    [House Hearing, 111 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                       EXPANDING CLIMATE SERVICES AT THE
                        NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
                       ADMINISTRATION (NOAA): DEVELOPING
                          THE NATIONAL CLIMATE SERVICE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 5, 2009

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 111-24

                                   __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Technology

         Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.science.house.gov

                                     ______
                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    49-451                    WASHINGTON : 2009
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    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�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

                       HON. BART GORDON, Tennessee, Chair
    JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois          RALPH M. HALL, Texas
    EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas         F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR.,
    LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California              Wisconsin
    DAVID WU, Oregon                     LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
    BRIAN BAIRD, Washington              DANA ROHRABACHER, California
    BRAD MILLER, North Carolina          ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
    DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois            VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
    GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona          FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
    DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland           JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
    MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio                W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
    BEN R. LUJAN, New Mexico             RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
    PAUL D. TONKO, New York              BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
    PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama             MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
    STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey        MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
    JIM MATHESON, Utah                   BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
    LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee             ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska
    BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky               PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia
    RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri              PETE OLSON, Texas
    BARON P. HILL, Indiana
    HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona
    CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio
    KATHLEEN DAHLKEMPER, Pennsylvania
    ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
    SUZANNE M. KOSMAS, Florida
    GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
    VACANCY
                                     ------

                     Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

                      HON. BRIAN BAIRD, Washington, Chair
    JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois          BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
    EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas         ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
    LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California          VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
    DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois            JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
    GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona          W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
    DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland           RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
    BEN R. LUJAN, New Mexico             MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
    PAUL D. TONKO, New York
    JIM MATHESON, Utah
    LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
    BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
    BART GORDON, Tennessee               RALPH M. HALL, Texas
                      JEAN FRUCI Democratic Staff Director
                CHRIS KING Democratic Professional Staff Member
            MICHELLE DALLAFIOR Democratic Professional Staff Member
             SHIMERE WILLIAMS Democratic Professional Staff Member
          ELAINE PAULIONIS PHELEN Democratic Professional Staff Member
              ADAM ROSENBERG Democratic Professional Staff Member
              ELIZABETH STACK Republican Professional Staff Member
              TARA ROTHSCHILD Republican Professional Staff Member
                        STACEY STEEP Research Assistant

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  May 5, 2009

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

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

                               Opening Statements

    Statement by Representative Brian Baird, Chair, Subcommittee on
      Energy and Environment, Committee on Science and Technology,
      U.S. House of Representatives..................................     8
        Written Statement............................................     9

    Statement by Representative Bob Inglis, Ranking Minority Member,
      Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science
      and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..................     9
        Written Statement............................................    10

    Prepared Statement by Representative Jerry F. Costello, Member,
      Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science
      and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..................    10

                                    Panel I:

    Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and
      Atmosphere; Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
      Administration (NOAA)
        Oral Statement...............................................    12
        Written Statement............................................    14
        Biography....................................................    23

    Discussion
      The Structure of a National Climate Service....................    23
      Applications of a National Climate Service.....................    24
      The Size of Federal Government.................................    25
      Monitoring Greenhouse Gases....................................    27
      Potential New Programs.........................................    27
      Observing Climate Change.......................................    28
      Ocean Acidification............................................    30

                                   Panel II:

    Dr. Arthur DeGaetano, Director, Northeast Regional Climate
      Center, Cornell University
        Oral Statement...............................................    31
        Written Statement............................................    33
        Biography....................................................    40

    Dr. Eric J. Barron, Director, National Center for Atmospheric
      Research; Chairman, Climate Services Coordinating Committee,
      Climate Working Group, NOAA Science Advisory Board
        Oral Statement...............................................    40
        Written Statement............................................    41
        Biography....................................................    44

    Dr. Philip W. Mote, Director, Oregon Climate Change Research
      Institute and Oregon Climate Services, Oregon State University;
      Professor, College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences
        Oral Statement...............................................    45
        Written Statement............................................    46
        Biography....................................................    63

    Mr. Richard J. Hirn, General Counsel and Legislative Director,
      National Weather Service Employees Organization
        Oral Statement...............................................    63
        Written Statement............................................    65
        Biography....................................................    69

    Discussion
      Successes of Climate Forecasting...............................    70
      More on Structuring the Climate Service........................    71
      How Existing Climate Offices Coordinate........................    73
      International Cooperation and Disseminating Real Time Climate
        Information..................................................    74
      Responding to Climate Information..............................    76
      The Model Coordinating Agency..................................    77
      Suggestions for Changes at NOAA................................    78

                                   Panel III:

    Dr. Michael L. Strobel, Director, National Water and Climate
      Center, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States
      Department of Agriculture
        Oral Statement...............................................    82
        Written Statement............................................    84
        Biography....................................................    94

    Mr. David Behar, Deputy to the Assistant General Manager, San
      Francisco Public Utilities Commission
        Oral Statement...............................................    94
        Written Statement............................................    96
        Biography....................................................   100

    Mr. Paul Fleming, Manager, Climate and Sustainability Group,
      Seattle Public Utilities
        Oral Statement...............................................   101
        Written Statement............................................   102
        Biography....................................................   106

    Dr. Nolan J. Doesken, President, American Association of State
      Climatologists; Colorado State Climatologist, Department of
      Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University
        Oral Statement...............................................   106
        Written Statement............................................   108
        Biography....................................................   111

    Discussion
      More on Structuring a National Climate Service.................   112
      Interagency Coordination.......................................   113
      State Climate Offices..........................................   114
      Mitigating a Duplication of Services...........................   116

      EXPANDING CLIMATE SERVICES AT THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
         ADMINISTRATION (NOAA): DEVELOPING THE NATIONAL CLIMATE SERVICE

                                  ----------

                              TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2009

                      House of Representatives,
                Subcommittee on Energy and Environment,
                           Committee on Science and Technology,
                                                        Washington, DC.

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
    Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brian
    Baird [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.

                                hearing charter

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                       Expanding Climate Services at the

                        National Oceanic and Atmospheric

                       Administration (NOAA): Developing

                          the National Climate Service

                              tuesday, may 5, 2009
                             10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
                       2318 rayburn house office building

    Purpose

        On Tuesday, May 5, 2009 the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
    of the Committee on Science and Technology will hold a hearing on
    Expanding Climate Services at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA): Developing the National Climate Service.
        The purpose of the hearing is to hear expert testimony on options
    for expanding the delivery of climate services by the National Oceanic
    and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The hearing will also explore
    the role of other federal agencies in building a national
    infrastructure to deliver climate information to support the
    development of national, regional and local strategies to adapt to
    climate variability and change.

    Witnesses

    Panel I

    Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Under Secretary, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Dr. Lubchenco will discuss
    the current climate services available through NOAA's various programs
    and offices; the agencies' plan for internally organizing a National
    Climate Service; and how and to whom services are delivered.

    Panel II

    Dr. Arthur DeGaetano, Director, Northeast Regional Climate Center
    (NRCC). Dr. DeGaetano will discuss the products and services of the
    regional climate centers, specifically the Northeast Regional Climate
    Center. Dr. DeGaetano will also discuss regional data users and give
    examples of how the NRCC services influence regional management and
    climate decisions.

    Dr. Eric J. Barron, Director, National Center for Atmospheric Research.
    As Chairman of the Climate Service Tiger Teams Coordinating Committee,
    Dr. Barron will discuss how current climate services are organized and
    the potential impact of a coordinated, national climate service. In
    addition, Dr. Barron will discuss different organizational scenarios
    for a national climate service, as outlined in the Tiger Team
    Coordinating Committee and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
    Report.

    Dr. Philip Mote, Director, Oregon Climate Change Research Institute and
    Oregon Climate Services and Professor, College of Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University. Dr. Mote will discuss
    the role of the Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISAs) in
    delivering climate services. Dr. Mote will also discuss how the RISAs
    interface with NOAA, other agencies, Regional Climate Centers, State
    climatologists, NGOs, and the private sector.

    Mr. Richard J. Hirn, General Counsel and Legislative Director, National
    Weather Service Employees Organization. Mr. Hirn will discuss the
    National Weather Services' role in delivering climate service to the
    Nation and how these services are coordinated with other agencies, the
    private sector, Regional Integrated Science and Assessments (RISAs),
    Regional Climate Centers, State climatologists, and NGOs.

    Panel III

    Dr. Michael L. Strobel, Director, National Water and Climate Center,
    Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department
    of Agriculture (USDA). Dr. Strobel will discuss NRCSs role in
    delivering climate services and products to the Nation and how this
    interfaces with the services of NOAA and other agencies. Dr. Strobel
    will also discuss the users of the services USDA provides and how a
    national climate service would impact USDAs climate service.

    Mr. David Behar, Deputy to the Assistant General Manager, San Francisco
    Public Utilities Commission and Staff Chairman, Water Utility Climate
    Alliance. Mr. Behar will discuss what climate services and products the
    San Francisco Public Utilities Commission utilizes; how these services
    are delivered; and how these climate services and products influence
    the city's operations and management decisions.

    Mr. Paul Fleming, Manager, Climate and Sustainability Group, Seattle
    Public Utilities. Mr. Fleming will discuss how the Regional Integrated
    Sciences and Assessments (RISAs) deliver climate services and products
    to the Seattle Public Utilities, and how these climate services and
    products then influence their operations and management decisions.

    Dr. Nolan Doesken, State Climatologist for Colorado, and Senior
    Research Associate, Colorado State University. Dr. Doesken will discuss
    the climate services and products produced at State climate offices and
    explain who uses this information. He will also discuss the State
    climate offices' relationship with the Regional Climate Centers, the
    Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessment (RISA) program, and the
    NOAA Climate Program office.

    Background

        Multiple actors in society, from individuals to businesses to the
    government, rely on weather and climate information to make decisions.
    The United States recognized that a well-functioning society needed
    this kind information and in 1890, the first law was passed to
    authorize the creation of a weather bureau to track the weather and
    provide warnings and forecasts. Since that time, our ability to monitor
    and forecast the weather and, therefore to understand the climate has
    expanded dramatically, and the need for information about weather and
    climate has also expanded. Satellite-based information, improvements
    and expansion of ground-based and ocean-based observation networks,
    availability of faster, more advanced computers, and improved models of
    climate and weather phenomenon allow the National Weather Service (NWS)
    to provide more accurate weather forecasts, longer lead times for
    severe storms, and more reliable information about fluctuations and
    patterns of weather over intra-annual and inter-annual, decadal and
    longer time scales--or climate.
        Weather is the short-term variation in the state of the atmosphere
    that occurs in periods from minutes to weeks at specific locations. It
    results from the combination of temperature, humidity, precipitation,
    cloud cover, visibility and wind speed. Climate is the average weather
    conditions for a location over a period of decades (30 years, commonly)
    plus statistics of weather extremes.
        Over these decadal periods, scientists look for patterns of
    variability and cycles in climate. One of the best known cycles is
    associated with shifts in the winds and ocean temperatures in the
    equatorial Pacific Ocean that result in the El Nino and La Nina cycles.
    Climate change is discussed in the context of years, decades or
    centuries. Cycles of variability are monitored and studied to determine
    possible shifts in long-term climate that are more permanent.
        Increasing impacts of a changing climate demonstrate the need for
    information to support adaptation decisions. Climate variability and
    change are important for a wide range of human activities and natural
    ecosystems. Federal resource managers, State, local, and tribal
    governments, and the private sectors all recognize that a changing
    climate greatly impacts their ability to plan for tomorrow.
        The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is the
    leading provider of weather and climate information to the Nation and
    the world. Climate sciences have made major advances during the last
    two decades. NOAA has begun to extend climate science to address
    decision-relevant questions and build capacity to anticipate, plan, and
    adapt to climate variability and change. NOAA is providing climate
    forecasts and support for planning and management decisions by other
    federal agencies and by State, local and tribal governments, the
    private sector and the public. Through programs such as the National
    Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS), NOAA is expanding its
    delivery of climate information. Forecasts of El Nino and La Nina
    cycles, production of seasonal hurricane outlooks, production of
    monthly wildfire outlooks, and projections of snowpack and snow-melt
    are all examples of climate products that different user-groups are
    requesting and relying upon to respond to conditions that impact a wide
    array of economic and social activities including agriculture, the need
    for emergency management resources, resource management, and
    projections of energy demand.
        The Bush Administration announced its intention to create a
    National Climate Service in 2008, and requested the NOAA Science
    Advisory Board (SAB) examine four options for organizing a National
    Service. Two options focused on creating the Service at NOAA and the
    other two options examined other organizational structures with a NOAA
    role, but not a NOAA lead.
        Some of the key issues going forward are: the consideration of how
    services will be provided at the regional, State, and local levels to
    all potential users of climate information; what role will NOAA play in
    a National Climate Service; what type of interagency structure should
    coordinate the development and delivery of climate services by federal
    agencies; what is the role of other climate service providers including
    State and local governments; the private sector; universities; and
    other non-governmental organizations.

    Production and Delivery of Climate Services by NOAA
        The current structure at NOAA providing climate services is
    essentially the same structure that provides weather forecasting
    services. As discussed earlier, information about climate is built upon
    repeated, comparable observations of the weather in a given location
    over time. Information about climate has also grown as the number,
    distribution, type and quality of observations have grown. The primary
    line offices at NOAA that support climate services are the National
    Weather Service, the National Environmental Satellite, Data and
    Information Service and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.
    Observations and information provided by other NOAA line offices and by
    other federal agencies and the academic community also contributes to
    these efforts. The roles of each of these are described briefly below.

    National Weather Service (NWS)

        The National Weather Service (NWS) provides and wide array of
    weather and climate services every day for the U.S. and other nations
    in accordance with its fundamental missions to support: ``the
    forecasting of weather, the issue of storm warnings, . . ., the
    distribution of meteorological information in the interests of
    agriculture and commerce, and the taking of such meteorological
    observations as may be necessary to establish and record the climatic
    conditions of the United States.'' \1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ 15 U.S. Code Section 313 from the 1890 Organic Act establishing
    the National Weather Service.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        NWS operates and maintains a network of observing stations and
    provides operational weather and climate services through its regional
    centers and the 122 Weather Forecast Offices (WFO) and the River
    Forecast Offices (RFO) distributed throughout the Nation. The National
    Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) develops weather and climate
    forecast models and tools and is responsible for transitioning new
    models and tools to operations. The Climate Prediction Center (CPC)
    provides weather and climate products that span time scales from days
    (e.g., six- to ten-day Outlook) to months (90-day Outlook). CPC also
    provides the U.S. Hazards Assessment and Drought Assessments and the El
    Nino and La Nina predictions.
        NWS provides information to other federal agencies to support their
    weather and climate-related work and to private sector weather
    providers who develop specialized forecast products for distribution to
    businesses and the public. NWS also interacts with the international
    community through cooperative programs of the World Meteorological
    Organization.

    National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS)

        The National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service
    (NESDIS) operate the geostationary and polar weather satellites from
    which we obtain a wide array of observations. NESDIS receives data from
    the satellites, analyzes these data, provides the accompanying metadata
    (i.e., supporting information that describes key characteristics of
    data and how they were collected), and distributes data products to NWS
    and other NOAA line offices and non-federal users for use in weather
    and climate models. NESDIS provides data services and support for all
    of NOAA and for other federal agencies. The National Climatic Data
    Center provides for the long-term archiving of weather and climate
    data. NESDIS supports data product development to improve final weather
    and climate forecast products.

    Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR)

        The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) conducts the
    majority of NOAA's in-house research through its seven laboratories.
    The research is organized under three major categories: weather and air
    quality, climate, and ocean and coastal resources. In addition to their
    in-house research, many of the laboratories work collaboratively with
    universities and other non-governmental research organizations through
    formal agreements. OAR's research supports the operational missions of
    the other line offices at NOAA, and they work cooperatively with other
    federal research agencies. The advanced computational work, model
    development, observations, atmospheric and oceanic research done by OAR
    has enabled NOAA to expand the types and improve the quality of climate
    services they deliver.

    Climate Program Office

        The 1978 National Climate Program Act directed the Secretary of
    Commerce to establish a National Climate Program Office. The operation
    and scope of duties of this office have varied since that time.
    Currently, the Climate Program Office (CPO) is located in the Ocean and
    Atmospheric Research line office and it provides strategic guidance and
    oversight of the Agency's climate programs.

    NOAA Partnership Programs

        NOAA supports programs in partnership with other governmental and
    non-governmental organizations here in the U.S. and internationally
    that develop and deliver climate services. In addition to NOAA's in-
    house research done through OAR and through the other line offices,
    NOAA supports research through grants and cooperative agreements with
    universities. NOAA currently supports 21 Cooperative Institutes in 17
    states. A number of these are engaged in weather and climate research
    (e.g., Cooperative Institute for Climate Studies--Univ. of MD;
    Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies--Univ. of
    WI). Some of the other organizations that are working with NOAA to
    develop and deliver climate services are described briefly below.

    Regional Climate Centers

        There are six Regional Climate Centers (RCCs) overseen by the
    National Climate Data Center of NESDIS. The Centers are a federal-State
    partnership to provide climate data and information at the State and
    local level. The RCCs work with NESDIS to maintain the national climate
    data record archive and support regional climate monitoring and applied
    climate research. They maintain and provide access to the Applied
    Climate Information System, a climate data management system that
    facilitates collection and dissemination of climate data. The Centers
    often work with the network of State climatologists to facilitate
    exchange of data and to develop and deliver local and regional climate
    services.

    Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) Program

        The Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) Program was
    established by NOAA through OAR about 10 years ago. There are nine RISA
    offices located throughout the country. The offices are based at
    universities and are designed to deliver applied research on climate to
    decision-makers in formats that are readily applicable to regional and
    local situations. They provide assessments of impacts on the
    transportation sector, agriculture, coastal communities and human
    health. Feedback on current products and requests for new products come
    from the stakeholder community to the RISA offices and help to shape
    the research agenda to deliver what is needed.

    Other Federal Agency Partnerships

        NOAA is the primary provider of weather and climate information for
    the Nation; however, there are many other federal agencies that provide
    climate services through their own network of field offices. The
    specific climate services provided are developed by these other
    agencies with support from NOAA. The distributed inter-agency system
    that has developed provides a wide array of services delivered at the
    local and regional level. However, the coordination for this system is
    not formalized in a holistic way. Several examples of programs for
    delivering climate services by federal agencies other than NOAA are
    provided below.
        NOAA provides information to many other federal agencies and in
    some cases, receives data and information from the observing equipment
    and stations maintained by other federal agencies. USDA's Natural
    Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) operates the National Water and
    Climate Center to provide support for natural resource management at
    the level of river basins, watersheds and farm fields. NRCS is both a
    recipient of information from NOAA and a provider. They collect data on
    snowpack and soil characteristics through the Snowpack Telemetry and
    Soil Climate Analysis Network that is shared with other federal
    agencies including NOAA. NRCS utilizes data from these sources to
    develop climate services tailored to the needs of their traditional
    constituencies.
        The Joint Agricultural Weather Facility is located in the Chief
    Economists Office at USDA. The World Board on Agriculture and NOAA
    established this Facility in 1977 to monitor the weather and climate
    and to assess the potential impacts on the yield of major crops around
    the world. They provide a number of climate products including a
    monthly review of weather highlights, an annual crop production review,
    and weekly soil temperature maps.
        NOAA also provides support for the National Interagency Fire Center
    (NIFC) in Boise, ID in cooperation with eight other agencies of USDA
    and the Department of Interior (DOI). The NIFC provides support to
    federal agencies, State and local governments and the public in the
    preparation and mobilization of resources to prevent and fight
    wildfires. The Center produces monthly and three-month seasonal trend
    forecasts of fire potential for the U.S. The Center holds workshops
    each year to develop their assessments.

    Private Sector Climate Services

        Private Sector weather providers play a vital role in weather and
    climate forecasting. Their extensive radio and television outlets are
    the primary source of weather and climate information for the public.
    Private weather providers also deliver specifically tailored forecast
    products to individual customers using a combination of publicly
    available weather and climate data from NOAA augmented with
    observations and information from their own networks. As in the case of
    current weather and climate forecasting, private sector weather
    providers will continue to play an important role in refining and
    expanding the array of climate services available to specific customers
    and to the public.
        Chair Baird. Good morning and welcome. Our hearing will now
    come to order.
        I want to thank our witnesses and my colleagues and the
    panel, as well as staff, and the folks, other people in the
    audience.
        Our hearing today is on developing a National Climate
    Service. We will discuss the need for climate services, the
    type of services being delivered, and options for meeting the
    increased demand for climate information. As we all know,
    climate affects all of us every day in communities across the
    country. As our ability to understand and recognize climate
    cycles and patterns has grown, so has the demand for more
    climate information.
        This committee passed legislation in the 107th Congress,
    authored by Representative Hall, to expand climate services by
    authorizing the National Integrated Drought Information
    Service, or NIDIS. Droughts have taken an increasing toll on
    individuals, natural resources, and businesses in recent years,
    and these impacts have not been confined to the Western U.S.
    The Southeastern U.S. has experienced persistent drought
    conditions that still have not been completely alleviated in
    all areas. The severe shortage of water drove power plants to
    temporary shutdown, created financial hardships for
    recreational businesses, and loss in crop yields for farmers.
        Without some ability to predict the intensity and duration
    of these climatic events, State and local governments cannot
    develop plans to respond to them. That is why we need climate
    services. There are many examples where climate predictions
    have been useful in making important decisions. In our part of
    the country, the Pacific Northwest, data on snowpack provides
    critical information to decision-makers and water managers
    about the likely availability of water through the spring and
    summer months.
        The long-term data records that we have acquired through
    years of monitoring the weather indicate that climate is
    changing. Whether you believe this is due to greenhouse gases
    or to natural, long-term shifts in climates, we still need to
    understand the phenomenon and adapt to it. Therefore, it is in
    our best interests to structure a service that will utilize
    expertise to develop information that will not only support us
    nationally, but at the regional and local scale, where
    adaptation and response plans can best be implemented.
        Today, we will hear from witnesses who deliver climate
    services, and from those who use them. I look forward to
    hearing their recommendations for refining and expanding
    climate service to better address the needs of communities,
    businesses, and individuals for climate information that will
    reduce their vulnerability to weather and climatic events. I
    also look forward to hearing from the Administrator of NOAA,
    Dr. Lubchenco, about the Administration's plans for improving
    the delivery of climate services to the country. We may not be
    able to control the weather and climate, but we can prepare for
    it and adapt to it, if we know what we are facing.
        With that, I look forward to the testimony we will receive
    today. I want to thank our witnesses, and now recognize the
    distinguished Ranking Member, Mr. Inglis, for his opening
    remarks.
        [The prepared statement of Chair Baird follows:]
                    Prepared Statement of Chair Brian Baird
        Good morning and welcome to today's hearing on Developing a
    National Climate Service. Today we will discuss the need for climate
    services, the type of services being delivered, and options for meeting
    the increased demand for climate information.
        Climate affects all of us everyday in communities across the
    country. As our ability to understand and recognize climate cycles and
    patterns has grown, so has the demand for more climate information.
    This committee passed legislation in the 107th Congress authored by
    Representative Hall to expand climate services by authorizing the
    National Integrated Drought Information Service or NIDIS.
        Droughts have taken an increasing toll on individuals, natural
    resources, and businesses in recent years and, these impacts have not
    been confined to the western U.S. The Southeastern U.S. has experienced
    persistent drought conditions that still have not been completely
    alleviated in all areas. The severe shortage of water drove power
    plants to temporarily shut down, created financial hardships for
    recreational businesses, and loss in crop yields for farmers.
        Without some ability to predict the intensity and duration of these
    climatic events, State and local governments cannot develop plans to
    respond to them. That is why we need climate services.
        There are many examples where climate predictions have been useful
    in making important decisions.
        In my part of the country, data on snowpack provides critical
    information to decision-makers and water managers about the likely
    availability of water through the spring and summer months.
        The long-term data records that we have acquired through years of
    monitoring the weather indicate the climate is changing. Whether you
    believe this is due to greenhouse gases or due to natural long-term
    shifts in climate, we need to understand this phenomenon and adapt to
    it. Therefore, it is in our best interest to structure a service that
    will utilize our expertise to deliver information that will not only
    support us nationally, but at the regional and local scale where
    adaptation and response plans can best be implemented.
        Today we will hear from witnesses who deliver climate services and
    from those who use them. I look forward to hearing their
    recommendations for refining and expanding climate services to better
    address the needs of communities, businesses and individuals for
    climate information that will reduce their vulnerability to weather and
    climate events.
        I also look forward to hearing from the Administrator of NOAA, Dr.
    Lubchenco, about the Administration's plans for improving the delivery
    of climate services to the country.
        We cannot control the weather and climate, but we can prepare for
    it and adapt to it if we know what we are facing.
        With that, I look forward to the testimony we are going to receive
    today. I want to thank all of our witnesses for participating in this
    important hearing. I now recognize our distinguished Ranking Member Mr.
    Inglis for his opening remarks.

        Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
    this hearing.
        While Congress continues to debate the right way to reduce
    our greenhouse gas emissions and limit future anthropogenic
    changes to our climate, farmers, water managers, land use
    planners, and other decision-makers are trying to plan for the
    impacts of climate change that we can expect over the next few
    decades.
        We have a lot of work to do to provide them with the
    information they need. NOAA has done a good job of identifying
    existing capabilities and launching the process of constructing
    a National Climate Service at the federal level. In addition,
    the Science Advisory Board's Report, ``Options for Developing a
    National Climate Service,'' highlight the challenge of
    coordinating the unique roles of several federal agencies.
        I am interested in learning more about how we can marry
    federal services with research universities and State
    climatology offices, to keep the focus on local users. Existing
    climate information services aim to provide tools for seasonal
    and yearly planning. In South Carolina, we use this information
    to decide what crops to plant, how to manage our water supply,
    and whether we can expect forest fires, like the ones that
    raged on our coast last month.
        The testimony we are going to hear today highlights the
    critical importance of this information. The challenge is also
    expanding services and provide accurate information to a wide
    variety of users, for both short- and long-term decision-
    making. We also need to have a serious discussion about
    resources at NOAA. Existing observation and monitoring networks
    need to be updated. Computing capabilities are insufficient for
    local modeling, and information delivery needs to be improved
    to get the right information to the right people.
        These efforts won't be inexpensive, and we need to identify
    those needs now.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing,
    and thank you to the witnesses for appearing here. I look
    forward to learning about our progress toward a National
    Climate Service, and what obstacles remain.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Inglis follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Representative Bob Inglis

        Good morning and thank you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman.
        While Congress continues to debate the right way to reduce our
    greenhouse gas emissions and limit future anthropogenic changes to our
    climate, farmers, water managers, land use planners, and other
    decision-makers are trying to plan for the impacts of climate change
    that we can expect over the next few decades. We have a lot of work to
    do to provide them with the information they need.
        NOAA has done a good job of identifying existing capabilities and
    launching the process of constructing a National Climate Service at the
    federal level. In addition, the Science Advisory Board's report,
    Options for Developing a National Climate Service, highlights the
    challenge of coordinating the unique roles of several federal agencies.
    I'm interested in learning more about how we can marry federal services
    with research universities and State climatology offices to keep the
    focus on local users.
        Existing climate information services aim to provide tools for
    seasonal and yearly planning. In South Carolina, we use this
    information to decide what crops to plant, how to manage our water
    supply, and whether we can expect forest fires like the one that raged
    on the coast last month. Mr. Fleming, your testimony highlights the
    critical importance of this information. The challenge is to expand
    these services and provide accurate information to a wide variety of
    users for both short- and long-term decision-making.
        We also need to have a serious discussion about resources at NOAA.
    Existing observation and monitoring networks need to be updated,
    computing capabilities are insufficient for local modeling, and
    information delivery needs to be improved to get the right information
    to the right people. These efforts won't be inexpensive and we need to
    identify those needs now.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses. I
    look forward to learning about our progress to a National Climate
    Service and what obstacles remain.

        Chair Baird. I thank you, Mr. Inglis.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Costello follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello

        Good Morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding today's hearing
    on the development of a National Climate Service.
        Among the many challenges posed by climate change, one of the most
    important to address will be how these changes will impact our
    resources. Without workable information about the impacts of climate
    change, I am concerned our farms and industries will be unable to plan
    for the future.
        Currently, a variety of NOAA offices and programs make and
    distribute predictions about climate changes for a range of customers.
    Should Congress choose to develop a National Climate Service, the new
    program would need to be coordinated and efficient. Congress should
    work with NOAA and other stakeholders to ensure that this national
    service is quickly developed and works with the programs already in
    place. I am interested to hear from Dr. Lubchenco what she believes
    will be the most efficient means of consolidating and streamlining our
    current programs into a National Climate Service.
        It also will be important for a National Climate Service to provide
    useful, workable information to a variety of customers in different
    regions and different industries across the country. I am interested in
    hearing from the current providers of climate predictions on how a
    coordinated National Climate Service will enhance the programs
    currently in place. I would also be interested to hear their
    recommendations for streamlining the current system without diminishing
    or cutting back current programs. Finally, I am interested to hear from
    the utility companies how Congress and this subcommittee can best
    develop a program that suits your needs and continues to provide
    necessary information.
        I welcome our panel of witnesses, and I look forward to their
    testimony.

                                    Panel I

        Chair Baird. It is really a pleasure now to be able to
    introduce Dr. Jane Lubchenco at her first visit to this
    committee. I am sure it will be the first of many to come, and
    I thank you very much for your time.
        New Administrators are--Administrators are always busy, but
    especially at the start of a new Administration, and we would
    very much respect your time. But I do want to take the time for
    my colleagues and for members of the audience and others to be
    aware of just how impressive the resume of our new Director of
    NOAA is.
        Dr. Jane Lubchenco, a marine ecologist and environmental
    scientist, is the ninth Administrator of NOAA. Her scientific
    expertise includes oceans, climate change, and interactions
    between the environment and human wellbeing. Raised in Denver,
    she received a B.A. in biology from Colorado College, an M.S.
    in zoology from the University of Washington, and a Ph.D. in
    ecology from Harvard University. While teaching at Harvard from
    1975 to '77 and Oregon State from '77 to 2009, she was actively
    engaged in discovery, synthesis, communication, and application
    of scientific knowledge. Dr. Lubchenco has studied marine
    ecosystems around the world, and championed the importance of
    science and its relevance to policy-making and human well-
    being.
        A former President of the American Association for
    Advancement of Science, the International Council for Science,
    and the Ecological Society of America, she served ten years on
    the National Science Board, which this committee knows is
    basically the Board of Directors for NSF. From 1999 to 2009,
    she led a large four university interdisciplinary team of
    scientists, investigating the large marine ecosystems along the
    coast of Washington, Oregon, and California. She has a special
    interest in arctic ecosystems.
        Her scientific contributions include eight publications
    which are considered science citation classics. She is one of
    the most highly cited ecologists in the world. She is an
    elected member of the National Academies of Sciences, the
    American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American
    Philosophical Society, and the Royal Society. She has received
    numerous awards, including a MacArthur Genius Fellowship. Why
    don't we ever get--no, don't answer that question. Nine
    honorary degrees, the 2002 Heinz Award in Environment, the 2005
    AAAS Award for Public Understanding of Science and Technology,
    the 2008 Zayed International Prize for the Environment. She has
    also served on the Pew Oceans Commission and the Joint Oceans
    Commission Initiative, and the Aspen Institute Arctic
    Commission. Clearly someone who is totally unqualified for the
    position. Remarkable resume, the latter was a joke.
        This is an extraordinarily well qualified, impressive
    individual. We are grateful for your time and your expertise,
    and in respect for that time, and the various demands, I have
    asked that you be solo up today, so we can move quickly through
    what you have to say and our questions, and then, we will
    recognize other panels as follows.
        So, with that, as witnesses should know, we will have five
    minutes for your spoken testimony. We have received your
    written testimony, and then, following your testimony, Dr.
    Lubchenco, we will alternate between the two sides.
        Thank you, and please begin.

     STATEMENT OF DR. JANE LUBCHENCO, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
    FOR OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE; ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
                   ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)

        Dr. Lubchenco. There we go. Is that on? Thank you, Chairman
    Baird, Ranking Member Inglis. It is indeed a great pleasure for
    me to be here, and I too look forward to strong, productive,
    ongoing interactions with the Subcommittee and the Full
    Committee. So, thank you for your warm welcome.
        I am here today to discuss some of the benefits of the
    National Climate Service, and what it could provide to the
    Nation, as we work to adapt to a changing climate. I will also
    share with you our vision for how NOAA will work with other
    government agencies, the Executive Office of the President, and
    a diversity of public and private sector partners to help shape
    the National Climate Service, one that builds on existing
    capabilities, but also leverages the capacities of a range of
    federal agencies and other partners to develop new and vitally
    useful information services and delivery mechanisms.
        The Nation has already benefited from a sustained federal
    and extramural partnership and collaborations aimed at
    documenting and understanding climate change. Federal
    interagency collaborations, such as the climate change research
    efforts of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the U.S.
    Global Change Research Program, have produced state-of-the-art
    guidance through 21 synthesis and assessment products in the
    forthcoming ``State of Knowledge Report on Global Climate
    Change Impacts in the U.S.''
        We are indeed very proud of these achievements. Reports
    like these do an outstanding job of synthesizing existing
    scientific information. They do not, however, even begin to
    deliver all of the guidance now being sought by decision-makers
    from private and public sectors from local to international
    levels. To fill this void, a number of efforts have arisen to
    provide some climate services, and you will hear about many of
    those today.
        Each of these is important, but collectively, they are
    insufficient to meet the growing demand. More work and better
    integrated mechanisms are needed to provide usable, credible,
    salient information on an ongoing basis. In particular, more
    work is needed to understand users' needs, and to deliver
    climate relevant information at the appropriate scale in a
    fashion that is both true to the scientific knowledge, but
    also, sensitive to users' diverse styles and needs.
        Just as the Nation's climate research efforts have required
    sustained federal agency partnerships and strong engagement of
    academic and other partners, a new effort to provide climate
    services will also require sustained federal agency
    partnerships and collaboration with climate service providers
    and end users. It is time to learn from and build on existing
    efforts, but to take them to a new level of usability and
    usefulness.
        There is unequivocal evidence that the Earth is warming.
    This warming can be seen in increases in global average surface
    air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice,
    rising sea levels, and changes in many other climate-related
    variables and impacts. The impacts of our changing climate are
    regionally diverse, and relevant across numerous sectors,
    including water, transportation, forestry, coasts, fisheries,
    and human health.
        These impacts are expected to grow in response to projected
    future climate change. Weather and climate have profound
    impacts on our nation's economic and social well-being. Drought
    alone is estimated to result in average annual losses of
    between $6 and $8 billion to all sectors of the economy,
    including transportation, agriculture, and energy.
        The Nation's systems and infrastructure for water, energy,
    transportation, agriculture, and other sectors, have been
    designed and built based on what we know about current local
    environmental conditions or our understanding of the recent
    past. The assumption has been that the past will be a good
    indicator of the future. In similar fashion, our approaches to
    the management and conservation of ecosystems and species have
    been based on current and recent climate conditions.
        But now, the background patterns of temperature, rainfall,
    snowfall, and more are changing. For example, in the Northeast
    U.S., the number of heaviest precipitation days, defined as the
    heaviest one percent of all precipitation events, has increased
    by a startling 58 percent since 1958. Throughout the country,
    rapid climate change is presenting new challenges for managing
    water, building in coastal zones, growing food, providing clean
    energy, and helping to keep Americans healthy.
        As a consequence, decision-makers at all levels of
    government are seeking information to help them prepare their
    communities for the impacts. In similar fashion, the private
    sector is hungry for similar information to guide their
    planning. It is increasingly clear that the Nation needs an
    objective, authoritative, and consistent source of
    consolidated, reliable, and timely climate information at the
    appropriate scale to guide decision-making. This concept of the
    National Climate Service as a single point of accountability
    has been studied by the National Academy of Sciences, external
    advisory groups, and others. Each of these reports has raised
    serious issues, and has caused our thinking about a climate
    service to evolve.
        The overarching goal of a National Climate Service would be
    to provide the essential information about climate change that
    is needed for effective decision-making. A National Climate
    Service would enable public and private sector decision-makers,
    resource managers, and the public to better anticipate, plan,
    and respond to impacts of changing climate conditions. A
    National Climate Service would build on many agencies and other
    organizations' strengths and expertise, and rely upon strong
    partnerships across all levels of government, academia, and the
    private sector.
        Because NOAA already provides many climate services and
    data, because it has recognized scientific leaders with climate
    expertise, and because it has considerable experience in
    providing a range of other services, NOAA is well positioned
    and ready to work with a range of partners to help lead the
    development of a National Climate Service.
        The scientific basis for evaluation of climate change and
    its impacts must continue to come from existing collaborative
    efforts, with the relevant leading agencies, including NOAA,
    DOE, NASA, EPA, DOI, and NSF. These agencies will provide much
    of the data, information, and knowledge that will support a
    National Climate Service. The pace and nature of changes in
    Earth's climate reinforce the need for delivering targeted
    climate services. Much work lies ahead of us. We will need to
    draw from the experience of all of our partners to support the
    development of science-based and user-driven climate services.
        NOAA will contribute to this effort by building on its
    existing capacities and partnerships and networks to deliver
    and evolving suite of climate information and services, in
    collaboration with our partners.
        We are prepared to provide the leadership in partnership
    with other federal agencies to the design and development of a
    National Climate Service. Through an interactive dialog that
    engages the breadth of climate service providers and interests,
    including providers, researchers, and users.
        I look forward to working with the Committee, the White
    House Office of Science and Technology Policy, other federal
    agencies, and our partners to further evaluate and design the
    merits of the this effort.
        Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify, and I
    am happy to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Lubchenco follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Jane Lubchenco

    Introduction

        Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis, and other Members of the
    Subcommittee, I am pleased to speak with you today regarding the need
    for a National Climate Service and I am honored to be here as the Under
    Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and the Administrator
    of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), one of
    the Nation's premiere science and stewardship agencies, to discuss
    NOAA's capabilities in supporting this evolving national need.
        The climate challenge before us is real. Through sustained federal
    and extramural partnerships and collaboration, the Nation has made
    significant progress in our understanding of climate change. One
    example of federal agency accomplishments realized through such
    collaborations is the climate change research efforts of the U.S.
    Global Change Research Program and the U.S. Climate Change Science
    Program. The sustained partnerships and collaborations established
    through this intergovernmental body resulted in the publication of 21
    synthesis and assessment products, and the forthcoming report on Global
    Climate Change Impacts in the United States. This report will provide a
    comprehensive survey of the state of knowledge about climate change
    impacts in the United States, and will highlight for the American
    public just how far we have come in our understanding of climate
    change. We are proud of this achievement.
        More work is needed, however, to understand users' needs and
    deliver climate-relevant information to inform decision-making. In
    2007, The National Academy of Sciences released Evaluating Progress of
    the U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Methods and Preliminary
    Results, which highlighted existing gaps in federal programs to provide
    climate change information. This report recognized that good progress
    has been made to determine many aspects of climate change however,
    ``progress in synthesizing research results or supporting decision-
    making and risk management has been inadequate.''
        Just as the Nation's climate research efforts require and benefit
    from interagency and academic partnerships, so too will the
    communication of climate information to users. No single agency is
    capable of providing all of the information and services needed to
    inform decision-making. To be successful, this effort too will require
    sustained federal agency partnerships and collaboration with climate
    service providers and end-users.
        Today, I am here to discuss with you some of the benefits that a
    National Climate Service could provide as the Nation works to adapt to
    our changing climate. I will also share with you our vision for how
    NOAA will work with the several other relevant government agencies, the
    Executive Office of the President, and a diversity of public and
    private sector partners, to help shape a national effort that builds on
    existing capabilities and leverage the capabilities of other federal
    agencies to develop new information, services and delivery mechanisms
    to realize the potential of such a Service.

