WWW . NATIONALACADEMIES SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS I S aedr 20 21 7 19 8 7 5 16 3 4 2 3 Selected ReportsAvailable fromtheSSB SSB Calendar Board andCommitteeMemberNews Summaries of CongressionalHearings ofInterest New ReleasesfromtheSSB News fromCOSPAR SSB Staff SSB StaffNews SSB Activities Workshop Announcement SSB Standing Committees SSB Membership From theChair NSIDE Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Asse Earth A Applicationsfrom Science Space: and Bodies System Solar Icy to Missions Spacecraft for Requirements Protection Planetary of Assessment T the U.K.,andfloodsinRussiaareha . ORG HIS / SSB I SSUE / V heat waveafflictingtheUnited
Two issuesofinteresttoscience One isthelong-anticipatedconfirmationofexistence as a“giantleapforscience.”Bycontrast,themonth-long the Economistnewsmagazine,whereitwascharacterized “standard model” on ofparticlephysics.Itratedacover
APRIL—JUNE 2012 the HiggsBoson,andwith ssment of NASA's Implementa ssment of ving anentirely differentreception. Charles F.Kennel, Chair, SSB States, themonthofrainin it thecompletionof are inthenewsasIwrite. tion of the Decadal Survey Survey tion oftheDecadal OLUME 23,I
11 9 SSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012 S PACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (2010) of the Board on Physics and Astronomy and the Space Studies Board (SSB). FROM THE CHAIR Why should the country, and the global community, spend so much time, talent, and money on things the people cannot see with their own two eyes? The most fundamental argument has Two issues of interest to science are in been that advances in basic science have revolutionized society the news as I write. One is the long- three times in the past. Newton’s rational mechanics in the 17th anticipated confirmation of the century led to the Enlightenment in the 18th; Maxwell and existence of the Higgs Boson, and with Faraday’s electromagnetic theory propelled the second half of the it the completion of the “standard industrial revolution in the late 19th and early 20th centuries; the model” of particle physics. It rated a quantum mechanics of the 1920s enabled the vast developments cover on the Economist news in information and communications technology that are changing magazine, where it was characterized society today. It is unpredictable, but something equally as a “giant leap for science.” By significant could emerge from the advances in physics and contrast, the month-long heat wave astronomy in the offing. afflicting the United States, the month The Secretary-General of the United Nations, among others, of rain in the U.K., and the floods in has declared that climate change is the largest problem facing Russia are having an entirely different reception. Despite humanity in the 21st century. If so, advances in climate science authoritative forecasts of more frequent extreme events by could well have a long-term impact on society comparable with NOAA, the U.K. Met Office, and the UN Environmental that of a major advance in basic science. Why then is its support Programme, the heat in the United States re-provoked the bitter not as consistent and enduring as that of physics and astronomy? public debate about the reliability of climate science and the Twenty years ago NASA ethics of climate scientists. Arguably, in 50 years time, both set out to create the Earth events will prove to have signaled profound implications for Observing System, a project Above all the Earth humanity, yet today one is lauded, and the other is reviled. comparable in scope and Since the Higgs field endows all other particles with mass, observation enterprise ambition to JWST or the careful study of its deviations from the present standard model LHC. This enterprise was needs a stable, might begin to bridge the century-old chasm between quantum manifestly important to theory and general relativity and the worlds of the very small and motivating vision like society, and it was based on the very large. As they have done in centuries past, observational those that keep as- a new conceptual synthesis, astronomy and cosmology are again providing a fundamental the first comprehensive tronomers and challenge to physics: the present standard model has no provision approach to understanding for either dark matter or dark energy. No matter how they may physicists returning to the behavior of Earth as a turn out, the results to come from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) system. Twenty years later, the same questions for will certainly affect, and likely strengthen, the case for space the SSB’s recent Earth missions to study dark matter and dark energy. decades until they get Science and Applications from No matter how different their working styles, astronomers and answered. Space: A Midterm Assessment physicists have always had to pay attention to each other, and of NASA’s Implementation of they need to do so more than ever. Physicists devoted $10 billion the Decadal Survey documented a crisis in Earth observations, to and 20 years to building the LHC, just to sort through trillions of the point where even optimistic scenarios of future capabilities numbers to find one number—the mass of the Higgs. It will also predict that the number of missions and instruments to observe turn out that space astronomers will have spent almost as much Earth from space in the next decade will fall precipitously unless and taken just as long to build the James Webb Space Telescope existing space assets remain operational well beyond what is (JWST) to study hundreds of millions of arcane objects and, oh, by anticipated. the way, maybe refine the understanding of dark matter. Why is NASA Earth science not achieving its goals? Many Physicists can easily see devoting an entire space mission to the contributing factors are documented in the report but, in the end, dark energy question, just to find tiny deviations from the the fact is that a cornerstone of NASA science, despite good expansion of the universe predicted by Einstein’s cosmological management of its resources, is neither living up to its promise nor constant; astronomers would not willingly spend resources on it if fulfilling national needs. Of the many problems facing NASA’s the search did not also enable the study of hundreds of millions of Science Mission Division, the Earth observation crisis may be the objects fascinating in their own right. Fortunately, that is the most difficult to solve. It is not only a question of adequate case. It is now more essential than ever that NASA pursue the goals set forth for JWST and the Wide-Field Infrared Space (Continued on page 3) Telescope (WFIRST) in the decadal survey New Worlds, New
WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
(Continued from page 2) SSB MEMBERSHIP funding, although that is necessary. It cannot be solved by JULY 1, 2012—JUNE 30, 2013 NASA’s standard burst of inspired technology JULY 1, 2011—JUNE 30, 2012 CHARLES F. KENNEL, CHAIR development, although that always helps. It cannot be CHARLES F. KENNEL, CHAIR Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, solved by the Earth sciences alone, although they must University of California, San Diego University of California, San Diego lead. NASA cannot do it by itself, although without NASA JOHN KLINEBERG, VICE CHAIR JOHN KLINEBERG, VICE CHAIR the enterprise fails. NASA does not set its own policy, it Space Systems/Loral (ret.) Space Systems/Loral (ret.) must take national policy direction, and it has to make MARK R. ABBOTT MARK R. ABBOTT complex and fragile arrangements with other U.S. agencies Oregon State University Oregon State University and international partners. Indeed, several recent NRC STEVEN J. BATTEL JAMES ANDERSON reports, including the decadal survey and the midterm Battel Engineering Harvard University assessment, have highlighted the need for a YVONNE C. BRILL JAMES BAGIAN comprehensive national strategy for Earth observations Aerospace Consultant University of Michigan from space to better address a plethora of problems that ELIZABETH R. CANTWELL YVONNE C. BRILL center on the misalignment of agency roles and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Aerospace Consultant responsibilities with agency budgets. ANDREW B. CHRISTENSEN ELIZABETH R. CANTWELL Above all the Earth observation enterprise needs a Dixie State College of Utah Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory stable, motivating vision like those that keep astronomers ALAN DRESSLER ANDREW B. CHRISTENSEN and physicists returning to the same questions for decades The Observatories of the Carnegie Dixie State College of Utah until they get answered. The questions for the Earth Institution ALAN DRESSLER sciences are there, and the needs are there, but they have JACK D. FELLOWS The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution been obscured by the conflicted public debate, which is University Corporation for Atmospheric Research bound to affect decision making. If the Earth system THOMAS R. GAVIN California Institute of Technology science community continues to make its case, it should HEIDI B. HAMMEL AURA HEIDI B. HAMMEL eventually prevail. The climate is changing, after all. AURA Change can be unsettling at all times, and talk about FIONA A. HARRISON California Institute of Technology FIONA A. HARRISON changes in the Earth system tends to convey a pessimism ANTHONY C. JANETOS California Institute of Technology that is at odds with NASA’s “can do” optimism. However, University of Maryland JOSEPH S. HEZIR the fundamental message is positive. Observations from JOAN JOHNSON-FREESE EOP Group, Inc. space provide knowledge obtainable in no other way, U.S. Naval War College ANTHONY C. JANETOS which is crucial to keeping our planetary environment ROBERT P. LIN University of Maryland hospitable to advanced civilization into the indefinite University of California, Berkeley JOAN JOHNSON-FREESE future. Learning how to do this is breakthrough science. If MOLLY K. MACAULEY U.S. Naval War College we do break through, our children and grandchildren will Resources for the Future, Inc. ROBERT P. LIN have time to look up at the stars and ponder the JOHN F. MUSTARD University of California, Berkeley foundations of the cosmos. Brown University MOLLY K. MACAULEY SSB STANDING COMMITTEES ROBERT T. PAPPALARDO Resources for the Future, Inc. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California JOHN F. MUSTARD Institute of Technology Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science Brown University (CAPS) JAMES A. PAWELCZYK ROBERT T. PAPPALARDO Pennsylvania State University Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Philip R. Christensen, Arizona State University (Co-Chair) MARCIA J. RIEKE Institute of Technology J. Gregory Ferry, Pennsylvania State University (Co-Chair) University of Arizona MARCIA J. RIEKE
Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics (CAA) DAVID N. SPERGEL University of Arizona (joint with the Board on Physics and Astronomy) Princeton University DAVID N. SPERGEL Paul L. Schechter, MIT (Co-Chair) WARREN M. WASHINGTON Princeton University David N. Spergel, Princeton University (Co-Chair) National Center for Atmospheric MEENAKSHI WADHWA Research Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Arizona State University Space (CESAS) CLIFFORD M. WILL CLIFFORD M. WILL Washington University Washington University Mark R. Abbott, Oregon State University (Chair) THOMAS H. ZURBUCHEN THOMAS H. ZURBUCHEN Joyce E. Penner, University of Michigan (Vice Chair) University of Michigan University of Michigan Committee on Solar and Space Physics (CSSP) LIAISON LIAISON (On hiatus during the solar and space physics decadal survey) U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO COSPAR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO COSPAR ROBERT P. LIN ROBERT P. LIN For more information, University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley go to
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science A Workshop
November 12-13, 2012
National Academies Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center Irvine, California
hosted by the Space Studies Board
This workshop will review and discuss key aspects of the most recent National Re- search Council decadal surveys in space science, identifying lessons learned and best prac- tices from the most recent surveys: solar and space physics (2012), planetary science (2011), astronomy and astrophysics (2010), and Earth science and applications from space (2007). The workshop will bring together a variety of stakeholders in the space commu- nity who are impacted by and/or are responsible for the formulation and implementation of the decadal surveys. In addition to focusing on the decadal surveys, the workshop will also afford an opportunity to discuss the recent mid-decade reviews. To accomplish its goals, the workshop will foster a dialog among the workshop attendees with a view to identifying ideas for the future evolution of the decadal survey and mid-decade review processes. An NRC-appointed planning committee is working on the structure and content of the workshop. More information on the workshop agenda and how to register is available on the workshop's web site, available at http://sites.nationalacademies.org/SSB/CurrentProjects/ SSB_070954.
