Category: International

ULA Responds Sharply to SpaceX Lawsuit, Court's Action

ULA Responds Sharply to SpaceX Lawsuit, Court's Action

By Marcia Smith | Posted: May 1, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 1, 2014 12:58 pm ET

United Launch Alliance (ULA) issued a strongly worded statement today about SpaceX’s lawsuit and a judge’s ruling yesterday enjoining the government or ULA from buying RD-180 engines from Russia until the court is notified by three government departments that such purchases would not violate U.S. sanctions against Russia.

U.S. Court of Federal Claims Judge Susan Braden issued the injunction in response to a lawsuit filed Monday by SpaceX protesting a December 2013 contract award from the Air Force to ULA for 36 Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) cores.   ULA, jointly owned by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, uses two EELV rockets — Atlas V and Delta IV — to launch just about all of the nation’s national security satellites as well as spacecraft for NASA.  The Atlas V is powered by Russian RD-180 engines. 

The injunction prohibits the Air Force or ULA  from making payments to Russia’s NPO Energomash, which builds the engines, until the Departments of the Treasury, Commerce and State inform the court that the payments do not violate sanctions imposed by the United States against Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who oversees Russia’s space sector.

SpaceX is challenging the award of the EELV contract on a sole source basis instead of allowing competition.  The lawsuit does not seek an injunction against the purchase of RD-180 engines, but discussed them in the lawsuit and issued a statement today praising the judge’s decision.

In response, ULA said it would work with the Department of Justice to resolve the injunction “expeditiously.”  It called SpaceX’s actions “opportunistic” and an attempt to “circumvent the requirements imposed” on others.  It also noted that NASA and “numerous other companies” do business with NPO Energomash, other Russian companies and the Russian government.  The full text of the ULA statement is:

“ULA is deeply concerned with this ruling and we will work closely with the Department of Justice to resolve the injunction expeditiously. In the meantime, ULA will continue to demonstrate our commitment to our National Security on the launch pad by assuring the safe delivery of the missions we are honored to support.

“SpaceX’s attempt to disrupt a national security launch contract so long after the award ignores the potential implications to our National Security and our nation’s ability to put Americans on board the International Space Station. Just like ULA, NASA and numerous other companies lawfully conduct business with the same Russian company, other Russia state-owned industries, and Russian Federation agencies.  This opportunistic action by SpaceX appears to be an attempt to circumvent  the requirements imposed on those who seek to meet the challenging launch needs of the nation and to avoid having to follow the rules, regulations and standards expected of a company entrusted to support our nation’s most sensitive missions.” 

 

Last Updated: May 01, 2014 12:58 pm ET
NASA FY2014 Operating Plan Shows Full Support for SOFIA

NASA FY2014 Operating Plan Shows Full Support for SOFIA

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 30, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 1, 2014 8:20 am ET

Concerns that NASA might try to use FY2014 funds to begin mothballing the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) may be allayed by NASA’s FY2014 operating plan, which was recently approved by Congress.  It shows the agency plans to spend $84.4 million on SOFIA in FY2014, very close to the appropriated level.  NASA released a distilled version of its FY2014 operating plan today at the request of SpacePolicyOnline.com.

Like last year, NASA declined to release the operating plan itself, which typically provides considerable detail on the “puts and takes” of how it plans to spend the money appropriated by Congress.   Although Congress occasionally specifies an exact dollar amount for a program, project or activity in an appropriations law, more often it specifies funding at an account (e.g. Space Technology) or subaccount (e.g. Earth Science) level without getting into details.   NASA determines those details and provides them in an operating plan (often a succession of operating plans throughout the year) sent to Congress.   The operating plans are closely held by NASA and the congressional appropriations committees for reasons that are mystifying considering how much both the Administration and Congress insist that the government should be transparent.

However, NASA provided SpacePolicyOnline.com with a distilled version of the operating plan showing how much it plans to spend in its major accounts, subaccounts, and programs.  It also is posted on NASA’s budget website.

