Congress, NASA

NASA authorization bill text available

The full text of HR 6063, the NASA Authorization Act of 2008, is now available on Thomas. I have not had time to review it yet, but wanted to be sure people were aware it’s available and open up any discussion about its provisions (some of which has already started in the earlier post about the legislation.)

12 comments to NASA authorization bill text available

  • Ray

    Wow, I will second Al Fansome’s comment that everybody should take a look at the text. On first reading (without comparing numbers with last year, etc), a lot of it seems very good to me, and the whole thing is interesting. Some more excerpts to add to Al’s:

    It is in the national interest for the United States to have an export control policy that protects the national security while also enabling the United States aerospace industry to compete effectively … [a study is requested later]

    Earth Science – … including $29,200,000 for Suborbital activities …

    Planetary Science – … $2,000,000 to continue planetary radar operations at the Arecibo Observatory in support of the Near-Earth Object program …

    Astrophysics – … including $27,300,000 for Suborbital activities …

    Heliophysics – … including $50,000,000 for Suborbital activities …

    [a general statement supporting increased suborbital use also appears]

    $100,000,000 shall be to augment funding for International Space Station Cargo Services to enhance research utilization of the International Space Station, to remain available until expended …

    $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, to be used to accelerate the initial operational capability of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle …

    [NASA/NOAA] develop a process for Federal agencies to transition, when appropriate, NASA Earth science and space weather missions or sensors into operational status …

    NASA shall develop a plan for the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) … [hardware sitting around]

    CONGRESSIONAL INTENT.—It is the intent of Congress that NASA shall make use of commercial services to the maximum extent practicable in support of its lunar outpost activities. …

    identify opportunities to leverage technologies in NASA’s Constellation systems that deliver a rich, multimedia experience to the public, and that facilitate participation by the public, the private sector, and international
    partners. …

    ensure that provision is made in the design and construction of all future observatory-class scientific spacecraft intended to be deployed in Earth orbit or at a Lagrangian point in space for robotic or human servicing and repair. …

    contingency plan … in the event that United States commercial cargo resupply services are not available during any extended period …

    RFI for
    a low-cost space mission with the purpose of rendezvousing with and characterizing the Apophis asteroid …

    The Administrator shall give consideration to prize goals such as the demonstration of the ability to provide energy to the lunar surface from space based solar power systems, demonstration of innovative near-Earth object survey and deflection strategies, and innovative approaches to improving the safety and efficiency of aviation systems …

  • Aremis Asling

    Section 902 caught my eye. There’s some really strong wording in there to not just support COTS D but to favor it over the CEV whenever possible. Plus 100,000,000 in funding, half to the development of the vehicle itself and half for the technologies to make it work with the ISS and other systems. I’m guessing SpaceX’s newly minted lobbyists are driving hard for this bill.

    Anyone have any projections as to the probability of this thing getting approved?

  • Aremis Asling

    On further thought, I wonder with the priorities NASA has put in place already if some of these realignments won’t end up being the downfall of the bill.

  • GRS

    Looks like the House got it right on other points, as well. Note the direction given to OSTP to develop a plan for resumption of Plutonium fuel production for Radioisotope Power Systems. For Sec 505:

    (a) Plan- The Director of OSTP shall develop a plan for restarting and sustaining the domestic production of radioisotope thermoelectric generator material for deep space and other space science missions.

    (b) Report- The plan developed under subsection (a) shall be transmitted to Congress not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

    This is certainly a capability needed for science missions beyond the inner solar system. But it may also be important for lunar science and as a power backup for lunar crew operations.

  • Ray

    Aremis Asling: “Anyone have any projections as to the probability of this thing getting approved?”

    Well, considering that they’re asking for $19,210,000,000, which is a bit of a boost, and considering the hurdles it would have to go through, I’d hazard a guess that the chances are low. Even if the bill doesn’t survive its current form, though, it does show some sort of political support for areas that haven’t done so well recently, and recognitiion of the importance of those areas in Congress. I think some trends shown in the bill have a lot of staying power and will eventually make it.

