Res Communis

by P.J. Blount with the blog faculty

Yesterday the European Parliament adopted European Parliament resolution of 10 July 2008 on Space and security (2008/2030(INI)):

European Parliament resolution of 10 July 2008 on Space and security (2008/2030(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the European Security Strategy entitled “A secure Europe in a better world”, adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003,

– having regard to the EU Strategy against proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, likewise adopted by the European Council on 12 December 2003,

– having regard to Council resolution 2007/C 136/01 of 21 May 2007 on the European Space Policy(1) ,

– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, and their relevant provisions on European space policy (Article 189 of the TFEU), permanent structured cooperation on security and defence matters (Articles 42(6) and 46 of the TEU and Protocol 10) and enhanced cooperation in the civilian area (Part Six, Title III of the TFEU), as well as the solidarity clause (Article 222 of the TFEU) and mutual assistance provisions in the event of armed aggression against a Member State or States (Article 42(7) of the TEU),

– having regard to its resolution of 29 January 2004 on the action plan for implementing the European space policy(2) ,

– having regard to its resolution of 14 April 2005 on the European Security Strategy(3) ,

– having regard to the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (“the Outer Space Treaty”),

– having regard to the EU-Russia cooperation on space policy, which in 2006 created the Tripartite Space Dialogue between the European Commission, the European Space Agency (ESA) and Roscosmos (the Russian Federal Space Agency),

– having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A6-0250/2008),

A. whereas freedom from space-based threats and secure sustainable access to, and use of, space must be the guiding principles of the European Space Policy,

B. whereas the various political and security challenges which the European Union is increasingly facing make an autonomous European Space Policy a strategic necessity,

C. whereas the lack of a common approach to space policy between EU Member States results in overly costly programmes,

D. whereas the crisis management operations within the framework of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) suffer from a lack of interoperability between space assets operated by EU Member States,

E. whereas the European Union is lacking a comprehensive European space-based architecture for security and defence purposes,

F. whereas the development of a new generation of launchers takes approximately 15 years and the present generation of launchers will need replacing in the next 20 years,

G. whereas development of space assets by the USA, Russia, Japan and other emerging space-faring states, most notably China, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Brazil, Israel, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, South Africa and Turkey, is rapidly advancing,

H. whereas the French Presidency of the European Union during the second semester of 2008 sets out an advancement of the European Space Policy as one of its priorities,

I. whereas one of the most cost-effective elements of a space architecture and of achieving a sustainable fleet of space assets is on-orbit servicing, using in-situ means,

General considerations

1. Notes the importance of the space dimension to the security of the European Union and the need for a common approach necessary for defending European interests in space;

2. Underlines the need for space assets in order that the political and diplomatic activities of the European Union may be based on independent, reliable and complete information in support of its policies for conflict prevention, crisis management operations and global security, especially the monitoring of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of transportation and verification of international treaties, the transnational smuggling of light weapons and small arms, the protection of critical infrastructure and of the European Union’s borders, and civil protection in the event of natural and man-made disasters and crises;

3. Welcomes the endorsement of the European Space Policy by the “Space Council” as proposed by a joint communication presented by the Commission and the European Space Agency (COM(2007)0212), especially the chapter on security and defence, while regretting the absence of any reference to the threat of weaponisation of space within the “key issues to be considered in the development of a strategy for international relations” (as mentioned in Annex 3 to the above-mentioned Council Resolution of 21 May 2007); recommends, therefore, that the revised European Security Strategy should take this policy appropriately into account, and is of the view that space matters should be reflected in the possible White Paper on Security and Defence Policy;

4. Notes the inclusion of a legal basis for the European Space Policy in the Treaty of Lisbon; welcomes the opportunity given to it and to the Council to lay down, under the ordinary legislative procedure, the measures needed to shape a European Space Programme; calls on the Commission to submit to it and to the Council an appropriate proposal for such measures, together with a Communication relating to the establishment of appropriate relations with the European Space Agency; also welcomes the possibilities of permanent structured cooperation in security and defence matters and enhanced cooperation in the civilian area;

5. Encourages the Member States of the European Union , the European Space Agency and the various stakeholders to make greater and better use of the existing national and multinational space systems and to foster their complementarity; notes in this respect that common capabilities are needed for ESDP in at least the following areas: telecommunications, information management, observation and navigation; recommends the sharing and exchange of these data in line with the EU concept for Network Centric Operations Architecture;

