U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

52–705PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

ENHANCING FIRE WEATHER PREDICTION 

AND COORDINATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, 

AND TECHNOLOGY 

OF THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 12, 2023 

Serial No. 118–19 

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. FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

JIM BAIRD, Indiana 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

MIKE GARCIA, California 

STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma 

JAY OBERNOLTE, California 

CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee 

DARRELL ISSA, California 

RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas 

CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York 

RYAN ZINKE, Montana 

SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida 

DALE STRONG, Alabama 

MAX MILLER, Ohio 

RICH MCCORMICK, Georgia 

MIKE COLLINS, Georgia 

BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York 

TOM KEAN, New Jersey 

VACANCY 

ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking Member 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

HALEY STEVENS, Michigan 

JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York 

DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina 

ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois 

ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon 

VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina 

KEVIN MULLIN, California 

JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina 

EMILIA SYKES, Ohio 

MAXWELL FROST, Florida 

YADIRA CARAVEO, Colorado 

SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania 

JENNIFER MCCLELLAN, Virginia 

TED LIEU, California 

SEAN CASTEN, Illinois, 

Vice Ranking Member 

PAUL TONKO, New York 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

July 12, 2023 

Page 

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 2 

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Chairman, Committee on Science, 

Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .................................... 5 

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

Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member, Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 6 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 8 

Witnesses: 

Mr. Mark Goeller, State Forester/Director, Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 9 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 11 

Mr. James Peverill, Founder/CEO, GreenSight 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 16 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 18 

Dr. Ali Tohidi, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Wildfire 

Dynamics, San Jose State University 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 23 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 25 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 38 

Appendix: Additional Material for the Record 

Letter submitted by Representative Max Miller, Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives 

Tim Donovan, President and CEO, Competitive Carriers Association ........ 72 

(1) 

ENHANCING FIRE WEATHER PREDICTION 

AND COORDINATION 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 2023 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

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

2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Frank Lucas [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 
2 
3 
4 
5 

Chairman LUCAS. The Committee will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess of the Committee at any time. I recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. 

Good morning, and welcome to today’s Full Committee hearing 

examining fire weather prediction tools and capacities. Today’s discussion will help us assess the collaboration and coordination between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) and other Federal departments and agencies, and State 

and local officials, to ensure the safety of people and property. Today’s hearing is timely as we enter the summer months, which 

have traditionally marked the beginning of wildfire season. 

However, I’m sure many of my Western colleagues would agree 

that there’s not much of a true wildfire season anymore. They seem 

to occur year-round. In 2022 alone, the National Interagency Fire 

Center reported almost 69,000 fires that burned 7.5 million acres 

of land in the United States. Over the past month, the United 

States has had some of the worst air quality numbers in the world 

due to smoke from Canadian wildfires. 

By advancing our weather capacities, we have a chance to limit 

the size and scope of future fires, as well as improve research into 

air quality changes that come with fires. Lengthier droughts, hotter 

temperatures, and poorly maintained Federal lands are all contributing to a greater frequency and intensity of wildfires across the 

country and around the world. 

There is no silver bullet to completely prevent fires, but we can 

make significant progress in protecting our communities if we improve the forecasting and prediction of weather conditions that lead 

to fires. Our witnesses today are involved with State emergency 

management, commercial sector innovation, and academic research 

to enhance the sustainability and accuracy of fire weather information. Their testimony will inform our work on legislation to better 

prepare communities and regions facing the rapid spread of fires. 

Let me be clear, the objective of this hearing and any future legislation related to wildfires is not for the Federal Government to 

make decisions for people. But by providing State and local emergency managers the most accurate information possible, the Federal Government will be able to give local community leaders and 

everyday citizens the knowledge and understanding they need to 

make their own decisions. 

NOAA and the National Weather Service cannot tackle this problem on their own. Long gone are the days of fire watchers sitting 

in towers with binoculars scanning for smoke. A robust partnership 

with the commercial sector is necessary to help boost our forecasting and prediction capacities. I look forward to hearing about 

the advancements that the commercial sector has made with new 

technologies, including unmanned aerial aircraft. These are the 

types of innovations that will inevitably save the lives of firefighters and other emergency officials. 

Today’s hearing is important because it allows us to examine a 

wide range of sectors that partner with Federal departments and 

agencies to utilize different types of fire weather data. Their input 

will help us ensure the direction and resources we provide NOAA 
6 

end up benefiting most Americans and avoiding wasteful duplication. 

I thank our witnesses for sharing their expertise with us, and I 

look forward to a productive discussion. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Lucas follows:] 

Good morning and welcome to today’s Full Committee hearing examining fire 

weather prediction tools and capabilities. 

Today’s discussion will help us assess the collaboration and coordination between 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), other Federal departments and agencies, and state and local officials to ensure the safety of people 

and property. 

Today’s hearing is timely as we enter the summer months, which have traditionally marked the beginning of wildfire season. 

However, I’m sure many of my western colleagues would agree that there is not 

much of a true wildfire season anymore, with fires occurring year-round. 

In 2022 alone, the National Interagency Fire Center reported almost 69,000 fires 

that burned 7.5 million acres of land in the United States. Over the past month, 

the United States has had some of the worst air quality numbers in the world due 

to the smoke from Canadian wildfires. 

By advancing our fire weather capabilities, we have the chance to limit the size 

and scope of future fires, as well as improve research into air quality changes that 

come from fires. 

Lengthier droughts, hotter temperatures, and poorly maintained federal lands are 

all contributing to a greater frequency and intensity of wildfires across the country 

and around the world. 

There is no silver bullet to completely prevent fires, but we can make significant 

progress in protecting our communities if we improve the forecasting and prediction 

of weather conditions that lead to fires. 

Our witnesses today are involved with state emergency management, commercial 

sector innovation, and academic research to enhance the sustainability and accuracy 

of fire weather information. 

Their testimony will inform our work on legislation to better prepare communities 

and regions facing the rapid spread of fires. 

Let me be clear, the objective of this hearing, and any future legislation related 

to wildfires, is not for the Federal government to make decisions for people. 

But by providing state and local emergency managers the most accurate information possible, the Federal government will be able to give local community leaders 

and everyday citizens the knowledge and understanding they need to make their 

own decisions. 

NOAA and the National Weather Service cannot tackle this problem on their own. 

Long gone are the days of fire watchers sitting in towers with binoculars scanning 

for smoke. 

A robust partnership with the commercial sector is necessary to help bolster our 

forecasting and prediction abilities. I look forward to hearing about the advancements that the commercial sector has made with new technologies, including unmanned aerial aircraft. These are the types of innovations that will inevitably save 

the lives of firefighters and other emergency officials. 

Today’s hearing is important because it allows us to examine a wide range of sectors that partner with Federal departments and agencies to utilize different types 

of fire weather data. Their input will help us ensure the direction and resources we 

provide to NOAA end up benefiting the most Americans and avoid wasteful duplication. 

I thank our witnesses for sharing their expertise with us and I look forward to 

a productive discussion. 

Chairman LUCAS. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from California, for an opening statement. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, good morning. And thank you, Chairman 

Lucas, for holding this really important hearing. And I want to 

thank the witnesses again for coming to share your expertise on 

this topic which is of such importance to our country. 

Every year, wildlife—wildfires take lives and cause billions of 

dollars in damage. Perhaps most concerning is that the frequency 

and destructiveness of wildfires are increasing due to climate 
7 

change. Now, I’m from California, and I see the impacts of wildfires 

and communities firsthand. In 2020, Santa Clara County where I’m 

from experienced the fourth largest wildfire in California State history. The SCU (Santa Clara Unit) Lightning Complex fire burned 

over 396,000 acres, destroyed 225 structures, damaged a further 26 

structures, and injured six people. And that’s in addition to other 

very destructive wildfires that resulted in deaths to individuals. 

Now, thanks to brave emergency responders, these fires are dealt 

with. But despite the critical role, emergency responders and 

wildland firefighters play in protecting lives and property and the 

considerable danger they put themselves in in doing so, they’re significantly under-resourced. Support for our firefighters is far from 

the only challenge when it comes to reducing risks from wildland 

fires. Many agencies and organizations from local to Federal level 

play a role in mitigating and responding to wildfires, posing challenges for interagency coordination and efficient use of finite resources. 

At the Federal level, while there is coordination when it comes 

to wildfire response, there are significant gaps in coordination 

when it comes to increasing scientific understanding, prediction, resilience, and communication for wildland fires. We can’t just keep 

responding to disasters. We need to invest more in preventing them 

where we can. And that’s why I’m reintroducing this week the National Wildland Fire Risk Reduction Program Act. This bill would 

strengthen the Federal coordination of research and operational efforts across multiple Federal science agencies and support a more 

efficient and effective whole-of-government response to reducing 

wildland fire risk. And I am looking forward to working with our 

Chairman to move a bipartisan package of wildland fire bills 

through the Committee and hopefully on to the Congress itself. 

Some of the most important information for wildfire detection, 

mitigation, and emergency response comes from observational systems and predictive models. Now, we have mountains of data currently collected from assets owned and operated across academic, 

private, and the public sector, but there are considerable gaps in 

data, and there’s also inadequate coordination and dissemination of 

that data. For example, many datasets lack the desired spatial and 

temporal resolution for maximum utility in modeling applications. 

Wildfire forecasting models also need to be improved to better predict wildfire ignition and behavior. Coupled wildfire models, which 

integrate our best understanding of the physics of fire, interactions 

between fire and weather, are promising tools for improving realtime predictions of fire behavior. 

I’m so pleased that Dr. Tohidi, who is an expert in coupled fire 

weather modeling, is here from my own San Jose State in my district, and he is doing impressive work at the university about how 

Congress can help support innovations in modeling, along with our 

other two excellent witnesses. 

The increasing threat of wildfires poses to our community and 

our brave firefighters on the frontlines requires the Nation to effectively understand and predict fires, manage our wildlands safely, 

and expeditiously respond to them. I very much look forward to our 

testimony. 
8 

And just a note, all of us are in multiple Committees, and another Committee is meeting at this very moment, so I’m going to 

take a brief recess to go to that Committee and I’ll be right back. 

This is one of the most important things before this Committee and 

before this Congress. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:] 

Good morning. Thank you to Chairman Lucas for holding this important hearing, 

and thank you to the witnesses for coming to share your expertise on this topic of 

utmost importance with us today. 

Every year, wildfires take lives and cause billions of dollars in damage. Perhaps 

most concerning is that the frequency and destructiveness of wildfires are increasing 

due to climate change. 

Coming from California, I see the impacts of wildfires on communities first-hand. 

In 2020, Santa Clara County, which is part of my Congressional District, experienced the fourth largest wildfire in California state history. The SCU Lightning 

Complex Fire burned over 396,000 acres, destroyed 225 structures, damaged a further 26 structures, and injured 6 people. Thanks to the brave emergency responders 

the fire was contained with no fatalities. 

Despite the critical role emergency responders and wildland firefighters play in 

protecting lives and property—and the considerable danger they put themselves in 

to do so—they are still significantly under resourced. 

Support for our firefighters is far from the only challenge when it comes to reducing risks from wildland fires. Many agencies and organizations from the local to federal level play a role in mitigating and responding to wildfires, posing challenges 

for interagency coordination and efficient use of finite resources. At the Federal 

level, while there is coordination when it comes to wildfire response, there are significant gaps in coordination when it comes to increasing scientific understanding, 

prediction, resilience, and communication for wildland fires. We can’t just keep responding to disasters. We must invest more in preventing them where we can. That 

is why I am reintroducing this week the National Wildland Fire Risk Reduction 

Program Act. This bill would strengthen the federal coordination of research and 

operational efforts across multiple federal science agencies, and support a more efficient and effective whole-of-government response to reducing wildland fire risk. I 

look forward to working with Chairman Lucas to move a bipartisan package of 

wildland fire bills through the Committee this Congress. 

Some of the most important information for wildfire detection, mitigation, and 

emergency response comes from observational systems and predictive models. While 

mountains of data are currently collected from assets owned and operated across the 

academic, private, and public sectors, there are still considerable gaps in data. For 

example, many datasets lack the desired spatial and temporal resolution for maximum utility in modeling applications. Wildfire forecasting models also need to be 

improved to better predict wildfire ignition and behavior. Coupled fire-weather models, which integrate our best understanding of the physics of fire and interactions 

between fire and weather are promising tools for improving real-time predictions of 

fire behavior. I am excited to hear from one of my constituents, Dr. Tohidi, who is 

an expert in coupled fire-weather modeling, about how Congress can help support 

innovations in observational data and wildfire predictive modeling. The increasing 

threat wildfires pose to our communities and to our brave firefighters on the front 

lines requires our nation to effectively understand and predict fires, manage our 

wildlands, and safely and expediently respond to them. 

I greatly look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on how Congress can 

support these endeavors. Thank you to our committee members and witnesses for 

joining us today to engage in this important discussion. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. Thank you, Ranking Member. 

Our first witness today is Dr.—sorry, Mr. Mark Goeller. Mark is 

the State Forester and Director of the Oklahoma Department of 

Agriculture, Forest—Food and Forestry Services Division. While 

earning a bachelor of science and agriculture forestry management 

degree from Oklahoma State University, Mark began fighting 

wildfires with the U.S. Forestry Service in 1980 and has served as 

an incident commander on literally hundreds of multiagency, 

multijurisdictional fires. 
9 

Our second witness is Mr. James Peverill, founder and CEO 

(Chief Executive Officer) of GreenSight, a technology company that 

builds products built on a common technology platform applying robotics and AI (artificial intelligence) to solve high-impact problems 

in agriculture, defense, and weather monitoring. 

And our third witness is Ali Tohidi, an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Santa Jose State University and co-Principal Investigator at their Wildfire Interdisciplinary Research Center. His current research is based on developing the next generation of operational wildfire weather behavior models. 

