FROM DOC_DB.DOCUMENT D, DOC_DB.REPORTS R, DOC_DB.BACKGROUND B
						 *
ERROR at line 2:
ORA-00942: table or view does not exist 

-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-792	

TITLE:     WEATHER FORECASTING: National Weather Service Is Planning 
to Improve Service and Gain Efficiency, but Impacts of Potential 
Changes Are Not Yet Known

DATE:   07/14/2006 
				                                                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------- 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-792

     

     * Results in Brief
     * Background
          * NWS Office Structure: An Overview
          * NWS Relies on Key Systems and Technologies to Fulfill Its Mi
          * Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)
          * Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)
               * Operational Environmental Satellites
               * Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS)
               * Numerical Models
               * Supercomputers
          * Previous Reports Focused on NWS Modernization Systems Risks
          * NWS Established Performance Goals and Tracks Progress agains
     * NWS Is Positioning Itself to Provide Better Service through
          * NWS Has Plans for Upgrading Its Systems, Models, and Computa
               * NEXRAD
               * ASOS
               * AWIPS
               * Numerical Models
               * Supercomputers
          * NWS Appropriately Links Its System and Technical Upgrades to
     * NWS's Training Is Expected to Result in Forecast Service Imp
     * Changing Concept of Operations Could Affect Nationwide Offic
          * NWS Is Evaluating Changes to Its Current Operations
          * Impacts of New Concept of Operations Have Yet to Be Determin
     * Conclusions
     * Recommendations for Executive Action
     * Agency Comments
     * GAO Contact
     * Staff Acknowledgments
     * GAO's Mission
     * Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
          * Order by Mail or Phone
     * To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
     * Congressional Relations
     * Public Affairs

Report to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards,
Committee on Science, House of Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

July 2006

WEATHER FORECASTING

National Weather Service Is Planning to Improve Service and Gain
Efficiency, but Impacts of Potential Changes Are Not Yet Known

Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting
Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting
Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting
Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting
Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting
Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather
Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting Weather Forecasting

GAO-06-792

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2
Background 3
NWS Is Positioning Itself to Provide Better Service through Upgrades to
Its Systems and Technologies 20
NWS's Training Is Expected to Result in Forecast Service Improvements, but
the Training Selection Process Lacks Sufficient Oversight 27
Changing Concept of Operations Could Affect Nationwide Office
Configuration, but Impact on Forecast Services, Staffing, and Budget Is
Not Yet Known 28
Conclusions 31
Recommendations for Executive Action 31
Agency Comments 31
Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 33
Appendix II NWS Performance Goals for Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011 34
Appendix III NWS Previously Used A Stringent Process to Ensure Service Was
Not Degraded 36
Appendix IV Comments from the Department of Commerce 37
Appendix V GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 40

Tables

Table 1: NWS's Performance Measures, Goals, and Actual Performance for
Fiscal Years (FY) 2005, 2006, and 2011 18
Table 2: Ongoing and Planned NEXRAD Improvements (as of May 31, 2006) 22
Table 3: Ongoing and Planned ASOS Improvements (as of May 31, 2006) 22
Table 4: Ongoing and Planned AWIPS Improvements 23
Table 5: System Upgrades Are Linked to Expected Performance Improvements
26

Figures

Figure 1: NWS's 122 Weather Forecast Offices 5
Figure 2: Overview of Key Systems and Technologies Supporting NWS
Forecasts 6
Figure 3: NEXRAD Radar Tower 8
Figure 4: An ASOS System 9
Figure 5: ASOS Sensors 10
Figure 6: Approximate GOES Geographic Coverage 12
Figure 7: Configuration of Operational Polar Satellites 13
Figure 8: An AWIPS Workstation 14
Figure 9: Weather Model Output Shown on an AWIPS Workstation 15

Abbreviations

ASOS Automated Surface Observing System AWIPS Advanced Weather Interactive
Processing System DMSP Defense Meteorological Satellite Program DOD
Department of Defense FAA Federal Aviation Administration GOES
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites NEXRAD Next Generation
Weather Radar NPOESS National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental
Satellite System  NWS National Weather Service NOAA National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration OMB Office of Management and Budget POES
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

July 14, 2006

The Honorable Vernon J. Ehlers Chairman The Honorable David Wu Ranking
Minority Member Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards
Committee on Science House of Representatives

The National Weather Service's (NWS) ability to forecast the weather
affects the life and property of every American. The agency's basic
mission is to provide storm and flood warnings and weather forecasts for
the United States, its territories, and adjacent oceans and waters-in
order to protect life and property and to enhance the national economy.
NWS operations also support other agencies by providing aviation and
marine-related weather forecasts and warnings.

To carry out its mission, NWS uses a variety of systems, technologies, and
manual processes to collect, process, and disseminate weather data to and
among its network of field offices and regional and national centers. In
the 1980s and 1990s, NWS undertook a nationwide modernization program to
upgrade its systems and technologies and to consolidate its field office
structure. Today, with the modernization completed, NWS continues to seek
ways to upgrade its systems with a goal of further improving its
forecasting abilities. The agency is also considering changing how its
nationwide office structure works in order to enhance its efficiency.

Because of your interest in these plans for continued improvements, you
asked us to (1) evaluate NWS's efforts to achieve improvements in the
delivery of its services through the upgrades to its systems, models, and
computational abilities; (2) assess agency plans to achieve improvements
in the delivery of its services through the training and professional
development of its employees; and (3) evaluate agency plans to revise its
nationwide office configuration and the implications of these plans on
local forecasting services, staffing, and budgets.

To address these objectives, we reviewed NWS plans for system
enhancements, technology improvements, and professional training, and
assessed the extent to which these plans were tied to the agency's service
improvement goals. We also interviewed officials from NWS and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to obtain clarification on agency
plans and goals. To determine the status and potential impact of any plans
to revise the national office configuration, we assessed NWS reports on
ways to enhance its operations and interviewed key officials involved in
these reports.

We conducted our work at NWS headquarters in the Washington, D.C.,
metropolitan area and at NWS offices in Denver, Tampa, and Miami. We
performed our work from October 2005 to June 2006, in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards. Additional details on
our objectives, scope, and methodology are provided in appendix I.

                                Results in Brief

NWS is positioning itself to provide better service through over $315
million in planned upgrades to its systems and technologies through 2011.
In annual plans, the agency links expected improvements in its service
performance measures with the technologies and systems expected to improve
them. For example, NWS expects to reduce the average error in its
forecasts of hurricane paths by approximately 20 nautical miles between
2005 and 2011 through a combination of upgrades to observation systems,
better hurricane forecast models, enhancements to the computer
infrastructure, and research that will be transferred to forecast
operations. Also, NWS expects to increase its lead time on tornado
warnings from 13 to 15 minutes by the end of fiscal year 2008 after the
agency completes an upgrade to its radar system and realizes benefits from
software improvements to its forecaster workstations.

NWS also provides training courses for its employees to help improve its
forecast services, but the agency's process for selecting training lacks
sufficient oversight. Program officials propose and justify training needs
on the basis of up to eight different criteria-including whether a course
is expected to improve NWS forecasting performance measures, support
customer outreach, or increase scientific awareness. Many of these course
justifications appropriately demonstrate support for improved forecasting
performance. For example, training on how to more effectively use
forecaster workstations is expected to help improve tornado, flash flood,
and hurricane warnings. However, in justifying training courses, program
officials routinely link courses to NWS forecasting performance measures.
For example, in 2006, almost all training needs were linked to
expectations for improved forecast performance-including training on
cardiopulmonary resuscitation, spill prevention, and systems security. The
training selection process did not validate or question how these courses
could help improve weather forecasts. The overuse of this justification
undermines the distinctions among different training courses and the
credibility of the course selection process. Until it establishes a
training selection process that uses reliable justifications, NWS risks
selecting courses that do not most effectively support its training goals.

To improve its efficiency, NWS plans to develop a prototype of a new
concept of operations-an effort that could affect its national office
configuration, including the location and functions of its offices
nationwide. However, many details about the impact of any proposed changes
on forecast services, staffing, and budget have yet to be determined.
Further, NWS has not yet determined key activities, timelines, or measures
for evaluating the prototype of the new office operational structure. As a
result, it is not evident that NWS will collect the information it needs
on the impact and benefits of any office restructuring in order to make
sound and cost-effective decisions.

