List of Tables

Summary

For FY2000, NASA requested $13.58 billion compared to an FY1999 appropriation of $13.65 billion. Of this request, $8.17 billion is for research and development including $2.48 billion for the International Space Station (ISS), $2.20 billion for Space Science, $1.46 billion for Earth Science, and $1.01 billion for Aero-Space Technology.

In FY2000, NASA expects to launch 10 missions to continue construction and outfitting of the ISS, and to install the first ISS crew. Within space sciences, development of small Mars exploration missions will be initiated including a robotic aircraft. The next two satellites in the Earth Observing System (EOS) program are scheduled to be launched in FY2000 assuming successful launch of the first two EOS missions in FY1999. NASA also plans to terminate two major aeronautics research programs in FY2000, high speed research and advanced subsonic engine technology. The savings resulting from that action has permitted NASA to request an increase for ISS funding for FY2000 over FY1999.

The House (H.R. 2684, H.Rept. 106-286) appropriated $12.65 billion for NASA in FY2000, $0.93 billion below the request. The major share of the reductions would occur in the Space and Earth Sciences activities. The House argued that the cuts would be less severe than appears because most were in projects that were in their early stages or in programs that had grown substantially in recent years. The(S. 1596, S.Rept. 106-161) appropriated the full request. The bill reduced Space Science by $120 million and increased advanced space transportation by $100 million and Academic programs by $20 million.

The final appropriations (P.L. 106-74) provides $13.65 billion, $74.3 million above the request. A general rescission enacted in P.L. 106-113 brings the FY2000 NASA operating level $13.60 billion. Funding for the ISS is reduced $159.6 million from the request while funding for Aero-Space Technology is increased $118.4 million above the request. The other programs were funded close to the requests. In the NASA FY2000-FY2002 authorization bill (H.R. 1654), the House has authorized $13.64 billion for NASA for FY2000 and $13.78 billion for FY2001 while the Senate (H.R. 1654(S. 342)) has authorized $13.88 billion for FY2000 and $13.97 billion for FY2001. Conference action was scheduled for September 12 and will be incorporated when available.

Congress included a provision within the appropriations bill to setup a demonstration program for testing the commercial feasibility of the ISS. In addition, among other requirements, Congress directed NASA to examine utilization of data gathered from earth and space science missions, and study the consequences of termination of high speed research.

Introduction

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was created by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (P.L. 85-568) to undertake civilian research, development, and flight activities in aeronautics and space. This report describes the various NASA programs and their FY2000 budget request. Included are discussions of key issues that might affect congressional actions on the budget. The report will be updated to include future congressional authorization and appropriations actions.

To begin the report, a brief description of NASA's budget history is presented including a more detailed description of the FY1999 budget request and congressional appropriations and authorization actions.

Historical Budget

Since its creation, NASA has experienced periods of budget growth and decline, some of which have been quite dramatic. In the early 1960s, as the nation strived to put an American on the Moon by the end of the decade, NASA's budget increased rapidly, peaking at $5.25 billion in FY1965. As other national priorities gained precedence, NASA's budget declined sharply from the FY1965 peak to about $3 billion in FY1974. After FY1974, NASA's budget once again began to increase steadily, peaking at $14.5 billion in FY1994. As efforts to restrain federal funding took hold under the pressure of the budget caps, NASA's budget once again began to decline to its FY1999 level of $13.638 billion. The agency's budget history, both in current year dollars (unadjusted for inflation) and in 1998 dollars. (The one-year spike in 1987 was to build a replacement orbiter following the Challenger tragedy.) The sharpness of the budget growth and decline from the 1958 to 1974 period is quite clear when presented in 1998 dollars.

FY 1999 Budget

For FY1999, NASA requested $13.465 billion, a reduction of $173 million below the FY1998 level. The final appropriations bill (P.L. 105-276/H.Rept. 105-749) provided $13.66 billion for FY1999, 1.5% above the request and 0.2% above FY1998. In the Conference report, Congress directed NASA to make a separate account for the International Space Station (ISS) for the FY2000 budget submission.

During the 105^th Congress, no NASA authorization bill was enacted, although a bill did pass the full House and one was reported out of the Senate Commerce Committee. On April 24, 1997, the House approved by voice vote, H.R. 1275 (H.Rept. 105-65), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act, FY1998 and FY1999. The bill authorizes $13.92 million for NASA for FY1999. Among the findings are that NASA should emphasize basic research in air and space, facilitate commercial development of space transportation technologies, and work with the Department of Defense to reduce the cost of space missions. On May 22, 1998, the Senate Commerce Committee reported S. 1250 (S.Rept. 105-195), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act, FY1998, FY1999 and FY2000. The bill would authorize $13.46 billion for NASA for FY1999, the same as the request. The Committee also expressed its recognition of the need for core program funding and stated that its authorization recommendation was intended to provide funding and guidance needed for a "robust and balanced space program."

NASA Programs and FY2000 Budget Request

NASA's budget ⁽¹⁾ is funded in five appropriations categories: International Space Station (ISS), Launch Vehicles and Payload Operations (LVPO), Science Aeronautics and Technology (SAT), Mission Support (MS), and the Inspector

General (IG). ⁽²⁾ For FY2000, NASA requested a total of $13.58 billion, 0.6% below the FY1999 appropriation (see Table 1). Of this request, $8.17 billion is for research and development (ISS, Payload/Technology, and Science, Aeronautics and Technology), and $5.41 billion is for Mission Support and Shuttle Operations. R&D funding is down 2.0% from FY1999 while Mission Support and Shuttle Operations funding is up 0.7%.

For FY2000, NASA would continue assembly of the International Space Station, develop a new generation of launch vehicles, pursue a strong space science program, and strengthen environmental monitoring of earth. NASA also states that the FY2000 budget would continue to emphasize the development of space and aeronautics technology that can benefit the nation's economy. The reduction requested for FY2000 continues a trend of the past few years. NASA argues that this trend is justified by efficiency gains as demonstrated by reduced cost and development time for Earth and Space Science missions without sacrificing quality. In addition, NASA argues that it has greatly reduced shuttle costs allowing shuttle operations to become an increasingly smaller part of the total NASA budget.

On September 9, 1999, the House appropriated $12.654 billion for NASA for FY2000 (H.R. 2684), 6.8% below the request and 7.3% below the FY1999 level. While in full Committee, $400 million was added to the mark that emerged from the Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies. On September 24, 1999, the Senate appropriated $13.578 billion for FY2000 (S. 1596), the requested amount. On October 20, 1999, the final FY2000 NASA appropriations (P.L. 106-74) was signed into law approved, providing $13.653 billion, 0.6% above the request but just below the FY1999 level. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2000 (P.L. 106-113, H.Rept. 106-479) signed into law on November 29, 1999, Congress enacted a 0.38% across-the-board rescission to all discretionary spending for FY2000. The resultant NASA appropriation for FY2000 is $13.600 billion. NASA has also requested a $75 million supplemental appropriation and a $40 million reprogramming (H.R. 3908, H.Rept. 106-521), which is currently before the House. No comparable measure has been introduced in the Senate at this time.

In the report accompanying the House appropriation (H.Rept. 106-286), the House stated that while the reduction from the request was substantial it was less significant than might appear. The House argued that most of the reduction was being taken from projects that were in the early stages of development or were from future planning or technology development activities. The House noted that the latter budgets had grown substantially in recent years.

In the report accompanying the Senate appropriation (S.Rept. 101-161), the Senate repeated its desire to have NASA separately report the ISS account. This request was first made in H.Rept. 105-759. The Senate also requested NASA to develop a comprehensive performance plan that specifies for each of its centers responsibilities and activities. The plan should identify overlapping expertise and capabilities and justify the overlap. The Senate directed that NASA should provide a 10-year schedule for its missions as part of the plan and identify which center will be responsible for each mission. The purpose of the plan, according to the Senate is to demonstrate the connection between NASA resources and activities that "guarantees an advance technology strategy" that will keep NASA preeminent in its endeavors. The Senate also expressed concern about the varying cost structures among the different centers. It directed NASA to provide an analysis and comparison of the cost structures used at each of the centers.

The Senate also expressed its commitment in the appropriations report to encouraging greater cost efficiencies at NASA through more commercialization where appropriate. It noted the Consolidated Space Operations Contract as a major component of this effort and directed NASA to report on its progress and on other activities within the agency that would be candidates for commercialization. The Senate also expressed its concern about the possibility of illegal transfer of sensitive technologies for weapons development. It asked that any such risk be eliminated while noting the difficulties facing NASA in doing so because of the substantial international component of its activities. The Senate requested that NASA report annually on the mechanisms in place that govern the export of technology and on contractor compliance with export control laws.

Table 2 on page 6 shows authorization action to date. On May 19, 1999, the House approved H.R. 1654, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 1999, which provides an authorization of $13.637 billion for FY2000 and $13.757 billion for FY2001. On November 5, 1999, the Senate passed H.R. 1654 after adopting an amendment that substituted S. 342, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2000, 2001, and 2002. The Senate passed bill authorizes $13.883 billion for FY2000, and $13.967 billion for FY2001. Conference action was to be reported on September 12, 2000, and will be included when available.

