[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
A REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION'S
FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 30, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-12
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
36-093PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois Ranking Member
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon MO BROOKS, Alabama
AMI BERA, California, BILL POSEY, Florida
Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania BRIAN BABIN, Texas
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
BRAD SHERMAN, California TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee PETE OLSON, Texas
JERRY McNERNEY, California ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York JIM BAIRD, Indiana
BILL FOSTER, Illinois JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
DON BEYER, Virginia JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida Rico
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois VACANCY
KATIE HILL, California
BEN McADAMS, Utah
JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
------
Subcommittee on Environment
HON. LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas, Chairwoman
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas, Ranking
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania Member
PAUL TONKO, New York BRIAN BABIN, Texas
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois JIM BAIRD, Indiana
BEN McADAMS, Utah JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
DON BEYER, Virginia Rico
C O N T E N T S
April 30, 2019
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Lizzie Fletcher, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 9
Written statement............................................ 11
Statement by Representative Roger Marshall, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 13
Written statement............................................ 14
Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 16
Written statement............................................ 18
Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 20
Written statement............................................ 21
Witness:
The Honorable Neil Jacobs, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary of Commerce
for Environmental Observation and Prediction, performing the
duties of Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and
Atmosphere, NOAA
Oral statement............................................... 23
Written statement............................................ 26
Discussion....................................................... 31
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
The Honorable Neil Jacobs, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary of Commerce
for Environmental Observation and Prediction, performing the
duties of Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and
Atmosphere, NOAA............................................... 44
A REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION'S FISCAL
YEAR 2020 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 2019
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Environment,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lizzie
Fletcher [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. This hearing will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Good morning. Welcome to today's hearing entitled, ``A
Review of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request.'' I would like to welcome Dr.
Neil Jacobs to the Committee and thank him for coming to
testify today on the President's budget request for Fiscal Year
2020 for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
NOAA.
NOAA's mission is to ``understand and predict changes in
climate, weather, oceans, and coasts, to share that knowledge
and information with others, and to conserve and manage coastal
and marine ecosystems and resources.'' NOAA strives to meet
this mission through its six line offices that collect
environmental observations through satellites and specialized
marine vessels and aircraft; analyze, store, and disseminate
this data; provide weather forecasts and climate predictions;
protect our coastal and marine resources; and conduct cutting-
edge scientific research.
Many Americans utilize NOAA's publicly available data on a
daily basis. That is why NOAA's budget request for Fiscal Year
2020 of $4.5 billion, an almost 18 percent decrease from the
$5.4 billion provided in the Fiscal Year 2019 enacted budget,
is deeply alarming. Every line office within NOAA received net
decreases to their top-line budgets, with significant cuts to
both NOAA research programs and extramural research grants.
Many of our constituents are already dealing with impacts
of climate change, such as sea-level rise, heavy rainfall, and
rising temperatures in both our oceans and atmosphere. The
National Climate Assessment, a congressionally mandated report
published by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, describes
these and other risks and impacts arising from climate change
across the United States, in addition to examining the latest
climate science. The U.S. Global Change Research Program is
supported by funding contributions from the Federal member
agencies.
The increased frequency of severe weather events that are
impacting every part of the country is also described in the
National Climate Assessment. We must continue to support
efforts to enhance both our weather forecasting and climate
prediction capabilities, which are based on long-term records
of environmental observation. Across-the-board funding cuts
endanger NOAA's ability to continue to collect, analyze, store,
and disseminate this critical data. In order to sustain this
data stream, we must provide robust and consistent funding for
data collected by in-situ and remote-sensing platforms.
The U.S. has been the leader in weather forecasting and
climate prediction not only because of our cutting-edge weather
models, but also our uninterrupted record of environmental
observations and measurements that span decades, which feed our
models and help provide better, more accurate forecasts.
Additionally, NOAA has seen large improvements in forecasts by
focusing on the transition of weather research conducted at
line offices such as the Office for Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research, to operations at the National Weather Service.
The draconian cuts of over 40 percent to the Office of
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research would include the complete
elimination of NOAA's portion of funding for the National
Climate Assessment. These funding cuts would also significantly
reduce both intramural and extramural research, and slow down
the critical research to operations transition.
Stakeholders in decisionmaking roles at State and local
levels, including emergency managers, utilize many of the
products and services developed across NOAA. When Hurricane
Harvey hit my district in 2017, the National Hurricane Center
provided direct support to on-the-ground emergency managers and
to other decisionmakers in Houston and across Texas and
Louisiana.
The National Weather Service also issued its first-ever
storm surge watches and warnings during Harvey. These storm
surge watches and warnings had been under development over the
past several years. It is important to note that there were no
storm-surge related deaths from Hurricane Harvey, a category 4
hurricane. The proposed cuts in this budget to the National
Weather Service could negatively impact these existing
successful interactions with local stakeholders.
The benefits of a well-funded NOAA are clear, which is why
I am concerned that the widespread cuts proposed in this budget
will impact NOAA's ability to meet its mission. Consistent and
reliable funding is required to make significant improvements
to our weather and climate models, which can be decades in the
making, and ensure continuous collection of environmental
observations.
I'm glad to know that Congress will have the final say on
the budgets of Federal agencies so that we can ensure that NOAA
can continue to meet its critical mission by providing robust
funding to an agency that touches the lives of every American
on a daily basis. I hope today's discussion will shed some
light on how this budget will help support NOAA's long-term
priorities.