PAGE 4 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
SSB ACTIVITIES THE BOARD AND ITS STANDING COMMITTEES in Washington, DC. At the meeting, the committee was updated on the status of current and future NASA Earth science programs The Space Studies Board (SSB) spring meeting was held in the and missions. The committee received presentations from repre- second quarter, April 4-5, in Washington, DC. As mentioned in the sentatives of NASA’s Earth Science Division (ESD): Michael first quarter newsletter, the first day of the meeting was a joint ses- Freilich (ESD Director), Lawrence Friedl (Director, NASA Applied sion with the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board where the Sciences Program), and Jack Kaye (ESD Associate Director for boards heard from Robert Lightfoot, NASA’s acting associate ad- Research). The committee also heard from Peter Colohan and ministrator, Mason Peck, NASA’s chief technologist, Bill Gersten- Johannes Loschnigg from the Office of Science and Technology maier, associate administrator for NASA’s Human Exploration and Policy; Byron Tapley, chair of the NASA Earth Science Subcom- Operations Mission Directorate, Gale Allen from NASA's Office of mittee (by teleconference); and Jeremy Weirich, a staff member the Chief Scientist, as well as senior staff from OSTP, OMB, and the of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. In addition, CESAS US Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) received a briefing from Robert Winokur, chair of the NOAA Sci- On April 5 the boards met individually. The SSB had discussions ence Advisory Board’s Satellite Architecture Study. During the with NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Deputy Associate meeting, CESAS discussed—among other items—the recently Administrator Chuck Gay, and SMD Division directors (or their rep- released report Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Mid- resentative) and also received updates from Mary Kicza, Assistant term Assessment of NASA’s Implementation of the Decadal Survey, Administrator for Satellite and Information Service, NOAA, and Tim available for free download at
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 5
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
SSB ACTIVITIES, CONTINUED The ad hoc Committee on the Assessment of NASA’s Earth Sci- ence Program was formed to review the alignment of the NASA STUDY COMMITTEES Earth Science Division’s program with previous NRC advice, primar- The Planetary Science Decadal Survey, Vision and Voyages for ily the 2007 decadal survey report Earth Science and Applications Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022, was released in its final from Space, and was directed to neither revisit nor alter the scien- printed form in late December 2011. All of the original print run tific priorities or mission recommendations provided in the decadal copies were exhausted in the first quarter of 2012, but copies from a survey and related NRC reports; however, the committee was in- second print are now available. The full report (plus the reports of vited to provide guidance about implementing the recommended all of the mission and technology studies conducted in support of mission portfolio in preparation for the next decadal survey. The the survey) is available at
APRIL—JUNE 2012
SSB ACTIVITIES, CONTINUED STAFF NEWS OTHER ACTIVITIES Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology The 2014 for Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) scientific assem- Policy Graduate Fellowship Program bly will be held on August 2-10 at the Lomonosov Moscow State University The Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Pol- in Russia. See page 9 of this newsletter additional COSPAR news. icy Graduate Fellowship Program within the Policy and Global Affairs Division of the National Academies is de- signed to engage its fellows in the analytical process that Interested in SSB publications? Go to
Cheryl Moy will be joining the SSB this fall as a Chris-
tine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow. Cheryl Moy received her Ph.D. in chemistry from the University of Michigan. In her graduate work, she focused on elucidating the interac- tions that drive the formation of unique materials categorized as mo- lecular gels. During her graduate SSB STAFF career, she also helped design and implement a class-project centered on students editing RODNEY N. HOWARD MICHAEL H. MOLONEY Wikipedia pages as means of improving science education Senior Program Assistant Director and the public’s access to science. She holds a B.A. from JOSEPH K. ALEXANDER LINDA WALKER Willamette University, and her experiences there led to an Senior Program Officer Senior Program Assistant interest in bridging the gap between scientists and the ARTHUR A. CHARO TANJA E. PILZAK general public. In 2011, she interned at the Office of Sci- Senior Program Officer Manager, Program Operations ence and Technology Policy. Dr. Moy is excited for the SANDRA J. GRAHAM CHRISTINA O. SHIPMAN opportunity to be a Mirzayan Fellow to learn how to con- Senior Program Officer Financial Officer nect scientific discoveries with everyone who can benefit outside of the research atmosphere—from consumers to CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN IAN W. PRYKE government to industry. She enjoys spending her free Administrative Coordinator Senior Program Officer time outdoors especially to go on a bike ride or a hike. DAVID H. SMITH CATHERINE A. GRUBER Senior Program Officer Editor From the Board on Physics and Astronomy DWAYNE A. DAY* CELESTE A. NAYLOR Don Shapero, DEPS, Senior Scholar, retired in June as Senior Program Officer Information Management Associate director of the Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA) DAVID LANG* SANDRA WILSON after 38 years at the National Academies. He took a leave Program Officer Senior Financial Assistant of absence from the NRC in 1978 to serve as the first ex- ecutive director of the Energy Research Advisory Board at ABIGAIL SHEFFER Lloyd V. Berkner Space Policy the Department of Energy, but returned in 1979 as special Associate Program Officer Interns assistant to the president of the National Academy of Sci- MICHAEL W. BARTON LEWIS GROSWALD ences. In 1982, Shapero started the BPA and, as director, JOSEPH G. O’ROURKE Research Associate played a key role in a number of NRC studies, including the DANIELLE PISKORZ AMANDA THIBAULT* last three surveys of physics and the last three surveys of Research Associate SSB Summer Intern astronomy and astrophysics. He will continue to assist the DIONNA WILLIAMS MILES LIFSON BPA as a Senior Scholar. Shapero is a member of the Program Associate * Staff of other NRC boards who are shared American Astronomical Society and the International As- TERRI BAKER† with the SSB. tronomical Union, and a Fellow of the American Associa- Senior Program Assistant †Left the Board in April. tion for the Advancement of Science and the American Physical Society.
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 7
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS News from COSPAR The 39th scientific assembly of the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) was held in Mysore, India, on July 14-22. The U.S. delega- tion was led by COSPAR Vice President Robert P. Lin and supported by SSB staff members David H. Smith and Michael H. Moloney. Also present, supporting specific recent and/or on-going SSB activities, were Mitchell Sogin (chair of the Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Solar System) and SSB member Joan Johnson-Freese. The following awards were distributed during the opening ceremony held on July 16: COSPAR Space Science Award for outstanding contributions to space science: Janet Luhmann, University of California, Berkeley, Califor- nia; COSPAR International Cooperation Medal for distinguished contributions to space science and work that has contributed significantly to the promotion of international scientific cooperation: Roger-Maurice Bonnet, International Space Science Institute, Bern, Switzerland; COSPAR William Nordberg Medal commemorating the late William Nordberg and for distinguished contributions to the application of space science in a field covered by COSPAR: Herbert Fischer, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany; COSPAR Harrie Massey Award honoring the memory of Sir Harrie Massey for outstanding contributions to the development of space re- search in which a leadership role is of particular importance: Neil Gehrels, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland; COSPAR Distinguished Service Medal for extraordinary services rendered to COSPAR over many years: Peter Willmore, University of Bir- mingham, UK; Vikram Sarabhai Medal—a joint award of COSPAR and the Indian Space Research Organization—honoring Vikram Sarabhai, one of the architects of modern India, for outstanding contributions to space research in developing countries: Rafael Navarro-Gonzalez, National Autonomous University of Mexico; Jeoujang Jaw Award—a joint award of COSPAR and the Chinese Academy of Sciences—recognizing scientists who have made distin- guished pioneering contributions to promoting space research, establishing new space science research branches and founding new ex- ploration programs: Robert P. Lin, University of California, Berkeley, California; and Yakov B. Zeldovich Medals—a joint award of COSPAR and the Russian Academy of Sciences—conferred on a young scientist from each of COSPAR’s eight scientific commissions for excellence and achievements, honoring the distinguished astrophysicist Yakov B. Zeldovich: Scientific Commission A—Jadunandan Dash, University of Southampton, UK, for original contributions to monitoring of vegetation dy- namics from satellite observations; Scientific Commission B—Bethany L. Ehlmann, California Institute of Technology, for fundamental discoveries of aqueous mineral phases on Mars which have transformed our understanding of aqueous processes on Mars and its potential for habitability; Scientific Commission C—Tatsuhiro Yokoyama, University of Kyoto, Japan, for innovative modeling and experimental studies that helped resolve several outstanding problems concerning E- and F-region coupling processes; Scientific Commission D—Jonathan P. Eastwood, Imperial College, London, UK, for outstanding research into the basic properties of colli- sionless plasmas in space which has led to a significant advancement of our understanding of magnetic reconnection and collisionless shocks; Scientific Commission E—Makoto Uemura, Hiroshima University, Japan, for fundamental research in time-domain astronomy leading to understanding of the optical and near-infrared signatures of explosive events in the universe; Scientific Commission F—Chiara La Tessa, Helmholtzzentrum fϋr Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany, in recognition of out- standing contribution to the investigation of shielding materials for space radioprotection; Scientific Commission G—Michael Lukasser, Vienna University of Technology, Austria, for outstanding progress in code development es- sential for the choice of best parameters for the space experiment JEREMI; and Scientific Commission H—Peter J. Wass, Imperial College, London, UK, in recognition of seminal work on the charging rate of accelerome- ter proof masses and the limitations on performance of fundamental physics missions that arises from cosmic ray charging. At its meeting on July 22, the COSPAR Council awarded the 2016 scientific assembly to Istanbul, Turkey. Runner-up Rome, Italy, may compete for the 2018 assembly as will Sydney, Australia. Mexico has expressed interest in bidding for the 2020 assembly. The 2014 scien- tific assembly will be held on August 2-10 at the Lomonosov Moscow State University in Russia.
