NASA to launch safety review of SpaceX and Boeing after video of Elon Musk...

[ncb1397]

True...If he was working on the company time high as a kite or drunk off his butt sure, you statement is valid.

CEO doesn't clock in and out. There is nothing wrong with NASA enforcing their contract.

(b) (1)The Contractor shall institute and maintain a program for achieving a drug-and alcohol-free workforce. As a minimum, the program shall provide for preemployment, reasonable suspicion, random, post-accident, and periodic recurring (follow-up) testing of Contractor employees in sensitive positions for use, in violation of applicable law or Federal regulation, of alcohol or a controlled substance. The Contractor may establish its testing or rehabilitation program in cooperation with other Contractors or organizations

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/NNK14MA74C-SpaceX-CCtCap-Contract.pdf

If Dragon 2's chief designer didn't get follow up drug testing, then they didn't meet the minimum requirements for policies supporting a drug free workplace.

[whitelancer64]

So our standard is that if there's questionable public behavior by the person at the top of an organization, we need to review the safety culture of the entire organization?

NASA is a part of the executive branch of the U.S. government.  Lets follow that chain up to the top and see if the person at the top has any questionable public behavior.

When NASA is done with their review of the U.S. executive branch and its safety culture, then they can get started on Boeing and SpaceX.  Otherwise, it's hypocritical.

I think it's more than that. As I mentioned earlier, there were findings in both companies for their ISO 9001 audits that could indicated a poor safety culture.

[whitelancer64]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.

Elon Musk (and others at SpaceX) have security clearances, though. They work with secret satellites for the DOD, and operate on Air Force bases.

[punder]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.

I can't emphasize enough that I personally think it's ridiculous. (For all that's worth.) But you are factually wrong in saying there's no evidence of a NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation. Musk realllllly screwed up when he took that hit. Not in terms of reality, but in terms of federal law.

[Rocket Science]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.

I can't emphasize enough that I personally think it's ridiculous. (For all that's worth.) But you are factually wrong in saying there's no evidence of a NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation. Musk realllllly screwed up when he took that hit. Not in terms of reality, but in terms of federal law.

Then it should be isolated to him personally...

[Negan]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.

I can't emphasize enough that I personally think it's ridiculous. (For all that's worth.) But you are factually wrong in saying there's no evidence of a NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation. Musk realllllly screwed up when he took that hit. Not in terms of reality, but in terms of federal law.

Yup. Just suck it up and move on. Musk will still get people to Mars before NASA does.

[whitelancer64]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.

I can't emphasize enough that I personally think it's ridiculous. (For all that's worth.) But you are factually wrong in saying there's no evidence of a NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation. Musk realllllly screwed up when he took that hit. Not in terms of reality, but in terms of federal law.

Then it should be isolated to him personally...

It's not, though, because he's a CEO. A safety culture is a top-down, management-led part of an organization. Bad behavior of a person in a leadership position leads to people thinking, "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

And as a federal contractor that's not legally acceptable, as has already been pointed out.

[mlindner]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

And what in Elon's behavior show's he has a poor safety culture?

[mlindner]

NASA is being frakking (ucking) shameful.

Russia drills holes in it's spacecraft and knocks them over with a crane but you declare them safe and good to launch. Elon Musk takes one and only one half-puff of some marijuana (while discussing how much he dislikes it) while off work and you declare SpaceX unsafe after dozens and dozens of safe launches.

NASA do your job and sign the paperwork and let SpaceX launch. Stop being an impediment and ruining this nation's space program.

Can you show me where it says they are not going to let Boeing and SpaceX launch?

You think a hand interview of hundreds to thousands of employees and the associated review of their comments won't take time? Several employees will remember the odd incident (no work place is perfect) and then NASA will use that as a card to play to delay the missions further.

Interviews of all or even a significant proportion of employees? How would that even work? It would be a gross and totally unjustifiable intrusion into the company. It also shouldn't delay launches in any way; it's not the kind of immediate-critical issue that should do that, but a long-term-relationship level check where issues can be fixed at some reasonable pace.

According to Gerst, the focus is  "the companies’ safety culture — encompassing the number of hours employees work, drug policies, leadership and management styles, whether employees’ safety concerns are taken seriously, and more." That review doesn't need to take a long time, and should be mostly about talking to HR & HSE, but I'd like to see NASA  state some clear objectives before they start taking up additional time at the respective companies.

The whole thing seems like it's far too last-minute to be taken seriously. Did NASA not care about any of things before now? Can they show a clear link to the quality of services they are getting?

Did you read the article? https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/11/nasa-plans-invasive-review-of-spacex-after-musk-smoked-weed/

According to William Gerstenmaier, NASA's chief human spaceflight official, the review will be "pretty invasive" and involve interviews with hundreds of employees at various levels of the companies, across multiple worksites. The review will begin next year, and interviews will examine "everything and anything that could impact safety," Gerstenmaier told the Post.

"pretty invasive" and "everything and anything" are not light terms.

[whitelancer64]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

And what in Elon's behavior show's he has a poor safety culture?

We've been over this. One of the federal contracting requirements is to have a drug-free work environment.

[Rocket Science]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

And what in Elon's behavior show's he has a poor safety culture?

We've been over this. One of the federal contracting requirements is to have a drug-free work environment.

Then what does Elon have to do with Boeing if he is the cause?

[whitelancer64]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

And what in Elon's behavior show's he has a poor safety culture?

We've been over this. One of the federal contracting requirements is to have a drug-free work environment.

Then what does Elon have to do with Boeing if he is the cause?

As I've said repeatedly, I don't think this is the only concern.

Both companies had findings in their last ISO 9001 audits that may indicate safety culture problems.

[Rocket Science]

Then both commercial crew programs should have been halted then without singling out Elon...

[RotoSequence]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

The media does not like Elon, but this political hatchet job also seems to have SpaceX in the crosshairs.

[whitelancer64]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

Neither program was halted.

[Rocket Science]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

The media does not like Elon, but this political hatchet job also seems to have SpaceX in the crosshairs.

Or is it commercial crew spaceflight?

[Rocket Science]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

Neither program was halted.

So, then it was not a problem... See where I'm going?

[RotoSequence]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

The media does not like Elon, but this political hatchet job also seems to have SpaceX in the crosshairs.

Or is it commercial crew spaceflight?

It could be, but frankly I think it's in response to the company as a whole. This came on the heels of the SLS program feather ruffling prompted by BFR/Starship.

[whitelancer64]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

Neither program was halted.

So, then it was not a problem... See where I'm going?

I do not see where you are going.

[Rocket Science]

Then both commercial crew programs should have bee halted then without singling out Elon...

The media does not like Elon, but this political hatchet job also seems to have SpaceX in the crosshairs.

Or is it commercial crew spaceflight?

It could be, but frankly I think it's in response to the company as a whole. This came on the heels of the SLS program feather ruffling prompted by BFR/Starship.

There are still people dreaming of a white Christmas and Orion at ISS...