AAS Public Policy Blog

Countdown: 11 days, until federal funding for FY2011 ends and the new federal fiscal year FY2012 begins and, following the new ‘business as normal’ trend, Congress has yet to finish their appropriations work. While the Senate is scrambling to complete appropriations bills and the House has completed nearly all of their bills, there is no chance the required conference committees will be able to complete their work before the fiscal year ends. And so, preparing for the inevitable, House Appropriations Committee Chairman, Harold Rogers (R-KY) introduced a Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the government running after September through November 18th. The Senate is likely to follow suit in short order.

The CR continues funding for the federal government at a rate of $1.043 trillion – the total amount to which the Congress and the White House agreed in the recent debt-ceiling legislation. This is a 1.4% cut from the FY2011 level.

Both the House and Senate Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations subcommittees have marked-up their respective bills and they wait on the calendar for a floor vote before the appropriation process goes into conference to produce a final appropriations bill. These subcommittees have jurisdiction over NASA and NSF and other agencies including the Departments of Commerce and Justice.

NASA

(Point of Information: The NASA FY2012 President’s Budget Request (PBR) was prepared two different ways, a Full Cost View and a Separate Labor Allocation. Both appropriations bills for NASA use the Full Cost accounting.)

The Senate was very detailed in the report language of their bill (S.1572) detailing the budget for NASA. The total NASA budget is proposed to decrease to $17.9 billion, $509 million less than FY2011 enacted levels. Out of the nine directorates within NASA, only three increased compared to FY2011, including the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and the Space Technology Directorate.

All divisions within SMD increased compared to FY2011 enacted levels except for the Heliophysics Division, which remained flat compared to the PBR for FY2012 at $622.3 million. The Planetary Science Division would increase to $1.5004 billion, $49.65 million above FY2011. The Astrophysics Division included James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in the FY2011 budget, which totaled $1.1079 billion with JWST being $476.8 million of the total, almost 40%, leaving $631.1 million for other missions and research. In FY2012, the JWST was moved out of the Astrophysics Division budget to become an agency priority and its own line item. The Senate proposes to fund JWST in FY2012 at a level of $530 million, an increase of $53.2 million over FY2011. Under the Senate plan, the Astrophysics Division would receive $682.2 million, an increase of $51.1 million over FY2011.

The Senate’s line item programs within the Planetary Science Division with funding increases compared to FY2011 enacted levels are Planetary Science Research, Mars Exploration, Outer Planets, and Technology. The programs within the Planetary Science Division with funding decreases are the Lunar Quest Program, Discovery, and New Frontiers.

The programs within the Astrophysics Division with proposed Senate funding increases compared to FY2011, (excluding JWST) are Astrophysics Research and the Astrophysics Explorer Program. Programs within the Astrophysics Division with funding decreases are Cosmic Origins and Physics of the Cosmos. The Exoplanet Exploration program remained flat.

At this time we do not have detailed line-item information for the FY2011 enacted levels for the Heliophysics Division to compare individual programs and line items to the proposed FY2012 Senate appropriations.

The Senate report includes stringent language for NASA to avoid cost overruns, improve management, and make its programs more affordable. Other details in the report include a $10 million appropriation for the restart of domestic production of Plutonium-238 for planetary science missions and a statement of strong support for the completion of the James Webb Space Telescope, while imposing a cost cap of $8 billion.

The House FY2012 Appropriations bill (H.R.2596) passed earlier this year proposes to decrease the total NASA budget to $16.810 billion, a $1.637 billion decrease from FY2011. Of all the directorates only Aeronautics and Space Technology increase — SMD would decrease by $415.7 million. Within SMD, the JWST is proposed to be canceled, the Heliophysics Division decreases to $622 million (flat compared to the FY2012 PBR), the Astrophysics Division increases slightly to $683 million, and the Planetary Science Division increases to $1.5 billion.

NSF

The National Science Foundation (NSF) total budget is proposed to decrease in the FY2012 Senate Appropriation bill to $6.698 billion, $161.87 million lower than FY2011 enacted levels.

The important funding accounts in NSF for astronomy are the Research and Related Activities (R&RA), which includes funding for astronomy research, and the Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC), which includes funding for construction of large astronomy infrastructure. Some astronomy is also supported through the Office of Polar Programs and even other research Divisions, but all are incorporated into the R&RA line item. The Senate proposes to reduce the R&RA account to $5.443 billion, $120.87 million less than FY2011 and to keep MREFC flat compared to FY2011 at $117.06 million, while providing an option for up to $100 million from the R&RA account. A transfer would bring the total of the MREFC amount within $7 million of the PBR. Unfortunately, the detailed impact at the Division level is not included in the Senate report.

