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

81–196PDF 2013

RESTORING U.S. LEADERSHIP 

IN WEATHER FORECASTING 

PART I 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2013 

Serial No. 113–32 

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

( 

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

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia 

STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming 

DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

CHRIS STEWART, Utah 

VACANCY 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ERIC SWALWELL, California 

DAN MAFFEI, New York 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JOSEPH KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

SCOTT PETERS, California 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC VEASEY, Texas 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

MARK TAKANO, California 

ROBIN KELLY, Illinois 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

HON. CHRIS STEWART, Utah, Chair 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

MARC VEASEY, Texas 

MARK TAKANO, California 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Thursday, May 23, 2013 

Page 

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

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

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Chris Stewart, Chairman, Subcommittee on 

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

of Representatives ................................................................................................ 9 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 

Statement by Representative Suzanne Bonamici, Ranking Minority Member, 

Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ............................................................... 12 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 

Witnesses: 

Mr. Barry Myers, Chief Executive Officer, AccuWeather 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 17 

Mr. Jon Kirchner, President, GeoOptics 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 29 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 31 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 37 

Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions 

Mr. Barry Myers, Chief Executive Officer, AccuWeather .................................... 50 

Mr. Jon Kirchner, President, GeoOptics ................................................................ 56 

Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record 

Revised submission from GeoOptics, Inc., submitted by Mr. Kirchner ............... 72 

GeoOptics, Inc. closing comments, submitted by Mr. Kirchner ........................... 76 

(1) 

RESTORING U.S. LEADERSHIP 

IN WEATHER FORECASTING 

PART I 

THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2013 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:35 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Chris Stewart 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 
2 

LAMAR S. SMITtl. Thai 

C"",OMAN 

\tongrcss of tht tlnitnl £,tatcs 

!\oUSt of'Rtprrmtatioc.s 

COM,MITIEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

2321 RAYBURN HOUSE OffICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20615-6301 

(202) 225-6371 

www.8Clence.houae.gO'l 

Subcommittee on Environment 

Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting 

Thursday, May 23, 2013 

9:30 am. - 11:00 a.m. 

231 g Raybl\Itl House Office Building 

. Mr. Barry Myers, Chief Executive Officer, AccuWeather, Inc. 

Mr. Jon Kirchner, President, GeoOptics, Inc. 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON. Texas RANKING MEMBER 
3 

V.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COM.\UTTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

SUBCOM:\UTTEE ON ENVIRONMENT 

PURPOSE 

HEARING CHARTER 

Restoring cr.,..,'. Lelldership ill Welltiter Forecasting 

Thnrsday. May 23. 20B 

9:30 a.lll. ll:OO a.m. 

2318 Raylmm Honse Office Building 

The Subcommittee on Environment will hold a hearing clItilled Res/orillg US. 

Leadership ill Weather Forecasting Oil Thursday. l\by 23. 2013. at 9:30 a.lll. in Room :;318 of 

the Rayburn I-Iollse Office Building. The purpose orllle hearing is to examine ways to improve 

the National Oceanic and Atlllospheric Administration (NOAA) weather l'xecastinp.. and to 

receive testimony Oil draft legislation to prioritize weather-related research. 

WITNESS LIST 

.. )Ir. Barry Myers. ChiefExecntive Omce!".. Accu\Veather. Inc. 

.. )lr. Jon Kirchner. President. GeoOptics. Inc. 

BACKGROC'm 

Recent extreme weather events in the United States have underscored the need for 

reliable. first-class weather f(m~castill!l. by NOAA and the private sector. \Vithin NOAA the 

National i,x/eather Service (NWS). the OHice ofOceallic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). and 

the ~ational Environmental Satellite. Data. and Infi:mnatioll Service (NESDIS) play important 

roles in dcvelopilll' and deployilll' U.S. weather {'maaHstilll' capabilities. l NOAA line ol1ices arc 

joined in this effori by an ever-evolving weather enteq)rise. The National Academy of Sciences 

recclllly cmphasized the importance of this partnership. notilll' that H] p Jrivatc sector and other 

organizations provide sensor data. weather forecasts. and end-user services to a broad set of 

cu~tolllers .. ,J 

I For more information on thes.e responsibilities. see: "To Observe and Protect: How ~OAA Procnres Data for 

Weather Foreca'tin~.·· March 28. 20 12.l)tlJ)1I;i'.1_e!lc.c;.hf'l"(L€""ill"-migg!~'1b.,-c'lm'1!.tt"~\'.!lerini:?J1,g:5"!\.'":illllm'nl: 

1 
4 

Weather impacts Amencan Itv"s, and extreme weather sigllliicani risks to 

important pads of the U. S. ecollomy. NOAA has traced a rise weather disasters costing the 

ecollomy at least $! billion ill damage. and a recenl analysis fOllnd that substantial parts of the 

ecollomy are sensitive to weather variability, more than three percent of Gross 

Domestic Product and nearly $500 billion a yeaI'. 

In a 2012 report onlhe National \Veather Service. the >iatlolla! Academy of Sciences 

stated that "fa]s all outl!rowth of public and private sector iuvestment ill weatheL climate. and 

hydrological research. nc\v observational. data assimilatioll. and other teclmolc,gv 

advancements arc exceeding the capacity of the N\VS acquire. illtel!ratc, and 

COl111lHUllcate forecast and warning illi"'rIllation based Oil these technological 

achievements. Similarly. a USA Todm' editorial last October followiup, SlIperstonn Sandy 

highlighted cOllcems about American weather forecastilll! abilities. concluding that ,,[ tllre 

American model is the basis for many forecasts. and Its reliability problems beyond the ,hon 

lenn snggest something major is amiss .... The European model's superiority Oil 

Saudy ought to accelerate efforts to and fix what's wrong. 

In response to the destruction aud loss oflife associated with Supers/onB 

Sandy. Congress approved the Disaster Im"ntlri,71;,,,,, Act q/::O 13 which included 

siguilleant lilllds to improve J(lrecastillg equipment ami illii·astrnctmc. The 

Washillgton Post characterized tlus action as a "down payment" 

improvcments" for FS. weather prediction." 

"game-changing 

Citing concerns about potential data gaps for NOAA's polar-orbiiing and 

p,eostationary programs, iudllding a potential polar-orbiting gap of J 7 to 53 months. the 

Govennnenl Accountability Omce added NOA}\'s satellite programs 10 its High Risk List in 

20 l:l. This potential in wcathcr satellite coverage and problems with NOAA's 

satellite has been the of several Science. Space. and Committee hearings 

over many years. 7 The GAO emphasized the potential effects of a gap: 

Accordiu)! tn :>JO;\A pro!!rHm omcials. a sateUite data p,ap would result iules> accurate 

and timely weather forecasts and Wffi11illgS of extreme events. such as hurricanes, ,tonu 

surges and floods. Sueh degradation in forecasts and warnings would place liws, 

property. and ollr naliou', critical illfi'astl1lclmes in dall!!cr. Given Ihe criticality of 

satellite data to weather iC1recasls. the likelihood of significant gaps and the potential 

impact ofslIch p,aps 011 thc health ami safety (lrthe us pOJlulation and economy. GAO 

.m"[(JI·c'nc"ts m the 'works f()r CS. 'wcather Prediction. Th" \Vashin,gtou Po'\t, 
5 

has concluded that the 

it to the High Risk List 

in weather saMhle data is a high-risk area and added 

III addition, independent reviews of NOAA " weather research pOlifolio have also 

strongly recommended fin emphasis 011 moving researciHo-operations within NOAA's weather 

portfolio. In 2010. the National Academy of Public Adillinistration stated that 

pflliicnlarly institutional glue to support innovation across NOAA. 

NOAA '5 Scicnce AdvisOlY Board stated that "imless... science is tnmsilioncd into n",'nl!H)1lS 

NOAA will fail in its mission. NOAA must make certaiu that the intended end use 

scientific information is uuderstood fl'om the shirt 

questions and, ellsure that as well as 

illtO the fOl1llUlatioll. 

its researchers working on scientific 

eud-llser needs are incorporated explicitly 

NOAA role in makin!l procurement decisions abont systems 

,,,,,>,, .. ,'W,,, in the U.S. NOAA cUlTently uses iufol111ation over 100 

space-based remote sensing. observations. surfilCe 

Oue method to analyze the of weather data t10m 

observing systems is called an System Simulatioll (OSSE). OSSEs employ 

compnter modeling used to potential or to test 

cunem observational ami data systems. "could playa 

critical role in ... idclltityin!l future observation systems and dma assimilatioll 5yS"~IllS Ii)!' 

improvement. .. 11 

ADDITIONAl, READING 

• National Academies of Science Report, l!jE.fJl!J!?J~STI'lD1lU'QrJlj<E_0"fJljfglJ';..1'ff.Q!Lrf.I!g 

"'.'.'_"!!'L!Y_,'_~"'''' A IIg IISI ]0 n. • Dan Vergano, USA Today, "'~'''"'''_'''''''' .. ''''"-'~O'"-'~''"'':'':':~=='=-'=='''''''''''_'"'""''''''= October 

2012. 

• 

" 
6 

Appendix I: Of'f'ICE Of' OCEA:'IIIC & AT:\IOSPHERIC RESEARCH BUDGE'l': 

4 
7 

Discussion Draft 

Section-by-Section Analysis 

Section 1. Title. Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of2013. 

Section 2. Public Safety Priority. Directs Under Secretary to make weather forecasting to protect 

lives and property NOAA's top planning and management priority in relevant line offices. 

Section 3. Weathel' Research and Forecasting Innovation. 

(a) Establishes/codifies NOAA weather research program, directing agency to place "priority 

emphasis on development more accurate and timely warnings and forecasts of high 

impact weather events that endanger life and property." 

(b) (b)(l) and (b)(2) describe specific program elements to be pursued-advanced radar, 

aerial systems, computing/modeling, and OSSEs. 

(b)(3) codifies longstanding joint OAR-NWS tech transfer program, moving its funding 

fromNWS. 

Section 4. Weather Research and Development Plamting. Directs NOAA to develop a 

prioritized weather research plan to guide activities authorized under the Act, and restore U.S. 

world leadership in weather modeling, prediction, and forecasting. 

Section 5. Observing System Planning. Directs NOAA to maintain a list of observation data 

requirements and systematically evaluate the combination of systems necessary to meet such 

requirements, including as they related to potential data gaps. Directs NOAA to develop a range 

of options to address any identified gaps. 

Section 6. Obselving System Simulation Experiments. Directs NOAA to undertake Observing 

System Simulation Experiments (OSSEs) to quantitatively assess the relative value and benefits 

of obselving capabilities and systems. Specifies under what conditions OSSEs should be 

performed. 

Section 7. Computing Resources Prioritization Repolt. Directs the NOAA CIO to issne a plan 

to ensure that the Agency is pursing cutting-edge high performance computing power and 

providing a balance of models and computing resources to support enhanced weather prediction 

capabilities. 

Section 8. Commercial Weather Data. Clarifies that restrictions in existing law prohibiting the 

sale of weather satellite systems to the private sector do not extend to the purchase of weather 

data through contracts with conunercial providers or the placement of instruntents on private 

payloads. 

Section 9. Defmitiolls. 

5 
8 

Section 10. Authorization of Appropriations. Autborizes modest increases to NOAA's weather 

R&D activities, offsetting increased spending through cuts to non-weather R&D (climate and 

ocean research). 

6 
9 

Chairman STEWART. The Subcommittee on Environment will 

come to order. 

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to today’s hearing entitled 

‘‘Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting.’’ In front of 

you are packets containing the written testimony, biographies and 

Truth in Testimony disclosures for today’s witness panels, and I 

now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. 

First, let me say, diverting from prepared comments for just a little bit, that our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Oklahoma, and I think this tragedy highlights the importance of realtime forecasting to protect lives and property. 

I would like to thank our excellent witness panel as well for traveling here today, and while this hearing was scheduled several 

weeks ago to discuss draft legislation to help enhance weather forecasting, the tragedy in Oklahoma once again underscores the importance of this issue and should encourage us to start tackling 

these questions today. 

It is unfortunate that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is unable to testify in-person. However, as the Ranking Member and I have just discussed, we will be asking Acting 

Administrator Kathy Sullivan to submit comments for the record, 

and we will work to accommodate her in-person testimony on these 

issues some time very soon. 

We need a world-class system of weather prediction in the 

United States—one, as the National Academy of Sciences recently 

put it, that is ‘‘second to none.’’ We can thank the hardworking 

men and women of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, and their partners throughout the weather enterprise for the great strides that have been made in forecasting in 

recent decades. But the reality is, is that we can do better. And it 

is not enough to blame failures on programming or sequestration 

or lack of resources. As Moore, Oklahoma, has demonstrated, we 

have to do better. But the good news is that we can. 

Superstorm Sandy made clear what many in the weather community have known for years: Our model for weather prediction 

has fallen behind Europe and other parts of the world in predicting 

weather events in the United States. The Weather Forecasting Improvement Act, draft language our witnesses will be discussing 

today, would build upon the down payment made by Congress following this storm toward restoring the United States as a leader 

in this field through expanded computing capacity and data assimilation techniques. 

The people of Moore, Oklahoma, received a tornado warning 16 

minutes before the twister struck their town. Tornado forecasting 

is difficult but lead times for storms have become gradually better. 

The draft legislation would prioritize investments in technologies 

like multi-phased array radar, technology being developed at 

NOAA’s National Severe Storms Laboratory in Oklahoma, which 

has, and I am quoting, ‘‘the potential to provide revolutionary improvements in tornado warning lead times and accuracy, reducing 

false alarms’’ and could move us toward the goal of being able to 

warn on forecast. 

We have seen the devastating effects that severe weather can 

have in this country, and this bill would establish a priority mis-
10 

sion for all of NOAA to improve forecasts and warnings to protect 

lives and property. Recent studies suggest that even routine weather variability every year can have an impact on a large portion of 

the economy with hundreds of billions of dollars in consequences. 

The Weather Forecasting Improvement Act is based upon a number of recommendations received in the last Congress, and let me 

tell you what this bill will do. As the country faces severe satellite 

data gaps, it would encourage NOAA to systematically conduct 

cost-benefit assessments to ensure that we are getting the most 

bang for our buck in acquiring and procuring a mix of critical 

space-, air- and ground-based observational data. As Dr. Berrien 

Moore, Director of the National Weather Center at the University 

of Oklahoma, explained to this Subcommittee, ‘‘NOAA needs to do 

a better job of conducting quantitative assessments on data use, 

cost, and value.’’ 

This draft would help remove barriers to NOAA’s cooperation 

with parts of the weather enterprise, including upstream data options and downstream, value-added forecasting capabilities from 

the private sector. As Dr. David Crain, President and CEO of 

GeoMetWatch, a company looking to develop critical sounding observations from a constellation of satellites, stated ‘‘a commercial 

approach can provide the needed data years earlier and with minimal cost and risk.’’ It would balance NOAA’s research portfolio by 

emphasizing weather research with the potential to protect lives 

and property. In 2012, NOAA barely spent one-third of the resources on weather research as it did on climate research. 

And finally, the language would dedicate resources to transition 

next generation research into operational forecasting. As NOAA’s 

Science Advisory Board stated last month, ‘‘Unless science is 

transitioned into operations, NOAA will fail in this mission.’’ 

Unfortunately, NOAA was unable to testify in-person this morning, but we will be providing the Subcommittee with comments— 

I am sorry—they will be providing the Subcommittee with comments on forecasting improvements, and we look forward to their 

feedback informing this legislation and their future testimony on 

this and other topics. 

I look forward to discussing these absolutely critical issues with 

our witnesses today, and learning about how we can restore U.S. 

leadership in weather forecasting. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stewart follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN CHRIS STEWART

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

entitled ‘‘Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting.’’ 

First, let me say that our prayers are with the people of Oklahoma. This tragedy 

highlights the importance of real time forecasting to protect lives and property. 

I’d like to thank our excellent witnesses for traveling to be here today. While this 

hearing was scheduled several weeks ago to discuss draft legislation to help enhance 

weather forecasting, the tragedy in Oklahoma underscores the importance of this 

issue and should encourage us to start tackling these questions now. It is unfortunate that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is unable to testify 

in-person today; however, we have asked Acting Administrator Kathy Sullivan to 

submit comments for the record and we will work to accommodate her in-person testimony on these issues next month. 

We need a world-class system of weather prediction in the United States—one, 

as the National Academy of Sciences recently put it, that is ‘‘second to none.’’ We 
11 

can thank the hard-working men and women at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, and their partners throughout the weather enterprise 

for the great strides that have been made in forecasting in recent decades. 

But we can do better. 

Superstorm Sandy made clear what many in the weather community have known 

for years: Our model for weather prediction has fallen behind Europe and other 

parts of the world in predicting weather events in the United States. The Weather 

Forecasting Improvement Act, draft language our witnesses will be discussing 

today, would build upon the down payment made by Congress following this storm 

toward restoring the U.S. as a leader in this field through expanded computing capacity and data assimilation techniques. 

We can do better. 

The people of Moore, Oklahoma received a tornado warning 16 minutes before the 

twister struck their town. Tornado forecasting is difficult and lead times for storms 

have become gradually better. The draft legislation would prioritize investments in 

technologies like multi-phased array radar, technology being developed at NOAA’s 

National Severe Storms Laboratory in Oklahoma, which ‘‘has the potential to provide revolutionary improvements in. tornado. warning lead times and accuracy, reducing false alarms’’ and could move us toward the goal of being able to ‘‘warn on 

forecast.’’ 

We can do better. 

We have seen the devastating effects that severe weather can have on this country, and this bill would establish a priority mission for all of NOAA to improve forecasts and warnings to protect lives and property. Recent studies suggest that even 

routine weather variability every year can have impact a large portion of the economy with hundreds of billions of dollars in consequences. 

We can do better. 

The Weather Forecasting Improvement Act is based upon a number of recommendations received last Congress—As the country faces serious satellite data 

gaps, it would encourage NOAA to systematically conduct cost-benefit assessments 

to ensure that we are getting the most bang for our buck in acquiring and procuring 

a mix of critical space-, air-, and ground-based observational data. As Dr. Berrien 

Moore, Director of the National Weather Center at the University of Oklahoma, explained to this Subcommittee, ‘‘NOAA needs to do a better job in conducting quantitative assessments on data use, cost, and value.’’ 

This draft would help remove barriers to NOAA’s cooperation with parts of the 

weather enterprise, including upstream data options and downstream, value-added 

forecasting capabilities from the private sector. Dr. David Crain, President and CEO 

of GeoMetWatch, a company looking to develop critical sounding observations from 

a constellation of satellites, stated that ‘‘a commercial approach can provide the 

needed data years earlier and with minimal cost and risk.’’ 

It would balance NOAA’s research portfolio by emphasizing weather research with 

the potential to protect lives and property. In 2012, NOAA barely spent one-third 

of the resources on weather research as it did on climate research. 

This language would dedicate resources to transition next generation research 

into operational forecasting. As NOAA’s Science Advisory Board stated last month, 

‘‘Unless. science is transitioned into operations. NOAA will fail in its mission.’’ 

Unfortunately, NOAA was unable to testify in-person this morning, but they will 

be providing the Subcommittee with comments on forecasting improvements, and 

we look forward to their feedback informing this legislation and their future testimony on this and other topics. 

I look forward to discussing these absolutely critical issues with our witnesses 

today, and learning about how we can restore U.S. leadership in weather forecasting. 

