This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Personnel News

Bolden Seeks To Replace Multiple Center Directors

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
August 23, 2012
Filed under , ,

Keith’s 22 Aug note: Multiple sources report that NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden is planning to fire/reassign Ames Center Director Pete Worden and two other center directors as well.
Keith’s 22 Aug update: Sources report that Bolden has also discussed replacing both GRC (Ray Lugo) and JSC (Mike Coats) center directors even though neither have done anything to warrant replacement. Reassigning Woodrow Whitlow from NASA HQ has also been discussed. However, Bolden’s real focus is on going after Pete Worden – and these other replacements and/or chess moves are being discussed as window dressing to obscure that focus.
This is a good time to try and pull something like this off: the long Labor Day weekend is approaching, most of Congress is out of town and/or distracted by the upcoming conventions, the presidential election, and, in many cases, their own re-elections.
Cleveland’s NASA Glenn chief has no departure plans, despite blog report, Cleveland Plain Dealer
“But Lugo told The Plain Dealer Wednesday night that he had spoken to Bolden earlier in the day, and that the NASA administrator “confirmed to me that he is not planning to replace me or move me. To the best of my knowledge – and I’ve talked to the boss – there’s no truth to the rumor.” … In light of that, “Charlie and I, and most of the rest of the center directors, had a discussion about what people’s plans are for the near-term future, the next six to seven months,” Lugo said. Bolden “was just asking everybody what are their plans.”
Rumor: NASA chief Bolden considering replacing JSC director, Houston Chronicle
“The following statement comes from spokesman Mike Cabbage at NASA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C.: “We have a great management team at NASA, doing amazing things every day to keep the United States the world leader in space exploration. We’ve just landed the most sophisticated rover ever on Mars and we’re launching a space weather mission on Friday. Right now, we’re just focused on building on this record of success.”
Keith’s 23 Aug update: NASAWatch stands by its postings. Personnel plans often change quickly – especially when they are made public. As such, sources now report that Mr. Bolden has been directed not to make any of these senior personnel actions.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

46 responses to “Bolden Seeks To Replace Multiple Center Directors”

  1. dougmohney says:
    0
    0

    Reassign is one thing, fire is another.

    Guess we’ll see. 

  2. kcowing says:
    0
    0

    Actually the time-honored way to get rid of an SES employee (especially at NASA) is to reassign (promote)  them to a job that you know they will not take. Their only option is to resign. And then they are gone.

  3. Chuck Wayland says:
    0
    0

    Any time frame given as to when these changes might be announced?

  4. Fred says:
    0
    0

    Bolden can try, but its not his exclusive call. Its up to Congress to give the green light. The way its always been and will be.

    • Kate says:
      0
      0

      It is actually Bolden’s call.  The President (or his people) could tell him not to do it, but Congress does not have that right.  They can complain, but these are not Senate confirmed positions, so they have not vote.

      • Fred says:
        0
        0

        center directors are semi-political and do require the blessing of the state’s congressional delegation.

        • Kate says:
          0
          0

          They do not require the blessing of the congressional delegation.  Congress can make a fuss and hold hearings, but that is all.  It would be silly to ignore them, or do it without their blessing, but there is no such requirement.

      • eech1234 says:
        0
        0

        However, if the Senate decides they don’t agree with Bolden’s actions they can haul him in for questioning anyways.

  5. Ben Russell-Gough says:
    0
    0

    A message to the minions: “Obey or else”?

  6. phobos123 says:
    0
    0

    Hasn’t Ames been really successful under Worden?  I don’t know how to compare to others, but they’ve got some missions that stand out, and I thought they were responsible for a lot of the successful PPP, outreach, and other activities that are essential for NASA’s delivering value to the U.S. beyond just big flagship missions.

  7. Andrew_M_Swallow says:
    0
    0

    The people the boss appoints frequently reveals what he wants.  So what agenda is being used for choosing the replacements?
    Yes-men?
    We want to go to the Moon or Mars or Asteroid men?
    Anti-SLS men?
    Pro-SLS men?
    Or something really odd such as feminists?

