presented at the
Joint Meeting of Ocean Sciences and Surface Water Hydrology in Support of Wide-Swath Altimetry Measurements
October 30, 2006
Lucia Tsaoussi,
Deputy Associate Director for Research, Earth Science Division
NASA Headquarters
1

• NASA’s Science Plan
Development and review
• Focus On Earth Science Issues
Earth Science planning timeline, recommendations
• Next Steps
Near-term planning for plan amendment
2

• NASA released a new 2006 NASA Strategic Plan in February
2006, in keeping with the triennial requirement in the
Government Performance and Results Act
– The Science organizations follow with a strategic document describing their implementation of the NASA Strategic Plan
– The Space and Earth Science Enterprises produced strategy documents in 2003; it is timely now for the Science Mission
Directorate to produce its first strategy document
• The Congress requires NASA to produce such a plan in the
2005 NASA Authorization Act signed last December
3

*
• Strategic Goal 1: Fly the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010.
• Strategic Goal 2 : Complete the International Space Station in a manner consistent with NASA’s international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration.
• Strategic Goal 3: Develop a balanced overall program of science exploration, and aeronautics consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration.
• Strategic Goal 4: Bring a new Crew Exploration Vehicle into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement.
• Strategic Goal 5: Encourage the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector.
• Strategic Goal 6 : Establish a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations.
* 2006 NASA Strategic Plan
4

*
• Strategic Sub-goal 3A: Study Earth from space to advance scientific understanding and meet societal needs.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3B: Understand the Sun and its effects on Earth and the solar system.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3C: Advance scientific knowledge of the origin and history of the solar system, the potential for life elsewhere, and the hazards and resources present as humans explore space.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3D: Discover the origin, structure, evolution, and destiny of the universe, and search for Earth-like planets.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3E: Advance knowledge in the fundamental disciplines of aeronautics, and develop technologies for safer aircraft and higher capacity airspace systems.
• Strategic Sub-goal 3F: Understand the effects of the space environment on human performance, and test new technologies and countermeasures for long-duration human space exploration.
* 2006 NASA Strategic Plan
5

 Respond to Authorization Language
– NASA Authorization Act for 2005 (S.1281)
– Title I Section 101
– (d) SCIENCE.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall develop a plan to guide the science programs of NASA through
2016.
– (2) CONTENT.—At a minimum, the plan developed under paragraph (1) shall be designed to ensure that NASA has a rich and vigorous set of science activities, and shall describe — (A) the missions NASA will initiate, design, develop, launch, or operate in space science and earth science through fiscal year
2016, including launch dates; (B) a priority ranking of all of the missions listed under subparagraph (A), and the rationale for the ranking; and (C) the budget assumptions on which the policy is based, which for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 shall be consistent with the authorizations provided in title II of this Act.
6

 Respond to Authorization Language
– NASA Authorization Act for 2005 (S.1281) cont’
– (3) CONSIDERATIONS .
—In developing the science plan under this subsection, the Administrator shall consider the following issues, which shall be discussed in the transmittal under paragraph (6): (A) What the most important scientific questions in space science and earth science are.
(B) How to best benefit from the relationship between NASA’s space and earth science activities and those of other Federal agencies . (C)
Whether the Magnetospheric Multiscale Mission, SIM-Planet Quest, and missions under the Future Explorers Programs can be expedited to meet previous schedules. ( D) Whether any NASA Earth observing missions that have been delayed or cancelled can be restored. (E) How to ensure the long-term vitality of Earth observation programs at NASA, including their satellite, science, and data system components. (F) Whether current and currently planned Earth observation missions should be supplemented or replaced with new satellite architectures and instruments that enable global coverage, and all-weather, day and night imaging of the Earth’s surface features. (G) How to integrate NASA earth science missions with the Global Earth Observing System of
Systems.
7

• Preamble: The NASA Science Story
• Purpose & Progress
• Summary of Science Questions and Prioritized Missions
– Principle requirement in the NASA Authorization Act
• Common Elements of Strategy
• Research Areas
– Bulk of the Plan; a section for each of the four science areas
• Science Enabling and Enabled by Human Exploration
• Summary: On the Brink of Understanding
• Appendices
8