I yield back the balance of my time, and recognize Ranking Member Bonamici for 

an opening statement. 
12 

Chairman STEWART. With that, I yield my time, and recognize 

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

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Chairman Stewart, and 

welcome to our witnesses, Mr. Myers and Mr. Kirchner. I want to 

thank you for appearing here to provide your insights regarding 

weather data and weather forecasting. 

I join the Chairman in saying that our thoughts and prayers go 

out to all of the victims of the powerful and devastating tornado 

that just days ago swept through the State of Oklahoma. All of us 

have been moved by this event and the courageous efforts of the 

community. The event is a painful reminder that we are all vulnerable to unexpected disasters, and it also highlights how critical the 

work of the National Weather Service is as a public safety tool. 

And that leads us to the purpose of today’s hearing. The National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—NOAA—has an expansive mission: to predict the weather, to ensure healthy oceans and 

fisheries, to address climate mitigation and adaptation, and to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities and economies. To 

carry out all of these missions, NOAA must manage a very broad 

set of scientific challenges and look for ways to incorporate the 

findings of research into the daily lives of all our citizens. 

In recent years, our Nation has experienced harsher climactic 

conditions and a wave of severe weather. From unprecedented heat 

waves and droughts, to severe record-breaking weather events 

across this country, we have received constant reminders of the importance of accurate and timely weather prediction. 

Good weather prediction, however, doesn’t just happen. It requires collection of the appropriate data, and our understanding of 

what is useful evolves over time. It also requires us to conduct scientific research to understand the physical processes that drive 

short- and long-term weather conditions. 

Unfortunately, the draft legislation that we are considering today 

includes little or no acknowledgment of NOAA’s other missions carried out by the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, particularly with regard to its climate and ocean research. Although 

my colleagues across the dais might not always agree on every 

issue around climate and ocean science, sacrificing these critical 

areas will only weaken us for the future. Understanding the climate is as critical to public protection as understanding the weather. 

It is unfortunate that NOAA could not be here today. They received 10 days ago on May 13 a letter from the Chairman. It is my 

understanding that a copy of the draft bill was given to the agency 

at that time. That did not give them enough time for the agency 

to evaluate a bill, compose testimony, and then clear that testimony through OMB. 

Also, I want to point out that NOAA just released their Weather 

Ready Nation Roadmap last month after they spent more than a 

year preparing the report and seeking public input. Additionally, 

there have been four outside reviews of NWS and NOAA R&D in 

the last year, two by the National Academies of Science, one by the 

National Academy of Public Administration, and one done for the 

NOAA Science Advisory Board. These reports address key issues 

like how to move from research to operation; the need for NOAA 
13 

to more actively tap the modeling and forecasting expertise in the 

research community; and the divisions within NWS and between 

NWS and OAR. 

The draft legislation does not address all these relevant issues 

but they need to be considered. It would be both appropriate and 

beneficial for this Subcommittee to receive testimony about these 

reports before we move to mark up a bill. We can work together 

in this area if we have complete information, which requires a 

more complete Committee record than today’s hearing will yield. 

As I indicated to the Chairman, the minority submits that the 

importance of weather forecasting and the work of NOAA are so 

important that we are invoking our Rule XI right to ask for a second day of witnesses, and I am attaching that letter to my statement for inclusion in the record, and I appreciate the Chairman’s 

cooperation in that regard. 

I am sure we can work together, Mr. Chairman, to find a date 

and time and a range of expert witnesses who can help us craft 

strong legislation that will improve weather forecasting for the nation. I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the 

Committee Members in this critically important area. 

Thank you very much again for appearing before us, and I look 

forward to an informative discussion today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bonamici follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUBCOMMITTEE RANKING MEMBER SUZANNE BONAMICI

Thank you, Chairman Stewart. And welcome to the witnesses, Mr. Meyers and 

Mr. Kirchner. I want to thank you for appearing here to provide your insights regarding weather data and weather forecasting. 

My thoughts and prayers go out to all of the victims of the powerful and devastating tornado that just days ago swept through the state of Oklahoma. All of us 

have been moved by this event and the courageous efforts of the community. This 

event is a painful reminder that we are all vulnerable to unexpected disasters, and 

it also highlights how critical the work of the National Weather Service is as a public safety tool. 

And that leads us to the purpose of today’s hearing. The National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have an expansive mission: to predict the 

weather, to insure healthy oceans and fisheries, to address climate mitigation and 

adaptation, and to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities and economies. 

To carry out all of these missions, NOAA must manage a very broad set of scientific challenges and look for ways to incorporate the findings of research into the 

daily lives of all our citizens. 

In recent years, our nation has experienced harsher climactic conditions and a 

wave of severe weather. From unprecedented heat waves and droughts to severe 

record-breaking weather events across the country, we have received constant reminders of the importance of accurate and timely weather prediction. 

Good weather prediction, however, doesn’t just happen. It requires collection of 

the appropriate data, and our understanding of what is useful evolves over time. 

It also requires us to conduct scientific research to understand the physical processes that drive short- and long-term weather conditions. 

Unfortunately, the draft legislation that we are considering today includes little 

to no acknowledgment of NOAA’s other missions carried out by the Office of Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Research, particularly with regard to its climate and ocean research. Although my colleagues across the dais might not always agree on every 

issue around climate and ocean science, sacrificing these critical areas will only 

weaken us for the future. Understanding the climate is as critical to public protection as understanding the weather. 

It’s unfortunate that NOAA could not be here today. They were invited just 10 

days ago on May 13 by a letter from the Chairman. It is my understanding that 

a copy of the draft bill was given to the agency at that time. Six working days is 
14 

simply not enough time for an agency to evaluate a bill, compose testimony, and 

then clear that testimony through OMB. 

Also, NOAA just released their ‘‘Weather Ready Nation Roadmap’’ last month, 

after they spent more than a year preparing the report and seeking public input. 

Additionally, there have been four outside reviews of NWS and NOAA R&D in the 

last year-two by the National Academies of Science, one by the National Academy 

of Public Administration, and one done for the NOAA Science Advisory Board. 

These reports address key issues like how to move from research to operations; the 

need for NOAA to more actively tap the modeling and forecasting expertise in the 

research community; and the divisions within NWS and between NWS and OAR. 

The draft legislation does not address all these relevant issues but they need to 

be considered. It would be both appropriate and beneficial for this Subcommittee to 

receive testimony about these reports before we move to markup a bill. We can work 

together in this area if we have more complete information, which requires a more 

complete Committee record than today’s hearing will yield. 

As I indicated to the Chairman, the minority submits that the importance of 

weather forecasting and the work of NOAA are so important that we are invoking 

our Rule XI right to ask for a second day of witnesses. I am attaching that letter 

to my statement for inclusion in the record. 

I am sure we can work together, Mr. Chairman, to find a date and time and a 

range of expert witnesses who can help us craft strong legislation that will improve 

weather forecasting for the nation. I look forward to working with you Mr. Chairman in this critically important area. 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici, and regarding 

your request, once you have provided us with the written request, 

we will certainly review it, and we look forward to working with 

you on that. 

Okay. If there are Members who wish to submit opening statements, your statements will be added to the record at this point. 

At this time I would like to introduce our witnesses. Our first 

witness today is Mr. Barry Myers, Chief Executive Officer for 

AccuWeather Incorporated. He previously served as AccuWeather’s 

Executive Vice President and General Counsel. Mr. Myers has 

served as Special Advisor to three separate directors of the National Weather Service and is a Professional Member of the American Meteorological Society. He also currently serves on the Environmental Information Services Working Group for NOAA Science 

Advisory Board. 

Our next witness today is Mr. Jon Kirchner, President and Chief 

Operating Officer of GeoOptics. Previously, Mr. Kirchner has held 

senior executive positions for large satellite communication companies, Loral Space and Communications, and Arqiva Satellite and 

Media. Mr. Kirchner has worked to develop long-term space-based 

infrastructure for data networking, Earth observations and sensing, and information management systems. 

As our witnesses should know, spoken testimony is limited to 

five minutes after which the Members of the Committee will have 

five minutes each to ask questions, and I now recognize Mr. Myers 

for five minutes to present his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. BARRY MYERS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER, ACCUWEATHER 

Mr. MYERS. Thank you for inviting me to speak today, and to the 

families and friends of those who lost loved ones on Monday in 

Oklahoma and to those who suffered injury and other loss, I can 

only offer my condolences and a hope that today’s hearing will contribute to improved warnings of severe weather. 
15 

The United States has the most violent and challenging weather 

on Earth: tornados and hurricanes, lightning and hail, snow and 

ice and floods, to name a few. The United States has more tornados 

than any nation. In fact, we have four times the number that all 

of Europe has. 

On Monday, NOAA’s National Weather Service provided about 

16 minutes of warning before the tornado touched down, and actually over 30 minutes before it reached Moore. The agency and the 

people of the National Weather Service did an outstanding job. 

There can be no doubt without those warnings the toll would 

have been much worse. Mike Smith in his book ‘‘Warnings’’ points 

out the huge progress made in tornado forecasting since the 1950s. 

But we can and must do more relative to severe weather. People 

should not live in fear in America’s heartlands, in its cities and 

along its coasts. With enhanced modeling, perhaps we might have 

known hours in advance exactly where the tornado would form, 

where it would touch down, how monstrous it would grow, and its 

exact path. 

Imagine being able to tell people an hour or two in advance to 

move out of the zone of danger and have them watch the tornado 

from miles away. Is it a pipe dream? This year marks the 50th anniversary of AccuWeather’s creation. Fifty years ago, weather forecasting was more art than science. A tornado might form at night 

in the darkness unknown to those in its deadly path, and no radar 

was there to help a forecaster spot a hook echo. 

A storm like Hurricane Sandy without a weather satellite would 

have thought to have moved away out into the ocean only to return 

as a surprise, much like the great Galveston hurricane of 1900 that 

no one knew was coming because there were no eyes in the sky. 

In the United States, the National Weather Service and America’s weather industry and the academic and research communities 

each have important and complementary roles to play. It is a 

unique and special partnership and a benefit to the Nation. The 

United States government collects and disseminates data from 

local and remote sensing platforms, runs forecast models and prepares and makes special warnings. Weather companies and academic and research institutions use this information and also collect and disseminate data and make weather forecasts and warnings, some specific and tailored and some for the general public. 

The joint system of public and private cooperation helps to save 

countless lives and prevent hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage a year in the United States. In fact, it has a name: 

the Public/Private Partnership. And it has been held up as a model 

by other Federal agencies and even a recent Executive Order mentioned it this month. 

In 1962, if I had told anyone that a company named 

AccuWeather by 2008 would tell a manufacturing facility in Mississippi, a thousand miles away, 21 minutes in advance, that a tornado was headed right at it and that they needed to shelter their 

people and that the private weather warning would save 88 lives 

in a single electronic message, it would have not been believed, but 

it and similar situations have happened now repeatedly. 

The government is uniquely positioned to ensure and enhance 

the provision of weather data and the issuance of warnings for the 
16 

public aimed at the protection of life and property. These activities 

require research and development, transfer of knowledge between 

government agencies and the private sector, and this is needed 

with regard to advanced radar technologies, aerial observation systems, high-performance computing networks, advanced forecast 

modeling and other government-appropriate activities. We all need 

to protect this core functionality and the research that keeps the 

entire American weather enterprise ahead of the curve. 

Of special focus during Superstorm Sandy was the ECMWF, socalled European model, which did a better job at some points in the 

storm track than U.S. models did. This gap presents issues from 

an economic safety and national security standpoint. Relying on 

other countries for better weather models places America in a weak 

and subservient position. 

Weather research and development and the creation and operation of core infrastructure remain a matter of national government urgency, which the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act 

will help to address. Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Myers follows:] 
17 

Subcommittee on Environment of the Committee on Science, Space and 

Technology 

Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting 

Thursday, May 23, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building 

Barry Lee Myers, CEO, AccuWeather, Inc. 

Formal Remarks 

Thank you for inviting me to speak today. 

On average, the United States experiences 100,000 thunderstorms annually, resulting in 

more than 1,200 tornadoes. 

The tornado is the most violent storm on Earth. 

The United States has more tornados than any nation; in fact, we have four times the 

number in all of Europe. 

We also report more violent EF4 and EFS tornadoes than anywhere else. 

When hit by a powerful tornado, often entire buildings are destroyed. •. sometimes 

literally wiped off the face of the earth. 

We saw the devastating and heart sickening results of this on Monday in Oklahoma. 

The Magic of Weather Forecasting. 

Meteorology is a rewarding field and also, like the job of first responders, one often filled 

with gratitude and devastating horror, all at the same time. 

It is somewhat like being in the Twilight Zone because those of us in the field of 

meteorology have the ability to tell, with significant accuracy, what the future will hold. 

We can tell what the temperature will be tomorrow or next week and whether it will be 

sunny or cloudy. 

We can tell whether in the next 30 minutes, people are likely to be killed if they continue 

to stand where there are - in the path of a tornado or tsunami. 

Based on seeing the future, one can decide whether to start planning to move the Sunday 

wedding indoors or under a tent. One can decide to take shelter, or leave town, and save a 

life. 

We have a Crystal Ball that allows us to know the future. It is a privilege to have 

it. And it is a responsibility to continually improve the tools we have, and might 

develop, to improve the clarity of that crystal ball, to save lives and help people 

prosper. 

1 
18 

The crystal ball in am referring to is not actually round and clear; and when it is seen, one 

may not realize they saw it. 

But there is a magic in meteorology. 

From Government Operation to a Partnership Enterprise 

This year marks the 50th Anniversary of AccuWeather's creation and the 30'h Anniversary of 

The Weather Channel. That is interesting in light of how far the weather enterprise, and 

especially the weather industry, has come. 

I will tell you that when the first customer of the company that would grow to be 

AccuWeather signed up for $50 a month in 1962, meteorology was still in relative infancy. 

And what would become the American Weather Enterprise - consisting of the U.S. Weather 

Bureau (later NOAA's National Weather Service), academic and research organizations, and 

America's weather industry - was not a full concept in 1962. 

TIROS-l was launched just two years earlier and had operated for 78 days. And the first 

recorded weather radar observation occurred only 9 years before. 

Absent a garage, in 1962, work building AccuWeather actually began around my older 

brother's kitchen table with a single rotary dial telephone. Joel Myers made perhaps 10,000 

calls to secure the first dozen or so customers in the first two years. 

2 

So it would seem that the competitive landscape was wide open for those who would make 

the effort. 

But that was not so. 

At the time, weather forecasting was more art, than science, and even a forecast for a 

heavy snow storm just hours away might result in a sunny afternoon. 

And a tornado might form at night and in the darkness, unknown to those in its deadly path 

- as no radar was there to help a forecaster spot a hook echo signature. 

A storm like Hurricane Sandy, without a weather satellite, would have thought to have 

moved away out into the ocean and gone, only to return as a surprise. It would have been 

like the great Galveston hurricane of 1900 that no one knew was coming, because there 

were no eyes in the sky. 

In 1962, most of the weather information reaching bUSiness, industry, the media, and the 

public came from the United States Weather Bureau - the government. 

So, the idea of starting a weather company, literally on pocket change, and competing with 

the government's free services, is the story of AccuWeather ... and American's weather 

industry in general. 

When Joel and I were thinking through the weather company concept in those early years -

probably 95% of all the weather information reaching the public came from the 

government. 

Government employees did the weather broadcasts on radio. 
19 

Government employees did the newspaper weather maps and charts for The Associated 

Press and many newspapers. 

Government employees consulted free with anyone who called them on the phone or 

stopped into their offices, and provided special scheduled services to large and small 

companies. 

At the same time, as our business struggled to grow through the 1960s and 1970s, 

sometimes government employees discouraged potential customers from using our 

services, calling them up and offering services for "free," at government expense. 

It was like the Post Office and Federal Express, except it would be like the Post Office 

offering to carry every letter without postage, and every package for free. 

Despite that, it is estimated today, that 95% of the weather information reaching business 

and industry, the media, and the public comes - not from the National Weather Service -

but from AccuWeather and other members of America's weather industry. 

A complete reversal from 1962! 

Basis for America's Weather Success 

In 1994, I was asked to offer thoughts to the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization 

about weather information and its use. What I said was, in part: 

Viewed broadly, weather is a world-wide resource. 

In gathering weather information, time is of the essence. 

In analyzing it, and in distributing the results of that analysis of weather 

observations, time is critical. 

And, in getting this analysis into the hands of those who need it to protect life and 

property, not only is time critical, but the very nature of the message and its 

understandability by those receiving it, is paramount. 

In the United States, the National Weather Service has a speCific role to play and America's 

weather industry, and the academic and research communities, each have important and 

complementary roles to play. It is a unique environment and special partnership for the 

benefit of the public. 

The laws of the United States do not hamper or restrict the nature of the private sector. In 

fact, unlike many other countries, they encourage private sector and especially weather 

industry activities. 

3 

The United States government collects, and disseminates data from local and remote sensor 

platforms, runs forecast models, and prepares and makes special warnings and also general 

public forecasts. 

Weather companies and academic and research institutions also collect and disseminate 

data, and make weather forecasts, some specific and tailored and some general public 

forecasts. 
20 

Weather companies also develop communication methods designed to move weather 

information as quickly and as understandably as possible to the end user. 

In fact, the government and the weather industry work together, to carry out these 

functions. 

4 

This joint system of public and private cooperation helps to save countless lives and prevent 

hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage per year in the United States - in fact it 

has a name - The Public/Private Partnership. 

This cooperative effort, better than anywhere else on earth, is dedicated to the proposition 

that weather information is (1) highly time sensitive and (2) a perishable scientific 

commodity, which, if utilized quickly and communicated to people who are in a position to 

act, effects real economic efficiencies, saves lives, and, results in benefit to the nation. 

Another guiding principle is that all scientists should be free to access scientific data so that 

they may render timely viewpoints and opinions on what future weather may be - that is 

create forecasts and warnings. 

This freedom of access to SCientific data and its free use for the benefit of society is typically 

American. 

In the United States this "free and open access" is founded upon principles having to do 

with free speech and freedom of information. 

These comments seem self-evident to many. In making these remarks to the World 

Meteorological Organization, almost 20 years ago, these comments did not seem selfevident to many of the hundreds in the audience from around the world. 

The weather industry in the United States was born of the concept of "free and open" 

availability of weather information. 

It has led the world as a model of growing success, transitioning from a govemment agency 

"doing it all," at the end of World War II, to massive infusion of weather into every 

America's life through companies like The Weather Channel and AccuWeather - and a 

growing global presence by American companies as the preferred suppliers of weather to 

the world. 

It has been a transition of work from the government to private industry involving no letting 

of government contracts, no industry subsidies, and no cost to the government. 

In fact a tax paying industry creating perhaps tens of thousands of jobs - has been born. 

It truly has built on a concept that if information is free for all, we should leave the rest to 

ingenious, innovative, and entrepreneurs, who would find ways to make a viable industry. 

By the end of 2013, figures suggest that American Weather Companies will have weather 

apps and access portals on or accessible from perhaps two billion digital devices worldwide. 

People who had no weather forecast of merit for 25 minutes ahead, now have forecasts, on 

an hour by hour basis, for 25 days ahead on AccuWeather.com. 
21 

People who had no warnings for severe and deadly weather, now can use at a device that 

looks like something they would have used to ask "Scotty beam me up" that contains more 

information than Star Trek creators ever imagined. 

These comments seem self-evident to many today. 

5 

In 1994 if I had told anyone that by 2008 a private weather company in Pennsylvania would 

tell a manufacturing facility in MisSissippi, a thousand miles away, 21 minutes in advance, 

that a severe tornado was heading right at it and they needed to shelter their people - and 

that the private weather waming would save 88 lives in a single electronic message - it 

would not have been believed. 

