U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20–878PDF 2017

PRIVATE SECTOR WEATHER FORECASTING: 

ASSESSING PRODUCTS AND TECHNOLOGIES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

June 8, 2016 

Serial No. 114–81 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
(II) 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

RANDY K. WEBER, Texas 

JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

STEVE KNIGHT, California 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

DARIN LAHOOD, Illinois 

WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ERIC SWALWELL, California 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts 

DON S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

MARK TAKANO, California 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

HON. JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma, Chair 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR. 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

JOHN MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

MARK TAKANO, California 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

June 8, 2016 

Page 

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Jim Bridenstine, Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House 

of Representatives ................................................................................................ 4 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 6 

Statement by Representative Suzanne Bonamici, Ranking Minority Member, 

Subcommittee on Enviorment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ............................................................... 8 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 9 

Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ........................................................................................................... 11 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 12 

Witnesses: 

Mr. Barry Myers, CEO, AccuWeather 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 13 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 15 

Mr. Jim Block, Chief Meteorological Officer, Schneider Electric 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 27 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 29 

Dr. Neil Jacobs, Chief Scientist, Panasonic Weather Solutions, Panasonic 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 76 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 78 

Dr. Antonio Busalacchi, Director, Earth System Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 97 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 99 

Dr. Sandy MacDonald, Director, Numerical Weather Prediction, Spire Global 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 122 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 123 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 128

Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions 

Dr. Neil Jacobs, Chief Scientist, Panasonic Weather Solutions, Panasonic ....... 142 

Dr. Antonio Busalacchi, Director, Earth System Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland .............................................................................................. 145 

(1) 

PRIVATE SECTOR WEATHER FORECASTING: 

ASSESSING PRODUCTS AND TECHNOLOGIES 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 8, 2016 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:32 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jim Bridenstine 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 
2 
3 
4 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The Subcommittee on Environment will 

come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. 

Welcome to today’s hearing titled ‘‘Private Sector Weather Forecasting: Assessing Products and Technologies.’’ I recognize myself 

for five minutes for an opening statement. 

Good morning, and welcome to this morning’s Environment Subcommittee hearing. 

The American weather enterprise is made up of stakeholders 

that provide services which ultimately save lives and property. 

Among these are private-sector weather forecasting companies that 

over the years have become a major source of weather information. 

Today we have companies that specialize in sector-specific forecasting, as well as companies which create their own forecasts that 

are disseminated to millions of Americans. 

The services they provide are essential to protecting Americans 

in the face of severe weather. This is particularly important to me 

as my constituents in Oklahoma face some of the most severe 

weather in the country. Providing them advanced warnings is critical. I look forward to hearing about the advances made by privatesector weather companies working on the forefront to protect lives 

and property. 

NOAA currently provides important data which is then utilized 

by other stakeholders to construct forecasts. Many private-sector 

companies also use their own methods and technologies to enhance 

this data. 

To me, there is a clear delineation here. NOAA should focus on 

providing the foundational datasets that others utilize to produce 

life-saving forecasts, rather than duplicating efforts and technologies that are employed or could be employed by the private sector. 

As an example, the main tenet of H.R. 1561, the LucasBridenstine Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act, is 

its recognition of the role commercial weather data can play as a 

piece of the solutions available to NOAA. In the face of looming 

data gaps, we need to maintain continuous, efficient, robust, and 

cost-effective data streams to feed the initial conditions of our numerical weather prediction models. 

This Subcommittee has a long history of oversight of NOAA’s satellite programs, which over the years have been plagued with costoverruns, delays, and mismanagement. This has underscored my 

belief that we need to augment our space-based observing systems 

by incorporating alternative methods of data collection. 

Earlier this year before this subcommittee, NOAA Administrator 

Kathy Sullivan testified to the ability of the private sector to 

produce weather data. She testified that ‘‘In the weather domain, 

we believe it is a promising but still quite nascent prospect to actually have data flows from private-sector satellites.’’ Today, I am 

pleased to have one of the many private-sector satellite companies 

before us to discuss their perspectives on commercial weather data. 

I was encouraged by NOAA’s budget request this year for commercial weather, which includes funding to continue the Commercial Weather Data Pilot program authorized by our House-passed 
5 

weather bill. This pilot program is an important signal to the private sector that NOAA is interested in new and innovative sources 

of data. 

Likewise, I was also encouraged to see NOAA incorporate a line 

item for the purchase of radio occultation data as a potential alternative to another constellation of COSMIC satellites. 

The Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations bill supports 

both these initiatives, and I’d like to thank my colleagues on that 

committee, particularly Chairman Culberson. 

In light of these directions from Congress, I look forward to following up with NOAA to find out how these decisions will be made. 

I look forward to an in-depth discussion today about how privatesector data and products can build on the foundation provided by 

NOAA to help enhance the safety of all Americans. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bridenstine follows:] 
6 
7 
8 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. I now recognize the gentlewoman from 

Oregon, the Ranking Member, Ms. Bonamici, for an opening statement. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you to all of our witnesses for being here today. 

I’d like to start by congratulating Dr. Busalacchi, who will soon 

be the President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research later this summer. 

Today’s hearing is an opportunity to hear about the successes of 

the private weather industry, learn about the impressive weather 

research being conducted at academic institutions, and recognize 

the critical role that the National Weather Service has played, and 

will continue to play, in ensuring the strength and continuity of the 

entire American weather enterprise. 

The three sectors that make up the weather enterprise—private, 

public, and academic—work collectively to meet the needs of the 

public, inspire growth and innovation, and protect life and property. To maintain the progress we have made over the last decade, 

we must explore opportunities to leverage expertise across these 

sectors. More can be done by NOAA and the Weather Service to 

strengthen this partnership and keep us on a path of serving the 

public even better. 

If, however, Congress were to reduce the role of one sector, or 

shift responsibilities without considering how such a change might 

affect the entire enterprise, we risk upsetting the balance and losing the progress so many of us have worked so hard to achieve. 

In 2003, the National Academies released their seminal report on 

the weather partnership, ‘‘Fair Weather: Effective Partnerships in 

Weather and Climate Services’’, and their recommendations state 

that continued success requires recognizing the core mission of 

each partner. 

The core mission of the National Weather Service is to provide 

weather forecasts and warnings to protect life and property, and to 

enhance our national economy. The NWS network includes thousands of forecasters, across hundreds of forecast offices, who support the critical infrastructure of observing, data processing, prediction, and dissemination systems. Research taking place at our 

academic institutions advances the science needed to make forecasts more accurate, while inspiring the next generation of meteorologists. The private sector has the ability to use both the research and NWS data to tailor exciting new products to meet the 

changing demands of a diverse set of end-users and consumers. 

Although some advocate for disaggregating the current structure, 

I am confident that the weather enterprise is stronger together. In 

the 13 years since the release of the Fair Weather Report, the 

weather partnership has flourished and the state of U.S. weather 

forecasting is strong. Although we should always look for ways to 

improve, we must do so in ways that strengthen each partner, not 

diminish any of the key roles. 