In the report accompanying the House authorization bill, H.Rept. 106-145, the House noted that the authorization was necessary to assure the International Space Station reached its full scientific potential and to improve the health of the U.S. commercial and government space launch enterprise. The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-77, urged NASA to take steps to meet difficult cost challenges including, where feasible, increased cost sharing with industry and academia, more privatization of its operations, and greater purchase of commercial products. The Senate also stated that NASA should enhance managerial control to ensure relevance of its work to the direct customers and the general public, and to make safety a top priority, particularly for the construction of the ISS. The Senate noted that the authorization bill is to help provide for a balanced and robust space program.

International Space Station (ISS)

The principal ISS mission is to establish permanent human presence in space. ⁽³⁾ The station will serve as a platform for a range of research activities in biology, physics and materials science, as well as for Earth and astronomical observations. NASA also hopes that experience using the ISS will facilitate decisions about the future of its Human Exploration and Development of Space enterprise. NASA considers the ISS as central to fulfilling that enterprise including the commercial exploitation of space. The agency hopes that the ISS will attract a substantial number of commercial ventures, and that an increasing fraction of the ISS operational costs will be covered by the private sector.

For FY2000, NASA requested $2.483 billion for the ISS, an increase of 7.7% over the FY1999 appropriation. The increase is primarily for rebuilding reserves depleted by previous cost escalation, compensating for Russian funding problems, and increasing efforts to develop a crew return vehicle. In addition there is slippage in the construction schedule due primarily to the delay in launch of the Russian Service Module. Currently, the launch is scheduled sometime during the period ranging from December 26, 1999 to January 16, 2000.

Of the request, $890.1 million is for the space station vehicle, a decrease of 13.9% from the FY1999 appropriation. This activity is responsible for continuing fabrication of the station including associated laboratory equipment. At the end of 1998, the first two elements of the space station were launched and successfully placed in orbit. Three more launches are scheduled for the remainder of FY1999 including the Russian Service Module. The Service Module is designed to provide the life-support systems for the ISS as well as guidance, navigation and control. In addition, the Russian vehicle that is expected to be used to reboost the station periodically would dock with the Service Module. For FY2000, assuming the FY1999 launches go off as scheduled, 10 launches are planned. By the end of FY2000, the station is to have power generation capability, its first crew, and initial capability to perform research.

For space station operations capability, NASA requested $850.2 million. This activity's objective is to develop operational procedures and infrastructure for the station once it is completed. Space station operations includes operation of the station in flight and the associated ground operations. A major objective of operations capability is to ensure that all operations are safe, reliable, and sustainable. For FY2000, the space station control center will begin preparation for space station flights scheduled at the end of FY2000 and for FY2001. Planning and engineering support for follow-on flights will also begin in FY2000.

Space station research would receive $394.4 million in FY2000, an increase of 17.2% over the FY1999 appropriation. The objective of space station research is to develop the facilities and procedures to carry out research on the space station in the areas of biology, physics, and materials science. In addition, this activity supports research in those fields and will direct the transition from the current short-term, in-orbit focus of research now carried out on the space shuttle to a long-term focus made possible by the ISS. For FY2000, the first human research facility rack ⁽⁴⁾ will be placed on the ISS and other racks, to be added later, will continue through the design process. Other racks designed to provide common support to all ISS experiments will also be installed in FY2000.

NASA requested $200 million for FY2000 for Russian program assurance, a reduction of 19.3% from the FY1999 appropriation. Those funds would be used by NASA to procure equipment and services in the event critical contributions to the ISS from Russia are not forthcoming or are delayed excessively. For FY2000, they may be used to launch an interim control module that would provide attitude control and reboost capabilities for the ISS so that construction can continue without the Russian Service Module.

The final component of the space station program is the Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) project, for which NASA is requesting $148 million for FY2000. No funds were requested or appropriated for this program in FY1999. This project's objective is the development of a vehicle that could return up to seven ISS crew to Earth in the event of an emergency. The first of four crew return vehicles will be required for the ISS by FY2004. For FY2000, NASA will make a final design decision on the CRV. It will either continue development of the CRV based on the X-38 test vehicle or make use of alternative design concepts also under study.

For FY2000, the House approved $2.383 billion for the ISS, 4.0% below the request but 5.0% above the FY1999 level. The Senate approved the full request, $2.483 billion for the ISS for FY2000.

The final appropriations bill provided $2.331 billion for the ISS, 6.1% below the request but 2.7% above the FY1999 level. Part of the reduction, $17.1 million, is a transfer to Mission Support for personnel costs. The Congress also approved a reduction of $100 million from funds requested for the CRV and a $35 million general reduction. Application of the rescission enacted in P.L. 106-113 reduced the final figure for the ISS for FY2000 to $2.323 billion.

For FY2000, The House approved authorization of $2.483 billion for the ISS including $394.4 million for Space Station research to be administered by the Office of Life and Microgravity Research. The Senate version would authorize $2.283 billion, $200 million below the NASA request. The reduction results from absence of any authorization for the $200 million requested by NASA for the Russian Program Assurance.

Perhaps none of NASA's programs has generated more controversy than the ISS. Despite the successful launch late last year of the first two major components of the station, the ISS program is likely to continue to be main focus of congressional concern during consideration of the FY2000 budget request. NASA recently announced that the cost to complete assembly of the station had risen to a range of $23.4 to $26 billion depending on its completion date. At present, the major concern about the station is the reliability of Russia to meet its commitments to the ISS. One consequence of this uncertainty is that NASA has budgeted about $600 million over the next five years, including $200 million for FY2000, to fund ISS efforts that might be needed in the event key Russian contributions are not forthcoming or are excessively delayed. It is important to note that those funds would not be transferred to Russia, but would be used by NASA to procure substitute services and facilities. Even that amount, however, might not be sufficient. The most immediate concern is when the Russian Service Module will be launched. Without the Service Module, the station cannot be inhabited unless the space shuttle is docked to it.

The House, in H.Rept. 106-286, expressed its pleasure with the progress NASA is making on assembly of the ISS. It was concerned, however, that continued Russian attempts to maintain its MIR space station would create a drain on Russia's ability to meet its ISS commitments. The House also expressed its concern about the growing costs of the ISS. It noted that NASA has not made much progress toward commercialization of the ISS program. The House directed NASA to step up its efforts to include commercial participation in the ISS, and said that NASA must accept commercial proposals for the ISS program if they are cost-effective and do not compromise national security or public safety. The House directed that NASA consider the full cost of the government action when evaluating costs of the commercial proposal. The House believes the best way to hold down ISS costs is to involve the commercial sector to the fullest extent possible. It also stated that NASA must create a favorable environment for the commercial space industry.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 101-161, noted its strong support for the ISS and its mission as a permanent space laboratory. The Senate however, expressed grave concern about the continuing cost escalation of the project. While the Senate noted the uncertainty inherent in space exploration, it expects that NASA can provide better cost and schedule estimates after over 40 years of operation. The Senate also expressed its concern about NASA's practice of taking funds from other NASA activities for the ISS. While expressing support of the international nature of the ISS, the Senate noted substantial concerns about the ability of Russia to meet its commitments and about the possibility that other international contributions may not meet their schedule or requirements. The Senate directed NASA to report on these two situations. It also directed NASA to use domestic suppliers for those contributions from international partners that are not likely to meet assigned schedule and requirements.

Also in the appropriations report , the Senate directed NASA to carry out an independent, quarterly review of the ISS's status in comparison to the schedule reported in the FY2000 budget justification. In this connection, the Senate directed NASA to accelerate commercialization of the ISS. It asked for a plan for giving details about how NASA will undertake this effort for those ISS logistic needs that can be supplied by private vendors. The Senate also gave NASA authority to reprogram funds from the ISS to the Space Shuttle for any needed upgrades. It noted that the Shuttle will likely be needed for most of the 2000-2010 period, if not longer, and significant upgrades will be needed.

The conference report to the NASA appropriations bill (H.Rept. 106-379) contained an extended discussion of issues about the ISS. First, the conferees added a provision to the bill that would establish a demonstration program to "test the feasibility of commercial ventures using the station .... ." NASA would be permitted to negotiate agreements with commercial enterprises who would lease space and other services -- including possibly transportation -- on the ISS for their operations. NASA would be permitted to keep any funds above that needed to pay for relevant services and reinvest those excess funds in further economic development activity for the station. The purpose of this provision is to test and evaluate ways of using the ISS as the "catalyst" for economic development of low-earth orbit. The demonstration program would be in effect only during the period of station assembly and early operations. It Congress's intent that lessons learned during this program will be made part of NASA's long-term program to commercialize the station.

The conferees also directed NASA to ensure that international agreements for ISS hardware should be binding and that the agreements should not complicate station assembly. In this connection, NASA is directed to supply the two Appropriations Committees with a report on the details of all of those agreements. Congress also directed NASA to report quarterly, beginning April 1, 2000, on the status of station assembly. The reports are to show any changes from the cost and schedule baseline provided in the FY2000 budget request.

In the House authorization bill report, H.Rept. 106-145, the House expressed its strong concern about how dependent completion of the ISS had become on Russia. It reminded NASA that Congress raised these concerns when Russia first became a participant in the program and that NASA had promised Congress that the United States would maintain an independent capability to complete the ISS. In the report the House noted that NASA has finally taken steps to remove Russia from the station's critical path to completion. The House also noted its displeasure about continued cuts in the ISS research budget to fund construction, and reminded NASA about previous congressional recommendations to shift management of research funding to the OLMSA. For FY2000, the House included language in its authorization bill enacting such a shift.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-77, noted that it was optimistic about the eventual completion of the ISS with the successful launch of the first two modules. The Senate, however, stated that NASA must still pay close attention to containing costs. It also directed NASA to develop more accurate information about ISS decommissioning costs and other "outstanding technical requirements." Finally, the Senate noted the lack of specific plans about the use of the Russian Program Assurance request in recommending against authorization of those funds.

