Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile: Need to Define Requirements and Establish Criteria to Assess Performance
NSIAD-96-7
Published: Oct 17, 1995. Publicly Released: Oct 17, 1995.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
GAO reviewed the Army's plans for acquiring the Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile (EFOG-M) system.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Defense | Before deciding to either acquire more EFOG-M or retain the limited quantity beyond the user evaluation, the Secretary of Defense should require the Army to prepare: (1) a formal EFOG-M requirements document; and (2) analyses comparing EFOG-M cost and operational effectiveness with other alternatives for satisfying the requirement, including the weapons of other services if appropriate. |
DOD agreed to require the Army to prepare a formal cost and operational effectiveness analysis and a statement of requirements if the results of the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration indicate that a larger quantity of EFOG-M should be acquired. Even though the advanced technology demonstration has not been completed, the Army eliminated funding for the EFOG-M program in the fiscal year 1999 budget request.
|
| Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should establish measurable exit criteria regarding the most critical EFOG-M performance issues before beginning the tests, demonstrations, and evaluations. |
DOD did not agree with the recommendation, stating that: (1) exit criteria are not appropriate for use with an Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration; (2) appropriate testing will be performed to characterize performance; and (3) required levels of performance will not be established until the conclusion of the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration.
|
| Department of Defense | The Secretary of Defense should evaluate the feasibility and costs of performing the tests and evaluations to be conducted during the limited procurement in such a fashion as to preclude the need to repeat them if a larger procurement is desired. |
DOD agreed with the recommendation, stating that it intends to address this issue within the Transition Integrated Product Team process to avoid unnecessary duplication of tests. However, the Army eliminated funding for the EFOG-M program in the fiscal year 1999 budget request.
|
| Department of Defense | Before requesting appropriations to support and operate the EFOG-M equipment beyond the extended user evaluation period, the Secretary of Defense should require the Army to provide evidence that such a deployment would be cost-effective. In addition, before requesting funds for a larger procurement, the Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Army has planned sufficient funding and personnel to support, operate, and maintain the larger procurement. |
DOD agreed with the recommendation, stating that: (1) the results of the Rapid Force Projection Initiative Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration will include an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of a limited fielding with the inventory procured for the demonstration; and (2) any decision to procure additional units will include full consideration of funding and manpower required to operate and support the expanded deployment. However, the Army eliminated funding for the EFOG-M program in the fiscal year 1999 budget request.
|
Full Report
Public Inquiries
Topics
Weapons systemsArmy procurementCost effectiveness analysisDefense contingency planningMissilesProcurement appropriationsRequirements definitionTestingU.S. ArmyMilitary forces