22 September 2021

NASA HEADQUARTERS ORAL HISTORY PROJECT

EDITED ORAL HISTORY TRANSCRIPT

STEPHEN G. JURCZYK

INTERVIEWED BY SANDRA JOHNSON

FREDERICKSBURG, VIRGINIA – SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

JOHNSON: Today is September 22nd, 2021. This interview with Steve Jurczyk is being 

conducted for the NASA Headquarters Oral History Project. Mr. Jurczyk is talking to me today 

over Microsoft Teams from Fredericksburg, Virginia. The interviewer is Sandra Johnson and 

I’m in Santa Fe, Texas. I appreciate you talking to me today for this project, and I want to start 

out by asking you if you could talk about your background, about your education, and why and 

how you came to NASA and those first years before you ended up at Headquarters.

JURCZYK: Yes. Sure. I’m a graduate of the University of Virginia [UVA, Charlottesville]. I

have a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in electrical engineering from UVA in ’84 and ’86. I

actually ended up at NASA because a branch chief at NASA Langley Research Center 

[Hampton, Virginia] did on-campus interviews at UVA in 1986, and I signed up for an interview 

and got an interview. His name was Glenn Taylor. Then back in that timeframe he did not have 

a civil service position, so I was hired on with a contractor at Langley and I worked with an onsite contractor for two years. Then in September of 1988 I was hired as a civil servant in the 

Electronic Systems Branch, the Flight Electronics Division, at NASA Langley Research Center. 

That’s how I ended up at NASA. It was an on-campus interview with a NASA Langley branch 

chief.

Actually back then you would go to a room that had boxes on tables with the name of the 

company or organization that was conducting interviews a few weeks out and you would drop a 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 2

resume in the box. I was with a friend who said, “Oh, hey, NASA Langley, I want to interview 

with them.” I said, “All right, I’ll interview with them.” It turns out that his name was Steve 

[Stephen] Sandford and his father Maynard [C.] Sandford worked at NASA Langley, and so I

had that connection too. I happened to go to grad school with the son of a NASA Langley 

researcher who grew up in Hampton, Virginia. We both ended up interviewing, both ended up at 

NASA.

I was an electronics engineer for years, mostly working on remote sensing systems to 

support Earth science research that flew on a number of satellites and eventually one on 

International Space Station [ISS]. Then went into line management and worked my way up from 

branch chief to deputy director of engineering, director of engineering, director of research and 

technology, Deputy Center Director at Langley, Center Director at Langley, and then Associate 

Administrator [AA] for the Space Technology Mission Directorate. That’s when I came to 

Headquarters in March of 2015 to be the AA for Space Technology Mission Directorate.

Then in February of 2018 Robert [M.] Lightfoot was the Acting Administrator and had 

been the Acting Administrator for a little over a year at the time. He brought me up to the Office 

of the Administrator to help Lesa [B.] Roe and himself, Robert, to help run the Agency. They 

were both doing two jobs, Acting Administrator and Acting Deputy Administrator, and 

Associate Administrator and Deputy Associate Administrator jobs. So when Jim [James F.] 

Bridenstine was confirmed in April of 2018, I was on a detail with the Office of Administrator 

and sort of acting like the Associate Administrator, because actually Lesa had left earlier and 

Krista Paquin had become the Deputy Associate Administrator, and then Robert left and Jim 

Bridenstine came in, and I was the continuity between Robert along with Krista and others in the 

Administrator’s Office, the continuity between Robert Lightfoot and Jim Bridenstine.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 3

JOHNSON: Let’s talk about that period before Jim Bridenstine came in. He was picked by the 

president [Donald J. Trump] in September 2017, but he had a long period before he actually 

started April 23rd, 2018. His approval process was somewhat contentious, and it took a long 

while, and Robert Lightfoot ended up being the longest-serving Acting Administrator because of

it. But talk about those first impressions maybe that you had in that position helping Robert run 

the Agency and being that Acting [Associate Administrator].

JURCZYK: Yes. As the Space Technology Mission Directorate AA I was a direct report to 

Robert. So I had sensed for months that Robert was working long hours and working very hard 

to be the Acting Administrator as well as do the Associate Administrator job. I had offered 

several times to Robert, saying, “Hey, listen, if you need help, I’d be more than willing to come 

up to the Office of Administrator and help out. My deputy in Space Technology Mission

Directorate, Jim [James L.] Reuter can act and he’s very capable of running [the directorate].”

That went on for a little while and then I had a conversation with Krista Paquin and said, 

“Hey, listen, I told Robert, I’ll tell you, I’m more than willing to come up and help, because I

know you guys are just stretched really really thin.” That’s how in February of 2018 I ended up 

going up to the Office of Administrator. Now Robert did an amazing job, 15 months acting as 

Administrator. He did an amazing job. But trying to do both, run, I’ll call it the up and out job 

with the new [presidential] administration and other government agencies and international 

partners and do the down and in job, essentially the chief operating officer of the Agency. He 

was working very long hours and stretched very thin. So I felt with my experience as a Center 

Director and AA I could help him, and he took me up on that offer about a year in.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 4

But he did do an amazing job along with Lesa and then Krista. It’s a difficult job. First 

of all, any job where you’re acting is challenging. You’re not sure where the boundaries are 

between what decisions you can make and what decisions you need to defer to the person 

coming in permanently to the job. The second thing is a new administration, and you’re not their 

person, you’re not the political appointee in the position. So you have to also develop those 

relationships and do the best you can knowing that they’ve nominated somebody and they’re 

going to be waiting for that confirmation to make some decisions and figure out how to move the 

Agency forward.

Acting in general is very challenging, particularly when you’re a career civil servant 

acting a political appointee position. Yes, hats off to Robert in the job that he did in those 15 

months.

JOHNSON: Did you follow the confirmation process that Bridenstine was going through?

JURCZYK: Somewhat. It was quiet for a long time between his hearing and his vote, because at 

least one or more senators had put a hold on his nomination, and that’s all it takes is one senator 

to put a hold on it, at least back then. So there wasn’t much to follow between his hearing and

his confirmation.

Now during his vote we were in Colorado Springs [Colorado] at the Space Symposium. I

was with Robert, as Acting Administrator, and we were meeting with heads of international 

space agencies and industry representatives, and we were listening to the [U.S. Senate] vote on 

somebody’s iPhone as we were walking between meetings in Colorado Springs at the Space 

Symposium. I’ll never forget it was going to be a tie the way the vote initially stood before they 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 5

closed the vote out, and I think [Vice President] Mike [Michael R.] Pence was in Florida. He

was not there to go to the Senate and break the tie. Then I think it was [Senator] Jeff [Jeffry L.] 

Flake changed his vote from no to yes, and that gave Jim Bridenstine the 51 votes he needed to 

be confirmed. So yes, even up to the end in the final vote there was a little bit of drama there.

Jim Bridenstine was at the Space Symposium also when the vote occurred and then he 

was sworn in in the following days and probably was sworn in that next week and started that 

next week in April.

JOHNSON: What were your impressions of him as a potential Administrator and then those first 

days?

JURCZYK: There was a lot of obviously second- and thirdhand information through the press. 

Some of it I think was politically motivated. There are a couple of things that he was quoted as 

saying early on in his career in the House of Representatives, particularly relative to the LGBTQ 

[lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer or questioning] community, and climate change. I

tried to just—that’s politics and it’s noise and I’m just not going to pay attention to that.