Honorees from the Space Studies Board or its committees included:
Janet Luhmann, former SSB SSB member Robert P. Lin (NAS) Bethany L. Ehlmann is a member, chaired the Committee serves on the Panel on Solar and Helio- former SSB 2003 summer on PI-led Missions in the Space spheric Physics of the current solar and undergraduate intern. Sciences and the Committee on space physics survey and was a member Solar and Space Physics and was of the Committee on NASA's Suborbital on the Panel on Solar Wind- Research Capabilities, the Review of Magnetospheric Interactions for NASA Strategic Roadmaps: Science the 2003 solar and space physics Panel, and the Committee on Solar and decadal survey. Space Physics, among others.
PAGE 8 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB
Summaries are reproduced here without references, notes, figures, tables, boxes, or attachments. Copies of reports are available from the SSB office at 202-334-3477 or at
Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies
This report of the ad hoc Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Outer Solar System of the Space Studies Board (SSB) is available at
Summary NASA’s exploration of planets and satellites over the past 50 years has led to the discovery of water ice throughout the solar system and prospects for large liquid water reservoirs beneath the frozen shells of icy bodies in the outer solar system. These pu- tative subsurface oceans could provide an environment for prebiotic chemistry or a habitat for indigenous life. During the coming decades, NASA and other space agencies will send flybys, orbiters, subsurface probes, and, possibly, landers to these distant worlds in order to explore their geologic and chemical context and the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Because of their potential to harbor alien life, space agencies will select missions that target the most habitable outer solar system objects. This strategy poses formidable challenges for mission planners who must balance the opportunity for exploration with the risk of contamination by terrestrial microbes that could confuse the interpretation of data from experiments concerned with the origins of life beyond Earth or the processes of chemical evolution. To protect the integrity of mission science and maintain compliance with the man- date of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty to “pursue studies of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies . . . so as to avoid their harmful contamination,”1 NASA adheres to planetary protection guidelines that reflect the most current experimental and observational data from the planetary science and microbiology communities.2 The 2000 National Research Council (NRC) report Preventing the Forward Contamination of Europa3 recommended that space- craft missions to Europa must have their bioload reduced by such an amount that the probability of contaminating a Europan ocean with a single viable terrestrial organism at any time in the future should be less than 10–4 per mission.4 This criterion was adopted for consistency with prior recommendations by the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) of the International Council for Science for “any spacecraft intended for planetary landing or atmospheric penetration.”5 COSPAR, the de facto adjudicator of planetary protection regulations, adopted the criterion for Europa, and subsequent COSPAR-sponsored workshops extended the 10–4 criterion to other icy bodies of the outer solar system.6,7 In practice, the establishment of a valid forward-contamination-risk goal as a mission requirement implies the use of some method—either a test or analysis—to verify that the mission can achieve the stated goal. The 2000 Europa report recommended that compliance with the 10–4criterion be determined by a so-called Coleman-Sagan calculation.8,9,10 This methodology estimates the probability of forward contamination by multiplying the initial bioload on the spacecraft by a series of bioload-reduction fac- tors associated with spacecraft cleaning, exposure to the space environment, and the likelihood of encountering a habitable envi- ronment. If the risk of contamination falls below 10–4, the mission complies with COSPAR planetary protection requirements and can go forward. If the risk exceeds this threshold, mission planners must implement additional mitigation procedures to reach that goal or must reformulate the mission plans. The charge for the Committee on Planetary Protection Standards for Icy Bodies in the Outer Solar System called for it to re- visit the 2000 Europa report in light of recent advances in planetary and life sciences and examine the recommendations resulting from two recent COSPAR workshops. The committee addressed three specific tasks to assess the risk of contamination of icy bodies in the solar system. The first task concerned the possible factors that could usefully be included in a Coleman-Sagan formulation of contamination risk. The committee does not support continued reliance on the Coleman-Sagan formulation to estimate the probability of con- taminating outer solar system icy bodies. This calculation includes multiple factors of uncertain magnitude that often lack statisti- cal independence. Planetary protection decisions should not rely on the multiplication of probability factors to estimate the likeli- hood of contaminating solar system bodies with terrestrial organisms unless it can be unequivocally demonstrated that the fac- tors are completely independent and their values and statistical variation are known. The second task given to the committee concerned the range of values that can be estimated for the terms appearing in the Cole-
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 9
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
(Continued from page 9) uncertain magnitude. At the same time, the framework provides a man-Sagan equation based on current knowledge, as well as an platform for incorporating new observational data from planetary assessment of conservative values for other specific factors that exploration missions and the latest information about microbial might be provided to the implementers of missions targeting indi- physiology and metabolism, particularly for psychrophilic (i.e., cold vidual bodies or classes of objects. The committee replaces the -loving microbes) and psychrotolerant microorganisms. Coleman-Sagan formulation with a series of binary (i.e., yes/no) The committee’s third task concerned the identification of scien- decisions that consider one factor at a time to determine the nec- tific investigations that could reduce the uncertainty in the above essary level of planetary protection. The committee proposes the estimates and assessments, as well as technology developments use of a decision-point framework that allows mission planners to that would facilitate implementation of planetary protection re- address seven hierarchically organized, independent decision quirements and/or reduce the overall probability of contamination. points that reflect the geologic and environmental conditions on The committee recognizes the requirement to further improve the target body in the context of the metabolic and physiological knowledge about many of the parameters embodied within the diversity of terrestrial microorganisms. These decision points in- decision framework. Areas of particular concern for which the clude the following: committee recommends research include the following: 1. Liquid water—Do current data indicate that the destination • Determination of the time period of heating to tempera- lacks liquid water essential for terrestrial life? tures between 40°C and 80°C required to inactivate spores from 2. Key elements—Do current data indicate that the destination psychrophilic and psychrotolerant bacteria isolated from high- lacks any of the key elements (i.e., carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, latitude soil and cryopeg samples, as well as from psychrotolerant phosphorus, sulfur, potassium, magnesium, calcium, oxygen, and microorganisms isolated from temperate soils, spacecraft assem- iron) required for terrestrial life? bly sites, and the spacecraft itself. 3. Physical conditions—Do current data indicate that the physical • Studies to better understand the environmental conditions properties of the target body are incompatible with known ex- that initiate spore formation and spore germination in psychro- treme conditions for terrestrial life? philic and psychrotolerant bacteria so that these conditions/ 4. Chemical energy—Do current data indicate that the environ- requirements can be compared with the characteristics of target ment lacks an accessible source of chemical energy? icy bodies. 5. Contacting habitable environments—Do current data indicate • Searches to discover unknown types of psychrophilic spore- that the probability of the spacecraft contacting a habitable envi- formers and to assess if any of them have tolerances different from ronment within 1,000 years is less than 10–4? those of known types. 6. Complex nutrients—Do current data indicate that the lack of • Characterization of the protected microenvironments within complex and heterogeneous organic nutrients in aqueous environ- spacecraft and assessment of their microbial ecology. ments will prevent the survival of irradiated and desiccated mi- • Determination of the extent to which biofilms might in- crobes? crease microbial resistance to heat treatment and other environ- 7. Minimal planetary protection—Do current data indicate that mental extremes encountered on journeys to icy bodies. heat treatment of the spacecraft at 60°C for 5 hours will eliminate • Determination of the concentrations of key elements or all physiological groups that can propagate on the target body? compounds containing biologically important elements on icy bod- Positive evaluations for any of these criteria would release a mis- ies in the outer solar system through observational technologies sion from further mitigation activities, although all missions to and constraints placed on the range of trace element availability habitable and non-habitable environments should still follow rou- through theoretical modeling and laboratory analog studies. tine cleaning procedures and microbial bioload monitoring. If a • Understanding of global chemical cycles within icy bodies mission fails to receive a positive evaluation for at least one of and the geologic processes occurring on these bodies that pro- these decision points, the entire spacecraft must be subjected to a mote or inhibit surface-subsurface exchange of material. terminal dry-heat bioload reduction process (heating at tempera- • Development of technologies that can directly detect and tures >110°C for 30 hours) to meet planetary protection guidelines. enumerate viable microorganisms on spacecraft surfaces. Irrespective of whether a mission satisfies one of the seven deci- sion points, the committee recommends the use of molecular- based methods to inventory bioloads, including both living and dead taxa, for spacecraft that might contact a habitable environ- ment. Given current knowledge of icy bodies, three bodies present special concerns for planetary protection: Europa, Jupiter’s third largest satellite; Enceladus, a medium-size satellite of Saturn; and Triton, Neptune’s largest satellite. Missions to other icy bodies present minimal concern for planetary protection. The advantage of the decision framework over the Coleman- Sagan approach lies in its simplicity and in its abandoning of the multiplication of non-independent bioload reduction factors of NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB, CONTINUED ON PAGE 12 PAGE 10 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
