Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee

[6] Among the parameters that were considered in the course of the review were "crew and mission safety, life-cycle costs, development time, national space industrial base impacts, potential to spur innovation and encourage competition, and the implications and impacts of transitioning from current human space flight systems".

[11][12] Chairman Alan Mollohan stated the cut was a "pause" and "time-out" caused by the review of human space flight.

The Committee's final report mentions the possibility of evaluating near-Earth objects for "their utility as sites for mining of in-situ resources."

These might include international cooperation, developing new industries, energy independence, reducing climate change, national prestige, etc.

Some of these resources are available on Mars, and perhaps on the Moon, but the Committee report noted the cost and difficulty of "travel into the deep gravity wells of the lunar and Martian surface."

The panel was to "work closely with NASA and will seek input" from the United States Congress, "the White House, the public, industry, and international partners as it develops its options".

[19] General Lyles, who also serves as Chairman of the National Academies Committee on the "Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program", led the International and Interagency Integration subgroup.

In the committee's summary report[15] provided to the White House and NASA on September 8, 2009, the panel concluded that human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit was not viable under the FY 2010 budget guideline.