ࡱ> 8:567 ?bjbjWW  55448{llllCCCu{w{w{w{w{w{w{$~L{Z?!"CZ?Z?{ll{GGGZ?llu{GZ?u{GGjuezl,CNAwja{{0{wJEPdezezC '( G=0T7CCC{{G^CCC{Z?Z?Z?Z?CCCCCCCCC4 T: INTERGOVERNMENTAL OCEANOGRAPHIC COMMISSION (of UNESCO) IOC/PTWS Working Group Two Meeting 01-03 March 2011, MCDEM Wellington Meeting report Opening Nora Gale, chair of ICG/PTWS WG2, opened the meeting on behalf of the host David Coetzee from MCDEM, who has been extremely busy with the response after the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and welcomed the 24 participants from 14 PTWS Member States (see participants list). Reports from participants / member states The chair invited participants to make presentations on the status of their national earthquake and tsunami detection, warning, and dissemination systems. Chris Ryan, co-director of the Joint Australian Tsunami Warning System (JATWS), summarized their actual status and warning services under the JATWC. Since July 2007, JATWC issued roughly 200 alert messages (80% for the PTWS and 20% for the IOTWS) which on average is more than 1 alert message per week, with almost all no threat bulletins for the Australian coastline. Since 1 March 2010, the average response time is 21 min (12 min for GA, 9 min for BOM), and thus within their 30 min target time. The MOST model is used for pre-calculated scenarios and threat assessments are categorized into no, marine coastal, or land threat evaluations to the public. At the community level, tsunami impact maps are being developed to support emergency response and evacuation planning. Australia and AusAID continue to support international capacity building in the Indian Ocean and Pacific. A media guidebook has helped to educate the media. Chip McCreary, director of Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC), reported that the center has improved their warning latency/performance from about 1 hour in earlier days to less than 10min in the last year. He also noted that improvements in detection networks and forecasting now permit better, more accurate warning and information advice. Based on this he suggested modifying the PTWS watch/warning procedures along the following guiding principals: providing watch messages for near-field tsunami events more detailed watch messages which give different alert levels for regions frequently update the TWFP contact details through official channels and reduce the no of fax numbers for one TWFP to one and one alternate to reduce costs slightly revise the format of the bulletins including the placement of a narrative statement in the beginning of that could be translated into different languages On communications tests, PTWC noted that it has not done tests recently because of the past poor response. He expressed his hope that with the implementation of the new secure IOC website, which should allow TNC and TWFP to check and confirm their contact information, this should lead to communication tests to be more effective. In the following discussion JMA confirmed that the contact information of many TWFPs has expired and noted that the IOTWS Secretariat has reconciled differences for the Indian Ocean. Now the Pacific System needs this effort. It was noted that e.g. tools developed and used in Australia/AusAID for the Solomons SOP exercise project for visualization and decision support are useful and should be made available broadly. Some participants asked for further assistance in better understanding the PTWC messages, and its timeliness. It was suggested that the PTWS Task Team on Improved Tsunami Warning Products should deal with the issue and prepare suggestions for the ICG/PTWS-XXIV in May. Sionetasi Pulehetoa from the Niue Meteorological Service reported that as of February 2011, they are now officially members of the IOC and the PTWS. It hosts one seismic and one sea level station contributing valuable data from this part of the Pacific. The Niue Meteorological Service is the official focal point of the country for warnings, including tsunamis and cyclones. Upon receipt of the PTWS messages, the Met Service extracts the relevant information for Niue and forwards the warning to police commission which then is broadcasted on radio and television. He recounted several eyewitness tsunami wave accounts that have helped to build awareness and preparedness. Dominique Raymond from CPPT in French Polynesia reported on a promising sensitivity and performance analysis comparing their SeiscomP3 configuration and earthquake detection system with NEIC-reported parameters based on 3 months of monitoring (M>5.5). Moreover, new warning criteria and procedures have been implemented which take into account a low-level tsunami vigilance which considers potentially strong currents along coasts. Since 2006, seven distant/regional tsunamis have generated warnings (M>8.0) for French Polynesia. He also reported that for the last earthquake and tsunami off Chile they could provide a timely warning which was well accepted and followed by the population. CPPT is developing a tsunami database of scenarios from regional and distant sources; Greens law is being used to propagate offshore heights onshore. He noted that Greens law is not adequate in some locations due to the amplification effects, e.g. in the Marquesas. Tomoaki Ozaki from the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) provided an overview of their national and international tsunami warning system, including networks, earthquake source characterization, tsunami forecasting and threat evaluation, warning criteria, and warning dissemination. He detailed that the national TWS in Japan is based on 182 tide gauge and 230 seismic stations of which 20 are also BB instruments. This very high sensor density enables JMA to issue national tsunami warnings within 2-3 minutes picking automatically the best fit of pre-calculated tsunami scenarios. For earthquakes, they internally also display nearby historical seismicity in order to better decide on the final parameters. The JMA headquarters in Tokyo has a backup-centre in Osaka. For their international role, he summarized the Northwest Pacific Tsunami Advisory and the interim Indian Ocean Tsunami Watch Information. He reported on recent support to Chile, including a two-day training on tsunami warning in February 2011. Malaki Finau from the Fiji Mineral Resources Department reported on their national plan and recent progress in upgrading the TWS in Fiji. He recalled historical events of the last three decades and outlined the earthquake and tsunami risk for Fiji. He focussed on the JICA-sponsored upgrades to their seismic network, data sharing with Tonga, the installation of tools to improve decision-making during events and awareness building activities. He also reported on recent Earthquake Risk Management Committee activities, including the posting of tsunami billboards, identification of risk zones and evacuation areas, installation of sirens, and building of awareness in schools. He noted that the latter was triggered by the fact that during warnings, students went to the coast to look for the tsunami, rather than evacuate away from the coast. Mohamed Rosaidi from the Malaysia Meteorological Department presented the actual status of the Malaysian tsunami warning system which instrument-wise consists of 21 tide gauges, 17 seismometers, three tsunameters and 18 beach cameras. He emphasised that Malaysia installed a siren network along the threatened coastlines which could directly be triggered from their national warning centre (MNTEWC). He also mentioned a fixed line alert system (pre-recorded, automated telephone notifications using a commercial service provider) and awareness and exercise activities. Since 2010, the national tsunami alert messages have been disseminated within 12 minutes. Mathew Moihoi from the Port Moresby Geophysical Observatory (PMGO) reported on the status of their national tsunami warning system development. As reported during the meeting of the SW Pacific Seismic Data Sharing Task Team, Papua New Guinea is currently in the process of re-building the national seismic network of 10 short period (eventually upgraded to broad-band) stations with funding from the European Commission until 2015. As part of this project PMGO will also be upgraded with a SeisComP3 PC system. Once established the centre is supposed to issue national tsunami warning messages to the National Disaster management Organisation, other agencies, and the public. The current challenge is to harden communications and increase bandwidth to accommodate data transmission needs. It was noted that the current seismic stations in PNG fill critical gaps in seismic monitoring for this region. Esline Garaebiti from the Vanuatu Department of Geology and Mines provided a summary of their tsunami warning arrangements. The three key stakeholders in tsunami warning are now co-located in the same building, the Meteorological Service (VMS) as the tsunami warning focal point, the Department of Geology and Mines and the National Disaster Management Office. In-country warning dissemination includes radio, email, website, fax, telephone, and SMS (pending). However, Vanuatu is comprised of many islands so reaching all threatened communities in a timely manner is a major challenge. For the August 14, 2010 earthquake, VMS issued information within 5-10 min and before the PTWC. Problems occurred in telecoms, which were saturated and overloaded, and with panic and public information gaps on adequate evacuation. In response staff training improved, a dedicated media room and line to the President has been established, and better evacuation guidance is planned. Gary Rogers from Natural Recourses Canada reported