[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LOOKING BACK TO PREDICT THE FUTURE:
THE NEXT GENERATION OF WEATHER SATELLITES
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
AND TECHNOLOGY
OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 21, 2022
__________
Serial No. 117-69
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-523PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma,
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon Ranking Member
AMI BERA, California MO BROOKS, Alabama
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan, BILL POSEY, Florida
Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey BRIAN BABIN, Texas
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
MELANIE A. STANSBURY, New Mexico MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
BRAD SHERMAN, California JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida
JERRY McNERNEY, California MIKE GARCIA, California
PAUL TONKO, New York STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
BILL FOSTER, Illinois YOUNG KIM, California
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
DON BEYER, Virginia JAKE LaTURNER, Kansas
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania JAY OBERNOLTE, California
DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina PETER MEIJER, Michigan
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin JAKE ELLZEY, TEXAS
DAN KILDEE, Michigan MIKE CAREY, OHIO
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
VACANCY
------
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics
HON. DON BEYER, Virginia, Chairman
ZOE LOFGREN, California BRIAN BABIN, Texas,
AMI BERA, California Ranking Member
BRAD SHERMAN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado BILL POSEY, Florida
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida
VACANCY YOUNG KIM, California
------
Subcommittee on Environment
HON. MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey, Chairwoman
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma,
DAN KILDEE, Michigan Ranking Member
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
VACANCY CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida
C O N T E N T S
September 21, 2022
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Don Beyer, Chairman, Subcommittee on
Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 10
Written Statement............................................ 12
Statement by Representative Brian Babin, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives........... 13
Written Statement............................................ 14
Statement by Representative Mikie Sherrill, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 15
Written Statement............................................ 17
Statement by Representative Stephanie I. Bice, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 18
Written Statement............................................ 19
Written statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 20
Witnesses:
Dr. Stephen Volz, Assistant Administrator, National Environmental
Satellite, Data, and Information Services, NOAA
Oral Statement............................................... 21
Written Statement............................................ 24
Mr. John Gagosian, Joint Agency Satellite Division Director, NASA
Oral Statement............................................... 35
Written Statement............................................ 37
Mr. Fred Meny, Assistant Inspector General for Audit and
Evaluation, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector
General
Oral Statement............................................... 43
Written Statement............................................ 45
Discussion....................................................... 58
Appendix: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Mr. John Gagosian, Joint Agency Satellite Division Director, NASA 76
LOOKING BACK TO PREDICT
THE FUTURE: THE NEXT GENERATION
OF WEATHER SATELLITES
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2022
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics,
joint with the Subcommittee on Environment,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Beyer
[Chairman of the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics]
presiding.
[[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Beyer. Good morning. This hearing will come to
order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare
recess at any time.
Before I deliver my opening remarks, I wanted to note that,
today, the Committee is meeting both in person and virtually,
both Members and witnesses. And I want to announce a couple of
reminders to the Members about the conduct of this hearing.
First, Members and staff who are attending in person may choose
to be masked, but it is not a requirement. However, any
individuals with symptoms, a positive test, or exposure to
someone with COVID-19 should wear a mask while present. Members
who are attending virtually should keep their video feed on as
long as they are present in the hearing. Members are
responsible for their own microphones. And also please keep
your microphones muted unless you're speaking.
Finally, if Members have any documents they wish to submit
for the record, please email them to the Committee Clerk, whose
email address was circulated prior to the hearing.
Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing, ``Looking
Back to Predict the Future: The Next Generation of Weather
Satellites.'' I want to welcome our witnesses. We're pleased to
have you here both in person and virtually.
Today, the Subcommittees on Environment and Space and
Aeronautics are meeting jointly, and I want to thank Chair
Sherrill for her collaboration on this hearing.
The importance of advanced, reliable weather prediction and
understanding of long-term climate trends can't be understated.
Devastating winds, storm surges, and flooding in Alaska and
Puerto Rico are just recent examples. While weather continues
to present serious risks to life and property, we've come a
long way from 1900 when a hurricane with 135 mile per hour
winds decimated Galveston, Texas, and wiped out 8,000 lives and
an estimated 3,600 buildings.
Our Nation's weather satellites in essence are the
workhorses that provide imagery and data that feed weather
forecast models and predictive tools. These critical satellite
capabilities support the Government's core weather services,
global users, as well as a thriving commercial weather
industry. Today, advanced technologies increased scientific
understanding of the Earth system and a burgeoning commercial
space industry, providing new options and opportunities for our
next generation of operational weather systems. We need to
start by looking back to predict the future, and that story
begins with NASA (National Aeronautics and Space
Administration).
In the early stages of our space program, NASA developed
and launched in 1960 the world's first weather satellite, the
Television Infrared Observation Satellite, TIROS-1, equipped
with two television cameras and two video recorders that proved
the value of space-based weather operations. A year later,
President John F. Kennedy in a historic May 1961 speech to a
joint session of Congress included a request for appropriations
that will, quote, ``will help give us at the earliest possible
time a satellite system for worldwide weather observation.''
Following the TIROS satellites led to NASA's Nimbus series,
as NASA worked first with NOAA's (National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's) precursor and then NOAA to
establish a weather satellite system. NASA also developed the
first geostationary weather satellite, followed by the first
operational Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite,
GOES, in 1975. And today, through a reimbursable arrangement
with NOAA, NASA leverages its decades of experience to manage
NOAA's satellite and instrument development, acquisition and
contracting, and launch services. And once NASA checks out the
satellite's on-orbit performance, it has a responsibility to
NOAA for operational services.
The benefits of NASA's contributions, however, don't end
there. NASA and NOAA can transition instruments initially
designed for NASA's cutting-edge space-based Earth science
research into NASA's--NOAA's operational weather systems. The
Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer, MODIS, on NASA's
Earth science, Terra and Aqua satellites lead to the
development of their Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite,
VIIRS, a key instrument on NOAA's current Joint Polar Satellite
System (JPSS) series. And NASA's planned Earth science TROPICS
(Time-Resolved Observations of Precipitation structure and
storm Intensity with a Constellation of Smallsats) mission to
involve a small satellite constellation could, if successful,
provide options for future weather satellite missions and
architectures.
NOAA's and NASA's collaboration is long and strong, though
the partnership has had its share of changes over time. The
challenges and eventual dissolution of the prior tri-agency,
NOAA, NASA and DOD (Department of Defense), NPOESS (National
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System)
weather satellite program, led to NASA's establishment of the
Joint Agency Satellite Division (JASD) within the Science
Mission Directorate. The division provides a dedicated effort
to manage NASA's work for NOAA.
It's clear both NOAA and NASA have learned a lot. Their
decades-long relationship has matured to the point where NOAA
and NASA jointly chair program management councils. We need to
examine the lessons of this partnership, especially as the
Federal Government considers equally challenging and important
interagency efforts, including a space situational awareness,
an era--area in which Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee are
actively working, working together because reducing
miscommunication and facilitating information flow are
essential if we are to develop successful systems such as
weather satellites, while minimizing cost, schedule, and
management challenges.
For example, challenges with the GOES-R program's key
instrument, the Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI), on the
currently operating GOES-17 satellite led to significant
redesign of the instrument for the follow-on GOES-T satellite,
which launched 18 months later than planned. Ensuring that
lessons learned from previous mistakes are incorporated into
future programs is essential to successfully executing NOAA's
critical weather forecasting program.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how NOAA
and NASA's partnership and decades of experience and lessons
will lead and advance our Nation's next-generation weather
satellite systems.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Beyer follows:]
Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing, Looking Back
to Predict the Future: The Next Generation of Weather
Satellites.
I want to welcome our witnesses. We are pleased to have you
with us, both in person and virtually.
Today, the Subcommittees on Environment and Space and
Aeronautics are meeting jointly, and I want to thank Chair
Sherrill for her collaboration on this hearing.
The importance of advanced, reliable weather prediction and
understanding of long-term climate trends can't be understated.
Devastating winds, storm surges, and flooding in Alaska and
Puerto Rico are recent examples.
While weather continues to present serious risks to life
and property, we've come a long way from 1900 when a hurricane
with 135 mph winds decimated Galveston, Texas and wiped out
8,000 lives and an estimated 3,600 buildings.
Our nation's weather satellites and instruments are the
workhorses that provide imagery and data to feed weather
forecast models and predictive tools. These critical satellite
capabilities support the government's core weather services,
global users, as well as a thriving commercial weather
industry.
Today, advanced technologies, increased scientific
understanding of the Earth system, and a burgeoning commercial
space industry are providing new options and opportunities for
our next generation of operational weather systems.
We need to start by ``Looking Back to Predict the Future'',
and that story begins with NASA.
In the earliest years of our space program, NASA developed
and launched in 1960 the world's first weather satellite, the
Television Infrared Observation Satellite--TIROS-1--equipped
with two television cameras and two video recorders that proved
the value of space-based weather observations.
A year later, President John F. Kennedy, in his historic
May 1961 speech to a Joint Session of Congress, included a
request for appropriations that ``will help give us at the
earliest possible time a satellite system for world-wide
weather observation.''
Follow-on TIROS satellites led to NASA's Nimbus series as
NASA worked first with NOAA's precursor, and then NOAA, to
establish a weather satellite system.
NASA also developed the first geostationary weather
satellite, followed by the first operational Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellite--GOES--in 1975.
Today, through a reimbursable arrangement with NOAA, NASA
leverages its decades of experience to manage NOAA's satellite
and instrument development, acquisition and contracting, and
launch services.
Once NASA checks out the satellite's on-orbit performance,
it hands responsibility to NOAA for operational services.The
benefits of NASA's contributions, however, don't end there.
NASA and NOAA can transition instruments initially designed
for NASA's cutting-edge, space-based Earth science research
into NOAA's operational weather systems.
The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer--MODIS--on
NASA's Earth science Terra and Aqua satellites, led to the
development of the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite--
VIIRS--a key instrument on NOAA's current Joint Polar Satellite
System series.
And NASA's planned Earth science TROPICS mission--to
involve a small satellite constellation--could, if successful,
provide options for future weather satellite missions and
architectures.
NOAA and NASA's collaboration is long and strong, though
the partnership has had its share of changes over time.
The challenges and eventual dissolution of the prior tri-
agency--NOAA, NASA, and DOD--NPOESS weather satellite program
led to NASA's establishment of the Joint Agency Satellite
Division within the Science Mission Directorate. The Division
provides a dedicated effort to managing NASA's work for NOAA.
It's clear both NASA and NOAA have learned a lot. Their
decades long relationship has matured to the point in which
NOAA and NASA jointly chair program management councils.
We need to examine the lessons of this partnership,
especially as the Federal government considers equally
challenging and important interagency efforts, including in
space situational awareness, an area on which the Space and
Aeronautics Subcommittee is actively working.
Because reducing miscommunication and facilitating
information flow are essential if we are to develop successful
systems, such as weather satellites, while minimizing cost,
schedule, and management challenges.
For example, challenges with the GOES-R program's key
instrument, the Advanced Baseline Imager on the currently
operating GOES-17 satellite, led to significant redesign of the
instrument for the follow-on GOES-T satellite, which launched
18 months later than planned.
Ensuring that lessons learned from previous mistakes are
incorporated into future programs is essential to successfully
executing NOAA's critical weather forecasting mission.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how NOAA
and NASA's partnership and decades of experience and lessons
will lead and advance our nation's next generation of weather
satellite systems.
