1. Presented By: Ken Crawford, State Climatologist for Oklahoma August 11, 2009

2. This Position Paper is intended to develop a systematic, objective methodology so that data users and data providers can discriminate between those networks capable of producing climate- and weather-quality data from those networks which fall short of this important goal. Ingredients Still Missing In the AASC Position Paper Sites and networks that are truly urban in their location and purpose should not be rated using the siting standards in the current AASC document. Additional evaluation criteria must be developed for the exposure of urban networks.

3. Six categories are being proposed for use by the AASC to define criteria as the basis for establishing ‘tiers of networks’ in a National Mesonet: 1.Metadata – Essential Information Before Other Criteria Are Addressed 2.Criteria For Site and Network Evaluation 3.Sensors – Requirements for Accuracy and Resolution 4.Defining an Observation – Data Logger Processing 5.Data Quality Control and Quality Assurance 6.Data Reliability and Data Availability

4. The network evaluation (and ‘tier ranking’) is simply a composite (i.e., it’s a linear average) of all station scores in the network.

5. The ‘tier level’ of each network is a multiplicative network score of the three performance measures compared to the threshold scores determined by the AASC to qualify for Tier 1, or Tier 2, or Tier 3-4-5 status in the national network-of- networks. (Example is a Tier 2 Network)

6. Final Thoughts and a Few Personal Opinions 1.The proposed 3-dimensional ‘Network of Networks’ must have a strong foundation (i.e., the in-situ surface observations must be reliable and reliably available). 2.Those who operate wide area networks (such as many State Climatologists and some private sector companies) have a breath and depth of experience that should prove to be invaluable in developing a National Mesonet. 3.The potential economic impact from applying quality surface data will prove to be.