RSS Feed
Twitter
1 Comment
Keith's note: The Mars Science Laboratory Readiness to Proceed Review is underway and will last from 18-20 November.
"OBJECTIVES: The review board reviews the projects current technical and programmatic status in light of the progress made since the Re- Baseline Review, and is able to conclude that:
- The project's revised technical baseline & implementation approach for the 2011 opportunity remains viable, and adequate plans exist for closure of open items;
- The project's technical and programmatic risks are understood, have been credibly assessed, and plans and adequate resources exist for managing these risks to levels that are acceptable;
- The current cost to go is credible, and the programmatic resources, including the schedule margin, scope margin, and budget reserve, are adequate to complete the project within constraints with acceptable risk; and
- The Project is prepared to restart ATLO operations in February 2010, or has adequate plans and resources to complete preparations."
MSL SRB Team
Figueroa, Orlando - Chair GSFC
Calloway, Michelle - RM HQ
Beach, Tim - New RM HQ
Braun, Robert, SAIC
Casani, John, JPL
Copeland, Mike, SAIC
Cunningham, Glenn, SAIC
Erickson, Jim, JPL
Free, James, GRC
Grammier, Rick, JPL
Greathouse, Richard, HQ
Hagopian, Michael, GSFC
Hill, Adrian, APL
Irons, Jim, GSFC
Jurczyk, Steve, LaRC
Kieffer, Hugh, SAIC
Kim, Yunjin, JPL
Lee, Gentry, JPL
Luers, Philip, GSFC
Muirhead, Brian, JPL
Patel, Keyur, JPL
Roberts, Barney, SAIC
Scott, Steve, GSFC
Thibault, Steven, APL
Readiness to Proceed Review? What the hell is that? It's certainly not in the lifecycle defined in NPR 7120.5 or the technical reviews defined in NPR 7123.1. Of course you can do more reviews than the 14 mandatory reviews in 7123.1, but if you are, it is a sign that you are struggling. I don't put much faith in the SRB's established as part of the independent review process. They are pretty much a rubber stamp, because if they weren't, the would be recommending cancellation for a lot of NASA's major projects. Of course the SRB has no authority, only recommendations. Program management has complete and unfettered authority over all aspects of its projects. I understand it has to be that way, everyone else just provides recommendations. But our program management NEVER cancels projects, even when they are failing miserably. Even the Management Councils at the Agency level don't have the cojones to reign in out-of-control projects. Not to say that MSL is such a project, but one could certainly make the argument. I wonder if they follow the law passed by Congress which requires them to report to Congress if cost overruns exceed 15% and to conduct a Termination Review if cost overruns exceed 30%?