So now that I’ve slaughtered your last names, let’s move on. I 

now recognize Dr.—Mr. Goeller for five minutes to present his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. MARK GOELLER, 

STATE FORESTER/DIRECTOR, 

OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 

FOOD AND FORESTRY 

Mr. GOELLER. Thank you, Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member 

Lofgren, Members of the Committee, for inviting me to this hearing 

today and the opportunity to testify on behalf of Oklahoma Forestry Services and the National Association of State Foresters. I’m 

Mark Goeller, State Forester, Chair of the Southern Group of State 

Foresters, and member of the National Association of State Foresters Executive Committee. 

Nearly every State Forester is required by their individual statutes to deliver wildland fire prevention, detection, suppression, and 

investigation. State Foresters also support Federal land management agencies nationwide through cooperative agreements to conduct wildland fire operations. 

My wildland firefighting career began in 1980, and I’ve fought 

wildfires in 22 States. I’m currently qualified as a Type 1 Incident 

Commander and serve on both State and national incident management teams. These experiences, along with serving as a Fire Management Chief for 13 years and now as State Forester, I have an 

advanced understanding that the key to minimizing loss of life and 

property depends on fire weather forecasting, early wildfire detection, wildfire preparedness, and response. 

Wildfire is common in Oklahoma. Prior to 2015, I would have an 

on-average one day’s warning that areas of the State would experience high to extreme fire danger. That changed in late 2015 when 

the National Weather Service officials approached our agency to inform us of their research and new findings related to impactful fire 

weather systems. Because of this relationship with the National 

Weather Service, my fire management staff now has from three to 

seven days to pre-position firefighting resources for response. Red 

flag warnings have transitioned from strictly meeting hot, dry, 

windy criteria to currently a threat index of where the probability 

of high impact wildfires will occur in the State, early warning 

where fire effective weather systems will intersect. High severity 

wildland fuels also allows for focused fire prevention messaging 

and firefighter safety briefings. Firefighter and public safety is 

greatly enhanced through this improved situational awareness. 
10 

Oklahoma’s wildfire detection system traditionally is limited to 

our commercial timber lands in far eastern Oklahoma, and we have 

lost all of our fire towers and man those and have gone strictly to 

other means. New wildfires are now detected statewide by the National Weather Service’s GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) 16 and 17 satellites and typically within 1/4 

mile accuracy. Often, these emerging wildfires are detected before 

they’re reported by the public to 911 dispatch centers. 

These advances in fire weather forecasting and wildfire detection 

by the National Weather Service during high to extreme fire danger has allowed State, Federal, and local firefighting agencies to 

target aggressive initial attack in areas where wildfire would have 

the greatest potential and impact of loss of lives, values at risk, 

and natural resources. 

Another innovation employed in Oklahoma is to issue fire warnings utilizing an integrated warning team approach. This warning 

system involves the local National Weather Service forecast office 

detecting and communicating to partners the location of a potentially dangerous wildfire. Oklahoma forestry services utilizing 

Wildfire Analyst, a commercially available modeling software to 

predict the potential spread from wildfire’s ignition point. We contact the incident commander and local emergency managers to confirm the warning need and also to provide the relevant evacuation 

information. And finally, State emergency management broadcasts 

the fire warnings through the Emergency Alert System to a targeted area jointly identified by the National Weather Service and 

Oklahoma Forestry Services. 

While this seems pretty cumbersome, the fire—fire warnings 

issued in just 6 minutes on a recent wildfire occurring in a heavily 

populated wildland urban interface (WUI) area in the Oklahoma 

City metro. Oklahoma is the first State in the Nation to utilize this 

system. Using our legacy process, it often required approximately 

90 minutes to issue the fire warning. 

As an incident commander responsible for recommending evacuations in advance of an approaching wildfire, it’s imperative that 

local officials with evacuation responsibilities and the public are 

provided with the greatest advanced warning and most accurate 

evacuation information possible to minimize the loss of life. Oklahoma’s fire warning system gives the time and decision space to facilitate an orderly, safe evacuation. 

These advances in Oklahoma and Texas would not be possible 

without the close relationship between the National Weather Service forecast offices, Oklahoma Forestry Service, and Texas A&M 

Forest Service. The ability to utilize each other’s resources is critical to success in providing for firefighter safety and minimizing 

loss of life and property. This collaborative approach and technological advances in fire weather forecasting and detection can be 

easily applied to preparedness and response actions nationwide. 

In closing, I appreciate the Committee holding this important 

hearing to investigate how National Weather Service and other entities will impact future wildland fire preparedness and response 

nationally through improved and emerging technologies. I look forward to answering any questions. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Goeller follows:] 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 

Chairman LUCAS. Thank you. We now turn to you, James, for 

your five minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JAMES PEVERILL, 

FOUNDER/CEO, GREENSIGHT 

Mr. PEVERILL. Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, and 

Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting GreenSight to 

testify today before the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to discuss innovative products and services provided by the 

commercial sector and how they can partner with the National 

Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration for the improvement of fire weather nowcasting and prediction. I’m James Peverill, 

co-founder and CEO of GreenSight. 

At the outset, I’d like to mention that it is a very exciting time 

in the United States for new and innovative technologies, especially 

for drone technologies, robotics, and artificial intelligence. For both 

civil and defense applications, these systems are showing tremendous value. Whether it’s the unmanned drone conducting missions 

on the surface of Mars or military drones playing increased roles 

in our national security, these systems have a proven record for 

aiding government missions. 

GreenSight is an innovative small business based in Boston, 

Massachusetts, that specializes in exotic robotic systems for transformative business applications. We’re focused on several different 

markets, including agriculture, weather, and defense. We have several product lines, all based on a common platform of USA-made 

hardware and software components that empower end users to 

solve their mission requirements. 

As it pertains to the mission of environmental prediction in today’s hearing, GreenSight is currently collaborating with the Air 

Force Weather Service and Defense Innovation Unit using our 

WeatherHive system for prototype development. GreenSight’s 

WeatherHive is a unique sensing technology that uses swarms of 

nanosized drones to directly measure atmospheric conditions. This 

system can sample up to 200 square miles per flight, generating a 

dense 3D cube of measurements. This technology was initially developed through a National Science Foundation- (NSF-) funded 

SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) grant and has now 

been selected by the U.S. Air Force and Defense Innovation Unit 

for prototype development, contract, and potential procurement. 

This selection was made under the Peacetime Indications and 

Warning: Global Weather Sensing commercial solutions opening. 

WeatherHive data shows promise to enable new breakthroughs 

in weather forecasting and climate science. Armed with data from 

WeatherHive, forecasting models may be able to much more accurately predict tornado formation, severe storm behavior, wildfire 

movement, and hurricane paths. It is a promising new tool against 

increasingly common severe weather conditions that cause property 

damage, injuries, and deaths every year. 

For the specific mission of fire weather, NOAA would benefit 

from an enhanced mission focus to improve their detection and 

forecasting capabilities. As a commercial company, we feel we can 

assist NOAA with this mission by providing critical data that improves the accuracy and timeliness of information to inform the 
17 

public and safeguard lives and property. Previously, our conversations with NOAA have been centered around other weather events 

such as tornadoes, but applications for fire weather are equally as 

beneficial, if not more. 

The unique aspects of fire events place a greater emphasis on remote sensing. Fires are inherently dangerous and often happen in 

remote areas that are difficult to reach. Using sensing technologies 

such as drone swarms will allow NOAA to continuously monitor 

and collect various forms of data in a safe and efficient manner. 

The data collected by the WeatherHive system can be streamed in 

real time and used for both nowcasting events and in forecasting 

prediction systems and models. The data that WeatherHive collected is also compatible with many existing analytical tools, so 

there’ll be minimal need to redevelop forecasting infrastructure to 

ingest these new types of data. 

By establishing research partnerships, NOAA would be able to 

harness the ingenuity of American industry. These partnerships 

can be mutually beneficial and lead to breakthroughs in technologies that improve our scientific understanding of fire weather. 

Likewise, the establishment and coordination of mechanisms for 

commercial data buys will allow NOAA to quickly ingest new 

sources of data to improve prediction of fire weather events. 

GreenSight stands ready to assist and partner with NOAA to improve their mission requirements for both research and operations. 

Lastly, an issue that must be addressed when moving these 

types of innovative technologies into widespread operational use is 

complying with the associated regulatory framework. Historically, 

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the regulatory authority to grant the use and restriction of drones in the United 

States. Utilizing novel and unique use cases for drones means that 

the FAA needs to address potentially outdated Federal regulations 

and look for creative solutions to offer integration into both public 

and private missions. 

WeatherHive is designed to operate with minimal risk to aviators, people, and property, while promising to offer significant 

overall benefits to public safety. I look forward to working with the 

FAA to ensure that our progress in these technologies is not limited so that we can continue to partner with the Federal Government to improve mission success. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Committee, I thank you for the opportunity to testify you—before you 

today, and I’d be pleased to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Peverill follows:] 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 

Chairman LUCAS. Thank you. I now recognize Dr. Tohidi for five 

minutes to present his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. ALI TOHIDI, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR 

OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING AND WILDFIRE DYNAMICS, 

SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, and other distinguished Members of this 

Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear as a witness 

in this hearing on a topic of growing importance to both the Nation 

and the world. We appreciate the Committee’s attention to 

wildfires and the efforts you have undertaken over the last few 

years to invest in wildfire science. 

My name is Ali Tohidi, and I’m an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at San Jose State, and I’m also co-principal 

investigator of Wildfire Interdisciplinary Research Center at San 

Jose State. My background is in fluid and fire dynamics, and my 

research and development efforts over the past 10-plus years have 

been dedicated to understanding the fundamentals of wildfire 

spread mechanisms, particularly a phenomenon called firebrand 

shower, also known as ember attack. In this testimony, I present 

a concise overview of wildfire physics and modeling approaches and 

elaborate on some of the identified challenges by the fire science 

community. Then I provide recommendations to overcome them. 

Wildfires are an important part of the ecosystem globally. However, detrimental effects of the climate change, poor land management practices such as fire exclusion, and continuous growth of the 

wildland urban interface or, as we call it, WUI areas, have 

transitioned wildfires regimes to extreme and high impact events 

leading to loss of lives, severe disturbances in biological systems, 

and—biological systems, and causing billions of dollars in damages. 

The impacts are projected to grow in severity and magnitude. 

Thus, we need our communities to become more resilient to 

wildfires. 

A key component to achieve this is the ability to accurately estimate the potential progression of the fire through the landscape 

and our communities. Fire models—fire weather models fulfill this 

objective by simulating fire spread mechanisms and their secondary effects on their environment. Briefly, wildfires are spread 

by the progression of the fire front through heat transfer from 

flames and hot gases to onboard combustibles and ignition of spot 

fires far ahead of the main fire front by firebrand showers. 

While our fundamental understanding of some of these processes 

is improving and findings are partially implemented in models, it 

is still challenging to deliver a high fidelity forecast. This is due to 

the multiphysics, multiscale, and stochastic nature of wildfires, 

leading to current knowledge gaps that are stated in my—in detail 

in my written testimony. 

From the operational fire weather modeling standpoint, the main 

cause of unreliable forecasts is partly due to the oversimplification 

of the fire dynamics in models and model formulations and partly 

due to their design objectives. Most fire weather models, including 

the data layers, are designed to simulate wildfires in large spatial 

temporal scales tens of meters in space and hours in time. This 
24 

may be appropriate for wildland fires in remote areas, but not for 

the current regime of fires we experience at WUI zones, as fire dynamics occur at flame scale, meters in space, and seconds in time. 

To enhance the current state of fire weather models, we need to 

invest in the cross-disciplinary initiatives to design and deploy sensors and observe and measure wildfire behavior at flame scale with 

unsaturated clean and high resolution data. Such continuous and 

high resolution measurements nationwide can also serve as a reliable situational awareness platform for first responders. We need 

to invest in multiscale laboratory infrastructures, controlled field 

campaigns, and rapid data collection teams nationwide to study 

wildfire dynamics at, again, flame scale. These measurements and 

observations are crucial for defining the canonical cases of wildfires 

and fire weather model development validation and verification. 

We need to invest in improving the quality, frequency, and resolution of the current data layers for fire weather models, leveraging 

the advances in scientific machine learning and AI. 

We need to establish infrastructures to centralize, standardize, 

and integrate wildfire-related datasets and provide access to the 

scientific community for model development. Support is needed for 

data collection efforts on the exposure of communities and infrastructures to wildfire risk, post-incident damages, and suppression 

activities and their effectiveness during events. These are key 

datasets for informing and calibrating the risk models, particularly 

in WUI zones. 

We must encourage and support community-driven and opensource wildfire model development that co-produces with the relevant stakeholders. Co-production is essential for success of our 

models, as definition of success differs from one stakeholder to the 

other. 

The need for rigorously validated and reliable wildfire models is 

increasing, and accurate estimation of fire behavior across the 

scales has invaluable benefits for communities and stakeholders. 

My view is that the key to developing high performing models is 

the comprehensive application of fundamentals of fire behavior and 

safety sciences, leveraging insights from field and experimental observations at flame scale, along with efficient implementation of 

these findings with co-production in mind. 

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Tohidi follows:] 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 

Chairman LUCAS. I again thank the witnesses for all your testimony, and I recognize myself for five minutes. 

Mark, from one Okie to another, welcome to the Nation’s capital, 

and thank you for taking time to share our State’s great work on 

this topic. 

I want to dig a little deeper on the value of collaboration and 

partnerships in the area of fire weather prediction, your experience 

in Oklahoma, and the development of the tools you mentioned in 

your testimony, who all needed to be at the table, including the 

Federal, State, and local parties. How did this come together? 

