Document type: Guide Practice area: Technology — Aerospace Jurisdiction: United States (federal) and international Last reviewed: 5 September 2026

Who this is for

The first lawyer at a space company, or outside counsel asked to build a regulatory plan for one. It assumes the company is building spacecraft rather than launch vehicles, and notes where a launch operator's path differs.

Our example is Thalassa Systems, a 120-person company in Boulder building a constellation of eighteen satellites carrying a radar payload for maritime domain awareness. Its general counsel is Priya Ostrowski-Adeyinka. Its first launch is nineteen months away, on a rideshare from a commercial provider.

The organizing principle of this guide: the regulatory schedule is the program schedule. A company that treats licensing as paperwork to be done once the design is finished will redesign the spacecraft or slip the launch. Both are more expensive than starting early.

Step 1 — Stand up the export control program before anything else

Not first among equals. First.

Why. Violations of the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. § 2778, and the export control regulations are criminal. They occur before anyone thinks about them — in a design conversation with a foreign supplier, in a repository a visa-holding engineer can read, in a diligence data room opened to a foreign investor. And they are discovered, typically, during a financing or an acquisition, years after they happened.

Classify every item. Which subsystems are on the United States Munitions List and controlled under ITAR; which are on the Commerce Control List and controlled under the EAR, with spacecraft items concentrated in the 500 series at 15 C.F.R. Part 774; and which are uncontrolled. Since the 2014 reform moved many commercial satellites and components from the Munitions List to the Commerce Control List, this is an item-by-item analysis. Assuming everything is ITAR slows engineering and costs money; assuming nothing is creates criminal exposure.

Record the classifications. A classification register, with the basis for each determination and the date, maintained as the design changes.

Then control access.

  • Deemed exports are the recurring failure. Releasing controlled technical data to a foreign national inside the United States is an export to that person's country. Space companies hire internationally. Audit who can read what, by nationality, in every repository, drive, wiki, and ticketing system.
  • Foreign suppliers and launch providers. Technical exchange requires authorization — a Technical Assistance Agreement under ITAR, or the analogous EAR authorization. Identify these before the engineering conversation, not after.
  • Foreign ground stations involve exporting equipment and technical data.
  • Foreign investors and board members with access to controlled data. This intersects with foreign investment review for critical technologies.

Write a technology control plan, train the engineering organization, and appoint an empowered official. If you find historical violations — and a first audit usually does — evaluate a voluntary disclosure promptly. Companies that self-report and fix the program are ordinarily resolved without penalty; companies found by an investigation are not.

Step 2 — Build the regulatory schedule backwards from launch

One page, and it governs the program.

L-19 months  Export program stood up; classification register complete
L-18         FCC application filed  ← the long pole
L-17         Remote sensing application filed (if imaging Earth)
L-15         ** Design freeze — AFTER the debris analysis **
L-14         Launch services agreement executed
L-12         ITU coordination proceeding in parallel
L-10         Earth station applications filed (each site separately)
L-8          Insurance placed
L-6          Payload review information to launch provider
L-3          Conjunction assessment arrangements in place
L-0          Launch
L+           Continuing obligations: reports, modifications,
             renewals, anomaly reporting, deorbit confirmation

The two dates that matter. The FCC filing, because it is the longest and because it constrains the design. And the design freeze, which must come after the orbital debris analysis, not before.

Assign an owner for each regulatory workstream and hold a standing weekly cross-functional meeting with engineering, because most regulatory requirements in this industry are engineering requirements.

Step 3 — File the communications application early, and let it shape the design

Section 301 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 301, prohibits radio transmission without a license. Section 307 is the licensing authority and § 309 the application procedure, including the public notice and petition-to-deny process that makes this slower than applicants expect. The substantive rules are at 47 C.F.R. Part 25.

Check the streamlined small satellite path first. Qualifying systems with limited operational characteristics get a lower fee and a faster shot clock. Many constellations do not qualify. Determine this early because it changes the schedule by months.

