FARAND-2 2/20/01 2:31 PM Page 2 r bulletin 105 — february 2001 The Code of Conduct for International Space Station Crews A. Farand Legal Affairs, ESA, Paris Introduction the Station, bearing in mind that the Partners A broad outline of the Code was already retain their jurisdiction and control over the contained in Article 11 of the four above- flight elements they themselves provide, and mentioned MOUs and therefore the drafters over personnel who are their nationals. The had their work mapped out in advance. The negotiations on the Code developed rapidly Code had to establish a clear chain of into a genuine inter-cultural exercise, based not command and relationship between ground only on the solid experience of human space- and on-orbit management, standards for work, flight built up over the last forty years by both responsibilities with respect to elements and the Russian and US Partners, but also on the equipment, disciplinary regulations, together valuable contributions of the other Partners, with physical and information security which had gained their experience through guidelines. It also had to define the ISS numerous flight opportunities offered by Russia Commander’s authority and responsibility to and the United States in the last fifteen years. In enforce safety procedures, physical and this exercise, an appropriate balance had to be information security procedures and crew- struck between features originating from the military heritage of the USA and Russian On 15 September 2000 in Washington DC, the Multilateral astronaut programmes and those needed to Coordination Board (MCB), the highest-level cooperative body firmly establish the civilian and multi-national established by the Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) pertaining to character of the ISS. the International Space Station (ISS) Programme signed early in 1998 by NASA and each of the Cooperating Agencies designated by the The closest approximation to this Code until other ISS Partners (i.e. the Russian Space Agency, ESA, the then was a ‘Standards of Government of Japan and the Canadian Space Agency), approved the Conduct Agreement’, which a Code of Conduct for International Space Station Crews. This mission specialist sent by a document contains a set of standards agreed by all Partners to govern foreign organisation such as ESA the conduct of ISS crew members, starting with the first expedition for training in the United States crew launched from Baikonur in Kazakhstan on 31 October 2000. was required to sign before being These standards had been developed over the previous six months by assigned to a specific US Space teams of Agency officials, working in close consultation with the Shuttle flight. The main purposes competent authorities of the Partner States. of this document are to obtain the person’s consent to be subject to the authority, orders and direction rescue procedures for the ISS. As far as the US of the Commander, to limit the Space Shuttle is concerned, these matters are disclosure of data which are covered by regulations adopted under the protected, and to refrain from authority of the legislation that established using his or her position or NASA. Similarly, specific Russian regulatory information obtained in the course provisions apply to crew members while being of the mission for personal gain. launched or returned on Russian space vehicles or conducting their activities on board Noteworthy issues covered by the Mir Space Station. the Code Legal requirements imposed on Because of the genuine partnership entailed by ISS crew Space Station cooperation pursuant to the When reading the Code, one corresponding Inter-Governmental Agreement may be surprised by the number (the IGA), it was necessary to develop a Code and scope of the various sets that could be applied on the various parts of of regulations that will apply 64 FARAND-2 2/20/01 2:32 PM Page 3 code of conduct for iss crews specifically to ISS crew, bearing in mind that a which a decision may be revised, and the type number of provisions of the IGA and MOUs are of disciplinary measures that could be imposed also directly relevant to astronaut activities. In depending on whether the violation occurred addition to the Code itself and the related on Earth or during flight, etc. The interest of this disciplinary policy, a crew member is subject to disciplinary policy lies in the implicit recognition the provisions of the ISS Flight Rules and the by the Cooperating Agencies that their other requirements imposed by the Cooperating astronauts’ behaviour may be subject to a Agency providing him or her, those relating to process that is administered not only on the the Earth to Orbit Vehicle (ETOV) being used for basis of their own personnel policy, but also of the mission, those defined by the various ISS rules developed by the ISS partnership. cooperation bodies listed in Article 11 of the MOUs dealing with various aspects of astronaut Issues affecting a crew member as an matters and, finally, to the requirements individual contained in the rules of the various institutions The prescriptions of the Code apply to an ISS hosting the training. It is therefore normal that crew member from the time he or she is assigned the Code specifies that the ISS crew member to a specific ISS expedition until completion of has a right to know about these requirements, post-flight activities. Some of the provisions, for and that he or she will be educated as to the example those outlining the responsibilities of applicable rules by the Cooperating Agency the Commander on board the ISS, are providing him or her, through the crew training obviously not relevant to the activities of the curriculum and normal programme operations. astronaut while on the ground, training for the flight, or conducting activities on return from the The disciplinary policy for ISS crew has been ISS, although the Commander at these stages developed by the Multilateral Crew Operations is still ‘directing the activities of the ISS Crew Panel (MCOP), a cooperative body established Members as a single integrated team to ensure through Article 11 of the MOUs, and approved the successful completion of the mission’. As at the above-mentioned MCB meeting of mentioned above, the requirements outlined in 15 September 2000. This policy will be further regulations pertaining to the space vehicle used expanded through detailed documentation by the crew member must also be observed. being established on the various steps it The Code applies to visiting crew members outlines. It covers matters on which the MCOP who will be staying on the ISS for only a few will exercise a central role, such as the days: the basic idea is that, while on board for procedure required for submitting a statement a visit or a full stay, all crew members are asserting violation of a prescription of the Code covered by the same legal prescriptions and by a crew member, examining and making are subject to the authority of the ISS determination on this statement, the manner in Commander. Although the Space Station is in the early stages of construction, it is already permanently occupied 65 FARAND-2 2/20/01 2:32 PM Page 4 r bulletin 105 — february 2001 The Code stipulates that a crew member must Authority of the Commander over payloads refrain from any use of that status motivated by An issue discussed during the negotiations was private gain. This requirement is not limited in whether or not the authority of the ISS time, but it is understood that each Agency will Commander should extend to payloads. One have to deal with the conditions applicable to argument advanced was that such an post-employment activities of astronauts and extension could jeopardise the understanding, determine what is acceptable in terms of apparently reached bilaterally between NASA compensation, in the form of bonuses, special and the RSA and reported in the press a remuneration for non-government agents, etc. number of years ago, according to which any Making a distinction between personal effects crew member, whether an American or Russian and mementos that could be carried on board national, could be designated to be an ISS by the crew members, the Agencies agreed Commander. One Agency contended that if that constraints of manifest, safety and stowage NASA considered that specific payloads would allocation were already sufficient and that there be particularly sensitive during a mission, NASA was no need for the Code to spell out the could object to the designation of a non-American discretion exercisable by an Agency in this ISS Commander. This matter was settled by regard. the addition of an explicit interpretative sentence stating that nothing in the relevant section of the Code would affect the designation by the MCOP of an individual of any Partner State to be an ISS Commander. This addition has the double advantage of the first recognition in writing at such a high level of the ‘rotation’ principle (i.e. a national of any Partner State) for designation of the Commander and the fact that no national of a non- Partner State can become ISS Commander. In this connection, the discussion developed further because of the insistence of one Agency that the authority of the ISS Commander over the payloads must be put in the appropriate framework, i.e. strictly in relation with the Commander’s responsibility to preserve the safety of the crew and the ISS. The Agency in question The Station’s long-stay Harassment wanted to make sure in the drafting crews (blue coveralls) One of the Agencies was adamant that ‘zero of the Code that the authority of the ISS sometimes play host to tolerance’ must be enforced in or on the ISS for Commander over payloads would not extend visiting Shuttle crews interpersonal or group harassment, as an express to the right of disposal, for whatever reason, provision of the Code.