Sea Control - Sea Control 448 - Integrating NOAA Into DoD's Arctic Operations

Episode Date: July 27, 2023

Links1. “White Hulls in the North: The Case for Tapping Unused Federal Resources in the Arctic,” by Kristen M. Heiserman and Ryan Burke, Modern Warfare Institute, December 12, 2022.2. “Bridging the Gap: How the United States Can Immediately Address It’s Arctic Capability Limitations,” by Adrienne Hopper and Ryan Burke, Modern Warfare Institute, June 22, 2022.3. National Strategy for the Arctic Region, the White House, October 2022.4. Sea Control 250: Dr. Joshua Tallis on Arctic Security, by Walker Mills, CIMSEC, May 16, 2021.5. “Why the US is Losing the Race for the Arctic and What to Do About It,” by Josh Caldon, CIMSEC, April 13, 2023.6. U.S. Air Force Academy Institute for Future Conflict.7. Modern Warfare Institute Project 6633.8. Dr. Ryan Burke, University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Hey folks, it's Jared Walker-Mills returns as host today with guest Major Kristen Heiserman from the United States Air Force, Dr. Ryan Burke, a professor at the Air Force Academy, and Lieutenant Commander Adrian Hopper. And they're going to discuss integrating NOAA into DOD's Arctic operations. This episode was edited and produced by Jim Jarby. We are rapidly approaching our 300th episode since relaunch. So to celebrate, we're going to attempt a little bit of a mailbag episode. If you have a question about the podcast that you'd like me to answer on the air,

please send it to sea control at simsec.org i'd like to pause here to highlight our local chapters whether you're in south korea egypt singapore france new york india or the caribbean chances are there's a simsec local chapter near you you can find a full listing of local chapters and contact information on our website simsec.org so if you're interested please reach out and get involved finally i want to take the opportunity to recommend our partners in the simsec podcast network the bilge pumps you can find alex jamie drack and a pile of iron brew bottles wherever you download your podcasts. And with that, Kimbers Minton. Welcome back aboard the Sea Control Podcast from the Center for International Maritime Security. I'm your host, Walker Mills.

Today, we're talking with Major Kristen Heiserman, U.S. Air Force, Dr. Ryan Burke, a professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy, and Lieutenant Commander Adrian Hopper from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. We're going to talk about a pair of recent articles our guests wrote arguing for the integration of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's fleet within the DoD's Arctic operations. Adrian, Ryan, you wrote the first article outlining the Federal Oceanographic Fleet's utility in arguing for NOAA's integration into DoD operations that the Modern War Institute published in June. Kristen Ryan, you evolved this argument in a second NWI article, digging into specific

capabilities NOAA vessels offer DoD for Arctic operations in evaluating the various legal and policy frameworks supporting the case. I think this is a really fascinating topic, so let's get started. Kristen, over to you first. Welcome to Sea Control. Can you introduce yourself a bit more to the listeners. Yeah, thank you, Walker, and thanks for having us. I've been in the Air Force for 14 years, mostly under Air Force Special Operations Command as a MQ-1 Predator Pilot and U-28 Draco Pilot. Prior to my current assignment, I was the speechwriter for the Commander of NORAD and U.S. NORTHCOM. That's where I found my interest in the Arctic and learned about the subsequent challenges we face for homeland defense. When I arrived at USAFA for my Institute for

Future Conflict Fellowship in 2022. I sought out Dr. Burke because we had the same interest in the Arctic. So I needed an advisor as well and to help guide me through the academic world. So this is all pretty new to me. So we spoke about NOAA and what Adrian and he had collaborated on, and we took the narrative one step further and added domain awareness to the mix. And that's Mantra. Awesome. Over to you, Ryan. i'm the i'm the one that pulls the thread together so in this case i prefer to be behind adrian so hey why don't you go ahead and go in front and i'll finish behind you thanks walker it's great to be here i'm excited for the for the conversation i've been with noah for just coming

up on 15 years now over six of that has been spent at sea i've spent time working in the gulf of mexico southeast united states caribbean and then out in the pacific kind of spanning from tahiti all the way north into the Arctic, into the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. So kind of an incredible maritime resume. The rest of my time has been spent in a variety of staff roles and positions. I've worked for fisheries out in Hawaii, and then a lot kind of here in the DC area, working at NOAA headquarters, but then also Department of Commerce with the political leadership team, doing some staff work there. So kind of great experiences across the board. Last year, I spent the year at Harvard at the Harvard Kennedy School.

