AWS's Flash Flood Warning and Disaster Preparedness Programs H. Michael Mogil,* John C. Monro, and Herbert 8. Groper* || Weather Service, NOAA Silver Spring, Md. 20010 Nati Abstract Flash foods have become the nation's number one stormy ‘weather killer in the 1970s, Deaths from flash floods are now approaching 200 each year compared to an average of Les ‘than 70 per year during the preceding 80-year period. Losses from lash floods sre now nearly I0 times what they were in the 1940s, "To combat these escalating loses the National Weather Service (NWS) ie expanding its eforts to improve forecasting land warning of flash floods and to improve the public's ve: sponse to flash flood threats, ‘This paper summarizes the resent and planned NWS operational fash flood warning And disaster preparedness programs. 1. Introduction Flash floods are 2 major natural disaster warning prob- Jem facing the nation, During the 1970s the average annual death toll from flash floods has tripled from the rate during the 1940s (Fig. 1) and has now become the tation’s number one stormy weather killer. Property 1 Disater Preparedness Stl. 2 Offce of Hydrology Fic, 1. Average annual fath flood deaths by decides. Figures are 9094 of all food-related deaths reported by the National ‘Glimacie Center, NOAA. damage from floods and flash floods now averages more than $1.0 billion annually compared to about $125 mil- lion during the 1940s and $875 million during the 19605 Figures 2 and 3 show damage from some recent flash, floods (also, see cover of May 1978 Buutenin). Based on reported lowes; we have not made adjustments for inflation. Fe. 2 Damage resulting to the John Enos home on Murphy Creek, ~#mi from the “Applegate River, near Medford, Oreg, after a flash flood in January 1974 690 Vol. 59, No. 6, June 1978Bulletin American Meteorological Society There are many reasons for this escalating trend in deaths and property losses. For example, an ever in: creasing number of vacationers are visiting flash flood prone recreational areas in dhe summer—the time of highest vulnerability to flash floods. People have also been establishing themselves at an increasing rate in flood plains across the nation. As this development oc curs, normal drainage is disrupted, In addition, mobile home and transient trailer parks are often located near rivers. People continue to believe “it can't happen here, Wich more than 15000 communities and recreational areas subject to flash Roos, the potential for disaster grows each year. The AMS has recently issued a state ment of concern about fash floods (AMS, 1978). ‘The National Weather Service (NWS) has defined a flash flood as a flood that follows the causutive event (excessive rain, dam or levee failure, etc) within a few hhours. Because of the short warning times involved and the limited number of realtime precipitation reports, 691 the NWS flood forecasting procedures used on larger streams generally cannot respond fast enough. Also, there is the difficult problem in predicting the amount, timing, and location of flash flood producing rainfall. Therefore, a special warning and preparedness system is needed to ensure the public safety Although most flash floods are the result of activity or slowly moving/ stationary thunderstorms or lines of thunderstorms (NOAA, 1972, 1976a, 1977b, 1977c; Randerson, 1976), some occur in conjunction with tropical eyclones (Groper and Dunlap, 1972; NOAA, 1973) and with extratropical cyclones (NOAA, 1977). Since 1971, more than 1000 significant flash floods Ihave occurred nationwide, with every state Raving ex- perienced at least one such flood, Since 1945, more than 8000 counties have received Red Gross assistance follow: ing foods or flash floods (Fig. 4). Although many of these did not make national headlines, dey have hada localized thunderstorm, Fic. 8. A boulderstrewn scene of destruction along Myers Creck in southern California follow: ing rains from Tropical Storm Kathleen, in September 1976, Note road washout in background and boulders on bridge in lower left corner of photo. (Photo courtesy of Union-Tribune: Pub- lishing Co., San Diego)Vol. 59, No. 6, June 1978 ic. 4, Flood and fash flood events by counties for the period 1945-76 ‘Figures are based on Red Cross assistance, devastating effect on scores of communities, But it is the catastrophic flash floods, such as Black Hills in 1972 (287 deaths) and the Big Thompson Canyon in 1976 (189 deaths), that highlight the vulnerability of the American people to these events (Fig. 5). To reduce loss of life and lessen damage to property the NWS has developed flash flood warning and disaster preparedness programs. Their responsibility for issuing weather-related warnings goes back to the establishment ‘of the Signal Corps in 1870 and the Organic Act of 1890. Although interest in forecasting severe thunderstorms and