Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites
Improvements Needed in Continuity Planning and Involvement of Key Users Gao ID: GAO-10-799 September 1, 2010The Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), with the aid of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is to procure the next generation of geostationary operational environmental satellites, called Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R (GOES-R) series. The GOES-R series is to replace the current series of satellites, which will likely begin to reach the end of their useful lives in approximately 2015. This new series is considered critical to the United States' ability to maintain the continuity of data required for weather forecasting through the year 2028. GAO was asked to (1) determine the status of the GOES-R acquisition; (2) evaluate whether NOAA has established adequate contingency plans in the event of delays; and (3) assess NOAA's efforts to identify GOES data users, prioritize their data needs, and communicate with them about the program's status. To do so, GAO analyzed contractor and program data and interviewed officials from NOAA, NASA, and other federal agencies that rely on GOES data.
NOAA has made progress on the GOES-R acquisition, but key instruments have experienced challenges and important milestones have been delayed. The GOES-R program awarded key contracts for its flight and ground projects, and these are in development. However, two instruments have experienced technical issues that led to contract cost increases, and significant work remains on other development efforts. In addition, since 2006, the launch dates of the first two satellites in the series have been delayed by about 3 years. As a result, NOAA may not be able to meet its policy of having a backup satellite in orbit at all times, which could lead to a gap in coverage if GOES-14 or GOES-15 fails prematurely. Even though there may be a gap in backup coverage, NOAA has not established adequate continuity plans for its geostationary satellites. To its credit, NOAA has established a policy to always have a backup satellite available and high-level plans if that policy is not met. Specifically, in the event of a satellite failure with no backup available, NOAA plans to reduce to a single satellite and, if available, rely on a satellite from an international partner. However, NOAA does not have plans that include processes, procedures, and resources needed to transition to a single or an international satellite. Without such plans, NOAA faces an increased risk that users will lose access to critical data. While NOAA has identified GOES data users and involved internal users in developing and prioritizing the GOES-R requirements, it has not adequately involved other federal users that rely on GOES data. Specifically, NOAA's processes for developing and prioritizing satellite requirements do not include documented input from other federal agencies. Further, since 2006, the GOES-R program has undergone significant changes (such as the removal of certain satellite data products), but these have not been communicated to federal agencies. Until improvements are made in NOAA's processes for involving key federal users, these users may not be able to meet mission requirements. GAO is recommending that NOAA address weaknesses in its continuity plans and improve its processes for involving other federal agencies. In commenting on a draft of this report, the Secretary of Commerce agreed with GAO's recommendations and identified plans for implementing them.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: David A. Powner Team: Government Accountability Office: Information Technology Phone: (202) 512-9286GAO-10-799, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites: Improvements Needed in Continuity Planning and Involvement of Key Users
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-799
entitled 'Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites:
Improvements Needed in Continuity Planning and Involvement of Key
Users' which was released on October 1, 2010.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
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.
Report to Congressional Committees:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
September 2010:
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites:
Improvements Needed in Continuity Planning and Involvement of Key
Users:
GAO-10-799:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-10-799, a report to congressional committees.
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Department of Commerce‘s National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), with the aid of the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA), is to procure the next generation of
geostationary operational environmental satellites, called
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R (GOES-R) series.
The GOES-R series is to replace the current series of satellites,
which will likely begin to reach the end of their useful lives in
approximately 2015. This new series is considered critical to the
United States‘ ability to maintain the continuity of data required for
weather forecasting through the year 2028.
GAO was asked to (1) determine the status of the GOES-R acquisition;
(2) evaluate whether NOAA has established adequate contingency plans
in the event of delays; and (3) assess NOAA‘s efforts to identify GOES
data users, prioritize their data needs, and communicate with them
about the program‘s status. To do so, GAO analyzed contractor and
program data and interviewed officials from NOAA, NASA, and other
federal agencies that rely on GOES data.
What GAO Found:
NOAA has made progress on the GOES-R acquisition, but key instruments
have experienced challenges and important milestones have been
delayed. The GOES-R program awarded key contracts for its flight and
ground projects, and these are in development. However, two
instruments have experienced technical issues that led to contract
cost increases, and significant work remains on other development
efforts. In addition, since 2006, the launch dates of the first two
satellites in the series have been delayed by about 3 years. As a
result, NOAA may not be able to meet its policy of having a backup
satellite in orbit at all times, which could lead to a gap in coverage
if GOES-14 or GOES-15 fails prematurely (see graphic).
Figure: Potential Gap in GOES Coverage:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
GOES-13:
Launch date: 2006;
Post launch test period: 2006;
Available as backup: 2007-2010;
Operational period: 2010-2015.
GOES-14:
Launch date: 2009;
Post launch test period: 2009;
Available as backup: 201--2011;
Operational period: 2012-2016.
GOES-15:
Launch date: 2010;
Post launch test period: 2010;
Available as backup: 2010-2015;
Operational period: 2015-2020.
GOES-R:
Launch date: 2015;
Post launch test period: 2015;
Available as backup: 2016;
Operational period: 2017-2020.
GOES-S:
Launch date: 2017;
Post launch test period: 2017;
Available as backup: 2017-2020;
Operational period: 2020.
Projected gap in backup coverage: Early 2015 through early 2016.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of figure]
Even though there may be a gap in backup coverage, NOAA has not
established adequate continuity plans for its geostationary
satellites. To its credit, NOAA has established a policy to always
have a backup satellite available and high-level plans if that policy
is not met. Specifically, in the event of a satellite failure with no
backup available, NOAA plans to reduce to a single satellite and, if
available, rely on a satellite from an international partner. However,
NOAA does not have plans that include processes, procedures, and
resources needed to transition to a single or an international
satellite. Without such plans, NOAA faces an increased risk that users
will lose access to critical data.
While NOAA has identified GOES data users and involved internal users
in developing and prioritizing the GOES-R requirements, it has not
adequately involved other federal users that rely on GOES data.
Specifically, NOAA‘s processes for developing and prioritizing
satellite requirements do not include documented input from other
federal agencies. Further, since 2006, the GOES-R program has
undergone significant changes (such as the removal of certain
satellite data products), but these have not been communicated to
federal agencies. Until improvements are made in NOAA‘s processes for
involving key federal users, these users may not be able to meet
mission requirements.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO is recommending that NOAA address weaknesses in its continuity
plans and improve its processes for involving other federal agencies.
In commenting on a draft of this report, the Secretary of Commerce
agreed with GAO‘s recommendations and identified plans for
implementing them.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click
on [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-799]. For more
information, contact David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286, pownerd@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Background:
GOES-R Is in Development, but Delays in Key Program Milestones Have
Endangered Satellite Continuity:
NOAA Has Not Established Adequate Continuity Plans for Its
Geostationary Satellites:
NOAA's Efforts to Involve External GOES Data Users, Prioritize Their
Data Needs, and Communicate Program Status Have Shortfalls:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Commerce:
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Summary of the Procurement History of GOES:
Table 2: Originally Planned GOES-R Series Instruments, as of August
2006:
Table 3: Key Changes to the GOES-R Program:
Table 4: Description of Flight Project Development Efforts, as of June
2010:
Table 5: Description of Ground Project Development Efforts, as of June
2010:
Table 6: Status of Flight Project, as of June 2010:
Table 7: Status of Ground Project, as of June 2010:
Table 8: Delays in Satellite Launch Dates:
Table 9: Key GOES Data Users:
Figures:
Figure 1: Approximate GOES Geographic Coverage:
Figure 2: Generic GOES Data Relay Pattern:
Figure 3: GOES-R Program Office Structure and Staffing:
Figure 4: Planned Schedule for GOES-R Program and Key Development
Efforts, as of June 2010:
Figure 5: Continuity of Satellite Operations:
Figure 6: Approximate Geographic Coverage in a Single GOES
Configuration:
Figure 7: Nine Current Satellite Products Removed from the GOES-R
Program Baseline:
Abbreviations:
GOES-R: Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R series:
NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration:
NESDIS: National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information
Service:
NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
NWS: National Weather Service:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
September 1, 2010:
The Honorable Bart Gordon:
Chairman:
The Honorable Ralph Hall:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Science and Technology:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Brad Miller:
Chairman:
The Honorable Paul Broun, Jr.
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight:
Committee on Science and Technology:
House of Representatives:
Operational geostationary environmental satellites play a critical
role in our nation's weather forecasting. These satellites--which are
managed by the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)--provide critical information on
atmospheric, oceanic, climatic, and solar conditions that help
meteorologists observe and predict global and local weather events.
They also provide a means to identify severe storm conditions, such as
hurricanes and tornadoes, and to track the movement and intensity of
these storms once they develop.