Chairman Beyer. So let me now recognize my friend, the
Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Ranking Member, Dr. Brian
Babin, for an opening statement.
Mr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
today's hearing as well and looking forward to hearing from our
witnesses.
One of this Committee's top priorities in recent years has
been improving the accuracy of weather forecasting in the
United States. NOAA's short- and long-term weather forecasts
utilize data from several sources, including a fleet of
satellites orbiting above. These satellites in polar and
geostationary orbit provide needed observations of the Earth
system that are vital in the development of our weather
forecasts, as well as monitoring and preparing for extreme
weather events.
NOAA partners with NASA for the acquisition and the
development of these satellites. NOAA establishes its
requirements, and NASA issues contracts to develop these
satellites within budget and ensure that they meet the
technical specifications laid out by NOAA. NASA is responsible
for the launch of these satellites and then turns over
responsibility of these operations to NOAA. And though NOAA
still has one more geostationary satellite to launch in 2024,
the agency has laid out its initial plans for the next
generation of geostationary satellites, which will be known as
the Geostationary Extended Observation System (GeoXO), or more
commonly known as GeoXO. At the same time, NOAA is continuing
the deployment of its polar satellites through the Joint Polar
Satellite System, with the next satellite JPSS-2 scheduled for
launch in November.
And though these systems are currently working well, that
was not always the case. A previous system of polar-orbiting
weather satellites to be developed in partnership with the
Department of Defense, known as NPOESS, was canceled due to
cost overruns, technical challenges, and schedule delays.
Additionally, the recently launched GOES-T satellite was
delayed by more than 18 months because of a needed redesign of
its Advanced Baseline Imager, or ABI, due to technical issues
experienced by its predecessor, GOES-S.
Both GAO (Government Accountability Office) and the
Department of Commerce's Inspector General have engaged in
extensive reviews of NOAA's development process for its fleet
of weather satellites and have offered a number of
recommendations for how best to improve that process. Today's
hearing should focus on how well NOAA has implemented these
recommendations in the development of the current fleet of
satellites, as well as what lessons still must be applied to
the next generation of weather satellites.
This Committee has a responsibility to ensure that taxpayer
dollars are spent in the most responsible manner possible and
we are getting the highest value for these satellites. As we
consider how best to maximize the use of taxpayer dollars, we
must continue to explore ways the Federal Government can
partner with private--with the private sector to provide
critical data.
We have seen tremendous growth in the capabilities of the
commercial satellite industry in recent years. The Weather Act,
sponsored by Ranking Member Lucas, and the PROSWIFT Act both
contained pilot programs that allowed NOAA to purchase data
from commercial sources. We have seen the commercial sector
willing and able to provide data to NOAA. In fact, NOAA
recently announced a second request for radio occultation data
from commercial weather satellites. Additionally, the agency
announced that three companies have received contracts to
provide space weather data to the agency.
As we look ahead to the next generation of NOAA's weather
satellites, we should consider how we can continue to leverage
the innovation and the resources of the private sector as we
work to provide the best weather forecast possible.
I want to thank our panel of witnesses for appearing before
us today, and I look forward to a very productive discussion on
this very important topic. And so with that, I'll yield back,
Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Babin follows:]
Thank you for holding today's hearing, Mr. Chairman.
One of this Committee's top priorities in recent years has
been improving the accuracy of weather forecasting in the
United States. NOAA's short and long-term weather forecasts
utilize data from several sources, including a fleet of
satellites orbiting above.
These satellites, in polar and geostationary orbit, provide
needed observations of the Earth system that are vital in the
development our weather forecasts as well as monitoring and
preparing extreme weather events.
NOAA partners with NASA for the acquisition and development
of these satellites. NOAA establishes its requirements and NASA
issues contracts to develop these satellites within budget and
ensure they meet the technical specifications laid out by NOAA.
NASA is responsible for the launch of these satellites and then
turns over responsibility for operations to NOAA.
Though NOAA still has one more geostationary satellite to
launch in 2024, the agency has laid out its initial plans for
the next generation of geostationary satellites, which will be
known as the Geostationary Extended Observation System, or more
commonly known as GeoXO (pronounced Geo-X-O).
At the same time, NOAA is continuing the deployment of its
polar satellites through the Joint Polar Satellite System, with
the next satellite, JPSS-2, scheduled for launch in November.
Though these systems are currently working well, that was
not always the case. A previous system of polar-orbiting
weather satellites to be developed in partnership Department of
Defense known as NPOESS (In-pose) was cancelled due to cost
overruns, technical challenges, and schedule delays.
Additionally, the recently launched GOES-T satellite was
delayed by more than 18 months due to a needed redesign of its
Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) due to technical issues
experienced by its predecessor, GOES-S.
Both GAO and the Department of Commerce's Inspector General
have engaged in extensive reviews of NOAA's development process
for its fleet of weather satellites and have offered a number
of recommendations for how best to improve that process.
Today's hearing should focus on how well NOAA has
implemented these recommendations in the development of the
current fleet of satellites as well what lessons still must be
applied to the next generation of weather satellites. This
Committee has a responsibility to ensure that taxpayers dollars
are spent in the most responsible manner possible and we are
getting the highest value from these satellites.
As we consider how best to maximize the use of taxpayer
dollars, we must continue to explore ways the federal
government can partner with the private sector to provide
critical data. We have seen tremendous growth in the
capabilities of the commercial satellite industry in recent
years.
The Weather Act, sponsored by Ranking Member Lucas, and the
PROSWIFT Act both contained pilot programs that allowed NOAA to
purchase data from commercial sources. We have seen the
commercial sector willing and able to provide data to NOAA.
In fact, NOAA recently announced a second request for radio
occultation data from commercial weather satellites.
Additionally, the agency announced that three companies have
received contracts to provide space weather data to the agency.
As we look ahead to the next generation of NOAA's weather
satellites, we should consider how we can continue to leverage
the innovation and resources of the private sector as we work
to provide the best weather forecasts possible.
I want to thank our panel of witnesses for appearing before
us today. I look forward to a productive discussion on this
important topic.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. And thank you, Doctor.
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir.
Chairman Beyer. The Chair now recognizes the Environment
Subcommittee Chairwoman Mikie Sherrill for an opening
statement.
Ms. Sherrill. Well, thank you so much, Chairman Beyer, and
thank you to our Ranking Member, Dr. Babin. It's wonderful to
be here today. And to our witnesses, thank you for joining us
both in person and virtually. I'm looking forward to hearing
about the successes and lessons learned from the current
weather satellite programs, as well as learning more about what
is to come with the next generation of satellites.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
weather satellite programs play a key role in its mission to
share Earth observations and scientific data used by the
public, private, and academic sectors. Access to this knowledge
is critical to communities in becoming resilient and weather-
ready. My district and many of my colleagues' districts have
seen increasingly frequent and severe weather. Communities such
as Little Falls, Woodland Park, and Denville in my district
have faced repeated catastrophic and sometimes deadly flooding
events such as the high-intensity rainfall from remnants of
Hurricane Ida.
I'm interested in hearing from our witnesses today about
how observations by these satellites and the next generation
after them will give communities like those in New Jersey's
11th District accurate and up-to-date forecasting tools to
predict and avoid life-threatening weather, especially extreme
rainfall, and confront the ever-worsening effects of the
climate crisis.
At the national level, rainfall and flooding like that
experienced in New Jersey and other extreme weather events can
cause billions of dollars in losses to our communities. NOAA
found that by July of this year, the U.S. had already
experienced nine weather and climate disasters that exceeded $1
billion each, and the year is not over yet. We are still in the
midst of what is predicted to be an above-average Atlantic
hurricane season. And just this past Sunday, Hurricane Fiona
made landfall in Puerto Rico, knocking out power to the island
and causing catastrophic flooding.
That's why this hearing is so critical. So many aspects of
our society and our economy depend on the environmental weather
and climate information collected from these satellites. Any
potential satellite malfunction or launch delay could cause
data gaps that would be devastating to national security, the
U.S. economy, and most importantly, public safety.
It has been several years since this Committee has done
extensive oversight over our Nation's operational weather
satellite programs. Today, we will hear about the successful
partnership between NOAA and NASA to develop, launch, and
operate the current generation of geostationary and polar-
orbiting weather satellites. In fact, earlier this year, we
celebrated the successful launch of the third satellite in the
GOES-R series, and we look forward to what we hope is another
successful launch of the JPSS-2 satellite later this year.
The credit for these recent successes is largely due to our
esteemed NOAA and NASA witnesses today and the teams that
support their efforts. However, this partnership has not been
without its issues, as we've heard. Both the Joint Polar
Satellite System and Geostationary Operational Environmental
Satellite programs initially faced ballooning costs and
extended delays.
Since then, NOAA and NASA have successfully turned around
these programs. Despite some challenges, including instrument
malfunctions on orbit, the agencies have worked to ensure no
disruption in observations and that the same mistakes are not
repeated. Continued planning, testing, and adjustments are
required to minimize the risk of any potential loss of
observational data. I hope to hear about the current
contingency plans in case any potential malfunctions or mishaps
occur and how NOAA and NASA will work together to address any
issues.
As the projected end of service dates for both the GOES-R
and JPSS series are expected at the end of the next decade,
it's important for NOAA to be developing the capabilities of
the next generation of satellites with the help of NASA's
expertise. NOAA is taking into consideration new technologies
and increasing user needs through input from a variety of
stakeholders, while establishing the future satellite
architecture in a timely and cost-effective way.
With all these considerations and lessons learned from the
current weather satellites, I look forward to hearing from NOAA
and NASA about their progress in the next generation of weather
satellites. The time is right for discussion on GeoXO, and the
future of low-Earth orbit (LEO) and space weather satellites.
The importance of these satellites providing uninterrupted
environmental and weather observations at a time when climate
change is causing more severe and frequent extreme weather
events cannot be stressed enough. The Department of Commerce's
Office of Inspector General's (OIG's) continuous oversight of
the satellite programs provides Congress and the public with
consistent updates on possible risks these programs may face. I
look forward to hearing the OIG's findings of a recent audit on
NOAA's progress of the next-generation satellites, as well as
any recommendations OIG may have in improving this progress.
Again, thank you to our witnesses for being here today. My
colleagues and I are committed to supporting the continued
success of the Nation's operational weather satellites. And
with that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Sherrill follows:]
Thank you, Chairman Beyer, and our witnesses, for joining
us today both in person and virtually. I am looking forward to
hearing about the successes and lessons learned from the
current weather satellite programs, as well as learning more
about what is to come with the next generation of satellites.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
weather satellite programs play a key role in its mission to
share Earth observations and scientific data used by the
public, private, and academic sectors. Access to this knowledge
is critical to communities in becoming resilient and weather-
ready. My district, and many of my colleagues' districts, have
seen increasingly frequent and severe weather.
Communities such as Little Falls, Woodland Park, and
Denville in my district have faced repeated, catastrophic, and
sometimes deadly flooding events, such as the high intensity
rainfall from remnants of Hurricane Ida. I am interested in
hearing from our witnesses today about how observations by
these satellites--and the next generation after them--will give
communities like those in New Jersey's 11th district accurate
and up-to-date forecasting tools to predict and avoid life-
threatening weather--especially extreme rainfall--and confront
the ever-worsening effects of the climate crisis.
