President Obama was a couple minutes late, but he finally spoke to the combined crew of the International Space Station and the space shuttle Discovery this afternoon just after 5:00 pm EST.

He asked ISS Commander Scott Kelly how he was doing and said how proud he is of the astronauts. He said they were setting a great example with their courage and commitment to exploration. He said to Discovery commander Steve Lindsey that it must be fun to be the last commander of Discovery and to be completing construction of the ISS. Lindsey said that with their landing now scheduled for Wednesday, Discovery will have flown for 365 days in space and would not be forgotten for a long time.

Obama noted that there is a vehicle from each of the ISS partners as part of the ISS right now, and it was a testament to the partnership. Obama also talked about the new “crew member” who is aboard the ISS — Robonaut 2. He said it would inspire young people to be interested in science and technology. Linsday said “he” was still in packing foam and Obama laughed and said they should unpack him. Lindsay said he’d been packed in the foam for four months and joked that they think they’ve heard scratching sounds and “let me out.”

Obama ended by saying “We could not be prouder of what you guys are doing.” He added that he had recently spoken with “Mark” — a reference to Scott Kelly’s astronaut brother who is married to Rep. Gabrielle (Gabby) Giffords, who is recovering from a gunshot wound to the head — and that Mark had said that Gabby was making “incredible progress” and she was in their thoughts and prayers. Scott Kelly thanked the President and called Giffords a “true inspiration.”

NASA may be caught between a rock and a hard place — an authorization law telling them what to do, but continued uncertainty over how much money they will get to do it — but the agency nonetheless named lead centers to execute the policy enunciated in the 2010 NASA Authorization Act.

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) will be the lead center for “enabling commercial human spaceflight capabilities,” Johnson Space Center (JSC) will be responsible for developing the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and Marshall Space Flight Center will take the lead for a new Space Launch System.

NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden unofficially announced these assignments at a breakfast meeting on February 17 sponsored by the National Space Club in Washington, but the agency made it official in a press release yesterday. None is a surprise. JSC and Marshall are continuing familiar responsibilities and NASA’s attempts to woo commercial crew providers to use NASA’s Florida facilities made KSC a sure bet for that role.

NASA’s acronym NIAC used to mean the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts. Established in 1998 to provide an independent source of advanced aeronautical and space concepts for the agency, it was terminated for budgetary reasons in 2007. At congressional direction, the National Research Council (NRC) did a study of what had been accomplished by NIAC and whether it should be resurrected. The study, co-chaired by Robert (Bobby) Braun of Georgia Tech and Dianne Wiley of Boeing, recommended that a NIAC-like entity — “NIAC2” — be reestablished. That process has begun.

In 2009, Bobby Braun became NASA’s Chief Technologist. NIAC originally was under the purview of the NASA Chief Technologist to ensure that its advanced concepts were broadly applicable to agency needs, but was later transferred to a single mission directorate — the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate — where it “lost its alignment with sponsor objectives and priorities” according to the NRC report. Thus, the NRC recommended that NIAC2 report to the Office of the Administrator and not a specific mission directorate. NIAC grants also were available only to external researchers. The NRC recommended that NIAC2 be open to internal NASA participants as well.

Yesterday, NASA issued a NASA Research Announcement (NRA) for proposals for Phase I NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts, a program managed by the Office of the Chief Technologist — essentially NIAC2. According to the NRA —

Concepts proposed for NIAC Phase I studies must be innovative and visionary, technically substantiated, and very early in development (10+ years out; Technology Readiness Level 1, 2, or early 3). Focused technology maturation and incremental improvement are explicitly not of interest in this program. Finally, while NIAC encourages great leaps and accepts the accompanying risk, all proposals must be technically credible, based on sound scientific principles.

Interestingly, a footnote in the NRA explains that NASA is not looking for focused technologies, but architectures, missions, and system concepts. Notices of Intent are due March 29; proposals are due May 2.

NASA also announced two other space technology solicitations. The Game Changing Development Program is for “revolutionary improvements in America’s space capabilities,” while Technology Demonstration Mission proposals are being sought for high-bandwidth deep space communication, navigation and timing, orbital debris mitigation or removal systems, advanced in-space propulsion systems, and autonomous rendezvous, docking, close proximity operations and formation flying.

With NASA’s funding situation uncertain, it is not clear how many, if any, grants will be made for any of these solicitations, however.

President Obama has signed into law the two-week CR that passed the House yesterday and the Senate today (H. J. Res. 44). No government shutdown will occur, at least for now.

That finalizes action on the FY2011 budget — but for only two more weeks, until March 18. The long-term CR that passed the House on February 19 (H.R. 1) is still in play. It would fund the government for the rest of FY2011 (through September 30) and cut $61 billion from current (FY2010) spending levels. NASA’s budget for FY2011 would be $18.1 billion under that CR, compared to its current spending level of $18.7 billion and the President’s FY2011 request of $19.0 billion.

Word is that the Senate will indeed pass the Continuing Resolution (CR) that was approved by the House yesterday extending government operations until March 18. That would temporarily avert a government shutdown while debate continues on what will happen with the rest of FY2011.

The House-passed CR (H. J. Res. 44) does not directly affect NASA. NOAA or DOD space programs. It does have indirect effects, continuing the uncertainty about how much money the agencies will get this year. It also leaves in place the restriction against NASA terminating the Constellation program that was in the FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act.

The Senate has passed the Continuing Resolution (CR) that was approved by the House yesterday. It will keep the government operating until March 18. The bill now goes to the President for signature.

