Final Certification for the Consolidation of 70 Weather Service Offices (WSOs)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Final Certification for the Consolidation of 70 Weather Service

Offices (WSOs)

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On January 2, 1997 the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans

and Atmosphere approved and transmitted 70 consolidation certifications

to Congress.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the final consolidation certification

packages should be sent to Tom Beaver, Room 09356, 1325 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Julie Scanlon at 301-713-1698 ext 151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 70 consolidation certifications were

comprised of three groups as described and listed below. The first

group, consisting of 42 consolidations, were proposed and the 60-day

public comment period commenced upon publication of three Federal

Register notices between December 1995 and February 1996. There were no

public comments received. The Modernization Transition Committee (MTC)

considered and endorsed these 42 consolidation certifications at its

April 24, 1996 meeting, concluding that these certifications would not

result in any degradation of service.

(1) Akron, OH

(2) Atlantic City, NJ

(3) Apalachicola, FL

(4) Baltimore, MD

(5) Bristol, TN

(6) Cape Hatteras, NC

(7) Columbus, OH

(8) Concord, NH

(9) Colorado Springs, CO

(10) Concordia, KS

(11) Dayton, OH

(12) Daytona Beach, FL

(13) Del Rio, TX

(14) Detroit, MI

(15) Grand Island, NE

(16) Harrisburg, PA

(17) Hartford, CT

(18) Havre, MT

(19) Helena, MT

(20) Kansas City, MO

(21) Knoxville, TN

(22) Lynchburg, VA

(23) Mansfield, OH

(24) Moline, IL

(25) New York City, NY

(26) Norfolk, VA

(27) Pensacola, FL

(28) Port Arthur, TX

(29) Portland, ME

(30) Providence, RI

(31) Raleigh, NC

(32) Richmond, VA

(33) Roanoke, VA

(34) Rockford, IL

(35) Toledo, OH

(36) Tupelo, MS

(37) Waco, TX

(38) West Palm Beach, FL

(39) Williamsport, PA

(40) Wilmington, DE

(41) Worcester, MA

(42) Youngstown, OH

The second group, consisting of 18 consolidations, were proposed

and the 60-day public comment period commenced upon publication of two

Federal Register notices in between March and April 1996. Two public

comments were received; one with regard to WSO Bakersfield, CA and one

with regard to WSO Indianapolis, IN. These comments and responses are

set forth here for reference.

Comment: A comment from Sean Boyd, KSEE 24 Television, Fresno,

California questioned the WSR-88D precipitation algorithm. He stated,

``Initially, I have concerns, which were unfounded, about the potential

health hazards for those in close proximity to the WSR-88D. Those

concerns have long been put to rest now. There is no question that the

WSR-88D is the finest tool to date for the detection of severe weather,

and for precipitation estimates. Regarding the former: severe weather

in central California is rare; however the rules for such episodes are

different

[[Page 2138]]

here than areas east of the Rockies, and the algorithms for the site in

Hanford could probably use a little ``tweaking.'' Please don't ask me

to be specific; I am not a mathematician. But from what I have learned

about the device, having taken Les Lemon's short course, there are

certain parameters that are, to an extent, adjustable. Regarding the

latter: it seems precipitation estimates are very good, and we get

excellent ground truth from our weather spotters, members of the

Association of Central California Weather Observers, whose numbers are

in the hundreds. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I have heard that there

is occasional trouble at the Hanford site with the 88D not clicking

into the precipitation mode, when there is precipitation reaching the

ground here.''

Response: The precipitation algorithm has three modes of execution;

Category 0--no precipitation within 124nm of the RDA; Category 1--

significant precipitation within 124nm of the RDA; and Category 2--

insignificant precipitation within 124nm of the RDA.

