United States General Accounting Office 

GAO	 Report to the Subcommittee on Coast 

Guard and Maritime Transportation, 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, House of Representatives 

September 2003 COAST GUARD 

New Communication 

System to Support 

Search and Rescue 

Faces Challenges 

GAO-03-1111


a
Highlights of GAO-03-1111, a report to the 


Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 


Maritime Transportation, Committee on 


Transportation and Infrastructure,


House of Representatives


Search and rescue—one of the 

Coast Guard’s oldest missions— 

involves minimizing the loss of life, 

injury, and property damage by 

aiding people and boats in distress. 

The Coast Guard has previously 

reported that its 30-year-old search 

and rescue communication system, 

called the National Distress and 

Response System, has several 

deficiencies and is difficult to 

maintain. Thus, the Coast Guard 

contracted to replace and 

modernize it with a new system, 

called Rescue 21. 

GAO was asked to identify the 

status and plans of the Coast 

Guard’s acquisition of Rescue 21 

and the technical and program 

risks associated with Rescue 21. 

GAO recommends, in part, that the 

Secretary of Homeland Security 

direct the Commandant of the U.S. 

Coast Guard to establish a new 

schedule for critical testing phases 

and initial operating capability and 

ensure that milestones are 

established for completing test 

plans for formal qualification 

testing, system integration testing, 

and operational testing and 

evaluation. 

In commenting on a draft of our 

report, Coast Guard officials 

generally agreed with GAO’s 

findings and recommendations and 

provided technical corrections, 

which were incorporated as 

appropriate. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-1111. 

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact David A. 

Powner at (202) 512-9286 or 

pownerd@gao.gov. 

September 2003 

COAST GUARD 

New Communication System to Support 

Search and Rescue Faces Challenges 

Rescue 21’s original schedule, which called for it to achieve initial operating 

capability by September 2003, has been postponed, and the Coast Guard has 

not yet finalized a new schedule. This postponement was due in part to the 

development of the system taking longer than planned. 

GAO reviewed the Coast Guard’s management of three risk areas associated 

with Rescue 21: 

• 	 Test management. Scheduled completion dates for key tests are still 

being determined. These key tests (formal qualification testing, system 

integration testing, and operational testing and evaluation) are 

incremental tests that the Coast Guard is planning to perform before 

reaching initial operating capability. Completion dates are not yet set 

because the Coast Guard decided to postpone initial operating capability 

due to delays in the original test schedule, which resulted in increased 

risks associated with compressing and overlapping key tests (see figure). 

In addition, key deliverables, including test plans, are still outstanding, 

and no scheduled completion dates exist. 

• 	 Requirements management. The Coast Guard has a process in place for 

managing system requirements. 

• 	 Risk management. The Coast Guard has a program in place for 

identifying, prioritizing, and minimizing risks. Two high risks identified 

by the Coast Guard are software development and environmental 

concerns related to the construction of new antenna sites, which may 

delay the implementation of Rescue 21. 

Key Testing Dates through June 2003 
Contents


Letter 1 

Recommendations 2 

Agency Comments 2 

Appendix 

Appendix I: The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An Update 

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. However, 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. 

Page i GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 

4 
Page 1 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 

A

United States General Accounting Office 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

September 30, 2003


The Honorable Frank A. LoBiondo


Chairman


The Honorable Bob Filner


Ranking Minority Member


Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation


Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure


House of Representatives


The National Distress and Response System is a significant component of 


the United States Coast Guard’s search and rescue program. However,


Coast Guard officials have reported that the 30-year-old system has several 


deficiencies and is difficult to maintain. In September 2002, the Coast 


Guard contracted with General Dynamics Decision Systems (General 


Dynamics) to modernize and replace the National Distress and Response 


System with a system called Rescue 21. As you requested, our objectives 


were to identify the (1) status and plans of the Coast Guard’s acquisition of 


Rescue 21 and (2) technical and programmatic risks associated with 


Rescue 21.


To identify the status and plans for acquiring Rescue 21, we analyzed 


Rescue 21’s acquisition strategy and cost and schedule estimates. We also 


compared original Rescue 21 plans with current strategies. To identify the 


technical and programmatic risks associated with Rescue 21, we reviewed


key Coast Guard acquisition documents, including test plans, requirements 


documents, the risk watch list, and risk mitigation plans. We performed our 


work at the Coast Guard headquarters in Washington, D.C.; the Coast 


Guard group site in Chincoteague, Va.; and General Dynamics in Scottsdale, 


Ariz. We conducted our work from November 2002 through June 2003 in


accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.