6. Applauds the efforts of the International Academy of Astronautics and the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety to promote remediation, understanding and measures in respect of space debris;

Autonomous threat assessment

7. Calls on the EU Member States to pool and exchange the geospatial intelligence necessary for autonomous EU threat assessment;

Earth observation and reconnaissance

8. Urges that the European Union Satellite Centre (EUSC) be fully developed to make full use of its potential; moreover, recommends the urgent conclusion of agreements between the European Union Satellite Centre and the EU Member States to provide imagery available to ESDP operation and force commanders while ensuring complementarity with Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) observation capacities and derived security-related information; in this regard, welcomes the Tactical Imagery Exploitation Station project, run jointly by the European Defence Agency (EDA) and the European Union Satellite Centre;

9. Recommends that the EU develop a common concept for geospatial intelligence, creating conditions for involvement of the EUSC in the planning for each ESDP operation requiring space-based observation and space-based intelligence; recommends that the EUSC establish a secure communication link in support of ESDP operations not only with the Operations Headquarters (OHQ) based in the EU but also with the Force Headquarters (FHQ) in the deployment region; furthermore, suggests that the EU explore the possibility of a financial contribution to the EUSC from the EU budget in order to provide sufficient funds to meet the increasing needs of ESDP operations;

10. Urges the EU Member States having access to the various types of radar, optical and weather observation satellites and reconnaissance systems (Helios, SAR-Lupe, TerraSAR-X, Rapid Eye, Cosmo-Skymed, Pleiades) to make them compatible; welcomes the bilateral and multilateral agreements between the leading EU countries (e.g. SPOT, ORFEO, the Helios cooperative framework, the Schwerin agreement and the future MUSIS); recommends that the MUSIS system be brought within a European framework and financed from the EU budget;

11. Emphasises the importance of GMES for foreign as well as security and defence policies of the European Union; urges the creation of an operational budget line to ensure the sustainability of GMES services in response to users” needs;

Navigation – positioning – timing

12. Underlines the necessity of Galileo for autonomous ESDP operations, for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, for Europe’s own security and for the Union’s strategic autonomy; notes that, in particular, its public-regulated service will be vital in the field of navigation, positioning and timing, not least in order to avoid unnecessary risks;

13. Notes the first-reading agreement between Parliament and the Council on the proposal for a regulation on the further implementation of the European satellite radionavigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo), which establishes that the Community is the owner of the system and that its deployment phase is fully financed by the Community budget;

14. Draws attention to its position adopted on 23 April 2008 on the European satellite radionavigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo)(4) , in particular, to the fact that the EGNOS and Galileo programmes should be considered as one of the major pillars of the future European Space Programme, and to the governance of these programmes, together with the Galileo Interinstitutional Panel, which may serve as a model in the development of a European Space Policy;

Telecommunications

15. Underlines the need for secure satellite-supported communication for ESDP operations (EU Military Staff, EU Headquarters, deployable headquarters) and EU Member States’ deployments under UN, NATO and other similar organisations;

16. Requests that the current and future satellite telecommunication systems at the disposal of the EU Member States (e.g. Skynet, Syracuse, Sicral, SATCOM Bw, Spainsat) be interoperable in order to provide for cost reduction;

17. Supports the cooperative development of a Software-Defined Radio (SDR) by the Commission and the European Defence Agency; notes that SDR will contribute to better interoperability of the ground segment of telecommunications systems;

18. Recommends that savings be achieved by shared use of the ground infrastructure supporting different national telecommunications systems;

19. Supports the possibility of funding future European satellite telecommunications systems supporting ESDP operations from the EU budget;

Space surveillance

20. Supports the creation of a European space surveillance system leading to space situational awareness (including, for example, GRAVES and TIRA) to monitor the space infrastructure, space debris and, possibly, other threats;

21. Supports the possibility of funding the future European space situational awareness system from the EU budget;

Satellite-based early warning against ballistic missiles

22. Deplores the fact that EU Member States do not have access to instant data on ballistic missile launches around the world; expresses support, therefore, for projects leading towards satellite-based early warning against ballistic missile launches (such as the French “Spirale”); furthermore, calls for information acquired through these future systems to be available to all EU Member States in order to protect their population and to support possible countermeasures, as well as to serve in the verification of compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and for the purposes of ESDP operations and safeguarding Europe’s security interests;

