3
Ad Hoc Study Committees:
Activities and Membership
When a sponsor requests that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine1 conduct a study, an ad hoc committee is established for that purpose. The committee terminates when the study is completed. These study committees are subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Section 15, because they provide advice and recommendations to the federal government. The Space Studies Board (SSB) and/or one of its standing committees provide oversight for ad hoc study committee activities. Eight ad hoc study committees were active during 2015; their activities and membership are summarized below. The SSB collaborated on two studies with the Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA) and on one study with the following boards of the Division on Earth and Life Studies: the Board on Atmospheric Science and Climate, the Board on Earth Science and Resources, the Water Science and Technology Board, and the Ocean Studies Board.
The Review of NASA’s Planetary Science Division’s Restructured Research and Analysis Programs study was formally initiated toward the end of 2015. Recruitment of committee members will commence in 2016 and a report is scheduled to be delivered to NASA by December 2016.
ACHIEVING SCIENCE GOALS WITH CUBESATS
The ad hoc Committee on Achieving Science Goals with CubeSats had their first meeting on June 22-23, 2015, at the Keck Center in Washington, D.C. During the meeting, the committee received agency perspectives on CubeSats from NASA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Defense (DOD), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The committee also received an update on space debris from the Secure World Foundation. The committee had their second meeting, which included a community symposium, on September 2-3, followed by a committee-only session on September 4 at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering in Irvine, California. The symposium began with keynote presentations on CubeSats and science return from David Korsmeyer (NASA Ames Research Center) and on technology trends from Richard Welle (Aerospace Corporation). The symposium continued with a series of keynote speakers and panel discussions. The first four sessions involved science areas: CubeSats in heliophysics, with a keynote by Harlan Spence (University of New Hampshire); CubeSats in planetary science, with a keynote by Julie Castillo-Rogez (Jet Propulsion Laboratory); CubeSats in astronomy and astrophysics, with a keynote by Kerri Cahoy (Massachusetts Institute of Technology); and CubeSats in Earth science, with a keynote by Antonio Busalacchi (University of Maryland). Additional panel discussions were held on technology for CubeSats, CubeSats for technology development, industry capabilities, and CubeSats in
___________________
1 Effective July 1, 2015, the institution is called the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. References in this report to the National Research Council are used in an historical context identifying programs prior to July 1.
education. The symposium also included a poster session with more than 60 participants. The committee had its third committee meeting in closed session on October 22-23, in Washington, D.C., followed by a policy-focused meeting on October 30 in Washington, D.C. The meeting opened with perspectives on CubeSat policy issues from Thomas Kalil (Office of Science and Technology Policy). The committee then held a panel discussion regarding orbital debris and space situational awareness, with participation from Josef Koller (DOD); J.-C. Liou (NASA); Lt. Col. Scott Putnam (Joint Space Operations Center); Michael Romanowski (Federal Aviation Administration); Dan Oltrogge (Analytical Graphics, Inc.); and Brian Weeden (Secure World Foundation). In the afternoon, the committee held a panel discussion on spectrum, with participation from Kathryn Medley (Federal Communications Commission); Jonathan Williams (National Telecommunications and Information Administration); Brennan Price (American Radio Relay League); William Horne (NASA); and Therese Moretto Jorgensen (NSF). The final discussion of the day regarded ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) current issues presented by Kevin Schmadel and Martin Ruzek (Universities Space Research Association). The committee is currently writing its draft report, and the anticipated prepublication release date is May 2016.
Membership2
Thomas H. Zurbuchen,3 University of Michigan (chair)
Bhavya Lal, IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute (vice chair)
Julie Castillo-Rogez,4 California Institute of Technology
Andrew Clegg, Google, Inc.