These modes are selected automatically by the software, but the

selection can be adjusted through parameters. The criteria to determine

which level is active at any given time is: (1) The real coverage of

the echoes, and (2) the intensity of the echoes. Category 1 and 2

generate precipitation products; category 0 does not. San Joaquin

Valley NWSO (Hanford WSR-88D site) had one occurrence, where through a

combination of clutter suppression and precipitation category settings,

precipitation products were not generated. This occurred as a light

precipitation event moved into the area. San Joaquin Valley NWSO

forecasters quickly diagnosed the problem, and it has not occurred

again.

Comment: One comment was received from Jerry Salerno, Terre Haute

Automated Flight Service Station (AFSS). His comment included the

following comments received from four Specialists:

``Specialist 1. Has observed little change in the elimination of

AP. Has noticed that, at times, the sensitivity of the WSR-88D seems

to increase, thus showing strong precipitation echoes when only

clouds or virga are present.

Specialist 2. Has noted improvement. Before the ``clean up'',

echoes would be shown beyond an area of thunderstorms when SA's

reported no precipitation in that area. Also noted at night and

morning, frequent large circles of ``echoes'' around many radar

sites simultaneously.

Specialist 3. On 5/15/96, prior to 1200Z through approximately

1300Z, large area of AP was observed in extreme southern Illinois

and western Kentucky--more than 100 miles from the nearest

precipitation.

Specialist 4. On 5/17/96 at 1800Z, ground clutter/AP was noted

around LOT, IND, MPX, OHX, and MRX radar sites.''

Response: On June 10, Dave Tucek, WCM NWSFO Indianapolis, called

the Terre Haute AFSS to discuss their radar concerns. Dave spoke with

Cynthia Cole, Assistant Manager of Programs, Mark Carver, Training

Specialist, and Jerry Salerno. Their position has not changed since

original discussions during the Confirmation of Services process. They

know that AP and ground clutter, which were not encoded in the ROB

before the WSR-88D, are now encoded by the AUTOROB program and a

potential source of erroneous interpretation by briefers. They are

satisfied the NWS is working toward a solution, but want to see this

non-precipitation data eliminated or reduced to a point it does not

cause confusion for the briefers. The AFSS briefers were trained to

recognize non-precipitation patterns through time-lapse monitoring, and

by comparison of radar echoes to satellite data, lightning data and

ground truth data. The AFSS briefers prefer not to use the AUTOROB

anymore for verification because of the AP and ground clutter encoding.

They are concerned they may mis-interpret ground clutter as a

thunderstorm, or worse, a thunderstorm as ground clutter. Despite the

improved filtering the NWS has incorporated this April through the use

of Hourly Digital Precipitation, ground clutter still exists as shown

by the AFSS example cases in May. Dave also spoke to Mike Edwards of

Kavouris (which supplies the AFSS radar data) about their filtering

methods on ground clutter. Kavouris does not filter single site radar

data but does employ extensive filtering techniques in their Composite

Radar Image. But still, despite filtering techniques employed by the

NWS and by Kavouris, ground clutter still occurs and is a concern. And

this is an issue for all radar sites, not just Indianapolis. The Terre

Haute Flight Service did not feel a need for additional training from

the Indianapolis NWSFO staff. They appreciated our offers for help but

felt further solutions would require decisions and actions at national

NWS and FAA levels. They again appreciate NWS' efforts but would still

like ground clutter suppression improved further. Regarding the events

in question that were listed in the Federal Register, NWS Indianapolis

had no archive data available. Other NWS office's clutter suppression

techniques and Kavouris' filter techniques and data display are not

well known either. Despite these limitations, Dave was familiar with

the problems the briefers experienced and provided the following

comments to those cases. Specialist 1 had observed little change to the

elimination of AP. At Indianapolis, we invoke different Clutter

Suppression Regions based on the degree of AP occurring. This filtering

reduces the amount of AP but typically does not eliminate it.

Specialist 1 also commented on apparent sensitivity changes leading to

strong precipitation echoes where only clouds or virga were present.