There is much interesting detail in that table, but one item of particular interest is the amount for SOFIA. The Obama Administration is proposing to mothball SOFIA in the FY2015 budget request and only $12 million is requested to accomplish that.   SOFIA is a 747 aircraft that flies at very high altitudes to allow observations of the universe in the infrared wavelengths.  It is a joint project between NASA and its German counterpart, DLR, with NASA paying 80 percent of the annual $100 million operating costs and DLR paying the remaining 20 percent.

SOFIA has many supporters in Congress and the astrophysics community.  The 2014 NASA authorization bill (H.R. 4412) that cleared that House Science, Space and Technology Committee yesterday prohibits NASA from spending any of its FY2014 funding to start closing down SOFIA before Congress decides on its fate.   The concern is that the amount of money the President is requesting for FY2015 to close down SOFIA, $12 million, is insufficient and NASA might be tempted to begin the close out process using FY2014 funds.

The operating plan, however, shows that NASA plans to spend $84.4 million on SOFIA in FY2014, very close to the $87.4 million that was appropriated.

Correction:  A typo in an earlier version of this story inadvertently identified the SOFIA aircraft as a 777 rather than 747.

Last Updated: May 01, 2014 8:20 am ET
HASC Subcommittee Proposes $220 Million for U.S. Alternative to Russia's RD-180 Engines – UPDATE

HASC Subcommittee Proposes $220 Million for U.S. Alternative to Russia's RD-180 Engines – UPDATE

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 30, 2014 10:07 pm ET

UPDATE,  April 30, 2014:   The subcommittee adopted the draft in less than 10 minutes today.  Amendments were deferred until full committee markup next week (May 7).  Two subcommittee Democrats rued the fact that important issues were not being debated at subcommittee level by the members most knowledgeable about them, but it was apparent a deal had been struck to defer discussion and action to the full committee.

ORIGINAL STORY, April 29, 2014:  The Strategic Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) will markup its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, April 30.  A draft of the subcommittee’s portion of the bill provides $220 million to DOD to begin development of a U.S.-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for the Atlas V rocket.

Tensions over Russia’s actions in Ukraine have added visibility to the extent to which the U.S. space program relies on Russia.   From crew transportation to and from the International Space Station (ISS) to engines for the Atlas V rocket, which is used to launch national security satellites as well as spacecraft for NASA, the increasing dependence of U.S. space activities on its Cold War competitor but more recent partner has gone largely unnoticed in Congress.  Lockheed Martin, which builds the Atlas V, insists that it has a two-year supply of RD-180 engines in stock as a buffer against any change in the geopolitical relationship, but the deteriorating situation is providing impetus to decision makers to make funding available to develop a new U.S. liquid rocket engine.

The subcommittee draft also explicitly supports DOD’s December 2013 block buy of rocket cores from the United Launch Alliance (ULA) for the Altas V and Delta IV rockets — jointly called Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELVs).   SpaceX, which is trying to compete against ULA for government launches, filed suit against the Air Force yesterday on the basis that the contract should have been awarded competitively rather than on a sole source basis.  The subcommittee draft does direct the Air Force to provide “opportunities” for competition by certified launch providers, but clearly supports the block buy.  SpaceX is going through the certification process now.

Other space-related provisions in the draft bill include:

  • a requirement that DOD assess and report to Congress on DOD’s ability to deter and defeat any adversary’s act of aggression in outer space, though China and Russia are cited as specific examples;
  • requires the Air Force to launch the last Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) satellite (DMSP-20) and limits expenditure of funds for DOD’s weather satellite follow-on program until the Air Force submits a plan to meet the meteorological and oceanographic collection requirements validated by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council;
  • limits the expenditure of funds for the Space-Based InfraRed Satellite (SBIRS) space modernization initiative until the Air Force certifies that data from SBIRS current sensors are being fully exploited;
  • expresses concern about the decision to delay procurement and launch of GPS III satellites and requires a report on a GPS replenishment plan;
  • requests a briefing on the potential use of modern communications satellite technologies such as high capacity communications satellites to meet DOD requirements;
  • supports the Army Space and Missile Defense Command’s Kestrel Eye nanosatellite-class imagery satellite; and
  • supports the Navy’s Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) but expresses concern about a lack of synchronization between availability of the space segment and user terminals.