That's where I met Ryan and in some of our classes. And, you know, one day over lunch, kind of having conversations and a back of the napkin exercise turned into a school project, which then, you know, has turned into some articles in this conversation today. So it's been exciting to kind of see things progress. Been looking forward to talking a little bit more. Awesome. Back to you, Ryan.

Thanks, Walker, for having us. I really appreciate it. It's great to be here. Again, Ryan Burke from the Air Force Academy. I've got several other affiliations. I'm broadly involved in the defense community through my research and other activities. But as I'm saying this, I can see Adrian and Kristen are probably unimpressed that they've heard this multiple times. So for today, I'm just going to be Ryan. but in all seriousness right again we appreciate the opportunity to talk through this because this is really an idea that's gaining a lot of traction really quickly we're thrilled to see what's evolved from this from that one conversation that adrian alluded to all right well we're glad that you guys did and before we start i'd like to remind our listeners that the opinions presented here are solely our own and should not be taken as representative of any of the institutions that we represent or associate with. Kristen, let's start with you. Before we talk about your article specifically, can you just step back a moment and kind of explain where the U.S. stands in

Arctic competition and why it's important to national defense? This is a great way to set the stage for the podcast. So the Arctic is an avenue of approach to the homelands. And by homelands, I mean Canada and the U.S. Due to melting sea ice, bandages in technology, and motivation to challenge international rules and norms, the Arctic is a place that is becoming more accessible and an economic stomping ground because of its resources. So since the U.S. entered GWAT, Russia and China took this as an opportunity to quietly build up resources and capabilities in the Arctic, the U.S.'s attention was diverted. Since 2007, Russia has been building up militarization of the Arctic by revitalizing Soviet-era bases in their north, and Putin just

revealed a nuclear icebreaker capability. Russia is putting constraints on freedom of navigation along the northern sea route, and similarly, the People's Republic of China have nukes and frequent the Arctic on military vessels conducting quote-unquote scientific missions. The PRC also declares themselves as a near-Arctic nation and envisions a polar silk road part of their Belt and Road Initiative, and are observers of the Arctic Council, who is currently chaired by Russia. Acknowledging this increase in activity, the White House will name an Arctic ambassador soon, and they recently updated the 2013 National Strategy for the Arctic Region, focusing efforts on security, climate change, and environmental protection, sustainable economic

development, and international cooperation and governance. That's kind of the emphasis here. This came out around the same month as the National Defense Strategy, which emphasizes increased shared maritime domain awareness, utilizing allies and partners, and echoing adherence to internationally agreed upon rules and norms in the Arctic. We've also seen how strategic competitors are capable of disregarding that ideal in other parts of the world. So although the U.S. is starting a small pivot toward the Arctic, it's not enough and it's a little late. It's too little, too late. Russia and China have over 20 years on us in advancing capabilities in the Arctic. So in order for the U.S. to remain in competition, we must have

persistent presence, which can give us all domain awareness. It all starts with domain awareness. If we have domain awareness, then we can achieve information dominance. This gives us a huge competitive advantage and insight of what our adversaries plan to do. So once we know that, then the ball is in our court. This is a considered decision superiority. Being persistently present in the Arctic is also campaigning. By campaigning in the Arctic, we can conduct integrated deterrence and stay left of crisis and conflict. We need to do more to adequately defend the homeland. Like the first line in our article, it says, we can't deter what we can't detect. And I think NOAA can help us out with that.

