chick one two three four five six seven eight nine ten one two three four five six seven eight nine ten  good morning everyone but here it is now come to order i want to welcome everyone this morning and let everyone know that this is the first subcommittee hearing of the second session and we've had a very active subcommittee over the last session and i fully expect that this upcoming year will be as busy in carrying out our oversight responsibilities and that regard i've called this hearing today so that we've had a chance to hear from nasa's watchdogs  general the government accountability office and the independent aerospace safety advisory panel as congress prepares to reauthorize nasa it's important we focus on the issues and the challenges that will determine whether or not nasa will be successful over the next decade the three individuals testifying before us today can provide us with the kind of expert objective assessments that we will need to inform our deliberations over nasa's future and we look forward to your testimony as everyone knows the president's fiscal year two thousand and eleven budget request was delivered to the hill on monday it opposes large changes to nasa's programs including the outright consolation constellation today's hearing of course is not intended to be an examination of that request in part because many of those details are still unavailable to us however i can assure you that the full science and technology committee and the subcommittee will be holding hearings over the next few weeks to examine the president's proposals and of course we intend to give them serious scrutiny i would just like to state that one of the reasons that i was particularly honored to accept the chairmanship of the subcommittee last year was my excitement to be involved in an agency that is inspired americans and frankly the world at large for decades but as i reviewed the president's budget request i found a quite glaring omission  again point all of you to this chamber in this chamber to the proverb that's on the wall behind us and in fact it's a it's good for members of the subcommittee and the full committee to to think about why we're here and of course that quote is where there is no vision th people perish and these words are as true today as when our forefathers undertook a voyage of discovery when they landed on this continent and founded america as a city upon a hill a beacon of light for the future world for the entire world to admire we are still that city on the hill and the eyes of all people are upon us we have set forth on a mission to explore the heavens and should we deal falsely with this work we have undertaken we shall be made a byword across the world we shall shame the faces of many of america's worthy civil servants have dedicated their lives to this mission today we're still a city on that hill but i fear that we may soon abandon our vision our jobs as servants of the people as members of the subcommittee is to allow our scientists our engineers our researchers our visionaries to be as bold in this undertaking as our faculties will allow to be unconstrained by artificial impositions of the speedy answer pers but rather limited only by the strength of their imagination and the immutability of the laws of physics my concern today is not numbers on a ledger but rather the fate of the american dream to reach for the stars should we falter should we slip should we let our dreams fade what we tell our children how will we inspire the next generation of great minds to pursue the science and engineering fields critical to our competitiveness in the twenty first century when we have band of a generation of thousands of aerospace engineers in the middle of the end of this endeavor while we tell the world that we lead into space and that we took the moon my fears that we will tell them tell us what the stars are like when you get there so in the coming weeks we'll be holding a number of hearings both in the subcommittee and in the full committee to address the range of nasa programs responsibilities and science or not it and spaceflight we will discuss the potential impact of program changes on tens of thousands of jobs precisely the type of high tech jobs that are critical to our economic competitiveness we will discuss the impact that nasa programs especially those in human space exploration play inspiring young people to pursue careers and stem fields another issue issue vital to developing a workforce for the twenty first century both of these issues will be especially timely as the full committee considers reauthorization of the america competes legislation and i in my work on the house armed services committee and others that serve on both of these committees  diving in the impact the proposed cuts to human spaceflight will have on our aerospace industry and our national defense as well no doubt we will hear a great deal in order to assess what will lose sight in the next few weeks and the testimony that we hear i think will today will likely raise additional concerns and considerations and just in closing before i hand over to mr olson i just like to tell a story that illustrates my concern nearly a hundred years before columbus sailed to the america china had a great fleet of ships traveling throughout the indian ocean this fleet was ahead of its time exploring the seas and spring an unprecedented era of knowledge trade and discovery however it chimes changed china felt they could no longer afford its fleet and so it defunded the fleet soon fell to ruin with some historians reporting that ships were burned and destroyed and so ended a great opportunity for the chinese people had the chinese continue to fund this endeavor of exploration of discovery the world today might very well be a totally different place and how ironic then it is that today we consider abandoning our space space worthy vessels and doing a half century of american leadership in space exploration just as the chinese ramp up their own space program and aim for the moon nasa is an agency with a wide range of programs responsibilities and science are not extend human spaceflight and we need to make sure that the agency is proceeding as as possible to carry out its diverse missions today's hearing will help us assess how nasa is doing in that regard i look forward to working with members on both sides of the aisle as we strive to ensure that congress craft the most responsible and productive future for the nation's space and are not exposed graham the stakes for america are too high for us to attempt anything less and with that the chair now recognizes mr olson for an opening statement well realize that each one of you has spent considerable time and effort preparing for this hearing i look forward to hearing from you so that our subcommittee can benefit from your expertise the role of watchdog is critical in our government and i applaud your efforts and encourage your continued diligence going forward we have a similar all right here in congress and when we can we'd like to partner with you to make each of our jobs more effective to accomplish our shared goals martin good to see again i trust you've got more acquainted in your new role as yourself again there i do have an admonition that will surely discuss in the future but it's a lot of the president's recent budget proposal his proposal is a radical departure for how nasa does business the impacts to the workforce and to the relationship between the government and its contractors is about to change in change dramatically i implore you employ you to monitor how this process of volves going forward was chaplain thank you for your work especially in light of your recent report on the international space station should this program continue and it appears it is going to continue least the twenty twenty you recommendations about a centralized structure will need to be addressed and we are anxious to hear more and finally add more dire we thank you for your service earlier this week we mark the seventh anniversary of the columbia tragedy we must not forget the inherent dangers that travel by space and bring on you and the members of the s f are critical in our efforts of exploration you recent annual report provided critical insight on the path our nation should be pursuing in regard to human spaceflight and i'd like to read for the record a very significant passage the statement was including the press release the agency issued but since that release what out at six pm on the friday of the long martin luther king day holiday i think it's worth reading for the record in regard to the constellation program you found that i quote to abandon the pro record as a baseline for an alternative without demonstrated capability or proven sapir year already is unwise and probably not cost effective let me read that again to abandon the program of record as a baseline for an alternative without demonstrated capability or proven sapir