    THE EARTH'S CLIMATE IS CHANGING

        There is unequivocal evidence that the Earth is warming. This
    warming can be seen in increases in global-average surface air and
    ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, rising sea
    level, and changes in many other climate-related variables and
    impacts.\1\ Most of the observed increases in global temperatures since
    the mid-20th century are very likely due to human-induced emissions of
    greenhouse gases.1
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report.
    Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment
    Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing
    Team, Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva,
    Switzerland, 104 pp.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Under a broad range of non-mitigation scenarios considered by the
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, warming over this century is
    projected to be substantially larger than over the past century.
    Changes in many other components of the climate system (warming
    patterns being only one example) are also very likely to be larger than
    those observed in the present century. The prospects of such climate
    changes have profound implications for a global society, underscoring
    the need for scientific information to aid decision-makers in
    developing and evaluating options for mitigating future anthropogenic
    climate change as well as alternatives for adapting to a changing
    climate.
        Within the United States, extensive climate-related changes have
    been documented over the last century. These include increases in
    continental-average temperatures, rising sea levels in many coastal
    locations, an increased frequency of extreme heavy rainfall events,
    lengthening of the growing season, earlier snow-melt, and altered river
    flow volumes. Water is an issue in every region, but the nature of the
    potential impact varies. Drought is a serious problem in many regions,
    especially in the West and Southeast; and floods and water quality
    problems are likely to be amplified by climate change in most regions.
        For example, the amount of rain falling in the heaviest downpours
    has increased approximately 20 percent on average in the past century,
    and this trend is very likely to continue, with the largest increases
    in the wettest places. Many types of extreme weather events, such as
    heat waves and regional droughts, have become more frequent and intense
    during the past 40 to 50 years.
        As a nation, our economic and social well-being is intricately tied
    to weather and climate; this relationship produces significant social
    and economic benefits and costs. Some examples include:

              Coral reefs world wide are among the ecosystems of
            highest risk of extreme degradation due to climate change. In
            2002, Hawaii's coral reefs, when combining recreational,
            amenity, fishery, and bio-diversity values, were estimated to
            have direct economic benefits of $360 million/year.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Cesar, H., P. van Beukering, S. Pintz, and J. Dierking, 2002:
    Economic valuation of Hawaiian reefs. Cesar Environment Economics
    Consulting, Arnham, The Netherlands, 123 pp.

              Drought is estimated to result in average annual
            losses to all sectors of the economy of between $6-8
            billion.\3\,\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Economic Impacts of Drought and the Benefits of NOAA's Drought
    Forecasting Services, NOAA Magazine, September 17, 2002.
        \4\ Interagency Working Group on Earth Observations, National
    Science and Technology Council Committee on Environment and Natural
    Resources. (2005) Strategic Plan for the U.S. Integrated Earth
    Observation System.

              Average annual damage from tornadoes, hurricanes, and
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            floods is $11.4 billion, of which:

                      hurricanes average $5.1 billion and 20 deaths per
                    year;

                      floods account for $5.2 billion, and average over 80
                    deaths per year, and

                      tornadoes cause $1.1 billion in damages.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Environmental
    and Societal Impacts Group, and the Atmospheric Policy Program of the
    American Meteorological Society. (2001) Extreme Weather Sourcebook
    2001: Economic and Other Societal Impacts Related to Hurricanes,
    Floods, Tornadoes, Lightning, and Other U.S. Weather Phenomena,
    National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colo. Available only
    online at http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/sourcebook/data.html

        These examples of current weather and climate impacts are why the
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    future effects of climate change matter.

    HOW COULD THE NATION BENEFIT FROM A NATIONAL CLIMATE SERVICE (NCS)?

        The impacts of our changing climate are regionally diverse and
    relevant across numerous sectors, including water, energy,
    transportation, forestry, coasts, fisheries, agriculture, ecosystems,
    and human health. These impacts are anticipated to grow in response to
    projected future climate change.
        Until now, the systems and infrastructure that we as a nation have
    developed as the foundation of our water, energy, transportation,
    agriculture, and other sectors have been designed and built based on
    what we know about local environmental conditions, and our
    understanding of the past. In the same way, our approaches to the
    management and conservation of ecosystems and species have largely
    relied upon our scientific, historical understanding of those systems.
        For example, water planning and management have been based on
    historical fluctuations in records of streamflows, lake levels,
    precipitation, temperature, and water demands. All aspects of water
    management including reservoir sizing, reservoir flood operations,
    maximum urban storm water runoff amounts, and projected water demands
    have been based on these records. Because climate change will
    significantly modify aspects of the water cycle, the assumption of an
    unchanging climate is no longer appropriate for many aspects of water
    planning. To appropriately prepare their communities, decision-makers
    will need to be supported with access to the best climate information
    science can provide, and tools to apply that data to guide their
    decisions.
        Meeting the climate challenge will require an unprecedented level
    of coordination among federal agencies, along with our nongovernmental
    partners, to pull together our collective expertise to accomplish the
    goal of providing high quality climate information and services that
    are user-friendly, responsive, and relevant. A broad range of
    capabilities for providing climate information currently exists in
    federal agencies, and various other organizations. As we move forward
    we must find ways to maximize use of these capabilities, by integrating
    efforts to provide climate information and services that most
    effectively and efficiently respond to user needs.
        The Nation's need for user-driven climate services is increasing
    and the Federal Government recognizes the importance of responding to
    these increasing demands. In order to ensure climate information and
    services are available to meet current and anticipated demands, many
    scientific agencies, including NOAA, the Department of Energy (DOE),
    the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Environmental Protection
    Agency (EPA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National
    Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will continue climate
    research activities to provide the valuable data required to understand
    how our climate is changing. The contributions of these agencies are
    coordinated by the National Science and Technology Council through its
    Subgroup on Global Change Research.
        At a hearing this committee held in May 2007, the Western Governors
    Association stated that ``decision-makers at all levels of government
    and in the private sector need reliable and timely information to
    understand the possible impacts and corresponding vulnerabilities that
    are posed by climate change so that they can plan and respond
    accordingly.''
        Specific examples of requests for climate services include the
    following:

              The wind power industry has identified a need for
            baseline data and future projections of wind measurements that
            would aid them in long-term planning for wind energy
            development to ensure a return on their investment.

               Corn growers have requested regional and long-term climate
            forecasts that would help them in making decisions about when
            and what they should grow.

              Federal agencies with land and water management
            mandates, such as the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Army
            Corp of Engineers, have requested scientific information and
            technical training on climate change impacts.

        Around the country, decision-makers at all levels of government are
    considering options for how to best prepare their communities for the
    impacts of a changing climate. As we move forward with efforts to
    mitigate and adapt to our changing climate, we will need to draw from
    the expertise of all federal agencies engaged in climate change science
    to support the development of climate services to enable decision-
    making. The Nation needs an objective, authoritative, and consistent
    source of consolidated, reliable, and timely climate information to
    support decision-making.
        As I mentioned during my confirmation hearing, I believe our
    country must address the impacts of the changing climate head-on. In my
    work on the Pew Ocean Commission, I heard first-hand from businesses
    and State and local governments in communities all across this country
    about the need for reliable information and predictions about the
    impacts of climate change. From concerns about droughts and sea level
    rise to changes in the chemistry of the ocean, there is a real hunger
    for more and better information. NOAA is equipped, and ready to work
    with its partners, to provide this information.

    KEY COMPONENTS OF A NATIONAL CLIMATE SERVICE

        Unlike climate services, weather services are familiar to most
    citizens. Weather services focus on the description, analysis, and
    atmospheric forecasting on very short time scales, from minutes
    extending up to a period of one week to ten days. The objective is to
    provide forecasts of continually changing weather conditions and
    warnings of severe weather events to protect life and property. The
    benefits of this service are measured in lives saved, injuries avoided,
    and reduction in property damage.\6\ For example, through NOAA's
    hurricane research to operations efforts, NOAA has improved wind speed
    estimates by 15 percent since 2004 and reduced track forecast error by
    50 percent since 1990. These hurricane forecast improvements are
    estimated to save taxpayers $640,000 per non-evacuated mile.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, National Research
    Council (2001) A Climate Services Vision: First Steps Toward the
    Future.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In contrast to weather, climate refers to the longer-term
    statistical properties of the atmosphere-ocean-ice-land system. Climate
    variability and change are products of: (1) external factors, such as
    the sun; (2) complex interactions involving the different components of
    the Earth system; and (3) human-induced changes to the Earth system.
    Climate services encompass a variety of types of activities in order to
    address the range of short- to long-term variations and changes in
    climate, including those that are natural and human induced. Such
    activities are often associated with different types of users or
    decision-makers and with different types of needs and products.6
    Improving development and targeting delivery of climate information
    through a National Climate Service offers untold economic, public
    health and safety, and national security benefits.
        NOAA has a vision of a National Climate Service as a partnership
    that would be established with other federal agencies, various levels
    of government, and the private sector. The National Climate Service
    would provide credible and authoritative climate information and
    services to assist the Nation, and by extension the world. This would
    include policy-relevant information for decisions related to climate
    change mitigation and adaptation. This concept of developing a National
    Climate Service as a single point of accountability for providing
    climate information and services to the Nation has been studied by
    NOAA, the National Academy of Sciences,\7\ external advisory groups,
    and by Members of this committee. Each of these studies has raised
    important issues that will need to be addressed. NOAA's current vision
    for a National Climate Service has evolved as a direct result of these
    studies, as well as input and feedback from public and private sector
    partners and constituents around the Nation.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ National Research Council, Panel on Strategies and Methods for
    Climate-Related Decision Support, Committee on Human Dimensions of
    Global Change (2009) Informing Decision in a Changing Climate.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The overarching goal of a National Climate Service would be to
    provide the essential climate change information needed for effective
    decision-making. As such, a National Climate Service must enable
    decision-makers, including resource managers, and the public to better
    anticipate, plan, and respond to impacts of changing climate
    conditions. A National Climate Service must also remain engaged in
    climate change science to maintain credibility, awareness, and
    flexibility, and to avoid insularity. In similar fashion, the National
    Climate Service must engage with a diversity of users to fully
    understand the needs and provide salient and usable information, tools,
    and expertise.
        The National Climate Service will build on many agencies' strengths
    and experience. The scientific basis for evaluation of climate change
    and climate change impacts on a global and regional level will come
    from existing collaborative efforts underway among NOAA and the other
    leading climate research agencies, including DOE, DOI, EPA, NASA, and
    NSF, in the following areas:

              climate observing systems and effective data
            management and delivery systems;

              problem-focused research and a close coupling with
            fundamental climate change research that establishes scientific
            credibility of evolving products;

              climate modeling for predictions and projections; and

              local, regional, national, and international
            assessments of climate change.

        Working with its partners, the National Climate Service will help
    support the following core climate services:

              ongoing, deliberate dialogue with users to understand
            evolving needs,

              climate tools and other products at scales relevant
            to support user decision-making;

              user outreach and capacity building; and

              public understanding.

        In order to build and maintain a bridge linking information and
    users, the Service will provide information to meet the key needs of
    government and society. Some of these products and services will be
    relevant for relatively short-term adaptation and mitigation decision
    support; others will be tailored to be relevant for longer-term
    choices. Some will be operational in nature; others will inform
    assessments of the state of climate research.
        The National Climate Service must have a clear set of principles
    regarding its products and services to ensure that it remains
    appropriately focused and managed in an effective way that best serves
    the Nation. NOAA envisions a successful Service guided by the following
    principles:

              provide balanced, credible, cutting edge scientific
            and technical information;

              focus on human-caused climate change, but link human-
            caused climate change and changes in natural variability, such
            as the frequency and duration of droughts, to meet broad user
            needs;

              provide and contribute to science-based products and
            services to minimize climate-related risks;

              provide predictions and projections of climate at
            scales relevant to decision support;

              strengthen observations, standards, and data
            stewardship;

              ensure timely assessments;

              improve regional and local projections of climate
            change;

              inform policy options;

              inform decisions and management options of others;

              foster climate literacy and workforce development;
            and

              engage a diversity of users in meaningful ways to
            ensure their needs are being met.

        An effective response to the societal demands of a changing climate
    is well beyond the scope, authority, or mission of any one federal
    agency. NOAA commissioned an external review of the challenge of
    developing a National Climate Service. This external review recommended
    each federal agency collaboratively define its role and level of
    commitment in a National Climate Service, but made clear that there
    must be a lead federal entity. This view is further endorsed by a
    recent report by the National Research Council,\8\ which stated:
    ``Because successful programs have a leader (NRC, 2005),\9\ the
    committee recommends that one agency take the lead in developing the
    climate service, although multiple agencies would have to be involved
    in its design and implementation.'' With respect to implementation, a
    more recent report by the National Research Council\10\ notes ``. . .
    that (the panel) does not recommend centralizing the initiative in a
    single agency,'' reflecting on the importance of integrating research
    and service functions across multiple agencies. NOAA agrees with these
    recommendations and is ready to meet the challenge of helping lead the
    development of a National Climate Service and working with our partners
    in its implementation to provide targeted climate information to the
    public and private sector to inform decision-making.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ National Research Council (2009) Restructuring Federal Climate
    Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate Change.
        \9\ National Research Council (2005) Thinking Strategically.
        \10\ National Research Council, Panel on Strategies and Methods for
    Climate-Related Decision Support, Committee on Human Dimensions of
    Global Change (2009) Informing Decision in a Changing Climate.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        An effective National Climate Service will rely upon strong
    partnerships within and among federal agencies, and across levels of
    government, academia and the private sector to provide the Nation with
    the science-based and user-responsive climate services it needs. This
    vision also requires that NOAA integrate its own resources and
    coordinate efforts with its partners to ensure reliable delivery of
    climate services and information.
        As I've stated earlier, no single agency can address the climate
    challenge on its own. NOAA is well positioned to provide leadership for
    a National Climate Service, based on the climate research efforts and
    experience in providing user-centric services of the collective Federal
    Government and nongovernmental partners. NOAA will continue to work
    with our interagency partners and most especially the agencies that
    participate with us as part of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.
    These agencies will provide much of the data and information that will
    support the delivery of climate services, and include: the Departments
    of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, the
    Interior, State, and Transportation; together with the Environmental
    Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
    the National Science Foundation, the Agency for International
    Development, and the Smithsonian Institution, and overseen by the
    Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Council on Environmental
    Quality, the National Economic Council and the Office of Management and
    Budget.
        Further design of a National Climate Service must be based on an
    interactive process that engages federal agencies and individuals from
    across the spectrum of climate research, service provision, users,
    partners and stakeholders. This process must be interdisciplinary,
    user-focused, regionally-representative, and include analysis of
    strengths and gaps in capacities. A critical design consideration that
    must be addressed in these processes is the best arrangement for
    federal agencies to work in partnership to maximize delivery of climate
    services to the Nation. As such, it would be appropriate for the White
    House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to lead an
    interagency process to analyze capacities and options. This effort
    would complement the broader interagency effort being led by the
    Council on Environmental Quality, OSTP and NOAA to prepare a federal
    adaptation strategy to help the Federal Government, along with State,
    local and private actors, increase their resilience to a changing
    climate.
        The public-private partnership that makes today's National Weather
    Service so successful provides a useful model to emulate. The Federal
    Government would not be able to fully provide critical information to
    the Nation without the private sector. We envision the government will
    develop and maintain an infrastructure of observation and information
    services on which the public (Federal, State, and local governments),
    private, and academic sectors will rely. The private sector will be
    able to use data collected by this infrastructure to create unique
    products and services tailored to the needs of their company or
    clients. We believe this cooperative relationship will lead to an
    extensive and flourishing set of climate services that will be of great
    benefit to the U.S. public and to major sectors of the U.S. economy.
        Finally, addressing the evolving climate challenge will require
    supporting decision-makers not just for a few years, but over many
    decades. The National Climate Service must be highly-responsive to
    changing user needs and able to lead based upon expert evaluation of
    new data and knowledge. The scope and nature of user interactions and
    partnerships required to support this effort will demand an
    extraordinary investment in ensuring continuous feedback and adaptive
    learning among users and providers. Similarly, products and services
    must be able to evolve, and be initiated rapidly, in response to new
    scientific information. These complex characteristics and relationships
    will necessitate ongoing assessments and evaluations of progress,
    plans, user requirements, and outcomes as a core component of an
    adaptively-managed National Climate Service.

    FROM NOAA'S CURRENT CLIMATE CAPABILITIES TO A NATIONAL CLIMATE SERVICE

        There is much work to be done to fully realize a National Climate
    Service. The development of a National Climate Service will take
    leadership and sustained efforts across the Federal Government to work
    collaboratively. Through its climate research and science, NOAA is
    currently delivering climate services that generate significant social,
    economic, and environmental benefits for the Nation. These services are
    outlined below, as requested by the Committee in my letter of
    invitation, and represent some of the contributions that NOAA would
    bring to a National Climate Services.

    NOAA's current climate and climate-related capabilities and mandates
        NOAA's mission is to understand and predict changes in Earth's
    environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to
    meet our nation's economic, social, and environmental needs. This
    mission already encompasses the delivery of some climate services. As
    the lead federal agency responsible for delivering national weather,
    ocean, fishery, coastal, and environmental data products and services,
    and among the leaders in climate and satellite information, NOAA
    provides some of the many scientific underpinnings required for an
    effective National Climate Service.
        The breadth of NOAA's climate and climate-related capabilities
    includes:

              A long history of building sustained partnerships and
            interacting with other federal agencies, the private sector,
            all levels of government (international, national, State,
            tribal, local), non-governmental organizations, and the public.

              Extensive experience in both weather and climate
            forecasts and predictions. Weather forecasts, seasonal
            outlooks, inter-annual to decadal predictions, and climate
            change projections require observations, models, and scientific
            understanding of the Earth system. NOAA has established a
            strong and sustained capability and infrastructure in all of
            these areas.

              Existing strengths in climate and earth system
            research and modeling. NOAA maintains a range of capabilities
            to understand and address key impacts of climate such as
            coastal hazards, ocean acidification, droughts and floods.

              At an international level, NOAA along with other
            leading climate research agencies has played a major role in
            informing policy decisions by contributing to scientific
            assessments including the World Meteorological Organization/
            United Nations Environment Programme Scientific Assessments of
            Ozone Depletion and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
            Change assessment reports. NOAA has served as one of the lead
            agencies of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) and
            had a primary role in its predecessor, the U.S. Global Change
            Research Program. NOAA has led several of the CCSP synthesis
            and assessment products, including the forthcoming report on
            Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States.

              A unique breadth of mandates and experience in
            environmental service delivery that provide a strong foundation
            for a National Climate Service. NOAA's mandated
            responsibilities include, for example: fisheries, endangered
            species and marine mammal management, National Marine
            Sanctuaries, and coastal and estuarine management. With each of
            these mandates, NOAA managers must account for the effects of
            climate variability and change on coastal and marine
            ecosystems, and resources and communities, as well as adapt
            their management practices accordingly. NOAA and its partners
            in coastal and marine resource managers are among the vanguard
            of users of climate information. In addition, the National
            Weather Service has an established and credible field
            infrastructure that currently delivers climate products daily
            at a national, regional, and local level.

              NOAA contributes to sustained climate observing
            networks comprised of a suite of operational satellites and in
            situ networks for integrated atmospheric and oceanic
            observations, including measurements of air and ocean
            temperatures, greenhouse gases, aerosols, and ozone. NOAA also
            maintains several of the Nation's permanent archives of
            weather, climate, and oceanographic data through its data
            centers. NOAA, along with the other leading climate research
            agencies, provides analyses of the observed records, including
            the Nation's climate statistics and reanalysis of observations
            for initial conditions for climate prediction. With its wealth
            of observational data, NOAA makes major contributions to the
            process studies required to attribute the causes of climate
            change.

    Transitioning to a National Climate Service
        Through our existing statutory responsibilities under the National
    Climate Program Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C.  2901-2908), NOAA has a long
    history of producing climate information, delivering products and
    services, and building the capacity of others through established
    networks and partnerships at all levels.
        We expect that development of a National Climate Service will
    stimulate advancements of similar stature as those generated through
    NOAA's integrated weather services. For example, NOAA's `end to end'
    weather services have increased annual average lead times for tornadoes
    from less than four minutes in 1987 to almost 15 minutes today, and
    flash floods from less than 10 minutes in 1987 to better than 50
    minutes today. Such advancements are estimated to have contributed to
    NOAA's weather services preventing over 330 fatalities and 7800
    injuries from tornadoes, and to have resulted in health and welfare
    benefits that we estimate to be of over $3 billion between 1992 and
    2004.
        Development of a National Climate Service can benefit from NOAA's
    existing expertise, infrastructure, and capabilities in climate
    science; its extensive experience in service delivery; its
    relationships with other federal, State, and local partners; and must
    leverage the extensive experience of the other leading climate research
    agencies. NOAA's existing climate products and services include climate
    data services, climate predictions and climate change projections,
    assessments, and decision support information.
        Existing networks include interagency and other partnerships that
    comprise the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS),
    National Weather Service Forecast Offices and River Forecast Centers,
    National Data Centers, Regional Integrated Science and Assessment
    projects at universities, Regional Climate Centers, State
    Climatologists, Sea Grant, the Coastal Services Center, international
    climate research institutes, NOAA Cooperative Institutes, and extension
    agents.
        Two examples illustrate NOAA's experience as a leading source of
    climate information and provide a strong indication of the agency's
    foundation for the development of climate services: (1) NOAA's
    partnership with the National Association of Home Builders and
    Department of Housing and Urban Development, and (2) its leadership of
    NIDIS.
        Partnership with the National Association of Home Builders and the
    Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)--NOAA performed a
    decade of research to develop an Air Freezing Index, which has now
    translated into operational use by the construction industry. Home
    builders can now construct a frost protected shallow foundation as a
    practical alternative to deeper, more-costly foundations in cold
    regions with seasonal ground freezing and the potential for frost
    heave. Construction of a frost protected shallow foundation can be
    informed by NOAA's Air Freezing Index, and incorporates strategically
    placed insulation to raise the frost depth around a building. NOAA's
    air freezing research is estimated to provide an annual savings benefit
    to U.S. homeowners of $300 million saved in new construction costs and
    energy savings of 586,000 megawatt-hours.
        National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS)--The growing
    impacts of drought on society led to a call by our State governors for
    drought preparedness information. NOAA's implementation of the NIDIS
    Act of 2006 is being achieved through the coordination and
    collaboration of federal, State, tribal, academic, and local
    representatives on issues including water resources, agriculture,
    ecosystem impacts, energy and coastal environments. NIDIS is working to
    provide dynamic and easily accessible drought information for the
    Nation by serving as an integrated knowledge center by identifying,
    collecting, and disseminating existing innovations at the national,
    regional, watershed, State, county, and private sector levels. NIDIS
    provides data to help decision-makers assess the risk of having too
    little water and to prepare for and mitigate the effects of drought
    (such as farmers making decisions about crops, forestry professionals
    planning ahead for the next fire season, and urban water managers
    preparing for high-demand seasons). Still in its initial phases, NIDIS
    is continually developing more robust services and regional decision
    support resources.
        While significant in their own right, these examples are only a
    snapshot of how, through a National Climate Service, NOAA can apply its
    current climate capabilities and mandates, and leverage the expertise
    and strengths of the other leading climate research agencies to address
    the growing demand for climate services. As NOAA works to define its
    role in a National Climate Service, we will continue to develop and
    expand, in partnership with the other leading climate research
    agencies, the products and services to assist a number of key social,
    economic, and environmental climate change decisions, particularly
    those at regional and national levels.
        Examples of emerging issues that a National Climate Service could
    address through collaborative and coordinated effort among federal
    agencies and other partners include:

        Mainstreaming climate change adaptation for critical
    infrastructure--Current infrastructure design criteria and construction
    codes may be inadequate for climate change and exacerbate vulnerability
    to increasing storm intensity and flooding. For example, along the U.S.
    Gulf Coast, from Houston, Texas to Mobile, Alabama, 27 percent of major
    roads, nine percent of rail lines, and 72 percent of ports in the area
    are built on land at or below four feet in elevation; a level within
    range of projections for relative sea-level rise in this region in this
    century. A National Climate Service would provide information that
    would allow the U.S. to relocate and/or secure these installments as
    well as improve planning for future infrastructure investments.
        Delivering regional and decadal climate information--Currently,
    U.S. climate modeling efforts allow us to provide information at
    centennial and continental scales. With funds from the American
    Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, NOAA will be able to continue to
    increase its computing power so that its climate models can provide
    information at the decadal and regional scales, which are most relevant
    to decision-makers. It is important to recognize that the reliability
    of this information depends on more than just greater model resolution.
    Critical research efforts will be required to ensure that all essential
    processes at these new scales are represented in the models in order to
    produce reliable information. This new information coupled with
    advances in tools and expertise led by the other leading climate
    research agencies will open the door to opportunities for a National
    Climate Service to develop and work with its partners to deliver
    authoritative products and services to users at scales previously not
    possible.
        National security--Climate change has the potential to affect
    national security by reducing predictability and stability throughout
    the world, for example, through disruptions resulting from food and
    water shortage. The U.S. will also need to anticipate and plan for
    growing immigration pressures both at home and in other countries. A
    National Climate Service could help to prepare for and adapt to these
    changes by providing the observations and forecasts that can be
    utilized by agencies such as U.S. Agency for International Development
    and the Department of State to develop policies and action to mitigate
    these impacts (e.g., new agricultural practices).
        Underpinning research--Providing reliable climate information at
    the fine spatial scales relevant to human activities requires further
    and rapid progress in scientific understanding and quantitative
    predictions. NOAA, in partnership with other agencies, will enhance
    essential climate research programs to shape and inform our fundamental
    understanding of climate change, its pace, and its consequences.
    Meeting these new challenges and delivering timely, relevant, and the
    best scientifically-informed climate information and services to
    decision-makers will require a coordinated effort that builds upon and
    expands the Nation's observational, research and modeling
    infrastructure.

    CONCLUDING REMARKS

        This is a time of rapid change. The pace and nature of changes in
    the Earth's climate reinforce the need for delivering targeted climate
    services at appropriate scales. We will need to draw from the expertise
    of all federal agencies to support the development of science-based and
    user-driven climate services to enable decision-making. Development of
    a National Climate Service will take leadership, sustained efforts, and
    a commitment across the Federal Government to work collaboratively.
        Much work lies ahead of us. NOAA will contribute to this effort by
    building on its existing capabilities, partnerships and networks to
    deliver an evolving suite of climate information and services, in
    collaboration with our partners. We are prepared to provide leadership,
    in partnership with other federal agencies, to the design and
    development of a National Climate Service through an interactive
    dialogue that engages the breadth of climate service interests,
    including service providers, researchers, and users.
        I look forward to working with the Office of Science and Technology
    Policy, other federal agencies, our partners, and this committee to
    further evaluate the merits of this effort.
        Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. I look
    forward to answering your questions.

                          Biography for Jane Lubchenco

        Dr. Jane Lubchenco, a marine ecologist and environmental scientist,
    is the ninth Administrator of NOAA. Her scientific expertise includes
    oceans, climate change, and interactions between the environment and
    human well-being. Raised in Denver, she received a B.A. degree in
    biology from Colorado College, a M.S. in zoology from the University of
    Washington and a Ph.D. in ecology from Harvard University. While
    teaching at Harvard (1975-1977) and Oregon State University (1977-
    2009), she was actively engaged in discovery, synthesis, communication,
    and application of scientific knowledge.
        Dr. Lubchenco has studied marine ecosystems around the world and
    championed the importance of science and its relevance to policy-making
    and human well-being. A former President of the American Association
    for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the International Council for
    Science and the Ecological Society of America, she served 10 years on
    the National Science Board (Board of Directors for the National Science
    Foundation). From 1999-2009 she led PISCO, a large four-university,
    interdisciplinary team of scientists investigating the large marine
    ecosystem along the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California. She
    has a special interest in Arctic ecosystems, with recent work in
    Svalbard, Greenland and the Alaskan arctic.
        Dr. Lubchenco has provided scientific input to multiple U.S.
    Administrations and Congress on climate, fisheries, marine ecosystems,
    and bio-diversity. Dr. Lubchenco served on the first National Academy
    of Sciences study on `Policy Implications of Global Warming,' providing
    advice to the George H.W. Bush Administration and Congress. In 1997 she
    briefed President Clinton and Vice President Gore and Members of
    Congress on climate change.
        Her scientific contributions are widely recognized. Eight of her
    publications are ``Science Citation Classics''; she is one of the `most
    highly cited' ecologists in the world. Dr. Lubchenco is an elected
    member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of
    Arts and Sciences, the American Philosophical Society, and the Royal
    Society. She has received numerous awards including a MacArthur
    (`genius') Fellowship, nine honorary degrees, the 2002 Heinz Award in
    the Environment, the 2005 AAAS Award for Public Understanding of
    Science and Technology and the 2008 Zayed International Prize for the
    Environment.
        Dr. Lubchenco co-founded three organizations that communicate
    scientific knowledge to the public, policy-makers, the media and
    industry: (1) The Leopold Leadership Program (teaches environmental
    scientists to be effective communicators), (2) COMPASS (the
    Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea, communicates marine
    sciences); and (3) Climate Central (a non-advocacy source of
    understandable scientific information about climate science and
    solutions). She co-chaired the Synthesis for Business and Industry of
    the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, an international scientific
    evaluation of the consequences of environmental changes to human well-
    being. She also served on the Pew Oceans Commission and the Joint
    Oceans Commission Initiative and the Aspen Institute Arctic Commission.

                                   Discussion

        Chair Baird. Thank you very much, Doctor. I will recognize
    myself for five minutes.

                  The Structure of a National Climate Service

        You know, when you talk about the implications of this, Mr.
    Inglis talked about fires. We look in our area, in terms of El
    Nino events, whether they or not will happen has profound
    implications for our agricultural industry, our power supply, a
    host of other, fishing, for example, in the Northwest, as you
    know better than I. So, this is really something we recognize,
    on this committee, the importance of.
        The question, then, is really what are the best ways, how
    do we best go about structuring this? Given that there are
    various aspects, as you mentioned, various aspects of what the
    data can be used for--we will hear from a panel in a minute
    about that--but also, various entities within government that
    also provide some of the pieces.
        What are your thoughts about the best way to put the pieces
    together? Do we have a coordinating body? Do we create a new
    entity? Do we draw upon the various agencies separately, or do
    we integrate them?
        What are your thoughts? And we will hear, there may be
    other thoughts later on here, but what are your ideas about
    this?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this topic has
    actually been addressed by some of the different studies that
    have looked at this concept of National Climate Service, and
    there are some continuing themes that loop through each of
    those different reports: the need for an integrated national
    effort, number one; an effort that draws on the wealth of
    existing research information, and is tied to the ongoing
    discovery of new information; three, an effort that is
    connected to and cognizant of users' needs; and three, that
    draws--four, that draws on the wealth of experiences that
    currently exist through existing federal agencies, for example,
    within NOAA, the experiences we have had with the National
    Weather Service, but the Regional Climate Centers, the Regional
    Integrated Assessment and Service Organizations that are
    providing a wealth of existing climate services.
        So, I think, to sum that up, there are a lot of existing
    pieces in play. I believe that a single effort is needed to
    look broadly across those capacities and lessons learned, and
    to integrate them at the federal level. I would envision an
    interagency process led by the Office of Science and Technology
    Policy as the appropriate entity to really take stock of, and
    lead that designing effort. We now, I think we have gotten to
    the point where we are in agreement that something is needed,
    something that does not now exist, and the question is how to
    design that.
        Typically, in an interagency process, there is a lead
    federal agency. NOAA is willing to play that lead. We would not
    insist on that. It just seems logical, because of the wealth of
    our capacities, capabilities, and experiences. But I believe
    this really is an interagency process, but one that does not
    ignore the regions and the local experiences and capacities,
    because it really is delivery of services at the local and
    regional level that should be the focus.
        Chair Baird. I share that belief that NOAA is the best
    suited and qualified, and has the longest history of dealing
    with this, so I would certainly support that.

                   Applications of a National Climate Service

        Let us talk a little bit about the applications now. How
    would you envision, obviously, for agriculture, this is
    critically important, when you look at, and downstream, for
    those of us who eat the products of agriculture, it is
    important. When we look at predictions of what might happen,
    for example, to the regional ability to grow different crops,
    or needs for irrigation or chemicals, or other factors, how do
    you envision getting the information out effectively to the
    various regions of the country, which will have different
    needs, based on crops and climate in those regions?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Mr. Chairman, our current ability to make
    reasonable forecasts about climate scale information is really
    best at the scale of the entire continent, and best at the
    scale of a century. Neither of those time or space scales is
    what we need. Our modeling capacity is getting better and
    better, and with the recent new supercomputers, we have reason
    to believe we will be able to deliver regional scale
    information, hopefully on the 20, 30, 50 year timeframe.
        So, our capacity to provide the kind of information that
    users are asking for and needing is getting better and better,
    which is why it is so timely to be designing the mechanism for
    sharing that information with users that are asking for it.
        So, relative to what trees to plant, what crops to plant,
    how to think about water management, how to think about fire
    management, how to think about building coastal cities, all of
    those will require information that is at that 20 plus time
    horizon, and more at a regional scale. So, that is where we
    need to be heading.
        Chair Baird. So, we have a combination of a challenge of
    the research necessary to refine that precision of our
    predictions, but also, then, a process of making that, those
    predictions relevant and valuable to the consumers in the
    field.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Yes, Mr. Chairman, although I think it is
    probably more appropriate to be talking about forecasts as
    opposed to predictions. Predictions implies more certainty than
    will probably be appropriate, but forecasts, much like we do
    for the weather forecast, with some uncertainty described, is
    probably what we are looking at.
        Chair Baird. Thank you. I recognize Mr. Inglis for five
    minutes.
        Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Lubchenco, we very
    much appreciate your work at NOAA.

                         The Size of Federal Government

        And you know, I was interested in your observation that
    NOAA is well positioned to collaborate, and I can definitely
    speak to that, having been with Dr. Baird in Australia, and
    seeing employees of NOAA there. It is very impressive that NOAA
    is that extramural, I think you call it, that we are, I am also
    on Foreign Affairs as well as the Science Committee, and
    realizing the opportunity there to generate and keep, in the
    case of Australia, good will, by having our employees present
    there working on something that is very important to them, the
    Great Barrier Reef, which also is important to us in gathering
    science and information. This really is, it substantiates what
    you were saying about NOAA being well positioned to lead this
    collaboration.
        So, tell me, for folks that are concerned about creating
    new things in the Federal Government, the goal, it seems to me,
    is to create stronger, smarter, simpler, more flexible kinds of
    government agencies. How would this fit with that criteria, or
    would it just be growing larger? The concern that a lot of
    people have is we grow the Federal Government larger.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Thank you for that question. I think that it
    is likely the case that we can make better use of many of our
    current capacities, make them more efficient, make them more
    synergistic, connect, set international, federal, regional, and
    local efforts in a more efficient fashion.
        That said, what will be required, and what is already being
    asked by many users of us, will require significantly greater
    investment than currently now exists, so I think we can do some
    combination of synergies and finding efficiencies, but that
    alone will not be able to deliver the range of products and
    services that we believe would best serve the Nation.
        Mr. Inglis. So, in other words, your hope is, I suppose to
    actually get more bang for the buck, in terms of the
    expenditures, more synergistic effects. Of course, that is what
    we are looking for in the Federal Government, it seems to me,
    as we think about ways to make it stronger, simpler, more
    effective, more efficient.
        And so, I hope that that is what we can achieve here.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Congressman Inglis, could I clarify. I do
    think that that is possible, but I also think that we are
    talking about something new, as well, that there are new, there
    will be new efforts required to, in addition to the synergies
    and the efficiencies, to be delivering the services that we
    think are going to be needed.
        Mr. Inglis. Right, and of course, our challenge, as Members
    of Congress, as we encounter these new challenges, we need to
    go figure out what it is that we have already licked, and get
    rid of some of those things. You know, there are places in the
    Federal Government where agencies keep on going forever, long
    after the problem is licked.
        So, hopefully, we can do that together. We can add to
    capabilities here, but eliminate things elsewhere. Perhaps in
    NOAA, but certainly, across the Federal Government in other
    places.
        So, I have just a brief little time left, but it is a good
    way to ask the question, I suppose, with a time limit. Let us
    say you got on the elevator out here, and somebody told you
    just nonsense, that there are anthropogenic causes of climate
    change. What is your elevator answer? You have got three
    floors, you have 49 seconds to get down to the bottom. What
    would you say? I am just curious.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Regardless of what you think the causes of
    climate change are, I think the evidence is unassailable that
    there is change underway, and most people are experiencing that
    in their daily lives. The temperatures are increasing. We are
    seeing more extreme precipitation events, more floods, more
    droughts. We are seeing, as a consequence, more fires, more
    insect outbreaks. Sea level is rising, and the oceans are
    becoming more acidic, and all of those changes are well
    documented.
        Now, the challenge, relative to the topic of today's
    hearing, is how do we deal with those changes in a way that is
    most useful?
        Mr. Inglis. Great. Thank you. The elevator just got to the
    first floor.
        Chair Baird. Thank you, Mr. Inglis. I recognize Ms. Woolsey
    for five minutes.
        Ms. Woolsey. Thank you very much. Thank you, Doctor, for
    being here. We are so pleased to have a real scientist leading
    your organization, so congratulations.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Thank you, Congresswoman.
        Ms. Woolsey. It gives all of a lot of confidence that----
        Dr. Lubchenco. Thank you.

                          Monitoring Greenhouse Gases

        Ms. Woolsey.--we are going to go in the right direction. In
    your testimony, you talk about global climate change and how a
    National Climate Service can be used in mitigation and
    adaptation, and to the problem that we are creating.
        So, this leads me right up to where do you see, or where do
    you see the role of the National Climate Service in monitoring
    greenhouse gases?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Congresswoman, it really is important that
    as we think about different types of mitigation, and as we work
    toward the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we will
    need to monitor the types of, or the amounts of greenhouse
    gases that are being emitted, and that are in the atmosphere,
    and we currently do some of that. We need to be doing more of
    that, and we need to have mechanisms to be reporting that on an
    ongoing basis.
        So, I think there is absolutely a need to have that
    capacity, and----
        Ms. Woolsey. So, would that be, when you talk about,
    Congressman Inglis asked about, you know, growing our
    government, that new doesn't mean that we replace existing, so
    would this be some of the new responsibility?
        Dr. Lubchenco. We already do some monitoring of greenhouse
    gas emissions. We need to be doing that on an ongoing basis,
    and probably at greater scale, for verification purposes. So,
    that need will continue and will grow, along with the need to
    provide information that will focus more on the adaptation end
    of the climate challenges.

                             Potential New Programs

        Ms. Woolsey. So, are there any other examples you would
    like to give us of what new programs we will need, while we
    continue with our existing important NOAA programs?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Well, I think some of the other benefits of
    having something like a climate service, would be enabling
    those in the private sector who are thinking about new types of
    renewable energy sources, information that would enable them to
    do a better job of having successful businesses. Say, for
    example, that you are interested in building a wind farm. You
    would like to know not where the winds have been good for the
    last hundred years, but where they are likely to be good for
    the next hundred years, and so, that information would be
    extremely useful to you in helping to design where to place,
    where to site, you know, decide whether this is a good
    investment or not.
        So, there are many kinds of services that a climate,
    National Climate Service could provide that would help with
    creation of new jobs, new industries, and provision of clean
    energy.
        Ms. Woolsey. So, do you see a need for the oceans being
    considered in relationship to climate? Where is that going to
    come into play?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Oceans in coastal areas are being strongly
    affected by the increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
    This committee has been, and the Chairman in particular, have
    been strong champions of focusing on the changing chemistry of
    the oceans. As oceans are absorbing the carbon dioxide, they
    become more acidic, and that, in turn, is affecting our
    ecosystems, especially along the West Coast, but also
    elsewhere.
        In addition to that, ocean ecosystems are responding, as a
    result of changes in temperature, changes in ocean currents,
    changes in coastal winds, and then, of course, sea level rise.
    And all of those consequences of climate change to ocean
    ecosystems are affecting the way people interact with those
    ocean ecosystems, whether they are on the land side or the
    ocean side. And as we deal with this range of changes that is
    underway, information to help guide decisions about growth in
    coastal areas, planning of where to move infrastructure,
    planning of where to move communities, where to build airports,
    where to build wind farms, wave energy facilities, all of those
    will be vastly enhanced by having more, by having information
    that we envision being able to be provided by a National
    Climate Service.
        Ms. Woolsey. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Baird. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. Dr. Ehlers.
        Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I have no questions, but I did just want to say I am very
    pleased that Dr. Lubchenco has received this appointment, and I
    look forward to a lot of good work happening in NOAA in the
    future. Thank you.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Thank you, Congressman, and thank you for
    all of your efforts over the years as a strong champion of
    science.
        Mr. Ehlers. Thank you.
        Chair Baird. There has been no stronger champion over the
    years than Dr. Ehlers, and you will appreciate his expertise in
    many realms, and Dr. Ehlers, thank you.
        Mr. Rohrabacher.

