Keith’s note: Several sources report that the NASA GISS lease of the Armstrong Hall building in New York City can’t be broken by GSA without incurring a large financial penalty. So, if NASA leaves anyway with a DOGE claim of a cost savings NASA will still be paying ~$3 million a year until 2031 for a building they can’t/won’t use – – plus the rent for wherever the GISS folks are moved to.

Keith’s note: According to this Fox News story “NASA backs Trump budget blueprint with $6B cut to agency“ – “The reductions in the President’s blueprint budget counterintuitively represent an opportunity to truly innovate in how we conduct our space missions,” senior NASA official Ryan Whitley told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement.” In other words “Bye Bye $6 billion – we don’t really need you after all” FYI According to Janet Petro on 14 February 2025: “New Senior Advisor Appointment: This week, we welcomed Ryan Whitley as a new senior advisor to the administrator. With experience in both commercial and civil space, Ryan is a senior executive who has led significant business development, program management, and engineering efforts. Prior to leading commercial space activities, he managed engineering teams at multiple NASA centers and served as a director of civil space policy for the National Space Council.”

Keith’s note: This was released the other day. Looks like the gutting of NASA’s budget has impacts far beyond the U.S. Indeed, such a statement by another space agency about internal NASA issues is rather unprecedented. “ ESA Director General reaction to a reduced budget proposal for NASA“

“On 2 May 2025, the White House Office of Management and Budget released a ‘skinny’ version of the President’s Budget Request (PBR) for fiscal year 2026. The more detailed version of the request is expected to be released in late May-early June. The Budget Request release marks the beginning of the appropriation process in US Congress culminating in the President’s signature of the budget bill passed by the House and the Senate – thus it should be kept in mind that this is still very much a work in progress.

Keith’s note: Lisa Watson-Morgan HLS Program Manager held a tag-up with over 400 attendees today after NASA Acting Administrator Janet Petro sent an email out about the White House FY 2026 “skinny” budget [Audio part 1] [Audio part 2]

Keith’s note: Janet Petro just sent out “Fiscal Year 2026 Discretionary Budget Request” – “On Friday, the Trump-Vance Administration released topline details of its fiscal year 2026 budget request, which outlines a focused approach for advancing America’s leadership in space. While this is just the starting point, it’s clear NASA’s role in shaping the future of space exploration remains central to the American story.

Keith’s note: Here are the NASA excerpts from the FY 2026 Budget outline – “Support Space Flight. The Budget refocuses National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) funding on beating China back to the Moon and on putting the first human on Mars. By allocating over $7 billion for lunar exploration and introducing $1 billion in new investments for Mars-focused programs, the Budget ensures that America’s human space exploration efforts remain unparalleled, innovative, and efficient. To achieve these objectives, the Budget would streamline the NASA workforce, information technology services, NASA Center operations, facility maintenance, and construction and environmental compliance activities. The Budget also terminates multiple unaffordable missions and reduces lower priority research, resulting in a leaner Science program that reflects a commitment to fiscal responsibility.”

• Mars Sample Return: cancelled
• SLS and Orion: cancelled after 3 flights
• Gateway: cancelled
• Landsat Next mission: descoped
• Climate monitoring satellites: cancelled
• Space Technology: 50% cut
• ISS: reduce crew and science, splash in 2030
• Green Aviation: gone
• STEM/Education: Its woke so its gone.
• HAPPY NATIONAL SPACE DAY!

Keith’s 30 April note: At today’s meeting of MEPAG a NASA speaker said that that an outline or top-level aka “skinny” budget for FY 2026 might be released in the next few days. The full-blown, formal FY 2026 budget proposal will probably not come out until the end of May. Keith’s 1 May Update: the White House is going to release FY 2026 budget information on Friday.

Keith’s note: the following letter was sent on 30 April 2025 to House and Senate leaders: “Dear Chairmen Moran and Rogers, and Ranking Members Van Hollen and Meng: We write to express our profound alarm to the reported Fiscal Year 2026 budget proposal emerging from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget to cut an astonishing 47% of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) budget in a single year.

