Competition for available crude time and heavy demand for Key Facilities to limit the amount and type of experiment that can come to iss the crouton is already allocated at 100 to redress the challenge now is dependent on commercial crew providers who promised the capabilities as planned. With these capabilities nasa can had a crew member to devote most of the time to research to double the research time. However many technical challenges than the ability to fund the program could delay the efforts. Finally even if they can navigate the challenges challenges, demonstrating a return on investment is difficult and scientific research. In the short term it is essential that the continued to make progress to achieve the goal of the increased role and we reported that nasa could do more to define and assess on progress and for example, by assigning a measurable targets to the annual performance the tricks. They concurred and agreed to take action and respondent in conclusion it will likely require continued investment through 2024 and as a result to reassure the capabilities are being used to support scientific gains is critical furthermore to mr. Duke and communicating the return on investment to help support nasa to achieve the shared goal to sustained commercial markets in low earth orbit. This concludes my prepared remarks i am happy to take any questions you may have. Now live a lie to you recognize the doctor to present his testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Cook met cavorting thank you for the opportunity to discuss this research is the only platform of its kind and it is the essential to the nasa exploration goals. To prepare for the hearing here last for specific questions. I will address each opportunities and challenges. The Augustine Commission face the three stressors prolonged exposure to galactic radio shack a prolonged periods to microgravity and confinement in close quarters all of these are present in the iss environment. Marsha an operation in that war stressors which they did enviro the gravitational field with more than onethird of our zero new york. Unless they limit the centrifuge a day are limited descending and those to mars with no knowledge a over their responses a gravitational field less than hers. Two challenges dominate the landscape we can reasonably anticipate it will become worse as the facility ages and the demand to perform maintenance become more acute it is of matter of case sponsored research compete for resources with better coordination is needed. Ask about critical areas of research the National ResearchCouncil Survey that was completed 2011 at congress a request summarized 65 higher priority tasks and the steady created Research Plans to build a Research Enterprise with the goal of the Human Mission to mars. To ask about prairies prioritize the research is not a new concept we have been to read that close at 15 years but it is and scientific it is Something Like this the fundamental research or Transitional Research takes precedence over the Research Program purpose of the answer to the question has to be provided by government. Once those priorities are sequenced can be prioritized the research . Absolutely. The survey provides a very detailed scheme and criteria led to do so. The process operations is well understood cases receive 50 percent followed by Human Research then technology and what resources remain are devoted to biology and physical science. And the criteria that they should consider. With a simple yes or no question with a Robust Program exclamation point absolutely did transformation it was nothing short of remarkable. I have provided several examples but there are large gaps to of mars that would be one year or longer in the recently reported on this topic first they found the extension through 2024 would not provide enough time to mitigate Human Health Risks perspire not prepared to except that conclusion ted these risks a task analysis of future operations it did not address for additional research. Has the better to quantifier utility is the good metric but we need to look at the efficiency of the research in their research cheyenne is considered with a six person crew read the seventh member. My top recommendations are prioritized refused the essential resources with the nominal responsibility is research. And to extend biological experiments to incorporate marsh said gravity. Bet i am very optimistic that nasa can deliver another decade of research. Thank you for your support of the program and the opportunity to appear. Thank you mr. Pawelczyk all witnesses thanks for your testimony and members are reminded Committee Rules to limit questioning to five minutes and the chair recognizes himself. This question is for mr. Gerstenmaier end mr. Elbon the Spacex Mission had day docking mechanism with Water Filtration device and then do spacesuit on board. Can you explain the impact of loss of these items and how do you plan to mitigate the impact . Starting with the docking adaptor that is scheduled for the crew was lost we wanted to have two units in orbit before we began cruz flights we believe we can support them schedules to be as simple as us bear or a backup to work with the contract to get that on time but the docking adaptor is the cargo flight when it docker is sufficient to support the program and they can accommodate that the biggest impact is the cost to manufacture a third unit from the spare parts that remain with the multi filtration said the a japanese his fur vehicle flies and i guess we should get a new one manufactured thing studio steepening work of bowing to expedite the work. We have been trending down on doriden estate the space station and we will continue to monitor that carefully. The boss of the space to we will now reconfigure one. We will do repairs and have that available. And then to look at the Orbital Sciences