tornadoes has had a tong history (Ludlum, 1970), interest in flash flood and excessive rainfall forecasting is more recent. In fact, a national flash flood warning program was not established until 1971, and there have been only limited studies into the hydrological and meteorological aspects of flash floods. Although the NWS was active in preparedness in the Jae 1950s and the 1960s, a disaster preparedness program ‘was not formally authorized by Congress until 1971, and the primary emphasis was on hurricanes. The program has since been expanded to include severe local storms, winter storms, floods, and flash floods, During its first 7 years of existence, this program has been instrumental in making the public aware of weather hazards, A major public safety and educational program has been de- veloped to improve response to warnings. From the national viewpoint, resolving the flash flood problem cannot fall exclusively on the NWS. Preventive measures by local and state governments and individual citizens are also required if the damage and loss of life resulting from flash floods are to be effectively reduced. For example, effective flood plain management secks to minimize the occupation of potentially hazardous flood plains. In some instances, flood proofing of essential buildings and/or judicious use of physical controls such as reservoirs, levees, and channel improvement may be appropriate, But these must pass the tests of economic feasibility and environmental compatability. The highly localized nature of ash floods and the thousands of vulnerable locations require the NWS, with other fed- eral agencies and state and local groups, to develop effective and fully coordinated programs. ‘This paper will give an overview of the NWS's flash flood warning and disaster preparedness programs and hhow the NWS works with other groups in preparing for flash floods. We will also include some proposed changes, as well as ongoing and planned NWS changes, to the ‘warning and preparedness programs. 2. Flash flood watch/warning program ‘The basic forecast program begins at the National Mete- orological Center (NMC) in Camp Springs, Md. Here computers process meteorological observations and pro- duce maps of observed and forecast weather systems (Brown and Fawcett, 1972; Fawcett, 1977). The Quanti tative Precipitation Branch (QPB) of NMC routinely issues rainfall forecasts 6 times per day. These indicate areas in which rainfall amounts are expected to equal or exceed selected forecast values (NOAA, 1976b). This, information is wansmitted on teletypewriter and fac simile for use by River Forecast Centers (RFCs) in their river flood prediction program and by Weather Service Forecast Offices (WSFOs) for use in operational forecast programs. ‘This guidance, based largely on synopticscale analyses and forecasts, cannot be used to specify localized exces sive convective rainfall amounts, Tt has, however, beenBulletin American Meteorological Society Some recent significant fash flood events 693 Since the map was prepared, fash floods have struet southern California twice (February and March 1976) Killing neatly 40. people and causing more than $109 million in damages, very useful in specifying synopticscale rainfall patterns and amounts. At the present time, the NMC QDR is restructuring its program to give additional support to the flash flood program, Fewer fxedissuance time, fixed forecast period products will be issued; instead, the QPB will issue “outlooks” such as those issued by the National Severe Storms Forecast Center (Kansas City, Mo.) and will ‘monitor weather situations more closely and coordinate with field offices more frequently (NWS, 1978) Currently, the flash flood warning program consists of the following elements 1) flash flood watches and warnings; 2) local flash flood warning programs; 8) stream stage forecasts; 4) flash flood alarm systems (FFAS); 5) combinations of the above. ‘The RFCs prepare stream stage forecasts (Golton and Burnash, 1978) and hydrologic flash flood guidance for use by WSFOs. The flash flood guidance is based in part fon drainage basin configuration and past rainfall. The RECs also develop local flash flood forecast procedures and recommend applicable flash flood warning systems to local communities ‘The WSFOs are responsible for issuing flash flood watches. Flash flood watches are usually valid for pe: riods of 12h or less and may affect all or part of WSFO forecast area. Coordination among WSFOs is necessary to ensure watch continuity across state borders. To be most effective, watches should be issued prior to the onset of heavy rainfall. There axe some general {guidelines for predicting thunderstorm rainfall potential based on a diagnosis of synopticscale data (Mogil and Groper, 1976; Maddox et al., 1977; Maddox and Chap- pell, 1978; Hughes and Longsdorf, 1978). There are