I look forward to the discussion today about how we can accomplish that goal. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on this issue, and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bonamici follows:] 
9 
10 
11 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. I’d like to thank the Ranking Member, 

and I now recognize the Ranking Member of the full Committee, 

Ms. Johnson, for an opening statement. 

Mrs. JOHNSON OF TEXAS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 

and good morning, all. 

People in Texas are very familiar with the impact weather has 

on our daily lives. As a matter of fact, there is a common saying 

that we have all four seasons, and some days we have all of them 

in one day. In just the last few weeks, terrible floods have taken 

the lives of more than a dozen people. 

Weather has a universal impact, and it is only through reliable 

and accurate forecasts that we are able to act to protect ourselves. 

This is why the mission of the National Weather Service is to provide weather, water, and climate data, forecasts and warnings for 

the protection of life and property and enhancement of the national 

economy. So while this hearing is part of an ongoing dialogue regarding the role of the commercial weather industry in our weather 

enterprise, we must keep in mind that the protection of our citizens 

and national security are inherently government functions. 

That is why, in 2003, the National Academies Fair Weather Report provided recommendations of how to strengthen the existing 

partnership between the Weather Service, academia, and the private sector, and not simply strip away government functions as 

some may suggest. Despite the claims by some that we must 

disaggregate the weather enterprise, it is very clear to me that the 

existing partnership between these three sectors has made our 

weather forecasts more reliable and more accurate. 

We will hear from some of the witnesses that NWS should focus 

on its core functions and let private companies handle the rest. 

However, if weather data collection and weather forecasting are not 

core functions of the NWS, I don’t know what is. As we must work 

to ensure that NWS’s forecasts are as accurate and timely as possible, we need to make sure that NWS has the resources and mandates to do so. 

It should also be noted that NWS weather data has enabled the 

growth of a significant value-added industry. There may be ways 

that the private sector can complement and support that mission, 

but I’m very skeptical that transferring all of the responsibilities 

to the private sector is either wise or necessary, and therefore I do 

not support doing so. 

And finally, I would have hoped the Majority would have invited 

NOAA and the Weather Service to participate in this hearing but 

I look forward to hearing their perspective at another time. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having the hearing, and I yield 

back the balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mrs. Johnson of Texas follows:] 
12 
13 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentlelady yields back. 

Let me introduce our witnesses, and because we’re short on 

time—we have the Prime Minister from India here today—I’m 

going to skip the long and impressive bios, and I’ll just introduce 

the individuals here. 

Our first witness today is Mr. Barry Myers, CEO of 

AccuWeather. Our next witness today is Mr. Jim Block, Chief Meteorological Officer for Schneider Electric. Our third witness today 

is Dr. Neil Jacobs, Chief Scientist for Panasonic Weather Solutions. 

Our next witness is Dr. Antonio Busalacchi, Director of the Earth 

System Interdisciplinary Center, and Professor in the Department 

of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science at the University of Maryland. 

And our final witness today is Dr. Sandy MacDonald, Director of 

Numerical Weather Prediction at Spire Global. 

So I will now recognize Mr. Myers for five minutes—we’ll say 

three minutes—to present his opening testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. BARRY MYERS, 

CEO, ACCUWEATHER 

Mr. MYERS. Good morning, Chairman Bridenstine, Ranking 

Member Bonamici, and members of the Subcommittee. 

AccuWeather is a global leader in weather information and digital distribution, and I’m honored to be invited to participate in today’s hearing. 

The United States has the best weather information available to 

its citizens and its business and industrial sectors of any Nation. 

This result did not occur by the American weather industry acting 

alone; it was and continues to be the interactive, cooperative approach of the weather industry, the academic research community, 

and NOAA and its National Weather Service that has led to this 

result. These entities form the Nation’s weather enterprise. 

American weather companies are now becoming the focal point 

for weather information in many countries around the world. For 

example, the number one weather mobile source in Europe is an 

American company, AccuWeather. We estimate that AccuWeather 

information is on 1.5 billion or more devices globally. It’s American 

business leadership, academic research, and government partnerships that are propelling this American weather phenomenon. 

Some believe that the reduction in weather-related deaths in the 

United States since the late 1950s when the American weather industry was at its beginning through the joint and collaborative efforts within the weather enterprise have saved as many as 1 to 2 

million lives. These successes were enabled by the foundational 

partnership between the National Weather Service and the weather companies that directly receive NWS data, observations, forecast 

models and so forth, which the weather companies and private-sector meteorologists develop into weather information products for 

Americans and for the global marketplace. Private-sector innovation and investment has enabled many of the technological advances in how American weather companies communicate weather 

to the public. 

At the end of World War II, about 98 percent of the weather information received by the public came from the government directly, and now it’s estimated that that’s reversed and about 98 
14 

percent comes from the weather industry, and this includes special 

warnings for tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, et cetera. The 24/7/365 

acquisition and distribution of core foundational data, funding research and development, and running of models and issuing government warnings are some of the most important things that the 

National Weather Services does, and those that the entire weather 

community and the public rely on. 

There needs to be a renewed effort within the weather enterprise 

with the Environment Subcommittee through its oversight role to 

strengthen the foundational data partnership between the National 

Weather Service and the private-sector weather industry, which industry is now woven into the fabric of American life. America’s 

weather industry is a critical piece of the Nation’s weather value 

chain as the 2012 National Academy of Sciences report clearly 

points out. The private weather sector needs to be supported and 

nurtured by NOAA for the good of the Nation. 

If NOAA does its part, the private sector will do its part by continuing to foster technological innovation in the development of 

more advanced and sophisticated weather products, forecast services, presentations, and communication of weather and warnings to 

the public. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for 

inviting me to participate today. I would be pleased of course to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Myers follows:] 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Myers. 

Mr. Block, you’re recognized for three minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JIM BLOCK, 

CHIEF METEOROLOGICAL OFFICER, 

SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC 

Mr. BLOCK. Thank you, Chairman Bridenstine, Ranking Member 

Bonamici. I appreciate the invitation to testify today on the opportunities for public and private partnership to deliver improved 

weather forecasting services for American taxpayers. 

My name is Jim Block, and I’m a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society and a Certified Consulting Meteorologist at 

Schneider Electric. Schneider Electric a global Fortune 300 company with 170,000 employees worldwide, $30 billion in sales, and 

operations in more than 100 countries. We have facilities with almost 300 employees in Ms. Bonamici’s district, and 360 in Mr. 

Rohrabacher’s, for example. Schneider Electric is a specialist in energy management and automation offering integrated solutions 

across multiple market segments including buildings, industrial 

manufacturers, utilities, and data centers. 