                            Observing Climate Change

        Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I
    have been a long-time fan of NOAA, and I wish you success, and
    look forward to working with you.
        Chair Baird. Dr. Lubchenco, be advised that Mr. Rohrabacher
    is an avid surfer, and so he brings us the perspective----
        Dr. Lubchenco. Excellent.
        Chair Baird.--of someone who spends a lot of time in the
    water.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. As well as scuba diver, let me note that,
    but not as avid a scuba diver as my Chairman.
        The climate change, you are referring to climate change--
    were you, at any point in your career, someone who used the
    words global warming instead of climate change?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Yes, Congressman, I think most of us have
    used both of those terms.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. Why is it that you stopped using the word
    global warming and have now moved to climate change?
        Dr. Lubchenco. The words global warming, to me, imply
    something that is gradual, and something that is only about
    temperature, and the sum total of the changes that are underway
    are much more than gradual and just temperature.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. But the temperature change itself, correct
    me if I am wrong, for the last eight years, there has not been
    higher temperatures. Could that have something to do with your
    change of wording, from global warming to climate change?
        Dr. Lubchenco. No, sir. I don't believe that the change of
    wording, at least in the way that I understand the words, is
    anything other than an honest attempt to communicate better
    with the public about the range of changes that are underway.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. Well, I am sure you are always, I am in no
    way implying you ever were, or people who I disagree with have
    ever been dishonest with the public. Let me just put that on
    the record. People can have honest disagreements, but also,
    people can be wrong, and my suggestion is that there are so
    many people who are using the word global warming, and now,
    don't use it, because it hasn't been getting warmer. I think it
    is, and I am not saying this about you, but for many other
    people, I think it is that they were wrong and refused to admit
    it.
        Let me ask you, so is that correct that there has not been
    warming on the planet, generally, in the last eight years?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Congressman, I think, if, may I use an
    analogy that is on the beach, if you will? If you are standing
    on a shore that you have never been at before, and you are
    trying to decide if the tide is going in or coming out, and you
    watch eight waves come in, you can't tell whether the tide is
    ebbing or flowing. You need to look at it over a longer period
    of time.
        The same is true with climate records. Looking at an eight-
    year record is insufficient to tell you if there is any
    meaningful change through time. You need a longer period of
    time to be examining whether there really is a change, whether
    it is going one way or another.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. I was assuming that the Weather Service
    and the scientists that were using the words global warming,
    had actually been studying the trends over long periods of
    time. Tell me, is the climate of this planet, someone who is an
    expert in this area, would you say the climate on the planet
    over the millions of years of our planet's history has been a
    stable climate, or someone that has been volatile?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Over millions of years, the climate has gone
    through many different cycles. We have good evidence, going
    back some 650,000 years, from ice core data, for example, that
    give us better insight into that fairly long period of time.
        And during that interval, we know that what is happening
    now is outside of the normal ranges of the climate cycle.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. But there have been major changes in the
    climate over that time period. About ice cores, does the ice
    core prove, and I have several scientists that we have put in
    the record here, major heads of major university science
    laboratories, et cetera, that have said that the idea that
    CO2 introduction has caused the climate to change
    was wrong, the wrong analysis ten years ago. And they have
    studied it, and they now believe that it is warming that causes
    the CO2 to go up, and not the other way around.
        Do you disagree with those scientists?
        Dr. Lubchenco. I disagree with that, and I think there has
    been resolution of that particular issue. I think it is now
    commonly accepted that increases in carbon dioxide are, in
    fact, causing both a general warming trend and increasing
    variability of the climate, and there is good evidence that
    that is happening.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. And has the CO2 gone up in the
    last eight years, and we have not seen--instead, we have a
    cooling now, yet the CO2 continues to go up?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Congressman, this is the same phenomenon
    that I was describing earlier. Eight years is not enough to
    detect a trend in a system that has some natural fluctuation,
    and we are seeing over the last century, significant warming
    through that time, and very significant increases in carbon
    dioxide. I think there is considerable unanimity within the
    scientific community on those points.
        Mr. Rohrabacher. I would suggest, and I have already put it
    in the record, many scientists, prominent scientists who don't
    agree with that. And my time is up. Thank you very much, Mr.
    Chairman, and thank you to the witness.

                              Ocean Acidification

        Chair Baird. Thank the Chairman, or Mr. Rohrabacher. I
    don't plan to have a whole second round, but what are we seeing
    in the area of ocean acidification, over the time period? This
    is basic chemistry. Is there anyone who would suggest that more
    CO2 is in the air is going to lead to less
    acidification of the ocean and less adverse effects? You are an
    expert in that particular area. Could you enlighten us a little
    bit about that?
        Dr. Lubchenco. Mr. Chairman, this is an area where there
    really is no controversy at all. It is very straightforward
    chemistry. As you increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the
    atmosphere, the ocean absorbs it, and that makes ocean water
    more acidic is the very simple, straightforward thing.
        We know that over the last 100 years or so, the amount of
    acidity in the ocean has increased by about 30 percent, and
    that is having a very significant impact on everything from
    coral reefs to the microscopic plants in the ocean, the
    phytoplankton, on anything that has a shell or a skeleton, from
    mussels to clams to sea stars, sea urchins, oysters. And all of
    those changes that are underway are likely to continue for some
    time, because of the carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere
    now.
        Chair Baird. Even if we were to stop additional
    CO2, we would still have continued acidification
    impacts?
        Dr. Lubchenco. We would indeed.
        Chair Baird. Unless any of my colleagues have urgent
    questions, I think we will thank the Director for her service,
    look forward to many future conversations, and working closely
    with you and your agency on developing a National Climate
    Service and legislation to support that.
        And with that, we will take a brief break. Dr. Lubchenco,
    you are excused, and thank you very much for joining us again.
    Hope to see you soon.
        Dr. Lubchenco. Thank you so much.
        Chair Baird. A very brief break, as we seat the next panel,
    and our staff puts the proper nametags in the proper place.
    Thank you again, Dr. Lubchenco, and thank my colleagues.

                                    Panel II

        Our panel is now seated. We want to thank the panelists. I
    also acknowledge we have been joined by Eddie Bernice Johnson,
    as well, the gentlelady from Texas, and we will now introduce
    our second panel. I thank you for your patience, gentlemen, and
    thank you for your background and contributions today.
        Dr. Arthur DeGaetano is the Director of the Northeast
    Regional Climate Center. Dr. Eric Barron is the Director of the
    National Center for Atmospheric Research. Dr. Philip Mote is
    the Director of the Oregon Climate Change Research Institute
    and Oregon Climate Services at Oregon State University. And Mr.
    Richard Hirn is the General Counsel and Legislative Director
    for the National Weather Service Employees Organization.
        Thank you all for being here very much. We look forward to
    your comments. As mentioned earlier, each witness will have
    about five minutes to speak, and you will watch the lights, and
    they will turn yellow when you are about one minute, and we try
    to keep it as close as we can to five, and then, we will follow
    with a series of questions by panel.
        And with that, we begin by recognizing Dr. DeGaetano. Thank
    you.

    STATEMENT OF DR. ARTHUR DEGAETANO, DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST REGIONAL
                   CLIMATE CENTER, CORNELL UNIVERSITY

        Dr. DeGaetano. Thank you, Chairman Baird.
        I am a professor at Cornell University and Director of the
    Northeast Regional Climate Center. The NRCC is one of six
    Regional Climate Centers that have been supported by Congress
    for nearly two decades. It is administered by NOAA.
        We provide timely, efficient, and reliable climate services
    to a wide variety of sensitive sectors within our regions. I
    hope this experience will serve as a model for climate services
    in the years to come. In the next few minutes, I will elucidate
    several key characteristics of climate services, based on the
    25 year history of the RCC program.
        As I expand on these characteristics, please try to see the
    ties between them, because just like effective climate services
    cannot be done by any one organization, the characteristics of
    climate services in general are also interwoven.
        The first characteristic is partnership and integration.
    Partnerships are critical. The Climate Centers have seen this
    in our interactions with the National Climatic Data Center, and
    with partners represented by many of my fellow witnesses. Web-
    based tools developed by the RCCs facilitate climate services
    by local National Weather Service offices, State
    climatologists, and Natural Resource Conservation Service
    offices in every U.S. county. They integrate data from across
    the State, local, and other federal networks that are used by
    these partners, another key area of integration.
        Partnerships should also extend to our stakeholders. Trust-
    based, active, two way dialogs between climate scientists and
    users of climate information is critical for effective climate
    services. Examples based on these feature can be relatively
    simple, but solve a substantial problem for the user. Like the
    investment banking industry's need for degree days to be
    tabulated from Friday to Thursday to match industry practices.
    Or more complex, such as ongoing applied research to develop
    climate-dependent tools for monitoring and controlling the
    spread of vectors of West Nile virus.
        Such data-driven climate decision models will become more
    and more entrenched in climate services in the coming years. It
    is not enough to just provide climate data. Users require
    climate products, and these analyses must be capable of
    interacting with other models. A robust computer
    infrastructure, that operationalizes research results and
    dynamically links data to decision tools, is a third climate
    service component. We have seen this in our interactions with
    the RISAs. The RCC computer infrastructure interfaces with
    hydrological models developed by the Climate Impact Groups at
    the University of Washington, in Chairman Baird's home state,
    providing real-time data for water management decisions.
        Responsiveness to local and regional issues is a fourth
    component. Responsiveness not only includes being there day in
    and day out to provide the types of operational products
    described previously, but it also includes the ability to react
    when unanticipated climate anomalies develop, be they
    hurricanes, droughts, or other crises indirectly related to
    climate. Just the other day, my Center provided data to help
    track the spread of the hemlock woolly adelgid, an invasive
    pest.
        Responsiveness also includes being in tune with important
    political, social, and environmental considerations within a
    region. A Climate Center example from the Northeast involves
    the influence of climate on nitrogen runoff into the upper
    Susquehanna and Chesapeake Bay. The above example also
    highlights interdisciplinarity. Having climate service partners
    affiliated with universities offers ties to disciplines outside
    the atmospheric sciences, provides a link between basic and
    applied research, and capitalizes on established affiliations
    with cooperative extension, the Land Grant college system and
    NOAA Sea grant.
        I once heard a farmer say that he deals with change every
    day, changes in technology, changes in economics, changes in
    environmental regulations. Climate is only one of the many
    changes facing agriculture and other industries. This
    highlights the final element of a National Climate Service,
    that if you are prepared to deal with adaptation to climate
    change.
        I leave this critical component for last, to make the point
    that traditional approaches to solve past climate problems,
    like I have discussed, trust-based relationships with
    stakeholders, partnership, interactive decision tools, modeled
    link with data, collaborations between climate service
    providers and researchers from other disciplines, provide the
    foundation for responding to concerns about future climate
    variations and change.
        Let me conclude by saying that the United States needs a
    comprehensive National Climate Service that has the ability to
    address the broad spectrum of climate needs facing the Nation.
    The existing core set of organizations and capabilities
    provides a useful and functional framework. To meet newer
    challenges, this incomplete infrastructure requires consistent
    and reliable support, augmentation of capabilities, and much
    better integration across a wide variety of boundaries.
        NOAA capabilities and affiliated programs, such as the
    Regional Climate Centers, will be integral and necessary
    components, but alone are not sufficient.
        Thank you for your attention.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. DeGaetano follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Arthur DeGaetano

        Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members: Thank you for inviting me
    to testify before this subcommittee, to address the expansion of
    climate services within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA). I am a Professor in the Department of Earth and
    Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University and Director of the
    Northeast Regional Climate Center (NRCC). The NRCC is one of six
    Regional Climate Centers (RCCs) that have been supported by Congress
    for nearly 25 years. Over this time the RCC Program, administered by
    NOAA, has provided basic climate services in a timely, efficient and
    reliable manner to a variety of climate sensitive sectors within their
    regions. I hope this experience will serve as a model for expanded
    climate services in the years to come, particularly with regard to the
    vital requirement that climate services be regional in nature and
    responsive to stakeholder needs, and transition to a comprehensive
    Service that can meet sector needs to respond to future uncertainty in
    a changing climate.
        The six RCCs serve all fifty states in the Nation. Through its
    history, the RCC Program has coordinated with partners in the NOAA
    National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the NOAA National Weather Service
    (NWS), the American Association of State Climatologists (AASC), NOAA
    Cooperative Institutes and research programs, numerous State and
    federal agencies, private industries, and individual citizens to
    deliver a comprehensive suite of climate services at national,
    regional, State and local levels. This successful effort provides
    jointly developed products, services, and capabilities that enhance the
    delivery and usefulness of climate information to the American public.
    As NOAA and Congress work to help society adapt to climate change and
    variability, these collaborative efforts form a framework for data
    stewardship, climate services, climate assessment, and applied research
    geared toward helping individuals, communities, government agencies,
    and industries make informed decisions using climate information.

        Strong Congressional support for the RCC program over the last two
    decades has allowed for development of trust-based relationships
    between the Centers and decision-makers from various economic sectors.
    These relationships have been fruitful for both the users as well as
    the RCCs. Decision-makers receive the data and information they need in
    a format, time-frame, and manner that is most useful for their
    application, while the RCCs capitalize on the feedback received from
    users of climate information to develop robust and efficient data
    delivery systems, drive applied research projects, and synthesize the
    climate-related applications that impact social and economic sectors
    within their regions.
        Dependable relationships with credible partners, accumulated
    climate knowledge and a robust computing infrastructure are critical
    components for effective climate services at local to national scales.
    Attempting to recreate this efficient, established, proven, and
    reliable system, would be wasteful in terms of resources and disruptive
    to a large user base that relies upon operational RCC data products 24
    hours a day. Through this testimony, I hope to elucidate several key
    characteristics of climate services based on the accumulated experience
    of the RCC program. Examples are used to illustrate existing features
    that could be incorporated into an expanded National Climate Service.
    Drawing upon their history and familiarity with user communities, the
    RCC's vision for a National Climate Service includes:

              Providing services based on direct interaction with
            climate stakeholders

              Enhancing established climate service partnerships

              Distributing accurate and unbiased climate data,
            data-products, and summary information in response to changing
            user needs

              Developing decision support tools through
            interdisciplinary applied research

              Educating stakeholders on emerging regional climate
            issues

              Developing adaptation strategies for changing
            environmental, technological and societal conditions

    Key Components of a National Climate Service

    Integration--Local to National
        In partnership with NOAA and the American Association of State
    Climatologists (AASC), the RCCs envision an integrated climate service
    structure that supports improved decisions to enhance industries,
    protect the environment, and promote public safety at State, regional
    and national levels. Through integration, national climate services
    will benefit from

              Access to local data sources from regional, State,
            local and private networks

              Dynamic products that span time scales from
            historical to real-time to near-term forecast to longer range
            climate projection

              Local knowledge of climate impacts, climate extremes
            and emerging issues

              Synchronized data values and consistent analyses

        Such a structure is already in place within the RCC regions.

              The Western RCC (WRCC) has teamed with the State of
            California to integrate NOAA data with observations from a
            variety of State, local and other federal networks. This
            expanded data network, when linked to WRCC analysis software
            and interpretive human expertise, informs decisions related to
            water resources, fire risk and air quality.

              At all RCCs, a distributed climate data access system
            (ACIS) enables State climate offices to respond to requests for
            climate information from engineers, insurance companies,
            banking institutions and energy firms using the most up-to-date
            NOAA data and standardized processing routines.

              Crop disease risk models developed by the Northeast
            RCC merge hourly NOAA data, observations from privately
            operated weather stations and NWS gridded forecasts. NRCC data
            systems provide a mechanism for NWS access to the private
            climate observations.

    Active Local Stakeholder Engagement
        Through decades of experience, the RCCs have learned that effective
    and meaningful climate services must be defined broadly to satisfy
    stakeholder needs. Climate services should satisfy the domain-specific
    needs of stakeholders in ways that can be directly assimilated into
    their business practices and decision strategies. Effective climate
    services should include:

              Two-way dialogues between climate scientists and
            users of climate information

              Timely access to quality climate data, products, and
            analyses from integrated data sources that incorporate State,
            regional, and national data networks

              General and specific assessments of climate
            conditions at pertinent spatial and temporal scales

              Responsiveness to new climate issues as they arise,
            such as adaptation to climate change and variability

              Access to research results pertaining to basic and
            applied climate issues

              Decision support tools developed for domain-specific
            applications

        An example from the Northeastern United States epitomizes this
    strategy. Heating degree days have been used as a common measure of
    heating demand, and hence fuel usage, for decades. These data,
    available from NOAA and a variety of other sources, have typically been
    tabulated on a weekly basis from Sunday through Saturday. Through
    discussions with UBS, a nationwide investment firm, the NRCC learned
    that this definition of a week did not coincide with energy trading
    practices which operated on a Friday-Thursday time interval. The
    mismatch in summary period affected the accuracy of the forecast models
    used by the industry. By working with these companies and the NOAA
    Climate Prediction Center, the NRCC now provides these data to USB and
    other investment firms in a format that addresses their needs.

    Adaptation Strategies for Climate and Environmental Change
        A core component of a National Climate Service should include the
    capacity and ability to provide data and insight on climate change
    adaptation strategies. The RCCs have been increasingly called upon for
    information related to future climate conditions. Users are more aware
    of variations in climate conditions and require information to assist
    them in managing year-to-year climate variations and adapting to
    changing climate conditions. As with traditional approaches to solve
    past problems, those that focus on climate change adaptation require
    extensive stakeholder dialogue. Furthermore, the inherent uncertainly
    of longer-term climate projections makes established trust between
    climate service providers and decision-makers an even more important
    component of climate adaptation research, outreach and service. Again
    from past experience, it is evident that these types of relationships
    can best be established at local, State and regional levels. To address
    climate change adaptation a national climate service should:

              Assess vulnerability to climate change impacts and
            research appropriate strategies and plans to reduce such
            vulnerability at local, State, regional, and national levels

              Develop dynamic climate information products,
            databases, decision tools, and services for decision-makers and
            policy-makers at multiple temporal and spatial scales

              Educate stakeholders about the potential
            uncertainties in climate projections and work with decision-
            makers to determine how best to apply these projections in
            light of uncertainty

        Users are more comfortable when tools for climate adaptation are
    derived from existing climate products and decision support systems
    available through established relationships. Most of the data, tools
    and products currently provided by the RCCs can be used or modified to
    support climate change adaptation. The climate services partners such
    as the RCCs and AASC have the expertise to help local sectors identify
    vulnerabilities in relation to climate. The key to using these tools
    effectively will be to understand how climate is changing--what might
    change, what will be the magnitude, and over what time periods. For
    example, a crop yield model used currently to project seasonal yields
    can be used to plan for adaptation to climate change by providing
    outcomes for different scenarios of temperature, precipitation, and
    other climate-related inputs in the model. New risk-management tools
    can be developed to help utilize these results for making decisions
    about adaptation. Because of the RCC understanding of many stakeholder
    needs, the RCCs help agencies determine critical climate thresholds
    that will impact a particular sector.

    Innovative Environmental Data Management
        The RCCs have been in the forefront of developing operational
    climate data support systems. The Applied Climate Information System
    (ACIS) is the foundation for RCC data management and electronic
    information delivery. ACIS was developed to provide operational
    efficiency, redundant reliability, and flexibility to accommodate
    evolving information system configurations and needs. ACIS is becoming
    an effective operational component of international GEOSS activities
    through a partnership with the Northrop Grumman Corporation. The
    flexible design of ACIS provides data to web servers and services,
    automated data delivery systems, and on-demand data polling from remote
    users and user applications. The RCCs envision such a system as a key
    component of a National Climate Service. It already provides
    operational support to federal climate service providers and the
    general public through:

              xmACIS
               An interface for NOAA partners to access RCC data products
            and data holdings that alleviates the need to maintain and
            update separate databases at individual local NWS offices.

              NOWData
               An abbreviated version of xmACIS designed for use by the
            general public and available on each local NWS office website.

              ThreadEx
               A product developed in collaboration with the RCCs, NWS,
            NCDC, and The WeatherChannel to standardize the reporting of
            weather extremes.

              AgACIS
               Specially designed climate data products for use by Natural
            Resource Conservation Service field offices in each of the 3140
            U.S. counties.

              WxCoder III
               A web-based interface that allows NOAA Cooperative weather
            observations to be entered electronically, providing timely
            access and eliminating the need to digitize handwritten
            observations.

        These systems deliver tens of thousands of products every month and
    provide a cost-effective method to deliver NOAA and non-NOAA climate
    data and products to the public.
        Information systems such as ACIS also provide a means for linking
    decision support tools developed through NOAA research programs such as
    the Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA), Sector
    Applications Research Program (SARP) and Transition of Research
    Applications to Climate Services (TRACS) program to real-time
    operational climate databases. The RCCs expect that ACIS will be
    required to transition these research results into operational
    products. Such data systems will also be advantageous, as they have the
    ability to seamlessly incorporate data from disparate networks, remote-
    sensing platforms and meteorological and climatological models into
    existing decision tools.

    Responsiveness to Local and Regional Issues
        A national climate service must be closely attuned to regional
    issues and ready to provide nimble and appropriate responses as
    anomalous climate conditions develop or unanticipated situations arise.
    Under such circumstances, the value of a National Climate Service is
    more clearly apparent. Effectively addressing these issues requires:

              Local knowledge of important political, environmental
            and social considerations

              Established trust-based stakeholder relationships

              Pre-existing tools, data and information ready for
            rapid application

              A network to engage stakeholders at State and local
            levels, such as the one that exists through the 50 State
            climatologists, the USDA Cooperative Extension Service and NOAA
            Sea Grant

        The regional diversity of local climate issues that need to be
    addressed by a National Climate Service is best illustrated by examples
    from each of the RCCs.

                The Midwestern RCC
        The Midwestern Regional Climate Center (MRCC) monitors the climate
    in the Nation's major corn and soybean growing region and provides
    tools for producer and agribusiness decisions. A method to produce
    county-level soil moisture measurements based on radar and
    precipitation measurements is used to produce up-to-date maps of soil
    moisture estimates in the Midwest. During the growing season, crop
    yield models provide yield estimates of corn and soybeans. Numerous
    agribusinesses, ranging from large international conglomerates such as
    Cargill, Inc. to seed companies and local producers, rely on RCC data
    and products to assess current conditions and provide guidance for
    operational decisions.

                The Southeast RCC
        The Southeast Regional Climate Center (SERCC) is taking the lead in
    exploring links between climate and health, largely because of the
    existing expertise of Center staff, the location of a major School of
    Public Health on the same campus, and the presence of the Centers for
    Disease Prevention and Control in the southeast region. At the federal
    level, RCC staff participates in an interagency working group assessing
    likely responses to public health threats posed by climate change.
    Major emerging roles for the Center are provision of information about
    climate variability and change at the local level in a form
    understandable to and usable by local, State and federal public health
    organizations, and assistance in translating the information into an
    assessment of potential health impacts.
        The SERCC is also linking the health-related work with the
    disaster-related concerns of the Department of Homeland Security.
    SERCC, along with the Southern Regional Climate Center, is involved
    with assessing the direct physical threats posed by hurricanes to the
    Atlantic and Gulf coastlands. In addition, SERCC is in a position to
    assist in the development of strategies to deal with the health
    aftermaths of a hurricane strike.

                The Southern RCC
        Since 1992, the SRCC has provided decision support to the Louisiana
    Governor's Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness
    during tropical storm and hurricane events affecting Louisiana coastal
    communities. SRCC personnel provide observational data and
    interpretation of official NOAA forecasts and warnings that help
    emergency managers make informed decisions on evacuations, emergency
    sheltering, resource staging, rescue missions, and other critical
    decisions that depend on continually changing assessments of risk. In
    the past few years, LSU has increased its support of these activities
    providing additional services that include damage and mortality
    modeling, storm surge modeling, and post-storm recovery support in
    which the SRCC plays a major role.

                The Northeast RCC
        The NRCC frequently deals with urban issues related to water
    resources and temperature extremes. It has ties to corporations ranging
    from energy providers to investment banking firms. In addition,
    agriculture is an important industry in the region. Climate related
    decisions in this sector have both economic and environmental
    implications. Coastal issues are also within the realm of the center,
    given it is bordered by both the Atlantic Ocean and Great Lakes. A
    project that syntheses these interrelated issues deals with the
    management of agricultural nitrogen. Across department collaborations
    at Cornell have resulted in the creation of Adapt-N, a web-based tool
    that links high resolution climate data derived from Cooperative
    Network observations, radar estimates and meteorological model
    initialization fields with soil nitrogen and crop yield models. Adapt-N
    provides recommendations for nitrogen application rates in maize that
    incorporate ambient weather conditions. These recommendations optimize
    corn yield, while minimizing nitrogen losses. Nitrogen runoff within
    the Upper Susquehanna River Basin and ultimately Chesapeake Bay is a
    primary concern of the NY Department of Environmental Conservation and
    the Susquehanna River Basin Commission. Farmers using the tool also
    derive an economic benefit via more efficient nitrogen use.

    The Western RCC
        The WRCC addresses a broad spectrum of climate issues and user
    needs. For example, federal and State land management agencies rely on
    WRCC for data products supporting wildland fire decision-making,
    including data management of the 2,400 sites of the national Remote
    Automated Weather Station (RAWS) network, and archival of National
    Lightning Detection Network data for fire management use. WRCC has
    worked closely with the National Park Service nationwide on needs for
    and provision of weather and climate data and information for
    operations, research, and public interpretation of climate.
        Drought has been present in the West every year since 1995 as a
    serious and persistent problem. WRCC has played an influential role in
    the development and implementation of the National Integrated Drought
    Information System and its western activities. The West has warmed much
    more than the rest of the U.S. over the past 35 years; this has
    significant implications for future water supplies, most of which rely
    on snowpack. Adaptation to climate variability and change are becoming
    a major WRCC theme. This Center specializes in mountain environments,
    the source of water, timber, recreation, minerals, renewable energy,
    and tourism, all greatly affected by climate. The region is over 50
    percent public land, and WRCC interacts with numerous federal,
    regional, tribal, State and county resource management agencies to
    monitor, understand, and provide sustainable utilization of these
    shared resources. Ecosystem services and environmental health are now
    seen as vital to the western economy, and are strongly tied to climate.
    WRCC provides front-line information delivery capability for NOAA, and
    in turn knowledgeably informs and participates in development of
    improved information capabilities tailored to the unique needs of this
    diverse region.

                The High Plains RCC
        The High Plains Aquifer (Ogallala) is one of the world's largest
    aquifers. About 27 percent of the Nation's irrigated land overlies this
    aquifer and about 30 percent of the U.S. ground water used for
    irrigation comes from the High Plains Aquifer. Clients using the HPRCC
    irrigation tools can select the nearest weather stations, the crop that
    will be addressed, its maturity level, emergence date, and enter local
    precipitation from the field of interest, if available. The output
    provides an estimate of how much additional water the soil can hold and
    a projection of soil water relative to crop water stress level. The
    goal is to keep the water in the soil well above the stress level and
    to leave enough room in the soil for any rainfall anticipated from the
    forecast. Informed scheduling of irrigations reduces the number of
    irrigations and thus conserves water, reduces energy used for pumping,
    minimizes run-off, and maintains potential yields (even in semi-arid
    climates).
        The HPRCC is also engaged in climate variability and climate change
    analyses to build tools for current clients to provide assessments on
    possible climate change impacts on the Plains: future frost-free
    seasons, heat during the growing season, impacts on water use/yield and
    shifting of crop production zones.

    Interdisciplinary Collaborations
        Climate is just one of many issues that decision-makers must
    consider. Thus effective climate services must have the ability to
    synthesize non-climatic influences and data sources. Interactions
    between climatic and non-climatic factors are often non-linear,
    particularly in situations where the climate and associated factors are
    changing. Economists, social scientists, communication specialists,
    innovative instruction experts, agronomists and entomologists represent
    interdisciplinary collaborations that the RCCs have fostered to address
    climate related problems. Scientists from these and other diverse
    fields are critical components of national climate services. An
    efficient means of integrating scientists is through the inclusion of
    research universities as partners in a National Climate Service. A
    National Climate Service-university relationship also benefits climate
    services in general by:

              Leveraging resources for research funds from federal,
            State, and private sponsors

              Fostering unique interdisciplinary collaborations

              Providing substantial cost sharing support

              Establishing links to Cooperative Extension and Sea
            Grant

        The RCCs, AASC and RISAs currently provide ties to major U.S.
    universities. Each year the RCC base funding is leveraged considerably
    through external grants and contracts. The RCC directors are on faculty
    at major research universities and they maintain active research
    programs that further the goals of national climate services in data
    quality, novel data products and climate related decision-modeling.

    Concluding Remarks

        The United States needs a comprehensive National Climate Service
    that has the ability to address the broad spectrum of climate needs
    facing the Nation. These needs are spread across a wide diversity of
    disciplines and economic sectors that touch nearly every aspect of
    society. The existing core set of organizations and capabilities
    provides a useful and functional initial framework. To meet newer
    challenges, this patchy and incomplete infrastructure requires
    consistent and reliable support, augmentation of capabilities, and much
    better integration across a wide variety of boundaries. NOAA capacities
    and programs such as those we have outlined will be integral and
    necessary components but, alone are not sufficient. Climate is so
    pervasive an issue that the success of a National Climate Service, on
    the scale and broad scope that we need, can only derive from a sense of
    shared ownership of the Service among its widely scattered
    participants: federal, regional, State and local agencies and
    organizations inside and outside government. It is my opinion that this
    nation has the talent, the attitude, the motivation, and the resources
    to provide global leadership in this crucial endeavor.
        In closing, I thank the Committee for inviting me to testify today.

                         Biography for Arthur DeGaetano

        Art DeGaetano is Professor in the Department of Earth and
    Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell. He is also the Director of the
    Northeast Regional Climate Center (NRCC) and Associate Chairman of
    Earth and Atmospheric (EAS). The NRCC's mission is to enhance the use
    and dissemination of climate information to a wide variety of sectors
    in the Northeastern United States in partnership with NOAA's National
    Climatic Data Center. Art serves as an associate editor for the
    American Meteorological Society Journal of Applied Meteorology and
    Climatology. Art has been at Cornell since 1991 serving as the Center's
    Research Climatologist until 2001. Prior to his arrival at Cornell Art
    was an Assistant Professor with the Meteorology Department at the South
    Dakota School of Mines and Technology in Rapid City. He received an
    interdisciplinary Ph.D. focusing on Climatology and Horticulture from
    Rutgers University in 1989.

        Chair Baird. Thank you. Dr. Barron.

    STATEMENT OF DR. ERIC J. BARRON, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTER FOR
      ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH; CHAIR, CLIMATE SERVICES COORDINATING
     COMMITTEE, CLIMATE WORKING GROUP, NOAA SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD

        Dr. Barron. Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis, and
    Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to
    testify on the important topic of creating a National Climate
    Service. My name is Eric Barron, and I am the Director of the
    National Center for Atmospheric Research.
        The climate debate has changed dramatically over the last
    decade. We now know that we are going to be forced to make a
    number of decisions that are climate-related, and some mix of
    adaptation and mitigation is going to be inevitable.
        Unfortunately, our nation is not ready for those decisions.
    It lacks the capability to provide a diverse range of climate
    information that could benefit society. The simple fact of the
    matter is there is no single source of authoritative, credible,
    and useful information that will allow society to span the
    connections between climate and human health, water, energy,
    changes in severe weather, agriculture, and environmental
    stewardship.
        It is interesting, every time I talk to a natural resource
    manager, I discover that many of them just don't know where to
    go to get the information that they need, and many of them are
    particularly concerned that they need information that is
    authoritative, the very best information available, if they are
    going to make decisions that can withstand the tests of our
    society or even of litigation within our society.
        You know, consider the fact that we have dozens of climate
    models out there. Should a manager from Washington State or
    from South Carolina, California, Texas, or New York turn around
    and just pick whichever climate model they might want to use
    for a particular problem? Or would we rather have a single
    source, where you can go see the full range of predictions, and
    see with those full range of predictions, the information about
    uncertainties and their ranges, and other expert opinion?
        In other cases, we know that if we can put users,
    information, and new research together, we can actually solve
    problems. We can tailor the information to the needs of a user,
    to remarkable benefit.
        Recently, I chaired the Climate Services Coordinating
    Committee, a body within the Climate Working Group of NOAA's
    Science Advisory Board. The Committee prepared a report that
    was entitled ``Options for Developing a National Climate
    Service.'' I would like to bring the conclusions of this report
    to your attention.
        First, NOAA must play a key role in any climate service.
    This agency already contains many of the fundamental components
    of a climate service, and it has a considerable history of
    providing authoritative services to the Nation. However, in the
    panel's opinion, weather and climate within NOAA have to be
    better integrated, and research operations and users have to be
    better joined if their role is to be successful.
        Second, in addition to NOAA, there are several federal
    agencies that are positioned to contribute expertise,
    information, and resources to support a National Climate
    Service. Each federal agency needs to define collaboratively
    its role and its level of commitment to this Service, and it
    can't be optional. It needs to be persistent and consistent.
        Third, to make this work, the overall authority and
    guidance must be at the highest possible level within the
    federal system, preferably within the White House. There are
    simply too many pieces out there in too many federal agencies
    to have this work well without clear and potent leadership.
        Fourth, a National Climate Service requires a defined,
    independent budget that is large enough to influence the
    direction of the Climate Service, and ensure that we achieve
    its mission. Some of our most successful regional climate
    services are chronically underfunded, and not all parts of this
    Nation are even represented. The Service needs a budget that is
    appropriate to match societal need.
        Fifth, the Service needs to be able to connect with and
    actively engage a broad range of users. We need a nimble and
    flexible structure that empowers users, that can put industry
    at the table, that can promote interaction between users and
    the research community. Frankly, this is something that the
    Federal Government doesn't do well. Our view is that we need a
    separate consortium or nonprofit that is directly funded
    through a lead agency, and is designed specifically to promote
    this interface. We need an entity that has a single focus, no
    competing agenda, in order to connect credible climate
    information to those who need it, whether it is a city, a
    state, a climate services corporation, or a research manager.
        I believe that a National Climate Service that is
    structured well and implemented effectively will dramatically
    increase our ability to respond to these challenges. The
    potential to serve our nation, I think, is enormous if we do
    this well.
        Thank you for this opportunity, and I would be pleased to
    answer any questions when the time comes.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Barron follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Eric J. Barron

        Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis, and Members of the
    Subcommittee: Thank you for inviting me to testify on the importance of
    creating a National Climate Service. My name is Eric Barron, and I am
    the Director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a
    federally-funded institute based in Boulder, Colorado, that supports
    and conducts research and scientific inquiry into our atmosphere and
    its interactions with the Sun, the oceans, the biosphere, and society.
    In all these areas, our scientists are looking closely at the role that
    humankind plays in creating climate change, increasing our ability to
    predict future changes, and assessing the impact that climate change is
    having, in turn, on us.
        I am also Chairman of the Climate Services Coordinating Committee,
    a body within the Climate Working Group of NOAA's Science Advisory
    Board which formed last year to examine options for developing a
    National Climate Service. The Committee recently prepared a report
    titled Options for Developing a National Climate Service, which I would
    like to bring to your attention as a key document and resource on this
    topic. This report is intended to provide Members of this committee,
    other Members of Congress, and the new Administration, with a solid
    foundation on which to make well-reasoned choices on the development of
    a National Climate Service. At the core of the Report, we identify four
    options for developing a National Climate Service, weigh the pros and
    cons of each option, and list key recommendations for design and
    implementation.
        I recommend that you review and take into consideration the
    findings and recommendations of Options for Developing a National
    Climate Service. It reflects the coordinated efforts, over the course
    of more than a year, of an authoritative group of climatologists,
    climate policy experts, federal policy-makers, potential users of a
    National Climate Service, and other key stakeholders. It is
    representative of a broad spectrum of interests from a range of sectors
    and backgrounds, all of which have a stake and should be taken into
    account in the integrated design of a National Climate Service.
        The outcome of our Committee's efforts--distilled in the form of
    our report--offers an informed and well-considered analysis of how to
    best approach the design and implementation of a National Climate
    Service. I hope that, as you formulate policy ideas, and especially if
    you begin to draft an authorization bill for the National Climate
    Service, you will make ample use of our report, take advantage of our
    hard work, and use the members of the Coordinating Committee as
    resources.
        Today, climate services--provided by a number federal agencies,
    universities, non-profits, and private sector firms nationally--provide
    decision-makers with information about long-term trends in the weather
    and other Earth systems. While such climate services met some of user
    demand in the past, demand for climate information and the range of
    information that is needed are rapidly growing as decision-makers are
    increasingly concerned about the consequences of global warming: How
    should my community prepare? How can my community minimize losses? How
    can we maximize gain? Planners, commissioners, policy-makers, and other
    decision-makers want to know detailed and specific information about
    how climate change will affect their state, region, community,
    industry, or utility. They need a dependable and accurate source of
    information to which to turn. They need a level of engagement with
    experts that enables them to make informed decisions. They need a
    research community that recognizes and responds to their problems. The
    lives and the well-being of their clients and constituents are at
    stake, as are economic vitality of their communities and other
    priorities like environmental stewardship and sustainability.
        The patchwork of climate services that currently exists does not
    have the capacity to meet growing needs and demands. Rather, climate
    services are disparate and disconnected by type and region, lacking
    central coordination, focus, and direction. They generally do not
    obtain data, predictions, and syntheses across a broad span of sectors
    and regions, nor do they have the resources to tackle the advanced
    computer climate modeling that is required to produce high-resolution,
    down-scale climate predictions. Currently, there is no single source of
    authoritative, credible and useful information that will allow society
    to span such important topics as the physical aspects of sea level
    rise, temperature and precipitation, the resource implications of
    failed crops, anticipating adverse human health outcomes, robust water
    supply, managing changes in ecosystems, or the social implications of
    migrations and resource competitions. In short, current climate
    services as they are presently constituted are not suited to new
    challenges or the rapidly growing demand for climate information.
        As we face the certainty of a warming planet over the next 100
    years--``unequivocal'' in the words of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel
    on Climate Change--a National Climate Service would dramatically
    increase our ability to respond, and it's necessary to unify,
    strengthen, and optimize our nation's existing climate services. The
    purpose of the National Climate Service would be to provide the best
    possible information to the public to assist in understanding,
    anticipating, and responding to climate, climate change, and climate
    variability, and their impacts and implications. Centralized within the
    Federal Government, integrated across region and type of services, and
    supported with sufficient resources and leadership, a National Climate
    Service would be unique in its capacity to produce and deliver
    authoritative, timely, and useful information on climate change. It
    would enable decision-makers to manage climate-related risks and
    opportunities, along with other local, State, regional, tribal,
    national, and global impacts.
        A National Climate Service should:

            1)  promote active interaction among users, researchers, and
            information providers;

            2)  be user-centric, ensuring that scientifically-based
            information is accessible and commensurate with users' needs
            and limitations; and

            3)  provide usable information and enable the development of
            decision support tools through a sustained network of
            observations, modeling, research activities, and user outreach
            and assistance.

        Critical to the survival and success of a new National Climate
    Service are the functions of design, leadership, and funding. These are
    addressed in the key recommendations laid out in Options for Developing
    a National Climate Service, the following five of which are critical to
    implement:

    Recommendation #1. Internally Reorganize at NOAA. Given NOAA's mission
    and operational capabilities, it is an agency that should play a key
    role in the establishment and implementation of a National Climate
    Service. NOAA already contains many of the fundamental components of a
    climate service and they have considerable history in providing
    services to the Nation. However, as it is currently organized, NOAA is
    not well-suited to the development of a unified climate service
    function. An internal reorganization of NOAA that allows greater
    connectivity between weather and climate functions, and between
    research, operations, and users, is a necessary step for success.

    Recommendation #2. Define Role of Each Agency. There are several
    federal agencies that are positioned to contribute expertise and that
    must contribute resources to support a National Climate Service. Each
    federal agency needs to collaboratively define its role and level of
    commitment in a National Climate Service. To achieve success, each
    agency must commit a set amount of funding that is not optional and
    must commit to participation at a very high level within the agency.
    There are examples of interagency programs that have failed because
    leadership was not involved and participants did not have the authority
    to make commitments on behalf of their agency. This service is too
    important to the security and well-being of the country to risk that
    approach. We must also define a lead federal entity. There is also good
    logic for considering NOAA as the lead agency. A lead agency provides a
    greater ability to speak with an authoritative voice, and a NOAA-lead
    allows us build quickly from existing components of a climate service,
    ensure support of inherently governmental functions (observing systems,
    operational systems), and increases our ability to ensure ``one-stop
    shopping'' if weather and climate functions are integrated.

    Recommendation #3. Place under High-Level Leadership. Success of a
    National Climate Service requires recognized, clear, authoritative,
    responsible leadership within the Federal System at the highest level
    possible, ideally within the White House. The importance of this cannot
    be overemphasized. The service must be interagency and involve State
    and local governments as well as the private and public sector. To make
    this work, someone with clear and obvious authority must take the lead.

    Recommendation #4. Grant a Large, Dedicated Budget. A National Climate
    Service requires a defined, independent budget large enough to
    influence the direction of the Service and achieve its mission.