also guidelines for predicting extratropical storm rainfall (Smith and Younkin, 1972). In addition, some recent studies (NOAA, 1976a; Johnson e¢ al., 1978) suggest that a comparison between observed and climatological mois- ture values (Lott, 1976) can be a useful indicator of convective rainfall potential. Macroscale model guidance can be helpful, too, especially when the heavy rainfall is tied to largescale weather systems (Estelle, 1974; Hovermale et al., 1975). However, it re mains extremely difficult to accurately forecast rainfall amounts from decaying tropical storms (NOAA, 1972) and from thunderstorms (NOAA, 1976a; Olson, 1977). Local NWS offices issue warnings only when flash fooding is observed and reported of when flash flood producing rainfall is indicated by radar, automated rain ages, or by rainfall observers. The NWS also solicits reports from CB groups and ham radio operators (Weigel, 1977). Flash flood war for periods of <4h, They may be valid for a single drainage basin, although issued for several counties. ‘The WSFOs and WSOs also issue statements about thunderstorm rainfall that may cause drainage and/or small stream flooding. Radar can be especially useful because it gives an areal perspective and cin be used to quickly estimate accumulated rainfall, For example, the following can be done: numerical ings are usually issued they are more commonly 1) Subjective radar scope evaluation. Neatly stationary lines of thunderstorms, or slowly moving thunder-storms that show redevelopment on the upstream side of the storm, provide important clues to heavy rainfall events, Examination of echo tops and in- tensities is important, too. However, heavy rain can fall from echoes that have relatively low tops. 2) Manually digitized radar (MDR). The MDR. values are based on a relationship between theoreti cal rainfall rates and echo intensity (Moore et al., 1974) and can be used to keep track of accumu: lated rainfall, Although there appears to be a good relationship between total storm rainfall and MDR totals for long-duration storms (NWS, 1977), MDR is not an infallible flash flood alerting tool under certain meteorological conditions. In addi tion, other factors such as terrain and previous, rainfall have to be considered. In several recent fash floods (eg, Kansas City), flash flooding was already in progress before critical MDR values were reached (NOAA, 1976) 3) Radar Digitizer and Processor (RADAP) data. This system automatically computes numerous radar fields and displays them digitally. One of these fields is accumulated rainfall for 6 km by 10 km areas Gaffe, 1976). The RADAP uses a convective rainfall rela onship of Z= 552% (where R is the rainfall esti- mate and Z is the reflectivity), which more than doubles the rainfall estimates obtained from the MarshallPalmer relationship (Greene and Clark, 1974). This experimental equipment is only in use at five network radar locations at the present time. Very limited evaluation of total storm rainfall est mates obtained by evaluating the maximum (peak) rainfall data collected by RADAP shows excellent agreement with observed rainfall totals (Greene and. Safle, 1978). All of the above require the use of a ZR relationship, However, because of the many assumptions used in de riving such a relationship (Greene, 1971), there has been ‘considerable variation among researchers as to what the relationship should be (Battan, 1973). In some parts of the United States (for example, in the High Plains from eastern Colorado to the Dakotas) the presence of hail and/or the evaporation of precipitation as it falls through low-level drier air can make it difficult to rely on any ZR relationship. Also, researchers at NOAA's Environmental Research Laboratories in Boulder (Mad- dox et al, 1977) and others have suggested that for a variety of factors rainfall estimates may be significantly ‘underestimated at large ranges. Some attention has been placed recently (eg, Brandes, 1974; Woodley et al. 1974; Cain and Smith, 1976) on techniques for calibrat- ing radars using rainfall observations. However, their procedures are not being used operationally. Satellite data may also be used for estimating rainfall amounts. Both the National Environmental Satellite Service (NESS) (Oliver and Scofield, 1976) and the Na- tional Hurricane and Experimental Meteorology Labora tory (NHEML) (Griffith ef al,, 1976) have developed Vol. $9, No. 6, June 1978 techniques for estimating rainfall amounts from satellite imagery. Provisional procedures have been published by NESS for this (cofekd and Oliver, 1977) based on a sealy of convective rainfall events over the central United Staves for one summer sean, and several NWS offces are now evahating these procedures. Results of fone of these initial studies indicated that use of the NESS procedtes in conjunction with radar date yielded