Minutes of the

18th Meeting of the Inter-Agency Consultative Group for Space Science (IACG)

Bern, Switzerland

October 7-8, 1998
 
 

AGENDA
 

October 7, 1998

1. Approval of Agenda

2. Report from the Executive Secretary

3. Appointment of New Executive Secretary

4. Agency Reports

4.1 NASA

4.2 RSA

4.3 ISAS

4.4 ESA

5. Reports from the Working Groups

5.1 WG-1: Solar System Exploration

5.2 WG-2: ISTP

5.3 WG-3: Data Archiving

5.4 WG-4: Tracking, Commanding, and Data Acquisition

October 8, 1998

6. Reports from the Panels

6.1 Panel 1: High Energy Astrophysics

6.2 Panel 3: VLBI

7. Working Group and Panel Membership

8. Conclusions on Working Group and Panel Recommendations

9. Update on International Space Science Institute (ISSI)

10. International Mars Exploration Working Group (IMEWG)

11. International Lunar Exploration Working Group (ILEWG)

12. Any Other Business

13. Date and Place of Next Meeting

14. Adjourn

R.M. Bonnet welcomed the Delegations to Europe. He wished them an enjoyable stay and a fruitful meeting. Bern was a special place for space science since it hosted ISSI, which had been successfully established with the support of the IACG. Its Executive Director, J. Geiss, said that ISSI had been very pleased to help in the organization of the 1998 IACG meeting on behalf of ESA and also that one of its staff members, V. Manno, would be nominated as the next IACG Executive Secretary. He was joined by B. Hultqvist in extending a warm welcome to the participants.
 
 

1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

The agenda had been distributed in advance of the meeting. Following agreement to re-order several items it was approved as reflected in the final version.
 
 

2. REPORT FROM THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

C. Pilcher reported that most of the past year had been spent in concluding the reorganization of the IACG as approved at the 16^th meeting in 1996. Four new working groups and one additional panel were established. He showed the current membership, which would be available for discussion during the meeting.

He also reported that the IACG had received an invitation to participate in UNISPACE III in Vienna in July 1999. He had responded that the IACG would be fully represented through the four agencies, all of which participated in UNISPACE III, and therefore a separate invitation was not entirely necessary. However, it might good to have an IACG presence at UNISPACE. It was agreed that the Heads of Delegations would discuss this point at their separate meeting.

C. Pilcher explained that R. Bonnet had made a proposal to the other Heads of Delegations that a permanent structure, hereafter to be called the IACG Secretariat be established at ISSI. This had been unanimously accepted, as had the proposal that V. Manno should be the new Executive Secretary for a four-year term. He distributed copies of the letters signed by four heads of Delegation (in Annex), plus the minutes of the previous year’s meeting and officially handed over his duties to V. Manno.
 
 

3. APPOINTMENT OF NEW EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

R. Bonnet outlined V. Manno’s career, including his involvement in the creation of the IACG in 1981. It was a pleasure and an honour to have him as Executive Secretary. He praised C. Pilcher for his dedication to the IACG and to international space science, thanking him for his contribution to the IACG, which had been greatly appreciated.

V. Manno expressed his acceptance of the appointment. He thanked the Heads of Delegation for their confidence and felt personally very pleased because of the close involvement he had had with the IACG since the very beginning. To set up such a group in the vastly different political environment of 1981 had not been an easy task and would not have survived and achieved success without the personal dedication of the four leaders and of their successors. He stressed his commitment to the IACG and looked forward to serving the heads of Delegation and the IACG as a whole for the years to come.
 
 

4. AGENCY REPORTS

4.1 NASA

E. Huckins congratulated ESA on the amazing recovery of SOHO.

He then reported on NASA’s activity during the last year. NASA Space Science Office had been through a major transition. W. Huntress had left his position two weeks previously. He had been a great leader and an active participant in the international space science community. E. Weiler had been appointed acting Associate Administrator and during his interim no changes in policy were anticipated.

C. Pilcher had succeeded the tragically deceased J. Rahe in his position as Director of the Solar System Exploration Division of the OSS and M. Allen would take over the duties of C. Pilcher.

A period of heavy launch activity was beginning with 13 different missions scheduled for flight during the next six months, including DS-1 on October 25, STS-95 on October 29, Mars-98 in December and Mars Polar Lander in January, Stardust and a number of smaller missions on Pegasus launch vehicles.

Major software validation problems had been encountered on AXAF. The launch was now fixed for March 21, 1999 but could slip into April (from an original launch date of December 1998) involving 30-40 M$ extra cost.

A major re-look at the Mars Program, including the Mars 2003 lander was being undertaken.

A Strategic Plan had been produced covering four themes for space science: Sun/Earth connections, Astronomical Search for Origins, Structure and Evolution of the Universe, and Solar System Exploration. Heavy emphasis was being given to technology throughout the program and to new missions, which were enabled by the introduction of this technology.

A. Bunner gave a detailed presentation on the theme "Structure and Evolution of the Universe" (SEU) and a brochure was made available. SEU addressed three fundamental questions:

A new cosmology was emerging and data to support it would come from the MAP, Planck, AXAF and NGST missions.

AXAF would be launched in March or April 1999 and would complement XMM, ASTRO-E and SPECTRUM-X. For the future, a "Voyage to a black hole" was planned to try to understand the physics of the earliest moment of the Universe and the evolution of the structure following the Big Bang itself. The "Voyage to a Black Hole" involved:

- the follow-on of COMPTON – GLAST – scheduled for an FY02 start

- HTXS (also called Constellation-X)

- LISA gravitational waves;

- OWL high-energy cosmic rays.

The timeline for these missions was not precisely defined.

G. Withbroe presented the theme of the Sun/Earth connection. This was devoted to the study of what causes solar variability, how the Sun and its variability affect the Earth and the other planets, and how the Sun interacts with interstellar medium. The current missions include: TRACE, ACE, SOHO, POLAR, WIND and GEOTAIL. Future missions included TIMED, HESSE, IMAGE, Cluster 2, Solar-B and Solar Stereo. He showed some images from TRACE which had been launched on April 1, 1998. Interesting results had been obtained from TRACE, Yohkoh and SOHO He noted that solar terrestrial physics events were attracting press attention.

The FY99 budget includes funding for the solar terrestrial probes. The next missions include US participation in the Japanese Solar-B mission and Stereo, composed of two spacecraft for stereo imaging of the Sun to serve as a research tool and prototype space weather early warning system for solar energetic particles. The third probe was Magnetospheric Multiscale for the investigation of the magnetospheric response to solar mass ejections. If the FY99 budget and subsequent planned budgets are approved, this would ensure the financial resources to continue the ISTP program through Solar Maximum.

C. Pilcher, on behalf of E. Weiler, presented the theme of "Astronomical Search for Origins". This covered:

- how did life on Earth arise?

- did life arise elsewhere in the Universe?

- are there worlds around other stars?