At the national level, rainfall and flooding like that
experienced in New Jersey and other extreme weather events can
cause billions of dollars in losses to our communities. NOAA
found that by July of this year, the U.S. had already
experienced nine weather and climate disasters that exceeded
one billion dollars each, and the year is not over yet.
We are still in the midst of what is predicted to be an
above average Atlantic Hurricane Season. Just this past Sunday,
Hurricane Fiona made landfall in Puerto Rico knocking out power
to the island and causing catastrophic flooding. That is why
this hearing is so critical. So many aspects of our society and
economy depend on the environmental, weather, and climate
information collected from these satellites. Any potential
satellite malfunction or launch delay that could cause data
gaps that would be devastating to national security, the U.S.
economy, and most importantly, public safety.
It has been several years since this Committee has done
extensive oversight over our Nation's operational weather
satellite programs. Today we will hear about the successful
partnership between NOAA and NASA to develop, launch, and
operate the current generation of geostationary and polar-
orbiting weather satellites. In fact, earlier this year we
celebrated the successful launch of the third satellite in the
GOES-R Series, and we look forward to what we hope is another
successful launch of the JPSS-2 satellite later this year. The
credit for these recent successes is largely due to our
esteemed NOAA and NASA witnesses today, and the teams that
support their efforts.
However, this partnership has not been without its issues.
Both the Joint Polar Satellite System (or ``JPSS'') and
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (or ``GOES'')
programs initially faced ballooning costs and extended delays.
Since then, NOAA and NASA have successfully turned around these
programs. Despite some challenges, including instrument
malfunctions on-orbit, the agencies have worked to ensure no
disruption in observations, and that the same mistakes are not
repeated. Continued planning, testing, and adjustments are
required to minimize the risk of any potential loss of
observational data. I hope to hear about the current
contingency plans in case of any potential malfunctions or
mishaps, and how NOAA and NASA will work together to address
any issues.
As the projected end of service dates for both the GOES-R
and JPSS Series are expected at the end of the next decade
[2040 and 2039, respectively], it is important for NOAA to be
developing the capabilities of the next generation of
satellites with the help of NASA's expertise. NOAA is taking
into consideration new technologies and increasing user needs
through input from a variety of stakeholders while establishing
the future satellite architecture in a timely and cost-
effective way. With all these considerations and lessons
learned from the current weather satellites, I look forward to
hearing from NOAA and NASA about their progress on the next
generation of weather satellites. The time is ripe for a
discussion on GeoXO, and the future of low Earth orbit and
space weather satellites.
The importance of these satellites providing uninterrupted
environmental and weather observations at a time when climate
change is causing more severe and frequent extreme weather
events cannot be stressed enough. The Department of Commerce's
Office of Inspector General's continuous oversight of the
satellite programs provides Congress, and the public, with
consistent updates on possible risks these programs may face. I
look forward to hearing OIG's findings of a recent audit on
NOAA's progress of the next generation satellites as well as
any recommendations OIG may have in improving this progress.
Again, thank you to all our witnesses for being here today.
My colleagues and I are committed to supporting the continued
success of the nation's operational weather satellites.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill, very much.
Now, the Chair recognizes the Environment Subcommittee
Ranking Member, Congresswoman Stephanie Bice, for an opening
statement.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Chairman Beyer and Chairwoman
Sherrill. And thank you to our witnesses for taking the time to
share your expertise with us this morning.
When you drive across the State of Oklahoma, you can easily
spot many signs of the traditional weather enterprise. You'll
see weather stations and their Doppler radars and transmitting
towers. You'll see mesonet stations on public and private land
that make up our best-in-class State system. And if you can
make it to Norman, Oklahoma, you'll see the National Weather
Center, the premier hub for Federal, State, and academic
research related to weather modeling and prediction.
But all of this is just half of our capabilities. What you
can't see are the highly technical instruments orbiting above
us in space. To truly understand and monitor their full range
of global and national weather patterns, NOAA, NASA, and the
National Weather Service collaborate on a fleet of satellites
that circle the Earth and collect vast amounts of data critical
to weather modeling and forecasting.
Currently, NOAA owns or operates a total of 16 satellites,
10 of which they own and operate themselves. The other six are
partnerships in which NOAA is critical to the operations. Many
of them are the result of recent efforts and congressional
support. In fact, it was just in March of this year that NOAA
launched its most recent and most sophisticated satellite known
as GOES-18. The GOES program has faced its fair share of
challenges, ranging from equipment failures to COVID delays,
but I look forward to the launch of the final satellites in
this series, GOES-U in 2024. I'm also eager to discuss the
lessons learned as we transition to the next generation of
satellite systems, GeoXO.
At the same time, it is important that we remember that the
design and launch of satellites are just two pieces of the
puzzle. In order to truly see the maximum benefits of these
efforts, we must ensure that the data is useful to the weather
community and that we have adequate ground systems to get the
information obtained from space to them. An important part of
this will be the development and use of high-performance
computing by the weather enterprise. More computing power and
better models will allow meteorologists to input large amounts
of data, run weather models more times for accuracy, and
produce a higher-resolution forecast, ultimately saving lives
and property.
Although there is room for improvement and increased
support, NOAA should not be alone in this effort. The
commercial weather industry has seen tremendous growth over the
last decade and has shown the value their partnerships can add
to Federal agencies' existing efforts. Private companies and
research institutions have both computing resources and
satellite data, both of which NOAA can acquire for use for a
fraction of the cost it would take for them to build it out.
The commercial weather data program and NOAA has proved these
partnerships can be successful and benefits all parties
involved.
Additionally, researchers at universities can lead the
development of next-generation instruments that can either be
added to the commercial satellites or launch on their own
dedicated payload. These are the type of cost-effective
solutions we should encourage and support to supplement Federal
observation efforts.
Again, I want to thank the witnesses for being with us this
morning, and I look forward to your testimony. Mr. Chairman, I
yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Bice follows:]
Thank you, Chairman Beyer and Chairwoman Sherrill, and
thank you to our panel of witnesses for taking the time to
share their expertise with us this morning.
When you drive across the state of Oklahoma, you can easily
spot many signs of the traditional weather enterprise. You'll
see weather stations with their Doppler radars and transmitter
towers. You'll see mesonet stations on public and private land
that make up our best-in-class state system. And if you make it
to Norman, you'll see the National Weather Center--the premier
hub for federal, state, and academic research related to
weather modeling and prediction.
But all of this is just one half of our capabilities. What
you can't see are the highly technical instruments orbiting
above us in space. To truly understand and monitor the full
range of global and national weather patterns, NOAA, NASA, and
the National Weather Service collaborate on a fleet of
satellites that circle the Earth and collect vast amounts of
data critical to weather modeling and forecasting.
Currently, NOAA owns or operates a total of 16 satellites--
ten of which they own and operate themselves, the other six are
partnerships in which NOAA is critical to the operations. Many
of them are the result of recent efforts and Congressional
support. In fact, it was just in March of this year that NOAA
launched its most recent--and most sophisticated--satellite,
known as GOES-18.
The GOES program has faced its fair share of challenges,
ranging from equipment failures to COVID delays, but I look
forward to the launch of the final satellites in the series:
GOES-U in 2024. I'm also eager to discuss the lessons learned
as we transition to the next generation satellites system,
GeoXO.
At the same time, it's important we remember that the
design and launch of satellites are just two pieces of the
puzzle. In order to truly see the maximum benefits of these
efforts, we must ensure that the data is useful to the weather
community and that we have adequate ground systems to get the
information obtained from space to them.
An important part of this will be the development and use
of high-performance computing by the weather enterprise. More
computing power and better models will allow meteorologists to
input large amounts of data, run weather models more times for
accuracy, and produce a higher resolution forecast--ultimately
saving lives and property.
Although there is room for improvement and increased
support, NOAA shouldn't be alone in this effort. The commercial
weather industry has seen tremendous growth over the past
decade and has shown the value their partnerships can add to
federal agencies' existing efforts.
Private companies and research institutions have both
computing resources and satellite date, both of which NOAA can
acquire or use for a fraction of the cost it would take for
them to build out. The Commercial Weather Data Program at NOAA
has proved these partnerships can be successful and benefit all
parties involved.
Additionally, researchers at universities can lead the
development of next generation instruments that can either be
added to commercial satellites or launch on their own dedicated
payload.
These are the type of cost-effective solutions we should
encourage and support to supplement federal observation
efforts.
Again, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today
and I look forward to each of your testimony. Thank you,
Chairman Beyer, I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Congresswoman Bice.
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 morning and thank you to Chairs Beyer and Sherrill for
holding this important hearing on the future of NOAA's weather
satellites.
The importance of NOAA's weather satellites is
unquestionable. The ability of the National Weather Service to
provide accurate and lifesaving forecasts often starts with
data collected by these satellites. This past week, we have
seen the devastating remnants of a typhoon pummeling Western
Alaska. Despite record storm surge and hurricane force winds,
the Weather Service was able to provide timely warnings that
allowed Alaskans to evacuate with no injuries or fatalities
reported thus far. And earlier this week, Hurricane Fiona
caused Puerto Rico to lose power, and flooding due to
catastrophic rainfall continues. As we evaluate the devastation
caused by this storm on the five-year anniversary of Hurricane
Maria, I am hopeful that timely warnings based in part on data
from those critical satellites helped to minimize the loss of
life in Puerto Rico as well.
These are just a few recent examples of why it is important
not only for the public to know the value of these assets but
also for Congress to understand how a program of this magnitude
is being carried out to ensure its continued success. As these
types of once in a lifetime storms become more commonplace due
to climate change, it is vital that NOAA's future satellite
programs not only maintain current capabilities, but further
enhance them to deal with a rapidly changing climate and
protect communities most at risk from climate impacts.
In years past, this Committee held oversight hearings to
provide insight into weather satellite programs that faced
delays and growing costs. This work led to a reconfiguration of
NOAA's satellite programs, and further formalized the ongoing
partnership between NOAA and NASA. This interagency partnership
to develop, launch, and operate these satellites has led to
significant overall improvement in program implementation. The
current geostationary, or GOES-R series, and polar-orbiting, or
JPSS satellites made significant advancements in image quality
and detection capabilities from previous programs.
As NOAA and NASA embark on the next generation of weather
satellites to follow GOES-R and JPSS, it is important to
understand what metrics are being used to develop future
programs. That is why the oversight work of the Office of
Inspector General at the Department of Commerce is crucial.
Having regular, independent, and thorough assessments of the
ongoing satellite programs helps to ensure the most successful
outcomes possible.
This Committee has done a great deal of work in showing the
value of weather and climate data to Americans in their
everyday lives. It is important to understand how lessons
learned from previous and current satellite development
programs can help inform future satellite architectures. I
anticipate a robust and enlightening discussion with our
witnesses this morning on what to expect in the coming years
and decades.
Thank you and I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. At this time, I'd like to introduce our
witnesses. Our first witness today is Dr. Stephen Volz. He's
the Assistant Administrator of the National Environmental
Satellite, Data, and Information Services (NESDIS) at NOAA. Dr.
Volz has 35 years of professional experience in aerospace. He's
a leader in the international Earth observation community,
serving as NOAA's principal both to the Committee on Earth
Observation Satellites, CEOS, and at the Coordinating Group of
Meteorological Satellites. Dr. Volz is the principal U.S.
representative to the International Group on Earth
Observations, and he helps leads efforts to coordinate global
satellite-based observations among the international space
agencies. He serves as the co-Chair of the NOAA Observing
Systems Council and is also a member of the NOAA Executive
Council.