    Recommendation #5. Establish a Federated Structure. A National Climate
    Service requires an interface best described by a federated structure
    (i.e., non-profit or federation). This point is extremely important.
    The greatest strengths of the federated or non-profit option is their
    flexibility and nimbleness (especially the non-profit option), ability
    to connect and actively engage a broader range of users and members of
    the research community, and potential to have a single focus (no
    competing agenda).

        Implementation of the recommendations outlined in the report will
    establish an efficient and effective service that promotes interactive
    partnerships among scientists, information providers, and a variety of
    users. For instance, accurate and properly-scaled predictions of long-
    term trends in wind volume and sunshine levels at a research
    institution can help renewable energy companies plan where to build
    their new wind turbine farm or concentrated solar thermal plant. A
    national clearinghouse for all carbon and climate monitoring data and
    all impact analyses, based in Washington, D.C., could support policy-
    making and provide an authoritative signal to Congress about how
    rapidly and deeply you should cut or mitigate greenhouse gas emissions
    to minimize losses. A civil engineer's high-resolution model of how
    streamflow will change over the long-term for a key river could help
    fisherman improve management of that river's fisheries, farmers improve
    irrigated agriculture along the river, and dam operators optimize
    hydropower production. And authoritative information on weather and
    climate parameters associated with causes of adverse health outcomes
    could help officials at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention
    and other health professionals respond to adverse health outcomes in
    advance and prepare with an appropriate level of medical community
    preparation.
        As these examples show, the benefits of a National Climate Service
    will be manifold, will extend to all parts of the economy, and will
    have implications for the everyday lives of all people of this country.
    Climate change is happening now and it is occurring at a faster rate
    than anticipated. We need a National Climate Service that will enable
    people to plan for change in a constructive, efficient manner. If we
    succeed in this endeavor, I am confident that we can avoid many of the
    adverse changes that could surely affect our society otherwise.
        Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Inglis: Thank you again for the
    opportunity to testify before your Subcommittee regarding this very
    important program. I would be more than happy to field any questions
    you or the other Members of the Subcommittee have for me today.

                          Biography for Eric J. Barron

        Eric J. Barron, Director of the National Center for Atmospheric
    Research (NCAR), began a career in geology with an undergraduate degree
    from Florida State University (1973). After obtaining his Master's
    degree in oceanography, marine geology and geophysics from the
    University of Miami (1976), his interest turned to climate studies with
    a Cray Supercomputing Fellowship at NCAR. Upon completing his Ph.D. in
    oceanography from the University of Miami (1980), he returned to NCAR
    as a postdoctoral research fellow and then continued as a research
    scientist in the global climate modeling group. In 1986 Barron went to
    Pennsylvania State University to direct the College of Earth and
    Mineral Sciences' newly formed Earth System Science Center (ESSC), and
    was promoted to Professor of Geosciences in 1989. Under Barron's
    leadership, the growth of ESSC resulted in the establishment of the
    College of Earth and Mineral Sciences' Environment Institute,
    encompassing the ESSC and a group of other research center. Barron
    became the Director of this new institute in 1998 and earned the title
    of Distinguished Professor in 1999. In 2002 he was named Dean of the
    College of Earth and Mineral Sciences at Penn State. Prior to coming to
    NCAR in July 2008, Barron served as Dean of Jackson School of
    Geosciences at the University of Texas at Austin.
        Barron's research interests are in the areas of climatology,
    numerical modeling, and Earth history. During his career, he has worked
    diligently to promote the intersection of the geological sciences with
    the atmospheric sciences and the field of Earth system science. He
    served as Chairman of the Climate Research Committee of the National
    Research Council (NRC) from 1990 to 1996. In 1997, he was named Co-
    Chairman of the Board on Atmospheric Sciences (BASC) of the NRC, and
    since 1999 he has chaired the BASC. Additional NRC panels on which
    Barron has served include the Committee on Global Change Research, the
    Assessment of NASA Post-2000 Plans, Climate Change Science, the Human
    Dimensions of Global Change, the Panel on Grand Environmental
    Challenges, and the Committee on Tools for Tracking Chemical,
    Biological, and Nuclear Releases in the Atmosphere: Implications for
    Homeland Security. In addition to serving on the National Research
    Council, Barron chaired the Science Executive Committee for NASA's
    Earth Observing System and NASA's Earth Science and Applications
    Advisory Committee (ESSAC). He has also served as Chairman of the
    USGCRP Forum on Climate Modeling, the Allocation Panel for the
    Interagency Climate Simulation Laboratory, the U.S. National Committee
    for PAGES and the NSF Earth System History Panel.
        Barron is a fellow of the American Geophysical Union, the American
    Meteorological Society, the Geological Society of America, and the
    American Association for the Advancement of Science. In 2003, he
    received the NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal.

        Chair Baird. Thank you. Dr. Mote.

       STATEMENT OF DR. PHILIP W. MOTE, DIRECTOR, OREGON CLIMATE
     CHANGE RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND OREGON CLIMATE SERVICES, OREGON
    STATE UNIVERSITY; PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
                                SCIENCES

        Dr. Mote. Thank you, Chairman Baird and Ranking Member
    Inglis, and Members of the Committee. I am still with the
    Climate Impacts Group at the University of Washington for a
    couple more months, in addition to my responsibilities with the
    Oregon Climate Change Research Institute. And at the University
    of Washington, I also serve as State Climatologist, and I am
    pleased that you all have Nolan Doesken, the President of the
    AASC, to speak in a few minutes.
        I have been invited here to speak on behalf of the nine
    university-based, regionally focused research teams known as
    RISAs, which Dr. DeGaetano already mentioned. RISA stands for
    Regionally Integrated Sciences and Assessments, and they are
    supported by NOAA's Climate Program Office. Most of the RISA
    teams have contributed to my oral and written testimony.
        RISAs have been providing climate services, since the first
    RISA, our own Climate Impacts Group at the University of
    Washington, was established in 1995 by Ed Miles. Indeed, our
    group, with Ed as lead author, wrote a paper on national
    climate services, published in 2006, that helped start the
    current discussion about climate services.
        Climate services provide the use-inspired climate science
    needed to support decisions that plan for and cope with climate
    variability and change. With steady progress in science,
    vigorous growth in demand for actionable climate information,
    and the urgency of coping with a changing climate, the time for
    a National Climate Service has arrived.
        Selecting from dozens of possible examples, I provide here
    a few examples of climate services that the RISAs provide,
    focusing for brevity on water resources. Early on, the
    Northwest and Pacific RISAs helped agencies like Seattle public
    utilities and Pacific Island water resource managers apply
    seasonal forecasts to estimates of water supply. Western and
    Southeastern RISAs have engaged in drought planning and
    monitoring and post-drought analysis. CLIMAS, the Southwest
    RISA, worked with State agencies in Arizona on the Arizona
    Drought Preparedness Plan. The RISA in the Carolinas developed
    a drought monitoring tool to monitor low flow triggers.
        Looking decades into the future, RISA scientists analyzed
    the effects of climate change on the small rivers that supply
    urban needs, like the Cedar River for Seattle, and on the large
    basins, the Columbia and the Colorado, for example. Such
    projections are now routinely being used in long-range planning
    by municipal and State governments, in partnership with RISAs,
    as in California, Colorado, and Washington. Western RISAs have
    worked for a number of years with the U.S. Bureau of
    Reclamation and others to understand uses of climate
    information.
        These and other examples illustrate the importance of the
    partnerships that RISAs have with NOAA offices and other
    federal agencies, Regional Climate Centers, State
    climatologists, extension, tribes, State and local governments,
    NGOs, and the private sector. Each of these partners has unique
    contributions, perspectives, and responsibilities. The RISAs,
    based at universities, emphasize user-oriented research and
    outreach.
        In a National Climate Service, user-oriented research would
    be vital, and RISAs would play a critical role. Here is an
    example of what an NCS could accomplish. Redrawing floodplain
    maps with a rigorous assessment of how climate change may be
    changing the flood risk, also known as the hundred year flood.
    Federal labs provide climate model outputs. University
    researchers run hydrologic models. Political science experts
    craft flexible policies to incorporate local concerns. RISAs
    and State climatologists and extension services engage
    emergency managers, land use planners, and so on.
        Climate services are already provided in various forms by
    the nine RISAs, by Regional Climate Centers, private
    consultants, State climatologists, and so on, but the efforts
    fall short of what is needed. For one thing, the RISA program
    needs to be expanded to serve all fifty states, plus the
    territories. And funding for the RISA program is so thinly
    stretched now that we cannot meet user demand.
        Building on the 2001 NRC report, the RISAs came up with ten
    key elements that we believe will be critical to an effective
    NCS. I have condensed it to five for brevity.
        Number one, needs of stakeholders must be foremost, and are
    best understood at the regional scale. Two, NCS must recognize
    that decision contexts need climate information and much more.
    Three, because capability must span a range of space scales,
    implementation must be national, but with strong regional and
    State components, including universities, to assist regional
    and State level decisions. Four, NCS design should be flexible
    and evolutionary, and be built around effective partnerships.
    Five, NCS success requires that an effective larger national
    and international climate science enterprise, including
    observations, exist to support it.
        The RISAs show that regional university/federal
    partnerships can make unprecedented progress in providing
    climate services, and we succeed because we are backed up by a
    world-class federal science enterprise. Climate knowledge,
    properly used and conveyed, will help Americans deal with, and
    indeed prosper, in the face of future climate variability and
    change.
        Thank you for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Mote follows:]

                      Prepared Statement of Philip W. Mote

        I have been invited here to speak on behalf of the nine university-
    based, regionally-focused research teams known as RISAs. RISA stands
    for Regionally Integrated Sciences and Assessments, supported by NOAA's
    Climate Program Office. Most of the RISA teams have contributed to my
    oral and written testimony.
        RISAs have been providing climate services since the first RISA,
    our own Climate Impacts Group at the University of Washington, was
    established in 1995 by Ed Miles. Indeed, our group with Ed as lead
    author wrote a paper on national climate services in 2006 that helped
    start the current discussion about climate services.
        Climate services provide the use-inspired climate science needed to
    support decisions that plan for and cope with climate variability and
    change. With steady progress in science, vigorous growth in demand for
    actionable climate information, and the urgency of coping with a
    changing climate, the time for a national climate service has arrived.
        Selecting from dozens of possible examples, I provide here a few
    examples of climate services RISAs provide, focusing for brevity on
    water resources. Early on, the Northwest and Pacific RISAs helped
    agencies like Seattle Public Utilities and Pacific island water
    resource managers apply seasonal forecasts to estimates of water
    supply. Western and southeastern RISAs have engaged in drought planning
    and monitoring, and post-drought analysis. CLIMAS (the southwest RISA)
    worked with State agencies in Arizona on the Arizona Drought
    Preparedness Plan. The RISA in the Carolinas developed a drought
    monitoring tool to monitor low-flow triggers. Looking decades into the
    future, RISA scientists analyze the effects of climate change on small
    rivers that supply urban needs, like the Cedar River for Seattle, and
    on the large basins of the Colorado and Columbia Rivers. Such
    projections are now routinely being used in long-range planning by
    municipal and State governments in partnership with RISAs, as in
    California, Colorado, and Washington. Western RISAs have worked for a
    number of years with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and others to
    understand uses of climate information.
        These and other examples illustrate the importance of partnerships
    RISAs have--with NOAA offices and other federal agencies, with regional
    climate centers, State climatologists, extension, tribes, State and
    local governments, NGOs, and the private sector. Each has unique
    contributions, perspectives, and responsibilities--RISAs, based at
    universities, emphasize user-oriented research and outreach. In a
    National Climate Service, user-oriented research would be vital and
    RISAs would play a critical role. An example of what an NCS could
    accomplish: redrawing flood plain maps with a rigorous assessment of
    how climate change may be changing flood risk, a.k.a. the 100-year
    flood. Federal labs provide climate model output, university
    researchers run hydrologic models, political science experts craft
    flexible policies to incorporate local concerns, RISAs and State
    climatologists engage emergency managers, land use planners, and other
    local officials.
        Climate services are already provided in various forms by the nine
    RISAs, by regional climate centers, private consultants, State
    climatologists, extension, the National Weather Service, and others,
    but the efforts fall short of what is needed. For one thing, the RISA
    program needs to be expanded to serve all 50 states plus the
    territories. And funding for the RISA program is so thinly stretched
    that we cannot meet user demand.
        Building on a 2001 NRC report, the RISAs came up with ten key
    elements that we believe will be critical to an effective National
    Climate Services (NCS); I've condensed it to five for brevity.

            1.  Needs of stakeholders must be foremost, and are best
            understood at the regional scale.

            2.  NCS must recognize that decision contexts need climate
            information and much more.

            3.  Because capability must span a range of space scales,
            implementation must be national but with strong regional and
            State components, including universities, to assist regional
            and State-level decisions.

            4.  NCS design should be flexible and evolutionary, and built
            around effective partnerships.

            5.  NCS success requires that an effective larger national (and
            international) climate science enterprise, including
            observations, exists to support it.

        The RISAs show that regional university-federal partnerships can
    make unprecedented progress in providing climate services, and we
    succeed because we are backed up by a world-class federal science
    enterprise, a global climate observing system, data centers, and global
    and regional climate modeling. Climate knowledge, properly conveyed and
    used, will help Americans deal with, and indeed prosper, in the face of
    future climate variability and change. Thank you for allowing me and my
    colleagues to share our thoughts with your subcommittee today.

    Executive Summary

        NOAA's Regional Integrated Science and Assessments (RISA) program
    consists of nine teams focused on different climatically-sensitive
    regions of the United States. These teams have developed innovative
    place-based, stakeholder-driven research, partnership, and services
    programs over the past decade, and in doing so, have created an
    effective demonstration-scale climate service for parts of the Nation.
    The experiences of the RISA programs and their successful development
    of decision support tools and other products indicate that the
    following key elements will be critical to an effective National
    Climate Services (NCS):

             1.  NCS must be stakeholder (user)--driven, and accountable to
            stakeholders.

             2.  NSC must be based on sustained regional interactions with
            stakeholders.

             3.  NCS must include efforts to improve climate literacy,
            particularly at the regional scale.

             4.  Multifaceted assessment as an ongoing, iterative process,
            is essential to NSC.

             5.  NCS must recognize that stakeholder decisions need climate
            information in an interdisciplinary context that is much
            broader than just climate.

             6.  NCS must be based on effective interagency partnership--no
            agency is equipped to do it all.

             6.  Implementation of NCS must be national, but the primary
            focus must be regional, where decisions are made.

             8.  Capability must span a range of space and time scales,
            including both climate variability and climate change.

             9.  NCS design should be flexible and evolutionary, and be
            built around effective federal-university partnership.

            10.  NCS success requires that an effective regional, national
            and international climate science enterprise, including ongoing
            observations, model simulations and diagnostics, exists to
            support it.

        Prepared through a collaborative effort of RISA partners, this
    document reviews literature in support of the RISA approach, and
    provides several examples of RISA efforts that illustrate these ten key
    elements, focusing on water resource, wildfire, and agriculture.
    Moreover, during the past 10 years, droughts in the western and the
    southeastern U.S. have illustrated the value and utility of RISA teams
    in diagnosing and predicting droughts, and in designing drought
    mitigation and preparedness plans. Such efforts arise from the
    interdisciplinary and collaborative nature of the RISAs, and provide a
    template for NCS. Scaling up the RISA experience into an NCS poses
    organizational challenges, but offers numerous important lessons, as
    well as the promise of success.

    1. Introduction

        Climate services are intended to provide the use-inspired climate
    science needed to support decision-making in society, particularly as
    it relates to anticipating, planning for, and dealing with climate
    variability and climate change. Owing to steady progress in climate
    science and vigorous growth in public demand for actionable climate
    information, the motivation for rapid expansion of climate services has
    never been greater. Climate information includes paleoclimate
    (reconstruction of past climate from proxies like tree rings);
    statistics about means and extremes from instrumental data and
    interpretations thereof; seasonal climate forecasts; projections of
    global and regional climate change; and much more. Climate services are
    already provided in various forms by the NOAA Regional Integrated
    Sciences and Assessments (RISA) program through its nine regional
    groups, by regional climate centers, private consultants, State
    climatologists, the National Weather Service, and others. This document
    describes the experiences of the RISA program for input as the Nation
    contemplates the design and implementation of a National Climate
    Service (NCS).
        Basic research in climate dynamics, as well as efforts to observe
    and predict the Earth system, have paid immense dividends in improved
    weather forecasts, seasonal climate predictions, and responses of
    global climate to external forcing like greenhouse gases or volcanic
    eruptions. Climate services connect these advances to specific decision
    environments, much the way the National Weather Service implements new
    research in an operational, decision-relevant setting. A fundamental
    aspect of this connection is a responsiveness to users' needs. It is
    this responsiveness that is at the heart of the RISA success in
    understanding how climate information is interpreted and used by a wide
    range of stakeholder decision-makers.
        The RISA program supports integrated, place-based research across a
    range of social, natural, and physical science disciplines to expand
    decision-makers' options in the face of climate change and variability
    at the regional level. RISA teams are comprised of researchers from the
    physical and natural sciences, engineering, economic, legal, and social
    sciences who work together and partner with stakeholders in a region to
    determine how climate impacts key resources and how climate information
    could aid in decision-making and planning for those stakeholders. It
    opens new conduits for the flow of information and documents innovative
    practices for providing services that can lead to improvement across
    the whole climate services enterprise. The significant RISA success in
    meeting user needs illustrates the power of regional stakeholder-driven
    interdisciplinary climate research as a complement to the more
    operational, national-scale support provided by federal agencies such
    as NOAA.
        In this document we briefly review some relevant history of climate
    services, describe key elements of climate services, provide examples
    based on the RISA experience, and offer some thoughts about
    implementing National Climate Service informed by the RISA experience.

    2. RISA Teams and Background Literature

        The network of RISA teams (Figure 1) represents a significant body
    of experience and knowledge about climate services needs. Each RISA
    developed independently and defined its own approaches to meeting
    stakeholder demand. Since the first RISA was established in the Pacific
    Northwest in 1995, the network has expanded to nine teams, each of
    which has long-term relationships with users of climate information
    from a wide variety of sectors, levels of government, and regions.
    RISAs work closely with these users to identify and address needs
    including climate literacy, fundamental use-inspired and applied
    research, and development of decision-support tools.
        A critical element of the regional focus is the intense, sustained
    contact with users that is necessary to uncover, assess and refine the
    ways in which climate services can best meet user needs. These efforts
    often break new ground as they respond to the research and support
    needs of regional user groups. Some specific RISA efforts have also
    delved more deeply into cross-scale issues examining a local situation,
    a sector, or multi-jurisdictional area within a regional context. The
    efforts have generated many lessons on climate needs, as well as best
    practices in effective development and delivery of services. RISAs have
    also had success in the development and transfer of information
    prototypes, applications, service innovation, and research
    methodologies. With time, RISAs have also begun to collaborate more
    regularly with each other, as well as other regional climate science
    partners.

        In the meantime, a steady drum beat of published statements have
    stressed the need for a coordinated approach to climate services. In
    2001 the National Research Council issued a report called A Climate
    Services Vision: First steps toward the future (NRC, 2001). The report
    highlighted that the societal value of climate information is dependent
    upon many factors, including the:

              strength and nature of linkages between climate,
            weather, and human activities;

              nature of uncertainties associated with forecasts;

              accessibility of credible and useful climate
            information by decision-makers;

              ability of users and providers to identify each
            other's needs and limitations; and

              ability of users to respond to useful information.

        According to the NRC report, addressing these factors requires
    research, data stewardship, product development, and education
    programs.
        The NRC report also outlines five ``guiding principles'' for the
    development of a new climate services effort:

        (1). The activities and elements of climate services should be
    user-centric--the user community is diverse, with a wide range of space
    and time scales needed. Users are becoming increasingly diverse and
    knowledgeable, with a commensurate increase in specialized needs. In
    order to address these needs, evaluation, mutual information, and
    feedback are needed to improve communication and accessibility of
    information.

        (2). If a climate service function is to improve and succeed, it
    should be supported by active research, and research is needed not just
    on the fundamentals of climate variability and change, but also on
    diffusion of knowledge and information. This requires mission-oriented
    research with active mechanisms to transfer knowledge from research to
    useful products.

        (3). Advanced information (including predictions) should be
    provided on a variety of space and time scales, and in the context of
    the historical record, in order to understand natural variability and
    climate change. Predictions should be accompanied by analysis of
    probabilities, limitations, and uncertainties. Causes and character of
    natural variability should be described. Continuous, accurate, and
    reliable historical climate observations are needed at diverse locales,
    and products need to be provided for scales from local to global.

        (4). The climate services knowledge base requires active
    stewardship: observations must be reliable, freely exchanged, and
    accessible. This requires open and free exchange of data, combining
    observations into useful, multi-purpose records, and assuring synergism
    between observations, theories, and models. All of this should be
    driven by a ``robust and easily accessible delivery system.''

        (5). Climate services require active and well-defined participation
    by government, business, and academe. Each of these players has
    important roles in providing climate services. The government should be
    motivated by ``public goods and services,'' which they describe as non-
    rival and non-exclusive. These are products that are of a general
    nature, not for individuals or individual commercial operations.
    Government should also take the lead role in maintaining the official
    climate records. The private sector should use the data to meet basic
    and applied research needs of its users. Academic research
    organizations should focus on their central mission of research,
    education, and outreach. Sometimes this may include research data and
    analysis and product development in partnership with industry or
    government towards meeting these goals.
        The NRC recommendations were presented in three sections: (1)
    promoting more effective use of the Nation's weather and climate
    observation systems; (2) improving the capability to serve the climate
    information needs of the Nation; and (3) interdisciplinary studies and
    capabilities needed to address societal needs. Recommendations 1 and 2
    of the NRC report focus primarily upon the infrastructure and provision
    of routine services. While the RISAs contribute to these goals, their
    most notable successes occur in Recommendation 3, which can be
    elaborated as:

              Develop regional enterprises designed to expand the
            nature and scope of climate services;

              Increase support for interdisciplinary climate
            studies, applications, and education;

              Foster climate policy education; and

              Enhance the understanding of climate through public
            education.

        The report describes a service system that ``should strive to meet
    the needs of a user community at least as diverse and complex as the
    climate system itself, ranging from the international community to
    individual users, and involving both the public and private sectors.
    Central to the scope of a climate service is the need to embrace wide
    ranges of time and space scales because decision-making occurs on all
    scales from local to global and from weeks to centuries.''
        Since 2001, several reports have highlighted the critical role that
    RISAs provide through their research and service. A 2003 forum of the
    American Meteorological Society focused on ``Improving Responses to
    Climate Predictions,'' emphasized the need for more ``science
    integrators'' (Greenfield and Fisher, 2003). Finding 5 of the forum
    notes that ``climate information is most effectively developed and
    applied through partnerships between climate information providers and
    decision-makers.'' The report also notes the importance of evaluation
    of risks and benefits as a factor encouraging use of climate forecasts.
        Miles et al. (2006) provided a perspective on climate services
    linking the international aspects of climate monitoring, research and
    modeling to regional applications of climate information. Based in
    large part on the success of the Climate Impacts Group (the Northwest
    RISA), they stressed that regional organizations were a key component
    in successful delivery of climate services within the context of an
    NCS.
        In a review of the Climate Change Science program, the National
    Research Council (2007) noted that ``discovery science and
    understanding of the climate system are proceeding well, but use of
    that knowledge to support decision-making and to manage risks and
    opportunities of climate change is proceeding slowly.'' The report
    emphasized the smaller spatial scales at which decisions are made and
    the need for improved understanding of the impact of climate changes on
    human well-being and vulnerabilities. The review called for stronger
    connections with social science researchers and a more comprehensive
    and balanced research program, including human dimensions, economics,
    adaptation, and mitigation. The report again highlights RISA as a
    positive example: ``NOAA's Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments
    program has been effective in communicating research results to
    stakeholders in particular sectors . . . or regions, but this program
    is small and has limited reach . . . Building and maintaining
    relationships with stakeholders is not easy and requires more resources
    in the CCSP Office and participating agencies than are currently
    available. Yet a well-developed list of stakeholders, target audiences,
    and their needs is essential for educating the public and informing
    decision-making with scientifically-based CCSP products.''
        In 2007, the Western Governors' Association and Western States
    Water Council suggested that improving relationships between State
    agencies, academia and federal climate science agencies was the most
    critical action on improving State and regional response to climate
    variability and change (CDWR, 2007). RISA was again highlighted as a
    ``successful step to a bridging effort between the research community
    and practitioners'' and they recommended that the program be expanded.
        The maturation and expansion of the RISA Program has contributed to
    the body of knowledge about how climate information is conveyed,
    received, and utilized by key stakeholder groups. These findings should
    be used to construct improvements in the products and services provided
    by federal agencies and State climate office services. Within the NOAA
    Climate Program Office, programs such as Transition of Research
    Applications to Climate Services and the Sector Applications Research
    Program have supported research geared toward better understanding of
    how stakeholders use climate information. These studies are often at a
    regional, State or local level, allowing each study to capitalize upon
    unique circumstances to the area. For example, the RISA-served areas of
    the country with a strong response to El Nino-Southern Oscillation
    (ENSO), namely the Pacific Islands, Northwest, California, Southwest,
    and Southeast, can make use of seasonal predictions; whereas for the
    parts of the country with lower seasonal predictability, the utility of
    seasonal forecasts may be low.
        A common theme in these reports is that rapid growth in demand for
    climate services have converged with growth in knowledge of climate and
    of human interactions, and with technological advances including
    communication networks, to pave the way for a transformation of climate
    services. They envision the emergence of a broader, organized, and
    sustained climate service that addresses multiple environmental
    challenges.

    3. Essential elements of a National Climate Service

        Drawing on collaboration and shared experiences, the RISA teams
    have summarized our reflections on the essential elements of a National
    Climate Service (Table 1). These include elements that are essential
    when working with user groups, as well as implications for
    institutional design.

    3.1 A stakeholder-driven perspective
        A national climate service must prioritize stakeholder needs and
    support services based on their usefulness in addressing those needs.
    Critical climate service needs vary among regions depending on
    vulnerabilities and how planning and policy decisions consider local
    climate conditions such as drought, wildfire, snowpack depth, ice
    storms, storm frequency, the likelihood of heat waves, or the impact of
    ocean temperatures on fisheries. The climate science enterprise
    currently addresses these issues, but as the NRC report Decision-Making
    for the Environment (2005:26) points out, approaches to framing
    research questions and data analysis often mean that ``when science is
    gathered to inform environmental decisions, it is often not the right
    science.'' A user-centric approach, which is more likely to gather the
    ``right science,'' affects the design of research, models, and
    observation systems to support fundamental use-inspired and applied
    research, and extends to new communication and operations standards.
    The timeliness of information availability is also critical to its
    utility--decision calendars vary by region, and climate services will
    need to be timed to provide the best information at most useful times.

    3.2 Sustained, ongoing regional interactions with users
        From El Nino events in the 1980s, to global climate change today,
    stakeholder interest in climate science has grown rapidly. In order to
    provide relevant information, RISAs have demonstrated that users and
    scientists committed to innovation in this area must make a sustained
    commitment to learning from each other about climate science and about
    the equally complex sectoral decision needs--the processes,
    vulnerabilities, goals, constraints, calendars, and capabilities--that
    influence the value, utility, and availability of climate information.
    Stakeholders are seeking trusted sources to help them understand a new
    set of issues characterized by rapidly evolving science, uncertainties,
    and highly politicized controversies. Ongoing engagement is necessary
    to build and maintain the credibility required of a national climate
    service, and to respond flexibly to rapidly evolving stakeholder needs
    and capabilities.
        Implicit in making climate services stakeholder-driven, and based
    on sustained stakeholder partnerships, is the fact that the enterprise
    must be inherently regional in nature. National entities cannot succeed
    without strong regional presence and partnership. The RISA success has
    been built on the regional strengths of universities and their well-
    established ability to partner in a sustained way in their regions, and
    to do so in a way that cuts across disciplinary, agency, and sectoral
    boundaries.

    3.3 Broad efforts to improve climate literacy
        Many decision-makers are already hearing and heeding calls to use
    climate information as part of accountability and disclosure from
    regulators, constituents, or clients. For decision-makers to use
    climate information in an effective manner, they often must have at
    least a rudimentary understanding of the strengths, limits, and
    availability of good climate information and services. For example,
    seasonal forecasts are often expressed as shifts in probabilities,
    whereas users often reduce these forecasts to the simpler notion of
    ``above average.'' Many users are in the early stages of learning about
    general climate issues, whereas others are interested in more
    sophisticated treatment of topics related to specific professional or
    occasionally personal interests. RISA experiences indicate that both
    sophisticated and casual users of climate information want to relate
    general processes (e.g., global warming or El Nino) to local/regional
    experience, expectations, and concerns, and vice versa. When users
    understand the statistical and physical reasoning of climate sciences,
    and how to evaluate the plausibility of an explanation or the validity
    of a seasonal forecast, they can make better use of climate
    information. They can also be a more active partner in driving the
    needed science and services. One of the most effective ways to improve
    society's resilience to climate variability and change is through
    greater climate literacy.

    3.4 Assessment as an multifaceted, ongoing, and iterative process
        Several types of assessment are integral to a successful climate
    services. At one end of the spectrum, climate services must assess--at
    regular intervals--the state of the climate system, the state of
    climate understanding, and the range of potential climate impacts,
    risks and vulnerabilities that might occur. This is akin to the
    assessment approach employed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
    Change. In addition, advances in climate science and the changing
    dynamics of socioeconomic systems require that the needs of stakeholder
    decision-makers also be assessed in an ongoing, iterative manner, just
    as the effectiveness of all climate service methodologies and
    activities must be routinely assessed and improved. These latter types
    of assessment are best implemented via social science research.
        Growing populations, shifting economic sectors, greater reliance on
    new energy sources, changing demands on water and on other critical
    resources, are but a few of the trends that will alter the character of
    known vulnerabilities and stakeholder needs. Changing patterns of
    threats and hazards, and emerging issues like re-engineering
    California's San Francisco Bay and Delta system, ocean dead-zones and
    acidification, will require regular investigation of patterns of risk
    and vulnerability to inform decision-making (Healy, Dettinger and
    Norgard, 2008; Dettinger and Culberson, 2008). For all of these
    reasons, assessment must be addressed as an iterative process, and all
    aspects of the climate service enterprise must learn from these
    assessments. Ongoing assessments at regional scales will improve
    conditions and decision-making at those scales while also, in
    composite, providing a better grounding for decisions, adaptation and
    mitigation by the Nation as a whole.

    3.5 Stakeholder decisions need climate information and much more
        Decisions that could benefit from climate information typically
    also have inputs from other types of environmental and societal
    information. A National Climate Service must address critical
    interfaces of climate variability and change with societal decision-
    making and adaptation across scales and sectors. For example, coastal
    communities concerned about projections of sea level rise and
    variability in frequency and intensity of storms, also need to worry
    about municipal bond ratings, availability of insurance, and impacts of
    local coastal erosion processes. Water utilities evaluating strategies
    for dealing with projected changes in drought frequency, intensity, and
    duration, must make their decisions in the context of aging
    infrastructure, projections of population growth and demand, the
    efficacy of water conservation strategies, future energy requirements,
    ecological constraints and the flexibility of regulatory frameworks. To
    meet these interdisciplinary needs, an NCS must provide services that
    are useful in the context of socioeconomic and environmental decision-
    making--e.g., decision support tools--that in turn requires developing
    both (a) much closer interactions between climate science and other
    intellectual disciplines and (b) closer coordination of climate
    information with socioeconomic and environmental impact models.

    3.6 Interagency partnership is essential
        The capacity to address the broad scope of activities and goals
    affected by climate is distributed across federal, State and local
    agencies where experienced staff, tools, and skill sets as well as a
    deep understanding of the policies, procedures, and regulations have
    been developed over decades. In particular, a federal-level interagency
    partnership is needed to ensure that climate services support the
    integration of appropriate climate information with non-climatic
    information, and also enable users to make decisions in cross-agency
    jurisdictional frameworks. Specialized insights into sectoral capacity,
    key institutional challenges, major regulatory issues, research needs,
    critical uncertainties, and potential interactions among climate,
    social, economic, and ecological systems is critical to successful
    adaption involving multiple complex systems and avoiding maladaptive
    choices and unexpected consequences.

    3.7 Implementation must be national in scope, but regional in focus
        Ultimately, NCS should be capable of providing both regionally
    specialized products and equivalent quality services to all parts of
    the country. Brief consideration of the contrasts among the Pacific
    Islands, the small, highly variable New England States, the arid,
    rapidly growing Southwest, and the climatically vast State of Alaska,
    highlights the formidable scale of the task. The distinctive regional
    character of environmental and climate processes and science
    challenges, as well as regional-distinct vulnerabilities, decision-
    making processes, adaptation issues, and the value of close engagement
    with stakeholders, all indicate that many of those services will be
    most effectively designed and delivered through a regional focus. To
    achieve equity in coverage, many regional issues will require
    regionally-explicit approaches to meet specific observation and
    research needs, or to assess the complex interactions of human and
    natural systems in a place.
        Regional texture in dominant issues, climate-sensitive sectors,
    policy context, and dominant climate processes require regionally
    specific information, not just higher spatial resolution. National
    implementation of a regionally focused climate service can ensure that
    shared regional needs (e.g., large-scale observing systems, modeling
    and basic research on continental to global-scale processes) are
    addressed in an efficient manner, and that lessons learned in one
    region can benefit another. A national scope also addresses the
    interconnectedness of climate-sensitive sectors in which information
    about drought, crop productivity, or snowfall in another region can be
    as important as local information: for example, energy supply in
    California is closely related to snowpack (and hence hydropower
    production) in the Northwest. Agricultural production in one region can
    often be optimized with information about trends throughout the
    country. In order to meet demands for climate services for national-
    scale needs, regional findings must be inter-comparable and amenable to
    national-scale compilations, thus requiring national scale equivalency
    of quality and (to some extent) methods.

    3.8 Capability must span a range of space and time scales
        Decision contexts often require information on a range of
    timescales in one location, for example, water supply planning can
    integrate timescales from one to forty years, or longer. The demand for
    climate services will continue to come from nested spatial and temporal
    scales in which each of the levels plays a role in increasing overall
    societal resilience, so NCS must be able to span these scales. Notably,
    RISAs have repeatedly identified decadal scale variability as an area
    of unexpected and, to date, under-addressed importance to stakeholders
    as they plan, scope and design long-term infrastructure investments and
    adaptations to climate variations and change.
        A successful climate service must also cover both climate
    variability on seasonal to centennial timescales, as well as climate
    change. Decision-makers often need information and support that
    integrates across both near-term and long-term decision scales.
    Ideally, climate services also integrate seamlessly with weather. In
    the real world, all variations in the environment, whether natural or
    human caused, have to be dealt with.

    3.9 Program design should be flexible and evolutionary--universities
            are key
        Climate service is a relatively young endeavor that requires
    greater capacity in new areas to address dynamic areas of knowledge and
    rapidly expanding--and changing--user needs. In just the past decade,
    stakeholder needs have grown much more sophisticated and have expanded
    from a focus on seasonal forecasts to an integrated interest in climate
    change projections, paleoclimate, and inter-decadal outlooks. Recent
    droughts, wildfires, levee failures, and insect outbreaks have prompted
    calls to understand the nature of these threats and to inform
    strategies to increase social, economic, and ecological resilience.
    Many such climate-related events have limited public issue-attention
    cycles and ``windows of opportunity'' when constituents, victims, and
    policy-makers are focused on addressing an event or issue. A NCS will
    need to continually prepare, anticipate, evolve, and then be quick on
    its feet to be judged successful in meeting those periods of intense,
    focused demand. Successful climate services must maintain the ability
    to translate and apply new science and to anticipate and fulfill
    evolving research and information needs. Effective climate services
    must be able to learn and change.
        The RISA program has proven the merits of using innovative and
    strong federal-university partnerships to develop and provide climate
    services. Table 2 highlights some of the key capabilities that
    universities provide, and the RISAs have demonstrated how universities
    are uniquely able to understand regional issues, build and maintain
    regional science and stakeholder partnerships, provide the needed
    interdisciplinary contexts, rapidly shift foci in response to new
    stakeholder need, educate, and work with private-sector partners. RISAs
    have also shown how university teams are ideally configured for
    interdisciplinary research, for developing prototype service
    methodologies and products, and for working with operational
    organizations (e.g., federal agencies) to transition these services
    into operations. Universities also have a long tradition of working
    with federal partners to develop national-scale observing, modeling and
    research programs.

    3.10 Climate services rely on a larger climate science enterprise
        In designing and implementing a national climate service, there may
    be an inclination to include all climate science activities under the
    rubric of climate services. Certainly, climate services rely on quality
    observations, modeling, and research, much of which requires vastly
    more resources than any NCS effort can provide on its own. Regionally-
    focused observation, research, and modeling efforts may be sensibly
    included within climate services (and at universities), but where to
    draw the line between NCS and national or global climate science that
    supports NCS? Should global satellite observation programs be included?
    The modernization of the Historical Climate Network? The USGS stream
    gauge network? Global climate model inter-comparison efforts? The
    importance of all of these examples goes beyond just regional climate
    service, and design of a NCS needs to include mechanisms for
    determining what is within or outside NCS institutionally and
    financially. At the same time, it is critical that mechanisms be
    developed that allow the climate service to influence other elements of
    the national climate-science enterprise to ensure it is responsive to
    stakeholders and useful to the Nation. Separating NCS from other
    climate science activities recognizes the importance of these other
    activities, and allows NCS champions to identify and advocate for the
    whole breadth of climate science.

    4. RISA Experiences in Climate Service

        Some examples of climate services developed by RISAs illustrate the
    ten essential elements just discussed. These examples are not intended
    to be a comprehensive catalogue of each RISA's activities, nor do they
    reflect the level of accomplishment of each RISA. Although the examples
    below emphasize the work of the mature RISAs, it is worth highlighting
    that the new RISAs also provide illustrations of the ten essential
    elements. The examples cover some of the research topics that span
    several of the RISAs--water, agriculture, and wildfire--that
    collectively serve to illustrate the ten key elements enumerated in the
    previous section.

    4.1 Water
        Most RISAs have a significant focus on water because of its deep
    connections to other societal and environmental needs, like
    agriculture, energy, aquatic ecosystems, wildfire, and human health.
    Stakeholders with significant interest in water have been at the
    forefront of adoption of new applications of climate science, owing in
    part to their extensive computational and technical capacity.
        Early successes resulted from applying seasonal forecasts to water
    supply. As early as 1997 Seattle Public Utilities and several other
    stakeholders began paying attention to seasonal forecasts, and even
    applying them internally, in partnership with CIG (northwest RISA). CIG
    also issues annual ENSO-based seasonal hydrologic forecasts (Hamlet et
    al., 2002) that are now closely watched by public and private entities
    alike. Likewise, Pacific island water resource managers used ENSO
    forecasts to determine how to plan for water system conservation, with
    assistance from the Pacific RISA.
        Drought cuts across sectors in ways that no other natural
    environmental hazard does, because water is fundamental to municipal
    water supplies, public health, fire, agriculture and food production,
    ecosystems, energy production, and more (Wilhite and Buchanan-Smith,
    2005). Thanks in part to unusually prevalent western and southeastern
    U.S. droughts since 1999, several RISAs have had the opportunity to
    engage in drought planning, monitoring, and post-drought analysis.
    CLIMAS (southwest RISA) worked with State agencies in Arizona to
    construct the Arizona Drought Preparedness Plan. In the Carolinas, RISA
    scientists developed a regional drought monitoring tool used to
    determine and monitor low-flow triggers for Federal Energy Regulatory
    Commission dam relicensing processes (Carbone et al., 2007). RISA
    scientists and regional and municipal water managers in the West led to
    infusion of NOAA paleoclimatology program analyses and data into water
    resources planning and the adoption of new modeling methods for
    evaluating the sensitivity of water supply to drought (Woodhouse and
    Lukas, 2006). CIG researchers also found strikingly different
    institutional responses in Oregon and Idaho to the 2001 drought. RISAs
    worked over several years with Western Governors' Association to
    develop the framework for the National Integrated Drought Information
    System, and the newest RISA (SCIPP, the south-central RISA) has a major
    focus on drought.
        Vigorous efforts by RISA scientists to educate stakeholders about
    the emerging science of climate change have convinced many public
    agencies and businesses that climate change may pose significant
    challenges to future water supply. Indeed, work by RISA scientists and
    others show that many of the expected changes are already detectable
    (e.g., Barnett et al., 2008). Using fine regional scale observations,
    global climate model simulations, down-scaling technique, and a set of
    hydrologic models, RISA scientists have projected future streamflows on
    scales from the small watersheds supplying urban needs, to the large
    basins of the Colorado and Columbia Rivers. Such projections are now
    routinely being used in long-range planning and assessments by
    municipal and State governments in partnership with RISAs as in
    California, Colorado, and Washington. A multi-RISA project,
    ``Reconciling Projections of Future Colorado River Stream Flow,''
    compares different modeling approaches to see how well these methods
    can reproduce recent flows, as part of a larger cross-RISA effort to
    help western U.S stakeholders deal with drought and climate change.
        For water resources planning, western RISAs have worked for a
    number of years with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and related
    agencies to understand uses of climate information and respond to these
    needs. Early efforts included studies of the Salt River Project in
    Arizona, as well as the Aspinall Unit in Colorado (e.g., Ray, 2004).
    When the Bureau of Reclamation began considering climate change, their
    personnel were already well acquainted with RISA scientists and turned
    to them for information. As a result of a process including WWA
    (intermountain west RISA), CAP (California RISA), and CIG, long-term
    climate variability, risk of extended drought, and climate change were
    included in the National Environmental Policy Act process for
    contending with shortage on the Colorado River.

