U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

57–906 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025

S. HRG. 115–885 

EXAMINING THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL 

SPACE STATION: ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE, SCIENCE, 

AND COMPETITIVENESS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 16, 2018 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

TODD YOUNG, Indiana 

BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

JON TESTER, Montana 

NICK ROSSI, Staff Director 

ADRIAN ARNAKIS, Deputy Staff Director 

JASON VAN BEEK, General Counsel 

KIM LIPSKY, Democratic Staff Director 

CHRIS DAY, Democratic Deputy Staff Director 

RENAE BLACK, Senior Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE, SCIENCE, AND COMPETITIVENESS 

TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts, Ranking 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on May 16, 2018 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Cruz ..................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Nelson .................................................................................. 2 

WITNESSES

William H. Gerstenmaier, Associate Administrator, Human Exploration and 

Operations, National Aeronautics and Space Administration ......................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5 

Hon. Paul K. Martin, Inspector General, National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration ..................................................................................................... 10 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

APPENDIX

Response to written questions submitted to William H. Gerstenmaier by: 

Hon. Bill Nelson ............................................................................................... 31 

Hon. Edward Markey ....................................................................................... 35 

Hon. Gary Peters .............................................................................................. 36 

Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Paul K. Martin by: 

Hon. Gary Peters .............................................................................................. 38 

(1) 

EXAMINING THE FUTURE OF THE 

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION: 

ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVES 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2018 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE, SCIENCE, AND COMPETITIVENESS,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:36 p.m. in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Cruz, Chairman 

of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Cruz presiding], Nelson, and Gardner. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS 

Senator CRUZ. This hearing is called to order. Good afternoon. 

We’ll ask for the senator from Colorado to stop being unruly. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CRUZ. Welcome to our witnesses. Welcome, everyone. 

The International Space Station is the largest and most complex 

habitable space-based research facility ever constructed by humanity. It’s a marvel of engineering, and it’s critically important to our 

national space program. For over 17 years, the ISS has provided 

the United States with continuous access to low Earth orbit which 

has been paramount to the success of NASA, our commercial partners, scientific research, and to human space exploration. 

It’s due to the significance of the ISS as a key component of our 

national space program that this Subcommittee led the effort that 

extended the operation of ISS to 2024 by enacting the bipartisan 

U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act in 2015, 

which Senator Nelson and I worked on hand in hand and which 

was signed into law by President Obama. 

We then followed up on that effort by once again working in a 

bipartisan manner, me working closely once again with Senator 

Nelson, in enacting the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 

which was signed into law by President Trump and established the 

ISS Transition Principles. The purpose of the ISS Transition Principles was to create a step-wise approach to eventually transition 

from the ISS once there is the emergence of a proven and reliable 

commercial alternative. 

Congress decided to take a step-wise approach due to the long 

history at NASA in which major programs like Constellation and 

the Space Shuttle had been eliminated prematurely. These deciVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
2 

sions have long-term repercussions at NASA, its work force, the 

local communities surrounding NASA Centers, and American taxpayers who face increased replacement costs for lost capabilities. 

Not only was it concerning when NASA failed to deliver the ISS 

Transition Report to Congress before December 1, 2017, as required by Federal law, but it was deeply troubling when reports 

leaked that some were pushing a proposal to end all Federal funding of ISS in 2025. 

Congress was explicitly clear in making its long-term interest in 

ISS known in the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017. Federal statute required the transition plan to include cost estimates 

for extending operations of the ISS to 2024, to 2028, and to 2030. 

It also required an evaluation of the feasible and preferred service 

life of the ISS through at least 2028 as a unique scientific, commercial, and space exploration related facility. Nowhere in Federal 

statue is there a request from Congress seeking a hard deadline to 

end Federal support for ISS, to cross our fingers and hope for the 

best. We’ve seen that act play out too many times in our national 

space program and it’s time we learn the lessons of history. 

Prematurely canceling a program for political reasons costs jobs 

and wastes billions of dollars. We cannot afford to continue to pursue policies that have the consequence of creating gaps in capability, that send $3.5 billion in taxpayer money to the Russian government, or to create a leadership vacuum in low Earth orbit that 

provides a window of opportunity for the Chinese to capitalize 

upon. 

Let me be clear. As long as I am Chairman of this Subcommittee, 

the ISS will continue to have strong support and strong bipartisan 

support in the U.S. Congress. And as long as Article I of the Constitution remains intact, it will be Congress that is the final arbiter 

of how long the ISS receives Federal funding. 

I’d now like to recognize the Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Senator Nelson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Indeed, what we have is $100 billion or more invested in low 

Earth orbit. Ever since we started assembling the Space Station 

years ago, this incredible flying machine, the Space Shuttle, which 

was designed to carry components that would go up to low Earth 

orbit, be assembled, and we now have a structure on low Earth 

orbit that is as large as a football field from goalpost to goalpost, 

or 120 yards. That’s how big it is. People don’t realize how big it 

is. 

People don’t realize the research that is going on, not only with 

somebody like Mark Kelly’s twin brother, Scott, that went up and 

lived for a year so we could study the long-term effects of 

weightlessness on the human body—because when we go to Mars, 

hopefully, we’re not going to have to go with conventional technology that would take us 8 months. Because then you’ve got to 

land, stay on Mars until the planets realign, which could be as 

much as a year, and then come back. We’re not ready for that. 

Hopefully, we’re going to sprint with faster propulsion. But even so, 

3 

it’s going to be long periods in weightlessness unless we create 

some kind of centrifugal force, like a revolving spacecraft that 

would give some effect of gravity. 

But, nevertheless, we need to figure out all of this, and we’ve got this platform up there that cost north of $100 billion. Abandoning 

this incredible orbiting laboratory when we are on the cusp of a 

new era of space exploration, would be irresponsible at best and 

probably disastrous. 

It’s pretty clear that the proposal to end the funding of ISS by 

2025—that wasn’t a NASA decision. That was an OMB decision, 

which, traditionally, has been the bane of NASA’s existence because they’ve wanted to run the space program. So it was a political decision. 

As far as this Committee is concerned—and I can tell you as far 

as this senator is concerned—that proposal is dead on arrival because, as Ted says, this is a bipartisan outfit and we’re looking at 

this in a bipartisan fashion, and, indeed, this is where you bring 

together all the players, industry, academia, everybody except the 

White House’s Office of Management and Budget. OMB is the one 

that then focuses on a random date and it’s the wrong way to approach a transition from the ISS. 

Now, one day, low Earth orbit is going to be filled with commercial space stations and other platforms used by NASA. In lunar 

orbit, there are going to be commercial platforms and there’s also 

going to be a NASA platform. That NASA platform will be a means 

by which, ultimately, we go in what has been set by the President 

as a goal to go to Mars in the decade of the 2030s with humans. 

So it’s going to be a combination of government and non-government commercial activities. 

But it’s not fair to NASA or to industry to force a transition 

based on an arbitrary date. That decision should be based on factors like NASA’s research requirements and the readiness of the 

industry to take the lead. We need to listen to our scientists and 

the experts at NASA. They have made it clear that NASA will continue to need access to low Earth orbit for astronaut training, technology development, and research. 

So today, we have skilled people at Kennedy, at Johnson, indeed, 

across so many centers working on the ISS and on commercial crew 

and cargo, and these are some of the only people in the world who 

know how to keep people alive in space. If this plan to prematurely 

end the current ISS program moves forward, I fear that NASA’s expertise in these critical areas, expertise that we’re going to have to 

have if we’re going to Mars with humans and safely return, will be 

lost. 

The good news is that NASA’s ISS transition report indicates 

that the Space Station has plenty of operational time left, at least 

through the end of 2028 and probably beyond. We have time to continue the critical research taking place on the Station, to keep 

training astronauts to live and work in space as they prepare for 

those long duration missions, and to develop a robust commercial 

market in low Earth orbit. 

NASA should be focused like a laser on getting commercial crew 

up and running right now so that American astronauts can once 

again be launching to the Station from the Cape. NASA ought to 

4 

be laser focused as it’s getting ready within 2 years to launch the 

largest, most powerful rocket ever, the SLS. NASA shouldn’t be off 

on these rabbit trails having to defend a Space Station that ought 

to be there. 

Once Boeing and SpaceX are regularly transporting crew to the 

Station, it’s going to enter into a golden era and we’ll see just how 

valuable the research platform is. It makes good business sense to 

take full advantage of our investment on the ISS, just as it is common sense to maintain our Nation’s leadership in space. Remember, I said just a minute ago, the largest rocket ever, a third more 

powerful than the Saturn V that took us to the moon, is right 

around the corner from its first test flight. We want to keep NASA 

focused on that. 

The ISS is an unprecedented accomplishment that continues to 

serve humanity and maintain U.S. global leadership in space. So 

I look forward for this Committee continuing to exercise its jurisdiction over this issue. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator CRUZ. Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

I would note there are issues on which Senator Nelson and I disagree, but on this issue, the importance of the ISS and a resolved 

commitment to not wasting the billions of dollars we have invested 

in that asset, Senator Nelson and I are on exactly the same page. 

Now, I welcome each of the witnesses to present your testimony. 

Senator NELSON. Why couldn’t we agree on a lot of other pages? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CRUZ. We’ve got hours left in the afternoon. 

Our first witness is Mr. Bill Gerstenmaier, who serves as the Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations at 

NASA. Our second witness is Mr. Paul Martin, who serves as the 

Inspector General at NASA. 

Now I’ll recognize Mr. Gerstenmaier to present your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. GERSTENMAIER, ASSOCIATE 

ADMINISTRATOR, HUMAN EXPLORATION AND OPERATIONS, 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Thank you very much for allowing me to 

present in this important hearing on Examining the Future of ISS: 

Administration Perspectives. 

The ISS has accomplished amazing things and transformed the 

way that we see human space flight. Crews have lived continuously 

on ISS for almost 18 years. The ISS has enabled groundbreaking 

research that benefits us all. The Space Station has helped NASA 

prepare for deep space missions. The Space Station has allowed us 

to maintain a leadership role in international space flight. 

The Space Station International Partnership has developed voluntary standards, such as the international docking standard, that 

could transform space flight for decades to come. These standards 

will allow anyone to be part of space flight by designing to these 

standards. The cooperation of the ISS partners is amazing and 

serves as an example of a diverse community working together for 

common goals. 

Last, the ISS has enabled innovative U.S. companies to reinvent 

the launch industry. Further, crew—private sector developed crew 

5 

transportation systems with the aid of NASA are about ready to go 

fly. 

With all these amazing accomplishments from the ISS, it is only 

fitting that we take time to seriously plan for the transition of ISS 

in low Earth orbit. NASA is preparing to secure the Nation’s longterm presence in LEO by partnering with industry to develop commercial orbital platforms and capabilities that the private sector 

and NASA can utilize after cessation of direct U.S. Federal funding 

for the ISS by 2025. 

To be clear, NASA is not abandoning low Earth orbit. We must 

ensure the right pieces are in place to maintain an operational 

human presence in low Earth orbit, whether through a modified 

ISS program, commercial platforms, or some combination of both. 

We are asking industry, academia, and others through a series 

of funded studies to provide ideas for utilizing the unique properties of space and creating commercial opportunities. 

We will work with the Space Council and the Department of 

Commerce to help with the transformation of low Earth orbit. We 

have also proposed funds in the 2019 budget that help support this 

transition. 

NASA looks forward to working with Congress, stakeholders, 

other government agencies, researchers, private industry, and our 

international partners on the future of ISS and low Earth orbit to 

ensure that the U.S. maintains our human space flight leadership. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gerstenmaier follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. GERSTENMAIER, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, 

HUMAN EXPLORATION AND OPERATIONS, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE

ADMINISTRATION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to discuss the future of the International Space Station 

(ISS) and NASA’s long-term vision for use of low-Earth orbit (LEO). 

NASA is preparing to secure the Nation’s long-term presence in LEO by 

partnering with industry to develop commercial orbital platforms, and capabilities 

that the private sector and NASA can utilize after the cessation of direct U.S. Federal funding for ISS by 2025. 

To be clear, NASA is not abandoning LEO. We must ensure the right pieces are 

in place to maintain an operational human presence in LEO, whether through a 

modified ISS program, commercial platforms, or some combination of both. 

In October of last year, the members of the National Space Council endorsed a 

recommendation to the President that NASA should return to the Moon. Following 

that recommendation, on December 11, 2017, the President signed Space Policy Directive 1 which requires NASA to ‘‘Lead an innovative and sustainable program of 

exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion 

across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities.’’ This was nearly 45 years to the moment since the last time that NASA landed 

humans on the Moon. 

NASA will shift the focus of its human exploration program to the Moon and 

cislunar region with an eye towards Mars, evaluating new habitat technologies, surface transportation systems, landing systems, fuel generation, and storage solutions. 

In every domain, we intend to renew and strengthen our commitment to American 

commercial space companies, which are critical partners in the human exploration 

of the Moon, Mars, and beyond. As NASA reorients the human spaceflight program 

back to the Moon and beyond to Mars, we will push to develop new ways of operating in LEO that will benefit our exploration endeavors, science goals, and ultimately the taxpayers. 

As you know, the ISS currently serves as a unique platform to prepare for human 

exploration beyond LEO, promotes U.S. economic activity in space, and accelerates 

innovative research and technology development. Equally important, under the leadVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
6 

ership of the United States, the ISS contributes to America’s preeminence around 

the world in space and technological innovation. Since its inception over 30 years 

ago, the ISS partnership has been a model of peaceful international cooperation. ISS 

has exceeded all of its original goals and accomplished many things that were never 

envisioned. Things like helping to establish a cube satellite market and helping to 

return commercial satellite launches to the U.S. through reduced launch costs. However, NASA must look beyond ISS in its current form in order to continue U.S. leadership in LEO; that is why the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, together 

with the Administration, are united in transitioning NASA’s LEO activities to a 

model where NASA is one of many customers of a vibrant, U.S.-led, commercial 

LEO enterprise. The synergy between industry and Government requirements in 

this endeavor cannot be overstated. We are partners in ensuring American preeminence as the world’s leading spacefaring nation. 

The Administration views public-private partnerships as the foundation of future 

U.S. civilian space efforts, and NASA is continuing to develop cooperation on use 

of the Station to enable increased commercial investment and to transition to more 

public-private partnership models. For example, the Agency has begun to transition 

from a model where NASA provides payload integration and other services to one 

where those services can be purchased from many commercial partners. 

As we consider the future of the ISS and U.S. leadership in space, it is helpful 

to review the benefits provided by U.S. leadership in LEO to exploration, space commercialization, and terrestrial applications. 

Preparing for Human Deep Space Missions 

In order to prepare for human expeditions into deep space, the Agency must first 

conduct breakthrough research and test the advanced technology necessary to keep 

crews safe and productive on long-duration space exploration missions. On-orbit 

platforms are necessary to mitigate 22 of the 33 human health risks in the portfolio 

identified by NASA’s Human Research Program in support of current and future 

deep space missions. The research to mitigate these risks must continue beyond 

2025 to ensure that we learn what is necessary to travel deeper into space and to 

live and work in microgravity for long durations. This requirement will not go away 

no matter what orbital platforms are used. 

NASA also plans to continue to use LEO facilities as testbeds to fill critical gaps 

in technologies that will be needed for long-duration deep space missions. For example, elements of the ISS life support and other habitation systems will be evolved 

into the systems that will be used for deep space exploration missions and undergo 

long-duration testing. It is NASA’s plan to first develop and demonstrate many critical technology capabilities using LEO platforms prior to deploying these capabilities 

beyond LEO. This approach is much more cost-effective and faster than conducting 

this research in cislunar space because of the risks inherent in operating so far from 

the Earth. 

As both research and technology development requirements evolve, NASA will 

look to take advantage of additional platforms in LEO as a way to accelerate development timetables. If there are cheaper and more efficient ways to meet these requirements, NASA is prepared to utilize them. 

Enabling a LEO Commercial Market 

NASA’s vision for LEO is a sustained U.S. commercial human spaceflight marketplace where NASA is one of many customers. We envision multiple privately-owned/ 

operated platforms—human-tended, permanently-crewed, or robotic—together with 

transportation capabilities for crew and cargo that enable a variety of activities in 

LEO, where those platforms and capabilities are sustained to a greater degree than 

today by commercial revenue. These future platforms may either leverage ISS or be 

free-flying. This flexibility allows the private sector to determine how best to meet 

the market demand rather than have the Government dictate how to meet this demand. 

NASA must also communicate our forecasted needs in LEO to allow the private 

sector to anticipate that demand in their business cases. The Administration has 

proposed 2025 as the date by which direct Federal support of ISS will end; setting 

this date provides market clarity for our commercial LEO supply partners. At the 

last National Space Council meeting at Kennedy Space Center, the Vice President 

asked the NASA Administrator to work with the secretaries of State and Commerce 

to develop a strategy for how we can further enable cooperation with our international and private industry partners to continue to develop the infrastructure and 

policies necessary to spur economic growth in space. That work is ongoing and we 

plan to deliver some of those recommendations at the fall meeting of the Council. 

7 

In this vision, NASA would be able to share the cost of LEO platforms with other 

commercial, Government, and international users. This would allow NASA to maximize its resources toward missions beyond LEO, while still having the ability to utilize LEO for its ongoing needs for research, training, and technology development. 

In order to enable this vision, NASA is not only executing several public-private 

partnerships, currently centered around the ISS, to foster the development of customers for LEO capabilities, but also is maturing the supply industry to be able to 

meet future demands. NASA is also initiating the Commercial LEO Development 

program to further the development of commercial on-orbit capabilities beyond what 

is available today through the ISS. 

The Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contracts, the Commercial Crew Program, and the ISS National Laboratory are key complementary activities to enable 

this vision. Under the CRS contracts, NASA’s two commercial cargo partners, Space 

Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital ATK, have demonstrated not only 

the ability to provide cargo deliveries to ISS, but also the flexibility to recover effectively from mishaps. The addition of the Sierra Nevada Corporation as a third commercial service provider will add significant on-orbit and return capability. Both Orbital ATK and Sierra Nevada Corporation have begun to investigate options to perform significant on-orbit operations after their primary cargo mission is completed. 

These two providers are able to provide an on-orbit research capability independent 

of ISS. NASA’s commercial crew partners, SpaceX and the Boeing Company, are developing the Crew Dragon and CST–100 Starliner spacecraft, respectively. These 

companies have made significant progress toward returning crew launches to the 

U.S., and NASA anticipates having these capabilities in place by 2019 to regularly 

fly astronauts safely to and from ISS. The crew and cargo vehicles, as well as the 

launch vehicles developed by these providers, have the potential to support future 

commercial enterprises as well as ISS. 

The Center for the Advancement of Science In Space (CASIS) manages the activities of the ISS National Laboratory to increase the utilization of the ISS by other 

Federal entities and the private sector. CASIS works to ensure that the Station’s 

unique capabilities are available to the broadest possible cross-section of U.S. scientific, technological, and industrial communities. The ISS National Laboratory is 

helping to establish and demonstrate the market for research, technology demonstration, and other activities in LEO beyond the requirements of NASA. Commercial implementation partners are now bringing their own customers to LEO through 

the National Laboratory, as well. 

ISS Transition 

In the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, Congress requested a plan 

from NASA to transition ISS from the current regime that relies heavily on NASA 

sponsorship to a regime where NASA could be one of many customers of a LEO nonGovernmental human spaceflight enterprise. NASA has been building a strategy 

and assessing options that support this vision for the future of human spaceflight 

in LEO, and this is reflected in the ISS Transition Report, delivered to Congress 

in late March of this year. NASA anticipates that the ISS is capable of continuing 

to operate within prudent technical margins and its lifetime could exceed original 

engineering estimates. This is a testament to American ingenuity and technological 

prowess. 

However, complacency is the enemy of progress in technology development. We 

must continue to push the boundaries of what we believe is possible, not just for 

NASA but for the entire space industry. NASA is ready to ensure that LEO is open 

for American business and that our international partners have a role to play in 

lunar development. The development of commercial space operations in LEO will 

benefit NASA as we continue to utilize those capabilities to do the things that only 

NASA can do in exploration. Those principals are two sides of the same coin—they 

operate together and are not mutually exclusive. 

As we contemplate what will happen in this transition, it is important that we 

remember lessons learned from the ISS and continue to build on them for the next 

phase of NASA’s involvement in LEO and beyond. This transition is an opportunity 

to demonstrate to the world that U.S. leadership in space is not about one program, 

but about the qualities that make us the greatest spacefaring nation on the planet. 

Our insistence that the industry has the ability to respond to Government imperatives and that our international partners can count on us to lead the next generation of capabilities in LEO and beyond will light the way for this next phase of 

human exploration. 

8 

ISS Transition Principles 

Several key principles will be reflected in any strategy or decision regarding the 

ISS and the future of LEO, as well as NASA’s role as one of many customers of 

services or capabilities that are provided by private industry as part of a broader 

commercial market. The following principles will ensure uninterrupted access to 

LEO capabilities and long-term national interests in human space exploration, while 

supporting national security objectives, such as a competitive industrial base and 

U.S. leadership: 

• Expanding U.S. human spaceflight leadership in LEO and deep space exploration, including continuity of the relationships with our current ISS international partners; 

• Increasing platform options in LEO to enable more ISS transition pathways, security through redundant capabilities, and industrial capability that can support NASA’s deep space exploration needs; 

• Spurring vibrant commercial activity in LEO; 

• Continuing to return benefits to humanity through Government-sponsored basic 

and applied on-orbit research; 

• Providing continuity among NASA’s LEO, deep space exploration, and development and research activities and missions toward expanding human presence 

into the solar system; 

• Maintaining critical human spaceflight knowledge and expertise within the 

Government in areas such as astronaut health and performance, life support, 

safety, and critical operational ground and crew experience; 

• Continuing Government-sponsored access to LEO research facilities that enable 

other Government agencies, academia, and private industry to increase U.S. industrial competitiveness and provide goods and services to U.S. citizens; and 

• Continuing to reduce the Government’s long-term costs through private industry partnerships and competitive acquisition strategies. 

ISS Transition Strategy 

As part of a cohesive exploration strategy, NASA intends to meet its needs and 

requirements in LEO by leveraging private industry capacity, innovation, and competitiveness that could offer the prospect of lower cost to the U.S. Government, 

while at the same time expanding the economic sphere of U.S. industry into LEO 

and beyond. This could enable NASA to apply more personnel and budget resources 

to expanding human space exploration beyond LEO and enhancing U.S. leadership 

in human spaceflight around the world. Beyond the prospect of lower operational 

costs for a LEO platform, shifting focus to industry can additionally reduce the infrastructure burden on NASA, which could reduce operations and maintenance 

costs. 

In order to ensure that private industry is prepared to provide the services and 

capabilities that support NASA’s needs in LEO, as outlined in the key principles 

above, and to enable private industry to develop markets and customers beyond the 

Government, NASA is proposing the following approach: 

1. Begin a step-wise transition of LEO human spaceflight operations from a Government-directed activity to a model where private industry is responsible for 

how to meet and execute NASA’s requirements. Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, this does not mean NASA is ‘‘commercializing the ISS.’’ Instead, NASA maintains U.S. Government leadership and responsibilities as 

outlined in the Partnership agreements, and continues to maintain the essential elements of human spaceflight, such as astronaut safety and the high-risk 

exploration systems. 

This will give NASA time to engage with industry to begin transforming the 

many NASA-directed activities that are currently performed through several 

contracts into more of a public-private partnership and/or services contract(s) 

model where NASA’s current responsibilities are executed and managed by 

private industry. This time period will also provide the opportunity for NASA 

and private industry to engage with stakeholders and to only proceed when 

industry has matured and is capable of executing NASA’s requirements. The 

transition of ISS will ensure that there are private companies with the experience and expertise to operate various types of platforms in LEO by the mid2020s. This transition to private industry must be done in a cost-effective manner and not exceed current operational costs. 

Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, NASA will continue discussions 

with the ISS international partners to help shape the long-term future of LEO. 

9 

2. Solicit information from industry on the development and operations of private 

on-orbit modules and/or platforms and other capabilities that NASA could utilize to meet its long-term LEO requirements that are consistent with the ISS 

Transition Principles. The scope of the solicitation may include risk reduction 

development activities, or modules or elements that could either be attached 

to the ISS or be free-flying. The solicitation may also include private-industryconducted studies on the future of the ISS platform that may be combined with 

private industry objectives in LEO. 

NASA began with a solicitation in FY 2018 to gather broad industry input on 

interest in meeting NASA’s long-term needs and objectives that should lead to 

multiple awards in FY 2019 funded out of the Commercial LEO Development 

program. 

3. NASA will also be working with the Department of Commerce to investigate 

opportunities to facilitate and enable private industry to develop new market 

opportunities in LEO. It is important that U.S. industry discover the global 

competitive advantage of utilizing space for research and revenue-generation 

activities. This ultimately allows NASA to be one of many customers. 

ISS Considerations and the Eventual Future of the ISS Platform 

From a structural integrity analysis standpoint, the ISS platform is expected to 

have significant structural life well beyond 2028 (based on the current assessment 

period). Many of the ISS modules, particularly the modules launched in the later 

years of ISS assembly, are likely to have structural life well into the 2030s. Although it is thus likely technically feasible to continue to operate the ISS well beyond 2028 with continued maintenance, it is also necessary to consider the current 

high costs of operating this complex facility. The ISS lifetime must also be considered in the context of what our national priorities are for a robust LEO economy. 

The LEO economy is unlikely to reach its full potential if the Federal Government 

is the sole supplier of LEO research capabilities. 