In 2005 the U. S. Congress Bi-partisan Committee on the review of Hurricane Katrina cited 

AccuWeather saying ~AccuWeather issued a forecast predicting the target of Katrina's 

landfall nearly 12 hours before the NHC [National Hurricane Centerj issued its first warning, 

and argued the extra time could have aided evacuation of the region." 

I am not telling you this to place AccuWeather in the spotlight. My friends at The Weather 

Channel and at many other non-governmental organizations have this and other important 

capabilities. 

Everywhere within the American Weather Enterprise there are meteorologists, scientists, 

researchers, and professionals of all kinds of equal merit. 

But the government is uniquely positioned to ensure and enhance the provision of weather 

data and the issuance of warnings for the public aimed at the protection of life and property. 

These activities also require research and development, transfer of knowledge, technologies 

and applications to other government agencies and the private sector. 

And this is needed with regard to advanced radar technologies, aerial observing systems, 

high performance computing networks, advanced forecast modeling and other governmentappropriate activities. 

We all need to protect this core functionality and the research that keeps the entire 

American weather enterprise ahead of the curve. 

Free and Open Access Drives America's Unique Success 

So indulge me for a few minutes to point out that if we want to successfully approach the 

present problems the weather enterprise may face we should understand that the huge 

success we have had, did not occur serendipitously. It was well planned, thought through, 

and took much hard work in all sectors of the weather enterprise over many years. 

In 1980 the Paperwork Reduction Act was passed. The law stated its purpose was, among 

other things to: 
22 

Ensure the greatest possible public benefit from information created, collected, maintained, 

used, shared, and disseminated by or for the Federal Government. 

6 

It also said one of its purposes was to provide for the dissemination of public information on 

a timely basis, on equitable terms, and in a manner that promotes the utility of the 

information to the public and makes effective use of information technology. 

In follow up to the law, the Office of Management and Budget issued Circular A-130, which 

was updated over the following decades. 

The Circular is lengthy, but states in part: 

The free flow of information between the government and the public is essential to a 

democratic SOciety. It requires dissemination of information on equitable and timely 

terms. 

It states the government must avoid establishing, or permitting others to establish 

on their behalf, exclusive, restricted, or other distribution arrangements that 

interfere with the availability of information dissemination on a timely or equitable 

basis. 

- It declares agencies shall avoid establishing restrictions or regulations, including the 

charging of fees or royalties, on the re-use, resale, or re-dissemination of Federal 

information, setting user charges at a level only sufficient to recover the cost of 

dissemination, but no higher. 

Under Section lOS of the Copyright Act of the United States, in general, government 

information is not entitled to domestic copyright protection declaring it free - domestically. 

The 1991 NWS Public Private Partnership policy was an early cooperative attempt to 

implement concepts from the Paperwork Reduction Act, Circular A-130 and issues relating 

to the growing weather industry. 

About ten years later the National Research Council was requested by the National weather 

Service to undertake a study of the status of the enterprise and the Fair Weather Report 

was issued in 2003. 

This led to the AMS Commission on Weather and Climate Enterprise. 

And, the Fair Weather Report led to a new partnership policy issued by NOAA governing its 

relationship with America's weather industry. 

In the main policy section, the first sentence says: "NOAA will adhere to the poliCies 

contained in the Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB Circular A-130 and other relevant laws." 

The second sentence says: "These poliCies are based on the premise that government 

information is a valuable national resource, and the benefits to society are maximized when 

government information is available in a timely and equitable manner to all.· 

It goes on to endorse "Open and unrestricted access." 
23 

And further that NOAA will promote the open and unrestricted exchange of environmental 

information worldwide. 

7 

NOAA also states it will avoid duplication and competition in areas not related to the NOAA 

mission. 

So today's policies trace their origins to the core nature of the republic and critical pieces of 

federal legislation and rules long a part of the fabric of the country's legal structure. 

Building on this, NOAA and NWS have developed formal and internal directives defining 

what they will do and not do and specifically stating where government personal will defer 

to the America's weather industry. 

Even the Weather Ready Nation program now specifically endorses the role of America's 

weather industry and states that the requirements and activities of Weather Ready Nation 

participants may be fulfilled through arrangements with America's weather industry. 

And, the Open Data Executive Order signed by President Obama just this month on May 9, 

2013 stated: 

"For example, decades ago, the Federal Government made both weather data and the 

Global Positioning System (GPS) freely available to anyone. Since then, American 

entrepreneurs and innovators have used these resources to create navigation systems, 

weather newscasts and warning systems, location-based applications, precision farming 

tools, and much more 

Nature of America's Weather I ndustry Success 

America's Weather Industry is the most robust weather industry existing in the world today. 

AccuWeather and other companies in the weather industry are out of the kitchen, and into 

every ones garage, home, television, radio, newspaper, internet, and mobile device. And 

yes, back into the kitchen on Samsung refrigerator digital screen displays. 

Weather is on the gas pump where you fuel your car or truck. 

It is on the electronic signage in your doctor's office or retail store. 

It is on the counter of the check-in desk at the hotel where you stay. 

If products travel by rail or truck, America's weather industry helps get them to the nation. 

If food is served, the industry helped grow it and assisted the commodities traders who 

transacted in it. 

In banking or financial services the industry helps customers be more efficient and better 

able to pay their loans and increase their depOSits. 

In insurance, we help in planning for losses and adjusting them after a weather-related loss. 

Weather is about the national economy. 
24 

No matter the business, you can protect property, increase efficiencies, and yes - save 

lives. 

The weather is also the news every day. 

It is the single most accessed piece of information watched, listened for, or selected on 

radio, television, the wired web, and mobile devices. 

You can watch local weather channels. 

You can access the AccuWeather forecast on AccuWeather.com from anywhere on earth. 

AccuWeather and other weather sources are available on just about any mobile phone or 

other mobile device you carry and your friends and family might carry. 

And the AccuWeather mobile web site is available globally and in 39 languages. 

You find it as a widget you can click on, on the screen of your new television set. 

So weather is a media phenomenon, and it drives weather companies that wish to be 

successful - to become media companies - with weather as their core information. 

While the weather may be interesting to many, and of economic importance to others, 

accuracy of weather information is the most important secret sauce of the weather - for 

bUSinesses, government, and the public. 

And the secret sauce potentiating accuracy - is communication. 

The most accurate forecast or warning, not communicated in an effective and timely way, 

not understood and not leading to action, is merely a theoretical exercise. 

So many weather companies are media companies empowering all weather information to 

be actionable and empowering businesses and people who receive it to use it to their 

advantage. 

8 

But the fact that America's weather industry is the most robust on the world today does not 

mean the American Weather Enterprise has the best that is possible. There is room for 

enhancement, there is room for improvement. 

And improvement in the field of meteorology means saving lives and property. 

Success Stories from the Partnership 

Often warnings are issued by the government for tornados. 

Usually community-warning sirens go off. 

On February 5, 2008, at about 5:37 PM, a machinery company plant in Oxford, Mississippi, 

was bustling with activity, as 88 people were at work. 

No government tornado warning extended to the location of the plant. 
25 

No warning siren was sounded. 

In the winter darkness miles away, a tornado dipped from the sky, unseen by the naked 

eye, and began racing toward the plant. 

Twenty-one minutes later the violent tornado struck the plant with a horrifying fury ripping 

and chewing the plant to pieces. 

Steel girders twisted and collapsed, metal walls shredded. 

All that debris fell in to the space people occupied inside. 

9 

The calm orderly work environment was suddenly a violent swirling mass of shrapnel, totally 

exposed to the monster storm. 

It left a picture, of a plant perhaps hit by an aerial bomb or a terrorist attack. People would 

be lucky to have survived. 

As the monster tornado formed in the darkness that winter night and began to dip from the 

sky, and started its race toward the people in the Caterpillar plant, a meteorologist at our 

office in Wichita was at work. 

He saw a tornado signature on a radar image on a computer screen. He didnljust 

"happen" to see it. He was looking for it. 

He knew what circumstances could lead to a tornado that night. 

He had cutting-edge computer tools, developed by, and proprietary to AccuWeather, that 

notified him to be on guard. 

He had access to the government's Doppler radar system; that did not exist in 1962. 

At another time, or in another place, he might have looked on in horror wondering what 

humanity the monster storm would claim. 

Instead, he pressed a key stroke and an AccuWeather computer sent an electroniC message 

to another computer at the Caterpillar plant in Oxford, Mississippi. 

A human at the plant was required to confirm receipt of the message. 

In fact, a person-to-person telephone contact was also immediately established with the 

plant's safety director. 

The message was clear; a tornado was forming about 30 miles southwest of the plant, and 

may be at or near the plant in about 22 minutes. ' 

The first images of the destroyed plant were seen by the people who worked at the plant, 

not as they watched the horror around them, not as they and their co-workers were 
26 

10 

contemplating death, but as they emerged from their tornado shelter, after the tornado had 

done its destructive work and moved on. 

Not a single person was injured, not a single person died. They all went home - shaken, but 

safe. 

Hundreds of miles away, an AccuWeather meteorologist also went home - shaken, but safe. 

He went home knowing he had just saved the lives of scores of people, and the misery that 

death and injury would have brought to their families. 

The government/private sector collaboration worked. A government radar network and a 

private weather company, working together, saved lives. 

Why Support Weather Research and the American Weather enterprise? 

Questions arise as other governments in other nations invest in improved modeling both in 

accuracy and timeliness. 

This means others can forecast better for American shores than America itself. 

Of special focus was the ECMWF (so called European Model) during Hurricane Sandy, which 

model did a better job at some pOints in the storm track, than the U.S. models did. 

This gap presents issues from an economic, safety, and national security standpoint. 

From an economic standpoint foreign companies and investors could potentially get the 

jump on Americans relative to weather events occurring on American shores. 

Additionally, as America's weather industry continues to expand worldwide, restricted 

access to quality models could place it in a position of having second class primary 

information. 

And interestingly, many foreign governments do not look at the weather industry as their 

partners, like we do here in America. And so those countries do not get to leverage the 

value of their government investment, like we do here. So a dollar spent on improved 

modeling, for example, in America, has greater value to our economy than a dollar spent by 

other governments. 

Relying on other countries, for better weather models, places America in a weakened 

position in time of national and international crisis. And we cannot get full access even to 

the European Model from what my government sources tell me. 

Weather infrastructure and related research and development, and operation of core 

infrastructure remain a matter of national urgency today. 

Many functions that were only government functions at the dawn of the development of 

America's weather industry 50 years ago - such as media forecasting, business forecasting, 

and general public forecasting have been subsumed by America's weather industry. 
27 

Even some data sources such as mesonets and lightning networks have been taken under 

the wing of private sector entities. 

But much remains, and may forever need to remain, government functionality. 

50 I entreat you to consider joining with me to support five primary tenets: 

1. To empower and facilitate the American weather enterprise to achieve its full 

potential 

11 

2. To define the value chain of all parts of the American weather enterprise to ensure 

the American public is served with the best possible information employing the most 

cost efficient combination of private and public institutions. 

3. To place special focus and funding on NOAA/NW5 role as the builder of the nation's 

core weather infrastructure, core data sensing, core research and model 

development, operational modeling, public warnings for weather events that pose 

imminent threat to life and property, and working with America's weather industry, 

to achieve national and world-wide leadership in weather and weather media. 

4. To focus federal support to ensure a legislative and budgetary agenda which makes 

maximum and optimum use of all parts, public and private, of the American weather 

enterprise. 

5. And to encourage the execution of the aligned missions and roles through public and 

private partnerships. 

Thank you for your time. 

END 
28 

Barry lee Myers is the Chief Executive Officer of AccuWeather, Inc., a position he has held since late 

2007. AccuWeather is an American iconic brand in weather known around the world. 

He previously served as the company's Executive Vice President and General Counsel. 

Recognized as an expert in public/private relationships in the weather and weather media industry 

worldwide, (although not himself a meteorologist), Mr. Myers has served as special advisor to three 

separate directors of the National Weather Service and is a professional member of the American 

Meteorological Society (AMS). 

He has been an invited speaker at the World Meteorological Organization (the United Nations body that 

coordinates international weather information) and at the World Federation of Scientists, on the topics 

of weather data exchange and public-private sector relationships in the weather field. 

Mr. Myers was involved in advocating for language applying to real-time government data in the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, and worked with the author of OMB Circular A-130 to further support this 

concept. This portion of the statute serves as a basis for the free and open exchange of weather and 

other government data 

He currently serves on the Environmental Information Services Working Group (EISWG) for the NOAA 

Science Advisory Board. Mr. Myers also is on the steering committee of the AMS Commission on the 

Weather and Climate Enterprise. He serves on the Boards of the Weather Coalition and of the American 

Weather and Climate Industry Association. 

During Mr. Myers' tenure as CEO, AccuWeather has become the leading force in weather on mobile 

devices on a global basis. AccuWeather is now the largest mobile weather provider worldwide and in 

January became the only private company authorized in China to do business as a weather provider in 

the digital media space there. 
29 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you, Mr. Myers. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Kirchner. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN KIRCHNER, 

PRESIDENT, GEOOPTICS 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Chairman Stewart, Ranking Member Bonamici 

and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, it is indeed the 

first time I have been to a hearing such as this, and it is a privilege 

for me to be present here today and provide you testimony in the 

absence of my colleague and our CEO, Vice Admiral Conrad 

Lautenbacher, former NOAA Administrator. The admiral sends his 

regards and regrets his inability to be here today. 

We also pass on our condolences and thoughts with those in 

Oklahoma as well. 

The U.S. weather forecasting capabilities are in need of repair 

and attention not solely because of technical shortcomings, inadequate computing power, or deficient weather models but also because of the explosive growth in the cost of acquiring critical 

weather data from satellites and the resulting significant delays in 

new satellite programs. The traditional methods for the collection 

of satellite data effectively block new instruments in more potent, 

lower cost and proven data sensing instruments. The net effect is 

damaging our Nation’s ability to keep pace in weather observations 

and predictions. A transition of the weather data acquisition community to 21st-century methods, both technical and economic, is 

overdue and our weather-dependent economy depends on it. 

The genius of American innovation and initiative has had technical and market solutions to the weather data crisis at the ready 

for many years. As analogs, a few working cases from related sectors already exist. At NASA, instead of operating a fleet of costly 

space shuttles, NASA has contracted with the private sector for its 

payload needs and works cooperatively with other governments. 

The commercial satellite-based communications industry provides 

the government 80 percent of its bandwidth globally. The commercial satellite-based imagery industry also provides government 

much of the imagery outside of the intelligence community application. 

With these analogs in mind, the focus would be better placed on 

achieving data quality, accuracy and excellence from wherever that 

data may come rather than necessarily owning that data infrastructure. The added irony is that the costs of technologies of every 

kind have plummeted over the last 20 years except not seemingly 

in the wider space domain. Tragically, the benefits of mobile and 

miniaturized technologies that we all carry in our pockets are 

seemingly sheltered from the critical space mission of forecasting 

weather. 

GeoOptics, our company, will advance a small satellite cellularlike observing model that starts with a GPS radio occultation. We 

believe an integrated private company can deploy such systems for 

a fraction over current cost to government. GeoOptics working with 

private-sector partners and the science community can realize uncommon efficiencies to deliver path-breaking science speedily at 

bargain prices for the public good and lower government’s cost for 

satellite weather data. 
30 

We want to emphasize that today, our government and, as a consequence, our economy and citizens, is facing a weather data crisis 

that can be relieved almost immediately through procurement reform that would unleash the resourcefulness and the ingenuity of 

American private enterprise. In doing so, the government will foster a vibrant and innovative free market in satellite weather data, 

creating a new weather data economy that will be supported by 

weather data security that will once again stock our shelves with 

the best possible weather products and services. 

In sum, we highlight some of the following comments regarding 

the bill and general recommendations. In section 3 regarding forecasting innovation, it mentions little regarding the general principal of the role of commercial private sources of innovation or the 

potential role of public-private partnerships; it could. Section 6 regarding OSSEs does not mention the potential role of the private 

sector or scientific university sources of research to support these 

efforts, which it also could. In section 8, we believe that overall procurement reform is needed. Elements of this reform could include 

shift the focus of Federal agencies and users away from the ownership of weather data infrastructure, open competition to acquire 

the best, most effective and lowest-cost efficient data. Government 

could articulate—should articulate and implement procurement reform by creating new performance-based pay-on-delivery data purchase procurement models that enable Federal agencies to immediately contract for services they need now from private companies 

that can provide them. This approach will energize capital for private-held companies and aid in rapid deployment of needed product 

and services. Establish specific programs within NOAA and the Air 

Force and possibly other agencies with budget authority beginning 

in Fiscal Year 2015. We recommend satellite data purchase line 

items of $10 each for NOAA and Air Force in 2015, growing to $50 

million for each by 2020 accompanied by RFQs and/or BAAs soliciting proposals. 

These recommendations and actions are necessary to ensure that 

the United States is never again lagging behind any country or 

consortium of countries in weather prediction or forecasting. Opening up the government through changes to procurement to very economical, proven and reliable data sources that meet the standards 

and specifications of NOAA, Air Force and other users will be the 

act that infuses innovation and creativity into our Nation’s weather 

enterprise. The results of this change to the weather enterprise will 

not only enhance public safety through better forecasting but will 

also feed our economy and society with an important source of jobs 

and help participants in our economy manage vital risk. 

Additional examples of GeoOptics’ efforts in a small satellite 

cellularized world are available on our Web site. Admiral 

Lautenbacher and I will be happy to provide any follow-up comments needed by the Subcommittee. I will be happy to answer your 

questions. Thank you. 

.The prepared statement of Mr. Kirchner follows:] 
31 

STATEMENT OF MR. JON KIRCHNER 

PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER 

GEOOPTICS INC. 

BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE AND TECHNOLOGY 

ADDRESSING THE RESTORAL OF U.S. LEADERSHIP IN WEATHER FORECASTING 

May 23, 2013 

Chairman Stewart, Ranking Member Bonamici and distinguished members of the 

Subcommittee: It is a privilege for me to be present here today and provide testimony to you in 

the absence of my colleague and our company's CEO, Vice Admiral Conrad Lautenbacher, 

Ret., former NOAA Administrator from 2002-2008. The Admiral sends his regards, and 

regrets his inability to be here today. He and I will be happy to provide any follow-up 

cOlll1llents needed by the Subcolll1llittee. 

The U.S. weather forecasting capabilities are in need of repair and attention not solely because 

oftechnical shortcomings, inadequate computing power, or deficient we-ather models - but also 

because of the explosive growth in the cost of acquiring critical weather data from satellites and 

the resulting significant delays in new satellite programs. The status quo -- of continuously 

purchasing costly systems and marginally-effective improvements in current weather sensors --

effectively blocks investments in potentially new, more potent, lower cost, and proven data 

sensing instruments, and is damaging our Nation's ability to keep pace in weather observations 

and predictions. 

The irony is that the costs of technologies of every kind - some of tile very tec1mologies used in 

the very newest satellite weather sensors -Ilave pllUIDneted over the past 20 years, except, 

conspicuously, in tile space domain. A transition of weather data acquisition to 21st century 

methods, both tec1mical and economic, is overdue and the weather-dependent economy 

depends on it. The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported to the National Research COImcil ill 

the National Academy Press pUblication, nle Atlllospheric Sciences Entering the Twenty-Firs! 