It was probably a year or two before Jim was nominated, he gave a talk at the Space 

Symposium about a piece of legislation that he had proposed, the [American] Space Renaissance 

Act. It was a set of policies and reforms focused on civil and national security space. It was

very well thought out and addressed a large number of the challenges in civil and national 

security space. His talk walked through that proposed piece of legislation. Later on I found out 

that he never thought it would get passed as a single piece of legislation because it was so 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 6

comprehensive. But it was passed, elements of it were proposed and passed in Congress. I’m 

not sure exactly which ones those were. I don’t remember off the top of my head.

Yes, I was very impressed with the quality of the work that went into the Space 

Renaissance Act, and the thoughtfulness of addressing some of the challenges in civil and 

national security space by Jim and by his staff when he was in the House.

JOHNSON: When he started and you were still Acting AA, how soon after that did they ask you 

to continue on in that position?

JURCZYK: I’m trying to remember whether I started the AA position in May or June of 2018. 

But it was within four to six weeks of Jim coming on board in the end of April, maybe seven or 

eight. Four to eight weeks of Jim coming on board in the end of April, where I met with Jim and 

Jim said, “I’d like you to stay on as the Associate Administrator.” Relatively quickly after he 

was sworn in.

JOHNSON: Did you expect that, that they would ask you to continue on?

JURCZYK: I wasn’t sure. Different leaders have different approaches to coming into a new

organization. Some will rely on people who are there and in the organization and bring in some 

of their own people that they have relationships with and trust. How much they ask the existing 

staff to stay on or the career staff to stay on versus bring in new people varies from leader to 

leader. Obviously, Jim brought in some of his staff from the [Capitol] Hill, Deputy Chief of 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 7

Staff Gabe Sherman. Matt [Matthew M.] Rydin who eventually became his press secretary. 

They came from his staff, his [Washington] DC and local staff when he was a congressman.

Then others like myself and Melanie [W.]Saunders who’s Deputy AA came from JSC

[NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas]. He drew on people from inside NASA. So it 

seemed like Jim had a balanced approach to bringing people in that he knew and had a 

relationship with and drawing on people from the organization that had experience to help him 

be successful.

JOHNSON: Sometimes transitions between one Administrator to the next and the staff changing 

out, it can be smooth, or it can be contentious. It can be a lot of different ways. How did you 

feel about this transition? Especially because it was changing from Robert Lightfoot and being 

an Acting Administrator for so long and then to Bridenstine. As you said, he brought his own 

people with him. Did things mix well during the transition?

JURCZYK: Yes, he kept me on as AA. We had Melanie as Deputy AA. He did not replace any 

of the AAs, at least initially. That comes later. Or Center Directors. That happened over time as 

Center Directors retired, so there wasn’t a lot of turnover. Same thing with Chief Engineer and 

Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance. There wasn’t a lot of turnover in the highest level of 

career civil servants. Yes, the transition was relatively smooth with respect to personnel and 

organizational structure and personnel.

The challenge was developing an updated strategy for the Agency, updated program 

content, and budgets to go along with that program content that aligned with the new 

administration’s priorities. That’s really where the challenge was, and that happens in every 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 8

change in administration. Sometimes even from the first term to the second term of the same 

administration. That’s really where Jim asked a lot of questions and in some cases challenged us 

to think about how we planned and implemented programs in different ways to align more 

effectively with the new administration’s approach and priorities.

JOHNSON: Unlike some of our Administrators he was coming from that political background 

instead of a NASA background. Do you feel that helped him? Like you said he was asking 

questions and he had to learn about the programs and what was going to go forward. But do you

think being in that political position helped him?

JURCZYK: I think so. He understood how Congress worked. He had relationships with his 

former colleagues in Congress. I think that not only helped Jim Bridenstine but is also helping 

Senator [Bill] Nelson advocate for the Agency. He has even a longer history with Congress on 

the Senate side than Jim did on the House side. I think that helped.

The interesting thing was Jim didn’t fully understand how the executive branch worked 

necessarily. When I mean work, I don’t mean the role of the executive branch as opposed to the 

legislative and judicial, but how the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] worked with the 

White House to develop the president’s budget request. I think that was the new experience for 

Jim that he just, not having been in the executive branch, just being the receiver of the 

president’s budget request when he was a congressman, he didn’t realize how we worked closely 

with the Office of Management and Budget and our examiners at OMB to develop the 

president’s budget request on an annual basis to submit to Congress. I think that was the new 

piece for Jim. Yes.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 9

JOHNSON: Like you said, it was the opposite side of what he was used to, that’s for sure.

JURCZYK: Yes, he was the receiver of that document, not the developer of it, so yes, that’s right.

JOHNSON: Talk about those first few months. You mentioned his priorities, his strategic vision, 

and the things that he had to accomplish that the president wanted. Let’s talk about those first 

few months and maybe some of those priorities and how those priorities—which there were 

some changes—how that was received at Headquarters.

JURCZYK: First there was a real focus on advancing human exploration, what NASA calls 

exploration, but human exploration, and focusing on returning astronauts to the Moon and to the 

lunar surface. But also something a little bit different than the previous administrations was 

using the lunar orbit and lunar surface as a proving ground for technologies, systems, and 

operations for an eventual human mission to Mars. It was an “and.” Before in the George W. 

Bush administration it was the Moon. Then in the [Barack] Obama administration it was Mars

and Asteroid Redirect Mission. With the new administration we had worked to develop this 

more comprehensive approach to human exploration which made returning astronauts to the 

Moon a priority, but also had the horizon goal of human missions to Mars. That was definitely a 

large focus for the Agency leadership along with the administration from early on in Jim’s 

tenure.

There was support for space technology because it was an enabler for human exploration.

But again the focus for space technology was more on technologies to enable human exploration 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 10

of the Moon and Mars. The focus previously had been on developing crosscutting technologies 

that would help human exploration and robotic exploration and science as well as commercial 

space interests. There was a little bit of an adjustment there in the space technology portfolio to 

make sure that the lion’s share of the investments were going into technologies like higherperforming, higher reliability environmental control and life support systems, advanced space 

suit technology, including the Portable Life Support System, more efficient and higher thrust 

propulsion technology to reduce trip time for mission to Mars, etc. In situ resource utilization

using the resources of the Moon and Mars to produce materials and supplies to reduce the 

logistics burden, etc. There was that shift in space technology, again reflecting the priority on 

human exploration. But the good news there too was that they proposed budget increases for 

space technology that were very helpful in advancing those goals and objectives.

Then there were a couple of controversial things in that first budget that Jim did not 

necessarily support. One was zeroing out the budget for education for the Office of STEM 

[Science, Technology, Engineering, Math] Engagement. Jim personally did not support that and 

pushed back on that and was told to submit a budget with $0 there. Of course the funding was 

put back by Congress when they appropriated dollars every year. Then also Earth science. Yes,

the administration was not necessarily supporters of NASA’s Earth science programs and 

missions, including climate research and climate missions. I’m not sure that budget was 

necessarily reduced. It was reduced some. But they didn’t get the increases that they needed to 

really move forward on the missions in the Earth Science Decadal Survey.

So those were a couple of areas where some priorities’ budgets were flat, or cuts were 

made just about that first year and every year. That money was really for the most part restored 

by Congress through the appropriations process. Because the administration has their priorities,
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 11

but of course Congress has their own, and those things very rarely are in 100 percent alignment. 

We worked through all that across the four mission areas. Aeronautics research was pretty much 

held flat or given modest increases. It was not necessarily a priority. Nor was it an area they

were looking to cut funding.

