NASA has relatively little experience with purchasing private sector data to meet scientific objectives. In may be reasonably anticipated that numerous procurement and legal issues will arise in the process, such as allocating intellectual property rights for data acquired with public and private resources. As a beginning step, NASA could provide more information to the private sector on baseline scientific requirements so that industry can propose creative solutions. Excess Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles as Space Launchers Some advocates of the use of converted ICBMs for space launch purposes see them as a low-cost alternative to commercial or government space launch systems. While this use can be tempting, it has been the policy position of past and current Administrations that the use of ICBMs for space launch should be subject to some exacting conditions. Commercial launch firms have stated that such vehicles should not be available for commercial use as they constitute unfair government competition with private industry. This is similar to the economic policy rationale for limitations on the use of space launchers from non-market economies (or economies in transition) such as Russia, China, and Ukraine. Under certain conditions, the government may use converted ICBMs for space launches. First, the use of a converted ICBM must be consistent with the treaty obligations of the United States, especially in international arms control. Second, the converted ICBM must meet the mission requirements of the using agency. Third, the use of a converted ICBM must result in cost savings to the government. There are significant technical differences between an ICBM and a space launcher, although the technology can be indistinguishable. These differences result in conversion costs that can often make ICBM use economically unattractive. Some educational institutions have asked that they be allowed to use excess ICBMs for student training and research, arguing that they cannot afford a commercial launch. Given the concern of commercial launch providers with unfair government competition, conditions could be imposed to ensure that using a converted ICBM truly enables an educational function and does not compete with industry. For example, a converted ICBM might be allowed for use by an institution of higher education if the payload itself will not compete with commercial firms, the cost of converting and using the missile is less than 50% of the price of a comparable commercial launch, and the educational institution pays for the cost of conversion and launch (rather than being subsidized). Conclusions Space commerce consists of several different industry sectors with their own market dynamics. I have not addressed those sectors, such as reentry vehicles, where I have not done research. In areas where I have worked, such as remote sensing, GPS, and space launch, it is my view that: The United States can most effectively promote GPS as a global The regulatory process for remote sensing licenses can be made Clear conditions on the use of converted ICBMs for space launchers can prevent competition with commercial launch firms while still enabling appropriate government and educational uses. Assuming the X-33 program is a success and truly low-cost access to space becomes possible, I hope there will be future hearings to address new challenges such as space manufacturing, tourism, and property rights beyond earth. Until then, there is much that can be done to promote the reality of space commerce today. Thank you very much and I would be happy to respond to any questions you might have. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Thank you, Dr. Pace. You used Mr. Dailey's minute and 37 seconds. Mr. Brender. STATEMENT OF MARK BRENDER, CHAIRMAN, RADIO-TELEVISION NEWS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION REMOTE SENSING TASK FORCE Mr. BRENDER. Good afternoon. I'm Mark Brender. I chair the Radio and Television News Directors Association's Remote Sensing Task Force, something we established back in 1986. The media is very anxious to use imagery from high resolution imaging systems. And we hope that there will be unfettered access to such systems when they are placed in orbit beginning, some as early as this year and on into the end of the century. At ABC News where I work, we've used imagery many times, most recently to look at areas of Bosnia, and also to look at that nuclear facility near Pyon Yang in North Korea. We were the first to put on the air that imagery of that particular facility. Concerning the presidential policy and the policy that you want to codify into law, the policy says that the government can issue shutter control orders if they feel there's a threat to the national security, or a threat to foreign policy concerns. The Radio and Television News Directors Association feels that that is a very high limbo bar. And the Supreme Court has said that it is only a direct and immediate threat to the national security of the United States. We're concerned that in the present policy and the policy you want to codify, the wording is overly broad and very vague. Quite frankly, it is unconstitutional. Just because we may use an outside source to gather news, that source should have the same First Amendment protections. As far as the cabinet officer, the Secretary of Commerce, according to the policy, is the one that issues shutter control orders. We would hope that that would remain with the court. Tradition has had it that it is the courts that direct edicts to the news media for prior constraint, and not a member of the Executive Branch. This procedure is embedded in constitutional law. All we need, and all we're asking, is that the government tell us in the law, and tell us in the policy, what standards-what standards you'll use when you're going to issue shutter control orders. And those standards are of course the phrase, from the Pentagon Papers case, 1971, that you'll issue shutter control orders when there is a direct, immediate threat to the national security of the United States, not foreign policy concern or international obligations, or some vague national security threat. Media companies will have little or no interest in investing in companies doing remote sensing if the government can step in at almost any whim and issue some type of shutter control orders. On the issue of shutter control in Israel-I'll just make a brief comment about that-the Administration_probably is going to give Israel the de facto shutter control over U.S. commercial imaging systems. It's going to force U.S. imaging systems in the long run if other countries follow the same track, and if other countries want the same courtesy extended to them as the U.S. plans to extend to Israel. American orbiting satellites will have to orbit some patchwork quilt orbit around the earth. We believe that is also-such a policy is also unconstitutional, and also doesn't bolster investor confidence. There are plenty of existing regulations that protect the national security, especially in a time of conflict-espionage laws, trade laws, UN sanctions. So for example, no U.S. company, if you have one meter resolution or better now would be able to sell imagery to Iraq because there are trade restrictions against Iraq. The U.S. has for 40 years now supported the open skies philosophies established by the UN. That same philosophy should be now applied to commercial systems. And we shouldn't change it. We're entering this age of transparency, and rightly so many governments are uncomfortable with it, an age of transparency at one meter resolution. But the U.S. should stay the principle course on the precepts based on the Constitution. The U.S., of all nations, should not support limits on such information systems. We hope that one day such imaging systems at one meter will be as indispensable to us in the news gathering business as a hand-held camera and a printing press. Thank you very much. [The prepared statement of Mr. Brender follows:] Chairman Sensenbrenner and distinguished members of the subcommittee: I am pleased to testify today on behalf of the RadioTelevision News Directors Association regarding the Space Commercialization Promotion Act of 1996. The Radio-Television News Directors Association ("RTNDA") is the world's largest professional organization devoted exclusively to electronic journalism. RTNDA represents local and network news executives, educators, students and others in the radio, television and cable news business in over thirty countries. Over the past several years, RTNDA has urged both the Department of Commerce and the Congress to adopt regulatory policies that will encourage the development of a commercial remotesensing satellite industry. RTNDA seeks greater availability of high resolution earth images for use by the news media to inform the American public, free from unwarranted government interference. High-resolution remote-sensing Chairman Loren Tobia KMTV, Omaha, NE President Chairman-Elect Mike Cavender WTSP-TV, St. Petersburg, FL Treasurer Lou Prato Media Consultant Past Chairman Directors KOA Radio, Denver David Busiek KCCHTV, Des Moines, IA Jerry Dahmen Janet Evans-Ferkin Robert Garcia Bernard Gershon Al Gibson Vickie Jenkins KOIT Radio, San Francisco Dave McGinn Mark Millage Lucy Riley John Sears Steve Smith Scott Uecker Indianapolis Brian Whittemore Gary Wordlow WJLA-TV, Washington Will Wright Wound Carmint 1 |