MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

1

 NASA OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

 WASHINGTON, D.C. 

 Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Rollout 

 "Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Budget Briefing" 

 Speaker: 

 DOUGLAS R. COOKE, Association Administrator, 

 Exploration Systems Mission Directorate 

 Moderated by GREY HAUTALUOMA,

 Office of Public Affairs, NASA 

 4:00 p.m., EDT 

 Thursday May 7, 2009 

 NASA Headquarters 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

2

 P R O C E E D I N G S 

 MODERATOR: This is Grey Hautaluoma in the NASA 

Headquarters, Office of Public Affairs. Welcome to today's 

telecon about the President's request for the FY2010 NASA 

budget. For those of you who have not gotten that 

information yet, you can go to www.nasa.gov/budget, and the 

full detailed documents are there. 

 With us today is Doug Cooke, the Associate 

Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission 

Directorate. He will give a brief presentation, and then 

we will open up for questions and answers. 

 Again, press Star/1 if you have a question, and 

that will put you in the queue to let us know that you have 

one. 

 We do just have 50 minutes today, and we have 

lots of callers, and we may not reach everybody. So please 

limit yourself to one question, and if we have time, we 

will go back and do follow-up. 

 All right. Let me turn it over to Doug. 

 MR. COOKE: Thank you, Grey. 

 Thanks, everyone, for calling in. As Grey said, 

we are discussing the fiscal year 2010 budget request, and 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

3

we will be concentrating on that part that is associated 

with Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. 

 Just to start off with a few introductory 

remarks, between this year and next, we in ESMD are getting 

an additional, approximately, $630 million of additional 

funding and including this year's 2009 budget, which is 

actually not part of the request, but it is part of the 

operating plan that is over on the Hill for review, where 

we did receive $400 million in stimulus money 

 This money in these years is very helpful. We 

have been saying for sometime that in these years before 

Shuttle retires, the budget is constrained, and that money 

now is helpful in a development cycle for long lead items 

and early testing. So the additional $630 million is 

important to us. 

 In terms of the overall budget through this 

run-out, starting with this year, our budget is $3.9 

billion, a little over $3.9 billion. Next year, 2010, it 

is a little over $3.9 billion. In 2011, after Shuttle 

retires, that will go to over $6 billion, and that is the 

case in 2012 as well. In 2013, it is right at $6 billion, 

and then 2014, it is about $6.2 billion. Those numbers, 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

4

the exact numbers, I know are available. 

 During this time, we are still focused on initial 

operating capability for Ares I and Orion for March 2015, 

with all the supporting projects, and are continuing to 

work hard towards that goal. 

 We do have important milestones ahead for ESMD, 

the first being in June, we have the Lunar Reconnaissance 

Orbiter and the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing 

Satellite, which is due to fly in June. We have a 

five-segment ground test motor, first-stage motor in 

August. We have the preliminary design review for Orion in 

August as well. 

 We do have Ares 1-X being assembled at the Cape 

right now for a launch later this summer or early fall, and 

we have Pad Abort 1 in November, which will test our abort 

system. 

 As a part of the budget roll-out, it has been 

announced that we are initiating an independent U.S. human 

space flight review of the human space flight plans 

post-Shuttle retirement. That will include assessing the 

transportation architecture options as we go forward in 

exploration, as well as looking at options for Space 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

5

Station extension beyond 2015. 

 The objective of the study is to ensure a safe, 

innovative, affordable, and sustainable plan going forward. 

 Some of the goals are to expedite capability to support 

early Space Station utilization, support missions to the 

Moon and other destinations beyond low-Earth orbit, to 

stimulate commercial capabilities that fit within the 

budget profile. 

 As I said, we will continue to manage the 

Exploration Systems Mission Directorate programs as 

currently defined in authorization bills and 

appropriations. During this period of review, programs in 

Exploration include Constellation, our technology program, 

the Lunar Precursor Robotic Program, Human Research 

Program, and COTS. 

 I think we should all consider this to be a 

prudent activity in terms of the review, as the new 

administration looks at the long-range plans for 

exploration and the associated investments over this long 

period of time, as well as the benefits that can be 

achieved with Exploration in the future. 

