Wanted: a Collective Effort Toward Space Debris Mitigation

WANTED: A COLLECTIVE EFFORT TOWARD

SPACE DEBRIS MITIGATION

By: M. Jesusa Cruz Panton, Esq.

Barry University School of Law

April 2003

1. Introduction

We have come a long way in using the seemingly boundless space. Space technology became an integral part of our lives; it made communication faster, easier and more convenient; information on almost anything could be accessed with a push of a button from almost anywhere, anytime – whether from a cable television or from a computer, among others. However, the advent of space technology came with grave problems. Space debris continuously grows at an alarming rate. This paper discusses the current efforts and problems facing the international community, the United States government, and the commercial sector in addressing space debris mitigation.

1. What’s up there?

Four decades of space activity (ending as of November 1997) resulted in more than 3,875 missions to earth orbit and beyond and produced more than 20,000,000kg placed into earth orbit and 4,300,000kg remain today.[1] Of more than the 25,000 objects officially cataloged, about 8,500 debris pieces stayed in orbit and millions more, in smaller debris.[2] Despite declining launch rates, the mass in orbit climbed for the last 15 years at a steady rate of 190,000kg annually.[3] The estimated population of spacecraft and rocket bodies, ranging in size from than 10cm to about 50m numbered around 4,000 pieces and for operational debris, about 1,000 debris pieces, ranging in size from 1mm to over 1m.[4] About 1,000,000 debris pieces, ranging in size from 1µm to 10m came from breakup debris and from solid rocket motor slag, more than 100,000 debris pieces ranging in size from 1µm to 10µm and 1cm to 10cm.[5]

The majority of risk objects originated in satellite breakups.[6] Satellite breakups produced the majority of small debris and can generate hundreds of debris less than 10cm in diameter and thousands of debris pieces less than 1cm in diameter.[7] During the 1990’s the breakup rate increased significantly primarily due to rocket bodies.[8]

Absent other influences, objects placed in orbit around the Earth will continue in orbit indefinitely, as the momentum of the object causes it to orbit the Earth along a trajectory determined by the Earth’s gravitation.[9] An object’s orbit around the Earth can be affected by a number of additional factors.[10] Objects in low earth orbit (“LEO”) will experience drag from collisions with molecules of gas from the upper reaches of the Earth’s atmosphere.[11] Atmospheric drag results in orbital decay (i.e., a gradual lowering of the object’s orbit) and eventually orbital decay will result in the object reentering the Earth’s atmosphere.[12] Atmospheric drag on orbiting objects decreases dramatically as the orbital altitude of the object increases.[13] For example, from an altitude of 250 kilometers, a typical spacecraft in a circular orbit will reenter the Earth’s atmosphere within approximately two months, and from an altitude of 600 kilometers, it will reenter within approximately 15 years.[14] On the other hand, orbits with a perigee of 850 kilometers suggest an orbital lifetime typically exceeding 500 years.[15] At the geosynchronous earth orbit (GSO), atmospheric draft essentially does not exist.[16] The GSO refers to a circular orbit at an altitude of approximately 35,786 kilometers.[17] A spacecraft in a GSO needs to be maintained at a constant longitudinal position relative to the Earth, thus allowing the satellite to be “seen” continuously from a fixed point on the Earth’s surface.[18] Gravitational forces affect objects in orbit other than the Earth’s (especially lunar and solar forces) and by solar pressure.[19] These forces can be of particular significance for objects in and around GSO.[20]

Objects reentering the Earth’s atmosphere typically burn up from the heat generated during re-entry; however, larger or particularly heat-resistant objects may survive reentry and reach the surface of the Earth.[21] Approximately 75 percent of the mass launched into orbit since the beginning of human activity in space has reentered the Earth’s atmosphere.[22] Because a significant number of objects remain in orbit indefinitely, and with continuing activities to place new objects in orbit, long-term growth in the mass and number of orbital debris became inevitable.[23]

Because of the high relative velocities involved, even some of the smaller objects, particularly those greater than 0.1mm in diameter, can produce significant impact damage and for debris objects larger than 1mm in diameter, impact damage can include significant structural damage to a satellite.[24] Objects larger than approximately 1 cm in diameter can produce catastrophic damage to other space objects.[25] These types of impacts, of course, produce more debris objects.