Our next witness today is Mr. John Gagosian. Mr. Gagosian
serves as Director of the Joint Agency Satellite Division at
NASA, which is responsible for the development of space systems
supporting operational weather observation requirements of
NOAA. His role as Director of JASD, he assesses program and
project performance, as well as risk. Prior to joining JASD,
Mr. Gagosian represented NASA's Science Mission Director's
Astrophysics Division Program Executive for the Exoplanet
Exploration Program and the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope.
Mr. Gagosian also previously served as the Program Executive
for the Hubble Space Telescope, Stratospheric Observatory for
Infrared Astronomy, and the Cosmic Origins Program.
Our final witness is Mr. Frederick Meny. Mr.--am I saying
that right?
Mr. Meny. Yes, you are.
Chairman Beyer. OK, great. Mr. Meny is the Assistant
Inspector General for Audit and Evaluation at the U.S.
Department of Commerce. He leads the oversight efforts
regarding intellectual property, IT (information technology)
security, cybersecurity, and satellite and weather systems. Mr.
Meny has more than 35 years of Federal Government experience in
leading, managing, and directing organization staff, budgets,
and IT resources, as well as major systems acquisition and
development programs. During his 25 years with the OIG, Mr.
Meny has led numerous reviews that improve the 2020 and 2010
decennial censuses, departmentwide acquisitions and grants,
First Responder Network Authority management, USPTO's (U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office's) patents and trademarks, and
NOAA's polar and geostationary satellites and weather systems
development and operations.
We are delighted to have all of you here. As you should
know, you'll each have five minutes for your spoken testimony.
Your written testimony can be much, much longer, and it will be
included in the record for the hearing. When you have all
completed your spoken testimony, we will begin with the
grueling questions. Each Member will have five minutes to
question the panel.
So we will start with Dr. Volz, who is here with us
virtually. Dr. Volz, the floor is yours.
TESTIMONY OF DR. STEPHEN VOLZ,
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR,
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE,
DATA, AND INFORMATION SERVICES, NOAA
Dr. Volz. Thank you, sir. Good morning, Chairs Sherrill and
Beyer, and Ranking Members Bice and Babin, and all Members of
the Committee. And as I've been introduced, Dr. Volz, head of
the NOAA's, Environmental Satellite Data Information Service.
It's a real honor to be invited to speak to you, and it's a
pleasure to talk to you about the successes we've had and about
the importance of the information from our satellite observing
system to address the challenges from climate change and severe
storm events that we are experiencing. We need no greater or
more compelling reminder of the importance of our mission than
the terrible storms that have made landfall in Puerto Rico and
western Alaska in just the last few days.
NOAA has a very unique mission: to understand, predict, and
support the health of our oceans and atmosphere. We save lives,
protect property, and enhance the American economy by
monitoring and forecasting weather, water, and the climate,
informing our citizens every day. We deploy ships and planes
buoys, balloons, and drones, and satellites. Satellite data
account for around 90 percent by volume of all the data used by
NOAA's forecast models, and satellites are essential to develop
and to extend essential planetary climate data records, which
allow us to understand the changing planet.
But we don't just use satellite data. In fact, NOAA devices
plans for the Nation's Environmental Satellite Program, manages
their construction, and operates them, while NASA builds and
launches them on our behalf. NASA is our longest-standing and
closest strategic partner in observing Earth and space. Our
agency's missions are complementary. NASA and NOAA both conduct
Earth and climate science research and model development. NASA
develops new space technologies. NOAA exploits those and other
technologies and delivers the observations and information the
Nation needs. And that need is great and growing greater.
Our experience with hurricane observations and research has
taught us this lesson over the years: that better observations
from satellites, geostationary and low-Earth orbit from
aircraft and other systems and better research and data
simulation all have led to improved forecasts and outcomes for
communities in the paths of storms. Since Hurricane Andrew in
1992, we have reduced hurricane track accuracy error by 75
percent and intensity forecast error by 50 percent with these
efforts.
We will continue to face hurricanes, stronger and more
frequent than in the past, but we're also dealing with
significantly more frequent and severe extreme events,
including wildfires and flooding. We need to be able to
forecast fire and flooding events, as well as derechos and ice
storms, with the same level of confidence, not hours, but days
in advance to prepare emergency managers and communities to
respond. To do this, we need better observations and better
models. And NESDIS is working to deliver those improvements
with our next-generation satellite observing system, with
better and more information, all leading to a better NOAA.
Recently, we completed the NOAA Architecture Study to help
define our next-generation missions and integrate NOAA's assets
with those of our international and commercial partners. We
have demonstrated with our current programs the value of buying
instruments and other essential program elements in bulk to
reduce mission cost and risk and the value of selectively using
different contracting approaches.
NOAA's geostationary satellites provide the only continuous
near-real-time observations of the Western Hemisphere.
Supporting severe weather and extreme events, watches and
warnings, our next-generation Geostationary Extended
Observations, or GeoXO mission, will continue and expand the
current GOES-R series. GeoXO's first launch will be in 2032,
followed by five more satellites with planned observation
through 2055. One of GeoXO's advanced capabilities is a
hyperspectral infrared sounder. This sounder install will
provide significantly improved real-time vertically resolved
observations of wind speed and direction. With these data,
experts will be able to better track and monitor storms and to
better predict the behavior of fire and smoke.
NOAA's current fleet of low-Earth orbit satellite, JPSS,
provides continuous observations, and together with our
partners satellites, are the backbone of the global weather
forecasting models. NOAA's future LEO satellites will
supplement and eventually replace our current JPSS satellites.
They will provide more frequent and varied observations and
better spatial and vertical resolution, improving modeling and
driving higher resolution short- and long-term weather
forecasts.
Our Nation's current space weather system includes NOAA
observations, along with NASA and other research satellites.
And with these, NOAA provides forecasts that help safeguard
power grid infrastructure, civil aviation, and spacecraft and
astronauts. Space Weather Next will maintain and extend those
observations from multiple observing points to improve critical
storm forecasts for current users and for the expanding
commercial space industry. These observations are required and
has been authorized through the PROSWIFT.
In conclusion, I'll state we know our citizens need weather
and environmental informations to thrive in this changing
world. NOAA and NESDIS, we're not only ready to do this, we
were created for this mission. And I thank you for your strong
and continued support of NOAA's mission and its satellite
program, and I'm happy to answer your questions. Thank you,
sir, and back to you, Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Volz follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Dr. Volz, very much.
We'll now hear from Mr. Gagosian.
TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN GAGOSIAN,
JOINT AGENCY SATELLITE DIVISION DIRECTOR, NASA
Mr. Gagosian. Good morning, Chairs Beyer and Sherrill,
Ranking Members Babin and Bice, Members of the Committee. My
name is John Gagosian, and I'm the Director of the Joint Agency
Satellite Division at NASA headquarters, a unique office
charged with overseeing the development and launch of satellite
systems to meet NOAA's research and operational mission
requirements. Yes, you heard that correctly. We are charged at
NASA with meeting NOAA's needs. But I want to emphasize the way
our collaboration with NOAA on weather satellites has
strengthened our larger partnership with our sister agency.
I'll discuss the benefits that our cooperation offers to both
agencies and share a bit of what we're looking forward to in
the future.
As the Chairs and Ranking Members described so well, since
the 1960's, NOAA and NASA have been strategic partners in
research and operations, with NASA focused on answering
emerging scientific questions, and NOAA focused on using
environmental information to safeguard the public and grow our
economy. In this relationship, NOAA has long coordinated with
NASA in the development of its satellites, taking advantage of
NASA's unique expertise in developing and launching space
systems.
The two agencies have three integrated joint program
offices at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. NOAA
provides overall program management requirements and budget
while NASA is responsible for the acquisition and development
of mission systems through its rigorous flight program
management processes. At Goddard, work is directed by
interagency leadership teams and governed by joint agency
management councils to ensure close collaboration in every step
of project development. In this structure, NOAA maintains
programmatic authority and NASA exercises technical authority
using a tailored and formally documented process. Following
launch, on-orbit checkout and validation by NASA, NOAA takes
over operation of its satellites. Together, we have developed
the JPSS series, the GOES-R series, and the Discover Space
Weather Monitor. We're looking toward the next generation of
geostationary satellites, the GeoXO program, which will include
the addition of ocean and atmospheric monitoring. We're also
working toward a new architecture of low-Earth orbit
satellites, starting with Quick Sounder and the future of space
weather monitoring with Space Weather Follow-On and Space
Weather Next programs.
Throughout this work, both NOAA and NASA can point to many
successes that have come through collaboration. The state-of-
the-art instruments that NOAA uses in its JPSS series have
built upon NASA instruments first developed for the Earth
observing system in the 1990's. NASA has also been able to host
its own research instruments on JPSS satellites, for example,
to monitor ozone and to measure the energy reflected and
emitted by the Earth.
NASA missions like TEMPO (Tropospheric Emissions:
Monitoring Pollution), monitoring air pollution across America,
and GLIMR (Geostationary Littoral Imaging and Monitoring
Radiometer), measuring ocean color along our coasts, have led
directly to capabilities plan for NASA--excuse me for NOAA's
GeoXO program. GeoXO will bring new capabilities to address
emerging environmental challenges of the future in support of
U.S. weather, ocean, and climate operations.
NOAA's radiation monitors in geostationary orbit are
critical sources of data for NASA's space weather research.
They provide key measurements demonstrating that solar
variability is driving space weather processes. These
measurements are currently performed by the GOES-R series and
will be transitioned to the Space Weather Next series in the
future.
Indeed, many of NOAA's operational assets are crucial for
NASA's research, and our common data needs have led to joint
work, advancing data assimilation and modeling. Together, NOAA
and NASA are leveraging the best innovations across the space
industry to reduce costs and improve the capabilities of future
missions. Our work toward a network of small low-Earth orbit
satellites can improve global coverage, reduced development
timelines, and more quickly infuse new technologies. We've
explored new acquisition strategies that rely on the private
sector for mission operations and data transport, and have
executed commercial data buys using licensing agreements that
allow us to share the data with other government agencies. We
have reduced the cost of access to space via secondary
payloads, hosted payloads, and new launch vehicles. We also see
the potential in cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and
machine learning to enable research and improve data products.
In summary, our two agencies' close collaboration has
allowed each of us to accomplish far more than we could have
achieved on our own and has amplified the unique benefits that
each of us bring to the Nation. We thank you for your support
of our joint operations. Thank you for inviting NASA to join
this hearing today, and I'd be happy to take any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gagosian follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Beyer. Mr. Gagosian, thank you very much.
And next, we'll hear finally from Mr. Meny. The floor is
yours, sir.
TESTIMONY OF MR. FRED MENY,
ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL
FOR AUDIT AND EVALUATION,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Mr. Meny. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Beyer, Chairwoman
Sherrill, Ranking Members Babin and Bice, and Members of the
Subcommittees. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
NOAA's satellites are vital to the Nation and its ability
to collect weather and climate data for warnings and forecasts.
As an Assistant Inspector General for the U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of Inspector General, my office has oversight
responsibility of the NOAA satellite programs. We have
conducted many audits of these programs that made numerous
recommendations to improve their efficiencies and
effectiveness.