NEW RELEASES FROM THE SSB, CONTINUED Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey This report of the ad hoc Committee on the Assessment of NASA's Earth Science Program of the Space Studies Board (SSB) is available at
Summary Understanding the complex, changing planet on which we live, how it supports life, and how human activities affect its ability to do so in the future is one of the greatest intellectual challenges facing humanity. It is also one of the most important challenges for society as it seeks to achieve prosperity, health, and sustainability.1 The 2007 National Research Council report Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond (referred to in this report as the “2007 decadal survey” or “2007 survey”) called for a renewal of the national commit- ment to a program of Earth observations in which attention to securing practical benefits for humankind plays an equal role with the quest to acquire new knowledge about the Earth system.2 The decadal survey recommended a balanced interdisciplinary pro- gram that would observe the atmosphere, oceans, terrestrial biosphere, and solid Earth and the interactions between these Earth system components to advance understanding of how the system functions for the benefit of both science and society. NASA responded positively to the decadal survey and its recommendations and began implementing most of them immedi- ately after the survey’s release. Although its budgets have never risen to the levels assumed in the survey, NASA’s Earth Science Division (ESD) has made major investments toward the missions recommended by the survey and has realized important techno- logical and scientific progress as a result. Several of the survey missions have made significant advances, and operations and appli- cations end users are better integrated into the mission teams. The new Earth Venture competitive solicitation program has initi- ated five airborne missions and is currently reviewing proposals submitted in response to an orbital stand-alone mission solicita- tion. At the same time, the Earth sciences have advanced significantly because of existing observational capabilities and the fruit of past investments, along with advances in data and information systems, computer science, and enabling technologies. Three missions already in development prior to the decadal survey—the Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM), Aquarius, and the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP)3—have since been successfully launched and promise significant benefits to re- search and applications. The potential for the science community to make use of space-based data for research and applications has never been greater. Finding: NASA responded favorably and aggressively to the 2007 decadal survey, embracing its overall recommendations for Earth observations, missions, technology investments, and priorities for the underlying science. As a consequence, the sci- ence and applications communities have made significant progress over the past 5 years. However, the Committee on Assessment of NASA’s Earth Science Program found that, for several reasons, the survey vision is being realized at a far slower pace than was recommended. Although NASA accepted and began implementing the survey’s rec- ommendations, the required budget assumed by the survey was not achieved, greatly slowing implementation of the recom- mended program. Launch failures, delays, changes in scope, and growth in cost estimates have further hampered the program. In addition, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has significantly reduced the scope of the nation’s future operational environmental satellite series, omitting observational capabilities assumed by the decadal survey to be part of NOAA’s future capability and failing to implement the three new missions recommended for NOAA implementation by the survey (the Operational GPS Radio Occultation Mission, the Extended Ocean Vector Winds Mission, and the NOAA portion of CLAR- REO). Thus, despite recent and notable successes, such as the launches of OSTM, Aquarius, and Suomi NPP, the nation’s Earth ob- serving capability from space is beginning to wane as older missions fail and are not replaced with sufficient cadence to prevent an overall net decline. Using agency estimates for the anticipated remaining lifetime of in-orbit missions and counting new missions formally approved in their enacted budgets, the committee found that the resulting number of NASA and NOAA Earth observing instruments in space by 2020 could be as little as 25 percent of the current number (Figure S.1).4 This precipitous decline in the quantity of Earth science and applications observations from space undertaken by the United States reinforces the conclusion in the 2007 decadal survey and its predecessor, the 2005 interim report, which declared that the U.S. system of environmental satel- lites is at risk of collapse.5 The committee found that a rapid decline in capability is now beginning and that the needs for both investment and careful stewardship of the U.S. Earth observations enterprise are more certain and more urgent now than they were 5 years ago. VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 11
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
Finding: The nation’s Earth observing system is beginning a establish and manage mission costs. rapid decline in capability as long-running missions end and Recommendation: key new missions are delayed, lost, or canceled. • NASA’s Earth Science Division (ESD) should implement its The projected loss of observing capability could have significant missions via a cost-constrained approach, requiring that adverse consequences for science and society. The loss of observa- cost partially or fully constrain the scope of each mission tions of key Earth system components and processes will weaken such that realistic science and applications objectives can the ability to understand and forecast changes arising from interac- be accomplished within a reasonable and achievable fu- tions and feedbacks within the Earth system and limit the data and ture budget scenario. information available to users and decision makers. Consequences Further, recognizing that survey-derived cost estimates are by are likely to include slowing or even reversal of the steady gains in necessity very approximate and that subsequent, more de- weather forecast accuracy over many years and degradation of the tailed analyses may determine that all of the desired science ability to assess and respond to natural hazards and to measure and objectives of a particular mission cannot be achieved at the understand changes in Earth’s climate and life support systems. estimated cost, The decrease in capability by 2020 will also have far-reaching con- • sequences for the vigor and breadth of the nation’s space- NASA’s ESD should interpret the 2007 decadal survey’s observing industrial and academic base, endangering the pipeline estimates of mission costs as an expression of the relative of Earth science and aerospace engineering students and the level of investment that the survey’s authoring committee health of the future workforce. believed appropriate to advance the intended science and should apportion funds accordingly, even if all desired CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION AND OPPORTUNITIES science objectives for the mission might not be achieved. TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT WITH THE DECADAL SURVEY To coordinate decisions regarding mission technical capabili- Although there have been a number of successes, NASA’s Earth ties, cost, and schedule in the context of overarching Earth science program has suffered multiple setbacks and other external system science and applications objectives, the committee pressures that are, in many cases, beyond the control of program also recommends that management. Foremost among these is a budget profile that is not • sufficient to execute the 2007 decadal survey’s recommended pro- NASA’s ESD should establish a cross-mission Earth sys- gram. In addition, some of the survey-recommended missions have tem science and engineering team to advise NASA on exe- proved more challenging than anticipated, and others envisioned cution of the broad suite of decadal survey missions within synergies that are not readily achieved via the suggested imple- the interdisciplinary context advocated by the 2007 de- mentation. The ESD budget has been further strained as a result of cadal survey. The advisory team would assist NASA in co- mandates from Congress (e.g., the addition of the approximately ordinating decisions regarding mission technical capabili- ties, cost, and schedule in the context of overarching $150 million TIRS [Thermal Infrared Sensor] to the Landsat Data 7,8 Continuity Mission) and the interjection of administration priorities Earth system science and applications objectives. (e.g., the Climate Continuity missions6) without the commensurate The cost of executing survey-recommended missions has in- required funding. creased, in part because of the lack of availability of a medium-class Finding: Funding for NASA’s Earth science program has not launch vehicle. To control costs and to optimize the use of scarce been restored to the $2 billion per year (in fiscal year [FY] 2006 fiscal resources, the 2007 decadal survey recommended mostly dollars) level needed to execute the 2007 decadal survey’s rec- small- and medium-class missions that could utilize relatively low- ommended program. Congress’s failure to restore the Earth cost small- or medium-class launch vehicles (e.g., Pegasus, Taurus, science budget to a $2 billion level is a principal reason for and Delta II). However, the Taurus launch vehicle has failed in its NASA’s inability to realize the mission launch cadence recom- past two launches, and the Delta II is being phased out as the com- mended by the survey. mercial sector focuses on heavier-lift launch vehicles, which are substantially more expensive to procure. Use of such heavy-lift The committee concluded that in the near term, budgets for launch vehicles is not generally cost-effective for Earth science mis- NASA’s Earth science program will remain incommensurate with sions; indeed, the excess capability and high cost of these vehicles programmatic needs. However, even as NASA strives to “do more encourage designers to grow their payloads to better match the with less,” it is confronted with challenges, including limited access launcher’s capabilities, which encourages growth in scope and cost. to affordable medium-class launch vehicles—the mainstay of Earth The lack of a reliable and low-cost medium-capability launch vehi- observation programs—and significant growth in the cost to de- cle thus directly threatens programmatic robustness. The commit- velop instruments and spacecraft, a consequence, in part, of how tee offers the following finding and recommendation concerning NASA manages its space missions. These challenges (discussed the cost and availability of medium-class launch vehicles (see the further in Chapter 3) have hindered implementation of the envi- section “Access to Space” in Chapter 3): sioned balanced Earth system science program. With respect to cost growth, the committee found that decadal survey missions Finding: Lack of reliable, affordable, and predictable access to have thus far not been managed with sufficient consideration of space has become a key impediment to implementing NASA’s the scope and cost outlined in the 2007 decadal survey in either an Earth science program. Furthermore, the lack of a medium- absolute or a relative sense. Chapter 4 offers recommendations to class launch vehicle threatens programmatic robustness.
