SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS

Transcription

1 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS I N S I D E T H I S I S S U E APRIL JUNE 2012 Two issues of interest to science are in the news as I write. One is the long-anticipated confirmation of the existence of the Higgs Boson, and with it the completion of the standard model of particle physics. It rated a cover on the Economist news magazine, where it was characterized as a giant leap for science. By contrast, the month-long heat wave afflicting the United States, the month of rain in the U.K., and the floods in Russia are having an entirely different reception. From the Chair 2 SSB Membership 3 SSB Standing Committees 3 Workshop Announcement 4 SSB Activities 5 SSB Staff News 7 SSB Staff 7 News from COSPAR 8 New Releases from the SSB Charles F. Kennel, Chair, SSB Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies 9 Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey 11 Summaries of Congressional Hearings of Interest 16 Board and Committee Member News 19 SSB Calendar 20 Selected Reports Available from the SSB 21 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

2 S PACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS FROM THE CHAIR Two issues of interest to science are in the news as I write. One is the longanticipated confirmation of the existence of the Higgs Boson, and with it the completion of the standard model of particle physics. It rated a cover on the Economist news magazine, where it was characterized as a giant leap for science. By contrast, the month-long heat wave afflicting the United States, the month of rain in the U.K., and the floods in Russia are having an entirely different reception. Despite authoritative forecasts of more frequent extreme events by NOAA, the U.K. Met Office, and the UN Environmental Programme, the heat in the United States re-provoked the bitter public debate about the reliability of climate science and the ethics of climate scientists. Arguably, in 50 years time, both events will prove to have signaled profound implications for humanity, yet today one is lauded, and the other is reviled. Since the Higgs field endows all other particles with mass, careful study of its deviations from the present standard model might begin to bridge the century-old chasm between quantum theory and general relativity and the worlds of the very small and the very large. As they have done in centuries past, observational astronomy and cosmology are again providing a fundamental challenge to physics: the present standard model has no provision for either dark matter or dark energy. No matter how they may turn out, the results to come from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) will certainly affect, and likely strengthen, the case for space missions to study dark matter and dark energy. No matter how different their working styles, astronomers and physicists have always had to pay attention to each other, and they need to do so more than ever. Physicists devoted $10 billion and 20 years to building the LHC, just to sort through trillions of numbers to find one number the mass of the Higgs. It will also turn out that space astronomers will have spent almost as much and taken just as long to build the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to study hundreds of millions of arcane objects and, oh, by the way, maybe refine the understanding of dark matter. Physicists can easily see devoting an entire space mission to the dark energy question, just to find tiny deviations from the expansion of the universe predicted by Einstein s cosmological constant; astronomers would not willingly spend resources on it if the search did not also enable the study of hundreds of millions of objects fascinating in their own right. Fortunately, that is the case. It is now more essential than ever that NASA pursue the goals set forth for JWST and the Wide-Field Infrared Space Telescope (WFIRST) in the decadal survey New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (2010) of the Board on Physics and Astronomy and the Space Studies Board (SSB). Why should the country, and the global community, spend so much time, talent, and money on things the people cannot see with their own two eyes? The most fundamental argument has been that advances in basic science have revolutionized society three times in the past. Newton s rational mechanics in the 17 th century led to the Enlightenment in the 18 th ; Maxwell and Faraday s electromagnetic theory propelled the second half of the industrial revolution in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries; the quantum mechanics of the 1920s enabled the vast developments in information and communications technology that are changing society today. It is unpredictable, but something equally significant could emerge from the advances in physics and astronomy in the offing. The Secretary-General of the United Nations, among others, has declared that climate change is the largest problem facing humanity in the 21 st century. If so, advances in climate science could well have a long-term impact on society comparable with that of a major advance in basic science. Why then is its support not as consistent and enduring as that of physics and astronomy? Twenty years ago NASA set out to create the Earth Observing System, a project comparable in scope and ambition to JWST or the LHC. This enterprise was manifestly important to society, and it was based on a new conceptual synthesis, the first comprehensive approach to understanding the behavior of Earth as a system. Twenty years later, the SSB s recent Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA s Implementation of Above all the Earth observation enterprise needs a stable, motivating vision like those that keep astronomers and physicists returning to the same questions for decades until they get answered. the Decadal Survey documented a crisis in Earth observations, to the point where even optimistic scenarios of future capabilities predict that the number of missions and instruments to observe Earth from space in the next decade will fall precipitously unless existing space assets remain operational well beyond what is anticipated. Why is NASA Earth science not achieving its goals? Many contributing factors are documented in the report but, in the end, the fact is that a cornerstone of NASA science, despite good management of its resources, is neither living up to its promise nor fulfilling national needs. Of the many problems facing NASA s Science Mission Division, the Earth observation crisis may be the most difficult to solve. It is not only a question of adequate (Continued on page 3) VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

3 (Continued from page 2) funding, although that is necessary. It cannot be solved by NASA s standard burst of inspired technology development, although that always helps. It cannot be solved by the Earth sciences alone, although they must lead. NASA cannot do it by itself, although without NASA the enterprise fails. NASA does not set its own policy, it must take national policy direction, and it has to make complex and fragile arrangements with other U.S. agencies and international partners. Indeed, several recent NRC reports, including the decadal survey and the midterm assessment, have highlighted the need for a comprehensive national strategy for Earth observations from space to better address a plethora of problems that center on the misalignment of agency roles and responsibilities with agency budgets. Above all the Earth observation enterprise needs a stable, motivating vision like those that keep astronomers and physicists returning to the same questions for decades until they get answered. The questions for the Earth sciences are there, and the needs are there, but they have been obscured by the conflicted public debate, which is bound to affect decision making. If the Earth system science community continues to make its case, it should eventually prevail. The climate is changing, after all. Change can be unsettling at all times, and talk about changes in the Earth system tends to convey a pessimism that is at odds with NASA s can do optimism. However, the fundamental message is positive. Observations from space provide knowledge obtainable in no other way, which is crucial to keeping our planetary environment hospitable to advanced civilization into the indefinite future. Learning how to do this is breakthrough science. If we do break through, our children and grandchildren will have time to look up at the stars and ponder the foundations of the cosmos. SSB STANDING COMMITTEES Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science (CAPS) Philip R. Christensen, Arizona State University (Co-Chair) J. Gregory Ferry, Pennsylvania State University (Co-Chair) Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics (CAA) (joint with the Board on Physics and Astronomy) Paul L. Schechter, MIT (Co-Chair) David N. Spergel, Princeton University (Co-Chair) Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space (CESAS) Mark R. Abbott, Oregon State University (Chair) Joyce E. Penner, University of Michigan (Vice Chair) Committee on Solar and Space Physics (CSSP) (On hiatus during the solar and space physics decadal survey) For more information, go to < JULY 1, 2011 JUNE 30, 2012 CHARLES F. KENNEL, CHAIR Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego JOHN KLINEBERG, VICE CHAIR Space Systems/Loral (ret.) MARK R. ABBOTT Oregon State University STEVEN J. BATTEL Battel Engineering YVONNE C. BRILL Aerospace Consultant ELIZABETH R. CANTWELL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ANDREW B. CHRISTENSEN Dixie State College of Utah ALAN DRESSLER The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution JACK D. FELLOWS University Corporation for Atmospheric Research HEIDI B. HAMMEL AURA FIONA A. HARRISON California Institute of Technology ANTHONY C. JANETOS University of Maryland JOAN JOHNSON-FREESE U.S. Naval War College ROBERT P. LIN University of California, Berkeley MOLLY K. MACAULEY Resources for the Future, Inc. JOHN F. MUSTARD Brown University ROBERT T. PAPPALARDO Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology JAMES A. PAWELCZYK Pennsylvania State University MARCIA J. RIEKE University of Arizona DAVID N. SPERGEL Princeton University WARREN M. WASHINGTON National Center for Atmospheric Research CLIFFORD M. WILL Washington University THOMAS H. ZURBUCHEN University of Michigan LIAISON U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO COSPAR ROBERT P. LIN University of California, Berkeley SSB MEMBERSHIP JULY 1, 2012 JUNE 30, 2013 CHARLES F. KENNEL, CHAIR Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego JOHN KLINEBERG, VICE CHAIR Space Systems/Loral (ret.) MARK R. ABBOTT Oregon State University JAMES ANDERSON Harvard University JAMES BAGIAN University of Michigan YVONNE C. BRILL Aerospace Consultant ELIZABETH R. CANTWELL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ANDREW B. CHRISTENSEN Dixie State College of Utah ALAN DRESSLER The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution THOMAS R. GAVIN California Institute of Technology HEIDI B. HAMMEL AURA FIONA A. HARRISON California Institute of Technology JOSEPH S. HEZIR EOP Group, Inc. ANTHONY C. JANETOS University of Maryland JOAN JOHNSON-FREESE U.S. Naval War College ROBERT P. LIN University of California, Berkeley MOLLY K. MACAULEY Resources for the Future, Inc. JOHN F. MUSTARD Brown University ROBERT T. PAPPALARDO Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology MARCIA J. RIEKE University of Arizona DAVID N. SPERGEL Princeton University MEENAKSHI WADHWA Arizona State University CLIFFORD M. WILL Washington University THOMAS H. ZURBUCHEN University of Michigan LIAISON U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO COSPAR ROBERT P. LIN University of California, Berkeley For more information on SSB membership, visit our website at < VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 3