Subcommittee markup is at noon EDT on April 30.

Last Updated: Apr 30, 2014 10:07 pm ET
House Appropriators Propose Substantial Increase for NASA, Including Europa

House Appropriators Propose Substantial Increase for NASA, Including Europa

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: May 7, 2014 8:02 am ET

The House Appropriations Committee released a draft of the FY2015 Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) bill that will be marked up by the CJS subcommittee tomorrow (April 30).   It proposes a substantial increase for NASA compared to the President’s request and funding for a robotic mission to Jupiter’s moon Europa would be one beneficiary of the increased spending.

The subcommittee draft recommendation for NASA is $17,896 million, $435 million above the President’s request of $17,461 million.  It is about $250 million more than NASA’s current (FY2014) appropriated level of $17,647 million.

The draft bill provides little detail of the changes the subcommittee wants, but it has a few specifics, including increases compared to the President’s request for the Europa mission, aeronautics, Orion, and the Space Launch System (SLS), and decreases compared to the request for space technology, exploration ground systems, and space operations.

The bill does not specify how much money would be allocated to
commercial crew, one of the more controversial aspects of NASA’s budget
request, or for the International Space Station.

More information on how the subcommittee wants NASA to spend the money typically is contained in the report to accompany the bill, which usually is not publicly released until after the full committee marks up the bill.   Tomorrow’s action is markup at the subcommittee level; the date for full committee markup has not been announced.

The draft bill continues the cap on development funding for the James Webb Space Telescope at $8 billion as well as the prohibition on NASA or the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy from spending funds related to space cooperation with China unless certain conditions are met.

The draft is just that, a draft.  It is a first step towards providing FY2015 funding for NASA and other agencies (including NOAA) covered by the bill.  Subcommittee markup must be followed by full committee markup and then passage by the House.  The Senate will produce its own version of the bill using a similar process.  Eventually the two sides of Capitol Hill must agree and the President must sign it.  Whether they complete the process by the beginning of FY2015 on October 1, 2014 is always chancy.

The funding figures in the House CJS subcommittee draft bill are as follows

  • Science:   $5,193 million.  That is $221 million more than the President requested, and $42 million more than the FY2014 amount.  Of the $5,193 million, $100 million is for the Europa mission.  The President requested $15 million for FY2015.   The President requested zero for Europa in FY2013 and FY2014, but Congress appropriated $75 million in FY2013 (subject to rescissions and the sequester, which left about $69 million) and $80 million in FY2014.
  • Aeronautics:  $666 million.  That is $115 million more than the President requested, and $100 million more than the FY2014 amount.
  • Space Technology:  $620 million.  That is $85.5 million less than the President requested, but $44 million more than the FY2014 amount.
  • Exploration:  $4,167 million.  That is $191 million more than the President requested, and $54 million more than the FY2014 amount.  Of the $4,167 million — 
    • $1,140 million is for Orion, which is $87 million more than the President requested, but $57 million less than the FY2014 amount.
    • $1,600 for development of the Space Launch System (SLS), which is $220 million more than the President requested, and the same as the FY2014 amount.
    • $315 million for Exploration Ground Systems, which is $36 million less than the President requested, and $3 million less than the FY2014 amount.
    • Specific amounts are not provided for commercial crew and exploration R&D, the other two components of this budget category.
      • The President requested $848.3 million for commercial
        crew and $343.4 million for exploration R&D, a total of $1,191.7
        million. 
      • Designated funding for Orion, SLS and exploration ground
        systems in the draft bill totals $3,055 million, leaving $1,112 million
        for commercial crew and exploration R&D.  How they plan to split
        that funding may become clearer tomorrow during subcommittee markup.
  • Space Operations:  $3,885 million.  That is $20 million less than the President requested, but $107 million more than the FY2014 amount.  The figure is not broken down to show how much is for the International Space Station and how much for Space and Flight Support.
  • Education:  $106 million, which is $17 million more than the President requested, but $10.6 million less than the FY2014 amount.  The bill specifies that of the $106 million, $9 million is for EPSCoR and $30 million is for Space Grant.
  • Safety, Security and Mission Services:  $2,779 million. This is a new name for a budget category labeled Cross Agency Support in the NASA budget request; it more accurately describes what activities the money supports.   The draft bill proposes the same amount as the President’s request, which is $14 million less than the FY2014 amount.
  • Construction, Environmental Compliance and Restoration (CECR):  $446 million.   That is the same as the President’s request, and $69 million less than the FY2014 amount.
  • Inspector General:  $34 million. That is $3 million less than the President’s request, and $3.5 million less than the FY2014 amount.

