From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: NASA Lunar Programs Description: How is NASA handling a halving of their timeline to return humans to the moon? Related GAO Work: GAO-20-68: NASA Lunar Programs: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Analyses and Plans for Moon Landing Released: December 2019 [ Background Music ] [ Cristina Chaplain: ] They're already behind, or have a lot of delays, on some of the key efforts they've already had underway, like SLS and Orion. [ Matt Oldham: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the US Government Accountability Office, I'm Matt Oldham. In March 2019, the White House directed NASA to move up its plans to return humans to the Moon by four years. The new target is 2024. Cristina Chaplin is a Contracting and National Security Acquisitions director at GAO, and we're going to talk about a report looking at how NASA has updated its lunar plans to support this accelerated timeline. Thanks for joining me, Cristina [ Cristina Chaplain: ] Thanks, good to be here. [ Matt Oldham: ] So is this going to be smooth planning for NASA, just over four years from now to get humans back on the Moon? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] No, it won't be smooth at all to have half the time to do the same work to get to the Moon. When you look how long it took to get to the Moon under the Apollo program that was nine years. And here NASA originally had eight years, which intuitively you think 50 years later, we should be able to do it in half the time. But NASA's looking to stay there for the long term, so there's more work to be done. And they do have certain pieces of what they need to go the Moon already underway that includes the large rocket to carry people, and the actual crew capsule known as the Orion. But there's still a lot to do, like landers to bring people, an orbiting platform around the Moon that goes around a Moon, known as the Gateway System, rovers, spacesuits. They also want to engage more with the commercial sector as well as international partners. So there's a lot of stuff here that's going to make planning very difficult. [ Matt Oldham: ] How is NASA responding to this planning challenge? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] So to get there quicker they definitely scope back or adjusted their plans for acquisitions to really get on buying things that are more executable, and just what they need to do the core missions in the beginning. And then later they'll add pieces that help more with the sustainment part of going to the Moon, and bringing in more of the international aspects to it. [ Matt Oldham: ] So are there any concerns with their approach? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] We did have some concerns. And so what we saw going on here was some things may be done a little out of order. For example, they're rolling out requirements for individual systems without having a full architecture in place first that would help guide what requirements should be made. And also when it came to milestones, we noticed that some milestones were either pushed off or done a little out of sync - that is maybe the program wide milestone would be held before individual project milestones for the same activity. So there was some risk, and then when it comes to actually gaining support for the program, there were some areas that we thought could be improve. For example, NASA did not do a formal analysis of alternatives for this particular mission. It did a lot of studies leading up to going to Mars, but they didn't do something very specific to this effort. And then meanwhile you have a lot of advocates out there arguing 'this way,' 'go that way,' you know, use different types of systems to go to the Moon.' So when you have that kind of advocacy, you really want to have a good business case in place so that you can maintain support for this effort. [ Background Music ] [ Matt Oldham: ] So, it sounds like the new target date of 2024 is bringing some risks to the lunar program. For instance, NASA hasn't fully assessed the range of alternatives to their plans. Cristina could these risks affect NASA's Moon landing mission? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] Some could. When it comes to requirements if they do get out of sync, that could lead to costly rework that will set you behind. And you also have to keep in mind, they're already behind, or have a lot of delays on some of the key efforts they've already had underway like SLS and Orion. So, you want to make sure you minimize those kind of delays to the extent possible. [ Matt Oldham: ] So what can NASA do moving forward? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] We made a number of recommendations in terms of how they should set up milestones for their program, how they should establish cost transparency, and then recognizing that they are where they are and they're faced with this time frame that they're under. We know they couldn't do certain things like go backwards and do an analysis of alternatives, but we did recommend that they document their rationale and their analysis for choosing the options that they chose. [ Matt Oldham: ] So last question, what's the bottom line of this report? [ Cristina Chaplain: ] The bottom line is four years to go back to the Moon is going to be challenging - not easy in any stretch. And NASA has indeed taken steps to position themselves to do this. They readjusted their efforts, or focus, on things that are more executable. And this is our first look at this program. We're really early on, so they can still go fast, but if they have things more in sync or do other things to make sure that discipline is there, they'll be better off. [ Matt Oldham: ] Cristina Chaplin was talking about NASA's Moon landing plans with an accelerated timeline. Thank you for your time, Cristina. [ Cristina Chaplain: ] Thanks. [ Matt Oldham: ] And thank you for listening to the Watchdog Report. To hear more podcasts, subscribe to us on Apple podcasts. Make sure you leave a rating and review to let others known about the work we're doing. For more from the Congressional Watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office, visit us at gao.gov.