Defense Space Activities
Continuation of Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program's Progress to Date Subject to Some Uncertainity Gao ID: GAO-04-778R June 24, 2004The U.S. space policy states that access to and use of space is critical to preserving peace and protecting U.S. national security and also benefits the country's civil and commercial interests. Air Force guidance explains further that access to space requires the ability to launch critical space assets, when needed, by a mix of space launch systems from standard launch pads at major support facilities. This is to ensure that a launch failure or other catastrophic event does not prevent mission success. These critical space assets, or satellites, are used for a wide range of government activities such as communications, navigation, and ballistic missile warning. The Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program, consisting of both Atlas V and Delta IV launch vehicles, was established as the strategic launch system to meet the nation's critical space mission needs and correspond with U.S. policy that requires U.S. government satellites to be launched on U.S. manufactured launch vehicles. Specifically, the EELV program's overarching objective called for the development of a national expendable launch capability for assured access to space that would reduce the overall recurring cost of launch by at least 25 percent to 50 percent while maintaining or improving the reliability and capability levels over those of the heritage systems. In its instruction on mission needs and operational requirements guidance and procedures, the Air Force states that key performance parameters are so significant that failure to meet their minimum values could be cause for program reevaluation or termination. The current EELV acquisition strategy addresses and reinforces the program's objective and system capabilities by encouraging contractor investment in launch vehicle development and promoting competition over the life of the program in an expected robust commercial marketplace. However, this commercial market never materialized. Furthermore, the availability of federal funding may affect future program strategy and condition. This letter responds to a request by the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Senate Committee on Armed Services. Our objective was to determine the extent to which the implementation of the Department of Defense's (DOD) EELV program has achieved assured access to space and projected program cost savings.
While the EELV program achieved success in meeting its assured access to space and cost-saving objective, the program continues to face various risks and cost increases that could jeopardize this objective. Since August 2002, the EELV has been launched successfully six times using two contract launch providers, and the EELV System Program Office projected 25 to 50 percent in cost savings over previous launch systems initially through July 2003 and recently in May 2004. Furthermore, three out of four of the Air Force's key performance parameters have been met, which contributed to initial program success. While the fourth parameter, the standard vehicle interface, has not yet been fully met for both launch providers' vehicles, progress has been made in achieving solutions. However, vehicle mission reliability has not been fully demonstrated. Several more launches need to take place before vehicle mission reliability can be assured. Furthermore, program risks, such as a potential single point of failure involving one upper stage engine used by both launch providers, present, at this time, some uncertainty about continuing to achieve the assured access to space part of the EELV's program objective and present cost implications. Program costs have increased over the approved 2002 program baseline estimate of $18.8 billion, resulting from the failure of the commercial market to materialize, additional access to space and mission assurance initiatives, and several other factors such as incorrect inflation assumptions and satellite weight growth. Furthermore, these cost increases triggered a requirement3 requiring the Secretary of Defense to certify that the EELV Program is critical to national security and that revised program cost estimates are reasonable. The certification process was completed on April 26, 2004, after the Secretary of Defense's certification group identified a potential cost increase of up to $13.2 billion. This figure differs from the $13.3 billion previously reported by the EELV System Program Office because it includes some overlapping costs addressed in prior DOD acquisition reports and additional unrecognized costs such as the launch providers' infrastructure costs that will be incurred in fiscal year 2005. The System Program Office disagrees with the addition of some of these previously unrecognized costs in the recently certified program baseline cost estimate and is working with the certification group to adjust the baseline by the end of June 2004. Despite this disagreement, the System Program Office, in May 2004, estimated launch cost savings of 51.4 percent over the heritage systems. The System Program Office is also in the process of modifying the existing acquisition strategy to better achieve EELV program objectives. The government, however, will continue to pay a significant share of costs until a commercial market emerges and the cost burden shifts to others requiring launch services.
GAO-04-778R, Defense Space Activities: Continuation of Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program's Progress to Date Subject to Some Uncertainity
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-778R
entitled 'Defense Space Activities: Continuation of Evolved Expendable
Launch Vehicle Program's Progress to Date Subject to Some Uncertainity'
which was released on June 24, 2004.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
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. 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.