Current projects included the Hubble Space Telescope and the Keck Interferometer. Future missions comprised FUSE, WIRE, HST-SM3, NGST, and Terrestrial Planet Finder. C. Pilcher showed results from HST which had been phenomenally productive. This was a central part of the Origins program and HST provided insights into the search for the origin of stars. There had been a tremendous public response to the astronomical search for the origins of the Universe, galaxies, planets and life.

One other element of NASA’s Space Science Program was astrobiology. This was defined as the study of life in the Universe; and the chemical and physical forces and adaptation that influence life’s origins, evolution and destiny. It sought to answer the question "Is life a cosmic imperative?" C. Pilcher gave an overview of the Astrobiology Research Institute created by NASA. The Institute was a very exciting development and would be particularly international with 12 consortia involved.

C. Pilcher then presented the theme for which he was responsible, "Solar System Exploration" whose current missions were: Galileo, Cassini, Mars Global Surveyor (MGS), NEAR and Lunar Prospector. Future missions would be Mars Orbiters (98 and 01), Mars Landers (98 and 01), Mars Sample Returns (03 and 05), Stardust, New Millennium Program, Europa orbiter and Pluto-Kuiper Express. He showed results from Lunar Prospector which had raised the question of whether ice was buried at the poles since the data suggest excess hydrogen. The MGS had been returning spectacular results indicating that Mars was an Earth-like planet. The Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter had shown the topography of parts of the northern hemisphere of Mars to be extremely flat and the magnetometer had shown magnetic anomalies that were being analysed. Evidence of layering on Mars had also been seen.

Galileo was returning extremely interesting results of the Jovian system. Images of the surface of Europa showed an extremely chaotic surface with evidence of liquid water beneath the surface. There was magnetic evidence of subsurface salty oceans on both Europa and Callisto, the latter being particularly hard to understand. Fascinating results were being obtained which would challenge the theorists.

The New Millennium Program Deep Space 1 (about to be launched) would validate technologies for rapid access in deep space exploration.

Stardust would be launched on February 6, 1999 and encounter Comet Wild on January 2, 2004, returning to Earth on January 15, 2006.

R. Bonnet thanked C. Pilcher and noted that W. Huntress had initiated most of this impressive program. He expressed the IACG’s appreciation of W. Huntress’ work that served as an example to all.

4.2 RSA

A. Galeev presented the current missions of the Russian space program: Spectrum-X, Radioastron, UVT and Integral (the latter being a cooperative project with ESA). Priority was being given to Spectrum-X.

He then described the mission scenario of the Mars-PHOBOS Sample Return mission scheduled for launch in 2005.

He gave the present status of INTERBALL that was a cooperative project. The Auroral probe which until recently had operated very well, was now rotating randomly but all principal data were still being received from the spacecraft. In May 1998 there was a successful reactivation of the sub-satellite Magion-5 that was providing electric field data.

The ROY project was in Phase A and intended to study fundamental plasma turbulence and magnetic field annihilation in thin current sheets. It would do in-situ multipoint measurements and remote scanning by radio tomography.

The project would consist of one main spacecraft (BASE) and 3-4 small sub-satellites. It was planned to observe on very small scales (10-300 km) in various critical regions of the magnetosphere.

Launch is expected in 2004.

A future project, Interhelios (under study by Izmiran Observatory) would use electric propulsion to go through Mercury and Venus. It would be part of the program pursued by ESA with the Solar Orbiter.

R. Bonnet asked if it was planned to test the solar probe using the Mir space station. A. Galeev explained that RSA wanted to cancel the Russian solar probe mission due to lack of resources and funds. The program he had just presented was the short-term program with Spectrum-X being top priority. The only project to be launched from Mir would be an electric propulsion unit. This was a technological experiment included in the space station program.

R. Sunyaev confirmed that Spectrum-X had the highest priority in the Russian space science program and was using a large part of the funding. Integral was next priority. and an agreement between ESA and RSA had been signed whereby Russia would provide a Proton launcher in return for 25% observing time.

He went on to describe the other missions in operation:

KOSMOS A: observing small gamma ray bursts

GRANAT, launched in 1989, continued observations of galactic center in the 35-600 KeV band imaging. Due to celestial mechanics, the mission would end next year.

Mir-Kvant had been launched in 1987 and continued to map the galactic centre region in 3-30 KeV, black holes and supraluminal sources.

Russia continued to produce hardware. Spectrum-X (which would complement AXAF and XMM) had two unique instruments: a focal X-ray polarimeter supplied by NASA, and an objective Bragg spectrometer with a spectral resolution of 6eV for 6.7 KeV line, produced as a collaborative project by Russia, Denmark and Germany.

On Integral, the change to the new elliptical 72-hour orbit permitted the spacecraft to be outside the radiation belts for 80% of the time. They were working on the theory where it was possible to use germanium crystals on Integral. The "scattering" effect would be measured.

In R. Sunyaev’s personal opinion, Russia would continue its commitment to space science. Many people, including many young people, were behind the space science program.

R.M. Bonnet congratulated the Russian delegation on its efforts in overcoming current difficulties and expressed his hope for a successful outcome for the visionary and ambitious missions to come.

4.3 ISAS

A. Nishida presented the key events of the ISAS program over the last year.

The Nozomi (Planet B) mission to Mars had been launched successfully. Solar B had started phase A and Selene phase B. The pace was slightly slower but steady progress was being made. The launch of Lunar A had been rescheduled by one year for a launch in 1999.

He then gave an overview of ISAS activities including Yohkoh (launched in 1991 and working very successfully, with an impressive number of publications produced and high involvement in data analysis), Akebono, Geotail and ASCA, launched in 1989-1993.

K. Tsuruda presented the status of on-going programs in solar system exploration:

Planet-B, renamed Nozomi (meaning Hope) was Japan’s first Mars orbiter. It aimed to study Martian aeronomy with emphasis on solar wind interaction with upper atmosphere. It carried 14 instruments, some developed under international collaboration. It had been launched on July 4, 1998 and carried out its first lunar swingby on September 24, 1998. The second lunar swingby would take place on December 18, 1998 and Nozomi would leave Earth’s orbit on December 20, 1998, arriving at Mars on October 11, 1999. All instruments had been tested successfully and were working well.

The objectives of Lunar-A, due for launch in August 1999 with an M-V-2 launch vehicle,are to study the lunar internal structure, especially the size of the core, using lunar penetrators carrying seismometers. The most difficult part of the program would be to ensure that the instruments and batteries survive penetration.

The main aim of the Muses-C mission is a technology demonstration mission with additional engineering performance. The scientific aim is to return samples from an asteroid. Muses-C also carries a very small micro rover to study the surface of the asteroid. It would be launched on January 20, 2002 with capsule return to Earth in 2006.