I look forward to a productive discussion with Dr. Jacobs
to better understand the Administration's justification for its
proposed Fiscal Year 2020 budget for NOAA. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Fletcher follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. The Chair now recognizes Ranking
Member Marshall for an opening statement.
Mr. Marshall. Thank you, Chairwoman Fletcher, for holding
this hearing today. It is important that we, as Members of
Congress, remember it's the responsibility of Congress to vet
budget requests, hear from the relevant agency leaders, and
make the final decision on funding levels.
I also want to add my thanks to Dr. Neil Jacobs for being
here today and for his continued service. Coming from the
private sector, Dr. Jacobs brings a unique and valuable
perspective to NOAA. On top of that, he's graciously taken on
the responsibility of being the acting head of NOAA, performing
the duties of Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and
Atmosphere.
NOAA has a wide-ranging mission from fisheries management
to atmospheric observation. Their products and services have a
tremendous economic impact and affect more than one-third of
America's gross domestic product.
As we've heard, the President's budget request for NOAA is
$5.4 billion, an 18 percent decrease from last year's enacted
funding. Like all other agencies and departments, NOAA was
forced to make tough decisions, but the budget request reflects
an attempt to be more efficient in its delivery of services in
a constrained budgetary environment.
One area I'm pleased to see prioritized is NOAA's research
in improving forecasting. America's leadership has slipped in
severe weather forecasting, and European weather models
routinely predict America's weather better than we can.
Critical weather data is a lifeline for many of my constituents
that make their living in the agriculture industry.
This spring, NOAA's National Severe Storms Laboratory will
join with several partners in the Environmental Profiling and
Initiation of Convection, or EPIC, field project. I'm
particularly interested to hear how this project, authorized by
this Committee last Congress and supported in the President's
budget proposal, could have an impact on agriculture and
production.
I do have some modest concerns about the growth of NOAA's
satellite division, the National Environmental Satellite Data
Information Services, or NESDIS. At $1.4 billion, or roughly 33
percent of NOAA's total R&D budget, it's the largest and
highest-funded area. Not too long ago, in 2008, the satellite
budget came in at under $1 billion. Let me say, I do think this
increase is warranted, as NESDIS provides critical data and
services, but we must ensure the office is equipped to handle
this booming growth and use all resources in the most efficient
way.
NOAA is a mission-oriented agency, and this Committee
supports these core priorities. We face fiscal constraints that
force us to make difficult choices about our science and
technology services. I believe that this Committee, regardless
of a political affiliation, should always support NOAA's desire
to emphasize protecting life and property.
Thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Marshall follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Marshall.
The Chair now recognizes the Chairwoman of the full
Committee, Ms. Johnson, for 5 minutes.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much, Chair Fletcher,
and good morning, everyone. I'd like also to welcome Dr. Jacobs
and thank him for being here today to testify on NOAA's Fiscal
Year 2020 budget request.
For decades, NOAA's research and services have played a
critical role in protecting American lives through accurate
weather forecasting and climate prediction, improving our
environmental knowledge and stewardship, and supporting a
thriving United States economy. It seems obvious to say that
the NOAA budget should reflect its mission and ensure NOAA can
fulfill its obligations to the American people.
NOAA's mission is ``to understand and predict changes in
climate, weather, oceans, and coasts; to share that knowledge
and information with others; and to conserve and manage coastal
and marine ecosystems and resources.'' Yet NOAA's budget
request for Fiscal Year 2020 is $1 billion lower than its
current budget, which is an 18 percent reduction. These cuts
are felt across nearly every program and activity across the
agency. This budget would also terminate approximately 547
civilian positions. How will NOAA deliver on its mission with
these drastic cuts?
We don't have time to go into every detail, so I'd like to
use part of my time to highlight some of the greatest concerns.
The first is with NOAA's delivery on climate research. Climate
change is real and happening right now. Rising temperatures and
sea levels, and changes in ocean chemistry and ecosystems, pose
a real threat to public health. These climate impacts also
affect the management of our fisheries and coasts and the
overall resiliency of our communities to extreme weather
events. NOAA's activities, tools, and services are central to
our ability to understand, to adapt to, and mitigate the
impacts of a changing climate.
As climate and severe weather events increase in frequency
and intensity, so do the costs to human lives and the economy.
In 2017, a record-breaking year, the U.S. had 16 weather and
climate events that each cost at least $1 billion and a total
cost of $300 billion and 362 fatalities. This budget proposes
to cut almost $500 million from its climate laboratories and
cooperatives--institutes and nearly dismantles NOAA's Climate
Program Office. How will this impact the ability of communities
across the United States to prepare for and respond to climate
change and severe weather?
It also proposes to eliminate the agency's funding for the
National Climate Assessments. These assessments represent years
of work and extensive review. In our first full Committee
hearing on the State of Climate Science, we heard from experts
who contributed to the Fourth National Climate Assessment. What
does it mean when the leading Federal agency studying the
climate drops out of the main Federal report on climate change?
I look forward to hearing from Dr. Jacobs on how NOAA intends
to continue working on this congressionally mandated report
without any dedicated funding for it.
I recognize that Dr. Jacobs was given a tough budget
proposal from the Administration and had to make some difficult
decisions. But we need to think about the lives at risk, and
the potential economic and environmental harm of such a reduced
budget.
I thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson.
The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member of the full
Committee, Mr. Lucas, for an opening statement.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Chairwoman Fletcher, for holding this
hearing on NOAA's FY2020 budget request. NOAA has a broad array
of responsibilities, ranging from weather forecasting and
climate prediction to ocean and atmospheric observation. NOAA's
work benefits America's farmers, ranchers, coastal communities,
disaster personnel, land-use planners, weather forecasters, and
Americans across the country. NOAA's research and publicly
available data has immense economic impact.
