    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                              WEATHERING THE STORM:
                         IMPROVING HURRICANE RESILIENCY
                                THROUGH RESEARCH

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

                                 FIELD HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                          SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JULY 22, 2019

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 116-26

                                   __________

     Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                                ______

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
     36-506PDF               WASHINGTON : 2020

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                 HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
    ZOE LOFGREN, California              FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
    DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois                Ranking Member
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             MO BROOKS, Alabama
    AMI BERA, California,                BILL POSEY, Florida
        Vice Chair                       RANDY WEBER, Texas
    CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania             BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas               ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
    HALEY STEVENS, Michigan              ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
    KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma                RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
    MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
    BRAD SHERMAN, California             TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               PETE OLSON, Texas
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
    ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado              MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 JIM BAIRD, Indiana
    BILL FOSTER, Illinois                JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
    DON BEYER, Virginia                  JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
    CHARLIE CRIST, Florida                   Rico
    SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                VACANCY
    KATIE HILL, California
    BEN McADAMS, Utah
    JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
                                     ------

                          Subcommittee on Environment

                    HON. LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas, Chairwoman
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas, Ranking
    CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania                 Member
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    CHARLIE CRIST, Florida               ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
    SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                JIM BAIRD, Indiana
    BEN McADAMS, Utah                    JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
    DON BEYER, Virginia                      Rico

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                 July 22, 2019

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

                               Opening Statements

    Statement by Representative Lizzie Fletcher, Chairwoman,
      Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
      Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................     8
        Written Statement............................................     9

    Statement by Representative Brian Babin, Subcommittee on
      Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
      House of Representatives.......................................    10
        Written Statement............................................    11

    Written statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
      Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
      House of Representatives.......................................    12

                                   Witnesses:

    Dr. Louis W. Uccellini, Assistant Administrator for Weather
      Services, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and
      Director, National Weather Service
        Oral Statement...............................................    14
        Written Statement............................................    17

    Dr. Hanadi Rifai, John and Rebecca Moores Professor,
      Environmental Engineering Graduate Program; and Director,
      Hurricane Resilience Research Institute, University of Houston
        Oral Statement...............................................    29
        Written Statement............................................    33

    Ms. Emily Grover-Kopec, Director of Insurance Practice, One
      Concern, Inc.
        Oral Statement...............................................    52
        Written Statement............................................    54

    Mr. Jim Blackburn, Co-Director, Severe Storm Prediction,
      Education and Evacuation from Disaster Center; and Professor,
      Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice
      University
        Oral Statement...............................................    62
        Written Statement............................................    64

    Discussion.......................................................    85

                 Appendix I: Additional Material for the Record

    Letter submitted by Representative Lizzie Fletcher, Chairwoman,
      Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
      Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................   108

                             WEATHERING THE STORM:

                         IMPROVING HURRICANE RESILIENCY

                                THROUGH RESEARCH

                                  ----------

                             MONDAY, JULY 22, 2019

                      House of Representatives,
                           Subcommittee on Environment,
                   Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                       Washington, D.C.

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:14 p.m., at
    Houston Community College, West Loop Campus Auditorium, 5601
    West Loop South, Houston, Texas 77081, Hon. Lizzie Fletcher
    [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Fletcher. This hearing will come to order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at
    any time.
        The Chair would like to request unanimous consent for Ms.
    Garcia and Ms. Jackson Lee to participate in today's hearing.
    Without objection.
        Good afternoon, and welcome to today's hearing entitled,
    ``Weathering the Storm: Improving Hurricane Resiliency through
    Research.'' This hearing will follow the format that is
    standard for the Committee's Science, Space, and Technology
    hearings on Capitol Hill. First, I will give a 5-minute
    statement on the topic of the hearing. Then Dr. Babin, the
    senior-most minority Member on the Environment Subcommittee in
    attendance here today, will have 5 minutes to give an opening
    statement. After that, we will hear 5 minutes of oral testimony
    from each of our expert witnesses. Then, starting with myself,
    each Member will have 5 minutes to question the panel. We will
    alternate back and forth between Democratic and Republican
    Committee Members. If there is time, we will hold a second
    round of questions.
        Thank you for joining us at today's Subcommittee on
    Environment field hearing. I would like to welcome our panel of
    witnesses that includes two fellow Houstonians, Dr. Rifai and
    Mr. Blackburn.
        I'm glad we're able to hold this hearing in Houston today,
    and I'm so pleased to welcome our witnesses and my colleagues
    here in Houston. I thank Chairwoman Johnson, who will be
    joining us shortly, for making this field hearing possible.
        Here in Houston, we know the devastating effects that
    hurricanes can bring, and we know the importance of preparing.
    As a young girl, I was just a few blocks from where we're
    sitting today in the house I grew up in when Hurricane Alicia
    came through Houston and the eye of the storm passing right
    over our heads.
        In the years since, we have seen many storms here and
    across the Gulf Coast. We know them by name: Rita, Ike, Harvey.
    In fact, Texas is particularly vulnerable to hurricanes. The
    Texas General Land Office has found that in the last 14 years
    every coastal county in Texas has received at least one
    hurricane disaster declaration.
        In 2017, Hurricane Harvey rewrote the continental U.S.
    record for rainfall from a tropical cyclone. It was the second-
    costliest hurricane in United States history behind only
    Hurricane Katrina. At least 68 people died, as we know all too
    well in this community, from the direct effects of the storm,
    and it left an estimated $125 billion worth of damage in its
    wake. We are still recovering.
        We have watched in recent days as Hurricane Barry made its
    way to the coast, predicted to dump 1 to 2 feet of rainwater
    across Louisiana with storm surges along the Mississippi River.
    Fortunately, the effects were not as severe as expected, but we
    know that will not always be the case.
        The science is clear: Hurricanes are becoming more frequent
    and more intense. That means more storms like Harvey. And with
    that knowledge it's time to expand the conversation beyond just
    improving weather forecasts so that communities can prepare for
    and recover from severe storms.
        The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or
    NOAA, defines coastal resilience as, quote, ``building the
    ability of a community to bounce back after hazardous events
    such as hurricanes, coastal storms, and flooding rather than
    simply reacting to impacts.'' I know that my constituents and
    Americans across the country want the Federal Government to do
    more than simply react to storms.
        Investing in research can facilitate the development of
    evidence-based policies that address how our environment is
    changing and how this change will affect society. We need not
    only a better understanding of the conditions that generate
    hurricanes but also an understanding of how to adapt our
    natural and manmade structures to better withstand more
    frequent and intense tropical storms.
        Today's advancements in hurricane forecasting would not be
    possible without Federal investments at agencies like NOAA. The
    National Hurricane Center, part of NOAA's National Weather
    Service (NWS), works closely with research partners and with
    the broader research community to develop products and services
    that ultimately lead to more accurate forecasts. Given the
    success of these Federal investments in improving hurricane
    research and forecasting, it is now time we expand our focus to
    building coastal resilience to hurricanes we have gotten much
    better at predicting.
        While hurricane forecasts have improved tremendously, we
    still need to continue to improve our forecasts and to better
    understand what to expect during hurricane season in both the
    short and long term. Hurricane forecasts help us understand the
    new normal we are facing, informing research needed to develop
    resilience to increasingly extreme hurricanes. This means broad
    investments into interdisciplinary research that can address
    tough problems. That is why we are here today.
        I look forward to hearing from our expert panel how the
    Science, Space, and Technology Committee can best support
    interdisciplinary research needed to help coastal communities
    like Houston build resilience to hurricanes.
        [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Fletcher follows:]

        Good afternoon, and welcome to the Subcommittee on
    Environment's field hearing on hurricane and coastal resilience
    research.
        I am glad we are able to hold this hearing in Houston
    today, and I am pleased to welcome our witnesses, including two
    Houstonians, Dr. Rifai and Mr. Blackburn, and my colleagues. I
    thank Chairwoman Johnson for making this field hearing
    possible.
        Here in Houston, we know the devastation hurricanes can
    bring-and we know the importance of preparing. As a young girl,
    I was just a few blocks from where we sit today, in the house I
    grew up in, when Hurricane Alicia came through Houston-the eye
    of the storm passing right overhead. And in the years since, we
    have seen many storms, here and across the Gulf Coast. We know
    them by them by name: Rita. Ike. Harvey.
        In fact, Texas is particularly vulnerable. The Texas
    General Land Office has found that in the last fourteen years,
    every coastal county in Texas received at least one hurricane
    disaster declaration. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey rewrote the
    continental U.S. record for total rainfall from a tropical
    cyclone. It was the second-costliest hurricane in U.S. history,
    behind only Hurricane Katrina. At least 68 people died from the
    direct effects of the storm, and it left an estimated $125
    billion of damage in its wake. We are still recovering.
        We have watched in recent days as Hurricane Barry made its
    way to the coast, predicted to dump one to two feet of
    rainwater across Louisiana, with storm surges along the
    Mississippi River. Fortunately, the effects were not as severe
    as expected. But we know that will not always will be the case.
        The science is clear: Hurricanes are becoming more frequent
    and more intense. That means more storms like Harvey. And with
    that knowledge, it is time to expand the conversation beyond
    just improving weather forecasts, so that communities can
    prepare for and recover from severe storms.
        The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or
    NOAA, defines coastal resilience as ``building the ability of a
    community to `bounce back' after hazardous events such as
    hurricanes, coastal storms, and flooding - rather than simply
    reacting to impacts.'' I know that my constituents, and
    Americans across the country, want the federal government to do
    more than simply react to hurricane impacts.
        Investing in research can facilitate the development of
    evidence-based policies that address how our environment is
    changing and how this change will affect society. We need not
    only a better understanding of the conditions that generate
    hurricanes, but also an understanding of how to adapt our
    natural and man-made structures to better withstand more
    frequent and intense tropical storms.
        Today's advancements in hurricane forecasting would not be
    possible without federal investments at agencies like NOAA. The
    National Hurricane Center, part of NOAA's National Weather
    Service, works closely with research partners within the
    Agency, such as the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research,
    and with the broader research community, to develop products
    and services that ultimately lead to more accurate forecasts.
    Given the success of these federal investments in improving
    hurricane research and forecasting, it is now time we expand
    our focus to building coastal resilience to the hurricanes we
    have gotten much better at predicting.
        While hurricane forecasts have improved tremendously, we
    still need to continue to improve our hurricane forecasts, and
    to better understand what to expect during hurricane season in
    both the short- and long-term. Hurricane forecasts help us
    understand the new normal we are facing, informing research
    needed to develop resilience to increasingly extreme
    hurricanes. This means broad investments into interdisciplinary
    research that can address tough problems. That is why we are
    here today.
        I look forward to hearing from our expert panel how the
    Science, Space, and Technology Committee can best support
    interdisciplinary research needed to help coastal communities
    like Houston build resilience to hurricanes.