June 24, 2004:
The Honorable Wayne Allard:
Chairman:
The Honorable Bill Nelson:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States Senate:
Subject: Defense Space Activities: Continuation of Evolved Expendable
Launch Vehicle Program's Progress to Date Subject to Some Uncertainty:
The U.S. space policy states that access to and use of space is
critical to preserving peace and protecting U.S. national security and
also benefits the country's civil and commercial interests. Air Force
guidance explains further that access to space requires the ability to
launch critical space assets, when needed, by a mix of space launch
systems from standard launch pads at major support facilities. This is
to ensure that a launch failure or other catastrophic event does not
prevent mission success. These critical space assets, or satellites,
are used for a wide range of government activities such as
communications, navigation, and ballistic missile warning. The Evolved
Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program, consisting of both Atlas V
and Delta IV launch vehicles, was established as the strategic launch
system to meet the nation's critical space mission needs and correspond
with U.S. policy that requires U.S. government satellites to be
launched on U.S. manufactured launch vehicles. The program was
implemented in 1995 to support and sustain assured access to space with
more affordable launch vehicles, provided by two contract launch
providers, that replaced the past, or "heritage," systems such as the
Delta II, Atlas II, Titan II, and Titan IV.
Specifically, the EELV program's overarching objective called for the
development of a national expendable launch capability for assured
access to space that would reduce the overall recurring cost of launch
by at least 25 percent to 50 percent while maintaining or improving the
reliability and capability levels over those of the heritage systems.
The Air Force further identified four EELV system capabilities referred
to as key performance parameters--mass to orbit,[Footnote 1] vehicle
design reliability, standard launch pads, and standard vehicle
interfaces[Footnote 2]--considered essential for mission success. In
its instruction on mission needs and operational requirements guidance
and procedures, the Air Force states that key performance parameters
are so significant that failure to meet their minimum values could be
cause for program reevaluation or termination.
The current EELV acquisition strategy addresses and reinforces the
program's objective and system capabilities by encouraging contractor
investment in launch vehicle development and promoting competition over
the life of the program in an expected robust commercial marketplace.
However, this commercial market never materialized. Furthermore, the
availability of federal funding may affect future program strategy and
condition. For instance, GAO has stated that the U.S. government's
long-term financial condition presents enormous challenges to the
nation. This condition is likely to affect a broad range of federal
programs.
This letter responds to your February 25, 2004, request. As agreed with
your offices, our objective was to determine the extent to which the
implementation of the Department of Defense's (DOD) EELV program has
achieved assured access to space and projected program cost savings. On
April 6, 2004, we provided your offices with a briefing on our
observations regarding the EELV program's achievements. As requested,
we are transmitting the briefing (encl. I) in this letter.
In conducting our work, we reviewed laws, presidential directives, and
DOD and Air Force policy documents on assured access to space, as well
as pertinent EELV program reports and related material, to determine
the EELV program's progress in achieving program mission objectives and
cost goals. We interviewed responsible DOD, Air Force, and other
government officials from, among others, the EELV System Program
Office; Office of the Secretary of Defense; and the Cost Analysis
Improvement Group. We also interviewed Air Force officials at offices
of the Secretary of the Air Force, Air Force Operational Test and
Evaluation Center, and Air Force Space Command and responsible space
access officials at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Furthermore, we inspected the Delta IV launch site at Vandenberg Air
Force Base, California, and toured the Atlas V production facility in
Denver, Colorado. Additionally, we received briefings by both launch
providers. We discussed relevant information with appropriate officials
to assess its validity and determined that the data were sufficiently
reliable to answer our objective. Our review was conducted from April
2003 to May 2004 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
Summary:
While the EELV program achieved success in meeting its assured access
to space and cost-saving objective, the program continues to face
various risks and cost increases that could jeopardize this objective.
Since August 2002, the EELV has been launched successfully six times
using two contract launch providers, and the EELV System Program Office
projected 25 to 50 percent in cost savings over previous launch systems
initially through July 2003 and recently in May 2004. Furthermore,
three out of four of the Air Force's key performance parameters have
been met, which contributed to initial program success. While the
fourth parameter, the standard vehicle interface, has not yet been
fully met for both launch providers' vehicles, progress has been made
in achieving solutions. However, vehicle mission reliability, which is
the ability to complete the entire mission successfully (i.e., from
launch to satellite replacement), has not been fully demonstrated.
Several more launches need to take place before vehicle mission
reliability can be assured. Furthermore, program risks, such as a
potential single point of failure involving one upper stage engine used
by both launch providers, present, at this time, some uncertainty about
continuing to achieve the assured access to space part of the EELV's
program objective and present cost implications.