The President's budget proposal for NOAA reflects difficult
decisions made across the Federal Government. I appreciate the
effort of the Administration to submit a proposal that
emphasizes NOAA's core priorities, principally, protecting life
and property. Beyond these basic functions, NOAA is
prioritizing other areas within its jurisdiction, including
improving agency efficiencies for satellite management,
maximizing the economic contributions of our coastal and marine
resources, and reducing the impacts of extreme weather
incidents.
We have heard concerns about some of the proposed cuts
included in this request. I would remind my colleagues that the
President's budget request is just a starting point for our
discussions, and we're here today to learn more about how to
best prioritize NOAA's resources. It's also important to note
that in recent years Congress has decided to fund NOAA at a
higher level than the President's budget request.
Many of our constituents are interested in NOAA's work,
particularly the National Weather Service. Oklahoma is home to
cutting-edge research on weather forecasting and climate
prediction. Last month, I had the opportunity to tour the
University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to learn about the
research being conducted in partnership with NOAA.
I also toured the National Weather Center in Oklahoma and
heard from many dedicated researchers working to improve our
weather forecasting abilities. There was one unmistakable
conclusion from this trip: The work done by the National
Weather Service is very important and must be a focus of this
Committee's work in this Congress.
As a rancher--and, in all fairness, my wife prefers to
refer to me as a farmer; she's the rancher--I can tell you that
accurate weather prediction is critical for our Nation's
agricultural producers. So I have a keen interest in the
Committee's work to help improve weather forecasting. During
the 115th Congress, this Committee passed my Weather Research
and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2017, which was subsequently
passed into law and is being implemented by NOAA. I look
forward to hearing about NOAA's continued implementation
efforts for this Act.
I want to thank Dr. Jacobs for appearing before the
Subcommittee today. His enthusiasm for his work is apparent,
and he brings a unique perspective to NOAA's leadership thanks
to his extensive experience in the private sector.
Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lucas follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Lucas.
If there are Members who wish to submit additional opening
statements, your statements will be added to the record at this
point.
At this time, I would like to introduce our witness. Dr.
Neil Jacobs was confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction in
February 2018. He's been performing the duties of Under
Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere since February
2019.
Prior to joining NOAA, Dr. Jacobs was the Chief Atmospheric
Scientist at Panasonic Avionics Corporation. He was also
previously the Chair of the American Meteorological Society's
Forecast Improvement Group and served on the World
Meteorological Organization's aircraft-based observing team.
Dr. Jacobs has a bachelor's degree in mathematics and
physics from the University of South Carolina and a master's
and doctoral degree in atmospheric science from North Carolina
State University.
Dr. Jacobs, you will have 5 minutes for your spoken
testimony. Your written testimony will be included in the
record for the hearing. When you've completed your spoken
testimony, we will begin with questions. Each Member will have
5 minutes to question you.
Dr. Jacobs, you may begin your testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. NEIL JACOBS,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL OBSERVATION AND PREDICTION,
PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF UNDER SECRETARY
OF COMMERCE FOR OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE, NOAA
Dr. Jacobs. Chairwoman Fletcher, Ranking Member, Members of
the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
The President's FY2020 budget request for NOAA is $111
million above the FY2019 request and emphasizes core programs
while making targeted investments, which we believe will
produce a substantial return for the American taxpayer.
Accelerating advancements in global modeling program is a
top priority. While there have been many achievements in 2018,
problems exist with the current structure of weather research
to operations. The internal and external strategy is fractured,
the computing procurement process is cumbersome, and the
funding process disincentives collaboration. The FY2020 request
addresses many of these challenges through the creation of the
Earth Prediction Innovation Center, or EPIC.
Based on the Weather Research and Forecast Innovation Act
of 2017 and recently authorized in the National Integrated
Drought Information System (NIDIS) Reauthorization Act of 2018,
EPIC will serve as a hub for building and maintaining a true
community model. EPIC's innovative structure will link
scientists and software engineers in academia, private
industry, and partner agencies with research, development, and
operational activities inside of NOAA. EPIC will significantly
enhance our ability to access external expertise,
reestablishing preeminence of U.S. forecast model skill, and
improving our ability to provide accurate watches and warnings.
The NOAA Satellite Observing System Architecture study, or
NSOSA, which was completed in 2017, analyzed various approaches
to better meet mission requirements of greater flexibility,
responsiveness, and incorporate and involve--evolving
technologies. Congress recognized the importance of NSOSA,
codifying the program in the NIDIS Reauthorization Act of 2018.
The budget initiates NSOSA implementation with investments to
evaluate innovative space-based solutions and partnerships,
including $12.3 million for joint venture partnerships and
hosted payloads on geostationary and polar orbits. It also
continues the importance of the Commercial Weather Data Pilot
program, as well as $5 million for the option to purchase data
after successful testing.
This budget makes necessary investments for strong coastal
communities and economies and includes an increase in $2.3
million for regional fishery management councils to analyze and
remove outdated or ineffective regulations. To help level the
playing field for U.S. commercial fishermen in the global
seafood marketplace, an additional $1.6 million is requested to
enforce the Seafood Import Monitoring Program and prevent the
importation of seafood caught using illegal fishing practices.
Finally, the budget includes an increase of $3.6 million to
support aquaculture by assisting industry with regulatory
compliance, conducted research, and insured American-farmed
fish are safe and sustainable.