Then the Mission Support Directorate and the Security, Safety, and Mission Success 

[SSMS] budget and the construction of facilities budgets, we were trying to negotiate the 

appropriate levels for those accounts with the White House. We did make some progress there 

in I think the second year of Jim’s tenure on the administration side. But then on the 

congressional side through appropriations those budgets were held flat or cut. Again, dealing 

with NASA’s infrastructure challenges was not necessarily a priority for the administration but 

we talked to them about the challenges and got a little bit of support there. Then we just need 

that SSMS budget to support procurement and legal and human capital and financing 

management. Unfortunately the challenge there is as the program budgets were increasing and 

the program content was increasing that budget was held flat or decreasing. That put stress on 

those mission support functions to be able to support the programs. That’s something that I

know over time Jim as Administrator, and now at least in the new administration before I left in 

May, that’s something they were working on to make sure they had the resources in those

mission support functions which are critical to the success of the programs.

JOHNSON: Part of getting his priorities across to NASA and to the people that would be 

approving the budget is the ability to communicate and to interact. Every Administrator has a 

different way of communicating. You were at Headquarters under Charlie [Charles F.] Bolden, 

and he had his own way of communicating. I know Robert Lightfoot did too. But let’s talk 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 12

about Administrator Bridenstine’s communication and the interaction that you may have had 

with him, and maybe some of the similarities or differences from some other Administrators you

worked for.

JURCZYK: Yes. Jim was a really talented communicator. He viewed communicating internally

and externally to be of critical importance with his job as Administrator. A critically important 

part of his job in gaining the broadest possible support for NASA and the mission of NASA both 

with stakeholders, the administration, and Congress, but also the broad public support for the 

Agency. Yes. He definitely put the time and attention into it that maybe previous 

Administrators just hadn’t done because they had different backgrounds and different interests, 

and it was a different time when they were Administrator. That was one thing.

The second thing I would say is that Jim was talented in communicating in several ways. 

One of the ways was you could tell him something that he never heard before about a science 

program or research program or technology program and he would not only remember it, he 

would be able to, without notes, speak to it in a speech or in an interview as if he had known it 

for years and years and years and was intimately involved with it. He had this photographic 

memory or just this ability to not only absorb new information but also then talk to it and explain 

it in a highly effective way, and why it was important for NASA, and why it was important for 

the nation. That was just a skill and a talent that I haven’t seen in very many people. That was 

another reason why Jim was very highly effective.

He really demonstrated a passion for the mission of the Agency and what the Agency was

trying to accomplish. That’s really important in communicating, having energy and passion for 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 13

what you’re talking about is a really important part of being an effective communicator, and Jim 

absolutely had that energy and passion, and it came through.

He would prepare for interviews and prepare for speeches and events. But he would 

always speak extemporaneously. Very rarely if ever I saw him use a speech or notes or anything 

written. He just was able to take the information, prepare, organize it in his head, and then go 

out and talk extemporaneously and be very very effective, very comprehensive, accurate, and do 

a really great job. Jim made it a priority. He had a skill and talent for it. That was one of the 

things I would consistently hear from people inside and outside the Agency, is how effective Jim 

was as an Administrator, one of the reasons why Jim was so effective as an Administrator was

because of his ability to communicate effectively.

JOHNSON: Being in the NASA workforce before he was appointed or before he was approved, 

and then afterwards when that communication became apparent, personally I heard a lot of 

people change their mind about him quickly. I think there was an anticipation of him being a 

certain way and then afterwards that changed.

JURCZYK: Yes. That really helped particularly down and in with the leadership and the

workforce of the Agency. I will also say I think Jim surprised a lot of people because of all of 

what they had heard about Jim before actually getting to know him, in that when he became 

NASA Administrator, he was not political. I would say he was very apolitical because he knew 

he needed to build bipartisan support for the Agency. He needed Democrats to support the 

Agency as well as Republicans, particularly in Congress. All his thinking, all his 

communication, all his actions were focused on what’s the best thing, what’s going to help the
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 14

Agency succeed, what is the best decision, what is the best approach for the Agency to enable

the Agency to accomplish its mission. I think that really won a lot of people over. They could 

tell that he was not playing politics with the Agency, he was really trying to build bipartisan and 

broad support, and his primary motivation was the success of the Agency and the people working 

in the Agency and for the Agency. I think that came across early on, yes.

JOHNSON: Not quite a year after you became the AA, in March 2019 the vice president 

announced that NASA would put a human on the Moon by 2024. Did you know that 

announcement was coming or were you there when he announced it?

JURCZYK: No, I personally did not have much of a heads-up that that announcement was 

coming. All of that happened in probably the period of a couple of weeks where we engaged in 

communication with the White House on that goal and then there was a National Space Council

meeting where it was announced, I believe, later that month. That all happened very quickly. 

We knew that would be extremely challenging and would have felt comfortable with maybe a 

2026 goal. But that’s how organizations accelerate progress, is through these really challenging 

audacious goals. So we embraced it as a challenging and audacious goal and worked to put a 

plan in place to achieve the next astronaut landing on the Moon by the end of 2024, knowing that 

it would be very challenging. I think we were on this path for 2028 for the first year or so of the 

administration, and then March of ’19 we got the direction, it was essentially the administration’s 

policy that we would land the next astronauts on the Moon in 2024, and we put plans in place to 

do that.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 15

JOHNSON: Then they said they were going to land the first woman and the next man.

JURCZYK: That’s right. Yes. I’m trying to remember. Must have been May of ’19, that year, 

late April, early May of ’19. I was on a vacation trip to Hawaii and I get back from Hawaii and I

hear about Artemis and the Artemis Program. I was like, “What’s Artemis?” In that 10 or so 

days I was gone they were talking about what are we going to call our lunar program, both 

human and robotic exploration of the Moon. Somebody mentioned, and I believe Jim said it was

a gentleman who’s now the chief economist for the Agency, Alex [Alexander] MacDonald. I

think Alex MacDonald ran into Jim Bridenstine in the hallway and said, “You know, you ought 

to consider calling our lunar program Artemis. She’s the twin sister of Apollo and the goddess 

of the Moon.” Jim goes, “Oh, that’s great, that’s brilliant, that’s what we’re going to do.” So 

that was one of those serendipitous things where Jim just happened to bump into Alex. I think I

have this right. I think Jim told the story in the going away event that we had virtually in 

January of ’20. That’s how it became the Artemis Program, and I think everybody’s fully 

embraced that now, because Artemis is very well known definitely within the space community

and somewhat beyond. I think it’s a brilliant name for the program.

JOHNSON: A lot happened to say the least while you were AA. But one of them was in March of 

2020 when everybody’s life changed and we all went home and began working at home, and the 

country effectively shut down because of the pandemic [COVID-19]. That was somewhat 

challenging I would think especially for your position. Let’s talk about what you were 

responsible for during the beginning of COVID, because we had to not only figure out how 

people could work from home, but we had to figure out how people could communicate from
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 16

home, and how we could still have meetings from home, and how to keep everyone safe if they 

did have to go onsite. Talk about what it took to keep NASA working toward those goals that 

were already set.

JURCZYK: Yes. Jim from the very beginning told me and the leadership team that our first 

priority was to keep the workforce safe and healthy, while keeping the mission moving forward 

as best we could. Mission-critical functions like continuing to operate the International Space

Station effectively, to protect the health and safety of the astronauts and the cosmonauts. Jim set 

the tone from the very beginning.