Since these are draft numbers, we are not yet updating our fact sheet on NASA’s FY2015 budget request, but will do so when the bill completes full committee markup.

Note:  An earlier version of this article mistakenly compared the amount recommended by the subcommittee for Exploration Ground Systems to the FY2014 appropriated amount.  The subcommittee’s recommendation of $315 million is $3 million less than the $318 million appropriated.

Last Updated: May 07, 2014 8:02 am ET
Rogozin Warns Sanctions Could Boomerang, Suggests Trampoline for Sending Astronauts to ISS

Rogozin Warns Sanctions Could Boomerang, Suggests Trampoline for Sending Astronauts to ISS

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 29, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 29, 2014 4:56 pm ET

Statements attributed to Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin appear to be the first public linkage between tensions over Ukraine and the future of U.S. astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS).  U.S. officials have repeatedly insisted that the ISS would not be affected by the deterioration in U.S.-Russian relations.  This appears to be the first public statement by a Russian official.

Russia’s Interfax news agency reportedly quoted Rogozin as saying that “Sanctions are always a boomerang which come back and painfully hit those who launched them.”  He also reportedly said that if the aim of new sanctions imposed by the Obama Administration yesterday are intended “to deliver a blow to Russia’s rocket-building sector, then by default they would be exposing their astronauts on the ISS.”  The Obama Administration announced restrictions on exports to Russia yesterday for items on the U.S. Munitions List — which includes commercial satellites — if they might aid Russia’s military.  Details were not provided.

Rogozin’s comments were in Russian and English translations were reported by a number of western news outlets, some of which also cited remarks along the same lines on Rogozin’s Russian-language Twitter account.  Alan Boyle of NBC News reports that Rogozin suggested via Twitter that the United States “bring their astronauts to the International Space Station using a trampoline.”

The United States and the other non-Russian partners in the ISS have had to rely on Russian Soyuz rockets and spacecraft to get back and forth to the ISS on a routine basis since the space shuttle was terminated in 2011.  The ISS crews also must rely on the Soyuz spacecraft as “lifeboats” in case they need to evacuate the station in an emergency.   Today, there are three Russians, two Americans and one Japanese aboard the ISS.  NASA continues to report that all is well there.   Russia and the United States jointly operate the ISS and it would extremely difficult for one to operate it without the other.

The United States, Europe, Japan and Canada — all partners in the ISS — each announced new sanctions against Russia in the past two days because of its activities in Ukraine.  CNN has a handy list of the individuals and entities that have been sanctioned so far.  None appears to be directly related to space station activities other than Rogozin himself, who was among the first group of Russians sanctioned by the United States in March.   As noted, the Obama Administration also is restricting exports to Russia that might aid Russia’s military.  It also instructed NASA to limit its cooperation with Russia other than for activities that are exempted, such as ISS.

