U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

77–020 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–638 

WEATHERING CHANGE: NEED FOR CONTINUED 

INNOVATION IN FORECASTING AND PREDICTION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OCEANS, ATMOSPHERE, 

FISHERIES, AND COAST GUARD 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOVEMBER 16, 2011 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

MARK WARNER, Virginia 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, Ranking 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

ELLEN L. DONESKI, Chief of Staff 

JAMES REID, Deputy Chief of Staff 

TODD BERTOSON, Republican Staff Director 

JARROD THOMPSON, Republican Deputy Staff Director 

REBECCA SEIDEL, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OCEANS, ATMOSPHERE, FISHERIES, AND COAST 

GUARD 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska, Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MARK WARNER, Virginia 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine, Ranking 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on November 16, 2011 ...................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Begich .................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Snowe ................................................................................... 3 

Statement of Senator Boozman .............................................................................. 31 

WITNESSES

Hon. Mary M. Glackin, Deputy Under Secretary for Operations, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce .... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7 

Hon. Todd J. Zinser, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Commerce ........... 14 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

David C. Trimble, Director, Natural Resources and Environment, U.S. Government Accountability Office ............................................................................. 19 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 20 

Rear Admiral Cari B. Thomas, Director of Response Policy, United States 

Coast Guard .......................................................................................................... 25 

Tom Iseman, Program Director, Water and Climate Adaptation, Western 

Governors’ Association ......................................................................................... 37 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39 

Dr. Peter P. Neilley, Vice President, Global Forecasting Services, The Weather Channel Companies ......................................................................................... 44 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 46 

Robert S. Marshall, Founder and CEO, Earth Networks, Inc. ............................ 49 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50 

APPENDIX

John D. Rockefeller IV, U.S. Senator, West Virginia, prepared statement ........ 63 

Daniel A. Sobien, President, National Weather Service Employees Organization, prepared statement ..................................................................................... 63 

Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Mary M. Glackin by: 

Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV ............................................................................ 66 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 71 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 75 

Hon. Olympia J. Snowe .................................................................................... 77 

Hon. Roger F. Wicker ....................................................................................... 78 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV 

to Hon. Todd J. Zinser ......................................................................................... 80 

Response to written questions submitted to David C. Trimble by: 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 81 

Hon. Olympia J. Snowe .................................................................................... 82 

Response to written question submitted by Hon. Roger F. Wicker to Rear 

Admiral Cari B. Thomas ..................................................................................... 82 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV 

to Tom Iseman ...................................................................................................... 83 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Roger F. Wicker to: 

Dr. Peter P. Neilley .......................................................................................... 84 

Robert S. Marshall ........................................................................................... 85 

(1) 

WEATHERING CHANGE: 

NEED FOR CONTINUED INNOVATION 

IN FORECASTING AND PREDICTION 

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OCEANS, ATMOSPHERE, FISHERIES, 

AND COAST GUARD, 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:33 a.m. in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Begich, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator BEGICH. It’s like the beginning of church. Everyone is 

very quiet. I’m not sure if we’re starting or not, but we are. So 

thank you all very much for being here. 

I will call this meeting to order of the Oceans Subcommittee. 

Thank you again for the panelists to be here this morning. We anticipate one or two additional senators to be here, but I wanted to 

go ahead and start the meeting. And again, good morning to all of 

you. 

We’re here to talk about the weather and the climate, which really is just the same as weather, on a longer time scale. Today’s 

hearing is meant to provide oversight of these two important functions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, otherwise known as NOAA. 

NOAA’s weather programs touch the lives of every American 

every day. Forecasts help people make informed decisions, whether 

a family planning their annual trip from their village to Anchorage, 

or a fisherman trying to stay safe in the Gulf of Maine. 

And while the phrase ‘‘climate change’’ is always controversial, 

we in Alaska are already living the effects. Having solid information about climate trends is critical for good governance and business planning. I’m proud to serve on the Commerce Committee 

where, for decades, both Republicans and Democratic chairmen 

have promoted the highest standards of scientific integrity. 

I’m a big supporter of efficient and effective government, too. So 

as I look forward to hearing more today about efforts to better support state and local governments and business decisionmakers 

through the creation of the Climate Service within NOAA, you 

2 

don’t have to be a climate scientist to wonder what’s going on this 

year. 

2011 has shattered weather and climate records across the country, from record heat and cold, to snow and rain, drought and flooding. Even in Alaska, where we are used to braving many extremes, 

last week’s massive storm was a sobering reminder of the importance of knowing what’s coming and being as prepared as possible. 

Last week, Alaska was hit by a massive winter storm. Had it hit 

the lower 48, it would have stretched from Mexico to Canada. With 

hurricane-force winds and 10-foot tidal surges, it was truly an epic 

event. Fortunately, NOAA was able to give clear warnings of what 

was coming. Alaskans are resilient. They hunkered down, and communities implemented their emergency plans. While assessments 

are still under way, the damage could have been far worse if we 

did not have the benefit of those warnings from NOAA a few days 

in advance of the storm. 

NOAA weather satellites are key to providing these advanced 

warnings. I joined several members of this committee this year to 

fight for funding of the Joint Polar Satellite System. Polar satellites provide critical data for forecasters of severe weather nationwide, and to Alaska in particular, since NOAA’s other satellites 

don’t adequately cover our northern state. 

I’m pleased to report that the House and Senate conference report on NOAA appropriations supported funding for that expensive 

yet critical program. 

I hope today’s hearing will help NOAA and the Committee find 

ways to continue to promote the highest level of innovation, even 

as we recognize the tough budget climate we face for the coming 

years. Our nation cannot afford to overlook the importance of reliable weather information. 

Today’s hearing is meant to push deeper and promote cost-effective and earlier decisions regarding program management in the 

deployment of weather and climate services. The last administration ran up a multi-billion price tag due to program delays in the 

management of the weather satellites, and I want to make sure 

this administration is a better steward of the taxpayer funding. 

For these reasons I am pleased to welcome our witnesses here 

today, and I want to extend a very special thank you to Deputy 

Under Secretary Mary Glackin. 

Ms. Glackin, I understand you are to retire from what has been 

an exceptional career in public service. You have worked at NOAA 

for more than three decades, earning seemingly every professional 

award possible, including twice the Presidential Rank Award. 

I am grateful you are here today, particularly given your own expertise and your leadership in improving weather operations by 

capitalizing on new technology and science. Your retirement is a 

real loss to NOAA and to the Federal Government, but I wish you 

every success and fulfillment in your future endeavors, and thank 

you again for being here. 

I’m also pleased to welcome the Honorable Todd Zinser, Department of Commerce Inspector General. Mr. Zinser will testify about 

the challenges NOAA faces in its efforts to develop and launch the 

Joint Polar Satellite System, while minimizing the loss of critical 

weather and climate information. 

3 

David Trimble, Director of the Natural Resources and Environment branch of the Government Accountability Office, will assist 

the Committee in providing recommendations to help advance Federal climate change strategic planning efforts. 

And I’m honored to welcome Rear Admiral Cari B. Thomas, Director of Response Policy in the United States Coast Guard. With 

this year’s extreme weather events around the country, including 

last week’s massive Alaskan storm, I welcome your timely perspective regarding the importance of NOAA weather and climate information to the success of the Coast Guard’s search and rescue mission. 

Panel 2 will include Dr. Peter Neilley, Vice President of Global 

Forecasting Services for the Weather Channel Companies, which I 

was happy to participate in recently about the Alaska storm. Doctor, it’s amazing they let a senator on the Weather Channel, but 

we thank you for that. 

Dr. Neilley will speak to the relationship between the private 

sector and NOAA in the development of weather and climate information and outline the priorities for NOAA’s services. And I know 

you’re a big fan of the new Coast Guard reality show also, Dr. 

Neilley. 

Tom Iseman of the Western Governors’ Association will offer perspective on the significant impacts that severe weather events and 

long-term climate trends can have on life in the West. He will also 

speak to the partnership that I believe shows significant promise, 

the Governors’ close coordination with NOAA on the delivery and 

sharing of objective, credible weather and climate information and 

services. 

Thank you all for willing to be witnesses. I will ask Senator 

Snowe to say a couple of words but give her a second here. 

I will also say, with the Coast Guard’s new reality show, I will 

say that Alaska now has the most reality shows of any state—— 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BEGICH.—anywhere, and we love it because it shows 

more about Alaska. But it also shows, if you notice, almost every 

one of those shows has a significant weather component. I don’t 

care if you’re flying or out there catching crab or in the Coast 

Guard, whatever it might be. It is weather that dictates a lot of our 

activity in Alaska, and literally our weather systems are vast and 

wide when you think about where we are and how large we are. 

So again, thanks to this panel and the panel that will be coming 

up next. 

Let me ask my Ranking Member, Senator Snowe, to say a few 

words, and then we’ll start the discussion. 

Senator Snowe? 

STATEMENT OF HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on the state of our nation’s environmental and weather observation infrastructure and satellite systems. As you know, I’ve been 

a long supporter of the Integrated Ocean Observing System, introducing authorizing legislation in each of the last four Congresses. 

4 

The IOOS system, which was first piloted in the Gulf of Maine 

in 1999 and has been collecting data since 2001, has proven to be 

a highly successful nationwide network of regional coastal and 

ocean observing systems. It served as a model in the development 

of innovative applications that makes data readily available to decisionmakers in real time for critical uses ranging from oil spill response in Portland Harbor to a lobsterman checking wave heights 

offshore. 

Certainly, we have witnessed the benefits of this network approach in Maine. Indeed, scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute have determined that the Gulf of Maine Observing System has returned six dollars to our region’s economy for 

every one dollar invested in the system. 

Now, as we look forward, this hearing is especially timely. We 

are at the intersection of the previous satellite program, the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System, 

or NPOESS, which operated from 1994 to 2010, when it was dismantled by the White House Office of Science and Technology; and 

the Joint Polar Satellite Program, or the JPSS, currently under development by NOAA and NASA. 

On October 28, the only Earth-observing satellite completed 

under the NPOESS program, the NPOESS Preparatory Project, or 

NPP—a lot of acronyms—was successfully launched as a bridge to 

the next generation of the Joint Polar Satellite System. And frankly, there should be no question it is now crucial in order to preserve 

the continuity of vital data for our long-range weather forecasting 

climate record that we ensure the $920 million appropriated for the 

Joint Polar Satellite Program, which represents over one-third of 

NOAA’s Fiscal Year 2012 appropriation, is implemented efficiently 

and in a timely manner. 

The fact of the matter is, according to the Government Accountability Office and the Inspector General, whom we’ll hear from 

today, we could expect to see a gap in the data provided by our 

polar satellites several years from now due either to the failure of 

the NPP satellite or delayed launch of its replacement, the JPSS– 

1. Yet underlying acquisition and management issues that led to 

the dissolution of the NPOESS in the first place remain unresolved. 

Indeed, the GAO has reported that the NPOESS was plagued by 

cost overruns and delays since 2005. The program’s original cost estimate was $6.5 billion, yet by 2010 that estimate had more than 

doubled to $15 billion. Moreover, the program suffered setbacks to 

the development of vital new sensors, which delayed the launch of 

the final NPOESS satellite for 5 years. And now, the most recent 

reports on the development of the Joint Polar Satellite System Program from the Inspector General, as well as the GAO, regrettably 

show that cost estimates have not improved, and that sensor and 

ground system development may delay the launch of the JPSS–1. 

Well, we simply cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the 

NPOESS program in implementing the Joint Polar Satellite System, nor can we countenance new problems that the GAO is concerned with in terms of a lack of interagency strategy for environmental observations among NOAA, NASA, and the Department of 

Defense, which could result in loss of economic benefit from a coVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
5 

ordinated approach and limit our ability to understand long-term 

climate change. The stakes are simply far too high for failure. 

According to the National Climatic Data Center, the economic costs of severe weather events have exceeded $50 billion this year 

alone. Our ability to effectively predict and mitigate extensive damage from severe weather events, such as the massive coastal storm 

that just struck Alaska, relies heavily on the continual data coverage provided by NOAA’s geostationary and polar-orbiting satellites. The two- to three-day forecasting capability provided by this 

data can mean the difference between safe evacuation or lost lives 

in the case of a hurricane, or provide enough time to take shelter 

before a tornado strikes. 

Given the devastation we have witnessed in the Midwest and the 

Southeast in April and May, clearly these extra minutes and days 

matter greatly in the context of saving human lives from the 

strength of the storm. Indisputably, the long-term investment in 

the infrastructure that provides this critical information must be a 

national priority. 

In the short term, we must also explore a range of options to ensure data continuity via alternative sources. The private sector is 

thinking creatively about how to obtain the same forecasting capacity with fewer resources by creating new platforms capable of supporting a range of sensors or using existing ones such as commercial aircraft in different ways. 

So I look forward to hearing from each of our panelists today on 

the innovations and technologies they believe can provide the most 

accurate, cost-effective information that we rely on in so many aspects of our daily life and commercial activities. So with that, I welcome the panelists, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for convening this hearing. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much, Senator Snowe. 

Let’s first start with the Deputy Under Secretary of Operations, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Mary Glackin. 

And again, I can’t stress enough your 30 years of service to this 

country. I know when people retire it really means they’re going to 

be doing more work in some field that they’ve been wanting to do 

for a long time, so I wish you the best there. But, please. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARY M. GLACKIN, DEPUTY UNDER 

SECRETARY FOR OPERATIONS, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND 

ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

COMMERCE 

Ms. GLACKIN. Thank you, Chairman Begich, and thank you for 

your kind words about not only myself but NOAA services. And, 

Ranking Member Snowe, we appreciate all of the support from this 

committee, and also the opportunity to testify in front of you today 

about the need for, and NOAA’s role in, supporting innovations to 

improve weather and climate services. 

NOAA has a leading role in understanding changes in weather 

and climate extremes, including trends in severe local storms and 

extremes in precipitation, whether it’s too little or too much, too 

often or too infrequent. This year we have seen an unprecedented 

number of natural disasters, from the heart-wrenching tornado outbreaks in Alabama and neighboring states in April, and in Joplin, 

6 

Missouri in May, to the record flooding in the upper Plains and the 

Northeast, to the extreme drought that is continuing across the 

Southwest. 

We have seen at least 10 disasters, each costing $1 billion or 

more this year. In the face of these challenges, NOAA has been 

able to provide accurate forecasts because of its continued investments in mission-focused research and development that drive innovation. There is much more to be done if we are to achieve new, 

life-saving advancements for the future, and NOAA is committed to 

working with its partners in the climate and weather enterprise to 

continue to spur innovation and build upon this record of success. 

Our scientists have been at the forefront of weather and climate 

science, forecasting and public preparedness for decades. Our 

science helps save lives and livelihoods. I want to briefly discuss 

two timely examples, weather radar and environmental satellites. 

In recent years, NOAA has developed a new weather radar upgrade called Dual Polarization Radar Technology. This capability is 

being installed this Fiscal Year and will assist forecasters in the 

warning and forecast process, leading to, among other things, better estimates of precipitation for water management, more accurate 

flood warnings, better identification of rain to snow transitions, and 

more precise severe thunderstorm warnings. 

Now, to turn to polar satellites, which have been highlighted 

here today, they have supported weather forecast models for over 

30 years. NOAA is working toward the launch of the next polar 

satellites, the Joint Polar Satellite System, JPSS. We thank the 

Committee and the Senate as a whole for their recognition of this 

national priority, and their support in the Senate’s Fiscal Year 

2012 appropriations bill for NOAA. 

Nonetheless, NOAA is expecting a data gap beginning as early 

as late 2016, when the current satellites reach the end of their life 

expectancies. Within available resources, NOAA is preparing to 

mitigate this gap to the greatest extent possible. 

NOAA is continuing working to improve the science and practice 

of forecasting and prediction. It’s not enough, however, to provide 

longer lead times for droughts, seasonal flooding, heavy rainfall 

events, and heat waves. We must also ensure that people hear 

these warnings and take informed and appropriate action to protect 

their own safety. 

The mixture of technology and social science advancements is a 

new approach to building a weather-ready nation, one that we expect to provide huge returns measured in avoided economic losses 

and lives saved. In all its efforts to support innovation, NOAA 

works in close partnership with the broader weather and climate 

enterprise that includes other Federal agencies, the private sector 

weather and climate industry, academic institutions and consortia, 

state and local governments, and other non-government organizations. My written testimony provides several examples of these ongoing partnerships, and I’m pleased that you’ll hear testimony from 

several key partners at this hearing today. 

So in conclusion, the investments made by Congress and the administration in NOAA’s weather prediction and warning capabilities directly saves lives in the United States during these disasters. 

NOAA is continuing to innovate to improve preparedness, detecVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
7 

tion, modeling, and forecasting efforts necessary for improved decisionmaking and to save lives and property. Although nothing can 

eliminate the physical threat that severe weather and natural hazards pose, NOAA has demonstrated success in better predicting 

them, reducing their impact, and helping vulnerable communities 

become more resilient to their devastating effects, and will work to 

continuously improve its products and services to the Nation. 

I’ll be happy to take any questions from the Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Glackin follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARY M. GLACKIN, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR

OPERATIONS, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Good morning Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, and Members of the 

Subcommittee. My name is Mary Glackin and I am the Deputy Under Secretary for 

Operations at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the need for, and NOAA’s role 

in, supporting innovation to improve weather and climate services. 

NOAA, since its beginnings, has relied on mission-focused research and innovation as a means of improving services to the Nation. NOAA has the sole responsibility of issuing severe weather warnings to communities across the country. NOAAled weather innovations such as the national Doppler RADAR network and weather 

modeling improvements continue to provide our Nation with increases in advanced 

warnings that protect lives and property from tornadoes and other severe weather 

events. This year we have seen an unprecedented number of natural disasters, from 

the heart wrenching tornado outbreaks in Alabama and neighboring states in April, 

Joplin, Missouri in May, to record flooding in the upper Plains and the Northeast. 

In the face of these challenges, NOAA has been able to provide advanced and accurate forecasts because of its continued investment in the long-term research and development that drive innovation. There is much more to be done if we are to achieve 

new life saving advancements in the future, and NOAA is committed to working 

with its academic, private sector, and other partners in the broader climate and 

weather enterprise to continue this record of success. 

NOAA scientists have been at the forefront of weather and climate science, forecasting and public preparedness for decades—our science helps save lives and livelihoods. NOAA has a leading role in understanding changes in weather and climate 

extremes, such as trends in severe local storms and extremes in precipitation—too 

little or too much, too often or too infrequent. Extreme weather and associated societal impacts have increased in recent years, and with our changing climate, the Nation can expect more frequent extreme weather events in the future. To combat this 

increased vulnerability, communities across the country must become more resilient 

to extreme events, with smarter land use planning, more widespread use of emergency action plans, and numerous other actions. 

Our nation’s environmental predictive capabilities are supported by four 

foundational pillars: observations, computer modeling (including High Performance 

Computing), scientific research, and our people, who provide forecasts, warnings, 

and decision support services to key decisionmakers. By strengthening the pillars— 

through improved satellite and in-situ observations, computational capacity, and 

coupled atmosphere, ocean, land models, and necessary research—we can revolutionize the forecast process across the entire spectrum, from relatively small-scale, 

short range applications to long range weather and climate predictions. 

Yet, the success of NOAA’s mission should not only be measured by the accuracy 

of its information, but by the effectiveness of its application. As such, NOAA is pursuing a number of innovative approaches to not only to provide significantly more 

lead time for forecasts, but to also ensure that people hear these warnings and take 

informed and appropriate actions to protect their own safety. This mixture of technological and social science advancements is a new approach to building a ‘‘Weather-Ready Nation’’ and one that we expect to provide huge returns—measured in 

avoided economic losses and lives saved. 

A Historic Year in the Making 

Despite NOAA’s quality forecasts and outlooks, severe weather events in 2011 

have demonstrated the need for continued investment in scientific innovation to improve environmental intelligence. 2011 has already established itself in the record 

books as a historic year for weather-related disasters, and it is not over. We have 

8 

already seen ten $1-billion-plus disasters. Total damages from weather- and waterrelated events since January for the United States are well over $45 billion and 

climbing. 2011 is now the fourth deadliest tornado year for the United States since 

1875, and the deadliest since 1936, with 548 people killed as of November 6. April 

2011 ranks as the most active tornado month on record with 875 tornadoes, breaking the previous record of 542 set in 2003. More tornadoes occurred on April 27 of 

this year than any other day in the past 61 years. On May 22, a large portion of 

Joplin, Missouri was devastated by an EF–5 (winds greater than 200 mph) tornado, 

resulting in over 150 fatalities and over 1,000 persons injured. The Joplin tornado 

was the deadliest this year and is ranked 7th among the deadliest tornadoes in U.S. 

history. 

Fueled by record-setting precipitation totals, historic flooding has hit the Midwest 

and Ohio Valley, from the smallest streams to the largest rivers. The Ohio Valley 

region had its wettest April on record, and the record goes back to 1895 for some 

states. Record breaking heavy rains across Montana and the Dakotas, combined 

with runoff from record winter snowpack, caused tremendous flooding across those 

states, with Minot, North Dakota, being among the hardest hit. 

This year the United States has also experienced severe impacts due to decadalscale changes in our climate. Across the U.S. Southwest extreme drought continues—stretching from New Mexico through Texas and Oklahoma across the Gulf 

States and Florida. According to the State of Texas, the past twelve months—from 

October 2010 through September 2011—have been the driest in state history since 

1895. Nearly two-thirds of Texas is currently experiencing drought categorized as 

‘‘exceptional’’—the most severe type. Texas has responded to more than 24,000 fires 

in approximately the same period, which have burned more than 3.8 million acres 

and destroyed over 7,000 businesses and homes. The Texas Agrilife Extension Service has calculated that Texas’ agriculture sector alone experienced losses of roughly 

$5.2 billion through August. 

Prime wildfire conditions continue across large portions of the Southern Plains 

and Southwestern States. More than 8.2 million acres have burned nationwide— 

nearly 120 percent of the 10-year average by this time of year. 

What it Means 

Nearly 90 percent of all Presidentially declared disasters are weather- and waterrelated, and our vulnerability to the impacts is increasing as our population grows. 

As shown in the chart below, the number of natural catastrophes resulting in property damage and/or bodily injury in the United States is trending upward, with 

2011’s numbers on track to surpass last year’s record as of July. 

Source: Munich Re NatCatSERVICE (statistics and chart). 

Over the past thirty-plus years, the United States has seen a total of 107 

weather- and climate-related disasters each totaling over $1 billion dollars in damVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE

1116GLACK1.eps
9 

age. Total standardized losses since 1980 exceed $750 billion (inflation-adjusted to 

2011 dollars using the Consumer Price Index). 

Demographic trends and population growth and an increased reliance on technology have made our society more vulnerable to high impact events at a time when 

we are seeing an increasing trend in extreme weather events. As a result, many agricultural, business, and urban planners are looking for ways to increase community 

resilience now. For example, the City of Chicago is taking steps to prepare for the 

likelihood of intense storms striking more often, of rainfall events causing more 

flooding, and of warmer temperatures. Local climate studies, along with recent 

trends such as an increase in the frequency of heavy rainfall events, have led them 

to conclude that proactive steps are needed to mitigate the cost and impact of these 

events. New York City is also engaged in adaptation planning, with particular focus 

on the risk of flooding from rising sea level. The Navy’s Task Force on Climate 

Change has advised that the Navy should prepare to police the equivalent of an 

extra sea as the Arctic ice melts. These cities and organizations, among many others, recognize the need to understand changes and trends in weather patterns, and 

to apply this to planning that may reduce vulnerability to high-impact weather and 

water events. Their recognition of the need to reduce their vulnerability to weather 

and water extremes is an important first step. However, there is much more that 

needs to be done in other sectors of our economy and with the general public to increase our resiliency to the impacts of these events. 

NOAA Science Spurs Innovation to Better Meet Societal Needs 

NOAA’s science spurs innovation within the agency. NOAA science includes discoveries and ever new understanding of the oceans and atmosphere, and the application of this understanding to such issues as the causes and consequences of climate change, the physical dynamics of high-impact weather events, the dynamics 

of complex ecosystems and biodiversity, and the ability to model and predict the future states of these systems. NOAA is supported in these efforts by key pieces of 

legislation, such as the Global Change Research Act and America COMPETES Act, 

the latter of which this Committee reauthorized in 2010. 

NOAA conducts and supports innovative research in order to provide the public 

with information, products, and services that enable stakeholders to make the best 

decisions possible to advance economic growth while promoting a healthy environment. NOAA is not alone in these endeavors and works in close partnership with 

the broader weather and climate enterprise that includes other Federal agencies, 

the private sector weather and climate industry, academic institutions and consortia, state and local governments, and other organizations. NOAA supports research at partner institutions such as Cooperative Institutes, its Sea Grant college 

network, Regional Integrated Science and Assessments program, and other mechanisms. 

Often, NOAA-supported advances are conducted in partnership with the private 

sector, such as through the NOAA Small Business Innovation Research program, 

and foster additional opportunities for economic growth in the private sector. Many 

innovative weather and climate technology advances spurred by NOAA investments 

in its own and partner institutions have been commercialized by the private sector 

and are now sold by the private sector around the world as the gold standard, such 

as NOAA’s Argo floats, which are state-of-the-art profiling floats that are providing 

realtime pressure, and ocean temperature and salinity for climate, weather, and 

other service applications and research efforts. 

Research, Observations and Prediction 

Longer lead-time forecasts for droughts, seasonal flooding, heavy rainfall events, 

heat waves and cold spells provide tremendous economic value for the Nation 

through overall reductions in loss of life and in physical and economic damage. 

NOAA provides a spectrum of critical information across a range of time and space 

scales, which is used by government, business, emergency managers, planners, and 

the public. The value of that information increases when businesses, farmers, energy producers and utilities, as well as the general public, are prepared and have 

effective plans of action to mitigate impacts. 

Returning to NOAA’s four pillars, future investments in innovation will be focused 

on: observations, computer modeling (including High Performance Computing), 

foundational scientific research, and our people, who will be better positioned to advise key decisionmakers during extreme events. For example, on the larger scale, 

coupled environmental models provide improved simulations of the interaction between the ocean and atmosphere, resulting in more accurate predictions of tropical 

cyclone behavior. On smaller scales, higher resolution observations and models can 

provide the type of short-term severe weather predictions that will 1 day allow us 

10 

to know up to 60 minutes ahead of time where a tornado will touch down, and to 

provide warning to the public based on these forecasts. 

An example of scientific innovation in observations is NOAA’s deployment of Dual 

Polarization radar technology. Developed in NOAA, ‘‘Dual Pol’’ is the latest weather 

radar upgrade, providing both horizontal and now vertical components to what 

NEXRAD Doppler radar is seeing. It will add fourteen new products to the suite 

of data already available to NOAA weather forecasters and our partners who receive 

radar data. These new tools will assist forecasters in the warning and forecast process. With Dual-Pol radar, forecasters can better glean information such as the size, 

shape, and type of precipitation particles. This information will lead to better estimation of total precipitation for water management and flood forecasting; accurate 

identification of the snow levels in higher terrain; improved ability to identify areas 

of heavy rainfall, including flash flooding potential; identification of rain-to-snow 

transitions, to alert travelers and road crews; and more precise severe thunderstorm 

warnings, especially for those containing hail. The full benefit of Dual-Pol radar, 

however, will not be fully realized until weather forecasters and research meteorologists develop new ways to utilize the data specific to their geographic areas and gain 

experience. 

One of NOAA’s very promising technologies toward improving higher resolution 

observation that supports weather predictive capabilities is called Multi-Function 

Phased Array Radar (MPAR)—the potential future generation replacement of 

weather radars. These new prototype radars build off existing military technology 

with a unique antenna that collects the same weather information as existing 

weather radar, but in about one-sixth the time. MPAR could not only expand the 

current weather surveillance network, but also has the potential to meet air traffic 

surveillance, homeland security and defense requirements for identifying and tracking non-cooperative aircraft over the United States. The decision to determine the 

feasibility of MPAR deployment is still several years out and will require significant 

research and collaboration with academic and industry partners. Steps for finalization include research, prototype development, testing and evaluation, and, if the 

technology proves feasible, eventual deployment of new systems. 

We anticipate numerous enhanced weather and climate service benefits from 

MPAR. MPAR’s adaptive sensing capability has the potential to support continued 

improvements to the severe weather warning system for tracking tornadoes, strong 

wind gusts, hail and locally heavy rains responsible for flash floods and mudslides. 

In addition, MPAR will provide observations that allow for more precise information 

about hazardous weather that affect flight safety and airspace capacity, in turn providing economic efficiency to domestic aviation and surface transportation systems. 

Finally, more detailed atmospheric observations, such as would flow from MPAR, 

are anticipated to improve air quality real-time advisories and forecasts, climate 

variability monitoring and forecasting, and wildfire monitoring and prediction. 

We know that shifts in weather patterns are often regional in nature, and have 

variable time spans. For example, El Nin ̃ o and La Nin ̃ a, which have become household words, are generally predictable over fairly definable areas and time spans. 

During the 1997–1998 El Nin ̃ o and 1998–1999 La Nin ̃ a, the U.S. agricultural sector 

experienced damages of $2.4–2.8 billion and $3.6–10.7 billion (in 2010 dollars), respectively. We are coming to understand many of these larger scale phenomena, 

such as the North Atlantic Oscillation, which is a change in the water temperature 

in the North Atlantic that is strongly correlated with heavy snowfall events in the 

Mid-Atlantic and Northeast states. These patterns, observed in-situ by NOAA’s 

Tropical Atmosphere-Ocean (TAO) buoy array in the equatorial Pacific Ocean, 

strongly influence and can help inform NOAA’s seasonal forecasts, including the recently published 2011–2012 Winter Outlook. NOAA has successfully transitioned 

numerous research innovations such as the TAO array into operations, turning wise 

investments into critical operational tools for accurate environmental prediction. 

Our tornado warnings have improved significantly over the past two decades primarily because of past research efforts. More research would help us better understand the rapid evolution of severe thunderstorms and why some produce tornadoes 

and others do not. We face a similar challenge with our understanding of hurricanes. While our track forecasts have improved greatly—our forecast location for 5 

days out is now as accurate as the forecast location for 3 days out was 15 years 

ago—we still do not understand what causes some tropical systems to jump two intensity categories in less than 24 hours, while others do not. NOAA’s goal—through 

an innovative research-to-operations test-bed called the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project (or HFIP)—is to demonstrate a 20 percent reduction to the average errors of hurricane track and intensity forecasts by the end of Fiscal Year and 

operationalize that improvement over the next few years. This will improve the accuracy and reliability of hurricane forecasts; extend lead time for hurricane forecasts 

11 

1PMEF DOC–2: Collect and provide the Nation with critical intelligence data, imagery, and 

other essential information for predictive environmental and atmospheric modeling systems and 

space-based distress alert systems by operating NOAA-controlled satellites, communications 

equipment, and associated systems. 

PMEF DOC–3: Provide the Nation with environmental forecasts, warnings, data, and expertise critical to public safety, disaster preparedness, all-hazards response and recovery, the naContinued 

with increased certainty; and increase confidence in hurricane forecasts. The desired 

outcome is to ultimately reduce the Nation’s risk to hurricane impacts by delivering 

improved forecasts and tools for community planners and other decisionmakers. The 

anticipated societal benefits will reduce deaths, injuries and property damage, and 

reduce the other costs associated with hurricanes by enabling decisionmakers to better identify at-risk populations and property, and by raising the confidence levels 

to initiate mitigation measures further in advance of approaching hurricanes. 

NOAA is making investments in key research and development areas that address a key information gap today between instruments on Earth’s surface and on 

satellites. One area of NOAA investment that could help bridge that gap is in Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). Operated by remote pilots and ranging in wingspan 

from less than six feet to more than 115 feet, UAS collect data from dangerous or 

remote areas. UAS have the potential to improve NOAA’s ability to monitor and understand the global environment by collecting data from areas that are currently inaccessible. In partnership with NASA NOAA spent 6 weeks in the fall of 2010 

studying hurricane formation and development in the Gulf of Mexico and the western Atlantic Ocean. Researchers sent the Global Hawk, equipped with a suite of instruments, over hurricanes Earl, Karl, and other storms in the region. The UAS 

flew multiple times over hurricane eyes, soared above one storm (a record for a unmanned aircraft system), and collected high-resolution data on the storms’ wind and 

cloud structures, particles in the air, lightning strikes and other meteorological variables. NOAA is partnering with other Federal agencies, academia, and private companies to test a variety of UAS. UAS may also have significant benefits beyond hurricanes, including new observational support for improving: the accuracy of other 

storm, flood, and drought forecasts, benefiting emergency managers and diverse private industries; our understanding of climate change; assessments of changes in 

Arctic sea ice and effects on ecosystems and coasts; and fire weather forecasts to 

increase safety and success in fighting wildfires that threaten people and property. 

