Author Topic: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites  (Read 7706 times)

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
https://spacenews.com/fcc-to-set-five-year-deadline-for-deorbiting-leo-satellites/

Quote
The Federal Communication Commission wants to require operators of low Earth orbit satellites to deorbit their spacecraft within five years after their mission ends, a much shorter timeframe than currently required.

The FCC issued a draft order Sept. 8 setting a “five-year rule” for post-mission disposal of LEO satellites. The commission will take up the order at its Sept. 29 open meeting.

The order, if adopted by commissioners, would require spacecraft that end their missions in or passing through LEO — defined as altitudes below 2,000 kilometers — dispose of their spacecraft through reentry into the Earth’s atmosphere as soon as practicable and no more than five years after the end of the mission. The rule would apply to satellites launched two years after the order is adopted, and include both U.S.-licensed satellites as well as those licensed by other jurisdictions but seeking U.S. market access.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6103
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9324
  • Likes Given: 39
Attached: the draft FAA order (says little other than it will be discussed at the meeting 2022/09/29), and the AIAA “Satellite Orbital Safety Best Practices” guide.

Page 14 / Practice D-1 of the AIAA document is the relevant section on deorbit, but Practice A-2 contains an interesting line:
Quote
If the satellite will occupy an orbit for which the natural decay deorbit will require more than five years
(the companies signing this document think that we should all aspire to a goal of one year), once
a standard has been defined for active debris removal any necessary interfaces should be installed
on your satellite to allow straightforward active debris removal of your satellite should it become
inoperable.
Likely included at the request of OneWeb due to their use of Altius' DogTag interface. This implies that an eventual FAA rule may include the ability for a satellite to be captured and deorbited by a third party as an alternative to including a redundant mechanism on the satellite itself (like the 'Lifeboat' system on CORONA) for deorbiting in the event of failure.
That would reduce cost and mass per-satellite, at the expense of needing to develop (or hire the services of) an additional disposal satellite.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
No special interface is needed, tho. I mean it’s nice, but not essential.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6103
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9324
  • Likes Given: 39
No special interface is needed, tho. I mean it’s nice, but not essential.
Having at least a common interface is a good idea, be it a dedicated grapple structure or a "your nozzle bell must be no longer than xxx mm and with a throat between yy mm and zzz mmm in diameter" spec (think MEV grapple). That way any given deorbit vehicle can interface with any given dead satellite. If your constellation is exceptionally reliable then you can - for example - sell your deorbit services (be that deorbit satellites you've built and launched, or a contract you purchased but no longer need) to recoup your investment.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Use a general purpose grasper, and you already have a common interface.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
BTW, I think a 5 year requirement is good.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6103
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9324
  • Likes Given: 39
Use a general purpose grasper, and you already have a common interface.
Not that easy, which is why every object-to-object grapple between space vehicles has been performed with a dedicated purpose grappler (with the exception of Intelsat 6 which was grabbed by hand, but I don't think anyone is going to volunteer to be the manipulator of a loitering disposal vehicle).
With the fragility of most spacecraft subsystems, there are a limited number of locations you can grab to start with, so designating "you can grab this bit, and it'll be at least within these dimensions" greatly simplifies the task over general-purpose manipulation.

Offline Hog

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 1700
  • Likes Given: 6866
Anyone know the current timeline for disposal requirements?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Oh ya, STS-49!  The only time 3 astronauts have "been outside" for Extra-Vehicular Activity(EVA).  Shuttle getting to perform one of its original purposes.  With all the fancy fixtures, arms and technology, sometimes you just have to go "hands on".

Attachment
1) Hieb, Akers, and Thuot assist in capturing the Intelsat 603 satellite from its derelict orbit.
Paul

Offline DreamyPickle

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • Home
  • Liked: 921
  • Likes Given: 205
How would this actually be enforced?

Providers will be required to show a design that "reliably" return a satellite within 5 years. But what happens if the system fails in a 1000km orbit? Are there going to be fines or will they just be required to update the design?

In theory if OneWeb were to go bankrupt and leave all of it's satellites in orbit they could remain there essentially forever.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5484
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4316
  • Likes Given: 1757
How would this actually be enforced?

Providers will be required to show a design that "reliably" return a satellite within 5 years. But what happens if the system fails in a 1000km orbit? Are there going to be fines or will they just be required to update the design?

In theory if OneWeb were to go bankrupt and leave all of it's satellites in orbit they could remain there essentially forever.
The ruling appears to say that they must show a design. It does not say that the design must work in all cases, just that it is designed to work in all cases. The enforcement is that if you do not show such a design, you will not get a license. The ruling is for new license applications, not for licenses that have already been granted. Oneweb is not the only company that has FCC-licensed satellites in LEO.

Abandoned LEO satellites are in the same situation as abandoned oil and gas wells. Eventually, the government will be stuck with the cleanup. This is a classic example of "privatize the profits, socialize the liabilities".

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #10 on: 09/24/2022 02:00 am »
Satellite operators want option to exceed deorbiting rules

Quote from: theregister.com
A group of satellite operators has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reconsider its proposed five-year window to remove orbital junk by adding language that would let them request waivers to exceed the limit.

Iridium Communications, HughesNet operator EchoStar, Luxembourg-based SES, and OneWeb, currently building a satellite constellation it said will provide global broadband, penned the letter [PDF] earlier this week. The group asked that the FCC "adopt explicit language recognizing that operators may seek and obtain waivers of the five-year post-mission disposal rule for good cause," as well as establish "objective criteria" for evaluating waiver requests.