Signal intelligence

23. Supports the exchange of signal intelligence (electronic intelligence such as the French “Essaim” and communications intelligence) at European level;

Autonomous access to space and international environment

24. Supports secure, independent and sustainable access to space for the European Union as one of the preconditions of its autonomous action;

25. Recommends that the European non-commercial satellites be carried into orbit by European launchers, preferably from the territory of the European Union, bearing in mind the aspects of security of supply and protection of the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base;

26. Points out that it is necessary to increase the development effort in order for an enhanced Ariane 5 to be available before 2015;

27. Recommends that strategic long-term investment in new European launchers be initiated as soon as possible, in order to keep up with the rising global competition; demands a greater degree of discipline for this project, in budgetary and time-frame terms;

28. Recommends that on-orbit servicing be established as a means of support to enhance the endurance, persistence, availability and operational efficiency of operational space assets and, at the same time, to reduce asset deployment and maintenance costs;

Governance

29. Encourages strong inter-pillar cooperation for space and security, involving all the relevant actors (i.e. the Commission, the Council, the European Defence Agency and the European Union Satellite Centre), in order to safeguard the security policy and data security linked with the ESDP;

30. Strongly recommends the promotion of equal access for all EU Member States to operational data gathered using space assets under a reinforced ESDP framework;

31. Recommends that administrative and financial capacities for the management of space-related activities be developed by the European Defence Agency;

Financing

32. Points out that the EU budget commits expenditure amounting to approximately EUR 5 250 million in the years 2007-2013 on common European space activities, resulting in an average expenditure of EUR 750 million per year over that period;

33. Calls on the European Union to set up an operational budget for space assets that serve to support the ESDP and European security interests;

34. Is alarmed by the fact that the lack of coordination among Member States results in a scarcity of resources due to unnecessary duplication of activities; therefore supports the idea of the launching of joint programmes by the Member States, which will provide costs savings in the longer term;

35. Furthermore, notes that the cost of the absence of a common European approach to the procurement, maintenance and functioning of space assets is estimated to amount to hundreds of millions of euros;

36. Points out that, as experience has shown, large-scale common projects cannot be properly managed when 27 different national budget authorities applying the principle of “fair return” are involved; therefore strongly recommends that these projects and programmes be financed from the EU budget;

37. Notes that the estimates of available expertise suggest that the level of investment needed to address the European security and defence needs in terms of satellite telecommunications, and the appropriate expenditure of the European Union on Earth observation and intelligence gathering, including signal intelligence, should be substantially increased in order to provide for the needs and ambitions of a comprehensive space policy;

38. Takes the view that the European Union, the European Space Agency, the European Defence Agency and their Member States should provide for reliable and adequate funding for the space activities envisaged and the research connected therewith; attaches great importance to the financing from the budget of the EU, such as on the Galileo project;

Protection of space infrastructure

39. Underscores the vulnerability of strategic space assets as well as the infrastructure allowing access to space, e.g. launchers and space ports; therefore stresses the need for them to be adequately protected by ground-based theatre missile defence, planes and space surveillance systems; furthermore supports the sharing of data with international partners in the event that satellites are rendered inoperable by enemy action;

40. Calls for the vulnerability of future European satellite systems to be reduced through anti-jamming, shielding, on-orbit servicing, high-orbit and multi-orbital constellation architectures;

41. Emphasises that the protective measures must be fully compliant with international standards regarding peaceful uses of outer space and commonly agreed transparency and confidence-building measures (TCBMs); asks EU Member States to explore the possibility of developing legally or politically binding “rules of the road” for space operators, together with a space traffic management regime;

42. Stresses that, as a result of this vulnerability, advanced communication should never be made fully dependent on space-based technologies;

International legal regime for uses of space

43. Reiterates the importance of the principle of the use of space for peaceful purposes expressed in the above-mentioned 1967 Outer Space Treaty; is therefore concerned by the possible future weaponisation of space;

44. Urges that under no circumstances should European space policy contribute to the overall militarisation and weaponisation of space;

