1. Planetary Protection of Outer Solar System bodies - PPOSS -

2. PPOSS
PPOSS is supported by the European Commission Horizon programme for three years ( ) under Grant Agreement
Seven Contractual Partners
European Science Foundation – ESF, France (Coordinator)
German Aerospace Center – DLR, Germany
Committee on Space Research – COSPAR, France
Eurospace, France
National Institute for Astrophysics – INAF, Italy
Space Technology Ireland Limited –STIL, Ireland
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine – IC, UK

3. Planetary Protection is an issue of global relevance
PPOSS is supported under the ‘International Collaboration’ 2014 Work Programme item
International Partner organisations are full members of the PPOSS team
Sit in the project Steering Committee
Support the participation of experts to the various events
Host PPOSS seminars …
One international partner completed MoU
China Academy of Space Technology (CAST)
Two international partners to complete MoU
Institute of Biomedical Problems (IBMP) – Contact point Natalia Novikova
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) – Contact point Hajime Yano
One international observer
Office of the Space Studies Board of the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine – Contact point David Smith

4. Planetary Protection Regulation
The meticulous process of determining planetary protection regulations for a specific mission depend on:
the target body (e.g. Mars vs the Moon)
the type of encounter (e.g. Orbiter vs Lander)
specific goals (e.g. to see if the target body has/had life)
Each mission presents unique contamination challenges and therefore has different requirements
Planetary Protection Officer/Agencies will determine specific requirements for a mission and classify it into a Mission category(s) – With support from the scientific community

5. Planetary Protection Regulation
Mission Category
Mission Type
Planetary Bodies I
Any
Bodies not of direct interest for understanding the process of chemical evolution or the origin of life. No protection of such planets is warranted II
Bodies of significant interest relative to the process of chemical evolution and the origin of life, but only a remote chance that contamination could compromise future investigations
III
Flyby, orbiter
Bodies of significant interest to the process of chemical evolution and/or the origin of life, and where scientific opinion provides a significant chance that contamination could compromise future investigations IV
Lander, Probe
V (unrestricted)
Earth Return
Earth-return missions from bodies “deemed by scientific opinion to have no indigenous life forms.”
V (restricted)
Earth-return missions from bodies deemed by scientific opinion to be of significant interest to the process of chemical evolution and/or the origin of life.

6. The Case of Mars Mars missions have specific set of requirements
Category III:
The probability of impact on Mars by any part of the launch vehicle (e.g., upper stage) shall be <1x10-4 for the first 50 years after launch
One of the following conditions shall be met:
The probability of impact on Mars by any part of a spacecraft is <1x10-2 for the first 20 years after launch, and <5x10-2 for the time period from 20 to 50 years after launch
The total bioburden of the spacecraft, including surface, mated, and encapsulated bioburden, is <5x105 bacterial spores

7. The Case of Mars Mars missions have specific set of requirements
Category IV:
Missions that are designed to reach Mars’ surface (i.e., Lander, Probe)
IVa: Lander systems not carrying instruments for the investigations of extant Mars life
IVb: Lander systems designed to investigate extant Martian Life
IVc: Missions investigating Martian special regions, even if they do not include life detection experiments. Martian Special Regions include those within which terrestrial organisms are likely to replicate and those potentially harboring extant Martian Life

8. The Case of Mars
All landers to Mars must carry < 5x105 heat-resistant organisms (‘spores’) in total (surface, mated, and embedded), and < 3x105 on exposed surfaces, distributed at < 300 ‘spores’ per m2.
Category IVb missions comprise lander systems carrying instruments designed to investigate extant Martian life, and must meet either of these more stringent requirements:
Exposed surfaces of the entire landed system must be cleaned and treated to produce a 4 decade reduction in the above levels, or to levels driven by the nature and sensitivity of the particular life- detection experiments, whichever are more stringent. OR
All surfaces that may contact the samples must be cleaned and treated to produce a 4 decade reduction, and a method to prevent recontamination be in place. Modelling must demonstrate a low probability of recontamination from untreated hardware