NOAA, with the aid of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), is procuring the next generation of
geostationary satellites, called the Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellite-R (GOES-R) series. The GOES-R series is to
replace the current series of satellites, which will likely begin to
reach the end of their useful lives in approximately 2015. This new
series is expected to mark the first major technological advance in
GOES instrumentation since 1994. It is also considered critical to the
United States' ability to maintain the continuity of data required for
weather forecasting through the year 2028.
This report responds to your request that we review NOAA's management
of the GOES-R program. Specifically, we were asked to (1) determine
the status of the GOES-R acquisition, including cost, schedule, and
performance trends; (2) evaluate whether NOAA has established adequate
contingency plans in the event of delays; and (3) assess NOAA's
efforts to identify GOES data users, prioritize their data needs, and
communicate with them about the program's status.
To determine GOES-R acquisition status, we evaluated program
documents, including acquisition plans, contractor performance reports
on development efforts, and executive briefings. To evaluate whether
NOAA has established contingency plans, we compared NOAA's contingency
planning documentation to federal requirements and industry best
practices and also met with key GOES data users to determine the
potential impact of NOAA's plans on their data needs. To determine the
adequacy of NOAA's efforts to identify GOES users, prioritize their
data needs, and communicate program status, we compared relevant
program documents, including acquisition plans, user requirements, and
GOES user group meeting minutes, to industry best practices. We also
interviewed key users of GOES data to determine whether NOAA's efforts
to prioritize their data needs and communicate program status and
changes were adequate.
We conducted this performance audit from October 2009 to September
2010, in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Appendix I
contains further details on our objectives, scope, and methodology.
Background:
Since the 1960s, geostationary and polar-orbiting environmental
satellites have been used by the United States to provide
meteorological data for weather observation, research, and
forecasting. NOAA's National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
Information Service (NESDIS) is responsible for managing the civilian
operational geostationary and polar-orbiting satellite systems as two
separate programs, called GOES and the Polar-orbiting Operational
Environmental Satellites, respectively.
Unlike polar-orbiting satellites, which constantly circle the earth in
a relatively low polar orbit, geostationary satellites can maintain a
constant view of the earth from a high orbit of about 22,300 miles in
space. NOAA operates GOES as a two-satellite system that is primarily
focused on the United States (see figure 1). These satellites are
uniquely positioned to provide timely environmental data about the
earth's atmosphere, surface, cloud cover, and the space environment to
meteorologists and their audiences. They also observe the development
of hazardous weather, such as hurricanes and severe thunderstorms, and
track their movement and intensity to reduce or avoid major losses of
property and life. Furthermore, the satellites' ability to provide
broad, continuously updated coverage of atmospheric conditions over
land and oceans is important to NOAA's weather forecasting operations.
Figure 1: Approximate GOES Geographic Coverage:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Illustration depicts the coverage and overlap of coverage of GOES-East
and GOES-West.
Sources: NOAA (data), MapArt (map).
[End of figure]
To provide continuous satellite coverage, NOAA acquires several
satellites at a time as part of a series and launches new satellites
every few years (see table 1).[Footnote 1] NOAA's policy is to have
two operational satellites and one backup satellite in orbit at all
times.
Table 1: Summary of the Procurement History of GOES:
Series name: Original GOES[B];
Procurement duration[A]: 1970-1987;
Satellites: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
Series name: GOES I-M;
Procurement duration[A]: 1985-2001;
Satellites: 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
Series name: GOES-N;
Procurement duration[A]: 1998-2010;
Satellites: 13, 14, 15, Q[C].
Series name: GOES-R;
Procurement duration[A]: 2008-2017;
Satellites: R, S.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[A] Duration includes time from contract award to final satellite
launch.
[B] The procurement of these satellites consisted of four separate
contracts for (1) two early prototype satellites and GOES-1, (2) GOES-
2 and -3, (3) GOES-4 through -6, and (4) GOES-G (failed on launch) and
GOES-7.
[C] NOAA decided not to exercise the option for this satellite.
[End of table]
Five GOES satellites--GOES-11, GOES-12, GOES-13, GOES-14, and GOES-15--
are currently in orbit. Both GOES-11 and GOES-13 are operational
satellites, with GOES-11 covering the west and GOES-13 the east. GOES-
14 is currently a backup for the other two satellites should they
experience any degradation in service. The final satellite in the
series, GOES-15, is undergoing a post-launch test period until October
2010, at which time it will also be put in on-orbit storage mode. GOES-
12 is at the end of its service life, but is being used to provide
coverage of South America. The GOES-R series is the next generation of
satellites that NOAA is planning; the satellites are planned for
launch beginning in 2015.
Each of the operational geostationary satellites continuously
transmits raw environmental data to NOAA ground stations. The data are
processed at these ground stations and transmitted back to the
satellite for broadcast to primary weather services and the global
research community in the United States and abroad. Raw and processed
data are also distributed to users via ground stations through other
communication channels, such as dedicated private communication lines
and the Internet. Figure 2 depicts a generic data relay pattern from
the geostationary satellites to the ground stations and commercial
terminals.
Figure 2: Generic GOES Data Relay Pattern:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Depicted on the illustration:
GOES satellite:
Raw environmental data sent to ground station;
Processed environmental data sent back to GOES;
Processed environmental data broadcast to users.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of figure]
Overview of the GOES-R Program:
NOAA plans for the GOES-R program to improve on the technology of
prior series, in terms of both system and instrument improvements. The
system improvements are expected to fulfill more demanding user
requirements by updating the satellite data more often and providing
satellite products to users more quickly. The instrument improvements
are expected to significantly increase the clarity and precision of
the observed environmental data. NOAA originally planned to acquire
six different types of instruments. Furthermore, two of these
instruments--the Advanced Baseline Imager and the Hyperspectral
Environmental Suite--were considered to be the most critical because
they would provide data for key weather products. Table 2 summarizes
the originally planned instruments and their expected capabilities.
Table 2: Originally Planned GOES-R Series Instruments, as of August
2006:
Planned instrument: Advanced Baseline Imager;
Description: Expected to provide variable area imagery and radiometric
information of the earth's surface, atmosphere, and cloud cover. Key
features include:
* monitoring and tracking severe weather;
* providing images of clouds to support forecasts; and;
* providing higher resolution, faster coverage, and broader coverage
simultaneously.
Planned instrument: Hyperspectral Environmental Suite[A];
Description: Expected to provide information about the earth's surface
to aid in the prediction of weather and climate monitoring. Key
features include:
* providing atmospheric moisture and temperature profiles of the
rapidly evolving pre-storm convective environment to support forecasts
and warnings of high-impact weather phenomena;
* monitoring coastal regions for ecosystem health, water quality,
coastal erosion, and harmful algal blooms; and;
* providing higher resolution and faster coverage.
Planned instrument: Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
Description: Expected to continuously monitor total lightning (in-
cloud and cloud-to-ground) activity over the United States and
adjacent oceans and to provide a more complete dataset than previously
possible. Key features include:
* detecting lightning activity as an indicator of severe storms and
convective weather hazard impacts to aviation, and;
* providing a new capability to GOES for long-term mapping of total
lightning that only previously existed on NASA low-earth-orbiting
research satellites.
Planned instrument: Magnetometer;
Description: Expected to provide information on the general level of
geomagnetic activity, monitor current systems in space, and permit
detection of magnetopause crossings, sudden storm commencements, and
substorms.
Planned instrument: Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
Description: Expected to provide information on space weather to aid
in the prediction of particle precipitation, which causes disturbance
and disruption of radio communications and navigation systems. Key
features include:
* measuring magnetic fields and charged particles;
* providing improved heavy ion detection, adding low-energy electrons
and protons; and;
* enabling early warnings for satellite and power grid operation,
telecom services, astronauts, and airlines.
Planned instrument: Solar Imaging Suite[B];
Description: Expected to provide coverage of the entire dynamic range
of solar X-ray features, from coronal holes to X-class flares, as well
as estimate the measure of temperature and emissions. Key features
include:
* providing images of the sun and measuring solar output to monitor
solar storms, and;
* providing improved imager capability.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[A] The Hyperspectral Environmental Suite was canceled in September
2006.
[B] The Solar Imaging Suite was divided into two separate
acquisitions, the Solar Ultraviolet Imager and the Extreme
Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor.
[End of table]
However, in September 2006, NOAA decided to reduce the scope and
technical complexity of the GOES-R program because of expectations
that total costs, which were originally estimated to be $6.2 billion,
could reach $11.4 billion.[Footnote 2] Specifically, NOAA reduced the
minimum number of satellites from four to two, canceled plans for
developing the Hyperspectral Environmental Suite (which reduced the
number of planned satellite products from 81 to 68), and divided the
Solar Imaging Suite into two separate acquisitions. In light of the
cancellation of the Hyperspectral Environmental Suite, NOAA decided to
use the planned Advanced Baseline Imager to develop certain satellite
data products that were originally to be produced by this instrument.