that their warning services are provided by the WC/ATWC. National partners are the Geological Survey of Canada, the Canadian Hydrographic Service, and the British Columbia Emergency Program (for Pacific Coast, BCEP). BCEP receives the warning directly from WC/ATWC and is responsible for public safety. He also outlined several projects which are set to testing new technologies for operational use to rapidly detect vertical displacement at the coastline during earthquakes. The use of differential GPS and the vertical displacement deducted from smart strong motion sensors seem to be promising new technologies for future operational use. Data are free and available to all in real-time. They also used the existing cabled ocean observatory NEPTUNE for including deep-see pressure and seismic sensors which turn out to be as nice to have but rather expensive. Nora Gale from GNS, New Zealand, reported on their national efforts and arrangements. The national authority responsible for tsunami warnings and the TWFP is MCDEM while GNS is advisory for the technical aspects. On average, there are two earthquakes per year that the national warning system responded to. She described their tsunami warning response once the event is detected. New Zealand has similar warning thresholds and threat descriptions as Australia. During the 2010 Chile tsunami was effected and several harbours and jetties (e.g. Port Chalmers (Christchurch)) were flooded; luckily, no one was hurt. Chris Ryan reported on the recent ICG/IOTWS Working Group 2 and RTWP Task Team meetings in Hyderabad and outlined their decisions and recommendations. Until now the Indian Ocean Regional Tsunami Watch Providers (RTWP) issued watch messages simultaneously, and much work has been done over the last months and even years to harmonize the products to ensure consistency in information and thereby minimize confusion. A RTWP User Guide by each regional centre will be made available. The three centers from the region - India, Australia, and Indonesia, will officially take over the regional watch service so far provided by PTWC and NWPTWC by October this year and their advice messages will be distributed through GTS, fax, and email. Additionally a secure website will provide the full text of the message. He also reported that one training workshop has been held with a goal to have the RTWP system be used in the IOWave2011 planned for October 12. Indian Ocean RTWP Services will be considered operational afterward, with the interim services (PTWC and JMA) operating in shadow mode until at least the following ICG session in 2012. Review of WG2 Actions in PTWS Implementation Plan Nora Gale introduced the agenda item and the group discussed the action items: Detection, Warning and Dissemination in detail. Secretariat/ITIC actions: It was suggested that the PTWS Implementation Plan needs a glossary to ensure a self-contained document (IOC Secretariat). Add the actual TNC and TWFP contact details to the ICG/PTWS session invitation for Beijing for each individual member state and ask to revise the contact information (Secretariat). ITIC will provide a listing of recently conducted trainings for the ICG session in Beijing. Priority Action Items Working Group 2 The Group reviewed the priority action items to assess the activity status. PTWS Priority Actions in Detection, Warning, and Dissemination Perform. IndicatorsBenchmark / Status1. In an ongoing process the Secretariat shall secure that all PTWS countries have formally defined their TWFP and TNC and/or reviewed and updated their TWFP and TNC details. TWFP information should be forwarded to PTWC, NWPTAC, and WC/ATWC. Number of MSs that have submitted TWFP and TNCBefore ICG/PTWS-XXIV, all MSs have submitted TWFP and TNC information and/or updated contacts2. Detection: Address operational limitations of PTWS warning centers as indicated in the PTWS Operational Users Guide with specific focus on improving seismic data availability for monitoring and more quickly evaluating earthquakes, especially to be able warn against local tsunamis. Priority stations identified through sensitivity and gap analysis.Increase in number of seismic stationsBy end of IP period, 3-4 additional seismometers installed & operational. PTWC has completed a broad sensitivity gap analysis for the location of earthquake using the 1st-arriving P-waves. It did not include latency and time required for magnitude estimation. PTWC, working with GA, agreed to provide a summary report of their work, and recommendations on gaps & priority stations for presentation to the ICG/PTWS-XXIV. 3. Detection: Address operational limitations of PTWS warning centers as indicated in the PTWS Operational Users Guide with specific focus on improving seismic source characterization techniques to more quickly evaluate the tsunamigenic potential of large earthquakes.Number of techniques available and appliedTime to analyze seismic data is shortened as compared to the current timeframe? W-phase has been implemented. 3D Greens functions in order to compute finite fault futures. Mm computed on growing window does work accurately although no improvement in warning latency. For the Samoa tsunami, at a distance of 21 deg, it takes about 10 min and as no P waves are used there is no initial underestimate of magnitude. GA (Dan Jaksa) volunteered to compile methods and techniques for presentation to the ICG/PTWS-XXIV. 4. Detection: Address operational limitations of PTWS warning centers as indicated in the PTWS Operational Users Guide with specific focus on improving sea level data availability for monitoring and more quickly evaluating the tsunami threat. Priority stations identified through sensitivity and gap analysis.Increase in number of stations and transmission intervalsBy end of IP period, 3-4 additional tide gauges installed/upgraded, and operational. PTWC conducted a sensitivity and gap analysis, in consultation with GLOSS and the University of Hawaii. A summary report of their work, and recommendations on gaps and priority stations to be presented at ICG/PTWS-XXIV. 5. Warning and dissemination: Enhance tsunami advisory products to improve their clarity, understanding and speed of dissemination, and to ensure consistency with products and terminology used globally. Reference Recommendation PTWS-XXIII.1Number of appropriate changes to enhance productsBy end of IP period, tsunami products simplified and harmonized where appropriate. PTWC developed some tsunami products which will be discussed at a meeting of PTWS regional TWCs and identify critical information needed for tsunami warning. PTWC will harmonize with TOWS WG. 6. Dissemination: In coordination with the PTWS Technical Secretariat, establish a reliable and secure mechanism for Member States to regularly review and update their TWFP and report to the IOC. (Reference Recommendation PTWS-XXIII.3). Implement similar or the same mechanism for use in the regular communication tests conducted by PTWC, NWPTAC, and WC/ATWC.TWFP information available to countriesBy end of IP period, TWFP review mechanism implemented, and used for communications test. Standard forms for notification of TWFP and TNC exist and should be used. PTWC, JMA, and PTWS Secretariat will review the present official forms for formal, as well as practical, application. The Secretariat will attach the current TNC and TWFP information to the ICG/PTWS-XXIV invitation. 7. Dissemination: Establish and recommend reliable mechanisms for Member States to receive information from the regional to the national tsunami warning centers, e.g. from PTWC, NWPTAC, and WC/ATWC to TWFPs according to recommendations in the PTWS Operational Users Guide. (Ref. Recommendation PTWS-XXIII.8). Number of reliable mechanismsBy end of IP period, countries implemented at least 2 reliable mechanisms To be implemented by the Emergency Communication Task Team8. Dissemination: Identify and recommend the most reliable mechanisms of the available operational technologies for Member States to disseminate information from national authorities to the general public (Ref. Recomm. PTWS-XXIII.8) Number of reliable mechanisms By end of IP period, countries implemented at least 1 reliable mechanism To be implemented by the Emergency Communication Task Team9. Training: MS in collaboration with the Technical Secretariat, ITIC and other appropriate regional organizations provide opportunities for training and building in-country capacity in earthquake and tsunami detection, warning, and alert dissemination. Such training could include, but is not limited to, the development of national Standard Operational Procedures (SOPs) for tsunami warning.Number of trainings Number of trained personnelBy end of IP, 1 training conducted in each sub-region ITIC will compile trainings and provide report to ICG/PTWS-XXIV and harmonize with other bodies/MS active in this field: SOPAC, IOC Secretariat, NZAid, BOM Australia, GFZ Germany  Bernie Kilonsky suggested that a sea-level users workshop after Caribbean Workshop for the PTWS would be useful. An outcome would be better understanding on the process for assigning and implementing satellite frequencies in the Pacific. The creation of a PTWS sea-level Task Team was suggested by New Zealand and seconded by ITIC. Decisions and Actions of WG2 to the ICG/PTWS: A Task Team on Sea-level Monitoring for Tsunami Detection and Warning was established with the following Terms of Reference: Review the PTWS Medium Term Strategy and make recommendations for upgrading and improvements relating to sea-level measurements, in coordination with GLOSS Review and recommend changes to the ICG/PTWS Implementation Plan in relation to sea-level monitoring