And this means???
This report would actually have some meaning if it had at least ONE incident where an elevated BAC had rendered an astronaut unfit for duty, or even had one accident or near-accident attributed.
But alas, nearly all NASA accidents have been due to equippment malfunctions that have been entirely outside the hands of the astronauts - the Apollo launchpad fire (due to bad wiring harness in 100% oxygen cabin), Apollo 13's on-board explosion (again, bad wiring in a cryo tank) , and both shuttle disasters (bad engine seals and take-off debris impact). Frankly, not bad reasons to calm some nerves the night before strapping yourself in.
We keep looking to astronauts to be something more than human, and then we get so upset when we find that they really are just very, very fit (intellectually and physically) humans.
As for the previous poster that whined about NASA's being a waste of money, an AMAZING amount of NASA technology and expertise has filtered down into the civilian economy, to say nothing about the pure science that things such as Hubble, Viking, Pioneer, Mars Rovers, etc. have generated. If anything, the recent Scaled Composite deaths while static engine testing should remind us all that this stuff really isn't that easy, and NASA can't just be replaced by private industry to do it all better, faster or cheaper. The X-Prize for private spaceflight was given to Scaled Comps for re-entering from "space" at Mach 3...the Shuttle re-enters from orbit at Mach 25+ (this immense speed is a function of orbital mechanics, and can't be "engineered around"). Clearly, the gap between where private spaceflight is and what NASA has done is much greater than the press would like us to believe...