NOAA also fosters innovation through partnerships. Water management decisionmakers require a new generation of water information, forecasts, and decision support. NOAA is working with its Federal partners USGS, USACE and others to implement Integrated Water Resources Science and Services, creating an integrated, 

high-resolution common operating picture for water information, supporting timely 

and critical water management decision in full coordination and collaboration with 

forecasting and decision support services. 

And finally, advances in data assimilation, computer modeling, and atmospheric 

observations through high-tech polar orbiting satellites and geostationary satellites 

have led to substantial improvements in NOAA’s model forecasts. For example, leading up to the ‘‘Snowmageddon’’ event of February 2010, NOAA was able to detect 

the storm threat seven-plus days in advance and begin alerting the East Coast up 

to 5 days in advance of the storm. This allowed states to implement contingency and 

continuity of operations plans, airlines to rearrange flights, and the retail industry 

to pre-stock their shelves. As a result, there was minimal impact to national and 

local airline and highway transportation. This long lead time was made possible in 

large part by observations obtained by NOAA’s polar-orbiting satellite and numerical weather prediction models. 

Polar-orbiting satellites are the backbone of all model forecasts for 3 days and beyond; however, future innovation in our observations and improvements in our forecasting are at risk. The launch of the next generation of NOAA’s polar-orbiting satellites, the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), has been further delayed by funding 

shortfalls in Fiscal Year 2011. As a result, NOAA is faced with a nearly 100 percent 

chance of a data gap in the U.S. civilian polar orbit, on which both civilian and military users rely, by late 2016 to early 2017 when the current polar satellites reach 

the end of their life expectancy. JPSS is a critical part of NOAA’s future infrastructure needed to continue our path of forecast improvement—and to maintain what 

we have built over the last 30 years. NOAA thanks the Committee, and the Senate 

as a whole, for their recognition of this crucial need and their support in the Senate’s Fiscal Year appropriations bill for NOAA. 

Uninterrupted flow of data from NOAA satellites is required to support two Department of Commerce Primary Mission Essential Functions (PMEF),1 which have 

12 

tional transportation system, safe navigation, and the protection of the Nation’s critical infrastructure and natural resources. 

been approved by the National Continuity Coordinator, thus making NOAA satellites not just NOAA priorities but also national priorities. NOAA is investing now 

to ensure that the Nation can continue to rely on these critical observations in the 

future. These observations and the derived products and services allow the Nation 

to prepare effectively for and deal with severe weather and other environmental 

phenomena. 

Getting the Word Out 

As the Federal Government’s sole official voice for issuing warnings during lifethreatening weather events, and as an established, reliable, and trusted source, 

NOAA provides the Nation’s first line of defense against severe weather. NOAA operates the Nation’s geostationary and polar orbiting satellites, a nationwide network 

of Doppler weather radars and surface observing stations. Scientists develop computational models that combine these observations with equations describing the 

physics of our atmosphere and ocean, and our forecasters interpret and deliver critical information. Alerts and warnings for severe weather and other near term hazards (tornadoes, hurricanes, severe thunderstorms, winter storms, most floods, 

chemical spills, volcanic ash, tsunami, space weather, etc.,) are delivered through 

multiple redundant mechanisms, including: NOAA Weather Radio, which triggers 

the Emergency Alert System; NWSChat, which focuses on real-time coordination 

with local core customers in the broadcast media and emergency management; the 

Internet; and, through our private sector partners, commercial television and radio, 

which communicate critical information to much larger audiences and effectively inform those in harm’s way to take appropriate action. 

Preparedness 

Our prospects for achieving our vision of resilient communities lie in our unique 

enterprise capabilities. The goal of disaster resilience is to enhance the capacity of 

a community exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing, in order to 

reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. The preparedness challenge remains essentially the same across both short-term and long-term 

weather and water events: public awareness, education, and plans of action to mitigate impacts on the personal, community, and regional scales provide the best protection against potential disasters. NOAA has long-held and strongly established 

ties to the emergency management community, through state, local, and tribal officials, which help ensure appropriate action is taken to prepare communities for 

weather and water events. NOAA and its partners, such as the National Sea Grant 

network, use integrated research, training, and technical assistance to enhance the 

ability of communities to prepare for, respond to, and rebuild after disasters strike. 

For example, we are developing a Coastal Resilience Index that provides a tangible 

way for communities to identify gaps and examine how prepared they are for storms 

and storm recovery, and provide guidance on how to increase resilience through 

measures including strengthening infrastructure or adopting stricter building codes. 

The historic floods, which spanned from Montana across the Dakotas, into northern and central plains and southern Mississippi Valley earlier this year, are an excellent example of why we need to prepare for catastrophic events. The NOAA 

spring flood outlook highlighted those particular areas as having the likelihood of 

major flooding. Our River Forecast Centers and local Weather Forecast Offices 

worked with Federal, state and local emergency managers and planners to help prepare for and plan to mitigate the impact of the flooding. Based on our forecasts, 

communities took extensive actions to limit the impact of the flooding, including 

massive levee reinforcements and eventual evacuations to prevent loss of life. FEMA 

prepositioned relief assets, and the USGS ensured their river gauges were operational—all of the agencies worked together to help mitigate the potential impact. 

Unfortunately, in spite of our best efforts, severe weather events still cause loss 

of life and significant damage. More of this could be mitigated with more timely, 

accurate and focused warnings. The impacts and lives lost from the disasters mentioned above would have been far worse without critical data input of observations 

from satellites and in-situ observations, and the extensive work of NOAA and our 

Federal, non-Federal, state, and local partners to improve the Nation’s preparedness 

for these events through education and outreach. However, as evidenced by the 

tragic loss of life in a number of these events, there is a long way to go to truly 

achieve a Weather-Ready Nation. 

13 

Achieving a Weather- and Water-Ready Nation 

With the high death toll and impacts we’ve seen this year, we take little solace 

in knowing that outcomes could have been worse without the extensive work of 

NOAA and our Federal, non-Federal, state, and local partners. There is much more 

that needs to be done to improve the Nation’s resilience for these events. Research, 

education, and outreach are the essential ingredients to improving preparedness 

and via improved forecast and warning accuracy and lead times. Realizing a Weather-Ready Nation, where society is prepared for and responds to weather dependent 

events, is vital. 

NOAA has started a national dialog with the Nation’s top experts in broadcast 

meteorology, emergency management, and the weather industry to examine what is 

happening with severe weather and what can be done in the short-and long-term 

to improve the Nation’s severe weather forecasts and warnings, and community preparedness. Included in this effort are social sciences, innovative technologies, and 

social media to improve our effectiveness in reaching those in harm’s way and provoking appropriate response, whether to the urgency of a tornado or tsunami warning, or to the longer-term likelihoods of flooding or drought. For example, most NWS 

offices have established Facebook pages, providing an additional medium for conducting outreach and education, as well as highlighting information about ongoing 

or upcoming weather events. Additionally, NOAA uses NWSChat to give private sector partners an invaluable opportunity to interact with NWS experts and to refine 

and enrich their communications to the public. Moreover, more private companies 

are carrying weather warnings on wireless networks, providing real-time alerts to 

your cell phone or e-mail. 

Sustaining our commitment to existing services, while continuing to innovate to 

improve our capacity to meet the Nation’s weather and water needs, requires targeted investments to shore up aging infrastructure, improve scientific understanding, and implement enhanced services to reduce risk to the Nation caused by 

weather and water. NOAA must increase our capacity to collect and assimilate increasing amounts of data to improve model performance, which is achieved through 

scientific innovation and technological advancements. Future technology improvements include more advanced polar and geostationary satellites, more sophisticated 

radar coverage, observing systems, and improved computing capabilities. These 

technology assets are crucial pieces of our national infrastructure. 

Additional, innovative projects, such as the Weather and Emergency Manager Decision Support (WxEM) and the HFIP’s Socio-Economic Research Recommendations 

Projects are also integrating social science into NOAA products and information to 

encourage more resilient behavior that reduces loss of life and property. 

Through the Weather and Emergency Manager Decision Support, NOAA is exploring ways to make its information easier to find, easier to understand, and easier 

to apply in operations by the Emergency Management community. This will result 

in improved decisionmaking for risk management of life and property. Further, the 

HFIP Socio-Economic Research project is using social science to help improve tropical cyclone risk communication, including the development of new or reconfigured 

existing graphics (e.g., the hurricane forecast cone of uncertainty) and visualization 

techniques, to better communicate tropical cyclone and storm surge risk and promote appropriate public response. 

We know that NOAA forecasts, warnings, and community-based preparedness 

programs are vital in enhancing the economy and saving lives. It all starts with a 

commitment on improved forecasting and ends with a Weather-Ready Nation in 

which businesses, governments, and people are prepared to use those forecasts to 

mitigate impacts. 

Summary 

To achieve an increase in community resilience and reduce the Nation’s vulnerability to weather and water related extreme events, we must continue to improve 

predictions. Again, our Nation’s environmental predictive capabilities are supported 

by four foundational pillars: observations, computer models, research, and our people. By strengthening the pillars—through continued innovation in improved satellite and in-situ observations, computing capacity, coupled atmosphere, ocean, land 

models, and necessary research and science improvement—we can revolutionize the 

forecast process across the entire spectrum from relatively small-scale, short range 

applications to long range weather and climate predictions. 

The dual goals of preparing for and mitigating natural hazards require the continuous commitment and partnership of many individuals and sectors—from Federal, 

state, tribal, and local to public, private, and academic. The investments made by 

Congress and the Administration in NOAA’s weather prediction and warning capabilities directly save lives in the United States during these weather disasters. 

14 

NOAA remains committed to leading U.S. efforts to save lives and property through 

preparedness, detection, modeling, and forecasting efforts necessary for improved 

decisionmaking. Although nothing can eliminate the physical threat that severe 

weather and natural hazards pose, NOAA has demonstrated success in better predicting them, reducing their impact, and helping vulnerable communities become 

more resilient to their devastating effects—and will work to continuously improve 

its natural hazards products and services to the Nation. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much for your comments. 

Next we’d like to have Todd Zinser, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Commerce. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TODD J. ZINSER, INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Mr. ZINSER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Snowe. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and thank you for 

your recognition of Mary’s service. It’s been a privilege of mine to 

serve with her these past 4 years as Inspector General. 

My office has oversight responsibility for NOAA, including 

NOAA’s weather satellite programs. We recently issued an audit 

report this past September on the Joint Polar Satellite System, 

known as JPSS. My written testimony summarizes our findings 

and recommendations, and this morning I would just offer three 

observations based on our continuing oversight. 

First, JPSS is a critically important program for the Nation and 

its ability to observe weather and provide data for forecast watches 

and warnings, but it is a program that must overcome years of setbacks experienced by its predecessor program called the National 

Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System, or 

NPOESS. NPOESS was an early effort dating back to the mid1990s to reduce duplication and overlap in the polar environmental 

satellite programs of the Department of Defense, NASA and 

NOAA. The effort did not succeed, and, in February 2010, after 

many years of delays and cost overruns, in February 2010 the administration restructured the program. This involved decoupling 

Defense on the one hand and NOAA and NASA on the other. 

NOAA and NASA are now partners on JPSS and my sense is 

that, despite a difficult transition over the past 21 months, the program officials are continuing to work diligently and are optimistic 

about continued progress of the program. 

My second observation is that there are many challenges ahead 

for JPSS, and those challenges must now be met against a backdrop of seriously constrained budgets for perhaps the next decade. 

We have placed these challenges into two groups. Number one, the 

JPSS program must take steps to prevent a potential near-term 

coverage gap from the current polar satellite called NOAA–19, and 

a stop-gap satellite called NPOESS Preparatory Project, or NPP 

that was successfully launched late last month as part of a contingency plan. NPP was originally intended as a test satellite but has 

been launched with the intent to use the data it collects to provide 

continuity of weather observations. 

While NPP was successfully launched by NASA and the checkout 

period for the instruments is progressing well, it is expected to take 

18 months or longer before the NPP satellite data is fully operational. That 18-month time-frame coincides with the end of 

NOAA–19’s design life in March 2013, leaving very little room for 

15 

contingencies and creating the potential for a near-term coverage 

gap. The plan to use NPP as a contingency created other challenges 

identified in our September report. 

The second major challenge for the JPSS program is to mitigate 

a longer-term coverage gap that is expected to occur between the 

end of design life for the NPP satellite and the operational date for 

JPSS–1. NPP’s projected end of design life is November of 2016. 

The program plans to launch JPSS–1 in the first quarter of Fiscal 

Year 2017. That date depends on full funding for JPSS for Fiscal 

Year 2012 and beyond. There will also be a checkout period for 

JPSS–1 instruments which could extend from 6 to 18 months after 

launch. If an extended checkout period is necessary for JPSS–1, the 

coverage gap for polar satellite data could be as long as 21 months. 

My third observation, then, Mr. Chairman, is that the senior 

management at NOAA and the JPSS program must take steps (a) 

to ensure that there is no additional slippage in the schedule 

through close management of the program and (b) minimize the potential impact of any coverage gap. Our recent report makes two 

recommendations in that regard. 

First, NOAA needs to finalize a program baseline which includes 

costs, and scheduling requirements, and keep the Department and 

Congress informed of the program’s performance against that baseline. In doing so, the JPSS program should prioritize all requirements and contingencies in order to maintain the current planned 

launch date. 

Second, NOAA should coordinate across the agency to develop 

contingencies for a coverage gap. NOAA needs to ensure, for example, that the scientists who work for the National Weather Service 

are working together with the scientists from the satellite service 

to develop options for using data from all of its sources to compensate for some of the possible loss of polar satellite data. Our 

concern is that, at this point, there is no coordinated approach to 

the problem across NOAA’s lines of businesses—and that there 

should be. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I’d be happy to respond to any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Zinser follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. TODD J. ZINSER, INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to testify today about the challenges NOAA faces in 

its efforts to develop and launch its new environmental satellites while minimizing 

expected data gaps. 

For the past 50 years, NOAA, in partnership with the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA), has been responsible for developing and operating 

polar and geostationary environmental satellite systems. NOAA’s environmental 

satellite operations and weather forecasting are designated primary mission-essential functions of the Department of Commerce because they directly support government functions the President has deemed necessary to lead and sustain the Nation 

during a catastrophe. But NOAA’s current constellation of polar and geostationary 

operational environmental satellites is aging, and its capabilities will degrade over 

time. As a result, the risk increases for gaps in critical satellite data. 

Between 1995 and early 2010, NOAA partnered with the Department of Defense 

(DOD) and NASA in the development of the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), which was at that time the planned replacement system for NOAA’s Polar Operational Environmental Satellite System 

16 

and DOD’s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program. The original NPOESS program was to develop six satellites, with first launch planned for 2009 and an estimated life-cycle cost of $6.5 billion through 2018. By late 2009, however, the program had reduced its scope to four satellites; the first launch was delayed until 

2014, while its life-cycle cost estimate had escalated to $14 billion through 2026. 

In February 2010, the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy announced its decision to have NOAA, in partnership with NASA, establish the Joint 

Polar Satellite System (JPSS) program as part of a NPOESS restructuring due to 

its long history of cost overruns and schedule delays. At that time, the JPSS program planned to launch two satellites—at an estimated cost of $11.9 billion—to collect data for short-and long-term weather and climate forecasting through 2026. In 

order to be included in the Fiscal Year President’s budget request, NOAA had to 

develop the JPSS budget estimate so quickly that—while NOAA had existing 

NPOESS requirements in place—it did not have time to formally approve high-level 

requirements for JPSS. In September 2011, NOAA notified Congress that it had recently completed its high-level JPSS requirements, was refining its cost estimate, 

and planned to incorporate updated baselines (cost, schedule, and performance) in 

the upcoming Fiscal Year budget submission. The Senate Committee on Appropriations has proposed funding JPSS with $921 

million in Fiscal Year while the House of Representatives appropriations bill recommends $901 million. Both bills fall short of the President’s $1.07 billion budget 

request for JPSS, which the program maintains is necessary to ensure the first 

JPSS satellite’s (JPSS–1’s) launch date in the first quarter of 2017. 

Given its history, this critical program requires strong program management and 

close oversight to minimize further delays and prevent interruptions in satellite coverage. Our work has identified these near-term priorities for NOAA as it manages 

JPSS: 

• complete the data checkout for the NPOESS Preparatory Project (NPP) and 

• strengthen program management and systems engineering to mitigate JPSS 

coverage gaps. 

Preventing Near-Term Coverage Gaps: from NOAA–19 to NPP 

JPSS–1 will be preceded in orbit by the NPP satellite, originally a NASA-led risk 

reduction effort to test NPOESS’ new instruments in flight. NOAA will now use 

NPP to maintain continuity of climate and weather forecast data between NOAA’s 

current polar-orbiting operational environmental satellite (NOAA–19) and JPSS–1. 

Despite recent efforts by NASA’s NPP team (including contractors) to meet the satellite’s scheduled launch date, late development of the ground system has compressed the mission schedule—and delayed the schedule for data product availability. 

Since we issued our September 30, 2011, report on JPSS, NASA successfully 

launched NPP on October 28 and reports that satellite checkout activities, such as 

instrument activation, are proceeding according to schedule. Once checkout completes, NASA will turn the satellite over to the JPSS program to calibrate the instruments and validate the scientific quality of data products; ultimately, the JPSS 

program will hand over satellite operations to NOAA. 

After the launch, NOAA originally planned to make NPP operationally ready in 

18 months, which coincides with the end of the design life of NOAA–19 (approximately March 2013). This plan left little room for contingencies. Both NOAA and 

our office have identified a number of risks that, if not properly mitigated, could 

cause further delays in NPP operational readiness and degradation of NOAA’s 

weather and climate forecasting capability: 

• Potential coverage gap. According to the ground system’s contractor, Raytheon, 

the ground system will not be able to support the validation of a significant 

number of data records until after a system upgrade, planned for March 2012. 

In addition, NOAA has not finalized coordination between the NPP/JPSS program and NOAA’s Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR), which 

is critical to transferring satellite observation into operations. Consequently, 

NOAA has extended its projection for readiness from 18 to 24 months after 

launch, which could lead to a gap in operational data between NOAA19 and 

NPP if NOAA–19 stops functioning properly at the end of its design life. 

• Insufficient number of ground station locations. Unlike NOAA’s existing operational satellite systems, NPP has only a single mission management center for 

controlling the satellite, and NPP’s ground station has the system’s only science 

data downlink (the means to transmit a signal from the satellite to the ground 

station). NOAA and JPSS program officials have commissioned studies to develop an alternate mission management center and hope to have one ready well 

17 

1 NOAA projected a JPSS–1 launch in the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2017, pending (1) the 

program receiving the full President’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2012 ($1.07 billion) and 

beyond and (2) no Fiscal Year 2012 continuing resolution beyond the first quarter of Fiscal Year 

2012. 

in advance of the JPSS–1 launch. Program officials indicated that the ground 

station has redundancy in terms of antennas and equipment. However, while 

there is redundancy, the use of a single ground station in a single geographic 

location is not consistent with NOAA’s existing polar and geostationary operational environmental satellite systems, which use more than one location. 

• Postlaunch ground system development challenges. NASA conducted two major 

ground system/NPP satellite compatibility tests in 2011; the first test had been 

delayed when ground system software builds took longer than expected to 

produce. Both tests experienced further delays and compressed the remaining 

work schedule for the NPP launch. NASA has also postponed analysis of some 

test results and requirements verification. Further, in response to an independent review team’s recommendations, the project completed a stress test in 

late September and early October to evaluate NPP’s operational readiness—any 

system fixes required to mitigate identified concerns would add to the 

postlaunch data production workload. 

In order to reduce the risk of a data gap between NOAA–19 and NPP, NOAA 

management needs to provide sufficient oversight to enable communication and coordination between the JPSS program and STAR. Further, it must balance instrument calibration and data validation activities (needed to produce operational data) 

with other ground system development tasks. NOAA should also determine the feasibility of establishing an alternate mission management center and an additional 

science data downlink for NPP as soon as possible. 

Mitigating Longer-Term Coverage Gaps: from NPP to JPSS–1 

NOAA expects a gap in weather and climate observations between NPP’s end of 

design life and the operational date of JPSS–l. NPP’s projected end of design life 

is November 2016, NOAA plans to launch JPSS–1 in the first quarter of 2017,1 and 

there is a minimum 6-month checkout period before key data products from JPSS– 

1 will become operational. We project that, due to continued budget uncertainty and 

probable Fiscal Year funding somewhat below the President’s budget request, the 

JPSS–1 launch date will be no earlier than February 2017. Based on a February 

2017 launch, the gap would last at least 9 months (3 months from November to February, plus the additional 6 months for checkout). Should checkout take 18 months 

(as NOAA predicts NPP’s will), the gap would extend a total of 21 months (see figure 1). NOAA’s studies have found that its weather forecasting at 5, 4, and 3 days 

before an event could be significantly degraded during the coverage gap period. 

JPSS–1 will require a checkout period longer than 6 months to achieve full operational capability (versus an interim capability to produce key data products). Full 

checkout could be prolonged because JPSS–1 instruments will have manufacturing 

changes from the models flown on NPP—and, in all probability, NPP will no longer 

be operational when JPSS–1 is on-orbit, thus leaving the JPSS–1 mission without 

a direct, and more efficient, means for comparison. 

18 

2 High-level requirements include the number of spacecraft, the instruments needed, the observational data to be provided, the timeliness of data delivery, and data distribution methods, 

among others. 

Source: OIG analysis of NOAA data, as of August 22, 2011. 

We have identified the following areas that require senior management attention 

to help ensure JPSS–1 operational readiness and minimize the potential impact of 

the coverage gap: 

• Prioritize all JPSS requirements,2 develop reliable cost estimates to support future funding requests, and systematically communicate planned actions and 

progress with decisionmakers. NOAA is currently developing a revised life-cycle 

cost estimate. Additionally, NOAA tasked NASA with developing contingencies 

that prioritize some of the most important requirements and maintain a launch 

readiness date no later than February 2017. We believe the JPSS program 

should formally prioritize all of its requirements, not just the subset in this contingency exercise, so that it can efficiently adjust the program’s performance capabilities or launch dates, if needed, in response to year-to-year funding 

variances. Further, the program should develop a plan to accommodate requirements that may have to be removed or relaxed when annual funding falls short 

of the program’s budget but could be recouped in future appropriations. Finally, 

due to the importance and complexity of the JPSS program, NOAA must establish a program baseline (cost, schedule, and requirements) as soon as possible— 

and keep the Department and Congress informed of its planned actions and 

progress against this baseline to facilitate decisionmaking. 

• Coordinate NOAA response, in case NPP does not live through its 5-year design 

life. The NPP spacecraft was designed to last 5 years and carries enough fuel 

to last 7 years. However, most of its instruments were managed and developed 

under the NPOESS contract, which received limited government oversight and 

had a history of technical issues. Additionally, under the NPOESS contract, 

NASA lacked technical oversight during the instrument development, manufacturing, and testing phases, creating uncertainty about the instruments’ ability 

to operate for the length of the spacecraft’s design life. For these reasons, 

NASA’s revised criteria for NPP mission success called for only 3 years of operability. Although NOAA’s current analysis assumes that NPP will have a 5-year 

operational life, NOAA understands that a residual risk of a shorter life expectancy remains due to the lack of oversight during the development of most of 

NPP’s instruments. In order to sufficiently prepare for an expected gap in polar 

satellite data from the afternoon orbit, NOAA should coordinate efforts from 

across its line offices to minimize the degradation of weather and climate forecasting during gaps in coverage. 


1116ZIN1.eps
19 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we have provided (and will continue to provide) our 

independent assessment of the JPSS program. We look forward to NOAA’s action 

plan to address recommendations in our September 30 audit report. The hope is 

that, when closing the looming satellite coverage gaps, NOAA finds innovative solutions—and can convey them, in a timely fashion, to Congress and other stakeholders. This concludes my prepared statement, and I will be pleased to respond to 

any questions you or other Subcommittee members may have. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Next we have David Trimble, Director, Natural Resources and 

Environment, Government Accountability Office. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID C. TRIMBLE, DIRECTOR, 

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT, 

U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Mr. TRIMBLE. Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, I’m 

pleased to be here today to discuss Federal efforts to provide climate data and services to decisionmakers. Recent assessments of 

the potential impacts of climate change in the United States have 

found, among other things, that climate-related changes such as 

rising temperature and sea level will combine with pollution, population growth, urbanization, and other social, economic and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any one of 

these factors alone. 

Policymakers are increasingly viewing adaptation, defined as adjustments to natural human systems in response to actual or expected climate change, as a risk management strategy to protect 

vulnerable sectors and communities that might be affected by 

changes in the climate. It may be costly to raise river or coastal 

dikes to protect communities and resources from sea level rise, 

build higher bridges or improve storm water systems, but there is 

a growing recognition that the cost of inaction could be greater. 

Over the years, GAO has reported on many climate change 

issues, including recent reports on adaptation and Federal funding 

for climate change programs and activities. Let me highlight four 

points from these reports. 

First, climate change adaptation has begun to receive more attention and resources because the greenhouse gases already in the 

atmosphere are expected to continue altering the climate system 

into the future regardless of efforts to control emissions. Further, 

there is a growing recognition that past practices for making decisions may no longer be reliable. According to the National Research 

Council, many decision rules for such things as building bridges or 

establishing zoning rules assume a continuation of past climate 

conditions with similar patterns or variation and the same probability of extreme events. According to the NRC, that assumption, 

fundamental to the way people and organizations make their 

choices, is no longer valid. 

Second, Federal, state and local authorities on the front line of 

early adaptation efforts face challenges obtaining local or site-specific climate data such as projected temperature and precipitation 

changes, and translating that data into information they need to 

make decisions. The lack of such data makes it hard for these officials to understand or quantify the potential impacts of climate 

change, and difficult to justify the cost of adaptation efforts since 

projections of future benefits are less certain than current costs. 

20 

1 USGCRP coordinates and integrates Federal research on changes in the global environment—including climate change—and their implications for society. 

Third, according to the experts we have surveyed, Federal actions to provide and interpret site-specific information could help 

address some of these challenges. Our 2009 report on climate 

change adaptation discusses several potential actions that Federal, 

state and local officials identified as useful to inform adaptation decisionmaking. These included state and local climate change impact 

and vulnerability assessments, and the development of processes 

and tools to access, interpret, and apply climate information. 

In that report, we also obtained information regarding the creation of a climate service, a Federal service to consolidate and deliver climate information to decisionmakers to inform their adaptation efforts. While we have not made a recommendation regarding 

the creation of a climate service within NOAA or any other agency 

or interagency body, our 2009 report discussed a range of potential 

strengths and limitations of such a service. 

Fourth, adaptation will require making policy and management 

decisions that cut across traditional sectors, issues and jurisdictional boundaries. Many Federal entities, executive offices and organizations manage programs and activities related to climate 

change. However, getting these entities to work toward a common 

goal is complicated. In 2009, we recommended the development of 

a strategic plan to guide the nation’s efforts to adapt to a changing 

climate, including the identification of mechanisms to increase the 

capacity of Federal, state and local agencies to incorporate information about current and potential climate change impacts into government decisionmaking. 

The recent Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force 

is a positive step, but coordination on climate change issues across 

the government is still a challenge. Our May 2011 report on climate change funding found that Federal officials do not have a 

shared understanding of strategic government-wide priorities, including the roles and responsibilities of the key Federal entities. In 

a period of declining budgets, effective collaboration across all Federal agencies is critical, now more than ever. 

That concludes my statement. I will, of course, be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Trimble follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID C. TRIMBLE, DIRECTOR, NATURAL RESOURCES AND

ENVIRONMENT, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss Federal efforts to provide climate data 

and services to decision makers. Climate change is a complex, crosscutting issue 

that poses risks to many existing environmental and economic systems, including 

agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and human health. A 2009 assessment by 

the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) found that climaterelated changes—such as rising temperature and sea level—will combine with pollution; population growth; urbanization; and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factors alone.1 According to the National Academies, USGCRP, and others, greenhouse gases already 

in the atmosphere will continue altering the climate system into the future, regardless of emissions control efforts. Therefore, adaptation—defined as adjustments to 

21 

2Office of Management and Budget, Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress (June 2010). See http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislativelreports/FY2011lClimatelChange.pdf. 3Panel of the National Academy of Public Administration, Building Strong for Tomorrow: 

NOAA Climate Service, a report prepared for Congress, the Department of Commerce, and 

NOAA (Sept. 13, 2010). 4GAO. Climate Change Adaptation: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help Government Officials Make More Informed Decisions, GAO–10–113, (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2009), and Climate Change: Improvements Needed to Clarify National Priorities and Better Align Them with 

Federal Funding Decisions, GAO–11–317, (Washington, D.C.: May 20, 2011). 5For more information about the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, see 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/adaptation. 6GAO–10–113 and GAO–11–317. 

7GAO–10–113. 

natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate change—is an 

important part of the response to climate change. 

Many Federal entities manage climate change programs and activities. According 

to the Office of Management and Budget’s June 2010 Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress, 9 of the 15 cabinet-level departments, along with 7 

other Federal agencies, received funding for climate change activities in Fiscal Year 

2010.2 In addition, entities within the Executive Office of the President, such as the 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Federal interagency coordinating bodies, like USGCRP, work together to ensure Federal climate change activities are 

guided by the latest climate science. A September 2010 report by the National Academy of Public Administration, which was prepared for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Congress, referred to this set of Federal activities as the Federal ‘‘climate change enterprise.’’ 3

Federal climate programs are shifting their focus to adaptation and climate services. Our October 2009 report on climate change adaptation found no coordinated 

national approach to adaptation, but our May 2011 report on climate change funding cited indications that Federal agencies were beginning to respond to climate 

change more systematically.4 About the same time as the issuance of our October 

2009 report, Executive Order 13514 on Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance called for Federal agencies to participate actively 

in the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force.5 The task force, which 

began meeting in Spring 2009, is co-chaired by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality, NOAA, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy and includes representatives from more than 20 Federal agencies and Executive Branch 

offices. The task force was formed to develop Federal recommendations for adapting 

to climate change impacts both domestically and internationally and to recommend 

key components to include in a national strategy. In addition, USGCRP recently 

launched a national climate assessment designed to engage stakeholders in a process that builds on science, data, and information to help decision making. Individual 

agencies are also beginning to consider adaptation actions. For example, in May 

2009, the Chief of Naval Operations created Task Force Climate Change to address 

the naval implications of a changing Arctic and global environment. 

My testimony today addresses: (1) the data challenges that federal, state, and 

local officials face in their efforts to adapt to a changing climate, (2) the actions Federal agencies could take to help address these challenges, and (3) Federal climate 

change strategic planning efforts. The information in this testimony is based on 

prior work, largely on our recent reports on climate change adaptation and Federal 

climate change funding.6 Our work was based on, among other things, analysis of 

studies; site visits to areas pursuing adaptation efforts; responses to a web-based 

questionnaire sent to federal, state, and local officials knowledgeable about adaptation; and interviews with such officials. A detailed description of our scope and 

methodology is available in each issued product. All of the work on which this statement is based was performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

A Lack of Site-Specific Data, Such as Local Projections of Expected 

Changes, Can Challenge the Ability of Officials to Manage the Effects 

of Climate Change 

As we reported in October 2009, insufficient site-specific data, such as local projections of expected changes, make it hard for federal, state, and local officials to predict the impacts of climate change, and thus hard for these officials to justify the 

current costs of adaptation efforts for potentially less certain future benefits.7 Based 

on the responses by a diverse array of federal, state, and local officials knowledgeable about adaptation to a web-based questionnaire designed for that report, related 

22 

8The number of respondents varies because some officials did not respond to certain questions. 9 National Research Council of the National Academies, Panel on Strategies and Methods for 

Climate-Related Decision Support, Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change, Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate (Washington, D.C., 2009). 10GAO–10–113. 

challenges generally fit into two main categories: (1) translating climate data—such 

as projected temperature and precipitation changes—into information that officials 

need to make decisions and (2) difficulty in justifying the current costs of adaptation 

with limited information about future benefits. 

The process of providing useful information to officials making decisions about adaptation can be summarized by the following: 

• First, data from global-scale models must be ‘‘downscaled’’ to provide climate information at a geographic scale relevant to decision makers. About 74 percent 

(133 of 179) of the officials who responded to our questionnaire rated ‘‘availability of climate information at relevant scale (i.e., downscaled regional and 

local information)’’ as very or extremely challenging. 

• Second, the downscaled climate information must be translated into impacts at 

the local level, such as increased stream flow. Some respondents and officials 

interviewed for our October 2009 report said that it is challenging to link predicted temperature and precipitation changes to specific impacts. For example, 

one Federal official said that ‘‘we often lack fundamental information on how 

ecological systems/species respond to non-climate change related anthropogenic 

stresses, let alone how they will respond to climate change.’’ 