Keith’s note: according to NSF director to resign amid grant terminations, job cuts, and controversy at Science: “Although Panchanathan, known as Panch, didn’t give a reason for his sudden departure, orders from the White House to accept a 55% cut to the agency’s $9 billion budget next year and fire half its 1700-person staff may have been the final straws in a series of directives Panchanathan felt he could no longer obey. “He was trying so hard to present the agency in a positive light,” says one knowledgeable source who asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of their position. “But at the same time, Panch knew that he was alienating himself from the scientific community by being tone deaf to their growing concerns about the fate of the agency we all love.”

Keith’s note: I was just on Bloomberg Radio/YouTube talking about the recent (possible) biosignature news of exoplanet K2-18 b and Astrobiology, while back on Earth, NASA’s budget cuts loom and how soon-to-be NASA-administrator Jared Isaacman is going to have to figure this all out. [Audio]

Keith’s note: According to this press release issued on Monday by Rep. Judy Chu CA-28, whose district includes JPL and Caltech: “Today, President Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reportedly sent a preliminary budget plan to NASA that proposes a 50% cut to NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and to eliminate funding for the Mars Sample Return (MRS) mission led by Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), which is owned by NASA and administered by the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).” Full text below.

Keith’s note: NASA has led space science and “Made America Great In Space” for more than half a century. Let’s not let that science leadership fade. Let’s expand it further. NASA has led the way by:

• touching the sun
• visiting every planet in our solar system
• sending humans to walk on another world
• doing the first offworld search for life
• moving an asteroid
• finding water on the Moon and Mars
• discovering oceans inside icy moons
• sailing across interstellar space
• peering back to the dawn of the universe
• developing a global brand that all nations aspire to

Keith’s note: people have been talking about cuts to NASA – specifically science and most specifically Earth/Climate science for a while. It stems back too the overt anti-science statements and plans made in the Project 2025 effort. Now, Ars Technical has pulled that all together with the actual budget passback document as a guide. So there it is folks. Now we have numbers. Even if Congress and the White House pull some of this back, NASA’s science portfolio will be gutted and the impact will last for a very long time. And this affects more than just the science crowd. Fewer science missions means fewer launches and that directly affects the KSC civil servant and contractor workforce. The same goes for fewer payloads since the NASA centers and allied research institutions that build and operate payloads will be hit hard too. As science starts to dry up, the need for future commercial space stations will start to fade since the science they are supposed to be doing will be gone. Add in congressional intent to keep ISS operational until 2030, and the commercial space station thing will need to find all of its money elsewhere. Meanwhile, the Big Aerospace firms are uninterested in any of the personnel things – unless it affects their bottom line. Even then they remain mostly silent. Cuts like this assure that when it comes to space science NASA will NOT “make space great again”. So let’s “Embrace The Challenge”, as Janet Petro still says.

Keith’s note: For all of you Space Symposium fans who think we’re on the verge of a commerce golden age in space or that U.S. will #MakeSpaceGreatAgain and devote big bucks to space science, Moon, Mars, new space stations, Space Force etc. Just look at what the tariff thing did in mere days to our economy. Do the math. Where is the money going to come from? Discuss this among yourselves.

Keith’s note: This American Astronomical Society (AAS) call to action should not be a surprise to anyone. Project 2025 made mention of it, actions already taken against NOAA, NSF, NASA, EPA, CDC, NIH show a complete disregard for science. And DOGE has supercharged things. It is only going to get worse with RIFs and wholesale budget slashing. “AAS Alarmed by Rumored Deep Cuts to NASA and National Science Foundation“:

Keith’s Note: According to NASA SMD: “As you may be aware, the new Administration has issued Executive Orders (EOs) and implemented policy and guidance that may affect grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts. SMD, consistent with agency direction, is working diligently to comply with the requirements of the new policy and guidance, as well as court orders resulting from litigation related to EOs and guidance. SMD currently oversees approximately 6,000 grants, cooperative agreements, contracts, interagency transfers, and internal NASA transfers; thus, as you can imagine, the process of implementing the new policy and guidance is taking some time and the turnaround time on actions will be longer than normal. We ask for your patience. Please also realize that we are in a highly dynamic environment with multiple lawsuits being adjudicated each with the potential to impact policy and guidance affecting grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts. SMD would like to provide the following brief updates:” Full memo