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Before I recognize Dr. Babin, I would
    also like to enter into the record a letter from Marie Lynn
    Miranda, Director of the Children's Environmental Health
    Initiative at Rice University, on behalf of the Hurricane
    Harvey Registry. The registry is an ongoing research effort at
    Rice that collects health, location, and exposure information
    for people along the Texas Gulf Coast. I commend the
    researchers at Rice for seeing a need to systematically track
    and identify short- and long-term health and housing impacts of
    this horrific storm on our community. This information can be
    used for ongoing efforts, as well as for future disaster
    response efforts. Without objection, so ordered.
        I will now recognize Dr. Babin for an opening statement.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I really
    appreciate you having this hearing. I want to welcome our panel
    of experts, looking forward to hearing what you have to say,
    and also for those who came to hear what we have to say.
        As a lifelong resident of southeast Texas, a witness to
    many storms over the years. The very first one I remember was
    Hurricane Audrey in 1957, which had about 400 casualties in
    Louisiana, just over the line from where we lived in Beaumont.
    So this could not be a more fitting place and fitting location.
        And less than 2 years ago, Hurricane Harvey made landfall
    in Texas and left a staggering amount of damage in its wake. As
    has already been said, it's second only to Katrina. Eighty-
    eight lives were lost. The National Hurricane Center estimated
    that more than $125 billion in damages occurred due to the
    hurricane and subsequent flooding. Nearly 40,000 people were
    forced out of their homes and into shelters. Over 200,000 homes
    were damaged, many outside the 100-year floodplain.
        I can continue citing statistics, but the point remains
    that Harvey was absolutely a devastating event for the
    residents of my district and surrounding communities. I
    represent nine counties basically from Houston over to
    Louisiana, and all nine counties were federally declared
    disasters.
        If we need a reminder of the impacts of severe weather,
    Hurricane Barry struck Louisiana just last week, dropping 15
    inches of rain in a period of hours. And though the Atlantic
    hurricane season began on June the 1st, we saw last year that
    many of the most devastating hurricanes did not make landfall
    until August or September.
        Earlier today, this Committee had the opportunity to tour
    the National Weather Service office near Galveston, which was
    on the very frontline of Harvey, and were able to hear
    firsthand about the innovative forecasting techniques utilized
    to determine the paths of hurricanes.
        This Committee has played a critical role in the
    development of weather forecasting, and I'm proud to serve on
    it. In April 2017, President Trump signed the Weather Research
    and Forecasting Innovation Act, legislation that was drafted by
    Ranking Member Frank Lucas from Oklahoma.
        It sounds like some weather out there right now, doesn't
    it?
        Among the provisions included was section 104, which
    directed NOAA to improve hurricane forecasting by improving the
    prediction of rapid intensification and the track of hurricanes
    to include the forecast and communication of storm surges from
    hurricanes to improve communication of these very grave
    threats. We will hear about NOAA's ongoing efforts to implement
    these provisions and what other steps this Committee can take
    to improve hurricane forecasting this Congress, the 116th.
        Knowing what will happen is only half of the battle. In
    addition to understanding the patterns of behavior of
    hurricanes, we will also hear today about how we can better
    allocate our research priorities in order for communities to be
    more resilient when a severe hurricane makes landfall.
        As many in this room have experienced in the last couple of
    years, we saw homes, businesses, roads, dams, even Federal
    Government facilities such as the Johnson Space Center, which I
    represent, were unprepared for the damaging effects of Harvey.
    Houstonians are strong, and they're resilient. And as we've
    seen in the recovery over the last 2 years, they are tough
    folks that live here. We have an obligation to ensure that the
    residents of Houston and other communities across the country
    can have greater certainty that they will know just how strong
    a hurricane will be and feel certain that they live in a
    resilient community.
        I want to thank our panel of witnesses today again for
    sharing your expertise with us. I'm very proud to be sitting up
    here with our Houston delegation members. And I would yield
    back, Madam Chair.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Babin follows:]

        Thank you for holding this hearing, Chairwoman Fletcher.
        This hearing could not take place in a more fitting
    location. Less than two years ago, Hurricane Harvey made
    landfall in Texas. Harvey left a staggering amount of damage in
    its wake. Eighty-eight lives were lost. The National Hurricane
    Center estimated more than $125 billion in damages occurred due
    to the hurricane and subsequent flooding. Over 200,000 homes,
    many outside of the 100-year flood plain, were damaged, forcing
    nearly 40,000 people into temporary shelters. I could continue
    citing statistics, but the point remains that Harvey was a
    devastating event for the residents of my district and
    surrounding communities.
        If we need a reminder of the impacts of severe weather,
    Hurricane Barry struck Louisiana last week, dropping 15 inches
    of rain in a period of hours. Though the Atlantic Hurricane
    season began on June 1st, we saw last year that many of the
    most devastating hurricanes did not make landfall until August
    and September.
        Earlier today, members of this committee had the
    opportunity to tour the National Weather Service office near
    Galveston, which was one of the first cities to be devastated
    by Harvey. We had the opportunity to hear first hand about the
    innovative forecasting techniques utilized to determine the
    paths of hurricanes.
        This committee has played a critical role in the
    development of weather forecasting. In April 2017, President
    Trump signed into law the Weather Research and Forecasting
    Innovation Act- legislation drafted by Ranking Member Lucas.
    Among the provisions included was section 104, which directed
    NOAA to enhance hurricane forecasting by improving the
    prediction of rapid intensification and track of hurricanes,
    the forecast and communication of storm surges from hurricanes,
    and the communication of these threats. We will hear about
    NOAA's ongoing efforts to implement these provisions and what
    other steps this committee can take during this Congress to
    improve hurricane forecasting.
        Knowing what will happen is only half the battle. In
    addition to understanding the patterns of behavior of
    hurricanes, we will hear today about how we can better allocate
    our research priorities in order for communities to be more
    resilient when a severe hurricane makes landfall. As many in
    this room saw a couple of years ago, homes, businesses, roads,
    dams, and even federal government facilities, such as Johnson
    Space Center, were unprepared for the damaging effects of
    Harvey.
        Houstonians are strong and resilient, as we've seen in the
    recovery from Hurricane Harvey over the last two years. We have
    an obligation to ensure that the residents of Houston, along
    with other communities across the country, can have greater
    certainty that they will know how strong a hurricane will be,
    and feel confident that they live in resilient communities.
        I want to thank our panel of witnesses today for sharing
    their expertise with us. Thank you, Chairwoman Fletcher. I
    yield back.

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Babin.
        If there are Members who wish to submit additional opening
    statements, your statements will be added to the record at this
    point.
        [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]

        Good afternoon and thank you, Chair Fletcher, for convening
    this important hearing on how we can improve hurricane
    resilience research. I am excited to hear how we can help
    coastal communities like Houston become more resilient to the
    increasingly frequent and intense storms we are already seeing.
        As Chair Fletcher mentioned, the Texas coast is no stranger
    to hazardous weather. Hurricane damage is primarily caused by
    their high winds, heavy precipitation, and storm surge. These
    hurricane impacts can be devastating, especially to the
    estimated six million Texans that NOAA has estimated live along
    our over 3,000 miles of shoreline. Storm surge, and the waves
    caused by hurricanes, are the largest potential threats to life
    and property in coastal areas. Texan cities like Houston are on
    the forefront of dealing with these impacts, along with inland
    flooding caused by heavy precipitation, as we saw with Harvey.
        Hurricane forecasts have improved tremendously in recent
    years. Many of the operational forecasting products developed
    by the National Hurricane center within NOAA's National Weather
    Service can be attributed to federally funded research. The
    Weather Service's partnerships with hurricane research
    programs, both within NOAA and extramurally, have played a huge
    role in improving the accuracy of hurricane models and
    forecasts.
        I look forward to hearing from Dr. Uccellini, about the
    successes of the National Hurricane Center, and future
    opportunities for Congress to support initiatives within NOAA
    that can continue to improve hurricane forecasts.
        Along with many of my fellow colleagues from Texas here
    today, I serve on the Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee. It is becoming clear that the way our current
    infrastructure was designed decades ago, cannot withstand the
    coming impacts of a changing climate. Better understanding our
    future climate through improved weather forecasts and long-term
    climate predictions is critical to developing more resilient
    coastal infrastructure.
        Just as hurricane forecasts have improved due in part to
    federal research investments in weather forecasting and
    modeling, there is opportunity for Congress to bolster research
    into coastal resiliency solutions. Conversations like the one
    we are having today with federal agencies, academic
    researchers, and resilience-focused businesses, can provide
    recommendations that will inform decision-makers on how to move
    forward.
        I am glad we have two Houstonians on this panel who are
    actively collaborating across disciplines and institutions in
    the Houston area, and beyond, to leverage a wide-range of
    expertise. I can guarantee that there is no one more dedicated
    to developing innovative solutions for building coastal
    resilience than those who have seen the devastation these
    storms can cause first-hand. I hope today's discussion brings
    us one step closer to finding these solutions.
        Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.

        Chairwoman Fletcher. At this time, I would like to
    introduce our witnesses. Our first witness from NOAA, Dr. Louis
    Uccellini, serves as the Assistant Administrator for Weather
    Services, and the Director of the National Weather Service.
    Prior to this position, he served as the Director of the
    National Centers for Environmental Protection, NCEP, for 14
    years where he directed the operations at nine NCEP centers.
    Before that, Dr. Uccellini has been the Director of the
    National Weather Service's Office of Meteorology, Chief of the
    National Weather Service's Meteorological Operations Division,
    and section head for the Mesoscale Analysis and Modeling
    Section at the Goddard Space Flight Center's Laboratory for
    Atmospheres. Dr. Uccellini received his Ph.D., master's, and
    bachelor of science degrees in meteorology from the University
    of Wisconsin Madison.
        Our second witness, Dr. Hanadi Rifai, is the John and
    Rebecca Moores Professor, and Director of Hurricane Resilience
    Research Institute, or HuRRI, at the University of Houston.
    HuRRI is a national center uniting a coalition of coastal
    universities to promote U.S. coastal resiliency through
    research and educational programs. Dr. Rifai's research focuses
    on groundwater flow modeling, risk assessment, hydrology,
    hazardous waste, and urban stormwater quality. She authored
    three widely used computer models for the decomposition of
    organic matter by microorganisms. She also codirects the Severe
    Storm Prevention, Education, and Evaluation from Disaster,
    SSPEED, Center, with another of our panelists, Mr. Jim
    Blackburn. Dr. Rifai received both her Ph.D. and M.S. in
    environmental engineering from Rice University and received her
    B.S. in civil engineering from American University of Beirut in
    Beirut, Lebanon.
        Our third witness is Ms. Emily Grover-Kopec. She serves as
    the Director of Insurance Practice at One Concern and has more
    than 15 years of experience in catastrophe modeling and climate
    analytics primarily for use by the insurance industry. Prior to
    joining One Concern, Ms. Grover-Kopec spent 12 years at Risk
    Management Solutions as a vice president where she focused on
    analytics for the flood peril in the United States. Ms. Grover-
    Kopec holds a B.S. degree in atmospheric, oceanic, and space
    sciences from the University of Michigan and an M.S. degree in
    meteorology from Penn State University.
        Our last witness, Mr. Jim Blackburn, is the Co-Director of
    the Severe Storm Prevention, Education, and Evacuation from
    Disaster, SSPEED, Center, at Rice University, where he's also a
    Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental
    Engineering. In his work at the SSPEED Center, Mr. Blackburn
    uses simulations of hurricanes to improve the lead time for
    warnings of storm impacts and researches effective mitigation
    and coastal resiliency strategies for Houston that can be
    extrapolated to other communities. The SSPEED Center is
    recognized as the Gulf Coast's top university-based resource
    for research and education related to protection strategies for
    severe storm flooding and hurricane-related surge.
        Mr. Blackburn is also a practicing environmental lawyer
    with the Blackburn & Carter law firm in Houston and a Rice
    faculty scholar at the Baker Institute. Mr. Blackburn received
    a B.A. in history and a J.D. from the University of Texas at
    Austin, as well as an M.S. in environmental science from Rice
    University.
        We will begin with Dr. Uccellini.