We are making recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce to direct NWS
to strengthen its training selection process; to establish key activities,
timelines, and measures for evaluating the prototype of the new concept of
operations; and to ensure that the plans for evaluating the new concept of
operations address the impact of any changes on budget, staffing, and
services.

The Department of Commerce provided written comments on a draft of this
report in which it agreed with our recommendations and identified planned
steps for implementing them (see app. IV). The department also provided
technical corrections, which we have incorporated in this report as
appropriate.

                                   Background

The mission of NWS-an agency within the Department of Commerce's National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)-is to provide weather,
water, and climate forecasts and warnings for the United States, its
territories, and its adjacent waters and oceans, in order to protect life
and property and to enhance the national economy. NWS is the official
source of aviation- and marine-related weather forecasts and warnings, as
well as warnings about life-threatening weather situations.

In the 1980s and 1990s, NWS undertook a nationwide modernization program
to develop new systems and technologies and to consolidate its field
office structure. The goals of the modernization program were to achieve
more uniform weather services across the nation, improve forecasts,
provide more reliable detection and prediction of severe weather and
flooding, permit more cost-effective operations, and achieve higher
productivity. The weather observing systems (including radars, satellites,
and ground-based sensors) and data processing systems that currently
support NWS operations were developed and deployed under the modernization
program. During this period, NWS consolidated over 250 large and small
weather service offices into the office structure currently in use.

NWS Office Structure: An Overview

The coordinated activities of weather facilities throughout the United
States allow NWS to deliver a broad spectrum of climate, weather, water,
and space weather services. These facilities include weather forecast
offices, river forecast centers, national centers, and aviation center
weather service units. The functions of these facilities are described
below.

           o  122 weather forecast offices are responsible for providing a
           wide variety of weather, water, and climate services for their
           local county warning areas, including advisories, warnings, and
           forecasts (see fig. 1 for the current location of weather forecast
           offices).

           o  13 river forecast centers provide river, stream, and reservoir
           information to a wide variety of government and commercial users
           as well as to local weather forecast offices for use in flood
           forecasts and warnings.

           o  9 national centers constitute the National Centers for
           Environmental Prediction, which provide nationwide computer model
           output and manual forecast information to all NWS field offices
           and to a wide variety of government and commercial users. These
           centers include the Environmental Modeling Center, Storm
           Prediction Center, Tropical Prediction Center, Climate Prediction
           Center, Aviation Weather Center, and Space Environment Center,
           among others.

           o  21 aviation center weather service units, which are co-located
           with key Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control
           centers across the nation, provide meteorological support to air
           traffic controllers.

Figure 1: NWS's 122 Weather Forecast Offices

NWS Relies on Key Systems and Technologies to Fulfill Its Mission

To fulfill its mission, NWS relies on a national infrastructure of systems
and technologies to gather and process data from the land, sea, and air.
NWS collects data from many sources, including ground-based Automated
Surface Observing Systems (ASOS), Next Generation Weather Radars (NEXRAD),
and operational environmental satellites. These data are integrated by
advanced data processing workstations-called Advanced Weather Interactive
Processing Systems (AWIPS)-used by meteorologists to issue local forecasts
and warnings. The data are also fed into sophisticated computer models
running on high-speed supercomputers, which are then used to help develop
forecasts and warnings. Figure 2 depicts the integration of the various
systems and technologies and is followed by a description of each.

Figure 2: Overview of Key Systems and Technologies Supporting NWS
Forecasts

Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD)

NEXRAD is a Doppler radar system1 that detects, tracks, and determines the
intensity of storms and other areas of precipitation, determines wind
velocities in and around detected storm events, and generates data and
imagery to help forecasters distinguish hazards such as severe
thunderstorms and tornadoes. It also provides information about heavy
precipitation that leads to warnings about flash floods and heavy snow.
The NEXRAD network provides data to other government and commercial users
and to the general public via the Internet.

The NEXRAD network is made up of 158 operational radars and 8
nonoperational radars that are used for training and testing. Of these,
NWS operates 120 radars, the Air Force operates 26 radars, and the FAA
operates 12 radars. These radars are located throughout the continental
United States and in 17 locations outside the continental United States.
Figure 3 shows a NEXRAD radar tower.

1Doppler radar is used to determine the speed and direction of rain or
snow particles, cloud droplets, or dust moving toward or away from the
radar. The radar accomplishes this by sending out a pulse using a stable
frequency and then measuring the changing frequencies as the distance
between the radar and the object changes.

Figure 3: NEXRAD Radar Tower

Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)

ASOS is a system of sensors, computers, display units, and communications
equipment that automates the ground-based observation and dissemination of
weather information nationwide. This system collects data on temperature
and dew point, visibility, wind direction and speed, pressure, cloud
height and amount, and types and amounts of precipitation. ASOS supports
weather forecast activities and aviation operations, as well as the needs
of research communities that study weather, water, and climate. Figure 4
is a picture of the system, while figure 5 depicts a configuration of ASOS
sensors and describes their functions.

There are currently 1,002 ASOS units deployed across the United States,
with NWS, FAA, and the Department of Defense (DOD) operating 313, 571, and
118 units, respectively.

Figure 4: An ASOS System

Figure 5: ASOS Sensors

  Operational Environmental Satellites

Although NWS does not own or operate satellites, geostationary and
polar-orbiting environmental satellite programs are key sources of data
for its operations. NOAA manages the Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellite (GOES) system and the Polar-orbiting Operational
Environmental Satellite (POES) system. In addition, DOD operates a
different polar satellite program called the Defense Meteorological
Satellite Program (DMSP). These satellite systems continuously collect
environmental data about the Earth's atmosphere, surface, cloud cover, and
electromagnetic environment. These data are used by meteorologists to
develop weather forecasts and other services, and are critical to the
early and reliable prediction of severe storms, such as tornadoes and
hurricanes.

Geostationary satellites orbit above the Earth's surface at the same speed
as the Earth rotates, so that each satellite remains over the same
location on Earth. NOAA operates GOES as a two-satellite system that is
primarily focused on the United States (see fig. 6). To provide continuous
satellite coverage, NOAA acquires several satellites at a time as part of
a series and launches new satellites every few years.2 Three satellites,
GOES-10, GOES-11, and GOES-12, are currently in orbit. Both GOES-10 and
GOES-12 are operational satellites, while GOES-11 is in an on-orbit
storage mode. It is a backup for the other two satellites should they
experience any degradation in service. The first in the next series of
satellites, GOES-13, was launched in May 2006, and the others in the
series, GOES-O and GOES-P, are planned for launch over the next few
years.3 In addition, NOAA is planning a future generation of satellites,
known as the GOES-R series, which are planned for launch beginning in
2014.

2GOES has historically been a joint program between NOAA and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), with NOAA funding and
managing the program and NASA providing engineering and launch
capabilities.

3Satellites in a series are identified by letters of the alphabet when
they are on the ground and by numbers once they are in orbit.

Figure 6: Approximate GOES Geographic Coverage

Unlike the GOES satellites, which maintain a fixed position above the
earth, polar satellites constantly circle the Earth in an almost
north-south orbit, providing global coverage of conditions that affect the
weather and climate. Each satellite makes about 14 orbits a day. As the
Earth rotates beneath it, each satellite views the entire Earth's surface
twice a day. Currently, there are four operational polar-orbiting
satellites-two are POES satellites and two are DMSP satellites. These
satellites are positioned so that they can observe the Earth in early
morning, morning, and afternoon polar orbits. Together, they ensure that
for any region of the Earth, the data are generally no more than 6 hours
old. Figure 7 illustrates the current configuration of operational polar
satellites.

Figure 7: Configuration of Operational Polar Satellites

NOAA and DOD plan to continue to launch remaining satellites in the POES
and DMSP programs, with final launches scheduled for 2007 and 2011,
respectively. In addition, NOAA, DOD, and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration are planning to replace the POES and DMSP systems
with a state-of-the-art environment monitoring satellite system called the
National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System
(NPOESS). In recent years, we reported on a variety of issues affecting
this major system acquisition.4

4GAO, Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites: Cost Increases
Trigger Review and Place Program's Direction on Hold, GAO-06-573T
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 30, 2006); Polar-orbiting Operational
Environmental Satellites: Technical Problems, Cost Increases, and Schedule
Delays Trigger Need for Difficult Tradeoff Decisions, GAO-06-249T
Washington, D.C.: Nov. 16, 2005); Polar-orbiting Environmental Satellites:
Information on Program Cost and Schedule Changes, GAO-04-1054 (Washington,
D.C.: Sept. 30, 2004); Polar-orbiting Environmental Satellites: Project
Risks Could Affect Weather Data Needed by Civilian and Military Users,
GAO-03-987T (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 2003); and Polar-orbiting
Environmental Satellites: Status, Plans, and Future Data Management
Challenges, GAO-02-684T (Washington, D.C.: July 24, 2002).

  Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS)

AWIPS is a computer system that integrates and displays all
hydrometeorological data at NWS field offices. This system integrates data
from NEXRAD, ASOS, GOES, and other sources to produce rich graphical
displays to aid forecaster analysis and decision making. AWIPS is used to
disseminate weather information to the national centers, weather offices,
the media, and other federal, state, and local government agencies. NWS
deployed hardware and software for this system to weather forecast
offices, river forecast centers, and national centers throughout the
United States between 1996 and 1999. As a software-intensive system, AWIPS
regularly receives software upgrades called "builds." The most recent
build, called Operational Build 6, is currently being deployed. NWS
officials estimated that the nationwide deployment of this build should be
completed by July 2006. Figure 8 shows a standard AWIPS workstation.

Figure 8: An AWIPS Workstation

  Numerical Models

Numerical models are advanced software programs that assimilate data from
satellites and ground-based observing systems and provide short- and
long-term weather pattern predictions. Meteorologists typically use a
combination of models and their own experience to develop local forecasts
and warnings. Numerical weather models are also a critical source for
forecasting weather up to 7 days in advance and forecasting long-term
climate changes. One of NWS's National Centers for Environmental
Prediction, the Environmental Modeling Center, is the primary developer of
these models within NWS and is responsible for making new and improved
models available to regional forecasters via the AWIPS system. Figure 9
depicts model output as shown on an AWIPS workstation.

Figure 9: Weather Model Output Shown on an AWIPS Workstation

  Supercomputers

NWS leases high-performance supercomputers to execute numerical
calculations supporting weather prediction and climate modeling. In 2002,
NWS awarded a $227 million contract to lease high-performance
supercomputers to run its environmental models from 2002 through September
2011. Included in this contract are an operational supercomputer used to
run numerical weather models, an identical backup supercomputer located at
a different site, and a research and development supercomputer on which
researchers can test out new analyses and models. The supercomputer lease
contract allows NWS to exercise options to upgrade the processing
capabilities of the operational supercomputer.

Previous Reports Focused on NWS Modernization Systems Risks

During the 1990s, we issued a series of reports on NWS modernization
systems and made recommendations to improve them.5 For example, early in
the AWIPS acquisition, we reported that the respective roles and
responsibilities of the contractor and government were not clear and that
a structured system development environment had not been established. We
made recommendations to correct these shortfalls before the system design
was approved. We also reported that the ASOS system was not meeting
specifications or user needs, and recommended that NWS define and
prioritize system corrections and enhancements. On NEXRAD, we reported
that selected units were falling short of availability requirements and
recommended that NWS analyze and monitor system availability on a
site-specific basis and correct any shortfalls. Because of such concerns,
we identified NWS modernization as a high-risk information technology
initiative in 1995, 1997, and 1999.6

NWS took a number of actions to address our recommendations and to resolve
system risks. For example, NWS enhanced its AWIPS system development
processes, prioritized its ASOS enhancements, and improved the
availability of its NEXRAD systems. In 2001, because of NWS's progress in
addressing key concerns and in deploying and using the AWIPS system-the
final component of its modernization program-we removed the modernization
from our high-risk list.

5See, for example, GAO, Weather Forecasting: Improvements Needed in
Laboratory Software Development Process, GAO/AIMD-95-24 (Washington, D.C.:
Dec. 14, 1994); Weather Forecasting: Unmet Needs and Unknown Costs Warrant
Reassessment of Observing System Plans, GAO/AIMD-95-81 (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 21, 1995); Weather Forecasting: Radar Availability Requirement Not
Being Met, GAO/AIMD-95-132 (Washington, D.C.: May 31, 1995); Weather
Forecasting: Radars Far Superior to Predecessors, but Location and
Availability Questions Remain, GAO/T-AIMD-96-2 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 17,
1995); Weather Forecasting: New Processing System Faces Uncertainties and
Risks, GAO/T-AIMD-96-47 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 29, 1996); Weather
Forecasting: Recommendations to Address New Weather Processing System
Development Risks, GAO/AIMD-96-74 (May 13, 1996); and Weather Satellites:
Planning for the Geostationary Satellite Program Needs More Attention,
GAO/AIMD-97-37 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 13, 1997).

6GAO, High-Risk Series: An Overview, GAO/HR-95-1 (Washington, D.C.:
February 1995); High-Risk Series: Information Management and Technology,
GAO/HR-97-9 (Washington, D.C.: February 1997); High-Risk Series: An
Update, GAO/HR-99-1 (Washington, D.C.: January 1999); High-Risk Series: An
Update, GAO-01-263 (Washington, D.C.: January 2001).

NWS Established Performance Goals and Tracks Progress against These Goals

In accordance with federal legislation requiring federal managers to focus
more directly on program results, NWS established short- and long-term
performance goals and regularly tracks its actual performance in meeting
these goals.7 Specifically, NWS established 14 different performance
measures-such as lead time for flash floods and false-alarm rates for
tornado warnings. It also established 5-year goals for improving its
performance in each of the 14 performance measures through 2011. For
example, the agency plans to increase its lead time on tornado warnings
from 13 minutes in 2005 to 15 minutes in 2011. Table 1 identifies NWS's 14
performance measures, selected goals, and performance against those goals,
when available. Appendix II provides additional information on NWS's
performance goals.

7The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-62) was
intended to improve federal program effectiveness, accountability, and
service delivery by requiring federal agencies to develop strategic plans
with long-term, outcome-oriented goals and objectives; annual performance
goals linked to the long-term goals; and annual reports on actual results.

Table 1: NWS's Performance Measures, Goals, and Actual Performance for
Fiscal Years (FY) 2005, 2006, and 2011

                                         FY05                FY06           FY11 
                                                            Actual               
  Performance                            Actual  Goal           to      On  
  measure            Description   Goal (final)  met?  Goal   date target?  Goal
  Tornado warning    The             13      13   Yes    13    13a     Yes    15 
  lead time          difference                                             
  (minutes)          between the                                            
                     time a                                                 
                     warning is                                             
                     issued and                                             
                     the time of                                            
                     the first                                              
                     report of a                                            
                     tornado in a                                           
                     given county                                           
  Tornado warning    The             73      75   Yes    76    82a     Yes    76 
  accuracy (percent) percentage of                                          
                     time a                                                 
                     tornado                                                
                     actually                                               
                     occurred in                                            
                     an area                                                
                     covered by a                                           
                     tornado                                                
                     warning                                                
  Tornado warning    The             73      77    No    75    76a      No    74 
  false-alarm rate   percentage of                                          
  (percent)          time a                                                 
                     tornado                                                
                     warning was                                            
                     issued but no                                          
                     tornado event                                          
                     was reported                                           
  Flash flood        The             48      54   Yes    48    63a     Yes    49 
  warning lead time  difference                                             
  (minutes)          between the                                            
                     time a                                                 
                     warning is                                             
                     issued and                                             
                     the time of                                            
                     the first                                              
                     report of a                                            
                     flash flood                                            
                     in a given                                             
                     county                                                 
  Flash flood        The             89      88    No    89    93a     Yes    90 
  warning accuracy   percentage of                                          
  (percent)          time a flash                                           
                     flood                                                  
                     actually                                               
                     occurred in                                            
                     an area                                                
                     covered by a                                           
                     flash flood                                            
                     warning                                                
  Marine wind speed  A measure of    57      57   Yes    58    56b      No    59 
  forecast accuracy  the accuracy                                           
  (percent)          of wind speed                                          
                     forecasts                                              
  Marine wave height A measure of    67      67   Yes    68    71b     Yes    69 
  forecast accuracy  the accuracy                                           
  (percent)          of wave                                                
                     forecasts                                              
  Aviation forecast  The             46      46   Yes    47    45b      No    59 
  Instrument Flight  percentage of                                          
  Rule               time                                                   
  ceiling/visibility Instrument                                             
  accuracy (percent) Flight Rule                                            
                     conditionse                                            
                     are predicted                                          
                     and occur                                              
  Aviation forecast  The             68      63   Yes    65    61b     Yes    50 
  Instrument Flight  percentage of                                          
  Rule               time                                                   
  ceiling/visibility Instrument                                             
  false-alarm rate   Flight Rule                                            
  (percent)          conditionse                                            
                     are predicted                                          
                     but do not                                             
                     occur                                                  
  Winter storm       The average     15      17   Yes    15    16c     Yes    17 
  warning lead time  time from the                                          
  (hours)            issuance of a                                          
                     warning to                                             
                     the time of                                            
                     the first                                              
                     report of a                                            
                     winter storm                                           
                     in a given                                             
                     county                                                 
  Winter storm       The             90      91   Yes    90    91c     Yes    92 
  warning accuracy   percentage of                                          
  (percent)          verified                                               
                     winter storm                                           
                     events that                                            
                     were covered                                           
                     by winter                                              
                     storm                                                  
                     warnings                                               
  Precipitation      A score based   27      29   Yes    28    39d     Yes    30 
  forecast day 1     on the                                                 
  threat (score)     agency's                                               
                     accuracy in                                            
                     forecasting                                            
                     precipitation                                          
  U.S. seasonal      A score based   18      19   Yes    18    24d     Yes    20 
  temperature        on the                                                 
  forecast skill     agency's                                               
  (score)            accuracy in                                            
                     forecasting                                            
                     temperature                                            
  Hurricane track    A measure of   128     101   Yes   111   N/Af    N/Af   106 
  forecast error at  the                                                    
  48 hours (nautical difference                                             
  miles)             between the                                            
                     projected                                              
                     locations of                                           
                     the center of                                          
                     storms and                                             
                     the actual                                             
                     location in                                            
                     nautical                                               
                     miles for the                                          
                     Atlantic                                               
                     Basin                                                  