Then in February we realized we may be going to remote work, and so we worked with 

Headquarters, the Centers, and the CIO [Chief Information Officer] to do a telework day out at 

[NASA] Ames [Research Center, Moffett Field, California] I believe it was. Then a telework 

day for the entire Agency to stress the IT [information technology] and look at how we would 

use [Microsoft] Teams and Webex and the tools [audio/video conferencing software], see what 

worked and what didn’t work. I think that was just a tremendous thing. Doing the Center-level 

and then Agency-level telework days really helped us understand the strengths and limitations of 

the tools, make sure that the networks could handle the traffic, etc., and set us up for success in

allowing people to work remotely and be productive. I think that was one thing that was really 

important that again Agency leadership, not just me but the team, had the foresight to suggest

and to do.

The second thing was I remember we were still at Headquarters in late February, maybe 

it was late February, early March. At that time our political appointee CFO [Chief Financial 

Officer] had resigned and Melanie Saunders, the Deputy AA, went to be the Acting CFO. I had 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 17

asked Cathy Mangum, who was the Associate Director at Langley, to come up and be the Acting 

Deputy Associate Administrator in November of the previous year, November of ’19. Cathy was 

my Acting Deputy at the time. I remember sitting in Cathy’s office with Jane Datta and we had I

think J.D. Polk, our Chief Medical Officer.

We put this decision-making framework in place that had stages, stage 1, 2, 3, and 4, with 

4 being the most restrictive operations at Headquarters and the Center, and 1 being close to 

business as usual. We set criteria for what stage each Center and location would be in based on 

things like case counts in your area and region, hospitalizations, positivity rate, etc. That 

decision making framework—and we had to evolve it and tweak it over time—but that allowed 

each Center and each location to use data to determine what level of activity to have at their 

Center between stages 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Then the CIO put a dashboard in place that each Center could use and Headquarters that 

collected the data electronically on case counts and positivity rate and hospitalizations for their 

area and their state so they could, on a regular basis, go in and look at the data and determine

what stage they needed to be in. I think that framework, plus the CIO setting up that tool so they 

could easily access the data, was really important in making sure we were making the right 

decisions and protecting the workforce while keeping critical activities moving forward.

Eventually all the Centers and locations were either in stage 3 or stage 4. A lot of them 

stage 4, which is mission-critical activities only, everybody else is teleworking, working 

remotely, and really limiting the number of people who are working onsite.

Then there were a couple of missions that we knew were critical that we needed to move 

forward with. One was the first commercial crew mission with SpaceX with crew, the Demo-2 

[Crew Dragon DM-2, May 30, 2020] mission, which we kept moving forward with a lot of 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 18

precautions in place. We also made sure Centers and contract partners had personal protective 

equipment [PPE], social distancing where we could do social distancing, enhanced cleaning, 

contact tracing. That was another really important thing. We put a tool in place to allow each 

chief health medical officer at each Center to do contact tracing with help. Because initially we 

were going to rely on the local and state-level health offices do the contact tracing. But they 

became overwhelmed immediately. So we realized early on we were going to have to do our 

own contact tracing. For people working on-site we made sure that we had the PPE available,

social distancing, cleaning, contact tracing. Made it clear to employees, “If you’re symptomatic 

do not come into work, go see your doctor.” Later on we put a contract in place to allow people 

to get kits so they can swab themselves at home and send them in and get test results.

One other thing we did, which is I thought really innovative, is the Fitbits [activity 

trackers]. For people who are working onsite like Stennis [Space Center, Mississippi] for the 

SLS [Space Launch System] Green Run test, they couldn’t social distance. They were wearing 

PPE, but they needed to work in close quarters. We gave them Fitbits because the Fitbit 

monitors things like your pulse rate, your breathing rate, your blood oxygen level, while you’re 

sleeping, and then in the morning you can look at those statistics. If your breath rate is way up, 

your blood oxygen level has dropped, it’s like “Okay, I’m not going to work, I’m going to go see 

the doctor and I’m going to go get tested.” That was something that J.D. Polk had read about 

that organizations were using. We gave people working onsite Fitbits to track some of their key 

health metrics. I think that helped people recognize that they might have COVID, not go in 

when they were asymptomatic, go get tested, and some of them tested positive and stayed away 

from work so we didn’t have to worry about other people being exposed and doing the contact 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 19

tracing. So we did some innovative things like that too. All of that for the onsite work was 

really important.

All this was being worked in March and April and May and on through a team that I led 

initially that met every morning initially, and then every other morning, and then eventually a 

couple times a week. It had the Deputy AA on it, Jane Datta, the AA for Human Capital, AA for 

Procurement, Chief Health and Medical Officer, and others, our General Counsel, etc. Chief 

Financial Officer representation. We had a core set of people that basically met every morning 

to go through how are we doing with PPE, what Centers are at what stages, what Centers are 

proposing moving to a different stage, etc.

The other thing we did is we worked very closely with our on-site contractors and our 

prime contractors who were doing work at their locations to make sure that they had adequate 

funding so they wouldn’t have to furlough or lay people off because not all of their folks could 

work off-site. Many of them could but some of them couldn’t work off-site. We had people that 

couldn’t necessarily get onsite to do their jobs and really couldn’t work effectively off-site. So 

we had them do training or update procedures and things like that, our contractors doing that. 

But eventually you get to the point where it’s hard to have work for some of the technicians, the

people who are doing hands-on work, who are working on things that weren’t as high priority to 

have them be onsite. So we also worked very closely with our contractors, and I think that was 

really important and they really appreciated that. That was enabled by a provision in the CARES 

[Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and. Economic Security] Act that allowed us to put agreements in

place with contractors to make sure we had the workforce that we needed moving forward and 

they weren’t going to furlough and lay people off. I can go on and on. As it evolved there are 

just so many things that we were learning and so many things that we were putting in place.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 20

The other thing that we did is we developed guidelines for Centers for onsite work and 

then we let each Center develop their own plan for how they would implement those guidelines. 

So we gave local authority and control to the Center Directors and their leadership team within 

those guidelines, and each Center had a plan for what work they were going to do onsite that was 

critical, how they would move from stage to stage, and how they would work given their unique 

operations, their unique facilities, how they would perform onsite work but keep the workforce 

safe and healthy. That was giving guidelines but allowing each Center and location to develop 

their own plan. I think that was a good approach.

Then May came around and we had the flight readiness review for the first crew launch 

from Kennedy Space Center [Florida] in almost a decade, and we launched Bob [Robert L. 

Behnken] and Doug [Douglas G. Hurley] successfully in May and returned them in early August. 

That was the Demo-2 mission. Then we had two crew missions. We actually did three crew 

missions with SpaceX in 11 months between May of 2020 and April of ’21. That was kudos to 

the team. During a global pandemic.

Then the other priority was the Perseverance rover Mars 2020 mission because we had a 

planetary launch window end of April through early August, and if we missed it, the next 

window was 24 months out. So kudos to the team that was able to complete the flight hardware

integration, and test and launch in July, land the Perseverance rover in February, and then also 

fly the Ingenuity helicopter on Mars not long after the landing. That mission is doing very well. 

The helicopter is still flying and helping them with reconnaissance and operations. The rover has 

collected the first three samples for the Mars sample return mission that’s in planning stages 

right now to go grab those samples and bring them back to Earth for examination and testing. So 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 21

it was a very challenging time, but we also kept the mission and missions moving forward and 

accomplished a lot of really difficult and important activities for the Agency and the nation.