Century: 

"There can be 110 dOllbt that weather is important to the U.S. economyalld to the health alld 

safety of its citi;ens. Estimates l'al)', bllt 15% to 41% of the U.s. gross domestic product is 

ajJected by weather, and hundreds olmilliolls oldollars are sOl'ed each year by taking 

action based on illlpro\'ed forecasts and weather 1I'al'llillgs. " 

The 2011 figure for the Gross Domestic Product is $14.99 trillion. Using these estimates, the 

range ofthe economy directly impacted by weather is $3.3-$6.3 trillion. These cOlll1llents were 

published in 1998 as we entered the 21" Centmy. Since weather conditions affect so much of 

the US economy it only makes sense in this century to have the best sensing instrmnents to 

provide critical weather data at a cost we call afford. 

1 
32 

Tbe genius of American iImovation and initiative bas had technical and market solutions to the 

weatber data crisis at the ready for many years now. It is no longer cost-effective for the 

government to keep these solutions on the sidelines. One working government case study for 

this already exists with NASA. Instead of operating a fleet of costly space shuttles, NASA has 

contracted witb tbe private sector for its payload needs and works throu!ili cooperative 

agreements with scientific space programs from other cOlmtries. With this model in mind, the 

focus might be better placed on achieving data quality, accuracy and excellence - from 

wberever data migllt come - rather than weather data infrastructure ownership. Economic 

imperatives beg such a new perspective. It is time for the govermnent to start tangibly 

augmenting this transition - with no less than the U.S. weather forecasting program at stake. 

One step: We respectfully recommend that you enable federal agencies to purchase satellite 

weather data from commercial providers, aided by contingent, milestone-based contracting 

vehicles and procurement process that both enable competition and incentivize the private 

sector to take action. There are a number of competitive, creative companies that will promptly 

respond to supply the Nation with a botmty of new weather data - vastly more data, better 

quality data, new kinds of data - and do so far more quickly, far more inexpensively, and with 

zero financial risk to the taxpayer. Another working model exists wherein the satellite-based 

commtmications industry provides the US Government a large majority of its needed 

bandwidth, commercially. In yet another, the satellite-based imagery industry also provides the 

US Government with much of its needed imagery. cOlmnercially. It is tinle for the govenunent 

to encourage commercial providers of satellite-based weather data infrastructure to address 

similar needs of tile earth observation and remote sensing cOlmnunity. 

A little recent history: In early 2007, the Office of Space Commercialization (OSC), under the 

leadership of Vice Admiral Courad Lautenbacher, then Administrator of NOAA, instituted a 

fledgling satellite data purchase program. The OSC met with private sector companies and 

solicited data suppliers of all kinds. In July 2007 OSC issued its first Request for Infol1llation 

for commercial solar irradiance data. In the Fall 2007 they issued a comprehensive RFI for 

satellite weather and enviromnental data, listing a dozen critical products. Dozens of private 

companies responded witll creative ideas of evelY descriptiou. 

In 2008, NOAA followed up by releasing a fomlal Request for Quotes ii-om private companies 

to supply those satellite weather and environmental products. They ftmded several dozen 

studies by companies large and small, each laying out a plan for providing data commercially, 

quoting fII1Il prices. Companies were told that by spring 2009, NOAA would select the initial 

products for acquisition, that funding for purchase of that data would be requested for FY20 I 0 

- or FY2011 at the latest. NOAA was OIl a proactive path to filling tlle looming weather data 

gap long before it would ever materialize. Companies across the Nation mobilized to provide 

commercial data, new enterprises were fonued, and the private sector raised capital preparing 

to offer these new products. 

Unfortunately, on tbe road to tbis would-be cormllercial realization, tlle program was shelved. 

Inquiries to NOAA from bidding companies continued to be met with encouraging words. But 

little to no substantive progress has occurred since. 

In the meantime, the average cost-to-in-orbit-delivery per sensing instrtunent on NPOESS/JPSS 

has gone from $80 million in 2005 to over $500 million today, and the JPSS launch has slipped 

2 
33 

another ten years. TIle annual budget for JPSS is less than the progr8Ul's anllual cost growth. 

Its future remains clouded. Please consider the following: With $80 million - the original 

estimate for aile JPSS instrument - a private sector company can deploy a constellation of a 

dozen small satellites, each carrying a state-of-the-art sensor able to measure atmospheric 

temperature, pressure, density, and other critical weather paranleters with accuracies and 

resolutions far surpassing those of any instrument that will fly on JPSS, and with far greater 

forecast impact per measurement, as documented by NOAA's own impact studies. With 

$500M a private sector company could put up more than 100 such satellites. The first 

instruments could be flying 18 months from now, at no up-front investment by, and thus no 

fmanciaillsk to the govermllent. 

The ultimate increased cost to government, and to those served by less than the best possible 

forecasts, is incalculable. The Space Act of 1998 and its successors, and current national 

remote sensing policy, explicitly encourage the development of private satellite data suppliers 

and forbid the government from deploying competing systems. Yet in practice, we have not 

seen any tangible encouragement to transition government practice to these laws and policies: 

and to support the technical and economic engines of American private enterprise in an arena 

where their innovations are most urgently needed. 

Moreover, the fruits of the cellular/mobile tec1moiogies that we all carry in our pockets are 

seenliugly sheltered from the critical mission of forecasting severe weather. These eX8Ulples 

have transformed our lives and commerce in the past decade - the smartphone, tablets, and 

numerous others. Infinitely more powerful than what we knew just 10-15 years back, these 

devices are ubiquitous, affordable and accessible to those of the most modest means. The sanle 

benefits of these technologies offer the US weather forecasting infrastructure greater power and 

greatly reduced costs, and they are available now to the earth observation and remote sensing 

satellite arena -- but have yet to be captured. 

Excellent eX8Ulples of our own efforts are available on our website - www.geooptics.com - and 

can be described more expansively in written documents that we would be happy to provide to 

the Subcornmittee. We want to emphasize that today our govemment - and as a consequence 

our economy and citizens - is facing a weather data crisis that can be relieved almost 

immediately through the simple act of unleashing the resourcefulness and genius of American 

private enterprise. In doing so the government will foster a vibrant and innovative free market 

in satellite weather data, a new "weather data economy" that will be supported by "weatller 

data security" that will once agaiu stock our shelves with the best possible weather products 

and services. 

To 8Ulplif'y the point of the value of data excellence, and having access to cost-effective and 

efficacious data sources, in lieu of data infrastl1lcture ownership, please consider what was 

recently reported in the Wasbington Post on March 3, 2013 by Professor Ric1lard Rood, an 

atmospheric scientist at the University of Michigan: 

"In contrast, the European Centrefor Medillm-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), which 

011'11$ 110 illstnlmellts, can and does idelltiJj' the breather dara} obsen'ations that would 

most impr01'e the forecast. ECMWF im'ests ill obsen'atioll quality control alld the 

obsen'atioll-I1se interface. /11 the past decade, ECMWF has beell able to implement 

am'allced methods that blend 0/' assimilate obsen'ed [data} informatiol/ into the weather 

3 
34 

model. As eor~v as 1995, The weaTiler forecasts from The ECMWF were emerging as higher 

qllality than u.s. weather products. u.s. scientists and science managers fOlll1d this 

del'elopment a matter of great concern. 

ECMWF kn01t'S to iI/I'est in software and to spend on compllfers. For example, when faced 

\l'ith a paradigm shift ill computational technolog)" as ill the late 1990s, ECMWF im'ested, 

far in admnce, in both software and sllstained ,'endor-based benchmarking ill order to be 

ready when the paradigm shift occurred. 11lis practice has continued. in the United States, 

we remain large~l' reactionary to the e\'olutioll of high-performance computing systems. 

Therefore, each shift in compllting techllology is a moment ill time that the/orecast gap is 

increased, 

ECMWF has integrated research alld operations Together with illstilutioll-wide attentioll to 

Science-based, mlidated products. This stallds in contrast to the United States, where we 

dralt'sharp contrasts between research and operatiolls. ill the Ullited States scielltists alld 

science-program managers place high mille on research, especial{v basic research. There 

is lower mlue on IISe-dril'en research; synthesis o/research to prot'ide products; the 

complex entanglement of obsen'atiollal, complitaTiollal and scielltiftc capabilities that IIIllst 

be brollght together to produce a product; and the operations, monitoring and assessment 

0/ those products. " 

In Stnll, we bighligbt tile following recotnlllendations: 

1. Shift tile focus of our US Govenunent weather agencies and users away from a bias of 

ownership of data infrastructure to an operational focus on data excellence and 

operational application of data, infonuation and solutions. Shift that bias to the best, 

most effective and cost-efficient data - no matter where it comes from. 

a, Move to a weatller enterprise biased toward operationally focused outcomes and 

the production of operationally driven forecasting products and technologies -

supported and enabled by the reseal·c!J. community, Start with tile outward, 

market-oriented uses and desired outcomes of our weatller community - and 

work inward towards the reseal'ch community in a more seamless, pragmatic 

reseal'ch-to-operations modeL 

b. As the initial step in making this change, make a general announcement tllat to 

alleviate tlle weather data crisis the govemment, as of now, is in tile market to 

buy satellite weather and space weather data from private suppliers; tIlat this will 

be an ongoing program, so long as qualified suppliers remain; tIlat tile ultinlate 

purpose is to establish a vibrant, iunovative, self-sustaining weather data 

economy in tlle U.S. that will be a model for tlle world. 

2, To actually deliver on this new focus, the US Govenunent must take tile necessary 

action to articulate and implement procurement refonll. 

a. Create a new contingent. milestone-based pay-on-delivery procurement policies, 

procedures and process that enable US agencies to contract for services tIlat they 

need now - from private companies tllat Call provide tllem .. which will help 

underwrite fmancing for tIlese very companies and aid in rapid manufacturing 

and deployment of needed products and services. 

3, Under tbese newly established procurement policies, announce tile government's 

intention to sign actual data purchase contracts inlmediately upon the review and 

4 
35 

selection of proposals. These contracts need not include significant (or any) up-front 

payments. They can be purely pay-on-delivery of validated data, thus exposing the 

government to no financial risk whatever. We advocate a new method for procurement 

and contracting - one that places risk on the private sector and increases competition to 

develop better, more robust teclmologies that will boost the Nation's critical weather 

forecasting infrastructure and, as a result, help grow the economy. 

4. Establish specific programs within both NOAA and the Air Force (AFWA and 

SSAEM), and possibly other agencies, with budget authority beginning in FY2015. We 

recommend satellite data purchase line items ofSlOM each for NOAA and the Air 

Force in FY2015, growing to $50M each by 2020. 

5. As soon as possible, release an RFQ or BAA on behalf of NOAA and the Air Force 

soliciting proposals for commercial data provision begilllling in FY2015. 

It is these recommendations and actions that are necessary to ensure that the US is never again 

lagging behind any COlllltry or consortium of cOlllltries in weather prediction or forecasting. 

Opening up the government to very economical, proven and reliable data services - that meet 

the standards and specifications of NOAA. US Air Force and other users - will be the act that 

infuses innovation and creativity into our nation's weather enterprise. The resnlts of this 

change to the weather enterprise will not only enhance public safety - the protection of life and 

property -- through better forecasting, but will feed our economy with an important source of 

jobs and help participants in our economy manage vital risk. 

Envirolllllental data - big, vollUninous, flowing and open - will also create an industry with 

new and un-thought-of ideas, uses, applications, markets, products and solutions to weather and 

envirolllllenlaI problems. And, by implementing procurement reform policies that enable and 

incentivize the private sector to act nCMI, our government can actually act immecliatelyto: 1) 

resolve weather data gaps and; 2) add value to society and economy. 

Thank you. I would be happy to answer your questions. 

5 
36 

JON KIRCHNER 

Jon Kirchner is President & Chief Operating Officer of GeoOptics, Inc. and a 20-year 

veteran of technology-based businesses having held C-Ievel and general management 

positions of independent entrepreneurial start-ups, the management of large scaled 

engineering-based and aerospace-based companies, as well as start-ups within large, 

well-funded engineering-centered corporations. 

These positions included fUll-time senior executive roles for large satellite communication 

companies Loral Space & Communications and Arqiva Satellite & Media, and start-up 

information services company Handley Group. Client and customer relationships have 

included Intelsat, Lockheed Martin, Echostar, MacDonald Dettwiler, Disney, Verizon, BT, 

DuPont, Cargill and Global Crossing amongst many others. These positions and 

relationships have revolved around building and managing long-term enabling spacebased infrastructure for telecommunications, data networking, broadcast media, earth 

observation and sensing, satellite communications, public safety, energy and information 

management services. 

Mr. Kirchner received his MBA, with Distinction, from Ashridge Management College, 

Hertfordshire, UK, and his BA, in Business Administration, from Westminster College, 

Fulton, Missouri, USA. 
37 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you, Mr. Kirchner. I thank the witnesses again for your testimony, for your dedicated service to our 

Nation. I remind Members that Committee rules limit questioning 

to five minutes, and the chair will at this point open the round of 

questioning. 

Before I do, I ask unanimous consent to recognize Representative 

Bridenstein. Without objection, so ordered. 

The chair now recognizes himself for five minutes for questions. 

I think your testimony illustrates something that I pointed out 

in my opening comments, and that is that we can do better, and 

the innovation and the technology development that your companies represent is encouraging to us. You know, I have done some 

scary things in my life. I was a military B–1 pilot for many years. 

I do a lot of rock-climbing. Heck, I taught six teenagers how to 

drive. But I have never been as scared as I was one night in Texas 

when we lived in the plains of Texas and a storm around us and 

to hear the tornado warning siren go off. It is a terrifying and helpless feeling because there is really not much you can do other than 

pray that the storm misses you and jump in the bathtub, which 

isn’t very comforting actually. 

Mr. Myers, you mentioned the 16-minute warning that we had, 

and 16 minutes is significant, but I would ask, you know, what is 

our goal? How many minutes could we achieve? How many hours 

could we actually be able to provide warning? And I ask that hypothetically, but I would like you to address it if you could in your 

answer. And then what technologies will allow us to do that? And 

then I would like to follow up with Superstorm Sandy if I could, 

recognizing that the technologies for tornado warning is quite different than for hurricane warnings. So if you could, either one of 

you, what is a realistic goal for us in providing warning to people 

and what technologies will help us get to that? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, I would suggest in looking at hurricanes and 

looking at tornados, there is an interesting comparison. Because we 

can see hurricanes, because they are large and they move relatively 

slowly over large land and sea areas, we can evacuate people. In 

fact, the prime objective is to determine the best path and get people out of the way, and we see news stories all the time of people 

who decided they were going to, quote, ride out the storm, and we 

think that is foolish. 

With regard to tornados, we do the opposite. We expect people 

to ride out the storms in their bathtubs. That is not acceptable. 

The only reason that that is the case is because we cannot yet scientifically determine far enough in advance the strength, the exact 

path and location of where a tornado is going to form and where 

it is going to go. What we need to strive for is having sufficient 

lead time so that people can get out of the way. If you are not 

there, you cannot get hurt. We can’t stop the buildings from being 

destroyed. What is that lead time? I don’t know, but it seems to 

me, you know, an hour, two hours, plenty of time for people to get 

out of the way. The science is not there. I don’t know how we are 

going to get it there. I think that is what research is required to 

do. 

Chairman STEWART. Mr. Kirchner, do you have anything to add 

to that? 
38 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Sure. I am probably not in the best position to 

answer what happens, giving a warning minutes before a storm. 

The technology that we work with is in the polar-orbiting, I will 

call it the longer-term forecast realm. But I think within a portfolio 

of capabilities and the ability to do things faster, irrespective of 

whether you are right before the storm or days before the storm, 

the kinds of technologies that we are working with have been proven to, in the example of GPS RO, which is the technology that we 

are first and foremost focused on. There are studies that show that 

a portfolio of GPS RO observations can help four days in advance. 

It can give you eight hours of additional time ahead of existing 

methods of forecasting—eight hours. If you go out 8 days, it can 

help with 15 hours of additional time. Now, that is on the long end, 

but I think within a portfolio of predicting and planning for severity and weather patterns, anything we can do to be efficient and 

faster at any part of that time horizon is going to be extremely 

helpful to weather forecasters. 

Chairman STEWART. Mr. Myers, I would like to come back to you 

if I could and just back up what we started to talk about. You 

know, knowing that technology is emerging and that we can’t predict exactly until we test it and deploy it. With the current technology that you know as under development or being tested, is it 

reasonable to say that we could, say, double the warning time from 

16 to, say, 30 minutes, give people a half-hour or more than that 

even? 

Mr. MYERS. I think we could, and in fact, you know, the 16 minutes was in advance of when that storm actually touched down. 

People on the far end had more warning because it was on the 

ground and people knew it was coming. But as you can see, even 

30 minutes, which was the case at the far end, is not enough, and 

people don’t know what to do. It is interesting because in our business, I mentioned about a plant in Mississippi that we protected, 

and we do this all over the country. But we have specific sites that 

we can forecast for with regard to where a tornado was moving on 

a path. You can’t do that publicly because you have large communities, and people don’t all have shelters and places to go. So there 

needs to be enough lead time. You can probably double with improvement on current technology quickly. The lead time has increased significantly in the last 20 years. 

Chairman STEWART. Okay. Thank you. I am a little bit over my 

time. Thank you to both of you and to the Ranking Member. 

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

for your testimony. 

Mr. Kirchner, you spoke specifically about the bill, so I am going 

to ask this question to you, but if Mr. Myers wants to weigh in, 

that is great too. Section two of the legislation makes weather-related activities the top priority in the planning and management 

of programs within all relevant line offices. So which of the six 

NOAA line offices would you consider to be relevant? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. That is a level of detail regarding the structure 

that I am not acquainted with. I am still relatively new to this industry. I have been in this position for about 6 months. I think the 

portfolio that we address as a company is one of weather data, data 

that serves the operational weather community, the space weather 
39 

community as well as the climate community, and to the extent 

that we can help our customer balance and address those needs, 

we will respond to that as a service company. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you. Mr. Myers, do you have any opinion 

about which of the six NOAA lines offices would be relevant and 

would have to prioritize weather-related activities under the legislation? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, it seems to me the ones that deal with weather 

mostly are the National Weather Service, NESDIS and obviously 

OAR. I know I have seen over time, and I think that one of the 

good provisions in the bill is the need for the agencies to cooperate, 

especially the Weather Service, to make sure that they get the kind 

of research that they think is necessary and that there is a connection between the research that is being done in OAR that is tighter 

than perhaps we see today. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you. One of the concerns that I have, and 

I know I have other colleagues on this Committee who represent 

coastal areas, and in fact, we are having a lot of conversations in 

our Oregon coast about tsunami evacuation. So we are talking 

about how much warning do we need, so that goes on in a different 

context. So my constituents rely on the ocean economy for vital jobs 

in hard-hit coastal areas without research done by NOAA’s Sea 

Grant program on invasive species, for example, without the work 

of NOAA’s cooperative institutes, their livelihoods could be at risk. 

So if weather forecasting is the top priority in every line office, 

which is what we are trying to figure out under the draft proposal, 

what would happen to the climate and oceans and invasive species 

programs and all the other work that NOAA does. I just wanted 

to pose that question because there is a broad mission at NOAA, 

and we need some clarity about weather-related activities being the 

top priority in all relevant line offices. 

I have another question for both of you. The OAR, Office of Atmospheric Research, which is the subject of much of this bill, has 

responsibilities that range well outside of weather research. They 

are also the lead on climate mitigation and adaptation. They do important work on oceans, Great Lakes, invasive species. So some 

have commented that the division between the weather forecasters 

and the research done at NWS and the research done at OAR leads 

to the OAR doing work that has no utility for the forecasters. So 

how do you view the proposal that the weather research be pulled 

out of OAR and moved to NWS to consolidate all of the weather 

work in one place? Would you support that? 