Mr. GOELLER. It started out as a result of the 2005/2006 dormant 

fire season in Oklahoma where we had multiple wildfires impacting the State, not only Oklahoma, but Texas and others in the 

Southern Great Plains. As a result of that episode that we had, 

there were a number of individuals that formed what was called 

the Southern Great Plains Wildfire Outbreak Group that included 

at the time individuals from the Texas Forest Service, now Texas 

A&M Forest Service, Oklahoma Forestry Services, National Weather Service Forecast Offices out of Norman, Amarillo, Abilene, Midland, and a number of others to start looking at that phenomenon 

that we experienced there in Oklahoma. And so as time went on, 

the partnership that developed between those offices, individuals, 

just continued to grow and really start to look into the weather dynamics of how that affected our firefighting response in this—in 

those States. 

The missions between our agencies and the National Weather 

Service, they meet in the protection of life and property. And so the 

one thing with the National Weather Service is, obviously, they 

have the tools to look at the weather, weather patterns, and so on 

and analyze such. We have the wherewithal to evaluate our 

wildland fuel conditions. And so the meeting of those two groups 

and agencies, along with State and other local emergency managing—and management personnel is what formed that, and it was 

critical to be able to do that to put us to where we are today. 

Chairman LUCAS. One last question along that line. Can you 

share some of the lessons that you learned from other States who 

might be interested in developing similar tools for forests and communities? 

Mr. GOELLER. One of the things that—the lesson learned as traveling around the United States and working on fires, it’s a little bit 

different when you’re involved with an incident management team 

assigned to a fire in Montana, California, Oregon, wherever it is. 

We do have Incident Meteorologists (IMET) through the IMET program with the National Weather Service that are assigned to the 

fire team, the incident command team. 

But, you know, the things that I would emphasize for lessons 

learned is for other State forestry agencies, local emergency management agencies to get to really working closely with their National Weather Service forecast offices. Look at the model that we 

employ in Oklahoma, look at the process that we went through. It’s 

applicable anywhere in the United States. The same parameters 

that we have in Oklahoma would not necessarily work in other 

States, but the process would. And the research that went into 
39 

what affects our weather systems would be absolutely employable 

in other places. 

Chairman LUCAS. And to my other two witnesses, you know, it’s 

not hyperbole to say that each of you conduct work that saves lives, 

directly saves lives, whether its citizens in affected areas or firefighters. Could you briefly touch on how you engage both first responders and everyday communities to get their input on your 

products or research and ensure that what you offer is useful to 

both groups? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Well, part of when we developed WeatherHive, we 

engaged with a lot of end users. Actually, when we participated in 

the NSF SBIR program, part of that was engaging with a tremendous number of end users, both first responders, public entities, as 

well as universities and other types of forecasting entities. And 

that was really part of the project from the outset. We really wanted to engage with users and make sure that the data that we were 

generating with the system would be very relevant for public applications and for weather forecasting applications. And the excitement that we saw during that process has really driven us to push 

even harder to get the technology into use with the public. And so 

that has been—it’s been part of our engagement since the beginning. 

Chairman LUCAS. Absolutely. Doctor? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. This is exactly why we 

started the Wildfire Interdisciplinary Research Center at San Jose 

State University. And part of the mission that we have is to include the stakeholders, know their problems and what they are 

dealing with in facing wildfires and try to address those questions. 

For example, CalFire is also part of the center, and we hear their 

problems, and we try to tailor the models such that it can address 

those questions that they have. They want to know where the fire 

is exactly and what are the projections for the forecasts, and we are 

trying to address those. 

Chairman LUCAS. Thank you. My time has expired. 

I now recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, for 

five minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all the 

witnesses for your expertise. I agree with the Chairman that the 

work you do helps to save lives and property. 

The climate crisis is certainly contributing to making wildfires 

more dangerous and frequent, putting lives and property and the 

environment at risk. And in my home State of Oregon in the Pacific Northwest, we’re expected to see longer-term hotter and drier 

weather, making our forests more vulnerable. Accurate fire weather and air quality forecasts are extremely important to our region, 

and I know NOAA needs to be able to continue this work and improve it, especially coordinating with other Federal and State agencies to support the rapid containment and suppression of wildfires. 

We’re using some remote cameras right now, increasingly using 

those. We have about 93 remote cameras now spread over 64 locations with a target of 110 cameras by the end of the year. In addition to digital fire outlooks, some of the programs have various levels of artificial intelligence. For example, Portland General Electric 

is now investing more than $20 million in its wildfire mitigation 
40 

and resiliency plan. And that includes high definition AI cameras 

to detect wildfires across the region. 

So I want to ask you, and I have a question for each of you. Mr. 

Peverill, as AI advances, how can we leverage the technology to 

better predict, locate, and battle fires? And how can we streamline 

and improve interagency coordination? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Well, the types of data that we’re generating with 

our system is really what we call nowcasting. So instead of generating data that needs to be run through a lot of forecasting models, 

which takes time, we’re actually directly sampling the conditions, 

which is very suited to use by artificial intelligence algorithms that 

would feed into first responders. It’s really about delivering the 

data rapidly that can be used immediately for first responder planning activities. And I think directly collaborating between companies like us that are generating data and agencies like NOAA and 

CalFire that are used—that are involved with fire control directly 

is really critical. 

Ms. BONAMICI. That’s great. And, Dr. Tohidi, your work on modeling and the whole physics of fires, really interesting and, I think, 

important. How does your work intersect with what NOAA is 

doing? NOAA does, you know, the weather modeling, and then 

you’re doing the sort of physics and modeling of how the firewall 

progress. How does that intersect, and how do you work together 

with NOAA on that? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. We use a lot of data layers that NOAA generates to initialize our fire weather models, and 

those are going to be used to set the initial conditions. And the 

models basically solve the conservation laws and do the forecasts. 

We also use a variety of different data layers from other institutions such as U.S. Forest Service, the fuel layers, fuel moisture, 

and, you know, some—we have some aesthetic layers such as training typography that we also use. And that’s basically the relationship that we have in the capacity of fire physics modeling. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you. Thank you for your work. 

And, Mr. Goeller, I want to ask about the timing of warnings. 

And you mentioned in your testimony something about what you 

call innovative and probabilistic approach that results in earlier 

warnings than the old red flag system. So after the wildfires 

caused some horrific damage in Oregon in 2020, in September of 

2022, our State requested access to Federal funds for wildfire response in preparation before the growth of the number of wildfires 

expanded beyond what the State could handle, you know, especially 

related to emergency declaration. I think this is important because 

that opens up Federal resources. 

So many fires were already burning. Vital staff and resources 

were stretched thin. And the State was concerned that without the 

Federal resources, they would not have what they needed to provide emergency power generation, communications, evacuation support, et cetera. So based on your experience, how can improvements 

in wildfire prediction enhance the mitigation but also prepare 

States with more adequate response efforts? And I’m really concerned about this timing because we did not get the emergency declaration. It’s typically done after the fire happens, not always but 

after. So are there enough Federal resources available so States 
41 

could use disaster mitigation to engage in suppression efforts before they happen? And how can the Federal Government improve 

our efforts to pre-deploy assets? 

Mr. GOELLER. There’s a lot to unpack there. The—there’s a couple of things. One is in regards to timing issues is the ability to 

obviously model the fire weather that is impactful to your State, is 

looking at what conditions and parameters are involved when we 

have the situations that we experience large fire growth. In Oklahoma, the National Weather Service—the duties that—the work 

that was done was collateral to their normal duties, the bunch of 

dedicated individuals that put their heads together and started 

looking at the parameters that existed during those times that we 

had the high extreme fire danger and what weather systems 

caused that, and then the ability to look at that out three to seven 

days and even farther. And then as we got closer and closer to the 

day that was predicted, we would be able to really hone in where 

that would impact the State and then pre-deploy resources to support aggressive initial attack and keep the fire small. 

And so looking at Oregon’s situation, it would be where you 

would need to have the Weather Service officials or whoever that 

might be look at those parameters that caused those conditions for 

large fire growth, to see those and predict them into the future. 

The declaration that you spoke of may be the Farm Management 

Assistance Grants (FMAGs) through FEMA (Federal Emergency 

Management Agency). There are two different things at work here. 

FMAGs are—have to be applied for when the fire emergency starts. 

It has to be when it’s ongoing, and then that is a separate process, 

then deploying resources to a particular fire. So how can we best 

utilize our meager resources that we have? And I’ve fought fire in 

Oregon many times. It would be to know where those conditions 

are going to occur in advance and then have those resources 

prepositioned such as we do in Oklahoma and other States. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you so much. And I yield back. Sorry about 

that. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Garcia, for five minutes. 

Mr. GARCIA. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to 

thank the witnesses today, and thank you for this very important 

topic. 

I come from southern California, north L.A. County in a district 

which—it’s probably the largest wildland-to-human interface in the 

Nation in terms of wildfire risks, and met with the Department of 

Forestry personnel leadership in SoCal, throughout California as 

well last week about the upcoming season. In the fall, it’s bad for 

us with the way the winds and the environment changes in the fall 

through the winter. And fire season is almost becoming a yearround thing. We just had a fire yesterday. Actually it was put out, 

a 30-acre brush fire. And I want to, first of all, thank the firefighters and the folks at the Angeles National Forests, L.A. County 

for containing that one very quickly. 

And so it’s been a good news story for California in terms of the 

water, right, the rain that we’ve gotten. And I—we see that as a 

good thing helping us mitigate the drought, but we also know that 
42 

that beast on the horizon is all of those fuels drying out during the 

summertime, becoming effectively the BTUs that are going to burn 

in the fall. And so this is a problem we see coming. And so what 

you’re doing is very important for us to save lives. 

And I do see these fire operations as literally combat operations. 

You know, God bless our firefighters out there on the frontlines, 

putting their lives on the line and saving homes. I myself have 

been evacuated from my home a couple of times in the last couple 

of decades because of these wildfires, so we can’t support them 

enough. And because these are combat operations, you have to 

treat this almost like an entire kill chain from the predictive behavior of your threat. In this case, it’s the fires. It’s the brush. It’s 

the prescribed burns to mitigate in advance of, but especially the 

predictive modeling that you’re doing on the weather side that 

feeds information to the warfighter, in this case, the firefighters to 

make real-time decisions that ultimately save their lives and the 

lives of our constituents. 

So I can’t thank you guys enough for doing what you’re doing 

and want you to know that anything we can do to support you on 

the predictive modeling side, especially through NOAA and other 

agencies, don’t hesitate to let us know. And we’re happy to do that. 

We need all hands on deck right now. Especially with AI and some 

of the other capabilities coming online now, we probably aren’t 

fully leveraging the technologies that are available to us. And while 

we can’t replace the firefighter with a shovel and a hose, and, you 

know, in our case, we’ve got bulldozers out there doing the fire 

breaks and C–130’s and DC–10’s flying overhead literally like a 

combat operation. We can’t replace those folks. We need more of 

those folks. We need to pay them better, treat them better, but also 

give them these tools. 

So to that end, I guess two questions. The first is with the fastmoving development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and 

frankly even unmanned surface vehicles, ground-based vehicles, is 

there something that we can be doing and not just with these 

drone quadcopters that are five, you know, 10 pound widgets, but 

bigger class, you know, type two, type three class UAVs that are 

carrying sensors and infrared sensors, for instance, that can help 

feed information. And again, not to replace the firefighter on the 

ground, but to help be a force multiplier to give the firefighter information like where hotspots are, to give 24 hour persistence and 

surveillance overhead when maybe a helicopter flying over mountainous terrain is not the safest thing to do. 

What are you guys seeing, I guess, from an art of the possible, 

not necessarily state-of-the-art, but also incorporating the state-ofthe-art and the art of the possible in terms of ConOps to support 

the firefighter in terms of these drones? And I shouldn’t call them 

drones because everyone thinks these are smaller things, but there 

are larger, you know, 10-, 15-foot wingspan UAVs, and then surface-based tractors, et cetera, that are unmanned. But, Mr. 

Peverill, if you can—and frankly, anyone—if anyone wants to 

chime in here. From that technology perspective, what does the future of firefighting look like? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Well, one of the major barriers right now is actually the regulatory side, and I think what needs to be done is we 
43 

need to take into consideration the relative level of safety for these 

types of operations, whether it’s operating with something that’s 

fairly benign like our Nano Drone here or some of the larger aircraft that can carry out—carry larger sensors or maybe even drop 

firefighting materials. You know, the Federal Aviation Administration needs to put a framework in place where they can consider the 

relative safety of what’s being attempted by the unmanned aircraft, 

you know, safety to the public, and also take into consideration the 

public safety benefits because in many cases, you’re talking about 

a—deploying a technology, which has some level of risk, but the 

risk is far outweighed by the benefits to the public by what you can 

get out of it. 

Mr. GARCIA. Would you say that the FAA is being too conservative right now in the regulatory—regulation of these things and 

almost adopting a zero risk mentality instead of leaning forward a 

little bit? 

Mr. PEVERILL. I think they are. 

Mr. GARCIA. OK. 

Mr. PEVERILL. You know, the FAA is not currently tasked with 

taking into consideration the overall risk benefit. You know, they’re 

tasked with maximizing the safety of aviation. So any amount of 

risk is often considered unacceptable, which is really not—you 

know, the appropriate way to carry about it if you want to deploy 

these advanced technologies in a reasonable amount of time. 

Mr. GARCIA. OK. And I’m out of time, but thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Michigan, Ms. Stevens, for five minutes. 

Ms. STEVENS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you to our witnesses. You know, we’re here talking about wildfire detection and 

how to do it better, and I really appreciate the emphasis on interagency. I’m in Michigan, and it’s been quite sobering over the last 

month because we haven’t really traditionally been one of the 

States that has been subject to wildfire smoke. And this was 

wildfires that began in Canada in late May and took a month and 

the smoke spread down to our region and across many parts of the 

Midwest, leading to some head-scratching realities for folks, upticks in asthma incidences, hospitals being filled up. 

