National Academies Press: OpenBook

The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples (2002)

Chapter:Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory

« Previous: Appendix A Deinococcus radiodurans as an Analogue to Extremophile Organisms That May Have Survived on Mars
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

Appendix B
A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory

May 25, 1961

President John F. Kennedy, in a special message to Congress on “urgent national needs,” sets a goal for the United States: “… I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish.”

October 1961

The Space Task Group at NASA Langley Field, which has been executing the Mercury Program, begins to move to temporary quarters in Houston in preparation for setting up the new Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC) there.

February 1964

Elements of MSC begin occupying their newly constructed center at Clear Lake City, Texas.1

February 25, 1964

An internal MSC memorandum is sent from the Assistant Chief for Space Environment to the Director of Engineering and Development in which the need for a central facility to accept and handle lunar samples is first identified. The original concept is for a 10′ × 10′ × 7′ vacuum chamber, 10–7 bar pressure, in which lunar sample containers will be opened and the samples characterized, subdivided, and packaged for distribution to external investigators. Remote manipulators are to accomplish these operations in the vacuum chamber.2,3

1  

King, B. 1989. Moon Trip. University of Houston, Houston, Texas.

2  

Annexstad, J.O. 1978. The Lunar Receiving Laboratory: A Management Study. Unpublished manuscript submitted to the Graduate Program in Public Administration, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the Master of Arts in public administration.

3  

Compton, W.D. 1989. Where No Man Has Gone Before: A History of Apollo Lunar Exploration Missions. NASA SP-4214. Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D.C., 415 pp (and original documents).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

The rationale for vacuum processing is to preserve loosely bonded lunar gases in the samples for analysis, and also to guard against the possibility that the samples might be reactive with the terrestrial atmosphere.

March 1964

The Engineering Division of MSC completes planning of a preliminary engineering concept for a lunar facility and presents it to MSC management. The projected cost is $11 million, and operational status will be reached in 1968.4

June 15, 1964

The Apollo Science Teams of the Planetology Subcommittee of NASA’s Office of Space Sciences and Applications (OSSA) is asked by NASA management to consider the necessity and requirements for a central lunar facility. The Apollo Science Teams meet in Houston. Their report is issued in December 1964.5,6

July 7, 1964

The projected design of the lunar sample facility at MSC is upgraded to something that more nearly resembles the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL) that is later built. The facility is to include a vacuum chamber and also a cabinet filled with purified N2 gas for processing samples, ancillary laboratories for science, and offices, occupying in all ~8,000 square feet. At this time there is no plan for quarantine against back contamination. Manual versus mechanical manipulation is not specified for the vacuum chamber.7

July 29, 1964

The Space Science Board (SSB) of the National Research Council convenes a conference of representatives from the Public Health Service, the Department of Agriculture, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Academy of Sciences, and NASA to assess the back-contamination problem. The conference concludes that the existence of life on the Moon cannot be precluded, and it recommends that astronauts, spacecraft, and lunar materials should be received into an isolation unit; the astronauts should be held in rigid quarantine for at least three weeks; and preliminary examination of the samples should be conducted behind “absolute biological barriers, under rigid bacterial and chemical isolation.”8

October 1964

NASA Headquarters challenges the scale of the sample-handling facility MSC has proposed. OSSA establishes an ad hoc committee to consider the requirements and concepts for a lunar laboratory, which meets in November and December in Houston.9,10

January 1965

NASA requests that the National Research Council’s SSB review a draft of the ad hoc committee’s report. The SSB concludes that there is a need to quarantine the astronauts and lunar samples until they are proven biologically innocuous. Quarantine can be at some existing Public Health Service or U.S. Army installation. A

4  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

5  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

6  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

7  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

8  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

9  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

10  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

minimal quarantine facility, including a radiation-counting laboratory, might be built for $2.5 million and staffed by 12 to 30 professional scientists.11,12

March 18, 1965

The Center for Disease Control (later the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC) publishes its recommended procedures for handling and quarantining the returned lunar samples.

June 1965

MSC management establishes a technical working committee for preliminary and final engineering design studies of LRL.13

July 1965

NASA Headquarters organizes a series of disciplinary working groups, which meet in Falmouth, Massachusetts, for the NASA Lunar Exploration and Science Summer Conference. Plans are made for soliciting and screening proposals by outside investigators. Participants consider and endorse the current plans for an LRL.14,15 The group warns of the likelihood that lunar soil will contaminate the ocean upon return to Earth. Although the group makes recommendations on details of sample handling, nothing is said about doing so in a vacuum.