45. Calls for the international legal regime to be strengthened so as to regulate and protect non-aggressive space uses and for the strengthening of TCBMs, within the framework of the drafting by the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) of space debris mitigation guidelines consistent with those of the Inter-Agency Debris Coordination Committee as well as the development by the UN Conference on Disarmament of a multilateral agreement on the prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space; furthermore, asks the EU Presidency to represent the EU proactively in COPUOS; calls on the EU institutions to promote a conference to review the Outer Space Treaty, with the aim of strengthening it and expanding its scope to prohibit all weapons in space;

46. Calls on all international actors to refrain from using offensive equipment in space; expresses its particular concern about the use of destructive force against satellites, such as the Chinese anti-satellite system tested in January 2007, and the consequences of the massive increase in debris for space security; recommends, therefore, the adoption of legally binding international instruments focusing on banning the use of weapons against space assets and the stationing of weapons in space;

47. Calls on all space users to register their satellites, including military satellites, by way of a space security confidence-building measure promoting transparency; supports the Council’s pursuit of a comprehensive EU Code of Conduct on Space Objects; demands that this Code be transformed into a legally binding instrument;

48. Urges the United Nations and the European Union to engage in the active diminution of, and protection from, space debris harmful to satellites;

Transatlantic cooperation on space policy and missile defence

49. Urges the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to launch a strategic dialogue on space policy and missile defence, while bearing in mind the legal imperative of avoiding any action that might be incompatible with the principle of the peaceful use of space, especially on the complementarity and interoperability of systems for satellite communications, space surveillance, and early warning of ballistic missiles, as well as protection of European forces by a theatre missile defence system;

50. Calls on the European Union and the United States of America to engage in a strategic dialogue on the use of space assets and to take the global lead within and outside the UN to make sure that outer space is preserved for peaceful policies only;

Other international cooperation

51. Welcomes the strengthened cooperation between the European Union and the Russian Federation within the framework of the above-mentioned Tripartite Space Dialogue set up in 2006 between the European Commission, the European Space Agency and Roscosmos, including space applications (satellite navigation, Earth observation and satellite communications) as well as access to space (launchers and future space transportation systems);

o
o o

52. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Space Agency, the parliaments of the Member States and the Secretaries-General of the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

(1) OJ C 136, 20.6. 2007, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 96 E, 21.4.2004, p. 136.
(3) OJ C 33 E, 9.2.2006, p. 580.
(4) Texts adopted, P6_TA(2008)0167.

by P.J. Blount with the blog faculty
H.R. 6455: To require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was introduced July 10, 2008 by Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX). The coin designated under the bill woulb be:

SEC. 3. COIN SPECIFICATIONS.

(a) Denominations- In commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Secretary of the Treasury (hereafter in this Act referred to as the `Secretary’) shall mint and issue the following coins:

(1) $50 GOLD COINS- Not more than 50,000 $50 gold coins, which shall–

(A) weigh 33.931 grams;

(B) have a diameter of 32.7 millimeters; and

(C) contain 1 troy ounce of fine gold.

(2) $1 SILVER COINS- Not more than 300,000 $1 coins of each of the 9 designs specified in section 4(a)(3)(B), which shall–

(A) weigh 26.73 grams;

(B) have a diameter of 1.500 inches; and

(C) contain 90 percent silver and 10 percent copper.

(b) Legal Tender- The coins minted under this Act shall be legal tender, as provided in section 5103 of title 31, United States Code.

(c) Numismatic Items- For purposes of section 5134 of title 31, United States Code, all coins minted under this Act shall be considered to be numismatic items.

(d) Mintage Level Limit- Notwithstanding the mintage level limit described under section 5112(m)(2)(A)(ii) of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary may mint and issue not more than 300,000 of each of the 9 $1 coins authorized to be minted under this Act.

SEC. 4. DESIGN OF COINS.

(a) Design Requirements-

(1) IN GENERAL- The design of the coins minted under this Act shall be emblematic of the 50 years of exemplary and unparalleled achievements of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

(2) DESIGNATION AND INSCRIPTIONS- On each coin minted under this Act, there shall be–

(A) a designation of the value of the coin;

(B) an inscription of the year `2008′; and

(C) inscriptions of the words `Liberty’, `In God We Trust’, `United States of America’, and `E Pluribus Unum’, and such other inscriptions as the Secretary may determine to be appropriate for the designs of the coins.

