NASAs review process came under sharp criticism following the loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia in February. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report released in August said cultural and managerial factors, including upper level managers ignoring the concerns of lower ranking employees, led to a series of miscommunications. The Board also concluded that a accident was the result of NASAs failure to properly analyze and appreciate the potential danger posed by the foam impact that was the physical cause of the breakup of Columbia.
Concerns about the launch of another crew to the space station from Russia Oct. 18 were raised during pre-launch reviews by two officials at NASAs Johnson Space Center in Houston: Nitza Cintron, NASA's chief of space medicine, and William Langdoc, chief of the Habitability and Environmental Factors Office. Agency officials said during a teleconference with reporters Oct. 23 that the fact that those concerns reached the highest levels of agency management during this launch review is proof that NASA is taking the CAIB report seriously.
Cintron and Langdoc signed a dissent that warned about the continued degradation of environmental monitoring and health maintenance systems and exercise equipment aboard the station, but those concerns were overruled by NASA management and the Russian Soyuz rocket was launched Oct. 18.
Word of their dissent was first disclosed in a front-page story in the Oct. 23 edition of the Washington Post.
While Cintrons and Langdocs concerns were overruled, NASA officials were satisfied that they had given the issue full consideration.
We read the CAIB report and have really taken it to heart, William Gerstenmaier, NASA's space station program manager, said from Moscow during an Oct. 23 teleconference with reporters. Were working hard to go above and beyond what is required of us.
A New Process
Speaking from Washington, Mary Kicza, NASAs associate administrator for biological and physical research, said the scrutiny being given to this issue is a very positive indicator that the agency is following the CAIB recommendations. People do feel the power to express their concerns and the management process all the way up is willing to discuss the issues, she said.
Cintron and Langdoc said they were not made to feel uncomfortable when raising their concerns with management, an issue that may have been a problem during the Columbia mission.
We all read the CAIB report and we understood what the concerns were in the process, Langdoc said. What I saw going on [with the launch review] was not the process that had been reviewed and criticized. We felt we were given a set of information at the time and have done the right thing in making the recommendations we did. The program listened to that at the highest levels of center management and agency management and I felt really good that all that we were worried about was on the table and looked at. Nothing was left hidden.
While Cintron and Langdoc both opposed the launch early in the flight readiness review process, their concern was not with the launch, but with long-term habitation of the station. Some of those concerns were addressed during the review.
The time we signed the dissent was very early, before all the mitigation systems were worked out and defined, Langdoc said. The recommendations we gave were based on the information, or lack of information, at the time, and by the time we go through the process, we dont vote again. The program has looked at all of these things and made the decision to go. Personally, Im comfortable with going and continuing to support operations as we have them.
The agency will attempt to return air and water samples to Earth with the current crew, which is planned for Oct. 27, Gerstenmaier said. However, NASA does not expect to have those samples back at Johnson for several weeks, and the data might not be ready for analysis until December, Langdoc said.
During this time, NASA will keep a close watch on the station and will not put the crew at any extra risk, Gerstenmaier said. Youre getting a glimpse at how difficult it is to fly the station, he said. Its an extremely complicated spacecraft flying in a very hostile environment. We have to pay attention to detail and during this timeframe with limited ability to fly and return, we need to be extra vigilant.
Support from Washington
Response outside the agency was generally positive.
In a situation like this, you either have faith in Mr. OKeefe and his decision-making ability or you dont, said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Science Committees space and aeronautics subcommittee.
He is the director and if you want him to remain in that position, you have to have faith in him for cases exactly like this. Obviously he is making the decision about whether or not the concerns that were raised met the threshold to cancel [the launch] and he decided not to, Rohrabacher said. He has made that decision, and politicians and political people should not be second guessing it. If hes right, then everything will be OK. If he's wrong, he will live with the consequences, as will the rest of us. That is what leadership is all about.
Brian Chase, executive director of the National Space Society in Washington, said he did not think the situation facing the space station crew is analogous to the problems that led to the Columbia disaster.
I dont think the same kind of situation. On the space station they have an escape system. They have the ability to get out when there is a problem, chase said. There is ample warning and systems that can identify risks. I know [there are problems with those systems] but if they lose that ability, they have said that they will evacuate the station.
I think this is very, very different from Columbia, where they did not recognize the risks, and there was no escape option, Chase said. In this situation, they had all the facts on table, knew risks and there was a decision to move forward.
Chase said the medical side of NASA has been extremely conservative, throughout its history. I think any alarms they raise ought to be considered in light of the service they perform.
During a press conference from the space station, members of the new crew said the did not feel they were in any danger.
"I do not believe this issue in any way is putting in question how long we will stay on this expedition, or indeed the expeditions that follow us," said Mike Foale, commander of the Expedition 8 crew.
advertisement