The House FY2012 Appropriations bill proposes to keep funding for NSF flat at $6.859 billion compared to FY2011, but increases R&RA to $5.6069 billion and decreases MREFC to $100 million.

The report for the Senate bill includes language related to the Giant Segmented Mirror Telescope (GSMT) selection process, the third priority for large-scale ground-based recommendations by the National Research Council’s 2010 decadal survey in Astronomy and Astrophysics. There were no statements on the first priority, the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST).

Detailed tables of NASA and NSF funding:

NASA Budget Compared

NSF Budget Compared

The President has released his Administration’s budget request for FY 2011. Science has fared well despite the spending freeze proposed by the President on all non-discretionary spending. This budget request asks for a 5.9% increase in non-defense R&D spending (an increase of $3.7B for a total of $66B). The country’s total R&D budget request for FY 2011 is $147.7B once the defense R&D funding is included. This is an increase of $343M or 0.2% over the enacted FY 2010 level. There is also significant investment in programs to foster the next generation of S&T workers, both at the NSF, DOE and the Department of Education.

The breakdown for the agencies relevant to the astronomy community is as follows:

NSF: The NSF request is for $7.4B, an increase of 8% over 2010 levels.  The Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate (MPS), which houses the Astronomical Sciences (AST) within NSF, receives a 4.3% increase and AST receives a 2.5% increase to $251.77M.

Of the facilities supported by MPS, the AST facilities have done very well getting a majority of the funding increases. The requests and the percent increase over FY2010 estimates are: ATST – $2M, ALMA – $23.5M (33.8%), Gemini – 1$19.58M (2.5%), IceCube – $2.5M (16.3%) and LIGO – $30.30 (6.3%).

The Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF) program sees a 16.4% increase to $158.24M while the Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER) sees a 6.5% increase to $209.16M. There is also an additional investment of $103M to realign and consolidate existing programs to broaden participation by under-represented groups in the S&T workforce.

NASA: The biggest change at NASA is of course a new vision for the manned space flight program. NASA’s total budget request is for $19B with $5B for the Science Mission Directorate. The biggest increase within SMD goes to Earth Science in line with the Administration’s focus on renewed investment in global climate change research.

Planetary Science sees a small increase, targeted to identify and catalog Near Earth Objects. Some really good news for planetary science is that the Plutonium-238 production restart is called out prominently. Members might recall that the Administration had requested $30M in funds in the last budget for the Pu-238 production restart required to power missions to explore other planets in the solar system. Congress had zeroed out the request citing inadequate detail. This request reopens the dialogue. Heliophysics sees a small increase as well of roughly $13M. Astrophysics funding declines over 2010 levels by 2.5% (~$27M). The good news for the astronomy community is that new money has been requested to fund the increased investment in earth science and space science was not cut to fund that increase.

DOE: The Office of Science at DOE receives a 4.4% ($217.7M) increase for a total of $5.1B. The High Energy Physics program, which supports astronomical programs such as Fermi, receives a 2.3% increase for a total of $829M. Fusion energy sciences are down 10.8% to $380M. Of some interest to our community might be that the U.S. ITER project sees a decrease of $55M compared to FY 2010 levels. This is a reflection of the pace of construction and W.F. Brinkman, the Office of Science Director, is quoted as saying that the DOE was not willing to provide money for ITER until it had solved some underlying problems and the funding reduction was intended to “send a message.”

The President’s budget request reflects the priorities of the Administration. It is very supportive of science, including curiosity-based science, but has focused its big investments in climate change research, renewable energy sources, and STEM education.  There is also a substantial investment in technology development at NASA. We must now engage Congress about the role astronomy plays in the national agenda and what our community can contribute to the nation. Everyone is awaiting the report from the Decadal Survey to set funding priorities for astrophysics. But we need to start talking to lawmakers now about the role of astronomy in the innovation agenda.

