[meteorite-list] Antartic treaty
David & Kitt Deyarmin
bobadebt at ec.rr.com
Sun Jun 4 19:39:09 EDT 2006
Why are you on this list?
Is it your sole purpose to condemn us for what we do?
I have only been a member for a very short time and I'm so sick of your drivel.
Find some other list to troll.
----- Original Message -----
From: Armando Afonso
To: 'Meteorite Mailing List'
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 1:43 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Antartic treaty
Hi again.
This is known to everybody, but it clearly shows how, in reality, the
meteorite hunters are seen by the scientific comunity, regardless of the
many times described (by the first) proximity and cooperation between them:
A PLAGUE.
The problem of Saharan meteorites is exactly the same as Antartica`s, and
should be seen and regulated in the same way, in my opinion.
Instead of this, the legal and knowledge vacuum in that countries is used by
this entrepreneurs, and aplauded by most of us.
Nobody seams to understand what is lost in this process.
I think honestly, that the entities that classifies the martian and lunar
material for the dealers, make them a BIG favour, but are giving a bad
contribution to the problem.
Without their participation, that stones would sell only as unclassified NWA
(max. 0.05 USD/Kg).
More or less the initial value to the discoverers (they had lunch that day)!
Or confiscated...
Sorry again for one more inconvenient reflection.
AA
Antarctic Treaty
The Hague, The Netherlands, 11-15 September 2000
ANTARCTIC METEORITES
Working Paper submitted by SCAR
At the meeting of the SCAR Working Group on Geology, held in Tokyo, Japan,
10-14 July 2000 during XXVI SCAR, serious concerns were expressed regarding
the potential for collection of Antarctic meteorites by private expeditions.
All meteorites have major intrinsic value to science and Antarctic
meteorites have considerable commercial value. These factors make the
collection of Antarctic meteorites very attractive not only to scientists
but also to entrepreneurs. All meteorites collected by scientists are lodged
and catalogued in internationally recognized depositories and are made
freely available for study by the scientific community. Meteorites not
collected by the scientific community may be retained in private hands or
offered for sale at inflated prices so that they are effectively lost to
scientific research.
At XXII SCAR in 1992, SCAR Delegates adopted Recommendation XXII-1 on
"Protection of Geological Specimens", specifying meteorites among other
types of geological specimens. This recommendation was noted in the report
of XVIII ATCM and its general provisions were incorporated into ATCM
Recommendation XVIII-1, specifically in the Attachment to the Recommendation
at Section E) paragraph 4). However, specific reference to meteorites, and
to other items identified by SCAR, was omitted. In the current situation,
SCAR wishes to re-emphasize the vulnerability of geological specimens,
particularly meteorites, to unrestricted collecting and has adopted the
following recommendation.
Recommendation XXVI SCAR-10
On the collection of Antarctic meteorites
Noting that members of certain private expeditions are apparently going to
Antarctica with the expressed aim of collecting meteorites for subsequent
sale,
Concerned that meteorites collected in this way will be lost to science, and
Mindful of SCAR Recommendation XXII-1,
SCAR recommends that National Committees, via their governments, request the
ATCM to take a stronger position on Recommendation XXII-1 that states:
"SCAR recommends that:
1. Geological specimens, such as fossils, minerals, meteorites, volcanic
bombs and ventifacts in Antarctica should be collected for scientific or
educational purposes and not for commercial gain;
2. Geological samples collected from Antarctica for these purposes should be
properly curated in institutions accessible to the scientific community and,
wherever possible, should be publicly displayed."
The papers and discussions that led to the formulation of the recommendation
are attached to this paper in Annexes 1-4 as follows:
Annex 1: E-mail message from Professor Gregory Herzog, Chairperson of the
Meteorite Working Group, to Professor Ross Powell, US Representative to the
SCAR Working Group on Geology
Annex 2: Paper prepared for the SCAR Working Group on Geology by Dr Ralph P.
Harvey, Principal Investigator, Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program
Annex 3: Press Release by Space Adventures Ltd, dated July 17, 2000
Annex 4: Extract from the draft Report of the SCAR Working Group on Geology,
Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
______________________________
Annex 1
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 14:46:07 -0400
From: herzog herzog at rutchem.rutgers.edu
To: ross at geol.niu.edu
Subject: Antarctic meteorites: some issues for SCAR
Dear Prof. Powell:
I write to you in your capacity as the US representative to the Scientific
Committee on Antarctic Research. As you no doubt know, the Antarctic is a
wonderful place for finding meteorites. Most of the lunar and Martian
meteorites in the world's collections come from there as do many other rare
meteorites of great scientific value. Lately, I have become concerned about
the implications of Antarctic meteorite collections undertaken by
non-governmental agencies. For more than twenty years, several elements of
existing government programs have allowed researchers to take full advantage
of the recovery of Antarctic meteorites:
1) careful and consistent documentation on collection;
2) sustained curation of high quality; and
3) availability, on an impartial, cost-free, and timely basis, of samples to
working scientists around the world.
