Status Report

NASA Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) Program Operating Plan (POP 04) Guidelines

By SpaceRef Editor
February 17, 2004
Filed under , ,

I. Overview

A. Strategy

The Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) is preparing a process and associated timeline to address NASA’s exploration vision and implementation strategy. This timeline will extend forward some number of months, but to assist in the Program Operating Plan (POP 04) planning activities, and until further clarity of mission evolves, a series of guidance steps are provided below.

In order to explain when and how the Centers engage in the process, a bit of background is necessary. OBPR is currently scrutinizing its whole program from a variety of perspectives. In particular, OBPR has established a process and schedule for a detailed examination of the current research base, to include any new investigations warranted by our evolving mission. This process will entail an internal assessment and external evaluation of key tenets of our program, such as the Bioastronautics Critical Path Roadmap (CPR), Principal Investigator (PI) projects and the ground-based research program, to name a few. Alignment of these activities, with the newly evolving mission focus and the architecture studies being conducted as a part of the Space Architect’s Office, is being assured through close coordination.

At the highest level, the interdisciplinary organizing questions remain essentially unchanged, and they continue as the foundation of our Enterprise strategy. That is, humans will extend the exploration of space, and to prepare and hasten the journey, OBPR must answer the following questions:

  • How can we assure the survival of humans traveling far from Earth?
  • How does life respond to gravity and space environments?
  • What new opportunities can our research bring to expand understanding of the laws of nature and enrich lives on Earth?
  • What technologies must we create to enable the next explorers to go beyond where we have been?
  • How can we educate and inspire the next generations to take the journey?

II. Enterprise-Wide POP Guidance

A. Program Reserves

For the purposes of risk reduction and contingency planning, all programs/projects with development or operational components must identify reserves in addition to program/project content as part of their POP submit. Reserves are considered funds to be made available to mitigate unknown risks (“unknown-unknowns”) to the program/project. Reserves are not considered funds to address threats or liens (“known” risks) or program/project enhancements over the baseline. The amount of the reserves should be 20% for hardware development content and 10% operational content. All unresolved major issues and/or problems (unfunded liens and threats) must also be identified separately and a mitigation strategy for resolving them from within your base must be presented during your submission.

B. ISS Research Institute Guidelines

In late 2002, early 2003, an internal NASA study was conducted, together with a series of meetings and discussions, to ascertain the most appropriate option to implement ISS utilization management functions, per the directive from the President’s FY 2002 Budget Blueprint. This document suggested a Non-Government Organization (NGO) to help NASA achieve its stated objectives. Subsequently, the NASA study results indicated that a non-profit institute was the superior approach, and this institute would focus on research planning, research program management, manifesting, resource allocation, advocacy, outreach, and archiving. It would be established following NASA Procedures Guideline (NPG) 5000.1, entitled “Establishing a Science and Research Institute.”

At this time the decision has been made that the ISS Research Institute efforts will be deferred for one year, giving time for OBPR to assimilate the impact of the new Agency strategic thrust, and in particular, the role of ISS in carrying out the new, focused exploration initiative. The contract start is now scheduled for 1st quarter, FY2006. Based on the SOW content, indicate the Center work to be transitioned to the ISSRI starting in FY2006 with the associated FTE and budget. Consider the impacts of supporting the work transition period in accordance with the transition schedule (TBD) and continuing oversight of ISSRI work. Guest Investigator projects should be assumed to have a 6-month transition period prior to full turnover. Also indicate the FTE and budget impact on previous POP planning due to the delay from FY2005 to FY2006.

C. Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS)

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) Project Team will continue to work towards a Phase 2 Safety Review, to be conducted at the earliest opportunity, with an additional allotment of $600K anticipated and available in the second quarter of FY 2004. Regarding other design and development activities having to do with payload integration, the Project shall re-plan that effort over the next 3 months under the assumption that no additional NOA for FY 2004/2005 will be forthcoming. This applies to carrier development as well. The Project should then provide the Headquarters Program Executive with an appraisal of the impacts to Flight Hardware Availability (FHA) dates as a result of the rephrasing process, and an assessment of cost and schedule reserves required to support those dates. Further, the Project should provide an estimate of resources required by fiscal year to “buy back” schedule and pull in the launch timeframe back to a nominal launch date of April 2007. The re-plan should naturally take into account the recommendations of the recent Enterprise Program Management Council (EPMC); any perceived inconsistencies between these guidelines and the EPMC recommendations should be raised to the attention of the Program Executive as soon as possible. The Project is henceforth expected to provide Headquarters and Center senior management with quarterly reviews of progress, including an informed assessment of issues and progress on the detector side of the interface.

