[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                  AN OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL OCEANIC
                 AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION BUDGET
                     PROPOSAL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

=======================================================================
                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
                             AND TECHNOLOGY

                                 OF THE

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 11, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-13

                               __________

 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                    
53-137 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------       
 
              COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                  HON. FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman
BILL POSEY, Florida                  ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking 
RANDY WEBER, Texas                       Member
BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JIM BAIRD, Indiana                   HALEY STEVENS, Michigan
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
MIKE GARCIA, California              DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee         VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
DARRELL ISSA, California             KEVIN MULLIN, California
RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas              JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             EMILIA SYKES, Ohio
RYAN ZINKE, Montana                  MAXWELL FROST, Florida
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida              YADIRA CARAVEO, Colorado
DALE STRONG, Alabama                 SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
MAX MILLER, Ohio                     JENNIFER McCLELLAN, Virginia
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia              TED LIEU, California
MIKE COLLINS, Georgia                SEAN CASTEN, Illinois,
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York             Vice Ranking Member
TOM KEAN, New Jersey                 PAUL TONKO, New York
VACANCY
                                 ------                                

                      Subcommittee on Environment

                    HON. MAX MILLER, Ohio, Chairman
BILL POSEY, Florida                  DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina, 
RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas                  Ranking Member
RYAN ZINKE, Montana                  SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
MIKE COLLINS, Georgia                MAXWELL FROST, Florida
                         
                         
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              May 11, 2023

                                                                   Page

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

                           Opening Statements

Statement by Representative Max Miller, Chairman, Subcommittee on 
  Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. 
  House of Representatives.......................................     8
    Written Statement............................................     9

Statement by Representative Deborah Ross, Ranking Member, 
  Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and 
  Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................    10
    Written Statement............................................    11

Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Chairman, Committee on 
  Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..    11
    Written Statement............................................    12

Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member, 
  Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of 
  Representatives................................................    13
    Written Statement............................................    14

                               Witnesses:

The Honorable Richard W. Spinrad, Ph.D., Administrator, National 
  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
    Oral Statement...............................................    15
    Written Statement............................................    18

Discussion.......................................................    26

             Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

The Honorable Richard W. Spinrad, Ph.D., Administrator, National 
  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)..................    40

            Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record

Letter submitted by Representative Bill Posey, Subcommittee on 
  Environment, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. 
  House of Representatives

    To Richard W. Spinrad, Ph.D., Under Secretary of Commerce for 
      Oceans and Atmosphere, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
      Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
      Administration, from Representative Neal P. Dunn, et al....    60

 
                  AN OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL OCEANIC
                     AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
                  BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              


                         THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2023

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

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in 
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Max Miller 
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Chairman Miller. This Committee will come to order. With no 
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the 
Committee at any time. Welcome to today's hearing, entitled 
``An Overview of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) Budget Proposal for Fiscal Year 2024.'' I 
now recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement.
    Good morning, and welcome to our hearing on NOAA's budget 
proposal for Fiscal Year of 2024. I'd like to welcome the Under 
Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, or more simply 
known as the NOAA Administrator, Dr. Rick Spinrad, as our sole 
witness this morning to discuss the President's proposed budget 
for the agency. Economically, we are in unprecedented time. 
Everyone might be tired of hearing that word, having been used 
countless times during COVID, but there is no other way to 
describe the state of our economy right now.
    Federal spending is at a record high, while inflation is 
nowhere near the Fed's 2 percent target, and prices continue to 
rise for American families. We're also rapidly approaching the 
debt limit, and the possibility of the Federal Government 
defaulting on its debts. All of that to say, any talks around 
the budget and spending, even at an agency like NOAA, warrant 
careful consideration and calculated decisions. The President 
has requested $6.8 billion for NOAA's budget in Fiscal Year 
2024, the most in NOAA's history. This request would be a $407 
million increase from the discretionary and mandatory money 
that NOAA was appropriated last year, and a $1.3 billion 
increase from Fiscal Year 2022. It's also worth noting that 
NOAA received an additional $2.7 billion from the 
infrastructure law that remains available until 2027. NOAA also 
received one-time influxes of $3.3 billion in the Inflation 
Reduction Act and over $500 million in the Fiscal Year 2023 
Disaster Supplemental bill.
    So, with some quick back of the napkin math, we can see 
NOAA has an additional $8 billion that they didn't have just 2 
years ago, and likely didn't prepare for. That is a staggering 
number, and prime for waste, fraud, and abuse without proper 
oversight. As I have already mentioned, our current economic 
outlook clearly tells us that Federal spending isn't 
sustainable. I'm not placing the blame on NOAA, nor am I 
advocating for drastic cuts at the agency. I'm simply opening 
an honest and upfront dialog about what is critically necessary 
and what is a luxury within our country. We can't act like 
NOAA's coffers are dry. We need to shift from the give me more 
mindset to maximize what we've been given.
    As the budget request accurately describes, NOAA's--NOAA 
provides the environmental science, information, and services 
needed to protect lives, lifestyles, and livelihoods for every 
single American. Therefore, when making any budget decision, we 
should be asking, does this program, activity, or funding 
protect lives and property? I'm pleased to see manageable 
increases to NOAA's oceanic and atmospheric research and the 
National Weather Service. These two offices are at the 
forefront of innovation and prediction that can indeed save 
lives. On the other hand, I'm perplexed to see a decrease in 
the funding for the National Mesonet Program and a long-term 
plan to flat fund commercial data purchases in the future.
    These two programs are golden examples of how NOAA can 
supplement, and even improve, their weather data inventory with 
cheaper, flexible industry efforts. If we're looking to save 
taxpayer money, it seems logical to bolster these programs, 
rather than have NOAA try to collect data on their own through 
expensive buildouts and federally owned instruments. 
Nonetheless, I remain optimistic about NOAA's future. I have no 
doubt Administrator Spinrad had tough conversations of his own 
in developing this budget, without question. I'm confident we 
can talk civilly through any differences in opinion we have and 
work together to best advance NOAA's mission. I look forward to 
hearing from Administrator Spinrad today, and in the future, as 
we look together to support NOAA's lifesaving activities.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Miller follows:]