4 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science A Workshop November 12-13, 2012 National Academies Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center Irvine, California hosted by the Space Studies Board This workshop will review and discuss key aspects of the most recent National Research Council decadal surveys in space science, identifying lessons learned and best practices from the most recent surveys: solar and space physics (2012), planetary science (2011), astronomy and astrophysics (2010), and Earth science and applications from space (2007). The workshop will bring together a variety of stakeholders in the space community who are impacted by and/or are responsible for the formulation and implementation of the decadal surveys. In addition to focusing on the decadal surveys, the workshop will also afford an opportunity to discuss the recent mid-decade reviews. To accomplish its goals, the workshop will foster a dialog among the workshop attendees with a view to identifying ideas for the future evolution of the decadal survey and mid-decade review processes. An NRC-appointed planning committee is working on the structure and content of the workshop. More information on the workshop agenda and how to register is available on the workshop's web site, available at SSB_ PAGE 4 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

5 THE BOARD AND ITS STANDING COMMITTEES The Space Studies Board (SSB) spring meeting was held in the second quarter, April 4-5, in Washington, DC. As mentioned in the first quarter newsletter, the first day of the meeting was a joint session with the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board where the boards heard from Robert Lightfoot, NASA s acting associate administrator, Mason Peck, NASA s chief technologist, Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for NASA s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, Gale Allen from NASA's Office of the Chief Scientist, as well as senior staff from OSTP, OMB, and the US Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) On April 5 the boards met individually. The SSB had discussions with NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Deputy Associate Administrator Chuck Gay, and SMD Division directors (or their representative) and also received updates from Mary Kicza, Assistant Administrator for Satellite and Information Service, NOAA, and Tim Killeen, Assistant Director for Geosciences, NSF. The Executive Committee of the Board (XCOM) met on August 8-9 at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA, and the next full meeting of the Board will be held November 14 at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center in Irvine, CA, and will be preceded by a workshop on Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science on November (see below ). Visit < to stay up to date on board, workshop, and study committee meetings and developments. The SSB 2012 workshop Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science on November at in Irvine, CA, will focus on lessons learned and best practices from the most recent decadal surveys: solar and space physics, planetary science, astronomy and astrophysics, and Earth science and applications from space. The workshop agenda will foster a dialogue among stakeholders in the space community who are impacted by and/or are responsible for the formulation and implementation of the decadal surveys. To learn more see page 4 of this newsletter and visit < sites.nationalacademies.org/ssb/currentprojects/ssb_070954>. The Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics (CAA) held its first meeting on June 4-6 at the Keck Center of the National Academies in Washington, DC. At the meeting the committee heard presentations from NASA/Astrophysics and SMD, DOE/HEP, NSF/ AST, Scott Gaudi, James Kasting, Sarah Church, Steven Ritz, Ed Feddeman, and Alan Dressler. During the meeting the committee held roundtable discussions with representatives from NASA, DOE, and NSF. Of particular note, NASA announced that the Astrophysics Division had acquired two telescopes with 2.4-meter mirrors, and will begin to contemplate the use of the telescopes for advancing WFIRST scientific priorities. The CAA will meet again in-person next spring, and will hold several teleconference-based meetings in the interim. More information about CAA is available at < sites.nationalacademies.org/bpa/bpa_048755>. The Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space (CESAS) (formerly the Committee on Earth Studies) held its first meeting on July at the Keck Center of the National Academies SSB ACTIVITIES in Washington, DC. At the meeting, the committee was updated on the status of current and future NASA Earth science programs and missions. The committee received presentations from representatives of NASA s Earth Science Division (ESD): Michael Freilich (ESD Director), Lawrence Friedl (Director, NASA Applied Sciences Program), and Jack Kaye (ESD Associate Director for Research). The committee also heard from Peter Colohan and Johannes Loschnigg from the Office of Science and Technology Policy; Byron Tapley, chair of the NASA Earth Science Subcommittee (by teleconference); and Jeremy Weirich, a staff member of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. In addition, CESAS received a briefing from Robert Winokur, chair of the NOAA Science Advisory Board s Satellite Architecture Study. During the meeting, CESAS discussed among other items the recently released report Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA s Implementation of the Decadal Survey, available for free download at < record_id=13405>. The committee had lengthy discussions with ESD leadership on its potential role in following up on the findings and recommendations in the report as well as other areas of mutual interest. CESAS will meet in person again next spring; in the interim, it will continue to hold e-meetings. For more information about CESAS and to learn about upcoming meetings, please visit < The Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science (CAPS), a new activity combining the responsibilities formerly exercised by COMPLEX and COEL, held its first meeting at the National Academies Keck Center in Washington, DC, on May 23-25, This meeting was devoted to familiarizing the committee s co-chairs and 17 members with NASA s current programs in the areas of planetary science and astrobiology. Particular attention was paid to the Administration s proposed FY 2013 budget for NASA s Planetary Science Division and its implications for the implementation of the scientific and programmatic recommendations contained in the planetary science decadal survey, Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade In addition, the committee heard presentations on re-planning activities in NASA s post-maven Mars exploration activities and the restructuring of the Jupiter Europa Orbiter mission into flyby and orbital elements. The committee s second meeting is tentatively scheduled to be held at the National Academies Beckman Center in Irvine, CA, on September The committee s first meeting of 2013 will be held at the National Academy of Sciences building in Washington, DC, on March 6-8. The Committee on Solar and Space Physics (CSSP) is on hiatus until the completion of the solar and space physics (heliophysics) decadal survey. We anticipate restart of the committee in the third quarter of More information on the SSB and ASEB Board Meetings is at (SSB) and (ASEB) VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 5

6 SSB ACTIVITIES, CONTINUED STUDY COMMITTEES The Planetary Science Decadal Survey, Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade , was released in its final printed form in late December All of the original print run copies were exhausted in the first quarter of 2012, but copies from a second print are now available. The full report (plus the reports of all of the mission and technology studies conducted in support of the survey) is available at < record_id=13117> and is available on a single DVD from the SSB (see the last page of this newsletter). An illustrated version of the survey report intended for a popular audience is scheduled for publication in the 3rd quarter of Dissemination activities for the Committee for the Decadal Survey on Biological and Physical Sciences in Space report Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences Research for a New Era, continued in this period. The report was reprinted by NASA during this period, making the report available for distribution within NASA and to study participants and the relevant communities. Work on a short derivative product intended to highlight some of the topic areas in the full report was completed in July, closing out work under this contract. A draft report from the ad hoc Committee on A Decadal Strategy for Solar and Space Physics (Heliophysics) was nearing completion as the quarter ended, with public release of an approved pre -publication version of the report scheduled during a press event that will occur on August 15, Please check the website of the Space Studies Board for details about the press release and for information on how to download a free PDF of the committee s report. Detailed information about the survey is available at < sites.nationalacademies.org/ssb/currentprojects/ssb_056864>. The ad hoc Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Solar System has completed its activities and its report, Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies, was released to the public on April 16. The final, printed report was published in early-july. Copies of the report are available upon request (while supplies last) from the SSB. Additional copies may be purchased directly from NAP. Since the report s delivery to NASA, its conclusions and recommendations have been presented to various groups, including NASA Headquarters staff, NASA s Planetary Protection Subcommittee, the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, and participants in the COSPAR Planetary Protection Colloquium (Alpbach, Austria), and the 39th COSPAR Scientific Assembly (Mysore, India). In early June, Catharine Conley, NASA s Planetary Protection Officer, requested that the SSB conduct additional dissemination of the report s conclusions and recommendations. In response, the SSB convened a community briefing at the National Academies Keck Center in Washington, DC, on July During the course of that day and a half event, an invited group of former committee members and outside experts conducted in-depth discussions of report s ramifications and, in particular, the relationship between the reports principal recommendations and current COSPAR policies for icy solar system bodies. SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS The ad hoc Committee on the Assessment of NASA s Earth Science Program was formed to review the alignment of the NASA Earth Science Division s program with previous NRC advice, primarily the 2007 decadal survey report Earth Science and Applications from Space, and was directed to neither revisit nor alter the scientific priorities or mission recommendations provided in the decadal survey and related NRC reports; however, the committee was invited to provide guidance about implementing the recommended mission portfolio in preparation for the next decadal survey. The committee s report, Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey, was released in prepublication form on May 2, 2012, and is available at < The final version of the report will be available in print and at the same URL in August. The summary report of the workshop for Effects of Solar Variability on Earth s Climate is in final response to review and editing. The workshop agenda and abstract booklet are available at < sites.nationalacademies.org/ssb/currentprojects/ssb_061983>. The Committee for the Implementation of a Sustained Land Imaging Program held its second meeting on April 25-27, 2012, in Washington, DC, and a writing meeting on June 4, 2012 in Irvine, CA. In April, the committee heard an update from the USGS, discussed the use of Landsat Data by the Forest Service, and discussed public-private partnerships and land imaging data buys. The committee also heard from Western States Water Council and an expert on thermal band imaging. The committee is currently writing their report for expected delivery in early More information is available at < SSB_065886>. Under planning funds provided by NASA, preliminary planning work was carried out for the congressionally requested Human Spaceflight Study. Much of this work was focused on assembling research materials, the identification of skill sets, knowledge and perspectives critical to the study, and the broad solicitation of names as well as the review of qualifications for an extensive set of committee candidates. Outreach activities conducted in this period included a discussion session held during the Global Space Exploration Conference in Washington, DC, where representatives from several space agencies were invited to discuss the perspectives of their citizens and governments on the value, rationale, and future direction of human space exploration. Coordination activities between groups that will support the study continued to develop during this period as well. The parent division of SSB and ASEB, the Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences (DEPS), has been asked to conduct a comprehensive, agency-wide assessment of NASA s strategic direction. ASEB and SSB staff will help manage a study on NASA's Strategic Direction for DEPS. The committee held meetings on May 1-2, June 25-27, and July (all in Washington, DC) and on August 6-7 (Irvine, CA). Committee members have also visited many of the NASA field centers, collecting information and perspectives of those working there. The committee will hold a final meeting in September, and plans on delivering its report after the November elections. PAGE 6 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