Well, thank you. That's really kind of a great scene setter. And I've personally, I've definitely become more interested in the Arctic. I recently did a short course with the Ted Stevens Center that the DOD recently established up in Alaska. And then for the listeners, we'll throw the links to a couple other podcasts we've done on different facets of maritime security in the Arctic if they want to look for those. And so, Adrian, Ryan, first, I just want to ask if you've got anything that you'd want to add to that. no we'll cover a couple more points of emphasis and responses as we go through thanks sounds good so ryan now moving on to the argument that you guys make between these two pieces you know what's the proposal you know what are you what are you suggesting that the united states do to increase the u.s maritime presence and in the arctic the the point of emphasis here is maritime presence and so one of the things the in the evolving narrative in the arctic is people come out and

they say that that the u.s isn't in the arctic and we need to we need to clarify that because it's not the case right the u.s is in the arctic they have been in the arctic when i say we you know a pretty significant time period during the cold war but the preponderance of that presence if not almost exclusively that the level of that presence has been in the subsurface domain some submarines and then in the air domain right and flying planes around and doing reconnaissance and a whole host of other things so it's not to say that the u.s has not ever been in the arctic that we need to be more in the Arctic, again, the point of emphasis being on the maritime presence in the Arctic, the surface level presence in the Arctic. And that's where this argument really

comes in to try to kind of bridge that gap. The title of the argument or the title of the article that Adrian and I wrote is bridging the gap, right? And we mean that for a reason. What we're trying to do is put some teeth behind these policies. So we've seen a flurry of Arctic strategies and Arctic policies and so forth coming out from all the various services in the last few years. We've seen now a new flurry of Arctic language in the various policies that have come out. The National Defense Strategy just recently mentioned that the Arctic has a particular point of emphasis. And we see a lot of this great policy rhetoric. It all sounds great, but when you really break it down and look at what we were actually doing, there's not a whole heck of a lot of

substance behind it. So it's a lot of, again, it's a lot of verb, or excuse me, a lot of verbiage, a lot of oxygen being wasted without a whole lot of substance and action behind it. So what we're trying to do, myself and Kristen and Adrian, through the course of these advocacy pitches, right, through articles and podcasts like this one, is trying to bring awareness to what we have available, what we currently are doing versus what we're not doing. And then obviously try to bring some attention to some underutilized federal assets. And that's where the crux of the argument comes in. So if we start by acknowledging that the U.S. is not really in the Arctic by way of a maritime presence, right? That at least gives us a point of departure to say that it doesn't

take a whole heck of a lot to do more, right? Because we're just not doing really anything to say anything about our current presence. Yeah, the Navy and the Coast Guard, they have their regular operations, right? The Navy partakes in an annual Arctic exercise, right? But it's scheduled, it's limited. There's not a whole heck of a lot of time beyond the scheduled operation. That's not necessarily a persistent, it's not necessarily, it's an unnecessary modifier. That is not persistent presence by any definition. And so this isn't a secret, right? We've got even folks like General Van Aher, who's the current commander of U.S. NORAD and NORTHCOM, saying that we don't have enough presence to compete in the other way in the United States. We simply don't

have enough presence to compete in the Arctic the way we need to compete. And so we can talk a big game and we can write great policies that sound really good. But again, absent any action corresponding with these policies, we're not doing enough really, again, to emphasize what Kristen mentioned about defending the homeland in particular. And so what we want to do is look into currently available federal assets, in this case, in the federal fleet. And this is where the NOAA proposal comes in. And Adrian will speak a little more in detail about what the NOAA fleet actually can do by way of utility value for the Arctic. But we're talking about basically bringing in an existing federal asset writ large in the NOAA fleet and bringing them onto the DOD mission

