NOAA's Observing Systems: Additional Steps Needed to Achieve an Integrated, Cost-Effective Portfolio
Released: 2014-11-17T00:00:00

Letter

Background

Six organizational entities within NOAA have responsibilities related to its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. NOAA has six line offices, which are responsible for executing the agency’s broad mission and programs. Five of those line offices operate and maintain observing systems. Staff offices support the line offices in achieving their missions and one staff office—the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations—also operates and maintains ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. The missions of the six offices with responsibilities related to ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems are as follows:

National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service: Provides timely access to global environmental data from satellites and other sources to promote, protect, and enhance the nation's economy, security, environment, and quality of life.

National Marine Fisheries Service: Promotes stewardship of living marine resources through science-based conservation and management and the promotion of healthy ecosystems.

National Ocean Service: Provides science-based solutions through collaborative partnerships to address evolving economic, environmental, and social pressures on the nation’s oceans and coasts.

National Weather Service: Provides weather, water, and climate data, forecasts, and warnings for the protection of life and property and enhancement of the national economy.

Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research: Provides the research foundation for understanding the complex systems that support the planet.

Office of Marine and Aviation Operations: Delivers effective earth observation capabilities, integrates emerging technologies, and provides a specialized, flexible, and reliable team responsive to NOAA and the nation. This office manages, maintains, and operates NOAA’s fleet of ships and aircraft, which the line offices use to gather data they need to help achieve their missions.

NOAA is the lead federal agency responsible for implementing the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009 and has established the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) program office. This office is part of NOAA’s National Ocean Service and works with 18 federal agencies and 11 regional associations to expand, standardize, and integrate ocean observing systems and data. The U.S. IOOS program relies on the voluntary participation of its federal and regional partners to achieve its coordination objectives, which have focused primarily on increasing the data compatibility and integration among the observing systems owned by NOAA, other federal agencies, and regional partners. According to NOAA officials, the program does not manage any of these systems, including those ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems operated by NOAA.

On the basis of our review of NOAA documents and discussions with agency officials, there are several ways in which integration could take place in the context of an observing systems portfolio. One way is by changing how a portfolio of observing systems is managed. This type of management integration could occur to different degrees along a continuum. At one end of the continuum, each individual observing system would be operated and managed separately by its program manager, with little or no higher-level organizational oversight. This would result in little to no integration because decisions about operating and maintaining each individual system would be made in isolation from each other. At the other end of the continuum, all the observing systems would be managed centrally, rather than at the individual program level. In this scenario, top-level managers would make decisions about operating and maintaining the organization’s portfolio of systems by considering trade-offs among all of the systems the organization manages. Between the two extremes of individual and central management, a number of other management approaches would offer different degrees of integration. For example, several observing systems within the portfolio could be grouped together and managed by a small number of organizational units or individual programs could manage their systems but also have some sort of oversight from higher levels in the organization. Another way that integration can occur is for data collected by observing systems to be integrated. For example, using a standardized data collection format and quality control protocols increases the comparability of data obtained from different observing systems. This would allow data from multiple systems to be combined more efficiently for analysis and to produce products, such as weather forecasts. Integration can also occur by combining physical components (hardware) of various observing systems, for example, by placing additional sensors on an existing platform to collect data on different environmental parameters.

NOAA recognized the need to begin taking steps toward integrating its observing systems portfolio in 2002, when the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere initiated a review to examine NOAA’s strengths and identify opportunities for improvement. Historically, most of NOAA’s observing systems were designed individually to meet specific data collection needs. For example, the Marine Optical Buoy observing system was designed to collect data on an environmental parameter that is used by multiple satellites to validate their ocean color imagery data. Most observing systems also used different data collection formats, which historically made it difficult to combine and use data from different systems. Management of NOAA’s observing systems portfolio was decentralized and, according to NOAA documents, the agency considered its systems to be “stovepiped.” The 2002 review generated many recommendations, one of which called for NOAA to centrally plan and integrate all observing systems. The report did not specify what central planning and integration of NOAA’s observing systems portfolio would look like or how the agency would accomplish these goals. NOAA officials we spoke with described this review as the catalyst for the actions the agency has taken since 2002 to address observing systems integration issues.

NOAA Operates 41 Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Observing Systems

We identified 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems at NOAA. The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research manages 14 of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems and the National Ocean Service manages 11 observing systems. Management of the remaining 16 systems is split between four other NOAA offices. Table 1 shows the number of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems each NOAA office manages. See appendix III for an alphabetized list of the entire portfolio of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems we identified and appendix IV for a list and descriptions of the systems organized by the office that manages them.

The majority of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems use one of three types of platforms—buoys, ships, or satellites—to collect data on environmental parameters. Buoys are used by 18 of the agency’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. For example, the Chesapeake Bay Interpretive Buoy System consists of 11 buoys located in the Chesapeake Bay that collect meteorological, oceanographic, and water- quality data used to help protect and restore the area. (See fig. 1 for a map of the buoy’s locations in the Chesapeake Bay.) Five of the observing systems use a combination of NOAA ships or chartered vessels to collect data. The National Marine Fisheries Service’s Fish Surveys, for example, are conducted from ships and collect data on the distribution and abundance of commercially-targeted and ecologically-important fish species. Four of the observing systems use satellites as their primary platform. For example, the Jason Ocean Surface Topography Mission satellite collects data for use in ocean models to predict severe storm intensity. Other ocean and coastal observing systems also use satellites to transmit their data to land-based data centers.

Thirty-three of the 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing system platforms are located in situ—meaning situated where the data are measured. For these systems, that means in the water. The other systems are located remotely (either on land or in the atmosphere) and look down at the environment they are measuring. Some in situ systems are on a fixed platform, such as a moored buoy. These types of platforms are used to obtain a series of measurements over a long time at the same location. For example, the National Weather Service’s Tropical Atmospheric Ocean buoy array was designed to study and predict climate variations due to the El Niño Southern Oscillation on a year-to-year basis. This moored buoy system is located in the equatorial oceans and it collects data on several environmental parameters, such as air temperature and sea surface temperature, as shown in figure 2. The data are transmitted via satellite to NOAA and are used to assist in monitoring, predicting, and understanding El Niño and La Niña events.

In contrast, other in situ systems use mobile platforms that measure how environmental parameters vary spatially, temporally, and geographically. For example, the Global Ocean Observing System Argo Profiling Floats use a free-drifting buoy system to collect data on the heat content and salinity of the upper ocean over a predetermined depth (up to 2,000 meters) and cycle time (10 days) as shown in figure 3. Data collected by an Argo float is available within hours of collection, which allows for continuous monitoring of the state of the ocean and provides data for other scientific uses, such as weather forecasting and climate modeling, according to a NOAA official.