9. The Case of Mars Cat. IVc - In addition to requirements for Cat Iva
If the landing site is within the special region, the bioburden of the entire surface system shall be <30 bacterial spores on exposed internal and external surfaces
One of the following conditions shall be met:
The bioburden of the entire surface system is <30 bacterial spores on exposed internal and external surfaces if the special region is accessed through horizontal (e.g., roving) or vertical mobility (e.g., drilling)
The subsystems which directly contact the special region are sterilized to these levels, and, a method of preventing their recontamination prior to accessing the special region shall be in place.
If an off-nominal condition (such as a hard landing) can cause a high probability (>10-2) of inadvertent biological contamination of the special region by the spacecraft, the bioburden of the entire surface system shall be <30 bacterial spores on exposed internal and external surfaces, and the total (surface, mated, and encapsulated) bioburden level shall be ≤ x 104 bacterial spores

10. The case of Europa Missions to Europa
Category III and IV. Requirements for Europa flybys, orbiters and landers, including bioburden reduction, shall be applied in order to reduce the probability of inadvertent contamination of a Europan ocean to less than 1 x 10-4 per mission. These requirements will be refined in future years, but the calculation of this probability should include a conservative estimate of poorly known parameters, and address the following factors, at a minimum:

11. The case of Europa CATEGORY III/IV/V REQUIREMENTS FOR EUROPA
Bioburden at launch
Cruise survival for contaminating organisms
Organism survival in the radiation environment adjacent to Europa
Probability of landing on Europa
The mechanisms and timescales of transport to the europan subsurface
Organism survival and proliferation before, during, and after subsurface transfer
 Except the estimation of the bioburden at launch all other factors are unknown!
 What scientific investigations are necessary to come to better estimates? (WP 3)

12. The case of Europa
Preliminary calculations of the probability of contamination suggest that bioburden reduction will likely be necessary even for Europa orbiters (Category III) as well as for landers, requiring the use of cleanroom technology and the cleanliness of all parts before assembly, and the monitoring of spacecraft assembly facilities to understand the bioburden and its microbial diversity, including specific problematic species. Specific methods should be developed to eradicate problematic species. Methods of bioburden reduction should reflect the type of environments found on Europa, focusing on Earth extremophiles most likely to survive on Europa, such as cold and radiation tolerant organisms (SSB 2000). Sample Return Missions from Europa Category V. The Earth return mission is classified, “Restricted Earth return.”

13. The case of Small Solar System Bodies
Category I, II, III, or IV. The small bodies of the solar system not specifically discussed in COSPAR policy represent a very large class of objects. Imposing forward contamination controls on these missions is not warranted except on a case-by-case basis, so most of such missions should reflect Categories I or II. Further elaboration of this requirement is anticipated.
Sample Return Missions from Small Solar System Bodies
Category V. Determination as to whether a mission is classified “Restricted Earth return” or not shall be undertaken with respect to the best multidisciplinary scientific advice, using the framework presented in the 1998 report of the US National Research Council’s Space Studies Board entitled, Evaluating the Biological Potential in Samples Returned from Planetary Satellites and Small Solar System Bodies: Framework for Decision Making (SSB 1998).

14. The case of Small Solar System Bodies
Specifically, such a determination shall address the following six questions for each body intended to be sampled:
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that there was never liquid water in or on the target body?
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that metabolically useful energy sources were never present?
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that there was never sufficient organic matter (or CO2 or carbonates and an appropriate source of reducing equivalents) in or on the target body to support life?
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that subsequent to the disappearance of liquid water, the target body has been subjected to extreme temperatures (i.e., >160°C)?
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that there is or was sufficient radiation for biological sterilization of terrestrial life forms?
Does the preponderance of scientific evidence indicate that there has been a natural influx to Earth, e.g., via meteorites, of material equivalent to a sample returned from the target body?