Executive Order 13840 established a National Ocean Policy
focused on providing tools to coastal communities to
substantially manage their offshore waters. The budget includes
an additional $4 million for ocean data platforms, building on
innovative tools developed by NOAA to improve siting of
offshore activities.
NOAA has made great strides in the past 2 years to reduce
the amount of time needed for environmental review. The time to
complete formal and informal Endangered Species Act
consultations was reduced by over 22 and 65 percent,
respectively. Incidental harassment authorizations under the
Marine Mammal Protection Act have been reduced by 25 percent.
The FY2020 budget builds on this success by providing an
additional $3 million to further reduce the timeline for
consultations and permits.
Other sections in the Blue Economy that this budget
addresses include marine transportation through additional
precision navigation data, efforts to reduce marine debris,
accelerating economic benefits of the new and expanded marine
sanctuaries, and reducing the backlog of natural resource
damage assessment cases.
Finally, this budget includes $5 million for the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program. We intend to use these funds
to leverage investments from other Federal agencies, private
industry, philanthropic organizations that have shared interest
in advancing ocean research. These funds can be used for a
variety of partnerships ranging from ocean exploration to new
technology to detect and protect marine mammals.
NOAA's services touch every American every day. I believe
this budget request meets NOAA's core mission of protecting
lives and property, while also positioning the agency to be
more effective in moving forward.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I
would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Jacobs follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs.
At this point, we will begin our first round of questions,
and I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
I have two general categories of questions, so I'm going to
try to move through them fairly quickly, Dr. Jacobs. The first
is on the impact of the budget request to NOAA's mission and
global leadership.
Despite NOAA's stated priorities of reducing the impacts of
extreme weather and water events, maximizing the economic
contributions of ocean and coastal resources, and advancing
space innovation, the President's budget for Fiscal Year 2020
requests a total of $4.5 billion for NOAA, which is 18 percent
below the Fiscal Year 2019 enacted budget, as we heard
previously.
A few questions if you could touch on these, how does NOAA
intend to meet its mission and priorities with reduced funding
for every single line office of the agency? How can the U.S.
remain a global leader in weather forecasting, climate
prediction, and oceanic and atmospheric research given these
significant cuts across the board at NOAA? And how will NOAA
continue to support robust private-sector and academic research
in the ocean and atmospheric sciences with reduced funding for
extramural grants throughout the agency?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, the FY2020 request, just going across the
board, the climate is $88 million, oceans are $98 million, and
weather is $110 million. I would like to say that a lot of the
research we're doing on the weather forecasting aspect, we're
transitioning to a unified forecasting system, which is also--
the weather model is going to double as a dynamic core for our
climate model. So while we're funding the research for the
weather model, that's actually going to benefit the dynamic
climate modeling system.
On the weather forecasting side, currently the U.S. is not
considered the leader. We're actually lagging the European
Center, and that was the basis for the Earth Prediction
Innovation Center, which actually sort of answers your last
question. So the idea in this center would be to harness
external development through universities and private industry
and give developers for the model code a cloud-based sandbox so
to speak to do collaborative model development, so it would
harness a lot of what's in private industry as well.
And then on the ocean side, we have the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program, which would also leverage
private investment to help further some of our research.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. And switching gears, the
other topic that I want to cover with you with the remainder of
my time is reductions in funding for Hurricane Forecast
Improvement Project. This Fiscal Year 2020 budget request would
slow the development of the Next-Generation Global Prediction
System and Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project by reducing
research grants for the collaborative research activities and
NOAA's testbeds. The budget request notes that this $2.1
million reduction may be offset by the additional funding for
the Earth Prediction Innovation Center, but it is not clear
whether that will be the case.
Hurricane Harvey inflicted $125 billion of damage in
Houston and southeast Texas, and hurricanes are predicted to
increase in frequency and intensity with the changing climate.
Timely and accurate hurricane forecasting will be essential to
protecting life and property in the face of these oncoming
disasters.
Dr. Jacobs, how can NOAA ensure that our communities are
equipped with the best possible hurricane forecasts given this
funding cut to the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project and
the rising threats from more intense and frequent storms?
Dr. Jacobs. So on the modeling side--so I'll break it in--I
break it down into three sections to improve the hurricane
forecasting. We have model code development, which we're doing
through EPIC now. That includes the Finite Volume Cubed Sphere
(FV3), which is our global model that we use for hurricane
track. It also is ultimately going to be the model that we
transition from the WRF (Weather and Research Forecast) Model,
which is our hurricane intensity model, to the FV3.
I'd also like to mention the storm surge forecasting. This
is something that's really critical. A lot of people don't
realize when they think of hurricanes, they think about high
winds, but it's actually the water that is responsible for the
deaths of most individuals. We have a very sophisticated storm
surge forecasting model that we're working on. That's actually
funded through the National Weather Service. Even though it
would be research, it's funded and it's used operationally in
issuing watches and warnings.
The next step--you know, so going back to the observation
side, we are acquiring more ship observations. We're outfitting
an acquisition of a second backup capability with the G4
aircraft. We'll have both of our P3 Hurricane Hunters in
operation this year.
The thing that I'd really like to highlight is the National
Water Model. So one of the things that we haven't done yet but
we're working on and we've--we saw this in Harvey and we'll
see--we saw it in Florence and we'll likely see it again is the
integration between the inland flooding and the storm surge. So
one of the things a lot of individuals don't realize is,
particularly in the case of Florence, when these storms produce
a tremendous amount of rainfall, that rain has to exit the
coast. And if there's onshore sustained winds from a storm
surge, the water just piles up. So we're in the process of
coupling our storm surge models with the National Water Model.