The agency’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems gather a broad range of data that NOAA uses to create a variety of products. In some cases, NOAA prepares products directly from data from an individual observing system and, in other cases, the agency prepares products by combining and analyzing data from a number of observing systems. Some of NOAA’s products include the following:

Forecasts and warnings. NOAA provides weather, water, and climate forecasts and warnings for the nation, its territories, adjacent waters, and ocean areas that are used by the private and public sectors. The forecasts and warnings are derived from weather prediction models that use the data collected by the ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. For example, the Coastal Weather Buoys observing system measures barometric pressure, wind direction, and air and sea temperature, and these data are used in weather prediction models to create forecasts. In addition, data from aircraft and satellites that observe ocean environmental parameters are used to develop severe storm and flash flood warnings.

Scientific research. Data collected by the agency’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems are used to support NOAA’s research projects and activities. For example, the Ecosystems and Fisheries- Oceanography Coordinated Investigations observing system was established in 1984 and collects data on ecosystem changes in the Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea, and Arctic Ocean. Scientists use the data to determine how biological and physical environmental trends, such as the loss of sea ice in the Bering Sea, are affecting Alaska’s marine ecosystems. In addition, the observing systems that comprise the Global Ocean Observing Systems collect long-term measurements of environmental parameters such as sea surface temperature and ocean current speed that can be used to help assess climate change.

Navigation tools. Navigation tools are some of NOAA’s most important products, according to NOAA documents, because they help ensure the safe navigation of ports and harbors. Data collected by some of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems are used to generate nautical charts. For example, the National Ocean-Shoreline observing system surveys the nation’s shorelines, and the Hydrographic Surveying observing system measures, among other things, the depth between the sea’s surface and the sea floor and the locations of potentially hazardous obstructions. Data from both of these systems are used to create nautical charts of coastlines and ports that are used by ships engaged in maritime commerce. These charts are also used for other activities, such as port and harbor maintenance.

Emergency management and response. NOAA uses its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems to provide data and information that the agency uses in its emergency response and management efforts. For example, the National Ocean Service’s National Water Level Observation Network observing system collects data on water levels and currents that are used to develop plans to contain oil spills. In addition, the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations uses its ships and aircraft to collect data on severe weather events, such as hurricanes, and in federal disaster response efforts.

NOAA Spent about $430 Million Annually from Fiscal Year 2012 through 2014 on the Operations and Maintenance of Its Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Observing Systems

NOAA estimates it spent approximately $430 million annually on average to operate and maintain its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems in fiscal years 2012 through 2014. That amount is about 9 percent of NOAA’s total annual appropriations for these years. NOAA provided us with estimated cost information because its budget structure and accounting system are not designed to capture costs at the observing system level. Of the 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems, 4 have line items in NOAA’s budget that identify the amount of money dedicated to operating and maintaining those systems. Funding for the other observing systems comes from the budgets of various NOAA programs that cover multiple program activities, including the observing systems. For example, the Sustained Ocean Observations and Monitoring program in the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research provides funding for a variety of activities, including operating several observing systems, such as the Global Ocean Observing System Argo Profiling Floats, Ocean Reference Stations, and Ocean Carbon Networks, that are key components of the Global Ocean Observing System. All of the activities and observing systems within the Sustained Ocean Observations and Monitoring program are funded through a single line item in the NOAA budget, which does not identify specific amounts for each of the observing systems.

According to NOAA’s estimated cost information, the agency’s annual operations and maintenance costs ranged from about $22 million at the National Marine Fisheries Service to $198 million at the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations in fiscal year 2014 (see table 2).

The two line offices with the highest reported annual costs for their observing systems for fiscal years 2012 through 2014 were the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations and the National Ocean Service. For the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, these costs include operation and maintenance of NOAA’s fleet of specialized ships and aircraft, including the scientific and technical equipment they carry to collect data, according to NOAA documentation. For example, in fiscal year 2013, NOAA’s fleet included 16 active ships that provided 1,702 days at sea and 9 aircraft that provided 2,503 flight hours to programs in each of NOAA’s line offices to support observational activities needed to achieve their environmental and scientific missions. The National Ocean Service’s costs include operating 11 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems that collect data NOAA describes as being essential to safe, efficient, and sustainable uses of busy coastal areas and waterways. For example, some of these costs were for the Hydrographic Surveying observing system that provides data that are used primarily to develop nautical charts. The costs also included operating and maintaining the National Water Level Observation Network and the National Current Observation Program observing systems that monitor tides, currents, water levels, and other environmental parameters. The data from these systems are used to create navigational products and provide other services.

NOAA’s estimated annual costs vary widely across the different observing systems. In fiscal year 2014, NOAA’s costs ranged from nearly $170 million to operate the NOAA-owned ships that collect ocean and fisheries-related data, to $80,000 for the Ocean Acoustic Monitoring System. That system consists of mobile underwater hydrophones in the Pacific Ocean that are primarily used to listen for earthquakes, but they can also be used for observing some endangered marine species. The 10 systems with the highest estimated annual costs, as shown in table 3, together accounted for approximately 79 percent of NOAA’s annual costs to operate and maintain its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems in fiscal year 2014. The largest item in the annual operations and maintenance costs for the 10 systems varies depending on the type of observing system. For example, most of the costs for the Global Ocean Observing System Argo Profiling Float system are for the acquisition of new floats since deployed floats are not retrieved for maintenance. But, for the Coastal Weather Buoys, the major cost is labor to maintain the systems’ stations, sensors, and instruments. For other systems, such as Fish Surveys, ship time accounts for a majority of the annual operations costs. See appendix V for the annual costs for each of NOAA’s 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems for fiscal years 2012 to 2014.

NOAA Has Not Taken All of the Steps It and Others Have Identified to Integrate and Improve the Cost-Effectiveness of Its Observing Systems Portfolio

NOAA has not developed a plan for achieving an integrated observing system nor has it assessed whether there is unnecessary duplication in its observing systems. NOAA has created an observing systems council to provide a more centralized perspective on observing systems management and is working to obtain the capability to conduct analyses to help understand how to make its portfolio more cost-effective. However, NOAA has not developed a methodology to consistently capture accurate observing systems cost information for use in these analyses.

NOAA Has Not Developed a Plan for Achieving an Integrated Observing Systems Portfolio

In a variety of plans and reports NOAA has identified the need to move toward an integrated observing systems portfolio. For example:

Strategic Plan for Systems Integration. This 2004 plan states that NOAA “will manage our processes on a corporate-wide basis to include standardizing processes and practices at the enterprise level, moving away from the current practice of managing at the system level. We will design and plan, engineer and develop, and control and manage at the enterprise level as we move away from stovepipe systems and programs.”

Buoy Recapitalization Strategic Plan. This 2009 plan, which focused on 19 of NOAA’s in situ buoy ocean observing systems, found that allowing individual programs within NOAA’s line offices to make portfolio management and funding decisions has created “an ever-increasing burden on NOAA to sustain a growing number of established systems, while continuing to develop new and innovative ones. In addition, the systems in the pipeline may not be the ones that NOAA deems most critical to the achievement of its future strategy.”