    Good morning and welcome to our hearing on NOAA's Budget 
Proposal for Fiscal Year 2024.
    I'd like to welcome the Under Secretary of Commerce for 
Oceans and Atmosphere, or more simply known as the NOAA 
Administrator, Dr. Rick Spinrad, as our sole witness this 
morning to discuss the President's proposed budget for the 
agency.
    Economically, we are in an unprecedented time. Everyone 
might be tired of hearing that word having been used countless 
times during COVID, but there is no other way to describe the 
state of our economy right now.
    Federal spending is at a record high, while inflation is 
nowhere near the Fed's 2% target, and prices continue to rise 
for American families. We are also rapidly approaching the debt 
limit and the possibility of the federal government defaulting 
on its debts. All of that to say, any talks around budget and 
spending, even at an agency like NOAA, warrant careful 
consideration and calculated decisions.
    The President has requested $6.8 billion for NOAA's budget 
in FY24, the most in NOAA's history. This request would be a 
$407 million increase from the discretionary and mandatory 
money that NOAA was appropriated last year, and a $1.3 billion 
increase from FY22.
    It's also worth noting NOAA received an additional $2.7 
billion from the Infrastructure Law that remains available 
until 2027. NOAA also received one-time influxes of $3.3 
billion in the Inflation Reduction Act and over $500 million in 
the FY23 Disaster Supplemental bill.
    So with some quick, back of the napkin math, we can see 
that NOAA has an additional $8 billion that they didn't have 
just two years ago, and likely didn't prepare for. That is a 
staggering number and prime for waste, fraud, and abuse without 
proper oversight.
    As I have already mentioned, our current economic outlook 
clearly tells us that federal spending isn't sustainable. I'm 
not placing the blame on NOAA, nor am I advocating for drastic 
cuts at the agency.
    I'm simply opening an honest and upfront dialogue about 
what is critically necessary and what is a luxury. We can't act 
like NOAA's coffers are dry. We need to shift from the ``give 
me more'' mindset to ``maximize what we've been given.''
    As the budget request accurately describes, NOAA provides 
the environmental science, information, and services needed to 
protect lives, lifestyles, and livelihoods for all Americans. 
Therefore, when making any budget decision we should be asking: 
does this program, activity, or funding protect lives and 
property?
    I'm pleased to see manageable increases to NOAA's Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Research and the National Weather Service. 
These two offices are at the forefront of innovation and 
prediction that can indeed save lives.
    On the other hand, I'm perplexed to see a decrease in 
funding for the National Mesonet Program and a long-term plan 
to flat fund Commercial Data Purchases in the future.
    These two programs are golden examples of how NOAA can 
supplement and even improve their weather data inventory with 
cheaper, flexible industry efforts. If we're looking to save 
taxpayer money, it seems logical to bolster these programs 
rather than have NOAA try to collect data on their own through 
expensive buildouts and federally owned instruments.
    Nonetheless I remain optimistic about NOAA's future. I have 
no doubt Administrator Spinrad had tough conversations of his 
own in developing this budget. I'm confident we can talk 
civilly through any differences in opinion we have, and work 
together to best advance NOAA's mission.
    I look forward to hearing from Administrator Spinrad today 
and in the future as we look together to support NOAA's 
lifesaving activities.

    Chairman Miller. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the 
Environment Subcommittee, the gentlewoman from North Carolina, 
for an opening statement.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you, Chairman Miller, and we're celebrating 
because we got a bill through the House this week, doing a lot 
of work together. But thank you for holding this important 
hearing on NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request. And thank 
you to Administrator Spinrad for joining us this morning to 
discuss NOAA's plans for this upcoming year.
    NOAA is at the forefront of weather and climate prediction, 
research, fisheries management, coastal resilience, 
environmental stewardship, economic development, and so much 
more. By executing its mission, NOAA is playing a critical role 
in protecting the health and well-being of people and the 
environment in the United States, and it has been doing this 
for decades. Without a doubt, it's paramount for Congress to 
continue supporting NOAA's mission through a well-funded 
budget.
    I was excited to see the focus of NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 
budget is building a climate-ready nation. As we're all aware, 
climate change is progressing at breakneck speed, with some 
impacts being seen far sooner than models have predicted. 
Severe weather events, including drought, flooding, coastal 
erosion, and super storms are becoming more common, and their 
destructive power is increasing. Climate change threatens our 
food system by affecting the productivity of agriculture and 
fisheries. The importance and timeliness of NOAA's focus on 
building a climate-ready nation cannot be understated.
    With more than $450 million increase in discretionary 
appropriations from the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted budget, NOAA 
is poised to shore up its efforts in key areas critical to the 
interests of all Americans. I'd like to highlight a few here. 
Building on the investments made in the Inflation Reduction Act 
and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, NOAA's requested funding 
will support an Earth system approach to climate products and 
services, advance precipitation predictions across weather and 
climate timescales, and support a whole-of-government effort to 
address the climate crisis.
    North Carolina's Second Congressional District, which I 
represent, is home to NC State University, and close to other 
major research universities on the forefront of addressing the 
climate crisis in the United States and beyond. Partnerships 
between academic institutions and NOAA, and access to 
competitive grants for research, rely on the agency receiving a 
robust and reliable funding system. Beyond these grants and 
partnerships, agriculture and fisheries are major contributors 
to my State's economy. We must ensure NOAA has the support it 
needs to provide the science necessary to effectively manage 
our food, resources, and economy.
    However, NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 plans for improving its 
life-saving products, services, and other capabilities are at 
risk. I'm very concerned about the proposed budget cuts led by 
Speaker McCarthy that passed the House. Cutting NOAA's budget 
by at least 22 percent below Fiscal Year 2023 enacted levels 
will be devastating for the progress that NOAA is making to 
increase forecast accuracy and support communities becoming 
climate resilient. I hope all Members of this Committee can 
agree on the importance of NOAA's mission and work together to 
support this critical work on behalf of our districts. I look 
forward to hearing from Administrator Spinrad today about 
NOAA's plans for Fiscal Year 2024 and how Congress can support 
you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Ross follows:]

    Thank you, Chairman Miller, for holding this important 
hearing on NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request, and thank 
you to the honorable Administrator Spinrad for joining us this 
morning to discuss NOAA's plans for this upcoming year.
    NOAA is at the forefront of weather and climate prediction 
and research, fisheries management, coastal resilience, 
environmental stewardship, economic development, and more. By 
executing its mission, NOAA is playing a critical role in 
protecting the health and wellbeing of people and the 
environment in the United States-as it has been doing for 
decades. Without a doubt, it is paramount for Congress to 
continue supporting NOAA's mission through a well-funded 
budget.
    I was excited to see that the focus of NOAA's Fiscal Year 
2024 budget is building a climate-ready nation. As we are all 
aware, climate change is progressing at break-neck pace, with 
some impacts being seen far sooner than models have predicted. 
Severe weather events including drought, flooding, coastal 
erosion, and super storms are becoming more common and their 
destructive power is increasing. Climate change threatens our 
food system by affecting the productivity of agriculture and 
fisheries. The importance and timeliness of NOAA's focus on 
building a climate-ready nation cannot be understated.
    With a more than 450 million dollar increase in 
discretionary appropriations from the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted 
budget, NOAA is poised to shore up its efforts in key areas 
critical to the interests of Americans. I would like to 
specifically highlight a few here. Building on the investments 
made in the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, NOAA's requested funding will support an 
earth system approach to climate products and services, advance 
precipitation predictions across weather and climate 
timescales, and support a whole-of-government effort to address 
the climate crisis.
    North Carolina's 2nd District, which I represent, is home 
to NC State University and close to other major research 
universities on the forefront of addressing the climate crisis 
in the U.S. and beyond.
    Partnerships between academic institutions and NOAA-and 
access to competitive grants for research- rely on the agency 
receiving a robust and reliable funding stream. Beyond these 
grants and partnerships, agriculture and fisheries are major 
contributors to my state's economy. We must ensure NOAA has the 
support it needs to provide the science necessary to 
effectively manage our food resources and economy.
    However, NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 plans for improving its 
life-saving products, services, and other capabilities are at 
risk. I am very concerned about the proposed budget cut led by 
Speaker McCarthy that passed the House. Cutting NOAA's budget 
by at least 22% below the Fiscal year 2023 enacted levels will 
be devastating to the progress NOAA is making to increase 
forecast accuracy and support communities in becoming climate 
resilient. I hope all Members in this Committee can agree on 
the importance of NOAA's mission and work together to support 
its critical work.
    I look forward to hearing from Administrator Spinrad today 
about NOAA's plans for Fiscal Year 2024 and how Congress can 
support them.
    I yield back.