We maintain the largest commercial business-to-business weather forecasting and consulting organization in the United States, 

providing accurate weather forecasting for over 15,000 customers 

all over the world. We utilize more than 80 separate data sources 

including those from NOAA. We innovate and develop specialized 

technology to take the NOAA data and add value by fine-tuning it 

and aligning it to specific customer needs. For example, we predict 

turbulence and flight hazards for over 250 airlines. We also help 

determine the amount of chemicals to put on icy roads for over 30 

state transportation agencies. We provide the temperature forecasts used by 70 percent of U.S. utilities as well as protect many 

sports teams from adverse weather. 

Currently, commercial weather services like Schneider Electric 

focus on solutions to solve specific end-user problems. Conversely, 

NOAA provides general forecasts and warnings for the overall protection of life and property along with services that support those 

activities. This division of services between the private and public 

sectors of weather is very efficient and services the American taxpayer very well. However, it requires more cooperation and communication between NOAA and companies like Schneider Electric to 

work effectively. 

Some critics may question the need for a government weather 

agency at all. However, we strongly disagree. No commercial entity 

can operate the weather infrastructure that NOAA operates today, 

but at the same time, the multitude and diversity of end-user 

projects can only be addressed by companies like ours and others 

using information from NOAA and other sources. 

We offer the following recommendations to drive public-private 

partnerships and help deliver the best results to communities and 

taxpayers. First, there should be more, and more effective, cooperation between NOAA and the private sector. We believe that strong 

cooperation between NOAA and the private sector is necessary and 

long overdue, and we believe that NOAA should have a regular 

committee that includes permanent private-sector members. 
28 

Second, NOAA should place more emphasis on the use of existing 

data sets from commercial sources. We believe there is a need to 

look at the relationship between NOAA and downstream service 

providers such as Schneider Electric. We believe that NOAA can 

benefit from our specialized knowledge of weather information end 

users. For example, Schneider Electric has built and now operates 

the largest agricultural weather network in the United States, 

which consists of more than 4,600 weather stations located on 

farms, where the data is used by farmers to make critical decisions 

on a daily basis. This is information that could be tremendously 

useful to NOAA. 

Third, NOAA should eliminate decision support services that duplicate those available in the private sector. NOAA should refrain 

from overextending its scope beyond data sets and severe weather 

warnings. We believe that the private sector can and should collaborate with NOAA on any downstream user or business services 

with clear role delineation. Specialized services have a marginal 

benefit to the public and needlessly tie up taxpayer dollars on offers that are already available in the private sector. Closer cooperation with NOAA could resolve such situations. 

We believe that NOAA’s mission can be enhanced and be more 

cost-effective if NOAA works more closely with the private sector, 

uses data sets such as the ag weather networks, and eliminates duplicative services. 

We commend the Committee for considering our recommendations, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Block follows:] 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Block. 

Dr. Jacobs, you’re recognized for three minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. NEIL JACOBS, 

CHIEF SCIENTIST, 

PANASONIC WEATHER SOLUTIONS, PANASONIC 

Dr. JACOBS. Good morning, Chairman Bridenstine, Ranking 

Member Bonamici, members of the Subcommittee. My name is Neil 

Jacobs, and I serve as Chief Scientist for Panasonic Weather Solutions. I am honored to be invited to participate in today’s hearing. 

Panasonic has a great public-private partnership to provide its 

TAMDAR data to NOAA through the National Mesonet Program, 

which is an example of a successful and sustainable business model 

for data acquisition. Panasonic is very pleased to continue our longterm relationship with NOAA to improve the quality of weather 

forecasting. The distinct advantages of our TAMDAR data will enhance the National Weather Service’s core mission: the protection 

of life and property. 

TAMDAR provides real-time global observations of wind, temperature and moisture, its spatial and temporal resolutions greater 

than both radiosondes and ACARS. TAMDAR-equipped aircraft 

and UAVs also report real-time icing and turbulence, which are 

routinely used by the NTSB for accident investigations. The 

SATCOM transmission doubles as a real-time back channel communication and flight tracking system. 

Dr. Louis Uccellini, Director of NOAA’s National Weather Service, said the National Weather Service has long recognized the utility of TAMDAR data for analysis and numerical forecast models, 

and I am pleased about this path forward to incorporate these data 

in our day-to-day operations. Dr. Curtis Marshall of the National 

Weather Service has said the provision of this unique TAMDAR 

data set continues to steer the National Mesonet Program in a direction consistent with the National Academy of Science’s Network 

of Networks vision of a broad range of non-federal data to improve 

situational awareness at the National Weather Service forecast offices and to enhance our high-resolution modeling capabilities. 

Panasonic also runs a suite of models from rapid cycling regional 

models to our own global model including an 80-member ensemble. 

These models were developed through longstanding collaborative 

partnerships with both NCAR and several universities. Panasonic 

is the only private entity in the world with a custom-developed 

end-to-end operational global weather modeling platform initialized 

from raw observations. Panasonic has worked cooperatively with 

federal agencies by providing TAMDAR data to NOAA and the 

FAA and at many times at no cost. 

While we are a commercial company responsible to our shareholders, we also have another responsibility: to help share our technological expertise with meteorological agencies around the world. 

In closing, I would like to call the Subcommittee’s attention to 

NOAA document NAO–216112, Policy on Partnerships and the Provision of Environmental Information. This policy is intended to 

strengthen the partnerships between public, private, and academic 

sectors to provide the Nation with the highest quality environmental information. The partnership agreement was approved in 
77 

2006 by then-NOAA Administrator Dr. Conrad Lautenbacher. It 

was developed in response to recommendations from the National 

Academy of Science and the Fair Weather report. I recommend the 

Subcommittee work closely with NOAA, the American Meteorological Society, and America’s weather enterprise on any revisions to 

this important agreement. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you 

again for inviting me to participate today. I’m happy to take your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Jacobs follows:] 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs. 

Dr. Busalacchi, you’re recognized for three minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. ANTONIO BUSALACCHI, 

DIRECTOR, EARTH SYSTEM INTERDISCIPLINARY CENTER, 

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. Good morning Chairman Bridenstine and Ranking Member Bonamici, Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you 

for this opportunity to brief you again this morning. 

Let me begin by noting today’s weather enterprise is a triad that 

consists of the academic and research communities, the public sector, and the private sector. The government’s traditional role within this triad is the protection of life, property and enhancement of 

national security. This public-sector role is grounded in sustainability and dependability of observational data and models that 

have free and open access. The private sector’s traditional role is 

to create customized and tailored products to a broad customer 

base of private individuals and businesses in a multitude of sectors. 

The academic community works to improve our common understanding of your system, perform basic and applied research that 

leads to innovation, and trains the next generation of workforce 

both for the government and the private sector. The three work together in a public-private partnership that on the world stage is 

often the exception rather than the rule. This is a particular 

strength of our Nation’s approach to the weather enterprise. These 

three pillars of success have yielded the world’s most comprehensive and successful array of weather services in support of the public and private good. 

While the roles of each of these legs of the weather enterprise 

must continue to evolve, weakening any single leg will compromise 

the entire enterprise and will negatively impact its diverse beneficiaries. We must also recognize that the private sector has been 

built upon and has benefited from the foundation of the free and 

open approach data and models. As a result of this tremendous investment from the public, there has been an enormous return to 

the public in terms of jobs and innovations. 

