- TXT
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
Tip
?
113th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 113-383
======================================================================
WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013
_______
March 21, 2014.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2413]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 2413) to prioritize and redirect
NOAA resources to a focused program of investment on near-term,
affordable, and attainable advances in observational,
computing, and modeling capabilities to deliver substantial
improvement in weather forecasting and prediction of high
impact weather events, such as tornadoes and hurricanes, and
for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Amendment.......................................................2
II. Purpose and Summary.............................................7
III. Background and Need for the Legislation.........................7
IV. Hearing Summary.................................................9
V. Committee Consideration........................................10
VI. Committee Votes................................................10
VII. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill........................12
VIII. Committee Views................................................13
IX. Committee Oversight Findings...................................17
X. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives..........17
XI. New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditur17
XII. Advisory on Earmarks...........................................17
XIII. Committee Cost Estimate........................................17
XIV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................17
XV. Federal Mandates Statement.....................................19
XVI. Compliance with House Resolution 5.............................19
XVII. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................19
XVIII.Applicability to Legislative Branch............................20
XIX. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation.................20
XX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported..........22
XXI. Exchange of Committee Correspondence...........................23
XXII. Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markup.........................25
XXIII.Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup.......................83
I. Amendment
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of
2013''.
SEC. 2. PUBLIC SAFETY PRIORITY.
In accordance with NOAA's critical mission to provide science,
service, and stewardship, the Under Secretary shall prioritize weather-
related activities, including the provision of weather data, forecasts,
and warnings for the protection of life and property and the
enhancement of the national economy, in all relevant line offices.
SEC. 3. WEATHER RESEARCH AND FORECASTING INNOVATION.
(a) Program.--The Assistant Administrator for OAR shall conduct a
program to develop improved understanding of and forecast capabilities
for atmospheric events and their impacts, placing priority on
developing more accurate, timely, and effective warnings and forecasts
of high impact weather events that endanger life and property.
(b) Program Elements.--The program described in subsection (a) shall
focus on the following activities:
(1) Improving the fundamental understanding of weather
consistent with section 2, including boundary layer and other
atmospheric processes.
(2) Improving the understanding of how the public receives,
interprets, and responds to warnings and forecasts of high
impact weather events that endanger life and property.
(3) Research and development, and transfer of knowledge,
technologies, and applications to the NWS and other appropriate
agencies and entities, including the American weather industry
and academic partners, related to--
(A) advanced radar, radar networking technologies,
and other ground-based technologies, including those
emphasizing rapid, fine-scale sensing of the boundary
layer and the use of innovative, dual-polarization,
phased-array technologies;
(B) aerial weather observing systems;
(C) high performance computing and information
technology networks;
(D) advanced numerical weather prediction systems and
forecasting tools and techniques that improve the
forecasting of timing, track, intensity, and severity
of high impact weather, including through--
(i) the development of more effective
mesoscale models;
(ii) more effective use of existing, and the
development of new, regional and national
cloud-resolving models;
(iii) enhanced global models; and
(iv) integrated assessment models;
(E) quantitative assessment tools for measuring the
value of data and observing systems, including OSSEs
(as described in section 8), OSEs, and AOAs;
(F) atmospheric chemistry and interactions essential
to accurately characterizing atmospheric composition
and predicting meteorological processes, including
cloud microphysical, precipitation, and atmospheric
electrification processes, to more effectively
understand their role in severe weather; and
(G) additional sources of weather data and
information, including commercial observing systems.
(4) A technology transfer initiative, carried out jointly and
in coordination with the Assistant Administrator for NWS, and
in cooperation with the American weather industry and academic
partners, to ensure continuous development and transition of
the latest scientific and technological advances into NWS
operations.
(c) Extramural Research.--
(1) In general.--In carrying out the program under this
section, the Assistant Administrator for OAR shall collaborate
with and support the non-Federal weather research community,
which includes institutions of higher education, private
entities, and nongovernmental organizations, by making funds
available through competitive grants, contracts, and
cooperative agreements.
(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress that not
less than 30 percent of the funds authorized for research and
development at OAR by this Act should be made available for
this purpose.
(3) Report.--The Under Secretary shall transmit to Congress
annually, concurrently with NOAA's budget request, a
description of current and planned activities under this
section.
SEC. 4. TORNADO WARNING IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Under Secretary, in collaboration with the
American weather industry and academic partners, shall establish a
tornado warning improvement and extension program.
(b) Goal.--The goal of such program shall be to reduce the loss of
life and economic losses from tornadoes through the development and
extension of accurate, effective, and timely tornado forecasts,
predictions, and warnings, including the prediction of tornadoes beyond
one hour in advance.
(c) Program Plan.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Assistant Administrator for OAR, in
consultation with the Assistant Administrator for NWS, shall develop a
program plan that details the specific research, development, and
technology transfer activities, as well as corresponding resources and
timelines, necessary to achieve the program goal.
(d) Budget for Plan.--Following completion of the plan, the Assistant
Administrator for OAR, in consultation with the Assistant Administrator
for NWS, shall transmit annually to Congress a proposed budget
corresponding to the activities identified in the plan.
SEC. 5. HURRICANE WARNING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Under Secretary, in collaboration with the
American weather industry and academic partners, shall establish a
hurricane warning improvement program.
(b) Goal.--The goal of such program shall be to develop and extend
accurate hurricane forecasts and warnings in order to reduce loss of
life, injury, and damage to the economy.
(c) Program Plan.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Assistant Administrator for OAR, in
consultation with the Assistant Administrator for NWS, shall develop a
program plan that details the specific research, development, and
technology transfer activities, as well as corresponding resources and
timelines, necessary to achieve the program goal.
(d) Budget for Plan.--Following completion of the plan, the Assistant
Administrator for OAR, in consultation with the Assistant Administrator
for NWS, shall transmit annually to Congress a proposed budget
corresponding to the activities identified in the plan.
SEC. 6. WEATHER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, and
annually thereafter, the Assistant Administrator for OAR, in
coordination with the Assistant Administrators for NWS and NESDIS,
shall issue a research and development plan to restore and maintain
United States leadership in numerical weather prediction and
forecasting that--
(1) describes the forecasting skill and technology goals,
objectives, and progress of NOAA in carrying out the program
conducted under section 3;
(2) identifies and prioritizes specific research and
development activities, and performance metrics, weighted to
meet the operational weather mission of NWS;
(3) describes how the program will collaborate with
stakeholders, including the American weather industry and
academic partners; and
(4) identifies, through consultation with the National
Science Foundation, American weather industry, and academic
partners, research necessary to enhance the integration of
social science knowledge into weather forecast and warning
processes, including to improve the communication of threat
information necessary to enable improved severe weather
planning and decisionmaking on the part of individuals and
communities.
SEC. 7. OBSERVING SYSTEM PLANNING.
The Under Secretary shall--
(1) develop and maintain a prioritized list of observation
data requirements necessary to ensure weather forecasting
capabilities to protect life and property to the maximum extent
practicable;
(2) undertake, using OSSEs, OSEs, AOAs, and other appropriate
assessment tools, ongoing systematic evaluations of the
combination of observing systems, data, and information needed
to meet the requirements developed under paragraph (1),
assessing various options to maximize observational
capabilities and their cost-effectiveness;
(3) identify current and potential future data gaps in
observing capabilities related to the requirements under
paragraph (1); and
(4) determine a range of options to address gaps identified
under paragraph (3).
SEC. 8. OBSERVING SYSTEM SIMULATION EXPERIMENTS.
(a) In General.--In support of the requirements of section 7, the
Assistant Administrator for OAR shall undertake OSSEs to quantitatively
assess the relative value and benefits of observing capabilities and
systems. Technical and scientific OSSE evaluations--
(1) may include assessments of the impact of observing
capabilities on--
(A) global weather prediction;
(B) hurricane track and intensity forecasting;
(C) tornado warning lead times and accuracy; and
(D) prediction of mid-latitude severe local storm
outbreaks; and
(2) shall be conducted in cooperation with other appropriate
entities within NOAA, other Federal agencies, the American
weather industry, and academic partners.
(b) Requirements.--OSSEs shall quantitatively--
(1) determine the potential impact of proposed space-based,
suborbital, and in situ observing systems on analyses and
forecasts;
(2) evaluate and compare observing system design options; and
(3) assess the relative capabilities and costs of various
observing systems and combinations of observing systems in
providing data necessary to protect life and property.
(c) Implementation.--OSSEs--
(1) shall be conducted prior to the acquisition of major
Government-owned or Government-leased operational observing
systems, including polar-orbiting and geostationary satellite
systems, with a lifecycle cost of more than $500,000,000; and
(2) shall be conducted prior to the purchase of any major new
commercially provided data with a lifecycle cost of more than
$500,000,000.
(d) Priority OSSEs.--Not later than June 30, 2014, the Assistant
Administrator for OAR shall complete OSSEs to assess the value of data
from both Global Positioning System radio occultation and a
geostationary hyperspectral sounder global constellation.
(e) Results.--Upon completion of all OSSEs, results shall be publicly
released and accompanied by an assessment of related private and public
sector weather data sourcing options, including their availability,
affordability, and cost effectiveness. Such assessments shall be
developed in accordance with section 50503 of title 51, United States
Code.
SEC. 9. COMPUTING RESOURCES PRIORITIZATION REPORT.
Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, and
annually thereafter, the NOAA Chief Information Officer, in
coordination with the Assistant Administrator for OAR and the Assistant
Administrator for NWS, shall produce a report that explains how NOAA
intends to--
(1) aggressively pursue the newest, fastest, and most cost
effective high performance computing technologies in support of
its weather prediction mission;
(2) ensure a balance between the research requirements to
develop the next generation of regional and global models and
its highly reliable operational models;
(3) take advantage of advanced development concepts to, as
appropriate, make its next generation weather prediction models
available in beta-test mode to its operational forecasters, the
American weather industry, and its partners in academic and
government research;
(4) identify opportunities to reallocate existing advanced
computing resources from lower priority uses to improve
advanced research and operational weather prediction; and
(5) harness new computing power in OAR and NWS for immediate
improvement in forecasting and experimentation.
SEC. 10. COMMERCIAL WEATHER DATA.
(a) Amendment.--Section 60161 of title 51, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``This prohibition shall
not extend to--
``(1) the purchase of weather data through contracts with
commercial providers; or
``(2) the placement of weather satellite instruments on
cohosted government or private payloads.''.
(b) Strategy.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce, in
consultation with the Under Secretary, shall transmit to the
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a strategy to enable the
procurement of quality commercial weather data. The strategy
shall assess the range of commercial opportunities, including
public-private partnerships, for obtaining both surface-based
and space-based weather observations. The strategy shall
include the cost effectiveness of these opportunities, as well
as provide a plan for procuring data from these nongovernmental
sources, as appropriate.
(2) Requirements.--The strategy shall include--
(A) an analysis of financial or other benefits to,
and risks associated with, acquiring commercial weather
data or services, including through multiyear
acquisition approaches;
(B) an identification of methods to address planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution challenges to
such approaches, including--
(i) how standards will be set to ensure that
data is reliable and effective;
(ii) how data may be acquired from commercial
experimental or innovative techniques and then
evaluated for integration into operational use;
(iii) how to guarantee public access to all
forecast-critical data to ensure that the
American weather industry and the public
continue to have access to information critical
to their work; and
(iv) in accordance with section 50503 of
title 51, United States Code, methods to
address potential termination liability or
cancellation costs associated with weather data
or service contracts; and
(C) an identification of any changes needed in the
requirements development and approval processes of the
Department of Commerce to facilitate effective and
efficient implementation of such strategy.
SEC. 11. WEATHER RESEARCH AND INNOVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
(a) Establishment.--The Under Secretary shall establish a Federal
Advisory Committee to--
(1) provide advice for prioritizing weather research
initiatives at NOAA to produce real improvement in weather
forecasting;
(2) provide advice on existing or emerging technologies or
techniques that can be found in private industry or the
research community that could be incorporated into forecasting
at NWS to improve forecasting;
(3) identify opportunities to improve communications between
weather forecasters, emergency management personnel, and the
public; and
(4) address such other matters as the Under Secretary or the
Advisory Committee believes would improve innovation in weather
forecasting.
(b) Composition.--
(1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall appoint leading
experts and innovators from all relevant fields of science and
engineering that inform meteorology, including atmospheric
chemistry, atmospheric physics, hydrology, social science, risk
communications, electrical engineering, and computer modeling.
(2) Number.--The Advisory Committee shall be composed of at
least 12 members, with the chair of the Advisory Committee
chosen from among the members.
(3) Restriction.--The Under Secretary may not appoint a
majority of members who are employees of NOAA-funded research
centers.
(c) Annual Report.--The Advisory Committee shall transmit annually to
the Under Secretary a report on progress made by NOAA in adopting the
Advisory Committee's recommendations. The Under Secretary shall
transmit a copy of such report to the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
(d) Duration.--Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Advisory Committee until the date
that is 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 12. INTERAGENCY WEATHER RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COORDINATION.
(a) Establishment.--The Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy shall establish an Interagency Committee for
Advancing Weather Services to improve coordination of relevant weather
research and forecast innovation activities across the Federal
Government. The Interagency Committee shall--
(1) include participation by the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, NOAA
and its constituent elements, the National Science Foundation,
and such other agencies involved in weather forecasting
research as the President determines are appropriate;
(2) identify and prioritize top forecast needs and coordinate
those needs against budget requests and program initiatives
across participating offices and agencies; and
(3) share information regarding operational needs and
forecasting improvements across relevant agencies.
(b) Co-Chair.--The Federal Coordinator for Meteorology shall serve as
a co-chair of this panel.
(c) Further Coordination.--The Director shall take such other steps
as are necessary to coordinate the activities of the Federal Government
with those of the American weather industry, State governments,
emergency managers, and academic researchers.
SEC. 13. VISITING OAR RESEARCHERS PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Assistant Administrator for OAR, in
collaboration with the Assistant Administrator for NWS, may establish a
program to detail OAR researchers to the NWS.
(b) Goal.--The goal of this program is to enhance forecasting
innovation through regular, direct interaction between OAR's world-
class scientists and NWS's operational staff.
(c) Elements.--The program shall allow no fewer than 5 and no more
than 15 OAR staff to spend up to 1 year on detail to the NWS. Such
detail shall be at any of the National Centers for Environmental
Prediction or at any of the Regional Forecast Offices where such
interaction could be productive in improving forecasting capabilities.
Candidates shall be jointly selected by the Assistant Administrator for
OAR and the Assistant Administrator for NWS.
(d) Report.--The Under Secretary shall report annually to the
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of
Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate on participation in such program and shall
highlight any innovations that come from this interaction.
SEC. 14. VISITING FELLOWS AT NWS.
(a) In General.--The Assistant Administrator for NWS may establish a
program to host postdoctoral fellows and academic researchers at any of
the National Centers for Environmental Prediction.
(b) Goal.--This program shall be designed to provide direct
interaction between forecasters and talented academic and private
sector researchers in an effort to bring innovation to forecasting
tools and techniques available to the NWS.
(c) Selection and Appointment.--Such fellows shall be competitively
selected and appointed for a term not to exceed 1 year.
SEC. 15. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) AOA.--The term ``AOA'' means an Analysis of Alternatives.
(2) NESDIS.--The term ``NESDIS'' means the National
Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service.
(3) NOAA.--The term ``NOAA'' means the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
(4) NWS.--The term ``NWS'' means the National Weather
Service.
(5) OAR.--The term ``OAR'' means the Office of Oceanic and
Atmospheric Research.
(6) OSE.--The term ``OSE'' means an Observing System
Experiment.
(7) OSSE.--The term ``OSSE'' means an Observing System
Simulation Experiment.
(8) Under secretary.--The term ``Under Secretary'' means the
Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.
SEC. 16. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Fiscal Year 2014.--There are authorized to be appropriated for
fiscal year 2014--
(1) out of funds made available for operations, research, and
facilities in OAR, $83,000,000 to carry out section 3, of
which--
(A) $65,000,000 is authorized for weather
laboratories and cooperative institutes; and
(B) $18,000,000 is authorized for weather and air
chemistry research programs; and
(2) out of funds made available for research and development
in NWS, an additional amount of $14,000,000 for OAR to carry
out the joint technology transfer initiative described in
section 3(b)(4).
(b) Alternative Funding for Fiscal Year 2014.--If the Budget Control
Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25) is repealed or replaced with an Act
that increases allocations, subsection (a) shall not apply, and there
are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2014--
(1) out of funds made available for operations, research, and
facilities in OAR, $96,500,000 to carry out section 3, of
which--
(A) $77,500,000 is authorized for weather
laboratories and cooperative institutes; and
(B) $19,000,000 is authorized for weather and air
chemistry research programs; and
(2) out of funds made available for research and development
in NWS, an additional amount of $16,000,000 for OAR to carry
out the joint technology transfer initiative described in
section 3(b)(4).
(c) Fiscal Years 2015 Through 2017.--Out of funds made available for
operations, research, and facilities in OAR for each of fiscal years
2015 through 2017, there are authorized to be appropriated--
(1) $100,000,000 to carry out section 3, of which--
(A) $80,000,000 is authorized for weather
laboratories and cooperative institutes; and
(B) $20,000,000 is authorized for weather and air
chemistry research programs; and
(2) an additional amount of $20,000,000 for the joint
technology transfer initiative described in section 3(b)(4).
II. Purpose and Summary
The purpose of H.R. 2413 is to prioritize and redirect
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration resources to a
focused program of investment on affordable and attainable
advances in observational, computing, and modeling capabilities
to deliver substantial improvement in weather forecasting and
prediction of high impact weather events, such as those
associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, floods, storm
surges, and wildfires.