Another issue is the lack of a Crew Return Vehicle. Although NASA has known since 1994 that it would have to build a CRV, it did not include it in its annual budget requests because of funding constraints. The only activity NASA has funded toward a CRV is the X-38 project designed for CRV technology development. It is not clear whether the X-38 technology will be adequate or whether another direction will be necessary. Although NASA's schedule shows the CRV being ready in 2003 for a 2004 deployment, NASA is uncertain it can meet that schedule. As a contingency, NASA plans to buy two Russian Soyuz vehicles, which will increase reliance on Russia. ⁽⁵⁾

Launch Vehicle and Payload Operations

The function of this activity is to provide the transportation for people and payloads to support NASA's missions. ⁽⁶⁾ Launch Vehicle and Payload Operations is divided into two components: the Space Shuttle and Payload Utilization and Operations programs. Both shuttle operations and safety and performance upgrades are supported by the Space Shuttle program. NASA missions are the primary customer of the shuttle, although industry, academia, and international entities use shuttle services, usually on a reimbursable basis. Currently, the Space Shuttle program is designed for an average of seven launches per year. The payload utilization and operations program is charged with support and processing of shuttle payloads, and of NASA payloads that use expendable launch vehicles (ELV). This program also supports a small, advanced projects research effort, which helps support X-38 technology development (see above). An important component of the Payload Utilization and Operations program is its engineering and technical base activity, which provides technical support for NASA's space flight laboratories and test beds. In addition, the activity supports a small research effort on long-term human space flight requirements.

For FY2000, NASA requested $3.155 billion for Launch Vehicles and Payload Operations, a 0.6% decrease from the FY1999 appropriation. For the Space Shuttle program, the request was $2.986 billion, including $2.547 billion for operations and $0.439 billion for safety and performance upgrades. The former is 4.9% above FY1999 while the latter is 23.2% below FY1999. The request for the Payload Utilization and Operations program was $169.1 million, a 7.1% decrease from FY1999. NASA has scheduled eight flights for the shuttle for FY2000, seven of which will be in support of the ISS. In addition, certain operations and manufacturing improvements would be undertaken. The Space Flight Operations Contract (SFOC), which is an attempt to consolidate all shuttle contract operations, would expand in FY2000 as more contracts are brought under its umbrella. Safety and performance upgrades would be directed at improving and upgrading orbiter and associated ground-based facilities. A particular focus of this activity would be the development of systems and technology to deal with aging and obsolescence of shuttle components and facilities. The decline in funding for the Payload Utilization and Operations program is due to continued reduction in advanced projects started in FY1998 when most of its activities were transferred to the ISS account, and less funding for the engineering and technical base program.

The House approved $3.005 billion for Launch Vehicle and Payload Operations, 4.8% below the request and 6.4% below the FY1999 level, $2.836 billion for shuttle operations and $169.1 million for payload utilization and operations. The Senate provided the full request, $3.156 billion, $2.987 billion for shuttle operations and $169.1 million for payload utilization.

The final appropriations bill provides $3.001 billion for shuttle operations and $169.1 million for payload operations. The former is $25 million above the request and is to be used for urgent shuttle safety upgrades. After application of the rescission enacted in P.L. 106-113, the FY2000 levels are $2.980 billion for the shuttle and $165.1 million for payload operations.

In H.R. 3908, NASA has requested a supplemental appropriation for FY2000 of $25.8 million for "urgent" shuttle upgrades. In addition, it is requesting permission to reprogram $40 million appropriated for a space shuttle science mission for shuttle upgrades and hiring additional staff at four NASA Centers.

H.R. 1654 authorizes $3.004 billion for Space Shuttle operations and safety and performance upgrades, and $169.1 million for Payload and Utilization Operations. The former is $18 million above the NASA request. In its version of the authorization bill, the Senate authorized $3.011 billion for Space Shuttle operations and safety and performance upgrades, the NASA request, and $169.1 million for Payload and Utilization Operations.

The major concerns about NASA's space shuttle operations appear to center on shuttle safety. The Aerospace Advisory Panel recently issued a report about shuttle operations that expressed concern about future shuttle safety. In particular the report noted that personnel issues such as a growing shortage of skilled workers and aging of the shuttle workforce coupled with budget constraints and downsizing might lead to serious safety problems. A related concern is how transition to the SFOC will affect safety. Because the shuttle is likely to be the primary means of human access to space for several more years, continued efforts to maintain safe shuttle operations are essential. The aging of the shuttle systems and workforce are likely to make this task increasingly difficult.

The House stated in H.Rept. 106-286 that it could not "accommodate the additional funding at this time" for the requests it received for shuttle upgrades. It stated that it might be able to revisit this issue prior to final enactment of the bill. The House expressed its continued commitment to shuttle safety and believes that the funding it recommends will not compromise that safety.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-161, noted its concern about the shuttle's future. Because it is likely that NASA will need to use the shuttle for the 2000-2010 time period, if not longer, the Senate expressed concern about needed safety and performance upgrades. It directed NASA to report on the needed upgrades and their costs and schedule for implementation as well as a 10-year funding schedule of all shuttle costs. The Senate also expressed concern about NASA's planning for the needs of the Hubble Space Telescope and the use of Hubble reserves to pay for cost overruns on the Chandra X-ray telescope. In a more general matter, the Senate directed NASA to prepare more accurate budgets for its programs. To that end, the Senate approved legislative language that would terminate all projects and programs that had either a 15% total or annual overrun of its original budget projection with the exception of the ISS.

In the conference report, H.Rept. 106-379, the conferees directed NASA to carry out shuttle upgrades to ensure continued safe operation. NASA is also to report about such proposed changes including their costs and completion schedules. The conferees also directed that $40 million should be used for a space science mission to be flown on the shuttle between the flight of STS-107 and December 2001. (These are the funds that NASA wishes to shift to shuttle upgrades and new staff as described above). The purpose of that mission is to perform scientific experiments of the type that will eventually be carried out on the ISS. The conferees believe it is important to continue such work during ISS construction so that the relevant scientists remain "fully engaged in human space flight activities."

The House noted in the report accompanying its authorization bill, H.Rept. 106-145, that NASA's ability to bring about Shuttle safety and performance upgrades has been limited by budget constraints. The House directed NASA to devote sufficient resources to maintain Shuttle safety, but stated that "such improvements should not be a disincentive to the development of a Shuttle replacement." In S.Rept. 106-77, the Senate Commerce Committee directed NASA to use the increase authorized for shuttle upgrading to build upon the safety and reliability gains made in previous years.

Science, Aeronautics, and Technology

The Science, Aeronautics, and Technology account of the NASA budget funds the bulk of its research and development activities. Included are the Offices of Space Science, Earth Science, and Life and Microgravity Science and Applications, Advanced Space Transportation Technology, and Aeronautical Research and Technology Base. The Offices of Space and Earth Science focus on increasing human understanding of space and the planet, and make use of satellites, space probes, and robotic space craft to gather and transmit data. The Office of Life and Microgravity Science and Applications, and Advanced Space Transportation Technology fund research intended to support and advance human exploration of space. The Aeronautical Research and Technology Base continues a long tradition of aeronautics research dating back to one of NASA's predecessors, the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics. For FY2000, the NASA Science, Aeronautics, and Technology account requested $5.425 billion, 4.7% below FY1999.

Space Science. The Office of Space Science (OSS), which is responsible for NASA's Space Science Enterprise, has four missions: understanding the universe, exploration of the solar system, discovering planets around other stars, and searching for life beyond Earth. Using primarily space-based telescopes and other sensing probes, the NASA OSS programs study the nature of stellar objects to determine their formation, evolution, and fate. Robotic probes are sent to other bodies in the solar system searching for information about their makeup and whether the conditions for life exist. To accomplish these tasks, NASA supports a series of large, focused missions such as the Space Infrared Telescope Facility and the Hubble Space Telescope; the Explorer program to provide low-cost access to space with small, single purpose satellites; the Discovery program to support small planetary missions; and a Mars exploration activity. The OSS also funds an extensive supporting research and technology effort. The research component focuses on data analysis and theoretical studies to understand space-based observations, and supports complementary ground-based and laboratory activities. Universities and NASA centers are the principal performers of supporting research. Supporting technology is designed to provide enabling technologies for the next generation of space science missions, cross-cutting technology development that can be used on a number of NASA missions, and flight testing of new technologies -- the New Millennium Program -- that can be used on future NASA science missions.

For FY2000, NASA requested $2.197 billion for the OSS, an increase of 3.6% over the FY1999 appropriation. Of this amount, $999.4 million was requested for scientific missions and $1.152 billion for supporting research and technology. For FY2000, continued development work is planned for the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) and the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) missions. Launches are also planned for the Relativity (formerly Gravity Probe-B) and the Thermosphere, Ionosphere, Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics (TIMED) missions, and a major upgrade is planned for the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Within the Explorer program, four launches are scheduled for FY2000 along with the continuation of planning and development for seven other missions. Within the Discovery program, planning and development on three missions are scheduled for FY2000. Announcements of opportunity for the next Discovery mission(s) are also planned for release in FY2000. In the Mars surveyor program, continued development of the 2001 Mars Surveyor Orbiter and Lander is planned along with planning for future Mars Surveyor missions.