Selene is a project being carried out jointly by ISAS and NASDA. The scientific objectives are to study the origin and evolution of the Moon and science of the Moon with in-situ measurements and science from the Moon. The engineering aspects are NASDA’s main interest in the mission and would provide technology development for future lunar exploration. He explained the project organisation and management, followed by a summary of the mission and its development schedule. Launch is scheduled for 2003.

Future missions being studied informally included a Mercury Orbiter, Selene 2 and a Venus atmospheric mission.

Y. Ogawara gave an overview of the ISAS Space Astronomy missions.

The missions presently in operation are Muses-B (HALCA), ASCA and Yohkoh. Future missions comprised ASTRO-E, ASTRO-F (2004) and Solar-B (2005).

Muses-B (HALCA), a VLBI mission, was launched in February 1997.. ASTRO-E is planned for launch in early 2000 and would complement AXAF and XMM. It has six X-ray detectors and five X-ray mirrors. He showed a comparison of the effective areas as compared with other telescopes of AXAF and XMM. The planned lifetime is more than two years.

ASTRO-F, the first infrared dedicated astronomy mission of ISAS, would be launched in 2004.

Yohkoh could last until 2002 and would see the next maximum. Solar-B would follow Yohkoh with a launch date in 2005 (Japanese fiscal year) with an M-V launcher. The main instruments are SOT, XRT and EIS. The US and UK are collaborating on the instruments. The expected lifetime is more than three years.

A. Nishida then gave an update of the recent government reorganisation in Japan which was still on-going. The Ministry of Education would merge with the Science and Technology Agency and there would be a definition of new ministries in the next fiscal year. The target was to reduce government employees by 20%. The government also had plans for outsourcing, possibly setting up independent administrative agencies. NASDA had enjoyed a private status although it was fully funded by the government and was an example of what could be the new pattern in the future. Concerning the potential impact on basic research, no directives had been given to university collaborative research institutes such as ISAS. The merger of ISAS and NASDA was not on agenda so far.

He also drew attention to an article in "Space News" of the previous month in which it was stated that ISAS was in financial distress while other agencies were prospering. This was totally untrue and a correction had been carried in a later edition.

R. Sunyaev asked if ASCA operations would continue after ASTRO-E? A. Nishida replied that the principle was to operate as long as the spacecraft lasted.

R. Bonnet congratulated ISAS on the report and its potential programme. Science was achieved one way or another and done very well.

4.4 ESA

M. Huber presented the past achievements, starting with Hipparcos. Since the release of the Star Catalogue the number of published papers outnumbered SOHO and ISO combined. The riddle of the old stars being older than the universe had also been resolved. One of the recent European highlights concerning HST had been the discovery of dense clusters of young stars in the Small Magellanic Clouds. The European Coordinating Facility was undertaking a new calibration scheme for the Faint Object Spectrograph Instrument with the aim of improving the wavelength scale and redshift scale.

Using viewgraphs, M. Huber reported that Ulysses was in its second orbit and going towards two polar passes as it approached solar maximum. The surge of solar activity at the end of 1997 was followed by a more extended outburst earlier this year. On both occasions the effects of events were observed at

1 AU and 5 AU. A comparison of data obtained would be one of the themes of the Ulysses Aphelion Workshop to be held at the end of October. Ulysses had also provided a unique opportunity to measure the true radial variation of the anomalous cosmic ray component in the inner heliosphere. The length of the mission was well exploited by observing this phenomena.

On Huygens the second in-flight checkout had taken place. The change in the signal level of the Probe-to-Orbiter umbilical radio link, observed during the first checkout was again detected. This was due to solar noise which had been corrected and would not appear during the descent on to Titan.

ISO was a tremendous success. All instruments had functioned perfectly and there had been one more year’s observing time than had been expected. M. Huber presented some scientific highlights. One of the most outstanding results had been the detection of water everywhere in the sky and on the planets, including Mars and Titan. ISO was now in the post-operations phase which would last 3.5 years to archive the data in a proper way. This was being done through a collaboration between ESA and five national data centres plus IPAC. The ISO Data Centre was located at Villafranca in Spain. It supported the European community and communicated the ISO results to a wide audience.

Turning to SOHO, M. Huber showed recent scientific highlights. He showed a transparency of a tidal wave on the Sun caused by a flare. This had previously been a theory which was now proved. This phenomenon had never before been observed and demonstrated the need to put into instruments into space since the tidal wave was only of the order of 1 arc second. The latest news from SOHO was that the VIRGO instrument had been turned on.

J. Credland retraced the history of the SOHO recovery action which had been made possible by the good cooperation between ESA and NASA. He thanked NASA and the European contractors for their outstanding efforts during this recovery. The spacecraft was working well, although two out three gyros had been lost. The payload was being switched on. SUMER and VIRGO were already working and GOLF would be switched on that same day.

The launch of the XMM mission would be delayed until late January 2000 due to the late delivery of one of the instruments. The X-ray mirrors (28 shells) were a superb technological achievement.

For Cluster II, ESA’s contribution to the ISTP, J. Credland reported that the satellites would be launched by two Soyuz launch vehicles in pairs in June and July 2000. This mission had been squeezed into the ESA Science Programme at a cost of 215 MECU.

Integral was scheduled for launch in April 2001. Integral was based on the XMM bus and due to economies of scale it had been possible to undertake the mission as a medium mission instead of a cornerstone (i.e. at half the cost).

SMART-1 was a small mission for advanced research and technology. The objective was to demonstrate key technologies for future deep space missions, e.g. solar electric propulsion. SMART missions cost 50 MECU in total. The current launch date for SMART-1 was 2001. SMART-2 was under study internally and the possibility of using a Spanish microsatellite as a bus was being considered.

On ROSETTA there had been problems in setting up the industrial consortium in keeping with the rules on industrial return and five months had been lost. Nevertheless it was hoped to meet the 21 January 2003 window. The payload was in intermediate design review and the ground segment was on schedule. Concerning the lander, an independent review was under way.

The Mars Express mission was basically an orbiter mission to be submitted for final approval to ESA’s Science Programme Committee (SPC) in November. It was due for launch in June 2003 at a cost of 150 MECU. The possibility of including a lander was being studied. ESA had been asked by NASA and ASI to work on a telecommunications package for 2005. This was feasible but outside the overall cost envelope. This would also be submitted to the SPC.

The FIRST and Planck missions had been combined. The ESA Executive had proposed a merged mission (one spacecraft, one launcher) which would fit within the financial envelope. However, the SPC had voted in favour of a carrier mission (two spacecraft, one launcher) which led to an extra 80 MECU cost. The launch was planned for 2006.

J. Credland commented that the ESA Science Programme budget was constantly being eroded and the Horizon 2000 Programme in jeopardy. It was hoped that the Level of Resources (LOR) for the next five years would be voted at the meeting of the ESA Council in December 1998. Until the LOR was decided, planning of ESA science missions after the year 2003 was hypothetical.

E. Huckins was impressed by the cost of Mars Express and asked if this included instruments. J.Credland confirmed that the total cost would be 150 MECU of which 60 MECU would cover industrial costs.

