Mars Sample Return: Considerations for the Curation of Astromaterials from a Restricted Planet
Andrea D. Harrington1, Aurore Hutzler2, and Francis M. McCubbin1
1NASA, Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, USA
2
ESTEC, European Space Agency, The Netherlands
The joint NASA/ESA Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign is underway. The Perseverance Rover has already collected areturnable sample suite currently cached at Three Forks and the pairs to these samples are stored on the Rover with morecompelling samples planned to be collected. The MSR collection would represent the most geologically diverse astromaterialcollection ever returned and should provide information on topics ranging from Martian geological and biological history toMartian environmental hazards and in situ resource utilization to support potential human exploration [1]. Although Jezero
Crater and the surrounding area are not Mars special regions, the scientific opinion is that Mars as a whole is of significant
interest to the process of chemical evolution and/or the origin of life. Therefore, due to possibility, however remote, that thesamples could contain extraterrestrial life, MSR is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA
Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide apristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, but it mustalso provide high-containment to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release
and/or sterilized.
The SRF is first and foremost a curation facility, however it will be utilized for an array of tasks and scientific objectives,
including:• Receive the flight hardware containing the sample collection (e.g., Earth Entry System, Orbiting Sample)• Deintegrate the sample tubes from the hardware and put in a stable state• Characterize the sample tubes (Pre-Basic Characterization)• Open the sample tubes (e.g., collect headspace gas, extract samples while maintain stratigraphy)• Perform initial sample characterization and cataloging• Conduct a sample safety assessment• Execute preliminary examination of samples for science• Enable select competed/early science• Prepare, sterilize, and distribute samples for science outside of the SRF• Sample isolation/storage
The SRF is not intended to be the long-term curation facility for Martian samples. The nominal utilization period for the SRF
is anticipated to be 2-5 years. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, thisanticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to the highcontainment requirements, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR.
As a result of the complexity of designing, constructing, and operating a contamination-controlled high-containment facility,
NASA initiated an assessment of current technologies. Personnel toured both contamination-controlled and high-containment
facilities around the world, exploring the implementation of new technology and standard practices. The report, entitled:“Tours of High-Containment and Pristine Facilities in Support of Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility(SRF) Definition Studies” compiles the knowledge of experts in their fields and offers recommendations for the best pathforward [2]. NASA and ESA have used this data, as well as outputs from numerous MSR science working groups, to performthe Mars SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) and the European Extraterrestrial Sample Infrastructure (EETSI) System Study.
While EETSI investigated the preliminary design, costs, and schedules for new, traditionally built fixed SRF and Sample
Curation Facilities (SCF), MSAS was a scoping study, designed to assess the feasibly of utilizing traditional versus more novel
infrastructure, specifically:
1. Lease and renovation of existing space
2. Construction of a new, traditional fixed facility
3. Construction of a modular facility (new or within an existing building)4. Construction or renovation of a hybrid facility to address requirements with multiple modalities that may include acombination of modalities 1-3.
The assessment also considered the following aspects of the SRF for each modality:• Ability to meet requirementso Regulatory
o Planetary protectiono Contamination controlo Science and curation• Ability to meet changing needs for equipment, timelines, and facility use• Timelines for design, construction, commissioning, installation of equipment, testing, training, and operational
readiness drills• Cost for construction and operation, including those associated with hazard resilience• Ease of access for international users• Decommissioning, repurposing, sale, or lease following use of the facility• Uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces• Uncontained ancillary spaces• Waste management
The outputs for MSAS and EETSI have been critical to understand the potential trades and identify priorities for the SRF.
However, while options were able to be refined, a second phase (MSAS2) will develop high-concept designs at multiple
locations in order to optimize the technical capabilities, cost, and schedule of the SRF. As part of the next steps in planning, theNASA/ESA Mars Sample Receiving Project (SRP) Joint Curation Office (JCO) is developing a curation plan following
guidelines from the NASA NPR 7100.5 [3] and supporting the Measurement Definition Team (MDT). The MDT is charteredto evaluate the measurements and instrumentation needs for the SRF. Outputs from this team, as well as the Sample Safety
Assessment Protocol (SSAP) Tiger Team, will be critical for SRF design. Upon completion of MSAS2, the SRF designconcepts would be utilized to inform site-specific design but the location of the SRF will not be finalized until NASA’s
completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.
Every sample return mission offers scientists and engineers unique challenges and opportunities, MSR is certainly not anexception. While differences in robotics and spacecraft are often apparent, differences in the approach for the curation of agiven collection are usually more nuanced. NASA’s Astromaterial Acquisition and Curation Office, and other international
space agency partners, have developed strong foundations of best-practices and lessons learned. Although MSR represents thefirst Restricted Earth return in five decades, the knowledge gained from the development and operations of the Lunar
Receiving Laboratory are informing the potential curation strategies for MSR. Whether the SRF is reutilized by NASA for
another Restricted Earth return after the MSR samples are deemed safe or turned over to a partner for other types of highcontainment work, the knowledge gained during technology development, SRF design, construction, and operations will lay
the foundation for sample return missions for the next five decades.
References[1] Czaja A. D. et al. 2023. Meteoritics & Planetary Science 58: 885-896. [2] Mattingly R. L. et al. 2020. JPL/NASA Report.
[3] https://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?Internal_ID=N_PR_7100_0005_&page_name=main&search_term=7100.5