What the application requires:

  • Frequency selection supported by a coordination analysis, not by what your radio vendor supports. The attractive bands are congested and the analysis is specialist technical work. Operators who choose the band before the analysis restart the application.
  • Orbital parameters and a mission profile the Commission can evaluate.
  • The orbital debris showing — see Step 4.
  • Legal, technical, and financial qualifications.

Then the international layer, running in parallel. Frequency assignments and, for geostationary systems, orbital positions are coordinated through the International Telecommunication Union, and a United States applicant reaches that process through the FCC, which files on its behalf. Watch the bringing-into-use deadlines: an assignment not brought into actual use within the prescribed period lapses, which becomes a real constraint when a launch slips.

Engage specialist counsel. A Part 25 application is not general corporate work, and the difference between an experienced filer and a first-timer is measured in quarters.

Step 4 — Do the orbital debris analysis before you freeze the design

This is the step that determines whether Step 3 goes smoothly or catastrophically.

What must be addressed:

  • No operational debris released — no lens caps, no separation hardware, no deliberate breakups.
  • Collision risk at deployment and across the mission, with the probability of collision with large objects.
  • Maneuverability — whether the spacecraft can maneuver, with what propulsion, and how conjunction warnings will be handled. A non-maneuverable satellite in a congested shell is an increasingly hard case.
  • Post-mission disposal, against a five-year expectation in low Earth orbit — materially tighter than the previous twenty-five-year guideline.
  • Casualty risk on reentry for components that may survive.
  • Disposal reliability, multiplied across every satellite in a constellation.
  • Space situational awareness arrangements — conjunction data sources, screening thresholds, the maneuver decision process, and how another operator reaches you at three in the morning.

Why this drives design. The five-year disposal expectation sets a relationship between orbital altitude, ballistic coefficient, and whether a deorbit device or propulsion is carried. A company that picks its altitude for revenue reasons and then runs the analysis will face three unattractive options: a lower orbit that costs performance, a drag device that costs mass and adds a failure mode, or propulsion that costs mass, money, and a qualification campaign.

Run the analysis at concept, not at critical design review. Thalassa ran it at L-17 and lowered its orbit by 40 kilometers, a trade study rather than a crisis.

Step 5 — Remote sensing, if you point anything at Earth

Operating a private remote sensing space system requires a license under 51 U.S.C. § 60121, with conditions of operation at § 60122 and regulations at 15 C.F.R. Part 960.

The tiering question comes first. Systems are sorted by whether the data they can produce is substantially available from other sources — domestic, foreign, or otherwise. A capability with widely available analogues carries light conditions. A capability nobody else has carries conditions tailored to it.

Prepare the availability analysis yourself. Identify comparable systems, domestic and foreign, with their capabilities and availability. An applicant that arrives with a documented analysis showing its capability is already obtainable elsewhere is in a much better position than one that asserts it.

Expect conditions and read them carefully. Section 60122 preserves the requirement to operate consistent with national security concerns and the foreign policy and international obligations of the United States — the statutory basis for limitations on collection or dissemination over specified areas during specified periods. Your license will contain the conditions that make that operable. Understand them before you sign customer contracts, because your data agreements cannot promise what your license does not permit.

Radar, very high resolution, non-Earth imaging, and novel modalities are where this regime becomes the schedule driver rather than a formality. Thalassa's radar payload was in that category and the license took eight months.

Step 6 — The launch provider relationship

Understand what you are and are not licensing. The Commercial Space Launch Act, at 51 U.S.C. § 50904, makes it unlawful for a United States citizen to launch without a license, and § 50905 governs applications and conditions. The launch provider holds that license, not you. The framework is at 14 C.F.R. Part 450.

But your payload is reviewed. The FAA conducts a payload review, determining whether launching your payload would jeopardize public health and safety, safety of property, national security or foreign policy interests, or international obligations. A payload licensed by another agency — FCC-authorized, remote-sensing-licensed — is generally addressed through that authorization. A payload no agency licenses goes through a payload review on its own, which is where novel missions meet the mission authorization gap.

