Science Committee Hears Administration Plans for Space Station

Publication date
Number
118

Five days after his confirmation, the new Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Jacob Lew, found himself in the hot seat at an August 5 House Science Committee hearing on problems with the International Space Station. Committee members challenged the Administration's optimistic, "wait-and-see" attitude toward Russia's fulfillment of its commitments, and the focus on only the most immediate problems.

This is the third Science Committee hearing on this issue in three months. Having heard the findings and recommendations of NASA's Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force (the Chabrow report; see FYIs #75, 100), the committee now awaited the White House response. The Chabrow report found the program's biggest threat to be Russia's inability to complete its commitments, and also that funding for the program, particularly in the FY 1999 budget request, is insufficient. Committee members wanted to hear a comprehensive, long-term strategy to end dependence on the Russian government, and an estimate of the expected costs.

"Unfortunately," commented chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), "the White House did not adopt the recommendation of the [Chabrow] Task Force or NASA to initiate a program to solve our long-term reliance on the Russians.... I think we are all anxious to hear," he added, "why it rejected NASA's recommendation to address our long-term dependence on Russia, why it will not provide the funds necessary to fix these problems...and why it thinks declining to address these issues now in the fiscal year 1999 budget process won't result in bigger problems later."

Lew was jointed at the witness table by NASA Administrator Dan Goldin and OSTP Associate Director Duncan Moore. They explained that last year - at the urging of the Science Committee - NASA developed a contingency plan to deal with delays in Russian contributions, and implemented the first step, development of an Interim Control Module as a potential backup for the Russian Service Module. "Given continued Russian shortfalls," Lew stated, NASA and the Administration are "now prepared to implement an additional step" by developing plans to modify the Space Shuttle "to meet a significant portion of the Station reboost requirements" to keep the station in its orbit. He testified that sufficient funds (approximately $50-100 million) could be found within NASA's FY 1999 budget request to begin this action.

As for longer-term actions expected to cost more than $500 million, Lew said "I'm not prepared to discuss that today." The Administration intended to review the issues this fall, he said, and its decisions would be reflected in the FY 2000 budget submission. "I know many of you would like to see a detailed plan today," he noted, but "we must be careful not to act in haste." The Administration would prepare contingency actions "on a year-by-year basis as problems arise," he testified.

When pressed about the likelihood of needing further contingency actions, Lew characterized recent talks with the Russian government as "encouraging," and said it would be premature to presume default by the Russians. "The decision can't be made on worst-case scenarios," he said. "We do not share the view...that there is no more hope that the Russians will fulfill their commitments." Sensenbrenner responded, "They've broken every other commitment and missed every other deadline; what leads you to believe anything's changed?" Space Station foe Rep. Tim Roemer (D-IN) mused, "What is the worst case?" since the U.S. is already "sending a buy-out package" to help save the Russian economy.

Rep. Nick Lampson (D-TX) challenged the Administration policy that to build the station at the lowest cost, NASA might have to cut or defer funding for Station operations or research. Delaying research is "not desirable," agreed Lew; "Our, and your, goal is to have the major purpose of the Station realized, which is research." Ranking Minority Member George Brown (D-CA) declared that from the beginning, "committee members have made it clear that financing the space station cost overruns out of the research budget is not an acceptable solution." Brown aligned himself with most of Sensenbrenner's comments, and described himself as "very, very deeply concerned that we're not taking the proper steps to assure ourselves that the station will come in, not on schedule and on budget, but a little less behind schedule and over budget."

Administration officials will begin this fall preparing the FY 2000 budget request, which will be submitted to Congress in February 1999.