your ready is unwise and probably not cost effective yet this is exactly what the president's two thousand and eleven budget  my concern about the direction the ministrations budget proposal take nasa is something i spoke about about and will continue to do so we're on the verge of abandoning human spaceflight in the near term and i fear beyond that the witnesses before us will play a critical role in the direction they see goes and the men and women of this diocese will have an equally critical role in the direction our nation goes and i look forward to work with you to chart that p diverse complex and yet risky set of programs and missions with resources it too often are deemed to be inadequate and yet nasa succeeds producing startling discovery could help us better understand our solar system and universe and planet earth and living and working in space i can't think of any other cheval federal agency that matches its record of scientific achievement are one with a record of fostering new technologies that help transform the american economy and madam chairwoman speaking to sound management congress expection demands that the executive branch of our solid justification for their plans and programs let's allow for me i cannot understand how this is ministration going to rationalize its decision to scrap constellation and simply start a new especially given the strong support it received from congress republicans and democrats is naive to assume that a do over will somehow offer a buffet for cheaper system pastor than the current path where own there's a lot you're in or crew vehicle have been designed to be a very safe and robust system they've undergone rigorous and you know american taxpayers i'm invested nine billion dollars and the agency in this contractor spent by years or going to ensure the constellation will be flexible affordable and safe the separate offices and gamble america's human space flight program on and on and on tested system is more than alarming i look forward to taking part in your and coming hearings examining nasa budget request an exploration program madam chairman i thank you back and thank you mr hall for your leadership over so many years and mr olson if there are other members that wish to submit opening statements or statements will be added to the record at this point at this time i'd like to introduce our witnesses first up we have honorable paul martin who was recently confirmed by the senate as inspector general for nasa welcome back mr martin we have miss christina chaplain who is the director of acquisition and source management team  at the government accountability office thank you our nation's watchdog group we're glad you're back as well and finally we have vice admiral joseph dyer who is the chair of nasa as aerospace safety advisory panel and admiral thank you for your service to our nation a will each have five minutes for your spoken testimony your written testimony will be included in the record for the hearing and when you've completed your spoken testimony will begin rounds of questions and each member will have five minutes to question the panel i would like to start this morning with the honorable mr martin thank you madam chairwoman chairwoman giffords ranking member also then members of the subcommittee thank you for inviting the office of inspector general to testify about the key challenges facing nasa based on our oversight work we identified five critical issues number one transitioning from the space shuttle to the next generation of space vehicles number two managing risk risk to people with money and mission number three improving the agency's financial management number four addressing systemic weaknesses and acquisition and contracting process is a number five ensuring the security of nasa's information and information technology systems some of these challenges in particular financial management acquisition and contracting and i t security have confronted nasa leadership for most of the past decade other challenges such as transitioning from the space shuttle or more recent but none of these challenges are easily solved they are complex multifaceted issues that will take dedication determination and nessus best efforts to address successfully my written statement provide detailed information about each of these challenges in my remarks this morning i will focus on two challenges transitioning from the space shuttle and nasa separates to produce a clean financial statement perhaps the highest profile challenge facing nasa at the moment is maintaining the critical skills and capabilities required to safely fly the five remaining space shuttle missions until the program's planned retirement in september of this year we have doubts however that nasa will be able to keep to this ambitious timetable and most likely the last of the planned shuttle flights will take place in the second quarter of fiscal year two thousand and eleven importantly any delay nasa is current timetable has ramifications far be scheduling given that the agency spends approximately two hundred million dollars a month to sustain the shuttle program moreover if the shuttle's flight schedule is extended beyond the five missions currently planned nasa will need to re evaluate not only funding issues but also the sustainability of the shuttle's workforce and infrastructure much of which has been in wind down mode since two thousand and nine i will leave it to a step chairman dyer to address the potential safety implications of extending the shuttle program beyond its currently scheduled manifest just this past monday the president spoke school year two thousand and eleven budget set out the administration's blueprint for nasa and the shuttle program of course this subcommittee and other committees of congress will weigh in and help shape nasa future direction however one thing is clear nasa will need a sustained level of funding to enable it to successfully execute whatever plan is ultimately adopted financial management for most of the past decade the o i g has identified the need to improve financial management as one of the agency's top management challenges in early december two thousand and nine when i last testified before the subcommittee i noted that several challenges remain even though nasa has successfully implemented a variety of corrective actions to address these longstanding weaknesses and masses and masses fiscal year two thousand and nine audit the independent accounting firm ernst and young disclaimed an opinion on the agency's financial statements this disclaimer result of primarily because of continued weaknesses and nasa's internal controls over accounting for legacy assets specifically the space shuttle and the international space station as we discussed in detail at the december hearing ian why identified three significant deficiencies in internal controls one of which was considered a material weakness since that december efforts i'm hopeful that by implementing the outstanding recommendations and continuing to focus on its monitoring and remediation efforts nasa can correct its financial management to the point that even why i can render an opinion and ten we will continue to work closely with nasa managers in an attempt to achieve that goal finally the oh i g has several reviews ongoing that examines other high profile nasa projects such as the agenc development of the james webb space telescope and upgrades to the tracking and data relay satellite system in the months ahead we look forward to working with nasa leadership this subcommittee and other congressional committees as we seek to he agency address these and other critical challenges thank you thank you mr martin chaplain and i'm chairwoman members of the subcommittee thank you for inviting me to discuss nasa as major management challenges our work in recent years has identified several specific challenges they are very similar to the thing clued retiring the space shuttle completing and sustaining the international space station acquiring highly complex unique systems for exploration science and aeronautics research improving financial management and protecting critical data and i t systems each one of these activities is integral to the success of the agency yet difficult to achieve given a variety of factors for instance inherent technical in engineering some flexibility and challenges to developing systems create challenges to developing systems as well as recruiting the right workforce complications associated with launching spacecraft can also make mit missing scheduled deadlines much more costly than on space systems the broad changes to nasa as direction proposed in the president's budget this week do not change the basic challenges facing nasa the agency will still be acquiring complex unique systems that demand highly specialized skills high performing contractors and partners and highly effective management  oversight for nearly two decades g a o has