Program costs have increased over the approved 2002 program baseline
estimate of $18.8 billion, resulting from the failure of the commercial
market to materialize, additional access to space and mission assurance
initiatives, and several other factors such as incorrect inflation
assumptions and satellite weight growth. Specifically, the EELV System
Program Office reported about $13.3 billion in program cost increases
over the life of the program, as reflected in previous DOD acquisition
reports. These cost increases impact the cost-savings goal, although
the significance of that impact cannot be determined until the Air
Force submits a revised program cost baseline. Furthermore, these cost
increases triggered a requirement[Footnote 3] requiring the Secretary
of Defense to certify that the EELV Program is critical to national
security and that revised program cost estimates are reasonable. The
certification process was completed on April 26, 2004, after the
Secretary of Defense's certification group identified a potential cost
increase of up to $13.2 billion. This figure differs from the $13.3
billion previously reported by the EELV System Program Office because
it includes some overlapping costs addressed in prior DOD acquisition
reports and additional unrecognized costs such as the launch providers'
infrastructure costs that will be incurred in fiscal year 2005. The
System Program Office disagrees with the addition of some of these
previously unrecognized costs in the recently certified program
baseline cost estimate and is working with the certification group to
adjust the baseline by the end of June 2004. Despite this disagreement,
the System Program Office, in May 2004, estimated launch cost savings
of 51.4 percent over the heritage systems. The System Program Office is
also in the process of modifying the existing acquisition strategy to
better achieve EELV program objectives. The government, however, will
continue to pay a significant share of costs until a commercial market
emerges and the cost burden shifts to others requiring launch services.
Background:
In mid-1994, the Air Force conducted a study to address the
deficiencies and the rising costs of space launch. While considering
options, the Air Force determined that continued production, operation,
and maintenance of existing launch vehicle systems were not cost-
effective. Increasing expenses associated with these launch vehicle
systems and their extensive infrastructure along with outdated
technologies, designs, and manufacturing techniques generated the need
for a more capable, affordable, and flexible launch vehicle system.
Later that year, a plan was selected to improve, modernize, and evolve
existing expendable launch vehicles that served as the genesis of the
EELV program. By May 1995, the Air Force initiated a new acquisition
strategy to obtain launch services using the EELV system. While the Air
Force's initial acquisition strategy was to select one contractor for
final development and production, in November 1997 it approved a
revised acquisition strategy designed to maintain the ongoing
competition between the two previous pre-engineering phase contractors.
The revised strategy was based on forecasts that growth in the
commercial space launch services market would support more than one
contract launch provider.
The EELV Program Acquisition Strategy was structured to break new
ground in the area of military and commercial integration of the space-
related defense industrial base with the commercial industrial base.
This strategy forged a partnership between the government and industry
to gain affordable and assured access to space by
* promoting competition for launch services over the life of the
program;
* encouraging contractor investment and innovation for launch vehicle
development;
* procuring launch services that include the vehicle, the liftoff, and
flight to orbit under one contract instead of procuring launch vehicles
and launch operations under two or more separate contracts;
* leveraging the benefits of a robust commercial marketplace; and:
* providing the government with free and open access to contractor
performance data.
This acquisition strategy permitted the government to obtain launch
services that placed a satellite in the proper orbit at a fixed price
instead of having to buy launch vehicles on a cost reimbursement basis
while paying for launch pad operations, maintenance, repairs, and
improvements.
Despite the initial promise of the EELV Program Acquisition Strategy,
the expected robust commercial market for space activities never
materialized. Furthermore, future federal funding may affect the
program's acquisition strategy and condition. GAO has recently stated
that the U.S. government's long-term financial condition and fiscal
outlook present enormous challenges to the nation and to the role of
the federal government. The growing long-term fiscal imbalance will
continue to constrain the federal budget in future years. These
constraints will, in turn, affect DOD investments in the EELV program.
Progress Made in Achieving Assured Access to Space and Cost Savings
Objective, but Program Risks Present Some Uncertainty for Continued
Access to Space:
The EELV System Program Office has made progress in implementing DOD's
assured access to space program objective through early successful
launches and cost savings over heritage systems. While three of four
performance parameters have been met, certain elements of the remaining
performance parameter are currently unrealized. Nevertheless, progress
is being made to meet them. However, program risks present some
uncertainty in continuing to achieve the access to space objective.