This likely resulted from a radar site switching from Precipitation

Mode to Clear Air Mode. Clouds and virga are often detected in Clear

Air Mode but not in Precipitation Mode due to longer sampling times and

greater sampling density. On a Kavouris composite, clouds and virga

appear as weak echoes. On a Kavouris single site display, clouds and

virga may be interpreted as strong precipitation echoes because the

color scheme for weak echoes is similar to the composites colors for

strong echoes. The briefers must recognize that a particular color may

represent different intensities on composite data and single site data.

Specialist 2 noted improvement because of the lack of echoes occurring

behind an area of thunderstorms. This was likely coincidence that AP

was not occurring behind the thunderstorms. Specialist 2 also noted

frequent large circles of echoes around many radar sites during the

night and morning. This is typical AP many radar sites display at these

times of day. Moisture and temperature stratifications overnight yield

atmospheric density discontinuities which lead to animalous beam

refraction or AP. Unless clutter suppressions are invoked at each

individual site, this AP signature will not disappear until atmospheric

conditions change, which is usually late morning. Specialist 3 noted on

5/15/96 a large area of AP over southern Illinois and western Kentucky

more than 100 miles from any rain. These locations are beyond our

radars display range but are the typical AP patterns that occur at many

sites for reasons mentioned in the above paragraph. Specialist 4 noted

on 5/17/96 at 1800Z ground clutter/AP patterns occurring at LOT, IND,

MPX, OHX, and MRX radar sites. I cannot attest to weather conditions at

sites other than IND. This was a rather uncommon event. Anomalous

Propagation does not normally occur in the early afternoon because

layer stratification has been destroyed by convective mixing. In this

case, Indianapolis' ground was very wet due to nearly one inch of rain

on 5/15 and

[[Page 2139]]

nearly 5 inches of rain since May 1. A strong temperature inversion

over Indiana at midday on the 17th likely resulted in strong moisture

gradients leading to the AP experienced. In conclusion, the Terre Haute

AFSS is satisfied with NWS efforts to improve radar data but still

wants to see further improvement. In our opinion, the AFSS specialists

can recognize AP and correctly distinguish precipitation and non-

precipitation targets for pilots. We conclude the Indianapolis WSR-88D

is meeting the needs of our customers.

The MTC considered these 18 consolidation certifications and the

public comments received, and endorsed them at its June 27, 1996

meeting, concluding that these certifications would not result in any

degradation of service.

(1) WSO Allentown, PA

(2) WSO Atlanta, GA

(3) WSO Bakersfield, CA

(4) WSO Beckley, WV

(5) WSO Bridgeport, CT

(6) WSO Charleston, WV

(7) WSO Columbus, GA

(8) WSO Dubuque, IA

(9) WSO Elkins, WV

(10) WSO Huntington, WV

(11) WSO Indianapolis, IN

(12) WSO Las Vegas, NV

(13) WSO Lubbock, TX

(14) WSO Macon, GA

(15) WSO Minneapolis, MN

(16) WSO Portland, OR

(17) WSO Salem, OR

(18) WSO Wilkes-Barre, PA

The third group, consisting of 10 consolidations, were proposed and

the 60-day public comment period commenced upon publication of a

Federal Register notice in July 1996. There were no public comments

received. The MTC considered and endorsed these 10 consolidation

certifications at its September 19, 1996 meeting, concluding that these

certifications would not result in any degradation of service.

(1) WSO Baton Rouge, LA

(2) WSO Columbia, MO

(3) WSO Des Moines, IA

(4) WSO Lansing, MI

(5) WSO Lexington, KY

(6) WSO Lincoln, NE

(7) WSO Louisville, KY

(8) WSO Montgomery, AL

(9) WSO Siox City, IA

(10) WSO St. Louis, MO

After considering any public comments received and the MTC

endorsements, the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere

approved all 70 consolidation certifications and transmitted them to

Congress on January 2, 1997. Certification approval authority was

delegated from the Secretary of Commerce to the Under Secretary in June

1996. The NWS is now completing the certification requirements by

publishing the final consolidation certifications in the Federal

Register.

Elbert W. Friday, Jr.,

Assistant Administrator for Weather Services.

[FR Doc. 97-892 Filed 1-14-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-12-M