7 SSB ACTIVITIES, CONTINUED OTHER ACTIVITIES The 2014 for Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) scientific assembly will be held on August 2-10 at the Lomonosov Moscow State University in Russia. See page 9 of this newsletter additional COSPAR news. Interested in SSB publications? Go to < or use the order form on the last page of this newsletter. MICHAEL H. MOLONEY Director JOSEPH K. ALEXANDER Senior Program Officer ARTHUR A. CHARO Senior Program Officer SANDRA J. GRAHAM Senior Program Officer IAN W. PRYKE Senior Program Officer DAVID H. SMITH Senior Program Officer DWAYNE A. DAY* Senior Program Officer DAVID LANG* Program Officer ABIGAIL SHEFFER Associate Program Officer LEWIS GROSWALD Research Associate AMANDA THIBAULT* Research Associate DIONNA WILLIAMS Program Associate TERRI BAKER Senior Program Assistant SSB STAFF RODNEY N. HOWARD Senior Program Assistant LINDA WALKER Senior Program Assistant TANJA E. PILZAK Manager, Program Operations CHRISTINA O. SHIPMAN Financial Officer CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN Administrative Coordinator CATHERINE A. GRUBER Editor CELESTE A. NAYLOR Information Management Associate SANDRA WILSON Senior Financial Assistant Lloyd V. Berkner Space Policy Interns MICHAEL W. BARTON JOSEPH G. O ROURKE DANIELLE PISKORZ SSB Summer Intern MILES LIFSON * Staff of other NRC boards who are shared with the SSB. Left the Board in April. STAFF NEWS Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellowship Program The Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellowship Program within the Policy and Global Affairs Division of the National Academies is designed to engage its fellows in the analytical process that informs U.S. science and technology policy. Fellows develop basic skills essential to working or participating in science policy at the federal, state, or local levels. More information about the fellows program can be found at < index.htm>. Cheryl Moy will be joining the SSB this fall as a Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow. Cheryl Moy received her Ph.D. in chemistry from the University of Michigan. In her graduate work, she focused on elucidating the interactions that drive the formation of unique materials categorized as molecular gels. During her graduate career, she also helped design and implement a class-project centered on students editing Wikipedia pages as means of improving science education and the public s access to science. She holds a B.A. from Willamette University, and her experiences there led to an interest in bridging the gap between scientists and the general public. In 2011, she interned at the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Dr. Moy is excited for the opportunity to be a Mirzayan Fellow to learn how to connect scientific discoveries with everyone who can benefit outside of the research atmosphere from consumers to government to industry. She enjoys spending her free time outdoors especially to go on a bike ride or a hike. From the Board on Physics and Astronomy Don Shapero, DEPS, Senior Scholar, retired in June as director of the Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA) after 38 years at the National Academies. He took a leave of absence from the NRC in 1978 to serve as the first executive director of the Energy Research Advisory Board at the Department of Energy, but returned in 1979 as special assistant to the president of the National Academy of Sciences. In 1982, Shapero started the BPA and, as director, played a key role in a number of NRC studies, including the last three surveys of physics and the last three surveys of astronomy and astrophysics. He will continue to assist the BPA as a Senior Scholar. Shapero is a member of the American Astronomical Society and the International Astronomical Union, and a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Physical Society. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 7

8 News from COSPAR SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS The 39 th scientific assembly of the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) was held in Mysore, India, on July The U.S. delegation was led by COSPAR Vice President Robert P. Lin and supported by SSB staff members David H. Smith and Michael H. Moloney. Also present, supporting specific recent and/or on-going SSB activities, were Mitchell Sogin (chair of the Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Solar System) and SSB member Joan Johnson-Freese. The following awards were distributed during the opening ceremony held on July 16: COSPAR Space Science Award for outstanding contributions to space science: Janet Luhmann, University of California, Berkeley, California; COSPAR International Cooperation Medal for distinguished contributions to space science and work that has contributed significantly to the promotion of international scientific cooperation: Roger-Maurice Bonnet, International Space Science Institute, Bern, Switzerland; COSPAR William Nordberg Medal commemorating the late William Nordberg and for distinguished contributions to the application of space science in a field covered by COSPAR: Herbert Fischer, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany; COSPAR Harrie Massey Award honoring the memory of Sir Harrie Massey for outstanding contributions to the development of space research in which a leadership role is of particular importance: Neil Gehrels, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland; COSPAR Distinguished Service Medal for extraordinary services rendered to COSPAR over many years: Peter Willmore, University of Birmingham, UK; Vikram Sarabhai Medal a joint award of COSPAR and the Indian Space Research Organization honoring Vikram Sarabhai, one of the architects of modern India, for outstanding contributions to space research in developing countries: Rafael Navarro-Gonzalez, National Autonomous University of Mexico; Jeoujang Jaw Award a joint award of COSPAR and the Chinese Academy of Sciences recognizing scientists who have made distinguished pioneering contributions to promoting space research, establishing new space science research branches and founding new exploration programs: Robert P. Lin, University of California, Berkeley, California; and Yakov B. Zeldovich Medals a joint award of COSPAR and the Russian Academy of Sciences conferred on a young scientist from each of COSPAR s eight scientific commissions for excellence and achievements, honoring the distinguished astrophysicist Yakov B. Zeldovich: Scientific Commission A Jadunandan Dash, University of Southampton, UK, for original contributions to monitoring of vegetation dynamics from satellite observations; Scientific Commission B Bethany L. Ehlmann, California Institute of Technology, for fundamental discoveries of aqueous mineral phases on Mars which have transformed our understanding of aqueous processes on Mars and its potential for habitability; Scientific Commission C Tatsuhiro Yokoyama, University of Kyoto, Japan, for innovative modeling and experimental studies that helped resolve several outstanding problems concerning E- and F-region coupling processes; Scientific Commission D Jonathan P. Eastwood, Imperial College, London, UK, for outstanding research into the basic properties of collisionless plasmas in space which has led to a significant advancement of our understanding of magnetic reconnection and collisionless shocks; Scientific Commission E Makoto Uemura, Hiroshima University, Japan, for fundamental research in time-domain astronomy leading to understanding of the optical and near-infrared signatures of explosive events in the universe; Scientific Commission F Chiara La Tessa, Helmholtzzentrum fϋr Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany, in recognition of outstanding contribution to the investigation of shielding materials for space radioprotection; Scientific Commission G Michael Lukasser, Vienna University of Technology, Austria, for outstanding progress in code development essential for the choice of best parameters for the space experiment JEREMI; and Scientific Commission H Peter J. Wass, Imperial College, London, UK, in recognition of seminal work on the charging rate of accelerometer proof masses and the limitations on performance of fundamental physics missions that arises from cosmic ray charging. At its meeting on July 22, the COSPAR Council awarded the 2016 scientific assembly to Istanbul, Turkey. Runner-up Rome, Italy, may compete for the 2018 assembly as will Sydney, Australia. Mexico has expressed interest in bidding for the 2020 assembly. The 2014 scientific assembly will be held on August 2-10 at the Lomonosov Moscow State University in Russia. Honorees from the Space Studies Board or its committees included: Janet Luhmann, former SSB member, chaired the Committee on PI-led Missions in the Space Sciences and the Committee on Solar and Space Physics and was on the Panel on Solar Wind- Magnetospheric Interactions for the 2003 solar and space physics decadal survey. SSB member Robert P. Lin (NAS) serves on the Panel on Solar and Heliospheric Physics of the current solar and space physics survey and was a member of the Committee on NASA's Suborbital Research Capabilities, the Review of NASA Strategic Roadmaps: Science Panel, and the Committee on Solar and Space Physics, among others. Bethany L. Ehlmann is a former SSB 2003 summer undergraduate intern. PAGE 8 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

9 NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB Summaries are reproduced here without references, notes, figures, tables, boxes, or attachments. Copies of reports are available from the SSB office at or at < Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies This report of the ad hoc Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Outer Solar System of the Space Studies Board (SSB) is available at < study was led by Chair Mitchell L. Sogin and Vice Chair Geoffrey Collins. The study was staffed by Study Director David H. Smith and Senior Project Assistant Rodney N. Howard. Other staff are listed in the report. Summary NASA s exploration of planets and satellites over the past 50 years has led to the discovery of water ice throughout the solar system and prospects for large liquid water reservoirs beneath the frozen shells of icy bodies in the outer solar system. These putative subsurface oceans could provide an environment for prebiotic chemistry or a habitat for indigenous life. During the coming decades, NASA and other space agencies will send flybys, orbiters, subsurface probes, and, possibly, landers to these distant worlds in order to explore their geologic and chemical context and the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Because of their potential to harbor alien life, space agencies will select missions that target the most habitable outer solar system objects. This strategy poses formidable challenges for mission planners who must balance the opportunity for exploration with the risk of contamination by terrestrial microbes that could confuse the interpretation of data from experiments concerned with the origins of life beyond Earth or the processes of chemical evolution. To protect the integrity of mission science and maintain compliance with the mandate of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty to pursue studies of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies... so as to avoid their harmful contamination, 1 NASA adheres to planetary protection guidelines that reflect the most current experimental and observational data from the planetary science and microbiology communities. 2 The 2000 National Research Council (NRC) report Preventing the Forward Contamination of Europa 3 recommended that spacecraft missions to Europa must have their bioload reduced by such an amount that the probability of contaminating a Europan ocean with a single viable terrestrial organism at any time in the future should be less than 10 4 per mission. 4 This criterion was adopted for consistency with prior recommendations by the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) of the International Council for Science for any spacecraft intended for planetary landing or atmospheric penetration. 5 COSPAR, the de facto adjudicator of planetary protection regulations, adopted the criterion for Europa, and subsequent COSPAR-sponsored workshops extended the 10 4 criterion to other icy bodies of the outer solar system. 6,7 In practice, the establishment of a valid forward-contamination-risk goal as a mission requirement implies the use of some method either a test or analysis to verify that the mission can achieve the stated goal. The 2000 Europa report recommended that compliance with the 10 4 criterion be determined by a so-called Coleman-Sagan calculation. 8,9,10 This methodology estimates the probability of forward contamination by multiplying the initial bioload on the spacecraft by a series of bioload-reduction factors associated with spacecraft cleaning, exposure to the space environment, and the likelihood of encountering a habitable environment. If the risk of contamination falls below 10 4, the mission complies with COSPAR planetary protection requirements and can go forward. If the risk exceeds this threshold, mission planners must implement additional mitigation procedures to reach that goal or must reformulate the mission plans. The charge for the Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Outer Solar System called for it to revisit the 2000 Europa report in light of recent advances in planetary and life sciences and examine the recommendations resulting from two recent COSPAR workshops. The committee addressed three specific tasks to assess the risk of contamination of icy bodies in the solar system. The first task concerned the possible factors that could usefully be included in a Coleman-Sagan formulation of contamination risk. The committee does not support continued reliance on the Coleman-Sagan formulation to estimate the probability of contaminating outer solar system icy bodies. This calculation includes multiple factors of uncertain magnitude that often lack statistical independence. Planetary protection decisions should not rely on the multiplication of probability factors to estimate the likelihood of contaminating solar system bodies with terrestrial organisms unless it can be unequivocally demonstrated that the factors are completely independent and their values and statistical variation are known. The second task given to the committee concerned the range of values that can be estimated for the terms appearing in the Cole- VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 9