    4.2 Agriculture
        The SECC (southeast RISA) has demonstrated a successful regional
    approach for climate services for the agricultural and water sectors
    with most of the Essential Elements of Climate Services presented in
    this document. With multi-agency funding and input from farmers,
    Extension Agents, and foresters, the SECC developed a climate risk
    management decision support system (http://AgroClimate.org). This
    system was transitioned to the Cooperative Extension Services, which
    now operates this system and provides education programs and climate in
    formation to all counties in four SE states. The success of this
    research-to-operational program has also been demonstrated through
    financial support provided by the USDA and by other states adapting
    AgroClimate for their agricultural stakeholders. For example the most
    recent support from USDA translated AgroClimate into Spanish to serve
    farmers who would otherwise not be able to make use of this
    information. Now that this system is in use, the RISA is developing
    similar climate information and decision support systems for water
    resources managers and coastal resource users. The SECC is focusing
    much of its research to develop information to address needs expressed
    by a wide range of stakeholders, working with Extension to reach county
    and city managers, water managers, coastal resource managers, land
    developers, public utilities, and other sectors. Many of the new
    demands for local and regional climate services are for information
    options for responding to climate change.
        Using integrated climate and social science research, CLIMAS is
    investigating the prospects for improved use of climate information by
    ranchers in the Southwest. CIG is using a crop model to evaluate
    impacts of climate change on key crops in Washington State.

    4.3 Wildfire
        Wildland fires cost the United States over $1 billion annually and
    their severity is determined by several factors including climate,
    vegetation and human behavior, on timescales from weeks to decades.
    Successful climate services supporting wildland fire management and
    prediction require multi-agency coordination and multi-disciplinary
    perspectives. In anticipation of sustained dry conditions, CLIMAS, CAP,
    and SECC convened a ground-breaking 2000 workshop to bring together
    climate scientists and fire management stakeholders (Morehouse, 2000).
    After first hearing that the fire management community did not see an
    obvious need for climate information, a spirited discussion stimulated
    interest in using historical ENSO information and climate forecasts in
    pre-season fire prediction. Scientific knowledge was too new for
    operational implementation at first, so the RISA program facilitated
    sustained science-management exchanges, which led to identification of
    early adopters, potential agency partners, and better understanding of
    the insertion points for climate information in fire management
    decision-making (Corringham et al., 2008).
        In 2003, CLIMAS, the National Interagency Coordination Center's
    Predictive Services Group, and the Program for Climate, Ecosystem, and
    Fire Applications (a contributor to the CAP RISA) began developing pre-
    season fire potential climate outlooks for the conterminous United
    States and Alaska through a decision support process called the
    National Seasonal Assessment Workshops (NSAW) (Garfin et al., 2003).
    Over the years this process has improved understanding of climate
    forecasts and forecast evaluation, and facilitated connections between
    NOAA science and operational entities and the fire community. RISA
    involvement and partnership has catalyzed change in (a) operational use
    of climate forecasts by this stakeholder community, and (b) climate-
    fire integrated research and prediction (Brown and Kolden, 2007).
        The pre-season outlooks are used by the National Multi-Agency
    Coordinating Group in firefighting resource allocation decisions,
    including pre-positioning of resources, personnel planning, prescribed
    and wildland fire use decision-making, and fire mitigation (park
    closures and fire bans). Outlooks are now routinely used to brief the
    Secretary of Agriculture and have been successfully transferred to
    operations.
        CAP, CIG, CLIMAS, and ACCAP (Alaska's RISA) have contributed
    substantially to climate-fire research, particularly on the subject of
    climate change. CIG research demonstrated that in most western states,
    a substantial portion of the inter-annual variability and long-term
    trends in area burned can be explained by considering summer climate
    (McKenzie et al., 2004). Collaborative CAP and CLIMAS research
    elaborated the mechanisms, focusing on spring snowpack and on fire
    season length and other fire parameters (Westerling et al., 2006). CIG
    research further distinguished climate-fire relationships for different
    eco-regions (Littell et al., 2008). ACCAP researchers recently
    developed a fire forecasting tool for use by agencies in firefighting
    asset management. These results have been of great interest to forest
    ecosystem managers, insurance companies, timber companies, and others.

    4.4 Reflection on key elements
        In the examples just given, a central theme is the focus on user
    needs as the driving force, as well as on assessment and partnership as
    mechanisms to identify and fulfill need. In many cases the scientists
    took the lead in contacting stakeholders and educating them about
    emerging climate science, and piqued the institutional curiosity of the
    stakeholders. Two examples are the fire season outlooks and the use of
    climate model projections by municipal utilities. Growing interaction
    provides both the climate scientists and the stakeholders with insights
    regarding new products, for example the fire season outlooks, that
    could be developed and used. Social-science research also proved
    essential in stakeholder needs assessment.
        Another theme is the success of cross-institutional interagency
    interactions. The wildfire example was explicitly multi-agency, and it
    was a multi-agency institution that ultimately made climate an integral
    part of their operational efforts. The fire season outlooks include
    USFS; an array of NOAA entities, including CPC, ESRL, and NWS; IRI,
    Scripps ECPC, Regional Climate Centers, and the CLIMAS, CAP, WWA,
    ACCAP, and SECC RISAs.
        Moreover, SECC has forged a successful partnership with USDA and
    with the State climatologists of its three constituent states, Florida,
    Georgia, and Alabama. CIG annual workshops on water resources outlooks
    likewise involve USDA, NRCS, the NOAA River Forecast Center, and a
    close partnership with Idaho Department of Water Resources. Operational
    forecasts of coho salmon returns were developed in a collaboration
    between CIG and NOAA fisheries scientists (Lawson et al., 2004), and
    because the collaboration included agency scientists the result was
    both usable and influential. These partnerships, and many others,
    provide RISA teams with the broad expertise--and best practices--needed
    to carry out their mission of meeting stakeholder needs.
        Other partnerships extend internationally. The Pacific RISA emerged
    as a demand for climate research and policy from stakeholders
    established by the Pacific ENSO Applications Climate Center, which
    serves the U.S. client jurisdictions of American Samoa, Federated
    States of Micronesia, Guam, Hawaii, Northern Mariana Islands, Marshall
    Islands, and Palau. Partnerships extend across the Pacific to the Fiji
    Met Service, New Zealand's National Institute for Water and Atmospheric
    Research, Australia's Bureau of Meteorology, and Pacific regional
    environmental and disaster management organizations. These partnerships
    ensure value and consistency of climate information, and the network
    establishes the Pacific Climate Information System (PaCIS), a regional
    climate services example.
        CLIMAS in the southwest and CIG in the Northwest also have
    partnerships in Mexico and Canada respectively. Climatic, hydrologic,
    and ecological issues cross the border and cannot be solved without
    recognizing that fact. CIG has partnered with Canadian organizations
    like the Columbia Basin Trust as it grapples with climate change, and
    helped train hydrologists at the University of Victoria's Pacific
    Climate Information Consortium. One of CLIMAS' regular stakeholder
    publications, the bilingual monthly ``Border Climate Summary/Resumen
    del Clima de la Frontera'' is co-produced with colleagues in Mexico.
    CAP, along with many other university, State, federal and NGO partners,
    is centrally involved in an ongoing biennial assessment of California's
    vulnerability and adaptive capacity to climate change. The California
    experience has demonstrated that, when defined goals are set, the State
    Government and research community is able to collaborate across
    disciplinary lines to produce useful analyses and syntheses--this
    effort that has produced scenarios-based climate evaluations in 2006
    and in 2009 (Cayan et al., 2008; Franco et al., 2008; State of
    California, 2009).
        Placing climate information in the stakeholders' interdisciplinary
    decision context is also critical. WWA is working with a number of
    municipal and other large-scale water providers, who are trying to
    understand the sensitivity of their systems and supply to climate
    change, but the looming issue is how population growth and land use
    change will affect the equation. Fluctuations in salmon populations in
    the Northwest are best understood as climatically driven within the
    context of along decline in salmon habitat extent and quality.
        The examples given above are but a small subset of the climate
    services developed by the RISAs that would not have been possible
    without the inherently regional understanding, approach and presence of
    the university-based RISAs. Education, training and literacy-building
    was also integral, as was the production of a steady flow of graduate
    students and post doctoral researchers trained to do stakeholder-
    driven, interdisciplinary climate research--many now work in other
    regions, have helped spawn new RISAs, or work in government agencies.
    Clearly, both climate variability and change are needed foci, and for
    example, many stakeholders originally focused on climate variability
    and skeptical of climate change, are now actively working on climate-
    change adaptation strategies.
        Lastly, much of the regional RISA success in supporting
    stakeholders would have been impossible with out federal agency
    partners, particularly in NOAA, but in other agencies as well. The RISA
    program has successfully transferred a number of programs to their
    federal operational partners, and the national science enterprise
    (e.g., the Climate Change Science Program and the U.S. Global Change
    Research Program) is integral to RISA success at the regional level.

    5. Implementation Advice

        Implementing a vision for national climate services will require
    careful deliberation including all major federal and non-federal
    partners, and we can do no more here than offer some thoughts based on
    the RISA experience. Primary issues to be addressed include governance
    structure, funding, and defining roles for federal agencies and
    nonfederal partners in a way that recognizes their respective missions,
    strengths, and limitations.
        Many RISAs were involved in the first U.S. National Assessment, a
    large climate-focused interagency effort whose strengths and weaknesses
    have been discussed elsewhere (Morgan et al., 2005). The National
    Assessment included five sectorally focused activities, 17 regionally
    focused activities, and one focused on native peoples and homelands.
    Among the lessons are (1) each regionally or sectorally focused
    activity had a lead federal agency as a partner and fonder, which
    ensured an uncluttered reporting structure on the team level; (2)
    perhaps the biggest strength was that regional teams almost all had
    strong participation by stakeholders; (3) sustained funding is required
    to sustain interactions with stakeholders; and (4) the Assessment
    needed ``a budgeting mechanism which would allow greater freedom in
    allocating resources across various assessment activities'' (Morgan et
    al., 2005).
        We note several other considerations of the federal context for
    National Climate Services. Though still in its early stages, the
    National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) provides a
    working example of a multi-agency partnership intended to connect
    climate science to decision-makers. Another federal context for the
    development of climate services is the re-examination of the U.S.
    Global Change Research Act of 1990 and the Climate Change Science
    Program. The National Weather Service some years ago designated a
    ``climate focal point'' at each weather forecast office, someone to
    discuss seasonal forecasts. These must be augmented by experts in
    climate dynamics, global change, water resources, and so on, at other
    federal and non-federal institutions, to build a climate service.
        Clearly the governance structure and funding must be designed so
    that participants particularly the regional decision-makers in
    society--are the primary drivers of climate services enterprise, and so
    that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This means
    ensuring that each federal agency has sufficient new funding, working
    authority, and intellectual motivation to engage in climate service
    activities that relate to its central mission, and to collaborate with
    other federal agencies and other partners. It also means that
    mechanisms be established so that regional stakeholders have a real say
    in setting funding priorities for all aspects of the climate services
    enterprise.
        The preeminence of NOAA in climate observations, research, and
    prediction, and the differences between the role of a climate service
    and the primary tasks of the other agencies, lend weight to the
    argument that NOAA should play a lead role overall, although certainly
    other agencies should appropriately play a lead role on specific topic
    areas. For example, USFS should clearly take the lead on forest
    management and planning in order to manage the massive land-cover
    transformations that are sure to be a part of world that is undergoing
    climate change.
        Another RISA lesson is that longer-term funding mechanisms ensure
    that regional partners, for example at universities, can entrain and
    sustain the stakeholder partnerships that are needed for success. The
    current NOAA model works well, with extended period grants (i.e., five-
    year once a RISA is mature and proven) competed at five-year intervals
    for each region.
        Some RISAs are working examples of multi-agency partnerships as
    well, with funding and participation by USGS, USFS, USDA and others.
    University-based scientists, agency scientists, and agency managers
    collaborate on researching and developing new climate knowledge with
    clear applications in mind, and host frequent workshops to extend the
    connections to other partners, as discussed in some of the examples
    above. Some RISA participants have joint university--agency
    appointments, formally bridging the two institutional environments and
    ensuring better communication of research results to others within the
    agency. In the province of Quebec, a RISA-like entity called Ouranos
    takes such partnership one step further: personnel from several
    universities, one federal agency, the provincial hydropower company,
    and several provincial ministries interact daily because they all work
    together in the Ouranos office. Another example of successful regional
    multi-agency partnerships involves the co-location of NOAA Sacramento
    Weather Forecast Office and California Nevada River Forecast Center
    with the California Department of Water Resources' Hydrology, Flood
    Operations Office, and the State Climatologist. Federal and State staff
    work side-by-side to produce daily river forecasts, issue flood
    bulletins, water supply forecasts, and to share and exchange data. The
    added benefit to users comes from the regional integration of various
    sources of observations, forecasts, and expertise to produce internally
    consistent information.
        Governance of a climate service should probably include a cabinet-
    level council, led by the Secretary of Commerce, to ensure agency
    cooperation and coordination at the highest level. A second, working-
    level council involving all participating federal agencies and key non-
    federal partners would oversee the climate services efforts in greater
    detail. Participation by non-federal partners would be crucial, since
    much of the on-the-ground connection to decision-makers happens in the
    RISAs, the regional climate centers, State climatologists, and private
    sector experts.
        Finally, we note that the Climate Working Group of NOAA's Science
    Advisory Board recommended considering four structural options for a
    national climate service:

            1.  Create a national climate service federation that would
            determine how to deliver climate services to the Nation;

            2.  Create a non-profit corporation with federal sponsorship;

            3.  Create a national climate service with NOAA as the lead
            agency with specifically defined partners; and

            4.  Expand and improve weather services into weather and
            climate services within NOAA.

        An assessment of these four options is underway by NOAA and its
    partners.

    6. Conclusions and outlook

        The RISA teams have successfully built knowledge-action networks to
    provide useful climate information, connecting the climate research
    enterprise with real-life situations where the outputs of that
    enterprise can materially improve the lives of Americans. These
    successes have required very modest investment and have had large
    payback to the Nation.
        The RISA teams also see huge gaps that a mature and well-designed
    National Climate Service could fill. One obvious gap is purely
    geographic: only about half the land area of the Nation is actually
    served by RISAs. Another gap is the fact that when a product or
    decision support tool is developed through RISA research, there is
    generally no obvious mechanism to provide a transition to an
    operational environment, as was done with the fire season outlooks.
        Three emerging issues need the kind of effort that only an NCS
    could provide. In all three of these cases, basic research can be
    connected to stakeholder needs through RISA efforts and/or a national-
    scale sectoral research program--that is, the stakeholder demand
    already exists. The first is the need for vigorous research on decadal-
    scale predictions with a goal of providing outlooks with skill
    demonstrated from hindcasts and with uncertainties properly
    characterized; such outlooks would help fill an oft-stated need of
    stakeholders. These predictions would be useful for a variety of
    decisions, but are not yet produced either by the seasonal forecasting
    entities like NCEP nor by the climate change simulations of IPCC.
        The second emerging issue concerns sea level rise, which is already
    a great concern for coastal communities from Alaska to the Pacific
    Islands to the Carolinas. Stakeholders want probabilistic guidance
    about sea level rise on a very fine spatial scale, overlaid on planned
    or existing infrastructure, beach slopes, inland estuaries, wetlands,
    and river deltas. Meeting these demands will require a concerted effort
    among ice sheet researchers, coastal oceanographers, wetlands
    scientists, and social scientists, to name a few. As a stopgap, a few
    RISAs have attempted to provide such guidance (e.g., Cayan et al.,
    2007, Mote et al., 2008) but without the full complement of needed
    expertise.
        The third is a crosscutting issue, the issue of climate adaptation.
    Vigorous research in social sciences including economics, policy, and
    law, are needed in conjunction with climate and natural science
    research to provide tools and processes for building adaptive capacity,
    especially at the local to regional level. A significant step in this
    direction was the creation of a Guidebook for local, regional, and
    State governments (Snover et al., 2007), a joint effort of CIG and
    staff from King County (which includes Seattle), Washington, and all
    the RISAs are already in jeopardy of being overwhelmed by stakeholder
    demand for help in adapting to climate change (in addition to climate
    variability). Adaptation science and application must also be an
    integral part of the decision-making currently underway on alternative
    energy deployment and climate change mitigation--for example, regional
    adaption needs for land and water resources should be factored in as
    early as possible, and before costly mistakes are made.
        The RISA experience also highlights the central role that
    universities must play in NCS. Universities have a tradition of trusted
    regional stakeholder partnerships, as well as the interdisciplinary
    expertise--including social science, ecosystem science, law, and
    economics--required to meet stakeholder climate-related needs.
    Universities have a proven ability to build and sustain interagency
    partnerships. Universities excel in most forms of education and
    training. Universities also have proven innovation, entrepreneurship,
    technology transfer and capability for partnership with the private
    sector.
        RISAs have become a resource in their respective regions for
    dealing with climate variability and change in practical ways. When
    drought or climate change or sea level rise became a central issue for
    Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest
    Service, and State governments in Alaska, Washington, Idaho,
    California, Florida, and elsewhere, these stakeholders turned to RISAs
    for technical, intellectual, and policy assistance.
        A well-funded, carefully designed, and properly governed NCS will
    meet the rapidly growing needs for applied climate information, drawing
    together partners from federal agencies, academic partners, private
    sector, State climatologists, and other experts. The experiences in the
    RISA program offer many useful lessons in the design of an NCS.

    7. References Cited

    Barnett, T.P., D.W. Pierce, H.G. Hidalgo, C. Bonfils, B.D. Santer, T.
            Das, G. Bala, A.W. Wood, T. Nozawa, A.A. Mirin, D.R. Cayan, and
            M.D. Dettinger, 2008: Combining a regional hydrologic and
            global climate model implies that human-caused CO2
            emissions have already greatly changed river flows and snow
            pack in the western United States. Science 319 (5866), 1080.
            [DOI: 10.1126/science.1 152538]

    Brown, T. and C. Kolden, 2007. The Science of Fire: New technologies at
            the Desert Research Institute make a difference in wildland
            fire management. Wildland Firefighter 9:28-29.

    California Department of Water Resources, 2007: Proceedings of the May
            2007 Climate Change Research Needs Workshop. Sacramento, CA:
            California Department of Water Resources.

    California Department of Energy 2009: DRAFT 2009 Climate Action Team
            Biennial Report to the Governor and Legislature http://
            www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CAT-1000-2009-003/CAT-1000-
            2009-003-D.PDF

    Carbone, G.J., J. Rhee, H. Mizzell, and R. Boyles, 2008. A regional-
            scale drought monitor for the Carolinas. Bull. Amer. Meteorol.
            Soc. 89(1):20-28.

    Cayan, DR., P.D. Bromirski, K. Hayhoe, M. Tyree, M.D. Dettiinger, and
            R.E. Flick, 2007: Climate change projections of sea level
            extremes along the California coast. Climatic Change, 10.1007/
            s10584-007-9376-7.

    Cayan, D.R., A.L. Luers, G. Franco, M. Hanemann, B. Croes and E. Vine,
            2008: Overview of the California climate change scenarios
            project. Climatic Change, 87, (Suppl 1):S1-S6, doi:10.1007/
            s10584007-9352-2.

    Corringham, T., A.L. Westerling and B. Morehouse, 2008: Exploring Use
            of Climate Information in Wildland Fire Management: A Decision
            Calendar Study. Journal of Forestry, 106(2):71-77.

    Dettinger, M.D., and S. Culberson, 2008: Internalizing climate change--
            Scientific resource management and the climate change
            challenges. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 6(2),
            Article 6

    Franco, G., D. Cayan, A. Luers, M. Hanemann and B. Croes, 2008: Linking
            climate change science with policy in California. Climatic
            Change, 87, (Suppl 1):S7-S20, doi:10.1007/s10584-007-9359-8.

    Garfin, G.M., Wordell T., Brown T., Ochoa R., and Morehouse B. 2003.
            National Seasonal Assessment Workshop Final Report, February
            25-28, 2003, Mesa Arizona. Tucson, AZ: Institute for the Study
            of Planet Earth, Univ. of Arizona, 24 pp.

    Greenfield, R.S. and G.M. Fisher, 2003. Improving Responses to Climate
            Predictions: An Introduction. Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc.
            84(12):1685-1685.

    Hamlet, A.F., D. Huppert, and D.P. Lettenmaier. 2002. Economic value of
            long-lead streamflow forecasts for Columbia River hydropower.
            ASCE Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
            128(2):91-101.

    Healey, M., M. Dettinger and R. Norgaard, 2008: State of the science
            for the Bay-Delta system--Summary for policy-makers and the
            public: CALFED Science Program Report, 19 pp.

    McKenzie, D., Z. Gedalof, D. Peterson, and P. Mote, 2004: Climatic
            Change, Wildfire, and Conservation. Conservation Biology
            18(4):890-902.

    Miles. E.L., A.K. Snover, L.C. Whitely Binder, E.S. Sarachik, P.W.
            Mote, and N. Mantua, 2006: An approach to designing a national
            climate service. Proceedings of the National Academy of
            Sciences, 103, 19616-19623.

    Morehouse, B., 2000. The Implications of La Nina and El Nino for Fire
            Management. Tucson, AZ: Institute for the Study of Planet
            Earth, The University of Arizona, 45 pp.

    Morgan, M.G., R. Cantor, W.C. Clark, A. Fisher, H.D. Jacoby, A.C.
            Janetos, A.P. Kinzig, J. Melillo, R.B. Street, and T.J.
            Wilbanks, 2005: Learning from the U.S. National Assessment of
            Climate Change Impacts. Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 23, 9023-
            9032, 10.1021/ es05O865i

    Mote, P.W., A. Petersen, S. Reeder, H. Shipman, and L.C. Whitely
            Binder, 2008. Sea Level Rise Scenarios for Washington State.
            Report prepared by the Climate Impacts Group, University of
            Washington, Seattle, and the Washington Department of Ecology.

    National Research Council, 2001. A Climate Services Vision. Washington,
            DC: National Academy Press. 96 pp.

    National Research Council, 2005. Decision-Making for the Environment.
            Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 296 pp.

    Ray, A.J. 2004, Linking climate to multi-purpose reservoir management:
            Adaptive capacity and needs for climate information in the
            Gunnison Basin, Colorado. Dissertation, University of Colorado
            Dept. of Geography, 328 pp.

    Snover, A.K., L.C. Whitely Binder, J. Lopez, E. Willmott, J.E. Kay, D.
            Howell, and J. Simmonds. 2007. Preparing for Climate Change: A
            Guidebook for Local, Regional, and State Governments. In
            association with and published by ICLEI-Local Governments for
            Sustainability, Oakland, CA.

    Wilhite, D.A. and M. Buchanan-Smith, 2005. Drought as hazard:
            understanding the natural and social context. In D.A. Wilhite
            (ed.), Drought and Water Crises: Science, Technology, and
            Management Issues. Boca Raton, Taylor and Francis, pp. 3-29.

    Woodhouse, C.A. and J.J. Lukas, 2006. ``Drought, tree rings, and water
            resource management.'' Canadian Water Resources Journal 31:297-
            310.

        This document was prepared by Cheryl Anderson (Pacific), Dan Cayan
    (CAP), Mike Dettinger (CAP), Kirstin Dow (CISA), Holly Hartmann
    (CLIMAS), Jim Jones (SECC), Ed Miles (CIG), Philip Mote (CIG), Jonathan
    Overpeck (CLIMAS), Mark Shafer (SCIPP), Brad Udall (WWA), and Dan White
    (ACCAP). For contact information, please go to the RISA web site at:
    http://www.climate.noaa.gov/cpo-pa/risa/

                          Biography for Philip W. Mote

        Prof. Mote serves as Director of the Oregon Climate Change Research
    Institute and Oregon Climate Services at Oregon State University, and
    is a Full Professor in the College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences.
    Until July 2009 he also works at University of Washington (UW) as a
    research scientist with the Climate Impacts Group, where since 1998 he
    has built the group's public profile through hundreds of public
    speaking events, over a thousand media interviews, deep engagement with
    the region's stakeholders, and ground-breaking research in the impacts
    of climate change on the West's mountain snow and on wildfire. He has
    published over 70 scientific articles and edited a book on climate
    modeling. He serves as State climatologist for Washington and, as
    Director of Oregon Climate Services, serves in a similar role there. He
    was a lead author of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report; the IPCC was
    awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. In 2008 he received the UW
    Distinguished Staff Award and was named one of the region's 25 most
    influential people by Seattle Magazine. He earned a Ph.D. in
    atmospheric sciences from UW and a BA in physics from Harvard.

        Chair Baird. Thank you. Mr. Hirn.

         STATEMENT OF MR. RICHARD J. HIRN, GENERAL COUNSEL AND
       LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE EMPLOYEES
                              ORGANIZATION

        Mr. Hirn. Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis, and
    Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for offering the
    National Weather Service Employees Organization the opportunity
    to present its views on options for developing a National
    Climate Service.
        It is our view that the creation of a National Climate
    Service as a separate line office within NOAA is unnecessary,
    because it would duplicate the historic and current mission,
    program, and services of the National Weather Service, and will
    inevitably result in a reduction of resources for the Weather
    Service.
        Today, nearly 1,000 employees of the Weather Service are
    performing climate service work as a key element of their jobs.
    The NWS already operates the surface and upper air observing
    systems that are the basis of the Nation's climate record. It
    conducts applied climate prediction research, and issues an
    extensive array of climate forecasts and outlooks. Moreover,
    the entire Weather Service has integrated climate into its
    current weather forecast and warning activities. Therefore, the
    new National Climate Service should be created as an entity
    within the National Weather Service, or the National Weather
    Service should be re-chartered as the National Weather and
    Climate Service, which in fact, is a better descriptor of its
    current mission.
        Much of what a National Climate Service would do is already
    being done by the Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center
    in Camp Springs, Maryland. The CPC performs global climate
    modeling, engages in applied climate research, issues
    predictions of climate variability, and assessments of the
    origins of major climatic anomalies.
        Among its many climate products are the Atlantic and
    Eastern Pacific Hurricane Outlooks, the Seasonal Drought
    Outlooks disseminated by the National Integrated Drought
    Information System, and El Nino and La Nina Climate Forecast.
    The CPC even provides climate forecasts that assist the USAID
    with famine relief in Africa, Southeast Asia, South and Latin
    America, and Afghanistan.
        Climate services are also fully integrated within the
    National Weather Service field organization and forecasting
    offices across the country, from acquiring national climatic
    data to producing and disseminating climate predictions. There
    is a Climate Service Program at each Weather Service regional
    office. Each of the Weather Service's 122 forecast offices
    issues a variety of climate products several times a day, and
    manages the government's Climate Monitoring Network. The data
    provided by this network is used for the management of water
    resources, prediction of crop yields, and the study of climate
    variability.
        A number of the findings and recommendations contained in
    the Science Advisory Board's recent report on options for a
    climate service lead to the conclusion that a National Climate
    Service should be embedded within the Weather Service. First
    amongst the SAB's recommendations was that: ``An internal
    reorganization of NOAA that enables greater connectivity of
    weather and climate functions is a necessary step for
    success.'' Therefore, rather than standing up the National
    Climate Service as a separate new agency, NOAA should
    consolidate the disparate climate programs in other NOAA line
    offices with the climate service programs already provided by
    the National Weather Service. The SAB also concluded that:
    ``From every practical standpoint, this option is the simplest
    to implement.'' In other words, we already have a shovel-ready
    National Climate Service.
        The alternative, which has been proposed by NOAA, is to
    sever weather from climate by some arbitrary temporal
    distinction between the two, or worse yet, duplicating services
    and programs already delivered by the Weather Service. Not only
    would this be a waste of resources, but there would be no
    authoritative voice in climate matters.
        As the SAB noted in its findings: ``The greatest strength
    of a combined Weather and Climate Service are an ability to
    speak with an authoritative voice, build quickly from existing
    components of a Climate Service, and an ability to ensure one
    stop shopping if weather and climate functions are
    integrated.''
        Finally, it is not possible to transfer the ongoing climate
    services performed by the NWS into another line agency, since
    they are so functionally integrated with the day to day
    operations of the Weather Service, and are widely dispersed
    among over 150 NWS offices. Prediction of the climate cannot be
    severed from prediction of the weather.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hirn follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Richard J. Hirn

        Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis, and Members of the
    Subcommittee. Thank you for offering the National Weather Service
    Employees Organization the opportunity to present its views on the
    options for developing a National Climate Service. As you may be aware,
    NWSEO represents not only the forecasters and technicians at the
    National Weather Service, but employees throughout NOAA, including
    employees at OAR and NESDIS.
        It is our view, and that of many in National Weather Service
    management, that the creation of a National Climate Service as a
    separate line office within NOAA would be an unnecessary expense
    because it would duplicate the historic and current mission, programs
    and services of the National Weather Service, and will inevitably
    result in a reduction of resources for the NWS.
        Today, nearly 1,000 employees of the National Weather Service are
    performing Climate Service work as a key element of their jobs. The NWS
    already operates surface and upper air observing systems, monitors
    climate variability in real time over a broad range of time scales,
    conducts applied climate prediction research, and issues an extensive
    array of climate products and information, including climate forecasts
    and outlooks. Moreover, the entire National Weather Service workforce
    has climate integrated into its current weather forecast and warnings
    activities. NWS Director Jack Hayes has said that the NWS is ``at the
    forefront of climate service delivery to this nation'' and ``is
    critical to . . . advancing NOAA's mission goal for a National Climate
    Service.''
        Therefore, the new National Climate Service should be created as an
    entity within the National Weather Service, or the NWS should be re-
    chartered as the ``National Weather and Climate Service,'' which is in
    fact a better descriptor of its current mission.

    The NWS is already the Nation's ``National Climate Service''

        According to National Weather Service Policy Directive 10-10,
    issued by NWS Director Jack Hayes on January 29, 2008:

             Provision of climate services, in particular the monitoring of
            variations in climate and climate forecasting, is essential to
            mitigate the loss of life and property and to enhance the
            national economy. The NWS is the federal agency charged with
            delivering these services to the U.S., its territories, and, as
            appropriate, its interests abroad.

             http://www.weather.gov/directives/010/010.htm

        Much of what a National Climate Service would do is already being
    done by the Climate Prediction Center (CPC) in Camp Springs, Maryland
    which is part of the National Weather Service. The CPC performs global
    climate modeling, issues predictions of climate variability, and
    assessments of the origins of major climate anomalies. Among its many
    climate products are the Atlantic and Eastern Pacific hurricane
    outlooks; the seasonal drought outlooks disseminated by the National
    Integrated Drought Information System; and El Nino/La Nina climate
    forecasts. In January alone, over 30 million visitors obtained climate
    forecasts from the CPC's website.
        The International Weather and Climate Monitoring Project at the CPC
    provides climate forecasts that assist the USAID with famine relief in
    Africa, Southeast Asia, South and Latin American and Afghanistan. The
    CPC's Africa Desk works with the governments of over 30 countries in
    sub-Sahara Africa by providing climate monitoring and predictions. The
    CPC trains twelve meteorologists a year from Africa in climatology
    during a four month residency program.
        The CPC provides climate forecasts out to thirteen months, and with
    modest additional resources, it could produce climate outlooks covering
    decadal time frames. The CPC engages in applied climate research; makes
    assessments of climate variability and climate anomalies; and provides
    services to other federal agencies such as the Departments of
    Agriculture and Energy, FEMA and the EPA, as well as foreign
    governments, academia, and private sector agricultural, energy,
    construction, insurance, and leisure industries.
        Climate services are also fully integrated within the NWS' field
    organization and forecasting offices across the Nation, from acquiring
    national climatic data to producing and disseminating climate
    predictions.
        The NWS Organic Act of 1890 charges the NWS with the responsibility
    for ``the taking of such meteorological observations as may be
    necessary to establish and record the climatic conditions of the United
    States.'' The Nation's official climate record is based largely on
    observations from the NWS' Cooperative Observer Program. The COOP
    program consists of 11,400 observation stations that report daily
    minimum and maximum temperatures, precipitation, snowfall, snow depth
    or hydrological data. This network, along with about 1,000 Automated
    Surface Observation Stations, forms the Federal Government's weather
    and climate monitoring network. The data provided by this network is
    used for real time forecasting, management of water resources,
    prediction of crop yields, and the study of climate variability.
        There is a ``Climate Services Program'' at each NWS Regional
    Office. For example, the NWS Alaska Region's Climate Services Program
    centers around a number of indicators of climate change in Alaska and
    the Arctic: sea ice melt and retreat; glacier melt; warming
    temperatures; thawing permafrost with loss of infrastructure;
    precipitation pattern shifts, coastal erosion and flooding; ecosystem
    shifts; and potential health epidemics. The Alaska Region's Climate
    Services Program is addressing observations, monitoring, and
    assessments with its partners and collaborators to provide new climate
    products for a changing climate and is making this information
    available to local and regional decision-makers and the general public.
    As part of this effort, the NWS Alaska Region has partnered with the
    Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy to provide monthly
    Alaska weather and climate highlights on a web site.
        The NWS Central Region's Climate Services Program covers
    agriculture, bio-energy, and drought impacts and planning. It
    disseminates information, including climate change, weather/climate
    data, water and drought planning information, through many entities,
    including extension services, State climate offices, various academic
    institutions, and other decision-makers.
        Each of the 122 Weather Forecast Offices routinely issues climate
    products, including the ``Supplementary Climate Data Report'' every six
    hours, ``Daily Climate Report'' two or three times a day for several
    locations, a ``Monthly Climatological Report'' and National Drought
    Information Statements.
        The Science Advisory Board's Report noted that the ``NWS field
    offices are highly visible points-of-contact for a wide range of
    [climate] information requests.'' The National Weather Service has
    published a comprehensive plan or ``Operations Document'' for
    ``Regional and Local Climate Service Delivery'' (November 2007) which
    charges the staff at the Forecast Offices and other local NWS offices
    with the responsibility for outreach and education in each office's
    area of responsibility on climate products, data and information.
    http://www.weather.gov/om/csd/graphics/content/about/Ops2.pdf One of
    the forecasters at each WFO serves as a ``Climate Services Focal
    Point,'' but other Forecast Office staff members respond to public
    climate information inquiries as well. Forecast Offices conduct
    workshops targeted to local audiences (media, agriculture sector,
    energy and weather risk management industries) to educate customers on
    the potential uses and availability of climate resources and to gather
    feedback on climate products and services. Local Forecast Offices are
    also charged with establishing and maintaining partnerships with other
    members of the climate community in the local area, including the
    Regional Integrated Science and Assessments (RISAs), universities,
    State Climate Offices and the Regional Climate Centers. Forecast Office
    staff are also charged with conducting climate analyses at scales
    important to local customers. Attached to this testimony is a sample
    page from the Tampa Forecast Office's web site which illustrates some
    of the kinds of climatic information disseminated by local Forecast
    Offices.
        In addition, the ``Observational Program Leader'' (OPL) and the
    Hydrometeorological Technicians at each Forecast Office manage the
    Cooperative Observer Program--a prime element in recording the Nation's
    climate. The OPLs are charged with maintaining the climate
    observational equipment while also recruiting and training the
    thousands of observers who comprise the ``citizen corps'' of NWS
    climate observers. Each office maintains the Automated Surface
    Observation Systems in the WFO's area of responsibility. Twice a day,
    specially trained and certified staff at 70 Forecast Offices launch
    instrumented weather balloon packages to collect current atmospheric
    data critical to atmospheric predictive modeling and to establish the
    earth's climate profile up through the stratosphere.
        The Anchorage Weather Forecast Office Sea Ice Desk performs Sea Ice
    analysis, Sea Surface temperature analysis, and Sea Ice Forecasts for
    the North Pacific/Bering Sea and portions of the Arctic Ocean. The
    changes in Sea Ice coverage shown by these analyses are an important
    indicator of climate change.
        The 18 smaller Weather Service Offices in Alaska and Pacific
    Regions also launch and collect data from instrumented weather balloons
    and respond to public climate information inquiries. Some also daily
    issue climate products such as the Supplementary Climate Data Report
    and Daily Climate Report. Four WSOs in Alaska take sea-ice and sea
    surface temperature observations. The duration of open waters is very
    important to determining Arctic sea ice climate change.
        The 13 NWS River Forecast Centers collect and archive hydrological,
    snowfall, snowpack depth and rainfall data. Some offices have collected
    over 100 years of historical data. The River Forecast Centers are also
    responsible for Flood Climatology and Flood Frequency Program data
    collection and archiving vital for FEMA and flood insurance. The Alaska
    RFC collects and archives river and lake freeze-up dates and ice
    thickness measurements, which are important indicators of climate
    change in the region where climate change is now occurring the fastest.
        The Climate Services Division at the NWS headquarters acts as the
    portal for NOAA information on climate change and variability, oversees
    the NWS's operational climate services programs, identifies user
    requirements for climate data and products, and develops training on
    climate services for NWS field staff.
        Other federal agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture, use
    the aforementioned NWS generated climate data, products and services to
    administer and oversee nearly $1 billion in pasture, rangeland, and
    forage insurance products. State and Federal Wildland Fire agencies use
    NWS climate forecasts for wildland fire planning purposes.

    NWSEO agrees with many of the Recommendations and Findings of the NOAA
                        Science Advisory Board

        A number of the findings and recommendations contained in the NOAA
    Science Advisory Board's report, ``Options for Developing A National
    Climate Service'' (February 2009), lead to the conclusion that the
    National Climate Service must be embedded in the National Weather
    Service. In evaluating the question of whether the National Weather
    Service should serve as the platform for a National Climate Service,
    the NOAA Science Advisory Board concluded that, ``from every practical
    standpoint, this option is the simplest to implement.'' Therefore,
    rather than standing-up the National Climate Service as a separate line
    office, NOAA should quickly consolidate the disparate climate programs
    in other NOAA line offices with the climate service programs already
    provided by the National Weather Service.
        First among the SAB Report's recommendations is that an ``internal
    reorganization of NOAA that enables greater connectivity of weather and
    climate functions is a necessary step for success.'' Also among the
    Report's findings is that ``the current NOAA organization is not well-
    suited to the development of a unified climate services function.
    Greater connectivity between weather and climate functions . . . is
    required.'' The SAB ``tiger team'' that studied the National Weather
    Service recommended that three NOAA data centers (the National Climate
    Data Center, National Oceanographic Data Center and National
    Geophysical Data Center) be transferred from NESDIS to the NWS as part
    of a new ``National Weather and Climate Service'' to more fully
    integrate climate services in one agency. Consolidation of these data
    centers with the climate programs of the NWS would link the new Weather
    and Climate Service to the Regional Climate Centers and State
    Climatologists because of their existing ties to the NCDC. As the SAB
    ``Tiger Team'' explained, ``[t]his organization simplifies the seamless
    distribution of information ranging from past history through present
    conditions to weather forecasts and forecasts of inter-seasonal to
    inter-annual.'' As noted earlier, with additional resources, the
    Climate Prediction Center can extend it predictions and assessments to
    the decadal time frame.
        The SAB also concluded that ``greater connectivity between . . .
    research, operations and users is required.'' Therefore, NWSEO suggests
    that the Climate Program Office in NOAA's Office of Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Research also be transferred to the NWS. The CPO is already
    co-located with NWS headquarters in Silver Spring, MD. At a minimum,
    consideration should also be given to transferring the Climate
    Observations Division of OAR's Climate Program Office to the new
    Weather and Climate Service. This Division has three operational
    observing programs--Ocean Climate Observation, Arctic Research Program
    and Atmospheric Climate Observations. This would link these real-time
    weather and climate observation programs with the observation programs
    now maintained by the NWS, as well as the new observation network (the
    ``Climate Reference Network'') being spun-up by the NCDC.
        The alternative--which has been proposed by NOAA leadership--is to
    sever weather from climate by some arbitrary temporal distinction
    between the two; or, worse yet, to duplicate services and programs
    already delivered by the National Weather Service. Not only would this
    be a waste of resources, but there would be no authoritative voice on
    climate matters. As the SAB noted in its findings, ``the greatest
    strength of a . . . combined weather and climate service are an ability
    to speak with an authoritative voice, build quickly from existing
    components of a climate service . . . and an ability to ensure `one-
    stop shopping' if weather and climate functions are integrated.''
        Further, it is not possible to transfer the ongoing climate
    services performed by the National Weather Service to another line
    agency, since they are so functionally integrated with the day-to-day
    operations of the National Weather Service and are widely dispersed
    through among over 150 NWS offices. Moreover, prediction of the climate
    cannot be severed from prediction of the weather. Today's climate
    prediction will eventually become tomorrow's weather forecast; and come
    tomorrow, today's weather will be part of our climate history.
        The SAB ``Tiger Team'' that studied the option of creating a new,
    not-for-profit National Climate Service noted that this option would
    create ``potential competition with NWS offices'' and would not be able
    to speak with an authoritative voice like the NWS. The Report failed to
    address the question of what would become of the climate services
    already performed by the National Weather Service--an issue which NOAA
    has also ignored in the development of its proposal to create the
    National Climate Service as a new line agency elsewhere in NOAA. We
    have, however, heard from NWS management that there are already
    proposals to transfer personnel and funding (specifically the personnel
    and funding that relate to the Historical Climatology Network) from the
    National Weather Service to NCDC as part of a plan to evolve NCDC into
    the new National Climate Service.
        In short, the Nation already has a ``shovel-ready'' Climate
    Service. With some additional resources, the National Weather Service
    can augment the panoply of climate services that it already provides in
    order to meet the Nation's evolving needs for climate analysis and
    prediction. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing us to share our views
    with the Subcommittee on this important issue.

