A
Statement of Task

In Section 301(a) of the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, the Congress directed NASA to have “[t]he performance of each division in the Science directorate … reviewed and assessed by the National Academy of Sciences at 5-year intervals.”1 In late 2006 NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct such an assessment for the agency’s Planetary Science Division. The committee’s statement of task is to:


Review the alignment of NASA’s Planetary Exploration Division program with previous NRC advice—primarily the reports New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy and several recent studies concerning Mars, such as Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities.2 More specifically, the committee shall address the following:

  1. The degree to which NASA’s current solar system exploration program addresses the strategies, goals, and priorities outlined in Academy reports;

  2. NASA progress toward realizing these strategies, goals and priorities; and

  3. Identify any actions that could be taken to optimize the science value of the program in the context of current and forecasted resources available to it.

1

SEC. 301. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The performance of each division in the Science directorate of NASA shall be reviewed and assessed by the National Academy of Sciences at 5-year intervals.

(b) TIMING.—Beginning with the first fiscal year following the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall select at least one division for review under this section. The Administrator shall select divisions so that all disciplines will have received their first review within six fiscal years of the date of enactment of this Act.

(c) REPORTS.—Not later than March 1 of each year, beginning with the first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit a report to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate—

(1) setting forth in detail the results of any external review under subsection (a); (2) setting forth in detail actions taken by NASA in response to any external review; and (3) including a summary of findings and recommendations from any other relevant external reviews of NASA’s science mission priorities and programs.

2

The recommendations made in Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities (NRC, 2003) were summarized in the New Frontiers decadal survey, and therefore including the former was essentially redundant. However, the committee did include recommendations from Assessment of NASA’s Mars Architecture 2007-2016 (NRC, 2006). This was the most recent of three Mars assessment reports and, in the committee’s view, was the most up-to-date NRC guidance on NASA’s Mars plans.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 69
A Statement of Task In Section 301(a) of the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, the Congress directed NASA to have “[t]he performance of each division in the Science directorate . . . reviewed and assessed by the National Academy of Sciences at 5-year intervals.”1 In late 2006 NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct such an assessment for the agency’s Planetary Science Division. The committee’s statement of task is to: Review the alignment of NASA’s Planetary Exploration Division program with previous NRC advice—primar- ily the reports New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy and several recent studies concerning Mars, such as Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities.2 More specifically, the committee shall address the following: 1. The degree to which NASA’s current solar system exploration program addresses the strategies, goals, and priorities outlined in Academy reports; 2. NASA progress toward realizing these strategies, goals and priorities; and 3. Identify any actions that could be taken to optimize the science value of the program in the context of current and forecasted resources available to it. 1SEC. 301. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS. (a) IN GENERAL.—The performance of each division in the Science directorate of NASA shall be reviewed and assessed by the National Academy of Sciences at 5-year intervals. (b) TIMING.—Beginning with the first fiscal year following the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall select at least one division for review under this section. The Administrator shall select divisions so that all disciplines will have received their first review within six fiscal years of the date of enactment of this Act. (c) REPORTS.—Not later than March 1 of each year, beginning with the first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad- ministrator shall transmit a report to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate— (1) setting forth in detail the results of any external review under subsection (a); (2) setting forth in detail actions taken by NASA in re- sponse to any external review; and (3) including a summary of findings and recommendations from any other relevant external reviews of NASA’s science mission priorities and programs. 2The recommendations made in Assessment of Mars Science and Mission Priorities (NRC, 2003) were summarized in the New Frontiers decadal survey, and therefore including the former was essentially redundant. However, the committee did include recommendations from Assessment of NASA’s Mars Architecture 2007-2016 (NRC, 2006). This was the most recent of three Mars assessment reports and, in the committee’s view, was the most up-to-date NRC guidance on NASA’s Mars plans. 6