The future of the ISS will be evaluated using the ISS Transition Principles to ensure there is no gap in the availability of a LEO platform to meet NASA’s needs, 

whether this means transitioning the operations of the ISS to private industry 

through public-private partnership, augmenting the ISS with privately developed 

modules, combining portions of the ISS with a new private platform, or de-orbiting 

the ISS and beginning anew with a free-flying platform. 

Decisions about the future of the ISS will be discussed across the ISS international partnership. The partners agree on common themes for considering the future of ISS and exploration, including: 

• Reducing operational costs; 

• Offering frequent visible national astronaut opportunities; 

• Continuation and continuity of research and technology development activities; 

• Building synergies between LEO and exploration activities; and 

• Support of commercial opportunities. 

NASA’s Long-Term LEO Requirements 

NASA and the U.S. have a long history of human spaceflight leadership and LEO 

research and technology development that go all the way back to the Mercury program through Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, the Space Shuttle, and the ISS. 

Regardless of what happens next in this transition, NASA will maintain U.S. 

leadership in LEO and human spaceflight through lunar exploration as a basis for 

gaining the knowledge and capabilities for Mars consistent with the ISS Transition 

Principles. Within that context, NASA is planning to continue with the following 

LEO needs and objectives beyond the life of ISS: 

• Maintaining the current ISS international partnership and possibly adding new 

international and domestic participants; 

• Conducting regular LEO crewed operations, including short-and long-duration 

missions: 

» Enabling operational space proficiency; 

» Shifting from human health and performance countermeasures development 

(the ISS portion of which is expected to be complete by 2024) to validations 

of integrated long-duration systems, habitation, operations, and crew isolation; 

• Developing and demonstrating long-term technology/systems (e.g., life support); 

10 

• Conducting space life and physical sciences basic and applied research at current level and capabilities; 

• Conducting National-Laboratory-based research and technology development; 

and 

• Providing opportunities for astrophysics, space, and Earth Science research. 

These long-term requirements, while similar to that of the current ISS Program, 

could be met with various types of modules or platforms that do not necessitate a 

vehicle (or vehicles) as complex as the ISS. Many of the research activities could 

be conducted on shorter-duration platforms, similar to the Space Shuttle, or even 

crew-tended platforms. 

Fast Forwarding to the Mid-2020s 

Continuing with current policies, including the Commercial LEO Development 

program, NASA can project what the LEO landscape may look like in the mid2020s. We will maintain our strong global leadership position in LEO, starting with 

the continuation of the ISS through 2024, the validation of commercial cargo and 

crew transportation costs, and the completion of many NASA exploration-related 

human and systems research and demonstration activities. Through the commercial 

LEO development program, we hope to have in operation multiple alternatives to 

the current model of space station operations that can both meet growing commercial needs and meet Government needs at a lower total cost to the Government than 

exists today. 

Conclusion 

NASA looks forward to working with Congressional stakeholders, researchers, private industry, and our ISS international partners on the future of the ISS and LEO, 

to ensure that the U.S. maintains our human spaceflight leadership. 

Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to respond to any questions you or the other 

Members of the Subcommittee may have. 

Senator CRUZ. Thank you, Mr. Gerstenmaier. 

Mr. Martin. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL K. MARTIN, INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

Mr. MARTIN. Thank you, Chairman Cruz, Senator Nelson, and 

thank you for the opportunity to discuss the future of the International Space Station. 

Over the past 5 years, the Office of Inspector General has issued 

13 reports related to the ISS, including reviews on NASA’s efforts 

to maximize onboard research, manage contracts with private companies to fly cargo and crew, and maintain international partnerships that fund almost one-quarter of the Station’s annual expenses. 

My testimony today is informed by these past reviews, but draws 

primarily on findings from a forthcoming OIG audit that assesses 

NASA’s progress in maximizing utilization of the ISS to accomplish 

its human exploration objectives. This report, which we plan to 

publicly release in a few weeks, will also examine the challenges 

associated with continuing ISS operations after 2024, as well as the 

status of NASA’s plans for the Station’s eventual decommissioning 

and deorbit. 

For the past 20 years, the ISS has served as a unique platform 

for humans to learn about living and working in space, but a platform that costs NASA between $3 billion to $4 billion annually or 

about half of its human space flight budget. The President’s 2019 

budget request proposes ending direct Federal funding of the ISS 

beginning in 2025, and a March report outlines NASA’s plans to 

become one of many customers of a commercially operated station 

or other privately owned low Earth orbit platform. In my remarks 

11 

today, I offer three observations about the Administration’s admittedly high-level plans for the ISS post-2024. 

Observation One. Based on our work, we question whether a sufficient business case exists under which private companies can create a self-sustaining and profit-making business using the ISS 

independent of significant government funding. From our perspective, it is unlikely that a private entity or entities would assume 

the Station’s annual operating costs currently projected at $1.2 billion in 2024. Such a business case requires robust demand for commercial market activities. Candidly, the scant commercial interest 

shown in the Station over its nearly 20 years of operation give us 

pause about the agency’s current plans. 

Observation Two. The amount of savings NASA may realize 

through commercialization of the ISS may be less than expected 

given the significant expenditures—particularly for crew and cargo 

transportation for NASA-sponsored flights to LEO coupled with ongoing civil servant and infrastructure costs—are expected to continue past 2025, even if many activities transition to a privatized 

ISS or another commercial platform. Consequently, any assumption 

that ending direct Federal funding frees up $3 billion to $4 billion 

beginning in 2025 to use on other NASA exploration initiatives is 

wishful thinking. 

That said, unless the agency receives a substantial increase in 

funding or can dramatically reduce costs, it will be hard pressed to 

continue supporting ISS operations under its current model while 

attempting to fund other initiatives such as the Lunar Gateway, a 

lunar orbit and moon landing, and a crewed Mars mission. 

Observation Three. One obvious alternative is to extend ISS operations under the current regime, which from a technical standpoint is doable, given that the Station’s infrastructure and critical 

equipment are or soon will be certified to at least 2028. Our recent 

audit work determined that research for at least six of 20 top 

human health risks that require the ISS for testing and four of 40 

technology gaps will not be completed by the end of 2024. 

In addition, research into two other human health risks and 17 

technology gaps are not scheduled to be completed until sometime 

in 2024, meaning that even minor schedule slippages could push 

their completion past the Station’s planned retirement date. 

Finally, at some future point, whether in an emergency or because its useful life has ended, NASA likely will need to decommission and deorbit most or all of the Station. NASA estimates a controlled re-entry of the ISS will take up to 3 years to execute and 

cost approximately $950 million. However, NASA has not finalized 

such a plan or developed the necessary capabilities to safely deorbit 

the Station in an emergency. 

In whatever time remains, NASA must redouble its efforts to 

maximize the Station’s potential, and the sooner Congress and the 

Administration agree on a path forward for the ISS, the better 

NASA will be able to plan. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Martin follows:] 

12 

1The ISS is currently authorized to continue operations until October 1, 2024. 

2 In FY 2018, the ISS budget included approximately $1.7 billion for crew and cargo transportation, $1 billion for systems operations and maintenance, $267 million for research, and $225 

million for labor and travel. 3Through its first round of Commercial Resupply Services contracts (CRS–1), NASA awarded 

a total of 31 cargo resupply missions to Orbital ATK and SpaceX worth $5.9 billion, or an average cost of $191.3 million per mission. As a follow-on to CRS–1, in 2016 NASA awarded a second 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL K. MARTIN, INSPECTOR GENERAL, 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Markey, and Members of the Subcommittee: 

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is committed to providing independent, aggressive, and objective oversight of NASA, and we welcome this opportunity to discuss the Agency’s utilization of the International Space Station (ISS or Station) and 

the challenges and opportunities related to its post-2024 future.1

The OIG has issued 13 reports related to the ISS over the past 5 years, including 

reviews on NASA’s efforts to maximize research, extend its operations, manage contracts with private companies to fly cargo and eventually crew to the Station, and 

maintain international partnerships that fund close to one-quarter of the Station’s 

annual expenses. My testimony today is informed by these past reports, but primarily draws on findings in a forthcoming audit assessing NASA’s progress in maximizing utilization of the ISS to accomplish its human exploration objectives. This 

report—which we plan to release publicly in the next few weeks—will also examine 

the options and challenges associated with the Station’s eventual retirement and 

deorbit. 

For the past 20 years, the ISS has served as a platform for humans to learn about 

living and working in space. NASA’s original vision was that astronauts living on 

the Station would conduct biological and materials research, demonstrate American 

leadership in space, forge international cooperation, and lead efforts to commercialize low Earth orbit. To date, the Agency has accomplished many of these goals. 

NASA has sponsored research aboard the ISS in the areas of life and physical 

sciences, human health, astrophysics, Earth sciences, space science, and commercial 

research and development for pharmaceuticals, materials, manufacturing, and consumer products. The ISS has also been used in disaster response on Earth by providing near-real time mapping support for recovery and humanitarian aid efforts. 

However, all of these achievements have come at a cost of $3—$4 billion annually 

or about half of NASA’s annual human space flight budget.2

Against this backdrop, the President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 budget request proposes ending direct Federal funding of the ISS beginning in 2025, and a congressionally mandated report prepared by NASA and submitted in late March provides 

a high-level outline of the Agency’s plan to transition the Station to commercial operation. Our forthcoming report examines this plan as well as other options the 

Agency may consider, including extending ISS operations beyond the current retirement date and the necessity at some future point to safely dispose of the Station 

through a controlled destructive re-entry into the Earth’s atmosphere. 

Transition to Private Operations 

NASA’s current plan for the future of the ISS past 2024 is to transition responsibility for its operation—in whole or in part—to a commercial entity or entities. The 

Agency expects this approach to offset some portion of its substantial annual investment in ISS operations while providing more cost-effective operation of the Station 

through increased private sector investment, ultimately spurring greater commercial development of low Earth orbit. Under this plan, NASA envisions itself as only 

one of many customers for the ISS or other privately-owned and operated low Earth 

orbit platforms. 

As part of this vision, the Agency is considering a range of options including 

transitioning operations to private industry, augmenting the Station with privately 

developed modules, combining portions of the current platform with a new private 

platform, or deploying an entirely new free-flying platform and de-orbiting the ISS. 

NASA is also assessing whether its long-term research requirements, while similar 

to those of the current ISS Program, could be met with platforms or modules that 

do not require a vehicle as complex and expensive as the ISS. 

NASA has taken several concrete steps over the past 10 years to meet its goal 

of increasing commercialization of the ISS and low Earth orbit. Most prominently, 

NASA pays commercial partners Orbital ATK and Space Exploration Technologies 

Corporation (SpaceX) to deliver cargo to the ISS with a third contractor, the Sierra 

Nevada Corporation, scheduled to begin resupply flights in 2020.3 In addition, 

13 

round of resupply contracts known as CRS–2 to Orbital ATK, SpaceX, and the Sierra Nevada 

Corporation. 

NASA is paying The Boeing Company (Boeing) and SpaceX to transport astronauts 

to the ISS as early as FY 2019. These activities represent NASA’s most significant 

investment in the commercialization of low Earth orbit, given that cargo and crew 

transportation account for approximately $1.7 billion or roughly 50 percent of the 

Station’s annual costs. 

NASA is also engaging private industry directly regarding potential future commercialization of the ISS. For example, in July 2016 NASA issued a Request for Information seeking industry ideas to stimulate economic development through the 

use of unique ISS capabilities. Last month, NASA released a Research Announcement soliciting industry concepts, business plans, and viability studies for development of commercial platforms in low Earth orbit, as well as industry input on the 

role Government should play in the commercialization of low Earth orbit. NASA 

also plans to coordinate with the Departments of Commerce and Transportation to 

create a multi-agency working group to identify specific actions or legislation that 

would enhance development of a commercial market in low Earth orbit. 

While all of these actions are positive steps, NASA’s current plan to privatize the 

ISS remains a controversial and highly debatable proposition, particularly with regard to the feasibility of fostering increased commercial activity in low Earth orbit. 

Specifically, it is questionable whether a sufficient business case exists under which 

private companies can create a self-sustaining and profit-making business independent of significant Government funding. In particular, it is unlikely that a private entity or entities would assume the Station’s annual operating costs, currently 

projected at $1.2 billion in 2024. Such a business case requires robust demand for 

commercial market activities such as space tourism, satellite servicing, manufacturing of goods, and research and development, all of which have yet to materialize. 

Candidly, the scant commercial interest shown in the Station over its nearly 20 

years of operation gives us pause about the Agency’s current plan. This concern is 

illustrated by NASA’s limited success in stimulating non-NASA activity aboard the 

Station through the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space, Inc. (CASIS). 

Established in 2011 to facilitate use of the ISS by commercial companies, academia, 

and other Government and non-Government actors for their research or commercial 

purposes, CASIS’s efforts have fallen short of expectations. Apart from these privatization challenges, the amount of cost savings NASA may realize through commercialization of the ISS may be less than expected given that significant expenditures—particularly in crew and cargo transportation and civil servant costs—will 

likely continue even if many low Earth orbit activities transition to a privatized ISS 

or another commercial platform. 

Extension and Continued Operations 

An obvious alternative to privatization is to extend current ISS operations. NASA 

originally targeted the Station’s service life to end in 2015, approximately 15 years 

from the time its first elements were placed into orbit. Since that time, NASA has 

extended the Station’s operational life on two occasions: the first in 2011 when ISS 

construction was nearing completion (an extension through 2020) and the second in 

2014 that approved continuation of ISS operations through 2024. 

NASA is currently evaluating the feasibility of extending the Station’s service life 

through at least 2028. As of June 2017, Boeing, NASA’s prime ISS contractor, had 

certified all major U.S. structural elements to 2028 with the exception of an external 

stowage platform and six truss segments that it expects to certify by 2019. In addition, Boeing has assessed and cleared to 2028 critical operational capabilities such 

as electrical power, environmental control and life support, and thermal control. 

An extension to 2028 or beyond would enable NASA to continue critical on-orbit 

research into human health risks and to demonstrate the technologies that will be 

required for future missions to the Moon or Mars. In recent audit work we determined that, as of February 2018, NASA forecast that research for at least 6 of 20 

human health risks requiring the ISS for testing and 4 of 40 technology gaps will 

not be completed by the Station’s planned retirement in September 2024. In addition, research into 2 other human health risks and 17 additional technology gaps 

is not scheduled to be completed until sometime in 2024, meaning that even minor 

schedule slippage could push completion past the Station’s planned retirement date. 

While NASA may be able to find alternative, ground-based testing options for certain health risks and technology demonstrations, Agency officials have stressed that 

research into others will continue to require the Station’s unique microgravity environment. If the remaining health risks and technology demonstrations cannot be 

14 

fully tested on the ISS, NASA may have to accept higher levels of risk than planned 

for future exploration missions. 

Extending the ISS past 2024 presents NASA with multiple challenges, most point- edly its $3—$4 billion annual cost. Moreover, any extension could also increase the 

possibility of failure in the Station’s aging systems and infrastructure. Finally, continued support from NASA’s international partners—who currently pick up about 23 

percent of the U.S. Segment’s operating costs—remains an open question beyond 

2024. 

Funding Issues 

NASA currently spends about half of its Space Operations budget in support of 

ISS operations and will continue to do so with any extension of the ISS’s service 

life beyond 2024. Unless the Agency receives a substantial increase in funding or 

can dramatically reduce the cost of ISS operation and maintenance, NASA will be 

hard pressed to continue supporting ISS operations under its current model while 

attempting to fund its other potential space exploration initiatives such as the 

Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway, a lunar orbit/landing mission, and preparations 

for a crewed Mars mission. 

Even if the Agency ends direct funding of the ISS in 2025 as envisioned in the 

President’s FY 2019 budget request, it is unlikely that the bulk of the funding currently devoted to the ISS Program could be immediately diverted to these and other 

exploration activities. Even with termination of most Station activities, NASA expects to retain a presence in low Earth orbit and therefore would need to fund related crew and cargo transportation costs. Furthermore, significant funding would 

be required to maintain offices and infrastructure currently funded by the ISS Program such as the Mission Operations office, which is expected to be needed by future exploration programs. 

Over the past 10 years, NASA has worked to reduce the costs of supporting the 

ISS, particularly crew and cargo services—the Program’s most expensive element. 

In addition, NASA has saved more than $172 million annually since 2007 through 

de-scoping, renegotiating, and combining Station-related contracts. For example, 

NASA renegotiated the Program’s largest contract for engineering support with Boeing in 2010, reducing requirements and saving an estimated $67 million per year. 

In addition, by combining its mission support, program integration, and infrastructure operations contracts, NASA estimates it has saved an average $59 million per 

year since 2013. NASA also awarded a new contract in 2015 to support spaceflight 

operations, thereby reducing costs by an average $46 million per year. While these 

are positive cost reductions, taken together they represent a small portion of the ISS 

Program’s overall budget. 

Managing Risks of Hardware Failures 

By 2028, the original elements of the Station will be 30 years old and will have 

operated for 3 decades in a harsh microgravity environment, exposed to ionizing radiation, extreme temperature changes, and micrometeoroids and orbital debris. 

While many systems have been replaced or upgraded and the Agency has not identified any structural issues that would preclude an extension through 2028, risks related to hardware degradation, system failure, and technological obsolescence may 

increase with continued operation beyond 2024. These issues have significant implications on NASA’s ability to repair or replace components because transportation of 

relatively large items is more difficult since retirement of the Space Shuttle, an 

issue NASA is taking steps to address. 

According to NASA, micrometeoroids and orbital debris strikes are the primary 

threat to the Station’s integrity because a direct strike can cause catastrophic and 

irreversible depressurization or other significant damage with immediate life-threatening risks to the crew. To mitigate this risk, the U.S. Government currently tracks 

more than 500,000 pieces of man-made, orbital debris, which consists of nonfunctional spacecraft, abandoned launch vehicle stages, and other mission-related debris. 

Continued Support of International Partners 

Lastly, any discussion of whether to extend ISS operations past 2024 needs to 

consider the level of support from NASA’s current international partners—Russia, 

the European Space Agency (ESA), Canada, and Japan—whose continued participation hinges on issues ranging from international politics to differing space exploration goals. For example, the outlook for Russia’s continued involvement with the 

ISS is uncertain given the current state of relations between the two countries. Russia’s role is critical to sustaining Station operations because it controls the Station’s 

propulsion system and propellant and is currently the only partner capable of providing crew transportation to and from the ISS. The participation of NASA’s other 

current international partners is also unsettled at this time given their desire to 

15 

consider exploration missions beyond the ISS. For example, ESA has announced its 

intent to partner with NASA on the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway and other 

lunar activities. ESA is also working with the Chinese Space Agency to fly European 

astronauts on the Chinese space station planned for operation in 2022. Given that 

NASA’s current international partners cover 23 percent of the Station’s shared annual costs, the loss of one or more of these space agencies could have a significant 

impact on NASA’s cost to extend ISS operations beyond 2024. 

Decommission and Deorbit 

At some point, whether in an emergency or because its useful life has ended, 

NASA will need to decommission and deorbit the Station. Ideally, this will occur via 

a controlled, destructive re-entry into the Earth’s atmosphere. NASA estimates a 

controlled reentry of the ISS will take up to 3 years to execute and cost approximately $950 million. However, the Agency has not completed the necessary tasks 

to execute such a deorbit. In January 2017, NASA completed a draft plan to address 

various deorbit scenarios; however, the plan has not been finalized and is pending 

review by the Russia Space Agency. And, while NASA engineers continue to work 

on the technical details of deorbit scenarios, the Agency presently does not have the 

capability to ensure a controlled deorbit of the ISS in the event of an emergency. 

Conclusion 

For the past 20 years, NASA has used the ISS as a research platform in low 

Earth orbit essential for advancing its deep space ambitions. But such celestial research comes at a steep cost: each year the Station remains in orbit, NASA allocates 

roughly half of its total human space flight budget to ISS operations—an expenditure that limits the Agency’s ability to fund development of systems needed to visit 

the moon and other destinations beyond low Earth orbit. 

Each of the options for extending, transitioning, or retiring the ISS presents 

NASA with significant challenges that will require it to balance cost, feasibility, and 

risk. The President’s FY 2019 budget request proposes ending direct Federal funding of the ISS by 2025, at which time NASA proposes transitioning the Station to 

commercial operations. While this proposal faces an uncertain future in Congress, 

we question whether a sufficient business case will exist by that time to make such 

an option feasible. 

Similarly, NASA’s other options present challenges. Extension of the ISS past 

2024 will require significant ongoing funding, which would eat into the money available for NASA to pursue its other exploration goals. In addition, extending the ISS 

to 2028 or beyond would increase safety risks due to aging hardware and equipment. Moreover, it is unclear whether NASA can count on funding from its existing 

international partners if it seeks to extend the Station’s operations beyond 2024. Finally, NASA needs to finalize a plan to decommission and safely deorbit all or part 

of the ISS at the end of its useful life. 

Regardless of the outcome, NASA must redouble its efforts to maximize the potential of whatever time remains on the Station. Important work on several human 

health risks and technology demonstrations will not be completed by 2024, leaving 

NASA with the choice of extending Station operations, relying on alternate testing 

methods, or accepting higher levels of risk. The sooner Congress and the Administration decide on a path forward for the future of the ISS, the better NASA will 

be able to plan. 

Senator CRUZ. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Thank you, gentlemen, 

for your testimony. 

Mr. Gerstenmaier, where did the 2025 date to end Federal support for the ISS that’s cited in both the ISS Transition Report and 

also the President’s budget request—where did that date originate? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. It originated in the Administration. 

Senator CRUZ. Did it originate in OMB? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I don’t know specifically where it came from, 

but it came from the Administration and discussions about picking 

a date collectively. 

Senator CRUZ. So the date did not come from NASA? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. We didn’t pick a particular date. We talked 

about criteria, as you’ve seen in the Transition Report and other 

things. We didn’t see the necessity of picking a specific date within 

16 

the agency, but as part of the Administration, we came to the conclusion that picking a date would prompt a serious discussion. 

Senator CRUZ. The NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, 

as you know, required NASA to submit the ISS Transition Report 

to Congress not later than December 1, 2017. NASA was 3 months 

late in submitting that report, which was in direct contradiction to 

Federal law. How many drafts of the ISS Transition Report were 

prepared before the final report was submitted to Congress on 

March 30, 2018? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I don’t have a specific number, but we go 

through a pretty iterative process of putting the report together 

with lots of comments from a variety of folks, so there were numerous iterations of the report placed together. I think part of the reason was the complexity of the report. If you look at the requirement 

language in the bill, there was a lot of information required, and 

we did our best to pull together all that data, and, frankly, we 

missed the December date on our own just because we couldn’t get 

the information put together and written down in time to make 

that December date. 

Senator CRUZ. Is it correct that NASA sent at least two drafts 

to the Administration, both of which were rejected? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I don’t know. I’d have to go check on the specific number. I would say they’d never been rejected. They get sent 

over, and we get comments back. We iterate back and forth on the 

comments, and that occurred after the December deadline. It occurred this year. 

Senator CRUZ. On February 20, 2018, Senator Nelson and I together sent a letter to NASA requesting, quote, ‘‘All preliminary 

versions of the ISS Transition Report as described in Public Law 

115–10 including any drafts of the report that have been delivered 

to OMB or the National Space Council for review.’’ To date, that 

request has not been complied with. Does NASA intend to comply 

with that request? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Let me take that question for the record, 

and we’ll deliberate and see. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Answer: The process of generating a report is an iterative one, both inside NASA 

and with the rest of the Administration. Thus, it is not the case that drafts are ‘‘rejected’’—they are revised to reflect the wider policy context in which they are developed. 

Answer: Draft reports are predecisional materials that reflect Executive Branch 

deliberations. They often contain initial views of individuals before other individuals 

have commented and further discussions occur. They are by nature preliminary and 

often do not reflect the ultimate view of the Administration or the Agency. Accordingly, their release creates a risk of impeding the free exchange of views and positions that is critical to effective decision-making. 

Senator CRUZ. To your knowledge, is someone in the Administration specifically blocking NASA from providing those documents? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. There’s no specific blockage. I think we just 

need to discuss amongst ourselves what the benefit is and what’s 

in those versions of the documents and see if they’re helpful or not 

in the discussion moving forward. Many of the comments will reflect actual debates within NASA itself, where we had lots of discussions back and forth about what should be in the document, 

what shouldn’t be in the document, et cetera. Some of those things 

17 

we consider somewhat pre-decisional, where we’d like to have that 

free debate within the agency. 

We think it’s important for us to have open dialogue within the 

agency where we can disagree with each other and not be subject 

to external review. So for some of those reasons, we’d like to hold 

some of those back. But I’d like to meet with our teams and the 

legal folks, and we’ll get together and determine what the right approach is. 

Senator CRUZ. Well, let me be clear. We’re not asking for internal 

documents within NASA. We’re asking for any drafts that were 

submitted to OMB. So, presumably, once a draft was submitted to 

OMB, NASA had resolved the internal questions and was submitting something for approval, and it is my concern that considerations other than the merits of the science drove this decisionmaking process. 

So the letter from Senator Nelson and me was not a request for 

NASA to assess how helpful it might be or not to have those drafts 

submitted to OMB turned over to us. It is rather for Congress to 

make that determination. 

Let me ask a different question on the merits. Mr. Gerstenmaier, 

as a scientific matter, is the ISS capable of operating beyond 2025? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Yes. 

Senator CRUZ. How long do you believe we can safely operate the 

ISS? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. We’ve done a look at the structural integrity 

and the major components through 2028, and it looks very viable 

through 2028. The current maintenance on Station is fairly low. 

