Nov 27 2001
From The Space Library
A team of astronomers using the HST published results of the first direct detection and chemical analysis of the atmosphere of a planet located outside of the solar system. The scientists had used Hubble to examine the planet’s atmosphere as it passed in front of its parent star~called HD 209458~a technique that enabled them to see the star’s light filtered through the planet’s atmosphere. During the analysis, the astronomers had detected sodium in the planet’s atmosphere. They hoped that the observation was a harbinger of a new phase in analyses of extrasolar planets, often referred to as exoplanets. Scientists also hoped that this type of analysis would enable them to measure any unusual abundance of atmospheric gases created by living organisms, thereby offering them a method of acquiring direct evidence of life on other planets. (NASA, “Hubble Measures Atmosphere on World Around Another Star,” news release 01-232, 27 November 2001.)
The GAO released a generally positive assessment of NASA’s efforts to meet its FY 2002 performance plan~ as required by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993~ and to overcome its major management challenges, which GAO and NASA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) had previously identified. The GPRA required each government agency to develop an annual plan, which must include its performance goals, the resources required to achieve them, and the measures it would use to assess its performance. In its examination of NASA’s FY 2002 performance plan, GAO had determined that NASA had successfully met its stated goals. NASA’s goals for the fiscal year had included expanding commercial development of space and deploying and operating the ISS safely and cost-effectively. However, GAO’s report also stated that NASA’s performance plan had not explained the reasons that NASA had changed its previous performance goals to those stated in the FY 2002 performance plan. In addition, GAO questioned NASA’s measurements of its performance in meeting the stated goals and gave mixed assessments of NASA’s performance in the areas of human-capital management and information security. In its response to the report, NASA concurred with GAO’s findings but it also defended the explanations and measurements of its performance goals, as outlined in its FY 2002 performance plan. (U.S. General Accounting Office, “NASA: Status of Plans for Achieving Key Outcomes and Addressing Major Management Challenges” (report no. GAO-02-1 84, Washington, DC, November 2001), http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02184.pdf (accessed 8 December 2008).)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