I think we should act with caution so as not to do any harm and 

assure that the marketplace retains its competitiveness and no barriers to entry are neglected. In short, we need to find a workable 

method to strategically plan the entire enterprise. 

The last major study from the National Academies, as you’ve 

heard, was the Fair Weather report of 2003. As a result of that report, NOAA worked to produce a policy to support dissemination of 

environmental information to the public that was beyond just 

weather data. In 2012, the Academies released a report on weather 

services for the Nation becoming second to none. That was an assessment of the National Weather Service modernization program. 

It had three main recommendations: prioritize core capabilities, 

evaluate function and structure, and leverage the entire enterprise, 

and that was the bulk of my written testimony. 

I believe it is time to revisit these two reports but we are lacking 

a national strategy, and I think we run the risk of losing sight of 

the big picture. At one moment we may be occupied by the challenge of commercialization of satellite observations, the next mo-
98 

ment by the potential private-sector models, and the next by procuring models from another country, all at the expense of what 

may be best for the country as a whole. I can easy see a scenario 

where company X takes publicly supported and freely available 

models and data and adds unique value to them. Company Y sells 

some data to the government but withholds some for its business 

purposes, and Company Z has its own proprietary models and data 

that are not available for the common good. Is this what is best for 

our Nation to protect lives, property, and support our military in 

the field? 

Continued improvement in our forecasting ability requires that 

observations be reliable and accessible and forecasts for the public 

good be verified, validated and transparent. 

Prior to taking on my new position with UCAR, I was co-chairing 

the next Decadal Survey for Earth Science and Applications from 

Space. As requested by the Congress, all of the space sciences have 

a long history of these decadal surveys that the agencies are beholden to as well as the insight they provide to you, OMB and 

OSTP. We have no such activity for the weather enterprise. Given 

the evolving nature of the weather enterprise, I would submit we 

need an active and ongoing strategic planning process as could be 

achieved by Congress requesting a decadal survey for the weather 

enterprise inclusive of midway assessments and subsequent followon surveys. 

In closing, there is considerable upside potential for the Nation 

if we do it right. We have much to lose if we do it wrong. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Busalacchi follows:] 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Dr. Busalacchi. 

Dr. MacDonald, you’re recognized for three minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. SANDY MACDONALD, DIRECTOR, 

NUMERICAL WEATHER PREDICTION, SPIRE GLOBAL 

Mr. MACDONALD. Chairman Bridenstine, Ranking Member 

Bonamici, and Members of the Committee, I retired from NOAA in 

January after 40 years, fabulous organization. I signed on to Spire 

Global Incorporated, which is a company that’s going to use small 

satellites to I think bring revolutionary changes to our ability to observe the weather. 

I started my career as a young weather officer giving weather 

briefings, and the truth is, we had almost no information. The pilots, their lives depended on what we could tell them, and we knew 

very little. I’m sure our Chairman could vouch for that occasionally. 

But it’s a different world now. The government, originally a sole 

player in those days, I think has now been enhanced by our growing commercial sector, which I think if we have the right policies, 

we can have a fabulous partnership between the academic, the 

public and the private weather capabilities to serve this country. 

I’ll give a couple examples. I was, back in about the year 2000, 

part of a group who said let’s have a community model, the weather research and forecast model, and I think NCAR and NOAA and 

others, NASA, worked on this but the big thing that I think that 

happened was, NCAR basically said we’re going to make this a real 

community model to support it, to not have intellectual-property 

issues and other issues get in the way, we’ll have workshops and 

so on. It’s been a huge success. So it’s a great example of privatepublic partnership. I think the fact that the Panasonic model that 

Neil Jacobs talked about used the Weather Service GFS model is 

another example of that. 

I’d like to talk about the satellite observing systems. I think that 

the private sector can really bring some dynamism and complementary to the federal sector in satellites, and a good example of that 

is Spire, the company that I work for. We all remember when we 

went from mainframes to PCs. I think that’s what Spire is trying 

to do with satellites. They’re trying to take a big, expensive technology, put it down in a little tiny box, and still get incredible quality out of it. So they propose to generate radio occultations from 

cubesats. I think they’re going to have probably 30,000, 40,000 next 

year, and their goal is 100,000 COSMIC 1-quality radio 

occultations. This is like having a radiosonde balloon that has a 

sounding for every degree of lat and longitude over the entire 

globe. 

I think it’s important that we protect our federal sector. It’s really what we depend on for safety, for working on Earth system 

issues. Examples of those are COSMIC 2. We know that GOES–R 

and JPSS are going to have a fabulous set of sensors. It’s really important that we have the private sector be complementary to that. 

Finally, I’d like to say I think the sort of strength of the U.S. is 

its ability to mix the advantages of public and private, and I think 

that’s our job here to do that in the weather business. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. MacDonald follows:] 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. I’d like to thank all the witnesses for 

their testimonies. 

Members are reminded that Committee rules limit questioning to 

five minutes, and I’ll start by recognizing myself for five minutes. 

Dr. Jacobs, I wanted to start with you. Panasonic has its own numerical weather models, and Panasonic uses its own data in some 

cases, and in many cases uses data from NOAA and other sources 

as well. Can you share with us your weather forecasting models? 

How does that compare to the GFS—the Global Forecasting System—or the European model? How is your model comparing to the 

others? 

Dr. JACOBS. So that’s correct. We use our own data. We bundle 

that with all the publicly available data. We assimilate that into 

a suite of different models, our flagship model being a global model. 

It differs slightly from NSEP’s in both the data assimilation 

scheme as well as a lot of the modifications and the physics. Its 

performance really depends on how you verify it. If you verify it 

through sort of the standard anomaly correlations, it’s slightly 

ahead of NSEP. The European center had a major upgrade in 

March. It’s slightly lagging the European center. If you verify it 

through other means, particularly case studies, there’s been some 

major weather events over the last two years where it’s outperformed both. 

If you actually consider the fact that we have complete control 

over the system that’s fully customizable from a business perspective, it’s highly advantageous because we can write out files in increments, levels and variables that you wouldn’t normally get from 

the government center because our motivation is actually helping 

other businesses. We believe that the Weather Service’s mission is 

to protect life and property. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Has anybody from NOAA or the Department of Defense reached out to you to get information on how 

you’re able to accomplish this? 

Dr. JACOBS. Yes. I actually have some meetings at the Pentagon 

lined up shortly. I’ll be giving a seminar next month on some of our 

data assimilation methods. Our software engineers are in constant 

contact with the NSEP, and to the extent that it doesn’t negatively 

impact our business model, we do share information with them. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. And the intent with the model is to 

what? You want to license the outcomes, the outputs of your 

model? Is that your intent? 