2012 Implementation Plan. NOAA’s 2012 implementation plan for its objective to produce accurate observation data identifies the need for NOAA to integrate the planning, operation, and data management of its observing systems.

NOAA Science Advisory Board Report. An April 2013 report from NOAA’s Science Advisory Board found that there was room for improvement—both in effectiveness and cost-efficiency—for NOAA observing systems. The report said that “given the need to protect and sustain resilient coastal communities, the absence of an integrated coastal observation system is a matter of particular concern.”

Our previous work has found that, in developing new initiatives, federal agencies can benefit from following leading practices for strategic planning. Taking steps toward managing NOAA’s observing systems as an integrated portfolio is a significant initiative for NOAA. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), as amended by the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, was enacted to improve the efficiency and accountability of federal programs, among other purposes.The act, as amended, requires, among other things, that federal agencies develop long-term strategic plans that include agency-wide goals and strategies for achieving those goals. We have reported that these requirements also can serve as leading practices at lower levels within federal agencies, such as at NOAA, to assist with planning for individual programs or initiatives. Taken together, the strategic planning elements established under the act and associated Office of Management and Budget guidance and practices we have identified provide a framework of leading practices in federal strategic planning. These practices include defining a program’s or initiative’s goals, defining strategies and identifying the resources needed to achieve the goals, and developing and using performance measures to track progress in achieving them.

NOAA has not, however, developed a plan that sets forth a clear vision of (1) what it wants its integrated portfolio of observing systems to look like and how it will be managed, (2) its strategy for taking the steps necessary to move toward this target systems architecture and management approach, or (3) how to measure progress toward the goal of an integrated observing systems portfolio. A NOAA official told us that the 2004 strategic plan for systems integration is not being used to guide its current systems integration efforts, and no other integration plan exists. One of the actions identified in the 2004 strategic plan was the development of a NOAA observing systems architecture master plan. This plan would “allow NOAA leaders to determine which future observing and data management systems NOAA needs to meet our users’ current and evolving environmental information requirements.” According to a NOAA official, this plan was never developed. One of the long-term outcomes identified by the 2012 implementation plan, to be accomplished between fiscal years 2014 and 2018, is the development of a plan for an integrated observing system portfolio that meets the full range of needs of NOAA’s strategic objectives. A NOAA official also told us that they are not working on developing this observing systems integration plan. Instead, the NOAA official said the agency has focused on taking tangible actions. For example, the agency established an observing systems council to provide a more centralized perspective on observing systems management. However, without a plan describing what NOAA’s integrated observing systems portfolio should look like and how it will be managed, a strategy for moving toward this target architecture and management approach, and performance measures related to systems integration, NOAA cannot be assured that it has established a framework to effectively guide and assess the success of its observing systems integration efforts and for its stakeholders to track the agency’s efforts and hold it accountable. In addition, without a detailed plan and performance measures, NOAA could waste resources, time, and effort in a constrained budget environment, pursuing activities that may not prove effective in creating an integrated observing systems portfolio.

NOAA Has Not Assessed Whether There Is Unnecessary Duplication in Its Observing Systems Portfolio

Since 2010, some NOAA planning documents have identified the need to reduce systems costs by eliminating unnecessary duplication. For example, one of the agency-wide objectives in NOAA’s 2010 strategic plan was to collect accurate and reliable data through a sustained and integrated observing system. The plan said that pursuing this objective would include reducing the costs of observations through, among other things, “reducing unnecessarily duplicative capabilities.” Similarly, NOAA’s 2012 implementation plan for its objective to produce accurate observation data included as a short-term outcome “educed, consolidated, and/or closed observing sites and sensors based on quality and utility of observations supporting all NOAA needs.” NOAA officials did not, however, provide documentation of any observing sites that have been reduced, consolidated, or closed since the agency developed the 2012 implementation plan even though these outcomes were to be accomplished in fiscal years 2012 or 2013.

Although NOAA documents have indicated a need for the agency to reduce unnecessary duplication in observing systems capabilities, NOAA officials we spoke with said they were not aware of any duplication in the geographic distribution of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems or of unnecessarily duplicative data being collected. One official said that given the vastness of the ocean environment, NOAA’s observing systems were more likely under-sampling than over-sampling. In addition, officials we spoke with said the agency had not identified any unnecessary duplication in the data collected by its observing systems portfolio. NOAA officials could not, however, provide documentation of any analyses that NOAA has conducted to support its conclusion that unnecessary duplication does not exist in the data collected by its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. NOAA officials said the agency’s existing analytical tools have limited ability to determine whether there is duplication in the data collected by its observing systems.

In our analysis of the 75 environmental parameters measured by NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems, we identified several parameters that are measured by multiple observing systems, suggesting the potential for unnecessary duplication in the data being collected. For example, as shown in table 4, 21 observing systems, including at least 1 system operated by each of NOAA’s line offices, currently collect data on sea surface temperature. Not all of these systems may need to collect sea surface temperature data to meet the needs of NOAA’s programs. However, according to NOAA officials, there are a variety of reasons why multiple observing systems might measure the same parameters. First, the systems may all be collecting data, such as sea surface temperature, in different locations. Second, in some situations, collecting data on the same environmental parameter is done purposefully to maintain continuity of data collection in the event that one system failed. Third, different observing systems may collect data on the same environmental parameter but at different times or with different degrees of accuracy. While one or more of these reasons, or some other reasons, may be why 21 observing systems collect data on sea surface temperature, NOAA officials could not provide analysis or documentation to show that unnecessary duplication does not exist. NOAA officials told us they do not believe unnecessary duplication in data collection in the agency’s observing systems portfolio is a significant problem requiring further analysis. However, without analyzing whether there is unnecessary duplication or opportunities to reduce or consolidate observations, NOAA would not know if there were opportunities to achieve cost savings.

NOAA Has Created a Council to Help Integrate the Management of Its Observing Systems Portfolio

NOAA’s 2002 agency-wide review recommended the development of a “cross-cut team” to centrally plan and integrate the management of its observing system portfolio. In response to the recommendation, the agency created the NOAA Observing System Council (NOSC), which held its first meeting in July 2003. The NOSC consists of representatives from each of the six line offices, the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, the Chief Financial Officer, and the Chief Information Officer. The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction chairs the NOSC, with support provided by three vice chairs. The purpose of the NOSC is to provide a more centralized, agency-wide perspective on the management of NOAA’s observing systems. However, according to NOAA officials, individual programs within NOAA’s line offices are still responsible for operating and managing their observing systems.

According to NOAA officials and documents, the NOSC coordinates all of the agency’s observing systems portfolio and data management activities and provides recommendations to the NOAA Executive Council on observing system investments. For example, in 2009, the NOSC appointed a team, with representation from each line and one staff office, to review analyses of 25 alternatives related to NOAA’s observing system portfolio. The team recommended whether the various options should or should not be funded. For example, the team recommended funding to expand annual fish surveys that provide data for fish stock assessments conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service, in part, because the assessments were both a line office and agency priority. According to NOAA documentation, NOAA’s Program Analysis and Evaluation Office planned to use the team’s recommendations as part of the agency’s planning and budgeting process for fiscal years 2013 through 2017.