                  TESTIMONY OF DR. LOUIS W. UCCELLINI,

              ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR WEATHER SERVICES,

                        NOAA; AND DIRECTOR, NWS

        Dr. Uccellini. Good afternoon, Chair Fletcher and Members
    of the Committee. I am Louis Uccellini, Director of NOAA's
    National Weather Service. It is my honor to testify before you
    today on the state of hurricane forecasting in the United
    States.
        Hurricane track forecast accuracy has improved tremendously
    over the past 2 decades. Storm track forecast errors have
    decreased every decade since records began, but we've
    accelerated that improvement since the mid-90s. And new records
    are set almost every year. Our 48-hour forecast improved from
    an era of over 300 miles in the 1960s to only 85 miles today.
    The 5-day forecast is better now than the 1-day forecast was in
    the 1960s. Our current experimental 7-day forecasts are as
    accurate as the day-3 forecasts were 25 years ago.
        More recently, intensity prediction has also improved by
    about 25 percent over the past 5 years. Improved forecasts have
    many contributing factors, including improved models and the
    experience and skill of our forecasters. There are three
    contributing components to improved America weather prediction:
    Increased supercomputing capacity; assimilating global
    observations of the atmosphere, oceans, and land; and, three,
    improving the increasingly complex models themselves.
        With respect to improving the models, the global forecast
    system model improvements--that's the American model--the
    introduction of ensemble forecasts, and the Hurricane Weather
    Research and Forecasting model all represent significant steps
    forward in our numerical prediction of hurricane structure,
    intensity, and track.
        The research and development for the Hurricane Weather
    Research and Forecasting model--and we refer to that as HWRF--
    is a joint effort between NOAA and academic partners as part of
    the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project. This advancement,
    which began under the U.S. Weather Research Program, highlights
    the importance of research and operational entities working
    together to more rapidly transfer promising research techniques
    into operations. These programs also accelerated the track
    forecast improvements that we've seen over the last 2 decades.
        The Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act that
    was noted earlier addresses NOAA's critical mission areas,
    including improvements to the Hurricane Forecast Improvement
    Program, spanning improved modeling, computing capacity, and
    working with the private and academic sectors to obtain the
    best possible data and to further research on hurricane
    behavior to improve the numerical weather prediction of--and
    especially to improve the numerical weather prediction of rapid
    intensification.
        As an example of the important role of our forecasters, the
    hurricane forecasters at the National Hurricane Center apply
    their experience and knowledge about hurricanes to computer
    models and other inputs to make forecasts that, on average, are
    more accurate than every individual computer model prediction.
    These improvements in NOAA's hurricane forecasts have helped
    emergency managers make better, timely, focused, and accurate
    community preparation and evacuation decisions and are
    responsible in part for the decreasing impacts that we see of
    these storms at landfall.
        Ninety percent of fatalities from tropical weather systems
    are due to water. These water fatalities are either from storm
    surge or from inland flooding. The impact from storm surge can
    reach up to 100 miles inland along major rivers and
    tributaries. To reduce the storm surge impacts, we now issue
    storm surge products--watches, warnings, and inundation maps--
    for the public, for emergency managers, and for others. We
    believe these products have led to better decisions--are the
    main reasons for the recent reduction in the number of storm-
    surge fatalities from major landfalling storms in 2017 and
    2018.
        Heavy rains from tropical systems can lead to extreme
    inland flooding, sometimes hundreds of miles inland and away
    from the center of the storm and days after the storm makes
    landfall. We have demonstrated increased skill with our
    precipitation forecasts, but that is not enough. For Hurricane
    Harvey, we predicted over 50 inches of rain and historic
    catastrophic flooding days before it occurred. While
    meteorologists knew the flooding would be catastrophic, we
    needed to map and communicate those impacts.
        Given the predicted magnitude of Harvey, we accelerated
    what we called the first use of our experimental flood
    inundation mapping information that was under development at
    the National Water Center. These maps identified areas that
    would flood and, just as importantly, areas that would remain
    dry for staging and for shelters. These inundation maps clearly
    improved our ability to communicate the potential flood impacts
    related to the historic 50-plus-inch rainfall amounts.
        Intensity forecasts have improved, especially in the
    extended time periods. Strengthening or weakening trends are
    often captured by the models, and recent improvement in the
    HWRF model showed great promises to predict rapid
    intensification and the extent of these trends. The goals of
    the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Program are to improve the
    track and intensity forecast accuracy by another 50 percent
    over the next 10 years, to extend high accuracy forecast from 5
    to 7 days in advance, and to further integrate social and
    behavioral sciences into new products.
        Through our newly provided impact-based decision support
    services authorized in the 2017 Weather Act, we are better
    connected than ever to decisions being made across the entire
    spectrum of emergency managers at the local, State, regional,
    and national levels, and to the public. Effective communication
    about storms provided through these new products, outreach, and
    education efforts to increase the attention on the individual
    impacts from wind and water hazards that could occur in each
    community and to focus on these winds, tornadoes, storm surge,
    inland flooding, and ocean waves and rip currents will all lead
    to lessen the impact of these storms.
        In conclusion, NOAA and the weather enterprise have made
    significant strides in the accuracy of hurricane forecasts, but
    we must continue to improve these forecasts, including a focus
    on the social and behavioral sciences to better understand
    people's reaction to the information.
        Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today.
    I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Uccellini follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Uccellini.
    I'm learning we need to sit very closely to the microphones.
        We will now hear from Dr. Rifai.

                     TESTIMONY OF DR. HANADI RIFAI,

                   JOHN AND REBECCA MOORES PROFESSOR,

              ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING GRADUATE PROGRAM;

                       AND DIRECTOR OF HURRICANE

                     RESILIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE,

                         UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON

        Dr. Rifai. Chair Fletcher, Members of the Committee, I
    appreciate the opportunity to testify before you here today. My
    name is Hanadi Rifai, and I am John and Rebecca Moores
    Professor of Environmental Engineering and Director of the
    Hurricane Resilience Research Institute, or HuRRI, at the
    University of Houston. I organized my testimony today into
    three sections highlighting the past, the present, and the
    future of my hurricane and coastal research. I'll start with
    the past.
        My journey with hurricanes and severe storms dates back to
    Hurricane Katrina in 2005. At the time, we in Houston felt New
    Orleans' pain profoundly. A group of us, faculty from Houston
    and Louisiana, met to discuss what could be done, and that was
    the seed that germinated the Severe Storm Prediction,
    Education, and Evacuation from Disaster, or SSPEED, Center. It
    was difficult then to secure research funding for the center,
    and it remains difficult now to do the same.
        My work with SSPEED focused on Houston's industrial
    infrastructure and its vulnerability to natural hazards. The
    industries along the Houston Ship Channel produce, store, and
    transport chemicals and petrochemicals. And in times of natural
    hazards, the processing units, storage, and transportation
    facilities, including the Port of Houston, are vulnerable to
    storm surge, wind, rainfall, and high-channel flows. There are
    upwards of 4,100 storage tanks in the Houston Ship Channel, and
    they are full with various types of chemicals and
    petrochemicals, and the tanks themselves have various shapes
    and sizes.
        Our research at SSPEED developed the first-of-its-kind
    predictive model. The model quantifies economic losses in the
    Houston Ship Channel that would be incurred due to varying
    storm surge heights at the individual facility level and for
    the entire Houston Ship Channel. With this model, we call it
    FEDERAP, we predicted catastrophic losses exceeding $70 billion
    at 25 foot surge just from the Houston Ship Channel and the
    Port of Houston alone.
        Other related and critical research that we undertook in
    the SSPEED Center involved a closer look at the environmental
    impacts associated with surge protection and building gates and
    barriers across parts of the Galveston Bay system. We have
    developed relatively short- and long-term models of bay water
    quality looking at temperatures and salinities when such
    mitigation measures are implemented that can be used to inform
    surge protection systems design and implementation. Much more
    effort, however, is needed to further develop these models into
    robust predictive platforms that can elucidate the--incorporate
    changes in sediment regimes, flood flows in the San Jacinto and
    Trinity Rivers, the timing of the flood flows, drought cycles,
    climate change, and sea-level rise. But importantly, we must
    maintain the delicate balance of the Galveston Bay system
    between its freshwater inflows and its healthy interaction with
    the Gulf Coast.
        It brings me to the present. As we embark on our recovery
    journey in Houston after Harvey, the affinity we felt with
    Louisiana in 2005 expanded. We now were looking at the entire
    Gulf Coast because of the severity of the 2017 hurricane season
    and its disastrous outcomes for all of us from Texas to
    Florida.
        In forming HuRRI, we aimed to catalyze innovation. We're
    looking at six dimensions of resilience. We call them MAPPER.
    These include mitigation, assessment, prediction, protection,
    education, and recovery. The main goal of our institute is to
    change the paradigm from waiting and paying for hurricanes to
    anticipating and accommodating them to save lives and reduce
    damages and costs associated with natural disasters.
        At present, HuRRI faculty are undertaking 12 collaborative
    projects that span hurricane flood modeling, sensor
    development, resilient power systems, mental and physical
    health during hurricanes, and public policies associated with
    hurricanes and severe storms.
        In my own research program and with the National Science
    Foundation grant and seed grant from the College of Engineering
    at the university, I mobilized my research team immediately
    after Harvey, and we began to assess the environmental damages
    and the chemical and biological hazards that may have been
    released during Harvey from environmental and industrial
    infrastructure. We sampled water and sediment quality many,
    many times over a 1-year period to assess the resiliency of our
    waterways, our natural water systems, and Galveston Bay. The
    results were astounding. It was evident that our waterways have
    become rivers of brown, carrying with them a chemical and
    biological mix of pollutants onto land, into homes, and into
    waterways and sensitive ecological systems.
        The overall impact on Galveston Bay is yet to be fully
    quantified and understood. In addition to near zero salinities
    for an extended period of time, the system experienced
    extensive sediment deposition and erosion, pollutant loads
    containing organics, metals, and pathogenic organisms.
        While the full impact of Hurricane Harvey remains unknown,
    what is clearly apparent, however, is that much research is
    needed on how to soften the impact from environmental and
    industrial infrastructure failures. This knowledge gap has
    never been more greater or glaring to us as we observe the
    uneven distribution of these impacts amongst Houston's
    communities. We determined that while flooding was universally
    inclusive, human health effects were not equivalently borne by
    our communities. We found a disturbing pattern of their
    prevalence in areas with a high percentage of concentrated
    disadvantage populations.
        This brings me to the future, which is what we're all
    about, I hope, here. Harvey is not your typical storm for
    Houston by any stretch of the imagination. What the climate
    experts, however, are telling us is that storms like Harvey are
    the new normal and that in the future, hurricanes and severe
    storms will be more frequent, more intense, they will linger
    around longer, and they will move slower. These factors, when
    taken together, do not portend a bright future for our region.
    Houston, until Harvey, was still implementing Tropical Storm
    Allison recovery projects. In that last 15-year period, we've
    had multiple severe storms and a hurricane.
        Confronting the recent rise in disaster losses locally is a
    defining challenge for Houston as we aim to be both resilient
    and smart. The good news is we do have scientific and
    engineering foundations that can reduce the toll on humans,
    economic, environmental, and infrastructure losses from extreme
    events. However, investments in research must be made to build
    our society's capacity to reduce and manage risk and create
    resilient and prosperous communities that are not just well-
    prepared but socially just.
        My analogy and justification for increased research funding
    for hurricanes and coastal resilience stems from observing the
    benefits derived from directing funding toward research from
    penalties after the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Obviously, we
    cannot penalize Mother Nature for hurricanes and severe storms.
    On the contrary, we need to respect her power and accommodate
    it. And this can only be accomplished with research and funding
    for research on how to best achieve hurricane and coastal
    resilience. There is much to be learned on how to harden the
    physical infrastructure, how to soften the environmental
    impacts, how to understand the ramifications of transitioning
    to the new NOAA Atlas 14 storm on flooding, infrastructure, and
    communities, and even greater need is to understand future
    climate projections, sea-level rise, and their impacts on our
    region.
        Research should guide our decisionmaking into mitigation
    and remedies. Do we elevate homes? Should we expand buyouts? Do
    we build tunnels beneath Houston? Do we expand conveyance with
    our bayous? Do we build more detention capacity or more
    reservoirs? Better yet, do we need to research nature-based
    solutions and the possibility of recharging our depleted
    aquifers with floodwaters? We also need to research and develop
    strategies for rapid response during and after extreme events
    to protect people and ecosystems, especially human health.
        As academic institutions, our educational mission cannot be
    understated. Funding would be needed to integrate knowledge,
    training, research methodologies, and findings into existing
    and new curricula across disciplines to create a well-trained
    hazard and disaster mitigation workforce. Importantly, we need
    to leverage the power of data, data analytics, machine learning
    (ML), artificial intelligence (AI), and emerging and enabling
    technologies in and hurricane protection. We have made
    significant advances and coordinated declarations of disaster,
    disaster response, and evacuations. This is the right time to
    begin to anticipate and accommodate extreme events and focus on
    recovery and resiliency.
        One of the most important steps we should take--and
    admittedly, I am somewhat biased in my passion toward research,
    science, engineering, and technology--is to provide continuous
    and sustained support for research and research centers such as
    SSPEED and HuRRI. We have missions and visions that transcend
    day-to-day living and are forward-thinking and forward-looking
    engines of innovation and creativity.
        In conclusion, I greatly appreciate the effort of this
    Committee to support hurricane and coastal resilience research
    that keeps Houston and America safe, secure, and globally
    competitive and assures constituencies a high quality of life,
    health, and prosperity. I'd be glad to answer any questions you
    may have.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Rifai follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Rifai. Ms. Grover-
    Kopec.

                    TESTIMONY OF EMILY GROVER-KOPEC,

           DIRECTOR OF INSURANCE PRACTICE, ONE CONCERN, INC.