identified significant weaknesses in the acquisition management practices at nasa specifically projects are allowed to move forward into full scale acquisition programs when they still have considerable unknowns about technology and design to in turn technology and design problems invariably arise and are much more costly to fix than they would have been in a more forgiving environment earlier in the acquisition process another issue contractors and international partners are not always able to execute as intended optimistic guesstimating allows too many programs to compete for too few dollars funding instability disrupt high performing programs and causes delays that may end up being much more costly in the long run requirements might not always be stable and lastly sound contract management practices such as limiting the use of contracts are not always followed our review of nasa's projects issued this week confirm that these problems still persist nine of nineteen projects we reviewed experienced significant cost and schedule growth some within just a year or two only one ongoing project in the implementation phase did not have significant cost and schedule growth the remaining projects were either in the formulation phase were no baselines or set or were just very recently had baseline set there was a one point two billion total cost increase in just two years for the projects that had baselines this number does not include the constellation program as it does not have a baseline yet or the james webb telescope which just established a measurable baseline fiscal year two thousand and nine it also does not include cost growth that may have occurred before the base lines were set the president's budget also proposes heavy your reliance on commercial suppliers for human space flight missions again the need for effective management and oversight practices will be just as necessary here as they were for the constellation program in the past based programs claiming to be following commercial approaches did not succeed because they lack sound insight and oversight on the government's part in fact he government technical expertise was let go while such programs were in vogue and that was a trend that both deity and nasa have deeply regretted moreover while we found in prior reports that the cots providers were making progress in meeting their milestones and that the program was well managed we also noted that the most very difficult phases of development lay ahead lastly in moving forward with the new budget it is critical that nasa maintain transparency and accountability for the spending we cry means for baselining and authorizing major programs have helped considerably to shed light on problems and the health of the acquisition portfolio but little is known about programs before they reach implementation which can sometimes take years and there has not always been clarity on costs involved with the challenges we identify in our testimony we recognize that nasa is taking an array of actions to reduce acquisition risk and respond to recommendations for example those revamping cost estimating and providing more oversight at the headquarters level we're hopeful that these and other efforts will the challenge is to be discussed but for this to happen senior leaders need to sustain their attention to instituting discipline processes and  let me begin by quoting from the report's conclusions the panel continues to believe as it did in two thousand and eight that nasa places unprecedented challenges perhaps greater than any time in the agency's history important decisions on the teacher of human space nasa as well as the white house the congress and the nation's commercial entities and international partners will likely have a larger role in transporting both cargo and crew to orbit it is critical that nasa focus on the stablished being the criteria requirements and the certification process for orbital transportation vehicles as well as a process for validating compliance the performance and safety requirements may be stated properly and clearly to enable nasa and non nasa to proceed in the most productive and effective manner that carries one vehicle has been designed from the beginning with a clear emphasis safety before any changes made to architecture the inherent safety of a selected approach should be assessed to ensure it offers a level of safety equal to or greater than the program of record we recognize that the shuttle is risky by inherent design and is becoming more so because of aging and weight extension of the shuttle is a good extension of the shuttle's use significantly beyond what is planned to the current man not recommended space exploration is dangerous enterprise the risk must be shouldered by nasa the congress and in ministration and those risks must be communicated late communicated clearly to the public the panel hopes that our summary of critical safety related issues will help focus attention on the important decisions and the direction of the agency close quote the two thousand and report has been widely read strongly commanded and energetically criticized with those well rounded metrics we believe we have fulfilled our statutory purpose which is to infuse safety considerations into an informed debate the panel spent a good amount of ink on two specific issues human writing requirements are h r are  for follow on vehicles and the shuttle extinction regarding human rating requirements in our report the panel recommends nasa stipulate directly the a political a t r standards and the level of acceptable risk for potential commercial contractors not only should the standards be provided but the certification mechanism and required validation data should be made clear as well regarding the shuttle extension the panel does not support extending the shuttle significantly beyond its current manifest we are especially concerned over any kind of serial expansion where flights at a time might be added the report goes on to add other issues and opportunities those include the use of robots to both supplement astronauts and to replace them in some of undertakings as well as facilities and aging infrastructure a growing and underfunded issue if one steps back and observes with the wide lands the two thousand and nine a separate pork is about three things first about the space shuttle second about safely meeting our nation's goals and objectives for space transportation and third the knowledge needed to safely transport human beings into space the address those wanted time with the shuttle we believe that every responsible american has some concerns about the safety of the shuttle the shuttle has flown  hundred twenty nine flights there been two catastrophic accidents and fourteen lives lost the shuttle's history a general rosing supply roading supply and support chain all speak to increasing risk secondly we must be clear about our goals for space transportation and what is required to achieve safety in the implementation of those goals are the goals to a minimize the gap between shuttle and america's next transportation vehicle is it to privatized transport of nasa astronauts into low earth orbit is it to secure a launch vehicle with right or left and potentially greater flexibility the panel believes nasa can accomplish any of these goals given sufficient time and money but nasa cannot be expected to accomplish all three safely and concurrently with the an available budget third let's talk about the knowledge perhaps competency would be the better word the panel is not against commercial transport with humans but has registered concern in our report about commercial transportation without updated safety standards those standards have not yet been written by nasa so no one can truly claim compliance with the chairman in closing i want to highlight what causes programs to get into situations where safety is at risk we believe there are most often three common things compressing scared stretching resources and a workforce that loses direction we believe both government and contractor for a new and focused attention to the workforce transition plan that has maintained a stable shuttle workforce requisite knowledge in jeopardy it will be a challenge to keep the necessary skill as workers find themselves without a clear future and are looking for a safe place to land thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the aerospace thank you admiral dyer into all of our witnesses today at this point we're going to  our first round of questions in the chair will recognize herself for five minutes i'd like to start with mr chaplin has reported that cost and says schedule growth in several of nasa's projects has resulted from problems such as failing to adequately dental fi requirements and underestimating technology complexity and maturity and i know that this is just a draft that you've submitted here to our subcommittee but can you talk a little bit about cost growth