[Senate Hearing 109-521]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-521
VOLCANIC HAZARDS--IMPACTS ON AVIATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER PREVENTION AND PREDICTION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 16, 2006
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
29-351 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
0SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Co-
CONRAD BURNS, Montana Chairman
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas Virginia
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada BARBARA BOXER, California
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia BILL NELSON, Florida
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
Lisa J. Sutherland, Republican Staff Director
Christine Drager Kurth, Republican Deputy Staff Director
Kenneth R. Nahigian, Republican Chief Counsel
Margaret L. Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Samuel E. Whitehorn, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and General
Counsel
Lila Harper Helms, Democratic Policy Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER PREVENTION AND PREDICTION
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina, E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska,
Chairman Ranking
TED STEVENS, Alaska MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon BILL NELSON, Florida
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 16, 2006................................... 1
Statement of Senator DeMint...................................... 20
Statement of Senator E. Benjamin Nelson.......................... 2
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Statement of Senator Stevens..................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 1
Witnesses
Eichelberger, Dr. John C., Professor of Volcanology, University
of Alaska Fairbanks; Coordinating Scientist, Alaska Volcano
Observatory.................................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
McVenes, Captain Terry, Executive Air Safety Chairman, Airline
Pilots Association, International.............................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Quick, Dr. James E., Program Coordinator, Volcano Hazards
Program, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior.... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Appendix
Inouye, Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, prepared statement.. 23
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), prepared
statement...................................................... 23
VOLCANIC HAZARDS--IMPACTS ON AVIATION
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Disaster Prevention and Prediction,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m. in
room SD-562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TED STEVENS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
The Chairman. Thank you all for coming here today. It's a
very confused day, probably about 40 votes on the floor today.
We all know the threat that volcanic ash poses for Alaska. The
staff just gave me a little bit of ash, Dr. Eichelberger, from
Augustine. I've got an opening statement which I'll put in the
record. But very clearly over half the population of Alaska
lies within 200 miles of Augustine. And 2 months ago it spewed
ash throughout south central Alaska shutting down several
airports throughout the area.
We're going to have testimony today, from Captain Terry
McVenes, Air Safety Chairman for the Airline Pilots
Association, Mr. James Quick, Program Coordinator for the
Volcano Hazardous Program at USGS and Dr. John Eichelberger,
Coordinating Scientist at Alaska Volcano Observatory at the
University of Fairbanks, and Dr. Eichelberger, I do thank you
for flying all this way to appear before us to make the record
on this issue, and I'm sure you want to go back in case
Augustine decides to erupt again, right.
[The prepared statement of Senator Stevens follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ted Stevens, U.S. Senator from Alaska
Thank you all for coming today, I am happy to be chairing this
hearing, since volcanic ash poses such a grave threat to Alaska. I
expect Senator DeMint to join us a bit later.
As we speak, Augustine Volcano located in Cook Inlet, is at code
orange, which means an explosive eruption is possible within a few days
and may occur with little or no warning. The United States Geological
Survey folks in Alaska sent me this picture last night. This was right
before sunset yesterday over Augustine, you can see the steam spewing
from the top.
Over half the population of Alaska lies within 200 miles of that
volcano. Two months ago, it spewed ash throughout south-central Alaska,
shutting down several airports throughout the area.
Alaska averages four days of volcanic ash activity a year, and
since more than one third of Alaskans do not have road access, flying
is the preferred method of transportation. Anchorage, our biggest city,
is within potential striking distance of ash from over 9 active
volcanoes. Anchorage International Airport is also the largest cargo
hub in the United States, and all passenger flights from Asia to the
United States, fly over Alaska and its 41 active volcanoes.
Dr. Eichelberger. Exciting times.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator, do you have any opening
statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. E. BENJAMIN NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Ben Nelson. I would ask that my more complete
opening statement be included in the record. Let me say first I
appreciate very much, Mr. Chairman, you having this hearing
today. Coming from the State of Nebraska we don't have to worry
much about our volcanoes. We're not too concerned in the state
about experiencing a loss due to a tsunami or a hurricane
either, but we recognize that the number one mission of our
government is to protect our citizens.
While we may have other natural hazards we have to deal
with, we're certainly mindful, and sensitive, to hazards that
others experience. I'm very pleased to be able to be here
today. We recognize that the hazards of volcanoes are not
limited to those on the ground, but also to those who fly in
the air as well. We all have an abiding interest in making sure
that we're doing everything that we can in this Committee to
protect the public.
I thank you very much, and I thank the witnesses as well.
[The prepared statement of Senator Nelson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. E. Benjamin Nelson, U.S. Senator from
Nebraska
Coming from the State of Nebraska, we don't have to worry about
volcanoes, tsunami, or hurricanes. But we do know that the number one
mission of the government is to protect its citizens, whether through
military strength, homeland security, or ordinary warnings about
environmental hazards. It is this duty to protect through warnings that
is at the heart of today's hearing on volcano hazards to aviation.
Our witnesses today will tell us about the Nation's 169
geologically active volcanoes, and the dangers they pose. Frankly, when
we think of volcano hazards, we assume they pose a danger to people on
the ground, those who live and work near these sleeping giants. But
each year, up to 50,000 aircraft pass near potentially active
volcanoes. Should one of those volcanoes erupt, the consequences are
dangerous, as Captain Terry McVenes will tell us.
In April 2005, the U.S. Geological Survey issued ``An Assessment of
Volcanic Threat and Monitoring Capabilities in the United States:
Framework for A National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS).'' The
NVEWS report states that many hazardous and potentially hazardous
volcanoes are left largely under- or un-monitored, including 18 very
high threat volcanoes and 37 high threat volcanoes. The report
concludes that full monitoring of these volcanoes and more basic
monitoring of moderate and low threat volcanoes through a National
Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS) will allow the U.S. to protect
both people and property proactively.
I hope that we will learn that significant progress has been made
since last April, and that there is a plan for systematically
addressing the priority monitoring challenges. However, I fear that
this is basically a question of money, money that the Geological Survey
doesn't have. The FY 2006 budget for the USGS Volcano Hazards Program
is $21.5 million. The FY request is $21.7 million, an increase of
$206,000. According to your budget documents, the agency hopes to
rebuild and improve monitoring at four sites. However, there will be no
wide scale implementation of the NVEWS framework. The plan for FY 2006-
2007 supports no new monitoring in 2006 and new monitoring at only one
volcano, Pagan volcano in the Marianas, in FY 2007.
I look forward to our witnesses' candid assessment of what is truly
needed to protect our citizens on the ground and in the air.
The Chairman. They just sent this to me. That picture was
taken just before sunset yesterday, so the volcano is semi-
active again, Doctor. Let's proceed in the order that's on the
schedule. Captain McVenes, may we have your testimony. All of
your statements, by the way, will appear in full as though read
and our statements likewise will appear as though read. But
we're under a time constraint unfortunately because the votes
start at 10:30. But, Captain, will you proceed, please.
STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN TERRY McVENES, EXECUTIVE AIR SAFETY
CHAIRMAN, AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION,
INTERNATIONAL
Captain McVenes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Subcommittee. I am Captain Terry McVenes, Executive Air Safety
Chairman of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), which
represents more than 60,000 professional pilots who fly for 39
airlines here in the United States and Canada. ALPA appreciates
the opportunity to discuss volcanic hazards and the impacts on
aviation.
Of the more than 1,330 volcanoes worldwide that have
demonstrated activity over many thousands of years,
approximately 500 of them have recent histories of events and
action. However constant seismic monitoring is only available
on 174 volcanoes and yet, worldwide, there are 55 to 60
eruptions per year. From 1980 to 2005, more than 100 turbojet
aircraft have sustained volcanic ash damage, with repair costs
in excess of $250 million dollars. Seven of these encounters
caused temporary engine failure, and 3 of the aircraft involved
temporarily lost all engine power. These engine failures took
place as far away as 600 miles from the erupting volcano and
more than 1,500 passengers were in jeopardy.
Volcanoes around the Pacific form what's referred to as the
Pacific Ring of Fire. Most of the ring volcanoes are
unmonitored for seismic activity yet some of the world's
busiest air navigation routes crisscross these areas.
Consequently turbojet aircraft encountering volcanic ash could
be in grave danger.
I have brought with me at your request an actual recording
of a KLM Flight. A Boeing 747 with more than 240 passengers
onboard, that encountered volcanic ash, during the 1989
eruption of Mt. Redoubt near Anchorage, Alaska. Listen closely
to the radio transmissions between Anchorage Center, which is
the air traffic control facility for that region, and KLM 867.
So what happened here? All four engines and many electrical
systems failed in only 59 seconds. The cockpit displays became
an electronic nightmare. Ash was shorting electronic circuit
boards. This four-engine jumbo jet was a glider for several
minutes. Although all engines eventually were able to be
restarted, they all delivered reduced performance. In fact the
last engine only restarted just before landing in Anchorage.
They did finally land safely, but there was $80 million dollars
in damage to the airplane. Had the crew's emergency procedures
failed, more than 200 fatalities and a total hull loss could
have been the result.
In a 1982 encounter near Jakarta, Indonesia, a British
Airways Boeing 747 had a similar experience at night when Mt.
Galungung erupted and propelled ash to flight altitudes without
warning. That British Airways crew was surrounded in ash. They
lost communications because of the electronic interference, all
four engines flamed out, and was left without assistance until
just before an emergency landing. With communications lost,
most aircraft systems failed, and the crew was only able to
navigate to safety visually. They successfully avoided what
could have been another fatal consequence.
There has been progress. Today both geostationary and polar
orbiting satellites can detect eruption gases and cloud
movement. However, industrial priorities must be constantly
justified and Federal budgets annually adjusted to assure that
these capabilities continue on future replacement satellites.