The agency estimated that the revised program would cost $7 billion.
Subsequently, NOAA made several other important decisions about the
cost and scope of the GOES-R program.[Footnote 3] In May 2007, NOAA
had an independent cost estimate completed for the GOES-R program.
After reconciling the program office's cost estimate of $7 billion
with the independent cost estimate of about $9 billion, the agency
established a new program cost estimate of $7.67 billion. This was an
increase of $670 million from the previous estimate. Further, in
November 2007, to mitigate the risk that costs would rise, program
officials decided to remove selected program requirements from the
baseline program and treat them as contract options that could be
exercised if funds allow. These requirements include the number of
products to be distributed, the time to deliver the remaining products
(product latency), and how often these products are updated with new
satellite data (refresh rate). For example, program officials
eliminated the requirement to develop and distribute 34 of the 68
envisioned products, including aircraft icing threat, turbulence, and
visibility. Program officials included the restoration of the
products, latency, and refresh rates as options in the ground system
contract that could be acquired at a later time. Program officials
later reduced the number of products that could be restored as a
contract option (called option 2) from 34 to 31 because they
determined that two products were no longer feasible and two others
could be combined into a single product. See table 3 below for an
overview of key changes to the GOES-R program.
Table 3: Key Changes to the GOES-R Program:
Baseline program, as of August 2006:
Number of satellites: 4;
Instruments:
2 critical instruments:
* Advanced Baseline Imager;
* Hyperspectral Environmental Suite;
4 noncritical instruments/suites:
* Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
* Magnetometer;
* Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
* Solar Imaging Suite (which included the Solar Ultraviolet Imager,
and Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor);
Number of satellite products: 81;
Life-cycle cost estimate (in then year dollars): $6.2 billion-$11.4
billion (through 2034).
Revised program, as of September 2006:
Number of satellites: 2;
Instruments:
1 critical instrument:
* Advanced Baseline Imager;
5 noncritical instruments/suites:
* Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
* Magnetometer;
* Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
* Solar Ultraviolet Imager;
* Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor;
Number of satellite products: 68;
Life-cycle cost estimate (in then year dollars): $7 billion (through
2028).
Current program:
Number of satellites: 2;
Instruments:
1 critical instrument:
* Advanced Baseline Imager;
5 noncritical instruments/suites:
* Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
* Magnetometer;
* Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
* Solar Ultraviolet Imager;
* Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor.
Number of satellite products: 34 baseline; 31 optional;
Life-cycle cost estimate (in then year dollars): $7.67 billion
(through 2028).
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of table]
Acquisition Strategy:
NOAA's original acquisition strategy was to award contracts for
concept development of the GOES-R system to several vendors who would
subsequently compete to be the single prime contractor responsible for
overall system development and production. In keeping with this
strategy, NOAA awarded contracts for concept development of the
overall GOES-R system to three vendors in October 2005. However, in
March 2007, NOAA revised its acquisition strategy for the development
contract. In response to recommendations by independent advisors, the
agency decided to separate the overall system development and
production contract into two separate contracts--the spacecraft and
ground system contracts.
In addition, to reduce the risks associated with developing
technically advanced instruments, NASA awarded contracts for concept
development for five of the planned instruments. NASA subsequently
awarded development contracts for five instruments and, upon
completion and approval by NASA, these instruments will be provided to
the prime contractor responsible for the spacecraft of the GOES-R
program. NASA will then work with the spacecraft contractor to
integrate and test these instruments. The sixth instrument, the
Magnetometer, is to be developed as part of the spacecraft contract.
Program Office Structure:
NOAA is solely responsible for GOES-R program funding and overall
mission success. However, since it relies on NASA's acquisition
experience and technical expertise to help ensure the success of its
programs, NOAA implemented an integrated program management structure
with NASA for the GOES-R program (see figure 3). NOAA also located the
program office at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. Within the
program office, there are two project offices that manage key
components of the GOES-R system. These are called the flight and
ground system project offices. The Flight Project Office, managed by
NASA, is responsible for awarding and managing the spacecraft contract
and delivering flight-ready instruments to the spacecraft. The Ground
System Project Office, managed by NOAA, oversees the Core Ground
System contract and satellite data product development and
distribution.
Figure 3: GOES-R Program Office Structure and Staffing:
[Refer to PDF for image: staffing chart]
Top level: Commerce and NASA.
Second level, reports to Commerce:
NOAA;
Communication with: NOAA Program Management Council.
Third level, reports to NOAA: National Environmental Satellite, Data,
and Information Service;
Communication with:
Goddard Space Flight Center Management Council;
NOAA Program Management Council;
Third level, reports to NASA: Goddard Space Flight Center Management
Council.
Fourth level, reports to National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
Information Service: GOES-R Program: System Program Director: NOAA;
Deputy System Program Director: NASA; Assistant System Program
Director: NOAA;
Communication with:
Program Scientist: NOAA;
Goddard Space Flight Center Management Council.
Fourth level, reports to National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
Information Service: Program Scientist: NOAA.
Fifth level, reports to GOES-R Program:
Program Control Lead: NOAA;
Program Mission Assurance Lead: NASA;
Program Systems Engineering Lead: NASA;
Contracts Lead: NOAA;
Flight Project: Project Manager: NASA; Deputy: NOAA;
Ground System Project: Project Manager: NOAA; Deputy: NASA.
Source: NOAA. Program Scientist: NOAA
[End of figure]
Prior Report Noted Challenges with Instrument Development and
Recommended Steps to Improve Management and Oversight:
In April 2009, we reported that a key instrument had experienced
technical challenges that led to cost overruns and schedule delays.
[Footnote 4] Specifically, the Advanced Baseline Imager experienced
problems with the quality of components in the focal plane module,
mirrors, and telescope. As of November 2008, the contractor had
incurred a cost overrun of approximately $30 million and delayed $11
million worth of work. In addition, we found that the contractors for
both the Advanced Baseline Imager and the Geostationary Lightning
Mapper programs had not documented all of the reasons for cost and
schedule variances in certain cost reports. At the time, we
recommended that NOAA improve its ability to oversee contractor
performance by ensuring that the reasons for cost and schedule
variances are fully disclosed and documented. Over the past year, NOAA
has improved its ability to oversee contractor performance by, for
example, ensuring that the reasons for cost and schedule variances are
fully documented in contractor monthly variance reports.
In that same report, we also found that NOAA had delayed key GOES-R
program milestones, including the launch of the first satellite, which
was delayed from December 2014 to April 2015. Program officials
attributed these delays to providing more stringent oversight before
releasing the request for proposals for the spacecraft and ground
system, additional time needed to evaluate the contract proposals, and
funding reductions in fiscal year 2008. We reported that, as a result
of these delays, NOAA may not be able to meet its policy of having a
backup satellite in orbit at all times. Specifically, in 2015, NOAA
expected to have two operational satellites in orbit, but it would not
have a backup satellite in place until GOES-R is launched. As a
result, any further delays in the launch of the first satellite in the
GOES-R program would increase the risk of gaps in satellite coverage.
GOES-R Is in Development, but Delays in Key Program Milestones Have
Endangered Satellite Continuity:
The GOES-R program has continued to make progress in the development
of its major projects, but key instruments have experienced technical
issues and significant work remains to be completed. Further, key
program milestones, including the launch dates for the first two
satellites in the series, have been further delayed. As a result, NOAA
may not be able to meet its policy of having a backup satellite in
orbit at all times, which could lead to a gap in satellite coverage if
an existing satellite fails prematurely.
Progress Continues to Be Made on GOES-R Procurement, but Much Work
Remains to Be Completed on the Flight and Ground Projects:
NOAA and NASA have made progress on the procurement of its two major
projects--the flight project and the ground project. The flight
project includes contracts for the development of the five key
instruments and spacecraft[Footnote 5] while the ground project
includes contracts for the development of key systems needed for the
on-orbit operation of the satellites, receipt and processing of
information, and distribution of satellite data products to users.
For the flight project, between September 2004 and December 2008, the
GOES-R program awarded contracts for the five key instruments and
spacecraft. The contractors are making progress in completing key
milestones in developing these components. However, due to bid
protests of the award of the spacecraft contract in December 2008,
work on the contract did not begin until August 2009. As a result of
these delays, NOAA later approved a 6-month delay in the launch date
for the first satellite (GOES-R), from April 2015 to October 2015, and
the second satellite (GOES-S), from August 2016 to February 2017.
Program officials stated that the estimated program life-cycle cost
estimate remains steady at $7.67 billion. Table 4 describes the
development contracts for the flight project, including their contract
award date, and their cost and schedule estimates.
