Minutes to Meeting

1. Introductions and Welcome

Chairman (Doug Brown – USA/NOAA) and Vice Chair (LCDR Rafael Ponce – Mexico) welcomed the attendees (28 persons). A list of attendees is contained in Annex A. Chairman explained that purpose of meeting was to update and review the status of the electronic chart initiative project for the region. Chairman made mention that Dr. Lee Alexander (USA - Univ. of New Hampshire) has been contracted by USA-NOAA to assist the Chairman and Vice Chairman with technical coordination for the Caribbean Sea – Gulf of Mexico region GHC Region electronic chart implementation project.

2. Status of Action Items from Last Meeting

Erich Frey (USA-NOAA) provided an update on the status of action items resulting from the last Meeting (April 2001). Terms of Reference and the Revised Plan have been harmonized. A Primary Port List was also developed. It included a list of ports and points-of-contact for commercial shipping companies. This information is available on the CGMHC-ECWG website: http://www.iho-cgmhc.org/

Lee Alexander (USA) mentioned that the list of ports had not been prioritized, and requested that each participant provide an updated list of ports based on their assessment of importance for commercial shipping and recreation/tourism. Rosemary Tuhey (UK) supplied an extract from the ARCS licence database (using 6 major international ports) showing shipping companies who already had electronic chart fits. These could be the start point for setting up a SHARED type demonstration.

3. Major Challenges Associated with Producing Official Data in CGM Region

LCDR Rafael Ponce (Mexico) gave a PowerPoint presentation that provided an overview of the problems and challenges associated with hydrography and charting for Mexico. [Note: A copy of the presentation will be posted on the CGMHC-EC Working Group Website: http://www.iho-cgmhc.org/]. In particular, he described the approach that Mexico is taking to increase the production and coverage of nautical charts (paper and electronic) in Mexican waters. The Nautical Cartography National Plan of Mexico involves four main areas:

a. Adequacy of Hydrographic Surveying

b. ENC Production (tools and training)

c. Data Distribution and Services

d. Funding (investment and income)

Specific mention was made of Plan Puebla – Panama project. It is intended to increase human and ecological richness of the Meso-American region with a view to enhancing sustainable development while maintaining cultural diversity. Increased production of nautical charting products and services are considered necessary to facilitate efficient, cost-effective transportation of people and merchandise. This project is also linked with the Central American Commission for Maritime Transportation (COCATRAM) Project. COCATRAM has the objective to increase intermodal transportation throughout the entire Central American region. Another project, Escalera Nautica intends to develop a nautical chart infrastructure that is targeted for the tourist and yachting market in four Pacific Coast and Gulf of California states of Mexico. This project involves both hydrographic surveying and the production of large-scale electronic chart products in over 100 ports and recreational regions. It also includes the establishment of an intermodal transportation infrastructure (e.g., roads, airports, shipping terminals, and marina facilities.

LCDR Ponce also presented some of the potential options for regional data distribution of electronic chart data. More specifically, a comparison was made between PRIMAR-style Regional Electronic Chart Center (RENC) and Virtual RENC (VRENC). Regardless of which approach is to be followed, there are a number of issues that must be considered. Perhaps the most important factors are limited resources and funding.

Chairman remarked that in addition to RENC and VRENC, there were also two other possible options: “individual HO-based distribution and private sector-based distribution.

RADM Angrisano (IHB) commented that as a result of the ENC Workshop held in Havana, Cuba in conjunction with GEOMATICA 2002, that a VRENC was an option most favored by the private sector since they could make the greatest contributions to this option (e.g., value-added distribution and service).

Phil Wainright (UK) provided a brief update on the status of PRIMAR. Beginning in July, the original PRIMAR will be replaced by two separate RENC entities: PRIMAR- Stavanger and International Centre for ENC by the UKHO.

Tony O’Connor (Canada) asked if there was any indication of a regional demand for electronic chart products. For instance, based on Canadian experience, a “raster first then ENC” may be the best approach. This approach was also quite successful in the USA. Rolando Feito (Cuba) agreed and made mention that 160 RNCs were first produced to provide coverage of all Cuban national waters. The next step is to shift the focus and to begin producing ENCs.

4. Regional Electronic Chart Data Coverage

Lee Alexander (USA) provided a summary of the various types and coverage of Electronic Chart data for the region. [Note: A copy of this presentation will be posted on the CGMHC-EC Working Group site: http://www.iho-cgmhc.org]. This includes official HO (ENC and RNC) as well as commercially-produced raster and vector data. Chairman made specific mention that in the USA, an ENC updating service needs to be implemented before they can be used for navigation purposes.

Michel Huet (IHB) provided a brief update on the IHB WEND study that is being conducted to determine the availability and compatibility of ENCs to satisfy world-wide requirements of shipping. The key emphasis is on main shipping routes and ENC coverage. The report is being prepared by Portugal and is due to be completed this month. [Note: Further information about this survey study is contained in IHB CL 31/2001, 29 June 2001].