        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Thank you, Chair Fletcher, Chairwoman
    Johnson, distinguished Members of the Committee, for holding
    this important hearing and for giving me the privilege of
    providing a private-sector perspective. And thank you to the
    Committee staff, who have been a pleasure to work with in
    preparing for this hearing. It is an honor to address the
    Committee regarding the importance of creating resiliency
    through scientific R&D (research and development) in a city
    that knows firsthand the importance of a more resilient future
    and to do so in my current capacity directing the insurance
    practice at One Concern, a benevolent artificial intelligence
    company.
        At One Concern, our mission is to prepare communities to
    save lives and economic livelihoods through action before,
    during, and after natural disasters. My testimony today focuses
    on using R&D in AI and natural hazard sciences to predict
    disaster damage, aid officials during all phases of emergency
    management, and drive informed decisions that create resilient
    systems and financial tools.
        One Concern's work would not be possible without the R&D
    performed and funded by the U.S. Government and at universities
    around the country. We are developing technology to minimize
    the impact of disasters like the flooding Houston experienced
    during Hurricane Harvey, as well as earthquakes and wildfires.
    Our AI platform removes the elements of human bias and
    insufficient data in times of crisis, providing objective
    situational awareness in near real time to drive informed
    response.
        Machine learning and AI sit at the core of these analytics,
    helping to unlock new ways of understanding how complex
    disciplines interact. And these mathematical algorithms
    leverage several fields of scientific study, including
    hydrodynamic and hydrological-coupled science, structural
    engineering, fluid mechanics, seismic and atmospheric sciences.
        A specific example of One Concern's unique research efforts
    is our platform's application for active flood events that
    provides a high-resolution understanding of impending flood
    inundation based on forecasted precipitation generated by the
    National Weather Service. The solution's AI-driven approach
    allows it to correct and adjust during the event, thereby
    addressing the core complexity associated with modeling floods:
    Their dynamic nature.
        Decisions around evacuations in large metro areas like
    Houston can be informed by technologies like ours that provide
    a granular view of an impacted area at a block level up to 5
    days out from a flooding event. This provides an understanding
    of which populations face the greatest risk and, through our
    continued R&D process, will allow first responders to
    understand the impact of mitigated actions. This level of
    situational intelligence could potentially change outcomes by
    informing targeted evacuations and mitigation to divert
    floodwater away from people and critical infrastructure. We are
    also working with jurisdictions to implement our flood risk R&D
    toward other proactive preparedness efforts, allowing emergency
    personnel to create better plans for a disaster.
        R&D such as One Concern's could have even more impact
    through pre-disaster mitigation. We believe it is important
    that policy and infrastructure planning intended to improve
    resiliency should be equitable, should focus in on mitigation
    overall societal risk rather than mitigating purely the
    greatest financial risk, the latter of which tends to show bias
    toward the most affluent.
        Our data and models assess the baseline resilience of the
    entire community, including how natural hazards impact
    structures, as well as critical infrastructure. Our R&D,
    therefore, would be well-positioned to drive equitable and
    informed decisions around overall societal resilience.
        In addition to effective mitigation, preparedness,
    response, and access to insurance to support a community's
    recovery plays a critical role in resilience to disasters such
    as hurricanes and their associated flooding. One Concern's
    current R&D efforts include assessing the risk to a business'
    physical structure, as well as its access to power, water,
    roads, and bridges. This provides a transparent view of a
    business' overall resilience, which will enable an expansion of
    insurance and resilience finance tools. We seek to partner with
    businesses and insurers to support the development of new
    insurance products that will help businesses, their
    communities, and the economy to recover. Ultimately, this helps
    transfer risk from taxpayers to the private sector.
        In closing, I would like to again thank Chairwoman and the
    Committee for inviting me to share One Concern's ongoing R&D
    efforts to create a more resilient future. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Grover-Kopec follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Mr. Blackburn?

