U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation Hearing: Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
Hearing: Transition and Implementation: The NASA
Authorization Act of 2010
Senators in Attendance:
• Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), chair, Science and Space Subcommittee
• Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), ranking member, Full Committee
• Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), ranking member, Science and Space Subcommittee
• Sen. George LeMieux (R-FL)
• Sen. Mark Warner (R-VA)
• Sen. Mark Begich (R-AK)
• Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Witnesses:
• The Honorable John Holdren, director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
• The Honorable Elizabeth Robinson, chief financial officer, NASA
• Cristina Chaplain, director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management, U.S. GAO
• Accompanied by: Susan Poling, managing associate general counsel, U.S. GAO
Sen. Bill Nelson’s Opening Statement:
Sen. Nelson gave great credit to his Senate colleagues on pushing the new NASA Authorization Act through Congress
with little time to spare. Sen. Nelson said, “People on the last day didn’t believe NASA proponents had the two-thirds
vote necessary to pass the legislation. To Rep. Steny Hoyer’s, Rep. Bart Gordon’s, and Rep. Ralph Hall’s credit, they were
able to push the bill through, and it passed by a comfortable margin.”
Now that the NASA Authorization Act has been signed into law, the Senate Committee to begin its oversight duties to
ensure NASA implements the new authorization bill in a time of funding uncertainty.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison’s Opening Statement:
Sen. Hutchison also credited the bi-partisan and bi-cameral efforts that were necessary to pass the new NASA
Authorization Act. She noted concern about some of the delays in the design of the heavy lift launch vehicle and warned
that a delay could diminish the U.S. investment in the International Space Station.
Questions she said she needed answered at the hearing were:
• With a new roadmap, signed into law, is NASA full steam ahead?
• Are NASA, Congress, and the White House on the same page?
• Are there impediments, and if so, what are they?
Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Space Foundation 1Sen. David Vitter’s Opening Statement:
Sen. Vitter said he was very pleased with the outcome of the new NASA Authorization Act. However, he said the
question remained: is the Administration going to be a fully active positive partner to implement the new law? He said
that in his opinion, “the evidence so far is no.”
Members of Congress are currently working together on new language (omnibus bill or continuing resolution) to fix any
impediments from language in last year’s 2010 Appropriation Act to continue work on the Constellation program. Sen.
Vitter said this should be an easy fix. However, he said he found it ironic that before the new NASA Authorization Act
was passed, the Administration “was doing everything it could to close down Constellation, but now it points to the
language in last year’s 2010 Appropriation Act as a reason for not implementing the vision in the new NASA
Authorization Act.”
Sen. Nelson follow-up:
Sen. Nelson said he believed Sen. Vitter’s concerns were well-founded, because “there were too many times over the
course of the Congress trying to build consensus to pass the new NASA Authorization Act that there was too much
evidence the Administration was not helping. Not from the highest levels of the White House, but from elsewhere.”
Sen. Nelson said that if Congress passes a Continuing Resolution FY 2010, NASA’s funding will be $18.7 billion, and in the
context of an economic recession, $300 million less constitutes a difference of only 1.67%. Therefore, he said, the
Congress wants to see the new NASA authorization law implemented “without a lot of griping and moaning” if it is able
to secure that appropriation level.
Witness testimony
Dr. John Holdren:
Dr. Holdren said that the new NASA Authorization Act represents a crucial step forward toward achieving the President’s
goals, including extending the ISS effort, advancing the commercial crew transportation industry, building a new heavy
lift vehicle, advancing new space technologies, and modernizing the space launch facilities in Florida.
According to Dr. Holdrem, the important change will help chart a new path forward in space, help the nation in skilled
jobs and industries of the future, further help place NASA’s program on a more stable footing and enhance the long-
term sustainability of those efforts.
He said that a lot of work lies ahead in terms of translating this law into programmatic success, citing the current lack of
appropriations for fiscal year 2011 as one immediate challenge, adding that the Administration hopes the Congress will
act swiftly to provide funds and budgetary guidance that will enable NASA to fully implement the direction provided in
the NASA Authorization Act of 2010.
Whatever the challenges are that may be faced, Dr. Holdren said he is confident that NASA employees and contractors
have “the commitment, the wherewithal and the passion needed to pursue the initiatives and continue to make the
progress toward achieving the Nation’s initiatives in space.”