The NOSC, in 2004, established the Technology, Planning and Integration for Observation (TPIO) program office to assist in conducting technical analyses to support the NOSC’s recommendations to NOAA leadership on integrating and improving the cost-effectiveness of the agency’s observing system portfolio. According to NOAA documentation, TPIO identifies: (1) NOAA’s observation requirements, (2) NOAA’s observing system and data management capabilities, (3) gaps between observation requirements and capabilities, and (4) observing system and data management solutions to fulfill NOAA’s observational requirements. For example, in 2011, TPIO conducted an analysis of observational needs for six of NOAA’s high priority program areas, including fisheries management and tide and current data. Specifically, the analysis examined the effect to the programs if NOAA no longer collected data on key observational requirements. For example, TPIO’s analysis found that four observing systems collect data on key requirements related to tides and currents and, if these systems were no longer funded, key data on these requirements would no longer be available. The purpose of the analysis was to provide an agency-wide perspective to NOAA leadership on which high-priority programs were critical to fund in an increasingly constrained fiscal environment. NOAA officials told us this particular analysis was only conducted once as the agency decided to invest in other analytical tools to assist with its decision making.

In 2009, the NOSC formed a subcommittee—the Observing Systems Committee—consisting of representatives from NOAA’s line and staff offices. According to NOAA documentation, the Observing Systems Committee’s purpose is to conduct analyses of the current observing systems portfolio and provide recommendations to the NOSC for changes in the configuration of the portfolio to maximize its benefits. For example, according to NOAA officials, one of the Observing Systems Committee’s first activities was to develop the criteria to identify NOAA’s “observing systems- of-record.” Observing systems-of-record are those systems that the agency deems necessary to meet its mission and receive sustained funding. As of 2014, the Observing Systems Committee has identified 108 observing systems of record, which includes nearly all of the 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems we identified.

The NOSC also established a second subcommittee in 2009—the Environmental Data Management Committee—which includes members from each line office and the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. This subcommittee (1) coordinates the development of NOAA’s data management strategy related to its observing systems, (2) provides guidance to promote consistent implementation across NOAA, and (3) identifies opportunities to improve the usability of its data. For example, in response to a recommendation from NOAA’s Science Advisory Board, in 2013 the committee developed an agency-wide environmental data management framework that defines the policies, requirements, activities, and technical considerations relevant to the management of NOAA’s observational data and products.

NOAA Is Working to Develop Analytical Capabilities to Improve the Cost-Effectiveness of Its Observing Systems but Has Not Developed a Methodology to Consistently Capture Cost Information

To enhance NOAA’s ability to understand and make cost-effective management decisions for its entire observing system portfolio, of which the ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems are a part, the agency has developed some analytical tools:

NOAA Observing System Architecture database. The database, initially created in 2003, provides a comprehensive list of NOAA’s observing systems and their capabilities. Currently, the NOAA Observing System Architecture database includes documentation on more than 200 observing systems that are operational, planned, in development, used for research purposes, retired, or canceled. About half of the systems are associated with other federal agencies, states and localities, the commercial sector, or foreign countries. NOAA includes these systems in the database because they are deemed important to the agency’s mission, according to NOAA officials. TPIO is responsible for updating and managing the database and uses it to analyze NOAA’s observing system capabilities. In 2008 and 2009, TPIO used the database to help prepare analyses to support observing system investment decisions. For example, TPIO examined whether to fund additional aerial data collection for shoreline and coastal areas for use in nautical maps.

Consolidated Observation Requirements List. The NOSC developed this database in 2003 to create a more formalized process for NOAA to identify, collect, document, and update its observational needs and requirements. After a line office has identified the environmental parameters that it believes need to be measured, it assigns each one a priority level. TPIO and the line office then initiate a validation process for those observing requirements identified as priority-1. According to NOAA documentation, the purpose of the validation process is to confirm that a program needs to observe a specific environmental parameter. After the NOSC reviews and concurs with the validated observation requirement, it is added to the database. NOAA officials told us the database now contains information on more than 1,000 validated observation requirements. NOAA officials said the agency still needs to document the observing requirements for about 15 percent of the agency’s ocean and coastal programs. According to NOAA officials, they use the Consolidated Observation Requirements List and the NOAA Observing System Architecture databases as analytical tools to help focus their investment decisions on high-priority observation requirements. For example, TPIO can compare observational capabilities listed in the system architecture database with observational requirements listed in the requirements list database to identify gaps between capabilities and requirements.

NOAA Observing Systems Integrated Analysis. The NOAA Observing Systems Integrated Analysis model is a tool intended to help compare the cost-effectiveness of the agency’s observing systems in obtaining mission-critical data and to inform investment decisions. Two external reviews conducted in 2010 at the request of NOAA found that the agency had developed tools such as the NOAA Observing Systems Architecture and Consolidated Observation Requirements List databases, but there was no mechanism to evaluate the observing systems portfolio agency-wide. As a result, NOAA developed a pilot integrated analysis model, known as NOSIA-I, which was completed in December 2011. The NOSC, in March 2012, decided to expand the pilot model so it could analyze the agency’s entire observing systems portfolio including operational observing systems and satellites under development. As of September 2014, the expanded model (NOSIA-II) is still in development but, according to NOAA officials, it is expected to be fully operational by August 2015. The expanded model includes information on NOAA’s strategic goals and objectives, key products, qualitative performance ratings of the observing systems, and their costs. According to NOAA officials, the cost information is important because it will be used in analyses to help inform management decisions on observing system investments. For example, NOAA could use it to show different ways that the agency could absorb a 5 percent budget cut for its observing systems and how best to allocate those cuts to still allow the agency to meet its mission.

However, the two external reviews conducted in 2010 identified concerns with the quality of the cost information NOAA collected on its observing systems. Specifically:

One review found that NOAA does not have guidance on how to capture costs associated with its observing systems and has limited documentation to support its reported observing systems costs. It also found a major weakness in the apparent lack of any formal, documented process for preparing and reporting observing system costs. Based on their assessment, the reviewers were concerned that there was a low level of consistency in observing system cost information across line offices.

The other review similarly found (1) accurate cost data for NOAA’s observing systems appeared very difficult to determine due to accounting differences and no standard process for how to record and report the data within programs and (2) a lack of consistency in what programs included in their observing system costs. The review concluded that more work was needed to improve the quality and accounting of costs for NOAA’s observing systems.