and schedule discipline the discipline has a lot to do with it there are issues with regard to planning ahead for acquisitions notably like really looking at your supplier base the health of it what gaps in expertise they have what potential problems you may have when you come to acquisitions more that could be done at the headquarters level and the project level also issues that are related to launch manifest that are going to be very severe in the next few years as nasa goes away from the delta to vehicles to other medium launch vehicles they raise the cost of missing any kind of launch deadline so i think it's just an array large scale projects and includes a thumbnail sketch of aries one you indicate in the report that the totality of your work lasted until february tenth yet when you go to describe the status of aries one you failed to acknowledge significant progress such as the successful aries one ground tests the next flight an agreement on how to deal with the thrust oscillation issue all of these events that i mentioned happened late last year so i'm curious why there weren't knowledge in report and whether or not you consider them to be among the risk reduction activities a couple of things with regard to that we do have to cut off our audit work at a certain point in time to allow for production of the report and and we also allow at least a month for agency comment period so you're always going to have a leg of a month or two between the audit work and the report where we could be tried to update the projects specifically with some issues that were brought to our attention either by the for the committee some key events like there is one x we we couldn't validate the results so they're not reflective they'll be reflected in the next one on the other hand you might have some positive events taking place there might be negative abends taking place the n p p project for example may have more cost increase in what we reflect in the report so we really to be sure that we're accurate as possible we have to cut off and know what we can validate i'll also know that when the fed does have an opportunity to provide comments it can also point out those events that have taken place they didn't specifically point out anything like out in their comment letter and in our agency exit meeting we didn't have any specific updates that were validated and when i say validate it has to be provided by documentation and things we can substantiate and analyze we didn't get those kinds of materials from nasa at the exit conference either in addition to that each program has an opportunity that update their status when they comment on the two page sheet that we produced for that report chaplain's that pretty typical of agencies not providing that information i mean obviously nasa is unlike all agencies just because of the complexity and the cost of these programs but i'm just curious what are not that's that's typical and  know i'd say yes we produce a very similar product for our d a d weapons portfolio and there again most information on that is based on the selected acquisition reports like that of the congress every year and that information can be dated by the time the report comes out the projects try to update where we can we try to validate where we can but you tend to have that lag but the one thing about this mandate for this work is there's a bi annual reporting requirement that gives us an opportunity to brief staff mid year and kind of report on the updates have taken place and where we stand with some of the programs ok i just have a few seconds admiral dyer would you just talk briefly about your thoughts on where aries one stands on then aries one of the safest quickest opportunity and probably the most cost effective one if the nation is willing to accept a wider gap more risk and a higher cost than other going activities of any developmental program part of getting the work done and programs that are really in general and in great difficulty we think what you're seeing with theories is part of the developmental process we think the program so thank you a compliance it has been suggested that nasa follow the f a a model by delegating safety and mission as sure as authority to the space launch provider has been asserted that this system is much more efficient adaptable and cost effective than having to deal with nasa cumbersome safety regime under the f a a for smith system select employees of aircraft manufacturers airlines and aircraft maintenance companies are licensed by the f a a charged with the forcing f a i i'm not as familiar with the evidence process but i do have some thoughts we we would almost like to see a process analogous to what they have for the launch services program for nasa probably more stringent than that so when nasa is looking to get a new supplier for example to take up science missions it has a very rigorous process for certifying those suppliers and ensuring that they meet all of nasa standards for taking up science missions which are stringent in and of themselves along with this process comes insight into design production and test activities and in the case of human spaceflight you would almost expect that they have approval authority over top level requirements and test strategies and success criteria overall i would just see a much more rigorous process and a lot more insight and oversight than what we have with the cots program and the cots wasn't set up to be the kind  want our perhaps predict to valving can't catch twenty two opportunities the first is that f a a has great knowledge about the certification of commercial vehicles but little knowledge about space just the opposite is true on nasa deep knowledge with regards little knowledge with regard to certifying commercial vehicles jerram i guess you could call this a interagency opportunity and i'm making a second catch twenty two related is how do you as you've heard us mention a couple times how do you both communicate what is required  certified the second catch twenty two mr olson i believe will be commercial industry belief that they can only deliver on cost and ellen schedule nasa is kept at arm but keeping nasa at arm's length will neither transition that knowledge that's needed nor build the confidence to certify these are two serious problems that need to be addressed as we go into the future yes sir can see how of those would affect safety one more question and this is for you to get on with our one of the biggest technical challenge for the area ryan has been the design of development of a large abort system and as you know later this spring nasa was scheduled its first major test of an integrated launch abort system at white sands assuming this system won't be used on the orion vehicle is it reasonable to believe that this technology and design can be transferred to other vehicles with the hardware and soft be fairly generic and what are the kinds of validation tests that would be required to ensure the system is safe and reliable so i would know to note that the technology in the development of sound there's much knowledge with this regard probably some of it can be transferred but i we don't have on the board the panel the deep knowledge necessary to answer your question thanks for the answer and i'll close with just one comment like to make me one of the things we hear  sort of a follow up on a comment i'm a barmaid things we hear is how the the justification for this new budget and its implication for human space flight is just the cost overruns and how the constellation project is just way beyond budget and the numbers are true we've vetted you know we have put nine billion dollars in there and i want to point out that some of the cost overruns would jordi the problem hasn't been with the agency it's been with the people in this room the people in the congress and the people over six hundred pennsylvania avenue the budget for two thousand and eleven i want to and i just want to say i do share the concerns expressed by my colleagues about the proposed budget and the impact on human spaceflight and essentially decimating america's human spaceflight capacity i think there is a bit of an inconsistency between thinking about and as the president has outlined the future in twenty first century technology and job creation for this century and maintaining a robust human spaceflight program and we need to resolve those in inconsistency tonight look forward to working with the committee and with the subcommittee in doing that i'm concerned about a couple of things one  n you said that you noted in your testimony that nasa has produced over the years them amazing research and technology but the projects cost more and take longer how much different really is this sa from department of defense large scale weapon systems or military spaceflight how much greater are the cost overruns and the financial management problems within nasa  different from these out from say the department