Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Planetary protection”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

Enviromnental Control and Life Support Systems for Mars Missions - Issues and Concerns for Planetary Protection

Planetary protection represents an additional set of requirements that generally have not been considered by developers of technologies for Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Planetary protection guidelines will affect the kind of operations, processes, and functions that can take place during future human planetary exploration missions. Ultimately, there will be an effect on mission costs, including the mission trade space when planetary protection requirements begin to drive vehicle deisgn in a concrete way. Planetary protection requirements need to be considered early in technology development and mission programs in order to estimate these impacts and push back on requirements or find efficient ways to perform necessary functions. It is expected that planetary protection will be a significant factor during technology selection and system architecture design for future missions.

Barta, Daniel J.

Sampling Size Optimization for Bioburden Density Estimation in Planetary Protection

Planetary protection (PP) is a discipline that focuses on minimizing the biological contamination of spacecraft to ensure compliance with international policy. Precise estimation of bioburden - the total number of microbes in or on spacecraft hardware – and the bioburden density are of utmost importance for PP. Such estimation is the way concordance with requirements is demonstrated, and it is critical for quantifying the potential risk of inadvertently contaminating other planetary bodies. Although a suite of molecular techniques have been used to thoroughly characterize and profile the microbiome of various cleanroom environments and spacecraft, the gold standard remains the physical enumeration of microbes via culturing of samples directly taken from spacecraft and associated surfaces. However, due to technical, budgetary, and programmatic constraints, only a manageable portion (around 10%) of the entire spacecraft surface is directly sampled with cotton swabs or wipes. To generate the bioburden current best estimate (CBE) for components not directly verifiable, the accepted approach is to apply a NASA-defined bioburden estimate based on the components’ manufacturing or assembly environment. This approach utilizes a prespecified bioburden density estimation that applies a maximum value across the total surface area of the specified component. For hardware components that underwent similar assembly processes, an implied bioburden is adopted for all components, based on a direct verification of a representative component within the same lot. Once all components have a CBE, the bioburden estimates are generated. In previous publication [ 1], we have shown that statistical risks quantifying the accuracy of the estimates for sampled, prespecified, and implied components can be derived and ranked. For mean squared error (MSE) function, the risks are available analytically and hence a cost function can be obtained to optimize the risks with respect to the sampling area and sampling cost. Since the sampling area and sampling cost are two complimentary variables, their sum will have a well-defined minimum. This paper presents the multivariate optimization of the integrated risk of an empirical Bayes estimator to determine the optimal sampling schedule for a given number of components. It is assumed that given a number of components, N, the bioburden density for each component can either be sampled, implied, or prespecified. The multivariate optimization searches through different options to sample, imply or prespecify the bioburden density for a component, and account for the component’s surface area and cost of sampling. The idea of the optimization is based on the observation that the statistical risk of using an estimator is a monotonically decreasing function of the sampled area. The larger the sampled area, the lower the risk of using the estimator as the estimator becomes more and more accurate as the sampling area increases. On the other hand, the cost of sampling is monotonically increasing as the sampled surface grows. This makes the risk and total cost of sampling complimentary variables which can be counterbalanced to achieve an optimal overall value with respect to the sampled surface. In this paper, the integrated risk has been used to quantify the accuracy of the estimator. This risk has been selected because it depends on neither the true value of the parameter nor on the collected data. The cost of each sample was also available to obtain the total cost of sampling of N components. The paper will present the results based on computer-simulated data as well as the data collected during the InSight mission. The computer-simulated data have N components with randomly generated total areas and each component assigned to one of the three categories according to the method of estimating of bioburden density: sampled, implied, or prespecified. The cost of sampling is also available. The cost of sampling is estimated based on a cost model provided by the planetary protection group at JPL. For this paper, the overall cost was assumed to be a linear function of exposure. The optimization process finds the allocation of the components to the three categories that minimizes the tradeoff between integrated risk and total cost. For the InSight data, a set of components is selected representing all three categories, and optimization is performed to determine if the performed allocation was optimal or if a better allocation could have been obtained. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first attempt not only perform an accurate estimation of bioburden density but also do it in an optimal way.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING

Planetary Protection Technologies for Planetary Science Instruments, Spacecraft, and Missions: Report of the NASA Planetary Protection Technology Definition Team (PPTDT)

Planetary bodies like Mars, Europa, and Enceladus pose the question, "How to study them without contaminating them and destroying future prospects to detect life, if it is there?" The natural trade-off, of course, is that the cleaner your spacecraft, the more you can explore such a body without risk of contaminating it. As chartered by NASA Headquarters, the Planetary Protection Technology Definition Team (PPTDT) was asked to provide a report covering six different areas related to the engineering and technology challenges of implementing planetary protection requirements on solar system exploration missions, including: Assessment of technical and engineering challenges to applying available microbial-reduction methods, including recontamination prevention, to spacecraft hardware and instruments, to meet current NASA requirements on preventing the forward contamination of potentially habitable worlds by future spacecraft missions (orbiters, atmospheric missions, landers, penetrators, and drills); Identification of spacecraft and instrument materials known to be compatible with existing planetary protection protocols; Planetary protection protocols/processes available or which appear promising, and areas ripe for technological development; The technical and engineering challenges in ensuring that spacecraft hardware and instruments can meet organic cleanliness requirements needed to ensure high confidence in differentiating Earth contamination from extraterrestrial signals to avoid false negative as well as false positive results; Approaches for mitigating the identified challenges that would allow instruments to be flown successfully at the required levels of cleanliness and microbial reduction, beginning with identification of commonly used materials and spacecraft hardware that are compatible (or particularly vulnerable) to planetary protection protocols; Engineering, technology, and scientific research and development that could be funded by NASA to provide future capabilities to field scientific instruments and spacecraft on missions that require either subsystem or system-level microbial reduction and recontamination prevention.

John D. Rummel

Planetary Protection is Not a One Size Fits All Missions Approach: Enabling the Planetary Protection Programmatic and Engineering Process

Missions have a wide range of variables that change their management and engineering structure (e.g., competed vs directed missions, multiple NASA centers, international partnerships, increased commercial collaborations, etc.). Why would an identical planetary protection approach and structure for each mission make sense in this evolving landscape? Missions do not fit in a one-size-fits-all approach, likewise their planetary protection process should not be a one-size-fits-all approach. During the significant update to NPR 8715.24 and NASA-STD-8719.27 planetary protection policies, the programmatic execution and engineering implementation processes were changed to provide clarification, streamlining, and expansion to include alternative approaches. From a programmatic perspective, these changes include the flexibility in timing and combination of gate products in addition to providing varying levels of technical depth commensurate and appropriate with the mission categorization. From a technical perspective, these changes include the ability to A) leverage either a performance-based and/or a prescriptive-based approach, B) identify applicable international consensus standards for verification, and C) propose alternative methods that adhere to sound scientific and engineering consensus. This presentation will directly highlight the culture shift in planetary protection, areas of flexibility available to the technical community for mission program and engineering execution, and feature some of the specific mission scenarios that have already leveraged such processes.

Nick Benardini

Independent Scientific Review of Biological Assumptions and Planned Ultraviolet Treatment for Mars Sample Return Backward Planetary Protection

The Backward Planetary Protection Study Team (“the Study Team”), assembled by the Office of the Chief Scientist (OCS) at the request of the Office of Planetary Protection (OPP), has conducted numerous detailed discussions on the potential use of an active ultraviolet (UV) approach for minimizing or eliminating biological contamination of the exterior of the planned Orbiting Sample container (OS) of the Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. This review of the backward planetary protection (BPP) considerations for the MSR mission focused on two key parameters that are opportunities for further process development to support implementation of planetary protection practices in meeting mission requirements. These parameters include: 1) Sub-cellular biological assumptions – should Mars missions consider self-replicating organisms only or do they need to consider non-self-replicating entities without a cellular organization such as viruses, prions, etc. and macromolecules capable of genetic information transfer, as well? 2) UV biocidal impact – what is the UV fluence in the Mars atmosphere and its associated potential biocidal credit? The assembled subject matter experts (SMEs) in the Study Team are listed in Appendix A, with a brief description of each member’s relevant expertise.

