WASHINGTON — As officials from several federal agencies expressed support for a White House proposal for oversight of novel space activities, the chair of a key Senate subcommittee raised concerns about it.
At a Dec. 13 hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee’s space subcommittee, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), chair of the subcommittee, said that while she welcomed the mission authorization legislative proposal released by the National Space Council Nov. 15, there have been quite a few problems with it.
“I’m heartened that the administration is working on this critical issue, however the proposal incorporates quite a few ambiguities, latest undefined terms and broad grants of open-ended authority,” she said.
Sinema didn’t elaborate on those concerns, and he or she left the hearing shortly after her opening statement. She did state that she had asked the National Space Council to take part in the hearing, but that the White House declined to supply someone.
The subcommittee’s rating member, Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), also expressed disappointment that the council didn’t offer a witness for the hearing. He said he supported “balanced, light-tough policies that empower, not hinder, ingenuity and innovation and the get the federal government out of the best way.”
One major criticism of the White House proposal is that it splits mission authorization between the Department of Transportation and the Department of Commerce. The Department of Transportation, through the Federal Aviation Administration, can be accountable for human spaceflight in addition to in-space transportation of products, while the Department of Commerce, through the Office of Space Commerce, would handle all other business space activities not currently regulated by the FAA or other agencies.
The House Science Committee advanced a bill Nov. 29 that might take a unique approach, assigning mission authorization entirely to the Department of Commerce. An industry group, the Industrial Spaceflight Federation (CSF), criticized the dual-agency approach since it could lead to “duplicative and conflicting” requirements between the 2 agencies, and out of concerns that it might further burden the FAA’s Office of Industrial Space Transportation, which handles launch and reentry licensing.
The National Space Council’s Users’ Advisory Group also questioned that approach. During a Dec. 1 meeting of the committee, a subcommittee offered 12 recommendations for handling mission authorization, amongst them having “one clear agency industry works with for this type of authorization to attenuate confusion and compliance burden,” said committee member Karina Drees of the CSF.
In the course of the Senate hearing, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) quizzed the witnesses on scenarios which may fall within the jurisdiction of each agencies, similar to an in-orbit servicing vehicle docking with a business space station for refueling. Richard DalBello, director of the Office of Space Commerce, explained that servicing vehicle can be licensed by Commerce while the space station can be licensed by Transportation.
“There will likely be a sturdy interagency process,” he said, to deal with any jurisdictional issues, while maintaining strict timelines to review license applications. “Where there’s a jump ball, there will likely be an interagency discussion.”
“For a single activity, only a single agency may have oversight of that responsibility,” added Kelvin Coleman, director of the FAA’s Office of Industrial Space Transportation, or AST. “There is no such thing as a situation where each the Department of Commerce and the Department of Transportation may have joint oversight responsibilities for a single activity.”
Two other agencies offered their support for the Space Council’s mission authorization proposal. “As NASA is increasingly a customer of economic services, we actually need greater clarity regarding who’s accountable for authorizing and supervising business space activities,” said NASA Deputy Administrator Pam Melroy. She said the proposal offered “a logical extension of the authorities of the Departments of Commerce and Transportation” to offer that authorization and supervision.
John Hill, deputy assistant secretary of defense for space and missile defense, noted the proposal would also give the Commerce Department the authorities it must handle civil space traffic coordination, allowing the DOD to focus its resources on the “inherent military features” of space domain awareness. “We urge your support.”
One concern from industry in regards to the White House mission authorization proposal is that giving even a subset of responsibilities to AST would further burden an office that’s scrambling to maintain up with a growing pace of economic launches and reentries.
“Launch licensing is an intense process,” Coleman said, but argued that mission authorization can be different due to a far lower risk to the uninvolved public that drives the rigor of the launch licensing process. “We envision a really light-touch approach.”
In an interview after the hearing, Coleman said his office had not determined the extent of staffing it might have to implement the mission authorization proposal from the White House, but noted it might likely follow existing procedures for payload and interagency policy reviews for launch licensing.
“I view authorization of those activities in form of a unique light than I’d view licensing for a launch since the risks posed to the general public is significantly different,” he said. “I consider a light-touch approach is suitable and there must be a commensurate amount of resources related to that form of approach.”
On the hearing, some senators mentioned that they’re working on a business space bill, yet to be introduced, that might offer their very own version of mission authorization. They didn’t disclose details about their proposal, but industry officials said they expect it to differ from each the White House proposal and the House bill.