Shifting priorities and shrinking Federal budgets have
repeatedly lessened these satellite capabilities in recent
years.
There remain some problems to be addressed. In spite of the
satellite umbrella, seismic monitors are needed around the
world, especially in sparsely populated areas where
communications are not fully developed. The Mariana Islands,
for example, have volcanoes throughout their territory. Mt.
Anatahan, the most active, has only minimal seismic monitoring
plus a backup instrument on nearby Pagan. It has had eruptions
for the last 3 years, including a stretch of five straight
months of activity propelling ash clouds to cruise flight
altitudes. Flights to these islands have been disrupted, and
there have been deviations of commercial traffic flying air
routes over the islands. Though Guam and Saipan are usually
excellent en route alternates for over flights, volcanic
activity introduces special emergency fuel and weight limiting
procedures for long-range twin-engine commercial aircraft.
These special procedures and diversions have cost carriers in
the millions of extra operating dollars. In addition, U.S.
military operations around Guam have been frequently postponed
or canceled, driving DOD expenditures there higher. A wider
array of monitoring in the Marianas could improve
predictability, allow earlier warnings for the air traffic
system, and reduce unnecessary reroutes and/or cancellations in
this important area of the world.
So to summarize, we continue to have multiple ash
encounters by airliners every year. Potentially active
volcanoes, especially in remote locations need to be
seismically monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Geologic
observatories must coordinate closely with regional air traffic
authorities to ensure that warnings are disseminated as soon as
possible. Commercial operators should ensure that flight crew
training curricula address the normal and emergency procedures
for hazard avoidance and inadvertent encounters. The Congress
and U.S. Government agencies should be cognizant of the
volcanic hazard and its impacts on aviation, in order to
understand the technical and financial support required to
maintain the necessary detection that is required and to
provide those resources. Aspects of this program are shared by
the U.S. Geological Survey, the Smithsonian Institution, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its
National Weather Service (NWS), and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). All of their administrative budgets must
be annotated in support of shares of that responsibility.
In conclusion, commercial turbojet aircraft are certified
with multiple redundant systems to prevent total system
failures. Yet even they can be rendered helpless by volcanic
ash. Therefore, detection, prediction and dissemination
strategies are essential to avoid the hazard. Either we will
identify a turning point in our understanding of the volcanic
hazards and the impacts on aviation, or we will continue on our
present course and accept the hazards of the encounters that we
have reviewed. Unfortunately, continuing on our present course
may produce fatal results.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to share ALPA's
views on this important matter, and I will be happy to answer
any questions you and the other Members of the Subcommittee may
have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Captain McVenes follows:]
Prepared Statement of Captain Terry McVenes, Executive Air Safety
Chairman, Air Line Pilots Association, International
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Captain Terry
McVenes, Executive Air Safety Chairman of the Air Line Pilots
Association (ALPA), which represents more than 60,000 professional
pilots who fly for 40 commercial airlines in the United States and
Canada. ALPA appreciates this opportunity for me to appear before you
today to join with members of government and the aviation community to
discuss volcanic hazards and the impacts on aviation.
Discussion
Historically, 1,330 volcanoes worldwide have demonstrated
indications of activity over many thousands of years. More than 500 of
them have shown some activity in recent history, but constant
monitoring is currently only available on 174 volcanoes and yet,
worldwide, there are 50 to 60 eruptions per year. From 1980 to 2005,
more than 100 turbojet aircraft have sustained at least some damage
after flying through volcanic ash clouds, resulting in cumulative
damages of over $250 million dollars. At least 7 of these encounters
have resulted in temporary engine failure, with 3 aircraft temporarily
losing power from all engines. Engine failures have occurred at
distances from 150 to 600 miles from the erupting volcanoes. Ash
related aircraft damages have been reported as far as 1,800 miles from
a volcano eruption.
The eruption of a volcano located in a densely populated area of
the world can produce catastrophic consequences for those in its
vicinity. Because the ferocity of volcanic eruptions bring potential
danger to life and property, the most active of them usually have
seismic monitors near them, and networks of observatories and
scientists with reactive plans to transmit warnings, evacuate
population and protect life. Volcanic activity is usually obvious to
those in close range and public reports may be as plentiful as those
from the scientific community. As a necessary adjunct to those plans,
aviation authorities must be notified so that air traffic may be
rerouted to avoid potential danger.
Volcanoes located in sparsely populated regions present a vastly
different problem because most are unmonitored, and reports of activity
may be either extremely random or nonexistent. Warnings to the aviation
community may never be given, and the first indication for an aircraft
in the area may be an inadvertent encounter with the ash cloud. Many of
the volcanoes around the rim of the Pacific Ocean fall into that
category. Volcanoes along the western coasts of North and South
America, the Alaskan Aleutians, the Kamchatkan Peninsula, and the Asian
coastal regions South to Australia, form what geologists refer to as
the Pacific Ring of Fire. The majority of the Ring's volcanoes are
unmonitored, yet some of the world's busiest air navigation routes
crisscross these areas. Turbojet aircraft exposed to heavy
concentrations of volcanic ash are in grave danger. Multi-engine
commercial aircraft encountering ash clouds have suffered severe
consequences as a result. As an example, KLM Flight 867, a Boeing 747
with more than 240 passengers aboard, encountered the 1989 eruption of
Mt. Redoubt near Anchorage, Alaska. Review these transmissions between
Anchorage Center, the air traffic control facility for that region, and
KLM 867 . . .
Video/Voice/Recording plays for 57 seconds for Members and audience at
hearing . . .
Pilot KLM B-747--``KLM 867 heavy is reaching (flight) level 250 heading
140''
Anchorage Center--``Okay, Do you have good sight on the ash plume at
this time?''
Pilot KLM B-747--``Yea, it's just cloudy it could be ashes. It's just a
little browner than the normal cloud.''
Pilot KLM B-747--``We have to go left now . . . it's smoky in the
cockpit at the moment sir.''
Anchorage Center--``KLM 867 heavy, roger, left at your discretion.''
Pilot KLM B-747--``Climbing to (flight) level 390, we're in a black
cloud, heading 130.''
Pilot KLM B-747--``KLM 867 we have flame out all engines and we are
descending now!''
Anchorage Center--``KLM 867 heavy anchorage?
Pilot KLM B747--``KLM 867 heavy we are descending now . . . we are in a
fall!''
Pilot KLM B-747--``KLM 867 we need all the assistance you have sir.
Give us radar vectors please!''
To classify this encounter as one presenting grave danger for those
240 passengers and that crew is an understatement! All four engines of
this aircraft failed within 59 seconds! A false cargo compartment fire
warning indication required special attention by the crew. All normal
airspeed indications failed! The avionics compartments containing all
of the radio, radar, electronic systems monitoring, and communications
systems, all overheated and individual systems failed. The
sophisticated electronic cockpit displays became an electronic
nightmare. While ash was contaminating the engines and causing them to
flame out, it was also contaminating electrical compartments and
shorting electronic circuit boards. This four engine jumbo jet was
essentially a glider for several minutes until the crew was able to
individually restart engines. Three of the engines eventually restarted
but delivered reduced performance. The fourth engine eventually came on
line when the aircraft was on final approach to Anchorage. Although the
crew landed safely, the encounter caused $80 million dollars damage to
the airplane. Under only slightly different circumstances, 240 plus
fatalities and a total hull loss could have been the result.
KLM 867 was only one of several commercial aircraft exposed to
varying amounts of damage during several days of volcanic activity from
Mt. Redoubt. Anchorage is one of the world's busiest airports for both
passengers and cargo. The eventual economic impact of aircraft damages,
cargo delays, passenger flight delays and cancellations, and general
disruption to the Alaskan economy was staggering. Every commercial
aviation operation in or through that territory suffered economic
consequences.
Mt. Redoubt was monitored, and the system of warnings was
activated, but the capability to detect and predict the ash movement,
and to track the cloud, was not as sophisticated in 1989 as it has
become today. Nor were the commercial flight crews as aware of the
hazard, or as specifically trained to deal with avoidance or escape, as
many have been trained to do today.
In an earlier encounter near Jakarta, Indonesia, a British Airways
Boeing 747 had a similar experience at night when Mt. Galungung erupted
and propelled ash to flight altitudes without warning. That BA crew was
enveloped in ash, lost communications because of the electronic
interference, flamed out all four engines, and was left without
assistance until just before an emergency landing. With communications
lost, most aircraft systems failed, and pure visual pilotage to
navigate to safety, they also successfully avoided what could have been
fatal consequences.
Progress
The capability for today has improved. Both geostationary and polar
orbiting satellites employ sensors to detect eruption gases and to
depict cloud movement. However, industrial priorities must constantly
be justified and funding made available to ensure that those
capabilities continue on future replacement satellites. Shifting
priorities and shrinking Federal budgets have lessened the satellite
capabilities in recent years. Operational plans are employed throughout
the world to maintain communications priorities to transmit volcanic
ash hazard warnings and notices within the aviation community. Since
1989, two international volcanic ash and aviation safety conferences
have been held to bring the scientific and aviation communities
together to refine and improve prediction, detection, and monitoring of
the hazard; and to improve training, operational procedures, and
communications and warning strategies within the aviation community.
Remaining Problems to Be Addressed
In spite of the satellite umbrella, seismic monitors are needed
around the world, especially in sparsely populated areas where
communications are not fully developed. The Mariana Islands, for
example, have volcanoes throughout their territory. Mt. Anatahan, the
most active, has only minimal seismic monitoring plus a backup
instrument on nearby Pagan. It has had eruptions for the last three
years, including a stretch of five straight months of activity
propelling ash clouds to cruise flight altitudes. Flights to the
islands have been disrupted, and there have been deviations of
commercial traffic flying air routes over the islands. Though Guam and
Saipan are usually excellent en route alternates for over flights,
volcanic activity introduces special emergency fuel and weight limiting
procedures for long-range twin-engine commercial aircraft. These
special procedures and diversions have cost carriers in the millions of
extra operating dollars. In addition, U.S. military operations around
Guam have been frequently postponed or cancelled, driving DOD
expenditures there higher. A wider array of monitoring in the Marianas
could improve predictability, allow earlier warnings for the air
traffic system, and reduce unnecessary reroutes and/or cancellations in
this important area of the world.