Offline DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5484
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4316
  • Likes Given: 1757
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #11 on: 09/24/2022 02:18 am »
Satellite operators want option to exceed deorbiting rules

Quote from: theregister.com
A group of satellite operators has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reconsider its proposed five-year window to remove orbital junk by adding language that would let them request waivers to exceed the limit.

Iridium Communications, HughesNet operator EchoStar, Luxembourg-based SES, and OneWeb, currently building a satellite constellation it said will provide global broadband, penned the letter [PDF] earlier this week. The group asked that the FCC "adopt explicit language recognizing that operators may seek and obtain waivers of the five-year post-mission disposal rule for good cause," as well as establish "objective criteria" for evaluating waiver requests.
Another classic "tragedy of the commons". These companies do not want to be held responsible for cleaning up the mess they are making, because it's expensive. But in this case the mess will directly affect their entire industry and is a lot more closely-coupled than most of the earlier "commons", such as polluting the air and water, increasing CO2, or NG leaks from abandoned wells. Maybe this time the regulators can actually be effective and keep LEO from getting too cluttered to allow space operations.

I actually sympathize with companies whose business plans are barely profitable and who don't have the resources to fix the problem. But trying to save a marginal company now can cause better business plans to become unworkable later if LEO becomes too cluttered.

Offline toren

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • Idaho, USA
  • Liked: 291
  • Likes Given: 1178
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #12 on: 09/25/2022 03:16 pm »
Can someone tell me where Congress delegated such rule making authority to the FCC?  If there is none, it is likely subject to a court challenge should someone care to do so.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #13 on: 09/27/2022 04:01 am »
Can someone tell me where Congress delegated such rule making authority to the FCC?  If there is none, it is likely subject to a court challenge should someone care to do so.

Congress didn't give FCC authority for space debris mitigation, but as you said it's only an issue if someone wants to challenge it in court, I don't think the satellite companies want to do that at the moment.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #14 on: 09/27/2022 01:39 pm »
If original Starlinks are still operational and still have the ability to deorbit, why not let them continue working?  Seems like this rule is contrary to LEO constellations for internet service whether it be Starlink, One Web or another company.  In my opinion, this rule isn't law, and should be deorbit at the end of life of the particular satellite.  Satellites can be robust enough to last for many more years. 

What is their reasoning for this?

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #15 on: 09/27/2022 02:08 pm »
I don’t think they have to deorbit if they’re still being used.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline tbellman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 964
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #16 on: 09/27/2022 02:42 pm »
If original Starlinks are still operational and still have the ability to deorbit, why not let them continue working?  Seems like this rule is contrary to LEO constellations for internet service whether it be Starlink, One Web or another company.  In my opinion, this rule isn't law, and should be deorbit at the end of life of the particular satellite.  Satellites can be robust enough to last for many more years. 

What is their reasoning for this?

If the satellite is still operational, then it obviously isn't "post-mission" (wording from the FCC meeting agenda), or "at the end of its useful life" (wording from the operator proposal), and the proposed rules would not require the satellite to be deorbited yet.

What do you think the proposed rules say?

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #17 on: 09/28/2022 02:28 pm »
I re-read the article.  It says 5 years AFTER the end of the satellites mission.  This may be reasonable since LEO is going to be crowded.  No need to have a lot of dead satellites up there.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #18 on: 09/29/2022 02:04 am »
Wow did not expect this coming from a democrat controlled congress, very interesting: https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/science-committee-leaders-send-letter-to-fcc-on-orbital-debris-mitigation-standards

Quote
SEPTEMBER 27, 2022

SCIENCE COMMITTEE LEADERS SEND LETTER TO FCC ON ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION STANDARDS

(Washington, DC) – Today, Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Ranking Member Frank Lucas (R-OK), Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics Chairman Don Beyer (D-VA), and Ranking Member Brian Babin (R-TX) sent a letter to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the FCC's potential consideration of new regulations for orbital space debris at its upcoming open Commission meeting. The letter is a follow up to a letter sent from the bipartisan leadership of the Science Committee to the FCC in 2020. In the letter, the Committee leaders reassert their concern about the FCC’s proposal and request the Commission postpone consideration of this matter.

“As leaders of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, we understand the importance of supporting a safe, sustainable space environment. However, we are concerned that the Commission’s proposal to promulgate rules on this matter could create uncertainty and potentially conflicting guidance,” the Members said in the letter.

They continued, “Internationally, NASA has led coordination on space debris mitigation guidelines with other space agencies over several decades. This U.S. leadership in coordinating orbital debris guidelines provides a strong foundation for leading other areas of space sustainability. Actions on orbital debris mitigation that stand apart from or conflict with Federal government guidelines could lead to confusion that, in effect, undermines, rather than strengthens, national and international efforts to reduce and mitigate the risk of orbital debris.”

A full copy of the letter can be found here.

Read the 2020 letter here.

The letter also said "As the bipartisan leadership of the Science Committee and our Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee wrote to your predecessor in April 2020,2 the Commission does not have clear authority from Congress, a fact which remains true today.", could be very useful in beating back space NIMBYs' attempt to kill constellations via FCC.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6103
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9324
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: FCC to set five-year deadline for deorbiting LEO satellites
« Reply #19 on: 09/29/2022 08:23 am »
could be very useful in beating back space NIMBYs' attempt to kill constellations via FCC.
The constellation operators (specifically Iridium, Oneweb, and SpaceX, via the AIAA) are the ones proposing the more stringent deorbit rules, not opposing them.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1