10 (Continued from page 9) man-sagan equation based on current knowledge, as well as an assessment of conservative values for other specific factors that might be provided to the implementers of missions targeting individual bodies or classes of objects. The committee replaces the Coleman-Sagan formulation with a series of binary (i.e., yes/no) decisions that consider one factor at a time to determine the necessary level of planetary protection. The committee proposes the use of a decision-point framework that allows mission planners to address seven hierarchically organized, independent decision points that reflect the geologic and environmental conditions on the target body in the context of the metabolic and physiological diversity of terrestrial microorganisms. These decision points include the following: 1. Liquid water Do current data indicate that the destination lacks liquid water essential for terrestrial life? 2. Key elements Do current data indicate that the destination lacks any of the key elements (i.e., carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, potassium, magnesium, calcium, oxygen, and iron) required for terrestrial life? 3. Physical conditions Do current data indicate that the physical properties of the target body are incompatible with known extreme conditions for terrestrial life? 4. Chemical energy Do current data indicate that the environment lacks an accessible source of chemical energy? 5. Contacting habitable environments Do current data indicate that the probability of the spacecraft contacting a habitable environment within 1,000 years is less than 10 4? 6. Complex nutrients Do current data indicate that the lack of complex and heterogeneous organic nutrients in aqueous environments will prevent the survival of irradiated and desiccated microbes? 7. Minimal planetary protection Do current data indicate that heat treatment of the spacecraft at 60 C for 5 hours will eliminate all physiological groups that can propagate on the target body? Positive evaluations for any of these criteria would release a mission from further mitigation activities, although all missions to habitable and non-habitable environments should still follow routine cleaning procedures and microbial bioload monitoring. If a mission fails to receive a positive evaluation for at least one of these decision points, the entire spacecraft must be subjected to a terminal dry-heat bioload reduction process (heating at temperatures >110 C for 30 hours) to meet planetary protection guidelines. Irrespective of whether a mission satisfies one of the seven decision points, the committee recommends the use of molecularbased methods to inventory bioloads, including both living and dead taxa, for spacecraft that might contact a habitable environment. Given current knowledge of icy bodies, three bodies present special concerns for planetary protection: Europa, Jupiter s third largest satellite; Enceladus, a medium-size satellite of Saturn; and Triton, Neptune s largest satellite. Missions to other icy bodies present minimal concern for planetary protection. The advantage of the decision framework over the Coleman- Sagan approach lies in its simplicity and in its abandoning of the multiplication of non-independent bioload reduction factors of SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS uncertain magnitude. At the same time, the framework provides a platform for incorporating new observational data from planetary exploration missions and the latest information about microbial physiology and metabolism, particularly for psychrophilic (i.e., cold -loving microbes) and psychrotolerant microorganisms. The committee s third task concerned the identification of scientific investigations that could reduce the uncertainty in the above estimates and assessments, as well as technology developments that would facilitate implementation of planetary protection requirements and/or reduce the overall probability of contamination. The committee recognizes the requirement to further improve knowledge about many of the parameters embodied within the decision framework. Areas of particular concern for which the committee recommends research include the following: Determination of the time period of heating to temperatures between 40 C and 80 C required to inactivate spores from psychrophilic and psychrotolerant bacteria isolated from highlatitude soil and cryopeg samples, as well as from psychrotolerant microorganisms isolated from temperate soils, spacecraft assembly sites, and the spacecraft itself. Studies to better understand the environmental conditions that initiate spore formation and spore germination in psychrophilic and psychrotolerant bacteria so that these conditions/ requirements can be compared with the characteristics of target icy bodies. Searches to discover unknown types of psychrophilic sporeformers and to assess if any of them have tolerances different from those of known types. Characterization of the protected microenvironments within spacecraft and assessment of their microbial ecology. Determination of the extent to which biofilms might increase microbial resistance to heat treatment and other environmental extremes encountered on journeys to icy bodies. Determination of the concentrations of key elements or compounds containing biologically important elements on icy bodies in the outer solar system through observational technologies and constraints placed on the range of trace element availability through theoretical modeling and laboratory analog studies. Understanding of global chemical cycles within icy bodies and the geologic processes occurring on these bodies that promote or inhibit surface-subsurface exchange of material. Development of technologies that can directly detect and enumerate viable microorganisms on spacecraft surfaces. NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB, CONTINUED ON PAGE 12 PAGE 10 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

11 NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB, CONTINUED Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey This report of the ad hoc Committee on the Assessment of NASA's Earth Science Program of the Space Studies Board (SSB) is available at < study was led by Chair Dennis L. Hartmann. The study was staffed by Study Director Arthur A. Charo, Research Associate Lewis B. Groswald, and Senior Project Assistant Linda M. Walker. Other staff are listed in the report. Summary Understanding the complex, changing planet on which we live, how it supports life, and how human activities affect its ability to do so in the future is one of the greatest intellectual challenges facing humanity. It is also one of the most important challenges for society as it seeks to achieve prosperity, health, and sustainability. 1 The 2007 National Research Council report Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond (referred to in this report as the 2007 decadal survey or 2007 survey ) called for a renewal of the national commitment to a program of Earth observations in which attention to securing practical benefits for humankind plays an equal role with the quest to acquire new knowledge about the Earth system. 2 The decadal survey recommended a balanced interdisciplinary program that would observe the atmosphere, oceans, terrestrial biosphere, and solid Earth and the interactions between these Earth system components to advance understanding of how the system functions for the benefit of both science and society. NASA responded positively to the decadal survey and its recommendations and began implementing most of them immediately after the survey s release. Although its budgets have never risen to the levels assumed in the survey, NASA s Earth Science Division (ESD) has made major investments toward the missions recommended by the survey and has realized important technological and scientific progress as a result. Several of the survey missions have made significant advances, and operations and applications end users are better integrated into the mission teams. The new Earth Venture competitive solicitation program has initiated five airborne missions and is currently reviewing proposals submitted in response to an orbital stand-alone mission solicitation. At the same time, the Earth sciences have advanced significantly because of existing observational capabilities and the fruit of past investments, along with advances in data and information systems, computer science, and enabling technologies. Three missions already in development prior to the decadal survey the Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM), Aquarius, and the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP) 3 have since been successfully launched and promise significant benefits to research and applications. The potential for the science community to make use of space-based data for research and applications has never been greater. Finding: NASA responded favorably and aggressively to the 2007 decadal survey, embracing its overall recommendations for Earth observations, missions, technology investments, and priorities for the underlying science. As a consequence, the science and applications communities have made significant progress over the past 5 years. However, the Committee on Assessment of NASA s Earth Science Program found that, for several reasons, the survey vision is being realized at a far slower pace than was recommended. Although NASA accepted and began implementing the survey s recommendations, the required budget assumed by the survey was not achieved, greatly slowing implementation of the recommended program. Launch failures, delays, changes in scope, and growth in cost estimates have further hampered the program. In addition, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has significantly reduced the scope of the nation s future operational environmental satellite series, omitting observational capabilities assumed by the decadal survey to be part of NOAA s future capability and failing to implement the three new missions recommended for NOAA implementation by the survey (the Operational GPS Radio Occultation Mission, the Extended Ocean Vector Winds Mission, and the NOAA portion of CLAR- REO). Thus, despite recent and notable successes, such as the launches of OSTM, Aquarius, and Suomi NPP, the nation s Earth observing capability from space is beginning to wane as older missions fail and are not replaced with sufficient cadence to prevent an overall net decline. Using agency estimates for the anticipated remaining lifetime of in-orbit missions and counting new missions formally approved in their enacted budgets, the committee found that the resulting number of NASA and NOAA Earth observing instruments in space by 2020 could be as little as 25 percent of the current number (Figure S.1). 4 This precipitous decline in the quantity of Earth science and applications observations from space undertaken by the United States reinforces the conclusion in the 2007 decadal survey and its predecessor, the 2005 interim report, which declared that the U.S. system of environmental satellites is at risk of collapse. 5 The committee found that a rapid decline in capability is now beginning and that the needs for both investment and careful stewardship of the U.S. Earth observations enterprise are more certain and more urgent now than they were 5 years ago. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 11