I believe that governmental agencies are more likely to build and sustain
programs that have these elements than are non-governmental ones. We know
from experience that both the Japanese and the U.S. meteorite programs have
consistently provided samples in this way to the international community.
A related issue of possible interest to SCAR seems likely to arise some time
soon, namely, the conditions under which Antarctic samples originally
collected for scientific purposes might eventually be sold. Existing
treaties, I believe, already bar large-scale mineral exploitation from the
Antarctic. Meteorite recovery, however, is intrinsically small scale and may
not be covered by the treaties. With some rare -- and therefore
scientifically valuable -- types of meteorites now priced at $(US)10k/g, the
temptation to sell a valuable find will probably be harder to resist for a
non-governmental than for a governmental agency. One can argue about what
the consequences of such sales might be. My concern is that they would limit
for years to decades the quantities of material available for research.
I encourage SCAR to consider these issues. My personal view is that any
program to collect Antarctic meteorites should have to (a) commit to
implementing and (b) demonstrate the ability to implement programs that have
the features listed above. As far as I know, there are no such requirements
at present. I also believe it is in the best interest of science and of
international amity to limit the commercialization of Antarctic meteorites.
Perhaps SCAR can help lend these positions or ones like it some moral, or
better still, legal authority. Enforcement presents complicated problems
that will have to be addressed.
Thank you for your attention. I would be very interested to learn the
outcome of your discussions.
Gregory Herzog
Chairperson,Meteorite Working Group*
*The Meteorite Working Group is a standing committee with ten members that
meets twice yearly. Among other tasks, it oversees the distribution of
samples of meteorites held in the U.S. collection at the Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Texas.
Gregory Herzog
Dept. Chemistry, Rutgers Univ.
Wright-Rieman Laboratories
610 Taylor Road
Piscataway, NJ 08854-8087
Voice: 732-445-3955 FAX: 732-445-5312
______________________________
Annex 2
Paper tabled at the meeting of the SCAR Working Group on Geology
Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
Protecting Antarctic Meteorites
Introduction
Since the discovery of a concentration of meteorites at the Yamato (Queen
Fabiola) Mountains in 1969, more than 25,000 meteorite samples have been
recovered from Antarctica. The vast majority of these have been collected by
nationally funded scientific expeditions and made available to the planetary
materials research community. These specimens have proven to be of
extraordinary value to planetary scientists- they are currently the only
source of "ground truth", non-microscopic extraterrestrial materials.
Meteorites also have extraordinary desirability as curiosities, and are
often assigned high monetary value by collectors. With the increase in
private access to the continent, the allure of Antarctic meteorites to
private expeditions has become stronger, and in the 1999-2000 Austral
summer, the first systematic collection of meteorites by a private
organization occurred. This summary has been prepared for SCAR
consideration, with the intent of expressing the concern of the planetary
materials community over this recent development and promoting an
examination of possible solutions.
The importance of Antarctic meteorites to science
Antarctic meteorite recoveries provide a reliable and continuous supply of
extraterrestrial samples. The abundance of samples has made destructive
analysis, which is unavoidable for some types of measurements, easier to
justify, allowed accommodating access to samples, and provided a quantity
and breadth of materials for study far beyond that from any previously
discovered source. The relatively complete and unbiased nature of systematic
collections in Antarctica has been particularly valuable. Antarctic
meteorites, collected from a single icefield in a consistent, unbiased
manner, serve as a well-preserved and represen-tative sample of the full
spectrum of materials arriving from space.
Illustrating the importance of Antarctic meteorites, the recently published
book Planetary Materials (Papike, 1998) is the most recent comprehensive
survey of research on extraterrestrial materials, running over 1000 pages.
Of the 435 individual meteorites listed in the index to this book, 38% (167)
were collected in Antarctica. Similarly, GeoRef, the comprehensive online
bibliography of Earth Sciences publications includes 2250 publications on
Antarctic meteorites since 1972. Meteorites collected by the US Antarctic
Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) program have been particularly important. 68%
(114, or 26% of all meteorites) of the Antarctic meteorites listed in
Planetary Materials were collected by ANSMET; 16 have been the topic of more
than 10 publications, 8 have been the topic of more than 20 publications,
and 4 having been the topic of more than 50 publications.