Table 4: Description of Flight Project Development Efforts, as of June
2010:
Instruments:
Flight project component: Advanced Baseline Imager;
Description: Expected to provide variable area imagery and radiometric
information of the Earth's surface, atmosphere, and cloud cover;
Contract award date: Sept. 2004;
Scheduled completion date: June 2012;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $255 million.
Flight project component: Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
Description: Expected to provide information on space weather to aid
in the prediction of disturbances and disruptions of radio
communications and navigation systems;
Contract award date: Aug. 2006;
Scheduled completion date: June 2012;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $51 million.
Flight project component: Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor;
Description: Expected to provide real-time measurement of solar
activity in the Extreme Ultraviolet and X-ray spectrum;
Contract award date: Aug. 2007;
Scheduled completion date: June 2012;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $55 million.
Flight project component: Solar Ultraviolet Imager;
Description: Expected to observe the sun's ultraviolet emissions and
provide early detection and location of flares and coronal mass
ejections;
Contract award date: Sept. 2007;
Scheduled completion date: Oct. 2012;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $112 million.
Flight project component: Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
Description: Expected to continuously monitor lightning activity over
the United States and adjacent oceans;
Contract award date: Dec. 2007;
Scheduled completion date: Sept. 2012;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $58 million.
Flight project component: Spacecraft;
Description: Expected to provide the platform for instruments and
communication systems. The spacecraft contract also includes
development of the sixth instrument, the Magnetometer, which is
expected to measure the magnitude and direction of the Earth's
magnetic field;
Contract award date: Dec. 2008;
Scheduled completion date: Sept. 2015;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $691 million.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of table]
For the ground project, a contract for one of three key subcomponents,
the Core Ground System, was awarded in May 2009, and contracts for the
two other subcomponents are planned to be awarded in July 2010. The
Core Ground System is of critical importance because it provides for
command and control and ground processing capabilities for GOES-R
satellites and instruments. Table 5 describes the development
contracts for the ground project, including their contract award date,
and their cost and schedule estimates, while figure 4 depicts the
schedule for both the overall GOES-R program as well as the flight and
ground projects.
Table 5: Description of Ground Project Development Efforts, as of June
2010:
Ground project component: Core Ground System;
Description: Expected to (1) provide command and control of GOES-R
satellites and instruments, (2) receive and process information from
the instruments and spacecraft, and (3) distribute satellite data
products to users;
Contract award date: May 2009;
Scheduled completion date: Sept. 2015;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): $615 million.
Ground project component: GOES-R Access Subsystem;
Description: Expected to provide ingestion of data and distribution
for GOES-R products and data to authorized users. When completed, this
subsystem will be integrated into the Core Ground System;
Contract award date: Planned July 2010;
Scheduled completion date: Planned June 2016;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): n/a.
Ground project component: Antennas;
Description: Expected to provide six new antenna stations and modify
four existing antennas to receive GOES-R data. The antenna contract is
also expected to include the construction of related infrastructure,
software development for control systems, and maintenance;
Contract award date: Planned July 2010;
Scheduled completion date: Planned June 2016;
Original contract cost (excludes award fees): n/a.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of table]
Figure 4: Planned Schedule for GOES-R Program and Key Development
Efforts, as of June 2010:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustrated table]
Program start: 2003;
Key instruments complete: 2012;
GOES-R launch: 2015;
GOES-S launch: 2017;
Program end: 2028.
Flight project: Key instruments:
* Advanced Baseline Imager: 2004-2012;
* Space Environmental In-Situ Suite: 2006-2012;
* Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor: 2007-2012;
* Solar Ultraviolet Imager: 2007-2012;
* Geostationary Lightning Mapper: 2007-2012;
* Spacecraft: 2008-2015.
Ground project:
* Core Ground System: 2009-2015;
* GOES-R Access Subsystem: 2010-2016;
* Antennas: 2010-2016.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of figure]
Flight Project--Progress Made, but Two Instruments Have Experienced
Technical Challenges:
The GOES-R program has continued to make progress on the development
of the spacecraft and five key instruments. After starting work on the
spacecraft contract in August 2009, the contractor worked to establish
the initial cost and schedule baseline and completed a key program
milestone intended to demonstrate that the spacecraft concept meets
mission requirements. The contractor is currently conducting
preliminary design activities and plans to assess the readiness of the
program to proceed with detailed design activities in January 2011. In
addition, three instruments, the Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance
Sensor, the Solar Ultraviolet Imager, and the Space Environmental In-
Situ Suite have recently completed critical design reviews. Completion
of this review is intended to demonstrate that the instruments'
detailed design is appropriate to support proceeding to full-scale
fabrication, assembly, integration, and testing.
Two other instruments--the Advanced Baseline Imager and the
Geostationary Lightning Mapper--have experienced significant technical
issues, which have resulted in cost increases and schedule delays to
the contractors' performance baselines. The Advanced Baseline Imager
program has experienced technical issues primarily related to
underestimating the design and development complexity of two
components--the focal planes and telescope, which led to cost
increases and delays in developing the prototype model. As a result,
in September 2009, the program office rebaselined the cost and
schedule targets of the Advanced Baseline Imager program.[Footnote 6]
This increased contract costs from the most recent estimate of $375
million to $537 million, an increase of $162 million, and delayed the
completion of the prototype model from March 2010 to December 2010.
Program officials reported that the rebaseline did not affect the
instrument's completion date and that they have sufficient contingency
reserves to address the cost overruns experienced to date, meaning
that these system-specific cost overruns will not affect the overall
GOES-R program's cost.[Footnote 7] The program is currently testing
the prototype model and plans to conduct an updated critical design
review in January 2011 to validate any required design changes as a
result of testing.[Footnote 8]
The Geostationary Lightning Mapper experienced technical issues
primarily related to underestimating the design complexity of the
instrument, as well as an architecture change that significantly
increased the electronics design and fabrication cost. As a result, in
March 2010, the program office rebaselined the cost and schedule
targets of the Geostationary Lightning Mapper program, which increased
contract costs from $71 million to $157 million, an increase of about
$86 million, and delayed the contract completion from June 2012 to
September 2012--a 3-month delay.[Footnote 9] According to GOES-R
program officials, contingency funds are available to cover these
changes and they will not affect the overall cost or schedule of the
GOES-R program. In addition, the program replaced the development of a
prototype model with an engineering development unit, which requires
less rigorous development procedures and testing requirements. For
example, the planned engineering development unit is not required to
undergo comprehensive environmental testing to validate that the
instrument will meet mission objectives in the launch and space
environment. According to GOES-R program officials, this decision was
made to reduce program risk because the schedule for development of
the prototype model and production model would have otherwise
overlapped--thus reducing the inherent benefits of a prototype model.
However, the lack of a prototype model increases the risk that design
issues that would have been identified during more comprehensive
testing will surface in the production model, when it is too late to
make changes.
The status and program-identified risk level of each of the components
of the flight project is described in table 6.
Table 6: Status of Flight Project, as of June 2010:
Instruments:
Component: Advanced Baseline Imager;
Status: This instrument was rebaselined in September 2009 due to
continued technical issues related to underestimating the design and
development complexity of two components--the focal planes and
telescope. Currently, the program is testing a prototype model, which
is planned to be completed in October 2010. An updated critical design
review is planned for December 2010. This instrument is to be
delivered for integration on the spacecraft by June 2012;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: medium;
Technical: low.
Component: Space Environmental In-Situ Suite;
Status: This instrument completed a critical design review in June
2010 and is currently conducting development and testing activities.
This instrument is to be delivered for integration on the spacecraft
by June 2012;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Component: Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance Sensor;
Status: This instrument completed a critical design review in November
2009 and is currently conducting development and testing activities.
This instrument is to be delivered for integration on the spacecraft
by June 2012;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Component: Solar Ultraviolet Imager;
Status: This instrument completed a critical design review in December
2009 and is conducting development and testing activities. This
instrument is to be delivered for integration on the spacecraft by
October 2012;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Component: Geostationary Lightning Mapper;
Status: This instrument was rebaselined in March 2010 due to technical
issues related to underestimating the design complexity of the
instrument. Currently, the program is conducting development and
testing activities. A critical design review is planned for November
2010. This instrument is to be delivered for integration on the
spacecraft by September 2012;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: medium;
Technical: medium.
Component: Spacecraft;
Status: Due to protests of the contract award, the start of the
spacecraft contract was delayed 8 months to August 2009. Subsequently,
the contractor worked to establish the initial cost and schedule
baseline and completed a key program milestone intended to demonstrate
that the spacecraft concept meets mission requirements. A preliminary
design review for the spacecraft is planned for January 2011. The
spacecraft is planned to be completed by September 2015;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Sources: NOAA and NASA data.