scope. And not necessarily retasking or repurposing scientific vessels or research vessels. That's not in any way what we're saying. We're saying take advantage of what's already being done, right? And Adrian will speak much more particularly about the specifics of that. But again, the point being is that NOAA is already in the Arctic. They're in the Arctic in many cases, more so than most other federal assets, at least in certain times of the year. This is an empirical fact. You can look at the numbers and days at sea and what NOAA vessels are doing versus what the Coast Guard and the Navy are doing as an example. And we can see that NOAA is the most Arctic president of our federal fleet, right? We're large and inclusive of the DOD and our scientific vessels. And so we want to

emphasize that it's probably fair to say that nobody knows the Arctic more than NOAA. Nobody is in the Arctic more than NOAA. And DOD doesn't know what NOAA knows. And DOD needs to know what NOAA knows, right? So this is, we're talking about environmental intelligence and understanding of the operational environment, which for anybody who's worn the uniform or works in the Department of Defense, you know that it's a critical requirement for any operational mission set. You need to understand the environment that you operate in. And if we're not present in the Arctic, we simply don't understand the environment. And so what we are proposing collectively is that we should take advantage of the most present federal asset writ large, again, with the NOAA

fleet that has and collects the majority of our Arctic environmental intelligence. And I'll wrap up here by saying that there's a number of different examples that we can get into with what NOAA can do by way of increasing presence and providing us a utility value. But a recent tasker just came down. For those on the inside working at the U.S. Northcom, a recent task we came down, we're trying to talk about some ways to implement the current national strategy for the Arctic region. And looking at a handful of these, these, the lines here in the document, which I can't, I can't speak, I can't exactly quote right now, because it's a, it's a for official use only sort of document. But to give you a sense, some of the things that they,

that NORFCOM is asking its internal channels to look at and to consider how we collectively can do better. I'll just read down a list. They want to improve environmental data. They want to improve weather, weather information. They want to improve mapping capabilities, charting capabilities, and better understanding of sea ice forecasting, better understanding of seasonal weather predictions and maritime conditions, satellite coverage, efficiency in the commerce domain, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. This is directly out of a NORFCOM document. All these terms are things that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration can do for us already does and all we are simply saying is link the two together to provide a better sense

better operational picture for the department of defense to defend the homeland take advantage of what no one's already doing it's all taxpayer funded let's put it together and let's make our let's get our taxpayer dollars what they're what they're worth adrian so can can you explain to us exactly what the federal oceanographic fleet is and how noah already fits into the u.s government for listeners that might not be as familiar with it. You know, we talk a lot a bit about the Navy and we also get into the Coast Guard a lot, but I don't think we've ever had a podcast,

at least at CIMSAC, that talks about NOAA. Well, let us be the first then. So let's start with NOAA in this family, right? So National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, we fall under Department of Commerce. And so depending where you live and what extracurricular activities, right, people are involved in,

it's going to depend on on who knows what aspects of our work right so we like to say that our mandate ranges from the surface of the sun to the bottom of the ocean because that that's really as extreme as what it is that that we cover and we're involved in so most people are likely to be familiar with NOAA through National Weather Service which then a smaller subsect of that is National Hurricane Center or through National Marine Fisheries right like we do all sorts of work with management of fisheries, marine mammal protection, coral reefs, coastal work, things like that. So, you know, we're really, we're prevalent, but again, it depends on if you live in that part of the country or if your activities, you know, take you to our websites and information for

different purposes. So of the 12,000 people that work for NOAA, about 320 of us are commissioned officers. And we're the ones that operate the ships and aircraft that NOAA has. So on the aircraft side, we have nine aircraft, two of which are the hurricane hunters, right? Those are the planes that actually do hurricane storm penetration. And then on the maritime side, we have 15 active ships, which are stationed throughout the country and really kind of fall into three broad categories based on their work. So it's, we've either got hydrographic ships, which they're the ones that to go out and do all of the survey to produce the nautical charts that are used, fishery ships or oceanographic ships. And so that's kind of the broad kind of NOAA operational family. When we