III.International Efforts on the Issue of Orbital Debris

Four international agreements primarily regulate outer space activities: (1) the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Outer Space Treaty); (2) the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (Liability Convention); (3) the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (Registration Convention); and (4) the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Moon Treaty).[26]

The Outer Space Treaty provides a general framework for conducting activities in outer space and speaks of the required mutual relationship among spacefaring nations in preserving space as the common heritage of mankind.[27] This Treaty, to which the United States and more than 100 countries are parties, provides that State Parties enjoy equal rights in the use and exploration of space and these rights encompass the undisturbed use of outer space. [28]

Despite arguments to the contrary, liability for activities that occurred in the past, such as the generation of space debris, has a legal basis.[29] The language of the Outer Space Treaty implies a perpetual jurisdiction by States Parties and pursuant to Article VIII, a State Party retains jurisdiction and control over its space objects while in outer space.[30] Since the Treaty does not specifically exclude non-functioning space objects, this provision could be viewed as applicable to orbital debris.[31]

The liability provisions of both the Liability and Registration Conventions reflect the most serious attempts at regulating the space environment; however, these contain ambiguity and limited in scope.[32] Fewer countries signed and ratified their accession to these treaties making their effect limited.[33]

Article III of the Liability Convention holds a State liable for damage caused by its space objects to another State, if the first State happens to be at fault.[34] Since the Convention does not contain specific exclusion, it can be presumed that the launching State’s liability continues whether the space object functional or not.[35] The Convention makes a distinction between the liability of the launching State in cases where its space object causes damage on the earth’s surface or to aircraft in flight, and cases in which such an object causes damage to objects in outer space.[36] In the event of the former, the launching party would be held absolutely liable; in the event of the latter, the launching party would be liable only if at fault.[37]

The Registration Convention provides a system of registration with the United Nations of any space object launched in earth orbit or beyond.[38] Although liability issue is not specifically covered by the Registration Convention, it assists in clarifying the issue of identifying space objects.[39] A “launching State” means a State that launches or procures the launching of a space object or a State’s territory or facility where a space object is launched.[40] A space object includes component parts of the space object as well as the launch vehicle and parts thereof.[41] The responsibility for registration, therefore, lies with all owners of the spacecraft as well as with the launching organization.[42] Accordingly, a launching State would still be deemed to have jurisdiction and control over such debris, and, therefore, be responsible for all damage it may cause.[43] However, the issue of identification of such debris for liability purposes remains unanswered.[44] Where identification of debris causing damage cannot be obtained from registration information, the Convention requires other parties with space monitoring and tracking facilities to assist to the greatest feasible extent in identifying the space object.[45]

The subject of orbital debris remains constant in the international fora agenda. In 1993, several of the world’s space agencies formed the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordinating Committee (IADC) to facilitate the exchange of technical research and information related to orbital debris, to facilitate opportunities for space debris cooperation, and to identify debris mitigation options.[46] The IADC compiled orbital debris mitigation guidelines for the world’s spacefaring governments to follow which draw heavily from standards developed by the spacefaring nations.[47] This year, the IADC will present its guidelines to the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee for the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), which since 1994 has included orbital debris as an annual agenda item.[48]

Although international treaties are in place, the issue of enforcement remains the biggest challenge. The spacefaring nations, however, recognize the problem exists and at the very least, efforts on national level produced suggestions on mitigating space debris. Because of problems inherent in passing an international resolution, these national efforts may not go any further and may not reach the international arena at all. But are national efforts enough?

IV.National Efforts in the United States

A.Government Efforts

Beginning in 1988, the Reagan administration released the first national space policy calling for agencies to seek to minimize the creation of orbital debris.[49] The following year, the United States government issued a report on orbital debris, noting the lack of good measurements.[50] The report called on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) to develop a plan to monitor the debris environment and as a result, the Haystack radar, a facility operated by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, began tracking small orbital debris.[51]

The government updated its orbital debris report in 1995, issuing the following recommendations: (1) to continue and enhance debris measurement, modeling, and monitoring capabilities; (2) conduct a focused study on debris and emerging low earth orbit (LEO) systems; (3) develop government/industry design guidelines on orbital debris; (4) develop a strategy for international discussion; and (5) review and update U.S. policy on debris.[52] A year after the issuance of this report, President Clinton reaffirmed the earlier policy by calling for U.S. government agencies to minimize space debris.[53] The 1996 policy required NASA, DoD, the intelligence community and the private sector to develop design guidelines for U.S. government space hardware procurements and stressed a United States leadership role in urging other nations to adopt debris mitigation practices and policies.[54]

In 1997, a U.S. interagency working group led by NASA and DoD developed a work plan and created a set of “U.S. Government Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices.”[55] Based on a NASA safety standard of procedures for limiting debris, government-operated or procured space systems, including satellites as well as launch vehicles, started applying the Standards Practices.[56] The interagency working group shared the guidelines with the aerospace industry to encourage voluntary compliance.[57]

Now forming the foundation of U.S. government protocol regarding orbital debris, the Standard Practices supports four objectives, which apply to launch vehicle components and upper stages:

1. Control of debris released during normal operations. Spacecraft as well as upper stages should be designed to eliminate or minimize space debris released under normal circumstances. Any planned released of debris larger than five millimeters that remain on orbit for over 25 years should be evaluated and justified on the basis of cost effectiveness and mission requirements.