III. Background and Need for the Legislation
Weather impacts American lives, and extreme weather poses
significant risks to important parts of the U.S. economy. NOAA
has traced a rise in weather disasters costing the economy up
to $1 billion in damage per weather event, and a recent
analysis found that substantial parts of the economy are
sensitive to weather variability, representing more than three
percent of Gross Domestic Product and nearly $500 billion a
year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2011BAMS2928.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent severe weather events in the United States have
underscored the need for timely, accurate, and reliable weather
forecasts. Within NOAA, the National Weather Service (NWS), the
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), and the
National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service
(NESDIS) play important roles in developing and deploying U.S.
weather forecasting capabilities.\2\ NOAA is joined in this
effort by an ever-evolving private sector weather enterprise.
The National Academy of Sciences recently emphasized the
importance of this partnership, noting that ``[p]rivate sector
and other organizations provide sensor data, weather forecasts,
and end-user services to a broad set of customers.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\For more information on these responsibilities, see: ``To
Observe and Protect: How NOAA Procures Data for Weather Forecasting,''
March 28, 2012, http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-energy-
and-environment-hearing-how-noaa-procures-data-weather-forecasting.
\3\http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-
reports/reports-in-brief/Weather-Services-Report-Brief.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapid technological advances in computing and other areas
such as remote sensing and advanced radar hold great promise to
improve severe weather prediction, but have yet to be fully
exploited. This promise was detailed in NOAA's most recent 20
Year Research Vision, which asserted that emphasis on weather
research and technological development will result in
significant benefits to public safety:
Severe storm and event warnings will save more lives
and property. The enhanced information delivery systems
of the future will be well coordinated and able to
quickly disseminate severe storm and event warnings.
The warnings themselves will see dramatic improvements.
For example, tornado warning lead times will be on the
order of one hour, rather than minutes. Technology like
phased array radar, significant improvements in our
under-standing of meso-scale weather processes, and the
development of models that embody this understanding
will enable this accomplishment. Improvements in storm
surge forecasting and increased tsunami monitoring/
warning capacity will also greatly minimize loss of
life and property damage from these hazards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\http://nrc.noaa.gov/sites/nrc/Documents/
Reduced%20file%20size_20%20yr%20Research%20Vision.pdf
Citing ongoing concerns about potential data gaps for
NOAA's polar-orbiting and geostationary satellite programs,
including a potential polar-orbiting gap of 17 to 53 months,
the Government Accountability Office added NOAA's satellite
programs to its High Risk List in 2013. This potential gap in
weather satellite coverage and management problems with NOAA's
satellites have been the subject of several Science, Space, and
Technology Committee hearings over many years. The GAO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
emphasized the potential effects of a gap:
According to NOAA program officials, a satellite data
gap would result in less accurate and timely weather
forecasts and warnings of extreme events, such as
hurricanes, storm surges, and floods. Such degradation
in forecasts and warnings would place lives, property,
and our nation's critical infrastructures in danger.
Given the criticality of satellite data to weather
forecasts, the likelihood of significant gaps and the
potential impact of such gaps on the health and safety
of the U.S. population and economy, GAO has concluded
that the potential gap in weather satellite data is a
high-risk area and added it to the High Risk List in
2013.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/652133.pdf
In addition, independent reviews of NOAA's weather research
portfolio have also recommended a stronger emphasis on moving
research-to-operations within NOAA's weather portfolio. In
2010, the National Academy of Public Administration stated that
OAR ``provides particularly important institutional glue to
support innovation across NOAA.''\6\ In April 2013, NOAA's
Science Advisory Board stated that ``unless . . . science is
transitioned into operations . . . NOAA will fail in its
mission. NOAA must make certain that the intended end use of
the scientific information is understood from the start by its
researchers working on scientific questions and, ensure that
internal as well as external end-user needs are incorporated
explicitly into the problem formulation.''\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\http://www.napawash.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/NAPA-Final-
Report_NOAA-Climate-Service-Study_September-20101.pdf
\7\http://www.sab.noaa.gov/Reports/2013/
SAB%20R&D%20Portfolio%20Review%20Report%20to%20NOAA%20FINAL.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Hearing Summary
The Environment Subcommittee held a hearing on May 23, 2013
entitled ``Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather Forecasting.''
The purpose of the hearing was to examine ways to improve NOAA
weather forecasting, and to receive testimony on draft
legislation to prioritize weather-related research.
The Committee received testimony from: Mr. Barry Myers,
Chief Executive Officer of AccuWeather, Inc. and Mr. Jon
Kirchner, President of GeoOptics, Inc.
Witnesses discussed the current weather forecasting systems
in the U.S. and highlighted opportunities to improve weather
forecasting through new technologies.
The Environment Subcommittee also held a hearing on June
26, 2013 entitled ``Restoring U.S. Leadership in Weather
Forecasting Part 2,'' with the purpose of continuing the
discussion of improving NOAA's weather forecasting.
The Subcommittee received testimony from: The Honorable
Kathryn Sullivan, Acting Administrator at the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration; Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, Vice
President for Research, Regents' Professor for Meteorology,
Weathernews Chair Emeritus, University of Oklahoma; Dr. William
Gail, Chief Technology Officer, Global Weather Corporation,
President-Elect, American Meteorological Society; and Dr. Shuyi
Chen, Professor, Meteorology and Physical Oceanography,
Rosentiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, University
of Miami.
In the 112th Congress, the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology held a hearing on March 28, 2012, entitled, ``To
Observe and Protect: How NOAA Procures Data for Weather
Forecasting.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine how
NOAA develops, evaluates, and executes plans to deliver the
best and most cost effective data necessary to meet
requirements for severe weather prediction and other
observational needs.
The Subcommittee received testimony from: Ms. Mary Kicza,
Assistant Administrator, National Environmental Satellite,
Data, and Information Service, NOAA; Dr. Alexander MacDonald,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research Laboratories and
Cooperative Institutes, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research, NOAA; Mr. John Murphy, Chief, Programs and Plans
Division, National Weather Service, NOAA; Mr. Eric Webster,
Vice President and Director, Weather Systems, ITT Exelis; Dr.
David Crain, Chief Executive Officer, GeoMetWatch; Mr. Bruce
Lev, Vice Chairman, AirDat LLC; and Dr. Berrien Moore, Dean,
University of Oklahoma College of Atmospheric and Geographic
Sciences, and Director, National Weather Center.
V. Committee Consideration
On June 18, 2013, H.R. 2413 was introduced by Rep. Jim
Bridenstine and referred to the Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology.
On July 9, 2013, the Subcommittee on Environment met in
open markup session and adopted H.R. 2413, as amended, by voice
vote.
On December 5, 2013, the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology met in open markup session and adopted H.R. 2413, as
amended, by voice vote. Further, the Committee ordered H.R.
2413 favorably reported to the House, as amended, by unanimous
voice vote.
VI. Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. A
motion to order H.R. 2413 favorably reported to the House, as
amended, was agreed to by voice vote.
During Full Committee consideration of H.R. 2413, the
following amendments were considered:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
VII. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill
Public Safety Prioritization. The bill directs the
Administrator of NOAA to prioritize weather-related activities
to protect life and property and the enhancement of the
national economy in all relevant offices.
Weather Research Prioritization. The bill codifies
and expands NOAA weather research activities, directing the
agency to place ``priority on developing more accurate, timely,
and effective warnings and forecasts of high impact weather
events that endanger life and property.'' The bill also
codifies an existing technology transfer initiative carried out
jointly between OAR and the NWS aimed at ensuring ``continuous
development and transition of the latest scientific and
technological advances into NWS operations'' and supporting the
associated research data facilities.
Tornado Warning Improvement and Extension Program.
The bill creates a tornado research program, the goal of which
shall be the development and extension of accurate, effective,
and timely tornado forecasts, predictions, and warnings,
including the prediction of tornadoes beyond one hour in
advance. It also requires NOAA to prepare a program plan
detailing the research and development activities and the
associated budget resources necessary to successfully realize
the tornado forecasting improvements.
Hurricane Warning Improvement Program. The bill
creates a hurricane research program, the goal of which shall
be to ``develop and extend accurate hurricane forecasts and
warnings in order to reduce loss of life, injury, and damage to
the economy.'' It also requires NOAA to prepare a program plan
detailing the research and development activities and the
associated budget resources necessary to successfully realize
the hurricane forecasting improvements.
Weather Research Planning. The bill directs OAR,
in coordination with the NWS and NESDIS, to annually develop
and issue a prioritized weather R&D plan to restore U.S. world
leadership in weather modeling, prediction, and forecasting.
Improved Observing System Planning. The bill
directs NOAA to systematically evaluate the combination of
observing systems necessary to meet weather forecasting data
requirements, and develop a range of options to address
potential data gaps. The bill further specifies that one
component of this planning effort shall include Observing
System Simulation Experiments (OSSEs) to quantitatively assess
the relative value and benefits of potential observing
capabilities and systems.
Observing System Simulation Experiments. Section 8
of the bill specifies that OSSEs shall be conducted prior to
acquisition of government owned or leased operational observing
systems. It also requires the Assistant Administrator for OAR
to use OSSEs to assess the value of data from Global
Positioning Systems (GPS) radio occultation and a geostationary
hyperspectral sounder global constellation by June 30, 2014.
Computing Resources Prioritization Report. NOAA
must issue an annual plan that explains how NOAA intends to
pursue the newest, fastest, and most cost effective high
performance computing technologies in support of its weather
prediction mission and harness new computing power in OAR and
NWS and determine how it can best be utilized for immediate
improvement in research, modeling, forecasting, and
experimentation.
Commercial Weather Data. Section 10 clarifies that
NOAA can buy private sector weather data and fly weather
sensors on commercial satellites and requires the Secretary of
Commerce to develop a strategy to do so within six months of
enactment.
Expanded Weather Coordination. The bill requires
the Under Secretary to develop a Federal Advisory Committee to
provide advice for prioritizing weather research initiatives at
NOAA and identify emerging technologies. The bill requires the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to
establish an Interagency Committee for Advancing Weather
Services. The bill also gives the Assistant Administrator for
OAR the discretionary authority to establish a program to
detail OAR researchers to NWS. The bill allows the Assistant
Administrator for NWS to establish a program to host post-
doctoral fellows and academic researchers at any of the
National Centers for Environmental Prediction.
Authorization of Appropriations. The bill
authorizes appropriations for OAR's weather laboratories and
cooperative institutes, weather and air chemistry research
programs, and joint technology transfer initiative.
VIII. Committee Views
H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013,
aims to enhance NOAA's protection of lives and property through
improved severe weather forecasting, prioritization of research
and computing resources, observing system planning, and
emphasis on research-to-operations technology transfer. The
bill codifies ongoing research and development activities and
builds upon funds provided by Congress following Superstorm
Sandy. The core principle that informs this bill is a firm
commitment to restore America's leadership in numerical weather
prediction, forecasting and, risk communication. As Dr. Tom
Bogdan, President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric
Research, wrote to the Committee: ``By key measures, U.S.
weather forecasting capabilities have slipped behind those of a
number of international competitors, including the European
Union, United Kingdom, and Japan.''
Through this prioritization and greater collaboration with
the American weather industry and academic partners, H.R. 2413
will result in better prediction of high impact weather events.
The Committee is aware of a long series of reports, including
from the National Research Council, the National Academy of
Public Administration, and the NOAA Science Advisory Board
which demonstrate that the Federal weather effort at NOAA has
ample room for improvement. A recurring theme of these reports
is that efforts to integrate research into the operational
needs of the weather service could be much stronger, and that
the overall effort at NOAA to consider new ideas and techniques
from outside the agency needs to be more vigorous.
Improving these processes should not be expensive, though
there are numerous research issues that could also be funded to
improve weather forecasting. To improve these processes, it is
vital to enhance cooperation and communication with the ample
resources outside the agency. The private weather enterprise in
America is robust and expanding. Some of the most innovative
forecast products available anywhere in the world are routinely
produced by American private firms. Many of the most creative
thinkers about extreme weather events and forecasting
challenges reside in American universities and research
institutes and are readily available to work with the agency.
This bill would create new processes within NOAA and encourages
more consistent, contact between the agency and the broader
weather enterprise. The Committee recognizes that there are
many important weather research questions that could be pursued
in ways that enhance public safety. We encourage the
Administration to include the higher funding levels recommended
in this Act in future budget requests.
Throughout H.R. 2413, the Committee gives responsibility to
different line offices within NOAA, but requires coordination
between these offices. The Committee fully expects that the
coordination will be real and meaningful, with the goal of
improving research-to-operations in a way that improves public
safety and efficiency in government. The bill directs the Under
Secretary of NOAA to prioritize weather-related activities,
especially those that protect American lives and property and
enhance our national economy, in all relevant line offices,
including NWS, OAR, and NESDIS. This provision highlights that
improved forecasting is of central importance to NOAA's public
safety mission. We applaud the position articulated by
Undersecretary Kathy Sullivan in our hearing on June 26, 2013
that ``the forecast services that protect American lives and
livelihood . . . are already NOAA's highest priority.'' Based
upon the testimony of witnesses like Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier of
the University of Oklahoma and Dr. Shuyi Chen of the University
of Miami, the Committee recognizes the interconnectedness of
research on weather, oceans, and climate. The language of
Section 2 allows NOAA to make decisions that reflect the need
for a balanced research portfolio while insisting the agency
fulfill the Committee's direction and its commitment that
improved weather-related public safety be NOAA's highest
priority.
Section 3 codifies and clarifies a NOAA program, led by the
Assistant Administrator for OAR, for weather research and
forecasting innovation. This program includes a number of
elements, including accelerated research, development, and
deployment of critical technologies like next-generation radar
and aerial observation systems, new global and national models,
advanced high performance computing using graphic processing
information technology networks, and quantitative assessment
tools for measuring the value of data and specific observing
systems, as well as a technology transfer initiative between
relevant NOAA line offices and in collaboration with external
partners. In enumerating the elements of the program in
subsection (b), the Committee relied upon the expert advice of
the weather enterprise--particularly suggestions from
university and not-for-profit research center scientists--to
try to capture specific research issues. However, it is not our
intent to exclude from consideration other areas of research
and development. The Committee's expectation is that the
Assistant Administrator for OAR will develop a program that
reflects the full range of pertinent research challenges.
The technology transfer initiative prescribed in subsection
(b) should be consistent with NOAA's Weather Ready Nation
program, build upon the successes of NOAA's weather-related
test beds, include the necessary advanced research data
handling and processing, and help to ensure that dedicated
resources to support research-to-operations are not diverted.
In subsection (3)(b)(4), the Committee directs that the
Assistant Administrator for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
establish a technology transfer program designed to move the
innovations of OAR into the operational work of NWS. In
carrying out this subsection, the Assistant Administrator
should consult closely with the Assistant Administrator for
Weather Services regarding the value of the science and
technology to be transitioned, integrated, and implemented into
an operational environment. Section 3 further encourages
extramural research collaboration and establishes the sense of
Congress that NOAA should provide competitive grants,
contracts, and cooperative agreements consistent with historic
levels. Subsection (c) directs the Assistant Administrator of
OAR to collaborate with and support the non-Federal weather
research community. The bill requires the Under Secretary to
transmit, as part of the budget process, a report that
identifies the funding provided for extramural research. We
expect that report to specify extramural research funding in
the current and prior fiscal years, as well as the proportion
of extramural research funding planned for in the budget
request.
Building upon the successes of NOAA's Hurricane Forecast
Improvement Program, H.R. 2413 directs the creation of tornado
and hurricane warning improvement programs with detailed
research, development, and technology transfer budgets and
plans. Following several deadly tornado outbreaks in 2013,
including in Moore, Oklahoma, the tornado program will focus on
extending accurate forecasts and warnings to beyond one hour.
The bill encourages NOAA to address the loss of U.S.
competitiveness in weather forecasting by requiring the annual
development of a plan to restore and maintain leadership in
numerical weather prediction and forecasting. Section 6 goes on
to specify that one of the elements of the plan will be that it
``identifies and prioritizes specific research and development
activities, and performance metrics, weighted to meet the
operational weather mission of NWS.'' This ensures that the
Assistant Administrator for Weather Services will have
meaningful input into R&D planning because the plan must
reflect, to some degree, initiatives that are tied directly to
operational needs. This section also includes a requirement
that the agency pay special attention to the social science
knowledge necessary to turn improved weather forecasting skills
into communications that will help the public take effective
steps to be safe. The challenge of risk communication was
repeatedly highlighted to the Committee in both testimony at
the June 26, 2013 hearing and also in informal communications
to Members and staff.
In order to address observing system needs and potential
data gaps, H.R. 2413 also requires NOAA to conduct
comprehensive observing system planning. In support of this
planning, the Assistant Administrator for OAR shall conduct
OSSEs prior to major observing system acquisitions or
commercial data purchases. The bill codifies NOAA's commitment
to complete OSSEs on GPS radio occultation and a geostationary
hyperspectral sounder global constellation in FY 2014 using
funds made available in the Superstorm Sandy Supplemental. NOAA
has informed the Committee that these OSSE studies are underway
and directs the corresponding reports be shared with the
Committee by June 30, 2014. The bill provides flexibilities
within NOAA's assessment of observing systems, and the OSSE
provisions are consistent with NOAA Administrators'
characterization of these experiments as ``powerful tool'' to
``inform our strategies for investing in observation networks''
and ``to help determine what new data or technologies will
yield the best improvement in forecast accuracy.'' These
activities should be carried out collaboratively with the Joint
Center for Satellite Data Assimilation and other relevant
bodies.