Roadmaps
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
06
Mars to
NRC
Helio

Astro
Earth (Internal

Draft)


Mars
NRC
Report
Solar System
(Exec Sum)
 Solar
System
SMD Agency
SMD Management Review

Draft of Common Elements Sections


4/20


5/31


9/29
Roadmap Presentations to Subcommittees
Status / Content Presentation to NAC / SC


Draft of Science Division Sections
 5/31 
Draft 3 for SC, Subcommittees, NRC, Industry review

6/23
Meeting of SSB ad hoc Review Committee

7/11-13
Draft 3.5 for Sept. Subcommittee Meetings

9/13
Comments from NRC, NSAG, etc.

Draft 4 for NAC/SC, Other Agency Review
9/15

10/3
10/6
SMD Science
Plan
Schedule
10/5/06
Key

Roadmap
SMD Review
Draft
Presentation
Table Top Review
Meetings
Delivery
Italics = change from prior version of the schedule
Final Discussion with NAC / SC
Table top review with PA&E
10/24
Table top review with OMB, OSTP 10/26
SSB report on impacts of FY07 request
Draft for Agency & OMB clearance 11/27
Deliver to Congress
12/8?
AGU 12/11-15
NAC Science
Committee
2/8-9 HQ 5/17-18 JPL 7/19-20 JSC 10/10-12 GSFC
2/7-8 HQ?
Science
Subcommittees
Chairs telecon -
4/7
5/3-4
Conference
7/6-7
9
5 mtgs in mid, late Sept

4 11
SEPT
18 25 2 9
OCT
16 23 30 6
NOV
13 20 27 4
DEC
11 18 25 1
JAN
8
9/13

Draft 3.5 for Sept. Subcommittee Meetings
9/13-15 HS Mtg 9/25-26 PSS Mtg
9/14-15 AS Mtg 9/27-28 ES Mtg
Critical window for revising draft
9/15

9/19
Comments from NRC, NSAG, etc.

SMD Senior Mgmt Mtg to Confirm Mission Priorities
Draft 4 for NAC/SC Review

10/6
Provide Draft 4 for review by other Agencies
NAC 10/10-12
10/20
Comments from Other Agencies; Cut off for external comments from all sources
Draft 4.X if needed for NAC, other Agency comments
10/24
Table top review with PA&E
Table top review with OMB, OSTP
10/24
10/26
Draft 5.0 for editing by P&D 10/30
Draft 6.0 for layout by TAJ 11/13
Layout doc for editing
11/27
Doc ready to start
Mgmt concurrence
10
SMD
12/6
Approved Doc
(pre-pub)
Deliver to Congress; post pdf version; send to printer
Agency
12/8
AGU
Detailed Schedule for Completion of
SMD Science Plan
10/5/06
Key

Roadmap
Mgmt Review
Draft
Presentation
Table Top Review
Meetings
Delivery
Italics = change from prior version of the schedule
Printed copies available
1/5

• NAC Science Committee & Subcommittees
• National Research Council / Space Studies Board /
Committee on Review of NASA Science Mission Directorate
Science Plan
• NASA Science Associates Group (major industrial contractors)
• Partner US Government Agencies
11

Ad Hoc
Biomedical
Committee
(David Longnecker)
NASA
Advisory Council
Chair:
Harrison H. Schmitt
Ex-Officio
Members
Ray Colladay
Lennard Fisk
Aeronautics
Committee
Chair:
Neil Armstrong
Audit and Finance
Committee
Chair:
Bob Hanisee
Exploration
Committee
Chair:
James
Abrahamson
Human Capital
Committee
Chair:
Gerald
Kulcinski
Science
Committee
Chair:
Edward David
Space
Operations
Committee
Chair:
Paul Robinson
Astrophysics
Subcommittee
(David Spergel)
Earth Science
Subcommittee
(Daniel Jacob)
Heliophysics
Subcommittee
(Alan Title)
Planetary
Science
Subcommittee
(Sean Solomon)
Planetary
Protection
Subcommittee
(Ronald Atlas)
12