    Chairman Miller. Thank you, Ms. Ross. I now recognize the 
Chairman of the Full Committee, the gentleman from Oklahoma, 
for an opening statement.
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you, Chairman Miller, and I want to 
extend my warmest welcome to Administrator Spinrad. It's good 
to see you again. When you were in front of this Committee for 
the first time as Administrator, I told everyone there's a 
picture of you in Oklahoma at the dedication of the National 
Weather Center in 2006. Since the Weather Center received $9.5 
million last year for an expansion project, which we can 
discuss more today, I hope to see you in Norman, Oklahoma, very 
soon for a similar celebration and another picture.
    While we're only 5 months into this Congress, today's 
hearing is already our third involving NOAA-related activities. 
That goes to show you how much this Committee, and I 
personally, value and appreciate NOAA's role in the Federal 
research ecosystem. While the previous two hearings have 
focused on the Committee's future legislative efforts, a NOAA 
Organic Act and reauthorizing the Weather Act, I hope that 
today's hearing will focus more on current activities and the 
appropriate funding levels for certain programs. Before we move 
forward with any legislative changes, we need to understand 
what's already happening, examining what's working and what 
isn't.
    When it comes to the President's budget request, I've said 
many times over many years that this is just that, a request. 
Congress controls the purse, and you're here to make the case 
for your vision of NOAA. We'll see where we agree, where we 
need to work out some difficulties--differences, but I promise 
you, we'll get there. NOAA's requesting $6.8 billion for a 
broad array of activities arrange--ranging from weather 
forecasting and climate prediction to ocean and atmospheric 
observations. While I don't doubt the need for these 
activities--I've personally advocated for requiring some of 
them, I acknowledge that--it's important to put it into 
context. This would be an annual budget of $1.4 billion more 
than what NOAA was operating with just 5 years ago.
    That's a quick growth for any agency, especially for one 
that at times has struggled with workforce recruitment and 
retention. So while I respect many of NOAA's goals, and 
understand that funding is required to achieve them, we must 
recognize we are in a time of tough but important 
conversations. We can't assume an endless increasing budget, 
and must be aware of that fact, that, to be accountable to 
taxpayers, even funding increases come with caveats and 
reforms. At the end of the day, all of the activities under 
NOAA's budget request should have one fundamental end goal, 
protecting lives and property. Anything else is window 
dressing. I look forward to working with the Administrator to 
advance this goal in the best possible ways. And with that, 
thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lucas follows:]

    I want to extend my warmest welcome to Administrator 
Spinrad. It's good to see you again.
    When you were in front of the Committee for the first time 
as Administrator, I told everyone there's a picture of you in 
Oklahoma at the dedication of the National Weather Center in 
2006. Since the Weather Center received $9.5 million last year 
for an expansion project, which we can discuss more today, I 
hope to see you in Norman, Oklahoma very soon for a similar 
celebration and picture.
    While we're only five months into this Congress, today's 
hearing is already our third involving NOAA-related activities. 
That goes to show you how much this Committee, and I 
personally, value and appreciate NOAA's role in the federal 
research ecosystem.
    While the previous two hearings have focused on the 
Committee's future legislative efforts--a NOAA Organic Ac and 
reauthorizing the Weather Act--I hope that today's hearing will 
focus more on current activities and the appropriate funding 
levels for certain programs. Before we move forward with any 
legislative changes, we need to understand what's already 
happening-examining what's working and what isn't.
    When it comes to the President's budget request, I've said 
many times over many years that this is just that- a request. 
Congress controls the purse, and you are here to make the case 
for your vision of NOAA. We'll see where we agree and where we 
need to work out some differences, but I promise you, we'll get 
there.
    NOAA is requesting $6.8 billion for a broad array of 
activities ranging from weather forecasting and climate 
prediction to ocean and atmospheric observation. While I don't 
doubt the need for these activities--I've personally advocated 
for legislation requiring some of them--it's important to put 
it into context: this would be an annual budget $1.4 billion 
more than what NOAA was operating with just five years ago.
    That is quick growth for any agency, especially for one 
that at times has struggled with workforce recruitment and 
retention. So while I respect many of NOAA's goals, and 
understand that funding is required to achieve them, we must 
recognize we are in a time of tough but important 
conversations. We can't assume an endlessly increasing budget 
and must be aware of the fact that, to be accountable to 
taxpayers, even funding increases may come with caveats and 
reforms.
    At the end of the day, all of the activities under NOAA's 
budget request should have one fundamental end goal: protecting 
lives and property. Anything else is window dressing. I look 
forward to working with the Administrator to advance this goal 
in the best ways possible.

    Chairman Miller. Thank you, Chairman Lucas. I now recognize 
the Ranking Member of the Full Committee, the gentlewoman from 
California, for an opening statement.
    Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, Chairman Miller and Ranking 
Member Ross, for this important hearing. And welcome back, 
Doctor. Thank you for your service and leadership at NOAA. I'm 
looking forward to today's discussion on NOAA's priorities in 
the upcoming year.
    I think NOAA is just a critically important scientific 
agency, and we all know it has a direct effect on the 
livelihoods of all Americans. Tasked with helping our 
communities, economy, and ecosystems remain healthy and 
resilient, we have to recognize that, in the face of growing 
climate change threats, NOAA provides absolutely critical 
research products and services necessary to us. I think the 
budget request is a positive step, but as the Ranking Member of 
the Subcommittee has mentioned, in the proposed 22 percent 
budget cut that passed the House a couple of weeks ago, I think 
that would be pretty--a pretty catastrophic impact on NOAA, and 
I'd love to have your thoughts on that when it comes to your 
testimony. I'm eager to learn from you, Administrator, about 
how the proposed cuts would affect NOAA, and your services.
    We learned that one of the primary reasons we lag our 
international counterparts in severe weather forecasting is due 
to NOAA's lack of access to high-performance computing, as well 
as its investment in data assimilation, which is a step behind. 
And as we've seen ever more severe weather events, including, 
I'll mention, this winter's just devastating flooding and loss 
of life in California due to atmospheric rivers, the forecasts 
and warnings are needed now more than ever.
    I believe that the President's budget request contains a 
number of programs and activities to expand NOAA's capabilities 
and increase the resiliencies of communities, and one important 
investment for the future of NOAA's observational capabilities 
that would result from the next generation of weather 
satellites. Now, the data collected by NOAA's weather 
satellites really make up the backbone of NOAA's weather 
prediction capabilities. And although you're working diligently 
to update the national civilian weather satellite system to 
increase capabilities and the continuity of accuracy, we really 
need to support those efforts, as is outlined in the 
President's budget.
    As we look ahead to the future of NOAA, I look forward to 
working with Chairman Lucas and our colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle as we sort through the various issues relative to 
NOAA, and the President--the Chairman's idea about 
restructuring, which we will work on in good faith. I would 
just note that, you know, sometimes it's easy to focus on the 
cost, and neglect to understand the value. And here's a case 
where, with our atmospheric rivers threatening agriculture, the 
fire devastation that's occurred not only in California but 
throughout the West, we need accurate forecasting. Both to pre-
deploy resources for predicted devastating fires, to help our 
farmers prepare for, you know, devastating flooding, and many 
other things. So I look forward to hearing from you how the 
President's proposed budget would help us better protect 
Americans who need your predictions to be accurate, timely. 
And, again, thank you for appearing here, Doctor. I look 
forward to your testimony, and I would yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]