On a timescale consistent with available resources, the Project should conduct a rigorous make/buy analysis for the AMS flight carrier detailed design, development and qualification, factoring in any issues associated with post-flight maintainability, under the assumption that there will not be an AMS Shuttle return-to-Earth mission. Existing capabilities at the various supporting Centers (MSFC, JSC, and GSFC) should be considered in this analysis. This analysis and supporting procurement approach recommendations should be briefed to the OBPR Executive Council at the earliest opportunity, consistent with the re-plan and revised FHA date.

D. New Initiatives

Trailblazer Program – A new free flyer spacecraft line to address the new exploration agenda for the space biology and physics scientific communities.

The OBPR Mission Integration Division, Code UM, will have the responsibility for coordinating NASA Center responses for item number (1) below, whereas the other individual research divisions within OBPR (UF, UB, UG, US) will have the responsibility for coordinating NASA Center responses for item number (2), as shown below.

1). Trailblazer Program/ Mission Integration – The OBPR Mission Integration Division, Code UM (Level I), will delegate responsibility to the Ames Research Center (ARC) for the Program Integration Office (Level II). In turn, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) will be designated as the Free Flyer Mission Management Office (Level III), and directly support ARC/Level II, for this POP budget request. Additional mission budget responsibilities, as required for formulation or implementation, will be delegated by GSFC to other NASA Centers and JPL as required.

Headquarters is currently engaged in a cross-Enterprise effort to elucidate the top-level mission requirements through a Red Team/Blue Team approach to scrubbing the candidate Design Reference Missions (DRMs), provided as input to the process from the Joint Strategic Assessment Committee (JSAC). This activity will result in a couple of plausible strawman architectures, and level 0 requirements for the various components of the new vision. This series of activities will be completed in a timely fashion, and serve to provide another layer of program-level guidance for the implementing Centers.

For planning purposes, assume that a detailed study will be performed after the integration phase of the Blue/Red Team activity, which incorporates the resulting DRMs, including the ways in which the ISS will be used as an orbiting laboratory for understanding the influences of varying degrees of low gravity on human biology. Additionally, this study will be guided by the recent Free Flyer Community Workshop, held in Northern California in December 2003. The Trailblazer Program is a series of competitively selected missions, which enable focused scientific investigations in direct support of OBPR responsibilities within the new integrated exploration mission framework. Examples of such investigations might be: (1) advanced life support techniques and technologies, (2) ionizing radiation, dust, and atmospheric properties sensor suites for robotic planetary landers, (3) augmented variable gravity studies in support of or in addition to the centrifugation research to be conducted on ISS, etc. Advanced technology demonstrations are also to be considered, again in the context of extending the human presence beyond low Earth orbit for exploration and exploration-enabled scientific investigations.

The range of spacecraft to be considered include nanosatellites to explorer-class, where the launch mass requirements do not exceed the currently available family of industrial launchers.

The intent is to use this study effort to position OBPR for a possible FY’07 new start initiative within the Agency. FY’05 products will include supporting analyses, synthesis of OBPR requirements, roadmaps, and candidate mission designs. Consideration should be given to the use of further workshops with the community to achieve these study objectives. The proposed mission line should include a companion Research and Analysis (R&A) funding line.

2). Trailblazer Program/Research – POP guidelines associated with selection of the science investigation, instrumentation development, and operations and data analysis (including archiving).

The OBPR participating Centers should also identify any requirements for ground laboratory, balloon, sounding rocket, or KC 135 parabolic trajectory aircraft experiments or validations, not to exceed 5% per annum during development years.

NASA Center responses should identify any FY 2005 funding requirements needed in preparation for a FY 2007 initiative for an OBPR Free Flyer Program. Specifically, these might include concurrent design activities, workshops, and technical interchange meetings (TIMs).

III. Education and Outreach

This past fall, the Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) Enterprise Strategy was published. It is a comprehensive strategy that we use to guide and prioritize all research and other activities throughout the Enterprise, including Education and Public Outreach activities. To develop the connection between our education and public outreach communications and the Enterprise Strategy, we have developed a comprehensive Enterprise Communication Strategy. This Communication Strategy was presented to our Education and Outreach community at our annual conference in January 2004. The goal for the Educational and Public Outreach components of the Communication Strategy is to establish comprehensive OBPR Educational and Public Outreach Program portfolios that are linked to our Enterprise Strategy and maximize achievement of the communication outcomes identified.

An Educational Outreach Roadmap with stated goals, primary audiences, strategic objectives, and outcomes has been developed to support the NASA Education Enterprise Strategy, to meet education’s operating principles for exemplary programs, and to meet the goals of the OBPR Communications Strategy.