Section 10 makes clear that NOAA is not prohibited from
purchasing weather data through contracts with commercial
providers or the placement of weather satellite instruments on
government or private payloads. The Committee views NOAA's
unwillingness to seriously consider all sources of cost-
effective, critical weather data, including from commercial
providers, as short-sighted and with the potential to compound
future data gaps. To help rectify this resistance to non-NOAA
sources of observing data, H.R. 2413 directs the Secretary of
Commerce to develop and transmit a strategy to enable the
procurement of quality commercial weather data, including
commercial opportunities for surface- and space-based
observations. The purchase of data from commercial satellite
vendors could lead to the best pricing for quality weather
data. In assessing the range of commercial opportunities and
developing the strategy of quality commercial weather data, the
full range of commercial options must be considered, including
FAR and non-FAR opportunities, public-private partnerships,
commercial service agreements, anchor tenancy agreements, and
pay on delivery contracts. NASA has provided a model for many
of these options, including data purchases and NASA's
Commercial Orbital Transportation Services for working with
commercial companies cost-effectively to build confidence in
commercial capabilities. If the Department of Commerce requires
revised authority in order to implement one or more of these
options, the strategy should clearly note this but it should
not be a primary criterion in negatively assessing an option.
Section 11 directs NOAA to develop an independent weather
research and innovation advisory committee. The Committee
encourages NOAA to take advantage of the experience and
expertise of NOAA's Science Advisory Board and the
Environmental Information Services Working Group in carrying
out this section.
H.R. 2413 authorizes funding to allow NOAA to carry out a
balanced portfolio of research and development related to
weather forecasting and other areas. Authorization of funds for
the joint technology transfer initiative enabled by OAR's
Global Systems Division advanced data facility indicates the
Committee's desire to ensure that dedicated research-to-
operations be preserved in order to promote active partnerships
between NOAA line offices. The FY 2013 Disaster Relief
Appropriations Act ``kick-started'' important weather
forecasting improvement initiatives by providing initial
program funding and making possible the procurement of critical
enabling hardware such as a Global Hawk for the OAR unmanned
aircraft system research and development program and graphic
processing unit supercomputing infrastructure for revolutionary
new model development. The funding authorized by this bill will
follow through on these initiatives by making possible robust
3-5 year operational base technology development programs for
new aerial weather observing systems to provide better
meteorological data, higher performance research computing,
accelerated development of next generation global and national/
regional weather models, and an institutionalized OSSE process
capability. Dedicated OAR funding for the direct transfer of
new knowledge, technologies, and applications to the NWS and
other agencies and entities under a ``real-time research''
approach completes this vision. The bill authorizes
appropriations to be made out of the overall funding for
operations, research, and facilities at OAR.
IX. Committee Oversight Findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee held oversight hearings
and made findings that are reflected in the descriptive
portions of this report.
X. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the performance goals and
objectives of the Committee are reflected in the descriptive
portions of this report, including the goal to prioritize and
redirect the NOAA resources to a focused program of investment
on affordable and attainable advances in observational,
computing, and modeling capabilities to deliver substantial
improvement in weather forecasting and prediction of high
impact weather events.
XI. New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its
own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974.
XII. Advisory on Earmarks
In compliance with clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI,
the Committee finds that H.R. 2413, the ``Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013'', contains no earmarks.
XIII. Committee Cost Estimate
The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
XIV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, January 13, 2014.
Hon. Lamar Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2413, the Weather
Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf.
Enclosure.
H.R. 2413--Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013
Summary: H.R. 2413 would authorize appropriations over the
2014-2017 period for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) to improve forecasting of severe weather
events. The bill also would authorize NOAA to carry out various
other activities related to weather forecasting and research.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized and necessary
amounts, CBO estimates that implementing the legislation would
cost $530 million over the 2014-2019 period. Enacting H.R. 2413
would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-
as-you-go procedures do not apply.
H.R. 2413 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 2413 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
----------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2014-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Weather Forecasting Program:
Authorization Level........................ 113 120 120 120 0 0 473
Estimated Outlays.......................... 45 87 107 119 72 30 460
Planning and Research Activities:
Estimated Authorization Level.............. 14 14 14 14 14 14 84
Estimated Outlays.......................... 6 10 12 14 14 14 70
Total Changes:
Estimated Authorization Level.......... 127 134 134 134 14 14 557
Estimated Outlays...................... 51 97 119 133 86 44 530
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
legislation will be enacted in 2014 and that the authorized and
necessary amounts will be appropriated for each fiscal year.
Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for
similar NOAA programs. Although funds have probably been
appropriated through January 15, 2014, to conduct activities
authorized under the bill, CBO cannot identify those amounts
because NOAA has not yet allocated its 2014 appropriations for
those activities.
H.R. 2413 would authorize the appropriation of $112.5
million in 2014 and $120 million a year over the 2015-2017
period for NOAA to develop a program to improve forecasting of
severe weather events. Under the bill, NOAA would use those
funds to purchase equipment and conduct research to improve the
agency's forecasting capabilities and warning systems. In 2013,
the agency spent about $80 million to fund similar activities.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates
that implementing the program would cost $460 million over the
2014-2019 period.
The legislation also would require NOAA to conduct
additional activities related to weather research. H.R. 2413
also would establish committees to help NOAA prioritize
research initiatives and coordinate weather-related research
across federal agencies. Finally, the bill would establish
programs to allow NOAA employees and postdoctoral fellows to
work as visiting researchers at National Weather Service
facilities. Based on information provided by NOAA and assuming
appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that
conducting those activities would cost $70 million over the
2014-2019 period. Those amounts would be used to hire new
employees and contractors, purchase new equipment, and provide
grants to academic institutions to perform experiments related
to weather.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 2413
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Jeff LaFave; Impact on
state, local, and tribal governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact
on the private sector: Amy Petz.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
XV. Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
XVI. Compliance With H. Res. 5
A. Directed Rule Making. This bill does not direct any
executive branch official to conduct any specific rule-making
proceedings.
B. Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
XVII. Federal Advisory Committee Statement
Section 11 of the bill consolidates existing advisory
activities under a federal advisory committee to provide advice
for prioritizing weather research initiatives at NOAA and to
identify emerging technologies.
XVIII. Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
XIX. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short Title. This section established the short
title as the ``Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013''.
Section 2. Public Safety Priority. This section directs the
Under Secretary of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA Administrator) to prioritize weather-
related activities, including weather data, forecasts, and
warnings for the protection of lives and property.
Section 3. Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation.
This section directs the Assistant Administrator of the Office
of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) to undertake a
weather research program and directs the Assistant
Administrator to place priority on developing more accurate,
timely, and effective warnings and forecasts of high impact
weather events that endanger life and property. Section 3
further defines the specific program elements to include
advanced radar, aerial systems, computing/modeling, and
Observing System Stimulation Experiments (OSSE) and codifies a
longstanding joint OAR-National Weather Service (NWS) tech
transfer program, moving its funding from NWS. Finally, Section
3 directs NOAA to support weather research through competitive
grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements.
Section 4. Tornado Warning Improvement and Extension
Program. This section establishes a Tornado Warning Improvement
and Extension Program focused on developing and extending
accurate tornado forecasts and warnings beyond one hour in
order to reduce loss of life, injury, and damage to the
economy.
Section 5. Hurricane Warning Improvement Program. This
section establishes a Hurricane Warning Improvement Program
focused on extending accurate hurricane forecasts and warnings
in order to reduce loss of life, injury, and damage to the
economy.
Section 6. Weather Research and Development Planning.
Section 6 requires NOAA to develop a prioritized weather
research plan to guide activities authorized under the Act and
restore U.S. leadership in weather modeling, prediction, and
forecasting. The section requires the plan to also identify,
through consultation with the National Science Foundation, the
research necessary to integrate social science knowledge into
weather forecast and warning processes.
Section 7. Observing System Planning. Section 7 directs
NOAA to maintain a list of observation data requirements and
systematically evaluate the combination of systems necessary to
meet such requirements. This section further directs NOAA to
identify current and potential future data gaps in observing
capabilities and develop a range of options to address any
identified gaps.
Section 8. Observing System Simulation Experiments. This
section directs NOAA to undertake Observing System Simulation
Experiments (OSSEs) to quantitatively assess the relative value
and benefits of observing capabilities and systems. This
section identifies specific instances when an OSSE must be
performed. Section 8 specifies that OSSEs shall be conducted
prior to acquisition of government owned or leased operational
observing systems.
Section 9. Computing Resources Prioritization Report.
Section 9 directs NOAA to issue a plan that explains how it
intends to: (1) aggressively pursues the newest, fastest, and
most cost effective high performance computing technologies in
support of its weather prediction mission; (2) ensure a balance
between the research requirements; (3) take advantage of
advanced development concepts; (4) identify opportunities to
reallocate existing advanced computing resources from lower
priority uses to improve operational weather prediction; and
(5) harness new computing power in OAR and NWS and determine
how it can best be utilized for immediate improvement in
forecasting and experimentation.
Section 10. Commercial Weather Data. This section clarifies
that restrictions in existing law prohibiting the sale of
weather satellite systems to the private sector do not extend
to the purchase of weather data through contracts with
commercial providers or the placement of instruments on private
payloads. This section requires the Secretary of Commerce to
transmit a strategy that assesses the range of commercial
opportunities for obtaining both surface-based and space-based
weather observations. The strategy shall include an analysis of
financial or other benefits, methods to address planning and
budgeting, and identification of the changes needed to
facilitate effective implementation of such strategy.
Section 11. Weather Research and Innovation Advisory
Committee. Section 11 requires NOAA to draw upon existing
advisory activities in developing an advisory committee to
provide advice for prioritizing weather research initiatives at
NOAA and identify emerging technologies. The Committee shall be
composed of leading experts and innovators from all relevant
fields of science and engineering. The Committee will transmit
an annual report to the Undersecretary. The Undersecretary will
relay such reports to the Committee.
Section 12. Interagency Weather Research and Innovation
Coordination. This section requires the Director of the Office
of Science and Technology Policy to establish an Interagency
Committee for Advancing Weather Services. The Committee will
improve coordination of relevant weather research and forecast
innovation activities across the federal government.
Section 13. Visiting OAR Researchers Program. Section 13
grants the Assistant Administrator for OAR the authority to
establish a program to detail OAR researchers to NWS. If OAR
establishes the program, it allows between five and fifteen OAR
staff to spend up to one year on detail to the NWS to allow for
productive interaction to improve forecasting capabilities. The
Undersecretary shall submit an annual report to the Science
Committee detailing the program participation and highlighting
any innovations that come from this interaction.
Section 14. Visiting Fellows at NWS. This section allows
the Assistant Administrator for NWS to establish a program to
host post-doctoral fellows and academic researchers at any of
the National Centers for Environmental Prediction.
Section 15. Definitions. This section provides definitions
for terms in the bill.
Section 16. Authorization of Appropriations. If the Budget
Control Act's FY 2014 discretionary allocations increase,
Section 16 authorizes, out of funds made available for OAR's
operations, research, and facilities appropriations account,
$96.5 million for Fiscal Year 2014 to carry out the weather
research program established under section 3. It further
specifies that out of the $96.5 million provided in this
section, $77.5 million is authorized for weather laboratories
and cooperative institutes and $19 million is authorized for
weather and air chemistry research programs. It also authorizes
for FY 2014, $16 million to carry out the joint technology
transfer initiative described in section 3. If discretionary
allocations do not increase, the section authorizes $83 million
for Fiscal Year 2014 to carry out the weather research program
($65 million for weather laboratories and cooperative
institutes and $18 million for weather and air chemistry
research programs) as well as $14 million to carry out the
joint technology transfer initiative.
For FY 2015-2017, the section authorizes $100 million to
carry out the weather research program established under
section 3. It further specifies that out of the $100 million
provided in this section, $80 million is authorized for weather
laboratories and cooperative institutes and $20 million is
authorized for weather and air chemistry research programs.
Finally, this section also authorizes $20 million annually to
carry out the joint technology transfer initiative described in
section 3. The bill authorizes appropriations to be made out of
the overall funding for operations, research, and facilities at
OAR.
XX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is
printed in italic and existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 60161 OF TITLE 51, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 60161. Prohibition
Neither the President nor any other official of the
Government shall make any effort to lease, sell, or transfer to
the private sector, or commercialize, any portion of the
weather satellite systems operated by the Department of
Commerce or any successor agency. This prohibition shall not
extend to--
(1) the purchase of weather data through contracts
with commercial providers; or
(2) the placement of weather satellite instruments on
cohosted government or private payloads.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
MARKUP ON H.R. 2413,
WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013
----------
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Environment,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Chris
Stewart [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Chairman Stewart. The Environment Subcommittee on the
Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the
Subcommittee at any time. And I now recognize myself for an
opening statement.
Good morning and welcome to the morning's Environment
Subcommittee markup of H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013, introduced by our Subcommittee's Vice
Chairman, Jim Bridenstine, and I serve as a proud cosponsor on
this bill.
The legislation before us today prioritizes protection of
public safety and forward-looking weather research; improves
procurement of observing system data from space, air, and land;
and opens up NOAA's process to encourage private sector weather
solutions. The legislation is a long-term down payment to
upgrade our weather prediction system that has, in some cases,
fallen behind international standards.
This markup is a result of the Subcommittee's hard work in
both the 112th and 113th Congresses. This year we have had two
legislative hearings on restoring U.S. leadership in weather
forecasting, where expert witnesses provided testimony on the
text of Mr. Bridenstine's legislation, and informed members of
the need for improved weather forecasting and the potential for
improved research and technology transfer efforts.
Our efforts this Congress build on a similarly deep record
established in the 112th Congress, where the Committee explored
these issues through multiple hearings and oversight
activities. Collectively, this work helped to inform the
Committee of NOAA's weather forecasting challenges and
opportunities related to the programmatic management, research
prioritization, and commercial data acquisition.
I am pleased that the bill before us today reflects
improvement from its original discussion draft to include
recommendations from the witness testimony, which expands
resources available to achieve the objective of protecting
lives and property through weather research and improved
forecasting.
I'm also pleased to have been able to work with Ranking
Member Bonamici through this process, including by holding a
second hearing where we received valuable input from both NOAA
and outside witnesses. This input has led to an improved work
product and changes that were included in the introduced bill
as well as the Manager's Amendment that I will offer today.
We may not agree on every detail, but we certainly agree
that improved weather forecasting is an important national
priority, so I hope we can continue this cooperative effort
today and through our Full Committee markup.
And with that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stewart follows:]
Prepared Statement of Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart
Chairman Stewart: Good morning and welcome to this morning's
Environment Subcommittee markup of H.R. 2413, The Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013, introduced by our Subcommittee's Vice
Chairman, Jim Bridenstine, and I serve as a proud co-sponsor.
The legislation before us today prioritizes protection of public
safety and forward-looking weather research; improves procurement of
observing system data from space, air, and land; and opens up NOAA's
process to encourage private sector weather solutions. The legislation
is a long-term down payment to upgrade our weather prediction system
that has, in some cases, fallen behind international standards.
This markup is a result of the Subcommittee's hard work in both the
112th and 113th Congresses. This year, we have had two legislative
hearings on restoring U.S. leadership in weather forecasting, where
expert witnesses provided testimony on the text of Mr. Bridenstine's
legislation and informed Members of the need for improved weather
forecasting and the potential for improved research and technology
transition efforts.
Our efforts this Congress build on a similarly deep record
established in the 112th Congress, where the Committee explored these
issues through multiple hearings and oversight activities.
Collectively, this work helped to inform the Committee of NOAA's
weather forecasting challenges and opportunities related to
programmatic management, research prioritization, and commercial data
acquisition.
I am pleased that the bill before us today reflects improvement
from its original discussion draft to include recommendations from
witness testimony, which expands resources available to achieve the
objective of protecting lives and property through weather research and
improved forecasting.
I am also pleased to have been able to work with Ranking Member
Bonamici throughout this process, including holding a second hearing
where we received valuable input from both NOAA and outside witnesses.
This input has led to an improved work product, and changes that were
included in the introduced bill as well as the manager's amendment that
I will offer today. We may not agree on every detail, but we certainly
agree that improved weather forecasting is an important national
priority, so I hope we can continue this cooperative effort today and
through our Full Committee markup.
Chairman Stewart. I now yield to the Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee, Ms. Bonamici, for her remarks.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. On June
26, 2013, you chaired the second Subcommittee hearing on
restoring U.S. leadership in weather forecasting, and I thank
you very much for holding that hearing. The testimony was
intelligent and constructive. We had a very distinguished panel
of witnesses, all of whom provided extensive input and
expertise about ways we can improve weather forecasting.
I was encouraged by your willingness to work together on
this important issue, and following the June 26 hearing, I
asked my staff to continue to work with your office and the
Committee's majority staff to revise the bill to reflect the
expertise gathered during that hearing. Then, on July 3, I
heard that a markup had been scheduled for today, July 9. This
rushed timeline, especially over a holiday recess, did not give
us time to work together to improve this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I still want to work on this bill in a
bipartisan way, and I ask that we make a concerted effort
before we get to the full Committee markup to find language
that serves the public safety interest of all of our
constituents and is supported by the weather enterprise. Will
you commit to that, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Stewart. We'll certainly commit to working with
you in any way that we can. Thank you.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Experts who testified raised several issues that should be
addressed, and here are a few. First, we all agree that public
safety is critical, but not one witness who testified stated
that weather, which is about a two-week timeframe, should be a
higher research priority at NOAA than climate, which is about
what happens beyond two weeks. In fact, experts say that it
will be difficult to improve weather forecasting without
improving our understanding of climactic forces. Americans
living along our coasts won't be safer if we reduce progress on
seasonal tropical storm and hurricane warnings.
