FCC Reconsiders Tightening 25-Year Deadline For Space Junk Disposal
AGI sat tracking image
WASHINGTON: After an outpouring of objections from the Pentagon, much of the federal government and the satellite industry, the FCC punted on its more controversial draft rules for space debris mitigation.
Rather than approve draft language from FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, the five commissioners today decided to delay a vote on a number of the specific proposals — including a requirement that satellites orbiting above the International Space Station (ISS, 400 kilometers in altitude) be able to maneuver to avoid potential collisions.
“The Commission today also adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which invites additional comment on orbital debris mitigation measures related to the probability of accidental explosions; collision risk and casualty risk for satellite constellations on a system-wide basis; and on requiring maneuverability for space stations located above a certain altitude in the low earth orbit region and limiting post-mission orbital lifetime,” the FCC said in a press statement today.
“The Commission will also seek public comment on adopting an indemnification requirement similar to one used in some other countries and on the use of a surety bond tied to post-mission disposal,” the statement added.
Most surprisingly, the FCC decided to re-open consideration of the current US government guideline for disposing any satellite in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) within 25 years after it ceases to function. The draft regulations would have upheld that 25-year-rule, recently reiterated by the National Space Council but which DoD has criticized.
Many in the military space community worry that the 25-year deadline is simply too long to allow dead satellites — which are effectively dangerous space debris — to linger in orbit, especially given the boom in LEO mega-constellations made up of short-lived satellites. Given that many currently planned LEO satellites will cease to function in less than five years and be replaced as they do so, experts point out, simple math shows that the number of dead sats will increase exponentially within 25 years.
Meanwhile, a new study released today by the Aerospace Corp. today shows that many firms today do not actually comply with the long-standing 25-year rule. The study, called “Slash The Trash: Incentivizing Deorbit,” proposes a number of ways that firms could be motivated to dispose of defunct satellites. These range from stricter US government enforcement to a kind of ‘cap and trade’ scheme for satellite disposal.
The 25-year rule “clearly has benefits to the environment, but it also costs something,” said Marlon Sorge, principal engineer at Aerospace’s Space Innovation Directorate. He noted that the focus on the study was to look at compliance writ large — “getting people to behave in the proper way” — and simply used the 25-year rule as one example of where incentives might be useful.
Charity Weeden, who represents Astroscale — a Japanese startup that plans to remove debris from orbit — stressed that much of industry would agree there need to be a shorter guideline, saying companies should “be a good neighbor” and clean up their dead satellites as soon as possible. She noted that the Space Safety Coalition (SSC) has agreed on a five-year rule.
The SSC, launched last September, includes a large number of major satellite operators — Intelsat, Iridium, Inmarsat and SES among them — as well as some start-up companies with LEO mega-constellations including Planet and one launch firm, Virgin Orbit.
As I reported earlier this week, DoD, the Commerce Department and most of the satellite industry bombarded Pai with petitions to reconsider the proposed new rules that they all consider seriously flawed — but for different reasons.
Overall, Industry had been worried that many of the FCC’s proposed regulations would go too far and stifle innovation, especially in the booming small satellite sector — perhaps even barring use of tiny cubesats.
The satellite industry also is deeply worried about the possible cost ramifications from the draft requirement for firms to purchase insurance to indemnify the US government against costs associated with claims under international law resulting from a US-licensed spacecraft causing damage to another. Not only do company representatives say this requirements is vague and thus could heap huge, impossible-to-plan-for costs onto operators, they challenge the FCC’s legal authority to impose such a requirement.
(That said, one US government official watching the debate closely told me that the space industry needs to “stop whining” and face the fact that most companies require insurance, and that it is normally simply a cost of doing business.)
Many of the draft rules originally included in the draft set of FCC proposals — and now put off for future consideration — would go further than the interagency Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices (ODMSP) agreed by the National Space Council in December. The ODMSP recommendations apply to all space operators — including the Pentagon, NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that regulates Earth observation satellites.
Interesting, only two companies — Ligado (which as I’ve reported had a controversial proposal of its own in front of the FCC earlier this week) and Viasat — refused to sign an April 13 Satellite Industry Association brief raising concerns. In addition, OneWeb, which recently declared bankruptcy, abstained.
For its part, Viasat says its objection to the SIA letter simply reflected the fact that it agrees with the FCC’s approach over all, including the maneuverability clause, and did not want the commission to delay its vote.
“Putting non-maneuverable cubesats into LEO in densely populated orbits … is like putting go-carts on the freeway. Nobody would do that,” said Viasat’s John Janka, in a webinar sponsored by startup Astroscale today.
“I’m very concerned nobody has brought solutions to the FCC. The tragedy of the commons is why the FCC cannot rely on industry standards; industry standards have no teeth,” he added.
Breaking D readers know the original FCC draft rules raised a hue and cry from other USG agencies involved in the ODMSP process (led by NASA, under Space Policy Directive-2) for jumping the interagency gun. The current set of proposals, some officials similarly fret, could create problems for future interagency decision-making about space traffic management practices that currently are in nascent discussions (led by Commerce) under Space Policy Directive-3, signed in June 2018 by President Donald Trump.
The proposed new rules were contained in a 119-page document issued by the Federal Communications Commission April 3. Those adopted will apply to all commercial and non-USG space operators (such as state and local governments) seeking a license from the FCC. The FCC has regulatory authority over use of the radio-frequency spectrum, including by satellites.
Changes that were approved today include: “requiring that satellite applicants assign numerical values to collision risk, probability of successful post-mission disposal, and casualty risk associated with those satellites that will re-enter earth’s atmosphere,” the FCC release said.
“Satellite applicants will also have new disclosure requirements related to protecting inhabitable spacecraft, maneuverability, use of deployment devices, release of persistent liquids, proximity operations, trackability and identification, and information sharing for situational awareness. The new rules also update the process for geostationary orbit satellite license term extension requests,” it continued.
The final FCC rulemaking document should be made public next week.