If funding were to be provided from new sources, then it would be highly beneficial to fly additional annual flights until the ISS (with Rev. F capabilities) is complete.
Assuming that the proposed Rev. G schedule and capability are selected, then:
If capabilities were to be reduced according to Rev. G projections, then annual shuttle flights devoted to science should be flown until the ISS reaches either the research capability planned for “assembly complete” under Rev. F, or a similar level of capability that has been reviewed and approved by an independent body of scientists that can credibly represent the interests of the ISS user community.
In case B above, it should be noted that plans to use the shuttle will have to be integrated into the overall NASA mission planning by 2004. These recommendations also assume that the currently planned space shuttle microgravity missions, STS-107 and STS-123 (R2), planned for 2002 and 2004 respectively, are conducted as scheduled. Also, the activities described above should not be accomplished in such a manner as to jeopardize the sustainability and readiness of the program for microgravity research in the biological and physical sciences.
Fettman, Martin J. 2001. Letter to Joel Rothenberg on funding for the Space Station Biological Research Project. Colorado State University, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, March 9. Photocopy.
Goldin, Daniel S. 2001. Statement before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, April 4. Available online at <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/legaff/goldin4-4.html>.
Katovich, Michael J. 2001. Letter to the Honorable Barbara A.Mikulski on funding for the Space Station Biological Research Project. University of Florida, College of Pharmacy, June 28. Photocopy.
Sekerka, Robert F. 2001. Letter to the Honorable Barbara A.Mikulski on the level of ISS research funding. Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Physics, June 27. Photocopy.