FYI NRC’s Review Team
• A. Thomas Young – Chair
• Spiro K. Antiochus – NRL
• Ana P. Barros – Duke U
• James L. Burch – SRI
• Antonio J. Busalacchi – U Md
• Jack D. Farmer – Arizona State
• Margaret G. Finarelli – GMU
• John P. Huchra – Harvard- SCA
• Ralph Lorenz – Univ of Arizona
• Daniel McCammon – UW-Madison
• Anneila I. Sargent – CIT
• Jessica Sunshine – U Md
• Carl Wunsch – MIT
13

Earth Science Approach and Key Issues
• ESD Roadmap and Decadal Survey in progress
• Legacy Science Focus Area roadmaps available and draft Research Plan (Jan 2005) reviewed by
ESSAAC
• Plan to implement missions that are currently in development and formulation
• Utilize SFA Legacy roadmaps to initiate mission concept studies in a preparatory process to respond to decadal survey report
• Continue to work interagency planning and collaborative programs
14

(Interim Report)
6 Science
Focus Area roadmaps; yet to be integrated into a single Earth
Science roadmap
2005
15
2006
Science
Plan
Earth
Science section

• 4.1
Intellectual Foundation
• 4.2
Science Objectives and Outcomes: The Six Science
Focus Areas
– 4.2.1 Atmospheric Composition
– 4.2.2
Weather
– 4.2.3 Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems
– 4.2.4
Water and Energy Cycle
– 4.2.5
Climate Variability and Change
– 4.2.6
Earth Surface and Interior
– 4.2.7
Interdisciplinary Science
• 4.3
Mission Summaries
– 4.3.1
Mission Classes
– 4.3.2 Missions in Formulation and Development
– 4.3.3
Planning for Future Missions
– 4.3.4
Representative Future Mission Elements
16

• 4.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Program Elements
4.4.1 Research and Analysis Program
4.4.2
Applied Sciences Program
4.4.3 Technology Program
4.4.4
Modeling and High-End Computing
4.4.5
Data and Information Systems
4.4.6
Suborbital Science Program
4.4.7
Earth Observation and Science Partnerships
4.4.8
Earth Science Education and Public Outreach
• 4.5
Earth Science Beyond 2016
17

• The compelling nature of Earth Science leading to
NASA’s strategic goal: “
”
• The unique role of NASA among other US government agencies and contributions made by
NASA programs
• Program essential to the implementation of 3 major
Presidential initiatives (CCSP, GEO, AOP).
18

• 3A.1: Understanding and improving predictive capability for changes in the ozone layer, climate forcing, and air quality associated with changes in atmospheric composition.
• 3A.2: Enable improved predictive capability for weather and
extreme weather events.
• 3A.3: Quantify global land cover change and terrestrial and marine
productivity, and improve carbon cycle and ecosystem models.
• 3A.4: Quantify the key reservoirs and fluxes in the global water cycle and improve models of water cycle change and fresh water
availability.
• 3A.5: Understand the role of oceans, atmosphere, and ice in the climate system and in improving predictive capability for its future
evolution.
• 3A.6: Characterize and understand Earth surface changes and variability of the Earth’s gravitational and magnetic fields
19

Variability
Precipitation, evaporation & cycling of water changing?
Global ocean circulation varying?
Global ecosystems changing?
Atmospheric composition changing?
Forcing
Atmospheric constituents & solar radiation on climate?
Changes in land cover
& land use?
Motions of the
Earth & Earth’s interior?
Response
Clouds & surface hydrological processes on climate?
Ecosystems, land cover & biogeochemical cycles?
Changes in global ocean circulation?
Consequence
Weather variation related to climate variation?
Consequences of land cover
& land use change?
Coastal region impacts?
Prediction
Weather forecasting improvement?
Improve prediction of climate variability & change?
Ozone, climate & air quality impacts of atmospheric composition?
Atmospheric trace constituents responses?
Regional air quality impacts?
Carbon cycle & ecosystem change?
Ice cover mass changing?
Sea level affected by Earth system change?
Change in water cycle dynamics?
Earth surface transformation?
Climate Variability and Change Atmospheric Composition
Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems Weather
Water and Energy Cycle Earth Surface and Interior
20
Predict & mitigate natural hazards from Earth surface change?

