Space Commerce Certification to Interface with Commercial Regulat

Go-To Guide:

The proposed Space Commerce Certification process is intended to interface with commercial space regulations and streamline agency review, and would:

Be open to “novel space activities” not clearly regulated by existing federal regulatory frameworks and identified as eligible by the Office of Space Commerce (OSC);
Be voluntary and opt-in;
Involve a light-touch, interagency review focused on national security, foreign policy, international obligations, and space safety; and
Operate on a presumption of Secretary of Commerce approval of a Space Commerce Certification, with decisions generally issued within 120 days.

The Certification process would not replace existing Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), or Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs (CRSRA) licensing obligations.

On March 24, 2026, OSC released its Proposal For Space Commerce Certification Process (Proposal), seeking to establish a unified “mission authorization” process for novel space activities, which may include in-space manufacturing, orbital computing, satellite servicing, and lunar operations. Commerce published the Proposal in response to Executive Order 14335, which directs the agency to develop a mission authorization framework for space activities not clearly addressed by existing regulatory regimes. The framework seeks to streamline existing, disparate regulatory regimes while working within existing law.

Addressing the Absence of U.S. ‘Mission Authorization’

Today, the United States lacks a unified federal regulatory regime for authorization and continuing supervision of non-governmental space activities. Various federal laws empower federal agencies to regulate certain aspects of space activity. For example, the FAA licenses launch and reentry; the FCC licenses spectrum use and associated requirements (including orbital debris mitigation); and CRSRA — a division of OSC — licenses private operators of remote sensing space systems.

There is concern that the absence of a unified “mission authorization” framework may result in burdensome and duplicative federal regulatory requirements for novel space activities. To address this concern, and as directed by the president, OSC proposes a voluntary certification regime designed to provide a centralized pathway for interagency review.

The ‘Space Commerce Certification’ Concept

To streamline interagency review of qualifying novel space activities, OSC proposes to create a process during which an operator would voluntarily agree to abide by — or certify to uphold — both general “light-touch” requirements and conditions requested by the interagency. Ultimately, if favorably reviewed, OSC would issue a Space Commerce Certification to an operator for their specific mission, which would include any relevant conditions.

According to the Proposal, the “Space Commerce Certification would not relieve an operator of the obligation to obtain and comply with [CRSRA, FAA, and/or FCC] authorizations.”

The goal is that an operator could present their Space Commerce Certification to regulators as evidence that certain federal agency-specific regulatory requirements are satisfied or can be waived, thereby minimizing federal regulatory review and duplication of efforts. The Proposal specifically discusses how the Space Commerce Certification might interact with existing FCC, FAA, and CRSRA rules:

FCC: While the FCC would “continue to accept and review applications for space and earth station licenses and oversee licenses under its existing regulatory procedures for spectrum/communication-related concerns,” OSC posits that “[t]he FCC could waive its rules governing orbital debris mitigation requirements and include a condition requiring its licensee to obtain, maintain, and comply with an OSC certification.”
FAA: The FAA “could accept the OSC certification either in whole or in part as a means of satisfying” the requirement to review a payload to determine it does not jeopardize national security, international obligations, or foreign policy interests. However, the FAA would continue to review payloads for public health and safety and safety of property.
CRSRA: The regulator could “issue guidance indicating that it would accept an OSC certification as satisfying its satellite disposal requirements.” Additionally, for Tier 3 licensees (g., systems with unique remote sensing capabilities), CRSRA could “include a temporary condition requiring its Tier 3 licensees to obtain, maintain, and comply with an OSC certification, instead of conducting its separate interagency review for determining temporary conditions” addressing national security concerns or international obligations, as currently required in regulations.

The “requirements” that an operator must attest to uphold are unknown. “General requirements” will be iterated during process implementation, with OSC leveraging initial applications, industry standards, and interagency discussions to define requirements of general applicability. Additionally, specific “conditions” may be proposed during interagency review of a specific application and would be incorporated with a Certification.