JOHNSON: I wanted to talk a little more about that, especially about the one in May 2020, the 

Demo-2, because you led the flight readiness review for that. I spoke with Gabe Sherman for 

this project. He talked about the weight of that moment, that he could see that you felt the 

weight, and that he could see that you felt the weight of the decisions. Talk about that, because I

also read a quote from you that said, “Managing space programs is really about managing risk.” 

Talk about that flight readiness review and managing that risk and how you were feeling

knowing that you were making that decision to go forward.

JURCZYK: One thing that we agreed on as a leadership team well before May actually, probably

18 months before the May launch, that every two or three months we would have a review of the 

Commercial Crew Program with Agency senior leadership. At that review—Kathy [L.] Lueders 

at the time was the Program Manager, now it’s Steve Stich. One of the key things they presented 

was their risks and their mitigation plans for those risks and where they were with those 

mitigation plans.

Myself along with Agency leadership had a lot of insight into the risks, the mitigation

plans, and the progress against those plans leading up to the flight readiness review. I think that 

was tremendously helpful with being able to ask the right questions at the flight readiness review

and assure that the program had identified all the risks appropriately and had mitigated the risks 

that they could mitigate effectively, and that we were willing and able to accept the residual risk.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 22

Because the other thing in spaceflight is there is always risk. The only zero-risk 

spaceflight is never launching. That’s the only zero-risk spaceflight; it’s not actually spaceflight. 

I absolutely felt the weight of the decision, but I also had these series of reviews with Agency 

leadership leading up to that final flight readiness review that prepared us to have an effective 

review, to ask the questions, and do that final check and assure ourselves that all risks had been 

mitigated appropriately and to the best of the program and Agency’s ability, and we were willing 

to accept the remaining risk, the residual risk, and it was time to go fly. Yes. So I think that was

really important.

JOHNSON: Talk about that, because it was the first crewed mission of Americans leaving from 

American soil since 2011. That’s a long time, it’s longer I think than we’ve waited before. 

Were you at that launch? Talk about what was going on during that time when it finally 

launched.

JURCZYK: Yes, we had a successful flight readiness review and we did a press conference after 

that and got some interesting questions. I actually signed two things at the end of that review. I

signed the certification of flight readiness, the CoFR for that flight, but I also signed the human 

rating certification, which said that this vehicle, both the launcher and the spacecraft, meet 

NASA’s requirements for a human-rated vehicle. Human-rated launch vehicle and human-rated 

spacecraft. With a few exceptions. Some things needed to be verified on future missions. So 

yes, I signed that human rating certification and I signed the certification of flight readiness that 

said this rocket and this spacecraft are ready to go fly people into space and astronauts into 

space. That was a really important outcome, and many years to get there.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 23

Then I was on console in Firing Room 4, SpaceX’s launch control center in the Launch

Control Center at Kennedy Space Center. Yes, I watched. I followed along with the 

preparations for launch, Bob and Doug rolling out to the pad and getting into the vehicle, 

propellant loading, and liquid oxygen loading, which was a big deal because years before 

SpaceX had an incident on the pad, an explosion on the pad. They believed it was due to how 

they loaded liquid oxygen, given that they had what’s called a composite-overwrapped pressure 

vessel pressurized to high pressure in the liquid oxygen tank that had been used for the system. 

So NASA and SpaceX did a lot of research on those systems, composite-overwrapped pressure 

vessels in a liquid oxygen environment, and changed the design, changed operations, and put 

controls in place of how they loaded oxygen, etc. That was a big deal to convince ourselves that 

we could have the astronauts on the vehicle while we were loading propellant and oxidizer. 

I was following along just like everybody else with my headset on. There’s a picture of 

me standing up in my suit and tie with the headset on during the launch, with my mask on. You 

can just see the concentration and concern in my eyes even with the mask on during the launch, 

because the team did everything they possibly could to have a successful launch, but these

systems are so complicated that every once in a while, not often, but every once in a while, there 

is something missed and there’s a problem.

But yes, the team did a great job with everything leading up to day of launch. The launch

went off without a hitch. We got very lucky too because the first day we scrubbed. The second 

day the weather did not look great and there were several weather criteria that were not within 

the parameters for go for launch. It wasn’t until, I’m not sure, I’m trying to think, it was maybe 

20, 25 minutes before launch that several of the criteria, winds and other things, went green and 

we were go for launch. It worked out. That second day worked out. That’s just the way it goes 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 24

sometimes. Sometimes everything looks great and then right before launch something happens 

with the weather or the system, and sometimes things don’t look so good but then the weather 

clears and everything’s fine and you launch, and that was the case on the second launch attempt 

for the Demo-2 mission.

Then we flew from Kennedy Space Center to Johnson Space Center to be in ISS Mission 

Control Center for docking and hatch opening. I’m trying to remember. I think Senator [Ted] 

Cruz was there, Congressman [Brian] Babin was there. They welcomed the crew and said some 

remarks. Jim Bridenstine made some remarks. Then Jim turned it over to me to make remarks. 

I didn’t know he was going to do that. Then he turned it over to Vanessa [E.] Wyche, who was 

there for the Center, to make some remarks. I don’t think she was planning on making remarks. 

But yes, it was great to see Bob and Doug on Station with their NASA and Russian colleagues

for a relatively short duration mission, but it was a test flight. But on their over two months, I

know they helped out quite a bit with Station maintenance and with the scientific and research 

and technology demonstrations that they were doing on Station over those two plus months.

JOHNSON: I imagine everyone had a big sigh of relief that day.

JURCZYK: Yes. Absolutely. It was a sigh of relief and a celebration. Then we got really good 

weather also, I think it was the first day we planned to return Bob and Doug in August. We got

really good weather on the Gulf side. Water was really calm. Wave heights were really low, and 

everything was go for landing, and so we had a successful landing in August.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 25

JOHNSON: July of that year, the rover was launched to Mars and it landed in February. Did you 

go to JPL [Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California] for that?

JURCZYK: I was. I was at JPL in the Mission Control Center at JPL for the Perseverance 

landing. So yes, that was a great experience. A little frustrating because they have two clocks 

on the wall, there’s time on Mars and then the time when you’re going to get the telemetry back, 

which is 11 minutes after it actually happened on Mars. Zero time we landed on Mars, and then 

we waited 11 minutes to get the data back because of the speed of light and the distance, and saw 

that we had successfully landed, and soon after got the first pictures back. That was the second 

time they’d used the Sky Crane [System] Entry, Descent, and Landing architecture to land a very 

large rover, a 1,000-kilogram-plus rover the size of a Mini Cooper, on the surface of Mars.

JOHNSON: Like you said, during COVID so many things were happening. That things continued

on schedule; I don’t know that everyone would have expected that at the beginning of the 

pandemic.

JURCZYK: Yes, it really was between JPL and Armstrong Flight Research Center [Edwards, 

California], which provided some of the transportation from California to Florida and Kennedy 

Space Center for the people who needed to be there for flight system integration to the Kennedy 

Space Center, Launch Services Program, Kennedy Space Center folks, and our contractors, ULA 

[United Launch Alliance], and our contractors that were able to protect the workforce but keep 

the mission moving forward so we didn’t incur that 24-month delay, which would have been 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 26

really disappointing to the scientists and the mission folks as well as would have been very costly 

for the Agency. Yes.