21

Earth-Sun Systems: Earth Science FY07 Budget
FY 07 Earth Science Budget
Earth Systematic Missions
GPM
Glory
LDCM
OSTM
NPP
Corporate
Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP)
OCO
Aquarius
Cloudsat / CALIPSO
Future / Corp./Other (Next AO NET FY 08)
Earth-Sun System Multi-Mission Operations
Earth Research
Earth R&A, EOS Research
Operating Missions / Data
Scientific Computing / HECC
Suborbital Science
SMD Administrative *
Corporate
Applied Sciences
Education and Outreach
Earth Science Technology
FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11
1,439.9
1,530.7
1,470.7
1,464.4
1,515.8
1,537.9
163.8
301.7
289.3
270.2
220.9
206.0
23.2
24.2
25.4
117.8
121.6
140.1
52.7
27.1
19.9
31.7
9.2
52.0
34.0
12.1
98.1
109.8
103.4
40.6
70.2
16.6
30.6
72.9
16.6
14.9
6.2
15.8
7.8
61.4
11.4
6.2
12.5
7.3
14.6
26.0
6.4
11.6
141.8
161.4
111.5
40.7
51.7
68.2
65.5
34.1
55.6
29.5
19.9
10.2
17.5
6.4
15.4
97.5
12.3
26.9
58.3
172.0
6.7
5.9
159.4
207.2
4.6
202.6
267.3
264.6
287.1
303.5
309.4
294.0
686.8
672.6
657.1
667.6
681.9
696.8
223.7
220.5
240.5
251.9
262.6
267.2
262.8
246.8
236.6
236.6
241.5
239.2
69.4
43.7
49.1
49.1
47.0
47.4
34.2
47.2
49.5
35.3
78.0
48.3
35.3
46.9
48.7
32.8
47.7
49.5
32.9
48.5
49.4
32.9
60.4
49.7
94.8
22.7
62.7
51.0
23.3
56.1
50.3
23.7
51.8
48.6
25.3
51.6
48.7
27.5
55.5
48.8
27.5
57.6
* 2007 includes placeholder for NASA Institutional termination liabilities for deferred SMD Projects
22

Earth Science Mission Priorities and Rationale
Highest priority is given to missions that fulfill Legislative or Executive Branch mandates and inter-agency commitments.
Systematic mission priorities are based on the importance of the measurement to global change research and the maturity of the operational transition plan.
These are followed by missions that will make first-time global measurements: two pathfinder missions having been selected within the same competitive process have a relative priority inferred by the launch order.
The representative future measurements are not listed in priority order.
The forth-coming first NRC decadal survey for Earth science will identify science community priorities for future measurements, as well as begin to address issues arising from recent changes in the NPOESS program. Also influencing the eventual priorities is the US Integrated
Earth Observation Strategy, which plans the US contribution to the Global Earth Observation
System of Systems.
23

Table 2.2.a Earth Science Mission Priorities and Rationale
NPOESS Preparatory Project (2009)
Strategic mission - Systematic measurement
Landsat Data Continuity Mission (2010)
Strategic mission - Systematic measurement
Required for continuity of several key climate measurements between EOS and NPOESS
Required for continuity of long-term global land cover change data; plan for post-
LDCM acquisition operational agency in work
Ocean Surface Topography Mission (2008)
Strategic mission - Systematic measurement
Glory (2008)
Strategic - Initializes a systematic measurement
Orbiting Carbon Observatory (2008)
Competed mission - Earth System Science
Pathfinder
Aquarius (2009)
Competed mission - Earth System Science
Pathfinder
Global Precipitation Measurement (2012)
Initializes a systematic measurement
Earth System Science Pathfinder launch; subsequent TBD
– TBD (2014)
Competed mission - 2008 solicitation for 2014
Required for continuity ocean altimetry; planned as part of a transition to operational agencies
Addresses high priority objective of the US
Climate Change Science Program
First global measurement of CO2 from space
First global measurement of sea surface salinity from space
Extend spatial coverage to global and temporal coverage to every 3 hours with constellation
24
Could address one of the future representative mission elements below; focus and relative priority to be determined using decadal survey