We just did a space walk today to repair some things and move 

things forward, but that’s predicted. I think we have a good operational life at least through 2028 and possibly a little bit further 

beyond that. We just need to continue to watch Station and continue to maintain it. 

The IG calls out in their report components we need to watch 

and upgrade and maintain. But the teams are doing a good job of 

doing that and keeping it in good operational capability. What we 

don’t want to have happen is where we’re spending more time 

doing maintenance than we are doing research. At that point, then, 

the utility of Station starts to diminish, and we have not seen that 

yet. Station is very viable at least through 2028. 

Senator CRUZ. Page six of the ISS Transition Report states, 

quote, ‘‘Among the benefits beyond the prospect of lower operational costs for an LEO platform, shifting focus to industry can 

additionally reduce the infrastructure burden on NASA, as has already been demonstrated at NASA facilities at Kennedy Space 

Center, Johnson Space Center, Stennis Space Center, and Michoud 

Assembly Facility.’’ 

If the policy as described in the ISS Transition Report is carried 

out, how will the infrastructure of the Johnson Space Center be reduced? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I think what the report is referring to is it’s 

talking about a way we can reduce the infrastructure costs for 

NASA programs. So in the case of the Michoud Assembly Facility, 

we were able to bring some commercial companies in that could use 

the facilities at Michoud in parallel with our operations. So then 

18 

they would share some of the facility use, some of the utility bills, 

some of the support personnel. There were multiple users in the facility of which NASA only had to pay now a portion of some of that 

infrastructure cost. So that’s what that report is referring to. 

So when we think of Space Station, if we have multiple users in 

space, where NASA is just one of multiple users, then that cost of 

infrastructure and, say, cargo flights or crew flights—those can be 

shared between the government and the commercial sector, and 

then that lowers the cost to the government. That’s what’s implied 

by that infrastructure discussion. So it’s not a reduction in personnel. It’s an efficiency that’s gained. 

So at the Johnson Space Center, if some commercial companies 

could come in and do operations in the facility or in the center 

where they share some of the overhead of maintenance and lighting and utilities, then that lowers costs for NASA. So that was 

what the intent of that discussion was in the report. 

Senator CRUZ. How would you project that Mission Control at 

JSC would be impacted? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, we see Mission Control continuing at 

JSC as we bring commercial crew online. Boeing has chosen to operate CST–100 out of the Johnson Space Center. We also see the 

Gateway activity that we do around the moon—that will be operated out of the Johnson Space Center. So I see Mission Control continuing into the future as we move human presence into the solar 

system, carrying the traditional role that the Johnson Space Center 

has carried in the past. 

Senator CRUZ. So as I mentioned in my opening statement, 

NASA hasn’t fared well in the past when decisions were made prematurely in major programs, like Constellation and the Space 

Shuttle. While there were a host of valid reasons for needing to 

transition away from the Space Shuttle, the reality is the program 

was phased out before an alternative was established. This decision 

created a gap in capability for our National Space Program and has 

made NASA reliant upon Russia to transport American astronauts 

to and from the ISS. 

As you can see from this first chart here, between 2006 and 

2018, the price that NASA has paid the Russian government to secure seats to transport American astronauts to and from the ISS 

has increased from roughly $21 million to over $80 million, a cost 

increase of 372 percent or a $60 million increase in just 12 years. 

As you can see from this second chart, the consequence of having 

this gap in capability means that American taxpayers will have 

sent roughly $567 million to the Russian government to transport 

our astronauts to and from the ISS, which comes out to roughly 

$3.5 billion between 2006 and 2018. And it’s also worth noting that 

commercial delivery systems cost will be 2.4 times more than the 

Space Shuttle. 

What do you see as the consequences in terms of capability lost 

if Federal funding is phased out for the ISS in 2025? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, I think, you know, we have some 

principles that we carry within human space flight, and one of 

those principles is the continuity of human space flight. We believe 

keeping a continuous presence in human space flight is important 

19 

and continuing to keep a leadership role in space flight, and I think 

Station needs to have that leadership role. 

What we’re describing here with this activity is we think now is 

the time to do the planning to make sure that we have a good transition from the predominantly government-funded Space Station 

we have today to where we have now commercial space stations 

and other activities in low Earth orbit that we can continue to use 

to keep our leadership role and to keep human presence in space. 

So we’re thinking more of a transition rather than a stop and then 

a start. As you’ve shown through your graphs in the plots here, it’s 

not good when you stop and then you start at some TBD point in 

space. 

So what we’re trying to do through this activity and through the 

Transition Report is establish some principles, which you can read 

in the report. We’re trying to go out to industry, ask industry what 

the government can do to help them take a better role in low Earth 

orbit operations, and how we can make an effective transition 

where the government doesn’t have to be the sole payer and U.S. 

industry can do new things in innovative ways in space. 

We’ve seen some positive examples of that with both commercial 

crew and commercial cargo. I think there are some real advantages 

of the private sector doing some things in innovative and creative 

ways. I think we can do the same thing in low Earth orbit. We 

need some time to do that. We would like to begin that activity in 

earnest now, and then we can see how that works through the period of time and then figure out when the right time is to transition 

Station. 

Senator CRUZ. So, as you know, China has announced that it intends to have its first permanent manned space station ready for 

service in 2022. Do you have any concerns that China may be putting itself in a position to fill a leadership vacuum in low Earth 

orbit if it’s the only country with an operational station beyond 

2025? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I think we need to be aware of that consideration and factor that into our planning as we go forward. 

Senator CRUZ. Final question for Mr. Martin. Both the ISS Transition Report and the President’s budget request list 2025 as the 

date on which direct Federal support of the ISS will end. Has your 

office looked into where that 2025 date originated, and, if not, will 

you commit to examining that question? 

Mr. MARTIN. We have not looked into where the 2025—and, respectfully, we will not look into—it’s a policy issue by the Administration. Unless there’s some evidence of any nefarious outside influence on that decision, it really is a policy decision, much like the 

previous administration had decided to focus on an asteroid retrieval mission as opposed to a lunar return. 

So, really, the Inspector General’s Office—we look at—we don’t 

deal with policy. We’re not management. We look at programs once 

they’ve been decided on by the Congress and the Administration, 

and then we find fault in those programs. 

Senator CRUZ. With all due respect, Mr. Martin, it is not a policy 

decision when it is directly contrary to Federal statute that has 

been enacted into law—the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 

20 

2017—and I believe that date directly contradicts statutory language that was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress. 

Senator Nelson. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This Senator has 

been through a kabuki dance on the issue of OMB trying to control 

NASA for years and years. It’s a problem in both Democrat and Republican administrations and here we go again. 

Mr. Martin, I’m going to have most of my questions for you, because Mr. Gerstenmaier is in a very difficult position, as he has to 

mind the fact that there are those folks at OMB who think they’re 

running NASA, so he has to be careful about what he says, even 

though he’s one of the best NASA managers that has ever come 

down the pipe. 

But I do want to ask Mr. Gerstenmaier—and I think it will make 

the point here—when Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and I authored the NASA authorization bill of 2010 that set NASA off on 

the dual course of a commercial industry of launchers as well as 

NASA being able to get out beyond low Earth orbit and explore 

and, thus, the course that we are now seeing come to fruition with 

the launches of two commercial rockets carrying crew within the 

next year and then the big rocket as the first of the Mars program 

maybe in a couple of years, all of that set the table so that it would 

be worthwhile for commercial companies to come in and develop 

rockets and spacecraft in order to get humans to and from the 

International Space Station, which also would allow us to stop paying the Russians all of those monies that we’ve paid over the years, 

even though they’ve been a reliable partner. 

So, given the fact that this was a business model for SpaceX, for 

Boeing, and others to come, to go to and from low Earth orbit, specifically the Space Station, what do you think this is going to do 

to their business model if suddenly there’s not an International 

Space Station there? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. It’s envisioned in the way we’ve seen the legislation is that there would be potentially other commercial platforms in low Earth orbit that could be serviced by both of these 

companies, both by the cargo providers and also by the crew transportation providers. So the idea was instead of having a sole government space station, there would be a government station, potentially other smaller commercial space stations in low Earth orbit of 

which this industry, the supply industry of transportation, would 

be able to service. 

So that’s the discussion we’ve had, and that’s the thing we’re trying to pursue, to see if there’s a market that supports that and to 

put the details of how that works. And we’re going to ask industry 

and ask others through a series of studies here fairly soon to give 

us their business plans, to give us their understanding of what 

they see as the revenue potential in low Earth orbit. 

I think we’re starting to see a real interest in low Earth orbit 

from commercial companies, where there’s just an inkling that 

there could be some revenue generation there. That’s a starting 

point. That’s a tipping point, and what we need to do is we need 

to figure out a way we can help enable that through the Commerce 

Department, through NASA, to get that vibrant economy there, 

and then again we’ll see this commercial sector take activity in low 

21 

Earth orbit. So we have to walk between figuring out the right 

time for the government station to start ramping down and the private station to start coming in place. 

Senator NELSON. And you do not have any assurance that that 

business model is still there to support their commercial rockets. 

Is that correct? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. There’s no absolute assurance that that 

business model is there. But we can construct a transition plan 

thoughtfully amongst all of us that can help lower the risk to acceptable levels where it’s a right risk for the private sector and it’s 

a right risk for the government to get the capabilities we need in 

low Earth orbit. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Martin, what was it that you were talking 

about—six of 20 human risks that requires research on the ISS? 

Six of 20 human risks, you say, have been identified on the Station. 

Mr. MARTIN. Yes, sir. NASA has a very robust program to look 

at—from their Human Research Program to look at what are the 

key health and human performance risks that can be detrimental 

to astronauts in long-duration space flight, and they have a very 

colorful chart that maps out when they would get these risks to a 

successful point where they could either mitigate it or they’ve decided to accept the risks. And according to NASA’s own figures, six 

of the 20—the mitigation activities and the research on those 

health and human performance risks will not be completed by 

2024. 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Gerstenmaier, do you think that substitutes, if they could be put up—commercial stations—by 2025 

would be available? Do you think that’s possible? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. I think it’s possible for those items, and 

what we need to do is make sure that those unique facilities and 

capabilities are present in the commercial activities, so we can actually make sure that they have the ability to investigate those 

particular areas. 

Senator NELSON. You know, right now, NASA is paying for the 

transportation cost to and from the Station on commercial cargo 

and soon to be American astronauts to go to and from. Do you 

think that the commercial companies could pick up that burden if 

NASA were to abandon the ISS? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, I think, as we’ve all seen, one of the 

largest costs for having a capability in low Earth orbit is the transportation cost. So we need to watch that transportation cost. Again, 

I think the model is if there’s revenue generation by the private 

sector, then they can pay for some portion of that transportation 

cost—and what that percentage is, I don’t know, but we can work 

that out—and then the government gets a reduced cost for the activities that the government needs. So then the government pays 

for the services it requires and what it needs. 

So there’s a transition phase so it doesn’t go from full government funding to no government funding. I think there needs to be 

a transition phase, and that’s what we’ve kind of alluded to in the 

Transition Report of how we discover and how we build that right 

transition model to make sure we don’t lose this capability that 

we’ve acquired with Space Station. 

22 

Senator NELSON. Not just the transportation cost, but the $1.2 

billion per year that Mr. Martin indicated just to keep the Station 

alive. So commercial companies would have to pick that up. You’re 

talking about commercial companies suddenly taking such a large 

bite of the financial pie. It’s possible they might choke on it, isn’t 

it? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, I think we have to be careful as we 

think about the next platform in low Earth orbit. The Space Station, as you described in your opening remarks, is amazing in 

terms of size and complexity. These commercial stations could be 

dramatically simpler and dramatically smaller, and, potentially, 

the operating costs for those and some of the transportation costs 

can be reduced some amount by having a smaller capability. 

We’ve seen some things now where the cargo providers are doing 

an after-mission activity with their cargo vehicles. They actually fly 

an extended mission after they’re done delivering cargo to Station. 

That could serve a function of a space station to be crew tended, 

in a sense, not even in orbit for a permanent amount of time and 

return. 

So I think we have to open up our thinking about what that new 

commercial station is and recognize that having a commercial entity take on the full cost of ISS doesn’t make sense, but is there another model that still can give us the capability we need for reduced costs in maybe a different manner and innovative way of 

achieving it, and that’s what we want to start exploring with companies in the near term, because at some point, Station will wear 

out. Station will no longer be supportable. We’re going to have to 

deorbit Station. We want to make sure that event doesn’t occur 

without us being prepared to look at a transition to another activity in low Earth orbit that can keep this continuous presence moving forward. 

Senator NELSON. Well, I would suggest, Mr. Gerstenmaier, that 

I can speak on behalf of Senator Cruz and myself and say that as 

you do all of this planning, you also ought to plan for the alternative that the Station is going to stay alive until 2028 and even 

beyond. And as you look at your different scenarios, I would recommend that you do that because this Committee is going to require that. 

Mr. Martin, does the ISS Transition Report adequately consider 

the risk of ending the ISS program in 2025? 

Mr. MARTIN. We don’t believe, based on our work, that it does, 

Senator. 

Senator NELSON. What are your impressions of the Transition 

Report and the manner in which it was influenced by the Administration? 

Mr. MARTIN. Senator, I can’t speak to the latter part of your 

question because we have no knowledge of the input that OMB had 

or didn’t have on the language. But looking at the report—and, 

again, based on the OIG’s work—the report is—apart from describing a high-level framework and using words—dropping words like 

‘‘robust economy in low Earth orbit’’—we think that a lot of the 

conclusions or observations are overly optimistic in nature, particularly with the ability over the next 6 years to generate a sufficient 

23 

economy in low Earth orbit to pull off this plan. So we have serious 

reservations about it, sir. 

Senator NELSON. Of the $3.5 billion that NASA spends on ISS 

operations, transportation, and research each year, roughly $1 billion goes, as you have already indicated—$1.2 billion—to operating 

and maintaining the Station itself. The ISS Transition Report 

makes it clear that NASA will continue to need access to low Earth 

orbit, even as we move to exploring Mars. 

The report says NASA is going to keep paying for research and 

for transportation to low Earth orbit, yet it doesn’t say how 

transitioning to a privately-run Space Station or platform will actually save money. If a commercial space station exists by 2025, it 

won’t be free. 

How, Mr. Gerstenmaier, will using commercial platforms in low 

Earth orbit save NASA money? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, it has to come from the things we described. There needs to be some ability for the commercial sector 

to generate revenue in low Earth orbit on their own so they have 

a revenue stream separate from the government, or other government agencies contribute to the funding. That lowers some of the 

cost, or the cost is shared now across a community rather than just 

NASA paying for that cost. The other way would be if we back off 

on some of the capability and we have less functionality in low 

Earth orbit such that it costs less to maintain that functionality in 

low Earth orbit. 

Those would be two examples that we need to investigate and 

see which ones of those have the potential of yielding the benefit 

that we describe or we would like to try to get by making this transition. 

Senator NELSON. So, Mr. Martin, I ask you, based on the work 

of the Office of Inspector General, is the commercial industry ready 

to assume the cost of operating and maintaining the ISS? 

Mr. MARTIN. We don’t believe so, and we think the—we had 

some specific concerns with the Transition Report. If you look on 

page 27, it talks about an STPI study that assesses the economic 

viability of a commercial low Earth platform. Some of the assumptions that this study uses are belied by the chart that the Chairman just put up. The operating assumption in that study was the 

cost of an astronaut transportation to low Earth orbit was $20 million. Last time I looked, it was closer to $84 million per seat. 

In addition, on page 29 of the Transition Report was an interesting comment about venture capitalists that were contacted by 

the study writers to assess the economic viability. No venture capitalists that they spoke with for this report would invest in a commercial platform in low Earth orbit until there was much more 

clarity on revenue and costs. 

Senator NELSON. On the basis of what you just said, if I were 

trying a jury trial, I would say, ‘‘Your Honor, the plaintiff or the 

defense rests.’’ 

Are there areas in which NASA could save cost under the current ISS program? 

Mr. MARTIN. Myself or Mr. Gerstenmaier? 

Senator NELSON. You, Mr. Martin. 

24 

Mr. MARTIN. I’m sure there are, and they have—they’ve consolidated contracts, they’ve moved from—to fixed price contracts with 

its main contractor, Boeing. There are lots that they’ve done over 

the past five, 10 years, and our hats are off to the managers at 

NASA for that, and I’m sure that there are additional efficiencies 

that they could identify in the coming years. 

Senator NELSON. And then there’s the question of demand. 

NASA’s goal is to be one of many users of commercial space stations. But right now, I don’t see who those non-government users 

are. 

Mr. Gerstenmaier, do you expect—who would be the one that 

would join NASA for LEO services on a commercial space station? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, I think if we look at what’s going on 

on the Station today, we don’t see a single user that’s going to come 

in and take a majority stake in the operations on the Station or 

have a majority activity. But what we’re starting to see for the first 

time is we’re starting to see a variety of companies find benefits 

that they can gain by doing research onboard the Station. 

So the pharmaceutical companies, of which you’re well aware, 

have been doing research into various drugs on Station. They’ve 

been using animal models and plant models to go look at various 

drug efficiencies, and some of those are having very interesting and 

positive benefits. The fact that the human genome changes slightly 

in space is also very intriguing to drug companies and other folks. 

There’s some very novel new treatments that may come out for disease that we face that are coming that companies could gain revenue from. 

We’re also beginning to start to see some manufacturing companies actually fabricate some material in space. There’s some fiber 

optic material that’s being manufactured today that, again, has the 

potential of being a better fiber conductor of optical transmissions 

on the Earth. 

So, again, I would say it’s too early to say that there’s any one 

company, any one discipline, but there are a variety of areas and 

disciplines that show promise. Our job, along with Commerce and 

others, is to figure out ways that we can enable that industry to 

continue to investigate and see through their entrepreneurial and 

their innovative understanding that they can generate a case to 

generate revenue, and then at that point, they can start picking up 

some of the burden that we carry in space. But, again, I think it’s 

a slow step-wise process. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you for that comprehensive answer, and, 

if you would, since you have just made the case for extending the 

ISS, would you provide to the Committee examples of all those 

things that are going on that you just referenced for the Committee’s perusal and probably the Committee’s wanting to talk about 

it? Because the general public doesn’t really understand some of 

the research that is quite dramatic, as you said, on pharmaceuticals that is going on. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Please see the attached slides for examples of entities involved in the ISS National Laboratory and their research areas. 

25 


516MFR1.eps 516MFR2.eps
26 


516MFR3.eps 516MFR4.eps
27 

Senator NELSON. Since we have a vote in progress, Mr. Chairman, I think I’ll stop right there. I thank the witnesses, thank 

them for their expertise, and I think that the purpose of this hearing has been accomplished. 

Senator CRUZ. Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

We just heard the defense rest, and I will say my friend, Senator 

Matlock, would receive a directed verdict if this were, indeed, a 

courtroom. 

Senator NELSON. If you were the judge, I’m sure. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CRUZ. I’m going to ask just a couple of very brief questions, and we’re going to wrap this hearing up. 

Mr. Gerstenmaier, a minute ago, you were having a discussion 

with Senator Nelson about pharmaceutical research. If a billion 


516MFR5.eps 516MFR6.eps
28 

dollar drug is created due to the research on the ISS, what claim 

would NASA have to the intellectual property, and what share, if 

any, of the revenue would NASA receive? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Again, we can—that’s a pretty detailed answer that comes from that, and we can go look at that. We’ve been 

trying to look at the advantages of providing—if a company operates with NASA, typically, we own the intellectual property rights 

if they participate and develop something in our facilities. But if 

they put in the majority of the work, all the innovation comes from 

their side, all the creativity comes from their side, then they should 

rightfully have ownership. So we’ve been trying to look at ways 

that we could amend or clarify what our ownership of intellectual 

property right is. 

Typically, we have those rights. We typically don’t ever grab 

those rights from someone that does research, but we own those 

rights. That’s held some people back from doing research on Station, because there’s a significant amount of work that these companies will have to invest to get that revenue. They’re going to 

have to not only make the discovery on Station, but then they’re 

going to have to take it through maybe 10 years of Federal drug 

agency trials to actually get a pharmaceutical that’s on the market. 

So they’ll make a significant amount of investment in that that 

is probably not appropriate for us to go capture some revenue from 

that, because they’ve earned that through the money they’ve put in 

place. So we’ll work with that, and we’ll see how that looks. But 

I think, in general, we would like to have them—if they put the 

revenue in, put the time in, put the creativity in, that’s their intellectual property that they should be able to use. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Answer: There are no special or different intellectual property requirements specifically applicable to research on the ISS. Under the current statutory and regulatory regime, commercial entities retain all commercial rights in intellectual property created through use of the ISS. 

NASA does not have authority to accept or retain royalties (or profit-share) for 

commercially-owned technologies even when those technologies are developed using 

government support or assets. Government agencies (including NASA) are only authorized to collect and retain royalties (as a share of sales or profits) from private 

entities only when the private entities are commercializing Government-owned technologies pursuant to a technology transfer license. (See 35 USC 209 and 15 USC 

3710c). Similarly, NASA is not authorized to seek or retain a share of profits or revenue earned by a commercial entity through making a commercial product on the 

ISS. 

Senator CRUZ. So does NASA have any agreements in place for 

sharing revenue that could be utilized to lower ISS costs? 

Mr. GERSTENMAIER. Not in that direct revenue sharing sense, no. 

Senator CRUZ. Well, I think that may be ripe for further discussion, and I look forward to working with you on that. 

Let me just say, finally, I want to thank all of the good men and 

women that work at NASA, the incredible scientists, the incredible 

leaders, astronauts, brave men and women that are leading our 

country’s space program. We are grateful for your service. As 

Chairman of this Committee, I view it as a responsibility that I 

take very seriously to stand up and fight for you. I know Senator 

Nelson views that responsibility with the same gravity. So I thank 

you both for your testimony. 

29 

The hearing record is going to remain open for two weeks. During this time, senators are asked to submit any questions for the 

record, and upon receipt, the witnesses are requested to submit 

their written answers to the Committee as soon as possible. 

And with that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:36 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(31) 

A P P E N D I X 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BILL NELSON TO

WILLIAM H. GERSTENMAIER

Question 1. Please provide examples of the types of users on ISS today that could 

eventually be paying customers of a commercial space station? What types of activities are these users engaged in? 

Answer. Please see the attached slides for examples of entities involved in the 

International Space Station (ISS) National Laboratory and their research areas. 

Question 2. At the hearing you discussed the new Commercial LEO Development 

program that is supposed to help NASA achieve its goal of being one of many users 

of commercial space stations. The FY 2019 Budget provided very little information 

about this new program. Please provide a summary and a timeline of the activities 

the program will conduct. 

Answer. The primary purpose of the Commercial low-Earth orbit (LEO) Development program is to spur a vibrant, sustained U.S.-led, commercial LEO human 

spaceflight marketplace where NASA is one of many customers. The vision includes 

one or more privately-owned/operated platforms—either human-tended or permanently-crewed—together with transportation capabilities for crew and cargo that enable a variety of activities in LEO, where those platforms and capabilities are sustained to a greater degree than today by commercial revenue. These future platforms may either leverage the ISS or be free-flying. NASA must also communicate 

its forecasted needs in LEO to allow the private sector to anticipate that demand 

in their business cases. With this vision, NASA is able to share the cost of a LEO 

platform with other commercial, Government, and international users. In the President’s FY 2019 Budget Request, the runout is as below: 

• FY 2019—$150M 

• FY 2020—$150M 

• FY 2021—$175M 

• FY 2022—$200M 

• FY 2023—$225M 

To achieve the Commercial LEO Development program’s goals, a first activity will 

be to solicit inputs from industry on the development and operations of private onorbit modules and/or platforms and other capabilities that NASA could eventually 

utilize to meet its long-term LEO needs as one of many customers. NASA is laying 

the groundwork for 2019 by working with industry in 2018 (including an industry 

day May 1, 2018) and releasing small study contracts focused on understanding how 

the commercial sector can be incentivized to support NASA’s LEO needs. Based on 

these initial inputs, NASA expects to then conduct a full and open competition for 

public and privately funded module(s) and/or platform(s) attached to the ISS or freeflying in LEO, or other capabilities in FY 2019. 

NASA also intends to use a portion of these funds to continue to stimulate nonNASA demand for LEO activities that will be needed to support private LEO platforms. For example, NASA has been investing—and will continue to invest—in commercial on-orbit facilities and integration costs for promising research leading to 

sustained non-NASA use of LEO, such as on-orbit manufacturing. NASA has been 

covering transportation costs, which allows a variety of companies to experiment 

with different revenue-generating activities or demand for space-based activities. In 

addition, industry studies funded by this program will allow interested parties to 

specify what support they desire from NASA, what commercial opportunities they 

are pursuing, and viability of private industries’ business cases. This could potentially include options such as: (a) access to a port on ISS; (b) access to NASA’s experience and capabilities through its unique workforce with expertise in the design, 

construction, launch, operations, and/or utilization of orbital platforms; and (c) financial support provided through the Commercial LEO Development program. As 

32 

a companion activity to this program, NASA will develop a policy that ensures that 

NASA or ISS National Laboratory activities do not compete with the capabilities 

provided by commercial LEO platforms. Ultimately, the commercial sector must develop the demand market. NASA and the Department of Commerce can create an 

environment that will allow commercial companies to develop demand. The Agency 

will leverage best practices from other commercial programs as applicable. 

