United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to the Subcommittee on 

Environment, Technology, and 

Standards, Committee on Science, 

House of Representatives 

WEATHER 

FORECASTING 

National Weather 

Service Is Planning to 

Improve Service and 

Gain Efficiency, but 

Impacts of Potential 

Changes Are Not Yet 

Known 

July 2006 

 

GAO-06-792 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

July 2006

WEATHER FORECASTING 

National Weather Service Is Planning to 

Improve Service and Gain Efficiency, but 

Impacts of Potential Changes Are Not Yet 

Known 

Highlights of GAO-06-792, a report to the 

Subcommittee on Environment, 

Technology, and Standards, Committee 

on Science, House of Representatives 

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. 

NWS is positioning itself to provide better service through over $315 million

in 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 costeffective decisions. 

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 pownerd@gao.gov. 
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 

Page i GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

Page ii GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 marinerelated 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 

Page 1 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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. 

Results in Brief 

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 

Page 2 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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. 

Background 

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, 

Page 3 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

• 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). 

• 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. 

• 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. 

• 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. 

Page 4 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Figure 1: NWS’s 122 Weather Forecast Offices 

Sources: NWS and MapArt.

Seattle

Portland Pendleton

Spokane

Missoula

Great Falls

Medford

Eureka

Sacramento Reno

Elko

San Francisco

Hanford

Las Vegas

Los Angeles

San Diego

Flagstaff Albuquerque

El Paso

Amarillo

Lubbock

Midland

Phoenix

Tuscon

Glasgow Grand Forks

Bismark

Aberdeen

Rapid City Souix Falls

Billings

Riverton

Cheyenne

Boise

Pocatello

Salt Lake City

San Angelo

San Antonio

Fort Worth

Houston

Corpus Christi

Brownsville

Denver

Grand Junction

Pueblo

Goodland

Topeka

Witchita

Tulsa

Norman

Dodge City

North Platte Omaha

Des Moines

Davenport

Minneapolis

Hastings

Duluth

La Crosse

Green Bay

Marquette

Milwaukee

Gaylord

Grand Rapids

Detroit

Cleveland

Wilmington

Northern 

Indiana

Indianapolis

Louisville

Jackson

Chicago

Lincoln

St. Louis

Kansas City

Springfield

Little Rock

Shreveport

Lake Charles

New Orleans

Jackson

Mobile

Birmingham

Tallahassee

Jacksonville

Melbourne

Miami

Key West

Tampa

Atlanta

Huntsville

Nashville Knoxsville

Memphis

Charleston

Wilmington

Newport Raleigh

Columbia

Greer

Paducah Blacksburg

Wakefield

Sterling

Charleston

Pittsburgh

State College

Buffalo

Philadelphia

Binghamton

Albany

Burlington

New York City

Boston

Portland

Caribou

Honolulu

Anchorage

Fairbanks

Juneau

San Juan

Guam Alaska Hawaii Puerto Rico

Page 5 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 

Source: GAO.

Next Generation 

Weather Radar 

(NEXRAD) 

Operational 

Environmental 

Satellite 

Automated Surface 

Observing System 

(ASOS) 

Advanced Weather Interactive 

Processing System (AWIPS) 

Numerical weather 

models run on 

supercomputers

Page 6 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

Next Generation Weather 

Radar (NEXRAD) 

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. 

 1

Doppler 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. 

Page 7 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Figure 3: NEXRAD Radar Tower 

Source: NOAA.

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. 

Page 8 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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

Source: NOAA.

Page 9 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Figure 5: ASOS Sensors 

Source: NWS.

Freezing rain 

sensor 

Celiometer Precipitation 

identification 

sensor 

Wind sensor 

Data

collection 

package 

Temperature 

and dew point 

sensor 

Precipitation 

accumulation 

sensor 

Visibility

sensor

Although NWS does not own or operate satellites, geostationary and polarorbiting 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 

Operational Environmental 

Satellites 

Page 10 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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, GOES11, 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. 