Perhaps the single most important aspect of Antarctic meteorite collection
efforts to date is that nearly all of these important samples are made
available to the world's planetary materials research community through
altruistic distribution systems that are virtually unparalleled in the world
of science. It was recognized early on that no single institution, let alone
single investigator, could begin to realize the scientific potential of
these specimens. Even-handed sample distribution systems were created that
continue to serve the community. For example, ANSMET meteorites are shipped
from the field unsorted to the Johnson Space Center in Houston, where each
sample undergoes rapid, broad-brush characterization. These initial
characterizations are published on the web and in a bi-annual newsletter,
and scientists from around the world are actively invited to receive the
samples. Neither the field team nor the initial characterization team has
any pre-emptive rights to the specimens, ensuring that opportunities for new
discoveries are available to anyone. The US program receives requests from
around 250 researchers each year, and provides approximately 600 samples in
that timeframe. The active Japanese Antarctic meteorite program has a
similar sample distribution ethic, as have the several smaller programs
initiated by European agencies.
The problem of private expeditions
The biggest concern is that active recovery of Antarctic meteorites by
private or other non-governmental groups will result in the loss of
specimens to science. Throughout human history, meteorites have been
assigned uncommon value and been actively sought out by both scientists and
private collectors. The lure of meteorites has in turn given them both
commercial and assumed value, and unfortunately often proves strong enough
to encourage illegal activities. For example, in spite of laws forbidding
the export of meteorites, an extremely active and systematic "black market"
in the countries of the Sahara has resulted in the loss of thousands of
specimens in recent years. In contrast to the altruistic Antarctic sample
distribution systems, only a tiny, non-representative sample of Saharan
meteorites end up in scientific repositories &endash; and these only in
exchange for money. Even the most "mundane" samples are of great value
commercially. Ordinary chondrites, the most common type of meteorite (about
90% of what falls) typically sell for US $1&endash;10 per gram depending on
a specimen's state of weathering and completeness; similar to the price of
gold. Martian meteorites typically sell for about 100 to 1000 times as much,
and unique Martian meteorite samples may sell for perhaps US
$30,000&endash;50,000 per gram - approaching the price of cut, flawless
diamond. Money can thus be a powerful driving force behind meteorite
recovery. Similar problems plague the field of paleontology as well.
Unfortunately Antarctic meteorites, because of their rarity on the market,
have exaggerated trade value. For example, the largest meteorite found in
Antarctica (ALH76009) was recovered in the first season of the ANSMET
program before strict protocols were in place. It consisted of dozens of
scattered fragments totaling more than 440 kg. A few pieces ended up outside
of scientific controls, and occasionally they can be found for sale. Asking
price is typically US $500-600 per gram. Even when not sold for cash, the
rarity of Antarctic meteorites gives them an enhanced value in trades
&endash; one mundane Antarctic specimen is currently worth many dozens of
rarer types from other continents. This implied value is clear enough that
the US repositories of Antarctic meteorites (the Johnson Space Center and
the Smithsonian Institution) have chosen not to conduct permanent trades of
these specimens to avoid infringing on the Antarctic Treaty System.
While historically the lack of access to the continent, the harsh
conditions, and the Antarctic Treaty and its protocols have provided some
protection, the unique nature of Antarctic meteorite concentrations make
them an increasingly attractive target. The locations of existing Antarctic
meteorite stranding surfaces have been identified in the literature, and
become potential targets for any recovery expedition. Access to these sites
is now primarily an issue of funding &endash; Twin Otter aircraft operated
by commercial entities such as ANI can easily locate and land at these
locations. Most legal obligations can be simply met by claiming scientific
or educational credentials and keeping all sample exchanges off the public
record.
Previous consideration of the issue
Discussions among those familiar with Antarctic research and planetary
materials researchers showed that most considered the potential for private
meteorite expeditions low until recently. Costs seemed prohibitive and risk
seemed high. Periodically private expedition planners discussed plans to
look for meteorites along their paths, or collectors approached existing
meteorite recovery team members, but none targeted meteorites as a primary
goal and no recoveries were made (or admitted to). That situation changed in
1998 when a private group with the specific goal of recovering meteorites
(The Planetary Studies Foundation) visited the Patriot Hills and surrounding
regions. While their goals were generally stated as science and education,
their website specifically states that "..... the team especially sought
meteorites", and the party included two members whose primary interests were
meteorite collection. While the 1998 expedition did not meet any obvious
success in finding meteorites, they later serendipitously discovered a tiny
fragment of meteorite within a collected morainal sample. The same private
group organized a larger expedition to Antarctica in January 2000 and, with
meteorite collecting as a primary focus, recovered 19 specimens thought to
mass nearly 5 kg total from the Thiel Mountains area. The group has publicly
stated that it plans future expeditions. While for both expeditions the
group has privately claimed that meteorite samples would be made available
to outside scientists and shared with existing sample distribution channels,
they have yet to do so or make this offer publicly.