JOHNSON: We talked about managing risk, because you weren’t only managing spaceflight risk,

but you were managing COVID risk, that risk to keep people healthy.

JURCZYK: Yes, that’s exactly right. Again trying to figure out how to do the transportation and 

operations at JPL and Kennedy and balance, make sure the risk of the workforce was acceptable 

while they were working and keeping things moving forward. I think we slipped a few days in 

the launch window. We didn’t make the first day of the launch window. We had a few 

challenges with the flight system and with the launch vehicle. But yes, they got it. They also got 

favorable weather on the first launch day attempt, which was a few days into the opening of the 

launch window, and was able to launch in late July and land in February. Yes.

JOHNSON: Going back to President Trump, and Administrator Bridenstine had to work toward 

what the President wanted and the goals that he had for NASA, the President announced and 

signed several space policy directives. There was a variety of them, some of which were just 

reestablishing some things I think that NASA was already doing. But one of them was the 

establishment of the [U.S.] Space Force. Let’s talk about that for a second and just how or if 

NASA discussed what type of relationship, even though it’s a separate military branch, but 

NASA does have a history of working with the military. Talk about how the Agency was going 

to collaborate with that new military branch.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 27

JURCZYK: Yes. A conscious decision was made in 1958 to have a separate civil space agency 

from the Air Force and military space. I think actually it served the nation and NASA very well, 

because we’re viewed by foreign space agencies as a civil space agency, and we can enter into 

agreements and go places and do things that if we were both a civil and a military space 

organization we could not do. Jim fully believed and all of us fully believed we wanted to 

maintain that distinction between NASA as a civil space agency and the Air Force and now the 

Space Force as a military space organization.

Now having said that, we do collaborate particularly on science and technology. We do 

collaborate developing advancing science and developing technologies that enable NASA as 

well as enable the mission and capabilities for national defense, both the military and intelligence 

communities. We were doing that mainly with the Air Force and the NRO [National 

Reconnaissance Office], and now the Agency has continued and will continue to do that with the 

Air Force, the Space Force, and NRO. Three times a year we have meetings with the NASA 

Administrator, the Secretary of the Air Force, and the Director of NRO. Then once the Space 

Force got established, General [John W. “Jay”] Raymond, the Commander of the Space Force, 

was added to that group of principals that had met three times a year. I was the person at NASA 

that worked to set the agenda and prepare for those meetings with colleagues at Air Force, Space 

Force, and NRO. I think that collaboration is really important.

Then the other thing that’s really important, and I think Scott [N.] Pace has said this, and

others have said this, that space is getting both congested and contested. We’ve enjoyed I would 

call the good of the commons in space where everybody behaved in a way that was consistent 

with norms of behavior, some of which were established in the UN [United Nations] Space 

Treaty [Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 28

Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies] and subsequent agreements. I

think that’s continued although there are many more systems being launched into space now than 

ever before, so we have that space traffic management challenge and debris challenge.

Also there are countries that are developing not only defensive but offensive capabilities

in space, and so we look to the Space Force to protect and defend not only military and 

intelligence assets in space, but civil space assets and capabilities as well as commercial space 

systems and assets and capabilities. That’s something I think that’s evolving, this protect and 

defend mission that the Space Force has, and again if we can contribute from a science and 

technology standpoint to enable those capabilities, we, NASA will, as well as share information, 

particularly operationally.

We actually have several people who are out at Vandenberg Air Force Base [California] 

at the Combined Space Operations Center, who look at the tracking information for spacecraft to 

do what we call congestion assessment to see if any spacecraft are going to approach, have a 

close approach with a probability that they might collide. Sometimes we maneuver the 

International Space Station, we maneuver science spacecraft to make sure we lower the 

probability of those collisions if analysis says there’s going to be a close approach. That’s 

another where we’ve collaborated with the Air Force, and now we’re collaborating with the 

Space Force from an operations standpoint.

Those are the things that we’re continuing to do and have done with the Air Force in the 

past that NASA will now do with the Space Force. But Jim and all of us agreed that we wanted

to maintain this separate civil space agency, separate from Air Force, Space Force, NRO, the 

military and intelligence space agencies.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 29

JOHNSON: Another thing that the President did is reestablish the National Space Council. Let’s 

talk about that and what impact you think that had with the vice president leading the Space 

Council. Even though we had had it in the past, it had been disbanded for a long time.

JURCZYK: Right. I think Scott Pace and his staff did a really great job in working with agencies 

and commercial space entities to craft the policy directives that were ultimately signed by the 

President. I think all the research and legwork and crafting of those policies were done by Scott. 

A lot of it was done by Scott and his staff at the National Space Council.

Also it did give the ability for Jim to have access to the vice president that he wouldn’t 

have had if the vice president wasn’t engaged and chairing the National Space Council. It wasn’t 

often that Jim went over to the White House to meet with the vice president and the Executive 

Director of the Space Council, Scott Pace, and others, OMB, if there was a budget challenge. 

But yes, he had the ability to do that, which I think was important. Because he works for the 

president and he was even more aware that he met with the president. But the president was

looking to the vice president to chair the Space Council and for space policy, and so it was 

important that there was somebody very high up in the White House that was paying attention to 

space and space policy that the NASA Administrator could meet with to talk through some

challenges or work through issues or take advantage of opportunities. I think that was another 

important aspect of reestablishing the National Space Council with the vice president being the 

chair of it.

JOHNSON: One of the other things that was going on during this time on top of the pandemic was 

a lot of social unrest. There was an effort by NASA to make sure that the workforce knew that 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 30

NASA was inclusive. Were you involved in setting up some things to help the Centers deal with 

that?

JURCZYK: Yes, that was really important. Like I said, one of the most important things that Jim 

did, and that he made a priority, was communication. I think that goes for leaders in general. 

Communicating. It’s really important to be an effective communicator if you’re going to be an 

effective leader just in general.

One of the things we did during COVID and the social unrest was have virtual town hall 

meetings with Jim Bridenstine, Jim [James] Morhard, myself, sometimes Cathy Mangum, J.D.

Polk, etc. We took questions ahead of time, and then people upvoted the questions. Jim insisted 

on, and we agreed, going through each question in rank order. If it was a repeat question, we’d

read the question and we’d say, “Well, we believe we’ve answered that question in the answer to 

question number three. Just to expand on it a little bit.” Jim never skipped a single question. 

We didn’t have time to answer all of them but we went in the order they were voted starting at 

the top and working the way down, going through as many as we could in the hour, hour and a 

half that we were doing this town hall meeting. I think that was really important.

We not only addressed questions related to COVID, but we addressed questions related to 

social unrest and made statements up front before we went to the questions about the social 

unrest. I think that recognition that this was an issue that the nation was struggling with for 

many many decades and for the existence of the country pretty much, and that we were in a time

where we had some of these new and unique challenges, or challenges that had been around for a 

while that had bubbled up to the top of everybody’s attention and consciousness. I think that 

recognition was really important.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 31

We had discussions among the senior leadership team including the Center Directors 

about our personal experiences with things that had happened in the past that were relevant to 

what was going on now. Very powerful, particularly from our African American colleagues and 

our Hispanic colleagues and our LGBTQ colleagues or colleagues that had LGBTQ sons, 

daughters, friends, etc. Having those open and honest conversations I think was really important 

for us to make sure we were connecting with what was going on. The other thing that I did, and 

that all the Centers did too at the senior level and at the workforce level too, was continue 

engaging in conversations, because how I communicated to the leadership was “Hey, we need to 

listen, empathize, and support as best we can, because that’s really what we can do.”