good estimates of heavy convective rainfall Gohnson et al, 1978). Following the disstrous Johnstown ash flood, the [NESS and NHEML techniques were used to estimate the comective rainfall Both yielded excellent estimates (Gcofield, 1978; Woodley et el, 1978), Reabtime evalua. tion of the NESS techniques is planned for this year. 3. Local flash flood warning system ‘The NWS watch/warning program is as accurate as the available data and the meteorological/hydrological state fof the art permits However, a locally operated com munity warning system is, at present, the most effective ‘means of preventing loss of life and seducing property damage from flash Rooding, This is because it is respon- sive to NWS warnings and can also activate itself when required by localized weather conditions that NWS may not be aware of. The design of such systems will depend upon site specific problems (eg. geography, population in the flood plain, food control structures, and warning time) and resources available for program implementa. tion and maintenance, The systems can range from the simple to the sophisticated. Some equ ‘munication options of the local flash ood warning sys tem are given below: Equipment plantie vain gage staff sive gage recording electronic ‘automated rainfall reposting stations Communication System—from observer to flash flood ‘coordinator: telephone ham radio Ch radio police, fire, and other emergency radio Communication System—from automated equipment to flash flood coordinator: telephone hhardiwine Tine of sight radio satellite relay radio ‘The essential elements of such a local program are the following: 1) volunteer rainfall and stream gage observers; 2) a reliable and rapid local communication system ‘with emergency backup: 3) a flash flood warning coordinator and alternate; 4) forecast procedures developed by NWS hydrolo- sists;Bulletin American Meteorological Society 695, RASH F000 ALARM Fic. 6, Flash lood alarm system locations. Some communities not shown in the figure have azo stalled alarm systems. 5) a warning dissemination plan; 6) an adequate preparedness plan (including public education). Normally, inexpensive rainfall gages and stall gages for river data will be sufficient. However, in some areas where time is critical and observers are not available, automated precipitation gages and electronic stream level sensors are essential, Eventreporting instruments tion is useful, too (Bumash and Twedt, 1978). ‘The NWS assists communities in establishing their flash flood warning program. Thus, NWS will survey the area, recommend appropriate equipment and network design, and provide some of the necessary equipment (eg. staff gages and plastic rain gages). The NWS has also purchased and installed 67 electronic river level sensors (FFASS) as part of a demonstration program ig. 6). ‘The FFAS has three components: a river station, an imermediate station, and an alatm station, The river station senses the critical water level for flash flooding. The intermediate station provides power to the river station and couples the river station's signal output to the alarm station. The alarm station is located in an appropriate place in the community and has Talay, 24h a day stuffing. It receives a continuous signal from the river station that provides information on the system's ‘operational status, When the critical level is reached at the river station, an audible and visible alarm i acti- vated, During the major flooding and flash flooding that occurred in eastern Kentucky, western Virginia, and West Virginia on 2-5 April 1977, four FFASs pro- vided invaluable notification of critical river levels to officials in the communities (NOAA, 1977). ‘The FFAS is only one of several devices now available for automated river level sensing. Automated precipita: tion sensors have also been developed. This type of equipment can be a valuable complement to existing volunteer observer networks, especially in remote water- shed areas, Costs of such automated equipment range from about $200 to over $3000 per site A critical element in local programs is the stream level forecast procedure, NWS hydrologists prepare simplified procedures for predicting stream levels, given an index fof antecedent soil moisture conditions and reported rainfall amounts (Monro and Anderson, 1974). Hydro- logic staffs at RFCs routinely furnish the index to com- munities that have local flash flood warning programs. ‘The forecast procedure usually includes a set of tables696 and/or graphs, These are used by the community's flash ood warning coordinator to predict potential flooding. The success of the local warning program depends on a rapid and reliable local communications system. A, redundant configuration is recommended. 