"The redundancy in the above recommendations does not help."

After concurring with each of the six recommendations in the inspector general’s report, Koerner made the following comment:

“NASA is dedicated to continuous enhancement of our processes and procedures to ensure safety and address potential risks and deficiencies,” she wrote. “However, the redundancy in the above recommendations does not help to ensure whether NASA’s programs are organized, managed, and implemented economically, effectively, and efficiently.”

A careful reading of the second sentence reveals that Koerner feels that the inspector general’s efforts are both redundant and unhelpful. This is not accidental language. Koerner’s response was certainly reviewed by NASA’s senior managers, who could have flagged and removed the text. And yet they went through with it.

  • @llamacoffeeOPMEnglish
    1•7 months ago

    NASA issued statement after story publication:

    “That is not a correct interpretation of the agency’s response. As stated, NASA recognizes the critical role of the Office of Inspector General, and furthermore, the agency values the Office of the Inspector General’s attention to the Artemis campaign. NASA’s response highlights that analysis and mitigation of the issues identified during Artemis I have been underway since the conclusion of the mission. NASA engineering teams contributed fully and openly to the Office of the Inspector General’s report by providing data directly resulting from that work and appreciate the report’s summary of those pre-existing efforts in the Recommendations section. NASA remains committed to ensuring the safety of the Artemis II flight next year, and to future missions.”