12 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS Finding: The nation s Earth observing system is beginning a rapid decline in capability as long-running missions end and key new missions are delayed, lost, or canceled. The projected loss of observing capability could have significant adverse consequences for science and society. The loss of observations of key Earth system components and processes will weaken the ability to understand and forecast changes arising from interactions and feedbacks within the Earth system and limit the data and information available to users and decision makers. Consequences are likely to include slowing or even reversal of the steady gains in weather forecast accuracy over many years and degradation of the ability to assess and respond to natural hazards and to measure and understand changes in Earth s climate and life support systems. The decrease in capability by 2020 will also have far-reaching consequences for the vigor and breadth of the nation s spaceobserving industrial and academic base, endangering the pipeline of Earth science and aerospace engineering students and the health of the future workforce. CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION AND OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT WITH THE DECADAL SURVEY Although there have been a number of successes, NASA s Earth science program has suffered multiple setbacks and other external pressures that are, in many cases, beyond the control of program management. Foremost among these is a budget profile that is not sufficient to execute the 2007 decadal survey s recommended program. In addition, some of the survey-recommended missions have proved more challenging than anticipated, and others envisioned synergies that are not readily achieved via the suggested implementation. The ESD budget has been further strained as a result of mandates from Congress (e.g., the addition of the approximately $150 million TIRS [Thermal Infrared Sensor] to the Landsat Data Continuity Mission) and the interjection of administration priorities (e.g., the Climate Continuity missions 6 ) without the commensurate required funding. Finding: Funding for NASA s Earth science program has not been restored to the $2 billion per year (in fiscal year [FY] 2006 dollars) level needed to execute the 2007 decadal survey s recommended program. Congress s failure to restore the Earth science budget to a $2 billion level is a principal reason for NASA s inability to realize the mission launch cadence recommended by the survey. The committee concluded that in the near term, budgets for NASA s Earth science program will remain incommensurate with programmatic needs. However, even as NASA strives to do more with less, it is confronted with challenges, including limited access to affordable medium-class launch vehicles the mainstay of Earth observation programs and significant growth in the cost to develop instruments and spacecraft, a consequence, in part, of how NASA manages its space missions. These challenges (discussed further in Chapter 3) have hindered implementation of the envisioned balanced Earth system science program. With respect to cost growth, the committee found that decadal survey missions have thus far not been managed with sufficient consideration of the scope and cost outlined in the 2007 decadal survey in either an absolute or a relative sense. Chapter 4 offers recommendations to establish and manage mission costs. Recommendation: NASA s Earth Science Division (ESD) should implement its missions via a cost-constrained approach, requiring that cost partially or fully constrain the scope of each mission such that realistic science and applications objectives can be accomplished within a reasonable and achievable future budget scenario. Further, recognizing that survey-derived cost estimates are by necessity very approximate and that subsequent, more detailed analyses may determine that all of the desired science objectives of a particular mission cannot be achieved at the estimated cost, NASA s ESD should interpret the 2007 decadal survey s estimates of mission costs as an expression of the relative level of investment that the survey s authoring committee believed appropriate to advance the intended science and should apportion funds accordingly, even if all desired science objectives for the mission might not be achieved. To coordinate decisions regarding mission technical capabilities, cost, and schedule in the context of overarching Earth system science and applications objectives, the committee also recommends that NASA s ESD should establish a cross-mission Earth system science and engineering team to advise NASA on execution of the broad suite of decadal survey missions within the interdisciplinary context advocated by the 2007 decadal survey. The advisory team would assist NASA in coordinating decisions regarding mission technical capabilities, cost, and schedule in the context of overarching Earth system science and applications objectives. 7,8 The cost of executing survey-recommended missions has increased, in part because of the lack of availability of a medium-class launch vehicle. To control costs and to optimize the use of scarce fiscal resources, the 2007 decadal survey recommended mostly small- and medium-class missions that could utilize relatively lowcost small- or medium-class launch vehicles (e.g., Pegasus, Taurus, and Delta II). However, the Taurus launch vehicle has failed in its past two launches, and the Delta II is being phased out as the commercial sector focuses on heavier-lift launch vehicles, which are substantially more expensive to procure. Use of such heavy-lift launch vehicles is not generally cost-effective for Earth science missions; indeed, the excess capability and high cost of these vehicles encourage designers to grow their payloads to better match the launcher s capabilities, which encourages growth in scope and cost. The lack of a reliable and low-cost medium-capability launch vehicle thus directly threatens programmatic robustness. The committee offers the following finding and recommendation concerning the cost and availability of medium-class launch vehicles (see the section Access to Space in Chapter 3): Finding: Lack of reliable, affordable, and predictable access to space has become a key impediment to implementing NASA s Earth science program. Furthermore, the lack of a mediumclass launch vehicle threatens programmatic robustness. PAGE 12 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

13 Recommendation: NASA should seek to ensure the availability of a highly reliable, affordable medium-class launch capability. Another impediment to effective and efficient implementation of the 2007 decadal survey is the lack of a national strategy for establishment and management of Earth observations from space. This problem was recognized in the decadal survey report, which stated (as quoted in this midterm assessment report), The committee is concerned that the nation s institutions involved in civil Earth science and applications from space (including NASA, NOAA, and USGS) are not adequately prepared to meet society s rapidly evolving Earth information needs. Those institutions have responsibilities that are in many cases mismatched with their authorities and resources: institutional mandates are inconsistent with agency charters, budgets are not well matched to emerging needs, and shared responsibilities are supported inconsistently by mechanisms for cooperation. These are issues whose solutions will require action at high levels of the federal government. 9 Such a strategy is perhaps even more important in an era of severe fiscal constraint. Not only is such a strategy important for optimizing NASA s and the nation s resources dedicated to Earth system science, but also it is critical to meeting national needs for the results of Earth system science, including the understanding of climate change and land use. The decadal survey recommended that the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in collaboration with the relevant agencies and in consultation with the scientific community, should develop and implement a plan for achieving and sustaining global Earth observations. This plan should recognize the complexity of differing agency roles, responsibilities, and capabilities as well as the lessons from the implementation of the Landsat, EOS, and NPOESS programs. 10,11 Despite this and other subsequent calls from the community for this national strategy, only a preliminary plan has been outlined. 12 A more complete plan for achieving and sustaining global Earth observations remains to be presented or funded. However, the recently released NASA Climate-Centric Architecture plan 13 includes a set of Climate Continuity missions, tacitly recognizing for the first time NASA s role in sustained observations associated with climate (see the section Lack of a National Strategy for Establishment and Management of Earth Observations from Space in Chapter 3). Finding: The 2007 decadal survey s recommendation that the Office of Science and Technology Policy develop an interagency framework for a sustained global Earth observing system has not been implemented. The committee concluded that the lack of such an implementable and funded strategy has become a key, but not the sole, impediment to sustaining Earth science and applications from space. Chapter 4 discusses a number of items that should be considered in the formulation of such a national strategy. In addition to cost control measures, the committee considered other ways for ESD to maximize the value of its limited resources. These include the possible augmentation of the Earth Venture-class program discussed below, and use of alternative and/or synergistic platforms or novel flight architectures (including suborbital platforms as previously mentioned), as well as seeking value-added international partnerships. Alternative platforms such as balloons and aircraft (piloted and unpiloted), hosted payloads, small satellites, the International Space Station, and flight formations (for example, the Afternoon Constellation, or A-Train ) provide NASA with a diverse portfolio of options for exploring different and, where appropriate, less costly ways of conducting Earth observations and measurements (see the section Alternative Platforms and Flight Formations in Chapter 4). Finding: Alternative platforms and flight formations offer programmatic flexibility. In some cases, they may be employed to lower the cost of meeting science objectives and/or maturing remote sensing and in situ observing technologies. Large uncertainties are typical when attempting to factor international partner missions into long-term plans for U.S. Earth observation missions. Nevertheless, the committee found that ESD has made admirable efforts in securing such partnerships (see the section International Partnerships in Chapter 4). Finding: NASA has made considerable efforts to secure international partnerships to meet its science goals and operational requirements. STATUS OF PROGRAM ELEMENTS IN NASA S EARTH SCIENCE PROGRAM In its assessment of NASA s Earth science program, the committee examined the major individual programmatic elements within NASA s ESD and also considered the overall program s effectiveness in realizing the objectives of the 2007 decadal survey. 14 In particular, the committee reviewed the following program elements and also commented on NASA s Climate Continuity missions. The program elements described in this summary are elaborated on in Chapter 2, where they are listed in the same order as they are here: Extended missions missions whose operations have been extended beyond their nominal lifetime; Missions in the pre-decadal survey queue missions that the decadal survey assumed would be launched as precursors to the decadal survey missions; Decadal survey missions new missions recommended by the 2007 decadal survey; Climate Continuity missions; Earth Venture missions a class of smaller missions recommended by the decadal survey; Applied Sciences Program; Suborbital (Earth Science) Program; Technology development; and Research and analysis. Extended Missions Extended missions (missions that operate and provide data beyond their originally planned and funded mission lifetimes) continue to provide a wealth of observations and measurements of benefit to society and to the Earth science community. Data from extended missions are critical to the operations of users such as NOAA s National Weather Service; they also provide information of fundamental importance to advance Earth science research. Over- VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 13