 And it is not without precedent. In my own 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

6

experience over the years, I have actually participated in 

four major reviews of Space Station and six major reviews 

of Exploration. So it is something that we do on a 

periodic basis to make sure that we have our best foot 

forward and the best plan in place. 

 I think with the leadership of the new 

blue-ribbon panel provided by the highly respected Norm 

Augustine, we should look forward to an objective and 

thoughtful review of these plans and the plans for the 

future of human space flight. NASA will fully support this 

effort, and that NASA support will be led by Mike Hawes, as 

was announced a little earlier today. 

 I encourage everyone who has asked to participate 

to give their full support. This review will ensure that 

we are on the best path forward for human space flight. We 

should expect to benefit from the recommendations from this 

committee, and we will move forward with the decisions that 

are made coming out of it. 

 I do want to emphasize that it is important as 

the new administration assesses this future and assesses 

the path for the future of human space flight and human 

exploration, that all us in the space community, including 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

7

NASA, industry, academia, and all the rest, support the 

decisions that are made coming out of the activity and put 

all of our energies into making them successful. 

 I believe strongly that human space flight and 

the benefit it brings is a national asset, and I do believe 

that the President has shown that he believes that human 

space flight is important to the economic, technological, 

and scientific leadership of the country. 

 So, with that, I would like to open it up for 

questions. 

 TELECONFERENCE OPERATOR: Thank you. 

 If you would like to ask a question, please press 

Star/1 on your touchtone phone. Remember to unmute your 

phone and record your name clearly as prompted, as your 

name is required to introduce your question. If there is a 

question you would like to withdraw, simply press Star/2. 

 One moment while we wait for the first question. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Thank you. Again, identify 

yourself and the media outlet you are with, and at this 

point, limit yourself to one question. We will try to get 

to as many people as we can. 

 We will start with Bill Harwood of CBS. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

8

 TELECONFERENCE OPERATOR: Mr. Harwood, your line 

is open. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thank you. 

 Hi, Doug. It is Bill Harwood down at the Kennedy 

Space Center. 

 MR. COOKE: Hi, Bill 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: A quick question for you. 

Knowing what you know about building space systems and all 

of that, is there any other architecture that you could 

even imagine that is politically or technically feasible 

that could get anywhere near an IOC around 2015, other than 

what you are working on? In other words, if somebody comes 

back and says we really want to change course, is there any 

imaginable way you have an IOC anywhere near 2015? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: Thanks, Bill. 

 Obviously, over a period of time, we have looked 

at a lot of different approaches and have continued to look 

at and evaluate our own. I have confidence in what we are 

doing, and I think we are putting our best energies into a 

capability that will work. If there are new ideas that 

come out, Bill, that can improve on that, we should be 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

9

ready to accept them. I don't see a problem with that. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks, Bill. 

 Next up will be Frank Morring of Aviation Week. 

 TELECONFERENCE OPERATOR: Sir, your line is open. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thank you. 

 Hi, Doug. 

 MR. COOKE: Hi, Frank. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: We were told a little earlier 

that there is $150 million in this stimulus package for 

accelerating human commercial transport to the Space 

Station. Can you give us a schedule on that and tell me 

whether it has been affected by this review, if it would be 

put on hold until the review is over? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: Actually, I don't know exactly the 

schedule. I do know it is a part of the operating plan 

that we have put forward and is being reviewed on the Hill, 

which is a part of the normal process. 

 I think that we are in a position to move out on 

it, once we are free to do so. I don't think that will be 

held up by this study. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

10

 Seth Borenstein of the Associate Press, you are 

next. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Hi. Doug, thanks. This is 

Seth Borenstein at AP. 

 Between now and the end of August when the 

Augustine review would be coming, can you detail what major 

spending that Exploration program will be doing on 

Constellation between now and then and how much they would 

be, and would you consider -- and I know this is a second 

question -- would you consider delaying the PDR for Orion 

until after the Augustine Commission report, just because 

they are going to have a great say on your future? 

