1. a. FY12-13 GIMPAP Project Proposal Title Page Title: : Using GOES and NEXRAD Data to Improve Lake Effect Snowfall Estimates Type: GOES Utilization Status:New Duration: 2 years Project Leads: Mark Kulie (CIMSS,Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison), mskulie@wisc.edu Other Participants: Andrew Heidinger (NOAA/NESDIS/STAR/ABSP), Andi Walther (CIMSS/UW- Madison), Ralf Bennartz (CIMSS/UW-Madison) 1

2. b. Project Summary 2 Develop, test, and implement GOES lake effect snow (LES) snowfall estimate product Augments NEXRAD coverage over Great Lakes Synergistic GOES/NEXRAD data application Utilizes CIMSS GOES-R Proving Ground Empirical GOES/NEXRAD relationships NWS nowcasting applications Useful real-time product LES advisories/warnings

3. c. Motivation / Justification LES impacts: Prodigious snow amounts Hazardous weather Great Lakes hydrology Locally variable Difficult to forecast Radar detection deficiencies 3 Marquette, MI NWS Web Page: http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/mqt/0809snow.jpg

4. c. Motivation / Justification NEXRAD 1734ZTerra MODIS 1725Z 4

5. c. Motivation / Justification NEXRAD 1638ZTerra MODIS 1635Z 5

6. d. Methodology “Calibrate” GOES with NEXRAD (~100 km range) Develop empirical relationships –NEXRAD snowfall rates (Z-S relationships) –Relate derived snowfall rate to GOES products –CIMSS GOES-R Proving Ground essential component 6

7. e. Expected Outcomes Create LES GOES/NEXRAD testing dataset –MQT initial focus –Enthusiastic initial response from MQT NWS WFO GOES LES operational snowfall rate product (Great Lakes focus) 7

8. e. Possible Path to Operations 1.Proof-of-concept, demonstration phase CIMSS GOES-R Proving Ground 2.Outreach and feedback NESDIS Satellite Analysis Branch NWS offices (e.g., MKX, MQT, APX, GRR, BUF, etc.) 3.Operational implementation 8

9. f. Milestones YEAR 1: Compile case studies w/ MQT NWS WFO collaboration Identify useful GOES cloud products (e.g., cloud top height, optical thickness, cloud phase, microphysics, etc.) Develop NEXRAD/GOES snowfall rate relationships YEAR 2: Process larger dataset (e.g., entire snowfall season) Outreach/feedback from NESDIS/NWS Hone methodology based on feedback Prepare for operational transition 9

10. g. Funding Request (K) Funding SourcesProcurement Office Purchase Items FY12FY13 GIMPAPStAR Total Project Funding $55K* StAR Grant to CIMSS $55K$60K StAR Federal Travel StAR Federal Publication StAR Federal Equipment StAR Transfers to other agencies Other Sources 10

11. g. Spending Plan FY12 FY12 $55,000 Total Project Budget 1.Grant to CIMSS - $55,000 –% FTE - 40% (~$50,000) –Travel - $5,000 (Travel to NWS sites, NESDIS, conference) 2.Federal Travel – 3.Federal Publication Charges – 4.Federal Equipment - 5.Transfers to other agencies – 6.Other - 11

12. g. Spending Plan FY13 FY13 $60,000 Total Project Budget 1.Grant to CIMSS - $60,000 –% FTE - 40% (~$50,000) –Travel - $5,000 (Travel to NWS sites, NESDIS, conference) –Publication charge - $5,000 2.Federal Travel – 3.Federal Publication Charges – 4.Federal Equipment - 5.Transfers to other agencies – 6.Other - 12