[End of table]
Our analysis of contractor-provided earned value management data
[Footnote 10] showed that most components of the flight project were
on track between May 2009 and April 2010. Specifically, contractors
for three instruments--the Extreme Ultraviolet/X-Ray Irradiance
Sensor, the Space Environmental In-Situ Suite, and the Solar
Ultraviolet Imager--and the spacecraft are generally meeting cost and
schedule targets. The other two instruments, the Advanced Baseline
Imager and the Geostationary Lightning Mapper, are meeting their
revised cost and schedule targets since completing their rebaselining
efforts in September 2009 and March 2010, respectively.
Ground Project--Development Is Under Way, but Important Work Remains
to Be Done:
Development of the ground project is under way. After awarding the
contract for the Core Ground System in May 2009, the contractor has
been conducting system definition activities and plans to conduct a
preliminary design review in February 2011 to assess the readiness of
the program to proceed with detailed design activities.
However, the awards of two additional ground project contracts have
been delayed and important work remains to be completed. For example,
contract award for the GOES-R Access Subsystem has slipped 6 months,
from January 2010 to July 2010. These delays were due, in part, to
delays in releasing the request for proposals. Award of the antennas
contract has also been delayed by 3 months. Both contracts are
critical to ensuring that GOES-R data are received, stored, and
distributed to users. The status and program-identified risk level of
each of the components of the ground project is described in table 7.
Table 7: Status of Ground Project, as of June 2010:
Component: Core Ground System;
Status: After the contract award for this system in May 2009, the
contractor has been conducting system definition activities and plans
to conduct a preliminary design review in February 2011. A critical
design review is planned for September 2011;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Component: GOES-R Access Subsystem;
Status: Originally planned for award in January 2010, this contract is
scheduled to be awarded in July 2010--a delay of about 6 months. These
delays were due, in part, to delays in releasing the request for
proposals. The GOES-R Access Subsystem is planned for completion in
June 2016;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Component: Antennas;
Status: This contract was originally planned for award in April 2010
but has been delayed to July 2010. According to program officials,
these delays are due, in part, to delays in developing the system's
requirements and releasing the request for proposals. GOES-R antennas
are expected to be completed by June 2016;
Program-identified risk level:
Cost: low;
Schedule: low;
Technical: low.
Sources: NOAA and NASA data.
[End of table]
Our analysis of contractor-provided earned value management data for
the Core Ground System indicates that cost and schedule performance
were generally on track between June 2009 and April 2010. Between
these dates, the contractor for the Core Ground System completed work
slightly under budget.
Continued Delays in Launch Dates Put the Continuity of Satellite
Operations at Risk:
Over the last few years, NOAA has delayed the satellite launch dates
several times. We previously reported that, since 2006, the launch of
the first satellite had been delayed from September 2012 to April 2015-
-a slip of more than 30 months.[Footnote 11] These delays were due, in
part, to delays in releasing the requests for proposals for the
spacecraft and Core Ground System and additional time needed to
evaluate the contract proposals. Since our last report, NOAA further
delayed key GOES-R program milestones by 6 months, including the dates
when the first two satellites in the series would be available for
launch. These recent delays were due to bid protests of the award of
the spacecraft contract in December 2008, which delayed the start of
work until August 2009. In order to allow sufficient time for the 72-
month development cycle required for the spacecraft, NOAA approved a 6-
month delay in the launch dates for the first two satellites in the
series. Table 8 identifies the delays in the satellite launch dates
over time.
Table 8: Delays in Satellite Launch Dates:
First satellite launch (GOES-R);
As of June 2006: Sept. 2012;
As of July 2007: Dec. 2014;
As of March 2009: Apr. 2015;
As of November 2009: Oct. 2015.
Second satellite launch (GOES-S);
As of June 2006: Apr. 2014;
As of July 2007: Apr. 2016;
As of March 2009: Aug. 2016;
As of November 2009: Feb. 2017.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of table]
While NOAA's policy is to have two operational satellites and one
backup satellite in orbit at all times, continued delays in the launch
of the first GOES-R satellite could lead to a gap in satellite
coverage. This policy proved useful in December 2008, when NOAA
experienced problems with GOES-12, but was able to use GOES-13 as an
operational satellite until the problems were resolved. However,
beginning in April 2015, NOAA expects to have two operational
satellites in orbit (GOES-14 and GOES-15), but it will not have a
backup satellite in place until GOES-R is launched and completes an
estimated 6-month post-launch test period--resulting in a 12-month gap
during which time a backup satellite would not be available. Figure 5
below depicts this gap in backup coverage.
Figure 5: Continuity of Satellite Operations:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
GOES-13:
Launch date: 2006;
Post launch test period: 2006;
Available as backup: 2007-2010;
Operational period: 2010-2015.
GOES-14:
Launch date: 2009;
Post launch test period: 2009;
Available as backup: 201--2011;
Operational period: 2012-2016.
GOES-15:
Launch date: 2010;
Post launch test period: 2010;
Available as backup: 2010-2015;
Operational period: 2015-2020.
GOES-R:
Launch date: 2015;
Post launch test period: 2015;
Available as backup: 2016;
Operational period: 2017-2020.
GOES-S:
Launch date: 2017;
Post launch test period: 2017;
Available as backup: 2017-2020;
Operational period: 2020.
Projected gap in backup coverage: Early 2015 through early 2016.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
Note: GOES-11 and GOES-12 are currently operating beyond their
expected lifespans. However, GOES-12 is no longer supporting U.S.
operations; it was moved to provide coverage of South America.
[End of figure]
If NOAA experiences a problem with either of its operational
satellites before GOES-R is in orbit and operating, it will need to
rely on older satellites that are beyond their expected operational
lives and therefore may not be fully functional. Any further delays in
the launch of the first satellite in the GOES-R program would likely
continue to increase the risk of a gap in satellite coverage.
NOAA Has Not Established Adequate Continuity Plans for Its
Geostationary Satellites:
While federal policy and industry best practices call for the
development of plans for continuing essential operations during a
disruption or emergency, NOAA has not developed adequate continuity
plans for its geostationary satellites for the period of time when
there will be no backup in orbit. Planning for the continuity of
operations facilitates the performance of an organization's essential
functions during emergency events or other situations that disrupt
normal operations.[Footnote 12] Federal policy requires agencies to
develop and document continuity of operations plans for essential
functions that provide, among other things, a description of the
resources, staff roles, procedures, and timetables needed for the
plan's implementation. NOAA has defined providing satellite imagery in
support of weather forecasting as one of its essential functions.
NOAA has developed continuity plans for the ground systems used to
operate and process data from geostationary satellites. Specifically,
NOAA's continuity plans for its Satellite Operation Control Center and
its Environmental Data Processing Center describe plans to transfer
critical functions to a backup facility during an emergency. Both of
these continuity plans contain, among other things, descriptions of
the alternate locations for performing key functions, resources, and
implementation procedures.
In addition to planning for the continuity of its ground systems, NOAA
has established a policy to ensure the continuity of its geostationary
satellites--and high-level plans if that policy is not met. As
previously mentioned, NOAA's policy is to have two operational
satellites and one backup satellite in orbit at all times. That way,
if an operational satellite fails, the backup satellite would be moved
into place to pick up operations. However, if there is no backup
satellite in orbit--as is expected to be the case during the year
leading up to when GOES-R becomes operational--NOAA officials stated
that they would move the single remaining operational satellite to the
middle of the continental United States. According to NOAA officials,
this would provide sufficient coverage of the continental United
States, but would provide limited coverage of the Atlantic and Pacific
Oceans (see figure 6). In addition, NOAA would contact other nations
to request that a spare geostationary satellite, if available, be
positioned to provide temporary coverage of the coastal regions, as
well as the oceans.[Footnote 13]
Figure 6: Approximate Geographic Coverage in a Single GOES
Configuration:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Illustration depicts the following for a Single GOES:
Single satellite coverage footprint;
Lost coverage area.
Sources: NOAA (data), MapArt (map).
[End of figure]
However, NOAA has not established continuity plans for its
geostationary satellites that describe the resources, staff roles,
procedures, and timetables needed for the plan's implementation. This
is important because there are many procedures and coordinating
activities that NOAA would need to perform to ensure the continuity of
geostationary satellite data in the event of a satellite failure with
no backup available. For example, the transition to a single satellite
would require NOAA, at a minimum, to inform users of changes to the in-
orbit configuration through various methods, including users groups
and Web site postings. Alternatively, the transition to an
international satellite would require modifications to the software
code of several processing systems to account for expected differences
in spectral channels, refresh rate, resolution, and coverage areas due
to the repositioning of the satellites. Further, all geostationary
satellite data products would need to be reverified and validated to
account for differences in product coverage. Lastly, NOAA would have
to notify GOES data users of differences in satellite capabilities,
such as the loss of space weather instruments and data, and changes to
viewing angles caused by satellite positions that are different from
current GOES locations. For example, the orbital location of an
international satellite positioned in a backup configuration may
provide a less comprehensive view due to the more severe observing
angle over the United States.