On August 13, 2003, we provided your offices with a status briefing on the 


results of this review, which is included as appendix I. The purpose of this 


letter is to provide the published briefing slides to you and to officially 


transmit our recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security.


In brief, we reported that the Coast Guard’s original schedule for reaching 


initial operating capability by September 2003 had been postponed and that 


the Coast Guard had not yet finalized a new schedule. The postponement of 


the schedule for reaching initial operating capability was due in part to the 


system’s development taking longer than planned. In reviewing the Coast 


Page 1 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Guard’s test management practices, we found that the Coast Guard 

postponed key tests in part because prior schedules showed delay, overlap, 

and compression of tests, which increased the risk that all requirements 

would not be tested. In addition, schedules for key tests and deliverables, 

including test plans, were still outstanding. These key tests (formal 

qualification testing, system integration testing, and operational testing and 

evaluation) are incremental tests that the Coast Guard is planning to 

perform before reaching initial operating capability. We also determined 

that the Coast Guard has developed key documentation used for managing 

system requirements and that the Coast Guard has a program in place for 

identifying, prioritizing, and minimizing risks. 

Recommendations	 To mitigate Rescue 21 risks and ensure that adequate testing occurs and all 

requirements are fulfilled so that the deployed system will work as 

specified, we are recommending that the Secretary of Homeland Security 

direct the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard to 

•	 establish a new schedule for critical testing phases and initial operating 

capability and 

•	 ensure that milestones are established for completing test plans for 

formal qualification testing, system integration testing, and operational 

testing and evaluation and that test plans address all requirements of the 

system. 

Agency Comments	 In providing oral comments on a draft of this report, Coast Guard officials, 

including the Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Project Manager, stated that they 

generally agreed with our findings and recommendations. Coast Guard 

officials also stated that the Coast Guard is actively working with General 

Dynamics to jointly develop a new schedule that considers all the risk 

factors identified in this report. In addition, Coast Guard officials provided 

technical corrections that we incorporated in this report, where 

appropriate. 

As we agreed with your staff, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution of it until 30 days from 

the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of 

Homeland Security, the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, 

Page 2 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
and other interested parties. Copies will be made available to others upon 

request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO 

Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-

9286 or by e-mail at pownerd@gao.gov. Sophia Harrison, Richard Hung, 

David Noone, Colleen Phillips, Karl Seifert, and Eric Winter were major 

contributors to this report. 

David A. Powner 

Director (Acting), Information Technology 

Management Issues 

Page 3 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I 

The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An 

Update 

1 

The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 

Acquisition: An Update 

August 13, 2003 

Page 4 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


2 

Briefing Outline 

• Introduction 

• Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 

• Results in Brief 

• Rescue 21 Background 

• Status and Plans 

• Key Risk Areas 

• Conclusions 

• Recommendations 

Page 5 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


3 

Introduction 

Search and rescue is one of the Coast Guard's oldest missions and one of its 

highest priorities.* The search and rescue mission involves minimizing the 

loss of life, injury, and property damage by aiding people and boats in 

distress. 

The National Distress and Response System (NDRS) is a significant 

component of the Coast Guard’s search and rescue program. NDRS is a 

short-range communication network used to communicate over U.S. Coastal 

waters and inland waterways. NDRS allows Coast Guard officers to monitor 

the radio distress frequency and to coordinate search and rescue missions in 

response to mariner distress calls. 

Coast Guard officials have previously reported that the 30-year-old NDRS has 

several deficiencies and is difficult to maintain. Therefore, the Coast Guard 

contracted with General Dynamics Decision Systems (General Dynamics) to 

develop and implement a modernized NDRS, called Rescue 21. 

*14 U.S.C. § 90; 6 U.S.C. § 468. 

Page 6 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


4 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 

Objectives 

• Identify the status and plans of the Coast Guard’s acquisition of Rescue 21. 

• Identify the technical and programmatic risks associated with Rescue 21. 

Page 7 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


5 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology (cont’d) 

Scope and Methodology 

To identify the status and plans for acquiring Rescue 21, we analyzed the 

Rescue 21 acquisition strategy and cost and schedule estimates. We also 

compared original Rescue 21 plans with current strategies. 

To identify the technical and programmatic risks associated with the Rescue 

21 acquisition, we reviewed the Coast Guard’s acquisition plans and policies. 