As witnesses at the July 26 hearing noted, these storm
forecasts are heavily dependent on accurate climate and ocean
modeling, which appears to be weakened under the current
vision--version of this bill. Hurricanes and tropical storms
are terribly damaging to our country, so it is inconceivable
that we would move a bill that purports to improve weather
forecasting but would simultaneously hinder NOAA's long-term
forecasting for these storms. And it won't help farmers if we
require NOAA to work on making five-day weather forecasts
marginally more precise at the expense of reducing our progress
on making useful seasonal drought forecasts.
Second, it is problematic that a bill to improve weather
forecasting seems largely to ignore the National Weather
Service, focusing instead on the Office of Oceanic and
Atmospheric Research, the line office responsible for research
within NOAA. NWS runs its own multimillion dollar R&D
enterprise and its own multimillion dollar research-to-
operations program. This bill appears to ignore those efforts.
I am concerned that the bill does an inadequate job of
something the witnesses emphasized: the need to bring better
coordination across OAR and NWS.
The witnesses provided many useful suggestions about how to
improve the research-to-operations and operations-to-research
efforts at NOAA. There are low-cost ways to achieve high impact
in generating innovation in NOAA's forecasting efforts and in
integrating advice from the broader community into NOAA's work.
Instead, we appear to be authorizing unnecessary expenditures.
For example, the bill authorizes OAR to spend $20 million on a
joint technology transfer initiative, but NWS currently spends
almost $80 million on research to operations. Do we need a
second initiative located in an office that does not do
operational forecasts? This seems to empower the wrong office
and also appears redundant and potentially wasteful.
Mr. Chairman, because this markup was noticed immediately
prior to the July 4 holiday, we have had very little time to
turn these ideas into legislative language, and importantly, to
vet that language with the weather community. I certainly hope
that there will be time for that before moving to a Full
Committee markup.
As it stands, the bill we are marking up today remains
flawed, a conclusion I reached listening to the testimony of
expert witnesses who were invited by the minority and by the
majority. This is an area where, if we have a chance to do
something good for the public and be truly bipartisan, we can
if my colleagues in the majority are willing.
I want to emphasize how concerned I am about this rushed
timeline. Members have not even had a chance to submit
questions for the record following our June 26 hearing, which
was less than two weeks ago, much less received answers back.
The record of that hearing is still open. This bill is
important to the safety of the public. Why rush it and risk not
getting it right?
Because of the rushed time frame for this Subcommittee
markup, I plan to submit substantive amendments at the Full
Committee markup. I remain optimistic that we can both improve
public safety and the weather enterprise if we work together,
and I look forward to doing that.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bonamici follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ranking Subcommittee Member Suzanne Bonamici
Mr. Chairman, on June 26, 2013, you chaired the second Subcommittee
hearing on restoring U.S. leadership in weather forecasting. Thank you
for holding that hearing. The testimony was intelligent and
constructive. We had a very distinguished panel of witnesses, all of
whom provided extensive input and expertise about ways we can improve
weather forecasting.
I was encouraged by your willingness to work together on this
important issue, and following the June 26th hearing, I asked my staff
to continue working with your office and the Committee's Majority staff
to revise the bill to reflect the expertise gathered during that
hearing.
Then on July 3rd, I heard that a markup had been scheduled for
today, July 9th. This rushed timeline, especially over a holiday
recess, did not give us time to work together to improve the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I still want to work on this bill in a bipartisan
way, and I ask that we make a concerted effort before we get to the
Full Committee to find language that serves the public safety interests
of all of our constituents and is supported by the weather enterprise.
Will you please commit to that? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The experts who testified raised several issues that should be
addressed. Here are a few.
First, we all agree that public safety is critical. But not one
witness who testified stated that weather, which is about a two-week
time frame, should be a higher research priority at NOAA than climate,
which is about what happens beyond two weeks. In fact, experts say that
it will be difficult to improve weather forecasting without improving
our understanding of climactic forces.
Americans living along our coasts won't be safer if we reduce
progress on seasonal tropical storm and hurricane warnings. As
witnesses at the June 26th hearing noted, these storm forecasts are
heavily dependent on accurate climate and ocean modeling, which appears
to be weakened under this bill. Hurricanes and tropical storms are
terribly damaging to our country, so it's inconceivable that we would
move a bill that purports to improve weather forecasting but would
simultaneously hinder NOAA's long-term forecasting for these storms.
And it won't help farmers if we require NOAA to work on making five-day
weather forecasts marginally more precise at the expense of reducing
our progress on making useful seasonal drought forecasts.
Second, it's problematic that a bill to improve weather forecasting
seems to largely ignore the National Weather Service, focusing instead
on the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, the line office
responsible for research within NOAA.
NWS runs its own multi-million dollar R&D enterprise and its own
multi-million dollar research to operations program. This bill appears
to ignore those efforts. I am concerned that the bill does an
inadequate job of something the witnesses emphasized--the need to bring
better coordination across OAR and NWS.
The witnesses provided many useful suggestions about how to improve
the research to operations and operations to research efforts at NOAA.
There are low-cost ways to achieve high impact in generating innovation
in NOAA's forecasting efforts and in integrating advice from the
broader community into NOAA's work.
Instead, we appear to be authorizing unnecessary expenditures. For
example, the bill authorizes OAR to spend $20 million on a joint
technology transfer initiative, but NWS currently already spends almost
$80 million on research to operations. Do we need a second initiative
located in an office that does not do operational forecasts? This seems
to empower the wrong office and also appears redundant and potentially
wasteful.
Mr. Chairman, because this markup was noticed immediately prior to
the July 4th holiday, we have had very little time to turn these ideas
into legislative language and, importantly, to vet that language with
the weather community. I certainly hope that there will be time for
that before moving to a Full Committee markup.
As it stands, the bill we are marking up today remains flawed, a
conclusion I reached listening to the testimony of the expert witnesses
who were invited by the Minority and by the Majority. This is an area
where we have a chance to do something good for the public and be truly
bipartisan if my colleagues in the Majority are willing.
I want to emphasize how concerned I am about this rushed timeline.
Members have not even had a chance to submit questions for the record
following our June 26th hearing, much less receive answers back. The
record of that hearing is still open. This bill is important to the
safety of the public; why rush it and risk not getting it right?
Because of the rushed time frame for this Subcommittee markup, I
plan to submit substantive amendments at the Full Committee markup. I
remain optimistic that we can improve both public safety and the
weather enterprise if we can work together.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 2(f) and House Rules XI 2(h)(4),
the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes on
matters on which the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 2413 for markup. The
clerk will report the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 2413, a bill to prioritize and redirect
NOAA resources to a focused program of investment on near-term,
affordable, and attainable advances in observational computing
and modeling capabilities to deliver substantial improvement in
weather forecasting and prediction of high-impact weather
events such as tornadoes and hurricanes and for other purposes.
[H.R. 2413 appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. Without objection, the bill is considered
as read.
I yield five minutes to Mr. Bridenstine for his statement
on the bill.
Mr. Bridenstine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me
to briefly describe my bill. I also want to thank the Chairman
for his leadership on this issue and for scheduling today's
markup on this very important and timely topic.
I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, my staff was here all week
last week, and we didn't get any calls about, you know, having
any desire to talk about any of these issues last week.
So let me briefly describe my bill. The Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013 will prioritize the mission of NOAA to
include the protection of lives and property and make funds
available to improve weather-related research, operations, and
computing resources. The bill both directs NOAA to undertake
quantitative cost-benefit assessments used in obtaining data
for forecasts and prepare a report outlining the options of
commercial opportunities for obtaining space-based weather
observations.
The centerpiece of this bill is a codification and
expansion of NOAA weather research activities specifically
directing the Agency to place ``priority emphasis on
development of more accurate and timely warnings and forecasts
of high-impact weather events that endanger life and
property.''
The bill also codifies an existing technology transfer
initiative carried out jointly between the Office of Oceanic
and Atmospheric Research and the National Weather Service aimed
at ensuring ``continuous development and transition of the
latest scientific and technological advances into NWS
operations.''
The bill creates a Tornado Warning Extension Program, the
goal of which shall be to ``develop and extend accurate tornado
forecasts and warnings beyond one hour in order to reduce
life--loss of life, injury, and damage to the economy.''
It also requires NOAA to prepare a program plan detailing
the research and development activities and associated budget
resources necessary to successfully realize the tornado
forecasting improvements.
The bill also directs NOAA to systematically evaluate the
combination of observing systems necessary to meet weather
forecasting data requirements and develop a range of options to
address potential data gaps. It further specifies that one
component of this planning effort shall include observing
system simulation experiments to quantitatively assess the
relative value and benefits of potential observing capabilities
and systems.
Finally, the bill clarifies that NOAA is not prohibited
from obtaining weather data through contracts with commercial
providers and directs NOAA to prepare a report assessing the
range of commercial opportunities for obtaining cost-effective,
space-based weather observations.
Mr. Chairman, my State has seen all too many times the
destructive power of tornadoes and severe weather. In the wake
of the latest outbreak in May that cost 48 lives, it is
painfully clear that we must do more. The good news is that we
can do more. In testimony before the Subcommittee, witnesses
detailed how a concentrated effort to improve forecasting
innovation would improve protection of lives and property. Dr.
Droegemeier, from the University of Oklahoma, testified that
with concerted research and technology development, zero deaths
from severe weather should be our ultimate goal. By making
weather research and the protection of lives a priority and
lives and property NOAA's top priority, the bill before us
today makes a small but important first step towards achieving
this goal.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bridenstine is unavailable.]
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. I now
recognize the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms.
Johnson, for five minutes.
Ms. Johnson Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And I would like to reiterate the comments of my colleague,
Ms. Bonamici. Weather should not be, cannot responsibly be, a
partisan issue. The whole country experiences severe weather,
and billions of dollars in business and investments are tied to
weather and seasonal forecasts. I am disappointed that we don't
have a bipartisan bill that all Members can rally behind at
today's markup. The Committee has never tried to pass a weather
authorization that lacked the support of the weather enterprise
stakeholders. This bill does not have the support now, and
based on the testimony at the June 26th hearing, I doubt it can
get that support without significant changes.
The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has had its
reputational ups and downs, but there are only one or two areas
in our jurisdiction that have been as historically nonpartisan
as weather forecasting. I know this is a hard Congress to find
space to cooperate, but I want to encourage all the Members of
the strongest terms to take the time to develop a strong,
nonpartisan piece of legislation. Reauthorizing the other
programs is a type of policy issue where the American people
just cannot understand why we can't get along. I hope that we
can get there before we schedule a markup at Full Committee,
and I want to lend my support to Chairman Stewart and Ranking
Member Bonamici in this effort.
The short time Members have been given to prepare for this
markup is not going to allow us to fix this bill today, but I
want to join Ms. Bonamici in asking the Chairman to work with
us in the coming days to produce a bill that we can all be
proud of when we are done.
Thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Full Committee Ranking Member Eddie Bernice
Johnson
Mr. Chairman, I would like to reiterate the comments of my
colleague, Ms. Bonamici.
Weather should not be, cannot responsibly be, a partisan issue. The
whole country experiences severe weather, and billions of dollars in
business and investments are tied to weather and seasonal forecasts. I
am disappointed that the efforts of our Chairman and Ranking Member on
this Subcommittee have not produced a bipartisan bill that all the
Members can rally behind.
The Committee has never tried to pass a weather authorization that
lacked the support of the weather enterprise. This bill does not have
that support now and, based on the testimony of June 26, I doubt it can
get that support without significant changes.
The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has had its
reputational ups and downs, but there are only one or two areas in our
jurisdiction that have been as historically non-partisan as weather
forecasting. I know this is a hard Congress to find space to cooperate,
but I want to encourage all the Members in the strongest terms to try
here. Reauthorizing weather programs is the type of policy issue where
the American people just cannot understand why we can't get along.
I hope that we can get there before we mark up at Full Committee,
and I will be the first to congratulate both Members if they can
honestly address the problems with the current bill and move us to a
place where all of us can be proud of our work. I will do anything I
can to help in this effort.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Is there any
further discussion of the bill?
Mr. Grayson. I would like to say a few words if I may.
Congressman Grayson, from Florida.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, sir. And we recognize the gentleman
from Florida.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, trying to be as dispassionate and objective
here as possible, you have heard the Ranking Members of the
Committee and the Subcommittee indicate to you that it wasn't
necessarily the best practice to release the draft of this bill
the day before the July 4th weekend when Congress was not in
session. It is our desire--everyone's desire here to come up
with a bill that is the best bill that we can get to the
Committee; understanding that, and understanding that sometimes
there is a choice we have to make between doing things fast and
doing things right, and having heard the arguments that were
made, will the Chairman consider a one-week recess for this
markup?
I will yield to the Chair.
Chairman Stewart. We appreciate that. And I would like to
point out that the bill was introduced on June 18th, which was,
of course, several weeks prior to the July 4th break. It has
been available to the Members for, you know, at least that
amount of time. And, of course, there was a discussion previous
to that even. That being a fact, I believe we will go ahead.
The Chair decides to go, and I will go ahead with the markup as
scheduled.
Mr. Grayson. Well, recalling my time--reclaiming my time, I
do want to point out that the Manager's Amendment was, in fact,
released just a few days ago, and in fact, the two amendments I
am offering today are premised upon specific changes that were
made from the original draft and what we were given on July
3rd. So I think they were material changes that were made. I
don't think you would dispute that, because you were the one
who made those changes. So----
Chairman Stewart. Yes----
Mr. Grayson [continuing]. With that in mind, I would prefer
to see us proceed in a manner where every Member of the
Committee feels that they have been given the proper time to
give their input and make this bill the best that it can be.
Chairman Stewart. Again, we appreciate your comments. As
the author of the Manager's Amendment, it's very--I think
generally technical in the sense that there are a few changes
that were made in the structure, in some cases even commas and
semicolons is all, very little substantive to it, and I believe
there has been adequate time, even over the last week, since we
brought the Manager's Amendment for anyone to read and have
input to that.
Mr. Grayson. Well, reclaiming my time. The price that you
all pay for doing this this way is that you haven't earned the
cooperation of the minority. That may mean something to you; it
may not. We both know that is going to be very hard to get any
bill passed through the Senate, any bill actually signed into
law when you are not making it a bipartisan bill but rather a
partisan bill.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Mr. Grayson. It seems to me to be a small price to pay for
the chance of making this a bipartisan bill to simply postpone
this proceeding for one week. There is nothing in this bill
that is time-sensitive. This is a bill that could have been
introduced three months ago, six months ago. It could be
introduced six months from now. It is not as if hurricanes are
going to go away in the meantime or tornadoes. So again, with
the possibility that we might be able to make this a bipartisan
bill, I have to ask you once more--and this will be the last
time, I promise--that we postpone these proceedings for one
week in order to try to make this a bipartisan bill.
Mr. Grayson. Mr. Grayson, once again, we appreciate your
comments, and thank you for this being the last time that
you're going to ask. That's good to know. We believe there has
been adequate time since the bill was introduced and adequate
time since the Manager's Amendment was introduced. Again, it's
not substantive. Many of it--much of it is almost entirely
grammatical in its nature and we believe there has been time--
adequate time for us to proceed. So thank you.
Mr. Grayson. All right. I yield the balance of my time.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. If I could just put this in a little
perspective, 10 days is a long time to be able to consider a
bill, and I don't know. I have been here a number of years, and
we would have been grateful to have had 10 days' notice in
knowing what the bill was. And people do work over the 4th of
July break, just to note. I know maybe your staff doesn't. My
staff worked up until I think the 2nd or 3rd of July. I was in
contact with them at any time. That means that actions could
have been taken and calls to the office here and to the various
Members and to the Chairman's office would have been returned.
So I just would think that the criticism that in some way
the day before the 4th of July break--business didn't stop that
day. It went on during the week of 4th of July, at least it did
in my office. So if indeed there was some kind of an attempt to
short-circuit the right of the minority to have time for
consideration, I would think that that would be a very serious
charge and that we should take a look at ourselves, and is that
something that really happened and deal with it and make it
right. I do think that the criticism here, however, is
unjustified.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grayson. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I certainly will.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you. Just to respond, I don't think
anybody is suggesting that nobody did anything since the 3rd of
July. In fact, Ms. Bonamici has introduced four amendments that
were produced since July 3rd, and I have introduced two. That
is not the same as saying that we have had enough time to
thoroughly go over this and make this the best bill that it can
be. The text that we are working from is something that was
given to us on July 3rd. I don't need to tell you what happened
on July 4th.
July 6th and 7th were a weekend, and this is the first full
day back--we were back in session after a week-long recess. I
don't think that one can do one's best legislating under those
conditions. I am not saying that your office couldn't. I am
saying that our office had to extend itself to do what we were
able to do by today. Probably Ms. Bonamici feels the same way.
That is the sentiment she expressed. And what is the rush? But
in any event, I understand your point, and I guess we can
proceed.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, thanks to both the gentleman. And I
would remind all of us, the purpose of this markup is to
discuss and to improve the bill, to offer amendments if those
are appropriate and to vote on those amendments. So we are in
the process of doing, I think, Mr. Grayson, what you are hoping
to accomplish. And rather than delay that, I believe that we
should proceed as scheduled with the understanding that there
has been adequate time and that there will be time in the
future if there are concerns before this bill is brought up
before the Full Committee.
So with that final comment on that, again, we will proceed.