                         Biography for Richard J. Hirn

        Richard J. Hirn is an attorney whose practice focuses on labor,
    civil rights, constitutional and administrative law and litigation. Mr.
    Hirn's cases have pioneered unique theories in constitutional law,
    employment discrimination, labor relations and other legal matters
    having public impact. For example, he litigated the first case of
    Hawaiian national origin discrimination, Kahakua et al v. Friday. This
    case was the subject of a special report on All Things Considered,
    broadcast on National Public Radio, and was the subject of an article
    in the centennial issue of The Yale Law Journal, ``Voices of America:
    Anti-discrimination Law and the Jurisprudence for the Last
    Reconstruction.'' Mr. Hirn has been responsible for significantly
    expanding the collective bargaining rights of federal employees and
    their unions. Mr. Hirn represented the Fort Stewart Association of
    Educators before the Supreme Court, which ruled that Congress intended
    for federal agencies to bargain over wages unless salaries were
    specifically set by law. As a result of this unanimous Supreme Court
    decision, Fort Stewart Schools v. FLRA, 495 U.S. 641 (1990), wage
    negotiations became routine in a number of federal agencies.
        Representative clients include national labor unions in both the
    private and public sectors, including the Nation's two largest teacher
    unions, federal employee unions, and those in the maritime and
    transportation industries. As part of his Washington, D.C. based
    practice, he has represented numerous labor organizations before
    Congress and federal agencies.
        Among the unions that Mr. Hirn represents is the National Weather
    Service Employees Organization. He has served as General Counsel of
    NWSEO since 1981 and has represented the organization in federal courts
    throughout the country, in collective bargaining and in labor
    arbitrations and has been quoted as its official spokesperson in New
    York Times, Washington Post, USA Today and other major daily
    newspapers; and interviewed on NBC's Dateline and on National Public
    Radio. Over the years, Mr. Hirn has visited scores of NWS and NOAA
    offices from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Lihue, Hawaii and Kodiak, Alaska.
    Since 2004, Mr. Hirn has also served as NWSEO's Legislative Director,
    and has testified before subcommittees of the House Science and
    Appropriations Committees on NWSEO's behalf.
        Mr. Hirn was a member of the Obama Campaign's Labor, Employment and
    Worklife Policy Committee. He served as an elected Delegate to the 2004
    Democratic National Convention as well as an Alternate Delegate to the
    1972 Democratic National Convention.
        Prior to entering private practice, Mr. Hirn was an attorney for
    the National Labor Relations Board. He was awarded a Juris Doctor
    degree by American University in 1979 and a B.A. in Political Science
    by Haverford College in 1976.

                                   Discussion

        Chair Baird. Thank you, Mr. Hirn. Very interesting and
    thought provoking testimony. I should mention we have also been
    joined by Mr. Tonko. Thank you very much for joining us.

                        Successes of Climate Forecasting

        I will recognize myself for five minutes. Let me start by
    just getting a sense of what it is we have to offer here, in
    terms of accuracy and benefits. When someone comes and says
    okay, I need a climate forecast, and I thought Dr. Barron, your
    testimony was very eloquent, you know, and you listed the
    various reasons for doing it: human health, food security,
    disaster preparedness, energy, basically every aspect of our
    life is in some way going to be influenced by this, is
    influenced by it. The question is how we are able to prepare
    for that.
        Give us some examples of where someone has, an entity has
    come and said give us a climate forecast, and that climate
    forecast has been given, and it has been beneficial
    economically, or in human health, et cetera. Have we got some
    success stories?
        Dr. Mote. Well, the RISAs have a number, sorry, the RISAs
    have a number of such success stories. One example was actually
    a partnership among several of the Western RISAs to cooperate
    with several federal agencies, to come up with a seasonal
    wildfire outlook. There are climatic aspects to wildfire risk,
    and this helps position resources, and this effort has been
    going on for a number of years. I have mentioned water
    resources. Energy is another one. There are linkages up and
    down the West Coast on energy supply. With hydropower, we know
    what the fuel availability is several months in advance, just
    based on the snow on the ground, but using a seasonal forecast,
    we can expect shifts in the probabilities of that fuel even
    several months in advance of that.
        I could give you many other examples.
        Chair Baird. That is a good start. Dr. Barron.
        Dr. Barron. I was going to add, for example, that major
    cities in the United States, notably New York City and Chicago,
    both have developed climate plans that are influencing their
    decisions about infrastructure renewal, because that
    infrastructure is required to exist for many, many decades,
    as----
        Chair Baird. If I built something that may one day be below
    sea level, and you need it to be above sea level, that is----
        Dr. Barron. Right, for which the water resource will
    change, as another example.
        Chair Baird. Excellent points.
        Dr. DeGaetano. Mr. Chairman, can I----
        Chair Baird. Please.
        Dr. DeGaetano.--on that? In New York, we are also looking
    at extreme rainfall, like Dr. Lubchenco mentioned earlier. We
    are not looking at just the big rainfall events, but kind of
    relating those to what we--from water or runoff in any of our
    cities. It is that the stakeholders actually base their
    decisions on, and providing them data based on the trends we
    have seen in the past years.
        Chair Baird. So, you are giving them predictions, this is
    what we think is likely to happen the next 10, 20, 50 years.
        Dr. DeGaetano. Correct. The Administrator also alluded to
    that in her discussion, that the state-of-the-art, as far as
    climate modeling, is not enough to make those projections
    accurately out into the future. So, in that case, we do have to
    rely upon the trend that we have seen, to give some uncertainty
    in how to do it, if you are looking to build infrastructure
    that has a lifetime of 50 years, you don't want to go into that
    decision blindly, based on just some static record----
        Chair Baird. Right.
        Dr. DeGaetano.--that is assumed to be stationary.

                    More on Structuring the Climate Service

        Chair Baird. Let us go into, then, this issue of, if we
    acknowledge that there can be benefits from this, let us talk a
    little bit about possible structures for this. We have heard
    Mr. Hirn suggest that maybe, they would, he would assert, his
    organization would assert that the Weather Service is basically
    already providing this. It needs to be possibly given that
    title and acknowledgment. Others have said there needs to be a
    separate or coordinating entity, that coordinates the various
    elements, perhaps Weather Service with the RISAs, et cetera.
        What are the pros and cons of the different models, and I
    am going to leave that somewhat open, and Dr. Barron, I thought
    you were suggesting, you acknowledged a high level, possibly, I
    don't know if you said OSTP, but it sort of came to my mind,
    and Dr. Lubchenco had mentioned it. But then, it sounded like
    you talked about a nonprofit third entity, and let us talk
    about the pros and cons of that.
        Dr. Barron, talk about that first, and then, if somebody
    wants to respond to Mr. Hirn's suggestion, pros and cons of
    that, and vice versa.
        Dr. Barron. Okay. So, I really think that we need many
    facets. No, one of the things that came out of the option
    report is none of those options were perfect. So, for instance,
    you may be able to stand up something quickly in NOAA, but how
    does NOAA partner with all of those other federal agencies?
    That requires something that is quite different, in order to
    ensure that everybody is participating.
        We have seen a lot of examples where we have created
    something like a National Carbon Program, but then, if one
    agency, because of other competing missions, doesn't involve
    themselves in it, it starts to fall apart, and it is no longer
    even close to what it is that you had set up. So, it cannot
    just be adding climate to weather. I think that is a rather
    different topic. So, that is one element of it there, to have
    that integration at a federal level, and I think, as high up in
    the structure as possible, and OSTP certainly makes sense.
        But I think there is this other sense that we have a lot of
    users that cross all these boundaries that we are talking
    about. So, should every city have to redo the research
    themselves? Or if you are sitting there looking at oil rigs
    offshore, in many, many different states, can they all sit
    there at the table and work together, and generate the research
    that works on that? Or if you are looking at hurricane
    forecasting, do you have that capability? You wouldn't want to
    regionalize that.
        And so, I think there was a sense among the options
    committee that an entity, a nonprofit, a facility, a center
    that promoted this, in terms of research and connecting to
    users was something that is important. There are many users out
    there that have a sense of what they want. And if you throw the
    data over the transom, they will go grab it. There are many,
    many other users who haven't realized the potential here yet.
    They are beginning to think about something. It is in three or
    four different places. They need some capability to integrate
    that. So, my feeling is this isn't a single story here that we
    have to facilitate.
        Chair Baird. So, we are not necessarily one, the style that
    we are asking for, what is the one climate prediction, but what
    is the source one goes to to gather the multitude of
    perspective?
        Dr. Barron. And where do you go for help.
        Chair Baird. Yeah. Mr. Hirn.
        Mr. Hirn. Well, I have some concerns about this nonprofit
    federation that is outside the government. I question, of how
    much oversight that this committee and other Congressional
    committees would be able to give to that. I fear that that is
    just going to become a source of earmarking or maybe a source
    of pet projects, as time goes by, and would rather see it being
    done by a federal agency that is responsive to the public and
    the Congress.
        I note that in Dr. Lubchenco's written testimony, and
    certain public statements she has made, she has talked about
    making it, using the National Weather Service as a model of
    private and public partnership for this National Climate
    Service. NOAA has not yet answered to anyone, and nor to the
    employees of the Weather Service, why would you use the
    National Weather Service as a model for this, rather than just
    continue to use the Weather Service for actually carrying it
    out, much as they do today?
        Chair Baird. I recognize Mr. Inglis for five minutes.

                    How Existing Climate Offices Coordinate

        Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am still wondering
    about the, whether we are creating an overlap here, and
    whether, how to make this most efficient.
        And as I understand it, I really am sort of unclear, so
    maybe you can help me understand the difference between what
    the work of the RISAs and the Regional Climate Centers, and the
    State climate offices. They work together, but they don't
    provide the same services. So, I wonder, are all three needed,
    or how much duplication is there between those three, the
    RISAs, the Regional Climate Centers, and the State climate
    offices?
        Dr. DeGaetano. Can I respond, Mr. Inglis? I was actually
    going to respond the same way to the previous question. What
    are the problems with having a large federal entity, be it a
    nonprofit or the Weather Service, kind of a place to go, is
    that the other side of climate services is the other way
    around. It has to be active. What we have seen in any number of
    years, in a lot of cases, like Dr. Barron said, you can't just
    throw the data over the transom and have people come to them.
    But you actually have to actively go out and seek out these
    people and talk to them. A good example is, I work with West
    Nile virus. You know, it was us going out and speaking to the
    people from New York City who control the mosquito population,
    public health officials, where we got the understanding of what
    were the climate issues in this problem.
        It is very hard to do that from one place, be it regional,
    be it national. When you get down to the State level, or even
    the local-er levels than that, that is where those trust-based
    relationships are. You can think of the Service as almost like
    a funnel, where that information comes up, those ideas are
    generated, but when the Service becomes operational, when data
    go out, when models are developed, you have to make sure that
    these are all being based on the same data, the same models,
    the same ideas. That is where the regional comes into play.
        You can think of it almost as the airline system, where
    perhaps the regional area is the hubs, and the State
    climatologists are the individual airports, and maybe the
    National Weather Service or some federal entity is the
    overarching company. The climate services work very much in the
    same way.
        Dr. Mote. If I could respond as well. The Western RISAs all
    have very good relationships with the Western Regional Climate
    Center, and I think we have sort of worked out a division of
    labor, that there is very little overlap.
        Mr. Inglis. And what is that division of labor? How does
    that work?
        Dr. Mote. I would say, and Dr. DeGaetano can correct me if
    I am wrong, but I would say that the Regional Climate Centers
    are best at understanding the climate data, the observations
    for the region. They typically do not, at least the Western
    Regional Climate Center doesn't do a lot of work, say, with
    global climate model output scenarios of future climate. The
    same is true of the Weather Service. Their climate focal points
    are not trained in dealing with some of these longer timescale
    issues.
        The RISAs, based at universities, are focused on
    innovation, publishing research papers, coming up with new
    ideas, not so much operational. So, we have developed things
    that we have handed off to, for example, the River Forecast
    Centers within the Weather Service, or the Water and Climate
    Center, within the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural
    Resources Conservation Service.
        Now, the State climatologists are best at having those
    relationships with individual entities within their states, and
    your State Climatologist, Hope Mizzell, is an excellent State
    Climatologist. She has developed a lot of great products for
    the State of South Carolina. Those are things that are
    supported by the Southeast Regional Climate Center, and
    informed by what is needed locally. So, the State
    climatologists are really listening locally.
        A lot of this is not about, as Dr. Barron said, we don't
    just generate climate knowledge and throw it over the transom.
    We are actively listening to what people need, and responding.
        Mr. Inglis. Anybody else want--Dr. Barron.
        Dr. Barron. Well, I just want to point out that despite all
    these different components, it is still not good enough, and
    one of the reasons why it is not good enough is because these
    teams are small enough that they have to focus on particular
    areas. And therefore, they can't address the broad range of
    users. And it is very hard to cross from place to place.
        So, what I see, as one of the really good examples is, in
    the '50s, we discovered that with computers, we could predict
    the weather, and we are getting pretty good at it, to the point
    where we close schools and do things in advance of a particular
    storm. If you take the human health community, they almost
    always react to the number of cases that came in the door. It
    is very rarely a forecaster prediction. Yet, so many different
    parts of human health are now tied to environmental conditions.
    But if you can predict environmental conditions, you can begin
    to predict adverse human health outcomes, and save an enormous
    amount of money.
        Do I put that in a state? Do I put that in a region? It
    requires something that is quite different from that particular
    component, if we are all of the sudden going to realize the
    fact that out 15 years, we will be doing human health forecasts
    just like we do pollen alerts and air quality and weather
    forecasts.
        But we don't have anything in place that allows those
    communities of users to intersect with this environmental
    prediction, climate modeling, weather forecasting groups, just
    as an example.
        Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Baird. Thank you. Ms. Woolsey.
        Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Baird. I should mention we have been joined by Ms.
    Edwards as well. Thank you for joining.
        Ms. Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to leave
    some time for the rest of the panel to respond to the
    Chairman's question, but before I do that, I would like to make
    a comment.

         International Cooperation and Disseminating Real Time Climate
                                  Information

        Wouldn't it be something if climate change became news like
    weather is now, because we actually, with the National Weather
    Service, kind of conceive what is coming, and why it happened,
    and when it is going to happen? I think it would be very good,
    because then, the people of this country would see it as news,
    and not just as something that happened to them, that they have
    no control over.
        And I just think this is all getting, leading us in the
    right direction, and I know that Chairman Baird wanted, you
    know, more, I thought that some of you wanted to answer,
    respond to Chairman Baird's question, his open question about
    why we need to do this, and what is a better way.
        And as you are answering it, if you could, for me, talk
    about if there is opportunity for international cooperation in
    our get along here. So, I am doing part of your job for you. I
    am yielding to finish your question.
        Chair Baird. I appreciate that, actually. I would have
    appreciated more time, but in deference to my colleagues, I
    gave back some, but thank you, Ms. Woolsey.
        Mr. Hirn. Ms. Woolsey, I recently had a visit to the
    Climate Prediction Center in Camp Springs, I believe in
    Congresswoman Edwards' district. I visited what they call the
    Africa Desk there, which I was extraordinarily impressed. They
    do climate forecasting for Africa and other Third World, areas
    of the Third World, helping them with their drought
    predictions. But what I thought was most remarkable was I met a
    number of meteorologists from Malawi and elsewhere in Africa.
    The Weather Service brings 12 meteorologists a year from Africa
    for a four month residency at the Climate Prediction Center,
    and teaches them, trains them in climatology, to go back and
    work on drought prediction, things like that.
        Ms. Woolsey. Well, that is very interesting, and that is,
    and let us get up to the doctors here, who didn't get to answer
    the Chairman, and maybe we will have time to talk some more
    about those people, the Africans that came.
        Dr. DeGaetano. I think there is tremendous opportunity for
    that, and the thing that we need to look at is exactly getting
    down to the regional scale, not looking at these broad global
    problems, but actually bringing data in, and projections, or
    even looking at data down to the regional levels, and starting
    to interact with stakeholders.
        It may not be that we can make a prediction or a forecast
    on what the climate will be like in 2100, but to bring people
    along to see the types of things that they have to start
    concerning about. To make them more resilient to the types of
    climate variations we see today will only make it stronger in
    the future, when the modeling and capabilities are able to come
    around to make those projections at regional levels.
        Ms. Woolsey. Dr. Barron.
        Dr. Barron. You know, I think the ground is so fertile, to
    make, to do so many things that are beneficial, or to at least
    have reasoned answers for particular actions. And you can look
    at one example after another. We are watching the Rocky
    Mountains being ravaged by the pine bark beetle, the first time
    that I know of, you know, leave only a footprint, take only a
    picture, we have used pesticides, insecticides in Rocky
    Mountain National Park, as an example.
        So, now, when we watch these trees go away, do you live it?
    Do you plant the same tree again? Do you plant a different
    species, a more resistant species? This is a decision we are
    going to have to make one way or another. It would be nice to
    be able to integrate climate in there.
        If you look at hurricane forecasting, everybody is talking
    about our hurricanes becoming more intense, or not intense.
    Climate models actually don't simulate hurricanes. They don't
    simulate hurricanes, because we don't have the power to get the
    climate models down to a resolution to simulate them. It is so
    important for so many coastal states. If we can embed weather
    forecast models in climate models, as part of a regional
    emphasis on climate, something we are not doing today, we will
    actually be at the point where we are simulating hurricanes out
    decades in a row.
        Sea ice is melting around Alaska. We are watching native
    village peoples have to be moved. How many times would you like
    to move them? Do you sit there and decide in advance to move
    them slowly? Do you do it in one particular lump, as the sea
    ice is gone, and the waves start pounding the coast, and in the
    buildings go? It seems to me it would be nice, and it is a
    relatively small investment, when you consider the costs of
    moving infrastructure, to sit there and try to do this in some
    particular intelligent manner.
        The Colorado River Compact was one that was negotiated
    based on a time period of rather abundant rainfall. Will we
    have to look at this again, and wouldn't we rather do that,
    instead of looking at a limited record, with some larger
    understanding of climate change?
        So, I think it is just an enormous, enormous potential, if
    we can start connecting climate to society.
        Ms. Woolsey. Okay.
        Chair Baird. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. I appreciate you
    following that line of questioning. Having grown up and studies
    in the Colorado River basin, the entire basin ravaged for years
    by political infighting that grew out of having, as I
    understand it, divvied up the water in a fairly record high
    water year, and so, promising water that didn't, then, later
    exist, and it has been really years and years and years of
    litigation and conflict and inadequate water supply.
        I will recognize Mr. Tonko for five minutes.
        Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Barron, you touched
    upon this in your most recent response, but I represent a
    District that has many communities along a historic waterway.

                       Responding to Climate Information

        The advantages of a system that is optimum, as you would
    define it, be it State, regional, and national in design, how
    can we emphasize prevention, to avoid certain flooding, and
    then, how can we respond in mitigation terms? What would you
    envision to be the modeling out there that would enable
    communities to better avoid floods, and then, to better respond
    to floods? How would that infrastructure work? Because it seems
    to be a repeated pattern, with the extremes of climate change,
    that more and more communities are impacted by flooding of
    rivers, and intracoastal waterways.
        Dr. Barron. Yes. I gave the example in human health, to
    think broadly and cross regions, but I think an example that
    you have just selected, it points to how important it is to
    have a community of scientists to interface with that are local
    and regional, because so many of those examples are examples by
    which the way you build infrastructure makes an enormous amount
    of difference, in terms of your vulnerability. And I think that
    this whole notion of building resilience into communities, by
    understanding this, makes an enormous amount of difference.
        So, this is where this system needs to couple that on a
    global scale and a regional scale, and understanding how the
    system might change through global models, and coupling those
    with weather forecast models. But taking yourself right down to
    that local and regional level, because all of these problems,
    when you come right down to it, are local. But we are now being
    affected by local decisions as well as global decisions.
        Mr. Tonko. I was just going to ask if anyone else has a
    response.
        Dr. Mote. I would like to emphasize that in addition to
    better modeling to characterize the physical system, which both
    I and Dr. Barron emphasized earlier, we need vigorous social
    science research to understand how decisions are made, the
    decision context, how to provide information that is actually
    useful, and will be used to make better decisions. And this is
    a component of this whole enterprise, that is, and I say this
    as a physical scientist, degree in physics. This is a part of
    this that is greatly neglected in the current climate science
    enterprise.
        Dr. DeGaetano. If I may.
        Mr. Tonko. Yes, please.
        Dr. DeGaetano. Actually, your question was pretty timely,
    because Monday, I'll be traveling to Norrie Point, which is
    either in your District, or just south of your District, to
    address that very issue.
        We are working with DEC and a number of entities within New
    York State, to look how sea level rise will manifest itself up
    the Hudson River, to look at infrastructure along the river, to
    look at different control mechanisms that might be put in place
    between, up the river, a true interdisciplinary effort between
    hydrologists, social scientists, through the Rising Waters
    Program, which is out of the Hudson River Estuary Commission.
        So, those types of things are things that you know, any of
    our organizations are involved with, and are starting to work
    with now.

                         The Model Coordinating Agency

        Mr. Tonko. So, the model that best coordinates all of that
    would look like what? Is there, who brings all the agencies,
    obviously have to have input here together, and then, how is it
    connected to the local planning or response effort?
        Dr. DeGaetano. I am probably not the best one to say who
    brings all the agencies together, but I think this is a good
    example of how the system needs to work. For instance, you need
    the local knowledge and expertise to know what is going on on
    the Hudson. You need the local expertise to do the modeling of
    what is going to happen in the Hudson River basin. The basin,
    the hydrology is very different than other river basins, so you
    can't just take some river model off the shelves. So, those are
    the local components.
        On the national scale, you know, do you use my sea level
    rise projection, or do you use somebody else's? There, you need
    the coordinating efforts to make sure the data, either the
    observed data or the projections that go into these types of
    things, are consistent, that those types of things that come
    into play are there, that authoritative voice to say that this
    sea level rise projection, or this suite of sea level rise
    projects, manifest themselves his way on the Hudson River, and
    has this implication.
        Mr. Tonko. Thank you.
        Chair Baird. Thank you, Mr. Tonko. Dr. Mote, I appreciate
    your observation about social science. As my colleagues know, I
    am a social scientist. And I was down at AOML a couple years
    ago, and they were talking about the need for more
    supercomputing to predict hurricanes, but someone pointed out
    that even if we, the basic, we looked pretty good at Katrina,
    but you know, magnitude, timing, location, pretty accurate. But
    even if we had to the date, the moment, the magnitude, 50
    percent of the people still wouldn't evacuate, and that is a
    social science problem, so I appreciate your raising it.
        Ms. Edwards is recognized for five minutes.
        Ms. Edwards. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank
    you to the panelists. I am sorry I actually missed Dr.
    Lubchenco, because I had a chance to spend some time with her
    out at NOAA, to learn in a lot more detail about the work that
    is going on there, both in weather forecasting, but also, the
    range of work that the Agency already does in climate, and was
    really impressed by the work going on at that facility and the
    others around the country.

                        Suggestions for Changes at NOAA

        My question, really, for Dr. Barron is to ask you, given
    what may be deficiencies or inadequacies in, you know, the
    current wide range of climate activity going on across the
    spectrum of the Federal Government and the private and academic
    sector, if NOAA were to retain the role of, or gain the role
    of, essentially the federal kind of coordinator of Climate
    Service activities, what do you think would be the essential
    thing that needs to change within NOAA, to be able to take on
    this activity? And I am also curious to know what you think
    NOAA's strengths are, in being able to gain that
    responsibility?
        Dr. Barron. Okay. In many ways, I think NOAA is the natural
    lead, as I said, because of both their current effort in
    providing services, and because they have pieces here that they
    fund, National Climate Data Center, the RISAs, and those
    activities.
        The reason why our group said it is not enough is because,
    I will give you just one example, and that is that if you go
    around the table, and I had a meeting with OSTP, in which 40
    people representing 15 agencies were there, resource managers,
    they were asked the question what do you need first? And they
    all said regional climate predictions. Those become essential,
    because they get closer to the decisions.
        Now, we don't have the computer power to do a very high
    resolution global climate model, but we have the capability to
    imbed weather models within climate models, and then provide,
    with that global model input, a weather forecast 30 years out,
    40 years out, not stating the day, but those conditions would
    yield this type of weather. And we could simulate things like
    hurricanes.
        So, we know we are going to have to couple those
    capabilities, and within NOAA, these are quite separate. So, we
    have to find a way to have the conversation occur within NOAA
    that helps promote synergism between the modeling components.
    That is one example.
        The other example I think we see is that that connection to
    users is now being done through a RISA, or providing data that
    is sitting out there, that a private company can grab, and we
    are going to move into a climate mode where private companies
    are going to want to grab that data, but there is also an
    enormous number of things by which that whole community hasn't
    had decades of weather forecasts to be able to say, oh, I am
    interested in that. That will affect what I want to do in this
    particular----
        Ms. Edwards. Let me just interrupt you, because I think
    those things may be true, but it seems to me and others, you
    know, have an opportunity to comment on this, that some of that
    is also a resource question, and a need to coordinate
    information and data, and so, it is not so much about where the
    house is, but what the pieces need to be, you know, what is the
    structure.
        And I look at, for example, on Weather Service, and
    thinking only in my lifetime, the evolution of how we have come
    on Weather Service, where we have been able to get down to that
    regional level, where people, if you talk to them in
    communities, I mean, maybe it is not such a bad idea that they
    think that their local weatherperson is the weather predictor.
    That is just because the information has been made usable and
    accessible, and so, I don't know that there is anything that is
    an institutional barrier within NOAA, that would not enable us
    to thoughtfully figure out a way to bring that under a house,
    so that our weather and our climate predictions and forecasts
    are connected.
        And I wonder, in my limited time left, if there are others
    on the panel who have a response to that?
        Dr. Mote. Well, if I might, it really needs to be all about
    the users, so it is not just about providing information, and
    there are many other agencies that are responsive to the users.
    And so, it really goes beyond the NOAA. I agree with Dr.
    Barron. There needs to be a really high level, a multi-agency
    partnership.
        Ms. Edwards. Mr. Chairman, I will yield, and I will just
    say, just in closing, that it does seem to me that as we go
    forward, for this Congress to provide the kind of oversight
    that we need to, it will be very complicated, I think, for us,
    reaching over several different stretches of the Federal
    Government, to figure out who is on first.
        Chair Baird. I appreciate that, and I think, gentlemen, you
    are probably getting a sense from the Committee, we recognize
    fully, and I think your testimony, and that of Dr. Lubchenco,
    has really illustrated the need and the value for this
    information. I think there is an appreciation on the part of
    the Committee Members that, based on your testimony, that it
    needs to be better integrated, better distributed, better
    coordinated, et cetera, that there are multiple different
    entities within the government that are now doing parts of
    this.
        I think, though, what we are all struggling with a little
    bit, I think, this is in line with Ms. Woolsey's question, Ms.
    Edwards' as well, is how does it all fit together? If you, and
    the bottom line for us is, if we write a bill, which we intend
    to, to create some form of climate service, what should that
    look like? Where do the pieces fit together? How is it
    coordinated?
        And we have another panel. I think you are, Dr. Mote and
    others have talked about the importance of users. We will move
    very shortly to the next panel, but I would invite you to do
    this. So often in these Committee hearings, and it is true
    throughout the Congress, what happens is we ask you for your
    testimony. We ask questions, and then, we don't see you again
    for a really long time, if ever. And you don't necessarily
    always get to follow up with input about what the other, what
    other panelists suggested. So, I would invite you to give us
    followup testimony, if you will, based on, if you feel the need
    to further elucidate the questions we asked you, or to respond
    to what a colleague on the panel may have said. Say, here is,
    you know, so-and-so said this. This is where I agree, this is
    where I disagree, here is an alternative synthesis or
    divergence.
        Please do that for us, and if you can do it in a very
    timely manner, that would be most appreciated, because my hunch
    is you have all spent a lifetime working on this. We have read
    the testimony. We have had this discussion. We want to do
    something right. We want to follow the dictum of do no harm. We
    believe something needs to be done.
        So, if you can follow up in that fashion, it would be most
    appreciated. And unless anyone has any burning issues for this
    panel, and we may submit to you, it is customary at the end of
    these hearings to say the record will be open for two weeks, we
    may also follow up and say some more honing in points on, ideas
    on this.
        [The information submitted by Dr. DeGaetano follows:]

        Chair Baird. With that, I want to thank our witnesses for a
    very informative and thought provoking discussion, and for your
    many years of service, all of you, in your respective roles, on
    an ongoing basis, that have helped serve the country and this
    Congress and constituents.
        We will adjourn this, recess, not recess, we will excuse
    this panel, and invite the next panel up. Take a very, very
    brief break while the names are switched around by our capable
    staff.

                                   Panel III

        Thank you again. Be seated, and we will begin very, very
    shortly with our third panel. I appreciate your patience. I
    think it is a very constructive structure we have here, I hope,
    with the folks who provide some of the information, and some of
    the recipients and utilizers, and people who apply that. And
    that is the main focus of panel three, and let me introduce
    that panel.
        Dr. Michael Strobel is the Director of the National Water
    and Climate Center for the United States Department of
    Agriculture. Mr. Paul Fleming, the Manager of the Climate and
    Sustainability Group for the Seattle Public Utilities. Dr.
    Nolan Doesken, or Mr. Nolan Doesken. Did I say the last name
    right?
        Dr. Doesken. Doesken.
        Chair Baird. Doesken. Thank you, Dr. Doesken, the State
    Climatologist for Colorado, and a Senior Research Associate at
    Colorado State University, the alma mater of my father, by the
    way. Spent some time in Fort Collins.
        And I would now like to recognize my friend from
    California, Representative Lynn Woolsey, to introduce Mr.
    Behar.
        Ms. Woolsey. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am going to take a lot
    more time on Mr. Behar than you did on all these together. Is
    that all right?
        Chair Baird. Well, that is sort of the custom here.
        Ms. Woolsey. All right.
        Chair Baird. We introduce them, and the local folks get a
    little extra time.
        Ms. Woolsey. My guy, I work for him, so I will take better
    care of him.
        Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to introduce one of my
    constituents, someone I work with, work for in my District. He
    is here today to testify before our committee. His name is Mr.
    David Behar. David's career spans over 20 years in
    environmental policy and water utility management. He currently
    serves as Deputy to the Assistant General Manager, Water
    Enterprise, at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission,
    the SFPUC.
        Mr. Behar developed the SFPUC-sponsored Water Utility
    Climate Change Summit, held in San Francisco in early 2007, and
    he currently serves as Staff Chairman of the Water Utility
    Climate Alliance. From 1991 to 1997, he served as the Executive
    Director of the Bay Institute of San Francisco, and from 1989
    to '91, he served on the staff of U.S. Senator Alan Cranston, a
    Democrat from California. In November of 2006, David was
    elected to the Board of Directors of the Marin Municipal Water
    District, a district with 200,000 customers, just north of San
    Francisco, in my District, in Marin County.
        David lives with his two children in Marin County, and I am
    pleased to welcome him here today in Washington, D.C.
        Chair Baird. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. I appreciate that. We
    all serve all these people, whether or not we are----
        Ms. Woolsey. Oh, well.
        Chair Baird.--privileged to have you in our District, we
    are honored to have you here today.
        We will proceed in questioning, witness statements from Dr.
    Strobel and across, through the panel. With that, I will begin
    with Dr. Strobel. Thank you.

     STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL L. STROBEL, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WATER
      AND CLIMATE CENTER, NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE,
                UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

        Dr. Strobel. Good morning, Chairman Baird, Ranking Member
    Inglis, and other Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
    the opportunity to testify today about the climate data
    collection and analysis activities of USDA's Natural Resources
    Conservation Service. My name is Michael Strobel. I am the
    Director of NRCS' National Water and Climate Center in
    Portland, Oregon.
        NRCS has been a leader in climate services to assist
    agricultural activities and natural resource conservation since
    1935. In that year, the Soil Conservation Service, which NRCS
    was then known as, established a formal, cooperative snow
    survey and water supply forecasting program. The Snow Survey
    Program has grown in scope and in number and diversity of users
    that rely on the water supply forecast developed by NRCS.
        In addition to the Snow Survey Program, the National Water
    and Climate Center also manages the Soil Climate Analysis
    Network, or SCAN, a soil moisture and climate information
    system designed to provide data to support natural resource
    assessments and conservation activities. I will briefly discuss
    SCAN later, but I will spend the majority of my time discussing
    the Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting Program, how it
    works, why it is important, and who uses that information.
        Depending on the geographic location, 50 to 80 percent of
    the annual water supply in the West arrives in the form of
    snow. The NRCS' Snow Survey Program is a main source of data on
    high elevation snowpack in the West. Data on the depth and
    density of the snowpack provide critical information to
    decision-makers and water managers throughout the West. NRCS
    works hard to ensure that consistent and reliable water
    forecasts are available for a wide variety of uses throughout
    the year.
        Since 1935, the Snow Survey Program has grown into a
    network of almost 2,000 snowpack monitoring sites in 13 Western
    states, including Alaska. More than 1,200 of these sites are
    manually measured snow courses. Either an NRCS employee or an
    employee of a partner organization must visit each manual snow
    course site once a month during the snow season, and take
    snowpack measurements manually. The remaining 760 sites are
    automated snowpack telemetry, or SNOTEL, climate stations,
    which do not require monthly visits, but provide real-time
    snowpack information via Meteor Burst technology.
        In the future, we will continue to increase the percentages
    of snow survey sites that are automated. This would result in
    more accurate water supply forecasts and snowpack reports, as
    well as a decrease in the safety risks for NRCS employees and
    partners who monitor remote sites in what can be sometimes
    challenging winter conditions.
        NRCS employees use the manual snow course and automated
    SNOTEL data, as well as modeled water supply and streamflow
    volume data to develop streamflow forecasts for over 740
    locations in the West. These forecasts help reduce the
    uncertainty for users making everything from long-term
    strategic decisions regarding multi-year water supplies to
    immediate emergency response decisions in times of high
    streamflows.
        Let me give you a few concrete examples of how our
    customers use our water supply forecasts. Agricultural
    producers use our forecasts to manage drought risk, make
    cropping decisions, and determine irrigation allotments.
    Wildlife conservationists use streamflow forecasts to help
    manage habitat for threatened and endangered species. Climate
    researchers use snowpack data to develop climate change risk
    assessments for long-term water availability. Municipal
    officials use snow survey data and analysis to manage reservoir
    levels in Western towns and cities. The National Weather
    Service's River Forecast Centers depend on Snow Survey data for
    the snowpack component of their data analysis and forecasting
    systems. And recreation is a key industry in the West. Ski
    resorts, river rafting companies, and others use our data and
    forecasts to operate and manage their facilities. I hope I have
    given you a sense of the number and diversity of end users that
    rely on our Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting
    information.
        The National Water and Climate Center also manages SCAN,
    the Soil Climate Analysis Network, which was started as a pilot
    program in 1991. SCAN has evolved into a cooperative system
    that monitors soil moisture and other climate parameters, and
    makes the data available to users on a real-time basis. The
    system is used primarily for monitoring and mitigating the
    effects of drought and flooding. The current SCAN system
    consists of 150 stations located in 39 states across the U.S.
        In summary, NRCS' climate services produce critical data,
    forecasts, and analysis for a wide variety of public and
    private uses. Users rely on NRCS' near real-time data and
    unbiased forecasts to plan and execute short and long-term
    decisions, ranging from individual farmers planting dates to
    basin-wide water management planning.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
    appear before you today, and I would be happy to respond to any
    questions.
        [The prepareed statement of Dr. Strobel follows:]

                    Prepared Statement of Michael L. Strobel

        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about
    the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service's climate data and
    analysis activities. My name is Michael Strobel and I am the Director
    of NRCS's National Water and Climate Center in Portland, Oregon. The
    Center directs NRCS's climate services.
        Our understanding of a climate service is an activity to inform the
    public through the production and delivery of authoritative, reliable,
    timely, and useful information about climate to enable the management
    of climate-related risks and opportunities related to impacts. Resource
    management agencies and departments, including USDA, have
    responsibilities in preparing the Nation to adapt to climate change and
    will be important clients of improved information about the climate and
    expected climate changes.
        NRCS has been a leader in climate services to assist decision-
    making associated with agricultural activities and natural resource
    conservation since 1935. In that year, the Soil Conservation Service
    (as NRCS was then known) established a formal cooperative Snow Survey
    and Water Supply Forecasting (SS-WSF) Program. Since that time, the SS-
    WSF has grown in scope and in the number and diversity of users that
    rely on the water supply forecasts developed by NRCS. In addition to
    the Snow Survey program, in 1991 the National Water and Climate Center
    began a pilot program that later turned into the Soil Climate Analysis
    Network (SCAN), a soil moisture and climate information system designed
    to provide data to support natural resource assessments and
    conservation activities.
        I will now discuss the Snow Survey Program and SCAN in more
    detail--how they work, why they are important, and who uses the
    information.

    SNOW SURVEY and WATER SUPPLY FORECASTING

        From its beginnings in 1935, the SS-WSF Program has grown into a
    network of more than 1,200 manually-measured snow courses and over 750
    automated Snowpack Telemetry (SNOTEL) weather stations in 13 Western
    states, including Alaska. The SS-WSF Program provides water supply
    data; modeled water supply and streamflow volume data; and streamflow
    forecasts for over 760 locations in the West. SNOTEL is a reliable and
    cost effective means of collecting snowpack and other weather data
    needed to produce water supply forecasts used by water managers in the
    west from irrigators to municipalities. The data and information is
    also important in achieving the objectives of the Western Governors
    Association as noted in their report, Water Needs and Strategies for a
    Sustainable Future.
        With 50-80 percent of the water supply in the West arriving in the
    form of snow, data on the snow pack provide critical information to
    decision-makers and water managers throughout the West. The basic data
    becomes even more valuable when used in concert with partner
    organizations to provide water supply forecasting tailored to meet end-
    user needs.
        Reliable information helps reduce the uncertainty in making
    critical environmental, agricultural, industrial, and municipal
    management decision regarding annual and multi-year water supplies and
    streamflows within specific watersheds and sub-basins in the western
    United States. These decisions may be long-term strategic-planning
    decisions; logistical, tactical, and operations planning decisions;
    short-term planning decisions; or immediate, emergency decisions.
        Below are examples of how customers use SS-WSF data and analyses:

              Reservoir management

              Irrigation water management

              Cropping decisions

              Crop futures forecasting

              Risk management related to agriculture in general and
            agricultural finance in particular

              Planning and scheduling of water-related business or
            government activities

              Flood damage reduction

              Drought risk reduction

              Climate change risk assessments for long-term water
            availability

              Emergency response and emergency preparedness

              Protection of threatened and endangered species

              Power generation and other energy contracting and
            management

              Recreation management and other recreation-related
            decision-making

              Municipal and industrial water supply management

    CASE STUDIES OF NRCS CLIMATE SERVICES USERS

        SS-WSF data and related reports and forecasts are made available-in
    near real time for the automated SNOTEL sites-to private industry; to
    Federal, State, and local government entities; and to private citizens
    through an extensive Internet delivery system and other distribution
    channels. Following are some examples of how these data and reports are
    used by NRCS customers.