The cooperation of both NOAA and NASA leadership and staff
has facilitated our oversight, and I am very pleased to join my
fellow witnesses today to discuss the next generation of
weather satellites. My written testimony summarizes challenges
pertinent to this hearing in our Fiscal Year 2022 ``Top
Management and Performance Challenges'' report, as well as
results from two recent audits. This morning, I would like to
offer three observations from that work.
First, delivering fully capable satellite systems on orbit
is a technical challenge that requires adherence to sound
system engineering and mission-assurance practices. However,
the need to stay on schedule can sometimes lead NOAA to make
risk-based decisions to deviate from those best practices. NOAA
aggressively manages its launch schedules to mitigate potential
data gaps. However, we have found that an overly schedule-
driven approach can sometimes have negative performance effects
when critical testing or other steps are modified to stay on
schedule.
In our latest audit of the GOES-R program, we found that
NESDIS is planning launches of those satellites sooner than its
policy requires. This results in more frequent launches and
therefore higher costs over time. To justify this practice, we
recommend that NESDIS conduct a cost-benefit analysis and
update its governing policy accordingly.
Our second observation is that NOAA policies and procedures
need to be fully aligned to the needs of users of satellite
data. User needs, well-defined and validated, become
requirements that form the basis for systems architectures,
design, integration, and verification. In our recent audit of
NOAA's efforts to plan and implement its next generation of
satellite systems, we found the need for improvement in NOAA's
requirements management policy and practices. Most notably,
NOAA's process for validating user observation requirements
must be updated to meet the needs of next-generation satellite
programs. The current defined process is not timely.
NOAA also needs to ensure distinction between requirement
threshold and objectives. These minimum and desired
specifications create trade space that provide flexibilities in
allocating resources. In addition, NOAA leadership must further
distinguish the priorities of its user observation
requirements. Satellite programs are often responsible for
multiple mission-critical or priority-one requirements. This
can be a challenge for program managers who need to understand
which requirements take precedence for risk-based decisions.
My third and final observation is that NOAA satellite
programs have had success avoiding potential data gaps, as well
as applying lessons learned. The same program offices will also
manage the acquisition and development of the next generation
of satellites. To seek new efficiencies, NOAA should reassess
many of their programmatic assumptions. We have often
questioned such assumptions in our work, leading to
recommendations and greater assurance that taxpayers dollars
are well spent.
In conclusion, NOAA satellite programs are vital to the
Nation and require continued oversight. This hearing is an
important effort in ensuring their success. Right now, my
office has audits underway assessing space weather follow-on,
GeoXO, polar weather satellites. As always, once our final
reports are issued, I look forward to sharing our results with
you and your staff.
This concludes my statement. I would be happy to respond to
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Meny follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Beyer. Mr. Meny, thank you very much.
We will now begin our round of questions, and I will begin.
Dr. Volz, just listening to Mr. Meny, one of the things he
said was that NOAA requires the program to work toward the
earliest achievable launch dates for its satellite missions.
And this is in order to minimize the risk of a satellite
coverage gap, but that the aggressive planning dates can also
increase pressure on schedules and lead to lots of bad
decisions along the way. How do you respond to this pressure
between the earliest possible launch and the need to do things
right the first time?
Dr. Volz. So thanks for the question, sir. And I
certainly--I would say our primary focus when we look at the
timeliness and the timeline for launching our missions is to
assure the continuity of information to our users. Nothing's
more important than making sure there's no gap in the
information that goes into our weather forecasts or the
emergency managers from our geostationary satellites. There
will always be a tension between continuing testing versus
meeting the launch date.
And I would contend with--argue with the argument, we don't
go to the earliest possible launch date. We're constantly
looking at the health of our on-orbit constellation, and we're
managing the system of observations we need. So for example,
for the GOES-R series, we have a policy which requires two
satellites in orbit operating GOES-East and GOES-West. And we
have a flight spare in the middle of the of the Nation--of the
sky between the two so we have no more than a few--a few-hour
delay. If we lose a satellite, we can turn the other one on. So
we make sure we maintain that on-orbit readiness, and that's
what drives our launch readiness for our birds that are being
developed on the ground.
So there will always be tension between the desire to do--
for thorough testing and meet the launch dates, but we are
driven by our need for continuity. And it's a constant balance,
and the program managers know that. And we don't cut corners
for testing. As you yourself stated up front, we delayed the
launch of GOES-18 by a little over a year as we had to correct
a problem we noticed on GOES-17. We did that knowing we had a
healthy constellation, which allowed for that timeliness, that
delay in order to fix the instrument on the ground and yet not
have a gap in our performance. We're constantly making these
decisions on a--all the time as we look at our satellite
constellation. Thank you.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Dr. Volz, very much.
Mr. Gagosian, one of the things you wrote is--and talked
about is the--that you're exploring alternative acquisition
strategies, such as making the spacecraft prime contractor
responsible for mission operations and data transport. This
feeds in so much to the work that we're doing on the Committee,
especially the Space Subcommittee, on how--the explosion of the
commercial sector and how much can be meaningfully moved to the
commercial sector without sacrificing quality and at big cost.
Can you expand on this a little bit? Do you see our weather
satellites ultimately being managed by the commercial sector?
Mr. Gagosian. Thank you for the question, sir. So we're
exploring a lot of different strategies for program management
and acquisition, primarily now with the Quick Sounder project,
which is the initial mission under the next-generation low-
Earth orbit weather satellites. So we issued a request for
information several months ago to the private sector looking at
ideas for how to execute, as I explained, a mission where the
contractor is responsible for operations and data transport,
basically delivering data to NOAA for processing and
distribution. So we're looking at these techniques because we
know that our commercial partners have best practices that they
developed over the years for efficient operations. And we're
going to take the lessons that we learned from Quick Sounder
and apply those to planning future missions under the LEO
program, which one of the visions for that program is a
disaggregated constellation of smaller satellites, as I also
referred to in my testimony, sir.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Gagosian.
Mr.--Dr. Volz, one more question. The--some of--much of the
testimony is all about ever-better data, you know, better
satellites, more sophisticated, better instruments and the
like. Is it just about data or how much is also about theory
and modeling and going beyond being able to measure things more
carefully to actually thinking differently about the data that
you have?
Dr. Volz. And that's a great way--a great question to ask
it that way. It's not about better data. It's about better
information and better understanding, and that requires better
data, but it also requires better understanding of what you're
observing and the understanding of the Earth system. And that's
a great example where NASA and NOAA work together whereas--
where NASA does exploration missions to understand processes
that drive different effects of the Earth, and NOAA is looking
at how those processes affect our ability to forecast and
predict phenomena that are of impact to our communities and our
world.
So it is the--we are--there's a push-pull. The improved
models identify what they--we understand and the need for
greater resolution in the information. So as we go to a higher-
resolution model, we might need better, higher-resolution data.
And the better data, the understanding of processes, drives the
modelers to look at a different way to analyze and predict the
phenomenon we're trying to forecast. So it requires both. It
requires consistent and continuous improvement on both sides.
And with the NOAA side, as we look at these new satellites
and GeoXO, for example, we're actively working with the
National Weather Service, Ocean and Atmosphere Research Group,
to understand what the models need and how the models need to
improve and develop over the coming years so they're ready to
use the data when we provide it and not just to--not to leave
the data untapped and unvalued as it gets delivered to them. So
it takes both in coordination, and we're doing that very
carefully as we look forward to these next-generation
satellites.
Chairman Beyer. OK. Thank you very much.
I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member of the
Space Subcommittee, Dr. Babin.
Mr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.
As Dr. Volz noted, the scoping of next-generation satellite
programs is underway, and definitive lifecycle costs have not
been finalized yet. It's important to note that lifecycle costs
can change in both good and bad ways. For example, the GOES
program increased by 8 percent in 2020, while at the same time
the Polar Follow-On program decreased by 9.7 percent.
My question is for all three of you witnesses, and I think
it's very simple. How do your agencies and programs ensure that
the most accurate lifecycle cost analysis is put in front of
Congress so that we can know exactly what we're getting?
Basically, how do we avoid starting what might seem like a
minor endeavor but watch it suddenly balloon into a major cost
program that's far too--too far along to abandon?
Dr. Volz. Well, if I may take the answer first----
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir. Dr. Volz.
Dr. Volz [continuing]. Chairman Babin. I think that's a
great question. And I would say that we don't see any of our
programs as minor or any of the endeavors as minor. We treat
them all as--we're looking at building systems that will be
operating for 20 to 30 years, so fully recognizing that it's
not just the cost of a thing, a spacecraft or something, but
it's the cost of the system and the impact of that system, so
fully recognizing that and looking at the best of modeling
techniques that we have for cost and schedule modeling that's
been developed over many years.
I spent 25 years with NASA developing and working on
missions with different ways of doing cost estimating and
programming, and we have a very rigorous combined NOAA-NASA
approach to doing cost estimation and assessments, which are
really accurate at determining the cost of space assets. And on
the NOAA side, we have a long operational tail that we have to
quantify as well. As we said, GeoXO is going to be operating
into the early 2050's.
So our models are varied but actually look at those
different pieces very accurately. And as we go through, for
example, GeoXO is coming up for a mission commitment in the
next--in the coming months, we have numerous independent
assessments, as well as our grassroots bottoms-up assessments
by the program team, which allow for a rigorous discussion of
the pros and cons of different modeling approaches.
And I think your own example of a slight--an 8 percent
increase in one and a 9 percent decrease in the other reflected
our ability to continuously revisit the lifecycle cost not as
an emergency after we have a problem, but as a routine best
practices. And we do that throughout the program, even after we
start with an initial cost basis.
And I'll turn to my colleagues, to John and to Fred, for
other comments. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Babin. Mr. Meny.
Mr. Meny. Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Babin. I don't--I don't think your your mic is on.
There we go.
Mr. Meny. Oh, thank you, Ranking Chair.
The lifecycle cost estimates for any program are extremely
important, as you know. And as I said earlier, the
understanding of user observation requirements and what those
requirements are is very important as well. That drives what
will be allocated to a satellite program or another platform of
how you will get that data. So understanding that baseline is
extremely important. GOES-R, as you brought up earlier,
initially in its development, there was a hyperspectral sounder
on it--hyperspectral sounder--hyper-environmental spectral--
spectrum sounder on that satellite. However, it was not
technology-ready to be flown, and it was dropped from that
program.
GeoXO is going to be bringing a similar, you know, approach
involved here for the extended orbits, so it's extremely
critical to understand what that actual baseline will look like
and how those development costs and technology readiness
associated with the capabilities it's going to deliver is laid
out.
It's also important to test assumptions. We had reports on
JPSS where we hit them up early with recommendations on looking
at GAO's lifecycle cost estimates and changing assumptions. So
following that guidance is extremely important.
Mr. Babin. Thank you. Mr. Gagosian?
Mr. Gagosian. Yes, thank you. If I may, I'd also like to
echo what Dr. Volz said about having a variety of different
cost models that are run early in a program. They all have
different assumptions and techniques that are used. And so by
having a suite of different models, we're able to, let's say,
you know, determine a cost target early on that has some
realism to it. But really, I want to fall back on the NASA
process, which is not to validate the cost estimate and really
commit to the cost until what we call key decision point C,
which is after the preliminary design review occurs on the
system.
So we have a standing review board fully review the design.