Although I am hesitant to ask this question, is there any
further discussion on the bill?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I did want to
respond to some of the concerns that have been raised about the
timing. And just so--not to be defensive, but I want to explain
that there were calls in to talk with staff. The markup was
scheduled on July 3rd for today, and, of course, as Mr. Grayson
has explained, July 4th was a holiday, and then we had a
weekend intervening. The concern isn't just with our staff
cooperating with each other, which I hope we will continue to
do. The concern is that with a lot of these amendments and with
this legislation, it is important to get the input of the
weather community. We want to make sure that we have a bill
that addresses the real needs out there to improve weather
forecasting and that it is also workable and effective for the
stakeholders involved. So it isn't just our staff needing to
communicate with each other, even though it was a holiday
weekend; it is getting input from the people who will be
implementing this legislation that is important as well. And I
just wanted to explain that, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Again, and, Ms. Bonamici, I appreciate
your comments. May I remind you and other Members that we have,
I think, gone to extraordinary measures in order to do just
what you've said. We held two hearings on this. We held a
subsequent hearing at the request of the minority. We allowed
them and others to invite their own witnesses once again, and
we feel like we have had the opportunity to get input from the
experts in the field. Without objection, and I ask unanimous
consent that the bill is considered as read and open to
amendment at any point and the Members proceed with the
amendments in the order listed on the roster. So ordered.
The first amendment on the roster is an amendment offered
by the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. And the clerk
shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Ms. Bonamici
of Oregon, amendment number 001. Page 2, lines 4 through 11,
strike----
[The amendment of Ms. Bonamici appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize, once again, Ms. Bonamici for five minutes to
explain the amendment.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This
amendment would strike Section 2 of the bill. Two weeks ago--
well, actually less than two weeks ago, the Subcommittee
received testimony regarding this bill. This section raised a
significant amount of concern for the witnesses of that
hearing. Every witness said that it would be potentially
counterproductive to prioritize weather research over climate
or oceans research as the section does.
Mr. Chairman and Committee Members, we all care about
public safety, but those expert witnesses were very clear that
the most significant research challenges in understanding
weather processes and improving forecasting ability lie beyond
the arbitrary boundary used to separate weather from climate,
which is just 14 days. They also noted that ocean atmosphere
interface questions are significant for weather forecasting.
Nowhere is this more true than as it relates to tropical
storms. If what you want is to have a more powerful seasonal
forecast about the severity of hurricanes, for example, or if
you want to understand the generation and behavior of the
storms, you have to study oceans and climate.
I want to add that Dr. Droegemeier, who is here and
testified from Oklahoma, said this: ``My final comment concerns
climate and weather in a mutually reinforcing context. All of
us recognize the importance of balance between weather and
climate investments in our Nation's research and operations
portfolio, yet the traditional line dividing weather and
climate is increasingly blurred as climate models are now run
at resolutions approaching those of weather models.''
Consequently, we would do well to consider weather and
climate not as two distinct elements at the extreme ends of the
spectrum, but rather as inseparable parts of the Earth's
system.
Mr. Chairman, because this language, I believe, is
counterproductive to improving weather forecasting and
anticipating that we will be able to work out some language
that would be a better reflection of the expert testimony we
received, my amendment would strike this section.
I also want to point out, Mr. Chairman, that it has been
mentioned this morning that Dr. Droegemeier talked about the
goal of zero deaths. But that, Mr. Chairman, is not in the
bill, so we need to have further conversations about how we can
improve weather forecasting without limiting the work of NOAA
and its relevant line offices, which, I also want to add, are
not defined in this section.
Mr. Chairman, although I have serious concerns about this
section of the bill and offer this amendment, as I explained,
we have received pretty clear testimony that this section is
problematic and could be counterproductive to the goal of
ending--improving weather forecasting. However, given your
commitment, Mr. Chairman, to work with us as we move forward, I
will withdraw this amendment and look forward to having further
conversations about addressing this issue as we work to improve
this bill, hopefully before the full Committee markup.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Okay. And thanks once again, Ms.
Bonamici.
And if there are no further comments that anyone would like
to add after your comments, we appreciate your willingness to
withdraw the bill, and we look forward to again working with
you to hopefully improve this before it goes before the Full
Committee.
The second amendment on the roster is the amendment offered
by the Chair. And the clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Mr. Stewart of
Utah.
[The amendment of Mr. Stewart appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. Ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize myself for five minutes to explain this
amendment.
This two-page Manager's Amendment, as I have said, is
comprised of a handful of technical and clarifying changes to
the bill. Most of these are simple wordsmithing. The following
three are minor clarifying, substantive provisions made in
response to valuable testimony submitted by witnesses at our
two hearings on this bill.
First, on the June 26th hearing, testimony from NOAA
Administrator Kathy Sullivan expressed concern that the bill
not stipulate that only Observatory System Simulation
Experiments, otherwise known as OSSEs, be used to assess the
relative value and benefits of the observing systems. This was
never the intent of the bill's requirement that NOAA undertake
observing system planning and prioritization to address
potential gaps in weather satellite coverage, so the amendment
clarifies that NOAA use not only OSSEs but also observing
system experiments and other assessment tools in these planning
efforts.
Second, Administrator Sullivan recommended that Congress
not require OSSEs to benefit the--to assess the benefits of
existing systems and instead focus resources on potential new
systems. We agree that this is a concern and appreciate NOAA's
explanation of why this is important. And so the amendment
strikes language requiring OSSEs on existing systems, once
again improving the bill because of the testimony of our
witnesses.
Finally, the amendment clarifies that in carrying out the
requirement to conduct OSSEs, NOAA shall prioritize assessments
of the value of data from both global positioning system radio
occultation and a geostationary hyperspectral sound global
constellation. These technologies, which the Committee has
received testimony on at multiple hearings, hold great promise
to improve severe weather forecasting and to minimize the
harmful effects of potential weather satellite data gap.
It is our understanding that NOAA is pursuing OSSEs on
these technologies using funding from Hurricane Sandy
supplemental spending bill, so the bill codifies and
prioritizes this effort.
And with that, I yield back.
Are there any other comments on this amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move to
strike the last word.
Chairman Stewart. So ordered.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to briefly
comment on the Manager's Amendment. I am generally supportive
of the technical corrections in this amendment, although they
do not remedy all of the concerns raised by Members and the
witnesses. I do find it necessary, however, to discuss and
object to the portion of this amendment that amends Section 7
of the bill.
Section 7 of the bill, entitled ``Observing System
Simulation Experiments,'' requires NOAA to run a specific type
of simulation experiment on a host of NOAA acquisitions. And,
as you said, we have heard from several witnesses at the
hearing on June 26 that this was an overly prescriptive
requirement. We heard testimony that there are multiple tools
available to NOAA to evaluate acquisitions, and different
approaches may be more appropriate in different circumstances.
I would note that Dr. Droegemeier, the majority's own
witness at the June 26 hearing, spoke to this issue
specifically saying that, I think, the only thing that we are
saying is basically there are many tools available, probably
let the scientists decide which ones are most appropriate. And
I agree with that sentiment wholeheartedly.
Unfortunately, the Manager's Amendment only adds to the
prescriptive nature of this requirement by directing NOAA to
analyze two specific potential acquisitions with this tool. I
would note that these appear to be proposals from two specific
companies, which only adds to my discomfort here. With this
language, we are taking a step back.
Based on what the expert witnesses--including the
majority's witness--said in our Subcommittee, it is clear we
should either be deleting this section of the bill or, at the
very least, making it much less prescriptive. Instead, this
section of the Manager's Amendment makes it more prescriptive.
For this reason, I oppose the amendment and hope this is
something we can address as we move forward.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. Again, let me
reiterate it was never the intention of this bill's requirement
that NOAA undertake observing systems planning and
prioritization to address these gaps in coverage. The amendment
simply clarifies that NOAA use not only OSSEs but also
observing system experiments and other assessments in these
planning tools.
And if I could finally reiterate with this, the overall
importance of the OSSEs, which have been roundly endorsed by
many different weather experts and stakeholders, is critical in
NOAA's gap mitigation planning and are in fact already underway
as a result of funding provided by the hurricane supplemental
spending.
Is there further discussion on this amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, the Ranking Member.
Ms. Bonamici. If I could be recognized again, Mr. Chairman,
I just--I would just like to clarify the section I am referring
to is on page two of the amendment where it calls for amendment
on page nine after line 3, inserting a new subsection of
priority OSSEs that does use the term ``shall complete OSSEs.''
So there is a section that adds required mandatory OSSEs in
certain circumstances.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you. Is there further discussion on
the amendment?
Mr. Grayson. Just a moment, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes. The gentleman from Florida.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you. I just want to observe that support
for this amendment should--could not be construed necessarily
as support for Section 7 because amendment number 4 that we
will be considering would strike the entire section. So one
could vote for this amendment and still agree with Ms. Bonamici
about her point.
Thank you. I yield the rest of my time.
Chairman Stewart. And so noted. Thank you.
Any further discussion?
Hearing none, the vote occurs on the Stewart amendment.
All in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, say no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The next amendment on the roster is the amendment offered
by the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Grayson. And the clerk shall
report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Mr. Grayson of
Florida, amendment number 143.
[The amendment of Mr. Grayson appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize Mr. Grayson for five minutes to explain his
amendment.
Mr. Grayson. Chairman Stewart, Ranking Member Bonamici, the
amendment before you is a simple technical amendment that I
hope we can all support this morning. It adds only five words
to the bill, ``such as tornadoes and hurricanes.'' My amendment
would add these five words to page 3, line 13 of the bill
immediately after the word ``severe storms.'' The exact same
phrase that these words provide appears in a discussion draft
of this bill that was posted on the Committee's website until
yesterday, one day before this markup.
As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, this bill would authorize
almost half a billion dollars for the research being described
in Section 3 of the bill, specifically, $400 million. I feel it
is important that the words ``tornado'' and ``hurricane''
explicitly appear in Section 3 at least once. Currently, that
is not the case, so I urge support for this simple technical
amendment.
And I yield the balance of my time.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Grayson.
Mr. Bridenstine.
Mr. Bridenstine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida for his
amendment. This amendment adds reference for tornadoes and
hurricanes to severe storm forecasting within the bill. And I
believe this is a good amendment.
While our Congressional Districts face very different
extreme weather events, I do not believe that this is overly
prescriptive at all, and I am glad that we both agree for the
need to improve forecasting capabilities. I am honored to
support this amendment.
Ms. Edwards. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, Ms. Edwards.
Ms. Edwards. Mr. Chairman, you know, I had not planned to
speak on this, but I have to tell you that in reviewing Mr.
Grayson's amendment, understanding that it may be accepted by
the majority, it is case in point why it was necessary to
review this and to move forward. We would not have actually had
to do an amendment had we had the kind of bipartisan
cooperation that the Ranking Member spoke about earlier.
And so looking at Mr. Grayson's amendment and seeing
something as simple as adding such as hurricanes and tornadoes,
that the American public would have been shocked that we would
have been able to move forward a bill without an amendment that
wouldn't recognize that we had these kind of severe storms,
given what this country and what parts of this country have
experienced.
And so I just want to echo the concern that sometimes
moving fast does not always produce the best results, and this
just happens to be one example of that, although I am
supportive of the amendment.
And with that, I yield.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Edwards.
And once again, I believe that that is the purpose of these
Subcommittee markups is to do what you have asked and all of us
hope to do here. And I just have to reject the statement that
the Chair nor the majority has not made an effort to work in a
bipartisan manner. I believe that Ms. Bonamici and I have had a
relationship where we have tried to do that. We are going to
continue to try to do that.
I agree with the statement made by others that this is a
Subcommittee that should be bipartisan, and we want to be
bipartisan, but I don't believe that we have violated that
effort. In fact, I don't believe that the timing of this bill
is an indication of our unwillingness to be bipartisan in this
effort. It is simply not. We want to work with the minority,
and we will work with the minority. And I think that some may
be reading too much into the simple timing of this bill when
was not our intention at all.
Having said that----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. If we are going to demand before we even
start the amendment process that every piece of legislation be
considered perfect before we can go through the perfection
process of amendments, this--we would never get anything done.
There would never be a bill that was perfect enough that a
comma shouldn't be changed from one place to another. That's
what this process is all about. That's why you have
Subcommittee meetings.
And sometimes, by the way, there aren't Subcommittee
meetings of markups, and it goes directly to the Full
Committee. And the fact that we are right here, right now
perfecting this bill demonstrates, I think, good will on the
part of the leadership and a commitment to making sure we have
good legislation by being open to amendments from both sides of
the aisle. So I would commend you rather than suggest that any
criticism of you and how you have handled yourself is in any
way justified. Thank you.
Chairman Stewart. All right. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher.
Is there any further discussion on the amendment?
Hearing none, let me make a note here that we have probably
35 minutes to complete these hearings if we can, so we are
going to try and move a little more quickly, taking the time as
necessary to discuss it, of course.
Hearing on the vote occurs on the Grayson amendment to
number 143.
All in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, say no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The next amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by
the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. And the clerk shall
report the amendment.
The Clerk. H.R.--amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Ms.
Bonamici of Oregon, amendment number 002.
[The amendment of Ms. Bonamici appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered. I recognize Ms. Bonamici for
five minutes to explain the amendment.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
This amendment strikes the requirement that the assistant
administrator for OAR is required to run observing system
simulation experiments or so-called OSSEs. The Subcommittee
learned in our June 26 hearing that OSSEs are not the only
analytical tool available to evaluate potential configurations
of observing systems on weather forecasting, and we talked
about that again this morning. According to that expert
testimony, other tools have been developed that are quicker,
less expensive, and potentially more robust. I expect that if
we modified the language of the section to simply require the
use of the more appropriate--most appropriate and effective
analytical tool, which in some cases would be an OSSE and some
cases not, we would have broad bipartisan support.
I hope we can get there before we mark up at Full
Committee, and barring that, I ask that we strike this section
as it now stands, particularly because of the provisions that
were added in the amendment you offered, Mr. Chairman. And I
hope we can work with knowledgeable members of the weather
enterprises to craft a responsible language.
Additionally, as I noted, the Manager's Amendment now
appears to create an earmark for the benefit of one or two
companies, and I don't know what this would cost the taxpayer,
but it is unclear why we should do this or what we hope to
learn.
With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you. I moved to last--strike the
last word and recognize myself to speak on the amendment.
The amendment would strike Observing System Simulation
Experiments from the legislation, and I oppose this amendment.
OSSEs play a very important part in the observing system.
Planning for NOAA, these tools are available at a quantitative
easing--assessing of the relative value and the benefits of
potential observing capabilities and systems which aid in
NOAA's accurate forecasting abilities. Two weeks ago, the
current head of NOAA, Dr. Kathy Sullivan, called these
experiments one of the tools to help determine what new data or
technologies will yield the best improvement in forecasting
accuracy. Likewise, former NOAA Administrator called Observing
System Simulation Experiments a powerful tool to inform our
strategies for investing in observing networks.
NOAA recently contracted with Riverside Global Science
Solutions to assess its approach to future satellite gaps, and
their report stated clearly that OSSEs should be a normal part
of NOAA planning and evaluations. Moreover, OSSEs are critical
to determine how best to mitigate the degradation of NOAA
weather services and should be used to inform decisions which
proposed alternatives and combinations of alternatives provide
the best cost-benefit to gap mitigation.
And with that, I yield back.
Are there others who would like to address the amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes. I recognize Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I am not disagreeing that OSSEs can be a valuable tool,
as we heard in the testimony. But, as explained, the amendment
would strike the provision, and I hope that we can continue to
work to make this a better section, even in light of the
Manager's Amendment.
We have heard pretty clear testimony that the section is
problematic, but given the Chairman's commitment to work with
me as we move forward, I will withdraw this amendment and hope
we can discuss this issue further and work out bipartisan
language regarding the use of OSSEs before this bill moves
forward for a markup at the Full Committee.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Okay. Thank you. And with that, the
amendment is withdrawn.
The next amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by
the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Grayson. And the clerk shall
report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Mr. Grayson of
Florida, amendment number 144.
[The amendment of Mr. Grayson appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize Mr. Grayson for five minutes to discuss his
amendment.
Mr. Grayson. Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply
reestablishes equal treatment under this bill for hurricanes
and tornadoes. I recognize that our time is very limited this
morning, as the Chairman has already pointed out. Maybe it
might be better for me to just reserve the balance of my time
in the hope that we can move quickly on this.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Chairman Stewart. The Chair recognizes the reserving
balance of your time.
Are there others who would like to speak to the amendment?
The Vice Chairman, Mr. Bridenstine.
Mr. Bridenstine. I would just like to support the gentleman
from Florida in this amendment.
Chairman Stewart. Was there further discussion on the
amendment?
Hearing none, the vote occurs on the Grayson amendment.
All in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, say no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
The next amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by
the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. The clerk shall
report the amendment. My apologies. Ms. Edwards.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Ms. Edwards of
Maryland, amendment number 003.
[The amendment of Ms. Edwards appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize Ms. Edwards now for five minutes to explain her
amendment.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My amendment would strike Section 8 of the bill entitled
``Computing Resources Prioritization Report.'' This section
requires NOAA to issue a plan for high-performance computing
support of its advanced research and operational weather
prediction models. Included in this plan, NOAA must identify
opportunities to reallocate existing computer resources to
improve operational weather prediction.
While this language, on its face, seems like it would be
helpful to move towards a shared goal of improving operational
weather prediction models, I believe in reality it would be
detrimental to the Agency and to our Nation. NOAA's weather and
climate computing takes place both in the Office of Oceans and
Atmosphere Research, OAR, as well as the National Weather
Service.
While they are not rigid lines, much of the weather and
climate research computing takes place at OAR, and much of the
operational weather computing takes place at the National
Weather Service. The provision in this bill attempts to take
the resources of OAR with the functions of the National Weather
Service. The result of this would be a reduction in research
computing focused on climate and weather. This amendment really
aims to undermine climate research computing, and I simply
cannot support this.