 2

GOES 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. 

3

Satellites in a series are identified by letters of the alphabet when they are on the ground 

and by numbers once they are in orbit. 

Page 11 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Figure 6: Approximate GOES Geographic Coverage 

Sources: NWS and MapArt.

GOES-10 GOES-12 

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. 

Page 12 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Figure 7: Configuration of Operational Polar Satellites 

Sources: GAO and MapArt.

POES

DMSP 

POES

DMSP 

Notional local equatorial crossing times

0530 

hrs

0730 

hrs

1330 

hrs

0830 

hrs

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

 4

GAO, 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). 

Page 13 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

Advanced Weather Interactive 

Processing System (AWIPS) 

Figure 8: An AWIPS Workstation

Source: NOAA.

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 

Numerical Models 

Page 14 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
AWIPS system. Figure 9 depicts model output as shown on an AWIPS 

workstation. 

Figure 9: Weather Model Output Shown on an AWIPS Workstation

Source: NOAA.

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 

Supercomputers 

Page 15 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 

 5

See, 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). 

6

GAO, 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). 

Page 16 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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. 

 7

The 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. 

Page 17 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Table 1: NWS’s Performance Measures, Goals, and Actual Performance for Fiscal Years (FY) 2005, 2006, and 2011 

FY05 FY06 FY11

Performance 

measure Description Goal

Actual 

(final)

Goal 

met? Goal

Actual 

to date 

On

 target? Goal

Tornado warning lead 

time (minutes)

The difference between the time 

a warning is issued and the time 

of the first report of a tornado in

a given county

13 13 Yes 13 13aYes 15

Tornado warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of time a 

tornado actually occurred in an

area covered by a tornado 

warning 

73 75 Yes 76 82aYes 76

Tornado warning 

false-alarm rate 

(percent) 

The percentage of time a 

tornado warning was issued but 

no tornado event was reported 

73 77 No 75 76aNo 74

Flash flood warning 

lead time (minutes) 

The difference between the time 

a warning is issued and the time 

of the first report of a flash flood 

in a given county 

48 54 Yes 48 63aYes 49

Flash flood warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of time a flash 

flood actually occurred in an 

area covered by a flash flood 

warning 

89 88 No 89 93aYes 90

Marine wind speed 

forecast accuracy 

(percent) 

A measure of the accuracy of 

wind speed forecasts 

57 57 Yes 58 56bNo 59

Marine wave height 

forecast accuracy 

(percent) 

A measure of the accuracy of 

wave forecasts 

67 67 Yes 68 71bYes 69

Aviation forecast 

Instrument Flight Rule 

ceiling/visibility 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of time 

Instrument Flight Rule 

conditionse

 are predicted and 

occur 

46 46 Yes 47 45b

No 59

Aviation forecast 

Instrument Flight Rule 

ceiling/visibility falsealarm rate (percent) 

The percentage of time 

Instrument Flight Rule 

conditionse

 are predicted but do

not occur 

68 63 Yes 65 61b

Yes 50

Winter storm warning 

lead time (hours) 

The average time from the 

issuance of a warning to the 

time of the first report of a winter 

storm in a given county 

15 17 Yes 15 16cYes 17

Winter storm warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of verified winter 

storm events that were covered 

by winter storm warnings 

90 91 Yes 90 91cYes 92

Precipitation forecast 

day 1 threat (score) 

A score based on the agency’s 

accuracy in forecasting 

precipitation 

27 29 Yes 28 39dYes 30

Page 18 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
FY05 FY06 FY11

Performance 

measure Description Goal

Actual 

(final)

Goal 

met? Goal

Actual 

to date 

On

 target? Goal

U.S. seasonal 

temperature forecast 

skill (score) 

A score based on the agency’s 

accuracy in forecasting 

temperature 

18 19 Yes 18 24dYes 20

Hurricane track

forecast error at 48

hours (nautical miles) 

A measure of the difference 

between the projected locations 

of the center of storms and the 

actual location in nautical miles

for the Atlantic Basin 

128 101 Yes 111 N/AfN/Af106

Source: GAO analysis of NOAA and NWS reports. 

a

Metric measured between October 2005 and January 2006. 

b

Metric measured between October 2005 and February 2006. 

c

Metric measured between October 2005 and December 2005. 

d

Metric measured between October 2005 and March 2006. 

e

Instrument 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. 

f

Data 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: 

• 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. 