corporation and to carry spacesuits is in the future read mitigated all your concerns but the impact is not significant we can accommodate. I will add to what he said the most difficult and involvement is the docking adaptor. In the third unit the parts are available to put the plan together to replace the one that was lost and were working very closely to undersea and though Water Filtration issue to get those ready to launch on the next resupply vehicle and i a agree we are in good shape next question is a the Aerospace Safety and buys every panel is reviewing the objectives for continuing you san clearly articulate to ensure the cost in safety risk is balanced given that human spaceflight is risky it needs to be weighed against the value to be gained what are nasa objective to expand operations through 2020 for . In then to ruth talk about the microgravity environment than have that risk mitigated to launder endeavors we have detailed investigations with their courage when your expedition to redress many of those issues and concerns moving forward. What is inside does nasa had been to the mishap been performed at spacex looking at the challenger accident and columbia you believe the investigation benefited from independent reviews separate from the program or the contractors . Meyer understanding since the faa granted the license to spacex they are leading the accident investigation with the orbital mishap that nasa has us separate review to get to their roots cause there but there is and the same accident investigation that were currently conducting with the contractor last accident investigation that is the way it is intended to be hispanic that completes my questions for girl. Thank you to the witness is. Mr. Merges report of september 2014 with of budget of 3 billion per year that it is reiterated through the testimony but i am curious, mr. Gerstenmaier, talk to the basis of crew and Cargo Transportation costs and i would note there has been three cargo mishaps in the last eight months does that factor into your projection for cost . It seems that alone will shoot the cost up as one could expect over the course of operations through 2024. So it would be helpful to know your basis for the estimated cost it respond to the challenges mr. Martin has laid out in the 2014 report. We have been working aggressively with cost control and consolidated some contracts to raise smaller number and also using competition into attempt to root drive down the cost rate now rewritten a blackout period through the never to contract award. We have good competition from that activity and will help us to hold the costs down for career actively working and aware of those issues as they have the objective strategies for it to remove cost for the Program Every think we can hold that cost down from what we have done and seen. Mr virgin mr. March said your 2013 report is your assessment that the projections are overly optimistic . And with your analysis with your mishap failures in terms of looking at the cost . Diane not sure how many accidents are factored in but i do think the cost objections are optimistic. Over the life of the program there is and 8 increase annually from 2011 to 2013 there was a 26 increase for the iss no moving forward extending the life of the station through 2024 that 59 of expenses will be four crew and Cargo Transportation and that is the big piece of the pie. For the panel if you look at the rationale to include research and technology to benefit society to establish commercial crab row and cargo if you believe what that top priority should be bin to figure out first, ed dr. Pawelczyk . That is a great question in extremely important for the said committee to take on. Release the idea of Discovery Science the Big Questions to have been inserted. So of a piece of Research Equipment when it was largely used in the Nobel Prize Winning awards. Social have a return on investment gives a translation and we have contended in the Scientific Community it is not our job to sequence those priorities but the job of the executive branch or the legislative branch to you have been clearer you said mars is very important but it is the and nestle will maintain the fundamental Research Program so you have already told us mars is the answer edward you look at the research the remains to be done over the risk in the red most of them or half of them are associated with the extended duration on mars with three years duration and. So to provide extended Research Capability the iss is our choice for that and that is how it should be used. Thank you. I will recognize mr. Brooks. Mr. Gerstenmaier, it in light of the recent launch failures for the Development Production of the commercially provided vehicles that service the iss is part of the a accident investigation with spacex. We have the representatives as part of that to be actively involved what occurred on the cargo vehicle within the hardware changes that need to be made somewhere actively involved to transition that information directly into the crew program. I appreciate that response and and i experience it has a tremendous amount of insight and expertise and i encourage an asset to show a the leadership of what theyre doing to assist with a commercial crew to being more successful than they have been. Retrospect to both mr. Elbon and mr. Gerstenmaier the loss of the spacex vehicle is a big loss as a replacement space to spacesuit for the iss whether the implications for the loss of the suit . As i describe your there we will take one hit inside or been refurbishing of their then develop a capability to transport suits on all vehicles to bring up as needed. With the analysis necessary to make sure the space station with the capabilities. What is the cost of the lost space suit . I can take that for a the record we have 38 available and we will not replace that it will not be