Summary of:
Space Act Agreements and Low Earth Orbit Commercialization at NASA
By Amy Xenofos
To preface their discussion of the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) economy, Xenofos (2024)
provided brief descriptions for the different kinds of Space Act Agreements (SAAs) that NASA
utilizes under their “other transactions” authority (OTA) included in the 1958 Space Act. Today
there are several national agencies that can exercise OTA, but NASA was the pioneering
organization to do so, allowing them to efficiently fulfill their functions through methods outside
of contracts, leases, grants, or cooperative agreements in the conduct of their work whenever
necessary. As mentioned by Xenofos (2024), these SAAs can be divided into three groups. Non-
reimbursable agreements between NASA and a partner involve each party funding their own
collaborative activities (no exchange of funds). Contrary to these, reimbursable agreements
involve a partner paying NASA for the use of its resources without interference in order to
advance their interests, so long as it does not compete with the commercial sector. Lastly, funded
agreements involve NASA transferring funds to a domestic partner (strictly) in order to
accomplish an objective with no direct benefit to NASA, which are used when such objectives
cannot be accomplished otherwise (Xenofos, 2024).
With these uniquely authorized agreements between NASA and various types of partners
comes several issues that need to be considered. Of these concerns, one of particular importance
to NASA is the allocation of intellectual property rights. With NASA being a “title-taking”
agency, utilizing a partner’s invention is within their rights if the Unites States government
(USG) was involved in its development (via funds, facilities, or personnel), with the exception of
smaller businesses that are protected by Bayh-Dole rights. If requested by the partner, NASA can
Space Act Agreements and Low Earth Orbit Commercialization at NASA
By Amy Xenofos
To preface their discussion of the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) economy, Xenofos (2024)
provided brief descriptions for the different kinds of Space Act Agreements (SAAs) that NASA
utilizes under their “other transactions” authority (OTA) included in the 1958 Space Act. Today
there are several national agencies that can exercise OTA, but NASA was the pioneering
organization to do so, allowing them to efficiently fulfill their functions through methods outside
of contracts, leases, grants, or cooperative agreements in the conduct of their work whenever
necessary. As mentioned by Xenofos (2024), these SAAs can be divided into three groups. Non-
reimbursable agreements between NASA and a partner involve each party funding their own
collaborative activities (no exchange of funds). Contrary to these, reimbursable agreements
involve a partner paying NASA for the use of its resources without interference in order to
advance their interests, so long as it does not compete with the commercial sector. Lastly, funded
agreements involve NASA transferring funds to a domestic partner (strictly) in order to
accomplish an objective with no direct benefit to NASA, which are used when such objectives
cannot be accomplished otherwise (Xenofos, 2024).
With these uniquely authorized agreements between NASA and various types of partners
comes several issues that need to be considered. Of these concerns, one of particular importance
to NASA is the allocation of intellectual property rights. With NASA being a “title-taking”
agency, utilizing a partner’s invention is within their rights if the Unites States government
(USG) was involved in its development (via funds, facilities, or personnel), with the exception of
smaller businesses that are protected by Bayh-Dole rights. If requested by the partner, NASA can