  8. dougmohney says:
    0
    0

    I wonder if there is any linkage with the FOIA requests on NASA conference spending. Hmm. 

  9. Fred says:
    0
    0

    Rumor of Coats retiring has been around for over a year. He has been the longest serving JSC director in its history. Some say he is waiting till the election in hopes of a new administration that would select someone that would understand and preserve JSC’s value to the Nation.

  10. GRSG says:
    0
    0

    Pete Worden is one of the good guys. Is this what being good does for your career?

  11. brunnegd says:
    0
    0

    NASA needs a DoD-type BRAC.  Too many centers, too many people doing make-work.  The overhead to carry the centers is keeping funding from being used for advancement of the NASA mission.

    • no one of consequence says:
      0
      0

      Yeah sure. I’ve heard this since the 70’s. Total nonsense.

      But unlike BRAC, the centers have facilities you can’t move or recreate. So – “never going to happen”.

      There are many pools of funding that keep NASA from its mission. All directed by Congress. To Congressional districts. Much bigger issue.

  12. tao54nyc says:
    0
    0

    Lord knows we can’t have a successful maverick at the helm of a NASA center. Something useful might actually get accomplished. :/

  13. nuttyunclepaul says:
    0
    0

    why worden? i don’t get it.

  14. 2814graham says:
    0
    0

    Mike Coats seems to have disappeared a few weeks ago with Dr. Ochoa standing in for some time now. Maybe Coats is just taking a few weeks off for summer vacation. Coats is a nice guy, a good friend of Bolden (they went to school together) so I’d be surprised if Bolden instigated the change. From where I sit the Center Director has little real authority and the programs have the resources and the control and I think that is where some serious change is needed (whats left of the programs).   

  15. William Ogilvie says:
    0
    0

    Pete Worden always joked about wanting to do such far-out stuff he’d get fired.   If it’s a disagreement with HQ it may be Google-money vs RIF.  He is well liked, has accomplished a lot, and will be missed.  Six years is a long time at any job  in Silicon Valley.

  16. Nox Anonymous says:
    0
    0

    Keith – Don’t say “Multiple Sources” when you can’t provide them. They are Multiple Anonymous Sources inside the agency.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      Wrong. Multiple sources Inside, outside the agency. I can’t name them.  Don’t like how I cover things?  Read another website.  Funny how someone posting under the name “Nox Anonymous” gets all hot and bothered about anonymous sources.

  17. Steve Harrington says:
    0
    0

    Pete Worden is doing a great job integrating Ames with the local business community. And having the entrepreneurial, creative and results focused people of Silicon Valley interact with NASA is a good thing. 

  18. thehuntsman1961 says:
    0
    0

    The rummor of Mike Coats leaving has been arround. I would like to see them bring Wayne Hale back as center director. The man is gifted with intelligence, insight into people and a dedication to the mission of NASA… not just JSC. in my humble opinion!

    • 2814graham says:
      0
      0

      While Wayne Hale does have the intelligence, insight and communications ability, I have seen enough astronauts and flight directors in positions of center-level leadership at JSC to last a decade or two. JSC, if it is to remain useful, needs to re-establish itself as a technical center of excellence for human space vehicle development. I’m not sure if anyone from within JSC higher management currently fits the need. Maybe you could bring someone like former astronaut, retired General Kevin Chilton in to provide leadership in advance development, which he seemed to do a great job with in the USAF. Whoever it is needs to be a proven leader with serious technical credentials.