Source: GAO analysis of NOAA and NWS reports.

aMetric measured between October 2005 and January 2006.

bMetric measured between October 2005 and February 2006.

cMetric measured between October 2005 and December 2005.

dMetric measured between October 2005 and March 2006.

eInstrument Flight Rule conditions exist when ceilings and visibilities
are less than 1,000 feet and/or 3 miles, respectively, and ceilings and
visibilities are greater than, or equal to, 500 feet and/or 1 mile,
respectively.

fData for this metric are not available until the beginning of the next
calendar year because of the timing of the hurricane season.

NWS periodically adjusts its performance goals as its assumptions change.
After reviewing actual results from previous fiscal years and its
assumptions about the future, in January 2006, NWS adjusted eight of its
5-year performance goals to make more realistic predictions for
performance for the next several years. Specifically, NWS made six
performance goals less stringent and two goals more stringent. The six
goals that were made less stringent-and the reasons for the changes-are
the following:

           o  Tornado warning lead time: NWS changed its 2011 goal from 17 to
           15 minutes of warning because of delays in deploying new
           technologies on NEXRAD radars and a lack of access to FAA radar
           data.

           o  Tornado warning false-alarm rate: NWS changed its 2011 goal
           from a 70 to 74 percent false-alarm rate for the same reasons
           listed above.

           o  Flash flood warning accuracy: NWS changed its 2011 goal from 91
           to 90 percent accuracy after delays on two different systems in
           2004, 2005, and 2006.

           o  Marine wind speed accuracy: NWS changed its 2011 goal from 67
           to 59 percent accuracy after experiencing the delay of marine
           models and datasets, a deficiency of shallow water wave guidance,
           and a reduction in funds for training.

           o  Marine wave height accuracy: NWS changed its 2011 goal from 77
           to 69 percent accuracy for the same reasons identified above for
           marine wind speed accuracy.

           o  Aviation instrument flight rule ceiling/visibility: NWS changed
           its goal from 48 to 47 percent accuracy in 2006 because of a
           system delay and a reduction in funds for training. Goals for 2007
           through 2011 remained the same.

           Additionally, the following two goals were made more stringent:

           o  Aviation instrument flight rule ceiling/visibility false-alarm
           rate: NWS reduced its expected false-alarm rate from 68 percent to
           65 percent for 2006 because of better than anticipated results
           from the AWIPS aviation forecast preparation system and an
           aviation learning training course. Goals for the remaining years
           in the 5-year plan, 2007 to 2011, remained the same.

           o  Hurricane track forecasts: NWS changed its 2011 hurricane track
           forecast goal from 123 to 106 nautical miles after trends in
           observed data from 1987 to 2004 showed that this measure was
           improving more quickly than expected.

           NWS is positioning itself to provide better service through system
           and technology upgrades. Over the next few years, the agency plans
           to upgrade and improve its systems, predictive weather models, and
           computational abilities, and it appropriately links these upgrades
           to its performance goals. For example, planned improvements in
           NEXRAD technology are expected to help improve the lead times for
           tornado warnings, while AWIPS software enhancements are expected
           to help improve the accuracy of marine weather forecasts. The
           agency anticipates continued steady improvement in its forecast
           accuracy as it obtains better observation data, as computational
           resources are increased, and as scientists are better able to
           implement advanced modeling and data assimilation techniques.

           Over the next few years, NWS has plans to spend over $315 million
           to upgrade its systems, models, and computational abilities.8 Some
           planned upgrades are to maintain the weather system infrastructure
           (either to replace obsolete and difficult-to-maintain parts or to
           refresh aging hardware and workstations), while others are to take
           advantage of new technologies. Often, the infrastructure upgrades
           allow NWS to take advantage of newer technologies. For example,
           the replacement of an aging and proprietary NEXRAD subsystem is
           expected to allow the agency to implement enhancements in image
           resolution. Key planned upgrades for each of NWS's major systems
           and technologies are listed below.

           NWS has initiated two major NEXRAD improvements. It is currently
           replacing an outdated subsystem-the radar data acquisition
           subsystem-with current hardware that is compliant with open system
           standards. This new hardware is expected to enable important
           software upgrades. In addition, NWS plans to add a new technology
           called dual polarization to this subsystem, which will provide
           more accurate rainfall estimates and differentiate various forms
           of precipitation. Table 2 shows the details of these two projects.

  NWS Is Positioning Itself to Provide Better Service through Upgrades to Its
                            Systems and Technologies

NWS Has Plans for Upgrading Its Systems, Models, and Computational Abilities

  NEXRAD

8This cost estimate includes the expected cost of key system upgrades, as
well as estimated annual costs for improvements to AWIPS software and
numerical models through the year 2011. It does not include the expected
costs of supercomputer upgrades because NWS does not estimate what portion
of its $26 million annual supercomputer budget is attributable to
upgrades.

Table 2: Ongoing and Planned NEXRAD Improvements (as of May 31, 2006)

                                                     Estimated    Estimated   
                                         Current     acquisition  completion  
Improvement  Description              status      cost         date        
Radar data   A subsystem that         In process; $43.8        Estimated   
acquisition  transmits and receives   107 of 158  million (NWS to be       
subsystem    radar signals, controls  sites have  portion is   completed   
replacement  the radar antenna,       been        $22.6        in late     
                processes the received   installed.  million)     2006.       
                signal, and sends the                             
                processed data to the                             
                radar product generator;                          
                replacement of this                               
                subsystem will enable                             
                software upgrades                                 
                including an enhancement                          
                that will allow                                   
                operators to view more                            
                detailed weather                                  
                features.                                         
Dual         A technology upgrade to  Acquisition $38 million  Expected    
polarization allow enhanced target    process is  (NWS portion contract    
technology   identification.          under way.  is $25       award at    
upgrade                                           million)     the end of  
                                                                  2006.       
                                                                              
                                                                  Deployment  
                                                                  is expected 
                                                                  to begin in 
                                                                  fiscal year 
                                                                  2009 and    
                                                                  end in      
                                                                  fiscal year 
                                                                  2011.       

Source: NEXRAD Program Office.

  ASOS

NWS has seven ongoing and planned improvements for its ASOS system (see
table 3). Many of these improvements are to replace aging parts and are
expected to make the system more reliable and maintainable. Key subsystem
replacements-including the all-weather precipitation accumulation
gauge-are also expected to result in more accurate measurements.