Realistically, the impact of these activities has been small. However, the
potential for future activity is significant. The 19 specimens recovered by
the private group demonstrate the feasibility of private recoveries, and if
sold or traded could easily translate to enough actual value to finance
several future expeditions. It is not apparent that the existing Treaty and
related protocols and laws can hinder such activity as long as it is done in
the name of science or education. Yet the damage such expeditions can do to
the existing programs is real. Private expeditions can greatly lessen the
value of government-supported efforts by removing meteorites from areas
currently being systematically searched in several ways. First, private
collections almost certainly cannot (or will not) conduct searches, handle,
curate and distribute samples to the standards of the governmental
collections. As a result all collections suffer; the private samples are
biased and underutilized, while the public collections are incomplete and
may also suffer bias (particularly if private collectors "high-grade" during
searches, removing or withholding the biggest or the best samples). The
Thiel Mountains region, where ANSMET had conducted reconnaissance searches
in 1982-83 and 1991-92, has now been degraded in this manner.
Possible solutions
ANSMET's preferred tactic has been to appeal to the altruism of other
parties that may operate around meteorite stranding surfaces. The potential
for meteorite recoveries is fairly well-known among Antarctic researchers,
and when field parties have encountered meteorites, in virtually every case
they have enthusiastically offered them to the existing curatorial system.
This solution is ideal for all concerned &endash; non-meteoritical groups
can enjoy the thrill of finding meteorites and know they are serving
science, while the planetary materials community avoids the loss of
specimens.
Private expeditions have different motives and are unlikely to feel this
altruism so strongly; if at all. The cost of mounting a private expedition
is significant, and meteorites represent a tangible, valuable return on
their investment. The private expeditions detailed previously bear witness
to this conclusion. The leader of both expeditions was approached on several
occasions by representatives of the US Antarctic meteorite efforts, in the
hopes that representative samples of recovered specimens could be provided
to research scientists through the existing system. Unfortunately no
agreements were reached, and the prospects for these samples reaching the
larger community remain unknown.
Other possible solutions have been discussed, most of a more severe nature.
One of them is for ANSMET and the other governmental meteorite recovery
efforts to quit publishing find-site locations. This is the tactic currently
favored within the paleontological community to preserve fossil locations
and is used extensively by the illegal collectors operating in the Sahara.
Unfortunately this tactic also has the potential to diminish the value of
the scientific collection, by removing the capability of establishing the
geographical relationship among finds. ANSMET has published fairly detailed
maps and indexes of all of its meteorite recovery sites since its inception,
all of which are publicly available.
Another possible solution is to limit access to and activity within specific
areas by designating individual meteorite stranding surfaces as "Sites of
Strategic [sic] Scientific Interest" (SSSI). There are several complications
to this approach. First, it obviously imposes limits to the activities of
both meteoritic and non-meteoritic expeditions. Finding limits that can
segregate harmful activities from those that are helpful or unrelated may be
difficult. For example, the SSSI regulations might require that a
significant proportion of each recovered meteorite sample be provided
immediately to one of the established governmental distribution centers. But
how would such a regulation be enforced? Private groups might simply claim
the rocks they collected are terrestrial, and take them out of the public
eye. A second complication is the fairly large number of sites currently
under investigation could increase the number of SSSI by 10 or more, with
more being added as time goes on. Some of the areas currently under study
consist of many small and intricately shaped icefields &endash; would we
designate "all the exposed blue ice within the given range" as an SSSI, or
designate each small icefield individually? It is clear that guidelines
would have to be developed as to which sites should be included, for how
long, and what procedures should be followed for future designations.