As was discussed during Education/Outreach Leadership meetings held in January 2004, each research division’s Education and Outreach Program Manager will coordinate budget inputs for all educational and public outreach investments for their respective research divisions, and will align and consolidate those inputs, based on the four research organizing questions identified in the Enterprise Strategy. The level of 2% of OBPR research program funding investment devoted to education and public outreach by 2006 remains an Enterprise goal. We are working with the Education and Outreach Program Managers to develop budget integration and presentation formats for the Enterprise.

IV. Division – Specific Guidance

Biological Sciences Research Theme

Bioastronautics Research (BR) General Guidance

In response to this POP, JSC Bioastronautics should reflect the goals and objectives of the OBPR and BR strategies and implementing research roadmaps (i.e. Critical Path Roadmap (CPR) and risk management tools), recognizing that full implementation of the newer elements of this strategy are still subject to review.

Include resources in the budget to continue evaluation and updating of the Critical Path Roadmap in FY 2005-2006. The plan should include review by the United States research community to ensure that the research content of this program is appropriate to achieve the objectives stated in the Bioastronautics Strategy, dated January 27, 2003.

Include funds to identify and integrate appropriate technology developments from OBPR Divisions, other NASA enterprises, other government agencies, and commercial sources.

Continue to pursue the “Advanced Integrated Matrix (AIM)” concept. Show the integrated aspects of this activity in the budget plan for Bioastronautics Level 2 management as well as the specific research elements in Advanced Human Support Technology (AHST) and Biomedical Research and Countermeasures (BR&C).

Identify resources required and funding source for the design and construction of the life sciences building at JSC. This project must be funded within current guidelines, so identify tradeoffs that must be made to allow project execution. Brief the Office of Biological and Physical Research to obtain approval, in conjunction with submission through the C of F budget process.

Identify unencumbered reserves and a reserves management plan, include current liens and threats, and explain how reserves will be allocated. Continue to allocate funding at the levels currently specified in the JSC detailed content database listing for Headquarters activities including Code UB reserves.

Identify resources needed to support Education and Public Outreach shown elsewhere in these guidelines, including support for a post-doctoral fellowship program.

Bioastronautics Research – Development (UPN 118)

Human Research Facility (HRF) will be complete by the end of FY 2004.

Bioastronautics Research – Operations – International Space Station Research Capabilities (ISSRC) – UPN 300

Identify current and proposed flight project elements. Document specific objectives, tasks, budget, schedules and metrics, including flight projects from both BR&C and AHST. Identify approved and projected flight experiments and significant Experiment Unique Equipment (EUE). Identify management approach and budget adjustments for managing experiments conducted on the Space Shuttle.

Assess the use of the current UPN structure and assure that budgets are aligned correctly within the definitions provided.

Identify reserve requirements as well as current threats and liens. Follow OBPR reserves policy stated elsewhere in this guidance.

Identify and include funds in the FY 2006 budget to study hardware development to upgrade the HRF-1 and HRF-2 racks. The study should show how funding requirements align with the current ISSRC budget as well as provide a detailed schedule.

Bioastronautics Research -Research – UPNs 111/131

(Advanced Human Support Technologies (AHST) – UPN 131)

1. Identify current and proposed projects within the program elements of AHST: Advanced Life Support (ALS), Advanced Environmental Monitoring and Control (AEMC), and Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) and Advanced EVA (AEVA).

2. Provide details of the AHST flight program. Clearly identify how flight program responsibilities and funding are divided between AHST and ISSRC.

3. Develop a plan and schedule for an AHST integrated test program including participation with the “AIM” concept. Describe the aspects of the AHST elements that require integrated testing and the estimated costs and schedule for these integrated tests.

(Biomedical Research and Countermeasures (BR&C) – UPN 111)

1. Identify current and proposed projects within the program elements of BR&C: ground research, flight experiments projects, the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), Countermeasures Evaluation and Validation Project, technology development, space radiation health project, Artificial Gravity project, bedrest studies, and program integration. The budget should demonstrate stable funding profiles for investigator-initiated ground and flight based research.

2. Provide a utilization plan for the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) including costs broken down by major users (e.g., Bioastronautics, Fundamental Space Biology, and Physical Sciences Research). Include resources in the budget plan to address how the scientific data produced at NSRL and related facilities will be managed and used to predict risk and reduce uncertainty in risk predictions. The plan should consider how research and risk prediction would be incorporated into space radiation protection, including instrumentation and management policies.

3. Propose a cost and content plan for identifying and effectively utilizing flight analogs, including bedrest studies, to achieve the objectives of the Bioastronautics Strategy.

