Fiscal Year 1998 Budget Authorization Request

NOAA Satellites (GAO/AIMD-96-141R, Sept. 13, 1996).

Weather Forecasting: Recommendations to Address New Weather Processing Systems Development Risks (GAO/AIMD-96-74, May 13, 1996).

Weather Forecasting: NWS Has Not Demonstrated that New Processing System Will Improve Mission Effectiveness (GAO/AIMD-96-29, Feb. 29, 1996).

Weather Forecasting: "New Processing System Faces Uncertainties and Risks (GAO/ T-AIMD-96-47, Feb. 29, 1996).

Weather Forecasting: Radars Far Superior to Predecessors, but Location and Availability Questions Remain (GAO/T-AÍMD-96-2, Oct. 17, 1995).

Weather Service Modernization Staffing (GAO/AÍMD-95-239R, Sept. 26, 1995). Weather Forecasting: Radar Availability Requirements Not Being Met (GAO/ AIMD-95-132, May 31, 1995).

Weather Forecasting: Unmet Needs and Unknown Costs Warrant Reassessment of Observing System Plans (GAO/AIMD-95-81, April 21, 1995).

Weather Service Modernization Questions (GAO/AIMD-95-106R, March 10, 1995). Weather Service Modernization: Despite Progress, Significant Problems and Risks Remain (GAO/T-AIMD-95-87, Feb. 21, 1995).

Meteorological Satellites (GAO/NSIAD-95-87R, Feb. 6, 1995).

Weather Forecasting: Improvements Needed in Laboratory Software Development Processes (GAO/AIMD-95-24, Dec. 14, 1994).

Weather Forecasting: Systems Architecture Needed for National Weather Service Modernization (GAO/ĂIMD-94-28, March 11, 1994).

Weather Forecasting: Important Issues on Automated Weather Processing System Need Resolution (GAŎ/IMTEC-93-12BR, Jan. 6, 1993).

Weather Satellites: Action Needed To Resolve Status of the U.S. Geostationary Satellite Program (GAO/NSIAD-91-252, July 24, 1991).

Weather Satellites: Cost Growth and Development Delays Jeopardize U.S. Forecasting Ability (GAO/NSIAD-89-169, June 30, 1989).

Joel C. Willemssen

Mr. Willemssen is Director of Information Resources Management within GAO's Accounting and Information Management Division. In this position, he is responsible for GAO's reviews of information technology management at many of the federal government's major departments and agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, HUD, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Veterans Affairs; and EPA and SSA.

Mr. Willemssen joined GAO in 1979 and since that time has participated in and led numerous computer systems reviews in a wide array of federal agencies. His evaluation experience is predominantly in assessing major modernization efforts,

telecommunications, software management, performance evaluation, requirements definition, acquisition approaches, systems maintenance, and business process reengineering.

Mr. Willemssen has received many awards throughout his career, including GAO's Meritorious Service Award. He received a bachelors and a masters degree in business administration from the University of Iowa, and completed the executive level program in information systems at UCLA.

NOAA FLEET

Chairman CALVERT. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. First, Mr. DeGeorge, your testimony was interesting on several planes. First I would like to discuss the NOAA fleet.

It seems that in your testimony you believe that NOAA has been somewhat resistant to the idea of moving in a direction that we have indicated that we wanted them to go into. Is that your conclusion?

Mr. DEGEORGE. I can understand the natural reluctance on the part of the Corps and NOAA, and even the Department, to face the issues. Right now I think we have the worst of all worlds.

We have not started to buy new ships. NOAA wants to, and I guess they have to make certain repairs to current ships to keep them going. But the issue of how we go about starting to contract and charter for longer term investments has not really been yet approached on the part of the Department or NOAA. And I think that we must start.

Actually, I think we have used up most of this year, and we have made little progress. NOAA was charged in the 1997 budget to deal with the issue, and I think that the monies were restrained.

Actually, the FRAM planning money was severely reduced. They do not have the money to buy new ships. They do not have the money to modify ships. They were directed by Congress to do the maximum amount of chartering.

And they have done some, but not nearly enough to push in the direction that I think both the NPR, the National Performance Review, and this Committee suggested.

I do really believe that we are moving in several areas, in the hydrographic work and some of the scientific work, to begin to understand that is a direction we should begin to go.

One final thought. Unfortunately this issue gets all mixed up with the NOAA Corps issue, per se, because the question of who operates the NOAA ships is closely involved with whether they should be NOAA Corps officers, NOAA Corps officers converted to civilians; or we should turn these ships over to third parties to operate, using or not using those.

The present FRAM plan which is in front of the Department I guess will be the basis for this Committee making a subsequent decision, but I think they could have moved out more energetically, yes, sir.

UNOLS VESSELS

Chairman CALVERT. When you talk about alternatives for Fleet, the utilization of the University National Oceanographic Laboratory System known as UNOLS, has NOAA actively sought out that type of an alternative, in your opinion?

You mentioned that there really was not a long-term strategy to start moving out and looking at alternatives

Mr. DEGEORGE. I think they have moved in the direction of using UNOLS. I don't know that I am as familiar as I might be as to the extent that they have maximized the use of these UÑOLS.

I do know that their university ships have been implemented, and there is a higher use of them, but that really covers a very small percentage of the total ship days that they need.

Longer term leases, longer term charters, or basically deciding who is going to operate them for longer terms, are really the direction that we must go.

The UNOL community has told us they are anxious. They can do more, and they are willing to do more.

AWIPS

Chairman CALVERT. Moving to a different subject, the subject of AWIPS and certainly that is an extremely important transition that is taking place, and a lot is obviously dependent upon that and decisions are being made here in the budget as far as closing Weather Stations and really, quite frankly, because AWIPS is to go on line and is supposed to give us the service that we expect both to predict weather and to make sure that we get accurate information.

Is it both of your opinions that, from your testimony, that we are not going to be within the budget, and we are not going to be on time? What should we expect from that?

Mr. DEGEORGE. I think there is a reasonable chance to make the $550 million cap if the decisions on the separation of work, the definition of the balance of the contract, and the recognition in effect that WFO-Advanced is at least 2 years ahead of where the contract

was.

The separation of work, what's left to be done by the contractor, what software development has still to be completed by him, what is to be done by the Forecast Laboratory, and what direction is to be given to the operation by the Systems Integration Office under the Director of the Weather Service, are still being sorted out.

I think they have addressed two letters to you and your Committee searching for information to finalize those decisions which were promised this summer.

I think I would disagree with my colleague on the left a little bit that the Forecast Lab does not have the processor techniques to complete the design; I think it does. It is fortunate for everyone that in effect it picked up the slack for the contract.

We are further ahead. The release of the first 21 systems will give us a pretty damn good picture over the next, say, 3 to 6 months whether the balance of the production release can be released.

So I think we have the means of knowing within the next 3 or 4 months.

Chairman CALVERT. Mr. Willemssen?

Mr. WILLEMSSEN. Looking at the current schedule for full deployment of AWIPS, the schedule is incredibly tight. For any system such as this, which is very complex, has a history of problems, one would generally expect the schedule from here on out to allow some room for problem resolutions.

Problems identified during testing are natural to occur on any major system development, whether it is in the public sector or the private sector.

The current schedule that the Weather Service has does not really allow for any of those unforeseen problems, and therefore it is our opinion that it is highly likely that a fully functional, fully deployed AWIPS will likely not be done on schedule at this point.