Summary
Antarctic meteorites are a significant scientific resource that private
(non-governmental) expeditions have begun to collect. While such expeditions
may describe themselves as scientific or educational, such descriptions may
disguise meteorite collection activities that counter, rather than enhance,
scientific returns. This kind of activity by private groups could lead to
the disappearance of Antarctic meteorites from scientific circulation, as
well as open the door to more general exploitation of Antarctic resources
for profit (with either monetary or implied monetary value) contrary to the
spirit, if not the letter, of the Antarctic Treaty System. Private
collectors have significant potential to interrupt current and planned
meteorite recovery efforts (in fact they already have done so). These
interruptions can dramatically lower the scientific return represented by
all recovered specimens. There is significant reason to believe that private
expeditions to collect meteorites will increase in number and frequency, now
that the first successful expedition has just been completed. The planetary
materials research community is eager to find a solution that will guarantee
the rapid availability of significant samples of privately collected
meteorite specimens. We welcome the help of SCAR in this regard.
Helpful Internet resources:
Homepage of ANSMET, the US Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program.
http://www.cwru.edu/affil/ansmet/
Antarctic Meteorites Curation homepage (including biannual Antarctic
Meteorite Newsletter)
http://www-curator.jsc.nasa.gov/curator/antmet/antmet.htm
Antarctic meteorite locations homepage
http://cass.jsc.nasa.gov/pub/research/amlamp/intro/tableofc.html
Homepage of Japan's Antarctic Meteorite Research Center
http://yamato.nipr.ac.jp/AMRC/
The Meteorite Shop; a retail outlet that lists Antarctic and Saharan
meteorites for sale.
http://www.meteoriteshop.com/
Homepages for Planetary Studies Foundation's 1998 expedition. See "everybody
must get stones" for reference to the expedition's meteorite goals.
http://beyond.landsend.com/antarctic/epilogue/
Homepages for Planetary Studies Foundation's 2000 expedition.
http://www.foxnews.com/science/antarctica/dispatch_0114.sml
This summary prepared for the SCAR Working Group on Geology by:
Ralph P. Harvey
Principal Investigator, Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Geological Sciences
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland OH 44106-7216
USA
Tel: +1 216-368-0198
E-mail: rph at po.cwru.edu
______________________________
Annex 3
For Immediate Release - July 17, 2000
Contact: Bill Bell
Space Adventures, Ltd.
+1 703 524 7172
info at spaceadventures.com
PRIVATE EXPLORERS TO GO IN SEARCH OF MARTIAN METEORITES
Space Adventures Now Assembling Explorer Team For Antarctic Expedition
ALEXANDRIA, VA, July 17
Space Adventures, the world's only space tourism company, announced today
the immediate availability of seven places on its first expedition to the
frozen continent of Antarctica. The voyage will mark the first time private
individuals will specifically seek the retrieval of Martian-origin
meteorites.
"NASA's 1996 discovery of possible Martian fossils inside a meteorite
launched interest in Antarctica as a space destination," commented Eric
Anderson, President and CEO of Space Adventures. "We are extremely excited
about bringing this opportunity to the world's adventure tourists in the
tradition of our other 'Steps To Space' expeditions."
The objective of this expedition is to find more Martian meteorites, which
could contain further evidence of extra-terrestrial, fossilized life. The
ideal scenario would be to find a sample and transport it back to the
laboratory with its ice casing intact; Meteorites collected will be used and
studied by NASA or other research organization.
The 14-day voyage was created in partnership with Adventure Network
International (ANI), the only organization in the world providing
private-sector services to the Antarctic interior since 1985. The expedition
will be led by an ANI field guide with a resident geologist accompanying the
group through most of the journey.
The seven-member Space Adventures "team" will begin their journey on
December 1, 2000 in Chile where they will depart, by aircraft, to Patriot
Hills, Antarctica. From there the group will travel by plane to the Thiel
Mountains, only 300 nautical miles from the geographical South Pole. Here
they will spend 7 days searching for meteorites and exploring the terrain
before departing home. Parties interested in joining the expedition should
contact Space Adventures now.
About Space Adventures, Ltd.
Space Adventures, Ltd., a privately-held company, is the world's premier
space travel and tourism agency. Founded by astronauts and adventure travel
pioneers, Space Adventures offers a broad spectrum of educational and
adventure space experience programs. Programs available today include the
Steps to Space series of adventures: zero-gravity flights at 2.5 times the
speed of sound to the edge of space in high-altitude supersonic jets, and
exclusive tours of the world's space and astronomy facilities, institutions
and centers. Space Adventures also has partnered with the world's most
innovative rocket development companies, which are planning actual tourist
flights into space within the next three years. The company's advisory board
includes Apollo 11 moonwalker Buzz Aldrin; shuttle astronauts Kathy
Thornton, Charles Walker, Norm Thagard, and Byron Lichtenberg; and Skylab
astronaut Owen Garriott.
