Is Dava Newman's Nomination In Limbo? (Update)
Keith’s note: Dava Newman was chosen as the nominee for NASA Deputy Administrator 4 months ago in October 2014. We have heard nothing since then. Dava Newman has yet to testify before the Senate (and get their approval) so it is unclear when she will be formally confirmed. With impending food fights in the Republican-led Congress, such routine things as nominations may be stalled – or (worse) may become opportunities to score partisan points agains the Administration – with the nominee taking the brunt of the negative energy. Stay Tuned.
Executive Session Scheduled for 2/26 – Markup of nine bills and nominations for six agencies, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
“The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will hold an executive session on Thursday, February 26, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. to consider legislation and nominations.”
Keith’s update: Six significant nominations are on the agenda. No mention of Dava Newman as Deputy Administrator of NASA.
White House Announces Dava Newman Nomination, earlier post
This is not partisan. No one (right now) is holding this up. There is no food fight (yet). Hopefully zealots from both sides of the aisle will keep NASA above board. No one, that I have seen publicly (or privately with the people I know on the right) has come after Ms. Newman.
President Obama threw bones to everyone at NASA so we can only hope. Team Alabama. Texas, and Florida should all be pacified.
If this was going to the House I would feel very differently. I think we have a very good chance to see DN the new Deputy Dawg at NASA.
Not everyone gets a bone. SLS/Orion are cut $450 Million. I don’t see Senator Cruz, Senator Shelby, or other congresspeople being happy with that.
Joe I will try and answer this – not that you, or anyone has to believe me.
NASA admits Orion is behind schedule and that SLS is on schedule. Moreover, Gerst told congress at this point it is not a money issue. These numbers were worked, as I understand, with HEO, to make sure we do not have more slippage.
I do not know if anyone has reached out to the Majority staff to convey this message. I do know that you are correct wrt Senator Shelby – but I think that Senator Cruz will work with NASA on this.
JSC is in his state… too.
Not that Senator Cruz worries about public perception (look at his speeches) but he does listen. It behooves him to prove his critics wrong (the left) who tried to tar and feather him in January with his views on science.
Here is a chance for him to be a statesman (which many think he is incapable of). I am hopeful the appointment of Dava Newman.
If I remember correctly Gerst told Congress that more money couldn’t get us back to the December 2017 launch date. Cutting SLS and Orion now might make the launch date slip even more. That is what I am concerned about.
You are correct in saying that Shelby is worried solely about SLS/Orion while Cruz seems to see more of the bigger picture.
What I hope happens is that Commercial Crew is fully funded while SLS/Orion keep their current funding (of course if I was in charge I would give both more but I am trying to be a realist).
I think Dava Newman will be confirmed. The delay seems to be a result of the elections and the rearrangement of committees, not dislike of her as a nominee.
The GAO said if funding decreased in the future the schedule would slip also.
Exactly. Which is why I am hopeful that Congress will reverse these cuts.
I wonder how much slippage (if any) in schedule for the Orion the failure if the flotation system might cause. Minor fix or major system redesign?
I highly doubt that it would cause much of any schedule slippage. Looks like it will be a simple fix.
Maybe… maybe not.
The root cause is unknown. Apparently helium leaked from the 5k psi system. Maybe because they used threaded joints, Maybe not. Where was the redundancy? Are other systems also fault-intolerant? NASA says there will be a system redesign required. Remember Apollo 7, 8, 11, 12, and 16 all floated Stable 2, upside down with the hatch under water. Will adding in the design, manufacture and testing with attendant QA, QC, and certification of a major crew safety system slip the program a quarter? Maybe, maybe not. Why did it not fail in non-flight tests? What environmental conditions killed the system? Can they be assured of the fix? Can it hold 5K PSI for 21 days in space? We’ll see.
If it was vibration, temperature, pressure, whatever, what other systems might be sensitive, and might have been at the edge of failure. There are unknown unknowns.
Something about the heat shield has a redesign in the works too, or at least a rethink. The one that flew had issues in the manner of its construction and I seem to recall that they had to build a different process to use in future construction.