talk about the larger federal oceanographic fleet, that's comprised of the academic research fleet. So think the ships that operate out of Scripps, Woods Hole, University of Washington, University of Hawaii, things like that, NOAA, Coast Guard, and then the ships that are chartered by the National Science Foundation. So together, that is the federal oceanographic fleet. And those assets then support the academic operations, the surveys and research, which are across a spectrum of national needs, respective of the owning organizations. So we are one part of a much larger operational family. And what are some of the, are there specific capabilities within these vessels that we think would be particularly relevant? Or how are we, you know, thinking

about the specific contributions of the fleet beyond simply presence? Sure. So, I mean, each, when you, when you break it down, right, each ship, whether it's like NSF related ships or academic ships, like they're all, they're all built for their specific mission sets, right. Of, of what they are as it pertains to NOAA. We've got several ships that what is called ice strengthened hulls, which really at the end of it comes down to mean that we can operate in and around first year ice. So, so it is limited. When I was up in the Arctic, I can remember driving the ship, you know, working with the CEO, picking our way through some, some very small, I don't even want to say ice field, but just areas of ice.

And so we are up there and have the abilities to do that. When you want to talk about the scientific capabilities, that is a huge range and spectrum. Some of these ships are incredibly capable, whether it's sonar systems that are on them, whether it's the labs that they have and just the work that scientists can do off of them. It's an incredible host of array and capability that these ships, A, provide, or B, just inherently have. Christian do we think that these vessels would be a kind of a stop gap as as I think was said in the title of one of the articles bridging the gap or that you know it'd make more sense to have NOAA given a more enduring role in competition of the arctic or are we just thinking that this is

gonna something that helps shore up the lack of presence you know while the coast guard gets working on their polar polar security cutter program and other ships come online yeah that's a good question. I think the relationship between NOAA and enhancing homeland defense should be an enduring relationship. It's rooted in federal law and their capabilities are very unique. No one else does what they do. One of the arguments in our article was to establish a NOAA liaison at U.S. NORTHCOM, which we think should be a permanent position that contributes not only Arctic relations, but encompasses the entirety of the U.S. coastline. There's probably a liaison for every other agency out there, but NOAA is the one that's not there. So I think it should be

enduring and not just a stopgap. And Adrian, so going back to this kind of small size of the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps, you know, with only, I think you said it was about 320 officers, over 10,000 employees in total. Do you think, how much of a difference do you think that this contribution can make? You know, the United States Navy's got close to 300 ships, you know, if the federal fleet only has about 15, and most of them are not suitable for Arctic operations or in the region, how much of a difference do we think that we'd be able to make? Well, you know, I think a lot of it comes back to points that Kristen and Ryan have already made, is that just by being there, we're already doing more and doing more than what we already have.

this, it's going to take a whole of government approach. And so we've got, we've got these assets that are there, maybe not full time, maybe not all the time, but take advantage of what we have just by, just by this conversation and some of the writing it's, it's casting the net farther and wider to tapping into some unused, maybe unknown resources and assets that we didn't realize and and all of a sudden if we're like oh my gosh right we've got ships that are up there you know we've got planes that are flying up there we have unmanned systems which are getting deployed from ships and from planes that can go beyond where the ships and planes can go we've got buoys that are out there collecting all sorts of oceanographic and atmospheric data trying to

understand heat exchanges and patterns. We've got all of these resources at our disposal. And so it's just plugging and playing and using. So I think with just a little bit more of a, or a lot more, but of a coordinated approach, we can really improve decision superiority in some of these aspects, right? When the information is there, we just have to get it into the right hands. And I'll jump in on that too, to kind of double tap some of these points that both Kristen and Adrian made. It's about homeland defense. It's about environmental awareness, right? It's about domain awareness broadly. And this is what U.S. NORTHCOM has really been harping on over the last several years, especially under General Van Herk, is this idea of domain awareness, right? To create