For more information or for reservations, call 1-888-85-SPACE
(+1-703-524-7172 outside the U.S.) or visit
http://www.spaceadventures.com/
______________________________
Annex 4
Extract from the draft Report of the SCAR Working Group on Geology
Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
2.7 Private collection of Antarctic meteorites
R Powell (USA) drew members attention to US concerns that participants in
certain private expeditions were going to Antarctica with the express
intention of collecting meteorites for subsequent sale. The Working Group on
Geology expressed its concern that the integrity of future meteorite
collections for scientific research is at risk, and that many meteorites of
important scientific value may find their way into private collections and
be lost to science. The WG drew attention to Recommendation SCAR XXII-1:
On Protection of Geological Specimens
Recalling the commitment to environmental protection under the Antarctic
Treaty;
Recognizing the increasing frequency of non-scientific activities in
Antarctica; and
Recognizing further the consequent possible loss of scientifically valuable
geological specimens;
Mindful of the possible consequences of identifying the location of such
geological specimens through formal site protection;
Noting the likelihood of further discoveries of such specimens;
SCAR recommends that:
1. Geological specimens, such as fossils, minerals, meteorites, volcanic
bombs and ventifacts in Antarctica should be collected for scientific or
educational purposes and not for commercial gain;
2. Geological samples collected from Antarctica for these purposes should be
properly curated in institutions accessible to the scientific community and,
wherever possible, should be publicly displayed.
That was adopted by SCAR Delegates at their meeting in San Carlos de
Bariloche, Argentina, June 1992. SCAR forwarded the recommendation to the
ATS where it was subsumed into ATS Recommendation XVIII-1: Tourism and
Non-governmental Activities. Section E4 of that ATS Recommendation states:
Do not collect or take away biological or geological specimens or man-made
artifacts as a souvenir, including rocks, bones, eggs, fossils and part or
contents of buildings.
Members suggested that a suitable action might be for the US to write to
IAATO, notifying them of the apparent non-compliance of some private
expedition participants with this ATS Recommendation. They further suggested
that SCAR might remind ATS that their recommendation was not being fully
complied with and requesting that they strengthened their position. The US
representative to the CEP might also pursue this issue. Members then
approved Recommendation XXVI-Geol 1
Recommendation XXVI-Geol-1
Noting that members of certain private expeditions are apparently going to
Antarctica with the expressed aim of collecting meteorites for subsequent
sale,
Concerned that meteorites collected in this way will be lost to science, and
Mindful of Recommendation XXII-Geol 1 that the collecting of geological
samples and meteorites for barter or sale should be expressly forbidden, and
that any specimens should be curated in institutes or museums with free
access for study,
The WG Geology recommends that SCAR asks the ATCM to take a stronger
position on Recommendation XXII-Geol 1, and further asks that SCAR should
bring these activities to the attention of the CEP through a working paper.
U.S. Regulations Governing Antarctic Meteorites
[Federal Register: March 31, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 61)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15378-15380]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31mr03-26]
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
45 CFR Part 674
RIN 3145-AA40
ANTARCTIC METEORITES
Agency
National Science Foundation (NSF).
Action
Final rule.
Summary
NSF is issuing a final rule that authorizes the collection of meteorites in
Antarctica for scientific research purposes only. In addition, the
regulations provide requirements for appropriate collection, handling, and
curation of Antarctic meteorites to preserve their scientific value. These
regulations implement Article 7 of the Protocol on Environmental Protection
to the Antarctic Treaty and are issued pursuant to Section 6 of the
Antarctic Conservation Act, as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and
Conservation Act of 1996.
Dates
The rule is effective April 30, 2003.
For Further Information Contact
Anita Eisenstadt, Office of the General Counsel, at 703-292-8060.
Supplementary Information
On August 27, 2002, the NSF published a proposed rule authorizing the
collection of meteorites in Antarctica for scientific research purposes
only. NSF invited public comments on the proposed rule. NSF received nine
comments on the proposed rule. All of the commenters were supportive of the
proposed rule. One of the commenters suggested that NSF revise Sec.
674.5(3)(ii) to recognize that in some cases, a meteorite will not belong to
any well-established classification. NSF agrees with this comment and has
revised the language accordingly.
Another commenter requested clarification whether or not meteorites are
considered mineral resources. As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule,
the authority for this rule derives from Article 7 of the Protocol on
Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty which states that "any
activity relating to mineral resources, other than scientific research,
shall be prohibited." These regulations implement this provision of the
Protocol with respect to meteorites.