replaced. Transparent investigation . Are they investigating without nasas role . I think he he could go into greater detail. Under the contracts the faa gives the license. Under the contract the contractor leads the investigation and review. Unlike past challenger where nasa themselves would need an independent investigation board. Nasa is a member, or an advisory member of their review board. They they are not leading the activity. Perhaps phil could go deeper on that. They are participating with the ntsb. They developed a fault tree just as nasa has done. The way they work that is that all three entities all have to agree that this item is closed and not contributing to the accident. Its by consensus and the Engineering Team led by spacex but fully represented by the government and the government cant say whether we accept or do not accept their explanation for what the root cause was. Its a fairly effective way for us and we can do our own independent research on the side. We can make sure we are representing the government. The best from nasa participating along with the contractor let activity. Do you feel confident that there is that transparency and that we as a body of congress will be able to see that transparency . So far it has been extremely transparent. We had the same transparency with the orbital investigation. It has been effective. We can show direct evidence of how that transparency is and how its being implemented. Thank you. Now i would like to recognize the gentleman from florida mr. Posey. Thank you mr. Chairman. We know that planning for the iss began 20 years before it was actualized and now were less than ten years out from the administrations proposed extension in 2024. Does nasa have plans for some station in lower earth orbit before then . Perhaps private partnerships . Does nasa intend to leave any station entirely to other companies . We are looking to see if we can leave that to commercial companies. We are allowing them to do investigations on station to see if they can get a market return and it make sense to do that. We believe the agencys role is to push further out in space and go into the region around the moon. We will move our research and our endeavors into that region. It helps the agency get prepared to take Bigger Missions toward mars. At this point we are envisioning a lower orbit that would be private sector activity. Well use the remaining station to let the private sector understand their research and investigation to see if it helps them from a fundamental research standpoint. Thats great to hear. Our government is investing in capital. Those capsules are optimized to get crews back and forth. What role capsules play once the space station reaches the end of its life . For the commercial crew program and the Cargo Program, the companies have an interest beyond just the nassau need. There building these capsules and will be able to operate them for their own purposes. They can use this transportation to deliver cargo to it, they can deliver crew to it etc. Outside of cetera outside of the government. This will essentially allow the private sector to get Transportation Services on its own to these companies that weve enabled as these initial startups. Thats great. The Space Shuttle and x37 are both example of reusable spacecraft. They they have had track records of success. Have they completely rolled out the use of reusable vehicles for crew or cargo in the future . The simple answer is no. In case of the oryan vehicle its geared toward deep space activities where carrying wings makes it difficult to reenter the atmosphere. The deepest base vehicle will usually be a capsule type vehicle but for lower space orbit it will be winged vehicles and they have many advantages as we saw through the shuttle program. Thank you mr. Chairman. I yelled back. A bike to recognize the gentleman from virginia, mr. Mr. Meyer. Thank you chairman. On the one hand weve had three unfortunate losses that we previously mentioned. On the other hand our commercial space industry is getting ready to grow exponentially. We are adding great value to our economy and civilization with satellites, internet, space to hers and even mars. Can we put we put this in the proper perspective compared to train and airline and automobile accidents . All the transportation accidents in history, are we looking at the relatively two or three that have come up in the right perspective compared to the last 150 years question. Thats an interesting question. I think the positive thing is in all three of these cases there have been no loss of life. That means our basic process and procedures are in line. We did the right thing. I think the right thing is to not get so fixated on the problem but how can we learn from the problem. As an emerging industry the more we fly the more we solve problems. The impacts are not devastating they hurt research but they are recoverable. The real tragedy will be if we dont learn from these events and dont understand the engineering behind the failure and improve the industry overall. Just as the Aviation Industry has suffered a lot of failures throughout its history, the reason for success today and the safety we have in the aircraft industry is a result of Lessons Learned and those lessons being applied to build better and safer aircraft. We need to do the same thing in the space industry. We need to learn from these events, internalize it not be afraid of it, internalize it, not be afraid of it, figure out how to make design changes and build a more robust Transportation System. I see see this as a painful but may be necessary learning process. Its excellent to learn on cargo. We do not want to learn on crew. We will learn from cargo and apply those to crew. Thank you for your optimistic attitude. Why you have the microphone up the safety panel has determined some key safety concerns. How do