Question 3. The ISS Transition Report describes in qualitative terms some of 

NASA’s ongoing requirements in Low Earth Orbit. Does NASA plan to quantify 

these requirements? How are they being communicated to industry? 

Answer. NASA’s broad long-term LEO requirements are laid out in Section 4.1 

of the ISS Transition Report. NASA is currently working to develop a more detailed 

forecast (including quantifying where possible) of future LEO needs and will communicate this forecast to industry through public forums. An initial forecast later 

this summer will include specific types of facilities and capabilities that NASA will 

need, such as volume and interfaces for continued on-orbit testing of life support 

technologies, and research rack space. Further maturation of these forecasts will define estimates of crew time, upmass, and downmass. In order to ensure that private 

industry is prepared to provide the services and capabilities that support NASA’s 

needs in LEO, NASA is proposing a step-wise transition of LEO human spaceflight 

operations from a Government-directed activity to a model where private industry 

is responsible for how to meet and execute NASA’s requirements, as well as the 

needs of commercial operators. In order to effect a smooth transition, provide private industry with a vision of the future work, and allow NASA to plan and alter 

its activities, NASA is proposing that this transition of LEO human spaceflight responsibility to private industry will be essentially complete by 2025. This will give 

NASA time to engage with industry to begin transforming the many NASA-directed 

activities that are currently performed through several contracts into more of a public-private partnership and/or services contract(s) model where NASA’s current responsibilities are executed and managed by private industry. This time period will 

also provide the opportunity for NASA and private industry to engage with stakeholders and to only proceed when industry has matured and is capable of executing 

NASA’s requirements. 

On May 17, 2018, NASA released a research announcement requesting proposals 

to study the future of human spaceflight commercialization in LEO. The research 

announcement solicits industry concepts detailing business plans and viability for 

habitable platforms, whether using the ISS or a separate free-flying structure, that 

would enable a space economy in LEO in which NASA is one of many customers. 

NASA will continue to have a need in LEO for regular crewed operations, long-term 

technology development and demonstrations, space and life sciences research, and 

opportunities for astrophysics, space, and Earth Science research. Access to an orbital platform on which to conduct these activities will be key as NASA and its commercial and international partners prepare for crewed missions to the Moon and beyond. NASA anticipates awarding multiple four-month, fixed priced contracts, not 

to exceed $1M per award. Selection is expected to take place in July with the final 

reports delivered to NASA in the December timeframe. Through these studies, 

NASA is looking forward to learning how industry plans to meet NASA’s ongoing 

needs in LEO as well as develop non-NASA demand. 

33 


516MFR1.eps 516MFR2.eps
34 


516MFR3.eps 516MFR4.eps
35 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. EDWARD MARKEY TO

WILLIAM H. GERSTENMAIER

Research Conducted on the ISS. Since 2005, the International Space Station has 

been a platform on which our astronauts carry out groundbreaking scientific research in low-Earth orbit. The ISS is the only microgravity research platform of its 

kind. This research on engineering, physical sciences, and biology, is absolutely necessary as we look to exploring our Moon, Mars, and beyond. NASA has always held 

that QUOTE, ‘‘Failure is not an option.’’ However, the Administration’s proposal to 

decommission the ISS in just seven years puts this pivotal research in jeopardy and 

without it, failure is inevitable. 

Question 1. Mr. Gerstenmaier, it was mentioned that six out of 20 human health 

risk assessments will not be completed by the Administration’s proposed decommission date of ISS in 2025. How can you guarantee that these critical assessments and 

other scientific research will continue uninterrupted in low-Earth orbit? 

Answer. The Administration is not proposing to decommission the ISS in seven 

years. The Administration is proposing to end direct Federal funding of the ISS by 


516MFR5.eps 516MFR6.eps
36 

2025. Research that has not been completed by the end of 2024 will be conducted 

on whatever platforms—whether they be new commercial platforms or commercially-operated ISS elements—are available in 2025. NASA wants to ensure there 

is no gap between ISS in its present operating model and what follows it. 

Question 2. Do you believe the private market and NASA will be able to support 

this research, including a reliable platform, by the mid-2020s? 

Answer. Yes. NASA has been able to support this research already even in the 

absence of a robust commercial market. NASA’s Commercial low-Earth orbit (LEO) 

Development effort will explore options for conducting human LEO operations and 

research beyond 2025, and encourage the development of viable commercial platforms and operations. In support of this, on May 17, 2018, NASA released a research announcement requesting proposals to study the future of human spaceflight 

commercialization in LEO. The research announcement solicits industry concepts 

detailing business plans and viability for habitable platforms, whether using the ISS 

or a separate free-flying structure, that would enable a space economy in LEO in 

which NASA is one of many customers. NASA will continue to have a need in LEO 

for regular crewed operations, long-term technology development and demonstrations, space and life sciences research, and opportunities for astrophysics, space, and 

Earth Science research. Access to an orbital platform on which to conduct these activities will be key as NASA and its commercial and international partners prepare 

for crewed missions to the Moon and beyond. 

Commercial Partnerships. Several of my Subcommittee colleagues and I are working on bipartisan commercial space legislation and one of my top priorities in this 

bill is to make it easier for smaller businesses to partner with NASA for use of assets and facilities in order to build up the commercial market. Mr. Gerstenmaier, 

in your testimony you state that ‘‘NASA’s vision for low-Earth orbit is a sustained 

U.S. commercial human spaceflight marketplace where NASA is one of many customers.’’ 

Question 3. What do you think are the biggest challenges and impediments facing 

small businesses in building working partnerships with NASA? 

Answer. Through Requests for Information (RFIs) and other interactions since 

2014, including workshops with external stakeholders (most recently in August 

2017), industry has identified the following challenges and barriers to achieving the 

vision of a self-sustaining marketplace in LEO: 

• Uncertainty Concerning Future Availability and Uses of ISS/LEO Platforms; 

• Cost of Transportation/Access; 

• Government Acceptance of the Premise that Commerce has Value; 

• Ability of Government Astronauts to Participate in Commercial Activities; 

• Lack of Current Commercial Pricing Structure; 

• Flexibility in Contracting and Public/Private Partnership Agreement Mechanisms; and 

• Recognition of Intellectual Property (IP) Rights; 

• Lack of a clear demand signal from Government; and 

• Threat of competition by the Government that would undercut private investment. 

• Foreign competition. 

Question 4. Do you think these challenges will be overcome in time for the proposed decommissioning of ISS in the mid-2020s? 

Answer. In order to achieve the vision of a self-sustaining marketplace in LEO, 

NASA will work together with industry to overcome these challenges. Some can be 

addressed through the development of an ISS commercial use policy and pricing 

structure for ISS services. Cost of transportation/access is expected to continue to 

be a significant barrier, particularly for small businesses. By setting 2025 for the 

end of direct Federal funding for ISS and releasing the RFP noted above, the Agency has spurred the discussion with its about how best to realize a commercial LEO 

environment and provided a time-frame for the resolution of the challenges. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. GARY PETERS TO

WILLIAM H. GERSTENMAIER

ISS Funding Deadlines. I am concerned that setting an arbitrary deadline for 

ending direct funding to ISS increases the risk that NASA will lose access to low 

Earth orbit for a period of time. I propose that it would be better to make a decision 

37 

to end funding based on the ability for commercial providers to meet NASA’s needs 

in low Earth orbit. 

Question 1. What sort of capabilities will commercial providers need to demonstrate in the near term to give us confidence that we are on track toward healthy 

public-private partnerships in low Earth orbit? 

Answer. On May 17, 2018, NASA released a research announcement requesting 

proposals to study the future of human spaceflight commercialization in low-Earth 

orbit (LEO). This commercial LEO NASA Research Announcement is the next step 

in enabling a LEO space marketplace. The announcement solicits industry concepts 

detailing business plans and viability for habitable platforms, whether using the 

International Space Station (ISS) or a separate free-flying structure that would enable a space economy in LEO in which NASA is one of many customers. Via this 

announcement, industry is tasked to identify ways to stimulate demand for commercial LEO services with a goal to sustain the space marketplace. Additionally, the 

announcement seeks industry input about the role of Government and evolution of 

the ISS in the process of transitioning U.S. human spaceflight activities to a nonGovernmental commercial human spaceflight enterprise in LEO. 

NASA will continue to have a need in LEO for regular crewed operations, longterm technology development and demonstrations, and Earth, space and life 

sciences research. Access to an orbital platform on which to conduct these activities 

will be key as NASA and its commercial and international partners prepare for 

crewed missions to the Moon and beyond. 

Question 2. If we start planning to end funding by 2025, but it becomes apparent 

before that deadline (for example in 2022) that this will result in an interruption 

in access to low Earth orbit, would costs of changing plans to ensure continued access to low Earth orbit exceed currently planned costs in those years leading up to 

2025? 

Answer. The proposal to discontinue direct Federal funding to ISS by 2025 represents a balance among the need to continue to conduct exploration-related research in LEO to prepare for deep-space missions, the recognition that the commercial sector is rapidly developing space capabilities that can support the requirements 

of both Governmental and non-Governmental customers, and the need for NASA to 

utilize the Moon as a stepping-stone to eventual human missions to Mars. NASA 

is laying the groundwork (e.g., the issuance of the RFP noted above) to ensure that 

the Agency will be able to meet its LEO requirements after the end of direct Federal 

funding to the ISS. The current budget leading up to 2025 does not preclude continued access to LEO beyond 2025 should no alternate platforms become viable. 

Commercializing Low Earth Orbit. The ISS Transition report includes forecasts 

from STPI saying a commercial operator will lose a significant amount of money 

under all but the rosiest of scenarios. 

Question 3. What specific evidence can you cite that points toward a robust market for low Earth orbit and likely commercial success? 

Answer. While the commercial LEO market is still developing the ISS National 

Lab, managed by the Center for the Advancement of Science In Space (CASIS), has 

been a key enabler of the expanded commercial use of LEO. Since 2011, more than 

200 ISS National Laboratory research projects have been flown to the ISS—ranging 

from developing new drug therapies, to monitoring tropical cyclones, to improving 

equipment for first-responders on the ground, to producing unique fiber-optics materials. In the last several years, at least 50 percent of the ISS National Lab projects 

were new-to-space customers, and more than 50 percent involve commercial users 

(i.e., for-profit companies). CASIS has estimated a projected incremental revenue of 

more than $900 million directly tied to National Laboratory projects to date. 

The ISS National Lab is currently opening up the possibilities of the Station research environment to a diverse range of researchers, entrepreneurs, and innovators 

that could create entirely new markets in space. These areas include, but are not 

limited to the following: drug delivery systems; crop science; regenerative medicine; 

reaction chemistry; materials science; fluid dynamics and transport phenomena; onorbit production and microgravity-enabled materials; protein crystal growth (also 

known as macromolecular crystal growth); and, Earth observation and remote sensing. These activities are part of a young portfolio of non-NASA projects that are beginning to benefit from increased access to the ISS as well as shorter timeframes 

from project concept to implementation on the ISS. The ISS National Lab portfolio’s 

current positioning forecasts growth in the next ten years in areas such as cell and 

gene therapy, 3D bio-printing scaffolds, and aerospace projects using the LEO platform to raise technological readiness levels of next-generation LEO and beyond infrastructure systems. Additionally as discussed in question 1 above, the commercial 

38 

LEO NASA Research Announcement is the next step in enabling a LEO space marketplace. 

As one example of a commercial use of ISS, NanoRacks’ CubeSat Deployer is a 

stackable, modular, ground loaded launch case which is designed to meet the growing demand to deploy CubeSat format satellites from ISS for a variety of customers. 

As of June 2018, over 600 payloads have been launched to ISS via NanoRacks services for the U.S. Government (including NASA), commercial entities, and a variety 

of international space agencies and other organizations. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. GARY PETERS TO

HON. PAUL K. MARTIN

ISS Funding Deadlines. I am concerned that setting an arbitrary deadline for 

ending direct funding to ISS increases the risk that NASA will lose access to low 

Earth orbit for a period of time. I propose that it would be better to make a decision 

to end funding based on the ability for commercial providers to meet NASA’s needs 

in low Earth orbit. 

Question 1. What indicators in the low Earth orbit market might demonstrate 

that we are headed toward a robust commercial environment? 

Answer. The most significant indicator that a robust commercial environment exists in low Earth orbit is for commercial entities such as Goodyear, Merck or Proctor 

and Gamble to make significant monetary investments in low Earth orbit research 

and activity. Such an environment would require expansion beyond the more traditional investments in microgravity research and applications into broader commercial activities such as space tourism, satellite servicing, manufacturing of goods, and 

corporate research and development, all of which have yet to materialize. 

Question 2. If we start planning to end funding by 2025, but it becomes apparent 

before that deadline (for example in 2022) that this will result in an interruption 

in access to low Earth orbit, would costs of changing plans to ensure continued access to low Earth orbit exceed currently planned costs in those years leading up to 

2025? 

Answer. If NASA, for example, decides in 2022 to retain and extend ISS operations beyond 2025, much of the added operations and maintenance costs will be 

determined by the level of investment needed to address aging systems and infrastructure issues as well as crew and cargo transportation payments to supporting 

companies such as Boeing, SpaceX and Sierra Nevada. Operations and maintenance 

costs are currently scheduled to decrease to about $1.4 billion in the three years 

prior to 2025 because NASA would not be making advance payments for future repair parts or cargo and crew flights. Such payments to contractors typically begin 

up to 36 months before a flight occurs. If additional flights are scheduled, planned 

annual costs in the years leading up to 2025 would increase to $3 to $4 billion or 

about half of NASA’s annual human space flight budget. 

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION TRANSITION REPORT

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 303(C)(2) OF THE NASA TRANSITION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017 

(P.L. 115–10) 

MARCH 30, 2018 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction 

2.0 Executive Summary 

3.0 Transition 

4.0 Major Elements of Transition 

4.1 NASA’s Long-Term LEO Requirements 

4.2 Enabling the Development of a Commercial Market in LEO 

4.3 Science and Technology Policy Institute Analysis 

4.4 Utilizing the ISS to Enable Human Exploration of the Solar System 

39 

4.5 Benefits to Humanity 

4.6 Technical Evaluation of Extending ISS Through the 2020s 

4.7 Cost Estimates of ISS extension 

4.8 Community Input 

5.0 Conclusion 

Appendix—Excerpt from NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115–10) 

1.0: INTRODUCTION

This report responds to direction in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transition Authorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115–10, hereafter ‘‘the Act’’), Section 303(c)(1), to submit to Congress a report evaluating the International Space 

Station (ISS) as a platform for research, deep space exploration, and low-Earth orbit 

(LEO) spaceflight in partnership with its four foreign space agency partners, and 

the commercial space sector (see Appendix for text of the reporting requirement, excerpted from the Act). 

The ISS represents an unparalleled capability in human spaceflight that is increasing knowledge of engineering and physical sciences, biology, the Earth, and the 

universe. This knowledge is benefiting life here on Earth and enhancing the competitiveness of U.S. private industry. The research and technology demonstrations 

onboard the ISS are not only providing the basis for extending human presence beyond the bounds of LEO and taking America’s next steps into the proving ground 

of cislunar space, but also advancing the competitiveness of U.S. private industry. 

Building on the partnership of five space agencies representing the 15 ISS Intergovernmental Agreement signatory nations, over 101 countries and areas have utilized, 

or are currently utilizing, the ISS. Astronauts have continuously lived aboard the 

ISS for over 17 years. Approximately one-quarter of the U.S. population today only 

knows a time when Americans have lived in space. 

This report lays out NASA’s activities and future plans for operations, research, 

and development in LEO. ‘‘Transition,’’ (Section 3), as that term is used in Section 

303 of the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, discusses the LEO capabilities that the ISS currently provides the Nation, which include a sustained American 

presence in LEO, sustained American global space leadership, the continued development of a commercial space industry and a commercial space marketplace, the 

continued development of deep space exploration capabilities, and the continued return of research and development benefits to humans on Earth. ‘‘Transition’’ also 

discusses what NASA envisions the LEO landscape to look like in 2024 and beyond, 

as well as the key issues that need to be considered when contemplating ISS endof-life and transition to other platforms. ‘‘Major Elements of Transition’’ (Section 4) 

goes into detail on the LEO commercial marketplace, the ISS’s role in the expansion 

of humanity into deep space, the benefits currently being returned to Earth from 

research on ISS, and an evaluation of the technical and cost implications of continuing to operate ISS through and beyond 2024. Section 5 provides a Summary. 

2.0: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115–10) provided for an 

ISS Transition Report under section 303: 

The Administrator, in coordination with the ISS management entity (as defined 

in section 2 of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transition 

Authorization Act of 2017), ISS partners, the scientific user community, and the 

commercial space sector, shall develop a plan to transition in a step-wise approach from the current regime that relies heavily on NASA sponsorship to a regime where NASA could be one of many customers of a low-Earth orbit non-governmental human space flight enterprise. 

Uses of Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) Platforms 

Preparing for Human Deep Space Missions 

In order to prepare for human expeditions into deep space, the Agency must first 

conduct breakthrough research and test the advanced technology necessary to keep 

crews safe and productive on long-duration space exploration missions. An on-orbit 

platform like the ISS is necessary to mitigate 22 of the 33 human health risks in 

the portfolio identified by NASA’s Human Research Program in support of current 

and future deep space missions. NASA is also using the ISS as a testbed to fill critVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
40 

ical gaps in technologies that will be needed for long-duration deep space missions. 

For example, elements of the ISS life support and other habitation systems will be 

evolved into the systems that will be used for deep space exploration missions and 

undergo long-duration testing. It is NASA’s plan to first develop and demonstrate 

many critical technology capabilities using the ISS (and potentially other future 

platforms) as a permanently-crewed testbed prior to deploying these capabilities beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO). This approach is much more cost-effective and faster 

than conducting this research in cislunar space because of the risks inherent in operating so far from the Earth. 

Global Leadership in Human Spaceflight 

Consistent with the President’s space policy directive, ‘‘Lead an innovative and 

sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to 

enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new 

knowledge and opportunities’’, the strength of the international partnership created 

through the ISS Program is a testament to U.S. leadership in space and to the aerospace expertise of all the nations involved. It serves as an example of how many 

countries can work together to design, build, operate, and maintain large, complex 

human space assets. As we consider the future of ISS and potential successors and 

prepare for human missions of exploration into deep space, it is important to reflect 

on the critical value of the proven partnership that has made the ISS possible, and 

to consider how to build on these relationships as NASA proceeds into cislunar 

space. The ISS partner agencies are looking for leadership in human spaceflight and 

LEO from the U.S. Informally, all of the partner agencies have indicated that they 

expect to continue cooperative activities with NASA as long as NASA continues to 

maintain America’s commitment to the partnership. 

Enabling a LEO Commercial Market 

NASA’s vision for LEO is a sustained U.S. commercial LEO human space flight 

marketplace where NASA is one of many customers. The vision includes one or 

more privately-owned/operated platforms—either human-tended or permanentlycrewed—and transportation capabilities for crew and cargo, that enable a variety of 

activities in LEO, where those platforms and capabilities are sustained primarily by 

commercial revenue rather than relying on NASA and the U.S. Government as their 

main source of revenue as is the case today with the ISS. NASA must also communicate its forecasted needs in LEO to allow the private sector to anticipate that demand in their business cases. With this vision, NASA is able to share the cost of 

a LEO platform with other commercial, Government, and international users. This 

allows NASA to maximize its resources toward missions beyond LEO, while still 

having the ability to utilize LEO for its ongoing needs as described in Section 4.1. 

In order to enable this vision, NASA is executing several public-private partnerships centered around the ISS to foster the development of customers for LEO capabilities, but also is maturing the supply industry to be able to meet future demands. 

NASA is also initiating the Commercial LEO Development program to further the 

development of private on-orbit capabilities beyond what is available today through 

the ISS. 

The Commercial Resupply Services (CRS), the Commercial Crew Program, and 

the ISS National Lab are key complementary enabling activities to enable this vision. Under the CRS contracts, NASA’s two commercial cargo partners, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital ATK, have demonstrated not only the 

ability to provide cargo deliveries to ISS, but also the flexibility to recover effectively 

from mishaps. The addition of the Sierra Nevada Corporation as a third commercial 

service provider will add significant on-orbit and return capability. Both Orbital 

ATK and Sierra Nevada Corporation have begun to investigate options to perform 

significant on-orbit operations after their primary cargo mission is completed. These 

two providers are able to provide an on-orbit research capability independent of ISS. 

NASA’s commercial crew partners, SpaceX and the Boeing Company, are developing 

the Crew Dragon and CST–100 Starliner spacecraft, respectively. These companies 

have made significant progress toward returning crew launches to the U.S., and 

NASA anticipates having these capabilities in place by 2019 to regularly fly astronauts safely to and from ISS. The crew and cargo vehicles, as well as the launch 

vehicles developed by these providers, have the potential to support future commercial enterprises as well as ISS. 

The Center for the Advancement of Science In Space (CASIS) manages the activities of the ISS National Laboratory to increase the utilization of the ISS by other 

Federal entities and the private sector. CASIS works to ensure that the Station’s 

unique capabilities are available to the broadest possible cross-section of U.S. scientific, technological, and industrial communities. The ISS National Laboratory is 

41 

helping to establish and demonstrate the market for research, technology demonstration, and other activities in LEO beyond the requirements of NASA. Commercial implementation partners are now bringing their own customers to the ISS 

through the National Lab as well. 

Benefitting Humanity 

Across a range of disciplines and applications, research on a crewed space platform ultimately benefits people on Earth. In the physical and biological sciences 

arena, a LEO space platform can allow researchers to use microgravity conditions 

to understand the effect of the microgravity environment on microbial systems, fluid 

physics, combustion science, and materials processing, as well as environmental control and fire safety technologies. Technologies developed for use in space, such as 

water purification technologies, can have applications on Earth. Crewed platforms 

can also be the site of sensors that provide data used to support activities such as 

disaster relief. 

ISS Transition 

ISS Transition Principles 

There are several key principles to any strategy or decision to be made regarding 

the ISS and the future of LEO and NASA’s role as one of many customers of services or capabilities that are provided by private industry as part of a broader commercial market. The following principles will ensure uninterrupted access to LEO 

capabilities to enable NASA and the Nation’s long-term interest in LEO and human 

spaceflight exploration including supporting National security objectives, such as a 

competitive industrial base and U.S. leadership: 

• Continuity among NASA’s LEO, deep space exploration, and development and 

research activities and missions toward expanding human presence into the 

solar system; 

• Expanding U.S. human spaceflight leadership in LEO and deep space exploration, including continuity of the relationship with our current ISS international partners; 

• Increase platform options in LEO to enable more ISS transition pathways, security through redundant capabilities, and industrial capability that can support 

NASA’s deep space exploration needs; 

• Spur vibrant commercial activity in LEO; 

• Maintaining critical human spaceflight knowledge and expertise within the 

Government in areas such as astronaut health and performance, life support, 

safety, and critical operational ground and crew experience; 

• Continuing to return benefits to humanity through Government-sponsored basic 

and applied on-orbit research; 

• Continuing Government-sponsored access to LEO research facilities that enable 

other Government agencies, academia, and private industry to increase U.S. industrial competitiveness and provide goods and services to U.S. citizens; and 

• Continuing to reduce the Government’s long-term costs through private industry partnerships and competitive acquisition strategies. 

ISS Transition Strategy 

As part of a cohesive exploration strategy, NASA intends to begin shifting responsibility for meeting its needs and requirements in LEO by leveraging private industry capacity, innovation, and competitiveness that would offer the prospect of lower 

cost to the Government to enable NASA to apply more personnel and budget resources on expanding human spaceflight beyond LEO and enhancing U.S. leadership in human spaceflight around the world. Among the benefits beyond the prospect of lower operational costs for a LEO platform, shifting focus to industry can 

additionally reduce the infrastructure burden on NASA has already been demonstrated at NASA facilities at Kennedy Space Center, Johnson Space Center, Stennis Space Center, and the Michoud Assembly Facility. 

In order to ensure that private industry is prepared to provide the services and 

capabilities that support NASA’s needs in LEO, as outlined in the key principles 

above, and to enable private industry to develop markets and customers beyond the 

Government, NASA is proposing the following approach: 

1. Begin a step-wise transition of LEO human space flight operations from a Government-directed activity to a model where private industry is responsible for 

how to meet and execute NASA’s requirements. Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, this does not mean NASA is ‘‘commercializing the ISS.’’ InVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
42 

stead, NASA maintains leadership and governing responsibilities as outlined 

in the Partnership agreements, and continues to maintain the essential elements of human spaceflight such as astronaut safety and the high-risk exploration systems. 

In order to effect a smooth transition, provide private industry with a vision 

of the future work, and allow NASA to plan and alter its activities, NASA is 

proposing that this transition LEO human space flight responsibility to private 

industry be essentially complete by 2025. This will give NASA time to engage 

with industry to begin transforming the many NASA-directed activities that 

are currently performed through several contracts into more of a public-private 

partnership and/or services contract(s) model where NASA’s current responsibilities are executed and managed by private industry. This time period will 

also provide the opportunity for NASA and private industry to engage with 

stakeholders and to only proceed when industry has matured and is capable 

of executing NASA’s requirements. The transition of ISS will ensure that there 

are private companies with the experience and expertise to operate various 

types of platforms in LEO by the mid-2020s. This transition to private industry must be done in a cost-effective manner and not exceed current operational 

costs. 

Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, NASA will continue discussions 

with the ISS International Partners to help shape the long-term future of 

LEO. 