4. Develop an integrated schedule, budget and technical plan for Artificial Gravity (AG) research to be considered for funding within the existing BR budget.

5. Identify the budget, schedule, and technical plan to develop and maintain a data archiving activity. This plan should include provisions for a review by the scientific community. The plan must define roles, responsibilities and interactions between Life Sciences Data Archive (LSDA) and NSBRI data archiving activities, and must insure that appropriate data capture and integration occur across all aspects of the program, including fundamental biology and international data. The plan should cover specific objectives, tasks, budget, schedules and metrics to include staffing requirements and should identify a NASA lead.

Fundamental Space Biology (FSB) General Guidance

The POP 04 submission should reflect the goals and objectives of the OBPR Enterprise Strategy and reflect the President’s exploration goals for NASA. The submission should also take into account the Critical Path Roadmap (CPR) and new OBPR research alignments, recognizing the full implementation of the newer elements of these elements are still subject to review. Include resources in the budget to participate in and monitor the updating of the CPR in FY 2005-2006. The plan should include review by the United States research community to ensure that the research content of this program is appropriate to achieve the objectives of FSB, OBPR, NASA, and the President’s exploration agenda.

Include funds to identify and integrate appropriate technology developments from OBPR Divisions, other NASA enterprises, other government agencies, and commercial sources.

Identify resources needed to support Education and Public Outreach shown elsewhere in these guidelines, including support for a post-doctoral fellowship program.

Fundamental Space Biology (FSB) [Research and Technology (R&T) & ISSRC]

Development – Habitat Holding Rack (HHR)

The POP 04 submission should include a plan for work, workforce and facilities based on the POP 04 financial guidelines, which will be provided March 15, 2004, for development of the Space Station Biological Research Project (SSBRP) Habitat Holding Racks. It should include a detailed review of the HHR content, budget, and reserves policy, through threats and liens, including adherence to programmatic guidelines in Section A of this guidance.

Document any anticipated slips in schedule or performance. Develop costs and schedules to support a readiness for integration date of 7/04 for HHR#1 and a readiness for integration date of 12/04 for HHR#2. Integration costs should be identified and included in the Utilization budget.

Fundamental Space Biology – Operations (FSB/ISSRC)

ARC and KSC Research Integration Offices

The POP 04 submission should include a plan for work, workforce and facilities based on the POP 04 financial guidelines, which will be provided March 15, 2004, for ISS and Shuttle utilization and development/integration of the SSBRP habitats. Planning for FSB ISS utilization should align with the OBPR Enterprise Strategy and maximize strategic research in support of exploration. The plan should include support for the flight of both validation and peer-reviewed science investigations. It should also include the integration and flight of the suite of equipment consistent with hardware flight readiness dates. Include the flight of EMCS on ULF1.1, with all planned experiments, and the flight of the ABRS (split-plenum PGF) with all experiments planned for it.

Initiate a rapid study to re-evaluate the appropriateness of all planned and in progress SSBRP hardware with respect to the exploration agenda, achieving the goals of the CPR, and currently projected flight opportunities and Shuttle upmass and downmass availability. Integrate the planned hardware availability with research timelines and assess compatibility. Provide alternate scenarios for the use of other NASA, international, and commercial hardware, as well as free flyers to achieve the research goals.

Any consideration of refurbishment of the Biomass Production System (BPS) should cease immediately.

The plan should also include a detailed review of the content and budget of the utilization requirements, based upon current FSB ISS planned research activities, including the ILSRA solicitation in FY04. It should also reflect the scientific priorities established for the development of the SSBRP habitats as a result of re-evaluation of the research program, based on an exploration focus. Document any anticipated slips or potential for acceleration or augmentation of schedule or performance for either the utilization or habitat construction components, along with cost impacts.

Develop a flight traffic model that optimizes available budget, flight hardware, and ISS resources, maximizes the science return, and is aligned with the OBPR Enterprise Strategy and exploration focus. Refer to the ISS Assembly Sequence, Multi Purpose Outfitting Model (MPOM), and ISS/OBPR Traffic Payload Models referenced in the “ISS Research Capability Manifesting & Utilization Guidance” section of this document. Use the updated hardware integration readiness dates and align the research to be carried out in the traffic model with research on nano-satellites, free flyers and other flight opportunities.

Include costs, reserves (including liens and threats), and schedule for completion of the collaborative effort with GRC for the Light Microscopy Module.

In addition, provide an updated cost estimate for high priority hardware that complements the current hardware suite; e.g., Single Loop Cell Culture System, EMCS Drosophila Containers, Small Mass Measuring Device, and Rodent Biotelemetry System. Also develop plans and a cost estimate for an on-station genomics capability and other technologies that will minimize sample return and maximize research return. Assume a hardware start date of FY05 for any new hardware, and incorporate the appropriate cost, schedule, and reserves in the estimate.

