226 



However, from the point of view of the Japanese and Canadians 

 and the Europeans, I think they see their investment in the Station 

 as being significant — we are talking multiple billions of dollars 

 here on the part of Europe and over 1 billion for Japan — see them- 

 selves as very much participating here as full partners, but with 

 the recognition that you need someone pulling it all together. And 

 I think there is an understanding that for efficiency and just good 

 management, that that needs to be the United States. 



But that does not mean that the United States will, of course, in 

 all cases be able to call all the shots. This will necessitate compro- 

 mise. Again, that is where you weigh the benefits and the risks and 

 have to make judgments. 



Mr. Packard. Up to this point it has been rather loosely struc- 

 tured then, with perhaps some specific agreements, but in the 

 future do you see us moving more and more in the direction of 

 where it's going to require a very well delineated agreement and 

 structure so that we do not assume to take the leadership role, it 

 becomes something that is negotiated? 



Mr. Pedersen. Well, what will have to happen as you do the 

 agreement for development and operation is the responsibilities, 

 decisionmaking structures, who set priorities for utilization of the 

 facilities, how are those set, how are crews put together, how is the 

 Space Shuttle system and other transportation systems organized 

 and optimized for logistics, for taking payloads up, bringing them 

 down, all of these kinds of decisions that will have to be made that 

 will influence each of the partner's activities, those mechanisms 

 will have to be spelled out, I believe, in great detail. Those are the 

 questions people will want to know. 



Let me give you one example, if I may. Sharing of costs, the oper- 

 ating costs of the station — power, you know, heat, light, deprecia- 

 tion, consumables, water — all of these costs will have to be shared 

 by the partners. 



Mr. Packard. Even the manpower. 



Mr. Pedersen. Yes. And the formula by which those costs are al- 

 located and how that is worked out both in forms of direct payment 

 or bartering are going to have to be very carefully spelled out and 

 worked out. 



So I view the next agreement — up till now we have some sort of 

 a confederation; that is, a number of partners studying in a paral- 

 lel manner possible participation in a Space Station. The next phase 

 will involve dealing with issues and resolving issues that are much, 

 much more complicated and get to the very heart of the manage- 

 ment and operation of an international facility which, in addition 

 to being international, will be used for intense competition. 



I think that's one of the interesting things about the Space Sta- 

 tion. We are cooperating, if it goes ahead as a cooperative project, 

 to build a major piece of space infrastructure that will be used as 

 the site of intense commercial competition, and that makes it all 

 the more interesting. And that's how it should be, by the way, I 

 believe. 



Mr. Packard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. LuJAN. I was interested in your saying that NASA doesn't 

 start off by saying, "We want something in the international field," 

 but you have the program and if it fits into it, then that is fine. 