4, Dissemination ‘The NWS relies upon many systems to disseminate include com: cable television, NOAA Weather Wite Service (teletypewrites), NOAA Weather Radio, hotline telephones, and the national press wire services The NOAA Weather Radio is an extremely important vehicle for disseminating critical weather information. ‘This is an NWSoperated VHE-FM system with three special frequencies (162.40, 162.475, and 162.55 MH2), having an effective range of ~65km. In March 1978 there were approximately 170 stations in operation; by the end of 1979 the NWS expects to have more than 300 stations in operation that will be within listening range of 90%, of the US. population, ‘The NOAA Weather Wire Service is a teletypewriter system devoted exclusively to weather information. Com: mercial radio and television, police, some local civil defense offices, and others subscribe to tt Commercial radio and television and cable television represent other important vehicles for warning dis semination, They receive NWS watches and warnings from the NOAA Weather Wire Service, NOAA Weather d are urged to rebroadcast the information immediately About two years ago, the NWS, the Federal Communi watches, warnings, and statements. Thes mercial radio and television, Radio, national press wite services, or by telephone a ENVIRONMENTAL ‘CUES A. National Weather Service 8. Law Enforcement Authorities ©. Civil Emergency Services D. Other Involved Organizations ic. 7. The “wi ing system” showing the complex interactions among, age Vol. 59, No. 6, June 1978 ‘ations Commission, the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency (DCPA), and the National Industrial Advisory Committee (which represents the broadcast industry) began a joine effort to develop state and local disaster warning dissemination procedures for the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS). Once operational area plans are implemented, NWS offices will be able to relay short fase warnings rapidly to many broadcast stations by simply calling one station. “The NWS also uses several civil defense and law en- forcement communications systems in its warning pro- gram, The most important of these is the National Warning System (NAWAS), « multipoint inter and intrastate telephone hotline system funded by the DCPA. This system connects state and area warning points local municipalities, and many NWS offices, There are also a few statewide microwave emergency communica- tions systems in (en KEWS—Kentucky Emergency Warnings System). In addition, radio and CB groups cin be used to disseminate war: ing information as well as to gather storm reports ‘An improved NWS communications system called ABOS (Automation of Field Operations and Services) is scheduled for nationwide implementation beginning this year (NOAA, 19760), This system will provide NWS offices with high-speed data handling and display capa- bilities by means of on-site minicomputers linked to- gether in a nationwide network (Johnson and Giraytys, 1975), Weather information will be displayed on TV-like screens instead of on paper, and warning messages will likely be received by adjacent weather offices in seconds rather than minutes. The AFOS system will have fore: cast applications as well (Klein, 1976). ‘operation RESPONSE ENVIRONMENTAL cues (After MeLuckie, 1873) dissemination subsystems, and the publicBulletin American Meteorological Society 5, Disaster preparedness For any community to respond positively to flash flood, the community officials and the individuals in the com: ‘munity must be prepared. Whereas most federal agen: cies are involved in postdisnster relief and recovery pro- grams, the NWS's program is committed to predisaster planning and preparedness. For example, the NWS has issued a "Guide for Flood ancl Flash Flood Preparedness Planning” (Owen, 1977) and has developed and dis tributed Hiterature about flash floods and flash flood safety, Recently, the NWS introduced, in its prepared: ness literature, the weather conscious logo—Owlie Sky. warn, Owlie tells children in elementary schools safety rales for all natural disasters, ‘Ac the present time, 18 WSFOs have been assigned a dedicated disaster preparedness meteorologist. In addi: tion, meteorologists at WSFOs and WSOs and hydrolo- gists at WSFOs and RFCs support the flash flood warn: ing and disaster preparedness programs. These people and others are involved in the following activities: 1) hold preparedness meetings with state, county, and local officials, law enforcement agencies, schoo! off: cials, amateur radio and CB groups, and others to establish and maintain local warning communica: tion systems and storm spotter and volunteer ob- server networks and to implement local flash flood warning progr 2) work with the mass media to ensure that lash flood releases and safety information a reliably disseminated, 8) encourage appropriate response by local officials and the public by distribution of weather safety literature (pamphlets, slid leases). rapidly and films, and news re: The NWS has also begun to examine the sociological aspects of its warning program (McLuckie, 1973, 1974), Particularly important is the complex. linkage among warning, dissemination, and response (Fig. 7). Recent disasters continue to show that people do not iow how to respond adequately to a flash flood threat (Gruntfest, 1977; NOAA, 19776) ‘The National Science Foundation (NSF) has recently completed a research assessment of natural hazards (White and Haas, 1975) and the natural hazard warning systems (Mileti, 1975) in the United States. Mileti’s graphic illustration of inputs to warning cleatly shows the difficulties in providing adequate warnings to people in flash flood prone areas (Fig. 8). The University of Minnesota (Carter et al., 1977) is engaged in a Syear NSF-funded study to assess community and organiza tional response to natural hazard warnings 6. Improvements to the warning and preparedness programs ‘There are numerous actions that could be taken to im: prove the flash flood warning and disaster preparedness programs. Some of these are already underway, but 697 ENHANCEMENT MITIGATION eUNeaTiOn | ‘esraUcHVe ‘ecnnotocy POTENTIAL aero, 1978) Fie. §. The major variables affecting warning—electivenes, variation in, and/or existence. All of the variables on the Teft act to increase the potential for disastrous flash floods AIL of those on the right act to mitigate that potential, but they have not been adequately addressed others have yet to be initiated because of personnel and/or fiscal limitations, The following are some of the initiatives the NWS and other agencies can take to improve warning dissemination and increase public awareness/response: 1) expand the local flash flood warning program for all communities subject to flash flooding; 2) install additional NAWAS drops at NWS offices, RFCs, and at selected emergency action agencies 3) complete the manning of the NWS flash flood and disaster preparedness programs. nationwide: 4) place more emphasis on predisaster efforts (eg. there should be funding to enable smaller com ‘munities with limited resources to plan for natural disasters by purchasing needed FFASs, rain gages, and communications equipment, and to support plan maintenance): 5) encourage the private sector to develop inexpensive automated precipitation and river alarms; 6) increase public understanding of and response to hazardous weather (this could include a major flash flood public awareness program in conjunction with other federal, state, and private agencies involved in flash floods or recreational activities; the news media, including outdoor recreation publications, should be involved heavily in this program); 1) provide additional NOAA Weather Radio trans- mission capability, especially for highly used recre ational areas, In the area of hydrometeorological forecasting and re search, the following could be done: 1) ensure that all management and field personnel really understand flash flooding and that it can698, ‘occur in proximity to tornadoes and other severe weather; 2) encourage more local hydrometeorological studies {into the flash flood problem; 3) develop improved statistical guidance forecasts for heavy rainfall 4) increase understanding of convective cloud scale processes: 5) continue development of techniques for estimating rainfall based on satellite dats; continue efforts to calibrate radar by use of rain. fall observations and initiawe development of tech: niques for estimating rainfall from radar parat- eters other than intensity (eg., echo tops, vert cally integrated liquid water content, Doppler signatures) 7) standardize the approach to small basin hydrologic forecasting: 8) develop a flash flood watch/warning verification program that includes an evaluation of NMC. QPB guidance forecasts for significant rainfall 9) encourage hydrometeorology cross training offices 10) establish @ flash flood forccasting course, 6 field In addition to these, we support the recommendations contained in the AMS Statement of Concern about flash foods (AMS, 1978). 7. Summary In this paper we have attempted to present & general overview of the NWS's flash flood and disaster prepared- ness programs and to give some insight into needed pro- {gram improvements. Some of the recommendations have already been addressed; others will require longer-range developmental efforts and/or budgetary support. Acknowledgments. We would like to thank Karl Johannes sen (Office of Meteorology and Oceanography), Robert Clark (Office of Hydrology), and Herbert Lieb (Disaster Prepared. ‘es Sta for supporting ws during the writing of this paper. We would also like to thank Lisa Grandier (Ofice of Meteorology an Oceanography) anit Barbara Pakenham and Desha DeVor (Disaster Preparedness Staff) for their assistance in preparing this