Mr. MYERS. Anything that could improve the way in which the 

research is conducted as it relates to the critical needs of improving 

forecasts to protect life and property I would support. Whether that 

is the best division, I can’t sit here and tell you, but things that 

move in that direction, I think, are useful. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Kirchner, do you have an opinion if the 

weather research be pulled out of OAR and moved to NWS? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Well, I will echo some of what Mr. Myers just 

said. From an organizational perspective, it is about being the most 

effective and efficient in terms of structure. I can’t speak to that 

in terms of how NOAA should operate in that regard. I think the 

most—the thing that I would say is that there are different func-
40 

tions that the organization plays out. There is operational weather, 

which has heavy emphasis coming from NWS. We are supportive 

of all the areas of the weather enterprise that our data and other 

forms of data will support. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you. One more quick question. Section 4 

directs the Assistant Administrator of OAR in coordination with 

the Assistant Administrator of Weather Services to issue a plan to 

restore U.S. leadership in weather modeling prediction and forecasting. That plan is supposed to be issued within 6 months of passage and then annually. Now, I mentioned in my opening statement two reports that the National Academy of Science has done, 

other reports that have recently been done, what National Weather 

Service, for example, worked for more than a year on such a plan. 

So do we need another study? Do we need it annually? If we need 

another study, why should the Assistant Administrator be in 

charge of it? Mr. Kirchner? Oh, I see my time is expired, but if you 

could do a brief response? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Again, I will just, not dissimilar to what I said 

earlier, that structure and how to organize oneself to meet these 

needs is an area that I am not going to be able to speak wholly 

to. We just would look for the best direction as a customer to give 

the market—— 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, and I see my time is expired. Thank 

you. 

Chairman STEWART. Yes, thank you. And gentlemen, we recognize that you are not experts on NOAA organization and structure, 

and that is why we look forward to hearing them from their representative at some time in the future. 

Okay. We now recognize Mr. Rohrabacher for his questions. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I remember when I was about six or seven years old and my family 

came from North Dakotato visit my mother’s sister. It was very 

dark—there was a storm—and the radio said there was a tornado 

that might be happening that night. I recall that we felt absolutely 

helpless and we had no idea. We crawled down—this was into a 

cellar where my aunt had all these little jars of things that she had 

made, jellies and jams and things. We spent the night in this cellar 

underneath the floor, and we had no idea where were the tornados, 

how close they were, but we knew there were tornados. There were 

tornado warnings out there on the radio. And we have advanced so 

dramatically since then. However, it is—we also sat through Hurricane Hazel back in the 1950s. My dad joined the Marine Corps and 

we lived on a Marine base down in North Carolina. In fact, we 

went through two hurricanes at the same year, I remember. It was 

pretty incredible. 

Gentlemen, there is all this talk about the weather getting worse 

than it used to be. Is that experience from your companies and 

your perspectives? You are around weather all the time. Do we 

have worse weather now? Is Sandy so much worse than Galveston, 

as you mentioned, in 1900, which was a horrible loss of life, or are 

we just more aware of the weather now? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, Mr. Rohrabacher, I am not sure if I can answer 

that. I know my grandfather always told me that the winters had 

gotten much milder, that when he was a boy they were much 
41 

worse. I think you are thinking of Hurricane Hazel in 1954 and 

probably Connie and Diane in 1955. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Mr. MYERS. And clearly, when we see events like Sandy and we 

see an event like Moore, Oklahoma, we conclude that things are 

getting worse because where we are and what we see tends to influence us, I think, the most. I don’t know that anyone has statistics that can demonstrate that is the case, but as I said in my talk, 

America really in a sense has the worst weather in the world, and 

it is so variable, the nature of it, from hurricanes to tornados to 

droughts to what have you, that we really need to focus on it, I 

think more than perhaps we have and more than other nations do. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, there has been a lot of talk about climate and weather around here, and when I was young, I just remember people saying that you can—a lot of people are concerned 

about the weather and talk about the weather but nobody does 

anything about it. Now we are being told that we are actually affecting the weather and the long-term climate, which some of us 

are very skeptical about, but whatever it is, we do know that 

weather, for example, in Galveston—how many people lost their 

lives in the Galveston hurricane? Five thousand? So we are talking 

about—the fact is, with modern technology and satellite technology, 

especially space-based assets, we have been able to save thousands 

and thousands of lives that otherwise would have been lost, and I 

think that we can be proud that our country has invested in this, 

and I do—I remember, well, just one last note. 

I remember when I first got here, Vice President Gore had a 

meeting with all of the weathermen that he could put together. 

There is a legend about that, that he had them all gathered there 

at the White House for a conference talking about weather, and the 

weathermen were supposed to be talking about global warming. 

But there was a huge storm front that came through while they 

were there. The rain was pouring down, but only about two of the 

weathermen bothered to bring an umbrella to the meeting. I don’t 

know what that all indicates, but I think that we should pay a lot 

of attention to the weather. So thank you very much. 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you, sir. Mr. Takano, your five minutes for questions. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I would be out there selling umbrellas. That 

is what my job would be. 

Mr. TAKANO. This is a question for both the gentlemen. As we 

consider how to reauthorize weather research, who would you recommend the Committee hear from? We have testimony from you, 

the private firms, representing private firms. What other experts or 

stakeholders should we take testimony from? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. I would think the scientific community, university community in terms of research. I think there are models for 

how other countries look at this domain that may be useful to hear 

from, and I think the wealth of private industry—we come from— 

our two companies come from two different parts of the value 

chain. My company will produce some of the most advanced, best 

weather data on the planet. Mr. Myers’ company will use that data 

downstream to inform the citizenry and enterprise. There are a va-
42 

riety of people in between that could be useful from a private enterprise perspective to hear from. 

Mr. TAKANO. Mr. Myers? 

Mr. MYERS. I would agree with that. When you look at the American weather enterprise, we always think of it as a three-legged 

stool comprised of the government assets, the weather industry, in 

a broad sense as was just described by Mr. Kirchner, and the academic and research community, and I think it is appropriate to 

hear from all of those with regard to this that they get their viewpoint. 

Mr. TAKANO. So you do not consider yourself of the academic and 

research community, you are—both of your—the authority from 

which you are able to speak is not academic or research oriented? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. No, I can speak from an authority of sort of commercial data service provision, but not the technical aspects of satellite delivery and collection of that data. 

Mr. MYERS. And we are a weather information company, and we 

don’t view ourselves as heavily into the research aspect of basic 

modeling and things of that nature. 

Mr. TAKANO. But you both have a respect and esteem for the research and scientific community, especially those who are recognized experts in the field of climate and weather research? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Indeed. Our company was founded by a gentleman by the name of Tom Yunck, who was at JPL for 30 years. 

We are engaged as a company with an organization called LASP, 

the Laboratory for Atmospheric Space Physics out in Colorado, 

which is part of the university. So there is no question that we are 

as a company drawing on the very research expertise both in the 

scientific community and in the university community to help build 

our company. 

Mr. TAKANO. Do you happen to know your founder’s view on 

global climate change? Does he take the scientific consensus on 

global climate change seriously or not seriously? Is he a skeptic, 

non-skeptic? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. I cannot speak to that. 

Mr. TAKANO. Would you say it is worthwhile to hear testimony 

from NOAA on this bill? 

Mr. MYERS. I would think it would be quite necessary and appropriate to have the customer who we are dealing with who is, you 

know, involved in this domain, leading the domain in the United 

States to be heard from. 

Mr. TAKANO. Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman STEWART. Okay. Thank you. Dr. Broun. 

Mr. BROUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Myers, thank you for 

AccuWeather. I have got my AccuWeather app here on my phone 

and I depend upon it greatly, so thank you for the service that you 

provide. 

Mr. MYERS. Glad to hear that. Thank you. 

Mr. BROUN. I am a pilot, though I am not currently flying, and 

I am also a hunter and a fisherman, and I like to follow you all’s 

weather forecasts and what you have there, but thank you very 

much. 

Dr. Cliff Mass, professor of atmospheric studies, or sciences, at 

the University of Washington recently wrote: ‘‘The politicization of 
43 

climate change—that’s hard for a southerner to pronounce—also 

has had a major impact on government resource allocation with 

bountiful funding going into climate change research while other 

areas such as weather prediction are poor cousins. How else can 

one explain that climate research gets more than 100 times the 

computer resources provided to weather prediction, with the latter 

having huge benefits for people today. NOAA Administrators have 

continuously pushed the climate agenda while downplaying weather prediction. This needs to change.’’ And I could not agree more. 

Mr. Myers and Mr. Kirchner, do you agree with Dr. Mass’s position on this? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, I know Cliff, and he tends to state things rather emphatically. I agree that I think we need a reallocation between climate and weather resources. I don’t know if I can ascribe 

reasons to why we have an imbalance the way we do, and so I am 

not interested in weighing into a maybe quasi-political debate on 

climate change and the causes of it. Whether or not, though, as 

many who do support the concerns over climate change state that 

weather events have become more severe, and I am not saying I 

agree or I don’t agree, but if that is the case, that suggests that 

we really should be allocating more resources into looking at what 

is happening on the weather front. And so I think it is perfectly 

consistent with anyone’s climate position that more money needs to 

go to weather research, whether it is because there is change that 

is affecting the weather now or those people who believe that there 

isn’t, but we still have severe weather issues that we have got to 

address. So I think it is actually something that all sides of the political spectrum and the climate area should be supporting simply 

by the very nature of what people believe climate is causing. 

Mr. BROUN. Mr. Kirchner? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. I am not intimately, just due to time, not that intimately familiar with all the workings of NOAA. What I can say 

from being in this business for six months is that my understanding is that the National Weather Service has its primary 

focus to tend to day-to-day weather prediction. I think there is a 

broader question, though, that I think is worth talking about: what 

role does weather prediction in the short term, medium term or 

long term play in terms of a strategic role in our society and economy? Ultimately we believe that weather is of strategic interest to 

supporting our economy, industry, infrastructure; and our company’s response to that broad belief has developed, and will continue to develop, products and services that will address the dayto-day operation of weather interests, which are forecasting now to 

the next 10 days and beyond, to space weather. Space weather is 

that weather that is out in the ionosphere, which is further from 

the ground but deals with the sun ejecting coronal mass, and indeed climate. Our particular technology, GPS RO, is both for operational weather and for climate application, is absolute in its establishment of temperature, water pressure and water vapor—air 

pressure and water vapor. It is unique. It does this in such a way 

that calibrates all other forms of data for both long-term climate 

application and operational weather, and our focus is on providing 

a suite of those capabilities, whether you are talking about the 

short term or the long term. 
44 

Mr. BROUN. Well, my time expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

but I agree with Dr. Mass. We have got to put more funds on 

weather research than we are on climate change. I think we are 

allocating those funds in an improper way. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you, Dr. Broun. 

A vote has been called, and in order to provide all Members time 

to ask their questions, I would like to ask the witnesses if they 

would make themselves available after a short recess? 

Mr. MYERS. Yes. 

Mr. KIRCHNER. Yes. 

Chairman STEWART. Thank you. That being the case then, the 

Committee will recess subject to the call of the chair, and without 

objection, so ordered. The Committee stands in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman STEWART. The Subcommittee on Environment will 

come to order. 

To the witness panel, thank you for bearing with us as we had 

other obligations there with our vote, and unfortunately, we have 

lost some of the Members who wanted to have the opportunity to 

ask you questions, so we remind them, as other Members, that 

they can always submit written questions, and if we do, we would 

appreciate your response within a two week period. We now turn 

to my colleague, Mr. Weber from Texas, for his five minutes of 

questions. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really don’t know exactly where to begin. My wife and I have this conversation from 

time to time, a good job to have would be a weather forecaster because you can be wrong so much of the time and still get paid. So 

I want to ask you guys really about your satellite systems, if you 

will, some of the more technical aspects, I suspect. 

First of all, let me get into the monetary side of it maybe. Are 

either of you aware of competition from foreign companies, I am 

talking about from foreign countries, where they could come in and 

put up a satellite or a system like an AccuWeather where they can 

do the kinds of things that we do? I guess what I am really driving 

at is, what is the pressure, what kind of pressure is there on you 

all to be your best and do your best? Is there pressure in the marketplace? 

Mr. KIRCHNER. I will certainly respond to that. Depending on 

what industry we are talking about—I actually come out of the 

communication satellite world where there is a lot of global pressure and global competition that overlaps regions. In the weather 

domain, so far as I have seen, there is less pressure per se coming 

for satellite systems. They tend to be over particular regions or 

particular countries, especially the geosynchronous kind that are 

22,000 miles away that are staring at a particular region. The 

polar orbiting systems, the lower earth orbit systems that cover the 

globe, to my knowledge, there are certainly other countries or consortium that have those kinds of systems the Europeans have those 

kinds of satellites. 

What we would love to see more of, frankly, is intense competition, intense commercial competition, not state funded necessarily 

but privately funded, and that is part of what my company is here 
45 

to talk about is how do—in this world, how do we evolve to a model 

where the weather satellite community is privately funded, not 

necessarily on the balance sheets of the taxpayers. And we are 

looking for, hopeful that our customer can migrate to a world of 

looking to commercial provision of services to do that. Today there 

is a data buy provision. There are data buy policies that exist but 

those data buy policies within NOAA have to do with buying something that exists today. My company has a system that it is planning to deploy, which means my company needs to go to the marketplace, raise capital, talk to customers about something that we 

need to start building today that won’t be available just due to 

technology for 18 to 24 months. What we are ultimately looking for 

are ways to change the procurement approach that allow us to get 

contingent commitments to say I will take the data that you are 

going to provide that meets the specifications of NOAA or Air Force 

or other agencies but give that commitment today so that we can 

begin to build our systems now. That would feed competition certainly in the United States. I am sure—we ultimately like competition. We want to deliver the best possible service on a highly competitive basis and we believe that we will do that if we have that 

kind of procurement structure in place. 

Mr. WEBER. Mr. Myers? 

Mr. MYERS. AccuWeather is really a downstream user of satellite 

information, and we are more than happy to see competition in the 

area. Right now we receive satellite information mostly from government and government consortiums around the world including, 

of course, the U.S. satellites which we read directly. The weather 

industry itself in the United States is very competitive, and worldwide, that is true as well. There are a number of robust weather 

companies in Korea, in China, in Japan, and in Europe at this 

point, and we compete with them on a worldwide basis. So I think 

the competitive landscape is good. I think it is a huge advantage 

that the United States has, though, that the American weather industry is really ahead of the rest of the world and some of the 

things that we are talking about in terms of enhanced research, I 

think we should realize get leveraged in a very great way because 

there is such an industry. So it does not only benefit the government and the ability for the government to issue warnings, but it 

benefits all those downstream who can make use of the information, the modeling and what have you to provide specialized services and even general public services on Web sites and mobile devices and so forth to the public. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. I see I am out of time, Mr. Chairman. I do 

have other questions. Are you going to round two hopefully? 

Chairman STEWART. No, Mr. Weber, we actually don’t anticipate 

doing that, but you are free to take as much time if you need additional time. 

Mr. WEBER. Well, thank you. Let me ask this question then. So 

having said that about the pressure to be as good as you can be 

and looking forward to see, you know, what kind of policies we can 

put into place to make sure the taxpayers are getting the most 

bang for their buck, a couple of questions. Number one is more 

technical in nature about the ability of a satellite to look out into 

the—if you are looking at a hurricane that is forming over in the 
46 

Atlantic and coming off the Atlantic—I mean the African coast, for 

example, what kind of time degree of predictability is there? Can 

you predict with any degree of certainty three days, five days, 

seven days? I guess Mr. Myers. 

Mr. MYERS. It depends on the weather regime that is occurring 

at that particular time. Some storms are more predictable than 

others as a result, so I can’t give you a definitive answer to that. 

Mr. WEBER. Can you give me a window? Is it three to five days? 

Is it one to three days? 

Mr. MYERS. Well, the further out you go, the bigger the cone. We 

have all seen those cones at the Weather Service and the weather 

companies. 

Mr. WEBER. But surely you have got statistics, and that was my 

follow-up question. How far back does your data go to say that we 

have had a degree of success in predicting these weather events by 

30 percent, 60 percent, 90 percent going back as far as ten years 

or 20 years? 

Mr. MYERS. There are statistics that do go back that far, and 

generally they indicate that the predictability has increased significantly, that the cones have narrowed. The accuracy going out has 

increased. I don’t have those statistics here with me to refer to. But 

they have certainly improved significantly. 

Mr. KIRCHNER. What I might add is that as I said earlier, the 

technology world that we are in is predominantly about looking, 

evaluating, gathering data that is going to tell you what is going 

to happen. Other technologies such as geosynchronous satellites 

tell you what—really focus on what is happening right now and 

near-term warnings. Two examples, one I mentioned earlier and 

the other one I will give in addition. The technology that we work 

with is GPS RO, radio occultation. It has been proven or has been 

studied within NOAA as well as other organizations that we can— 

that data can tell you four days out that something is going to happen eight hours sooner. We can tell you eight days out that we can 

give you 15-hour additional heads-up on a hurricane, as an example, or severe weather that might be coming. So those hours are 

precious, absolutely precious to the forecast community to predict 

what is going to happen. 

The other example that I would give, which if I had a camera 

or a picture I could show you, is that the GPS RO data, looking 

back at Hurricane Ernesto back in 2006. This was done by UCAR. 

It actually visibly shows in simulation where with GPS RO data, 

you can see a storm that without it you could not see 54 hours, 78 

hours and 102 hours. So there is actually mechanisms, and this 

technology does this, that enables with other data—it is not alone, 

it is with the other suite of data sources we have—but with GPS 

RO data, you can see things further in advance that you wouldn’t 

have been able to see without it, and again, that is about bringing 

forward the ability to see and forecast that in a portfolio of analyzing weather you would want to grab every hour and every 

minute you could. 

Chairman STEWART. Recognizing the time is short now, Mr. 

Weber, are you—— 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. 
47 

Chairman STEWART. And since we had additional time over here, 

to the minority side, would you request any additional time for further questions? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman STEWART. Okay. Thank you. 

To the witnesses, again, thank you for your valuable testimony, 

and to the Members for their questions. The Members of the Committee, as I mentioned previously, may have additional questions 

for you as witnesses, and we ask you to respond to those in writing, 

if that is the case. The record will remain open for two weeks for 

additional comments and written questions from Members. 

I would also like to note that the Ranking Member, my colleague 

from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, and I have had an opportunity to discuss the minority’s request for a House Rule XI hearing. We have 

agreed to hold a subsequent hearing with two witnesses from both 

the minority and the majority parties. I look forward to inviting a 

representative from NOAA as one of our witnesses to be a part of 

the witness panel, and we will work with all parties to schedule 

this most important second hearing on this topic at the nearest 

available time. And as a result of that agreement, the minority has 

agreed to withdraw their request for a Rule XI hearing. 

With that, the witnesses are excused and this hearing is now adjourned. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(49) 

Appendix I 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS
50 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS

Responses by 
51 

NWS. With greater research and computer investment we can surge past the 

European's in a three to five year period. 

b. Are there provisions in this draft legislation that would help accomplish that 

goal? 