For FY2000, NASA's plans for the Supporting Research and Technology program include: planning and development work on the Next Generation Space Telescope, as a follow-on to the HST; the Space Interferometry Mission designed to identify planets beyond our solar system; and new technologies for exploration of the solar system, and for studying the sun and large-scale structures in the universe. In addition, NASA would undertake initiatives to enhance Mars-to-Earth communications capability, and develop Mars micromissions. The latter includes the technology for delivering smaller payloads for the exploration of Mars including robotic aircraft. The Supporting Research program is scheduled to continue analysis of data from various space science missions, and to develop models about the nature of the universe. A significant portion of the program's budget would focus on development of technologies to enhance data collection and analysis for the specific NASA missions. The program would also focus on planning for upcoming missions.

Through its Supporting Research and Technology program, the NASA OSS is putting more emphasis on developing enabling technology for future missions. By expending more effort at this stage, NASA hopes to reduce the cost and increase the reliability of its future missions. A principal example of this technique is the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST) currently in the planning stage. NASA has set stringent cost requirements for the project even though its goal is to provide more extensive science than the Hubble Space Telescope. About 30% of the NGST's cost will be for enabling technology development. ⁽⁷⁾

The House approved $1.956 billion for Space Science for FY2000, 11.0% below the request and 7.7% below the FY1999 level. Funding for the Explorer and Discovery programs would be reduced $60 million each from the request; the Contour mission would be canceled saving $50 million; and funding for Supporting Research and Technology would be reduced by $95 million from the request. The Senate appropriated $2.077 billion for Space Science for FY2000, 5.46% below the request and 2.01% below FY1999. The Senate also approved the addition of $26 million to the mission to repair the gyroscopes, $21 million for the Sun-Earth Connections, and $15 million for the STEREO Solar Probe mission. Therefore, a total of $180 million would have to be transferred from other Space Science programs to meet the budget adjustments approved by the Senate. It did not provide any details on how those adjustments should be allocated.

The final appropriations bill provides $2.198 billion for space science, $1.2 million above the request. The conferees reduced funding from the request for several items: $6.1 million for the Explorer program, $23.7 million for the Discovery program, $22.8 million for Mars missions, $4.4 million for supporting research and technology, and $37.4 million for the Champollin mission. The Congress directed that the last mission be canceled. Several increases over the request were also provided including $10 million for fundamental physics research, $23 million the next HST servicing mission, and $23 million for the Sun-Earth Connection program. Upon application of the rescission approved in P.L. 106-113, the final FY2000 level for the Office of Space Science is $2.193 billion.

The House authorized appropriations of $2.202 billion for Space Science, $6 million above the request. Of that amount, $472 million would be for the research programs. The bill also authorizes $30 million above the request for the Hubble Space Telescope repair mission. The Senate authorized of $2.197 billion for Space Science, the amount requested.

The Space Science Enterprise has perhaps the most ambitious mission of any activity within NASA ⁽⁸⁾. Over the last 15 to 20 years, efforts toward fulfilling that mission primarily made use of costly, highly sophisticated and complex missions. NASA successes have been substantial, significantly advancing our understanding of the universe and our knowledge of the solar system. At the same time, those missions have had a history of cost overruns and schedule delays. In some cases, technical problems have developed that have cost NASA a great deal to fix when a fix was possible. In order to continue towards its space and Earth science goals, NASA adopted a policy of "faster, better, cheaper" in the early 1990s to guide the design of future space missions. Such a policy would not eliminate the risks just mentioned, but it would likely reduce the consequences of such risks. Indeed, two missions designed under this policy, the Lewis and WIRE missions, have been total losses, and a third, the Clark mission, was canceled because of cost overruns. ⁽⁹⁾ At the same time, the number of satellite and spacecraft launches, many of which fall under the "faster, better, cheaper"rubric has increased dramatically. Since October 1998, NASA has launched eight missions, all but WIRE, successfully. It has plans to launch three more through July. Still, concerns remain about this policy. In particular, some view that technical risks have increased even if the financial consequences of failures might be less. A related concern is whether such missions are compromising the scientific achievements. In other words, are there scientific issues that cannot be addressed using small, inexpensive satellites? In 1998, Congress requested that NASA contract with the National Research Council to study this question and report its findings by September 30, 1999. ⁽¹⁰⁾

The House, in H.Rept. 106-286, noted that the project it recommended for cancellation was early in the planning stage. Further, it noted that the Supporting Technology and Research program budget had grown by over $250 million since FY1998 and the Explorer and Discovery programs had grown by $145 million over that same period. As a result, the House believes that the reductions recommended will not cause significant harm to the Space Science activity.

In S.Rept. 106-161, the Senate expressed its support for the Space Science program, but noted recent project failures and cost overruns. It also expressed concern that there has not been sufficient investment in data availability and analysis, and it directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to examine that issue and report to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The Senate also requested NASA to inform the Committee about the relationship between mission priority and the value of the data to be collected. The Senate expressed its concern about the balance among the Space Science program's four goals with respect to its future flights and its efforts in advanced technology development. It asked NASA for a report providing budget details on future missions and advanced technology development. The Senate noted its strong support of the Hubble Space Telescope, but was concerned that NASA had not adequately budgeted for problems with the telescopes gyroscope system. The Senate expressed its belief that future lunar missions can make an important contribution to future planetary missions and requested a report on NASA's plans for such lunar missions.

In the appropriations conference report, H.Rept. 106-379, Congress directed NASA to ensure that the reductions in the Explorer and Discovery programs do not affect current activities within the programs. In particular, the Contour, Messenger, and Deep Impact missions, within the Discovery program, are to be launched as scheduled. As for the Mars program reductions, Congress stated that they were made "without prejudice" although the Appropriations Committees are concerned about the recent Mars orbiting spacecraft failure. In this connection, Congress directed NASA to report to the Committees about the failure including corrective actions NASA will take on future Mars missions.

Also in the appropriations conference report, Congress directed NASA to contract with the National Research Council (rather than OSTP) to study the "availability and usefulness" of data from all of NASA's science missions. The study is to address congressional concerns that data collected by NASA missions is not being used as effectively as possible. The conferees also directed NASA to integrate the activities at the Goddard Space Flight Center more closely with the Independent Verification and Validation Center. In the FY1998 conference report (H.Rept. 105-297), Congress directed NASA to set a course so that 75% of its advanced technology funding was awarded on a competitive basis. In the FY2000 report, it directed NASA to continue on that path and provide the Appropriation Committees with a plan on how it intends to achieve that goal while maintaining core competencies of the NASA centers.

The conference report also contained language directing NASA to report, quarterly, on the status of all space and earth science missions. Included in the reports is to be a review of any mission that is exceeding its annual or total budget projection by 15% of more. The reports are to cover all missions in phase B or phase C/D status, and include all funding requirements.

In H.Rept. 106-145 accompanying the authorization bill, the House expressed concern about the declining portion of the NASA Space Science budget for research and analysis at the same time the flight rate for missions has increased significantly. While the Congress has supported space science research for a number of years, the report argued that NASA has not put adequate emphasis on analyzing the data from its space science missions. The House also noted in the report that NASA has not been able to "constrain continuing cost growth and program delays" in the Chandra program, and that the New Millennium program, designed to develop new technology for space science, appears to have disappeared from the budget.

Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications. The Office of Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications (OLMSA) funds and directs biomedical and health research in support of the Human Exploration and Development of Space enterprise. It carries out a number of programs that investigate the biomedical effects of space flight and the effects of gravity on biological processes, develops technologies to support humans living in space, enhance space crew health and safety, and address medical care requirements for human space flight. The office also supports research on biological, chemical, and physical processes in a microgravity environment. An important function of the OLMSA is to assist the private sector to make use of space for product development, primarily in the life sciences. Research activities sponsored by the OLMSA are carried out in space on robotic vehicles, in ground-based laboratories, and on space shuttle missions. The International Space Station is to serve as a site for much OLMSA research.

For FY2000, the OLMSA requested $256.2 million, a decrease of 2.8% from the FY1999 appropriations. During FY2000, the launch of facilities for carrying out human research on the ISS is planned, and payloads for future research missions on the station are to go through their final checks. Experiments examining the effects of microgravity on plant growth are scheduled for FY2000, and initial microgravity research operations are expected to begin on the ISS. Expansion is also scheduled for research to develop low-gravity technology and for efforts to validate countermeasures to reduce risk to humans on long-duration space flight.

The House appropriated $249.2 million for the OLMSA for FY2000, 2.7% below the request and 5.4% below the FY1999 level. The Senate approved $256.2 million for Life and Microgravity Science and Applications for FY2000, the full request.

The final appropriations bill provides $277.2 million for the OLMSA, 8.2% above the request. Included in the increase is $15 million for the OLMSA portion of two science missions to be flown on the shuttle prior to December 2001. Application of the P.L. 106-113 rescission lowered the amount to $274.7 million.

In its version of the NASA FY2000 authorization bill, the House approved authorization of $333.6 million for the OLMSA, an increase of $77.4 million above the request. Part of the increase, $32.6 million, resulted from an amendment adopted by the full House Science Committee, to terminate the Triana program in Earth Sciences and transfer the funds to the OLMSA. The Senate authorized $256.2 million for OLMSA for FY2000, as requested.