• Third, local impacts must be translated into costs and benefits, since this information is required for many decision making processes. Almost 70 percent (126 

of 180) of the respondents to our questionnaire rated ‘‘understanding the costs 

and benefits of adaptation efforts’’ as very or extremely challenging.8 As noted 

by one local government respondent, it is important to understand the costs and 

benefits of adaptation efforts so they can be evaluated relative to other priorities. 

• Fourth, decision makers need baseline monitoring data to evaluate adaptation 

actions over time. Nearly 62 percent (113 of 181) of the respondents to our questionnaire rated the ‘‘lack of baseline monitoring data to enable evaluation of adaptation actions (i.e., inability to detect change)’’ as very or extremely challenging. 

These challenges make it difficult for officials to justify the current costs of adaptation efforts for potentially less certain future benefits. A 2009 report by the National Research Council (NRC) discusses how officials are struggling to make decisions based on future climate scenarios instead of past climate conditions.9 According to the report, requested by the Environmental Protection Agency and NOAA, 

usual practices and decision rules (e.g., for building bridges, implementing zoning 

rules, using private motor vehicles) assume a stationary climate—a continuation of 

past climate conditions, including similar patterns of variation and the same probabilities of extreme events. According to the NRC report, that assumption, which is 

fundamental to the ways people and organizations make their choices, is no longer 

valid. 

Federal Actions to Provide and Interpret Site-Specific Information Would 

Help Officials Understand the Impacts of Climate Change and Available 

Adaptation Strategies 

Federal actions to provide and interpret site-specific information would help address challenges associated with adaptation efforts, based on our analysis of responses to the web-based questionnaire and other materials analyzed for our October 2009 report.10 The report discussed several potential Federal actions that federal, state, and local officials identified as useful to inform adaptation decision making. These included state and local climate change impact and vulnerability assessments and the development of processes and tools to access, interpret, and apply 

climate information. In that report, we also obtained information regarding the creation of a climate service—a Federal service to consolidate and deliver climate information to decision makers to inform adaptation efforts. 

About 61 percent (107 of 176) of the federal, state, and local officials who responded to the web-based questionnaire developed for our October 2009 adaptation 

report rated the ‘‘creation of a Federal service to consolidate and deliver climate information to decision makers to inform adaptation efforts’’ as very or extremely useVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
23 

11GAO–10–113. 12For more information about the NOAA Climate Service, see http://www.noaa.gov/climate.html. A range of climate information is presented at www.climate.gov, NOAA’s Climate 

Services Portal. 13The Department of Defense and Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 prohibited 

any funds appropriated in the act to be used to implement, establish, or create a NOAA Climate 

Service as NOAA had previously described it during Fiscal Year 2011. 14Panel of the National Academy of Public Administration, Building Strong for Tomorrow: 

NOAA Climate Service, a report prepared for Congress, the Department of Commerce, and 

NOAA (Sept. 13, 2010). 15 USGCRP’s September 30, 2011 Draft Strategic Plan reflects elements of these NRC recommendations. 

ful.11 Respondents offered a range of potential strengths and weaknesses for such 

a service. Several said that a climate service would help consolidate information and 

provide a single-information resource for local officials, and others said that it would 

be an improvement over the current ad hoc system. A climate service would avoid 

duplication and establish an agreed set of climate information with uniform methodologies, benchmarks, and metrics for decision making, according to some officials. 

According to one Federal official, consolidating scientific, modeling, and analytical 

expertise and capacity could increase efficiency. Similarly, some officials noted that 

with such consolidation of information, individual agencies, states, and local governments would not have to spend money obtaining climate data for their adaptation 

efforts. Others said that it would be advantageous to work from one source of information instead of different sources of varying quality. Some officials said that a climate service would demonstrate a Federal commitment to adaptation and provide 

a credible voice and guidance to decision makers. In an announcement on February 

8, 2010, the Department of Commerce proposed establishing a NOAA climate service. Though not yet established, information is available on the NOAA climate service website, including draft vision and strategic framework documents.12 According 

to NOAA documents, such a climate service would provide a single, reliable, and authoritative source for climate data, information, and decision support services to 

help individuals, businesses, communities, and governments make smart choices in 

anticipation of a climate changed future.13 A September 2010 report by the National 

Academy of Public Administration discusses the factors needed for a NOAA climate 

service to succeed—such as the designation of a lead Federal agency to be the dayto-day integrator of the overall Federal effort regarding climate science and services—and makes recommendations on how to achieve those factors.14

Other respondents to our questionnaire, however, were less enthusiastic about the 

creation of a climate service. Some voiced skepticism about whether it was feasible 

to consolidate climate information, and others said that such a system would be too 

rigid and may get bogged down in lengthy review processes. Furthermore, certain 

officials stated that building such capacity may not be the most effective place to 

focus Federal efforts because the information needs of decision makers vary so much 

by jurisdiction. Several officials noted that climate change is an issue that requires 

a multidisciplinary response, and a single Federal service may not be able to supply 

all of the necessary expertise. For example, one Federal official stated that the information needs of Bureau of Reclamation water managers are quite different from the 

needs of Bureau of Land Management rangeland managers, which are different 

from the needs of all other resource management agencies and programs. The official stated that it seems highly unlikely that a single Federal service could effectively identify and address the diverse needs of multiple agencies. Several respondents also said that having one preeminent source for climate change information 

and modeling could stifle contrary ideas and alternative viewpoints. Moreover, several officials who responded to our questionnaire were concerned that a climate 

service could divert attention and resources from current adaptation efforts by reinventing duplicative processes without making use of existing structures. The 2009 

NRC report on informing decisions in a changing climate recommends that the Federal government’s adaptation efforts should be undertaken through a new integrated interagency initiative with both service and research elements but that such 

an initiative should not be centralized in a single agency.15 Doing so, according to 

this report, would disrupt existing relationships between agencies and their constituencies and formalize a separation between the emerging science of climate response and fundamental research on climate and the associated biological, social, 

and economic phenomena. Furthermore, the report states that a climate service located in a single agency and modeled on the weather service would by itself be less 

than fully effective for meeting the national needs for climate-related decision support. The NRC report also notes that such a climate service would not be user-driven and so would likely fall short in providing needed information, identifying and 

24 

16GAO–10–113. 17GAO–11–317. 18GAO. Environmental Satellites: Strategy Needed to Sustain Critical Climate and Space 

Weather Measurements, GAO–10–456, (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 27, 2010). For another example 

of the need for improved strategic planning, see Climate Change: A Coordinated Strategy Could 

Focus Federal Geoengineering Research and Inform Governance Efforts, GAO–10–903, (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 23, 2010). 

meeting critical decision support research needs, and adapting adequately to changing information needs. 

We have not made recommendations regarding the creation of a climate service 

within NOAA or any other agency or interagency body, although the provision of 

climate data and services will be an important consideration in future governmentwide strategic planning efforts, particularly in an era of declining budgets. 

Federal Climate Change Strategic Planning Efforts Could Be Improved 

Federal strategic planning efforts could be improved for many aspects of the climate change enterprise. Our October 2009 report on climate change adaptation concluded that, to be effective, related Federal efforts must be coordinated and directed 

toward a common goal.16 This report recommended the development of a strategic 

plan to guide the Nation’s efforts to adapt to a changing climate, including the identification of mechanisms to increase the capacity of federal, state, and local agencies 

to incorporate information about current and potential climate change impacts into 

government decision making. Some actions have subsequently been taken to improve Federal adaptation efforts, but our May 2011 report on climate change funding found that Federal officials do not have a shared understanding of strategic governmentwide priorities.17 This report recommended, among other things, the clear 

establishment of Federal strategic climate change priorities, including the roles and 

responsibilities of the key Federal entities, taking into consideration the full range 

of activities within the Federal climate change enterprise. In other reports, we also 

noted the need for improved coordination of climate-related activities. For example, 

our April 2010 report on environmental satellites concluded that gaps in satellite 

coverage, which could occur as soon as 2015, are expected to affect the continuity 

of important climate and space weather measurements.18 In that report, we stated 

that, despite repeated calls for interagency strategies for the long-term provision of 

environmental data from satellites (both for climate and space weather purposes), 

our Nation still lacks such plans. 

Of particular importance in adaptation are planning decisions involving physical 

infrastructure projects, which require large capital investments and which, by virtue 

of their anticipated lifespan, will have to be resilient to changes in climate for many 

decades. The long lead time and long life of large infrastructure investments require 

such decisions to be made well before climate change effects are discernible. Our ongoing work for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Oversight and Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

will explore this issue by reviewing the extent to which federal, state, and local authorities consider the potential effects of climate change when making infrastructure 

investment decisions. 

Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, and Members of the Subcommittee, 

this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to respond to any questions 

that you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have. 

Why GAO Did This Study 

Climate change is a complex, crosscutting issue that poses risks to many existing 

environmental and economic systems, including agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and human health. A 2009 assessment by the United States Global Change 

Research Program (USGCRP) found that climate-related changes-—such as rising 

temperature and sea level-—will combine with pollution, population growth, urbanization, and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factors alone. 

According to the National Academies, USGCRP, and others, greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere will continue altering the climate system into the future, 

regardless of emissions control efforts. Therefore, adaptation—-defined as adjustments to natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate 

change—-is an important part of the response to climate change. 

This testimony addresses (1) the data challenges that Federal, state, and local officials face in their efforts to adapt to a changing climate, (2) the actions Federal 

agencies could take to help address these challenges, and (3) Federal climate change 

strategic planning efforts. The information in this testimony is based on prior work, 

largely on GAO’s recent reports on climate change adaptation (GAO–10–113) and 

25 

Federal climate change funding (GAO–11–317). These reports are based on, among 

other things, analysis of studies, site visits to areas pursuing adaptation efforts, and 

responses to a web-based questionnaire sent to Federal, state, and local officials. 

What GAO Found 

As GAO reported in October 2009, challenges from insufficient site-specific data— 

such as local projections—make it hard for Federal, state, and local officials to predict the impacts of climate change, and thus hard to justify the current costs of adaptation efforts for potentially less certain future benefits. Based on responses from 

a diverse array of Federal, state, and local officials knowledgeable about adaptation, 

related challenges generally fit into two main categories: (1) translating climate 

data—such as projected temperature and precipitation changes—into information 

that officials need to make decisions and (2) the difficulty in justifying the current 

costs of adaptation with limited information about future benefits. 

Federal actions to provide and interpret site-specific information would help address data challenges associated with adaptation efforts, based on responses to 

GAO’s web-based questionnaire sent to Federal, state, and local officials and other 

materials analyzed for its October 2009 report. In addition to several potential Federal actions identified as useful by respondents to GAO’s questionnaire, including 

the development of state and local climate change vulnerability assessments, GAO’s 

2009 report also contained information about the creation of a Federal climate service. Specifically, about 61 percent (107 of 176) of respondents rated the ‘‘creation of 

a Federal service to consolidate and deliver climate information to decisionmakers 

to inform adaptation efforts’’ as very or extremely useful. Respondents offered a 

range of potential strengths and weaknesses for such a service. For example, several 

respondents stated that a climate service would help consolidate information and 

provide a single information resource for local officials. However, some respondents 

to GAO’s questionnaire voiced skepticism about whether it was feasible to consolidate climate information, and others stated that such a service would be too rigid 

and may get bogged down in lengthy review processes. GAO has not made recommendations regarding the creation of a climate service within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or any other agency or interagency body. 

Federal strategic planning efforts could be improved for many aspects of the climate change enterprise. For example, GAO’s October 2009 report on climate change 

adaptation concluded that, to be effective, related Federal efforts must be coordinated and directed toward a common goal. This report recommended the development of a strategic plan to guide the Nation’s efforts to adapt to a changing climate, 

including the identification of mechanisms to increase the capacity of Federal, state, 

and local agencies to incorporate information about current and potential climate 

change impacts into government decisionmaking. Some actions have subsequently 

been taken to improve Federal adaptation efforts, but GAO’s May 2011 report on 

climate change funding found that Federal officials do not have a shared understanding of strategic governmentwide priorities. 

[For an online version of this testimony, go to http://www.gao.gov/products/ 

GAO–12–238T]. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

The next person is Admiral Thomas, Director of Response Policy, 

United States Coast Guard. 

STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL CARI B. THOMAS, DIRECTOR 

OF RESPONSE POLICY, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

Admiral THOMAS. Good morning, Chairman Begich, Ranking 

Member Snowe, members of the Committee. I’m pleased to appear 

before you today to discuss the United States Coast Guard’s use of 

environmental products, satellite distress information provided by 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in support 

of Coast Guard operations. 

The Coast Guard has enjoyed a partnership with NOAA for more 

than 100 years. This partnership includes providing situational 

awareness to both professional mariners and recreational boaters 

on impending weather and dangerous conditions, as well as 

26 

NOAA’s active participation on the National Search and Rescue 

Committee, of which I had the honor to chair. 

In more than 27 years of conducting Coast Guard operations, I 

have used any number of NOAA products to help make critical 

operational decisions. Water temperature, wind and current data, 

and distress alerting information all assist both the art and the 

science of saving lives at sea. 

Specifically, I’d like to share with you today two situations that 

demonstrate the critical role that NOAA plays in supporting Coast 

Guard daily operations. 

In the Gulf of Alaska, five people were forced to abandon their 

fishing vessel into 38-degree water. Tied together and adrift in 

some of the most dangerous waters in the world, it was only the 

SARSAT distress beacon, activated by the crew and received by 

NOAA’s weather satellite, that alerted the Coast Guard that they 

were in distress. That distress notification was transmitted via the 

NOAA Mission Control Center in Suitland, Maryland, directly to 

the Coast Guard Rescue Coordination Center in Juneau, Alaska. 

In addition, the NOAA weather satellite provided on-scene 

weather information that crews from three helicopters and one 

C130 rescue aircraft used to prepare for the rescue mission. At the 

Juneau Rescue Coordination Center, search and rescue specialists 

helped develop the comprehensive search plans to locate the source 

of the distress alert. Our search planning tool uses critical weather, 

tide, and ocean current information provided by NOAA. 

In seconds, this program analyzed the weather and environmental data, along with other critical information, to develop the 

most effective search plan, allowing for the quickest rescue possible 

and ultimately minimized risk to our search crews and the mariners in distress. Though only three of the five crew members were 

saved that day, the three survivors owe their lives in part to 

NOAA’s operation and management of the U.S. SARSAT program 

and environmental information that weather and climate services 

provide to the Coast Guard and other partners. 

As dramatic as it sounds, it is this type of case that the men and 

women of the Coast Guard face daily. Last August, and right here 

along the East Coast, NOAA’s environmental data was used in our 

own mission planning, port readiness, citizen preparedness and infrastructure protection in response to Hurricane Irene. NOAA’s 

forecasting assisted the Coast Guard’s advance planning and enabled commercial and recreational vessels alike to seek safety, 

whether by making preparations to prepare ships in port or get 

their ships under way to evade the storm at sea. 

Coast Guard captains in the port were able to make sound decisions to limit the amount of time that ports were closed during and 

after the storm. Minimizing the time a U.S. port is closed is critical, especially when taking into account the economic and security 

impacts of port closures. These critical decisions on port closures 

during Hurricane Irene by the Coast Guard were based in part on 

the information received by NOAA’s environmental data. 

Our own rescue assets, Coast Guard cutters, small boats, aircraft, and most importantly our members and families, all use 

NOAA’s environmental information to determine the safest locations to avoid the storm, and also minimize the time for Coast 

27 

Guard units to respond to any distress caused by the storm. The 

fact that so little damage was sustained in these port areas is a 

reflection on the amount of preparation performed by the Coast 

Guard, FEMA, and our other port partners, all leveraging NOAA’s 

environmental data. 

These are but two examples of the many situations in which 

NOAA’s environmental data provides invaluable support to the 

Coast Guard. The Coast Guard capital fleet uses these products to 

make decisions at sea, but our ships are old and we appreciate 

Congress’ support for its recapitalization. NOAA relies heavily on 

the weather observations of our ships at sea. It only makes sense 

that the technology that supports weather prediction and distress 

beacon transmissions also require updates, and we thank Congress 

for their support for the JPSS for NOAA. 

As I mentioned before, every day the Coast Guard relies on 

NOAA’s environmental products and distress alerting information 

to ensure the safety of our people, the security of our nation, and 

the protection of our environment. Thank you, and I look forward 

to answering any questions you may have. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you again. Thanks to all of you for your 

testimony. I will start with 5 minutes with some questions here to 

Secretary Glackin. 

Let me ask you, in your testimony you talked about, and you’ve 

already heard from the others, too, that the potential gap, especially in 2016–2017, the 100 percent likelihood that there will be 

some gap of some sort at some level. You’ve also talked about how 

NOAA has significant innovation and ideas around advancing technology to improve weather forecasting and predictions. 

What are we doing to prepare for the potential gap that we have 

when we know it’s coming? What is NOAA doing to prepare for 

that, and what innovative steps are you taking to kind of be ready 

for this potential? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Thank you, Senator. As Senator Snowe highlighted 

in her introductory remark, the projected gap that we’re talking 

about is billed around how long we expect the NPP spacecraft, 

which we just launched, to be able to last, and when we’re able to 

launch the JPSS–1 spacecraft and have that checked out so it’s 

providing useful data, which is obviously not the day it’s launched 

but some number of months after that. 

In regard to addressing what steps to take during that period of 

expected gap, there are two primary approaches that we’ve been 

taking. One is strengthening and trying to look at expanded international partnerships. So, for example, we rely today on the Europeans for a mid-morning orbit, and we need to ensure that that 

partnership stays strong in this period of time so that we’ll have 

that data available to us so we won’t be without any data. And for 

the Committee’s background, that spacecraft does fly instruments 

that are used currently today in our models and are also what I 

would say are modern instruments, not ones that were developed 

25 years ago. 

Senator BEGICH. Could I pause you there for 1 second? The economic troubles that Europe is going through, is there indication of 

problems with their funding of their continued programs that may 

affect us that you’re partnering with? 

28 

Ms. GLACKIN. Well, we can’t say that it won’t ultimately, but 

their next spacecraft that’s due to be launched is fully funded and 

ready to go, and they have commitments, or subscriptions they call 

them, for follow-on efforts in that regard. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. 

Ms. GLACKIN. So they’re well—I think they’re well poised, and 

that’s been an excellent partnership for us. 

Beyond that partnership, other countries that we look at when 

we look at who is flying instruments that would be comparable to 

this, unfortunately there’s not a lot there, and one of the prime 

ones is China in that regard. So we do have a dialogue with China, 

but we have no plans in place in that regard. We do use some of 

their data today, is used in opportunistic ways. So that’s one—— 

Senator BEGICH. Do they use—if I can interrupt again. I apologize. Do they use any of our data going the other way? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Yes, yes. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. 

Ms. GLACKIN. Our data is freely available. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. So there is—I mean, for our satellite system to continue to operate efficiently and effectively, they have an 

interest in making sure that occurs, because their system is robust 

but not like ours. 

Ms. GLACKIN. That’s right. 

Senator BEGICH. Is that fair to say? 

Ms. GLACKIN. It’s fair to say, and it’s also—I could further say 

that our instruments are of superior quality. They are, of course, 

putting a lot of money into their program in this regard, and they 

have a big pipeline coming. So I think that they will get better in 

capability. 

Senator BEGICH. Right. OK. 

Ms. GLACKIN. So that’s what we’re doing on the international 

front, which is probably the most ready thing to do. 

The other is to make sure that we’re using all of the available 

data that we currently have, and this is in-situ data, observations 

that come from on-ground, as well as other satellite systems that 

are in this regard. We’ve really been in the position of doing this 

because we do this anyway. So there has not been a lot there that 

we can do in this regard, but we have been looking at that. 

And I want to stress to the Committee that using, assimilating 

satellite data into numerical weather prediction models is a nontrivial process. It takes months and years to get this done, and if 

you don’t do it well, you can actually degrade the model forecast. 

So that’s not a trivial process. 

But the staff is looking at that and trying to see, but there’s really no substitute for a satellite system, obviously, because it’s the 

way to get the ocean data over the ocean and things like that. So 

they’re the two primary things we’ve been doing. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. I’m going to ask one quick question 

to Mr. Zinser here, and then we’ll continue to go with 5 minutes 

for each remaining senator. Then we may do a second quick round 

depending on how people go and keep to the 5 minutes. 

But, Mr. Zinser, let me ask you, do you think NOAA—I mean, 

I’ve read your recommendations, and do you think NOAA is preVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
29 

pared, if funding is flat or lack of funding occurs from Congress, 

to fill that gap? 

Mr. ZINSER. Thank you, Senator. I think any kind of flat-lining 

of resources or a reduction of resources is going to make it more 

difficult, and what we’re recommending is that the satellite data be 

made part of a larger formula. NOAA plugs the satellite data into 

a larger model to come up with their observations and predictions, 

and it needs to make sure that all parts of the agency are contributing to fixing the data gap. 

Senator BEGICH. Do you think they are doing that now? 

Mr. ZINSER. NOAA is not doing everything that we’re recommending. We think NOAA should have a coordinated effort across 

the lines of business with the studies necessary to determine how 

the lack of satellite data will degrade the forecast. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. I’ll follow up on this on my next 

round. 

Senator Snowe? 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. Just to clarify the issue of the shortterm and the long-term data gap, does it depend, Mr. Zinser, on 

the question of funding only? I understand that’s obviously one of 

the major issues, but is it the only issue with respect to the possibility of having this coverage gap? 

Mr. ZINSER. For the potential near-term gap between NOAA–19 

and NPP, it’s not so much a funding issue as an issue of calibration 

and validation work that needs to be done with respect to NPP 

data collecting. Funding is more of an issue for JPSS–1, and if 

there is a reduction in any kind of funding, that will result in some 

extension of the gap. 

Senator SNOWE. How long would that short-term gap be? 

Mr. ZINSER. Potentially it may not exist at all. The issue is how 

well NOAA can get the ground system and the science behind the 

data validated and calibrated in order to produce the necessary 

weather forecast data. 

Senator SNOWE. Ms. Glackin, you mentioned the fact, when you 

were referring to NOAA’s response to the report that was issued 

by the Inspector General, that the Inspector General’s report 

should clarify the budgetary assumptions, and that specifically 

they should say what request is going to be essential to avoiding 

or averting this coverage gap. Is that correct? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Senator, I believe that you’re referring to a comment that we had on the draft report, was the Inspector General 

was projecting a particular gap. 

Senator SNOWE. Right. 

Ms. GLACKIN. And we’ve been trying to be careful in this long period of time, which is going about 18 months now, where we’ve had 

various numbers on the table at various times to be consistent 

about what assumptions go into a gap. So that was the only point 

that we were making in the Inspector General’s report, is that it 

would be helpful to have the underlying assumptions documented. 

Senator SNOWE. What should be the underlying assumption for 

the budget, then? I guess I’m trying to understand that, because 

the conference report has it 13 percent less than the administration’s request. 

30 

Ms. GLACKIN. So let me talk to that directly. First of all, thank 

you again. It’s been fabulous support from this committee for JPSS, 

and we are extremely pleased at the conference report that came 

out and look forward to that being signed into law. 

Based on that, my expectation is that when the President delivers, my expectation is when the 2013 budget comes out, we’ll reflect into that the JPSS program, including the projected launch 

dates that will also take into account the best we’re able to deliver 

in the time-frame. We have to respond to the Senate language 

about out-year costs, which was also, at least in part, picked up in 

the conference report. 

So I think that given what looks like some certainty in the funding for 2012 at a level that’s not perfect but certainly very good for 

this program, we’ll be in a much better position to inform the Committee about what we expect that to be. 

Senator SNOWE. Mr. Zinser, what would be your response? Do 

you think the administration’s request is the minimum that is required in order to keep it on track? 

Mr. ZINSER. Thank you, Senator. One issue that NOAA needs to 

finalize right away is its requirements document. This lays out 

cost, schedule, and other requirements; it also provides a baseline. 

They need a baseline. And the current timeline for the launch that 

NOAA has provided for November 2016 is, as far as I know, based 

on the President’s Fiscal Year 2012 request. 

Our assumptions going in were that funding was going to be 

somewhat lower than the President’s request; and, in fact, it will 

be. As a result, we’ve added some time in the timeline and are projecting a launch more in the first quarter of the calendar year (as 

opposed to the Fiscal Year) in 2017. 

Senator SNOWE. I think you make an excellent suggestion about 

a baseline, for NOAA to draft a baseline with all the specific requirements. I think that’s very essential for costs and other requirements to stay on track. 

Ms. GLACKIN. If I could just add, that’s what I was referring to 

that would be part of the 2013 budget. 

What we’re saying is consistent. 

Senator SNOWE. That’s great. 

At a recent hearing, Ms. Glackin, before the House Subcommittee 

on Investigations and Oversight, Kathryn Sullivan of NOAA, testified that NOAA in collaboration with NASA has fully staffed the 

JPSS program, that the office was staffed by NOAA and NASA and 

the Air Force and contract officers. And I gather that is at a staffing level of 819, although that’s far short of what NOAA had projected or estimated originally, that it would require 1,600 contract 

employees. 

So what accounts for the discrepancy, and how is that going to 

affect the program? 

Ms. GLACKIN. OK. With the reduced funding that we’ve had in 

2011, we had to limit our priorities and work to getting NPP 

launched and fully operational, getting an operational data stream, 

and then maintaining work on some critical satellite instruments 

that would fly on JPSS–1. We have staff to be able to support those 

activities. 

31 

However, there is more that we need to do and would be, again, 

why we’re so excited about the conference report. We’ll now begin 

to add staff to bring it up to levels that we had projected because 

we’re going to be able to expand efforts into areas that we need to 

work on; for example, the spacecraft bus for JPSS–1. 

Senator SNOWE. So will you be going up to the 1,600? 

Ms. GLACKIN. I can’t give you an exact number today, but I’d be 

happy to take that for the record. 

Senator SNOWE. I appreciate that. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Senator Boozman? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Glackin, in your testimony you talked about the importance of high-performance computing, and you also mentioned earlier that you are working with the Europeans in this area. Are we 

working with the other departmental agencies to see if they can be 

of value in utilizing their computing resources? And along these 

lines, can you comment on the technical developments that they’ve 

developed with our other agencies? 

Ms. GLACKIN. So the short answer is yes, that we are doing that. 

We work across the Federal agencies, and in particular with the 

Department of Defense, the Navy, and the Air Force there, NOAA, 

and we also work with NASA and DOE on climate issues and 

things like that. So we work in terms of the numerical weather 

prediction models that we use. Currently, NOAA is using all of its 

own high-performance resources to do this. We have back-up, failback capabilities there, but we don’t actually use them operationally. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Mr. Zinser, in your written testimony, could 

you please clear up something for me? I’m a bit confused. You talk 

about the NPP satellite and that it’s good for 5 years, but the instruments are only good for 3 years in some specific or certain 

cases. Could you please elaborate on that and tell me a little bit 

about the problem? 

Mr. ZINSER. Yes. The issue is that the instruments being used on 

NPP have been transferred from the NPOESS program, but because the NPP was originally designed as a test satellite, these instruments were not constructed according to NASA standards. 

They were constructed according to standards set by the contractor, 

and there is some concern that since they didn’t get much government oversight while they were being developed, they may not last 

as long as they should. Therefore our conservative estimate is 3 

years for the instruments. The 5 years is for the end-of-life design 

of the satellite itself, but there’s enough fuel on the satellite to go 

for 7 years. 

Senator BOOZMAN. And how confident are you with regards to 

the 3 year versus the 5 year time frame guarantee? 

Mr. ZINSER. It’s very hard to say based on the limitations that 

we’ve identified, but I think 3 years is a conservative estimate. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

32 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. We’ll do one quick, final 

round here before we dismiss the panel. We thank you very much. 

I just want to follow up if I can on the question I had earlier, 

Mr. Zinser, in regards to the recommendations and is NOAA prepared, are they doing it, are they coordinating. 

Are there things that indicate to you that they are ready and 

willing to do that, or is it just a process that they’re just not geared 

up yet to have that cross-coordination of all the different agencies 

to prepare a—I call it kind of a Plan B, but also the baseline. Can 

you respond to that? 

Mr. ZINSER. Yes. I think that NOAA and NASA are working diligently, as I mentioned. They have to overcome many years of setbacks under the NPOESS program. NPP itself is a contingency operation, and they have had to make decisions in that program that 

haven’t eliminated all the risks. For example, we incidated in our 

report, certain aspects of the ground system had to be deferred 

until after launch, because their efforts were focused on getting the 

NPP satellite launched. A lot of the prelaunch work that may have 

gone on under a normal program ahead of the launch with respect 

to the ground system has been deferred until now, after the satellite has been launched. 

Thus they have had competing demands on their resources and 

time, but I think that they are looking at different ways to mitigate 

the gap, and we’re going to continue our oversight there. 

Senator BEGICH. And from your end of it on the oversight, can 

I assume that is also probably a role and responsibility we should 

have to make sure that we’re checking in with you on a regular 

basis to make sure it is happening? 

Mr. ZINSER. Yes, sir. We’d be happy to keep your staff informed, 

and we have a number of audits that we’ve planned to carry out 

this year on both the JPSS, and GOES program. 

Senator BEGICH. Excellent. And then I thought I heard you say 

that your analysis of the gap was based on funding but at a little 

lower amount than what was proposed by the President’s budget. 

Did I hear that right? 

Mr. ZINSER. Yes, sir. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. And a likelihood I think in your report— 

and if I’m wrong on this percentage, correct me—was upwards of 

80 percent likelihood there will be a gap, even with that funding 

with a reduced amount, which probably reflects what the conference committee report is now about to produce. 

Mr. ZINSER. Yes, sir. One of the difficulties in estimating the 

JPSS–1 gap is the period of time needed to check out the instruments. Right now, for example, the checkout could be as long as 

18 months. As a result, when NOAA comes up with its baseline, 

the estimate for JPSS–1 instrument checkout will be critical. It 

could be 6 months, it could be 18 months. 

Senator BEGICH. Eighteen months. Got you. Thank you very 

much. 

Let me ask two quick questions to the other two that are here 

that probably thought you were going to be off the hook with no 

questions. I know what the feeling is sitting there. You’re going, 

‘‘Please, no questions. I’ve done my testimony. Let me go sit back 

in the chair.’’ Not possible here. 

33 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BEGICH. Let me, Mr. Trimble, let me ask you, and I 

know GAO did a web-based kind of questionnaire in asking agencies and others should there be a Federal service to consolidate and 

deliver climate information to decisionmakers, and I think it was 

60 percent or somewhere in that area if I remember right, a pretty 

high percentage said yes. 

Can you just elaborate a little more on that, and do you think 

having a centralized system like that, or a central place for information, will create some restrictive ability for it to be flexible and 

nimble in this ever-changing information that’s flowing? Does that 

question make sense to you? 

Mr. TRIMBLE. Absolutely. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. In our 2009 report, we surveyed knowledgeable climate information users in various branches of government, and 

you’re right, about 61 percent thought that having a single source 

for climate data would be useful. 

There are advantages to that approach, Information users would 

have a single source, a common methodology, and there is potential 

to save money. A small minority, it was about 6 percent, didn’t 

think it would be useful. So it’s pretty—— 

Senator BEGICH. Pretty overwhelming. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. Pretty overwhelming. The downsides, as you point 

out, come from comments in an NRC paper from 2009. The National Research Council raised those concerns about being detached 

from the users who need the information. So I think there’s always 

tension about how much centralization. If you get too centralized, 

you get away from the people who need the data. So I think what 

they were pointing out was concerns that if you get too centralized, 

you are getting away from the people who need climate information 

it is difficult to be responsive. 

In this area in particular, the users of climate-related data are 

not necessarily traditional NOAA customers, so you don’t necessarily have the same longstanding relationship. So I think that 

was the gist of it. 

Senator BEGICH. Is that something that could be mitigated you 

feel? 

Mr. TRIMBLE. You know, we’ve not done work on that question. 

I expect it could be. We’ve not reviewed the details of any plan for 

this, but I assume that could be tackled. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. Thank you very much. 

Admiral Thomas, let me ask you just a quick question. First off, 

thank you for those couple of examples of how weather information 

is vital. 

In your work that’s occurring and continuing to increase really 

as you look at the Arctic and Alaska and the issues of oil and gas 

and transportation, all the things that are happening now in the 

Arctic, when I look at the dates of 2016, 2017, through 2017, beginning of 2018, there’s going to be a lot of activity up there, with or 

without us promoting it, I mean the U.S. I mean, there’s shipping 

already going, there are visitors, what’s going on in Russia, all 

kinds of activity. 

34 

Give me your thoughts or maybe just quickly. Do you think that 

the Coast Guard is fully engaged enough to make sure that NOAA 

has the necessary information? Because without that weather information, you’re going to be at a disadvantage. Is that a fair statement? 

Admiral THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. What I’d like to do is just 

describe a little bit about how we prosecute search and rescue, and 

how we then apply weather data in order to help provide the very 

best operational decisions to be able to minimize risk and increase 

response time. 