Answer: Yes. The designation offunding for weather research is essential to achieve 

these goals. This bill moves the needle in that direction. Some want to suggest that 

legislation in this area should be general and comprehensive and not specific and 

directive. I do not care to engage in a philosophical or political debate over that. To 

quote Ted Kennedy in eulogizing his brother Robert "[when hel saw wrong [hel tried 

to right it." If this bill can help address weather research that puts us ou a better 

path toward saving lives, then I support moving it along. I also support other 

efforts to better focus and fund the nation's weather infrastructure while ending 

unneeded activities of government that can be or are being handled in the weather 

industry. 

4. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Public Administration 

have recommended that NOAA establish a weather-focused advisory committee under 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act, while some in the weather community have 

recommended a weather commission modeled after the ocean commission. 

a. What is the best mechanism to provide feedback on weather forecasting? 

Answer: Right now, NOAA has some level of input on these topics from the EISWG reporting into 

the NOAA Science Advisory Board. This is good. A weather-focused advisory committee under the 

FACA would be an excellent additional or replacement vehicle. Some have advocated a weather 

commission, but there is no uniform agreement that such is needed or would be helpful. There have 

been many studies in the weather field by the National Academy of Sciences and the recent NAPA 

study. It would be good to implement these recommendations where appropriate, especially those 

that support the public/private partnership and encourage continued development of the American 

weather industry and support of the core functions of NOAA and NWS. This is much of the 

emphasis of these reports. 
52 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

Subcommittee on Environment 

Hearing Questions for the Record 

The Honorable Suzanne Bonamici 

Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting 

Mr. Barry Myers 

1. Your company, Accuweather, provides hourly forecasts to the American people, on the 

Internet, via smartphones,lf\I, newspapers, and through many other sources. In the process, you 

have built a successful business and made a respectable profit. As you testified, your business 

depends on NOAA's infrastructure and data. If you could not access that data, what would it 

mean for your business? 

Answer: The American weather industry (defined above) of which AccuWeather is a 

part, is built upon use of available government data generated for government use, 

but made available to the public at the incremental cost of access - the public/private 

partnership. The access occurs not only with regard to government weather 

information but also economic information, agricultural information, health 

information, and much more. It is founded on both constitutional principles as well 

as federal legislation providing for and guaranteeing such access supported by 

administrative rules, OMB policies, and Executive Orders. If all ofthis was to be 

reversed and government information was hoarded by the government it would have 

disastrous effects on the American weather industry and the nation in general. Lives 

and property losses would escalate and government costs would grow substantially. 

America has the best weather information for its citizens of any nation in the world 

thanks to the public/private partnership. It, and the weather industry, need to be 

supported. The American weather industry has used this data and information to 

build new and different products, its own forecasts and warnings and brought 

weather information to the American public (see my formal remarks) in a way 

greater than available to any other nation on earth. Rather than simple relay 

government information, the weather industry has innovated in ways the government 

could not nor should be expected to do. 

2. If you had to pay a commercial data company for your data, how would this change your 

business model, and how would it change the private:-public partnership around weather? 

Answer: This is an area of much concern and discussion at present. Some data is 

already available only from commercial suppliers, for example lightning data. As 

long as such data is available in a competitive marketplace with multiple suppliers it 

could be expected competition will keep the cost reasonable. Basic weather data 

does not command a high price at present (or historically), not only here in the 

United State but globally. It is the value added products where more targeted value 

is created in the value chain. We must ensure that information the government 

acquires from outside sources is provided under licensing rights that allows the 
53 

government agency to distribute that information and the derivative products 

created from that information. For example, we currently have a situation where 

America is kowtowing to the European Center in restricting a U.S. created MOS 

product built on top of the European Model by using American ingenuity at NWS, 

but which the European Center has insisted NWS agree not to distribute. So 

companies like AccuWeather, who have the highest customer status with the 

European Center and are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for access to the 

European Model, cannot get access to the very additions our own government has 

created. The government by signing restrictive agreements with government or nongovernment entities. It disrupts the entire weather enterprise symbiotic relationship 

and value chain. 

3. In2012, the NOAA Science Advisory Board issued a report titled, "Toward Open Weather 

and Climate Services", that outlined a strategy by which the nation could derive greater value 

from NOAA's weather and climate information. You served on the working group that drafted 

that report. The report recommended, and NOAA appears to have embraced, an Open 

Environmental Information Services (OEIS) concept. Could you briefly describe the OEIS 

concept? Are there any elements of the draft bill that might weaken the OEIS? 

Answer: The OEIS concept is best understood by a full examination of the reports. 

Briefly it embraces the concept discussed above of free and open access to all 

government data, in this case weather data, and addresses the growing concern that 

"big data" can and may, through technological insufficiency, become bottled up at 

the source and not be able to flow freely to the citizens and businesses of the nation. 

It suggests ways to leverage the special value of the public/private partnership to 

liberate big data at its source. I did not see elements of the bill that might weaken 

OEIS. In fact, if some research aimed at this topic is funded by the bill, the bill will 

assist the OEIS concept. 

4. If the law were to be changed to allow for the private provision of weather data, what 

protections could be put in the law to guarantee continued full open access to that data for the 

public and weather enterprise? 

Answer: See the answer to Question 2 above. I believe the law currently allows 

for the private provision of weather data to the government and currently the 

government has data acquisition and license agreements with some companies for 

data - lightning data being one example. Having all data generated by either 

public or private sources that the government acquires and/or uses in its products 

must be made available to the weather industry along with all the derivative 

products therefrom, and in real time. The reason for this is to continue to ensure 

a common data base of information that is foundation to all forecasts and the 

validation by all scientists, public, private and academic, of the validity of 

forecasts in real time. 

5. Do you have any suggestions, beyond data buys, for how NOAA can be more creative in its 

public-private partnerships? 

Answer: It has been suggested at professional meetings over recent years that 

NOAA and NWS should be looking at what it is doing and why, when it comes to 

creating products and services. Much of what is being done in government on the 

product creation side is duplicative of what is being done by the weather industry. 

And since it is generally acknowledged that about 95% of all information reaching 
54 

the public is coming from the weather industry (including the weather media 

component of the weather industry) spending taxpayer money to duplicate 

products say for example web and mobile products - only being exposed to 5% of 

the total consumer base, suggests more creative approaches may lead to increased 

efficiency. Focus on core infrastructure, modeling and warning improvement, it is 

being suggested by many, is where the government function is strongest and most 

justifiable. 

6. The director of the NWS, Lou Uccellini, has said that the Sandy Supplemental has given 

NWS sufficient computer funding to give them the most powerful weather computing power of 

any country. Does this make the provisions of the bill regarding a computer assessment 

unnecessary? lfit is your position that we still need those provisions, please explain why. 

Answer: I do not have his quote, but I have great respect for Lou Uccellini. What I 

can tell you is that I would caution that we need to always think ahead of the 

technology curve to be the leader. For our national weather services to be "second 

to none," we need to always be thinking ahead. The fact that Lou has said we will 

have the most powerful computing power of any country should not be taken to 

mean we will stay ahead unless we commit to stay ahead. It was a failure to do that 

that got us behind. 

7. How would you define the boundary between what weather infrastructure and· services 

. should be built and run at NOAA and what should be done by extramural partners, such as the 

academic and private sectors? 

Answer: NOAAlNWS should focus on core infrastructure (satellites, radars, remote 

sensing tools, data networks of sufficient density, research, modeling, warning 

improvement, and operational warnings). The weather industry already handles forecasts 

and services for business and industry and the general public. 

8. The NOAA Science Advisory Board R&D Task Force issued a report earlier this year that 

recommended NOAA capitalize on the support and skills of the extramural research ,community 

by developing carefully targeted initiatives that ensure the results are integrated into NOAA's. 
55 

R&D operations. 'Based on your awareness of the weather enterprise, where do the academic' 

and government sectors of the enterprise stand on this bill? Are you concerned that the legislation 

under consideration has no role for the extramural community? Do you. agree that the academic 

and government sectors of the weather enterprise should be represented in the bill? . 

Answer: I cannot speak for the academic and government sectors. 

9. The bill prefers OSSE's as a method for examining alternative methods of data 

collection. However, a limitation on OSSEs is that these simulations are only as good as the data 

and assumptions that go into the model. What standards should be erected for the quality and 

reliability of claims regarding proposed systems submitted to NOAA? What steps should be 

taken to validate cost claims for proposed systems? 

Answer: This is not an area of my personal expertise. 

10. A body of peer reviewed literature is emerging that links certain current weather 

phenomenon with the changing climate. Do you agree that an understanding ofthe changing 

climate is important to forecasting and prediction of weather? 

Answer: Climate and weather are inter-related in various ways. In a sense, 

weather occurrence over long periods is climate; and, climate is a perspective of 

smoothed weather trends over time. Based on my interaction with atmospheric 

scientists of all kinds, it seems to me that we are in a relatively early stage in 

understanding these relationships in depth. So one can argue research in all of 

these areas is valuable. Since the best life-protecting action related to severe 

and dangerous weather, regardless of cause, is lead time to escape the danger 

area, any research that enhances lead time as soon as possible is worthy of 

consideration. 
56 

Responses by 

RESPONSES TO SUBCOMMITTEE QUESTIONS FROM MR. JON KlRCHNER 

PRESIDENT AND OllEF OPERATING OFFICER 

GEOOPTICS INC. 

BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE AND TECHNOLOGY 

ADDRESSING THE RESTORAL OF U.S. LEADERSHIP IN WEATHER 

FORECASTING 

Chairman Stewart's Questions 

1. What advanced technology systems might offer the greatest increase in NWS forecasting 

capability? In addition, what technologies would offer the best increase while also 

giving us the most "bang for our buck?" 

a. What specific technology would ofter an increase in tornado forecasting? 

b. What specific technology would offer an increase in hurricane forecasting? 

Establishing a measurable and achievable objective for warning times fllf each respective 

type of storlll -- that can be agreed by the \\eather community and by public safet~ -- may be 

the first step toward achieving real change and progress. 

Additionally. we believe that dramatically enhancing waming and prt~pare(ilness 

be thought of as an objective across the entire weather-fhrecasting 

long-range fbrecast to the no\yeast. and not only to the warnings jfs not solei) 

about \\hafs happening right this second. It's also ahout what could have been beller secn 

days earlier that also plays a role, a, seen by the visual example beit)\\. 

GeoOptics, Inc. 1 
57 

Din.'ell> abm..: is a pn"crful illustration urlhe unique and disruptile laille uflhe (iP~-RO 

(radio occultation) data collection technique. (iPS-RO is the most measlIrem<:nt for 

hUITicanl' lim,:ccbting eler del j,elL as d<.'lIlonstrat,'d b) 11 20()7 l :nl\ ersity <. ·orporatiol1 fbr 

Atmospheric Research (UeAR) study of Hurricane' I:rncslo in 2006, in the picture abO\ c. 

The (jPS-RO sensor is all all-Ih:ath"r scn,()r that sees compktd) through the storm 10 chart 

pressure" tt'mperaturc and moisture II ith unparalleled accnracy The illustration abO\.: 

sho»s \Ihat Ilouid han: been I{)rccas\c'd \Iitliolll GPS RO (illf It'fn IcrSlIS "ith (iPS RO data 

lIur right) as compared to the actual storm (middle) o\er 54. IX and t02 hour I,,'r<:<:aslill!! 

tilll': periods. 

(iPS RO can be a,; cf!ceti\ e fIll' lllrtJado tbrecasling as ttlr hurril:allt' but 

signi ticalltl~ higher (knsi!) of lllt'<lsurelllenb is 1I11>n.: 

Intali/td phenomenon. A !!lohal(OIlS!ei!atinll or:>·1 saldlitlC sellsnrs !!ellcraling O\el" 3(,.1)00 

soundings per day would be needed to pro\ ide the kId of !,)(al RO delhi!) 0\ ,'[ 

singk region the silt' ofOklahollw Our ::4-satdlitc ("!CERO constellation 

InitialiY<: for Continllous Earth Re!Hok' OI1';en aliou) \\\luld ens! ah,1ut $1 XO milli''l1to huilt! 

and launch and could be on orbit and 

CICERO ].I Satellite Sensor (iJIIstellatitm 

Mort' hroadly Hnd as memion,:d in our t,>,tin"..-" GpS-RO soundings ,,\ell on the l1.irl)-

small de!11on<;(rator Icn.:1 that exists loda) of glohall) -- haw bcen shown in a '10:\:\ 

Stud) tIl provide an eight hour impmvemcnt on the Four Da~ Forecast anti a 15 hour 

illlpron:ment on the Eight Day Forecast. Achieving a scale of -J6JlU(H ea.:h 

da). anos, the glohe, \\ould dralllaticall:- imprmc our ahilit) to ":>recast and ilO\\Ca,t 

catastrophic \\cather evenl'>. 

1'0 dnm a compiem.:nral) comparison, (;PS-RO soundings are very much like a \\eather 

balloon (radiosonde), but \;,itl! much higher lOx accuracy. Weather balloons arc Immdwd 

twice daily across the llS from 122 Wcather Scrvicc Fore,:as! Ot11ccs (WF(l). at an a\Cnl~C 

cost of about $200 cach. Thcse hal e hecn cmplo) ed I()f decade> and arc used as a \ CI) 

reliable and foundational source of data fhr Im:aliled. ncar-term of sen;re slonn 

cells, tornados. hurricanes and SI1O\\ storms. 

GeoOptics. Inc, 2 
58 

\Nilh a :':-f-satellite constellatinn, providing apprnxilllal.:iy 36,000 sounding~ per da: . lIPS 

RO Ilouid cosl$~5() p~r sounding - a small Ihlction of the cost of a mdiosonde. At such 

scalc. across the US and the globe, (iPS RO \Iould be the most valuable contributor of 

complementary and redundant data (0 daily radiosonde deplo)l1lems. It would also pro\ ide 

a "net" that could till in the hlanks betwccn radiosonde dCpi<l)Il1CIHS. cr.:aling a much 1110re 

comprehcnsive picture "f l<:l1lpcraturc, II ater vapor and air pressun:. as \Icll as the \\ intI 

prolilcs that radiosomks uniquel) pnn ide. 

Outside ofGPS RO, through other technologies, il is our understanding that Se\(Te \It'ather 

Ilarning lead tillles ll1a~ h.; e"tcnded 11'0111 the current 14 minutes and I~llsc alam! rate, 

rt~duced from the currenl 75 percellt. An c'l.ampk of such a promising l1el\ technolog) 

iVlultil11issioll Phascd Array Radar (MPAR). a tcchnol()gkal athane.: that \\ould prnpcl til,' 

countr) into a l1e\1 era of better tornado prcdiL'lahilit) and \I cather ;;eClIril). MPAR's utilil) 

also goes beyond scwre weather to Illultiple applicatiolls that hel1ctit commercial a\ iatioll. 

the military and e\CIl the intelligence collltTllmity. Ihle continue to U"e NEXRAD 1<)1' thl.' 

next :20 )ears it is our understanding li-olll radar scicntists that IYC will again be 

I\:chnologicall) disadvantaged in comparison to other countries. Until f\IPAR deployed 

natinlmide thc country \I ill continlle to IX1} f'Jr and operate file indil idua! radar 'i~ stems. 

MPAR could repl,l\:e all IiI e current systems and real dollar sal ings to the gO\ernmenl 

I\mild he in the billions. 

2. Mr. Kirchner, NOAA is currently using funds provided by Congress after Superstorm 

Sandy to conduct an Observing System Simulation Experiment on GPS radio 

occultation. What do you expect will be the result of this experiment, and do you have 

any concerns? 

OSSEs han' a long cstablisht'd record liw pro\idillj! reliable rc:;ults. We helicle l11alll1c 

OSSE conducted b: NOAA ab(llll (iPS RO 1\ ill releal \\hat Ilumerous prey imh sludies al 

NOAA. European Centre liw Mid-Range Weather Forecasts (EC!'vI\\T), thc UK \kt and 

UCAR have sho\\n I cry rcct:ntl:- ... that RO is a vcr: p()\\erful data sOlln:e for dramatic'ali) 

impr()\ing ilJrecasting and predictioll. What I\C hdiele an OSSE \\il! confirm: la) (IPS RO 

data is the l11()st potent sillgk weather Il1Ca,urelllcnt el er dClised, and (h) higher densitic" "I' 

GPS RO data deli\' er bettcr and highly cost-effective' pert\mnancc, 1\ ilh a minimulll ,H,.OOO 

sounding .... frOtH :::4 satellite sensors. Thi'> can hale a profound impact 011 NUll1crical 

Weather Prediction (:'>J\\P) modeling and could playa role in plugging a siglllikant 

of the com illg \It'ather data-gap \1 hile in filet, changing the \\l\) Illodder, and as:mrlll",tOl'S 

design N\VP l110tieb tll include and amplit~ thi, po\\erfuL scaled data ,ouree 

GeoOptics, Inc. 3 
59 
60 

,Ol11ran:~ the mcragc 5-day lhrccast quality 0\ er a40-tia) period ill the southern 

hemisphere in 20()8 llsing {(1m different data comhinations. The maximum "lille \\ould he 

1.0 (i)r a perfect thrccast (let\ axis). This was conducted llsing actual j(lrt~CaSI results. no! 

simulations. 

rhl..~ lir:--! har n:pn.:..;cnh NOA;\\ ~talldard npc-rmiPIKt! data mi.,: grnuBlL ain.:raft txdhHJn .. , 

and AMSU-A d,na Ih)J11 NOAA ,,,tdlites. The \alnc ()ro. is conskkrcd their minimulIl 

ace,-,ptabk standard. An}lhing belOl\ that is culled a "drnpoul." ril,';' dUN: the the-da} 

l1.>rccas! quality anti 4ll-day period time intcnal 1,.1' analysis becalhc it bard) met th,' 

threshold ill the S<)lIth,Tn ht'lllbphcrc. 

The second bar inclndes 111<.' stundard dataset plus data iI'om three NASA 'EOS ithlrum.:nls 

t"" mic!'(\wu\ e and olle inlhU't'd (AIRS l. The lUtal cost "I' building I not laundlingl those 

inSlrtllllcnh. in today\ dollars. is \\ell ab,IVe $1.2 billion. The additional data bumped 

perl<)[ll1am:c hl O.7X. \\hkh is c,lnsiderc'd a ~ignitkal1t impro\t~!11cnt. 1I"\\C\,'I\ O. 

represents a SOI'l oreeiling. Irlhe) d,Hlbk the amnul11 "raddi!;()n,,1 data. or <In,!, AIR'. 

altogether, the) still get ahout O.7X. 1'11<:) "c csscntiall) exhatlSlt'd the inft>r!llalit>n \ (lllle .. 1 

ennvemional satellite data. 

I he third bar reprc>cnts Har 1 plus IH) data !i'om the c'luivakn! of our St'll'"r:; 

( 2.(I()O prollle, per del»). Tod,n we can build tlHhe s(ensors fcw elbou! $250.000 

cad,. :Yu NASA J:( lS dahl was used Perf(ll'lllanec slight I, surpassed the Belr = ceiling. 

0.7l) 

The I(HlJ'lh har re'presenh Bar :1 plus data from the two NASA micn)\\'c\1 ~ in'trmll~nts 

(dropping th" $601l~ Illilli,'n AIRS). This i, tht: llllb' stunning and ul1e"pe't:led 

resliit. Pcrlhnnal1ce '''IS booskd It) OK;. truly lIl1eharlt.:d territon. This is Hot a dll',T\-

pic\.."d r"",it; it is the onh sllch stuti) NOAA rws done. 

