1989 NASA AUTHORIZATION

THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 1988

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS,

Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:40 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bill Nelson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Staff present: David D. Clement, counsel; William S. Smith, Jr., science consultant.

Mr. NELSON. Good morning. Our meeting will come to order. Dr. Fletcher, we are delighted to have you as our lead off witness, as we get started on the round of NASA authorization hearings as we prepare for the mark-up of the NASA budget.

This is a particularly challenging year. We all have greeted with approval the President proposing to the Congress an increase in NASA's budget of just about $2.5 billion from around $8.9 billion in the present fiscal year to a level of close to $11.5 billion, yet we greet with that good news the sobering reality of the President's agreement with the congressional leadership last December in which the entire budget for non-defense discretionary can only rise by $3 billion. That is non-defense discretionary spending, everything that is not defense spending and everything that is discretionary or not entitlement spending such as social security, all of that spending in the Federal budget can only rise by $3 billion over this present fiscal year.

Our task is to figure out how to take a ten pound sack of potatoes and put it into a three pound sack. I'm not sure how we can do that. That's our challenge. All of the spending that is limited to $3 billion, not only includes NASA, not only includes all of the other general science and technology areas of the budget, such as the National Science Foundation, but includes everything else that is not entitlement programs in defense; the Department of Transportation, Department of Education, the Housing Department, all of those can only rise by $3 billion net against the deficit.

We have a rather challenging situation. In the President's budget proposal, he accommodates the $3.4 billion increase in the general science and technology area by cuts in other areas of the budget. He cuts severely, for example, in the housing area, what is called CDBGs, Community Development Block Grants. He almost eliminates what are called UDAGS, Urban Development Action Grants. He considerably clips other housing programs and that brings into play a whole new set of politics, particularly as it gets

into the allocation of these resources in the congressional budget resolution, which will be coming up before we ever even get to the point of determining what we are going to authorize in this Committee for NASA.

We are now facing the overall spending limits in different categories which will be placed upon us by a budget resolution.

For the first time, we have a rather unique set of circumstances in allocation of resources driven by the budget agreement between the President and the Congress last December. That is going to call on us to be inventive. It is going to call on us to be extremely most discerning in our allocation of the resources. It is going to call on us to be realistic.

All of this is in the context of NASA getting back on its feet as we get the Space Shuttle flying again and Admiral Truly and Dr. Fletcher, as you all accomplish that later on this summer, that is going to be a big shot in the arm.

Nevertheless, the budget battles are going to be fought before that day occurs. They are going to be fought early this year. It is not going into the summer and into the fall. These battles are going to occur over the course of the next couple of months because of the budget resolution coming out.

Our task is large and challenging. Dr. Fletcher, we welcome you in this realistic environment to come and share with us on your plan as you lead the National Aeronautics and Space Administra

tion.

Dr. Fletcher.

STATEMENT OF DR. JAMES C. FLETCHER, ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION, ACCOMPANIED BY DALE MYERS, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THOMAS CAMPBELL, COMPTROLLER

Dr. FLETCHER. Mr. Chairman, before I respond, I would like to introduce the folks at the table. You probably know them well. Mr. Dale Myers, Deputy Administrator and Mr. Tom Campbell, Comptroller of NASA, and also seated in the front row here are the program AA's from various headquarters' programs.

What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is to submit the prepared statement for the record and simply highlight some of the things that are in that statement. With your permission, I will do

So.

Commenting on your opening statements, we are well aware of the difficulty that we are facing because of the budget summit agreement, but what is in the prepared statement addresses what NASA needs. There are no extra dollars asked for anything. We think it is a tight budget and it's unfortunate that we have to ask for that large an increase in the year when the overall budget is tight. I want to re-emphasize it is a tight budget and is necessary to get NASA back on its feet, so to speak.

Proceeding with the highlights of the budget, the most important point is that this is a crucial year for NASA. It's a year with opportunities and hazards but it will make or break the nation's civil space program. There are three reasons for that. First, this is the year, as you mentioned, that we will restore the Space Shuttle to

safe flight. This is NASA's job. We are working on it. Things are going well. We are determined to succeed. Getting the shuttle flying again is the key to the revival of the space program and to the exciting missions like the Hubble Space Telescope which is scheduled to fly next year and the flights to Venus and Jupiter all scheduled for launching next year.