That's something that we're going to be working on with the
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) and the stream gauge data that
they provide. And while it won't be operational this year, I
think that that's really going to show some improvements in the
future.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs. And I see that
my time has expired, so I'll now recognize Ranking Member
Marshall for 5 minutes.
Mr. Marshall. Thank you, Chairwoman, again.
Dr. Jacobs, we have a saying back home in Kansas that if
you don't like the weather, just wait an hour. And then my
question is how does your new Earth Prediction Innovation
Center, going to help my constituents, my farmers more
particularly?
And just to give you one example, people think of
agriculture and weather as all that matters is if it's raining
or not, but take something as simple as alfalfa. You cut the
alfalfa, there's probably about an hour or two each day that
the humidity is maximum for locking in all the protein in those
leaves. If you wait too long, it dries out. If you wait too
long beyond that, it's going to--that afternoon thunderstorm is
going to pop up. And if you do it too soon, there's too much
moisture in it. So how are you--how is this EPIC going to
impact my farmers?
Dr. Jacobs. So on--well, there's a couple different ways,
so starting from the longer range and coming back into the
shorter range, we are actually looking at seasonal to sub-
seasonal forecasting with the dynamic climate models, as well
as some statistical models. I think for long-range decisions in
agriculture, that's going to be very helpful.
On the shorter range with the convective-allowing models,
we're going to be looking at doing probabilistic forecasting.
Right now, the capability to predict a tornado is not within
the science, but we can predict the probability of a tornado.
And so we have a couple of things we're working on here. One of
them is what we call warn-on forecast where instead of actually
waiting to see when the tornado appears on radar, we actually
have the capability in the forecasting to simulate rotation in
the thunderstorms and issue warnings before the tornadoes
appear on the radar. That can extend the lead time slightly.
The other thing is social sciences. So one of the things
that we learned in some of the social science research was that
humans aren't necessarily rational, and we have to think really
smart about how we message the warning. If--you know, if we
give someone enough lead time to make a decision but on the
other hand if we give them a lot of lead time, they might not
make the same decisions. So the last step of this is actually
interfacing with the emergency management community and also
looking at the social science aspect of it.
Your statement about the moisture in the crops is
interesting and also actually ties into the land surface
modeling. So one of the things we've noticed with the land
surface modeling is that the transpiration in plants over
fields versus plowed fields can actually induce convective
activity, so this is something that we're looking at, but it's
at a very high resolution. And some of the satellite data we
collect is critical to this.
Mr. Marshall. OK. Maybe we'll move on here. I'm sure we
continue to have that discussion. There's more to talk about.
But next, as I understand, NOAA is fast approaching the end of
its current contract for its Weather and Climate Operational
Supercomputing System, WCOSS--I'm sure you've got a
pronunciation for that--a priority of this Administration, and
we'll need to enter into a new contract. Can you explain the
importance of this system for NOAA's mission, and are there any
limitations in how NOAA must enter new contracts such as the
ability to enter multi-year contracts to reduce costs?
Dr. Jacobs. So WCOSS is critical to our mission. This is
our high-performance computing (HPC) where we run all of our
operational models. The procurement process is a little bit
tricky. Typically, we will go through a third-party vendor to
do the procurement, but when they do the procurement, they
actually acquire the hardware from the actual vendors. And so
what happens is when they--when this procurement agent goes to
acquire the hardware from the vendors, they don't want to get
stuck holding the bill, so they will actually ask us to put
what's called a cancellation liability fee, essentially money
in escrow to protect them in the very rare chance we might back
out of the contract.
What happens is we have to essentially park $50 million in
escrow to protect them from us backing out. That $50 million is
$50 million less of HPC that we actually can use for computing
resources. And if we're on a 3-year rolling renewal of the
lease cycle, we'll almost have to have this money parked
indefinitely to protect us from that.
Mr. Marshall. OK. Thank you so much. I'll yield back the
remainder of my time.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you very much.
I will now recognize Chairwoman Johnson for 5 minutes.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much.
Dr. Jacobs, you might know that I chaired a hearing on
NASA's Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request earlier this month, and
one of the Members asked about FCC's (Federal Communications
Commission's) 5G spectrum auction at the 24 gigahertz band.
Administrator Bridenstine was very clear in saying that
potential bleed over into weather data channels could take us
back to the 1970s in terms of weather forecast. He mentioned a
study that NASA did in conjunction with NOAA that determined
that it's a very high probability that we are going to lose a
lot of data.
Do you have any reaction to Mr. Bridenstine's response, and
what is NOAA's current state of play on the issue, and what are
we doing to mitigate any potential interference?
Dr. Jacobs. So the potential interference in the 24
gigahertz spectrum is essentially out-of-bounds emission from
the adjacent spectrum. Now, we do passive water vapor sensing
from our polar orbiting satellites, and if the out-of-bounds
emissions thresholds are too large, essentially these
instruments will just blind our satellites and we won't be able
to detect water vapor.
We are currently--so our subject matter experts are looking
at the proposed minus 20 decibel watts of out-of-bound emission
proposed by the FCC. Our subject matter experts, along with
NASA subject matter experts and subject matter experts from the
FCC are collectively collaborating on a study. They're actively
doing that right now. The results of that study will be decided
upon on May 15, whereby we will ultimately make a decision on
what the acceptable out-of-bounds emissions is to protect
future spectrum. Right now, the number is in flux because
there's a lot of assumptions that go into the study, but we
should have a definitive answer in the next couple weeks.
