The Honorable Senator Barbara Mikulski
Suite #503
Hart Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
tel (202) 224-8858
fax (202) 224-4654

I plan to do the same with Paul Carliner, who appears to be Democratic clerk on NASA’s appropriations subcommittee holding up Centennial Challenges funding. He presumably answers to Mikulski. His contact information is:

Mr. Paul Carliner, Clerk
Senate Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Subcommittee
S-146A Capitol Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
tel: (202) 224-7277
fax: (202) 224-2698

I encourage anyone who cares to do the same, especially anyone in Maryland (I’m not) or in states with Senators or Representatives on NASA’s appropriations subcommittees. You can find them, their contact information, their staff, and their staff’s contact information here:

House — http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=happr9&pcommid=happr

Senate — http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=sappr2&pcommid=sappr

The letter below emphasizes the next prize competition taking place in Maryland (Mikulski’s state). Feel free to copy it, but you may want to modify if you’re mailing to a different Congressman or staffer.

Here’s the letter I’m sending:

=== begin letter ===

November [XX], 2006

The Honorable Senator Barbara Mikulski
Suite #503
Hart Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Mikulski:

I am writing to increase funding for the NASA Centennial Challenges Program in the FY 2007 budget. I am an aerospace industry professional [or other relevant background] and a citizen of [Your State].

This spring, a Maryland organization (Volanz Spaceflight Inc./Spaceflight America) will conduct a prize competition for breakthrough astronaut glove technology. The NASA Centennial Challenges Program sponsors the prize for this competition and that program is in jeopardy.

Centennial Challenges is NASA’s pilot program of prize competitions, a new and critically important tool to stimulate innovation in our civil space program and in the aerospace sector at large. In less than two years, this remarkable program has:

— Induced a small, private company to develop and fly a new rocket-powered vehicle with vertical take-off/landing and fast re-flight capabilities that are applicable to NASA’s future lunar landers and the emerging sub-orbital space flight industry. This vehicle was built for a very small fraction of comparable military efforts ($200 thousand versus $58 million) and with the company’s own dollars.

— Encouraged dozens of university and company teams to develop and demonstrate high-density wireless power transmission systems and high strength-to-weight materials. These are key technologies for making NASA’s lunar return sustainable and aerospace vehicles more efficient.

— Partnered with six external organizations to manage these and other future prize competitions at no cost to the taxpayer. Prizes pay only for demonstrated success and are a proven tool for innovation with a history going back centuries. Centennial Challenges is perhaps the most efficient program at NASA and has great potential for the aerospace sector.

The FY 2007 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Bill (S. 109-280) terminates funding for the NASA Centennial Challenges Program for the second year in a row. I respectfully request that funding be restored and increased to $20 million during the House-Senate Conference markup.

Plans and studies for future prize competitions, as detailed in NASA’s FY 2007 budget request, are exciting and highly relevant to NASA’s mission. Please ensure that this important pilot program receives the support it deserves.

Thank you for your attention and consideration.

Very sincerely,

[Your Name]
[Your Address]

=== end letter ===

On a final note, the $58 million Pixel comparison is to the stated build costs of the DC-X, which one can find here:

http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/DCX/

It’s not a perfect comparison, but it’s the most relevant one. And $58 million is actually an underestimate as it does not include site or operations costs.

Here’s hoping that prizes at NASA survive Congress…

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=22585

According to NASA Watch’s presentation of the memo, NASA has objections to reductions to spending on the NASA-designed/built/operated Ares I and CEV and related items, etc. The Ares I/CEV part in particular carefully identifies the local areas that benefit from that program. I will not say it’s just pork (in fact some of the goals are similar to Centennial Challenges goals), but the NASA memo sells it as if it’s pork.

Nowhere is there a complaint about Centennial Challenges being zeroed in the Senate appropriations bill. In spite of the Aldridge Commission finding that entrepreneurial space and prizes are the key to the success of the VSE, some parts of NASA don’t seem to be too interested. So, if like Rick Tumlinson you want to see the new Centennial Challenges happen, you’ll need to get in contact with your Congressperson before the Senate and House committees iron out their differences on this issue.

Ray http://spaceprizes.blogspot.com/

For the most part, these all seem like great graduate school projects and judging by the list of participants at the spaceward foundation challenge, it would seem that this holds out to be true. Even a look at the sponsors confirms this as the majority are related to promoting education: spaceward foundation, spaceflight america, CSEWI, and FSRI. The prize purse itself is more aimed at inspiring grad students and hobbyists as the prizes are so low in dollar value ($200-300k) instead of being in the millions which would bring in more serious small business. The only exception to this being the Lunar Lander Challenge, which to me seems like a natural extension for the x-prize with or without NASA’s backing.

Maybe support of the Centennial Challenges should not be couched in terms of promoting NewSpace and entrepreneurship but in terms of promoting education and inspiring the next generation of engineers to enter the field. Terms that Congress, especially Democrats now running it, understand and readily support.

On a side note if Mr Tumlinson is reading this is perhaps to look at other programs like SBIRS as something they can also concentrate on getting better funded or raising their cost caps. SBIRS is in my own opinion one of the best areas that the government has truly gotten right in promoting small, entrepreneurial firms. While not as glamorous perhaps as Centennial Challenges, it is perhaps much more effective.