So search and rescue is a system. And so for us, it requires us 

to use airplanes, to use ships, to use boats, to use commercial mariners, to use other commercial salvage people in order to prosecute 

a search and rescue case. Well, it’s the same thing as a consumer 

of weather. So we use NOAA data, we use DOD data, we use NGA 

data, we use international partner data, observers in airplanes, observers on the sea, NASA, international partners. All help provide 

data that goes into our search and rescue system. 

So then we’ll get data on-scene, and then we send out the right 

asset. We make search planning decisions based on all that information. 

Two roles that I play. I sit on FEMA’s Emergency Support Functions Leadership Group, and in that capacity is we’re preparing for 

all disasters. We’re responding to them. Weather is a critical part 

of that. Secondarily, I am also the chair of the National Search and 

Rescue Committee, and NOAA is an important player on that as 

well, both from the weather perspective as well as the distress beacon perspective. 

So minimizing the gap in-between the NPP and the JPSS system 

will allow us to improve response time, will allow us to minimize 

the risk to our crews, will allow us to increase our effectiveness onscene. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. Thank you very much, Admiral. 

Senator Snowe? 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral Thomas, one of the key components of the JPSS is the 

Search and Rescue Satellite-Aided Tracking sensor, SARSAT. During his testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigations and 

Oversight and Environment in the House of Representatives back 

in September, David Powner of the GAO testified that NOAA had 

not yet determined how it would accommodate the sensor on the 

JPSS–1 satellite. 

Given the importance of this sensor for search and rescue missions, can you tell the Committee exactly what action the Coast 

Guard is taking to coordinate with NOAA on this sensor? 

Admiral THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. As I understand, the first 

launch of the first JPSS will not hold a SARSAT system on it, but 

that said, there are other satellite providers that will allow us to 

get rescue data, beacon data. One is a geostationary satellite that 

will continue to be flying. Second, the Coast Guard is partnering 

with the Air Force to provide a medium Earth orbit satellite that 

will allow us to get additional information as well. 

And so weather prediction and distress beacon is sort of like intelligence, and you wish it to be perfect; it’s never perfect. So 

35 

through a combination of those technologies, I believe that the 

Coast Guard will have sufficient capabilities, but minimizing the 

gap will be important for us. 

Senator SNOWE. So, it is yet to be established; is that correct? 

Admiral THOMAS. That’s correct. I understand the second, the 

next version of JPSS will then go into SARSAT after that. Yes, 

ma’am. 

Senator SNOWE. Ms. Glackin, do you have any comments on 

that? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Yes, I would like to comment on that. The Admiral 

is quite correct that it’s not going to be on the JPSS–1 satellite. 

However, it still is included in that timeframe, and NOAA is currently assessing opportunities to launch this, whether it would be 

in a free-fly or another mission of opportunity. So that’s something 

that we’re working through in the coming months. 

Senator SNOWE. Admiral Thomas, I noted that there was a 

strong partnership between NOAA and the Coast Guard during the 

Deep Water Horizon oil spill, and there was very close cooperation 

and coordination. Can you tell the Subcommittee how well that 

worked in terms of determining the currents, the tides, and winds 

with regard to the movement of the oil? 

Admiral THOMAS. Yes, Senator. Thank you. One of the important 

partnerships that NOAA brought to the table is this program called 

the Scientific Support Coordinator. So NOAA is a partner of a national response team, of which the Coast Guard and EPA are the 

co-chairs of that team. And then at the regional level there are regional response teams that also help provide technical information 

and strategic priorities for regional responses. 

So then when it gets down to the local level, the Federal on-scene 

coordinator needs a suite of folks to help them make the very best 

operational decisions that they can make, and NOAA’s Scientific 

Support Coordinator, very important partner in that effort, provides principal science advice to the Federal on-scene coordinator, 

provides trajectory forecasts, provides GIS information, information 

management. They brought a system called ERMA, which was 

really crucial to us in making good decisions. 

Shoreline clean-up assessments, all part of the Scientific Coordinator’s support and really an important part of our response efforts 

in Deep Water Horizon. 

Senator SNOWE. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Trimble, you mentioned in a report that was published in 

May that there needs to be greater coordination between appropriations and our priorities with respect to climate research. Given 

there hasn’t been a clear interagency strategy and coordination 

when it comes to Earth Observation issues if a climate service was 

created, how would that help or how would that hurt? Are there 

risks or benefits involved? 

Mr. TRIMBLE. From our most recent report there’s a broader need 

across the Federal Government on the issue of climate change for 

a more coherent, articulated national strategy. Right now, from our 

survey of users, there’s a different sense of what the priorities are. 

There’s no clear articulation of that. I think a climate service could 

help focus some of these issues. 

36 

But as I alluded to earlier, there are pros and cons when you 

centralize. You risk over-centralizing. We’ve not taken a position on 

the creation of a climate service. Our reports have really just 

talked about the pros and cons at this point. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. Can I just make one point? Mr. 

Zinser, I think you’ve made an excellent recommendation in your 

report, suggesting that NOAA should develop a plan or strategy to 

report to Congress with understandable data, the impact of losing 

the satellite capacity and what the satellite capacity means for the 

future, with respect to identifying and anticipating events much 

sooner. As we know, the JPSS program, is expected to reduce the 

cone of uncertainty for the landfall of the eye of the storm by estimated 875 miles which is a big difference in allowing communities 

to be able to evacuate sooner and so on. So it saves lives, and it 

saves money. 

I think that that would be a very useful report for Congress to 

understand the connection between all of this and the material effect, both in terms of life and property and what it means to this 

country. That would be very helpful. 

I gather, Ms. Glackin, that NOAA is in the process of doing that? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Yes. We accepted the Inspector General’s recommendations and we’ll be moving forward on them. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. Ms. Glackin, I wish you well. On 

your three decades of service to this country, thank you. 

Senator BEGICH. Can I ask you a quick one on that? When do 

you think you’ll have a report that will be ready to present? If you 

can’t answer that right now, can you get that for the record? 

Ms. GLACKIN. Yes, let me come back, because I guess what I’m 

thinking about is that we need to work through, given the resources we have now, what’s the timeframe. I think you would like 

not only all of the impacts but you’d like to know what’s that expected gap and when are we expected to see it. 

Senator BEGICH. Yes. 

Ms. GLACKIN. So I think we’re going to be, again, pretty much 

consistent with the President’s budget coming out, that information. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. Well, we look forward to that, if you can 

get that data, so we can do some additional follow-through on this 

part of the Committee. 

Senator Boozman, do you have some additional? 

Senator BOOZMAN. Just a quick question, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral Thomas, you mentioned a number of different tools that 

you use in weather predicting and forecasting. I guess the only 

thing I would ask of you, while we’ve got you here, is how can we 

make things easier? Are there some specific technical things that 

you lack that might be helpful, some gaps that you have that you’d 

like to see done to make your life a little bit easier in being able 

to carry out your mission? 

Admiral THOMAS. Thank you, Senator. As a consumer of weather, we are always looking with our various partners to help improve the quality of the data. Having done many, many assignments around the Coast Guard and watching the weather and 

making decisions about are we going to go to sea or are we going 

to have to close a port, all very difficult challenges for us. And as 

37 

I mentioned, we use all of our different partners because truly 

making these kinds of decisions is an art, and there’s nothing perfect about it. 

And so you take the very, very best information that you have 

when you’re trying to sort out where you’re going to search for 

someone who is lost, how long you’re going to search for them, and 

between things like in the Gulf of Maine has an oceanographic observatory system that provides information to our computer systems. We take information from DOD. We take information from 

NOAA. We take information—our weather guys are looking at commercial providers as well to be able to provide the best things that 

we can. So we’re consumers. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Is there some information out there somewhere that you’d like to collect that’s not there but nevertheless 

would be helpful in your job? 

Admiral THOMAS. Right now we’ve got everything that we need. 

But, of course, I’d probably defer to NOAA to continue to support 

continued improvements in that. 

Senator BOOZMAN. OK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much, and I want to thank this 

panel. I appreciate your time here, again being patient while we 

asked our second round of questions. Thank you. 

We’ll now have the next panel come up. And as they get situated, 

we have three individuals that will present on the next panel. 

Again, we want to thank everyone for taking the time out of their 

busy schedules to attend and help give us information to do a better job in forecasting and predicting weather and what we need to 

do to continue to be innovative in this arena. 

The next panel, feel free to go ahead and grab your seats. Thank 

you again very much for being here, and we’ll go from my left to 

right in the sense of presentation. So again, we thank you. 

The first person we have is Mr. Tom Iseman, Program Director, 

Water Policy and Implementation, Climate Adaptation, Western 

Governors’ Association. 

Again, we thank you, and we thank you for kind of the unique 

partnership that’s being developed. So, please. 

STATEMENT OF TOM ISEMAN, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, WATER 

POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION, CLIMATE ADAPTATION, 

WESTERN GOVERNORS’ ASSOCIATION 

Mr. ISEMAN. Thank you, Chairman Begich, Ranking Member 

Snowe, and members of the Committee. Good morning. I’m Tom 

Iseman. I’m the Program Director for Water and Climate Adaptation at the Western Governors’ Association. WGA is a bipartisan, 

consensus-based organization that represents the Governors of 19 

Western states and three U.S. Flag Pacific Islands. 

Western Governors have long recognized the significant impacts 

that severe weather events, climate extremes, and long-term climate trends can have on life in the West. Whether it is drought, 

heat waves, severe storms, too little snowpack, or too much river 

runoff, they affect natural resources, infrastructure, economies, and 

communities throughout the Western states. That is why WGA has 

such a strong interest in the weather and climate data and forecasting services of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdminisVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
38 

tration, and why we appreciate the opportunity to testify here 

today. 

Drought in particular has been a high priority for the Western 

Governors, and it has been a catalyst for WGA’s work with NOAA. 

We have worked on drought issues for several decades, with many 

administrations and across party lines. 

The National Integrated Drought Information System, or NIDIS, 

is one of the success stories of our work on drought. The NIDIS Act 

was passed by Congress in 2006. NIDIS is building an emerging 

network of regional drought early warning systems. It established 

a drought portal where information is integrated across agencies, 

and it’s available at one place online, at drought.gov. And most importantly, WGA and the Western states have 

worked directly with NOAA and the Federal agencies to co-develop 

this system, making NIDIS a model for the development and delivery of integrated drought and climate information. 

While drought can be a widespread and severe phenomenon, the 

Governors recognize that a variety of climate and weather events 

affect the West. Building on our work on drought, the Governors 

adopted a policy resolution in 2009 addressing climate adaptation 

science in the West. The policy calls for improved predictive capabilities at a regional scale; increased coordination among Federal 

agencies and with state agencies; and the establishment of a National Climate Service to undertake and communicate research and 

modeling of climate and its impacts. 

Recent events in the West have only underscored the need for enhanced coordination, improved data networks, and advanced predictive models on climate and weather events. For example, the 

states of the Upper Missouri River Basin have just endured prolonged and widespread flooding, affecting hundreds of homes and 

communities throughout the basin. Governors from the Upper Missouri states agree on the need for improved forecasting to reduce 

flood risk. 

In recent testimony on the Missouri River Annual Operating 

Plan, Governor Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota called for significant improvements in predicting snowpack accumulation and annual runoff, and he urged consideration of NOAA’s forecast for a 

recurrence of the La Nina climate pattern in planning reservoir 

management for 2012. 

The same is true of other recent or current events. The American 

Southwest is in the midst of severe drought. Guam and other islands in the West Pacific are located in Typhoon Alley and experience an array of extreme weather events, or Alaska, which just last 

week saw its coast buffeted by a severe storm that Chairman 

Begich described. 

These and other weather and climate events are confronting 

states and local communities every day, and NOAA provides essential information for states to prepare and respond. This is why the 

Governors and NOAA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding this summer at the Annual Meeting of WGA. The MOU 

focuses on sharing weather and climate information, with a particular emphasis on disaster risk reduction. 

Under the MOU, WGA and NOAA intend to target the most 

pressing weather and climate issues in specific sub-regions of the 

39 

Western states; for example, water resources in the Pacific Northwest, snowpack and river runoff in the Upper Missouri, drought in 

the Southwest, and coastal management on the West Coast and 

Pacific Islands. 

Over the course of our work with NOAA, several key and consistent themes have emerged. These are not technological innovations but rather innovation in how we develop and apply forecasts 

to reduce the impact of weather and climate events. 

We encourage building state partnerships or partnerships directly between NOAA and the states. We recognize the importance 

of engaging the private sector in this effort. We urge the design of 

regionally focused programs. National information is useful, but we 

really need to get down to the local level to understand impacts 

and take action. We recognize the need for improving predictive capabilities and models, and also recognizing the uncertainty associated with forecasts. And we want to emphasize the importance of 

providing basic data, like temperature, precipitation, snowpack, 

and stream gauging. 

And finally, we do agree with the points about the need to coordinate the Federal climate enterprise. 

In conclusion, Western Governors are taking a pragmatic approach to weather and climate issues. They recognize the impacts 

of weather and climate trends, climate extremes and long-term 

trends, and they seek information to make sound management decisions. NOAA plays an essential role in this effort, and we are 

pleased to work to strengthen the development and delivery of this 

critical information. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Iseman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOM ISEMAN, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, WATER AND CLIMATE

ADAPTATION, WESTERN GOVERNORS’ ASSOCIATION

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senators, Ladies and Gentlemen. 

Good Morning. I am Tom Iseman, Program Director for Water and Climate Adaptation issues at the Western Governors’ Association. I am pleased to participate this 

morning on behalf of the Western Governors’ Association. WGA is a bipartisan, consensus-based organization that represents the Governors of 19 Western states and 

3 U.S. Flag Pacific Islands. The Governors work through the WGA to identify and 

address key policy and governance issues, which include natural resources, the environment, human services, and economic development. 

Western Governors have long recognized the significant impacts that severe 

weather events and long-term climate trends can have on life in the West. Whether 

it is drought, heat waves, severe storms, too little snowpack or too much river runoff—they all affect the environment, infrastructure, economies and communities 

throughout the Western states. That is why WGA has such a strong interest in the 

weather and climate forecasting services of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, and we appreciate the opportunity to testify here today. 

Drought, in particular, has been a high priority for the Western Governors, and 

it has been a catalyst for WGA’s working relationship with NOAA. We have worked 

on drought issues for several decades, with many administrations and across party 

lines. You can find many of WGA’s reports and resolutions on this topic on our 

website, and we have provided a brief bibliography in our formal submission. 

When the National Drought Policy Commission was convened in 1998, no sitting 

Western Governors were included. Gov. Brian Schweitzer, prior to being elected 

Governor of Montana, was one of 15 members of the commission, listed simply as 

‘‘Montana farmer, rancher and soil scientist.’’ Of course, he later became the Governor of Montana and Chair of the WGA, during which he carried with him a strong 

commitment to address drought issues. 

40 

1Governor Jack Dalrymple, North Dakota, Testimony for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Public Scoping Meeting on the Missourit River Annual Operating Plan, Bismark, ND, 

November 1, 2011. 2Travis Miller, et al, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, August 2011. 

3See WGA Inventory of Existing NOAA Climate Services and how they are Currently Used, 

prepared by WGA for Governor Otter, March 2011. 

The National Integrated Drought Information System, or NIDIS, is one of the success stories of our work on drought. The NIDIS Act was passed by Congress in 2006. 

It established a ‘drought portal’ where information is integrated across agencies, 

providing a single entry point for users of drought information online at 

www.drought.gov. NIDIS is also building an emerging network of drought early 

warning systems, working with local managers to address key regional drought 

planning needs. Importantly, NIDIS demonstrates a partnership among the Federal 

agencies and between the Federal agencies and states and other stakeholders. WGA 

has worked directly with NOAA and the Federal agencies to ‘co-develop’ this system, 

making NIDIS a model for the delivery of integrated drought and climate information in partnership between Federal agencies and states. 

While drought has been a focal interest, the Governors recognize that a variety 

of climate and weather events affect the Western economy, public health, and the 

environment. Building on our work on drought, the Governors adopted a policy resolution (09–2) in 2009 addressing climate adaptation science in the West. This policy 

calls for improved predictive capabilities at a regional scale; increased coordination 

among Federal agencies and with state agencies; and the establishment of a ‘‘National Climate Service’’ to undertake and communicate research and modeling of climate and its impacts. 

The resolution also established a Climate Adaptation Work Group comprising 

Western state resource managers across a range of sectors that includes water, wildlife, air quality, and forests. The Work Group partnered with a number of entities, 

including NOAA and other Federal agencies, to prepare a Scoping Report on climate 

adaptation priorities for the Western States. This report elaborates on the Western 

States’ priorities for climate science, including both observational data and predictive models, as well as enhanced communication between scientists and decisionmakers. 

Recent events in the West have only underscored the importance of coordination, 

data, and predictive models on climate and weather events. For example, the states 

of the Upper Missouri River Basin have just endured prolonged and widespread 

flooding, affecting hundreds of homes and communities throughout the basin. A 

group of Governors from Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana has 

called for improved forecasting of snowpack and runoff in order to reduce flood risk. 

In recent testimony on the Missouri River Annual Operating Plan, Governor Jack 

Dalrymple of North Dakota called for ‘‘significant improvements in predicting 

snowpack accumulation and annual runoff,’’ 1 and he urged consideration of NOAA’s 

forecast for another La Nina climate pattern in planning reservoir management for 

2012. As North Dakota’s State Water Engineer put it: ‘‘this (2011) was an unprecedented year; we need to know if we’re likely to see these kinds of events again— 

and potentially more often—in the future.’’ 

Similarly, the American Southwest is in the midst of a severe drought; agricultural losses alone in Texas have been estimated to exceed $5 billion.2 Information 

on current and projected conditions, as is being provided by NIDIS, is essential to 

states and local communities that are affected by drought events. The same is true 

of fire management and response, species conservation, coastal protection, infrastructure investment, and a variety of other decisions that states and local communities are making every day: they are affected by short-term weather events and 

long-term climate trends, and NOAA provides essential information for states to 

prepare and respond. 

This is why the Governors and NOAA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding this summer at the Annual Meeting of WGA. The MOU focuses on sharing 

weather and climate information,3 with a particular focus on disaster risk reduction 

in the Western states. As Governor Gregoire, WGA’s Chair, said on signing the 

agreement, ‘‘a good working relationship with NOAA in providing science and information services states need will help us all build healthy and resilient communities 

and economies.’’ Under the MOU, WGA and NOAA intend to target the most pressing weather and climate issues in specific sub-regions of the Western states, for example water management in the Pacific Northwest, snowpack and river runoff in 

the Upper Missouri, coastal erosion on the West Coast and Pacific Islands and 

drought in the Southwest. 

41 

Over the course of our work with NOAA, several key and consistent themes have 

emerged: 

• State Partnerships: NOAA must work directly with states. It is not enough to 

post forecasts. By working directly with states (and other partners), NOAA can 

ensure that its climate and weather services are available to decisionmakers 

and resource managers, and they can tailor future products to respond to user 

needs 

• Private Sector Engagement: Governors recognize the important role of the private sector, both as providers and users of climate information. When the MOU 

was signed, Governor Gregoire and Administrator Lubchenco co-hosted a ‘business roundtable’ with select industries with a clear nexus to climate and weather. We are pleased to see a private sector panelist today and look forward to 

continued work with the private sector in this effort. 

• Regional Programs: Weather and climate events, and our vulnerabilities to 

them, vary by region. NOAA must respond to regional variability and priorities 

by tailoring information services to the appropriate climatic and management 

scale. In NIDIS, we have called these ‘Regional Early Warning Systems.’ A national map may tell a good story, but users need more tailored information in 

order to make investment and management decisions. 

• Predictive Capability: WGA (and an array of other resource managers) consistently call for better forecasts, from seasonal to multi-decadal time scales. That 

said, we recognize the challenges and inherent uncertainties regarding projections of future climate. Resource managers can make decisions under climate 

uncertainty, and have done so for decades in the American West; but they need 

clear acknowledgment and quantification of uncertainty associated with weather and climate forecasts. 

• Basic Data: Western States continually emphasize the importance of basic data 

to sound resource management. In addition to temperature and precipitation 

and other data provided by NOAA, this includes USGS streamgaging and NRCS 

snowpack monitoring. These basic data may be overlooked in the discussion of 

global climate models and orbiting satellites, but they are a fundamental tool 

of day-to-day resource management in the West. 

• Coordination of Federal Agencies: While NOAA is the undisputed expert in atmospheric sciences, many Federal agencies contribute weather and climate information or, like the states, have management responsibilities that are affected 

by weather and climate. We urge greater coordination across the Federal enterprise and clearer points of contact for the states, which are often confused and 

overburdened by the array of Federal initiatives around climate. 

In conclusion, Western Governors are taking a pragmatic approach to weather 

and climate. They recognize the impacts of weather events and climate trends, and 

they seek information to make sound management decisions. NOAA plays an essential role in this effort, and the Governors are pleased to work to strengthen delivery 

of this critical information and make it more responsive to state needs. We thank 

you for the opportunity to be here today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senators, Ladies and Gentlemen. 

WESTERN GOVERNORS’ ASSOCIATION

POLICY RESOLUTION 09–2 

Supporting the Integration of Climate Change Adaptation Science in the West 

A. Background 

1. Global warming poses a serious threat to the Western economy, public health 

and environment. The impacts of climate change are being observed in Western states and are predicted to worsen in the future. The potential adverse consequences include variability of precipitation leading to serious water supply 

problems, the degradation of air quality, damage to infrastructure, and the loss 

of plant and animal species. Global warming will directly affect Western industries including tourism, skiing, fishing, agriculture and forestry and will 

disproportionally affect communities with limited resources to adapt and cope. 

2. Western Governors recognize that while action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are occurring at the local, state, regional and Federal levels of government, simultaneous efforts should be taken to mitigate current and potential 

future impacts from climate change. 

42 

3. Appropriate actions to decrease greenhouse gas emissions must be taken to 

avoid, reduce and delay the adverse impacts of global warming to Western 

states. In addition, adaption is necessary to address impacts to Western states 

from warming which is unavoidable due to past and current emissions. 

4. Predictive modeling is being used by decisionmakers to mitigate potential economic, social and environmental impacts of climate change and this type of 

planning data should be encouraged. However, these models are still being developed and their effectiveness for application to natural resource planning 

should be assessed and implemented appropriately. 

5. The Western States Water Council (WSWC) and the Western Governors’ Wildlife Council (WGWC) are actively pursuing strategies to identify and adapt to 

impacts from climate variability on water and wildlife resources, as identified 

in WGA reports. 

B. Governors’ Policy Statement 

1. Western Governors believe that planning for climate change adaptation should 

be undertaken in a coordinated fashion at all levels of government with state 

expertise being fully utilized. Such planning must be in cooperation and consultation with the private sector and non-governmental organizations. 

2. Western Governors urge Congress and the Administration to fund research to 

improve predictive capabilities for climate change and related impacts at regional and global levels. 

3. Western Governors encourage Congress and the Administration to prioritize investment in Federal programs that study climate adaptation, addressing scientific questions, natural resource management, and protection of infrastructure at the regional, state and local levels. 

4. Western Governors support the establishment of new revenue streams to support climate adaptation in relevant climate change legislation. 

5. Western Governors support streamlined coordination of Federal agencies that 

respond to climate adaptation and greater cooperation with state agencies. 

6. Western Governors encourage Congress and the Administration to support the 

development of a National Climate Service to undertake, coordinate and communicate necessary research and modeling with respect to climate change and 

adaptation. A National Climate Service should provide relevant decision tools 

for local and state governments in addressing climate change and adaptation 

issues, should connect social, health and economic trends to climate change 

(and vice versa), and should include in its mission public education and outreach. 

7. Western Governors agree that results from ongoing scientific research should 

be assessed and incorporated into policies related to climate change adaptation 

and greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies. (E.g. as predicted impacts 

worsen; mitigation efforts should be stepped up). 

C. Governors’ Management Directive 

1. The Western Governors direct WGA staff to establish a Climate Adaptation 

Work Group (CAWG) for the purpose of determining appropriate uses of climate adaptation modeling in informing natural resource and economic infrastructure planning and policies, and for identifying and filling existing gaps in 

climate adaptation efforts within WGA. This work group could also review current and future climate legislation to assess the impact to states and their efforts to adapt to a changing climate and report their findings to the WGA Staff 

Council. 

2. Chairs or their designees from existing WGA initiatives will comprise the initial membership of the CAWG. These existing groups include WGA’s working 

groups on water, forest health, wildlife habitat, wildlife corridors and air quality. This initial membership of CAWG will compare efforts, share information 

and identify gaps in their work as it relates to the broad issues of climate 

change adaptation at the state and regional levels. The CAWG will report 

these findings to the WGA Staff Council along with recommendations for the 

need for, mission and composition of an expanded CAWG. 

3. The Western Governors direct WGA staff to conduct a workshop to study current climate change modeling and the application of different models to policy 

decisionmaking, using the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment program as the starting point for consideration. 

43 

4. The Western Governors direct WGA staff to work with the CAWG to prepare 

a report outlining how to more effectively use climate change modeling in policy decisionmaking. 

5. WGA shall post this resolution to its website to be referred to and transmitted 

as necessary. 

Prepared by the Western Governors’ Association, March 2011 

Inventory of Existing NOAA Climate Services and how they are Currently Used: This table identifies existing NOAA climate services 1 and who uses them to make decisions. The table focuses on state applications of climate services and provides several specific examples as illustrations. Many of the services span categories and are used in multiple sectors. They also span climate 

timescales from extreme events like floods and hurricanes, to seasonal events such as droughts, and decadal-centennial changes 

like increases in aridity. 

Climate Products and Providers Key Users Examples 

Services to Support the Agriculture and Water Resource Management Sectors 

Temperature Forecasts 

(National Weather Service—NWS) 

Precipitation Forecasts (NWS) 

River Flow Forecasts 

(NWS-River Forecast Centers i) 

Drought Monitoring and Forecasts 

(National Integrated Drought 

Information System-NIDIS ii) 

Climate Normals 

(National Climatic Data Center—NCDC iii) 

U.S. Drought Monitor 

(NOAA—USDA—National Drought 

Mitigation Center Partnership) 

Crop yield risks (RISAs iv) 

Estimate crop water usage 

(Regional Climate Centers v) 

Regional Drought Outlooks (NIDIS) 

• Farmers 

• Municipal Water Managers 

• Energy Companies 

• Levee/Flood Control Management 

• State Departments of Agriculture 

• State Water Resource Boards 

• USDA/NRCS 

• Bureau of Reclamation 

NOAA provides seasonal surface water 

runoff projections to resource managers in 

Idaho. This information has been used for 

maximizing hydro-power output, irrigation supplies, and conservation flows for 

endangered fish populations. It has also 

been used to explore sites in the state of 

Idaho for potential new hydropower generating stations. 

Services to Support the Energy Sector 

Climatology on wind and energy 

(NCDC) 

Greenhouse Gas Monitoring 

(NOAA Global Monitoring Division) 

• Energy Companies 

• State Public Utility Commissions 

• DOE, NASA, EPA 

Energy producers use NOAA projections 

of precipitation, wind, and weather to 

plan and manage solar, wind-power, and 

hydropower facilities. 

Services to Support the Transportation Sector 

Navigation charts 

(NCDC Buoy Data) 

Real-time Tides and Currents 

(NOAA Tides and Currents) 

Surface Airport Climatology 

(NWS) 

Extreme Weather Forecasts 

(NWS-Storm Predication Center vi) 

• Airline Industry 

• Shipping Industry 

• Port Managers 

• State DOTs 

• DOT, FAA 

Engineers are tasked with provid-ing safe 

roadways under virtually all weather conditions. Caltrans is working with NOAA 

and other climatologists and hydrologists 

to develop new methods for estimating 

peak precipitation and runoff events for 

the purpose of road design and safety. 

Services to Support the Public Health and Safety Sectors 

Hurricane Forecasting 

(NOAA Nat’l Hurricane Center vii) 

Tornado Forecasting 

(NOAA Storm Prediction Center) 

Temperature Extremes 

(NCDC) 

• State and Local Emergency Managers 

• Public Health Agencies 

• Hospitals 

• FEMA 

The Oregon state epidemiologist is a 

member of Oregon’s Climate Change Integration Group. One of the 10 key recommendations of the group is to incorporate the implications of climate change 

on public health into the policy, planning 

and preparation for climate change. 

Services to Support the Oceans and Coastal Management Sectors 

Sea-level Data 

(NOAA Nat’l Ocean Service viii) 

Tides and Currents 

(NOAA Tides and Currents) 

• Ocean-front Communities 

• State Coastal Commissions 

• State Emergency Managers 

• FEMA 

The state of Alaska is responding to thawing sea ice and increased coastal erosion 

that threaten communities. As Governor 

Parnell stated in testimony to Congress, 

‘‘. . . the state of Alaska strongly supports NOAA and its initiatives to improve 

its observations and research across the 

Arctic and to develop innovative forecasting models for next week’s weather 

and the next century’s climate.’’ 

1This table focuses on NOAA climate services. Other agencies also provide climate-related information, including the USGS streamgaging network and the NRCS snowpack network. Coordinating with these other agencies 

would be part of the mission of the proposed NOAA Climate Service. i National Weather Service River Forecast Centers (NWS–RFCs) performs continuous river basin modeling and 

provides hydrologic forecast and guidance products for hundreds of locations along rivers and streams across the 

U.S. 

44 

ii National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) is an interagency and interstate effort to establish a 

drought early warning network for the U.S. NIDIS provides a better understanding of how and why droughts affect society, the economy, and the environment, and is improving accessibility, dissemination, and use of early 

warning information for drought risk management. iii National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) provides access and stewardship to the Nation’s resource of global climate and weather related data and information, and assess and monitor climate variation and change. ivRegional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISAs) focus on sector specific users and the environment in 

which they make decisions and where climate data could be used to improve the quality of those decisions. vRegional Climate Centers (RCCs) provide and develop sector-specific climate data products and services and 

provide integration of climate data from multiple sources. vi NWS-Storm Prediction Center issues timely watch and forecast products dealing with tornadoes, wildfires and 

other hazardous weather phenomena. vii NWS-National Hurricane Center issues watches, warnings, forecasts and analyses of hazardous tropical 

weather. viii National Ocean Service translates science, tools, and services into action, to address threats to coastal areas 

such as climate change, population growth, port congestion, and contaminants in the environment, all working toward healthy coasts and healthy economies. 

WGA–WSWC Bibliography 

The Western Governors’ Association and Western States Water Council have written a series of reports on water, drought and climate adaptation. The reports are 

available at our website: www.westgov.org under the ‘Reports’ tab. These reports include: 

Drought Response Action Plan, Western Governors’ Association, November 1996. 

Creating a Drought Early Warning System for the 21st Century: The National 

Integrated Drought Information System, Western Governors’ Association, June 

2004. 

Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future, Western Governors’ Association and Western States Water Council, June 2006. 

Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future: Next Steps, Western Governors’ Association and Western States Water Council, June 2008. 

Climate Adaptation Priorities for the Western States: Scoping Report, Western 

Governors’ Association, June 2010. 

Improving Drought Preparedness in the West: Findings and Recommendations 

from the Western Governors’ Association and Western States Water Council 

Workshops, January 2011. 

In addition, the National Drought Policy Commission authored a report on 

drought policy: 

Report of the National Drought Policy Commission: Preparing for Drought in the 

21st Century, National Drought Policy Commission, May 2000. http://www 

.drought.unl.edu/pubs/pfd21main.html 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Next we have Dr. Peter Neilley, Vice President, Global Forecasting Services, the Weather Channel Companies. 

I hope when I appeared on Weather Channel, we did not ruin 

your ratings. 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. NEILLEY. I think you helped very much. 

Senator BEGICH. I know you have good morning ratings. Put us 

on there, things will go the other way. So thank you very much for 

being here. 

STATEMENT OF DR. PETER P. NEILLEY, VICE PRESIDENT, 

GLOBAL FORECASTING SERVICES, THE WEATHER CHANNEL 

COMPANIES 

Dr. NEILLEY. Thank you, Chairman Begich and Ranking Member 

Snowe, and members of the Committee. Good morning, and thank 

you for the opportunity for us to address you today. 

Again, my name is Dr. Peter Neilley, and I am the Vice President for Global Forecasting Services for the Weather Channel Companies. I am also the Chair of the American Meteorological SociVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
45 

ety’s Committee on Weather and Forecasting, and a member of 

NOAA’s Environmental Information Services Working Group. 

The Weather Channel Companies are a major developer and provider of weather services for consumers and businesses across our 

Nation. Our television, Web and mobile products reach nearly 100 

million users each month. We also serve nearly half of the television stations across the U.S., dozens of global airlines, and numerous traditional and renewable energy companies worldwide. We 

have been serving the Nation’s weather interests for 30 years, and 

we’re proud and respectful of the trust the Nation has instilled in 

us to inform and protect it from the weather. 

We are one of many private weather companies that provide 

weather and forecasting services to serve our Nation. 

