three things to look out for this week!
licensing rules, space stations, research costs
1. The Federal Communications Commission rewrites space licensing rules
What’s happening: In October 2025, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to initiate a regulatory change majestically titled “Space Modernization for the 21st Century,” aimed at creating a “licensing assembly line” to streamline and accelerate the licensing process for space and earth stations. On July 1, 2026, the FCC released a draft Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission is scheduled to consider this draft at its July 22 open meeting. Since it remains a circulated draft, its contents could still change before adoption.
Why it matters: The new draft would subject earth and space station applications with reportable foreign ownership above 10% to additional review, reinforcing the national-security role of the FCC’s licensing process that sits next to a separate Foreign Adversary Control (FAC) rule from January 2026. The reforms would further extend the FCC’s role as one of the most consequential federal regulators of commercial activity in orbit, even though authority over space activities remains divided across multiple agencies.
If adopted, the new rules would require operators to share satellite-location and velocity data with Space Situational Awareness providers, helping improve collision avoidance and reduce the creation of additional debris. Extending license terms for space stations to 20 years would also give firms more regulatory certainty and time to plan their investments.
Additionally, the draft would create a new space station category called the Variable Trajectory Space Station (VTSS)—covering transfer vehicles, servicing missions, and lunar missions—alongside the FCC’s Geostationary Orbit (GSO) and Non-Geostationary Orbit (NGSO) categories. The draft would reduce the public notice period for earth and space stations from 30 days to 15 days, which some operators have argued is too short to review filings. Shorter comment windows could favor larger, better-resourced operators who can turn filings around fast.
What you should look out for next: Updates from the July 22, 2026, Open Commission Meeting, where the FCC is expected to vote on the draft order and decide whether to open the accompanying Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
2. Who should build the next space station?
What’s happening: NASA recently released a draft Request for Proposals (RFP), seeking feedback from firms to plan the next era of space stations in orbit. The International Space Station is scheduled to be retired in 2030, and there are already talks to fill the gap. The Senate’s proposed 2032 extension instructs NASA not to deorbit the ISS until a replacement station is operational.
NASA is currently asking private companies to design and operate commercial space stations rather than developing a new government-owned station itself. In its “Ignition” strategy in March 2026, NASA proposed a plan to build and own a core module that would initially attach to the ISS, under which private companies would have been asked to dock their own commercial modules to this NASA-owned module. Firms were concerned because they’d already invested in their own designs for a free-flying space station. NASA has since done away with the core module idea and issued the RFP instead.
Why it matters: The policy dilemma goes beyond the private sector versus government conflict. NASA is the private sector’s most important customer, and big investment decisions are usually made with long time horizons in mind. NASA’s sudden and successive changes may make it harder for firms to plan investments, although the latest reversal also shows the agency responding to industry feedback and existing private investment.
Even if free-flying commercial space stations become a reality, there are still some risks associated with the project. Any replacement space station must be operational and certified before the ISS retires and needs to pass all the safety tests to operate. The policy problem is ensuring standards are rigorous enough to protect crews and predictable enough for firms to design, test, and certify their stations on schedule.
What you should look out for next: July 27, 2026, is the deadline for companies to send feedback on the draft RFP. A comprehensive RFP is expected before September.
3. The limits of low-cost space research
What’s happening: An initial analysis by Ari Koeppel and Casey Dreier of the Planetary Society examined whether NASA’s cheapest science missions produce the most scientific value for money. They compared mission costs with failure rates, publications, citations, and the time required to produce highly cited research (>100). The initial findings reveal that low-cost missions don’t always produce the greatest scientific impact per dollar value. No planetary mission costing less than an inflation-adjusted $100 million produced a highly cited paper in the study.
Failure rates were highest among low-cost missions and declined as mission costs increased. Success also differed across research areas. For example, low-cost heliophysics missions performed better. The study’s broader finding was that mid-tier missions ($250 million to $750 million) offered the shortest path on average to more citations.
Why it matters: Lower-budget missions can help diversify risk, encourage experimentation, and support the pursuit of narrower scientific questions. But some discoveries simply require more expensive instruments that many smaller missions cannot accommodate. That raises another question: how should policymakers measure the value of scientific research? Citation counts and mission success matter, but some missions also operate over long time horizons. Cost efficiency and affordability are different questions. I explored similar questions last week in a Space Jam article on funding, which you can find here.
What you should look out for next: ESCAPADE, a planetary mission below the $100 million threshold, is currently in a loiter trajectory around the Earth-Sun L2 region. It is scheduled to perform an Earth gravity assist and go to Mars later this year to explore how the solar wind interacts with Mars’ environment. Will it become an exception as a successful lower-cost mission? Also, look out for more information from the Planetary Society about their study’s methodology, mission classifications, and treatment of unsuccessful missions.