Review and suggest changes to the procedures for assigning transmission slots for sea-level station data to meteorological geostationary satellites Review existing training documents and coordinate the organisation of a training workshop for sea-level instrument operators and users in 2011 The Task Team on PTWS Exercises will report on progress to date at the ICG. The Task Team on Seismic Data Sharing agreed on: The need for follow-up training in the configuration and use of seismic monitoring and analysis systems for member states in the SW Pacific. Confirming the seismic technical specifications of the Vanuatu meeting of the Seismic Data Sharing Task Team. That relevant national seismic data should be shared through IRIS. The necessity of coordination among donor countries with respect to installation, training & sharing of seismic data for sustainable national seismic networks. To collate documents on site selection, data centre setup by ITIC through an interim email list until other technologies are made available to meet the Task Team requirements. That SeisComp3 is the de-facto the regional earthquake analysis system. Recommendations of WG2 to the ICG/PTWS: WG2 recommends that the ICG approve the PTWC proposed enhanced products as described in the report to the ICG on the Task Team on Enhancing Tsunami Warning Products. This will include that the PTWC use the numerical tsunami forecast to enhance the PTWC products and that the PTWC applies a lower magnitude for local tsunami threat, subject to a study on historical records and numerical models of local tsunami. And to elaborate on the implementation process. Requests the Secretariat to seek funds for the follow-up training in the configuration and use of seismic monitoring and analysis systems for member states in the SW Pacific. Reports from all Task Teams that have met to date See attached reports Any Other Business Preparation for ICG/PTWS-XXIV, 24-27 May 2011, Beijing, China Nora is going on Maternity leave from May 2011 for 1 year. Vice Chair Chip McCreery (nominated by Chris Ryan and Ken Gledhill) and co-Vice Chair Daniel Jaska (nominated by Chip McCreery and Ken Gledhill) will take over WG2 lead WG2 from May onwards and represent WG2 at the ICG?PTWS-XXIV. Closure The meeting was closed on 3 March, 17:15 PTWS WG2 Attendance list Nora Gale (chair) GeoNet Network Development Manager 1 Fairway Drive Avalon 5010 Lower Hutt New Zealand Tel. +64-4-570 4710 Email:  HYPERLINK "http://www.ioc-unesco.org/mailto:n.gale@gns.cri.nz" n.gale@gns.cri.nz Dr. Ken Gledhill GeoNet Project Director GNS Science Te Pu Ao Lower Hutt P.O. Box 30-368 New Zealand Tel. +64-4-5704848 Email:  HYPERLINK "http://www.ioc-unesco.org/mailto:K.Gledhill@gns.cri.nz" K.Gledhill@gns.cri.nz Mohd Rosaidi CHE ABAS Director of Geophysics & Tsunami Division Marine Meteorological & Oceanography Department Malaysia Malaysian Meteorological Department Jalan Sultan 46667 Petaling Jaya Selangor Malaysia Tel: 603-79678000 Email: rosaidi@met.gov.my Malaki FINAU Mineral Resources Department Fiji Email: mala@mrd.gov.fj Ms Esline GARAEBITI Geo-Hazards Manager Port Vila, P.M.B 001 Vanuatu Tel: (678) 7747970 (678) 22423 Email: gesline@vanuatu.gov.vu Mr Daniel JAKSA Co-Director, Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Centre Geoscience Australia Cnr Jerrabomberra Ave and Hindmarsh Drive Symonston Canberra ACT 2609 Australia Tel: +61 (0)2 6249 9685 Email: Daniel.Jaksa@ga.gov.au Dr Laura KONG Director ITIC UNESCO IOC International Tsunami Information Centre 737 Bishop Street, Suite 2200 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 United States Tel: +1-808-532-6423 Email: l.kong@unesco.org Dr Charles (Chip) MCCREERY Director PTWC RH Hagemeyer Pacific Tsunami Warning Center 91-270 Fort Weaver Rd, HI 96706 United States Tel: +1 808-689-8207 x301 Email: charles.mccreery@noaa.gov Mr. Mathew MOIHOI Seismologist Port Moresby 121 National Capital District Papua New Guinea Tel: (675) 321 4634 Email: pmgo@daltron.com.pg Ms. Filomena NELSON Principal Disaster Management Officer Disaster Management Office Ministry Of Natural Resources & Environment Apia, Samoa Tel: +685 20856 Email: filomena.nelson@mnre.gov.ws Mr Tomoaki OZAKI Senior Coordinator for Tsunami Forecast Modeling Japan Meteorological Agency 1-3-4 Otemachi Chiyoda-ku 100-8122 Tokyo Japan Tel: +81 3 3212-8341 ex. 4839 Email: tozaki@met.kishou.go.jp Mr Sionetasi PULEHETOA Director - Supervisor of the operation and forecasting services Niue Meteorological and Climate Change Service PO Box 82 Hannan Airport Alofi, Niue Tel: +683 4600 Email: sionetasi.pulehetoa@mail.gov.nu Dominique REYMOND Geophysicist in charge Laboratoire de Gophysique, Commissariat l'Energie Atomique (CEA/DASE/LDG), 98713 Papeete French Polynesia Tel: (689) 82 80 25 Email: reymond.d@labogeo.pf Mr Chris RYAN Chief Meteorologist, JATWC Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne 700 Collins Street Docklands GPO Box 1289 Melbourne VIC 3001 Australia Tel: +61 (0)3 9669 4030 Email: c.ryan@bom.gov.au Mr Rennie VAIOMOUNGA Seismologist Ministry of Lands, Survey, Natural Resources & Environment P.O Box 5 Nuku'alofa Tonga Tel: (676) 25508 Email: rennie@lands.gov.to Mr. Edward H YOUNG JR Deputy Regional Director National Weather Service/National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration Pacific Region Headquarters 737 Bishop Street, Suite 2200 Honolulu Hawaii 96813-3213 United States Tel: 808-532-6412 Email: Edward.Young@noaa.gov PTWS WG2 Task Team members Tim BARTON Geoscience Australia Email: tim.barton@ga.gov.au Dr Mark CHADWICK Operational & Research Seismologist GNS Science 1 Fairway Drive Avalon 5710, Lower Hutt New Zealand Email: m.chadwick@gns.cri.nz Sylvain TODMAN Advisor Vanuatu Email: stodman@vanuatu.gov.vu Invited Observers Mr Kevin ALDER IS Operations Manager Wellington New Zealand Tel: +64-4-4700720 Email: kevin.alder@metservice.com Dr Bernard KILONSKY Research Associate University of Hawaii at Manoa, Joint Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research 1000 Pope Road Marine Science Building 312 Honolulu Hawaii HI 96822 United States Tel: 1 808 956-6574 Email: kilonsky@hawaii.edu Dr. Garry ROGERS Scientist Natural Resources Canada, Geological Survey of Canada 9860 West Saanich Road Sidney V8L 4B2, British Columbia Canada Tel: 01 250 363 6450 Email: grogers@nrcan.gc.ca IOC Secretariat Mr Rajendra PRASAD National Programme Officer for DRR & Tsunami Warning c/o SPC - SOPAC Office Mead Rd, Suva, Fiji Tel.: +679 - 3381377 Email: r.prasad@unesco.org Dr Ulrich WOLF Senior Advisor 1 rue Miollis 75015 Paris, France Tel.: +33 1 456 83929 Email:  HYPERLINK "mailto:u.wolf@unesco.org" u.wolf@unesco.org Appendix I Seismic Data Sharing Task Team report Summary of Outcomes The following were agreed by the Task Team: That the technical specifications agreed at the Vanuatu Task Team meeting be endorsed (40 HZ sampling, 3 channel, 20 second latency, Broadband); That seismic data be supplied to IRIS via the seedlink protocol for use by Warning Centres; That SeisComP3 be endorsed as the preferred seismic analysis system for training and general use in the SWP; That a mechanism be established to allow users in the SWP to easily communicate for mutual support; There is a need for more in-depth training on how to configure and use SeisComP3; Documentation is needed on data communications option and the selection of appropriate seismograph sites. Actions: ITIC will establish an email group to allow easy communications between users in the SWP region (Laura Kong); A list of available data communications options will be compiled (with appropriate detail) to aid users in the region in making cost-effective decisions on moving data from stations to national data centres (Tim Barton); A list of available information on seismograph site selection will be compiled and made available to users in the SWP (Ken Gledhill). The possibility of holding an in-depth training course in the region on the configuration and use of SeisComP3 be investigated (Ken Gledhill). Meeting Notes Opening/welcome On behalf of the organizing committee Nora Gale, chair of ICG/PTWS WG 2 welcomed the participants and explained that due to the recent and very destructive earthquake in Christchurch several participants from New Zealand will be occupied with the response to the event and thus could not make it to the meeting. Ken Gledhill, chair of the PTWS Task Team on Seismic Data Sharing in the SW Pacific, also welcomed the participants and introductions were made. Adoption of the agenda The chair introduced the agenda which was accepted without any changes. Based on the current situation in Christchurch the chair also suggested the election of a vice-chair as he might be called any time and requested to leave immediately. The group elected Tim Barton from Geoscience Australia by acclamation. Progress since the last meeting Ken Gledhill recalled the recommendations from the last meeting of the Task Team in Vanuatu (2009) and reviewed the current status of implementation. He also reported on a regional seismic training course he attended as a trainer and which was conducted in July 2010 in Fiji funded by the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 4. PTWS Report Charles McCreary, director PTWC, provided a detailed report on recent developments and plans to improve tsunami warning time by using different procedures like less seismic stations for magnitude and earthquake locations as well as upgrading the seismic instrumentation network. The group discussed how best to increase the density of the instrumentation network and how to improve the data transmission through different means. Several members of the group reported on