The witnesses at the June 26th Subcommittee hearing were
clear. All of these activities are critical for the improvement
of weather and climate forecasting, and each is related. Not
one of the witnesses advocated the approach that has been taken
in the majority bill, none, not a single one, not even the
witnesses called by the majority. Even after holding two
hearings, no witness was able to support this effort. Moreover,
acting Administrator Sullivan specifically cautioned against
this approach in her testimony at the hearing.
I believe that the proper path forward would be to find
sufficient resources to improve all of these vital activities
which save lives and are critical to the economy.
Of course, I realize that the hands of my Republican
colleagues are tied in this respect as they continue to push
for flat or lowered funding levels, even as we require and
expect more of our science agencies, a wholesome problem on
this Committee and the Congress.
In particular, I would like to highlight that although this
bill and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim a
desire to improve operational weather computing at NOAA, they
all voted against providing NOAA with the resources to do just
that in the Sandy Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013.
That legislation provided NOAA with funds to improve
specifically operational and weather research computing. Acting
Administrator Sullivan testified that these funds will allow
NOAA to improve their operational computing power tenfold by
2015.
So my colleagues had a chance to do something concrete to
improve the same operational computing at NOAA and yet they
chose not to. I think it is a better approach to recognize the
resources required to accomplish these goals and to ensure
these improvements, rather than prescribing organizational
changes that truly serve to be a detriment in the long term
while ignoring the real challenges. I urge adoption of the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Edwards.
The Chair recognizes the Vice Chair, Mr. Bridenstine.
Mr. Bridenstine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This amendment would strike Section 8 of this bill, the
computing resources prioritization reports, which directs NOAA
to issue a plan for high-performance computing support of its
advanced research and operational weather prediction models. I
oppose this amendment. It is crucial that computer resources
remain a top priority to advance weather forecasting research
and models. Over the years, an imbalance has formed between the
resources available for weather and climate modeling research.
Do we have a--the graph there? Computer resources available to
weather are substantially lower than that of climate.
[Chart]
Mr. Bridenstine. I would like to show on the screen a chart
developed by Dr. Cliff Mass at the University of Washington.
The first five bars illustrate the computing power of NOAA's
climate-focused supercomputers. The first five bars are NOAA's
climate computing supercomputers. The last bar shows the
capability of the National Weather Service's operational
computer. I don't know if you guys can see the last bar. I
can't see it from here. The imbalance is clear, and the chart
speaks for itself, which is why the bill includes a provision
requiring a review. It's just a review of how NOAA's
supercomputers can be put to use for weather forecasting, not
just climate science.
I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Bridenstine.
I would move to strike the last word and recognize myself
to speak on the amendment.
Ms. Edwards, we are sympathetic to your pleas for funding,
and in a perfect world, we would be able to fund everything
that we would like to. We would be able to fund many needs that
perhaps go unfunded today. But the reality is is that we have
to prioritize and we have to choose, that one of the great
dangers, I believe, facing the future of our Nation is our
inability to do--be effective at that. And I believe that this
bill helps us move NOAA and other--and setting their priorities
move forward in an effective way.
Is there further discussion on the amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. The Chair recognizes the Ranking Member.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move to
strike the last word.
Chairman Stewart. So ordered.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to state my support for Ms. Edwards' amendment. Yes,
we should increase our support for operational weather
computing, but I cannot agree with increasing support for the
operational weather computing by reducing weather and climate
research computing resources, and that is what Section 8 of
this bill attempts to do.
I also want to note, as Ms. Edwards did, that this Congress
just recently appropriated millions of dollars for upgrades to
NOAA's operational weather computing. That was about $25
million for a supercomputer that was in the Sandy supplemental
project so that the National Weather Service will, once
implemented, have the most powerful computer and computing
ability, probably, in the world.
Acting Administrator Sullivan testified that as a result of
those appropriated dollars, NOAA's operational weather
computing power would increase tenfold by 2015. So this seems
like an issue that we just recently addressed.
We need to be financially responsible, Mr. Chairman. And
so, as we move forward, although we have to have sustained
support for improvements to both operational and research
computing at NOAA, the best way to do that is continue
supporting NOAA when they make their budget requests. Reducing
other important parts of the agency is counterproductive, and I
cannot support that.
For this reason, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I
yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici.
Is there further discussion on the amendment?
Mr. Neugebauer. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Mr. Neugebauer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to rise
in opposition to this amendment. I think your chart was very
compelling, and as I understand Section 8, it basically says
to--six months after enactment of this act, that NOAA Chief
Information Officer, in coordination with the Assistant
Administrator of OAR, they'll come up with a plan on what is
the best utilization of the computer resources that they have
to make sure that they're dedicating enough resources to the
prediction side. Am I missing something here?
Chairman Stewart. I don't believe so, Mr. Neugebauer.
Mr. Neugebauer. Yes. And, as I think the Chairman pointed
out, you know, we don't have an unlimited amount of resources
here. And every agency--every federal agency in our entire
government is going to have to be looking at how they're
utilizing American, hard-working taxpayers' money and making
sure that we are utilizing them in the most efficient and
effective way. And I think moving some of those dollars away
from research on climate change to saving lives for weather
prediction--probably the American people think that is a pretty
good investment on our behalf. And so I urge other Members not
to support this amendment.
Mr. Takano. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes. And thank you, Mr. Neugebauer. And,
I am sorry, was there--
Mr. Takano. I seek recognition, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes.
Mr. Takano. Mr. Chairman, I would like to comment briefly
and then yield the balance of my time to my colleague, Ms.
Edwards. It has become apparent to me that the pleas of balance
are disingenuous, that this is really an attempt to undermine
research efforts on the Federal Government on climate change.
You know, I find it absurd that the balance--the term
balance is being used to justify this with charts that purport
to show an inordinate amount of resources being spent on
climate--the federal resources that we must continue to support
acquiring knowledge and acquiring better understanding of the
total systems in order to understand the more localized effects
that result in weather.
I yield the balance of my time to my colleague.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you to my colleague, Mr. Takano.
And I just want to point out to the majority that the chart
that has been shown--and it is important for the public to
understand this--does not reflect the $25 million at all, not
even on the chart. And so, you know, I think, you know, if we
are thinking about fiscal responsibility, then it is
responsible for us to acknowledge the $25 million that is
actually already going to the National Weather Service that
acting Director Sullivan pointed out to us to show how they
plan to raise the computing capacity.
I would also like to say again that I understand, because
it has been clear on this Subcommittee, it has been clear and
our Full Committee, that there is a deep animus to anything
related to climate research on the side of the majority. But
the fact is that climate impacts weather and that our experts
need to have the full knowledge and expertise about this impact
so that there can be better forecasting so that it works for
our farmers and for our industry.
And I suppose you can bury your head in the sand, if there
is any sand left on the beach, when another severe climate
event happens and our weather services are not able to keep up
with that for the American public.
And so those are the choices that we have, but the reality
is that whoever causes climate, wherever it is caused, it is
impacting weather and it impacts our weather forecasting. And
it is important for us as policymakers to stop having this
silly debate and to provide the agencies with the resources
that they need to respond so that our communities are not
further devastated by the impacts of severe weather events.
And I would just close by saying to my colleagues, really
pleading with them, that for our coastal communities, for our
communities in the midsection of our States that are
experiencing very, very severe weather events and not to have
the kind of capacity that we need to save lives is very
irresponsible, and I would rather see us make sure that we
spend those resources appropriately, recognizing money that has
already been designated, funding that has already been
designated to provide for greater computing power and not to
destroy the element that is there that is going to help our
scientists better understand the impact of climate on weather.
And when another community is devastated, whether it is
this year or next year or the year after, I guess I would leave
it to the scientists on this Committee to explain to the
American public how we failed them.
And with that, I yield.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, the Chair recognizes Mr.
Sensenbrenner.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Mr. Chairman, I moved to strike the last
word and yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Chairman Stewart. So noted.
Mr. Bridenstine. Thank you, Mr. Sensenbrenner.
I just would like to bring up the chart one more time if
that is possible.
[Chart]
Mr. Bridenstine. Okay. So the last bar there is a bar that
is significant. And it is true that $25 million is not included
in that last bar and it is true that that would be a tenfold
increase. But when you go from that bar, which is pretty much--
you can't see it from here. It doesn't--you increase it by
tenfold and it's still the lowest bar on the chart. This does
not in any way reflect balance, as the folks on the other side
of the aisle has--have tried to insinuate, that we are
unbalanced. This is what is unbalanced, if you look at that
chart. And if you increase the last bar by 10 times, it is
still going to be the lowest bar on the chart.
What we do need is we do need balance because the priority
here is to save lives. I have constituents in Oklahoma who have
been dealing with these, you know, catastrophic weather events
for hundreds of years in Oklahoma we have been dealing with
this. And certainly, our goal here is not to render ineffective
the research on climate. Our goal here is to save lives, and to
do that, we have to prioritize on weather forecasting and
warning.
I yield back.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. I yield back as well.
Chairman Stewart. I thank both the gentleman. The Chair
would comment as some of the things that are being said. It is
not our intention at all to undermine climate research. As the
Vice Chairman has pointed out, we are simply trying to bring
some balance and to set priorities, and we recognize that there
are people in coastal areas that have great concerns with
climate research, but there are millions of people living in
the central and southern parts of this Nation that have great
interest as well in weather research. And we have seen the
devastating impacts very clearly that that can have on their
lives this last spring and will continue to.
So, with that, is there any further discussion on the
amendment?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman, just--I move to strike the
last word.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. And I appreciate the Chairman's sincerity
and his efforts to reach out to the minority on this. And let
me just say I think that you have struck a balanced approach,
but if I could speak up for an unbalanced approach for a
moment.
As this chart amply demonstrates, for the last 10 to 15
years there has been a huge imbalance in the passing out and
the granting of research grants by--whether it is Department of
Energy or whether it is NOAA or whatever agency it happens to
be. And that huge imbalance, in order to correct that, will
take--will mean that we have to focus more heavily on one side
than the other. You correct imbalances by focusing on the
imbalance. And to suggest that that is itself not trying to
make things better but are--is an unbalanced approach is
actually irrational.
Let me suggest from a distance, and you take a look at how
much money the Federal Government has been putting into climate
research, it's no wonder those of us who are skeptical that
mankind is causing the climate to change, no wonder that we are
a bit disturbed because climate research, if you--with a close
look has become synonymous with research cronyism.
Over the last 10 years we have seen--and actually 20 years
now, we have seen grant after grant being given for--to anyone
who can come up with something that will excite the public
about global climate change in a way that would suggest that
mankind is responsible in order to justify restrictions on
human activity or control of human activity by the government.
We have seen everything from the polar bears are disappearing
and all the way to the--my coastal district is going to be
flooded, and there is not going to be any more sand, which is--
was just mentioned by one of our colleagues.
This type of basic research aimed at alarming the public to
the point that the public will accept further levels of a
decline in their standard of living or control of their lives
and their economic activities is something that is very
disturbing to us and should not be taken lightly. That is one
side of the--what we are talking about in a broader view. And
while I accept the Chairman's balanced approach, I am very
happy to be the aggressive person in trying to point out the
nonsense that we are talking about.
Second of all, the people that we are--that are the most
concerned about making decisions and trying to determine where
the best use of our tax dollars is going to be, the things that
will really help our own people, the people--will protect our
people from weather incidents that cause people to die or lose
their income, those people who are the most vocal about
sequestration are now trying to suggest that we can't
prioritize, and we can't in any way try to rectify the fact
that these research grants have been so out of balance for so
long.
And so I would suggest that we--this type of debate is
fundamental to people who would kind of have an honest
disagreement on whether or not the climate cycles are caused by
human activity or caused by the sun. That's an honest
disagreement, and I think that it pops up every now and then in
debates on policy just like this.
But as I say, the big picture is as important in the
understanding of this debate as are the details in this
legislation.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher.
The Chair recognizes the Ranking Member, Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I had two questions for Mr.--Vice Chair Bridenstine, one of
which you already answered, Mr. Bridenstine, about how the
chart is not reflect the Sandy supplemental funding.
And my other question, if you could please give us the
underlying data for the chart, because we would like to
determine whether it considers the use of other agency
computers by NOAA. So we would appreciate receiving that.
And also, just in response to some of the discussion and
further support of Ms. Edwards' amendment, I would like to just
point out that when Dr. Droegemeier was here from Oklahoma, his
written testimony says this: ``Climate models have proven
capable of reproducing environments hundreds of years in the
past and thus can be useful for determining future environments
and hence the types of storms that might be expected to form
within them. Conversely, our understanding of and ability to
predict high-impact weather will improve climate model
representations of storms' precipitation, the radiation budget,
and even chemical processes. We are moving toward the day when
we no longer use separate models for weather and climate and
our investments likewise should reflect that trajectory.''
I again support Ms. Edwards' amendment, and I yield back.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici.
And we recognize the Vice Chair.
Mr. Bridenstine. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The chart there came from--it was developed by Dr. Cliff
Mass of the University of Washington who, from all evidence
that I have seen, is not by any stretch necessarily a
conservative researcher. And certainly I think that that chart
is accurate, and it reflects priorities that have been
mismanaged over time.
And so with that I would also say that Dr. Droegemeier was
very clear about the fact that we do have an ability--given the
advancing technology of today, we do have the ability--to
predict tornadoes up to an hour in advance. And if you
remember, during his testimony he showed us charts, lines of
tornadoes that they predicted an hour in advance and not only
that they would form but the direction that they would go, and
they were extremely accurate.
That reflects the fact that we can save lives, and we can
save property, and we can prevent catastrophic economic effects
from these kind of disasters if we do properly prioritize.
And so with that I will yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you. Is further discussion on the
amendment?
Mr. Grayson. May I be recognized, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, sir. The Chair recognizes the
gentleman from Florida.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you. The chart in question that we have
been debating now for, oh, geez, almost half an hour has a Y
axis that is listed as P capacity petaflops. Is there anybody
in the majority who can identify what a petaflop is?
I yield. I take it the answer is no.
Mr. Bridenstine. It is the ability to do--it's computing
capacity, the ability to do calculations.
Mr. Grayson. How many?
Mr. Bridenstine. That's a great question.
Chairman Stewart It's a thousand teraflops.
Mr. Grayson. A thousand teraflops, all right. And what is a
teraflop?
Chairman Stewart. That is a--one million megaflops.
Mr. Grayson. Oh, okay. Well, I see where this is going.
What is a megaflop?
Mr. Bridenstine. It is one more than a flip-flop.
Mr. Grayson. Listen, here is the point. The point is that
we have been talking about a chart that simply says in visual
form that we are devoting more computer resources to climate
than we are to weather. I don't think there is anything really
wrong with that. Climate is a much more difficult problem to
map than weather it is. It is just intrinsically more
complicated. It deals with much longer periods of time than
weather does. It is like saying, well, an MRI of the brain is
going to be more complicated than an MRI of the arm. That is
just the way it is. And with that understanding, I think that
Ms. Edwards' observations are well taken.
I yield the rest of my time.
Chairman Stewart. I thank you, Mr. Grayson.
Is there further discussion on the amendment? Hearing none,
the vote occurs on the amendment.
All in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, say no.
The nays have it, and the amendment is not agreed to.
Ms. Edwards. I would ask for a recorded vote, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. The clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Stewart.
Chairman Stewart. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bridenstine.
Mr. Bridenstine. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Bridenstine votes no.
Mr. Sensenbrenner.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sensenbrenner votes no.
Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. Rohrabacher. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no.
Mr. Neugebauer.
Mr. Neugebauer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes no.
Mr. Brown.
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Weber.
Mr. Weber. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Weber votes no.
Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Bonamici votes aye.
Ms. Brownley.
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Edwards.
Ms. Edwards. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Edwards votes aye.
Mr. Takano.
Mr. Takano. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Takano votes aye.
Mr. Grayson.
Mr. Grayson. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Grayson votes aye.
Mr. Stewart is recorded as voting no. Mr. Chairman----
Chairman Stewart. The clerk will report the vote.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, four Members have voted aye; six
members have voted nay.
Chairman Stewart. The amendment is not agreed to.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The next amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by
the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. And the clerk will
report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by----
[The amendment by Ms. Bonamici appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize Ms. Bonamici for five minutes to explain her--
the amendment.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
As we heard in the testimony, severe weather events that
can result in the loss of life and property have become all too
frequent in recent years. We have seen it across the country,
and we know the consequences can be devastating. That is why we
are here today. The willingness and ability to improve weather
forecasting at NOAA is something that this bill intends to do,
but as I said in the June 26th hearing on the bill, if we want
to improve weather forecasting, we should focus on the actual
weather forecasters' needs at the National Weather Service.
The witness--witnesses who testified before the
Subcommittee at the June 26th hearing agree. The current
authorizing language focuses only on funding at the OAR, the
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which is contrary
to the stated intention of this legislation. If improving
weather forecasting is the goal, then the bill should not fund
OAR's weather effort over the work of the National Weather
Service. This could prove to be both problematic within NOAA
and importantly, counterproductive.
Therefore, I offer this amendment that removes the language
in the bill that authorizes OAR only. It is a common-sense
amendment, Mr. Chairman.
I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. I move to strike
the last word and recognize myself to speak to the amendment.
The amendment would completely strike Section 11 of this
bill and the authorization of the appropriations. I oppose this
amendment. Striking the authorization for appropriations of
these activities would cut at the heart of the bill's very
purpose. We are ensuring that the priorities of the bill--to
protect lives through increased weather research--is funded
through a Congressional mandate. In these austere times, it is
critical that our most important research programs are
authorized by Congress and thus are protected by future
budgetary constraints.