The House, in H.Rept. 106-286, noted that it had provided NASA with $15 million for FY1999 to conduct a dedicated life and microgravity science research flight on the shuttle. The House is convinced that such flights on a regular basis are essential to ensure optimal use of the ISS for life and microgravity science research when it is completed. The House expressed its strong concern that NASA has so far failed to provide such flights despite repeated congressional requests to do so. It therefore directed NASA to use the $15 million to undertake such a flight in the near-term by allocating more research funds to an upcoming shuttle flight and to begin plans for another flight in the 2002 period.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-161, expressed its support of this program because most of the research supported by the OLMSA is to be performed on the ISS.

In H.Rept. 106-145 accompanying its authorization bill, the House noted that the increase it approved for the OLMSA budget over the request, apart from the funds made available from the Triana amendment, are designed to help restore microgravity and life science research funding that NASA had removed to help pay for ISS cost increases. The report language noted that the restored funds were being placed under control of the OLMSA rather than in the ISS research budget in order to permit NASA to undo "the damage done to the research community" by the cuts.

Earth Science. The Office of Earth Science (OES), which is responsible for NASA's Earth Science Enterprise, has the goal of understanding the total Earth system including the consequences for the environment of changes wrought by nature and human activity. NASA uses a combination of space-based, airborne, and ground-based instruments to observe and analyze appropriate phenomena. The centerpiece of this array of instruments is the EOS (Earth Observing System) spacecraft series, the first of which was launched in FY1999. ⁽¹¹⁾ In addition, the OES supports a major effort to manage the large database expected to result from these spacecraft. The EOS Data Information System (EOSDIS) forms the core of that activity. Research is also funded by the OES to analyze these data and to develop models that may explain the observations. An important objective of the OES is to enhance predictive capabilities about potential global environmental risks. In particular, the NASA effort is a critical contributor to the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Another important function of the OES is to assess the health of the world's vegetation. Finally, a cross-cutting aspect of the Earth Science Enterprise is to develop enabling technologies that can be used to reduce cost and increase reliability of future missions.

For FY2000, NASA requested $1.459 billion for the Office of Earth science, an increase of 3.2% over the FY1999 appropriation. Of this amount, $663.2 million was requested for EOS and $231.5 million for EOSDIS. Collection and analysis of data from Terra (formerly EOS AM-1) and Landsat-7 is expected to be a major activity in FY2000. NASA plans additional software for EOSDIS to enhance the capabilities of EOS AM-1 and Landsat-7, and further EOSDIS development for the EOS PM-1 mission. Launch of EOS PM-1 is planned for FY2000, as well as completion of critical design reviews for CHEM-1, the next two principal spacecraft in the EOS program. The first of the Earth System Science Pathfinder satellites is scheduled for launch in FY2000. That program is focusing on the development of small, rapidly developed spacecraft to meet specific scientific objectives. Launch is also scheduled for the Triana mission, an Earth-observing satellite that will be located at the Earth-Sun LaGrange-1 (L1) point. ⁽¹²⁾ As part of the FY2000 request for the OES, NASA asked for $420.2 million for applied research and data analysis. NASA intends to increase the number of investigators and research tasks supported, and intends to complete its contribution to the first USGCRP national assessment of the potential consequences of climate change and variability.

The House appropriated $1.174 billion for Earth Sciences for FY2000, 19.5% below the request and 17.0% below the FY1999 level. The House approved cancellation of the TRIANA and LightSAR projects; a reduction of $150 million for the EOS program; and a reduction of $50 million for the EOSDIS program. The Senate approved $1.459 billion for Earth Sciences, the amount requested. The Senate included $32 million for the EOSDIS core system, $7 million for additional uses of the EOS, and up to $5 million for the LightSAR program.

In the final appropriations bill, Congress is providing $1.455 billion for Earth Sciences, $3.9 million below the request. Included are several funding reductions below the request: $20 million from termination of the LightSAR program, $23.5 million from PM-1 mission reserves, $22 million for the EOS special spacecraft, and $5.7 million for algorithm development. Several increases are also provided including $31 million for the EOS Core System and $7 million $7 million for that System to help make EOS data more readily available. Finally, the conferees directed suspension of work on Triana pending completion of an evaluation of the project by the National Academy of Sciences. Application of the rescission approved in P.L. 106-113 resulted in an FY2000 level for Earth Sciences of $1.443 billion.

For FY2000, the House has authorized $1.382 billion for Earth Sciences, $76.6 million below the request. As mentioned above, $32.6 million of that reduction is a result of termination of the Triana project. The Senate authorized $1.459 billion, the requested amount.

The Earth Science Enterprise is the largest effort by one federal agency to study the Earth and its environment. It serves an important function by aiding critical scientific understanding of environmental issues, particularly global climate change. NASA expects that FY1999 will be a very important year for the enterprise because of the launch of Terra and Landsat-7. In addition, NASA is participating in launches of nine other satellites that will monitor environmental conditions on Earth. If NASA is successful in meeting its FY1999 launch goals, substantial amounts of data should finally be forthcoming, particularly from the long-delayed EOS effort. Securing and analyzing those data will be a major focus in FY2000.

The controversial nature of many of the subjects being studied by the EOS program along with those delays have resulted in substantial criticism of the Earth Science Enterprise over the last several years. Those issues have led some to question the value of the enterprise. Although it seems likely that EOS will now start producing data, many of those critics are concerned that those data will not be used effectively. In particular, concern exists that practical applications of the data will not receive sufficient emphasis compared to scientific application. ⁽¹³⁾

A major source of the EOS launch delays are attributable to difficulties in developing data management and satellite control software for the EOSDIS program. NASA has been forced to scale back the program more than once from its original design, and just recently announced another reduction in the system's ability to archive data. ⁽¹⁴⁾ In the last four years, reduction in system size has resulted in a $200 million reduction in its overall cost. NASA also announced that the processing capability of the system will only be at 50% by the time Terra is launched. It is expected to be up to 75% a year later. NASA claims that the decision to expand capability over time is budget-driven. Others disagree, however, arguing that the EOSDIS was more complicated than NASA was prepared for when it started the project. ⁽¹⁵⁾ NASA agrees that there have been difficulties in making EOSDIS operational but claims that budget constraints have added to the problem. In addition, it points out that the needs of the user community are changing continually, resulting in project modifications. In FY2002, EOSDIS operations will become part of the Consolidated Space Operations Contract (see below).

As with the Space Science budget, the House, in H.Rept. 106-286, noted that the LightSAR project is early in the planning stage and its cancellation should not prove severe. In addition, the House noted that the EOSDIS program had expended $1.6 billion since it began and had yet to yield significant results. The House also expressed concern that NASA was not using unmanned aerial vehicles for science missions. It noted that NASA had spent of $100 million on this program and believes that the Office of Space Science should begin a program to use these vehicles. The House directed NASA to provide a report giving a five-year plan on how it will use these aircraft as a scientific research platform, and include that plan in its FY2001 budget submission.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-161, directed NASA and the Office of Science and Technology Policy to examine the availability and utilization of data gathered by Earth Science missions. As with the Space Science program, the Senate requested a report from NASA about the how Earth Science missions are prioritized in terms of the potential value of the expected data. The Senate also directed NASA to develop a plan to enhance its efforts to commercialize EOSDIS data. The Senate expressed concern about NASA's long-term plans for Earth Science. It directed NASA to develop a plan for the period following the current EOS program. In particular, the Senate wants to know what NASA intends to do to make optimum use of the $6.6 billion investment in EOS and EOSDIS. In this connection, the Senate would like to see more attention paid to making use of the EOSDIS core system and the regional earth science applications centers to develop "higher level" applications of earth science data for various user groups.

The Senate urged NASA to continue the LightSAR program because of its significant potential for remote sensing applications. In a related matter, the Senate directed NASA to join with the National Science Foundation to examine the challenges facing the remote sensing industry and to recommend ways that federal/private partnerships can best develop needed technologies. The Senate also requested NASA to work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Environmental Protection Agency to develop programs to demonstrate those technologies for relevant applications.

In the conference report, H.Rept. 106-379, Congress included Earth Science within the concerns it expressed about data use and project management that are discussed above under the Space Science heading. In addition, the conferees directed NASA to select a domestic competitor for its contract on sounding rocket operations, if it meets the contracts requirements, in order to help revitalize the domestic sounding rocket industry. In directing suspension of payments for Triana, Congress stated that it expected the NAS study would be completed expeditiously. Congress also directed NASA to refrain from launching Triana, in the event the NAS study is favorable, until after January 1, 1999. The conferees also retained the House report language that directs NASA to develop a five-year plan for utilizing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), and to proceed with the UAV Science Demonstration program. The conferees did not include the directive contained in the Senate report that NASA report on EOSDIS data commercialization. Finally, Congress directed NASA to provide a detailed plan on earth science through FY2010 by April 15, 2000.

While decreasing funding for LightSAR, the conferees stated that NASA's termination of the program failed to recognize significant private sector interest in the program. The Congress noted that LightSAR has important practical applications and directed NASA to report to Congress by February 1, 2000 how the agency can assist industry develop a U.S. synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability with focus on NASA as a customer for SAR data.

In H.Rept 106-145, the House expressed its concern about NASA's apparent emphasis on data acquisition at the expense of research and analysis. It also noted the delays in launching the EOS system of satellites.