Weather is woven into the fabric of our society. A recent estimate 

suggested that nearly 40 percent of our economy is sensitive to the 

weather. So far this year we have seen 14 $1 billion weather disasters, more than any year on record, and that does not include the 

accounting of last week’s storm in Alaska. 

Despite these losses, our Nation enjoys substantial protection from the weather. One recent study estimated that the roughly $5 

billion we spend annually producing weather information directly 

avoids over $30 billion in annual weather-related losses. Hence, our 

investments in a weather-ready nation are paying substantial dividends to the economy, and continuing such investments will return 

far more value to our society than their cost. 

Our nation is the global leader in the creation of state-of-thescience weather information to serve our society. This is the result 

of the Weather Enterprise, an effective three-way partnership between NOAA and other weather-related government agencies, private weather services, and academic and research institutions. The 

effectiveness of the Weather Enterprise to serve society is derived 

from the cutting-edge science and technology developed by the research community, NOAA’s implementation of these technologies to 

create foundational datasets, weather and climate datasets, and 

the private sector building upon these foundational datasets to create forecasts and other value-added products. 

The private sector is where much of the weather-related job creation has occurred recently, such as the weather-services sector enjoys one of the lowest unemployment rates in the Nation, as recently reported by the Wall Street Journal. 

It is critical that our Nation designs and funds next-generation 

weather and climate services with an Enterprise-optimized perspective is used so that we continue to derive optimal value from 

these investments. 

The foundational weather datasets from NOAA are essential to 

the private sector’s ability to create and deliver weather information for the Nation. From our perspective, continued provision and 

evolution of these data is the single most important function of 

NOAA. Doing so will enable the broader Weather Enterprise to create new weather services to meet the evolving needs of the Nation 

and grow our economy. 

History has shown that the private sector is the most responsive 

and effective at developing new applications of NOAA’s 

foundational weather information. Therefore, the private sector 

46 

should strategically be relied upon to deliver next-generation 

weather services that leverage evolving foundational datasets from 

NOAA. 

The specific needs of the Weather Channel Companies for information services from NOAA are, in priority order: one, the 

sustainment and evolution of all existing weather-observing platforms; two, improved numerical weather prediction capabilities; 

three, access to all known weather data, including those currently 

not readily available; four, improved detection of hazardous weather phenomena, particularly those that are not well-observed by the 

existing weather radars; five, liaison with NOAA’s international 

counterparts to seek open access to all international weather information that enables fair competition in a global economy; six, support of scientific research that improves forecasts of impactful 

weather by the Enterprise; and finally, seven, climate information 

and forecasts to inform our Nation about the impacts of a potentially changing climate. 

The Weather Channel Companies plays an important role in 

serving the weather needs of the Nation. We perform this function 

only through a collaborative partnership with the Weather Enterprise. NOAA’s crucial role in the Weather Enterprise is the creation of the foundational datasets and sustaining and involving 

those datasets as critical to the Weather Channel Companies’ ability to help make our Nation weather ready. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee, and I’ll 

look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Neilley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. PETER P. NEILLEY, VICE PRESIDENT, GLOBAL

FORECASTING SERVICES, THE WEATHER CHANNEL COMPANIES

Introduction 

Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Snowe, and Members of the Subcommittee— 

Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to address you today. My name 

is Dr. Peter P. Neilley and I am the Vice President of Global Forecasting Services 

for The Weather Channel Companies. I am also the Chair of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Weather and Forecasting, as well as a member of the 

Environmental Information Services Working Group of NOAA’s Science Advisory 

Board. In my remarks today, I am speaking as a representative of The Weather 

Channel Companies. 

The Weather Channel Companies, which includes The Weather Channel and WSI 

Corporation, is a major developer and provider of weather services for both consumers and businesses across our Nation and around the world. The Weather Channel Companies’ content is ubiquitous on nearly all forms of popular communication—The Weather Channel’s television network is available in more than 100 million households, and our online and mobile products reach nearly 100 million users 

each month. In addition to our branded television, radio, print, web and mobile 

products for consumers, our content also serves the needs of businesses around the 

world with weather solutions for the media, aviation and energy industries. Through 

our business-solutions corporation WSI, our weather content is used by nearly half 

of the local television stations across the country, dozens of airlines around the 

world and numerous traditional and renewable energy companies worldwide. We 

are just one of many private companies that provide a wide range of valuable 

weather and forecasting services to meet the diverse weather needs of our Nation. 

We have been serving the weather interests of the Nation for thirty years and 

are proud and respectful of the trust the Nation has instilled in us to inform, advise 

and protect it from the weather. 

Weather Has a Substantial Impact on Our Nation 

Weather plays a role in the daily lives of nearly every American and its impacts 

are woven into the fabric of our economy. One 2002 published estimate suggested 

47 

that nearly 40 percent of our economy or nearly $4 trillion annually is sensitive to 

the weather. In 2011, so far we have seen fourteen $1 billion weather disasters 

occur or over 50 percent more than any other year on record. This includes the numerous tornado outbreaks that ravished the Southeast this spring, Hurricane Irene 

that swept the U.S. eastern seaboard in August, the ongoing devastating Southern 

Plains drought, and the recent early season snowstorm that hit New England. Despite these losses, our Nation enjoys substantial protection from the weather. One 

2009 study estimated that we avoid over $30 billion in losses annually as a direct 

result of the roughly $5 billion annual investment our Nation makes in producing 

risk-avoiding weather information. This and other similar studies clearly show that 

although our Nation has significant weather risk, our investments in becoming a 

weather-ready nation are paying substantial net dividends to the economy and our 

society in general. It is imperative that we continue these investments in order to 

sustain and improve our resilience to the weather. Without such investments we potentially will lose far more value to our society than the cost of these investments. 

The Weather Enterprise is Critical in Meeting the Needs of a WeatherReady Nation 

The United States enjoys the broadest and most effective meteorological services 

in the world. Our nation is the global leader in the creation of state-of-the-science 

weather information and the provisioning of that information to serve both public 

and private interests in safety and economic prosperity. This leadership is the result 

of a strong and vibrant three-way partnership between (a) NOAA and other weather-related government agencies, (b) private weather services such as The Weather 

Channel® network, and (c) academic and research institutions. Collectively, the 

players in this partnership are generally referred to as the Weather Enterprise. 

Each sector of the Enterprise has a unique but critical role to play in serving the 

Nation. In general terms, research by the academic community leads to cutting-edge 

science and technology that drives the evolution of the field, NOAA implements and 

operates these technologies to create foundational weather and climate datasets, 

and the private sector builds upon these datasets to create forecasts and other products that inform the public and provide value-added services to industry. The private-sector is also where much of the meteorologically related job creation has occurred over the past decade and is a principal reason why the weather-services sector of our economy enjoys one of the lowest unemployment rates in the Nation. 

The stated mission of NOAA’s National Weather Service is to protect life and 

property and to enhance the national economy. It has been able to meet this mission 

only through the mutual collaboration of all members of the Weather Enterprise. 

The Weather Channel Companies and the other private sector weather services play 

a crucial role in communicating timely weather information to the Nation. We are 

dependent on NOAA, and in particular its National Weather Service for creating 

and serving some basic components of our overall service. The Weather Channel 

Companies’ ability to continue to inform and serve the Nation effectively is strongly 

dependent on continued reliable and accurate foundational information services 

from NOAA. Further, it is critical that as our Nation designs and funds next-generation weather and climate services, that it considers a holistic, Enterprise-optimized perspective to these services, rather than focusing solely on optimizing or 

broadening the roles of the Enterprise’s individual components. 

NOAA’s Focus on Creating and Serving State-of-the Science Foundational 

Weather Datasets 

Key to the ability of The Weather Channel Companies to deliver critical and actionable weather information to serve the Nation are the foundational datasets from 

NOAA that provide relevant observations of the state of the atmosphere, timely 

watches, warnings and advisories of threatening weather, and numerical weather 

prediction datasets that are reliable and accurate. The creation of these data is a 

function that only the government-sector of the Weather Enterprise can adequately 

perform. From our perspective, this is the single most important function of NOAA 

and it must remain the central focus of the Agency moving forward. We believe that 

NOAA’s priorities should be the maintenance and modernization of its weather observing platforms, sustaining and evolving its world-class numerical weather and 

climate prediction capabilities, and ensuring robust and effective accessibility to its 

complete set of weather information by the Weather Enterprise outside of NOAA. 

Maintaining this as NOAA’s core competency will then enable the broader Weather 

Enterprise to create new, value-added weather services to meet the future needs of 

the Nation. History has shown that the private-sector is much better equipped, more 

responsive and more effective at providing new types of applications of NOAA’s 

foundational weather information. Therefore, the private-sector should strategically 

48 

be relied upon to develop and deliver next-generation weather services such as forecasts of weather’s impacts, and new communication services for a rapidly evolving 

digital society that leverage next-generation foundational datasets from NOAA. 

Critical Information Needs of The Weather Channel Companies 

In order to continue to meet the needs of a weather-ready nation, The Weather 

Channel Companies will require new and evolved information services, many of 

which we believe are best met by capabilities developed and provided by NOAA. In 

priority order, our overall needs for services from NOAA are: 

1. Sustaining state-of-the-science weather observation platforms and capabilities 

including weather radars, satellite observing systems and traditional weather 

observing systems. 

2. Improved numerical weather prediction capabilities that employ state-of-thescience initialization techniques and other improvements that optimize the accuracy and usable duration of their output. 

3. Implementing new approaches that enable timely access and use of the complete set of weather and forecast data that NOAA currently creates but for 

which practical considerations limit the ability to share outside of NOAA. This 

includes full-resolution, ensemble numerical weather prediction datasets that 

are generally too large to practically and timely communicate, and therefore 

are not fully leveraged to serve society today. 

4. The deployment of new sensors and technologies to better detect hazardous 

weather near the surface of the earth such as tornadoes and other forms of severe weather. This includes a denser weather radar network that can detect 

the many low-level tornadoes that are not well observed by the existing NOAA 

radars. 

5. Aggressive liaison with its international counterparts to provide open and fair 

access to international weather and forecast information so that we may effectively and fairly compete on the world marketplace in the provisioning of 

weather information for a global economy. 

6. Continued funding and other support of scientific research that will improve 

the Enterprise’s ability to detect threatening weather, forecast its occurrence, 

and inform society of its impacts in effective ways. 

Climate Services needs for The Weather Channel Companies 

Our Nation faces uncertain but potentially substantial impacts from a changing 

climate. In order for our Nation to make informed and effective choices on responses 

and adaptation, it is important that our society be informed with factual, accurate 

and relevant climate information. Although The Weather Channel Companies’ traditional focus has been in the provision of real-time and short-term weather information, we recognize and accept a responsibility to help inform the Nation regarding 

climate changes and its potential impacts. We believe that The Weather Channel 

Companies should play a leading role in educating our Nation about climate matters 

in a balanced and scientifically sound manner. In order to serve that role, The 

Weather Channel Companies will rely on NOAA to develop rich climate data services, including but not limited to accurate long-term weather archives, analyses of 

these data to elicit regional climate variations and trends, as well as state-of-thescience climate forecasts. We believe these are critical needs of the Nation and are 

services best provided by NOAA as part of its weather and climate foundational 

datasets mission. 

Summary 

The Weather Channel Companies, as a major member of the broader Weather Enterprise, plays an important role in serving the weather needs of our Nation. We 

have been able to perform this function only through a collaborative partnership 

with NOAA and its various weather-related divisions. NOAA’s crucial role in the 

Weather Enterprise is the creation and provisioning of foundational datasets and we 

believe this must remain the core focus of the Agency. Continued modernization and 

evolution of these datasets is critical to The Weather Channel Companies success 

in its role in making our Nation weather ready. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee. I look forward to any 

questions you may have. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Our next panelist is Robert Marshall, President and CEO of 

Earth Networks. 

49 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT S. MARSHALL, FOUNDER AND CEO, 

EARTH NETWORKS, INC. 

Mr. MARSHALL. Thank you, Chairman Begich, Ranking Member 

Snowe, and members of the Committee, for your continued interest 

in innovation in weather forecasting and prediction, and allowing 

me to testify. 

My name is Bob Marshall, and I am the Founder and CEO of 

Earth Networks. I don’t need to spend any time talking about the 

great impact that severe weather is having on our society. We all 

know it, and we see it every day. 

I will focus my remarks on the innovations that can help costeffectively improve the accuracy and timeliness of our forecasts and 

warnings and to help save more lives. 

There is one thing that all scientists and meteorologists can 

agree to, and that is that high-quality observations of the atmosphere are required to produce accurate forecasts and warnings. You 

simply must measure what is happening to predict what will happen in the future. 

Of course, NOAA has developed a strong backbone infrastructure 

of observations over the past couple of decades, ranging from surface-based, in-situ and remote sensing platforms to satellite observing platforms. However, in 2008, the National Academy of Science 

report entitled ‘‘From the Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of 

Networks’’ documented critical gaps in NOAA’s observing infrastructure. 

Among other recommendations, this report called for NOAA to 

first take advantage of all existing surface-based weather station 

networks, otherwise known as mesonets. If properly integrated, 

these observational data will clearly improve both forecasts and 

warnings. For example, had the National Mesonet been fully integrated into NWS operations, it is quite possible that better warnings could have prevented six deaths in the Indianapolis State Fair 

tragedy. 

It is important to note that these existing networks were not federally funded but are owned and operated by private sector companies, states and universities. NOAA must simply acquire the data 

and operationalize it, which makes this very cost effective relative 

to deployment of new observation networks. 

I am pleased to report that the National Mesonet program has 

received some limited funding for pilot programs to date, but it is 

not yet in the NOAA base budget, nor has it been fully funded or 

operationalized. The National Mesonets should be fully funded and 

completed. 

Now I want to talk about some exciting advances and innovations in Mesonet technology. Earth Networks is spearheading one 

very exciting innovation to provide improved severe weather warnings, and that is the integration of total lightning sensors into our 

National Mesonet. Researchers have long known that severe 

storms have very high total lightning rates. Simply said, if you can 

measure total lightning, it is a precursor to severe weather, and 

lead times for severe weather warnings can be improved. 

We have deployed these sensors at no up-front cost to the taxpayer, and our dangerous thunderstorm alerts are now fully operational in the Continental U.S. Let me briefly mention two examVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
50 

ples. In the terrible super-tornado outbreak across the South this 

past spring, where hundreds of our citizens perished, we evaluated 

seven of the most devastating of those tornados. In those events, 

total lightning-based alerts provided an extra 13 minutes of warning, on average, over and above the National Weather Service severe thunderstorm and tornado warnings. The deadly Springfield, 

Massachusetts tornado of June 1 of this year is highlighted on the 

easel to my left. Total lightning alerts provided an additional 38 

minutes of increased warning in that situation. 

Now let me say that NOAA and the National Weather Service 

generally do a fantastic job of warning our citizens to severe weather dangers, and that is especially true in the super-tornado outbreak from this spring. But minutes do matter when it comes to 

severe weather and saving lives. With improved lead times, more 

people will find shelter and more lives will be saved. I’m pleased 

to say that total lightning is currently being trialed in National 

Weather Service field offices, but this must be quickly funded and 

moved to operations. 

Again, to provide perspective, NOAA and the National Weather 

Service have spent about $4.5 billion over the past couple of decades, and this investment has yielded an impressive improvement 

in lead time, from 4 to 14 minutes. However, this new and innovative ground-based sensor technology on the National Mesonet can 

provide a step-function increase in warning time for a tiny fraction 

of the previous investment. Let me repeat, this technology is here 

and ready today, and more lives can be saved. 

Lastly, I want to touch on NOAA’s overall observational model. 

Given the current fiscal and budget reality, it is not an understatement to say that NOAA’s traditional model, to purchase and own 

all of the observations it needs, is severely challenged, if not outright broken. NOAA must embrace public-private partnership models whereby the cost of the networks are shared by many users, 

such as energy and transportation companies. In our case, NOAA 

pays a small percentage of what it would have cost them to deploy 

a comparable network. 

To summarize, even with the budget challenges that NOAA faces 

ahead, there are public-private partnerships and innovative new 

technologies that will enable us to collectively and cost-effectively 

create a weather-ready nation and to better protect the lives and 

property of our citizens. Earth Networks stands ready to do our 

part. 

I thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I’m happy to take 

any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT S. MARSHALL, FOUNDER AND CEO, 

EARTH NETWORKS, INC. 

Introduction 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee for this opportunity to 

testify on the importance of continuing innovation to improve weather forecasting 

and warnings. My name is Bob Marshall, founder and CEO of Earth Networks and 

I am very appreciative of this opportunity to discuss topics relating to the weather 

observing and forecasting programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. We thank the Committee for its continuing interest in addressing the 

51 

complex requirements of observation, prediction, planning and response, and the 

critical role these efforts play in protecting lives and property. 

Earth Networks’ particular expertise is in owning and operating large, dense environmental and atmospheric sensor networks. We utilize the data from these observational networks to deliver daily environmental information and alerting to millions of consumers; Federal, state and local governments; and the myriad of industries impacted by weather. While we certainly rely on many NOAA services, and 

incorporate NOAA data and forecasts into our products and services, we have found 

that the needs of the marketplace (and of government) often require higher resolution solutions and data sets that are more locally targeted and in much greater frequency than NOAA is currently able to provide through its own observing networks. 

In this manner, existing local networks of this type are able to supplement NOAA’s 

in a unique and powerful public/private partnership. 

Weather is having a greater impact on our society than ever before. This includes 

impacts to the lives and property of our citizens and to our economy. To provide the 

most accurate forecasts and warnings for weather, dense high quality observations 

are required, so I will focus my comments on that component of the overall system. 

Without observations of the atmosphere, quality forecasts and warnings are not possible. And meteorological observations on the mesoscale (i.e., local/county scale) are 

of the greatest importance as evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of severe 

weather life and property losses are associated with mesoscale events such as tornados, thunderstorms, fronts, squall lines, etc. 

The need for improvements in observations of this kind are well documented and 

compelling as recently indicated within the National Research Council report From 

the Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of Networks. Among other recommendations, 

the Council advocated that a first priority be the development of a surface based 

National Mesonet, with comprehensive data collection, quality control and dissemination capabilities, which will provide the critical information needed to improve 

short and medium term weather forecasting (down to local scales), plume dispersion 

modeling, and air quality analyses. In this manner, not only will the overall capabilities of the atmospheric community be substantially improved, but decisionmaking will be significantly enhanced across a broad spectrum of market sectors 

and end user constituencies including energy, agriculture, homeland security, disaster management and emergency response, insurance and economic forecasting, 

transportation, education, recreation and scientific research. 

From an observing perspective, there are a number of specific areas that NOAA 

weather and climate programs should focus on in order to establish a truly Weather 

Ready Nation. Three key areas are: (1) a comprehensive and robust observing system; (2) early warning capabilities that leverage key mesoscale observing systems; 

and (3) strong public-private partnerships. While each of these components could be 

examined more closely to identify key requirements, assess the current condition of 

readiness and prescribe appropriate efforts and investments necessary for a more 

capable domestic program, my testimony today will only touch upon these aspects 

at a high level. Please note that my recommendations here today are rooted in recent reports from the National Academy of Sciences, national efforts by leading industry associations regarding weather and climate services, as well as my own experiences in leading an organization that interacts with all aspects of the American 

Weather Enterprise, i.e., public, private and academic interests involved in sourcing 

and distributing weather information. Finally, I’ll also touch briefly upon climate 

considerations in this regard. 

(1) Comprehensive and Robust Observing Systems 

The objective of weather and climate observing systems is to provide critical information on the current state of the atmosphere and terrestrial biosphere in a timely 

manner such that informed decisions can be made at varying time scales. In this 

context, decisions on the long term may involve potential global temperature 

changes and sea level rise that require development of climate mitigation and adaptation strategies. Intermediate term decisions may include flood, drought and winter 

weather or tropical storms expected to affect large areas and many sectors of the 

economy over prolonged periods of time. Alternatively, short fuse decisions more 

often entail those relating to convective (i.e., thunderstorm) weather events that 

while often widespread, occur quickly and dramatically impact people, property and 

critical assets. 

Supporting these varying decisions and timescales requires various types of observation platforms, including surface based in-situ and remote sensing monitoring networks as well as space based satellite systems. When seamlessly integrated, these 

complementary resources provide the raw data foundation upon which an entire nationwide decision support system is built. These data are critical inputs to and reVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
52 

quired for the establishment of situational awareness, the generation of forecasts, 

as well as the subsequent dissemination of warnings and alerts for the protection 

of life, infrastructure and optimization of weather sensitive market sectors. With regard to the latter, it should be noted that the impact of weather on our Nation’s 

economy was recently estimated to be as much as $485 billion or 3.4 percent of the 

2008 U.S. gross domestic product. (Lazo, Lawson, Larsen and Waldman, Bulletin of 

the American Meteorological Society, June 2011, (http://www.sip.ucar.edu/publications/PDF/LazolsensitivitylJunel2011.pdf). 

Recent advances in electronics technology have enabled surface based sensors to 

become smaller, faster, more accurate, more reliable and less expensive. Networking 

of the sensors via the Internet and wireless networks has enabled dense surface 

based observation networks to proliferate rapidly. Environmental parameters that 

were once not practical to observe at the surface are now proven and operational. 

In some cases, these breakthroughs in surface based network technology potentially 

obviate the need to observe these parameters from space, where the costs and risks 

to do so are far higher. Generally, anything that can be observed from the surface 

should be observed at the surface due to the extremely high costs and risk factors 

inherent in any satellite launch. Satellites should only be considered where ground 

based sensors are inadequate. 

These advances are similar to the advances seen in astronomy. Ten or twenty 

years ago, the technology available from ground-based telescopes was not adequate 

to capture data at sufficient resolution for all research purposes; space based telescopes like Hubble were necessary. Now, technological advances have significantly 

improved the capability of ground-based observations. As a result, we collect from 

space only that data which we cannot collect from the ground—the two domains 

complement each other. Like in astronomy, improvements in the technology of 

ground-based in situ sensors, communications, power management, data handling 

and storage have all enabled the deployment of cost-efficient sensor networks with 

a density sufficient to allow applications thought impossible just a few short years 

ago. 

But sometimes a satellite is the appropriate answer. For example, the JPSS satellite is critical to NOAA’s ability to forecast weather accurately, especially in the 

3–5 day period and longer. This was never more apparent than the terrible southern 

tornado outbreak from this spring. The NWS was able to predict a very high potential for severe weather in the region many days in advance which helped communities to prepare. Studies have shown that the polar orbiting satellite data was critical to this success. Winter storms forecasts and warnings are also another area 

where the polar orbiting satellites are critical. In last year’s ‘‘snow-mageddon’’, NWS 

forecasts allowed for up to a week’s advanced warning of this storm, which again 

allowed time for communities to prepare in advance of the severe weather. There 

is no surface based technology that can provide an alternative for the observations 

that will be delivered by JPSS. It is critical for JPSS to be funded to prevent a significant decline in forecast and warning accuracy for these type events. 

(2) Early Warning Capabilities 

As mentioned previously, most severe weather occurs at the mesoscale, i.e., local 

and regional scale and NOAA/NWS generally does a very good job of generated severe weather warnings to cover this domain. However, while warning lead times 

correspondingly improved during the NWS modernization that began in the 1980s, 

during recent years the warning lead times have not improved appreciably. This is 

a direct reflection of operational observing systems also not significantly improving. 

With the frequency and severity of weather events increasing and our population 

growing, further improvements in warning lead times are necessary to better protect life and property. High resolution mesoscale observations enable more accurate 

and timely forecasts and warnings in the 0–6 hour’s timeframe. Fortunately, this 

committee and the National Weather Service have taken steps toward making this 

capability operational by appropriating monies for and implementing demonstration 

programs and pilot projects. For example, the National Mesonet Program championed by Senator Barbara Mikulski after the 2004 Baltimore Water Taxi Incident, 

involves a broad cross section of weather and climate network operators throughout 

the country who are supplying comprehensive surface observations and associated 

metadata from stationary and mobile platforms. But more should be done; we need 

to move beyond pilot projects to operational implementation. 

To this end, I maintain that following the recommendations of the 2008 NRC report From the Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of Networks, and leveraging to 

the maximum extent existing and proliferating surface observations, be fully implemented as soon as possible. Doing so will significantly enhance NOAA’s ability to 

forecast near-term severe weather and do so in a highly cost-effective manner. This 

53 

is particularly germane in a year where the Nation experienced an historic number 

of severe weather outbreaks, including destructive Tornado outbreaks in Tuscaloosa, 

AL and Joplin, MO as well as severe droughts, crippling snow storms and devastating hurricanes in other parts of the country. And the situation is only being 

exacerbated as our population grows and migrates toward urban and coastal areas. 

In fact, the previous annual record of 9 individual $1 billion weather-related catastrophes has been surpassed already in 2011 with a record setting 14 as of today. 

Beginning in the 1980s, NOAA invested heavily in infrastructure for observing, 

analysis, visualization and dissemination capabilities which resulted in significant 

tornado warning lead time improvements from 4–14 minutes. This important and 

necessary advancement was the outcome of an approximately $4.5 billion investment. Since then, however, there have only been marginal improvements. What I 

want to stress is that new and innovative technologies can immediately deliver stepfunction improvements in early warning times at a fraction of the previous cost. 

These advancements in sensor technologies are the result of motivated and fully engaged private, academic and state government organizations that have enabled the 

deployment of dense, surface based observation networks throughout the country. 

A specific recent innovation in mesonet technology is the integration of total lightning sensors. For many years, researchers have demonstrated that monitoring cloud 

flash lightning data at high detection efficiencies would provide insight into early 

stage convective development and that such total lightning observations could potentially provide significant improvements in storm warnings. But the technology 

was never available to cover large, continental areas at a reasonable cost. Using innovative new technology, Earth Networks has rapidly and efficiently deployed a continental scale total lightning network on its nationwide mesonet. This network is 

operational today and is automatically producing severe storm alerts with lead 

times as much as 30 minutes in advance of NWS Severe Thunderstorm and Tornado 

Warnings. During the April 25 to 28, 2011 Super Outbreak that killed more than 

346 people and included the tornado that tore through Tuscaloosa, AL, Earth Networks total lightning system achieved an average lead time increase of 13 minutes 

for a broad subset of these events. Similar lead time performance achievements 

have been repeatedly observed for many other events throughout the country over 

the past several years and as such, the NWS is currently piloting the technology 

in 27 field and regional forecast offices. 

As mentioned, this type of technology has only been made available on a broad 

scale and for such purposes during the past couple of years. It should also be emphasized that its cost is only a small fraction of that required to achieve the same 

from space and was accomplished without consuming a single dollar of taxpayer 

money. With the Earth Networks total lightning network being fully operational, 

the need to observe lightning in the future from satellites should be evaluated. The 

forthcoming GOES–R satellite includes a lightning sensor at a cost of more than 

$100M. The Earth Networks ground based total lightning network already delivers 

many of the benefits of the GOES–R satellite lightning sensor including higher resolution and accuracy. This is the kind of issue that should be looked at carefully, so 

that the government can be assured that a proper cost-benefit analysis has been 

completed. Even if the GOES–R lightning sensor initiative, scheduled for operations 

in 2017, is too far along to be shelved the Earth Networks total lightning capability 

should leveraged immediately to improve severe weather forecasting and alerting as 

well as to provide ground truth for satellite calibration, forecast validation and after 

action reports. 

I have attached a Power Point presentation to this statement that demonstrates 

the power and effectiveness of this currently available and cost effective technology. 

(3) Public Private Partnerships 

Achieving a condition where the Nation is adequately equipped to foresee weather 

related threats and alert the community with sufficient warning lead-times requires 

vision, coordination and continued investment. It is particularly clear, however, that 

the Federal Government cannot achieve this goal alone, particularly in the face of 

an increasingly difficult budget environment. Therefore, it is imperative that vigorous public-private partnerships be nourished to drive innovation and allow for the 

appropriate mixture of baseline government provided services and market based offerings. By utilizing the capabilities of private networks, NOAA can acquire the data 

and services it needs at a fraction of the cost of owning the network assets. The 

return required for the network deployment costs are amortized over a variety of 

market segments; the costs and risks are shared. Only this type of partnership will 

ensure that available government funding is being deployed most effectively and efficiently. 

54 

Consistent with the 2003 NRC report entitled Fair Weather: Effective Partnerships 

in Weather and Climate Services, the NWS has initiated and expanded upon a dialogue with the private sector. These conversations have improved coordination 

among the sectors by providing greater insight into each other’s respective needs, 

plans and capabilities. These efforts should be continued and identified synergies 

should be acted upon with greater urgency in order to rapidly fill the gaps in capabilities and services. 

While the Federal Government is well suited to act globally and nationally, it is 

limited in its capacity to act locally beyond the provision of oversight and funding 

support. As such, it is envisioned that a public/private partnership structure, with 

guidance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, facilitate and 

integrate these disparate networks and delivery of customized services. An organizational model of this type is particularly applicable given that many networks have 

been deployed by local organizations with local considerations in mind. These stakeholders can react quickly and efficiently, and are uniquely positioned to recommend 

future network evolution within their domains. These networks are in-place and 

available today. As such they offer the ability to deliver immediate returns. 

(4) Climate Considerations 

Before turning to my conclusions, let me comment briefly on another related monitoring initiative that Earth Networks is pursuing. 

NOAA is charged with conducting research on the complex carbon cycle and its 

impact on climate variability. Currently, there are very limited carbon observations 

available to scientists for this research. NOAA operates about 10 such surfaced 

based carbon observationsites and there are a few dozen operated by others around 

the world. The current carbon observation network is limited to global and continental scale measurements and analysis. Many more observations are required to 

develop a better understanding of the carbon cycle at local and regional scales and 

to provide measurement, reporting and verification to support international treaties, 

as well as any regulatory or market-based reductions schema. 

Similar to the advances described above, advances in electronics technology have 

also significantly improved the ability to accurately and reliably measure carbon 

from the surface. Earth Networks is deploying the largest surface-based greenhouse 

gas observing network in the world, with 50 sensors planned for the continental 

United States, 25 in Europe, and 25 distributed around the rest of the globe. Again, 

with this innovative new technology there is the potential for significant cost savings by increasing investments in ground based carbon measurements relative to 

satellite-based measurements. Unfortunately, the original Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) satellite launch failed on launch. The cost of that mission was approximately $280 million. A second carbon satellite, OCO2, is being developed at a cost 

of another $200 million. While all scientists, including those at Earth Networks desire data from both surface and space based platforms, the question is whether this 

is practical given the current budget constraints. Before funds are fully committed 

to a new or replacement satellite program, an exhaustive analysis should be accomplished to determine the tradeoffs associated with these funding decisions. As the 

previously referenced National Academies report title intimated, we should always 

start ‘‘from the ground up.’’ 

Conclusion 

While NOAA has built up significant observational assets and capabilities over 

many decades, there remain significant gaps that limit our ability to further improve forecasts and warnings. Further, with budget challenges that will no doubt 

confront us for the foreseeable future, NOAA’s model for acquiring and maintaining 

critical observations is infeasible. Overall budgets will likely be flat or lower. Satellite program costs are consuming an ever larger proportion of the NOAA budget 

and the current trajectory is simply not sustainable. 

Immediate improvements, however, in forecasting and prediction can be realized 

by utilizing Public-Private partnerships to enhance existing space and ground based 

observing platforms. Therefore, specific strategies adopted in this regard should: 

• Guarantee annual funding of the National Mesonet in NOAA’s budget to fully 

integrate locally collected mesoscale surface weather data into the forecasting 

and warning functions at every National Weather Service field office; 

• Guarantee that NOAA incorporate continental scale total lightning data into 

the National Mesonet and into its storm warning capability to achieve a stepfunction improvement in warning times; 

• Fund cost efficient surface based carbon networks to improve local and regional 

scale climate science; 

55 

• Establish a standing NOAA advisory panel whose sole mission is to look at the 

balance of NOAA’s forecasting needs for both weather and climate, and then 

recommends in a public way how those requirements should be met between the 

three observational domains of surface, airborne and space based measurements; 

• Hold annual Congressional hearings on the state of innovation in forecasting 

and warning to measure the progress on the important objectives that the public demands and which must be done in a fiscally prudent manner given the 

challenging economic times. 

Through the types of strategies and initiatives that I have highlighted today, the 

broader weather and climate industry will be able to expedite and support NOAA 

in establishing a truly Weather Ready Nation. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I would be happy to answer any 

questions you may have. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. 

Let me first start, if I can. Again, this will be a 5-minute round. 

Mr. Iseman, let me again thank the WGA for their partnership 

with NOAA, and I guess the first question I have is, from your perspective, what, if any, hurdles are there in the development or the 

expansion of the partnership that you see that maybe are being 

caused by our end of the equation? 