NOAA documents have also recognized the need for accurate cost information for its observing systems in order to assess the cost- effectiveness of its portfolio. For example, NOAA’s 2012 implementation plan for its objective to collect accurate observation data states that “it is critical that NOAA have the capability to determine the optimum portfolio of observing systems that enable it to accomplish its mission in the most cost- effective, efficient, and economic manner possible.” The implementation plan further stated that it is critical that NOAA’s Chief Financial Officer develop a standardized methodology for obtaining accurate cost information to support investment analyses and to improve the cost-effectiveness of NOAA’s observing systems portfolio. Specifically, according to NOAA documents, it is important that the NOAA Observing Systems Integrated Analysis model include accurate, consistent, and up-to-date cost information on all of NOAA’s individual observing systems. Without reliable, consistent cost data, comparisons of the cost-effectiveness of various systems would not be accurate. However, in a 2013 presentation on the status of the development of the model, TPIO noted that observing system cost data needs to be improved and is likely the weakest component of the model.

NOAA has taken limited steps to improve the quality of these data. Officials from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer told us they were not working on developing the methodology identified in NOAA’s 2012 implementation plan. The officials told us they do not have the technical expertise and knowledge of the operational requirements of the observing systems to develop this methodology, and suggested it should be done through the NOSC. TPIO officials told us they do not have in-house expertise in this area, and that is why the implementation plan delegated this responsibility to the NOAA Chief Financial Officer. TPIO officials said that earlier this year they had informal discussions with the staff from NOAA’s budget and finance offices to address the need for a standardized methodology for estimating the costs of its observing systems. According to NOAA officials, the NOAA Chief Financial Officer has since asked a committee to explore developing a better method for tracking observing system costs though no time frame for doing so has been established. Without accurate, consistent, and reliable cost information, the observing system integrated analysis model will not provide decision makers with the best information to make decisions regarding investment trade-offs and to improve the cost-effectiveness of NOAA’s observing systems portfolio.

Conclusions

NOAA has identified a need to better integrate and improve the cost- effectiveness of its portfolio of observing systems, including ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems. The agency has taken some positive steps toward integrating its portfolio, such as creating an observing systems council to provide a more centralized, agency-wide perspective on the management of its observing systems and developing databases that catalogue the agency’s observing requirements and capabilities. The agency has not, however, developed a plan for systems integration that identifies what it wants the portfolio of observing systems to look like in the future and includes ways for NOAA to measure and track its progress toward its goals. Without such a plan, NOAA does not have a detailed, transparent framework to effectively guide and assess the success of its observing systems integration efforts, and it will be difficult for stakeholders to hold the agency accountable for meeting its integration goals. Also, because NOAA has not assessed whether there is unnecessary duplication in its observing systems portfolio, the agency may be missing opportunities to reduce duplication and achieve cost savings. Finally, NOAA does not have consistent, reliable information on the costs associated with operating and maintaining each of its observing systems. This will make it difficult for NOAA to use its observing systems integrated analysis model to produce accurate comparisons of the cost- effectiveness of its observing systems or provide decision makers with the best information for making informed investment decisions.

Recommendations for Executive Action

To help strengthen the management and cost-effectiveness of NOAA’s observing systems portfolio, including ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems, we recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct the NOAA Administrator to take the following three actions:

Develop a plan for observing systems integration that includes a description of what an integrated portfolio of observing systems will include and achieve and how it will be managed, the steps necessary to move toward an integrated portfolio of observing systems, and how to measure progress toward the goal of an integrated observing systems portfolio.

Analyze the extent to which unnecessary duplication exists in NOAA’s portfolio of observing systems.

Develop a standardized methodology for the routine preparation and reporting of observing systems cost data.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Commerce for comment. In its written comments, (reproduced in appendix VI), NOAA, providing comments on behalf of Commerce, generally agreed with our recommendations. In commenting on the recommendation that NOAA develop a plan for observing systems integration, NOAA’s response focused on the 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems identified in the report and acknowledged there is no single observing plan for these systems. NOAA listed existing observing plans for several of its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems and said it plans to build off of these and other existing documents to explore the feasibility of enacting this recommendation. From NOAA’s response, it appears the agency believes that our recommendation was directed only at its 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. This is not the case. NOAA does not manage the 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems as a separate portfolio and we are not recommending that they do so. Rather, we recommended that NOAA develop a plan for integrating the agency’s entire observing systems portfolio, including the ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. In response to the recommendation that NOAA analyze the extent to which unnecessary duplication exists in NOAA’s portfolio of observing systems, NOAA acknowledged a continued need to do so and said it has taken steps in this regard with the development of the NOAA Observing Systems Integrated Analysis model. In response to our recommendation that NOAA develop a standardized methodology for the routine preparation and reporting of observing systems cost data, NOAA said that it agrees with this recommendation and has already begun talks to address how its accounting system could collect and report cost data for all observing systems of record.

NOAA also provided three general comments. First, NOAA said that the title of the report should refer to NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems, since that was the original scope of our study. While two of the report’s objectives address only ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems, the third objective examines the extent to which NOAA has taken steps to integrate and improve the cost-effectiveness of its portfolio of observing systems, including ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems. Our recommendations address the third objective and consequently we believe the report title is both accurate and appropriate. Second, NOAA said that it has long seen the need for an integrated and cost-effective observing systems portfolio, which is vital to maximizing the benefits of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes information for the nation. NOAA said it has dedicated a large effort over the past decade to systematically develop management structures as well as tools to address these issues. We agree that NOAA has developed management structures and tools and the report includes examples of both. Third, NOAA said that the fact that key parameters, such as temperature, are measured by multiple observing systems is not in itself an indicator of potential duplication. We agree. However, our report noted that multiple systems measuring the same parameter suggested the potential for unnecessary duplication and we recommended that NOAA analyze the extent to which unnecessary duplication exists in its portfolio of observing systems. NOAA also provided technical comments that we incorporated into the report as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of Commerce, the NOAA Administrator, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-3841 or fennella@gao.gov. Contact points for our Office of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VII.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report (1) identifies and describes the ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) operates, (2) identifies the annual operations and maintenance costs of these systems for fiscal years 2012 through 2014, and (3) examines the extent to which NOAA has taken steps to integrate and improve the cost- effectiveness of its portfolio of observing systems, including ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems.

To identify which of NOAA’s observing systems collect data on oceans, coasts, and the Great Lakes, we first identified a list of environmental variables, known as “parameters” related to the ocean, coast, and Great Lakes. After consulting with NOAA officials, we determined that National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Global Change Master Directory contained the federal government’s most complete list of these environmental parameters. The directory is a Web-based catalogue that we accessed in October 2013 to identify the 74 environmental parameters it contained related to the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. For example, the environmental parameters we identified included wave direction, sea level, salinity, and ocean temperature. In addition, we also identified another environmental parameter, stock assessment, based on NOAA documentation and interviews with NOAA officials. Our final number of environmental parameters related to NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems totaled 75. See appendix II for a list of the 75 environmental parameters we identified.