Congressional actions are also reflecting the current tensions.  The House Armed Services Committee’s Strategic Forces subcommittee is preparing to mark up its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act tomorrow.  Among other things, it plans to provide $220 million to DOD to develop an American-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for Atlas V rockets.  Instead of referring to “Russian” engines, though, the language refers to “non-allied.”  The bill also requires a report from DOD assessing threats to U.S. space operations especially from China and Russia.

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), who chairs the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds NASA, said in a speech yesterday, that the United States is facing “real competition in space” not only from China, but “for the first time since the end of the Cold War, an overtly hostile Russia that is threatening our allies in Europe.”

Last Updated: Apr 29, 2014 4:56 pm ET
Wolf Insists Return to Moon Should be Next Step and Congress Would Pay For It

Wolf Insists Return to Moon Should be Next Step and Congress Would Pay For It

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 7:57 pm ET

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) insisted today that the next step for the U.S. human spaceflight program should be a return to the Moon, underscoring once again the lack of consensus on the nation’s future space program.   Another prominent House member insists on a flyby of Mars in 2021, while President Obama wants to go to an asteroid.  Wolf’s enthusiasm for returning to the Moon was coupled with optimism that Congress would increase NASA’s budget to pay for such a goal.

Wolf knows a lot about money and Congress — he chairs the House Appropriations Committee’s Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) subcommittee, which funds NASA.  A veteran lawmaker, he plans to retire from Congress after 17 terms at the end of this year.

In his talk to George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute this afternoon, Wolf lambasted the Obama Administration for everything from a lack of leadership on the space program to the worst human rights record of any recent U.S. administration because of failure to intervene in crises such as Darfur.  In addition to his work on the appropriations committee, Wolf is co-chairman of the congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.  A substantial portion of Wolf’s talk today was about human rights abuses in China, Sudan and elsewhere.  China’s poor human rights record is a major reason that Wolf opposes U.S. space cooperation with that country.

Regarding NASA’s future in human spaceflight, Wolf criticized the Obama Administration’s decision to terminate the Bush-era Constellation program that focused on a human return to the Moon by 2020 as a step towards sending humans to Mars.  Scott Pace, Director of SPI and host of today’s event, was a high ranking NASA official when the Constellation program was designed and initially implemented under the leadership of then-Administrator Mike Griffin.

Wolf has been relentless in his criticism of the decision to terminate the Constellation program, ardently arguing that a return to the Moon is a program that would appeal to U.S. taxpayers and international partners alike.   NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden told Congress last year that the reason the United States is not sending astronauts back to the lunar surface is because it does not have the estimated $8-10 billion needed to build a lunar lander. 

Today, Wolf was asked whether Congress would increase NASA’s budget to pay for a lunar return of if NASA would have to stop doing other activities in order to find the money.  He said that if a President now or in the future announced a plan to return to the Moon, that would be a “game-changer” and lead to increased NASA funding.

The Constellation program, with a human return to the lunar surface as its centerpiece, was cancelled by the Obama Administration after a review by the 2009 Augustine Committee found that it was not affordable unless NASA’s budget was increased by $3 billion per year.  The Bush Administration did not request such increases and while Congress did increase NASA’s budget in some years, it was not by that amount.

The Augustine Committee laid out options for the human spaceflight program, but did not make recommendations.   Months later, the Obama Administration cancelled the Constellation program and instead proposed to augment NASA’s budget over 5 years by $6 billion to invest in game-changing technologies especially in propulsion, extend operations of the International Space Station (ISS) to 2020 (from 2015), and use government money to facilitate development of commercial crew systems to take astronauts to and from ISS.  The announcement,  made as part of the FY2011 budget submission on February 1, 2010 rather than as a separate policy statement, stunned and infuriated members of Congress from both political parties.  The President consequently gave a speech at Kennedy Space Center on April 15, 2010 where he announced his vision for the future of the human spaceflight program:  to send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025 and to orbit (not land on) Mars in the 2030s.  A human landing on Mars would follow, he said, within his lifetime.