 MR. COOKE: Thank, Seth. 

 Our plans are to fully pursue our milestones on 

the path that we are on during this period, and that has 

been supported by the White House. 

 I mean, we are under guidance right now from the 

Authorization Act and our appropriations, and we are 

responsible to the taxpayers and our stakeholders to 

deliver what we have said. So I think it is incumbent on 

us to continue to do that. 

 We can't presume a solution out of the review. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

11

So the best thing we can do is make progress, and all of 

that should contribute to where we come out of this. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: And in terms of spending 

between now and August? 

 MR. COOKE: We will be spending on plan, exactly 

the way it has been laid out in the program. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks. 

 Florida Today is next, Todd Halvorson. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Todd Halvorson of Florida 

Today. Hey, Doug. 

 MR. COOKE: Hi, Todd. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: I just wanted to ask you what 

you personally think about the idea of switching from Ares 

I to an EELV at this point in the program. 

 MR. COOKE: I really don't want to presume an 

answer. I think all of that will be looked at by this 

review committee. 

 I know that we will be asked to support it, and 

we will provide data. I think our job is to provide data 

at this point and let them evaluate it. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Irene Klotz of Reuters is 

next. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

12

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks very much. 

 I think I am having some deja vu here that we all 

voted out Norm Augustine committee report, gosh, almost 20 

years ago, and I was sort of poking around a bit and just 

remembered that one of the findings of that report is about 

using the Moon as just a stepping stone and that the real 

target of long-term human exploration program should be 

Mars. 

 At this point, with how much work NASA has done 

on Constellation, I just wanted your assessment of if there 

was a strategy change in the long-term goal. Would that 

impact anything that has been done so far, and as far as 

you know, is all of this on the table for the review 

committee? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: This is all just forming. So I don't 

know exactly what scope they will pursue. Certainly, all 

of that is possible. 

 I think that in terms of the approach that we 

have been on, it has been, and associated with the 

authorization bill, it has been on a path that pursues the 

Moon and does look at steps beyond. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

13

 I think that the architecture that we have been 

working on does that, and if there are changes in 

priorities, I think it is adaptable to those other 

possibilities. 

 The approach that we are taking was envisioned to 

pursue the various possibilities. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Space News is next, Becky 

Iannotta. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Hi, Doug. We have seen a 

number of reports out in recent weeks about Constellation, 

and I have kind of a two-part question. One is, why do you 

think the President feels we need yet another report on 

Constellation, and in this process, how do you keep morale 

among your staff, you know, in check when these questions 

continue to crop up? 

 MR. COOKE: Well, once again, I think it is 

prudent for the new administration to look into a long-term 

plan such as human exploration that goes out many, many 

years and with the associated investment and looks at the 

benefits that are to return. So I think it is a prudent 

thing for anyone who is inheriting an effort of this type 

to go look at it. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

14

 I think with the blue-ribbon panel and what I 

understood of the nature of the participants that are 

expected, that it will be an objective, and no matter how 

it comes out, they are a group that will provide new eyes 

to what we are doing, and I think we will benefit from it, 

regardless. 

 We have had internal, kind of independent reviews 

in the last year or so, and each time we do that, we get 

new ideas that we end up adopting that are improvements. 

So I certainly think that we are in a situation where we 

will benefit from what comes next. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Ken Chang of The New York 

Times will be next. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Hi. I noticed that in the 

years 2011 out, this is a sharp drop compared to what 

President Bush had proposed last year. That strikes me as 

somewhat of a lack of confidence in the current program, 

and how will this affect going to the Moon in Ares V? 

 MR. COOKE: I think the near-term budget is the 

most important to us because it is in early years when we 

need money for long lead items and early testing, as I 

mentioned. I think that the budget will continue to be 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

15

evaluated over time, and so the best thing we can do is 

make the best use of the money we have in the near-term 

years, and then we will see, coming out of this review this 

summer, ideas on the plan forward. And NASA and the 

administration will make decisions on that path forward, 

and it will take into account budgets and very many aspects 

that we haven't even talked about in terms of workforce and 

so on, as we move through these next few years. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Rob Coppinger of Flight 

International is next. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Hi, Doug. Looking at the 

budget, I can't see where the money is coming from for the 

Ares V concepts, designs. Four contracts were supposed to 

be in place last month. Are those contracts going to be 

placed, or is that permanently on hold now? 