• 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. 

• 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. 

• Marine wind speed accuracy: NWS changed its 2011 goal from 67 to 59 

percent accuracy after experiencing the delay of marine models and 

Page 19 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
datasets, a deficiency of shallow water wave guidance, and a reduction in 

funds for training. 

• 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. 

• 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: 

• 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. 

• 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. 

NWS Is Positioning 

Itself to Provide 

Better Service 

through Upgrades to 

Its Systems and 

Technologies 

Page 20 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 Has Plans for 

Upgrading Its Systems, 

Models, and 

Computational Abilities 

NEXRAD 

 8

This 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.

Page 21 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Table 2: Ongoing and Planned NEXRAD Improvements (as of May 31, 2006) 

Improvement Description Current status Estimated acquisition cost Estimated completion date 

Radar data 

acquisition 

subsystem 

replacement 

A subsystem that transmits and 

receives radar signals, controls

the radar antenna, processes 

the received 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. 

In process; 107 

of 158 sites 

have been 

installed. 

$43.8 million (NWS portion is

$22.6 million) 

Estimated to be completed in 

late 2006. 

Dual 

polarization 

technology 

upgrade 

A technology upgrade to allow

enhanced target identification. 

Acquisition 

process is under 

way. 

$38 million (NWS portion is 

$25 million) 

Expected contract award at the 

end of 2006. 

Deployment is expected to 

begin in fiscal year 2009 and 

end in fiscal year 2011. 

Source: NEXRAD Program Office. 

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. 

ASOS 

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

Improvement Description Current status

Estimated or actual 

acquisition cost 

Estimated or actual 

completion date

Processor upgrade Provides a more robust 

processor with increased 

capacity, speed, and memory. 

962 installations 

completed out of 1002 

total planned sites (312 

installations completed

out of 313 NWS sites) 

$6.61 million (NWS

portion is $2.89 million) 

June 30, 2006

All-weather 

precipitation 

accumulation

gauge 

Replaces existing heated 

tipping bucket rain gauge with 

a gauge that measures 

precipitation by weight, 

resulting in more accurate 

measurements.

323 of 331 installed (303

of 311 NWS) 

$7.10 million June 30, 2006

Dewpoint sensor Replace existing sensor’s 

chilled mirror technology with a 

humidity sensitive capacitor. 

958 of 1002 installed 

(303 of 311 NWS) 

$9.20 million (NWS

portion is $3.14 million) 

June 30, 2006

Page 22 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Improvement Description Current status

Estimated or actual 

acquisition cost 

Estimated or actual 

completion date

Ice-free wind

sensor 

Replaces the existing cup and

vane anemometer with a new

ultrasonic sensor. 

231 of 1000 installed (60 

of 311 NWS) 

$7.53 million (NWS

portion is $2.90 million) 

November 30, 2006 

Enhanced 

precipitation 

identifier 

Replaces sensor that only 

reports rain and snow with one 

that is to report rain, snow, 

drizzle, hail, and ice pellets. 

Field demonstration 

testing to begin July 

2006 

$10.14 million (NWS

portion is $3.55 million) 

March 31, 2009

Ceilometer (cloud 

height) 

Replaces senor that measures

cloud heights up to 12,000 feet

with one that is expected to 

measure cloud heights up to 

40,000 feet. 

Evaluation of commercial 

sensors almost complete; 

solicitation for system 

development expected to 

begin by end of May 

2006. 

$33 million (NWS portion 

is $12 million) 

September 30, 2011 

Sunshine duration 

sensor 

Adds a new sensor to measure 

solar radiation.

