Planning NASA’s future

When NASA administrator Sean O’Keefe announced his retirement in December 2004 to become chancellor of Louisiana State University, NASA was still reeling from the 2003 loss of the space shuttle Columbia, strained relations with the science community, and upcoming tough budget decisions. The White House quickly chose Michael D. Griffin, a 35-year career veteran in both NASA and the commercial space industry, to head the agency. Physics Today recently interviewed Griffin at NASA headquarters in Washington, DC (a full transcript is available on the Physics Today website).

One of the first things a visitor to Griffin’s office notices is a framed 1953 book called A Child’s Book of Stars hanging on the wall. “It was the first book I got when I learned to read,” says Griffin, “and I literally don’t remember a time when I was interested in anything other than science, mathematics, or engineering.” Griffin has degrees in physics, aerospace engineering, electrical engineering, and civil engineering because “the space industry is a highly multidisciplinary field.”

“I got a business degree,” he adds, “because when I began to get promoted to the higher ranks, I found it necessary to talk to financial types, and I needed to be able to speak in a language that they spoke, because there was no prayer that they would speak mine.” This mixture of scientific, engineering, and business experience, says Griffin, means that nothing in his job surprises him. “If I’m surprised at this time, then I’m not qualified to run NASA,” he says.

Griffin adds that he took the job because of recommendations by the Columbia accident investigation board for NASA to look beyond flying to the space station and take up more challenging work such as returning to the Moon and heading on to Mars; both goals are supported by President Bush and Congress. “I think it’s the right thing,” he says. “I am deeply committed to help bring that about.”

PT: What is your management style for running NASA?

GRIFFIN: If I had my way, I would do the job under an assumed name. I am not interested in ceremonial aspects of the job. They do exist, and I recognize that responsibility, but I don’t like it. It’s one of the aspects of the job that I would say was on the debit side of the balance sheet as opposed to the credit side, in taking the job.

Anytime that I can avoid a public appearance or anytime that I can be participatory as opposed to directive in a management meeting, I would do that. I would like people, if possible, to buy into my ideas on how NASA should be structured, organized, and run rather than accept them as commands. I am very comfortable with an agency in which there is discourse, argument, debate, and discussion before a decision is made.

My final decision will not improve because of my reluctance to hear opposing views. So I try to run my management meetings like any community of science and engineering professionals, by putting out theories, judgments, designs, and proofs or critique. And then the hope is that when we have all the best minds looking at the problem, the best answer emerges.

PT: What is your role in developing relationships with NASA’s international partners?

GRIFFIN: I enjoy a very good relationship with my international counterparts Jean-Jacques Dordain from the European Space Agency; Anatoly Perminov from Russia’s Federal Space Agency; Madhavan Nair, chairman of India’s space research organization; and Keiji Tachikawa of JAXA, Japan.

As you might expect, most of the discussions at this top level are on guidelines and constraints. For example, would we consider a cooperative effort with Europe on the James Webb Space Telescope in which a European Ariane-5 rocket would be used as the launch vehicle and the US will build most of the telescope? That’s a nice division of labor in this case, and it can’t be agreed to at a lower level.

Another discussion which would come to my level would be whether we should have a major European component or Japanese component in the shuttle replacement program. The answer is no because we need independent forms of space transportation.

Issues such as exactly what price we will pay for transportation for American astronauts on Russian launch vehicles I don’t typically get involved in.

PT: What is NASA’s relationship with the Chinese?

GRIFFIN: Well, really, there isn’t one at the present other than the various forms of data exchange for scientific missions. The ability to forge any sort of a cooperative relationship with China in space depends on the resolution of higher-level issues between the Chinese government and the US government.

PT: How do you justify to your international partners the cancellation of shuttle flights such as the AMS-2 [Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer-2] trip to the space station?

GRIFFIN: Sam Ting [the principal investigator of AMS-2] has been very visible in his objection to [the AMS flight cancellation], but his experiment is no more and no less damaged than those of many other people. The fact is that by presidential decree the US usage of the shuttle is now to finish assembly of the space station and retire. It is one of many unfortunate things to occur in the wake of the loss of Columbia.

PT: A significant number of NASA’s workforce will be eligible for retirement in the near future. Are there any particular plans to get younger workers into the NASA workforce?

GRIFFIN: Our budget has been relatively fixed in inflation-adjusted dollars, so we’re not going to be bringing more people into the agency or, for that matter, into our contractor workforce, because constant dollars buys a constant number of people. The aerospace industry and NASA is a rather graying industry; our average age is around 49–50. Now that is an opportunity and a threat.

The opportunity is that unless older people retire I can’t hire young people. The fact that a quarter of our people are eligible to retire in the next five years allows us the opportunity to hire some fresh young faces. The flip side is that many of those retirees possess a lifetime of critical skills that aren’t written down in books. They can be taught, they can be passed on, but it is very much an apprenticeship rather than training. So the loss of some of these critical skills is a problem, particularly with regard to flying people in space.

PT: So what are you going to do to make sure there is a smooth transition?

GRIFFIN: We’re trying to offer people the opportunity early to get onto the new programs, bringing some of their skills with them. We’re trying to provide opportunities for some younger people to work on the shuttle and space station while those programs are still here.

PT: In 2007 the National Academy of Sciences released an Earth science decadal survey. Both NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been studying that report for the past 10 months. What conclusions have you come to?

GRIFFIN: I was one of the people who asked for and wanted an Earth science decadal survey because it’s been my observation that the decadal surveys in astrophysics, planetary science, and heliophysics have been very helpful to the community. That said, the Earth science decadal survey called for 2.5 times the amount of programs that can be afforded, at least not without pillaging other areas of science, and I don’t think that’s a good idea. So a little bit of adult supervision is going to have to be brought to bear to determine what can and will be done.

PT: Not many individuals in Congress have a science background or express an interest in science. How does that affect your job?

GRIFFIN: Well, it can be difficult at times, but I also believe that if you understand something, you should be able to explain it to any level of educational background. I think I have developed a relationship with the legislative branch based on trust and credibility. I answer all of the questions put to me very straightforwardly, and I do not hesitate to admit it when I make a mistake or when NASA makes a mistake. I want them to believe that what I am telling them is the truth as best I know it, and I think they understand that. So if I tell them that in some difficult technical choice A is better than B, I believe that they believe that I am telling them the truth, even if they don’t have the background to be able to make that choice themselves.

PT: Do you need extra resources?

GRIFFIN: Extra resources are always welcome, but if we continue to get the budget the president has promised, which is essentially level or slightly increasing in constant dollars, we can finish the space station by 2010, we can get to the Moon by 2020, and we can get to Mars by the mid-thirties.