Mr. ISEMAN. I think the big challenge for us right now in moving 

forward with this Memorandum of Understanding is taking it from 

the conceptual phase of a memorandum and into implementation, 

and we’re working through that right now. We’ve had great support 

from NOAA in taking these steps. I think the real test of this partnership will come when we move to apply the memorandum in specific places and to work on the ground to develop the improvements 

that we’ve envisioned. So we’re hopeful and optimistic for now. 

Senator BEGICH. Do you think they have—and this is not a criticism of NOAA. It’s just kind of my view of the Federal Government 

in general as a former mayor. Do you think they have the capacity 

to be regional as you had described? You know, the Federal Government has a bad habit of let’s make everything national and all 

will work out for the best, and usually it doesn’t because they don’t 

recognize the regional differences and the uniqueness of certain 

areas. I mean, our state has multiple weather systems, compared 

to just one state that might have one weather system. 

So can you—tell me your kind of confidence level. I know you 

have a good partnership with them, but this is, I think your comment was—I noted that your concern is can you bring it down to 

the regional level. 

Mr. ISEMAN. Right. 

Senator BEGICH. What’s your confidence level in that capacity? 

Mr. ISEMAN. I think there are some positive signs. One is the 

MOU itself. Two, I’ve seen some of the ways that they have organized and are delivering services at a regional scale, and one of 

those is through the NIDIS program, where they’re working on regional early warning systems for drought and actually working 

with the people in the local community to develop those systems 

and deliver the services. And another is the Regional Integrated 

Sciences and Assessments where they are marshalling capacities at 

the universities to help states and local communities address onthe-ground problems. 

56 

So I think there are positive signs, and we’ll be happy to report 

back on our progress under the MOU. 

Senator BEGICH. I think that would be great, because I think the 

more NOAA partners, and that’s kind of what this panel is really 

about, is how do you partner with other organizations and groups 

and private sector to expand the capacity of NOAA to provide the 

necessary information for forecasting and prediction that benefits 

everybody. So I’d be very interested in knowing how you progress 

on that and what are those challenges that might start to appear 

in the implementation of it, because that’s always the—it’s great 

and easy to do an MOU. I used to do those a lot when I was mayor. 

But then as mayor, you had to implement them, and so you had 

to make sure they were real. And so I would look forward to that 

commentary as you move forward. 

Mr. ISEMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator BEGICH. Mr. Marshall, I appreciated your presentation. 

Your comment, which again caught me, and I want to follow up on 

it, do you think there is enough or are there areas that NOAA 

could really expand in maximizing the private sector capacity of 

what’s now developed? I mean, if this was 20 years ago, it’s a whole 

different ballgame with weather services in the private sector, but 

it’s a different business now, proven by the Weather Channel and 

many of the industries that are related now to it. 

Can you tell me, do you think there is more opportunity that’s 

not being taken advantage of? And I’ll pause for a second by saying 

this is a challenge we have also at the Coast Guard, and that is 

they want to own everything, and to partner means less authority 

or less jurisdiction, and I think there’s a way probably to meld the 

two. But in NOAA, is that something that you would hope they 

would start looking at because of financial conditions, but also because of technology development? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. Thank you, Senator. I think there are really 

two sides to the public-private partnership from my perspective. I 

mean, on one side you have companies like the Weather Channel, 

myself, and many others that take the very important information 

from NOAA, develop value-added products, and help distribute that 

information to businesses and consumers. 

I think one of the new areas that has evolved over the last decade or so, for sure, is that with advances in technology and with 

the ubiquitous nature of the Internet as a communications platform, virtually every sensor in the world is being connected to the 

Internet, and the data is flowing in real time every second. You 

know, the sensors are smaller, faster, more accurate, more reliable, 

and less expensive. So you have companies like ourselves that are 

deploying sensor networks all over the place, and this is a new 

area where the private sector can form a public-private partnership 

in NOAA to provide that data to NOAA to integrate into their operations, and it can be done very quickly and very cost-effectively. 

So NOAA does not have to necessarily invest in all of the observational technology. It can just acquire the data. And I think that’s 

a relatively new circumstance, and NOAA is embracing that model 

to some degree. But technology is evolving so rapidly that it can 

certainly be adopted faster, and this information can be put into 

57 

the hands of the forecasters to make sure that warnings and forecasts get better immediately. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. I’ll probably follow up again in just 

a minute on that. 

Mr. Neilley, let me ask you again. Thank you for your efforts 

here. You had seven points, I think, and one of them that stood out 

I think was access to weather data not available now. Can you 

elaborate on that? 

Dr. NEILLEY. Thank you, Senator. NOAA creates a tremendous 

amount of weather information routinely throughout the day. The 

volume of it is so vast that it is impractical to communicate a lot 

of that information outside of NOAA, and decisions must be made 

about how to filter that data to provide general services to partners 

of NOAA. 

However, the data that is unfiltered still has a tremendous 

amount of value to providing forecasting information, and we need 

to seek ways in which we can have access and use that information 

to create more value from that information. 

As I mentioned earlier, I sit on the Environmental Information 

Services Working Group of NOAA, and we’re exploring that question and expect to have recommendations to the NOAA Science Advisory Panel perhaps later this month. 

Senator BEGICH. And do you think NOAA is responsive to this 

idea of sharing some of the—it’s basically the raw data? 

Dr. NEILLEY. I think—I believe they are. In preliminary discussions with NOAA, they certainly embrace this. Dr. Jack Hayes 

made a public endorsement of some of the concepts that were put 

forth and how we might be sharing some more of these data, and 

recent discussions with Kathy Sullivan have indicated strong endorsement of trying to figure out ways in which overall the society 

can benefit from all the data that NOAA has, yes. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. 

Senator Snowe? 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. Just a follow-up on that question. 

Has there been information that you haven’t received in the accumulation of that data, that raw data, that could have had an effect 

on the public, do you think? 

Dr. NEILLEY. Oh, absolutely. We wouldn’t be seeking this information if we didn’t think it had a great deal of value to the public. 

It probably would be difficult to cite a specific example offhand, but 

there are—it would probably be conveyed in everyday weather, the 

frequency with which we update the information, the precision of 

which we can provide the information to the public so they can 

make daily decisions in going about their lives and businesses. 

Senator SNOWE. So do they filter the data that gets to you, or 

what is the answer? Are they just accumulating it so fast that they 

can’t transmit that data? 

Dr. NEILLEY. It’s both of those. The data gets accumulated so 

fast. Super-computers run and create the information at a great 

deal of precision and resolution, and fundamentally we don’t have 

communication systems to make it practicable to send that data 

outside of those super-computing facilities. 

Senator SNOWE. You mentioned in your testimony that the private sector should be strategically relied upon to deliver next-genVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
58 

eration weather services, and I know that you, and Mr. Marshall 

as well, probably use a lot of mobile phone technology, desktop applications and so forth. Would that suggest reaching a broader audience through those mechanisms and through the advanced technologies that people use every day? 

Dr. NEILLEY. Absolutely. History has shown that the private sector has been much more adaptable and responsive and faster in developing services that the public uses and can consume in their everyday lives, and I believe it’s one of those—relying on the private 

sector to be the voice of the weather to the Nation is one of those 

ways that the private sector can most effectively do and should be 

the strength of what we should rely on from the strengths of the 

private sector. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Dr. Neilley. 

Mr. Marshall, you were mentioning this national Mesonet program. How has NOAA reacted to that? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I think they’ve embraced the National 

Academy’s report that came out in 2008. I think there has been 

some activity and there has been some limited funding put in 

place. I mean, we are somewhat disappointed that the Mesonet activities have not made it into the President’s budget yet, despite 

the fact that the national Mesonet is briefed routinely by Dr. Hayes 

and his team as something that’s very important for the National 

Weather Service strategically. So we certainly would like to see 

that become a reality, because this is very cost effective. It’s 

leveraging existing sensor networks that are out there, that all you 

have to do is integrate them into the operations of the forecast offices and immediate improvements can happen for forecasts and 

earlier warnings. 

So relative to the cost of deploying a new satellite, which is 

measured in the billions of dollars, this is very, very inexpensive 

and something that can happen very, very quickly. 

Senator SNOWE. So are you suggesting there could be more sensors in different locations? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Well, I mean, there are tens of thousands of sensors out there today that are in different networks. We have our 

own, universities, other companies, and that data just needs to be 

integrated into one database and leveraged by the National Weather Service. Again, there has been some work done, but I think it’s 

really a clear opportunity to make substantial progress in the short 

run, particularly when you have a difficult budget environment 

where you can’t fund everything that you want to do. This is lowhanging fruit. 

Senator SNOWE. Right. So you’re suggesting instead of having to 

deal with major satellites, that you could do some limited investments to gather all the information that’s out there that’s being accumulated on a daily basis. 

Mr. MARSHALL. Yes, and I want to make sure I’m clear. I mean, 

in certain situations, yes. You can take advantage of existing networks, and they can fulfill the needs of many things, even stuff 

that satellites can do; not for all things, though. 

Senator SNOWE. Right. 

Mr. MARSHALL. So when you come to, like, the JPSS satellite, 

there is no surface-based alternative sensors out there today that 

59 

would fit the need for that. So that’s an important and critical initiative for NOAA that needs to move forward, or else there will be 

a big gap in their ability to forecast weather, particularly in the 3 

to 5 day time-frame for winter storms and tropicals. So there isn’t 

surface-based alternatives for that, but there are for other things 

that can really make a material improvement for forecasts and 

warnings. 

Senator SNOWE. Does NOAA integrate all your data? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Not all of it. I mean, no. I mean, it’s partial. At 

the end of the day, we’ve done some limited pilot projects, but 

clearly it would not take a significant amount of money to make 

sure that the data from our network, from other company privatesector networks, from academic networks gets integrated, assimilated, and used operationally within the forecast offices and in the 

numerical forecast models, and that’s really what we would like to 

see happen. 

Senator SNOWE. I see. 

Mr. Iseman, you were discussing the importance of tailoring information to the appropriate scale for regions and resource managers. Could NOAA make better use of their weather service stations, for example, as a way of doing that? 

Mr. ISEMAN. I’m not prepared to comment on that question right 

now. I’d like to get back to you. 

Senator SNOWE. Are there ways in which NOAA could better engage local communities right now? 

Mr. ISEMAN. Well, absolutely, and I’m sorry, I’m not familiar 

with all of the efforts that NOAA has under way to work directly 

with local communities, but we see a lot of ways that they could 

engage with the states, ways that we’re trying to implement 

through this Memorandum of Understanding that we think can improve this relationship. 

Senator SNOWE. Yes, I am aware of the MOU that was just 

reached, and that certainly would be an important step forward to 

have that common understanding and that partnership. But the 

outreach by NOAA to states and local communities could be extremely important in all of this, as well. 

Mr. ISEMAN. Agreed. Thank you, Senator. And one of the things 

that NOAA has been doing is more Webinars and updates on a regular basis with the communities that are affected by these events, 

and I know right now they’ve got a series going on in the Southwest for drought, and they’re going to be starting one in the Upper 

Missouri to look at the forecasts for snowpack and river runoff, and 

I think they’re getting ahead of the game in trying to do a better 

job of communicating that. 

Senator SNOWE. I appreciate that. Thank you. 

Mr. ISEMAN. Thank you. 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you all. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you all very much. I just have two quick 

questions, and one, just to make sure, Mr. Marshall, only because, 

being parochial here for a moment, Mesonet, is it connected to 

Alaska or not? Is it continental? Did I hear continental; right? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. They are absolutely. Thank you, Senator. 

No. The Mesonet is really, they’re a global Mesonet. So we have 

sensors in Alaska. There are others that have sensors in Alaska. 

60 

And all of that information should absolutely be integrated into one 

national Mesonet to make sure that the Weather Service takes advantage of that existing data in your state, in all the other states. 

Senator BEGICH. Very good. Thank you. 

Mr. Iseman, let me end my—I just have one final question, and 

that is you heard the last panel that was here. I talked about the 

Centralized Climate Service Program and that there was a group, 

a small percentage, a very small percentage, that are concerned 

that when you centralize it, you may not create enough information 

flowing out. I’m assuming the same comment you had earlier on 

my other question about making sure it’s regional, local, the work 

that NOAA does and the MOU you have, same situation probably 

here, that you want to make sure if they centralize, that there’s 

still a local understanding of what’s going on. Is that a fair statement? 

Mr. ISEMAN. Yes, it is, Senator. And—— 

Senator BEGICH. I just didn’t want to assume that based on your 

earlier statement. 

Mr. ISEMAN. We have supported a national climate service. We 

think there’s value in coordinating and centralizing this information and disseminating it. But one of our important comments on 

that topic has been that it be regionalized. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. Very good. 

Senator SNOWE. May I ask a question? 

Senator BEGICH. Yes, Senator Snowe. 

Senator SNOWE. I wanted to ask you, Dr. Neilley, so it’s not our 

imagination that we’re experiencing extreme weather events? Is it 

unprecedented in this last year? 

Dr. NEILLEY. Certainly from an economic—— 

Senator BEGICH. Microphone? There we go. 

Dr. NEILLEY. Thank you, Senator. Certainly from an economic 

perspective, so far and with still sort of 2 months of accounting to 

go, we’ve seen 14 $1 billion weather disasters this year. I believe 

the previous highest number was 9. So we’re almost 50 percent 

higher this year than we’ve seen in any year. 

Senator BEGICH. I know just from Alaska’s perspective that the 

storm we just had—I mean, it was a big storm, earlier than usual 

in the sense of the magnitude it had, and more damaging because 

you have no ice buildup. You have no capacity to protect against 

erosion. And that’s still being analyzed in Alaska. When we have 

erosion, it’s not a few feet of ground that disappears. It could be 

upwards of 50 to 70 feet inward, inland that disappears, gone. 

So it’s an interesting pattern of weather we have now. As I tried 

to explain to my son yesterday when our neighbor was watering 

her plants, her flowers outside, as we turned on the TV or Internet 

to check in with my wife where it just snowed lots of inches of 

snow in Anchorage, and then Juneau just had a record snowfall at 

this time of year, which doesn’t make sense for Juneau. They’re 

trying to figure that one out. But it’s very different than it was in 

the past, that’s for sure. 

Thank you all very much. And again, this gave us a lot of good 

information, a lot of opportunity to look at ideas, and this last 

panel I really appreciate some of the innovation that you all are 

doing in the private sector in organizations, because that, I think, 

61 

as we deal with the budget issues, we’re trying to find innovative 

ways to continue to make sure we have robust weather prediction, 

and I think you all have offered some good suggestions and some 

ideas and food for thought here. So I think on behalf of both of us, 

we thank you very much. 

The record will be open for 14 days for any additional questions 

we may have that we might submit to you. But again, thank you 

all very much, and at this time the meeting is adjourned. Thank 

you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 12:13 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(63) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, 

U.S. SENATOR, WEST VIRGINIA

Today we will be examining the many important weather programs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). From the streams of data 

provided by environmental satellites, to the severe weather alerts of the National 

Weather Service, the products, services, and warnings that NOAA provides benefit 

all Americans. Every day, decisions are made based on NOAA weather information, 

whether it helps one decide to carry an umbrella, or to seek life-saving shelter during a storm. 

This year has unfortunately shattered almost every weather record imaginable in 

the United States. Record-breaking snowfall, cold temperatures, extended drought, 

high heat, severe flooding, violent tornadoes, massive hurricanes—all of these 

events have amounted to the greatest number of multi-billion dollar weather disasters in our nation’s history. For each of these record-setting events, human lives 

were lost, and entire communities and livelihoods were torn asunder. Thinking of 

the many Americans harmed, I believe the public’s need for timely and accurate 

weather forecasts and emergency warnings could not be more critical. 

Though the hardships of many are devastating, the death and destruction could 

have been far worse had it not been for the guidance and expertise of NOAA scientists, meteorologists, and climatologists. NOAA forecasts and warnings provided 

crucial lead times that protected property and saved lives. In my own state of West 

Virginia, innovations in forecasting have provided greater notice of flash flood 

events, allowing people to better protect their property and evacuate safely when 

needed. In times of emergency, minutes can save lives. 

It’s clear that NOAA atmospheric services are invaluable to all Americans, yet 

this year in a terrible demonstration of irony the agency’s important functions have 

again been taken for granted. House Republicans have repeatedly sought to slash 

NOAA’s budget and prohibit the agency from conducting basic research and weather 

observational science. As a result of continued underfunding and programmatic 

delay in NOAA’s Joint Polar Satellite System, or JPSS, the nation faces the likely 

loss of essential weather forecasting capability in the coming years, because our current weather satellite capabilities will degrade before JPSS is launched and becomes 

operational. Such a gap would take our forecasting capabilities back decades, detrimentally hindering the ability to warn the public about severe weather events. 

This penny wise, pound foolish approach threatens to leave millions of Americans, 

communities, and first responders without the life-saving forecasting information we 

all expect and depend on to make timely decisions that ultimately save lives. This 

is a risk we cannot afford. I believe we must work now to mitigate the impacts of 

such a later gap in the most responsible and cost-effective way possible. 

I have also supported NOAA’s good governance proposal to better align the agency’s atmospheric science and services. This would continue NOAA’s mission of providing reliable and accurate scientific information and support services to a public 

looking for answers. This is why we’re here today. We must assess if current NOAA 

weather services are meeting our growing needs. Where they are not, we need to 

find ways to fill those gaps and push for innovation. And we need to have a better 

grasp of the necessities of the future. This is not an easy task, but I’m confident 

that our two panels of witnesses can help us make a big step forward. I’m grateful 

to each witness for sharing your testimony and expertise with the Committee. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DANIEL A. SOBIEN, PRESIDENT, 

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION

Thank you, Chairman Begich and Ranking Member Snowe, for inviting the National Weather Service Employees Organization to submit written testimony for the 

Subcommittee’s hearing on the need for continued innovation in weather forecasting 

64 

and prediction. I am the Lead Emergency Response Meteorologist at the Tampa Bay 

Area Forecast Office and National President of NWSEO. 

The 3,800 employees of the National Weather Service represented by our union 

are pleased that the Subcommittee considers this issue one worthy of attention. Our 

organization and its members have been encouraging the National Weather Service 

to develop innovative forecasting techniques, products and services for several years. 

I am pleased to report that through collaborative labor-management efforts, NWS 

and NWSEO have identified and are now in the early stages of implementing nine 

pilot projects to deliver innovative weather services to the Nation. We are also in 

the early stages of designing an additional seven pilot projects to implement in 

2012. In order to pay for these projects and the additional forecasters that will be 

assigned to them, the union and the NWS’s Chief Financial Officer jointly identified 

and agreed to efficiencies in current NWS operations and expenses, that will free 

up $50 million over 5 years. These cooperative efforts constitute a milestone in Federal sector labor-management relations, and demonstrate how public employee 

unions can be part of the solution to providing better services to the taxpayer despite tight fiscal constraints. Nearly two decades ago, the National Weather Service underwent a $5 billion 

modernization and restructuring. By all accounts this modernization was a huge 

success; a recent National Academy of Sciences report found the NWS modernization; ‘‘allowed more uniform radar coverage and surface observations across the 

United States. Improvements were particularly evident in the forecasting and detection of severe weather such as tornadoes and flash floods. The probability of detecting these events improved over the course of, and after, the MAR, and the lead 

times of the warnings increased.’’ But since that time, the agency has made only 

modest and incremental changes and improvements in service delivery. Last year, 

however, the NWS tested a pilot project to improve aviation forecasting services 

which it referred to as the ‘‘Golden Triangle.’’ The NWS assigned three additional 

forecasters—one per shift—at the New York, Chicago and Atlanta Forecast Offices. 

These nine additional forecasters were charged with providing air traffic controllers 

with real-time site specific aviation forecasts. Within 3 months, the assignment of 

these additional forecasters dedicated to aviation needs was responsible for reducing 

weather related air traffic delays by 50 percent when compared to periods of comparable weather in prior years. (See chart attached hereto). 

NWSEO and NWS used the success of this initial pilot as a basis for developing 

other test beds as part of the NWS’s ‘‘Weather Ready Nation’’ initiative. Management and the union jointly solicited suggestions and proposals for local offices across 

the nation; local management and labor teams drafting proposals that were sent to 

the national level where they were reviewed and refined by senior management and 

union officials. The parties then agreed to move forward with the following pilot 

projects, which will involve approximately 27 new positions at the nine offices involved: 

• A National Operations Center at NWS headquarters in Silver Spring that will 

serve as a national incident command center for multi-region or national large 

scale weather events; respond to sudden and unexpected demands for services 

that exceed NWS’s local or regional resources; and liaise with other Federal 

agency command centers and assist with public information during large scale 

events. 

• A Regional Operations Command Center at the NWS Southern Region headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas that will serve as an incident command center 

for regional large scale weather events and, among other products, prepare a 

twice daily Threat Briefing Package. 

• An ‘‘Impact-Based Decision Support Services’’ program at the Sterling, Virginia 

(Washington, DC) Forecast Office staffed by three ‘‘Emergency Response Meteorologists’’ who will assist local and state emergency management agencies to 

with response to natural and man-made emergencies that have a weather related component (i.e, terrorism, toxic chemical discharge, or severe weather). 

One of these ‘‘ER Mets’’ will be embedded with the Maryland Emergency Management Agency, one at the FEMA National Capitol Regional Coordination office and the third will staff a Decision Support Desk at the Sterling Forecast 

Office and will support the needs of the Virginia Department of Emergency 

Management. They will be dispatched to field locations during emergencies to 

assist local authorities in decisionmaking in which weather plays a factor. 

• A similar pilot program will be established at the New Orleans Forecast Office 

consisting of three Emergency Response Meteorologists who will test the provision of decision support services to local and state authorities for events impacting the coastal environment. This pilot will build on the experience which the 

65 

NWS gained in assisting Federal, state and local authorities during the Deepwater Horizon spill. These ER Mets will be prepared for dispatch to the site of 

disasters or to local emergency management operation centers. 

• An ‘‘Ecosystem Forecasting’’ pilot at the Tampa Bay Forecast Office will provide 

enhanced coastal forecasts for maritime interests (i.e., oil platforms) and new 

ecosystem forecasts for water temperature, salinity, currents and red tide. 

Hydrological runoff forecasts will be issued to mitigate the development and 

transport of harmful algal blooms. The forecasters will also serve as emergency 

response meteorologists for the Tampa area, which regularly hosts national security events such as the Super Bowl, the World Series and the 2012 Republican National Convention. 

• A ‘‘Mesocale Science to Operations’’ pilot will be established at the Charleston, 

West Virginia Forecast Office that will attempt to improve localized short-fused 

warning lead-times of convective weather and flash flooding by applying new research on mesoscale (intermediate scale weather) forecasting techniques and 

models in an operational environment. The goal will be to provide more specificity in time and space in the forecasting of warning-level weather events. 

• A pilot at the Boulder, Colorado Forecast Office will test the integration of the 

work of the NWS’s Space Weather Prediction Center in Boulder to daily aviation forecasting. 

• The MidAtlantic River Forecast Center in State College, Pennsylvania will test 

production of high resolution QPF (Quantity of Precipitation Forecasts) in a digital format for any point along rivers. 

• The ‘‘Golden Triangle’’ pilot project will be expanded into San Francisco 

(Monterrey) Forecast Office in an effort to reduce weather-related air traffic 

delays in the San Francisco area. 

Six of these pilot projects are in the early stages of staffing. Staffing for the Boulder, State College and Monterrey projects may be delayed until next year. 

The NWS and NWSEO are in preliminary discussions about seven additional pilot 

projects for 2012. Five of these pilots will be located in ‘‘tornado alley’’—Kentucky, 

Missouri, Alabama, Oklahoma and possibly North Carolina. The NWSEO and NWS 

jointly recognize that while much progress has been made over the past few decades 

in warning the public of tornado dangers, the capability of forecasters to give adequate lead time, accuracy and intensity forecasts of the strongest tornados is not 

adequate to allow the public to reach safety in many circumstances. In addition urbanization of areas prone to these extreme tornados has led to catastrophic situations such as the 2011 tornado season with over 500 fatalities reported. These pilots 

will incorporate the latest neighborhood scale modeling techniques in an attempt to 

improve lead times and accuracies to a point where residents can be evacuated from 

areas under a threat of extreme tornados. They will also test the concept of Emergency Response Meteorologists utilizing the latest communication technology to 

maximize warning effectiveness. Two other pilots under discussion will involve tsunami mitigation outreach efforts in Puerto Rico and the Pacific Northwest. 

In addition to these national-level initiatives, regional NWS and NWSEO officials 

have agreed to a number of new initiatives to improve weather services in Alaska: 

• The Alaska Aviation Weather Unit has implemented a new product called the 

Hazardous Weather Graphic that gives users information not covered in regular 

aviation forecasts such as solar activity that would cause jamming of communications; debris expected from wind or fires in long term situations; strong surface winds 3 days in advance and significant turbulence or low level winds 

shear expected in heavily trafficked areas. The AAWU will also be developing 

gridded forecasts of wind shear, turbulence and icing and other meteorological 

parameters up to 60,000 feet creating a ‘‘3-D’’ forecast. • The Alaska Region has added a Decision Support Meteorologist in the Regional 

Office who has developed a social networking site on Facebook to assist the public in getting weather information during storms. The three forecast offices in 

Alaska contribute to this site as well. The Decision Support Meteorologist has 

enhanced communication between the NWS and the Alaska Department of 

Homeland Security and Emergency Management. An example is a daily conference call which he organized between the forecast offices, the state emergency management agency and the villages affected by the early November 

storm. 

• A new forecast desk (and four additional forecasters to staff it around the clock 

on a rotational basis) at the Anchorage Forecast Office that will improve decision support services as well as watches/warnings and aviation forecasts for the 

forecast office’s service area. 

66 

• Marine satellite phones are being deployed at several Weather Service Offices 

that allow the staff to receive calls from ships in remote Alaskan waters. The 

staff will receive marine observations from previously data-sparse waters in the 

Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea, which will improved forecast accuracy for those areas. 

• The operations of the Sea Ice forecasting desk at Anchorage will be expanded 

to 7 days a week. 

• The creation of a experimental Arctic Ocean Offshore Forecast from 60 to 200 

nautical miles of the Arctic Coast of Alaska. Until 5 years ago, this area was 

iced over nearly year round. However, due to climate change, the Arctic Ice 

Pack has melted and there is now much open water in this area during the 

summer. This forecast in being developed in anticipation of further melting 

which will result in the movement of commercial ventures (oil exploration, shipping) into the area. 

Our members appreciate the support of the National Weather Service that Congress has shown by full funding of the agency for Fiscal Year 2012. We hope we 

can count on your support for our efforts at innovation. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO HON. MARY M. GLACKIN

Projected Gap in Polar-orbiting Satellite Data 

Question 1. In November, my staff met with Mary Kicza, Assistant Administrator 

for NOAA satellites. She was unable to indicate concrete steps that NOAA was taking to deal with the likely gap in satellite data, beyond the drafting of a Request 

for Proposal (RFP), to be issued by NOAA only after the loss of satellite capacity 

occurs. NOAA has repeatedly stated that full funding is necessary to minimize any 

gap, but recent reports even if the program received full funding going forward, a 

gap is still likely to occur. Shouldn’t NOAA be pursuing a dual track of securing 

funding for JPSS while simultaneously proactively exploring opportunities to mitigate the forecasted loss of data? 


1116SOB1.eps
67 

Answer. There are no viable operational alternatives in the event that Suomi NPP 

(S–NPP) fails before JPSS–1 becomes operational. Neither the Department of Defense nor the Europeans, our well-established operational partners, fly weather satellites in the afternoon orbit. However, NOAA is taking several steps to plan for gap 

mitigation. First, the Assistant Administrator of NESDIS has tasked her team to 

look at ways of maximizing the life of S–NPP starting now. This includes conditioning the batteries, minimizing heat stress, minimizing fuel use, etc. The Suomi 

NPP satellite is flying the same instruments that will fly on JPSS–1. Second, NOAA 

will take a second look to determine if there is any way to move up the launch date 

of JPSS–1. At this point, moving up the launch date of JPSS–1 may not be possible 

simply due to the fact that it takes a certain amount of time to actually build the 

satellite and put it through the various testing required before launch. 

Third, NOAA is also assessing other international missions, such as the China 

Meteorological Administration (CMA) Feng Yun 3B (FY–3B) satellite that is currently flying in the afternoon orbit with instruments similar to NASA EOS legacy 

satellites, however, the data will need to be analyzed to ensure it is of a quality 

comparable with current data streams. Currently, there are no other countries that 

are flying microwave sounders in the afternoon polar-orbit. NOAA will continue to 

assess whether other U.S. and international government or private sector satellites 

are launched that could provide the type of data that are needed for NOAA’s numerical weather prediction models. 

Fourth, NOAA will take a look at whether there are different, non-traditional 

ways of using data that we have not done before. To that end, the NOAA Administrator has directed NOAA’s Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observations and 

Prediction to develop a written, descriptive, integrated, end-to-end plan that considers the entire flow from candidate alternative sensors through data assimilation 

and on to forecast model performance. She is assembling a team that includes independent technical consultants to make an enterprise-wide examination of contingency options that could be exercised in the event of a gap in polar satellite observations. This will include the use of alternative observations (from, e.g., other satellites 

or in situ instrumentation), changes in data assimilation and/or modeling methods 

and so forth. The work being initiated by the NESDIS Assistant Administrator, 

mentioned above, will be included in this larger enterprise-wide assessment. 

In addition, NOAA’s National Weather Service is looking into ways to mitigate 

the impact to weather forecasts should a gap in polar afternoon orbital coverage 

occur. Unfortunately, many of those forecasts use Numerical Prediction Models as 

a primary input, these models rely heavily on polar data and there is no getting 

around the fact that any gap in polar coverage would impact the accuracy of model 

outputs. 

Question 2. Given that a significant gap in satellite coverage in 2016 and 2017 

is almost a certainty, what other types of data and infrastructure can NOAA utilize 

to ensure continuity in weather and climate forecasting capabilities? 

Answer. NOAA assimilates many types of observational data (e.g., satellite-derived observations, radar, aircraft observations, weather balloon profiles of the atmosphere, surface observations across the country, marine observations from buoys, 

ships, etc.) into numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. These models generate 

weather guidance, or weather forecast simulations via operational supercomputers, 

which are used by forecasters to provide accurate and reliable forecasts from hours 

to several days in advance. Despite NOAA’s numerous sources of observational data, 

data from polar-orbiting satellites are unique because they provide global coverage 

that cannot be replaced by in situ data. Loss of polar-orbiting satellite data would 

result in degradation in forecast skill beyond day one for regional prediction and day 

three and beyond for global prediction. 

NWS has assessed the impact to operations and all possible mitigations for the 

expected gap between Suomi NPP and JPSS. While we will continue to leverage our 

current data streams, there are no viable operational alternatives that will cover the 

projected data gap in the afternoon orbit that will occur due to the delayed launch 

of the first JPSS–1 satellite in the afternoon orbit. Neither Department of Defense 

nor the Europeans, our well established international partners, fly weather satellites that would provide global data in the afternoon. 

Question 3. While recognizing the budget-constrained environment, what steps is 

NOAA taking to identify and secure alternate types of technology and infrastructure 

that aren’t satellite-based? 

Answer. Weather and climate forecasts and warnings use integrated observations 

from different systems such as satellites, radars, weather balloons, automated surface observing systems, and coastal weather buoys. NOAA operates a suite of computer weather models from global models to regional scale models to high resolution 

68 

local scale models. For regional prediction and forecasting, loss of satellite data can 

be partially mitigated through surface-based remote sensing, aircraft, and in-situ 

data. 

Satellite data cannot, however, be replicated through ground observations. Any 

loss in satellite observations will decrease NOAA’s ability to protect lives and livelihoods from extreme weather events. Polar-orbiting environmental satellites provide 

global coverage and other systems provide local in situ observations. Ninety four 

percent of data assimilated into numerical weather prediction (NWP) models is from 

satellites and 84 percent is from polar-orbiting satellites. Polar-orbiting satellites 

provide data required for Global NWP models needed for weather forecasting 

Through the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), NOAA will continue to 

utilize access to worldwide data from the WMO’s 189 member states and territories 

including ground stations and radiosondes. WMO facilitates the exchange, processing and standardization of observational data between its members. NOAA will 

continue to leverage this resource. 

Prioritization of NOAA’s Climate and Weather Data Collection Activities 

Question 4. How does NOAA incorporate the needs of natural resource managers, 

policymakers, and the private sector when determining what types of weather and 

climate data it will collect? 

Answer. NOAA’s observation requirements are derived from the data needs of 

NOAA’s operational and research programs which support Nation’s operational need 

for weather forecasting and environmental monitoring. NOAA actively works with 

external partners such as the Department of Homeland Security, Department of the 

Interior, Department of Transportation to ensure that their mission needs are reflected in NOAA’s mission requirements. NOAA’s data policy of full, free, and open 

exchange of data facilitate the wide use of NOAA data by domestic and international users. NOAA continues to encourage the use of these data by these users. 