Thus, OSC calls upon CRSRA, the FAA, and the FCC to “utilize the Space Commerce Certification to waive certain elements of their regulatory review.” However, the Proposal does not address how agencies would legally do so. The “precise means of accepting Space Commerce Certification as sufficient for their own requirements would be for regulatory agencies to determine” as the process is further defined.

The Draft Process to Obtain a Space Commerce Certification

As outlined in the Proposal, a novel space activity operator would obtain a Space Commerce Certification by submitting an application, on a per-mission basis, furnishing certain mission information and making specific attestations.

Application Contents – Not yet defined; OSC anticipates application requirements “will in part depend on the activity to be conducted.” Nonetheless, the application would generally require “information necessary to satisfy or waive requirements of” the FAA, the FCC, and CRSRA, including but not limited to: (i) contact information and proof of eligibility (e., nationality); (ii) mission information, such as launch date, location, provider, and space object(s) physical form and composition; and, (iii) description of proposed operations.
Application Attestations – The draft process would require an applicant attest that: (i) the space object “is not a weapon” and does not carry nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction; (ii) the operator will comply with the requirements included in the Space Commerce Certification; and, (iii) the operator will notify the government of any material change to certified activities.

Review begins once OCS deems an application “complete.” OSC would simultaneously coordinate Department of Commerce review of the application and shepherd it through an interagency review for identification of “any concerns relating to national security, foreign policy or international obligations, and safety of operations.” The reviewing agencies could request specific conditions for a mission or request denial of a Certification for specific and compelling reasons.

Nominal timeline – Interagency participants would have 30 days to complete review; total of 120 days for the Secretary to approve a certification or deny it and provide accompanying rationale.
Extended timeline – The interagency may request two 30-day extensions for review (e., up to 90 days). After 180 days, the Secretary must grant, grant subject to conditions, or deny an application.

Operators that receive a Space Commerce Certification will be subject to “continuing supervision and monitoring” that is “intended to be risk-informed and proportionate to the nature of the certified activity,” but which is not presently defined. Further, OSC would leverage cross-enforcement authorities for operator compliance with Certifications (it is unclear what enforcement authorities OSC has to ensure operator compliance with conditions of a Space Commerce Certification). For instance, “[t]o the extent a commitment in the OSC certification addressed FCC’s statutory and regulatory interests, FCC could pursue enforcement action against any licensee failing to comply with this condition.”

The below outlines the proposed certification process:

Certifying Authority	Secretary of Commerce
Eligible Entities	Any U.S. entity Missions owned and operated by USG entities are exempt.
Eligible Novel Space Activities	N/A
Scope	A single mission May include multiple space objects launched at separate times, as long as the “planned activities can be anticipated at the time of application.”
Direct Cost	$0 No fees assess as part of certification process.
Interagency Participants	Mandatory Secretary of War Secretary of State FAA Administrator NASA Administrator FCC Chairperson NOAA Administrator	Discretionary “[R]epresentatives of other departments and agencies that have specialized interests in a given commercial space activity,” as determined by the Secretary of Commerce.
Subjects of Review	Operator compliance with and commitment to certification(s). Likelihood and capacity to: · Harm national security interests; · Cause violations of U.S. international obligations or impact foreign relations; and · Cause unacceptable danger to safety of space operations, assets, or public safety.
Requirements to Certify	N/A Possibility of both general requirements and specific conditions for a mission’s Certification.
Term of Certification	N/A Not discussed.

Potential Implementation

Rather than promulgate rules governing the process, OSC’s Proposal contemplates that the Space Commerce Certification scheme “could be implemented initially between industry applicants and the government.”

Once initiated, OSC would define eligible types of novel activities and what relief would be provided. According to the Proposal, OSC anticipates it would need to be selective initially in choosing applications to process and would focus on those “that are critical to industry and government interests.” If the Proposal takes effect, OSC anticipates “refining” its processes and requirements over time as it gains experience, allowing it to “develop a more standard certification process that provides greater predictability to industry and requires less intensive involvement of the interagency.”

Source link