Progress Was Made in Achieving EELV Program's Objective:
The EELV System Program Office and two launch providers, working
together, have met the assured access to space objective by completing
six consecutive successful missions (two government missions and four
commercial missions) between August 2002 and August 2003. According to
a December 2002 Air Force Test and Evaluation Center Operational
Assessment report, the EELV system is a significant improvement over
the heritage launch systems it replaces. For example, the report stated
that the level of standardization implemented under EELV would reduce
costs and launch schedule delays and allow for contingencies that the
heritage systems could never provide. Further, according to the EELV
System Program Office, launch services acquired under the current
government contract met projected program cost savings of 25 percent to
50 percent--projected at 50.8 percent in July 2003 and at 51.4 percent
in May 2004--over heritage launch systems. We were unable to verify the
statements or projections.
This early success is based, in part, on the program structure,
management initiatives, and initial favorable launch service costs. For
example, in order to monitor risk, System Program Office Integrated
Product Teams, comprised of government and industry representatives,
were established with the responsibility to address issues before they
become serious matters of concern. The EELV System Program Office and
launch providers also maintain open lines of communication, interacting
on a daily basis to gauge program progress, resolve issues, and monitor
performance. Further, the government benefited from "Initial Launch
Services" contracts that reflected substantially lower launch services
prices to the government that were submitted in anticipation of a
robust commercial marketplace. This, in turn, was to allow the launch
providers to spread substantial fixed costs among all of the
participants in the market.
While Progress Continues on the Remaining Performance Parameter, Risks
Present Some Uncertainty for Future Mission Success:
According to the EELV System Program Office, the EELV systems have met
three of four performance parameters that the Air Force considers
essential for mission success. The EELV Atlas V and Delta IV systems
have not met elements within the fourth parameter--standard vehicle
interface. Furthermore vehicle mission reliability, which is the
ability to complete the entire mission from launch to placement of the
satellite in orbit, has not been fully demonstrated. With regard to the
parameter's elements, both families of launch vehicles (i.e., the Delta
IV and Atlas V systems) have vibration problems that exceed the
vehicles' established performance parameters. The vibrations, caused by
the separation of the nose-cone from the Delta IV launch vehicle, and
the noise, generated from the Atlas V solid-fuel rocket engines during
initial launch, exceed acceptable performance parameters. The EELV
System Program Office and its launch providers are currently working on
solutions to these problems. Regarding the Delta IV vehicle, a design
solution is being pursued, and a modification is being tested for the
Atlas V vehicle. With regard to vehicle mission reliability, according
to DOD and Air Force test and evaluation and Space Command program
officials, determination of the EELV systems' mission reliability is
typically demonstrated by 10 to 30 successful launches within the same
family, class, and configuration of launch vehicles (e.g., a Delta IV
medium launch vehicle with two strap-on solid rocket engines). Thus,
several more launches need to take place before vehicle mission
reliability can be fully demonstrated.
While progress regarding all performance parameters has been made,
several program risks present some uncertainty in achieving continued
assured access to space. First, both launch providers use a variant of
the RL-10 engine for the EELV's upper-stage that is a potential single
point of failure for the system. While the RL-10 engine has a proven
reliability record, if a launch failure occurred and were attributed to
the engine, neither launch provider would be able to launch its vehicle
until an investigation was completed. The Air Force has funded a study
to evaluate the engine's critical components, producibility, and
viability. Second, even though the Atlas V launch contractor has 13 RD-
180 launch vehicle engines in its U.S. inventory, continued engine
availability remains uncertain because the engine is produced solely in
Russia. To address this issue, that contractor plans to build a co-
production facility in the United States. However, the operation of a
U.S. co-production facility is not scheduled until 2008; and the first
mission-ready, co-produced U.S. RD-180 engines may not occur until
2012, which is over halfway through the EELV program life. If the RD-
180 U.S. co-production facility is not completed, U.S. dependence on
the Russian-made engine will be prolonged. And third, the risk of not
having an operational West Coast launch pad for the Atlas V vehicle
leaves only the Delta IV family of vehicles capable of launching from
both coasts. Although the Atlas V contractor has begun building a West
Coast launch pad, it is not scheduled to be operational until May 2005
with the first Atlas V launch occurring in October 2005. While the EELV
System Program Office is working to mitigate these risks, assured
access to space is subject to some uncertainty. Mitigating these risks
to avoid the possibility of mission failure will have an impact on
cost, as discussed in the following section.