  19. oxbridge says:
    0
    0

    A more pertinent question is why hasn’t Lugo been
    heretofore removed? The Inspector General (IG) executed an investigation of
    Lugo (as well as his Deputy Director, former Associate Director, and former
    Chief of Staff), resulting in a final report titled “Alleged Allegations
    of Criminal Misconduct by the Glenn Center Director,” which was rendered
    in October 2011. The situation is akin to that of the recent Penn State tragedy
    in which an administrator was fully aware of a subordinate’s misconduct, had
    the resources and authority to correct the problem, and chose not to act. What
    the people of Glenn Research Center have had to endure during Lugo’s tenure is
    abominable and the lack of leadership at NASA Headquarters is nothing less than
    gross negligence. Allowing the situation to continue for as long as it has
    without intervention is reason for Bolden and Garver to be replaced as well.
    The abuse of public trust and taxpayer funds is inexcusable. The rationale for
    which the Government Services Agency (GSA) Chief had to recently undergo
    congressional hearings is a walk in the park compared to the situation at
    Glenn.  All FOIA requests for the report
    of which I am aware have been denied by the IG.

    • Spaceman888 says:
      0
      0

      Ray Lugo was a joke at KSC and has been a bigger joke at GRC.  He has accomplished nothing during his tenure at GRC except for padding his travel schedule and refurnishing his diggs at GRC.  I’d love to see the report mentioned above.  I remember when he started and established a goal of $1 billion in Center funding.  Who knew he was talking about granite floors and $20K conference room tables.  Let’s face it, GRC is the EEO experiment that failed very badly and Ray Lugo is just the latest installment in rubbish management.  I say shut it down and put the $700 million to better use!

      • Robin Seibel says:
        0
        0

        Aside from Lugo, please explain how GRC is failed experiment that should be shuttered.  I’d argue that given the work that has been done there, GRC should absolutely stay open.

        • Spaceman888 says:
          0
          0

          Obviously you have not been around very long Robin.  Do an audit of LeRC/GRC achievements from say 1975 to 1995 and compare that to the last 17 years.  Or better yet, do a comparison of achievements from Silverstein to Ross and compare that to those of Campbell to Lugo and see what you come up with.  And here is another idea, do a search on and compare the content and quality of technical reports in those two time frames.  That is pretty revealing as well.  Then finally, compare the salary of a GS13-15 to the equivalent engineer/manager in the private sector in the Cleveland area, now that is really interesting.  The downward trajectory in actual accomplishments, quality and importance of work, and bang for the taxpayer buck is quite evident and you’ll convince yourself very quickly that over the last 15-17 years GRC has become nothing more than a jobs program for the upper-middle class.  Good luck!

  20. RocketBuilder says:
    0
    0

    I once heard Pete Worden say, “If you are not about to get fired, then you are not really doing your job.”

  21. Geoffrey Landis says:
    0
    0

    It’s very hard to understand the timing: two months and two weeks before a presidential election?  Doesn’t seem like a good time to do a shake-up in NASA management, since regardless of who wins, it’s likely that new directives (and hence new requirements on the leaders) will be coming.  In addition, with the threat of sequestration still on the table, it wouldn’t be a good idea to change new people in.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      I totally agree with your assessment. Looks like some other people did too since this plan has been halted.

      • oxbridge says:
        0
        0

        I wouldn’t put it past Lugo to have leaked the information himself in a pre-emptive strike knowing that the possible plan was for him to be replaced and hoping to make the news public in an attempt to halt it.

  22. Gonzo_Skeptic says:
    0
    0

    As such, sources now report that Mr. Bolden has been directed not to make any of these senior personnel actions.

    The question would then be: “directed” by whom if not the President?

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      The list is rather short ….

      • Steve Whitfield says:
        0
        0

         sources now report that Mr. Bolden has been directed not to make any of these senior personnel actions

        The list is rather short ….

        And this, to me, is the root source of many problems at NASA. Even the people at the top of the heap can’t keep straight who’s in charge of whom, and what everybody’s limitations are.  The original NASA Charter, which as far as I know still rules, says that the NASA Administrator reports to the President, and once a year the President is required to report to Congress on NASA.  But these days Congress seems to think it’s everybody’s immediate boss, including the NASA Administrator, and an awful lot of people seem to assume that this is true, so they get away with it.