Lesson Summary
Potentially active volcanoes, especially in remote
locations, should be seismically monitored 24/7.
Geologic observatories must coordinate closely with regional
air traffic authorities to ensure that warnings are
disseminated as soon as possible.
Commercial operators should ensure that flight crew training
curricula address the normal and emergency procedures for
hazard avoidance and inadvertent encounters.
The Congress and U.S. Government agencies should be
cognizant of the volcanic hazard and its impacts on aviation,
in order to understand the technical and financial support
required to maintain the necessary detection and prediction
resources. Aspects of this program are shared by the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), the Smithsonian Institution, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its
National Weather Service (NWS), and The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). All of their administrative budgets must
be annotated in support of shares of that responsibility.
Conclusion
Commercial turbojet aircraft are certified with multiple redundant
systems to prevent total system failures. Yet even they can be rendered
helpless by volcanic ash. Therefore, detection, prediction and
dissemination strategies are essential to avoid the hazard. Either we
will identify a turning point in our understanding of the volcanic
hazards and the impacts on aviation, or we will continue on our present
course and accept the hazards of the encounters that we have reviewed.
Continuing on our present course may produce fatal results.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to share ALPA's views on
this important matter, and I will be happy to answer any questions you
and the other Members of the Subcommittee may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Captain. Dr.
Eichelberger.
STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN C. EICHELBERGER, PROFESSOR OF
VOLCANOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS;
COORDINATING SCIENTIST, ALASKA VOLCANO
OBSERVATORY
Dr. Eichelberger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Members of
the Subcommittee for this opportunity to discuss prediction and
prevention of volcanic hazards. I would like to focus on the
Alaska region and for obvious reasons that's where most of the
U.S. volcanoes are and the Alaska Volcano Observatory which has
an unusual aspect of direct involvement of the academic
research community. I am Coordinating Scientist of AVO, and so
I lead the University portion of the AVO effort. And as Senator
Stevens pointed out, we're now dealing with a major eruption of
Augustine volcano. It's rapidly extruding lava. It had an
explosive phase early on and could go back to major explosions
really at any time.
Americans tend to think of their 49th state as remote,
although remoteness is in the eye of the beholder. Most people
don't think of their homes as remote. It surprises people to
discover that flights between eastern Asia and North America
pass over Alaska, not Hawaii. Thus, some 25,000 people traverse
Alaska's skies every day and Anchorage ties Tokyo in air
freight. Along this route are about 100 volcanoes capable of
blasting ash to flight levels, with the potentially fatal
results that Captain McVenes described. Some of these volcanoes
are in Japan, many in the Russian Far East, and about half in
Alaska.
It is not enough to justify a program by pointing out a
danger. The more important question is whether something can be
done about it. And for volcanoes, this means getting people out
of the way. Happily, prediction of eruptions is possible
through geophysical monitoring, so volcanology is a case where
a modest investment produces a large benefit in reducing the
impact of catastrophic natural events.
For the airlines, adequate monitoring means knowing when
and where it is safe to fly. For communities, it means knowing
when to protect facilities, how to advise people on health
risks and when to evacuate. By making information on the
condition of Augustine volcano, instantly available to
everyone, AVO, I believe, has vastly reduced the disruption
caused by the current activity.
Our observatory is unique in the world in that it is a
thoroughly collaborative undertaking of Federal and State
government scientists, and, key from my standpoint, faculty and
students of the university. The strengths of this approach are
diversity of expertise, the connectedness of the university to
local communities, government agencies, and the U.S. scientific
community, and--most of all from the university's perspective--
the involvement of students in exciting science for immediate
public benefit and the education of the next generation of
geoscientists.
The challenges of Alaska which our Chairman is well aware
of, have kind of defined our areas of leadership. We have
developed the means to geophysically monitor volcanoes in
remote harsh environments. We've been the first to use
satellite remote sensing operationally for volcano monitoring.
We have educated a diverse group of talented geoscientists
who serve in public, private and academic sectors, not just in
natural hazard mitigation but also in areas of mineral and
energy resources.
We now have 30 volcanoes geophysically monitored and no
other observatory in the world comes close to that.
Finally, and here again our academic face helps us, we're
the most international of observatories, linking with our
Russian colleagues to cover the entire North Pacific. For the
university, having a strong core program in volcano monitoring
leads to success in related areas. Spin-offs from this work
include a new model for particulate plumes; new satellite
remote sensing techniques; international volcano research
drilling in Japan (we actually drilled through the conduit of
an active volcano); geothermal energy research in Alaska (which
I think is a bright hope for the future); and collaborative
volcanological education and research in the Russian Far East
and Alaska--the latter is supported by the National Science
Foundation and the Russian Academy of Sciences involving
students from all over Russia and the U.S. These NSF programs
have opened a new bright window in our common border with
Russia, which I think is very important.
The immediate challenge for the Alaska Volcano Observatory,
illuminated by the current eruption, is stability of Federal
support. We hope that through improved coordination among the
Departments of Interior, Transportation and Commerce and the
National Volcano Early Warning System that Dr. Quick is going
to discuss that will become possible.
The need for a combination of instrumented vigilance,
advances in technology and science of volcano monitoring, and
geoscience education will continue as long as humankind exists
on this dynamic planet. The benefits are not only property and
lives saved, but in knowledge gained and in students inspired.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Eichelberger follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. John C. Eichelberger, Professor of
Volcanology, University of Alaska Fairbanks; Coordinating Scientist,
Alaska Volcano Observatory
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity to discuss the natural hazard threat that volcanoes pose to
international aviation over Alaska, to Alaska's communities, and to the
role that the Alaska Volcano Observatory plays in mitigating this
hazard. James Quick of the U.S. Geological Survey, on behalf of Acting
Director Patrick Leahy, is reporting at this hearing on the national
program of volcano hazard mitigation. I would like to focus on some of
the special and unusual aspects of this work in the Alaska region by
the Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO), an observatory which itself has
some unusual aspects. I am Coordinating Scientist of AVO, and as such
lead the University of Alaska portion of the AVO effort. This is an
important time for such a report, as we are now dealing with an
explosive eruption in Alaska's most populous region, as well as with
unrest at other volcanoes. I believe that AVO's successful prediction
of and response to the eruption of Augustine Volcano makes the case for
continued support of this effort all the more compelling.
Americans tend to think of their 49th state as remote, although
remoteness is in the eye of the beholder. A remote place is far from
home and usually at the corner of a map. But Earth does not have
corners. It surprises people to discover that flights between eastern
Asia and North America pass over Alaska, not Hawaii. Thus, some 25,000
people traverse Alaska's skies every day and Anchorage ties Tokyo
(Narita) in landed airfreight. Along this route are about 100 volcanoes
capable of blasting ash to flight levels, some in Japan, many in
Russia, and about half in Alaska. However, Alaska's volcanoes are
remote in the sense of getting geophysical equipment installed and
getting data out. They provide unforgiving environments for hi-tech
instrumentation. These facts, combined with Alaska's small population,
define the mission of AVO and explain its areas of international
leadership in volcanology.
Of course, it is not enough to justify a program by pointing out a
danger. The more important question is whether something can be done to
reduce the impact of a natural event in terms of damage to property and
loss of life. For volcanoes, this often means getting people out of
harm's way, which in turn requires either immediate or preferably
advance warning of eruptions. Happily, prediction of eruptions in a
useful timeframe is often possible for volcanoes through observation of
increased seismicity, subtle inflation, and increased heat and gas
output. These changes are detected through surface seismic and GPS
networks, through surveillance flights, and through sophisticated
satellite remote sensing techniques. In addition to when, it is vital
to know how a volcano will erupt, and for this we rely on the lessons
of history that geology of the volcano provides.
Ash clouds do not respect immigration procedures, and so
comprehensive monitoring requires close coordination with international
counterparts. Finally, hazard information must be disseminated widely,
freely, and instantly, as is now possible through the Internet and
World Wide Web. These activities, then, comprise the Alaska Volcano
Observatory. Except for very large eruptions--infrequent but they do
happen, and Alaska did have the world's largest eruption of the 20th
century in 1912--potential losses are less than for large earthquakes
or hurricanes. But volcanology is a case where a modest investment
produces a large benefit in reducing the impact of catastrophic events.
For the airlines, the result of AVO's vigilance is knowing when to
cancel flights during an eruption, knowing when it is safe to fly, or
knowing when to take on extra fuel and less cargo if diversion may be
necessary. Indeed, the availability and reliability of volcano eruption
warnings is a factor in cargo airlines choosing to use Anchorage as a
refueling stop. For communities, it means when to shut down or protect
facilities from ash and how to advise people on health risks.
How does one carry out a sophisticated and diverse monitoring
program in a state with a small population? The way Alaskans persevere
through other challenges: cooperation. The Alaska Volcano Observatory
is unique in the U.S. and probably the world in that it is a thoroughly
collaborative undertaking of Federal scientists, state scientists, and
university faculty and students. There are many rewards to this
approach, despite its seeming administrative complexity. As the USGS
Acting Director cites, the USGS has a Congressional mandate to mitigate
geologic hazards, of which volcanism is an important component. The
USGS manages AVO and supports it within its national pool of
volcanological talent. The Alaska Division of Geological and
Geophysical Surveys (ADGGS) has a similar mandate at the state level,
and is naturally more attuned to state priorities. In addition, ADGGS
maintains extensive knowledge and databases of state geology, and is a
logical choice for disseminating this information to the public. The
University of Alaska has the unique role within the partnership of
education, both in terms of introducing students to societally engaged
science and in producing the next generation of geoscientists. It also
provides a fertile intellectual environment that is more difficult to
maintain in government agencies. All three partners have their
specialties, though they also all participate in the monitoring and
scientific aspects of the operation.