J. Green asked if the instruments had been selected and R. Schmidt confirmed that seven instruments had been selected as follows: ASPERA-3, HRSC, OMEGA, PFS, SPICAM-UV, SSRA and the Radio Science Instrument.

G. Cavallo then reported on ESA’s future studies, the first of which were the F-missions intended as preparation for cornerstone missions. The first F-mission would be Mars Express and the others would be selected through a competitive process

The MiniSTEP mission had been renamed STEP and was a cooperative mission with NASA. ESA had a maximum of 20 MECU to devote to this mission.

Concerning the future of solar astrophysics, at the last IACG a discussion had taken place on whether to support a colloquium on this topic. IACG support had not been given since the meeting was essentially a European one. However the colloquium had been held on Tenerife where a consensus was reached on recommending that ESA undertake a Solar Orbiter, with possible international participation, in 2007. Endorsement had been given for possible European involvement in the Stereo and Probe missions.

Turning to the future cornerstones, G. Cavallo outlined the calendar: studies were on-going until September 1999, to be followed by presentations to the ESA scientific Working Groups and the Space Science Advisory Committee in October 1999. The technology development was on-going. Three candidate cornerstones were presently under study:

• A Mercury orbiter. Consideration was being given to the use of solar electric propulsion and a hard lander. The mission promised very good science.
• GAIA, a 3-axis spacecraft of the Hipparcos type, which would be launched by an Ariane 5 in a dual launch with another passenger.
• IRSI, the Infrared Space Interferometer, whose objective was to detect an Earthlike planet around a star within 20 parsec, based on 6 telescopes of 1.53m diameter each.

The LISA study, also under study by NASA, was a mission to detect gravitational waves.

R. Bonnet drew attention to some future problems. A meeting of the ESA Council Working Group (set up to prepare the Council at ministerial level) had taken place the day before. This meeting had discussed the Level of Resources of the Science Programme for the next five years. The Member States had recognised that the Science Programme had no more flexibility and that any cost increase in a mission would have an impact on other missions. Any launch delay would cost money and in the interests of efficiency launch dates must be maintained. The actual flexibility was limited to cancelling Mars Express or delaying FIRST/Planck. A decision on the LOR in December would allow mission planning for the next five years.

R. Bonnet commented that in addition to the cornerstones described by G. Cavallo, ESA’s scientific advisory groups had identified a set of priorities, as follows:

1. A mission to Mars – this has been implemented by Mars Express with a cheap mission;
2. Implementation of a solar physics programme after SOHO – the Tenerife workshop had identified a Solar Orbiter mission;
3. Continuation of the successful cooperation with NASA on HST by participating in NGST. Potential areas of cooperation were under discussion with NASA.

In the context of a flat budget, it was possible, with some difficulty, to maintain schedules. Continuation of the budget erosion would cause serious problems and for this reason the launch schedule for cornerstones had not been given. The dates would be available in December or in the first half of 1999. Six missions had been launched over the last ten years and after the period 2000-2007 14 satellites would have been launched. The cheaper, faster approach was risky and a big challenge to project teams and to industry.

5. REPORTS FROM THE WORKING GROUPS

5.1 WG-1: Solar System Exploration

C. Pilcher recalled that WG-1 had been set up two years previously at the Florida meeting. As reported the previous year, a consensus had been reached to focus science objectives on the Moon, Mars and small bodies. The full WG membership had been identified and discussions had continued on what would be most effective focus of WG-1.

Concerning missions for small bodies investigation, there were nine IACG member missions planned or in development which potentially involved 16 or 17 small bodies, including Deimos and Phobos. This was a rich program ideally suited for international coordination by the IACG. There is a great deal of work that needs to be done internationally for the overall coordination of the missions, combination of the databases and for model developments There was a need for ground characterisation of missions targets as well as NEOs, that can benefit from international collaboration similar to the Halley Watch that found its operational role within the first phase of the IACG on Comet Halley. Furthermore the possibility existed of space based NEO search from the planned missions, using imaging systems in serendipity mode. In relation to this area the WG 1 proposed that the IACG accept sponsoring the workshop on NEOs to be held in Turin in June 1999 before Unispace III.

The case for making exploration of small bodies the focus of Working Group 1 and the new area of intervention of the coordinating activity of the IACG, was indeed compelling, and the WG recommended approval by the IACG.

At the Working Group meeting there had been an in-depth discussion on up-coming Mars missions and mission planning including Mars-Phobos, Nozomi, Mars Express

R. Bonnet said that WG-1 had done an excellent job in proposing topics for coordination which would improve this field of science.

The IACG unanimously supported sponsoring the Workshop on NEOs of June 1999.

5.2 WG-2: ISTP

L. Zelenyi reported that this working group was newly established, with new terms of reference and new members. Two important preparatory meetings had been held prior to this meeting in Bern. WG-2 had met at Nagoya during the COSPAR meeting and at the ISTP workshop at RAL.

L. Zelenyi distributed the recommendations of the WG to heads of delegations. These covered recommendations on the four Campaigns initiated by the IACG and addityional topics. They are reported herewith:
 

Recommendation to the IACG
 

Campaign 1

Background: Campaign 1 (Magnetotail Energy Flow, Storage and Release) which was initiated in 1995 has been extremely successful resulting in more than 50 science publications whilst others are still appearing. It is recognized that new opportunities to complete this campaign science will occur during solar maximum with the existing ISTP mission complement and with several new agency missions.

Recommendation 1: WG-2 recommends that Campaign I be extended another 5 years through Solar Maximum conditions.

Campaign 2

Background: Campaign 2 (Boundaries in Collisionless Plasmas) was designed around the unique multi-point measurement ability of the Cluster mission. It is important to note with the current fleet of IACG missions (Wind, Polar, Geotail, Interball) and other missions (Equator S) and ground-based data which are now becoming available, a limited set of Campaign 2 science objectives can be realized. These missions provide an important and unique experience in studies of collisionless boundaries which will be very valuable for more detailed studies. However, to complete Campaign 2 Cluster II mission is essential.

Recommendation 2: WG-2 recommends that Campaign 2 be continued through the next Solar Maximum and the prime mission of Cluster 2.

Campaign 3

Background: WG-2 finds that the objectives of IACG Campaign 3 (Solar Events and their Manifestation in Interplanetary Space) have largely been met with the spectacular observations of coronal mass ejection's by SOHO, other imaging instruments, and by the interplanetary spacecraft.

Recommendation 3: As we enter the current maximum of solar activity, it is recommended that these studies (including new problem areas) be incorporated into the proposed IACG Solar Maximum Campaign.

Campaign 4

Background: WG-2 notes that the objectives of IACG Campaign 4 (Solar Sources of Heliospheric Structures out of the Ecliptic) have been completed with the first full heliocentric orbit of Ulysses. Results have been amply reported at the ESLAB-31 Symposium and in the regular literature. Accomplishments point to a new series of interesting physical questions that can be addressed in the future regarding the transition between small-scale coronal fields and large-scale heliospheric fields, especially in the origin of "open" solar magnetic fields.