    Thank you, Chairman Miller and Ranking Member Ross for 
holding this important hearing on NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 
budget request. Welcome back Dr. Spinrad, and thank you for 
your service and leadership at NOAA. I am looking forward to 
today's discussion on NOAA's priorities in the upcoming year.
    NOAA is a critically important scientific agency that has a 
direct effect on the livelihood of all Americans. NOAA is 
tasked with helping our communities, economy, and ecosystems 
remain healthy and resilient. This is especially important as 
we continue to face the growing threat of climate change. NOAA 
provides critical research, products, and services necessary 
for our ability to understand, adapt to, and mitigate climate 
change effects.
    I would say the budget request is a positive step forward 
in NOAA's ability to accomplish its mission. However, I would 
be remiss to not mention the proposed 22 percent budget cut for 
civilian agencies that passed the House a couple of weeks ago 
as part of Speaker McCarthy's debt limit scheme. Anything even 
approaching that cut, or the 10 year flat-lining of agencies 
also proposed, would devastate NOAA's ability to provide life-
saving and economy-saving weather forecasting and climate 
services.
    I am eager to learn from you, Administrator Spinrad, about 
how these irresponsible cuts would affect NOAA and the services 
it provides. We have learned that one of the primary reasons 
the U.S. lags behind our international counterparts in severe 
weather forecasting is due to NOAA's access to high- 
performance computing and its investment in data assimilation 
being a step behind. Also, as we have seen ever more severe 
weather events with significant impacts, including this past 
winter's devasting flooding and loss of life in California due 
to atmospheric rivers, NOAA's forecasts and warnings are needed 
now, more than ever. How would these suggested budget cuts 
reduce the progress of bettering our forecasts and preparing 
our communities for climate change? These are just a few 
questions that need to be answered to understand how these cuts 
would affect our communities.
    The President's budget request, on the other hand, contains 
a number of programs and activities that will expand NOAA's 
capabilities and increase the resiliency of communities. One 
important investment for the future of NOAA's observational 
capabilities is the increased funding request for the next 
generation of weather satellites. The data collected by NOAA's 
weather satellites make up the backbone of NOAA's weather 
prediction capabilities and support weather forecasting 
activities around the globe. NOAA is working diligently to 
update the national civilian weather satellite system to ensure 
increased capabilities and continuity of accurate and reliable 
forecasts and warnings. NOAA is actively assessing future 
capabilities and working toward a more nimble satellite system 
in the Near Earth Orbit Network. I look forward to learning 
more about these efforts in today's discussion.
    As we look ahead at the future of NOAA, I look forward to 
working with Chairman Lucas and colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to continue to focus on identifying and investing in the 
necessary solutions to address severe weather and the threat of 
climate change.
    I yield back.

    Chairman Miller. Thank you, Ms. Lofgren. I now want to 
recognize the gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, to 
introduce our witness today.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It's an 
honor to introduce Dr. Rick Spinrad, Administrator of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, and an 
Oregonian. Dr. Spinrad is a champion of science, ocean health, 
and natural resources with a distinguished career spanning more 
than four decades. He has made significant contributions to the 
field of oceanography and dedicated his life to the advancement 
of scientific knowledge, and the protection of the planet's 
precious resources.
    As an alum of Oregon State University, Dr. Spinrad 
understands and deeply appreciates the natural beauty and 
economic importance of the country's coastal regions. His 
lifelong work as an oceanographer reflects his expertise in 
this area, and his dedication to its preservation and 
protection.
    Before his appointment as NOAA administrator, Dr. Spinrad 
held a number of important positions in the field of 
oceanography. He served as Chief Scientist of NOAA's National 
Ocean Service, and the Assistant Administrator for Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Research. He was also the Vice President for 
Research at Oregon State University, where he oversaw research 
programs in a wide range of scientific disciplines. Dr. Spinrad 
has served as a member of numerous scientific advisory 
committees, including the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, 
and the National Science Foundation's Advisory Committee for 
Geosciences.
    As Administrator, Dr. Spinrad has been instrumental in 
developing and implementing key policies and programs that 
support NOAA's mission to understand and predict changes in 
climate, weather, oceans, and coasts. Additionally, his 
expertise is vital to implementing important investments from 
the Fiscal Year 2024 budget request in research and 
development, coastal resilience, and climate adaptation. We're 
fortunate to have such a distinguished and accomplished 
individual leading NOAA, and I am confident that his--under his 
leadership, the Nation's natural resources are in good hands. 
Please join me in welcoming NOAA Administrator Dr. Rick 
Spinrad. And I yield back.
    Chairman Miller. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. I now recognize 
Administrator Spinrad for 5 minutes to present his testimony.

         TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE RICHARD W. SPINRAD,

             Ph.D., ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL OCEANIC

             AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)