In addition, NOAA's lack of continuity plans has precluded the agency
from documenting and communicating the operational impact of its plans
to reduce to a single satellite and rely on an international
satellite. For example, a single satellite configuration would reduce
coverage of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans where satellite data
provide critical warnings of approaching severe weather, such as
tropical cyclone and hurricane activity. According to air traffic
officials from the Federal Aviation Administration, the reduction to a
single satellite would have a significant impact on the agency's
ability to make informed aviation planning decisions over the ocean
areas surrounding the continental United States. In addition,
transitioning to an international satellite would be dependent on the
availability of foreign satellites and it could take several months to
reposition an international satellite to provide backup coverage.
Furthermore, foreign satellites lack capabilities currently available
to GOES users, such as instruments that provide space weather
information. For example, the National Weather Service's (NWS) Space
Weather Prediction Center relies solely on space weather data from
GOES for two-thirds of its data products, which are critical to
providing warnings of severe space weather that may impact airline and
maritime communication, satellite operations, and astronaut safety.
According to the Deputy Director of the Office of Satellite
Operations, continuity plans for geostationary satellites have not
been established because the transition to single satellite and to an
international satellite has been done previously. Specifically, in
1989, after the failure of GOES-6, NOAA repositioned GOES-7 to the
middle of the continental United States. Subsequently, in 1991, the
European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological
Satellites and the European Space Agency repositioned the Meteosat-3
satellite to backup NOAA's aging GOES-7 satellite in order to provide
coverage of the Atlantic Ocean in case GOES-7 failed before a
replacement could be launched and placed into operation. While this
accomplishment has merit, current GOES and their related ground
processing systems are increasingly complex and have enhanced
capabilities as compared to earlier satellites, such as ability to
capture and process higher resolution images of weather patterns and
atmospheric measurements. In addition, there are likely new staff who
will not be able to rely on the 1989 and 1991 experiences.
Establishing continuity plans that describe the resources, staff
roles, procedures, and timetables needed for the plans' implementation
(as required by federal policy) would better ensure that NOAA can
continue to provide these critical capabilities in the event of a
satellite failure.
Without continuity plans, NOAA may not be able to fully meet its
mission-essential function of providing satellite imagery in support
of weather forecasting. This could have a devastating affect on the
ability of meteorologists to observe the development of severe storm
conditions, such as hurricanes and tornadoes, and track their movement
and intensity to reduce or avoid major losses of property and life. In
addition, the loss of a single satellite could affect many satellite
data users outside NOAA, including the Federal Aviation
Administration, which use satellite-provided weather data for air
traffic management, and the U.S. Forest Service (within the U.S.
Department of Agriculture), which uses satellite-provided weather data
to predict and prevent wildfires and mitigate their damage.
NOAA's Efforts to Involve External GOES Data Users, Prioritize Their
Data Needs, and Communicate Program Status Have Shortfalls:
NOAA has identified key GOES data users and involved internal users in
defining and prioritizing the GOES-R program requirements, but lacks a
comprehensive approach for eliciting and prioritizing the satellite
data needs of external users. Further, while NOAA has taken steps to
communicate program status and changes to all GOES data users,
important changes to currently available GOES data products have not
been adequately communicated to external users. Until these weaknesses
are addressed, NOAA faces the increased risk that its satellite
acquisitions may not meet the needs of key GOES data users.
Key GOES Data Users Have Been Identified, but Efforts to Involve Other
Federal Agencies and Prioritize Their Data Needs Are Not Sufficient:
Leading organizations routinely identify relevant operational users
and involve these users in key program activities, including
requirements definition.[Footnote 14] Moreover, best practices call
for eliciting the needs of operational users and developing these
needs into prioritized requirements. Prioritized requirements should
serve as the basis for determining project scope and can help to
ensure that requirements critical to key users are addressed quickly.
Key GOES data users can be categorized into three tiers. The first
tier includes internal NOAA users that depend on GOES data for their
primary mission, such as NWS. The second tier includes other federal
agencies that depend on GOES data for their primary mission, such as
the Department of Defense and the Federal Aviation Administration. The
third tier includes all other users that receive GOES data, including
private industry and universities. See table 9 below for descriptions
and examples of each tier of GOES data users.
Table 9: Key GOES Data Users:
Tier: 1;
Description: NOAA users who depend on GOES data for their primary
mission;
Examples:
* NWS;
* NESDIS;
* Other NOAA offices (e.g., NOAA Marine and Aviation Operations, NOAA
Ocean Service, etc.).
Tier: 2;
Description: Other federal agencies that depend on GOES data for their
primary mission;
Examples:
* Department of Defense;
* Department of Homeland Security;
* Department of the Interior;
* Federal Aviation Administration;
* Environmental Protection Agency;
* U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Tier: 3;
Description: All other users who receive GOES data;
Examples:
* Universities;
* Research institutions;
* Private industry;
* News media;
* Broadcasters;
* General public.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of table]
In formulating the GOES-R program, NOAA primarily involved internal
NOAA users (tier 1) in requirements definition activities, but did
receive input from one other federal agency, the Department of
Defense. Beginning in 1998, NOAA collected high-level system
requirements from NWS. Over the next few years, NOAA continued to
collect and refine these requirements by including input from other
NOAA offices, including NESDIS, NOAA Ocean Service, NOAA Research,
NOAA Fisheries, and NOAA Marine and Aviation Operations. Also, in
February 2003, the Department of Commerce requested that the
Department of Defense provide a consolidated list of its environmental
information needs, including those data needs that could be met by
geostationary satellites. This input, combined with that of NOAA's
offices, served as the basis for the 2004 GOES-R Program Requirements
Document, which represented a preliminary set of GOES-R requirements.
In June 2007, prior to entering the development phase of the GOES-R
program lifecycle, the Deputy Undersecretary for Commerce Oceans and
Atmosphere approved a baseline set of prioritized GOES-R requirements
(known as the Level 1 Requirements).[Footnote 15] Efforts to
prioritize the Level 1 Requirements were led by a working group of
representatives from various NOAA organizations. This working group
categorized the requirements into four priority levels according to
the importance of each requirement to NOAA, as well as the
requirements contribution to the GOES-R series.
However, other than the Department of Defense's input into the 2004
version of the requirements, external users that rely on GOES data
were not adequately involved in the GOES-R requirements definition or
prioritization process. According to NOAA officials, input to the
requirements from other federal agencies (tier 2) and other interested
users (tier 3) was collected via casual conversations between NOAA
offices and these users, as well as during GOES User Conferences,
which were held to educate and obtain input from prospective GOES-R
users. While these methods are reasonable for eliciting input from
tier 3 users, federal agencies that rely on GOES data to meet unique
mission requirements warrant documented input to the GOES-R
requirements. For example, the U.S. Forest Service relies on GOES for
fire monitoring and detection capabilities to sustain an estimated 193
million acres of the nation's forests and grasslands. According to
U.S. Forest Service officials, the lack of a structured process for
their agency to provide input into the requirements definition process
has made it difficult to ensure that its requirements have been and
will be implemented.
Further, NOAA did not account for the priority data needs of other
federal users in prioritizing the Level 1 requirements. As previously
mentioned, the priorities of the requirements were established by the
GOES-R requirements working group. However, this group only includes
membership from NOAA offices, such as NWS and NESDIS, and does not
include membership from other federal agencies. According to GOES-R
program officials, the Level 1 Requirements are intended to reflect
the priorities of NOAA users, primarily those of NWS, and the
assumption is that other users will adapt to the data provided by
NOAA. However, given the unique missions of other federal agencies and
their reliance on GOES data to meet their missions, input into the
prioritization of GOES-R requirements is critical to ensure that GOES-
R will meet the needs of their organizations.
The lack of involvement by federal agencies in GOES-R requirements
definition and prioritization is due to weaknesses in NOAA's processes
for defining and prioritizing satellite data requirements.
Specifically, the lack of a structured process for eliciting the data
needs of key operational users inhibits NOAA's ability to produce
prioritized requirements that reflect the needs of other federal
agencies that depend on these satellites. Without improvements in
these processes, NOAA's satellite acquisitions may not fully meet the
needs of important GOES data users.