July 31, 1965

A meeting between representatives of NASA and the Public Health Service (PHS) recommends that construction of an LRL be made contingent on NASA accepting responsibility for adequate containment of astronauts and returned materials and equipment behind suitable biological barriers. The responsibilities of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior are recognized. The director of the Planetary Quarantine Bioscience Programs Division is specifically directed by the deputy administrator of NASA to establish informal discussions between PHS and the Office of Manned Space Flight (OMSF) on “planning for lunar return.”16

August 9, 1965

Melpar Inc. issues a report, “Semidetailed Design Considerations Related to Functions and Sample Flow Through the Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory.” This plan includes a vacuum processing chamber (10–6-mm pressure).17,18

September 27, 1965

Discussions between PHS officials and NASA at Houston reveal that the two groups differ greatly in the gravity they attach to the quarantine requirement. Arguments by MSC, that material near the lunar surface is surely sterile, are rejected. Even if it costs $50 million to implement an effective quarantine, argues the PHS

11  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

12  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

13  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

14  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

15  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

16  

Bagby, J.R., Jr. 1975. Back contamination: Lessons learned during the Apollo lunar quarantine program. Prepared for JPL/CIT under Contract #560226.

17  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

18  

Frondel, C. 1964-1970. Memos and papers from his participation in planning for lunar sample return and membership on the Lunar Sample Analysis Planning Team and Lunar Sample Preliminary Examination Team.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

representative, the added expense is justified. The requirement for a splashdown procedure that prevents contamination of the ocean dates from this time.19

October 1965

The engineering study for LRL is completed and the projected facility cost is $9.1 million, up from an earlier estimate of $6.5 million because of the added cost of quarantine.20,21

November 1965

A survey of facilities in the United States that might serve to quarantine the Apollo crews finds none to be adequate.22

January 1966

The Interagency Committee on Back Contamination (ICBC) is established. It includes representatives from the Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Academy of Sciences, and NASA.23

February 24, 1966

The House Subcommittee on Manned Space Flight rejects NASA’s request for $9.1 million for the Lunar Receiving Laboratory.

March 9, 1966

A NASA Headquarters reorganization moves lunar science from the Manned Space Flight program to OSSA.

March 16-23, 1966

In response to congressional criticism, NASA carries out another survey of facilities external to MSC that might serve as quarantine sites for the crews and samples. NASA again concludes that none is suitable.

March 31, 1966

In a rehearing, NASA convinces the House Subcommittee on Manned Space Flight that $9.1 million is needed for LRL, and that amount is approved by the House of Representatives.24

May 1966

An LRL working group is established as part of the Planetology Subcommittee of NASA, composed of scientists from outside the agency. This group and ICBC establish the LRL requirements, and they review the design for construction.25

July 1966

Proposals have been received from prospective lunar sample investigators outside NASA.26

19  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

20  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

21  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

22  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

23  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

24  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

25  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

26  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

August 1966

The Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences approves an appropriation for LRL construction but reduces it to $8.1 million.27 Construction of LRL begins.

October 1966

It is found that no aircraft carrier in the U.S. fleet has a deck crane rated to lift the Apollo Command Module (CM), with the astronauts inside, aboard during conditions of high seas. (The original plan has been to lift the CM onto a carrier and open it after it is connected to a shipboard containment facility.) The astronauts will have to exit the CM while it is floating in the ocean. Will this act contaminate the ocean? ICBC satisfies itself that it will not: The CM’s environmental control system will effectively filter pathogens and dust out of the CM’s air during the return trip. Thus the only concern is that the astronauts themselves might have become infected by hypothetical lunar pathogens, and they can wear biological isolation garments when they exit the CM. This is the basis for approving an ocean pickup.