Provide a plan for work, workforce and facilities to redesign or modify as required and manufacture Animal Enclosure Modules (AEMs) for transportation of rodents to ISS via Shuttle middeck and/or Multipurpose Logistics Module (MLM). This development effort will be funded within the established Advanced Animal Habitat (AAH) budget. The development schedule should be aligned and phased with the delivery schedule for the Advanced Animal Habitats. Also, develop a plan for use of AEMs to carry out rodent research on ISS prior to AAH delivery.

Develop a utilization that includes EMCS experiments on every increment following ULF1.1. Prepare a similar utilization plan for AEM sortie experiments assuming one AEM with 12 adult mice or 5-6 adult rats on every sortie mission, each with a defined topic area, a team of PIs for the definition period, and Biospecimen Sharing Plan and including Space Life Sciences Laboratory utilization pre- and post-flight.

Fundamental Space Biology – Research (FSB) – UPN 121

Fundamental Space Biology (FSB) POP 04 submission should reflect the planning for implementation of the FSB research program in alignment with the OBPR Enterprise Strategy and Level I direction. The plan should include proposed mechanisms for developing integrated research teams to work on strategic exploration-related questions and that include ground-based, pre-flight, and flight investigators.

ARC is requested to respond to the following:

Provide a cost estimate for NASA’s contribution to a collaborative mission with European Space Agency (ESA) on Foton missions in mid 2006 and subsequently. Assume the NASA contribution in 2006 will include up to 3 self-contained experiments with small organisms, e.g., C. elegans, Drosophila, and/or microbial species. In addition provide an estimate for the inclusion of an ISGEN payload for Foton, inside the spacecraft, outside, or both.

Provide a complete project plan, schedule and budget with reserves for the ISGEN project, assuming both a flight rate of one flight every 12 months and two flights every 12 months, with a first launch in FY 05. Include a mechanism for soliciting peer-reviewed research after the initial flight and plans for integrating ISGEN research in the larger FSB research agenda.

Provide a new approach to the management and utilization of Ames facilities that support the FSB program, i.e., the Animal Colony and the unique suite of acceleration devices. The approach should involve ways to reduce overall costs to the FSB program to sustain the facilities while retaining their capabilities for the use of the science community and describe how the approach would support an exploration agenda.

KSC is requested to respond to the following:

Provide a plan, including schedule and budget, to establish a Microbial Ecology Archive for samples collected from space platforms. The plan should include the schedule for the development and release of a NASA Research Announcement (NRA) to initiate microbial ecology science investigations during FY05.

Provide an integrated plan for conducting targeted, strategic ground and flight research utilizing plants to achieve goals outlined in the OBPR Enterprise Strategy, including research that is currently covered in both FSB and AHST. The plan should comprehensively cover near, mid, and long-term activities including hardware development, experiment operations support, and investigation research funding. The plan should include a mechanism to facilitate teams of researchers working on strategic exploration questions. Also include plans for the development of ground bioregenerative life support facilities that will support the design of eventual Moon and Mars facilities. Describe how the plan will fit with the AHST “AIM” integrated test facility.

Propose an approach to the management and utilization of the Space Life Sciences Laboratory that supports the FSB program and describes relationships with other appropriate users and entities. The approach should involve ways to minimize overall costs to the FSB program to sustain the facility while maximizing its capabilities for the use by the science community, and describe how the approach would support an exploration agenda.

Physical Sciences Research Theme

The Physical Sciences Research Division is evolving its program emphasis from fundamental research for intrinsic scientific value to more focused Exploration research supporting NASA’s goal to create new capabilities and opportunities for exploration and discovery. Within the PSR program, some elements will be re-aligned and enhanced, while others will be de-scoped and/or phased out. Centers should evaluate the PSR fundamental content that is being phased out and re-deploy center infrastructure to support OBPR’s Exploration Goals and the PSR Product Line deliverables.

