The Government Accountability Office (GAO) wants the space science and technology strategy developed by the Department of Defense (DOD) and Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to be more robust.

In the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, building on existing staututory requirements, Congress required DOD and the DNI to prepare a space science and technology (S&T) strategy every two years to address their goals and how to achieve them. It also required GAO to review those strategies.

GAO found that the first of these documents, submitted to Congress in April 2011, met the statutory requirements, but did not “address fundamental challenges facing the space S&T community.” It also noted that the strategy was due at the time the President’s FY2012 budget request was delivered to Congress, February 14, 2011, so the strategy was late. By law, GAO is required to provide its assessment to Congress within 90 days of when the strategy is submitted.

GAO made three recommendations in order to enhance the next version of the strategy. They are that the Secretary of Defense and the DNI —

• develop a specific implementation plan providing a detailed process for achieving the strategy’s goals;
• include information on required human capital, required funding, prioritization, ways to measure progress against goals, and process(es) for revising goals to address the challenges in space S&T; and
• enhance coordination between the DOD space S&T community, the intelligence S&T community, NASA, and NOAA so the space S&T area can be examined strategically.

In its response to GAO, printed as an appendix to the report, DOD concurred with the recommendations.

While many of us were focused on the space shuttle launch on Friday, the House passed the FY2012 defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2219) and began consideration of the energy and water appropriations bill (H.R. 2354).

No amendments were adopted during consideration of the defense bill that would directly affect military space activities. As reported from the House Appropriations Committee, the Defense Weather Satellite System (DWSS) — DOD’s portion of the former National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) — was cut in half and several other programs were cut, too. Their fate is now in the hands of the Senate, which has not yet marked up its version of the bill.

As for the energy and water bill, as reported from the House Appropriations Committee, it denies the request for Department of Energy (DOE) funding to restart production of plutonium-238, which is needed for some of NASA’s deep space and lunar probes. In the FY2012 request, DOE and NASA would split the costs, but the appropriations committee is not convinced that DOE should pay for any of it since NASA is the agency that benefits from the Pu-238.

Josh Hartman, a former congressional staffer and Department of Defense (DOD) acquisition official, believes “we need to change what we buy and how we buy it” to meet DOD space requirements.

Now a principal at the Center for Strategic Space Studies (CS3), Hartman made the comments in opening a meeting sponsored by CS3 and the Space Foundation on Capitol Hill on Thursday. Hartman said the goal of the meeting was to start a government-industry dialogue on how to make that happen.

Under Secretary of the Air Force Erin Conaton, herself a former Hill staffer, made the keynote address and said she welcomed the opportunity to engage in that dialogue. Recounting the difficult financial straits in which the government finds itself today, she made clear that the Air Force would not be exempt from the constrained budgets that lie ahead. The only question is how limited they will be and how to juggle all the competing demands within the Air Force. Space activities are up against major force modernization programs such as the F-35 and ICBMs, she pointed out.

Conaton is one of the architects of the proposed Evolutionary Acquisition for Space Efficiency (EASE) strategy to change the way DOD acquires space systems. On Thursday, she focused on the need to use block buys in order to provide stability to prime contractors, to improve systems incrementally instead of looking “for the next best thing,” and to encourage and demand better prices for the taxpayers. EASE “is not the answer to everything,” she said, but it can “help on the industrial and cost profile” issues.

Acquisition of space systems has a long and troubled history in both the defense and civil arenas. Programs like the SBIRS-High early warning satellites, the Advanced EHF communications satellite system, and the NPOESS environmental satellites are poster children for the need to change the way business is done. Joanne Maguire, Executive Vice President of Lockheed Martin Space Systems, offered a long list of reviews Lockheed Martin is performing in response to the “long nightmare of the past decade” and the “self-inflicted wounds” of the “faster, better, cheaper” era. Her company will “not sacrifice mission assurance for affordability,” however, she said. She pointed to the need for stable requirements as a key factor in improving the situation. EASE can make a difference, she said, but only if the entire government “is in.”