planned seismic network upgrades all over the PTWS while in some cases the real-time access to the data is still an issue. National reports Sionetasi Polehetoa reported that Niue has one seismic station maintained by GeoScience Australia and one GLOSS tide gauge at Alofi harbour. Niue has experienced power and telephone line cuts, and so has requested that the seismic station should be upgraded with VSAT data transmission. However, a fibre optic cable is being proposed by Telecom Niue to install in the villages to improve internet access on Niue. Rennie Jegsen Vaiomounga reported on an ongoing project in Tonga conducted in cooperation with JICA and the government of Fiji to upgrade the seismic instrumentation network to a dozen broad-band stations in the Tonga/Fiji region. The project is supposed to end with the complete network installed by October 2011. Although the government of Tonga is actually covering the data transmission costs with Intelsat 701 there are opportunities to get further support from JAICA if the data will be openly provided to other member states and the regional warning system. Mathew Moihoi reported that since 2000 in Papua New Guinea the national seismic equipment went out of service and has not been replaced. However, PNG is hosting three international broad-band stations and PMGO is currently in the process of re-installing the national system of 10 short period (eventually upgraded to broad-band) stations with funding from the European Commission. The project will continue until 2015, and PMGO will also be provided with a SeisComP3 earthquake detection system in the process. Esline Garaebiti provided an overview on the current status on the Vanuatu instrumentation networks. The National system has now consolidated most hazards functions into one organisation including Vanuatu Met Service and Vanuatu Geohazards, formally a part of the Department of Geology and Mines. Vanuatu is coordinating with New Caledonia to exchange real-time seismic data. On behalf of his colleagues from New Caledonia, Sylvain Todman reported on a project funded by the European Commission which is finalising the installation of 7 broad-band seismic stations in New Caledonia. Like Vanuatu, New Caledonia is using SeisComP3 as their primary earthquake analysing software. Filomena Nelson briefly reported on the status of the Samoan national seismic network and the ongoing efforts to improve access to real-time data (e.g. for PTWC). Samoa collaborates with the China Earthquake Administration and contracted a company to install six new broad-band seismic stations. She also mentioned the ongoing coordination with American Samoa e.g. on harmonizing the thresholds of warnings. Dominique Reymond presented the status of the seismic network in French Polynesia which is composed of 10 short period stations and 3 broad-band stations (plus 3 stations belonging to the GEOSCOPE network). The warning centre has a staff of 9 people and, besides TREMORS, has successfully tested SeisComP3 over the last three months using data received from145 international seismic stations, mainly from the Pacific region. Tim Barton gave an overview on the status on the seismic instrumentation network of 45 broad-band stations in Australia and especially focussed on pros and cons of the different data transmission options the related costs and their experiences within ATWS on the different systems. Ken Gledhill provided a national report for New Zealand focussing on the national seismic detection system based on 50 broad-band instruments, over 120 regional sites and a regionally adapted SeisComP3 system in testing. Given the recent earthquake in Christchurch he also showed the performance of the NZ system with actual data. Seismic data exchange and training Based on recent developments and the tendency of more and more centres in the SW Pacific region making the decision to use SeisComP3 the group decided to designate the GFZ freely available seismic analysis system as the backbone software for training purposes and through the generally used seedlink servers a good solution for waveform and earthquake data exchange. The following discussion highlighted the general need for additional trainings at two levels: i) for centres which run their national seismic networks (e.g. Fiji, Tonga, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, PNG) have a specific need for more in-depth training on the use and configuration of SeisComP3; and ii) training for TWFPs without a detailed seismic background (e.g. Niue, Tuvalu) on how to properly interpret the warning products. The second of these is more a general requirement outside the scope of this Task Team. Tim Ahern from IRIS reported (via email) that they are contracting GEMPA, the developers of SeisComP3 to work on a Graphical User Interface to make it easier to configure the system, so it might be worth waiting until that is complete before arranging additional training. The group discussed several data communication options such as VSAT, ADSL/Internet as well as radio and G3 mobile phone networks. It was agreed that all options should be used with the priority given to limiting communication cost but ensuring reliability and redundancy. Tim Barton (Australia) agreed to complete his document on available data communication options. The group reconfirms the recommendation for MS to provide seismic data through seedlink servers to IRIS, and the parameters for seismic data agreed at the Vanuatu Task Team meeting (40 HZ sampling, 3 channel, 20 second latency, Broadband). It was noted that IRIS has a turnkey seedlink server available to assist this process. There seems to be a need for standards on site selection and instrumentation performance requirements. Ken Gledhill (New Zealand) volunteered to compile a list of available resources that have already been written or produced by other groups. The discussion on SeisComP led to the idea that a regional users group is required to communicate effectively. Several options like Facebook, workspaces on websites and email lists were discussed. ITIC volunteered to look into the issue, and in the first instance provide an email list. 7. Closure The chair volunteered to present the decisions and recommendations at the following WG2 session and the meeting was closed at 17:00. Appendix II Sea Level Measurements Task Team Task Team for sea level measurements of the ICG/PTWS, meeting March 2nd 2011, Wellington Chris Ryan introduced the draft terms of reference and the group agreed on the following priority goals: Review the PTWS Medium Term Strategy and make recommendations for upgrading and improvements relating to sea-level measurements, in coordination with GLOSS Review and recommend changes to the ICG/PTWS Implementation Plan in relation to sea-level monitoring Review and suggest changes to the procedures for assigning transmission slots for sea-level station data to meteorological geostationary satellites Review existing training documents and coordinate the organisation of a training workshop for sea-level instrument operators and users in 2011 Decisions - Task Team members are requested to review the PTWS Medium Term Strategy as well as the PTWS Implementation Plan and provide comments to the Task Team chair by 31 March 2011. The Chair will collate the suggested modifications and provide these to the WG2 chair by 15 April for inclusion in WG2 report to ICG - Bernhard Kilonsky volunteered, in consultation with PTWC and JMA, to draft the proposed procedure for requesting and allocating higher transmission frequency slots for tide gauge data via meteorological satellites, to be submitted to the WG 2 chair for inclusion in recommendations for the next ICG/PTWS session in Beijing. - Bernie Kilonsky will also review the existing documentation and explore training opportunities for tide gauge operators and users in 2011. Appendix III Report of the PTWS Task Team on Enhancing Tsunami Warning Products March 2, 2011, Wellington, New Zealand Chair, Charles McCreery, PTWC A PTWC-JMA Coordination meeting took place April 11-13, 2011 in Honolulu to follow-on with discussions from the Wellington March meeting. It was attended by the ITIC Director, PTWS Southwest Pacific Chair, South China Sea Chair, Indonesia BMKG Deputy Director, US National Weather Service Pacific Region Deputy Director. PTWS WG 1 (Risk Assessment) Chair, WG 3 Chair (Awareness and Response) and IOC Senior Tsunami Advisor joined by teleconference for initial and final summary discussions. The PTWC enhanced new tsunami products that are proposed are covered in the PTWS Task Team on Enhanced Tsunami Warning Products Report to the ICG/PTWS-XXIV Summary March 2, 2011 meeting This Task Team was formed on March 1, 2011 by the PTWS Working Group on Detection, Warning and Dissemination at their meeting in Wellington, New Zealand, in accordance with Recommendation ICG/PTWS-XXIII.1. Membership of the Team is the following: Charles McCreery (USA-PTWC) Chair, Tomoaki Ozaki (Japan-JMA), Chris Ryan (Australia-JATWC), Daniel Jaksa (Australia-JATWC), Ken Gledhill (New Zealand-GNS), Dominique Reymond (France-CPPT), Mathew Moihoi (PNG-PMGO), Mala Finau (DMR-Fiji), Indonesia (pending), SE Pacific (pending), and Laura Kong (ITIC). Terms of reference of the Task Team are defined in ICG/PTWS-XXIII.1 as follows: 1. Review the capabilities and plans of the international TWCs with respect to their operational products and product dissemination for the PTWS 2. Gather feedback from Member States regarding international TWC current and planned product content, format, and dissemination 3. Consider best practices based on social science as well as the experiences of the Member States 4. Consider