 MR. COOKE: We have talked about those contracts, 

and more than anything, I think I have been inclined to 

hold off on them because I don't want to presume an answer 

out of this review. I think we really need to see where we 

end up in terms of recommendations there before we start a 

new contracted activity. 

 We are going to continue on our current 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

16

contracted activities on plan, but to start a new one right 

now, I am not sure we fully developed that thought process. 

 Right now, I am inclined to hold off. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. James Dean with Florida Today 

is next. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: To continue with the current 

Constellation architecture or something similar, can you 

say how the funding outline in this budget would impact the 

planned workforce transition from Shuttle, Constellation, 

and specifically, if you are able to say, down here at 

Kennedy Space Center? 

 MR. COOKE: Well, of course, we are looking at 

this, once again, this review this summer that will look at 

-- actually, it will consider workforce and transition. 

Our program is intermingled and intertwined with Space 

Operations, the Shuttle Program, and Space Station. I know 

that the review will consider all those aspects, and we 

really should rely on that activity to see where we are. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We have a little time left. 

Please press Star/1 if you do have a question, and we will 

be able to take follow-up, if there are additional 

questions from other people who haven't asked. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

17

 We will go back to Becky Iannotta right now. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: I am looking at the out years 

for the commercial crew and cargo budget, and I see it is 

stated as a priority, and we talked about it being a 

priority, but there is really no money in the request for 

2011 though 2014. Do you anticipate that changing? Where 

is that money going to come from? 

 MR. COOKE: Once again, I think that will be a 

subject of part of this review to evaluate that. There is 

money in the SOMD budget for cargo missions, and that is in 

their budget. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Bill Harwood of CBS News is 

next. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Yeah. I just wanted to go 

back and see if I could talk you into actually answering 

that question I was asking. I know you are not trying to 

presuppose what anybody might do, and that is not what I am 

asking. I am just asking as a space engineer and expert, 

in your opinion, you know, is there any other system out 

there you see that wouldn't, by default, push IOC 

downstream from 2015, if there was a course change? 

 Thanks. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

18

 MR. COOKE: Okay. Thanks, Todd. 

 I don't personally see one. We have looked at 

other possibilities in anticipation of questions. 

 I think that we have got a plan that gets there 

as quickly as we know how. If we could come up with one 

that is better, we would do it. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We will go back to the 

Associated Press and Seth Borenstein. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Let me try to get another 

answer to my original question too, then. Thanks again, 

Doug. 

 In term, can you spell out what major spending 

you will be doing? I know it is all just continuing with 

what is, but what big purchases are being done between now 

and August on the Constellation program? 

 MR. COOKE: There aren't any new contracts being 

let. I mean, we have fully contracted for Ares I, all 

parts of Ares I and Orion. Those are the only ones that we 

are pursuing. They are on a plan with milestones and 

tests, and so there aren't any major purchases at that 

level. 

 Obviously, as we build hardware and components 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

19

are bought, those are done at lower levels of the program 

in terms of test hardware and that sort of thing. 

 Somebody asked about this one. We did have some 

RFPs out and proposals in on phase one study contracts on 

Ares V and Altair, the Lunar Lander, and we are holding off 

on those because they haven't been awarded yet. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Until after August? 

 MR. COOKE: Until we see where we come out at the 

end of the summer. Right. 

 MODERATOR: We will go back to Irene Klotz of 

Reuters. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thank you. 

 I was wondering if you might talk a little bit 

about this COTS-D and the issue with a commercial passenger 

service to the Space Station and how that might impact your 

plans and funding for Orion, and if you see it at all as a 

conflict that there could be a commercial provider for a 

service that NASA has pretty invested in developing on its 

own? 

