Planetary Protection 1 Planetary Protection Considerations for Mars Sample Return C. Conley, NASA PPO G. Kminek, ESA PPO 4 August, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT
Advertisements

IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANETARY PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RPWI EXPERIMENT ONBOARD THE JUICE SPACECRAFT I. Kolmasova 1, O. Santolik 1,2, J. Soucek 1,
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT IN AN ICS STRUCTURE. EU Mission Statement The Environmental Unit is established to provide technical and scientific expertise and capabilities.
Information Risk Management Key Component for HIPAA Security Compliance Ann Geyer Tunitas Group
香港民航處 Civil Aviation Department Hong Kong 1 ICAO Recommended Security Control Guidelines for Screening Liquids, Gels & Aerosols (LAGs) HK CAD 10 July 2007.
Draft BY QI organization June 2014
Auditing Computer Systems
Copyright © 2013 United Launch Alliance, LLC. Unpublished Work. All Rights Reserved. Civil Space 2013 Critical Challenges: Safety, Mission Assurance, and.
 Molecular Laboratory must have an ongoing Bio-safety SOP and also quality improvement program to monitor and evaluate objectively and systematically.
SAE AS9100 Quality Systems - Aerospace Model for Quality Assurance
BRC Storage & Distribution Safety and Quality Management System Training Guide
Lunar Advanced Science and Exploration Research: Partnership in Science and Exploration Michael J. Wargo, Sc.D. Chief Lunar Scientist for Exploration Systems.
GLAST LAT ProjectLAT Engineering Meeting, April 1, 2003 GLAST Large Area Telescope: Performance & Safety Assurance Darren S. Marsh Stanford Linear Accelerator.
The Need for an Integrated View of Water Quality Modeling and Monitoring Bruce Kiselica USEPA, Region 2 Second Workshop on Advanced Technologies in Real.
PLANETARY PROTECTION GUIDELINES POLICY & REQUIREMENTS FOR CUBESATS Dr. Cassie Conley, James E. Johnson, January 8, 2015.
Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points
Session 3 – Information Security Policies
Protection Against Occupational Exposure
System Software Integration Testing Mars Polar Lander Steven Ford SYSM /05/12.
Engaging Contractors in the Environmental Management System (EMS) Department of Energy EMS Workshop: Implementation, Lessons Learned, and Best Practices.
Overview report of a series of FVO fact- finding missions and audits carried out in 2012 and 2013 in order to evaluate the systems put in place to give.
Bonn, Germany Sunday, 25 March 2012 The Carbon dioxide Capture and geological Storage As project activities Under CDM – The Durban Regulation First SDM.
Unit 5.6 Evidence and Sampling.
History Of Planning for a Mars Sample Return Mission Presentation to the Planetary Protection Advisory Subcommittee August 4, 2010 Pericles D. Stabekis.
Planetary Protection: Background and Planning for PP Compliance Karen Buxbaum Mars Program Planetary Protection Manager Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California.
Methods of Astrobiology By Michael Timmons Analytical/Radio/Nuclear (ARN) Seminar Spring 2006.
Planetary Protection Planetary Protection at NASA: Overview and Status Catharine A. Conley, NASA Planetary Protection Officer 4 August, 2010.
International Atomic Energy Agency IX.4.4. Pre-disposal waste management Safety Standards.
System Integration Testing Requirements Mars Polar Lander Steven Ford SYSM /11/12.
1 FRENCH PROPOSAL FOR ESARR6 1 - BACKGROUND - 15/02/00 : Kick-off meeting, Presentation of the CAA/SRG input (SW01), Request from the chairman to comment.
Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Mars 2020 Project Planetary Protection Topics for Landing Site Selection Doug Bernard Mars.
Protecting Data Rights Under DoD Contracts October 14, 2009 NCMA Workshop Cape Canaveral Chapter Keith R. Szeliga Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton.