the global harmonization of tsunami warning products and terminology 5. Develop recommendations to improve current products and /or develop new products The Chair led the discussion. Charles McCreery provides an outline (see end of report) summarizing possible changes that will improve the timeliness, accuracy, and usefulness of PTWCs products to Pacific countries. Based upon changes that have happened or are underway regarding PTWCs operations he recommended enhancements to PTWC tsunami warning products to: 1) utilize numerical forecast models during events to reduce the number of areas unnecessarily warned and to provide more accurate alerts for a marine threat and a land threat; 2) modify current criteria and procedures to provide alerts for potential local tsunamis, taking into consideration that PTWCs elapsed time from the earthquake to the first product is now10 minutes or less for most areas, and 3) modify PTWCs message products to make them more effective. He demonstrated a user-friendly, Google-based tool that can be used to query a forecast model for expected heights at different coastal locations. The PTWC-derived forecast model, RIFT, has the advantage that it is able to provide forecasts for all Pacific coasts quickly in near real-time, and has the capability of including the actual earthquake source parameters in the numerical model. Chris Ryan, Australia, described the templates agreed upon for the Indian Ocean RTWP messages. Australia welcomed the improvements in the services, but raised the concern and need to minimize confusion between the advisory PTWC and the authoritative national warnings. IO countries are adamant that the RTWP provides services only to national authorities, and will not provide public information that could confuse and/or conflict with national messages to its populations and local communities. Dominique Reymond, France, asked whether it might be better, where wave heights or forecasts are provided, to provide crest-to-trough, than amplitude since Civil Defense (and the public) are more concerned with a larger number. Reymond also raised the issue of the name Tsunami Information Bulletin and that it might be called Seismic Information Bulletin if there is no threat. Other participants gave reasons why it is useful to keep the word tsunami in the name. Mathew Moihoi, Papua New Guinea, emphasized that another important consideration is the length of the message. If a message is too long, then it takes a long time to understand and identify the pertinent country information this then means they cannot act as quickly as they would like. McCreery reported the plan for the re-formatted and re-arranged US domestic product. A main headline (evaluation) is placed at the top followed by supplementary information. The message would have, in this order, routing info, key changes since the last product, headline, evaluation, and recommended actions (internationally, would include reference to national authority for country safety), other centers actions, follow-up product information. Tabular sections follow with forecasts and measurements. McCreery also reported on US development of a consolidated tsunami portal that is being planned to include PTWCs international products. It was noted that the definition of Estimated Arrival is not clear - does it correspond to the forecast or the observed amplitude when both are specified. Under the proposed format, the warning forecast point must be the same as observations point (sea level gauge). This is currently not always the case, so more discussion and coordination between NWPTAC and PTWC are needed before PTWC introduces new products. JMA asked for clarification on the role of the regional center vs Pacific-wide center. Currently, NWPTAC adds more information to its product because it is a regional center. PTWC and JMA agreed that this matter and others need further discussion between the two centers. Additionally, Gledhill, as Southwest Pacific Chair and New Zealand, noted that further discussion is needed to clarify and elaborate on the role of PTWC for small countries without tsunami threat evaluation capabilities and large countries that have their own systems McCreery introduced whether it would be useful to establish a lower-magnitude threshold to help countries be alerted for local or regional tsunamis. It was noted, however, that this is a local decision, however, for countries without monitoring capabilities, PTWCs alerts would be helpful. Tonga, Vanuatu, and Samoa reiterated that PTWC messages and threat evaluations are important for their country to evaluate their national threats. It is essential for countries to develop their country procedures and implement them for local events, it is not wise to wait for PTWC messages. PTWC-proposed possible enhancements to PTWC products PTWC develop procedures for using tsunami forecast models to Reduce the area of coast that is warned unnecessarily Provide for the following two levels of warning Marine threat (expected maximum amplitude is 0.25 0.50 meters) Land threat (expected maximum amplitude is greater than 0.5 meters) Provide finer scale division of coasts Every 50 km? Provincial boundaries? Countries only (same as now) Staging alerts as event evolves Initial alert seismic only? Initial alert based on conservative application of forecast? Second alert based on better seismic Third (or later) alert based on sea-level constrained model Define Watch area PTWC develop procedures for issuing alerts for potential local tsunamis Establish criteria for local warning messages Earthquake Magnitude (Mwp) 7.1-7.5 (same as Indian Ocean and Caribbean) Hypocenter Depth < 100 km (same) Under the sea (same) Areas of alert Distance-based - coasts within 300 km of epicenter Threat based forecast for marine and land threat Levels of Alert One threat level only (land threat - same as now) Two threat levels marine and land threats PTWC Message Products Text products Reorganization of content Narrative section with most critical information (multiple languages?) Tabular section ETAs, forecast, observations Earthquake parameters Public or private GTS is public Fax, Email, SMS private Web can be public or private Web site Text Products Map or Maps Travel time Historical earthquakes Historical tsunamis Propagation forecast Coastal forecast Sea level gauges Table or Tables ETAs (1ST arrival, 1ST wave over threshold, maximum wave, last significant wave) Coastal forecast values Observations Map of Coastal and Deep Ocean Gauges Maximum wave amplitudes Waveforms Table of maximum wave amplitudes Email (text plus some of the above-mentioned graphical products) Revised text products Revised format Appendix IV Emergency Communications Task Team Meeting Chair Filomena Nelson, Co-Chair Edward Young 28 February (Monday), 2.00pm to 5.30pm Provisional Agenda 1. Welcome and discussion of the work of the Task Team.- Filomena Nelson The meeting started at 2:10 pm on Monday, February 28, 2011, in a 9th floor small conference room at MCDEM Headquarters. Filomena welcomed Task Team members. Participating in the Task Team meeting were: Kevin Alder, Met Service of New Zealand, Ltd. (Kevin.Alder@metservice.com) Daniel Jaksa, Geoscience Australia ( HYPERLINK "mailto:Daniel.Jaksa@ga.gov.au" Daniel.Jaksa@ga.gov.au) Filomena Nelson, Samoa Disaster Management ( HYPERLINK "mailto:filomena.nelson@mnre.gov.ws" filomena.nelson@mnre.gov.ws) Edward Young, NOAA/NWS Pacific Region ( HYPERLINK "mailto:Edward.Young@noaa.gov" Edward.Young@noaa.gov Rajendra Prasad, UNESCO/IOC, Suva ( HYPERLINK "mailto:R.Prasad@unesco.org" R.Prasad@unesco.org) Filomena reviewed the Task Teams provisional agenda, and said it was important to carry out the work of the Task Team, in spite of only having two members appointed ahead of time. She provided some background on how the Task Team, which originally was a Working Group at the IOC/ICG/PTWS XXII Session in Ecuador in October, 2007, and it became a Task Team under PTWS Working Group Structure agreed upon at the IOC/ICG/PTWS XXIII Session in Samoa in February, 2009. This task team is now an official task team of Working Group 2 (Tsunami Detection, Warning, and Dissemination). 2. Preparation for a special Task Team session within Working Group 2, to review current, known dissemination methods among member states in attendance. The purpose of the initial meeting of the Task Team on Pacific Emergency Communications on Monday, February 28, 2011, was to organize a session of the Task Team within the working mechanism of Working Group 2, and the Task Team Chair/Co-Chair would work with the Working Group 2 Chair to request time for the Task Team to meet to address the three issues: 1. Update on the current progress on the development of tsunami warnings and public safety alert arrangements from international centres through national authorities to the public in their respective countries. 2. Update on present and emerging technologies, methods, and systems of dissemination being planned by Member States. 