Mamta Patel Nagaraja

Next Steps in Planetary Protection for Human Spaceflight

Planetary protection is defined as: a) the prevention of contamination of extraterrestrial bodies by terrestrial microorganisms, and b) biohazard containment of returned samples from bodies in the Solar System that could harbor life.1 While the majority of interplanetary missions to date have involved robotic exploration, future missions will include human explorers. Current planetary protection requirements do not address the unique challenges associated with human exploration. The purpose of this abstract is to review planetary protection efforts for crewed missions and provide a forward plan for implementing them at the systems level. Article IX of the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967 provides the definition of planetary protection, outlined above.1 COSPAR holds the international standard in line with this treaty2, while NASA's Planetary Protection Policy (NPD 8020.7G) outlines the U.S. implementation of the COSPAR standard. 3;4 NPI 8020.7 groups future human spaceflight planetary protection studies as follows: 1) microbial monitoring, 2) contamination mitigation and control, and 3) environmental effects. Additionally, a NPI 8020.7 outlines a five-step plan for forward work: 1) a literature review, 2) community inputs, 3) completion of recommended studies, 4) developing a draft NPR, and 5) implementation with NASA teams. The literature review was published in 2016.5 Inputs from the community were gathered at the Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Extraterrestrial Missions, held in 2015.6 Johnson and Race (2016) outlined notional requirements and prioritized studies needed before final requirements can be produced. This prior work sets the stage for completing the necessary studies and finalizing planetary protection requirements for human spaceflight. We propose a continuation of the systems engineering approach adopted thus far. The challenges associated with the implementation of notional requirements will be quantified in detailed discussions with internal stakeholders. The status and results of high-priority studies that have been completed since 2016 or are ongoing will be incorporated into discussions with stakeholders. In this way, we plan to bridge the gap between the science behind planetary protection and the engineering development that will implement it, allowing finalized planetary protection requirements to be developed for future human space missions.

Mitchell, Julie

A Review of the Approach of NASA Projects to Planetary Protection Compliance

NASA planetary protection, formerly planetary quarantine, is a set of regulations for extraterrestrial space missions which addresses applicable COSPAR resolutions, and ultimately derives from a 1967 United Nations treaty (the "Moon treaty"). The purpose of the NASA regulations is set forth in a basic policy, NPD 8020.7E (Ref. 1). The purposes are: to protect extraterrestrial objects from terrestrial biological contamination that may interfere with the search for extant life or its remnants or its precursors; and to protect the Earth from the possible hazards of an extraterrestrial sample return.

planetary protections

What You Need to Know about Planetary Protection Categorization for Your Mission

Planetary protection mission categorization helps to define the risk posture for requirements definition and implementation practices on space flight projects with planetary protection considerations. NASA has recently updated it’s planetary protection policy (NPR 8715.24), and with the update comes a major change in how the planetary protection categorization process is performed for NASA missions. Previously, projects would request the NASA Planetary Protection Officer (PPO) provide a categorization letter documenting the planetary protection category assigned to the proposed mission. Under the new policy the project manager (PM) proposes the planetary protection category for their mission. Depending on the level of the category, the PPO either concurs or recommends concurrence to the Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) before forwarding to the Mission Directorate Associate Administrator (MDAA) for final approval prior to the system requirements review (SRR). But what topics must be considered for categorization? This presentation will provide key considerations for planetary protection mission categorization including the target solar system body to be explored, the trajectory to get to the target body, and the operations to be performed at the target body. Additional unique scenarios such as secondary and auxiliary payloads, encountering other solar system bodies on the way to the target body, and sample return missions will also be discussed to share lessons learned from missions that have been through the new categorization process.

