AIP FYI #110: Senate FY 2001 Appropriations Bill for NASA

FYI

The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News

Number 111: September 15, 2000

As reported in FYI #110, Senate appropriators finally passed
their FY 2001 VA/HUD funding bill on September 13. FYI #110 lays
out the context and provides details on the NSF portion of the
bill. Below are details of the NASA portion.

Under the Senate Committee’s bill, NASA would receive a total of
$13,844.0 million. This represents a decrease of 1.4 percent
from the Administration’s FY 2001 request, but a 1.7 percent
increase over FY 2000 funding. The House recommended $13,713.6
million. The Committee report has some stern words for the cost
and schedule overruns for the space station, and reduces funding
for Human Space Flight below both current-year funding and the
request. Although expressing some concern over lessons learned
from the recent Mars mission failures, the Committee is generally
supportive of NASA’s space science programs and would increase
funding for the Science, Aeronautics and Technology (SAT) account
over the current-year level, although not as much as requested.

Neither the bill text nor the report language spell out specific
funding amounts for Space Science, Earth Science, Life and
Microgravity Sciences and Applications, or the International
Space Station. However, the report has extensive language on all
these areas. Selected portions of the report (Sen. Report 106-
410) are highlighted below.

The report calls the International Space Station (ISS) “the
current centerpiece of NASA’s mission…that when complete in
2005-2006 will represent the most sophisticated long-duration
habitable microgravity research laboratory in space.” However,
it adds that “the Committee remains very concerned by cost
overruns and unrealistic budgeting by NASA, especially those
associated with the development and construction of the
International Space Station.” It cites a 1998 independent cost
assessment and validation report which estimated the final ISS
cost at $24.7 billion instead of NASA’s estimate of $17.4 billion
and states, “many of these higher costs were unfairly borne
through budget reductions in other NASA programs and activities,
most particularly programs and activities designed to increase
our understanding of the space and earth sciences.”

HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT: The Committee would provide $5,400.0
million for Human Space Flight, 1.8 percent less than the request
and 1.6 percent less than FY 2000 funding. The House would
provide $5,499.9 million. This account includes funding for the
space station and space shuttle.

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION: Although the committee reiterates
its strong support for the space station, “nevertheless,” the
report says, “a reduction of funding is appropriate because of
the program’s history of delays and overruns that mean many
activities and associated costs will be pushed into subsequent
fiscal years.” The Committee continues to have concerns over
Russia’s fulfilment of its commitments, but “is sensitive to the
difficult issues that face Russia as it attempts to make the
transition from communism to a more democratic and commercial
society.” The Committee “is also troubled over NASA’s failure to
provide adequate information” on the station’s operational costs,
and directs NASA to develop, for public comment, a ten-year plan
for “all research efforts, activities, and missions related to
the ISS, including operational needs.” Additionally, it calls
for a plan identifying universities “that will coordinate with
NASA for the individual science disciplines that will be the
focus of research” when the station is completed.

SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS AND TECHNOLOGY: The Committee would provide
$5,837.0 million, a decrease of 1.6 percent from the request, but
4.6 percent over FY 2000 funding. The House would provide
$5,606.7 million. This account includes funding for Space
Science, Earth Science, and Life and Microgravity Sciences and
Applications, as well as NASA’s Academic Programs.

SPACE SCIENCE: The report is supportive of the space science
program. It concurs with the report of an independent assessment
team that, in the wake of the two Mars mission failures,
“acknowledged the value of the Mars program as well as the
viability of the ‘faster, better, cheaper’ philosophy.”
Cognizant of the inherent risk of failures, the Committee adds
that “any failure must be smart failure, not stupid failure.” It
recognizes that the recommendations of the Mars program
assessment team “may be applied throughout the Space Science
enterprise in order to minimize the possibility of future mission
failures,” and asks for a five-year profile of the resulting
additional costs.

The Committee provides the full $20.0 million request for NASA’s
“Living with a Star” initiative to study the sun. It “fully
supports NASA’s goal to develop new long-term partnerships,
particularly with university laboratories throughout the
country.” It urges competitive selection of 75 percent of space
science advanced technology funding, but requires a National
Academy of Sciences review of whether this would cause a loss of
“‘core competencies’ at the NASA field centers.” NASA “is
directed to fully fund all upgrades” to the Hubble Space
Telescope (HST). The Committee adds $2.5 million to the HST
project for a Composites Technology Institute in Bridgeport, WV,
and argues that additional HST servicing expenses due to shuttle
delays should be allocated to the Human Space Flight account.

EARTH SCIENCE: The report says, “The Committee remains troubled
by the lack of a follow-on strategy for the next generation of
earth science satellites,” and recommends an increase of $2.5
million for follow-on studies by the National Academy of
Sciences. In addition, it orders the Office of Earth Science to
devise a flight program “similar to the space science effort in
explorer, discovery and parallel class missions.” It provides
$1.5 million for studies on Landsat-7 data purchase; $2.0 million
for technology development work on a global precipitation
mission; $2.0 million for technology development work on a global
earthquake satellite; $50.0 million for technology development
work on an NPP mission; and $5.0 million for studies on a next
generation data system, while urging some re-use of the existing
system. The report provides $40.0 million “above the request to
ensure delivery of a full scale EOSDIS Core System.”

The Committee provides an additional $20.0 million “to continue
commercial data purchases to meet NASA’s Earth Science and
Application data needs,” and expresses support for programs
“aimed at fostering the development of a robust U.S. commercial
remote sensing industry.” It directs NASA to develop university
centers of excellence “throughout the nation to develop this
industry and increase commercial applications,” and includes a
number of earmarks to specific universities for commercial remote
sensing academic partnerships.

LIFE AND MICROGRAVITY SCIENCES AND APPLICATIONS: The report
provides the full budget request ($302.4 million) for this
account, “since much of the research associated with these
activities are targeted to the International Space Station.”
Additionally, within the Human Space Flight section, the report
directs NASA to “schedule an additional annual shuttle flight for
microgravity research as important in order to maintain the
continuity and quality of microgravity research.”

ACADEMIC PROGRAMS: The report includes the requested $19.1
million (equal to current funding) for the National Space Grant
College and Fellowship Program; $12.0 million (more than FY 2000
funding or the request) for EPSCoR; $55.0 million (also greater
than FY 2000 or the request) for minority university research and
education activities, and more than $60 million in assorted
earmarks.

EXPORT CONTROL REGULATIONS: The science community has raised
concerns that overly restrictive satellite technology export
regulations under the International Traffic in Arms Control
Regulations (ITAR) are adversely affecting NASA research, and
House report language called for review and clarification of the
issue. The Senate report, however, seems to indicate support for
the regulations: “The Committee remains sensitive to continuing
risks regarding the illegal transfer and theft of sensitive
technologies that can be used in the development of weapons….
The Committee commends both NASA [and its Inspector General] for
their efforts to protect sensitive NASA-related technologies” and
directs NASA to report annually on this issue.

###############

Audrey T. Leath

Public Information Division

The American Institute of Physics

fyi@aip.org

(301) 209-3094

http://www.aip.org/gov

##END##########