“President Obama will chart a course for NASA within weeks, based on the advice of a handful of key advisers in the administration and Congress. Obama, who met Dec. 16 with NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, hasn’t said when or how he’ll announce his new policy.
The announcement likely will come by the time the president releases his fiscal 2011 budget in early February, because he must decide how much money the space agency should get.”
U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, today wrote a letter to NASA Inspector General Paul Martin calling for an investigation of the Augustine Commission’s staff. The Augustine Commission was tasked with reviewing U.S. human space flight activities and presenting objective options to the President on the optimal path going forward. In light of the fact that several members of the Commission’s staff are federally registered lobbyists for the commercial space industry, Shelby called on NASA to investigate how these staff members’ involvement affected the Commission’s findings:
“Lobbyists are paid to represent a certain viewpoint and advocate for their client or employer’s position,” Shelby wrote to Martin. “Clearly, these lobbyists, whom represent the commercial space industry in their full time profession, have an agenda which is biased. Thus their decision-making is inevitably skewed by their allegiance. It is unfortunate that the options presented by the Augustine Commission are now tainted by the efforts of these individuals who happen to gain the most from the imbalanced comparisons and lack of consistent treatment of flight options in the report.”
December 14, 2009
The Honorable Paul K. Martin
Inspector General
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
300 E Street, SW
Suite 8V39
Washington, DC 20546-0001
Dear Mr. Martin,
I am writing with serious concerns regarding the Augustine Commission staff, their vocation, and their conduct while serving as Commission staff. It has come to my attention that several members are, in fact, federally registered lobbyists and that some of these individuals have taken direct advantage of their temporary roles on the Commission to further their personal business. Further, there are lobbyists that worked as Commission staff that are not even acknowledged in the report. This is both disturbing and unconscionable.
The Augustine Commission was tasked to review U.S. human space flight activities – a noble goal to ensure that the nation is on a sustainable path to achieving its aspirations in space. I have a significant interest in the future of NASA’s human spaceflight program, the recent options presented by the Augustine Commission, and the pending decisions by the President on the future direction of NASA. However, I am concerned by the presence of lobbyists on this independent commission.
Lobbyists are paid to represent a certain viewpoint and advocate for their client or employer’s position. Clearly, these lobbyists, who represent the commercial space industry in their full time profession, have an agenda which is biased. Thus their decision-making is inevitably skewed by their allegiance. It is unfortunate that the options presented by the Augustine Commission are now tainted by the efforts of these individuals who happen to gain the most from the imbalanced comparisons and lack of consistent treatment of flight options in the report.
Therefore, I ask your office to conduct a thorough investigation regarding the role of federally registered lobbyists on the Augustine Commission. I request your office investigate and document any and all contacts these lobbyists made while serving on staff on the Commission. It is clearly possible that these individuals used their position to enhance their professional contacts benefiting their lobbying business and their client’s interests. Further, I would like a review of any and all input these individuals had into the report and its findings.
Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to reviewing your findings on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Richard Shelby
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Following publication today of a new report on the future of NASA, U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson said President Obama has assured him the space program will get what it needs.
The report, prepared by the White House’s Augustine Commission, suggests several options for NASA’s future beyond the space shuttle and International Space Station missions. But it says America’s space program “appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory.”
“It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources,” the report says. More specifically, the space program needs another $3 billion annually.
“I’ve asked the president to use money from leftover stimulus funds,” said Nelson, in a prepared statement. “I’ve also asked him to help minimize the job losses after the space shuttle is retired, in part, by transferring other NASA-related work to Cape Canaveral.
“He’s assured me that NASA will get enough money to do what it does best: go explore the heavens,” Nelson said.
The Florida Democrat is the only sitting member of Congress to have flown in space. He did so aboard Columbia in 1986. He’s remained an outspoken advocate of space exploration.
In addition to pressing the administration to use leftover stimulus money to bolster the program, he played key roles in getting an extra $1 billion to extend the life of the shuttle and in the selection of new NASA administrator Charlie Bolden.
“Whatever the president chooses, I will continue to fight to get NASA the funding it needs for the next generation of human spaceflight,” Nelson said today. “It’s critical for Florida and the country.”
Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee
Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation
Executive Summary
The U.S. human spaceflight program appears to be on an unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources. Space operations are among the most demanding and unforgiving pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really is rocket science. Space operations become all the more difficult when means do not match aspirations. Such is the case today.
The nation is facing important decisions on the future of human spaceflight. Will we leave the close proximity of low- Earth orbit, where astronauts have circled since 1972, and explore the solar system, charting a path for the eventual expansion of human civilization into space? If so, how will we ensure that our exploration delivers the greatest benefit to the nation? Can we explore with reasonable assurances of human safety? Can the nation marshal the resources to embark on the mission?
Whatever space program is ultimately selected, it must be matched with the resources needed for its execution. How can we marshal the necessary resources? There are actually more options available today than in 1961, when President Kennedy challenged the nation to “commit itself to the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.”
First, space exploration has become a global enterprise. Many nations have aspirations in space, and the combined annual budgets of their space programs are comparable to NASA’s. If the United States is willing to lead a global program of exploration, sharing both the burden and benefit of space exploration in a meaningful way, significant accomplishments could follow. Actively engaging international partners in a manner adapted to today’s multi-polar world could strengthen geopolitical relationships, leverage global financial and technical resources, and enhance the exploration enterprise.