Strengths of this unique approach are the diversity of expertise it
makes available, the connectedness of the observatory to local
communities, government agencies, and the U.S. scientific community,
and--most of all from the university's perspective--the involvement of
students in exciting science for immediate public benefit. It is worth
noting that volcanology programs funded by other agencies such as the
National Science Foundation (NSF) and NASA cannot provide this
experience because geophysical monitoring, the task of turning
geoscience data quickly into information for safety decisions, is
solely the mission of the USGS Volcano Hazards Program.
The challenges of Alaska have defined AVO's areas of leadership. We
have pioneered the installation of stand-alone geophysical stations
that can operate without attention for two to three years in a harsh
environment, telemetering real-time seismic and GPS data via radio,
satellite, and telephone links to Anchorage and Fairbanks. We have
initiated the first operational satellite monitoring of active
volcanoes, sometimes catching the very earliest precursory activity
because infrared-imaging satellites (for example, weather satellites)
can peer down into deep craters. We have contributed much to the
scientific community's understanding of how volcanoes work. And we have
educated a diverse cadre of talented geoscientists who serve in public,
private and academic sectors, not just in natural hazard mitigation and
research, but also in acquisition of mineral and energy resources. We
have also developed volcanology's most acclaimed website, which serves
the dual purposes of dissemination of hazard information and, for the
Nation as a whole, science education. We are the most international of
observatories, having worked with our Russian colleagues to develop
monitoring capabilities first in Kamchatka and now in the Kurile
Islands. Russian volcanoes frequently put ash into areas where the U.S.
has aviation safety responsibilities. The most amazing fact about AVO
is the number of volcanoes geophysically monitored: 30. No other
observatory in the world comes close.
For the university, having a strong core program in volcano
monitoring leads to success in related areas of endeavor. Spin-offs
from this work include a new model for particulate dispersal in the
atmosphere; new satellite remote sensing techniques; volcano research
drilling in Japan funded by the international scientific community;
geothermal energy research in Alaska; and collaborative volcanological
education and research in the Russian Far East and Alaska, supported by
NSF and the Russian Academy of Sciences and involving students from all
over Russia and the U.S. These NSF programs have opened a new bright
window in our common border with Russia.
The immediate challenge for the Alaska Volcano Observatory is
adequate funding, not so much in terms of dollars though a modest
increase is essential, but in increased stability. The USGS Volcano
Hazards Program has not received sufficient funds to cover the expanded
role of monitoring volcanoes that threaten only aircraft. Hence,
Congress has annually assigned about half of AVO's budget, representing
mitigation of the ash hazard to aircraft, to the FAA, which then
transfers the funds through the Department of Commerce to USGS. This
cumbersome process precludes long-term planning. This year we have a
serious funding shortfall just as Augustine Volcano emerged from two-
decade slumbers and volcanoes Spurr, Veniaminof, Cleveland, and Korovin
became ``hot.''
Alaska Volcano Observatory is the most obvious example of the
evolving role in natural hazard mitigation of the USGS Volcano Hazards
Program. Before AVO, no ``remote'' volcanoes were monitored. Changing
perceptions of remoteness are a natural consequence of increasing human
population and changing patterns of human travel, specifically,
reliance on long-distance, great-circle-route air travel. Fortunately,
evolving technology has kept pace and gives us the tools to mitigate
newly recognized hazards. The need for a combination of instrumented
vigilance, advances in technology and science of volcano monitoring,
and geoscience education will continue as long as humankind exists on
this dynamic planet. The benefits are in knowledge gained as well as in
property and lives saved.
The Chairman. Our next witness is Mr. James Quick, Program
Coordinator for the Volcano Hazards Program at USGS. Dr. Quick.
STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES E. QUICK, PROGRAM
COORDINATOR, VOLCANO HAZARDS PROGRAM, U.S.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dr. Quick. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for this opportunity to discuss the threat that
volcanoes pose to aviation and our vision for a national
volcano early warning system to monitor the Nation's volcanoes
at levels commensurate with the threat that each poses.
The message that I hope to convey is that volcanic
eruptions even at seemingly remote volcanoes pose a serious
threat to aviation. But this threat can be effectively
mitigated by strategic improvement of volcano monitoring
capability coupled with continued improvement in interagency
communication and response plans.
Currently Mount St. Helens in Washington, Kilauea in
Hawaii, and Augustine in Alaska are erupting. And several other
volcanoes are being closely watched for possible renewed
eruptive activity.
Most people are aware of the hazards that erupting
volcanoes create on the ground, including mudflows, fiery
avalanches, and lava flows such as those that could reach in
less than 2 hours the highly developed Kona Coast on the flanks
of Mauna Loa in Hawaii.
Less well known by the public is the threat posed to
aviation by erupting volcanoes. Volcanoes threaten aviation
safety when magma erupts explosively and plumes of small pieces
of volcanic rocks, minerals, and glass, what we term ash, are
ejected high into the atmosphere and drift for long distances
across air routes.
For example, the 1992 eruption of Mt. Spurr in Alaska was
tracked on satellite images for more than 3,000 miles downwind
of the volcano over Canada and the Great Lakes region,
disrupting air traffic as far east as Cleveland, Ohio.
Many major air routes traverse the world's most
volcanically active regions, and numerous instances of aircraft
flying into volcanic ash clouds have demonstrated the life-
threatening and costly damages that can be sustained.
The practical mitigation strategy is for aircraft to avoid
airspace containing volcanic ash. Ash avoidance is not a simple
matter. It involves elements of: ground-based volcano
monitoring, satellite-based detection of ash clouds, modeling
cloud movements in the atmosphere, and coordinated
communication protocols among volcanologists, meteorologists,
air traffic controllers, dispatchers and pilots.
As the USGS has increasingly recognized that volcano
monitoring is needed to protect against aviation hazards, we
have adjusted our monitoring program accordingly. For example,
although the ground population is sparse in the volcanically
active Aleutian Islands of Alaska, the risk to aviation is
high. More than 200 flights carry roughly 25,000 people over
Northern Pacific air routes on a daily basis. With the support
of Senator Stevens, the Alaskan Volcano Observatory, which is a
partnership between USGS, the University of Alaska Fairbanks,
Geophysical Institute, and the State of Alaska has
systematically expanded its monitoring into the Aleutian chain,
from four instrumented volcanoes in 1996, to 30 at the end of
this past summer's field work.
Impending volcanic eruptions can be forecast, and warnings
issued before the hazardous event occurs. This capability was
recently demonstrated at Augustine volcano near Alaska's most
populated area, the Cook Inlet, when the Alaska Volcano
Observatory issued a successful forecast on January 10, 2006.
Such forecasts and warnings depend on telemetered, real-
time data from adequate arrays of different types of monitoring
instruments located on and near volcanoes. No single
geophysical monitoring technique or system can confidently
provide timely alerts of eruptions.
In order to meet the needs of the aviation community, our
goal is to notify the appropriate FAA center of an ash-
producing eruption within 5 minutes of its onset. This level of
notification requires 24/7 operation at U.S. Volcano
Observatories, and sufficient ground-based monitoring networks.
Once an eruption is in progress the USGS, NOAA, FAA and the Air
Force Weather Agency share data and coordinate their warning
messages, so that necessary information reaches the cockpit
quickly.
There are 169 active volcanoes in the United States. In
order to focus resources among these volcanoes, the USGS
recently published an evaluation of the Nation's volcanoes
monitoring needs based on a systematic assessment of the
societal threats they pose. This publication is the scientific
foundation for a national volcano early warning system and
identifies as high priorities for improved monitoring 19
volcanoes in Alaska, and the Northern Mariana Islands, that
pose substantial threats to aviation but that have no real-time
ground-based monitoring, and 9 Cascade volcanoes that pose
threats to both aviation and ground communities, but have
inadequate, or antiquated networks.
In conclusion, please allow me to reiterate that there are
no remote volcanoes when we consider aviation hazards.
Mitigation of this risk requires appropriate volcano
monitoring, timely analysis and efficient teamwork by multiple
agencies.
The USGS will continue to do its part by providing
scientific information based on reliable monitoring data.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing the opportunity to
present this testimony and I'll be pleased to answer any
questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Quick follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. James E. Quick, Program Coordinator, Volcano
Hazards Program, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity to discuss the natural hazard threat that volcanoes pose to
aviation, the U.S. Geological Survey role in volcano research,
monitoring, and eruption warnings, and our national strategy for a
proactive, fully-integrated volcano hazard mitigation effort.
Overview of Volcanic Hazards Program
For more than 125 years, USGS has provided the Department of the
Interior, the Nation, and the world with relevant science to guide
policy and safeguard society. This legacy of scientific excellence is
reinforced by the authority afforded USGS under the Disaster Relief Act
(Pub. L. 93-288, popularly known as the Stafford Act) as the lead
Federal agency with responsibility to provide notification for
earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and landslides, to enhance public
safety, and to reduce losses through effective forecasts and warnings
based on the best possible scientific information.