2. Solicit information from industry on the development and operations of private 

on-orbit modules and/or platforms and other capabilities that NASA could utilize to meet its long-term LEO requirements that are consistent with the ISS 

Transition Principles. The scope of the solicitation may include risk reduction 

development activities, or modules or elements that could either be attached 

to the ISS or be free-flying. The solicitation may also include private industry 

conducted studies on the future of the ISS platform that may be combined with 

private industry objectives in LEO. 

NASA will begin with a solicitation in FY 2018 to gather broad industry input 

on interest in meeting NASA’s long-term needs and objectives that should lead 

to multiple awards in FY 2019 funded out of the Commercial LEO Development program. 

Throughout this approach, NASA will also be requesting market analysis and 

business plans from private industry in order to gauge the depth of possible commercial markets as they apply to industry’s ability to meet NASA’s needs and requirements with a base where NASA is only one of many customers. This approach 

is also dependent on NASA identifying our long-term requirements for LEO, which 

are highlighted in Section 4.1. 

ISS Considerations and the Eventual Future of the ISS Platform 

From a structural integrity analysis standpoint, the ISS platform is expected to 

have significant structural life well beyond 2028 (based on the current assessment 

period). Many of the ISS modules, particularly the modules launched in the later 

years of ISS assembly, are likely to have structural life well into the 2030s (see section 4.4). Although it is thus likely technically feasible to continue to operate the 

ISS well beyond 2028, it is also necessary to consider the costs of operating this 

complex facility as we have been doing (approximately $1.1 billion per year for O&M 

in the outyears) as we consider the future of the ISS platform. 

NASA’s international partners are likely to have different levels of interest in continuing the ISS and in moving to new LEO programs. There are common themes 

across the partnership, however, in considering the future of ISS and exploration, 

such as: 

• Reducing operational costs; 

• Offering frequent visible national astronaut opportunities; 

• Continuation and continuity of research and technology development activities; 

• Balancing LEO and exploration; 

• Maturation of commercial opportunities. 

The eventual future of the ISS, whether it is transitioning the operations of the 

ISS platform to private industry through the use of public-private partnerships, 

augmenting it with privately developed modules, combining portions of the ISS with 

a new private platform, or beginning anew with a free-flying platform and de-orbiting the ISS, will be evaluated using the ISS Transition Principles. 

43 

Fast Forwarding to the mid-2020s 

Continuing with current policies, including the Commercial LEO Development 

program, NASA can project what the LEO landscape may look like in the mid2020s. In predicting the LEO landscape, areas that have a high degree of certainty 

include maintaining our strong global leadership position with the continuation of 

the ISS through 2024, validating commercial cargo and crew transportation costs, 

and completing the majority of NASA exploration-related human and systems research and demonstration. Other nations will have deployed their own space station(s). Examples of areas that will have a lower degree of certainty include whether 

or not private industry capabilities have matured enough to satisfy NASA’s needs 

and requirements, and whether or not a viable commercial market has matured in 

LEO that is not dependent on Government support. The Commercial LEO Development program, along with expanded ISS public-private partnerships, is targeted to 

address these uncertainties. 

NASA’s long-term LEO requirements 

NASA and the U.S. have a long history of human spaceflight leadership and LEO 

research and technology development that go all the way back to the Mercury program through Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, the Space Shuttle, and the ISS. 

Regardless of the eventual fate of the ISS platform itself, NASA is expecting to 

maintain U.S. leadership in LEO and human spaceflight through lunar exploration 

and eventually to Mars consistent with the ISS Transition Principles. Within that 

context, NASA is planning to continue with the following LEO needs and objectives 

beyond the life of ISS: 

• Maintaining the Partnership with our current ISS international partners and 

possibly adding new international and domestic participants; 

• Regular LEO crewed operations, including short and long durations: 

» Enables operational space proficiency; 

» Shift from human health and performance countermeasures development (the 

ISS portion of which is expected to be complete by 2024) to validations of integrated long-duration system, habitation, operations, and crew isolation; 

• Long-term technology/systems development and demonstrations (e.g., life support); 

• Space life and physical sciences basic and applied research at current level and 

capabilities; 

• National Laboratory-based research and technology development; 

• Opportunities for astrophysics, space, and Earth Science research. 

These long-term requirements, while similar to that of the current ISS Program, 

could be met with various types of modules or platforms that do not necessitate a 

vehicle (or vehicles) as complex as the ISS. Many of the research activities could 

be conducted on shorter-duration platforms, similar to the Shuttle, or even crewtended platforms. These requirements are expanded upon in Section 4.1. 

Conclusion 

NASA believes that this is a well-balanced approach where the Agency’s and other 

U.S. Government interests are protected and enhanced while offering the prospect 

of lower cost to the Government and opening new markets and new business models 

to the U.S. industrial base. This approach will also lay the foundation where NASA 

could be one of many customers in a LEO commercial marketplace and provides the 

basis for determining the long term future of the ISS Platform and LEO along with 

the ISS International Partners. 

NASA looks forward to working with Congressional stakeholders along with researchers, private industry, and our ISS International Partners on the future of the 

ISS and LEO, to ensure that the U.S. maintains our human spaceflight leadership 

in LEO while shifting Government resources and focus towards expanding human 

presence into the solar system and returning benefits to U.S. taxpayers. 

3.0: TRANSITION

On November 2, 2017, NASA marked 17 years of continuous United States 

human presence in LEO onboard the ISS. The Station has enabled the U.S. to solidify its global space and innovation leadership across multiple capabilities and policy 

objectives. In determining where the U.S. wants to position itself in the mid-2020s, 

there are several key principles to any strategy or decision regarding the ISS and 

the future of LEO and NASA’s role as one of many customers of services or capabiliVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
44 

ties that are provided by private industry as part of a broader commercial market. 

Adhering to the following principles in considering ISS transition will ensure uninterrupted access to LEO capabilities for NASA and the Nation’s long-term interests 

in LEO and human spaceflight exploration. National interests include supporting 

national security objectives of maintaining a competitive industrial base and U.S. 

leadership. 

• Continuity between NASA’s LEO, deep space exploration, and development and 

research activities and missions to expand human presence into the solar system; 

Rationale: Continuity provides a key stabilizing factor in Government and industry due to the multi-decadal nature of spaceflight. Instability in policy and 

programmatics can result in misdirected efforts and funding and decreased capability and investment from Government, industry, and international partners. 

• Expanding U.S. human spaceflight leadership in LEO and deep space exploration, including continuity of the relationship with our current ISS international partners; 

Rationale: U.S. leadership in exploration and human spaceflight is based on the 

foundation of the ISS international partnership that has matured over 20 years. 

Expanding international partnerships will ensure that the U.S. continues its 

global leadership into the future. 

• Increase platform options in LEO to enable more ISS transition pathways, security through redundant capabilities, and industrial capability that can support 

NASA’s deep space exploration needs; 

Rationale: Creating multiple dissimilar suppliers is a key element of fostering 

a commercial market and is also one of the key elements of securing the capabilities to needed to meet the long-term needs of NASA and the U.S. in LEO. 

• Spur vibrant commercial activity in LEO; 

Rationale: A vibrant commercial activity in LEO is essential to the goal of 

NASA becoming one of many customers in LEO. It is also key to lowering the 

cost of access to the Government and to other customers. 

• Maintaining critical human spaceflight knowledge and expertise within the 

Government in areas such as astronaut health and performance, life support, 

safety, and critical operational ground and crew experience; 

Rationale: The knowledge and expertise to expand human missions into deep 

space for long durations is required to be maintained over many years as well 

as many programs and missions that are inherently Government-led and -executed. This is due to the unique NASA mission of expanding human presence 

into the solar system. 

• Continuing to return benefits to humanity through Government-sponsored basic 

and applied on-orbit research; 

Rationale: Continuing NASA’s portfolio in basic and applied research is a natural extension of the knowledge and expertise that the U.S. has developed in 

space over the past half century. 

• Continuing Government-sponsored access to LEO research facilities that enable 

other Government agencies, academia, and private industry to increase U.S. industrial competitiveness and provide goods and services to U.S. citizens; 

Rationale: With the creation of the ISS National Lab in 2010, the U.S. has 

taken the lead in enabling private industry and other Government agencies 

(such as NIH and NSF) to conduct research and technology development activities in LEO. These activities, though in its beginning stages, are producing results that could directly benefit the competitiveness of U.S. industry and quality 

of life for U.S. taxpayers. Continuing the National Lab and NASA’s support will 

continue to be critical to the success of private industry and other Government 

agencies’ research activities. 

• Continuing to reduce the Government’s long-term costs through private industry partnerships and competitive acquisition strategies. 

Rationale: As industry becomes more capable in executing NASA’s mission independently, NASA should leverage the competitiveness and efficiencies of private 

industry to realize cost reductions. Broad-based industry investments and capabilities also enhance the industrial capacity security of the U.S. to carry out not 

only NASA’s missions but broader National goals. 

45 

Fast Forwarding to the mid-2020s 

Continuing with current policies, NASA can project what the LEO landscape in 

the mid-2020s may look like. Some areas that can be projected with some confidence 

include: 

• Americans have maintained a continuous presence on the ISS for over 24 years; 

• NASA continues to lead a strong international ISS partnership; 

• Commercial crew transportation to the ISS is operational, and has enabled the 

permanent addition of a 4th U.S. On-orbit Segment (USOS) crew member; 

• Commercial cargo and crew transportation costs to ISS have been validated 

over several years; 

• NASA is conducting human missions in cislunar space using a deep space capability such as the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway; 

• NASA has completed the majority of exploration-related human research, life 

support, and other system demonstrations which are ready for incorporation 

into missions beyond cislunar space, including preparations for crewed orbital 

flights to Mars; 

• Other nations are operating their own LEO space stations, possibly in partnership with other nations (including some of the ISS Partner nations), and potentially offering subsidized services. 

Some areas that can be projected with less certainty include: 

• How successful the Commercial LEO Development program has been in reducing the barriers to alternative approaches to support government and commercial LEO activities; 

• Whether or not private industry users, have built self-sustaining business cases 

that include integration, transportation, and execution of their research or technology development for LEO capabilities; 

• Whether or not other Government organizations, like the National Institutes of 

Health (NIH), have established long-term requirements for conducting research 

in LEO and have allocated funds to pay for overhead costs; 

• Whether or not independent commercial market activities in LEO (e.g., tourism, 

activities supporting the satellite sector, manufacturing products and services 

for use in space and on Earth, research and development, and media advertising and education) have been established; 

• Whether or not ISS is a hub of the growing space economy, providing infrastructure services for a broad spectrum of Government, commercial, and academic 

users and serving as one of multiple consumers of LEO launch, on-orbit, and 

return services; 

• Whether NASA has been able to reduce the cost of operating the ISS. 

ISS Transition Strategy 

Given the above ISS Transition Principles and the projected state of LEO in the 

mid-2020s, NASA intends to implement a transition strategy that builds upon the 

strengths of the projected U.S. position in LEO, and to mitigate the uncertainties. 

NASA intends to begin shifting responsibility for meeting its needs and requirements in LEO to the private sector by leveraging private industry capacity, innovation, and competitiveness. This will offer the prospect of lower cost to the Government to enable NASA to apply more personnel and budget resources on expanding 

human spaceflight beyond LEO and expanding U.S. leadership in human spaceflight 

around the world. Among the benefits beyond the prospect of lower operational costs 

for a LEO platform, shifting focus to industry can additionally reduce the infrastructure burden on NASA as already demonstrated at NASA facilities at KSC, JSC, 

Stennis, and MAF. 

In order to ensure that private industry is prepared to provide the services and 

capabilities that support NASA’s needs in LEO, as outlined in the key principles 

above, and to enable private industry to develop markets and customers beyond the 

Government, NASA is proposing the following approach: 

1. Begin a step-wise transition of ISS operations from a Government-directed activity to a model where private industry is responsible for planning how to 

meet and execute NASA’s requirements. Consistent with the ISS Transition 

Principles, this does not mean NASA is ‘‘commercializing the ISS.’’ Instead, 

NASA maintains leadership and governing responsibilities as outlined in the 

Partnership agreements, and continues to maintain the essential elements of 

46 

human spaceflight such as astronaut safety and the high-risk exploration systems. 

In order to incentivize private industry and to effect the transformation of 

NASA’s responsibilities, NASA is proposing that this transition of ISS execution responsibility to private industry be essentially complete by 2025. This 

will give NASA time to engage with industry to begin transforming the many 

NASA-directed activities that are currently performed through several contracts into more of a public-private partnership model where NASA’s current 

responsibilities are executed and managed by private industry. This time period will also provide ample opportunity for NASA and private industry to engage with stakeholders and to only proceed when industry has matured and 

is capable of the responsibility to execute NASA’s requirements. The transition 

of ISS will ensure that there are private companies with the experience and 

expertise to operate platforms in LEO by the mid-2020s. 

In FY 2018 NASA will begin to develop this strategy. 

Also, in FY 2018 NASA intends to solicit inputs from private industry regarding interest in planning and executing the day-to-day ISS operations. 

Consultations with the ISS partners and stakeholders are essential to developing an implementation strategy that could result in the day-to-day execution 

of the ISS being performed by private industry by 2025. 

Additionally, in support of enabling further development of commercial market-driven activities onboard the ISS and its commercial cargo and crew systems, NASA is developing a commercial use policy for ISS resources including 

crew time, up-and down-mass, and crew rotation opportunities. This policy addresses private activities, such as tourism, private professional astronauts, 

marketing, and advertising that are outside the scope of the National Laboratory statutory activities such as education and research activities, and where 

there are legal, policy, regulatory or contractual gaps in NASA’s ability to participate in such activities, even only as part of a transitional role to enable a 

LEO marketplace. A draft of this policy will be provided to our International 

Partners and also be made available for industry comment in FY 2018. 

Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, NASA will continue discussions 

with the ISS International Partners to help shape the future of the ISS platform and LEO after 2024. 

2. Solicit information from industry on the development and operations of private 

on-orbit modules and/or platforms and other capabilities that NASA could utilize to meet its long-term LEO requirements that are consistent with the ISS 

Transition Principles. NASA will begin with a solicitation in FY 2018 to gather 

broad input on industry interest in meeting NASA’s long-term needs and requirements that could lead to one or more awards in FY 2019 funded by the 

Commercial LEO Development program. The scope of the solicitation will include modules or elements that could either be attached to the ISS or be freeflying. The solicitation will offer funded and non-funded opportunities as well 

as asking what Government services or capabilities industry is interested in. 

The solicitation will also request inputs on the relative merits of Governmentprovided funds vs. no funding. The result of this solicitation could result in 

NASA purchasing services and/or capabilities in the mid-2020s. 

Throughout this approach, NASA will also be requesting market analysis and 

business plans from private industry in order to gauge the depth of possible commercial markets as they apply to industry’s ability to meet NASA’s and other customers’ needs and objectives with a base where NASA is only one of many customers. This approach is also dependent on NASA identifying our long-term requirements for LEO; which are highlighted in Section 4.1. 

Additional Transition Activities 

There are additional activities that NASA plans to execute in the near future that 

expand the enabling of a LEO commercial market, enable increased international 

cooperation beyond the current Partnership activities, help define a broader Government role in the development of a commercial market in LEO, and expand the role 

of other Government agencies in utilizing the ISS and other platforms in their research and development activities. Some of the activities include: 

Enabling a LEO Commercial Market 

Allowing private industry use of ISS resources and crew and cargo transportation for commercial for-profit activities – Offering on a competitive basis spare 

ISS resources, including crew time, commercial crew seats on NASA missions, 

47 

cargo transportation, and other resources for commercial for-profit activities. 

NASA is currently developing a commercial use policy for ISS resources including crew time, up-and down-mass, and crew rotation opportunities. This policy 

will address private activities that are outside the scope of the National Laboratory statutory activities such as educational and research activities. A draft of 

this policy will be provided for industry comment following consultation with 

intergovernmental stakeholders and ISS International Partners. 

Global Leadership 

• Offering targeted crew opportunities to foreign nationals – Based on broader national foreign policy objectives, invite targeted non-ISS Partner countries to join 

ISS missions in LEO on a one-time basis or long-term strategic basis. In accordance with the IGA and MOUs, NASA could offer existing seat opportunities 

aboard commercial crew transportation vehicles already on contract with NASA 

or expand the ISS crew for short durations. NASA would work to ensure that 

any such activities do not undercut any U.S. commercially-offered services. 

• Offering targeted research and utilization opportunities to foreign countries beyond the ISS Partners – In accordance with the IGA and MOUs, NASA could 

offer additional opportunities to targeted non-ISS Partner countries that would 

benefit U.S. strategic scientific and technology leadership in many disciplines. 

These opportunities could be realized on the ISS or on new commercial platforms. 

• Building on the existing ISS partnership as a stepping stone to human space 

flight activities beyond LEO – Under strong U.S. leadership, the resiliency of 

the international partnership, involving the harmonization and effective integration of over a dozen different political systems, budgetary mechanisms, and 

cultural, management, and industrial approaches, has laid the foundation for 

exploring beyond LEO. It demonstrates every day how numerous countries can 

work together to design, build, safely operate, and maintain large, complex 

space systems. As we consider the future of ISS and prepare for human missions of exploration into deep space, it is important to reflect on the critical 

value of the proven partnership that has made the ISS possible, and to consider 

how to build on these relationships. The ISS partner agencies depend on the 

U.S. to lead in human spaceflight, both in LEO and beyond. 

Government Role in the Development of a LEO Commercial Market 

With the objective of a sustained U.S. commercial LEO marketplace where NASA 

is one of many customers, NASA is executing a broad effort to address the policy 

and regulatory environment, development of capable private industry suppliers, and 

development of a demand for LEO services across broad areas of the economy. A 

main part of this effort will be successful execution of Commercial LEO Development program activities with private industry, which will focus on enabling, developing, and deploying commercial orbital platforms. This effort is expanded upon in 

Section 4.1. Working across Government agencies is among the efforts that NASA 

is pursuing. 

• Participate in a multi-agency working group among NASA, the Department of 

Transportation, and the Department of Commerce, and others to identify specific 

actions or legislation that would further the development of a commercial market 

in LEO – The development of a commercial market has not been a traditional 

NASA policy objective. Though NASA for many years has supported the National aerospace industrial base, it is not well-equipped in the policy and regulatory fields that are the responsibility of other Government agencies. As the 

development of a commercial market in LEO is a long-term national goal, 

NASA recommends that a multi-agency working group be formed to address the 

policy, rules and regulations, and legislative actions that would be necessary to 

enable a market in LEO. Participation in such a multi-agency activity has also 

been endorsed by the National Space Council in March 2018: 

At the request of the Vice President, the Acting Administrator of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration Robert Lightfoot agreed to work with the 

Secretaries of State, Commerce, and other interested members to develop a strategy for how we can further enable cooperation with our international and private 

industry partners to continue to develop the infrastructure and policies necessary 

to spur economic growth in space. This strategy will be reported out at the fall 

council meeting. 

48 

Expanding the Role of Government Agencies in LEO Research and Utilization 

• Initiate a government wide policy to access research needs for LEO platforms like 

the ISS across agencies such as NSF, NIH, NIST and others. The assessment 

could be conducted in cooperation with the National Academies as NASA currently does – LEO platforms like ISS offer unique on-orbit science and technology development capabilities that can benefit Government-wide research beyond the NASA mission. 

The National Lab, through CASIS, is working with other Government agencies 

to conduct research onboard the ISS that is based on limited objectives. Several 

of their experiments are already onboard the ISS, and more are planned. However, if the Nation is intent on funding the capability to perform research in 

LEO for many years to come, it would be prudent to initiate a broader Government activity to establish long-term Government research that would benefit 

the Nation. 

ISS Considerations and the Eventual Future of the ISS Platform 

Clarity regarding plans for the ISS and exploration would be beneficial for 

NASA’s ISS International Partners as well. There are common themes across the 

partnership in considering the future of ISS and exploration, such as: 

• Reducing operational costs; 

• Offering frequent visible national astronaut opportunities; 

• Continuation and continuity of research and technology development activities; 

• Balancing LEO and exploration; 

• Maturation of commercial opportunities. 

The eventual future of the ISS, whether it is transitioning the operations of the 

ISS platform to private industry, augmenting it with privately developed modules, 

combining portions of the ISS with a new private platform, or deploying a new freeflying platform and de-orbiting the ISS, should be evaluated against such considerations as: 

• Whether alternative platforms for conducting necessary NASA research and 

technology development are available; 

• The cost of continuing ISS and the cost of enabling the development of new capabilities that could meet NASA’s long-term LEO needs and the needs of others; 

• The interest among NASA’s International Partners to extend, change, or terminate the existing ISS Partnership; 

• NASA’s strategic human spaceflight leadership; 

• The potential for different management approaches for the ISS to reduce its operating costs; 

• Changes to the current assessment of the technical feasibility of extending the 

platform beyond 2024; 

• The demand outside of NASA in private industry and other Government agencies for LEO research and technology development capabilities; 

• The amount of time required for ISS maintenance vs. research time; and 

• The ability to add additional international participants, including distributing 

costs among a wider base. 

From a structural integrity analysis standpoint, the ISS platform has significant 

structural life well beyond 2028 (based on the current assessment period). Many of 

the ISS modules, particularly the modules launched in the later years of ISS assembly, are likely to have structural life well into the 2030s (see section 4.4). 

These considerations should also be taken into account within the broader national policy questions concerning the importance of an ongoing U.S. human presence in LEO, the foreign policy value of international collaboration in space exploration, and the role of the U.S. Government in that ongoing presence. 

NASA believes that with the transition approach and near-term activities outlined 

here, the U.S. will be well positioned in the mid-2020s to continue to be the global 

leader in human spaceflight, space research and technology development, and will 

continue to expand commercial markets that directly benefits the U.S. 

This approach will put in place the necessary private industry and Government 

capabilities and activities that will allow for the ISS Transition Principles to be continued to be met through a smooth and uninterrupted process and to facilitate a 

graceful and predictable logical end to the ISS on-orbit platform in the future. 

49 

4.0: MAJOR ELEMENTS OF TRANSITION

The following sections highlight several of the major elements of ISS Transition 

that shape current ISS operations and utilization, as well as the ISS Partnership, 

and the future of the ISS and LEO. 

4.1: NASA’S LONG-TERM LEO REQUIREMENTS

Consistent with the ISS Transition Principles, NASA’s exploration strategy and 

the U.S. Government’s obligation under the International Partner agreements, 

NASA has developed the following long-term LEO requirements that are meant to 

be part of a broader commercial market in LEO where NASA is one of many customers. 

Expanding our International Partnerships 

With the expectation that NASA will leverage the ISS International Partnerships 

to expand the U.S. leadership in space from LEO to the Moon and eventually to 

Mars, it is vital that NASA continue to meet U.S. obligations under the ISS agreements. Additionally, given the expected geopolitical environment in LEO in the mid2020s, and to expand the U.S. leadership position beyond the current ISS International Partners, NASA intends to support relationships with other space agencies 

and/or nations that share NASA’s goals in LEO and exploration. 

Regular LEO Crewed Operations, Including Short and Long Durations 

It will remain vital to NASA’s mission of exploration and discovery to continue 

regular crew rotations and operations in LEO. The demands and risks associated 

with deep space travel will require seasoned and experienced crews who are proficient in the rigors of human spaceflight as well as the operational experience of 

critical dynamic flight operations such as launches, vehicle proximity operations, 

docking, and extra-vehicular activity. LEO provides the only cost-effective and viable environment to gain the experience necessary to send crews into deep space. 

Additionally, NASA crews can be available to conduct research activities that are 

consistent with their exploration mission. It is expected that research could also be 

conducted by private or other Government agency professional astronauts in the future. 

Human Health and Habitation System Integrated Performance and Validation 

Human health and performance risks during spaceflight derive from five primary 

stressors: Altered Gravity, Hostile/Closed Environment, Isolation and Confinement, 

Radiation, and Distance From Earth. The impacts of these individual stressors on 

health and performance vary with both mission and vehicle design. 

Many years of health and performance monitoring coupled with dedicated research facilities and crew participation in LEO research experiments, especially 

aboard the Space Shuttle, Mir Station, and more recently ISS, have significantly improved our understanding of and ability to mitigate the risks associated with Altered Gravity and Hostile/Closed Environment. 

As currently planned onboard the ISS, NASA expects to conclude its Altered 

Gravity and Hostile/Closed Environment research and countermeasures development by 2024. In addition, NASA also expects to complete its long-duration habitation system/technology demonstrations by 2024 onboard the ISS including the life 

support system, environmental monitoring, and other systems. 

The other three individual stressors, Isolation and Confinement, Radiation, and 

Distance From Earth, will be very different from our current experience on ISS than 

during exploration missions, especially those beyond the Earth-Moon system. Combining the elements of spacecraft design and life support systems, with the expected 

time delay in communications on deep space missions, along with isolation and confinement of an actual on-orbit flight simulation is an essential element for validating countermeasures and integrated system/vehicle performance during long-duration deep space missions. Ideally, these simulations of up to a year in length 

would be conducted in deep space to also include the effects of radiation as well. 

However, it may be prudent from an access and overall integrated LEO and exploration strategy to begin these simulations in LEO where access is more readily 

available. These simulations can also be combined with other NASA requirements 

as described in this section. 

Long-Term Technology/System Development and Demonstrations 

In order to continue to be able to operate long-duration deep space systems that 

are reliable and functional on missions of one-to-three years in duration, NASA will 

require that the technology and systems that support human health and performance are ‘‘life’’ tested and have the ability to evolve in a real-life test bed environVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
50 

ment. This testbed environment is ideally suited for LEO and longer-duration crew 

rotations. The human-related systems such as life support and environmental monitoring will always remain critical to the NASA exploration mission as it is key to 

human spaceflight. 