Aero-Space Technology. The Office of Aero-Space Technology, which is responsible for the Aero-Space Technology Enterprise, has two primary responsibilities: support of NASA's Aeronautical Research and Technology and Advanced Space Transportation Technology activities. The Aeronautical Research and Technology activity is divided into the Research and Technology Base and Aeronautical focused programs. The former supports research in information technology, airframe systems, propulsion systems, flight research, aviation operation systems, and rotorcraft. That research makes extensive use of computational systems to model new concepts. The objective of those programs is to develop a technology base that can be applied to new aeronautical products and solutions to current problems facing civilian aviation. The Aeronautical focused programs examine specific civilian aviation technical issues. Through FY1999, topics under investigation included supersonic air transport (high-speed research or HSR), advanced subsonic engine technology (AST), and aviation system capacity. Research is directed at key technological concerns such as aircraft noise and engine emissions, and aircraft safety. In both programs, NASA performs cooperative research with the civilian aeronautics industry.

The Advanced Space Transportation program is charged with development and demonstration of next-generation technology for access to space. Such technology could serve as the basis for commercial space transportation systems. Consequently, this work is often done in partnership with industry. The prime NASA goal is a dramatic reduction in launch costs, while improving reliability and safety. The program has three elements: a reusable launch vehicle (RLV), the advanced space transportation program, and future space launch studies. In the RLV component, technology development is concentrating on the X-33 and X-34 test vehicles and the Future-X pathfinder program. Advanced space transportation research is directed at developing enabling technologies for space transportation vehicles beyond the X-33 and Future-X. Future space launch studies supports basic research in novel space transportation concepts such as high-energy propellants and anti-matter drive.

For FY2000, NASA requested $1.006 billion for the Office of Aero-Space Technology, a decrease of 33.0% from the FY1999 appropriation. Of that request, $620 million was for the Aeronautics Research and Technology activity, $254 million for the Advanced Space Transportation Technology activity, and $132.5 million for Commercial Technology programs. The latter encompasses technology transfer and small business innovation research programs for all of NASA's activities. The Office of Aero-Space Technology intends to continue efforts now underway in the six areas making up the Research and Technology Base program. In particular, demonstrations of computer aided evaluation of aircraft design and a new generation of propulsion systems for general aviation are planned, and work is to continue on concept and procedure development to improve the nation's aviation system. Within the focused programs, two new programs are planned. One would develop and demonstrate technologies that can increase aviation safety, and the other would focus on ultra-efficient engine technology. Within the Advanced Space Transportation Technology program, spending would decline as NASA nears the end of its commitment to the cooperative X-33 program. Final assembly and initial flights of the X-33, extended flight testing of the X-34, and critical design review for the Future-X demonstrator are all planned for FY2000. Work is also expected to continue on different propulsion schemes for in-space transportation, and advanced propulsion concepts will be explored.

The House appropriated $963.0 million for the Aero-Space Technology program for FY2000, 4.3% below the request and 28.1% below the FY1999 level. The House approved an addition of $25 million for the Ultra Efficient Engine Technology project. The Senate provided $1.106 billion for this program for FY2000, 9.9% above the request. The Senate approved an additional $110 million for future launch technologies.

The final bill provides $1.159 billion for aeronautics and space transportation, 15.1% above the request. Included are increases above the request of $20 million for Ultra Efficience Engine technology, $80 million for the Space Liner 100 project, and $20 million for aircraft noise reduction research. Application of the P.L. 106-113 rescission lowered the FY2000 level to $1.125 billion.

For FY2000, the House approved an authorization of $1.010 billion including $543.8 million for Aeronautical Research and Technology and $334.0 million for Advanced space Transportation Technology. The total approved is $2.8 million above the request. The request for ultra-efficient engine technology as a focused program was not authorized, but it included the funds, $50 million, as part of the Research and Technology Base activity. Also, the House did not authorize any of the request for the NASA portion of the High Performance Computing and Communication and Information Technology for the 21^st Century programs, $87 million, but stated that is will deal with those programs in a separate authorization bill. For Advanced Space Transportation Technology, the House authorized $61 million for the Future-X program, $30 million over the request, and $105.6 million for the Advanced Space Transportation Program, $50 million over the request. Finally, the House authorized $132.5 million for Commercial Technology.

The Senate authorized of $1.006 billion, the requested amount, including $620 million for Aeronautical Research and Technology, and $254 million for Advanced Space Transportation Technology. The Committee also authorized $132.5 million for Commercial Technology.

The large decline in requested funding for FY2000 for the Aeronautical Research and Technology activity is a result of NASA's proposal to terminate its high-speed and advanced subsonic research activities. NASA states that the demise of the HSR program is primarily a result of a decision by its industrial partner, Boeing, to halt work on supersonic transport development, although NASA did note other budget needs elsewhere within the agency, specifically the ISS program. NASA also announced that the AST program was being terminated due to those budget needs. In any event, the funds made available by ending these two programs along with the steep reduction in commitments for the X-34 program allowed NASA's total budget request to be slightly below the FY1999 appropriation while absorbing a significant increase in the ISS funding request.

The termination of high-speed research is the second time that the United States has halted efforts to develop technology for a commercial supersonic transport. ⁽¹⁶⁾ In this connection, the NASA Administrator stated that while he understands Boeing's decision to suspend HSR, the action points out how near-term stress on U.S. corporations is making it difficult for them to undertake longer term research even on a cooperative basis. ⁽¹⁷⁾ The current NASA program has been underway for several years and apparently has produced a number of useful results. How NASA will preserve this knowledge in the event HSR is taken up again remains to be seen.

Another issue facing the Office of Aero-Space Technology is development of a reusable launch vehicle (RLV). NASA hopes that industry will take the lead in that effort, relying on NASA for assistance only during the technology development stage. Currently, this is the motivation behind NASA's support of the X-33, and, more indirectly with the X-34 and Future-X programs. The latter two programs both are directed at demonstrating technologies that would lead to low cost reusable access to space. It is unclear, however, whether any of the candidates NASA is now pursuing will lead to an acceptable RLV, or that industry will take the lead in developing an acceptable system once NASA support has ceased. A recent study funded by NASA indicated that industry could not have a cost-effective RLV that could replace the shuttle for at least 8 to 12 years. ⁽¹⁸⁾ NASA has projected a substantial increase in funds for RLV development for FY2001 and beyond, but there is little certainty that a candidate technology will be ready during that period.

Another option NASA is starting to look at in more detail is development of a crew transfer vehicle (CTV) that would both deliver crews to the ISS and serve as a CRV. Such a craft could be placed in orbit aboard expendable launch vehicles or an RLV. The potential benefit of a CTV it that is would provide more time to develop a permanent replacement for the shuttle. ⁽¹⁹⁾ There is some concern at NASA, however, that the cost of developing a CTV might be excessive given that it would not serve as an RLV itself.

The House, in H.Rept. 106-286, expressed support of NASA's plan to convert the Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) program into a competitive process. The House urged NASA to ensure that the main focus of the project continue to be development of unmanned aerial vehicles for use as research platforms, and that the particular requirements of the Office of Space Science be kept in view. The House also asked NASA to protect its investment in the ERAST alliance during the transition.

The Senate, in S.Rept. 106-161, expressed concern about NASA's decision to terminate the high-speed research and advanced subsonic technology programs. While supporting the budget request, the Senate requested that the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) carry out an independent review of the implications of the decisions. NASA was also directed to ensure the knowledge developed by these programs is not lost. The Senate also expressed its intention that the Ultra Efficient Engine Technology Program be fully funded.

The Senate also stated in the report that outside of shuttle safety, the most important activity at NASA must be development of new technologies allowing lost-cost access to space, and that will enhance commercialization of space. The Senate noted NASA's efforts with industry to develop a reusable launch vehicle and the delays in the program that have forced NASA to be reliant on the shuttle for a longer period than originally planned. The Senate, however, expressed encouragement about those efforts and its support of the X vehicle programs. The Senate also noted the decline in U.S. share of the commercial launch market and expressed the view that commercial space will be very important to U.S. economic growth and national security. It further noted that investments in "leap-ahead technology" must be made now if NASA's cost reduction goals are to be reached. For this reason, the Senate recommended the addition of the $110 million to the future launch technology program. The Senate also expressed its support of the ERAST program including the solar powered aircraft program.

In the conference report, H.Rept. 106-379, Congress affirmed the request for OSTP to carry out a review of the decision to terminate the HSR program. The conferees added that the review should also examine whether NASA should launch an effort on aircraft safety and noise reduction. The conferees also expressed concern that the large reductions in NASA's rotorcraft research budget will damage capabilities in this technology. NASA is directed to take steps to ensure that existing expertise is retained. With respect to ERAST, the conferees directed NASA "to balance carefully" two recent efforts involving 1) flight testing of solar-powered aircraft and 2) development of combustible fuel, unmanned flight technology.

In H.Rept. 106-145 accompanying its authorization bill, the House urged NASA to enhance its efforts to support development of technology that would greatly reduce the cost of access to space, and to play a greater role in the growth of the commercial space launch industry. The report language urged NASA to spend most of the increased funding it authorized for advanced space transportation on "experimental technology demonstrations which will enable near-term cost reductions" for all of NASA's space flight requirements. The House also reiterated its belief of the importance of the Advanced Space Transportation Program as the source of new technologies and advanced concepts for the focused programs.

Space Communications. The NASA Space Communications program effort includes both the Mission Communications Services program in the Science, Aeronautics, and Technology account, and the Space Communications Services program in the Mission Support account. The two programs provide command, tracking, and telemetry data services between ground facilities and all of NASA's missions. The Space Communications Services program is responsible for the space-based portion of the network while the Mission Communications Services program handles the ground-based portion. Satellite links, ground networks, mission control, data processing, and related facilities comprise the elements of this program. Services are provided for deep space and Earth-orbital missions, research aircraft, and sub-orbital flights. High-speed telecommunication links are provided to connect industry, universities, laboratories, and investigating scientists participating in NASA missions with the tracking, data acquisition, mission control, and data acquisition facilities. In addition, mission support services, including orbit and attitude determination, and mission planning and analysis are provided by the Mission Communications Services program.

