[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 10, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-19519]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: August 10, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

 

Final Certification for the Relocation of the San Francisco 
Weather Service Forecast Office

SUMMARY: On March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14387), the National Weather Service 
(NWS) published its proposed certification for the relocation of the 
San Francisco Weather Service Forecast Office, Redwood City, to 
Monterey, California, as required by the Weather Service Modernization 
Act, 15 U.S.C. 313n, (the Act). In accordance with the Act, the NWS 
provided the public a 60-day period in which to comment. After 
considering the comments received and consulting with the Modernization 
Transition Committee, the NWS has determined that this action will not 
result in any degradation of service to the affected area and has so 
certified. In accordance with the Act, the Secretary of Commerce has 
transmitted this certification to Congress, and the NWS is now 
publishing the final certification together with a summary of the 
supporting documentation.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 10 1994.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the final relocation certification 
package should be sent to Senator Raygor, Wx21, 1325 East-West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Senator Raygor at 301-713-0391.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Weather Service (NWS) is 
relocating its forecast office for Northern California from Redwood 
City to Monterey. This is the first modernization action which requires 
a certification of no degradation of service under the Act.
    Based on the recommendation of the relevant Meteorologist-in-
Charge, on June 24, 1994, the Assistant Administrator of the NWS 
certified that this relocation will not result in any degradation of 
service to the affected area as required by section 706 of the Act. On 
July 21, 1994, the Secretary of Commerce transmitted this certification 
to Congress. The NWS is now completing the certification requirements 
by publishing the final relocation Certification in the Federal 
Register.
    Published with this Notice are (1) the Certification by the 
Assistant Administrator of the Weather Service; (2) a memorandum from 
Norman C. Hoffmann, Meteorologist-in-Charge, WSFO San Francisco, 
endorsed by Dr. Thomas D. Potter, Director, Western Region, which 
recommends certification and summarizes the basis for the 
recommendation. This memorandum also sets forth the supporting 
documentation required by the Act, NWS regulations and certification 
criteria at 15 CFR part 946. However, this supporting documentation 
generally is too voluminous to publish with this Notice and can be 
obtained through the contact listed in ADDRESSES. This material 
includes:
    (1) A description of local weather characteristics and weather-
related concerns which affect the weather services provided within the 
service area;
    (2) A detailed comparison of the services provided within the 
service area and the services to be provided after such action;
    (3) A description of any recent or expected modernization of 
National Weather Service operation which will enhance services in the 
service area;
    (4) An identification of any area within California which would not 
receive coverage (at an elevation of 10,000 feet) by the next 
generation weather radar network;
    (5) The evidence, based upon operational demonstration of 
modernized NWS operations, which was considered in reaching the 
conclusion that no degradation in service will result from such action 
including the relocation checklist and evidence from similar moves;
    (6) A copy of the letter appointing the liaison officer; and
    (7) The recommendation of the Modernization Transition Committee 
(the Committee), made at its June 22, 1994, meeting, that supports the 
certification. (The Committee did not issue any report evaluating the 
proposed certification as is its prerogative under section 706(b)(6) of 
the Act.)
    The memorandum recommending certification considered and responded 
to all public comments received on the proposed certification during 
the 60-day comment period. These comments and responses are set forth 
here for reference:
    Comment: Both of the negative comments received centered on the 
belief that, if the Weather Forecast Office (WFO) is not located in the 
San Francisco Bay area, services to that area could be degraded. 
Related to this point, these commentors focussed on the distance of the 
move and argued that services would be degraded because the forecasters 
would not be able to ``see'' the conditions in the San Francisco Bay 
area.
    Response: First of all, these comments ignore the fact that this 
WSFO is responsible for weather services to all of northern California, 
not just the San Francisco Bay area. The NWS is convinced that the 
relocation to Monterey will enhance weather forecasting for the entire 
northern California service area. The logical conclusion of this 
comment is that each WFO must be located in close proximity to the 
population center of its particular service area. Such a result 
obviously is not reasonable.
    Furthermore, there will be no degradation of weather services to 
the San Francisco Bay Area itself. The services are dependant on a 
variety of information which includes surface observations, weather 
radars, upper air soundings, weather satellite data, spotter networks, 
aircraft reports, and numerical guidance from the National 
Meteorological Center. The collection of this data and information is 
dependant on communications, not the exact location of that office, and 
will be equally available to the Monterey office as it was in Redwood 