 MR. COOKE: Right now, we don't see it as a 

conflict as a funding matter to develop that capability. 

 We do have money that we are spending, that we 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

20

intend to spend, in the stimulus to further capabilities 

that will enhance that opportunity, but, once again, I 

think the review this summer will include consideration of 

the possibility of COTS-D itself, which is purchasing -- 

well, COTS-D is actually a demonstration of a crew transfer 

capability, a crew launch capability, and I am sure they 

will consider that in the mix of possibilities for support 

of the Space Station. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. And just a 

clarification, SpaceX is the only company that has that D 

part of its contract; is that correct? 

 MR. COOKE: Well, currently in our Space Act 

Agreements, I think is what you are referring to, there was 

a COTS-D component of their proposal, but that hasn't been 

funded. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Right. But Orbital doesn't 

have that? 

 MR. COOKE: Orbital does not have that. Right. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Frank Morring, Aviation Week. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. 

 Doug, can you explain to me just exactly what IOC 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

21

means? I mean, Chris said this afternoon that it was 

taking a crew up to the Space Station and bringing them 

back, but does that mean supporting the Space Station like 

Soyuz does now with the six-month stay period and the 

ability to do a quick return? 

 MR. COOKE: It will eventually, but the initial 

flight will not be a six-month stay. That will come later. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: So IOC is really a test -- or 

what you are calling the March 15th -- I mean the March 

'15, March of 2015 date is more of a test flight. An 

actual operational capability would come when? 

 MR. COOKE: The full operational capability is 

March 2016. That would include a launch daytime. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: For verification, what needs 

to be done to get from March 2015 to Mach 2016, what 

changes in the vehicle? 

 MR. COOKE: There wouldn't be any changes at that 

point, and we are assessing all of that right now to see 

how that might be brought in. There is a pull-up flight, 

uncrewed, before the IOC flight, and so we are looking at, 

depending on how testing goes on the earlier tests, exactly 

how we will step through that, but it is possible we could 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

22

do a little better, I think, but the full operational 

capability is a long stay and really, actually, doing the 

full job. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Todd Halvorson, Florida Today. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. Todd Halvorson, 

Florida Today, again. 

 I am wondering what the rationale was for 

spending stimulus money to stimulate the COTS-D program, 

rather than accelerate Ares and Orion. 

 And just a quick second one, what has happened to 

the idea of maybe doing an Ares 1-X prime mission? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: Well, the way the stimulus spending 

was put together had to do -- there were agreements with 

the White House on the balance and all that, and so that is 

part of it. 

 We are looking to spend money, the remaining 

money out of that for a ground test article acceleration 

for Orion, buying critical engineering development units 

for some of the critical hardware to get into early 

testing, and also looking at materials testing for getting 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

23

better margins on structures and that sort of thing for the 

crew launch vehicle. In particular, the J2X engine, we are 

buying engine assemblies to get into testing earlier. 

 So we are striking a balance there, and in 

actuality, some of the things that we would be doing as a 

part of the COTS piece of that -- we are not calling it 

"COTS-D" because it is not the demonstration flight, but it 

is bringing along capabilities earlier for their developing 

a human capability. Actually, a lot of it has dual use. 

It helps them, but there is also development of 

capabilities that are accelerated, that actually we will be 

using as well. So there is a dual use to a lot of what we 

are doing there, but it helps them, and it helps us too. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We will go to Rob Coppinger at 

Flight International. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Hello again. Of the Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act, $400 million for Exploration, I think 

$250 million of it is not going to commercial. Can you 

talk about how you are going to spend that $250 million, 

and can we see it included in the budgets? Is it being 

given to Orion in this fiscal year, or is it being given to 

Ares in the next fiscal year? What is the breakdown on how 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

24

you are spending that $250 million? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: Okay. That was a little bit of what 

I was talking about, but I can go into a little more 

detail. 

 Once again, this is up on the Hill with our 

operating plan. So this has come out of our work with the 

White House, and it is over on the Hill now, and they have 

an opportunity to review what we are doing. 