Maybe they can work on it a few more years to make more affordable 🙂
Which line items?
“Funded well above the president’s budget request, the SLS and Orion are receiving the resources they need to ensure their success,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the House science, space and technology committee.”
I am talking about the President’s FY2016 Budget Request. It proposes $450 Million in cuts to SLS/Orion from the previous enacted levels.
The quote from Rep. Smith is referencing that last year Congress funded NASA above the President’s FY2015 request.
You don’t see the same pattern again asserting itself?
Also, its important to search other cubby holes. For example the budget request for Space Technology was bumped up $125mill and that includes “Support future upgrades of SLS and Orion with advance composite structures, thermal management, and thermal protection systems”. How much of that went to that I do not know.
Does the SSMSCER budget include launch pad services, etc for Orion/SLC?
I know there is never a dollar for dollar reallocation of funds due to different priorities and constituents, but if the entire SLS/Orion budget put $1 into planetary science I think it would be a good deal. I would be happy just zeroing it out and saving the money.
I see it a a huge diversion of resources – most importantly the attention of NASA. Focus can go only go so wide. The first human in space on an Orion/SLC is maybe seven years from now, and it will be similar to the flight that occurred 55 years before, with the first (undetermined) original flight years later.
Yet it (and ISS) consumes NASA.
Or Democratic Senator from Florida, Bill Nelson. SLS is in his wheelhouse.
Quite true.
but everyone’s favorite SpaceX and commercial crew got an extra 1.5 billion.
It’s interesting that you neglected to mention the other Commercial Crew winner.
that is because I said “everyone’s favorite” – no one else talks about the other commercial crew developers either
Commercial crew is a competitive program with two providers currently selected, SpaceX and Boeing, and I think most supporters of the program hope both will be very successful and continue to support ISS. This will avoid the possibility of being without access to space if either of the providers experiences delays or technical problems.
I hope they are successful too. My problem is with people that keep touting the “successes” of these two competitors while simultaneously badmouthing NASA without knowing one bit about how much they actually do and how much differently they have to do it.
Keep the big picture in mind.
The right has been on a crusade to reduce the size of government for nearly 40 years. Part of the strategy is to create a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy– by denying judges and other appointees, the claim can be made that the government isn’t ‘working’, which it isn’t. Part of the reason it’s not working is appointee refusal. Bu the headlessness of NASA is repeated throughout countless agencies, too.
They have successfully captured working Americans, clearly against self-interest, mostly with silly talk about trickle-down economics. And they will do just about anything to win, including the use of racism – never forget the Southern Strategy, that swept conservative Democrats from office after the civil rights legislation was passed.
I admire and applaud our right wing overlords although I disagree with them. They have a better understanding of the issues and a better long term plan than those tree-huggers on the left (like me). And who knows? They could be right.
All part of Mitch McConnell’s plan to insure this President was a failure in his first term and be a one term President.
The nomination was formally presented to the Senate on Jan 8. Soon enough so no real delay could yet be ascribed.
I think everyone here just decided it was a non-issue, that there is no fight and she would be appointed soon, and moved on to discuss actual fights.
But with your comment and my reply at least the two of us are back on topic. 😉
I’m sure Professor Newman is a competent engineer; but I just don’t see her as the #2 leader NASA needs to push forward human space exploration programs. Unless I looked at the wrong write up about her, her background is mostly in academia. The people NASA needs should be experienced in super projects both in & out of industry, military, and/or Government. I’m convinced that obama wants another woman at the top of NASA management; but their are other women more qualified than her.
If approved, I feel Dr. Newman will be overwhelmed by the NASA & congressional bureaucracy required to get programs approved and funded for the long term. I give her about 2-3 years before she returns to MIT.
I raised this issue in a meeting I had with a Senate staffer recently during the SEA Legislative Blitz. According to the staffer I spoke with, the delays have thus far been mostly due to Dava Newman getting all the required paperwork completed and accepted, and then to make the rounds talking to each applicable Senator BEFORE the very public hearings. The staffer did not believe there has been any intentional delays and believes that she WILL be confirmed by the Senate.