The United States is home to 169 volcanoes considered to be active,
more than any other country in the world. The USGS has recently
completed a systematic assessment of the relative societal threat posed
by each of the Nation's 169 geologically active volcanoes. For each
volcano, the study determined a level of societal threat based on an
evaluation of the hazards that could be anticipated and the societal
exposure to those hazards. This study, An Assessment of Volcanic Threat
and Monitoring Capabilities in the United States: Framework for a
National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS), the recommendations of
which are discussed later in my testimony, is being used to guide long-
term improvements to the national volcano-monitoring infrastructure
operated by USGS and its partners. The USGS and its Federal, State, and
university partners operate five volcano observatories to monitor
eruptive activity and unrest at 50 volcanoes in the Cascade Range,
Hawaii, Alaska, California, and Yellowstone National Park. Currently,
three U.S. volcanoes are erupting (Mount St. Helens in Washington,
Kilauea in Hawaii, and Augustine in Alaska), and two are being closely
watched for unrest or renewed eruptive activity, Mauna Loa in Hawaii
and Anatahan in the Northern Mariana Islands.
The threats that volcanoes pose to populations on the ground are
generally understood in the United States. Most people are aware of the
hazards that erupting volcanoes create, such as lava flows, hot,
gaseous flows of volcanic blocks and ash, and mudflows. The potential
harm of these phenomena, in terms of loss of life and societal and
economic disruption, are very serious considerations for communities
near or downwind and downstream of many of the Nation's volcanoes. For
example, lava flows from Mauna Loa Volcano, which has been exhibiting
signs of increased unrest for two years and may be advancing toward
eruption, can reach the highly developed Kona Coast of Hawaii in as
little as two hours. Within the Cascade Range, 13 volcanoes pose
significant threats to people and infrastructure on the ground. At
Mount Shasta in California, searing avalanches of volcanic rock and gas
could reach more than 6,000 people in the vicinity of the town of Weed
and Mount Shasta City in less than 10 minutes. Large mudflows formed by
melting of thick ice and snow on Mount Rainier, Mount Baker, or Glacier
Peak in Washington could race down populated valleys at speeds of up to
60 miles per hour, devastating communities lying in the path of the
potentially deadly mudflows.
With appropriate monitoring, impending volcanic eruptions can be
forecast and warnings issued before the hazardous events occur. This
capability was demonstrated in advance of the June 1991 eruption of
Mount Pinatubo, Philippines--the largest volcanic eruption of the 20th
century to affect a heavily populated area. Because the eruption was
forecast by scientists from the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and
Seismology (PHIVOLCS) and USGS, civil and military leaders were able to
order massive evacuations and take measures to protect property before
the eruption. The USGS and PHIVOLCS estimate that their eruption
forecasts saved at least 5,000 and as many as 20,000 lives. At least
$200 million to $275 million in losses of military aircraft and
equipment were averted by having those assets flown to safe areas or
covered in advance of the eruption. A more recent example of this
successful forecasting ability was demonstrated at Augustine Volcano
near Alaska's most populated area, the Cook Inlet. Utilizing monitoring
networks already in place, the Alaska Volcano Observatory detected the
onset of unrest and raised the alert level on November 29, 2005, and
began monitoring the unrest closely to determine if activity was likely
to escalate, plateau, or die down. Unrest continued to escalate, and
the USGS issued an information bulletin on January 10, 2006, that
indicated a heightened possibility of an explosive eruption within the
``next few weeks or months.'' The following day, an eruption at
Augustine Volcano was underway. Timely forecasts and warnings such as
these examples depend on telemetered, real-time data from adequate
arrays of different types of monitoring instruments located on and near
volcanoes and on remotely sensed data transmitted by other agencies
(e.g. GOES satellite data from National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)).
Volcanic Threats to Aviation Safety
Less well known by the public is the threat posed to aviation by
erupting volcanoes. Volcanic eruptions pose a serious threat to
aviation, but one that can be mitigated through the combined efforts of
earth and atmospheric scientists, the aviation industry, and air-
traffic control centers. Volcanoes threaten aviation safety when magma
erupts explosively to form clouds of small jagged pieces of rocks,
minerals, and volcanic glass the size of sand and silt that rises miles
above the earth's surface and is spread by winds aloft over long
distances across flight paths of jet aircraft. Unlike the soft fluffy
material created by burning wood, leaves, or paper, ``volcanic ash''
particles are angular, abrasive fragments having the hardness of a
pocket-knife blade. Upon impact with an aircraft traveling several
miles per minute, ash particles abrade the windscreen, fuselage, and
fan blades in the turbine engines. In addition to the problem of
abrasion, the melting temperature of the glassy rock material that
comprises ash is lower than the operating temperatures of jet engines.
Consequently, ingested ash particles can melt in hot sections of
aircraft engines and then fuse onto critical components in cooler parts
of the engine. An aircraft encounter with ash can result in loss of
visibility, and failure of critical navigational and flight systems,
and can immediately and severely degrade engine performance, resulting
in engine flame out and total loss of thrust power.
The volcanic-ash hazard to aviation extends the volcanic threat far
beyond the local area or region where a volcano is located. For
example, the 1992 eruption of Mount Spurr in Alaska produced an ash
cloud that was tracked on satellite images for three days and more than
3,000 miles downwind of the volcano over Canada and the Great Lakes
region.
Many major air routes traverse the world's most volcanically active
regions, and numerous instances of aircraft flying into volcanic ash
clouds have demonstrated the life-threatening and costly damages that
can be sustained. From 1973 through 2003, 105 encounters of aircraft
with airborne volcanic ash have been documented. This is a minimum
number of encounters because incidents have not been consistently
reported.
The potential for a disastrous outcome of an ash/aircraft encounter
has been illustrated by three dramatic encounters. The first occurred
in 1982 when a Boeing 747--at night over water with 240 passengers--
flew into an ash cloud about 100 miles downwind from Galunggung volcano
in Indonesia. The aircraft lost power in all 4 engines and descended
25,000 ft. from an altitude of 37,000 ft. above sea level. After 16
minutes of powerless descent, the crew was able to restart three
engines and make a safe landing in Jakarta. A few weeks later, a second
Boeing 747 with 230 passengers encountered an ash cloud from another
eruption of the same volcano. The aircraft lost power to 3 engines and
descended nearly 8,000 ft. before restarting one engine and making a
nighttime emergency landing on two engines. In both cases, the aircraft
suffered extensive damage. Fortunately, a greater human tragedy was
averted.
A third incident occurred in 1989 and was related to an eruptive
event at Redoubt Volcano in Alaska. A Boeing 747 with 231 passengers
onboard was nearing Anchorage International Airport and flew into what
appeared to be a thin layer of weather clouds. It was actually an ash
cloud erupted by Redoubt Volcano, approximately 150 miles distant. The
aircraft lost power from all four engines and descended for four
minutes over mountainous terrain. With only one to two minutes
remaining before impact, the engines were restarted and the aircraft
safely landed in Anchorage. Damage was estimated at more than $80
million (in 1989 dollars).
A decade of these harrowing events prompted action by airlines,
dispatchers, air-traffic control, aviation meteorologists, and
volcanologists. It had become clear to all that damaging, even life-
threatening, aircraft encounters with volcanic ash are not flukes but
rather a persistent hazard that requires a coordinated, multi-pronged,
operational response for the purpose of ash avoidance. Responding to
this newly recognized hazard, the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO)--with strong participation from USGS scientists--
established procedures on a global scale for the rapid dissemination of
information related to ash-producing eruptions and the movement of ash
clouds to the aviation sector. One of these procedures is the use of a
color-coded alert system for volcanic ash warnings to the air carrier
industry. This alert system, originally developed in 1990 by USGS
scientists at the Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO), is now recommended
for worldwide use by ICAO.
Areas Targeted for Increased Monitoring
As the USGS has increasingly recognized that volcano monitoring is
needed to protect against aviation hazards as well as the more well-
known ground hazards, we have adjusted our monitoring program
accordingly. For example, although the ground population is sparse in
the volcanically active Aleutian Islands of Alaska, the risk to
aviation is high. More than 200 flights carry roughly 25,000 people
over Northern Pacific air routes on a daily basis. Since 1996, with
funding support from FAA, AVO has undertaken to expand its monitoring
beyond the few volcanoes that threaten communities around Cook Inlet in
the south central portion of the state. Over the past decade, AVO has
systematically expanded its seismic monitoring into the Aleutian chain,
from 4 instrumented volcanoes in 1996 to 28 at the end of this past
summer's field work. This increase in real-time monitoring capability
is an amazing accomplishment of both planning and execution on the part
of AVO, a partnership between USGS, the University of Alaska Fairbanks,
and the State of Alaska.
AVO also developed a capability for frequent, systematic satellite
monitoring of active volcanoes throughout the North Pacific, to
recognize pre-eruptive thermal signals at volcanoes and to detect
eruptive plumes. This pioneering effort at regional satellite
monitoring complements traditional seismic monitoring and serves as a
model to other volcano observatories worldwide. AVO is also
contributing to National Weather Service (NWS) efforts to develop the
Volcanic Ash Collaboration Tool, a system that uses networked
workstations for real-time collaboration among agencies by providing
common views of data sources and the ability to rapidly delineate and
discuss areas of ash hazard.
Another area where USGS recently began volcano monitoring due to
volcanic hazards to aviation is the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands. Like the Aleutians, ground population is sparse on
most of these islands, but the aviation risk is significant, including
the threat to stealth B-2's and other military aircraft housed at
Andersen Air Force Base on Guam. The initial eruption in May 2003 of
Anatahan--a long dormant volcano with no real-time ground-based
monitoring in place--was a surprise. Since then, USGS has installed a
rudimentary seismic system with real-time data transmission and is
working closely with local emergency management officials, the U.S. Air
Force, NOAA, and FAA to provide eruption notifications.
The activity at Anatahan has demanded sustained vigilance. In 2005,
the volcano erupted to over 40,000 feet numerous times and expelled
several million cubic yards of ash during a nearly continuous eruptive
episode that lasted eight months. After the largest ash eruption, USGS
provided forecasts of ash deposition on Saipan to the local government
there. USGS also supports AFWA's mission of providing volcanic-ash
advisories and situational awareness to DOD aviation. For example, USGS
volcanologists furnished short-term forecasts of potential ash-plume
heights to AFWA for use in planning and completing a critical training
exercise in the Marianas region by the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group.