    Case Study--Agricultural Producers
        Despite the great variety of agricultural operations in the Western
    U. S., a common denominator is some degree of dependence on a diverted
    or stored water supply. In some areas, snowpack is the only significant
    water storage available. In other areas, reservoirs provide a means of
    stretching water storage into the summer and sometimes into the fall
    growing and harvesting seasons.
        In southern Idaho, producers in the Salmon Falls and Twin Falls
    irrigation tracts rely on SNOTEL data and stream forecast information
    as input in making decisions about what, when, and how much to plant.
    Irrigation district managers within this region use SS-WSF data and
    forecasts early in the season to inform their water users on the
    percentage of their full irrigation allotment they should expect to
    receive in the upcoming growing season. These irrigation allotment
    predictions are based on SS-WSF data that show (1) the probability of
    varying levels of water supply given existing snowpack, soil moisture,
    and water content; and (2) historic probabilities for additional
    snowpack and water content accumulations.
        These reports are crucial to producers who use them to make
    cropping and operation decisions well in advance of the growing season.
    Based on modeling of the typical cropping patterns in the area for a
    160-acre farm, the value of the SS-WSF data to producers in this region
    is estimated as ranging from $27 per acre in a normal year to $111 per
    acre in a water short year. Based on irrigated acres in those areas,
    the total value to producers is estimated to be as much as $21.8
    million in a water short year.

    Case Study--National Weather Service River Forecast Centers
        The National Weather Service (NWS) operates River Forecast Centers
    (RFCs) covering all of the landmass of the U.S. In the mountain
    regions, the RFCs produce river flow, flood prediction, and other
    hydrologic and weather-related data products for the Western regions of
    the U.S. and part of lower British Columbia. They depend on NRCS SS-WSF
    data for the snowpack component of their data analysis and forecasting
    systems.
        The river forecasts, along with NWS flood warnings, help save lives
    and give communities time to take appropriate actions to lessen flood
    damage. SNOTEL data is used to validate and adjust the amount of snow
    and snowmelt simulated in a hydrologic model which produces more
    accurate forecasts of river flows. These daily river forecasts are also
    used during non-flood periods for recreational purposes (rafting,
    kayaking, fishing, etc.).

    Case Study--Recreation Industry
        Recreation is an important industry in Western States and many
    categories of tourism and recreation are--in one way or another--
    dependent on or affected by either snowpack levels, water supply
    volumes, or both. Potential commercial and private users of SS-WSF data
    include recreation associations, hunters, fishermen, boaters, skiers,
    snowmobilers, campers, tourists, and others whose recreational
    activities or travel plans might be affected by snow depths or
    streamflows.
        An outfitter operating a river rafting business in the
    Intermountain West reported that SNOTEL data had indicated that river
    conditions would render their traditional rafting equipment inoperable
    in the 2002 season--ultimately the worst season on record for rafting
    in the area. Based largely on SS-WSF information, the firm purchased
    smaller craft that would be operable in the environmental conditions
    predicted by the data. Without the advantage of streamflow projections
    prior to the beginning of the rafting season, the low water levels
    would have resulted in a year with little to no revenue. Instead, the
    decision to purchase the smaller craft resulted in a $600,000 revenue
    year.

    Case Study--Denver Water Board
        Power, utility, and water companies use the SS-WSF data in their
    daily operations and long-range planning decisions. They can also use
    the data in forward contracting for purchasing and selling power in the
    wholesale market.
        The Denver Water Board uses SNOTEL real-time snowpack and water
    supply forecast information as input for their reservoir management
    decisions. If decisions were based only on the historic water supply
    averages, the Board could lose as much as $5.5 million annually in
    potential revenue due to sub-optimal transfers of water between the
    various storage reservoirs within their collection and distribution
    system.

    SOIL CLIMATE ANALYSIS NETWORK

        Started as a pilot program in 1991, the Soil Climate Analysis
    Network (SCAN) has evolved into a system supported in part by NRCS and
    by various federal, State, local, tribal and university groups that
    assist in funding and field operations. SCAN monitors soil moisture and
    other climate parameters and makes the data available to users on a
    real time basis. The system is used primarily for monitoring and
    mitigating the affects of drought and flooding. The current SCAN system
    consists of 150 stations located in 39 states.
        National resource management issues for which long-term soil-
    climate information is needed include:

              Monitoring drought development and triggering plans
            and policies for mitigation.

              Predicting changes in runoff that affect flooding and
            flood control structures.

        Here are a few examples of how SCAN data are used across the
    Nation:

              The Newby Farm SCAN station in Alabama helps poultry
            farmers monitor local conditions so they can mitigate odor
            issues when managing poultry waste.

              Data from 15 SCAN sites in Mississippi are used by
            local farming communities near each site to determine when soil
            temperature and soil moisture are optimal for planting.

        NRCS's National Water and Climate Center works closely with the
    NOAA/USDA Joint Agricultural Weather Facility (JAWF), located in USDA's
    Office of the Chief Economist. JAWF meteorologists monitor weather
    conditions and crop developments on a daily and seasonal basis, and
    prepare agricultural assessments for USDA commodity analysts and the
    Office of the Secretary of Agriculture. JAWF relies heavily on SCAN
    data for U.S. soil temperature maps which are published in the Weekly
    Weather and Crop Bulletin; temperature and precipitation data used in
    the U.S. Drought Monitor which is also released every week and followed
    closely by decision-makers; and weekly agricultural weather information
    disseminated by the USDA Stoneville Data Center to the agricultural
    community.
        The National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS), an
    interagency, multi-partner approach to drought monitoring, forecasting,
    and early warning led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA), builds on existing systems infrastructure, data,
    and operational products from various agencies. For example, it
    incorporates data from the SNOTEL (SNOw TELemetry) network of USDA's
    NRCS.

    SUMMARY

        NRCS climate services produce critical data, forecasts and analyses
    for a wide variety of public and private users. Users rely on NRCS's
    near-real time data and unbiased forecasts to plan and execute short-
    and long-term decisions ranging from individual farmers' planting dates
    to basin-wide water management planning. In the future, we hope to
    increase the percentage of Snow Survey sites that are automated. This
    would result in more accurate water supply forecasts and snow pack
    reports, as well as decrease the safety risks for NRCS employees who
    monitor remote sites in challenging weather conditions. Thank you
    again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you today,
    and I would be happy to respond to any questions.

                        Biography for Michael L. Strobel

        Dr. Strobel received B.S. and M.S. degrees in Geology and
    Mineralogy from the Ohio State University in 1985 and 1990 and a Ph.D.
    in Geology, specializing in hydrology, from the University of North
    Dakota in 1996. From 1983 to 1988 he worked in the field of glaciology
    for the Byrd Polar Research Center and conducted field work in
    Antarctica, Greenland, Peru, and Alaska. He joined the U.S. Geological
    Survey in 1988 and served as a hydrologist in Ohio, North Dakota, South
    Dakota, North Carolina, and Nevada. He was Deputy State Director for
    the Nevada Water Science Center for almost six years. Dr. Strobel
    authored the book Water in Nevada which provides non-scientists a
    primer on basic hydrology. He served on the Board of Directors for the
    Nevada Water Resources Association and was Chief Editor of the Journal
    of the Nevada Water Resources Association. Since June, 2007, he has
    served as the Director of the National Water and Climate Center, NRCS,
    in Portland, Oregon. The Center oversees the Snow Survey and Water
    Supply Forecasting Program, which operates over 750 automated snow
    telemetry (SNOTEL) sites and 1,200 manual snow courses in 13 Western
    States, including Alaska. The Center also operates the Soil Climate
    Analysis Network (SCAN) that has stations in 39 States and U.S.
    territories. SCAN provides data at a national scale for climate
    assessment and drought mitigation.

        Chair Baird. Thank you, Dr. Strobel. I envy your work. I
    would love to spend some days up looking at snow sites from
    time to time.
        Dr. Strobel. It is a great job.
        Chair Baird. And you do great work for the Northwest. I am
    grateful for it. Thank you.
        Mr. Behar.

     STATEMENT OF MR. DAVID BEHAR, DEPUTY TO THE ASSISTANT GENERAL
           MANAGER, SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

        Mr. Behar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking
    Member Inglis, Members of the Committee, and of course,
    Congresswoman Woolsey. Thank you very much for that
    introduction. I will go back and report to our constituents,
    who know and love and respect your work very much that you are
    on top of climate change issues, as you are, and that matter so
    much to all of us in Marin.
        I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to come and
    speak from a stakeholder perspective about the need for a
    National Climate Service. I have been introduced, SFPUC has 2.5
    million water customers in the Bay Area. We are the sixth
    largest municipal district in the country, and as Ms. Woolsey
    mentioned, we are also a founding member and coordinate the
    Water Utility Climate Alliance, which is a consortium of eight
    large water utilities from around the Nation, serving more than
    36 million customers. It is focused exclusively on adaptation,
    the adaptation challenges we face in the water industry.
        According to two recent EPA reports to Congress, water and
    wastewater utilities together will need to spend about $480
    billion over the next 20 years or so upgrading our systems to
    keep them in a state of good repair. The figure does not
    include responding to climate change challenges, but we know
    that all of those investments in new assets will be made as our
    climate is changing. However, as has been mentioned, many of
    today's climate change projections are so uncertain as to be
    difficult to use in planning how we purchase those assets, and
    planning how we spend those funds on our systems.
        And that is why, when it comes to climate change science,
    water utilities are looking for what WUCA members have begun to
    call actionable science. We define actionable science to mean
    ``data analysis and forecasts that are sufficiently predictive,
    accepted, and understandable to support decision-making,
    including capital investment decision-making.''
        The term is intended to convey our understanding that
    perfect information on climate change is neither available
    today, nor likely to be available in the near future, but that
    over time, as the threats climate change pose to our systems
    grow more real, predicting those effects with greater certainty
    is a nondiscretionary choice that we need to make.
        Now, if actionable science is one need, accessible science
    is another need. A National Climate Service, we believe, can
    provide access to science to those of us who are assessing our
    vulnerability, in an accessible fashion. I want to agree
    strongly with Dr. Barron, who said that from a stakeholder
    perspective, it can be difficult, at times, to get the kind of
    climate information that we need to plug into our operations
    models, and begin to think about what our adaptation challenges
    actually are. I have seen from my experience at both the PUC,
    and as a Director at MMWD, how difficult it can be to access
    sound science, and to know what it is you are actually
    accessing. Even relatively sophisticated water agencies are
    having a difficult time answering the most basic questions
    related to what climate challenges we actually face in the
    long-term, which is the asset investment strategy that we have
    to think about.
        I want to also commend Dr. Barron and the Science Advisory
    Board that NOAA asked to put together its options for
    developing a National Climate Service report. The report
    identified key attributes of a National Climate Service that I
    think are worth citing for a moment.
        It said: ``The Service will achieve its mission by
    promoting active interaction among users, researchers, and
    information providers. The Service will be user-centric, by
    ensuring that scientifically based information is accessible
    and commensurate with users' needs and limitations.'' This has
    been echoed in some of the testimony so far you have heard
    today, and I want to agree wholeheartedly with that.
        In our view, a powerful and responsive National Climate
    Service should be like a wheel, with a hub, which is our
    headquarters, and spokes, which are regional centers. Like a
    wheel, without the hub, the wheels come off. At the end of the
    spokes is where we think the rubber is going to hit the road.
    At the center, we need a federal family to come together, and
    create a cohesive federal structure that supports the NCS
    mission. We want to see lessons learned from the example of the
    U.S. Climate Change Science Program, which has produced a
    tremendous amount of important research, but has, at times,
    been criticized for failing to achieve a consistent and
    transparent vision for that research, and also, for struggling,
    at times, to effectively engage the stakeholder community.
        At the spokes of the wheel, stakeholders and researchers
    alike strongly believe that the success of an NCS mission, as
    others have said today already, depends on creating a robust
    and geographically distributed regional presence. Such a
    presence would feature engaged, multi-disciplinary teams of
    physical scientists, social scientists, communication
    specialists, and modelers, that are located in the communities
    that are facing adaptation challenges. Those boots on the
    ground experts understand their region and its unique
    conditions, and are active participants in ongoing
    conversations with climate information users, folks like
    ourselves. And they aren't paratroopers, just to stretch the
    military analogy to its breaking point. They are actually part
    of the communities that they serve.
        This decentralized, user-centric approach is far from
    unprecedented in the Federal Government. Many have talked about
    the RISA program. We agree that it is a model that can be
    expanded upon, improved, even made broader, with a more
    consistent mission across the United States, and perhaps
    provide a model for that geographically distributed approach
    that we think is so essential to reflect user concerns over
    adaptation, and bringing climate science out to our
    communities.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Behar follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of David Behar

        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for this
    opportunity to appear and present a stakeholder perspective regarding
    formation of a National Climate Service. My name is David Behar. I am
    the Deputy to the Assistant General Manager at the San Francisco Public
    Utilities Commission (SFPUC). The SFPUC is the sixth largest municipal
    water provider in the U.S. and manages water and power facilities that
    serve 2.5 million Bay Area residents, as well as wastewater and
    stormwater facilities in San Francisco. For the City and County of San
    Francisco, I also am helping develop a City-wide Climate Adaptation
    Plan encompassing all City departments facing climate change-related
    vulnerabilities, similar to programs underway in New York City,
    Chicago, and other cities across the U.S.
        I also serve as Staff Chairman of the Water Utility Climate
    Alliance (WUCA), a consortium of eight water utilities dedicated to
    providing leadership and collaboration on climate change issues
    affecting drinking water utilities by improving research, developing
    adaptation strategies, and creating mitigation approaches to reduce
    greenhouse gas emissions. WUCA is chaired by SFPUC General Manager Ed
    Harrington and includes some of the largest water providers in the
    Nation serving 36 million Americans. WUCA members include Denver Water,
    the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, New York City
    Department of Environmental Protection, Portland Water Bureau, San
    Diego County Water Authority, Seattle Public Utilities and the Southern
    Nevada Water Authority. In my spare time, I serve on the Board of
    Directors of the oldest municipal water agency in California, Marin
    Municipal Water District (MMWD), a position to which I was elected in
    2006.

    The Stakes for Water and Wastewater Utilities

        According to two recent EPA reports to Congress, water and
    wastewater utilities in the U.S. will need to invest some
    $480,000,000,000 over the next twenty years to keep our systems in a
    state of good repair.\1\ This figure does not include climate change
    response, but we know those investments will be made as our climate is
    changing, and the life cycle of those assets--including transmission
    lines, treatment plants, outfalls, urban drainage systems, dams--is
    measured in periods from several decades to over a century. This is the
    same timeframe for climate change projections that are commonly
    presented in the scientific literature. But many of today's climate
    projections are so uncertain as to be unusable as we weigh how best to
    spend that $480 billion. We need information on a host of climate
    parameters for which past hydrology is no longer an indication of
    future conditions. These include temperature, precipitation, changes in
    the mix of precipitation falling as rain and snow, changes in runoff
    timing, changes in demand, drought duration and frequency, extreme
    events including storms and heat waves, and sea level rise. The models
    often don't simulate important aspects of climate successfully and
    don't agree with one another in terms of the scale of expected change
    and in some cases even the direction of change. A key issue is that the
    global climate models don't produce data at the temporal and spatial
    scale that we need to make decisions--that is, at the watershed and the
    sewershed levels. Of course, compounding the difficulty is the fact
    that, in the absence of national and international agreements on
    curbing greenhouse gas emissions, we face a multitude of emissions
    scenarios as well.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ ``Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment:
    Third Report to Congress.'' USEPA Office of Water, 2005. ``Clean
    Watersheds Needs Survey 2004: Report to Congress.'' USEPA, January
    2008.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Water utilities, and others planning a response to climate change,
    are handcuffed by uncertainty--but we're not paralyzed. The challenge
    lies in taking steps today that make sense before factoring in the
    effects of climate change, but that also create resiliency to climate
    change in whatever form that change takes in the future. These we refer
    to as ``no regrets'' strategies. For many utilities but particularly in
    the growing but arid west, aggressive water conservation strategies
    have taken center stage, as are projects that diversify supply to
    include drought-resistant sources such as recycled water and
    conjunctive use groundwater programs. In San Francisco, for example,
    due to a combination of these programs, since the 1970's we have
    reduced our consumption of Hetch Hetchy water by 27 percent while
    population increased 13 percent. In Southern California, the
    Metropolitan Water District, a WUCA member and the largest municipal
    water agency in the Nation, has developed over the past 20 years
    600,000 acre feet of conservation, 250,000 acre feet of water
    recycling, and over 100,000 acre feet of groundwater recovery and
    augmentation, while increasing local storage capacity by a factor of
    fourteen. Even as population has grown by 3.5 million, total water use
    in MWD's service area has actually declined.
        But we know such strategies alone may not allow us to escape the
    projected effects of climate change on our water systems. And because
    it can take decades to plan, fund, design, permit, and construct new or
    renewed projects, we are thinking today about our infrastructure needs
    of 2030, 2050, and beyond.

    ``Actionable Science''

        When it comes to climate science, water utilities are looking for
    what WUCA utilities call ``actionable science.'' We define actionable
    science as

             Data, analysis, and forecasts that are sufficiently
            predictive, accepted, and understandable to support decision-
            making, including capital investment decision-making.

        We've come up with this term to convey our understanding that
    perfect information on climate change is neither available today nor
    likely to be available in the future, but that over time, as the
    threats climate change poses to our systems grow more real, predicting
    those effects with greater certainty is non-discretionary. We're not
    yet at a level at which climate change projections can drive climate
    change adaptation. This makes us nervous--and it's not terribly
    comforting for our ratepayers either.
        At least two things must happen from our perspective in the short-
    term to provide society with some reassurance at this early but ominous
    phase of climate change adaptation planning. First, we need increased
    investment in climate science that will, as swiftly as possible,
    provide local entities of all stripes with intelligence about the
    future that is of a quality and scale that meets the definition of
    ``actionable.'' Second, partnerships must be built between local and
    regional entities whose systems are vulnerable to the effects of
    climate change and the research community (including social scientists,
    economists, and legal researchers), policy-makers, and others to assist
    those entities in understanding the range of futures they face and
    provide decision support in the face of less than perfect information.

    Accessible Science: The National Climate Service

        Today's hearing, on the subject of a National Climate Service, lies
    along the path, we hope, to providing ``accessible science'' to those
    who are assessing their vulnerability to climate change--and planning
    their adaptation response. These science ``users'' include water
    utilities, local governments, public health officials, parks and
    wildlife managers, coastal zone agencies, urban planners, farmers,
    homeowners, NGOs and other public and private sector interests.
        I've seen from my own personal experience both at the SFPUC and as
    a board member at MMWD how difficult it can be to access sound climate
    information. Even a sophisticated water agency has difficulty finding
    answers to the most basic questions and accessing data compatible with
    their systems models. University researchers are busy teaching and
    publishing, agency staff in Washington, D.C. are unknown to us, and
    those who we call ``users'' of climate information are often left to
    scramble haphazardly to collect tidbits of information from a
    multiplicity of sources as we seek to create resilient communities
    ready to adapt to the effects of climate change.
        We commend the Climate Working Group of NOAA's Science Advisory
    Board for its thoughtful and focused report ``Options for Developing a
    National Climate Service'' (February 26, 2009). The report identified
    ``Key Attributes'' of a National Climate Service worth citing here:

             The Service will achieve its mission by promoting active
            interaction among users, researchers, and information
            providers. The Service will be user-centric, by ensuring that
            scientifically-based information is accessible and commensurate
            with users' needs and limitations. (p. 5)

        We agree.
        Several organizational options were outlined in this report and we
    concur with those who have suggested that each option contains elements
    of what a future NCS should look like.
        In our view, a powerful and responsive NCS should be like a wheel,
    with a hub (headquarters) and spokes (regional centers). To leverage
    the metaphor a bit further: without the hub, the wheels come off. And
    at the end of the spokes is where the rubber hits the road.
        An NCS, we believe, requires the support of a lead federal agency
    with budgetary authority and responsibility for critically important
    science and data management functions. It seems clear that NOAA, with
    its broad and deep expertise and responsibilities in these areas, is
    well positioned to assume this role. In addition, oversight, as well as
    coordination and cooperation between the lead and other federal
    agencies such as EPA, USGS, NASA, USDA, and others is critically
    important. We need the federal family to come together to create a
    cohesive federal structure that supports the NCS mission. Hopefully,
    lessons have been learned from the example of the U.S. Climate Change
    Science Program, which has been widely criticized for failing to
    achieve a consistent and transparent vision across the federal
    enterprise and for doing a poor job of engaging with stakeholders.
        Stakeholders and researchers alike strongly believe that the
    success of an NCS mission depends substantially on creating a robust
    and geographically distributed regional presence. Such a presence would
    feature engaged, multi-disciplinary teams of physical scientists,
    social scientists, communications specialists, and modelers in the
    communities facing adaptation challenges. These ``boots on the ground''
    experts understand their region and its unique conditions and are
    active participants in an ongoing and iterative conversation with
    climate information users that builds a familiarity that informs both
    sides. They aren't paratroopers, either--they are a part of the
    communities they serve.
        For the user, we need an accessible go-to entity we can count on to
    help us sift through the ever-changing science, gather the raw data,
    benchmark against the experience of others, educate our publics, and
    work with us in assessing our vulnerabilities. In addition, all these
    players together will organically develop research partnerships with a
    responsive university community, bringing a ``grass-roots science''
    approach that can complement the ``Big Science'' pursuits in the area
    of climate modeling and atmospheric and oceans science that underpin
    our understanding of global climate change. All this work should be
    part of a set of ongoing relationships, born of a shared mission that
    is at the heart of the term ``service,'' between climate scientists and
    engineers, economists and rate administrators, oceanographers and urban
    planners, elected officials and agency managers.
        These conversations are far from easy. I have attended workshop
    after workshop with climate scientists and decision-makers that are
    intended, like an arranged marriage, to create an advantageous union.
    Usually the climate scientists present their research. Then comes an
    uncomfortable silence. Usually one of the climate scientists who did
    not present makes a comment. Then we move on to the next presentation.
    At one recent workshop track I forced myself to announce that I didn't
    understand the last speaker's presentation, but it seemed important
    that at some point I do. It was like a great weight had been lifted
    from my fellow non-scientists in the room.
        The greatest advances in multi-disciplinary understanding on the
    subject of climate change simply don't happen in one-off workshops.
    They take practice. They happen over time and are based on sustained
    relationships.
        This decentralized, user-centric approach is far from unprecedented
    in the Federal Government. Closest to home, the NOAA-funded Regional
    Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) program offers a notable
    demonstration model. These university-based partnerships, with very
    small but essential core funding from NOAA, have done outstanding work
    in the Southwest, Colorado Basin, Pacific Northwest, California, and
    elsewhere. They have benefited many stakeholders that have had the good
    fortune to work with them and they are today at the heart of both
    general public and stakeholder education about climate change
    adaptation effects for water utilities and others. They bring the
    multi-disciplinary conversations and a science-meets-policy-meets-
    decision-making focus that we need. They are already the most useful
    spokes of our wheel.
        A project Denver Water, another of WUCA's member utilities, is
    helping lead illustrates the power of the RISA model and how its
    expansion could pay dividends across the United States. To understand
    climate science and determine potential impacts to local hydrology, the
    water providers of the Front Range urban area of Colorado are
    collaborating on a cooperative regional study in partnership with the
    local RISA, the Western Water Assessment, led by the estimable Brad
    Udall, along with the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Water
    Research Foundation and the State of Colorado. The participating water
    providers supply water to nearly two-thirds of the population of the
    State of Colorado. Working with local researchers and climate change
    experts, the local RISA helped provide educational sessions,
    documentation, direction, and access to experts to help the water users
    understand climate change science and modeling, understand and obtain
    down-scaled global climate model projections, convert the projections
    into sets of planning scenarios, and assist with setting up local
    hydrology models to convert the global climate model projections into
    projected impacts on local streamflow. Being a regional entity, the
    local RISA was familiar with the regional climate projections,
    researchers, water systems, and water utilities. A federal climate
    agency without that regional connection and approach probably would not
    have been able or available to support a regional effort like this,
    making it much more difficult for water utilities to make use of
    climate science. The Front Range cooperative effort is today leveraging
    local cooperation with local service provided by a locally-based
    federal climate science boundary organization, the RISA.
        The RISA program is not perfect, however, and expanding it
    exponentially will have to be done with care. For example, each RISA
    today has a different mission (and even a different name). Greater
    uniformity and clarity of mission within the program would make sense
    if the program model were to be expanded--while maintaining the
    flexibility of each office to respond to differing local and regional
    conditions.
        In addition, expansion of the RISA program alone won't be
    sufficient. Data management, storage, and access depend significantly
    on centralized facilities that regional adaptation programs must have
    the ability to access. In addition, local relationships with regional
    arms of federal regulatory, land management, and operational agencies
    such as USGS, EPA, Bureau of Reclamation, USDA, the Fish and Wildlife
    Service, and the Army Corps will continue, and adaptation efforts must
    account for the need to work with these agencies both in Washington and
    in the field and regional offices.
        Nonetheless, with an annual budget of the nine RISA programs at a
    mere $5 million total, their track record argues for inclusion of the
    model they have field tested in any NCS program. Add a zero (or two) to
    that budget figure, expand the geographic scope, broaden and
    rationalize the mission, and you have the basis of a vigorous regional
    element of a National Climate Service.

    Conclusion

        To conclude and emphasize my most important points:

              Drinking water utilities will invest hundreds of
            billions of dollars in the near-term in our assets--and those
            investments must be informed by climate change science and
            services delivered by an NCS;

              An NCS should have a user-centric mission that
            emphasizes providing actionable, accessible science to
            stakeholders;

              An NCS requires sufficient federal funding provided
            by a lead federal entity with active participation and
            coordination across the federal enterprise, but its most
            important work should take place through establishment of a
            multi-disciplinary, geographically distributed presence in the
            communities in which adaptation must take place;

              The RISA program provides a model to build upon for
            successful service delivery.

        Thank you again for the opportunity to appear today, Mr. Chairman
    and Members of the Committee, and I would be happy to answer any
    questions you may have.

    APPENDIX

                         CLIMATE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

        In response to specific questions from the Chairman regarding
    various products and services utilized by the SFPUC in our operations,
    the following was prepared by Dr. Bruce McGurk, Operations Manager,
    Hetch Hetchy Water and Power, San Francisco Public Utilities
    Commission.

    Please discuss the climate services and products the San Francisco
    Public Utilities Commission utilizes; how this service is delivered;
    and if there is a price associated with this service. Please also
    discuss and provide examples of how these climate services and products
    affect operations and management decisions (and) is there a need for a
    better organization for how these services are delivered.

        The SFPUC's Hetch Hetchy Water and Power division, our up-country
    system that provides 85 percent of total water supply, depends on real-
    time streamflow and reservoir elevation/storage data from USGS to
    monitor and operate our project and monitor other river systems around
    us. We pay 100 percent for 16 USGS gages (at an annual cost of
    $320,000) because cooperator co-funding at USGS has been cut
    drastically. We have re-occupied gages that USGS has cut out (Middle
    and South Forks Tuolumne River) because we need the data for current
    operations and future climate change research. The cutbacks that cause
    these and other high-elevation gages to be discontinued make it much
    more difficult to monitor runoff timing shifts and quantity, the exact
    issues that we need to know about to manage our water supply and detect
    the rate of global warming. An additional five to eight real-time
    stream and reservoir gages are operated in the Bay Area and funded
    exclusively by the SFPUC. They are used for release compliance and
    system monitoring.
        We also use a variety of products from NOAA and the National
    Weather Service. We routinely use the Climate Prediction Center's six-
    to ten- and eight- to fourteen-day forecasts, as well as the one month
    and three-month forecasts. NWS forecasters provide valuable advice with
    the Area Forecast Discussions and Zone forecasts. The NWS California-
    Nevada River Forecast Center provides invaluable information with their
    Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Services and their daily modeling of
    flows into our reservoirs and others across the state. They combine
    historical and weather forecast data to show likely runoff from our
    basins for the next week to 10 days, and this is very important for
    reservoir operations. We cooperate with the CNRFC and supply them with
    climate and flow data that we collect so that they can do the best job
    possible with their models.
        We use a wide array of other climate and snowpack information
    presented by the California Data Exchange Center (CDEC) and collected
    by cooperators all across California. We depend on snow courses, snow
    sensors, and other climate data that are hosted by CDEC. Data from the
    USDA/NRCS SNOTEL sites are also included in our runoff forecast models.
    We compare our runoff forecasts with NRCS and State-generated
    forecasts.
        We have routine interaction with the NOAA Western Regional Climate
    Center in Reno, and they operate one of the sites that produces
    critical data for our runoff forecast system.
        The current branches of NOAA/NWS are not focused on providing data
    to help with climate change inquiries. They are focused on their
    monitoring and short-term forecasting missions, and as a result it can
    be hard to find appropriate information that has long enough record,
    has the necessary metadata, and is searchable. An NCS that worked with
    NWS in regional centers and provided the data and a focus for climate
    change analysis would be a big improvement. This new function would
    address the current difficulty in partitioning the routine monitoring
    and forecasting from the effort to provide climate scientists and
    adaptation planners with the specialized products that are needed to
    build models using the past data and also produce data that are
    representative of the climate in the future.

                           Biography for David Behar

        David Behar career spans over twenty years in environmental policy
    and water utility management. David currently serves as Deputy to the
    Assistant General Manager, Water Enterprise, at the San Francisco
    Public Utilities Commission. The SFPUC is the sixth largest municipal
    water provider in the U.S. and manages water and power facilities and
    operations at Hetch Hetchy, the regional system that delivers water 160
    miles to 2.5 million Bay Area residents, and water, wastewater, and
    stormwater facilities in San Francisco. He led development of the
    SFPUC-sponsored Water Utility Climate Change Summit held in San
    Francisco in early 2007 and currently serves as Staff Chairman of the
    Water Utility Climate Alliance (WUCA). Established in early 2008, WUCA
    is a coalition of eight water utilities dedicated to providing
    leadership and collaboration on climate change issues affecting
    drinking water utilities by improving research, developing adaptation
    strategies and creating mitigation approaches to reduce greenhouse gas
    emissions. WUCA is chaired by SFPUC General Manager Ed Harrington and
    includes Denver Water, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
    California, New York City Department of Environmental Protection,
    Portland Water Bureau, San Diego County Water Authority, Seattle Public
    Utilities and the Southern Nevada Water Authority. Prior to joining the
    SFPUC, David was an environmental policy consultant whose clients
    included the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Pacific Rivers
    Council. From 1991-97 he served as Executive Director of The Bay
    Institute of San Francisco, and from 1989-91 he served on the staff of
    U.S. Senator Alan Cranston (DCA). In November 2006 he was elected to
    the Board of Directors of the Marin Municipal Water District, a
    200,000-customer water district just north of San Francisco in Marin
    County, where he lives with his two children.

        Chair Baird. Thank you, Mr. Behar. Mr. Fleming.

          STATEMENT OF MR. PAUL FLEMING, MANAGER, CLIMATE AND
             SUSTAINABILITY GROUP, SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES

        Mr. Fleming. Good morning, Chairman Baird, Ranking Member
    Inglis, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for this
    opportunity to testify before your committee today. My name is
    Paul Fleming, and I am the Manager of the Climate and
    Sustainability Group at Seattle Public Utilities.
        Seattle provides reliable drinking water to 1.3 million
    people in the Greater Seattle area, and provides sewer,
    drainage, and solid waste services to Seattle residents. The
    City of Seattle has made addressing climate change a top
    priority. Our mayor, Greg Nickels, has been the leader in an
    effort to engage other mayors across the political spectrum on
    the issue of climate change, and the need to take local action.
        In addition, the City's municipally owned electric utility,
    Seattle City Light, will likely see significant impacts to the
    hydropower-based operations, as climate change affects our
    region. They both support my testimony here today.
        Seattle uses, relies on, and supports financially several
    monitoring and forecasting services provided by federal
    agencies, such as NOAA, U.S. Geological Survey, and the Natural
    Resources Conservation Service's, to inform our real-time
    decision-making and short-term planning. As Dr. Mote noted,
    Seattle has also engaged with NOAA's Regional Integrated
    Sciences and Assessment program, RISA, to assess the projected
    long-term impacts of climate change on our water supply, and we
    have used this research to develop initial adaptation options.
    Our operational and institutional capacity have benefited from
    this engagement.
        As an active user of several federal services, and as a
    partner and collaborator with numerous federal agencies,
    Seattle believes there are potentially great benefits
    associated with the creation of a National Climate Service. We
    view NOAA's RISA program as a potential model, particularly
    given its distributed geographic structure. If it were to serve
    as a potential framework for a National Climate Service, the
    RISA model, however, would need to be strengthened and expanded
    along the following lines.
        One, it would need to involve multiple federal agencies in
    the provision of services. The water sector uses the services
    of, interacts with, and is regulated by many federal agencies.
    Our interaction with the federal family would be facilitated by
    having the relevant agencies coordinating their climate change
    programs and research through a National Climate Service, and
    by viewing it as an authoritative source of climate
    information.
        Two, the National Climate Service should involve multiple
    sectors in the development and implementation of programs and
    services provided by the Service. The water sector is engaged
    on the issue of climate change. A National Climate Service
    should recognize this capacity, and view the water sector not
    just as an end user, but as a partner, as well. For example,
    industry research groups, such as the Water Research
    Foundation, should play a critical role in conducting applied
    research for the water sector.
        Three, ensure there is consistency across the distributed
    structure. A National Climate Service should have a common set
    of goals and objectives, so that the distributed branches are
    coordinated and emanate from the common trunk.
        Four, increase overall funding for a National Climate
    Service, while maintaining and expanding, if necessary,
    existing monitoring networks and forecasting services.
        Five, build upon existing partnerships that are effective
    in delivering services. For example, Seattle has partnerships
    with the U.S. Geological Survey and the Natural Resources
    Conservation Service to support the ongoing operations and
    maintenance of streamflow and snowpack monitoring
    infrastructure. This infrastructure should be expanded, and a
    National Climate Service should build off of what currently
    works.
        In addition, I would encourage a National Climate Service
    to be established in such a way that allows for an option to
    scale the services beyond the U.S. As the Federal Government
    continues to engage internationally on climate change, there is
    great potential for the U.S. to assist other countries in
    identifying the projected impacts of climate change, and
    enhance their adaptive capacity. In so doing, we may also
    address potential national security issues.
        In closing, I want to reiterate a few points. Large
    utilities in the water sector are engaged, to varying degrees,
    in furthering their capacity to understand and prepare for
    climate change. Given the operational knowledge and
    institutional capacity of the water sector, a National Climate
    Service should involve the water sector, not just as an end-
    user, but as a partner.
        A National Climate Service should serve as a vehicle to
    coordinate the climate change programs of the numerous federal
    agencies that are involved in this issue.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify this
    morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Fleming follows:]

                       Prepared Statement of Paul Fleming

    Introduction

        Good morning Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Inglis and Members of
    the Subcommittee. Thank for this opportunity to testify before your
    committee today. My name is Paul Fleming, I am the Manager of the
    Climate and Sustainability Group at Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). SPU
    provides reliable drinking water to 1.3 million people in the greater
    Seattle area, and provides sewer, drainage and solid waste services to
    Seattle residents. My position at SPU is responsible for developing
    SPU's climate adaptation and mitigation strategies, and establishing
    partnerships with other utilities and research organizations in the
    U.S. and abroad.
        SPU, like many water utilities in the US, is an active participant
    in numerous water sector climate change initiatives related to the
    management, policy and technical challenges and research needs that
    arise from the projected impacts of climate change. We are one of the
    founding members of the Water Utility Climate Alliance (WUCA), a group
    of eight urban water suppliers that collectively provide drinking water
    services to nearly 36 million people. WUCA is currently funding two
    projects: one on decision support systems for the water sector and
    another on an assessment of climate modeling. SPU is also active in the
    climate change initiatives of the Association of Metropolitan Water
    Agencies, the American Water Works Association and the International
    Water Association. SPU is currently advising both the Water Research
    Foundation and the Water Environment Research Foundation as they
    develop their climate change research agendas for the drinking water
    and clean water sectors respectively and continue their leadership
    roles in supporting emerging research. We are also reaching out to
    utilities and researchers in an effort to glean best practices from
    other parts of the world. This engagement with multiple entities
    reflects SPU's belief in the importance of climate change for the water
    sector and our commitment to continually enhance our institutional
    capacity to prepare for the implications of climate change. This depth
    of engagement, understanding and commitment is common to varying
    degrees amongst numerous large water utilities in the U.S.
        The City of Seattle has made addressing climate change a top
    priority. Our mayor, Greg Nickels, has been the leader in an effort to
    engage other mayors across the political spectrum on the issue of
    climate change and the need to take local actions. In addition, the
    City's municipally-owned electric utility, Seattle City Light, will
    likely see significant impacts to its hydropower-based operations as
    climate change affect our region. They support my testimony here today.
        Today, I will highlight some of the existing federal monitoring and
    forecasting services Seattle relies on for water supply system
    operations and planning, describe how we use these services to help
    ensure that we meet our responsibilities and policy objectives and
    describe attributes that we would like to see in a National Climate
    Service.

    Seattle's use of Federal Monitoring and Forecasting Services

        Seattle's water supply is derived from two watersheds located in
    the Central Cascade Mountains in Washington State: the Cedar River and
    Tolt River Watersheds. These watersheds receive precipitation in the
    form of rain and snow. Seattle manages these watersheds, the Cedar and
    Tolt Rivers, and our mountain-based reservoirs, to achieve the
    following objectives:

              Water supply for people

              Instreamflows for aquatic species

              Flood management

              Dam safety

              Water quality

        Given the dynamic nature of managing our water supply system, with
    our multiple objectives, capricious weather and the need to balance
    immediate and short-term issues with longer-term planning horizons, it
    is critical that we have access to real-time monitoring and forecasting
    information. Seattle relies on several federal agency monitoring and
    forecasting services to help inform our decision-making. These services
    include, but are not limited to:

              U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) stream gages

              Natural Resources Conservation Service's (NRCS)
            SnoTel sites

              National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
            (NOAA) National Weather Service's weather observations and
            daily and mid-range weather forecasts,

              NOAA's Climate Prediction Center's 30-90 day and
            multi-seasonal climate outlooks

              NOAA's Remote Sensing of Snowcover

        Seattle uses these services and others for operational planning at
    multiple time scales, from day-to-day to several months out, to manage
    our rivers and reservoirs in order to meet our objectives. USGS gages
    are used to help us comply with our landmark Cedar River Habitat
    Conservation Plan and to protect salmon habitat and salmon redds on the
    Cedar River. The National Weather Service's general weather forecasts
    inform our reservoir operations and help us time releases of water.
    NRCS's SnoTel sites provide us with estimates of snowpack which we can
    use to project how much water is embedded in the snow blanketing the
    hills in our watersheds. These services are our eyes and ears on the
    ground as well as the binoculars peering over the horizon.
        These services also serve as an authoritative and credible source
    of information, which is critical for the type of collaborative
    resource management decision-making that we engage in on a regular
    basis.
        In addition to using these services, Seattle provides financial and
    in-kind support for some of them. The Tolt and Cedar River Basins are
    extensively gauged and networked, partially as a result of a
    cooperative funding arrangement between SPU, Seattle City Light and
    USGS. In 2009, SPU will contribute roughly $125,000 towards this
    arrangement. We greatly appreciate this arrangement and the excellent
    work of the Tacoma, Washington Office of the USGS. For the NRCS's
    SnoTel program, we provide in-kind surveying of the land where their
    equipment is located. We have invested in these systems and appreciate
    and depend on continued federal support for them.
        Another federal service we have used is NOAA's Regional Integrated
    Sciences and Assessment (RISA) program. In the Pacific Northwest, the
    RISA program is represented by the University of Washington Climate
    Impacts Group (UW-CIG). UW-CIG has been instrumental in helping to
    elevate the issue of climate change in the central Puget Sound region
    and Washington State. The research UW-CIG has conducted has greatly
    advanced the region's ability to understand how climate change is
    projected to affect different sectors of the region and state. Seattle
    benefited directly from engaging with the UW-CIG to conduct two studies
    within the past five years on how climate change is projected to affect
    the hydrology of the watersheds where we operate.
        The most recent study we completed involved the creation of three
    climate scenarios that were based on three Global Climate Models (GCMs)
    coupled with two emission scenarios and down-scaled to the central
    Puget Sound region. The three scenarios projected decreases in our
    water supply ranging from six percent to twenty-one percent by 2050 due
    to climate change. Given this projected range of impacts, we then
    developed initial adaptation strategies and evaluated their
    effectiveness in offsetting the reductions in supply. The first
    strategies we've evaluated were ``no-regrets'' strategies: operational
    adjustments that are low to no-cost, enhance our operational
    flexibility and which could be implemented quickly. By deploying this
    initial portfolio of strategies we estimated we could offset the
    impacts of climate change in two out of the three climate scenarios.
        This assessment also reinforced the role of water conservation as
    an essential component of our climate change strategy. Since 1984, our
    total water consumption has declined by 28 percent while population has
    grown by 26 percent. As a result, water consumption per capita is 43
    percent less than it was a year ago. This has been due to the combined
    effects of higher water rates (and a seasonal and inclining block rate
    structure), the Washington State plumbing code, over two decades of
    aggressive conservation programs, and improved system operations. We
    are also committed to saving an additional fifteen million gallons a
    day (mgd) through conservation programs over the next 20 years. By
    2030, we project that water demand will still be less than it was in
    1965 even though we'll be serving 80 percent more people.
        This engagement with the research community has strengthened
    Seattle's knowledge of the implications of climate change, stimulated
    our development of initial adaptation strategies and enhanced our
    institutional capacity. We look forward to continued interaction with
    UW-CIG, federal agencies and the research community as a whole in the
    co-production of knowledge.

