Safety of Space Station Demands Independent Probe [Jackson Lee]
by SHEILA JACKSON LEE
In the U.S. House Science Committee, I am known to be one of the most steadfast supporters of NASA and its human space-exploration program. However, ever since Adm. Harold Gehman and the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) issued their report, I have been deeply concerned about the safety of the international space station (ISS).
The CAIB reported that management problems at NASA were partially to blame for the demise of the shuttle Columbia and its crew. There is no reason to think that the space station was immune to those management problems. We and our partners have invested tens of billions of dollars in the endeavor already, and the lives of two brave astronauts in the sky above us hinge on keeping it safe. Therefore, I have been pushing the Science Committee to find a way to ensure that the space station is as safe as possible.
On Nov. 6, at my invitation, NASA officials came to Capitol Hill and briefed the Space Subcommittee on space-station safety. There, I was presented with NASA's "Implementation Plan for ISS Continuing Flight," describing how the agency plans to keep the station up and running safely. Although I was pleased to hear of the agency's attention to known vulnerabilities and past waivers of engineering standards, I remained troubled by the unknown. I kept wondering, does the space station have its own "falling foam" or "O ring" that might eventually doom it? If it does, will this team at NASA find that Achilles' heel before disaster strikes?
Now that I have read the report, I am even more worried about the future of the ISS than I was before. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to see that the new implementation plan does not rival the Gehman Report in its level of detail, objectivity or rigor. The ISS is a complex facility, half the size of a football field, designed over decades by teams scattered around the planet. I do not believe that this short and superficial report rises to the level that such a critical task deserves.
I will leave it to engineers and scientists to determine the merits of the brief technical sections of the report, but my belief is that its overall superficiality indicates that the change in "culture," called for by the CAIB, is still more of a goal than a reality at NASA. That broken culture was forced under the microscope in October when it was reported that a fresh two-man crew was sent to the station over objections from the medical team. Even though faulty air quality-monitoring devices and exercise equipment might endanger the crew, an astronaut and a cosmonaut were sent up for 200 days, without a public dialogue, and without any consultation with us in Congress. I was troubled that the NASA ISS report contained no mention of the broken sensors or how they will be replaced. I don't think the new conscientious culture has taken over yet.
I believe that the NASA administrator does have good intentions; nevertheless, Congress has a strict duty of oversight to ensure that NASA is adhering to a safety standard beyond reproach. It is extremely difficult for any large bureaucracy to investigate itself, and as reported by Adm. Gehman, NASA has an especially poor track record for such introspection. Furthermore, results from a recent Web survey of NASA employees indicate that many feel that management has not yet taken to heart the recommendations of Congress and the CAIB with respect to making safety a priority.
The lackluster implementation plan provided one more piece of evidence that NASA management is not yet capable of the level of self-scrutiny demanded by the space station. I understand that the report is meant to be the first edition of a work in progress, but that work does not seem to be going in the right direction, and last month's crunching noise heard by the ISS crew suggests that maybe we don't have time to waste.
Therefore, although I have the greatest respect and admiration for the fine work of our neighbors at NASA, I am calling for a comprehensive and independent review of ISS safety. envision a board, much like that assembled by Gehman, made up of technical experts and talented minds from here and around the world. Such a board could bring a level of objectivity that cannot be produced from within NASA at present - doing interviews, researching through e-mails, correspondence, and technical documents, and conducting experiments to prove that the station is as safe as we can make it.
We have seen the power of independent investigation boards after the Challenger disaster and after the Columbia disaster. I hope we do not wait to do that kind of quality work until after the next disaster. The international space station deserves a closer look, now.
U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee represents the 18th Congressional District of Texas in Houston. She wrote this commentary for the Orlando Sentinel.
Next Article