The development of commercial capabilities like Firefly Aerospace’s Blue Ghost 1 lander is providing new urgency to efforts to coordinate and even govern such activities on the Moon. (credit: Firefly Aerospace)

ATLAC and the early emergence of lunar governance

by Dennis O’Brien
Monday, March 17, 2025

At its February meeting, the United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) formally created ATLAC, the Action Team on Lunar Activities Consultation. In doing so, it may have provided the missing piece in the evolving framework of governance for the Moon, and perhaps beyond. ATLAC’s mandate, along with the efforts of the Working Group on Legal Aspects of Outer Space Resources, give us an early glimpse into how the international community will govern activity on the Moon.

The first attempt to govern such activity was the Moon Treaty of 1979. That treaty tried to fill in the gaps left by the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 (OST), but it had a major flaw. Article 11 called for the adoption of an international agreement on outer space resource activity, but it did not provide any specifics. Many countries feared that the result would be a new supra-national authority whose advance approval would be required before any such activity, much like the Seabed Authority in the Convention on the Law of the Seas (CLOS). As a result, most countries rejected it, including all the spacefaring countries.

At the time there was no compelling need for such governance, as the United States and other countries suspended their efforts to utilize or even explore the Moon, focusing instead on scientific missions to other celestial bodies and establishing a permanent human presence in low Earth orbit. It was not until the recent development of reusable launch vehicles, which greatly reduced the cost of getting into space, that a return to the Moon seemed economically sustainable. By 2018, water ice had been discovered in the eternally dark craters at the Moon’s poles, raising the possibility that lunar operations might even become self-sustaining. The race back to the Moon has since accelerated; just this month, Firefly Aerospace achieved the first fully successful private landing on the Moon.

In the 2010’s, there was also increased activity within civil society concerning such activity, as non-governmental entities around the world felt compelled to help move humanity forward. In 2010, Space Resource International was incorporated. In 2016, the Hague International Space Resources Working Group began work on their Building Blocks for space resource utilization. In 2017 The Moon Village Association, Open Lunar, For All Moonkind, and the Space Treaty Project were all created. They have provided fresh input and energy for COPUOS, which responded in 2022 by creating the Working Group on the Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities (SRWG) under its Legal Subcommittee. That Working Group was given a five-year mandate, which included consideration of possible new “international governance instruments.”

Since then, there has been an evolving realization that an additional entity would need to be created to help facilitate any new governance, even if it was not a new CLOS-type authority. At last year’s general COPUOS meeting, a consensus was reached that such an entity could be considered without interfering with the work of the SRWG on substantive rules and principles. Romania formally proposed the creation of an Action Team on Lunar Activity Consultation—ATLAC—though it took till this February to choose its co-chairs and begin its work.

According to the Mandate, Terms of Reference, and Methods of Work adopted by COPUOS, ATLAC will consider “the establishment of an international mechanism” (agency) for “improving consultations related to lunar activities” as distinguished from the “instrument,” or agreement, being considered by the SRWG. It will recommend “priority topics relevant to its mandate that could subsequently be addressed under its proposed international mechanism.” ATLAC participation “is to be open to all States members of the Committee [COPUOS].” ATLAC will work within the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA): “The Office for Outer Space Affairs will facilitate the work of the Action Team, including by providing substantive secretariat services.”

The mandate, terms, and methods suggest two areas of analysis. The first is the structure of ATLAC and, by extension, any “international mechanism” it recommends. The second is the topics that will be considered by ATLAC and, again by extension, the topics that it will recommend be included within the purview of any future mechanism or agency.

Recently, several COPUOS member states submitted comments on both structure and topics, with substantive recommendations from Algeria, Armenia, Ecuador, France, Germany, India, Poland, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Their recommendations for structure included:

1. Broad participation by both established and emerging countries. One reason is practical: even emerging countries are now involved in the production and operation of spacecraft and will likely participate in future outer space activities. Another is legal, ethical, and political: Article IX of the OST allows any State Party to request consultation if it “has reason to believe that an activity or experiment planned by another State Party in outer space… would cause potentially harmful interference with activities in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space.”
2. Representation and leadership must be balanced. This refers to the emerging division of lunar activities between the Artemis lunar exploration campaign and the International Lunar Research Station. To this end, the recently named co-chairs are from Romania and Pakistan (rather than Korea, as initially proposed.)
3. Stakeholder participation, including experts. This is mainly a call for private sector membership and involvement, even if final decisions are made by the sovereign states. Co-chairs are also expected to be experts.