1. Minimization of debris generated by accidental explosions, during and after missions operations. During missions, spacecraft and upper stages should not have any credible failure modes for accidental explosions, or the probability of a failure mode’s occurrence should be limited. After missions, on-board stored energy should be depleted or made safe.

1. Selection of safe flight profile and operational configuration. Spacecraft and upper stage design and mission profiles should estimate and limit the probability of collision with known objects during orbital lifetime. Tether systems should be analyzed for intact and severed conditions.

1. Post-mission disposal of space structures. Launch vehicle components, upper stages, spacecraft, and other payloads should be disposed of at the end of mission life by one of three methods: (a) atmospheric re-entry; (b) maneuver to a designated storage orbit, or (d) direct removal. Tether systems should be analyzed for intact and severed conditions when performing trade-offs between various disposal strategies.[58]

1. Space Clean Up

Although officials criticized the notion of space clean up as “unrealistic,” NASA proposed feasible projects.[59] One of such projects, ORION, would utilize modest-powered laser and earth sensors and the system would detect, track, and eliminate various-sized debris by nudging them out of their present orbit and forcing the debris to re-enter the earth’s atmosphere and harmlessly burn up.[60] No engineering breakthroughs will be needed in completing this project; ORION would integrate current technologies into one system.[61] NASA indicated that after a year of long study, Project ORION appears to be an “inexpensive international solution.”[62] NASA projected that ORION could de-orbit up to 30,000 pieces of debris ranging from one centimeter to ten centimeters in size at below 800 kilometers altitude in two to three years for a total cost of $60 to $70 million.[63] In comparing this estimated cost to the potential loss of a single satellite worth that amount or more, or the price of other mitigation measures such as additional protective shielding, such as expense becomes relatively inexpensive.[64] Once proper funding becomes available, the system could be operational in two years.[65]

Project ORION sounds very promising and should be pushed in the forefront to receive proper funding. Another source of funding would be from fees imposed to seafaring nations when applying for launching licenses. Unless and until the international community comes up with viable solution, Project ORION seems to be the best alternative at present and should be given serious consideration.

1. Insurance

Procurement of insurance appears to be one of the methods available to launch and satellite operators to minimize the risk from orbital debris.[66] Although insurance does not contribute to the ultimate reduction of space debris, it allows launch and satellite operators to allocate the risks of debris among the parties involved.[67] Most launch and satellite operators today opt for all-risk policies that currently do not exclude damage caused by orbital debris.[68] However, a problem exists in the fact that insurers cannot quantify the risk derived from orbital debris since neither the operator nor the insurance community experienced the outcomes of the risk.[69] If and when a satellite operator presents a claim for loss from orbital debris critical questions need to be answered.[70] How will insurers react?[71] Will they start excluding orbital debris damage?[72] Will they begin to write separate policies for such coverage?[73] These uncertainties may hold some undesirable consequences for the commercial space industry.[74] However, appropriate risk apportionment may create adequate incentives for owners to implement their own solutions.[75] Under the Outer Space Treaty, an owner of a space object carries perpetual jurisdiction and control, and, therefore, liability, for its space object.[76] If the risk of loss rests solely on an owner, such a policy would create an incentive to improve satellite designs and materials and to take preventive steps such as de-orbiting or boosting satellites into supersynchronous orbit.[77]

D.The Commercial Sector

Licensing authority for non-government space activities rests with three agencies: Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).[78] Pursuant to the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended, the FAA acts as the United States licensing authority for commercial launches.[79] The FAA regulates launches from Unites States territory and launch activities by United States nationals outside the United States.[80] The FAA regulations provide detailed launch safety and liability insurance requirements.[81] The regulations also specifically indicate that the FAA does not review “payloads”[82] subject to regulation by the FCC or NOAA.[83]

Under the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992,[84] NOAA acts as the United States licensing authority for commercial remote sensing systems.[85] The Remote Sensing Act and NOAA’s implementing regulations[86] address national security, foreign policy and science policy issues, other than radio communication matters.[87] The Land Remote Sensing Policy Act requires that a licensee, “upon termination of operations under the license, make disposition of any satellites in space in a manner satisfactory to the President.”[88] The Remote Sensing Act did not alter the authority of the FCC concerning licensing of satellites transmitting radio communications.[89] Thus, because they use radio frequencies to transmit data collected in space back to the Earth, commercial United States remote sensing satellites typically must obtain a license from both NOAA and the FCC.[90] Both the FAA and NOAA issue regulations concerning mitigation of orbital debris and in several respects, those regulations require non-governmental space missions to adopt practices consistent with the Government Standard Practices.[91]