It is the law and it isn't an advisory framework.

But, you're moving along the----

I am pretty critical--and the Chairman has been, as well--of the last 2 years' budget requests from the administration.

I have been working with the Chairman, now, for the last couple of years to have a plan for NASA, going forward, that we believe protects NASA's mission and is a balanced program that invests in the commercial sector, but has an emphasis…

But, are you moving toward the type of use of present technology, but with the further mission, beyond the present one, of using our technology but also being able to adapt it later for beyond-Earth orbit, and all of the relevant pieces of…

I'm trying to get a--just a clear answer to whether you are going in the direction that the law asked you to go, or actually told you to go.

It's just not feasible. And certainly, NASA is one of those that, I have been bringing up repeatedly, must be in a long-term CR.

The law prioritizes the continuation of work on the Orion crew exploration vehicle and redirects the agency's efforts to develop a heavy launch vehicle to carry Orion beyond low-Earth orbit.

Am I to take, then, from your answer that you are--where the contract is one that will be ongoing, but with modifications, that you are beginning to make those modifications?

It doesn't seem like the contracts are being modified to address the law that uses the technologies that we have.

Are there any legal impediments, in the minds of those of you who are running the operations at NASA, to your moving immediately to the modification of useful contracts?

I rise to talk in morning business about the energy issue facing the country. Anyone who has filled up the car or truck in the last month knows we have an energy crisis that is building and needs to be addressed. Last week I filled up my…