Jim Armor of ATK, a second tier supplier, said that EASE is “OK with us,” though he noted that EASE calls for long term commitments while they are not yet well defined. Calling today’s environment “crunch time for the space industrial base,” he pointed to the successful launch of ORS-1 the night before, noting that there are no follow-on satellites in that series, it is one-of-a-kind. Praising the Obama National Space Policy released last year and the National Space Security Strategy issued early this year, he nonetheless asked “where’s the implementation?” Jim Simpson of Boeing said that block buys of satellites save 30 percent in the commercial sector, but it has to be implemented in “production mode,” after risk has been reduced in the development phase.

The House Appropriations Committee rejected EASE at its markup of the defense appropriations bill last month because it would require advance appropriations. Thus, this meeting also undoubtedly was part of an effort to better explain EASE to congressional staff.

Acquisition of launch services to put DOD and intelligence satellites in orbit was a key topic throughout the meeting and the subject of a special panel. The Air Force, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and NASA recently signed a memorandum of agreement that commits the government to buying eight Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) cores per year for the next five years – a total of 40. The United Launch Alliance (ULA), a Lockheed Martin- Boeing joint venture, builds the Delta and Atlas families of EELVs and sells services to the government. The Air Force will fund five per year and the NRO will fund three. Gil Klinger, currently Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Space and Intelligence Office, and a long time player in the defense and intelligence space arena, commented that EELVs are the fifth largest expense center in the Air Force budget.

Chris Andrews from ULA traced the long history of the EELV program, which has endured many ups and downs and contract restructurings over the past decade and a half. The government bought a block buy of EELVs in the late 1990s – 28 vehicles – that were to be launched by 2006, but some still have not been launched, he said.

Larry Williams of SpaceX picked up on that point in criticizing the government’s decision to commit to 40 EELV cores. Why make such a commitment when “competition is just around the corner” with new entrants like SpaceX, he asked? Based on how long it is taking to launch the 28 vehicles bought years ago, he believes it will take to the end of the decade to launch these 40. Meanwhile, new entrants might be able to offer much lower costs if given the chance. He also took issue with those who claim that there is overcapacity in the launch services market today. His company is signing lots of orders, he said, and is bringing that business back to the United States.

The government speakers made it clear, however, they were not willing to risk mission success on unproven launch capabilities like those SpaceX is offering. To the defense community, mission assurance is the key and they want launch vehicles with a proven track record. Klinger said DOD would “apply competition when and where it makes sense.”

Yesterday’s sunset launch of ORS-1 was scrubbed due to thunderstorms in the area. A second attempt will be made tonight between 8:28 and 11:28 pm EDT.

As noted here yesterday, the launch should be visible along the mid-Atlantic coast. A map of where the best viewing opportunities are is available on the Wallops Flight Facility website.

Weather permitting — and there’s a really good chance it will not be — the first Operationally Responsive Space satellite, ORS-1, will be launched at sunset today. The launch from Wallops Island, Virginia should be visible along portions of the Mid-Atlantic East Coast.

Launch of the Minotaur 1 rocket with the ORS-1 satellite is scheduled for 8:28 pm EDT. The Air Force satellite will launch from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) at the southern portion of the DELMARVA (Delware-Maryland-Virginia) peninsula. A NASA map showing areas where the launch should be visible is available on WFF’s website. The website states that as of yesterday evening there was a 70 percent chance that weather will prevent the launch. Launch opportunities extend through July 10.

ORS-1 is a small reconnaissance satellite that is part of an effort to build and launch comparatively simple satellites more quickly than traditional satellites in response to urgent needs of field commanders. The goal for ORS-1 was to launch within 24 months of getting approval to build it. It fell short of that time frame. It is the first operational satellite of its type; two precursors (TacSat-2 and TacSat-3) were previously launched.

The Secure World Foundation and Canada’s Project Ploughshares released the latest edition of their Space Security Index this week. The report assesses trends in eight indicators of space security. The 2011 report is the eighth in the series.

The first trend pointed out in the report is that the amount of debris in low Earth orbit (LEO) continued to increase during the past year (2010). Debris from China’s 2007 antisatellite (ASAT) test against one of its own satellites has surpassed 3,000 objects according to the report. Some of the increase can be attributed to discovery of additional debris from the test itself, but some is also caused by debris impacting other debris and creating more of it. Even though there is more awareness of the problem, “space debris continues to pose an increasing threat to operational satellites and the long-term sustainability of space activities,” says the report.

