Posted on 10/12/2005 4:58:13 AM PDT by NautiNurse
They were billed as one of the most important advances in the history of weather forecasting: radars so powerful, they could spot a swarm of insects soaring through a field some 30 miles away.
Known as Doppler radars, they were 10 times more sensitive than the vintage radars that had dotted the nation's landscape since the 1950s, and would give forecasters more details than ever about hurricanes making landfall.
But the National Weather Service project that came with such high hopes in 1987 was quickly battered by schedule delays, contractor clashes and runaway spending.
Congress stepped in, lambasting the Weather Service. Audits and hearings were ordered, consultants hired, administrators fired. Finally, after 10 years and $1.4 billion, four times more than the original cost estimate, the nation's forecasters had their state-of-the-art radars.
Except they died -- during hurricane season. The 158 new radars lost power in strong wind, rain and lightning. Worse: The backup power system was inadequate, leaving the radars vulnerable at critical times.
What happened after that -- how, according to one former Weather Service contracting specialist, ''$5 million disappeared in broad daylight'' -- is one of the thorniest chapters in the Weather Service's decadelong struggle to manage high-priced equipment projects.
It is the story of an agency consumed by internal warfare, overwhelmed by unexpected costs, and overly dependent on scientists who had little experience supervising multimillion-dollar projects, according to federal documents, audits, former employees and government consultants.
The project came at a time when some 40 hurricanes battered the United States and the Caribbean, leaving more than $100 billion in damage and thousands of people dead.
It came while the government's hurricane researchers watched their budget requests die and their staff reduced, while forecasters at the Weather Service's field offices and at the National Hurricane Center in Miami-Dade struggled to get a fix on dangerous storms while basic equipment malfunctioned -- or wasn't available at all.
Then, even the new radars didn't work right.
''It was a huge disappointment,'' said Neil Frank, director of the Hurricane Center from 1974 to 1987. ``A lot of money was set aside to build these things and through errors and neglect, we spent a lot more than we needed to get them functioning.''
The radar project was part of a plan by Congress in the 1980s that devoted hundreds of millions of dollars to several big-ticket tools like satellites, but overlooked a wide range of basic equipment, including buoys and weather balloons.
While those weather-observing devices aged or fell into disrepair, compromising forecasts, the Weather Service made matters worse by mishandling the larger projects, according to audits and experts who have studied the agency.
For example, the Weather Service spent $500 million on a computer system to merge satellite, radar and other data for easy access by forecasters. The system is finally running -- years behind schedule and about $150 million more than planned.
No project, however, gave the agency a bigger black eye than the radars, which still break today when forecasters need them.
Weather Service bosses, including former chief Elbert ''Joe'' Friday, defend the program, saying the costs and delays were not unusual considering the scope of the groundbreaking project. Friday said the initial cost for the radars did not include inflation, land and changes in the scope of the project.
But he conceded that politics and infighting within the Weather Service and its parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), stalled the project and raised the price while the nation's forecasters waited for new radars.
One nine-month delay came in 1989 when a top NOAA official demanded the Weather Service consider another radar contractor after the work had already begun; the idea was eventually scrapped.
''We were getting a black eye for being delayed in the program,'' Friday said. `` . . . But nothing was as destructive as . . . being stopped for nine months.''
The radar project began in 1987, but there were problems with the radars and the contract from the start. By 1990, the project had all but stopped.
The Department of Commerce, which oversees NOAA and the Weather Service, brought in a new project development director. The director quickly discovered that the Weather Service wrote unrealistic contract specifications that gave the contractor, Unisys, free rein to raise the cost of the radars.
''There was this great cloud of ambiguity that blew up about what we were actually building, what it would cost and who was authorizing it,'' Thomas Giammo, former associate director at the General Accounting Office, told The Herald. ``Unisys was feasting at the table.''
The Weather Service blamed Unisys, and threatened to kill the contract. Unisys blamed the Weather Service, and threatened to sue.
Giammo had the Department of Commerce's lead contract officer taken off the project. He redefined the performance requirements, upgraded the computer technology on the radars and settled the dispute with Unisys, upping the government's cost by $182 million.
Then came another setback.
Auditors in 1995 reported the new radars weren't always working -- some had been down for a month. Why, auditors asked, did the Weather Service install radars, needed to withstand severe weather, without continuous backup power?
Radars allow forecasters to track a hurricane when it's still 250 miles out at sea, or as much as 24 hours before landfall. They are the single most important tool for tornado detection; one hurricane can spawn dozens.
Worried about the power losses in severe weather, the Weather Service in 1997 set out to rig the radars with equipment to keep the radars working continuously when the commercial power went out. Hired for the $43 million job: an electronics company in Raleigh, N.C., called Powerware.