paper, We also want to thank those who reviewed the draft manuscript for Ws References AMS, 1078: Statement of Concern: Flash floods—A national problem, Bull. Amer, Meteor. Soc, §9, 685-586, Battan, L. J., 197%: Use of radar for precipitation measure: ‘ments, Radar Observation of the Atmosphere, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 84-118, Brandes, E. A., 1974: Radar rainfall pattern optimizing tech nique. NOAA Tech. Memo,, ERL-NSSL:67, Norman, Okla 16 pp. Brows, H. E, and E, B, Faweett, 1972: Use of numerical {uidance at the National Weather Service's National Mete forological Center. J. Appl. Meteor, U1, 1175-1182 Burnash, R. J. C, and T. M, Twedt, 1978: Event-reporting Vol. 59, No. 6, June 1978 {instrumentation for realtime Mash flood warnings. Pre prints, Conference on Flash Floods: Hydrometeorologieal ‘Aspects (Los Angeles, AMS, Boston, pp. 96-10) Cain, D. E, and P.-L, Smith, Jr, 1976: Operational adjust. iment of radar eatimated rainfall with rain gage data: A statitieal evaluation. Preprinis, 17th Conference om Radar Meteorotogy (Seattle), AMS, Boston, pp. 533-538, camer, T. M, J.P, Clatk, RK. Heik, and G. A, Fine, 1877 Social factors affecting the dissemination of and response to wamings. Postprints, 110h Technical Conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology (Miami Beach), AMS, Boston, pp. 02-00 Colton, D-E, and R. J. C. Bumash, 1978: A fash food warn- ing system. Preprins, Conference on Flash Floods: Hydro. meteorological Aspects (Los Angeles), AMS, Boston, pp. 102-108 Eacelle, E. W,, 1974: Characteristics of the models in forecast ‘ing precipitation. NMC Tech, Auach. 7&4, Washington, DG. pp Faweett, E- By 1977: Current capabilities in prediction at ‘the National Weather Service's National Meteorological Center, Bull, Amer, Meteor. Sac, $8, 43-14. Greene, D. R,, 1971: Numerical techniques for the analysis of digital radar data with applications to meteorology and hnydrology. Phid. thesis, Texas ARM Univ., College Station, 135 pp. — and R.A. Clatk, 1974: ‘The operational use of digital Talar data for flash flood monitoring. Proceedings of Flash Flood Symposium, International Amocation of Hydrolog cal Sciences, Pari, pp. 100-105 — and RE, Safe, 1978: Radar analysis of the 1977 Johns town Hash flood. Preprints, Conference on Flash Floods Mydrometeorological Aspects (Las Angeles), AMS, Boston, pp. 176-160. Grith, GG, W. F. Woodley, D. W. Martin et al, 1976: Rainfall estimation from gconynchronous satellite imagery during daylight hours. NOAA ‘Tech, Rept, ERL WMPO", Miami, 106 pp. Groper, H. S, and D, V. Dunlap, 1972: Meteorotogial and Inydrological analysis of the August 27-28, 1971, New Jersey flood, Water Resour, Bul, 8, 1044-1054, Grumiest, F.C. 1977: What people did during the Big Thompson flood. Natural Hazard Research Working Paper 32, Iosttute of Behavioral Science, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, 64 pp. Hovermate, J, D. Matks, R. Chu, 8. Scoinik, and R. Jones, 1975: Experimental forecasts of hurricane movement with a limited-area fine-mesh grid, Paper presented at Ninth Technical Conference on Hurricanes and ‘Tropical Mete orology, AMS, Key Biscayne, Fla, 27-30 May. Hughes, L. A. and L. L. Longsdort, 1978: Guidelines for flash ood and small tributary flood prediction, NOAA, Tech. Memo, NWS CR-58 (revised), Kansas City, Mo., 10pp. Johnson, G. A. Je. Belville, and J.D, Ward, 1978: A ash flood aide limited area QPF. Preprints, Conference on Flash Floods: Hydrometcorological Aspects (Los. Angeles) AMS, Hoston, pp. 21-28 Jobson, RE, and J. Giraytys, 1975 imental system. WMO Bull, 24, 86-92 Klein, W. H, 1976: AFOS forecast applications. Preprints, Sisih Conference on Weather Forecasting and Analysis (Albany), AMS, Boston, pp. 36-48 Lot, G. A, 1976: Preciptable water over the United States, "The AFOS experiBulletin American Meteorological Society Vol, 1, Monthly means. NOAA Tech, Rept,, NWS20, Silver Spring, Ma, 173 pp. Ludlum, D. M., 1970: Early American Tornadoes, 1586-1870, "AMS, Hoston, 219 pp. Maddox, R. A. and ©. F. Chappell, 1978: Meteorological as pects of 20 significant flash flood events. Preprints, Gon ference on Hydrometeorological Aspects of Flash Floods (Lor Angeles), AMS, Boston, pp. 1-9 ) F. Garacena, LR, Hit, and ©. F. Chappell, 1077: Meteorological aspects of the Big Thompson Flash Flood of 31 July 1975, NOAA ‘Tech, Rept,, ERL 388-APCLI1, Boulder, Colo. 88 pp. MeLuckie, B, F, 1973: The warning system—A. social science perspective. NWS, NOAA, Ft. Worth, Tex., 66 pp. 197A: Warning—A Call to Action. NOAA, NWS ‘Worth, Tex. 85 pp. Mileti, D. §, 1975: Natural Hosard Warning Systems in the United States: A Research Assessment. Monogr. NSF-RA E5018, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, 7 pp. Mogil, H.M,, and HS, Groper, 1976: On the short-range pre diction of localized excessive convective rainfall, Preprints, Conference