Program on hold pending 

ceilometer production; 

will be developed after 

the ceilometer; planned 

to restart by 2010. 

$1.77 million (this 

upgrade affects only 

NWS systems) 

September 30, 2011 

Source: ASOS program office. 

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. 

AWIPS 

Table 4: Ongoing and Planned AWIPS Improvements

Improvement Description Current status Estimated cost

Timeline/estimated

completion date

Linux migration An effort to replace legacy 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. 

In progress $17.92 million 2002 to 2007 

Architecture 

analysis 

An effort to refine AWIPS hardware and 

communications architecture in support of the Linux 

migration and to build an advanced Linux prototype 

system. 

In progress $900,000 2004 to 2006 

Information 

technology 

security 

An initiative to replace obsolete routers and firewalls 

throughout the system. 

In progress $3.22 million 2004 to 2006 

Page 23 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Improvement Description Current status Estimated cost

Timeline/estimated

completion date

Hardware 

refresh 

An initiative to keep the AWIPS 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. 

In progress $53.21 million 2006 to 2015 

Software rearchitectureAn initiative to reengineer the AWIPS software suite to 

a standard service-oriented architecture. 

In progress $23 million 2006 to 2010 

Software 

upgrades 

Includes efforts to enhance advanced precipitation 

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. 

In progress About $10 million 

per year 

Continuous 

Source: NWS. 

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. 

Numerical Models 

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. 

Supercomputers 

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 

 9

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

Page 24 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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.

Page 25 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Table 5: System Upgrades Are Linked to Expected Performance Improvements 

System Expected results of ongoing and planned system upgrades Primary performance measures affected 

NEXRAD Replacement of the data acquisition subsystem is expected to allow 

future software and hardware enhancements. These enhancements 

are expected to improve forecasting performance. 

Tornado warnings lead time

Tornado warnings accuracy

Tornado warnings false-alarm rate 

Flash flood warning lead time

Flash flood warning accuracy

Winter storm warnings lead time 

Winter storm warnings accuracy 

ASOS Processor and sensor replacements are expected to allow more 

reliable and maintainable systems. Selected system 

improvements—including the deployment of an all-weather

precipitation gauge, an enhanced precipitation identifier, and a new 

ceilometer—are expected to directly improve forecasting 

performance. 

Flash flood warning lead time

Flash flood warning accuracy

Aviation forecast ceiling/visibility accuracy 

Aviation forecast ceiling/visibility false-alarm 

rate 

AWIPS Infrastructure upgrades (including a software migration and 

hardware refreshment) are expected to allow major software 

enhancements that will result in more accurate and timely 

forecasts. 

Tornado warnings lead time

Tornado warnings accuracy

Tornado warnings false-alarm rate 

Flash flood warning lead time

Flash flood warning accuracy

Marine wind speed forecasts accuracy 

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 capabilities are expected to allow 

advanced modeling and data assimilation—and to result in 

improved forecast accuracy. 

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 

Models Modeling improvements, enabled by increased supercomputer 

capacity, are expected to result in more accurate and timely

forecasts. 

Flash flood warning lead time

Flash flood warning accuracy

Marine wind speed forecasts accuracy 

Marine 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. 

Page 26 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

NWS’s Training Is 

Expected to Result in 

Forecast Service 

Improvements, but 

the Training Selection 

Process Lacks 

Sufficient Oversight 

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 

Page 27 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 postimplementation 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.

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. 

Changing Concept of 

Operations Could 

Affect Nationwide 

Office Configuration, 

but Impact on 

Forecast Services, 

Staffing, and Budget 

Is Not Yet Known 

 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.

Page 28 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

NWS Is Evaluating 

Changes to Its Current 

Operations 

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 

 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. 

Page 29 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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.

Page 30 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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. 