Table 3: Ongoing and Planned ASOS Improvements (as of May 31, 2006)

                                                      Estimated or Estimated  
                                                      actual       or actual  
                                                      acquisition  completion 
Improvement     Description       Current status   cost         date       
Processor       Provides a more   962              $6.61        June 30,   
upgrade         robust processor  installations    million (NWS 2006       
                   with increased    completed out of portion is   
                   capacity, speed,  1002 total       $2.89        
                   and memory.       planned sites    million)     
                                     (312                          
                                     installations                 
                                     completed out of              
                                     313 NWS sites)                
All-weather     Replaces existing 323 of 331       $7.10        June 30,   
precipitation   heated tipping    installed (303   million      2006       
accumulation    bucket rain gauge of 311 NWS)                   
gauge           with a gauge that                               
                   measures                                        
                   precipitation by                                
                   weight, resulting                               
                   in more accurate                                
                   measurements.                                   
Dewpoint sensor Replace existing  958 of 1002      $9.20        June 30,   
                   sensor's chilled  installed (303   million (NWS 2006       
                   mirror technology of 311 NWS)      portion is   
                   with a humidity                    $3.14        
                   sensitive                          million)     
                   capacitor.                                      
Ice-free wind   Replaces the      231 of 1000      $7.53        November   
sensor          existing cup and  installed (60 of million (NWS 30, 2006   
                   vane anemometer   311 NWS)         portion is   
                   with a new                         $2.90        
                   ultrasonic                         million)     
                   sensor.                                         
Enhanced        Replaces sensor   Field            $10.14       March 31,  
precipitation   that only reports demonstration    million (NWS 2009       
identifier      rain and snow     testing to begin portion is   
                   with one that is  July 2006        $3.55        
                   to report rain,                    million)     
                   snow, drizzle,                                  
                   hail, and ice                                   
                   pellets.                                        
Ceilometer      Replaces senor    Evaluation of    $33 million  September  
(cloud height)  that measures     commercial       (NWS portion 30, 2011   
                   cloud heights up  sensors almost   is $12       
                   to 12,000 feet    complete;        million)     
                   with one that is  solicitation for              
                   expected to       system                        
                   measure cloud     development                   
                   heights up to     expected to                   
                   40,000 feet.      begin by end of               
                                     May 2006.                     
Sunshine        Adds a new sensor Program on hold  $1.77        September  
duration sensor to measure solar  pending          million      30, 2011   
                   radiation.        ceilometer       (this        
                                     production; will upgrade      
                                     be developed     affects only 
                                     after the        NWS systems) 
                                     ceilometer;                   
                                     planned to                    
                                     restart by 2010.              

Source: ASOS program office.

  AWIPS

Selected AWIPS system components have become obsolete, and NWS is
replacing these components. In 2001, NWS began to migrate the existing
Unix-based systems to a Linux system to reduce its dependence on any
particular hardware platform. NWS expects this project, combined with
upgraded information technology, to delay the need for a major information
technology replacement. Table 4 shows planned improvements for the AWIPS
system.

Table 4: Ongoing and Planned AWIPS Improvements

                                        Current  Estimated Timeline/estimated 
Improvement      Description         status   cost      completion date    
Linux migration  An effort to        In       $17.92    2002 to 2007       
                    replace legacy      progress million   
                    hardware and to                        
                    port approximately                     
                    4 million source                       
                    lines of code of                       
                    AWIPS software from                    
                    the original                           
                    proprietary                            
                    Hewlett-Packard                        
                    Unix operating                         
                    system to the open                     
                    source Linux                           
                    operating system.                      
Architecture     An effort to refine In       $900,000  2004 to 2006       
analysis         AWIPS hardware and  progress           
                    communications                         
                    architecture in                        
                    support of the                         
                    Linux migration and                    
                    to build an                            
                    advanced Linux                         
                    prototype system.                      
Information      An initiative to    In       $3.22     2004 to 2006       
technology       replace obsolete    progress million   
security         routers and                            
                    firewalls                              
                    throughout the                         
                    system.                                
Hardware refresh An initiative to    In       $53.21    2006 to 2015       
                    keep the AWIPS      progress million   
                    hardware baseline                      
                    fresh and                              
                    maintainable                           
                    through a                              
                    continuous                             
                    technology refresh.                    
                    NWS plans to                           
                    refresh hardware                       
                    components every 4                     
                    to 5 years after                       
                    the Linux migration                    
                    is completed.                          
Software         An initiative to    In       $23       2006 to 2010       
re-architecture  reengineer the      progress million   
                    AWIPS software                         
                    suite to a standard                    
                    service-oriented                       
                    architecture.                          
Software         Includes efforts to In       About $10 Continuous         
upgrades         enhance advanced    progress million   
                    precipitation                per year  
                    algorithms for                         
                    estimating                             
                    rainfall; continue                     
                    enhancement of                         
                    advanced decision                      
                    assistance tools;                      
                    implement a                            
                    distributed                            
                    hydraulic model;                       
                    and enhance                            
                    forecasting and                        
                    evaluation of seas                     
                    and lakes to                           
                    provide a                              
                    prediction                             
                    capability tool for                    
                    marine forecasters.                    

Source: NWS.

  Numerical Models

NWS plans to continue to improve its modeling capabilities by (1) better
assimilating data from improved observation systems such as ASOS, NEXRAD,
and environmental satellites; (2) developing and implementing an advanced
global forecasting model (called the Weather Research and Forecast model)
to allow forecasters to look at a larger domain area; (3) implementing a
hurricane weather research forecast model; and (4) improving ensemble
modeling, which involves running a single model multiple times with slight
variations on a variable to get a probability that a given forecast is
likely to occur. NWS expects to spend approximately $12.7 million in
fiscal year 2006 to improve its weather and real-time ocean models.

  Supercomputers

NWS is planning to exercise an option within its existing supercomputer
lease to upgrade its computing capabilities to allow more advanced
numerical weather and climate prediction modeling.

NWS Appropriately Links Its System and Technical Upgrades to Expected Service
Improvements

In accordance with federal legislation and policy, NWS's planned upgrades
to its systems and technologies are expected to result in improved
service. The Government Performance and Results Act calls for federal
managers to develop strategic performance goals and to focus program
activities on obtaining results.9 Also, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) requires agencies to justify major investments by showing how
they support performance goals.10 NOAA and NWS implement the act and OMB
guidance by requiring project officials to describe how planned system and
technology upgrades are linked to the agency's programmatic priorities and
performance measures. Further, in its annual performance plans, NOAA
reports on expected NWS service improvements and identifies the
technologies and systems that are expected to help improve them.

9Pub. L. 103-62, 107 Stat. 285 (1993).

NWS service improvements are often expected through a combination of
system and technology improvements. For example, NWS expects to reduce its
average error in forecasting a hurricane's path by approximately 20
nautical miles between 2005 and 2011 through a combination of upgrades to
observation systems, better hurricane forecast models, enhancements to the
computer infrastructure, and research that will be transferred to NWS
forecast operations. Also, NWS expects tornado warning lead times to
increase from 13 to 15 minutes by the end of fiscal year 2008 after NWS
completes retrofits to the NEXRAD systems, realizes the benefits of AWIPS
software enhancements, and implements new training techniques. Table 5
provides a summary of how system upgrades are expected to result in
service improvements.

10OMB requires agencies to annually submit documentation, called an
exhibit 300, justifying major information technology initiatives or
improvements.