The following is a listing of the OBPR Exploration Product Lines and the relevant PSR sub-categories:

  • Radiation
    – Modeling (transport)

    – Shielding

    – Biological effects/Radiation Limits/Countermeasures

    – Monitoring/Dosimetry

  • Human Health
    – Bone and Muscle

    – Cardiovascular

    – Immunology

    – Medical systems

    – Integrated Modeling/ Digital Human

    – X-Cut: Artificial Gravity

    – X-Cut: ISS Research Capability

  • Human Life Support
    – Life Support Systems

    – Environmental Monitoring and Control

    – EVA Systems

    – Fore Research, Detection and Suppression

    – In-Situ Fabrication & Repair

    – X-Cut: ISS Research Capability

  • Low Gravity Research for Exploration
    – Spacecraft and Propulsion Materials

    – Power and Propulsion Subsystems

    – ISRU Research

    – X-Cut: ISS Research Capability

  • Biological and Physical Research on the Moon and Mars
    – Remote Research Instrumentation Technology

    – Lunar Precursor Mission Research

    – Lunar Research and Hardware (lab and experiments)

    – Lunar Research Integration and Operations

    – Mars Precursor Mission Research

    Modifications in the Approach to Program Planning and Implementation

    • Focus NRA solicitation topics on exploration-targeted research
    • Charter directed thrust research teams with outcome/product based
    • objectives
    • Form targeted, rapid development cycle flight research teams
    • Establish formal and effective research collaborations with other programs within Code U and with other NASA Enterprises.
    • Plan ISS facility utilization to support exploration product lines

    Program Areas that will be targeted for Phase-out

    • Downscope Fundamental Research Flight Investigations to the Ground Based Program
    • Provide the optimal plan to phase out the following fundamental projects in order to realign resources to support the Exploration Initiative.


    Please provide deleted content list to cover $2M dollars in FY04.
    The following project cuts begin in FY05 through FY09

    – MDCA (and investigations DCE/BCDCE/DDCE/SEDC)


    – MGFA (and investigations Cheng, Hicks, Law, Axelbaum)


    – LFCA

    – UMRF

    – PhaSE-2

    – PCS-3

    – DAFT (dollars FY06-FY09)

    – BDiSL

    – UVIS

    – CHAINS

    – CLSM

    – BVX

    – PCS-2

    – MIDAS

    – PIMS ($200K/YR in UPN 400)


    Please provide deleted content list to cover $2M dollars in FY04.
    The following project cuts begin in FY05 through FY09

    – QMI (and investigations PEP/CGH/CSS/IPSIDS/RIDGS/CROMIS)

    – SHIVA


    – All Biotech Operations (UPN 400)

    – Discipline Science (UPN 101)

    – Engineering and Management Support (UPN 101)


    The following project cuts begin in FY05 through FY09

    – All Development (UPN 122)

    – All Operations (UPN 400)

    – LTMPF (UPN 101, FRD)

    – LCAP (UPN 101, FRD)


    – Fifth Flight

    Reassess ISS Resources

    In the area of ISS research implementation, analyze the remaining ISS research plans and modify to minimize upmass and downmass requirements of flight investigations. Also conduct similar analyses and modifications to minimize crew time requirements.

    Additional detailed direction will be provided by subsequent guidance, issued on or about March 15, 2004.

    Research Partnerships and Flight Support Theme

    ISS Research Capability Manifesting and Utilization Guidance

    This section outlines the strategic resources and manifest planning guidelines for the International Space Station (ISS) research. This includes the ground and flight multi-user hardware, payload integration and operations required to support: bioastronautics, fundamental space biology, physical sciences, Earth and space science, space product development, engineering research technology, and international partner research. Possible changes in return to Shuttle flight plans or NASA’s ISS transportation strategy may result in changes to the OBPR ISS research planning. Resulting impacts may require 2004 and future budget adjustments to re-align the OBPR ISS research program with the new planning strategy. For the purposes of POP04 planning, the OBPR performing centers should plan assuming the following:

    1) Assume a yearly Shuttle flight rate of one (1) in FY-2004, and five (5) in FY-2005 and five (5) in each subsequent fiscal year until assembly complete.

    2) Assembly occurs up to the end of 4th Quarter FY 2009; steady state operations begin 1st Quarter FY 2010.

    3) For the ISS research facilities, assume no-earlier-than launch deployment time frames as follows:

  • 4th Quarter, FY-2004
    – Human Research Facility-2 (HRF2)

  • 1st Quarter, FY-2005
    – Minus Eighty Degree Laboratory Freezer for ISS (MELFI)

    – European Modular Cultivation System (EMCS)

    – Window Observational Facility Rack (WORF)

  • 2nd Quarter, FY-2006
    – SpaceDRUMS

    – Combustion Integrated Rack (CIR)

    – Holding Habitat Rack-1 (HHR1)

    – MELFI (exchange)

  • 1st Quarter, FY-2007
    – MARES

    – Materials Science Research Rack-1 (MSRR1)

    – Life Sciences Glovebox (LSG)

    – Fluids Integrated Rack (FIR)

    – Express Rack 6 (ER6)

    – MELFI (exchange)

  • 4th Quarter, FY-2007
    – HHR2

    – ER8

    – Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS)

