Step as nasa still has low confidence, 30 that it can meet the earlier date. Going forward, we have short and longterm concerns about nasas human Space Exploration programs. In the short term the programs are entering the most risky phases of development. There are still technical hurdles to overcome. Particularly with the orion spacecraft which is addressing challenges with the parachute system and heat shield among others. There is also considerable development and testing ahead for orion in terms of the human support systems. Meanwhile, sos is continuing to pursue the earlier launch dates of december 2017. While nasas urgency is understandable, the schedule for achieving the earlier date mostly with respect to the core stage is very aggressive. Theres little room to address problems. Moreover, it does not appear that orion and the ground system can achieve the earlier date. And the longterm we have concerns about the cost estimating for human Space Exploration programs. Nasas only produce estimates for sos and ground system through the first flight test and orion through the second flight test. There is still Significant Development ahead for sos after the first flight and significant operations and sustainment cost for all three programs. Moreover, there is still uncertainty about action taken after the second test. Without knowing the missions formally, nasa is limited in its plan for the future and is at risk for closes today that will not make sense later. Affordability for the long haul is a real issue and one that they had theorys on. But to garner the longterm commitment from the congress and taxpayers, that is needed to make this program a success, we need transparent and realistic estimates about the resources that will be needed to achieve the nations goals for human Space Exploration. Thank you. Wh that concludes my statement. Im happy to answer any question is you have. Committee rules limit questions to five minutes. The chair will open the round of questions. The chair recognizes himself for five minutes. Mr. Gerssten meyer, in the test by gao miss Chaplin States that gao found that nasas proposed funding levels affected the sos program. The Program Ability to resources since its inception. Gao reported that sos is tracking a 400 million shortfall in funding as the most significant risk. Nasa officials have testified multiple times before this committee that the president s budget request was sufficient to keep the sos and orion on budget and on schedule. I realize there is a tough question for you to answer because you have to defend the president s budget request, but congress is ultimately responsible for funding this program and ensuring taxpayer dollars are efficiently spent. Given that nasa has now delayed the launch of sos due to funding pressure, what funding level would keep the 2017 date on track . Again i would say that the that the recent review we did, problematic review that christine why talked about, we o committed to joint confidence level of 28 and thats consistent with the budget we submitted to congress through the administration. Thats a consistent plan. We have been trying to work to an earlier schedule and thats based on the Risk Mitigation or extra fund weg received from congre congress. We try hold the earlier launch dlat we can potentially hold moving forward. We need to be aware of the concerns that gao brought up and make sure we dont overly pressure that schedule and try to work too fast and do things that end up in wasting the funds or wasting of resources. So our current planning we were Holding December of 2017. I would say weve now moved off of that date. We will be somewhere in 2018 timeframe. Now with our current planning and thats just based on the reality of problems that have come along if the program and some uncertainty and funding. We will move a little bit into planning dates and i would say the june timeframe of 2018 and still ahead of our commitment into 2018 consistent with the president s budget request. So i would say were managing in this kind of interesting environment where we get different funding levels. There is technical progress and sos is entering, and where they actually go into manufacture of hardware and we will see how that goes over the next couple months in january, february and march. And we balance the budget needs that we have over all. And try to deliver a program as effectively ooze we can for the nation and for the congress. Ms. Chaplin, gao noted in the past that the sos and orion programs do not have innovative schedules for development and launch. How is nasa plannaging the schedules for the two programs so they launch, not just on time, but at the same time. There are still different dates in final launches and orion is tbd, you could say right now, because they are about go into the process where they look at their resources, their schedules and they seat launch date. At this time, it does not look like they could make 2017 and 2018 is even a clael in and of itself. So we look forward to seeing what that date really is. And then having the dates of the other programs align. And it is important to plan it a single date as early as you can so that you can align tasks appropriately to meet that date. You dont unnecessarily spend resources trying to meet dates that other people or other systems cant meet. So well have to see what happens after this next kdbc cycle for orion and see how all of the dates shake out. I now recognize ms. Edwards. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Again, thank you for the testimony. We have all recognized that resources for orion sos programs have been constrained. And i think we can acknowledge as well that flat budgets are not optimal for carrying out Major Development programs like orion and sos. But i am impressed with how much progress has been made on these programs given these constraints. And as you know, the committee has a goal of having sos and orion operational at the earlier possible date. You indicated that. But you also indicated slippage based on the budget constraint. Were going to be authorizing nasa again well, reauthorizing next year. So i want to understand what the additional progress could be made on the sos and orion programs if we were to authorize additional resources. And whether or not the impact on the exploration programs, whether there would be any impact if there were inflationary increases as recommended by the National Academies report of 5 increase, say. And would a sustained increase of this kind of magnitude be sufficient to accelerate the progress that you described for projecting launch dates for em1 and 2 or would it only be enough to reduce the risk of those dates being pushed even further to the right. I guess im just trying to figure out what would get us back to a 2017 target. You seem to indicate it is not just resources but you know, even ms. Chaplin acknowledges that the 2018 dates are at risk as well because of the uncertainty around budget constraints. And think one thing that could be helpful us to is to get stability and understanding what the budget is. It is difficult for the programs to plan for potentially what could be a congressional budget versus administration budget. To get some agreement between administration and congress so we know what the plan for in terms of budget would be helpful for us overall. As well as the absolute level. In terms of the technical work, again i think we have really probably moved off of december 2017 when i look at the work so i dont think funding will pull us back to that date. I also respectfully have a difference of opinion with gao. I think it is perfectly fine to complete one of these programs ahead of the others. They dont need to all sneak up at exactly the same time. When you take a vehicle to launch at the Kennedy Space center, technically the rocket is ready to go well before the payload is. It is to our advantage to have difference in scheduled between tlem. I think sos coming first. Having ground systems ready if florida and orion showing up at the third place is perfectly fine. It is not going to Waste Resources on if em1 is complete. If sos is ready to fly we will begin working on the next core for the flight of sos. So that will transition immediately from em1 to em2. So there is an need to have all of the programs synced up. We have to be careful and think about that. If there is extra constraint in where i have to sync up and match all of the schedules, i think that puts another burden in that can make an inefficiency. Again from a technical standpoint, where probably under 2018, where sos and the first part with funding levels weve he is not, we have made commitment and kdbc activity and ground ops in june of 2018 with our commitment and were in the process of doing the orion evaluation date. With the rocket and spacecraft without a mission, we set a longterm goal of a house pass nasa authorization act for 2014 of sending humans to mars. And we need a roadmap from nasa, the best way to get there. And it seems to me that now is the time for that. What role do you see sos and orion having in reaching that goal and when will we have a strategy for getting there . I think both sos and orion play a key role and that strategy described, sos is heavy lift launch is that we need that ability to launch that much to go do a mars mass mission. With what you see in the test and hire from a lunar return velocity which most capsules have not so those two components are critical to our mars strategy. There is others that need to be added. And we are actually using space station today to buy down risk on the Human Performance and how well systems work. So i think it was talked about the life support system of orion is being tested on space station today. So we are actually getting a chance to see how the mean swing bed operations work on board space stations. So we can use all these pieces to continue to advance towards mars but i dont think there is any request that these two pieces fit squarely in any plan for mars activity. So we should set aside that criticism, right . Yes. Thank you. Now recognize mr. Brian stein from oklahoma. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for your leadership on this very important committee. Thank you to our witnesses providing testimony today. Its an honor to be with you and certainly hear your testimony. Gene, the last man to walk on the moon, took off the moon december 17, 1972. Three years before i was born. He was naval af aviator, engineer, electrical engineer, a pilot, fighter pilot, and an astronaut. He and so many others that accomplished that pentacle feat, never went back to the moon. And i think that is a tragedy. And certainly something that this committee needs to be aware of. It hasnt happened in my lifetime. My parents remember exactly where they were the first time it happened with Neil Armstrong and buzz aldrin. Congress as a whole commissioned a report that cost 3. 2 million. They spent 18 months, it was a group of individuals led by governor Mitch Daniels and they came up with a report called pathways to exploration. And one thing that i thought was telling in this report is they talk about a horizon goal. What is the horizon goal for nasa . And their horizon goal, according to them, nasas horizon goal, aught to be mars. And of course there are stepping stones, pathways, to get to land a human on mars and bring humans home from particulars. And interestingly, it says the Current Program to develop launch vehicles for spacecraft for flight beyond leo cannot provide the flight frequency required to maintain competence and safety. And i will read that again. Cannot provide the flight frequency required to are main competent and safety. I took a trip down to houston. I talked to them about sos. Of course, everybody was looking forward to the first launch. It was going to be december of 2017. Now were here in 2018. What is interesting is what the followon launch after that was go tock. A human long. In 2021. And my initial reaction as a navy pilot, remember, gene sterni sternan inspired guys like me to join the United States navy, to become a pilot. It was aspirational. This is the benefit to the United States of america. And