Paulo Lozano, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Malcolm Macdonald, University of Strathclyde
Robyn Millan, Dartmouth College
Charles D. Norton, California Institute of Technology
William H. Swartz, Johns Hopkins University
Alan Title, Lockheed Martin
Thomas Woods, University of Colorado
Edward L. Wright, University of California, Los Angeles
A. Thomas Young, Lockheed Martin (retired)
Staff
Abigail Sheffer, Program Officer, SSB
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
Dionna Williams, Program Coordinator, SSB
CONTINUITY OF NASA-SUSTAINED REMOTE SENSING OBSERVATIONS OF THE EARTH FROM SPACE
NASA’s Earth Science Division (ESD) conducts a wide range of satellite and suborbital missions to observe Earth’s land surface and interior, biosphere, atmosphere, cryosphere, and oceans as part of a program to improve understanding of Earth as an integrated system. Earth observations provide the foundation for critical scientific advances, and environmental data products derived from these observations are used in resource management and for an extraordinary range of societal applications, including weather forecasts, climate projections, sea-level change, water management, disease early warning, agricultural production, and response to natural disasters.
As the complexity of societal infrastructure and its vulnerability to environmental disruption increases, the demands for deeper scientific insights and more actionable information continue to rise. To serve these demands, ESD is challenged with optimizing the partitioning of its finite resources among measurements intended for exploring new science frontiers, carefully characterizing long-term changes in the Earth system, and supporting ongoing societal applications. This challenge is most acute in the decisions the division makes between support-
___________________
2 All terms began on May 14, 2015, unless otherwise noted.
3 Term began March 10, 2015.
4 Term began October 13, 2015.
ing measurement continuity of data streams that are critical components of Earth science research programs and in developing new measurement capabilities.
The current ESD decision-making process is primarily qualitative. Completing a study requested by NASA, the Committee on a Framework for Analyzing the Needs for Continuity of NASA-Sustained Remote Sensing Observations of the Earth from Space published the report Continuity of NASA Earth Observations from Space: A Value Framework in November 2015. The decision framework presented in this report provides a transparent and partially quantitative alternative that prioritizes the relative importance of different measurements based on their scientific value. The report identifies key evaluation factors and puts forward a decision-making framework that quantifies the need for measurement continuity and the consequences of measurement gaps for achieving long-term science goals. Following publication, Committee Chair Byron Tapley (University of Texas) briefed the report to NASA, NOAA, the Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space, and the SSB. The report is available at http://www.nap.edu. The Summary of the report is reprinted in Chapter 5.
Membership5
Byron D. Tapley, University of Texas, Austin (chair)
Michael D. King, University of Colorado, Boulder (vice chair)
Mark R. Abbott, Oregon State University
Steven A. Ackerman, University of Wisconsin, Madison
John J. Bates, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Rafael L. Bras, Georgia Institute of Technology
Robert E. Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin
Randall R. Friedl, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Lee-Lueng Fu, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Chelle L. Gentemann, Remote Sensing Systems
Kathryn A. Kelly, University of Washington
Judith L. Lean, Naval Research Laboratory
Joyce E. Penner, University of Michigan
Michael J. Prather, University of California, Irvine
Eric J. Rignot, University of California, Irvine
William L. Smith, Hampton University
Compton J. Tucker, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Bruce A. Wielicki, NASA Langley Research Center
Staff
Arthur A. Charo, Senior Program Officer, SSB
Anesia Wilks, Senior Program Assistant, SSB
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
DECADAL SURVEY FOR EARTH SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS FROM SPACE
The 2017-2027 decadal survey for Earth science and applications from space (ESAS 2017) began in late 2015. Sponsored by NASA, NOAA, and USGS, the survey will produce a report by July 31, 2017, that will
- Assess progress in addressing the major scientific and application challenges outlined in the 2007 survey;
- Develop a prioritized list of top-level science and application objectives to guide space-based Earth observations over the survey interval;
- Identify gaps and opportunities in the programs of record at NASA, NOAA, and USGS in pursuit of the top-level science and application challenges—including space-based opportunities that provide both sustained and experimental observations; and
___________________
5 All terms ended on March 31, 2015.
- Recommend—considering science priorities, implementation costs, new technologies and platforms, interagency partnerships, international partners, and in situ and other complementary programs—approaches to facilitate the development of a robust, resilient, and appropriately balanced U.S. program of Earth observations from space.