NOAA Has Not Effectively Communicated with Other Federal Agencies:
While NOAA has taken steps to communicate program status and changes
to internal and external GOES data users, important changes to
currently available GOES data products have not been communicated to
key external users. According to industry best practices, programs
should regularly communicate program status to relevant operational
users.[Footnote 16] Moreover, best practices call for identifying and
documenting deviations from plans and communicating significant issues
to relevant operational users.
NOAA has taken steps to communicate program status and changes to GOES
data users. For example, the GOES-R requirements working group was
established to identify and represent NOAA user requirements and
serves as a forum for communication of GOES-R requirements status and
changes with internal NOAA users. Another initiative, known as the
GOES-R Proving Ground, engages the NWS forecast and warning community
in preoperational demonstrations of selected capabilities anticipated
from GOES-R. Through this program, NWS users are given the ability to
test and evaluate expected GOES-R capabilities, such as lightning
detection, before the satellites are operational. Lastly, GOES User
Conferences are held to educate and obtain input from any prospective
GOES users, including other agencies, universities, and industry.
However, the GOES-R program has undergone significant changes over the
course of its acquisition lifecycle, and these changes have not been
communicated to GOES data users outside of NOAA. As previously
mentioned, in 2007, program officials removed requirements from the
baseline program to treat them as a contract option that could be
exercised if funds allow (known as Option 2). These changes resulted
in a baseline program of 34 satellite data products and 31 Option 2
products. However, NOAA did not communicate the removal of these
products to external federal agencies. In addition, 9 Option 2
products are currently available to GOES data users, which means that
users may lose access to these products if the contract option is not
exercised. These 9 products are critical to measuring cloud
properties, infrared radiation, and sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere.
However, NOAA did not inform external federal agencies about the
potential loss of these products. See figure 7 for a description of
the 9 currently available products removed from the GOES-R program
baseline.
Figure 7: Nine Current Satellite Products Removed from the GOES-R
Program Baseline:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustrated vertical bar graph]
Planned satellite products:
Option 2 new products: 22;
Option 2 existing products: 9:
Baseline new products: 6;
Baseline existing products: 28.
Option 2 existing products:
Product: Cloud Ice Water Path;
Description: A measure of the equivalent water mass of the ice
particles in a vertical column through the cloud.
Product: Cloud Layers/Heights;
Description: The heights of the cloud layer bases above local terrain
or above mean sea level.
Product: Cloud Liquid Water;
Description: The amount of liquid water per unit volume of air.
Product: Cloud Type;
Description: The main characteristic form of a cloud used in its
identification.
Product: Low Cloud and Fog;
Description: Low cloud is defined as clouds with a mean height level
which is between the earth‘s surface and 6,500 feet. Fog is defined as
clouds in contact with the earth‘s surface.
Product: Downward Longwave Radiation: Surface;
Description: The downward component of infrared radiation across a
given surface.
Product: Upward Longwave Radiation: Surface;
Description: Outgoing/emitted infrared radiation at the earth‘s
surface.
Product: Upward Longwave Radiation: Top of Atmosphere;
Description: Outgoing/emitted infrared radiation at the top of the
atmosphere.
Product: Sulfur Dioxide Detection;
Description: Detection of sulfur dioxide, which is a non-inflammable
colorless gas that can lead to acid rain.
Source: GAO analysis of NOAA data.
[End of figure]
According to GOES-R program officials, the decision to make these
products part of the contract option was based on NOAA's input and was
approved by the requirements working group. However, key GOES data
users at other federal agencies that currently rely on these products
have not been involved in, nor told of, these changes. For example,
the U.S. Department of Agriculture uses cloud-based products (such as
cloud liquid water) to develop weather forecasts used by farmers and
radiation-based products (such as upward longwave radiation) for
streamflow simulation modeling. In addition, the Department of Defense
relies on the cloud-based products (such as cloud type and cloud
heights) as input into weather prediction models for forecasting of
high-altitude winds, which are used to navigate ships and planes.
If the contract option is not exercised, these agencies will not have
access to these GOES data products that they currently utilize. If
this occurs, GOES-R program officials stated that GOES data users may
be able to get these products via the Internet from NESDIS, but added
that the details for this alternative have not been determined because
the program expects to receive approval from NESDIS to exercise this
contract option by December 2010. Given that these products are
currently available to GOES data users, any significant changes to
these products should be communicated to these users to ensure that
they have sufficient time to implement workarounds or determine other
sources for the data. Without communicating significant changes, other
federal agencies may lose access to critical data products needed to
meet mission requirements.
Conclusions:
Over the last few years, the GOES-R program has continued to make
progress on key development efforts, but much work remains to be
completed. While the GOES-R program has awarded most development
contracts, two instruments have experienced technical challenges that
led to contract cost increases, and significant work remains on the
program's flight and ground projects. In addition, continued delays in
the launch date of the first two satellites in the GOES-R series have
endangered satellite continuity because these delays extend the time
in which there will not be a backup satellite in orbit. Any further
delays in the launch of the first satellite in the GOES-R program
increases the risk of a gap in satellite coverage.
The risk of a gap in coverage is further exacerbated because NOAA has
not established adequate continuity plans. While NOAA plans to reduce
to a single satellite and, if available, rely on an international
satellite, these plans have weaknesses, including a lack of continuity
plans needed to support geostationary satellite operations during an
emergency. Until these weaknesses are addressed, NOAA faces a
potential 12-month gap where it may not be able to provide critical
geostationary data needed for predicting global and local weather
events in the event of a satellite failure.
Finally, NOAA has taken steps to identify GOES data users, prioritize
their data needs, and communicate program changes, but has not
adequately involved or communicated with key external users. For
example, while NOAA involved internal users in its process for
defining and prioritizing the GOES-R requirements, improvements are
needed in these processes to ensure that other federal agencies that
rely on GOES data have a means to provide documented input to the
requirements and the prioritization of those requirements. Further,
while NOAA has taken steps to communicate with GOES data users, it has
not established processes to notify other federal agencies of GOES-R
program status and significant changes. Until these improvements are
made, important GOES users may lose access to critical data products
and future GOES acquisitions may not meet the mission requirements of
these users.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To improve NOAA's ability to maintain geostationary satellites
continuity and improve efforts to involve key GOES data users, we
recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct the NOAA Administrator
to ensure that the following three actions are taken:
* Develop and document continuity plans for the operation of
geostationary satellites that include the implementation procedures,
resources, staff roles, and timetables needed to transition to a
single satellite, an international satellite, or other solution.
* Establish processes for satellite data requirements definition and
prioritization to include documented input from external federal
agencies that rely on GOES data on future satellite acquisitions.
* Establish and implement processes to notify these agencies of GOES-R
program status and changes.
Agency Comments:
We received written comments on a draft of this report from the
Secretary of Commerce, who transmitted NOAA's comments. The department
agreed with our recommendations and identified plans to implement
them. For example, the department stated that NOAA will develop a plan
for transitioning to a single satellite that leverages existing
contingency agreements with its international partners. In addition,
the department stated that NOAA will document a process to define and
prioritize the requirements of other federal agencies and provide
these users with updates on GOES-R program status and changes. The
department's comments are provided in appendix II.
As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents
of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days
from the report date. At that time, we will send copies to interested
congressional committees, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator
of NASA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and
other interested parties. The report also will be available at no
charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staffs have any questions on the matters discussed in
this report, please contact me at (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov.
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who
made major contributions to this report are listed in appendix III.
Signed by:
David A. Powner:
Director, Information Technology Management Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Our objectives were to (1) determine the status of the Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellite-R (GOES-R) series acquisition,
including cost, schedule, and performance trends; (2) evaluate whether
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
established adequate contingency plans in the event of delays; and (3)
assess NOAA's efforts to identify GOES data users, prioritize their
data needs, and communicate with them about the program's status.
To determine GOES-R acquisition status, we evaluated various
programmatic and technical plans, management reports, and other
program documentation. We reviewed the cost and schedule estimates
(including launch dates), planned system requirements, and monthly
executive-level management briefings. We also interviewed agency
officials from NOAA and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) to determine key dates for future GOES-R
acquisition efforts and milestones and progress made on current
development efforts. Furthermore, we analyzed the earned value data on
development efforts contained in contractor performance reports
obtained from the program. To perform this analysis, we compared the
cost of work completed with budgeted costs for scheduled work for a 12-
month period to show trends in cost and schedule performances. To
assess the reliability of the cost data, we compared it with other
available supporting documents (including monthly program management
reviews); electronically tested the data to identify obvious problems
with completeness or accuracy; and interviewed program officials about
the data. For the purposes of this report, we determined that the cost
data were sufficiently reliable. We did not test the adequacy of the
agency or contractor cost-accounting systems.