3. Report on existing and future capacities and requirements of regional and national warning centres for the disseminating and confirming alerts to customers. To do this, the Task Team will request individuals attending the Working Group 2 session, to prepare short presentations on the following topics: Emergency Notification through Cell Broadcast by Responsible Disaster Management Officials Daniel Jaksa will present an example of legislation in place in state governments of Australia for authorized cell broadcasts of tsunami warning messages to mobile phone users within reach of each commercial providers cell phone tower in coastal areas of risk. This legislation arose from last years fire. 5-10 minute Country Presentations from on existing arrangements for dissemination of national or international tsunami bulletins: Japan Malaysia Samoa Vanuatu Review of Bureau of Meteorology of Australia/SOPAC Member Country National Tsunami Warning and Mitigation Capacity Building Assessments Rajendra Prasad and Edward Young will review the tsunami capacity building assessments and recommendations for communications. General Overview of Implementation of Common Alerting Protocol Edward Young and Kevin Alder Alerting technologies Whats out there, and whats being planned? All participants (include information on the PDPN web site) Summary The participants agreed to produce a Task Team Report back to Working Group 2 on Thursday, March 3, 2011. Closure of Sessional meeting of the Task Team Appendix V - Report of the PTWS Task Team on Exercises Meetings, 2-4 March 2011 Meeting 1: 2:00-3:30 pm, Wednesday, 2 March 2011 Meeting 2: 4:30-5:30 pm, Thursday 3 March 2011 Meeting 3: 1:30-3:00 pm, Friday 4 March 2011 Co-Chairs Laura Kong (ITIC), Jo Guard (New Zealand) Introduction: The PTWS WG2 Task Team on PTWS Exercises met for three brief sessions during the PTWS Working Group 2 Meeting in Wellington, New Zealand 28 February 4 March 2011. The Co-Chairs are Jo Guard (New Zealand) and Laura Kong (ITIC). Dr. Kong chaired the meetings due to absence of Ms. Guard who was deployed to Christchurch to assist in the earthquake response to the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Members of the Task Team are PTWC, JMA, New Zealand (GNS Nora Gale, Ken Gledhill, MCDEM, David Coetzee), Samoa (Filomena Nelson), Papua New Guinea (Mathew Moihoi), Russia (Tanya Ivelskaya, Sakhalin TWC), Philippines (PHIVOLCS), Nicaragua (INETER, Angelica Munoz), France (Dominique Reymond), Indonesia (BMKG), a representative from South America, and the PTWS Secretariat. The Task Teams Terms of Reference (ICG/PTWS-XXIII.2) are to review the PacWave08 Summary Report to identify lessons learned, and design and carry out PacWave11. The IOC should announce the Exercise to Member States 180 days in advance and the Exercise Manual should be available at least 90 days in advance. The two previous PTWS exercises, Exercise Pacific Wave 2006 (PacWave06, http://itic.ioc-unesco.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1658&Itemid=2333&lang=en) and 2008 (PacWave08, http://itic.ioc-unesco.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1597&Itemid=2333&lang=en) were the 1st basin-wide exercises conducted under the coordination of UNESCO/IOC. PacWave06 became the model for other basin-wide exercises, such as Indian Ocean Wave 2009 and Caribbean Wave 2011. Due to the 2009 Samoa and 2010 Chile Tsunamis, the biannual Pacific-wide exercise has been delayed. The PTWS Steering Committee recommended in its meeting in August 2010 to have the next exercise, Exercise Pacific Wave 2011 (PacWave11), in first half of November 2011 as a multi-scenario, real-time exercise to enable all PTWS countries to participate. PacWave06 and PacWave08: Dr. Kong summarized the previous Pacific-wide exercises, including its objectives, format, conduct, scenarios, post-exercise assessments, findings and outcomes, and recommendations. Several common outcomes were the need to Continually review and update TWFPs; Emphasize stakeholder coordination as a key to effective warning; Have written warning and response SOPs, especially at local levels, to enable fast orderly response; and Identify and resolve the continuing communication challenges (lack of reliable infrastructure) in reaching geographically remote islands and regions in a timely manner. Nonetheless, exercises were considered extremely valuable for strengthening preparedness and increasing awareness. The last important recommendation from PacWave08 identified the high value of both actual exercise component (warning receipt, notification, and response) and the post-exercise evaluation component that assesses the SOPs performance and identifies problems and where possible, immediately takes corrective actions. It was noted that the compilation of post-exercise responses was labor-intensive and contained a great range of responses making it difficult to easily cross-compare the 2006 and 2008 exercise in detail. She opened the floor for further discussion on lessons learned from PacWave08. She additionally asked for input on what the objectives and goals of PacWave11 should be, in light of the three deadly local tsunamis in the last three years in the Pacific. As few had recently read the PacWave08 Summary Report, the discussion was deferred and will be solicited from Task Team members through email. Similarly, for PacWave11 objectives. Additionally, the Co-Chairs will soliciy input from the PTWS SC and at the PTWC-JMA Tsunami Warning Coordination meeting. This will be included in the PTWS Exercises Task Team report ICG/PTWS-XXIV. She reported that at the TOWS Inter-ICG Task Team meeting in December 2010, it was noted that there is no generic and consistent guideline available for ICGs on the development, management, and evaluation of tsunami exercises. With the prevalence of exercises now being conducted, the Task Team recommended that a compilation be done noting that the focus of exercises is on the testing of SOPs of TWCs and DMOs; such a resource could be shared across ICGs and be applicable to both exercise coordinators and exercise players (watch & warning centres, as well as disaster management agencies). PacWave11 Planning PacWave11 Dates: The Group discussed the feasibility of designing and conducting a multi-scenario exercise and agreed that PacWave11 will be carried out on 9-10 November 2011. It was noted that this would be during or just prior to APEC, which will be held in Honolulu this year. PacWave11 will thus offer a high-visibility opportunity to showcase the PTWS system. Many APEC high-level diplomats will be in Hawaii for APEC. APEC Countries should take advantage of this timing to improve tsunami awareness and build the case for increased sustainable resources. Announcement: IOC Circular Letter announcing PacWave11 should be issued by 9 May 2011 (180 days in advance). The PTWS Secretariat would need the draft letter by 1 May 2011. The PacWave11 Exercise Manual should be made available by 9 August 2011 (90 days in advance). Scenario Location and Magnitude: The Group identified the following scenario locations. Task Team members from each of these regions should be consulted for the locations. NW Pacific Kamchatka. Noting that PacWave08 was off-northern Japan and so further sources are probably not necessary. South China Sea Manila Trench Sulawesi Sea (forecast pts would need to be added) request from Malaysia West Pacific - Philippines Trench SW Pacific Tonga Trench. Note that his was the original source requested by PTWS-XXIII (2009). Vanuatu South America Southern or Northern Chile, Southern Peru this scenario could take advantage of NZ 2010 Tangaroa National Exercise since coastal and DART measurements, and other info and inject had already been completed by NZ. The TT representative from South American should be consulted. Central America Nicaragua North Pacific - Aleutians Islands, noting the Shumagin Gap could be the source location. The earthquake magnitude that triggers the destructive tsunami will be based on the length of the associated subducting trench. In order to identify the best PacWave11 scenarios from among the choices above, PTWC will compute scenarios with its RIFT model and share the results. ITIC will provide an online PacWave11 Scenarios survey to the PTWS TT, PTWS WG2, and the PTWS Steering Committee in order to solicit input on which scenarios are the highest priority to exercise. This Survey will be ideally conducted before the PTWC-JMA Coordination Meeting so that it can be discussed and final scenarios chosen. Conduct: To reduce confusion of many messages from many scenarios, and to reduce the size of the manual and save on costs for hard copy printing and distribution., it was decided that exercise messages should be available and accessed online through a secure web site. Participants would be able to access their chosen scenario and the ensuing messages and associated data in a user-friendly manner. Time of Event: The request from the SW Pacific is for the events to commence during daytime working hours. The Task Team will seek inquire to other regions if there are similar requests. International Tsunami Warning Centre Messages Because each event will likely be a destructive basin-wide event, messages could continue for 24 hours. Because of this, and knowing that there will be multi-scenarios, only the beginning messages would be transmitted, and ensuing messages would be issued only periodically. These issued would include the initial earthquake information, any revised earthquake parameters, expected tsunami wave arrivals and forecasts, and sea level observations. However, all messages will be available in the PacWave11 Exercise Manual and online through a secure site. During the exercise, there will be lot of messages and it could get confusing. There is a trade-off work-wise for PacWave11 there could be a lot of scenarios with fewer messages, or fewer scenarios with more messages. PTWC and JMA will review the different types of messaging arrangements (time start, how many msgs to issue, and when, etc) to decide on the most feasible during the planned April 11-13, 2011 PTWC-JMA Tsunami Warning Coordination Meeting in Honolulu. Enhanced new tsunami warning products should be implemented and tested in PacWave11 JMA reported that it could only provide NWPTAC messages for only 1 scenario in