Like the 2007 inaugural decadal survey, Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond, ESAS 2017 will help shape science priorities and guide agency investments into the next decade. Detailed information about the survey and a calendar of upcoming events is available at http://www.nas.edu/esas2017. Notable events that occurred in 2015 included appointment of the Survey Steering Committee (http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DEPS/esas2017/DEPS_169444), receipt of more than 200 responses to the survey’s request for information (RFI), the organization of a town hall on December 14, 2015, at the fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU), and planning for the first meeting of the steering committee on January 18-20, 2016, in Washington, D.C. Additional town halls were also planned at 96th annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society and the AGU Ocean Sciences meeting in January and February 2016, respectively. Presentations from these events will be posted on the survey’s website. The survey steering committee is supported by several study panels (http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DEPS/esas2017/DEPS_170909) and cross-disciplinary working groups; in total, some 100 members of the community are expected to participate on one or more of the survey’s committees.
Membership6
Waleed Abdalati, University of Colorado, Boulder (co-chair)
Antonio J. Busalacchi Jr., University of Maryland, College Park (co-chair)
Steven J. Battel, Battel Engineering, Inc.
Stacey Boland, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Robert D. Braun, Georgia Institute of Technology
Shuyi S. Chen, University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences
William E. Dietrich, University of California, Berkeley
Scott C. Doney, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Christopher B. Field, Carnegie Institution for Science
Helen A. Fricker, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
William B. Gail, Global Weather Corporation
Sarah T. Gille, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Dennis L. Hartmann, University of Washington
Daniel J. Jacob, Harvard University
Anthony C. Janetos, Boston University
Everette Joseph, University of Albany, State University of New York
Molly K. Macauley, Resources for the Future
Joyce E. Penner, University of Michigan
Soroosh Sorooshian, University of California, Irvine
Graeme L. Stephens, Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology
Byron D. Tapley, University of Texas, Austin
W. Stanley Wilson, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Staff
Arthur A. Charo, Senior Program Officer, SSB
Charlie Harris, Research Associate, SSB (from September 28)
Andrea Rebholz,7 Program Coordinator, ASEB
___________________
6 All terms began on December 1, 2015.
7 Staff from other Boards who are shared with the SSB.
NASA SCIENCE MISSION EXTENSIONS: SCIENTIFIC VALUE, POLICIES, AND REVIEW PROCESS
The Committee on NASA Science Mission Extensions was formed in October 2015 and held a committee-only teleconference in December. The committee, co-chaired by Vicky Hamilton and Harvey Tananbaum, is to hold its first in-person meeting February 1-2, 2016, at the Keck Center in Washington, D.C., and a second meeting is scheduled for March 2-4, 2016, at the Beckman Center in Irvine, California. The committee will be looking at the process by which NASA conducts science mission extensions. Its report is tentatively scheduled for delivery to NASA in late summer 2016.