Dr. JACOBS. Well, the primary intent would be to customize and 

develop products and applications to sell to other industries. They 

would be products that you can’t normally derive from the publicly 

generated weather model data. As far as the government agencies 

are concerned, the possibility of licensing some of the software does 

exist. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. And my understanding is, your model is 

a global model to establish the global initial conditions for weather 

forecasting. Can you share with us, does your model have the ability to do mesoscale forecasting or even microscale forecasting for 

my constituents that are obviously hit with severe weather from 

time to time? 
129 

Dr. JACOBS. Right. So one of the reasons why we decided to run 

our own global model is, every regional model needs what they call 

boundary conditions provided by a global model. So we run the 

global model to provide lateral boundary conditions to high-resolution nested regional models. We currently run several different 

nested regions running from 4 to 2–1/2 kilometers, and within 

those nested regions we can have high-resolution domains down to 

sub-one kilometer. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Got it. 

And Mr. Block, how has NOAA reacted to your innovation with 

weather modeling and forecasting? 

Mr. BLOCK. They have expressed considerable interest in the— 

especially in the ag weather network data that we provide, and we 

look forward to working more closely with them to figure out how 

we can use that information or even extend or expand that information to add things like soil temperature or soil moisture to the 

observations we make. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Awesome. 

Dr. MacDonald, how many GPS radio occultation sensors has 

Spire launched to date? 

Mr. MACDONALD. So far, I think we’re kind of at the beginning. 

We actually have four satellites and then two test satellites, and 

we’re just learning how to get the quality out of them that we need. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. And is your intent to establish your own 

numerical weather models as well or to piggyback on the numerical 

weather models of others? 

Mr. MACDONALD. Our intent is not to establish our own weather 

models except to the extent that we want to be able to test the 

value of these so that we can talk to our customers and show that 

it’s valuable. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. So your objective would then be to provide a service to others that are providing the model? It could be 

Panasonic, it could be NOAA, it could be others? 

Mr. MACDONALD. That’s correct. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Okay. I’ve been encouraged that NOAA 

is moving forward with the commercial weather data pilot as outlined in the bipartisan House-passed weather bill, H.R. 1561. I’m 

very pleased with that. 

Dr. MacDonald, can you give me your take on NOAA’s approach 

to working with the private sector to incorporate data such as Spire 

data into their weather models? 

Mr. MACDONALD. I think that we have to see about the future. 

I think the ideas in the Fair Weather Act and the experience already with private data being available that Neil Jacobs just talked 

about shows that the path is there, so we’re hoping that we can 

have that partnership with the data also. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Excellent. 

And I’d like to—my time is out. I’ll recognize the Ranking Member from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, for five minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 

to all the witnesses for your testimony. 

Dr. Busalacchi, a well-funded and forward-thinking Weather 

Service is critical for the continued protection of the lives and public of the American public, and we certainly heard that recognition 
130 

not just from you but from others today, and we want continued 

growth. 

You mention in your testimony the need for a national strategy, 

so I’m going to ask you about a couple of things, and then I want 

you to talk about what you envision as part of the national strategy. One, should we be investing in greater supercomputing capacity for the Weather Service, and if so, what would be the needs for 

optimal model runs? And then also, Dr. Block mentioned in his prepared statement that NOAA should leverage the examples of other 

agencies and have regular committee or working groups that include the private-sector members. So do you have any perspectives 

on that idea? Are there other models that may be considered? And 

what would you envision as a national strategy? 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. Thank you very much. So with respect to supercomputing, the answer is yes, but—so if you look at one of the reasons why for this medium-range time scale for weather, predicting 

weather on time scales from three to five to seven days, one of the 

reasons why we’re about ten years behind the Europeans is in part 

because of supercomputing, but as a result of your encouragement, 

NOAA is now at the forefront worldwide in supercomputing capability at this instant. What we lack is the budgetary, the planning 

process to keep us there, all right? In years past we were behind 

the Europeans. We’re now at the forefront but for a snapshot. One 

problem. So we need to solve that. 

The second problem is this whole topic of transition from research to operations so that the Nation can take the best of the 

best wherever it comes from, not just the private sector but from 

academia as well. Europeans are much better at doing that transition from research to operations. NOAA has a plan called RTAP, 

Research Transition Acceleration Program, that is going to try and 

move that. I think that’s in the right direction. But one of the challenges going forward with respect to a strategy—so Mr. Block’s recommendations are very consistent with what were in the Fair 

Weather report of 2003, 13 years ago. One of the challenges there 

is follow-up. I don’t think we need another report onto itself but we 

need a process. 

So over the years I’ve done something like 20 different National 

Academy reports. Oftentimes those reports end up on a shelf collecting dust because there’s no follow-up, and that’s why I recommended a decadal survey because it’s mandated by you. The 

agencies need to show cause if they differ from the recommendations in the decadal survey. Five years into the process—I mean 

after the report is written, there’s a midterm assessment to see 

whether or not the agencies are doing what was encouraged, and 

then five years after that, there’s another decadal survey. So it’s a 

process, it’s not a one-off activity. And it’s not—we’re not talking 

here about a bunch of academics. It is this three-legged stool. Onethird of my colleagues here from the private sector, one-third from 

academia, and you couldn’t have the feds at the table but you could 

have one-third composed of former senior government officials now 

in industry like Sandy MacDonald. Myself, I spent 18 years in 

NASA as an SESR, then went into academia. So you have—you’re 

taking advantage of the best of the best. 
131 

Ms. BONAMICI. Dr. Busalacchi, I don’t mean to interrupt but I 

want to get another question in before my time expires. 

The employees of the National Weather Service work tirelessly 

to serve our communities and assist, for example, with natural disasters. My State of Oregon and the Northwest have faced severe 

wildfires. Weather Service employees have provided specialized 

forecasts tailored to those wildfires to help firefighters safely and 

effectively extinguish them. 

So the National Weather Service is a public good, so could you 

explain why it’s important that the Weather Service provide the 

baseline forecasts? What other benefits are there of having government-provided publicly accessible forecasts? 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. So again, the vast majority of what my colleagues have spoken to about here are founded upon the publicly 

available forecasts and the data, and again, in terms of the role of 

the government, in terms of protecting public life, infrastructure 

and, again, homeland and national security, we need to have the 

best of the best, and that goes back to this three-legged stool: having the private sector engaged, having academia and the research 

engaged, and having a strong partner in the government as well. 

That’s, in my opinion, the only way that we could have the best of 

the best and compete with the Europeans. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Terrific. Thank you. 

My time’s about to expire. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. I thank the Ranking Member. 

As I pass the baton here for one second, I’d like to get Dr. MacDonald to respond to Dr. Busalacchi. You mentioned that the movement from research to operations is going well. Dr. MacDonald, do 

you agree with that? When you think about the high-resolution 

rapid refresh model, didn’t that sit on the shelf for years? 

Mr. MACDONALD. I think the high-resolution rapid refresh should 

have gone faster but I think it’s a pretty fabulous model and I’m 

exciting about that accomplishment. 