they said 2017, i would be the first launch, 2018 could be what it flips to and ultimately we launch a manned Orion Mission in 2021. Now, it would appear that would have to flip as well. But my initial reaction is we are going four years without a launch. And then put men in the vehicle and add women in the vehicle and send them into space. And my question for you mr. Girssten meyer sorry, my name is briden stein, so i live with the same problem. My question for you is, do you agree with there assessment that Current Program develop launch vehicles for the spacecraft for flight beyond leo cannot provide the flight frequency required to maintain competent and safety. Do you agree with that . We are looking closely at those concerns. First of all, i would say that fact that em1 move need 18 doesnt mean that em2 has moved also. We will continue to look at ways of holding that. We are looking at building a system that we can fly repeatedly and fly for reasonable cost. And we still owe answers to gao on those activities. Our goal is once we fly crew in 21 we would like to fly roughly at flight rate of about once per year. And were off analyzing that once per year flight break to see if you can achieve that within our budgets and think if does that provide enough frequency of flight that it answers the safety concerns and we are off analyzing both of those activity right now. So our intent would be to take this period between the first uncrewed flight of orion to deep space on the sos and second flight with crew and follow that with roughly one flight per year after that. And did you agree that the verizon goal of the United States aught to be landing humans on mars . Yes. And at nasa we see three phases. We test out systems like i described. We also understand how the human body performs in micro gravity. Doing a oneyear expedition next year. And see if humans can with with stand going to mars. And the next region of space around the moon, thats where we are now days away from return. We can test the systems, look at orbital mechanics. See deep space radiation. Rendezvous without communication to the ground. We can verify and validate the concepts that will be needed to take us eventually to mars and the last phase is earth independent or the mars ready phase and thats this horizon goal you describe. But we think we have a macro level and orderly process beginning in lower oisrbit and eventually moving on to the mars Class Mission. If you will entertain me for a few seconds here, i would like to ask one last question. Which is, the report here that we commissioned, 3. 2 million, 18 months, a lot of experts they ipdcate that given our flat funding for the human space flight director that we wont accomplish that mission of getting to mars. Given where we are with flat funding, do you agree with that assessment . We are going to need some funding level above flat funding. Would you be willing to come back and provide us what kind of level is necessary in toward accomplish the objective . We can provide that and we can take that for the record and describe that. Again, it is going to be an assumption of the timeframe and the timeframe is driven. Not only by funding requirements but also by have we gained enough experience in space, have we brought down enough technical risks. Are we ready to take that next step. So there are several components. More than just a budget discussion. Also the technical speed and the assurance of what we can learn during period moving forward. And that obviously would require more flight frequency than what were currently getting. The gentlemans time expired. Thank you, sir. We may have six or seven thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you so much to the witnesses for being here today. Its really pretty exciting time for the u. S. Space program. I know that my colleagues and i all watched this orion test launch with great interest and i want to also join my colleagues to congratulate nasa. Lockheed martin. United launch alliance and everyone who participated in this test flight. I heard from some of my constituent who really applauded this, saw this as a big step in our leadership in space. And that comes as welcome news as we are trying to inspire and spark interest in the next generation of young scientists. In our previous space subcommittee hearings, we talked about the challenges communicating the importance of nasas work and mission to our constituency who support the mission with their hardearned tax dollars. As mr. Briden stein was saying, we have a lot of people who are inspired, looking back to the Apollo Missions and moon landings. But that Public Outreach is really important. And i noticed that you gave us a publication here that has it takes a country that talks about all of the places across the country where the parts and pieces were supplied and purchased and that showes a broad range of states and businesses im sure that participated in that. That kind of thing is important to convince our constituents of the importance economically as well. I want to make sure mr. Briden stein saw that congressman on board picture in this publication, too. You have some of our congressmen pictured in there. Also, i know that the budget challenges and the lack of certainty is very, very important. And mr. Girssten meyer, you talk about that need for stability. And it certainly is something that we talk about here on a regular basis. That that certainty in Decision Making is and longterm thinking is so important, especially more so for nasa than many of the other decisions we make here. And also we know about the importance of safety. Acknowledging as we all know that Space Exploration involves risk. There are safety concerns and i know that nasa does a lot to address those. So mr. Girssten meyer, some have said that outfitting orion with the necessary life support equipment on the first Cruise Commission will cause the spacecraft to be overweight. So should we be concerned about that . What options does nasa have to mitigate this possibility . And if the flight test that we just flew the next flight of orion will