House committee takes skeptical view of ISS commercialization plans

WASHINGTON — A month after NASA rolled out a technique to extend industrial use of the Worldwide Area Station, some in Congress are skeptical of the hassle.

At a July 10 listening to of the Home Science Committee’s house subcommittee, some members instructed that permitting industrial actions on the station, together with visits by personal astronauts, wasn’t an applicable use for the power as NASA prepares to return people to the moon and go on to Mars.

“We have to be certain that these sources are centered on these duties that may solely be carried out by the ISS and which might be a excessive precedence,” stated Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), chair of the total committee, in opening remarks on the listening to. “We can be taking an in depth take a look at NASA’s proposed commercialization initiative to see whether or not it meets that commonplace. At this level, I’m not satisfied that it does.”

She cited as one instance internet hosting personal astronauts, like house vacationers, on the station. “I’m skeptical that sending rich house vacationers to ISS is the most effective or perhaps a good use of a taxpayer-funded facility,” she stated, contrasting it with NASA’s need to carry out analysis to scale back human well being dangers of long-duration spaceflight. “Our focus ought to be on sending extra crewmembers or researchers to the station, not well-heeled people in search of an unique trip.”

Invoice Gerstenmaier, in his closing public look as NASA’s affiliate administrator for human exploration and operations earlier than being reassigned to a particular advisor place later the identical day, famous that the brand new commercialization technique allocates solely 5 p.c of ISS sources to industrial actions.

“We’re very centered on decreasing the danger related to Mars, each technically and likewise from a human physiology standpoint,” he stated. “We’re spending a variety of analysis time on each of these actions.”

He described allocating that small fraction of ISS sources to industrial actions as a step in direction of totally industrial house stations in low Earth orbit, of which NASA can be a buyer. “In some unspecified time in the future, this station will put on out,” he stated of the ISS. “We want to have the ability to use a non-public facility.”

One other challenge raised on the listening to is how a lot funding, if any, NASA will save by encouraging industrial actions on the station. NASA’s plans “name into query whether or not this plan will save NASA cash that it may apply to the moon program, or if it is going to find yourself costing us extra,” stated Rep. Kendra Horn (D-Okla.), chair of the house subcommittee.

The costs NASA is charging for industrial use of the station is “considerably backed,” famous Paul Martin, NASA’s inspector normal. He puzzled whether or not industrial exercise will be sustained on the station with out such subsidies.

“We proceed to query whether or not a enough enterprise case exists beneath which personal firms can create a self-sustaining and profit-making enterprise utilizing the ISS unbiased of serious authorities funding within the quick or mid-term,” he stated.

Firms take a unique view of the prospects of low Earth orbit commercialization. “I don’t see a pattern of firms coming as much as the Hill to ask for increasingly more cash for the station,” stated Eric Stallmer, president of the Industrial Spaceflight Federation. “I feel what we’re searching for is secure insurance policies.” Such stability, he argued, utilized to NASA’s pricing insurance policies for ISS industrial use: he stated any adjustments to these costs ought to be rare and made with advance discover to restrict disruption to enterprise plans.

There was assist for extending NASA’s authorization to function the ISS, which presently runs by means of 2024, to a minimum of 2028. “It’s onerous to do a marketing strategy for one thing that will not exist” in a couple of years, stated Stallmer. “If we are able to do 2028 or past, it makes for a greater case for funding.”

Any extension, although, comes with funding tradeoffs. “We’re spending cash in low Earth orbit that we might be spending in deep house,” stated Gerstenmaier. “We’d like to ensure we have now that proper steadiness.”

“It looks like the white elephant within the room is whether or not this plan will really work with commercialization and whether or not it is going to work within the timeline,” stated Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla.) late within the listening to. He famous that Martin gave the impression to be significantly skeptical of the plan.

“Skepticism is in an inspector normal’s job description,” Martin responded.