    All speculation though …

  • Vladislaw

    SEC. 601. UTILIZATION.

    The Administrator shall take all necessary steps to ensure that the International Space Station remains a viable and productive facility capable of potential United States utilization through at least 2020 and shall take no steps that would preclude its continued operation and utilization by the United States after 2016.
    ———————————————-

    This clause will make the russians happy, they have already pushed for this.

    ———————————————-
    SEC. 502. PROVISION FOR FUTURE SERVICING OF OBSERVATORY-CLASS SCIENTIFIC SPACECRAFT.

    The Administrator shall take all necessary steps to ensure that provision is made in the design and construction of all future observatory-class scientific spacecraft intended to be deployed in Earth orbit or at a Lagrangian point in space for robotic or human servicing and repair.

    ———————————————-

    Did they add a docking port to the Webb telescope? Good idea and it really confirms that ares 1 and V are still on the platter.

    ——————————————-

    (b) Additional Flight To Deliver the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer to the International Space Station- In addition to the flying of the baseline manifest as described in subsection (a), the Administrator shall take all necessary steps to fly one additional Space Shuttle flight to deliver the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer to the International Space Station prior to the retirement of the Space Shuttle.

    I thought certain members of the house on the ways and means committee were opposed to anymore shuttle flights, do you think they will fly this one?

  • space-student

    Remember this is only an authorization bill. Programs are rarely funded at their authorized level. But it looks like the appropriate wording has been included in this to keep things moving in the right direction.

  • Al Fansome

    VLADISLAW: I thought certain members of the house on the ways and means committee were opposed to anymore shuttle flights, do you think they will fly this one?

    Data please?

    There has been growing support for the AMS-02 on the Hill because of an effective lobbying campaign managed by the Nobel Prize winner that leads the AMS-02 project. The Senate has been strongly supporting the AMS-02.

    NOTE: NASA will not be given any more money for an extra flight. It will just come out of Constellation’s hide.

    – Al

  • anonymouspace

    “Anyone have any projections as to the probability of this thing getting approved?”

    The three biggest hurdles that this bill faces are NASA opposition to certain sections, White House opposition to the additional funding, and the lack of a companion bill in the Senate.

    If the NASA leadership (and I’m not talking about Griffin & Co. specifically, just generally) doesn’t want to implement certain sections (reports, independent reviews, technical direction, funding for certain programs, etc.), they can have their legislative affairs office work with various congressional staff to have those sections struck or modified. Depending on the number and magnitude of the issues, this can really tie up a bill in subcommittee or committee and prevent it from reaching the House floor.

    At each step of the bill process, the White House also sends a Statement of Administration Position (or SAP). A SAP will usually support some sections and suggest changes to others. If the issues are big enough, a SAP may even threaten to veto a bill unless certain changes are made. Given that the authorized level is $1.6 billion or 9 percent higher than what the White House requested for the NASA budget in FY 2009, the White House is probably going to come down negatively on the bill overall, which may further slow its passage through the House, especially if there’s a loyal Republican or two at the subcommittee or committee level. NASA will also pile on, adding their concerns to the White House SAP, in addition to working angles or slowballing with different congressional staff. Since this is only an authorization bill that does not result in actual funding, I doubt that the White House would threaten a veto, but their opposition could add to any NASA leadership concerns and further slow the process.

    Finally, there’s little that the House can do to force the Senate to develop its own version of the bill. Unless the Senate moves their own NASA authorization bill, and there’s no indication yet this year that they plan to, the best that can be hoped for is that this House bill makes it through subcommittee and committee relatively intact and gets passed on the House floor. But if it gets that far, the process probably ends there.

    Finally, it must be remembered that this is an authorization bill. It only authorizes the maximum amount that congressional appropriators can spend on the NASA budget. There is almost always a large gap between what is authorized and what is appropriated in the NASA budget. So even if by some miracle this bill makes it into law, it’s still highly unlikely that the appropriators will provide the necessary funding.

    My 2 cents is that this bill was not generated with the expectation of passage and is not aimed at the current White House or NASA Administrator. Rather, it’s House staff signaling to the next White House and NASA Administrator what they think is important. The further the bill gets, the more seriously those signals will be taken, but the bill doesn’t have to make it into law to send that message.