However, this analysis discounts the presence of lunar dust in the CM.28 The presence of the dust was acknowledged at the time, but not taken seriously: “The interior of the command module . . . may come in contact with a small amount of lunar material that has been tracked in by the astronauts; in any case it will contain the astronauts for more than 2 days after their lunar exposure. Thus it must be considered contaminated; after removal of the astronauts and sample containers, it will be sealed for the duration of the quarantine.”29

January 10, 1967

The Science and Applications Directorate is established at MSC.30

January 13, 1967

LRL is placed in the Lunar and Earth Sciences Division at MSC, whose head reports to the director of the Science and Applications Directorate.31

February 1967

ICBC writes a quarantine protocol aimed at consuming 1.2 kg of material, 5% of the nominal sample collection, in testing the reactions of animals and plants to lunar material. The protocol and sample requirement have been simplified by a decision to search not for living organisms in general but instead only for infectious organisms.32 The examinations are to include aerobic and anaerobic culturing; inoculation of plants, eggs, tissue cultures, amphibia, invertebrates, and normal and germ-free animals; and biochemical analyses.33

June 16, 1967

A formal protocol for operation of LRL and quarantining the samples and crew, 547 pages in length, is written by a team of biologists and physicians at Baylor University.34

27  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

28  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

29  

McLane, J.C., King, E.A., Jr., Flory, D.A., Richardson, K.A., Dawson, J.P., Kemmerer, W.W., and Wooley, B.C. 1967. Lunar Receiving Laboratory. Science 155:525-529.

30  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

31  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

32  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

33  

McLane et al., 1967; see footnote 29.

34  

Comprehensive Biological Protocol for the Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory, Manned Spacecraft Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Houston, Texas. Prepared under Contract NAS 9-6157 to Baylor University College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Submitted June 16, 1967.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

June 29, 1967

The newly completed LRL is opened. It is directed by an interim manager.35,36

August 1, 1967

A physicist and expert in vacuum technology is named manager of LRL and chief of the Lunar and Earth Sciences Division.37,38

August 24, 1967

An agreement between ICBC and NASA on the protection of Earth’s biosphere from lunar sources of contamination is signed.39

September 18-20, 1967

A meeting of approved outside sample investigators is held at MSC.40

September 1967

Two key committees are organized: the Lunar Sample Analysis Planning Team (LSAPT) and the Lunar Sample Preliminary Examination Team (LSPET).41 LSAPT has 14 members, mostly physical scientists; its charge is stated in Chapter 6 of this report. LSPET also has 14 members, 11 physical and 3 biological scientists. It will have the responsibility of characterizing the various lunar samples before they are subdivided and sent to outside investigators.

October 5-7, 1967

The first meeting of LSAPT is held at MSC.42

November 1967

MSC estimates that the funding needed to support outside investigators in the United States will be $3.6 million in FY 1968 and $3.8 million in FY 1969. There are 110 approved investigators, including 27 (not funded by NASA) from other nations.43

December 1-2, 1968

The first meeting of LSPET is held. Meetings of LSAPT and LSPET soon come to be held at about 1-month intervals.44

February 23, 1968

At a second meeting of LSAPT, discussion centers on problems associated with the uncompleted vacuum chamber in which returned lunar sample containers are to be opened (Figure B.1). The LRL manager, who has

35  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

36  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

37  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

38  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

39  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

40  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

41  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

42  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

43  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

44  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

confidence in the system, believes it will be operational in 3 to 4 months. LSAPT members are more skeptical and are concerned about how samples will be processed if the vacuum system is still problematical when Apollo 11 returns from the Moon.45

April 1968

ICBC revives the question of whether the Apollo Command Module’s environmental control system, by filtering microbes out of the CM’s air during the return trip from the Moon, can really provide adequate planetary protection. ICBC raises the issue of the loose dust in the CM. However, by this time MSC is committed to the mission plan and can do little to change it. MSC institutes ineffectual plans for the astronauts to vacuum-clean the inside of the CM during their return to Earth.46

Another breach of planetary protection during the splashdown is identified: At an altitude of 10,000 feet the returning CM is to be vented to Earth’s atmosphere. Reacting to ICBC’s concern, MSC studies the problem but finds that a system to filter air being exhausted from the CM would be unacceptably heavy (30 lb), and bypasses the objection.47

In the final analysis, planetary protection is subordinated to other priorities. Quarantine of the crew was never intended to be absolute. One of the guidelines governing procedures states, “The preservation of human life should take precedence over the maintenance of quarantine.” Thus if a command module begins to sink during recovery operations, or if a major fire breaks out in the crew quarters of the receiving laboratory, or if a quarantined astronaut suffers a medical emergency that cannot be handled within LRL, the plan is to break quarantine.48,49

October 22 - November 1, 1968

A simulation of the handling and preliminary examination of samples is held. At this time the F-201 vacuum chamber is still inoperable. Members of the biomedical component of the simulation find and critique many problems.