We then reviewed all of the systems that make up NOAA’s observing systems portfolio, as captured in its observing system architecture database, to identify which ones collect data on at least one of the 75 environmental parameters. This review identified 47 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. To obtain our final list of 41 systems, we excluded observing systems that, according to NOAA documentation, are not yet deployed or collect data for short-term, limited-scope research experiments. If NOAA’s documentation was unclear for a specific observing system, we spoke with the NOAA officials responsible for the system to determine whether the system was operational. The observing systems we excluded were (1) Joint Polar Satellite System, (2) Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite I-P, (3) Marine Sound, (4) Jason Ocean Surface Topography Mission 3, (4) Autonomous Underwater Vehicles, (5) Unmanned Aerial System, and (6) Animal Borne Tagging and Bar Code. We provided the list of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems we identified with NOAA officials for their review and comment and incorporated their views into our final list as appropriate. See appendix III for an alphabetized list of the 41 NOAA ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems we identified.

To obtain descriptive information about the systems we identified, we reviewed agency documentation, including NOAA’s observing system summary reports, budget summaries, and agency reports and presentations. We also interviewed NOAA officials, such as the principal investigators for individual observing systems, program managers that oversee more than one observing system, or line office officials familiar with the observing systems operated and maintained by their offices. We provided our descriptions of NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems with NOAA officials for their review and comment and incorporated their views into our final descriptions as appropriate. See appendix IV for a list and descriptions of the observing systems organized by the office that manages them.

To identify NOAA’s annual costs to operate and maintain its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems, we asked NOAA officials to provide cost data for these systems. In response, NOAA officials explained that this information is not readily available as the agency does not routinely collect data on observing system operation and maintenance costs in the ordinary course of business. They indicated that the most recent and best available observing system cost data were collected in 2013 by its Technology, Planning and Integration for Observation (TPIO) office for use in NOAA’s Observing Systems Integrated Analysis model. To collect the data, TPIO developed a spreadsheet template that requested specific cost information in a particular format. TPIO sent the template to each line office and asked them to provide annual costs for their observing systems for fiscal years 2012 through 2014. TPIO officials told us they intended the cost information they requested from the line office to be actual expenditures for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 and estimates for costs in fiscal year 2014 based on amounts in the 2014 presidential budget request. However, they said the observing systems costs reported by the line offices for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 are estimates because NOAA’s budget structure and accounting systems are not set up to track actual spending at the observing system level.

According to TPIO officials, the cost information provided by the line offices was not reviewed by TPIO or the Chief Financial Officers for each of the line offices prior to being entered into a database. After we requested the observing systems cost information TPIO had collected, NOAA’s Budget Office requested the data be reviewed to assess the accuracy of the information prior to releasing it to us. According to NOAA budget officials, they asked program managers to review the data they reported to TPIO for their respective observing systems and they asked each of the line office Chief Financial Officers to review the combined costs for the observing systems operated by their line offices. The purpose of the review was to verify that the cost information NOAA was providing to us accurately represented the information that had been reported to TPIO. The line office Chief Financial Officers also evaluated whether the costs were consistent with the program’s budget allocation based on NOAA’s appropriation levels for the fiscal years covered by the request. According to NOAA officials, the review resulted in mostly minor adjustments to the cost information originally collected by TPIO, and the information we received was the most accurate cost information NOAA has for its ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems portfolio.

We also took steps to assess the reliability of NOAA’s observing system cost information by, among other things, reviewing documentation of NOAA’s data collection procedures and interviewing agency officials, line office Chief Financial Officers, and observing system program managers. We found the data to be sufficiently reliable for the purpose of our report, which is to provide a general sense of the costs for NOAA’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems. While we believe the cost information are sufficiently reliable for this purpose, they may not be sufficiently reliable for other purposes that require more accurate cost data, such as for making comparisons of the relative cost-effectiveness of different observing systems. In addition, to obtain other information related to observing system costs, we reviewed agency documents, including budget requests, guidance, and policies, and documentation of NOAA’s managerial cost accounting system. We also interviewed NOAA headquarters and line office officials about NOAA’s budget structure and cost accounting practices. See appendix V for the annual costs of each of NOAA’s 41 ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing systems for fiscal years 2012 to 2014.

To determine the extent to which NOAA has taken steps to integrate and improve the cost-effectiveness of its portfolio of observing systems, including ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes systems, we reviewed agency documents and interviewed NOAA officials responsible for implementing the agency’s observing systems management activities. Specifically, we reviewed plans related to managing the agency’s observing systems portfolio, such as a 2004 strategic plan for system integration and plans related to implementing aspects of NOAA’s 2010 next generation strategic plan. In addition, we reviewed internal NOAA reports and external reviews that identified opportunities to improve the management and integration of the agency’s observing system portfolio. We interviewed officials in NOAA’s six line offices and in the one staff office that operates and maintains observing systems. In these interviews, we discussed the offices’ approaches to managing their observing systems, their budgeting processes, and NOAA’s efforts to integrate its observing systems portfolio. We also interviewed officials on NOAA’s Observing Systems Council about their efforts to create a more integrated, cost-effective observing systems portfolio and from TPIO about their development of analytical tools to support the agency’s observing system integration efforts. In addition, we reviewed GAO’s work on strategic planning and performance measurement to identify leading practices in these areas. We also reviewed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance to identify leading practices in planning and management.

We conducted this performance audit from September 2013 to November 2014 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 II: GAO Identified Ocean and Coastal Environmental Parameters

Appendix II: GAO Identified Ocean and Coastal Environmental Parameters 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.

Ambient Noise: Biological Ambient Noise: Total Atmospheric Pressure: Sea Level Bathymetry Buoy Support Carbon Dioxide: Partial Pressure Carbon Dioxide: Profiles Carbon Dioxide: Surface Carbon: Profiles Chlorophyll Concentration Conductivity: Profiles Conductivity: Surface Convection Coral Reef Assessment Diffuse Attenuation Coefficient Dissolved Gases: Oxygen Gravity Field: Airborne Gravity Field: Ground Based Hydrography: Bathymetry + Water Depth Ice Age Ice Concentration Ice Depth/Thickness Ice Extent Ice Motion: Direction Ice Motion: Speed Ice Origin Ice Temperature Ice Topography Marine Debris Removal Net Heat Flux Nitrate Particles: Profiles Nitrate Particles: Surface Nitrogen Oxides: Profiles Nitrogen Oxides: Surface Nutrients: Profiles Nutrients: Surface Ocean Color Ocean Color: Turbidity Ocean Contaminants Ocean Currents Subsurface 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75.

Appendix III: Alphabetized List of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 41 Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Observing Systems and Office

Global Ocean Observing System Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array Integrated Ocean Observing System High Frequency Radars Jason Ocean Surface Topography Mission (2, 3 & CS)

Appendix IV: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 41 Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Observing Systems by Office

Observing system managing office and name National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite N/O/P

Initially deployed (fiscal year)

This two-satellite system maintains a constant view of the earth from an orbit of about 22,000 miles in space and focuses primarily on the United States. The system provides timely environmental data about the earth’s atmospheric, cloud cover, and surface conditions. The system observes the development of hazardous weather conditions, such as hurricanes, and tracks their movement and intensity to protect life and property. The satellite sensors also provide the capability to detect ice fields and map the movements of sea and lake ice.