Chairwoman Johnson. If this budget is enacted, would NOAA
continue to participate in the NCA (National Climate
Assessment) process in the absence of the dedicated funding?
Dr. Jacobs. Absolutely. So we--this won't limit our
participation in NCA 5 at all. There's several other agencies.
I would like to note that the NCA budget for NCA 1, 2, and 3
was originally produced without a budget line, so I don't see
this impacting our ability to provide expertise and data for
NCA 5 at all.
Chairwoman Johnson. OK. With the proposed budget, what do
you predict would be the impacts that you would have to face?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, a lot of the cuts were made to external
research grants in favor of maintaining core capabilities so
that we wouldn't degrade our ability to deliver on our mission.
So external research, as it pertains to universities and such,
would likely take the largest hit. Maintaining our core
capabilities is obviously a top priority, and the core
capabilities within this budget will be maintained.
Chairwoman Johnson. Now, this budget proposes to
aggressively cut grants as it relates to students and graduate
students for--which really helps to create your manpower. How
do you plan to address that?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, there's a lot of opportunities through
external partnerships, through public-private partnerships, as
well as the public-private partnerships collaborating with
industry, and then using a lot of industry funding to drive
academic research. So that's the crux of EPIC, the Earth
Prediction Innovation Center, and also the backbone of NOPP,
the National Oceanographic Partnership Program.
Chairwoman Johnson. You have knowledge of this industry
spending coming about?
Dr. Jacobs. I do. So when I was at Panasonic, I actually
did a lot of collaborative model development with the Weather
Service. We also, through industry, funded five different
universities, including PIs (principal investigators) and
postdocs to do research. Granted, we had a financial interest
as a private company, but the ultimate benefiter was the
Weather Service in helping improve some of their forecast
models, as well as different PIs at universities and their
students who wanted to get research publications out.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. My time is expired.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson.
I'll now recognize Ranking Member Lucas for 5 minutes.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Chairwoman.
Dr. Jacobs, the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation
Act of 2017, which I sponsored along with many of my colleagues
here today, prioritized commercial weather data to improve our
forecast skills. I understand NOAA is continuing the Commercial
Weather Data Pilot program. Could you discuss with us for a bit
what is the status of the program, and does NOAA plan to buy
this data after it's tested?
Dr. Jacobs. Yes. So thank you very much for the Weather
Research and Forecasting Innovation Act, as well as the NIDIS
Reauthorization.
The Commercial--the Weather Data Pilot program, what we've
learned through testing is that the GPS-RO (radio occultation)
data that we were collecting adds value. We haven't quantified
exactly how much, but we know that it adds enough value to make
sense to enter into a contract to acquire the data, so we'll be
transitioning that from a pilot program to an actual data
acquisition program. The pilot program will still exist, and
we're using that to explore space-based data sets beyond GPS-
RO, for example, possibly hyperspectral sound or instruments
like that.
Mr. Lucas. Doctor, during my tour of the University of
Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, I heard from several of my
constituents that we are potentially on the cusp of a
breakthrough in our ability to forecast short and long-term
weather. And I know this is a topic that my colleagues have
discussed also, but do you agree with this sentiment, and what
steps can this Committee take to help assist NOAA and the
private partners in this endeavor?
Dr. Jacobs. We are very close to making some major leaps
forward. The primary difference between us and the European
Center, which is the modeling agency that we're always compared
to, is the data assimilation of the model. So while I just
spoke earlier on the upgrade to the dynamic core, we haven't
upgraded the data assimilation system yet. We're expecting
that. It's probably 1-1/2 to 2 years away, but we have to
upgrade a lot of the infrastructure and architecture around the
software, including the dynamic core, before we upgrade the
data assimilation system. That's where I think you're going to
see the biggest leap forward and improvement in forecast skill,
in addition to that, transitioning all of the code to cloud-
based architecture.
One of the biggest hurdles in harnessing external
collaborator development is they don't have login credentials
to our machines because of various security requirements, so
that--the best way to solve the problem was to move the model
code to a compute architecture that they had access to external
to NOAA. And I think once that transition is finished, you'll
see development rapidly occur.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Doctor. One last question, thinking
about the Chairwoman's questions about the spectrum and
frequency, this Committee has a long history of supporting
investments in NOAA's satellite systems. If the FCC is going to
auction off parts of the spectrum that affect the utility of
the systems, is it worth continuing to fund these billion-
dollar satellites, Doctor?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, we'll--ultimately, we'll have to wait
until the final number is decided on the out-of-bounds
emissions limits, and then we can actually use that number to
determine how much of the data will be impacted. And once we
determine how much data is impacted, then we can do an actual
assessment on whether or not we can meet the mission
requirements. If it's impacted such that we can't meet the
mission requirements, then it would be prudent to rethink the
investments in future polar orbiting satellites.
Mr. Lucas. And that would be a shame if we lost all those
billions of dollars in investment and that I would hope the
other areas of the Federal Government are paying as close
attention to this issue as you are, Doctor. Thank you very
much.
I yield back the balance of my time, Chairwoman.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you very much, Mr. Lucas.
I will now recognize Mr. Tonko for 5 minutes.
Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Chairwoman Fletcher, and thank you,
Dr. Jacobs, for joining us today.
