SPACE.com -- Columbia Board Boss: NASA's Safety Officials Need More Clout

Shuttle Investigator Says Tumbling Foam Packed More Punch

William Parsons will be NASA's New Shuttle Chief

Texas Congressman Says Shuttle Not Safe to Fly

Columbia Disaster FAQ


	Columbia Board Boss: NASA's Safety Officials Need More Clout By Brian Berger Space News Staff Writer posted: 03:45 pm ET 14 May 2003

Untitled

WASHINGTON -- The NASA organizations responsible for raising safety concerns need more clout if they are to be heard and heeded, the chairman of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board told a Senate panel May 14.

The safety organization on paper is perfect, but when you bore down a little deeper, theres no there there, retired U.S. Navy Adm. Harold Gehman, chairman of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, told members of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

NASAs associate administrator for safety and mission assurance, who along with the agencys associate administrator for spaceflight is responsible for signing off on every space shuttle mission, does not have enough engineering staff to conduct the depth of analysis that is needed to make convincing arguments during a flight review that a particular safety concern has merit, Gehman said.

While NASA allows engineers to raise safety concerns at any time, Gehman said that without a large pile of supporting research and analysis, it can be difficult for a minority opinion to win out over past experiences in which similar anomalies did not prevent the shuttle from reaching orbit or making it back to the runway.

You cant just go in there and wave your arms and beat your chest, Gehman told lawmakers. You have to go in armed with ammunition.

Gehman also expressed concern about the independence of the small army of staff engineers assigned to each of NASAs field centers. Gehman said Johnson Space Centers Engineering Directorate is almost wholly dependent on the space shuttle and space station programs for their funding so you know where their allegiances are.

Gehman said that it is his opinion, but not yet that of the board, that NASAs engineering directorate ought to be funded separately from the programs they support in order to ensure that they have the muscle to function as an independent check on mission safety.

NASA Administrator Sean OKeefe, who testified before the Senate panel alongside Gehman, said that NASA would take its guidance from the board on what needs to be done to ensure that NASAs safety officials have enough clout to be heard. If their view is its inadequate, thats the answer its inadequate, and we will go fix that, he said.

Gehman also informed the committee that an inquiry began 10 days ago aimed at finding out if there is anything NASA could have done to save Columbia and her crew if they had fully grasped the danger they were in. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board is opening such an inquiry only now, Gehman said, because it feels sufficient time has passed to start asking the difficult what-if types of questions without disturbing fresh wounds.

Gehman also used the hearing to respond to a request by Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) that congressional oversight committees be given unfettered access to all testimony the board has received from NASA employees and other offcials concerning the accident.

Gehman told reporters after the hearing that the board has promised anonymity to some 200 individuals who have given testimony to the accident investigation board. While the board intends to honor its agreements with those individuals within the fullest extent of the law, Gehman said he also believes a solution can be reached that will allow lawmakers to exercise their full oversight responsibilities without making the sworn statements public.