Space Life and Physical Sciences Basic and Applied Research at Current Levels and 

Capabilities 

NASA will continue to require access to a LEO platform to enable exploration and 

to pioneer scientific discovery for and with other Government agencies, commercial 

companies, and international partners. NASA will continue to focus research in the 

highest value areas as guided by the National Academy of Sciences’ Decadal Survey 

and NASA exploration program needs. These areas include research in plant and 

microbial biology, animal and human biology, fundamental physics research, cryogenics and heat transfer, combustion research, and applied materials research, 

among others. 

The knowledge gained and the researchers trained through this effort will help 

develop the future commercial workforce and be the foundation of future generations of space technologies, as NASA expands human presence in space and uses 

this understanding of the behavior of biological and physical systems in space to expand human capabilities. 

National Laboratory-Based Research and Technology Development 

Just as other national laboratories, such as those run by the Department of Energy, have provided ongoing essential science and technology research assets to the 

nation, an ongoing microgravity national laboratory capability is needed for use by 

other Government agencies and academia. Some specific examples are: 

• The Department of Defense programmatic expansion of life sciences research, 

development for Regenerative Medicine and Living Foundries, and activities to 

advance technology readiness levels for advanced materials, advanced manufacturing, and laser communication initiatives. 

• The National Institutes of Health biomedical research focused on human physiology and disease such as recently-sponsored ‘‘tissue chips’’ (or ‘‘organs-onchips’’), that will help scientists develop and advance novel technologies to improve human health. Additional discussions with other NIH institutes and centers include the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institute of 

Aging (NIA), the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin 

Diseases (NIAMS), and the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB). 

• The National Science Foundation’s research in the physical sciences and biomedical systems. 

These and other Government agencies, as well as academic institutions, have 

broadened their engagement in microgravity research and applications, and are expected to have continued needs for a LEO research platform going forward. 

Opportunities for Astrophysics, Space, and Earth Science Research. 

The infrastructure for maintaining human presence in LEO for longer durations 

is well-suited to accommodating some investigations in the fields of astrophysics, 

space and Earth sciences. The power, heat rejection, communication, and scale of 

platforms that can accommodate humans can also accommodate exterior payloads 

with compatible requirements, given appropriate forethought in attachment sites 

and available payload services such as power and communication. This approach 

has been used now for several years onboard the ISS. This approach is also being 

applied to the Gateway in cislunar space. 

Conclusion 

In this post-2025 timeframe, these long-term requirements, while similar to that 

of the current ISS Program, could be met with various types of modules or platforms 

that do not necessitate a vehicle (or vehicles) as complex as the ISS. Many of the 

research activities could be conducted on shorter-duration platforms, similar to the 

Shuttle, or even crew-tended platforms. 

4.2: ENABLING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMERCIAL MARKET IN LEO 

NASA’s vision for LEO is a sustained U.S. commercial LEO human space flight 

marketplace where NASA is one of many customers. The vision includes one or 

more privately-owned/operated platforms—either human-tended or permanentlycrewed—and transportation capabilities for crew and cargo, that enable a variety of 

activities in LEO, where those platforms and capabilities are sustained primarily by 

51 

commercial revenue rather than relying on NASA and the U.S. Government as their 

main source of revenue as is the case today with the ISS. NASA must also communicate its forecasted needs in LEO to allow the private sector to anticipate that demand in their business cases. With this vision, NASA is able to share the cost of 

a LEO platform with other commercial, Government, and international users. This 

allows NASA to maximize its resources toward missions beyond LEO, while still 

having the ability to utilize LEO for its ongoing needs as described in Section 4.1. 

Since 2014, NASA has identified specific goals and initiated key activities to help 

enable the vision for a sustained LEO human space flight marketplace. This plan 

has evolved as the landscape has changed, informed by the challenges and progress 

highlighted above. 

Initiatives are organized into three main goal areas—policy, enabling commercial 

supply, and enabling demand. 

Policy and Regulatory Environment 

NASA will continue to support the National Space Council’s commercial space 

cross-agency planning. Although other Government agencies are utilizing the ISS 

National Lab to an increasing extent, NASA would like to facilitate a multi-agency 

decadal planning initiative for LEO research to further support future LEO platforms from Government users besides NASA. NASA will continue to assess marketplace needs to help facilitate the ability of companies to conduct business. Executing 

the transition planning for the ISS, along with instituting new commercial activities 

on the ISS, is important to provide expanded opportunities and certainty for companies proposing new commercial activities. 

Self-Sustaining Supply of Commercial LEO Services 

The development of a healthy commercial supplier base for LEO activities is critical to NASA’s plans. Today, the ISS is already enabling commercial cargo and crew 

transportation that industry is working to make more cost-effective in the future. 

Through initiatives such as the Research, Engineering, and Mission Integrated 

Services (REMIS) contract, NASA is transitioning from historically NASA-provided 

services for tasks such as payload integration to purchasing those services from a 

wide variety of commercial suppliers (see Section 4.2.1 for more on REMIS). NASA 

intends to continue to expand these types of commercial interactions, utilizing more 

commercial acquisition strategies, and enabling greater commercial use of ISS by offering its unique capabilities while providing Earth-similar laboratory capabilities 

that ultimately can be transitioned to other platforms. As a first step in enabling 

Earth-similar laboratory capabilities on ISS, NASA has provided state-of-the-art, 


516TRANS1.eps
52 

1FAA Commercial Space Transportation Forecast, https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ 

headquarters_offices/ast/reports_studies/forecasts/ 

real-time analytical capabilities, such as quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction 

(qPCR), utilized standard laboratory processing techniques, and enabled the crew to 

operate as partners through real-time space-to-ground discussions with the researchers. NASA and CASIS have identified a candidate list of additional hardware 

and data capabilities including: 

• Automated cell-culture hardware with commercial off-the-shelf microfluidic systems; 

• Cell-culture hardware with embedded sensors capable of providing information 

on cell physiology and health status, metabolic flux, or electrophysiological output; 

• Expanded capabilities for rodent research; 

• Expanded capabilities for additive manufacturing, tissue engineering, and biofabrication; 

• CubeLab capabilities, including heating and accommodation of chemical reactions; 

• Multi-material 3D printing facility, dedicated metal casting facility, and computer-controlled milling capability; 

• Self-contained, plug-and-play, remotely-operated printed circuit board and electronics facility enabling in-space manufacturing of conductive materials, biologic 

material, functional electronic components, sensors, and circuits. 

The final initiative in the supply category is to facilitate new commercial LEO 

platforms and services and transition NASA’s needs in LEO to those services once 

available. In 2016, NASA issued an RFI and received interest in utilizing available 

ISS ports and other unique capabilities for commercial activities from multiple companies. Since then, the Agency has been assessing the policy, programmatic, and 

technical impacts of implementing a commercial module on the ISS. Currently, 

NASA is planning to solicit input from industry for capabilities and services in LEO 

that could meet NASA’s needs as one of many customers. This could include a module on the ISS, free-flyers, or other related capabilities. 

Demand from Broad Sectors of the Economy 

The final and most critical goal area relates to the development of commercial 

markets and demand for LEO activities beyond the more ‘‘traditional’’ microgravity 

research and applications, into broad sectors of the economy. Unless this demand 

is expanded, future private LEO platforms will likely not be viable without significant ongoing Government support. It is necessary to maximize the value and impact 

of the ISS today to allow users to explore new microgravity applications and test 

markets, and communicate those success stories to stimulate broader interest in 

LEO from non-traditional space users. Finally, NASA must communicate its forecasted future needs for LEO (described in Section 4.1) so that private companies can 

incorporate expected NASA demand into their business cases. 

4.2.1: THE CURRENT LEO ENVIRONMENT

The following section will examine: (1) the current commercial LEO landscape; (2) 

the challenges and barriers to enabling greater commercial utilization and markets 

in LEO; (3) the potential commercial LEO markets; and (4) the Commercial LEO 

Development program. 

(1) The Current Commercial LEO Environment 

Today, NASA is supporting the development of a commercial space economy in 

LEO through public-private partnerships to include contracts, and other agreements 

centered around the ISS platform. Total launches to the ISS equate to 14 percent 

of the worldwide commercial launch market, with NASA’s commercial cargo 

launches representing 5 percent of total launches.1 NASA’s commercial crew partners, SpaceX and Boeing, have made significant progress toward returning crew 

launches to the United States by 2019. NASA’s commercial cargo partners, Orbital 

ATK and SpaceX, continue to provide reliable and increasingly timely cargo deliveries to ISS, and the Sierra Nevada Corporation has been added to the fleet under 

the Commercial Resupply Services-2 (CRS–2) contract. Some of these launch vehicles are now being used for non-NASA customers, and the crew and cargo spacecraft 

have the potential to support future commercial enterprises as well. 

53 

When NASA initiated the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) effort, the Agency was in need of U.S. cargo transportation systems for the ISS and 

the United States had lost almost all of the global market for commercial launch 

services. COTS successfully addressed both of these issues. NASA is currently purchasing commercial cargo transportation services to and from the ISS and NASA’s 

commercial partners’ cost-competitive launch systems have allowed the United 

States to regain global commercial launch leadership. Since 2005, the year NASA 

began working with its partners, the U.S. share of the commercial launch market 

has grown from 9 percent in 2006 to 52 percent in 2016 and continues to increase 

today. Enabling commercial cargo and payload launch services development through 

the public-private COTS partnership and the CRS contracts proved to be a benefit 

to NASA, with both companies—Orbital ATK and SpaceX—financing the majority 

of their development costs. During the COTS partnership, NASA contributed $396 

million toward development of SpaceX’s commercial cargo transportation systems 

(Dragon spacecraft and Falcon rocket), while SpaceX estimates contributing approximately $450 million. Likewise, NASA contributed $288 million towards the development of Orbital ATK’s (then Orbital Sciences) system (Cygnus spacecraft and Antares rocket), while Orbital ATK estimates their company contribution to be approximately $500 million. The COTS effort proved to be cost effective for NASA 

when compared to traditional development approaches. NASA compared SpaceX’s 

Falcon 9 launch vehicle development costs using the estimated costs of a traditional 

cost-reimbursement contract versus the COTS milestone-based effort. NASA’s models predicted that Falcon 9 development would cost the Government multiple times 

more using a cost-reimbursement acquisition. SpaceX has indicated that their Falcon 9 development costs were approximately $300 million. 

In addition to the cargo and crew transportation initiatives, NASA is leveraging 

the ISS to enable other commercial capabilities. As the demand for space research 

and development projects increases, numerous commercial companies are developing, operating, and maintaining their own commercial payload facilities on the 

ISS. These organizations operate their facilities internally and externally on Station 

and provide users with more choices to address unique research needs; they are the 

pathfinders for a marketplace in LEO. Many of these organizations have used their 

own resources to invest in on-orbit research and development facilities, reducing the 

risk for the Federal sector to develop these facilities and services. These companies 

find customers through CASIS and their own business development efforts to enable 

the research and development for customers CASIS has developed. When these companies are able to provide capabilities that meet NASA needs, the Agency may contract with them as one of potentially many customers utilizing their unique services. 

Currently, a number of companies are providing services on-orbit, including 

BioServe, Made In Space, NanoRacks, Space Tango, TechShot, and Teledyne Brown 

Engineering. 

Through the ISS Research, Engineering, Mission and Integration Services 

(REMIS) contract, NASA has begun to transition from a model where NASA provides its own payload integration, engineering development, and sustaining services 

to one where those services can be purchased from one of many commercial providers through a competitive process. This contract was developed to allow companies to slowly take over historically governmental functions in a step-wise manner 

using their commercial approaches to doing business. By allowing industry to take 

over these functions, companies will develop more efficient approaches that will be 

cheaper and further reduce the costs of doing business in space. 

The ISS National Lab, managed by CASIS, has been a key enabler of the expanded commercial use of LEO. Since 2011, more than 200 ISS National Laboratory 

research projects have been flown to the ISS—ranging from developing new drug 

therapies, to monitoring tropical cyclones, to improving equipment for first-responders on the ground, to producing unique fiber-optics materials. In the last several 

years, at least 50 percent of the ISS National Lab projects were new-to-space customers, and more than 50 percent involve commercial users (i.e., for-profit companies). The ISS National Lab is currently opening up the possibilities of the Station 

research environment to a diverse range of researchers, entrepreneurs, and 

innovators that could create entirely new markets in space. These areas include, but 

are not limited to, drug delivery systems, crop science, regenerative medicine, reaction chemistry, materials science, fluid dynamics and transport phenomena, on-orbit 

production and microgravity-enabled materials, protein crystal growth (also known 

as macromolecular crystal growth), Earth observation, and remote sensing. These 

activities are part of a young portfolio of non-NASA projects that are beginning to 

benefit from increased access to the ISS as well as shorter timeframes from project 

concept to implementation on the ISS. The ISS National Lab portfolio’s current positioning forecasts growth in the next ten years in areas such as cell and gene therVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
54 

apy, 3D bio-printing scaffolds, and aerospace projects using the LEO platform to 

raise technological readiness levels of next-generation LEO and beyond infrastructure systems. 

CASIS has developed a successful sponsored-program model that attracts thirdparty funding from private industry and other Government agencies to solve significant problems or address target challenges. Successful sponsored programs include 

those by Boeing/Mass Challenge, Massachusetts Life Sciences Center, NSF fluid dynamics and combustion, and NIH’s National Center for Advancing Translational 

Sciences (NCATS) Tissue Chips in Space program. The significance of this model is 

the shift from 100 percent NASA-funded projects to an ability to attract third-party 

funding. Time is needed for the private sector to develop and grow new markets and 

opportunities in LEO using the ISS and to be willing to invest greater amounts of 

capital into such efforts. 

These initiatives represent great progress toward enabling a commercial space 

economy around LEO; however, today the non-NASA market demand is not able to 

offset the costs without significant Government support. The next sections will discuss the ongoing challenges and projected commercial market landscape. 

(2) Challenges 

Through Requests for Information (RFIs) and other interactions since 2014, including workshops with external stakeholders (most recently in August 2017), industry has identified the following challenges and barriers to achieving the vision 

of a self-sustaining marketplace in LEO: 

Uncertainty Concerning Future Availability and Uses of ISS/LEO Platforms 

Industry needs a clear statement of U.S. policy and commitment regarding the 

creation and support of an economy in LEO. Industry wants to understand what 

NASA’s transition plan is for ISS and LEO beyond 2024. Companies need concrete 

assurances that they can plan activities in LEO beyond the ISS program, and that 

the U.S. Government is committed to being involved in a commercial replacement, 

including whether it is as a regulator and customer, or other role. 

Cost of Transportation/Access 

Today, the $1.7 billion annual cost of transportation to the ISS represents over 

half of the total ISS budget. NASA’s current policy of providing transportation for 

all payloads has been a significant incentive to attract new users to the platform. 

It is uncertain whether these and future users would be able to afford their own 

access costs. The U.S. commercial launch providers are continuing initiatives to 

lower costs through innovations including reuse of components; however, launch 

costs continue to be substantial. Access to affordable and reliable transportation also 

has broader implications, such as ability to operate and manage any such ISS/LEO 

platforms. 

Government Acceptance of the Premise that Commerce has Value 

ISS activities shouldn’t be limited to only those activities that are considered the 

‘‘best and highest’’ uses of the ISS National Laboratory. U.S. companies seek authorization to brand, advertise, promote tourism, and manufacture commercial products 

on government platforms like the ISS that otherwise have little intrinsic value from 

a national perspective. In the view of U.S. industry, commercial companies should 

be able to conduct business on ISS as long as those activities are safe, legal, and 

ethical. There also needs to be a discussion with the ISS International Partners on 

the implications of broadened use in order to ensure consensus and effective implementation. This is being addressed in the development of the ISS commercial use 

policy. 

Ability of Government Astronauts to Participate in Commercial Activities 

Appropriated funds limitations, absence of statutory promotion authority and Federal ethics rules affect the ability of Government employees to participate in certain 

commercial activities being sought by companies, especially where endorsement or 

advertising are involved. This limits the types of activities that can be performed 

and some private revenue-generating activities. NASA has received expressions of 

interest to enable these types of activities as a means to an end for development 

of a commercial LEO marketplace. 

Lack of Current Commercial Pricing Structure 

In order to transition to a more commercial model where commercial users pay 

for transportation and other services, NASA must develop a pricing structure for 

ISS services that does not exist today. 

55 

Flexibility in Contracting and Public/Private Partnership Agreement Mechanisms 

Industry sees funded Space Act Agreements and other non-Federal Acquisition 

Regulation agreement mechanisms as preferred options for stimulating a new commercial space capability and would like NASA to expand their use as part of any 

LEO commercialization efforts. 

Recognition of Intellectual Property (IP) Rights 

NASA and the Department of Energy are the two principal Federal agencies that, 

pursuant to statute, take title to contractor inventions made in performance of their 

duties under their contract (including recipients of cooperative agreements, like 

CASIS, and grants) [51 U.S.C. § 20135]. Today, this title-taking requirement is seen 

as a barrier to private industry seeking to participate with NASA in research and 

development activities on the ISS National Lab because NASA takes title to any inventions made by such entities in the course of work funded by NASA. 

In 2017 NASA improved the ability of private industry to retain title to their inventions. NASA granted a patent waiver (i.e., a ‘‘Class Waiver’’) that allows commercial institutions with user agreements to retain title to their inventions. Specifically, 

the waiver applies to CASIS’ user agreements with commercial institutions that: (1) 

receive access to the ISS National Lab under CASIS’ cooperative agreement with 

NASA, but (d) do not receive any NASA funds from CASIS under the user agreement. This change is reflected in the patent rights clause in CASIS’ cooperative 

agreement. NASA also ensured, through the data rights clause, that parties to user 

agreements receive unlimited rights to data produced under the agreement and 

need only share such data with the Government and CASIS in limited situations. 

It is anticipated that the patent waiver and revised data rights clause will spur 

greater interest in performing privately-funded research and development work on 

the ISS National Lab. 

In addition to NASA’s grant of the ‘‘Class Waiver,’’ the Agency has also sought 

a legislative proposal that would further maximize the intellectual property rights 

retained by ISS National Laboratory users. Although users may retain title to their 

inventions under the recently approved ‘‘Class Waiver,’’ the Government is still required under the Space Act to retain a license in such inventions for Government 

purposes. Therefore, while the U.S. Government purpose license does not permit any 

transfer of the inventions to commercial entities for commercial purposes, it continues to be identified by industry as a barrier to commercial research and development because of a fear that the license could result in their competitors gaining access to their sensitive and/or proprietary information. The proposed legislation 

would exempt in totality inventions arising from use of the ISS National Laboratory 

from NASA’s title taking authority under the Space Act. ISS National Laboratory 

users would thus have immediate and full ownership of their inventions without 

NASA and other Federal agencies utilizing those commercial inventions for their 

own programs and activities. NASA supports this legislative proposal as a means 

to facilitate greater use of ISS National Laboratory and LEO commercialization. 

(3) Potential markets 

As non-NASA utilization of the ISS National Lab and interest in LEO continues 

to expand, some initial assessments of potential revenue-producing activities have 

been conducted by CASIS, NASA, and the Science and Technology Policy Institute 

(STPI—see Section 4.3). Based on these preliminary assessments, the potential activities that could generate revenue for a crew-tended or permanently-crewed platform in LEO can generally be summarized in the following categories: 

• Human habitats as a destination for private space flight participants, including 

Government-sponsored astronauts from the United States and other Partner or 

non-Partner nations; 

• Activities supporting the satellite sector, such as on-orbit assembly of satellites; 

• Manufacturing products and services for use in space and on Earth; 

• Research and development, testing, and Earth observation; 

• Media, advertising, and education. 

Estimates for revenues from these activities vary widely depending on many assumptions—operating costs of the platform, revenue models, magnitude of forecasted demand, future transportation costs—making it difficult to make projections 

as to the viability of these or other potential markets that might emerge. 

These types of assessments will continue to be updated as markets and assumptions mature over time. Though NASA is seeing an increase in new users that suggests a promising trend, today’s projections conclude that it is unlikely that these 

activities will have matured to the point where they can sustain a private platform 

56 

and their own transportation costs to LEO by 2024 without significant ongoing Government support. 

(4) The Commercial LEO Development Program 

Through the proposed Commercial LEO Development program, NASA will support commercial partner development of capabilities that the private sector and 

NASA can use. Efforts will focus on enabling, developing, and deploying commercial 

orbital platforms and user demand capabilities, with a goal towards ensuring that 

the U.S. has access to an orbital platform on which to conduct research and develop 

new technologies. 

To achieve the Commercial LEO Development program’s goals, its initial activities 

may include studies on the transition of ISS and other platforms in LEO, risk reduction activities to begin the development of capabilities that could satisfy NASA’s 

needs in LEO, or the development of private platforms or modules attached to the 

ISS or free-flying in LEO. $150M has been requested in FY2019 for these activities. 

This mechanism will allow interested parties to specify what support they desire 

from NASA, what commercial opportunities they are pursuing, and viability of private industries business case. This could potentially include options such as: (a) access to a port on ISS; (b) access to NASA’s experience and capabilities through its 

unique workforce with expertise in the design, construction, launch, operations, and/ 

or utilization of orbital platforms; and (c) financial support provided through the 

Commercial LEO Development program. As a companion activity to this program, 

NASA will develop a policy that ensures that NASA or ISS National Laboratory activities do not compete with the capabilities provided by commercial LEO platforms. 

In the longer term, activities currently supported by NASA and the ISS National 

Laboratory could be fully transitioned onto these new platforms once available. The 

Commercial LEO Development program will allow private industry to experiment 

with commercial activities and demonstrate the viability of commercial human 

spaceflight activities. 

The Commercial LEO Development program will advance the Nation’s goals in 

LEO and exploration by furthering development and maturity of the commercial 

space market to enable private industry to assume roles that have been traditionally Government-only, and to potentially realize cost savings to the Government by 

leveraging private industry innovation and commercial market incentives. 

4.3: SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY INSTITUTE ANALYSIS

An initial assessment was conducted in 2017. 

The Science and Technology Policy Institute (STPI), under the direction of OSTP, 

conducted an initial assessment in 2017 of the viability of a private LEO platform. 

An executive summary of the full report (‘‘Market Analysis of a Privately Owned 

and Operated Space Station,’’ by Keith W. Crane, Benjamin A. Corbin, Bhavya Lal, 

Reina S. Buenconsejo, Danielle Piskorz, Annalisa L. Weigel, February 2018) follows: 

The Administration has set the goal of transitioning the International Space Station (ISS) to a model where NASA is one of many customers of a non-governmental 

enterprise that owns and operates a human-tended space station in low Earth orbit 

(LEO). This transition poses important questions about continued U.S. human presence in LEO. Is the private sector likely to take over and run ISS on a commercial 

basis? Or will governments, including that of the United States, continue to be the 

primary owners, operators, and customers for space stations? The purpose of this 

evaluation is to determine whether a future (i.e., 2025 and beyond) private space station could generate sufficient revenues from a variety of possible activities to cover 

the operations and capital costs of such an endeavor. 

Methodology 

We assumed that a private space station would be wholly owned and operated by 

private parties who would decide the station’s capabilities, the markets it would 

serve, and the prices it would charge for its services. We identified revenue-generating 

activities, envisioning the station as an industrial park in space where entities rent 

parts of the station for their activities. We then generated ‘‘high’’ and ‘‘low’’ estimates 

of revenues that the space station could earn by leasing space or providing services 

in support of these activities, corresponding to different sets of revenue-driving assumptions, although neither should be considered a strict lower or upper bound. We 

generated these estimates using inputs from interviews with over 70 experts, by examining current ISS activities, and by drawing on other sources to determine likely 

market size in order to develop separate cost methodologies for each posited activity. 

The analysis has had to incorporate a number of cost assumptions for the 2025 

and beyond timeframe. Some of the most critical of these are: cost of launching an 

57 

astronaut, about $20 million; encapsulated cargo, about $20,000 per kilogram (kg); 

and propellant transport, $5,000 per kg. These represent considerable savings over 

market prices when research for this project was conducted, between May and October 2016. 

Potential Private Space Station Activities and Revenue Streams 

STPI identified 21 separate types of activities that could generate revenues on a 

private LEO space station. These fell into five broad categories: (1) Habitats for space 

flight participants or government astronauts, (2) activities supporting the satellite 

sector, especially on-orbit assembly of satellites, (3) manufacturing products and services for use in space and on Earth, (4) research and development (R&D), testing, and 

Earth observation, and (5) Media, advertising, and education. 

The ‘‘low’’ estimate for total annualized revenues from activities conducted on a 

space station is about $460 million, and the ‘‘high’’ estimate is roughly $1.2 billion. 

Manufacturing in space is the largest contributor to overall revenues, accounting for 

nearly 35 percent of the ‘‘high’’ estimate and more than half of the ‘‘low’’. Potentially 

profitable manufacturing of exotic optical fibers drive these revenues. Revenue from 

satellite support is 30 percent of total revenues in the ‘‘high’’ estimate. 

The large difference between the ‘‘high’’ and ‘‘low’’ estimates reflects the highly tentative nature of the cost estimates. Our methodology ruled out products and services 

such as growing human organs in space that we believe are more than a decade 

away from reality. Other challenges make our projections particularly uncertain, 

such as competition from other nations, new technology developments that negate the 

need for production in microgravity, and uncertain market growth patterns. While 

the projections are per force speculative, they do provide empirically-based assessments of almost all of the activities that have been discussed as potential revenue 

sources for a privately owned and operated space station. 