a better sight picture of an operational environment so we can better inform decision making within that environment. And we, I mean, I'm a strategy professor, right? In strategic dialogue, influence is produced through presence. Presence equals influence in strategic dialogue. And if we are not present in an environment, we are simply not going to be influential in that environment. So to answer your question in a little bit more, I guess, a little bit more direct way, Walker, to say that, like, I gave you, go back to the example, right, with the NORTHCOM thing, right? I gave you the list of those topics that NORTHCOM is actively seeking information on. How are we going to do this? And it's a billboard for NOAA. NOAA already does all

this stuff. So right now, I imagine, I work over at US NORTHCOM. I'm part of the staff over there in some other work that I do. I know that there are people right now actively having conversations. Where are we going to get this information from? What are we going to do? How are we going to get environmental data right how are we going to get sea ice forecasting and who do we call the answer is right in front of them right all we're trying to do is raise awareness to again these assets that are already that are already there they're already doing something and frankly it's better than nothing ask the navy how many ice hardened halls they have so adrian is being modest in the sense of saying that that that the that the ships of the no ships

that the six that they have that are ice hard they can only operate in first year ice true But they can operate in ice. The Navy has zero that are capable of operating in ice. And then the Coast Guard, it's got two icebreakers, one of which is more reliably broken and dry docked than it is operational at sea. The other one loaned out to the National Science Foundation is on its way down to Antarctica right now. So we're not using these icebreakers for a big strategic presence in the Arctic, and we're not gaining any influence through the assets that we currently do have. So again, we're trying to raise attention to the fact that these assets exist. They already do the majority of the jobs and the tasks that NORFCOM in particular is looking for. let's put it together right let's get everybody on the same page let's put everybody on the same team and let's work together to increase our ability to defend this homeland and improve our national security right so it seems like the the argument is is kind of like incorporating these vessels more into our dick competition isn't it doesn't have to solve homeland security

or homeland defense but it's kind of a no-brainer because they're already there and and we're hurting for assets. Ryan, so I want to kind of go back to you and flip this around. What are some of the challenges you see to this proposal? I mean, if it's such a clean, such an easy idea to execute, as y'all are making it sound, how come it hasn't been done? What are some of the challenges? It's not for lack of interest, right? It's not for lack of effort. We have been, myself, Chris, and Adrian, we have been working, the three of us in particular, have been working, I'd say tirelessly would probably be a bit hyperbolic, but we have been working just about every day, right? Since, gosh, Adrian, when did we start this? We literally had this

conversation in August last year, and we've been talking about it almost daily, right? Since August of 2021. And then Kristen and I met, I think, Kristen, we met in August of 22, right? And we've been talking about it damn near daily since then as well, to the point that we have been actively pushing this. And I can tell you, just from personal experience, Kristen and I were sitting in a meeting with the two-star chief of staff at U.S. NORTHCOM when we were pitching this idea directly to him about creating a better linkage and tie between NOAA and U.S. NORTHCOM. And the U.S. Northern Command leadership is 100% behind this. And there are folks that actively want to see a bigger and more established partnership evolve between these two organizations.

So we are, NORTHCOM is pulling without question. NORTHCOM is pulling in every which way. I'll speak for myself as a representative of the DOD. I would personally love to see, and I know that U.S. NORTHCOM would love to see a little bit more pull as well from NOAA. But again, there's a lot more to it than that. But I can tell you that from a purely logical standpoint, we wrote in some of these articles, this is not merely an academic suggestion. A lot of academics are, it's really nice to be an academic. I can put on my sweater, I can put on my glasses, and I can go stand in front of my classes and pontificate to my students about all these great ideas that I have. in reality, I don't have to be the one that executes. So I get some freedom and maneuver space and intellectual maneuver space because I can just opine, right, and pontificate and come up with ideas that are often ridiculous, right? But that's my job as an academic is to create ideas. This is an idea that is executable. And it's executable because, as Kristen mentioned, it's rooted in federal law. We outlined this in our article that this is a matter of federal law. It's U.S. code. It says that U.S. code actually states that U.S., that the that NOAA and DOD should be partners, that they should collaborate, that they should coordinate their operations, right, that they should undertake training programs and do things that are desirable for the defense of this nation.