Diligence the provider's license. Its status, its scope, whether it covers your orbit and trajectory, and what happens on modification, suspension, or revocation under § 50908.

Then work the schedule risk. Launch dates move. Your contract needs: a defined accommodation for delay; the customer's rights on extended delay including a walk-away; manifest priority protections on a rideshare, because the primary payload's slip becomes yours; and an express allocation of what happens if the provider's license is delayed or suspended.

And plan the technical exchange. Integration involves exchanging technical data with the provider, and if the provider or any of its personnel are foreign, that exchange needs export authorization identified in advance. Build it into the integration schedule.

Step 7 — The cross-waiver, and explaining it to your board

This is the conversation that surprises every first-time space company, and it should happen early and in writing.

Section 50914 requires a reciprocal waiver of claims. The licensee, its contractors and subcontractors, its customers, and the customers' contractors and subcontractors, and the United States, each waive claims against the others for property damage and for employee injuries sustained in connection with the licensed activity.

In plain terms: if the rocket fails and your satellites are destroyed, you have no claim against the launch provider. Not a capped claim. No claim. The statute requires it, so no amount of negotiating leverage produces a different result.

What that means operationally:

Your spacecraft is uninsured unless you insure it. Launch insurance is a real market with real premiums, typically a meaningful percentage of insured value. Whether to buy it is a capital allocation decision, not a legal one — and for a constellation it is a portfolio question. Thalassa insured its first three satellites and self-insured the rest, on the reasoning that the first launch carried the learning risk.

The remedy that exists is commercial. Negotiate a reflight guarantee or launch credit: what triggers it, on what timeline, at what priority on a future manifest, and what happens if the provider cannot reflight within a defined period. This term is the actual remedy for launch failure and it is worth real negotiating effort.

Orbit insertion accuracy is a separate failure mode from loss, and deserves its own remedy — a partial credit, or a commitment to a corrective opportunity.

Flow the waiver down. The statute contemplates that the waiver reaches contractors and customers at every tier, and your own subcontracts and customer agreements must actually implement it. A subcontractor who has not waived, and who sues the launch provider, creates a problem the provider will look to you to solve.

Then the second and third tiers of the financial responsibility structure. Section 50914 requires the licensee to carry insurance for the maximum probable loss from third-party claims and from claims by the United States for damage to government property, determined mission by mission. Section 50915 provides that for successful claims exceeding that insurance, the Secretary may pay, subject to appropriation, up to a statutory ceiling. Above that, liability returns to the licensee. Understanding the three tiers is what allows a board to evaluate the residual exposure rationally.

Step 8 — Ground segment authorizations

The spacecraft gets attention; the ground segment generates most of the recurring work.

Every earth station needs its own authorization. A satellite license does not authorize the stations that talk to it. Each site requires an FCC earth station authorization with frequency coordination against terrestrial services, site-specific interference analysis, and antenna characteristics — and each is a separate application on its own timeline. Plan for the domestic sites being the easy ones.

Foreign ground stations require that country's authorization, obtained under that country's law, usually through a local entity or partner, on that country's timeline. They also involve exporting equipment and technical data, which returns you to Step 1.

Ground-station-as-a-service providers do not relieve you of responsibility for the authorizations underlying the service. Verify what the provider actually holds, in which countries, for which bands, and get it in the contract.

Budget nine to twelve months for a global ground network, and start before you need it.

Step 9 — Insurance and risk transfer

Pre-launch. Covers the spacecraft from delivery through launch, including transport and integration.

Launch. Covers loss from ignition through a defined point — separation, initial checkout, or a defined period in orbit. The most expensive layer.

In-orbit. Covers loss or partial loss during operations. Priced against the spacecraft's design, heritage, and orbit.

