Report: Inadequate Coast Guard data sharing obstructed communication after oil spill

The failure of a beleaguered $30 billion U.S. Coast Guard modernization program to resolve communication problems hampered the exchange of data between aircraft and vessels during last year's Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, federal auditors say.

The program, also named Deepwater, was started in 1996 to refresh nearly all the service's assets, including command-and-control operations. But the C4ISR upgrade -- which stands for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance -- has not produced intended benefits, according to a July 28 Government Accountability Office report.

Data sharing, centralized networks and information from sensors are essential to achieving the Coast Guard's mission in a tight budget environment, federal officials have said.

There is no central network for the system yet, however, a shortcoming that has created transmission problems between vehicles, GAO auditors wrote. For example, the National Security Cutter and Maritime Patrol Aircraft, or MPA, use classified systems to handle command-and-control data, while the HC-130J turboprop aircraft and the HC-130H long-range surveillance aircraft use unclassified systems. Although vessels and planes have voice communication capability, all vehicles cannot fully exchange information with each other.

"Sharing data gathered by the MPA during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill incident was difficult because all information gathered by the MPA was maintained on a classified system," the report stated. Service officials are addressing the classification issues by amending Coast Guard policies, but the changes have not been finalized, the auditors noted.

The overall purpose of Deepwater is to enhance the service's ability to accomplish its main duty -- spotting and abating potential nautical conflicts. C4ISR was supposed to increase the chances of success by expediting the process of scouting the sea and responding to any situations. But the communications program has suffered delays due to ballooning costs and lackluster oversight, the report stated.

The government approved a new schedule and cost estimate for the system in February -- two years after the Coast Guard initially submitted the proposal to its parent organization, the Homeland Security Department, GAO officials wrote. The revised plan includes more than $1 billion in additional expenses largely due to post-Sept. 11 requirements and the need to sustain a uniform system design for longer than expected.

During their evaluation, auditors at first could not tell whether the service still planned to deploy data connectivity throughout all components. According to the Coast Guard's new cost estimate document, C4ISR would be installed on only 127 air and surface assets, which is fewer than half the approximately 300 components within the Deepwater acquisition.

In a draft report, GAO officials recommended the service decide whether it still wants to link its entire fleet using the C4ISR "system-of-systems" concept.

Jim Crumpacker, director of DHS' Departmental GAO Liaison Office, responded in a July 25 letter, "USCG remains committed to the system-of-systems approach for efficient and effective mission execution. The C4ISR project is revising its acquisition strategy and plans to deliver interoperable C4ISR capabilities to assets."

He added that the Coast Guard expects to provide DHS with an affordable and feasible revised system strategy that takes advantage of work already completed.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, said in a statement, "As delays continue and problems mount, we still do not know the true cost of the Deepwater program . . . The escalating costs of Deepwater must be contained."