Specifically, we reviewed 

• test management plans, including the test and evaluation master plan 

and formal qualification test plan; 

• requirements management plans, including the mission needs 

statement, operational requirements document, and contract 

performance specification; and 

• risk management plans, including risk watch list and risk mitigation 

strategies. 

Page 8 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


6 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology (cont’d) 

We also evaluated the Coast Guard’s policies for managing Rescue 21 risks, 

requirements, and testing by comparing them to industry best practices and 

Coast Guard policies. In addition, we interviewed program managers and 

contract officials. 

We performed our work at the United States Coast Guard headquarters in 

Washington D.C.; the Coast Guard group site in Chincoteague, Va.; and 

General Dynamics in Scottsdale, Ariz. We conducted our work from 

November 2002 through June 2003, in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. 

Page 9 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


7 

Results in Brief 

Rescue 21 Status and Plans 

• The original Rescue 21 schedule for reaching initial operating

capability by September 2003 has been postponed and the Coast Guard has not yet finalized a new schedule. 

Rescue 21 Technical and programmatic risks 

• Test management – Effective test management ensures that system functions meet their specified requirements. Scheduled end dates for 

formal qualification testing, system integration testing, and operational

testing and evaluation are still being determined, and key deliverables

are still outstanding, including test plans. The Coast Guard decided to

postpone these tests and IOC because of delays in development and 

the resulting risks associated with compressing and overlapping key 

tests. 

Page 10 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


8 

Results in Brief (cont’d) 

Rescue 21 Technical and programmatic risks (cont’d) 

• Requirements management – Effective requirements management 

ensures that the minimum functions and performance levels needed to 

satisfy user needs are met. The Coast Guard has developed key 

documentation used for managing requirements. 

• Risk management – Effective risk management typically includes 

identifying, prioritizing, resolving, and monitoring project risks. The 

Coast Guard’s plans for identifying, prioritizing, and minimizing risks 

are in place. 

Page 11 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


9 

Background: The Existing NDRS 

NDRS is a significant component of the Coast Guard’s current search and 

rescue program. This system 

• is the Coast Guard’s primary short-range communication network, with 

a range of about 20 nautical miles; 

• provides communications for command and control missions, such as 

maritime safety, maritime law enforcement, national security, and 

marine environmental protection; and 

• is composed of VHF-FM radios, communication towers, and 

communication centers. 

Page 12 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


10 

Background: The Existing NDRS (cont’d) 

Much of the existing system was installed in the 1970’s, making many of the 

system’s components expensive to maintain and difficult to upgrade. In 

addition, the Coast Guard has previously reported that the existing NDRS has 

several other critical deficiencies: 

• numerous gaps in the coverage of communication, affecting 14 

percent of Coast Guard’s total area of responsibility; in these areas, 

the Coast Guard cannot hear calls from mariners in distress; 

• limited direction-finding capabilities and no digital selective calling 

capabilities;* 

• no effective way to track Coast Guard assets; 

• limited interoperability with other federal and state communication 

systems; and 

• no means for secure/protected communication. 

*A digital selective calling radio has the ability to send a mayday signal that identifies the vessel and when 

connected to a Global Positioning System, sends the vessel’s location. 

Page 13 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


11 

Background: Rescue 21 

In September 2002, the Coast Guard awarded a contract to General 

Dynamics for developing and implementing a modernized NDRS, called 

Rescue 21. The contract and original schedule call for the following: 

• two initial Coast Guard locations to be operating with full functionality, 

scheduled for September 2003, referred to as achieving initial 

operating capability (IOC), and 

• continuing deployment to additional locations through 2006. 

Rescue 21 is to be a short-range communication system with a range of about 

20 nautical miles. The system is to include VHF-FM radios, communication 

towers, and hardware and software at the communication centers. Rescue 

21’s primary functions are to provide the Coast Guard with communication for 

• maritime search-and-rescue functions, such as monitoring distress 

calls from boaters and coordinating the response or rescue, and 

• command and control missions. 

Page 14 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


12 

Background: Rescue 21 (cont’d) 

According to the Coast Guard’s contract with General Dynamics, the Rescue 

21 system is to: 

• limit the number of communication coverage gaps in the United States 

to less than 2 percent; 

• use direction finding and digital selective calling to locate boaters; 

• allow the Coast Guard to track its mobile assets; 

• meet interoperability standards to allow communication with other 

federal and state systems; 

• allow secure/protected communication of sensitive information; and 

• archive voice and data communications and have them instantly 

accessible. 