                       TESTIMONY OF JIM BLACKBURN,

            CO-DIRECTOR, SEVERE STORM PREDICTION, EDUCATION

                AND EVACUATION FROM DISASTERS CENTER; AND

            PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

                      ENGINEERING, RICE UNIVERSITY

        Mr. Blackburn. Good afternoon, Chair Fletcher, Members of
    the Committee. I'm pleased to be here today to discuss
    resilience and research in my capacity as Co-Director of the
    Severe Storm Center at Rice, the SSPEED Center. In our work at
    the SSPEED Center, we were fortunate to be funded by a private
    foundation, the Houston Endowment, and we were able to use the
    latest and best cutting-edge methods to address flooding from
    coastal surge and from inland rainfall. We were allowed to make
    mistakes and find new ways forward. I would like to share with
    you what we've learned from that experience.
        Three implementable concepts have come from this research.
    First, we've developed a structural solution along the Houston
    Ship Channel called the Galveston Bay Park plan, a plan to
    protect the Houston Ship Channel industries and the west side
    of Galveston Bay from a 25-foot surge. This Park plan is
    compatible with the coastal spine project of the Corps of
    Engineers, and the park plan is being developed alongside the
    proposed widening of the Houston Ship Channel, working with
    stakeholders such as the Port of Houston Authority.
        Second, an economic solution--the Texas Coastal Exchange--
    is now a standalone nonprofit that will make grants to
    landowners for storing flood waters and carbon dioxide in their
    soil.
        And third, the proposed Lone Star Coastal National
    Recreation Area focuses on enhancing ecotourism and economy
    that is flood-resilient. Our research has convinced us that
    flooding is the biggest threat to the economic future of the
    Houston region, period. There are 2.2 million barrels of
    refining capacity, 200-plus chemical plants, and 800,000 people
    that are unprotected from hurricane surge along the Houston
    Ship Channel and the west side of Galveston Bay. The loss of
    these plants represents a legitimate threat to national
    security. This is what keeps me up at night.
        In our work at SSPEED Center, we found that a lack of
    adequate procedures and practices to integrate hydrology,
    climate, economy, ecology, and social considerations. They just
    simply don't exist. Current engineering and political science
    methodologies are antiquated. Our floodplain maps are wrong and
    understate the risk. In many ways, our current thinking about
    flooding is obsolete. We are not going to control storms like
    Harvey. We can learn to live with them. Big rains are coming,
    and we must make room for the water. We need a better
    understanding about the intersection of engineering and the
    storms of the future.
        Our climate has been, is, and will be changing. We must
    understand these changes to develop realistic engineering
    solutions. We need innovative urban design thinking for our
    cities. Our creativity needs to be jumpstarted. We are mired
    currently in 20th-century thinking facing 21st-century
    problems. We need economic methodologies that work with our
    engineering solutions.
        There's likely not enough Federal money to solve all the
    flooding problems in the coastal United States. Therefore, we
    need to research and understand how the private sector can
    participate in funding these solutions. We're committed to
    finding private-sector funding for the $3-$6 billion that the
    Galveston Bay Park Plan requires. We need research about how
    insurance and investment funds and other private capital
    sources can become a major part of our flood solutions not only
    here but throughout the United States.
        We need a better understanding of risk. What is a
    reasonable hurricane surge in the future with a hotter Gulf of
    Mexico? What is a reasonable rainfall to plan for in 2025 or
    2030? What level of risk is acceptable? Our engineering
    solutions are designed to last at least 50 years if not more,
    including highways, buildings, landfills, and hazardous waste
    sites. What we are building today must be functioning in 2040,
    in 2070. That will not occur with our current tools.
        Successfully addressing flooding is fundamental to
    succeeding as a region in the 21st century. It is the threat to
    the future of Houston. For the first time in 40-plus years, I
    am hearing the word fear used in conjunction with rainfall. And
    it is clear that national security is implicated. Why don't we
    think about flooding like President Kennedy thought about the
    space program back in 1962 when he spoke at Rice Stadium? We
    shouldn't undertake flood research because it's easy but
    because it is hard, because that challenge is one that we're
    willing to accept and one which we intend to win.
        Please consider forming a national flood-related research
    effort with a space-program mentality. We actually put
    astronauts on the moon with our research. Let's actually solve
    our flooding problems. Such a flooding program should focus
    upon practical applied research perhaps along the lines of the
    old National Science Foundation Research Applied to National
    Needs program. Such a program could be a major step in solving
    the severe storm flooding problem that threatens our national
    security in ways far beyond any other domestic and perhaps
    international problem.
        We can do this. We must do this. Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Blackburn follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Blackburn.
        So at this point we will begin our first round of
    questions. We will begin with the Committee Members of the
    Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and then we will turn
    to our colleagues from our Houston delegation to ask questions
    as well. With time permitting, we will have two rounds of
    questions.
        And for those of my colleagues--since we are in a field
    hearing, it's a little bit different than our setup that we're
    used to in Washington. But we each will have 5 minutes to ask
    questions of any of the witnesses on the panel, and I would
    remind my colleagues that the timer is right at the base of the
    stairs of the 5 minutes. And the lights will light up, and the
    witnesses should be able to see it as well to know if we're
    coming close to time.
        So with that, I will recognize myself for 5 minutes. My
    first question is directed to Dr. Uccellini. In the face of
    changing climate, Dr. Uccellini, what role can the Weather
    Service play not only in a short-term weather forecasting and
    predictions but also in long-term climate predictions? And, as
    we think about those challenges facing the coast, can you tell
    us what extent the Weather Service is currently engaging with
    stakeholders in the coastal resilience and infrastructure
    community on these particular issues?
        Dr. Uccellini. OK. So a number of questions there. With
    respect to the changing climate and its impacts along the
    coast, the principal impact has to do with the rising sea
    levels. With the warming ocean, the sea levels will rise for
    two principal reasons. One is the expanding volume of the water
    that's heated, and the melting ice that we see over the globe
    is certainly having its contributions to the rising sea level
    as well.
        We--now, we have to accommodate that background--changing
    background state into storm surge and potential impacts of
    intense storms, whether they be hurricanes or extratropical
    storms as well. So we do that--that's part of the short-term
    aspect is recognizing that background state is changing, and we
    need to account for it with respect to our watches and
    warnings.
        With respect to, you know, research into the changing
    climate, the Weather Service has responsibilities for
    predicting out to the sub-seasonal to seasonal range. And what
    we're doing today that we weren't doing 15 years ago is using
    dynamic climate models to improve or attempt to improve those
    forecasts that are used for water resource management, et
    cetera. We're seeing success in the temperature forecast. We're
    actually seeing challenges with precipitation forecast, and
    that's probably going to be the biggest challenge that we--that
    we'll face.
        We work with the climate community in these models by
    running them every day and in some cases like in our models we
    run four times a day. We are testing the fidelity of the
    algorithms that are then used by the research community in the
    global change arena. So our effort is to continue to improve
    those models both from a dynamic and from a physical
    perspective. And then we put those results back to the--to
    those researchers within government, within the academic
    community, on the--these model changes.
        So, you know, that's basically what we're working with both
    from a short-term and long-term perspective.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Dr. Uccellini. And my next
    question is to the other panelists, if any of you all could
    talk about how the National Weather Service products and
    services, which are particularly useful in your research or
    where there might be additional areas where you would like to
    see opportunities for weather research for your purposes.
        Dr. Rifai. So we use the products extensively, and we are
    very much dependent on a lot of the data that's generated.
    Obviously, the precipitation information, the climate change,
    the sea-level rise. I think it's going to be hard for us in the
    research community to keep up with change, so that's something
    to think about.
        In Houston, we're designing or have designed for 12.5-inch
    storm. The new Atlas could be anywhere from 16 to 18 inches.
    Experts tell us hydrologists such as myself, that our capacity
    in our bayous is no more than 6 to 8 inches in a 24-hour
    period, so we've got a big disconnect to live up to, and that's
    really the biggest challenge is this gap between what we're
    getting from NOAA to what really needs to be done and is being
    done at the--in the trenches so to speak.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you.
        Mr. Blackburn. Do you want to say something?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Yes, briefly.
        Mr. Blackburn. Go ahead.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Yes. We also make extensive use of
    National Weather Service products. So I mentioned that we use
    the quantified precipitation forecast for our flood modeling
    for live events, and we're trying to actually extend our
    technology as the Weather Service does the same, right? So
    there's a lot of work and funding going into the MRMS project
    from out of the National Severe Storm Laboratory. That's Multi-
    Radar/Multi-Sensor project, sort of the next step in
    understanding quantified precipitation as it falls. And we'll
    be utilizing that data and working it into our technology as
    well. We also utilize some of the weather observations into our
    wildfire monitoring to understand live events for wildfires as
    well.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Yes.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Mr. Blackburn briefly.
        Mr. Blackburn. I'd just like to add that we make extensive
    use of what we have access to. It would be nice to see that
    work expanded in the sense of not only looking for what has
    happened in the past up to 2017, which is what NOAA Atlas 14
    does, but begin to get projections of where we see these storms
    going in the future because that's what's really important to
    me because we're building stuff now, like I said, that's going
    to last for 50 years. And we need to know what that climate
    looks like going forward, and we don't really have the tools at
    all that will help us make those decisions. And I think that's
    an area for serious research. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Blackburn. And I have
    now exceeded my time, so I will yield back. And I will
    recognize Dr. Babin for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you very much. I just lost 4 seconds
    there. OK. All right. To the panel----
        Dr. Rifai. I'm glad you can see it.
        Mr. Babin. Can each of you, very briefly if you would,
    identify for us the areas where you believe this Committee can
    best focus on the research or moving forward both for weather
    forecasting and developing resilient communities? And we'll
    start with you, Mr. Blackburn. And try to keep it as brief as
    possible.
        Mr. Blackburn. Well, briefly, urgency. I think there is an
    urgency about addressing and really elevating this flooding
    problem to the--I think the national security issue that it is.
    And I think you could help with your abilities to focus us as a
    Nation on that issue. And I think a lot of the rest of it will
    follow.
        Mr. Babin. I could not agree more because I represent oil
    refining and chemical facilities in my district than anywhere
    else in the country.
        Mr. Blackburn. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Babin. And after Ike, the gasoline price spiked
    throughout the country, and so I appreciate that answer. Ms.
    Grover-Kopec.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Actually, I think through action
    demonstrated by this hearing is being open to new technologies
    like AI and ML. There's broad understanding of its potential
    across the board not just for disaster resiliency, and
    congressional committees have put some good funding into
    resilient projects. And having those projects being open-minded
    to including new technologies to demonstrate the efficacy and
    accuracy of those products would be a great way----
        Mr. Babin. OK.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec [continuing]. To implement them.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Yes.
        Mr. Babin. Doctor?
        Dr. Rifai. So in the big scheme of things we're heavily
    weighted on built environment and on infrastructure. We've paid
    a lot of attention to that, not so much on people. I think we
    need to bring both in the balance and start thinking about how
    people interact with their natural and built environment and
    their infrastructure.
        Mr. Babin. Excellent.
        Dr. Rifai. To me, that's very important.
        Mr. Babin. Excellent. Dr. Uccellini?
        Dr. Uccellini. Yes, thank you for the opportunity to answer
    this question. First of all, the extensiveness of the effort
    that's actually involved, technology through science and any
    related applications.
        Support of the Weather Act, this is probably the most
    foundational law that's been enacted that I know of that will
    have a direct impact on our ability to serve and people to
    react.
        Understand that it's from a spectrum from observations
    forecast to decisionmaking, so it's the importance not only of
    the physical sciences but the social sciences. We have to have
    both to move forward.
        Mr. Babin. OK. Yes, thank you. Excellent.
        And, Mr. Blackburn, much of your research is focused on
    resilience. Lack of resilient infrastructure was clearly an
    issue when Hurricane Harvey made landfall in August 2017. As we
    seek to prepare for future severe weather events, how do you
    differentiate the roles of different levels of government? What
    role should the Federal Government play in helping communities
    to improve resilience to these types of weather events?
        Mr. Blackburn. Well, I think all levels of government have
    to play in this, and I think the Federal Government
    historically has been a funder, a major source of funding. I
    would tell you that what I would like to see the Federal
    Government do is to reevaluate the methodologies they use to
    evaluate funding. I think there is a lot that can be done
    there.
        Our local government has stepped up with a $2.5 billion
    Flood Control bond issued in Harris County. The State of Texas
    has begun to get involved, and they were the last to get
    involved, and they were missing for a long time. But I'm happy
    to see that they're involved. All three have to be involved. I
    would say that a lot of the lead could come from the local
    government, but I think the Federal Government has always been
    the rudder, and think it will continue to be the rudder that
    will guide us. I would just like to see your methodologies
    updated. Thank you.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you as well. I'd also like to reiterate
    not only do I have the petrochemical plants, but I also have
    Port of Houston. And it was shut down. And so it was an acute
    feeling of helplessness when we----
        Mr. Blackburn. I understand. We're working on that, and----
        Mr. Babin. Yes.
        Mr. Blackburn [continuing]. We'll be back in touch with you
    on that.
        Mr. Babin. You bet. Dr. Uccellini, Hurricane Sandy struck
    New Jersey and New York October 2012, causing tremendous
    damage. What lessons were you able to take from forecasting
    Hurricane Sandy to the forecast for Harvey, and what lessons
    did you learn from Harvey, and how will you be able to apply
    those to future hurricane forecasts?
        Dr. Uccellini. Well, Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Harvey
    had similar traits and that is that they were highly unusual in
    terms of their track and the duration. I would say that from a
    forecasting perspective and a very difficult what we call
    predictable--predictability issue with respect to Sandy, that
    the forecasters did a remarkable job in predicting and
    communicating uncertainty.
        What we learned from Sandy, however, is the connectivity
    with decisionmakers across the government spectrum--local,
    State, to Federal--and it's been since Sandy that we've really
    adopted that into our strategic goal of building a weather-
    ready Nation and providing what we call now impact-based
    decision support services, which is also authorized by the
    Weather Act. And what this means is that we have to practice,
    practice, practice, practice, practice before an event, well
    before an event, establish the trust with these decisionmakers.
    And that's--I think was a test of us in Harvey and up and down
    the Texas coast.
        I'll point out that with the new satellite that was
    launched and our co-location with the emergency managers who we
    know each other really well, there were some tremendous
    decisions made during Harvey up and down the Texas coast,
    including where the eye wall crossed the coast and firemen went
    out in the eye itself--that never would have happened before--
    and saved over 200 lives. So we learned our lesson there.
        What we know for now is that we can't rest on past laurels.
    We scrub every event to learn what to do for the next event.
    And we're always in the process of doing that.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you very much, and I yield back. My time
    is expired.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Babin.
        Mr. Babin. Yes, ma'am.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. I will now recognize Mr. Weber for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Weber. Thank you, Madam Chair. And since I'm going to