Private Space Station Potential Costs and Net Profits 

We next examined general types of space station configurations to determine ones 

that might best generate revenues. We developed cost estimates for a station constructed from ISS-heritage modules and one constructed from expandable modules. 

We also used a publicly available estimate of the costs of a Skylab-like station as 

a benchmark. There are three elements in the breakdown of the annual cost estimate: 

(1) the costs of designing and constructing the station (amortized over 10 years), (2) 

costs of operations, and (3) costs to the station owner of transporting their astronaut 

employees to and from the station and resupplying them. Given the lack of consensus 

among our interviewees, we generated a low and a high estimate for operations costs. 


516TRANS2.eps
58 

Neither estimate of annual revenues covers the estimate of annualized costs for the 

expensive benchmark station. Out of the four boundary scenarios, only in the highrevenue low-cost estimate would the station be profitable, as shown in the diagram 

below. Venture capitalists interviewed for the project noted that the projections of revenues and costs are so uncertain that they would have little interest in financing a 

space station until projected revenues show signs of actually materializing. 

A sensitivity analysis on the results showed launch costs to be the major driver of 

both revenues and costs. If launch costs were cut in half, either as a result of a technology breakthrough or a government subsidy, the estimates of revenues for the lowcost station would increase by 23 to 53 percent, for the ‘‘high’’- and ‘‘low’’ scenarios, 

respectively, and costs would decrease by 16 percent. If the government subsidizes 

launch costs entirely, revenues for a low-cost private space station would go up by 

46 to 106 percent, for the ‘‘high’’- and ‘‘low’’ scenarios, respectively, and costs would 

decrease by 33 percent. 

Federal Government Participation in the Private Space Station Market 

The Federal Government may wish to plan in advance about how it would engage 

in the emergence of a private space station or space stations, to potentially reduce 

market, financing, regulatory, policy, and technology risks to operators and their inVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE

516TRANS3.eps 516TRANS4.eps
59 

vestors. Options that could be used separately or together to assemble a strategy for 

government participation include: 

• Early stage investment through a public-private partnership: A private 

space station is inherently risky. The U.S. Government can participate as an investor in a public-private partnership with a space station owner and operator 

to ensure that the project comes to fruition and also to influence the design of 

the station to ensure that it fills NASA’s needs. The private partners need not 

be commercial entities; they could be a non-profit consortium of universities or 

other organizations with the ability to raise private funds. 

• Advance purchase or lease agreements: Through advance purchase agreements and advance long-term lease agreements for a private space station, the 

U.S. Government could provide an early customer commitment to secure a guarantee-of-service at more favorable conditions than purchases at market prices 

after the station is completed. These policy instruments shift the outlays of expenditures closer to the time of delivery of the product or service than would a 

direct investment in the station. 

• Direct purchases of space station services: The U.S. Government could 

choose to wait until a space station is completed and operating, then rent space 

for R&D or purchase other services provided by the station as needed. At that 

point in time, purchases of services would be at market prices that would likely 

be higher than prices provided for advance purchases. Services may also be subject to availability constraints; however, purchases on these conditions would 

offer the government flexibility, as the government would have made no commitment in advance to purchase services. 

4.4: UTILIZING THE ISS TO ENABLE HUMAN EXPLORATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM

Through its Exploration Campaign, NASA will lead an innovative and sustainable 

program of human and robotic exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system, and to bring new knowledge and opportunities back to Earth. Beginning with missions beyond LEO, the 

U.S. will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations. The delivery 

and return of astronauts and cargo to and from ISS is measured in hours, but any 

journey to Mars will take many months each way, and early return is not an option. 

Deep space crewed missions will not have regular access to the Earth’s resources 

or the ability to rapidly return to Earth if a system fails. This is an entirely different operating regime, not just for physical access but also for communications 

with Earth-based teams. Astronauts in deep space must be more self-reliant and 

spacecraft systems and operations must be more automated to operate safely. Habitation systems must become more efficient and more reliable for safe, healthy, and 

sustainable human exploration. Furthermore, crews must be protected from the 

unique hazardous environments of deep space. Some deep space systems may have 

to remain dormant for years in preparation for crew, and must remain in operational order. Overcoming these challenges will be essential for deep space exploration. 

The Agency has developed a phased approach for deep space exploration, starting 

with ISS and progressing to cislunar space, the lunar surface, then to Mars and beyond. NASA is already well underway in executing this approach. Aboard the ISS, 

NASA and its partners are conducting targeted research to improve understanding 

of how humans adapt and function during long-duration space travel. Current and 

planned risk-reducing investigations include bone and muscle loss studies, understanding the effects of intracranial pressure changes and fluid shifts, monitoring immune function and cardiovascular health, conducting nutritional studies, and validating exercise protocols. With these studies, NASA explores the physiology of the 

human body, preparing for long-duration spaceflight and supporting development of 

terrestrial drugs and therapeutic practices. NASA and its partners’ activities on the 

ISS are achieving key milestones and enabling an expansion to early pioneering 

missions in cislunar space. 

On ISS over the coming years, NASA will also demonstrate many of the capabilities needed to maintain a healthy and productive crew in deep space. Currently 

manifested or planned experiments and demonstrations include improved long-duration life support, improved environmental monitoring technologies, advanced fire 

safety equipment, next-generation spacesuit technologies, advanced avionics and autonomy, high-data-rate communications and precision navigation, in-space additive 

manufacturing, advanced exercise and medical equipment, and radiation monitoring 

and shielding. 

60 

Specific systems and capabilities under development on ISS include: 

Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) and Environmental 

Monitoring Leveraging the ISS, NASA is focused on demonstrating advanced capabilities for robust and reliable ECLSS, which must operate for up to 1,100 days with 

minimal spares and consumables. Water and oxygen for human exploration in deep 

space will need to be launched with the crew, recycled from the spacecraft’s atmosphere and astronauts’ waste, or made using the resources of the destination—such 

as water ice on Mars. Missions into deep space will not have Station’s resupply capability, so improvements to recycling processes and technologies are needed to fly 

long-duration missions. The Station’s current system recycles about 90 percent of 

the water and about 47 percent of the oxygen in the spacecraft while disposing of 

the crew’s solid waste and the briny liquid waste left over from recycling. Regular 

resupply missions to the orbiting outpost supplement the unrecovered water and oxygen and provide replacement components for those that fail on the system. 

To reach a water recovery goal of 98 percent, for example (in comparison with ISS’ 

current recovery capability of approximately 90 percent), NASA will test new technology to reclaim additional water from the urine brine and process for reuse. NASA 

is also planning upgrades to improve the water recovery system reliability and reduce maintenance, including an improved catalyst for the water processing assembly. 

To reach a goal of greater than 75 percent recycled oxygen for deep space missions, NASA is investigating methods that involve the reaction of hydrogen and carbon dioxide to produce solid carbon and water, or acetylene and water. These candidate technologies go beyond the current system on the Station that reacts carbon 

dioxide and hydrogen to produce methane and water, and would increase oxygen recovery to between 75 and 100 percent. The resulting water is split into breathable 

oxygen for the crew by the oxygen generation system, and the hydrogen is recycled 

back to react with more carbon dioxide. 

Methods to manage and reduce metabolic and non-metabolic solid waste will also 

be demonstrated on ISS. A new Universal Waste Management System (UWMS) will 

be added to the current Russian commode. Technologies to compact, stabilize, and 

recover useful resources from trash, methods to repurpose logistical packing materials such as cargo bags and foam, and a simple laundry system will also be demonstrated. 

Over the next five years, NASA will install a series of exploration ECLSS demonstrations on ISS, culminating in an integrated demonstration of an exploration 

ECLSS system on the Station for two to three years to prove reliability. Additionally, ISS will conduct demonstrations of Environmental Monitoring systems that detect potentially hazardous materials in the atmosphere and water as well as combustion products. This will enable a transition away from sample return to fully onorbit environmental monitoring. 

61 

Communications and Navigation 

Currently, Mars robotic rovers have data rates around two million bits per second, 

using a relay, such as the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Transmission from the ISS 

is two orders of magnitude faster, at a rate of 300 million bits per second. Future 

human Mars missions may need up to a billion bits per second at a range many 

times greater than the distance to ISS, requiring laser-based communications, in addition to radio, to reduce weight and power. In addition, disruption and error-tolerant interplanetary networking and improved navigation capabilities are required to 

ensure accurate trajectories and precision landing. The Neutron-star Interior Composition Explorer/Station Explorer for X-ray Timing and Navigation Technology 

(NICER/SEXTANT), installed on ISS in June 2017, is one such capability that will 

enable improved navigation. It will test—for the first time in space—technology that 

relies on pulsars as navigational beacons. The technique may eventually guide 

human exploration to the distant reaches of the solar system and beyond. Additional 

details on communications and navigation technology will be included in the Space 

Communications plan (called for in Section 304(a) of the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017) to be provided to Congress in spring of 2018. 

Advanced Avionics, Software, and Autonomy 

In order to support extended human exploration to the Moon and beyond, a more 

integrated and autonomous vehicle will be needed, requiring more advanced avionics (computers, memory, networking, and software). As these systems and associated architecture are developed, systems will be flown on ISS to test and verify the 

capabilities in space. The advanced avionics will also be used to connect other new 

systems (e.g., ECLSS, or power), such as the Lunar Gateway and future interplanetary vehicles. 

Future vehicles will need to operate with no crew and limited ground control. To 

achieve this, more comprehensive and advanced autonomous systems, including vehicle health monitoring and reconfiguration, need to be developed and tested. The 

ISS will serve as a testbed for these systems. Initially, new autonomous system 

technology is being tested using existing ISS computers. As these advanced avionics 

architectures and systems are developed, the enhanced computing capability will be 

used to test and verify more advanced autonomous operations. In addition, the crew 

will need more advanced tools to assist them, such as planning assistants and augmented reality for troubleshooting and maintenance. As these are being developed, 

they will be tested on ISS to ensure they provide the astronauts with the required 

capabilities. Early versions of some of these tools are being tested on ISS now; this 

will grow in number and complexity as NASA develops more comprehensive or diverse tools and some of these will require the advanced avionics. 


516TRANS5.eps
62 

Exploration Extravehicular Activity 

Human explorers will require deep space exploration Extravehicular Activity 

(EVA) suits for use in cislunar space and beyond. Such suits must be available to 

provide for exploration of deep space destinations and environments, and for contingency EVAs in transit. The environments and logistics demand a different design 

solution than met by the current flight suit. New EVA systems must supply basic 

biological needs during spacewalks, provide protection from hostile environments, 

and enable comfort, flexibility, and dexterity to support human exploration and investigation of new worlds. Advanced space suit design, manufacture, and operation 

must address a wide range of considerations NASA has identified in recent years. 

For example, advanced space suits will operate at higher suit pressures to reduce 

EVA prebreathe and risk of decompression sickness. Filling consumables at higher 

pressures reduces the need to return exploration suits to Earth for servicing after 

contingency events have drained secondary oxygen tanks. High pressure oxygen 

generation systems will be demonstrated on ISS to address this requirement. Nearterm planned EVA technology demonstrations on ISS include testing to advance the 

technology readiness level of the Solid Water Membrane Evaporation (SWME) system to provide cooling for the next-generation spacesuit. More details on the challenges associated with EVA in deep space environments and NASA’s planned EVA 

capability development efforts can be found in the Advanced Suit Capability Plan 

provided to Congress in June 2017. 

Fire Safety 

Whether traveling through interplanetary space or on the surface of another planet, the habitat must detect and stop a fire while protecting the crew, and sustaining 

only minimal, if any, damage. Current systems onboard ISS rely upon large carbon 

dioxide suppressant tanks and have no fire cleanup capability other than depressurizing and re-pressurizing the cabin atmosphere. Deep space exploration systems require a unified fire safety approach that works across small and large architecture 

elements. 

Early detection is key to protecting the crew and vehicle. The ISS uses smoke detectors to spot the presence of any potential fire-initiated problems. Advanced smoke 

detectors—about the size of a small tissue box—are under development for NASA’s 

Orion spacecraft and eventual deep space habitats. They will be placed in the vehicle’s ventilation system and if a fire is detected, the spacecraft’s fire suppression systems will extinguish it. Additionally, a non-toxic portable fire extinguisher is being 

developed and tested on ISS to provide additional fire suppression capability. 

The real danger to astronauts is not necessarily fire itself but the gases produced 

during combustion, including carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen fluoride, 

hydrogen cyanide, and hydrogen chloride. NASA is developing a filtering cartridge 

dubbed the ‘‘smoke-eater’’ to neutralize and remove these compounds. The smokeeater will be used in the spacecraft’s atmospheric cleanup system, and a smaller 

version will be used in an emergency crew mask that contains its own air supply. 

Demonstrations of the unit will occur during the Spacecraft Fire Experiment 

(SAFFIRE) series of investigations that NASA has been executing aboard Orbital 

ATK’s Cygnus vehicles after they depart the ISS. Through these experiments, NASA 

will gather valuable data on how combustion gas and fire dangers spread in a spacecraft and how the vehicle’s detection, suppression, and cleanup technologies respond. Computer models will be developed from that data, enabling prediction of 

how the fire will propagate in a spacecraft and how the cleanup will go. 

Crew Health and Performance 

Long-duration exploration-class human missions, including Mars-duration missions of up to 1,100 days, introduce new and increased concerns for human safety, 

health, and performance. NASA is conducting scientific research needed to supply 

the evidence base for both technological and operational countermeasures to best address these risks. Human research on ISS includes assessments of devices, 

consumables/logistics, and operational procedures for the use of these capabilities in 

a representative microgravity environment in order to supply appropriate solutions 

to meet the health, safety, and performance challenges of long-duration exploration 

class missions. Technological and operational interventions and countermeasures 

that mitigate risk for long duration, exploration class missions include those which 

(i) optimize adaptation of the individual and crew to the space environment, and 

maintain emotional well-being, motivation, social cohesion, communication, morale, 

and productivity; (ii) support prevention, monitoring, diagnosis, treatment, and long 

term management of crew in-flight health conditions; including those induced or exacerbated by mission characteristics e.g., microgravity and radiation influenced conditions, and long-duration confinement with limited communications beyond the 

63 

crew; and, (iii) ensure that the habitat environment design, its ambient environment, architectural affordances, and crew information and communication technologies support task performance requirements and general safety and habitability 

requirements for crew. 

The Integrated Path to Risk Reduction (iPRR) displays the long-range, strategic 

research plan and schedule and contains a top-level summary of all the risks to the 

human system, research tasks necessary to close the gaps in our knowledge of these 

risks the logical sequence and timing of significant tasks, milestones (such as gap 

closure), and completion of major deliverables. The current version of the iPRR is 

maintained at https://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov. A simplified version is 

shown below. 

Human Research on the ISS focuses on reducing the risks of health and performance problems in future exploration missions. Research is prioritized to maximize 

the productivity of ISS resources. 

Radiation Protection 

Outside the Earth’s magnetic field, crew and electronics are exposed to increased 

high-energy particles, including constant exposure to galactic cosmic rays and infrequent—but potentially deadly—solar particle events. These high-energy particles 

can reduce immune response, increase cancer risk, and interfere with electronics. 

NASA’s HRP is developing methods and technologies to protect, mitigate, and treat 

the effects of various types of radiation on the crew and their exploration systems. 

Installed on ISS in December 2016, the Fast Neutron Spectrometer (FNS) investigation studies a new neutron measurement technique that is better suited in the 

mixed radiation fields found in deep space. Future manned and exploration missions 

will benefit from clearer, more error-free measurement of the neutron flux present 

in an environment with multiple types of radiation. 

Logistics and In-Space Manufacturing 

Living in deep space away from the frequent resupply enjoyed by ISS crews will 

require NASA to reduce, recycle, reuse, and repurpose materials. NASA is investigating long-wearing clothing and laundry capabilities to replace the current practice of disposing of cotton clothing. The Agency is also investing in tools to repurpose 

packaging materials for use as feedstock for in-space manufacturing of items such 

as replacement parts, science equipment consumables, short-lifespan hygiene equipment, and other tools. NASA’s in-space manufacturing objective is to develop and 

test on-demand manufacturing capabilities for fabrication, repair, and recycling durVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE

516TRANS6.eps
64 

ing deep space exploration missions. NASA is leveraging the significant and rapidlyevolving terrestrial technologies for on-demand manufacturing, adapting technologies to the microgravity environment and operations. Technology demonstrations on board ISS will lead to development of an integrated ‘‘Fab Lab’’ facility with 

the capability to manufacture multi-material components (including metal tools and 

electronics), as well as automation of part inspection and removal that will be necessary for sustainable exploration opportunities. 

4.5: BENEFITS TO HUMANITY

The success of the ISS as a research platform is measured, in part, in traditional 

scientific terms such as number of scientists using the platform, number of experiments completed, and number of scientific publications and their impacts. With the 

completion of the U.S. On-orbit Segment (USOS) of ISS in 2011 and the installation 

of its planned suite of science instrumentation, the academic community has given 

research on the ISS a new priority. Participation in NASA solicitations for ISS research continues to grow, with proposals for research projects submitted by leading 

research universities across the United States. Data from previous experiments on 

the ISS is now available online for scientists to study. 

The scientific rationale for the use of ISS for research and the potential exploration and terrestrial benefits is outlined by the National Academies of Science in 

their 2011 decadal survey—‘‘Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and 

Physical Sciences Research for a New Era.’’ NASA has completed a midterm review 

with the National Academies of the implementation of this survey. Of special interest to the Nation are those areas where knowledge gained on the ISS goes beyond 

the scientific literature to have a direct impact on the lives of people here on Earth. 

All serve as examples of LEO platforms’ potential as a groundbreaking research facility. Through advancing the state of scientific knowledge of Earth, looking after 

human health, developing advanced technologies, and providing a space platform 

that fosters commercialization, these benefits will drive the legacy of Station as its 

research strengthens economies and enhances the quality of life here on Earth for 

all people. Below are some benefits that have come from ISS research in the area 

of human health, Earth observation, innovative technologies, and space commerce. 

Details of the highlights listed below are tracked in a triennial international publication, ISS Benefits for Humanity, currently in its 2nd edition, with a 3rd edition 

under development. 

Human Health 

Understanding the Acting Mechanism of Osteoporosis Treatments: Biotech and 

pharmaceutical companies are using mouse models during spaceflight as a medium 

to study their drugs and do preclinical work that is important for Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) approvals. Industry partner Amgen tested three drugs (two 

for bone loss, one for muscle atrophy) that were under development on Space Shuttle missions to ISS. One of these drugs was Prolia®, which came to market in 2011. 

CASIS has partnered with Novartis and Eli Lilly, who are also conducting research 

using mice on ISS as part of their development cycles for other drugs to treat muscle wasting and bone loss. 

New Drug for Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy in Clinical Trials: Japanese scientists, through JAXA, crystallized a human prostaglandin D2 synthase-inhibitor 

complex (H–PGDS/HQL–79 complex) on ISS, identifying an improved complex structure and an associated water molecule that was not previously known. The H–PGDS 

protein has been shown to play a critical role in the formation of Duchenne muscular dystrophy—the most prevalent genetic form of muscular dystrophy, impacting 

up to 1 in 3,000 boys globally. As a result of this discovery, a new drug was developed that was successfully tested in Phase 1 human clinical trials and is now being 

tested in Phase 2 clinical trials. 

Improving the Delivery of FDA-approved Immunotherapy: KEYTRUDA® is an 

FDA-approved drug from Merck that is a monoclonal antibody (a large biological 

molecule or biologic) used in cancer immunotherapy which was crystallized on ISS. 

Crystallizing the protein allows Merck scientists to understand how it functions to 

improve treatment for patients on Earth. Crystallizing these monoclonal antibodies 

enables a method for delivering large doses with injections, rather than intravenously, and improves methods for storing monoclonal antibodies for extended periods. 

Robotic Surgery Applications: The development and use of the robotic arm for 

space missions on the Space Shuttle and the ISS by CSA has led to the world’s first 

MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging)-compatible image-guided, computer-assisted device specifically designed for neurosurgery. This technology, called Irmis®, has also 

65 

been applied to develop the world’s first robot capable of performing surgery inside 

MRI machines. It is also being applied in the design of KidsArm (a sophisticated 

teleoperated surgical system designed to specifically to operate on small children 

and babies). The device is now being used to augment surgeons’ skills to perform 

neurosurgeries that are traditionally considered difficult or impossible, thus leading 

to better patient outcomes. 

Like Irmis®, the Image Guided Autonomous Robot (IGAR) was designed to work 

in conjunction with an MRI that is highly sensitive to early detection of suspicious 

breast lesions. It is being used in clinical trials right now to provide increased access, precision, and dexterity in placing the biopsy and ablation tools within 1mm 

of the lesion. 

Wound Treatment with Cold Plasma: Technology developed to study dusty plasmas—a mixture of small particles in the charged gases of a plasma—has led to new 

insights into this unusual type of matter. Understanding the modes and dynamics 

of this mixed form of matter helps researchers on the ground understand the antibacterial properties of cold plasmas and how to apply those fundamental discoveries 

to new technologies. Knowledge gained from this ESA-sponsored ISS research has 

been applied in Europe to develop a medical device called terraplasma GmbH for 

disinfecting wounds, neutralizing drug-resistant bacteria, and promoting improved 

wound healing time. 

Earth Observation and Space Science 

Measuring Cyclones from ISS: Atmospheric scientists at Visidyne, Inc. captured 

time-lapse images of tropical cyclones using automated and handheld cameras 

aimed through one of the portals on Station. This imagery is used to measure the 

heights and temperature of the cloud tops just outside the clear eye at the center 

of the storm, where the highest winds and most torrential rainfall are located. Combining these measurements with other data allows scientists to retrieve the storm’s 

central sea-level air pressure, which leads to more accurate prediction of the intensities (peak wind speeds) and paths of the storms before they hit land. It also provides an increased understanding of the eyewall replacement cycle. 

Monitoring the Earth’s Atmosphere: The Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment III (SAGE III) was launched to ISS in February 2017, and stands ready to 

follow in the footsteps of its predecessor facilities to capture atmospheric data that 

could contribute to long-term monitoring of ozone vertical profiles that inform international assessment activities of ozone depletion and climate change. The SAGE III 

instrument’s primary objective is to monitor the vertical distribution of aerosols, 

ozone, and other trace gases in the Earth’s stratosphere and troposphere to enhance 

understanding of ozone recovery and climate change processes in the stratosphere 

and upper troposphere. In the event of natural disasters, such as volcanic eruptions, 

these ISS-based observations and measurements assist decision makers and first responders in addressing public health and aviation impacts. 

Ocean Vector Winds: ISS-RapidScat, which operated from September 2014 until 

August 2016, was a scatterometer that measured wind speeds and direction over the 

ocean. These measurements were used in near-real time to improve weather forecast models, including storm events, used by the United States Navy, the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and by European and Indian scientists. 

Images from Space Station Aid in Disaster Response: The Station offers a unique 

vantage for observing the Earth’s ecosystems with both hands-on and automated 

equipment. Station crews can observe and collect camera images of unfolding events 

as they occur. They may also provide input to ground controllers for the programmed observations of the Station’s automated Earth-sensing systems. This flexibility is an advantage over sensors on unmanned spacecraft, especially when unexpected natural events such as volcanic eruptions and earthquakes occur. The full 

suite of ISS instrument sensors is informed of activations under the International 

Disaster Charter (IDC) so that images and data related to floods, droughts, and 

other events can be distributed to U.S. and international agencies responding to the 

crises. During FY 2017, ISS instruments received 45 IDC activations. 

Exploring the Universe: Humanity’s understanding of the universe is being expanded through experiments flown to the ISS. The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer 

(AMS), launched in 2011, is a multinational partnership led by the U.S. Department 

of Energy that is unlocking the secrets of dark matter. The Cosmic-Ray Energetics 

and Mass for the International Space Station (ISS–CREAM) was launched in 2017 

to learn how cosmic rays are accelerated to the tremendous energies—far beyond 

what is produced in particle accelerators here on Earth—at which they pass through 

the universe. The Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) studies the 

extraordinary physics of neutron stars, and may pave the way for a future GPS-like 

system for spacecraft navigation anywhere in the solar system. Today’s basic astroVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:52 Jan 07, 2025 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\57906.TXT JACKIE
66 

physics research aboard is advancing NASA’s strategic objectives in astrophysics 

and expanding humanity’s understanding of the universe. 

Innovative Technologies 

Medical Device Technology use Space-Validated Fluid Models: The Capillary Flow 

Experiments examined capillary flows in space and led to an understanding of how 

to make liquids behave and how to influence where the liquid goes using passive 

forces of wetting and surface tension. They also led to the first space-validated models describing fluid behavior in space. These models and measurements are now 

being applied to the design of a technology called the Human Emulation System. 

This ‘‘organ on chip’’ can be used for predicting human response to diseases, medicines, chemicals, and foods. 

Improving Semiconductors with Nanofibers: Research on the ISS led to the development of a two-dimensional nanofiber layer that can assemble by itself into a very 

tight, repeating pattern. This material layer was used as a template that can be 

traced like a blueprint to mark the processing surface of a semiconductor. This novel 

process can be useful in developing new motherboards and computers and in creating chemical catalysts for industrial processes. Nano-patterned surfaces can also 

be used to detect individual molecules, which may improve research on new drugs 

to treat human diseases. 