EELV Program Costs Have Significantly Increased, Potentially Impacting
Cost Savings and Prompting a Revised Acquisition Strategy and Contract
Approach:
Increased program costs resulting, in part, from future infrastructure,
launch, and other costs could impact the EELV program's cost savings
objective. However, the specific impact has not yet been determined.
This increase in costs was caused, in part, by the failure of the
commercial market for launches to materialize. EELV launch providers
claimed that this market failure negatively affected their financial
condition, prompting the need for a revised Air Force acquisition
strategy and contract approach to assure access to space with two
viable launch providers.
Program and Launch Costs Have Increased for Several Reasons,
Potentially Impacting Cost Savings:
Program and launch costs increased by about $13.3 billion over the
approved 2002 baseline estimate of $18.8 billion for several reasons,
as reflected in DOD's December 2003 Selected Acquisition Report and
other program documentation. First, program initiatives to mitigate the
risk of a launch failure and increase mission success and safety
required additional funding. The EELV System Program Office considered
these initiatives critical to improve launch vehicle system reliability
and support assured access to space. Next, several other factors such
as launch reallocations, contract modifications, satellite weight
growth, and inflation contributed to cost growth. Furthermore, the
commercial market failed to materialize as expected, significantly
raising costs to the launch providers under the launch services
contracts and eventually causing them to renegotiate, with the
government paying a larger portion of the fixed costs. The EELV System
Program Office reported the cost of these initiatives and other factors
as follows:
* Assured access to space and safety initiatives costing $538.8 million
through fiscal year 2009.
* Mission assurance initiatives for fiscal years 2010 through 2020
costing $527 million.
* Reallocation of seven launches from one contractor to the second for
Procurement Integrity Act[Footnote 4] violations and Air Force support
for the second West Coast launch pad totaling $227 million.
* Satellite weight growth that required the use of larger and more
expensive launch vehicles costing $1.335 billion.
* Incorrect inflation assumptions of $2.821 billion.
Price increases on the second and all subsequent launch services
contract awards costing $7.807 billion due to the lack of a commercial
market.
According to the EELV System Program Office, the next contract for up
to 20 launches is anticipated to be completed in the summer of 2004 but
might be delayed until Procurement Integrity Act sanctions against one
launch contractor are lifted. The government may procure individual
launches on an "as needed" basis until the sanctions are lifted and a
new contract takes effect.
Because of these realized and expected cost increases, the EELV Program
Office anticipated a breach of the 25 percent cost increase threshold
established by title 10 United States Code section 2433, or the Nunn-
McCurdy Act.[Footnote 5] As a result of the anticipated breach, the
Office of the Secretary of Defense certified that:
* this acquisition program is essential to the national security;
there are no alternatives to this program that will provide equal or
greater military capability at less cost;
* the new estimates of the program acquisition unit cost or procurement
unit cost are reasonable; and:
* the management structure for this program is adequate to manage and
control total program acquisition unit cost or procurement unit cost.
To provide a basis for this certification, the Office of the Secretary
of Defense initiated an examination by the Cost Analysis Improvement
Group, an independent DOD audit group responsible for estimating and
verifying costs, to review and validate program costs. Based on the
Cost Analysis Improvement Group's examination, the Office of the
Secretary of Defense's certification was completed on April 26, 2004.
This group reported additional cost increases built into the revised
program cost baseline based on 137 operational missions instead of the
previous 181 manifested missions. The Cost Analysis Improvement Group's
revised estimates included about $13.2 billion in potential costs
consisting of the following:[Footnote 6]
* Annual fixed infrastructure costs to fund the EELV launch complex,
supplier readiness, production facilities, a government mission
director, and mission assurance. Mission assurance costs occurring in
fiscal years 2010 through 2020 will be incorporated into annual fixed
infrastructure costs under a new acquisition strategy and contracting
approach.
* Fiscal year 2005 infrastructure costs to be recovered by the launch
providers during fiscal years 2006 through 2009.
* RD-180 engine co-production development costs billed to the
government during fiscal years 2006 through 2015.
* Launch providers' recovery of losses incurred on the first and second
launch services contracts to be recouped during fiscal years 2006
through 2009.
Some of these costs had not been included in previous EELV DOD reports.
Conversely, annual fixed infrastructure costs contain some mission
assurance cost amounts (e.g., video instrumentation for selected
flights) that were previously included in these reports.