In terms of how well we do research to operations, I think a 

major point is that we can always do better. I think we learned a 

lot where we said okay, we’re going to have these big community 

models and everybody can work on them. The point that I’m making is, we did that for the regional models. I think we want to do 

that now for the global models, and I think it’s crucial. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Dr. Busalacchi, you’re recognized. 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. Thank you very much. Let me be very clear. I 

think that’s one of the fundamental differences between us and the 

Europeans. I think the Europeans do a much better job of the transition from research to operations, so again, what I was trying to 

say is, we need to do better at sustaining computing and we need 

to do a much better job of transition of research to operations from 

the research community as well as the private sector. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Got it. Okay. 

I’d like to recognize Mr. Weber from the State of Texas for five 

minutes. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

These will be for Dr. Jacobs. I’ll start with you. Dr. Jacobs, in 

your experience, in your opinion, does the federal government and 
132 

NOAA facilitate, hinder or resist commercial weather opportunities 

and involvement? 

Dr. JACOBS. I would say they facilitate it, particularly on the 

data acquisition side. So there’s been—we’ve had a very good experience in working with them and contracting for aircraft data. It’s 

been a little tricky navigating the re distribution rights issue but 

by and large we’re very happy with how things have gone, and I 

believe and they believe that it’s improving their mission, improving their models and improving their forecasts. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Well, I didn’t mean to put you on the spot but 

I wanted to put you on the spot. 

Dr. MacDonald, I’m going to come to you with the same question, 

and Dr. Jacobs, I want you to think about it. You said it was a little tricky. I’m going to give you a one minute warning here to facilitate some of that stuff. You’ll get your chance to abuse the witness. 

Dr. MacDonald, I’m going to come to you, same question. Do you 

think NOAA facilitates, hinders or resists commercial weather opportunities and involvement? 

Mr. MACDONALD. I think in our case, in Spire, we have good 

hopes that we’re going to have a great relationship with NOAA. I 

appreciate Neil’s comment because they’ve dealt with this issue already, and he said it was tricky but they got through it, so I’m really hoping that in our case with fabulous satellite data we really 

have that opportunity to help the world. 

Mr. WEBER. And Dr. Jacobs, back to you. Your one minute is up. 

You said it was tricky in them doing it. How so? 

Dr. JACOBS. So traditionally, per the WMO’s Resolution 40, most 

data that’s produced by NOAA is redistributed freely to the other 

government international met centers. That impacts our business 

model because if we want to sell it to the European center, we can’t 

sell it to the European center if NOAA buys it from us and gives 

it to the European center. There is a provision in the WMO Resolution 40 that allows for redistribution restrictions for commercially 

acquired data provided it’s defined as non-essential. So we’ve asked 

that that be restricted for the purposes of sort of forcing the WMO 

members into a cost-sharing model. So if we actually prevent redistribution, then we get to charge NOAA less because we can actually sell it to the other government international met centers, 

thereby sort of forcing a cost-sharing model on all the government 

agencies worldwide. 

Mr. WEBER. But I’m assuming you make up that income difference by selling it to the other agencies? 

Dr. JACOBS. We’re currently in contract discussions with both the 

European center and the U.K. met office for data acquisition. Every 

government met center has their own special needs. For example, 

some smaller countries don’t even run a global model so they’re 

only interested in the regional data around their domain. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. This really, I guess, is a question for the three 

on the right here. We’ll start back with you, Dr. Jacobs. Do you see 

any bias from NOAA in certain weather predictions? In other 

words, I’m speaking specifically about climate change, global warming, sea-level rise. Are you seeing any bias whatsoever? 
133 

Dr. JACOBS. Most of the forecasting that Panasonic is involved in 

is in the zero- to 2-week range. Every numerical model has its own 

unique bias characteristics but that’s more in the weather, not really so much in the climate. 

Mr. WEBER. Fair enough. 

Is it Busalacchi? Is that how you say it? 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. Perfect. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. With respect to the science of weather and climate, absolutely no bias at all. 

Mr. WEBER. That’s good to hear. 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. What I say, though, is with respect to model development for weather, the agency faces almost a catch-22. If they 

choose a model that’s developed in-house, they will be criticized by 

the external community for a ‘‘not invented here’’ syndrome. If they 

choose a model from the community that’s not invented within the 

agency, they’re going to get criticized, well, why are you making 

this investment inside the agency when you can get it outside. So 

they’re darned if they do and they’re darned if they don’t. 

Mr. WEBER. All right. I’m going to move over to you, Dr. MacDonald. 

Mr. MACDONALD. I do not see bias. I see scientists who argue 

about all aspects of it, and with reports like IPCC and others, I 

think it’s well represented, and no, I don’t see a bias. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. That’s good to hear. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 

Dr. Jacobs, just to follow up, if you—if your goal is to sell data 

to the Europeans or your goal is to sell data to NOAA, why did you 

build your own model? 

Dr. JACOBS. Well, part of the reason for that was, we can’t fully 

subsidize the cost of collecting the data so to run the data off the 

aircraft through SATCOM is quite expensive. So we offset that by 

generating products and services. The main reason why we actually 

run the models is to do quality control on the data because what 

we wanted to do is have the customers get the best value and impact of the data. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. So it’s to test the data? That’s——— 

Dr. JACOBS. It’s to test, and when we do provide the data, we 

provide a set of quality control flags along with the data. Those are 

derived from the data assimilation component in our model. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. Okay. 

I’d like to recognize the Ranking Member of the full Committee, 

Mrs. Johnson, for five minutes. 

Mrs. JOHNSON OF TEXAS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Busalacchi, I think what I’m hearing is that the NWS and 

the U.S. best work together or are at their best working together. 

Is that right? 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. That’s correct. Again, I think a unique strength 

of our approach, the U.S. approach to the Nation’s weather enterprise, is when the government, the private sector and the research 

community are working together all towards a common purpose. 

That’s correct. 
134 

Mrs. JOHNSON OF TEXAS. I have seen a great improvement in 

weather predictions, and I hope that’ll continue to improve because 

I’ve also seen where it saved a lot of lives even though in many 

cases there might be property destroyed. Lives are being saved because of those projections and people have time to get out of the 

way. 

We also talk a lot on this Committee about changes killing jobs, 

and I’m trying to figure out if it’s privatized, what would happen 

to these seasoned employees that are government workers? 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. So I’m sure there’s great concern within the 

agency. I mean, I used to be—the two of us used to be civil servants and so they provide this core support that has allowed over 

the last 20 years my colleagues here in the private sector to build 

off that. If that core support is gone, we may have some near-term 

gains but in the mid to long term the enterprise may well collapse 

on itself because that core of the data and these foundational models just won’t be there for the private sector to flourish. 

Mrs. JOHNSON OF TEXAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentlelady yields back. 

I’d like to recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, for 

five minutes. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. And thank 

you, witnesses, for being here. 

I’d like to ask my first question of Mr. Myers of AccuWeather. 

Mr. Myers, who makes up the American weather industry, quote, 

unquote, and what steps could be taken to improve cooperative relationships between NOAA and these companies? If you could 

elaborate on that, I would appreciate it. 