Page 15 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


13 

Status and Plans 

Rescue 21 is currently under development. As of June 2003, the Coast 

Guard’s testing and schedule for reaching initial operational capability (IOC) 

was as follows: 

The Coast Guard has received funding of $182.4 million for the Rescue 21 

acquisition through fiscal year 2003, and the projected funding through fiscal 

year 2007 is $569.2 million. 

*Formal qualification testing (FQT), system integration testing (SIT), and operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) 

are incremental tests the Coast Guard is planning to perform before reaching IOC. 

Page 16 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


14 

Status and Plans (cont’d) 

In July 2003, the Coast Guard delayed IOC from the original September 30, 

2003, date to a January to March 2004 timeframe. 

According to agency officials and test documents, the causes for delaying IOC 

and preceding test were as follows: 

• General Dynamics had taken longer than expected to obtain 

developers and subcontractors for Rescue 21, 

• the development of the system software continues to take longer than 

planned. 

Since postponing IOC, the Coast Guard has not developed a schedule for 

formal qualification testing, system integration testing, operational testing and 

evaluation, or IOC. 

Page 17 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


15 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management 

Test management is used to ensure that system functions meet their specified 

requirements. According to leading information technology organizations*, to 

be effective, software testing practices should be planned and conducted in a 

structured and disciplined fashion. Typically, this involves testing increasingly 

larger increments of a system until the complete system is tested and 

accepted and resolving critical problems before moving to the next phase of 

testing. 

*U.S. General Accounting Office Year 2000 Computing Crisis: A Testing Guide (GAO/AIMD-10.1.21, Washington, 

D.C.: November 1998). 

Page 18 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


16 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management (cont’d) 

Rescue 21 is planned to go through the following stages of testing before 

achieving IOC: 

initial operating 

capability (IOC) 

declared 

formal qualification 

testing (FQT) 

system integration 

testing (SIT) 

operational testing and 

evaluation (OT&E) 

•performed by the 

contractor and witnessed 

by the Coast Guard 

•demonstrates that the 

system meets the 

contract performance 

specifications* 

•takes place in a simulated 

environment located at 

the contractor’s facility 

•performed by the 

contractor and witnessed 

by the Coast Guard 

•includes system-level 

testing that cannot be fully 

performed during FQT 

•the contractor installs a 

fully functional system at 

two locations to validate to 

the government that 

installation and 

performance meet the 

performance specifications 

•performed by the Coast 

Guard 

•ensures that the installed 

system satisfies the 

contract performance 

requirements and that 

the acquisition program 

is ready to deploy the 

system at other Coast 

Guard locations 

•the system is to be 

operational at two 

locations 

*The contract performance specifications define system level requirements for communications as well as 

information and data processing. 

Page 19 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


17 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management (cont’d) 

Since early 2003, the Coast Guard began postponing formal qualification 

testing and subsequent testing for Rescue 21. In order for the Coast Guard 

and General Dynamics to meet scheduled end dates, they planned to 

compress and overlap testing schedules. Specifically, 

• formal qualification testing and system integration testing were delayed by 6 and 4 months, respectively; 

• the Coast Guard had originally scheduled 2 months to perform formal

qualification testing, but was planning less than a month; and 

• formal qualification testing and system integration testing were

planned to be performed in sequence, but were scheduled

concurrently. 

The graphic on the following slide depicts Rescue 21’s schedule at various 

dates and demonstrates delays and compression of the timing of key tests 

through June 2003. 

Page 20 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


18 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management (cont’d) 

Key Testing Dates Through June 2003 

Page 21 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


19 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management (cont’d) 

Schedule delays, test compression, and testing overlap increase the risk that 

• all requirements will not be tested during formal qualification testing, 

system integration testing, and operational testing and evaluation 

because of the lack of time, and 

• system anomalies that could be found in one testing phase could carry 

over to another testing phase or may not be fully resolved before the 

next testing cycle begins. 

We raised these testing concerns to the Coast Guard in April 2003 and later 

discussed whether these concerns could increase the likelihood that the 

Coast Guard would not be able to test the full functionality of the system and 

deploy the system in the initial sites by September 2003 as was originally 

planned. 

Page 22 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


20 

Key Risk Areas: Test Management (cont’d) 

Due to the previously stated delays in development and resulting risks 

associated with compressing and overlapping key tests, the Coast Guard 

decided to postpone IOC. 

