Draft Orbital Debris Order Faces Satcom Community Objections
The satellite industry and allies raised red flags about the draft orbital debris order on April 23's FCC members' meeting agenda (see 2004010063). Operators lobbied for changes or deferring decisions. They cited higher costs, in docket 18-313 Tuesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The Satellite Industry Association, Amazon, AT&T, Boeing, EchoStar, Inmarsat, Intelsat, Lockheed Martin, Planet, SES, SpaceX, Spire and Telesat advocated more discussion about reasons for deviating from the federal government's December orbital debris mitigation standard practices for government satellites (see 2003050040), in a call with an aide to Commissioner Mike O'Rielly. The 44 uses of “case-by-case” in the order "would be an unprecedented grant of delegated authority to the bureau level," they said. They urged risk standards moved to the Further NPRM on requiring a performance bond for satellite de-orbiting. They asked to mov to the FNPRM the collision risk demonstration and indemnification requirements, and the risk requirement concerning human casualty from re-entry. They suggested indemnification questions, including whether indemnification would put additional liability on satellite operators and if the licensee would be responsible when the liability is caused not through its fault.
Industry urged evaluating a maneuverability requirement because the implication seems to be no non-propulsive maneuvering would be allowable, eliminating smaller satellite designs. They said "such drastic operational design changes" need more than a two-year transition. They criticized the proposed disclosure requirement about deployment devices, saying the agency indicating it will decide whether to permit such devices case by case basis without setting out criteria creates uncertainty. Add queries on what approaches other than a bond might work and how a bond's cost would affect a company's licensing decisions, industry said. SpaceX spoke with O'Rielly's office and with an aide to Commissioner Brendan Carr.
In a call with an aide to Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, EchoStar/Hughes said indemnification needs more input because requiring it could conflict with U.S. launch liability law. The affiliated firms said the draft gives no guidance on how large such an indemnification could be, and if the agency moves forward on a requirement, it at least should have a cap. They expressed concerns about the proposed satellite disposal bond, saying some issues beyond an operator's control can prevent end-of-life disposal: The bond could cost tens of thousands of dollars yearly.
Aerospace academic researchers warned about proposed maneuverability and indemnification requirements. They said the proposals threaten "irreparable harm to the vast majority of academic SmallSat missions and ... U.S. leadership." They urged axing the indemnification requirement for public universities for instead cross-waiver and release.