14 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS all, the committee strongly supports the process of the NASA Earth Science Senior Review that evaluates these missions and makes recommendations concerning their funding and continuation. Missions in the Pre-Decadal Survey Queue The committee supports NASA s efforts to fly out its predecadal survey mission queue, also referred to as foundational missions. Unfortunately, delays, changes in scope, and launch failures 15 have hindered progress in implementing the pre-decadal survey mission queue. Decadal Survey Missions Implementation of the recommended decadal survey mission queue is proceeding at a pace that is slower than originally envisioned in the survey. Only two of the four Phase 1 missions recommended for implementation by 2013 SMAP and ICESat-2 have entered their implementation phase, while two other missions DESDynI and CLARREO remain in pre-phase A formulation and will likely face significant delays as a result of budget constraints. NOAA, facing its own budget constraints, has requested that NASA assume responsibility for implementing the sea-surface vector winds mission XOVWM (see Table S.1). Climate Continuity Missions To balance executive branch and congressional priorities with the community guidance set forth in the decadal survey, the NASA Earth science program issued the report Responding to the Challenge of Climate and Environmental Change: NASA s Plan for a Climate-Centric Architecture for Earth Observations and Applications from Space, 16 which convolves decadal survey and administration priorities to take advantage of new funds made available by the executive branch to accelerate its priorities. Although the committee was encouraged by ESD s incorporation of the priorities of the decadal survey into its 2010 report, the committee is concerned that in a static or shrinking budget environment there is tension between the need to continue successful Earth science measurements and the need for timely implementation of decadal survey missions. This problem is further compounded by the lack of an interagency framework for a sustained global Earth observing system. Earth Venture Missions NASA has moved expeditiously to implement the Earth Venture-class program, a new mission class recommended by the decadal survey. 17 NASA has released two solicitations for the Earth Venture program, one targeted toward suborbital investigations and one for a stand-alone mission that involves relatively simple, small instruments, spacecraft, and launch vehicles. As of December 2011, a draft solicitation had also been released for the first Earth Venture Instruments, targeting principal investigator (PI)-led instrument development. Currently, NASA plans to release Earth Venture stand-alone solicitations every 4 years, suborbital solicitations every 4 years, and instrument of opportunity solicitations every months. Earth Venture standalone (space-based) missions further offer an important opportunity to increase the launch frequency of Earth science missions, and thus the committee offers the following finding and recommendation. Finding: The Earth Venture-class program is being well implemented by NASA and is a crucial component of fulfilling the 2007 decadal survey s objectives. Recommendation: Consistent with available budgets and a balanced Earth observation program from space based on the 2007 decadal survey recommendations, NASA should consider increasing the frequency of Earth Venture standalone/space-based missions. Applied Sciences Program The Earth science and applications from space decadal survey establishes a vision acknowledging the dual importance of basic science and applications for societal benefits. With limited resources, 18 the Applied Sciences Program (ASP) within ESD has built a coherent program that is facilitating the use of remote sensing observations for societal benefits, mostly through collaborations with other federal agencies. Other activities include projects to encourage experts in the applications community to participate in specific mission definition teams and workshops. The engagement of end users throughout the entire mission life cycle is necessary to ensure that user needs are well understood; ASP appears to be following this model. ASP efforts appear to be aligned with the spirit and intent of the 2007 decadal survey. Finding: Aligned with the intent of the 2007 decadal survey, NASA s Applied Sciences Program has begun to engage applied researchers and governmental (federal and state) operational users on some decadal survey mission science definition and applications teams and to conduct research to better understand the value of these applications. Suborbital Program NASA s suborbital program was in decline for almost a decade, but following the release of the decadal survey in 2007, it has made a significant rebound with almost a doubling of financial support for its airborne program. Total flight hours have increased by a factor of 2.5, and flight hours associated with survey missions have doubled from FY2006 to FY2011. Suborbital platforms serve many purposes, including serving as technology testbeds, enabling instrument flight test and algorithm development before launch, providing data complementary to spaceborne observations, providing for calibration of instruments and algorithm validation measurements post-launch in support of data product generation, and directly contributing to local and regional scientific process studies. In addition, NASA Earth observing missions from the Airborne Science Program support gap filler missions, such as Operation Ice Bridge, which acquire observations between satellite missions. The committee s review led to the following finding: Finding: The suborbital program, and in particular the Airborne Science Program, is highly synergistic with upcoming Earth science satellite missions and is being well implemented. NASA has fulfilled the recommendation of the decadal survey to enhance the program. Technology Development Within NASA ESD is the NASA Earth Science Technology Of- PAGE 14 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

15 fice (ESTO), which is responsible for promoting the development of technology required to make the decadal survey missions flight ready. ESTO has funded more than 70 new, competitively selected projects that support each of the decadal survey missions to varying degrees. Furthermore, the recent ESTO solicitation for advanced information system technologies was partnered with, and partially funded by, ESD s Applied Sciences Program to help ensure the transition into operations of technologically matured information systems through applied science demonstrations and pathfinders. Based on its review, the committee found as follows: Finding: ESTO has organized its proposal solicitations around the 2007 decadal survey and is investing to advance technological readiness across the survey mission queue. Research and Analysis According to NASA, research and analysis (R&A) is the core of the [Earth Science] research program and funds the analysis and interpretation of data from NASA s satellites, as well as a full range of underlying scientific activity needed to establish a rigorous base for the satellite data and their use in computational models (for both assimilation and forecasting). The complexity of the Earth system, in which spatial and temporal variability exists on a range of scales, requires an organized approach for addressing complex, interdisciplinary problems, taking care to recognize the objective of integrating science across the programmatic elements towards a comprehensive understanding of the Earth system. 19 Recognizing the critical importance of R&A, the decadal survey made the following recommendation to NASA: NASA should increase support for its research and analysis (R&A) program to a level commensurate with its ongoing and planned missions. Further, in light of the need for a healthy R&A program that is not mission-specific, as well as the need for mission-specific R&A, NASA s space-based missions should have adequate R&A lines within each mission budget as well as mission-specific operations and data analysis. These R&A lines should be protected within the missions and not used simply as mission reserves to cover cost growth on the hardware side. 20 Through the current R&A program there have been advances in modeling, analysis, and data assimilation, yet much research is still needed to understand the processes in the Earth system and to fully assimilate Earth observations in Earth system models, thereby creating a consistent and integrated picture of Earth. Indeed, the committee emphasizes that a robust R&A program is a necessary condition to achieve the objectives outlined in the 2007 survey. Despite progress made in R&A investments, the challenges facing NASA s entire Earth science program mean that protecting the nation s investments in R&A is as important moving forward as in the past. Finding: NASA has maintained a healthy investment in R&A activities and has protected the budgets of both missionspecific and non-mission-specific R&A programs against possible reallocation to cover cost growth in mission hardware. THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION The committee s assessment of NASA s Earth science program could not be accomplished without also reviewing the state of NOAA s missions and Earth science program. NOAA s current and planned polar and geostationary programs were assumed by the 2007 survey s committee to be an integral part of the baseline capabilities as it developed its integrated strategy. Two of the survey s recommended 17 missions (the Operational GPS Radio Occultation Mission and the Extended Ocean Vector Winds Mission) and part of a third (CLARREO) were directed for implementation by NOAA, but none has been implemented. This committee offers the following finding on NOAA s implementation of recommendations to the agency from the 2007 decadal survey: Finding: NOAA s capability to implement the assumed baseline and the recommended program of the 2007 decadal survey has been greatly diminished by budget shortfalls; cost overruns and delays, especially those associated with the NPOESS program prior to its restructuring in 2010 to become the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS); and by sensor descopes and sensor eliminations on both NPOESS and GOES-R. 21 These descopes impacted numerous ESD science communities. The committee notes that in an era of budget austerity, NASA s ESD has very limited capabilities to mitigate the effect of these shortfalls. LOOKING AHEAD: BEYOND 2020 In preparation for the next decadal survey, the committee offers in Chapter 5 a summary of lessons learned that are derived from its evaluation of implementation of the current decadal survey programs. In particular, regardless of how future NASA Earth science programs evolve, the committee concluded that: 1. Maintaining a long-term vision with a fixed and predictable mission queue is essential to building a consensus in a diverse Earth science community that prior to the 2007 decadal survey had not come to a consensus on research priorities spanning conventional disciplinary boundaries. The strength of the decadal survey and its value to agencies and decision makers are, in fact, the consensus priorities established by the survey s outreach and deliberative processes. Without community buy-in to the survey, a return to an ad hoc decision process that is less informed and less efficient in its allocation of resources is the default to be expected. 2. Finding the balance between prioritizing science objectives and creating a mission queue that is viable will be one of the great challenges for the Earth science community over the coming decades. Too much focus on either risks the long-term sustainability and value of NASA s Earth science program. 3. The community will need to give more thought to balancing costs with science objectives and priorities. More explicit decision rules for different budget contingencies might also prove helpful for program managers. 4. Finally, the community will have to look at different ways to construct a healthy and robust mission portfolio for example, through partnerships and alternative platforms in addition to individual spacecraft and suborbital missions. Preparatory work to identify new technologies and readiness levels could be done ahead of any formal review and indeed could serve as an input to such a review. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 15