The EELV System Program Office, however, disagrees with the Cost
Analysis Improvement Group about including costs of the Atlas V RD-180
engine co-production development, recovery of launch providers'
financial losses from previous launch agreements, and fiscal year 2005
infrastructure cost recovery in the revised EELV program cost estimate.
The EELV System Program Office's position is that the Atlas V RD-180
engine co-production development costs, launch service losses, and
fiscal year 2005 infrastructure costs should be borne by the launch
providers. While the Office of the Secretary of Defense certified the
program for continuation based on the Cost Analysis Improvement Group's
cost estimate, it directed the Air Force and the Cost Group to update
their estimates. The Air Force is to submit a revised program cost
baseline within 60 days of the April 26, 2004, certification. Until the
revised program cost baseline is established, the specific impact of
program cost increases on program cost savings cannot be determined.
Nevertheless, using its own estimate, the EELV System Program Office in
May 2004 projected life-cycle program cost saving of 51.4 percent over
the heritage systems.
Acquisition Strategy Will Be Revised to Restructure Contracting
Provisions:
According to the two launch providers, they have incurred substantial
financial losses as a result of the failure of commercial launch market
to materialize, leading them to work with the EELV System Program
Office to modify the acquisition strategy and contract approach. They
are considering changing from a "fee for service" firm fixed price
contract to an approach that will use a combination of fixed price
contracts for actual launch services and cost reimbursement/fixed price
contracts to pay for contractors' fixed costs. Under this new approach,
the EELV System Program Office will pay for infrastructure upkeep
previously absorbed by the launch provider.
Other key features of this revised acquisition strategy include:
* maintaining mission success as the number one priority and providing
launch providers with incentives to achieve this goal;
* encouraging the launch providers to innovate and increase launch
market business; and:
* maintaining an affordable program with balanced production of launch
vehicles given limited competition.
According to the launch providers, changes in the acquisition strategy
and contract approach are necessary for each provider to avoid a
repetition of their financial losses. They believe this contract
approach may sustain their technical and financial viability.
Furthermore, the Under Secretary of the Air Force stated in recent
congressional hearings that it was important for the Air Force to
develop a strategy that "does not cause either provider to go into a
death spiral of trying to be competitive or face extinction.":
Conclusions:
Having a strategic launch capability, as cited in U.S. space policy, is
critical to the nation. However, program risks and significant cost
increases create some uncertainty about the continued achievement of
assured access to space. Because a robust commercial space launch
market may not materialize for some time, the government might be
burdened with a larger share of launch providers' fixed costs. In
addition, continued escalation of EELV program costs, in a fiscally
constrained environment with intense funding competition, is likely to
raise more concerns about the program's strategy, execution, funding,
and risk mitigation initiatives. As we have noted, key decisions or
program changes resulting from the recently completed certification
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Air Force's revised
program cost baseline due in June 2004, and expected revisions to the
launch acquisition strategy and contract approach will affect the EELV
program's strategy and funding. They could also negatively impact
mission success if such decisions and changes are not carefully
conceived and applied.
Agency Comments:
We requested official comments from DOD. The department's Office of
Networks and Information Integration reviewed a draft of this letter
and elected not to provide written or oral comments.
We will send copies of this letter to appropriate congressional
committees; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of the Air Force;
and the Director, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program. In
addition, the letter will be available at no charge on our Web site at
http://www.gao.gov. If you have any questions, please contact me at
202-512-6020. James Bancroft, Aisha Cabrer, Jane Hunt, Kenneth Patton,
and George Vindigni were major contributors to this letter.
Signed by:
Raymond J. Decker:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
Enclosure:
[See PDF for images]
[End of slide presentation]
(350357):
FOOTNOTES
[1] Mass to orbit is the requirement to lift a certain amount of
payload to a specific orbit.
[2] Common launch vehicle interfaces such as mechanical and electrical
connections, ground support equipment, services, and environmental
conditioning provide the flexibility to change the launch vehicle in
case there's a major problem requiring extended repair.
[3] 10 U.S.C. § 2433 commonly referred to as the "Nunn-McCurdy Act"
requires notification of Congress when major acquisition programs
exceed specific cost thresholds.
[4] 41 U.S.C. § 423. The Procurement Integrity Act restricts the
disclosing and obtaining of contractor bid or proposal information.
[5] 10 U.S.C. § 2433.
[6] Individual costs are excluded from the estimates because some of
those costs are proprietary.