Useful links for further information:

NSF budget page: http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2011/index.jsp

NASA budget page: http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/index.html

DOE budget page: http://www.energy.gov/about/budget.htm

AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program page: http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/fy2011/

OMB: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview/

Here is a list of astronomy policy-related events at the AAS meeting in January that might be of interest:

Monday, Jan 04, 2010: NSF Town Hall, 12:45 PM-1:45 PM; Marriot Ballroom Salon 1

Tuesday, Jan 05, 2010:

• Invited Talk by Charles Bolden, NASA Administrator; 12:30-1:45 PM; Marriott Ballroom
• NOAO Town Hall, 11:30-12:30 PM; Thurgood Marshall North
• JWST Town Hall, 11:30-12:30 PM; Thurgood Marshall South
• NRAO Town Hall, 6:30-8:30 PM; Thurgood Marshall North

Wednesday, Jan 06, 2010:

• NASA Town Hall, 12:45 – 1:45 PM; Marriott Ballroom Salon 3
• US Gemini Town Hall Meeting, 12:45-1:45 PM; Marriott Ballroom Salon 1

I will be around for most of the meeting.  So come find me and chat if you are interested in getting involved in science policy!

The Senate has voted to pass the FY2010 Omnibus Appropriations Bill.  It will now go to the President for his signature.  This bill included funding for NASA and NSF.

NSF got $6.927 billion, which splits the difference between the House and Senate numbers.  This is an increase of $436.1 million (6.7%) over FY2009 (without including the stimulus funding).  NSF funding in Fy2009 was nearly $9.5 billion when the stimulus funding is included.

NASA received $18.7 billion, which was the budget request and includes funding for the human spaceflight program.  The Science Mission Directorate received $4.469 billion.  This is close to the budget request and is a 0.75% cut from the FY 2009 levels (without including the stimulus funding).  It is to be noted that NASA science is not included in the doubling agenda for science funding in the United States.  NSF, DOE, and NIST are included in this doubling agenda.

On another note, Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) has decided not to run for re-election in 2010.  He was the influential chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee and a great advocate for science.  Congressman Jerry Costell (D-IL) has expressed interest in seeking the chairmanship of the full committee.  He is currently the second ranking Democrat on the S&T committee.

The Senate has passed the FY2010 Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Bill, which appropriates funds for NASA and NSF. The House passed their version back in June. The Bill is now headed to a conference vote where the differences between the House and Senate reports will be reconciled.

The Administration’s budget request for NASA was $18.686 billion, an increase of 5.3% over the FY2009 appropriation of $17.782 billion. The NASA science budget request was $4.477 billion, 0.6 percent below the FY 2009 appropriation level of $4.503 billion.

The House recommended $18.203 billion overall for NASA and $4.496 billion for science. The Senate provides the full amount of the Administration’s request for NASA and provides $4.517 billion for science at NASA. The major difference in NASA funding between the House and Senate reports is that the House appropriators decided not to fully fund the request for the exploration program pending the Augustine report.

The details of the appropriations are in the House Report (111-149) and Senate Report (111-34). The two reports are similar but highlight a couple of different aspects in science funding. The House language directs NASA to provide a projected full lifetime budget outline for the Outer Planets Flagship mission scheduled to launch in 2020. They ask for anticipated contributions from foreign partners and an alternative budget profile that would accelerate the launch to 2018. The House bill also includes funds requested to enable SIM-Lite to continue mission concept, technology and risk reduction efforts in fiscal year 2010. The Senate directs $21M to continue the development of the International Lunar Network and provides the full budget requirements for HST, JWST, and JDEM.

Both the House and Senate versions of the bill provide funding for the Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission and the Solar Probe mission, and call out support for a robust Mars Exploration program. Both bills also allocate $50M within the astrophysics budget to continue efforts for servicing existing and future observatory-class scientific spacecraft.

NSF: The Administration’s request for the National Science Foundation for FY2010 was $7.045 billion with a request for Research and Related Activities at $5.7 billion and $117.3 million for Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction.

The House has appropriated $6.94 billion for NSF, $108 million below the President’s request and $446 million above 2009. The appropriation for research and related activities is $5.64 billion, an increase of $459 million over the comparable fiscal year 2009 enacted level. The reduction recommended from the request goes to enable increases in research and education funding in NOAA and NASA. The Senate provides $6.92 billion for NSF, which is $426 million above the Fiscal Year 2009 enacted level. This total includes $5.62 billion for research, $122 million for research equipment and facilities; and $857 million for education activities. Advanced LIGO, ALMA, IceCube, and ATST are all fully funded at the requested levels in both versions of the bill.