Currently, NASA is in the process of consolidating all of these communications-related activities under a single contractor. NASA awarded a Consolidated Space Operations Contract (CSOC) to the Lockheed Martin Space Operations Company on October 1, 1998. It is NASA's belief that such an integrated operation will result in a substantial reduction in operating costs and significantly increase efficiency. NASA expects that some of the services now provided by CSOC will eventually move to the commercial sector. In FY2002, the EOSDIS, currently funded by the Office of Earth Science, is scheduled to become part of CSOC.

For FY2000, NASA requested $496.0 million for the Space Communications program. Of this, $406.3 million was requested for the Mission Communications Services program, a 6.9% increase above the FY1999 appropriation, and $89.7 million for the Space Communications Services program, a 51.7% decrease from the FY1999 appropriation. NASA intends to continue its contract consolidation efforts as CSOC will have been underway for nine months by the beginning of the fiscal year. In addition, NASA plans to continue pursuit of commercial services for ground tracking for low-orbit missions. The large decrease in the Space Communications Services program request is a result of completion of high cost activities including modification of the White Sands, NM, complex and the launch of the TDRS-H (tracking data and relay satellite) spacecraft. For FY2000, testing and acceptance of that craft is planned, and integration and test of the TDRS-I and J spacecraft is to be completed. Substantial cost savings were also anticipated upon implementation of CSOC.

The House appropriated $406.3 million for the Mission Communications Services program and $89.7 million for the Space Communications Services program, the requested amounts. The Senate also provided the requested amounts for these two programs.

The final appropriations bill provides $406.3 million for the Mission Communications program and $89.7 million for the Space Communications Services program, no change from the request. NASA chose not to reduce these amounts when it implemented the rescission mandated by P.L. 106-113.

The House authorized $406 million for the Mission Communications Services program and $89.7 million for the Space Communications Services program for FY2000. The Senate authorized the same amounts. In both cases, the amounts equaled the requested levels.

Recently, however, NASA reported that anticipated cost savings from CSOC would be delayed because initial cost reductions due to management consolidation will be used for new system architecture. ⁽²⁰⁾ One consequence has been a delay in upgrading the deep space network (DSN). ⁽²¹⁾ NASA had intended to start that work this year. Budget shifts in FY1999 in anticipation of CSOC savings, however, from the Space Communications program to other programs, primarily the ISS, is slowing that work. In addition, the launch of the TDRS-I, which only supports missions in Earth orbit, has been delayed six months to December 2002. The delay in the DSN upgrade could have severe consequences for space science as the number of its planetary missions grows. Currently, NASA plans to increase the number of space science missions launched from 25 in 1998 to 40 in 2005. Without a substantial upgrade in the DSN network, data acquisition from those missions, including several Mars' missions, could be in jeopardy. NASA still expects to save $1.4 billion from CSOC over the ten years of the contract, but now says the savings will not begin until 2003 and 2004.

In the conference report with the appropriations bill, H.Rept. 106-379, Congress directed NASA to examine the possibility of expanding coverage of CSOC to cover all of the remaining telecommunications and mission operations directorate communications activities not now covered by CSOC. NASA is deliver a report to the Appropriations Committees by February 8, 2000 on this question. The report is to compare full direct and indirect costs of the two options.

In H.Rept. 106-145 accompanying the authorization bill, the House expressed its continued concern about whether the savings that are expected to arise from CSOC will reach the levels predicted by NASA. The House also repeated its concern about whether the consolidation might inhibit competition for subcontracts, and stated that it will continue to monitor subcontracting closely to ensure a fair system.

Academic Programs. Academic programs include a broad array of activities designed to improve science education at all levels. They include programs that directly support student involvement in NASA research, train educators and faculty, develop new educational technologies, provide NASA resources and materials in support of educational curriculum development, and involve higher education resources and personnel in NASA research efforts. In addition, a separate set of programs is devoted to minority education issues. The program supplies NASA mission and research experience to students in grades K-12, and support for graduate students in NASA-related disciplines. Teachers at the K-12 level receive training from NASA to enhance math and science teaching skills and the application of NASA research results in the classroom. In both cases, efforts are made to reach underrepresented populations. Efforts to improve K-12 and higher education are supported through the aerospace education services and national space grant college and fellowship programs. NASA also funds an Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) to help develop research capabilities of states that have been less successful in obtaining NASA research grants. Programs are also funded to develop new teaching technologies based on NASA developments, apply those technologies to the classroom, and involve educators in NASA missions.

Programs devoted to minority education focus on expanding participation of historically minority-dominant universities in NASA research efforts. Working with NASA enterprises, these programs develop opportunities for participation by researchers and students from those institutions in NASA activities. Five competitive, peer-reviewed research award categories have been set up for these institutions. The objectives are to improve research quality in these universities, and increase the number of underrepresented investigators supported by NASA.

For FY2000, NASA requested $100 million for academic programs, a 27.8% reduction from the FY1999 appropriations. NASA stated that the FY2000 request would return the academic programs budget to its baseline level. In the Conference Report (H.Rept. 105-769) accompanying the FY1999 congressional appropriation for NASA, the NASA requested funding level was increased by $38.5 million by the conferees. NASA has chosen not to fund those congressionally-directed increases for FY2000. Of the FY2000 request, $54.1 million was for education programs, and $45.9 million was for minority research and education programs, compared to $71.6 million and $66.9 million for those programs in FY1999. About $28.8 million was requested in other NASA enterprises to supplement the minority research and education program. Reductions in the education programs are concentrated in the space grants, EPSCoR, and educational technology activities. Funding for the minority education and research program would be lower than for FY1999. The Offices of Earth Science and Space Science also have robust education programs.

The House appropriated $126.3 million for Academic Programs for FY2000, 26.3% above the request and 8.7% below the FY1999 level. The House approved an addition of $6.5 million above the request to the National Space College and Fellowship program. The Senate appropriated $120 million for Academic Programs for FY2000, 20% above the request. The Senate provided additions of $5.6 million above the request for the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program, $7.4 million above the request for EPSCoR, and $8.2 million above the request for NASA's minority university research and education activities.

The final appropriations bill provides $141.3 million for Academic Programs, 41.3% above the request. Included in the increase are an additional $6.5 million for the National Space Grant College and Fellowship program, $5.4 million for the EPSCoR program, and $7.6 million for Minority University Research and Education projects. Upon application of the P.L. 106-113 rescission, the final total for FY2000 is $138.0 million.

The House authorized $128.6 million for Academic Programs for FY2000, $28.6 million above the request. The Senate authorized $130.0 million, $30.0 million above the request.

In the accompanying report, H.Rept. 106-145, the House expressed its belief in the importance of the NASA Academic Programs as a means to inspire students in the science and math fields, and to reach groups currently not "heavily represented" in those areas.

Mission Support

The mission support account provides funds for the principal support activities for NASA missions. It includes funding for NASA civil service employees, assurance of mission safety and quality, development of engineering policies and standards, and facility construction. The space communications program, discussed above, is also included in mission support. For FY2000, NASA requested $2.495 billion for all mission support activities. That request is 0.6% below the FY1999 appropriation. Not including the space communications program, the request is $2.405 billion, 3.4% above the FY1999 appropriation.

Safety, Mission Assurance, Engineering, and Advanced Concepts. The Safety, Mission Assurance, Engineering, and Advanced Concepts (SMAEAC) budget has three components: the safety of NASA missions and personnel, oversight of NASA's crosscutting technology development activities, and coordination of NASA-wide technology goals. The Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) sets agency-wide safety and mission assurance policy and strategy, sets standards, and oversees compliance. It also supports research on new methods to assure safe and successful missions. The Office of Chief Engineer (OCE) is responsible for development of policies and standards to enhance NASA engineering practices. The Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) is responsible for development of a NASA-wide investment strategy for innovative technology, and oversight of NASA technology policies and capabilities.

For FY2000, NASA requested $43 million for SMAEAC, an increase of 20.8% above the FY1999 appropriation. The OSMA plans to focus on several safety activities about the ISS and associated launches. In addition, work would continue on risk management, software assurance, human reliability, non-destructive evaluation, and application of failure prevention tools. Most of the increase requested for FY2000 would go to the OCE. That office is scheduled to assume responsibility for risk reduction and evaluation of advanced electronics. The principal OCT function for FY2000 is scheduled to be oversight of NASA's implementation of the intelligent synthesis environment effort.

The House appropriated $43 million for the SMAEAC for FY2000, the requested amount. The Senate also approved the requested amount for the SMAEAC, $43 million for FY2000.

The final appropriations bill provides $43 million for the SMAEAC, the requested amount. No adjustment was made in this program by NASA in implementing the P.L. 106-113 rescission.

Both House and the Senate authorized $43 million for the SMAEAC budget for FY2000. This is the amount requested.

Research and Program Management. Research and program management provides the salaries, benefits, travel, and administrative support for all of NASA's civil service employees. For FY2000, NASA requested $2.181 billion for this activity, a 2.8% increase over the FY1999 appropriation. About 75% of the request was for salaries and benefits, 23% for administrative support, and 2% for travel. The request assumed a continued reduction in NASA full-time equivalent personnel from 18,545 in FY1999 to 17,970 in FY2000. The increase sought for FY2000 is primarily to pay for higher compensation levels and more technical support services.