Interagency and International Coordination
Ash avoidance is not a simple matter--it requires the coordinated
efforts of volcanologists, meteorologists, air-traffic control centers,
dispatchers, and pilots. It involves elements of: ground-based volcano
monitoring, satellite-based detection of ash clouds, modeling cloud
movements in the atmosphere, and specific communication protocols among
the diverse parties responding to the hazard.
In the United States, the USGS, NOAA, Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), and Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) at Offutt Air
Force Base in Nebraska collaborate according to International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) guidelines, sharing data and refining
communication protocols so that necessary information reaches
commercial and military pilots, dispatchers, and air-traffic
controllers quickly. The USGS has responsibility for providing
notifications of significant pre-eruption volcanic activity, volcanic
eruptions, and volcanic ash in the atmosphere. The USGS capability to
provide such notifications is based on data and observations collected
from monitoring networks operated by the five U.S. volcano
observatories supported by the USGS Volcano Hazards Program.
USGS volcano monitoring activities do not stand alone. For both
aviation and ground hazards, no single geophysical monitoring technique
or system can confidently provide timely alerts of eruptions; neither
seismic networks, GPS arrays, nor remote sensing techniques on their
own are adequate for reliable forecasting or alerting purposes.
Recognizing this, we have developed very close working relationships
with groups that track ash clouds using civilian meteorological
satellites, in particular the AFWA and NOAA's Volcanic Ash Advisory
Centers (VAACs) located in Washington D.C. and Anchorage. During
precursory unrest and eruptive episodes, we share observational data
and maintain frequent telephone contact to ensure consistent
interpretations of volcanic activity and potential hazards. No one
organization has a monopoly on critical monitoring information.
Effective communication among the various groups is crucial to
successful mitigation of the hazard.
In addition to USGS monitoring efforts, we also are working to
improve the communication procedures that are critical for eruption and
ash-cloud information to reach the cockpit. In call-down lists at U.S.
volcano observatories, FAA, VAACs, and aviation weather offices of the
National Weather Service (NWS) are among the first agencies to be
notified. Since the mid-1990s, USGS scientists have worked with Russian
scientists to disseminate information about eruptions from the
Kamchatka Peninsula that could affect U.S. controlled airspace.
Recently, USGS scientists played a key role in the establishment of the
first-ever monitoring and reporting group for the Kurile Island chain
of volcanoes. The USGS has organized the formulation of inter-agency
operating plans for dealing with ash episodes in the North Pacific and
Marianas regions. These plans provide operational guidance by
documenting the required procedures of the government agencies
responsible for ensuring safety of flight operations. The USGS is
working with FAA, NOAA, and AFWA to complete a national operational
plan for volcanic ash hazards to aviation.
Another important role for USGS is hazard education--building
awareness among volcanologists, meteorologists, pilots, dispatchers,
and air-traffic controllers of the nature of the hazard and how to
respond to it. The USGS has assisted in the development of training
videos for pilots and air-traffic controllers, provided technical
briefings for airlines and industry groups, organized technical
symposia, and published articles in aviation journals.
Research Priorities
Research is also a critical component of mitigation. To improve our
forecasting abilities, we need to gain a much better fundamental
understanding of eruption processes. Research and experience in the 25
years since the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens has brought
volcanology to a point where, with adequate monitoring systems in
place, the timing of volcanic eruptions can be forecast with some
confidence hours to days in advance. The next major scientific goal for
volcanology is to accurately forecast the size and duration of
eruptions, which bears directly on hazards issues confronted by enroute
aircraft and people on the ground. For instance, being able to forecast
that an eruption will be small and unlikely to erupt ash to altitudes
above 15,000 feet versus one that sends ash to 50,000 feet will have
amajor impact on response by the aviation community. Another aspect is
the ability to identify when an eruption is over, not just temporarily
paused. This is quite a complex problem. Such information is valuable
to airports, for example, because it tells them when they can start
cleaning up from ashfall and hasten the return to normal operation.
Air routes over active volcanic regions will continue to be heavily
used, and volcanic ash will persist as a serious aviation hazard. Much
has been done to mitigate the volcanic threat to aviation. More
volcanoes are being monitored now than 10 years ago, and eruption
reporting targeted to the aviation sector is in place. Satellite
detection of ash clouds and forecast models of ash-cloud dispersion
have greatly improved. As a result of increased awareness and improved
information in support of ash avoidance, no multiple-engine airplane
failures have occurred since 1991. Despite these successes, much work
remains. Many hazardous U.S. volcanoes are not monitored at a level
that provides for adequate tracking of volcanic unrest that precedes
eruption. It is still possible for there to be significant periods of
time when ash clouds drift undetected in or near air-traffic routes, as
was the case with the surprise eruption in 2003 of Anatahan volcano in
the Mariana Islands. Hours elapsed from the eruption's onset to the
issuance of the first warning to aviation of ash in the atmosphere.
Results of the Volcanic Threat and Monitoring Capabilities Assessment
In order to better focus resources on improved monitoring of
volcanoes that present the greatest threat, USGS recently published the
results of the first overall evaluation of the Nation's volcano-
monitoring needs based on a systematic assessment of the societal
threats posed by all of the 169 geologically active U.S. volcanic
centers. The publication is entitled An Assessment of Volcanic Threat
and Monitoring Capabilities in the United States: Framework for a
National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS). The report scores
various hazard and exposure factors for each volcano and identifies
volcanoes where monitoring capabilities are inadequate--and in some
cases nonexistent--for the threats posed. The results of the NVEWS
assessment are being used to guide long-term improvements to the
national volcano-monitoring infrastructure operated by USGS and
affiliated partners.
Aviation hazards carried substantial weight in the NVEWS
assessment. The USGS developed a methodology for assessing aviation
threat on a regional and local basis at each volcano and determined
that about half of U.S. volcanoes represent a significant threat to
aviation. Of this group, 19 volcanoes in Alaska and the Northern
Mariana Islands that pose substantial threats to aviation have no real-
time ground-based monitoring. These 19 volcanoes are identified as
high-priority NVEWS targets where better monitoring is needed.
Surprise eruptions occur at volcanoes that lack real-time ground-
based sensor networks. Depending on the remoteness of the volcano, even
eruption reports may be delayed without proper monitoring. Recent
experience shows that while eruptions can be confirmed in a matter of
minutes at volcanoes with ground-based monitoring, it may require
several hours for eruption confirmation at un-instrumented volcanoes by
remote sensing or pilot reports. Because of the speed with which an
aircraft can travel toward a potential volcanic-ash encounter (about 8
miles per minute), real-time 24/7 eruption reporting is necessary. Our
goal is that an observatory shall notify the appropriate regional air
traffic center of an ash-producing eruption within five minutes of the
start of the event. This level of notification requires 24/7 operations
at U.S. volcano observatories, adequate networks of seismic and other
instruments and, in some cases, portable ground-based RADAR to detect
ash clouds at night and in bad weather.
In the NVEWS assessment, other very-high-threat volcanoes,
including nine in the Cascade Range in California, Washington, and
Oregon and four in Alaska, were identified as having inadequate or
antiquated networks and are considered under-monitored for the threats
posed to both aviation and ground communities and infrastructure.
Eruptions at Mount St. Helens, Kilauea, Augustine, and Anatahan and
unrest at Mauna Loa in Hawaii and Spurr in Alaska also require a robust
monitoring capability.
Conclusion
Volcanic ash will continue to be a dangerous and costly threat to
aviation into the foreseeable future. The USGS will continue its
efforts to enhance monitoring capabilities at those sites where the
greatest risk exists.
Hazard mitigation for U.S. volcanoes requires:
Continued improvement of monitoring capabilities and
instrumentation of U.S. volcanoes with high aviation risk.
Concerns should focus not only on reporting where and when an
eruption has occurred and how high its plume went, but also
with reliably diagnosing volcanic unrest and forecasting likely
eruptive activity, including how long eruptive activity might
continue and the potential for recurring explosive events.
Continued refinement of protocols for communicating eruption
and ash hazard information to other agencies and clientele. The
aviation community must be familiar with and confident in
monitoring and notification abilities through the use of
conferences, publications, drills, and demonstrations.
Continued USGS leadership in building awareness of the ash
hazard to aviation. Without broad-based hazard awareness, the
commitment to carry out a mitigation strategy is severely
weakened. The USGS will continue to foster hazard education
through a variety of venues and methods.
There are no remote volcanoes when we consider aviation hazards.
Mitigating this risk requires efficient teamwork by multiple agencies.
The USGS will continue to do its part by providing timely information
based on reliable monitoring data. However, as the ability to prevent
ash encounters improves to the point that fewer incidents occur, we
must not mistakenly conclude that no threat exists. Rather, we must
call for continued vigilance and support of proven, broad-based
mitigation efforts.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present this
testimony.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. We have a problem here
and I don't know how we're going to deal with it this year,
because of the policies on earmarks. In the past the monies
that you have spoken about for the Alaska Volcano Observatory
have come from three basic sources from USGS, and this year the
President's budget does contain the same amount we had--as a
matter of fact it's gone up by $100,000 its $4.4 million, in
2006 and 2007. However the monies that the FAA has received
have been because of an earmark that the Congress approved at
my request each year. NOAA also contributed the $300,000
dollars a year to maintain the ash flow computer models. Their
funding was cut by 50 percent and the future of the FAA money
is in serious doubt.
Now Captain, I think you've made the case for the
international air routes going through the airspace of these
volcanoes and we'll do our best to try and maintain that FAA
earmark. As I said, I really don't know what's going to happen
to it this year. But let me ask Dr. Quick--USGS, because of
Augustine I understand, has had to direct a lot of your monies
in both monitoring equipment and manpower to really help keep
track of the Augustine eruption patterns that have developed
since January of this year. Has that adversely affected USGS'
capability to monitor other active volcanoes throughout our
country, Alaska and the south 48?