Second, there is now a burgeoning commercial space industry. If we craft a space architecture to provide opportunities to this industry, there is the potential–not without risk–that the costs to the government would be reduced. Finally, we are also more experienced than in 1961, and able to build on that experience as we design an exploration program. If, after designing cleverly, building alliances with partners, and engaging commercial providers, the nation cannot afford to fund the effort to pursue the goals it would like to embrace, it should accept the disappointment of setting lesser goals. Can we explore with reasonable assurances of human safety? Human space travel has many benefits, but it is an inherently dangerous endeavor. Human safety can never be absolutely assured, but throughout this report, safety is treated as a sine qua non. It is not discussed in extensive detail because any concepts falling short in human safety have simply been eliminated from consideration.
How will we explore to deliver the greatest benefit to the nation? Planning for a human spaceflight program should begin with a choice about its goals–rather than a choice of possible destinations. Destinations should derive from goals, and alternative architectures may be weighed against those goals. There is now a strong consensus in the United States that the next step in human spaceflight is to travel beyond low-Earth orbit. This should carry important benefits to society, including: driving technological innovation; developing commercial industries and important national capabilities; and contributing to our expertise in further exploration. Human exploration can contribute appropriately to the expansion of scientific knowledge, particularly in areas such as field geology, and it is in the interest of both science and human spaceflight that a credible and well-rationalized strategy of coordination between them be developed. Crucially, human spaceflight objectives should broadly align with key national objectives.
These more tangible benefits exist within a larger context. Exploration provides an opportunity to demonstrate space leadership while deeply engaging international partners; to inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers; and to shape human perceptions of our place in the universe. The Committee concludes that the ultimate goal of human exploration is to chart a path for human expansion into the solar system. This is an ambitious goal, but one worthy of U.S. leadership in concert with a broad range of international partners.
The Committee’s task was to review the U.S. plans for human spaceflight and to offer possible alternatives. In doing so, it assessed the programs within the current human spaceflight portfolio; considered capabilities and technologies a future program might require; and considered the roles of commercial industry and our international partners in this enterprise. From these deliberations, the Committee developed five integrated alternatives for the U.S. human spaceflight program, including an executable version of the current program. The considerations and the five alternatives are summarized in the pages that follow.
Key Questions to Guide the Plan for Human Spaceflight
The Committee identified the following questions that, if answered, would form the basis of a plan for U.S. human spaceflight:
1. What should be the future of the Space Shuttle?
2. What should be the future of the International Space Station (ISS)?
3. On what should the next heavy-lift launch vehicle be based?
4. How should crews be carried to low-Earth orbit?
5. What is the most practicable strategy for exploration beyond low-Earth orbit?
The Committee considers the framing and answering of these questions individually and consistently to be at least as important as their combinations in the integrated options for a human spaceflight program, which are discussed below. Some 3,000 alternatives can be derived from the various possible answers to these questions; these were narrowed to the five representative families of integrated options that are offered in this report. In these five families, the Committee examined the interactions of the decisions, particularly with regard to cost and schedule. Other reasonable and consistent combinations of the choices are possible (each with its own cost and schedule implications), and these could also be considered as alternatives.
Human Space Flight Review Committee Chairman Norman Augustine will hold a press conference at 1 p.m. EDT, on Thursday, Oct. 22, in the Zenger Room of the National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, in Washington.
Augustine will be accompanied by committee member Ed Crawley. Printed copies of the committee’s final report will be available during the press conference and an electronic copy of the report will be posted to the committee’s Web site at the start of the briefing.
The Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee will hold a public teleconference on Thursday, Oct. 8, from approximately 1 to 2 p.m. EDT.
The only topic for discussion will be finalization of scoring of options the committee presented in their summary report on September 8, 2009.
This meeting will be held by teleconference only. The teleconference will be open to the public. The service limit is approximately 300 dial-in callers. Public participants will be in a listen-only mode. The following numbers are available to hear the teleconference:
Toll-free number: 1-888-373-5705
Other number: 1-719-457-3840
Participant Passcode: 190078
The meeting must be held on this date for the committee’s final report to support the time frame associated with the federal budget process. For this reason, it is not possible to accommodate the usual full public notice period. A notice in the Federal Register is expected to appear on or about Oct. 6.
From Tuscaloosa News
Griffin said that NASA’s focus on continuing the space shuttle program and developing the International Space Station in partnership with other countries was to the detriment of America’s future in space. He noted that the shuttle is scheduled to be retired in another couple of years and there is no firm commitment to another space project on the scale of the moon landing.
Griffin said the U.S. should be in a leadership position on projects such as returning to the moon and going to Mars, rather than leaving the future of space to other countries such as Russia or China, both of whom have space programs.
View the Full Article at TuscaloosaNews.com
On Friday, Norm Augustine and the committee members met with OSTP (Office of Science and Technology Policy) and NASA senior management. The meeting was basically a recapitulation of what was presented in the public session on Wednesday, August 12.
The HSF committee’s next step is to prepare the final report which will add more depth and text around what was presented and decided on Wednesday, but it will contain the same primary message. Report availability date is TBD.
1:00pm – 5:00pm Committee Deliberations.
Today’s Public Meeting of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee will take place at:
The Ronald Reagan Building
Washington D.C.
August 12,2009
1:00 pm – 5:00 pm Eastern
Every public presentation presented at the first public hearing of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee is now available.
Meeting Presentations