 But in terms of the breakdown, let me talk about 

the phasing of it first, between now and next year. We 

will try to get all of it in work as early as possible, and 

that has been a major objective of the stimulus activity. 

 In terms of some of the things that we are doing, 

we are spending $25 million on the Mobile Launch Platform, 

ground support equipment down at the Cape. We are 

obligated by law, actually, to spend some of it on SBIR 

work. So that is about 10.2 

 On the Crew Exploration Vehicle, we are spending 

$165 million. I mentioned the Service Module Ground Test 

Article. That is right around at $49 million. That will 

be for getting a Ground Test Article accelerated, so that 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

25

we can do early testing, looking at the loads and 

environmental testing on the vehicle to get early data 

there. 

 We will spend about $112 million on the higher 

risk engineering development units to demonstrate some of 

the critical capabilities in systems early on, so that that 

can be done before critical design review. 

 We have about $4 million going into testing the 

materials and investigating the materials in terms of their 

margin of safety and their failure limits, and then the 

rest of it, then, is in commercial capabilities, the 150 

that we talked about. 

 There is a lot more detail to that, but, at a 

high level, that is what we are doing. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Bill Harwood, do you have 

another question? 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Yes, I do. Just a quick 

budget question for guys like me who aren't used to 

perusing budgets. Looking at last year's projections 

compared to this year's projections, as Griffin said in a 

recent speech, it looked like Exploration was down by about 

$3.5 billion over the out years. Is that an accurate 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

26

number, realizing these are projections and they have 

asterisks on them now, but is that an accurate number? 

 Thanks. 

 MR. COOKE: Actually, what we have got through 

2013, which is our comparison with FY09 President's budget, 

it is down in the current budget by about $3.1 billion. 

 So, because the run-out on the 2009 budget only 

goes to 2013, that is the comparison that we make. Once 

again, we are up this year and next by about $630 million, 

but, over that time period, it is down about 3.1. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thanks. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. James Dean? 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: On your most recent target 

date for Ares 1-X, I presume it is probably well after the 

review is going to be completed. So its future hinges on 

that review? 

 MR. COOKE: Right now, we are planning on getting 

it going as quick as we can, and right now, it is slated 

for no earlier than the end of August. 

 I don't presume what will come out of the review 

and how it might affect or not affect that flight. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We do have a few minutes left. 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

27

 If anybody has another question, please let us know, or we 

will get wrapped up here. 

 [No response.] 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Not seeing any further 

questions, we will conclude this teleconference. 

 Let me give you replay information. This 

recording will be up in about an hour and will be there 

through May 22nd. If you dial 800-879-5816 -- 

 Hold on. We have some late-breaking questions, 

so we will continue on for a minute. 

 Okay. Seth Borenstein? 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: If the Augustine Commission 

asks you what do you find wrong such as the Direct plan or 

the EELV plan, what would you say is the biggest flaw with 

the alternatives? 

 MR. COOKE: In my view -- and this is my view -- 

I have always felt that the biggest difference is in the 

risk. I mean, we can argue numbers all day long in terms 

of cost and schedules and that sort of thing. They have 

different levels of maturity. So you are never exactly 

comparing the same equivalent numbers. 

 But in terms of the risk numbers that we have 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

28

seen and calculated -- and I usually look closest at loss 

of crew numbers -- the Ares I approach has always been 

about at least two times better than these other 

approaches, comparing with EELVs and the Direct 2.0, and it 

gets down, in simple terms, the numbers of moving parts. 

 The first stage engine on the Ares I is a solid 

rocket that is simpler than a liquid fuel engine or 

combination of engines. So you can think about it somewhat 

in those terms, but I personally believe that the risk is 

lower to the crew on this vehicle, and that to me is the 

bigger of the discriminators. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Thank you. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We will go to Rob Coppinger of 

Flight International again. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: Oh, hi. Just two things. One 

is, could you just clarify what you mean by high-risk 

engineering development units for that $112 million? 

 The other thing I would like to ask, the 

Aerospace Corporation Reports on EELVs for launching Orion, 

has that now finished that report, and can you tell us what 

the conclusion is? 