(3) COIN IMAGES-

(A) $50 COINS-

(i) OBVERSE- The obverse of the $50 coins issued under this Act shall bear an image of the sun.

(ii) REVERSE- The reverse of the $50 coins issued under this Act shall bear a design emblematic of the sacrifice of the United States astronauts who lost their lives in the line of duty over the course of the space program.

(iii) HIGH RELIEF- The design and inscriptions on the obverse and reverse of the $50 coins issued under this Act shall be in high relief.

(B) $1 COINS-

(i) OBVERSE- The obverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act shall bear 9 different designs, each of which shall consist of an image of 1 of the 9 planets of the solar system, including Earth.

(ii) REVERSE- The reverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act shall bear different designs, each of which shall be emblematic of the contributions of the research and space centers, subject to the following requirements:

(I) EARTH COIN- The reverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act which bear an image of the Earth on the obverse shall bear images emblematic of, and honoring, the discoveries and missions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Mercury, Gemini, and Space Shuttle missions and other manned Earth-orbiting missions, and the Apollo missions to the Moon.

(II) JUPITER COIN- The reverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act which bear an image of the planet Jupiter on the obverse shall include a scientifically accurate depiction of the Galilean moon Europa and depict both a past and future mission to Europa.

(III) SATURN COIN- The reverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act which bear an image of the planet Saturn on the obverse shall include a scientifically accurate depiction of the moon Titan and depict both a past and a future mission to Titan.

(IV) PLUTO (AND OTHER DWARF PLANETS) COIN- The reverse of the $1 coins issued under this Act which bear an image of the planet Pluto on the obverse shall include a design that is emblematic of telescopic exploration of deep space by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the ongoing search for Earth-like planets orbiting other stars.

(4) REALISTIC AND SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE DEPICTIONS- The images for the designs of coins issued under this Act shall be selected on the basis of the realism and scientific accuracy of the images and on the extent to which the images are reminiscent of the dramatic and beautiful artwork on coins of the so-called `Golden Age of Coinage’ in the United States, at the beginning of the Twentieth Century, with the participation of such noted sculptors and medallic artists as James Earle Fraser, Augustus Saint-Gaudens, Victor David Brenner, Adolph A. Weinman, Charles E. Barber, and George T. Morgan.

(b) Selection- The design for the coins minted under this Act shall be–

(1) selected by the Secretary, after consultation with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Commission of Fine Arts; and

(2) reviewed by the Citizens Coin Advisory Committee.

by P.J. Blount with the blog faculty
NASA published a notice on the National Environmental Policy Act; Disposition of Space Shuttle Program’s Real and Personal Property in today’s Federal Register (73 F.R. 39989-39991). The notice states that there is a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for this disposition:

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and NASA policy and procedures (14 CFR Part 1216, Subpart 1216.3), NASA has made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the disposition of the Space Shuttle Program’s (SSP’s) real and personal property using a structured process consisting of a coordinated series of actions. Under Presidential direction, NASA will cease operations of its SSP by 2010. A number of assets will be dispositioned during the transition and retirement (T&R) activities. NASA proposes to implement a structured process for the disposition of the SSP real and personal property consisting of a coordinated series of actions. SSP T&R activities would include potential retirement, transfer, and disposal of property. SSP property disposition activities would extend for several years beyond 2010. On January 14, 2004, President George W. Bush presented his Vision for U.S. Space Exploration (hereinafter “the Vision”) to the nation. Congress expressly endorsed the President’s exploration initiative and provided additional direction for the initiative in the NASA Authorization Act of 2005. In announcing the Vision, the President directed NASA to use the Space Shuttle to fulfill its obligation to complete assembly of the International Space Station and then retire the Space Shuttle by 2010.

Under Presidential direction, NASA will cease operations of its SSP activities at all locations, including Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida; Johnson Space Center (JSC), Ellington Field (EF), and El Paso Forward Operating Location (EPFOL), Texas; Stennis Space Center (SSC), Mississippi; Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF), Louisiana; Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Alabama; White Sands Test Facility (WSTF), New Mexico; Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) and Palmdale (Air Force Plant 42, Site 1), California; and the associated contractor facilities. The cessation of SSP operations will necessitate the disposition of all program-related assets. Public comments received on the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) during the public review period conducted from February 27, 2008, through March 28, 2008, are provided along with responses in Appendix E of the Final PEA.