The report also notes that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) is adding to its capabilities to track and catalog such objects in Earth orbit through space situational awareness (SSA) activities such as plans to build a new Space Fence of ground-based radars. Information in the report is current through the end of 2010. More recently, the House Appropriations Committee recommended significant cuts to the proposed Space Fence and other DOD SSA plans in the defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2219).

During a panel discussion at the Canadian Embassy on Wednesday where the report was formally released, Andrew D’Uva, President of Providence Access Company, provided an update on the Space Data Association (SDA). One of the issues facing satellite operators is to know not only where satellites are, but where they are going. Operators often deliberately move their satellites from one orbital location to another, and occasionally lose control of a satellite entirely and it drifts through space affected by forces such as the solar wind.

For the first many decades of the Space Age, there were few satellites compared to the vastness of space in Earth orbit. Satellite owners did not worry about bumping into other satellites. But with the growth in operational and defunct satellites, not to mention space debris, collision avoidance based on luck alone no longer can be taken for granted. The 2009 collision of a commercial Iridium satellite with a defunct Russian satellite in low Earth orbit (LEO) drove home that point.

The U.S. Air Force provides a public catalog of thousands of space objects (http://www.space-track.org/), but it does not include classified satellites and the data it does make public are not always precise. Created by three of the major satellite operators – Intelsat, Inmarsat, and SES – SDA uses data provided by its members to more accurately track their satellites and coordinate actions. Likening the movement of satellites in orbit to traffic on a highway, D’Uva said that “SDA is putting turn signals on satellites.” He said enlightened self-interest motivated creation of SDA, not criticism that DOD does a poor job with its publicly available database. However, he noted that in a recent episode where Intelsat operators lost control of a satellite (Galaxy 15) and it drifted across a wide expanse of geostationary orbit (GEO), the data about the satellite’s location in the publicly available DOD database were incorrect 15 percent of the time. “We can’t rely on the TLEs,” he said, referring to the DOD database of “two line element” sets. SDA provides collision avoidance monitoring for 222 commercial satellites from 15 satellite operators in GEO, plus 112 satellites from seven operators in LEO. He estimated that is about 60 percent of commercial GEO satellites and a smaller percentage of commercial LEO satellites.

The Space Security Index tracks trends in eight indicators of space security grouped into three categories: the condition of the space environment (such as space debris); the type of actors in space and how space is used; and the status of space-related technology as it pertains to protecting or interfering with space systems, or harming Earth from space. In previous editions, a ninth indicator was included – space-based strike weapons (SBSW). The authors of the report concluded this year, however, that there is “an absence of reliably documented SBSW” and they would reinstate it if and when there is “clear evidence…that such weapons are being developed or deployed.”

The Senate Armed Services Committee completed work on the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act today. The biggest cut to space programs is to the Navy’s Mobile User Objective System, but only because of a launch delay that means the launch vehicle does not have to be procured now.

From the committee’s press release, here are the space-related actions:

Requires the Secretary of Defense to review and assess the ability of national security Global Positioning Systems (GPS) receivers to receive GPS signals without interruption or interference, over the next 2 years.

Authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force to purchase as a block, two Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellites using a fixed price contract and with incremental funding.

Includes a provision that would authorize the Air Force to enter into cooperative agreements or contracts with commercial space providers to improve the manner in which the space launch ranges are managed, including the ability to share costs.

Deletes $205.0 million from the Navy Mobile User Objective System satellite program for the purchase of the space launch vehicle for the 4th satellite as a result of the delay in the launch of the 4th satellite. The budget request was $282.2 million.

Reduces GPS IIF space segment by $40.0 million as a result of the Air Force decision to restructure the program by buying two satellites per year vice 3.

Added $15.0 million for Space-based Infrared satellite (SBIRS) ground stations and sensor exploitation.

Added $20.0 million for SBIRS to integrate the nuclear detonation sensors on the SBIRS satellites 5 and 6, consistent with existing statutory requirement to maintain the nuclear detonation detection capability in space.

Directed the Defense Information Systems Agency to look at a number of options, in addition to buying or leasing a single commercial satellite, when deciding to acquire commercial satellite communications capacity.

Added $6.0 million for space situational awareness (SSA) to analyze additional space sensors for use in the SSA system.