We obviously need to make sure we have an inclusive and equitable organization that 

doesn’t discriminate in any way but there’s only so much we can affect as an agency. But we 

need to listen to our people, our workforce who are struggling and challenged, etc., we need to 

empathize with what they’re going through, and we need to help support as best we can even if it

is just listening and empathizing. So I think that all the leadership stepped up to that from the 

senior leaders all the way down through branch chiefs and had discussions with employees at 

multiple levels through Headquarters and the Centers. I think that was really important.

Then we did some concrete things like also Melanie and I had meetings with 

representatives from the employee resource groups from around the Agency. African American, 

Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, women, LGBTQ. We asked for one or two representatives 

from Headquarters in each Center and we did a few hour Teams calls with them and sent them 

questions and things to consider ahead of time, got their responses to those, and just went into a 

discussion and a dialogue. We took some things out of those meetings and acted on them. I
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 32

think the Agency should continue to use ERGs [Employee Resource Groups] as a resource, 

particularly in advancing diversity and inclusion.

Then we added a fifth value. There’s safety, teamwork, integrity, excellence. Then we 

added an inclusion value, which I think was really important to really raise that to the level of the 

other values and hold each other accountable for behaving in a way that is consistent and honors 

all five of those values. Some people argued a little bit that it was redundant with teamwork or 

maybe redundant with integrity. But we felt it was important to have inclusion as a separate 

value to really highlight the work we needed to continue to do around equity and inclusion.

JOHNSON: Let’s talk about when Jim Bridenstine stepped down and you became Acting 

Administrator. From what I’ve learned talking to some of the other people for this project, his

administration wanted to keep things in place as much as possible going into the next 

administration and were trying to set it up to do that. Talk about that for a minute and those four, 

five months where you were actually the Acting Administrator, and how those priorities were 

continued and how it was expressed to the next administration that they should be continued.

JURCZYK: I think one of the things we wanted to do is make as much progress as we could on 

Artemis. I think we made good progress on SLS and Orion and Exploration Ground Systems. 

One of the important things that happened when I was Acting Administrator was the SLS Green 

Run test. We had an 8-plus-minute hot fire with a core stage of SLS and then we delivered that 

to Kennedy Space Center for integration. Hopefully for the uncrewed test flight of SLS and 

Orion later this year if not early next year. I think that was really important. That continuous 

progress moving forward was important.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 33

We awarded the contracts for the first elements of the [lunar] Gateway and we’re moving 

forward with the Gateway including power and propulsion element and habitation and logistics 

outpost, and logistics for the Gateway. Then we awarded the initial contracts for the human 

landing system. Then while I was Administrator, we downselected to one contractor, SpaceX, 

for the first what we’re calling the test flight of the human landing system from lunar orbit to the

surface and back to lunar orbit. That was a little bit controversial because we had expressed a 

desire to select two contractors for the human landing system and do two test flights. But we 

requested $3.2 billion or $3.3 billion for the human landing system for FY21 and we received

$800 million. So given the shortfall in that funding we just couldn’t figure out a way to select 

two contractors and ended up selecting one, the contractor that was rated highest by the source 

evaluation team. But it was important I think to keep the human landing system moving forward 

because that kept the Agency moving forward towards that next landing. Now it’s the first 

woman and the first person of color to walk on the Moon. So yes, I think that progress was all 

really important.

Jim also wanted to name the Artemis cadre of astronauts, which we did in December

down at Kennedy Space Center. I think it was the final National Space Council meeting. It’s a 

fairly diverse set of astronauts, 12 of them. Six men, six women, and fairly diverse in other

aspects. NASA sometime in the future will name the astronauts who will fly on the Artemis II 

mission, and then the Artemis mission that’ll be the next landing on the Moon, and the next two

astronauts to walk on the Moon. All of that was good progress and really important to show that 

we had a plan and we were executing on it with a new administration.

Having said that, we weren’t sure when a new administration came in what their policy 

was going to be particularly towards human exploration. We knew some things that were 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 34

validated later, that they were going to put a focus on Earth science at NASA because climate 

change was a priority. We knew that the budget for Earth science and particularly climate 

missions and research would increase, and it did in the president’s budget request for next fiscal 

year, current [Joseph R. Biden] administration.

We also knew aeronautics research was important, particularly green aviation, reducing 

fuel burn, reducing emissions, and reducing noise. We had plans to work on technologies to do 

that for transport aircraft and hopefully the Agency will be able to accelerate those plans with the

additional funding in aeronautics research.

Then we were unclear of the priority for human exploration and support for the Artemis 

Program. We gained clarity in an interesting way. I think this was in March. I’m not sure about 

the exact dates. March, or maybe it was in April. There’s the daily press briefing by Jen 

[Jennifer R.] Psaki, the [White House] Press Secretary, and she got a question by a Fox [News] 

reporter, Kristin Fisher. It turns out Kristin Fisher is the daughter of two astronauts, Anna [L.] 

and Bill [William F.] Fisher. She asked, “Does the administration support NASA’s Artemis 

Program?” Jen Psaki said, “I don’t know but I’ll find out.” 

This is the day after or couple days after she got the question about the Space Force, does

the administration support the Space Force, and gave an answer that was a little unsatisfying for 

some people. Some of the political folks who were at NASA from the Biden administration 

were in communications with the White House that evening. Hey, tell us about the Artemis

Program. Where are you guys? Then that next day at the end of the remarks I think Jake [Jacob 

J.] Sullivan, the National Security Advisor, made some remarks. Jen Psaki made some remarks. 

At the very end of her remarks before she went to questions said, “Oh, I want to follow up on a 

question by Kristin Fisher from Fox News yesterday regarding the Artemis Program.” Then she
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 35

went ahead and said, “The Biden administration supports the Artemis Program, we’re really

excited about it, first woman and first person of color on the Moon. I’m going to tell my 

daughter about it because I think she’s going to be excited about it.” Etc., etc. There you had it. 

That was it.

From then on, we had public acknowledgment that the administration supported Artemis 

and they were able to work with the White House and with me on the budgets that supported 

Artemis, supported Earth science, supported additional support for aeronautics research.

The other good thing, the new administration, they didn’t cut other areas to fund those 

priorities like Earth science and aeronautics research. They actually increased the NASA budget

in their priority areas. That’s always a good thing where you don’t have to take money from one 

area and give it to another. You actually get an increase and can maintain a balance across the 

programs and mission directions and programs. That was a positive too.

Yes, that’s the story. At least my understanding how things evolved over those two days. 

I actually talked to Kristin. Kristin Fisher is now at CNN. She’s the space and security reporter 

in Washington for CNN. I actually talked to her out at the Space Symposium off the record and 

thanked her for her question. Because it prompted a dialogue and an answer that the 

administration was willing to maintain some level of continuity on human exploration and 

Artemis Program from the previous administration and the current administration.

JOHNSON: Yes. Good thing she asked that question, right?

JURCZYK: It definitely accelerated getting a read from the White House on it.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 36

JOHNSON: We’ve been talking about an hour and a half. If you have a few more minutes, I just 

have a couple more questions, wrap-up questions. 

JURCZYK: I absolutely have a few more minutes. Hopefully I’ll be able to continue to be 

semicoherent.

JOHNSON: These shouldn’t be too hard. Based on your experience with NASA before and after 

Jim Bridenstine’s tenure, what would you consider the lessons learned from his administration?