But a problem quickly surfaced. The new backup power equipment didn't work.
Instead of canceling the job, however, the Weather Service allowed work to continue. In late 1999, 75 radars -- or almost half in the country -- had been fitted with malfunctioning equipment, government documents show.
THE PROJECT CONTINUES
DESPITE CONCERNS
MORE RADARS RIGGED
By then, Weather Service officials were clearly worried.
In fact, that December in an e-mail, Weather Service Operations Chief John McNulty complained, ``Why have we completed half a program to find out we're in such a quandry -- [sic] system doesn't perform as advertised, may never perform as advertised, and oh by the way, we don't know what the extent of the problems [sic] but expect more?''
Despite the concerns, the Weather Service allowed Powerware to keep building, and over the next six months, another 20 radars were fitted with the failing equipment.
''This would just be a comedy of errors if it weren't so serious,'' said contract administrator Robert Curtis, who is no longer with the agency.
In May 2000, the Weather Service shut down the program. All told, the new equipment was out of service on 33 of 94 radars, records show.
Four months later in an internal report, government lawyer Mark Langstein said Powerware was ``bent on passing along almost all increased costs resulting from its noncompliance to the government.''
To resolve the conflict, then Weather Service Chief Jack Kelly directed his staff to negotiate a settlement. The result, according to a 2003 Department of Commerce Inspector General report: the Weather Service allowed Powerware to keep $4.5 million for the defective equipment. Then, the Weather Service drastically modified the contract without negotiation, oversight or legal review, allowing Powerware to start over with different technology. No other companies were allowed to compete for the project.
The inspector general concluded the project was marred by ''unclear accountability and inadequate oversight'' within the National Weather Service. The report went on to say, ''many important business practices were ignored,'' but stopped short of saying whether the Weather Service violated federal regulations.
A former White House procurement policy official who reviewed the report for The Herald questioned the agency's actions.
'All those things sound improper in terms of law, regulation, policy and practice,' said Steven Schooner, now co-director of the Government Procurement Law Program at George Washington University. ``It's not the way I want my money spent, but sadly, it happens a lot in government.''
BACKUP POWER
A SETTLEMENT
AND SOME NEW PARTS
Officials with Powerware, now part of Eaton Corp., declined to comment through a company spokesman. Records show Powerware blamed the failures on a subcontractor that had manufactured the backup power parts. As a solution, Powerware sold the Weather Service new backup parts that Powerware manufactured.
Though members of Congress, including Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote letters to NOAA and the Weather Service in 2002 and 2003 demanding an explanation, no hearings have ever been held.
Then Department of Commerce Secretary Donald Evans responded to Grassley in a letter last year, saying procurement policies have been overhauled and the grants office restructured. He said the staff involved with the contract modification are no longer at NOAA.
''The equipment is working great. That's our bottom line at this point,'' said John Jones, National Weather Service deputy director.
But retired Air Force Col. Floyd Hauth, a meteorologist who studied the radar program for the National Research Council, said problems linger today.
Though the radars have dramatically helped forecasters improve predictions, lightning strikes continue to disable some during storms, even with the backup power. Miami's radar was struck twice in 2004 in the heart of hurricane season.
The technology is not yet available to completely protect the radars from a direct strike, but officials say rigging the radars with fiber optic cabling will help. The Weather Service, however, has been slow to get the job done, citing costs.
''The right information at the right time is what forecasters need to provide the most accurate predictions,'' Hauth said. ``But the radars have never lived up to their full potential.''
Part III Widespread hurricane warnings can breed complacency
Part II Blind Eye | Research cuts stifle hurricane forecasts
Part 4 of 4 for the hurricane series. Not a moment too soon for it to end.
Part 4 of 4 for the hurricane series. Not a moment too soon for it to end.
A very good link: http://weather.noaa.gov/radar/mosaic/DS.p19r0/ar.us.conus.shtml
Click on your location on the map.
I only know of one Doppler site that went out...due to a direct hit. That was the one in Slidell, La. The Buras site could have during the time I wasn't watching it via computer. All the rest of the coastal radars were up and running and I was able to go from site to site and watch the entire storm without interruption.
Offhand, I recall the Atlanta radar was not working when tornados were pounding the area. IIRC, there was a third site that wasn't working - perhaps Mobile.
1) Although some "new" equipment failed, "old" equipment worked perfectly. The Weather Service was the only government agency (at any level) that did its job well during Katrina. Every moment for 9 days prior to Katrina land fall in MS-LA the NWS accurately predicted precisely what would happen.
I oppose government agencies. But give credit where due.