Dr. Elizabeth Robinson:
Due to the new Authorization Act, Dr. Robinson said that NASA has clear direction and has begun to move forward.
“There are still details that the final appropriations outcome will provide, but broad outlines are now clear and that
makes the road ahead much easier,” she said.
Dr. Robinson said that operating under a continuing resolution can be a complex juggling act, stating:
• First, the Authorization Act and the continuing resolution must be read in concert wherever possible. E.g., NASA
program funding levels below the account level are generally controlled by the Authorization Act.
Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Space Foundation 2• Second, NASA must take heed of the pending appropriation bills because, when the final appropriation is
adopted, NASA must apply its constraints and funding levels back to the beginning throughout the entire fiscal
year.
• Third, there are specific restrictions in the current NASA appropriation act that prohibit the termination of
components of the Constellation program. Moreover, the continuing resolution requires that work not begin on
new starts, which is a legal term of art that the GAO has given NASA guidance in its May report. Using GAO
guidance, NASA has been working through what is and is not a new start, and NASA has not yet found anything
in the Authorization Act on which it cannot proceed. However, NASA is not done with its analysis. The analysis is
lengthy, and NASA is working the issue daily.
She also noted areas in which she says that NASA can clearly proceed:
• Planning efforts for the heavy lift launch vehicle and multi-purpose crew vehicle.
• Assessing the transition from Constellation to the new programs.
Cristina Chaplain:
Chaplain noted Appropriations’ Restrictions:
• The FY 2010 continuing resolution contains a restriction prohibiting NASA from terminating any program, project
or activity (PPA) of the Constellation program or creating new ones until provided for in a subsequent
appropriations act.
• These restrictions remain in place today because NASA is operating under a continuing resolution.
According to Chaplain, what this means for NASA’s implementation of the Authorization Act is that NASA must carry out
the Authorization Act but without terminating or eliminating any program, project or activity of the Constellation
program and without creating or initiating new ones.
She cited GAO opinions from earlier this year that may offer NASA some guidance as it moves forward:
• NASA did not violate the prohibition when it convened study teams to conduct planning activities.
• Agencies may conduct planning activities as part of the budget process and NASA’s planning activities earlier this
year did not create a new program, project or activity.
• NASA also continued to obligate funds to all the existing programs, projects or activities of the Constellation
program.
• As long as NASA did not improperly create or terminate a program, project or activity, NASA has discretion in
how it carries out the Constellation program consistent with Congress’s statutory direction. Shifts in priority do
not, in and of themselves, constitute the termination or elimination of a program, project or activity.
With regard to GAO’s perspective on steps NASA can take to increase the likelihood of success as it implements the
Authorization Act through highlighting recommendations related to how NASA manages its largest investments,
Chaplain said:
• Recently it has been reported that the James Web Telescope may cost $6.5 billion or more. GAO studies have
highlighted similar cases of large costs and schedule overruns in recent years.
• More than a decade of studies have consistently pointed to weaknesses in cost estimating, contract oversight,
funding stability, management reserves, as well as technology and design problems that manifest late in the
acquisition process.
Thus, she said, GAO would like to see NASA commit to the following key practices:
• First, base decisions to move programs forward on tangible knowledge about requirements and resources.
o NASA’s policies have incorporated many of the best practices GAO has advocated, but she said GAO still
doesn’t always see those policies translate into decisions. Some of the most expensive efforts are
allowed to proceed in complex phases of development while they are considerable unknowns about
requirements, time needed to execute programs, cost, available funding and available technology.
Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Space Foundation 3• Second, NASA needs to prioritize investments so projects can be fully funded and it is clear where projects stand
in relation to the overall portfolio.
o When funding profiles don’t match up with real needs of projects, high-risk development paths often
become the only way to keep projects alive.
o Projects within NASA are not prioritized until a cost overrun is discovered and good programs are left to
pay for poor performers.
• Third, NASA still needs to integrate GAO accountability.
o The recent study on James Web found that lines of authority and accountability are not clear, and that
ongoing regular independent assessment and oversight processes at NASA are missing.
o Until accountability is instilled, NASA will struggle on its implementation of the good practices it has
embraced in recent years.