Is there further discussion on the amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, the Chair recognizes the Ranking
Member.
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman, as I explained earlier, I have
serious concerns about this section of the bill, which is why I
have offered this amendment and explained why it is problematic
and counterproductive to the goal of improving weather
forecasting.
But given the Chairman's commitment to work with me as we
move forward, I am going to withdraw this amendment and look
forward to addressing this issue as we work to improve the
bill.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you. The Chair recognizes the
Ranking Member as withdrawing the amendment. We appreciate your
willingness and look forward to working with you on that. And
with that, the amendment is withdrawn.
The final amendment on the roster today is an amendment
again offered by the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. And
the clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2413 offered by Ms. Bonamici
of Oregon, amendment number 005.
[The amendment of Ms. Bonamici appears in Appendix I.]
Chairman Stewart. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading.
Without objection, so ordered.
I recognize Ms. Bonamici for five minutes to discuss her
amendment.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
As I explained in the prior amendment, putting all of the
emphasis on OAR is not consistent with our intention to improve
weather forecasting at NOAA.
We heard testimony from NOAA and experts in the weather
community at the June 26th hearing cautioning this Committee
about the detrimental consequences if weather research programs
are emphasized over other research programs or if research is
emphasized over weather forecasting. Resources for research are
already under constraints across all federal agencies,
especially with the cuts already in place and slated to be
implemented from the sequestration. This bill in its current
form makes things worse and actually jeopardizes research at
NOAA that could improve weather forecasting.
NOAA needs a solid research portfolio and a solid weather
forecasting portfolio. Weakening one to strengthen the other
could have serious negative consequences for NOAA's ability to
provide accurate, timely weather forecasting, and the witnesses
at the June 26th hearing all seemed to agree. A strategy that
emphasizes progress in all areas of NOAA's research enterprise
can only be accomplished if the OAR has the resources it needs.
In order for OAR to accomplish NOAA's weather forecasting
objectives, I propose this amendment that would strike through
the current section that authorizes only certain programs and
replaced it with language that authorizes funding for all
programs and research within OAR. The funding levels proposed
in my amendments are FY 2012 spending levels with three percent
for inflation added for each year over the next five years.
This replacement language will make NOAA whole again and
relieve the Agency from the negative impacts of sequestration.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici.
I move to strike the last word and recognize myself to
speak to the amendment.
The amendment once again would strike parts of--or entirely
Section 11, which authorize appropriations for weather research
and technology transfers and replace it with an authorization
of all NOAA research activities, including climate and weather.
It also calls for significant spending increases in the out
years. And as we've seen with other amendments, this amendment
would gut the bill's fundamental objective, which is to
prioritize weather research without increasing spending. To
paraphrase the Vice Chairman, Mr. Bridenstine's, earlier
comments, if we want to make weather research and public safety
a priority, we have to prioritize weather research and public
safety. It is as simple as that. And for these reasons, I
strongly oppose the amendment.
Is there further discussion on the amendment?
Ms. Bonamici. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stewart. Yes, Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again, as with the other amendments, I have serious
concerns about this section of the bill, which is why I have
offered this amendment. We have received pretty clear testimony
that this section could be problematic and counterproductive to
the goal of improving weather forecasting.
However, as with the other amendments, given the Chairman's
commitment to work with me as we move forward, I will withdraw
this amendment. I look forward to addressing this issue as we
work to improve the bill.
And, Mr. Chairman, I just want to add, with this amendment,
as with others, I hope and trust that we can have these
conversations before we move to a Full Committee markup. I am
here, as you are, to improve weather forecasting and, as was
discussed earlier in this Subcommittee markup, there is a lot
of room for bipartisan cooperation here, and having a
bipartisan bill significantly increases our chances of having
legislation that can be signed into law and will actually
improve weather forecasting.
So I am withdrawing this amendment as well as the others
with the understanding that we are going to continue to work
together with the goal of improving weather forecasting in a
bipartisan bill that I hope all Members will be able to support
and--
Mr. Grayson. Will the gentlelady yield before the
gentlelady finishes?
Ms. Bonamici. Yes, I will yield, Mr. Grayson.
Mr. Grayson. Thank you. I just wanted to ask the majority
where these numbers came from. This is just for my own
edification. And I understand that the amendment is being
withdrawn, so it will become moot, but I just want to know
where the numbers 80 million and 20 million and 20 million came
from. Maybe you can explain that to me. I will yield to anybody
who can do that.
Mr. Bridenstine. I would like to get back to you on that.
Mr. Grayson. Yes. All right. I yield back.
Chairman Stewart. All right. The Chair thanks the Ranking
Member for her comments. And once again, we look forward to
working in a bipartisan fashion. And the Chair recognizes that
the amendment has been withdrawn.
Are there any further amendments?
Hearing none and a reporting quorum being present, the
question is on the bill, H.R. 2413, as amended.
Those in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, say no.
The ayes have it, and the bill as amended is agreed to.
I move that the bill H.R. 2413, as amended, be favorably
reported to the full Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology and the staff be authorized to make necessary
technical and conforming changes.
Without objection, so ordered.
If there is any further discussion, that completes our
business, and this concludes the Subcommittee markup. The
Subcommittee on Environment stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
H.R. 2413, WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013,
Section-by-Section Analysis, Amendments
Amendment Roster
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Section-by-Section Analysis of
H.R. 2413, WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Amendments
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Amendment Roster
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
XXIII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE
MARKUP ON H.R. 2413,
THE WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013
----------
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2013
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:08 a.m., in Room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Chairman Smith. The Committee on Science, Space and
Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is
authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 2F and House Rule 112(h)(4), the
Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. Now, I
will recognize myself in opening statement.
The Science, Space and Technology Committee today meets to
mark up four bills, H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013 offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma,
H.R. 2431, the National Integrated Drought Information System
Reauthorization Act of 2013, sponsored by Mr. Hall of Texas,
H.R. 2981, the Technology and Research Accelerating National
Security and Future Economic Resiliency Act of 2013, or
TRANSFER Act, sponsored by Mr. Collins of New York, and H.R.
3625, offered by Mr. Brooks of Alabama, which provides for
termination liability costs for certain high priority NASA
projects. Each of the bill sponsors will explain their bill in
more detail shortly. But let me offer my views on each very
briefly.
Mr. Bridenstine's weather forecasting bill protects lives
and property through improved weather research to better
forecast warnings of tornadoes and hurricanes. Now, I want to
compliment Mr. Bridenstine for working with Environment
Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart and Ranking Member Suzanne
Bonamici in drafting a bipartisan amendment which strengthens
this bill.
Our second bill is H.R. 2431, the National Integrated
Drought Information System Reauthorization Act of 2013 by Mr.
Hall. And I thank the gentleman for his persistent leadership
over the years on this issue. Droughts in Texas and elsewhere
had been severe, and the NIDIS program has helped state and
local governments, farmers, ranchers and others both monitor
and predict drought conditions. A companion bill has already
been reported by the Senate Commerce Committee. The goal is to
reach an agreement with our Senate counterparts so we can put
this bipartisan bill on the President's desk early next year.
Our third bill, the TRANSFER Act, sponsored by Mr. Collins
of New York, has bipartisan co-sponsors and many endorsements.
The bill accelerates the transition of technology developed at
universities, Federal laboratories and non-profit research
institutions to the private sector. Mr. Collins has himself
started several small businesses and currently chairs the Small
Business Health and Technology Subcommittee. His personal
experience has made him a champion for small businesses.
Finally, our fourth bill sponsored by Mr. Brooks of Alabama
protects funding for key NASA programs. It also frees up over
half a billion dollars in funding that Congress already
provided the agency toward the development of the space launch
system, an Orion crew vehicle and space station operations.
Unfortunately, NASA's chief financial officer decided to change
NASA's rules on termination liability three years ago from the
way NASA managed termination liability for over 50 years. We
need to fix this situation with this bill. These funds will be
freed up to do what Congress intended, develop these high
priority NASA programs. With an amendment to be sponsored by
Ms. Edwards that I support, we have bipartisan support for Mr.
Brooks' bill to address NASA termination liability. And I want
to thank Mr. Brooks for his initiative on this issue, along
with Space Subcommittee Chairman Steve Palazzo who also sought
to address this issue with the NASA reauthorization bill.
All four bills provide bipartisan commonsense solutions
that will keep America competitive and on the forefront of
innovation. So I urge my colleagues to support all the bills.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Lamar Smith
The Science, Space, and Technology Committee meets today to mark-up
four bills:
H.R. 2413, the ``Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of
2013,'' offered by Mr. Bridenstine of Oklahoma;
H.R. 2431, the ``National Integrated Drought Information
System Reauthorization Act of 2013,'' sponsored by Mr. Hall of Texas;
H.R. 2981, the ``Technology and Research Accelerating
National Security and Future Economic Resiliency Act of 2013,'' or
TRANSFER Act, sponsored by Mr. Collins of New York; and
H.R. 3625, offered by Mr. Brooks of Alabama, which
provides for termination liability costs for certain hi-priority NASA
projects.
Each of the bills' sponsors will explain their bill in more detail
shortly, but let me offer my views on each.
Mr. Bridenstine's weather forecasting bill protects lives and
property through improved weather research to better forecast warnings
of tornadoes and hurricanes.
I want to compliment Mr. Bridenstine for working with Environment
Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart and Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici
in drafting a bipartisan amendment that strengthens this bill.
Our second bill today is H.R. 2431, The National Integrated Drought
Information System Reauthorization Act of 2013, offered by Mr. Hall of
Texas. I thank the gentleman for his persistent leadership over the
years on this issue.
Droughts in Texas have been severe, and the NIDIS [pronounced NEYE-
Diss] program has helped state and local governments, farmers,
ranchers, and others both monitor and predict drought conditions.
A companion bill has already been reported by the Senate Commerce
Committee. The goal is to reach an agreement with our Senate
counterparts so we can put this bipartisan bill on the President's desk
early next year.
Our third bill, the TRANSFER Act, sponsored by Mr. Collins of New
York has bipartisan cosponsors and many endorsements.
This bill accelerates the transition of technology developed at
universities, federal laboratories and non-profit research institutions
to the private sector. Mr. Collins has himself started several small
businesses and currently chairs the Small Business Health and
Technology Subcommittee. His personal experiences make him a champion
for small businesses.
Finally, our fourth bill, sponsored by Mr. Brooks of Alabama,
protects funding for key NASA programs. It also frees up over half a
billion dollars in funding that Congress already provided the agency
toward the development of the Space Launch System and Orion Crew
Vehicle and Space Station operations.
Unfortunately, NASA's Chief Financial Officer decided to change
NASA's rules on termination liability three years ago from the way NASA
managed termination liability for over 50 years. We seek to fix this
situation with this bill.
These funds will be freed up to do what Congress intended-develop
these high-priority NASA programs.
With an amendment to be sponsored by Ms. Edwards that I support, we
have bipartisan support for Mr. Brooks' bill to address NASA
termination liability.
I want to thank Mr. Brooks for his initiative on this issue, along
with Space Subcommittee Chairman Steve Palazzo, who also sought to
address this issue with the NASA authorization bill.
All four bills provide bipartisan common-sense solutions that will
keep America competitive and on the forefront of innovation. I urge my
colleagues to support all four bills.
Chairman Smith. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the
gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, for her opening statement.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I do
apologize for whatever this voice may come out to be this
morning. Today, we are marking up four relatively bipartisan
bills, and it is my hope that they will be even more bipartisan
after today's markup.
First, we have H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting
Improvement Act of 2013. Weather forecasting and weather
research are issues that should be truly bipartisan. And I am
very pleased that with the addition of the Manager's Amendment,
we now have a bill that we can receive bipartisan support. As
amended, this will be a strong bill, and it will improve
weather forecasting at NOAA. And I urge my colleagues to
support it. One of the things that we learned as we received
expert advice on this legislation is that weather research can
be strengthened but that we cannot do it at the expense of
ocean or climate research. These are all pieces of the same
puzzle. The progress in all of these areas is necessary for
progress in any single area. This bill would improve weather
research at NOAA and better integrate that research within the
forecasting community. And it accomplishes this without harming
the other important work that NOAA does. I want to especially
commend environmental--Environment Subcommittee Chairman Mr.
Stewart, Ranking Member Ms. Bonamici, and the bill's sponsor,
Mr. Bridenstine, for their cooperative spirit and hard work
that got us to where we are today. I hope that we can use this
process as a model for future bipartisan legislative action.
Next, we have 2431, the National Integrated Drought
Information System Reauthorization Act of 2013. This vital
program was originated by my friend and former chairman, Mr.
Ralph Hall, in 2006. The program provides critical draft--
drought information to communities all across our nation. Over
the past three decades, it is estimated that droughts have cost
our country hundreds of billions of dollars in economic
impacts. Loss estimates from the 2012 drought alone run upwards
of $17 billion. Moreover, the effects of climate change are
anticipated to exacerbate this problem in many parts of our
country, including in our home State of Texas. In the light of
the scope of the economic impacts of drought and the potential
of the NIDIS programs to lessen these impacts, I am concerned
that we are cutting the program's authorization level. My
colleague from Oregon has an amendment to modestly increase the
authorization levels, and I plan on supporting that amendment
and urge my others to do as well.
The next bill being considered is H.R. 2981, the TRANSFER
Act, a bipartisan bill introduced by Mr. Collins and Mr. Kilmer
that will help accelerate the commercialization of federally
funded research. Our investment in basic research has led to
incredible discoveries that improve our lives. But identifying
and moving those ideas into the marketplace is not an easy
task. In today's economy, private capital is even harder to
come by, especially for unproven technologies. This is where
the TRANSFER Act can make an impact. It can move good ideas and
technologies further along the path toward commercialization.
It can help spur the creation of new startups and spinoffs, and
help those new businesses succeed by providing resources, and
maybe even more importantly, advice and services. I would like
to commend my colleagues for their hard work to improve
technology transfer.
Now, just recently, the small business community has raised
some concerns over how the TRANSFER Act is funded. While I
strongly support the thrust of this bill, I do want to
emphasize that these concerns will need to be addressed in
order for this bill to move forward. I am a little concerned
that we are rushing to mark this bill up without having first
identified a viable path forward on this issue. This bill was
crafted by our Committee, and it also was referred to this
Small Business Committee. Kicking this bill over to the Small
Business Committee without having identified a funding fix
seems like a recipe for inaction. I hope we can continue to
work on this issue and ultimately get this bill enacted. But I
am concerned that rushing the bill to markup today will not
make this any easier.
Finally, we consider H.R. 3625, to provide for termination
liability costs for certain National Aeronautics and Space
Administration projects. This bill makes necessary changes to
the way in which NASA accounts for termination costs in their
flagship programs. When Congress funds spacecraft development,
we want the funding to go to spacecraft development. We don't
want sufficient portions of the funding to be aside--set aside
for just in case money for potential termination costs.
Unfortunately, this requires a legislative fix because the
Anti-Deficiency Act requires some reserves. And, frankly, NASA
is unable to float these reserves anymore due to the tight
budgetary times we are in. I look forward to a productive
markup today. And I yield back. Thank you. [The prepared
statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Today we are marking up four relatively
bipartisan bills, and it is my hope that they will be even more
bipartisan after today's markup.
First we have H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of
2013.
Weather forecasting and weather research are issues that should
truly be bipartisan, and I'm very pleased that with the addition of the
manager's amendment, we now have a bill that will receive bipartisan
support. As amended, this will be a strong bill, and it will improve
weather forecasting at NOAA, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
One of the things that we learned as we received expert advice on
this legislation is that weather research can be strengthened, but that
we cannot do it at the expense of ocean or climate research. These are
all pieces of the same puzzle, and progress in all of these areas is
necessary for progress in any single area.
This bill will improve weather research at NOAA and better
integrate that research with the forecasting community, and it
accomplishes this without harming the other important work that NOAA
does.
I want to especially commend Environment Subcommittee Chairman
Stewart, Ranking Member Bonamici, and the bill sponsor Mr. Bridenstine
for their cooperative spirit and hard work that got us to where we are
today. I hope that we can use this process as a model for future
bipartisan legislative action.
Next we have H.R. 2431, the National Integrated Drought Information
System Reauthorization Act of 2013.
This vital program was originated by my friend and former Committee
Chairman Ralph Hall in 2006. The program provides critical drought
information to communities all across our Nation.
Over the past three decades it is estimated that droughts have cost
our country hundreds of billions of dollars in economic impacts. Loss
estimates from the 2012 drought alone run upwards of 70 billion
dollars. Moreover, the effects of climate change are anticipated to
exacerbate this problem in many parts of our country, including in my
home state of Texas.
In light of the scope of the economic impacts of drought, and the
potential of the NIDIS program to lessen these impacts, I am concerned
that we are cutting the program's authorization level. My colleague
from Oregon has an amendment to modestly increase the authorization
levels, and I plan on supporting that amendment, and urge others to do
so as well.
The next bill being considered is H.R. 2981, the TRANSFER Act, a
bipartisan bill introduced by Mr. Collins and Mr. Kilmer that would
help accelerate the commercialization of federally funded research.
Our investment in basic research has led to incredible discoveries
that improve our lives, but identifying and moving those ideas into the
marketplace is not an easy task. In today's economy private capital is
even harder to come by, especially for unproven technologies.
This is where the TRANSFER Act can make an impact. It can move good
ideas and technologies further along the path toward commercialization.
It can help spur the creation of new start-ups and spin-offs and help
those new businesses succeed by providing resources-and maybe even more
importantly- advice and services.I'd like to commend my colleagues for
their hard work to improve technology transfer.
