Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

-13

Government be an early and substantial customer of a private sector system is an alternative which we believe warrants serious consideration.

With respect to international arrangements, we believe it is too early to speculate on how an international system might be formed. Until the institutional structure for the U. S. national ERIS program is resolved, it would not appear productive to speculate on potential arrangements for an international system. These questions can best be considered at a later time by the ERIS operator in conjunction with interested Government agencies.

What are the proper Government/private sector relationships? The reports prepared for the Committee contemplate an increasing responsibility in the private sector for an operational ERIS. It is suggested that such transfer could be facilitated if the Government were an early, major customer of a private sector system. However, while the goal, and means, of early transfer of responsibility to the private sector are suggested, the remaining discussion sets forth two reasons why an early transfer should not take place. First, with respect to the space segment, the report assumes that a Landsat type system will form the basis of ERIS and that the development costs of such a system "do not appear to afford possibilities of practical private venture

-14

for this class of satellite."

Given the costs for the first

Landsat-D mission of $290-330 million estimated by GAO,* this statement is probably true, unless the Government were to lease a substantial portion of the satellite facility from a private sector operator, as in the case of TDRSS. However, the statement neglects the fact that technology other than that used in the Landsat programs is available, that such technology can satisfy requirements that cannot be met by a Landsat type system, and that substantial cost savings may be possible through use of such technology. private sector investment in space segment facilities could be contemplated if the market for particular kinds of data services and products justifies the investment risk.

Thus,

Second, the report states that "public or international sensitivities probably mitigate against a private sector operation at this stage." No justification for this statement is given nor is there any discussion whether arrangements can be envisioned which would satisfy legitimate concerns with private sector ownership and operation of an ERIS. We believe there are means to protect those legitimate

*Report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of the United States, Landsat's Role in an Earth Resources Information System, PSAD-77-58 (1977).

-15

interests and that private sector investment in an ERIS

need not be dismissed on such grounds.

A potential role for the private sector is seen in the provision of a TDRSS type satellite-to-ground data relay link for ERIS. The report suggests that an appropriate role for the private sector would be to supply such a service "with the government buying a guaranteed level of service." Given the cost of TDRSS services recently procured by the Government ($781 million for ten years of service), use of a separate TDRSS type data link for ERIS probably would result in such a high investment cost for ERIS so as to preclude any private sector initiatives. A more economical alternative would be to use foreign earth stations and the INTELSAT system for data relay.

The discussion of the data handling segment contemplates a centralized governmental activity which would place all basic data products in the public domain. The role of the private sector would be limited to the provision of "value-added services." The effect of such scheme would be to preclude private sector initiatives in the provision of space segment sérvices as well as data handling services. Obviously, if the Government in effect competes in the provision of data products to the public and to its own constituent agencies, the private sector would be precluded from such activity.

-16

In summary, we believe that while it is recognized that there are means by which to encourage private sector initiatives with respect to establishment of an ERIS, certain system assumptions are adopted which create an environment of discouraging private sector initiatives. These system

assumptions are based on the Landsat experimental programs and we question their validity with respect to an operational ERIS. Before the question of public/private sector relationships should be resolved, we believe it is first necessary to address the recognized deficiencies in the present experimental programs and then determine how the respective resources and capabilities of the public and private sectors can be applied to correct those deficiencies and provide the data products and services which are desired by the user community.

What should be the involvement of not-for-profit organizations in ERIS?

The primary focus in the discussion materials regarding the role of not-for-profit organizations is in the area of technology transfer. While we agree training in the use of ERIS data services and products is necessary to broaden the user base and ensure the benefits of the technology are widely distributed, the appropriate extent of actual technology transfer raises significant questions regarding the maintenance of U. S. technological leadership. The role of

-17

the not-for-profit institutions, therefore, should be consistent with overall U. S. policies with respect to the transfer of technology.

What are the possibilities for participation of other countries in ERIS and what are their responsibilities?

We agree that there are a number of arrangements which can be envisioned for participation of other countries in ERIS. In the initial phases, it would appear that the primary concern will be to ensure that effective utilization of the system is available to foreign countries, consistent with any internationally agreed principles governing remote sensing to which the United States adheres. In later stages, attention can be devoted to questions of participation in system development, construction and operation, or the formation of an internationally owned and operated system. However, we believe the institutional framework for establishment of an operational ERIS by the United States can proceed prior to resolution of all questions involving international participation.

Who should operate the various segments of the system? The reports prepared for the Committee assume that the Government will operate the space segment of ERIS and that NASA is a logical choice as system operator.

This

« AnteriorContinuar »