    – Express Pallet-1 (Nadir)

    – Two (2) Space Product Development (SPD) sub-pallet payload opportunities on Express Pallet-1

  • 3rd Quarter, FY-2008
    – Biotechnology Facility (BTF)

    – Express Rack-7 (ER7)

    – MELFI (exchange)

  • 4th Quarter, FY-2008
    – Express Pallet-2 (Zenith)

    – Two (2) SPD sub-pallet payload opportunities on Express Pallet-2

  • 1st Quarter, FY-2009
    – Centrifuge Accommodations Module (CAM)

    – Cryogenic Freezer

  • 3rd Quarter, FY-2009
    – Express Pallet-3 (Nadir)

    – MELFI (exchange)

  • 1st Quarter, FY-2010
    – MELFI exchange

    4) Assume 5 Shuttle middeck lockers per Shuttle mission for utilization up to and including 2nd Quarter FY-2006, and 20 middeck lockers per Shuttle mission starting in 3rd Quarter FY-2006 and beyond.

    5) Resupply mass data assumption TBD.

    6) One ATV launch opportunity is planned for 3rd Quarter FY-2005. Assume a NASA utilization mass allocation of 500 kg.

    ISS Downmass Reduction

    Possible changes to NASA’s transportation strategy for supporting the ISS could result in significant reduction in the capability to return cargo from the ISS to the ground. To plan for such a possibility, all Research Integration Offices are requested to submit data which will be used to study options to reduce ISS-to-ground cargo return requirements (“downmass”) while preserving the ability to meet research goals for ISS. Strategies should be proposed and cost estimated in the following areas:

    • Development of new or replacement research hardware and lab support equipment which allows greater on-orbit analysis in lieu of returning hardware/samples for ground analysis
    • Modification of existing or planned hardware to allow removal of materials / samples from supporting hardware for the purpose of return and analysis
    • Development of additional flight units for hardware which is currently planned for return in order to be refurbished and reused (allowing disposal rather than return)
    • Technology development efforts that will allow reductions in downmass
    • Propositioning of research hardware and supplies prior to retirement of the Shuttle fleet
    • Planning for graceful degradation of research capability following Shuttle retirement to minimize requirements for spares development and transportation

    For the purpose of this POP, assume that downmass constraints begin in late 2010. Annual cost and workforce estimates with supporting rationale and estimated downmass savings should be provided. Any increases in crew time requirements that result from downmass reduction strategies should be identified. If reductions in downmass will result in cost increases to planned hardware, only additional costs should be included; refocusing existing new hardware funds to minimize downmass should be given consideration, but these costs should not be included. Cost increases resulting from this study should not be included in the within guideline POP response.

    Multi-User System and Support (MUSS)

    MUSS shall continue its core function of supporting the activities set forth in the POP03/FY05 PBS through payload planning, integration, processing, engineering integration, and software integration.

    In addition to the core function, MUSS shall provide support, as needed, to the Enterprise research reprioritization efforts and the return to flight effort. MUSS shall conduct an assessment of full cost and propose a civil servant to contractor ratio to reduce the full cost (relative to FY03) of providing its core function without eliminating or reducing content. The assessment shall identify government-only activities and associated FTEs, contractor-only activities, and associated manpower and activities that could be performed by either government or contractors.

    The MUSS budget shall incorporate the Office of the ISS Program Scientist as an easily identifiable and separate line item. The funding for the KSC Space Life Sciences Laboratory (SLSL) shall be transferred to and managed by the OBPR Fundamental Space Biology Division. The funding to be transferred is $6.1M per year.

    Mission Integration

    UPN 959 Mission Integration Funding to NASA/JSC will be reallocated to other Enterprise needs beginning in FY05.

    Office of the ISS Program Scientist

    The Office of the ISS Program Scientist was established at the beginning of FY 2004 to ensure science leadership at the highest level within the ISS Program Office, to represent all research on the ISS, and to provide recommendations to the ISS Program Manager and to the OBPR Associate Administrator regarding research on ISS. To ensure that this newly formed office has the resources to perform these tasks, please provide, the number of additional personnel, travel funding and procurement funding that will be required. In addition provide what functions will be performed over the POP04 budget horizon and how they link to the Biological and Physical Research Enterprise Strategy.