They look at all the risks. They do what's called a JCL
analysis, a Joint Confidence Level analysis. And by the time we
get to that key decision point, we have been able to shake the
design out and come up with a much more confident number as to
what the cost will be.
Mr. Babin. Thank you very much. And, Mr. Chairman, my time
has expired even though I have several other questions.
Chairman Beyer. Mr. Vice--Ranking Member--if it's OK with
you, I hope we'll do a second round.
Mr. Babin. OK, good.
Chairman Beyer. In the meantime, let me recognize the
distinguished gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much to the Chairs and Ranking
Members and to the witnesses.
In northwest Oregon where I'm honored to represent the 1st
District we are experiencing the effects of severe weather
patterns that cause more intense heat waves actually and longer
fire seasons. And just this month, the combination of high
winds, extraordinarily low humidity fueled wildfires in Oregon
that caused evacuations of some communities and also two of our
regional power utilities conducted planned shutoffs that
affected more than 40,000 Oregonians.
So as we invest in climate adaptation strategies to reduce
the consequences of extreme weather, the need for accurate and
timely and consistent data is essential, especially for
resiliency efforts in those vulnerable communities.
So, Dr. Volz, in the Pacific Northwest we rely on quality
data about the ocean to support industries like our fisheries,
protect marine life to build resilient communities. So in
addition to operating the Nation's weather satellites, as you
know, the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
Information Services, NESDIS, is home to the National Centers
for Environmental Information, NCEI, which serves as a
repository for many of the domestic and international sources
of environmental and climate data and information services to
inform climate change and mitigation and adaptation.
So, Dr. Volz, how does NESDIS, through its weather
satellites and NCEI, how does NESDIS support the broader
landscape of NOAA's climate change mitigation and adaptation
efforts? And how can next-generation weather satellites
integrate with ocean monitoring systems?
Dr. Volz. So thank you, Ms. Bonamici, for the excellent
question. And the other piece that we often forget when we talk
about NESDIS is the information services that you mentioned,
the National Centers for Environmental Information. So the
primary function of the NCEI is the archiving and retention of
all of the global climate environmental observations that we
make and split the archiving and storage, but it's the
utilization of those data which are so key. So are the ocean
observation systems, the ocean observation data that we have
and collect are part of NCEI's, and these are through our
partnerships with the National Ocean Service and the National
Marine Fishery Service are key information parameters for those
services to determine the changes in migration--fish migration
species, the changes in the ocean, the dynamics in the ocean
environment. So we work closely with them for the archiving of
their data and the integration of their data with other
datasets that we get from other sources, as well as satellites
and other partners.
So the--looking forward, as you mentioned, the changes that
we're seeing in the environment, whether it's ocean heat waves,
heat events, such as the hot blooms that have occurred, are a
key part of our forecasting requirements, that we understand
those better and forecast those better because of their impacts
on the fisheries and the economies [inaudible].
Ms. Bonamici. We had a hearing yesterday on the Arctic, and
we heard that they're having trouble with harmful algal blooms
up there, sometimes for the first time.
I want to follow up. Earlier this month, as you know, NOAA
and Department of Interior launched a portal for climate
mapping, resilience, and adaptation. So how is this data
distributed? How would a more cohesive climate service benefit
the mission of NESDIS? And we heard in the testimony earlier
that NOAA needs to better align data with the needs of users.
Is that something you're working on?
Dr. Volz. It is, and it is an important piece. It's not
just having the data, but it's getting it to the user. So we
have had a number of interactive sessions with communities
around the Nation and in the regions to try and understand the
data use needs that they have at the NOAA level, the NESDIS
level through our Regional Climate Service Directors and our
Regional Service Divisions. We're working directly with State
and locally--users of our data to provide and improve the
delivery of our services.
It is a scaling challenge for us as we are changing the way
that we deliver data to our users. And one of the initiatives
we started is to move all of our data into a cloud-based
format, our NESDIS Common Cloud Framework, which allows for
much easier, more rapid dissemination of data to different
users. That just opens the portal. It doesn't tailor the data
to the users as well as we need to. And that's part of our
ongoing activity is through user engagement to define the best
way to provide the data to those multiple users through our
regional and local interactions with the communities.
Ms. Bonamici. And what's causing the scaling challenge? Is
it funding? Is it work force? Is it technology, what--why is
it----
Dr. Volz. The technology--it's the application of
technology, No. 1, because we do have the ability to use the
cloud in a way to disseminate the data better, but there's also
the--it's a strong--it's a need for better and more engagement
with the communities and through work force growth in the RISA
(Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments), which are the
the science organizations out of OAR, Office of Atmospheric
Research, and our Climate Service Directors is actually
engaging in setting up a larger framework of dynamic
interactions with the local communities to--in order to tailor
those climate products, which are different from the WFO
(Weather Forecast Office), the weather products, as we see that
is definitely the growth area over the coming years as part of
a climate service that we will be setting up and establishing
and delivering.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much. I see my time is expired.
I think I heard from down at this end of the dais that there
may be another round, which is a good thing because I have more
questions. Thank you. I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. OK. Excellent. I figured you would.
Let me now recognize the Congresswoman from Oklahoma, Mrs.
Bice.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Volz, as I mentioned in my opening statement, data
processing, distribution, and assimilation are a critical and
often overlooked part of satellite operations. I think a low-
hanging fruit to increasing access is transitioning to
capabilities to the cloud. I know this has been an emphasis at
NOAA for a couple of years, but I'm concerned that the--that
NOAA tends to prefer owning and managing their own hardware
internally when running things rather than running things
through a commercial cloud software provider, which is
oftentimes a cheaper and more efficient solution and comes with
less headaches. Can you tell me more about NOAA's current cloud
capabilities related to satellite data and your outlook on the
future of cloud services with next-gen satellites?
Dr. Volz. Thank you, ma'am, for the question. And yes, I'm
happy to. The--it is not an either/or. It's not we do it in-
house or we use the cloud. It's going to be a combination of
both. And what we have specifically done within NESDIS is to
engage with the cloud service providers, several of them, to--
in order to move our data to a cloud environment for easier
access and dissemination. Now, that doesn't solve the usability
problem because you have to understand how to use the data as
well as how to get it. But it is a way that we are moving the
accessibility to our cloud--to our satellite data directly to a
cloud-based environment.
Now, on the--across NOAA, there are a number of different
activities happening with the--there's the NODD (NOAA Open Data
Dissemination Program), which the NOAA Open Data Distribution
Network that NOAA is trying to do writ large, I think there is
a general understanding within NOAA the need to move
dissemination--or accessibility to our global datasets to a
cloud environment, while still having a large portion of in-
house processing and require-capabilities that are necessary
for the dedicated weather forecast modeling and forecast
development. So it's a combination of both, and it is a big
part of our FY20--our budget initiative is asking for access to
funds to develop a more rapid dissemination and migration to
cloud environment within NESDIS.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you for that. And to follow up, in a
previous hearing, there was a conversation around collaboration
with NOAA and DOE (Department of Energy). DOE has some of the
most powerful supercomputing capabilities of any agency in
government. And so can you talk a little bit about what type of
relationship and how that's going?
Dr. Volz. So not in great detail, but I'm happy to take
that question for the record. I would note that even as we move
more data to the cloud for dissemination, the need--as we have
more complex data and better models of ecosystems in the larger
environment, we will need the increased access to high-
performance computing to demonstrate the models which are more
complex taking in these new data sets. So the--our--NOAA is
working with DOE, and I'll be happy to take that for the record
to get some comments back to you on the progress of those
coordinations with the DOE.
Mrs. Bice. I would appreciate that. I think that with DOE's
capabilities--supercomputing capabilities, there is an
opportunity for collaboration rather than sort of reinventing
the wheel and spending additional resources that may be able to
be utilized for other technologies, including new satellites.
So I thank you for that question, and will submit that for the
record.
To follow on that, the National Weather Center in Norman is
home to both the Advanced Radar Research Center and the
National Severe Storms Laboratory. Additionally, the NEXRAD
(Next-Generation Radar) Radar Operation Center is a frequent
collaborator just down the road. And while today's hearing is
certainly focused on weather satellites, we can't forget that
the next-gen of ground-based radars are also being developed.
Dr. Volz or Mr. Gagosian, with the understanding that
satellites take years to develop, build, and launch, as well as
the fact they can't be moved from orbit for upgrades, how does
NASA and NOAA ensure that space-based instruments complement
ground radar and account for potential improvements to
terrestrial observations?
Dr. Volz. So let me take that first, John, and then I'll
turn it over to you for addition. So, within NOAA, we have the
NOAA Observing Systems Council whose primary focus--and I'm one
of the co-Chairs, along with the National Weather Service
Director and the OMAO, the Office of Marine and Air--Aviation,
our co-Chairs, we look at the whole system of observations that
NOAA has, including ground, space, ocean, et cetera. And the
complementarity of the ground-based radars with the space-based
assets are understood and reviewed as a part of the general
investment strategies we have. And I'll note for an example,
they actually back each other up. If you go back to the
incident with Hurricane Maria over Puerto Rico several years
ago, the one National Weather Service radar system was knocked
out by the hurricane. And during that period of time before we
got a temporary replacement in place, we used proxy satellite
data as an equivalent radar system to provide the winds in the
radar forecasting--the weather forecasting for the island until
we could have a ground-based system assessed. So they do
complement each other even though they are different. But we
are focused on the delivery of service and not only continuity
only of a particular technology asset.
And John, I don't know if you had anything you wanted to
add to that.
Mr. Gagosian. So my organization is not really involved in
the development of the ground-based radars, but one thing we
are doing--we're working with NOAA on is reducing the
development timeline for new space systems. So Quick Sounder is
really a pathfinder for that. We're trying to close the gap
that way.
Mrs. Bice. Perfect. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Congresswoman, very much.
Now, let me introduce the--Congress greatest champion for
travel to Mars, Mr. Perlmutter from Colorado.
Mr. Perlmutter. I was just coming in to kind of settle in
and listen, Mr. Chairman, but if--I'm happy to pass and come
back to me or I can fake it. What would you like me to do?
Chairman Beyer. If you would prefer that we come back to
you----
Mr. Perlmutter. Please.
Chairman Beyer [continuing]. After Mr. Feenstra, we'd be
happy to do that.
Mr. Perlmutter. Sure.
Chairman Beyer. So the only----
Mr. Perlmutter. Now, we'll see if he's ready.
Chairman Beyer. He's been here for a while. Mr. Feenstra
from Iowa, the floor is yours, sir.
Mr. Feenstra. Well, I'd just like to say thank you,
Chairwoman Sherrill and Chairman Beyer, and Ranking Member Bice
and Babin, for holding this hearing today. And I really want to
thank the witnesses for their participation.
The collaboration between NOAA and NASA on weather
satellites is vital for my district. It's important that we
understand what's happening at a very quick time. I have seen
this time and time again. In December, we had significant
storms move through Iowa. Two years ago, we had the derecho
that was unheard of at the time. And there's still a lot of
concerns. I was excited to tour the National Weather Service
Forecast office on my August recess, and I started
understanding the importance of weather radar, both ground and
satellite.
And that is my question here is, as we move forward, it
seemed when I was at the National Weather Service that they
were having a difficult time disseminating tornadoes that were
F-0, F-1s. And--and, you know, it was pretty late that--that
they could start seeing F-2s and so forth. But it just seemed
what was happening was they could see it at--at 8,000 feet and
higher, but at lower levels they could not.