Table 5: System Upgrades Are Linked to Expected Performance Improvements

                  Expected results of ongoing    Primary performance measures 
System         and planned system upgrades    affected                     
NEXRAD         Replacement of the data        Tornado warnings lead time   
                  acquisition subsystem is       Tornado warnings accuracy    
                  expected to allow future       Tornado warnings false-alarm 
                  software and hardware          rate Flash flood warning     
                  enhancements. These            lead time Flash flood        
                  enhancements are expected to   warning accuracy Winter      
                  improve forecasting            storm warnings lead time     
                  performance.                   Winter storm warnings        
                                                 accuracy                     
ASOS           Processor and sensor           Flash flood warning lead     
                  replacements are expected to   time Flash flood warning     
                  allow more reliable and        accuracy Aviation forecast   
                  maintainable systems. Selected ceiling/visibility accuracy  
                  system improvements-including  Aviation forecast            
                  the deployment of an           ceiling/visibility           
                  all-weather precipitation      false-alarm rate             
                  gauge, an enhanced             
                  precipitation identifier, and  
                  a new ceilometer-are expected  
                  to directly improve            
                  forecasting performance.       
AWIPS          Infrastructure upgrades        Tornado warnings lead time   
                  (including a software          Tornado warnings accuracy    
                  migration and hardware         Tornado warnings false-alarm 
                  refreshment) are expected to   rate Flash flood warning     
                  allow major software           lead time Flash flood        
                  enhancements that will result  warning accuracy Marine wind 
                  in more accurate and timely    speed forecasts accuracy     
                  forecasts.                     Marine wave height forecasts 
                                                 accuracy Aviation forecast   
                                                 ceiling/visibility accuracy  
                                                 Aviation forecast            
                                                 ceiling/visibility           
                                                 false-alarm rate Winter      
                                                 storm warnings lead time     
Supercomputers Increased computational        Winter storm warnings lead   
                  capabilities are expected to   time Winter storm warnings   
                  allow advanced modeling and    accuracy Precipitation       
                  data assimilation-and to       forecast day 1 threat score  
                  result in improved forecast    U.S. seasonal temperature    
                  accuracy.                      forecast skill Hurricane     
                                                 track forecasts at 48 hours  
Models         Modeling improvements, enabled Flash flood warning lead     
                  by increased supercomputer     time Flash flood warning     
                  capacity, are expected to      accuracy Marine wind speed   
                  result in more accurate and    forecasts accuracy Marine    
                  timely forecasts.              wave height forecasts        
                                                 accuracy Aviation forecast   
                                                 ceiling/visibility accuracy  
                                                 Aviation forecast            
                                                 ceiling/visibility           
                                                 false-alarm rate Winter      
                                                 storm warnings lead time     
                                                 Winter storm warnings        
                                                 accuracy Precipitation       
                                                 forecast day 1 threat score  
                                                 U.S. seasonal temperature    
                                                 forecast skill Hurricane     
                                                 track forecasts at 48 hours  

Source: GAO analysis of NWS data.

 NWS's Training Is Expected to Result in Forecast Service Improvements, but the
             Training Selection Process Lacks Sufficient Oversight

NWS provides employee training courses that are expected to help improve
forecast service performance, but the agency's process for selecting this
training lacks sufficient oversight. Each year, NWS identifies its
training needs and develops this training in order to enhance its
services. NWS develops an annual training and education plan identifying
planned training, how this training supports key criteria, and associated
costs for the upcoming year. To develop the annual plan, program area
teams, with representatives from NWS headquarters and field offices,
prioritize and submit training recommendations. Each submission identifies
how the training will support up to eight different criteria-including the
course's effect on NWS forecasting performance measures, NOAA strategic
goals, ensuring operational continuity, and providing customer outreach.
These submissions are screened by a training and education team, and
depending on available resources, selected for development (if not
pre-existing) and implementation. The planned training courses are then
delivered through a variety of means, including courses at the NWS
training center, online training, and training at local forecast offices.

In its 2006 training process, 25 program area teams identified 134
training needs, such as training on how to more effectively use AWIPS,
training on an advanced weather simulator, and training on maintaining
ASOS systems. Given an expected funding level of $6.1 million, the
training and education team then selected 68 of these training needs for
implementation. NWS later identified another 5 training needs and
allocated an additional $1.25 million to its training budget. In total,
NWS funded 73 of 139 training courses.

The majority of planned training courses demonstrate a clear link to
expected forecasting service improvements. For example, NWS developed a
weather event simulator to help forecasters improve their tornado warning
lead times. In addition, AWIPS-related training courses are expected to
help improve each of the agency's 14 forecasting performance measures by
teaching forecasters advanced techniques in using the integrated data
processing workstations.

However, NWS's process for selecting which training courses to implement
lacks sufficient oversight. In justifying training courses, program
officials routinely link proposed courses to NWS forecast performance
measures. Specifically, in 2006, 131 of the 134 original training needs
were linked to expectations for improved forecasting performance-including
training on cardiopulmonary resuscitation, spill prevention, leadership,
systems security, and equal employment opportunity/diversity. The training
selection process did not validate or question that these courses would
improve tornado warning lead times or hurricane warning accuracy. Although
these courses are important and likely justifiable on other bases, the
overuse of this justification undermines the distinctions among training
courses and the credibility of the course selection process. Additionally,
because the training selection process does not clearly distinguish among
courses, it is difficult to determine whether sufficient funds are
dedicated to the courses that are expected improve performance.

NWS training officials acknowledged that some of the course justifications
seem questionable and that more needs to be done to strengthen the
training selection process to ensure oversight of the justification and
prioritization process. They noted that the training division plans to
improve the training selection process over the next few years by adding a
more systematic worker-focused assessment of training needs, better
prioritizing strategic and organizational needs, and initiating
post-implementation reviews. However, until NWS establishes a training
selection process that uses reliable justification and results in
understandable decisions, NWS risks selecting courses that do not most
effectively support its training goals.

Changing Concept of Operations Could Affect Nationwide Office Configuration, but
       Impact on Forecast Services, Staffing, and Budget Is Not Yet Known

NWS plans to develop a prototype of a new concept of operations-an effort
that could affect its national office configuration,11 including the
location and functions of its offices nationwide. However, NWS has yet to
determine many details about the impact of any proposed changes on NWS
forecast services, staffing, and budget. Further, NWS has not yet
identified key activities, timelines, or measures for evaluating the
concept of operations prototype. As a result, it is not evident that NWS
will collect the information it needs on the impact and benefits of any
office restructuring in order to make sound and cost-effective decisions.

11Because there is no precise definition of the term "office
configuration," we have defined it as NWS's current number of offices, the
location of the offices, hours worked at each of the offices, and the
services and functions provided at each of the offices.

NWS Is Evaluating Changes to Its Current Operations

According to agency officials, over the last several years, NWS's
corporate board12 noted that the constrained budget, high labor costs,
difficulty in training and developing its employees, and a lack of
flexibility in how the agency was operating were making it more difficult
for the agency to continue to perform its mission. In August 2005, the
board chartered a working group to evaluate the roles, responsibilities,
and functions of weather offices nationwide and to make a proposal for a
new concept of operations. The group was given a set of guiding
principles, including that the proposed concept should (1) be cost
effective, (2) ensure that there would be no degradation of service, (3)
ensure that weather services nationwide were equitable, and (4) not reduce
the number of forecast offices nationwide. In addition, the working group
was instructed not to address grade structure, staffing levels, office
sizes, or overall organizational chart structure.

The group gathered input from various agency stakeholders and other
partners within NOAA and considered multiple alternatives. They dismissed
all but one of the alternative concepts because they were not consistent
with the guiding principles. In its December 2005 proposal, the working
group proposed a "clustered peer" office plan designed to redistribute
some functions among various offices, particularly when there is a
high-intensity weather event. An agency official explained that each
weather forecast office currently has a fixed geographic area for which it
provides forecasts. If a severe weather event occurs, forecast offices ask
their staff to work overtime so that there are enough personnel available
to do both the normal forecasting work and the watches and warnings
required by the severe event. If a local office becomes unable to provide
forecast and warning functions, an adjacent office will temporarily assume
those duties by calling in extra personnel to handle the workload of both
offices.

Alternatively, under a clustered peer office structure, several offices
with the same type of weather and warning responsibilities, climate, and
customers would be grouped in a cluster. Offices within a cluster would
share the workload associated with routine services, such as 7-day
forecasts. During a high-impact weather event-such as a severe storm,
flood, or wildfire-the offices would redistribute the workload to allow
the impacted office to focus solely on the event, while the other offices
in the cluster would pick up the impacted office's routine services. In
this way, peer offices could help supplement staffing needs and the
workload across multiple offices could be more efficiently balanced.

12NWS's Corporate Board is chaired by the Director of the National Weather
Service, and made up of senior officials responsible for different aspects
of the agency's mission, including the Chief Information Officer and the
Directors of the Office of Climate, Water, and Weather Services; the
National Centers for Environmental Prediction; and the NWS Regions. It
meets at least twice annually to discuss the NWS budget and other
strategic issues. It also holds special meetings, as needed, to focus on
NWS issues such as postevent assessments of major weather services, such
as an assessment of weather services during Hurricane Charley in 2004.