And I was wondering if any of you could talk about some of the 

interagency efforts vis-a`-vis international relationships. We’ve got 

one of the great longstanding partnerships with Canada, an allied 

friendship with our neighbor to the north. But the question that 

was being posed at home is, is there anything that we can do to 

work with the Canadian Government to better detect fires? And 

are there existing mechanisms within our Federal Government, 

within NOAA or some of the other agencies that are stepping up 

that allow them to work with international governments? Go 

ahead, Mr. Goeller. 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, thank you. The—there’s a couple of different 

things. Early in—within the last year we’ve had three different 

calls with Alberta to talk about the use of AI and some of the advances that Alberta has used in their province to detect wildfires 

and to evaluate smoke conditions and so on. And that is pretty ex-
44 

citing research in regards to us also, especially where we are starting to employ cameras to facilitate fire detection. So that is on the 

forefront and will be continued to be investigated. 

As far as international response, the United States has, through 

the cooperative agreements with the U.S. Forest Service, sent numerous resources to Canada beginning in early May to help them 

with their fire situation. And that was limited at the time to specifically Federal employees only, which the States have numerous 

resources that could also assist in those firefighting efforts. And 

just this week, we did receive some news from the U.S. Forest 

Service and through the Office of General Counsel that also State 

employees would be able to be deployed to Canada to assist them 

with their firefighting efforts. So opening up the door to allow more 

resources to go there to help them with their situation is beneficial 

also to help limiting the smoke that impacts the United States. 

Ms. STEVENS. Yes, and particularly as we talk about standards, 

and we want to make sure that we’re all speaking as best as possible from the same page of standards. And some of the research 

has shown that, since the beginning of this century, a million-plus 

acres of forests have burned every year. I think 2015 was the first 

year that we hit 10 million acres of forest fire. And just wondering, 

you know, Dr. Tohidi, you know, is there anything that we could 

better do as we look to detect, but as we also talk about prevention 

to bring into this conversation? And I know we’re moving into this 

quarter 21st century mark here, as we recognize, right, the planet 

is getting warmer, and we want to responsibly lead and put into 

place sustainability practices. 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. There are a couple of 

things in my view that we can do. From the fire and weather modeling perspective, I think if we can improve the modeling such that 

it can represent a better—we can characterize the risk better and 

represent the risk in our communities better, that can be really 

helpful for the stakeholders to optimize the preparedness and mitigating actions that they are taking. Also, we need to invest in 

home hardening and prepare our communities for different scenarios that can happen. For them, there are some guidelines available that can—that communities can follow. But we also need social sciences to really educate our communities about these guidelines and also consider the vulnerabilities. You know, not all people 

in those communities are going to afford those guidelines and do 

these home-hardening practices. 

So in my view, it becomes a game of optimization. And the best 

way to do it is to have a better characterization of the risk throughout the landscape and figure out where we need to do forest management, where we need to spend the money on community management and home hardening. 

Ms. STEVENS. Thank you. And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from New York, Ms. Tenney, 

for five minutes. 

Ms. TENNEY. Thank you, Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member, 

for this hearing. 

And I represent New York’s 24th Congressional District, so we’re 

grateful for the Small Business Innovation Research program and 
45 

also for the Mesonet program. I do have a question. I’d just like to 

jump right in. And I wanted to ask—and Ms. Stevens asked the 

question. We had obviously a lot of poor air quality from Canada 

coming in from the forest fires that we had there throughout our 

whole of upstate New York, which I represent. And I just had a 

question for you, Mr. Goeller first. Is there a way that we can detect or predict where forest fires will be worse in spreading in a— 

maybe a region that has a lot of extra underbrush or thatch? Is 

that something that we could use this technology to say this should 

be a warning area? 

You know, I have friends that are forest rangers, a number of 

them actually, who said you know, the only reason the Adirondacks 

doesn’t go up in flames is because you’re so—it’s so humid because 

of the failure of the State of New York to really manage it properly. 

And I’m not talking about thinning. I’m talking about the thatch 

underneath and the underbrush. Is that something we could identify or detect in using the—this program? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, there’s—the fire environment is made up of 

three different—largely three different components, each with multiple facets underneath them, but it basically fuels weather topography. The weather portion of this we’ve discussed at great length, 

and the fuels is something that we need to look at not only in New 

York, but across the country. If you start to look at the forests 

across the United States, both either forests and rangeland both, 

if you start to evaluate where the fuel buildup is, and, as we have, 

it was mentioned earlier about lacking forest management. Anywhere that we don’t practice active management, the fuels will continue to build. It’s—— 

Ms. TENNEY. So would you say that this lack of management— 

and I know there’s a leave it untouched by mankind but, you know, 

obviously the Adirondacks are a beautiful place where, you 

know—— 

Mr. GOELLER. Absolutely. 

Ms. TENNEY [continuing]. We hosted the Olympics. We have a lot 

of people that are engaged in winter sports up there, whether it’s 

hiking and snowshoeing and all kinds of stuff. Would it be a good 

idea to invest in management of those forests using—you know, 

managing the thatch, managing the underbrush, and minimizing 

the risk of forest fire? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, ma’am, it would be. 

Ms. TENNEY. And is that something that you have an experience 

that New York is doing or not doing if you—— 

Mr. GOELLER. I do not have with New York. I can attest from 

personal experiences what we’ve just recently done in Oklahoma 

using hazard mitigation work to remove hazardous fuels in and 

amongst communities. Especially we recently completed a project 

in Washington County north of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Less than a 

month later after we removed the hazardous fuels, we had a wildfire impact the area, and when the fire made it to the area that 

was treated, the fire basically—I won’t say went out, but it was 

such of a low impact that local firefighters were easily able to stop 

any spot fires that crossed the lines. And then also we saved numerous homes and prevented loss of life and property in that area 

where we did the hazard mitigation work. 
46 

That’s easily transferable. And a lot of States are starting to do 

the hazard mitigation work because it is important. We—it’s much 

cheaper to do the mitigation work than it is to spend millions of 

dollars fighting the fires as they occur. 

Ms. TENNEY. Well, thank you. That’s a great answer. 

Mr. Peverill, Dr.—is it Dr. Peverill? Mr. Peverill, OK. Thanks for 

being selected by the Air Force for the Defense Innovation Unit 

prototype development. That’s a great achievement. Just wanted to 

speak a little bit on the role of the SBIR and what—with 

WeatherHive. So in my district, our big concern is snow. We have 

a lot of lake effect snow coming off Lake Erie and also Lake Ontario. Everyone remembers, I’m sure, that we had 7 feet of snow 

alone in Orchard Park, which forced the Buffalo Bills to play in Detroit it was so bad. But we’re just—I’m just questioning what kind 

of—what can we do is—with that technology, would the 

WeatherHive be able to help us know what we’re getting in—would 

that be effective in helping us mitigate and then solve that issue 

when it actually comes into play? 

Mr. PEVERILL. It could certainly help improve predictions. One of 

the things that’s unique about WeatherHive is that we’re able to 

really more accurately sample the boundary layer, which is the 

part of the atmosphere that’s, you know, closest to the earth. And 

a lot of those type of effects that you’re talking about, a lot of those 

mechanisms happen in this boundary layer region. And it’s the 

least monitored area of the atmosphere. You know, the only data 

we have on that area is really mostly from ground sensors, which 

are very low and pretty spread out. 

Ms. TENNEY. So are we doing that now? Are we able to do that? 

Mr. PEVERILL. We can do it with ground sensors. You know, people have towers. There’s sensors on—— 

Ms. TENNEY. Is that technology we can use in our region in upstate New York? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Certainly. Yes. The WeatherHive system is designed to spread sensors all over that boundary layer atmosphere, 

and you can sense atmospheric gradients, you know, temperature, 

humidity, and pressure, and that can be used to feed into new 

types of forecasting models that can really more—much more accurately track and predict what’s going to happen in those types of 

areas. 

Ms. TENNEY. Thank you so much. I think I’m out of time. I yield 

back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from North Carolina, Mrs. 

Foushee, for five minutes. 

Mrs. FOUSHEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this Committee hearing today. And thank you to our witnesses for your testimony and for appearing before us this morning. 

I am proud that my district, North Carolina’s 4th, includes the 

U.S. Forest Service Southern Research Station. It is an RTP- (Research Triangle Park-) based Federal research center, whose research on Federal wildfire and suppression expenditures was cited 

in last year’s OMB (Office of Management and Budget) climate risk 

exposure assessment. 
47 

Today, I would like to mention a little bit about their research. 

But first, I would like to thank all wildland fire first responders 

who make such tremendous sacrifice and commitment on the 

frontlines of what we are discussing today. My husband is a retired 

firefighter, having served for 31 years, so I know firsthand the kind 

of dedication that this takes, and we commend them for their service. 

Mr. Goeller, Forest Service researchers in my district looked at 

available data from the U.S. Forest Service and the Department of 

Interior on wildfire area burned and Federal suppression expenditures to project and calculate the effect of climate on Federal lands 

burned and subsequent Federal expenditures in the mid- and latter 

half of this century. Their findings indicate that if this troubling 

trend continues, Federal spending on wildfire—on Federal lands is 

expected to rise by double or triple by the mid- to late century. To 

put this into context, Federal spending for the Forest Service and 

Department of the Interior would rise from a historical median of 

$2 billion per year currently to $5.7 billion per year by the end of 

this century. 

As the cost of wildland fire suppression continues to increase 

faster than inflation, how can the Federal Government better coordinate its efforts to protect Federal lands? I understand from 

reading your testimony that National Association of State Foresters helps to partner with Federal land management agencies 

through cooperative agreements and good neighbor authority. Can 

you please elaborate on this collaboration? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, ma’am. We—one of the things that is critically important, as you mentioned, is the management of those 

Federal lands and the expenditures that occur as a result of 

wildfires is increasing. One of the things—if you look at the statistics for timber harvests on national forest lands over the—since 

1940, the amount of timber harvested has decreased dramatically, 

beginning in the late 1980’s. And there’s well-published data that 

will support that in numerous publications that show what timber 

has been harvested. Again, as the management and the harvest decline in areas, the fuel continues to build. It’s—that’s just nature 

happening. And the ability for us to remove those products for forest products is one way to reduce the amount of fuel loading, it’ll 

reduce the size of—the potential size of the fire. 

For the firefighters working on the frontlines, when we are able 

to utilize an area that’s been treated either through forest management through timber harvest, hazard mitigation work, whatever it 

is, it’s much easier for us to construct control lines. The fire is easier to control. And, typically, we have to go back to an area that— 

if you look at fire control and start thinking about, you know, why 

are we having trouble and why—where can we best stop a fire, it’s 

where we have a favorable change in fuels, weather, topography. 

So talking specifically about fuel, the more that we can utilize 

the material out of the forested areas for products and—that reduces the fuel loading, it reduces the fire intensity, it allows us to 

more easily construct control lines and control the fires in those 

areas. Not only that, but we’re locking up that material into—instead of releasing the carbon from the forest fires back into the atmosphere, we’re locking that up into products that we use for our 
48 

daily lives. And so there’s the win-win there in regards to forest 

management and how that impacts not only our daily lives and the 

products that we use, but also for fire intensity and fire control and 

the expenditures on that. 

So I would encourage the use of forest management practices and 

forest, you know, timber harvesting to help as part of that puzzle 

to reduce the amount of expenditures for wildland fire. 

Mrs. FOUSHEE. Thank you. And that’s my time, Mr. Chair. I 

yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Collins, for five minutes. 

Mr. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As someone from Georgia, I don’t think we really experience 

wildfires. But I want to reflect on something that was personal, 

and that was the fact that in 2017 in November, we had a fire up 

in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. And fortunate and unfortunate, my wife 

and I had a home up there that we had sold earlier in that spring 

that was one of the homes that was consumed in that fire and 

burned. 

And I don’t really know who I want to direct my question to, and 

it may be more personal, Mr. Chairman, than anything, but I’m 

just trying to learn where we had the failure at in that fire because 

we had people that lost their lives. And it spread so fast. So was 

there—is there a communications gap that we were missing that 

we’ve learned from that we’ve improved on? And the severity of 

that fire, is there something that, I don’t know, NOAA or someone 

could have been doing to help locals understand just how bad that 

fire was and how quick it spread? 

Mr. GOELLER. I’d be glad to answer that question. I was—happened to be in Gatlinburg 2 weeks before the fire occurred and 

then also a couple of weeks afterwards. And we were there as a 

part of a National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Risk Management Committee meeting, a meeting with the Great Smoky 

Mountain National Park, and also the Gatlinburg Fire Department 

and Pigeon Forge and a number of others to look at the potential 

for loss there in that area. Being that it’s a resort community and 

many of those cabins and houses that were up in that fire area are 

traditionally rented and a lot of transitional folks going through 

there, the ability for them to understand what the potential was, 

was very low because of just numerous factors. 

The situation there in the Smokies, traditionally with their humidity, the rainfall, the climatological conditions that exist don’t 

really contribute to a fire of that magnitude. But however, in November 2016 when the fire occurred, they were experiencing a longterm drought. Therefore, there in the Smoky Mountains, the fuels 

and terrain were just ripe for the loss that occurred from that incident, along with the fact that the evacuation information, the 

routes in and out, mostly single access, one way in, one way out 

that limited the evacuation possibilities for the folks that perished 

in that fire, that those were lessons learned that have been carried 

on in other places now because of that tragedy. 

The things that we can do now and the things that actually existed then were more to alert the public as to what the potential 
49 

is in the areas that they either visit or live. The National Fire Protection Association has a site called Firewise USA that promotes 

the things that they can do personally, that individuals can do personally around their homes for defensible space, to protect their 

homes from wildfire approaching. The National Cohesive Wildfire 

Strategy is employed across the country in order to protect communities and make them more resilient. 