February 1969

NASA Headquarters asks experts from the regulatory agencies to evaluate MSC’s preparations for receipt and quarantine of the lunar samples. These advisors find LRL far from ready to handle the mission: There are equipment problems, a shortage of technicians, incompletely trained personnel, and deficient protocols for biological testing.50

(Date uncertain)

An MSC contractor, Brown and Root Northrup (BRN), is given responsibility for carrying out the biological testing of returned samples. BRN and NASA personnel rewrite the Baylor protocol in time for the March simulation.

March 1969

A month-long simulation of sample processing is held. The F-201 breaks down repeatedly. Organic contamination in the system is found to emanate from the vacuum pumping system, reinforcing a feeling of LSAPT that

45  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

46  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

47  

Bagby, Jr., 1975; see footnote 16.

48  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

49  

Johnston, R.S., Dietlein, L.F., MD, and Berry, C.A., MD, eds. 1975. Biomedical Results of Apollo, NASA SP-368, pp. 410-411, 418.

50  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

FIGURE B.1 The vacuum chamber (the F-201) used for lunar sample processing in the Lunar Research Laboratory. Lunar Sample Curator E.A. King describes the chamber at a meeting of approved outside investigators in September 1967. The plate glass window through which the F-201 is visible is part of a “biological barrier” that envelopes the entire quarantined area, making it nominally a BSL-4 laboratory. SOURCE: Photograph by J.A. Wood.

processing in a vacuum is unworkable and should be abandoned. LSAPT recommends that sample containers be opened in a chamber filled with an inert gas, such as sterile nitrogen.51,52

April 4, 1969

NASA Policy Directive 8020.13 formally assigns responsibility for forward contamination to OSSA (meaning that an inventory of Earth organisms transported to the Moon should be maintained), and for back contamination to OMSF (“certifying to the Administrator that the recommendations and statutory requirements of the regulatory agencies have been fulfilled prior to the release of lunar astronauts or lunar exposed materials from quarantine”). Several years of warfare between OSSA and OMSF have preceded this.53

April 28-30, 1969

Another conference of approved outside investigators is held at MSC.54

June 1969

Another simulation of sample return is held.55,56 For this occasion, the director of LRL is temporarily replaced by a member of top-level MSC management. Technical personnel in LRL feel the simulation is as far from

51  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

52  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

53  

Bagby, Jr., 1975; see footnote 16.

54  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

55  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

56  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

satisfactory as the March 1969 simulation was. However, the interim director pronounces it a success and certifies the facility as ready to receive lunar samples.

July 24, 1969

Apollo 11 splashdown.

July 25 - August 10, 1969

The Apollo 11 samples are quarantined and subjected to preliminary examination. Sample containers are opened in the F-201, cursory preliminary examinations are made there, and individual samples are then packaged and placed in metal bolt-top vacuum containers and passed out of the F-201 for storage and distribution.

Few plans have been made for timely subdivision, packaging, and distribution of samples to outside investigators. No safeguards are in place against contamination of the samples that might compromise scientific investigations. Rocks are sawed or broken in open air, using ordinary, chemically impure tools. No plan is in place for the long-term curation of the samples, and this is an urgent problem because the Apollo 11 samples must be removed from the sample-handling facility, and the facility cleaned, before November 24, when the samples from the next mission (Apollo 12) will arrive.

Members of LSAPT are deeply concerned by the disarray of the system—the obstacles created by the vacuum chamber and also by quarantine protocols, the many potential sources of contamination of the samples, and the general inefficiency of operations. They take their case to the top, visiting the NASA administrator and the director of MSC. With the support of these managers, LSAPT members take personal responsibility for obtaining chemically clean chisels and other tools, and certifiably clean containers for sample distribution. Because of its effectiveness in improving LRL operations, and the outspoken nature of some of its members, LSAPT comes to enjoy an unprecedented degree of influence in the management of LRL.

November 6, 1969

After the Apollo 11 samples are found not to react with dry nitrogen, a consensus develops in LSAPT that handling the samples in pure nitrogen would be greatly preferable to relying further on the problematic F-201. However, the LRL director remains faithful to the vacuum system in which he has invested so much of his energy. In the end a compromise is reached: The mission plan for Apollo 12 is that one of the two sample return containers will be processed in the F-201 complex; the other, in a nitrogen-filled glove box.57

November 24, 1969

Apollo 12 splashdown.