So my question to Dr. Volz would be is there a way that we
can start using satellite radar and satellites to disseminate
some of these ground--these lower ground tornadoes that start
at 0--or start at F-0 or F-1s that turn out to be F-3 or 4s? Do
you see any research going down that path when it comes to
satellites?
Dr. Volz. So that's a great question, sir, and appreciate
asking and knowing how sensitive that region of the country is
to hurricanes or earthquakes or tornadoes as they occur. And
you've identified one of the key challenges we have in--from
observations in real--near real time, which has to be
geostationary, is really looking down through the atmosphere
and getting to the lower levels of the atmosphere. And that is
probably one of the primary benefits we're going to see from
our geostationary hyperspectral infrared sounder. The imagery
we have right now can be blocked by clouds and has limitations
in the vertical disseminate--vertical accuracy or resolution of
events, whereas the hyperspectral sounder will allow us to be
much more accurate in measuring the wind speeds and direction
at multiple levels of the atmosphere, exactly the phenomenon
you were identifying in your trip to the--for the WFO.
So the research is going on based on airborne research and
other research on how to model these events and how to see them
from space. Our sounder that will be launched as part of GeoXO,
will be the great--will be our improvement in the technology,
but we're working with our partners in Europe, who are flying a
similar sounder in a couple of years and hoping to be able--and
benefiting from their experience so that we can develop
products and use them soon and right away when we have our
systems on orbit. So it is a key piece of what we can do with
the next-generation GeoXO and is an example of what we
acknowledge, what we don't know now that we now know how to
understand better, and that's why we're putting these into our
program.
Mr. Feenstra. I thank you for those comments. That's very
important. I'm glad to hear that as we move forward. I mean,
technology is so critical and so it's research.
Dr. Volz, on that same vein, obviously, in Iowa,
agriculture is paramount. It's probably our most important
economic engine that we have. And that being said, we have a
lot of agricultural producers that go down this path. It also
includes precision ag. And do you see any collaboration when
you look at precision ag and new weather satellites that could
work together in--in some capability to help agriculture? Is
that--anything in that area on the radar?
Dr. Volz. Yes, and I think that's a key piece of our
mission objective is not just to tell you when the--when it's
going to rain or not rain but also to give you a time-based
understanding of the environment you're dealing with. In our
research into seasonal and sub-seasonal forecasting, that would
be a value to agriculture in the broad base but also locally
about the precipitation outlooks looking beyond the next week
or 10 days to the season so you have an idea of is it--will it
be wetter or drier, which can impact the choice of your seed
crops, what you're going to put in that year, what particular
type of seeds that you want to plant. But from an ecosystem
point of view as well, what are the forecasts in the near term
for humidity and soil moisture over the coming weeks so that
you can again decide to tailor the application of fertilizer or
of irrigation to maximize the effects of the performance of
your crops.
So these are tailored better information products that are
possible with better integration of the observations and the
modeling that are taking place within ocean and atmospheric
research right now, but also, through better datasets that we
use in NASA doing some of their research product development as
well, understanding ecosystem health as a part of--and using
satellite data for that.
So I think we definitely have a strong customer in the
agriculture community and not at the regional level but at
the--almost at the crop and field level. We can provide these
kinds of tailored and specific information.
Mr. Feenstra. Yes, well, Dr. Volz, thank you for that
information, and hopefully, we can continue to work
collaboratively on that.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Feenstra, very much.
If the head coach of the congressional softball team is
prepared----
Mr. Perlmutter. I'm readier. Let's put it that way.
Chairman Beyer. I recognize the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. Perlmutter. Yes, I was down--we're asking questions of
the CEOs of the biggest banks downstairs in Financial Services.
So I--but I said, no, I got some scientists I got to go talk
to.
So I guess my first question--I know Ms. Bonamici was
asking in this area, and I am sorry if I repeat her question,
but just, you know, obviously, wildfires have been a huge
stressor in Colorado and the West. And I am just curious what
you all at NOAA and those at NASA, what roles you're playing to
assist our wildfire-fighting efforts. So I'll start with NOAA
if you like.
Dr. Volz. Sure, thank you, Representative Perlmutter, and
thanks for the question. Yes, the wildfires are right on
everybody's front page. And I would say that one thing we've
learned from GOES-R series of satellites, we've revolutionized
the way that we address and serve the fire mission from space.
Often, the first call that a constituent might get that there's
a fire in their neighborhood comes from the NOAA Weather
Forecast Office because they have the image directly from GOES-
R. So we recognize the value of early and accurate detection
and pinpointing of locations of fires, which come from our
geostationary satellites. And we realize that with--and our
next generation--so we're continuing to working that with the
fire managers on providing that information in the most
effective and efficient way.
Our next generation has been tailored to improve that with
higher spatial resolution and better choice of bandwidth or
frequencies so that we can see the initiation of fire more
accurately and precision. And we've realized that the return on
value of an investment, that is significant. The sooner you get
to a fire, the sooner--the better chance you have to contain it
and to reduce the impact of a large fire.
So part of it is the--is better observations. The other
part is getting that information directly to the users in the
right way. And we've had a number of workshops with State and
local fire emergency managers to get the information not--they
don't need a GOES image. They need a pinpoint location, so they
tailor the information products in real time so that they can
accurately work with them and address it quickly. So GOES----
Mr. Perlmutter. So are you all part of the firefighting
team? I mean, do you have somebody stationed up in Boise? You
know, are you--do you have somebody out of your Colorado
offices that's dedicated to that?
Dr. Volz. We work with--we--our weather forecast offices
are now actively participants with every region around the
country in dealing with the fire seasons when they occur. But,
for example, with CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection) we have--we work with the FEMA (Federal
Emergency Management Agency)--we work with FEMA but also with--
through our weather forecasts offices with--during emergency
management of fire events and during fire season. So yes, it is
distributed. The information is sent directly to all of our
WFOs, and we work directly with the emergency managers in the
different regions on responding to fires in anticipation of
those.
Mr. Perlmutter. OK. Is--does NASA play any role in this, in
the firefighting efforts?
Mr. Gagosian. So what Dr. Volz is describing is the
operational role of NOAA. NASA is more oriented around, you
know, the research side, understanding the dynamics, the
conditions. And if you want, I can take a question for the
record to tell you what kinds of space-based and/or air-based
assets we're using for that.
Mr. Perlmutter. I'd appreciate it because what we found in
Colorado there--California and Colorado, I think Oregon, too,
is also using sort of Defense Department assets through a--what
is it, fire guard or something like that to help us, you know,
as quickly as possible pinpoint these things, then take the
data developed by NOAA and the Weather Service to figure out
where it's going to go and how quickly it's going to get there
and how to maintain it. So I would appreciate that.
I guess, Dr. Volz, I have another question probably out of
left field. The Office of Space Commerce (OSC) how is it--and
for anybody want to talk about it, is it folding into NOAA and
the Commerce Department well? How is that working? Because
we're kind of moving some responsibilities out of NOAA directly
into that Office of Space Commerce.
Dr. Volz. So the Office of Space Commerce is not moving out
of NOAA. It's moving from NESDIS to NOAA, to--both still within
NOAA, but to--directly responding to--reporting to the Under
Secretary of Commerce Dr. Spinrad.
Mr. Perlmutter. That's what I meant. Thank you.
Dr. Volz. So it is--that transition is still in work, and
it's moving along well. Richard DalBello, who is the Director
of OSC, who's actually here with me this week at the
International Astronautical Congress working with a lot of
international and technology partners on space commerce and
space situational awareness. So that is an ongoing activity
that is moving along well. And it is--it may be a little bit
out of left field, but it's still--when--if you wanted to start
talking about space weather, key--we're key part--compatriots
in understanding the near-Earth environment of the low-Earth
orbit where space commerce and space situational awareness is
going to be a key activity.
Mr. Perlmutter. All right, thank you very much. I'll go
down and talk to those CEOs now.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter.
Let me recognize the gentleman from Cape Canaveral,
Congressman Posey.
Mr. Posey. Thank you, Chairman Beyer, for holding this
hearing on the next generation of weather satellites.
Dr. Volz, currently there is no geostationary orbit
sounding capability over the United States. With all the recent
flooding, what are we doing to accelerate prioritizing the
development of that critical technology?
Dr. Volz. So thank you, sir, for the question. And the
Hyperspectral Infrared Sounder, which is a key component of the
GeoXO program, as Fred Meny mentioned earlier on, it had been
conceived of for the earlier GOES-R but was deemed not
sufficiently ready for the implementation in '24--2004. It is
now, and we are--I've actually had steady contracts with
vendors to build this into our program, and we fully expect and
hope that will be a part of our--located centrally over the
United States in our GeoXO constellation, providing
hyperspectral infrared sounding over the United States. We are
working with our European partners to be flying a similar
instrument in about 2 years to understand the application of
that instrumentation from--for weather forecasting and all the
other applications we might see. So we're looking forward to
having that available for you and for all of our customers here
to better understand storms and weather across the United
States.
Mr. Posey. I'm certainly glad to hear that. And as a follow
up to the first question, specifically, how do you protect
American innovation and ensure that the American geostationary
orbit sounding technology will remain on the weather satellites
of our international partners such as Japan and South Korea,
enabling the full sharing of this data?
Dr. Volz. That's a great question. And we have benefited,
as you're implying, over the last 30 years that Japan and our
Korean colleagues have used U.S. vendors and U.S. instruments
to fly the imagers, for example, that are flying right now. And
that common instrumentation is a--really is a great space and
timesaver because we have the same observations from East--
Western Africa to Central Asia from the same instruments and
the same measurements. And it helps our U.S. industry as well.
We have been working closely with our partners, Japan Met
Agency and Korean Met Agency, to encourage them to follow and
they have followed our lead in the past. The sooner we get our
systems designed and--defined and initiated, the greater the
likelihood we'll be able to maintain and continue that
coordinated development with our Asian partners who have been
key participants with us over the past. They have their own
timelines, and they're eager to get going on geostationary
observations for this next generation as well, so it's a race
to the--to get the start going as soon as we can. And we hope
to see GeoXO confirmed within our own department in December of
this year with the path forward defined.
Mr. Posey. Well, that's great. You know, other agencies are
rapidly increasing their low-Earth orbit satellites to advance
capabilities and achieve more frequent global refresh. You
know, what is NOAA's plan for moving out on the next generation
of low-Earth orbit?
Dr. Volz. I'll start and John can finish. The--we are
already in a rapid acceleration of low-Earth orbit assets, and
one of the key hallmarks of NOAA's program is that it's not
just NOAA satellites we use, it's everybody's if they have good
data that we can use. And we now incorporate data from 20 or so
different agencies and national partners into our numerical
weather forecasting based on interagency partner agreements. So
we already are disaggregated. NOAA is working with its Quick
Sounder approach to complement the JPSS program with a series--
upcoming series of small satellites focused on individual
observations, and that's part of what John Gagosian was saying
about the innovation is not just in technology, but it's in the
implementation approach, which allows for a rapid refresh, new
technology infusion, and as--and integration into our programs
and utilization of commercial assets when they're available.
And that's a key part of our overall program.
Mr. Posey. Do you think it's possible to accelerate
launches, move--move it up even faster?