16 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS SUMMARIES OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS OF INTEREST U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space and Science Risks, Opportunities, and Oversight of Commercial Space June 20, 2012 Attended and summarized by Michael Barton, SSB Intern Witnesses: Mr. William H. Gerstenmaier, NASA Associate Administrator, Human Exploration and Operations; Col. Pamela A. Melroy USAF (ret.), FAA Senior Technical Advisor, Office of Commercial Space Transportation; Dr. Gerald L. Dillingham, GAO Director of Civil Aviation Issues; Mr. Michael N. Gold, Bigelow Aerospace, LLC, Director, D.C. Operations and Business Growth; Capt. Michael Lopez-Alegria USN (ret.), President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation. NASA is in a state of change between the Shuttle era and the new commercial low Earth orbit (LEO) operations and NASA beyond Earth orbit (BEO) operations. As Sen. Bill Nelson, subcommittee chairman, said, It s an important time to get it right. The subcommittee called the hearing to examine the commercial space industry, its role in the nation s space program, and the progress it has made so far toward providing crew and cargo transportation services to the International Space Station (ISS). As Gerstenmaier said, NASA s prior investments into LEO systems and tools have created an environment where NASA no longer needs to work hands-on with LEO contractors and can instead focus on ISS utilization and BEO activities. NASA believes an increase in ISS utilization will expose the benefits of space-based research for terrestrial applications, which will create a market for commercial space companies, but only if commercial companies can provide regular, low-risk, low-cost access to ISS. Gold of Bigelow Aerospace agreed that a business case can be made featuring microgravity R&D, but only if reasonable costs for crew transport can be maintained. Right now, two vaccines, one for salmonella and one for MRSA, both developed from space-based research, are in FDA trials. Viruses and bacteria mutate in a unique form in space, and industry can take advantage of this to create a variety of different specimens quickly and then see which genes are turned on and modify the mutated virus into a vaccine. To enable a new economy based on this research, NASA needs to keep supporting commercial crew and, according to Gerstenmaier, anticipate and react well to the technical problems or failure that will occur during commercial cargo missions and not bring the program to an unaffordable halt for significant external investigation. The hearing also addressed FAA indemnification of the commercial space launch industry, which is up for extension. Indemnification, which became law in 1988, protects commercial companies by providing U.S. government payment of third-party claims in excess of maximum probable loss (MPL) insurance up to $1.5 billion. Under a recent memorandum of understanding signed between NASA and the FAA about only commercial missions to the ISS, FAA licensing will be required to address public safety, while NASA will continue to cover crew safety and mission assurance. According to Dillingham of GAO, the FAA and the GAO agree that they need to update the method in which they calculate MPL, but that extending indemnification is necessary for global competitiveness. Capt. Lopez-Alegria from CSF stated that if the companies are not globally competitive, they will have to exit the market, requiring the federal government to absorb the full cost of maintaining the defense launch industrial base. When Sen. Nelson asked Melroy if the Administrative Procedures Act was hampering the FAA s ability to plan future safety regulations for spaceflight passengers, Melroy replied that protecting humans in space is a major undertaking, and the FAA needs to have specific discussions with industry on how to avoid risks without stifling innovation. There was some discussion of the need to reform export control law, not only ITAR but also INKSNA, which bans U.S. government payments and barters to Russia. Congress amended INKSNA to exempt Soyuz flights to ISS until 2016, but Sen. Boozman wanted to know if ISS needs extension past Melroy and Gerstenmaier agreed that NASA will require exceptions to INKSNA in order to receive the engineering and research support from Russia that it needs to run the ISS past 2016, with or without the Soyuz. The commercial companies need certainty, and by not solving this issue, Congress is creating uncertainty. Sen. Hutchinson took a broader view, noting that despite the subcommittee s efforts over three administrations, the U.S. never gave NASA the support it needed to plan ahead to avoid the gap in manned spaceflight capabilities that will cost over $1 billion in launch seats paid to Russia. Sen. Hutchinson is concerned about another gap developing after ISS operations cease in 2020: NASA must move forward with both ISS support and BEO developments, not transfer money directly from the heavy-lift program to commercial crew and cargo like it did in FY2012. We must stop shortchanging the future to fund the present. Gerstenmaier stated that NASA will find a LEO/BEO balance and mentioned the recent progress made on the Space Launch System and Orion capsule. With Congress s help in funding, NASA intends to deliver both commercial crew and cargo and the next generation of BEO systems in a timely manner. Archived webcast and statements are available at < PAGE 16 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

17 SUMMARIES OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS OF INTEREST, CONTINUED U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Hearing on Mismanagement of Appropriated Funds within the National Weather Service June 21, 2012 Attended and Summarized by by Michael Barton, SSB Intern In Attendance: Frank R. Wolf, R-VA, Chairman; John Abney Culberson, R- TX; Jo Bonner, R-AL; Steve Austria, R-OH; Tom Graves, R-GA; Chaka Fattah, D-PA, Ranking Member; Norman D. Dicks, D-WA, Ranking Member of Committee on Appropriations; Michael M. Honda, D-CA Witness Panel: Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator; Dr. Kathryn D. Sullivan, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation & Prediction / Deputy Administrator and Acting Chief Scientist On November 29, 2011, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator was informed of allegations concerning financial mismanagement within the National Weather Service (NWS) involving a handful of civil servants during FY10 and FY11. The Administrator took immediate actions including informing the Deputy Secretary of Commerce, placing a NWS employee on indefinite administrative leave, setting the NOAA Fisheries Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to act as NWS CFO, informing the Appropriations Committees of the administrative leave and concerns about the FY12 budget, and beginning an internal investigation. The investigative team investigated from December 2011 to April 2012 and presented findings and recommendations on May 11, The team found no evidence of actions that put life or property at risk or jeopardized the delivery of timely and reliable weather forecasts and warnings. The team did find that NWS employees engaged in reprogramming NWS funds without Congressional notification during FY10 and FY11, which is a violation of the Appropriations Law for those years, and possibly the Anti- Deficiency Act. There was no evidence that these employees committed fraud or acted in the interest of personal financial gain. Rather, the employees moved money across line items within NWS as a necessary action, in their view, to protect operations from a structural deficit. The investigation did not find any evidence that money was moved out of the NWS. The team noted that the employees used complex, clever, undetectable financial mechanisms to conduct the unauthorized reprogramming, and there was no external signs to indicate that there was any problem. The only indications were internal complaints that were mishandled and belatedly addressed. The Administrator acknowledges that these actions were wrong, but she is engaged in implementing a corrective action plan involving 25 corrective actions that have been ordered to date, including new training to management on the appropriations allocation process and the handling of complaints. After an analysis of misallocated funds, she has also issued a FY12 reprogramming request to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees of $36M to protect NWS core mission functions and prevent furloughs. Also of note: National Weather Service former chief, Jack Hayes, retired suddenly on May 25, 2012 in light of these findings. There was no mention of him at this hearing and it does not appear he was connected directly. Result from Hearing An upcoming vote limited the time of the hearing, so the Committee prepared 65 questions to which they expect fully answered written responses by 5:30PM Monday June 25. The Committee will decide on reprogramming after analyzing and discussing these responses. Summary of Opening Statements Rep. Wolf started the hearing by discussing the basic facts of the incident and the investigation noted in the summary above. He said that in the next round of investigation, the Inspector General will be involved. He then discussed the reprogramming request (technically this is the driver of the hearing) for $36M, noting that $30M will be taken from NWS programs with non-nws NOAA programs supplying the remainder. Wolf expressed his disappointment that the problem in funding was not brought to the Committee. NWS funding has always been one of the highest priorities to the Committee, and in fact, both the FY12 budget and the FY13 CJS budget bill passed by the House include funding over the level of the President s budget request. This Committee would gladly have worked with NWS on reprogramming if they had asked, as would have the Committee in FY10 and FY11 led by Mr. Mollohan. In fact, the language in the CJS bill allows for and gives instructions for reprogramming of funds, but the NWS violated this. Fattah agreed that not following the law was a problem and that these employees were in the wrong, but that the actions seemed to be of good intent in that they addressed the structural deficit. He applauded the Administrator s actions in the handling of the matter. Administrator Lubchenco stressed that there were only a few individuals engaged in misconduct and that the lifesaving goals of the NWS were not harmed. She went over details that are included in the summary above. With regard to reprogramming, she stressed that NWS was not operating in the red, but there was a wrong amount of money in multiple accounts. She stated that NOAA is currently contracting an independent review to investigate further what took place and to look at possible violations before FY10. Regarding the structural deficit, Lubchenco stated that NWS has been living with an unmaintainable budget and that in the future the agency will need more flexibility that allows for evolution of services while still maintaining safety. Administrator Lubchenco anticipated three questions from the Committee: 1. How much money was moved? The investigation was not prepared to answer this conclusively, which is why the independent review was contracted. 2. What was the motive in moving the funds? It appears the motive of the employees was to protect warning and forecast operations. 3. Why did NOAA/NWS not ask for reprogramming of funds? VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 17

