EXTENDING SCIENCE

NASA’s Space Science Mission Extensions and the Senior Review Process

Committee on NASA Science Mission Extensions

Space Studies Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

A Report of

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS500 Fifth Street, NWWashington, DC 20001

This report is based on work supported by Contract NNH11CD57B with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the view of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-44878-9
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-44878-6
Digital Object Identifier: 10.17226/23624

Copies of this report are available free of charge from

Space Studies Board
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001

Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.

Copyright 2016 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Extending Science—NASA’s Space Science Mission Extensions and the Senior Review Process. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23624.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org.

Reports document the evidence-based consensus of an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and committee deliberations. Reports are peer reviewed and are approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Proceedings chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other convening event. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and have not been endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

For information about other products and activities of the Academies, please visit nationalacademies.org/whatwedo.

COMMITTEE ON NASA SCIENCE MISSION EXTENSIONS

VICTORIA E. HAMILTON, Southwest Research Institute, Co-Chair

HARVEY D. TANANBAUM, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Co-Chair

ALICE BOWMAN, Johns 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, The University of Texas at Arlington

AMY MAINZER, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

ALFRED S. McEWEN, University of Arizona

DEBORAH VANE, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Staff

DWAYNE DAY, Senior Program Officer, Study Director

KATIE DAUD, Research Associate

ANESIA WILKS, Senior Program Assistant

NATHAN BOLL, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow

CHERIE ACHILLES, Lloyd V. Berkner Space Policy Intern

CAROLINE JUANG, Lloyd V. Berkner Space Policy Intern

MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director, Space Studies Board and Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board

SPACE STUDIES BOARD

DAVID N. SPERGEL, Princeton University, Chair

ROBERT D. BRAUN, University of Colorado, Boulder, Vice Chair

JAMES G. ANDERSON, Harvard University

JEFF M. BINGHAM, Consultant

JAY C. BUCKEY, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center

MARY LYNNE DITTMAR, Dittmar Associates, Inc.

JOSEPH FULLER, JR., Futron Corporation

THOMAS R. GAVIN, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

NEIL GEHRELS, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

SARAH GIBSON, National Center for Atmospheric Research

WESLEY T. HUNTRESS, JR., Carnegie Institution of Washington

ANTHONY C. JANETOS, Boston University

CHRYSSA KOUVELIOTOU, The George Washington University

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR, University of Toronto

ROSALY M. C. LOPES, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

DAVID J. MCCOMAS, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

LARRY PAXTON, Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory

SAUL PERLMUTTER, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

ELIOT QUATAERT, University of California, Berkeley

HARLAN E. SPENCE, University of New Hampshire

MARK H. THIEMENS, University of California, San Diego

MEENAKSHI WADHWA, Arizona State University

Staff

MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director

CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN, Administrative Coordinator

TANJA PILZAK, Manager, Program Operations

CELESTE A. NAYLOR, Information Management Associate

MARGARET KNEMEYER, Financial Officer

SU LIU, Financial Assistant

Limited copies of SSB reports are available free of charge from

Space Studies Board

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001

(202) 334-3477/ssb@nas.edu

www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/ssb.html

Preface

In fall 2014, NASA Associate Administrator for the Science Mission Directorate John Grunsfeld discussed with members of the Space Studies Board the possibility of a study of the value of NASA’s extended science missions and how the agency evaluates mission extension proposals, known as Senior Reviews. NASA’s Astrophysics Division has conducted Senior Reviews on a regular basis since the early 1990s; the agency’s other divisions started following similar procedures afterwards, and they were formally required by the NASA Authorization Act of 2005, which states:

Although that Act (which was reaffirmed in 2010) requires biennial reviews, it does not define how NASA should conduct them, leaving the details to NASA, which has codified its requirements in internal management and other policy documents.

In summer 2015 NASA formally requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a study on this subject. The Academies established a committee in fall 2015. The committee held an organizing teleconference in December, and its first in-person meeting was held at the National Academies’ Keck Center in Washington, D.C., on February 1-2, 2016. The committee heard from the NASA Associate Administrator for Space Science as well as each of the division directors and other speakers. The committee’s second meeting was held at the Beckman Center in Irvine, California, on March 2-4. At this meeting the committee heard from the former chairs of several Senior Review panels, as well as persons in charge of large and small missions currently in their extended phase. The committee’s third meeting was held at the National Academy of Sciences Building in Washington, D.C., on April 18-20 and was primarily devoted to writing this report, which was delivered to NASA in late August.

This page intentionally left blank.

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Robert Barish, University of Illinois,

J. Bernard Blake, The Aerospace Corporation,

Lisa Gaddis, U.S. Geological Survey,

George M. Gloeckler, University of Michigan,

Guosheng Liu, Florida State University,

H. Jay Melosh, Purdue University,

Jon Miller, University of Michigan,

Clive R. Neal, The University of Notre Dame,

Rebecca Oppenheimer, American Museum of Natural History,

Michael Ryschkewitsch, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, and

Xubin Zeng, University of Arizona.

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Marcia J. Rieke, University of Arizona, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

This page intentionally left blank.

Contents

SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

The Science Mission Directorate

What Is an Extended Mission?

What Do NASA’s Extended Missions Cost?

How Does NASA Decide What Missions to Extend?

Reference

2 THE SCIENTIFIC BENEFITS OF MISSION EXTENSIONS

Astrophysics Discoveries During Extended Missions

Earth Science Discoveries During Extended Missions

Heliophysics Discoveries During Extended Missions

Planetary Science Discoveries During Extended Missions

Conclusions

References

3 REVIEW OF EXTENDED MISSIONS BY NASA

SMD-Wide Characteristics of Senior Reviews

Division-Specific Characteristics of Senior Reviews

Stakeholders

Incorporation of Lessons Learned into Senior Reviews

Summary History of Missions Reviewed by the Senior Reviews

Extension of European Space Agency Science Missions

Conclusion

Reference

4 THE BALANCE OF NEW MISSIONS VERSUS EXTENDED MISSIONS

Conclusion

References

5 INNOVATIVE COST REDUCTIONS FOR EXTENDED MISSIONS

Colocating Operations

Innovative Approaches

Repurposing Extended Missions to Create New Science Missions

Risk Assessment and Acceptance

The Need for Support in Response to Spacecraft Anomalies

Control of Costs and Risks Related to the Introduction of New Procedures

Determining the Lifetime Cost of Science Missions

Conclusion

APPENDIXES

A Statement of Task

B Scientific Discoveries of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and Opportunity Rover During Extended Phase

C NASA Science Mission Directorate Budgets by Division for Fiscal Year 2016

D Extended Mission and Senior Review References in Decadal Surveys

E Biographies of Committee Members and Staff

F Acronyms