Recommendation 4: As Ulysses is now still near the ecliptic, WG-2 recommends that this topic is taken up again by the IACG after a pause of one year.

Workshop

Background: The solar observatory spacecraft of the present generation (Yohkoh, SOHO, TRACE, Coronas I) and other heliospheric spacecraft (e.g.Ulysses) have generated an enormous volume of data relating to flares, CME's and other forms of solar activity, and the quiet sun. WG-2 feels that the time is ripe to conduct a major workshop/review activity, analogous to the Skylab workshop series, to help guide the scientific productivity of the new generation of observatories (HESSI and SOLAR B plus ground-based facilities).

Recommendation 5: It is proposed that IACG sponsorship is sought based on the concrete plans for the Workshops.

Radiation Belts

Background: With the oncoming era of Solar Maximum, WG-2 recognizes that renewed scientific emphasis will be devoted to the study of the dynamical properties of the Radiation Belts which are greatly affected by substorms, geomagnetic storms, and shock encounters of the magnetosphere. The evolving orbit of Polar, IMAGE, the recently selected IMEX mission of NASA, and other IACG projects will provide new fundamental observations in support of the renewed approach to the physics of trapped radiation.

Recommendation 6: WG-2 recommends endorsement of the recent COSPAR initiative to promote the developments of radiation belt models and the archiving of high resolution energetic particle data essential to verify the models.

IACG web page

Background: In the process of a campaign, progress reports on principal scientific results and an associated bibliography of relevant publications should be regularly prepared and placed on the IACG/ISSI web page.

Recommendation 7: At the conclusion of a campaign, a final report and bibliography should be prepared and featured on the IACG web page.

R. Bonnet said that the IACG took note of the recommendations and would reflect on them and rediscuss them under item 8 of the agenda. The extensive report of WG-2 showed the activity and richness of these missions. The IACG had played a useful role and should be proud of what had been achieved. Tremendous progress in the field studied by WG-2 had been made. He congratulated the members of the WG on their activity and achievements.

B. Hultqvist noted that several reports had mentioned forthcoming workshops and symposia. ISSI would be willing to give its support for such meetings.

5.3 WG-3: Data Archiving

M. Allen, representing J. Bredekamp, explained the terms of reference of the working group which had been structured according to the charter accepted at the last IACG

Working Group 3 on Data Archiving (WG 3) met the day before the IACG Plenary Session. Several short and informal presentations provided updates in international data archiving since the last IACG meeting last December in Moscow. These included descriptions of recent data system work in Europe, including mirror sites at the Max Planck Institute in Munich and at the Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory in England for the NASA Coordinated Data Analysis Web (CDAW) hosted by the National Space Science Data Center. This provides a integrated browsing capability for current datasets from many missions and instruments. An account of recent work on the DARTS system of ISAS was also discussed.

Working Group 3 reviewed the status of online access to astrophysics and solar-terrestrial data sets. Progress continues to be made, with comparable capabilities becoming available. WG 3 discussed the following topics and proposes further study in these areas:

1. Data Access

WG 3 recognizes the critical value of space science data sets accumulated as a result of agencies' investment in flight programs. In considering data archive and access policies and facilities, WG 3 recognized that three levels are involved: identification of relevant data; information about the data; and access to the data themselves. In addressing these needs, provisions should be made for long-term accessibility, particularly for smaller missions with shorter operational lifetimes. The Web is providing a consistent interface.

2. Quality Control, Validation, and Configuration Management

WG 3 discussed the necessities of ensuring proper calibration and recalibration, archive, and documentation of data. PIs and flight mission teams should plan for these activities and document them in advance in project data management plans.

3. Standards and Interfaces

Appropriate standard data set formats should be used, with access software made available. Trade-offs should be carefully considered between advantages of new and improved formats and the availability of necessary decoding tools.

4. Science Community Support and Participation

There is a need to promote information about available data sets to increase utilization; this will help strengthen PI participation in supporting broad access to their own data.

5. Proprietary Data Periods

WG 3 discussed the benefits of rapid release of space science data for public use, but also noted the need for adequate validation and calibration of data before release. Any proprietary data period should be balanced between the interests of the broader community and the investment of the investigator.

WG-3 had made no recommendation at this time but expected to continue its activity by e-mail and to hold another meeting before the next IACG.

R. Bonnet thanked WG-3 for the work undertaken. The topic would be followed up under item 8 of the agenda.

5.4 WG-4: Tracking, Commanding and Data Acquisition

J. Ellwood recalled that WG-4 had been set up at the last IACG. Some communication had taken place by e-mail and a first meeting had been held the previous day. The terms of reference had been refined and agreed and were now submitted to the IACG for formal confirmation. The WG had considered ways of implementing interoperability for space science missions in the future and had discussed a potential mission set and standards in space. The first candidates for implementation of interoperability would be the ESA Integral and the ISAS Muses-C.

A. Galeev requested that Coronas be included in the potential mission set.

The WG had held a very productive meeting the previous day, resulting in a set of ten recommendations and actions for the future. J. Ellwood presented each item. In particular the WG had refined and agreed its terms of reference and requested formal confirmation from the IACG. It endorsed the good work done by the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) and the Space Frequency Coordination Group (SFCG) and proposed that the pertinent recommendations/standards become the technical baseline for interoperability. The WG requested the IACG to endorse its recommendations and actions and approval to communicate the resulting conclusions to the CCSDS and the SFCG.

R. Bonnet thanked WG-4 and said that these recommendations would be discussed under point 8.
 
 

6. REPORTS FROM THE PANELS

6.1 High Energy Astrophysics

A. Bunner reported that the Panel had met on various occasions throughout the year at scientific conferences with a final meeting on October 6. The topics discussed were as follows:

• Integral-Proton launch vehicle – Integral was an important ESA mission with US and Russian participation to be launched on a Proton launcher provided by Russia. The formal agreement for the provision of a Proton had been signed at the highest level by ESA and RKA in November 1997 but had not yet been included in the Russian Federal programme. This was a cause for grave concern because, in case of unavailability of the Proton, ESA would be forced to purchase an Ariane launcher, not included in the overall budget of the mission. The impact on the ESA Science Program might lead to delays or cancellation of some of the science projects. On behalf of the science community, the Panel expressed the hope that this problem would soon be solved.
• Spectrum-X – this had the highest priority in the Russian space program, after the space station. It is a major collaborative program with the UK, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Spain and the US. Within the US the completion and launch of Spectrum-X was the highest priority space science collaboration with Russia. It had unique features including an X-ray polarimeter, a Bragg spectrometer and an all-sky monitor. However, the launch date kept slipping. The US is committed to complete this project and would join no other projects with Russia until that time. The Panel was seeking confirmation of a firm launch schedule.
• Coordination of Observing Programs – during the next year three significant launches were planned: AXAF, XMM, ASTRO-E. Because of the complementary capabilities of these missions, it was essential to ensure that the international scientific community used them as efficiently as possible. Panel 1 endorsed the principle that the peer review process be used to steer observing time proposals to the most appropriate observatory.
• Targets of Opportunity/Transient Sources – it was important in this field that the data be made available quickly. Panel 1 emphasized the importance of quick data release on targets of opportunity and transient sources.
• Coordination of Future Planning – complementary capabilities also existed in gamma-ray astronomy (Integral, Compton-GRO). A remarkable consensus had appeared for the future concerning the importance of high resolution spectroscopy in both x-ray and gamma-ray spectroscopy. It was necessary, as these plans evolved, to ensure that efforts were not duplicated but that complementary capabilities continued to be provided.