At the same time, Chaplain said it is important that Congress enable NASA to be realistic about what it can do cannot do
under the direction of the Authorization, and to support and assist NASA as it makes difficult trade-off decisions
between resources. That is time, money and requirements.
Major Points of Q&A (Verbatim)
Sen. Nelson: On page 4 of your testimony Dr. Robinson, you indicate NASA does not plan to fully implement the
Authorization Act. Dr. Robinson’s testimony notes, “In the execution under the existing appropriations of the law, the
following priorities have been in place since the June re-plan and are being used.” Dr. Robinson’s testimony goes on to
list: avoid termination of prime contracts, continue development of critical capabilities, and prioritize investments that
support initiatives under the 2011 President’s budget request and the NASA Authorization Act of 2010. Is NASA
suggesting that it intends to implement the President’s budget request instead of the law?
Dr. Robinson: No, not at all. NASA was trying to convey there are elements in the Authorization Act which were
discussed and presented in the budget. So, to the extent there was guidance there and parameters, NASA wanted to
make sure that the program was looking at those.
Sen. Nelson: Dr. Holdren, how would you characterize the Administration’s support for the entire Authorization Act?
Dr. Holdren: The Administration supports it wholly. The Administration is looking forward to the additional guidance and
resources that will come with appropriations that will make it easier to move forward more rapidly with all the elements
of the Authorization Act.
Sen. Nelson: What direction have you [Dr. Holdren] as the President’s science advisor given NASA to assure its full
support of the Authorization Act?
Dr. Holdren: I have spoken with Administrator Bolden, Deputy Administrator Garver, and Dr. Robinson and have had no
trouble coming to a complete agreement that NASA is in full support of the Authorization Act.
Sen. Hutchison: The Authorization Act states that funds will be authorized to carry out the shuttle launch on need. Is it
NASA’s position that it will carry out the launch on need?
Dr. Robinson: It is NASA’s position that it will carry out the launch on need, with the caveat that it doesn’t have the final
appropriation, so the agency doesn’t know if it will have money to pay for it. If NASA operates on a long-term continuing
resolution it would have the money to pay for the launch on need shuttle mission.
Sen. Vitter: I think the almost certain next step in terms of funding is going to be another continuing resolution for some
length of time. As Sen. Nelson indicated, that would put NASA funding very close to the amount it has been authorized
for FY 2011. In the grand scheme of things, that difference is trivial. Therefore, the next step, it seems it should be easy
to all agree on clarifying language, saying that anything from the 2010 Appropriation Act inconsistent with the new 2010
Authorization Act will have no force and effect. Given the unanimous support the Authorization Act received, it should
be a big hurdle to place this type of language in the continuing resolution. Has NASA developed language to accomplish
Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Space Foundation 4that for the new continuing resolution, and has NASA told congressional leaders the President absolutely wants that
language included?
Dr. Robinson: NASA has been working with the staff on the Authorization and Appropriation Committees to complete
that language.
Dr. Holdren: That message will be communicated, if it has not already been communicated to the key folks.
Sen. Warner: I believe the Deficit Commission leaving out commercial spaceflight funds was a smart move. What are
your thoughts/comments on that Dr. Holdren?
Dr. Holdren: We welcome that decision, because we believe commercial spaceflight is a great investment and terrific
opportunity to fulfill a national need.
About the Space Foundation
The Space Foundation is international global, nonprofit organization and the foremost advocate for all sectors of the
space industry - civil, commercial, military and intelligence. Founded in 1983, the Space Foundation is a leader in space
awareness activities, educational programs that bring space into the classroom, and major industry events, all in support
of its mission "to advance space-related endeavors to inspire, enable, and propel humanity." An expert in all aspects of
the global space industry, the Space Foundation publishes The Space Report: The Authoritative Guide to Global Space
Activity and provides three indices that track daily performance of the space industry. Through its Space
Certification and Space Technology Hall of Fame programs, the Space Foundation recognizes space-based technologies
and innovations that have been adapted to improve life on Earth. Headquartered in Colorado Springs, the Space
Foundation conducts research and analysis and government affairs activities from its Washington, D.C., office and has
field representatives in Houston, Texas, and Cape Canaveral, Fla. For more information, visit www.SpaceFoundation.org.
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, and read about the latest space news and Space Foundation activities
in Space Watch.
###
Transition and Implementation: The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 - Space Foundation 5You can also read