on Hydro-Meteorology (Ft. Worth), AMS, Boston, pp. 9-12. Monro, J. ©., and E, A. Anderson, 1974: National Weather Service River Forecasting System, J. Hydvaul. Div, ASCE, 100, 621-680. Moore, P. L., A. D. Cummings, and D. L. Smith, 1974: The National Weather Service manually digitied radar program and some applications. NOAA Tech. Memo., NWS SR, Ft, Worth, Tex., 21 pp. NOAA, 1972: Black Hills food of June 9, 1972—A report to the Administrator, Natural Disaster Survey Rept. 721, NOAA, Rockville, Md, 20 pp, —, 1973: Final report of the disaster survey team on the events of Agnes—A report to the Administrator. Natural Disaster Survey Rept. 73-1, NOAA, Rockville, Md, 45 pp. —, 10762: Big Thompson ‘Canyon fash flood of July 31 ‘August 1, 1976—A report to the Administrator. Natural Disaster Survey Rept. 76-1, NOAA, Rockville, Md, pp. 1916p: Facsimile Produets, NOAA, NWS Forecasting Handbook No. 1. NWS, Silver Spring, Md., ~270 pp. —, 1976: Project development plan for AFOS, NWS, Silver Spring, Md, 120 pp. —, 18772: Appalachian flood April 2-5, 1977—Preliminary disaster report. NOAA, NWS, Garden City, N.Y., 314 pp. 1977): Johnstown, Pennsylvania fash flood of July 19°20, 1977—A report to the Administrator, Natural Disas ter Survey Rept. 77-1, NOAA, Rockville, Ma., 60 pp. Fe 699 —, 197Te: Kansas City flash flood of September 12-18, 1977 =A report to the Administrator, Naural Disaster Survey Rept. 772, NOAA, Rockville, Md, 49 pp. NWS, 1977: Relationship between manually digitized radar (MDR) data sums and observed precipitation in long dura- tion storms, Easter Region ‘Tech, Auach, 77-14, Garden ity, NY. 4 pp. ——. 1078: "Excessive rainfall potential outlook, Tech, Proc. Bull. No, 299, Silver Spring, Mal, 7 pp: Oliver, V. J. and R.A. Scofield, 1976: Estimation of rainfall from satellite imagery. Preprints, Sixth Conference on Weather Forecasting and Analysis (Albany), AMS, Boston, pp. 212-248. Obwon, D. A., 1977: Evaluation of 1976 warm season objective quantitative precipitation forecasts, NMC Tech, Attach 77-5, Camp Springs, Ma, 5 pp. Owen, HL. J 1977: Guide for flood and fash flood prepared ness planning. NWS, Silver Spring, Md., 47 pp. Randerion, D., 1976: Meteorological analysis for the Las ‘Vegas, Nevada, flood of 8 July 1975, Mon. Wea. Rev, 106, nor. Safle, R. E., 1976: D/RADEX products and field operation, Preprints, 17th Conference on Radar Meteorology (Seattle), AMS, Boston, pp. 335-559 Scofield, R. A., 1978: Using satellite imagery to estimate rain fall during the Johnstown rainstorm. Preprints, Gonference on Flash Floods: Hydrometeorologieal Aspects (Los Angeles), AMS, Boston, pp. 181-188. "and V. J. Oliver, 1977: A scheme for estimating convec tive rainfall from satellite imagery. NOAA Tech, Memo. JESS 86, Washington, D.C., 47 pp. Smith, W., and R, J. Younkin, 1972: An operationally uscfut relationship between the polar jet stream and heavy pre- Gpitation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 100, 434-40. Weigel, E, P., 1977; Allies to disaster fighters, NOAA, 7(), 18-20 White, G. F., and J. E, Haas, 1975: Assessment of Research ‘on. Natural Hazards, Monogr. NSF-RA-E-75-001, Institute of Behavioral Science, Univesity of Colorado, Boulder, 487 pp. Woodley, W. I., A. Olsen, A. Herndon, and V. Wiggert, 1974 Optimizing the measurement of convective rainfall in Florida, NOAA Tech. Memo, ERL WMPO-18, Miami, 99 pp. =, 6 6. Gritith, J. Grifin, and J. Augustine, 1978: satel lite rain estimation in the Big Thompson and Johnstown flash floods, Preprints, Conference on Flash Floods: Hydro ‘meteorological Aspects (Los Angeles), AMS, Boston, pp. 451 . announcements Hydrodynamics of lakes—Call for papers [A symposium on the Hydvodynamics of Lakes, sponsored by the Hydraulics Laboratory of the Federal Institute of Tech nology, will be held 12-18 October 1978 in Lausanne, Switrer. land. It will feature four tesions: Mathematical modeling, Measuring techniques, Data analjis, and. Ait-water interface, Papers are solicited for oral (20min) and. veritten. presenta don. The written version is due prior to 1 August 1978. Symposium languages are English, French, and German, But ‘no simultaneous translation will be provided. Proceedings Will be published and distributed during the symposium; there is no participation fe, Participants should register no later than 1 August 1978, stating whether a contribution will bbe submitted and, if so, for which sesion. A detailed program will be sent to all who register before the closing date. Par: ticipants must arsange hotel accommodations. The symposium, will be held at ahe Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPF-L), Avenue de Cour 38. Registration should be directed to: Prok Walter H. Graf, Laboratoite ¢'Hydraulique (LHYDREB), Rue de Genéve 67, CH-1004 Lausnnne, Switzer Tana (tel: (021) 24.1841; telex: 24 478), Continued on page 719