Panel 1 therefore recommended that "It is important to studies of transient and time-varying astrophysical phenomena to have satellite data quickly released for follow-up observations. Therefore the IACG continues to endorse the principle of making satellite data on burst and transient sources quickly available to the scientific community for simultaneous or rapid follow-up observations by other satellites."

R. Bonnet noted that there was very successful cooperation in this field with striking results. The question of the Integral launcher had been discussed the previous day during an ESA/IKI meeting and was being pursued as a matter of great importance.

6.2 VLBI

J. Smith recalled that the space VLBI panel had been successful for over a decade. It had been reconstituted and now focussed on future missions. Its charter was to serve as an advocacy and planning forum for the development of the appropriate technologies and infrastructure for possible future space VLBI missions. For planning purposes a set of missions had been established covering: VSOP, Radioastron, VSOP-2, Millemetron, ARISE.

Using a viewgraph, J. Smith illustrated the Panel accomplishments during 1998 in link frequency allocations and data rate developments. The Panel encouraged the agencies to look at higher rates. Some success in this area had been achieved with the Canadians.

In summary, J. Smith said that the Panel would make one recommendation in that the membership should be reorganised in a better way.

R. Bonnet thanked J. Smith for his presentation and for the work done for the benefit of science.
 
 

7. WORKING GROUP AND PANEL MEMBERSHIP

C. Pilcher showed the working group and panel membership (status May 27,1998):

The following changes were approved by the IACG:

WG-1 no longer included a Mars planning subgroup.

WG-2: J. Ellwood was no longer a member and V. Domingo would be replaced by B. Fleck

Y. Ogawara would be replaced by T. Kosugi. Two IKI representatives: V. Kuznetsov and S.Savin. were added.

There were no comments concerning WG-3.

WG-4: R. Bonnet proposed that T. Yamada act as co-chair. A. Nishida agreed with this proposal.

There were no comments concerning membership of the Panels.

Since most of the panels and WGs had reformed this year, it was agreed that their membership would be reviewed in two years time (2000). The complete membership chart approved by the IACG is in Annex.
 
 

8. CONCLUSIONS ON WORKING GROUP AND PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS

WG-1:

the IACG approved that the area of the exploration of small bodies in the Solar System should constitute the focus of Working Group 1 and the new area of intervention for the coordinating activity of the IACG.

WG-2:

• -Recommendation 1 to extend Campaign 1 was endorsed by the IACG;
  -Recommendation 2 to continue Campaign 2 through the next Solar Maximum and the prime mission of Cluster was endorsed by the IACG;
  -Recommendation 3 that the studies be incorporated into the proposed IACG Solar Maximum Campaign was endorsed by the IACG;
  -Recommendation 4 that the topic be taken up again after a pause of one year was endorsed by the IACG;
  -The principle of holding a major workshop to review activity in the area of Sun and Heliosphere was agreed and ISSI’s invitation to host the meeting acknowledged;

  On recommendation 6 recommending endorsement of the recent COSPAR initiative to promote the development of radiation belt models, A. Nishida expressed some concern since the recommendation emphasised the models and not the science to be done. R. Bonnet agreed that this was a valid point. The IACG accepted the recommendation with the proviso that mention be made of the necessity to improving scientific understanding of the radiation belts in the future. L. Zelenyi confirmed that the text of the recommendation would be revised as follows:

  Recommendation 6: WG-2 recommends endorsement of the recent COSPAR initiative to promote the archiving of high resolution energetic particle data as a part of WG-2 efforts to deepen the understanding of the physical processes leading to the formation of Radiation Belts and acceleration of trapped radiation.

  With regard to Recommendation 7 suggesting an archive at the ISSI secretariat in Bern, R. Bonnet asked if ISSI could accept this proposal. B. Hultqvist said ISSI would be happy to do so but ISSI would need inputs from the members. L. Zelenyi confirmed that the inputs would be provided. J. Green said that the campaign coordinators should be asked to cooperate in this task. R. Bonnet appreciated ISSI accepting to undertake this task but emphasised that ISSI only had a small staff and would need help.With this proviso, Recommendation 7 was endorsed.

R. Bonnet noted that it was remarkable for such a number of recommendations to be issued and accepted.

WG-3:

M. Allen said that there were no specific recommendations but rather a set of issues and plans. The list of studies was endorsed.

WG-4:

J. Ellwood presented the 10 recommendations and actions. A. Nishida pointed out that there should be a distinction between the work planned and actual recommendations. The role of the IACG was to endorse (or otherwise) recommendations but planning was the task of the WG members. R. Bonnet asked J. Ellwood to extract the recommendations from the list. This was agreed.

Panel 1: the recommendation was endorsed.

Panel 3: the membership question had been discussed under item 7 and agreed.
 
 

9. UPDATE ON INTERNATIONAL SPACE SCIENCE INSTITUTE (ISSI)

J. Geiss recalled that ISSI had been set up nearly exactly three years ago and invited all the participants to visit the Institute. He also took this opportunity to thank the IACG for the moral support it had given from the beginning and it continued to give. He stressed that ISSI’s motto was "science first". ISSI’s basic tasks were to help the space science community to conduct coordinated multispacecraft interdisciplinary studies and to assist in synthesising the scientific results. This was achieved through workshops and working groups. At any one time between 2 to 30 visiting scientists were at ISSI.

B. Hultqvist circulated copies of recent ISSI publications and J. Geiss emphasised the importance of these publications and also the individual papers published with ISSI affiliation in international scientific journals.

At the request of the ESA Council, an evaluation of ISSI’s work had been carried out by an Evaluation Group composed of 7 scientists from different European countries, plus one US scientist. Sir Martin Rees chaired the group. The evaluation was very positive and had been accepted by the Director of Science of ESA and endorsed by the SPC that had recommended to Council to continue supporting the activities of ISSI at the present financial level for the period 1999-2003. ISSI was funded jointly by ESA and by the Swiss authorities. Extension of the funding until 2003 was under way in Switzerland. J. Geiss noted that some SPC delegates had raised questions about contributions from the other space agencies. He asked the IACG to reflect on ways and means for its member agencies to enhance their support for the activities of ISSI through direct financial contributions to cover travel to Bern and subsistence costs while at ISSI for their respective scientists

ISSI’s program focussed on solar system sciences and their astronomical implications. Four major fields were covered: cometary physics and chemistry, heliospheric physics, planetary science (Mars, Moon and Earth)and solar terrestrial physics. A series of Workshops ( started in November 1995) were currently planned until October/November 2000.

