Today, TechFreedom filed comments in response to NASA’s recent Interim Final Rule and Request for Comment related to implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), following the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ’s) rescission of its implementing regulations in February 2025.
“This rule is not exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice-and-comment requirements,” said James E. Dunstan, TechFreedom’s Senior Counsel. “NASA’s implementation of NEPA is not a rule that only concerns internal agency procedures. The rule instead has substantive effects on private parties—especially commercial space ventures doing business with NASA. While NASA is asking for comments after it has published its interim rules, it should instead start over with a notice of proposed rulemaking to seek public input. NASA should follow the lead of the FCC, FAA, and EPA in conducting formal rulemaking on these issues.”
“NASA should make clear that NEPA does not apply to any NASA-supported activity that relates exclusively to operations in outer space,” said Dunstan. “NASA acknowledges that the vast majority of its projects and missions are subject to categorical exclusions, eliminating the need to conduct environmental assessments or full environmental impact statements. But this conclusion starts at step two of the analysis, which NASA—and woefully, several other agencies—often skip: Does NEPA even apply to the activity? That is where NASA’s analysis should begin. For some of the missions and projects set forth in the Interim Rule Order, NEPA does not even apply because NEPA in most instances is limited to the human biome and the territorial borders of the United States.”
“NASA must put the 2023 NEPA amendment into its rules,” Dunstan concluded. “Congress recognized the inherently international nature of outer space activities and added a specific statutory exemption for activities that have only impacts outside the United States. Hamstringing U.S. companies with burdensome NEPA regulations plays right into the hands of our foreign adversaries, including China, by hamstringing U.S. space companies.”
###
Find these comments on our website, and share them on X (formerly Twitter) and Bluesky. We can be reached for comment at media@techfreedom.org. Read our related work, including:
- Comments for the FCC’s NRPM on Spectrum Abundance for Weird Space Stuff (May, 11, 2026)
- When the Assembly Line Breaks Down: Reassessing FCC Licensing of Next-Generation Satellite Systems (Apr. 8, 2026)
- Comments to the Office of Commercial Space (OSC) on its framework to establish a “Mission Authorization” regulatory regime for innovative space activities (Mar. 13, 2026)
- Comments on the NPRM to modernize the FCC’s space and earth station licensing process (Jan. 20, 2026)
- Comments to the European Commission regarding the EU’s Draft Space Act (Nov. 7, 2025)
- Comments to the Dept of Commerce on the Draft EU Space Act (Aug. 15, 2025)
- We need a National Space Council to chart our future in outer space, SpaceNews (Jan. 23, 2025)
- Comments on the mitigation of orbital debris in the new space age, (June 27, 2024)
- Comments on NASA’s Lunar Non-Interference Questionnaire, (June 7, 2024)
- Comments to the FCC on In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) (Apr. 29, 2024)
- Do We Still Have the Right Stuff?, City Journal (Dec. 2023)
- SpaceX Makes Progress on Second Test of Starship, Reason (Nov. 18, 2023)
- Tech Policy Podcast #349: The State of Space Exploration (July 25, 2023)
- Regulating the space economy is vital for America’s continued global leadership, Washington Examiner (July 15, 2023)
- Written testimony before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology on U.S. leadership in commercial space (July 13, 2023)
About TechFreedom: TechFreedom is a nonprofit, nonpartisan technology policy think tank. We work to chart a path forward for policymakers towards a bright future where technology enhances freedom, and freedom enhances technology.