City.
    One commentor's concern, that the loss of personal contact between 
NWS personnel and the media and agencies might degrade the overall 
quality of services, also is unfounded. The commentor is correct that 
``the NWS depends heavily on the media to get its warnings out.'' 
However, the primary means by which NWS warnings are disseminated is by 
telecommunications systems such as NOAA Weather Wire, not by personal 
contacts. The commentor claims that television reporters in the San 
Francisco area ``regularly visit and report from the office in Redwood 
City during weather emergencies, and that appearances on camera by NWS 
forecasters add immediacy to developing weather stories and allow the 
public to receive information directly from the source.'' There are 
network television affiliates in the Monterey area that could provide 
on camera interviews with the forecasting staff from the office in 
Monterey. With modern day telecommunications, these interviews can 
easily be broadcast over television stations located in the San 
Francisco Bay area.
    Contact with cooperating and user agencies such as FEMA and 
emergency managers in the San Francisco Bay area will continue even if 
the WSFO is relocated to Monterey. There is no reason to assume these 
contacts, that are currently done face-to-face, will be less effective 
in the future if they are done mostly via telephone, as is done now for 
users in the WSFO's service area that are outside the immediate San 
Francisco Bay area. Moreover, contact with cooperators and users will 
be enhanced by the addition of a dedicated Warning Coordination 
Meteorologist to the staff at Monterey.
    Comment: The two commentors opposed to the relocation also argued 
that, if the WFO is not located in the San Francisco Bay area, services 
would be degraded because of the climatological differences.
    Response: This comment is related to that above but requires some 
additional elaboration. There are numerous climatological zones located 
in central and northern California. A primary goal of the NWS 
modernization is to enable each future WFO to provide consistent 
weather services to its entire area of responsibility which includes 
the numerous climatological regimes. To accomplish this the NWS will 
employ advanced computers which will greatly improve the numerical 
guidance available to forecasters. Advanced weather satellites will 
make higher resolution imagery available allowing forecasters to see in 
detail what is occurring over their area of responsibility. The number 
and frequency of surface observations will be increased through the 
deployment of ASOS. A national network of WSR-88D Doppler radars is 
already halfway completed. This will provide forecasters in Monterey 
the ability to view the atmosphere in more detail than ever before 
possible. Not just over the San Francisco Bay area, but over all of 
northern and central California. Any attempt to compare services as 
they exist today with those that will be available in the future is a 
disservice to all the users of weather services in northern and central 
California.
    Comment: The two commentors opposed to the relocation believe that 
a number of experienced forecasters will elect to retire instead of 
relocate and the result will be degradation of services.
    Response: Clearly, the ability of the NWS to relocate an office (or 
to take a number of other modernization actions) cannot be contingent 
upon the number of employees that happen to retire during the process. 
Planning for these actions begins years in advance whereas the actual 
number of employees who will retire is not known for certain until the 
day the move takes place. Therefore, the NWS has to be prepared to deal 
with whatever vacancies occur in the same way it deals with vacancies 
at any office which occur all the time, when employees retire or 
transfer to other jobs. In this situation, even in the worst case 
scenario, a loss of 7 employees, the potential for any short term 
effects is negligible in view of the fact that the office will retain 4 
out of 5 lead forecasters; that it has already recruited 3 experienced 
forecasters and has identified 2 additional experienced forecasters 
that could be detailed to Monterey during the transition; and that the 
office will be able to field experienced personnel on each shift.
    Comment: Three commentors stated that with the new technologies the 
proposed relocation of the NWS forecast office would not degrade 
services that, in fact, they expect an enhancement of weather services. 
Two of the commentors stated that collocating with the Naval Post 
Graduate School would be beneficial to the NWS and create new 
opportunities for collaborative research activities.
    Response: The NWS agrees. Improved warning and forecast 
capabilities are expected to result from this collocation. Improved 
access to Fleet Numerical Oceanography Center data sources including 
satellite imagery from the Defense Meteorological Satellite System as 
well as global, regional, and wave numerical forecast models will 
enable improved weather services.
    Comment: One commentor believed that the relocation would be more 
costly.
    Response: The issue of cost associated with the office move is not 
relevant to certification. However, an Economic Analysis (EA) was 
completed on May 20, 1992, by the Special Engineering Program Office 
which concluded that the relocation to Monterey was the most 
economical. In July, 1993, the Department of Commerce Office of 
Inspector General validated that EA and determined the Monterey 
location to be the most economical to the Government.

    Dated: August 5, 1994.
Louis J. Boezi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Modernization.
[FR Doc. 94-19519 Filed 8-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-12-M