Membership8
Victoria E. Hamilton, Southwest Research Institute (co-chair)
Harvey D. Tananbaum, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (co-chair)
Alice Bowman, John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
John R. Casani, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (retired)
James H. Clemmons, The Aerospace Corporation
Neil Gehrels, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Fiona A. Harrison, California Institute of Technology
Michael D. King, University of Colorado, Boulder
Margaret G. Kivelson, University of California, Los Angeles
Ramon E. Lopez, University of Texas, Arlington
Amy Mainzer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Alfred S. McEwen, University of Arizona
Deborah G. Vane, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Staff
Dwayne Day, Senior Program Officer, ASEB
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
Anesia Wilks, Senior Program Assistant, SSB
REVIEW OF MEPAG REPORT ON PLANETARY PROTECTION FOR MARS SPECIAL REGIONS
The Committee for the Review of the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) Report on Planetary Protection for Mars Special Regions, an ad hoc activity of the Academies and the European Science Foundation, held its second and final full meeting in Irvine, California, on February 12-13, 2015. The committee completed delivery of its report to NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) in mid-September and presented its conclusions and recommendations at the COSPAR (Committee on Space Research) Planetary Protection Workshop held at the International Space Science Institute in Bern, Switzerland, on September 22-24. The committee completed its work and was dissolved at the end of December 2015. The final, printed version of the committee’s report, Review of the MEPAG Report on Mars Special Regions, was released in late December 2015. The Executive Summary of the report is reprinted in Chapter 5. A paper derived from the committee’s final report has been accepted for publication and is scheduled to appear in the February 2016 issue of Astrobiology.
Membership9
Petra Rettberg, German Aerospace Center, Cologne (chair)
Alexandre Anesio, University of Bristol, United Kingdom
Victor R. Baker, University of Arizona
___________________
8 All terms began on October 28, 2015.
9 All terms ended on November 30, 2015.
John A. Baross, University of Washington
Sherry L. Cady, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Christine M. Foreman, Montana State University
Ernst Hauber, German Aerospace Center, Berlin
Gian Gabriele Ori, Universita d’Annunzio, Pescara, Italy
David Pearce, Northumbria University, United Kingdom
Nilton O. Renno, University of Michigan
Gary Ruvkun, Massachusetts General Hospital
Birgit Sattler, University of Innsbruck, Austria
Mark P. Saunders, Independent Consultant
Dirk Wagner, German Research Center for Geosciences, Potsdam
Frances Westall, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Orléans, France
Staff
David H. Smith, Senior Program Officer, SSB
Emmanouil Detsis, Science Officer, ESF
Andrea Rebholz,10 Program Coordinator, ASEB
REVIEW OF PROGRESS TOWARD THE DECADAL SURVEY VISION IN NEW WORLDS, NEW HORIZONS IN ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS
The ad hoc Committee for the Review of Progress Toward the Decadal Survey Vision in New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics, chaired by Jacqueline Hewitt, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, held its first meeting on October 8-10, 2015, in Washington, D.C. The committee heard from the NASA Astrophysics Division (APD), the NSF Division of Astronomical Sciences (AST), the Department of Energy High Energy Physics (HEP) program, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, ESA, and project teams from or representatives of the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, NSF Mid-Scale Innovations Program, U.S. Laser Interferometer Space Antenna project, and U.S. Athena project.
The committee held a science symposium during its second meeting on December 12-14 at the Beckman Center in Irvine, California. The committee heard an opening keynote address from Roger Blandford, who chaired the 2010 astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey (Astro2010). The symposium continued with a series of speakers and panel discussions, many of whom participated in the Astro2010 process. The sessions assessed what progress had been made on the high-priority science questions and discovery areas identified in the 2010 New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics report. During the second day of the meeting, the committee heard talks from representatives of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST), the Thirty Meter Telescope, the Giant Magellan Telescope, and the Cherenkov Telescope Array, as well as presentations from the European Consortium’s eLISA mission and a community leader in exoplanet technology for direct imaging space-based missions. The symposium was webcast and has been made available for later viewing at https://vimeo.com/album/3742483.
The committee also held bi-weekly teleconferences, hearing from Daniel Eisenstein, Harvard University, on the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument; Debra Elmegreen, Vassar College, on the 2015 National Research Council (NRC) report Optimizing the U.S. Ground-Based Optical and Infrared Astronomy System; Randall Smith, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, on IXO-Athena-preparations; Amber Miller, Columbia University, on cosmic microwave background polarization; Eric Smith, NASA, on the James Webb Space Telescope; and Terry Herter and Riccardo Giovanelli, Cornell University, on the CCAT telescope.