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: 

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

• establish key activities, timelines, and measures for evaluating the 

“clustered peer” office structure prototype before beginning the prototype; 

and 

• 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 

Conclusions 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

Page 31 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
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 pownerd@gao.gov. 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 

Page 32 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 

Methodology 

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. 

Page 33 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix II: NWS Performance Goals for 

Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

Performance measure Description Goal

Final 

actual Goal

Actual 

to date Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal

Tornado warning lead 

time (minutes)

The difference between the time a 

warning is issued and the time of the 

first report of a tornado in a given 

county 

13 13 13 13a14 15 15 15 15

Tornado warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of time a tornado 

actually occurred in an area covered 

by a tornado warning 

73 75 76 82a76 76 76 76 76

Tornado warning falsealarm rate (percent) The percentage of time a tornado 

warning was issued but no tornado 

event was reported 

73 77 75 76a74 74 74 74 74

Flash flood warning lead

time (minutes)

The difference between the time a 

warning is issued and the time of the 

first report of a flash flood in a given 

county 

48 54 48 63a49 49 49 49 49

Flash flood warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of time a flash flood 

actually occurred in an area covered 

by a flash flood warning 

89 88 89 93a90 90 90 90 90

Marine wind speed 

forecast accuracy 

(percent) 

A measure of the accuracy of wind 

speed forecasts 

57 57 58 56b58 58 59 59 59

Marine wave height 

forecasts accuracy 

(percent) 

A measure of the accuracy of wave 

forecasts 

67 67 68 71b68 68 69 69 69

Aviation forecast 

Instrument Flight Rule 

ceiling/visibility accuracy 

(percent) 

The percentage of time Instrument 

Flight Rule conditionse

 are predicted 

and occur 

46 46 47 45b 48 51 52 53 59

Aviation forecast 

Instrument Flight Rule 

ceiling/visibility falsealarm rate (percent) 

The percentage of time Instrument 

Flight Rule conditionse

 are predicted 

but do not occur 

68 63 65 61b

64 58 57 56 50

Winter storm warning 

lead time (hours) 

The average time from the issuance 

of a warning to the time of the first 

report of a winter storm in a given 

county 

15 17 15 16c15 15 16 17 17

Winter storm warning 

accuracy (percent) 

The percentage of verified winter 

storm events that were covered by 

winter storm warnings 

90 91 90 91c90 90 91 92 92

Precipitation forecast day 

1 threat (score)

A score based on the agency’s 

accuracy in forecasting precipitation 

27 29 28 39d 29 29 29 30 30

U.S. seasonal 

temperature forecast skill 

(score) 

A score based on the agency’s 

accuracy in forecasting temperature 

18 19 18 24d19 19 19 20 20

Appendix II: NWS Performance Goals for 

Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011 

Page 34 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix II: NWS Performance Goals for 

Fiscal Years 2005 to 2011

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

Performance measure Description Goal

Final 

actual Goal

Actual 

to date Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal

Hurricane track forecasts 

at 48 hours (nautical 

miles) 

A measure of the difference between 

the projected locations of the center 

of storms and the actual locations in 

nautical miles for the Atlantic Basin 

128 101 111 N/Af110 109 108 107 106

Source: GAO analysis of NOAA and NWS reports. 

a

Metric measured between October 2005 and January 2006. 

b

Metric measured between October 2005 and February 2006. 

c

Metric measured between October 2005 and December 2005. 

d

Metric measured between October 2005 and March 2006. 

e

Instrument 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. 

f

Data for this metric are not available until the beginning of the next calendar year because of the 

timing of the hurricane season. 

Page 35 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix III: NWS Previously Used A 

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

Stringent Process to Ensure Service Was Not 

Degraded 

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 costeffective 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. 

 1

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

Page 36 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department Appendix IV of Commerce : Comments from the 

Department of Commerce 

Page 37 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 38 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix IV: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 39 GAO-06-792 Weather Forecasting
Appendix V: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 40 GAO-06-792 

Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov. 

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. 

Weather Forecasting

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(310817) 
GAO’s Mission 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: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

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 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER