1 “protect people, goods, public health and the environment” french space law implementation...
TRANSCRIPT
1
“Protect people, goods, public health and the environment”
French Space Law Implementation
Isabelle RONGIER CNES Inspector General
IAASS President
2
Table of contents
Why a space law ?How authorization process works?RulemakingOrganization and competencies for
supervisionSafety and environmental requirementsLessons learnedConclusion
3
Why a Space Law ?
The purpose of the FSOA is to set up a secured national regime of authorization and control of Space operations under the French jurisdiction or for which the French Government bears international liability, in accordance with UN Treaties principles
Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States ….
States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space…
The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space… shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State….
4audit energetique 4
To deal with all aspects and phases from launch to reentry, including in-orbit delivery, control in-orbit and end-of-life management
Safety of third parties Public health Environmental protection Space debris mitigation
State guarantee attached with the authorization: limitation of the operator’s liability for damage to third parties occurring on the surface of the earth or in Air space limited to a fixed amount of approximately 60M€, except in case of willful misconduct. If compensation for damage caused goes beyond this amount, the State supersedes the operator’s obligation to indemnify.
If the French State is sued under UN Space Treaties (1972 Convention…): right of recourse against the Space operator limited to the fixed ceiling of 60M€
Contractors, subcontractors, customers or insurers can also benefit from this guarantee for damage caused during the Launching phase.
To set up a liability regime for damage caused to third parties
Space Law basics
Long Term Sustainability of Space Activities Fair competition for
operators in a legal frame
5
Shall obtain an authorization: Any operator intending to launch a
space object from the French territory, or from facilities under French jurisdiction
Any French operator that launch a space object from the territory of a foreign State or from a place that is not under any State’s sovereignty
Any person having French nationality or company which are located in France, that aims at launching a space object, or any French operator that commands such an object during its mission in outer space.
How it works ?
CNES/P•Compliance certificates
MESR•Authorization Decrees
Operators•Operational data
CNES Technical Departments
Act no. 2008-518 of 3 June 2008 on space operations
(FSOA) entry in force 10th of December 2010
Decree no.2009-643 of 9 June 2009 on authorisations granted in application of the LOS (Authorisation decree)
Decree concerning
Technical Regulations
31th March 2011
Space systems
Best practices for Technical regulations implementation
Decree no.2009-644 of 9 June 2009 amending Decree no.24-510 of 28 June 1984
on CNES
(CNES Decree)
Decree regulating operations in Guiana Space
Center facilities
Decree concerning space objects identification
12th August 2011
6
French national authorisation procedure
Principle of prior authorization for:• any operator, irrespective of nationality, intending to launch or bring back to Earth a space object on French territory.• any French operator intending to launch or bring back to Earth a space object• any person of French nationality intending to launch a space object• any French operator intending to control such an object in space
Conditions for get authorizations The applicant must supply moral, financial and professional guarantees. The systems and processes implemented must comply with technical regulations.
Supervision to ensure that prescriptions are fulfilled
The French Space Agency (CNES) is mandated by the law to ensure that systems and procedures implemented by space operators comply with technical regulations”
Safety measures
The Minister and the President of CNES are empowered to take all necessary measures to ensure the safety of people, property, public health and the environment
7
COPUOS : Principles for the use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space Space debris mitigation guidelines of the Scientific and Technical
Subcommittee of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space …and future results of Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of
Outer Space Activities
ISO : 24113 Standard “Space debris mitigation” was an important step in the
harmonization process Writing of some news important standard ISO (Prevention of break-up of
unmanned spacecraft for example) is on going
IADC: IADC mitigations guidelines and Support to the IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines
On going works on Launch and Re-entry Safety
COSPAR : Planetary protection policy
1. How is “safe enough” defined or determined?
2. How is the safety of this launch or reentry assessed?
3. How are risk factors identified for launch safety?
4. How are assessments conducted?
5. What numerical metrics are used to assess risk?
6. What approaches are used to reduce risk?
7. How and who accepts the risk?
8. What computer modeling approaches are used?
9. How are risk uncertainties treated?
10. How are modeling (epistemic) uncertainties and real-world (aleatory) variations evaluated?
11. What statistical confidence level is used in the calculations feeding the risk acceptance decision?
Consider public safety main drivers
Some basis for rulemaking process
Analyze existing standards / practices
8
Identify realistic ways of compliance with regulations
Consult stakeholders early during rulemaking process
Define appropriate interim provisions: time and money are needed to adapt space systems to reach full compliance
Technical regulations rulemaking process
“Quality System” requirements
+ Technical dossier Description of the operation, Hazard analysis Impact studies Risk mitigation measures Demonstration of compliance with requirements
Quality manual
Processes
Procedures
Instructions
Records
9
“Worst case” approach in near field
Collective risk for people (maximum acceptable probability): 2 10-5/operation in far field
Nominal impact zones outside landmasses and territorial waters
Information to the air and maritime traffic authorities about impact zones for transmission of appropriate notifications
Criteria for launch collision avoidance with manned vehicles
Collective risk for the population (maximum acceptable probability): 2 10-5/operation
Nominal impact zones outside landmasses and territorial waters
Information to the air and maritime traffic authorities about impact zones for transmission of appropriate notifications
In the event of fully justified impossibility of proceeding with controlled atmospheric re-entry, the operator must make its best efforts to respect a quantitative objective of 10-4.
LAUNCHES REENTRIES / DEORBITATIONS
Specific safety objectives
10
Space debris mitigation requirements Do not generate debris during nominal operations Minimise the probability of accidental break up Prevent collisions with satellites whose orbital parameters are
known Remove space vehicles and orbital stages from protected
regions after the end of the mission(no interference in B region > 1 year + no come back during 100 years linked to perturbation effect) Live spacecraft in passive condition after the end of mission
NUCLEAR SAFETY
Planetary protection : Avoid harmful contamination and adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter
Protection of public health and the environment :Mitigating risk of dangerous contamination during launch or re-entry (qualitative characterization of impact of combustions gases, ozone layer depletion, sea pollution, nuclear material)
Common safety / environment objectives
11
Ethics Charter Impartial opinions, giving no grounds for
criticism
Independent evaluation concerning the design and implementation of the process
Transparency regarding the authority and operators
Insure confidentiality of information : Inspectors are empowered by legal Court after swear
Professional secrecy
Full control of internal and external communication
Expertise Space System architecture
Satellite and Launch System management
Quality, reliability and safety management
Hazards analysis
Command and control
Space dynamics» Mission analysis,
» End-of-life strategy,
» Collision avoidance
Operations
Supervision : Behavior and competencies
Clear segregation from Project role / FSOA technical compliance assessment
End of commercial in orbit positioning and operations in CNES premises
End of product insurance management shared with operator (CNES subsidy)
End of ground safety operations inside operator’s properties
Organisation aspects
12
FSOA application since December 2010
CNES sets the example: all its satellites have been verified for compliance and received a favourable decision from the President of CNES
20 authorisations for Ariane 5 ECA 4 authorisations for Ariane 5 ES-ATV 10 authorisations for Soyuz - 1 authorisation for Vega1 licence for A5-ECA (analysis under way)
3 certificates of compliance for Vega 1 preliminary certificate of compliance for A5-ES Galileo1 preliminary certificate of compliance for A5-MEOrbital systems: 3 certificate for ATV - 1 certificate for Galileo
1 licence for the EuroStar 3000 and SpaceBus 4000 platforms1 licence constituting authorisation for control in orbit for satellites already launched1 authorisation for control in orbit for Eutelsat 25B
1 authorisation for control in orbit for the first24 satellites in the Globalstar 2 constellation
1 authorisation for control in orbit for Robusta
4 authorisations for launch for Yahsat 1A and 1B, and Spot 6 and 73 authorisations for orbit acquisition and/or control for VNREDSAT-1, MEASAT-3B, DZZ-HR1 preliminary certificate of compliance for the ALPHABUS PF
1 preliminary certificate of compliance for the ALPHABUS PF 1 authorisation for control in orbit for Turkmenistan NSSC1 authorisation for launch for Turkmenistan NSSC
Under the Act or ESA-CNES agreements
COROT CALIPSO SMOS
ELISA SPOT 4 and 5 PARASOL
JASON 1 and 2 TELECOM 2D PICARD
PLEIADES 1A-1B ATHENA-FIDUS
13
Two sticking issues for space operations : Uncontrolled re entry risk Debris mitigation in LEO orbit region
Full compliance will be meet in 2020….but : Dedicated R&D program in progress is
challenging Sustainable practices are costly
Lessons learned from rulemaking process
Orbital lifetime prediction is not entirely deterministic Long-Duration Solar Flux Prediction Significant Moon-Sun perturbation for GTO orbit
Compliance with “25 years” rules can be only probabilistic objective (>0,9) New design of GEO satellite includes jettisonable auxiliary motor
module add specific requirements for disposal and passivation of these devices
Probability of successful disposal requirement too stringent considering the state of the art 0,9>>>0,85
Technical regulations shall not be static
Interim provisions
14
■ Mission success and safety of third party are separate objectives
■ State of the art reliability of space systems is not enough to guarantee public safety and debris mitigation
■ Dedicated requirements are needed for public safety and debris mitigation
Lessons learned from rulemaking process :Do not to take aim at the wrong target
■ Operator is in the best position to manage
safety risks : Impose objectives than
implementation solutions
■ The quality system of the organization with
authority over operations must allow it to
ensure safety for the entire system it
implements, and thus to manage all of its
components and interfaces.
■ Only accurate knowledge of the associated
hazards and potential vulnerabilities inherent
in the system, its operations and its
environment makes it possible to take
appropriate decisions with regard to the
acceptance of risks.
■ Human factors, which are largely informal in
nature, must be the subject of appropriate
measures for their management.
help operators with providing relevant tools
15
And beyond National borders, need for a global convergence
Why?
Make reachable debris mitigation
objectives
Define common public risk limits
applicable both for domestic and
international populations
Keep the competition fair between
commercial Space Operators
Balance between safety, environment
protection and cost at a global level