Nicolas Solente Workshop on Regulatory Requirements to Ensure Safe Disposal of Disused Sealed Sources for Operators and Regulators Amman, JORDAN 7-11 April.
Main Requirements on Different Stages of the Licensing Process for New Nuclear Facilities Module 4.5/1 Design Geoff Vaughan University of Central Lancashire,
Jacques Vanier ICAO EUR/NAT Regional Officer Almaty, 5 to 9 September 2005 SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS RISK VERSUS SAFETY.
Life Detection Workshop - Feb , 2012, San Diego, CA1 Life Detection Workshop Scripps Institution of Oceanography February 15-17, 2012 An Example.
PREDECISIONAL FOR PLANNING AND DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 1 Humans to the Martian System Preliminary Summary of Strategic Knowledge Gaps P-SAG (jointly sponsored.
Specific Safety Requirements on Safety Assessment and Safety Cases for Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste – GSR Part 5.
International Atomic Energy Agency Roles and responsibilities for development of disposal facilities Phil Metcalf Workshop on Strategy and Methodologies.
SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN TURKISH STATE RAILWAYS (TCDD)
Goals for this Meeting: Day 1 Day 2 Update the community on progress in the exploration of Mars, including NASA and the European Space Agency (missions.
And scattered about... were the Martians–dead! –slain by the putrefactive and disease bacteria against which their systems were unpre- pared; slain as.
International Atomic Energy Agency IX.4.2. Principles of radioactive waste management Basic technical management solutions: concentrate and contain, storage.
SRR and PDR Charter & Review Team Linda Pacini (GSFC) Review Chair.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration February 27, 2013 Defining Potential HEOMD Instruments for Mars 2020 A Work in Progress... NOTE ADDED BY.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Presenter Name School of Drafting Regulations for Borehole Disposal of DSRS 2016 Vienna, Austria Siting Strategies.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Presenter Name School of Drafting Regulations for Borehole Disposal of DSRS 2016 Vienna, Austria Requirements for.
Pre-decisional – for Planning and Discussion Purposes Only 1 Technology Planning for Future Mars Missions Samad Hayati Manager, Mars Technology Program.
ISO 9001:2015 Subject: Quality Management System Clause 8 - Operation
WORKSHOP ON ACCREDITATION OF BODIES CERTIFYING MEDICAL DEVICES INT MARKET TOPIC 9 CH 8 ISO MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS AND IMPROVEMENT INTERNAL AUDITS.
International Atomic Energy Agency V. Nys Definition and practical application of demonstration of operational and long-term safety for predisposal RWM.
Toward a New ATM Software Safety Assessment Methodology dott. Francesca Matarese.
1 The WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade Basic Concepts and Member Obligations.
Organization and Implementation of a National Regulatory Program for the Control of Radiation Sources Program Performance Criteria.
Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis
MAVEN Planetary Protection Lead Bob Bartlett Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN) Overall Approach to Planetary Protection Wednesday, October.
Planetary Protection at NASA
Planetary Protection at ESA
Planetary Protection of Outer Solar System bodies - PPOSS -
Planetary Protection of Outer Solar System bodies - PPOSS -
Planetary Protection Category III
Planetary Protection Category II
Planetary Protection Category V Restricted Earth Return
COSPAR Panel on Planetary Protection
Planetary Protection Basics
COSPAR Panel on Planetary Protection
Operationalizing Export Certification and Regionalization Programmes
DOD’S PHASED SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
EU Food Safety Requirements: - Hygiene of Foodstuffs -
REQUIREMENTS FOR MISSIONS towards europa
Presentation transcript:

Planetary Protection 1 Planetary Protection Considerations for Mars Sample Return C. Conley, NASA PPO G. Kminek, ESA PPO 4 August, 2010

Science class should not end in tragedy.... Science class should not The Basic Rationale for Planetary Protection Precautions (as written by Bart Simpson, Dec. 17, 2000, “Skinner’s Sense of Snow”)

Planetary Protection 3 Planetary Protection Mission Constraints Depend on the nature of the mission and on the target planet Assignment of categories for each specific mission/body is to be determined by the “best multidisciplinary scientific advice” »COSPAR will provide it in case such advice is not available to a nation Examples of specific measures include: »Reduction of spacecraft biological contamination »Constraints on spacecraft operating procedures »Spacecraft organic inventory and restrictions »Restrictions on the handling of returned samples »Documentation of spacecraft trajectories and spacecraft material archiving

Planetary Protection 4 PLANETMISSIONMISSION PRIORITIES TYPECATEGORY ANot of direct interest for understanding the AnyI process of chemical evolution. No protection of such planets is warranted (no requirements). BOf significant interest relative to the process of AnyII chemical evolution, but only a remote chance that contamination by spacecraft could jeopardize future exploration. COf significant interest relative to the process of Flyby, OrbiterIII chemical evolution and/or the origin of life or for which scientific opinion provides a significant chance of contamination which could jeopardize Lander, ProbeIV a future biological experiment. AllAny Solar System BodyEarth-ReturnV “unrestricted-” or “restricted Earth-return” Planetary Protection Mission Categories

Planetary Protection 5 Planetary Protection Compliance for Mars Sample Return Three aspects require PP involvement over mission lifetime »Outbound – protect Mars from Earth organisms »Sample Return – protect Earth from Martian organisms »Life Detection and Biohazard Assessment Protocol: Sample Distribution and Future Missions –Distinguish Earth-originating (round-trip) biota/biomarkers from those of potentially Martian origin –Demonstrate that samples are safe enough to be released from quarantine for distribution to investigators Requirements on the system to allow for sample distribution may be satisfied via several implementation methods at a range of costs, with significant implications for additional scientific investigations

Planetary Protection 6 Category III/IV Requirements for Mars Category III. Mars orbiters will not be required to meet orbital lifetime requirements* if they achieve total (surface, mated, and encapsulated) bioburden levels of ≤ 5x10 5 spores. * Defined as 20 years after launch at greater than or equal to 99% probability, and 50 years after launch at greater than or equal to 95% probability. Category IV for Mars is subdivided into IVa, IVb, and IVc: Category IVa. Lander systems not carrying instruments for the investigations of extant martian life are restricted to a biological burden no greater than Viking lander pre-sterilization levels a surface biological burden level of ≤ 3x10 5 spores, and an average of ≤ 300 spores per square meter

Planetary Protection 7 Category III/IV Requirements for Mars (cont.) Category IV for Mars is subdivided into IVa, IVb, and IVc: Category IVb. For lander systems designed to investigate extant martian life, all of the requirements of Category IVa apply, along with the following requirement:  The entire landed system must be sterilized at least to Viking post- sterilization biological burden levels a surface biological burden level of ≤ 30* spores, or to levels of biological burden reduction driven by the nature and sensitivity of the particular life- detection experiments, whichever are more stringent OR  The subsystems which are involved in the acquisition, delivery, and analysis of samples used for life detection must be sterilized to these levels, and a method of preventing recontamination of the sterilized subsystems and the contamination of the material to be analyzed is in place.

Planetary Protection 8 Category III/IV Requirements for Mars (cont.) Category IV for Mars is subdivided into IVa, IVb, and IVc: Category IVc. For missions which investigate martian special regions (defined later), even if they do not include life detection experiments, all of the requirements of Category IVa apply, along with the following requirement:  Case 1. If the landing site is within the special region, the entire landed system shall be sterilized at least to the Viking post-sterilization biological burden levels a surface biological burden level of ≤ 30* spores.  Case 2. If the special region is accessed though horizontal or vertical mobility, either the entire landed system shall be sterilized to the Viking post-sterilization biological burden levels a surface biological burden level of ≤ 30* spores OR the subsystems which directly contact the special region shall be sterilized to these levels, and a method of preventing their recontamination prior to accessing the special region shall be provided. If an off-nominal condition (such as a hard landing) would cause a high probability (how high is for future PPS consideration) of inadvertent biological contamination of the special region by the spacecraft, the entire landed system must be sterilized to a surface biological burden level of ≤ 30* spores and a total (surface, mated, and encapsulated) bioburden level of ≤ 30 + (2x10 5 )* spores.

Planetary Protection 9 Sample Return Missions from Mars Category V. The Earth return mission is classified, “Restricted Earth return.” Unless specifically exempted, the outbound leg of the mission shall meet Category IVb requirements. This provision is intended to avoid “false positive” indications in a life-detection and hazard-determination protocol, or in the search for life in the sample after it is returned. A “false positive” could prevent distribution of the sample from containment and could lead to unnecessary increased rigor in the requirements for all later Mars missions. The sample container must be sealed after sample acquisition. A redundant, fail-safe containment with a method for verification of its operation before Earth-return shall be required. The integrity of the flight containment system shall be maintained until the sample is transferred to containment in an appropriate receiving facility.