PAGE 12 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
Recommendation: NASA should seek to ensure the avail- international partnerships. Alternative platforms such as balloons ability of a highly reliable, affordable medium-class launch and aircraft (piloted and unpiloted), hosted payloads, small satel- capability. lites, the International Space Station, and flight formations (for Another impediment to effective and efficient implementation example, the Afternoon Constellation, or “A-Train”) provide NASA of the 2007 decadal survey is the lack of a national strategy for es- with a diverse portfolio of options for exploring different and, tablishment and management of Earth observations from space. where appropriate, less costly ways of conducting Earth observa- This problem was recognized in the decadal survey report, which tions and measurements (see the section “Alternative Platforms stated (as quoted in this midterm assessment report), and Flight Formations” in Chapter 4). The committee is concerned that the nation’s institutions in- Finding: Alternative platforms and flight formations offer pro- volved in civil Earth science and applications from space grammatic flexibility. In some cases, they may be employed to (including NASA, NOAA, and USGS) are not adequately prepared lower the cost of meeting science objectives and/or maturing to meet society’s rapidly evolving Earth information needs. Those remote sensing and in situ observing technologies. institutions have responsibilities that are in many cases mis- matched with their authorities and resources: institutional man- Large uncertainties are typical when attempting to factor inter- dates are inconsistent with agency charters, budgets are not well national partner missions into long-term plans for U.S. Earth obser- matched to emerging needs, and shared responsibilities are sup- vation missions. Nevertheless, the committee found that ESD has ported inconsistently by mechanisms for cooperation. These are made admirable efforts in securing such partnerships (see the sec- issues whose solutions will require action at high levels of the tion “International Partnerships” in Chapter 4). federal government.9 Finding: NASA has made considerable efforts to secure inter- Such a strategy is perhaps even more important in an era of se- national partnerships to meet its science goals and operational vere fiscal constraint. Not only is such a strategy important for opti- requirements. mizing NASA’s and the nation’s resources dedicated to Earth sys- tem science, but also it is critical to meeting national needs for the STATUS OF PROGRAM ELEMENTS IN NASA’S EARTH results of Earth system science, including the understanding of cli- SCIENCE PROGRAM mate change and land use. The decadal survey recommended that In its assessment of NASA’s Earth science program, the commit- “the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in collaboration with tee examined the major individual programmatic elements within the relevant agencies and in consultation with the scientific com- NASA’s ESD and also considered the overall program’s effective- munity, should develop and implement a plan for achieving and ness in realizing the objectives of the 2007 decadal survey.14 In par- sustaining global Earth observations. This plan should recognize the ticular, the committee reviewed the following program elements complexity of differing agency roles, responsibilities, and capabili- and also commented on NASA’s Climate Continuity missions. The ties as well as the lessons from the implementation of the Landsat, program elements described in this summary are elaborated on in 10,11 EOS, and NPOESS programs.” Chapter 2, where they are listed in the same order as they are here: Despite this and other subsequent calls from the community for 12 this national strategy, only a preliminary plan has been outlined. A • Extended missions—missions whose operations have been more complete plan for achieving and sustaining global Earth ob- extended beyond their nominal lifetime; servations remains to be presented or funded. However, the re- • 13 Missions in the pre-decadal survey queue—missions that the cently released NASA Climate-Centric Architecture plan includes a decadal survey assumed would be launched as precursors to the set of Climate Continuity missions, tacitly recognizing for the first decadal survey missions; time NASA’s role in sustained observations associated with climate • Decadal survey missions—new missions recommended by (see the section “Lack of a National Strategy for Establishment and the 2007 decadal survey; Management of Earth Observations from Space” in Chapter 3). • Climate Continuity missions; Finding: The 2007 decadal survey’s recommendation that the • Earth Venture missions—a class of smaller missions recom- Office of Science and Technology Policy develop an inter- mended by the decadal survey; agency framework for a sustained global Earth observing sys- • Applied Sciences Program; tem has not been implemented. The committee concluded • Suborbital (Earth Science) Program; that the lack of such an implementable and funded strategy • Technology development; and has become a key, but not the sole, impediment to sustaining • Research and analysis. Earth science and applications from space. Extended Missions Chapter 4 discusses a number of items that should be consid- ered in the formulation of such a national strategy. Extended missions (missions that operate and provide data be- In addition to cost control measures, the committee considered yond their originally planned and funded mission lifetimes) con- other ways for ESD to maximize the value of its limited resources. tinue to provide a wealth of observations and measurements of These include the possible augmentation of the Earth Venture-class benefit to society and to the Earth science community. Data from program discussed below, and use of alternative and/or synergistic extended missions are critical to the operations of users such as platforms or novel flight architectures (including suborbital plat- NOAA’s National Weather Service; they also provide information of forms as previously mentioned), as well as seeking value-added fundamental importance to advance Earth science research. Over-
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 13
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS all, the committee strongly supports the process of the NASA Finding: The Earth Venture-class program is being well imple- Earth Science Senior Review that evaluates these missions and mented by NASA and is a crucial component of fulfilling the makes recommendations concerning their funding and continua- 2007 decadal survey’s objectives. tion. Recommendation: Consistent with available budgets and a Missions in the Pre-Decadal Survey Queue balanced Earth observation program from space based on The committee supports NASA’s efforts to fly out its pre- the 2007 decadal survey recommendations, NASA should decadal survey mission queue, also referred to as “foundational” consider increasing the frequency of Earth Venture stand- missions. Unfortunately, delays, changes in scope, and launch fail- alone/space-based missions. ures15 have hindered progress in implementing the pre-decadal survey mission queue. Applied Sciences Program Decadal Survey Missions The Earth science and applications from space decadal survey establishes a vision acknowledging the dual importance of basic Implementation of the recommended decadal survey mission science and applications for societal benefits. With limited re- queue is proceeding at a pace that is slower than originally envi- sources,18 the Applied Sciences Program (ASP) within ESD has sioned in the survey. Only two of the four Phase 1 missions recom- built a coherent program that is facilitating the use of remote sens- mended for implementation by 2013—SMAP and ICESat-2—have ing observations for societal benefits, mostly through collabora- entered their implementation phase, while two other missions— tions with other federal agencies. Other activities include projects DESDynI and CLARREO—remain in pre-Phase A formulation and to encourage experts in the applications community to participate will likely face significant delays as a result of budget constraints. in specific mission definition teams and workshops. The engage- NOAA, facing its own budget constraints, has requested that ment of end users throughout the entire mission life cycle is neces- NASA assume responsibility for implementing the sea-surface vec- sary to ensure that user needs are well understood; ASP appears to tor winds mission XOVWM (see Table S.1). be following this model. ASP efforts appear to be aligned with the Climate Continuity Missions spirit and intent of the 2007 decadal survey. To balance executive branch and congressional priorities with Finding: Aligned with the intent of the 2007 decadal survey, the community guidance set forth in the decadal survey, the NASA NASA’s Applied Sciences Program has begun to engage ap- Earth science program issued the report Responding to the Chal- plied researchers and governmental (federal and state) opera- lenge of Climate and Environmental Change: NASA’s Plan for a Cli- tional users on some decadal survey mission science definition mate-Centric Architecture for Earth Observations and Applications and applications teams and to conduct research to better un- from Space,16 which convolves decadal survey and administration derstand the value of these applications. priorities to take advantage of new funds made available by the executive branch to accelerate its priorities. Although the commit- Suborbital Program tee was encouraged by ESD’s incorporation of the priorities of the NASA’s suborbital program was in decline for almost a decade, decadal survey into its 2010 report, the committee is concerned but following the release of the decadal survey in 2007, it has made that in a static or shrinking budget environment there is tension a significant rebound with almost a doubling of financial support between the need to continue successful Earth science measure- for its airborne program. Total flight hours have increased by a ments and the need for timely implementation of decadal survey factor of 2.5, and flight hours associated with survey missions have missions. This problem is further compounded by the lack of an doubled from FY2006 to FY2011. Suborbital platforms serve many interagency framework for a sustained global Earth observing sys- purposes, including serving as technology testbeds, enabling in- tem. strument flight test and algorithm development before launch, Earth Venture Missions providing data complementary to spaceborne observations, pro- viding for calibration of instruments and algorithm validation NASA has moved expeditiously to implement the Earth Ven- measurements post-launch in support of data product generation, ture-class program, a new mission class recommended by the de- 17 and directly contributing to local and regional scientific process cadal survey. NASA has released two solicitations for the Earth studies. In addition, NASA Earth observing missions from the Air- Venture program, one targeted toward suborbital investigations borne Science Program support “gap filler” missions, such as Op- and one for a stand-alone mission that involves relatively simple, eration Ice Bridge, which acquire observations between satellite small instruments, spacecraft, and launch vehicles. As of Decem- missions. The committee’s review led to the following finding: ber 2011, a draft solicitation had also been released for the first Earth Venture Instruments, targeting principal investigator (PI)-led Finding: The suborbital program, and in particular the Air- instrument development. Currently, NASA plans to release Earth borne Science Program, is highly synergistic with upcoming Venture stand-alone solicitations every 4 years, suborbital solicita- Earth science satellite missions and is being well imple- tions every 4 years, and instrument of opportunity solicitations mented. NASA has fulfilled the recommendation of the de- every 15-18 months. Earth Venture standalone (space-based) mis- cadal survey to enhance the program. sions further offer an important opportunity to increase the launch Technology Development frequency of Earth science missions, and thus the committee of- fers the following finding and recommendation. Within NASA ESD is the NASA Earth Science Technology Of-
