Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Venus Missions: Letter Report (SSB, 2006)

Distributed Arrays of Small Instruments for Solar-Terrestrial Research: Report of a Workshop (SSB, 2006)

The Astrophysical Context of Life (SSB with the Board on Life Sciences, 2005)

Earth Science and Applications from Space: Urgent Needs and Opportunities to Serve the Nation (SSB, 2005)

Extending the Effective Lifetimes of Earth Observing Research Missions (SSB, 2005)

Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report (ASEB, 2005)

Preventing the Forward Contamination of Mars (SSB, 2005)

Principal-Investigator-Led Missions in the Space Sciences (SSB, 2005)

Priorities in Space Science Enabled by Nuclear Power and Propulsion (SSB with ASEB, 2005)

Review of Goals and Plans for NASA’s Space and Earth Sciences (SSB, 2005)

Review of NASA Plans for the International Space Station (SSB, 2005)

Science in NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration (SSB, 2005)

Technology Pathways—Assessing the Integrated Plan for a Next Generation Air Transportation System (ASEB, 2005)

Assessment of Options for Extending the Life of the Hubble Space Telescope: Final Report (SSB with ASEB, 2004)

Exploration of the Outer Heliosphere and the Local Interstellar Medium: A Workshop Report (SSB, 2004)

Issues and Opportunities Regarding the U.S. Space Program: A Summary Report of a Workshop on National Space Policy (SSB with ASEB, 2004)

Plasma Physics of the Local Cosmos (SSB, 2004)

Review of Proposals for NASA’s Intelligent Propulsion Systems Foundation Technology Program (ASEB, 2004)

Review of Science Requirements for the Terrestrial Planet Finder: Letter Report (SSB, 2004)

Solar and Space Physics and Its Role in Space Exploration (SSB, 2004)

Stepping Stones to the Future of Space Exploration: A Workshop Report (ASEB, 2004)

Systems Integration for Project Constellation (ASEB, 2004)

Understanding the Sun and Solar System Plasmas: Future Directions in Solar and Space Physics (SSB, 2004)

Utilization of Operational Environmental Satellite Data: Ensuring Readiness for 2010 and Beyond (SSB with ASEB and the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate [BASC], 2004)

Vehicle Systems Panel Report on the Status of NASA’s Vehicle Systems Program (ASEB, 2004)

An Assessment of NASA’s Aeronautics Technology Program (ASEB, 2003)

An Assessment of NASA’s Pioneering Revolutionary Technology Program (ASEB, 2003)

Assessment of NASA’s Draft 2003 Earth Science Enterprise Strategy: Letter Report (SSB, 2003)

Assessment of NASA’s Draft 2003 Space Science Enterprise Strategy: Letter Report (SSB, 2003)

Interim Report of NRC Review of NASA’s Pioneering Revolutionary Technology Program (ASEB, 2003)

Satellite Observations of the Earth’s Environment: Accelerating the Transition of Research to Operations (SSB with ASEB and BASC, 2003)

Securing the Future of U.S. Air Transportation: A System in Peril (ASEB, 2003)

Steps to Facilitate Principal-Investigator-Led Earth Science Missions (SSB, 2003)

The Sun to the Earth—and Beyond: Panel Reports (SSB, 2003)

Limited copies of SSB reports are available free of charge from:

Space Studies Board

National Research Council

The Keck Center of the National Academies

500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001

(202) 334-3477/ssb@nas.edu

www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/ssb.html

This page intentionally left blank.

In January 2004 President George W. Bush announced a new civilian space policy that soon became known as the vision for space exploration. The vision had several cornerstones, including retiring the space shuttle by 2010, completing the International Space Station, and establishing a broad goal for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. The first steps in the new human exploration phase involve developing a new spacecraft for transporting humans into space, developing a lunar lander spacecraft, and building new launch vehicles for both spacecraft.

On September 30, 2005, Scott Pace, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Associate Administrator for Program Assessment and Evaluation, sent a letter to Lennard Fisk, chair of the National Research Council (NRC) Space Studies Board (SSB), requesting that the SSB and the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) help assess the current and future supply of qualified U.S. aerospace professionals and identify realistic, actionable solutions to meeting any identified needs (see Appendix A). In late 2005, the NRC Committee on Meeting the Workforce Needs for the National Vision for Space Exploration was formed under the auspices of the SSB and ASEB to respond to the NASA request. The committee (Appendix F) comprises 9 members from a diverse range of backgrounds and includes experts from both the science and the engineering communities, as well as members who reflect the traditional U.S. science and technology triangle of government, academia, and industry. The committee also includes members from the emerging entrepreneurial community, as well as experts from outside the space community.

The committee was tasked with conducting a study to explore long-range science and technology workforce needs to achieve the nation’s space exploration vision, identify obstacles to filling those needs, and put forward solutions for consideration by government, academia, and industry. The study’s focus is the particular needs of NASA and the larger aerospace science and engineering community. The full statement of task for the study is in Appendix B.

On January 23-25, 2006, the committee held a 2-day workshop to identify the important factors affecting NASA’s future workforce and its capacity to implement the new vision. The specific goal of the workshop was to identify and shape the issues to be explored by the committee in preparing its final report and to identify the available data on NASA’s workforce. The workshop involved approximately three dozen participants from government, academia, and industry. The full workshop agenda and participant list are in Appendix C. At a second meeting on February 22, 2006, the committee gathered additional information regarding the results of NASA’s analysis of current and future workforce competencies, and it also had discussions with representatives from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and aerospace industry. The agenda for that meeting is in Appendix D.

This document, which responds to NASA’s request for an interim report on the results of the initial stage of the study, presents the committee’s summary of highlights of the workshop and provides initial, but incomplete, findings with respect to the first three items in the study charge, namely to:

1. Assess current and projected demographics of the U.S. aerospace engineering and space science workforce needed to accomplish the exploration vision;

2. Identify factors that impact the demographics of the affected workforces; and

3. Assess NASA’s list of the workforce skills that will be needed to implement the vision for space exploration, both within the government and in industry.

This interim report also presents initial recommendations that stem from the committee’s conclusions to date. The committee’s full report will be completed in early 2007.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Lester A. Hoel, University of Virginia, and Porter E. Coggeshall, National Research Council. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

This page intentionally left blank.