___________________
10 Staff from other Boards who are shared with the SSB.
Membership11
Jacqueline N. Hewitt,12 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (chair)
Adam S. Burrows, Princeton University
Neil J. Cornish, Montana State University
Andrew W. Howard, University Hawaii, Manoa
Bruce Macintosh, Stanford University
Richard F. Mushotzky, University of Maryland
Angela V. Olinto, University of Chicago
Steven M. Ritz, University of California, Santa Cruz
Alexey Vikhlinin, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
David H. Weinberg, Ohio State University
Rainer Weiss, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Eric M. Wilcots, University of Wisconsin
Edward L. Wright, University of California, Los Angeles
A. Thomas Young, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired)
Staff
David Lang, Program Officer, BPA
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
Dionna Williams, Program Coordinator, SSB
A STRATEGY TO OPTIMIZE THE U.S. OPTICAL/INFRARED SYSTEM IN THE ERA OF THE LARGE SYNOPTIC SURVEY TELESCOPE
With funding from NSF, the NRC conducted a study that recommends a strategy to optimize the U.S. ground-based optical and infrared astronomy observatory system in preparation for the full operation of the LSST. The BPA-SSB ad hoc Committee on a Strategy to Optimize the U.S. Optical and Infrared System in the Era of LSST, appointed in July 2014, held three meetings in 2014. The committee’s report, Optimizing the U.S. Ground-Based Optical and Infrared Astronomy System, entered the review process in early February 2015, and the report was released on April 17, 2015. The committee chair briefed interested government parties in conjunction with the release of the report. The Executive Summary of the report is reprinted in Chapter 5.
Membership13
Debra M. Elmegreen, Vassar College (chair)
Todd A. Boroson, Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network
Debra Fischer, Yale University
Joshua A. Frieman, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Lynne Hillenbrand, California Institute of Technology
Buell T. Jannuzi, University of Arizona
Robert P. Kirshner, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Lori M. Lubin, University of California, Davis
Robert Lupton, Princeton University
Paul L. Schechter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Paul Adrian Vanden Bout, National Radio Astronomy Observatory
J. Craig Wheeler, University of Texas, Austin
___________________
11 All terms began on August 12, 2015, unless otherwise noted.
12 Term began on June 10, 2015.
13 All terms ended on May 1, 2015.
Consultant to the Committee
Joel Parriott, American Astronomical Society
Staff
David B. Lang, Senior Program Officer, BPA
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
Linda Walker, Program Coordinator, BPA
Beth Dolan, Financial Manager, BPA
SURVEY OF SURVEYS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE DECADAL SURVEY PROCESS
The ad hoc Committee on Survey of Surveys: Lessons Learned from the Decadal Survey Process completed a draft of its report in February 2015, and it was sent to 12 reviewers for comment in early March. The committee completed its responses to reviewer comments in late May, and the report was approved for release on June 15. The committee released its final report, The Space Science Decadal Surveys: Lessons Learned and Best Practices, as a prepublication on July 29, and the final printed version was delivered in late October. The Summary of the report is reprinted in Chapter 5.
Membership14
Alan Dressler, Observatories of the Carnegie Institution for Science (chair)
Daniel N. Baker, University of Colorado, Boulder
David A. Bearden, Aerospace Corporation
Roger D. Blandford, Stanford University
Stacey Boland, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Wendy M. Calvin, University of Nevada, Reno
Athena Coustenis, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France
J. Todd Hoeksema, Stanford University
Anthony C. Janetos, Boston University
Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute
J. Douglas McCuistion, X-energy, LLC
Norman H. Sleep, Stanford University
Charles E. Woodward, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
A. Thomas Young, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired)
Staff
David H. Smith, Senior Program Officer, SSB
Katie Daud, Research Associate, SSB
Dionna Williams, Program Coordinator, SSB
___________________
14 All terms ended on June 30, 2015.