Wolf today decried President Obama’s asteroid mission — currently the
Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) — as “not worthy of a great nation,” a
reference to the Augustine Committee’s report “Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation.”  One option in that report is the “Flexible Path” that includes missions to asteroids and Lagrange points.

Congress and the White House have been battling over the future of the human spaceflight program ever since.  It is less a partisan war between Democrats and Republicans than between Congress — which passed two laws (the 2005 and 2008 NASA authorization acts) supporting the Bush plan — and the White House.

Today, there are three strongly held positions on what the next step should be for the human spaceflight program:   Wolf’s view that we should return to the lunar surface and before China gets there; Obama’s plan for an Asteroid Redirect Mission that very specifically excludes returning to the lunar surface, though there would be operations in lunar orbit; and a concept called Mars 2021 championed by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) to send astronauts to flyby (not land on or orbit) Mars with launch in 2021 and incorporating a flyby of Venus enroute.  

Smith chairs the House committee that authorizes NASA activities.  That committee, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, will markup its version of the 2014 NASA authorization bill tomorrow (Tuesday, April 29).  The next day, Wolf’s appropriations subcommittee will markup the companion appropriations bill.  (Not sure of the difference between an authorization and an appropriation?  See our “What’s a Markup:  Answers to that and Other Mysteries of the Legislative Process” Fact Sheet.)

There is little disagreement (though it is not unanimous) that sending people to land on Mars is the long term goal.   The question is all the steps in between.  Wolf’s support of a human return to the Moon seems as heartfelt as Smith’s insistence on the Mars flyby mission.   Both are influential members of the House — Wolf in charge on money, Smith in charge of policy. 

Where that leaves the Obama plan, which NASA is assiduously trying to articulate as part of achieving the long term goal of sending people to land on Mars, is an open question.  Today Wolf said “No matter how much NASA tries to dress this up or rationalize this proposal to the Congress and to the public, it continues to ring hollow.” 

The disarray in planning the future of the U.S. human spaceflight program continues.  Wolf prognosticated that “most people believe” that whoever becomes President in 2016 will “abandon this uninspiring” ARM mission and “pivot towards more compelling missions.”  Whether that happens and whether Congress is wiling to appropriate the necessary funds is an open question.

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 7:57 pm ET
NASA Seeks Ideas For Private Sector Use of ISS, Future Commercial Space Facilities

NASA Seeks Ideas For Private Sector Use of ISS, Future Commercial Space Facilities

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 3:17 pm ET

NASA is seeking ideas on how the private sector can use the International Space Station (ISS) in new ways and ultimately “pave the way for private microgravity research facilities of the future.”

The Obama White House approved extending operations of the ISS until at least 2024 in January.   Previously it had committed only to operations through 2020 and is still seeking agreement from some of the ISS partners for that extension, never mind 2024.  ISS is a partnership of the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and 11 European countries.

NASA often talks about extending operations to 2028, the 30th anniversary of when the first ISS modules were launched, but the idea is that whatever the end date, at some point, the ISS will end.  The question is — what then?  The goal is for microgravity research and other activities to continue on space facilities owned and operated by the private sector.

The NASA Request for Information (RFI) released today asks for ideas on how to make better use of ISS itself by the private sector and to lead towards follow-on private sector facilities.  NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations Bill Gerstenmaier said the RFI is intended to “help identify how to open this … laboratory to the private sector in better and more practical ways — ultimately, helping to pave the way for private microgravity research facilities of the future.”

On Thursday (May 1), NASA and ISS researchers will showcase research activities taking place aboard ISS at an event sponsored by the American Astronautical Society (AAS) on Capitol Hill.  In June, AAS will hold its third ISS Research and Development conference in Chicago that brings together current and potential ISS researchers.