The data are primarily used by meteorologists for weather observation, monitoring, and forecasting. The data also support improved atmospheric science research, weather prediction models, and environmental sensor design and development.

The system measures sea surface height using a sensor mounted on a low-earth orbiting satellite.

The data are used to model the ocean, forecast weather events such as El Niño and La Nina, and predict hurricane intensity.

The system consists of a single moored buoy deployed off the coast of Hawaii. The system’s primary purpose is to measure visible and near-infrared radiation entering and emanating from the ocean. Measurements are taken at the sea surface and three deeper depths.

The data collected by the system are used by satellite systems to adjust their sensors that measure ocean color. Because of their remote location, satellites may experience interference in their measurements of ocean color. This system provides data to correct this interference.

The system uses polar-orbiting satellites to support environmental observations for imaging and measuring the earth’s atmosphere, surface, and cloud cover. The system measures three ocean and coastal environmental parameters—sea surface temperature, sea ice extent, and coral reef assessments.

The data are processed to provide graphical weather images and specialized weather products. The data are also primary inputs into models used for developing weather forecasts up to 3 days in advance, and can be used to monitor environmental phenomena such as ozone depletion. The data can also be used in climate studies.

System description The system has a joint mission to gather data to support long-term monitoring of climate trends and for weather forecasts. The satellite is equipped with five different sensors that collect environmental data such as ice thickness, ocean color, and sea surface temperature.

Data uses and products The data are used in models to generate advance forecasts and warnings for severe weather. The data are also used for fisheries and coastal zone management and long-term monitoring of climate trends such as El Niño.

The system is a network of buoys in the Chesapeake Bay that collect meteorological, oceanographic, and water-quality data.

Data collected by the buoys are delivered to users in real-time via wireless technology. Users include scientists and students who use the data to help protect, restore, and manage the Chesapeake Bay. In addition, the data are used as a resource for boaters to alert them to boating conditions.

The system is designed to monitor the health and status of living marine resources and their habitats in Alaska and New England. The goal of the observing system is to characterize the changing states of the ecosystems and forecast any subsequent impact on fisheries productivity. Data are collected primarily by research ships; however, satellites, buoys, and other methods are also used.

The data are used for the assessment and management of fish species and in a wide variety of research programs.

The system monitors the distribution and abundance of commercially-targeted and ecologically-important fish species. The surveys occur in all of the oceans surrounding the nation; however, the frequency of the surveys is contingent on available funding each year.

The data are used in models by fishery managers to determine the effects of fishing on fish populations.

System description

Initially deployed (fiscal year)

The system uses buoys to collect data to understand the condition of, and the processes influencing, the nation’s coral reef ecosystems. Since 2013, the system has been part of the National Coral Reef Monitoring Plan, with a goal of monitoring the status and trends of the country’s coral reefs.

The data are used to make better informed and timely management decisions related to the conservation of coral reefs. For example, the data are used to model and forecast climate- related risks and vulnerabilities to coral reefs.

The data are used to support a variety of products including nautical charts. The charts are then used for port and harbor maintenance, coastal engineering, coastal zone management, and resource development offshore. surveys of the physical parameters and waterbody features in the nation’s coastal areas. The areas covered by the surveys are prioritized based on a variety of factors, including the amount of time elapsed since an area was previously surveyed. The data include information on water depth and the nature of the sea floor, which has implications for anchoring, dredging, and fisheries habitat.

This system measures the speed and direction of ocean surface currents in near real-time. The radars can measure currents up to 200 kilometers offshore and can operate under any weather conditions. The radars are located along both the east and west coastlines of the United States.

The data from the radars are used in a variety of applications including to support pollutant tracking, search and rescue efforts, and management of the country’s coastal resources.

The buoy system collects data on ocean velocity, salinity, and temperature to determine the circulation along the United State’s coasts and estuaries.

The data are used to principally produce the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Tidal Current Tables. These tables predict the daily tidal current for each location where the data are collected. The tables are publicly available in an electronic format.

Data uses and products The data are used by many groups including researchers, educators, and coastal managers. For example, data from the network of reserves is used to help understand the effects of climate change in the nation’s coastal regions.

System description The system is located in the nation’s major coastal regions— west, northeast, Great Lakes, mid- Atlantic, southeast, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Sea—to determine how reserve conditions, including water quality associated environmental parameters, are changing in both the short-term and long-term. The system monitors environmental conditions, such as water quality, at 13 marine sanctuaries. The data are collected from a variety of platforms, including ships and buoys.

The data collected are used to measure progress toward maintaining and improving the natural and archaeological quality of the national marine sanctuary system.

The system consists of two programs—Mussel Watch and Bioeffects—that monitor the environmental quality of estuarine and coastal waters throughout the nation. Data are collected from multiple sites along the entire United States coastline, including the Great Lakes.

The data are used to characterize and assess the environmental impact of new and emerging contaminants and extreme events (hurricanes and oil spills) on the nation’s estuarine and coastal waters.

The system is a network that has over 200 coastal observing stations around the United States that collect continuous, long-term water level observations.

The data are used primarily to support safe navigation of the country’s waterways by computing tidal and water-level datums, producing tide prediction tables, and estimating sea-level trends. The data are collected and transmitted via satellite to their users.

The system uses aircraft to collect aerial imagery of the nation’s coastal areas.

The data are primarily used to produce nautical charts, which are used for a variety of purposes including coastal zone management and emergency response.

Observing system managing office and name Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System

System description The system was developed to provide accurate and reliable real- time information about environmental conditions in seaports. It collects data on wind, water, and air environmental parameters.

Data uses and products The data are provided primarily to ship masters and pilots in real- time to avoid groundings and collisions in the nation’s ports. Data on water levels, currents, and other oceanographic variables are available through a variety of formats, including the Internet.

The system is a network of observing instruments and platforms used by the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System program’s regional associates to collect data on a variety of environmental parameters in the nation’s coastal waters.

Data collected by the regional associations are being integrated with other data collected by NOAA’s National Data Buoy Center into a database, which the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System program plans to make publicly available.

The data are used to produce forecasts, warnings, and atmospheric models. Other uses of the data include scientific and research programs and to assist in emergency response to chemical spills. that are moored at specific locations but able to drift up to 2 miles in all directions. The buoys are located throughout the nation’s oceans and coastal waters.

The system has 60 stations in the nation’s coastal zones. Its platforms include buoys or land-based tower stations. The system was designed in the early 1980s in response to the need to maintain meteorological observations in U.S. coastal areas that had previously been gathered by U.S. Coast Guard personnel stationed at lighthouses.

The data are used to produce meteorological observations in coastal areas and are relayed to users at least once per hour from the system’s platforms.

The system consists of an anchored seafloor bottom pressure recorder and a companion moored surface buoy to detect tsunamis in U.S. coastal areas.

The data are transmitted in real- time to NOAA’s Tsunami Warning Centers via satellite. The centers then decide which coastal communities are in danger and issue warnings.