        I don’t care who you are or what your job is, everybody can have a maximum of exactly ONE boss, period.  Any deviations from this are guaranteed to cause ongoing problems and pissed off people.  So, if it wasn’t Obama who nixed Bolden’s plans, if they in fact were planned, then by the rules Bolden can go ahead.  Congress may rake him over the coals for it, but they can’t order him not to do it.  Presumably they could withdraw their approval of his appointment, but this close to the election I don’t think that would make any difference.

        I realize that other people see it differently, but it bothers me that the NASA Administrator can’t run his house the way he sees fit, without constant political intervention.  So many people say that “Bolden should do this,” and “NASA should do that,” but the reality is that the system sees to it that they are simply not empowered to do the things that people expect of them.  It must be very frustrating; like the VP of GM having to answer to a baby sitter.

        Steve

        • Geoffrey Landis says:
          0
          0

          I don’t care who you are or what your job is, everybody can have a maximum of exactly ONE boss, period.

          The boss is the person who controls the funding.  If there’s a piece of paper that says somebody else is “officially” your boss, but doesn’t control your funding– they’re not your boss.

          There’s an old adage to that effect– “he who pays the piper calls the tune.”

          • Daniel Woodard says:
            0
            0

            Good point. Funding for NASA is controlled by Congress, and primarily by the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Frank Wolf (R-VA) and he has shown no hesitation in directing NASA to follow certain policies or face massive funding cuts.

          • Steve Whitfield says:
            0
            0

            Geoffrey,

            You’ll get no argument from me on that score, but the truth of a proposition has little bearing on whether it is either justified or effective.  The fact remains that the NASA Administrator has, in effect, more than one boss, and therefore, in effect, has no boss, but is stuck in the middle of a perpetual tug of war, trying desperately not to get hung.  And he is therefore rendered, by politicians, unable to do the job to which he was appointed.

            The concept that “The boss is the person who controls the funding” is obviously always a factor, but in D.C. it is exaggerated almost to the point of open warfare, and operates, in my opinion, to the detriment of all concerned (except those politicians whose goal it is to exercise power, for its own sake, over others.)  I don’t consider that to be cynical, but rather an honest assessment of the situation.  And the longer those like Wolf continue to fight the Cold War, the worse it will become for  all.

            For another perspective, I’m reminded of a comment from Frank Herbert (from the first Dune book, if I recall correctly):

            He who can destroy a thing controls it.” 

            This is the path down which I currently see the US civil space program going through the actions (together and separately) of several politicians, and in some cases I can’t help but feel like it is their deliberate intent.  Is this what the American people want for NASA and US civil space?  Once removed, I think civil space would never again approach its currently size, scope or capability; and all of the technology and authority would reside with the military.  Is this any way for the world’s largest democratic republic to operate?  it’s long past time for the American voters to wake up and get back some measure of responsible behavior from their out-of-control Congress.  They are supposed to be elected REPRESENTATIVES, not elected autocrats.

            Steve

        • Gonzo_Skeptic says:
          0
          0

           SLS showed us who is really in charge of NASA.

  23. Fred says:
    0
    0

    I wouldn’t be surprised if a NASA center director or two, retires within the next couple of months

  24. fly_boy says:
    0
    0

    Come on November… let’s get Obama out, then Bolden out before they do anymore damage.

    • Daniel Woodard says:
      0
      0

      Be careful what you wish for. The Ryan budget includes substantial cuts in discretionary spending, which includes NASA, and Mr. Romney, while in Florida, made it clear he didn’t plan to spend anything on moon colonies. 

    • Steve Whitfield says:
      0
      0

      I don’t know what you consider them to have done that qualifies as damage, but if they’re replaced in November by Romney et al, I think you’re going to learn what real damage is.  You’ll be wishing for the NASA good old days of Omaba and Bolden.

      Steve