It also says that in federal law, right, that they should maintain liaison with the Department of Defense. These things are written down in black and white for anybody to Google and see that it's not, again, just a matter of an academic or a couple of academics writing articles with what they think is a good idea. We know this is a good idea because we're simply saying follow the law and then follow the interdepartmental regulations that are rooted in the law. And that's the other part is that there's a, again, we outlined this in the article Kristen and I wrote, but there's a fairly lengthy interdepartmental regulation signed between the Department of Defense and the Department of Commerce through NOAA that says all the things that NOAA and DOD agree to do. And I'm here to tell you, and I don't know what Adrian thinks here. She and I have talked about this over the course of the last year and a half. I'm here to tell you that most of this stuff is not happening, or at least it's not happening in any way, to any level that it should be, the way it's written in the regulation and the law. So the obstacles, again, it's a long way of circling back to a pretty simple answer. There are obstacles in resources, right? There's obstacles, obviously, in creating operational space for these organizations to get together and actually do what is stated in the law, in the federal regulation. But again, we believe, and I'll speak for myself here, not my colleagues, but I believe that it is a heck of a lot more simple than some folks are making it out to be, right? I believe that.

And I think really all it takes is just having a conversation, getting people at the same table to let's see, hey, how can we work together? What can we do? Instead of starting the conversation with no as the answer, let's flip the script and say, what does it take to get to yes? What does it take to do this and do what we should be doing as a matter of law and regulation? Kristen, I think we're going to end with you. And I want to ask, you know, what other organizations might also be able to make valuable contributions in the Arctic that we're not looking at or we're underappreciating? And then also, if you have any ideas for what greater institutional cooperation between NOAA and the DOD or NOAA and NORTHCOM would look like, besides just sending more vessels into the Arctic, if there's other ways of strengthening those institutional partnerships.

Yeah, Walker, I believe there are, I believe that there's more organizations out there and I'm searching for them. The 611th AOC Arctic Innovation Cell is trying to fill domain awareness gaps by utilizing commercial scientific research satellite capabilities. This brings new challenges like building the appropriate connective tissue between academia and our stovepipe Cold War era. So they are currently experimenting with several nontraditional sensors with the goal of operationalizing them for use in command and control organizations. The advantage we have now in these modern times is that we don't necessarily need the most powerful or capable sensor because our computers are good enough and they're fast enough to post process in near real time. And this kind of helps get over the slow acquisitions process that we are notoriously known for. And just like Adrian mentioned, there are probably federal assets that are underutilized, not just NOAA. One asset that I would like to pursue is the tecla. It's spelled Tiglax. It's used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It sails to islands in southeast Alaska, the far western end of the Aleutian chain, and into the Bering Sea, typically traveling 15,000 to 20,000 nautical miles.

Another resource I'd like to tap into is the Marine Exchange out of Juneau that tracks vessels using the AIS, or Automatic Identification System, which covers the entire coastlines of Alaska. The last one that's worth mentioning is the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management, or BOEM. The Alaska Outer Continental Shelf encompasses the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, the Bering Sea, Cook Inlet, and the Gulf of Alaska, and that's more than 1 billion acres of ocean next to 6,000 miles of coastline, the BOEM is responsible for mapping. And that's just a few

that I've come across in my research so far. As far as utilizing NOAA in kind of the institutional sense, still working that out. I do believe that we can tap into maybe some passive collect capabilities with NOAA as well. That's something that I'd like to work on with the J3 at Northcom. So more to come on that. Awesome. And if we've got any listeners from those institutions that Kristen mentioned, give us a shout and we'll bring you on the podcast so we can talk about this some more. But unfortunately, we're just about out of time for today.

