To Boldly Go Where Nasa Has Failed Before

To Boldly Go Where NASA Has Failed Before

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or NASA, was established in 1958 under the Eisenhower administration. Its main purpose was to act as an independent agency to direct the nation's space missions and research programs. Over the past 45 years, since its inception, NASA has experienced many problems and has received recent negative publicity. NASA has had longstanding managerial problems on the inside and with outside contractors. They have also failed to estimate costs and have conducted projects well beyond what their budget dictates. An example of that would be with the failed X-33 project, among others. This analysis will explore these areas of NASA and provide preliminary recommendations as to how the program can better itself, from management to new vehicles.

Although research of National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) government contractors over the last thirty years did not uncover any major allegations of shoddy workmanship or under spec deliverables, it did reveal serious issues with regard to billing fraud and huge bonuses paid out on over budget projects. Over the years there have been numerous allegations of fraud and abuse by NASA contractors. Finally in November 2000 the government was able to win a settlement against the Boeing Company of Seattle and the Houston-based United Space Alliance for a total of $825,000. In addition to the money that was awarded, these two companies agreed to forfeit any rights they have to collect on $1.2 million in unpaid invoices. This settlement was related to allegations that false claims had been submitted for work supposedly performed between 1986 and 1992 under the NASA Space Shuttle and Space Station Freedom programs. Originally, the Rockwell Space Operations Company (RSOC) was the contractor who was hired to manage the two programs. An RSOC sub-contractor, Omniplan Corporation, is accused of being involved in numerous fraudulent billing activities. The result of this fraud was that the United States was overcharged millions of dollars. The Boeing Company acquired RSOC in 1996 and at that time United Space Alliance took over the management of the two space programs. The government tried to sue Omniplan in 1993, but the company went bankrupt. In January 2000 the government then filed suit against RSOC claiming that they had submitted Omniplan's false invoices. It is the government's contention that a company is responsible for the billing accuracy of its sub-contractors and RSOC should have been validating that all costs submitted by Omniplan were legitimate. Invoices submitted included personal costs related to private homes, jewelry, and vacations abroad. It was also uncovered that Omniplan was leasing buildings and equipment to itself by setting up phony companies. The outrageousness of the fraud in the programs is only matched by the huge bonuses that have been paid out to contractors for projects that have been grossly over budget. An example would be the Gamma Ray Observatory, which came in at forty million dollars over budget in 1993, and NASA gave them a five million dollar bonus just because it was a "huge technical feat". Although the space program has many benefits for our society, past history tells us that serious controls need to be put in place to monitor the programs financials. The amount of waste that has occurred and potentially could occur in the future is unacceptable and puts the future of the program in jeopardy.

Publicity surrounding the fraud and waste in the NASA programs has forced the government to step back and revalidate the value of the space program. In 2001 the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 established the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry. Their task was to assess the future of the U.S. aerospace industry and to recommend actions to be taken by the Federal Government to support the ability of the U.S. aerospace industry to remain robust in the future. The Commission was given a broad mandate by the Congress and it contained a number of key items such as "the adequacy of the current acquisition process of federal departments and agencies; the procedures for developing and fielding aerospace systems incorporating new technology in a timely fashion; and the policies, procedures, and methods for the financing and payment of government contracts" (Commission of the Future, 2001). At the time this commission was formed, Vice President Dick Cheney issued the following statement, "The United States aerospace industry plays a major role in our national defense, economic growth, scientific advancement, and quality of life" (Commission of the Future, 2001). This statement mirrors how most Americans feel, but it is imperative that this commission takes steps to eliminate the fraud and waste in the NASA programs.

NASA puts a lot of money into the economy and almost every state in the union receives some benefit from the space programs or from companies that are created for space program research. NASA contributes different percentages of their annual budget to Science, Aeronautics, Exploration, Space Flight Capabilities and Inspector General. It also distributes monies to different companies, nonprofits, universities, and research centers involved in astronomy, aeronautical and astronomical research. NASA's budget has been negatively affected for numerous reasons; one in particular is failure to estimate costs appropriately. An example of NASA's failure to estimate costs is the International Space Station (ISS). In 1993, NASA said the space station would cost $17.4 billion and no more than $2.1 billion per year. NASA has had continual overrun costs, has not estimated costs appropriately, and is almost $5 billion over budget. The General Accounting Office has reported that the financial books are undocumented shambles and that there is not enough information to confirm or refute the financial information, which could lead to the reasons why there were overrun costs. Congress has chastised managers for mismanaging International Space Station Costs. Managers should know how to predict costs. Oâ„-Keefe, Administrator for NASA said a Marshall-developed software could restore public confidence and better determine costs.

Another issue that NASA has to deal with is its aging fleet of space shuttles. With NASA's fleet of four space shuttles well in its thirties, since they were developed in the 1970s and first flown in 1981, they are fast becoming outdated museum pieces. In fact the space shuttle Enterprise is already a museum piece, now the property of the Smithsonian Institute. NASA's latest casualty, the space shuttle Columbia,