    be leaving for an airplane here shortly, do I get 10 minutes
    now? I'm just asking.
        It's a great event you're holding here, and we really
    appreciate that. I do have a lot of questions. And I will be
    here for round two.
        Dr. Uccellini--am I saying that right--we got to tour the
    National Weather Service this morning, and you did a fab job
    down off of Highway 646 in Galveston County, which happens to
    be in my district. Hurricane Harvey, for many of you all who
    may or may not know, we were ground zero for flooding. I
    represent all three coastal counties starting at the Louisiana
    border. I got Jefferson County, then I've got Galveston County,
    then I have the southern half of Brazoria County. So for us it
    was a huge event.
        I got to drive all three counties during that time, as I
    told you all earlier today. I have an F-350 1-ton truck 4-
    wheel-drive. I'm from Texas after all. It sets up about knee-
    high, and I can go through water that most cars would never
    dream of. I got to watch you all in action, I've got to watch
    Jefferson County Emergency Management Center in action, and I
    got to watch Brazoria County Emergency Management Center in
    action. So I got up close and personal to watch this in real
    time what we were going through.
        So this is a very timely hearing, Congresswoman Fletcher.
    Again, I applaud you for holding it.
        This stuff is huge and very, very important to the Texas
    Gulf Coast. Dr. Babin is right. He may have more refineries
    than I do, but we actually manufacture about 65 percent of the
    Nation's jet fuel in my district, about 20 percent of the
    Nation's gasoline east of the Rockies. And when you take the--
    in my district. Now, that's without the Port of Houston. Jump
    up and grab that port, it's almost 85 percent of the Nation's
    gasoline, almost 60--jet fuel rather, and almost 45 percent of
    the gasoline. It is huge, about 6 million people in the
    collective area.
        I noticed that you talked about 800,000 people up and down
    the Ship Channel, but I would say let's expand that to all the
    families and the homes and the jobs that it represents, so that
    this is a huge issue for us to tackle.
        Well, all that to say that being a Member of the Science
    Committee, we are actually working on now a new type of
    supercomputing. You've probably heard about it. And my question
    is, are you interacting with any of the national labs on
    quantum computing?
        Dr. Uccellini. The research component of NOAA certainly is,
    and as we work our way toward the next generation of computing
    over the next 10 years, we are actually--well, NOAA and
    especially the Weather Service is what's been designated as an
    implementing agency. So we are certainly working with the
    research community within the government and outside the
    government on this next-generation compute, and we stand ready
    to be able to run on those computers and test out the new
    technology.
        Mr. Weber. Well, thank you for that. You said in one of
    your question and answers with one of the Members that you are
    running tests on algorithms. And if I understand correctly,
    quantum computing helps us run tests on algorithms. And maybe
    this is a question for the lady from the AI community.
        Dr. Uccellini. Right.
        Mr. Weber. Just super, super fast. Do you know if that's
    the case? Quantum computing--I'm sorry, your name is----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. That's OK.
        Mr. Weber. Dr. Grover-Kopec. Am I saying that right?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. It is, yes. I will defer--we are not
    using it, but I think it's more attuned to the scale of work
    that the Weather Service----
        Mr. Weber. Right.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec [continuing]. That NOAA is doing.
        Mr. Weber. Now, you did mention in your testimony that you
    want to take the human element out of it as much as possible.
    You want this artificial intelligence to be making--and
    obviously, they can make decisions quicker than any of us can
    generally speaking. But I will tell you, based on what I said
    earlier, I made all three of those counties--for about a solid
    week and a half I was on the ground in all of the emergency
    management centers. I was in many of the shelters and watching
    this in real time unfold. The Brazos Port River and the San
    Bernard River come to the southern Brazoria County, and my
    district director and I were over there day 1, and we said it's
    only a matter time before everything downstream is flooded. So
    we watched that very closely.
        I have to say, especially the Weather Service, who is
    embedded with the emergency management center over there in
    Galveston County, the people that were making those decisions
    were making it based on families and houses and neighborhoods
    and yes, industry, and yes, the ability to produce and
    manufacture gasoline, diesel jet fuel. You can go right--
    refined chemicals. You can go right down the list. So if we
    come in with artificial intelligence, are we going to be able
    to do that in such a way, Ms. Grover-Kopec, that will help
    those people to interface with those local officials?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. I think that's exactly the point, right?
    So maybe just to clarify my comment and then respond, some
    common hesitancy around machine learning is that there's
    inherent bias in the data. And so my point is in creating
    models in the data that we collect, we're doing so in a way to
    avoid that bias.
        But in terms of actually using the modeling to respond to
    events, we're absolutely on the same page. So, for example, the
    products that we put out for our live events actually allows a
    jurisdiction to look to see where the most vulnerable
    communities are, where are the hospitals, where are the nursing
    homes, where are the schools so that they can respond
    appropriately and have the human element of response in the
    decisionmaking, not in the analytics. If that make sense?
        Mr. Weber. OK. Well, I'm over my time. I appreciate that.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Weber. I will now
    recognize Mr. Olson for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Olson. Thank you, Chairwoman Fletcher, and thank you so
    much for your hard work to make this very important field
    hearing happen. And welcome to our four witnesses. A special
    welcome to Dr. Uccellini. One of your alumni from your alma
    mater, a guy named J.J. Watt, showed what Houston Strong means
    during Hurricane Harvey. That man by himself, our star football
    player, promised to raise $250,000 for our citizens here in
    Houston. He stopped at about $338 million. That is Houston
    Strong. That is J.J. Watt. Thank you, Wisconsin, for giving us
    such a hero.
        As you all know, damage from hurricane comes from mostly
    two sources, a storm surge--a wall of water--and heavy, heavy
    rainfall. Hurricane Ike in 2008 had a wicked storm surge
    wherein above the sea wall built after the Galveston hurricane
    in 1900 ricocheted off the older part of Galveston Bay, came
    back, hit Galveston without protection, and I saw all the
    damage that happened because of Hurricane Ike. And that was
    just a category-2 storm.
        Harvey was not a storm surge, at least not for us. Some
    parts of my district got 5 feet of rain in less than 2 days. In
    fact, it got so bad, as the Chairwoman knows, there are two
    reservoirs near Kinney, Texas. One is called Barker, one is
    called Addicks. They've never been open to stop an overflow of
    the levees, of the dams. They had to open those gates early, in
    the middle of the night. It flooded 600 homes, the subdivision
    called Canyon Gate. Those people woke up homeless.
        And so there's all sorts of solutions. We've talked about a
    third reservoir up there with Barker and Addicks. We've talked
    about a tunnel coming from Kinney down through Texas City, La
    Marque to Galveston Bay. We've talked about the coastal spine.
        But my question is, in your opinion, all of you, and
    starting from the left to the right with you, Mr. Blackburn, in
    your opinion, how should we be investing our limited resources?
    How do we balance things between storm surge, rain in an
    environment where, coming from D.C., our funds are very
    limited? As you know, right now, we're facing a $21 trillion
    national debt, and that's going to go up this week. So without
    a boatload of money coming from D.C., how can we fight to make
    sure we're resistant in the future--prevention?
        Mr. Blackburn. Well, that's a tough one. And I appreciate
    you asking that.
        Mr. Olson. That's why I'm here.
        Mr. Blackburn. I understand that. I appreciate you asking
    the question. A couple of thoughts on that. First of all, I
    think we've got to find more sources of money than just the
    Federal Government. We've got to--I mean, I mentioned the fact
    about trying to figure out how to bring other sources of money
    to this. There's all sorts of creative bond concepts that are
    out there. They're not being implemented. I don't know why. I
    think this is one of the things we're about to find out a lot
    more about.
        But I would just say, one, trying to increase the pool of
    money that is available ought to be a priority, and I think the
    private sector is a place to look and find that support.
        Second, I think that there needs to be prioritization of a
    number--I think you've got to split between storm surge and
    between rainfall flooding. They're both big issues. They're
    both huge issues. I would tell you the surge flooding is
    perhaps the more violent of the two. I think you've got a
    greater chance of loss of life. I think you've got a lot of--a
    better chance of major industrial damage and a huge
    environmental release. And I think that just on that scale
    surge demands a lot of attention. And we forget it a lot
    because it seems like we have a 100-year rain here all the
    time, but it--we don't have a 100-year surge very often. But I
    would split that between the two. Thank you.
        Mr. Olson. Ms. Grover-Kopec?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. I actually--I might turn the question on
    its head a bit. Rather than focusing on diverting research
    toward one aspect of a peril versus another, rainfall flooding
    versus surge, I would look at what makes the community more
    resilient regardless of where that water is coming from. And it
    won't surprise you that I'll say insurance. Take up for
    insurance among private citizens for flood is incredibly low,
    and we know that a significant amount of the loss that was seen
    in Harvey was outside of the NFIP (National Flood Insurance
    Program) take-up.
        So to Dr. Rifai's comments around social behavior, there's
    actually research in trying to guide the positive
    decisionmaking to get people to purchase that insurance, and
    having the products there available to them I actually think
    would be a good start.
        Mr. Olson. Well, darn, you're ready for Congress with that
    answer.
        Dr. Rifai, your comments?
        Dr. Rifai. So, very simply, I would second the motion and
    say we really need to incentivize resilience. Instead of paying
    us for damages, make us do it better. And when we do it better,
    it doesn't break.
        Mr. Olson. Dr. Uccellini?
        Dr. Uccellini. Well, thank you. I was actually--from a
    water resource management perspective, I can't offer
    engineering advice because I'm not an engineer, all right, and
    I don't know the--but we do know that if communities are ready
    and responsive to these extreme events, they tend to be more
    resilient. So a comment was made earlier about Barry wasn't as
    impactful as expected. Maybe it's the result of--that the
    community really had 5 to 10 days to become ready and
    responsive to the forecast.
        I suggest that if you even look at Harvey versus the 1900
    storm, there was no situational awareness of exactly where that
    storm was or when it was coming in and over 6,000 lives were
    lost. We'll never know how many lives were actually lost here.
    Eighty-eight lives lost is a terrible--that's a terrible
    statistic, but it could have been a lot worse if we didn't have
    this investment in what we're doing.
        So to address the issues that you're talking to will take a
    lot of effort in terms of becoming ready and responsive to
    increased resiliency. I would offer that, you know, we focus on
    the prediction aspect of that and working in partnership with
    the local communities to make that happen.
        Mr. Olson. Thank you. My time is expired. I yield back.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Olson. I'll now
    recognize Ms. Jackson Lee for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Madam Chair. And let me thank
    Congresswoman Fletcher for a very significant, timely, and I
    would offer to say crucial hearing as we are on the precipice
    of the beginning of probably one of the more intense times of
    our hurricane season, which would be August really through into
    the fall.
        And I can imagine that we are certainly looking to the
    question of resilience, resilience I believe being one of the
    most important responses to the devastation of flooding and
    hurricanes.
        And I think people are also what is important because
    today, I was--it was brought to my attention of a 75-year-old
    who is still living in a trailer on her property, pursuant to
    Hurricane Harvey. That means that throughout our respective
    districts there are people who are still struggling to be
    resilient and to overcome the devastation of Hurricane Harvey,
    51 trillion gallons of water, which I think we have not seen in
    this region for the time of our hurricanes, separating from the
    Galveston hurricane in the early 1900s.
        So I thank the witnesses for their presentation, and I have
    a series of quick questions. I do want to make the point,
    however, about NOAA and its importance and the Hurricane
    Research Division, that NOAA is continuing to improve
    predictions of hurricane intensity, high and sustained wind
    speeds over the course of a storm's life, storm size,
    structure, rainfall, and flooding, and storm surge, all of the
    elements that we ran into--run into with respect to floods and
    hurricanes.
        So quickly to Ms. Grover-Kopec, you mentioned that when we
    mitigate risk, it should be all over. It shouldn't be in just
    high-income areas or high-cost areas. Can you just expand on
    that very briefly?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Sure. I just--it's--it's just--we're a
    very mission-driven organization and feel that resiliency is
    our mission and that it should be aimed at benefiting an entire
    community and all that contribute and live in the community.
    And typically, with current analytics that are used, purely the
    financial output is used, which is absolutely important. But
    we've actually been developing technology that allows you to
    look at the expense of the community that's impacted, the
    number of people, the number of homes, which might not
    necessarily equate to just the financial risk. So the financial
    element is purely important. We just advocate for taking a more
    broad view.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. It gives a fair shake to older
    neighborhoods, senior citizens----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Exactly.
        Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. Who are living in different
    conditions----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Exactly.
        Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. Than some of our newer
    neighborhoods. But then it does not eliminate them because
    you're talking about all over----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Exactly.
        Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. Which I think is extremely
    important.
        Mr. Blackburn, let me thank you for your long service on
    these issues. How important is our understanding and acceptance
    of this phenomenon of climate change in our continued research
    and funding by the Federal Government on this research dealing
    with hurricanes?
        Mr. Blackburn. I think it's incredibly important. The
    rainfall amounts are changing. The data show us that. I think
    that we've lost a lot of time arguing about this issue. I think
    just here in the community person after person will tell you
    that they're seeing a larger rainstorm than we've ever seen in
    the past, and the data support that. So I would say it's very,
    very important.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. So we need to focus our time understanding
    how impactful climate change is and using Federal resources,
    which you indicated were very important----
        Mr. Blackburn. Yes, absolutely. And looking to the future.
    I mean, what none of us have a clue about is what is it going
    to look like in 5, 10, 20 years. Those are the issues that are
    most important from my perspective.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Ms. Rifai, would you explain--thank you--
    the importance of having a well-trained workforce? I think you
    mentioned that. And then my final question would be to Mr.
    Uccellini to mention the use of social media in your work going
    forward.
        Dr. Rifai. So I think it's very important to educate our
    generations into this very severe challenge that we have, which
    is dealing with natural hazards. We really must inculcate it in
    every student, in every curriculum in every university,
    community college, high school. Schoolchildren, they are the
    future, and this is a problem that we're leaving them that they
    have to deal with. So I feel very strongly that this should be
    really integrated in everything so that not some of us are
    prepared, but all of us are prepared today and tomorrow.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. Doctor?
        Dr. Uccellini. Yes, thank you for your question. I like to
    think of it in terms of the use of all media to get the
    information out. Social media is becoming increasingly
    important in interacting with groups of people who reassure
    each other that this is the real deal and they better take
    action, so we see that happening. We also get important
    information from the social media as the event is unfolding,
    which we can then factor into continually refining our messages
    during the event. So whether it's communicating outward or
    communicating in, the whole range of social media is being
    employed to keep track of exactly what's going on. Thank you.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. Madam Chair, let me thank you
    very much for your courtesies, and I ask to be excused with
    other matters in my district. And I'd like to thank the Houston
    Community College for their hospitality. And I see that our
    Chairwoman is here. I certainly want to welcome her, as I know
    that you will. But thank you very much for having this a very,
    very crucial hearing.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you very much. And yes, I would