the NWPTAC area of responsibility. Post-Exercise Evaluation: The Chair noted that a large activity of the Task Team is in the post-exercise analysis to assess the success of PacWave11; since compilation and analysis of country-submitted post-exercise surveys by hand can be time-consuming and tedious, it was agreed to employ electronic surveys if possible to facilitate a more-efficient and faster evaluation process. It was suggested to use and modify electronic evaluation tools used by NZ 2010 Tangaroa national exercise for PacWave11 To encourage consistency and build commonality in approach among ICGs and if ready, it was proposed to encourage IOWave11 to use the same methodology and/or questionnaire developed by the PTWS for PacWave11. PTWS Exercises Co-Chairs will liaise with IOWave11 (to be held 12 Oct 2011) Task Team Chairs India and Australia. Chris Ryan, Australia BOM, volunteered to serve as contact for interfacing. PacWave 11 Preparations Actions, Responsibilities, Dates Aim to be finalized Objectives to be finalized Scenarios Finalization RIFT models completed March 11 - PTWC Survey TT and WG2 March 14-18 - ITIC Survey issuance was delayed until 8 April 2011, due to the 11 March 2011 tsunami. PTWC-JMA Tsunami Warning Coordination and Exercise Pacific Wave 2011 Planning Meeting, 11-13 April 2011. This self-funded meeting will coordinate the proposal to ICG/PTWS-XXIV on enhanced new PTWS products. SW Pacific WG and South China Sea WG Chairs will attend, as well as Indonesia. Day 3 will coordinate PacWave11. NZ will attend and continue working with ITIC 13-20 April 2011 for PacWave11. Exercise Date Announcement by IOC 9 May 2011 (at least 180 days) draft letter 1 May 2011 to PTWS Technical Secretary Co-Chairs will draft (after previous exercises) and circulate to TT members for comment. Exercise Manual Finalization 9 August 2011 But the sooner the better so can be briefed and used in any trainings May-Sept General (Co-Chairs, ITIC) Messages (PTWC/WCATWC, JMA) Press release templates (Co-Chairs/ITIC to review past and adjust as needed), Evaluation process/questionnaire (Co-Chairs/ITIC) Review past questionnaire and propose new process); PNG Mathew Moihoi to help and provide comment, but feedback also from TT. Circulate to TT for comment and improvement Exercise Conduct and Post-Exercise Evaluation guidance improve upon previous to allow for better cross-comparison of evaluations NZ, ITIC and provide as soon as possible PacWave11 Marketing and Training - information briefings and/or SOP training 3rd quarter 2011. Countries should form PacWave11 Planning Committees to identify who, what, and how exercise will be conducted within their country. Where possible and requested, briefings and SOP training could be requested, pending funding. PacWave11 Press Release - at least 1 week prior to PacWave11 IOC internationally and countries nationally. Note that PacWave11 will occur during APEC 2011 - US could provide a press release as part of its Hawaii hosting of APEC (US NOAA Ed Young/ITIC/PTWC to inquire) PacWave11 9-10 Nov 2011 Exercise Evaluations - due 9 Feb 2012 (within 90 days) will use electronic reporting as described in Exercise Manual Summary Report (MCDEM, ITIC, Task Team, Filomena Nelson, maybe Australia and others) due for reporting at the IOC Assembly, June 2012 Task Team on PTWS Exercises (Rec ICG/PTWS-XXIII.2 PTWS Exercises) Terms of Reference: (i) Review the PACWAVE08 evaluation report (ii) Identify lessons learned and develop recommendations based on the PACWAVE08 evaluation and submit recommendations to the PTWS Steering Committee (iii) Design and carry out a third end-to-end Pacific-wide exercise with the following characteristics: a. The exercise will take place preferably in the fourth quarter of 2010 b. The exercise scenario be a major tsunami originating in the central south Pacific (e.g., Tonga-Kermadec) to complement previous scenarios in other places c. The exercise date be finalized by the Task Team and the exercise announced to Member States at least 180 days in advance of the exercise date d. The exercise manual including instructions to Member States regarding their participation and the evaluation instrument be prepared with content and structure similar to what was prepared for the previous two Pacific-wide exercises, but taking into account lessons learned and any need to collect additional information e. The exercise manual be distributed to Member States at least 90 days in advance of the exercise date f. Participating Member States be asked to complete and return the evaluation instrument no more than 90 days following the exercise g. The exercise be played out in real time h. The exercise be considered as a way to test new products from the international TWCs including graphical products     ICG/PTWS-XXIV/29 ,8:\]^`agûti_RJFBFBFBFh;nh] h(:h;n5h@?h*B*phh] >*B*phh;n5>*B*phh] 5>*B*phhSOh;n5B*]phh] 56B*phh3]Lh;n56B*phh;n56B*phh@?h#p56h@?h#p5 h65#h>Th6OJQJ\^JmH sH #h>Th65OJQJ^JmH sH %jhQ5UmHnHsH tHu,89:] } 7$8$H$gd~"\qs'  -7SVXY󲫣 h?& 5h?& h;n5h?& h;n\ h?& h?& h-Qh?& 5\h?& hfq4hTh;n5 hZz5hThZz5hZzhZz5\hZzh?d"hIUh;n5h;nh0h;n58Y:!=   % - . 2 O P #!5!U!m!r!!!!! "*""""""##2#P#i#x##### %\%^%l%z%%%%%%& h=h;nhKf=h;n\hIUh;n5hGhG5\hGhh56CJOJQJ\]^JaJ&hD>h5CJOJQJ\^JaJ h5CJOJQJ\^JaJ h''hCJOJQJ^JaJ#h''h5CJOJQJ^JaJh5CJOJQJ^JaJh ++hC6CJ]aJh ++hU6CJ]aJh ++h;n6CJ]aJh ++h56CJ]aJhU6CJ\]aJh ++hC56CJ]aJQ:R:::::;;;)<<gkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 layt $Ifgd h7$8$H$^hgd;n ;!;;;g<<<<!=-=.=>'>3>L>Y>Z>>>????G@{@ABAB򙄙s^Sh6CJ]aJ)hD>h5>*CJOJQJ\^JaJ h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ)hD>h6CJH*OJQJ]^JaJ&hD>h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ&h&xh5CJOJQJ\^JaJ)h&xh5>*CJOJQJ\^JaJh''hCJaJ h''hCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJ<<=>?? $Ifgdgkdq$$IflF>d|%>'    44 layt??@@BABB $7$8$H$Ifgd $Ifgdgkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytBBBBCCCODjDDDDDDDE(E~EEEEEEGGyG҆uuudS h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ hPhCJOJQJ^JaJ h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ&hPh6CJOJQJ]^JaJ#h&xh>*CJOJQJ^JaJ)h&xh5>*CJOJQJ\^JaJ h''hCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJh''hCJaJ(hXhCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH BB1DkDDEE $IfgdgkdS$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytEEFFGGG $Ifgdgkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytyGGGGGHIIIJJJKL"L#LLLLLLMMMMNNYNZN[NjNNOJPLPPQQQǼ}hdh;n(h%@uhCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH (hn:hCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH h6CJ]aJhCJOJQJ^JaJ h''hCJOJQJ^JaJh''hCJaJ&hn:h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ&hn:h6CJOJQJ]^JaJ&GGEImIIJJ $7$8$H$Ifgd $Ifgdgkd5$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytJJ#L$LBLLLL $Ifgdgkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytLLMMMNNZN $Ifgdgkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytZN[NOOPKPLPPQ $7$8$H$Ifgd $Ifgdgkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 laytQQQQQSRTRRRS~umhZ & F5x^5gdQgdC & FgdC 7$8$H$gd;n 7$8$H$^gdW 7$8$H$^gd;ngkd$$IflF>d|%>'    44 layt Q,Q-Q3QQR R@RTRRS%U/V9VNV}VVVVVVWWhmshms0JB* CJOJQJ^JaJeh@phjr@-hmshms0JB*CJOJQJ^JaJph3336jhmshms0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJph333$hmshms0JCJOJQJ^JaJhms0JCJOJQJ^JaJhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhW0JCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhRCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ*hWhR0J5CJOJQJ\^JaJ^^F^G^a^b^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ڹvVC0$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhW0JCJOJQJ^JaJ>hmshms0JB* CJOJQJ^JaJeh@phjr@-hmshms0JB*CJOJQJ^JaJph3336jhmshms0JB*CJOJQJU^JaJph333hms0JCJOJQJ^JaJhW0JCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhRCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhms0JCJOJQJ^JaJ^^^_efNillllm[mvmwmmmmmmnn=n>n?nFnGn$a$gdO$gdO$gdWgd.gd]^&_'___`__________________````*`,`?`@`A`T`U`^```i`j`q`r`````````` a a4a5a>a?aPaQaZa[arasaɹhms0JCJOJQJ^JaJ#he he CJOJQJ\^JaJhe 0JCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhRCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ;saaaaaaaaaabb b bbb%b&b+b,b:b;bSbUbobpbqb~bbbbbbbbbbbbcc&c'c(c4c5cEcFc_c`cpcqcccccccccccc"d#d'd)dhe 0JCJOJQJ^JaJh]0JCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhRCJOJQJ^JaJ$hWhR0JCJOJQJ^JaJB)d.d/d4d5d>d?dadcdsdtdudddddddddddddee-e/eEeFeGeQeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeefff$f%f&f'fnFnGn[n\nnnooq qos}s~sstҺucuuO&h=hO$5CJOJQJ\^JaJ#h=hO$6CJOJQJ^JaJ&h=hO$56CJOJQJ^JaJ#h=hO$5CJOJQJ^JaJ h=hO$CJOJQJ^JaJhO$5;OJQJ\^JhO$^JmH sH hO$hq5OJQJ^JhO$h5OJQJ^Jh05OJQJ^J(h.hCJOJQJ^JaJmH sH Gn[n\nnnovooGppqq qq|qYrrnsos}s~ssttYuZu & F*$gdO$ & F *$gdO$ & F*$gdO$gdO$tZuquuvvxxrzzzz^|c|||~~݄шڎ,~ӑ,/:u#h=hO$5CJOJQJ^JaJ&h=hO$56CJOJQJ^JaJ#h=hO$6CJOJQJ^JaJ&h=hO$5CJOJQJ\^JaJ h=hO$CJOJQJ^JaJ,h=hO$5B*CJOJQJ^JaJph,h=hO$B*CJOJQJ\^JaJph-Zuquvvvxxxqzrzzz"|#|Y~Z~Z[ӁԁEFa & F*$gdO$gdO$ & F*$gdO$abш҈BC^_ώЎ ./:JKgd8t!gdW & F*$gdO$gdO$̒'/68ڕIݠɼɃumhmd_dXdXdXdQdMh7 h*MIh:C h+Dh:C h:C6h:C h:C5h+Dh:C5h+hq5OJQJ^Jh+h05OJQJ^JhO$h8t!5OJQJ\^JhO$h8t!H*OJQJ^JhO$h.OJQJ^JhO$h8t!OJQJ^J hO$hqCJOJQJ^JaJh0hq5OJQJ^Jh0h05OJQJ^JhO$5CJaJQJٕڕە!"hiIp}<$a$gd:Cgd:C8^8gd8t!^gd8t!gd8t! & F gd8t!<Lϟ4ݠޠ st qүӯ h^`gd:Cgd:Cӯ߰,-bֳGִ/l͵ߵ' & F p^gd:C & F 88^8gd:C & F hh^hgd:Cgd:C-<b{}źȺ&'=>MNOPQceǺ~q~q`SIhj>*B*phh3]Lhj>*B*ph h|hj5B*CJaJphht0hj6B*phhj6B*phhjB*ph hjhqhj56B*phh3]Lhj56B*phhj5B*phh3]Lhj5B*ph#hO$hq5CJOJQJ^JaJh+h05OJQJ^JhUOh:CH*hXPh:C5 h:C5h:C'UӶHX̷ڷ;K & F @   ^ gd:C & F @  " ]"^ gd:C & F hh^hgd:C & F p^gd:C & F p|]|^gd:C & F 88^8gd:CKh~Ӹܸ-BSdtŹݹ' & F 88^8gd:C & F @   ^ gd:C & F p^gd:C & F   ^ gd:C'1R'NOQde~ $7$8$H$a$gdj$p7$8$H$^pa$gdj$7$8$H$^a$gdj $7$8$H$a$gdjgd:C & F p^gd:C & F 88^8gd:C & F @   ^ gd:C & F   ^ gd:CeǼ./1]^սֽ;<dexy =TkPRpǾǵǬǬ씊}}h:+hj5B*phhj5B*phhhHhj5B*phhvY1hjB*phhhj0Jh7hj0Jhjhj0JjhjB*UphhjhjB*phh:+hjB*H*phhjB*phh-hjB*ph1{|Ǽ1{|Z[ <=RXagop $7$8$H$a$gdjpz.