15. Planetary Protection Regulation
Focuses on and is mostly articulated around biological contamination… …although PPP recommends organic inventory and Mars 2020 addresses organic contamination sets quantitative guidelines

16. Programmatic Landscape
Mission Name
Target
COSPAR Category
Lead Agency, Country
Status
Dawn
Asteroids Vesta & Ceres (Mars flyby)
III
NASA, US
Ongoing
Rosetta
Comet C-G, Asteroid Lutetia
III (II-comet)
ESA,
Europe
Juno
Jupiter II
NASA, US
Hayabusa 2
Asteroid 1999 JU3
V (unrestricted)
JAXA, Japan
Cassini
Saturn System
OSIRIS-Rex
Asteroid 1999 RQ36
Planning Phase
JUICE
Ganymede (and Jovian Moons Callisto and Europa)
ESA, Europe
Ganymede Orbiter/Lander
Ganymede
TBD
ROSCOSMOS,
Russia
Concept
Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM)
Asteroid TBD
Europa Clipper
Europa and Jovian System

17. Programmatic Landscape
Mission Name
Target
COSPAR Category
Lead Agency, Country
Status
Dawn
Asteroids Vesta & Ceres (Mars flyby)
III
NASA, US
Ongoing
Rosetta
Comet C-G, Asteroid Lutetia
III (II-comet)
ESA,
Europe
Juno
Jupiter II
NASA, US
Hayabusa 2
Asteroid 1999 JU3
V (unrestricted)
JAXA, Japan
Cassini
Saturn System
OSIRIS-Rex
Asteroid 1999 RQ36
Planning Phase
JUICE
Ganymede (and Jovian Moons Callisto and Europa)
ESA, Europe
Ganymede Orbiter/Lander
Ganymede
TBD
ROSCOSMOS,
Russia
Concept
Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM)
Asteroid TBD
Europa Clipper
Europa and Jovian System
Mangalyaan – 5/11/2013

18. Some say:

19. Europa
subsurface oceans in contact with silicates - Europa

20. Ganymede
subsurface oceans without any contact with the silicates – Largest moon of SS

21. Enceladus
subsurface oceans in contact with silicates –Enceladus

22. Titan

23. Other (small) bodies

24. Sooner or later…
…new missions will orbit, land and return samples from these targets
An increasing number of countries will be involved
These missions will likely investigate the presence of organics
Planetary Policy issues should be carefully considered

25. PPOSS Main objective
To provide an international forum to consider and approach the specificities of Planetary Protection (biological and organic contamination) for outer Solar system bodies, including small Solar system bodies, in the general context of Planetary Protection regulation and to provide recommendations to COSPAR.

26. PPOSS Objective 1
Describe the state of the art and good practice for implementing planetary protection requirements, identify good practices and lessons to be learned
Describe the state of the art and good practices to implement planetary protection requirements in the form of a handbook, including a historical perspective, up-to-date implementation measures, identification of problems and how to solve them, lessons learnt, and aspects related to international cooperation (i.e. joint missions).

27. PPOSS Objective 1 ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 2
Describe the state of the art and good practice for implementing planetary protection requirements, identify good practices and lessons to be learnt
Describe the state of the art and good practices to implement planetary protection requirements in the form of a handbook, including a historical perspective, up-to-date implementation measures, identification of problems and how to solve them, lessons learnt, and aspects related to international cooperation (i.e. joint missions).
ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 2
- International Planetary Protection Handbook -

28. COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium
PPOSS Objective 2
Identify scientific challenges, scientific requirements and knowledge gaps related to planetary protection of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies.
In the context of the current and foreseen/foreseeable programmatic landscape, identify the many challenges, critical expertise as well as knowledge gaps raised by planetary protection related to i) biological contamination of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies and ii) organic contamination of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies. Propose planetary protection requirements based on scientific grounds, suggest activities to overcome the main hurdles and to fill-in knowledge gaps.
14/11/2018
COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium

29. PPOSS Objective 2 ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 3
Identify scientific challenges, scientific requirements and knowledge gaps related to planetary protection of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies.
In the context of the current and foreseen/foreseeable programmatic landscape, identify the many challenges, critical expertise as well as knowledge gaps raised by planetary protection related to i) biological contamination of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies and ii) organic contamination of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies. Propose planetary protection requirements based on scientific grounds, suggest activities to overcome the main hurdles and to fill-in knowledge gaps.
ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 3
- PPOSS Science White Book -
14/11/2018
COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium

30. COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium
PPOSS Objective 3
Develop a European engineering roadmap Based on the scientific requirements and recommendations, identify critical technologies required to best address planetary protection of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies, define their availability and readiness level in Europe, suggest a roadmap covering the next years.
14/11/2018
COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium

31. PPOSS Objective 3 ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 4
Develop an European engineering roadmap Based on the scientific requirements and recommendations, identify critical technologies required to best address planetary protection of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies, define their availability and readiness level in Europe, suggest a roadmap covering the next years.
ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 4
- European Engineering Roadmap -
14/11/2018
COSPAR Planetary Protection Collocium

32. PPOSS Objective 4
Review of the international outer solar system planetary protection regulation structure, process and categorisation, suggest improvements In the context of the findings and outcome from the project, as well as targeted consultation with stakeholder, review the planetary protection regulation process and the current planetary protection guidelines and categories related to of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies, and suggest improvements to COSPAR.

33. PPOSS Objective 4 ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 5
Review of the international outer solar system planetary protection regulation structure, process and categorisation, suggest improvements In the context of the findings and outcome from the project, as well as targeted consultation with stakeholder, review the planetary protection regulation process and the current planetary protection guidelines and categories related to of outer solar system bodies, including small solar system bodies, and suggest improvements to COSPAR.
ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 5
- Policy/Regulation Recommendation -

34. PPOSS Objective 5
Dissemination of knowledge Facilitate the dissemination of knowledge related to planetary protection as well as of the outcome of the project to a wider international audience through seminars. Develop and maintain the project website and a repository for planetary protection-related documentation.

35. ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 6
PPOSS Objective 5
Dissemination of knowledge Facilitate the dissemination of knowledge related to planetary protection as well as of the outcome of the project to a wider international audience through seminars. Develop and maintain the project website and a repository for planetary protection-related documentation.
ADRESSED THROUGH WORK PACKAGE 6
- Website, Seminars -

36. PPOSS Overview
2016
2017
2018

37. Workshop 1 – The International Planetary Protection Handbook
AGENDA
Workshop 1 – The International Planetary Protection Handbook
ESTEC, 19th September 2016

38. Agenda overview Time Presenters Lessons Learned 10.15 - 11 am
Petra Rettberg - DLR
Gerhard Kminek - ESA
Lessons learned from past missions.
Lessons learned from payload providers (questionnaire output from MOMA-DREAMS-MSL-Insight and MER).
Conclusions and recommendations.
Scope of the discussion
Which were the main PP issues associated with past missions?
What are the main issues that can be identified through interviews? Any difference between payload providers and industry input?
What are the main factors that prevent the proper implementation of PP requirements? (Initial cost estimate, lack of personnel, lack of training, timeline constraints)
Where should future efforts be focused to improve PP implementation?
Can we provide a pipeline to implement PP in space missions (Inner vs Outer Solar System)?

39. Agenda overview Time Presenters
The DO’s and DON’ts in Planetary Protection pm
Perry Stabekis - SETI
General summary of good practices and recommendations.
Scope of the discussion
What approaches worked in the past and should still be implemented?
What are the most common mistakes during implementation of PP guidelines?
How can we avoid those mistakes?
Is it possible to draft a list of necessary action items that should be taken into account during implementation of PP protocols?

40. Agenda overview Time Presenters
The International Planetary Protection Handbook pm
Susan McKenna-Lawlor - STIL
Alissa Haddaji - COSPAR
Review of the BPOCC chapter.
General review of the structure/proposed contents for the handbook
Scope of the discussion
What are the main challenges in considering organic contamination for Planetary Protection purposes?
Any missing commonality/difference between Mars and Icy Moons in the chapter?
Do we all agree on the general structure of handbook? Any missing point?