The House appropriated $2.031 billion for research and program management, 6.9% below the request and 4.2% below the FY1999 level. The House approved a reduction of $100 million for personnel and related costs and $50 million for research and operations support. These reductions were justified on the basis of programmatic cuts recommended elsewhere in the NASA budget. The Senate appropriated the full budget request, $2.181 billion for research and program management for FY2000.

The final appropriations bill provides $2.201 billion for research and program management, 0.9% above the request. The additional $20.2 million is to cover pay changes and lower than projected retirement rates. Upon application of the rescission mandated by P.L. 106-113, the FY2000 level was reduced to $2.218 billion.

In H.R. 3908, NASA is requesting a supplemental appropriation for FY2000 of $20.2 million for research and program management to add up to 282 full-time equivalent positions at four NASA Centers.

Both the House and Senate authorized $2.181 billion for research and program management for FY2000. This is the amount requested.

Construction of Facilities. Construction of facilities provides funding for individual projects needed to maintain NASA's basic infrastructure and its institutional facilities. For FY2000, NASA requested $181.0 million, an increase of 7.4% above the FY1999 appropriation. In addition, $25.2 million for facility construction was requested within the ISS and Launch Vehicles and Payload Operations accounts. Nearly all of the funding for FY2000 is planned for capital repair of existing facilities. In particular, specific building and utility system's modernization and repair is scheduled at most NASA centers. Major new projects for NASA missions are included within the appropriate account.

The House appropriated $105.4 million for construction of facilities, 41.8% below the request and 37.4% below the FY1999 level. The House approved deferral of projects in this account to be completed at a later date. The Senate appropriated the full request for construction of facilities, $181 million.

The final appropriations bill provides $181.9 million for construction of facilities, $900,000 above the request. NASA chose not to reduce this amount when applying the rescission mandated by P.L. 106-113.

Both the House and Senate authorized $181.0 million for construction of facilities for FY2000. This is the amount requested.

Outyear Budget Projections

Along with its FY2000 budget request, NASA supplies estimates of its requests for the succeeding four years. That five-year budget outlook is provided in table 2 (next page). Although the outyear estimates are subject to change, the trends they provide might give an indication of the general directions that NASA is headed at this time. The table shows that NASA is projecting essentially level spending for the next five years. Increases are projected in the Science, Aeronautics, and Technology account that would offset declines projected in the International Space Station account.

NASA intends for its space science enterprise to grow significantly through FY2004. The primary target of that growth is expected to be a nearly three-fold rise in spending on focused technology such as the next generation space telescope, the terrestrial planet finder, and a number of other scientific missions. In addition, growth in funding for Mars missions is expected as the Mars micromissions, now in the technology development stage, come to fruition. NASA intends to increase substantially the number of missions launched over the next five years.

The other major science and technology activities -- the Earth Science and Aero-Space Technology Enterprises -- do not show any scheduled increase over the next five years. While funding for the Earth Science Enterprise is projected to remain flat, some significant changes are planned for the enterprise. As the first generation of EOS satellites are launched, funding for those spacecraft would phase out over the 2000 to 2004 period, and a buildup in funding is projected for EOS follow-on systems. Also, a modest increase is planned for the Earth System Science Pathfinder program. For the Aero-Space Technology Enterprise, some increase in research on safety of civilian air transport is projected, but most other programs are planned to remain flat or decline slightly.

The Advanced Space Transportation Technology program budget, however, is projected for a substantial increase as mentioned above. Although no specific projects have been identified, a large increase in the space access budget, as a placeholder for future reusable space launch vehicle development, has been provided in the outyear budget estimate. In the FY2000 budget request delivered to Congress, NASA included $1.22 billion in placeholder funds compared to $760 million shown in the FY1999 budget request. In addition, NASA projects significant growth in the future-X and advanced space transportation programs.

Two NASA activities show significant declines over the next five years. The ISS budget is projected to drop substantially as fabrication of the station progresses. NASA also hopes that a growing portion of space station operations will be paid for by the private sector as it uses the ISS for commercial purposes. It is not clear, however, that NASA has factored any of those potential savings into its outyear budget estimates. Funding for the Mission Communications Services program is also expected to decline sharply as savings from the CSOC appears. As discussed above, those savings have been delayed. NASA still expects them to be substantial, however, and begin to show up in 2003.

The outyear projections indicate that NASA intends to increase its emphasis on research and development, although that emphasis appears to be confined to the Space Science Enterprise. NASA's perceived need to ensure lower cost access to space is also apparent in the outyear budget estimates. While the shuttle has a number of years remaining, it is still an expensive transportation system, and NASA believes that substantial expansion of its space activities as well as of commercial space ventures will require a significant reduction in launch costs.

Both the House and Senate bills provide authorization amounts for FY2001 and FY2002 in addition to FY2000. The amounts for the two outyears are given in Table 2. Both bills would authorize more funding for the Space Shuttle than requested by NASA, and both would authorize less for Space Science than the NASA request. The Senate bill recommends higher authorization for Earth Science than either the NASA request or the House version, while the latter authorizes less for Earth Science than the request. Finally, the House authorizes $144 million in FY2001 and $280 million in FY2002 for future planning for space launch options (the NASA requests are $150 million and $280 million). The Senate authorized the NASA request, but includes funding for FY2000 that was not requested. The Senate considers this future planning activity very important and does not want NASA to wait to begin the effort. In the report accompanying H.R. 1654, the House directed NASA to use the funds to address cost reduction issues for the near-term, and not on RLV technologies beyond the current generation.

Footnotes

1. ^(back)For budget details, see; National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Budget Estimates: Fiscal Year 2000, http://ifmp.nasa.gov/codeb/budget2000/.

2. ^(back)The NASA budget categories support its four strategic enterprises. They are: the Space Science Enterprise, the Earth Science Enterprise, the Human Exploration and Development of Space Enterprise, and the Aero-Space Technology Enterprise. For a detailed description of these strategic enterprises, see: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Budget Estimates, AS2-3.

3. ^(back)For a complete discussion of ISS issues, see Congressional Research Service, Space Stations, by Marcia Smith,CRS Issue Brief IB93017.

4. ^(back)A rack is the assembly in which specific scientific experimental facilities, or associated equipment, will be mounted.

5. ^(back)Russian Soyuz spacecraft will be used to provide emergency escape for U.S. crews until a CRV is ready. Each Soyuz can only hold a three-person crew, however, limiting ISS crew size, and the Soyuz must be replaced every six months, increasing operations costs. Those limitations are the reasons why NASA is in the process of building a more capable CRV, which can hold up to seven crew and would need to be replaced only once every three years.

6. ^(back)For a more extensive discussion on space launch issues, see: Congressional Research Service, Space Launch Vehicles: Government Requirements and Commercial Competition, by Marcia Smith, 93062, updated. Mar. 23, 1999

7. ^(back)Brian Byer, "Interview with Edward Weiler", Space News, Feb. 1, 1999, 22.

8. ^(back)The Space Science Enterprise Mission is: solve the mysteries of the Universe, explore the Solar System, discover planets around other stars, and search for life beyond Earth.

9. ^(back)The Wide-field Infrared Explorer (WIRE) mission was designed to detect infrared radiation from certain types of galaxies. The Lewis and Clark missions were funded by the Office of Earth Science, and were designed to demonstrate different land imaging capabilities.

10. ^(back)U.S. Senate, Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Bill, 1999, S.Rept. 105-216, June 12, 1998, 101.

11. ^(back)Landsat-7, which is part of the EOS program, was successfully launched on April 15, 1999.

12. ^(back)The Earth-Sun L-1 (LaGrange-1) point is the location in space where the Earth's gravitation field just balances the Sun's gravitation field. A satellite placed at that point would remain stationary with respect to the Earth, allowing a continuous, full disk sunlit view of the Earth. See, Congressional Research Service, NASA's Triana spacecraft: an overview of congressional issues, by Erin Hatch, RS20252, updated September 20, 1999.

13. ^(back)Warren Ferster, "Earth Science Program Poised for Launch," Space News, Mar. 1, 1999, 20.

14. ^(back)Paula Shaki, "NASA Reduces Data Network's Archiving Ability," Space News, Feb. 1, 1999, 18.

15. ^(back) "NASA Reduces" Space News, 18.

16. ^(back)In 1970, the United States halted work on development of a commercial supersonic transport after spending about $1 billion on the project. The Federal Aviation Administration was in charge of that project.

17. ^(back)"Goldin says Boeing HSCT Bailout a 'Loud Signal' About U.S. R&D," Aerospace Daily, Vol. 189, No. 56, Mar. 24, 1999, 431.

18. ^(back)Brian Berger, "No Shuttle Alternatives Seen in the Near Future," Space News, March 29, 1999, 4.

19. ^(back)"Studies see Crew Transfer Vehicle as Shuttle, RLV enhancement," Aerospace Daily, Vol. 189, No. 52, Mar. 18, 1999, 401.

20. ^(back)"Rohrabacher Worried CSOC Won't Produce Promised Savings," Aerospace Daily, Vol. 189, No. 49, Mar. 15, 1999, 384.

21. ^(back)Paula Shaki, "NASA Network Missions Grow as Funds Fall," Space News, March 15, 1999, 3.

Return to CONTENTS section of this Long Report.