of defense and other agencies because i think we suffer from some some of those same problems across the board in the federal government and the fact that we're spotlighting nasa  for i think a cut decimation of the human space flight program looking at those kind of things really miss places where we need to go in terms of how we think about risk taking and technology and i also wonder whether you've had an opportunity really to look within the culture of nasa where i think that there are times when when the agency recognizes the limitations here in the congress and as mr olson has pointed out it  hundred pennsylvania avenue and then constrains its requests to the congress and then we run up costs in programs and systems and and that is you know and i don't know that that necessarily can be placed at the foot of the agency i would say mass has issues with cost and schedule overruns are very similar to the ones that deity particularly the space systems and the underlying  very similar and some of that does have to do with culture and the competition for funding and having a lot of instability in that funding process i well know that deity there has been cut some big programs there as well thank you and then i also curious as to perhaps several dire you can comment on this when you look at things like contractor management and trying to stabilize stabilizing engineering designs and those challenges that nasa faces do you think that the agency is actually on a path and perhaps mr martin you could talk to that speak to this is well is actually on a path  to to doing a better job there so that there is a little bit more predictability for future programs i think the situation is improving it's certainly a focus for gen bolton but you do give me an opportunity to make a point to thinking about during this chapman's answer to your question cost and schedule and safety are very tightly related to one another so both from a safety perspective as well from a program management cost performance perspective if i could give this subcommittee a gift and deliberation going forward it would be an independent truly independent cost just one that's independent of the missionary movement the folks that are trying to sell a program and one this also independent of the folks that are trying to fit a program within the available budget and in my experience and many folks on the panel and independent cost estimate is the key to predicting the future and lastly is there any indication whatsoever that abandoning the human space flight program in terms of its residents within nasa were result in any lower costs and would change any of the challenges that you've already identified that nasa  faces take the as i mentioned in my opening it won't change the challenges there still needs to be a lot more discipline in that acquisition process we need cost estimates to prove we need them to be independent there's a lot of things that need to change whether that not necessarily here to discuss the new budget however not even perhaps to discuss policy but to talk about key challenges that we face america's space program and safety is of course one of the preeminent challenges  let us note that those of us who do believe that mankind is destined to head into space and that we look at that as a dramatic challenge to our generation to continue that movement of human kind into space that we understand that there are great risks involved with this perhaps most noble of human endeavors and that is to locate human beings elsewhere in this universe but let us also know that great risks should not be the impediment to fulfilling that task saying and admiral i'm sure you've heard this many times captain things his only responsibility towards the ship is the safety of a ship he will never leave port and there are safety there are safety elements that we have to have identify with my colleagues  remarked recently we just heard about comparing the cost overruns and some of the efficiency problems and now to the department of defense let me just note that that is not a proper comparison the proper comparison is are these extra costs and are these overruns comparable to the private sector and that's a question to be we have compared to space x except yeah we've we've done some comparisons to the other space companies and found that most of the commercial companies don't have the same but you have to remember they're not chasing after the same requirements they have much less demanding they're not pushing the technical edge that the at the end both mass are trying to do pushing the edge a let's take a look at this and look at some of the things that indicate admiral in your statement you indicate that areas the government approach to trying to new approach to getting the space has been designed from the very beginning with a clear emphasis on safety is it your contention that space x or orbital or lockheed martin or boeing that have not had an emphasis on safety in launching and developing in designing their  vehicles for sure these are right hearted folks and they have given safety a great consideration but i would make two points or the first is their own contract only for cargo deliveries not for human  one and number two the information the knowledge that needs to be transmitted in terms of human writing requirements out of nasa and provided to the commercial sector has not been published has not been made available and by the way that's a hard challenge because while nasa has human writing requirements there for nasa and they rest on a foundation of fifty years of understanding and institutional knowledge transfer to transmit that out to new activities with new undertakings or not your contention that these private companies are developing something that some say absolutely not i didn't say that what i said was they don't have the measuring stick yet available to passe not based on a willingness of these private companies to meet standards but instead by again a government agency not being able or willing to do its job in a timely manner upon general bolton's arrival at nasa this activity started and it started in earnest in the last quarter of last year but in terms of being behind the ball yes sir so cost effective alternative to just simply relying on the government for these endeavors how long do you think it should take to develop the certification and the standards that we can measure these companies buy less time  reliable than the counterparts in the private sector you're not saying that we're saying that it's well ahead on that timeline because it had human writing requirements and institutional knowledge and from the get go had would be executed these plans have been put on hold because of the uncertain future of masses human space flight program how are nasa personnel being impacted by the delays in settling on a new strategy for one number two how quickly can nasa modify and implement these transitions plans once a final decision is made with regard to the constellation program and please anyone on the panel given that we start with you mr  of this workforce transition strategy is going to affect masses of people masses bartz and masses facilities as far as the timetable for execution of that that's up to the agency i think they need to develop the strategy and i doubt they just developed at this point and then how long it would take to implement that remains to be s i would agree but i would also add that to match his advantage it does have a very robust strategic human planning process and a lot of good mechanisms for dealing with uncertainties and changes they were dealing with that someone under the constellation program a lot of flexibility need to be in place because we didn't quite know what the requirements were yet for consolation so i have confidence that the agency has a lot of good tools and processes to manage this on certainty but it will take national gland in ohio is significant and concerned about the decisions that are being made and why we are going through the time that we are but in my second question if the decision is made to in nasser's direct involvement in sending u s astronauts into space what would be an appropriate level of nasa involvement in oversight during vehicle design and development  covered a little bit of this before but i think they should have a much stronger role than they have now under the cots program they do have a pretty good process and guidance and certifications for  bringing new commercial vehicles on to do science missions and it's a very rigorous process and involves a lot of oversight into the zein of the vehicles and what's behind them so i i would see that as sort of the starting point for the thinking of what should happen when it comes to human spaceflight thank you admiral dire well sir i think you do touch this requirement for a delicate balance and the balance is deep enough insight to be able to certify and to manage the process of