    To improve the return from a broad range of research required for human exploration, implement a pilot program of science training for astronauts (SEHE: Science for Enabling Human Exploration). The program will include biomedical, biological, and physical sciences, including elements of in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). To realize the full return from scientific endeavors in these environments requires hands-on experience with the fundamentals of scientific/research method, formulating hypotheses, testing them, interpreting results, reporting results, and creatively thinking of how to take the next step. The program will also include some skills training in areas appropriate for ISS science officers. Once completed, the program should be evaluated and inform decisions regarding future science training. A separate program to screen the astronaut corps for science skills and teach those skills should be implemented at JSC. The skills course will insure that the skills required to perform experiments planned for ISS exist within the astronaut corps. Further, provide an assessment of OBPR-specific costs and the formative plans and associated timelines. While the ISS Program Scientist reports directly to the Associate Administrator, assume for the purposes of budget efficiency, that this office budget request will be included in the Multi-User System and Support budget.

    Space Product Development (SPD); RESEARCH/R&T & OPERATIONS/ISSRC

    The SPD program is undergoing a strategic realignment and budgets may change as a result. At this time, identify the following:

    1. New opportunities associated with the four SPD exploration realignment thrusts
    2. Impacts of reductions to the RPCs’ capabilities for contributing to NASA’s exploration agenda
    3. Impact to ISS utilization of realignment or reductions
    4. Associated RPC termination costs

    SPD is currently realigning its research content to better meet NASA’s exploration agenda. Proposals for the realignment thrusts will be presented and submitted as part of this POP.


    MSFC (SD12) will administer the Space Product Development Program (SPD) POP 04 process for NASA Headquarters.

    Consistent with the Agency and Enterprise policies and objectives described in the OBPR guidance, the Space Product Development Office will provide financial guidelines by Center in the March 15, 2004 updated guidance. Submissions should be prepared for review at Level 4 of the WBS. Center requirements for current content must not exceed the guidance levels. However, new SPD content consistent with the SPD realignment thrusts may be accommodated through reduction of budget for other content, combined with an over-guideline request. All content increases must be offset by other content reductions taken as part of the POP submission or included in the over-guideline submission as part of the new SPD realignment thrusts. All new content must be identified in the supporting narrative to be presented at the POP 04 review.

    For ISSRC Operations, follow assumptions as described in the ISS Research Capability Manifesting and Utilization Guidance. Assume payload traffic model for SPD experiments as referenced (copy enclosed). Please validate these requirements and associated budgets.

    Further guidance will be issued once the SPD realignment initiative proposals are completed.

    V. OBPR Enterprise Data Requirements (Centers and Division Directors):

    In addition to the Budget Formulation Release .5A/B data entry, the following data requirements are the minimum information that is to be included in the Program Recommendations to the Enterprise Associate Administrator for the period FY 2004 through FY 2010 for each of the Development, Operations, and Research components of the respective full cost budget Theme areas.

    1. Full Cost Budget Summary Content (NOA) (1 page)

    Display summary of the total full cost budget by the various elements of full cost by the designated project direct and indirect full cost components.


    -R&T Subtotal

    –Subtotal by second lower budget level (i.e., 5th digit UPN)

    –Subtotal by research/science sub-discipline (where appropriate)

    -ISSRC Subtotal

    –Subtotal by second lower level budget level (i.e., 6th digit UPN)

    2. Full Cost Budget Summary Trace (NOA) (2 to 3 pages)

    Display the summary total change value from the FY 2005 PBS to the POP 04 recommend by individual element of project direct and indirect components of full cost on one page.


    -R&T Subtotal

    –Subtotal by second lower budget level (i.e., 5th digit UPN)

    –Subtotal by research/science sub-discipline (where appropriate)

    -ISSRC Subtotal

    –Subtotal by second lower level budget level (i.e., 6th digit UPN)

    3. Full Cost Budget Summary POP 04 New Initiative Recommend (NOA) (1 page)

    For the new initiative requested, display summary total full cost budget by theme, showing the various elements of full cost by the designated project direct and indirect full cost components.

    4. Level 1 and ISSRC Reserves Budget Trace (1 to 2 pages)

    Provide a top level summary trace of the changes in the Operations reserves from the FY 2005 PBS to the POP 04 budget recommend; identify the major reasons for change in the reserves.

    On one or two additional pages, list the major individual items of change (and their annual budget change amounts) within each of the elements of project direct and indirect full cost. Identify the Performing Center associated with the major changes.

    5. What’s Same/What’s Changed in the Content/Schedule (2 to 3 pages)

    Provide narrative text phrases that explain the major changes identified by all element of full cost in item 2 above.

    6. Major Ground Rules/Assumptions (1 to 2 pages)

    Identify any major assumptions and/or ground rules used in the budget recommendation.

    7. Major Issues/Unresolved Issues/Liens (1 to 2 pages)

    Identify any major unresolved issues and/or problems; and/or any unfunded major budget liens/threats.

  • SpaceRef staff editor.