May
1, 2002
Dr.
Edward Weiler
Associate
Administrator for Space Science
National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
400
E Street SW
Washington,
DC 20546
Dear
Dr. Weiler:
The inaugural meeting of the
Planetary Protection Advisory Committee was held on March 18 and 19 of this
year. Because this was the initial
meeting, much of the agenda was devoted to introductory briefings and
reports. However, we did consider at
some length the MUSES-C mission. We
were briefed by Dr. Donald Yeomans and from Dr. Akira Fujiwara on the technical
details of the mission. The Committee
discussed a number of issues and devised the following recommendation:
“The Committee
heard presentations on the MUSES-C mission, and on the nature of the MUSES-C
target body, 1998 SF36. We have
evaluated the mission for the purpose of assessing planetary protection
requirements. Based on the framework
presented in Evaluating the Biological
Potential in Returned Samples from Planetary Satellites and Small Solar System
Bodies: Framework for Decision Making (National Research Council, 1998),
the Committee affirms that the target body belongs to class Ib. After discussion of this mission and the
target body, the Committee recommends that no special containment for samples
returned from 1998 SF36 is required for the purposes of planetary protection,
provided that subsequent information obtained prior to sample return remains
consistent with the classification of that body as an undifferentiated
metamorphosed asteroid. As such, we
recommend that for NASA purposes, the mission be designated Planetary
Protection Category V, “unrestricted Earth return.”
Should
new information be obtained prior to sample return that would call into
question this classification, the Committee would reconsider the matter at that
time.
With regard to Mars, the Committee heard from Mr. Orlando
Figueroa, Director for Mars Exploration on plans for Mars missions and Dr. John
Rummel, NASA PPO, on the development of a protocol for Mars sample
handling. The Committee will consider
this Protocol in more detail at our next meeting.
The current membership of the
Committee represents a good “mix” of backgrounds and expertise – however, there
is still a need for expertise in risk analysis and in science/risk
communication. I am gratified that
current members have already provided suggestions for candidates in these
areas. I am especially pleased that
most of the representatives from other Federal agencies have been
appointed. Those that joined us at this
first meeting provided useful information and thoughtful insights. I am also very pleased that we had excellent
participation from the international representatives. The continued participation of the other agencies and our
international partners will be critical for the future effectiveness of the
Committee’s deliberations. In addition,
we are anxious for the Space Science Advisory Committee to name its liaison to
the Committee so that we may carefully coordinate science objectives with
planetary protection requirements as was envisioned when the PPAC was
established.
Much work lies ahead for our
Committee. As NASA develops its roadmap
and detailed plans for Mars exploration and for missions to other Solar System
bodies, both forward and back contamination issues will loom large. To date, the scientific community has
focused on the science objectives and design of a Mars sample return
mission. Preparation for such a mission
must also address planetary protection issues such as the need for a sample
receiving/handling facility here on Earth, a “long-lead” item that will require
extensive planning. The requirements
for such a facility must be integrated with the science objectives before the
detailed mission design has been finalized (and cost estimates developed). This has not been done to date and will,
undoubtedly, be complicated by the relatively inefficient funding patterns
inherent in the U.S. budget.
Nevertheless, it seems prudent for the mission science definition team
and NASA’s Mars program managers to attend to this issue as soon as practicable
– even in the face of significant uncertainty about the timing of a sample
return mission.
The Committee heard from Dr. Colleen
Hartman of the Solar System Exploration Division. Her presentation was a good reminder that while Mars represents
the current focus of much of the planetary protection effort, future missions
to other solar system bodies (e.g., Europa, small bodies) will likely raise
planetary protection concerns for scientists, the public, and this Committee. The Committee looks forward to providing
advice on a systematic and strategic approach to planetary protection issues
across the entire gamut of Solar System Exploration activities. Such an approach might be especially helpful
as both nearer- and farther-term missions are considered and take more definite
shape.
On behalf of the entire Committee, I
thank you for meeting with us. We
appreciated your time and your perspectives both on science and on education
and outreach activities. We also would
like to thank all of our presenters. I
offer a special thanks to Dr. Rummel, the Committee’s Executive Secretary, and
Ms. Marian Norris for their help in establishing this Committee and
facilitating this meeting. Paula
Frankel did her usual superb job as meeting rapporteur.
I know the Committee joins me in
looking forward to working with you on the important planetary protection
issues that will merit our attention as NASA pursues its Solar System
exploration program.
Sincerely,
Norine
E. Noonan, Ph.D.
Chairman
cc:
Members
of the Planetary Protection Advisory Committee
Dr.
John Rummel, PPAC Executive Secretary and NASA PPO
Dr.
Charles Kennel, Chairman, NASA Advisory Council
Dr.
Sylvia Kraemer
Dr.
Joseph Alexander, Director, Space Studies Board, National Research Council