NASA is ramping up its efforts to demonstrate that its human spaceflight program is an integrated set of missions each leading to the next, starting with the ISS and ending with humans landing on Mars.  NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden emphatically drew the linkage between ISS and human exploration beyond low Earth orbit at a March 2014 congressional hearing before the House Science, Space and Technology.  He proclaimed that if operations of the ISS ended — because of the current friction between the United States and Russia, for example — he would recommend cancelling the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft currently being developed to take humans into deep space.  “I don’t want anyone to think I need SLS or Orion if I don’t have the International Space Station,”  he said.

At the same time, Gerstenmaier has begun stressing that the private sector needs to provide for continuation of operations in low Earth orbit as NASA shifts its focus to sending humans to lunar orbit and beyond.  This RFI is a step in that direction.  Responses are due by June 30, 2014.

 

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 3:17 pm ET
U.S. Imposes New Russian Sanctions Including Restricting Export Licenses – UPDATE

U.S. Imposes New Russian Sanctions Including Restricting Export Licenses – UPDATE

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 28, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 28, 2014 11:06 pm ET

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement this morning (April 28, 2014) announcing that additional sanctions are being placed on Russia because of the situation in Ukraine.  Asset freezes on 17 Russian companies and export license restrictions are among the new sanctions.

The statement is general so it is not clear at this point whether any of the actions will affect space-related activities.  The relevant part of the statement is as follows:

“The Department of the Treasury is imposing sanctions on seven Russian government officials, including two members of President Putin’s inner circle, who will be subject to an asset freeze and a U.S. visa ban, and 17 companies linked to Putin’s inner circle, which will be subject to an asset freeze.  In addition, the Department of Commerce has imposed additional restrictions on 13 of those companies by imposing a license requirement with a presumption of denial for the export, re-export or other foreign transfer of U.S.-origin items to the companies.  Further, today the Departments of Commerce and State have announced a tightened policy to deny export license applications for any high-technology items that could contribute to Russia’s military capabilities.  Those Departments also will revoke any existing export licenses that meet these conditions.”

Later in the day, the White House released a transcript of a telephone briefing in which a few — but not many — details were provided.  Two members of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle were sanctioned and 17 “entities” that are “affiliated with the oligarchs we designated a few weeks ago, on March 20, including the Rotenberg brothers and Gennady Timchenko.”

Perhaps of more direct important to space activities are export restrictions.  A “senior administration official” says that export license applications at both the Department of State and Department of Commerce have been on hold since the beginning of March and they are being scrutinized to “see which ones involve technology that the Russian defense industrial complex is in need of, and those are the ones that will be denied.”  Microelectronics was cited as one example.

Meanwhile, the State Department said that “effective immediately” the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls will “deny pending applications for export or re-export of any high-technology defense articles or services regulated under the U.S. Munitions List … that contribute to Russia’s military capabilities.”  It also will revoke any existing licenses that meet those conditions.    Other pending applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 

The Obama Administration is in the process of updating export control regulations on commercial satellites, but at the moment they remain on the U.S. Munitions List.   Several Russian rockets, including Proton, Soyuz, Zenit (which is partially Ukrainian), and Dnepr, are used to launch satellites that are manufactured in the United States or contain U.S. components.  Whether the Administration deems them to “contribute to Russia’s military capabilities” is an open question.  Two other interesting facets of the issue are that  International Launch Services (ILS), which markets the Proton rocket commercially, is a U.S.-based company, and the Soyuz rocket is launched not only from Russia, but from Europe’s Kourou launch site in South America a part of a European-Russian arrangement.  The United States wants to present a united front with Europe in imposing sanctions, but Europe has not announced its plans yet.

Note:  this article was updated at 11:00 pm ET on April 28, 2014.