When we talk specifically about that fire and others that have 

occurred, it goes back to evacuation information, warning the public as to what they have. Gatlinburg at the time had a siren that 

was to be sounded when they needed to leave and to alert the public that there was an issue. And when that fire occurred and electricity went out, the siren died. And so, you know, there were multiple failures there that now, I’m sure, have been addressed that 

would allow the public to be more alerted and warned. We’ve taken 

those lessons back home to be able—we have an area that’s very 

similar in southeast Oklahoma that we’re—we’ve purchased evacuation signage and we’re working with cabin owners to alert them 

what the possibility it is for those that come from the Dallas-Fort 

Worth area that have no idea what wildfire means to them in an 

area like that that is really intended in their minds just for recreation, but they don’t realize the risk that they’re putting themselves in. 

So State forestry agencies across the country are well aware of 

the situation, and we’re doing a lot to alert not only the public, but 

those that come in for recreational opportunities, what the dangers 

are for wildfire. And we—and Georgia is a great supporter of fire 

across the United States. Georgia Forestry Commission, Tim 

Lowrimore is your State forester, he’s great guy, and they do a lot 

of work with wildfire in Georgia and also support Florida and all 

the southern States. So thank you for them, and anything you can 

do to support them would be greatly appreciated. 

Mr. COLLINS. Thank you. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member from California, 

Ms. Lofgren, for five minutes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And 

thanks to all of you for your excellent testimony, which I’ve read. 

Now, Dr. Tohidi, in your testimony, you highlight some of the 

concerning gaps in our knowledge about the behavior of wildfire at 

the wildland urban interface. Specifically, you mentioned that we 

have a poor understanding of the differences between released energy from structural burns versus vegetation clusters and that 

none of the current fuel layer inputs for operational models consider structures and urban developments as flammable. Can you 

elaborate on the knowledge gaps, what they mean about the—our 

ability to accurately model fires as it transitions from wildland to 

urban areas? And if you’re able to address this—certainly not—we 

don’t have wildfires in every part of the United States, but we have 

smoke in every part of the United States. And what kind of mix 

of fuel leads to toxic reactions to that smoke? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. To address the first part 

of your question on what are the knowledge gaps, as I stated in my 

written testimony, there are significant knowledge gaps in knowing 
50 

how much energy is being released when you have a structure that 

is on fire and kind of scaling it up to the different layouts of the 

structures, different types of materials that, you know, structures 

that are—that we have in our communities and try to map that 

into the current fuel layers. So that’s been challenging, and I think 

it needs more work. 

There are some works being done in different institutions. I 

think Berkeley Fire Lab is working on it and also Colorado State 

University. They are building risk platforms that can estimate the 

risk of wildfires going through the WUI areas. But we still need to 

know a lot about the specificity of the structures and how it translates to heat transfer processes and map it accordingly. 

To address the second part of your question in terms of how we 

can improve this, as I mentioned, a lot of the fire models, especially 

the operational ones that we use, are designed for the objective of 

predicting the fire behavior in the remote areas. So we have these 

large pixel sized fuel layers of 30 meters by 30 meters. When it 

comes to wildland urban interface areas, we need to reduce it down 

to meters of scale, you know, the—or sometimes even smaller to 

have a really better understanding of the fire behavior in those 

areas. So if we can just work on these low-hanging fruits and improve the quality, resolution, and frequency of the data that currently goes to our operational models, we can improve our predictions and characterization of the risk by a lot. 

In terms of the smoke and which type of vegetation releases 

the—more toxins, it really depends on, first, the type of the vegetation and also the conditions of the fuel, the fuel moisture content 

that that vegetation has, how well it is being burned, what is the 

combustion efficiency of that? So it’s different depending on the 

properties of the fuel and weather. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Let me just get one more quick question for anybody who has an answer. The Wildlife Fire Risk Reduction Act is 

being reintroduced, and it asks the Federal Government to play a 

coordinating role. I was at a very interesting discussion at NASA 

(National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Ames several 

months ago with Federal agencies, local agencies, academic, including San Jose State, as well as private sector, and one of the issues 

that they identified was that we don’t really have a way to distribute even the data that we have, put aside the data that we’re 

missing. Do you have thoughts on how we might better coordinate 

the distribution and the standards for which the data is distributed? Any of you? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Sure, I think Federal collaboration on development of new standards for—and data platforms for the distribution 

of this data is very important. A lot of that’s happening at the 

State level right now. I think that’s the place where NOAA could 

do very well to build some new platforms and data standards 

around that type of information because there’s really not a Federal standard for that currently. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. My time has expired, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you. 

Chairman LUCAS. The Ranking Member’s time has expired 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Obernolte, for five minutes. 
51 

Mr. OBERNOLTE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I 

would like to say a special thank you to you for conducting this 

hearing on a topic that is really critically important to me and the 

people that I represent. I represent a very rural district in California. As I’m sure everyone is aware, California has experienced 

some of the worst wildfire seasons in the entire history of our State 

just in the last couple of years. And unfortunately, that situation 

is predicted to get worse, not better, as climate change exacerbates 

the decreasing density of the fuel sources. 

I have had the unfortunate experience of being evacuated out of 

my community several times due to wildfire risk in the times that 

I’ve lived there. Last year, in fact, we got an aerial—an air show 

that we got to watch, you know, as—we had aerial assets put out 

a fire that came within about a mile of my community before it was 

finally stopped, so this is a really critically important topic for me. 

Mr. Goeller, thank you for the work that you’re doing in Oklahoma. I was very interested in the parts of your testimony that 

concerned using technology to leverage the existing firefighting assets that we have. You were talking about its applicability to forecasting the severity of wildfires and the potential for them. 

But I’m—would like to talk about whether or not we’ve considered the use of technology to more quickly detect forest fires because, you know, we have tremendous capability now, aerial assets 

that we can dispatch very quickly to get to nascent fires. But if we 

detect them early and we have a flame front that’s like an acre, 

we can use those assets to quickly put those fires out. If we don’t 

detect them and we don’t dispatch them until the flame front is 

tens of acres or hundreds of acres, then we can’t do it with just aerial assets. We have to coordinate with ground-based assets. And 

that allows the time—the fire time to spread and get out of control. 

So I’m very interested in the possibility of using these new lowEarth orbit satellites that have the resolution to detect with thermal sensors a flame front of less than an acre and maybe pairing 

that with artificial intelligence to be able to distinguish between a 

large campfire and—you know, and lightning hitting a tree. Is that 

something that you’ve considered, and do you think that that’s a 

worthwhile effort? 

Mr. GOELLER. Absolutely. And we do utilize the GOES 16, 17 satellites that the National Weather Service employs to do wildland 

fire detection now statewide. The—when we first started doing this 

in 2016, the satellite resolution, our detection capabilities was typically 2-mile accuracy, and now it’s down to oftentimes within a 1/ 

4 mile and even closer, and sometimes even able to detect a carsized fire. So the use of those satellites and AI—with AI would be 

absolutely awesome to help you with detecting those fires while 

they are small and then the aggressive initial attack to keep them 

small when they’re able to do something with them is critical. 

So yes, if you can—the one thing with the system that we’re currently employing in Oklahoma and using the National Weather 

Service, that is available in a number of other States. Not every 

State is using that, as we are, our offices, forecast offices, Oklahoma, Texas, and now Kansas. Whenever they do detect a fire on 

the high to extreme days, they send us a text that shows us the 

location, shows us the nearest fire weather conditions from the 
52 

Oklahoma Mesonet, which is a system of remote weather stations 

across the State. It gives us a map of where the fire is located and 

then also tells us how it was detected and some other basic information on that particular fire. We’re able to get that information 

to the local responders, the emergency management, the fire departments, oftentimes before it’s reported by the public to the 911 

dispatch centers. 

Not only that, but the forecasting that they’re doing allows us to 

pre-position those resources because they base that on a probabilistic system as opposed to deterministic. And so as we see those 

systems developing, our forecasters, in conjunction with this Southern Great Plains Wildfire Outbreak Group, which would be transferable to your State as well, they show us within a certain percent, this is where the large fire occurrence can—will happen, 30 

percent, 50 percent, and they dial that in to the point that we can 

have those resources pre-positioned for those quick initial attack. 

We’ve seen a reduction in those large fires in those areas because 

of that focused effort that we’ve had. So yes, it’s—would be easy, 

I believe, to do that with California as well. 

Mr. OBERNOLTE. Right. Well, I think that, you know, a lot of the 

assets you’re talking about are geostationary assets. 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes. 

Mr. OBERNOLTE. With low-Earth orbit, we have the potential of 

having much higher resolutions. And even with the drone technology that I know we’ve been testifying about, you know, I’m very 

encouraged about the possibility of having drone swarms, not sampling weather, but also detecting fires. I see I’m out of time. Let’s 

continue to work on this issue. Thank you very much for your testimony. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman’s time has expired. The Chair 

recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Frost, for five minutes. 

Mr. FROST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The recent Canadian wildfires are an example of the growing destruction of the climate crisis, a threat that transcends borders, 

can’t build a wall around it. And it’s not just that. These fires show 

how, when it comes down to climate change, we’re all—we’re not 

all on the same boat. Seniors, folks who have respiratory issues are 

part of the most vulnerable community when we talk about this. 

That even includes me as someone—like millions of Americans, I’m 

asthmatic, and I’ve been my entire life. 

People with breathing problems or people who may need help 

evacuating also need the earliest possible notice. Mr. Goeller, can 

you speak to the role NOAA plays in getting critical information 

about wildfires to the public and first responders? 

Mr. GOELLER. Their mission with protecting lives and property 

in the cooperative agreement—well, not cooperative agreement—cooperation that we enjoy with them is what allows us to be able to 

get the information to the public in a very timely and fast manner. 

And so to be able to foster those relationships, it’d be—it’s imperative that the local forestry agencies, Florida Forest Service, for example, to be able to get with the various National Weather Service 

forecast offices, get those relationships built, and also work on that 

warning criteria. The ability to transfer to the public the information regarding where fires exist or could exist is critical. 
53 

Mr. FROST. Can you elaborate a little bit on the State—the current State and effectiveness of the fire hazard communication system? 

Mr. GOELLER. The—it varies across the country. And I guess I 

really can’t speak a whole lot to the way Florida works right now 

in regards to communicating the hazards to the public. But in 

other areas of the country, is it going to vary State by State and 

also how the State forestry agency, the local emergency State emergency management, local emergency managers, the relationship 

that they have with one another in communicating to the public, 

what the hazards are, either current or forecast. So, again, it’s 

going to be incumbent on the agencies to work together to improve 

that process. 

Mr. FROST. Yes, just a few weeks ago here in D.C. when the 

smoke was incredibly thick, you know, I had my staff work from 

home, but not many people have that choice. And folks had to, you 

know, commute through the toxic yellow haze. Another group of 

important workers who face such health threats are first responders and firefighters. Mr. Goeller, can you speak to the challenges 

firefighters face in their career and how we in Congress can better 

support their efforts on protecting others, especially when it comes 

down to wildfires? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, we in—the National Wildfire Coordinating 

Group has a Smoke Committee that has been established and has 

been for a number of years, and the Smoke Committee looks at the 

various aspects of the wildland fire smoke. Obviously, it’s a lot different for vegetative material and the smoke produced and especially now that we have to also address the smoke issues related 

to the wildland urban interface when homes burn cars and so on. 

It’s a much different picture than we used to have back in the early 

days of firefighting here in the United States. 

And so the Smoke Committee does a lot of work in regards to not 

only predicting the smoke impacts to communities, the notification 

of communities when a large fire exists. Typically, it’s those that 

are what we used to call campaign fires, those that lasted for 

weeks, weeks on end, and how those would impact various communities across the—not only the State—the local area, but also the 

State as well. 

The—we have now air resource advisors that are put in place 

and smoke monitoring equipment to be able to provide the public 

with the most accurate information possible in regards to particulate matter and what would impact their lives on a day-to-day 

basis and when to issue those warnings when they need to stay inside and so on. 

Mr. FROST. Thank you. 

Dr. Tohidi, better forecasting means faster evacuations. I’m curious how we can more quickly deploy new and effective promising 

modeling. 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. In my view, the fastest 

way is to really build on what we currently have. We have models 

that are operational, and they are working with some level of uncertainty. But if we can reduce the uncertainty in the predictions 

of these current models, then we’ll probably have a better understanding of the risk and also do a better job on forecasting. 
54 

So the highest priority from the modeling standpoint would be to 

improve the resolution quality and frequency of the data layers 

that goes into these models and improve them. And then if we can 

invest on the observational campaigns, the experimental campaigns 

to better observe these processes, free from contamination from 

suppression activities, then we can have a better understanding of 

the physics, and then we can implement them in the models. 

Mr. FROST. Yes, thank you all for your lifesaving work. I yield 

back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber, 

for five minutes. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Goeller, I guess these are for you. I came in late. Is it Geller 

or Goeller? 

Mr. GOELLER. Goeller. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. Forgive me if some of this is redundant. I was 

in another markup. 

Regarding Mesonet, we know it’s in Oklahoma. I think you said 

in your testimony it’s in other States. How many other States? 

Mr. GOELLER. I’m not exactly sure how many other States employ a system like that. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. And how long has Mesonet been in existence? 

Mr. GOELLER. I’m going to say since the late 1990’s maybe or 

early 1990’s. I’m not exactly sure, but 20 years. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. And there’s—according to what I read, there’s 

100 weather—it uses basically 100 weather—but it’s not in Texas, 

right? 

Mr. GOELLER. No, I don’t—— 

Mr. WEBER. Nothing you know about like that in Texas? 

Mr. GOELLER. I don’t believe so. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. 