    A National Climate Service

        It is often noted that water utilities are on the ``front lines''
    of, or ``first responders'' in, the battle against climate change.
    While this characterization is apt, it doesn't fully capture the
    breadth of activities the water sector pursues in operating and
    managing our systems and in identifying and preparing for the impacts
    of climate change. To continue with the martial metaphor, we're not
    just on the front lines, but we're also in the war room gleaning
    intelligence data from original research and reconnaissance we have
    conducted; we're often using satellite data to determine how much
    resources (e.g., water) we have to utilize; we're assessing threat
    levels through vulnerability assessments, developing new tools to
    counter those threats, and building alliances to share information and
    resources. The broad spectrum of strategic and tactical activities that
    the water sector is engaged in illustrate that we take the issue of
    climate change seriously and that we have the capability to do a lot of
    work. We need, however, the support of, and continued collaboration
    with, the Federal Government and welcome an integrated and user-driven
    National Climate Service that hastens our ability to identify and
    prepare for the impacts of climate change.
        As an active user of several federal services and as a partner and
    collaborator with numerous federal programs, Seattle believes there are
    potentially great benefits associated with the creation of a National
    Climate Service. Having extensive experience with NOAA's RISA program,
    we view that as a potential model, particularly given its distributed
    geographic structure. Such a structure has the potential of
    establishing strong linkages between the research community and the
    relevant sectors in a given region and creating tailored research and
    services that help to address a region's needs. If it were to serve as
    a potential framework for a NCS, the RISA model, however, would need to
    be strengthened and expanded along the following lines:

              Involve multiple federal agencies in the provision of
            services. The water sector uses the services of, interacts with
            and is regulated by several agencies. Having multiple agencies
            involved in the NCS and viewing it as an authoritative source
            of climate information would facilitate our interactions with
            these agencies.

              Involve multiple sectors in the development and
            implementation of programs and services provided by the NCS. As
            I have noted before, the water sector is engaged on the issue
            of climate change and is enhancing its capacity to understand
            and prepare for the impacts. The NCS should recognize this
            capacity and view the water sector not just as an end-user but
            as a collaborator as well. This is particularly salient with
            respect to vulnerability assessments, where a utility's tacit
            knowledge of its system operations can ``ground truth'' the
            assessment and identify and evaluate the effectiveness of
            operational adjustments. Such an emphasis could also help to
            complement the current university context for RISA program
            delivery.

              Ensure there is consistency across the distributed
            structure by establishing a common set of goals, objectives,
            and tenets across the country so that the NCS is responsive to
            the water sector's need for ``actionable science'' and that the
            distributed ``branches'' of the NCS are well coordinated.

              Increase overall funding for an NCS while maintaining
            and expanding, if necessary, existing monitoring networks and
            forecasting services. These services are essential for
            operations and planning today and will be even more critical in
            the future.

              Build upon existing partnerships that are effective
            in delivering services. As noted previously Seattle has
            established relationships with USGS and NRCS to support the
            ongoing operations and maintenance of streamflow and snowpack
            monitoring infrastructure.

              Establish a structure that allows for an option to
            scale the services beyond the U.S. As the Federal Government
            continues to engage internationally on climate change, there is
            great potential for the U.S. to assist other countries in
            enhancing their adaptive capacity as well as learning from them
            while also addressing potential national security issues.
            Through appropriate agreements or perhaps as part of foreign
            aid programs, the National Climate Service potentially could
            provide essential monitoring services and research for areas of
            the world that don't have access to such information.

    Conclusion

        In closing, I want to reiterate a few points:

              Large utilities in the water sector are engaged to
            varying degrees in furthering our understanding of the
            implications of climate change and in preparing for the
            challenges it creates;

              We welcome additional federal collaboration that
            builds off of and expands existing monitoring and forecasting
            services and collaborative partnerships;

              Given the operational knowledge and institutional
            capacity of the water sector, a National Climate Service should
            be based on a geographically distributed but nationally
            coordinated structure that involves and complements the water
            sector's tacit knowledge and experience.

        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify this morning Mr.
    Chairman and Members of the Committee.

                           Biography for Paul Fleming

        Paul Fleming is the Manager of the Climate and Sustainability Group
    for the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). SPU provides a reliable
    drinking water supply to 1.3 million people in the Seattle metropolitan
    area and provides essential sewer, drainage and solid waste services to
    City of Seattle customers. Paul leads SPU's climate change initiatives
    and is responsible for developing and directing SPU's climate
    adaptation and mitigation strategies and research agenda as well as
    establishing collaborative partnerships with other utilities and
    research organizations in the U.S. and abroad. Paul also supervises
    SPU's green building program and is involved in SPU's sustainable
    stormwater infrastructure initiatives.
        Paul is an active participant in several national and international
    efforts focused on water and climate change. He is active in the Water
    Utility Climate Alliance, an alliance of eight U.S. urban water
    suppliers focused on adaptation, GHG mitigation and climate research,
    where he chairs the Science and Research Committee. He serves on the
    Water Research Foundation's Climate Change Strategic Initiative Expert
    Panel, where advises the Foundation on the development of a climate
    change research agenda for the drinking water sector. He is also
    advising the Water Environment Research Foundation on their development
    of a climate change research agenda for the drainage and wastewater
    sector. Paul develops and leads SPU's international collaborative
    efforts, including work with Dutch researchers on urban drainage
    climate adaptation. He is also participating in a U.S. State
    Department-funded project that is examining security, energy, water and
    climate change issues in Central Asia.
        Paul has been an invited speaker on climate change and water at
    water industry conferences and workshops in Washington State,
    Amsterdam, Atlanta, Baltimore, Colorado, Edinburgh, Toronto and Tokyo.
    Prior to his current position Paul managed SPU's State legislative
    agenda and worked on State and regional water supply and environmental
    policy issues.
        Paul is a board member of Worldchanging.com, which is a media
    organization that covers tools, models and ideas for creating a better
    future. He is also a delegate to the U.S.-Japan Leadership Program.
    Paul has a BA in Economics from Duke University and an MBA from the
    University of Washington and lives in Seattle with his wife and
    daughter.

        Chair Baird. Thank you, Mr. Fleming. Dr. Doesken.

        STATEMENT OF DR. NOLAN J. DOESKEN, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
          ASSOCIATION OF STATE CLIMATOLOGISTS; COLORADO STATE
      CLIMATOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE, COLORADO
                            STATE UNIVERSITY

        Dr. Doesken. I am used to extemporaneous stuff, so wish me
    luck.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Inglis, Committee Members. I
    appreciate this opportunity to represent a State perspective on
    climate services. I am the State Climatologist for Colorado,
    the current President of the American Association of State
    Climatologists, and here is a little description of what we do.
        We are experts on the climate of our own states, whether it
    is just basic temperature and precipitation patterns,
    seasonality, geographic variations, year to year variations,
    which are a really big deal, drought and other extremes, which
    are a really big deal, and historic trends, which are very
    interesting.
        Perhaps more importantly, we see how the climate affects
    the citizens of our states, their lives and their livelihoods.
    We rely on data, quality, representative observations of our
    climate system, whether it is temperature networks, humidity,
    wind, precipitation, or very important, solar energy, all of
    the elements of our climate system. And our ability to provide
    useful information to our states really relies on the presence
    of quality data.
        Whenever I travel, I see climate services in action. The
    infrastructure that we drive on, our bridges, our culverts, our
    energy distribution systems, our buildings consuming energy to
    keep comfortable inside, regardless of the variations outside,
    and how we utilize what we know about our climate to better
    adapt our infrastructure.
        We have traditionally relied on federal sources for the
    data that we use in what we do. National Weather Service
    Cooperative Observer Network, very important. Airport weather
    observations through many decades. U.S. Geological Survey
    streamflow data, NRCS, which we have heard of here today. Soil
    moisture measurements, mountain snowpack data, streamflow
    predictions. We are long-time users of NOAA data resources in
    so many ways.
        We basically believe the climate monitoring activities are
    predominantly a federal responsibility, but more so, we keep
    seeing our fellow states doing more data collection on their
    own to address their own, State-specific needs. At least half
    of us, as State climatologists, are involved in some way in our
    own data collection systems. Often, for agricultural purposes;
    also for energy, water resources, et cetera.
        Let me talk briefly about collaborations, because if you
    knew what our State budgets were, and you probably do, we can't
    function well without collaborations, rich collaborations with
    federal partners. Many of us work closely with our Regional
    Climate Centers. We know them as friends. These groups have
    helped us stream out data access and management, so we can
    focus on interpretation of information, and the delivery of
    that information.
        A few of us have the benefit of working with RISAs. I am
    one of them, in Colorado. Not all states have RISAs. Many of
    our, my fellow State climatologists, have no experience working
    with RISAs, just because they are limited in geographic extent.
    Unlike RISAs, who get to focus on specific sectors and
    decision-makers, we get to work with the whole gamut, anywhere
    from State government down to small business and individuals.
        Private companies are pretty good friends with State
    climatologists. We provide information that really helps them
    make their business decisions, and we are not viewed as
    competition.
        National Weather Service, long partners, data collection,
    and more recently, in data services. And our organizational
    structure that facilitates working with the Federal Government
    is our association, the American Association of State
    Climatologists, just as a vehicle for two way communications.
    It is a little more efficient.
        In summary, we are local experts. We work at the grassroots
    level. We are an essential branch of climate services as they
    are occurring today. We track the pulse of our climate at the
    local level, and we do so on very, with very few resources, in
    so many ways. We are trusted advisors to State and local
    government, business, individuals, and communicators of
    information to our local media. We are flexible, and we are
    responsive.
        We are largely educators; 80 percent of us are at public
    universities. Many of us teach students, mentor grad students,
    as well as aid in decision-makers. More than 60 percent of us
    are at land grant universities, and utilize the infrastructure
    and wisdom of our traditional system of extension to reach
    broad audiences.
        So, we favor the concept of a National Climate Service. We
    are ready to help.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Doesken follows:]

                     Prepared Statement of Nolan J. Doesken

        Thank you very much for this opportunity to share a State
    perspective on climate services.

    Background

        Prior to 1973, each state had a State climatologist as a part of a
    long-standing climate program within the Department of Commerce, U.S.
    Weather Bureau. When that program was abolished in the early 1970s,
    states--as they were able over a period of years--established their own
    offices to carry on the functions of State-specific climate monitoring,
    research, education and service. NOAA's National Climatic Data Center
    (NCDC) was an early partner in fostering State-based climate
    activities. NOAA data, particularly temperature and precipitation data
    from the National Weather Service Cooperative Observer Network and more
    detailed Surface Airways observations, were the primary data sources at
    that time for almost all U.S. ground-based climate monitoring, research
    and service. NCDC still remains a strong partner supporting State
    efforts, facilitating access to data, and enlisting our expertise in a
    variety of ways.
        The American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) was
    established in the mid 1970s to professionally link the efforts of
    these emerging State programs, and to offer a forum for federal
    partners to more easily communicate and work with states on climate-
    related issues. AASC is an effective organization for communicating
    federal-level climate services, through State Climatologists, to the
    citizens and local stakeholders that we serve, within our states. It
    has also been an appropriate forum to communicate State-level data and
    information needs back to federal agencies. While there is so much
    climate diversity across our country, and the challenges faced by
    individual states vary greatly, we share many common interests and
    concerns that are best addressed together. For example, access to
    reliable long-term climate data, best practices in data analysis,
    applied research strategies, means of identifying and assessing State
    and local climate variability and change, effective means of outreach,
    and means of engaging stakeholders and assessing the impact of our
    efforts.
        Recognizing the important role of State Climatologists, the
    National Climate Program Act of 1978 included language that requested
    federal funding for State Climate Offices to improve the consistent
    delivery of critical climate information to the citizens of the United
    States. Funds for individual State activities were never appropriated
    then. Still, State climate offices independently developed. The
    National Climate Program Act of 1978 did not directly help State
    climate service efforts, but it did lead to the eventual formation of
    Regional Climate Centers (RCCs) which have been excellent partners and
    assets to State climate services ever since.
        Currently 48 states have State Climate Offices. Some are housed
    within State agencies, but most are affiliated with State universities.
    The majority, such as my host institution, are at Land Grant
    universities. Most State Climatologists are actively involved in
    research and teaching--collectively mentoring hundreds of future
    scientists and educators each year. Many of us are well connected or
    directly a part of our State Extension programs adding further to our
    outreach effectiveness.

    Activities of State Climate Offices

        State Climatologists (SCs) are experts on the climate of our
    respective states--seasonal cycles, geographic variations and year-to-
    year variability. We are familiar with the climate data resources of
    our states over the period of instrumental record--typically back to
    the 1880s. Some of us have expertise in paleoclimatology which helps
    provide longer perspectives about climate variability. Nearly all SCs
    have additional areas of expertise ranging from observation systems,
    agriculture, and remote sensing, to hydrology, climate modeling and
    climate change. We enjoy helping others find the data and information
    they need to address their challenges and opportunities. We often
    operate on a ``grass roots'' level, providing personalized and
    localized climate information to a wide range of businesses,
    individuals, and organizations. We don't often have the luxury of
    focusing our efforts on the needs and climate-affected decisions of
    specific user groups. Instead, we work with diverse groups--State and
    local government, utilities, large and small businesses, engineers,
    architects, builders, consultants, attorneys, researchers, educators,
    media and many others--and we do so with a local understanding of the
    climate and an appreciation for the needs and applications of the
    customers. Rather than just providing requested data, it is customary
    to ask ``How will you be using this information?'' That simple question
    so often results in better service, greater trust, frequent
    opportunities for applied research, and better information about the
    types of data, models and other decision-making tools, monitoring
    systems, forecasts and projections needed to answer important
    questions.
        A typical day in the life of a State Climatologist may go something
    like this. We may brief State agencies in the morning, do a media
    interview at lunch, teach a class and answer a variety of climate
    information requests during the afternoon, and then give an invited
    talk to a community organization during the evening. We are typically
    passionate about our work and love sharing information with others. Our
    products, services and approach to outreach vary somewhat from state to
    state, and are customized to meet specific local needs. Products
    typically include addressing weekly or monthly climate monitoring and
    reporting (to State and federal agencies, media, etc.), drought and
    water supply monitoring, agricultural decision support, historic
    climate trend analysis, information sources and tools for engineering,
    architecture, design and related consultants, and consultation to
    emergency management and law enforcement officials and to the legal
    profession. Some State offices have actively provided climate data and
    information supporting renewable energy planning for over 30 years.
        Here are a few examples of specific State activities, showing the
    breadth of our services.

             http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/

             http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ndsco/

             http://climate.rutgers.edu/stateclim/

        The AASC website provides quick-click access to all State Climate
    Office web sites

             http://www.stateclimate.org/

        State Climate Offices are both users of existing federal climate
    data sources and providers of unique local data. State climate offices
    continue to rely on the National Weather Service Cooperative Network
    data because it is the best source for high-quality nationwide
    temperature and precipitation data, the only source for nationwide
    snowfall data, and the only source of relatively consistent century-
    long nationwide data on the scale of individual counties. But we are
    interested in any well documented, verifiable data source to help us
    track specific elements of the climate within our states. We are
    currently partnering with NOAA to improve State-level data
    accessibility and information products for the new modernized
    Historical Climate Network (HCN-M) and the recently deployed Climate
    Reference Network (CRN).
        Driven by ever-growing demands for instantaneous weather data at a
    high-spatial density, many SCOs manage and maintain specialized
    observing networks. Best known is the Oklahoma Mesonet http://
    climate.ok.gov/mesonet/ But many other State climate offices are also
    involved in aggressive data collection efforts to meet a variety of
    decision support functions. Even low tech approaches like the volunteer
    ``Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow network'' http://
    www.cocorahs.org are helping gather important data while helping
    educate the general public about climate. The potential exists to
    integrate public and private data sources to achieve a national
    ``mesonet'' to serve both instantaneous weather and longer-term climate
    service and research needs.
        Real time weather data for forecasting and operations have great
    value but are not always suitable for climate analysis and research.
    The exact location of weather stations and how well they are maintained
    make a big difference to climatologists. Therefore, State Climate
    Offices give much attention to data quality and the development of
    quality control procedures and tools. We inform NOAA regarding our
    standards and expectations for climate data and information products.
    We also work with other federal agencies involved in climate monitoring
    and research. Stream flow measurements by the USGS, mountain snow
    accumulation, snow water content and soil moisture measured by the
    USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, and fire weather
    conditions monitored by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land
    Management all feed in to effective climate monitoring at the State and
    local level.
        State Climatologists receive frequent requests for statewide or
    more localized information and interpretation of seasonal climate
    forecasts and climate change projections and potential impacts. Because
    of the huge scale and magnitude of these efforts, most states rely on
    the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center for seasonal
    forecast information. For climate change projections and impacts, we
    typically turn to the resources of the Intergovernmental Panel on
    Climate Change (IPCC) and the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) as
    well as other State and regional assessments by public and private
    entities. We then communicate this information to our more localized
    audiences adding our knowledge and local perspective.

    State Climate Office relationships with existing NOAA climate service
                        programs

        As stated earlier, the AASC has worked with NOAA's National
    Climatic Data Center from our very beginning and appreciate the support
    that has been provided to our members. We also enjoy close working
    relationships with Regional Climate Centers. Some State Climate Offices
    are co-located with RCCs. Some RCC staff have previously worked in
    State Climate Office settings and understand our needs. RCCs have
    helped State Climate Offices by reducing the need for each of our
    states to maintain our own independent climate databases for NOAA and
    other agency climate data resources. The wide variety of information
    available from the Western Regional Climate Center web site is a good
    example. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/
        Our concerns regarding access to climate data and analysis are
    usually heard and often addressed. For example, the RCCs are currently
    developing a climate data access system specifically for State Climate
    Office needs based directly on specifications developed by our
    organization.
        National Weather Service climate service activities have, in recent
    years, become much more active and visible ranging from drought
    monitoring, to dissemination of seasonal forecasts to timely web-
    accessible local climate information. Because of their public
    visibility and accessibility, the NWS is often the first stop on first-
    time users' quests for climate information. Traditionally, the NWS
    major field-level role in climate service was climate data collection
    including the operation of their nationwide Cooperative Observer
    Network and airport weather data collection. This has been essential
    for basic climate monitoring and research. With data analysis support
    provided through the RCCs, NWS Forecast Offices have greatly improved
    their own local climate service potential in recent years. This has
    beneficially taken some of the load off SCOs in terms of routine
    individual climate information requests.
        AASC collaboration with Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessment
    teams (RISA) is a work in progress but with much potential for further
    enhancement. Up to this point, most states have not had RISA teams with
    which to partner. RISAs have benefited from the ability to focus on
    particular environmental applications and selected decision-makers.
    This is in marked contrast to State Climatologists who must address the
    diverse needs of all stakeholders and citizens within their states.
    Nevertheless, where RISAs have been active for several years, including
    where I work in Colorado, we are finding many and effective ways to
    partner to improve climate services, including customized climate
    education, and focused research and data product development needed to
    address the questions of specific decision-makers. A 2008 report
    sponsored by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, ``Climate Change in
    Colorado--A Synthesis to Support Water Resources Management and
    Adaptation,'' is an example example of RISA-enabled State partnerships.
        The presence and activities of the National Climate Program Office
    (NCPO), while well known at the national level, are not routinely
    evident at the individual State level. The NCPO has reached out to the
    AASC and invited our participation in several national-level planning
    and evaluation meetings (e.g., climate services; drought). We are
    represented on NOAA's Climate Working Group, their lead external
    advisory body, which evaluates and recommends future directions for all
    NOAA observing, research and outreach endeavors related to the climate
    system. Indirectly, we also benefit from the NCPO's support of RISAs
    and their sponsorship of other applied research endeavors.
        The National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) is a
    relatively new program but one that may have a large impact on State
    Climate Office activities. Drought-related efforts at the State level
    are often the most time consuming and important of all of our multi-
    faceted endeavors. AASC collaborations with NIDIS may have substantial
    mutual benefits. Here in Colorado, NIDIS is offering our office a lead
    role in shaping a portion of the Upper Colorado River Basin NIDIS pilot
    project with a focus on the drought early warning needs of several
    specific user groups.

    The American Association of State Climatologists and the National
                        Climate Service

        In 2008, the AASC prepared a statement expressing our interest and
    identifying our potential role in a developing and evolving National
    Climate Service. http://www.stateclimate.org/publications/
        Our Association looks favorably on the establishment of the
    National Climate Service. A well-organized National Climate Service has
    considerable potential to focus federal resources on global, national,
    State and local climate challenges. We see NOAA as a logical agency to
    lead this effort and we look forward to doing our part. We have much to
    offer and much to gain. Because we work most effectively on the State
    and local level, and have a finger on the pulse of what many decision-
    makers require, the AASC can add a credible local presence and voice to
    complete an effective National Climate Service. We are counting on
    NOAA, and other federal partners needed to construct an effective
    service, to work well together and to recognize the essential and
    foundational nature of systematic climate monitoring--maintaining and
    enhancing climate observing networks that simultaneously meet many
    needs (energy, water, agriculture, transportation, commerce, public
    safety, etc.).

    A concluding story

        In conclusion, I would like to tell a short personal story. Over 20
    years ago when ``Global Warming'' was first appearing regularly in the
    national press, I was invited to speak to a meeting of the ``Colorado
    Young Farmers'' organization. These farmers were mostly in their 40s at
    that time and well educated. They politely listened to the presentation
    where we showed upward trends in greenhouse gases and discussed the
    possible implications and some early climate model projections of
    warming. Then we showed graphs of 100 years of observed data over
    eastern Colorado. As dryland farmers on the Great Plains, they were
    intimately familiar with climate variability and its impacts on their
    lives and livelihoods. After the formal presentation ended and as we
    sipped hot coffee, one of the leaders of the organization came up to me
    (and I will never forget this). ``I guess we should take climate change
    seriously. When I look back at my grandpa and how he farmed I think we
    can change--we will change. We've already changed our farming practices
    so much. But this darn year-to-year variability . . . that's what kills
    us. We appreciate what you scientists are learning about climate
    change, but if you can do anything to help us deal with the big changes
    we see from year to year, we'll be very grateful.''
        With that in mind, we (the AASC) appeal to you to seriously
    consider the full range of potential benefits of a National Climate
    Service across a variety of time scales. With growing concern regarding
    climate variability and change in a vulnerable society, the needs for
    both generalized and customized climate data and information will only
    continue to grow and become more acute. Take the necessary time to
    develop the appropriate leadership structure that can incorporate the
    extensive expertise and service capabilities of other federal agencies
    and make full use of expertise and flexibility of State and university
    partners. Together, we can accomplish much.
        Thank you very much for this opportunity to share my views and
    those of many of my colleagues.

                         Biography for Nolan J. Doesken

        Nolan Doesken grew up in rural central Illinois with an early
    fascination with weather and climate that has stuck with him his entire
    life. He attended the University of Michigan receiving a Bachelors
    Degree in Meteorology and Oceanography in 1974. He returned to Illinois
    for graduate work at the University of Illinois. There he conducted
    climate research at the Illinois State Water Survey while completing a
    MS in Atmospheric Science in 1976. Nolan moved to Colorado in 1977 to
    become Assistant State Climatologist at Colorado State University. Over
    the past 32 years he has been involved in a wide variety of climate
    research and educational activities with a special focus on drought,
    precipitation measurement and analysis, and the effects of climate on
    agricultural and natural resources. He has worked with the National
    Weather Service on several projects evaluating climate data from new
    observing systems. Mr. Doesken is currently assisting the National
    Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) in the Upper Colorado
    River Basin pilot project. He has published many climate-related
    articles and reports including a popular book on snow: ``The Snow
    Booklet : Guide to the Science, Climatology and Measurement of Snow in
    the United States'' (1997). Nolan is just the fourth Director of the
    historic Fort Collins Weather Station with a record of continuous
    climate monitoring dating back over 120 years. He also manages the
    Colorado Agricultural Meteorological Network (CoAgMet).
        Nolan became Colorado State Climatologist in 2006. He is a long-
    time member of the American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
    and became President of that organization in 2008. Nolan was honored as
    a ``NOAA Environmental Hero'' in 2007 for his work in starting a
    nationwide volunteer program (CoCoRaHS--Community Collaborative Rain,
    Hail and Snow network) which provides climate education opportunities
    for the public while also producing an exceptional research-quality
    data set for climate monitoring and to aid weather forecasters.
        Nolan and his wife, Kathy, have a small farm near Fort Collins,
    Colorado. Nolan serves on the Board of Directors of an irrigation
    company there.

                                   Discussion

        Chair Baird. Thank you, Dr. Doesken, and thanks to all the
    panel, again, for your insightful testimony today, but also,
    your service.

                 More on Structuring a National Climate Service

        So, I am trying to envision the organizational chart in my
    head, which is maybe some of what we have been dealing with on
    the panel. And it is evident to me that you represent users,
    but also producers of information. It is clearly a two way
    system, where you can say our experiential data feeds back into
    the loop and vice versa.
        Does it make sense to come up with, if you had a National
    Climate entity, Service, does it make sense that you would look
    at some of the various agencies that you have described
    already, like NRCS, like USGS, like the Weather Service, like
    the RISAs, and others, doubtless, and say okay, so the National
    Climate Service, maybe those entities continue pretty much as
    they are, but the National Climate Service is the coordinating
    entity that brings their data together, and to some extent, the
    sub-agencies maybe have people with dual assignments or
    dedicated missions, so you know, they answer, sort of both
    chains.
        What about that idea? Bad idea, good idea, does it make
    sense, what is already being done, but there is the lack of a
    national coordination? What are your thoughts on that?
        Mr. Behar. I will start. I think from a stakeholder
    perspective, having that kind of one stop shopping approach
    that leverages the data and information, leverages the
    expertise that exists, and leverages the regulatory and
    operational relationships that we already have with entities
    like GS and Bureau of Reclamation, if we are in reclamation
    basin, is really important.
        It really will help to translate the climate change
    challenges to the user level. We need, ideally, a single or a
    few places that we know we can go to get the data, the
    analysis, the research assistance, and all the other inputs
    that go into, in the case of the water utility, in most cases,
    our systems operations models, so that we can then think about
    what it is we face, in terms of our water supply.
        Then, down the chain, we also probably could use some help
    from social scientists and others who are evaluating decision
    support methods that can be used in an atmosphere of
    uncertainty, which we know we'll obtain for many, many, many
    years in the future, no matter how much more money we put into
    the climate models, which we do think we should put more money
    into the climate models.
        And so from, you know, from end to end, as simple a
    structure as possible will be beneficial. It is very hard for
    users to really understand all of the different entities that
    are out there, and streamlining that would be very beneficial.
        Chair Baird. Mr. Fleming.
        Mr. Fleming. I would add that you seem to describe almost a
    matrix management approach, which I don't know if the Federal
    Government does that very well. I don't know if anyone does
    that very well, but I think fundamentally maintaining----
        Chair Baird. We won't get into credit default swaps, and we
    will be all right.
        Mr. Fleming. Ensuring that systems that are working now are
    not disrupted. So, I think, to varying degrees, you know, we
    are able to access pretty good information, really good
    information from USGS and NRCS, at least in Seattle, and I
    think Dr. Strobel would probably echo that, that that is the
    case across the Northwest and other parts of the country.
        So, National Climate Service should not disrupt those
    services that are working really well, but I believe there are
    information gaps that a National Climate Service could step
    into. So, it seems to me that you would want to have some
    service that does, provides some integrated function to it, and
    that doesn't replicate what is working now. And that is, we
    would definitely welcome coming back to you per your invitation
    to the previous panel, because I think you have an
    organizational challenge and opportunity ahead of you in
    crafting this bill.
        Chair Baird. Dr. Doesken.
        Dr. Doesken. Well, we feel very much like, I guess you
    would call us middlemen. We need a national perspective, a
    national modeling activities, national prediction skills that
    we will never have the capacity at the State level to do.
        And some customers want to be able to go right to that
    level. Other customers much prefer coming to a local level or a
    regional level. So, it seems like there is very good reasons to
    have a three tiered system, where users can enter at the level
    that they work. Exactly how all the pieces come together, I am
    not yet totally clear on, either, but leveraging the skills and
    capabilities and activities that are already involved, you got
    to start there.
        Chair Baird. And the notion we have heard, a great deal of
    today, also is that if you were, let us say you are an
    industry, or you are newly appointed to run some municipality,
    where do you go? It takes a while just to get up to steam, and
    there are places where you would like to go, and they don't
    exist yet. We don't have the datasets or, but it just takes you
    a while to figure out who you have got to talk to.

                            Interagency Coordination

        And in your experience, is the coordination across the
    various agencies sufficient, or do you find that well, I have
    to go to these folks for this, and then these folks for this,
    and get a little bit here, and then I piece it together with
    more or less degree of accuracy and certitude. How does that
    work?
        Dr. Strobel. Well, I guess I could just say that it is
    getting better. The fact, with the availability of the
    Internet, and the way that we can link on to other people's
    information and share that information, and the accessibility
    that folks have to access that information, not always just
    through our sites, but through other people's sites, and
    linking into it, has really greatly improved the collaboration
    and sharing of information, and the accessibility of that
    information.
        So, is it perfect? No. But is it getting better? Yes. I see
    very positive things happening with that.
        Chair Baird. Do you feel like a climate service entity
    within the, at the federal level would help facilitate that, or
    create new problems?
        Dr. Strobel. Our Department hasn't come out with a
    statement on this yet. I will just say that there are always
    benefits to more collaboration and more accessibility to the
    information. I mean, the more we get it out to the users, the
    better it benefits everybody.
        Chair Baird. Mr. Fleming, and then, I will recognize----
        Mr. Fleming. Seattle relies on the Internet to a large
    degree to get some of this data, particularly for the
    operational decisions, where we are looking at weather
    forecasts, to understand whether we need to make releases to
    provide flood management, or to ensure that we don't scour
    salmon rights in the rivers that we manage.
        I will also add that, you know, we have benefited immensely
    from having a RISA program in Seattle. The University of
    Washington Climate Impacts Group is a couple miles north of our
    offices, and we have been able to rely on them and work with
    them to enhance our understanding of what the implications of
    climate change mean for our water supply.
        So, to some degree, we definitely see the benefits of a
    National Climate Service, but we are operating from the
    position of having tremendous resources in our backyard.
        Chair Baird. Okay. The final thing, I would just comment
    before I yield to Mr. Inglis is that if you look historically
    at some of the great trends and changes in human history, the
    big dislocations, conflicts, it is so often climate-related,
    and that ties to demographics. And one of the things that I
    struggle with is, census data tells us we are looking at 139
    million more people in this country in the next 40 years. Very
    rarely do we make informed decisions about where people can
    live. We don't say gee, you know, if you all move to the
    desert, you might just have a water problem. And people tend to
    move there, and then expect somebody else to fix it, and
    somewhere, we have got to integrate the kind of data that you
    folks are experts in, with those kind of decisions, and we are
    miserable at doing that, actually.
        Mr. Inglis.

                             State Climate Offices

        Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Dr. Doesken, how
    are State climate offices typically funded? Is that by State
    appropriations, or are you getting federal money?
        Dr. Doesken. It is highly variable. And in some cases, it
    is on a State line item budget, but in many cases, it is within
    university settings. Only about six of us, I think, are in
    State government, of which South Carolina is one of those
    examples.
        So, we are all fighting our own battles in various ways,
    but again, we are typically affiliated with universities, and
    universities have found us to be great assets to the research
    efforts and the educational efforts that go on there. So, it
    makes some sense.
        Mr. Inglis. So, what we are talking about here, in creating
    a new office that would consolidate some of these things, or I
    am not sure consolidate is the right word, create new
    information. Is it, what do you see as the future of climate
    offices, the State climate offices, in that?
        Dr. Doesken. Well, trying to find the right place for us
    is, without asking for way more State or federal money, is a
    real challenge. We would like to see the service that we are
    providing funded to the level that our states need, and whether
    that is through State support, or whether it is through federal
    support, we are open either way.
        But we have a lot of flexibility when we are not a line of
    a federal agency. It gives us a lot more nimbleness on the
    local level, so we like to stay independent as much as we can,
    but would like to see additional support come to us, so we have
    more uniformity in what we are able to do nationally.
        Mr. Inglis. Do you, do climate offices, State climate
    offices ever charge for their data, or how does that work? Do
    you get fees from somebody?
        Dr. Doesken. We charge in a way that may vary from state to
    state. We definitely collect revenue when we are able to, to
    help offset some of our local expenses, and we work, utilizing
    graduate students and undergraduate students helping in our
    services, which is great training for them for the future, as
    well.
        Mr. Inglis. And you are the folks that set drought levels
    and things like that. Is that right? I mean, in South Carolina,
    for example, the State Climate Office there declares when we
    are, what level of drought, and that sort of thing.
        Dr. Doesken. We participate greatly in that process. State
    climatologists probably spend more time dealing with drought-
    related issues than most any of the other factors that we get
    to work with.
        Mr. Inglis. And I guess I am maybe asking a question you
    don't know, because it is South Carolina, but does that, is
    that a call by that office, or do they work with somebody else
    to make the call about restrictions, for example, on water
    usage?
        Dr. Doesken. It is a function of State drought response
    plans, how they have been written. Usually, we are advisors to
    the process. In only some states does the State climatologist
    actually make that call.
        Mr. Inglis. That is helpful. So, do you feel that the State
    climate office's standards and expectations for climate data
    are met by NOAA and other federal entities involved in
    producing those, that data?
        Dr. Doesken. We think they are doing a pretty good job
    monitoring for federal response, and a regional response. For
    State-based responses, higher resolution information, both in
    time and in space, are often required, and the measurement of
    variables that federal programs haven't always monitored. For
    example, soil moisture, evapotranspiration, things that help us
    with the water balance a little bit more. That is why a lot of
    states have gotten into data collection, to fill in those gaps.

                      Mitigating a Duplication of Services

        Mr. Inglis. So, that is all very helpful. I think the thing
    that I might ask, just a final question. Has anybody got any
    additional thoughts about how to make sure that we don't create
    a duplicative kind of situation here in any, I mean, it has
    been sort of the common thread of questions emanating up here.
    I don't know if anybody has any further observations about
    that.
        Mr. Behar. That is one of the tough questions, and we want
    to neither duplicate what is out there, nor create or
    institutionalize a dispersed structure at the climate level, as
    distinguished from the weather or the monitoring or data level,
    where obviously, we have got dispersed data sources, and need
    to collect those, and they are collected well, by GS, although
    we pay for our GS gauges now in San Francisco, because they
    have been discontinued by GS. And National Climate Data Center,
    and other places where that data exists.
        In terms of the policy-making, the decision-making, the
    climate, decadal scale information that we are starting to
    think about needing to plan around, as are many stakeholder
    entities, the challenge is to exactly do what you posed as the
    challenge, which is to have as much of a centralized, but at
    the regional level, place for stakeholders, by the way, of
    varying sophistication, to go to.
        It is worth noting that Seattle Public Utilities is
    probably at one end of the sophistication scale, at the high
    end, in terms of tracking this information. And there are many
    others who are really struggling with where to get the climate
    information, and how to think about it, as I think Dr. Barron
    alluded to as well.
        And we really need to meet all of those needs, across the
    spectrum, and provide, as much as possible, the kind of
    research institution and planning assistance that Seattle has
    in its backyard with the SIG program that not everybody has.
        That is starting to happen. We are starting to learn from
    examples like the RISA model, which is not duplicating what is
    going on anywhere else, in our view, and that is obviously one
    of the key questions in forming an NCS that is successful.
        Mr. Inglis. Well, I would like to add this, Mr. Chairman.
    You know, it is interesting that last night, we were having our
    dinner conversation at our house, about Wikipedia, and whether
    our girls should cite it, you know, and I think that they are
    more accurate. Isn't there some story about how they are more
    accurate than Encyclopaedia Britannica or something, fewer
    mistakes or something. And it really does show the change that
    information technology has brought, and the way the government
    has to figure out a way to harness the abilities we have now,
    because it used to be that you had this office doing this, and
    that one doing that, and this other one doing that, and they
    were all funded different ways, and they all had their jobs,
    and they didn't step on each other's toes. It doesn't deliver
    what people need, and what people expect, and it is a good
    expectation, that they get from private vendors, is you can go
    to the website, and you can drill down to exactly what you
    want.
        And so, you know, get down to my farm, tell me what is the
    rainfall at my farm. It is really what we in government have to
    figure out how to deliver, if we are going to remain relevant,
    and make, put it another way, deliver the kind of quality
    services that people expect, and that they are paying for. So,
    it really is, it is a big challenge here, is to figure out how
    to get this delivered in the most cost effective, powerful way.
        It is very important work, and we thank you.
        Chair Baird. Fascinating line of questions, as always, Mr.
    Inglis. As you thought, mentioned that, I was thinking one of
    the questions, really, is so what does it look like ten years
    from now? I mean, the sort of, just as we are talking about
    predicting climate, let us predict the organizational
    structure, and what does it look like ten years from now?
        And, you know, is it an integrated body that creates the
    Google Earth, that we can scan out, so I could zoom in on a
    computerized image of any area of our country, and ultimately,
    maybe, the planet, and then, time project that out on a host of
    variables, whether it is water supply, temperature, moisture,
    ground moisture, vegetation cover.
        Now, I am guessing that somewhere, that may happen, and it
    would be incredibly convenient, and maybe with some depth of
    confidence parameters around that, but how we get there is
    really sort of the question, and I think you are onto something
    there, in terms of what will that look like.
        Any final comments, we are about to conclude, but I can see
    Dr. Doesken has got something he wants to say.
        Dr. Doesken. But even if you are there, and I can envision
    that, too, because we are so close to that in many ways, still,
    converting that information to appropriate and wise decisions
    is a whole other ballgame, and we see that all the time, where
    people say I am smothered with data. This is fantastic. What do
    I do with it?
        Chair Baird. Yeah. Yeah.
        Dr. Doesken. And that is where a service provides that, as
    well.
        Chair Baird. Mr. Fleming.
        Mr. Fleming. Just to add to that. I think that issue of
    what to do with the information is one where it needs to rely,
    or reside with the local jurisdiction responsible for making
    those decisions.
        So, in the case of Seattle, we certainly look for and look
    towards having access to that type of information, but the
    tacit knowledge that we have, for instance, of our water supply
    system, is critical for making decisions, long-term decisions
    about what is the best course of action for that system. So, I
    just wanted to kind of echo that, at least in our situation,
    having local involvement in the development of adaptation
    options and decision-making is essential.
        Chair Baird. Great. I thank our panelists, and we will just
    conclude with the observation I made for the prior panelists.
    If there are things, thoughts or ideas or suggestions that have
    been stimulated by this interaction, or issues that you feel we
    could use some further insights into, please feel free to, and
    ask to provide that information.
        As is customary, the record will stay open for two weeks
    for additional comments from Members. We are grateful for the
    Committee's, or the panelists' participation, and with that,
    this hearing stands adjourned.
        Thank you very much.
        [Whereupon, at 12:27 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]