2) Is this the same government that will solve our problems with immigration, crime, poverty and healthcare? Is this the same government that will prove or disprove the theory of global warming?
3) The problems existed under both D and R administrations so it won't be solved "if we only elect the right person". The problems are inherent is the existence of a government bureaucracy.
4) Imagine a similar expensive government "solution" to immigration or any imagined problem. How many "solutions" can we afford?
5) The Katrina problem was a low tech problem, not a high tech problem. The Katrina problem is human error on the part of citizens who mistakenly assumed the government would take care of them; and human error on the part of government officials who mistakenly assumed that some other government bureaucrat or politician was supposed to do the "taking care of".
1) Although some "new" equipment failed, "old" equipment worked perfectly. The Weather Service was the only government agency (at any level) that did its job well during Katrina. Every moment for 9 days prior to Katrina land fall in MS-LA the NWS accurately predicted precisely what would happen.
I oppose government agencies. But give credit where due.
2) Is this the same government that will solve our problems with immigration, crime, poverty and healthcare? Is this the same government that will prove or disprove the theory of global warming?
3) The problems existed under both D and R administrations so it won't be solved "if we only elect the right person". The problems are inherent is the existence of a government bureaucracy.
4) Imagine a similar expensive government "solution" to immigration or any imagined problem. How many "solutions" can we afford?
5) The Katrina problem was a low tech problem, not a high tech problem. The Katrina problem is human error on the part of citizens who mistakenly assumed the government would take care of them; and human error on the part of government officials who mistakenly assumed that some other government bureaucrat or politician was supposed to do the "taking care of".
I don't recall using KFFC (Atlanta) at that time because they were way too far from the storm to display even the outer fringe of rain bands.
Columbus MS lost radar during the storm.
We used KGWX (Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi) during the landfall of the storm as part of a multi-site Doppler display. It didn't go out until later.
ok, Katrina was still a hurricane long after landfall. Columbus MS and Atlanta radars went out, as well as the SE LA site. I stand by my original statement.
Add Meridian MS and Jackson MS to the list of radar sites that went down during Hurricane Katrina.
>>>What happened after that -- how, according to one former Weather Service contracting specialist, ''$5 million disappeared in broad daylight'' -- is one of the thorniest chapters in the Weather Service's decadelong struggle to manage high-priced equipment projects.
Is this why Sen. Rick Santorum sponsored a bill in Congress that would stop the National Weather Service from providing weather information directly to the public?
The uncanny unnamed source - who doesn't work with the agency anymore. Hmmmm...
LOL! Thanks for posting all these NN:) We appreciate you no end.
Oh, I think it does. I saw a system in Tampa that does a great job and if it fails and a strike happens, your property is insured up to $10 million.
It will take the gub'mint another 30 years to learn about it, though.
>>>Sen. Rick Santorum
A weather service had made donations to his campaign too.
Sounds interesting. Got a link?
Thanks for the ping NautiNurse.
WTF?
Yup. Accu Weather wants to get the access for free and sell it back to us.
Accuw Weather made a nice contribution to Santorum.
The National Weather service is already funded by our tax money. So we should buy it again?
Government can't deliver the mail on time, so why should we be surprised that they can't forecast the weather? All large commercial growers have their own weather services, which are much more reliable and technologically superior to the National Weather Service. The TV stations in Oklahoma City are far more accurate in predicting tornado activity, and Gary England, OKC's premier TV weatherman, can show you exactly where the tornado is traveling minute by minute. The NWS is another failed government agency, and we could save billions by dumping it and letting private enterprise do the job better.
No, I don't. I'll see if I can find one, though.
It consists of a bowling ball-sized unit that you put somewhere up on your roof and tie it to your grounding grid. It shoots a low-energy ionized beam up into the air and acts like a quarter-mile-high lightning rod.
It bleeds off the charge so lightning won't strike within a half mile of it.
I guess it is kind of neat to be getting snowed heavily on (blizzard conditions) and have the radar not show it, but that kind of data can get you killed out here.
To the south, along the ND/MT border is a region where it is not uncommon to have three air masses mixing it up and very strong storms developing.
It is also an area, where although relatively sparse, the population generally works out in the countryside, not in an office.
There is no radar coverage there. At the same time, there were 4 radars within 40 miles of Bismarck ND.
It would seem siting is a matter of politics, economics, or (most justifiably) military expediency.
At any rate, they must know everything to know about storm cell formation, because the region where the storms brew up isn't covered.
We just depend on that old injury, the smell of the air, and the look of the sky, and do better than a lot of forecasters, anyway.
Speaking of hurricanes, have you seen Jeff Masters' blog today? He's claiming that Katrina was only a Cat 3 at initial landfall and a Cat 1 as it sideswiped New Orleans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.