Workshop
PBO Strainmeter Workshop
PBO Backbone Coordination
PBO Management Workshop
Siting Simulations Subcontract
TOTAL
$104,092
20,000
40,000
25,000
14,000
80,000
$283,092
Current and Pending Research Support
Thomas A. Herring
August 2001
A. Current Support
Source: NSF #9614302 (PI: B. Hager; Co-I's:
P. Molnar, T. Herring)
Title: Collaborative Research: Geodynamics of
Intracontinental Mountain Building in the
Tien Shan, Central Asia
Amount: $1,224,849
Time period: 4/97-5/02
Person-Months: 0 budgeted for year 3;
.5 mo for year 4; .25 for year 5
Source: NASA #NAS5-99007 (PI: T. Herring)
Title: GLAS Science Team Member Study
Amount: $680,000; currently $453,000
through 9/01
Time period: 12/99-12/03
Period-months for PI: 1 summer mo yrs. 1&4
1.5 summer for yrs. 2 & 3
Source: NSF #EAR 9903183; (PI: B. Hager)
Title: Collaborative Research: Vertical
Movement in the Southern Alps
Constrained by GPS and Absolute Gravity
Amount: $282,856
Time period: 10/99-9/04
Person-Months: .5 summer mo budgeted yr 1;
.25 summer budgeted yrs 2-5
Source: NSF #EAR 9912071; (PI: B. Hager)
Title Vertical Movement in the Southern Alps
Constrained by GPS
Amount: $99,323
Time period: 10/1/99 – 3/31/02
Person-Months: no sal. budgeted (equip)
Source: NSF EAR #0001631; (PI: R.King)
Title: Support for Fundamental GPS Research -UNAVCO Facilities for Data Processing
Amount: $175,000
Time period: 8/00-7/04
Person-months: no sal. budgeted Co-I
Source: Univ. So. CA SCEC subcontract NSF
(PI: B.Hager; Co-I: T. Herring)
Title: Continuum Models of Landers and Hector
Mine Postseismic Motions and Block
Models of So. Calif. From Geology and
Geodesy
Award amount: $60,000
Period covered: 2/01-12/01
Person-months: no sal. budgeted for Co-I
Source: Univ. So. CA SCEC subcontract NSF
PI: R.W. King; Co-I: T.A. Herring
Title: Improving the SCEC Crustal-Motion
Map: GPS Data Processing
Award amount: $50,000
Period covered: 2/01-12/01
Person-months: no sal. budgeted for Co-I.
Source: NSF EAR-0106571; (PI: R. Reilinger)
Title: Combining INSAR and GPS
Measurements of Active Tectonic
Deformation within the Arabia-Eurasia
Continental Collision Zone
Amount: $ 80,005
Time period: 8/01-7/02
Person-months: no sal. budgeted for Co-I
B. Pending Support
Source: JPL (PI: R. Reilinger)
Title: Geodetic Improvements for Calculating
Analyzing and Modeling INSAR
Measurements in Synergetic Combination
with GPS
Amount: $68,417
Time period: 7/01-11/01
Person-months: no sal. budgeted for Co-I
Source: UNAVCO subcontract #S0124019/ATM 9732665
Title: Scientific Director UNAVCO
Amount: $113,207
Time period: 10/00-9/01
Person-months: 1.5 summer mo.
*MIT fully supports the academic year salary of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professors, but makes no specific
commitment of time or salary to any individual research project.
The following information should be provided for each investigator and other senior personnel. Failure to provide this
information may delay consideration of this proposal.
Other agencies (including NSF) to which this proposal has
Investigator: Wayne S. Shiver
NSF
Support:
Current
Pending
Submission Planned in Near Future
*Transfer of
Support
Project/Proposal Title: Support of UNAVCO and Related Activities
Source of Support:
NSF EAR-9903413, SPO#2
Total Award Amount: $8,832,037
Total Award Period Covered: 1/15/1999 – 9/30/2004
Location of Project: Boulder, CO, USA
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
Cal: 7.0
Acad:
Sumr:
Support:
Current
Pending
Submission Planned in Near Future
*Transfer of
Support
Project/Proposal Title:
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Total Award Period Covered:
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
Cal:
Acad:
Sumr:
Current
Pending
Submission Planned in Near Future
*Transfer
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
Cal:
Acad:
Sumr:
Support:
Current
Pending
Submission Planned in Near Future
*Transfer of
Support
Project/Proposal Title:
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Total Award Period Covered:
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
Cal:
Acad:
Support:
Current
Pending
Submission Planned in Near Future
Sumr:
*Transfer of
Support
Project/Proposal Title:
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Total Award Period Covered:
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
Cal:
Acad:
Sumr:
*If this project has previously been funded by another agency, please list and furnish information for immediately
preceding funding period.
NSF Form 1239 (10/99)
G. Current and Pending Support
James L. Davis
For the period of performance of this proposal
Current Support
1. “Active Tectonics of Diffuse Intracontinental Deformation” (NSF/Caltech); 1/1/96
–5/31/2; $502,000; 7% effort
2. “Development of a GPS Calibration System for High–Accuracy Geophysical Applications” (NSF); 10/1/97–5/31/02; $850,000; 0% effort
3. “Continuous GPS in the region of Yucca Mt., Nevada” (DOE/Caltech); 11/1/98–
5/31/02; $594,000; 7% effort
Pending Support
1. “Geophysically Rigorous Determinations of Sea-Level Rate and Acceleration”;
1/1/2002; three years; NSF; $207,000; 8% effort
2. “A new method for constraining paleoclimate parameters using space geodetic
determinations of ongoing viscoelastic adjustment due to ancient glacial loads”;
1/1/2002; three years; NSF; $262,000; 8% effort
3. “Geodetic Constraints on Tectonics in the Africa-Eurasia Plate Boundary Zone”;
10/1/01; three years; NSF; $178,000; 0% effort
4. “A study of sea level change in the NE US using GPS and tide gauge data”;
10/1/01; three years; NSF; $327,000; 3% effort
5. “Support for UNAVCO, Inc. and Pre-Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO) Planning Activities” (this propsal); 10/1/2001; six months; NSF; 67% effort
H. Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources
For the duration of this proposal, the President's Office will be located at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for
Astrophysics (CfA), of which the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory is a member. The CfA has numerous
computer facilities, including workstations, automated backup, and Internet connections, all of which and are
supported by the CfA Computation Facility. Office space is provided to all research scientists and administrative
staff. All offices contain phone and computer connections. The CfA has a library containing books and journals on
geodesy and geophysics, with access to all of Harvard University's other libraries.
Other tasks will be performed at institutions belonging to other UNAVCO, Inc. community members. These
members are universities and non-profit organizations that generally have similar facilities.