The NWS’ mission is to provide weather, water, and climate data, forecasts and 

warnings for the United States, its territories, adjacent waters, and ocean areas for 

the protection of life and property and enhancement of the national economy. NWS 

regularly collaborates with users of these end products. To the extent possible, NWS 

incorporates other user needs as data are collected and processed; NWS makes the 

data available for open and unrestricted use, unless specific non-disclosure agreements are in place when private data sources are used. 

An example of NOAA’s incorporation of external partner needs is the WeatherReady Nation initiative—a collaboration of government agencies, researchers, and 

the private sector to: 

• Improve precision of weather and water forecasts and effective communication 

of risk to local authorities; 

• Improve weather decision support services with new initiatives such as the development of mobile-ready emergency response specialist teams; 

• Provide innovative science and technological solutions such as the nationwide 

implementation of Dual Pol radar technology, Integrated Water Resources 

Science and Services, and the Joint Polar Satellite System; 

• Strengthen joint partnerships to enhance community preparedness; 

• Work with weather enterprise partners and the emergency management community to enhance safety and economic output and effectively manage environmental resources. 

Question 5. What types of weather and climate data are given highest priority, 

and why? 

Answer. No one type of weather or climate data is given highest priority. Weather 

and climate forecasts and warnings use integrated observations from different systems as varied as satellites, radars, weather balloons, automated surface observing 

systems, and coastal weather buoys. The mix of observations also depends on the 

weather event being monitored. For example, the instruments used to monitor a 

hurricane versus a tornado are quite different. Also, different observations are required depending on how far out the forecast is in time. Short term weather forecasts would be more likely to utilize a combination of radar data, geostationary satellite data, and other surface observing data whereas weather forecasts further than 

three days out would rely more heavily on polar satellite data, and climate forecasts 

depend on observations from the Tropical Ocean Array data buoys as well as a suite 

of other technologies. While 94 percent of data assimilated into numerical weather 

prediction models are from satellites and 84 percent is from polar-orbiting satellites, 

the quantity of observations does not necessarily reflect a priority of importance. 

69 

Question 6. Are there any types of data that public or private sectors routinely 

request from NOAA that are currently not being collected by the agency? 

Answer. In general, no. However, while NOAA can supply meteorological data for 

a given weather station on a given date or over time, that data may not be representative of a nearby location of interest to a third party. It is common knowledge 

that weather can be quite variable over short distances, and additional information 

and analysis may be needed to adequately describe the weather at the secondary 

location. NOAA views this as a private sector role. (see more at http:// 

www.nws.noaa.gov/im/ and http://www.noaa.gov/partnershippolicy/) 

NWS primary responsibility is to collect and process data needed to meet NWS 

mission requirements. The NWS’ mission is to provide weather, water, and climate 

data, forecasts and warnings for the United States, its territories, adjacent waters, 

and ocean areas for the protection of life and property and enhancement of the national economy. To the extent possible, NOAA works to accommodate the needs of 

our other external partners, but our primary responsibility remains to provide forecasts to the American public to protect lives and property. NWS makes the data 

available for open and unrestricted use, unless specific non-disclosure agreements 

are in place when private data sources are used. 

NOAA continues to explore opportunities to partner with private and public and 

international environmental observational networks. 

Proposed Climate Service 

Question 7. In the FY 2012 President’s budget request for NOAA, the agency proposed a reorganization of its existing climate related programs, which are currently 

housed in multiple NOAA line offices, into a single line office. NOAA says that this 

will result in a line office dedicated to climate research in the same way that the 

Weather Service line office is dedicated to weather research. Since the Climate Service is purported to be ‘‘budget neutral’’ and will not add any new programs, in what 

ways would reorganization improve NOAA’s climate science services? 

Answer. Building on efforts initiated in the previous Administration, NOAA proposed reorganizing climate resources into a new line office, the NOAA Climate Service Line Office, in the President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 budget. This proposal was 

not included in the final FY 2012 Appropriations Act that President Obama signed 

in November 2012. 

Question 8. Would new activities be undertaken within this proposed Climate 

Service in the future? If so, what types of activities would be anticipated? 

Answer. The proposal to reorganize NOAA’s climate resources into a new line office was included in the President’s FY 2012 budget request; however, it was not 

included in the FY 2012 Appropriations Act that President Obama signed in November 2012. 

Question 9. Some have raised concerns that a NOAA climate service would be 

rigid, jurisdictionally narrow, and inherently non-collaborative, given it being 

housed in one agency. How is NOAA addressing these concerns to ensure its proposed climate service could effectively address the diverse needs of multiple agencies, jurisdictions, and stakeholders? 

Answer. The proposal to reorganize NOAA’s climate resources into a new line office was included in the President’s FY 2012 budget request; however, it was not 

included in the FY 2012 Appropriations Act that President Obama signed in November 2012. As a sound steward of American taxpayer dollars, NOAA will continue to 

work as efficiently and effectively as possible under our current organizational 

structure and within the resources we are provided to meet the growing public demand for information—including access to NOAA’s information assets, and enabling 

improved information sharing and more productive partnerships with a broader enterprise that includes: Federal agencies, local governments, private industry, other 

users, and stakeholders. 

Leveraging Private Sector Capabilities 

Question 10. Several witnesses today spoke about the benefits that NOAA and the 

private sector share when leveraging each other’s weather data. For example, Bob 

Marshall highlighted the value of a national comprehensive weather observing system—an integrated network or meteorological sensors that complements and enhances NOAA’s own array of sensors—so as to provide more accurate and faster 

warning capabilities throughout the country. Similarly, the National Research 

Council professed the same benefits of a National Mesonet in their report ‘‘From the 

Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of Networks.’’ 

However, NOAA has never requested funding for a National Mesonet. For the 

past few years, the Senate has understood the potential of such a partnership by 

including funding the National Mesonet in NOAA’s annual appropriation bills. Out 

70 

of a roughly $1 billion budget for the National Weather Service, the National 

Mesonet has only accounted for $8 million to $19 million. It appears that at the 

most, that’s 2 percent of NOAA’s budget for what has amounted to a relatively significant increase in weather data capacity for NOAA. Why has NOAA not requested 

funding for the National Mesonet? 

Answer. The President’s Budget reflects the Administration’s highest priorities for 

maintaining NOAA’s weather observing systems and assets. NOAA recognizes the 

value of leveraging data from local observing networks or ‘‘mesonets’’ which provide 

denser, local scale detail of the weather and environment. This information can be 

effectively used to improve short and local forecasts in areas with this local data. 

NWS will use FY 2012 funding to convene a peer-reviewed study to develop a plan 

for NOAA’s role in a National Mesonet, with recommendations for implementation 

as appropriate. 

Question 11. Please explain whether NOAA has—or has not—achieved value in 

this public private partnership. 

Answer. NOAA recognizes the value of leveraging data from local observing networks or ‘‘mesonets’’ which provide denser, local scale detail of the weather and environment. This information can be effectively used to improve short and local forecasts in areas with this local data. Mesonet system data are used in NWS operations as supplemental data sources. Mesonets are broadly consistent with the spirit 

and recommendations of From the Ground Up, in that they provide the types of observations that augment NWS’s ability to detect, forecast, and warn for localized, 

high-impact weather events. NOAA will continue its current approach to developing 

a National Mesonet by leveraging existing networks (operated by state and local 

governments, the private sector, and other Federal agencies), when and where available. 

A key to successfully leveraging existing data is to gather and provide detailed 

and enhanced metadata (‘‘data about the data’’). 

Question 12. The Commerce Committee remains strongly committed to the success and swiftest possible implementation of the Joint Polar Satellite System. However, it is clear to me that we must simultaneously continue to invest in additional, 

cost-effective innovations to ensure a weather-ready nation. As we face the gap in 

polar-orbiting weather satellite coverage, how will NOAA better integrate data and 

information from public private weather partnerships, such as the National 

Mesonet, to augment—or even improve—forecasts and warnings? Specifically, will 

NOAA incorporate data from the lightening mapper that Mr. Marshall spoke about 

in his testimony into NOAA’s models? If not, why not? 

Answer. NOAA applauds the Committee’s recognition of the importance of investing in cost-effective innovations to ensure a Weather-Ready-Nation. While there are 

no viable operational alternatives that will cover the projected data gap that will 

occur due to the delayed launch of the first JPSS–1 satellite in the afternoon orbit, 

NOAA will continue to work with the private sector to obtain mesoscale observations whenever possible and cost-effective. For example, NOAA is working with the 

renewable energy sector to investigate the use of local scale data in NWS numerical 

weather prediction models to provide more accurate and timely weather forecasts 

that can be used by both NWS forecasters and private sector forecasters. 

Mr. Marshall references the GOES–R Lightning Mapper (GLM), which will provide total lightning data (cloud-to-ground and in-cloud flashes) for the entire Western Hemisphere, complementing and expanding beyond existing ground-based systems. NWS currently obtains mainly cloud-to-ground lightning data from terrestrial 

networks. NOAA is assessing other research-based terrestrial systems which provide total lightning data. Total lightning data offers more information about storm 

severity and structure than cloud to ground lightning data and continuous monitoring of total lightning flash rate from the GLM is expected to improve tornado and 

severe storm warning lead time and improve hurricane track and intensity forecasts. Total lightning data from this research is used to simulate the data that will 

come from the GLM. Researchers are in turn using this simulated data in different 

local scale numerical weather prediction models to assess potential forecast improvement particularly in data-sparse regions where radar and other observations are not 

available. 

In order to continue to improve weather forecast skill, NOAA is and will continue 

to invest in the science of better understanding environmental processes, improved 

modeling and data assimilation, and the supporting computing infrastructure. 

71 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

HON. MARY M. GLACKIN

Spectrum 

Question 1. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration 

(NTIA) evaluated four spectral bands currently in government use for possible ‘Fast 

Track’ reallocation for wireless broadband service within the next five years. One 

spectral band they considered was the 1675–1710 MHz band used for downlinks 

from geostationary and polar-orbiting weather satellites that are administered by 

NOAA. This weather data is directly accessed by any number of Federal, state, and 

tribal government first-responder agencies in support of their missions. Additionally, 

foreign polar satellites also transmit signals to the United States in this band under 

international agreements. 

NTIA recommends that ‘‘15 megahertz (MHz) of the 1675–1710 MHz (specifically 

1695–1710 MHz) spectrum could be made available for wireless broadband use within five years, contingent upon timely allocation of funds to redesign the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R satellite and other costs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other Federal agencies 

will incur in connection with sharing this spectrum.’’ 

Please provide the list of actions NOAA needs to take over the next five years 

in order for the agency to share the 1695–1710 MHz band with the wireless 

broadband service? How much will these actions cost? How will they be paid for? 

How far along is NOAA in its planning activities? In particular, what is the potential impact on design, development, and deployment of JPSS? 

Answer. NOAA currently operates a number of polar-orbiting and geostationary 

operational environmental satellites in the 1675–1710 MHz range. NOAA and its 

European mission partner, the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT), operate polar satellites using identical direct 

broadcast imagery systems in the 1695–1710 MHz band. Assets that are currently 

in orbit cannot be retrofitted to change the transmission frequency. NOAA expects 

replacement satellites to be launched by 2017 for the Joint Polar satellite System 

and 2015 for the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R Series. 

In November 2010, the Department of Commerce, through its National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and working with other 

impacted Federal agencies, including NOAA, concluded a months-long analysis in 

response to the President’s June 2010 Broadband Initiative. In the report, Assessment of the Near-Term Viability of Accommodating Wireless Broadband Systems in 

the 1675–1710 MHz, 1755–1780 MHz, 3500–3650 MHz, and 4200–4220 MHz, 4380– 

4400 MHz Bands (Fast-Track Report), the Department recommended—and has formally proposed to the Federal Communications Commission—that a 15-megahertz 

portion of the band, 1695–1710 MHz, be made available for commercial use within 

five years, in a manner that protects critical government sites via exclusion zones. 

The exclusion zones would protect key earth station sites, including NOAA’s operational facilities, to minimize the likelihood of interference. Devices or reception 

sites that operate outside of these exclusions could face interference. 

NOAA is also participating in an NTIA-led engagement process with industry to 

develop options for repurposing this spectrum that maximizes its commercial use, 

while protecting essential NOAA capabilities. This may include more detailed interference modeling, which could allow for smaller exclusion zones, moving downlinks 

to less populated areas or other options. 

NOAA expects additional costs from redesigning observational systems and technical studies related to potential interference issues. NOAA is still evaluating the 

potential cost impacts and costs would be incorporated into its transition plan as 

required by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012. Examples 

of modifications that would entail additional costs include: 

GOES–R: NOAA’s next generation geostationary satellite program (GOES–R), 

which is currently under development for launch mid-decade, redesigned its direct broadcast communications subsystem to move below 1695 MHz to comply 

with the spectrum sharing regime identified in the Fast-Track Report. Changes 

to current contracts were executed and costs paid using GOES–R Program contingency funds. 

Radiosondes: As a result of the GOES–R redesign, NOAA’s radiosondes (balloon-borne instruments for atmospheric measurements) require redesign to reduce spectrum usage in time to support the GOES–R redesign. Redesign of 

NOAA systems attributable to making the frequency available for auction is expected to be paid for by auction proceeds. 

72 

Additionally, NOAA is eligible for funding for certain pre-auction planning costs, 

consistent with the terms articulated in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act. Funding from the Spectrum Relocation Fund, where proceeds from auctions of spectrum previously used by Federal agencies is held, is contingent upon 

approval by a technical panel, comprised of representatives of NTIA, OMB and the 

Federal Communications Commission, of a NOAA transition plan. NTIA is creating 

the procedures for the panel now and NOAA is working with NTIA to develop its 

transition plan. 

Question 2. My understanding is that NOAA intends to establish wireless radio 

‘exclusion zones’ surrounding satellite downlink sites to help minimize the impact 

to meteorological services from harmful interference. How many exclusion zones are 

being proposed? What are the sizes of the exclusion zones? How practical is this approach? Do you believe use of exclusion zones will diminish the relative value of the 

spectrum? 

Answer. In the report, Assessment of the Near-Term Viability of Accommodating 

Wireless Broadband Systems in the 1675–1710 MHz, 1755–1780 MHz, 3500–3650 

MHz, and 4200–4220 MHz, 4380–4400 MHz Bands (Fast-Track Report), the Department recommended—and has formally proposed to the Federal Communications 

Commission—that a 15-megahertz portion of the band, 1695–1710 MHz, be made 

available for commercial use within five years, in a manner that protects critical 

government sites via exclusion zones. The exclusion zones would protect key earth 

station sites, including NOAA’s operational facilities, to minimize the likelihood of 

interference. 

The report proposed exclusion zones around 18 Federal ground stations, of which 

five are critical to NOAA meteorological satellite operations. The other 13 sites are 

non-NOAA U.S. Government user locations. The exclusion zones proposed for protection of these five ground stations range in size from 90 km to 121 km. Proposed 

zone size varies from site to site due to differences in receiver characteristics, topography and other factors. 

NOAA is not well-positioned to assess the relative value of the spectrum. However, NOAA is participating in an NTIA-led engagement process where Federal 

agencies and industry are working together to develop options for repurposing this 

spectrum that maximizes its commercial use, while protecting essential NOAA capabilities. This may include more detailed interference modeling, which could allow for 

smaller exclusion zones, moving downlinks to less populated areas or other options. 

Also, the model used to determine the exclusion zone sizes proposed in the Commerce report did not fully consider anomalous propagation because it was not clear 

whether this effect is applicable when considering the aggregate interference from 

a deployment of geographically dispersed commercial handset as analyzed in the 

Fast Track Report. Through the NTIA process, NOAA will have a better understanding of the technical and deployment parameters of the commercial systems and 

the potential risks to in-band and adjacent band earth station receivers. Based on 

the additional information for the commercial systems further modeling may be necessary before an auction or license conditions to clarify NOAA’s protections. 

Question 3. Are you concerned that there may be out of band emissions from wireless devices operating in the 1695–1710 MHz band that may impact the operations 

of radiosondes (weather balloons) and sensors (many of which are unlicensed) in the 

1675–1695 MHz band? If so, what steps can NOAA take to help minimize the impact of harmful interference? 

Answer. Yes, out-of-band emissions are always a concern for operational impacts. 

NOAA radiosondes operate on National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) authorized (licensed) frequencies. Out-of-band interference 

analyses will be performed as part of the radiosonde system redesign process. Any 

out-of-band interference concerns will be brought to the attention of the NTIA Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) so that the concerns can be addressed during the NTIA/FCC process for reallocation of the 1695 to 1710 MHz 

band. NOAA will also improve the receiver out-of-band rejection performance as 

part of the radiosonde system redesign effort, when funding for repurposing the existing Federal allocation becomes available. 

JPSS 

Question 4. How long can NOAA wait to launch JPSS–1 before our weather modeling systems begin to suffer? 

Answer. NOAA currently estimates that JPSS–1 will launch no later than the second quarter of FY 2017. As such, NOAA cannot afford to have any further slips to 

the JPSS–1 launch date without further increasing the already high risk of a loss 

of data for numerical weather prediction (NWP) models and impact to the accuracy 

of National Weather Service forecasts and warnings. 

73 

The Suomi NPP satellite is currently expected to provide suitable data for weather forecasting through mid-2016. Assuming Suomi NPP provides data as planned, 

there is a high probability of a gap in data from the afternoon orbit from the end 

of the Suomi NPP mission until JPSS–1 has completed its in-orbit calibration and 

validation phase. NOAA is utilizing its resources to ensure that the launch date for 

JPSS–1 does not slip any further. In the absence of data from the afternoon orbit 

from an operational polar-orbiting satellite such as either NOAA’s POES or Suomi 

NPP satellites, there will be an immediate degradation to the National Weather 

Service’s numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. 

Question 5. Will the geostationary satellite system (GOES–R) maintain weather 

prediction at or near current levels during the gap in JPSS coverage? If not, how 

will coverage now be different during the gap including GOES–R in your analysis? 

Answer. The instruments on the current Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) cannot be used as a substitute for future Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) mission data needs and requirements. NOAA GOES and Polarorbiting Operational Environmental Satellite (POES)—JPSS is a POES satellite— 

constellations were developed to provide complementary space-based data to meet 

NOAA’s weather, ocean, space weather and climate mission. 

GOES does not provide the global coverage that POES provides. GOES satellites 

cover the Western Hemisphere that includes eastern Pacific to the western Atlantic 

and from southern Alaska to South America. The imagers and sounders on GOES 

satellites are optimized to provide the coverage that is required for a geosynchronous orbit (i.e., providing environmental data over fixed geographic regions). Data 

from GOES satellites, in conjunction with Doppler radar, are used for ‘‘nowcasting’’ 

severe weather events as they unfold; POES data cannot provide the same constant 

observations that GOES provides. 

Polar-orbiting satellites (current POES and the future JPSS) circle the Earth longitudinally from the North Pole to the South Pole and provide environmental data 

at periodic intervals over the entire globe. These global measurements are vital for 

the accuracy and reliability of the National Weather Service’s computer weather 

models that forecast the weather at 3 days and beyond. Additionally, polar-orbiting 

satellites provide satellite imagery over data -sparse areas like parts of Alaska 

above 60 degrees latitude. Access to these data has proven critical to protecting the 

people of Alaska and the U.S. Pacific Insular Areas because GOES satellites are unable to image accurately in those areas. 

In conclusion, NOAA’s polar orbiting and geostationary satellite systems provide 

mission critical, complementary data that is minimally redundant. NWS needs both 

the global coverage and higher resolution of polar orbiting satellites, and the ‘‘constant look’’ of the geostationary satellites to provide the full spectrum of short-term 

weather warnings to long-term forecasts. 

Question 6. In preparation for the gap in weather satellite coverage, is NOAA 

working with military, other governments and/or corporations, which have weather 

satellite capability to meet the United States weather prediction needs? 

Answer. There are no viable operational alternatives which will cover the projected data gap in the afternoon orbit that will occur due to the delayed launch of 

the first JPSS–1 satellite and the end of life of Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (Suomi NPP) in the afternoon orbit. Neither Department of Defense nor the 

Europeans, our well-established operational partners, fly weather satellites in the 

afternoon orbit. 

NOAA is also assessing other international missions, such as the China Meteorological Administration (CMA) Feng Yun 3B (FY–3B) satellite that is currently flying 

in the afternoon orbit with instruments similar to NASA EOS satellites. 

NOAA will continue to assess whether other U.S. and international government 

or private sector satellites are launched that could provide the type of data that are 

needed for NOAA’s numerical weather prediction models. 

In addition, NOAA’s National Weather Service is looking into ways to mitigate 

the impact to weather forecasts should a gap in polar afternoon orbital coverage 

occur. Unfortunately, many of those forecasts use Numerical Prediction Models as 

a primary input, these models rely heavily on polar data and there is no getting 

around the fact that any gap in polar coverage would impact the accuracy of model 

outputs. 

Question 7. We learned from NOAA that there has been internal reallocation of 

funding to meet the immediate funding needs of the JPSS program. How much 

funding was reallocated to JPSS? 

Answer. The FY 2011 Consolidated Appropriation bill amount continued the FY 

2010 funding level of $382.2 million for the JPSS Program. The Administration determined, and the Congress approved, an additional $89.7 million for the JPSS ProVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
74 

gram in the FY 2011 Spend Plan for a total of $471.9 million. The total of $471.9 

million represents the amount NOAA established for the program in FY 2011. 

In FY 2012, the Congress appropriated $924 million of the President’s Budget Request of $1.070 billion for the JPSS Program. In FY 2013, NOAA requests $916.4 

million for the JPSS Program. 

Question 8. Which program or line offices had funding redirected to meet the 

needs of the satellite program? How much funding did each of these program or line 

offices loose? 

Answer. The Administration’s FY 2011 spend plan for JPSS is $471.9 million from 

funds appropriated to the Department of Commerce by PL 112–10. Given the importance of JPSS in maintaining the Nation’s weather prediction capabilities, NOAA 

received Congressional approval to allocate that amount to JPSS for FY 2011 to 

support critical work on the spacecraft, instruments, and mission operations and 

sustainment activities. A portion, $39.8 million, of the $89.7 million increase in FY 

2011 for the JPSS program was provided though a transfer from other bureaus 

within the Department of Commerce. 

Question 9. Did any of these programs impact critical data required for fisheries 

management: observer coverage, stock assessment data, or ship time? 

Answer. The FY 2011 Spend Plan represents a comprehensive strategy that aims 

to address multiple and interrelated missions of the agency. We believe that all of 

these missions have considerable value to the Nation. Given the importance of JPSS 

in maintaining the Nation’s weather prediction capabilities and with Congressional 

approval, NOAA chose to allocate $471.9 million to the JPSS program for FY 2011 

to support critical work on the spacecraft, instruments, and mission operations and 

sustainment activities. 

Core fisheries research and management activities funded by NMFS are supported by the Fisheries Research and Management sub-activity. Between FY 2010 

and FY 2011 funding for this sub-activity increased by $5.6M ($432.9M and 

$438.5M respectively). This funding supports NMFS Regional Science Centers which 

provide the scientific knowledge base for the management and rulemaking process 

supported by NMFS Regional Offices and Regional Fishery Management Council 

and Interstate Marine Fisheries Commissions, which are also supported with this 

funding. Funding is also included specifically for stock assessments and survey and 

monitoring projects which provide data on abundance, distribution, and biological 

characteristics of fish stocks, the scientific basis for setting annual catch limits and 

other fishery management measures. 

The NOAA fleet provides the base data collection platforms to support fisheries 

research and management. The FY 2011 spend plan funded the NOAA fleet to allow 

for maximum utilization in FY 2011 without the need for Program Funded Days at 

Sea. FY 2011 actual base funded Days at Sea were 2,609. This is an increase from 

FY 2010 base funded Days at Sea of 2,395. 

Dual Polarization Doppler Radar Installation and Early Lessons 

Question 10. Over the last two years, NOAA was appropriated $9 million to acquire and install a coastal Doppler radar in Washington state. 

Please quantitatively describe how the new dual polarization Doppler radar has 

improved weather prediction and forecasting in Washington state. 

Answer. The NEXRAD program is a tri-agency effort between NOAA/Department 

of Commerce (DOC), The Department of Defence (DOD), and the Federal Aviation 

Administration in the Department of Transportation. The new Dopplar radar installed in Western Washington State is an example of excellent synergy between 

NOAA and DOD. Key NEXRAD assets for this project were transferred to NOAA/ 

NWS from the DOD Keesler, MS, Air Force Base maintenance and training facility, 

which no longer had the requirement for the equipment. 

This is the first winter in which dual-polarization radar (dual-pol) data are available. NWS will continue to analyze the data and quantify the radar’s contribution 

to improved weather prediction. However, qualitative benefits are already known. 

For example, the coastal radar has been used to issue and refine high wind warnings along the coastal zone. In one case, the radar indicated stronger winds than 

expected from the forecast models and provided the knowledge necessary for the 

forecaster to put up the warning before the winds hit. The dual-pol capability has 

allowed the NWS to detect the transition from rain to snow near the surface and 

accurately detect the elevated warm layer needed to form freezing rain or sleet. 

During the 19 January ice storm, NWS forecasters were able to better detect the 

developing event (leading to Emergency Alert System activation) and were able to 

monitor the freezing rain intensity and location with frequent updates to the emergency management community. 

75 

The coastal radar has improved our forecast and warning capability for areas that 

previously did not have radar coverage. The new radar also provides NWS forecasters with estimated location/intensity/amounts of precipitation in areas of Southwest and Coastal Washington that previously were terrain blocked to other radars. 

We believe the improved understanding of rainfall amounts and snow level has already provided information for more accurate flood forecasting than would have 

been provided if the new radar was not in place. 

Question 11. Some local weather programs, such as Seattle’s Storm Watch, are not 

yet incorporating the new dual polarization Doppler radar data. Is NOAA working 

with small local weather forecasters to ensure effective and timely use of dual polarization data? 

Answer. NOAA provides the operational dual-pol and legacy radar data in realtime through multiple data access points and providers. Our partners are encouraged to use these data in application development and in providing commercial services. Specifically regarding the new radar data in Washington State, the data are 

going directly to the University of Washington and they are processing and posting 

them to a live web page for others to use. They are also currently assessing the 

value of adding these new data to their Rain and Snow Watch programs. NOAA 

stands ready to assist them in this process. To help private sector/media meteorologists and non-meteorologists understand how to use dual-pol, NOAA developed an 

on-line dual-pol training module series. The local WFO is also working with local 

media to provide ‘‘lessons-learned’’ training following this first winter season. 

Question 12. How is the new Doppler radar funding pushing national weather prediction and modeling forward? In other words, how are algorithms developed for the 

Washington state dual-pol Doppler radar being utilized nationally? 

Answer. Precipitation algorithms developed for the Washington dual-pol radars 

will be employed by all the radars in the west and mountainous region. The precipitation algorithms are specific to western radars and mountainous terrain, and useful for orographic (mountain) precipitation situations. Algorithms for rain/snow delineations are useful nationwide. Other algorithms are more useful in the plains 

states and used for tornado detection. 

Question 13. In addition to acquiring the new Doppler, Washington state is now 

the first state to have complete dual polarization Doppler radar coverage. How is 

NOAA handling this new influx of data? Has NOAA acquired the super computers 

required to adequately employ this new, high quality data into weather prediction 

models? 

Answer. The additional data from the dual polarization capability is incorporated 

into the national radar network and used by local NWS forecast offices and NWS 

National Centers for Environmental Prediction. The existing NWS Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS) has the capacity to handle this additional 

data, and the data is used by the forecasters and incorporated into their forecasts 

and warnings. No additional supercomputing resources are necessary for this data. 

Since radar commissioning, NOAA has been collecting, distributing, and archiving 

data from the new Washington radar similar to other network radars and making 

the data available to the public and all users. NOAA continues to develop the capability and capacity to include data from the Doppler radar network into its computer 

models. The data are most useful in NOAA’s short-range models and are being incorporated at this time. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

HON. MARY M. GLACKIN

Improvements to Timely and Relevant Forecasting and Prediction 

Question 1. One of the biggest impacts NOAA has on my state is making sure 

that communities have up to the date and accurate weather information. Floods are 

an annual issue for communities across Minnesota, and last year we led the Nation 

with 145 confirmed tornadoes. That’s more than Kansas and Nebraska combined. 

We are not supposed to be number one in this category. Will the work that NOAA 

is doing help us to not only better predict and prepare for severe weather, but also 

help understand and develop new weather trends that may be developing? 

Answer. Yes. NOAA invests in the prediction and understanding of the environment. NOAA’s National Weather Service strives to continuously improve operational 

weather, water and seasonal climate watches, warnings and forecasts by investing 

in advanced technologies including models, supercomputers, observations and 

leveraging other NOAA investments and partner’s investments. NOAA’s Office of 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Research invests in research and development of the next 

76 

generation science and technology for weather and climate prediction including understanding new developing weather trends. NOAA also leverages and relies on a 

national and international investment in weather and climate science including academia, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations. These investments enable the Nation to better prepare for and respond to severe environmental 

events. 

Question 2. Is the science for flood forecasting continuing to improve, or have we 

reached a plateau for the accuracy of our flood forecasts? 

Answer. Advancements in hydrological science and service delivery enable continuing improvement in flood forecasting lead times and accuracy. NOAA’s Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service (AHPS) provides the Nation with improved 

forecast and decision support tools including scenario based uncertainty information 

at more than 3000 specific locations along the Nation’s rivers and water ways. 

NOAA’s Community Hydrologic Prediction System (CHPS), a new and advanced 

open software architecture hydrological modeling system will become operational in 

FY 2012. These technologies are among the suite of tools that will enable NOAA 

to continue to improve flood and flash flood forecast skill. In addition, ongoing nationwide deployment of dual polarization of the NEXRAD (Next-Generation Radar) 

network in FY 2012 and 2013 will enable improved estimates of precipitation type 

and amount, leading to better flash-flood forecasts and warnings. 

In order to explore further opportunities for improving water and flood forecasting, NOAA is working to leverage interagency investments. In 2009, NOAA, the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

launched a new partnership called the Integrated Water Resources Science and 

Services (IWRSS). In May 2011, this partnership was formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the three agencies. Specifically, NOAA seeks 

to accelerate flood forecasting skill and create flood maps over a larger geographic 

region by leveraging USACE’s Core Water Information Management System 

(CWMS) flooding and inundation modeling capability and USGS’ WaterSMART National Water Information System. 

On September 22, 2011, NOAA announced the award of a contract to build a new 

National Water Center (NWC) in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, which will be ready for initial occupancy in mid-2013. The NWC will create a first-of-its-kind national center 

for water forecast operations, research and interagency coordination. The NWC will 

be staffed by multiple Federal partner water agencies to ensure strong coordination 

and collaboration. The NWC will be the nerve center for coordinated water resources 

forecasts and decision support from floods to droughts and minutes to years. 

Interagency Coordination 

Question 3. In Minnesota, whether it’s flooding or tornadoes, we also work closely 

with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). How does NOAA affect 

disaster response efforts by Federal agencies such as FEMA? 

Answer. NOAA/NWS works with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 

including FEMA, to prepare for, and respond to disasters. NWS provides weather 

information to emergency response decision makers at multiple organizational levels 

as critical decisions are made in anticipation of and in response to weather or water 

events. NWS has a liaison position embedded at FEMA Headquarters as well as at 

the DHS National Operations Center to coordinate weather from a national perspective and provide decision support services. NWS also provides on-site support to 

FEMA Regional Headquarters Offices when damaging weather is expected. NWS 

provides specific webinars to impacted state and local emergency management offices, if resources cannot be provided for on-site support in the field. NWS support 

for FEMA and state and local emergency management continues after the event to 

ensure response efforts have the weather information available when they make 

their decisions. 

Question 4. Are there ways we can improve coordination, so that we can identify 

possible extreme weather events quicker, and respond to them in a timelier manner? 

Answer. NWS will continue to improve its forecast and warnings, including possible extreme events. For FY 2012, NWS is beginning six pilot projects as part of 

NOAA’s Weather-Ready Nation Initiative designed to improve coordination for the 

emergency management community and to improve effective response by the public 

and business community as necessary. These pilot projects will help set the direction for NWS services of the future to better meet its protect life and property mission. 

77 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE TO

HON. MARY M. GLACKIN

Question 1. In a particularly troubling section of the Inspector General’s report, 

the report describes the efforts of both the National Weather Service’s National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) as well as the National Environmental 

Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS) (pronounced NEZ-diss) to seek solutions to the anticipated data gap in the afternoon polar satellite orbit. 

While it is positive that efforts are being made to mitigate the risk of a data gap, 

the report also noted that there was ‘‘little evidence that these efforts are being 

tracked or coordinated across NOAA’s line offices.’’ NOAA has agreed with the recommendation to increase coordination across line offices and take a ‘‘NOAA-wide’’ 

view. To what do you attribute this communication breakdown between line offices? 

What specific steps are being taken to remedy it? 