The comments also included recommended topics, initially for ATLAC but also for any resulting mechanism or agency:

1. Notice of activities, avoidance of harmful interference. Article XI of the OST—consultation—requires countries to report the “nature, conduct, locations and results of such [outer space] activities.” Article IX requires “due regard” for the activities of others. The Artemis Accords also address this issue. Such notice and avoidance will be the primary mission of any mechanism or agency that is recommended by the Action Team for Lunar Activity Consultation.
2. Sharing information. In addition to overall transparency, countries recommended scientific cooperation, open-source lunar data, and even technology transfers, all of which could be facilitated by any adopted mechanism or agency.
3. Protecting sites of special interest. Countries spoke of preserving the lunar heritage in the broadest terms, suggesting this would apply to cultural and historical sites in addition to scientific. Any mechanism or agency would need a process for designating and cataloguing such sites.
4. Standards and practices, protection of environment. Countries listed operational safety, debris mitigation, sustainability, and environmental safeguards as important topics, along with a structured consultative process for addressing them. Again, a new mechanism or agency would be needed.

ATLAC and its recommended mechanism or agency is itself part of a two-pronged emergence of lunar governance. The other is the above-mentioned instrument or agreement that is being considered by the COPUOS Space Resources Working Group. Last year the SRWG held a two-part conference of international non-governmental experts. Their work was summarized in a previous article (see “Space Resources 2024: In search of the Grand Bargain”, The Space Review, June 3, 2024.) Although The SRWG will not issue its final recommendations until 2027, we know that it is considering the same topics listed above that were recommended by the new state members of ATLAC, along with others that would be beyond ATLAC’s purview, such as private ownership of resources removed from in place.

A new international agreement will be needed to address such issues, while at the same time creating an agency for ongoing consultations and to act as a repository for information. It now appears that the best vehicle or context for any new agreement will be as a Consultation Agreement under Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, initially drafted by COPUOS, then offered for adoption by the States Parties of the OST. The Space Treaty Project has been working on a model international agreement for several years, first as an implementation agreement for the Moon Treaty, then as a resource utilization agreement, constantly evolving to incorporate peer review and new proposals. It now offers the following comprehensive Model Consultation Agreement, which is based on three organizational principles:

1. It must be comprehensive in scope and support all private activity.
2. It must protect essential public policies.
3. It must build upon and integrate current institutions and processes, creating new ones if necessary.

MODEL CONSULTATION AGREEMENT
UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE OUTER SPACE TREATY

(The Space Treaty Project: updated March 2025)

1. SCOPE OF AGREEMENT; APPLICATION TO NATIONALS

The States Parties agree to adopt this Agreement and the Treaty On Principles Governing The Activities Of States In The Exploration And Use Of Outer Space, Including The Moon And Other Celestial Bodies (“Outer Space Treaty”), the Convention On Registration Of Objects Launched Into Outer Space, the Convention On International Liability For Damage Caused By Space Objects, and the Agreement On The Rescue Of Astronauts, The Return Of Astronauts And The Return Of Objects Launched Into Outer Space (collectively “Treaties”), and to ensure that all national activities, including those by non-governmental entities, are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in this Agreement and the Treaties.

2. UTILIZATION OF RESOURCES; ACCESS

The States Parties agree that any entity whose activity is authorized and supervised by a State Party shall have the right to utilize resources at the location of the activity. Utilization of resources shall include but is not limited to: (a) the collection/extraction of materials, and (b) the use of land, including surface and subsurface locations, for any public or private activity. The States Parties agree to be guided by the principles of open access, nonappropriation, and due regard as established by the Outer Space Treaty. Access to resources shall be shared. All space resource activity shall be conducted in such a manner so that other parties can safely access the same resource. Any activity that has the potential to deplete a resource shall be subject to additional consultation.