 MR. COOKE: The first question on EDUs, 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

29

engineering development units, basically, when you are 

developing hardware and you are developing the components 

of a life support system or an avionics system or a power 

system, you have various components, boxes that you build 

that have varying degrees of risk associated with them, and 

the ones that we have that are of higher risk are 

associated with life support systems and propulsion. 

 You go through a development process where you do 

preliminary designs and you build test hardware, which are 

these engineering development units, and then you are also 

getting further into the more refined designs as you 

develop further. 

 We were in a situation with constrained funding 

in '8, '9, and '10, where we were having to push out 

development of some of those units to be worked in parallel 

with further design work, which means that you build them 

and you have a problem in a test and you have to redesign, 

then that ripples through work that you are doing that is 

actually supposed to be further maturing where you end up. 

 So there was work that we were doing in parallel 

that we would rather do serially. So, with additional 

money this year and next, we are able to pull some of that 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

30

work back, especially in the more critical systems, to be 

more serial in nature, so that it is a more logical 

development path. 

 We have done these things in the past in other 

programs, but it always pushes some schedule and, 

therefore, cost risk into your development, if you have a 

problem somewhere along the lines. 

 In terms of the Aerospace Report, we have got 

draft charts on that, and we have not had a presentation 

from them at this point. We are trying to schedule that 

now. It has taken a little time because of this entire 

budget process. So we still need to have that presented 

and be able to ask some questions that we have. So we are 

not finished with that yet. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. We will go back to Florida 

Today, Todd Halvorson. 

 MEDIA QUESTIONER: One more time. Doug, I was 

just wondering what your thoughts are on the gap and any 

changes that might come out of this review. It seems to me 

that any significant changes would exacerbate the gap, and 

I was just wondering what your thoughts were on that. 

 MR. COOKE: I think that they will consider the 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

31

gap very, very, strongly. I mean, there are a lot of 

parameters involved in any changes that will include how 

the workforce is affected, how the gap is affected, the 

cost, the schedule. All of those will be taken into 

account. So, if there are ideas that help us improve that, 

then I am sure we would be happy to do it. 

 We are constantly looking ourselves to improve 

our situation. You have heard of some changes that we have 

made. We had actually planned this before all this has 

occurred, but we have been going through cost scrubs, which 

you do from time to time in a program to make sure that you 

have not over-specified your design and you are not trying 

to build too much into it, more than you need. So we are 

going through a cost scrub to try to make sure that we have 

got exactly the vehicle that we want, and that is why we 

have recently taken out the near-term ability to put six 

people in this vehicle, since we are not going to need that 

for a while. So we don't need to be flying hardware that 

we are not going to use. 

 We also have not brought into developing an 

extended nozzle for the first stage solid rocket engine. 

We were going to do that for life cycle cost purposes, but 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

32

it was going to cost us more in the near term, and we 

decided because of the constrained budget, we would put 

that off and carve out a little more overhead. 

 So we are constantly looking at ways to improve 

our budget posture and cost posture. We are also going 

through and looking at all the facilities that we would be 

using and trying to make sure that we are not spending 

money on facilities that we don't need on the ground. 

 So, I mean, we are going through those kind of 

processes ourselves, but, you know, once again, you get 

another set of eyes looking at this, they might find things 

that we haven't seen. We did have a Constellation 

Acceleration Study that was done that identified some items 

in design even that we have incorporated because they were 

good ideas. So I am looking forward to potentially new 

ideas that will help. 

 MODERATOR: Okay. Well, thank you, everybody. 

That will conclude our telecon today. 

 Again, the replay number is 800-879-5816. For 

international callers, it is 203-369-3565, and if you 

haven't seen it yet, we did just issue an advisory about an 

11:30 a.m., Eastern, teleconference tomorrow with Norman 
 MALLOY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE 

 (202) 362-6622 

33

Augustine about the review of the U.S. Human Space Flight 

Plan, and there is more information on nasa.gov if you want 

the information about RSVP-ing. 

 Thank you for joining us. 

 - - -