Answer. We do not believe there has been a ‘‘communication breakdown between 

line offices,’’ nor did the report state that there was a breakdown. Instead, NCEP, 

NWS, and NESDIS had been focusing on their own priorities, reflecting the high 

visibility of internal efforts to clarify and quantify the impact of the potential data 

gap within each NOAA Line Office. The Office of NOAA’s Deputy Under Secretary 

for Operations continually works across NOAA Line Offices to discuss and establish 

plans to address possible gaps in polar coverage to minimize the degradation of 

weather and climate forecasting. 

The decision to end the NPOESS Program in 2010 and initiate the JPSS Program 

has resulted in the need to modify the means by which coordination occurred. 

With the JPSS Program NOAA is engaging in a wide-ranging dialogue about the 

importance of data from NOAA’s satellites to meet NOAA’s missions and goals. This 

dialogue has received high visibility since many of the measurements are used by 

NOAA programs in conjunction with external partners. There has been, and continues to be, constant programmatic and scientific coordination among the NOAA 

Line and Program Offices. Examples of these coordination activities include: 

• NOAA Program Management Council (PMC): The PMC provides the forum for 

regular review and assessment of selected NOAA programs and projects. All 

NOAA Line-Offices are represented. 

• Environmental Satellite Users Group (ESUG): The ESUG is a recently reorganized user collaborative forum comprised of operational and research users of 

environmental satellite data. Participants are from the NOAA Line and Program Offices, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the 

U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy, and the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT). 

• NOAA Observing System Council (NOSC)/Low earth-Orbiting Requirements 

Working Group (LORWG): The NOSC is a forum for coordinating earth observing and environmental data management activities across NOAA. The LORWG 

manages the key requirements documents for the NOSC, which includes the 

JPSS Program’s Level 1 Requirements Document. 

• Joint Center for Satellite Data Assimilation (JCSDA): JCSDA is a forum dedicated to developing and improving the ability to exploit satellite data more effectively in the United States. Representatives include senior leaders from 

NOAA, NASA, the U.S. Air Force, and the U.S. Navy. 

• NOAA/NESDIS Satellite Products and Services Review Board (SPSRB): SPSRB 

is responsible for the oversight and guidance necessary to effectively manage 

the satellite product life cycle process. This process ensures satellite products 

are provided to all NOAA Line Offices, a wide range of Federal government 

agencies, international users, state and local governments, and the general public. 

To ensure Line Office coordination continues to provide a NOAA-wide/enterprise 

mitigation effort on the potential data gap, NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, 

NOAA’s Deputy Administrator Kathryn Sullivan, and myself as the Deputy Under 

Secretary for Operations, have initiated dialogue between NOAA Line and Program 

Offices through multiple meetings including the PMC, the NOSC, and one-on-one 

meetings with senior managers. 

Recently, the Assistant Administrator for Satellites and Information Services initiated directed requests for input from fellow Assistant Administrators and Program 

Office Directors seeking input on their space-based data requirements from all the 

systems in NOAA’s satellite portfolio. 

Question 2. One of the potential risks that could cause a gap in polar satellite 

data continuity would come from the NPOESS (EN-pose) Preparatory Project (NPP) 

78 

satellite, which was just launched on October 28, or its sensors, failed prior to the 

launch of the JPSS–1 satellite, now estimated to occur five years from now in early 

2017. A June report by the NASA Inspector General reported that the NPP sensors 

may only last three years because of problems in the development and testing of 

these sensors that compromised their integrity. These sensors were supposed to last 

seven years because the satellite was expected to operate for five years. Does NOAA 

agree with the Inspector General’s assessment that there were workmanship issues 

with the NPP satellite’s sensors? 

Answer. NPP was initially designed as a research and risk reduction spacecraft 

and was tested to NASA standards consistent with a five year mission life. NPP was 

pressed into operational service due to slips to the NPOESS program. 

The three year life expectancy identified in the NASA Inspector General report 

is consistent with the full mission success criteria in the NPP Level-1 Requirements. 

NASA chose three years as the NPP mission success criteria for NPP due to concerns about residual risk remaining in the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer 

Suite (VIIRS), Cross-track Infrared Sounder (CrIS), and Ozone Mapper Profiler 

Suite (OMPS) instruments and that the development and testing of the NPOESS 

Integrated Program Office (IPO)-developed NPP sensors were not subjected to 

NASA’s standards or oversight. The evaluation for mission success also includes engineering judgment based on factors such as first-of-its-kind sensors and first space 

use of 1394 communications bus, which added to NASA’s concerns about the life expectancy of those sensors.. Recall that these sensors (VIIRS, CrIS, and OMPS) were 

developed under the oversight and management of the now-closed NPOESS IPO 

using Department of Defense acquisition methodologies and delivered to NASA’s 

spacecraft contract for integration onto the NPP satellite. 

While there were well documented development, testing and workmanship issues 

with some of the sensors, each issue was eventually addressed either through design 

changes, or rework and testing methods that were agreed to by the contractors and 

the government, and were based on proven practices and processes. 

NOAA plans to use the NPP satellite operationally and requires the satellite to 

provide usable data for at least five years. Currently these sensors are being calibrated and initial data sets are being validated. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO

HON. MARY M. GLACKIN

Question 1. The Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), and the predecessor the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), has 

faced concerns regarding cost overruns and timeline slippage. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has reported that NOAA has not finalized their plans or 

fully implemented the recommendations from previous GAO reports. What is NOAA 

currently doing to reduce costs for the JPSS project to meet the $9.4 billion budget 

established by Congress? 

Answer. The appropriations bill adopts by reference all House and Senate report 

language regarding JPSS with the exception of the Senate report language regarding the lifecycle cost cap of $9.4 billion. Instead, the conferees direct NOAA to provide outyear funding estimates for this program prior to the submission of the Fiscal 

Year 2013 budget request. We have made great strides within the limits of the 

budget shortfalls to successfully launch NPP, to have its ground system become 

operational, and to continue to move forward on the development of the instruments 

and bus for JPSS–1. Moving forward, we recognize the importance of efficiently allocating scarce resources and are working with NASA to determine the best available 

options for maintaining a Life-Cycle Cost through FY 2028 of $12.9 billion or less 

for the JPSS program. 

NOAA has recently submitted a response to GAO recommending closure of its 

previous recommendations regarding the transition of the NPOESS program. 

Question 2. How will the potential gap in weather data from satellites impact the 

ability of NOAA to provide accurate hurricane warnings which coastal communities 

rely on to keep their residents safe? 

Answer. Hurricane warnings are typically issued when a storm is forecast to 

make landfall within 36 hours. By this time, operational forecasters rely on model 

forecasts that incorporate data from hurricane reconnaissance aircraft, both the Air 

Force Reserve ‘‘hurricane hunters’’ and the NOAA P3 fleet and Gulf Stream IV aircraft. These data are critical to NOAA’s immediate hurricane warning mission. The 

polar orbiting satellites provide data most essential to longer range forecasts of the 

hurricane track and intensity, particularly when storms are over the central or eastern Atlantic Ocean. Loss or degradation of these satellite observations will make 

79 

NOAA forecasts less certain at the 3–5 day and beyond range, and hamper evacuation planning efforts that require significant lead time on the order of days, such 

as is needed for Key West, Florida, or the U.S. Navy facility in Norfolk, VA. 

Question 3. Are NOAA weather data used to study storms retroactively (storms 

in the past)? 

Answer. Yes. NOAA scientists conduct post analysis on storms to understand how 

the atmosphere and waterways responded to the storms and incorporate these lessons learned into operations to provide improved forecasts and warnings of future 

events. Universities and the private weather enterprise also use NOAA data to conduct their own research into storms. 

Question 3a. What can NOAA gain from looking at storms in hind-cast? 

Answer. NOAA scientists learn how the atmosphere and oceans behaved under 

those particular circumstances and incorporate these lessons learned into operations 

to improve forecasts and warnings via model improvements. Should such atmospheric conditions arise in the future, operational forecasters can use their knowledge 

of what happened during these past storms and incorporate their newly found 

knowledge into forecast models that aid them in issuing more reliable warnings. 

Much of the historical improvement in storm track, storm intensity, and lead time, 

including hurricane forecasts, has come from careful analysis of historical storms, 

including efforts to improve models by forecasting previous storms better. 

Question 4. Can you summarize our Nation’s current public and private efforts in 

place today to collect and study weather related data? 

Answer. The Nation’s efforts to collect and study weather data take many forms. 

NOAA is the source of foundational data for a diverse set of services provided by 

the media and by others in America’s weather industry. These services contribute 

to public safety and to economic efficiency. NOAA also receives a wide variety of 

data from others, e.g., satellite data from EUMETSAT and weather model data from 

other modeling centers including the United Kingdom, Canada, and the European 

Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. 

NOAA and Federal efforts focus mainly on larger scales, while state and local governments, universities, and the private sector have built infrastructure to monitor 

smaller scales. NOAA has access to much of the data from these non-federal 

sources, and is working on data rights issues with the private sector to ensure market viability for these companies is not compromised by NOAA’s use of their data. 

Some companies charge NOAA for the data, others provide it for free, with limited 

redistribution rights. NOAA also works with the aviation community to obtain 

weather data from aircraft, which is used by NOAA computer weather models to 

analyze and predict the weather. 

Question 5. How does NOAA leverage private investments in weather observations and forecasting to ensure that Federal dollars are being optimally utilized? 

Answer. Observations are critical to NOAA’s mission. NOAA makes use of all 

available data, either international, federal, state, local government funded, university funded, or private sector data, whenever data rights issues can be addressed. 

NOAA is not duplicating others’ efforts for observing systems, but is accessing and 

using these data. For example, NOAA works with the aviation community to incorporate weather data from aircraft into NOAA analysis and forecast models. Non-federal data are quality controlled by NOAA to ensure data quality and integrity (e.g., 

mesonet data ingested through NOAA’s Meteorological Assimilation Data Ingest 

System (MADIS)). 

Question 6. Going forward, what priority does NOAA and the National Weather 

Service place on facilitating continued open access to taxpayer-funded weather data 

and research? 

Answer. NOAA has always maintained open access to its data for the public. 

NOAA provides these data and associated products without seeking reimbursement 

because these products are considered a public resource and part of NOAA’s core 

mission. The NOAA Partnership for the Provision of Environmental Information 

[http://www.noaa.gov/partnershippolicy/] has at its core existing Federal policies 

for providing taxpayer-funded data and information. NOAA data and information 

are essential for the protection of life and property and enhancement of the national 

economy. NOAA will always place a very high priority on providing open access to 

this taxpayer-funded information. 

Question 7. How do you see the National Weather Service’s role evolving over time 

with respect to the incorporation of the private sector? 

Answer. The National Research Council of the National Academies of Science published a report in 2003 entitled ‘‘Fair Weather: Effective Partnerships in Weather 

and Climate Services.’’ This report laid the foundation for improved partnerships beVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
80 

tween the private, public and academic sectors, broadly describing the roles of each 

sector, recognizing that collaboration and discussion best facilitates future services 

and changing boundaries. Open discussion of NOAA plans for future services allow 

the academic community to focus research and training efforts while the private sector can build its business model knowing the direction NOAA is headed. NOAA’s 

mission relates to protection of life and property and providing NOAA observations 

and forecasts, which have broad general value for many users. Many users of weather information require specific, tailored information which NOAA does not have the 

resources to provide, nor should it. For example shipping companies require detailed 

forecasts, and the private weather support companies use NOAA information to determine where ships need to be re-routed. Construction companies may require detailed continuous forecasts for their work and large retailers may use tailored forecasts for shipping certain products for sale in stores, (e.g., generators in the path 

of ice storms or hurricanes). Providing these tailored forecasts for specific user needs 

to obtain a market advantage is the role for the private sector. NOAA cannot provide all weather products and services to all those who need specific services, and 

NOAA relies on the private sector to communicate lifesaving information to the public. NOAA is working with the private sector to provide the information in industry 

standard formats to make it easy for the private sector to use. There is a symbiotic 

relationship between the sectors, and the current climate of open discussion seems 

to be working well. 

Question 8. How could the further expansion of public-private partnerships to collect weather related data ease the burden on the NWS and allow it to focus on the 

continued collection of core weather data necessary for public safety? 

Answer. NOAA will continue to use all available data to ensure the best possible 

forecasts and warnings for the protection of the public. NOAA will expand the public-private partnerships whenever possible, however recognizing that the private sector is a business, and its primary goal is to turn a profit. The Federal government 

has the core mission to protect its citizens and ensure public safety. NOAA will explore and leverage all opportunities, including those with the private sector that improve the economy and efficiency of the organization and provision of weather services. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO HON. TODD J. ZINSER

Solutions to Projected Gap in Polar-orbiting Satellites 

Question 1. Just a few months ago, the OIG released a report after a comprehensive audit to assess the adequacy of the JPSS program. Among the key findings, 

the report confirmed that a coverage gap will occur and weather forecasts will be 

degraded with a disruption in climate data. Given that a gap in polar-orbiting satellite coverage is now inevitable, what do you think are NOAA’s best options for 

keeping up its weather and data capabilities during this time? 

Answer. As noted in our audit report, we recommended that NOAA should coordinate efforts across its line offices to minimize the degradation of weather and climate forecasting during coverage gaps. A NOAA-wide view will help senior management ensure the adequacy of efforts and facilitate improvements. 

In response to our report’s recommendation, NOAA stated it is developing an integrated strategy to obtain and sustain foreign partner opportunities. It is also establishing a commercial assessments initiative to determine what polar data it can acquire commercially. Key considerations NOAA requires the commercial sector to 

demonstrate include: 

» an ability to provide sustained and uninterrupted observations, based on operational requirements; 

» compliance with NOAA’s data policy for full and open exchange of data; 

» technical feasibility to acquire and deliver the observations in a reliable and 

timely manner; and 

» affordability of operations and cost-effectiveness to the government. 

Question 2. Based on your findings, do you think NOAA is doing everything it can 

to minimize gaps in important climate and weather data? 

Answer. No, as noted in our report, NOAA is not doing everything it can to minimize gaps in important climate and weather data. In response to our report, NOAA 

stated it is developing an integrated strategy to minimize gaps in climate and 

weather data from the afternoon polar orbit. However, NOAA’s strategy must ensure that senior management at NOAA and the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) 

81 

1 Climate Change Adaptation: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help Government Officials 

Make More Informed Decisions, GAO–10–113, (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2009). 

program, through close management of the program, take steps to prevent additional slippage in the schedule. We believe NOAA needs to focus their planning in 

the following areas: 

» Finalizing a program baseline that includes costs, schedule, and requirements—and keeping the Department and Congress informed of the program’s 

performance against that baseline. In doing so, the JPSS program should 

prioritize all requirements and contingencies in order to maintain the current 

planned launch date. 

» Coordinating across the agency to develop contingencies for a coverage gap. For 

example, scientists who work for the National Weather Service (NWS) need 

to work with the scientists from the National Environmental Satellite, Data, 

and Information Service to develop options for using data from all available 

sources to compensate for the loss of afternoon polar satellite data. We are 

concerned that there has not been a coordinated approach to the problem 

across NOAA’s lines of businesses—and that there should be. 

Question 3. Additionally, Committee staff recently received a briefing from 

NOAA’s Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Information Services, Mary Kicza, 

about options to fill the coverage gap. She mentioned that the JPSS program is the 

only way the Nation can maintain weather data continuity and any investment in 

alternative solutions would be taking critical funds away from JPSS. Have you spoken with NOAA officials about non-satellite options? What was their response? 

Answer. Yes, we spoke with NOAA officials about non-satellite options. During 

our recent audit fieldwork, NOAA did not identify any non-satellite options to fill 

the coverage gap. 

However, NOAA told us that it has agreements (in place or being considered) with 

other agencies and foreign partners to obtain satellite data. In addition, we interviewed NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) leadership. 

Anticipating a gap in data from the afternoon orbit, NCEP told us they have been 

working with the Department of Defense to improve the data from satellites in the 

early-morning orbit. Additionally, NCEP is working to use data from NOAA’s nextgeneration geostationary satellite, which is currently scheduled to launch in October 

2015. According to NOAA, however, NWS does not believe this data would mitigate 

the loss of polar satellite data from the afternoon orbit. 

Question 4. Are you aware of any non-satellite options for minimizing the continuity gap? 

Answer. At this point in time, we are not aware of any non-satellite options for 

minimizing the data continuity gap in the afternoon polar orbit. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

DAVID C. TRIMBLE

Question. Agriculture is a major driver of Minnesota’s economy, producing $18 billion dollars worth of products. Farmers make planting and harvest decisions based 

on weather forecasts. How can improved weather forecasting provide better tools for 

farmers and ranchers, and help fuel this important sector of our economy? 

Answer. As we reported in October 2009 (GAO–10–113), climate change is a complex, crosscutting issue that poses risks to many existing environmental and economic systems, including agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and human 

health.1 According to the National Academies and others, greenhouse gases already 

in the atmosphere will continue altering the climate system into the future, regardless of emissions control efforts. Therefore, adaptation—defined as adjustments to 

natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate change—is an 

important part of the response to climate change. We reported that insufficient sitespecific data, such as local projections of expected changes, makes it hard to predict 

the impacts of climate change and thus hard to justify the current costs of adaptation efforts for potentially less certain future benefits. 

Federal actions to provide and interpret site-specific information would help address this challenge. For example, based on the responses by a diverse array of Federal, state, and local officials knowledgeable about adaptation to a web-based questionnaire designed for our October 2009 report, about 80 percent (148 of 185) of respondents rated the ‘‘development of processes and tools to help access, interpret, 

and apply available climate information’’ as very or extremely useful. Decision makers will need tools to interpret what regional and local climate data mean for activiVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:33 Dec 05, 2012 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\77020.TXT JACKIE
82 

ties like farming and ranching. In addition, about 61 percent (107 of 176) of respondents rated the ‘‘creation of a Federal service to consolidate and deliver climate 

information to decisionmakers to inform adaptation efforts’’ as very or extremely 

useful. 

In our October 2009 report, we recommended that the appropriate entities within 

the Executive Office of the President, such as the Council on Environmental Quality 

and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with relevant Federal agencies, state and local governments, and key congressional committees of jurisdiction, develop a national strategic plan that will guide the Nation’s efforts to 

adapt to a changing climate. We are monitoring the government wide implementation of this recommendation by the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task 

Force, co-chaired by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), and including representatives from more than 20 Federal 

agencies. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE TO

DAVID. C. TRIMBLE

Question. While NPOESS was disbanded because the interagency management 

approach among Department of Defense, NOAA and NASA made it difficult to 

prioritize the requirements of three agencies, recent testimony by the GAO before 

two House Subcommittees raises concerns that the lack of interagency strategy for 

environmental observations may actually result in an inefficient approach that does 

not address the priorities of additional Federal research priorities, and could ultimately limit our ability to understand long-term climate change. Given the budget 

uncertainties that we face, if interagency applications are now being limited, do you 

believe the division of NPOESS into two separate programs is still the best approach to meet both civilian and military data requirements as cost-effectively as 

possible? 

Answer. At the time of the White House’s decision to disband the National Polarorbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) program, the program was at risk of not meeting the near-term satellite data needs for military or 

civilian users. The program’s expected cost had more than doubled and there was 

a clear expectation that costs would continue to grow. Further, an independent review team reported that there was a very small probability of success if the management of the program were to continue as it was. Now, almost 2 years after the decision to disband NPOESS, a gap-filling environmental satellite is in orbit and is expected to provide satellite data needs through 2016. However, it is not yet clear 

what will be delivered, by when, and at what cost on either of the NOAA or DOD 

follow-on programs. NOAA expects to establish cost and schedule baselines on its 

Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) by July 2012, and it is not clear how DOD will 

proceed with its Defense Weather Satellite System (DWSS). Given our current budget uncertainties, it is not clear that the current approach will meet requirements 

cost effectively. We have ongoing work assessing these programs. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO

REAR ADMIRAL CARI B. THOMAS

Question. How will U.S. Coast Guard rescue and response efforts be impacted if 

NOAA experiences a decrease in satellite function? 

Answer. The loss of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 

(NOAA’s) geostationary or polar-orbiting satellite data would have a cascade effect 

throughout the oceanographic and meteorological modeling community and their 

ability to provide high-resolution, accurate models of present and future on scene 

conditions required by the Coast Guard for Search and Rescue (SAR) response and 

Marine Environmental Response. The Coast Guard SAR response relies upon accurate and timely forecasts of the oceanographic and meteorological conditions. 

By tapping into the Environmental Data Servers through its SAR Optimal Planning Scenario, Coast Guard SAR planners are able to access the meteorological numerical models for: 

(a) Sea Surface Currents, 

(b) Sea Surface Winds, 

(c) Waves (height, direction and period), 

(d) Visibility, 

83 

(e) Sea Surface Temperature, 

(f) Sea Surface Air Temperature, 

(g) Sea Surface Air Pressure, and 

(h) Ice Coverage. 

NOAA’s geostationary and polar-orbiting satellite constellations provide oceanographic and meteorological models that the Coast Guard uses for forecasting onscene conditions necessary to plan searches. These models provide SAR planners 

with meteorological and ocean conditions, surface currents and wind data to accurately estimate the drift of survivors and survivor craft. Additionally, timely accurate weather forecasts are critical to identifying potential risks during operational 

planning to ensure the safety of the Coast Guard personnel that are responsible for 

conducting our missions. 

In its role as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC), the Coast Guard is responsible for ensuring the cleanup of spills of oil and hazardous substances in the 

coastal zone. The FOSC depends heavily on NOAA and its cadre of Scientific Support Coordinators (SSC) for providing timely and accurate information related to the 

trajectory and environmental fate of a spill. The SSCs typically obtain and process 

this critical information from the wealth of data provided by NOAA’s satellite constellation. The resulting forecast models or real-time pictures are critical for decisionmaking by the FOSC and Unified Command during a spill. 

Lastly, if a decrease in satellite function impacts NOAA satellites carrying SAR 

repeaters (which receive and retransmit the 406 MHz distress signal) or SAR Processors (which transmits 406 MHz distress signal real-time), this will most likely result in a coverage gap and SAR planners may see a substantial increase in the 

length of time it takes to receive distress alert(s). These coverage gaps/delays will 

ultimately delay SAR response efforts and will continue to exist until the new SAR/ 

Global Positioning System becomes fully operational (expected sometime between 

Fiscal Years 2018–2020). 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO TOM ISEMAN

Access to Climate and Weather Data 

Question 1. How does NOAA disseminate their climate and weather data to state 

and local entities such as the WGA? Please provide examples. 

Answer. NOAA employs a range of tools and partnerships to disseminate weather 

and climate information, ranging from weather forecasts and websites to on-theground engagement with states, private sector and local communities. 

The most visible form of outreach is television and radio, and specifically the local 

weather forecast, where NOAA’s National Weather Service field offices provide information on day to day conditions. Citizens tune into their forecast every day to 

decide whether to bring an umbrella or how long their morning commute might be. 

Another tool is websites, like weather.gov, climate.gov, or drought.gov (which was 

a direct outgrowth of our partnership on the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS)). These websites are designed to collect and aggregate relevant 

information and to make it available as a ‘one-stop shop’ for states and users. They 

allow interested viewers to find a range of information and to focus on geographic 

or topical issues of interest. However, these are passive services that require some 

user initiative and knowledge to exploit. 

NOAA also provides periodic Climate Outlook Forums. In these forums, NOAA experts provide the latest climate forecasts to interested users, and they are available 

for dialogue and Q&A with the audience. These vary in geographic and temporal 

scale, from an annual climate outlook for the Nation to a seasonal climate outlook 

for a particular region of interest, for example, drought in the Southwest or flooding 

in the Upper Missouri. 

Finally, NOAA works directly with states and local users to engage in the development of information services, for example in the case of ‘‘Early Warning Systems’’ 

being developed by NIDIS. In these cases, NOAA works with stakeholders to understand the key weather and climate variables of interest for a relevant geography, 

and they ‘‘co-develop’’ a system to monitor and report on those variables over time. 

NOAA’s Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISAs) conduct stakeholder-driven research needed to inform these systems at the scale of watersheds, 

cities, and local communities where managers make decisions. Early Warning Systems are being developed for the Upper Colorado River, the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint Basin in the Southeast, and the ongoing drought in the Southern U.S. 

84 

These are the services that WGA is trying to promote through its MOU with 

NOAA: regional services that more actively engage states and other on-the-ground 

stakeholders in the identification and development of new tools to track and respond 

to key weather and climate events. By engaging states and other stakeholders, tools 

will address the key issues of interest—like how drought may affect a municipal 

water supply, or when flooding may delay the shipping of goods by rail, or whether 

infrastructure design criteria are sufficient to address severe storm events—and will 

be more widely adopted and employed than national websites. We recognize that regional, stakeholder-designed services may require additional resources and time; 

however, they are the best way to address the regional variability inherent in climate and its impacts to on-the-ground decisionmaking. 

Question 2. What concrete improvements can be made to increase access to this 

information? 

Answer. While portals like drought.gov have broad utility and should be continued, we support efforts to promote more active, stakeholder-initiated services that 

address key regional priorities. Regional systems provide a targeted assessment of 

key indicators, along with the expertise and resources to interpret and apply them 

to on-the-ground decisionmaking. Regional systems can stimulate efforts to plan and 

prepare for climate and weather events, rather than simply responding after the 

fact. We want to get to the point where a farmer uses the seasonal outlook to decide 

whether to plant certain crops, or a water utility uses long-range snowpack projections to design new infrastructure—just like you or I listen to the weather forecast 

to decide whether to carry an umbrella. 

We recommend a rigorous assessment of existing regional early warning systems, 

including those developed under NIDIS, to inform the design and implementation 

of future efforts. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO

DR. PETER P. NEILLEY

Question 1. Public-private partnerships to improve weather data collection not 

only ease the burden on Federal agencies, but also create jobs and bolster the economy. How does The Weather Channel Companies build upon baseline NOAA weather data to provide higher resolution forecasts for specific geographic regions? 

Answer. The Weather Channel Companies builds upon baseline NOAA weather 

data to provide value-added services to consumers and businesses in many ways 

that serve the weather needs of the Nation. Increased resolution is just one significant enhancement. However, there are many other dimensions of value-adding that 

we perform. These include providing forecasts in formats that consumers can easily 

acquire and utilize; operating a 7x24 cable television network; building consumerfriendly weather applications for the Internet and mobile devices; providing forecasts for specific business needs and personal interests; creating more accurate and 

timely forecasts; and providing an overall satisfying engagement experience for our 

consumers and clients. 

We are able to achieve this with a laser focus on the needs and interests of our 

viewers and clients that results in provisioning the weather content that they need 

and can act on. We accomplish this by making specific investments in people, jobs, 

technology and products that use foundational weather datasets from NOAA and 

others and then improve upon those data using proprietary scientific methods. For 

example, one forecasting method that we have developed and deployed starts by ingesting all of the computer-based (numerical weather prediction) forecasts created 

by NOAA, and augments these with similar forecasts purchased from other countries and our own computer-generated forecasts. We then use a complex artificial 

intelligence based statistical engine to distill all of these different computer forecast 

‘‘opinions’’ into a final forecast optimized for accuracy and relevance to the particular application. 

Our ability to create such value-added products and services is critically dependent on the foundational data from NOAA. It would not be possible for The Weather 

Channel Companies or any other private entity to build and operate networks of 

weather radars across the country, fund and operate fleets of weather satellites, or 

capitalize the vast supercomputing facilities used by NOAA. It is critical that as nation we continue to appreciate and invest in these foundational weather services 

from NOAA so that companies such as The Weather Channel can continue to provide the best possible weather services for our Nation. 

Question 2. How can the public-private partnership process be improved to promote effective collaborations? 

85 

Answer. First, it is important to recognize that there have been tremendous gains 

in the degree of cooperation and collaboration between NOAA and the weather and 

climate industry in the past decade or so. Guided heavily by the groundbreaking 

2003 report by the National Research Council ‘‘Fair Weather: Effective Partnerships 

in Weather and Climate Services’’, there have been numerous formal institutions 

created (e.g., The NOAA Science Advisory Board’s Environmental Information Services Working Group) that promote and sustain effective partnerships across our Nation’s weather and climate ‘‘Enterprise’’. Critically important in these advancements 

has been the deep recognition within NOAA of the essential need for strong partners in order to serve the Nation and meet the mission of NOAA’s National Weather 

Service (NWS). For example, the NWS could not fulfill its mission of protecting life 

and property without an effective cooperation with private-industry in order to publish time-critical warnings of impending severe weather. 

In order to promote effective public-private partnerships in the Nation’s weather 

enterprise, it is important that the participants in the enterprise continue to recognize the particular strengths and assets that each constituent of the enterprise has 

and that those strengths and assets be leveraged and fostered so that our Nation 

receives maximum benefit and value and all players in the partnership remain 

strong. In particular, NOAA should continue to consider where the private sector 

may be better able to serve the weather needs of the Nation and leverage those 

strengths in order to serve the Nation most effectively and efficiently. For example, 

the private sector has proven very agile in the development of a rich set of weather 

information applications for digital and mobile devices and hence the need for 

NOAA to consider creating similar functionality may not only be unnecessary but 

likely decrease the value the enterprise provides to the Nation possibly disrupt the 

established partnership balance. 

A specific area where NOAA could help strengthen the partnership is to work 

with the private sector and others outside of NOAA to find ways to gain access to 

the vast sets of NOAA weather data that are currently created but for which practical considerations make them inaccessible outside (and often times even inside) of 

NOAA. For example, the National Centers for Environmental Prediction division of 

the NWS produces high-resolution and high-frequency forecast data that must be 

filtered significantly before publication via the Internet outside of NOAA. If it were 

possible for the private sector to place value-adding computer servers inside of 

NOAA to process the high-resolution data, valuable and skillful forecast content 

could be derived from those data to help serve the Nation’s needs better. This is 

an example of the Open Weather and Climate Services paradigm that was recently 

endorsed by the NOAA Science Advisory Board and passed onto NOAA for consideration. Embracing the adoption of the Open Weather and Climate Services paradigm 

by NOAA will significantly advance the partnerships and the products and services 

provided. 

Question 3. Does The Weather Channel Companies currently have operations in 

the Northern Gulf of Mexico to improve hurricane forecasts and better determine 

impacts on coastal communities? 

Answer. The Weather Channel provides weather services for the entire nation. We 

are continuingly investing in operations and technologies that provide improved 

services for all of our consumers and clients. For the most part, our approach is to 

improve all forecasts and services that cover a range of weather types and locations. 

However, we recognize the significant impact that hurricanes can have along our 

Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coastal communities and accordingly invest materially 

in being sure that state-of-the-science forecasts and communication services are 

available to those that might be threatened by tropical cyclones. In general when 

such storms threaten a specific community or region we shift our resources to ensure that the best, most-timely and most accurate weather information is conveyed 

to those in the storm’s path. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO

ROBERT S. MARSHALL

Question 1. Public-private partnerships to improve weather data collection not 

only ease the burden on Federal agencies, but also create jobs and bolster the economy. How does Earth Networks build upon baseline NOAA weather data to provide 

higher resolution forecasts for specific geographic regions? 

Answer. Earth Networks ingests all NOAA weather data and incorporates it into 

Earth Networks products and services. In addition to NOAA weather data, Earth 

Networks also operates its own observation networks (surface weather stations, 

lightning sensors and a weather camera network). By integrating both NOAA data 

86 

and proprietary Earth Networks data into our products and services we are able to 

provide high resolution and very local forecasts and warnings for our customers. 

Question 2. How can the public-private partnership process be improved to promote effective collaborations? 

Answer. There are two sides to the public/private partnership that exists between 

NOAA and private sector weather companies. The side where private sector companies ingest NOAA data and distribute it with value added products to specific users 

is working relatively well. 

The second side of the partnership where NOAA ingests and uses data from private sector observation networks is not working as well. For reasons that are not 

completely apparent, NOAA has not fully embraced this model despite solid recommendations to do so by the NRC in its 2008 report, ‘‘From the Ground Up: A Nationwide Network of Networks’’. In the challenging budget times that exist today 

and will continue for the foreseeable future, it is more critical than ever that NOAA 

embrace this form of the public/private partnership to cost effectively obtain observations that it needs to fulfill its mission of protecting life and property. NOAA 

should develop a peer reviewed plan and budget to achieve a National Mesonet. The 

plan should be developed in conjunction with and embrace private sector and academic institutions that operate observing assets that can support NOAA’s mission. 

Question 3. Does Earth Networks currently have operations in the Northern Gulf 

of Mexico to improve hurricane forecasts and better determine impacts on coastal 

communities? 

Answer. Yes, Earth Networks operates a number of weather observation stations 

along the northern gulf coast and on oil platforms in the gulf. Further, the Earth 

Networks Total Lightning Networks covers a significant portion of the entire Gulf 

of Mexico. These observation assets as well as those of other private and academic 

network operators in the region have the potential to improve hurricane forecasts 

and will clearly improve the ability to determine impacts on coastal communities. 

Æ