Dr. Volz. Yes, it could. It is, sir. I think the the Quick
Sounder approach that we've initiated just this year is
targeting a 2025 launch. And with additional funds--with the
appropriate funding and the positive outcome of this program,
we're looking at the second half of this decade, we should--we
could be launching the next generation of complementary
missions from SmallSats out of the NOAA program.
Mr. Posey. Well, that's really great. And I see my time is
about to expire, so I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Congressman Posey.
I will now do a second round of questions for the stalwarts
who are hanging in. Let me begin.
Mr. Meny, we just heard a lot about, you know, the next-
generation satellites and GOES-R, GeoXO. One of your
recommendations was that the next-generation satellite programs
don't define more stringent requirement thresholds than the
corresponding thresholds in the dataset. Tell us more about
that. Is there the notion that we're overdesigning based on
what we can actually use?
Mr. Meny. Thank you for the question, Chairman. The
situation is that NOAA's policy on their user observation
requirements is to look and revalidate those observation
requirements at least every 4 years. In our work, we found that
76 percent of those observational requirements haven't been
revalidated in over 5 years, and 18 percent haven't been
revalidated over 18 years. So when you look at that process,
it's hard for the user observation requirement to transcend
down into what is being built on a satellite. So typically, the
satellite programs are putting together their specifications
and their thresholds, which is, you know, what, you know, the
minimum requirement is, is much higher than what is in the user
observation data base.
So what we're saying in that case is, one, the policy for
looking at those requirements should be refreshed and updated
to be more accurate if that's the need; and then, two, if in
fact the threshold requirement, the minimum requirement is what
is acceptable, maybe that should be an observation--excuse me,
an objective requirement and have a lower tradeoff, a smaller
like requirement underneath that so there's a trade space. We
found that in the GOES magnetometer recently, the one that
was--had a problem in development. Its actual mission was
meeting much higher--it was supposed to be a much higher--much
higher requirements than what was actually in the prior series,
which they fell back to do. And that's in the GOES-R program,
the only requirement that has a difference between the
threshold and objective values.
Chairman Beyer. Great. Thank you very much.
Dr. Volz, I'd love you to respond to it, but let me also
throw a question on top of that, which is you had said that 90
percent of all data used by NOAA's operational forecast is
coming from satellites right now. I'd love to know about the
relevance of the extensive network of ground-based weather
observation right now. How relevant is that 10 percent?
Dr. Volz. It's absolutely essential, sir. So the 90
percent/10 percent is not a valuation of 90 percent value, 10
percent value. Without the ground datasets, the satellite
datasets would be unmoored, unconnected to ground calibration
and validation, so it is essential that we have both. But the--
what the satellites provide is that global picture, especially
over the oceans and sparsely--with places where we don't have
ground calibration validation to give you that global picture,
which is essential for doing the long-term forecast. But the
ground datasets, the ASUS networks, the Weather Service, the
balloons, the airborne are absolutely necessary to have a well-
performing system, but we need both in other words.
Back to to Mr. Meny's point, I fully agree that our
requirements validation process that identifies a certain
refresh rate is not being satisfied. We did not meet that.
However, we did not rely on archaic requirement sets as the
basis for definition of the GeoXO. Recognizing this was a
problem, we actually went out and extensively researched and
communicated with the end users and the internal NOAA users on
how they want to and expect to use observations from GEO
(geostationary), from GOES, from geostationary and built that
into our requirements definition process, recognizing that we
don't have the refresh rates that we need, but we are working
in parallel to improve that. Through the--as we go to each
program, we're looking to upgrade and update the requirements
datasets. But I fully agree with his point that we need to
accelerate the refresh approach that we have for our
requirements, and that's one of the objectives, again, through
our NOAA Observing Systems Council that we are--we're
championing within NOAA to make sure that we do this more
systematically, but we--rather do everything at once, we're
focused on the ones where we have to make investments and
making sure those investments are based on well-validated
requirements, which we do believe we have for GeoXO.
Chairman Beyer. Great, thank you.
Mr. Gagosian, do you have any short follow up to that?
Mr. Gagosian. Very short, I just wanted to point out that
for all of our design reviews for GeoXO and all of our
lifecycle reviews, we have now specific criteria for user
engagement to make sure that the kind of user engagement that
Mr. Meny was describing is actually occurring.
Chairman Beyer. Great. Thank you very much. Let me
recognize the Ranking Member of the Committee.
Mr. Babin. Yes, thank you. I'm glad to come back through
with a second--second round. I appreciate it.
I have an additional question for Dr. Volz and for Mr.
Meny, NOAA and the Inspector General's Office. Will the
Department of Defense's future weather plans include flying the
Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite, or VIIRS,
instrument? VIIRS was the source of a lot of problems during
the development, and the taxpayers invested a lot of money to
ensure that it met both NOAA and DOD requirements. Despite
early issues, it has returned tremendous scientific and
operational results. NOAA flies VIIRS on JPSS right now to the
benefit of DOD. And it is my understanding that DOD recently
decided not to fly VIIRS in the early morning orbit, which it
is responsible for after the breakup of NPOESS. DOD has a much
larger budget than NOAA. That's an understatement. So it's a
little odd that NOAA may be carrying DOD's water in this
instance.
Furthermore, I wonder if there would be any discrepancies
with data continuity if DOD was to fly a different sensor or a
gap in coverage if they don't fly any sensor at all. Can each
of you elaborate on the benefits of the DOD flying VIIRS?
Dr. Volz. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Babin. Dr. Volz, yes, sir, you first.
Dr. Volz. [inaudible] question. So, yes, the VIIRS--VIIRS
was a beast to build. It was--as you mentioned, I think MODIS
was the precursor and we ended up building VIIRS. It is a very
capable instrument with multiple--and it turned out to be the
greatest producer of products that NOAA--that the JPSS program
produces. Many, many applications have been benefited from
that. And we will be flying VIIRS through the 2040's on JPSS-1,
-2, -3 and -4. The key is need for imagery in the morning orbit
is--does not require the full breadth of what VIIRS provides.
It requires a fairly narrow slice of that. There was larger
objectives for VIIRS.
So the fact that the DOD is not flying a VIIRS in the
morning orbit is certainly meeting still--but still meets
their--as far as I understand it, and you should--we need to
have the DOD confirmed this--meets their mission objectives
without covering the full spectrum of what the VIIRS does
provide. So we need VIIRS for what it does for us in the
afternoon orbit. In fact, the Europeans are flying a similar
instrument called METimage, which will be flying on their
second generation in the morning orbit. So between EUMETSAT
(European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological
Satellites) and NOAA, we will have two orbital coverages, not
exactly the same instrument but close.
And the DOD is going with a different approach for their
specific mission objective, which really was one of the reasons
for the default--the failure of NPOESS was that the divergence
of requirements led to different missions and different
observations in different orbits. I don't think we're carrying
the water for the DOD. I think VIIRS is a product--a service
suite that services us but many others, and we hope to benefit
from their observations in their orbits as well when they are
flying their disaggregated imagery in the coming years.
Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Meny?
Mr. Meny. Thank you for the question. Unfortunately, we
haven't looked at that, so I'll have to take that for the
record to come back. However, I do understand the concern about
what we're doing for other services when they have a larger
budget than what Commerce has. So----
Mr. Babin. Right.
Mr. Meny [continuing]. We'll take a look at it, but for
their orbit and picking up VIIRS, I don't have any information
I can provide right now, but I'd be happy to take your question
for the record.
Mr. Babin. OK. That's good. I think I'll just yield back to
you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you all.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Dr. Babin, very much.
Mr. Babin. Yes, sir.
Chairman Beyer. I recognize the Congresswoman from Oregon,
Ms. Bonamici.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
There have been a couple of hearings in this Committee that
the reaction was this is incredibly alarming. And one of them
was yesterday about the Arctic and the melting permafrost and
the other one was about spectrum, so that's what I'm going to
ask about. This Committee has had a long history of bipartisan
concern about harmful interference in the radio spectrum that
can undermine the performance of scientific instruments such as
NOAA weather satellites. Last summer, this Committee held a
hearing to examine the potential radiofrequency interference
that could possibly deteriorate weather forecasting
capabilities, as well as opportunities to mitigate, sorry, any
harmful interference.
So, Dr. Volz, why can interference be so harmful and
challenging to mitigate for the types of measurements that NOAA
satellites collect, especially for passive remote sensing? And
what are your concerns for future radiofrequency interference
with the Earth remote sensing satellite operations, including
any actions or developments at the domestic or international
level?
Dr. Volz. So thank you, Congresswoman Bonamici, for the
question related to the spectrum. The reason that passive--that
use of--the active use of the spectrum from terrestrial sources
is a problem for us in some areas is that we rely on with our
passive instruments, microwave in particular, looking for the
passive emission of signals from natural sources in various
bands through what are called transparent or atmospheric
windows, things that are not attenuated by the atmosphere. And
a couple of those, they happen to be those places where the
atmosphere doesn't attenuate radio frequencies are the best
places for radiofrequency uses as well, so there's conflict
already between the passive window and the active use of that.
And we saw this in a couple of the microwave soundings like at
24 gigahertz and in the 50 gigahertz range where those are
windows that we use because they reveal temperature and
pressure profiles in the atmosphere all the way down to the
ground. And now those are where you might see 5G application.
You sell that spectrum for other use.
So what the problem is, if there's an active source, it
interferes with the passive, and the active source can be much
larger and time varying, and it raises the noise level of our
signals and eliminates the value of the observation. So that is
a concern for us, for all of the observers of the passive
observations of the planet, of the Earth. And it is--and there
have been a lot of ongoing activity on how to co-use and--how
to use--how to co-incident or co-reside in the same spectrum
and nearby.
And I think that is--we have ongoing conversations with the
World Radio Conference, the WRC, as we call it, to try and find
the right separations between active use and passive use, and I
think we have it at a better place now in the coordination and
discussion on what are the allowable uses in parallel bands,
but it requires a careful coordination going into the global
application.
Ms. Bonamici. Well, I'm going to ask Mr. Gagosian then. How
does NASA incorporate radiofrequency interference mitigation
technologies into the development of weather satellites?
Mr. Gagosian. So when you're looking at how to mitigate, we
are working with NOAA on some studies for instruments that we
could fly to measure the ground-based interference sources. So
we've come up with concepts, and at this point, really, it's a
tradeoff, right? There's certain investment that would be
required versus the impact--the potential impact on the
observations. And Dr. Volz can confirm this, but it's--I think
it's up to NOAA to really do that--sort of that trade, right,
to assess the cost versus the benefit of that type of
instrument. But we have collaborated with them on those
studies.
Ms. Bonamici. Terrific. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Beyer. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Now, finally, I recognize the Congresswoman from Oklahoma,
Mrs. Bice.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I actually don't have
any additional questions, so----
Chairman Beyer. All right. Well, thank you. Then I believe
we are done. Good.
Well, before we bring the hearing to a close, thank you
very much for hanging in through these long 90 minutes, all our
witnesses for being here in person and virtually. And thank you
for the work you do. The weather, whether you live in Oklahoma
or Oregon or even Virginia and Texas, it's incredibly
important. And knowing and being able to predict what's going
to happen today, tomorrow, next week is essential. So thank you
very much for all that you do.
The record will remain open for two weeks for additional
statements from the Members or for any additional questions the
Committee may ask for the witnesses. The witnesses are excused,
and the hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the Subcommittees were
adjourned.]
Appendix
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]