Watch-by-County & VTEC Why, What, How, When and Operational Considerations

1. Watch-by-County&VTECWhy, What, How, WhenandOperational Considerations Deirdre Jones Jason Tuell Systems Engineering Center

2. Overview Purpose: Update on strategy and status of VTEC and WBC • Why? • Impetus behind WBC and VTEC • What? • WBC and VTEC by the numbers • How? • Implementation in AWIPS and NAWIPS • When • Schedule of major milestones and field activities • Operational considerations • What WBC and VTEC mean to the field • Summary

3. Why VTEC? • Improve partner’s use and interpretation of critical NWS warnings, watches and advisories • Reduce errors and insure consistency and continuity in watch, warning and advisory products Major private sector concern for almost ten years

4. What?VTEC • Two line character string that captures critical elements of watch, warning advisory • Event Tracking Number that ties all products associated with a meteorological event together • Action codes that clearly articulate life cycle changes to an event • Start and expiration time of the event • Clear identification of operational, test and experimental products /O.NEW.KRLX.BZ.A.0002.041222T1700Z-021223T0400Z/

5. How?VTEC • VTEC is implemented through four baseline software applications • Warngen - short fused convective warnings • Riverpro - hydrological warnings • Watch, Warning Advisory application (WWA) - long fused warnings • IFPS - marine warnings issued in public forecast products

6. When?VTEC • March 2004 – VTEC software delivered and tested in lab • April 2004 – Revised 10-1703 published April 2004 • April 2004 – IOT&E in lab environment • May 2004 - OB3.2 – updated VTEC software • July 5 - August 31 – OT&E • 1 October - Go/No Go decision • 1 December - Turn key implementation

7. Why WBC? • Provide an organized and consistent method for the convective watch process • Replace State Liaison Office concept which spread watch responsibilities among National Center, State Liaison Office and WFOs for warned counties • SPC (in collaboration with affected WFOs) is responsible for the initial convective watch area • WFOs are responsible for subsequent modifications to the convective watch area until the time of cancellation • Facilitate use and understanding of NWS Watch Products by the media and emergency management community • Customers often do not use WFO convective watch products (e.g., Special Weather Statements) • Customers identify content inconsistencies between local and national convective watches

8. What?WBC • A modernized convective watch process and suite of products which fits the 21st century NWS business case • Best leverages skills of the local WFO forecaster and national SPC severe weather specialist • National partners and customers receive watch information from one Watch Outline Update message instead of multiple State Areal Outline statements • Local customers receive convective watch information from their WFO (one stop shopping) instead of a State Liaison Office • Workload reduction for the 50 State Liaison Offices • New product suite reduces potential for erroneous information

9. How?WBC • SPC issues proposed watch guidance in form of a test and graphical Watch County Listing (WCL) • SPC and WFOs participate in collaboration calls to agree on which counties and marine zones to be included in WOU • WFOs issue Watch County Notification Message (WCN) for affected counties • WFOs update watches for counties in their county warning area (CWA) using the WCN • SPC updates the WOU on an hourly basis with information from the WCNs WCN 3 a 1 WCL WOU 1 2 b SPC WFO 2 2 3 WOU WCN 3 a Customers a b Initial issuance = numbers Updates = letters

10. WBC Issue • Phase 1 OT&E highlighted significant challenges, principally, poor performance: • Customers experienced erroneous messages, impacting usability of products • WFOs experienced difficulty using software (WWA) • Strategy: • Use automated QC to eliminate errors • Improve WWA • Phase I: “Lighten the Load” – December 2004 • Phase II: Redesign WWA – Est. 2006 • Plan for Phase I • Implement improvements in AWIPS releases • Conduct OT&E Phase II in May 2004 on subset of sites • Products become operational January 2005

11. When?WBC • June 2004 – OB 3 • December 2004 – OB4 • June 2004 - Accelerate OB4 WWA into OB3.2 • May 2004 – Phase II OT&E • July 2004 – Expand testing to all CONUS WFOs • July 2004 – Training • August 2004 – PNS • January 2005 – Turn key

12. Future Watch Warning Services • Near term plan to implement WBC and VTEC to meet both NWS and external partner objectives • VTEC and WBC development revealed shortcomings in watch, warning software, infrastructure and concepts of operations • Next Generation Warning Services initiative to address these shortcomings

13. Summary • Commitment to implement VTEC and Watch by County • WBC brings changes to the convective watch concept of operation • Automated QC will reduce errors and bring about greater standardization of products • Baseline tools address all mandatory requirements

14. Backup

15. /O.NEW.KRLX.BZ.A.0002.041222T1700Z-021223T0400Z/ • / and . Delimeters • K Fixed identifier of VTEC string type; O=Operational • NEW Action Code; New=initial issuance • KRLX Office ID; Charleston, WV • BZ Phenomena; BZ=Blizzard • A Significance; A=Watch • 0002 Event Tracking Number (ETN) • 041222T1700Z Date/Time Group yymmdd, beginning UTC • T Fixed Time Indicator • 0212223T0400Z Date/Time Group yymmdd, ending UTC

16. Requirements of WFOs • National standard for watches, warnings, and advisories • Automated quality control (QC) ensures standardization • Deviations from instructions are not permitted by the automated QC • New guidance for use of correction (COR) and amendment (AMD) • No current standardized approach or definition applicable across all the products • Initial limited implementation in the software

17. Operational ConsiderationsWatch-by-County • Watch by County includes close integration of WFO and SPC processes, requires a handshake of two systems to pass specially coded messages between the systems • Use of AWIPS required to assure WCNs are issued for SPC initiated watches and ensure SPC products are updated with WFO issued WCNs • Partners will look for convective watches for counties from the WFO responsible for the warning area • Need accurate times, follow-up messages related to issued products, clear indication when watch no longer applies

18. Operational ConsiderationsVTEC • Continuity and uniqueness of Event Tracking Number (ETN) critical in service back up scenarios • Partners expect ETN to be unique and continuous across events, even in service back up situations • Coordination between WFOs will be instrumental in meeting partner’s expectations • Use of VTEC action codes in weather scenarios • 10-1703 neutral as to how these are to be applied • Multiple solutions allowed, but some solutions preferable to others • Weather scenarios and job sheets • Will provide foundation for training and testing • Will document recommended use of VTEC in operational situations

19. WWA Test Drive • Participants • Alaska Region Angel Corona (AJK) • Eastern Region Joe Palko (PBZ) Josh Watson (ERH) • Central Region Greg Noonan (CRH) • Pacific Region Bill Ward (PRH) • Southern Region Chris Sohl (OUN) • Western Region Paul Flatt (BOI) Craig Schmidt (WRH) • NCEP Gregg Grosshans (SPC) Michelle Mainelli (TPC)