Elaine Seasly

Planetary Protection and Mars Exploration

Planetary spacecraft to explore Mars are subject to international and NASA policy regarding biological cleanliness. This policy is referred to as planetary protection and it establishes guidelines to prevent biological cross-contamination of planets during solar system exploration missions. Mars mission designs and exploration strategies are incomplete without consideration of planetary protection. In this paper, the foundation for planetary protection policy will be reviewed and key issues identified. Existing guidelines governing both forward and back contamination will be summarized. Various Mars exploration scenarios will be examined and the impact of planetary protection requirements will be assessed. Technical issues that need resolution will also be identified. Finally, there will be a discussion of anticipated public attitudes concerning the risk of back contamination from Mars sample return missions.

DeVincenzi, D. L.

Planetary Protection Technologies: Technical Challenges for Mars Exploration

The search for life in the solar system, using either in situ analysis or sample return, brings with it special technical challenges in the area of planetary protection. Planetary protection (PP) requires planetary explorers to preserve biological and organic conditions for future exploration and to protect the Earth from potential extraterrestrial contamination that could occur as a result of sample return to the Earth-Moon system. In view of the exploration plans before us, the NASA Solar System Exploration Program Roadmap published in May 2003 identified planetary protection as one of 13 technologies for "high priority technology investments." Recent discoveries at Mars and Jupiter, coupled with new policies, have made this planning for planetary protection technology particularly challenging and relevant.New missions to Mars have been formulated, which present significantly greater forward contamination potential. New policies, including the introduction by COSPAR of a Category IVc for planetary protection, have been adopted by COSPAR in response. Some missions may not be feasible without the introduction of new planetary protection technologies. Other missions may be technically possible but planetary protection requirements may be so costly to implement with current technology that they are not affordable. A strategic investment strategy will be needed to focus on technology investments designed to enable future missions and reduce the costs of future missions. This presentation will describe some of the potential technological pathways that may be most protective.

planetary protections

Bayesian Framework For Bioburden Density Calculations To Perform Planetary Protection Probabilistic Risk Assessment

The planetary protection discipline aims to minimize the microbial contamination on spacecraft to prevent the inadvertent contamination of other planetary bodies, known as forward planetary protection (PP). Planetary protection probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) relies on two core methodologies-the contamination probability event tree analysis and statistical parameter estimation. Planetary protection engineers combine several techniques to estimate the bioburden present on spacecraft components. A direct assay to enumerate CFU (colony forming units) is the preferred methodology, but given a similar processing environment the bioburden present on certain components is inferred using: (1) a NASA defined bioburden estimate based upon the biological cleanliness of the manufacturing/assembly environment or (2) sampled data from a similar spacecraft component. The paper presents an empirical Bayesian framework to systematically treat bioburden estimation and its uncertainties on different levels starting with measurement procedures to combining different components to subsystems and whole spacecraft. It is shown that the Bayesian approach can effectively handle estimations and their uncertainties at different levels and produce a reliable estimate for bioburden to be used to evaluate the probability of contamination.

Seuylemezian, Arman

Planetary Protection

This presentation includes an overview of Planetary Protection, Planetary Protection policy, and crewed mission activities.