[c 4N!ԾᰢtetYtetMthJh0CJH*aJhJh05CJaJhJh0B*CJaJphhJh0CJaJ hJh05B*CJaJph#h0h05B*CJ\aJphh0h05B*\phh0B*OJQJ^Jphh:+hjB*phhvY1hjB*phh:+hj5B*phhj5B*phhjB*phh'Fhj5B*phpyzZ[c4MN!XY $7$8$H$a$gd0gd0 $7$8$H$a$gd0 $7$8$H$a$gdjpJjk6v4b6P|2ƶةةة蚇r](hJh06B*CJaJmH phsH (hJh05B*CJaJmH phsH %hJh0B*CJaJmH phsH hJh0B*CJaJphhJh0CJ^JaJhJh06CJaJmH sH "hJh06CJ\aJmH sH hJh0CJ\aJmH sH hJh0CJaJhJh05CJaJ$vojk~cq & Fgd0 & Fgd0gd0 Ux$}~uv34b%&gd0^gd0 & Fgd0 & Fgd0mn56P/0./Go  & Fgd0m$h^hgd0  & Fh^hgd0m$^gd0gd0h^hgd0 |}QRT23'(78QR0^0gd0  & Fgd0m$^gd0h^hgd0  & Fh^hgd0m$24D&RST "#%&()+<خylaPHDHDHDHD5ha5Nha5NCJaJmH sH h 6jh 6U!hO$hjB*OJQJ^JphhJh0CJaJhJh0CJ^JaJhJh0CJaJmH sH hJh05CJaJmH sH +hJh05>*B*CJaJmH phsH ( *hJh0B*CJaJmH phsH (hJh06B*CJaJmH phsH %hJh0B*CJaJmH phsH (hJh0B*CJH*aJmH phsH RSmL| $7$8$H$a$gdj8xx^8`gd00xx^`0gd0xxgd0gd0^gd0  & Fh^hgd0m$!"$%'(*+<=>? $7$8$H$a$gdj$a$gda5Ngda5N <>?!hO$hjB*OJQJ^Jphh 610:p./ =!"#$6% n/'  ƹdPNG  IHDRqW pHYs.#.#x?vgAMAOX2tEXtSoftwareAdobe ImageReadyqe</QIDATxb`` &=(4F(<CG(T4` ELZ)Q0 h`A0 Fu@Q0 g s"{ Q0 hQ0*@Т@?`(`Q0@Q0 F(#(`Q0@1(6k@GcE` .0ughQ@}@h0OxaѠ F7Q0xqѠ F+Q0 u˃Ѡ F(73y(8` 0r >8$`Ph7 F(|/O$Ȱ ~8@V~`Q@[` UlPxq4* F+Q0 F( [;@;J WώOЁ@#zH F+Q0 F(gT=@alj#P/T n#g@( (T8. A ^ACŏ Ѹ  Ft;@.2Xz<πy`4@q˻|C/g?Sq Y F$:P:#ѡ?G ǑF`$8+ô~S+@>IQ硅hp[P#G@gcqπR4hZՒ(,t 6ď6cICQDLDK<:O8@?Z܎7 l7t 0t%@2@D>׏ ^~*Oz/'==zKoo |/pЬ1wʀ^yz_َҷm-V؞G+lGvnCF#"E W^ZRo[؎{hi{ z $ C*@Ww,EM*Qj/5B0$Gi٠v&(F+@*@ٝg\wb 9ÐAC 9Q0+C5#MԮI>= Cc?' V0z'v0eE0To3@'FPt: IC rEO#F+@XZbk8Ѻ7FNbx|3nU6~P3F92Im@3?I=10DH.}F\VNS@U~\D2Iڽ1rVRR!n`hwʡDʏhagR5R{ؤVȣ薆Q穙֕`(lG}#$&V~C5a` s+?Rhat8muh7}.7g@1R&ILT @|q4} H4yx"g⇣Q2$њeX2 0Q4 FHPvOSE?Ll~4<:z#4F(<y y8x$f;+;>p@Q0 Ǜ3 t P>>OA/$m@h_ OHD_bGGzyI ւP(]` @q]~4 EN C8(ȋ}@B*4Rpʞąj ZXG(7fЖ~h7 6y6#ϓd&z @V~x=7 x2 od}#*Dh` R@!nRnbH0e;oQ0>&@|p@>Q¯ 4ZQ0 '@JA5*`GR{4ZQ0 F{} > ڤ,p0zmT ,}Xn: F`(Hza0L+^&؀ ğUYGhXz8 F( vZ6N@>t ~8'f&JCi8V~=4 F( h 0TDH? @zs@1Q=Pu!r$ 8 .BOqj@El@׽(@ 校4Ȑ `+`(صHviy8 ߜ/(*X+he( S_U[Ofoʷ]ru{<jSπVvXvlM<($b/ h7t*?"F vjG?ZȞK=Fu[4Z >PZ)3($5R~|èC3RΞat*ba@G(lŠ4K*H@GR2%`˷R;qQra0 pJ_ROj哅A3l&@DPeM@V~\ #bAA.Ux4H@*Fi@e!۵"C5nFgd4^k XFgȂ`χaQ@[TUj wQ ^h7 F(GQ#40Z`W2 @#lOѴ0 FT~^3 F*?l 1=z`^(@)T~4ZQ0hY(~0;hQ@OpJ;0 1Xn3`/iU$PO { X$@`4-A Yua}C @R6 P@ f85?@ht(`f`Ѩ0n 9k] ; c0 @(,`6[[-tl=ROSxg8n96H``pBl(U9`)tFBwZZ(@6+l 1u İz0r\D?8nhtsQ@˞߁W{hO yTCaE;0 *%^&UvbT'2@?T?LO=Z}w`a@#`=7rZy|8PZEЀ f @/tyNR2 UĔN`@,?\H;0 F(P@kmGπzhi#JR#JȬ` *0 \Vj=ЅP\U'@[T`=SU` Pӳ2|>hQ0 F{-vUd70v1^ lV 3@s miU = 3`?-^ @]8 P1ty`KZh Pm r 9LV4i>PC6p*P1Chޛ0bv XТф<-@#Sn>#рp!Q0 ѳ@Pyph#u ʙ Y9W\*HT6OPL0 Þ CpG@34pb9P뇪S@?qaŧeGS68@գ~w/N`@lǠ4)@s~C\Ѻ$`WP;q8xh#uyĂP!z{ 4R` , PWp`@YRcO"a@ЭFda6Zq`U|^=TyĞ8]4B<1^HbŁmi*hr1p(L W?W]D >Jh7[ѣ"ۢ ?\*x0h9^^d j,o耇Xz2@")j@4x<[ Bj? #2 Fj0Lz 7׆!``C"*vW X\ hڕho HeCJ WHO{qd,  {!aO{4LpzF(L2MT@ehƃAn=+d+y/4ZѶ1\0:7 FrWRKdaq<1S '0 . P?ѳ=ݽg~` ,pTFȽBZrnw@?s & Xe 6dT_(`@v0a}A 0X @#76ܐ0 F( #ƠB}>;og@uHFA($@GD1ڏ|dlOE``=uF=げP%;!o:ju{y$T9lf0YU5=z|C'!RO;~hT~ìb_< o cd?`?D*?y$w9>T>i(oY'³B +||"*BzT` @s~C"6s뫨p400?/H k.>~C+ 9?J@Q"pԽ lAh$muN h|5j@!c]  DVwC{>C˻ /F2Aqs| vyꭗ@4* ?$(}Q0Hiv? kpTfDh`z(X6CeJ ? Nht%>ч͡<"08Nfi@ o!#lJK  MDkRTf0 ;6G+0`Υ ļ`=c`qT TўG+Q0`b@ak@"ϑ!˜zh4EÆ aJjzqc;v 4*O G)A="lOjaC~HC?BË^W7X Q02{~m=6A~T9"`P]͋kqP)@? C?]XF( ya+}*}+ho`7;(V&bA 4 @#7o=Rw```r'?@p E,^w0`^φܳQ>[@OAhhy,-Pdב3 -zI vX<@,~0nSX@Z9qpD~F6cHf>hU~朘8 Z/=0ZQG C0B Ghz sZ8z; _4P!.P(@aGYKFhںHFhU~F( Gл6"1XHbfO>;AT~i~@W F(\=|\P[+Y PRZ!$xh@!Od# Z@. 0q = F`5 Ѽ+@s5M;K~ Tc DrC""@DPq[l3h*{-p6ht(,`@: }- ]SZ̢uϷvutw80 ncv%l@D凬vNp" % FZw`||f }p e%'@J^h^C+ wy40 <;@^ l!FXF$h7 F4 BZ,bO'AiZ?jH=3lC߰^ꜙ |ԍ =Ai[?``гc@j.0X@94OU-@LîJ`ϩFh Bqr +hâanR`}]j,HLz/#MH=d` Z 7J5LIXjpy,y1Oi%klDKG(hJQ0 F-"{X0=A==lOC{ \ ŭX6?@t Fbw`<`PU~ 4`Q҃wa2 aO "W@=Q0 Fh击\rVh )|KhҪ4`@ [wh$V~F(PЦg0?Gy ;S=@Xg`0P!Z Z?T ߧAwG[-:ݧFgvL 0Je6F@#qh7 swt`s(V~IF\vⴁuq ~@. zڣG SZ/y 4ư2@ots VZ`C @ U^Fd@GIJh/P)J@ߐ19}C^V3TkqKdz"a?|\Uw쇚cVvb9B:8@Sׅ/11 Ddl2-IɮQ0xhCV[*T 5(3(ȭr{TҲ o@ժO<+?B=eFyqD^?a̸=OaOD59{UvTL#{}4 ^@Жb<twV}1 `QO-h `7 #aSknd!6BO`@][qV``5h,y?ʨ 9n\wC09't9ۀ(` '0{<=1j`=dG(Pߓ4@Q0 F@?riX '̕1n[π:WObH64hQ0 GLO XET Dʏ^?}2R<9>֜(F(`? e$_bnD;!e@ d|2Pd O :40^WkEh8?D7) V#@bcģCC $u> ԣ%z ,\JQحv ƞ~2e>=KtsFh7@=Z?+?{4Z3 q!S7X+DClg >W F+QBL F+QчIDn>pG#@Rk4<^0lQ@)xm z Hݫvq4JP 0;x  wN!nP:PgeNz KU@ +F(ƶT| ͞3237C{3Pp8'#o3KTh7Gh7|R*$lq#vanS.]@hth7Gh7JPR [*U lǨ[}̕w @(ţph)W #>e F(F0(Hl%d@3D؉1i' 3}a>hţx )T 5G\Jn#v)E4^Ks@[F(n(0 hKZ\'A" (; oO 74e-# hQ0 Fg~*)=\k^m?&?,@Joq@1Q0 FОJC"͉ ;N*ڹ+>Hz{h8!ԌơhQ0 F2ы"XZ5G$e*Ky[4F(Ra3~ a+MIr$g>H2Q4 F(+APOJL!chݻq|@Q0 ?a9\׉( 9|PPs;<M7ާ<{Of`P]2 FrѠ8-I`d` ~ JfAK.@ P;A~4"2eXmQ4 Fn}pcZj ;tئ=E` 0z *Bg*D +BǞ @Þ` *FO=BХ ށ@i˃aÕH #dF(\S(@(,G}'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ ayto$$If!vh#v#v#v:V l>'555/ aytj 2 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~ OJPJQJ_HmH nH sH tH L`L d +Normal$CJOJPJQJ_HaJmH sH tH DA`D Default Paragraph FontRi@R Table Normal4 l4a (k ( No List X@X ?& List Paragraph ^m$PJmH nHsH tH8O8 Rapple-style-spanBOB Rapple-converted-space4U`!4 ms Hyperlink >*phlo2l Default1$7$8$H$5B*CJOJPJQJ^J_HaJmH nHphsH tHH@BH qHeader  !PJmH nHsH tHRoQR q Header Char$CJOJPJQJaJmH nHsH tH4 @b4 a5NFooter  p#N/qN a5N Footer Char CJOJPJQJaJmH sH tH PK![Content_Types].xmlN0EH-J@%ǎǢ|ș$زULTB l,3;rØJB+$G]7O٭V$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3N)cbJ uV4(Tn 7_?m-ٛ{UBwznʜ"Z xJZp; {/<P;,)''KQk5qpN8KGbe Sd̛\17 pa>SR! 3K4'+rzQ TTIIvt]Kc⫲K#v5+|D~O@%\w_nN[L9KqgVhn R!y+Un;*&/HrT >>\ t=.Tġ S; Z~!P9giCڧ!# B,;X=ۻ,I2UWV9$lk=Aj;{AP79|s*Y;̠[MCۿhf]o{oY=1kyVV5E8Vk+֜\80X4D)!!?*|fv u"xA@T_q64)kڬuV7 t '%;i9s9x,ڎ-45xd8?ǘd/Y|t &LILJ`& -Gt/PK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 0_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!0C)theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] ? !kY&U-!5O: ;ByGQ]^^sa)d|6?|6@|6A|6B|6C|6D|6E|6F|6G|6H|6I|6J|6K|6L|6M|6N|6O|6P|6Q|6R|6S|6T|6U|6V|6W|6X|6Y|6Z|6[|6\|6]|6^|6_|6`|6a|6b|6c|6d|6e|6f|6g|6h|6i|6j|6k|6l|6m|6n|6o|6p|6q|6r|6s|6t|6u|6v|6w|6x|6y|6z|6{|6||6}|6~|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6 }6 }6 }6 }6 }6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6}6 }6!}6"}6#}6uuHHKKS[c a__  hhgg`#`#y%y%M&M&U&v())m**** + +++_-f-u-u-h1h122 :== =HHH1J1JfNfNSSScUcUUUfVWWWZ[]]]]]%e%e;eAeeee8l_l_lmmnnoooorrst^tttyuyuvvxxyyyyzzzzz{\|\||~~^^{{kk??__XXdϑɔ%%עע  556RRXXaggUUQ~ LLdd44>``ii @      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPRQSTUXVWYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~TTRZbii qddmmoog#g#%%T&Z&Z&}())x****,+,+++d-o-~-~-o1o1$2$2:=&=&=HHH?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPRQSTUWXVYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~ >*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName9s*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState;*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsaddress:*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsStreetB*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType H sssssssci' - 6 > '$qx !!!!E-L-::EE II TTVT[ToTwTDVFVVVVVWWWW/X5X YYZZZZf\m\\\\\\\]]=^H^L^W^h^q^r^z^BcGc[dbdeeHgPgrrrr*t0t1t;tavgv[xaxbxkx@yJy zz||'&-5rz=EZaݕ =D{)1ioɧЧkn δӴGM^gpwJRRZ!"$%'(*+=@-/**r=~=eekqrq^c̷η)My1=>Cfr79!"$%'(*+=@3333333333333333333333, 002355;1<m>>??CBDEE>RnRSShSiS~STT.U@UUUUVddeeefiiokkZmqmnnrrrҀoІ֬/ͭ߭HX;ӰtűR'e U$oR8RS@ef!"$%'(*+=@$74ar?(wB" "Wf1TS#"' ?$on)(nW+ F.0(`L5 Wܥ??F{ddATcT{DyX(v\8]g$bmp^H nPm^`.hh^h`.^`OJQJhh^h`.h808^8`0o(.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.^`o() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.hh^h`o(. 88^8`hH. L^`LhH.   ^ `hH.   ^ `hH. xLx^x`LhH. HH^H`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.h8^8`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh ^ `OJ QJ o(hHh ^ `OJQJo(hHhx^x`OJQJo(hHohH^H`OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hH808^8`0o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hHop^p`OJ QJ o(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hHo^`OJ QJ o(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hHoP^P`OJ QJ o(hHh  ^ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hHh| | ^| `OJQJo(hHhLL^L`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hH^`o() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.h^`OJQJo(hHhp^p`OJQJo(hHoh@ ^@ `OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHhP^P`OJQJo(hHoh ^ `OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohp^p`OJ QJ o(hHh@ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJ QJ o(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohP^P`OJ QJ o(hHh ^`o(hH.^`^J.pLp^p`L^J.@ @ ^@ `^J.^`^J.L^`L^J.^`^J.^`^J.PLP^P`L^J. ^`hH. ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pL^p`LhH.h @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PL^P`LhH.h^`OJQJo(hH ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH. ^`hH.h^`OJQJo(hH pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.h  ^ `OJQJo(hHh ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.hh^h`o(. 88^8`hH. L^`LhH.   ^ `hH.   ^ `hH. xLx^x`LhH. HH^H`hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH.cT{D "F.0)??bm]g1TS#$74(H nwB"?$`L5{ddAXv\nW+WW8Num1WW8Num3WW8Num4WW8Num5-                                   -                                                                                                                             98W;n0] ?& 8t!?d" ++Qa,#.fq4yf6Kf=U@:C&Ga5NSN-Q #mailto:filomena.nelson@mnre.gov.wsF` mailto:Daniel.Jaksa@ga.gov.auB6mailto:u.wolf@unesco.orgq7http://www.ioc-unesco.org/mailto:K.Gledhill@gns.cri.nzx3http://www.ioc-unesco.org/mailto:n.gale@gns.cri.nz  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$&'()*+,./012349Root Entry F@Ӈ,;Data 1TabledWordDocument SummaryInformation(%DocumentSummaryInformation8-CompObjr  F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q