PAGE 14 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012 fice (ESTO), which is responsible for promoting the development of planned polar and geostationary programs were assumed by the technology required to make the decadal survey missions flight 2007 survey’s committee to be an integral part of the baseline capa- ready. ESTO has funded more than 70 new, competitively selected bilities as it developed its integrated strategy. Two of the survey’s projects that support each of the decadal survey missions to vary- recommended 17 missions (the Operational GPS Radio Occultation ing degrees. Furthermore, the recent ESTO solicitation for ad- Mission and the Extended Ocean Vector Winds Mission) and part of vanced information system technologies was partnered with, and a third (CLARREO) were directed for implementation by NOAA, but partially funded by, ESD’s Applied Sciences Program to help ensure none has been implemented. This committee offers the following the transition into operations of technologically matured informa- finding on NOAA’s implementation of recommendations to the tion systems through applied science demonstrations and pathfind- agency from the 2007 decadal survey: ers. Based on its review, the committee found as follows: Finding: NOAA’s capability to implement the assumed baseline Finding: ESTO has organized its proposal solicitations around and the recommended program of the 2007 decadal survey has the 2007 decadal survey and is investing to advance techno- been greatly diminished by budget shortfalls; cost overruns and logical readiness across the survey mission queue. delays, especially those associated with the NPOESS program prior to its restructuring in 2010 to become the Joint Polar Satel- Research and Analysis lite System (JPSS); and by sensor descopes and sensor elimina- According to NASA, research and analysis (R&A) is “the core of tions on both NPOESS and GOES-R.21 the [Earth Science] research program and funds the analysis and These descopes impacted numerous ESD science communities. The interpretation of data from NASA’s satellites, as well as a full range committee notes that in an era of budget austerity, NASA’s ESD has of underlying scientific activity needed to establish a rigorous base very limited capabilities to mitigate the effect of these shortfalls. for the satellite data and their use in computational models (for both assimilation and forecasting). The complexity of the Earth LOOKING AHEAD: BEYOND 2020 system, in which spatial and temporal variability exists on a range In preparation for the next decadal survey, the committee offers of scales, requires an organized approach for addressing complex, in Chapter 5 a summary of “lessons learned” that are derived from interdisciplinary problems, taking care to recognize the objective of its evaluation of implementation of the current decadal survey pro- integrating science across the programmatic elements towards a grams. In particular, regardless of how future NASA Earth science comprehensive understanding of the Earth system.”19 Recognizing programs evolve, the committee concluded that: the critical importance of R&A, the decadal survey made the fol- 1. Maintaining a long-term vision with a fixed and predictable lowing recommendation to NASA: “NASA should increase support mission queue is essential to building a consensus in a diverse Earth for its research and analysis (R&A) program to a level commensu- science community that prior to the 2007 decadal survey had not rate with its ongoing and planned missions. Further, in light of the come to a consensus on research priorities spanning conventional need for a healthy R&A program that is not mission-specific, as well disciplinary boundaries. The strength of the decadal survey and its as the need for mission-specific R&A, NASA’s space-based missions value to agencies and decision makers are, in fact, the consensus should have adequate R&A lines within each mission budget as well priorities established by the survey’s outreach and deliberative proc- as mission-specific operations and data analysis. These R&A lines esses. Without community “buy-in” to the survey, a return to an ad should be protected within the missions and not used simply as 20 hoc decision process that is less informed and less efficient in its allo- mission reserves to cover cost growth on the hardware side.” cation of resources is the default to be expected. Through the current R&A program there have been advances in 2. Finding the balance between prioritizing science objectives modeling, analysis, and data assimilation, yet much research is still and creating a mission queue that is viable will be one of the great needed to understand the processes in the Earth system and to challenges for the Earth science community over the coming dec- fully assimilate Earth observations in Earth system models, thereby ades. Too much focus on either risks the long-term sustainability creating a consistent and integrated picture of Earth. Indeed, the and value of NASA’s Earth science program. committee emphasizes that a robust R&A program is a necessary 3. The community will need to give more thought to balancing condition to achieve the objectives outlined in the 2007 survey. costs with science objectives and priorities. More explicit decision Despite progress made in R&A investments, the challenges facing rules for different budget contingencies might also prove helpful for NASA’s entire Earth science program mean that protecting the program managers. nation’s investments in R&A is as important moving forward as in 4. Finally, the community will have to look at different ways to the past. construct a healthy and robust mission portfolio—for example, Finding: NASA has maintained a healthy investment in R&A through partnerships and alternative platforms in addition to indi- activities and has protected the budgets of both mission- vidual spacecraft and suborbital missions. Preparatory work to iden- specific and non-mission-specific R&A programs against possi- tify new technologies and readiness levels could be done ahead of ble reallocation to cover cost growth in mission hardware. any formal review and indeed could serve as an input to such a re- view. THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION The committee’s assessment of NASA’s Earth science program could not be accomplished without also reviewing the state of NOAA’s missions and Earth science program. NOAA’s current and
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 15
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
SUMMARIES OF they need to update the method in which they calculate MPL, but that extending indemnification is necessary for global competitive- CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS OF INTEREST ness. Capt. Lopez-Alegria from CSF stated that if the companies U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space and Science are not globally competitive, they will have to exit the market, re- quiring the federal government to absorb the full cost of maintain- Risks, Opportunities, and Oversight ing the defense launch industrial base. When Sen. Nelson asked of Commercial Space Melroy if the Administrative Procedures Act was hampering the June 20, 2012 FAA’s ability to plan future safety regulations for spaceflight pas- sengers, Melroy replied that protecting humans in space is a major Attended and summarized by Michael Barton, SSB Intern undertaking, and the FAA needs to have specific discussions with Witnesses: Mr. William H. Gerstenmaier, NASA Associate Administrator, industry on how to avoid risks without stifling innovation. Human Exploration and Operations; Col. Pamela A. Melroy USAF (ret.), FAA There was some discussion of the need to reform export con- Senior Technical Advisor, Office of Commercial Space Transportation; Dr. trol law, not only ITAR but also INKSNA, which bans U.S. govern- Gerald L. Dillingham, GAO Director of Civil Aviation Issues; Mr. Michael N. ment payments and barters to Russia. Congress amended INKSNA Gold, Bigelow Aerospace, LLC, Director, D.C. Operations and Business to exempt Soyuz flights to ISS until 2016, but Sen. Boozman Growth; Capt. Michael Lopez-Alegria USN (ret.), President of the Commer- wanted to know if ISS needs extension past 2016. Melroy and Ger- cial Spaceflight Federation. stenmaier agreed that NASA will require exceptions to INKSNA in NASA is in a state of change between the Shuttle era and the order to receive the engineering and research support from Russia new commercial low Earth orbit (LEO) operations and NASA be- that it needs to run the ISS past 2016, with or without the Soyuz. yond Earth orbit (BEO) operations. As Sen. Bill Nelson, subcom- The commercial companies need certainty, and by not solving this mittee chairman, said, “It’s an important time to get it right.” The issue, Congress is creating uncertainty. subcommittee called the hearing to examine the commercial Sen. Hutchinson took a broader view, noting that despite the space industry, its role in the nation’s space program, and the pro- subcommittee’s efforts over three administrations, the U.S. never gress it has made so far toward providing crew and cargo transpor- gave NASA the support it needed to plan ahead to avoid the gap in tation services to the International Space Station (ISS). As Ger- manned spaceflight capabilities that will cost over $1 billion in stenmaier said, NASA’s prior investments into LEO systems and launch seats paid to Russia. Sen. Hutchinson is concerned about tools have created an environment where NASA no longer needs another gap developing after ISS operations cease in 2020: NASA to work hands-on with LEO contractors and can instead focus on must move forward with both ISS support and BEO developments, ISS utilization and BEO activities. NASA believes an increase in ISS not transfer money directly from the heavy-lift program to com- utilization will expose the benefits of space-based research for mercial crew and cargo like it did in FY2012. We must stop short- terrestrial applications, which will create a market for commercial changing the future to fund the present. Gerstenmaier stated that space companies, but only if commercial companies can provide NASA will find a LEO/BEO balance and mentioned the recent pro- regular, low-risk, low-cost access to ISS. Gold of Bigelow Aero- gress made on the Space Launch System and Orion capsule. With space agreed that a business case can be made featuring micro- Congress’s help in funding, NASA intends to deliver both commer- gravity R&D, but only if reasonable costs for crew transport can be cial crew and cargo and the next generation of BEO systems in a maintained. Right now, two vaccines, one for salmonella and one timely manner. for MRSA, both developed from space-based research, are in FDA Archived webcast and statements are available at trials. Viruses and bacteria mutate in a unique form in space, and
PAGE 16 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
SUMMARIES OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS OF INTEREST, ming request to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees CONTINUED of $36M to protect NWS core mission functions and prevent fur- U.S. House of Representatives loughs. Committee on Appropriations Also of note: National Weather Service former chief, Jack Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, Hayes, retired suddenly on May 25, 2012 in light of these findings. and Related Agencies There was no mention of him at this hearing and it does not ap- pear he was connected directly. Hearing on Mismanagement of Appropriated Funds Result from Hearing—An upcoming vote limited the time of within the National Weather Service the hearing, so the Committee prepared 65 questions to which they expect fully answered written responses by 5:30PM Monday June 21, 2012 June 25. The Committee will decide on reprogramming after ana- Attended and Summarized by by Michael Barton, SSB Intern lyzing and discussing these responses. In Attendance: Frank R. Wolf, R-VA, Chairman; John Abney Culberson, R- Summary of Opening Statements TX; Jo Bonner, R-AL; Steve Austria, R-OH; Tom Graves, R-GA; Chaka Fat- Rep. Wolf started the hearing by discussing the basic facts of tah, D-PA, Ranking Member; Norman D. Dicks, D-WA, Ranking Member of Committee on Appropriations; Michael M. Honda, D-CA the incident and the investigation noted in the summary above. He Witness Panel: Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Undersecretary of Commerce for said that in the next round of investigation, the Inspector General Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator; Dr. Kathryn D. Sullivan, will be involved. He then discussed the reprogramming request Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation & Predic- (technically this is the driver of the hearing) for $36M, noting that tion / Deputy Administrator and Acting Chief Scientist $30M will be taken from NWS programs with non-NWS NOAA programs supplying the remainder. Wolf expressed his disappoint- On November 29, 2011, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ment that the problem in funding was not brought to the Commit- Administration (NOAA) Administrator was informed of allegations tee. NWS funding has always been one of the highest priorities to concerning financial mismanagement within the National Weather the Committee, and in fact, both the FY12 budget and the FY13 Service (NWS) involving a handful of civil servants during FY10 and CJS budget bill passed by the House include funding over the level FY11. The Administrator took immediate actions including inform- of the President’s budget request. This Committee would gladly ing the Deputy Secretary of Commerce, placing a NWS employee have worked with NWS on reprogramming if they had asked, as on indefinite administrative leave, setting the NOAA Fisheries would have the Committee in FY10 and FY11 led by Mr. Mollohan. Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to act as NWS CFO, informing the In fact, the language in the CJS bill allows for and gives instructions Appropriations Committees of the administrative leave and con- for reprogramming of funds, but the NWS violated this. cerns about the FY12 budget, and beginning an internal investiga- Fattah agreed that not following the law was a problem and tion. The investigative team investigated from December 2011 to that these employees were in the wrong, but that the actions April 2012 and presented findings and recommendations on May seemed to be of good intent in that they addressed the “structural 11, 2012. The team found no evidence of actions that put life or deficit.” He applauded the Administrator’s actions in the handling property at risk or jeopardized the delivery of timely and reliable of the matter. weather forecasts and warnings. The team did find that NWS em- Administrator Lubchenco stressed that there were only a few ployees engaged in reprogramming NWS funds without Congres- individuals engaged in misconduct and that the lifesaving goals of sional notification during FY10 and FY11, which is a violation of the the NWS were not harmed. She went over details that are included Appropriations Law for those years, and possibly the Anti- in the summary above. With regard to reprogramming, she Deficiency Act. There was no evidence that these employees com- stressed that NWS was not operating in the red, but there was a mitted fraud or acted in the interest of personal financial gain. wrong amount of money in multiple accounts. She stated that Rather, the employees moved money across line items within NOAA is currently contracting an independent review to investi- NWS as a necessary action, in their view, to protect operations gate further what took place and to look at possible violations be- from a “structural deficit.” The investigation did not find any evi- fore FY10. Regarding the structural deficit, Lubchenco stated that dence that money was moved out of the NWS. The team noted NWS has been living with an unmaintainable budget and that in that the employees used complex, clever, undetectable financial the future the agency will need more flexibility that allows for evo- mechanisms to conduct the unauthorized reprogramming, and lution of services while still maintaining safety. there was no external signs to indicate that there was any prob- Administrator Lubchenco anticipated three questions from the lem. The only indications were internal complaints that were mis- Committee: handled and belatedly addressed. 1. How much money was moved? The investigation was not The Administrator acknowledges that these actions were prepared to answer this conclusively, which is why the independ- wrong, but she is engaged in implementing a corrective action ent review was contracted. plan involving 25 corrective actions that have been ordered to 2. What was the motive in moving the funds? It appears the date, including new training to management on the appropriations motive of the employees was to protect warning and forecast op- allocation process and the handling of complaints. After an analy- erations. sis of misallocated funds, she has also issued a FY12 reprogram- 3. Why did NOAA/NWS not ask for reprogramming of funds?
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 17
SPACE STUDIES BOARD NEWS
(Continued from page 17) this “structural deficit.” The Administrator replied that there is no The Administrator was unaware of any insufficient funding levels evidence of insufficient funding to NWS overall, but there are un- until the details of this investigation were reported to her. Repro- derfunded programs. If the NOAA administration had known gramming is now in place. Money was pulled out of research, about the issue, they could have fixed it. She also referenced a planned improvements, and spare parts replacement because NAS study examining the future of the NWS that will help her these were the types of cuts that could be implemented so late in move forward. the fiscal year while avoiding furloughs. Understanding of the Law—Fattah stated that the appropria- Questions by the Committee tion rules are complex and arcane but very important. His interest is not in the handful that were involved, but if they had the training Compromised System—Wolf asked if there had been any necessary to understand the rules. The Administrator replied that compromise in weather prediction or warning. Lubchenco replied what they did was wrong and it is important not to understate that there had not been any compromise. that. She also said that some of the corrective actions are designed Impact of Illegal Actions and Reprogramming Request—Wolf to address these issues, including new training on appropriation asked about the impact of the raided funds. Lubchenco replied rules, training on handling complaints, and also correcting the lines that NOAA is unsure of how far the misallocation goes back, and of supervision within the office of the CFO so that there is not only that they are unaware of the full impact. This will be addressed by one person providing oversight. The Department of Commerce is the independent review. When asked for specifics on the raided looking broadly at these issues as well. funds, Lubchenco described AWIPS, which is a hardware/software Benefits of Illegal Action—Fattah asked which accounts bene- solution that is the backbone for the activities of NWS, NextGen, fited from the illegal action. The Administrator replied that local which is a collaboration with the FAA to improve aviation forecast- warnings and forecast received the additional funding. This is the ing, and the Weather Radio Program, which is used for weather largest line item, accounting for almost two thirds of NWS funding alerts. Lubchenco said that these same funds are being affected by and 80% of NWS labor. the reprogramming request, with little to no impact. An upgrade Severe Weather Frequency as Cause—Fattah asked if the re- to AWIPS will be delayed. NWS is ahead of FAA on NextGen so cent increases in severe weather outbreaks caused costs to rise, they are zeroing funds for a year to synch back up with FAA. The triggering the illegal action. Sullivan replied that severe weather hardware for the Weather Radio Program is maintained by a stock- reduced consumables such as jet fuel for increased storm fly- pile of spare parts. Under the reprogramming, used spares will not throughs and weather balloons, but that should not have triggered be replaced, which will impact the stockpile of spares but not op- such action. erations. Intent vs. the Law—Fattah stated that this was a unique case Wolf wanted to know specifically what was impacted by the in this era of Washington scandals because there was no personal illegal activities. If there were no impacts, were the programs over- motive and those in the wrong were trying to help a perceived na- funded? Sullivan answered that there was a delay of an upgrade to tional need. Wolf replied that the U.S. is a nation of laws, and even the alert system, specifically a new feature that would enable digi- if the intent was meritorious, the act was still illegal. He also won- tal transcription of automated messages produced by AWIPS from ders in what other agencies this is going on. text to speech, which would be broadcast. Currently these mes- Political Implications—Bonner stated that this hearing is not sages are recorded orally by employees, and this upgrade would about hurt feelings but about laws and the way the Constitution enable faster releases of warnings. The current system was never was set up with Congress in charge of the purse strings. He impacted. Lubchenco added that there was no obvious indication stressed the need to take this violation seriously for this reason. that something was wrong and that everything was in good work- Bonner stated that “this is the latest example of this administra- ing order; it took internal reports from people who knew about the tion giving the finger to Congress” and that Obama had appointed budget and funding situations to find any issue. more czars than Russia did from 1613-1917. It looks increasingly Confidence in Management—Wolf asked the Administrator is like the executive branch is keeping things from Congress. There she has confidence in the managers at NWS. Lubchenco stressed needs to be a relationship built on trust and respect. Fattah replied that there were only a handful of employees involved and that she that this is not a political issue as the employees breaking the law had confidence in all the management currently in place. When are professional federal employees who were hired under a previ- asked for a definition of “handful,” she said 2-3 would be a good ous Republican administration. Bonner replied that his intent was estimate. The Administrator explained that she was trying to be not to attack the administrator but to point out a pattern by the very careful because of the privacy laws that protect federal em- administration. Graves agreed with this notion of a pattern. Fattah ployees. replied that some people can find a pattern in anything, and that it Reprogramming Effects—Wolf asked the Administrator why was this administration’s people who raised the issue and took the reprogramming request was pulling funds from the same line corrective action, including working with the Committee. The Ad- items that were raided, asking if they overfunded. Lubchenco re- ministrator replied that she takes Congress’s role very seriously plied that the options for reprogramming this late in the fiscal year and that the Committee should have no concerns regarding if she without jeopardizing the mission and avoiding furloughs were very would come to the Committee. She was furious when she learned limited. There will be delays in research, which is not what NWS of these actions, but fortunately, the gold standard of the NWS wants, but there will be no impact on public safety. among government agencies was not compromised. She appreci- “Structural Deficit”—Wolf asked the Administrator to explain