Dr. Quick. Mr. Chairman, the USGS responds to new eruptions
of volcanoes by redirecting funds to the extent possible. The
eruption of Augustine has basically impacted our operations in
Alaska such that we will be performing no field work on hazard
assessments in the Aleutians this year, nor will we be
extending the monitoring network in the Aleutian chain this
year as the eruption continues, as we project it may for
another 5 months or so. Based on past histories, we project
that it will be necessary to redirect funds from other
activities, such as purchase and deployment of equipment to
extend the monitoring network in the Mariana Islands and
rebuilding of the monitoring network damaged by the eruption of
Anatahan also on the Mariana Islands. Funds will be redirected
that were previously identified for improvement of monitoring
networks at Mount Rainier, Mount Hood, and Three Sisters.
Let me assure you that monitoring volcanoes is the last
thing, however, that we will turn off. And we will continue to
monitor volcanoes as long as our networks are active.
The Chairman. Well, thank you. Have you discussed this with
the hierarchy of USGS in terms of any requests for supplemental
money for your agency?
Dr. Quick. We have had discussions about possible
supplementals, yes.
The Chairman. We'd be happy to be included in those
discussions, if that's possible, because there is a
supplemental going through right now, as a matter of fact. And
I would not want your agency to be without funds necessary to
continue expanding this coverage. As Captain McVenes has
indicated the danger goes all the way across the Pacific, not
just in our area. I hope that we can continue to expand and to
increase the safety factor as far as those planes are
concerned. Dr. Eichelberger, again I thank you for coming all
this way. Can you tell me, you're part of this observatory; it
really involves information going from USGS, from NOAA, to the
FAA.
Dr. Eichelberger. Right.
The Chairman. Each agency has to be involved. And obviously
each agency has to have funds. Are you satisfied that the
funding of the past was sufficient?
Dr. Eichelberger. Yes, I think the outcome as far as
enacted funding has been sufficient. It's been very good.
Although this year we're doing a million dollars or about 15
percent, just as we face this eruption. And I'm very concerned
about the future for the reasons you outlined.
The Chairman. You're right, that earmark went down a
million dollars. It was at a $4 million dollar level.
Dr. Eichelberger. That's correct.
The Chairman. And now it's down to a $3 million dollar
level. And in fact it requires an earmark to even maintain
that.
Dr. Eichelberger. That's correct, yes. So, without either
an earmark or a new firm arrangement for support within the
Federal budget process, we'll be starting to dismantle the
team. It's easy to see why this has happened I think. For one
thing originally it was seen as kind of a local problem in
Alaska. But really it's an international one. And then of
course the aviation hazard was a newly recognized thing. It was
an expansion of the USGS mission which USGS never received an
increase in funding for. It's in a sense within FAA mission but
it's not within FAA expertise, so one can understand how this
has happened, but it certainly needs to be addressed.
The Chairman. Well, after the--what was it, the 1989
eruption we had a meeting at the FAA office in Anchorage, USGS
came to that, as well as representatives of the airline
industry and the university and the observatory process was the
outcome of that meeting.
Dr. Eichelberger. Yes.
The Chairman. And it has been looked on by Congress as just
another Alaskan piece of pork.
Dr. Eichelberger. That's extremely unfortunate. But, you
know----
The Chairman. And that's one of the unfortunate problems of
being located where we are, whatever we add to the budget as
one of my colleagues formally said, was Eskimo ice cream. I
just don't know how to handle this one this year. We're going
to have to have some greater understanding throughout the
country the fact that those planes are flying in--they're not
even landing in Alaska. Isn't that right, Captain?
Dr. Eichelberger. Many of them are not, that's right.
The Chairman. Most of them are over flying Alaska these
days, cargo planes land there because of fuel, but the bulk of
the planes that your pilots fly start in Chicago or New York,
and fly over Alaska on the great circle route to the Orient.
And that's the great advantage of the great circle route to the
pilots, it just happens to come over Alaska.
Dr. Eichelberger. Yes.
The Chairman. But this is not an Alaska matter, this is
protecting Americans and people from all over the world that
are traveling on those planes. We don't seem to have the
understanding here that we need.
Dr. Eichelberger. That's right.
The Chairman. Senator Nelson?
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do we know
what some of the other nations in the vicinity do in terms of
monitoring, and what their contribution to this process may be?
They're obviously the beneficiaries of the same route, and they
obviously would have some of the same problems. Do we know what
they're doing?
Dr. Eichelberger. Yes, Japan is very advanced in monitoring
its volcanoes. Probably in general their volcanoes are more
thoroughly monitored than ours are. Russia has a lot of very
bright energetic people and not much in the way of financial
resources right now. And we have worked very closely with them
to help them develop their monitoring, which they are now doing
more and more. In fact I'll be going there after this meeting
and continue that work.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator DeMint?
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM DeMINT,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
Senator DeMint. I apologize for missing your testimony; I
appreciate all of you coming here. It's clearly a problem that
a lot of us have not been that familiar with. So it's very
helpful to me. This Committee is all about prediction and
prevention of natural disasters and certainly volcanoes are one
of those issues. Just one question, I know we need to go vote,
and this has probably already been answered. But does the
airline industry--and Captain, I can direct this at you,
believe that they receive adequate warnings from the National
Weather Service, the Federal Aviation Administration, or the
U.S. Geological Survey, about potential threats of ash plumes?
I mean, where are we with that?
Captain McVenes. Well if you look at the events that have
taken place, fortunately a lot of the mitigation strategies and
the monitoring of volcanic eruptions have improved greatly. We
haven't had any total engine failure situations since 1991, so
obviously there has been some progress made.
But we're still in a position where we need to do a little
bit better job. Have a little bit better monitoring, so we can
do better forecasting of when these eruptions will take place
so that the airlines can better plan their routes around these
areas; so that we don't get ourselves in a position of
inadvertently getting into them when we don't know it.
We also need to have some more research and advancements in
the areas of predicting the movement of the ash clouds again so
we can better plan ahead of time.
Senator DeMint. But this can be a problem at 30-40,000 feet
right?
Captain McVenes. Yes sir.
Senator DeMint. We've got a lot of work to do, I appreciate
all the information and Mr. Chairman, unless you have some
additional questions?
The Chairman. No, I do appreciate you taking the time, all
of you, to come help us make a record of this, so we can do our
best to try and restore this funding this year.
Dr. Eichelberger. Well, thank you. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. I know it's been hard on you particularly,
Doctor, so thank you very much for coming.
[Whereupon at 10:43 a.m., the hearing was adjourned].
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Daniel K. Inouye, U.S. Senator from Hawaii
I doubt that the general public is aware of the grave dangers
volcanic ash clouds present to passenger jets. Given the number of
volcanoes that we have in Hawaii, we are a bit more familiar with this
hazard.
Ash from an erupting volcano can reach 30,000 feet, the same
altitude passenger jets fly. Volcanic ash may limit visibility, damage
flight control systems, and cause jet engines to fail. It is difficult
for pilots and radar operators to distinguish ash clouds from ordinary
clouds, but the implications of flying through an ash cloud can be
disastrous.
The airlines have experienced a number of such cases, including one
incident where a passenger jet lost more than 14,000 feet of altitude
and resulted in $80 million worth of repairs. Also, ash clouds can
drift several hundred miles away from the eruption and present risks to
planes far away from volcanic activity. These are serious concerns for
me and the people of my state because we rely so heavily on aviation
for our transportation needs.
The best way to address this risk is for planes to avoid the
volcanic ash clouds completely. However, this requires coordination
between seismologists, volcanologists, air traffic control operators,
and pilots. This entire system depends on the accurate monitoring of
volcanic activity.
The recent report by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) is
disturbing because it found that many of the most dangerous volcanoes
currently are unmonitored. It correctly concludes that a greater, more
complete monitoring effort is required. I encourage the USGS to commit
greater attention and resources to the National Volcano Early Warning
System.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)
This Statement for the Record will provide a brief background on
the impacts of volcanic ash on aviation, and highlight the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) role in mitigating
the impact of volcanic hazards on aviation.
Impact on Aviation
With the advent of modern fuel-efficient commercial jet aircraft
engines and the increase in flights worldwide, routine volcanic
eruptions, which previously had been only a minor inconvenience to
commercial aviation, have become a major hazard. When fine silica
particles lofted into the atmosphere by volcanic eruptions come into
contact with jet engines, the particles melt from the heat of the
engine and become hard deposits on the turbine blades. These deposits
can eventually result in a loss of power or emergency shut-down of the
engine. Because aircraft are capable of moving at several hundred miles
an hour, the ash particles also act as projectiles. These particles
cause abrasion to the aircraft, damaging windshields, fuselage, and
critical instrumentation on the outside of the aircraft. The ash can
also enter the aircraft's cabin and ventilation systems.
The aviation industry is greatly impacted by the hazards posed from
volcanic ash. More than 80 commercial aircraft worldwide have
unexpectedly encountered volcanic ash in flight and at airports in the
past 15 years. Seven of these encounters caused in-flight loss of jet
engine power, which nearly resulted in the crash of the airplane. These
incidents highlight the vulnerability of aircraft to volcanic ash
clouds.
The national and international aviation communities have taken
action to help aircraft avoid such dangerous environments. In the mid-
1990s, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and NOAA
reached an agreement whereby NOAA monitors satellite imagery and data
to detect volcanic eruptions and, in the event of an ash eruption,
issues advisories and warnings for the aviation community. NOAA also
runs computer simulations to forecast the dispersion of volcanic ash.
NOAA, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) work in a strong partnership to monitor and
mitigate the effects of volcanoes on aviation.