• Mission Profile w/ESSP every two years
– Medium Class Systematic missions every other year starting 2017 (5 missions thru
2025)
– ESSP mission every other year starting 2014 (6 thru 2025)
• Mission Profile w/ESSP every four years
– Medium Class Systematic missions start 2016 (6 thru 2025)
– ESSP missions every four years starting 2014 (3 thru 2025)
• Mission Profile w/ESSP every four years includes Large Mission
– Large mission in 2021 (1 thru 2025)
– Medium Class mission starting 2016 (4 thru 2025)
– ESSP mission starting 2014 (3 thru 2025)
ESSP
Systematic
Mission
2006
CALIPSO
CloudSat
2007 2008
OCO
2009 2010
Aquarius
2011
Glory LDCM
NPP
OSTM
2012 2013 2014 2015
GPM
ESSP
GPM
Const
2016 2017
SYSP
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
ESSP
SYSP SYSP
ESSP
SYSP SYSP SYSP SYSP
25

Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements for Each Focus Area
Focus Areas Potential Element /
Measurements
Climate
Variability and
Change
Sea surface and terrestrial water levels
ICESat Follow-on (Detailed Ice elevation, ice sheet mass)
Earth Surface and Interior
Implementation Approach radar alt/ wide swath/ delayed doppler
Next Generation Ocean Surface
Winds
Wide Swath All Weather Geodetic
Imaging
Advanced scatterometer
L-Band InSAR
Land Surface Imaging spectrometers UV/vis, near-IR, thermal IR
Advanced Gravity Measurements GRACE-like satellite pairs, gradiometer constellation
Geodetic Observing System
Ionospheric Dynamics and
Atmospheric Surface
Pressure
SLR/VLBI/GNSS ground networks
GNSS Remote
Sensing/Magnetometry
26

Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements for Each Focus Area
Focus Areas
Water and
Energy
Cycle
Weather
Crosscutting
Potential Element / Measurements
Global Soil Moisture
Surface Water Runoff
Measurement of Snow and its Water
Equivalent
Changes in Groundwater Storage
Global Wind Observing Sounder
Implementation Approach
Active & Passive L-band (microwave) remote sensing system dual Ka-band SARs active Ku-band SAR + passive microwave radiometer (K or Ka band)
Constellation of GRACE satellite pairs
Hybrid (coherent and direct detection)
Doppler wind lidar
Synthetic aperture microwave radiometer Geostationary Synthetic Thinned
Aperture Radiometer
Active Temperature and Humidity
Sounder
Geostationary Precipitation Radar
Advanced Remote-sensing Imaging
Emission Spectrometer
Combination active (i.e. lidar) and passive IR sounder
Precipitation radar
Hyperspectral, high horizontal resolution
IR and visible grating spectrometer imager sounder
27

Table 4.3 Potential Mission Elements/Measurements for Each Focus Area
Focus Areas Potential Element / Measurements Implementation Approach
Atmospheric
Composition
Carbon Cycle and
Ecosystems
Sentinel multispectral atmospheric composition
GEO or L1 spectrometers UV/vis, near-IR, thermal IR
Next Generation Aerosol Measurements Multi-angle multi-spectral imaging polarimeter + High sensitivity backscatter lidar
Atmospheric Composition for Climate and Transport
Systematic Upper Trop/lower
Stratospheric Composition
Vegetation 3-D Structure, Biomass &
Disturbance
Advanced microwave sounder mid-earth orbit
Micro-FTS Solar Occultation
Global Ocean Carbon, Ecosystems, and
Coastal Processes
Physiology & Functional Groups
In priority order: 1) Profiling lidar; P-band
SAR; 3) InSAR? Optimal:
Combination of 1 and 2 or 3
LEO spectrometer and aerosol instrument;
20 aggregate bands in 350-1400 nm region with 5nm resolution from UV to
800nm; 1km spatial resolution
Polar-orbiting imaging spectrometer(s)
(~340-2500 nm) -- with aerosol lidar for atmospheric correction. over ocean
28

•
The NAC Science Committee discussed the draft Science Plan outline and approach in May and the draft (3.0) in July
– (see next slide on the NAC’s recommendation and NASA’s response)
• The Science Subcommittees reviewed the draft (3.0) in their July meeting(s) and provided comments
– These comments were incorporated in Draft 3.75
•
Most Science Subcommittees reviewed how we addressed their comments in their September meetings
– Findings addressed in letters to the NAC SC
• The NAC Chairman identified two issues with draft 3.0:
– In his view, the draft was not well written.
• NASA plans two rounds of professional editing before completion
– The draft did not adequately address lunar science
• Draft 4.0 articulates next steps in lunar science planning in each
Science chapter. Chapter 8 is substantially revised in this direction
29