certification but at the same time to have enough distance to allow commercial industry to exercise patience ease and hopefully speed that are promised thank you i would not in to suppose that the requirements would be different the performance requirements design approaches may be different but there will be different trades across the system at large and you can beat a common set of requirements with different approaches and note that you support supported the there is a consolation because it's safety somehow playing that from your testimony and i believe and i'd like to ask you how you feel about the president just clearing off a place in canceling but i don't imagine that's one that any of you want to answer and we sure would like to hear it but to get away from that risk of going out of business so leave in that then and the nation alerts what steps should nasa take to ensure that it has all turned to a means of getting us astronauts to and from our sir it isn't cheap but if you have sufficient resources and the undertaking is of sufficient importance and acquisition technique is to do all source to mitigate that risk that you  no and i ask admiral proponents of the commercial human spaceflight have argued that presently nasa relies on private contractors to bail maintain a large shuttle nasa is merely nasa's involvement today programs is significantly more engaging but they're the owner they are the owners and by giving up their ownership role in becoming a customer there's an implication that little else has changed in the relationship or in the execution the program and from a safety perspective what are your thoughts about the significance of being a mere customer now going from an owner to being just a customer well when we talk about certification and the process of service we're talking about clearing up or shortening that expands from just contracting the services twenty fourth congressional district in florida which is the home of kennedy space center so obviously your participation in the discussions as we move forward are very important to me like many others have expressed today extremely concerned about some of the lack of direction that we might have in the policy as put forth in the president's budget i don't see a vision i don't see an inspiration and i see a major loss of workforce and workforce and how how that could be impacted if we should make a determination that we want to add a couple of all flights we have not been requested to do that study and we have not done work there do you know if the certification process is is in process re certification process i don't believe so ok ok the other question i guess it would be for anybody who wants to answer what do you what do you see in terms of human spaceflight expertise capabilities and critical skills are we at risk of losing in the nation due to the gaps in the human access to space after us access to space after the shuttle is retired and how do we go about retaining those those skills particularly if the government's human exploration program is put on a hiatus which is apparently what is happening in the administration's budget directive i think nasa has a very good basis to build on when it comes to determine what skills might be at risk with this transition for the past several years they've been going through a skill mapping exercise that all their centers determine like what are the very critical skills the center needs to retain what kind of skills they are and so they kind of have an inventory now what they need and what they have and they can look at this change coming up and see what the gaps are because they could be considerable and you don't want to lose certain expertise in case there is something disastrous and happens and you need to call people back that again if they've been doing this assessment for several years it would be somewhat not relative to where where  we look to be moving based on what we've learned this week so i guess the question then becomes that you all observe that the current workforce transition plans were drawn based on what we anticipated to happen that is to say obviously that the next phase would be constellation and so forth now these plans would be on hold because the uncertain future of what has not been identified frankly as the u s human spaceflight program so if you can put that into the answer i would appreciate it just to clarify what i said earlier least they have an as is  inventory so they know what kinds of skills they have on board because they look to the new programs coming on and the new requirements that they'll have the police have the first part of the basis that they need to do a gap analysis or you're exactly right that going forward it's going to be a whole new kind of ball game in terms of what you want to stay onboard what you may not want that that part is going to be all new to  them with that response let me go back to admiral dyer if you don't mind can you can you answer the earlier question i asked about the certification and whether you have any details on  what what it would take for an extension should there be a congressional move towards extension extending the shuttle program for a couple of nights and let me repeat a caution from the panel we think the most dangerous thing that could happen to us with regard to extending the shuttle would be serial expansion but a couple more couple more followed by a couple more ok i want to run out of time but let's just assume we were last with that could shuttle be extended absolutely it would be we believe a fairly serious and expense to undertake again i'm going to run out of time but i want to just express to you again my appreciation for your being here and my extreme concern for my particular loss of jobs and the and the lost opportunities for this nation to remain number one space exploration  website the vision is to explore the universe and search for life and to inspire the next generation of explorers as only nasa can i believe that with the president's cutting in his budget of the constellation program it undermines that very mission the vision of nasa and the actual the principles upon which nasa was set up in the first place with human spaceflight i'm concerned about the intact on our children in science and math that in those fields and i'm concerned about our leadership in the world as it relates to the russians and the chinese by scrapping this human spaceflight program we've invested a tremendous amount of money billions of dollars already in the constellation program and i know this is maybe a policy decision that may be a little bit over your pay grade but i would like to get some comment from used as to why why we're doing this don't know the policy admiral i don't know if you have a comment and you may not want to touch that but as it relates to the commercial we're going to have a gap in human space flight in my judgment and that sounds like the plan here is to have a commercial space flight somehow fill the void in the gap there i've got some serious questions or reservations whether that's going to that's possible can you comment on that and also the fact that you know we have been working on the safety requirements as it  iran and aries why wouldn't that also apply to constellation first of all do you do you really think i mean i think we have a real gap in a break in human spaceflight under this proposal do you really think the commercial sector after we've invested billions of dollars in infrastructure nasa  it's been underway for a suitable period of time with human transport a fundamental part and with nasa knowledge imparted into it again commercial industry do that absolutely is it important to have a commercial industry going forward because the panel would agree but it's a question of what are those goals that we talked about earlier in the test one bit but i do you foresee a course something that's been expressed very favorably by members of the subcommittee for quite some period of time even consideration the fact that they are national space station is not even yet completed we certainly don't want to the orbited and not take advantage of the science and technology that that we have worked so hard and paid so much to construct this chaplain you talk about the primary obstacles in the way of utilization in terms of the effect of research for the international space station and the provisions in the upcoming nasa authorization legislation that you think would enhance greater prospects for better research on the i have yes we identified several challenges in our recent report on the station one of them just being the mer absence of the shuttle itself severely limited as to what you can take up and down from the station even more so in terms of what you could take down and that that matters a lot for scientific  research there was also the high cost to develop experiments and launch those costs were somewhat unknown and unknown as to who would really pay