This bill will now go into a conference vote, which may happen quite quickly, if the Appropriations Bill for the Dept. of Energy was any indication. Rumors are that the final bill will have the Senate numbers for funding. It will then be sent to the President for his signature, at which point it becomes law. This Administration is very supportive of science and that support is reflected in the budgets requested for the various science agencies. NASA’s budget has not seen the big increases seen in the NSF, NIST, and DOE budgets. This may be attributed to the uncertainty about the manned spaceflight program at NASA. Now that the Augustine Report has been released, we await the Administration’s decision and see what impact, if any, it will have on NASA’s science budget.

You can also read the FYI analysis to get details on the debate in the Senate accompanying this piece of legislation.

Detailed breakdown of the amounts provided for NASA science in House Report – http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/077.html

Detailed breakdown of the amounts provided for NASA science in Senate Report – http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/085.html

The long-anticipated final report from the Augustine Commission has been released.  You can download the full report here.

There are no big surprises in the main points of the report since the summary report was released in September.  The media has covered this extensively over the past day, so I won’t re-analyze the main conclusions – you can see the various media reports on NASA Watch.  What’s particularly interesting to me is that they don’t shy away from making some tough observations about the governance of the agency in Chapter 9.  The Commission astutely observes that the “why” should be considered thoughtfully before the “where” of what’s next for human space flight.  They mince no words in pointing out the gap between the expectations and the resources provided.  They also highlight the constant redirection of policy and budget reductions as being less than conducive to running an effective program.

It is of course up to the Obama Administration to decide what they will do with this report.  The Administrator of NASA and high-level officials within NASA have been discussing next steps for a little while now.  Hopefully a thoughtful policy will emerge as a result of all this effort.  As for how this will impact science funding at NASA, we will just have to wait and see!

What are your thoughts on the report?  We’d love to hear from you.

Its astronomy advisory committee meeting time in DC.  The Astrophysics Subcommittee of the NASA Advisory Council held its meeting on Oct. 8-9.  And the Congressionally Chartered AAAC held its meeting last week (Oct. 15-16).  You can see presentations from the AAAC meeting here.

It was interesting to see the process of how federal agencies like NASA, NSF, and DOE get advice from the community.  Everyone is waiting with bated breath for the Astro2010 Decadal Survey before making too many new plans for Astrophysics.  In addition to various mission updates (Fermi is performing fabulously! so is Kepler), there was an interesting discussion about whether to start a new line of named postdoctoral fellowships (like Hubble, Einstein, Sagan) for technology/instrumentation.  Its also clear that inter-agency cooperation (NASA, NSF, DOE) will be the way of the future.  There was even talk of whether this would be the last US decadal survey because it would be a global effort from next time.  We’ll have to wait and see on that one.

On a policy matter – Congress just passed the FY10 Energy and Water Appropriations bill and sent it to the Prez for his signature.  Why do we care?  Because this provides funding for DOE and DOE needs to re-start the production of Pu-238 in order to produce RTGs (Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators) to explore the solar system.  It made it into the Administration’s budget request this year – but Congress zeroed out the request saying they want more details.  So we’ll have to make sure it gets funded next year!  (If you are interested in this issue, see the NRC report.)

I attended the final open meeting of the Astro2010 Survey Committee this morning.  This is the top-level committee chaired by Roger Blandford that will consider and synthesize the input provided by the Science Frontiers Panels, the Program Prioritization Panels and the various working groups.

Representatives from the 3 major funding agencies (NASA, NSF, DOE) were there to present their answers to questions that had been posed to them.  A loud and clear message that came through was that funds are pretty tight and they are looking to the Decadal Survey Report to provide guidance on prioritizing investments in the coming decade.  NASA Astrophysics in particular expects to have about $4B total for new missions over the 2013-2023 timeframe.  Any augmentations to the R&D budget, extensions to older missions etc. will all have to come out of this $4B pot.  It was also interesting to hear that the stimulus money allowed NSF’s success rate for grants to go up from 21% to 36% this year, but this is unlikely to be sustained in coming years.

Kevin Marvel (AAS) and Kate Kirby (APS) presented the professional societies’ perspectives.  The ground based community was represented by Tony Readhead (Caltech) and Tim Beers (Michigan State Univ.).  Kevin made a strong case for the committee to own this report for the entire decade and not stop after some initial outreach for the final report.

Stay tuned!  In the meantime, you can get more info on Astro2010 at the NRC website.