Last Updated: Apr 28, 2014 11:06 pm ET
What's Happening in Space Policy: April 28-May 2, 2014

What's Happening in Space Policy: April 28-May 2, 2014

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 27, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 27, 2014 10:58 am ET

Here is our list of space policy-related events for the upcoming week and any insight we can offer about them.  The House and Senate will be back in session after a two-week spring break with a full agenda of NASA, NOAA and national security space decisions on tap.

During the Week

House committees and subcommittees will be making decisions on budgets and policy for the nation’s space program this week as they mark up appropriations and authorization legislation. (Not sure what a markup is?  Or the difference between an authorization and an appropriation? See our fact sheet:  What’s a Markup?  Answers to That and Other Mysteries of the Legislative Process.)

Customarily the House acts on appropriations legislation before the Senate, and, indeed, the Senate Appropriations CJS subcommittee is still holding hearings on FY2015 budget requests for the agencies under its jurisdiction.  Its hearing on NASA’s request is on Thursday. 

Also of interest is a House SS&T Environment Subcommittee hearing on NOAA’s FY2015 budget request on Wednesday.

NASA is engaged in a full court press to articulate the outline of the agency’s plan on sending humans to Mars and how the Asteroid Redirect Mission fits into it.   After meeting with the NASA Advisory Counci a week and a half ago and participating in a three-day Humans 2 Mars summit at George Washington University last week, NASA will hold its own public “exploration forum” at NASA Headquarters on Tuesday afternoon (interestingly, the House SS&T committee is marking up the NASA authorization bill at the same time, which, we imagine, is entirely coincidental).

Lots of other interesting events are scheduled, including a symposium on Capitol Hill sponsored by the American Astronautical Society on Thursday highlighting science experiments conducted on the International Space Station and Women in Aerospace’s annual conference on Wednesday featuring top government officials including Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James.

Here’s the list of everything we know about as of Sunday morning.

Tuesday, April 29

Wednesday, April 30


Thursday, May 1

Last Updated: Apr 27, 2014 10:58 am ET
Spacewalkers Make Quick Work of Replacing MDM

Spacewalkers Make Quick Work of Replacing MDM

By Marcia Smith | Posted: April 23, 2014 12:00 am ET | Last Updated: April 23, 2014 6:03 pm ET

International Space Station (ISS) crew members Rick Mastracchio and Steve Swanson made quick work of their task today of replacing a failed computer on the outside of the ISS. They were back inside, mission complete, in just 1 hour and 36 minutes.

The two NASA astronauts conducted a contingency (as opposed to planned) spacewalk to replace a Multiplexer-DeMultiplexer (MDM) that failed just before SpaceX launched its CRS-3 cargo mission to the ISS.  The MDM that failed is a backup unit and the primary unit was working fine so NASA determined the SpaceX launch could proceed as planned.  The MDM controls some of the robotic equipment needed to move SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft to its proper location on the ISS.  Dragon arrived at ISS on Sunday and was successfully berthed to an ISS docking port using the primary MDM.

However, NASA wanted to be sure a new backup was installed as quickly as possible, hence the spacewalk today.  The new MDM was up and running before the spacewalkers returned to the airlock.  The failed MDM will be returned to Earth so engineers can examine it.

Spacewalks typically last 5-7 hours, but on occasion are shorter in order to accomplish a very defined task or because of a problem that requires early termination.   Last year’s spacewalk where European astronaut Luca Parmitano’s helmet filled with water from the spacesuit’s cooling system ended after 1 hour and 32 minutes when it became apparent that something was quite wrong.   NASA has determined that the problem was silica particles that clogged a filter, but are still investigating the source of the particles. Mastracchio wore the same spacesuit today that Parmitano was wearing last July.  It has a new filter and the water system has been flushed several times.  No problems were evident today (it also was used in a December 2013 contingency spacewalk), but NASA still has not cleared that spacesuit or the other U.S. spacesuits aboard the station for regular use in planned spacewalks.

Last Updated: Apr 23, 2014 6:03 pm ET

SPACEPOLICYONLINE.COM

About | Contact | Privacy