Senate Appropriators Caution NASA on Space Station
Yesterday’s ninety-minute hearing of the Senate VA, HUD, Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee focused almost exclusively on the International Space Station. Station supporter Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and opponent Dale Bumpers (D-AK) offered two predictions that at first glance seem contradictory to their positions. Mikulski warned NASA Administrator Dan Goldin that because of the station’s escalating price, and Russian dealings with Iran, “we’re running out of patience here...[with] this appropriation we could run into a crisis.” Bumpers - who is retiring - expressed similar concerns in what he called his swan song, but concluded, when speaking of Congress, “we’re not going to kill the space station, you have nothing to fear.”
Committee chair Christopher Bond (R-MO) opened the hearing by telling Goldin that “we appreciate NASA’s willingness to step up to the plate” by doing “more with less,” referring to NASA’s downward budgets. While Bond and Ranking Minority Member Mikulski were very friendly toward Goldin, they clearly have reservations about NASA’s budgeting. Bond said NASA has only been “paying lip service” to U.S. contractor and Russian problems regarding the station. He is very concerned about NASA’s transfer of money from science programs to pay for the station, and uncosted carryovers from previous years. Importantly, Bond declared that it was premature to discuss NASA’s FY 1999 budget, but did say that the subcommittee’s allocation would be tight, citing pressures from VA medical, HUD housing, and disaster assistance programs.
Mikulski expressed gratitude that the Administration had not cut NASA’s FY 1999 budget deeper than earlier predictions had warned. She said “NASA is not moving ahead” as other R&D agency budgets are, and included on her list of “flashing yellow lights” the downsizing of science, Russian participation in the station, Russian/Iran weapons dealings, concerns about the Space Telescope Institute in Baltimore, and the year 2000 problem.
Goldin is a terrific witness at hearings. While enthusiastic about his agency, he does not dodge problems, at one point telling the senators about station budget problems, “I am not going to sugar coat this.” He is blunt in his assessments, both good and bad, saying “except for Russia, we are on track.”
“Except for Russia” is a very big exception. Mikulski is very troubled by Russian nonproliferation compliance when it comes to Iran, saying “we’ve got a major diplomatic crisis on our hands.” “How the hell” can we trust Russia on Iran if they are not complying with the station agreement, she asked Goldin. “This could sink the space station,” she told him. Chairman Bond associated himself with Mikulski’s remarks.
Bumpers peppered Goldin about a just released independent cost assessment and validation task force review called the Chabrow Report. This report, to be summarized in a future FYI, warns that the station cannot be built for the $17.4 billion -- the current cost cap. The cost to the U.S. could total $24.7 billion, and construction take an additional three years to complete, the report cautions. Bumpers asked Goldin at what point the station’s cost becomes too high, something Goldin said he could not answer on an off-the-cuff basis. Goldin told the subcommittee he had no problems with the quality of Russia’s work, saying NASA had learned much from them. “The only question is, will the Russians fund the Russian space agency?” Goldin said.