    Hope this helps… FWIW…

  • Ray

    anonymous.space: “My 2 cents is that this bill was not generated with the expectation of passage and is not aimed at the current White House or NASA Administrator. Rather, it’s House staff signaling to the next White House and NASA Administrator what they think is important.”

    I agree; in fact Chairman Udall’s statement said something to that effect:

    In addition to providing funding and programmatic direction for Fiscal Year 2009, this bill is also intended to provide congressional guidance for the next Administration relative to NASA. I believe that it is critically important for Congress to do so. Without a clear statement of congressional priorities and policies for the nation’s civil space and aeronautics enterprise, we run the risk of wasting both time and scarce resources during and after the transition from one Administration to the next. I want to avoid such an outcome if at all possible.

  • Ho Kim Hung, Patrick

    Dear sir/madam

    Space was full of a mystery. This mystery full of many resources and knowledge is waiting us to find out. Every times navigate by space must use much rocket fuels. Try to think that if navigate by space not need use any rocket fuel, only use electricity. Is it wonderful? For this reason I development a Slow Speed Space Engine. My design not same as spacecraft ion engine (development by European Space Agency and the Australian National University). My invention principle is use the basic principle of physics. It is very easy made and easy maintains. It only use electricity but need use rocket engine to get free from strong attraction like planets gravitation. It is because the Slow Speed Space Engine only has enough power navigate by space, it power not like the rocket engine so powerful. Though like that but use this design build the space ship size and weight can reduce. It is because the space ship not need carry too much rocket fuel to navigate by space. When go to Mars, space mining or probe the secrets of the universe, you not need worry have not enough fuel go to the destination or back to the earth. The space mining is one to solve the resource shortage problem. The space mining can use the machine find the ore afterwards start mining and transport mineral back to the earth. The solar energy or nuclear power is also can provide electricity. I believe this design is very suitable use in space program.
    If I can apply your funding, I can complete this designs. In Hong Kong not any funding supports person design therefore I need find other funding support.
    I live in Hong Kong (China). I not representative any company, organization or country. If I qualified or you have interest my idea, I very welcome answer for your question. My e-mail address is blueline_8888@yahoo.com.hk or skyrider@netvigator.com. I wait your good news.

    Yours sincerely,
    Ho Kim Hung, Patrick
    17th May, 2008

  • Ray

    Just for comparison, I tried figuring out the 2009 Administration request and House Authorization values side-by-side. Here’s what I came up with, for what it’s worth (not much). By the way, it looks to me like the $1B Ares/Orion acceleration value isn’t factored into the $19.21B total. If I’m right about that, the amount the Authorization is over the Administration value (1.8% over 2008) is quite a bit higher than 9%. That might be something to consider as we speculate on how likely the various provisions are to see the light of day. Anyway:

    Administration House

    Science 4,441.5 4,932.2
    *Earth 1.367.5 1,518.0
    *Planetary 1.334.2 1,483.0
    *Astrophysics 1,162.5 1,290.4
    *Heliophysics 577.3 640.8

    Aeronautics 446.5 853.4

    Exploration 3500.5 3,886.0
    *Constellation 3,048.2 same?
    *Advanced Capabilities 452.3 737.8
    COTS D and ISS docking adaptors 0 100.0

    Accelerate Ares/Orion 0 1000.0

    Operations 5,774.7 6,074.7
    *Shuttle 2,981.7 same?
    *ISS 2,060.2 same?
    *Support 732.8 same?
    Shuttle AMS 0 150.0
    augment ISS cargo services 0 100.0
    SOMD reserves and transition/retirement 0 50.0

    Education 115.6 128.3

    Cross-Agency 3,299.9 3,299.9
    *Center Mgmt 2,045.6 same?
    *Agency Mgmt 945.6 same?
    *Investments 308.7 same?

    IG 35.5 35.5

    Total 17,614.2 (1.8% increase) 19,210.0 (+ $1B ESAS add)

Leave a Reply to Vladislaw Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>