Chairman LUCAS. It is kind of amazing, actually. 

Mr. WEBER. Well, I know because things are bigger and better 

in Texas. I can’t believe that. 

But—so you say it’s been there about 20 years. Are they—are 

those 100 weather stations, are they—do you know how they’re positioned? Are they in concentric overlapping zones or those zones 

where they—those weather stations are—just happened to be there 

already? 

Mr. GOELLER. They were deployed across State. Every county in 

the State has at least one or two. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. 

Mr. GOELLER. They’re internet-accessible 24 hours a day. They 

update every five minutes. And that gives us the ability for—as fire 

managers—you know, prediction of fire weather is critically important—— 

Mr. WEBER. Sure. 

Mr. GOELLER [continuing]. To know what’s coming, and the 

Mesonet stations give us the ability to look during a fire event to 

see what the—how the weather is changing across the State and 

when it will impact the actual fire location. So we transition from, 

say—depending on the National Weather Service to tell us—they 

still do, don’t get me wrong. And there’s still a critical piece of that 
55 

puzzle to give us the advanced warning of weather systems, frontal 

passages, and so on. But it also—the—just the general—the guy 

out in the field working on the fire can pull up his phone, iPad, 

and look at those Mesonet stations and see how the relative humidity, the wind speeds, the temperature will be changing throughout 

the course of the day and see when that’ll impact their fire. 

Mr. WEBER. I got you. And maybe you may or may not know the 

answer to this. How many counties in Oklahoma—and maybe 

that’s a Chairman question—number of counties in Oklahoma? 

Mr. GOELLER. Seventy-seven. 

Mr. WEBER. Seventy-seven? Well, there’s 254 counties in Texas, 

you know, I think—we said Texas is bigger. I don’t know if we 

could get one—all 254 counties—— 

Mr. GOELLER. I hear that a lot. 

Chairman LUCAS. A century ago, we picked up three counties 

from Texas in a Supreme Court ruling, so just a side note. 

Mr. WEBER. Yes. 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes. 

Mr. WEBER. Well, don’t get any more ideas because those days 

are over. 

But the reason—is NOAA very proactive in doing this, in trying 

to get other States and more counties involved or do you know? 

Mr. GOELLER. Well, NOAA is—for the Mesonet, it’s Oklahoma 

State University, University of Oklahoma, and Oklahoma Climatological Survey. Those are the three entities that actually began the 

Mesonet. It was a collaborative effort between those. And so as far 

as NOAA in Texas, I could not address that. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. Just curious. And is there any kind of cost estimate involved as to what the system costs or what it does cost? 

Mr. GOELLER. I don’t know the answer to that. 

Chairman LUCAS. It’s a bargain. 

Mr. WEBER. Oh, it’s a bargain, absolutely. 

Mr. GOELLER. It is a bargain. 

Mr. WEBER. And if you—and I see where you actually had the 

background of going to work for the—was it the U.S. Forest and 

Wildlife in 1980? 

Mr. GOELLER. Um-hum. 

Mr. WEBER. So you were 10 years old when you started, right? 

Mr. GOELLER. That’s correct. 

Mr. WEBER. So I guess you’re—you’ve watched it for a long time. 

All that said, you’ve been paying attention a long time. How would 

you rate the success rating of this system? Is it good, bad, better, 

the best thing out there since sliced bread? Give us your thoughts. 

Mr. GOELLER. The Mesonet system? 

Mr. WEBER. Um-hum. 

Mr. GOELLER. It is a great tool, fantastic tool. And as we bring 

resources into Oklahoma to help us during some of our fire emergencies and other fire behavior folks and other firefighters, they 

are amazed that we have this available to us, and they wish that 

they had it in their State as well. 

Mr. WEBER. Anything better in the country? 

Mr. GOELLER. Not that I’ve seen. 

Mr. WEBER. Not—you haven’t seen anything better. 
56 

False alarms, let’s move over to false alarms. One of the questions was how false alarms or even bad information—how do false 

alarms or bad information impact the allocation of firefighting resources and general response? Have you—have we—has that system experienced false alarms? Can you give us examples? And how 

do you respond to those? 

Mr. GOELLER. You know, typically, we do have false alarms, yes, 

but it’s not as many as you might think. And it really has not 

caused us a tremendous amount of impact that hurts our system 

or causes us to miss one fire because of a false report somewhere 

else. 

Mr. WEBER. OK. Mr. Chairman, I’m going to yield back 10 seconds. 

Chairman LUCAS. I would simply note to my colleague from 

Texas that Lynda Lucas runs the farm. She is the herdsman, and 

I never call home without checking Mesonet first to see what her 

attitude is going to be. 

The gentleman’s time has expired. The Chair now recognizes the 

gentlelady from Colorado, Ms. Caraveo, for five minutes. 

Ms. CARAVEO. Thank you, Chairman Lucas, and Ranking Member Lofgren as well. And I appreciate our witnesses today taking 

time to discuss fire weather prediction capabilities, a very important issue in Colorado where we have experienced some of our largest wildfires in State history in the last five years. 

I have to start off by sharing that I recently visited NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) at their Boulder campus, and I had a wonderful time learning about some of the 

projects that they have been working on, including their work on 

leveraging VR (virtual reality) tech to help first responders such as 

firefighters digitally map out areas affected by fire. These types of 

technological advancements help firefighters suppress wildfires and 

in turn save lives and properties. But it also helps limit the health 

impacts on firefighters by limiting their exposure and giving them 

more information as they navigate fire-affected areas. 

Mr. Goeller, in your testimony, you touch on the State Fire Assistance and Volunteer Assistance Programs. Based on your experience, can you discuss some of the health impacts that firefighters 

specifically face and how those impacts could be mitigated? 

Mr. GOELLER. Some of the health impacts that we face is the environmental impacts from not only the fire itself, but also working 

in the extreme conditions that we must fight fire in. During a 

drought, during summer months when we have high temperatures, 

the problems that are—usually that we face are heat stress type— 

heat-related injuries, those that we have to try to mitigate through 

messaging to our firefighters on hydration and taking care of themselves, cooling, and so on. 

There’s a lot of work done by the NWCG Risk Management Committee and the National Interagency Fire Center and the Fire Lab 

in Missoula, Montana, that has—that looks at the stress on firefighters and what we can do to reduce that as they work during 

those hot months. But also in many areas of the country, especially 

in the South when we fight fire during the winter months, we have 

to work in extreme cold as well. And some of our heavy equipment 

operators that have to operate a piece of equipment during very 
57 

cold temperatures, especially the open cab, the older dozers, it’s extremely hard on them. Those are the environmental impacts of 

smoke. 

Again, the NWCG Smoke Committee has done a lot of research 

on the impacts to the lung functions. The one thing that is somewhat of an issue for us is the fact that we don’t have a lot of information regarding firefighter mortality after they retire on what 

happened. You know, there’s a lot of information there that we’re 

not party to that we don’t have accessible to us, and so to understand the long-term impacts of smoke exposure to wildland firefighters has been a little bit difficult to ascertain. We know what 

the immediate impacts are and how to mitigate those, but as far 

as long term, that research is going to be—is ongoing and—to try 

to figure out what that would be, so—thank you. 

Ms. CARAVEO. Well, I’m certainly glad that that research is ongoing. We need to know the health effects on the men and women 

that save property and lives, especially in places like Colorado. 

Switching gears, I would like to discuss fired hazard communications. Many of us have focused on that today. So this question may 

also be for you, Mr. Goeller. Like many of my colleagues, I believe 

that it is critical to have effective communication systems to ensure 

first responders and residents can act quickly. And like many families in my district, I come from a bilingual household, and many 

of my constituents are in households that really prefer one language over English to be frank. Do you know of any current 

State—the current State and effectiveness of multilingual hazard 

communications for families like those? 

Mr. GOELLER. I can’t speak to the effectiveness. I do know that 

when we’re in an area that are public information officers and 

we’re working in an area that has various languages that are spoken there, that we do employ multiple language public information 

releases to try to impact—or try to inform the public. You know, 

when we’re in an area like Arizona and Spanish is the primary language, we do a lot of media releases and so on in Spanish. In Oklahoma, I’ve done probably more interviews with Telemundo and 

some of the other Spanish-speaking media outlets than sometimes 

I do with the traditional media outlets in Oklahoma. And so it 

does—we do pay attention to that fact and try to get that information out as we can, depending on what areas of the country that 

we’re working. 

Ms. CARAVEO. Well, I certainly appreciate all of your work. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Miller, 

for five minutes. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. 

First, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter 

from the Competitive Carriers Association regarding the importance of wireless service and wildfire detection and mitigation. 

Chairman LUCAS. Seeing no objection, so ordered. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. Thank you very much, and thank you 

to our witnesses for being here today. It’s great to have you. 

Question for Mr. Goeller. I’m hearing more and more of this term 

fire year instead of fire season, recognizing that we are starting to 
58 

see fires at unusual times and unusual places. The current wildfire 

smoke issues we have seen all the way in Ohio from fires in eastern Canada are a prime example of just that. We’ve never seen 

that before. Can you talk about the prevalence and nature of wildfire in different parts of our country? Is wildfire the same in the 

East as it is in the West? Are we seeing more fire? And why is 

that? 

Mr. GOELLER. The difference—the fire year term has come about 

because we do actually fight fire across the country for the entire 

year. The southern United States, for example, our fire season is 

from January first through December 31st, but we break that into 

two distinct seasons, the dormant season and the growing season. 

Other parts of the country where snowfall and snowpack limits 

firefighting during the winter months, it’s a little different. But as 

you look at the United States and how fire transitions across the 

country during the course of the year, the fire season, if you wanted to call it that, it moves around. As—earlier, one of the Representatives from California mentioned October, November that in 

southern California is when the change in the seasons there affects 

the fire growth, the winds change, and so on. So we are very aware 

and have been for a number of years on how fires move across the 

country and where those impacts will be. 

The one issue that we face sometimes is when we start to see 

weather impacts, drought in various parts of the country and 

some—when the drought impacts two or more areas at once, it 

starts to become an issue as far as resource deployment. So those 

are things that we constantly are watching and seeing how we can 

do that. Fire is different in various parts of the country, difference 

in fuels, difference in what burns. Southern United States, especially along the coastal areas, we look—palmetto, gallberry, things 

like that, that are waxy and have—they’re volatile fuels Florida, 

Georgia, South Carolina going up across the coastal areas. But as 

you move inland, we start to transition into pine fuels, hardwoods, 

and so on. 

And so the fire managers in the various States are well aware 

of what their primary fuels are, when their fires are most active, 

and what they need to do in terms of resource deployment and 

bringing in—when they need to bring in resource to supplement 

their State agencies or the Federal agencies to be aware of and be 

prepared for any fire response. The Federal agencies, they call it 

the fire severity. They bring in severity resources to pre-position to 

be ready. States, we use our forest fire compacts to do that. And 

so as one area of the country is burning and the other is not, then 

we support each other. 

And so, again, it all is based on fuels, fuel conditions, the management of the forested areas, the range lands. It’s all a very complex issue that we constantly are trying to maintain our situational 

awareness of where those issues will occur. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you for that detailed answer. It’s much appreciated. 

Mr. Peverill, are there obstacles to the widespread implementation and use of drone technologies? How might the government facilitate the use of these technologies? Are there regulatory hurdles 

that you could see happening because of it? 
59 

Mr. PEVERILL. Absolutely. You know, the regulatory framework 

currently doesn’t allow advanced operations of drones like we were 

talking with our system. You know, there’s no path in place for us 

to have widespread use of a system like WeatherHive nationally. 

Those have been in development for years now at the FAA, but 

they have yet to produce a real framework to do that. And as I 

mentioned before, I mean, it’s really important for them to put in 

place a system that considers both the risk of a given operation 

when planning the method by which you allow permission and also 

consider the public safety benefits, which they don’t currently do. 

You know, this is a system that has significant public safety benefits and minimal, if any, safety implications once implemented 

properly. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you for that. I have a couple more questions, 

but I’m going to submit them for the record. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you very much. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Ms. Lee, 

for five minutes. 

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our panel 

of witnesses today for your time and your expertise on this subject 

matter. 

Back home in western Pennsylvania, we don’t experience 

wildfires, but that doesn’t spare our communities from the significant and far-reaching effects that these disasters have. Large 

amounts of smoke, pollutants, and particulate matter are released 

into the air, having severely detrimental effects on air quality. This 

poses health risks to those throughout my district, which is already 

known to have some of the worst air quality in the Nation. Wildfire 

smoke can exacerbate respiratory illnesses and contributes to 

smog, leading to various health problems for vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, and individuals with pre-existing respiratory conditions such as asthma, bronchitis, or COPD 

(chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) of course. 

The raging wildfires in Canada are still burning and have been 

for weeks. The smoke from these fires have led to several code red 

air quality alerts, which indicates unhealthy levels of pollution 

across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Not too long ago, many 

of us woke up to the scenes of hazy orange skies akin to those in 

sci-fi movies. Residents were advised to frequently check their local 

air quality through resources such as airnow.gov, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and the Allegheny County 

Health Department. The work that agencies and governments at 

all levels do to protect our communities are invaluable, and every 

tool at our disposal must be utilized to support them. 

So we can’t deny that growing frequency and severity of wildfires 

are influenced by climate change. While we’re here today to discuss 

pathways forward to improve quality, U.S. distribution and accessibility of fire weather data, real solutions will lie in addressing the 

root causes of climate change. Implementing effective mitigation 

and adaptation strategies will be crucial in preventing future 

wildfires and reducing their impact. Unprecedented extreme weather events are becoming alarmingly normal. This is not sustainable 

for Earth or humanity. If we don’t stand up now to change how we 
60 

interact with this planet, there will be nothing for future generations to inherit. 