JURCZYK: I think one of the lessons learned is that obviously developing good technology, doing 

good engineering, good program management is critical, but also communicating effectively and 

telling the story of NASA and what NASA is trying to accomplish, not only inside the Beltway 

but more broadly in the public, is really important, and we can do it and be successful. I’m really 

proud of the leadership and workforce for stepping up to that using Jim as an example of really 

reaching out at the federal level with stakeholders, at the state level, the local level, and just the 

general public, and with youth and inspiring youth to go into science, technology, engineering, 

math, and aerospace. I’m really proud of everybody from the leadership down to the engineers

and scientists and techs for getting out there and doing that. I think that’s important and will

continue to be a priority for the Agency.

It’s almost paying it forward with early career folks and folks K through 12 [kindergarten

through 12th grade] growing up and in college, inspiring them, using NASA as an inspiration, 

inspiring them. I have a big smile on my face every time I see somebody post on LinkedIn that 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 37

they just got an internship at NASA and how they’re thrilled and it’s the opportunity of a 

lifetime. I think that’s one thing.

The other thing I think is we should continue to be a learning and continuous 

improvement organization. Doing things like we’ve always done them is not necessarily the best 

thing to do moving forward. As technology advances, as policy changes, as society evolves and 

changes, etc., the world, the only constant is change. Change seems to be coming more rapidly. 

I think the other thing with Jim is he challenged leadership to do things in different ways. He

was open. He tried to get everybody to say, “Yes, if. Yes, Jim, I think we can do that if we do

this, this, and this.” It’s like maybe we can’t do it exactly the way you want to do it, Jim, but

rather than no, we can’t do that, it’s “yes, if.”

As a team we’d work through “Okay, how can we make this happen?” That was

absolutely true of private astronaut missions to the International Space Station. We had multiple 

meetings to work through the risks, all the risks, technical, programmatic, political, and get to 

“Yes, we can do private astronauts if we have medical screening and they pass the appropriate

training and they take out insurance.” Just an example of yes, if. Initially it was no, we cannot 

do private astronaut missions for this, that, and the other reason. Then say, “Let’s talk through it. 

How can we mitigate those risks? How can we get to yes, if?” We did. Now Axiom is going to 

do the first private astronaut mission to the Space Station in January of next year. That’s just an 

example. I think that’s the other thing that I would say was an evolution.

The other philosophy Jim had was Jim tried to eliminate all conflict and division. That 

included within the Agency and external to the Agency. It was unnecessary. It takes up energy 

and time, it distracts. Jim would try to sense any conflict and engage the parties and talk through 

it and see if he could minimize it or eliminate it. That was a mantra of Jim’s and a focus of 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 38

Jim’s, is this seeing where there was conflict or emerging conflict and being proactive and 

engaging.

I think we built on Charlie, Robert, and Lesa’s legacy in having a leadership team and an 

Agency that was more collaborative and less stovepiped and working together more effectively 

across the mission directorates, the Centers, and the offices of the chiefs. I think that serves the 

Agency well because working together as a team we could take on these challenges more

effectively and be more successful. Like I said I give Charlie and Robert and Lesa a lot of credit 

because I think they started us down that path of breaking down the stovepipes and working 

together more effectively as a leadership team, and then we just continue to take their momentum 

and build on that with Jim and Jim and Melanie and myself.

JOHNSON: Let’s talk about your decision to leave NASA after more than 30 years. In May 2021,

which was not that long ago, you decided to retire. Talk about that and how you came to that 

decision and why you felt like it was a good time to leave.

JURCZYK: When you get to a certain level in an organization and get fairly senior, you know that 

you serve at the pleasure of the leadership or the leader. I knew there was some probability that 

the new Administrator could come in, Senator Nelson in this case, and want his team and his 

people in senior leadership positions, including the AA position. I had conversations with 

Senator Nelson and decided that the best thing for him to effectively lead the Agency was to 

have Bob [Robert D.] Cabana come up from Kennedy Space Center and be the Associate 

Administrator, and then the best thing for me was to retire and move on to my next phase of my 

career life. Just talked through it with the new Administrator and thought it over, and talked it 
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 39

over with Ann, my wife, and decided that the timing was right for me to retire and to move on. It 

worked out.

After I retired, I took some time off and spoke with a lot of former colleagues at different 

aerospace organizations around the country and other people I had developed relationships with, 

and decided to take a job in an investment and consulting company and try my hand at being an 

entrepreneur. I’ve only been working for about six weeks now. I started in August. But so far,

it’s been fun. Very different, fun. Learned a lot in a very short period of time about the business 

side of things and being an entrepreneur, what it takes to build and run companies. So far so 

good. But yes, the combination of new leadership coming in and the timing for me personally 

was right. I’d been fully eligible to retire for a few years, and I took advantage of that.

JOHNSON: You probably have more time now with your family than you did.

JURCZYK: A little. Although my calendar is starting to fill up again as I’m getting into my new 

job. The other thing I’m doing that’s really interesting with some former NASA colleagues is 

I’m an adviser on a documentary film about Artemis with three film direction and production 

companies. We’re developing the concept for a 10-part series, and seeking distribution for it, 

and then once we get a distributor then we’ll sit down with the NASA Office of Communications 

and work out an agreement for how we go about doing this. That’s fun. I’m really enjoying 

doing that. Again something completely different.

JOHNSON: Yes. Sounds like it. Something out of what your norm has been. That sounds like 

it’d be fun and challenging.
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 40

JURCZYK: Yes. Again some retired NASA colleagues. It’s nice to connect with them too.

JOHNSON: I just have one more question. I was wondering if you could talk about what you feel 

your chief accomplishment when you were in this AA position at NASA would it be if you had 

to pick one?

JURCZYK: I never thought I would say this until March of 2020, but yes, it’s leading the Agency

through COVID, the social unrest, and being able to accomplish the things that we accomplished 

as a team. The Demo-2 mission, the Perseverance launch and landing, and two other crewed 

missions in 11 months and everything else, including the safe operations of ISS and everything

else. That was a tremendous challenge for Agency leadership and the Agency in general. I think 

the team really stepped up.

JOHNSON: It feels like it’s been about 10 years in the last year and a half.

JURCZYK: Yes. Just no experience to draw on. Never had to manage an organization like 

NASA through a global pandemic, and nobody had. We all had to figure it out as we went, and I

think the team did an amazing job.

JOHNSON: I think so too. I appreciate you taking the time to talk to me. Is there anything we 

haven’t talked about that you wanted to mention?
NASA Headquarters Oral History Project Stephen G. Jurczyk

22 September 2021 41

JURCZYK: No, I think eventually we got around to everything, particularly around Jim. Trying 

to think if there’s anything about Jim that I missed. Super smart, Jim Bridenstine, and Jim 

Morhard. Super smart. Also a person of very high integrity. Says what he’s going to do and 

does what he said he was going to do. Holds people accountable for doing what he expects them

to do, but in a way that is effective. Yes, got a lot of respect for Jim and the job that he did as 

Administrator in a relatively short time he was in the role. Also a lot of respect for Robert 

Lightfoot too, for being the Acting Administrator for 15 months, a really long time to be in that 

role as Acting during transition of the new administration. Yes, I think we covered everything.

JOHNSON: Okay, well, I appreciate it, and we’ll be in touch again soon with your transcript.

JURCZYK: Sounds good. Have a great evening.

JOHNSON: Okay, you too, have a good day. 

[End of interview]