The same commenter raised concerns that the definition of expedition would
enable U.S. citizens to avoid application of the rule by organizing
expeditions to Antarctica in a foreign country. NSF notes that the
restriction in Sec. 674.4 against collecting meteorites in Antarctic for
other than scientific research purposes applies to any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the U.S. This provision would extend to U.S. citizens
collecting meteorites in Antarctica, regardless of the location from which
the expedition is organized. Consistent with other regulations implementing
U.S. obligations under the Antarctic Treaty, the more detailed requirements
for preparation and plans and submissions of information to NSF are limited
to expeditions for which the United States is required to provide advance
notification under the Antarctic Treaty. NSF believes that this obligation
is appropriately apportioned.
Another commenter expressed concern that the exception for serendipitous
finds could result in meteorites "fall[ing] through the regulatory cracks
before arriving at a curation site." Section 674.7 provides that
serendipitous finds must be handled in a manner that minimizes contamination
and must otherwise be documented in accordance with the requirements of Sec.
674.5. This approach recognizes that serendipitous finds will occur and
assures that the opportunity to collect these specimens for scientific
purposes is not lost. NSF believes that the requirement for documenting and
curating serendipitous finds provides an appropriate mechanism for
adequately and accurately tracking Antarctic meteorites.
Another commenter suggested technical revisions to the handling requirements
in Section 674.5 (b)(1) to reflect current research laboratory practices.
These revisions have been adopted in the final regulation. All other
comments were appropriately considered in the promulgation of this final
rule.
Determinations
NSF has determined, under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866,
that this rule is not a significant regulatory action requiring review by
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The rule is not a major
rule under the Congressional Review Act. The Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), in sections 202 and 205, requires that agencies
prepare analytic statements before proposing any rule that may result in
annual expenditures of $100 million by State, local, Indian Tribal
governments, or the private sector. Since this rule will not result in
expenditures of this magnitude, it is hereby certified that such statements
are not necessary. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, it is
hereby certified this rule will not have significant impact on a substantial
number of small businesses.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, do not apply to the rule because
there are less than ten U.S. entities, which annually organize expeditions
to Antarctica for the purpose of collecting meteorites.
Finally, NSF has reviewed this rule in light of section 2 of Executive Order
12778 and I certify for the National Science Foundation that this rule meets
the applicable standards provided in sections 2(a) and 2(b) of that order.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 674
Antarctica, Meteorites, Research
Dated: March 24, 2003
Amy Northcutt, Deputy General Counsel, National Science Foundation.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the National Science Foundation
is adding 45 CFR part 674 to read as follows:
Part 674 - ANTARCTIC METEORITES
Sec.
674.1 Purpose of regulations.
674.2 Scope and applicability.
674.3 Definitions.
674.4 Restrictions on collection of meteorites in Antarctica.
674.5 Requirements for collection, handling, documentation and curation of
Antarctic meteorites.
674.6 Submission of information to NSF.
674.7 Exception for serendipitous finds.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.
Sec. 674.1 Purpose of regulations.
The purpose of the regulations in this part is to implement the Antarctic
Conservation Act of 1978, as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and
Conservation Act of 1996, (16 U.S.C 2401 et seq.), and Article 7 of the
Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty done at Madrid
on October 4, 1991. Specifically, this part is designed to ensure meteorites
in Antarctica will be collected for scientific research purposes only and
that U.S. expedition organizers to Antarctica who plan to collect meteorites
in Antarctica will ensure that any specimens collected will be properly
collected, handled, documented and curated to preserve their scientific
value.
Sec. 674.2 Scope and applicability.
This part applies to any person who collects meteorites in Antarctica. The
requirements of Sec. 674.5 apply to any person organizing an expedition to
or within Antarctica for which the United States is required to give advance
notice under Paragraph (5) of Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty where one
of the purposes of the expedition is to collect meteorites in Antarctica.
The requirements in this part only apply to the collection of meteorites in
Antarctica after April 30, 2003.
Sec. 674.3 Definitions.
In this part:
Antarctica means the area south of 60 degrees south latitude.
Expedition means an activity undertaken by one or more persons organized
within or proceeding from the United States to or within Antarctica for
which advance notification is required under Paragraph 5 of Article VII of
the Antarctic Treaty.
Incremental cost is the extra cost involved in sharing the samples with
other researchers. It does not include the initial cost of collecting the
meteorites in Antarctica or the cost of maintaining the samples in a
curatorial facility.
Person has the meaning given that term in section 1 of title 1, United
States Code, and includes any person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States.
Sec. 674.4 Restrictions on collection of meteorites in Antarctica.