Data uses and products The data are collected to help predict El Niño events. They are transferred to shore in real-time using satellites.

System description The system is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System. It was designed in response to an early 1980s El Niño event, which was neither predicted nor detected until nearly its peak. The system collects data on a variety of meteorological parameters, such as wind speed, and relative humidity, as well as ocean current profiles and upper ocean temperatures.

The system detects tsunami activity around Hawaii using sea-level gauges.

The data are used to confirm the generation of a tsunami and to predict locations where it may strike.

Voluntary Observing Ship The system uses ships, both U.S. and internationally owned, that voluntarily collect data on meteorological conditions. The data are encoded in a standardized format and sent via satellite or radio to services that provide marine weather forecasts.

The data are used for a variety of purposes, including weather forecasts, and to help measure extreme weather events and long-term climate changes. The data are also archived for future use by climatologists and other scientists.

Office of Marine and Aviation Operations NOAA Aircraft

NOAA uses its aircraft to collect data on multiple environmental parameters, including atmospheric pressure and ocean temperature.

The data are used to support global climate change studies, assessing marine mammal populations, surveying coastal erosion, investigating oil spills, flight checking aeronautical charts, and improving hurricane or winter storm prediction models.

NOAA’s fleet of ships collects data and supports federal disaster response around the world. The system collects data on multiple environmental parameters, including ocean pH and water depth.

The data are used for hydrographic surveys, oceanographic research, and fisheries research, among other things.

Observing system managing office and name System description Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Airborne Oceanographic Product

Initially deployed (fiscal year)

The system uses aircraft to collect data via aircraft 30 days a year in coastal Washington state, the Pacific Northwest, and Chesapeake Bay on fish and the thin plankton layer.

The data are used to support scientific research on specific parameters such as waves.

The data are used to understand long-term trends in the physical and biological state of the Arctic Ocean. of platforms: ocean or sea ice platforms, ships, aircraft, and land based climate atmospheric observatories to study meteorological, sea ice, and subsurface environmental parameters in the Arctic Ocean.

The system is used in the Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea, and Arctic to understand ecosystem dynamics and the life cycle of commercially valuable fish and shellfish stocks.

The data are used to produce ecosystem forecasts that help guide resource managers in making catch share allocations to commercial fishermen and to mitigate the effects of climate change on marine species and coastal communities.

The system uses free-drifting floats to observe the ocean’s upper 2,000 meters. The mission of the system is to describe and understand the physical processes responsible for climate variability and predictability.

The data are transmitted real- time via satellites to land-based receiving stations and are used in weather forecasting and climate prediction models.

The system is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System and was designed to use drifting buoys around the world to measure sea surface temperature and currents at 15 meters below the water’s surface.

The data are used to adjust satellite sea surface temperature observations and provide real- time data on the structure of global surface currents, among other things.

The system is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System and uses fixed platforms that are stationed on islands and in the coastal zones around the world to measure and report sea-level information. The data are transmitted in real-time using satellites.

The data are used in multiple NOAA missions including climate monitoring and prediction.

Data uses and products The data are transmitted via satellite in near real-time and are used for developing and improving models of the ocean.

System description The system is located in the Atlantic Ocean and is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System. It is a buoy system used to study ocean- atmosphere interactions in the tropical Atlantic Ocean that affect regional climate variability on seasonal, interannual, and longer time scales. The system is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System. It is a buoy system located in the Indian Ocean that gathers data to address scientific questions related to ocean conditions and monsoons. The system collects data on air temperature, atmospheric pressure, and the direction of ocean currents.

The data are real-time measurements that are used in climate research and forecasting.

The data are used to help with forecasting long-term climate trends.

The system obtains ocean measurements from around the world that contribute to NOAA’s understanding of the carbon cycle and is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System.The system is part of the multinational Global Ocean Observing System and uses buoys to maintain long-term observing capabilities on ocean and climate environmental parameters.

The data are transmitted by satellites, which enables users (scientists and the public) access in near real-time for use in products such as climate studies.

System description The system uses a network of cargo vessels, cruise ships, and research vessels that voluntarily collect ocean measurements by either using NOAA supplied instruments on specified routes or hosting NOAA technicians onboard to take measurements. These ships are also the primary vehicle for deploying NOAA’s drifting buoy arrays, surface drifting buoys, and Argo profiling floats, as well as other instruments. Data are collected on three environmental parameters related to temperature: air, sea, and subsurface. The system uses arrays of hydrophones to collect continuous digital acoustic data for ocean observation in the Pacific Ocean from the Arctic to tropical locations. The hydrophones are used primarily to listen for earthquakes, but can also observe icequakes, large waves, and some marine endangered species.

Data uses and products The data collected are used to produce more than 25 articles in peer reviewed scientific publications, scientific meeting presentations, and a large number of other products associated with monitoring the condition of the ocean.

The data are used in research related to earthquakes and marine endangered species.

The system is located in the Great Lakes and collects data on multiple environmental parameters including water temperature, extent of ice cover, wave direction, and turbidity.

The data are used by the National Weather Service to help verify its marine weather forecasts and for fisheries research.

The system collects continuous, time series data on the strength of the Atlantic Ocean meridional overturning circulation, which includes many currents. The system uses submarine cables and measurements from ships, among others, to monitor the condition of the currents.

The data provide the only measurement of the strength of the meridional overturning circulation and are used to improve climate forecasts.

The number of deployed platforms that are currently operational by NOAA. Some observing systems include platforms that are operated by other countries; however; we did not include those platforms in this table. The El Niño Southern Oscillation is a naturally occurring phenomenon that involves fluctuating ocean temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. The pattern generally fluctuates between two states: warmer than normal temperatures in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific (El Niño) and cooler than normal temperatures in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific (La Niña). A thin plankton layer is an aggregation of phytoplankton on the ocean’s surface.

The global carbon cycle is the process by which carbon is exchanged among various systems, including the earth's atmosphere, the oceans, geological sources of stored carbon (e.g., fossil fuels), and the vegetation and soils of the earth's terrestrial ecosystems.

Appendix V: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Annual Estimated Operations and Maintenance Costs for the Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Observing Systems by Office for Fiscal Years 2012 through 2014

Observing system managing office and name National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite N/O/P Jason Ocean Surface Topography Mission (2,3 & CS)

NOAA’s estimated costs for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 were based on final appropriations for those years. The estimates for fiscal year 2014 were based on the fiscal year 2014 President’s budget request. The estimates reported for here include costs to operate and maintain the Jason-2 mission. Development costs for the Jason-3 mission, with the operational environmental satellite scheduled to be launched in fiscal year 2015, are not included.

The Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System is a cost-sharing program where local partners provide funding for the sensor systems and their ongoing maintenance.

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Commerce

Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the individual named above, Stephen D. Secrist (Assistant Director), Cheryl Arvidson, Mark Braza, Heather Dowey, Richard Hung, Paul Kinney, Michael Meleady, and Jeanette Soares made key contributions to this report.