18 SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS (Continued from page 17) The Administrator was unaware of any insufficient funding levels until the details of this investigation were reported to her. Reprogramming is now in place. Money was pulled out of research, planned improvements, and spare parts replacement because these were the types of cuts that could be implemented so late in the fiscal year while avoiding furloughs. Questions by the Committee Compromised System Wolf asked if there had been any compromise in weather prediction or warning. Lubchenco replied that there had not been any compromise. Impact of Illegal Actions and Reprogramming Request Wolf asked about the impact of the raided funds. Lubchenco replied that NOAA is unsure of how far the misallocation goes back, and that they are unaware of the full impact. This will be addressed by the independent review. When asked for specifics on the raided funds, Lubchenco described AWIPS, which is a hardware/software solution that is the backbone for the activities of NWS, NextGen, which is a collaboration with the FAA to improve aviation forecasting, and the Weather Radio Program, which is used for weather alerts. Lubchenco said that these same funds are being affected by the reprogramming request, with little to no impact. An upgrade to AWIPS will be delayed. NWS is ahead of FAA on NextGen so they are zeroing funds for a year to synch back up with FAA. The hardware for the Weather Radio Program is maintained by a stockpile of spare parts. Under the reprogramming, used spares will not be replaced, which will impact the stockpile of spares but not operations. Wolf wanted to know specifically what was impacted by the illegal activities. If there were no impacts, were the programs overfunded? Sullivan answered that there was a delay of an upgrade to the alert system, specifically a new feature that would enable digital transcription of automated messages produced by AWIPS from text to speech, which would be broadcast. Currently these messages are recorded orally by employees, and this upgrade would enable faster releases of warnings. The current system was never impacted. Lubchenco added that there was no obvious indication that something was wrong and that everything was in good working order; it took internal reports from people who knew about the budget and funding situations to find any issue. Confidence in Management Wolf asked the Administrator is she has confidence in the managers at NWS. Lubchenco stressed that there were only a handful of employees involved and that she had confidence in all the management currently in place. When asked for a definition of handful, she said 2-3 would be a good estimate. The Administrator explained that she was trying to be very careful because of the privacy laws that protect federal employees. Reprogramming Effects Wolf asked the Administrator why the reprogramming request was pulling funds from the same line items that were raided, asking if they overfunded. Lubchenco replied that the options for reprogramming this late in the fiscal year without jeopardizing the mission and avoiding furloughs were very limited. There will be delays in research, which is not what NWS wants, but there will be no impact on public safety. Structural Deficit Wolf asked the Administrator to explain this structural deficit. The Administrator replied that there is no evidence of insufficient funding to NWS overall, but there are underfunded programs. If the NOAA administration had known about the issue, they could have fixed it. She also referenced a NAS study examining the future of the NWS that will help her move forward. Understanding of the Law Fattah stated that the appropriation rules are complex and arcane but very important. His interest is not in the handful that were involved, but if they had the training necessary to understand the rules. The Administrator replied that what they did was wrong and it is important not to understate that. She also said that some of the corrective actions are designed to address these issues, including new training on appropriation rules, training on handling complaints, and also correcting the lines of supervision within the office of the CFO so that there is not only one person providing oversight. The Department of Commerce is looking broadly at these issues as well. Benefits of Illegal Action Fattah asked which accounts benefited from the illegal action. The Administrator replied that local warnings and forecast received the additional funding. This is the largest line item, accounting for almost two thirds of NWS funding and 80% of NWS labor. Severe Weather Frequency as Cause Fattah asked if the recent increases in severe weather outbreaks caused costs to rise, triggering the illegal action. Sullivan replied that severe weather reduced consumables such as jet fuel for increased storm flythroughs and weather balloons, but that should not have triggered such action. Intent vs. the Law Fattah stated that this was a unique case in this era of Washington scandals because there was no personal motive and those in the wrong were trying to help a perceived national need. Wolf replied that the U.S. is a nation of laws, and even if the intent was meritorious, the act was still illegal. He also wonders in what other agencies this is going on. Political Implications Bonner stated that this hearing is not about hurt feelings but about laws and the way the Constitution was set up with Congress in charge of the purse strings. He stressed the need to take this violation seriously for this reason. Bonner stated that this is the latest example of this administration giving the finger to Congress and that Obama had appointed more czars than Russia did from It looks increasingly like the executive branch is keeping things from Congress. There needs to be a relationship built on trust and respect. Fattah replied that this is not a political issue as the employees breaking the law are professional federal employees who were hired under a previous Republican administration. Bonner replied that his intent was not to attack the administrator but to point out a pattern by the administration. Graves agreed with this notion of a pattern. Fattah replied that some people can find a pattern in anything, and that it was this administration s people who raised the issue and took corrective action, including working with the Committee. The Administrator replied that she takes Congress s role very seriously and that the Committee should have no concerns regarding if she would come to the Committee. She was furious when she learned of these actions, but fortunately, the gold standard of the NWS among government agencies was not compromised. She appreci- PAGE 18 VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2

19 (Continued from page 18) ates and respects the Committee and she believes this positive interaction enables a way forward. Bonner replied that he is glad that someone of impeccable character like Lubchenco, but that the Committee has to show an aggressive stance to discourage others from ignoring the law. Wolf agreed that there seems to be a shift in the respect for Congress amongst the agencies and that it is important to send a message that the law must be followed. Debris from 2011 Tsunami Dicks echoed Fattah s remarks, explaining that while the Committee does not like to see reprogramming violations, there was no personal gain and the Administrator handled it well. He then shifted gears to discuss the debris arriving on the West Coast from the 2011 tsunami in Japan. The Administrator stated that NOAA is training communities on what to do with debris and is working with an interagency task force to determine what assets exist to help manage incoming debris. NWS is providing tracking and modeling that shows and predicts where and when debris will arrive on shore, but this has proved difficult because of the scale of the dispersion of the debris field in space and time. Lubchenco stated that the debris will continue to wash up on shore for several years. Dicks stated his concern over management of the debris because the states do not have the resources to deal with this debris and NWS only has about $5M to work with. Lubchenco said that FEMA is involved but they are not taking a strong stance because the debris is not an emergency. Dicks stressed that this is a national issue, and the Administrator agreed, stating that it is unprecedented and it brings new challenges on top of the existing debris field in the Pacific. Dicks asked about the dangers of the invasive species that could be onboard, and the Administrator replied that it is a real scientific concern, and while most are probably not radioactive, they could be hazardous. Honda later asked questions similar to Dicks and got similar answers. Firing Federal Employees Culberson stated that he believes this illegal reprogramming of funds is the tip of the iceberg, noting similar situations that are increasing in magnitude in the VA and in the Department of Defense. Dicks suggested that a House Appropriations Committee Survey and Investigations Team (HAC S&I) take a professional look at this situation instead of just having Congressmen make allegations. Culberson agreed, but then asked about the consequences of illegally programming funds, specifically asking if anyone had been fired. The Administrator replied that corrective actions had been taken and are currently in work, and that she wanted to be careful because of privacy laws. Culberson was furious, discussing first the time he could not fire a VA cemetery director for disallowing religious recitations without prior family consent, and then that no one had been fired for allowing the 9/11 tragedy to occur. When he asked why the government cannot fire federal employees and stated that this is a fundamental problem with our government today, the Administrator stated that she was not an expert, but that while it is possible to fire someone, it is important that due process be done. Archived testimony is available at < Board and Committee Member News Daniel Baker, Director of University of Colorado s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, was presented with the American Astronomical Society s distinguished 2012 Popular Writing Award on June 12. Baker shares the honor with James Green, director of the NASA Solar System Exploration Division. They received this honor for their article The Perfect Solar Superstorm in the February 2011 issue of Sky & Telescope. Baker is a member of the National Academy of Engineering, former member of the Space Studies Board and several NRC committees, and serves as chair of the current decadal strategy for solar and space physics. Louis J. Lanzerotti, Distinguished Research Professor, Department of Physics, New Jersey Institute of Technology, was selected as the 2011 William Bowie Medalist of the American Geophysical Union. The Bowie Medal, AGU s highest honor, was established in 1939 in honor of William Bowie for his "spirit of helpfulness and friendliness in unselfish cooperative research." Lanzerotti, a member of the National Academy of Engineering, has served on the SSB and numerous NRC committees and boards and currently serves on the Laboratory Assessment Board and the Report Review Committee. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 19

20 J U L Y S M T W Th F Sa SSB Calendar A U G U S T S M T W Th F Sa Future SSB Meetings November 12-14, 2012, Irvine, CA (including a Workshop on Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science on November 12-13) March 6-8, 2013, SSB Standing Committee Space Science Week, Washington, DC April 4-5, 2013, Washington, DC November 7-8, 2013, Irvine, CA April 3-4, 2014, Washington, DC S E P T E M B E R S M T W Th F Sa / July Committee on Earth Sciences and Applications Washington, DC from Space (CESAS) July Committee on NASA s Strategic Direction Washington, DC August 6-7 Committee on NASA s Strategic Direction Irvine, CA August 8-9 Space Studies Board Executive Committee (XCOM) Pasadena, CA September Committee on NASA s Strategic Direction TBD September Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science (CAPS) Irvine, CA 1 November 5-7, 2014, Irvine, CA Visit < to stay up to date on board, workshop, and study committee meetings and developments. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 20

21 SELECTED REPORTS AVAILABLE FROM THE SPACE STUDIES BOARD For a complete list of titles visit our website at < Free PDF versions of all SSB reports are available online at < and on the DVD (listed below) Hardcopy versions of all SSB reports are available free of charge from the SSB while supplies last. To request a hardcopy of a report, send an to ssb@nas.edu and include your name, affiliation, mailing address, and the name and quantity of each report that you are requesting. Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society [prepublication] (2012) The Role of Life and Physical Sciences (2012) Booklet Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey (2012) Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies (2012) Assessment of a Plan for U.S. Participation in Euclid Technical Evaluation of the NASA Model for Cancer Risk to Astronauts Due to Space Radiation Space Studies Board Annual Report 2011 (2012) The Space Studies Board : Compilation of Reports (2012) DVD Only Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey (2012) Sharing the Adventure with the Public The Value of Excitement: Summary of a Workshop (2011) Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences Research for a New Era (2011) Book and CD Visions and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade (2011) Book and CD Space Studies Board Annual Report 2010 (2011) Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth Science Missions (2011) Forging the Future of Space Science: The Next 50 Years (2010) Panel Reports New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (2011) New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (2010) If you are unable to your request, please send a copy of this form to the address or fax number below. Remember to enter the number of reports you wish to receive in the space to the left of each report. Name Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions (2010) CD Only Capabilities for the Future: An Assessment of NASA Laboratories for Basic Research (2010) Revitalizing NASA's Suborbital Program: Advancing Science, Driving Innovation, and Developing a Workforce (2010) Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies (2010) CD Only An Enabling Foundation for NASA's Space and Earth Science Missions (2010) America s Future in Space: Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Needs (2009) Approaches to Future Space Cooperation and Competition in a Globalizing World: Summary of a Workshop (2009) Radioisotope Power Systems: An Imperative for Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Space Exploration (2009) CD Only Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Mars Sample Return Missions (2009) A Performance Assessment of NASA s Heliophysics Program (2009) Severe Space Weather Events Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts: A Workshop Report (2008) Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA's Constellation System (2008) Satellite Observations to Benefit Science and Society: Recommended Missions for the Next Decade (2008) Booklet Ensuring the Climate Record from the NPOESS and GOES-R Spacecraft: Elements of a Strategy to Recover Measurement Capabilities Lost in Program Restructuring (2008) Opening New Frontiers in Space: Choices for the Next New Frontiers Announcement of Opportunity (2008) Space Studies Board The National Academies 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC or fax a copy to: Affiliation Address City/State/Zip VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 PAGE 21