Technology Applications for Clean Water: Water recycling, oxygen generation, and 

carbon dioxide removal are critical technologies for reducing the logistics re-supply 

requirements for human spaceflight. This ISS demonstration project is applying lessons learned from operational experiences to next-generation technologies. The resin 

used in the ISS water processor assembly has been developed as a commercial water 

filtration solution for use in disaster and humanitarian relief zones in portable 

water filtration plants. The system has successfully provided clean water after natural disasters and in community development projects around the world. 

Space Commerce 

A Gateway to Space: A series of CubeSats—small satellites, each about the size 

of a loaf of bread—are delivered to ISS and jettisoned into orbit using the 

NanoRacks CubeSat Deployer (NRCSD) and JAXA’s Japanese Exposure ModuleSmall Satellite Orbiter Deployer (J–SSOD), from the Japanese Kibo module. These 

deployers provide a gateway to the extreme environment of space for Earth-and 

deep space observation. They are self-contained deployment systems that consist of 

rectangular launchers that deploy the small satellites to place them into orbit, and 

they have opened up new possibilities for U.S. Government organizations, commercial companies, and universities across the globe as a gateway to space. The satellites conduct a variety of studies, such as Earth observation, including studying 

weather patterns or monitoring the gaseous molecules in the atmosphere. More than 

180 CubeSats have been deployed from the Station. 

Growth of the U.S. National Laboratory 

The CASIS mission is to facilitate use of the ISS National Laboratory by academic 

researchers, other Government organizations, startups, small businesses, and major 

commercial companies. More than half of these projects launched in FY 2017 involved commercial entities that funded their research and development efforts to the 

ISS National Lab. They include several Fortune 500 companies including Merck, 

Proctor and Gamble, Eli Lilly, Hewlett Packard, and Boeing. In August 2017, Target 

and CASIS launched the ISS Cotton Sustainability Challenge to identify innovative 

ideas for the sustainability of cotton. In addition to these commercial entities, 

CASIS is sponsoring a protein crystal growth investigation led by the Michael J. Fox 

Foundation. This study optimizes crystallization of human protein kinase Leucinerich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2), which is a key signaling molecule in neurons and is 

tightly associated with the development of Parkinson’s disease. 

In addition, ISS National Lab projects funded by other U.S. Government agencies 

(i.e., non-NASA) continued to increase to include flight projects funded by the NIH’s 

NCATS as a part of its Tissue Chip for Drug Screening program; the NSF combustion and thermal transport research, and the Department of Defense (DoD) technology development and space test programs. 

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) 

NASA’s SBIR program leverages the Nation’s innovative small business community to support early-stage research and development in support of NASA’s mission 

in science, technology, human exploration, and aeronautics. This program provides 

the small business sector with an opportunity to compete for funding to develop 

67 

technology for NASA, and to commercialize that technology to spur economic 

growth. 

NASA hopes to incorporate SBIR-developed technologies into current and future 

systems to contribute to the expansion of humanity across the solar system while 

providing continued cost-effective ISS operations and utilization for its customers, 

with a high standard of safety, reliability, and affordability. Technology developed 

under the SBIR program is transforming NASA’s understanding of the complex 

issues regarding space exploration and revolutionizing technology that will deliver 

humans into the next stage of planetary exploration. 

Successful SBIR programs on ISS include: 

Techshot Bone Densitometer (Phase 3/$3,600,000): Techshot, Inc. (Greenville, IN) 

developed the first X-ray machine onboard the ISS. The bone densitometer is being 

used to study the bone density of rodents in microgravity. Bone loss is one of the 

primary challenges of long-duration spaceflight. The bone densitometer flew to the 

ISS in September 2014 onboard SpaceX CRS–4 and has been used in multiple rodent investigations so far, with plans for further use in upcoming investigations. 

Techshot Analytical Containment Transfer Tool (ACT2) (Phase 2e/$150,000): In 

2010, the Agency’s ability to analyze the DNA of biospecimens in space was more 

limited. Samples were collected, frozen, and analyzed post flight. Since return capsules didn’t yet exist, the samples had to be sent back to Earth with returning crew. 

In addition, separate tools were needed for collection and analysis, making the 

transfer of samples from the Space Shuttle to the laboratory a delicate process. The 

resulting ACT2 is a device that both contains and transfers samples in a safe manner from unique experiment-specific, spaceflight hardware to on-orbit analytical 

tools for real-time analysis. There is no need to send the sample back down to 

Earth, which was the previous protocol. NASA understood the ability to do this was 

a crucial step for performing in-flight analysis. It’s not only safer to use than the 

previous combination of tools, but because it is disposable, it is cost effective as well. 

The ACT2 flew to the ISS in February 2016 with SpaceX CRS–8. Recently, Techshot 

received a $9.5 million Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with 

NASA. Spanning five years, the agreement essentially is a menu of services and 

hardware, such as the ACT2, that the Agency can buy at pre-negotiated rates. 

Aurora Flight Sciences ISS Universal Battery Charging Station (Phase 2e/ 

$83,500; Phase 3/$167,000): Aurora Flight Sciences (Cambridge, MA) has developed 

a Universal Battery Charger (UBC) for use on the ISS capable of interfacing with 

the most commonly used batteries on board. This technology reduces the number 

of chargers and single-use batteries required on the ISS, reducing the cost of ISS 

operations and resupply logistics. The UBC flew to the ISS in February 2016 onboard SpaceX CRS–8. 

Orbital Technologies Corporation Zero-G Mass Measurement Device (ZGMMD) 

(Phase 2X/$300,000): Orbital Technologies Corporation (Madison, WI) developed the 

Zero-Gravity Mass Measurement Device to measure the mass of biological specimens (e.g., rodents and plants) in a microgravity environment. Knowing the mass 

of the biological specimen is integral to experimental manipulations (including anesthesia and drug doses). Once the hardware is flight-ready, it will be scheduled for 

launch to the ISS. 

Terminal Velocity Aerospace Low Cost Small Re-Entry Devices to Enhance Space 

Commerce and ISS Utilization (Phase 3/$300,000): Terminal Velocity Aerospace (Atlanta, GA) developed Re-Entry Devices (REDs) as a low-cost solution to returning 

small payloads from the ISS. These payloads are about the size of four CubeSats, 

and are deployed from the ISS to return small payloads. Smaller, alternative 

versions have also been developed that can record critical onboard engineering data 

from spacecraft reentering the atmosphere. The first group of REDs flew to the ISS 

in April 2017 onboard the Orbital ATK CRS–7. 

4.6: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF EXTENDING ISS THROUGH THE 2020S

There has been much discussion about the physical life of the ISS in recent years. 

A technical feasibility end date of 2028 has been informally discussed for several 

years; this was based on the expected 30-year structural life of the first on-orbit elements of the ISS that were launched in 1998—the FGB and the U.S. Node 1. However, many elements of the ISS could have a life expectancy well beyond the 2020s. 

The following technical assessment is a bottoms-up structural assessment of the ISS 

elements through 2028. Technical assessments beyond 2028 have not been performed. Also highlighted below are the critical system elements that would need to 

be replaced and/or augmented to continue with nominal ISS operations toward the 

end of the 2020s. 

68 

Structural Life Assessment 

NASA is performing a structural life assessment on the major U.S. structural elements, including truss segments, solar arrays, radiators, pressurized modules (including the U.S.-owned, Russian-built Functional Cargo Block [FGB]), docking 

adapters, common berthing mechanisms, and external stowage platforms. The analysis is based upon the design life of the elements and the actual performance of the 

on-orbit vehicle as measured by in situ measurements on structural items, cycle 

loading of the vehicle from reboost operations, and loading from docking vehicles. 

All of the elements have been structurally cleared through 2024. 

As can be seen in Table 1, all of the U.S. elements that have been on orbit for 

an extended time have also been cleared to 2028. The items in Table 2 have been 

cleared to 2020 based on their launch date and 15-year design life. These items have 

yet to be officially cleared to 2028, but given that these elements have been on orbit 

for a shorter time than the items in Table 1, it is anticipated that the structural 

margin of the ISS would be fully adequate to support ISS operations to 2028. The 

analysis to date indicates that there would be sufficient remaining margin to operate even beyond 2028. This analysis is scheduled to be completed by 2019. 


516TRANS7.eps 516TRANS8.eps
69 

Non-Replaceable and Critical Hardware 

In addition to assessing the structural integrity of the vehicle, each of the key 

subsystems has been systematically analyzed to ensure that its functionality and 

safe operations can be sustained over the projected life extension. These analyses 

focused primarily on critical structural hardware (e.g., pressure vessels), the failure 

of which would be catastrophic; critical operating hardware that is not replaceable 

and has no identified operational workaround; on-orbit replacement units (ORUs) or 

components for which a technical time or cycle issue would drive limited life or operational reductions; and operating hardware with functionality that is necessary for 

crew habitation or provides the capability to perform the science mission. Hardware 

items that matched these criteria were examined on a case-by-case basis. Additional 

work would be required for life extension to 2028 and beyond. 

Critical functional capabilities that have been assessed and cleared include: electrical power; thermal control; environmental control and life support; propulsion; 

guidance, navigation and control; communications and tracking; command and data 

handling; extravehicular activity; and crew health care. 

Additionally, system upgrades necessary to operate the ISS beyond 2020 have 

been implemented or are already under development. Such systems include lithium 

ion batteries (part of the electrical power system), power generation augmentation, 

oxygen and nitrogen composite overwrap resupply tanks, upgraded communication 

systems, docking systems, and rendezvous radio. The ISS is being upgraded with 

these systems over the next few years, which would support ISS operations beyond 

2024. 

System upgrades on the current Extravehicular Mobility Units (EMUs) are also 

being implemented. This includes new batteries, inclusion of a high rate data recorder, point-of-use filters to further purify cooling water, and a new carbon dioxide 

sensor. All upgrades have applicability toward the development of a new exploration 

suit. New suit technology development for water cooling is presently underway, with 

deployment to the ISS in 2018. In addition, funding is in place to develop and deploy 

this new suit for extensive checkout on the ISS. Production of a fleet of new exploration suits is still under consideration, and will be a future trade versus extending 

the current EMUs past 2024. 

Like the core systems, critical scientific capabilities have also been reviewed for 

supportability and continued safe operations. Permanent payload facilities supporting utilization on the ISS that have been cleared to 2020 or beyond include: 

• EXpedite the PRocessing of Experiments to the Space Station (EXPRESS) racks 

(a standardized payload rack system for transporting, storing, and supporting 

experiments on the ISS); 

• Human Research Facility (HRF); 

• Window Observational Research Facility (WORF); 

• Combustion Integrated Rack (CIR); 

• Fluids Integrated Rack (FIR); 

• Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) (shown in the image below); 

• Materials Science Research Rack (MSRR). 


516TRANS9.eps
70 

The ISS Program is currently evaluating the performance of these facilities 

through at least 2028. Assessments to date of the few cycle-limited components indicate sufficient margin for operation well beyond 2024 based on current predictions 

of facility use beyond this timeframe. 

Functional Availability and Sparing Assessments 

A comprehensive logistics analysis is performed each year to ensure that the proper quantities of spares (ORUs) are available. NASA assesses the expected functional 

availability of its systems to determine the type and quantity of spares that will be 

needed over time to sustain system operations. This analysis takes into account 

many factors, including age of the components and expected on-orbit performance 

based on mathematical analyses and actual hardware performance history. Analysis 

shows the sparing requirements would remain relatively flat as the ISS is operated 

beyond the current expected operational lifetime to at least 2028. This holds true 

for consumables as well. Consumables are those items required to sustain the crew 

and normal operation of the systems, including food, clothing, water, medicines, and 

waste and hygiene items. Over the years of ISS operation, the ISS Program has determined the minimum amount of consumables required to support operations. 

Consumables requirements are well understood and expected to remain stable. The 

only expected increase in consumables is associated with the fourth USOS crewmember, enabled by new commercial crew transportation capabilities via the Commercial Crew Program. 

The only projected additional requirements for the ISS beyond 2024 in its current 

form, are the varying types and amount of new hardware necessary to conduct new 

research and technology development on the ISS. Much of the research growth is 

expected to come from private industry and other Government agencies. 

Consumables, spares, system upgrades, and new utilization hardware are delivered to the ISS via an international cargo vehicle fleet, comprised of the Russian 

Progress, Japanese HII Transfer Vehicle (HTV), SpaceX Dragon, and Orbital ATK 

Cygnus. All of these uncrewed cargo vehicles deliver pressurized cargo. External 

ORUs are primarily delivered via the HTV or the Dragon. The primary means of 

returning hardware, research samples, and other items to the ground is the Dragon 

vehicle, although smaller items can also be returned with the crew on the Soyuz 

vehicle (Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser is expected to come online in 

2019 and will provide both pressurized and unpressurized cargo delivery, as well as 

pressurized cargo return). The other vehicles, destroyed on re-entry after departing 

the ISS, are used to dispose of trash and no-longer-needed equipment. 

International Partner Hardware 

All the ISS partners have responsibility for assessing the capability of their elements and systems with respect to an ISS lifetime extension. The Russian elements 

have been cleared through 2020 and are in the process of being cleared to 2028, 

with no known issues. CSA has identified no major issues with the robotic elements 

to 2028, including the ISS robotic arm, Mobile Remote Servicer Base System, and 

Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator. The JAXA elements are cleared to 2020 


516TRANS10.eps
71 

and analyses for extension to 2028 are planned. The ESA assessments to 2028 are 

complete and cleared. 

Safety Considerations 

The safety and mission assurance community has been involved throughout all of 

these assessments. Work continues to review existing hazard reports and other ISS 

documentation for any safety issues relative to the ISS lifetime extension. 

From a technical risk perspective, the same risks for the ISS that exist today will 

exist through at least 2024 and beyond. Micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) 

penetration of the pressure shell remains the largest risk to the ISS. The likelihood 

of penetration will increase as a function of the life of ISS on-orbit, although the 

likelihood of penetration in any six-month period is expected to remain stable. The 

USOS segment was designed with debris shields that protect the pressure shell 

from MMOD debris to about one centimeter in size. The Russian segment was not 

designed to the same shielding specifications, but has been modified over the years 

to enhance the MMOD protection capability. The final planned modification, which 

has already been implemented, is an additional external shield for the Progress logistics vehicle. Also, the ISS has an improved capability to maneuver to avoid objects that are large enough to be tracked, using the Predetermined Debris Avoidance 

Maneuver, which reduces the amount of notice necessary to perform a maneuver 

from over a day to down to just a few hours. The risks of operating in LEO are 

heavily outweighed by the benefits to the U.S. economy, human health and wellbeing, and the Nation’s strategic goals in leadership and exploration of deep space. 

Station is demonstrably more capable of operating in LEO today than it was 15 

years ago, and this experience has shown that NASA and its partners are able to 

conduct safe and effective operations in LEO onboard the ISS. While the risks inherent in operating in space cannot be eliminated, the technical environment is well 

understood through 2028. 

4.7: COST ESTIMATES OF ISS EXTENSION

The ISS Program analyzes its program and budget requirements on an annual 

basis. The budget estimate for ISS life extension to 2024, 2028, and 2030 based on 

its current configuration, including the Crew and Cargo Program, are provided in 

the figure below. 


516TRANS11.eps
72 

Within the above budget details, ISS Systems Operations and Maintenance 

(O&M) supports vehicle operations in the extreme conditions of space with constant, 

around-the clock-support. ISS Research supports research on ISS across a diverse 

array of disciplines, from fundamental physics and biophysics to human physiology 

and biotechnology. ISS Research also supports CASIS, the non-profit organization 

that manages the ISS National Laboratory. Funding for research varies depending 

on the individual payloads and other work in development. Crew and Cargo supports transportation to and from the ISS, for both crew and cargo. Labor and travel 

supports civil servant labor and travel. 

The cost estimates provided in this section assume that ISS will be de-orbited 

rather than turned over to a commercial entity due to the number of potential options for that scenario. Cost estimates for life extension through 2024 would be reflective of the budget above through FY 2025 with deorbit in January 2025. Cost 

estimates for life extension through 2028 would be reflective of the budget above 

through FY 2029 with deorbit in January 2029. Cost estimates for life extension 

through 2030 would be reflective of the budget above through FY 2031 with deorbit 

in January 2031. As NASA begins to shift responsibility for meeting its needs and 

requirements in LEO by leveraging private industry capacity, innovation, and competitiveness, it could offer the prospect of lowering the above projected cost to the 

Government. 

The budget estimates are based on the following major assumptions: 

• Reflects the FY 2018 President’s Budget Request for FY 2018 and the FY 2019 

President’s Budget Request for FY 2019 through FY 2023. 

• International Partner commitments continue through the life of the Program. 

• Inflation is estimated at the current contract rates or rates experienced within 

that service line. NASA is expecting to achieve cost efficiencies in order to absorb inflationary impacts within a flat budget. 

• Funds Soyuz crew rotation and rescue services through spring of 2019 and landing in fall of 2019. Assumes six-person crew operations until commercial crew 

transportation begins. 

• Legislative relief is obtained from the limitations in the Iran, North Korea and 

Syria Nonproliferation Act (INKSNA). 

• U.S. Visiting Vehicles include CRS for cargo transportation and commercial 

crew operational services for crew rotation through the life of ISS. 

» The budget covers an average of four to five CRS missions and two commercial crew missions per year. 

» Once commercial crew transportation begins, the crew complement will increase from six to seven persons; USOS crew size will permanently increase 

from three to four. 

• Consumables content is based on performance analysis and/or inventory assessment. 

• Corrective maintenance cost estimate is based on the current hardware reliability performance. 

• There will be no more than one major USOS software update per year through 

the life of ISS. 

• Six planned USOS EVAs are supported per year. 

• ISS deorbit and closeout costs through FY 2024, 2028, or 2030 can be absorbed 

within a flat budget profile. As crew and cargo flights reduce near ISS end of 

life, those funds will be re-directed to purchase de-orbit vehicles. Likewise, as 

spares purchases decrease near ISS end of life, those funds will be re-directed 

towards closeout activities. 

• Transportation and integration costs for the National Lab research will continue to be provided by NASA. 

• Additional funds required to support the development of commercial modules in 

LEO or on ISS are not included in the above budget. Commercial partner development of capabilities that the private sector and NASA can use will be funded 

by the Commercial LEO Development budget line. 

4.8: COMMUNITY INPUT

On August 9, 2017, NASA held a workshop in Washington, D.C., to engage ISS 

stakeholders in gathering information that may be used in the development of 

NASA’s future planning activities. Specifically, the workshop targeted the commercial space sector, researchers, technology developers, transportation and habitation 

73 

providers, other Government agencies, and other interested parties, providing a 

forum for dialogue with NASA on topics relevant to Station future planning. Approximately 130 people attended the workshop. Four breakout sessions addressed 

the LEO market, the value proposition of human spaceflight, public-private partnerships, and access to space. A complete summary of the workshop, including presentations, can be found here: https://www.nasa.gov/content/international-space-station-stakeholder-workshop 

There were several main themes from the workshop: 

• Attendees stated that a formal acknowledgment of a LEO human-spaceflightenabled commercial policy would be helpful for building business cases. Specifically, this would lend credibility to the idea that a need for LEO access and capabilities is ongoing, which would aid in long-term planning. 

• Attendees stated that it is important that the Government maintain its demand 

for human-spaceflight-enabled LEO capabilities, and that it quantify its needs 

where possible. The National Laboratory part of the ISS Program is working 

well, and is facilitating access to the microgravity environment and ISS platform in a way that is conducive to business and development. 

• The attendees expressed a strong desire for a pricing policy from NASA for 

services in LEO. While things like launch, crew time, power, and data transmission are currently free for users under the National Lab, this may not always be the case as demand for these services increases and the availability becomes more constrained. Ideas for study suggested by participants included examining the pricing policy of other Government agencies that regulate constrained markets, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for 

spectrum licensing, and the Forestry Service for logging rights. The idea of 

maintaining free access for users under the National Lab while also providing 

a for-pay ‘‘priority access’’ capability was also raised by participants and discussed as a group. 

• There was a broad desire to maintain U.S. leadership in LEO. Attendees voiced 

little confidence in the ability of foreign platforms to provide the kind of capability, reliability, and security needed to maintain long-term business planning. 

• Finally, attendees said that any transition away from ISS needs to be gradual 

and well-planned. 

5.0: CONCLUSION

The ISS is in its intensive research and technology demonstration phase and is 

enabling a maturing commercial market. The maturity and stability of the ISS Partnership allows the United States to demonstrate global leadership in human 

spaceflight and technology development and is already providing the foundation for 

continuing human spaceflight beyond LEO. Closer to home, NASA’s ISS National 

Laboratory partners can use the unique capabilities aboard Station to enable investigations that may give them the edge in developing valuable, high technology products and services for the global market. Furthermore, the demand for access to the 

ISS enables the establishment of robust U.S. commercial crew and cargo capabilities. Both of these aspects of the ISS National Laboratory will help establish the 

U.S. market for research in LEO beyond the current NASA requirements. 

NASA is actively developing transition strategies for the concurrent-and post-ISS 

LEO era and is engaged with the private sector to foster both private demand and 

supply for LEO services. It is NASA’s intention to continue to foster the development of private industry capabilities and private demand with a goal to end direct 

Federal support for the ISS by 2025 when, NASA intends to be one of many customers, including both private and other Government agencies, for LEO platforms. 

With this approach, NASA believes that the Nation’s interest in human 

spaceflight and LEO are protected and enhanced while relying on private industry 

to provide the services and capabilities to meet NASA’s needs. This approach also 

offers the prospect of lower cost to the Government by leveraging private industry 

capacity and innovation through a commercial marketplace where NASA is one of 

many customers and provides the basis for determining the long-term future of the 

ISS Platform along with the ISS International Partners. 

NASA looks forward to working with Congressional stakeholders along with researchers, private industry and our ISS International Partners to ensure that the 

U.S. maintains our human spaceflight leadership in LEO while expanding human 

presence into the solar system and returning benefits to U.S. taxpayers. 

74 

APPENDIX—EXCERPT FROM NASA TRANSITION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017 

(P.L. 115–10) 

SEC. 303. ISS Transition Plan 

(c) REPORTS.—Section 50111 of title 51, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator, in coordination with the ISS management entity (as defined in section 2 of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transition Authorization Act of 2017), ISS partners, the scientific 

user community, and the commercial space sector, shall develop a plan to transition in a step-wise approach from the current regime that relies heavily on 

NASA sponsorship to a regime where NASA could be one of many customers 

of a low-Earth orbit non-governmental human space flight enterprise. 

(2) REPORTS.—Not later than December 1, 2017, and biennially thereafter 

until 2023, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, 

Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives a report that includes— 

(A) a description of the progress in achieving the Administration’s deep 

space human exploration objectives on ISS and prospects for accomplishing 

future mission requirements, space exploration objectives, and other research objectives on future commercially supplied low-Earth orbit platforms 

or migration of those objectives to cis-lunar space; 

(B) the steps NASA is taking and will take, including demonstrations that 

could be conducted on the ISS, to stimulate and facilitate commercial demand and supply of products and services in low-Earth orbit; 

(C) an identification of barriers preventing the commercialization of lowEarth orbit, including issues relating to policy, regulations, commercial intellectual property, data, and confidentiality, that could inhibit the use of 

the ISS as a commercial incubator; 

(D) the criteria for defining the ISS as a research success; 

(E) the criteria used to determine whether the ISS is meeting the objective 

under section 301(b)(2) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transition Authorization Act of 2017; [Reference: 301(b)(2): ‘‘to pursue 

a research program that advances knowledge and provides other benefits 

to the Nation’’] 

(F) an assessment of whether the criteria under sub-paragraphs (D) and (E) 

are consistent with the research areas defined in, and recommendations 

and schedules under, the current National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Decadal Survey on Biological and Physical Sciences 

in Space; 

(G) any necessary contributions that ISS extension would make to enabling 

execution of the human exploration roadmap under section 432 of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transition Authorization Act 

of 2017; 

(H) the cost estimates for operating the ISS to achieve the criteria required 

under subparagraphs (D) and (E) and the contributions identified under 

subparagraph (G); 

(I) the cost estimates for extending operations of the ISS to 2024, 2028, and 

2030; 

(J) an evaluation of the feasible and preferred service life of the ISS beyond 

the period described in section 503 of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18353), through at 

least 2028, as a unique scientific, commercial, and space exploration-related 

facility, including— 

(i) a general discussion of international partner capabilities and prospects for extending the partner-ship; 

(ii) the cost associated with extending the service life; 

(iii) an assessment on the technical limiting factors of the service life 

of the ISS, including a list of critical components and their expected 

service life and availability; and 

(iv) such other information as may be necessary to fully describe the 

justification for and feasibility of extending the service life of the ISS, 

75 

including the potential scientific or technological benefits to the Federal 

Government, public, or to academic or commercial entities; 

(K) an identification of the necessary actions and an estimate of the costs 

to deorbit the ISS once it has reached the end of its service life; 

(L) the impact on deep space exploration capabilities, including a crewed 

mission to Mars in the 2030s, if the preferred service life of the ISS is extended beyond 2024 and NASA maintains a flat budget profile; and 

(M) an evaluation of the functions, roles, and responsibilities for management and operation of the ISS and a determination of— 

(i) those functions, roles, and responsibilities the Federal Government 

should retain during the lifecycle of the ISS; 

(ii) those functions, roles, and responsibilities that could be transferred 

to the commercial space sector; 

(iii) the metrics that would indicate the commercial space sector’s readiness and ability to assume the functions, roles, and responsibilities described in clause (ii); and 

(iv) any necessary changes to any agreements or other documents and 

the law to enable the activities described in subparagraphs (A) and (B). 

Æ