During today’s hearing of the House Science, Space & Technology Committee (HSS&T), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Administrator Charles Bolden was sharply questioned on the priorities reflected in the President’s FY2012 budget request. Members repeatedly said the request does not follow Congress’s directives for the agency as laid out in the 2010 NASA Authorization Act, particularly with respect to human spaceflight.

Chairman Ralph Hall (R-TX) began the hearing saying that “the Administration’s FY2012 budget proposal completely flips the priorities of the Act, significantly increasing Commercial Crew funding while making deep cuts to the Human Exploration Capabilities accounts.” Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), ranking member of the Committee, echoed this sentiment saying, “I had thought the Administration agreed with the compromise [agreed to in the Authorization], but I’m afraid I do not see it reflected in the NASA budget request.”

Although some Members attempted to get Bolden to speculate on the impact of cuts that were contained in the Continuing Resolution (CR) passed by the House on February 19, he declined to do so because they are not final yet. Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) quizzed Bolden about whether the White House or NASA informed Congress of the potential impact of a $300 million reduction adopted during floor debate, asserting that Republicans had tried to protect NASA while Democrats had not. The amendment was offered by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). Gen. Bolden said he would provide an answer for the record about what NASA did or did not tell Congress in that regard.

Brooks neglected to mention that the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee also cut about $300 million from NASA’s budget in the bill they sent to floor. Thus, that CR (H.R. 1) contains a total cut of $601 million from NASA’s FY2010 spending level. Congress continues to consider that CR, which would last through the end of FY2011. It passed a different CR (H. J. Res. 44) this week to fund the government through March 18; that one does not contain NASA-specific cuts.

The main issue of contention during the hearing, however, was the agency’s decision to request more money for development of commercial crew services for transport to low Earth orbit (LEO) than authorized in the 2010 NASA Authorization Act and less for a new NASA-developed Space Launch System (also called a heavy lift launch vehicle–HLLV) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle. Members asked whether NASA would comply with the directive in the law to fly a new HLLV and crew capsule by 2016.

Gen. Bolden explained that with budget constraints in mind and with safety still his number one priority, commercial transport to LEO remains the Administration’s preferred option. Development of the HLLV and crew capsule are for exploration missions beyond LEO, he said, and while they would serve as backup for LEO access if commercial ventures fail, it would be expensive to use them for that purpose. Developing them by 2016 is “difficult” under current budget constraints, he said, and NASA would be “challenged no matter how much money you give us.” An interim report sent to Congress by NASA in January on the preliminary designs for the two systems said the agency could not build them on the timescale and within the funding level authorized in the law.

A summary of the hearing will be available on SpacePolicyOnline.com soon.

Current NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and former NASA Administrator James Beggs will discuss the past 30 years of the space shuttle program and what lies ahead for human spaceflight at the State of the Agency meeting at NASA Headquarters on Friday. The meeting is sponsored by the NASA Alumni League and several other space organizations. Mr. Beggs, who was NASA Administrator from 1981-1986, is chairman of the NASA Alumni League.

Mr. Beggs was the driving force behind what is now known as the International Space Station (ISS) program, convincing President Ronald Reagan to back the program despite a lack of enthusiasm from just about everyone in his Cabinet. President Reagan announced that he was directing NASA to build a space station, and to invite other countries to join us, in his 1984 State of the Union address. The goal was to complete it within a decade. Beggs’s next hurdle was to convince Congress, which agreed to authorize the program in NASA’s FY1985 authorization act.

The space station program has survived myriad challenges since that time, with construction completed only now — a decade and a half late. For most people, the space station’s travails are just memories, if that. Attention today is consumed by what the future holds for human spaceflight with the shuttle program ending just as the ISS is hitting its stride and the next step in human spaceflight a work in progress.

Administrator Bolden is, of course, a veteran space shuttle pilot and commander, who now is charged with bringing that program to a conclusion and initiating both government and private sector replacements for it in a highly constrained budget environment.

The Bolden-Beggs discussion will cap a day-long event that features NASA associate administrators or their designees discussing the details of the FY2012 budget request. The meeting is open to the public, but an RSVP is required. See the announcement for details.

The House is expected to pass a two-week Continuing Resolution (CR) today that would extend government spending at FY2010 levels for most agencies through March 18. The bill, H. J. Res. 44, contains $4 billion in spending reductions.

The $4 billion reduction is achieved by eliminating earmarks and cutting spending by small amounts in a variety of government agencies. NASA is not affected by those cuts. The bill does not contain language lifting the restriction on terminating the Constellation program that was in the FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act.

Under the rule approved by the House Rules Committee yesterday the bill can be debated on the floor for only one hour and no amendments are permitted.

What the Senate will do this week remains unclear. It could agree to the House-passed bill or pass one of its own. Rumors are that the White House wants a 30-day bill instead of a two-week bill. The two chambers have until midnight Friday to reach agreement or force a government shutdown.

What will happen for the rest of FY2011 remains up in the air. It is conceivable that Congress would continue to pass short-term CRs if they cannot reach agreement on a version to last through the end of September. That would pose problems for all the government departments and agencies who would have no certainty about their funding levels. Compared to the deep cuts passed by the House on February 19, however, it might be preferable for some agencies if a series of short-term CRs meant they could retain their FY2010 funding levels. Under the February 19 bill, for example, NASA would lose $601 million compared to its FY2010 level.

Whether the government shuts down on Friday at midnight is now in the Senate’s court. The House just passed the two-week Continuing Resolution (H. J. Res. 44) that would fund the government through March 18. It contains $4 billion in cuts, but none directly affects space activities at NASA, NOAA or DOD.

The White House was hoping to get the bill extended to a 30-day CR instead of two weeks. It is up to the Senate at this point to decide whether to agree with the House or pass a bill with different language.