As the global climate crisis continues to press devastation
beyond our shores and into our communities, countless
businesses, local news stations, and millions of Americans
depend upon scientific forecasting from 4,200 National Weather
Service employees to stay safe. With that in mind, I have some
major concerns about National Weather Service understaffing.
In its Fiscal Year 2019 budget proposal, the agency sought
to eliminate 355 positions in the NWS, including 248 frontline
forecasters, 20 percent of all forecasters, in the NWS's 122
forecast offices nationwide. Congress soundly rejected these
proposed reductions, and the House Appropriations Committees
directed the National Weather Service to continue to hire in
2019 and to have additional FTEs (full-time employees) on board
by the end of the fiscal year.
However, according to reports the agency has provided to
the National Weather Service employees union, the number of
FTEs at the NWS is essentially unchanged from the beginning of
the fiscal year. There were, in fact, fewer nonsupervisory,
nonmanagerial employees at the NWS at the close of pay period 5
in 2019--March 16, 2019, to be specific--than there were when
the fiscal year began. NOAA has once again proposed to
eliminate some 355 positions in the NWS in its Fiscal Year 2020
budget request.
So my question is, is the NWS intentionally failing to fill
vacancies at the NWS in anticipation that Congress will
eventually approve this request?
Dr. Jacobs. So the--during the shutdown--so typically
this--this shutdown occurred during the end of the year, across
the end of the year, so a lot of times when individuals retire,
we will see that happen at the end of December. So prior to the
shutdown and resuming after the shutdown, this was the first
time since 2011 that the hiring has actually outpaced
attrition. We haven't fully gotten back to the number that we
recovered from what we saw during the shutdown, but during
FY2019, the onboard rate right now is roughly 91.5 percent.
Mr. Tonko. Well, will you be committing to doing the
remaining percent?
Dr. Jacobs. Yes, we are committed to trying to close that
gap, but we're also battling attrition and retirement at the
same time.
Mr. Tonko. Right, which is nothing new----
Dr. Jacobs. No, that's expected.
Mr. Tonko. OK. Last year, the agency informed the
Appropriations Committee that there were 381 funded vacant
positions at the NWS. What other items have to be done or what
other forces have to be engaged to experience progress in
filling these vacancies? I mean, you described some, but what
else are you going to do for that percentage that are yet
unfilled?
Dr. Jacobs. So if--when you see the cuts in there, that
actually is largely offset by some money that we're going to
save by reducing the need to move individuals around, so we
just recently implemented what's called GS 5 through 12, which
is a career progression, to go from the GS all--for GS 5 all
the way to 12.
Typically, historically, a lot of times what would happen
is a Weather Service forecaster, in order to receive a
promotion, would have to move from one forecast office to
another forecast office. And then many times we would actually
have to pay the--pay for that move, in some cases buy their
house. It ended up costing us around $12-$15 million a year.
With the new GS 5 through 12 career progression, we actually
will save money.
Mr. Tonko. Has this all been done in consultation with the
employees?
Dr. Jacobs. Yes, this went through the employees union.
Mr. Tonko. And what effect has the recent shutdown--you
mentioned that the shutdown was part of the delay, but what--
can you describe with more detail what the recent shutdown had
as an impact on hiring at the National Weather Service?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, the--you know, like I was speaking to
earlier, typically, individuals will work through the end of
the calendar year, so we see the most retirement right at the
end of the year, and so that happened to coincide with the
shutdown. So while they were retiring, there was, you know,
simultaneously a delay in onboarding people. There was not just
a delay in the direct hiring but a delay in the onboarding
process. So the people who were actually already hired but not
fully onboarded, that process was also delayed, and we're still
digging out of that right now.
Mr. Tonko. So what happens if we have a future shutdown,
and what impact can we anticipate or have we learned from that
shutdown?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, it really depends on when it is during
the calendar year. If it happens during the--in the end of the
calendar year across a transition, then we'll likely see a
fairly large number of retirements that we will, you know, be
delayed in onboarding new individuals and, you know, once the
lapse in appropriation is over.
Mr. Tonko. Madam Chair, I have exhausted my time, so I
yield back.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you very much.
I'll now recognize Mr. Babin for 5 minutes.
Mr. Babin. Thank you, Madam Chair, I appreciate it.
And, Dr. Jacobs, I appreciate you being here today as well.
Can you please talk a little bit about NOAA's relationship
with NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)? Are
there opportunities to be more involved in utilizing one
another's capabilities in the area of weather forecasting and
predictions, and what could these relationships look like down
the road?
Dr. Jacobs. So NASA, we have a fantastic relationship with
NASA. The two agencies are very collaborative and work on a lot
of different fronts. I think most people would think of the
NOAA-NASA collaboration when it comes to our satellite
programs, whether it's----
Mr. Babin. Right.
Dr. Jacobs [continuing]. The geo hosted or the joint
venture for polar orbiting. We've got some new things that
we're working on on that front in addition to the commercial
data buys.
But on the modeling side, there's a lot of collaborative
work that we can do at NASA on this. We are trying to go to a
unified forecasting system, so not just NOAA-NASA but all the
different government agencies are working off the same model
architecture so that whenever an agency is doing development
work, whether it's NOAA and NASA, DOD (Department of Defense),
DOE (Department of Energy), it all gets bundled into the same
framework.
A lot of other interesting things we're working on with
NASA are the data assimilation. We're looking at observation
impacts through their forecast sensitivity to observation tool,
which is extremely useful.
There's also work we're doing with them, as well as DOE, on
looking at GPUs (graphics processing units) instead of CPUs
(central processing units) for different type of processor work
as well, in addition to that, exploring cloud compute
architecture.
Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you very much. Also, I represent
southeast Texas where the Chairman had mentioned that we got
hit so hard, decimated by Hurricane Harvey almost 2 years ago.
We're still in the midst of recovery from this storm. And
there's been a couple of severe storms already this year, and
it's incredibly important to accurately predict storms and
their magnitudes. How accurate is the state of our severe
weather forecasting? And do you think that we can do it better?
Dr. Jacobs. I--we absolutely can do it better. There's
always room for improvement. Right now, the model that we would
typically use for the high-resolution convective forecasting
only runs out a day. We rapid cycle that model so it refreshes
every hour. There's a lot of work to be done on the physics in
the model, as well as observing system capability. Once we
eventually transition to a global model, a lot of our
convective forecasts will be driven by data that we collect
over the Pacific Ocean because the longer we predict out, the
further west we have to do observations. So there's work to be
done on the observing system side, as well as the modeling
side, and parallel to that, utilizing HPC better because, as we
go to higher resolutions, it requires more and more compute
resources.
Mr. Babin. OK. And then how do you plan to incorporate
emerging commercial capabilities, especially in space weather
area and in NOAA's long-range planning?
Dr. Jacobs. So when it comes to commercial space-based
observing systems, essentially what we would do is look at the
impact of the data and the models very much like we did with
the GPS RO data and determine how much value it adds to the
forecasting skill. That's a little bit of work on our part,
too, because we have to make sure that the model is accepting
of the data and can extract value out of it. Assuming that the
commercial market to produce space-based weather observations
is seeing value in selling the data to us, it's in my mind a
more viable path to acquire the data. We can do it for less
money. And, as long as they meet the thresholds that we set for
quality and reliability, I think it's a definite path forward.
Mr. Babin. OK. And then, lastly, what suggestions do you
have for us Members of Congress, to help you maximize the best
resources provided to NOAA?
Dr. Jacobs. Well, to maximize the best resources on the
compute side, the cancellation liability fee is obviously a
large concern because that's $50 million extra HPC that we
could be using that we're just sticking the money in an
account. Transitioning to cloud-based architecture is, I
believe, the future because it solves a bottleneck of compute
resources on the research side. And there will be some upfront
work to transition that code over. And then continuing to
support scientists both on the modeling side and the software
engineering side, both internal and external to NOAA, that's
where I think we'll see the biggest improvements in
forecasting.
Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you very much, Doctor, and I yield
back. My time is expired.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you.
I'll now recognize Dr. Baird for 5 minutes.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And, Dr. Jacobs, we really appreciate you being here today.
My district is home to Purdue University, which administers
the Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant college program, and that's in
partnership with the University of Illinois. And this Sea Grant
is funded through NOAA, and that works on aquatic invasive
species and their control, pollution prevention, and economic
opportunity. It also monitors weather and lake conditions using
two buoys, which I understand they have their own Twitter
account. Is that correct? But anyway, out in Lake Michigan
where real-time data about windspeed, lake temperatures, and
wave height is collected and sent to NOAA.
So my question, Dr. Jacobs, is, how does NOAA strike a
budget balance between the internal research that stays with
NOAA and the extramural research that goes out to NOAA's
private and academic partners?
Dr. Jacobs. So in the tough budget situation we're in, we
really had to prioritize maintaining our core capabilities of
protecting life and property. And while the Sea Grant program
is a fantastic program, I'm a huge supporter of it--we have Sea
Grants Knauss fellows on our staff--it was one of the things
that we ended up having to cut just to maintain our core
capabilities.
Mr. Baird. Then my second question in that same area,
historically, has more extramural research money been provided
to universities by NOAA's research office or by their weather
service?
Dr. Jacobs. Typically, the money for the research side, as
well as the cooperative institutes, runs through the research
side, not the forecast side, so the Weather Service budget was
relatively flat. It was the research side.
Mr. Baird. Thank you. My next question then deals with the
National Integrated Drought Information System, and I think
that was reauthorized in December. So when Congressman Marshall
made reference to the impact of EPIC on agriculture, because we
have a lot of agriculture in my district--my question deals
with how is this interagency partnership assisting farmers in
the agricultural industry across the country?
Dr. Jacobs. So EPIC, while originally designed to support
NOAA's mission, will actually be the transition for model
development produced by NASA, DOD, DOE, and other agencies. So
there--there's going to be a lot of development work running
through EPIC by other agencies that will ultimately help the
medium- to long-range forecasts.
So the dynamic model that we're looking at for global
forecasting runs out 15 days. Then beyond that we have two
methods for doing seasonal to sub-seasonal forecasting. One is
a dynamic model and associated ensembles, as well as
statistical models, which look at the dynamical model output
and then derives statistical forecast running out 9 months.
We're looking to extend those possibly beyond 18 months.
Mr. Baird. Thank you. Could you elaborate, though, how the
National Integrated Drought Information System----
Dr. Jacobs. So the----
Mr. Baird [continuing]. Relates?
Dr. Jacobs. The NIDIS Reauthorization supports--in there
was the authorization of EPIC but also supporting the seasonal
to sub-seasonal forecasting as well, and that long-range
forecasting is what the agricultural community is primarily
interested in.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Dr. Jacobs, and I'll yield back my
time.
Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Baird.
Before we bring the hearing to a close, I want to thank Dr.
Jacobs for testifying before the Committee today.
The record will remain open for 2 weeks for additional
statements from the Members for any additional questions the
Committee may ask our witness.
The witness is excused, and the hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:00 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]