So, Dr. Tohidi, how is climate change affecting how we train and 

educate emergency response officials in the field? And can you 

highlight specific changes that you have experienced in academia? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. I can answer this to the 

best of my knowledge. I’m not an expert in educating first responders. But in San Jose State University, we have a new minor called 

wildfire minor, and the College of Science hosts this, so the students who go through this minor, they get familiarity with five 

other indices that are available, and they can assess the situations, 

the atmospheric situations that are conducive to fire, and they can 

transition some of this knowledge to the work that they do. If some 

of them choose to be first responder, that will be very helpful for 

them. 

And in terms of the education, we definitely need to do more 

work on workforce development in this area because the more 

awareness we have about the problems that we are dealing with 

and the more awareness that we have, the urgency of the problem, 

the better answers we can have for them. 

Ms. LEE. Thank you. Mr. Peverill. What opportunities exist for 

input from private citizens for quicker wildfire response and improve fire hazard communication? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Well, I think better access to data about the 

boundary layer, you know, the areas that impact movement of 

wildfires, I think would significantly enhance the ability to inform 

the public about where they’re going to go. You know, as you mentioned, the air quality is a major challenge. It’s obviously in the— 

you know, in the air the public is breathing. But being able to 

study the boundary layer using tools like drones and other systems 

will really allow us to better predict and influence urban planning 

around air quality. 

Ms. LEE. Yes, your company provides products like—that utilize 

robotics and AI to create solutions to problems. Could you share 

what you think the potential is for integrating data and solutions 

from fields like agriculture into fire weather data to utilize crosscutting approaches? 

Mr. PEVERILL. Yes, well, you know, we were talking about the 

Mesonet system. It’s a great example of a data platform tool that’s 

been used to inform fire weather for decades. A system like ours 

is sort of like a Mesonet enhanced. You know, you can gather data 

throughout the atmosphere between Mesonet stations and really 

deliver a much more dense matrix of data that can be used to enhance predictions. You know, that sort of data source really doesn’t 

exist right now. It isn’t available to researchers, and it isn’t available to inform public policy and, you know, planning tools. 

Ms. LEE. Thank you. That’s my time. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Virginia, Mrs. 

McClellan, for five minutes. 

Mrs. MCCLELLAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, for planning this hearing, which, as we’ve heard, is very timely, given the experiences we had recently with the wildfires. And 

while we have some familiarity with wildfires in Virginia, I don’t 
61 

think we’ve ever had smoke travel from Canada before, or at least 

not in my recent memory. And we know that that as we continue, 

the air quality impacts that we saw that were historic and unprecedented are probably going to be much more prevalent going forward. 

And as we’ve touched on but I want to explore a little bit deeper, 

you know, I’m concerned we’re going to continue to see increasingly 

severe wildfire years as a result of climate change, which is exacerbating heat and drought conditions and making it much easier for 

fires to catch and spread. 

So, Dr. Tohidi, could you describe in a little more, you know, specifically, the ways in which climate change has impacted fire dynamics? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. Yes, the climate change 

effects and the way they are affecting the fire dynamics or the regime of fires that we see these days is a confluence of a lot of different parameters. But the general consensus is that the climate 

change leads to prolonged droughts, warmer and hotter temperatures, and that leads to drier fuels and lowers the fuel moisture 

content in our landscape and really builds up the platform for any 

ignition with any source that can happen. And then it goes from 

a single ignition point to large weather—fire weather systems that 

we have these days. So these are the main, you know, factors that 

we all know and there is evidence for it. 

Another factor that climate change makes an impact on is the 

soil moisture. Soil moisture is also known to be a very important 

parameter in the health of the biological systems that we have 

throughout the landscape and also having some correlations with 

the fuel moisture and how the fire dynamics changes. 

Mrs. MCCLELLAN. Thank you for that. And do you see any updates to data collection or modeling needed to account for these 

changes, or do you think the modeling is OK as-is? 

Dr. TOHIDI. The modeling, we do need to do a lot more in modeling perspective. And one of the avenues that we can improve the 

current State of the models is exactly that. We need to address the 

quality, resolution, and frequency of the data layers for these current models that we have. We do need to better understand the dynamics of the fire at different scales. As you know, fire happens to 

be a multiscale process, starting with the flame at very small 

scales and then how it grows to be large weather systems such as 

pyroCbs. We still have a lot to learn and fill that knowledge gap, 

so yes. 

Mrs. MCCLELLAN. Thank you. And touching on community resiliency a little bit, Mr. Goeller, could you discuss steps that Congress 

could take to better support vulnerable communities in anticipating 

wildfire scenarios and preparing mitigations? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, one of the things that we can do, one, the vulnerable communities, is the hazard mitigation, removing fuel. 

We’ve talked about climate change and the effects of climate 

change. One thing we can do to reduce the severity and impact of 

wildfires and how much smoke is generated and how much particulate matter is to remove fuel. And right now, our fuel buildup in 

the forested areas of the United States and in the rangeland areas 

where management has been largely reduced over the years— 
62 

there’s a number of reasons for that. There’s cultural changes. 

There’s changes in the demographics. The family farms aren’t as 

prevalent as they used to be. We’ve got people moving into the city 

areas, and therefore, a lot of land is relatively unmanaged and left 

alone just to grow and produce fuel, whether it be the rangelands 

or the forest lands of the United States. And the communities that 

are out in and amongst those areas, the hazard mitigation work 

that can occur is critical to protect those communities from the impacts not only from fire directly impacting or directly impinging 

into those areas, but also to limit the smoke generated from any 

wildfires in the areas that would cause them to have issues with 

that. And so addressing the one component in the fire environment 

that we do have the wherewithal to do is working on fuel reduction 

work and doing that ahead in advance of fire occurrence. 

Mrs. MCCLELLAN. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentlelady yields back. 

The Chair next recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Issa, for five minutes. 

Mr. ISSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’m going to follow up on that. Since—you’re in Oklahoma, right? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ISSA. Would you say you do a pretty good job of brush removal? 

Mr. GOELLER. We’re doing a lot better job. The one problem—the 

one thing that we have in Oklahoma is mostly private land, and 

the—there’s some difficulty in addressing those issues on private 

lands where the landowner really does not want to do anything. 

And so getting the word out, the information to them on what they 

can do and what we can do for them, we do have some grants now 

available to us and through the Federal Government and also some 

of the State things that we’re doing to affect the fuel work on private lands. 

Mr. ISSA. But, as you know, California is the opposite. We are 

mostly public lands. 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ISSA. Native American, Federal, and State. And we don’t do 

a very good job. We don’t use the funds to clear the brush, just the 

opposite. We can’t get a permit to do it most of the time, right? 

Mr. GOELLER. That is an issue, yes. 

Mr. ISSA. And the smoke goes from west to east, so the fact is 

that our annual fires, because we don’t abate the brush, in fact, affect most of the rest of the country with the flyover smoke. 

Mr. GOELLER. We do have issues, yes. And some of the things 

that you could do, some of the things Congress could do would be 

to make that a little easier for those public land, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, others to be able to affect that 

hazard mitigation work on Federal lands to reduce the amount 

of—— 

Mr. ISSA. Would you—— 

Mr. GOELLER [continuing]. Fire danger. 

Mr. ISSA [continuing]. Suggest that we preempt State law in this 

case because it flies over other States when we find ways to stop 

it on a State level? 

Mr. GOELLER. I’m sorry, I didn’t understand the question. 
63 

Mr. ISSA. California seems to stand out for a reason, and that is 

that you go into our courts, you get one after another delays. I was 

asking do you think that that Committees here in Congress should 

consider, on behalf of the other 47 lower 48 States that we should 

potentially preempt the State of California from its willingness to 

not clear brush as an Oklahoman where the smoke flies over you? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, fortunately, our wind speeds, typically, we 

don’t have many issues for very long in Oklahoma. It’s usually in 

Kansas or Nebraska by the time that it starts to be a problem. But 

that aside, you know, there are things that we need to do across 

the country. One, you know, when you do have regulations in one 

State that are more stringent than what the Federal Government 

offers, they have to look at what is the impact of that to the State? 

Is it something that we—they can do to reduce those impacts from 

wildfire, from smoke issues, and whatnot? Are they causing more 

harm than they’re doing good by the regulations that they impose? 

And so, no, I would not suggest that the Federal Government come 

in and tell the States what to do. But again—— 

Mr. ISSA. But a common 50-State standard would probably make 

sense, at least as to how you go about it and how long it takes to 

get a permit? 

Mr. GOELLER. Are you talking about for burning or for—— 

Mr. ISSA. Well, for clearing brush. You know, California uses the 

Environmental Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, and so on. 

They use it to go further than the Federal Government does in 

your home State. Well, look, enough about California. Let me ask 

you another question. Direct hire authority for firefighters, do you 

want to give us the idea of how important it is to be able to ramp 

up and do this without going through a long process? 

Mr. GOELLER. It’s—it is a great thing to have that direct hire authority. We—the number of wildland firefighters across the country, whether it be State or Federal, has diminished greatly over the 

years. And part of the issue is the—not—is the pay. You know, 

the—nowadays, a lot of wildland firefighters could make more 

money doing something else, working at just about anywhere. And 

so we have been focusing on increasing wildland firefighter pay, 

which would go a long ways to help that. 

We’ve lost a number of hotshot crews over the years. Our crew 

strength has diminished greatly across the country. You know, 

we’re—the 20 person crews, not only type one, type two, type two 

IA crews has continually decreased over the years, so our ground 

firefighting efforts has greatly been diminished. So direct hire authority would be great. 

Mr. ISSA. OK. Mr. Chairman, I think I got my two points across. 

And I appreciate the entire panel. I yield back. 

Chairman LUCAS. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms. 

Ross, for five minutes. 

Ms. ROSS. Thank you, Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member 

Lofgren, for holding this hearing. And thank you to the panelists 

for joining us today. 

Canada was not the only place facing wildfires in June. In North 

Carolina, tens of thousands of acres of the Green Swamp nature 

preserve burned, causing road closures and air quality issues in the 
64 

southeastern portion of our State. The number of annual wildfires 

in North Carolina has steadily increased over the past two decades, 

and it’s imperative to understand the behavior of wildfires to effectively predict where they will start and how they will behave. 

My first question is for Dr. Tohidi, and you touched on this a little bit about the gaps that we might have in wildland forest fire 

model modeling. So could you go back to those gaps and just list 

them out for the Committee? And then also let us know whether 

investing more in this modeling would be helpful. 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. Yes, in terms of the 

major gaps that we have, as I alluded to, one of the main knowledge gaps that we have currently in dealing with wildland urban 

interface fires is that we don’t have a physics-based representation 

of how these fires go from the intersection of the wildland to the 

communities and how they spread. This transition to the community is called urban conflagration. So if you can invest in studies 

that can improve our understanding of the dynamics and the physics for this process, we can implement that in models and improve 

our forecasting capabilities for the communities. 

The other area that we can do improvement and we are doing 

improvement in San Jose State University is to provide physicsbased representation for one of the mechanisms of wildfire spread 

called firebrand showers. These are degeneration and transport of 

tiny embers that are still burning and land and accumulate part 

of the main fire front. They ignite another fire, which we call spot 

fires. This is a process that is arguably the most complex and fastest mechanism of fire spread. And there has been some improvements, but we need to do more studies on how we can come up 

with a physics-based representation of this process in our operational models. The complexity of this process, and also the computational costs has been the primary deterrence for us to consider 

in our operations. 

Also, we need to invest in experimental and observational campaigns at flame scales, such that we can observe the evolution of 

fire from the single ignition point to larger scale flame topologies, 

as well as the interactions with the boundary layer and basically 

evolving to becoming larger weather systems. These are the main 

things that I can elaborate on. 

Ms. ROSS. OK, great. Thank you. And as we’ve heard from you, 

responding to wildfires is complex, and critical equipment and personnel must be moved to fire so that they can be brought under 

control before they grow. Mr. Goeller, can you expand on the considerations that must be made when responding to fire detections? 

And do you utilize any NOAA products when managing wildfire response efforts? 

Mr. GOELLER. Yes, we do. We typically utilize the information 

that they provide regarding weather systems approaching the fire. 

We depend on the National Weather Service to let us know when, 

say, for instance, any thunderstorms, any—that might be in the 

area are collapsing or building that would impact our fire operations. So there’s a—there’s two differences. One’s the initial attack 

efforts that we have. Those—typically, we use National Weather 

Service products and information either prior to or immediately 

during a wildfire. As we transition into extended attack where a 
65 

fire lasts for several days to several weeks, then we become more 

dependent on some of the day-to-day, hour-by-hour products that 

they can provide us on an incident to be able to—not only our strategic operations, but our tactical operations. And those are critical 

for firefighter and public safety. 

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

Mr. ISSA [presiding]. The gentlelady yields back. 

We now go to the gentlelady and acting Ranking Member from 

Oregon. 

Ms. SALINAS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank Chair 

Lucas and Ranking Member Lofgren for holding this hearing today, 

and thank you to the panelists for being here. 

You know, this is a really important hearing, especially for my 

State of Oregon. Wildfire risk is a key concern of many of my constituents in the 6th District, and I remember the fires of 2020, the 

Labor Day wildfires. I remember having my go bag, learning very 

quickly—and I don’t live in the WUI. I was in the Portland suburbs, and we all had our go bags, and we were ready to go, but 

we weren’t sure where because that’s how bad this was impacting 

the entire State. You know, it was one of the most destructive on 

record, resulted in at least 11 deaths, over a million acres burned, 

and the destruction of thousands of homes. And of course, the 

Western United States has always had wildfire season, but climate 

change-induced weather impacts like droughts, heat domes are intensifying them. And fires—and the so-called season is expanding. 

I—you know, I looked yesterday, and I think we had 22 wildfires 

burning in the State of Oregon right now, burning thousands of 

acres. I don’t know what it is today. 