J Andy Spry

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportunities for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamination, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR community will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Planetary Protection

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportunities for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamination, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR community will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Elaine Seasly

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportuni-ties for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamina-tion, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR com-munity will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Elaine Seasly

NASA Planetary Protection Program Overview and Update

NASA has an integrated planetary protection strategy that leverages COSPAR Policy guide-lines, workshops, scientific consensus, partnerships and international working groups to develop policy and implementation guidelines. The Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance, which in-cludes NASA’s Oÿce of Planetary Protection, depends on these activities to support NASA’s missions in the assurance of crew safety and mission success while protecting the public and planetary environment from harmful contamination. This report will detail the overall planetary protection policy development perspective to sup-port NASA’s upcoming mission opportunities for exploration to include crewed Mars and sam-ple return missions. NASA continues to evolve its strategies, policies, and standards. NASA’s support in the COSPAR workshop series on Refining Planetary Protection Requirements for Crewed Missions to Mars have resulted in a NASA interim directive and paved the way for the development of NASA planetary protection roadmaps. These Agency level roadmaps address technology development and testing required to fill knowledge gaps for developing responsive policy guidelines and quantitative technical standards. In addition to workshops and tech-nology management strategies, NASA is also leveraging the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee of Planetary Protection to serve as a source of advice on planetary protection measures. Finally, the report will include how the Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance is incorporating planetary protection into existing and new multi-agency partnerships.

Frank Groen

Robotic and Crewed Mars Missions Increasing the Demand for Planetary Protection Technology Needs

Planetary protection (PP) policy seeks to avoid harmful contamination by limiting biological and relevant organic contamination from spacecraft as well as preventing adverse changes to Earth’s biosphere when extraterrestial samples are brought back to Earth. The PP policy at NASA was updated in 2021 (NPR 8715.24) and 2022 (NASA-STD-8719.27) to enable missions by expanding the decades old prescriptive requirements to allow for an option of adopting performance-based requirements that are objectivesdriven, risk-informed and case-assured. In parallel, the final PP knowledge gap workshop was completed representing the international consensus on the key areas to be considered in developing crew PP policy. These knowledge gaps focused on key technology development areas in 1) microbial and human health monitoring, 2) technical and operations needed for contamination control and 3) natural transport of contamination on Mars. As robotic missions start to implement performance-based approaches and research and technology efforts commence to inform crew policy the demand for data quality driven verification and validation in relevant space environments. Examples of the types of testing that is envisioned includes test as you fly validation and verification of decontamination systems in a relevant on-orbit and Mars environment, developing lethality curves of terrestrial organisms to further our understanding of the biocidal impacts of Mars and the space environment, and particle transport model validation and verification. Thus, the PP discipline has identified the need for groundbased space environments to perform preliminary testing as validation and verification of flight systems and to advance the technology readiness level prior to further testing on-orbit or lunar environments to prepare for Mars.

J. Nick Benardini

Robotic and Crewed Mars Missions Increasing the Demand for Planetary Protection Technology Needs

Planetary protection (PP) policy seeks to avoid harmful contamination by limiting biological and relevant organic contamination from spacecraft as well as preventing adverse changes to Earth’s biosphere when extraterrestrial samples are brought back to Earth. The PP policy at NASA was updated in 2021 (NPR 8715.24) and 2022 (NASA-STD-8719.27) to enable missions by expanding the decades old prescriptive requirements to allow for an option of adopting performance-based requirements that are objectives-driven, risk-informed and case-assured. In parallel, the final PP knowledge gap workshop was completed representing the international consensus on the key areas to be considered in developing crew PP policy. These knowledge gaps focused on key technology development areas in 1) microbial and human health monitoring, 2) technical and operations needed for contamination control and 3) natural transport of contamination on Mars. As robotic missions start to implement performance-based approaches and research and technology efforts commence to inform crew policy the demand for data quality driven verification and validation in relevant space environments. Examples of the types of testing that is envisioned includes test as you fly validation and verification of decontamination systems in a relevant on-orbit and Mars environment, developing lethality curves of terrestrial organisms to further our understanding of the biocidal impacts of Mars and the space environment, and particle transport model validation and verification. Thus, the PP discipline has identified the need for ground-based space environments to perform preliminary testing as validation and verification of flight systems and to advance the technology readiness level prior to further testing on-orbit or lunar environments to prepare for Mars.

J Nick Benardini