R. Bonnet congratulated ISSI on its remarkable achievements and programme. The IACG was very pleased to see that the institute which it had been instrumental in setting up now had such a prominent place in the world of science. The series of workshops and publications illustrated the interdisciplinary nature of ISSI’s work. Support for the continuation of ISSI activities would be proposed to the ESA Council. He made a strong plea for the IACG delegations to support, encourage and facilitate their scientists’ visits and scientific work at ISSI so as to maintain the international character of the Institute.

A. Galeev praised ISSI’s scientific output and its really international character in space science.

A.Nishida said that ISSI was working better than he had expected and he shared the view expressed by the other participants.
 

10. INTERNATIONAL MARS EXPLORATION WORKING GROUP (IMEWG)

R. Bonnet noted that the IMEWG and ILEWG had been set up in conjunction with WGs 1 and 2 and should therefore report to the IACG.

C. Pilcher summarised the activities of the IMEWG which had met twice in 1998. First in Paris on March 5-6, at which Mars Express, the NASA/ASI agreement and human exploration study had been discussed. The second meeting had taken place in Montreal on June 29-30 where the following was discussed:

• Mars Express instrument selection
• Mars Surveyor
• NASA/CNES meeting
• NASA human exploration study.

A third meeting would be held in Florida in December to report on the new Mars program architecture.

C. Pilcher went on to present the status of bilateral agreements:

• The NASA Administrator and the President of ASI had signed a number of agreements on November 21, 1997 on the role of Science. Attached to the agreement was a summary of the discussions focussed on Mars exploration involving planning for a proposal since accepted by ESA for a NASA/ASI radar for Mars Express plus a telecommunications package to be provided by ASI.
• At a meeting at NASA HQ in June 1998 the NASA Administrator and the CNES President had signed an agreement concerning the Mars Surveyor mission.
• At the same time the NASA Administrator had received a letter from Minister Allègre of France who proposed more specific cooperation between France and the USA with provision of an Ariane 5 launcher for a NASA sample return mission, including Mars exploration. NASA welcomed the interest of France and provision of the launcher.
• An agreement existed between ESA and ASI for cooperation on Mars Express.
• An agreement was being negotiated between NASA and ESA.

In this way, a series of bilateral agreements concerning Mars exploration were being put in place.

The missions to be launched were:

• Mars Climate Orbiter on December 10, 1998
• Mars polar lander in January 1999
• Deep Space 2 – a mission to test technology which would use a penetrator to study the subsurface of Mars.
• Mars Surveyor in 2001 was experiencing budget problems. A problem also existed concerning the Athena rover whose weight and cost had been underestimated. Drastic measures had been taken and the orbiter was largely unchanged but the lander had been substantially modified.

C. Pilcher concluded with a presentation of the Mars architecture study to develop architecture for the next decade. This would achieve significant advances towards understanding the history of Mars and survey for evidence.
 

11. INTERNATIONAL LUNAR EXPLORATION WORKING GROUP (ILEWG)

C. Pilcher said that the ILEWG had not met since the last IACG but a meeting was planned the following week in Moscow. The Chairman E. Galimov would make a report at the next IACG meeting.
 
 

12. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

R. Bonnet summarised the discussion held at the meeting of the four Heads of Delegation, plus the outgoing and incoming IACG Executive Secretaries.

The first topic concerned IACG participation in UNISPACE III in Vienna (July19-30,1999). A consensus had been reached that the activities where the IACG was involved should be mentioned, in particular those related to small bodies exploration and NEOs. As mentioned by C. Pilcher, a workshop would be held in Italy in June 1999 on this topic which the IACG had agreed to sponsor under agenda point 5.1. A. Nishida (COSPAR Co-Chairman) pointed out that there would be a session on solar system exploration at Unispace III, organised by COSPAR, .and it would be appropriate for the IACG to join COSPAR in the organisation of this session. It was thus agreed

The second topic concerned the terms of reference of Working Groups 3 and 4. Working Groups 1 and 2 had well defined goals whereas Working Groups 3 and 4 lacked somewhat in scientific orientation

and focus. The Heads of Delegation agreed that the Working Groups should have explicit and focussed scientific aims. E. Huckins proposed that as the particular activities went ahead, the WGs should keep this caution in mind and reduce the breadth of their plans. A. Nishida and A. Galeev agreed with this statement.

R. Bonnet proposed that the WG Chairmen be asked to reflect on these remarks and make suggestions for review at the next plenary meeting. It was thus agreed.
 
 

13. DATE AND PLACE OF NEXT MEETING.

Y. Matogawa, on behalf of ISAS, invited the IACG to hold its next meeting in Naha City, Okinawa, during the week of November 15, 1999. All delegations accepted this proposal and the dates were confirmed with working group meetings planned for November 16, 1999 and the IACG plenary meeting on November 17-18, 1999.
 
 

14. CLOSURE OF MEETING

R. Bonnet thanked the local organisers and the staff of ISSI for their support. He also thanked the ISSI Directors, J. Geiss and B. Hultqvist, for their continued presence during the meeting which had been much appreciated. He congratulated them on the excellence of the work achieved by ISSI and was happy that the IACG permanent secretariat would be based in Bern.
 
 

Annex 1

List of Delegations
 

V. Manno, ISSI, IACG Executive Secretary

Observer

ISSI     J. Geiss
            B. Hultqvist
 
 

Annex 2

Membership of IACG Working Groups and Panels

Status as of October 7, 1998
 

Working Group 1 on Solar System Exploration:

NASA/C. Pilcher (Chair), D. Yeomans, S. Saunders
ISAS/K. Tsuruda (Co-Chair), H. Mizutani, K. Uesugi
ESA/M. Coradini,Y. Langevin, R.Pellinen
RSA/IKI/V. Moroz, V. Linkin, VERNADSKY/E. Galimov

Working Group 2 on ISTP Missions:

RSA/IKI/L. Zelenyi (Chair), S Savin, G. Zastenker,
               NIIJAF/M. Panasyuk, IZMIRAN/V. Oraevskii, V.Kuznetsov
ESA/M. Huber (Co-Chair), B. Fleck, C. Escoubet
ISAS/T. Mukai, M. Hoshino, A. Nishida, T. Kosugi
NASA/G. Withbroe, J. Green, BC/R. Carovillano, UC/H. Hudson

Working Group 3 on Data Archiving:

NASA/J. Bredekamp (Chair), WASH U./R. Arvidson, IPAC/G. Helou
RSA/IKI/A. Belyev, R. Nazirov
ISAS/F. Nagase, M. Hoshino
ESA/L. Sanchez, P. Benvenuti

Working Group 4 on Tracking, Commanding and Data Acquisition:

ESA/J. Ellwood (Chair), M. Warhaut, W. Hell
NASA/W. Watson (P. Liebrecht, backup), R. Miller, W. Martin
ISAS/T. Yamada (Co-Chair), I. Nakatani
RSA/IKI/ E. Vasilyev, NPO LAVOCHKING/K. Sukhanov

Panel 1 on High-Energy Astrophysics:

NASA/A. Bunner (Chair)
ISAS/Y. Ogawara, F. Makino, KYOTO U: K. Koyama
RSA/IKI/R. Sunyaev
ESA/S. Volonté, B. Taylor

Panel 2 on IR/Sub-mm Astronomy:

ISAS/H. Okuda (Chair), T. Matsumoto
NASA/H. Thronson (Co-Chair)
ESA/S. Volonté, B. Taylor
RSA/IKI: Sholomitskii

Panel 3 on VLBI

NASA/J. Smith (Chair), J. Ulvestad, R. Preston
RSA/ASC/V. Slysh (Co-Chair), N. Kardashev, V. Andreyanov
ISAS/NAO/N. Kawaguchi, ISAS: H. Hirabayashi
ESA/H. Olthof

Annex 3

September 24, 1998

Dr. V. Manno
International Space Science
Institute
Hallerstrasse 6
CH-3012 BERN
 

Dear Dr. Manno:

We are happy to inform you that the Heads of the IACG Delegations have unanimously agreed to ask you to become the next IACG Executive Secretary, for the 4-year term 1999-2002 inclusive.  At the same time, as you know, the Heads of Delegation have agreed that it is appropriate for the IACG to establish a permanent structure of support to the Executive Secretary, hereafter to be called the IACG Secretariat.  The IACC Secretariat will also serve as the reference point and institutional memory of the group.  We are pleased to inform you that the proposal made by Professor R. Bonnet, that the IACG secretariat be located at ISSI, was unanimously accepted.

Regarding the IACG Executive Secretary, the IACG Secretariat, and the IACG Secretariat hosting institution, the following points should be noted:

1. As you know, the IACG is a coordination group, and, as such, it deals mainly with already approved missions.

2. IACG has no funds and no staff of its own.

3. Hosting the yearly meetings will continue to rotate among
the four members of IACG and will be fully supported by the hosting agency through a local organizing committee.

• The Executive Secretary will call the meetings, take care of the preparation by liaisoning with the local organizing committee, present a yearly report and will be responsible for the official minutes.

• The Secretariat-hosting institution will be granted two observer seats at the plenary meetings.

4. The Executive Secretary will assist the IACG working groups and panels to prepare their meetings and recommendations.  He will direct the operations of the IACG Secretariat.

5. The main tasks of the IACG Secretariat will be:

• To provide support to the Executive Secretary in his IACG-related activities,

• To be the main IACG reference address and take care of the relevant correspondence,

• To maintain the "home page" of the IACG on the World Wide Web, and

• To keep an archive of IACG (documents, previous minutes, recommendations, publications etc.).

6. The main tasks of the Secretariat-hosting Institution will be to support the activities of the Executive Secretary and the Secretariat.  In particular:

• To provide a part time staff to assist the Executive Secretary.  Over one year the support will not exceed 25 percent of a full-time equivalent.  In the case that you accept the nomination, you would also be expected to carry out these tasks along with those of the Executive Secretary within a maximum of 25 percent of your time.

• To partly support the travels of the future Executive Secretaries on IACG duty (a maximum of one visit to each delegation per year).  The support should be on a 50/50 basis, partly by the Secretariat-hosting institution and partly by the agency to whom the Executive Secretary will belong.

If you agree with the above terms of reference, we would like to ask you to confirm with Dr. C. Pilcher, the present IACG Executive Secretary, your availability to become the next IACG Executive Secretary.

In the affirmative case, you will be formally appointed in the course of the next IACG plenary meeting (October 7-8, 1998).
 

Annex 4
 
 
 
 

September 24, 1998

Professor J. Geiss
International Space Science
Institute
Hallerstrasse 6
CH-3012 BERN

Dear Professor Geiss:

We are pleased to inform you that the Heads of the InterAgency Consultative Group (IACG) Delegations have unanimously agreed that it is appropriate for the IACG to establish a permanent structure of support to the Executive Secretary, hereafter to be called the IACG Secretariat.  The IACG Secretariat will also serve as the reference point and institutional memory of the group.  We are also pleased to inform you that the proposal made by Professor R. Bonnet that the IACG Secretariat be located at ISSI was unanimously accepted.  The Executive Secretary will be appointed on a 4-year basis.  In this context, we are pleased to inform you that we are asking Dr. V. Manno, presently at ISSI, to be the next Executive Secretary for the term 1999-2002.

Regarding the IACG Executive Secretary, the IACG Secretariat, and the IACG Secretariat hosting institution, the following points should be noted:

1. As you know, the IACG is a coordination group; and, as such, it deals mainly with already approved missions.

2. IACG has no funds and no staff of its own.

3. Hosting the yearly meetings will continue to rotate
among the four members of IACG and will be fully supported by the hosting agency through a local organizing committee.

• The Executive Secretary will call the meetings, take care of the preparation by liaisoning with the local organizing committee, present a yearly report, and will be responsible for the official minutes.
• The Secretariat-hosting institution will be granted two observer seats at the plenary meetings.

4. The Executive Secretary will assist the IACG working groups and panels to prepare their meetings and recommendations.  He will direct the operations of the IACG Secretariat.

5. The main tasks of the IACG Secretariat will be:
• To provide support to the Executive Secretary in his IACG-related activities,
• To be the main IACG reference address and take care of the relevant correspondence,
• To maintain the "home page" of the IACG on the World Wide Web, and
• To keep an archive of IACG (documents, previous minutes, recormnendations, publications, etc.) .

6. The main tasks of the Secretariat-hosting Institution
will be to support the activities of the Executive
Secretary and the Secretariat.  In particular:

To provide a part-time staff to assist the Executive Secretary.  Over one year, the support will not exceed 25 percent of a full-time equivalent.  In the case that Dr. Manno will accept the nomination to Executive Secretary, he is expected to carry out these tasks along with those of the Executive Secretary within about 25 percent of his time.

To partly support the travels of the future Executive Secretaries on IACG duty (a maximum of one visit to each delegation per year).  The support should be on a 50/50 basis, partly by the Secretariat-hosting institution and partly by the agency to whom the Executive Secretary will belong.

if you agree with the above terms of reference, we would like to ask you to confirm with Dr. C. Pilcher, the present IACG Executive Secretary, the availability of ISSI to host the IACG Secretariat permanently.