ESS COMMENTS ON DRAFT SCIENCE PLAN
• Adopt scenario of medium mission/2yrs, ESSP/4yrs
• First “open” mission in current plan is an ESSP in 2014; examine trade-off of scheduling medium mission instead
•
Atmospheric composition: continuous( g air quality) global ( g climate) measurement should be top priority, implies sentinel orbit (L1 or GEO).
• Better discuss cross-cutting opportunities in instruments & platforms across focus areas, importance of complementary technology (example: InSAR)
• Flesh out Earth Science objectives beyond 2016:
–Observation/prediction of rapid environmental change
– new technologies for Earth observation (microsatellites)
– Earth system modeling
• Better articulate science purpose of suborbital program, esp. UAVs
• Legacy road maps – move to Appendix. New road maps in 2007 (after decadal survey input)
• Overall document needs executive summary
• Acronym list at beginning of each chapter
30

• Supportive of NASA’s approach to mission prioritization
– “… the committee does not believe that NASA should or could produce a prioritized list across disciplines at this time .”
• Concerned with NASA’s ability to carry out the plan given the budget
– Extensive reference to the NRC report “An Assessment of Balance in NASA’s Science Program” [SSB view of FY07 budget request]
– Recommendations are cast in terms of “ recommendations on the implementation and viability of the draft Science Plan ”
• Several are not comments on the Plan per se , but on actions
SMD should take e.g., on R&A and controlling mission cost growth
• Several good comments that will improve the document. These are now in work by the Science Plan team for incorporation in draft 4.0
31

1.
“The draft NASA Science Plan successfully demonstrates that a major NASA objective is conducting scientific research…Portions of the plan do an excellent job of outlining the reasons that NASA carries out science missions”
2.
“The committee supports the plan’s treatment of priorities on a discipline-by-discipline basis and concludes that NASA should not or could not produce a prioritized list across disciplines”
3.
“…the current draft overemphasizes mission-specific work at the expense of strategies and steps for achieving goals in missionenabling areas…”
4.
“The draft Science Plan often declares an intention to implement a program or identifies a goal or mission as a top priority, but it does not indicate what steps it would take to achieve the goals…” (issue of mission cost growth, risk, schedule)
5.
“…lacks a strategy for an integrated synthesis of the variety and volume of Earth observations generated by NASA…Earth system models…linking and cross-cutting the six [ES] interdisciplinary science focus areas…”
32

1.
“…compare the key aspects of its 2003 Earth and space science plans with the 2006 plan in a list or table…”
2.
“…provide some indication of the strategy it will use to determine how critically needed technologies will be developed for future missions…”
3.
“…explicitly address realistic strategies for achieving the objectives of the missionenabling elements…” a.
“Undertake appropriate studies through its advisory structure in order to develop a strategic approach to all of its R&A programs… b.
“Develop a strategic plan to address computing and modeling needs, including data and information stewardship…”
4.
“NASA should improve mechanisms for managing and controlling cost growth…undertake independent, systematic, and comprehensive evaluations of the cost-to-complete of each of its space and Earth science missions…”
5.
“NASA/SMD should move immediately to correct the problems caused by reductions in the base of R&A programs, small missions, and initial technology…”
33

• NASA/SMD should incorporate into its Science Plan the recommendations of the NRC Earth science decadal survey interim report, and should incorporate the recommendations of the
Earth science decadal survey final report when it is completed.
• NASA/SMD should develop a science strategy for obtaining longterm, continuous, stable observations of the Earth system that are distinct from observations to meet requirements by NOAA in support of numerical weather prediction.
• NASA/SMD should present an explicit strategy, based on objective science criteria for Earth science observations, for balancing the complementary objectives of (i) new sensors for technological innovation, (ii) new observations for emerging science needs, and
(iii) long-term sustainable science-grade environmental observations.
34