for them when you're involving other agents he's like that and i h there's also the issue of little crew time available on the station to manage experiments so they have to be as automated as possible which could be a disincentive to some researchers there's also up until recently been very much uncertainty about the retirement date for the station which another disincentive for the scientific community to really engage need a lot of lead time to plan for experiments in terms of the authorization we didn't we looked at other national labs to see how they manage their facilities and this could anything be helpful for the station and we did identify three things one being the central management body to kind of help put the research together decide what's the most important ensure that it's peer reviewed and that's a recognize that this could be a good practice it's just that idea hasn't gone anywhere for a couple years and i know you guys have emphasized that a couple times the need for robust in house technical expertise that was lost in recent years on the station program and that really needs to come back if you want to fully utilize the station and then the idea of significant user outreach the mass of those have activities to outreach to user communities but they really could be more robust and i think the budget helps provide some of those resources but it really needs to be emphasized that they they need to have very strong outreach efforts it's a follow up with that you touched on it but can you  elaborate on nasa's progress so far and stablish in some agreements for using the i s f in conjunction with federal agencies perhaps private firms academic institutions and the provisions and again the upcoming authorization that would hand the prospects of the ice has become a national lab what was the second part of the the chances what we can do to improve the prospects of the i assess becoming a national laboratory ok in terms of agreements we i think there were five in place at the time of our review and it doesn't sound like a large number but they seem to be very significant agreements there weren't any with academic institutions at the time of our review there w agencies like that and i in terms of what can be done to improve the utilization that the biggest issue we saw was resources just in the hands of the managers of the station they've been depleted over the years and they're not able to do all the things they could be doing the manage the station and then also to kind of encourage nasa to manage it more like the labs in terms of having a central management body kind of help collect all the research ideas decide who's going to go on board and to really assist the users and their ability to use the station that you need a lot of guidance and outreach out there to kind of tell people what's available and then you know bring them into that process thank you at real dire any safety concerns with the extension of the eyes that's beyond twenty fifteen no specific ones we are scope has been limited to looking at the operation of r s a also look at logistic support has been underway has been an integral part of the design from the beginning and we think can help significantly thank you thank you madam chairwoman question for mr martin ms chapman regarding human spaceflight infrastructure costs that's is estimated that the carrying cost of the shuttle program was approximately two point seven billion dollars a year to pay for much of the personnel management and related infrastructure cost at the several nasa centers devoted to human spaceflight if nasa implements its proposed human spaceflight program is the obama administration wants by becoming a customer of commercial space laws companies how should the bookkeeping infrastructure and personnel now charge the shuttle program assuming that some portion of those same facilities and people can do continue to play a role in h mr martin it's a good question out of her that if i could to mr chapman we have not done work in that area we're looking at the our work today has focused on the transition of the shuttle program the cost associated with that and the concerns we have a  and the plans for the transition effort weren't really showing what costs would be involved in terms of vitalizing facilities that you could keep for constellation and what you couldn't obviously now everything changes so the question is what do you do with all these facilities that's will have to go through a process where it examines everything because some some things could be available to the commercial suppliers for example on the leasing basis so they'll  have to think more out of the box in terms of what to do with facilities if they take them down and dispense with them as they may have done with the constellation transition there's a lot of costs associated with environmental cleanup and indirect costs that could be better reflected in budgets and things like that sort of could raise one related matter and that is the issue of deferred maintenance of facilities i know that wasn't exactly what you were asking but as far as being a significant challenge  nasa an expensive challenge this testament is it's been about two point five billion dollars in deferred maintenance at nasa's aging facilities and that is a key issue that asked me to keep it on the ball thanks for the answer and i want to get many of my colleagues mention the issue of workforce transition and sort of what's happening now the president's budget out there and i spent yesterday i talked with the director of the johnson center mike coats and he is spending his days in the office going around every employee every federal employee that he has oversight over to talk to them let him know what he knows and trying to assuage their fears about their future and he's very confident that they're going to continue to proceed as as the professionals they are and complete the five three three operations working out of the johnson said we've got the constellation the shuttle and the i assess and you know with the administration's budget going to be down to one any deficiencies and as a follow on question now that the administration has proposed canceling the constellation by injecting new uncertainties in terms of a fallen system in scheduling jobs with this further complicate nasa's ability to keep the shuttle workforce for at least to close out the five manifested flights we have our i think that is perhaps the most significant near term safety worry if you're a navy veteran and in keeping with that with always risk in drifting while you're trying to figure it out so whatever the route forward to transition from deciding to implementing will lower this risk and allow for better human resource management and keeping the skills necessary to flush thanks very much we have commended nasa for its ability to try to manage the workforce the transition the sure that the right people martin as you indicated it's incredibly important that nasa keeps on its mission especially this sunday with the launch of devore and so i think you know we've seen a very professional workforce but the potential areas of question first for mr martin and ms chaplin in two thousand and nine both the g a o and you know i do you noted that in your audits and investigations quote they continue to reveal systemic weakness in the area of acquisition contract concepts five of the companies that received awards none were my minority and there may have been one woman on business and i wonder if you can comment on how nasa is meeting its  goals for investing in small minority owned businesses we've done a fair amount of work in the f b i our program actually raised a series of concerns that the lack of internal controls these tend to be not to be large contracts or grants i think nasa is focused given a multitude of other issues has been to push the money out i don't think there have been adequate safeguards to make sure that frankly there's not a double dipping where someone putting in for an f b i our brand through nasa is the same time through the national science foundation so i think we can learn we can adopt best practices from the national science foundation and others and we can monitor and oversee these grants much more effectively well i think i'd like to see you know a little bit more analysis both from g a o and from the inspector general to look at nasa's minority contracting process as i know over at goddard space flight center and with you know a number of businesses in or around the center who want to do business there it's very complicated for them they don't understand the contracting process and although i think the administrators made a commitment on this i don't i can't see the pathway toward meeting those those commitments also in the general contracting area and looking at sub contracts and analyzing r though i'm talking about i'm looking right now because you know that's one way for a small minority of