Though the Vision changed and reduced the scope of NASA’s goals for its  own research on board the ISS, Congress designated the ISS as a national  laboratory in 2005 in an effort to increase utilization of the ISS for  research. According to NASA officials,  this designation does not guarantee an appropriation specifically for ISS  National Laboratory research. The ISS Will Have Excess Research Facilities Available for Other Users by Construction Completion

The ISS has been continuously manned since 2000, and in March 2009 the  crew expanded from three to six. NASA’s primary objective for the ISS  through 2010 is construction, so research has not been the main priority. As such, research is being conducted at the margins of assembly  and operations activities as time permits, while the crew on board  performs assembly and operations tasks. Several Significant Challenges May Impede Full Use of ISS Research Facilities

NASA faces several significant challenges that may impede efforts to  maximize research utilization of the ISS, including (1) the impending  retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2010, reduced launch capabilities once  the shuttle retires, and the potential for a gap between retirement and  follow-on U.S. vehicles; (2) high costs for launches and developing  research hardware and a lack of dedicated funding streams for ISS  research; (3) limited crew time available for research due to a fixed crew  size and other requirements for crew time; and (4) an uncertain future for  the ISS beyond 2015. There is  currently no direct analogue to the ISS National Laboratory, and though  NASA currently manages research programs at the Jet Propulsion  Laboratory and its other centers that it believes possess similar  characteristics to other national laboratories, NASA has limited  experience managing the type of diverse scientific research and  technology demonstration portfolio that the ISS could eventually  represent. We  identified three common practices that may be applicable to whatever  management structure NASA decides on for managing all U.S.-sponsored  ISS research: central management of research, robust in-house technical  expertise, and significant user outreach. Congress has also directed NASA to develop plans involving an external  management body: in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration  Authorization Act of 2000, Congress instructed the agency to submit an  implementation plan to incorporate the use of an NGO to conduct  research utilization and commercialization management activities of the  ISS, and the NASA Authorization Act of 2008 required NASA to develop a  plan to support operations and utilization of the ISS beyond 2015,  including a research management plan that identified who would manage  United States research. In-house Expertise

The national laboratories and science programs we studied have capable  in-house scientific and technical experts (generally provided by the  management body) who can consult with and provide guidance to users. Significant User Outreach

The national laboratories and other large, user-based science institutes we  studied place a high priority on conducting outreach to current and  potential users and hold conferences and workshops on a regular basis for  this purpose. Though it may not be  possible to establish a management structure similar to those found at  other national laboratories that have been in existence for much longer  than the ISS in the limited time remaining, NASA may be able to leverage  existing agreements with management bodies to provide for a faster  solution, or leverage the scientific and technical expertise of other  sponsoring federal agencies (such as NIH) that have experience in  conducting peer-reviewed research in areas pertinent to their missions. To determine how NASA is managing the ISS, we interviewed NASA  officials and reviewed NASA plans and documentation, including its  Consolidated Operations and Utilization Plan 2008; ISS Utilization  Management Concept Development Study; Research and Utilization Plan  for the International Space Station; Commercial Development Plan for  the International Space Station; Reference Guide to the International  Space Station; NASA ISS Prioritization Desk Instruction; Human  Research Program: Integrated Research Plan; Advanced Capabilities  Division: International Space Station (ISS) Science Portfolio,  Determination and Management; NASA Report to Congress: Regarding a  Plan for the International Space Station’s National Laboratory; Plan to  Support Operations and Utilization of the International Space Station  Beyond FY 2015; and NASA’s Organizational Model Evaluation Team  Process, Analysis, and Recommendations.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2010, after about 25 years of work and the expenditure of billions of dollars, the International Space Station (ISS) will be completed. According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the ISS crew will then be able to redirect its efforts from assembling the station to conducting research. In 2005, Congress designated the ISS as a national laboratory; in addition, the NASA Authorization Act of 2008 required NASA to provide a research management plan for the ISS National Laboratory. In light of these developments, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was asked to review the research use of the ISS. Specifically, GAO (1) identified how the ISS is being used for research and how it is expected to be used once completed, (2) identified challenges to maximizing ISS research; and (3) identified common management practices at other national laboratories and large science programs that could be applicable to the management of the ISS. To accomplish this, GAO interviewed NASA officials and reviewed key documents related to the ISS. GAO also studied two ground-based national laboratories and several large science institutions.

What GAO Found

The ISS has been continuously staffed since 2000 and now has a six-member crew. The primary objective for the ISS through 2010 is construction, so research utilization has not been the priority. Some research has been and is being conducted as time and resources permit while the crew on board performs assembly tasks, but research will is expected to begin in earnest in 2010. NASA projects that it will utilize approximately 50 percent of the U.S. ISS research facilities for its own research, including the Human Research Program, opening the remaining facilities to U.S. ISS National Laboratory researchers. NASA faces several significant challenges that may impede efforts to maximize utilization of all ISS research facilities, including: (1) the impending retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2010 and reduced launch capabilities for transporting ISS research cargo once the shuttle retires; (2) high costs for launches and no dedicated funding to support research; (3) limited time available for research due to the fixed size of crew and competing demands for the crew's time; and (4) an uncertain future for the ISS beyond 2015. NASA is researching the possibility of developing a management body--including internal and external elements--to manage ISS research, which would make the ISS National Laboratory similar to other national laboratories. Though there is no existing direct analogue to the ISS, GAO studied two national laboratories and several other large science institutions and identified three common practices that these institutions employ that could benefit the management of ISS research. (1) Centralized management body: At each of the institutions GAO studied, there is a central body responsible for prioritizing and selecting research, even if there are different funding agencies. NASA's ISS managers are currently not responsible for evaluating and selecting all research that will be conducted on the ISS, leaving this to the research sponsor. (2) In-house scientific and technical expertise: The institutions GAO studied have large staffs of in-house experts that can provide technical and engineering support to users. NASA's staff members in ISS fundamental science research areas have been decentralized or reassigned, limiting its capability to provide user support. (3) Robust user outreach: The laboratories and institutes GAO studied place a high priority on user outreach and are actively involved in educating and recruiting users. NASA has conducted outreach to potential users in the public and private sectors, but its outreach is limited in comparison.