After receiving this proposal, the NWS corporate board chartered another
team to develop a prototype of the clustered peer idea to evaluate the
benefits of this approach. The team plans to recommend the scope of the
prototype and select several weather offices for the prototype
demonstration by the end of September 2006. It also plans to conduct the
prototype demonstration in fiscal years 2007 and 2008. Initial prototype
results are due in fiscal year 2009.

Impacts of New Concept of Operations Have Yet to Be Determined

Many details about the impact of the changes on NWS forecast services,
staffing, and budget have yet to be determined. Sound decision making on
moving forward with a new concept of operations will require data on the
relative costs, benefits, and impacts of such a change, but at this time
the implications of NWS's revised concept of operations on staffing,
budget, and forecasting services are unknown.

The charter for the team developing the prototype for the new concept of
operations calls for it to identify metrics for evaluating the prototype
and to define mechanisms for obtaining customer feedback. However, the
team has not yet established a plan or timeline for developing these
metrics or mechanisms. Further, it is not yet evident that these metrics
will include the relative costs, benefits, or impacts of this change or
which customers will be offered the opportunity to provide feedback. This
is not consistent with the last time NWS undertook a major change to its
concept of operations-during its modernization in the mid-1990s. During
that effort, the agency developed a detailed process for identifying
impacts and ensuring that there would be no degradation of service (see
app. III for a summary of this prior process).

Until it establishes plans, timelines, and metrics for evaluating its
prototype of a revised concept of operations, NWS is not able to ensure
that it is on track to gather the information it needs to fully evaluate
the merits of the revised concept of operations and to make sound and
informed decisions on a new office configuration.

                                  Conclusions

NWS is appropriately positioning itself to improve its forecasting
services by upgrading its systems and technologies and by developing
training to enhance the performance of its professional staff. Over the
next few years, NWS expects to improve all of its 14 performance
measures-ranging from seasonal temperature forecasts, to severe weather
warnings, to specialized aviation and marine weather warnings. However, it
is not clear that NWS is consistently choosing the best training courses
to improve its performance because the training selection process does not
rigorously review the training justifications.

Recognizing that high labor costs, difficulty in training and developing
its employees, and a constrained budget environment make it difficult to
fulfill its mission, NWS is evaluating changes to its office structure and
operations in order to achieve greater productivity and efficiency. It
plans to develop a prototype of a new concept of operations that entails
sharing responsibilities among a cluster of offices. Because it is early
in the prototype process, the implications of these plans on staffing,
budget, and forecasting services are unknown at this time. However, NWS
does not yet have detailed plans, timelines, or measures for assessing the
prototype. As a result, NWS risks not gathering the information it needs
to make an informed decision in moving forward with a new office
operational structure.

                      Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve NWS's ability to achieve planned service improvements, we
recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct the Assistant
Administrator for Weather Services to take the following three actions:

           o  require training officials to validate the accuracy of training
           justifications;

           o  establish key activities, timelines, and measures for
           evaluating the "clustered peer" office structure prototype before
           beginning the prototype; and

           o  ensure that plans for evaluating the prototype address the
           impact of any changes on budget, staffing, and services.

           We received written comments on a draft of this report from the
           Department of Commerce (see app. IV). In the department's
           response, the Deputy Secretary of Commerce agreed with our
           recommendations and identified plans for implementing them.
           Specifically, the department noted that it plans to revise its
           training process to ensure limited training resources continue to
           target improvements in NWS performance. The department also noted
           that the concept of operations working team is developing a plan
           for the prototype and stated that this plan will include the items
           we recommended.

           The department also provided technical corrections, which we have
           incorporated as appropriate.

           We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Commerce,
           the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other
           interested congressional committees. Copies will be made available
           to others on request. In addition, this report will be available
           at no charge on our Web site at www.gao.gov .

           If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at
           (202) 512-9286 or by e-mail at [email protected] . Contact points
           for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may
           be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major
           contributions to this report are listed in appendix V.

           David A. Powner Director, Information Technology Management Issues

           Our objectives were (1) to evaluate the National Weather Service's
           (NWS) efforts to achieve improvements in the delivery of its
           services through upgrades to its systems, models, and
           computational abilities; (2) to assess the agency's plans to
           achieve improvements in the delivery of its services through the
           training and professional development of its employees; and (3) to
           evaluate the agency's plans for revising its nationwide office
           configuration and the implications of these plans on local
           forecasting services, staffing, and budgets.

           To evaluate NWS's efforts to achieve service improvements through
           system and technology upgrades, we reviewed the agency's system
           development plans and discussed system-specific plans with NWS
           program officials. We assessed system-specific documentation
           justifying system upgrades to evaluate whether these upgrades were
           linked to anticipated improvements in performance goals. We also
           evaluated NWS performance goals and identified the extent to which
           anticipated service improvements were tied to system and
           technology upgrades. We interviewed National Oceanic and
           Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NWS officials to obtain
           clarification on agency plans and goals.

           To assess NWS's plans for achieving service improvements through
           the training and professional development of its employees, we
           reviewed NWS policies and plans for training and professional
           development. We reviewed the agency's service performance goals
           and assessed the link between those goals and planned and expected
           training and professional development activities. We also
           interviewed NWS officials responsible for training and
           professional development activities.

           To evaluate the status and potential impact of any plans to revise
           the national office configuration, we assessed studies of options
           for changing the NWS concept of operations. We also reviewed the
           charter for the prototype and interviewed key NWS officials to
           determine the possible effect of these plans on local forecasting
           services, staffing, and budgets and to identify plans for
           determining the implications of changing to a new concept of
           operations.

           We performed our work at NWS headquarters in the Washington, D.C.,
           metropolitan area, and at geographically diverse NOAA and NWS
           weather forecast offices in Denver and in Tampa, and at the NWS
           National Hurricane Center in Miami. We performed our work from
           October 2005 to June 2006 in accordance with generally accepted
           government auditing standards.

           Source: GAO analysis of NOAA and NWS reports.

           aMetric measured between October 2005 and January 2006.

           bMetric measured between October 2005 and February 2006.

           cMetric measured between October 2005 and December 2005.

           dMetric measured between October 2005 and March 2006.

           eInstrument Flight Rules take effect when ceilings and
           visibilities are less than 1,000 feet and/or 3 miles,
           respectively, and ceilings and visibilities are greater than, or
           equal to, 500 feet and/or 1 mile, respectively.

           fData for this metric are not available until the beginning of the
           next calendar year because of the timing of the hurricane season.

           In the 1980s, NWS began a nationwide modernization program to
           upgrade weather observing systems such as satellites and radars,
           to design and develop advanced computer workstations for
           forecasters, and to reorganize its field office structure. The
           goals of the modernization were to achieve more uniform weather
           services across the nation, improve forecasting, provide more
           reliable detection and prediction of severe weather and flooding,
           achieve higher productivity, and permit more cost-effective
           operations through staff and office reductions.

           NWS's plans for revising its office structure were governed by the
           Weather Service Modernization Act,1 which required that, prior to
           closing a field office, the Secretary of Commerce certify that
           there was no degradation of service. NWS developed a plan for
           complying with the law. To identify community concerns regarding
           modernization changes and to study the potential for degradation
           of service, the Department of Commerce published a notice in the
           Federal Register requesting comments on service areas where it was
           believed that services could be degraded by planned modernization
           changes. The department also contracted for an independent
           assessment by the National Research Council on whether weather
           services would be degraded by the proposed changes. As part of
           this assessment, the contractor developed criteria to identify
           whether service would be degraded in certain areas of concern. The
           department then applied these criteria to areas of concern to
           determine whether services would be degraded or not. Before
           closing any office, the Secretary of Commerce certified that
           services would not be degraded.

           David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286 or [email protected] .

           In addition to the contact named above, William Carrigg, Barbara
           Collier, Neil Doherty, Kathleen S. Lovett, Colleen Phillips, Karen
           Talley, and Jessica Waselkow made key contributions to this
           report.

           The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
           investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in
           meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve
           the performance and accountability of the federal government for
           the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
           evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
           recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
           informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
           commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
           accountability, integrity, and reliability.

           The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at
           no cost is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday,
           GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on
           its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted
           products every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe
           to Updates."