Keith’s note: Huge budget cuts will soon destroy much of NASA Science. Science either enables the technology to launch a payload or (most of the time) is the prime reason for the mission in the first place. Sometimes people tag along to make sure the Science gets done – sometimes on themselves. This may be a losing battle – but fight on we must. This cannot last forever. If you ever saw “The World According to Garp” then the second half of this scene should be an object lesson. Ad astra per scientiam

Keith’s note: Heads Up NASA: it would not be at all surprising if other agencies such as NASA were directed to take similar unilateral action. Imagine how the external space science community will respond. Will external research organizations even be able to support future NASA research? What programs will simply stop? And how does this keep ‘America Great in Space Science’? Oh yes: JPL works as a contractor to NASA.

• The NIH’s drastic cut to indirect cost rates is a critical threat to U.S. research infrastructure, Stat: “The National Institutes of Health has made a landmark decision that could irreparably damage the backbone of American scientific innovation: a dramatic reduction in the indirect cost rate for research grants. This sweeping policy change sets the indirect rate to 15%, a stark contrast with the 60% or more that many institutions currently rely on for essential administrative and operational costs.”
• NOT-OD-25-068: Supplemental Guidance to the 2024 NIH Grants Policy Statement: Indirect Cost Rates, NIH: “Pursuant to this Supplemental Guidance, there will be a standard indirect rate of 15% across all NIH grants for indirect costs in lieu of a separately negotiated rate for indirect costs in every grant.”

2024 Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges Full report. Excerpts:

• NASA has requested additional funding for Artemis systems through FY 2029, with the Artemis V mission delayed until 2030. At the same time, the lack of a comprehensive cost estimate for the Artemis campaign means that Congress and other stakeholders lack the level of transparency and insight needed about the long-term cost, feasibility, and sustainability of the effort.
• NASA expects to continue operations and maintenance of the Station through 2030. However, as the Agency delays the retirement of the ISS farther into the future, a variety of long-standing challenges will continue to intensify. These include maintaining and upgrading the Station, managing cargo and crew transportation constraints, and solidifying a transition and controlled deorbit plan.
• We also continue to identify funding instability as an impediment to NASA’s project management success. Unstable or uncertain funding, whether in terms of the total amount of funds dedicated to a project or the timing of when those funds are disbursed to the project, can result in inefficient management practices that contribute to poor cost, schedule, and performance outcomes. Protecting Ocean Worlds: Europa Clipper Planetary Protection Inputs To A Probabilistic Risk-based Approach
• Though the volume of interest in private astronaut missions has exceeded NASA’s expectations, significant demand for commercial activity in other sectors—such as in-space manufacturing and marketing products for sale on Earth—has yet to materialize. It is too early to determine the extent to which private astronaut missions will help facilitate a commercial market in LEO.
• At the end of 2023, approximately 64 percent of NASA employees worked in science and engineering occupations, yet the Agency remains at risk from a shortage of such staff due to increased competition for talent from the growing commercial space industry. NASA’s STEM engagement efforts have faced significant challenges over the past two decades including shifting administration priorities and declining budgets.
• much of NASA’s current infrastructure dates to the Apollo-era of space exploration and is in marginal to poor condition. As of July 2024, more than 83 percent of NASA’s facilities are beyond their original design life.
• Another area that we identified is NASA’s management of its cost-plus contracts for development efforts such as the SLS, Orion, and ML-2. These programs have experienced years of delays and billions of dollars in cost increases, due in part to payment of overly generous award fees that we have found to be inconsistent with contractor performance. Award- fee contracts are designed to incentivize contractors and reward strong performance, and these fees are in addition to the amounts paid to reimburse them for actual costs incurred.