• Presidential Decision Directive/NSTC-2 of May 5, 1994 created the National Polar-orbiting Operational
Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS)
• In 1999 NASA and the NPOESS Integrated Program Office
(IPO) agreed on the NPOESS Preparatory Project (NPP) as an alternative to the second round of Earth Observing System
(EOS) mission
• Due to a variety of technical problems, the completion cost for NPOESS grew by more then 25% initiating the Nunn-
McCurdy process in December 2005
• The restructured program was certified on June 5, 2006
• Restructured NPOESS deletes much of the climate research observing capability
• Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) asked for a white paper on the subject on June 25, 2006
35

NPOESS Nunn-McCurdy Certification
Content Reductions
36

• De-manifested Sensors: OMPS Limb Subsystem, TSIS,
ERBS,
and APS .
• Reduced Coverage Sensors: VIIRS and CrIS
• Reduced Capability Sensor: Conical Scanning
Microwave Imager (CMIS)
• NASA developed white paper now in review with NOAA for joint paper submission
• OSTP request for costs and schedules to restore the original capabilities – preliminary costing completed
37

• Accommodate Science Plan reviews (including other agencies and White House Offices) to generate Version for
NASA final approval and submit to Congress Dec. 2006
• Release of the Decadal Survey (DS) by the NRC to NASA
(and other sponsoring agencies) late 2006
• Assessment & evaluation of NPOESS N-M impact by WH and NRC panel report
• Develop Earth Science roadmap following DS priorities and mission studies results
• Develop amendment for the Earth Science plan and submit to Congress mid-2007
38

39

40

Associate Administrator (AA) (M. Cleave)
Deputy AA (C. Hartman)
Deputy AA for Programs
(M. Luther)
Chief Scientist
(P. Hertz)
Deputy AA for Technology
(G. Komar-Act)
Chief Engineer
(K. Ledbetter)
Management &
Policy Division
Dir. (R. Maizel)
Deputy (Vacant)
Budget (C. Tupper)
Policy (Vacant)
Administration (Vacant)
Heliophysics
Division
Dir. (R. Fisher)
Deputy (C. Gay)
Earth Science
Division
Dir. (B. Cramer-Act)
Deputy (J. Kaye-Act)
Planetary Science
Division
Dir. (J. Green-Act)
Dep. (S. Wojnar-Act)
(D. McCuistion)
Applied Science
(M. Frederick- Act)
Research (J. Kaye)
Astrophysics
Division
Dir. (R. Howard-Act)
Deputy (Vacant)
As of: October 1, 2006
41

• The standing advisory committees chartered to give advice to the Agency are:
– NASA Advisory Council (NAC)
– Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP)
– ISS Independent Safety Task Force
• The NAC is the primary external group advising NASA on its implementation of national space policy
– All other (formerly) independent groups and committees have been brought under the purview of the NAC
– In this way, advice to NASA is coordinated and provided to the Administrator
– The NRC performs studies at the request of the Congress or NASA, but is not part of the standing advisory process
• Responsibility and accountability for planning and executing NASA’s programs resides with NASA managers
42

• Dr. Edward David [Chair] - NAS/NAE, EDD Inc.
• Dr. Owen Garriott - Skylab & Spacelab astronaut
• Dr. Alan Stern - SWRI; NH-Pluto PI
• Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson - AMNH- NY
• Dr. Bradley Jolliff - Washington U/St. Louis
• Dr. Mark Robinson - Arizona St. Univ.
• Dr. Lennard Fisk - NRC Space Studies Board chair (ex officio)
43

S-06-5
Develop the Science Plan draft using the following guidelines:
* Define key scientific questions for each area
* Define reasonable progress in each area by
2016
* Describe the roles of major project elements (R&A, technology, large and small missions, etc) in each area. It is understood that the means will differ from question to question
SMD agrees and has prepared a first external review draft of the
Science Plan based on the
President's FY 2007 budget for
NASA. Initial review of the NAC
Science Subcommittees was generally positive. The entire NAC will receive a revised draft for review at its October meeting.
* Use OMB budget guidelines as the financial envelop to:
- Define missions and specific programs
- Define S&T investments that need to be made now to enable a robust set of program/mission options in 2011
- Use this planning exercise to inform
FY08 budget formulation
44
Note: NASA cannot use OMB budget guidelines in a document to be publicly released before the budget is approved. The FY 2008 budget will be presented in February
2007.