PAGE 18 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
APRIL—JUNE 2012
(Continued from page 18) ates and respects the Committee and she believes this positive interaction enables a way forward. Bonner replied that he is glad that someone of impeccable character like Lubchenco, but that the Committee has to show an aggressive stance to discourage others from ignoring the law. Wolf agreed that there seems to be a shift in the respect for Congress amongst the agencies and that it is important to send a message that the law must be followed. Debris from 2011 Tsunami—Dicks echoed Fattah’s remarks, explaining that while the Committee does not like to see reprogramming violations, there was no personal gain and the Administrator handled it well. He then shifted gears to discuss the debris arriving on the West Coast from the 2011 tsunami in Japan. The Administrator stated that NOAA is training communities on what to do with debris and is working with an interagency task force to determine what assets exist to help manage incoming debris. NWS is providing tracking and modeling that shows and predicts where and when debris will arrive on shore, but this has proved difficult because of the scale of the dis- persion of the debris field in space and time. Lubchenco stated that the debris will continue to wash up on shore for several years. Dicks stated his concern over management of the debris because the states do not have the resources to deal with this debris and NWS only has about $5M to work with. Lubchenco said that FEMA is involved but they are not taking a strong stance because the debris is not an emer- gency. Dicks stressed that this is a national issue, and the Administrator agreed, stating that it is unprecedented and it brings new chal- lenges on top of the existing debris field in the Pacific. Dicks asked about the dangers of the invasive species that could be onboard, and the Administrator replied that it is a real scientific concern, and while most are probably not radioactive, they could be hazardous. Honda later asked questions similar to Dicks and got similar answers. Firing Federal Employees—Culberson stated that he believes this illegal reprogramming of funds is the tip of the iceberg, noting simi- lar situations that are increasing in magnitude in the VA and in the Department of Defense. Dicks suggested that a House Appropriations Committee Survey and Investigations Team (HAC S&I) take a professional look at this situation instead of just having Congressmen make allegations. Culberson agreed, but then asked about the consequences of illegally programming funds, specifically asking if anyone had been fired. The Administrator replied that corrective actions had been taken and are currently in work, and that she wanted to be careful because of privacy laws. Culberson was furious, discussing first the time he could not fire a VA cemetery director for disallowing religious recitations without prior family consent, and then that no one had been fired for allowing the 9/11 tragedy to occur. When he asked why the government cannot fire federal employees and stated that this is a fundamental problem with our government today, the Administra- tor stated that she was not an expert, but that while it is possible to fire someone, it is important that due process be done. Archived testimony is available at
Board and Committee Member News
Daniel Baker, Director of University of Colorado’s Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, was presented with the American Astronomical Society’s distinguished 2012 Popular Writing Award on June 12. Baker shares the honor with James Green, director of the NASA Solar System Explora- tion Division. They received this honor for their article “The Perfect Solar Superstorm” in the Febru- ary 2011 issue of Sky & Telescope. Baker is a member of the National Academy of Engineering , for- mer member of the Space Studies Board and several NRC committees, and serves as chair of the current decadal strategy for solar and space physics.
Louis J. Lanzerotti, Distinguished Research Professor, Department of Physics, New Jersey Institute of Technology, was selected as the 2011 William Bowie Medalist of the American Geophysical Un- ion. The Bowie Medal, AGU’s highest honor, was established in 1939 in honor of William Bowie for his "spirit of helpfulness and friendliness in unselfish cooperative research." Lanzerotti, a member of the National Academy of Engineering, has served on the SSB and numerous NRC committees and boards and currently serves on the Laboratory Assessment Board and the Report Review Commit- tee.
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 19
www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/ 20 AGE 21 22 22 21 20 / P / 25 26 27 28 29 29 28 27 25 26 24 24 SSB / SEPTEMBER SEPTEMBER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 6 5 4 2 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 13 12 11 9 10 S M T W Th F Sa F Th W T S M 16 17 18 19 18 16 17 23/30 ORG . > to stay up to date 9 10 11 9 10 ittee meetings and developments. developments. and meetings ittee 8 ee Space Science Week, Washington, DC DC Week, Washington, ee Space Science d Applications Washington, DC DC Washington, Applications d d Planetary Science (CAPS) Irvine, CA 7 ive Committee (XCOM) Pasadena, CA Pasadena, (XCOM) Committee ive 6 AUGUST AUGUST NATIONALACADEMIES . Strategic Direction TBD TBD Direction Strategic 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 5 S M T W Th F Sa F Th W T S M SSB Calendar SSB Calendar 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 17 16 15 14 12 13 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 26 27 28 20 30 31 31 30 20 28 27 26 November 7-8, 2013, Irvine, CA November 7-8, 2013, Irvine, CA November 5-7, 2014, Irvine, CA April 4-5, 2013, Washington, DC DC April 4-5, 2013, Washington, April 3-4, 2014, Washington, DC Washington, April 3-4, 2014, November 12-14, 2012, Irvine, CA November 12-14, 2012, Irvine, WWW http://www.nas.edu/ssb Future SSB Meetings 27 28 27 Visit < Visit 26 26 11 12 13 14 13 11 12 10 JULY on board, workshop, and study comm on board, workshop, and study 2 March 6-8, 2013, SSB Standing Committ March 6-8, 2013, SSB Standing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 5 4 3 1 2 8 9 S M T W Th F Sa F Th W T S M 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 20 19 18 17 15 16 22 23 24 25 24 23 22 29 30 29 SSUE (including a Workshop on Lessons Learned in Decadal Planning in Space Science on November 12-13) on November 12-13) Science in Decadal Planning in Space Learned on Lessons (including a Workshop 23, I 23,
September 20-21 Committee on NASA’s September 24-25 Committee on Astrobiology an July 26-27 Committee on NASA’s Strategic Direction Washington, DC DC CA Washington, Irvine, Direction Direction Strategic Strategic NASA’s NASA’s on on (CESAS) Committee Committee Space 6-7 26-27 July 10-11 from Sciences an Earth on Committee July August August 8-9 Space Studies Board Execut OLUME V
APRIL—JUNE 2012 SELECTED REPORTS AVAILABLE FROM THE SPACE STUDIES BOARD
For a complete list of titles visit our website at
Free PDF versions of all SSB reports Hardcopy versions of all SSB reports are available are available online at
Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions (2010) [prepublication] (2012) CD Only Capabilities for the Future: An Assessment of NASA Laboratories for Basic The Role of Life and Physical Sciences (2012) Booklet Research (2010) Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of Revitalizing NASA's Suborbital Program: Advancing Science, Driving NASA's Implementation of the Decadal Survey (2012) Innovation, and Developing a Workforce (2010) Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Spacecraft Missions to Icy Solar System Bodies (2012) Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies (2010) CD Only Assessment of a Plan for U.S. Participation in Euclid An Enabling Foundation for NASA's Space and Earth Science Technical Evaluation of the NASA Model for Cancer Risk to Astronauts Due Missions (2010) to Space Radiation America’s Future in Space: Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Space Studies Board Annual Report 2011 (2012) Needs (2009) The Space Studies Board 1958-2012: Compilation of Reports (2012) Approaches to Future Space Cooperation and Competition in a DVD Only Globalizing World: Summary of a Workshop (2009) Report of the Panel on Implementing Recommendations from the New Radioisotope Power Systems: An Imperative for Maintaining U.S. Leader- Worlds, New Horizons Decadal Survey (2012) ship in Space Exploration (2009) CD Only Sharing the Adventure with the Public—The Value of Excitement: Summary Assessment of Planetary Protection Requirements for Mars Sample Return of a Workshop (2011) Missions (2009) Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences Re- A Performance Assessment of NASA’s Heliophysics Program (2009) search for a New Era (2011) Book and CD Severe Space Weather Events—Understanding Societal and Visions and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022 (2011) Economic Impacts: A Workshop Report (2008) Book and CD Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA's Space Studies Board Annual Report 2010 (2011) Constellation System (2008) Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Satellite Observations to Benefit Science and Society: Recommended Earth Science Missions (2011) Missions for the Next Decade (2008) Booklet Forging the Future of Space Science: The Next 50 Years (2010) Ensuring the Climate Record from the NPOESS and GOES-R Panel Reports—New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Spacecraft: Elements of a Strategy to Recover Measurement Astrophysics (2011) Capabilities Lost in Program Restructuring (2008) New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (2010) Opening New Frontiers in Space: Choices for the Next New Frontiers An- nouncement of Opportunity (2008) If you are unable to email your request, please send a copy of this form to the address or fax number below. Remember to enter the number of reports you wish to receive in the space to the left of each report. Name E-mail
Space Studies Board The National Academies Affiliation 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 or fax a copy to: 202-334-3701 Address City/State/Zip
VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2 WWW.NATIONALACADEMIES.ORG/SSB/ PAGE 21