We really want to peel back the onion and get into a lot of the specifics of the extraordinary work that you have done, Mr. Augustine.

I think, Mr. Chairman, I better provide that for the record.

to eliminate the gap or significantly reduce it would have a significant negative impact on the long-term exploration program.

What was the Committee's thinking on promoting the development of on-orbit refueling?

This is an exceptionally important topic, and I think that buzzer might tell us that a vote is starting.

OK. The record will stay open for a couple of days.

Well, under that plan on this same chart, you would be late 2020s with an actual landing on the Moon?

Since we have a consensus of opinion that we need to get NASA out of LEO, do you have a preference on the architecture?

Of course, you remember that the President said in the campaign, he wanted to be on the Moon by 2020.

Which, by the way, parenthetically, I assume will be a theme that will run throughout your report once it is produced publicly.

the human spaceflight program is so large that when it has problems, it tends to cannibalize the science program.

We spent over two decades constructing the ISS, and we now are talking about using it for only 5 years.

It is the additional science and technology that you get under that.

Did your committee discuss an Atlas or a Delta on the EELVs?

Thank you for this unpaid service, enormous public service that you have rendered.

I think it is important that the White House and OMB hear what you just said.

So that would still get you out on things like asteroids or one of the Martian moons utilizing an EELV?

the President is going to have to answer the question whether or not the cost of human space exploration is worth it.