Third-party liability. Required by § 50914 for the licensee; a payload customer should understand what the provider carries and whether it names the customer.

And the coverage question the market is still working out: liability for an in-orbit collision. The international framework imposes fault-based liability for damage caused in space, which means a collision produces a fault inquiry between operators, in a domain with imperfect tracking data and no established forum. Operators should understand that their conjunction assessment practices and their maneuver decision records are the evidence in that inquiry, and should keep them accordingly.

Practical instruction: engage a specialist space insurance broker early. The market is small, relationships matter, and coverage terms are negotiated rather than standard. Underwriter requirements will also drive design and operational decisions, so get them before those decisions are locked.

Step 10 — Selling the data or the service

Your customer agreements cannot promise what your licenses permit.

Read your license conditions into the contract. A remote sensing license under 51 U.S.C. § 60122 may carry conditions on collection or dissemination; a communications authorization constrains where and how you transmit. Customer agreements should reserve the right to comply with license conditions and allocate the consequences if a condition prevents delivery.

Define the deliverable precisely. Resolution, revisit, latency, tasking priority, coverage, quality thresholds, and the remedy for a miss — a service credit, a re-task, or a refund.

Derived products and downstream rights. What the customer may do with the data, whether it may create and sell derived products, whether it may sublicense, and what survives termination for data already delivered.

Government customers change the analysis. Data rights clauses determine what the government may do with delivered technical data and software, and the category depends heavily on who funded the development. Maintain contemporaneous records of what was developed at private expense; the question is asked years later and the burden is yours. Mark deliverables correctly and consistently.

Export controls apply to data too. Imagery and derived products delivered to foreign customers may be controlled. Run the analysis before the sales team commits.

Step 11 — Operate: the obligations that outlast the launch

Continuing obligations are a function, not a project:

  • Annual and periodic reports.
  • Modification applications for any change to orbital parameters, frequencies, or spacecraft characteristics — and "any change" is broader than operators assume.
  • License renewals.
  • Conjunction assessment and coordination, with screening thresholds and a documented maneuver decision process.
  • Anomaly and failure reporting.
  • Debris mitigation compliance against the licensed plan.
  • Deorbit confirmation at end of life.
  • Export program maintenance as the design and the staff change.

Staff it. A constellation operator's regulatory obligations are continuous. Operators who assign this to a general counsel already doing four other jobs find their modification applications sitting for months while spacecraft wait.

And keep the license conditions visible to engineering and operations. The most common compliance failure after launch is an operational change — a new altitude, a new band, a new ground station, a changed disposal plan — made by people who have never read the license.

Step 5A — Working with the agencies

The regulatory outcome in this industry depends substantially on the quality of the relationship with the people processing your application. Four practices matter.

Request a pre-application consultation, and bring something to it. Every agency in this space will meet an applicant before filing. Arrive with a written mission description, your own analysis of which authorities apply, the technical parameters, and a list of the specific questions you cannot answer yourself. An applicant who arrives with a coherent package gets substantive engagement; one who arrives asking what the rules are gets a referral to the website.

Answer information requests completely and on time. The single largest source of delay in these proceedings is an incomplete response that generates a second request. Treat each request as though the clock stops until you answer, because in practice it does.

Tell them about problems before they find them. A discovered anomaly, a design change that affects a licensed parameter, an operational deviation. Agencies respond very differently to an operator who reports and proposes a fix than to one whose problem surfaces in someone else's filing.

Read the conditions, and negotiate them before grant. License conditions are drafted by people who will accept a well-reasoned alternative and who will not reopen a condition after grant without a modification application. If a proposed condition is unworkable, say so with a proposed alternative and a technical justification, during the process.

And engage on rulemaking. This is an industry where the rules are actively being written, and comment proceedings are genuinely influential because the commenting population is small. An operator who has never filed comments has declined a cheap opportunity to shape the framework it will live under.