Our concerns, th"refbre, about our governm<'nt's current apprnach to GPS-RO haw mort' to 

do \\ ilh the underlying Illodd tl.)r the acquisition. procurement policy and IJl'o\isioll of this 

pOl\cr1'ul data capability to NOAA. and other Federal agencies and departments. 

to UCAR. ther<' are 0\ cr 2S()O organizations in 74 countries using RO data today. including 

NOAA itsd L pnn ided through the demonstrator p!atl(lfIll COSMIC I. The C! )SMIC I 

system. a 5i" siltellitc cOf1stdlation that lIas launched ill 2006 in a eollabNation het\\~'<:n 

Tai\\an's National Science Foundation, NASA, the US Air Force and UCAR. has Hilly 

demonstrated the concept of RO and the proll.mnd \ altle RO data has ill operational wt:ather. 

space weather and climate modeling around the wnrld. This s~stem is expt:ctcd!o readl 

its end oflile in ~()15. 

A replacel11cnt system, called COSIVIIC 2, has been in the planning stages thr a llumhcr o! 

ycars. At pre'St'll!. the t:>s<ltdlite planncd replacement system has two demenls \\e reler 

as: COSMIC 2(a) and cosrvllc 2(h) 

COSMIC :?(a). fundcd primm'il) h) Taiwan and the liS Air Force. j, six-satellite 

constellation to 11} in a ncar-equatorial orbit (24 0 inclination). planned Il.)!' launch in 

2016, The orbit was chosen by the Air Force to li.cus Oil space em ironmental 

l11onitoring, though the system \\ ill also be of value t()r tropical cyclone forecasting 

GeoOptics, Inc. 5 
61 

and \\ ill prO\ide I'''' crag" lin' \\I'alil"r tiH'el"bting ill [he ,ollthern L'S, In ahout 

y" latitude, It \\ ill hardly reach into europe, Rus,ja, or Ilnrlhl'nl Asia at aIL 

COSvllC 2(b) is not l'! ,chl'dubl li)r launch and is not f()fl'sl'en to hmm:h hel!:'rc 

~() I K Tlli, ( constellatipn "S a direct n:l'laCCmelil 

It)r COS!'vIlC I to PH\\ ilk global C(Heragl' Ibr NWP, 

I'll" RO liser base needs tili, data, in sea kd lolullle, ('( )Si\'lI( , 2( a) about ;,)0\1 0 funded, 

though slill at risk. Ilo\\elcr,('()Si\!I(' 2(h), covcrage thwuglll'UI the US, Europe, 

and :\si;], is nnt lill1lkd :lnd Iwl npcck'd tn launch lIlitil ~O I;,) or later This gap i, \ "1'> 

signiticmll, Umkr an anchor-knanc} (lll1pditil proeun:llll,nL (ommen:i<11 soure", of R() 

dala \Imild 1111 this gap \\ithin ~4-36 IlHlllth" In short, \\ itll Itl,' hl'lp ofa ",mlllen:!;]! 

'~Hcllitc II.:atlwr data prm ider. lih' (ien( lite' C(,ntraCled ,,)mpan~ )\oUld ,kli\ the' 

data scal<: Ihe' user cOllllllunit} li)r nee,b. 

3. The Government Accountability Oftlce and NOAA have recognized that there may be 

future gaps in data provide by our polar-orbiting and geostationary satellites. 

a. Mr. Kirchner, what alternative observing systems might be able to minimize the 

infonnation lost during these periods? 

Thl' oCikial JPSS lIeathcr data gap Itli'CCa\tc'd It> start in 

to closc \\ lIb toois a\ ailablc 10 (,n\ "rnm<:111 at co,!, it better amm.1 

appropriate' kITh of ri,k, { (iPS-RO sy,km could cnl1lribulC to 

portiol) oftlti, gap. At ,ub,tanlial seak, -'(l,nOn or IlHlfe', GPS-RO could prm ide 

and I'l'ckllne h011 \It,ather 

incrca,e in (iPS-RO 

sOllndings bc,\ol1d [ncb;. 's ~,:iOO per da;. \\t1uld pnl\ick significant impnncment -- at 1\1\\ 

cost and bargain leI ds c(lI11parl'd tn today', lurge gmcrnmenHmllcd and 

,ystems, (lur integrated Sy stem or the future, ,I' R() data prol'isioning, is he 1\1\\ , 

(i'eoOplle\' /Vetll'ork Architecture 

GeoOptics, Inc. 6 
62 

Regarding data m:tuull: needed and sped tied, NOAA, NASA and USAF 11:1\e ea<:h 

published lists of each organization's most imporlalH and needed data tYPt~S, GPS-RO i, 

atop both the AI' and NOAA lists, and is important for NASI\, as \\clL l\\oretHer, through 

\\\0 separate and qualified sources, \\c sec documented the highest prinrily and 

tranSf()rlHatin~ emphasis NOAA is placing on (;PS-RO 

Se\,' pag,"'+-] 10 '+-1'\6 of NOAA', ['{ ::013 Procurement, Axquisition and 

(\mstrucriol1 (PAC) \I h.;re NO,,\I\ 's tkscribes the 

GPS-RO 

(http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fyI2 _ bluebooklchapter4 _ 2012_ PAC.pd 

f). 

• [vime rlCc.:l1lly, GPS-RO \\(1' 11 Sulliull1, 

NOAA Administrator in JPSS gap 

mitigation. During this testilllOn;. Dr. cited a report hy Riversidt' 

Technology, thaI highlights GPS-RO as one of the obsel'vmi()lls. 

amongst other sources, that could help till the LEO \\cath.:r dma 

(http://www.legislative.noaa.govtT estimony!Sullivan041813.pdf). 

Other Global Earth OhsC'ning based systems are also ;){hanc.:d 

h)pC'rspCClrai soundings, This data/image t,mn being and \\ill he prmid.:d b) 

private source sllch as GcoMctWatch. a commercial data compan) t.hat will 

Geosynchronous-based (GEO) hyperspectral beginning in 2016 

(http://geometwatch.comihtm/our-partners). Other data sotlrces could come thllll 

govcrnments \\hCrL~ \\c hal\:' ;;,cientitic coopcratiw agreements 10 onr gap 

coverage during the III iligatioll period. 

In ordn for thc government to hegin tilling this gap in GPS-RO data, NOAA and the 

govcrnment at large need tn: I) tllrn to a I1c\v, open and compel!!!\ dy inviting pwulrem':ll! 

philosophy; 2) implement fully the and laws ll1nt .;xist ' :;) enable il ne" Ill,tmoving and coll1pel!!in: procul't'lTlent erl\'ironmcnt; 4) n.;all' 11(:\\ that directs 

NOAA III quickly turn to these coIllIlH:n:ia! solutions inin pot.:ntial realities to fill the 

ro the p"int of implementing \\hal alread} e,ists in law \\e dte very spccifieally the 

language ftllmd thml the (mice of Space Comm.:rcialization /\dv:lnt'c Fuuding 

COlllmitments 

Qillp:!lwww.space.commerce.gov/general/commerci!ilitllfchase£commitments.shtmI) and 

Section 507 oflhe FY 199,\ NASA Authorization Act (H,R, 6135, Publie La\\ 102-588), 

codified as 15 USC S.;c 5R06. that authorizes the Administrators 

enter inlu multi-year anchor tenancy conlracts \\ ith termination !jahUl!). 

(http://www.space.commerce.gov~nerallcommercjalpurghase/(;QITlmitments.shtmI#nasa) 

1 Page 9, Written Testimony before House Subcommittee on FisherIes, Wildlife, Ot-e:1ns, and Insular Affairs. April 18. 2013. on the National Oceanic 

and Atmo:-.-pheric Administration'$ IT 2014 Budget Request 

GeoOptics. Inc. 7 
63 

Ifli1t're are <lmbigui!i,,, <:il!H:erning this 1<1\\ thaI m:ed darilicalion, then 1111, must he (lime, 

\Vitll this lu\\ and in phl,:e it seems as NOAA <Ill\! the g(Wermlle!11 ean 

take nfcommerein! solutions !J(l\\, 

Ranking Member Bonamici's Questions 

1. GeoOptics and other commercial data buy companies have said they can develop, 

launch, and manage certain space-based Earth observing systems and sell the resulting 

data at a lower cost to the taxpayer than can NOAA, Please explain how you can deliver 

the same quality data at a lower cost. 

I<!:dm-erl {'(lsI'; 10 tlil.' bllyer/usN': Reduction" 

1hl.,~ .. :nrc, lmJ0rl) ing i,.'o;;t fIfth ... ' ~utdiit(" '-.,,'lbor con.;tdblit)H and 

,,'rvic,-, platform" rlillure of Ih,' husjm:" mo,kL 

Tlw Con' Slltellih' Nt'two!'k: The untkrlying >:l!dlitv· 

rmlll a worldwi{k ndw,'rk of! IS lIud ill1cmalional supplil.'rs ruggl.'Ui7,l.'d, 'paL'I.~ 

worthy cOll1m"rdal parI, ami world-da,'i lahnL Tht'>1.' parh 

Ih'm int1o\ ruih' 'illpplicr'i, \\ hich <:1',',11,', suppl!,,;r t'e-osys\cm of ink!!';e 

,omp,:tilion, with ill<:<:u1i, cs I,}r 'pc",d ilnd or tldi,ery, '1111., "n'lHHtTCIIUL 

t:tlmpe-titi'c appn'adl \\ ill .. hy ihelf {','slill ill drml1(HkalJ} I,m <:1' ,','SK Comp"Ilt:ll! 

ilnd ,)stem """'(:illg and prndne! dndnpmcrll Il1dhu,b, _. Ibm more 

II> ,,,"Is an; ,cr" wdl d()cumenll:d and rnnen in I:nmmt:rcial ,iltdl'te 

launch s!'item, It,r l'\t\St\, and ,'<'mlller,!al satclli!e imager}, 

\) Sh:lI'C'd Glnbllll'lat/hrll1: Ths' r"'inlting glohal seniees an:, mca11l1l>, and 

tn nunh..~rOth cu..;tnmtT:-,.. rhb~ oy thi ... \~ry shared n~l!lIfC~ mt"all:-. no fnh:' t'\)untry. 

()r~ani/atlnn. fl's ... "an,'h ill:-t!tlj(~~ unl\~r,dt), huc,;;inc:-.s ('iti/.;u ht:ar", the 

11.10"1'\"<:". Il,kk Ibm1 C(1llIrae) Iil:p",its tha! might lot: c<)lk(:l~d 

customer', C'"11milmel1!, Ihis approach ab,(,lute!y no cllpi!al "e'fmniI111~l1t 

part "I' \j( IAo'\ m ,,(!JeT ,lrganiTlltinth, In lolaL ",har..:!! 

rl'dllCs'S capital and opemtionallinan(lial rbl;s. and drmnmicalh n:dm::e, ""'l1thl" ami 

annual C{lsb It)!, un~ -om: ..:ountry or agt.:nl.,>~ 

Rigorous Hus!lIf;'sS I'mccssf;'s IllId Customl'" Se:i'\'i{'f;': (In'I',,,, 

ClIshllll<:r ;;v'nice and snisfbetiotl llK'lms that in addition to a 1.""H:lle<:lin~ 

Ctl\'h.lm~rs n:\.'("lh: highly p\.~r~onali!:e.d and n ... ':-.porr·;.j\'c ath.'ntiniL 

I.'XpCri(\IKt' in providing intc'gratL'd snlcllit{'·ba",d eOl1llrllmica1ions 

Depl1rtl11l.1l11 of Ikf,:n,e (DoD) mllKe;; 1\'al11w "lill" "flllis 

("ll1rc!I!ivr cnll1111t'rdal "I' 

pn.ciut'lst:rvic", thc) on"r arc: to pwhkm" 

t~lilurc, or net'd, til,H cnmparlll?' 

GeoOptlcs, Inc. 8 
64 

"to act" quickl) und rrJ.?l'bd~ l"hcsc mccntiYt:" tI\1 not eXl:--t in the domain \)f 

(iO\CTnmcnl-l,)\\Ih.'d \)1' inter-departmental SCtTlce pr()Vilkr~_ Til\,., Dt,A) ha~ prp\:uf.:J ~'HY~IJ or 

it, ""rld\\ ilk band\\ idtll rt'qnir"l1lel11, rhrongli cOl11merda! PH" itier' ' on th" h,lck or Ihi, 

reliance of cH ... lnmCf s~n icc and SLTVict: rl'1iahilit} 

Tnlll~ft'rrt'd Financial Risk: I !iiLhlighting Ittrth,,,' tile: financial point ah", c the 

comnh:rcial st'n icc, pnH'i\ion I!hH.kl rt::-.lIlh in a comp!~h: trall"kr (.If ~npital (:,p~nditur~ 

rl'~poIlsibi!iti~s !I'om gn\en)m~~tll and t~t\lXlyCr. to ~('n let' rrovidc'L TIlt't'l)mmerclal 

provider take, on the cOllll'ick r"'po,,,ihilit) to lind the capilaL to build the ,,'k'111, and 

pro\ ide al'rrnpriatc back-up and rcdundanc) eapahilitie'i tn opera'" the: S\ stem, reliah!) 

2. You indicated that GeoOptics would sell its data to NOAA without limits on its ability to 

share that data. Please explain what this statement means. For example, will all the data 

you collect go to NOAA for public release without limit? If NOAA makes your data 

available to the public without charge, what other market do you envision for your 

product? 

A, a commercial ,;er, icc: provider, our se.:k to slrik.: a balance in the 

best possible data services to the market at cnmpctitin: prices that rdleet dit1erent kwls of 

need or. and I a It,,: sOllglit b:-. our ClIStt>IW:rS, Our approach \1 ill be In prill ide sen ices at a 

price that enables om company \(\ illlest delil'.;r that sen ice, make a t~lir and 

re-im.;st protits into continllolls sen icc, replenishment ora lice!. accompanied 11) h,:ner and 

more valuable sen ices, We anticipate a price lInder a pa;>-for-deli\ er). allchor-len3!1e) 

data-buy -- prolided by statute 

(lLtm :IIVvWW·g?ace.commerce.gov Igenerall COl!ll1)~rci!!lPJll~Jl!l~!.9_9J:lllJ1jJ:m~Ilt~~~jJ!m I) all d 

Section 507 of the FY 1'>'>3 NASA Authorization Act (JUt 6135, Public La\\ !02-:iRRI. 

codified as l:i USC Sec. :iN06 to he Pile determined hy the mix ,)1' factor<;, including the 

fi,>lkming: 

I) research usc \CP;US (lpcratlollal tIsc: 

::) ra" processe:d data 1 er,us cnhant:ed proc\?ssed data products; 

:;) !larn.>I\ distribution IS, \\ ilk distribmiofl of the data. itsel f 

These difterenct'S in sen ice:, are tht: Hlctors that dil'ferentiate price" As an c\3111ple, nOlloperational science and research user, \\ ill n,)\ be charged j()r data, Op<:ralionai felfct'a'itt'rs 

I\ill collstitute the wrc elf our pa\ ing Cll,(omcr bast', The principal RO users in 

the US today, or in the rdaril .:1) llt:ar iilillre, \\ill include: 

I) NO;\/'I. through th,' National CeIlters fill' Emironmental Prediction (NeEP) the 

l"minnal Wcathc'r Sen ie.: (NWS): 

::) rile USAF for space \\cath(T through the Space Situatiollal A"arcllcss ami 

El1Iironmcntal f\1(>l1itorlng (SSAEM) office, and tbr \\ .:ather the 

Air Force 'v'v'c:athcr <\gcnc) (AFW;\), 

3) The US Nm: through their \ll:ather ,en ice at the \Jill al RC'icardl Lab, 

l'oda) these organization:; data i()r lise in their Numerical Weather Predictioll 

(N \\'1') and space \\Cather monitoring mod.:!s, tbnlugh both nil ncd \Ibsen S:- sIems and 

GeoOptics, [nco 9 
65 

t;0l11llleTcial s: stems. The) in turn pml'"k that data to US cOlllp,mic, and ,iIL/elh 1\ ithout 

charge. Wc do Iwt anticipate changing that model in the sak of our \\cather data. 

As a sen icc prcnidl'r under ,I 199:; NASA Authnri/ntiol1 ,,\ct 

(http://www.space.commerce.gov/generallcommercialpurchase/commitments.shtml#nasa) 

pay-l()r-lklher) data bu) pn1curcIIlcnt rd<mn. (icoOpliL's \\(luld ,dl Ihc data to Nn\A 

under license anci the) could then distribute it to pre-delilled w,ers \\ ith prc-defint'd sen icc 

attributes. Redistribution rights \\(luld be spccitlcd in the NOAA 11(cl1<;c. 

;\s a ClbtOl11t'r. 'l1)A'" \\()uld ddine \1111ch ()rthes.: and nthT attributt's it require's of iI, 

sen icc amI (ieoOptics would delelop an ofier to meet the lalm: deli\ered. These sen ices 

would include nm GPS-RO data and higher !elcl data products and could include mme 

sophisticmed vallie-added services (kli\ ering significanti) ill\:rt'ased accurac) and 

absolute ..:alibratioll (lfall other l\lnllS ofdata. With specilic regard I() the question abo\<:. if 

NOA'\ \lants to enabk data users and the public in the United States to hUll' ,H.:cess hI the 

data E'r II'cc the) can do that and \\C \I ill deli, er that sen ire k\ cl for a cmr\'spumlingl:-

competiti\c price. IfNOAt\ \\Hnts to c,tt'ml it;, distribution of our data be)ond this \\e 

\\(lUld enable them to do so -- at an agrec'd prke -- that rccogni/es that \alue. 

As ILlr (ltlte')' marhc'h. \\C cnn,idcr (iPS [.to data to be: a product f"f c<lulllrk, and 

organi/ations around the glob<:. i\, such \\C ,ee otln.:r national metcol\ll(lg) agend", 

O\ersc,\',. t'urth (Ibsen ation organilations and remott' 'i~nsing entitie~ being interested 

customers nrthis sen icc. 

3. How many satellites do you currently operate? Please explain how and where your 

hardware has been tested, and explain whether you have done adequate testing to assure 

accuracy in space. 

Tnda). \It: do not ('pcTalc' an) satellites as \\c arc a l1el\ start-up compan), \\'.:: have a tir,tchl"s satt'IIi!c and scnsor s),tem design and \\..:Il-qualitlcd busillc'" partners \\,wk.ing Llith Us 

to build. bunch Hnd operate a nell (iPS-RO,~ stenl. The spact'nall dc,ign has h"en 

de\dopc'd til!' and prol ided to Gc(,Oplies b) I.ASP (I.aborator) fill' ,\tmospheric and Space 

Ph)sics) at tile Ulli\c'rsjt~ ofCnlorado and the GPS R() sensor has hc'en lie<:nsed II'om the 

Jet Propulsion LaboratO!) (.11'1.) at the Califnrnia Institute or re,:]111OI,lgy. Pasadena, CA. 

Both an: l is aerospace je'\els mid \\mld rellowtlc'd for their I\ork in SIXlCe. L\SP-de,igl1c~d 

and opernk'd in'ilrtl11lcnh halc' been sent to e\er) planet ofotlr s(llar systcm and Pluto, Dr. 

Thomas Vunck.. our c()ml'al1~ 's (lUllder lind the nriginal creator of the (iPS RO technique 

and technology. 'pent nearl~ 30 yt'ars at JPL Dr. YUIlCk.·S team dc\ eloped all (iPS R{) 

,cnsors that hm c Illmn II'om 1995 through to COS\lIC. Ihey h,lH' built, 11,1\\11. and 

operated more than a d(vell RO ilhtruments. JPI. is the souree orthe pnl\efl [.to ted1!1nlog~ 

on COS\IIC L and that i, lHl\\ being ckli\(:rcd lilf COSMIC 2<1. The ne\\eSl JPL 

instrument lechnolog~ has been licelN:d b) (Jt'oUptk's Illr ollr RO constellation. 