So before I dive into the questions, I’d also note—and I think a 

few of my colleagues have also touched on this—that, you know, 

wildfires don’t just impact the areas where they’re burning, right? 

We see the effects of—Canada’s wildfire smoke travels far and wide 

and can endanger cardiovascular systems of people who are vulnerable. So my first question is—so, essentially, this is not just a 

Western States issue, as we’ve all heard today. 

My first question is for Dr. Tohidi. In your testimony, you outline 

the importance of fire physics for developing accurate wildfire models. Can you expand on your work integrating fire physics into 

models and identify where scientists’ understanding of the subject 

might be lacking? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you. Yes, specifically, my work relates to the 

phenomenon called firebrand showers. We have been studying their 

generation, their transport, and now spot ignition, and trying to 

implement them in our operational models. Improving this process 

and represent—a physics-based representation of this process in 

our operational models really help us to understand the contribution of this phenomenon in the actual rate of spread. You know, 

fire, usually as being perceived by public, is like a ball of flame 

that goes through the combustibles. But these particles that land 

ahead of that wall or that fire front can play an important role in 

the dispersion or the propagation of the fire in the community. So 

we have been trying to improve that part and at least provide a 

physical representation in our models. 
66 

Specifically, the areas of improvements, as I mentioned, we can— 

if we can improve the quality, resolution, and frequency of the data 

layers for these models, that can really help to see better forecasts 

in the short term. And in the long term, we need to really invest 

on better observations at flame scale using multispectral sensors, 

remote-sensing satellites to really observe the fire behavior at that 

scale. And the knowledge that we get from those observations and 

as well as the experimental campaign can be incorporated into the 

future or the next generation of fire models that we have. 

Ms. SALINAS. Thank you. That’s really helpful. 

Mr. Goeller, as you know, responding to wildfires is a complex 

undertaking. And I think you’ve touched on this a bit. Personnel 

and equipment must be moved rapidly to fires to bring them under 

control. Can you talk through the considerations that you must 

make when responding to fire detection? 

Mr. GOELLER. Some of the issues that we face responding to 

when a fire is detected, in particular, if we are transporting equipment across State lines, we do need some help in regards to being 

able to rapidly move in particular State and Federal equipment 

across State lines without having to go through the onerous process 

of receiving permits to be able to do that. And that does limit us 

on response, especially in those interagency, interstate deployments. The fire detection part of it for initial attack, to have that 

advanced knowledge of where the worst and the most probable occurrence of fires will happen is critical for us to pre-position equipment and resources, aircraft, equipment, personnel to make those 

aggressive and rapid initial attacks, keep the fire small to prevent 

those large-scale incidents from occurring. 

Ms. SALINAS. Thank you. And thank you all so much. I yield 

back. 

Mr. ISSA. The gentlelady yields back. 

We now go to the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank Chair Lucas and 

Ranking Member Lofgren and our witnesses for being here today. 

As I know my colleagues have highlighted this morning, wildfires 

and wildfire smoke impact communities and economies in every 

corner of the Nation. And they will only worsen, putting our communities at more danger if we do not address the threat of a climate change—of climate change with the urgency required. 

Earlier this summer, the communities that I represent in New 

York’s capital region experienced some of the worst air quality days 

in history due to smoke from the ongoing Canadian wildfires. And 

make no mistake, this was not a one-time event. My district is fortunate to have state-of-the-art weather research at the University 

at Albany, which houses the New York State Mesonet. It’s a program that has a network of 126 observing stations across the State 

and 17 Doppler LIDAR (light detection and ranging) sites that are 

critical for monitoring air quality and smoke. Last year, the university released a study using Mesonet data from 2021 and 2022, noting the ways that wildfire smoke from the Western United States 

is already impacting air quality across our Nation, reaching as far 

as the East Coast. 

So, Mr. Goeller, how can Mesonet data be used to track and respond to wildfires and wildfire smoke? 
67 

Mr. GOELLER. Well, for—to use the Mesonet data, especially as 

we—if—you know, looking at initial attack, for example, initial attack wildfires, using the Mesonet data would allow us to prioritize 

which fires might be addressed first. As we see where they occur 

and looking at the data that is generated through a Mesonet, it 

shows us what the weather system is doing at a particular time, 

where the most impactful temperature, winds, and humidity and— 

are occurring, and that would allow us to do some prioritization of 

resources and where they would most be efficient and utilizing in 

that. 

For tracking smoke, I’m not sure if the Mesonet does that or not. 

I think that we would have to use some other modeling and other 

systems—National Weather Service would be key in that—to address where the smoke is located, what the movements are. You 

know, we do have a number of airsheds across the United States, 

Oklahoma, seven, and I can’t address how many other—what other 

States have, but we do know through our air quality organizations 

where this—where the smoke will be moving and then what we 

would need to do in advance of that to warn the public and make 

the most appropriate—or take the most appropriate actions prior 

to that impacting the areas. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. And are there any challenges or limitations to using Mesonet data for these purposes? And how might a 

Mesonet program be strengthened and better prepared to address 

those challenges? 

Mr. GOELLER. I think having more sites would be great, having 

the ability to sample other data. We do use Mesonet not only for 

the—just the basic fire data, but we also have a program called 

OK-Fire. It’s another—kind of works off the backbone of the 

Mesonet. I’m not sure if New York uses this or not since they do— 

you mentioned the Mesonet there. But OK-Fire also has the fuel 

moistures. It has some of our energy release component data, burning index, a number of other products that are critical to fire managers for not only prescribed burning, but also for fire response. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. And, Mr. Goeller, can you speak more 

broadly to the role that smoke management typically plays while 

responding to a wildfire or carrying out a prescribed burn? How 

can we optimize these processes to mitigate harmful smoke in communities nearby and farther away? 

Mr. GOELLER. I’ll just specifically address the prescribed burning 

aspect of that, wildfire smoke being—it’s an unplanned ignition, 

and we do have those issues as far as addressing that. That becomes a little more complicated because it’s something that we are 

responding to and not being proactive for. And so using the 

Mesonet products and planning for prescribed burning, we can utilize the weather data that’s generated from the Mesonet stations 

and also the National Weather Service forecast offices to look at 

what the best days are for prescribed burning to limit smoke management impact. Most States do have voluntary smoke management guidelines. We try to live by those in order to keep those from 

becoming mandatory. And by utilizing the weather information 

from National Weather Service, NOAA, and our Mesonet stations, 

we can do that to limit those impacts. 
68 

When we have the—we don’t want to have exceedances that are 

identified by our State air quality organizations and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) because once we begin to have those 

exceedances, then the likelihood of our air quality regulations becoming mandatory become more real. So we want to do everything 

we can on prescribed burns to limit the smoke impacts to communities, values at risk as we do those activities, which, as you can 

imagine, it becomes more and more difficult as our weather systems change, as we have drier and drier fuels and more fuel to 

burn. It becomes a little more challenging to effectively prescribe 

burn and not have smoke management issues. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I had questions 

for Mr. Tohidi that I’ll get to the Committee, Subcommittee. And 

with that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ISSA. I thank the gentleman. 

We now go to the gentleman from Georgia, who has been patiently waiting. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

This is actually a fun topic for me because my dad was a special 

investigator for the forest fires and timber thefts. And so I remember growing up literally watching the retardant drop pictures, of 

big buckets held up from helicopters being dropped on fires, and 

knowing the unpredictable nature of both the start of forest fires 

and how you control them with the crews. With all the challenges 

we have right now, I’m actually really excited about your technology. I’m really interested to hear how you’ve used something 

that can actually save us money, save us time, and more effectively 

fight forest fires. I mean, what can be bad about any of those 

things? 

The one concern I have is how we’re managing this from a political aspect and making sure that we get out of your way in order 

to execute what you’re going to do to help us fight forest fires, 

which is coming back to the FAA and how we’re monitoring and 

how we might get in your way. What kind of things do we as Congress need to eliminate as—like antiquated rules, regulations, 

things that would get in the way of you being effective with your 

new technologies? 

Mr. PEVERILL. I think streamlining the use of advanced drone operations, you know, is really necessary to deploy these technologies. 

You know, they’re deployed kind of in research bases mostly now, 

but widespread deployment is possible. And we could have one of 

these hives placed at every Mesonet node, for instance. But that’s 

not possible under the current regulations. There really needs to be 

advancement there. The limitation is not really the technology at 

this point. It actually is the regulations. And so, you know, 

progress is needed there to get this technology out and benefiting 

the U.S. public. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. As far as you know, since you’d be more ready 

on this than myself, which I’m changing here today, right now, as 

we’re talking, is there any movement right now from Congress to 

make that effectively happen to get the regulation out of the way? 

Mr. PEVERILL. I think there is movement in the FAA reauthorization bill—— 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Perfect. 
69 

Mr. PEVERILL [continuing]. To bring more parties to the table to 

help the FAA move that forward. 

Mr. MCCORMICK. Hopefully, that’ll be a great bipartisan effort as 

we move forward to do something good for the Nation. Thank you. 

With that, I yield. 

Mr. ISSA. The gentleman yields back. 

We now go to the gentleman from Illinois. 

Mr. CASTEN. Thank you, Mr. Acting Chairman, and to all of our 

witnesses. 

So I just got back a couple days ago from a CODEL (congressional delegation) up to Alaska talking about the impacts of climate 

change up there, and, as you might imagine, a lot of focus on permafrost melt and what happens to methane releases. But we got 

into this really interesting conversation with folks from NASA and 

permafrost researchers who said that what they’ve found is that 

the—in addition to the methane risk, or maybe in lieu of the methane risk, they’ve observed that when you get on the regular fire 

cycle, so, you know, in the before times before the climate was so 

hot, the fire would come through, it would essentially burn up the 

forest later that had been deposited since the last fire cycle. But 

as the fires are coming more frequently and you’ve got fuel that’s 

on the ground, you’ve lost some of the protections of the canopy to 

slow down the fire. They’re now—you—they’re now saying that you 

burn all the way down into the soils and release, you know, hundreds or thousands of years of soil carbon, which of course raises 

all sorts of concerns about agricultural solutions to ameliorate climate change. 

I’ve now told you everything I know about the topic. So if you 

think I sound smart, don’t ask me any more follow up questions. 

But I guess I’d like to start with Mr. Goeller. Is that—and I saw 

you nodding, but is—do I have the basic facts of that right and the 

risk? Are you familiar with that phenomenon? 

Mr. GOELLER. Well, what I was nodding on is the phenomena 

that we see, you know, really anywhere in the country during the 

course of a year, and as we transition into a drought, the amount 

of fuel that will be burned during a wildfire. In some cases, as you 

mentioned, when we have adequate soil moisture and we have occasional rainfall, we may only burn one part of the fuel complex on 

the ground. But as we transition into drought, no matter where it 

is in the United States, we can burn the fuel all the way down to 

the soil surface, which releases more carbon and then also, it— 

more particulate matter into the atmosphere. And it becomes much 

more difficult to control those cases. 

Mr. CASTEN. And just to be clear, what they were saying is not 

just out of the soil surface, but all the way down to the mineral 

layer—— 

Mr. GOELLER. Well—— 

Mr. CASTEN [continuing]. And exhausting the carbon that’s 

locked in the soil. 

Mr. GOELLER. And that will depend on where you are in the 

United States. In Alaska, North Carolina, some of the coastal areas 

where we have—there’s three different types of fires. There’s surface fire, there’s crown fire, and then there’s ground fire. Ground 

fire is where it does actually burn below the surface of the soil, you 
70 

know, burns below the soil surface. In those cases in Alaska and 

North Carolina where they have peat bogs and a lot of the peat 

and other types of organic material that is below the soil surface, 

that will burn, and then there goes a release. In many parts of the 

country, we don’t have that. We just have the fuel laying on the 

surface. And that’s what go—where basically—the fire basically 

stops. 

Mr. CASTEN. OK. Well, if—I think it sounds like I got most of it 

right, but I’ll—you know, correct me if I’m wrong. But I guess what 

I’m wondering is if we want to make sure that the—that we keep 

as much of that carbon that’s locked up in the soil consistently 

locked up, then do we have—and maybe this is a question for Dr. 

Tohidi. Do we have enough sort of geospatial precision in our fire 

maps that we can say, OK, this particular region is at risk of these 

deeper fires and we should maybe take more precautions in this 

area, anticipate something’s coming, and sort of prioritize resources 

where the fires are going to be particularly intense and particularly—I’m not sure what the word is I’m looking for—likely to reverse centuries of carbon storage in soils? 

Dr. TOHIDI. Thank you for the question. We definitely can improve on the resolution of these data layers. You know, currently, 

from what I’m aware of the highest resolution that we get from the 

fuel layers—and that includes Alaska, too—is 30 meters by 30 meters. And you can imagine that there’s a lot can—that can happen 

in a 30 meter by 30 meter area. So increasing the resolution of 

these data layers can improve the current State of the forecasts 

that we have. 

I’m not aware of the work that we can identify the peatlands 

that will undergo peatland fires, but that’s a very important type 

of fire that we need to consider because these peatland fires, they 

burn for months and months and their suppression is extremely 

difficult, and we don’t want to get into that situation. So preventive 

actions are the best. 

Mr. CASTEN. OK. Well, I’m out of time, but if any of the witnesses have specific thoughts on areas we should be prioritizing research funding or otherwise that might address that, I’d welcome 

them for the record. 

Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Mr. ISSA. I thank the gentleman. 

And for the record, I want to thank our witnesses for their testimony and let you know, pursuant to Committee rules, the record 

will remain open for 10 days for additional comments, written 

questions, and of course, your various answers that you may want 

to put in further for the record. 

With that, that Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:13 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(71) 

Appendix 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL FOR THE RECORD
72 

LETTER SUBMITTED BY REPRESENTATIVE MAX MILLER
73 

Æ