Regulating commercial satellite gathering of information p. 14

By: Debra Gersh Hernandez

Congressional hearings on ways to protect national
security, including possible limits on news transmission sp.

SATELLITES HAVE BEEN an important intelligence-gathering tool since they first were launched.
But with reconfigurations of the world's politics, notably the fall of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War, there has been more thinking about how to use and regulate satellites for commercial purposes, such as mapping, as well as for news gathering.
Not surprisingly, the issue has generated heated debate, pitting the First Amendment and commercial business rights against national security and intelligence operations.
At a recent joint hearing before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, administration officials and private satellite companies made their cases for commercial remote sensing.
D. James Baker, undersecretary for oceans and atmosphere at the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, explained that under the 1992 Land Remote Sensing Act, "potential licensees [or operation of remote-sensing systems by U.S. companies] must demonstrate to United States government satisfaction that they will operate their system in a manner that preserves the national security and observes the international obligations of the United States.
"Further," he said, "they must make unenhanced data from their system available to the government of a sensed state and to the National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Archives. And they are required to notify us of any agreements they intend to enter with foreign nations or entities."
U.S. companies currently dominate the field, which is projected to grow to $15 billion by the end of the decade, Baker said.
However, a number of foreign companies, over which the U.S. government has no control, also have entered the market.
Such proliferation means not only concern about market share but also national security and worldwide political stability.
The Defense Department, however, noting that a stable economy also is important to national security, supports, "with the inclusion of some essential conditions in the licenses, the issuance of operating licenses under the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 and export licenses coming under the U.S. Munitions List regime," Keith Hall, deputy assistant secretary of defense/intelligence, said at the hearing.
In addition to his other concerns, CIA director R. James Woolsey noted that "controls on the dissemination of commercial remote-sensing data ? once the data are collected ? are difficult if not impossible to implement.
"Our recommended approach is to minimize this problem and ensure protection of critical national security interests by measures that would prevent the collection of sensitive data in the first place in certain cases," Woolsey testified.
Although he did not testify at the hearing, Radio-Television News Directors Association president David Bartlett submitted written comments to the committees.
Referring to an administration proposal to regulate satellite images during a national security emergency through a form of "shutter control" that could stop the images, Bartlett said that could amount to prior restraint.
"RTNDA is concerned that the interagency discussions in progress could lead to a form of censorship of earth pictures that would not be consistent with the substantive and procedural standards of the First Amendment," he wrote.
"Considering the American government does not own the remote-sensing satellite, outer space or the earth, restrictions on the imaging and dissemination process would likely be viewed by the courts as a presumptively invalid prior restraint on those wishing to publish this material."
Bartlett pointed out that the government "bears a heavy burden" of proving "clear and present danger" or a "serious and imminent threat" to justify any prior restraint.