Our satellite S) 'items and busil1t?ss pnlCesses. and thost' of our major partner. LAS!'. arc 

\\ell-pn1\cn and built on long records ofdt'll1(lllsrfated SIKee,s. including painstaking testing 

GeoOptics, Inc. 10 
66 

and n:tc,ting of all stag~s of the spacecraft manufacturing process. Our sakllile s~ stem lla', 

passed Critical Design Revbv (CDR) and the first spac~cran is midway through 

developmml. We are in the process of financing production orllle first six spacecraft 

4. If commercial data buy businesses fail in developing their observing systems and the 

nation's weather forecast suffers, what might be the repercussions and how would you 

address any potential liabilities from such failure? 

An impol1ant element of a robust and vibrant economy and competitive environment 

is ... choice. Opening up \\eather data satdlite markets to tair and open competition /i'om 

numerous potential providers re,ults in that choice. Choicc means that multiple companies 

can emerge as potential providers that gives the government IIser options f(lf a primm) 

prO\ider. as well as back-up and redundant providers. 

That said, as a commercial provider one of the most important attrihutes of successful 

cOlllmercial provision is to hm'c technical <lnt! qua lit) control procedures in place. along 

\\ ith sufficient and appropriate levels of redundanc} and back-up systems in case enol's or 

lillllts OCClII'. This has been the case \\ ilh communications satellite companies. satellite 

imagery companies and tciccom sen ice providers that today provide systems to the 

government. and its most demanding agencies and departments. including Department of 

Defense. FAA. Department of State. CIA. FBI. Department of I lome land Security. and 

numerolls others. 

Risks of failure. tedll1ical anomaly or in-orbit hazard exist for gmernmenl-lm ned systems 

as they would for commercial-O\med and operated systems. as seen recently with GOES 13. 

The aspects that the government mllst also consider include managing risks. decreasing costs 

and gaining additional value and innovation /i'om commercial solutions. In existing service 

contracts, through \vhich parts or government rccci\(: services toda) , there arc contractual 

clauses that put the appropriate burden on individual companies to build their companies and 

scrvices in ways to firstly, mitigate risks. and secondly, manage t11ilures or technical 

anomalies that might occur. 

What does change \\ ith commercial options is the certainty of timely-deliver) and the 

provision of the highest service-level and drall1alicall~ kmer costs that accompan~ a 

(,()lllll1crciall) created and competed data-buy solution. 

5. Do you have any suggestions, beyond data buys, about how NOAA can be more 

innovative in its public-private partnerships? 

Commercial data buys are likely to offer the most efficient. cost-elkctiv e approach to data 

acquisition in the long rlln since they harness the limitless pO\\.ef and innmllti\e dri\e 

offered b)" market incenti\ es and competition. The samc j(lrCl'S that put prodigious 

computing and coml1ll1nicatiollS pm\"r in consumcrs' pockets at little cosl \\ill have the 

sallle impact on weather data collection. Other possible Opti'1!1S include: 

GeoOptics, Inc. 11 
67 

Commi..:rcial ho .... h..'d pay load..; or t!0\ crnml'nl inqnlml'nt, 

Dd i\ t'r) of on~orhit weather monitoring ~('r\'il'l'~ through ~t.:r\ ic~ k'\ d agrt.'.:nh.:nt:--

"-'hart.:d gO\l'rnnlt..'nt'C(Hllractor invt.:stmct11 

Lngagc pri\i.lh.' n:sl',IfI:h organi/~tlion:--, IHltjU"lt public r~~ean;h. in cnn:'kh.:-ring and 'olving 

pn,bknh >\(Irking in tandem witlt go\C'rnment 

Space \\~atht.:r l'()nsortia. "lIch it>; those \\\wJ...ing \\ itb indthtf) -gO\ r...'fntnt'nt gnHII''', li,,(' 

I,','deral Lih:rgy Regulator\ CommissIon (FER( ') ilnd N,.rth Americun !:Iedri.: Rdiahilit\ 

Corporation (NLRU 

Uperational \leather und dinl:llC consortia, ,1Ich us the (in)lIp on Lurth (ll"cn at ion' (UE( I) 

and the UN Inkrnuti,ll1ul Strategy 1;,1' Dba,ter Reduction 

BCt!in think iog and addl'l..~,si ng the \\ irk ""\\ l'n1her and CtH' irnnlllental t'nt(,1'pri:-;('" as an 

ekment "four Nation', Criticallntr,,,trtlcturc' ,tnt! Key Re"HnTe, t('IKIt) and cOIl,kkr 

I11l'rib \)rthinJ...ing ora "\Ycather and Ct1yinllll1lCn1al intelligence'" ma('hin~, A..; citl~d in m) 

testimon). the Bur,'au olTcnnomil' Ancllysi, r,'ported hl thc Nati,lIlal Research Council in 

fhe National i\caLicm}- Pn .. 's-'; puhlication. 7/k' ,1fmo\pht'ric Scit'Jlt'('\ Ellfering Ille l'H't'ulrFinl ('Clllill'\' that an "limated 'D·6 trillion or about :'5 .. W",,·- of tile IS ee,)!l<Hll\ is 

directly impacted b) weatiler, 

According to the' National A"ociation "rpuhlic Admini,tratinll implement a ""lOather 

C<lllll11i>sion" a' a I dcral A(h ;'.;01') (OIl1l11ittc..: Act t !'AlA) body that h'ob at the ,eetnr· 

wide aspects ofopcTational \lc'ather aile! 'pace weather colketi\d) .. on the wcatlwr· 

~tlabkd t,.'cPlwmy and their Inng-knn imrlication~ on the it)reca:..L 

6. The director of the National Weather Service (NWS), Lou Uccellini, has said that the 

Sandy Supplemental has given NWS sufficient funding to provide them with the most 

powerful weather computing power of any country. Does this make the provisions of 

the bill regarding a computer assessment unnecessary? If it is your position that we still 

need those provisions in the proposed legislation, please explain why? 

A majnr upgrade to \;\\S op.:rational compuh:r, is sdwdul<.'d to hc'conlpict.:d in .lul~ :::01>. 

ill II hich NOAA op.:rational computing II ill undergo a threefold hardl\ arc capabilil) 

increase. This upgradc \I ill includc major resolution cnhancements and an adl anced glohal 

l1lodcltitat runs mort: cl'onoillicall) on the Ilel\ hardllarc. The Disaster Rdief 

,Appropriations Act 01':::0 I J is pWI iding additional funds to illlprm e operatioual and 

wcather research computing in both FY :::014 and FY :::015. With these funds. NOAA's 

operational computing capabilit) \Iill increase tenll1ld b) :::015. The F'I{ :::014 Prcsid.:n!', 

Budgct requests additional fUllds lilr '\lOA A to upgrade oplOrational computing. \\ hieh II ill 

prm idc a 27-1'01<1 increase in op,:rational computing capability b) :::01 t<. fhat alhancellK'nt 

\\ ill gile the NWS unmatched operational wmputing capabilit) and th.: ahility tt> run the 

latest long-range f()rccast tlw(kls \I ilb impnn cd resolution. The fuuding recci\ cd ali.:r 

Hurricanl! Sand" \\ as b a much 111.'I.'lkd "juillp-stan," but ('lIl1inlied funding i" e»cnliaLI he 

computing resources assessment \\ ill bring all this to I ight. and !()CUS 011 the need to contiuue 

flltlding lor operational computing capacit~. 

GeoOptics. (nc. 12 
68 

7. How do you define the boundalY between what weather infrastructure and services 

should be built and run at NOAA and what should be done by extramural partners, stich 

as the academic and private sectors? 

Th~ answer to this qllcstinll is ultimately detcrmined by what one ddines as thc dt?sired and 

needed objectives and outcomcs ofthc national \\cather enterprise and v\cather sc'curit) 

system, 

Our economy and societ) need and demand better t(wecasts. prt'dictions and ad\ al1ec 

warnings, These an; the desired objectives and outcomcs, Brcaking the ,,<'nice ddhcr) 

chain d()wl1 to \that deliYers these outcomes. the l110st nlluahk and ynlue-creating clement, 

arc t()lInd in hlm to lise, appJ). manipulate. analYlc and manage the dat<l required to achicv c 

those outeomcs through computational p()\\cr. IIPC strlJ(:tUl'es and data analytics, It is our 

belief that it is in these areas that NOAA and go\(:rnment should thetis their m\ nedintr<lstructun: dollars and ultimate e~cel!e1)(:t', 

Tht' abo\<.; foclIs Oil data analytics and forecasting e~cellence is achieved through and 

supported by the identification and specification orthe right data that arc needed to aehkn: 

them. In short. weather data and ils collection can and should he seCIl as a coll1mndit: a 

lo\\er vallie clemcnt of the entire weather data enterprise, As such. govcrnment should he 

looking at the best cost-peri(mmll1ce sources of this data, NOAA should be precise in \vhat 

data it needs and the specifications and o.tnndards it requires .. and thcn ask the market to 

pnn ide it reliably and cheaply. 

The scic11I:e-depcndcn( and science-based sector of data anal) sis. manipulatioll and 

management to create dcsired l<.lrecasting outputs tht' highest value ends that taxpayers and 

businesses want t() pay f(1r and benefit fhlln -- should be demarcated from thc datacollection )\odd which. \\hile vital and important. has the commodity and simplicity 

elcmcnts Ihat a highl) competitive and vibrant cOll1mercial selykes community can pn1\idc, 

NOAA/NASA should do \vhat cannot be done profitably or cost-efketi\Cly. or \\hat i, not 

being ofkrcd. by the academic a11l1 private sectors. Over timc, as the cnmmercial d~lta 

model takes hold. a greater portion of \\cnther data prmisiol1 \V ill he commercialized at 

grcat I) reduced C(lst. 

However. there will ah\uys remain unique. firsl-o!:a-kimL experimental :lcl\antcments. 

exempli tied hy a Ilumber of innovative instruments on EOS and JPSS that only the 

g()\crnment is in a position to SPOIlS"L 

8. The NOAA Science Advisory Board R&D Task Force issued a report earlier this year 

that recommended NOAA capitalize on the support and skills of the extramural research 

community by developing carefully targeted initiatives that ensure the results are 

integrated into NOAA's R&D operations. Based on your awareness of the weather 

enterprise, what is the position of the academic and govemment sectors of the enterprise 

on this bill? Should the academic and government sectors of the weather enterprise be 

represented in the bill? 

GeoOptics. Inc. 13 
69 

of \\'iscolbin, l 

Unln:r,it", lII1IH:r;,it) ofOklulmma, the UK 

Pnlgrlllli ()ffke, l(H' COSl\ lie. The,,: and couml"" 

play un aell\ in our national \Ieather 

9. The bill prefers Observing System Satellites Experiments as a method for examining 

alternative methods of data collection. However, a limitation on OSSEs is that these 

simulations arc only as good as the data and assumptions that go into the model. What 

standards should be erected for the quality and reliability of claims regarding proposed 

systems submitted by NOAA. What steps should be taken to validate cost claims for 

proposed systems? 

II1h:grill "f!he ami assumptions that fCt'd 

WI dil'len:nlihanIHI\\ our 

quantit: and Ilnture urlhe dala UpOll \\hich 

( 

rcpOl1 With 

colillborati\Hl II lIb thl: Ink'matlOllul Radio (kcultlilion 

Respectfully submitted by, 

Jon Kirchner 

President & Chief Operating Officer 

GeoOptics, Inc. 

JUlie 18, 2013 

GeoOptics. Inc. 14 

(71) 

Appendix II 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL FOR THE RECORD
72 

REVISED SUBMISSION FROM GEOOPTICS, INC., 

SUBMITTED BY MR. KIRCHNER
73 

assisting forecasters with data about tornadoes. Having a deployed GPS-RO microsatellite constellation would usher in an entirely new realm of information density to 

feed into forecasts. That info would contribute to helping save more lives in tornado 

prone regions of the country. 

Reinforcing the value of GPS-RO, the Riverside Technologies Report prepared at the 

request of NESDIS had a high assessment for the capabilities of GPS-RO, rating it with 

others as the highest level of merit in helping mitigate our nation's looming data gap. 

From a cost-to-customer perspective, our 24-satelilte CICERO constellation (Community 

Initiative for Continuous Earth Remote Observation) and our services business model 

saves the US Government the cost of taking on the full-capital cost and risks for such a 

robust system. It would cost GeoOptics about million to build, launch and 

operate and could be on orbit and operational in less than 32 months from today. 

NOAA and the federal government 00 NOT PAY for the $180 Million. ~~~~~~:!.!. 

about this point in our response. In the business model of GeoOptics, we affirm that the 

government does not provide the $180 Million for our satellite constellation. It is our 

business model that the government need not assume this financial risk. Instead, this 

risk belongs with the private sector in the marketplace. 

First Point: GeoOptics saves the government $180 Million in upfront capital cost and 

risk -- a "best bang for the buck" .. with maximum dollar impact. 

The government contracts for a pay-an-delivery data buy, and pays an annual "fee for 

service" for data delivered by our shared-platform and data service. 
74 

Second - More huge savings continue from GeoOptics with a deployed GPS-RO 

satellite constellation. 

The traditional method of using radiosondes is estimated at $200.00 cost per profile. 

This does not include the human capital costs for at least two NWS employees to launch 

the radiosonde twice each day at Weather Field Offices. So the NWS cost is actually 

much higher. 

The GeoOptics GPS-RO cost is ~$3.50 per profile, accompanied by lOx more accuracy. 

Third Benefit - an Abundant Harvest of RO Data 

NWS forecasters would have access to almost 13.1 million GPS-RO measurements per 

year globally, and 800 thousand GPS-RO soundings over CONUS versus the estimated 

182,500 radiosondes profiles per year currently being collected over CONUS by NWS. 

These numbers demonstrate the significantly higher density of measurements that 

would be available to forecasters to assist them with severe storms like hurricanes and 

tornados. 

if there were a 12 micro-satellite constellation orbiting the earth by 2017 - they would 

assist in closing the weather data gap that the Department of Commerce Inspector 

General cautioned in his report to Congress about the NOAA satellite program. 

Space News reported on 6/27/2013 that H.R. 2413: "Would ease restrictions on the 

commercialization of government weather satellite programs by allowing the Commerce 

Department, which encompasses NOAA, to contract with commercial providers for data 

acquisition. It would also allow hosting of private weather instruments aboard 

government satellites, and of government instruments aboard private satellites." 

Congressman Rohrbacher on June 26th asked Acting NOAA Administrator Kathryn 

Sullivan whether NOAA purchases commercial weather data. last year on March 28th , 

Chairman Ralph Hall asked Mary Kizca, Assistant Administrator of NESDIS in a hearing of 

the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment if "the potential benefits and cost 

savings seems too great to pass up" [from commercial weather satellites]. 

On the subject of viability of Commercial Weather Data from Space -- in 2008 NESDIS 

commissioned GeoOptics to conduct a comprehensive study on: 

Commercial Weather Data Pricing and Feasibility Study for GNSS Radio Occultation 

and Ocean Scatterometry. The report link is for your review: 

3 
75 

How can we bring the advantages of GPS-RO into the mainstream to help forecasters? 

We suggest the following amended changes to the bill: 

Section ::I 

Add (H): implementation of existing pay-on-delivery, anchor tenancy**, data-buy 

procurement agreement and policies that will lead to specific, fair and open 

competition for government-leased and government-owned systems. 

Section 5 

Add (5): Implement a pilot program based on the formula suggested by GeoOptics that 

the vendor provide the full, 24-satellite system at NO UPFRONT CHARGE to the 

government. The vendor is only paid for annually contracted data services upon 

delivery according to NOAA scientific requirements. 

Section 9 

Amend 

+++++++++ 

Report- Within "3" months 

**Anchor Tenancy agreements: 

http://www.space.commerce.govlgenera!/commerdalpurchaselcommitments.sh~l 

Anchor Tenancy, Section 507 of the FY 1993 NASA Authorization Act (H.R. 6135, Public 

law 102-588), codified as 15 USC Sec. 5806 that authorizes the Administrators of NASA 

and NOAA to enter into multi-year anchor tenancy contracts with termination liability. 

(Office of Space Commercialization - 1993 NASA Authorization Act) 
76 

GEOOPTICS, INC. CLOSING COMMENTS, SUBMITTED BY MR. KIRCHNER

GeoOptics -- Closing Comments 

Weather Forecast Improvement Act - Discussion Draft 

Overview: 

The legislation that created the Office of Space Commercialization in the Department of 

Commerce that became Public Law 102-588 was signed into law by President George 

Herbert Walker Bush in the 102th Congress. Since then we have seen four presidential 

administrations and despite the encouragement that this law offered, NOAA has 

resisted purchasing satellite weather data and (in some people's minds) has developed a 

system in favor of irresponsibly costly, delay-ridden government-owned and dominated 

satellites. This approach thwarts any hope of intense competition in cost, great ideas, 

quality or ingenuity by rewarding only a handful of select vendors. Moreover, this 

resulting approach does not offer a means of removing profound financial, deployment 

and performance risks - to taxpayers or agencies. Year after year, the agency testifies 

that it is open to purchasing weather data, but nothing changes and nothing ever 

happens. 

Perhaps, there can be no greater advocate for creation of specific legislation for this 

purpose than the Department of Commerce web page for the Office of Space 

Commercialization that states: 

• This page provides information about existing legal authorities that allow certain 

government agencies to make advance purchase commitments for products and 

services. Such commitments can be critical to the development of commercial 

space systems, as they demonstrate serious government interest in becoming a 

paying customer. Having a "guaranteed" government customer helps companies 

raise the significant amounts of private capital needed to launch new space assets. 

However, without specific enabling legislation; government agencies are 

forbidden from committing future funds to specific projects. 

Source: 

http://www.space.commerce.gov/general/commercialpurchase/commitments.shtml 

At a time when the nation faces the looming hardship from the weather data gap, one 

might think that NOAA would jump to create stop-gap data measures. Instead, we have 

learned that the funding for COSMIC 2B satellite program is in jeopardy. This is ironic 

since 75 countries, and 2,500 organizations within those countries including NOAA, 

depend on GPS-RO measurements that form the baseline for their forecasts using the 

Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) system. Moreover, if the COSMIC GPS-RO services 

are grounded, what happens to these countries' forecasts? 

Last year NOAA testified to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment on 3/28/13 

and said: "NOAA will pursue potential agreements with the commercial sector when it 

can provide data that addresses NOAA's requirements at a reasonable cost to the 

taxpayer. Some of the key considerations the commercial sector must demonstrate 

include: 
77 

Æ 

• Ability to provide sustained and uninterrupted observations to meet operational 

requirements, 

• Compliance with NOAA's data policy for full and open exchange and distribution 

of data, 

• Demonstrated technical feasibility to acquire and deliver the observations and 

data in a reliable and timely manner, and 

• Affordability of operations and cost-effectiveness to the Government." 

Source: 

http://democrats.science.house.gov/sites/democrats.science.house.gov/files/document 

s/NOAA%20Testimony.pdf ' 

The private sector would say to NOAA they have been for years and continue to be 

ready to live by strict standards and will deliver a great product at a reasonable cost to 

the taxpayers. But, another year has passed and we are no closer to NOAA closing the 

looming data gap or creating an opportunity for the commercial marketplace to help 

close it, cheaply and reliably. Only this legislation can instruct NOAA to do so. The clock 

is literally ticking. 

Thank you for your consideration.