The House Appropriations Committee approved the FY2012 defense appropriations bill today.

The committee adopted 13 amendments during full committee markup, but none affect space programs. The subcommittee recommendations stand.

In total, the bill provides $530 billion in non-emergency spending, $17 billion more than the current fiscal year, but $9 billion less than the President’s request for FY2012. It also provides $119 billion in emergency spending for the “global war on terror.” That’s a total of $649 billion.

The House Appropriations Committee will mark up the FY2012 defense appropriations bill tomorrow (Tuesday, June 14) at 10:00 am. If it adopts the recommendations of its defense subcommittee, it will be a mix of good and not so good news — mostly the latter — for the department’s space programs.

The subcommittee’s recommendations are contained in a draft of the committee’s report that is already published on the committee’s website along with a copy of the draft bill. (The report is not labeled “draft,” but full committee markup is not until tomorrow and committee staff confirm that it is the working document that the full committee will use at its meeting. Amendments are possible.)

Examples of the programs recommended for cuts by the subcommittee are the following:

• $225 million for the Defense Weather Satellite System (still entitled NPOESS in the table), $220 million below the President’s request
• $351 million for development of the GPS III operational control segment, $48 million less than the request
• $413 million for the GPS III space segment, $50 million below the request
• $1.6 billion for procurement of four EELVs, $174 million below the request
• $355 million for Advanced EHF milsatcom, $67 million below the request
• $29.5 million for Operationally Responsive Space, $57 million below the request
• $221 million for Space Situation Awareness Systems, $53 million below the request (-$40 million from Space Fence and -$12 million from SBSS)
• $79 million for JSPOC mission system, $40 million below the request
• $71 million for space technology, $44.5 million below the request
• $39 million for advanced spacecraft technology, $35 million below the request
• $34 million for Rocket Systems Launch Program, $124.5 million below the request

At least two programs, conversely, would get increases.

• $803.7 million for procurement of two Wideband Global System satellite, $335 million above the request
• $107.7 million for GPS IIF production readiness, $40 million above the request

Many others, like the Space-Based Infrared Satellite (SBIRS) system, would be funded at the same level as requested, in that case $622 million. After many, many years of schedule delays and cost growth, the first geostationary SBIRS satellite was finally launched last month.

In a lengthy section beginning on p. 185, the subcommittee sharply criticized DOD’s proposed Evolutionary Acquisition for Space Efficiency (EASE) acquisition approach to satellite systems. EASE assumes the availability of advance appropriations instead of the year-by-year appropriations that are typically provided. The subcommittee said it was “disappointed” that DOD developed EASE without input from Congress and found it “alarming” that DOD based its entire budget request for space programs on Congress accepting EASE. “The Committee does not approve the acquisition plan using the advance appropriations concept,” the subcommittee report states.

In a report released today. the Government Accountability Office (GAO) left no doubt about its assessment of the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) plans to enhance its Space Situational Awareness (SSA) capabilities.

“DOD has significantly increased its investment and planned investment in SSA acquisition efforts in recent years to address growing SSA capability shortfalls. Most efforts designed to meet these shortfalls have struggled with cost, schedule, and performance challenges and are rooted in systemic problems that most space acquisition programs have encountered over the past decade. Consequently, in the past 5 fiscal years, DOD has not delivered significant new SSA capabilities as originally expected. To its credit, the Air Force recently launched a space-based sensor that is expected to appreciably enhance SSA. However, two critical acquisition efforts that are scheduled to begin development within the next 2 years–Space Fence and the Joint Space Operations Center Mission System (JMS)–face development challenges and risks, such as the use of immature technologies and planning to deliver all capabilities in a single, large increment, versus smaller and more manageable increments. It is essential that these acquisitions are placed on a solid footing at the start of development to help ensure their capabilities are delivered to the warfighter as and when promised. GAO has consistently recommended that reliable acquisition business cases be established, such as maturing technologies prior to development start, utilizing evolutionary development, and stabilizing requirements in order to reduce program risks. For efforts that move forward with less mature technologies, assessments of the cost, schedule, and performance implications of utilizing backup technologies, if they exist, could provide the knowledge needed to determine whether the efforts are worth pursuing or the investment trade-offs that may need to be made.”