    Dr. Spinrad. Chair Miller, Ranking Member Ross, Chair 
Lucas, and Ranking Member Lofgren, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on 
the President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request for the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA. And, 
Congresswoman Bonamici, thank you for that very kind 
introduction.
    For Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA proposes a budget of $6.8 
billion in discretionary appropriations, an increase of $450.5 
million from the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted. The Fiscal Year 2024 
budget builds on investments in the Inflation Reduction Act and 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for climate-ready coasts, 
climate data and services, and fisheries and protected 
resources. This combination of funding will empower us to 
address a growing demand for climate information, services, and 
products that are needed to build a climate-ready nation.
    This budget supports NOAA's goal of scaling up critical 
efforts to understand and mitigate impacts of the climate 
crisis. Specifically, NOAA will make investments in research, 
observations, and forecasting, restoration and resilience, 
offshore wind development, and equity both within the agency 
and around the Nation. It also includes additional investments 
in our fleet and aircraft, satellites and space weather 
observations, and predictions to ensure NOAA continues to 
provide actionable environmental intelligence that is the basis 
for smart policy and decisionmaking in a changing world.
    Communities around the country, rural and urban, are 
struggling with the effects of high-impact weather, climate, 
and water events like hurricanes, floods, droughts, wildfires, 
and fisheries collapse. Our partners, including other Federal 
agencies, emergency managers, and underserved and vulnerable 
communities, rely on NOAA's weather and climate data, tools, 
and services to gain insights in order to take decisive action. 
Therefore, NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 request will make 
significant investments to optimize the National Weather 
Service Integrated Dissemination Program, improve precipitation 
forecasts using NOAA's Unified Forecast System, and expand our 
service delivery through the capabilities of the Climate 
Adaptation Partnerships Program, among other things.
    As our weather and climate become increasingly complex, 
NOAA's satellite observations, data, and scientific experts are 
needed now more than ever. In Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA will 
invest in the next generation of satellites, which will allow 
us to better observe environmental phenomena so that we can 
expand our service delivery to meet the evolving needs of the 
American public. In Fiscal Year 2024 NOAA will continue to 
optimize advances in science and technology to create value-
added, data-driven, sustainable economic development, with a 
particular focus on the new blue economy.
    Our request supports the expansion of offshore wind energy, 
ocean and coastal mapping and charting, and development of key 
information systems in our tsunami, weather, and space 
infrastructure. To that end, NOAA will continue to work closely 
with the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy 
Management to minimize the effects of offshore energy projects 
on protected marine resources, fisheries, and important 
habitats, as well as mitigate impacts to our fishery surveys.
    Additionally, Fiscal Year 2024 funding will support 
improvement in the safety of commercial space activities as 
Earth's orbits become increasingly congested with space traffic 
and debris. Our request will allow the Office of Space Commerce 
to continue toward meeting its goal of achieving full operating 
capability for space situational awareness services.
    NOAA continues to prioritize equity in every facet of our 
mission delivery, including how we co-develop and provide 
products and services to every community. NOAA is working 
internally to create a model agency that draws from the full 
diversity of the Nation, where everyone is treated with dignity 
and respect. In Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA will expand the use of 
social, economic, and climate change metrics that uniquely 
characterize a community's vulnerability and resilience to 
disturbances. This will in turn enable users to implement 
policies that address environmental, climate, and racial equity 
and justice considerations.
    People know that they can turn to NOAA for reliable climate 
and weather information to help make informed decisions that 
help save lives and livelihoods. With increased funding in 
Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA will ensure continuity from legacy 
systems, while providing significant improvements in data and 
products, and continue investments aligned with our strategic 
vision. I look forward to working closely with you all and 
discussing NOAA's mission more with you today. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Spinrad follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairman Miller. Thank you for your testimony. The Chair 
recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
    Administrator Spinrad, in December 2022 NOAA began its work 
on its next generation Geostationary Extended Observations, 
known as GeoXO, Satellite Program. This is NOAA's largest 
procurement ever. Issues with this previous NOAA weather 
satellite procurement, such as the Geostationary Operational 
Environmental Satellite R Series (GOES-R) and the Joint Polar 
Satellite System (JPSS), are enlisting on GAO's (Government 
Accountability Office's) High Risk Series.
    Due to significant schedule delays that threaten gaps in 
weather monitoring, degraded capabilities from what was 
originally promised, and outrageous cost overruns, GOES-R went 
from a projection of under $7 billion to costing over $11 
billion. JPSS, when originally conceived as the National Polar-
orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite Systems (NPOESS), 
was estimated to cost $6.5 billion, but eventually was scrapped 
in place of JPSS, which ballooned to nearly $13 billion, not 
accounting for $4 billion sunk into NPOESS. Very simply, what 
specifically is NOAA doing to ensure history is not repeated on 
GeoXO? And I'd like concrete steps and procedures, not broad 
goals.
    Dr. Spinrad. Thank you, Chair Miller, and I'd start by 
saying that obviously this element of our observational 
infrastructure is one of the critical components in our being 
able to produce even better forecasts--observations for the 
breadth of phenomena that were alluded to in the opening 
statements, from hurricanes, to atmospheric rivers, to even 
some of the fisheries issues that we deal with. So, having a 
sustained, reliable, well-managed satellite constellation 
activity is critical for NOAA.
    To that end, one of the things that I have undertaken in my 
role as administrator is to build what I would call a rigorous 
acquisition strategy and structure into our satellite program, 
which involves a requirements-based approach, a very specific 
definition of risk register elements, and mitigation aspects 
for that risk register, as well as milestone gates for each 
step in the acquisition process. Consequently, the budget that 
we've developed goes out several years, builds on lessons 
learned and capabilities we have right now, and also has risk 
mitigation elements, in terms of technology insertion.
    So that alludes to the fact that it takes several years to 
design, build, and ultimately launch these satellites. We know 
technology changes in that period. Can we design in a way that 
we can incorporate, in sort of a spiral development context, 
the new technologies to make sure that by the time we launch, 
say in the early 2030's, we're using the best, highest, and 
most reliable technology available to improve our forecast 
capabilities.
    Chairman Miller. And do you feel confident in your 
approach, in terms of mitigating those costs in the future? As 
I know that technology evolves over years, as you had stated, 
and costs increase, which we are very aware of, especially now, 
in today's economy, but you yourself, are you confident that we 
can treat taxpayer money responsibly and use it efficiently 
regarding these programs, and not have them balloon like some 
of the others that I just referenced?
    Dr. Spinrad. I--thank you, Chair Miller. I feel very 
confident, largely because I have a lot of confidence in our 
own technology, and our own technical expertise, but we also 
work very closely with our partners. So we work very closely 
with NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) on 
the initial design and construction, and launch, obviously, of 
these satellites, and we also have ongoing dialog with our--I 
would say partners--around the world. The European 
Meteorological Satellite Service, for example, the Japanese 
Satellite Service. Not so much relying on them but learning 
lessons with respect to technology from our partners. And, 
obviously, we rely heavily on our defense sector, and the 
methods and technologies that they are developing as well.
    Chairman Miller. Thank you. I'll try to squeeze this last 
one in. Administrator Spinrad, my district, Ohio-7, touches the 
southern part of Lake Erie and contains the Cuyahoga River. In 
2022, and for the first time in 30 years, NOAA sent one of its 
white ships to the Great Lakes with the explicit goal of 
mapping. While I appreciate last year's efforts and hope NOAA 
will continue to send its ships to the Great Lakes, the stark 
reality is that currently over--only 7 percent of the Great 
Lakes have been mapped. This leaves a tremendous amount of 
information on the table that could help us environmentally and 
economically.
    With NOAA having a set goal of mapping the entire U.S. 
entire Exclusive Economic Zone by 2040, and with NOAA mapping 
activities being flat-funded in your proposed budget, will NOAA 
be able to realistically meet this mapping trajectory, and is 
this a task that you can carry out on your own, and only with 
crude assets?
    Dr. Spinrad. So thank you for that question. I'm personally 
especially noting the work done in the Great Lakes because my 
own aide actually came off the Thomas Jefferson, and actually 
conducted some of that survey work, so I'm--I've got a personal 
guide associated with the work that needs to be done. Mapping 
and charting of the Great Lakes and coastal waters is a 
critical issue. We are behind the curve, in terms of being able 
to get to the full objectives that have been stipulated for 
many years. So what do we do about it? Well, one of the first 
things is establish, through a strategic design, what are the 