businesses to get in women and businesses to get in in the door but the general contracting process sees and making sure that those are spread out across our small and our large business community and that the sub contracting processes also are open in that sense and i just really want to pay attention to this because if we're investing on one hand and developing scientists engineers and researchers who represent the broad base of our population and we expect some of them to be entrepreneurs where do they get a foot in into the agency anyway i just leave that for open consideration for the future just as i close here admiral dyer in your statement you said that the two thousand and nine report has been widely read strongly commended  energetically criticized with those well rounded metrics we believe we have fulfilled our statutory purpose which is to infuse safety considerations into an informed debate and i want you to know that the subcommittee is really appreciative  contributions and will continue to seek your counsel on safety matters but also sure that you're aware that mr yuan mosque the c e o of space x and one of two cots manufacturers disagrees with your panel's findings and conclusions regarding the human rating of space x vehicles currently under development he says that the falcon nine rocket and dragon spacecraft quote meet all of nasa has published human to human rating requirements apart from the escape system and it was reported also that he said that the members of your panel didn't review space x s data and have quote no idea what our margins are and what is and what isn't human rated why is there so much divergence in the views held terms of fundamentals the human rating requirements have not been published by nasa and therefore a claim that one makes them we think is incorrect that sample thank you very much and i space our capabilities if the president's budget suggestions are followed it's not going to be just a gap i hope we all understand we're not talking about a gap here the president's budget is leaving us with no governmental alternative to human space transportation in the works anyway so this is something we should be taken very seriously about those of us who do believe that human beings should this research has been done constellation one test that had no new technology and hardware no new hardware in that test and that brought us to nine billion dollars that we spent on the program and now is being suggested that we scrap this does not speak well of using our government as the vehicle of getting human beings into space whether it's mouse care whether i know in that for example boeing has a delta system that could some way be reconfigured but instead we spent nine billion dollars and we didn't even have any new hardware so we need if we're going to have human beings in space which i believe then we've got to get serious about this and we can't simply just go back and say nasa we're going to rely on nasa to do it because obviously it's not working out let me get back to some analysis of this human space and ever admiral how long did it take is it seems to me that the stumbling block now is still nasa in the sense that we have to have these standards and human that will determine human flight whether human flight is possible in a certain vehicle how long did it take us to determine that the vehicles were approved for americans so i don't know the definitive answer to that we've had discussions with regard to the nasa senior technical leadership with regard to the safety of soyuz and i'm afraid we don't know the details and apparently it took about three years for us to even to analyze what the soviets read been doing for a long time much less a new system which is being developed don't you see this as one unacceptable burden and and weight that are being carried perhaps by some of our the entrepreneurs in the private sector to wait for that long just before they will even know what the standard is much less being able to incorporate it into their designs i'm a bit more empathetic in the following sense this institutional knowledge that's part of nasa  to communicate that to the private sector is a job to be done and one done carefully in some discussions on this topic a week or so ago used an analogy sir and it was it's one thing to give a building code to an electrician of of significant experience a guy who's built a lot of houses but to give a building code t novice electrician that doesn't have that history of experience in working in the human in this case but stretching the analogy in this human arena it's a dice you're undertake to let me go back on that you know a better thing to bring in fresh blood and new thoughts that may not have experience but may have an open vision to new ideas and perhaps certainly a new approach to trying to do things in a cost effective manner than what the nasa bureaucracy is has been showing us that they do in this last decade or two we'll thank you very much to all of you for sharing your talents with us today and sharing your your thoughts you know you threw out a question mr rohrabacher that i'd like ms chaplin to answer concerning the investment that's been made so far in constellation the nine billion dollars that's been spent obviously you know it wasn't just for one test flight you cou ld just detail briefly the money that has been invested so far in the program it was more than just that test flight i think concurrently there was a lot of money being invested in developing the new stuff that will be eventually included in perhaps admiral dyer can you comment on how far along are ryan is at this point i believe they recently had their plymouth very design review and the constellation program as a whole was expected to have a problem in every design review this spring that that puts them very close to the time in point when nasa would consider moving them into the formal phase of acquisition what we call implementation that's an baselines get set that's when they're held more accountable one thing that's been talked about here today is cost overruns technically they haven't had cost overruns because there is no baseline we're just looking at more money that was put to the contract than was originally in test anticipated thank you the chair recognize thank you madam chairman i apologize this is a busy day in my office today but this is an extremely important matter to me i want to and i'm sorry i missed some of the answers and questions and answers earlier particularly with regard to safety and the assessment of commercial safety but i want to move on to a slightly different question ask you miss chapman does does nasa have the tools to in place to manage a commercial crew procurement program and what steps would you recommend to enable nasa to adequately manage such a program particularly and how would that affect kennedy space center so that they do have the beginnings of that in place  but i think what they need to do is to see how much more robust it needs to be up until now the idea of having commercial crew was plan b not the only plan so you have to when it becomes the only plan you kind need to reconsider all your contracting tools or oversight mechanisms and you probably want to ramp up things you know in a more position of strength in terms of oversight and management than you have when it was just going to be one of several options ok thank you for that answer i guess it sort of begs the question do you does anyone want to make a statement as to whether or not they believe that the that the policy articulated by the administration anticipated this or adequately provides an opportunity for this to be addressed and i don't know the budget and enough detail to see that happening myself ok thank you for your back thank you ms cosmos before we bring the caring to a close i just want to thank our witnesses for testifying before the subcommittee today particularly for the g a o and for the office there are a lot of people that work with you in that that we don't see behind the scenes but you know every member of congress and all the american people really depend on the work that you do underappreciated probably not quite understood and i just want to thank the two of you and if you please pass that on to your colleagues admiral dire as well thank you just to you but to members of your panel for your many many years of dedication to a very very important issue that is facing our nation really at the moment the record will remain open for the next two weeks for additional statements from members and for answers to any follow up questions that perhaps the subcommittee members may have other witnesses and as i said in my opening remarks you can be assured that the full science and technology committee and our subcommittee as well will be holding a series of hearings over the next few weeks to examine the president's propose budget the witnesses are now excused and the hearing is adjourned thank you