Step 6A — Assembling the team and the budget

Counsel, plural. No single lawyer covers this. You need communications counsel who files Part 25 applications routinely; export control counsel with space experience; launch and commercial space counsel for the FAA regime and the launch agreements; remote sensing counsel if you image the Earth; government contracts counsel if you sell to agencies; and corporate counsel to hold it together. A generalist attempting all of it will be confident in the wrong places.

Technical consultants. Frequency coordination analysis, orbital debris analysis, and — for a launch operator — flight safety analysis are engineering disciplines performed by specialists. They are not legal costs and they should not sit in the legal budget, but they are on the licensing critical path and legal should be tracking them.

A regulatory program manager. At constellation scale this is a full role: tracking applications, modifications, reports, renewals, conditions, and the engineering dependencies each of them creates. Companies that leave it with a general counsel who has four other jobs discover the cost when a modification application sits for eight months while spacecraft wait.

Budget shape for a small constellation operator, first eighteen months. Export program stand-up and any voluntary disclosures. Communications counsel and the technical coordination analysis. Remote sensing application, where applicable. Launch agreement negotiation. Earth station applications, multiplied by sites and by countries. Insurance brokerage. Ongoing compliance. The legal line is meaningful; the specialist technical analysis line is often larger and is the one that gets underestimated.

And the internal cost nobody budgets: engineering time. Every regulatory workstream in this guide consumes engineering attention — the debris analysis, the coordination study, the export classification, the payload review data package. Schedule it as engineering work, with named engineers, or it will be done badly at the last moment by whoever is available.

Step 7A — Building the launch operator's path, if that is what you are

If the company builds and flies the vehicle rather than riding on someone else's, the sequence changes in four respects.

You hold the license, and it is the program. Section 50904 makes launching without a license unlawful; § 50905 governs the application and the conditions the Secretary may impose. The framework at 14 C.F.R. Part 450 is performance-based: it sets quantitative public risk criteria — collective and individual risk thresholds — and requires you to demonstrate compliance through analysis rather than by meeting a prescribed design.

That shifts the work from paperwork to engineering analysis. Flight safety analysis, hazard analysis, debris and blast modeling, population exposure, flight abort rules and the systems that implement them, and the demonstration that the whole package meets the risk criteria. This is a specialist engineering discipline and the license schedule is really the schedule of that analysis. Start it at vehicle concept.

Site and airspace. Launching from a federal range, a licensed commercial spaceport, or a private site each carries different arrangements. Airspace and maritime coordination, hazard areas, and notices are operational obligations with their own lead times. Where the vehicle operates in the national airspace system in a way that implicates aircraft certification, the boundary with 49 U.S.C. § 44701 becomes a live question — particularly for point-to-point suborbital concepts.

Financial responsibility becomes yours. Section 50914 requires you to carry insurance for the maximum probable loss from third-party claims and from United States Government property claims, determined per mission. Section 50915 supplies the indemnification tier above that, subject to appropriation and to a statutory ceiling, with exposure returning to you above it. And you administer the cross-waiver — obtaining it from customers and flowing it through your contractor chain, which is a contract administration function, not a one-time clause.

Anomalies and mishaps. Build the mishap response plan before the first flight: preservation of evidence and telemetry, the investigation obligation, the return-to-flight process, and the communications plan. A vehicle failure is a licensing event as well as an engineering event, and § 50908 governs modification and suspension of the license while it is worked out.

Step 8A — Financing, diligence, and the questions investors will ask

A space company's regulatory posture is a financing issue, and the diligence questions are predictable enough to prepare for.

What every investor asks, in order:

"Do you have your licenses?" The honest answer for a pre-launch company is usually "applications filed, here is the schedule, here are the dependencies." Have a one-page regulatory status sheet with each authorization, its status, its expected date, and what it constrains. A company that can produce that sheet in the first meeting is treated very differently from one that cannot.