priorities, how to get to those goals?
    So the national ocean mapping, exploration, and 
characterization, which includes the Great Lakes, gives us a 
pathway toward reaching the kinds of goals you alluded to, but 
also we're looking aggressively at how to work with our private 
sector partners to make sure that we can complement our 
government capabilities with those industry capabilities to get 
to the goals that you've alluded.
    Chairman Miller. Thank you, Dr. Spinrad. I now recognize 
Ranking Member Ross for 5 minutes of questions.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Severe weather 
is not new to North Carolina. Constituents in my district, and 
across the State, have been hit by hurricanes, floods, 
tornadoes, ice, and snowstorms. NOAA's Office of Marine 
Aviation Operations manages and operates NOAA's specialized 
ships and aircraft that are responsible for a range of critical 
research and collecting environmental data. This includes the 
P-3 aircraft that fly into tropical cyclones, collecting 
essential data that improves the intensity and tracks of 
hurricane forecasts by 10 to 15 percent, and 15 to 20 percent 
respectively.
    The two nearly 50-year-old P-3 aircraft will reach their 
end of life in 2030. The intended replacement aircraft, the C-
130's, will take at least 6 years to become operational. While 
the proposed budget ensures the P-3 aircraft will remain 
operational through 2030, I'm concerned with the lack of detail 
on the plan to replace those aircraft and acquire the new C-
130's that were highlighted as a priority. As you're aware, 
your rather--weather research missions are increasingly put at 
risk if the acquisition plan is not on schedule. What's your 
plan to ensure that there's no gap in the data that the P-3 
planes collect?
    Dr. Spinrad. Thank you, Ranking Member Ross, for raising 
this very important issue. I'll start by saying that you will 
see no compromise in our mission capability in the years to 
come, especially tied to hurricane reconnaissance and forecast. 
As you indicated, we're planning for the replacement of the two 
P-3s with up to four aircraft. That's part of an aircraft 
recapitalization plan that took several years to develop, is 
well thought out, and well justified. We've already started 
down that path through the resources provided in the 
supplemental appropriation. We have begun contracts for 
purchase of the first of those C-130 replacements, and the 
intent, as funds are available, is to include options on that 
contract for three additional aircraft.
    Ms. Ross. And how would any budget cuts affect that?
    Dr. Spinrad. Budget cuts obviously--no part of our mission 
is optional, and budget cuts would undoubtedly delay or, dare I 
say, depending on the specific guidance we get with respect to 
cuts, actually defer that kind of acquisition. And the main 
point, then, is we will lose that, as you indicated, anywhere 
from 15 to 30 percent improvement in our capability to forecast 
those storms.
    But I also want to point out that we have another 
aircraft--so when we talk about the hurricane hunters, we also 
have a high altitude aircraft, a Gulfstream 550 right now, that 
we use, and we've got resources through the Inflation Reduction 
Act to purchase an additional high altitude aircraft, and we 
have started that contract negotiation as well. So we're well 
on the way, in terms of contracts and acquisitions, to have two 
aircraft under construction for purchase by NOAA this year.
    Ms. Ross. Great. Next question, the important work being 
done across NOAA cannot be done without its workforce, and I 
represent some of the workforce. I want to highlight 
specifically the National Weather Service in the Raleigh 
office, and they--the work they do in providing severe weather 
and climate forecasts and warning that help protect lives, 
property, and more of constituents in my district and in the 
surrounding areas.
    Having a robust and diverse workforce is critical for NOAA 
to effectively carry out its mission. However, being 
competitive with the private sector, recruiting diverse 
experts, and strict work policies seem to be challenges that 
NOAA faces in recruiting and retaining people. Can you expand 
on NOAA's effort to recruit and retain its workforce, as well 
as your DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) efforts?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes, thank you for that. I couldn't be prouder 
of our workforce, so I love being able to talk about our 
ability to recruit and retain. We have, I would argue, one of 
the most dedicated and highly professional workforces in the 
Federal Government. The challenges of bringing people in, 
especially as we come out of COVID, and try to ensure that we 
are meeting our mission, but also attending to the work/life 
balance requirements that people have, has required us to put 
policies in place to make sure that we can accommodate people's 
needs and provide real opportunities.
    I would start by saying it's our mission that attracts most 
people into NOAA. A lot of folks are excited about working on 
improvements to weather forecasting, fisheries management, 
tsunami warnings, everything we do. We are exploiting--I should 
say heavily using--a number of tools like direct hire 
authority. So that allows us to use some of our fellowship and 
internship programs to bring people on in a much more 
accelerated fashion. I've also redoubled our efforts, through 
our Human Capital Services Office, to make sure that we can 
aggressively work through the Federal hiring process. We are 
already more than halfway through this fiscal year, and we are 
more than halfway through our goal of hires for this year.
    Diversity equity inclusion is of primary importance with 
respect to what our workforce looks like. We have some work to 
do in that regard, and I'm delighted that we've established a 
program of employee resources groups, as well as initiatives to 
work with the educational community through historically Black 
colleges and universities, and minority-serving institutions, 
to help build that--if you will, that workforce that then can 
apply to our jobs.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you very much. I see my time's expired, but 
it goes without saying that if you have a 22 percent budget 
cut, it will affect hiring, is that correct?
    Dr. Spinrad. It--again, I think, depending on what 
constraints and what guidance we're provided with, we would 
undoubtedly be faced with reductions in force with a cut of 
that magnitude.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Collins [presiding]. All right. Thank you, Ms. Ross. 
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Posey from Florida for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Posey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Spinrad, could you 
clarify how NOAA is working with all stakeholders, including 
the recreational and commercial fishermen, concerning its 
proposed rules to establish vessel speed measures to protect 
whales?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes. Thank you for that question, Congressman 
Posey. So the proposed rulemaking that you've alluded to is 
following the procedures associated with rulemaking that--or 
dictated to us----
    Mr. Posey. OK. But any reason why the Marine Manufacturers' 
Association told me they were not consulted before the rule was 
published?
    Dr. Spinrad. Actually, I believe the National Marine 
Manufacturers' Association did provide a comment during the 
public comment period.
    Mr. Posey. But before it was published?
    Dr. Spinrad. Well, the public comment period opens up after 
the proposed rulemaking.
    Mr. Posey. So there's no consulting before--about the rule 
at all?
    Dr. Spinrad. The process is one where open----
    Mr. Posey. OK.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Up the public comment----
    Mr. Posey. Could you tell me what specific statutory 
authority that NOAA has to justify the proposed rules?
    Dr. Spinrad. This is done under the context of the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the Endangered Species Act 
(ESA).
    Mr. Posey. What specific statutory authority to set speed 
limits in the ocean?
    Dr. Spinrad. I'm going to have to get back to you with 
respect to which specific part of the statute is the relevant 
one, but it is under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
    Mr. Posey. Well, I would really like to know what specific 
authority that Congress said we want you to set speed limits in 
the ocean.
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes. I want to be careful that I make correct 
reference to the component of MMPA and the ESA, so I'll have to 
get back to you with that specific answer.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Have you completed cost/benefit analysis of 
that rule?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes, we did do a cost/benefit analysis.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Would you send me a copy of that?
    Dr. Spinrad. We can certainly.
    Mr. Posey. Mr. Chairman, I want to ask for unanimous 
consent to include for the record a congressional delegation 
letter to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
concerning the published rule.
    Mr. Collins. Without objection.
    Mr. Posey. Thank you. Just out of curiosity, how many 
whales have been killed by boats? Do you have any idea?
    Dr. Spinrad. All whales?
    Mr. Posey. Let's say the right whales.
    Dr. Spinrad. The North Atlantic Right Whales, which are the 
ones that are under consideration right now in the rulemaking, 
the number is--and I'll give you an approximate number of about 
13 in the last 15 years.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Yes, I mean, is that going to compare with 
the windmill dying of the whales in the Northeast?
    Dr. Spinrad. There is no scientific evidence that any of 
the activity associated with the offshore wind development has 
had an impact on the health of the whales.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Does NOAA plan to control costs by 
developing the Geostationary Extended Observation Sounder 
instrument at the same time as the Japanese Sounder?
    Dr. Spinrad. We obviously are working very closely with our 
Japanese colleagues. In fact, next week I'll be meeting with 
the director of the Japanese Meteorological Agency and the 
director of the Japanese Space Agency. And in the acquisition 
for the sounder and imager, we have coordinated closely with 
the Japanese, and made sure that our plans with respect to 
acquisition are understood by them. So the answer is yes, we 
are coordinating closely with our Japanese colleagues.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Any chance that could be delayed, sounder 