    like to recognize and acknowledge our Chairwoman of the
    Science, Space, and Technology Committee, Chairwoman Eddie
    Bernice Johnson, who has joined us from Dallas, delayed by a
    little bit of weather getting down here. But we are so grateful
    to Chairwoman Johnson for her leadership of this Committee, of
    really bringing together a bipartisan Committee, working
    together in a bipartisan way with the Ranking Member and
    serving as a great example to all of us, and for making it
    possible for us to hold this field hearing in Houston today.
        So thank you so much, Chairwoman Johnson, for joining us,
    and you are now recognized for your questions for 5 minutes.
    Thank you.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. And let me
    apologize for being late. I'm coming from Dallas. I started out
    at 10 this morning to get here. I had no control over what
    happened. Just blame the airline.
        Let me thank our Subcommittee Chair, Mrs. Fletcher, for
    taking on the leadership of having this hearing. I was
    delighted to support her and say welcome to the other
    distinguished Members of the Committee and our visiting Members
    as well.
        I knew this would be a very important hearing because of
    where you're located and because of the weather that we are all
    experiencing. We know very well that we are dealing with this
    weather change. And it's not a debate. The debate is what can
    we do to see if we can relieve ourselves of some of the
    outcomes.
        Let me welcome our witnesses and thank you so very much for
    being here.
        We know that we are dealing with a hotter, wetter
    atmosphere due to increased greenhouse gas emissions and
    increasing rainfall during typical cyclones. According to the
    Fourth National Climate Assessment, Hurricane Harvey rewrote
    the continental U.S. record for total rainfall from a tropical
    cyclone. It has been estimated that the climate change
    increased rainfall 38 percent during Harvey, and accordingly,
    Houston experienced record-breaking floods in the years between
    2015 and 2017. I know full well that is not a pleasant
    experience.
        Now, Dr. Blackburn, thank you so much for being here. As
    extreme rainfall and flooding intensifies in the Houston area
    due to a changing climate, what research has been done on
    improving the resiliency of roads and infrastructure?
        Mr. Blackburn. In terms of the roads and infrastructure
    specifically, I would say that they are--in a way are among our
    more vulnerable infrastructure that we have. Unfortunately,
    they were built at a time before much of the information that
    we have now is--was well-known, so many of them are below the
    current 100-year floodplain and maybe below the--and certainly
    will be below the 100-year floodplain once it's readjusted with
    the NOAA Atlas 14 data.
        So we--I would tell you that roads are extremely
    vulnerable. I think our chemical plants and our refining
    infrastructure are also incredibly vulnerable. So right now, I
    would say we are a very vulnerable community to both rainfall
    flooding and surge flooding unfortunately.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Dr. Rifai, we know
    we've had a great deal of damage. I also serve on the
    Transportation Committee, and I've been asking for research for
    resilience now for several years. And before we can get all of
    it done, we are in great need of the outcome. What are some of
    the mechanisms for information-sharing among cities and
    emergency managers regarding successful strategies for
    resilience?
        Dr. Rifai. So there's a lot of data that we could use from
    them, and if we had access to this information, the idea is to
    put that type of knowledge in with the information from the
    weather and the predictions and in with the information from
    the sophisticated AI and algorithms and also from--excuse me--
    the data that we collect on anticipated damages, weaknesses,
    vulnerabilities, and fragilities in the system. So it does take
    all kinds of information to put together a system whereby we
    can make decisions and make improvements in our systems.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. Dr. Uccellini, to your
    knowledge, how equipped are forecasters and emergency managers
    quick to respond to rapid hurricane intensity changes?
        Dr. Uccellini. Yes, we have a very strong partnership. In
    fact, we call it a core partner with the emergency management
    community at every level of government as we've developed--or--
    our strategic or realizing our strategic goal of building a
    weather-ready Nation. We have to be in partnership with the
    folks who are on the ground and making decisions. And whether
    we are co-located with them, as we are here, whether we surge
    our resources to embed in the emergency management community
    during an event, or whether we're working through the social
    media outlets to--or direct communications, we keep them up-to-
    date on the situational awareness and whether it's in the
    forecast mode or during the actual events. So these rapid
    changes that we're seeing are well-communicated with them.
        And, as I answered before with respect to the changing
    climate, we have to calibrate our forecasts accordingly for
    things like storm surge or coastal flooding conditions based on
    sea-level rise, for example. So all of this is worked into our
    ongoing practice with them and actually during the event.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Let me just say
    that we just are celebrating the 50th anniversary of Apollo,
    Houston is very familiar with, and many people don't equate
    often that research with the outcomes of which we are working
    with today, all of the weather forecasting and all that. It's
    been such a tremendous 50 years of findings, but we still need
    additional information.
        It is clear that we have gained by having access to that
    information because we're saving a lot more lives with the
    projections and the predictions. We're trying now to make sure
    we can save some properties as well.
        I want to express to all of you just how important this is
    to our Committee's research and direction. All of us here that
    are on the Committee are very concerned about what we can do
    and do it in a fairly rapid manner to see if we can improve
    from where we are. And we are bipartisan, as you can tell, and
    I don't know that I could say that any Member on this Committee
    is doubting whether or not we are going to look out for as much
    as we can to try to prevent more property loss in all of this
    weather change.
        Let me thank Mrs. Fletcher, and I will yield.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you very much, Chairwoman
    Johnson. I will now recognize Ms. Garcia for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Garcia. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I, too, want to
    thank you for bringing this field hearing to Houston. And,
    Chairwoman, thank you for all the support that you gave
    Representative Fletcher to make sure that we could do this
    because, as you said, this is a very critical topic, and all of
    us must work together not only as Members of Congress but
    together with all the other local governments.
        And I do want to acknowledge that Council Member Stardig is
    here, and I know I've worked with her on some of these issue.
    And our former County Judge Eckels, who also is known for
    knowing these issues like the back of his hand, so thank you
    for doing that.
        And most of you on the panel I've run across before
    because, like many here at the table, I've been through Katrina
    and Rita and all of them. You know, I remember Tropical Storm
    Allison. I mean, that was not a surge event. It was just a hell
    of a lot of water. And that was probably the first time we
    experienced something like that to a great degree here in
    Houston. So we've been through a lot together.
        And my questions are really going to be to Ms. Rifai. You
    know, you say in your testimony on page 2 that it is important
    to note that we'd be exceeding $70 billion for a 25-foot surge.
    What was the surge in Ike?
        Dr. Rifai. I'm sorry?
        Ms. Garcia. Do you recall what the surge was during Ike?
        Dr. Rifai. So the scenario we analyzed resulted in a 25-
    foot surge.
        Ms. Garcia. Well, I know what you analyzed, but do you
    recall what it was for Ike?
        Dr. Rifai. Oh, for Ike it was 14, and so----
        Ms. Garcia. Fourteen.
        Dr. Rifai [continuing]. With the--at the----
        Ms. Garcia. So another 11 and we could have suffered $70
    billion. How much did we suffer after Ike?
        Dr. Rifai. Well, it was a few billion dollars. It wasn't
    70. But the idea is Ike, as has been mentioned earlier, is
    really not the big storm per se. So if you were to take Ike and
    increase its wind or its strength by 30 percent, you would end
    up with 25-foot surge. And that basically would be very
    disastrous for Houston not just from infrastructure losses but
    from its economic viability essentially.
        Ms. Garcia. Right. And earlier, you said that it's
    important that we kind of weigh infrastructure and people----
        Dr. Rifai. Exactly
        Ms. Garcia [continuing]. And I always keep it real simple,
    especially when I was County Commissioner, to make sure people
    understood where we were. I always say that it's the three P's.
    It's protecting people, the plants--and I mean industry--I
    don't mean their pretty ivies--and of course the port. And
    port, I don't just mean Port of Houston but the entire, you
    know, 26 miles of the Houston Ship Channel. Would you agree
    with that, keeping it simple?
        Dr. Rifai. Exactly.
        Ms. Garcia. Right.
        Dr. Rifai. But----
        Ms. Garcia. And then I was really intrigued with your
    figure--I think it's 12 on page 17. And I apologize to the
    audience if you don't have the handouts. But you mentioned the
    number of tanks, but you mentioned that only one has actually
    had a spill and--concentrated, but the spill was--it--
    significant concentrated disadvantaged populations.
        Dr. Rifai. So actually the figure that you are referring to
    shows at this one facility there was one tank that failed
    during Harvey----
        Ms. Garcia. Right.
        Dr. Rifai [continuing]. But in fact in figure 12 you will
    see that there were many other failures across the city.
        Ms. Garcia. Right.
        Dr. Rifai. And most of these failures are in these zones
    that have concentrated disadvantage. In our work, we define
    concentrated disadvantage, looking at five different measures
    of disadvantage, one being younger than 18, one being female
    head of household, one is the amount of money that you make in
    your household, and so on. So when you look at these five
    factors, that's the mapping of the community and what it looks
    like with regard to disadvantage and----
        Ms. Garcia. So is it too simple to say that most leaks have
    occurred and impacted the concentrated disadvantaged
    populations the most in our area?
        Dr. Rifai. OK.
        Ms. Garcia. OK means yes? Or would you say it another way?
        Dr. Rifai. Well, I mean, we see more impact in areas that
    have concentrated disadvantage. That's where the industries
    are, that's where most of the release is. Even when you look at
    the infrastructure like wastewater plants and hazardous waste
    sites, Superfund sites, they're all located in disadvantaged--
    concentrated disadvantaged communities. And so when you have a
    release, especially when people don't have the means to leave,
    they're sheltering in place, they really have no way to get out
    of the situation they're in, and on top of that they have to
    deal with these biological and chemical hazards, that all--are
    all around them.
        Ms. Garcia. I ask as I still remember the words at the
    first briefing that--I was a State Senator at the time that the
    State did before Harvey hit, and they said places that have
    never flooded before will this time. And, unfortunately, a lot
    of these disadvantaged areas--and many of which are in my
    district--sort of always get hit. I mean, I always say that
    Harvey was like the guy who's lost and doesn't want to stop and
    ask for directions because it wandered--Harvey wandered
    everywhere.
        So I guess my concern and my final question to you would be
    would you say then that the greater impact is usually to the
    disadvantaged populations?
        Dr. Rifai. I'm sorry, the greater impact?
        Ms. Garcia. Impact, negative impact, financial impact,
    losing their homes.
        Dr. Rifai. Yes.
        Ms. Garcia. Because, as you see, most people here are
    probably homeowners. I don't know how many people here are from
    industry. But I just want to make sure that when we talk about
    these issues that we always talk about people first.
        Dr. Rifai. Absolutely.
        Ms. Garcia. Thank you.
        Dr. Rifai. I couldn't agree with you more.
        Ms. Garcia. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Ms. Garcia.
        Thank you all for your very thoughtful questions. Thank you
    for your wonderful answers. We're going to begin our second
    round of follow-up questions where the remaining Committee
    Members will have up to 5 minutes to ask some follow-up
    questions. They may not take the whole 5 minutes, but we
    definitely want to follow up on a couple of things.
        And certainly we've talked a lot about Harvey and the
    impacts of Harvey. And I think there are lessons there that we
    can all take. Certainly, I think in response to some questions
    from Mr. Olson, Mr. Blackburn, I want to ask you a quick
    follow-up. I know Mr. Olson talked about particularly the
    flooding of Harvey and the Canyon Gate subdivision, which I
    think just the record will reflect is upstream of the Barker
    Reservoir. And of course that is a very important concern, the
    upstream flooding, as well as downstream.
        But one of the things you mentioned in response to that
    question, Mr. Blackburn, was that there are a lot of creative
    concepts that aren't being implemented, and I was wondering if
    you could give us some examples of some of those creative ideas
    that could be implemented here and elsewhere because, of
    course, the work on this Committee applies across the Gulf
    Coast and across the United States. But if you could just give
    us some examples of some of those creative ideas, I think that
    could be helpful.
        Mr. Blackburn. I mean, would that be--are you asking
    specifically to Addicks and Barker or more generally?
        Chairwoman Fletcher. No, more generally.
        Mr. Blackburn. OK. I think from a creativity standpoint,
    the--I've mentioned one, getting the private sector more
    involved from a financial side. I think looking hard at the
    methodologies and perhaps releasing some of the Federal
    agencies from some of the binding methodologies that they have
    that are kind of tying their hands in how they respond, the
    benefit-cost analysis process is something that I would ask you
    to take a look at. I think it was done at a time for good
    reasons, but it may not be appropriate for now.
        From a creative standpoint, I would also look at frankly,
    how we're--you know, the role of flood insurance and really
    buyout. I would tell you that if you want to get really
    creative, let's combine housing strategies with buyout
    strategies so that when we talk about buyouts, there are going
    to be homes available for people to move into, linking things
    that have not been linked before.
        And I concur with all of the focus on the equity issue. It
    has to be in the middle of that discussion and oftentimes has
    not been for various reasons I think related to methodologies.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. And would you include natural
    infrastructure as part of that creative approach?
        Mr. Blackburn. Absolutely. We've worked real hard with
    natural infrastructure and particularly trying to work with
    landowners to keep them on their lands so that those lands can
    flood and not generate a lot of damage. A lot of ranchers want
    to stay on their lands. We need to find ways to get money to
    them, and we're working on that with our Texas coastal
    exchange.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Terrific. And I have one more question
    for the full panel. We've talked a little bit about some of the
    funding challenges, the Federal Government's historical role as
    a funder, but there's encouragement of getting more involved,
    especially in the research. But could you identify for us any
    of the research gaps that you have found in your work that
    could be addressed with Federal funding?
        And likewise, are there suggestions of things where funding
    isn't really the issue, but there's some collaboration or
    collective effort that you could share with us would be helpful
    that we should know about?
        Mr. Blackburn. Is that to me or to others?
        Chairwoman Fletcher. That's to everyone. Maybe if each of
    you want to give a quick answer to that, and then we'll move
    on.
        Dr. Uccellini. Well, you know, I can't talk about funding,
    so what I will say is whether it's the Federal Government,
    within the Federal Government, or among the government
    partners, there's got to be I think more attention paid to how
    we can leverage each other. And that also applies not only
    nationally but internationally, so we certainly on the science
    side are always working with the international community to try
    to advance our predictive capabilities, for example.
        I see one of the biggest gaps, again, as we are now--it's
    relatively new that we're actually going beyond the forecast
    and warning to try to affect decisionmaking across the whole.
    And what we're finding is--and what's now being reported in
    literature is trying--a better understanding of the changing
    risk preference of people as an event is coming on them. And
    this is this link between physical and social science. And if
    there's a gap anywhere, it's cementing that linkage between
    those two sciences----
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you.
        Dr. Uccellini [continuing]. Science categories.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Dr. Rifai?
        Dr. Rifai. Sure. So, for me, I will focus on a couple of
    key points. One is the ability to basically have research-
    informed decisionmaking. We have a lot of tough decisions, and
    they're all costly. And it's not an infinite pot of money, as
    has been mentioned several times. So for us to make those tough
    decisions, we really need to fund research into what would--
    what can we buy most for the limited resources that we have.
        The second point that I would like to make is in our
    country in the U.S. our monitoring grid, our observation grid
    is really ancient and old. It doesn't give us all the
    information that we need, whether it be the rainfall gauges or
    water quality systems, any type of LIDAR (light detection and
    ranging) or satellite imagery or boots-on-the-ground-type data
    collection. I think it would behoove us to invest in upgrading
    that entire network to where we have data on the fly, real
    time, and people can make informed decisions.
        We'd like to be like NOAA. We'd like to be like the
    communities that have access to AI and machine learning and be
    able to take that data in real time and tell communities stay,
    leave, get out, you're at risk, this is what's going to happen,
    and provide this type of information at great detail.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you. Ms. Grover-Kopec?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. I would echo the comments that Dr.
    Uccellini and Dr. Rifai said. The thing I would add actually is
    a non-funding option is supportive of public-private
    partnerships. There are plenty of private enterprises who, both
    because it's good for their business and because they care
    about their communities that they operate in, are open-minded
    to partner with our municipalities, our State and Federal local
    governments, and supporting that would be extremely helpful.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Terrific. Thank you. Mr. Blackburn,
    any----
        Mr. Blackburn. No, I have nothing to add.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. OK. Thank you very much. Well, I will
    yield back my time, and I will recognize Mr. Babin for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Babin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple questions.
    Dr. Uccellini, how has the Weather Act passed by this Committee
    2 years ago, helped you improve weather forecasting to date?
    And another follow-up after that.
        Dr. Uccellini. Well, with the separate categories--and I
    could go through each one. With the observations, we depend on
    global observations. Satellite data is extremely important to
    everything we do, as an example. The commercial aspect of that
    where--which is being tested now, is something that we need to
    look at because, clearly, the government can't assume all the
    risk anymore with billion-dollar systems, so this is something
    that we are looking forward to actually working and adopting
    observations from any source, as long as those observations
    meet our standards.
        On Titles 2 and 3 is the research improvement of the
    models, and there's a major effort ongoing to create our
    linkages to the university community. It's titled EPIC as--and
    the Administration has been fully behind that, and our
    management team, leadership team, and NOAA is certainly pushing
    to work that. They're focused on seasonal and sub-seasonal.
    There's been increased money redirected toward that area, which
    is important for us because we have to know that climate
    background, you know, in that time range as we improve our
    forecasts.
        And then, of course, on Title 4, we have building a
    weather-ready Nation, increasing IDSS (Impact-based Decision
    Support Services), and we've really embraced that's to move
    forward. And title 5 is the tsunami program, and we're
    certainly making progress there as well.
        So it just teed up all of these efforts and brought a focus
    on very high-priority items that we're certainly working to
    address now the advances which we presume we'll be getting from
    all these efforts.
        Mr. Babin. You did mention EPIC.
        Dr. Uccellini. Yes.
        Mr. Babin. That was my follow-up question, so you took care
    of that one. So we will----
        Dr. Uccellini. That's Earth Prediction Innovation Center.
        Mr. Babin. That's right.
        Dr. Uccellini. Right.
        Mr. Babin. Earth Prediction Innovation Center, better known
    as EPIC. And you kind of alluded to it, but how is the National
    Weather Service--how are you going to be able to utilize EPIC
    in forecasting hurricane development and tracking in the
    future? Sorry about that.
        Dr. Uccellini. We need--we absolutely need to have better
    ties to the entire research community, not just those
    researchers----
        Mr. Babin. Right.
        Dr. Uccellini [continuing]. Within NOAA but the entire
    research community, academic community especially. And this
    center is designed to be able to work with them in design, in
    the actual research, and then assuring that the research is
    done within a framework that will allow for an accelerated
    research to operations. And that's one of the key areas that
    we're really focused on is accelerating those changes into our
    operational system. So we're pretty excited about it. We've
    worked with the academic community in the past. What we're
    doing here is to broaden that scope and to ensure that there's
    a faster return on investment in partnership with that
    community.
        Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you very much. And then my second and
    last question was for Ms. Grover-Kopec. Thank you for being
    here today and sharing the private sector's perspective on
    developing more efficient disaster response strategies. In your
    written testimony, you explain how One Concern's work is made
    possible by research sponsored by the Federal Government. Can
    you explain how you utilize your company's work to assist
    communities like Houston in planning for the next weather
    disaster? We'd be very interested in it.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Sure, yes. Well, I'll be honest with you.
    So most of the implementation that we've done on this
    technology has been earthquake-focused, so most of the examples
    I can cite would be focused on the West Coast and seismic risk,
    so we have some good work going with the city of Seattle, as
    well as American Family Insurance as an example of the public-
    private partnership that we're talking about.
        On the climate-related risk more related to kind of the
    hurricane risk that Houston sees here, we started to implement
    our flood product in the State of Arizona in the Nogales Wash,
    and we soon will be doing that with the State of Pennsylvania
    around Williamsport and the city of Pittsburgh. And so the
    intent there is it's the city managers, it's emergency
    responders, and those emergency management officials in those
    jurisdictions----
        Mr. Babin. Right.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec [continuing]. Using the live event
    products to respond.
        Mr. Babin. The amazing thing is--you know, you were talking
    about tsunamis a while ago. When you have a 25-foot storm surge
    like we had in Hurricane Ike, basically it's a tsunami with
    wind, and so we get a double whammy on that deal, so----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. Yes.
        Mr. Babin [continuing]. I'll yield back, Madam Chair. Thank
    you very much.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Babin. I will now
    recognize Mr. Weber for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Weber. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd just like to say for
    the public that's here, thank you for being here and for paying
    attention and caring enough to come out and spend your time.
        I make a note of optimism. You're seeing this very hearing
    for the very reason that you're here, to make sure that your
    government is on top of things and wanting to make things
    better and safer, protect people, families, you know, houses,
    and of course industry as much as possible because that means
    jobs.
        The science is getting better. There's much money needed
    for research. I think hopefully you're getting a sense of that
    from up here. And so take heart because I look for good things
    to happen.
        Dr. Uccellini, for you, we had this discussion when we
    toured the National Weather Service this morning, which of
    course is in my district in League City. And my district has
    the dubious distinction of having the two largest rainfall
    records in United States history. Tropical storm Claudette, in
    1979, dropped about 43 inches of rain overnight in a 24-year
    period in Alvin, Texas. And then of course, as you know, Harvey
    dropped about 61 inches in Jefferson County, drainage district
    number 7, a little longer timeframe but still it was the new
    rainfall record.
        And so you were very gracious with your time this morning,
    Dr. Uccellini. How many National Weather Service centers are in
    the United States?
        Dr. Uccellini. We have nine operational centers today. We
    have a 10th center, which is--will approach initial operation
    capability--that's the water center in Alabama--by September
    30. So we'll have 10, and they cover a spectrum from space
    weather to ocean predictions, so we have centers focused on
    what I call a domain space of the sun to the sea. And for those
    in the audience who don't think space weather is important, if
    you use GPS, it's important. So--as an--or if your plane is
    using it, it's important, too. So we have 10 centers.
        Mr. Weber. Well, thank you for that. And we are very, very
    fortunate and blessed that we have one local. And as you all--
    --
        Dr. Uccellini. Oh, wait a minute, I'm sorry. We have 122
    local forecast offices, so you have that local forecast office.
        Mr. Weber. Right, but you know, in Texas, things are bigger
    and better, and we want more centers in Texas. I'm just saying.
    And so we are very, very fortunate to have that. Now, we had a
    discussion with Galveston County, Judge Mark Henry, and he was
    there to kick us off. And he mentioned that the Federal
    Government, the National Weather Center, did not just barge in
    to the emergency management center there, but they asked if
    they could come in and partner with Galveston County. And of
    course the emergency management center, the Commissioners said
    of course you can, you're welcome, please come. And then Judge
    Mark Henry said, you know, you came as a volunteer, but now
    you're hostage; you can't leave.
        And you all laid out a scenario that worked for Hurricane
    Harvey, which was so astounding because you had emergency
    management personnel there on the ground, you were dealing with
    Texas Emergency Management Coordinator, you were dealing with
    Harris County. Would you describe for the panel and for the
    people here exactly why that worked so well being in close
    proximity?
        Dr. Uccellini. So it's the development of the trust that--
    between the forecasters who--we'll always have uncertainty in a
    forecast. We can ever produce a perfect forecast. So yet there
    were incredible decisions that have to be made 5, 6, 7 days in
    advance to even start the process. So they have to go through
    the practicing with us through this developing relationship our
    sense of certainty and uncertainty as we approach this event
    and gets to a key decision point in which they need to act.
        So--and you mentioned the rainfall records. The one
    difference between the two of them is we predicted the second
    one, right? And even that, making that prediction, I contend
    that if we didn't have that trust built in, I'm not sure people
    would have believed our forecast of over 50 inches of rain. So
    it's that trust factor through practice, practice, practice
    that's essential to making this work.
        Mr. Weber. Right. And I appreciate that. And for the
    panelists and the audience, there were people who stayed there
    how many days in a row?
        Dr. Uccellini. Geez, I get----
        Mr. Weber. Six, eight, 10 days----
        Dr. Uccellini. Yes, it was in the 5-, 6-, 7-day range.
        Mr. Weber. Right.
        Dr. Uccellini. And this facility was incredible in terms of
    not only colocations but they had showers----
        Mr. Weber. Right.
        Dr. Uccellini [continuing]. So, as was pointed out today,
    that's really essential for keeping that trusted relationship
    working through days 5 and 6.
        Mr. Weber. One of the comments made was that the showers
    weren't for him, it was for his coworkers, so--anyway, thank
    you for that and your service. And I just want the community to
    take heart because good strides and good steps are being made.
        And, Madam Chairwoman, I appreciate you, and I'm going to
    yield back.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Weber. I'll now
    recognize Mr. Olson for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Olson. I thank the Chair again. And my second round of
    questions starts out with you, Ms. Grover-Kopec, about the
    National Flood Insurance Program. As you know, there's a
    philosopher who said the definition of insanity is doing the
    same thing over and over and over expecting different results.
    I submit the FIP is a great example of that working in our
    Federal Government. Right now, it's in debt about $21 billion
    last year. It increased all the floods we had in the Midwest,
    what's going to happen to hurricane season. We don't know
    what's going to happen. It's going bankrupt.
        My former colleague, the Chairman of Financial Services Jeb
    Hensarling, tried to pass a bill. He knew the private sector
    could adequately address the costs and risks of most floods
    probably 90 percent or more with the public sector covering
    the--sort of the big issues. He thought that'd be more viable,
    lower cost, better service. And so what do you think about the
    private sector taking up a big chunk of flood insurance? Is
    that viable, will save money, more responsive, or should we
    just keep marching down with the current NFIP?
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. My own personal opinion is I think it is
    viable, though will probably not happen overnight. I do think
    some of the changes that FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
    Agency) made over the last year around the governance of NFIP
    in those policies helps considerably. For example, the ability
    of homeowners to use a private policy if they have a federally
    backed mortgage instead of an NFIP policy, assuming those are
    comparable, that's an example of a really concrete move that
    they've made in the right direction. And once those policies--
    they're seeing some stability in opening up that arena to the
    private sector, as well as openness on the regulatory front at
    the State level. I think you'll see insurers step in as--it's a
    growth opportunity for them, and they would like to cover that
    risk, assuming they understand it well.
        Mr. Olson. So say we create that environment, this will
    actually work, the private sector take a big chunk of what NFIP
    is doing right now. Is that----
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. If they understand the risk----
        Mr. Olson. Yes, all the--yes.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec [continuing]. And the regulatory
    environment allows it, yes.
        Mr. Olson. Work to go.
        But the second round of questions is for you again, ma'am,
    and maybe for you, Dr. Rifai. It's about AI. And I'm the co-
    Chairman of the House AI Caucus, along with Chair McNerney from
    California. And we all know what AI is going to do for the
    future, I mean, especially during natural disasters. It will
    give us real-time information on unpassable roads, powerlines
    that are down, trees are down, status of hospitals. For
    example, Memorial Hermann Sugar Land shut down because of the
    floods of the Brazos River during Hurricane Harvey.
        And also AI never forgets a situation. Who here remembers
    Tropical Storm Claudette? Not many hands. That storm set a
    record. That tropical storm dropped 42 inches of rain on Alvin,
    Texas, in less than 24 hours. That record stood until last
    year. Something happened in Hawaii.
        So my question is, how can AI--both of you--solve some of
    these problems, get this thing turned on and manage it, all
    these issues with biases, there's things out there, but what do
    you think about AI in the future? How can we help at the
    Federal Government make this thing a reality?
        Dr. Rifai. So there's so much data out there and so much
    knowledge, and it's really hard for the human brain to get
    their arms around it, so we need machines to help us sort
    through the information and detect patterns. And then by
    detecting these patterns, we can make better decisions. So if
    you ask me, we need to make maybe 10,000 computer simulations.
    Even with the fastest computers, there's no way I and my
    research group or any other entity by themselves can sort
    through all those results and give you the probability that a
    given scenario is going to happen. AI, machine learning helps
    with all of that. It's done really quickly. And while I'm not
    in quantum computing, I can buy into AI and machine learning;
    quantum computing is going to take us a little bit longer to
    get that done.
        Ms. Grover-Kopec. I just want to comment. That answer is
    spot on. And the thing I would add is that modeling approach
    allows us to not be so biased by history, right? If you take
    what Dr. Rifai just said and the ability to look at potential
    future scenarios in a dynamic and a quick manner, it allows to
    remove the bias of history. History is important, but we need
    to be able to account for the future view as well.
        Dr. Uccellini. And if I may, within the forecast process
    itself, there's a tremendous amount of information in the
    observations, in the models that we can extract and use not
    only for supporting decisionmaking--and I contend or believe
    that AI or cognitive computing is going to be really important
    in assisting in decisionmaking, but it also helps us extract
    the information that could improve our forecast and help
    pinpoint warnings as well. So we are very actively engaged in
    this and have been. There's been--there was artificial
    intelligence work that started in the 1990s, so this is
    something that we're actually looking toward to help our jobs
    as well.
        Mr. Olson. Mr. Blackburn, I'll give you your Rice-style
    farewell. I yield back.
        Chairwoman Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Olson.
        And before we bring our hearing to a close, I really want
    to echo the comments of all of my colleagues. I'm so grateful
    to have with us in attendance today some of our elected
    officials and leaders on this issue, of course Houston City
    Council Member Stardig, former Harris County Judge Eckels. And
    Russ Poppe from Harris County Flood Control was here but I
    don't see him anymore--and our community for coming out to this
    hearing to listen to these important issues. It really
    underscores the importance of the work that our witnesses are
    doing and the work that is before this Committee and the work
    that we need to do from where we sit in Washington.
        So I really want to thank all of our witnesses for their
    time. I want to thank the community for coming out.
        The record for this hearing will remain open for 2 weeks
    for additional statements from the Members or for any
    additional questions the Committee may want to ask of the
    witnesses.
        And with that, the witnesses are excused, and the hearing
    is now adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 5:08 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                   Appendix I

                                  ----------

                       Additional Material for the Record

               Letter submitted by Representative Lizzie Fletcher

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]