Airspace managers, in consultation with airlines, pilots, and
others in the aviation community, have developed a course of action in
the event of an impending encounter with volcanic ash. The common goal
is to completely avoid the ash cloud. To accomplish this, airspace
managers determine new flight paths for the aircraft based on the
location of the ash cloud and its projected path. There are ``safety
zones'' near ash clouds which range from a few miles to several hundred
miles based on forecast uncertainty and winds. Minor deviations can
cost the airlines in the order of tens of thousands of dollars, while
significant re-routes, which include landing at alternate airports, can
cost airlines hundreds of thousands of dollars or more per flight.
Timely and accurate observation, forecast, and warning information
is crucial to the aviation community for safety and economic reasons.
The aviation industry is moving toward a minimum of five minutes lead
time to be notified of an explosive volcanic eruption. Such an eruption
can send its ash high into the atmosphere reaching flight level in
about five minutes, potentially impacting en route jet traffic.
Research continues to develop better tools for forecasters to provide
faster and more accurate detection of eruptions.
NOAA Operations
Major volcanic events during the 1980s and into the early 1990s
helped to bring the global community together to help mitigate the
hazards of volcanic ash. By 1997, the ICAO established nine worldwide
Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACs) as part of a global network. NOAA
currently operates two of these nine VAACs. The Washington D.C. VAAC is
jointly managed by NOAA's National Weather Service (NWS) and NOAA's
National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS).
The Anchorage, Alaska, VAAC is managed by NWS and co-located with the
NWS Alaska Aviation Weather Unit (AAWU).
The Washington VAAC area of responsibility includes the continental
United States, Central America, the Caribbean, and South America to 10
degrees south latitude. It also includes U.S. controlled oceanic Flight
Information Regions (FIRs). The Anchorage VAAC area of responsibility
includes the Anchorage FIR and a portion of eastern Russia (north of
60+ N. latitude and east of 150+ E. longitude).
The role of the VAAC is to monitor all available satellite, radar,
and other observational data (e.g. Pilot Reports) to determine the
location, extent and movement of volcanic plumes. VAACs use this
information to issue real-time text and graphical products about
airborne volcanic ash to the aviation community. The centers use
volcanic ash dispersion model predictions to assist in making a
forecast of these ash plumes out to 18 hours. The dispersion model
predicts where the volcanic ash will spread over time and this
information is then relayed to the user community. Information about
the volcano, including a detailed forecast of the ash plume, is
included in a Volcanic Ash Advisory (VAA). VAACs provide this
information to international Meteorological Watch Offices (MWOs), which
in turn issue Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMETs) to the
aviation community. The SIGMET is the official warning product for
airborne volcanic ash.
There are dozens of MWOs around the globe, ostensibly one for each
country, or one designated by a country as an MWO. These offices are
established under an ICAO agreement, with three designated in the
United States located at the Aviation Weather Center in Kansas City,
the Weather Forecast Office in Honolulu, and the AAWU in Anchorage.
MWOs are responsible for issuing SIGMETs, warning the aviation
community about atmospheric hazards to aircraft, including volcanic
ash, turbulence, large areas of thunderstorms, icing, and tropical
cyclones.
The NWS also issues volcanic ash products for the national airspace
managers in the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) Air Route
Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC). Center Weather Advisories are produced
by NWS Center Weather Service Units (CWSU), which are collocated at 21
ARTCCs. NOAA products and information are distributed widely to the
aviation community, private sector, U.S. military agencies, and
Federal, state, and local governments.
As a further service to Alaska, one of the most volcano-vulnerable
areas of the United States, the Alaska Aviation Weather Unit/Anchorage
VAAC, Anchorage Weather Forecast Office, and CWSU also participate in
an interagency group for volcanic ash. Membership in this interagency
group includes the NWS, USGS, FAA, United States Air Force, United
States Coast Guard, and the State of Alaska Division of Homeland
Security and Emergency Management. The group meets quarterly to discuss
a wide variety of issues including science, research, and operations
issues concerning volcanic ash. The group is also responsible for
updating an Alaska Interagency Operations Plan for Volcanic Ash
Episodes every 2 years, which defines the responsibilities of each of
the participating agencies. The Alaska plan has become the foundation
for the development of a new National Interagency Volcanic Ash Plan.
Active Volcanoes
The Anchorage VAAC has just over 100 historically active volcanoes
contained both within and in close proximity to the Anchorage FIR. In
2005, there were several active volcanoes both within and in close
proximity to the Anchorage VAAC area of responsibility. These volcanoes
included Veniaminof and Cleveland in the Aleutian Islands and Karymsky,
Sheveluch, Bezymianny, and Klyuchevskoy in Kamchatka, Russia. In 2006,
only Augustine Volcano located just 175 miles southwest of Anchorage
has become active starting on January 11. A series of emissions
continued throughout February. As Augustine is close to the Kenai
Peninsula and Anchorage, the State of Alaska Division of Homeland
Security and Emergency Management, USGS, FAA, NWS, State of Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation, Municipality of Anchorage
Health and Human Services, and others have worked closely together
during these events to help mitigate potential impacts from the
eruptions. This collaborative partnership between numerous agencies at
different levels was coordinated by the NWS National Volcanic Ash
Program Manager, who is located at the NWS Alaska Region Headquarters
in Anchorage, AK.
In 2005, the following volcanoes within the Washington VAAC area of
responsibility were active; Mount St. Helens in Washington State;
Colima and Popocatepetl in Mexico; Soufriere Hills on Montserrat
Island; Anatahan volcano on the Mariana Islands chain; Santa Maria and
Fuego in Guatemala; Santa Ana in El Salvador; Reventador, Tungurahua,
and Sangay in Ecuador; Galeras in Colombia; and Negra, Sierra, and
Fernandina on the Galapagos Islands. So far in 2006, six volcanoes have
been active including Colima, Popocatepetl, Reventador, Santa Maria,
Soufriere Hills and Tungurahau. Ash from volcanoes located within the
Anchorage VAAC area of responsibility, such as Augustine volcano, can
move into the Washington VAAC area of responsibility, requiring
detailed additional coordination and requiring the Washington VAAC to
issue volcanic ash advisories.
Volcanic Ash Dispersion Models
NOAA's Air Research Laboratory (ARL) continues to improve volcanic
ash modeling with the HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated
Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model. The HYSPLIT model is NOAA's official
dispersion model and was developed by researchers at NOAA in
partnership with the external community. When the Washington or
Anchorage VAAC detects an eruption in their area, NOAA's National
Centers for Environmental Prediction is notified and runs the HYSPLIT
model. The dispersion model predicts where the volcanic ash will spread
over time and this information is relayed to VAACs, as well as the user
community. By tracking volcanic ash and forecasting where it will
spread, NOAA is helping to reduce the risk volcanic eruptions pose to
aviation.
Research and Improvements
The research community is very involved in the volcanic ash hazards
program. NOAA has made many contributions during the past decade. A
prime example of this effort is the development of multi-spectral
volcanic ash image products using Polar Operational Environmental
Satellite (POES) data, Geostationary Operational Environmental
Satellite (GOES) data, and Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) Aqua and Terra spacecraft. The FAA Aviation
Weather Research Program is also working on a multi-sourced automated
3-dimensional analysis of volcanic ash clouds. Here ``multi-sourced''
refers to the use of multiple satellites (geostationary and polar-
orbiting) and multiple ash detection and height estimation methods
(according to viewing wavelengths available, time of day, scene
characteristics, etc.). Sensors on NOAA's GOES and POES satellites are
able to detect a volcanic ash eruption within minutes of an event. In
some instances, these satellites are the only means by which NOAA
meteorologists know a volcanic ash hazard exists in the airspace. To
build on current satellite contributions to NOAA's volcanic ash
activities, NOAA's future GOES and NPOESS (National Polar-orbiting
Operational Environmental Satellite System) will continue these
detection capabilities. NOAA supplements its operations using data from
NASA Aqua, Terra, and TOMS (Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer)
spacecraft, and foreign satellites, as needed.
New guidance and products resulting from this research is tailored
to aviation needs and is focused on making the national airspace system
safer and more efficient during a volcanic ash event. Efforts are
focused on integrating the latest advancements in volcanic ash
detection and dispersion from the research community, allowing users to
overlay and manipulate this information in real-time, developing tools
to generate impact statements and graphics, and disseminating the
impact statements to end users in a timely fashion so hazard mitigation
plans can be activated.
The Volcanic Ash Collaboration Tool (VACT) is an experimental tool
designed to help locate and determine the extent and movement of
volcanic ash so that more accurate, timely, consistent, and relevant
ash dispersion and ash fallout watches, warnings, advisories, and
forecasts can be issued. The VACT allows users at different sites and
with different expertise to simultaneously view identical displays of
volcanic ash and other related data sets (i.e., shared situational
awareness) and collaborate in real-time. The VACT assists forecasts in
preparing and issuing current products and services and will also make
possible future products such as graphical tactical decision aides for
airspace management. The VACT has been successfully tested in
operations in Alaska during the recent eruptions of Augustine volcano.
All volcanic ash events are captured and archived to help improve
detection and dispersion methodologies, train new users on VACT
functionality, detect and eliminate problems with multiple agencies
collaborating in real-time on volcanic ash events, and improve
dissemination techniques.
Future efforts will focus on incorporating the VACT to adjacent
VAAC's operations so information isn't lost as ash moves across the
globe. The text chat capability will be extended to be multilingual. As
new detection, fallout, and dispersion techniques are created, they
will be integrated into the tool. New capabilities in dissemination
technology are also planned to be incorporated into the VACT. Such a
tool also shows great promise to allow interagency coordination for
other hazards such as tsunamis and hurricanes, and also represents a
capability to allow NOAA scientists to brief other decision-makers, the
media, etc.