American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an op-ed that I wrote in January called ``A one-stop-shop for private space exploration.'' [Jan. 22, 2018] A One-Stop-Shop for Private Space Exploration (By U.S. Rep. Brian Babin)
In the inaugural meeting of the reconstituted National Space Council, Vice President Mike Pence called for an overhaul of how the U.S. regulates commercial space activities. The potential of a robust economy in space will ``unlock new opportunities, new technologies, and new sources of prosperity,'' Pence said.
The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (H.R. 2809), recently passed by the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, accomplishes the vice president's goals. This bill places authority over private sector space activities in the agency best equipped to foster economic growth, the Commerce Department. The bipartisan legislation streamlines regulatory processes, limits government intrusion, promotes American innovation and investment, protects national security and satisfies our Outer Space Treaty obligations.
As chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee's space subcommittee, and as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I have the unique perspective of overseeing both of these agencies. Because of this perspective, I believe placing this responsibility at the Commerce Department is a good long-term decision for the United States and the space industry.
The Obama administration proposed giving the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), housed within the Department of Transportation (DOT), responsibility for managing a broad interagency review of all private sector space activity proposals through an opaque process without defined approval timelines, regardless of how benign those activities may be. My committee held numerous hearings on this idea to hear directly from experts and stakeholders. We found that FAA accomplishes its current mission--managing launches and re- entry--very well. However, the agency is challenged to meet its existing obligations to regulate launch and reentry, and should not be burdened with the additional responsibility of authorizing and supervising private activities in space.
Moreover, current law actually prohibits DOT from regulating activities in space. It only has the ability to deny a launch if no other agency has licensed the activity. Congress did not intend or design this authority to create regulatory authority for on-orbit activities, or authorization or supervision process for Outer Space Treaty compliance.
In contrast, the Commerce Department's mission is to ``create the conditions for economic growth and opportunity,'' and that mission runs deep through the culture. As the space economy develops, in-space activities will focus more on commerce, less on transportation logistics. Mining, habitation modules, and satellite servicing are only a few of the novel ideas that American innovators are proposing. These activities are not related to transportation, and DOT has no experience in this field. The Commerce Department, however, is familiar with the issues that future stakeholders will need to consider, including international trade and technology.
The bill also streamlines the federal space bureaucracy within the Commerce Department itself. It merges the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) responsibilities over space-based remote sensing into the already-existing Office of Space Commerce within the Commerce Department. NOAA is itself housed within the Commerce Department, so having two separate offices handling the same responsibilities makes no sense.
Reforming this splintered regulatory process minimizes the burden on other agencies and makes the Commerce Department a one-stop shop for Outer Space Treaty compliance. Giving DOT authority, as proposed by the previous administration, would split the regulatory system, requiring remote-sensing satellite operators to seek regulatory approval for their operations from both DOT and the Commerce Department.
Indeed, placing this authority at the Commerce Department is a continuation of long-standing law and national policy. Since 1984, Commerce has been the only federal agency with the legal authority to authorize and supervise space activities. While the Federal Communications Commission regulates spectrum and DOT regulates launch and re-entry, neither has the authority to authorize and supervise space activities generally to assure compliance with the Outer Space Treaty.
Some stakeholders have questioned whether the Office of Space Commerce can handle remote-sensing licensing and supervising general space activities. The answer is yes. The Commerce Department already has expertise authorizing and supervising remote-sensing systems, and the bill's streamlined review process is more transparent, quicker, and less burdensome on staff. Importantly, Commerce also has expertise in balancing national security with commercial interests, working with American industry internationally and in regulating space dual-use technologies through the Export Administration Regulations.
The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act declares that America is open for business in outer space. The only agency with the long-standing experience and culture to regulate and foster the budding space economy is the Commerce Department.
With this innovative legislation, which builds on that culture of transparency and clarity, we position the American space industry as a leader in growing a robust and lawful economy in space.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BABIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in favor of H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act.
The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act is a commonsense bipartisan bill that streamlines the regulatory processes, limits burdensome government intrusion, promotes American innovation and investment, protects national security, and satisfies our international obligations.
One of the fundamental drivers for this legislation has been that innovative American companies are pushing the boundaries. And when the Senate ratified the Outer Space Treaty 50 years ago, free enterprise in outer space was an idea but was not reality.
Today, not only does U.S. free enterprise exist in outer space, but it is innovating at an unprecedented pace. From astroid mining to private Moon missions, to satellite servicing, to remote sensing constellations, there is great promise that American enterprise will soon unlock new wealth and scientific benefits.
But this promise is threatened; threatened by expansive, unchecked regulatory authority, cumbersome non-transparent regulatory processes, and misperceptions about the United States' Outer Space Treaty obligations.
For several years, we have heard concerns from stakeholders that they need greater regulatory certainty to attract investment and to succeed. Stakeholders also reported that while they want to stay in America, due to regulatory burdens and uncertainty, they might need to go overseas.
The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act addresses these concerns without compromising our cherished principles of liberty and freedom.
It provides for presumptions of approval and requires the government to take affirmative steps before conditioning or denying proposed space or remote sensing operations.
It places the burden of demonstrating inconsistency with Outer Space Treaty obligations and national security requirements of the United States with the government and not the applicant.
It curtails vague, overreaching regulatory authority and prevents tolling of statutory adjudication timelines. It ensures U.S. industry receives a timely and transparent determination on applications.
The bill recognizes legitimate national security equities and provides for the condition or denial of authorized space activities with remote sensing systems that are a significant threat to U.S. national security in certain circumstances. But it protects against abuses of interagency discretion by requiring an explanation and evidence of the threat before conditions or denial can be made.
In order to ensure the Office of Space Commerce is empowered to represent the interests of our citizens and the private sector, the director of the office is elevated to be the new assistant secretary for Space Commerce.
The act also advances important public policy interests. The bill establishes a mandatory safety consultation between private and Federal Government operators. The goal of this consultation is for the affected parties to reach a voluntary agreement to mitigate safety risks.
For parties subject to U.S. jurisdiction, the act provides for Federal district court jurisdiction for any civil action resulting from certified or permitted space operations.
To protect against foreign harmful interference, the act directs the President to protect against acts of foreign aggression and foreign harmful interference.
The act also addresses concerns of harmful contamination of the Earth or celestial bodies. Pursuant to our international obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, operations may be conditioned or denied by the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with appropriate agencies such as NASA to address harmful contamination.
The bill posits longstanding U.S. policy, confirmed by both Department of State and NASA, that COSPAR planetary protection guidelines are not international obligations of the United States. This was done to allow all stakeholders, including the scientific community and industry, to work together as activities expand beyond scientific exploration and to address mutual interests, not by proscribing COSPAR guidelines as binding international law, but by allowing the Outer Space Treaty to guide our activities.
I am grateful to have worked with Chairman Smith and Representative Bridenstine, recently confirmed as NASA administrator, in the development of this bill.
I am also very glad that this is a bipartisan bill, with the support of Representatives Perlmutter and Kilmer and Bera.
I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.
Again, my op-ed is a very, very telltale reason and shows exactly why this is a great bill to put this under the Department of Commerce and take it out from under the Department of Transportation. For many reasons, I hope that this would be a source of debate and where we will get the reasons for what we are doing with this.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source