could be delayed?
    Dr. Spinrad. That our acquisition of the sounder, or our--
I'm--I want to make sure I understand----
    Mr. Posey. The award.
    Dr. Spinrad. Well, at this point we're on track for the 
award.
    Mr. Posey. OK. Any idea how we could avoid any delays in 
it, or----
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes. I think the--well, the sounder 
acquisition is underway. The imager acquisition, as I recall, 
is scheduled for August for announcement, and the way to make 
sure we stay on that is to use the rigorous acquisition cycle 
and milestone approach that we have been using thus far.
    Mr. Posey. And we're on course----
    Dr. Spinrad. And we are on course, yes, sir.
    Mr. Posey. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield 
back.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you, Mr. Posey. The Chair now recognizes 
Ms. Lofgren for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I discussed in my 
opening statement, the situation with flooding in California is 
pretty severe, and actually probably going to get worse when 
the snowpack in the Sierra melts in the Central Valley. But in 
my own district of the 18th District, we had just catastrophic 
flooding in Pajaro. The levees broke, hundreds of people were 
displaced along the Salinas River. Levees were over-breached, 
fields were inundated, San Ardo was flooded. That was in 
January, and then again in March, and these were described as 
atmospheric river events.
    So I'm concerned, and maybe you can reassure me, that it 
looks like the NOAA budget proposal looks to reduce the 
atmospheric river observations. That would be a concern. Can 
you explain that to me? Where are we going to be on that 
observation--critical observation?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes, the--I assure you it's very much front 
and center in our minds to improve our capability for 
atmospheric river forecasts, and there are various components 
of that, most of which are actually seeing increases in budget 
requests. And so I would point out that the very early research 
on atmospheric rivers was done by a NOAA researcher, Marty 
Ralph, who's now at Scripps Institution of----
    Ms. Lofgren. Right.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Oceanography, and I took the 
opportunity to get briefed by Marty just a few months ago to 
find out exactly what his intent was to do with our colleagues 
in Boulder. So there is a small increase for investment in 
atmospheric river research. I would also point out that part of 
the capability for the forecasts is our detection capability. 
So the geostationary satellite investments are intended to 
ensure we continue to have observational capabilities. I 
alluded to the improvements in our high altitude aircraft. The 
Gulfstream 550 is----
    Ms. Lofgren. Right.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Critical observational 
capability. And then the last thing I would point out is the--a 
large chunk of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding is 
tied to flooding forecast capabilities, and addressing some of 
the precipitation frequency forecasts built out of what we call 
the Atlas 15, the precipitation atlas. So there are a number of 
different steps that we're undertaking, both in research and 
operations----
    Ms. Lofgren. OK.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. To ensure improved capability.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much. That's very reassuring. I 
know you've discussed the impact of budget reductions. I'd ask 
that you--if your budget were cut 22 percent, could you 
describe--not here, but later--give us an outline of what are 
the various alternatives that you would look at to do a 22 
percent reduction in your budget? And if we could get that 
after the hearing, I would very much appreciate it. And with 
that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you, Ms. Lofgren. The chair now 
recognizes myself for 5 minutes.
    Administrator, NOAA has proposed a rule to broaden or add 
boats over 35 feet to the current 10 knot rule. It's currently 
imposed on boats over 65 foot, and in specific areas for those 
boats over 65 foot. So not only does it drop the boat length 
down from 65 to 35, but it's also going to expand the zone to 
basically the entire East Coast, and as far out as 100 miles, 
and that's going to be up to 7 months a year. My question is, 
can you tell the Committee just how many registered vessels 
there are between 35 and 65 feet long?
    Dr. Spinrad. I can't give you an exact number. We can 
certainly come back to that. I can tell you that, of the 
recreational boats, only about 3 to 4 percent of them are 
larger than 35 feet.
    Mr. Collins. My numbers are upwards of well over 10,000 
that I've been able to find, just so far since you and I 
recently talked. You just stated that you approximately think 
there may be 13 to 15--out of 15 years, these whales that have 
been hit. From what I've read, we've had 24 strikes in 24 years 
across 10 States. Out of that, eight were attributed to boats 
between 35 and 65 feet. You know what those odds are? That's 
one in a million. In light of that, how do you justify this 
rule?
    Dr. Spinrad. The--I would point out that of those eight 
strikes you alluded to, six were actually fatal as well, and I 
would say the justification for the rule comes from our 
obligation to follow the law of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act.
    Mr. Collins. That's one in a million odds to hit that, to 
hit a right whale with a boat that size. As a matter of fact, 
the strike zone that I think you have is somewhere in the 
neighborhood of three meters, or 30 feet? A boat between 35 and 
65 feet only drafts around three meters--or three feet, I'm 
sorry, one meter. The change will make this mandate--it's going 
to be the most consequential maritime regulation that the 
recreational boating/fishing sector has ever seen.
    And I just want to--I want NOAA to--you need to pause 
implementing--implementation of this rule, because it's not 
only going to have an effect on commercial and recreation 
fishing, but you're going to devastate the maritime industry up 
and down the entire East Coast. And so--I don't know how to 
express that any plainer to this administration, but NOAA needs 
to take an extra hard look at what they're about to do to this 
industry. And with that, I yield back. The Chair recognizes Ms. 
Bonamici for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you so much. The work of NOAA has been 
so critically important in our home State of Oregon, and, as 
representative for the--Oregon's North Coast, I'm very pleased 
to see that NOAA's budget is increased to expand NOAA's work on 
what you refer to climate goods and services. Our constituents 
benefit, and we benefit as policymakers, when we have good 
information and good science about wildfires, floods, drought, 
extreme heat, coasts, mitigation. There's just a lot that's 
going to be beneficial in there. Also align myself with the 
remarks of Ranking Member Ross on the importance of workforce, 
particularly with good weather and climate forecasters, and 
then also thank you for the mention of the blue economy. 
Tremendous economic potential for our coastal communities with 
the right policy.
    So, Dr. Spinrad, I want to talk about the Inflation 
Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, both of 
which I enthusiastically supported. We have seen funding 
notices for the infrastructure law, and I'm thrilled about 
the--six of the projects now are in Oregon, and our coastal 
communities, important infrastructure work there. So we have 
not seen a spend plan for the Inflation Reduction Act 
implementation. We expected it a few months back, and we're 
eager to see more of NOAA's plans, like the Climate-Ready Coast 
Initiative. So I appreciate your work to move forward on these 
initiatives, but what can I tell my constituents about the 
timing of the investments, and when they'll start to see 
benefits in their communities?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes, thank you for that, Congresswoman 
Bonamici. We're also very excited about what we're going to be 
able to do in terms of climate-ready coasts, coastal 
resilience, and we're especially delighted to make the 
announcement. I personally joined the Vice-President to 
announce $561 million worth of investment, including those that 
you alluded to in Oregon. That is just the first in what I know 
will be many similar announcements.
    The Inflation Reduction Act spend plan is moving through 
the system right now. We've made some final recommendations, 
and specifically wanted to make sure we were attending to needs 
of underserved communities and tribal communities, and that, of 
course, required a rigorous consultation process. But I can 
confidently tell you that it will be up here for consideration 
very shortly, within a matter of hopefully a couple of weeks to 
months.
    Ms. Bonamici. Terrific, that's good news. I appreciate 
that. So as you're aware, Administrator Spinrad, Oregon's 
highly vulnerable to tsunami events. I actually remember, back 
in 2011, after the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, we were 
bracing on the Oregon coast, but we're very concerned about a 
near-shore tsunami, of course, being on the Cascadia Subduction 
Zone. So one of the first bills I worked on when I got to this 
Committee more than a decade ago was the Tsunami Warning 
Education Research Act, that will really help our coastal 
communities prepare and update our tsunami warning system.
    So I'm glad that the Fiscal Year 2024 budget includes an 
increase to unify the tsunami warning centers under a common 
analytic system so they can continue to operate smoothly, avoid 
operational failures, and invest in information technology and 
information security. So how will these additional steps 
provide resources to protect our communities and ecosystems 
from these natural disasters? And the Tsunami Warning Program 
authorization expires this year, so do you have some 
suggestions about what we should be considering as we draft 
legislation to reauthorize the program?
    Dr. Spinrad. Thank you for that question. Tsunamis are, of 
course, a looming hazard, and I think, if you look at what 
happened in the last couple of years, for example, the Hunga 
Tonga earthquake--or mudslide-generated tsunami showed us that 
we still have a lot to learn with respect to what will generate 
these earthquakes. And I know I don't need to point out to you 
that, in the State of Oregon, it's the near zone Cascadia 
Subduction Zone threat that means having a tsunami that could 
hit the State in less than----
