Witnesses at a November 7 House Science Committee hearing
testified that a permanent space station with a three-person
crew, reduced research capability, and only a "core"
configuration was one viable outcome of the station program.
Thomas Young, who chaired the International Space Station
Management and Cost Evaluation Task Force, appeared with OMB
Deputy Director Sean O'Keefe to discuss the Task Force's
recommendations for the future of the space station. Both
O'Keefe and the committee members agreed that the Task Force
report laid out an acceptable blueprint for how to proceed with
the program and how to determine the appropriate "end state"
for
the station. O'Keefe called the Task Force recommendations a
"good course of action" that the Administration could work
with.
As reported in FYI
#135, the Task Force found the current space station program and
cost estimate "not credible," and outlined a number of management
reforms and other program changes to free up additional funds and make
completion of the "core complete" station configuration, by
FY 2006 and within current cost caps, more achievable. (The core complete
version lacks the originally-planned Crew Return Vehicle, Node 3, Habitation
and Propulsion modules and some research capability, and would support
only a three-person permanent crew.) While acknowledging that the core
complete configuration would not utilize the station's full research
potential, the Task Force recommended that as a first step, NASA make
the suggested changes and demonstrate the program's credibility over
the next several years. Only then, if the program performance was satisfactory,
would a decision be made about whether to supply additional resources
and enhance the station with items beyond the core configuration. Also
during the next several years, NASA should establish its science priorities
for the program, which would then help determine the desired "end
state," including the appropriate number of permanent crew.
In his testimony, Young reiterated that the current plan to
achieve core complete by FY 2006 for a budget of $8.3 billion was
"not credible." However, the Task Force believed that its
recommendations, "if properly implemented," could restore
the
program's credibility and possibly enable the core configuration
to be completed within the program's cost cap. He outlined ways
to achieve cost savings by reducing shuttle flights, and to
increase science utilization by overlapping Soyuz visits to the
station. The program's current financial management tools were
"inadequate," he said, and the cost estimates for enhancements
beyond core complete were not sufficiently developed yet to
assess their credibility.
There was broad agreement among the committee and the witnesses
that the technical accomplishments demonstrated so far by the
space station program were outstanding, but all agreed that the
primary purpose of the station was as a science program, not an
infrastructure program. Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-
NY) said the Task Force and the Administration "have outlined the
proper way to make the best of a bad situation.... Today's
hearing is really just the beginning of a multi-year process to
reform the space station program and determine if it can be
expanded beyond its core elements." He seemed to express the
views of all committee members present when he said, "in the
final analysis, we want the space station program to go forward,
and to produce significant scientific advancements for the nation
and the world."
To no avail, Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall (D-TX) urged the
Administration to "make clear up front...that it intends to honor
its commitments" and build the full, seven-person station. He
and Space Subcommittee Ranking Member Bart Gordon (D-TN) pressed
Young on whether permanently completing the station at the core
configuration was a wasted investment, but Young said that
statement was "too strong." He said the Task Force spent much
effort trying to balance cost issues against scientific
capabilities to "arrive at an intermediate solution." Young
pointed out that the report does not preclude a permanent core
complete configuration, but added, "I do not believe the core
complete program would be a waste, but I believe it would be a
significant disappointment." He acknowledged that such a
configuration would not realize the station's unique research
potential: "There's no question but that a three-person crew
adversely impacts the science," as well as agreements with the
international partners.
O'Keefe agreed that, "while it may not be optimum," the core
complete configuration would be worthwhile to finish. He added
that if the management reforms and other remedial actions are
successful in restoring credibility to the program, there would
not have to be any ultimate reduction in capability.
Several committee members raised concerns about the response of
the international station partners to the Task Force
recommendations, and about a potential lack of NASA leadership to
implement the reforms, with both NASA Administrator Dan Goldin
and the Associate Administrator for Human Space Flight due to
leave the space agency in the near future. Rep. Dave Weldon (R-
FL) challenged a Task Force finding that the single biggest
factor in the program's cost growth was NASA's culture of
managing to an annual budget instead of taking into account total
program cost. Weldon said there was "plenty of blame to spread
around" and that congressional and administration policies and
cost caps played a role in the escalating costs.
As the questioning drew to a close, Rep. Gordon summarized the
main points of the hearing: that "the major, if not only, purpose
of the station is science," and that it would take "a Herculean
effort" to achieve the core complete station within the current
budget allocation. He concluded, "the Administration is telling
us it's not going to make a commitment" to enhancements and
further resources until NASA has made the suggested program
changes to restore credibility and prove it can achieve the core
configuration. He asked O'Keefe to return in the spring to give
the committee a status report on the program's progress.
Future FYIs will provide details on what level of funding the FY
2002 VA/HUD appropriations conference report provides for the
space station program, and what conferees had to say about the
program's cost overruns.
Audrey T. Leath
Media and Government Relations Division
American Institute of Physics
fyi@aip.org
(301) 209-3094
Enlarge text
Shrink text
Print
E-mail
Digg this
Del.icio.us
Furl