Mr. MYERS. Well, I think different people have different definitions of what constitutes the American weather industry. If you 

look at some of the groups like the Weather Coalition or the American Weather and Climate Industry Association, they’re very welcoming of all members who touch upon any form of weather information and forecasts from the data collection itself all the way 

through the modeling and to the distributors of information. So I 

think the definition is relatively broad. Your second question was? 

Mr. BABIN. What could we do to improve cooperative relationships between NOAA and these particular companies that you just 

mentioned? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, this has been an ongoing effort at least that 

I’ve been involved in for 20-some years actively, and I think that 

it is generally improved. If you looked at a chart, it would be on 

the upswing. I think there needs to be further interaction at all 

levels of NOAA. I think that NOAA could benefit from better understanding exactly what the value is that the weather industry 

brings to the whole weather enterprise. We do get a lot of that recognition now in many of the management areas. A number of years 

ago when you talked about these things, it was looked upon as 

though we were competing somehow with what the government 

does but quite to the contrary, I have been here to testify and on 

other committees many times in support of funding for NOAA and 

the job that they do. I think that things like the EISG committee 

as part of the SAB for NOAA has over the last six or seven years 

it’s been in existence has been very beneficial in interacting and 
135 

enhancing that communication, and I think activities like that need 

to continue and be strengthened. 

Mr. BABIN. Okay. Thank you. And in your mind, what is the goal 

of weather forecasts in the future? How far out will we be able to 

accurately predict the weather, and are there specific goals for the 

next five, ten, fifteen years? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, I know at AccuWeather, we’re constantly pushing the envelope, and we sometimes get criticized for doing so. We 

launched a 90-day forecast, for example, that has day-by-day predictions that some have made a joke of, but the fact is that there’s 

actual science behind it. I know when we first started introducing 

a 5-day forecast decades ago, people said the same thing: ‘‘You can’t 

do it.’’ I think that there is no end to what you can do. Our accuracy, for example, with tornado and hurricane forecasting is literally amazing. We have had plants evacuated 20 minutes before 

they’ve been totally destroyed by tornados and saved all the lives 

inside. The U.S. Congress in its report on Hurricane Katrina talked 

about how AccuWeather was in fact the only organization that had 

it right and far enough in advance. 

So there are lots of things that can be done. I think that better 

understanding of what in fact the private sector does in forecasting 

is very important because we do specialize in a number of areas 

and activities, and even outside independent sources now that do 

ranking of forecasts have shown that the AccuWeather forecasts 

are actually statistically more valid than anybody’s, and there are 

ways that that happens. It’s not just magic. 

Mr. BABIN. Absolutely. Thank you so much. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 

I recognize the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you. I was told I had to go very, very, 

very last since I’m not on the Committee, so I’m happy to go or I’m 

happy to wait my turn. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. We’ll let you go. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, sir. 

And to the panelist from Colorado, welcome. Dr. MacDonald, 

good to see you. Dr. Busalacchi, nice to have you. And gentlemen, 

I appreciate the testimony because one of the things I’m hearing 

generally is that there’s an effort to work together to improve 

weather forecasting, predictions across the board, and as we’ve 

talked about in this Committee, for life, for property, for commerce, 

looking at those things, and a lot of the conversation that we’ve 

had when it comes to, you know, industry participating in weather 

forecasting is really just a matter of contract, you know, who’s 

going to get this advantage, who’s going to get that advantage, who 

gets the redistribution rights, what are the royalties, those kinds 

of things, and if you’re actually having a conversation and a dialogue, which it sounds like you are, then you can work out those 

contractual matters, and I appreciate the efforts being taken by everybody in this respect. 

And Dr. Busalacchi, congratulations on your appointment to 

head UCAR, and obviously that’s a very important organization for 

Colorado at the National Climate and Atmospheric Research Center. So I appreciate the efforts to continue to work together because 
136 

I do think it’s a three-legged stool as you’re talking about. You’ve 

got academia, the private sector and government because the one 

thing we know is the private sector is interested in profits, and 

that’s okay. That’s the way it works. And if there isn’t profits, then 

the question is, is that private company going to be altruistic and 

look out for the public good. Sometimes maybe yes but mostly no 

because they’ve got to talk to their shareholders and provide for 

their shareholders. 

So having given that little speech, Dr. Busalacchi, some entities 

such as some of the companies represented today that the Weather 

Service should focus on its core forecasting functions and should 

not duplicate services that are already provided by the private sector. What’s your opinion of that? Although I’m not sure I ever 

heard them say that. 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. No, I didn’t hear it either, and one of the issues 

is, you know, who’s going to arbitrate. So again, the role of the government, as I said before, is protection of life, property, support of 

economic competitiveness, and homeland and national security, and 

to do that, the government needs to be in the cutting edge and 

have these foundational data sets where we are the best in the 

world and then also have these free and open models so that my 

colleagues here can build upon it but again that those models need 

to be the best of the best, and as my colleague Sandy mentioned, 

the best way of being the best of the best is this community approach, taking advantage of the strengths of the academic community and the strengths of the private sector so that these core 

foundational models are at the forefront and the world’s best. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you. And I’m going to turn to you, Dr. 

MacDonald, in just a second, but I wanted to thank all three legs 

of the school: academia, government and private industry. We have 

some constituents who were missing during Cyclone Winston down 

in the Fiji area, which was a huge storm down there, and among 

the three, we were able to determine even though there was no 

communication that the path of the storm kind of bypassed them, 

and it brought a lot of comfort to the family members in my district. So NCAR and UCAR helped me, NOAA helped me, and Digital Globe and a number of other companies, so thank you. 

So Dr. MacDonald, my question to you is, now that you moved 

from the NOAA world to Spire, how do you see the collaboration 

and the cooperation? 

Mr. MACDONALD. Well, I think it’s going to take time to, you 

know, learn how to get the kind of relationships that we need. 

What I see is that—I joined Spire basically because I see a fabulous capability that could become available, you know, very quick 

and that I don’t think would in the normal course of our federal 

acquisition be available anywhere near as fast, so my hope is we 

work great together and we get better weather forecasts a lot sooner because of this situation. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you. I yield back. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for letting me go out of order. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 

A couple of important points I’d like to make, because there is 

a balancing act here between the public good and the private sector, and I think all of us on both sides of the aisle agree that we 
137 

absolutely must have a government backbone because it is for the 

lives and safety of our citizens but also for the property of Americans. So I agree with that completely. 

I also believe that there’s a commercial industry launching. 

Whether it’s devices that are on aircraft or whether it’s devices 

that are on satellites, at the end of the day they’re going to be selling data to the commercial sector, and if by selling to NOAA, 

NOAA gives the data way for free, then they will never sell to 

NOAA and the public sector will miss out on critically valuable 

pieces of information that ultimately could save lives and property. 

So this is a balancing act that we’re going to have to figure out why 

this Committee is so important. 

