« Previous: Appendix C: Report of NASA's Planetary Protection Independent Review Board: Findings and Recommendations

Page 71 Cite

Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Establishment of the PPIRB." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Assessment of the Report of NASA's Planetary Protection Independent Review Board. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25773.

D

Establishment of the PPIRB

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PLANETARY PROTECTION ISSUED BY THE NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL’S REGULATORY AND POLICY COMMITTEE

The Regulatory and Policy Committee of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC) forwarded the following set of findings and recommendations relating to planetary protection to the NAC for discussion and potential action at its meeting in December 2018.¹

Committee on Space Research

Finding: It is in NASA’s, the nation’s, and the world’s interest for NASA and non-government entities to contribute to the advancement of science and space exploration by executing missions to celestial bodies, with appropriate oversight and supervision by American authorities.

Finding: Policies and guidelines produced by the Committee on Space Research’s (“COSPAR’s”) Planetary Protection Panel are not legally binding.

Recommendation: NASA should establish a multi-disciplinary team of experts from industry, the scientific community, and relevant government agencies, to develop U.S. policies that properly balance the legitimate need to protect against the harmful contamination of the Earth or other celestial bodies with the scientific, social, and economic benefits of public and private space missions. The recommended multi-disciplinary team should be tasked with producing a detailed policy, provided to a joint session of the Regulatory and Policy Committee and the Science Committee, and (HEO [Human Exploration and Operations Committee]), that will describe best practices for the Administration, the science and research community, and private sector, to protect against harmful contamination and adverse changes in the environment of the Earth.

Recommendation: The term ‘Planetary Protection’ should not be used by NASA to describe the need to prevent the contamination of the Earth or other celestial bodies through human or robotic exploration. Instead, NASA should more properly refer to conducting space exploration so as to avoid ‘harmful contamination’ of celestial bodies and ‘adverse changes in the environment of the Earth’ when referencing concerns regarding contamination through human or robotic exploration. (alter to fit with the previous recommendation to review the term).

___________________

¹ NASA, “NASA Advisory Council Regulatory and Policy Committee Observations, Findings, and Recommendations,” December 10, 2018, https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/regulatory_policy_committee_report_dec2018_tagged.pdf.

Page 72 Cite

NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING COSPAR

The findings and recommendations relating to COSPAR and its planetary protection policy adopted by the NASA Advisory Committee’s (NAC’s) Regulatory and Policy Committee at its November 16, 2018, meeting were discussed by the NAC at its December 10-11 meeting and the following recommendation was issued.²

Name of Committee:	Regulatory and Policy Committee
Chair of Committee:	Mr. Michael Gold
Date of Council Public Deliberation:	December 10-11, 2018
Short Title of Recommendation:	COSPAR

Recommendation: NASA should establish a multi-disciplinary task force of experts from industry, the scientific community, and relevant government agencies, to develop U.S. policies that properly balance the legitimate need to protect against the harmful contamination of the Earth or other celestial bodies with the scientific, social, and economic benefits of public and private space missions. The recommended multi-disciplinary task force should be tasked with producing a detailed policy, provided to a joint session of the NAC Regulatory and Policy Committee, the Science Committee, and the Human Exploration and Operations Committee, that will describe best practices for the Administration, the science and research community, and private sector, to protect against harmful contamination and adverse changes in the environment of the Earth. The multi-disciplinary task force should also explore the use of the term ‘Planetary Protection’ relative to other terms utilized in the Outer Space Treaty.

Major Reasons for the Recommendation: The COSPAR regulations are becoming obsolete and do not properly account for the possibilities of human spaceflight and private sector missions. Creating a multi-disciplinary team to craft a balanced policy that can be implemented by NASA (and eventually COSPAR itself) will help to encourage new, innovative, human spaceflight, robotic, and private sector missions to Mars and other celestial bodies. The more of these missions that take place the more science, exploration, and commerce can be conducted.

Consequences of No Action on the Recommendation: If NASA adopts the COSP AR guidelines without any review or revisions they will have a chilling effect on robotic, human spaceflight, and private sector missions. The costs and complexity of conducting space missions will not be moderated and could become problematic. The result will be less science, exploration, and commercial activities, harming both national and global interests.

MEMBERSHIP OF THE PLANETARY PROTECTION INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD

NASA’s Planetary Protection Independent Review Board (PPIRB) was established by NASA’s Science Mission Directorate in mid-2019 in response to a recommendation issued by the NASA Advisory Council (see above). Its membership consisted of the following individuals:

Alan Stern, Southwest Research Institute, Chair
Edward Bierhaus, Lockheed Martin
Wendy Calvin, University of Nevada, Reno
Amanda Hendrix, Planetary Science Institute
Christopher H. House, Pennsylvania State University
Hernan Lorenzi, J. Craig Venter Institute
Tommy Sanford, Commercial Spaceflight Federation
Erika Wagner, Blue Origin
Andrew Westphal, University of California, Berkeley
Charles Whetsel, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Paul Wooster, SpaceX
T. Jens Feeley, NASA Headquarters (Ex Officio), Review Manager

___________________

² NASA, 2018, “NASA Advisory Council Recommendation, Export Control Reform: Avoiding Unilateral Export Controls in Support of Space Policy Directive 2 and the 2018 National Defense Authorization Control Act,” https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nac_meeting_recommendations_dec_10-11_2018_signed_tagged.pdf.

Next: Appendix E: Planetary Protection Categories »

Assessment of the Report of NASA's Planetary Protection Independent Review Board (2020)

Chapter: Appendix D: Establishment of the PPIRB

D

Establishment of the PPIRB

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PLANETARY PROTECTION ISSUED BY THE NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL’S REGULATORY AND POLICY COMMITTEE

Committee on Space Research

NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING COSPAR

MEMBERSHIP OF THE PLANETARY PROTECTION INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD

Welcome to OpenBook!

Get Email Updates

Assessment of the Report of NASA's Planetary Protection Independent Review Board (2020)

Chapter: Appendix D: Establishment of the PPIRB

DEstablishment of the PPIRB

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING PLANETARY PROTECTION ISSUED BY THE NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL’S REGULATORY AND POLICY COMMITTEE

Committee on Space Research

NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING COSPAR

MEMBERSHIP OF THE PLANETARY PROTECTION INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD

Welcome to OpenBook!

Get Email Updates

D

Establishment of the PPIRB