    Ms. Bonamici. It would be devastating.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Half an hour. Yes.
    Ms. Bonamici. Right, right.
    Dr. Spinrad. So, a few thoughts. You alluded to some of 
them. Technological solutions through improved observation and 
detection capabilities, including what we call the DART (Deep-
ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis) buoys, the next 
generation of DART buoys, is one of the things we'll be working 
on. We're also looking at a coordinated--even more coordination 
with our colleagues at USGS (United States Geological Survey), 
because if it's a--an earthquake generated near zone----
    Ms. Bonamici. Right.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. How can we use the existing 
warning systems as much for the near zone generation as we can 
for the distance generated tsunamis? I would also point out 
that--I want to emphasize the issue you raised with regard to 
unification of services from the two centers in Alaska and 
Hawaii. I did visit our Hawaii center, and asked specifically 
what do we need to do to make sure that--basically, for the 
user communities, they don't care if a warning is coming from 
one center or the other. We need to make sure that we have a 
standardized approach and process. So I'm delighted----
    Ms. Bonamici. OK.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. The head of the Weather Service, 
Ken Graham, has taken this as one of his top priorities.
    Ms. Bonamici. Terrific. That's encouraging, and I'm about 
to run out of time, so I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Collins. All right. Thank you. At this time we have no 
other questions, unless you all have any follow up that you 
would like to address the administrator?
    Ms. Ross. Just to thank him for his time.
    Dr. Spinrad. Thank you.
    Mr. Collins. I know we have a couple of other Members that 
were making their back over here. We've got numerous hearings 
going on at the same time. But I did have something I wanted to 
follow up with you. I had a meeting yesterday, and it was with 
Georgia Tech there in Atlanta, and they were very proud of 
their weather research that they're doing. And--do you tie into 
Georgia Tech, or is there a similarity between what you two do, 
or----
    Dr. Spinrad. Absolutely. I would say we have a wonderful 
relationship with the whole academic community. I can't tell 
you chapter and verse of every project we're working with with 
our colleagues at Georgia Tech, but I know if I went back to 
the office, we'd get a nice list of the specific activities.
    We work--in our research office, our Office of Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Research, we manage our research two ways. One is 
we have our own laboratories, and that is typically where we do 
things that we know are going to have to be sustained over many 
years, and which are directly tied into our operational 
capabilities. And then we have a research--a funded research 
program, sponsored research, with our academic colleagues, 
including Georgia Tech, where, through competitive grants, not 
dissimilar to the way the National Science Foundation conducts 
research, we actually provide grants, contracts, cooperative 
agreements, to do research on areas where we see particular 
expertise. And so a place like Georgia Tech, for example, has 
some world-renowned hurricane researchers, where they can bring 
special insight, and provide new findings that we can then 
advance into our operational capability.
    Mr. Collins. Right. So, I mean--and I just wanted to 
clarify--so there's really no duplication in what NOAA does, 
and maybe what some of these academic universities are doing?
    Dr. Spinrad. No, that----
    Mr. Collins. It's kind of complementary?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes. In fact, when I was the head of NOAA 
research, I instituted a rigorous review process for our 
research portfolio, including our laboratories, specifically to 
ensure there was no duplication of effort. We also have a 
Science Advisory Board, which is a Federal advisory committee, 
which rigorously reviews our research activities to ensure, 
first of all, we're spending the taxpayers' money in the most 
appropriate manner, and second of all, that we are not 
duplicating effort.
    Mr. Collins. Yes, sir. Do you have any idea on what's 
coming up on--and I didn't get to ask that of the Georgia Tech 
representatives there.
    Dr. Spinrad. Specifically at Georgia Tech?
    Mr. Collins. Yes.
    Dr. Spinrad. I don't off the top of my head. I do know 
there is some hurricane research. I don't know if we're 
currently doing that right now, but we can certainly get back 
to you with a more specific answer.
    Mr. Collins. Right. OK. Yes, that'd be great. I'd 
appreciate that. Thank you.
    Dr. Spinrad. Sure. Thank you.
    Mr. Collins. The Chair would like to recognize Mr. Lucas, 
who's probably 10 pounds lighter.
    Chairman Lucas. Mr. Chairman, you will find, as you work 
your way through this process, there's lots of exercise you 
will get. But that's what makes being a Member of this august 
body so wonderful. Are you recognizing me for 5 minutes, Mr. 
Chairman?
    Mr. Collins. Yes, sir, you are recognized----
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you----
    Mr. Collins [continuing]. For 5 minutes.
    Chairman Lucas [continuing]. Very much. Administrator 
Spinrad, when you testified on Fiscal Year 2022 budget, you 
said you shared my desire to expand commercial weather data, if 
it meets NOAA's standards and sustained availability. And while 
the Fiscal Year 2024 budget requests a $6 million increase for 
commercial data purchases, it also lays out a plan to keep the 
account essentially the same level of $25 million every year 
through 20--fiscal year 2028. Can you explain the decision--can 
you explain this decision just a little bit more to us?
    Dr. Spinrad. Yes. Thank you for that question. And I 
actually think we're in an extraordinary position right now 
with respect to the use of commercial data. I--when I--you may 
know I have come out of retirement twice now to come back to 
NOAA. When I had----
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Previously served as the head of 
NOAA Research, the idea of using commercial data was not even 
part of the thinking. So I think the first thing to recognize 
is that we now have a plan for sustained investment in 
commercial data. I would also add that, quite honestly, it's a 
bit of an unknown in two regards, because the private sector is 
developing new capabilities, and also because we want to make 
sure it's sustainable. The private sector is going to provide 
us data, but they need a bottom line of--if you will, of other 
clients. And so part of the thinking with respect to the long-
term investment is let's stabilize this, let's look at what the 
power of the investment is, and let's continue to reconsider 
how it should be balanced.
    Chairman Lucas. Can you expand for a moment on the sources 
on commercial data, number of providers, the new types of data 
becoming available to--in--on the market every year that NOAA 
could potentially purchase? Just give us a little background.
    Dr. Spinrad. I can give you a general response with a 
little bit of insight, and then I'd love to be able to follow 
up with some very specific response.
    Chairman Lucas. Please.
    Dr. Spinrad. But I know, for example, one of the areas 
that's been most powerful and effective is the purchase of what 
we call GPS (Global Positioning System) Radio Occultation Data, 
and that we have worked with at least three different 
corporations for the purchase of this data. In short, this is a 
novel capability the private sector has developed that allows 
us to collect thousands of profiles of atmospheric data per day 
using some very creative manipulation of satellite transmission 
data. Those three companies have demonstrated effectiveness in 
doing that. I believe we just renewed the contract for one of 
those. But that's an example of what we're doing, and how--and, 
by the way, those data feed directly into our numerical weather 
prediction guidance for our forecasters.
    Chairman Lucas. Absolutely. This Congress I am leading a 
major legislative effort to establish NOAA as an independent 
agency with an organic act. And I'm not going to ask you to 
endorse, I'm not even going to ask you for a comment on the 
legislation. But I don't want to hide the ball either on the 
intent behind my question. When putting together NOAA's budget, 
can you estimate how many meetings or conversations you have 
with what you would define as your higher-ups in the Department 
of Commerce (DOC)?
    Dr. Spinrad. A lot. And it's interesting you ask that, 
Chair Lucas, because I do keep a very close look at my 
calendar, in terms of----
    Chairman Lucas. Uh-huh.
    Mr. Spinrad [continuing]. Balance of internal and external 
engagement, and I can comfortably tell you it is about 50/50. 
And internal also includes the Department of Commerce. Now just 
my higher-ups, but I would say some of the most productive 
dialogs I'm having, for example, are with my counterpart at the 
Patent and Trademark Office, International Trade 
Administration, Economic Development Administration, and or 
course NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) 
and Census. So a lot of cross-decking in the Department.
    Chairman Lucas. Absolutely. And, to continue with my logic, 
it's public knowledge that Commerce has the capacity to 
transfer NOAA funding to its Working Capital Fund for shared 
services, and has done so with millions of dollars. Do you and 
DOC leadership discuss these potential actions, or, better yet, 
potential dollar amounts when putting together your annual 
budgets?
    Dr. Spinrad. We certainly discuss with the Department those 
distributions, yes.
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you. With that, Mr. Chairman, I 
appreciate your indulgence on time, and I yield back.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Having no other 
Members, or seeing no other Members--well, seeing no other 
Members that have any questions, I want to thank the witness 
for his valuable testimony, and the Members for their 
questions. The record will remain open for 2 weeks for 
additional comments and written questions from Members. With 
that, this hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                               Appendix I

                              ----------                              


                   Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                              Appendix II

                              ----------                              


                   Additional Material for the Record


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]