The second aspect of it is that this is the year the President has annunciated a National Space Policy. We now have long range goals. This policy reaffirms the goal of U.S. leadership in space. It stresses the key importance of the Space Station for our future in space and it recognizes the emergence of a commercial sector in the space arena and proposes to create opportunities for U.S. commerce in space.

For the first time, it sets the new long term national goal of extending human exploration and activity beyond the Earth orbit into the solar system. This opens the door to future missions to the moon or to Mars.

The President's policy sets goals and a clear course for the U.S. space program well into the 21st century. I believe it will have strong support in Congress and the public especially where there has always been strongly articulated concern that the space program has needed a new sense of direction pointed at the challenging new goals for the future and I will say this Committee also has urged us to do that. Now we have one.

The third point and perhaps this is the most important, this is the year of decision on NASA's budget, as you pointed out. This is not an ordinary budget year. It's not an overstatement to say that the entire future of the U.S. civil space program is at risk in this budget. Let me see if I can explain that.

The fiscal 1989 budget we are presenting, which totals as you said, $11.5 billion, comprises three main elements. It provides the funds required in fiscal 1989 to build up the flight rate of the Space Shuttle from one in fiscal 1988 to seven in fiscal 1989 and to ten in fiscal 1990. These funds are what it takes to get us back into space and start flying off the backlog of important national defense space science, space technology and commercial payloads that have been on hold for these past two and a half years.

It also provides the necessary build up of the Space Station which is required in the second year of hardware development. The fiscal 1989 requirement has been cut back, as you know, and the schedule revised to reflect the congressional fiscal 1988 reduction in the first year of funding for the Space Station development.

The third point, it provides for continuity and advances in space science, aeronautics and space technology, particularly the initiation of Advanced X-ray Astrophysics Facility satellite, major advances in astrophysics, development of an advanced solid rocket motor to upgrade the shuttle solid rocket boosters and to open this field to competition. We have had a lot of discussions on that subject in this Committee.

It also provides funds for the new Pathfinder program for developing the advanced technologies that will be required for future decisions to undertake human exploration beyond Earth orbit.

The point I want to emphasize is that failure to provide the funds required in fiscal 1989 for any one of these three main ele

ments of the budget will cut this space program off at the knees, and effectively keep the U.S. from achieving leadership in space, which all of us want to do.

For example, if we don't build back the Space Shuttle operations, the backlog of vital defense and science missions will remain on the ground unfulfilled. American astronauts will be denied effective access to space and our hopes for the restoration of U.S. leadership in space will be extinguished. If we don't move ahead with the Space Station, the teams will be disbanded and the goals of a permanent laboratory in space and a base in space for future exploration will have to be abandoned or deferred indefinitely.

If we can't aggressively pursue science and advanced technologies, we will not have the technical foundation we need for future achievements and the goal of long term U.S. leadership in space will become an idle dream. Also, of course, the country at large I will lose the benefits and the economic stimulation here on Earth of the advances in technology that we could make. We often make short term decisions which cost us in the long range and I think that is what would happen if we make significant cuts in this budget.

That's why I say that both the near and long term futures of the United States are at risk in the fiscal 1989 budget decisions that will be made this year.

I agree with you that some innovation is required in dealing with that and I'm hoping to work with you in that regard.

I'm well aware that the fiscal 1989 budget that NASA requires and which the President has recommended does represent a very substantial increase over the total appropriations for fiscal 1988. The plain fact, however, is that this increase is almost entirely due to the built in increases for building back the shuttle flight rate and for proceeding with the Space Station development on the basis approved by the Congress in fiscal 1988. We run our budget primarily from last year's budget.

The other increases are for advanced technology and facility improvements that must be initiated now to assure future U.S. leadership in space and aeronautics.

The President has faced these realities squarely and has provided the increases that NASA must have and has done so within the tight budget constraints that you mentioned and that were agreed to by the Congress and the President last year. He has provided strong policy leadership and a budget to back it up. Now it is up to Congress and I am confident that after your careful reviews you will recognize this need and provide to NASA the strong bipartisan support in Congress that we have always enjoyed in the past.

Before closing, I would like to remind you that the Space Station is really the key to the future of the U.S. space program, both for the full exploitation of space and Earth orbit and for human exploration beyond Earth orbit. Specifically, the Space Station will provide an in space laboratory for scientific research and commercial activities in materials processing. It will provide for life sciences, Earth monitoring, space physics and many other fields. It can also serve as a base for servicing co-orbiting unmanned science and commercial platforms.