To evaluate whether NOAA has established adequate contingency plans,
we analyzed relevant continuity planning documentation, agreements
with international partners, and meeting reports from the Coordination
Group for Meteorological Satellites.[Footnote 17] In addition, we
compared NOAA's continuity of operations plans to federal policy and
industry best practices to determine the extent to which the plans
will ensure the continuity of critical functions related to
geostationary satellites in the event of a satellite failure.[Footnote
18] We met with NOAA officials responsible for continuity of
operations planning and coordination with international partners, as
well as GOES data users within NOAA and at other federal agencies to
determine the potential impact of NOAA's plans on their data needs.
To determine the adequacy of NOAA's efforts to identify GOES users,
prioritize their data needs, and communicate program status, we
analyzed relevant program documents, including acquisition plans, user
requirements, and GOES user group meeting minutes. We compared NOAA's
efforts to industry best practices to determine the extent to which
users were appropriately identified and involved in program
activities.[Footnote 19] We also interviewed key users of GOES data to
determine whether NOAA's efforts to identify and prioritize their data
needs and communicate program status and changes were adequate. In
consultation with NOAA officials, we identified key GOES users at
organizations within NOAA and other federal agencies that depend on
GOES data for their primary mission. We selected three organizations
within NOAA that are primarily responsible for environmental satellite
data acquisition, processing and exchange, and environmental research.
These organizations include the National Weather Service, National
Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service, and the Office
of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. We also identified federal
government users outside of NOAA with the largest funding levels for
meteorological operations in fiscal year 2009.[Footnote 20] These
agencies were the Department of Defense and the Department of
Transportation (including the Federal Aviation Administration). On the
basis of discussions with GOES-R program officials and the Office of
the Federal Coordinator for Meteorology, we then selected additional
federal agencies that rely extensively on GOES data to meet their
mission requirements. These agencies include the Department of the
Interior (including the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of
Reclamation), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (including the
U.S. Forest Service).
We primarily performed our work at the Department of Defense,
Department of the Interior, Department of Transportation, NOAA, NASA,
and U.S. Department of Agriculture offices in the Washington, D.C.,
metropolitan area. In addition, we conducted work at Department of
Defense weather agencies in Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska and
Stennis Space Center, Mississippi. We conducted this performance audit
from October 2009 to September 2010, in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate
evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the
evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
[End of section]
Appendix II Comments from the Department of Commerce:
United States Department Of Commerce:
The Secretary of Commerce:
Washington, D.C. 20230:
August 3, 2010:
Mr. David A. Powner:
Director:
Information Technology Management Issues:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Powner:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Government
Accountability Office's draft report entitled "Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellites: Improvements Needed in
Continuity Planning and Involvement of Key Users" (GA0-10-799).
On behalf of the Department of Commerce, I have enclosed the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's programmatic comments on the
draft report.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Gary Locke:
Enclosure:
[End of letter]
Department of Commerce:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
Comments to the Draft GAO Report Entitled "Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellites: Improvements Needed in Continuity Planning
and Involvement of Key Users" (GAO-10-799/September 2010):
NOAA Response to GAO Recommendations:
The draft General Accountability Office (GAO) report states, "To
improve the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA)
ability to maintain geostationary satellite continuity and improve
efforts to involve key Geostationary Operational Environmental
Satellite (GOES) data users, we recommend that the Secretary of
Commerce direct the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and
Atmosphere to ensure that the following three actions are taken:"
Recommendation 1: Develop and document continuity plans for the
operation of geostationary satellites that include the implementation
procedures, resources, staff roles, and timetables needed to
transition to a single satellite, an international satellite, or other
solution.
NOAA Response: NOAA agrees with this recommendation. NOAA will develop
a plan to implement a single satellite strategy of operations if there
is a significant delay in the launch of GOES-R. This plan will include
several operational options, taking into account the potential support
of international partners through already existing contingency
agreements with such partners. Also, NOAA will consult the user
community to determine the best location and operational schedule of a
single spacecraft to meet their requirements. The plan will address
timely notification to users regarding all relevant operational
changes.
Recommendation 2: Establish processes for satellite data requirements
definition and prioritization to include documented input from
external Federal agencies that rely on GOES data on future satellite
acquisitions.
NOAA Response: NOAA agrees with this recommendation. NOAA will
document a process to define and prioritize requirements to include
documented input from NOAA, other Federal agencies, and non-Federal
users for satellite data from future GOES satellites.
Recommendation 3: Establish and implement processes to notify these
agencies of GOES-R program status and changes.
NOAA Response: NOAA agrees with this recommendation. The GOES-R
Program will continue to present program status and changes to the
broader user community at the GOES-R Users Conference, the NOAA Direct
Read-out Conference, and other topical meetings at which the user
community is typically in attendance. The GOES-R System Program
Director will provide an annual program status to the Office of the
Federal Coordinator for Meteorology (OFCM), which will be responsible
for its distribution to agencies that will be users of GOES-R data and
products. In addition, the Director of the OFCM has offered to convene
a meeting of these agencies at which a briefing on the program status
and changes can be presented.
[End of section]
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
David A. Powner, (202) 512-9286 or pownerd@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the contact name above, individuals making
contributions to this report included Colleen Phillips (Assistant
Director), Clayton Brisson, William Carrigg, Neil Doherty, Rebecca
Eyler, Franklin Jackson, Jonathan Ticehurst, and Adam Vodraska.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Satellites in a series are identified by letters of the alphabet
when they are on the ground and by numbers once they are in orbit.
[2] GAO, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites:
Additional Action Needed to Incorporate Lessons Learned from Other
Satellite Programs, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-1129T] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29,
2006) and Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites: Steps
Remain in Incorporating Lessons Learned from Other Satellite Programs,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-993] (Washington, D.C.:
Sept. 6, 2006).
[3] GAO, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites:
Acquisition Has Increased Costs, Reduced Capabilities, and Delayed
Schedules, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-596T]
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 23, 2009);Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellites: Acquisition Is Under Way, but Improvements
Needed in Management and Oversight, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-323] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 2,
2009); Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites: Further
Actions Needed to Effectively Manage Risks, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-183T] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 23,
2007); and Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites:
Progress Has Been Made, but Improvements Are Needed to Effectively
Manage Risks, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-18]
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 23, 2007).
[4] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-323].
[5] A sixth instrument, the Magnetometer, is planned to be developed
as part of the spacecraft contract.
[6] This is the Advanced Baseline Imager program's third rebaseline.
The program office rebaselined the cost and schedule of the program in
February 2007 and rebaselined the program schedule again in March
2008. In addition, contract costs increased from $255 million to $375
million--a total increase of about $120 million--in part, because of
the February 2007 rebaseline and other contract modifications.
[7] As of May 2010, the GOES-R program office reported that the flight
project had contingency reserves of approximately $455 million.
[8] The first critical design review for this instrument occurred in
February 2007.
[9] Contract costs increased from $58 million to $71 million--a total
increase of about $13 million, as a result of contract modifications
negotiated, in part, to reduce program risk.
[10] Earned value management integrates the investment scope of work
with schedule and cost elements for investment planning and control.
The method compares the value of work accomplished during a given
period with that of work expected in the period. Differences in
expectations are measured in both cost and schedule variances. The
Office of Management and Budget requires agencies to use earned value
management as part of their performance-based management system for
any investment under development or with system improvements under way.
[11] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-993], [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-18], and [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-323].
[12] Department of Homeland Security, Federal Continuity Directive 1:
Federal Executive Branch National Continuity Program and Requirements
(February 2008); and Software Engineering Institute, Capability
Maturity Model@ Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.2, CMU/SEI-2007-
TR-017 (Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2007).
[13] NOAA has reciprocal agreements with the European Organisation for
the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites and the Japan
Meteorological Agency to temporarily provide a backup geostationary
satellite on a best-effort basis, if one is available.
[14] GAO, Information Technology Investment Management: A Framework
for Assessing and Improving process Maturity, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-394G] (Washington, D.C.: March
2004); and Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity Model@
Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.2, CMU/SEI-2007-TR-017
(Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2007).
[15] The GOES-R Level 1 requirements were later updated in July 2008,
December 2008, and August 2009.
[16] Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity Model@
Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.2, CMU/SEI-2007-TR-017
(Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2007).
[17] The Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites is a forum
for the international exchange of technical information on
geostationary and polar orbiting meteorological satellite systems.
[18] Department of Homeland Security, Federal Continuity Directive 1:
Federal Executive Branch National Continuity Program and Requirements
(February 2008); and Software Engineering Institute, Capability
Maturity Model@ Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.2, CMU/SEI-2007-
TR-017 (Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2007).
[19] Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity Model@
Integration for Acquisition, Version 1.2, CMU/SEI-2007-TR-017
(Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2007).
[20] Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorology, The Federal
Plan for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research, Fiscal Year
2009, FCM-P1-2008 (Washington, D.C.: October 2008).
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