           The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies
           are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the
           Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
           Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are
           discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

           U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax:
           (202) 512-6061

           Contact:

           Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
           [email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or
           (202) 512-7470

           Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400
           U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
           Washington, D.C. 20548

           Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
           512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW,
           Room 7149 Washington, D.C. 20548

                                Agency Comments

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Appendix I: Objectives,
Scope, and Methodology

Appendix II: NWS Performance Goals for Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011 Appendix
II: NWS Performance Goals for Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011

                                    FY05        FY06     FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 
                                                  Actual                          
Performance                            Final          to                     
measure            Description   Goal actual Goal   date Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal
Tornado warning    The             13     13   13    13a   14   15   15   15   15 
lead time          difference                                                
(minutes)          between the                                               
                   time a                                                    
                   warning is                                                
                   issued and                                                
                   the time of                                               
                   the first                                                 
                   report of a                                               
                   tornado in a                                              
                   given county                                              
Tornado warning    The             73     75   76    82a   76   76   76   76   76 
accuracy (percent) percentage of                                             
                   time a                                                    
                   tornado                                                   
                   actually                                                  
                   occurred in                                               
                   an area                                                   
                   covered by a                                              
                   tornado                                                   
                   warning                                                   
Tornado warning    The             73     77   75    76a   74   74   74   74   74 
false-alarm rate   percentage of                                             
(percent)          time a                                                    
                   tornado                                                   
                   warning was                                               
                   issued but no                                             
                   tornado event                                             
                   was reported                                              
Flash flood        The             48     54   48    63a   49   49   49   49   49 
warning lead time  difference                                                
(minutes)          between the                                               
                   time a                                                    
                   warning is                                                
                   issued and                                                
                   the time of                                               
                   the first                                                 
                   report of a                                               
                   flash flood                                               
                   in a given                                                
                   county                                                    
Flash flood        The             89     88   89    93a   90   90   90   90   90 
warning accuracy   percentage of                                             
(percent)          time a flash                                              
                   flood                                                     
                   actually                                                  
                   occurred in                                               
                   an area                                                   
                   covered by a                                              
                   flash flood                                               
                   warning                                                   
Marine wind speed  A measure of    57     57   58    56b   58   58   59   59   59 
forecast accuracy  the accuracy                                              
(percent)          of wind speed                                             
                   forecasts                                                 
Marine wave height A measure of    67     67   68    71b   68   68   69   69   69 
forecasts accuracy the accuracy                                              
(percent)          of wave                                                   
                   forecasts                                                 
Aviation forecast  The             46     46   47    45b   48   51   52   53   59 
Instrument Flight  percentage of                                             
Rule               time                                                      
ceiling/visibility Instrument                                                
accuracy (percent) Flight Rule                                               
                   conditionse                                               
                   are predicted                                             
                   and occur                                                 
Aviation forecast  The             68     63   65    61b   64   58   57   56   50 
Instrument Flight  percentage of                                             
Rule               time                                                      
ceiling/visibility Instrument                                                
false-alarm rate   Flight Rule                                               
(percent)          conditionse                                               
                   are predicted                                             
                   but do not                                                
                   occur                                                     
Winter storm       The average     15     17   15    16c   15   15   16   17   17 
warning lead time  time from the                                             
(hours)            issuance of a                                             
                   warning to                                                
                   the time of                                               
                   the first                                                 
                   report of a                                               
                   winter storm                                              
                   in a given                                                
                   county                                                    
Winter storm       The             90     91   90    91c   90   90   91   92   92 
warning accuracy   percentage of                                             
(percent)          verified                                                  
                   winter storm                                              
                   events that                                               
                   were covered                                              
                   by winter                                                 
                   storm                                                     
                   warnings                                                  
Precipitation      A score based   27     29   28    39d   29   29   29   30   30 
forecast day 1     on the                                                    
threat (score)     agency's                                                  
                   accuracy in                                               
                   forecasting                                               
                   precipitation                                             
U.S. seasonal      A score based   18     19   18    24d   19   19   19   20   20 
temperature        on the                                                    
forecast skill     agency's                                                  
(score)            accuracy in                                               
                   forecasting                                               
                   temperature                                               
Hurricane track    A measure of   128    101  111   N/Af  110  109  108  107  106 
forecasts at 48    the                                                       
hours (nautical    difference                                                
miles)             between the                                               
                   projected                                                 
                   locations of                                              
                   the center of                                             
                   storms and                                                
                   the actual                                                
                   locations in                                              
                   nautical                                                  
                   miles for the                                             
                   Atlantic                                                  
                   Basin                                                     

Appendix III: NWS Previously Used A Stringent Process to Ensure Service
Was Not Degraded Appendix III: NWS Previously Used A Stringent Process to
Ensure Service Was Not Degraded

1Pub. L. 102-567 S: 706(b), 106 Stat. 4303, 4306 (1992).

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of Commerce Appendix IV:
Comments from the Department of Commerce

Appendix V: A Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

                                  GAO Contact

                             Staff Acknowledgments

(310817)

GAO's Mission

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Congressional Relations

Public Affairs

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-06-792 .

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact David Powner at (202) 512-9286 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-792 , a report to the Subcommittee on Environment,
Technology, and Standards, Committee on Science, House of Representatives

July 2006

WEATHER FORECASTING

National Weather Service Is Planning to Improve Service and Gain
Efficiency, but Impacts of Potential Changes Are Not Yet Known

To provide accurate and timely weather forecasts, the National Weather
Service (NWS) uses systems, technologies, and manual processes to collect,
process, and disseminate weather data to its nationwide network of field
offices and centers. After completing a major modernization program in the
1990s, NWS is seeking to upgrade its systems with the goal of improving
its forecasting abilities, and it is considering changing how its
nationwide office structure operates in order to enhance efficiency. GAO
was asked to (1) evaluate NWS's efforts to achieve improvements in the
delivery of its services through system and technology upgrades, (2)
assess agency plans to achieve service improvements through training its
employees, and (3) evaluate agency plans to revise its nationwide office
configuration and the implications of these plans on local forecasting
services, staffing, and budgets.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce to direct NWS
to strengthen its training selection process, and to establish key
activities, timelines, and measures for evaluating the prototype of a new
concept of operations before beginning the prototype. In written comments,
the Department of Commerce agreed with the recommendations and identified
plans for implementing them.

NWSis positioning itself to provide better service through over
$315millionin planned upgrades to its systems and technologies. In annual
plans, the agency links expected improvements in its service performance
measures with the technologies and systems expected to improve them. For
example, NWS expects to reduce the average error in its forecasts of
hurricane paths by approximately 20 nautical miles between 2005 and 2011
through a combination of upgrades to observation systems, better hurricane
forecast models, enhancements to the computer infrastructure, and research
that will be transferred to forecast operations. Also, NWS expects to
increase tornado warning lead times from 13 to 15 minutes by the end of
fiscal year 2008 after the agency completes an upgrade to its radar system
and realizes benefits from software improvements to its forecaster
workstations.

NWS also provides training courses for its employees to help improve its
forecasting services, but the agency's process for selecting training
lacks sufficient oversight. Program officials propose and justify training
needs on the basis of up to eight different criteria-including whether a
course is expected to improve NWS forecasting performance measures,
support customer outreach, or increase scientific awareness. Many of these
course justifications appropriately demonstrate support for improved
forecasting performance. For example, training on how to more effectively
use forecaster workstations is expected to help improve tornado and
hurricane warnings. However, in justifying training courses, program
officials routinely link courses to NWS forecasting performance measures.
For example, in 2006, almost all training needs were linked to
expectations for improved performance-including training on
cardiopulmonary resuscitation, spill prevention, and systems security. The
training selection process did not validate or question how these courses
could help improve weather forecasts. Overuse of this justification
undermines the distinctions among different training courses and the
credibility of the course selection process. Additionally, because the
training selection process does not clearly distinguish among courses, it
is difficult to determine whether sufficient funds are dedicated to the
courses that are expected to improve performance.

To improve its efficiency, NWS plans to develop a prototype of a new
concept of operations, an effort that could affect its national office
configuration, including the location and functions of its offices
nationwide. However, many details about the impact of any proposed changes
on NWS forecast services, staffing, and budget have yet to be determined.
Further, the agency has not yet determined key activities, timelines, or
measures for evaluating the prototype of the new office operational
structure. As a result, it is not evident that NWS will collect the
information it needs on the impact and benefits of any office
restructuring in order to make sound and cost-effective decisions.
*** End of document. ***