Now, just recently the small business community has raised some
concerns over how the TRANSFER Act is funded. While I strongly support
the thrust of this bill, I do want to emphasize that these concerns
will need to be addressed in order for this bill to move forward. I'm a
little concerned that we are rushing to mark up this bill without
having first identified a viable path forward on this issue.
This bill was crafted by our Committee, but it also was referred to
the Small Business Committee. Kicking this bill over to the Small
Business Committee without having identified a funding fix seems like a
recipe for inaction. I hope we can continue to work on this issue and
ultimately get this bill enacted, but I'm concerned that rushing the
bill to markup today will not make this any easier.
Finally, we will consider H.R. 3625, To provide for termination
liability costs for certain National Aeronautics and Space
Administration projects. This bill makes necessary changes to the way
in which NASA accounts for termination costs in their flagship
programs.
When Congress funds spacecraft development, we want the funding to
go to spacecraft development. We don't want significant portions of the
funding to be set aside as ``just in case'' money for potential
termination costs. Unfortunately, this requires a legislative fix
because the Anti-Deficiency Act requires some reserves, and frankly,
NASA is unable to float these reserves anymore due to the tight
budgetary times we are in.
I look forward to a productive markup today, and I yield back.
Chairman Smith. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Pursuant to notice,
I now call up H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting Improvement
Act of 2013, which was introduced by Representative Bridenstine
and submitted by the Subcommittee on Environment. And the clerk
will report the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 2413, the Weather Forecasting Improvement
Act of 2013, as amended by the Subcommittee on Environment.
[H.R. 2413 appears in Appendix I]
Chairman Smith. Without objection, the bill would be
considered as read, and the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr.
Bridenstine, is recognized for five minutes to explain the
bill.
Mr. Bridenstine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is truly an
honor to see the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act come
before this Committee today. Today's markup is of important
legislation. This important legislation is the result of months
of hard work by a coalition of Members and staff on both sides
of the aisle, as well as the individuals and the invaluable
input that we have all received from experts and leaders in
academia and business. And of course, let us not forget
constituents like mine in Oklahoma who have seen firsthand the
devastating effects or tornadic activity. I want to thank the
Chairman of the Full Committee, Mr. Smith, and the Chairman of
the Environment Subcommittee, Mr. Stewart, not only for their
co-sponsorship of this legislation but for their leadership and
commitment to seeing this bill moved to the House floor. I also
want to thank the Ranking Member of the Environment
Subcommittee, Ms. Bonamici, and her staff for their willingness
to work with us on the amendment in the nature of a substitute
that will allow the bill to pass this Committee with strong
bipartisan support.
H.R. 2413 makes the protection of lives and property the
top priority of NOAA and follows through on that commitment by
prioritizing funding and other resources on severe weather
detection and forecasting while not increasing overall
spending. Millions of Americans, both in government and private
industry, have dedicated their careers and lives to the mission
of providing their fellow citizens with accurate, timely
weather forecasts, and the technology this bill advances will
greatly assist their efforts. In particular, I have seen
firsthand the capabilities of phased array radar in the
American military, and I am certain that it will help lead
America's weather forecasting efforts towards the goal of
having zero preventable deaths occur as a result of severe
weather systems like a tornado. For Oklahomans and for all
Americans, I urge adoption of the Stewart/Bonamici amendment
and passage of this important legislation. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Smith. All right. Thank you, Mr. Bridenstine. We
have two amendments listed on the roster in regard to this
bill, and we will proceed now with the first amendment, which
is an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr.
Stewart and Ms. Bonamici. And the clerk will report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.
2413, the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013 offered
by Mr. Stewart of Utah and Ms. Bonamici of Oregon.
[The amendment of Mr. Stewart and Ms. Bonamici appears in
Appendix I]
Chairman Smith. Okay. Without objection, the amendment will
be considered as read. And the gentleman from Utah is
recognized to explain the amendment.
Mr. Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the Ranking
Member, Ms. Johnson, to both of you for your leadership. Again,
I would like to thank my friend, Jim Bridenstine, for his
leadership and vision in offering this legislation. And
finally, to the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, Ms.
Bonamici, for her willingness to work so hard in finding
agreement on this legislation. And I have to add that for me,
this has been a gratifying experience of what I think is
bipartisan cooperation, and I think we are seeing its fruition
today.
Mr. Chairman, the Manager's Amendment in the nature of a
substitute includes a number of clarifying and, in some cases,
substantive provisions made in response to some of the valuable
testimony submitted by the witnesses in our two hearings on
this bill and subsequent hearings on the potential satellite
gap. The Subcommittee worked to help inform the Committee of
NOAA's weather forecasting challenges and opportunities related
to the problematic management research prioritization and
commercial data acquisition. This input has led to an improved
work product and changes that were included in this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I have a letter of support to this amendment
from the University Corporation of Atmospheric Research,
President Tom Bogdan, and I would like to add that to the
record.
Chairman Smith. Okay. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears in Appendix II]
Mr. Stewart. The amendment before us prioritizes protection
of public safety and forward looking weather research. It
improves the procurement of observing systems for getting data
from space, air and land and opens up NOAA's process to
encourage private sector weather solutions. The amendment is a
long term down payment to upgrade our weather prediction
systems that has, in some cases, fallen behind international
standards. The need to adopt this amendment and the bill cannot
be overstated. As we heard from witnesses at a hearing in this
Congress, we are facing a critical gap in active weather
satellites beginning as early as 2016. This bill will help to
mitigate this gap by allowing NOAA access to critical satellite
weather data from outside of their agency in the event that
this gap does materialize.
We may not agree on every detail, but I think we certainly
agree that improved weather forecasting is an important
national priority. And this amendment will help NOAA to achieve
that objective protecting lives and property through weather
research and improved forecasting. And with that, Mr. Chairman,
I would yield back my time.
Chairman Smith. Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Does the
gentlewoman from Oregon wish to be recognized?
Ms. Bonamici. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Smith. The gentlelady is recognized.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored to join
Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Stewart, in offering this amendment
in the nature of a substitute. Members on both sides of the
aisle can be assured that this important bill has become a
truly bipartisan effort built on extensive advice from the
weather community. Mr. Bridenstine introduced a very well-
intentioned bill that went a long way toward improving the
tools available to NOAA for evaluating emerging forecast
technologies. His emphasis on tornado research was appropriate
and very helpful. At the Subcommittee markup, Mr. Grayson added
a beneficial amendment for a focused hurricane research
program.
This amendment, in the nature of a substitute, adds to the
tools and programs of the original bill. Many experts told us
that to improve weather forecasting, the research at OAR and
the forecasting at NWS needed to be better coordinated and
integrated. This amendment contains provisions to accomplish
that.
The amendment will provide for NOAA to use the Department
of Defense model of integrating operational needs and research.
We have language in this amendment that will more tightly align
the research at OAR with the operational needs of the weather
service. The amendment also includes incentives to open up NOAA
to insights from the broader weather community. At every
opportunity, we charge the agency to consult with the American
Weather Industry and researches as they develop research plans
and undertake new initiatives. We also press NOAA to get
serious about its growing private sector solutions to their
data needs. We make clear that we expect as historical support
for extramural research to continue even as research at OAR
expands.
The engine of weather forecasting innovation has not always
been found within NOAA but in the labs and research communities
that work with NOAA. That must continue. The amendment
establishes a new Federal Advisory Committee Act, or FACA
Committee, to provide ongoing advice about public sector
innovations the weather service could--should consider
adopting. The amendment establishes a visiting scholars program
to let top academics work side by side with NWS forecasters.
The FACA panel and the visiting scholars program replicate the
continuous innovation that European meteorologists have
experienced through their use of visiting researchers and
outside advice.
The amendment provides an explicit focus on tapping the
expertise of social scientists in communicating risk and
working in communities. Witnesses' emphasize the importance of
this work. The best forecasting skill and technology in the
world won't be effective unless we deliver the messages to the
public and they result in real action. As amended, the bill is
designed to improve public safety, enhance the American economy
and transform the innovation culture at NOAA.
I can assure Members on my side of the aisle that we have
addressed the issues that were brought up during the
Subcommittee markup. Weather research is strengthened, but not
at the expense of other important work. During the committee
process, we heard from witness after witness who stressed that
weather forecasting involves many different scientific
disciplines. This amendment reflects and understanding that we
cannot choose one area of research at the expense of others
without endangering the process as a whole. I ask my caucus
colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.
I want to thank Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson
for giving us this support to work out a compromise. I want to
thank Mr. Bridenstine for his willingness to work with us and
consider changes to the original bill. And I particularly want
to thank Chairman Stewart. All along, Mr. Stewart's attitude
has been collaborative and constructive, and the result is a
bipartisan bill that I hope will swiftly move to the floor and
through the Senate. I know the Chairman shares with me a core
belief that weather should not be a partisan issue and that the
American public needs and deserves the best weather forecasting
system we can provide.
The majority staff, particularly Dan Byers, Clint Woods and
Taylor Jordan worked hard on this and deserve the thanks of all
the Committee Members. On our side, Dan Pearson and Andrea
Jones spent countless hours working to move this effort
forward. And I am grateful for their tireless commitment on the
issue. And I also want to give special thanks to Eric Ffitch
from my office for his hard work on this bill as well.
The weather community deserves recognition for their
generous and comprehensive advice as we work toward this
amendment and through the bill. Each side has made compromises
along the way. It is not the bill the friends--my friends on
this side of the aisle would--it is not the bill that my
friends on the other side of the aisle started with, and it is
not the bill that we would likely move, were we in the
majority. But it is a bill that we can move together with broad
support in the weather community, and it is a bill that will
make measurable improvements in weather research and weather
forecasting.
And, finally, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to
include letters in the record from the American Commercial
Space Weather Association, Planet IQ, the Weather Coalition,
GeoOptics and four universities. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I
yield----
Chairman Smith. Okay. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears in Appendix II]
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Chairman Smith. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. Are there any
amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? The
gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I have
an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Smith. The clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to H.R. 2413 offered by Mr. Rohrabacher.
[The amendment of Mr. Rohrabacher appears in Appendix I]
Chairman Smith. Without objection, the amendment will be
considered as read, and the gentleman from California is
recognized to explain the amendment.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My
amendment would make small, but I think good and important
changes to Section 10 of the commercial weather data, and in
the subsection regarding the strategy to procure quality
commercial weather data. My amendment would do two things,
change the wording from cost effectiveness to expected cost
effectiveness of these commercial opportunities, and it would
also ensure that this strategy includes an expected timeline
for implementation.
The first change, the use of the word expected, is
important because it is a statement that we understand this to
be an estimate based on the best available data. But since what
we are telling the administration to provide is outside their
comfort zone, outside their normal practices and policies, that
we understand the reported cost effectiveness will not be with
the same confidence level that we are used to seeing from these
people. So an example of this might be in NASA's COTS program
to ensure the capabilities of commercial companies to deliver
cargo to the international space station. The way the COTS
program was designed is great and should be a guide for what we
use for other similar activities in the future where we are
bringing in the private sector. But they weren't really able to
capture necessarily the cost effectiveness of these same
opportunities before we actually tried the system out. NASA had
an expectation of what the cost effectiveness would be of this
commercial resupply, but none of the cost models could
accurately predict within the normal confidence levels how this
program would turn out. And it turned out, of course, to be
much better than anyone predicted. So as we move forward with
commercial acquisition of weather data, which I think is an
important goal, the broad range of ways we can do that--and we
are looking at those broad ranges--I think it is important for
us to acknowledge that no cost model is likely to give us the
full value of the benefit that we are likely to see. Now, we
will end up understanding that when we try this
commercialization, we actually end up getting more benefit than
what is usually predicted using the standard ways of predicting
benefit.
My second change, the inclusion of a timeline--note the
word '`expected'' here as well--is also small but important. A
timeline makes a strategy more real in the people's mind.
Otherwise, it just becomes a binder on the shelf that gets
dusted off every year to see what we didn't get done over the
previous 12 months. So if we have a timeline of what we want to
accomplish, that is sort of a--I believe that gives people who
are--who should be implementing this policy a much greater
reason and guidelines of how to do that and how serious they
should take it and--during a given time period. For that
reason, I believe that this Committee should make it clear and
explicit that we are expecting a timeline to be part of this
strategy.
Now, I understand, Mr. Chairman, there is an agreement that
my amendment and my proposals will be looked at seriously. And
if everybody reaches a consensus that it will be in some way
worked into the Manager's Amendment. And understanding that
agreement, I am now withdrawing the amendment that I had just
proposed.
Chairman Smith. And thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. Without
objection, the amendment will be withdrawn. And let me reaffirm
your comments and say that we do expect to be able to continue
to massage the language between here and the House floor and we
would expect to adopt some of that language in the Manager's
Amendment. So appreciate your comments and appreciate your
efforts.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for
that. And I would just note that I didn't mention the patent
issue once during my comments.
Chairman Smith. That is also appreciated. Are there any
other amendments to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute? If not, the question is on agreeing to the
amendment in the nature of a substitute. All in favor, say aye.
Those opposed, no. And the ayes have it. And the amendment in
the nature of a substitute is agreed to. Are there any other
amendments to the underlying bill? And if not, a reporting
quorum being present, the question is on the bill, H.R. 2413,
as amended, those in favor say aye. Opposed, nay. The ayes have
it in the Bill, as amended, is ordered reported favorably.
Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the
table. I move that the bill, H.R. 2413, as amended, be
favorably reported to the House and the Staff be authorized to
make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without
objection, so ordered.
Appendix I
----------
H.R. 2413, WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013,
Section-by-Section Analysis, Amendments
Amendment Roster
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Section-by-Section Analysis of
H.R. 2413, THE WEATHER FORECASTING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2013
As amended by the Subcommittee on Environment on July 9, 2013
Section 1. Short Title.
This section establishes the short title as the ``Weather
Forecasting Improvement Act of 2013.''
Section 2. Public Safety Priority.
This section directs the Under Secretary of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Administrator) to make weather
forecasting to protect lives and property NOAA's top planning and
management priority in relevant line offices.
Section 3. Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation.
This section directs the Assistant Administrator of the Office of
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) to undertake a weather research
program and directs the Assistant Administrator to place priority
emphasis on developing more accurate and timely warnings and forecasts
of high impact weather events that endanger life and property. Section
3 further defines the specific program elements to include advanced
radar, aerial systems, computing/modeling, and Observing System
Stimulation Experiments (OSSE) and codifies a longstanding joint OAR-
National Weather Service (NWS) tech transfer program, moving its
funding from NWS. Finally, Section 3 directs NOAA to support academic
weather research through competitive grants and contracts.
Section 4. Tornado Warning Extension Program.
This section establishes a Tornado Warning Extension Program
focused on developing and extending accurate tornado forecasts and
warnings beyond one hour in order to reduce loss of life, injury, and
damage to the economy.
Section 5. Hurricane Warning Precision Program.
This section establishes a hurricane warning precision program
aimed at developing and extending accurate hurricane forecasts and
warnings in order to reduce loss of life, injury, and damage to the
economy.
Section 6. Weather Research and Development Planning.
Section 5 directs NOAA to develop a prioritized weather research
plan to guide activities authorized under the Act and restore U.S.
leadership in weather modeling, prediction, and forecasting. The
section requires the plan to identify, through consultation with the
National Science Foundation, the research necessary to integrate social
science knowledge into weather forecast and warning processes.
Section 7. Observing System Planning.
Section 6 directs NOAA to maintain a list of observation data
requirements and systematically evaluate the combination of systems
necessary to meet such requirements. This section further directs NOAA
to identify current and potential future data gaps in observing
capabilities and develop a range of options to address any identified
gaps.
Section 8. Observing System Simulation Experiments.
This section directs NOAA to undertake Observing System Simulation
Experiments (OSSEs) to quantitatively assess the relative value and
benefits of observing capabilities and systems. This section identifies
specific instances when OSSEs must be performed.
Section 9. Computing Resources Prioritization Report.
Section 9 directs NOAA to issue a plan that: (1) assures that NOAA
aggressively pursues the newest, fastest, and most cost effective high
performance computing technologies in support of its weather prediction
mission; (2) assures a balance between the research requirements; (3)
takes advantage of advanced development concepts; and (4) identifies
opportunities to reallocate existing advanced computing resources from
lower priority uses to improve operational weather prediction.
Section 10. Commercial Weather Data.
This section clarifies that restrictions in existing law
prohibiting the sale of weather satellite systems to the private sector
do not extend to the purchase of weather data through contracts with
commercial providers or the placement of instruments on private
payloads.
Section 11. Definitions. This section provides definitions for terms in
the bill.
Section 12. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 11 authorizes, out of funds made available for OAR's
operations, research, and facilities appropriations account, $100
million for each of Fiscal Years 2014 through 2017 to carry out the
weather research program established under section 3. It further
specifies that out of the $100 million provided in this section, $80
million is authorized for weather laboratories and cooperative
institutions and $20 million is authorized for weather and air
chemistry research programs. Finally, this section also authorizes $20
million annually to carry out the joint technology transfer initiative
described in section 3.
Amendments
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Amendment Roster
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Appendix II
----------
Letters for the Record
Letter submitted by University Corporation of
Atmospheric Research, President Tom Bogdan
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter submitted by The Weather Coalition
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter submitted by Stein Sture,
Vice Chancellor for Research,
University of Colorado Boulder;
Susan Avery, President and Director,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; and
Margaret Leinen,
Director, Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
Vice Chancellor, University of California-San Diego;
Lisa Graumlich, Dean of the College of the Environment
University of Washington
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter submitted by the ACSWA Executive Committee
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter submitted by GeoOptics
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter submitted by PlanetiQ
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