Paul Cooper (USA- NAVO) gave a brief overview on the NAVOCEANO International Cooperative Hydrography Program. He made specific mention of the benefits to regional HOs of bi-lateral cooperation. He also feels there is an excellent opportunity to conduct a “Marine Electronic Highway” type project that could be funded by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). In the near-term, Panama and Honduras will be involved in HYCOOP.

Rosemary Tuhey (UK) asked about the process whereby the existance and limits of HYCOOP new survey information could be made available to the primary charting nation for incorporation into existing charts. Paul Cooper will check on this.

5. Discussion on Best Way Forward

a. Report on Discussions Held at GEOMATICA 2002

In conjunction with GEOMATICA 2002 Conference, an ENC Workshop was held in Havana, Cuba on 18 February 2002. Organized by the IHB, the purpose of this Workshop was to increase awareness of the challenges and benefits related to ENC production. Topics discussed included the status of international standards, various options for ENC distribution, and the role of the private sector in assisting regional HOs. During the Workshop the SHARED Demonstration Project was discussed as a means to facilitate ENC production, distribution and service for the region. In addition to recommendations regarding a new name and focus for the project, an important outcome was the preparation of an “Enhanced” Task List of the 13 action items listed in the Proposed Plan for Extending the SHARED Demonstration into the Caribbean Sea – Gulf of Mexico (23 February 2001). A copy of this “Enhanced Task List” is attached as Annex B. The ECWG greatly appreciates the interest and recommendations of the attendees at the ENC Workshop. The suggested tasks will be taken under consideration by the ECWG.

b. Near-term Actions

1) Identify Needs for ENC Production Training

Vice-Chair (Rafael Ponce) made specific mention of the need for extensive training in ENC production. Based on the experience of Mexico, extensive training on ENC production tools is needed in order for an HO to be able to produce ENC data.

2) Realign/Rename Project

It was agreed that “Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Electronic Chart Implementation Project”, as suggested during the ENC Workshop held prior to GEOMATICA 2002, was a more appropriate name than “Extension of the SHARED Demonstration Project.”

3) Refine Priority Ports List

There is a need to look at not only major shipping routes/ports, but also other routes/ports that are involved in regional trade/commerce – particularly as it relates to the tourism/recreational industry since this is such an important part of the regional economy. UK believes this should be a two-stage process that first involves existing ships on major routes with ECDIS/ECS. Chile pointed out that it is important to be open-minded in that there may be other ideas in terms of how priorities are made. USA-NIMA, USA-NOAA, Cuba and Mexico all agreed that the potential for the recreational market is very great.

4) Focus on large-scale ENCs

Vice-Chair also suggested that rather than working to achieve complete regional coverage of small-scale ENCs (e.g., general or coastal navigation purpose) that the initial focus should be to produce large-scale ENCs for approaches and harbors of high-priority ports within the Caribbean Sea – Gulf of Mexico region.

c. Long-Term Actions

1) Establishment of a RENC

Chairman asked if there was a consensus on what was the best approach to achieve regional cooperation for data distribution. France commented that a VRENC is still just a concept. Also, a key aspect is ENC maintenance and updating so that distributed data is accurate. Based on PRIMAR experience, Cuba supports the idea of creating a VRENC more so than a RENC. Mexico agreed and believes that a VRENC would enable a regional approach to training and exchange of knowledge. Venezuela supports the comments of Mexico and Cuba regarding the establishment of a VRENC.

The Netherlands feels that data validation must be performed regardless whether a RENC or VRENC, and that a centralized database may be advisable at least until a process for ENC validation is proven. UK agrees with the Netherlands that one central entity (e.g., a facility or organization) is key. Mexico agrees, that it is important where the server is physically located and who will operate it. UK suggested that it might be useful to utilize the two existing RENCs (International Centre for ENC (UK) and PRIMAR (Stavanger). UK also stressed that implementing an appropriate ENC updating service is crucial to official ENC production and coverage.

2) Obtaining International Financial Assistance

RADM Angrisano (IHB) remarked about the need to look into the opportunity to obtain financial assistance from international funding organizations (e.g., World Bank or GEF). However, in order to obtain a grant, it will be necessary to develop a detailed proposal.

6. Follow-up Action Items

a. Explore existing RENC models in order to develop an optimum infrastructure for the CGM region in order to harmonize production and coordinate distribution of official electronic chart products (e.g., ENCs and RNCs). Particular attention should be given to the matter of data validation and the experiences of other RENCs (e.g., PRIMAR and the MBSHC VRENC). An exploratory phase could include both interim and long-term solutions.

Action: Lee Alexander (USA) will prepare a “white paper” that will be sent to participants for comment prior to the next meeting.

b. Expand the List of Major Ports to include both major shipping routes/ports and key regional ports/routes considered important for tourism/recreation.

Action: Lee Alexander (USA) will contact IHB, regional HOs and other pertinent authorities to develop a comprehensive list of important ports/routes based on national priorities.

c. Explore the funding possibilities and requirements that may be available through the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and others.

Action: Lee Alexander (USA) will prepare a brief report that will be distributed for consideration and comment.

7. Next Meeting – To be held in conjunction with the CGMHC meeting on 4-6 November 2002 in Biloxi, Mississippi, USA.