I’d like to recognize Mr. Westerman for 2 minutes. We have to 

be on the Floor of the House technically at 10:35, so we’re going 

to go to 2-minute questions, so get your most important ones ready, 

and we’ll go from there. 

So Mr. Westerman, you’re recognized for 2 minutes. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Myers, you reference in your testimony the widespread use 

of smart devices these days. With the ever-expanding ability of 

crowdsourcing as a tool such with the success of the traffic app 

Waze, do you see this being applied to weather reporting in any 

way? 

Mr. MYERS. Yes, absolutely it will be. The collection of information through crowdsourcing, through vehicle sensors and a whole 

host of other things is an important area. It’s one that we have 

worked in extensively. In fact, we had one of the first patents having to do with the collection and reporting of severe weather 

through mobile devices, which, interestingly, for the Committee, we 

license for free to the National Weather Service because they were 

using that capability, and we felt it was so important. You know, 

people talk about the private sector but if you look at the company 

mission for AccuWeather, it starts out to protect lives and property, 

not to make a profit, not that we don’t want to make a profit but— 

and it’s our mission statement. Yes, it is. In fact, if you look at ours 

and the Weather Service’s next to each other, you have a very hard 

time distinguishing the difference. 

I think that’s true of most of the people that are in this field. 

They feel a strong obligation to the public to do these things, and 

constantly looking for ways to improve by using this kind of information. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. And because we’re limited in time, I’ll just ask 

Mr. Block if he’d like to add to that. 

Mr. BLOCK. Well, I certainly agree with a lot of the things that 

Barry is saying. In fact, we serve—my company serves over a thousand public emergency managers with our systems and our capabilities, and a lot of that information comes from NOAA, but it’s 

disseminated—it’s our systems that are actually the means of dissemination so for Schneider Electric, it’s very important that we 

continue to work closely with NOAA and make sure that we’re not 

in a competitive situation but in a cooperative one. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 
138 

The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer, is recognized for two 

minutes. 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Jacobs, I read an article where it talked about Panasonic’s 

weather forecasting model that’s among the best and maybe even 

the very best in the world, and there were some questions raised 

about whether or not Panasonic would share that model with 

NOAA or other organizations. Could you comment on that, please? 

Dr. JACOBS. Yes. Those—we do intend to share the information. 

What sort of form the information is shared in may depend on the 

licensing arrangement and redistribution rights obviously. Sharing 

the gridded data would be a lot different than sharing visual plots 

of model output, which can convey the same information, but the 

gridded data can actually be used for product generation, and if 

they redistributed the gridded data, it would negatively impact our 

business model. There are certain things that we can provide the 

Weather Service with to help improve their mission that wouldn’t 

negatively impact our business model, and we would certainly do 

that. 

Mr. PALMER. How would Panasonic share information, for instance, with NOAA, you know, to provide necessary information to 

protect lives and property? 

Dr. JACOBS. Well, a good example of that would be the aircraft 

data. So we currently have a contract to sell NOAA a subset of our 

aircraft data, but in times in the past when there’s been a national 

emergency, we typically define that as when the National Weather 

Service decides to do supplemental radiosonde launches at either 

16 or 18 Z. When those alerts are issued, we will activate the full 

feed to pipe them the remainder of the data at no charge. 

Mr. PALMER. Well, considering that Panasonic claims to have the 

world’s best, and I hope you do, I think this Committee would join 

me in looking forward to seeing that model. 

I yield back. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 

And I’d like to—for Mr. Myers, regarding giving the data away 

for free, from my assessment, I absolutely 100 percent am committed if the government is creating the data with taxpayer money, 

that is public data, and I fully support making sure that that data 

is available to the world as part of our WMO 40 agreements. It’s 

the commercial data that is licensed that we have to be concerned 

about because if we don’t do it right, then that commercial data 

will never be created, and if it’s not created, then it can’t be a public good for anybody. 

I’m going to go to Mr. Rohrabacher here in just a few minutes. 

Ms. Bonamici had a quick question. Would you mind if I yielded 

to her for one minute? 

Ms. Bonamici. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just wanted, Dr. Busalacchi, if you could address what process 

is involved in validating the models and forecasts that are disseminated by the National Weather Service? Because if we’re talking 

about or contemplating greater use of private data forecasts or 

models, should there be some similar validation or verification 

process before potential use in operational NWS forecasts? 
139 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. So anything in the public domain is fully vetted, it’s transparent. When dealing with the private sector, we have 

to talk about validation, verification, transparency. Our particular 

company, are their getting the right results or good results for the 

right reason? Can it be replicated? Can it be tested? That’s all part 

and parcel of the scientific method, but at the same time, sometimes that’s in conflict with intellectual property. But in terms of 

the public good, it has to be transparent, it has to be traceable in 

the peer-reviewed literature, absolutely. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentlelady yields back. 

I now recognize Mr. Rohrabacher for two minutes. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Just some fundamentals. How many weather satellites are there? 

When was the first weather satellite put into orbit? 

Mr. BLOCK. I believe that the first weather satellite was 

launched in the early 1960s. It was the TIROS satellite. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I remember—Mr. Chairman, I remember sitting through a hurricane back in the 1950s. We had almost no advance notice on it, and I’ll just note that what we’re talking about 

here saves not only lives, which are very important, probably thousands of lives, but also billions and billions of dollars. In that way, 

this is an industry that’s paying for itself in so many ways, and the 

fact that the private sector is now deeply involved in this I think 

this is a very—an American story of success, and I want to thank 

the witnesses for enlightening us today as to details. 

One last—I’m sorry—perhaps a little bit more controversial question is, are experiencing more severe weather incidences today than 

they did 100 years ago? Just a yes or no down the line if I could. 

Mr. MYERS. Not being a scientist, I’m going to pass on that question. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All right. 

Mr. BLOCK. I think the answer is yes, there is more—there are 

more instances of severe weather, but it’s largely a function of the 

population and the urbanized areas increasing in size so there’s 

more people to observe them. 

Dr. JACOBS. I would agree with that answer. I think that there’s 

a lot more observations so it tends to show——— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. So in other words, it’s not more severe 

weather, it’s just that we see more of it, especially now that we 

have so many satellites up there? 

Dr. JACOBS. Well, we don’t necessarily know for sure because the 

inverse of that would be, there were no observing systems or observers back then, so we don’t know if it was happening or not. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All right. 

Dr. BUSALACCHI. So where we have long contiguous records, we 

do see an increase in extremes. In addition, we have an increase 

in population that’s becoming more vulnerable to those extremes. 

Mr. MACDONALD. I think Tony’s answer captures my thoughts. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BRIDENSTINE. The gentleman yields back. 

I’d like to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony and 

the members for their questions. 
140 

The record will remain open for two weeks for additional comments and written questions from members. 
(141) 

Appendix I 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS
142 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS

Responses by Dr. Neil Jacobs 
143 
144 
145 

Responses by Dr. Antonio Busalacchi 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 

Æ