Planetary Protection 10 Sample Return Missions from Mars (cont.) Category V, cont. The mission and the spacecraft design must provide a method to “break the chain of contact” with Mars. No uncontained hardware that contacted Mars, directly or indirectly, shall be returned to Earth. Isolation of such hardware from the Mars environment shall be provided during sample container loading into the containment system, launch from Mars, and any in-flight transfer operations required by the mission. Reviews and approval of the continuation of the flight mission shall be required at three stages: 1) prior to launch from Earth; 2) prior to leaving Mars for return to Earth; and 3) prior to commitment to Earth re-entry. A program of life detection and biohazard testing, or a proven sterilization process, shall be undertaken as an absolute precondition for the controlled distribution of any portion of the sample.

Planetary Protection 11 Samples returned from Mars should be contained and treated as though potentially hazardous until proven otherwise If sample containment cannot be verified en route to Earth, the sample and spacecraft should either be sterilized in space or not returned to Earth Integrity of sample containment should be maintained through reentry and transfer to a receiving facility Controlled distribution of unsterilized materials should only occur if analyses determine the sample not to contain a biological hazard Planetary protection measures adopted for the first sample return should not be relaxed for subsequent missions without thorough scientific review and concurrence by an appropriate independent body SSB Recommendations on Mars Sample Return

Avoiding Backward Contamination: Handling Mars Samples Earth Ground Facilities: Mobile Retrieval Units (MRU) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Sample Curation Facility (SCF) Quarantine (SRF) Curation (SCF) Retrieval (MRU) ·Rapid retrieval and containment Samples declared safe? ·Subsampling ·Documentation ·Sample distribution ·Long-term curation ·Cold curation ·Preliminary examination/ characterization ·Subsampling, documentation ·Preliminary search for extinct/ extant life ·Hazard testing Research Laboratories EEVs Samples Certified Safe ? ?

Analyzing Returned Samples: The Draft Test Protocol (2002, update planned ) Perform appropriate testing for biohazard evaluation and life detection Comply with national regulations and legal constraints: US National Environmental Protection Act US Presidential Directive/National Security Council Memorandum #25 Ensure public communication and involvement to the extent necessary for public acceptance* of Mars Sample Return The perceived benefits of Mars sample return must outweigh the costs *and funding!

Planetary Protection 14 What Does ‘Potentially Hazardous’ Imply? Hazards must be either destroyed or contained  Contain Mars samples, or sterilize them, to ensure safety of Earth Must have sufficient confidence on containment  Provisional requirement: 1x10 -6 probability of releasing a single 0.2 micron particle of Mars material into the Earth environment (ESF input) Must have approved protocols for containment and testing  Review and update Draft Test Protocol using best available advice (next)  Requirements on flight system contamination flow back from test protocols Technical requirements flow from the hazard assessment – Impact on design and operation – Impact on flight and ground system (C&C) – Impact on hardware and software – Impact on qualification and acceptance margins Technology development needs are dictated by hazard considerations

PP_Subcom_August_2010 Probabilistic Constraints Premise: Hazard Requires: Containment & Sterilization Defined by: Release Probability & Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) Policy decision (ESF study): Acceptable risk level Derived technical requirements: Redundancy & Factors of Safety (FoS) Implementation: Flight/ground system, qualification approach, verification and procedures 15

PP_Subcom_August_ One Take on Risk Assessment th PPWG meeting, recommendation for loss of containment: –Severity level is Catastrophic: potential for severe detrimental environmental effects (conservative assumption for resource allocation, not expected or proven severity level) –Always keep containment/handling visible in the risk log ECSS-Q-ST-40C “…samples returned from Mars by spacecraft should be contained and treated as though potentially hazardous until proven otherwise…” because “…the potential for large-scale negative effects on Earth’s inhabitants or environments by a returned martian life form appears to be low, but is not demonstrably zero.”

Planetary Protection 18