• SMD has the lead for the robotic Mars, solar system, and planet finding components of the
Vision
• SMD is working with ESMD on planning for science that enables and is enabled by the human exploration portion Vision
– SMD is sponsoring an NRC study of Lunar science priorities; interim report delivered, final to be delivered in May 2007
– SMD and ESMD are jointly supporting the NASA Advisory Council’s Lunar Science
Workshop planned for Feb 26-March 2, 2007
– SMD is funding the Moon Mineralogy Mapper mission on India’s Chandrayaan-1 mission
– EMSD is funding a radiation environment instrument on SMD’s Mars Science
Laboratory
– SMD is funding an open solicitation for Lunar sortie science concepts for the early human lunar missions; proposals due Oct. 27
– The Discovery and New Frontiers Programs both currently provide opportunities for the science community to propose missions to accomplish lunar science investigations
– SMD plays a program scientist role in LPRP
• Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) data sets will be archived in the PDS and available to the community starting 6 months after the end of prime mission.
• As funds can be identified, SMD plans to initiate a Lunar Data Analysis
Program
45

•
General Reactions:
– “…a very good document…”
– “…’answers the mail’ in responding to Congress with considerable justification for the approach the Agency is taking”
– “…can be improved…increasing use of graphics, adding greater description of societal benefits, and a more comprehensive discussions of the interactions [between SMD and ESMD plans, esp. lunar science]”
– Clearly a difficult task to develop an Earth science plan absent an NRC decadal survey; some detailed comments in Consolidated Comments
• Responsiveness to Congressional Direction
– “…addresses the Congressional direction in spirit while not necessarily to the letter”
– “…the NSAG supports SMD’s approach of presenting its prioritization by disciplines”
– “…creation of a single chart, showing all divisions’ missions together…through 2016”
• NASA’s Prioritization Rationale
– “…generally appear to be internally self-consistent and consonant with
Congressional direction”
46

• Technology Development and Insertion
– “…does not focus much attention on the technology development needed…”
– “The Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) and the New Millennium
Program could be described in greater detail…”
– “Industry possesses a wealth of applicable technology, and NASA should address this resource and how it can be tapped in this plan”
•
Mission Size Mix
– “…better define what is meant by ‘large’ or ‘small’ missions…”
– “The plan shows a decrease in launch rate of AO missions…there is a consensus that this class of mission is very valuable…it is not our intent to make a specific recommendation in this regard”
• Industry-NASA Relations
– “…provide a clear statement of the value of the industry-government partnership”
– “Greater collaboration with industry is recommended in order to get industry inputs and analyses early on in the process of conceptualizing architectures, missions, and relevant technologies”
47

• Oceans exert great influence on climate – huge sink for solar energy
• Transport heat in ocean currents, release it back into the atmosphere as water vapor, transport it in the atmosphere, condenses, and returns as rain or snow – the hydrologic cycle
• Satellites offer a synoptic view of oceans starting with Seasat
(1978), Geosat (1985), TOPEX/Poseidon (1992), JASON-1 (2001), and OSTM (2008)
• NOAA and Navy are planning future operational missions
• NASA is working with the Navy and NOAA on an advanced altimetry mission that is backward compatible with OSTM and includes a Ka-Band interferometer ocean altimeter to provide wide swath coverage and greater spatial resolution
• This approach enables the examination of land surface water
(rivers and lakes) as well as costal waters that are not presently available with OSTM
48

1.
Proceed with the GPM and the Atmospheric Soundings from
Geostationary Orbit (GIFTS) missions;
2.
Evaluate plans for transferring needed capabilities to
NPOESS (Ocean Vector Winds, LDCM, GLORY);
3.
Develop a technology base for future Earth observation;
4.
Reinvigorate the NASA Earth Explorer Missions Program;
5.
Strengthen research and analysis programs; and
6.
Strengthen baseline climate observations and climate data records.
49

• Recommendation 2 addressed
• Recommendation 1 has not been addressed
• Recommendations 3,4, and 6 are mentioned but without providing objective, as well as strategic and tactical vision
• Recommendation 5 is not addressed at all.
50