In addition, key actions remain incomplete. The test plans for formal 

qualification testing, system integration testing, and operational testing and 

evaluation are incomplete, and no scheduled completion dates exist. 

Page 23 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


21 

Key Risk Areas: Requirements Management 

System requirements define the minimum functions and performance levels 

needed to satisfy user needs. According to leading industry experts an 

effective requirements management process should establish and maintain a 

common agreement among the project team, including the end user, and 

supplier team.* The mismanagement of requirements can result in an 

unwanted change in a project’s scope or a system that does not meet user 

expectations. 

*Software Acquisition Capability Maturity Model Version 1.03, March 2002. 

Page 24 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


22 

Key Risk Areas: Requirements Management 

(cont’d) 

The Coast Guard has requirements management practices in place. 

Specifically, it developed the following requirements documents: 

• Mission Needs Statement 

• Operational Requirements 

• Work Breakdown Structure 

• Contract Performance Specification 

Coast Guard officials reported that Rescue 21 requirements have not 

changed as a result of the Coast Guard’s moving from the Department of 

Transportation to the Department of Homeland Security. 

Page 25 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


23 

Key Risk Areas: Risk Management 

According to leading management practices, risk management is a key 

component of a sound system development approach. An effective risk 

management approach typically includes identifying, prioritizing, resolving, 

and monitoring project risks. In support of this approach, the Coast Guard’s 

risk management plan calls for 

• assigning a severity rating (high, medium, or low) to risks that bear 

particular attention and placing these risks on a “risk watch list;” 

• prioritizing these risks; 

• planning a response or strategy for each risk on the risk watch list, and 

drafting a detailed response plan; and 

• reviewing and evaluating all risks on the risk watch list during monthly 

management meetings. 

Page 26 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


24 

Key Risk Areas: Risk Management (cont’d) 

The Coast Guard is managing risks with Rescue 21 by 

• developing and monitoring a Rescue 21 risk watch list, 

• prioritizing and assigning a severity rating for each risk on the watch 

list, 

• creating a risk management team that meets once every 4 months, 

and 

• developing a risk mitigation strategy for each risk. 

Page 27 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


25 

Key Risk Areas: Risk Management (cont’d) 

High risks identified by the Coast Guard include: 

• software development may delay the schedule, and 

• acquiring antenna sites may be affected by environmental concerns and 

National Environmental Protection Act requirements, which may delay 

the schedule. 

Medium risks identified by the Coast Guard include: 

• Rescue 21 operating expenses are uncertain, and 

• the performance specification and the statement of work could be 

misinterpreted, which could have a negative impact on the technical 

performance of Rescue 21. 

Coast Guard plans for identifying, prioritizing, and minimizing risks are in place. 

Page 28 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


26 

Conclusions 

Development and testing of key Rescue 21 components have been delayed, 

and the Coast Guard has not yet established new schedules for key tests or 

for initial operating capability. In addition, key deliverables, such as detailed 

test procedures used to perform key tests, have not been completed. 

Although the Coast Guard has developed key documentation used for 

managing system requirements, it is unknown whether all Rescue 21 

requirements will be fulfilled until detailed testing procedures are completed 

and executed. 

Page 29 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
Appendix I


The Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Acquisition: An


Update


27 

Recommendations 

To mitigate Rescue 21 risks and to ensure that adequate testing occurs and 

all requirements are fulfilled so that the deployed system will work as 

specified, we are recommending that the Secretary of the Department of 

Homeland Security direct the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard 

to 

• establish a new schedule for critical testing phases and initial 

operating capability; 

• ensure that milestones are established for completing test plans for 

formal qualification testing, system integration testing, and operational 

testing and evaluation and that test plans address all requirements of 

the system. 

(310443) 

(310443) Page 30 GAO-03-1111 Coast Guard’s Rescue 21 Faces Challenges 
GAO’s Mission	 The General Accounting 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 the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this 

list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to 

e-mail alerts” under the “Order GAO Products” heading. 

Order by Mail or Phone	 The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A check 

or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO 

also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single 

address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: 	 Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

To Report Fraud, 	 Contact: 

W Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm aste, and Abuse in E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Public Affairs	 Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 
Presorted Standard


Postage & Fees Paid


GAO


Permit No. GI00


United States


General Accounting Office
 Washington, D.C. 20548-0001


Official Business


Penalty for Private Use $300


Address Service Requested