"What is your export control exposure?" They will ask because their counsel will make them. Have the classification register, the technology control plan, the training records, and — if there were historical problems — the voluntary disclosures and their resolutions. Disclosed and remediated is a manageable diligence item; discovered by the buyer's counsel is a valuation event.

"What happens if the launch fails?" The cross-waiver under 51 U.S.C. § 50914 means no claim against the provider. Explain the insurance position and the reflight terms. Investors who have not funded a space company before will need this explained slowly.

"Can your license conditions prevent you from serving your customers?" For a remote sensing operator with conditions under 51 U.S.C. § 60122, this is a real question with revenue implications. Answer it precisely rather than reassuringly.

"What is your foreign investment and clearance position?" Existing foreign investors, board composition, and any facility or personnel clearance requirements. If the company has or wants classified work, foreign ownership complicates it and mitigation is restrictive.

Then the reverse diligence you should be doing on your investors. A foreign investor's access to controlled technical data is an export. Non-controlling foreign investment in critical technologies can trigger foreign investment review. And an investor who will sit on the board will have access to everything. Run the analysis before the term sheet, not during the data room, because the remedy at that point is either a restructured investment or a lost round.

Practical instruction. Keep the regulatory status sheet current as a standing artifact, updated monthly. It serves the board, the investors, the acquirer, and the insurance broker, and assembling it under deadline pressure is how errors enter it.

Step 9A — How Thalassa Systems ran the nineteen months

Month 1 — Export program. The classification exercise found what first audits usually find. Two Italian suppliers had received drawings that needed authorization. Six engineers on visas had read access to a repository containing controlled technical data — deemed exports to four countries, occurring daily, for fourteen months. Thalassa filed voluntary disclosures, built a technology control plan with nationality-based access controls, appointed an empowered official, and trained 90 engineers. The disclosures resolved without penalty. Ostrowski-Adeyinka's assessment: "The single worst week of my first year, and the reason we still have a company."

Month 2 — FCC application filed. Specialist counsel. Streamlined path evaluated and rejected — eighteen satellites with propulsion did not qualify. Full Part 25 application.

Month 2 — Remote sensing application filed. Radar. Capability-leading. This one was going to take time.

Month 4 — The debris analysis changed the mission. The planned 590-kilometer orbit with the planned propellant load did not close the five-year post-mission disposal case with adequate reliability margin across eighteen spacecraft. The team lowered the constellation to 550 kilometers and increased propellant. Revisit performance dropped by about 8%, which the product team hated and the business survived.

This is the step the guide exists for. At month four it was a trade study. At month fourteen it would have been a redesign or an unlicensable spacecraft.

Month 5 — Design freeze, after the debris analysis rather than before.

Months 5–10 — Remote sensing license. Eight months, with an availability analysis Thalassa prepared itself identifying comparable foreign radar systems. The conditions imposed were narrower than the company had feared and were read into the customer agreements before the sales team signed anything.

Month 5 — Launch services agreement. The cross-waiver conversation with the board took three attempts. The negotiated terms: reflight credit with defined timing and manifest priority, orbit insertion accuracy remedy, manifest protection on the rideshare, and a walk-away right after nine months of cumulative delay.

Month 8 — Insurance. First three satellites insured; remainder self-insured as a portfolio decision by the chief financial officer.

Months 9–15 — Earth station applications. Four domestic sites, three foreign, through local partners. Longer than planned. Started too late by about three months, which Ostrowski-Adeyinka records as her own scheduling error.

Months 6–18 — ITU coordination in parallel, with the bringing-into-use deadline tracked against the launch schedule.

Month 16 — Conjunction assessment arrangements, screening thresholds, and a documented maneuver decision process — established before launch, on the reasoning that these records are the evidence in any future fault inquiry over a collision.

Month 19 — Launch.

Four lessons she passes on. Export first, and treat it as an operating program. File the communications application before the design freezes. Explain the cross-waiver to the board in writing, early, three times. And start the ground segment earlier than feels necessary, because it is the workstream that quietly runs late.