December 2, 1969

During preliminary examination of the Apollo 12 samples a cut glove in the LRL vacuum chamber causes a “spill,” sending 11 exposed people to the Crew Reception Area, which is filled to overflowing, for the duration of quarantine.58 (Some personnel who also were exposed to the hypothetical spill evade quarantine by fleeing the area before guards charged with enforcing quarantine rules arrive.)

February 12, 1970

The manager of LRL is replaced.59 The new manager also favors use of the F-201 for sample processing.

57  

Frondel, 1964-1970; see footnote 18.

58  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

59  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

FIGURE B.2 A portion of the sterile nitrogen atmospheric processing (SNAP) line, a system of glove boxes used for processing samples returned by the later Apollo missions. The cabinets contain purified dry N2 at slightly more than atmospheric pressure, so leakage is outward, protecting the samples but not personnel (if the samples had contained pathogens). Gas in the cabinets is continuously monitored for contamination by organic compounds, water vapor, oxygen, and other trace gases. SOURCE: Photograph by J.A. Wood.

April 13, 1970

The explosion of an oxygen tank in the Service Module of Apollo 13 prevents that mission from sampling the Moon and delays the launch of the next mission, pending study of the failure. Where Apollo launches had been scheduled to occur at 4- or 5-month intervals, Apollo 13 opens a hiatus of 13 months between the return of Apollo 12 and Apollo 14 samples.

This “breather” is welcomed by LRL personnel and LSAPT as an opportunity to install equipment, and acquire tools, needed for clean sample handling and storage in LRL. Extensive glove-box facilities (Figure B.2) are constructed to facilitate processing of samples in a sterile nitrogen environment, tested, and cleaned.

November 1970

LSAPT succeeds in having the F-201 deactivated in favor of the use of nitrogen cabinets.

December 15, 1970

The manager of LRL is again replaced.60

60  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×

February 9, 1971

Apollo 14 splashdown.

April 28, 1971

After life-detection experiments on samples from three Apollo missions return negative results, NASA announces that ICBC will no longer require crew or sample quarantine.61-63

61  

King, 1989; see footnote 1.

62  

Annexstad, 1978; see footnote 2.

63  

Compton, 1989; see footnote 3.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B A History of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory." National Research Council. 2002. The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10138.
×
Page80
The Quarantine and Certification of Martian Samples Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $29.00 Buy Ebook | $23.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

One of the highest-priority activities in the planetary sciences identified in published reports of the Space Studies Board's Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration (COMPLEX) and in reports of other advisory groups is the collection and return of extraterrestrial samples to Earth for study in terrestrial laboratories. In response to recommendations made in such studies, NASA has initiated a vigorous program that will, within the next decade, collect samples from a variety of solar system environments. In particular the Mars Exploration Program is expected to launch spacecraft that are designed to collect samples of martian soil, rocks, and atmosphere and return them to Earth, perhaps as early as 2015.

International treaty obligations mandate that NASA conduct such a program in a manner that avoids the cross-contamination of both Earth and Mars. The Space Studies Board's 1997 report Mars Sample Return: Issues and Recommendations examined many of the planetary-protection issues concerning the back contamination of Earth and concluded that, although the probability that martian samples will contain dangerous biota is small, it is not zero.1 Steps must be taken to protect Earth against the remote possibility of contamination by life forms that may have evolved on Mars. Similarly, the samples, collected at great expense, must be protected against contamination by terrestrial biota and other matter. Almost certainly, meeting these requirements will entail opening the sample-return container in an appropriate facility on Earth-presumably a BSL-4 laboratory-where testing, biosafety certification, and quarantine of the samples will be carried out before aliquots are released to the scientific community for study in existing laboratory facilities. The nature of the required quarantine facility, and the decisions required for disposition of samples once they are in it, were regarded as issues of sufficient importance and complexity to warrant a study by the Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration (COMPLEX) in isolation from other topics. (Previous studies have been much broader, including also consideration of the mission that collects samples on Mars and brings them to Earth, atmospheric entry, sample recovery, and transport to the quarantine facility.) The charge to COMPLEX stated that the central question to be addressed in this study is the following: What are the criteria that must be satisfied before martian samples can be released from a quarantine facility?

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!