No person may collect meteorites in Antarctica for other than scientific
research purposes.
(a) Any person organizing an expedition to or within Antarctica, where one
of the purposes of the expedition is to collect meteorites in Antarctica,
shall ensure that the meteorites will be properly collected, documented,
handled, and curated to preserve their scientific value. Curation includes
making specimens available to bona fide scientific researchers on a timely
basis, in accordance with specified procedures.
(b) Expedition organizers described in paragraph (a) of this section shall
develop and implement written procedures for the collection, documentation,
and curation of specimens which include the following components:
(1) Handling requirements. Handling procedures shall ensure that the
specimens are properly labeled and handled to minimize the potential for
contamination from the point of collection to the point of curation. At a
minimum, handling procedures shall include:
(i) Handling the samples with clean Teflon or polyethylene coated
implements or stainless steel implements (or equivalent);
(ii) Double bagging of samples in Teflon or polyethylene (or equivalent)
bags;
(iii) A unique sample identifier included with the sample;
(iv) Keeping the samples frozen at or below -15°C until opened and
thawed in a clean laboratory setting at the curation facility; and
(v) Thawing in a clean, dry, non-reactive gas environment, such as
nitrogen or argon.
(2) Sample documentation. Documentation for each specimen, that includes,
at a minimum:
(i) A unique identifier for the sample;
(ii) The date of find;
(iii) The date of collection (if different from date of find);
(iv) The latitude and longitude to within 500 meters of the location of
the find and the name of the nearest named geographical feature;
(v) The name, organizational affiliation, and address of the finder or
the expedition organizer;
(vi) A physical description of the specimen and of the location of the
find; and
(vii) Any observations of the collection activity, such as potential
contamination of the specimen.
(3) Curation. Make prior arrangements to ensure that any specimens
collected in Antarctica will be maintained in a curatorial facility that
will:
(i) Preserve the specimens in a manner that precludes chemical or
physical degradation;
(ii) Produce an authoritative classification for meteorites that can be
shown to belong to a well-established chemical and petrological group, and
provide appropriate descriptions for those meteorites that cannot be shown
to belong to an established chemical and petrological group;
(iii) Develop and maintain curatorial records associated with the
meteorites including collection information, authoritative classification,
total known mass, information about handling and sample preparation
activities that have been performed on the meteorite, and sub-sample
information;
(iv) Submit an appropriate summary of information about the meteorites
to the Antarctic Master Directory via the National Antarctic Data
Coordination Center as soon as possible, but no later than two years after
receipt of samples at the curatorial facility;
(v) Submit information on classification of the meteorite to an
internationally recognized meteorite research catalog, such as the
"Catalogue of Meteorites" published by the Natural History Museum of London
or the "Meteoritical Bulletin" published by the Meteoritical Society;
(vi) Specify procedures by which requests for samples by bonafide
scientific researchers will be handled;
(vii) Make samples available to bonafide scientific researchers at no
more than incremental cost and within a reasonable period of time; and
(viii) In the event that the initial curatorial facility is no longer in
a position to provide curation services for the specimens, or believes that
the meteorites no longer merit curation, it shall consult with the National
Science Foundation's Office of Polar Programs to identify another
appropriate curatorial facility, or to determine another appropriate
arrangement.
Sec. 674.6 Submission of information to NSF.
A copy of the written procedures developed by expedition organizers pursuant
to Sec. 674.5(b) shall be furnished to the National Science Foundation's
Office of Polar Programs at a minimum of 90 days prior to the planned
departure date of the expedition for Antarctica. NSF shall publish a notice
of availability of the plan in the Federal Register that provides for a
15-day comment period. NSF shall evaluate the procedures in the plan to
determine if they are sufficient to ensure that the meteorites will be
properly collected, handled, documented, and curated. NSF shall provide
comments on the adequacy of the plan within 45 days of receipt. If NSF
advises the expedition organizer that the procedures satisfy the
requirements of Sec. 674.5 and the procedures are implemented, the
expedition organizer will have satisfied the requirements of this part.
Sec. 674.7 Exception for serendipitous finds.
A person who makes a serendipitous discovery of a meteorite in Antarctica
which could not have been reasonably anticipated, may collect the meteorite
for scientific research purposes, provided that the meteorite is collected
in the manner most likely to prevent contamination under the circumstances,
and provided that the meteorite is otherwise handled, documented and curated
in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 674.5.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 6/2/2006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/private/meteorite-list/attachments/20060604/44d5a9b6/attachment.html>
More information about the Meteorite-list
mailing list