1. Research To Operations For Improved Precipitation Estimates and Forecasts David Kitzmiller Group Leader - Hydrometeorology Hydrology Laboratory, Office of Hydrologic Development National Weather Service, NOAA Quantitative Precipitation Estimation Workshop June 28-30, 2005 Norman, OK

2. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman2 General Needs Short-term precipitation estimates more than a few hundreds of meters from a rain gauge are generally poor Better estimates are needed in order to realize improvements in: –Flash flood detection –Distributed hydrologic modeling –Verification –Potential for wildland fires –Agriculture

3. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman3 Data Processing Needs Problems with precipitation processing: –Erroneous rain gauge data –Artifacts in radar data –Variable precipitation detection by radar and satellite –Lack of knowledge of estimates’ error distributions

4. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman4 “Inventors” for Improvements Field office personnel –Devise and implement local solutions –Initiate requests for national support Federal laboratory personnel –NOAA –NASA –Dept. of the Interior –Dept. of Defense University community Research foundations Consultants

5. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman5 Implementation Resources Basic and applied research community amounts to 100’s of individuals worldwide Number of implementers in NWS: –Office of Hydrologic Development: 3.5 for NEXRAD 3 for AWIPS MPE –Office of Science and Technology: < 10 in Systems Engineering Center, for NEXRAD and AWIPS < 10 in Meteorological Development Laboratory, for AWIPS –Office of Operational Systems: < 10 in Applications Branch, Radar Operations Center Implementers in other NOAA organizations: –Forecast Systems Laboratory –NCEP Environmental Modeling Center –NCEP Central Operations Branch

6. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman6 Implementation Resources The people who implement new techniques must also modify and re- engineer an ever-increasing catalog of existing applications Staff for prioritizing new requirements and allocating resources is also small Integrating staff must also prepare and sometimes deliver training materials, or innovations might go unused

7. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman7 Basic Development – Any Developer – Part I Develop new/improved products offline, using testbed server as data source Get user buy-in – real-time demos, conference papers Apply to Review Committee/User Grouip (to be formed) for incorporation in testbed In testbed, demonstrate viability and utility of new product Get further exposure: –NOAA and NWS personnel –General user community

8. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman8 Basic Development – Any Developer – Part II Review Committee reports routinely to NWS on new developments An NWS sponsor will submit improvement proposal to OSIP –Proposal might not require remainder of OSIP process ISSUES: –What are needs for JADE financial support as the main testbed? –Getting NWS and community support for JADE –How do we form/maintain Review Committee or advisory group?

9. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman9 NMQ Activities At NCEP Basic 3-D mosaic process is under testing at NCEP EMC Following must go through OSIP: –Justify 3-D mosaic generation and distribution –Justify need for production of Q2 (precipitation) for: RFC needs WFO needs AOR needs –Concept of Operations for Q2 –Must document continuing resources needs: Supporting internal coding support User support 24/7 troubleshooting support

10. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman10 NMQ Implementation Issues Who starts as OSIP sponsor to write Statement of Need, Concept of Operations? Exactly where to implement? –Centrally? –Regionally? Who provides short-term science support? –Network Control Facility? Who provides long-term science support? Benchmarks for approval for implementation? –Retrospective verification over an annual cycle? –Stage II and/or Stage IV as benchmark? –Final AOR as longterm benchmark?

11. June 28, 2005 QPE Workshop - Norman11 Validation of Improvements Retrospective verification over an annual cycle Regional as well as national validity Get benchmark for existing Stage II product as a benchmark How to bring in RFC quality control and expertise operationally Final AOR as longterm benchmark