But before we go, I'd like to go through and ask each of our guests what they're working on and if our listeners can find them anywhere online. So Kristen, we'll start with you. All right. If I haven't said it already, thanks for having us. you can find me on the Institute for Future Conflict website. It highlights not only what I'm doing, but what the other fellows are working on as well. Some of them are working on space, AI, emotional intelligence with AI. There's some really interesting stuff going on there,

not necessarily maritime related, but you might find something valuable there. Coming up, we'll be working on integrating NOAA into future Arctic Edge exercises. We'll be figuring that out at the end of this month. I'm presenting some findings about domain awareness. at the Holman Defense Symposium this summer, hopefully, and along the way, checking out the F-35 unit at Eielson, base defense at Thule, and hopefully getting on a NOAA sailing trip to see firsthand what they do.

I know an Air Force pilot being on a ship, I'm totally lost, but hopefully I can make that happen, maybe with the help of Adrian. So more to come in the publishing world, I hope. That's it for me, thanks. Awesome. Well, if they've got an extra seat for a Marine,

let me know as well. And what about you, Adrienne? What are you working on and where can we find you, if anywhere, online? Yeah, I appreciate it. Unfortunately, I am probably pretty hard to find online, but I'm actually at NOAA headquarters right now through kind of the spring and summer. And then I'll be PCSing out to Oregon to take over as executive officer of our Marine Operations Center Pacific, so kind of the central hub for all of our West Coast ships. So that's where I'll be here in the future. But other than that, you know, really continuing to work with Ryan and Kristen to continue these conversations. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out of the Arctic Edge planning here later this month and moving forward with those exercises. So I think lots more good, you know, to come in the future as we continue kind of building and strengthening this coalition and seeing, seeing where we can work. And I would love to be able to get you guys out on the ships, at least to see the ships. Like they're, they're cool, right? That's like the part of the, probably the best part of my job is being able to run people around and show them what we do and get to do a little bragging. So I look forward to doing that with you guys in the future. awesome yeah i just got back from i was working at cartagena columbia and one of the favorite parts of my job was every time we had a coast guard or a navy ship come in i i get on to get

on board and look at it oh yeah no it's awesome and ryan over to you where can our listeners find you online and what are you working on well first i'm going to take the the seat for the marine on the noah ship to your walker so that's my name's already on that one so you'll have to fight me for it. My proponents of my work right now is my hub these days is with the Modern War Institute and Project 6633. That's the Arctic and Antarctic Polar Region Security page. It's a special series within the MWI's broader research portfolio. So check us out there. And if you're interested in this topic, please write for us, send us an email and pitch an idea to us and we'll take it and have run with it. I write for a variety of other sources. I'm an opinion contributor for The Hill

right now. I've been writing for them for the last three, four years on a variety of topics, the Arctic included, and I write for several other entities. Some of the other things you can probably look at, find me on not only USAPA's website, but find me on the University of Alaska Fairbanks, the Center for Arctic Security and Resilience. I'm an affiliate professor with them as well. And we do decent research up there that's particularly focused on geopolitics and the Russian influence operations. And so if you're interested in influence campaigns and influence operations and so forth, the SASR up in Alaska, we work on that quite a bit. So take a look at our website up there as well, if you're interested in digging into some of that stuff. So other than

that, again, look at my profile on your website and you can find where I write and what I do. But nonetheless, I really appreciate you having us here. Thank you. This is a great opportunity to continue advancing this topic, and hopefully our listeners found it informative. And help us out. Keep us going in this. We're looking to maintain the momentum. Awesome. I'd like to thank my guests again, Major Kristen Heiserman, Dr. Ryan Burke, and Lieutenant Commander Adrian Hopper for joining us today to talk about their recent essays published in West Point's Modern War Institute about using the Federal Oceanographic Fleet for competition in the Arctic. And we'll try to collect some of the links to things that they've mentioned and post them in the show notes if any of the listeners want to take a closer look. Take care. © BF-WATCH TV 2021 We'll be right back.