Step 11A — Selling to the government

Most space companies do, and it changes the legal picture materially.

Data rights are the central issue and they turn on who paid. The government contract data rights categories — unlimited, government purpose, limited, restricted, and specially negotiated — depend largely on whether the technology was developed at private expense, at government expense, or with mixed funding. Two practical instructions follow. Maintain contemporaneous records of private-expense development, because the question is asked years later and the burden is yours. And mark deliverables correctly and consistently; unmarked or wrongly marked technical data can lose its protection.

Patent rights under federal funding carry disclosure obligations, election-of-title deadlines, a government license, and United States manufacturing preferences. Missing an election deadline can forfeit title. Put these dates on the patent docket, not in the contract file.

Other transaction agreements are common for space prototype work and are not standard procurement contracts. Their intellectual property, data rights, and dispute provisions are negotiated rather than prescribed — an opportunity, and a trap, because no default protects you.

Cost accounting, business systems, and audit rights attach above defined thresholds. A company moving from commercial-only revenue to significant government revenue needs accounting infrastructure it does not have, and discovering that during an audit is expensive.

Facility and personnel clearances take a long time and cannot be accelerated. Start early.

Foreign ownership, control, or influence. Foreign investment — including non-controlling investment — complicates clearances and can trigger foreign investment review for critical technologies, which reach certain space capabilities. Space companies raise money internationally; plan for the collision, and know that mitigation agreements are workable but restrictive.

And protests run both ways. Awards you win can be protested; awards you lose you can protest. Both are governed by short deadlines that start before you know why you lost.

Step 10A — Human spaceflight, if people are aboard

The regulatory posture has been deliberately restrained. Congress limited the FAA's authority to regulate the safety of spaceflight participants — occupants who are not crew — for a defined learning period, repeatedly extended. Confirm its current status before advising; it is a live legislative question.

What applies regardless. The operator must inform each participant in writing of the risks of launch and reentry, including the safety record of the vehicle type, and must state that the United States Government has not certified the vehicle as safe for carrying crew or participants. Participants must give written informed consent. Crew qualification and training requirements apply. And the operator must protect the safety of the public, which was never within the learning-period restraint.

Informed consent is a requirement, not a complete defense. The enforceability of a waiver of liability for gross negligence or willful misconduct varies by state, and choice of law and forum provisions in participant agreements are doing significant work. Several states have spaceflight liability statutes granting limited immunity where prescribed warnings are given; their scope differs.

Note that the cross-waiver structure does not resolve participant injury the way it resolves property loss between commercial parties. That is a separate insurance and liability analysis.

Practical drafting instruction. Write the informed consent document to be understood, not merely to be defensible. Record the briefing. Train the people who deliver it. And treat medical screening, training, and participant selection criteria as legal documents, because after an incident that is what they will be.

Step 12 — If you are doing something the statutes do not cover

In-orbit servicing, debris removal, commercial stations, lunar operations, point-to-point suborbital transport. Four instructions.

Engage the agencies early and jointly. A pre-application meeting with the FAA, the FCC, and the relevant Commerce components in the same room saves months compared with sequential engagement. Bring a written mission description and your own analysis of which authorities apply.

Expect to be regulated by license condition rather than by rule, which means the conditions are negotiable — and worth negotiating carefully, because they will become the template applied to your competitors and to you at renewal.

Do the treaty analysis yourself. The agencies will be discharging obligations they may not articulate: the Outer Space Treaty's requirements of authorization and continuing supervision of non-governmental activities, the Liability Convention's absolute liability for damage on the surface and fault-based liability in space, and the registration obligations. Section 50919 addresses the relationship of the launch statute to international obligations. An operator who understands why a question is being asked is a far more effective counterparty.

And budget for change. Legislation and rulemaking in this area are actively in motion. An authorization structure assembled today may be superseded, and a company that has built a relationship with its regulators will hear about it first.

Related documents

This guide is general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship.