On Monday, the President signed the 2010 NASA Authorization Act into law with little fanfare.  After an acrimonious debate that started with the February proposal of an FY2011 budget that would have dramatically shifted the agency’s goals and defied the traditional definitions of partisan warfare, the Senate’s compromise – championed by our own Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Florida’s Sen. Bill Nelson – won the day.

There are two things in the Authorization Act that stand out to me.  First, the Constellation Program, as envisioned by former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, is finished.  Congress has made it absolutely clear that his plan to abandon the International Space Station in 2015 is a non-starter.  NASA has been given clear direction to sustain the ISS through at least 2020.  Indications are that we are likely to keep it running for as long as is safe.

Second, the debate has shifted from whether commercial space will have a role in our national space program at all to what the most appropriate plan for developing public-private partnerships will be.  Even if we are only able to get modest reductions in launch costs, for example, through such partnerships, this will help NASA focus resources in its shift from an operationalized culture back to an exploratory culture.

The 2010 Authorization Act directs NASA to work on the following tasks over the next three years:

• Exploration:

1. A multi-purpose crew vehicle (likely derived from Constellation’s Orion)
2. A Space Launch System for exploration missions Beyond Earth Orbit
3. Exploration Technology Development, Human Research, Commercial Cargo, Commercial Crew, and Robotic Precursor Studies & Missions

• Space Operations:

1. ISS continuation
2. A successful run-out of the Shuttle program
3. A NASA infrastructure modernization program

• Continued science research in earth sciences, planetary science, astrophysics, and heliophysics
• Aeronautics and Space Technology Research
• Dedicated Education & Outreach programs

While top-level funding totaling between $19 and $20 billion annually is described for each line item, the real money won’t be laid out until the appropriations bill comes.  That’s not likely to happen until after the next Congress takes office.  Until then, NASA will be operating under a Continuing Resolution which keeps the agency at 2010 funding levels and direction.

Where the Authorization Act is important is in the policies, goals, and objectives it lays out for NASA – particularly with regards to human space flight.  Given that this Act passed unanimously in the Senate and with easily more than a 2/3rds majority in the House, it is unlikely that we will see a change in this guidance for NASA, even if the appropriations law moves around some of the pie pieces.

First, the Act states that the long-term goal of NASA’s human space flight and exploration efforts is to establish and expand a permanent human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit and to involve our international partners where it is practical to do so.

Second, the Act states that NASA’s objectives in human space flight are to fully utilize the ISS (both as a National Laboratory and a proving ground for living in space), to assist and enable the expansion of commercial presence in LEO, to lay the foundation for sustainable economic activities in space, to identify potential space resources, to figure out how to live in space with “decreasing reliance on Earth,” to maximize the contributions of space exploration to our knowledge base, and to build mutually beneficial international partnerships in the pursuit of those goals.

In terms of policy, the Act requires NASA commission the National Academies in 2012 conduct a review of the “goals, core capabilities, and direction of human space flight.”  This is one of the least discussed, but, perhaps, most important aspects of the 2010 Authorization Act.

The NASA science community is guided by a process called the Decadal Survey.  The National Research Council helps NASA identify and prioritize its science objectives and assess the missions required to meet those objectives.  This serves as a check and balance on mission creep and provides the Science Mission Directorate with guidance that survives beyond the political process.

Until now, human space exploration had no such process for providing policy and program guidance based on outside technical analysis.  Our work has been entirely subject to the vagaries of the ever-shifting political winds.  The 2010 Authorization Act explicitly calls for the National Academies to provide such a service for NASA human space flight, as their report will give findings and recommendations for the 10 years following the three covered in the Authorization Act.

Despite what you might read in some blogs, the Moon is not dead as a potential destination, either.  The Authorization Act explicitly states that the “regions of cis-lunar space,” including the lunar surface, should be included in space infrastructure development and that international partnerships in these endeavors will help address national security and economic concerns.

To provide the best value to the taxpayer, NASA is directed to take a “pay as you go” approach and size its crew and launch systems to the minimum necessary to conduct cis-lunar missions.  Missions to other destinations, such as asteroids or Mars, would be based on these technologies.

120 days from the enactment of the Act, NASA is required to present to Congress an assessment of any effort to expand or strengthen international collaboration on the ISS and any efforts in defining near-term cis-lunar missions.  These reports will be assumed to contribute to the development of the multi-purpose crew vehicle, the Space Launch System, and any other space technology the NASA Administrator deems appropriate.

While much has been reported about the Senate supposedly micro-managing the design of the Space Launch System, Section 302 (which covers SLS) is replete with caveats that give the NASA Administrator discretion on technical elements.  This suggests to me that Congress may be amenable if NASA runs the numbers and stands its ground if they’re asked to do something that doesn’t make sense.

The concern is that Congress wants the Space Launch System to be at initial operating capability by the end of 2016.  Under the existing funding profile, the Constellation Program’s Ares I rocket was not expected to be ready by that time and it was an arguably less capable booster than what Congress is asking for.

The only way NASA can accomplish this feat is if they have the technical and programmatic flexibility to develop a booster configuration that meets the schedule and budget constraints.  If this turns out to just not be possible, NASA needs to be able to speak out without fear of political repurcussion.

The Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, based on what has been learned from the Orion project, is also expected to be ready to enter service no later than the Space Launch System.  While a dedicated, versatile exploration vehicle that can operate in conjunction with mission-specific modules would be a tremendous asset to NASA, the concern for this project is much the same as with the Space Launch System.  It’s not yet clear that NASA can meet the schedule within the budget expected.

Section 307 is also important because it establishes as a matter of policy that NASA should have a healthy balance between operational capabilities and advanced technology development.  The NASA Administrator is authorized to make investments in such R&D because of the potential for transforming the human space flight enterprise.

The question now is how soon the appropriations will be given out and how closely those will follow the guidance given in the Authorization Act.  While some appropriations committee members have indicated they will defer to the Authorization Act, other Representatives and Senators who were unhappy with the Authorization Act have said they will fight to get changes made at the budget end.

NASA now has the task of making assessments and beginning initial planning for how it will carry out the direction given by Congress and the President to establish permanent human presence Beyond Earth Orbit, make the most possible utilization of the International Space Station, continue its leadership in basic science and aeronautics research, and research revolutionary technologies that could transform our world or protect it from harm.

We’re not out of the woods yet, but it’s a place to start on the long road ahead.