3. OWNERSHIP OF RESOURCES; NATIONAL LAWS

The States Parties agree that the removal of outer space resources from in place does not violate the ban on appropriation in Article II of the Outer Space Treaty. Resources removed from in place can become private property, subject to applicable national laws. The right to utilize resources shall terminate if an authorized entity fails to comply with the obligations in the Treaties and this Agreement.

4. PUBLIC POLICY OBLIGATIONS

The States Parties agree that the obligations of the Treaties and this Agreement include the following:

1. Use outer space exclusively for peaceful purposes;
2. Allow free access to all areas, with due regard for the activities of others;
3. Provide co-operation and mutual assistance;
4. Protect the environment and areas of special interest, including scientific, cultural, and historic sites;
5. Inform the public (with due regard for national intellectual property laws) of:
   • The nature, conduct, location, and results of outer space activities
   • Scientific discoveries
   • Any phenomena which could endanger human life or health
   • Any indication of organic life
   • The use of radioactive materials

5. AGENCY; FEES

The States Parties are responsible for the administration of this Agreement. The States Parties agree to create an agency (“Agency”) within the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) to facilitate ongoing consultation and to administer the provisions of this Agreement, including as a repository of information (e.g., activities, standards and practices, protected sites). The Agency shall be ministerial only. All substantive policy decisions, including the collection and use of any fees, shall be made by the States Parties.

6. REGISTRATION OF ACTIVITIES

The States Parties agree to register their space resource activities in accordance with the Registration Convention when applicable or with the Agency when not applicable. The Agency shall be the repository for such information.

7. STANDARDS AND RECOMMENDED PRACTICES

The States Parties agree to develop, in consultation with non-governmental entities, standards and recommended practices for the safe utilization of outer space resources by all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development. Such standards and practices shall not require technology that is subject to export controls. The Agency shall be the repository for such standards and recommended practices.

8. PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT; SCIENTIFIC, CULTURAL, AND HISTORICAL SITES

The States Parties agree to prevent harmful contamination and the disruption of the existing balance of a celestial body’s environment. All outer space resource activity shall require an environmental impact assessment before approval by a State Party. The States Parties further agree to protect scientific, cultural, and historic sites, and to designate an entity/process, such as UNESCO or the Agency, for making such determinations that will be binding on the States Parties and their nationals. The Agency shall be the repository for such determinations.

9. DISPUTE RESOLUTION; MEDIATION

The States Parties agree that any dispute between sovereign states shall be addressed using the consultation process detailed in Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, facilitated by the Agency. In addition, the States Parties hereby authorize the voluntary use of binding arbitration for disputes between non-state parties in accordance with the 2011 Permanent Court of Arbitration Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities. The results of such arbitration shall be enforceable under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (“New York Convention”). Likewise, settlements achieved through mediation shall be enforceable under the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (“Singapore Convention”).

10. CONTROLLING LAW; RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS, SETTLEMENTS

In accordance with Articles VIII and XII of the Outer Space Treaty, the States Parties agree that the controlling law at any location shall be the law of the country that authorized/supervises the activity at that location, including any stations, installations, and facilities, subject this Agreement. Relations between locations of different States Parties will be governed by current international law until such time as new substantive rules are created by the States Parties. Nothing in this Agreement or in the Treaties shall be interpreted as limiting or diminishing the rights of individuals or settlements under customary international law.

Conclusion

Both ATLAC and the Space Resources Working Group have a 2027 deadline to create a new mechanism or agency for lunar consultation and a new instrument or agreement to empower. It is still possible for humanity to avoid conflict in favor of consultation and cooperation. Maintaining peace in outer space may be the best way to promote peace on Earth.

Dennis O’Brien is president of the Space Treaty Project, a scientific/educational nonprofit based in northern California. He is also co-chair of the Space Law Committee of Space Renaissance International and a member of the Lunar Governance Working Group of the Moon Village Association. He was an official observer at last year’s COPUOS-sponsored Expert Conference on Outer Space Resources.

Note: we are now moderating comments. There will be a delay in posting comments and no guarantee that all submitted comments will be posted.

Home